User talk:Viridae/Archive5

Archives; Template
	1:28/04/2006-25/06/2006; 2:25/06/2006-26/07/2006; 3:26/07/2006-24/08/2006; 4:24/08/2006-12/01/2007; 5:12/01/2007-14/07/2007; 6:14/07/2007-14/02/2008; 7:14/02/2008-06/06/2009

Welcome to my talk page.
Click here to leave a new message at the end.
Alternatively, you can add your message at the end of the appropriate section listed in the index below.

I will respond to a post you make on your talk page, copy and pasting your comment over. Please do the same.
If I post on your talk page please respond there to keep the conversation readable.
Add new sections for new discussions.

Dresden Codak

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dresden Codak

Can I get you to review your close of this, please? You've called it "no consensus" when there is a "no reliable sources" reasoning to delete and reliable sources with non-trivial mentions are not provided. - brenneman 00:45, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

I stand by the non consensus. Feel free to take it to WP:DRV. Viridae ^Talk 08:59, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

January Greetings

Happy January 15th, 2007 Viridae. Did you know i have created over 60 articles? You can see them by viewing the bottom of my talkpage. Merry... January! --Chikinpotato11 16:28, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

ip ban on 204.193.6.90

your ip ban on 204.193.6.90 is a ban on a school what happened that made you ban that ip? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Stapuft (talk • contribs) 14:49, 19 January 2007 (UTC).

If you'd like to hear from him in the WP:AN/I thread...

...you should probably drop him a note on his talk page. As far as I can see – following an admittedly very cursory examination – nobody has followed up with The JPS during this discussion. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 12:15, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, hadn't checked. Viridae ^Talk 12:22, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Block precedent?

Hi. I'm curious about this block? A six-month block for an IP with three edits ever? Is it an open proxy? —Wknight94 (talk) 13:52, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh never mind. I see now it's probably a open proxy. Sorry to bother you... —Wknight94 (talk) 13:54, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

No problems. Viridae ^Talk 22:17, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

User 71.60.67.39

I was under the impression that physical threats were a reason for an immediate block, which is why I reported this user. TimVickers 00:20, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

I think they were more a case of a school aged child being idiotic, the primary offence being vandalism. Viridae ^Talk 00:22, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Can Admins edit the Edit summary? If this threat could be removed then I would be less concerned. TimVickers 00:30, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

I cant edit it, but as it was an uncontructive edit I can delete the edit entirely. Doing that now. Viridae ^Talk 00:31, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

The Bacteria article has now disappeared, is this normal? TimVickers 00:40, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

I deleted it and am in the process of restoring the 2200 revisions. I have to do it in bacthes because I'm getting an RSI checking all the check boxes. Viridae ^Talk 00:44, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Ah, thank you. Sorry to bug you but my heart stopped for a moment! :) TimVickers 00:48, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

I see you have done a massive amount of work on the article, Barnstar coming your way when I finish with this! Viridae ^Talk 00:52, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks so much! Thanks also for all that revision work. Ironically, after all that the moronic vandal didn't take the hint and re-inserted exactly the same threats. TimVickers 02:57, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Newyorkbrad's RfA

Thank you for your support on my RfA, which closed favorably this morning, as well as for your kind comments accompanying your !vote. I appreciate the confidence the community has placed in me and am looking forward to my new responsibilities. Please let me know if ever you have any comments or suggestions, especially as I am learning how to use the tools. Best regards, Newyorkbrad 20:26, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Request for Comment- Please provide Third Party Input.

If you could check this out and provide your input, it would be appreciated. thank you. TheGreenFaerae 08:33, 24 January 2007 (UTC) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Tr%C3%B6del

Please, I need to get a full consensus of all users who can provide input before the 48 hour deadline passes. As you handled the ANI, your input could porve very important tot eh RfC. TheGreenFaerae 04:53, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your assistance. I was afraid it would be unlsited before it had a chance for review.TheGreenFaerae 05:14, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Kuru RFA

Thank you for the congrats and for your vote. It was actually a little creepy, since I was flipping through your logs for samples of speedy deletion edit summaries when the "new message" bar popped up. Here's to hoping I don't live up to my incidental namesake! :) Kuru ^talk 03:59, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Protection requested

I had long and way out of line-terrible argument with mkil who was vandalizing marciano and other pages, i also asked him not to talk to me or leave me any more messages, i do not want to talk to him, all messages are left on marciano dispute pages, tell him never to contact me again. Also Marciano page should be locked longer and mkil not allowed to be there. I have evidence he was logging on under some other ip 58.8 and had some of his friends join in on the "fun" He was warned not to revert many times in the past. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Rocky_Marciano#Third_opinion Most of the info is here. Boxingwear

I will make my decision when the protection is removed - I may contact another admin to watch over it for me and reprotect when the protection runs out over the weekend when I am away. Protection is not meant to be permanent, it was placed in this case so editing diputes stopped being fought in the article space. If this behaviour continues, I may just hand out blocks to whoever I think is involved. Viridae ^Talk 23:15, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Right, i agree, but you have to look at the broader picture, on talk, right now, people agree with me, i also requested protection from mkil above, did you read that... i mean, wow. On a different subject... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Gwernol#Complaint This user deleted the lineal champions, we need to recreate it, reasons are given above and there are other people who agree with me, i can not believe why good articles are killed on wiki, bad remain...Boxingwear

If you'll look at the Marciano page, BoxingWear was told in no uncertain terms by another editor that my edits were not "vandalism." I requested a third party opinion that resulted in a strong chastisement of BoxingWear. He/She continues to assert that my edits are "vandalism" and that I log on under different IP addresses (which is false -- I welcome any attempts to trace IPs to see the truth of this). BoxingWear continues to attack me and refuses to recognize my good faith edits as legitimate. MKil 04:25, 26 January 2007 (UTC)MKil

How to do things

What is the code to put things into archive, to merge or rename article or to put music or square on my talk page. Boxingwear Is there any way you administrators can find out if some other user has been using different ip, in order not to reveal who he is like mkil?Boxingwear

whaa? vandal?

Last spring I was looking at the group, The Residents, listing and found it full of mistakes and suppositions. I made extensive corrections which as manager and historian of the group seemed a rightful responsibility. Acutally I am the only authority for this subject as I also oversee www.residents.com. I am even named in the article as a participant in the group. I made all the changes under my real name as I was not playing games. I just discovered that back in June all my corrections reverted back to the errors and I was branded a "vandal" for removing other people's erronous speculations where it seems to me the person who revereted the material back to the errors is the vandal. I had a message from you from June that I am now resonding to claiming this. Maybe it was you who vandalized my corrections. I don't know since I am not a power user.

Anyway, I do not monitor The Residents page nor will I start doing so, but do wish that the term vandal was not generously handed out to us authorized individuals. Meanwhile, the Wikipedia page for The Residents remains flawed and by naming me a vandal I guess it will stay that way. I do not understand allowing the ignorant to freely speculate on Wikipedia while blocking the knowledgable from correcting data.

Hardy Fox <email removed> www.residents.com —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hfox (talk • contribs) 18:20, 26 January 2007 (UTC).

Huh? I never warned you for vandalism. 02:16, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Irwin

Could you help me please? I have received my first warning on Wikipedia (I think from you). Last October there was vigorous debate regarding a quote from Germaine Greer inserted on Irwin's page. After this debate it was edited out and it remained that way for a couple of months until one person inserted it again. Based on previous discussion I and others deleted repeated attempts to insert it again. We suggested that this person read the archives – it seemed to me this person had not read the discussion. The last suggestion to this person was to discuss it before reinserting it. There has been extensive discussion and (at the risk of only presenting my side) all but two people did not want it reinserted for many good reasons. I am confused as to why the person making an insertion in these circumstances gets protection whilst another who removes this with the consent of the discusscion page gets blocked. What should I do. It seems unconscionable to permit this insertion. Alan Davidson 12:01, 28 January 2007 (UTC) I have now noticed you warned both of us. That does seem fairer. Many thanks. Alan Davidson 12:04, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Please Be slow

Hello dear still discussion is going on page so u can not Vandlize my page before it. Khalidkhoso 10:23, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Some countries mention Hezbollah as terrorist but some does not? Does this make it terrorist .what will you write on it? Artilce .Just need answer then I will change my user page and should stop vandalizing my page. And u sent me are for personal attacks ,I am not attacking on it ,I am writing some thing that most of communities think and write I can show you material if you want regarding it.

Khalidkhoso 10:54, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I do not have to say any thing ,it is like taking decison to Hanging some1 and later asking him "Do you have any thing to protect ur self" .u lokced my page and u took decison (now why invitation for disscusion,it is over my side).what else i would ,Say.But fine i would not use flags on my pgae(Just inWikipedia). when u r going to allow me to edit my Userpage. Khalidkhoso 11:37, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

U guys Own Wikipedia ,if u would not say i would not do it.i do not take parts on topics where my time is waisted and my work gets lost(as today).i just want to give some artilce to wikipedia that are not known to peoples around the world,that's it,other then this i do not have to do any thing here

Khalidkhoso 11:41, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Well you do not have to warn me ,When u attakced my user page it was My 1st warning for me and i could not do any thing and can not any thing.You do not have to tell me what u can do and u can not.Beacuse i know this.I thought my user page will get Unlocked by u,well i would not ask for it.i better wait for 24 hours. Caio Have Good day. Khalidkhoso 12:39, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

i think it is more then 24 hours ,u have still put lock on my userpage?can i ask u why? u mentioned that u will removed it with in 24 hours. Khalidkhoso 14:34, 30 January 2007 (UTC).

You userpage is now fully protected because you have continually reinserted the content in violation of policy. Please note that a protection if preferable to a block, and it was one or the other because of the policy violation. I have chosen protection however to allow you to discuss it here and at WP:ANI (see the bottom of the page). ViridaeTalk 10:54, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

i waiting for it to be done Please. Khalidkhoso 15:45, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Undeleting a "prod"

The article, 1936: Horror, was deleted via "prod" apparently without any discussion. I would ask that this be rectified. Thank you in advance. The Bearded One 07:06, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Prod deletions don't have discussion. I will undelete it for you. Viridae ^Talk 07:07, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

I apologize.

I will get a username next time. But I sincerely apologize. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 138.5.94.15 (talk) 19:51, 30 January 2007 (UTC).

Wow what was 68.162.20.124 hangup on you?

He's banned for now (4 days it says) geez what you do. Funny that they thought it was you doing the reverts and it was myself and other editors taking care of business. Glad its taken care of for now. See you around. --Xiahou 01:36, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Because I did reverts my userpage got hammered by 151.198.134.190 which was obviously a sock of User:68.162.20.124, oh well, he's been blocked for 31 hours now! RyanPostlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 01:45, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

If I remember rightly, I gave him a {{npa4}} warning. Viridae ^Talk 03:11, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Shouldn't you ask me what's written in arabic before deleting the template? Do you really want to provoke me? Who the fuck do you think you are? Do you want to bring more racism to wikipedia? Embargo 10:33, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Just a heads up that I've taken this to WP:AN, to try and stop a revert war, I've asked the user to stop adding it, however, he keeps on doing it RyanPostlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 11:10, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Let's take the opportunity to be nice.

Hello! If we want to make a neutral encyclopedia, we will need people from all over the world cooperatig with our efforts. Certainly, if Embargo adds non-neutral material to articles, that would be a problem. But maybe they're quite reasonable. Let's talk with them and see! --Kim Bruning 12:42, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Help over at CAT:CSD

Hi, and congrats on your promotion! Per this discussion, I'm dropping a friendly note to some of the recently-promoted admins requesting help with speedy deletions. I am not an administrator, so if you don't feel comfortable diving into deletions - or if you need more info - please don't come to me, but I'm sure that Cyde Weys would be happy to guide you if you want to help. Any help is great, but I'm sure that Cyde and others would deeply appreciate it if you could put the page on your watchlist and do a bit of work there on a regular basis? Maybe weekly? Thanks in advance! Oh and if you're already working away on CSD please disregard this message; it's not meant as a slight against any hard work you're already doing. Cheers! Anchoress 18:27, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Recent changes patrol

Hey Viridae i want to be "Recent changes patrol" so can you Guide me how to start work and how to do things here?

thanks ciao Khalidkhoso 22:46, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Request for Arbitration regarding Trodel

Because you have been working so hard to try to resolve the dispute, I am requesting that you once again help in resolving the dispute. I am filing a request for Arbitration, as it has become clear that Trodel will not abide by any decision we try to come to in the RfC. You won't be asked to do much, I think, just give your statement, much as you have for the RfC. Your help would be most appreciated. TheGreenFaerae 09:54, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#.7BFinal_Resolution_for_dispute_between_Tr.C3.B6del_and_TheGreenFaerae.7D

VegaDark

Hi. Thank you SO much for the offer. As I'm sure he's been active enough that many people will have seen much of his work, I'm afraid I'll have to accept only one or at most two co-noms from people familiar with him. I'm sure he'll welcome your support, though, and I hope you can help me out with my next nomination. Thank you again for the support! It's really appreciated. Cheers. Xiner (talk, email) 03:26, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

No problems, I will most definately support his RfA when it is posted. Viridae ^Talk 05:11, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Drini deleted your comments from the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard

[1]

AFAIK, this is disruptive behaviour.

I asked for all the comments (and my original text, rebutting Drini´s defamation against me) to be reposted again [2], and Drini deleted my petition and posted new defamatory (i.e., false) stuff against me [3].

I was receiving good ideas about what to do from other administrators until Drini came and started posting factually false nonsense [4] about me (as Drini recognized [5]). Drini was called to enter the fray from the Spanish Wikipedia [6].

I think that this Drini´s behaviour is outrageous, and I ask you for help. What can I do?.

Randroide 11:47, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Not so bad. False alarm, maybe

Well, the situation is not so bad as I thought (albeit is neither a good one).

Drini pasted the whole discussion in a different linked page [7].

I missed that pasting. I thought the text was deleted.

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Nonetheless, any comment?.

Randroide 12:11, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Quick question

A user/SPA has requested a copy a deleted article (deleted per AFD as NN). I don't see anything in the article that is sensitive - but a quick scan of policy scan reveals no guidelines. Is dumping a copy into his userspace kosher? Kuru ^talk 13:26, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Just undelete then move it to a subpage of their userspace. Viridae ^Talk 21:12, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Hope you don't mind

I had already indef blocked that CaptJebus guy before you left your warning, so I replaced your warning with an {{indef}}. I didn't think a threat like that even deserved a warning, but feel free to revert me and remove the block if you feel it was inappropriate. Kafziel ^Talk 21:22, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Don't mind at all. Viridae ^Talk 22:07, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

CN

Hi Viridae. I've replied regarding your ~~hijacking~~ re-redirecting of WP:CN at Wikipedia talk:Community noticeboard#Template updates. Picaroon 01:47, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Odd Trivia Vandal

I found this ip address 68.165.76.174 just pop up on the project today and add toomuchtrivia tags on any page he was on. I reverted all changes, but I wasn't sure what type of warning to leave on the talk space. I will leave a message though, and I would appreciate admin looking in on it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by TheGreenFaerae (talk • contribs) 12:49, 11 February 2007 (UTC).

Yeah, not sure whats going on there. Try posting this over to WP:ANI. Viridae ^Talk 00:07, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Garion96's RFA

Thank you for your support in my request for adminship which closed successfully last night. Feel free to let me know if I can help you with something or if I have made a mistake. I would also like to encourage you to vote often (just in case you don't) on other candidates since we need more admins. Happy editing, Garion96 (talk) 23:55, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

User:DrAndyWho

Hey. No problem. :) --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 07:38, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Speedies

I wasn't aware notability was remotely relevant to G11 spam ... Chris cheese whine 09:22, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Well considering you tagged it without the use of s epcific template, I took the most obvious one - db-bio, which meant notability applied. As it WAS a bio and not selling a product specifically, that was the appropriate action. Viridae ^Talk 12:00, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

3RR

I would agree, if it weren't for the fact it was a bread-and-butter merge (duplicate articles), and reverting the redirect was effectively a POV fork. User:Mais oui! also seems to have a history of edit warring, ironically using the summary "reverting edit warring by User:X". Chris cheese whine 12:17, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Not commenting on the other users behaviour yet, just your statement. I am looking into what is going on. It would be a damn site easier though if you two stopp removing stuff from the respective talk pages. Viridae ^Talk 12:21, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Er, it's a duplicate article. There are no changes to discuss. User:Mais oui! is merely being stubborn. Chris cheese whine 12:36, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

In which case, it should be easy to get consensus from the wider community. However if you continue to edit war (this applies to both of you) you WILL be blocked. Step away and calm down. Viridae ^Talk 12:38, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

blocking vandals

Hi, you removed an ip that I re-requested at the admin intervention page. Rather than reporting the same IP for the third time, and risking being regarded as a vandal myself, I just wanted to bring it to your attention that new vandal edits came from this ip. Making it 5 in just over 2 hours. Please deal with it in a way you see fit, I will stop monitoring this IP and get out of your way.

Thanks! Sander123 13:07, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Just re-report in future, if they have vandalised since a RECENT final warning then report them. I was offline. Viridae ^Talk 22:12, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Vandal of IP address

This and this and this is NOT a content dispute. I am resubmitting to WP:AIV. Real96 06:54, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

I have absoloutely no idea if that is a valid nickname or not, hence the removal. It does look like a content dispute though. 06:55, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Deltas are called Deltas. Zetas are called Zetas, not broads. Broad is an offensive American slang for woman. I thought you knew, but I forgot you are from a different country. Sorry for the hostility. Real96 06:58, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

I know the term as you spell it, but not as the vandal did. I will block them if they aren't Viridae ^Talk 06:59, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

(reduce indent) broads can be spelled as BRAWDS. The vandal has stopped now (thank goodness!) If the user vandalizes the pages again, I am reporting to WP:AIV, because he/she has passed level 4. It's kind of like slang in America is different around the world? cheers! Real96 07:08, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

They have stopped because I blocked them. Viridae ^Talk 07:12, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, so much! :-) Real96 07:14, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

NP. Viridae ^Talk 07:17, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

VegaDark's Request for Adminship

Viridae/Archive5

Thank you for supporting my RfA. It was successful at a unanimous 52/0/0. I hope I can live up to the kind words expressed of me there, and hope to now be more of an asset to the community with access to the tools. Please feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any suggestions for me in the future. Thanks again! VegaDark 07:29, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Your indefinite block of User:Dora Nichov

Viridae, I came across Dora Nichov (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)'s unblock request and would like to talk to you about potentially shortening the block from indefinite. From what I can tell the user has gotten annoyed and made some silly comments to IPs: 'I'm warning you..., You know, I hate vandals..., 'Didn't I tell you to stop!?, 'LISTEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! When I tell you to stop -- STOP!, If I could, I WILL ban you! Or do anything so you will be banned!. More importantly, the editor made two comments containing the phrase "I'll kill you". I don't want to minimize the significance of such comments, but I do think that, in context, even the target wouldn't take them as serious death threats: test1|Dora Nichov Plus I'll kill you if you vandalize my userpage again., and Stupid vandal, I'll kill you the way I kill moose!. Certainly, such comments display horrible judgment, are absolutely not acceptable, and warrant a long block. That said, I don't see how this is either a personal attack placing another user in danger or a pattern of persistent personal attacks (the two applicable situations warranting an indefinite block that I see in WP:BLOCK). Finally, given the editor's history of positive contributions, an indefinite block probably has the net effect of doing more harm than good to Wikipedia. I would instead suggest shortening the block to two months. In light of the serious reasons behind the block, I feel I need your consent or acquiesence rather than reducing the block myself. Thank you for your consideration.--Kchase T 10:20, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Have a look at this and consider the block. It was that diff in paticular that sparked the indef. If you want to reduce the block, feel free but I don't think behaviour like that shoudl ever be tolerated. Viridae ^Talk 12:51, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

A small heads up... Dora Nichov is now editing under anonymous IP (and not being very clandestine about it, either). See his Talk page. Thanks... Denn333 15:38, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Request for comment

Further to your intervention at User talk:217.44.98.169, please see:

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/3RR#User:81.155.34.127_reported_by_User:Mais_oui.21_.28Result:.29. --Mais oui! 11:55, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Please do not refactor my comments

as was done with this edit. While I realize your intentions were good and likely would have made the change myself if asked, I would like to be able to type and format comments as I choose. Thanks! Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me Please review me!} 21:58, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

fair enough. Just remember that it specifically says at the top that it isn't a vote. So xfd/rfa style bold text like that is strongly discourage. Viridae ^Talk 23:25, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Hello

You reverted my redirect on Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors - twas not vandalism, there's a consensus of sorts for this experiment on Talk:Main Page. Cheers --Monotonehell 08:29, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Redirects don't work when there is text below them. Viridae ^Talk 08:31, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I think I've rectified it now.. I was a bit confused, but then I saw your edit on the talk page. --Monotonehell 08:33, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

AfD: The "Super Stunt" Page

I was under the impression that Articles for Deletion had a five day review process? I just created the article on 2/20/07, it was vandalized repeatedly, and then deleted the same day. I don't recall seeing any votes for Speedy Delete or a Speedy Delete template. It would have been nice to have more than 12 hours to address the complaints and find more sources.--Notmydesk 10:35, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

WP:DRV. Yes the set length of time for AfDs is 5 days but many articles reguarly don't last that long. Viridae ^Talk 12:41, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Any particular reason this article needed to be deleted in less than a day? It would have been nice to have at least a chance to address the issues raised on the AfD page.--Notmydesk 14:43, 21 February 2007 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Notmydesk (talk • contribs) 14:25, 21 February 2007 (UTC).

The consensus was that it was unsourced, unencyclopedic and highly likely to remain unsourced. There i sno point in letting the AfD run its course in that sort of situation (hence why many afds are closed before the 5 day time). Viridae ^Talk 22:10, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

There was an external link to a column on the Minneapolis Star Tribune's website that covered the events written about in the article, which should count as a source. I would have been happy to point this out on the AFD page if it hadn't been deleted so quickly. It appears you didn't follow the external link, nor apparently did anyone else who voted for deletion. This is why it would have been beneficial to wait longer than a single afternoon before rushing to delete the page. Again, I don't know how I'm supposed to address the feedback given on the AFD page if the article is deleted before I even have a chance. Could this be why there's a five day period... so people have a chance to edit the article and address the reasons it was proposed for deletion?--Notmydesk 23:58, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of The "Super Stunt". Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Notmydesk 16:33, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Category:British Royal Consorts is up for discussion

The link is here. Your comments would be most helpful as you deleted the category on December 2nd but it was subsequently recreated. So we now have both Category:British Royal Consorts and Category:British royal consorts. --Woohookitty^Woohoo! 09:59, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Rlevse Rfa

Thanks for the rfa support. Glad we can work together. Rlevse 03:32, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

i know i messed up

i realized that what i did was not funny, and would like to appologize. yes i did vandalize 3 pages. and it was only to illustrate how unreliable wikis can be to a friend. anyway i would like to know how i can get unblocked. do i have to do some positive contribution? 7areega 03:08, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

You aren't blocked. If you are blocked under another username let me know. Viridae ^Talk 03:30, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

my ip is blocked, i had to fiddle for a long time till i managed to log in to post here. i think i clicked a "secure login" link. then created an account. :) thnx for your time.7areega 20:19, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I did not edit anything about Steve Erwin...

(I did not edit anything about Steve Erwin...) Hi! I got "spanked" a little for editing away the statement on the Wikipedia page on David Icke which stated "as an indisputable fact" (that's the impression) that The Protocols Of The Elders of Zion is "an Anti-Semitic Hoax". This has not been proven to be the case in any way and is simply a subjective statement, of course also adding to the "Anti-Semitic allegations" against Mr. Icke that are really quite ridiculous. I have read several of his books and I have not seen any statement by Icke condemning the Semitic race. (definiton of Anti-Semitism). He HAS on the other hand condemned Zionism many times. Something that also many Jews have condemned. Anyway.... Icke's message is a message about waking up to the Truth (opening one's eyes) and questioning consensus reality. And what the Wikipedia page hardly mentions at all; he documents thoroughly through his writings and lectures the criminal and unconscientous activities of the most powerful individuals and corporations on the planet. Whether they be reptilians or not. But "Anti-Semitism" and "Right-wing" something-something is what catches the eye of the reader. And this is certainly very far from "objective". greetings, Bjorn —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Bjornyvan (talk • contribs) 19:37, 2 March 2007 (UTC).

Unsure of how to report a vandal

An anonymous user under the IP address of User:74.109.244.5 has vandalized many pages [[8]], despite several warnings on the talk page. I am unsure of how to report this vandal, and knowing that you are an administrator I thought that I should let you know about this user. MelicansMatkin 00:25, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Well I can't see any recent vandalism (ie in the last few hours), however if you do find someone vandalising in the future, give them a warning using one of these templates (starting with the level one and moving through to level 4 as appropriate). Then if they continue after the level 4 warning, report them to WP:AIV. For more information see Wikipedia:Vandalism. Viridae ^Talk 00:30, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Survey Invitation

Hi there, I am a research student from the National University of Singapore and I wish to invite you to do an online survey about Wikipedia. To compensate you for your time, I am offering a reward of USD$10, either to you or as a donation to the Wikimedia Foundation. For more information, please go to the research home page. Thank you. --WikiInquirer 01:42, 4 March 2007 (UTC)^{talk to me}

Hi Viridae, I understand your concern. I have sent an unblock request to you via email. If you need more information, pls let me know asap. Thank you! --WikiInquirer 02:23, 4 March 2007 (UTC)^{talk to me}

Thanks for unblocking me. However, before I continue to solicit responses, I would like to wait for your reply. If you think it's ok, I shall carry on. --WikiInquirer 02:27, 4 March 2007 (UTC)^{talk to me}

(edit conflict)As you can already post here you are already unblocked. I had a closer look and it seems legitimate, however mass spamming of talk pages seemd and intresting way to go about it. I am also interested as to why you require the participants to have signed up before Jn '06? Viridae ^Talk 02:30, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Having now read the email, I see how you picked the names. I no longer have any problems with what is happening. Thankyou for your speedy response and the politeness you have shown in light of the block. Viridae ^Talk 02:32, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for your support on my RfA. It passed with 55/0/0. I'll try my best to be worthy of the trust the community has put in me. If there are any of my actions you have a problem with or a question about, please feel free to discuss this with me and if needed to revert me. If there is anything else I can help you with (backlogs, comments, ...), you can always contact me on my talk page. Fram 14:28, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Cave Clan site

Hi Viridae,

firstly thanks for taking the protection off the page. I don't really appreciate your comment "Lets see if people can behave" but hey this is the Internet and communication works in different ways...

Anyways, onto the topic in question... there is a constant 'dark cloud' hanging over the Cave Clan wikipedia page, that is a person who (amongst creating different usernames that are really the one person, him) was once an accessory of the CC (I don't think he was ever a member...) but is now vehement in his revenge on us, and an integral part of this is defaming us here because Wikipedia is for some people the first reference for info on some things. I'm not sure of his reasonings but he loves to paint us in a bad light - see his web links http://www.urbanadventure.org/main/stuff/ildraino/caveclan.htm and http://www.urbanadventure.org/main/stuff/ildraino/wikipedia.htm.

I don't know if you've read through the blab in the talk page on CC wiki but he has used a lot of different usernames to put forward his posts. His aliases are: hibou, UrbanExplorer, Raresaturn (recent creation), Panic!, Gunny... anyway I think you get my gist (I've listed them on the Talk page too). All the posts read in a similar vein, I hope you can notice that.

Just wondering; is there any way to check on IP addresses of the posts that have been made by the above and any users onto the Talk page? I would like to know what ones are associated with all the users who have made posts. Also this would ascertain the above statement further.

Finally... I was wondering (have talked with other CC people about this too) if you'd like to meet us, Cave Clan, to get a gauge of who we are and what we are about ('larrikinism' is something that can be as close as it gets to explaining our whole character). You can email info@caveclan.org for... more info, or browse www.caveclan.org for more (endorsed?) info. Thinking this would give you, a wikipedia admin person, a better idea of who we are, what we do, how we are organised etc. This is to support a definite NPOV being described on the CC wiki page e.g. homophobia, KKK comments removed permanently (as if we'd allow people like this to join or be associated with us...)

Anyways (final one) I hope you can understand what I'm saying above, overall that the CC wants a 'NPOV' cemented for its description here, Because at the moment some of it is, to put it simply, 'shit'.

Thanks Dmnscar 13:54, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

You might want to file a request at WP:RFCU. Only checkusers can see registered users IP addresses, to check for people using multiple accounts to edit abusively. Viridae ^Talk 21:21, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

RfA mistake

Hello, I'm sorry about the RfA confusion. The RfA looked malformed, because I have made that mistake when I nominated ProveIt. I did find answers afterall to the questions. What threw me off, was probroly the fact that there were no votes or comments, and that the edit count box looked incomplete.--Wikipedier (talk • contribs) 21:49, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

No problems, I guessed it was an honest mistake. Viridae ^Talk 21:53, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Recent 3RR report

Would you mind expaining how you came to the conclusion that no 3RR violation occured here?

Um, Rayis just unilaterally removed your decision from the heading. You might want to check it out. The Behnam 22:23, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Please explain why you do not think the rules should apply in this case, thanks --Rayis 22:31, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

It has been explained at the report. You have not demonstrated 4 reverts. Viridae ^Talk 22:33, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Even the user admits that he has done 3RR and 1 likely other one! overall there have been 5 "undoings of edits" and definite 4 reverts --Rayis 22:35, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Demonstrate the violation in your report and appropriate action will be taken. You failed to do that so the case was closed, No block. Viridae ^Talk 23:00, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I must say it is very interesting that I can't find the last time you edited the 3RR notice board yet you suddenly showed up to close this nomination. --Rayis 22:56, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

WP:TINC. Viridae ^Talk 23:00, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

In the interest of disclosure, Behnam has been blocked and his appeal has been declined. You're welcome to have a look (if there's a greater history, here, I'm not yet familiar with it). – Luna Santin (talk) 07:08, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello, Here's The Code For {{further}}; If You Know How To Make It So That We Can Use Infinite Arguments, Please Be My Guest:D100110100 21:50, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Further information: [[{{{1}}}]]

Question regarding reporting vandals

Hello, I noticed that you removed the request for Admin. intervention regarding the IP addresses 64.179.53.224 and 80.188.72.172. For the first you stated, "no recent warnings," although the last warning was less than a month ago (February 22, 2007) and his user page consists entirely of vandalism warnings and blocks. For the second you stated "no recent vandalism" although the incident I reported took place only a couple days ago (March 6th). This user's talk page also consists only of warnings about vandalism. Can you please specify for me what the time limit involved in reporting vandals amounts to (e.g., is there a policy regarding recency of activity or warnings). This would prevent me from providing spurious reports. In this case, however, I don't see that these two IP addresses have done anything but vandalize Wikipedia, so I hope this matter can be given some attention. Thank you. ◄Zahakiel ► 03:34, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Recent warnings means within the last 12 hours or so for IP addresses (that doesn't apply to logged in users) because unless you can show the IP is not dynamic we may be blocking someone for someone elses previous offences.

In the second case, we do not block vandals who are nto currently active, ie within the last half hour or so unless in ccases of very malicious or wide spread vandalism. Blocking is punative not preventative. Hope that clears things up. Viridae ^Talk 03:37, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, yes; I see the need for the distinction. ◄Zahakiel ► 03:39, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Merge and delete

I notice that you've interpreted the result of the AfD on double posting as "merge and delete", and I figured I should point out that actually going through with this (merging the material and then deleting the page it came from) is probably illegal under the GFDL. Section 4 B of the GFDL requires that modified versions of a document must include a list of five of the primary authors of the original version and in Wikipedia this requirement is met via the article histories. A merge without a copy of the article history being preserved somewhere on Wikipedia would therefore be unlicenced, and a copyvio. I'm moving the double posting article back to its original location, merging it, and then turning it into a redirect; as far as I'm aware this is the proper way to preserve article history in this situation. Bryan Derksen 04:21, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Thats quite fine by me. Viridae ^Talk 05:13, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

User:Embargo

Actually, sir, I took Twasnow's advice and changed it from "This user supports armed resistance to Israeli hostilities" to "this user supports resistance to hostilities". Now someone else, replaced it from "This user supports resistance to hostilities" to "This user supports resistance to Israeli hostilties" because he thought I had every right to keep, since other people can express whatever views they have. "This user supports cats to dog hostilities" should dog hostilities occur is acceptable. Now every one has witnessed Israel's last war, and we can all agree Israel is a disgusting murderous state. I can see you try your best to provoke me, thankfully till now it hasn't worked. Good thing not every one on wikipedia is biased against Arabs and Muslims. You are asked to leave me alone, or remove every single political userbox on Wikipedia. Regards. Emбargo 00:15, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

The word hostilities was wikilinked to massacre. And I saw that you were the user who changed it, absoloutely unacceptable and you know it. Viridae ^Talk 00:16, 11 March 2007 (UTC)