User talk:J.delanoy

User:J.delanoy/talkheader

Chess, anyone?

Make a move...

J.delanoy vs. World
Chessboard	Moves
a b c d e f g h 8 8 7 7 6 6 5 5 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 a b c d e f g h
	J.delanoy to move...
	# J.delanoy World 1 e4 e6 2 d4 Nf6 3 Bd3 Bb4+ 4 Bd2 Na6 5 a3 Bxd2+ 6 Qxd2 c5 7 Nf3 O-O 8 e5 Nd5 9 Nc3 Nxc3 10 Qxc3 cxd4 11 Nxd4 Qg5 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

Thanks

Thanks for that. That was...er...kinda scary that they knew my full name etc. Cheers again —— RyanLupin • (talk) 21:55, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

I see he's using a dynamic IP to harass you now :| —— RyanLupin • (talk) 22:51, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, that IP kinda freaked me out so until he stops with the scary harassment, I think it should stay deleted. Thanks —— RyanLupin • (talk) 23:11, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again *sighs* —— RyanLupin • (talk) 18:46, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Well as you can see, the guy just keeps coming back. What's the 'tool' you acquired? —— RyanLupin • (talk) 20:43, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

In case you haven't already seen it, this might interest you —— RyanLupin • (talk) 11:08, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, please protect it, thanks :) —— RyanLupin • (talk) 21:20, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Why on earth do I keep attracting attention from the wrong people? o_O Thanks again ——Possum (talk) 15:36, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

I didn't react at all in this instance, instead I continued to revert as normal. It was only when the harasser guy started texting/emailing me when I started to get panicky ——Possum (talk) 15:56, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

No, the guy threatening legal action I'm pretty sure was just a troll and he's left me be. I was referring to my dramatic behaviour back when I was harassed. I received text messages, phonecalls, emails etc. That's why I asked for my userpage be deleted. I'm just saying, I don't always react badly, only if there's a good reason XD ——Possum (talk) 16:00, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Oh believe me the police have been informed (see diff) but British Police being British Police have done nothing thus far. Ho hum :) ——Possum (talk) 16:13, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Sockuppetry

I am NOT guilty of sockpuppetry...I have the right to edit pages.

Hello J!

I contacted you recently about my edits, and I've been using Twinkle, right well, I might add :) I think Huggle would suit me fine, so do you think I'm ready for the Rollback tool? If not, I'll plug away and keep on fighting vandals (and writing articles). Thanks broseph. ^{XF Law} _{talk at me} 15:34, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

RFA/EOTW

I opposed for virtually identical reasons as Everyme (and long before you posted your reply, so it's not that you didn't see it). If you're going to jump on him, jump on me too. You might not agree with us, but I can – and will – defend every line of my oppose if you insist, which is not a boilerplate drive-by posting but a lengthy oppose based on Ed's answers to the questions, userpage, and recent history; I havent gone into detail as it's unfair on the candidate to turn an RFA into a de facto RFC unless he asks for it. I might have put it more politely than Everyme, but (as far as I can tell) we're saying virtually the same thing. (At the time of writing, we are two among 26 opposes, so we're hardly voices in the wilderness – and neither of us were in the first couple of opposes, so it's not a pile-on following us). – iridescent 22:23, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Iri, I haven't read your oppose yet as I write this. Mainly, just from reading your comment above, I'm sure you have more substantive "oppose" reasons than "don't like the sig/don't like the lolcat". And regardless, even if it is your rationale, I have no beef with you; we're fellow TPSers over at the late lamented AN:K, after all! I haven't even decided yet whether to support or oppose the user; I don't know him well enough and haven't done the research yet.

But to JDelanoy: Thank you. That really, really needed to be said. I've been less and less comfortable with the tone of RfA lately; it's one of the main reasons I haven't looked for a nominator myself (because god alone forbid that someone should self-nom--talk about the kiss of death!) I believe RfA needs an overhaul, sooner than later, because there's far too much "eeeewwww--I can't support somebody with an ORANGE sig, because I went to UMich and ORANGE is an Illini color..." type of bullwaste. Shortly I think I will begin to avoid RfA entirely, even as a lurker, because just reading some of this stuff makes me sad.Gladys J Cortez 22:48, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

(to Iridescent) I did read your oppose. The reason I did not jump on you was because your comments were very different than Everyme's. Your oppose included EotW's signature as one point among several more serious reasons. Because of this, I did not challenge your oppose. Everyme, on the other hand, originally opposed based on literally nothing. When he was challenged, he clarified his oppose. It was only when he was questioned on this attempt that Everyme came up with even one-half of (what is in my opinion, a) legitimate oppose rationale, and that was a "per XXXXX". I don't think I need to tell you what I think of the other half of Everyme's third attempt.

Basically, I do not understand the concept of opposing someone only because of their signature. (if their signature is not obscene or something). Everyme's tone and diction, especially that comment about the lolcat, were totally uncalled for. RfA is bad enough without people actively trying to turn it into the Wikispeak definition. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 23:46, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

J.delanoy, you just raised my respect of you A LOT. Someone really needed to say that sometime. While I agree that I have fucked up several times and opposed, including ID's, were extremely valid, Everyme's (and Badger Drink's) were completely uncalled for. Of course, if I were to say that at the RFA, people would accuse me of being a member of the civilty squad. It's already bad enough that people oppose on the grounds of I point out one fucked up process at my userpage. RFA sucks. the editorofthewiki (talk/contribs/editor review) 00:56, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

It is best to make comments you don't want others to see off-wiki. J.delanoy's response was completely needed, however, you as the candidate doing the same thing does not look good. Erik the Red 2 ~~~~ 01:00, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

EOTW, why didn't you tell me what you think on my talk page, or via email? When I first opposed, I thought my reasoning was very clear (not to mention, concise). When you stated your confusion by asking on my talk page "Is it considered wrong to offer to be one's friend?", I was actually at a loss for words (for a very short moment...). Maybe I should have posted an explanatory link to my talk page at my oppose. The reply I gave there is something I deeply believe in, and something that may explain my strong opinion on the issue of the sig: The terms "friend" and "friendship" have no meaning online. None. Whatsoever. And imho everyone who believes that's not true needs to leave the house, at least their computer, and certainly Wikipedia. I defy anyone to prove my logic wrong. Or to ask for a further explanation for anyone who still doesn't get it. Everyme 01:21, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Everyme: Your comment above is entirely your opinion, not objective fact. I have made many good friends during my time here on Wikipedia. If I ever get the chance to meet them in real life, I have no question that our friendship would only become stronger. Your statement that you "defy anyone to prove [your] logic wrong" is not appropriate. While you are entitled to your opinion, everyone else is also entitled to theirs. If you believe that it is impossible to make true friends online, that is perfectly fine. I have no problem with that. But your combative tone while stating your opinion, and your challenge to other to "prove you wrong" is unnecessary. In addition, saying that "everyone who believes that's not true needs to leave the house, at least their computer, and certainly Wikipedia" is tremendously inappropriate, perhaps even insulting. There are many, many people who have made very close friendships here on Wikipedia. While these are not perfect in the sense that merely typing and reading do not convey the full impact and emotional expression of human speech, I see no reason why text cannot forge as deep a friendship as speech can. Maybe even deeper, since it is very easy to say something mean without thinking about it. Typing something out allows you to actually read (and consequently think about) what you are saying before you say it, so your cyber-friends (if I may call them that) see more of your good tendencies and less of your bad ones. Many times, I have started typing something and then, before saving the page, I went back and toned it down a bit. I wish I could do that in the real world. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 02:13, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

That's probably a succinct summary of one major difference between us two: I wish we couldn't do it on Wikipedia. Everyme 02:16, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Couldn't do what? J.delanoy^gabs_adds 02:17, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Erm. You: " I wish I could do that in the real world." Me: "I wish we couldn't do it on Wikipedia." To which I'd add: precisely because we cannot do it in the real world. Everyme 02:19, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

despicable

[1] I think you may have misunderstood my line of reasoning. Or overlooked it entirely. Or decided not to care for some reason or the other. At any rate, EOTW is absolutely unsuited at this time to become an admin. And I daresay the way he opposed Karanacs' RfA over Karanacs pointing out EOTW's unacceptable self-promotion is far far worse than my uninvolved oppose. Far worse, if you bother to read through it. Everyme 01:05, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

As I implied in my comment on the RfA, various points brought up by other people in the RfA were enough to keep me from supporting. If you had included any of the other points in your oppose, I likely would not have said anything. But you didn't include any other points in your oppose. In my rant, I was not negating the other concerns that were brought up. Based on what I have seen and read, I regret to say that I also do not think that EotW is ready to be an admin now. However, your oppose was based on what is, IMO, a very flimsy rationale, and you tossed in quite a few unnecessary jabs and covert personal attacks. That is why I made the comment, and I fully stand behind everything I said there. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 01:49, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Then you're wrong. Also, I'm looking forward to my own RfA real soon now, as soon as September is over. Everyme 01:57, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Look, I'll explain it to you right now: I am of the deep and honest conviction that people who display overfriendliness online have more or less serious emotional issues, of the kind that certainly makes them unsuitable as admins. That's a conclusion I haven't made lightly nor quickly nor recently. It's not directed at anyone in particular. But everyone who has "your friend" or a smiley in their sig raises my strong suspicion. Therefore, I opposed based on that. To me, it still stands out of the multitude of deal-breakers in that RfA. When EOTW asked me at my talk page "Is it considered wrong to offer to be one's friend?", there was no other possible conclusion than that he didn't understand the difference between the Myspace/Facebook kind of "friendship" and real, actual friendship as I do and the firm, unwavering grasp of which distinction I regard as an enormously important quality, especially in Wikipedians. Everyme 02:10, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

See my reply in the section above. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 02:15, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Um, when you made your latest comment at the RfA, did you realise I had struck some parts of my initial comment? Everyme 03:54, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Something funny you should have.

I just saw a particular bit of editing you did on the LHC article, and it has to be the most hilarious history log I've ever seen on Wikipedia. I had to memorialize it, so I did so here. I'm surprised you didn't (unless I missed it). 24.145.19.247 (talk) 06:49, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Covering my ...

An anonymous user 207.181.229.38 did not like my removal of his edit at A Theory of Justice I stated WP:Cite for my removal as his edits seemed VERY biased. Can you check to be sure? I could be wrong... would not be the first time.... --CanadianLinuxUser (talk) 16:04, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

In reply to your comment on my talk page, you were correct to remove those edits. Such scathing criticism must be cited very heavily, and since the IP did not cite anything, you were well within policy to remove them. Using a more descriptive edit summary would have been better, but I know how it is when you are really into Huggling, so don't worry about that. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 16:09, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks J. --CanadianLinuxUser (talk) 16:11, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Removal of active block message

Hello J. I saw your edit summary on User talk:Rtvybo787 about the removal of an active block message. I was unaware of that. I always thought this and this were the guidelines. Can you point me in the right direction on this? Toddst1 (talk) 16:35, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

AFAIK there are still only 3 things that are not to be removed: Declined unblock requests while the block is active, Shared IP notices, and confirmed sockpuppetry notices. Per WP:BLANKING. –xeno (talk) 16:40, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

I hope my question came across ok. I wasn't being sarcastic. It's a strange and often misunderstood rule and the weird part is the rules sometimes change. Cheers. Toddst1 (talk) 05:16, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Reed210 blocked for only a week?

I was wondering why you blocked the racism-spewing vandalism-only account Reed210 for only a week. I don't see why that one wasn't indeffed. Can you explain to me your reasoning? Aunt Entropy (talk) 16:45, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Huggle blocks

Hi. I don't think we can use Huggle to block editors at the moment, due to the new "Allow user to edit own talk page" option. Huggle is disabling this option by default, so blocked users are being unable to appeal their blocks. This is also being discussed here. Epbr123 (talk) 16:47, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

3RR question

Hi J.delanoy, just wanted your opinion on this because you looked active right now. Am I handling this correctly by removing what I see as spam links from these disambig pages? Will I be subject to 3RR if I continue? Thanks, Darkspots (talk) 22:49, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Nice move with the French WP. Thanks! (You forgot to sign his talk page, btw) Darkspots (talk) 23:04, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

So....he's still at it. [2] I'm not reverting again because of 3RR—it seems like a gray area, whether or not my reversions count as a content dispute or as vandalism reverts. I warned him for 3RR, but I'm not sure of my ground here. Thanks, Darkspots (talk) 13:54, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

The icing on the gâteau for me is that it's extremely likely that he's Canadian and (also/therefore) speaks perfectly good English—highlighting your point even further. Darkspots (talk) 14:56, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

IP apology

listen im sorry for doing that to the pages i wont do it again sorry

GEM article

Your silly bot reverted a useful edit regarding a name change of the company. Wikipedia bots should be assassinated! 65.166.89.2 (talk) 13:46, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

secondary sex characteristic

Did you bother reading my rationale on the talk page? How on earth is what I have done - remove a clearly non encyclopedic photo which fails to show one of the most prominent secondary sex caharacteristics of a woman - vandalism? It's having mis-information like this that makes Wikipedia a laughing stock. 86.150.96.24 (talk) 15:04, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

72.14.172.170

Dear J.delanoy, after I saw IP 72.14.172.170 vandalizing your talkpage, I reported it to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. After I reported it, I visited its talkpage only to discover that you blocked it for 55 hours! :-) AdjustShift (talk) 15:15, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

User is "peeved" at me

This user 86.150.96.24 (talk) is "peeved" because I removed his picture. His was replacing one that had been there for months. I think I am correct... but as you know, I have been wrong before. His aggressive attitude is what puts me off I guess. At any rate... if I'm wrong... let me know please. PS: You relaize I only put stuff on your talk page to keep you but so I can Huggle faster than you !  ;-) --CanadianLinuxUser (talk) 15:34, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for signing my guestbook

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		Thank you for signing my guestbook. LAAFan

Congrats on being the 70th user to sign my guestbook. ;)--LAAFan^sign _review 01:22, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again, this time for the compliment. A comment like that from an admin is very valuable. :)--LAAFan^sign _review 03:55, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

LAAFan has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Reversion of Child Support

Ah, I feel more welcome already. It would be nice if instead of simply reverting my work on Child Support you provide an "informative edit summary". Removing external links can be contentious but the section was tagged and their was no discussion on the talk page. I'm sure a compromise can be reached, if you care to discuss this onTalk:Child_support.→(_Speak•^MorgothX•_Havoc) 03:32, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

I just saw that huggle thing, the revert was probably a mistake. There was vandalism on the page, though not from my edit. I removed it later. If huggle or whatever is causing these mistakes it could end up hurting things worse than regular vandals! →(_Speak•^MorgothX•_Havoc) 03:48, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Userpage code.

How do you hide the contents of your userpage so that it dispalys that little "TO VANDALS: Where did the information go?" thing? I would like to know so I can have that protection on my userpage. Thank you. Vandalism destroyer (talk) 03:41, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Before the text you want to hide, use <!-- and at the end of the hidden text put --> . That should do it. Useight (talk) 03:57, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

That only hides text so that it doesn't appear on the page. It still appears in the edit box. I want the exact opposite. I want the contents of my userpage to only appear on the page itself, and not the edit box, so that vandals can't touch it. Vandalism destroyer (talk) 14:55, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Put the text on a subpage, and {{name of subpage}} on your userpage. It won't stop vandals editing it but it'll make it harder. You can't prevent people editing your page – see that "anyone can edit" on every page? – iridescent 16:05, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

I just did it for you, VD. this is your real page. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 16:10, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Hey, thank you. I appreciate it. Vandalism destroyer (talk) 16:14, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Sure, why not? Vandalism destroyer (talk) 16:17, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

They're going after my talk page now, changing my comments so that they are offensive. I assume that I really can't do anything about users vandalizing my talk page. Vandalism destroyer (talk) 03:42, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps you could get it semi-protected. Useight (talk) 03:57, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Dear J.delanoy, thanks for blocking 65.18.10.144. Have a nice day! :-) AdjustShift (talk) 17:28, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Rollback?

I heard/seen you take rollback requests, and I was wondering if you could consider me? Thanks. Message from XENU^{u, t} 19:30, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

No problem. :) Message from XENU^{u, t} 19:55, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!

Hey, JD. I forgot to give this message to you a little earlier today, but because today is 1 October...

Happy First Edit Day, J.delanoy, from the Wikipedia Birthday Committee! Have a great night!

SchfiftyThree 01:26, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

User talk:87.112.21.192

When browsing Wikipedia without logging in I received this message:

" Welcome to Wikipedia. The recent edit you made to Phineas Flynn has been reverted, as it appears to be unconstructive. Use the sandbox for testing; if you believe the edit was constructive, ensure that you provide an informative edit summary. You may also wish to read the introduction to editing. Thanks. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 18:54, 6 July 2008 (UTC)"

I have neither edited Phineas Flynn nor heard of him. I am a registered Wikipedian and do not make anonymous edits. No-one else has access to my PC. If 87.112.21.192 is my IP, then someone, somehow is using my IP anonymously. I know neither where to find my PC's IP nor how someone else could clone it. If you can help me with either of these questions please contact me! Motacilla (talk) 13:29, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Anonymous user repeat of violations

Sorry to bother you with this, but it appears that anonymous user 202.89.32.166 (talk · contribs) is still posting material for which [s]he was blocked. C.f.

• User_talk:202.89.32.166#Your_edits_to_multiple_user_talk_pages
• User_talk:RJHall#suggestion_for_electron_article

The same IP is also posting aggressive comments on the Talk:Electron page. [S]he seems to have a particular agenda against modern electron physics. I am unsure of the proper approach, since the editor is dancing the fine edge of trolling.—RJH (talk) 19:41, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Re:

You're totally welcome. Good block too! Pinkadelica (talk) 06:52, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

I would have gone with a much longer one, myself. :P GlassCobra 09:04, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Nah, you're fine. Go ahead and get some rest, buddy, we'll take it from here. :) GlassCobra 09:39, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

XF Law

Hi J.delanoy, sorry for a late response to this, I've been on a break the last few weeks. While this user now has rollback anyway, I would have said yes to granting the request. Best wishes. Acalamari 16:37, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

RE: Your edits

Hi Techman!

I just wanted to let you know that I have been watching you, and all of your reversions that I looked seem good, as did your AIV reports. I think you may be a little overzealous with your UAA reports; you may want to read WP:USERNAME for a refresher, and please remember that UAA is only intended for blatant violations.

Basically, just keep up the good work with your reversions and AIV reports, and do take a minute to read the page I linked to!

Cheers!

J.delanoy^gabs_adds 16:37, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

What do you mean by "blatant" usernames? Techman224 (talk) 16:50, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Techman224 (talk) 17:42, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Question

Hi I have a question. The reason I'm asking you is because, being an administrator, you would know far more than myself or most editors. If you go to the King Kong vs Godzilla page and look under the "Legacy" section, the last paragraph talks about a script for sale (including a website link). Is it OK to leave that in there? It seems to me script solicitation on a Wikipedia page would violate some sort of policy or rule since it seems to be a form of advertising. Is that the case?Giantdevilfish (talk) 17:42, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Great. Thanks for the reply. It just seemed wrong to me for someone to use an online encyclopedia to advertise a script, but I just wanted to make sure that was the case which is why I asked. Cheers!Giantdevilfish (talk) 18:12, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Buckshot (Rapper) cousin Stones

What's up J. Delanoy I see you've made extensive contributions to the rappers Buckshot bio page and I was wondering if you could and would help me create a decent page for his cousin Stones. I have extensive information on him and was wondering why the wiki site does not feature any article of him considering him and buckshot has appeared in photos, footage, and events with each other not to mention he has co-signs from Brownsville legends such as Smoothe da hustler along with Buck and I think he is also close with St. Laz who's another up and coming Brownsville emcee that's not feautured on this site. I would love to make a page for those two but considering that I am new to this site I don't know how to with out it being deleted from the site within a matter of days. If need be you can check out either one of their myspace pages for some information of your own ,myspace/STONESMUZIK and myspace/STLAZPOTTERSFIELD. I would be very greatful if you were to help me because if you too are a lover of hip hop I know you can tell that Brownsville emcees are some of the most potent from M.O.P. to Heltah Skeltah, AZ and even some of the WU Members. Thank you in advance, Peace. —Preceding unsigned comment added by HipHopDoc (talk • contribs) 19:38, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

AIV Reports

Aaah, thanks for the compliment, but don't hurt yourself! We can't afford to lose someone as effective as you to carpel tunnel from blocking too many IPs... DARTH PANDA^talk 19:46, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! I know, I was mostly kidding too, but if you get carpel tunnel, I wouldn't be able to stop blaming myself... DARTH PANDA^talk 18:38, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism originating from 216.56.60.210

I noticed that you recently left a warning to 216.56.60.210 regarding vandalism. The same anonymous user, just prior to that, removed all the previous (multiple) warnings from their talk page. I'm unfamiliar with the protocol for this situation, as I do not want to remove your warning in order to restore the previous ones, and I suspect that the nature of your warning will change once that user's talk page has been restored. So, I'm kind of dropping it in your lap, hoping that I will one day be able to better handle similar situations myself. Thanks so much for your help. Steamroller Assault (talk) 00:57, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Hey Steamroller, this popped up on my watchlist and I thought I'd help out. Users (and anons) are free to remove items from their own talk pages, per this guideline, however doing so is taken as evidence that they have read and understood the messages, and little of the same vandalism is generally tolerated. Hope this helps. – Toon^(talk) 01:23, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

The 2008 King Kong vs Godzilla screenplay is real and not advertising.

That is real and undisputed. Here is additional verification that it is real:

The US Copyright Registered number is PAu003075664. You have full access to verify this with the US Copyright Office. As for a verifiable source, you can contact the President of Toho Eiga, Mr. Shougo Tomiyama at Toho Pictures Inc., 1-4-1 Setagawa-Ku, Seijyou, Tokyo, Japan 157-8561. Phone: 81-3-3591-1211

東宝　映画 〒157-8561　東京都世田谷区成城1-4-1

Is that enough of a source? Thank you for your contibutions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Spock seat (talk • contribs) 04:34, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't mean to butt in here, but whether its a copyrighted script or not, the site still lists it as being solicited for sale. If this script was sold and in production then fine. But its a script being shopped around. That seems to me to be a form of advertsing as in trying to sell a script.Giantdevilfish (talk) 04:44, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Not only that, but the text is badly written even if it weren't advertising. The two links are the same, it's badly punctuated, the number of pages is unnecessary detail, and it's generally unencyclopedic. —KCinDC (talk) 04:55, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

A poor quality page is not a good reason for deletion in most cases. Tombomp (talk/contribs) 18:39, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Alternate acc't

Hiya... the box I'm using on my alternate is one I found in the category of message templates for doing so. I'm not quite understanding why it looks like I'm running a sock.. could you explain? Prince of Canada ^{t | c} 08:42, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Hee! You didn't waste my time, I'm glad you brought it up if you felt there was an issue. NOW GO TO BED! Prince of Canada ^{t | c} 08:47, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Thankyou

Thankyou for being a pleasure to work with during my time on WP, I really appreciate it. You've even got a mention on my userpage. ;) Lradrama 07:15, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks J for your help and your reply —Preceding unsigned comment added by HipHopDoc (talk • contribs) 16:19, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

fine

but i will be back tomorrow, byeNo Hollaback Girl (talk) 02:46, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Your block of User:Vrraybadboy76

Nicely done - you may want to also look at User:72.135.25.233 and User:Vrraybadboy78. Similar "styles" of vandalism, and all three of them vandalized the WGN disambiguation page with the same content. Mlaffs (talk) 16:49, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

My Talk Page

Ta for that. Very quick - beat me to it by miles... Peridon (talk) 18:17, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Nice block ;)

You learn quickly, grasshoppah. *bows* GlassCobra 18:43, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Heh, I've made some decently rouge blocks myself. Meh. Anyway, no, I don't have Huggle, and I'm actually leaving to go out in a bit. I'm sorry, I'll help manually as long as I can. :( GlassCobra 18:51, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I've heard Huggle's not in very good shape. Hopefully it gets fixed up soon, eh? GlassCobra 18:54, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Is this Ok

User_talk:86.9.208.244 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.95.101.133 (talk) 19:03, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi J.delanoy, thank you for the semi-protection of ☻! Korg (talk) 19:38, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Robinsst&action=edit

Spam-only account. Sam ^Blab 19:41, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Hammer? Sam ^Blab 19:42, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

thanks

for watching my back :) Vishnava _talk 21:15, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Can I steal...

Hello there, can you send me the template for the notification used on your userpage, invented by Happy-Melon on the small fury animal, I like it. Stealing it would be satisfying, but your wiki-abilitys are far superior to mine, so I have no idea how to get around the page-hiding you have employed. Cheers, oh and yes do please reply on my talk page. Philip.t.day (talk) 21:31, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

thank you. Philip.t.day (talk) 21:45, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

vandalism?

why? Tenka is really a genus of Agaonidae!--Huhukoko (talk) 22:36, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

for reverting the vandalism of my user page. DoubleBlue (Talk) 22:52, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Howdy!

Hello, J.delanoy ... I noticed that you have a Here about a speedy delete? message like mine. :-)

Just wanted to know your opinion of the Flag templates for deletion warnings and the FLAG-protocols that I developed to address what I thought was a problem with the existing system, i.e., some deletions being Too Hasty.

Happy Editing! — 72.75.82.202 (talk · contribs) _{23:16, 7 October 2008 (UTC)}

Mr. Defender

		The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		For your great amount of vandal reverting and vandal fighting. I'd also like to thank you for reverting the vandalism done to my userpage and blocking the individual that had done so. DiverseMentality(Boo!) 23:40, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

How do you revert so fast?

When I try to revert "blanked the page", I noticed that you have already reverted it while I was trying to. I do view the recent changes list, but how do you eliminate the edit so fast? Do you use a software program? I wouldn't think it's vandalproof, because that has been disabled. Do you use anything, or do you just manage to click through the links to revert it so fast? -- IRP ☎ 23:41, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Rianxo

I still not understanding why you had reverted my article Rianxo and after you "undoing own edit". If you watch what I have made in that article, you understand that wasn't an unconstructive contribution. Please, do not revert articles without see what we had made on them. Thanks. 84.90.92.195 (talk) 00:16, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Question

Hi - I wanted to ask you about this article, where an anonymous IP editor is constantly reverting to assert that Kosovo is part of Serbia. Now in my judgment this is a content dispute which is not really vandalism, and I do not wish to partake in a revert war. But I reverted an edit he made which had an edit summary carrying a threat. Question: can his edits, owing to his edit summary/attitude, be construed as vandalism? Did I do properly to revert with Huggle, or should I leave such edits alone? Vishnava _talk 00:21, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Considering his edit summary, I'd say it is vandalism so I doubt any admin is gonna block you for WP:3RR--Xp54321 ^{(Hello! • Contribs)} 00:24, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks to you both! I want to be perfectly cautious not to violate any policy here by improper use of Huggle. Vishnava _talk 00:34, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for reverting vandalism on my user page. I think I might have pissed off an infamous puppet-master. Wronkiew (talk) 00:30, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry about it unless you get tired of reverting. Wronkiew (talk) 00:41, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks and also

Thanks for the revert. But the IP went to a different one 76.92.185.166 and reverted your edit back to theirs. Rgoodermote  00:35, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Cheers to you too, mate. I can feel the love from the vandals today. Rgoodermote  00:41, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Can you monitor my talk page? S/He is just going and going and going and is reminding me of the bunny...forgot the battery. Rgoodermote  00:44, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks mate, I can't deal with a lot of vandalism on my talk pages right now. Things are going too fast and getting too busy. Rgoodermote  01:02, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Crstyle

Please Delete That Page Its Just a kid that haves a youtube page and put up a profile of himself —Preceding unsigned comment added by The4's (talk • contribs) 01:59, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

J-Flexx

i am trying to fix the j-flexx section and add two albums by deleting off his page and put that info into the album information I know about rap and you dont so im going to improve it ok. —Preceding unsigned comment added by The4's (talk • contribs) 02:25, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

RFA Thanks

J.delanoy, I'd like to thank you for voting in my RFA. Thanks also for your kind words of support, and I hope that I live up to your expectations. Don't forget, if you have any questions (or bits of advice), please leave a message on my talk page. Thanks again, Spencer^T♦C 02:48, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

how did yu get this job with wikipedia?

so how did you get it? 199.107.237.180 (talk) 03:42, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Questions about Huggle

Hi. I'm a newbie editor with intentions of becoming a functional recent changes patroller. While I was checking out the Recent Changes page, I noticed you revert a lot of vandalism (kudos to you on that mate), but not just that –you are unbelievably fast. I definitely don't think I'm the fastest around here, but I'm definitely not slow either, yet when I get to the page, I always find you've already reverted it! I might not sleep at night if I have to assume this is the result of human training; I mean, can you really be that fast without the aid of something?

So, I read you use Huggle. I'd like to try it out, but a couple of things confuse me. Maybe you could clarify them for me, since you say you can help with the vandalism tools? Pretty please with sugar on top? :)

The questions would be:

• Is Huggle even functoinal anymore? On its page (I assume) it says MEDIAWIKI CHANGES/BUGS HAVE BROKEN HUGGLE. USE SOMETHING ELSE. THANKS. So... yeah. Kind of confused here. If it is unstable (or something), how long has it been this way? And do you think it might work properly again? (If it's broken in some way in the first place, of course)
• Is Huggle the reason you edit at the speed of light? Or do you just possess inhuman, godlike speed? I might just worship you if you do :D Or at least give you some sort of barnstar.
• Do I absolutely need rollback rights to use it? Or can I just do less things with it without having rollback rights? I want to know if I can fight vandalism better without having to apply for a privilege I don't fully understand and probably wouldn't get in a million years.

Any help on any/all of these questions is greatly appreciated. --QuadrivialMind (talk) 03:45, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for your answers mate. If I have more questions about the vandal fighter thingamabobs, I'll be sure ask you :)

And yes, you can call me Quad, lol. --QuadrivialMind (talk) 17:19, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Your revert on Ellis Island

Hi, you reverted the blankening of the article but failed to check the last edit before that. It was nonsense and should have been reverted as well. Please be a bit more careful. Thanks and greetings. --h-stt !? 11:49, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Huggle

Whilst rollbacking using recent changes, i noticed that you are able to use huggle. May i ask which version you are using, and and if you have any knowlege of the current huggle problm? Thanks. Montgomery' 39 (talk) 15:23, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

My gods man, think of the stalkers

You should start replying here and/or replying both places, and or placing a diff-link to your reply here =) –xeno (talk) 15:25, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

 Done[3] J.delanoy^gabs_adds 15:39, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Excellent. For the newer users you should still copy your reply to their page or ping them to come back and read. dats what I do. –xeno (talk) 15:46, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

about.com

Is about.com considered a reliable source? I am currently editing an article that uses about.com almost exclusively. It does not look kosher to me, and would appreciate the benefit of your experience. ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 15:41, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

According to our article about it, About.com is an online source for original information and advice [...] The site’s content is dynamic, attempting to keep up with new information and changing consumer interests.". So I would say that it is not reliable, since apparently pretty much anyone can say anything and they don't have to back it up like we do here. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 15:44, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

That is precisely what I thought. I am removing the references, which will, unfortunately, leave the article almost wholly unreferenced. Alas... ---RepublicanJacobite_{The'FortyFive'} 15:47, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Vandalism block, thanks.

[4]. Nice. Fast. I won't be surprised to see more of this from 87.112-87.115, which is the floating IP range for a provider used by both the banned User:Fredrick day and the blocked User:Oxyman42, which may or may not be independent users. Quite a coincidence if they are. (The only two very active users attempting to harass me are co-located?).? Anyway, thanks. Not worth spending a lot of time on this, they will just reboot the modem. --Abd (talk) 16:42, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I'll just block them as they show up. It's not hard, and it requires more effort on their part than on mine. Cheers! J.delanoy^gabs_adds 16:43, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Whack-a-mole is actually kind of fun, if a bit brainless. --Abd (talk) 16:50, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Pretty much. I remember one day someone vandalized an article with several different IP addresses, so I semi-protected it, since the mainspace actually matters. They then vandalized my talk page with "Ha, I sure pwned that article". I reverted and blocked. He came back again saying "I have unlimited IP address". rv, block. He kept this up for quite a while actually, and I just kept swinging the banhammer, and I refused to protect my page. After a while, he just stopped. Most vandals are like that. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 16:54, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Revert on user talk

Just as a note, I have undone your revert, I like to keep all messages for reference, unless they violate guidelines or whatever of course. Whilst it does perhaps constitute a personal attack, I'd prefer it be left. Just letting you know, you did indeed do the right thing, I just like to keep everything in one place. — neuro^(talk) 17:03, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

That is not a problem, it's your talk page. I just read it as a personal attack since you had reverted him, so I removed it. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 17:04, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

G7 revert

Seems Huggle is being odd, I told it to leave it alone. Then again, it's not like it's being a happy bunny at the moment as it is. — neuro^(talk) 18:24, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Oh, in that case, sorry for yelling at you. Here's hoping Gurch gets a new version out soon... J.delanoy^gabs_adds 18:26, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

You have nothing to apologise for. Have a good day, mate. :) — neuro^(talk) 18:28, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Wiki Cookie

I think you deserve this for your very hard work in fighting vandalism and make wikipedia not suck! Lol!

AtheWeatherman (talk) 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.

Thank you! J.delanoy^gabs_adds 18:56, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

You are very welcome! AtheWeatherman (talk) 19:10, 8 October 2008 (UTC)