User talk:Iridescent

Bauhinia Azalea

Hey, I think that Bauhinia on your user page is most likely Bauhinia variegata. The shape of the flower is more like variegata. Its colors can range from magentas to white, and I think the color fits the description best. bibliomaniac 1 5 19:14, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's a thought - although I've also been advised that it looks like it's actually an azalea of some kind. I'll leave it up a while longer and see if I can get some kind of consensus – frustrating, as it's quite a striking photo and it's irritating not to know what it's a photo of. Open note to anyone else reading this – if you have any thoughts as to what this is a picture of, please do let me know! (Taken on Lantau island, Hong Kong, on 1 March 2008, if that helps narrow it down...) — iridescent 19:19, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think I may have identified the Azalea in the photograph. I can't find the name of the species or hybrid, but your photograph looks just like the one shown here: http://www.ncazaleafestival.org . It's probably a good idea to wait for the input of experts though; I don't claim to be an expert on plant identification. CalamusFortis (talk) 20:11, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! As I say above, it's really irritating not knowing what it's a photo of. — iridescent 20:13, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

General note - the consensus now seems to be that this is some kind of Azalea. If anyone knows what kind, please do let me know! – iridescent 16:31, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(Further) general note: it now seems to be pretty positively identified as some kind of azalea due to the stem. Anyone want to have a crack at what species it is? – iridescent 14:33, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've been doing some searching, and I think that the photograph may be of the Azalea hybrid "George Tabor." Some pictures of this hybrid have very pink flowers, while others show an amount of white matching the flower in the photograph. I can't be sure that it is "George Tabor," but I suppose it's a start.Calamus Fortis 16:16, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I realise this is Not An Important Thing In The Great Scheme Of Things, but it's really bugging me not knowing what this is. It's quite a striking photo & I'm sure I could find a good use for it if I only knew what it was! – iridescent 16:19, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

re Karanacs RfA

"...Wikipedia is just Facebook for ugly people..."

You been peeking at my userpage? LessHeard vanU (talk) 21:26, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Eek! You might have warned me... That's still not the most alarming user portrait on Wikipedia; that goes to Ryan P. – iridescent 21:30, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen much worse. As an incentive to anyone reading this, all you hafta do is run through RFA so that you can see deleted images, have fun with this one, Iridescent. Payback for all the shockimages you've planted on my talkpage recently...er, I mean...it's an image of an Arcade...Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 21:41, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on your talkpage. I'm not getting caught by the "what links here" pixies. – iridescent 21:49, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe we should have a caption competition.... WjBscribe 01:51, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
Are we in?
Starting off with the rather bland Ryan:"You taste like the sockuppet I blocked."
I'm sure the iridescent one can do better. giggy _(:O) 11:25, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adele: "Dammit, I shoulda said Truth". Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 15:04, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Just checking if you violate WP:LIC, Adele". – iridescent 17:20, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

'When you said "biting the newcomers", I didn't realise this was what you meant' (I'll get me coat...) – iridescent 20:51, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Old bug seems to have resurfaced

Although, WTF is a two week old account doing with Huggle access? – iridescent 21:31, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, what was a one week old account doing with rollback? Would a minimum account age limit be useful? -- Gurch (talk) 22:17, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Since that post, have done some digging through the contribs of that account prior to it being given rollback (I agree the circumstances look very odd) and I think they're telling the truth about being an experienced user under another name. At least, they're not making either typical newbie edits or typical sockpuppet edits. PeterS was the one who granted rollback, and I can't imagine he wouldn't have checked as well. If you're happy, I'll remove that entire section from Feedback, as it could look a bit bitey & ABF to Gail. – iridescent 22:23, 17 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Schools of the Sacred Heart

Oh wow, you're brave for touching that one. It's such a merge mess. _{TravellingCari}^{the Busy Bee} 19:27, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I'd move it to List of Schools of the Sacred Heart — it's above & beyond a normal disambiguation page now — but I'm certainly not going to lose a second's sleep either way. – iridescent 19:29, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well at one point it was at Network of Sacred Heart Schools which was entirely untrue because the scope wasn't ever limited to those that were in a network, unless said network just included the name. I'm not sure what it accomplishes other than being a merge target, under any na,me. _{TravellingCari}^{the Busy Bee} 19:47, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If I was planning to clean it up (which I'm not, as what I know about it could be written on a postage stamp), I'd split it into a long Schools of the Sacred Heart explaining the organisation itself, and a separate List of Schools of the Sacred Heart. A glaring problem I can see from the start is the sheer number of "Sacred Heart" named organisations in any area with a substantial Catholic population that have nothing to do with this particular organisation.

In any List of areas that no-one valuing their sanity should ever have anything to do with on Wikipedia, "Schools" and "the Catholic Church" must both rank pretty high. Part of the reason you see so many articles on shopping malls, disused railway lines, ornamental lakes etc from me is precisely because you tend not to get irate fans editwarring on The Mall Wood Green about why other shopping malls are so much cooler (although someone did try to nominate it for AFD as "spam" once...). That said, one of my proudest unsung achievements here is the way in which the permanent BLP-editwarring on Beki Bondage ground to a complete halt as soon as I rewrote it. – iridescent 20:01, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, impressive. I don't like lists. I limit my work on them to red-link development such as List of museums in New York and related articles. A delete !vote about an AfD list came up in my RfA and thinking back, I still agreed with my initial vote. Some are useful, the vast majority are not. As a whole, school articles drive me nuts, churches are easier because a fair nummber are clearly non-notable and don't turn into the all out wars that schools and police departments do. As far as this particular list, I think it requires a gut to clean up and like yourself, I just don't care about this one. I'd rather spend on-wiki time elsewhere. _{TravellingCari}^{the Busy Bee} 20:23, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I hate lists. Personally, I think the onus on every list should be to demonstrate why it's useful to other Wikipedia articles. The only grounds I can see generally see for them are to serve as "redlist farms" to show which articles still need to be written. Notable residents of Crouch End (currently out of the article, but I've no doubt it will reappear yet again) is my personal bugbear. – iridescent 20:29, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have a personal bugbear as of yet but I was surprised that List of motorcycle clubs came back to my RfA. It's no longer the mess it was but it has no inclusion criteria: clubs where? and no definition of notability. That and it's also entirely reundant to the list in the article. But I gave up on that. Have a good evening. _{TravellingCari}^{the Busy Bee} 21:20, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If the only opposes are Kurt, Majorly and LGRDC I really don't think you need to worry. While they all (particularly Kurt) do excellent work elsewhere, I don't think there's anyone left who takes them seriously at RFA. – iridescent 21:42, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

False Warning

Dear iridescent, you have accidently restored a vandilism on a article and sent me a lvl 1 vandal warning. please reply on my talk page about this incident and remove the warning so that the administers now it was a mistake. Thanks for taking your time.

Your , Alexnia (talk) 06:54, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, looks like we might have to revoke your Huggle access, Iridescent... *ducks* :D -- Gurch (talk) 11:01, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd ban me. At the very least issue me a final warning...

Seriously, Alexnia, this is not your fault; it stems from a problem with Huggle, a program used to revert vandalism at high speed. If you save your edit at the same point someone else clicks the "revert" button in Huggle, it can cause the program to incorrectly think that your edit was the vandal edit. Some users think that the problem is serious enough in cases like yours, where a perfectly good editor is incorrectly tagged as a "vandal", that Huggle shouldn't be used; however, the general consensus is that the good caused by keeping Huggle active (no other process is as effective at keeping vandals off Wikipedia) outweighs the problems it causes.

Gurch (the poster above me), who wrote Huggle, will ~~probably~~ certainly be better placed than me to explain exactly how it works, if you have any questions about the process. – iridescent 19:03, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It would seem that Alexnia is not on the whitelist, as the account is only a few days old and has yet to make 500 edits. Another 1-week-old account with Huggle... :/ -- Gurch (talk) 21:54, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alexnia was approved here, after originally being denied access exactly two days earlier for inexperience reasons. Seems fishy. PeterSymonds (the approver) usually is an excellent screener of new editors...Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 22:01, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also approved by PS. What do you have to do not to get rollback? Maybe WP:RFHUG isn't such a crazy idea after all (although I think "anyone can use it, but screw up and it gets disabled" is more in spirit with Wikipedia). – iridescent 22:06, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Alexnia has 239 mainspace edits of which 198 are rollbacks, their third edit ever was to install Huggle, and has never made a mainspace edit that wasn't a revert, including "blatant vandalism" like this. What the hell is going on here? – iridescent 22:13, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe someone should address this with PS? Or Alexnia? Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 22:20, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alexnia's not at fault - I've posted a (hopefully) non-bitey warning about rollbacking of non-blatant vandalism and warned her that others may be more willing to remove rollback without warning. As with Xp last month, you can't really blame someone for misusing a tool if no-one's told them how to use it correctly. Unless more worrying examples come to light, I'd say leave PS alone for the moment; there may be excellent reasons for granting rollback (a returning right-to-vanished user who's notified him of their real identity via email, for example). It's not like removing Huggle access is difficult if it starts to cause a problem. – iridescent 22:26, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(hope I have enough colons)...agreed. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 22:27, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

←(to Iridescent) I have gone through all (read: 100%) of this user's Huggle reversions and I have found six (including the one you gave) that are 100% definitely not blatant vandalism. Two of them actually restored vandalism. Should I post the diffs here, or should I just not say anything unless Alexnia makes more mistakes after s/he reads your poke? J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 22:35, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Or, am I scrutinizing too much? I have never checked the last 250 or so of my reverts to see if they are all legit. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 22:36, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Depends how bitey you want to be... If they're potentially serious (restoring a BLP vio, for example), then warn - but it would probably be worth checking the edit immediately prior to Alexnia's to make sure it wasn't two Hugglers reverting at the same time, which (as Gurch has heard very, very often) causes this "double-revert" problem (see the post which begins this section...).

If there's an Xp style pattern of misuse, as opposed to the occasional mistake (lest we forget, some Wikipedia editors are human), let me know and me (or one of the assorted characters watching this page) will disable Huggle. I prefer disabling Huggle to removing rollback; you can explain where a user went wrong and then quietly give it back to them when you're satisfied, whereas removing rollback leaves a permanent blot on their log (see this example which I suspect you're all too familiar with).

Useful tip for ~~wikistalking~~ scrutinising edits; if you type the user's name into the navigation bar on Huggle and then select "recent edits" from the menu over the queue, it will bring up the user's contribution history; pressing the spacebar will automatically walk you through every diff of theirs. (I think for non-admins the viewable history may not go back so far.) – iridescent 22:45, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

None of them represent major problems, so I will just let them disappear into the cavernous vault know as ctrl-shift-h... J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 23:03, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

For quickly denying the speedy deletion on José Azueta (sailor) and for your comments to the editor who tagged it. I was displeased to see that pop up so soon, but since I knew what to do, I wasn't worried. But like you said, newbies might not feel the same way about that. --AW (talk) 20:14, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. One thing I absolutely loathe here is the editors who think they get some kind of bonus-points in the Wikipedia MMORPG by nominating articles for deletion 30 seconds after they're uploaded. I think it's more disruptive than vandalism, as it drives so many people away. – iridescent 20:16, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was reminded of this. The creator of the article didn't make any changes after that. I do wonder how much of this sort of stuff goes unnoticed. --Tombomp (talk/contribs) 20:26, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A lot. Especially when CSD's backlogged, the temptation to assume the nominator's probably right and not to check the history is always there. And that's quite aside from the trail of destruction the image-deletion-bots's "kill them all & let God sort them out" attitude left.

AGF and all that, but there's something very odd going on with the editor who nominated this, who has a bunch of FA/GA userboxes on their userpage for articles where they did nothing more than fix a couple of typos. No idea what's going on here. – iridescent 20:34, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This might shed some light [1]. I've been following a discussion about this across several people's talk pages, prompted by the actions of a few users, including the one linked in your message. If you've been seeing any patterns with relatively new users like this, you might want to talk to User:Laser brain. Karanacs (talk) 20:45, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The really odd thing is that this isn't a new user; over 3000 edits, over a period of more than a year. I can understand the "Myspace cabals" of new-ish users who seem to think Wikipedia is some kind of MMORPG with the high-scores measured in barnstars & userboxes (not mentioning any names...), but this is an established user with a history of genuine substantial contributions (on Michael Curry, for example) who now suddenly seems to have started doing this for no apparent reason.

I believe my opinions on the award center – and all the other Esperanza-lite unwelcome recent developments like secret pages & autograph books – are a matter of record. (Be aware that by mentioning it here you've probably directed a gaggle of trolls & sockpuppeteers towards both the MFD and your own talkpage, who will explain how YOU'RE ALL WRONG at excruciating length.) – iridescent 21:00, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I raised this same issue with that editor earlier this evening. It really pisses me off when people try to claim credit for things they haven't done. I got dragged into this by what I though was a genuine request to GA review the Anahim hotspot. On investigation I find that I, as the reviewer, made more than five times as many edits to this article as this nominator did. Weird! --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 21:07, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have a problem with the nominating – I could imagine nominating something even if I hadn't done much on it, for example if I were nominating a topic to WP:FT and wanted to demonstrate consistency across the range of articles. It's the claiming credit bit that's weird. – iridescent 21:17, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's also the incessant chivvying [2] [3] to pass the article once the review is opened that's weird. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 21:25, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And surprise surprise... Appears to be another wannabe working through a checklist. SandyG is spot on, that coaching program causes way more trouble than it's worth. Anyone who has to be taught common sense probably can't be taught it. – iridescent 21:28, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On Award Centers and what not, they are such a mess yet they seem to have their defenders. I don't get it. I don't get why this is such a competition. What am I missing? What memo did I miss when I signed up? _{TravellingCari}^{the Busy Bee} 21:29, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It wasn't a memo. It was a note folded neatly into a ninja star that was passed around at recess. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 21:30, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Giggy, not me, pointed this offering from the Award Center out, but the irony bears repeating. – iridescent 21:33, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OMG?!?! WP-EN izz n MMORPG?!? No way!!! LOL, ROFLCOPTER, etc!!!! Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 21:36, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

LMAO* Someone spiked your coffee today. I think it's the sweet smell of wins. Seriously... I don't get it. I want a ninja star. And recess. :) _{TravellingCari}^{the Busy Bee} 21:59, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Does every discussion here turn into one about myspace, cabals, me, RfA, and admin coaching? giggy _(:O) 00:01, 20 June 2008 (UTC) (Btw. Irid; I think I agree with you (following my day on the main page) that IP editing isn't that flash.)[reply]

I thought every discussion here turns into a discussion of Huggle? Besides, I think every discussion everywhere turns into a discussion of you. Except occasionally when they turn into discussions of Lara instead. – iridescent 00:03, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Iri, that's going to get a place of honor. Given that I refuse to have anything to do with MySpace and twitch when I have to use it for work, I'll take my ninja. _{TravellingCari}^{the Busy Bee} 02:26, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just to complete the social-networking, I'm entered your haiku contest too. – iridescent 03:48, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Commons actually has good images (and a category!) for moments like this. giggy _(:O) 10:37, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

and I restored your sanity ;) _{TravellingCari}^{the Busy Bee} 16:28, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Grr...

you just beat me to vandalism:-( Actually, you've beat me a handful of times. You're doing a nice job fighting vandalism on wikipedia, and I hope we can continue to rely on you to fight vandalism:-)--SJP (talk) 03:15, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid you won't... Vandal fighting is (to put it mildly) not high up my list of priorities. But thanks for the compliment! – iridescent 03:17, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re : please be carefull

sorry about that I thought that , that was a paragraph cut off so i reverteted it thanks for noticing me. For the future I will be a bit slower while I use huggle and check what paragraphs I am restoring. I will keep in mind to watch over paragraph restoration, sorry for wasting your time and thanks for warning me.

p.s please don't remove my rollback rights you can remove my huggle rights but I need the rollback to fight vandilism at school (school computer's only have Internet Explorer so twinkle dosn't work on them and I hate it when Huggle users beat me while I am using twinkle or the old school way.Alexnia (talk) 10:40, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

oh damn silly me, sorry for posting this on your talk page forgot to read one of the boxesAlexnia (talk) 10:42, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine... and don't worry! – iridescent 14:50, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Would you mind giving me huggle back? I just got rollback back and Huggle is a very useful tool. It has been quite a while and I think Metros said I could have it back around now but I decided to ask you cause he doesn't seem to be online.Thanks!--Xp54321^{(Hello!,Contribs)} 15:19, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much Iri!!! Did you find out yet what type of flower you have on your userpage is yet?:D--Xp54321^{(Hello!,Contribs)} 15:23, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by ****Provisionally****?--Xp54321^{(Hello!,Contribs)} 15:24, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By "provisionally", I mean that any misuse of it will see it taken away permanently and without further warning; Gurch, Metros etc won't give you the "benefit of the doubt" that, for example, we've given Alexnia in the thread above. I've explained at further length on your talk page. – iridescent 15:30, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the flower, it seems to be established as an azalea; the question now is identifying the species. – iridescent 16:38, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's an azalea, see this pic. It's called a "Simplicity" Azalea, of the Evergreen type. Of course, there are 10s of 1000s of variations worldwide, so I could be off by a speckle or stripe or two....Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 16:51, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Iri please block User:Ip2164915073. He/she is the account of the IP vandalizng my takpage and the one you just blocked for 48 hours. Evasion of block....Extend by 2-6 hours if you'd like--Xp54321^{(Hello!,Contribs)} 16:56, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He's gone into personal attacks and wiki-stalking.--Xp54321^{(Hello!,Contribs)} 17:01, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've reported this troll to WP:AIV. Should be blocked soon. Cunard (talk) 17:03, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Troll indefed..:D--Xp54321^{(Hello!,Contribs)} 17:12, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You've been quoted

FYI: Quoting your awesomness here. giggy _(:O) 11:06, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Hellingly Hospital Railway

The article Hellingly Hospital Railway you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. It hasn't failed because it's basically a good article, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Hellingly Hospital Railway for things needed to be addressed. Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 13:48, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It was painful (places nobody cares about, see), but I managed! Now we can go to the next phase of admin coaching! giggy _(:O) 14:44, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In case you didn't know..

...There's a meetup on July 13th in London. Coming? Ironho lds 00:53, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly but unlikely, and not under this name; I have no particular desire to be hiveminded. – iridescent 14:49, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PoliticianTexas & Diamond Joe Quimby

Yes, I knew that they were the same account, but I wanted some way to tell other Wikipedians that DJQ and PT were the same person. I didn't know a better way than to easily communicate this fact. I noticed that some users who had been reverting DJQ and his other SPs were not doing the same to PT thinking that he was a different user. So, how do you let people know without going to each and every one of them and leaving a message? (I also think that a contributor involved in a SP or other on going case, should be aloud to change their user name until the issue is resolved. It was obvious the he changed this account in order to evade the case against him and/or the block that may result.) So, if you know of an easier way to let others know, go for and let me know? ~ WikiDon (talk) 16:37, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

How about {{User Alternate Acct}} tagging? It doesn't have the same connotations... – iridescent 16:43, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bug?

Iri as a test I changed my huggle config page "rollback:false" but I can still use huggle. Bug?--Xp54321^{(Hello!,Contribs)} 17:31, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've already responded here. Is that how you understand it, Iridescent? You've got a bit better knowledge of Huggle than I do. Metros (talk) 17:34, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Replied on your (Metros's) talk – iridescent 15:04, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

Thank you, Iridescent, for nominating me for adminship and then providing so much enjoyable commentary as the RfA progressed. I was a bit surprised at how smoothly the process went and how I've emerged without feeling run through a large wringer (maybe just a tiny one). I'll do my best to avoid doing something stupid so that I don't make you look bad ;) Thanks! Karanacs (talk) 16:26, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A pleasure and thank you for being my first RFA nom to pass! If you aren't aware of it already, you may want to bookmark this, which is a good way to give yourself (and others) an idea of what you're doing with your new-found powers. – iridescent 16:29, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BLP Question

Iridescent, I would like your opinion on a reversion I made. I do not believe that the assertion removed by another editor violated BLP, and reverted it, and I was reverted again, with the other editor citing BLP at me. I'm not going to sweat one unsourced statement which I didn't even add to begin with, but I'd like your opinion on whether I was really in the wrong or not. Diffs here. Thanks for your time. Jclemens (talk)

I think "he is not a licensed attorney" is on very thin BLP ice with regards to an article about someone who gives legal advice, unless you can provide a citation for it. If it turns out that he is in fact a licensed attorney — or is working in a jurisdiction where the term "licensed attorney" has no meaning (while I know nothing about New Hampshire law, most New England law is based on English common law and there's certainly no such animal in the UK) — then you're re-inserting a defamation of a legal professional. In this case, there isn't even a source for there being allegations, let alone for them being true. I'd say it should stay out; remember, with BLPs the burden of proof is on whoever is adding to the article, especially with something potentially defamatory like this. – iridescent 16:35, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's an interesting way of putting it. Having studied under the man personally, calling him a lawyer would be more likely to be viewed as a hostile statement than calling him NOT a lawyer. :-) Interestingly enough, I've been trying to cite him not beling a lawyer for half an hour, and I've yet to find someplace that expressly says it. He's referred to a "notable firearms expert" or "self-defense expert" in hundreds of places, but "not a lawyer" or the like mostly turns up ghits for "I'm not a lawyer, but I went to this Massad Ayoob class and..." It's back to the old problem of proving a negative--there are probably thousands of other notable non-lawyers who couldn't be RS'ed as a non-lawyer.

At any rate, thanks for your time and quick response. Jclemens (talk) 16:49, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As a thought, he may well have a resume publicly available somewhere, which would presumably list his qualifications. Otherwise, the NH Law Society (or whatever body NH lawyers are registered with) probably maintains a public list of authorised lawyers (although he may practise elsewhere). – iridescent 16:54, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I finally found a couple of cites. They're not the best, but the way they're phrased, it's hard to argue that they're negative--i.e., "As former Vice Chair of the Forensic Evidence Committee of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers (NACDL), he is believed to have been the only non-attorney ever to hold this position." Thus, the way out of the situation was always about finding verification for a fact that I knew to be true, and that was never really in question. Next time, I won't revert a BLP allegation, no matter how trivial and POV-pushing I think it is, without putting some sourcing in. Again, thanks for discussing the nuances with me. Jclemens (talk) 17:14, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem at all. A general rule for unsourced material, particularly in BLPs, is, "if this turned out not to be true would someone potentially be hurt by it?". – iridescent 17:16, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/You Hear Me?

Since you might not be watching the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/You Hear Me?, I just thought I'd drop you a note saying that I have a question about your reply. Thanks!--Fabrictramp | talk to me 18:27, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Replied there. As I say, I'm not all that familiar with exactly how AMG operates so am more than willing to be corrected. – iridescent 18:36, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply! I'll keep a lookout for more info on this.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 20:05, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SOCIAL NETWORKING!!1!

The ~~Defender~~ Destroyer of the ~~Wiki~~ Huggle Barnstar

On the positive side, at least people will stop complaining to you about it on your talk page now, right? .... Right?

Oh shit I just gave a barnstar. Metros (talk) 00:51, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This barnstar is the best laugh I've had today. A hearty laugh, thank you Metros. Excellent perpsective, excellent timing. I may very well return tomorrow....Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 00:54, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, thanks. I was torn between the line about the talk page and a line about how dozens of users will never get adminship now because they can't edit without Huggle (not saying everyone who uses Huggle is like that of course before any junps all over that!). Take care Iridescent and Keeper, Metros (talk) 01:00, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You know I did answer your question on my adoption page waaaaay back.....--Xp54321^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 03:23, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Replies: Thoughts On Huggle and the Hugglers

You do all know that Huggle is (for the moment) still active, right? For the record:

I've no idea what's happened to Gurch and have no intention of prying; he's been through far more shit than anyone else I respect on Wikipedia (with the possible exception of Lara and Giano). If he's had to leave for personal reasons, good luck with whatever it is; if he's left because he's fed up with dealing with the non-stop torrent of crap from drunks, lunatics, petulant schoolchildren and obsessive admin-wannabes that, laughably, passes for "debate leading to consensus" on Wikipedia, I can't say I blame him one bit. I'd urge everyone to leave him alone;
While I'm not going to comment on the "who should take it over" thread (a post which has I intended to be a four-sentence heads-up notification has managed to blossom into a 100k shouting match), the only name of all those suggested whom I'd personally trust is Fritzpoll. In particular, I think the idea, which seems to be being seriously suggested, of entrusting potentially the third most destructive tool in the entire toolset to someone who listed at RFA their "best contribution to Wikipedia" as being a cut-and-paste copyvio is just plain crazy;
I don't have a problem with Huggle per se — although I've been arguing in many places about how it's used, I've never once actually advocated it being banned, even when Gurch himself was suggesting this. If anything, I've been advocating an expansion of the use of it.

Xp, yes I did read your answer. Like I said at the time, there's no right answer to that question (if hackers hadn't taken Wikipedia Review offline, you could read for yourself a large number of crazy people arguing over that exact question at extreme length). I haven't posted any reply to you there or on your talkpage, as while I've no problem with you, I am thoroughly fed up with taking abuse from your nutjob friends.

BTW, for anyone who wants to see exactly what kind of people Gurch has unleashed on us, this post (in his own RFA!) illustrates the current level of AGF and civility of Huggle users. (Before anyone complains, yes I know there are dozens of perfectly decent Huggle users. Unfortunately, it's only the misusers who come to notice). – iridescent 17:28, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I was aware it was back online and I had a decent idea of how you felt about Huggle and the related issues. I just thought I'd try to lighten things a bit because everyone appeared to be stressed and pissed off yesterday. And you better appreciate that barn star, damn it...I spent 10 minutes trying to find that photo and all (see, now I have concrete evidence through first hand experience of why social networking drains productivity! :) ) Seriously though, keep up the good work. Metros (talk) 17:59, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pride of place – nabbed the very last slot. I really do hope that either Gurch comes back, or Fritzpoll agrees to take it on. As you may have guessed, I'm less than convinced by the motley crew who've appointed themselves as Huggle-masters in Gurch's absence. – iridescent 18:05, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The huggle related AN discussion provides a convenient list of people whose RfAs you can oppose. (Original (slightly modified) quote by Friday... not that I disagree with it ;-)). giggy _(:O) 23:34, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I do need to point out that, whatever Majorly may think, I've never once opposed someone for using Huggle. I think he's mixed me up with Lradrama. – iridescent 23:36, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, no, it's not the reason for opposing that's a problem. It's the fact you opposed. giggy _(:O) 23:44, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There are many, many people whose opinions I respect on Wikipedia. I don't think it's any great secret that some people are not as high up that list as others. – iridescent 23:46, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Disused railway stations in the Tees Valley

Hi. I see that some time ago you (I think!) set up a category called that, and added Pinchinthorpe, Hutton Gate and Guisborough stations. I am really, really confused by their presence there. I know there's this thing they are calling Tees Valley but I am finding it incredibly hard to make the leap from that to in effect endorsing the statement "Guisborough is in the Tees Valley", because it just isn't. I wonder if you see what I mean and if any workaround presents itself? Thanks and best wishes Nomorenonotnever (talk) 17:32, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The "Disused railway stations in..." categories were deliberately set up to mirror the sub-categories of Railway stations in England, which in turn are derived from the ONS English sub-regions, so Tees Valley includes everything whose local authority is Darlington, Hartlepool, Middlesbrough, Redcar & Cleveland, and Stockton-On-Tees. Because Guisborough is (just) officially inside the boundaries of Redcar (it stopped officially being part of North Yorkshire in 1974), it goes into "Tees Valley" rather than "North Yorkshire", even though everyone there still thinks of themselves as Yorkshire. I agree it looks silly if you know the area and are well aware that it's part of Yorkshire — there are these kinds of problems everywhere that the official boundaries don't follow what people think of themselves as — but going by the official boundaries is the only practical way to do it, otherwise we get endless "Romford should be listed in Essex instead of London", "Pontypridd is in Glamorgan not Rhondda" etc editwars. – iridescent 17:45, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. And bother. And thanks. And argh! I see your point exactly, and I see why it's unavoidable. It's still giving me a red mist before the eyes and an attack of Retired Colonel-style harrumphing, because these silly place-name footlings seem to make one say "Guisborough is in the Tees Valley" (GAH!!) when in fact what one wants to say is more like "Well yes if you insist, Guisborough is in some odd conglomerate thingy called Tees Valley, but if it is in the Tees Valley then I am the Mayor of Maastricht" or words to that effect. So, I shall shut up now, and go and look for a nice drink, but it did, as you have kindly observed, have a disconcerting effect on me. Oh well, and ho hum. Cheers. Nomorenonotnever (talk) 18:12, 25 June 2008 (UTC) PS I used to walk to school over the level crossing at Hutton Gate station both before and after the withdrawal of service. I remember travelling into Middlesbrough by train from there too. Eeee them were t'days (takes out pipe, border collie, cap, cardie etc) :)[reply]

If it's any consolation, there are even worse problems in the south. (You try explaining that whatever your map might say, Southampton and Oxfordshire are in South East England.) Just be glad we no longer have Humberside with us; I think 50% of edits would end up being either additions or reversions of "Yorkshire" and "Lincolnshire". – iridescent 18:26, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Arf! Marvellous stuff! I am duly consoled. Cheers Nomorenonotnever (talk) 08:01, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a "Disused railway stations in the sub-region of Tees Valley in North East England. All stations are within the ceremonial counties of either County Durham or North Yorkshire." explanation to the category. Hopefully that will make it clear(ish) that they're in the administrative area called "Tees Valley" despite not all necessarily all being in the valley. Remind me what was so bad with "Cleveland"? – iridescent 15:38, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nice one, that's very decent of you, thanks. Oh, nothing is so bad about Cleveland per se. Being brought up in Guisborough (eee etc, please see above) I was perfectly clear about the fact that I lived in the North Riding of Yorkshire BUT that our bit of it was called Cleveland just as a historic and regional name, thank you Vikings or whoever. So when Guisborough ended up in something called Cleveland as a county or countylet or whatever it didn't really bug me too badly at all - it seemed slightly odd but OK and historically defensible. It's just this Tees Valley nomenclature that's trashing my blood pressure, because - like the other examples you cite - it seems fairly bonkers. Specifically, if you say "Tees Valley" then I guess the image that flashes up for me is Barnard Castle or High Force or something, and even though I know this whole question is somewhat fraught and undoubtedly difficult for administrators to get right, I do have the screaming abdabs over it seeming to claim to include Guisborough because it really does make me want to grip someone by the throat and say right smartarse, here we are in the middle of Guis, pray do show me (a) the Tees and (b) its valley! But hey, I should probably get out more - and I do hate it when other people have attacks of PNF (Place Name Fanaticism) so I think I'd better learn to cope a bit! Thanks again, it has been all most interesting and highly civilized of you to take the time and trouble. Cheers Nomorenonotnever (talk) 14:54, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just wondering

Is it your magnetic personality, your winsome smile, or your natural charm that brings you so many new friends? Risker (talk) 22:33, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For some reason, people seem to mistake my talkpage for the Wikipedia Complaints Department. Which as everyone knows, is actually User talk:Keeper76. – iridescent 22:37, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good God, that is so true. AIV/WT:RFA/ANI/AN/WQA all wrapped into one. I've got a real rabble going over there most days. Poor Mizcabot...Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 22:39, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Come on, be honest. You'd miss it if it stopped. ;-) --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 22:42, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Never said I wouldn't. :-) Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 22:45, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Xp

Extended (and batshit insane) discussion

Iris, I have a terrible feeling Xp is going to start something he regrets. :-( — Realist² (Who's Bad?) 01:17, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've tried to warn him as best I can to let it go, and posted something similar to Malleus. I can see you've warned him; maybe if he hears it from you, Kodster, RyRy etc he'll take it more seriously. I don't think he realises just how thin the ice is at the moment; I know he (and you) see Metros and I as the bad guys, but we've been far more lenient then most others will. (This is what would normally have happened regarding his old signature, for example.) – iridescent 01:22, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm actually going to give you a piece of advice (whether or not you take it is obviously up to you); do anything you can to try to keep him away from the "regulars" on Malleus's talkpage. I know you're trying to get a couple of articles up to FA yourself, and these are the very people who'll be reviewing it. While, to their credit, they will be fair, they're only human, and if they see you and think "oh, the disruptive one" they might nit-pick more closely. – iridescent 01:27, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I understand, hes really .... pissed off. He's taking it personally because of his own age, but he's going to get burnt. Ill go and ask Kodster for help, glad to see you realise we are different people. :-) As for my articles, lol, im doing Michael Jackson, I fully expect biased nit-picking, thats what will make it all the better when it does eventually pass. Anyway thankyou for your advise, dont tell anyone about this little discussion, I want to keep my reputation as a stroppy cow you know. Cheers. — Realist² (Who's Bad?) 01:30, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that's anything that anyone, including Xp, ought to be worried about (upsetting FA reviewers before taking an article to FAC). People would always consider the article on its own merits, and if they didn't, then they'd soon feel the Wrath of SandyG. :-) --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 14:36, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re Michael Jackson (and good luck with that one - keeping it clean must be like trying to nail water to a wall), you might want to run it past Giggy if you haven't already. He's usually pretty good with music articles, and he's very good with the policy-and-process side of FA/BLP. – iridescent 01:36, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He seems to be letting go of it. Hopefully thats the end of it. — Realist² (Who's Bad?) 02:15, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good. Malleus is always reasonable, but his style sometimes means bluntness could be mistaken for rudeness. Hopefully that will be the end of it. – iridescent 02:17, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I'm eating dinner,took a shower,basically a wiki-break. I'd kill myself if I prevented an article from going to FA status.<sigh>--Xp54321^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 02:22, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Was that comment really needed? Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 02:25, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I meant I won't continue the "flamewar I single-handedly started against several high profile editors".--Xp54321^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 02:27, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And Iri (To metros too) I really need to apologize for seeing you two as the bad guys. You are right you were both amazingly lenient. If anything I should have been blocked 12 hours for "harassment,personal attacks,etc.".:D Thanks for so much (R2 I haven't gone crazy,;)) wiki-love and AGF!!!--Xp54321^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 02:31, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have replied to you on my talkapge.--Xp54321^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 22:27, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Replied there, but I'm afraid you're not going to like what I say. And that really is the last I'm posting in this idiotic argument of yours. – iridescent 22:40, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This has forked into two totally unrelated conversations

(to Malleus) I almost feel like taking something to FAC just to see this famous process in action. You think they'd take Market Place (Finchley)? – iridescent 14:40, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I think they would. Take it to bits in very short oder that is. You'd stand a much better chance with your masterpiece, The Mall (Wood Green) I think. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 15:29, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Mall (Wood Green) is a bit too racy for my tastes. Maybe Hammerton's Ferry. I still can't quite work out how I managed to get 11k out of that. – iridescent 15:35, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That one's not bad actually, might be able to squeeze a GA out of that. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 15:39, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(Ahem) – iridescent 15:41, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See? I have a nose for these things. :lol: This is why we need a little green dot ... --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 15:54, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

One day, someone will explain to me how something as mind-numbing as that qualifies as GA but BWFE doesn't. I still don't quite understand that one. – iridescent 16:00, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We both know that the problem with BWFE was mainly the size of some of the pictures. Curiously though I think the Image MoS guidelines may have changed since then, so it might be worth another punt. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 16:15, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

← No, the MOS guideline is still "The image subject or properties may call for a specific image width to enhance the readability or layout of an article. Apart from the lead, other cases where a specific image width is appropriate include (but are not limited to) images with extreme aspect ratios, detailed maps, diagrams or charts, and images in which a small region is relevant, but cropping to that region would reduce the coherence of the image.". Which AFAIK BWFE complied with scrupulously throughout; although there are forced image widths on five occasions (I've just unforced a sixth), two of them are enlarged to show specific architectural details, and three have extreme aspect ratios. But What Do I Know. The MOS and me don't mix. – iridescent 16:25, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There was at one time an idea that image sizes ought not to be set in thumbnails. What's changed is that it's now OK, so long as the size is at least 300px. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 16:32, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah well. It's the second-highest traffic article I've ever written, I'm not going to lose sleep over a green dot. – iridescent 16:36, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh

Sigh and double sigh. Metros (talk) 22:57, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. I think I've said all I can on Xp's talk page; if he chooses to ignore it there's nothing I can do. I've gone above and beyond in trying to talk him out of his various "bright ideas", but this is taking far too much of my time. I'm not going to carry on defending him. – iridescent 23:01, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

??

What's going on with Deadly? Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 02:07, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Alison#Since you know these things – iridescent 02:07, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah! Figures. Support indef block. Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 02:08, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I added sock templates to the appropriate pages. Sigh. Next? Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 02:35, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ancient Greece

Oh yeah thank you! Too many false positives is a VERY good reason. TestPilot^{talk to me!} 02:47, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is a proper noun: Ancient Greece:) TestPilot^{talk to me!} 02:58, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes... but IMO there are far too many false positives where it shouldn't be capitalised, where "ancient" is just being used as a qualifier "the ancient Greek goalkeeper", "the cultures of ancient Greece and Rome" etc etc... I think it ought to stay off the list. At the moment, it's failing the 'run a wiki search on "ancient greece" and see what comes up' test - there seem to be more cases where it shouldn't be corrected than where it should. – iridescent 13:16, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Ryan

I apologise for the earlier conflict here. Perhaps we can reach some agreement on such debate? Cheers, and good morning (etc.). :-) --Mizu onna sango15/^Discuss 14:17, 25 June 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Don't worry about it... Just bear in mind, expressing a valid opinion with which you happen to disagree is not the same thing as a personal attack. There are excellent arguments both for and against age limits (under the Florida law which governs Wikipedia there is a legal definition of "child" in the context of the internet, whether or not you like the fact), and attacking one of Wikipedia's leading contributors in this way is not going to change his mind on the issue. – iridescent 14:25, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

True, but my point was not against his opinion (as he has every entitlment to that, as well as his stance at RfA), but the manner in which he presented it. An insulting remark such as this could cause him to be blocked again for incivility, and that was the last thing I wanted to see. I've no wish to start arguing, but I found that to be a little insulting. I completely concur, however, that a user of his age cannot (and shouldn't be put in a situation where he should be) be held accountable for admin actions, so I do not oppose him, just the way he said it.

Thanks, and good day. :-) --Mizu onna sango15/^Discuss 14:41, 25 June 2008 (UTC).[reply]

No problem at all. Whatever you think of the issue, it's certainly not worth the insane lamewar [sic] that the RFA and WT:RFA are descending into. – iridescent 15:16, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. Nice pun, BTW. --Mizu onna sango15/^Discuss 15:17, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I really would like to let this drop now. My final word is that I do not accept the charge of incivility over this edit, and I never will. If that's the kind of thing that merits a block these days then I will have to leave the asylum to be run by its inmates. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 15:32, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Everyone, please let this one drop. As I've said (it feels like) everywhere, there is no way on earth that that was a personal attack, but continuing to kick XP and Mizu for reacting to it isn't doing anyone any good. Underage admins (on a website, lest we forget, with no age verification process) are not exactly the biggest problem we have right now. – iridescent 15:38, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, let's let it go. Just so you know, Malleus, I made this post before we discussed everything, so now it's all understood. Thanks, and sorry for the misunderstanding. --Mizu onna sango15/^Discuss 15:40, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Award

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Thanks for repeatedly beating me. I really appreciate that, and I am awarding you this barnstar. Keep up the fantastic work. SchfiftyThree 19:41, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks... although I have to warn you I'm not really an active vandal-fighter at all – you may be better off giving it to Persian Poet Gal. – iridescent 19:42, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On huggle today

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		During some anti-vandalism work today, I kept coming across vandalism that had just been reverted by you. Leonard^(Bloom) 20:04, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WTF is going on here? Is this National Barnstar Week? – iridescent 20:05, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I wish! Then maybe I would get one... /tear/. ("Stay humble, stay humble, stay humble" -My little mantra) Leonard^(Bloom) 20:13, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

<-Only 63 to go for you, according to your edit count...Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 21:17, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Me or Leonard? – iridescent 21:21, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Does Leonard have 65xxx edits? Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 21:34, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

65xxx? I feel slighted. – iridescent 21:36, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't count huggle edits *ducks* Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 21:37, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, Mr 27%... – iridescent 21:41, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, 27%, but only one was Twinkled. I do like the AFD close script though. And trust me, you don't want me riteing ardicals. I'll stick to cleaning, and party hosting apparently on my blog...Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 21:44, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't knock Twinkle too hard. It kind of sucks at what most people use it for, which is reverting-and-warning, but it's fantastic for deleting things & issuing block notices, and Friendly (even though 90% of it is ridiculous) is very handy for automatically adding assorted cleanup templates to articles. Even Huggle has its definite upsides (as I think I may have mentioned once or twice). – iridescent 21:48, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Picolo abilities‎

Just so you know, the IP you just reverted on this page you prodded is actually the creator. They've been abusing multiple IPs, and also an account, and have recently threatened to vandalize the feature article. I thought I'd give you a heads up. Thanks. Acalamari 21:15, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deep joy. Had already spotted it was the same account (otherwise I wouldn't have restored the prod notice). As vandals go, this is possibly the most boring I've yet seen. – iridescent 21:18, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Enough is enough. The out-of-process police can sue me. If it reappears I'll semiprotect the redlink - it's not like there will ever be a valid reason for it to exist. – iridescent 21:25, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good call: if you hadn't done it, I would have deleted it myself. I was just using the page to uncover socks, and it seems they stopped appearing. I'm off to watch the featured article now. Thanks! Acalamari 21:28, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Useful tip:

Install Huggle
Uncheck the "move to next diff once reverted" box in preferences
Type the name of the current featured article into the nav box at the top

As long as your computer has IRC enabled, this will allow you to watch changes to the article in real-time. Just hit "R" to revert or "Q" to revert-and-warn. Whatever Huggle's (many) faults, this is something it's very useful for. – iridescent 21:33, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but I don't use Huggle, nor do I have any intention to use it. I find regular admin rollback good enough for what I do, and as much as I dislike "don't need" rationales, I personally don't need Huggle (no insult to Gurch or those who do use it, mind you). I don't have IRC either, and as such, my article-watching is via watchlist or history-refreshing only. :D Thanks for the suggestion, though. Acalamari 21:41, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe my opinions of Huggle are a matter of record, but it does have its uses. – iridescent 21:48, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Xp54321

Believe it or not I dont have his talk page on my watchlist so when I do go and look in a moment it will be new to me. I checked his talkpage about 5 hours ago and everything was fine then. Ive been having a bad day on wikipedia, someone from the past that I don't like has returned. I will look at this mess now. — Realist² (Who's Bad?) 23:26, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I know who you're talking about and trust me, he's being very closely watched. – iridescent 23:29, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Once I get an re from R2, I will decide wheter to retire or not.--Xp54321^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 23:31, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

XP, please be quiet for 2 minutes, Im trying to read 4 different threads and translate it into my mother tongue, please stop editing until I can assess the situation. OK. — Realist² (Who's Bad?) 23:35, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have replied. — Realist² (Who's Bad?) 00:14, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As have I...--Xp54321^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 00:17, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK: this is really my last post on this mess

Xp, even if you're not going to listen to me, please listen to R2. Wikipedia is not an anarchy is a non-negotiable core policy of Wikipedia, which means that there's no way around it.

You do bring plenty of positives to Wikipedia, otherwise you'd have been blocked last time. However, once someone decides that the time it takes dealing with your disruption (and that's not just the admin time you've wasted; it's the time R2's wasted talking about this with you when he could have been working on Michael Jackson, the time Metros spends explaining things to you when he could be vandal-fighting, and so on) outweighs the good you bring to the project, they will block you.

Just take some time to read pages without trying to edit everything you see. As someone (I forget who) told you when you tried to edit the Huggle configuration code without asking anyone first, just because you can edit things here doesn't mean you should. Please follow Ryan's advice, do something else for a few days - or even just read Wikipedia (I still regularly find things I didn't know about Wikipedia all the time, and that's quite aside from the facts you find out by clicking "Random Article"), and let the whole thing cool down. Don't let one very immature (yes, I said it) user wreck your time here.

If you're only going to take one piece of advice from me, take this: read WP:SYSOP and discover just what an admin actually does before you decide you want to be one, or take part in RFAs. It doesn't give you any special status; Giano, who's probably the best writer here of all, isn't an admin and never will be; nor is Malleus; nor is R2; nor is Giggy; nor is Gurch. It doesn't mean people respect them any less, because Wikipedia is all about the articles. – iridescent 00:34, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shucks, the guy had so much potential as well. Well done for trying to knock some sense into him ——RyanLupin • (talk) 00:47, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He wont be back anytime soon from what he has told me, its a sad turn of events, but he's very happy out of wikipedia right now. — Realist² (Who's Bad?) 00:52, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest, I hope he does come back. While he caused problems (as you both know) there's a difference between someone causing problems by being too keen, and someone causing problems by being wilfully disruptive (as the editor who goaded him into this is likely to find out sooner than he expects). – iridescent 00:57, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

...I completely agree, the kid had such a clearcut desire to help the project and it's a shame it's come to this. Hopefully, after a few days, he'll consider coming back ——RyanLupin • (talk) 09:59, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest my wiki related problems have gone beyond just Xp in recent days. To amuse myself I have created a "People who hate me" section on my userpage, I think its the only think keeping me going/remotely happy. I feel like im fighting a small army with a feather duster. Lol, I dont need a mop, I need a cannon. — Realist² (Who's Bad?) 01:05, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I completely agree, the kid had such a clearcut desire to help the project and it's a shame it's come to this. Hopefully, after a few days, he'll consider coming back ——RyanLupin • (talk) 09:58, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have 287 on mine. – iridescent 01:12, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nah, you only have 154. The rest are socks. Risker (talk) 01:13, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah well... at least I have User:Seeker of Truths's head to hang on the wall... – iridescent 01:17, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think I have more than you. ;-) giggy _(:O) 01:19, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Socks, heads, or enemies? (While you're here, is this really what passes for culture in Queensland?) – iridescent 01:22, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1 sock, 1 head, lots of enemies. :) (And while I loved The Big Pineapple, you haven't lived until you've been to The Big Stubby...) giggy _(:O) 01:26, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the world knows that you currently have 85 enemies... (I'm very disappointed they never built The Big Dunny.) – iridescent 01:31, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe I have 85 because of what's now known as The Big Bailout. giggy _(:O) 01:44, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

←And to all four of you, this is the reason the RFA process is so harsh. If you're going to snap at someone for making comments in an RFA, you're certainly going to snap when your talkpage has magically grown thirteen times in size in a week! – iridescent 14:04, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Need your help my friend just like last time.....

to correct this issue once and for all.....thank you so much!

I remember how you helped me before last week, which I was very thankful for, so here is the small issue I found just now when I logged into my wikipedia account......or so I think so....as I am new to this great site I might just be reading it wrong and looking at an old pre-edited version. When I logged in and looked in my talk section I noticed a "request for speedy deletion" in there. I just sent this same message to user Ukexpat who also helped me format my page properly after you were the one who insisted that the entry about me was far from deletion material. It was you who stepped up and said the entry about me is far from a speedy deletion article so it would be locked in here on wikipedia which I was very thankful for.....as noted in the email I sent both of you. It would mean the world to me to have this issue corrected as it was last week by you. I also received your email (I think it was you or user Ukexpat) about adding additional materials....references etc. Just started doing that today for the first time, since I never paid any attention to this stuff until now...wish I did. Off the top of my head I appeared in the video, "Body of Work" that was shown on MSNBC about women in wrestling featuring April Hunter who I trained with. This video can be seen all over the internet and on youtube. I didn't have any speaking parts but I was shown close up doing pushups, walking around, drills, and being around the ring. You can view this close up photo of me from MSNBC on my myspace page in the pro wrestling album....the pic with the official MSNBC logo in the bottom of it. I don't know where one would place that information on my page. Others have told me I was in a documentary featuring Tony Atlas but I have to look for the first time when I get a free moment. I appreciate all of your help before and I know this matter will be corrected my friend. When I was pro wrestling I was known as Brutus "The Barber" Beefcake's boy and was touted by many that I would be going pro with XWF with Brutus. I was even contacted by a female in the XWF inside that I was on the roster under a different wrestling persona and she even told me my salary and wrestling TV schedule. Pretty well known in the business and far from deletion material since there is a lot more info that can be added in the future to this entry. I might have had a spelling error or two that I just picked up on from the email message I sent user Ukexpat.....sorry bout that. I'll try to brainstorm and think of some other videos etc. I look forward to the correction of this small issue. Thank you so much for taking the time out of your busy schedule, as you did before my friend, to correct this issue once and for all....that meant the world to me! I'll start looking for additional material etc. to add to the entry.

Thnak You So Much Again Iridescent.....You Are A Great Friend! Jaderocker (talk) 03:30, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not really the best person to ask as I know nothing at all about pro wrestling. The best people to ask would be WikiProject Professional wrestling; they'll not only know where to find appropriate sources, but will be much better placed than me to judge what is (and isn't) notable in wrestling. Be aware (I think I warned you about this before) that while writing about yourself isn't forbidden, it's discouraged, both because it's hard to maintain a neutral point of view about yourself, and because you're almost never well placed to judge what other people think is important about your life. Good luck with the article! – iridescent 13:48, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks............

Thanks Iridescent. I can assume it is safe to say that my entry is now safe on wikipedia.....right? Especially since it was already professionally re-formatted correctly and approved by a Wikipedia editor on the site. I'll just try over time to find more articles and videos I was in to use as references. Thanks So Much!

Jaderocker (talk) 14:05, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say yes, but like I say, I don't know pro wrestling; some sports have their own specific guidelines on what gets included. (For the benefit of anyone else reading this who does know wrestling/bodybuilding and can advise Jaderocker, the article in question is John Quinlan). – iridescent 14:09, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		For your defending of the mainspace from deletionist hordes who "couldn't find their arse with an atlas" ;-) Serviam (talk) 15:51, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I agree entirely with the sentiment; IMO Wikipedia's stubs are its greatest strength – you can see my thoughts on the matter here – although I've done my share of deleting as well. Did anything in particular prompt this? – iridescent 15:59, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your kind words...

Hey Iri,

Thanks for your kind words. The WB-Enf doesnt seem to work, even though I have now purged my cache countless times. I have given up on it.halfway through editing this it decided to work. Lolz.

My main reasons for leaving was due to the comment on my User page. I find this pretty unacceptable. I will be bringing it up further, but with the help from more experienced editors. As for the whole RfA/MfD thing, I found it embarrassing due to the whole Shanner191 issue.

I am going to return, but i doubt I will ever run for adminship now as I am sure many editors will look back on this and oppose because of it. This is in addition to the IRC comments.

Thankyou, yet again, for all the support you have ever given me at Wikipedia. I am most grateful. Could you possibly do me a favour, and either comment on my Editor Review, or my Blackpool tramway Peer review. Or both, if you can. Can you also unenforce my WB? I have some apologies to make...

B G 7even 17:55, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NVM i found a way around it. Thanks anyhoo. B G 7even 17:59, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest, the Shanner business won't be taken into account, unless people think you're trying to hide it. Yes, socking was silly, but you owned up to it right away, and it happens all the time; the fact that you owned up will count in your favour, not against you. As long as you mention it yourself when you accept an RFA, and don't look like you're trying to cover it up, people won't hold it against you.

An RFA from you now would probably fail at this stage for the reasons people opposed in your first RFA (lack of experience in policy discussions; a high talk/article contribution ratio; lack of experience in the areas you said you wanted to work in). In addition, at this stage it would fail through a perceived maturity issue (basically, a worry that you'd block someone you didn't like). I don't know if you've been watching RFA lately, but in the last couple of days there's been a fairly heated debate about maturity, so it's more in focus than usual.

I'd suggest you, first of all, read the same advice I gave XP a couple of threads up; read WP:SYSOP and discover just what an admin actually does before you decide you want to be one, or take part in RFAs. It doesn't give you any special status; Giano, who's probably the best writer here of all, isn't an admin and never will be; nor is Malleus Fatuorum; nor is Giggy; nor is Gurch. It doesn't mean people respect them any less, because Wikipedia is all about the articles and nothing else.

Assuming you're planning to stay, then stay away from the controversial areas for a while. Concentrate on getting WP:TUK back up to speed and writing articles. From experience, a fairly easy way to do good article work is expanding station articles, some of which are in a wretchedly bad state; either get hold of a Middleton Press book (there's one for almost every line) or just rely on Google, and edits like this are fairly easy to do and give you a solid background of article work that you can then point to. Go through Railway stations in Derbyshire, Disused railway stations in Derbyshire and Tram transport in the United Kingdom and pick out a few that look like they need expanding (Hull Street Tramways and Hathersage railway station are jumping out at me right now). Once you've done that, don't be afraid to ask other editors what they think – this is a collaborative work – as if you've written something yourself, it's sometimes hard to see the problems in it. If you're writing about anything in or near Manchester, I'd strongly advise asking Malleus to take a look at it when you've finished, as he knows everything there is to know about both Manchester and Wikipedia. (Don't be offended if he points out mistakes or rewrites what you've said, though!)

There are no doubt plenty of other people watching this, some of whom may also chip in with advice (cue Giggy). If they do and you don't agree with it, feel free to explain why you don't agree, but don't get into full-blown arguments. You're not under any obligation to take any advice (I regularly ignore large chunks of the Manual of Style, for instance), but anyone advising you is generally trying to help, even if they seem annoying.

Good luck, and welcome back! – iridescent 18:25, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the Blackpool tramway Peer review (sorry, only just noticed that), I'd very very very strongly suggest asking Malleus to have a read of it. There's enough material there to get it to FA, let alone GA status, but it needs a lot of cleaning up. In particular, there are a lot of books referenced, but none of them are actually cited in the article; see Anglesey Central Railway or Hellingly Hospital Railway for the two different possible ways (split-section and single-section) to cite books in this sort of article. While it shouldn't matter at GA (depending on which reviewer you get), at FA level every fact has to be cited to a page number in a book, so people can check you haven't made them up. (Yes, they do check.) – iridescent 18:34, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) If I may just add to that, many of wikipedia's finest are not administrators, and some of them are never likely to be. I think iridescent is quite right in advising you to wait, given the present climate at RfA. Spend some time thinking about why you want to be an administator, and if in the future you decide that it's still something you'd like to do, so long as you're open and honest and deal with any questions arising calmly I wouldn't have thought you'd have any problems a little while down the line. But for goodness sake don't give up wikipedia just because you think you may have damaged your chances at RfA. There are far more important things than that; in fact I'm hard-pressed to think of anything less important. Go write some articles, that's what we're here for. ;-) --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 18:37, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PS. If I gave up wikipedia every time I damaged my chances at RfA I'd be resigning thre or four times a day. :lol: --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 18:40, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both for your kind words. I will reply in more depth presently... it's just youre answers are so long! With so much great help! I'll be back shortly... B G 7even 18:42, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just noticed the reference to the Blackpool tramway article. GA has got a lot tougher about referencing over recent months, so that would be a problem. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 18:44, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Malleus, which are you refferring to? BTW, i'm working on it at User:Bluegoblin7/Sandbox5. Also, i think the fleetlist and possibly depots should be split? Ideas? B G 7even 18:53, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was just making a general comment in response to the point that iridescent raised about there being lots of books referenced, but none cited in the article. The pendulum is definitely swinging towards printed sources for both GA and FA. So far as the fleet and depot lists are concerned, I definitely think they need to be restructured. The comment was made at the peer review that they overbalance the TOC. But as this is iridescent's talk page, and not Blackpool tramway's, we probably ought to continue the discussion there. I'll try and make a suggestion there shortly (in the next hour or so) as to what I'd do if I were you. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 19:17, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, both of you. My very long reply will wait until tomorrow now (sorry!), I am busy attempting to fix my own wiki, and also to do some BT stuff! B G 7even 19:21, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Now, Iri, Don't eat it all at once!

B G 7even has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thanks for being a great friend! B G 7even 20:14, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you... now go write some articles! – iridescent 20:15, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Will do. I'm going to work on Blackpool Tramway first - I reckon I can get some DYK's from splitting it as well, and of course getting it to GA/FA! I'm waiting for Malleus's ideas on the talk page. B G 7even 20:17, 26 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another barnstar for iridiescent...

...gotcha? ;-) giggy _(:O) 08:50, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

just a note

I'm leaving wikipedia because of you and your age racist freinds. You were not nice to me and when I told my mom said there are not nice people. You are one and I hope you banned forever soon. Jerk