User talk:east718

Archives

Current Late 2004 and onwards March 2006 and onwards November 2006 and onwards July 2007 August 2007 September 2007 October 2007 November 2007 December 2007 January 2008 February 2008 March 2008 April 2008 May 2008 June 2008 July 2008 August 2008 September 2008 October 2008 November 2008 December 2008 January 2009 February 2009 March 2009 April 2009 May 2009 June–July 2009 August–December 2009 January–June 2010 July 2010 and onwards

Leave a message, sign your posts, get a reply.

Question

Hello, it appears you deleted the original image I posted on wikipedia - biogas pipes. I wanted to know why? its a good quality image that I took personally and it looks good on the anaerobic digestion page--Alex Marshall (talk) 15:01, 25 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi, and apologies for the delay. The image wasn't actually deleted, but moved to Wikimedia Commons. Now, every project can use it, instead of just the English Wikipedia. Thanks for contributing high-quality free photos! east718 // talk // email // 23:40, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Ahhh I understand now, it confused me at first! --Alex Marshall (talk) 08:56, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Rfb question

I've posted my answer to your remaining question. Sorry it took so long, but it's been a crazy week for me as you can imagine. — Rlevse • Talk • 09:12, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

grawp hunting...

I was bored at work and clicked on the "recent changes" link... Nearly half of those were you in a grawp fighting spree. Great effort, keep it up!! May grawp yiff in hell... (wait, nevermind) Lucifer (talk) 20:40, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

RfB Thank You spam

Thank you for participating in my RfB! I am very grateful for the confidence of the community shown at my RfB, which passed by a count of 154/7/2 (95.65%). I have read every word of the RfB and taken it all to heart. I truly appreciate everyone's input: supports, opposes, neutrals, and comments. Of course, I plan to conduct my cratship in service of the community. If you have any advice, questions, concerns, or need help, please let me know. Again, Thanks! — Rlevse • Talk • 08:48, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Acadian Ambulance Service Logo.png

Please restore Image:Acadian Ambulance Service Logo.png and add {{logo fur}} to it. Thank you. I didn't know that it was going to be deleted until after it had been deleted. Thank you. The image belongs in Acadian Ambulance. --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 01:14, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

I undeleted and FUR'd it. MBisanz ^talk 14:59, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Article idea for Diplomatic missions in Houston

After reading Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of foreign consulates in Oklahoma City, I would like some advice. I want to start an article about the diplomatic missions in Houston that lists consulate generals and their equivalents (Taipei TECO), but does NOT list honorary consulates. What else should I add to this article in order to make it worthy of Wikipedia? Surely someone wrote a history of diplomatic missions in Houston somewhere.

I might start it soon, but it would not strictly be a list. It would also contain general information too. WhisperToMe (talk) 14:57, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Looks like you found one of my first AFD closes. :-) I'm not too knowledgeable about the topic so I can't judge the article's suitability, but if you're not listing the less notable honorary consulates, I guess it'll be OK. Just gamble and see if it survives article-space! east718 // talk // email // 23:42, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

My IP Address is Blocked

Why is my IP address blocked from editing? Benbenbenben (talk) 02:47, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi, you were most likely logged out. If you log in, you won't find yourself the accidental target of IP blocks. east718 // talk // email // 23:34, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

User:Mitrebox/AdultSwim

Back in February you blocked User:Mitrebox with the summary "until assurances are made that malicious bots will not be used". Mitrebox, frustrated with the situation, evaded his block with some additional accounts. The latest account, User:AdultSwim, is asking that this block be reviewed. See WP:AN#AdultSwim is asking for a review of his block. His socking has been to evade blocks, and never to support himself in a discussion or to edit war. The indef. blocks he's received were given simply because he was blocked as Mitrebox. I think it would help the situation if you could review the original block, see if Mitrebox/AdultSwim/Lemmey have given you enough assurance regarding malicious bots. This original block is pretty much the only reason he's blocked now. -- Ned Scott 06:31, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi Ned, and sorry for taking so long to get back to you, but I'm on break. I do think Mitrebox should be unblocked for a variety of reasons, but I also think that the community is rightfully a little raw over the constant block evasion. If Mitrebox can stay away for a couple weeks, I'll be willing to campaign for an unblock. - east 91.198.174.201 (talk) 04:23, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Images on common

I saw that you delete 'Image:LGen Andrew McNaughton, 1942.jpg' from english wikipedia because image was on commons. I import this image on commons because the license allow it and I have to use it on my french traductions. Could you please delete 'Image:H.D.G. Crerar.jpg' and 'Image:General Guy G Simonds.jpg' from english wikipedia for same reasons. If you could not do it, please explain what I have to do to delete it. How can I delete images imported to commons by myself? Thanks for your answers. --Beepertemp (talk) 00:40, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Could you please help me or suggest me an other helper for this task? Salam aleikoum --Beeper (talk) 06:29, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Done. east718 // talk // email // 23:34, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks --Beeper (talk) 07:47, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

71.107 unblocks

Those are all IPs used by banned User:JarlaxleArtemis a/k/a Grawp. He acknowleged that the 0/18 range was his range here (look at the link and remove the Q, since the site is blacklisted. Judging from the contributions, the separate IPs have never been used by anyone but Jarl/Grawp (I did get *one* email from a blocked registered user, and promptly unblocked him). Immediately after you unblocked the ranges, we started getting tons of Grawp pagemoves (check the move log for August 4). I would like to reprotect these IPs unless you can give me a really good reason not to. Thanks, NawlinWiki (talk) 03:53, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Hey, Nawlin. That /18 range is currently hardblocked as part of an even bigger range (71.107.128.0/17). I've also title-blacklisted all the user talk pages in that range to prevent the edit summary vandalism that Grawp was using to trick administators into softblocking individual IPsion that range (which he'd then use accouts from). Also, those other 71.107 and 71.108 IPs you've been blocking aren't static: they're actually part of a very dynamic Verizon DSL range for SoCal. I hope you don't mind the lack of discussion on my part, but I know you are very busy administrator, and didn't want to bother you with the nuances of network engineering. :) - east 91.198.174.201 (talk) 04:15, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Looks like you've got it under control. Thanks! NawlinWiki (talk) 04:20, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

718smiley.png

Was this based on something or is it 100% original? Because I see this smiley or one very much like it everywhere now. http://images.icanhascheezburger.com/imagestore/2008/7/24/d87abb00-2532-4a86-86ee-91380f6d01c1.jpg for example. --Random832 (contribs) 14:17, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

It's one of my pics from SA from a while ago. Anyway, I tried to get the damn thing deleted, but Commons wouldn't have it. east718 // talk // email // 23:35, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: Deleted Image (Image:Maya & Miguel logo.png)

I am writing to appeal the deletion of this image under CSD-I6. I am aware that it was unjustified under FURG, but I have experience dealing with FUR objects and preparing FUR's. Would you please be kind enough to undelete the image and allow me the opportunity to assemble a Valid FUR for this picture. Thanks. Thor Malmjursson (talk) 17:39, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

• I've restored the image (but left the I6 tag on). Please add a fair use rationale soon, and remove the tag when done or it will risk being speedy deleted again (East asked if I would deal with this for him). VegaDark (talk) 18:53, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks VegaDark - I will get that done now. Thor Malmjursson (talk) 19:20, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

The Ringleader

Hi East,

I noticed that you deleted Image:Ringleader.jpg because it was a non-free image not in use for seven days. The article on which it was previously used has been recreated. Would you mind restoring the image?

Thank you,

Neelix (talk) 21:34, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Done. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 00:10, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

History of Georgia article

Can you please help the article page of History of Georgia (previous article, before it became disambiguation page) → History of Georgia (country) (current article). I moved the current article nearly three years ago. Can you please cut and paste of the merge history of previous article to the current article without the talk page.

Sorry, my internet connection is on and off. --ApprenticeFan (talk) 00:15, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi! I've completed the history split and merge for the article, but left the talkpage alone because of the insignificance of attribution wrt it. east718 // talk // email // 23:38, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

William Hanna FAC preps

I've taken this article from this to this, in preps for filing it for FAC. I could use some help now with:

1. finding a free image of Hanna
2. some good copyediting
3. expanding the lead

and when that's done I'll unlink the repetitive links (things can change during ce, so I don't want to do now), then file for FAC.

Any help is greatly appreciated. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:50, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

One of your AfD closes has been mentioned at WT:AFD

Hello East718. Your name was mentioned in this thread. You could take a look there if you want. EdJohnston (talk) 18:19, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Second Annual WikiNYC Picnic

Greetings! You are invited to attend the second annual New York picnic on August 24! This year, it will be taking place in the Long Meadow of Prospect Park in Brooklyn. If you plan on coming, please sign up and be sure to bring something! Please be sure to come!
You have received this automated delivery because your name was on the invite list. BrownBot (talk) 20:05, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

718 bot error

The bot is apparently looking for the substring "class=", which caused it to make this erroneous edit. Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 23:21, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Hey Tito, I've unblocked the bot and am cleaning up the mess.

Cool. I was about to point out that it screwed up this edit as well. Titoxd^{(?!? - cool stuff)} 23:25, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

Note from your ol' pal Libsy

Hey how are ya? Noticed your AGF on the 3RR report on Be Black Hole Sun. Did you notice he rv'd the page (his 5th for the day) after receiving his 3RR warning? Five previous blocks for 3RR, and generally just being a d*nk, in the past he is an editor who shouldn't have to be warned... I think anyways. But then again I am just an old Wiki-hardass. He has received umpteen WP:CIVIL warnings too. If the concern posted in the 3RR report is valid then he used his floating IP range to do another rv as well... also after receiving his 3RR warning. Can you do an old mate a favour and re-visit the last few days history on the page. BBHS has been editing warring with other people besides that old f*rt Wiki libs. :-). I think he needs an old fashion Goodfellas b*ll-busting if you ask me. But, then again I think 90% of Wiki editors could use that treatment every now and then :D. Have a nice day! Libsy 156.34.142.110 (talk) 00:59, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Hey, Libs. If BBHS isn't edit warring anymore, there's really nothing that can be done... a warning would also be useless as they presumably already know 3RR (their previous blocks are testimony to that). I do agree though that any more edit warring will lead to some Casino-style disciplinary action being taken... but I will just have to wait and watch. :D Also, if you want to check out the IP angle, I'm sure you know about WP:RFCU. Don't be a stranger! east718 // talk // email // 01:06, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

I may be strange but I am never a stranger. PS. BBHS has done at least three more rv's since my last post. All to revert back to his personal version of the page. 156.34.142.110 (talk) 13:21, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

79 hours? Hmmm? Which wiseguy movie is that? :-D Appreciate your intervention on that article. I have watched it go back and forth for several days and did not want to get involved. As a word of some support. Be Black Hole Sun invited me to partake in the WikiProject Rock music. I have found him to be confrontational but also very productive. Can I request, on his behalf, that he be allowed to return sooner. If I offer to try and offer him etiquette and policy assistance I have some AGF that he will learn from his past mistakes. Feel free to contact me on my talk page for discussion. Cheers and take care. Anger22 (Talk 2 22) 14:56, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

I think the easiest way for BBHS to get unblocked immediately would be to promise to stay away from the article in question; unfortunately, his last two requests have been mildly hostile and uncompromising. east718 // talk // email // 15:00, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Understood. Actually I looked back on his talk page history. His negative edit attitude goes back further than I thought. My own first meeting with the user was to report him to ANI. But after that was resolved he did come back with a friendlier tone to me. Maybe he just chooses to be tactful when it suits his needs? Again, thanks for taking the time with the article overview. After Be Black Hole Sun cools down for a few days I will approach him and see if he will accept my assistance. Cheers! 67.103.105.208 (talk) 15:10, 17 August 2008 (UTC) Anger22 (Talk 2 22) 15:11, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

VengeancePrime

Just noticed your note and block on User talk:VengeancePrime. Was there an RFCU or any other discussion? Not that I mind either way, but apparently, the account was blocked on a false alarm before. user:Everyme 01:15, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Everyme! There was no on-wiki RFCU, but I ran it past two different checkusers. You'll have to ask Matt about the "false alarm" before; I don't really share notes with him or anything. east718 // talk // email // 01:20, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Nevermind, just wondered when I saw the previous block and subsequent unblock. user:Everyme 01:22, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

User:VengeancePrime -- vigilanceprime

has appealed to me for advice/perspective regarding his block as a sockpuppet. Of course, he denies any involvement and says he has not edited any "pedophilia" elated topics. I did see where he edited 1993 something or other about Michael Jackson. Musta forgotten that one.

I've had previous involvement with this user stemming from his deletion tagging and AFD proposing. I have had trouble following his reasoning on occasion, but had not figured him for a ban evader. He had my sympathy until he laid on the praise mixed with the "don't get involved for your own good stuff." If you could just bring me up to speed so I can stop thinking about, I'd appreciate it. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 14:36, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

OK, begging pardon if I'm missing something really big (general fatigue would probably be to blame for that), but what exactly are you asking of me? If it's the relevant evidence, VengeancePrime was brought to my attention earlier, and I had them checked against VigilancePrime on a gut feeling. I believe in second chances and was hesitant to block them until troublesome edits like the ones at promise ring popped up. Most confusedly yours, east718 // talk // email // 14:43, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Any confusion is more likely due to my fatigue then anyone else's. My brain is definitely in low gear. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 15:09, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

Got your email - I'll reply to you soon. east718 // talk // email // 15:37, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

You might discuss this with Morven. I'd exchanged a couple of e-mails with him on the subject not too long ago, and he was of the opinion that the two were not connected. Avruch ^T 18:29, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

A couple days ago, I sent arbcom-L a very long email concerning this and other recent developments regarding pro-pedophile activism; Morven is presumably a member on that list. east718 // talk // email // 01:32, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

User:ResearchEditor topic ban

You closed the discussion at WP:AN and implemented a topic ban on Research editor for only the Satanic ritual abuse article and its talk page. I note, however, that Moreschi was proposing to ban Research Editor from related topics as well. It seems to me that this part of the proposal had consensus as well. Are you sure there was no consensus for a broader ban? I note that Research editor is still, apparently, continuing his behavior at related pages; see WP:AN#ResearchEditor still pushing. Mangojuice^talk 14:49, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

I just read that thread again and can't proffer a single excuse as to why I missed that little detail... I've amended the ban to reflect the correct outcome of that discussion. east718 // talk // email // 15:38, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Great, thanks for the prompt attention! Mangojuice^talk 17:58, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

I believe that it is unfair to extend the ban to additional pages. I did not even have a chance to defend myself regarding this allegation. I believe that Treating Abuse Today is a reliable source. Many respected researchers have published there. See here. To extend the ban because of an edit I made at McMartin around this edit is unfair, especially without giving me a chance to defend my actions at the other pages. ResearchEditor (talk) 03:07, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

You may, or may not, be interested in my reply, and the fact that Treating Abuse Today has been dealt with before. WLU (talk) 12:52, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

I have read both discussions mentioned above. Your opinion in the first discussion is only one opinion. Others in the second discussion disagreed with you and felt that TAT was a reliable source. Even if it wasn't, one edit is not proof that there was any edit warring or problem at the McMartin page. The extension of the ban to other pages was not fair and had no factual backing. ResearchEditor (talk) 04:04, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Guys, I'm pretty uninterested in the actual substance of the dispute - all I did was close a discussion. If you have a problem with my closing we can discuss that, but any actions that may be taken as a result of my closing and ban implementation are remanded to the administrative corps at large and should be discussed with the community. east718 // talk // email // 05:16, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Absolutely. I've asked ResearchEditor politely to discuss his preocupations only in his user talk page (or presenting his complaint in ArbCom). —Cesar Tort 14:01, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

(undent) However, you did not simply close a discussion. You implemented a ban and later added the condition of closely related pages. See below -

"Per the consensus below and as noted at WP:RESTRICT, ResearchEditor is banned from Satanic ritual abuse, closely related articles, and their respective talkpages... there is no consensus for any other editing restrictions. With the time frame of the restrictions not being discussed, I am implementing the ban for Moreschi's suggested duration of six months. east718 // talk // email // 12:15, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

In my opinion, the substance of the dispute is important.ResearchEditor (talk) 22:17, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Of possible interest

This may be a cross wiki issue if I'm correct! Cheers --Herby ^{talk thyme} 15:12, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Could you please email/PM me those deleted contributions so I can spot this botnet better? :] With regards to that other cross wiki issue I wanted to talk to you about... I've been helping Kanonkas recently with detecting proxies/anonymizers/zombies and botnets, reading scan results, etc. and advised him to block the AS36351 /16 route... I didn't realize that Commons doesn't have the blockexempt flag though, and inadvertently gave him bad advice. Please heap all abuse on me... :D I've now instructed Kanonkas to seek CU advice when considering blocks of large ranges. east718 // talk // email // 15:44, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Yep, thanks for the help east. Regards, --Kanonkas :  Talk  18:05, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Deleted Image

I saw that you deleted the image Kazakhs.gif. I'm not sure of the exact reason, but it was a very useful and accurate image. I wish you had notified WikiProject Central Asia, instead of simply removing it. We could have found the image's source, and if need be created a new map which would met copyright requirements. As an admin, is there any way you may recover this image (or is it on commons somewhere) so that the good, accurate information this image provided might still be saved? Otebig (talk) 18:26, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Sure, I've uploaded the image here temporarily. The image was uploaded by somebody with a questionable history when it came to licensing, and there was no indication as to the source of the image. If you can track down the original and confirm its license, I've got no problem with you reuploading it - of course, creating a new map from scratch would be much appreciated! Thanks, east718 // talk // email // 01:34, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Re-created AfD article

This is the first time I've encountered this situation, so I'm not sure of the protocol. I noticed that an AfD that you closed with a result of "Redirect" was subsequently undone. Since that time there's been some editing (all by the user who undid your redirect), but all the article editing in the world won't make this group any more notable, and that was the reason for the AfD. Cmadler (talk) 19:08, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

I'd look the other way if the new article was better, but it's the exact same thing! I've restored the redirect for now. east718 // talk // email // 01:36, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

TKD

The whole thing (for better or worse and including the RfC on JJL) seems to have gone quiet, and be back to the usual removing spam links, Thanks for the offer of help but it seem everyone has got board of circular arguments (at last..). --Nate1481(^t/_c) 13:17, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Cool (sorry about the boredom though). If things flare up again with the Japan-Korea nonsense, just let me know. east718 // talk // email // 05:20, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

The World Ends With You image

Why did you delete this? Just yesterday I put the image back up (after another user had removed it to replace it with a duplicate image he had uploaded). So it had only been a few hours. If anything, the other image should have been deleted for being a duplicate. This is one of the downfalls to currently only having access to Wikipedia for about an hour a day and for 4 days. Take a look at the images and I think you will agree. TJ Spyke 16:22, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Looks like a technical glitch - when editing during peak hours, sometimes the "file links" counter on the image's page won't update for a while (see Help:Job queue for the nitty-gritty). I've restored the image and removed the orphaned tag from it. east718 // talk // email // 01:07, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

good attempt!

Your offer to unblock the $20 professor is a sign of good customer service. I am willing to discuss with him about the $20 edits. I come totally unbiased as I have not looked at the $20 edits. May I suggest that he will be allowed completely free editing if he discusses the $20 edits with me first and comes to an agreement with me? I have much incentive to have him not edit poorly about the $20 bill because I don't want to have egg on my face. It would also eliminate any feeling that the Wikipedia establishment is trying to muzzle him.

I do have a disclaimer to make. Two of my articles are about professors. One of them a psychology professor and the other one a history professor. I do not worship professors but some of them have good ideas, particularly Professor Shanteau and Professor Sealander. 903M (talk) 03:45, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Your posting on that talkpage is manifestly unhelpful. I don't care who you are, but please go back to your main account. east718 // talk // email // 05:15, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

This is my main account. I have consulted with a senior person in Wikipedia (senior person, please refrain from commenting here at this time) notified that person that this is my only account as the other account is retired. Don't ask me if it was because the other account edited porn articles. I'll let you take over the matter with the $20 professor. If you think a person other than you should do day to day supervision, I am happy to do it. Good luck. 903M (talk) 05:39, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Socks

On Sunday you blocked User:Be Black Hole Sun for 79 hours. Today, with many hours still remaining on his block, Be Black Hole Sun made an IP revert here whilest stillest insidest his 79 hour block. Me thinks that is not proper. Sayest you??? Libs (talk) 15:04, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

On it. east718 // talk // email // 05:15, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Homer

Oh dude, once again I can only marvel at the things you make MediaWiki do. However, I noticed Homer's nose is displayed as a square, at least for me. user:Everyme 16:32, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

Heh, that's an old CSS sandbox I used for testing out MediaWiki... I can't take credit for it though. [1] I'm sure you'll find plenty of cool stuff if you poke around in my userspace, but just don't tell anybody about the unseemly nonsense I'm hosting there! :O east718 // talk // email // 08:12, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

SOCKS

Hey east, I was wondering if you could help me with SOCKS & such things, thank you. Regards, --Kanonkas :  Talk  17:58, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

I think this guide is really helpful for finding SOCKS... if that doesn't do it for you, just find me on IRC as usual. east718 // talk // email // 08:12, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Indefinitely blocked users' talk pages

Hi, East718. I see you lots of times on the RC deleted user talk pages of indefinitely blocked users. Since I'm seeing you do that lots of times, I just wonder why indefinitely blocked users' talk pages should be deleted. Is it part of the deletion and blocking policies? Thanks. SchfiftyThree 01:40, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

See CAT:TEMP. The main reason for such deletions is to avoid the PR problems and OTRS complaints we get when a company name in conjunction with "this user has been blocked for spam/abuse" or attack against a person shoots to the top of Google's rankings (for example, User talk:B&R Equipment or anything listed here). Pages which provide useful information to administrators in the vein of editing restrictions, bans, or sockpuppeting aren't deleted. east718 // talk // email // 08:12, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi. I've noticed you've deleted talk pages for some indefinitely blocked spammers. We want to keep those since it helps us to keep track of spam when they resurface with a new account (which they do in >50% of cases). Otherwise, we just start back with the whole level 1- level2 - level 3- level 4 series of warnings again. Category:Temporary Wikipedian userpages has been removed from all the spam-specific templates and replaced with Category:Wikipedians who are indefinitely blocked for spamming. Unfortunately, we still have admins blocking spammers and using the more generic block notices that mark the pages as temporary.

So could I ask that you not delete talk pages if they belong to spammers and have useful tracking information? (An example is User talk:Admin1916.) Also, if you can swap out the categories or at least remove the temporary category, that would be great.

Thanks, --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:30, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

This seems sensible; I'll stop deleting spammers' pages. Good looking out on the template alteration too, I usually forget to get those. east718 // talk // email // 20:03, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs)} 23:21, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Aks818guy

EAST718 you got a lot of nerve blocking me for putting two SOURCED quotes of scientists, just EXACTLY like the ones above me, accept they state the converse to the theory in question. If you believe in Darwinism ok I did until I did some research as well, but if you blocked me for that or another thing against your beliefs you better cut that out or you will be reported and may loose your privelages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aks818guy (talk • contribs) 01:44, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Since coming off his recent block, User:Aks818guy has been once again editing Evolution as theory and fact to make evolution back into a theory again. Since he made no effort to obtain consensus, that would appear to be a continuation of his previous edit warring. He also removed one of Ronz's comments at User talk:Shot info. I have blocked him for 48 hours. EdJohnston (talk) 02:00, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Good block, Ed, and thanks for taking care of this for me in my absence. east718 // talk // email // 08:12, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

William Hanna

I am finally done with all the refs. Can you help expand the lead? I'm drawing a blank there. A copyedit would be appreciated too. Thanks for the help and those refs! — Rlevse • Talk • 02:24, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Hope you get better quick! — Rlevse • Talk • 02:30, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Image deletions

Hi! Can you restore Image:1992-05-19Jeopardy!Season8LeaderCard.jpg and Image:2007-01-11Season23Slate.jpg? The images were deleted (or auto-deleted) as orphans when the disputed section containing them was removed. Thanks. Robert K S (talk) 12:45, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Restored, please fix whatever thing caused them to be deleted. MBisanz ^talk 12:47, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Thumbnail problems with enormous PNG images

Hi, East718. Another user has alerted me to the fact that huge PNG images (those having more than 12.5 million pixels) don't thumbnail properly in MediaWiki (for example, Image:Midway chicago.png). In these cases 718 Bot shouldn't just naively replace an existing JPEG with a PNG in articles, because the thumbnails in the articles won't work. So perhaps 718 Bot could upload the PNG image and put the {{PNG version available}} tag on the JPEG description page just like it's doing now, but test the image dimensions before changing references to the JPEG in articles (they can be changed to the PNG later if the thumbnailing problem is ever fixed). Or maybe 718 Bot could rescale huge images down to 12.5 million pixels before uploading the PNG, so that thumbnails work (but that's also problematic, because the PNGs will then be of lower resolution than the original JPEGs). As a third possibility, maybe 718 Bot could just ignore images with such large dimensions. —Bkell (talk) 05:16, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Nice catch! - and this is why I love running my stuff in a live environment with all of its quirks and traps. I've just tweaked the bot to ignore all images over 12.5MP which is great for me too, as those ones always hogged my precious CPU time. Again, thanks for the heads up! east718 // talk // email // 18:37, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Martínez - Bunema on October 4th

Hello! As you may know, these two fighters will collide for the vacant WBC interim Superwelterweight title, and Bunema is from the Democratic Republic of the Congo. I wonder (in case of a Bunema win) which 3 capital letters I can use for the {flagicon|XXX} (with two { and })? I figured out that [Image:Flag of the Democratic Republic of the Congo.svg|20px] (with two [ and ]) is working as well, but I tried out DRC, CDR, CRD..... Do you know, by chance? Cheers, claudevsq (talk) 18:23, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Oh man, this one's a bit messy - it all depends which one of the many Congos Bunema's from. (And why doesn't he have an article?!) For the DRC, it's "COD," and for the Congo, it's "COG" or "CGO." (I think there's another Congo, but it got dissolved way back.) I'd be really happy to see Bunema win - he's kind of laid really low while putting in work before he wiped out Karmazin and Matthysse... but what I'm really excited about it Klitschko-Peter - let's hope Vitali doesn't pull a Grant Hill and break something heading to the ring! east718 // talk // email // 18:37, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, "COD" (in this case) is correct for Bunema. "COG" is the Republic of Congo with Brazzaville as capital and much smaller than the other one. If Bunema doesn't have an article page, I bet he's gonna have one as soon as he's going to be world champ, if so. I'm also excited to see Vitali crush Peter's bones... ;-) Cheers, claudevsq (talk) 13:07, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Libsy plea

Hey East718. A while back you put a block on User:Stra2caster for edit warring on the Fender Stratocaster page. The gist was he kept re-adding a poor quality image(his own) that had been voted down on the talk page. He ignored consensus and Scarian blocked him again. He also used a series of dynamic IPs to keep re-inserting the blurry pic. Tonight another IP.. different range... re-added the pic again. Rather than tend with the IP... the addy will likely switch around.... rotten IPs... I was wondering... since you knew some of the background (especially since I just eloquently reminded you of it :-D )... could you put a prot on the page just for safety sake? Maybe the IP won't return? But based on previous edit war history from the IP/User... I wouldn't count on "calm" Have a nice day! Libs 03:07, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Another memory booster for you

Remember this fella? He's the edit warrior you blocked.. and then extended to 1 week for using an IP sockpuppet inside of his block. Well... he has returned from his block and also returned to the page that got him blocked in the first place. Ignoring consensus and all previous edit wars he left this little threat ont he page in question. I know your fondness for edit warriors and wondered just what you thought about such an edit and edit summary? Me-thinks the hammer shall fall soon. Earlier in the day he left this little gem He got a warning for that. Bearing in mind the users pre-history for civility/edit wars/threats/npa's... I am surprised that didn't earn a quick vacation. Hope your health issues are getting sorted. Have a nice day! Libs 14:00, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

I'll ask another admin to look at both this and the thing above. east718 // talk // email // 18:56, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

A thousand thank-yous... as always. Has there been any reply, direction or focus? User has been dormant here for a couple of days since his last edit wars/rants/npa's. I notice that his IP (the one blocked after his SSP/3RR side-step) has been active on his native Norwegian No-Wiki. But has been scarce, logged or un-logged, since his last vios. Perhaps he decided to re-think his behaviour? Have a nice day! bet you knew I was going to say that :-D Libs 13:57, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Nothing's trickled down... and bah, now it's unactionable because of age. D: I see TRM's already counseled him... not much to do here now I guess... and you have a nice day too, Libs! :D east718 // talk // email // 14:04, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Apparently you are the mediator, so...

A situation in which you have been described as the mediator has been brought up at WP:AN/Arbitration Enforcement. Could I hear your thoughts here? GRBerry 21:52, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi GRBerry, I'll comment there shortly. east718 // talk // email // 19:57, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

User talk:12.24.47.10

You blocked as a zombie proxy, now they say the problem's been fixed. --Stephen 00:19, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Unblocked. east718 // talk // email // 19:57, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Company page

Hi, I saw that your protected the page called "Sextant Properties". It is a sound business with more than 1000 visitors per day. We help British customers to find their dream property in France and we are now among the top 3 on this market in the UK.

Would you be kind enough to write a few lines about us? our website: [www.sextantproperties.com]

Thanks

Matthieu —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.136.130.158 (talk) 15:33, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Short answer: no. Please see WP:BFAQ, then get back to me. east718 // talk // email // 19:57, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Palin

Hi, would you please check this out? Thanks.Ferrylodge (talk) 05:49, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Looks like it's already been taken care of. The reason for the protection is that I'm juping all media related to McCain and Palin here and on Commons for the next couple of days due to the large amount of traffic the articles are getting. Any sort of template or image vandalism that lasts more than a few seconds will be seen by thousands of people and has the potential to become a PR nightmare. east718 // talk // email // 10:07, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Copyright infringment

Hello, East718, would you give Oh Dong-gun (talk · contribs) an official warning regarding his uploading copyrighted images? He has gotten countless warnings by editors including me, but well, the user does not understand the image policy. I think a formal warning by an admin would be appropriate. Thanks--Caspian blue (talk) 13:22, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm slightly bemused at what an "official warning" is, and why it means more coming from me than you, but I'll give it a try. east718 // talk // email // 13:35, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I just don't want him to upload copyrighted images any more. Well, I tried to guide him about Wiki image policy in Korean, but he keeps ignoring....--Caspian blue (talk) 13:42, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to hear that. :( If they keep it up, I'll have to block them then. east718 // talk // email // 13:43, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Featured sounds

Thanks for lending a hand. :) Durova^Charge! 17:49, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

No problem! Shoemaker's Holiday asked me to close the Carmen Miranda one too, but I got beaten to it. :( east718 // talk // email // 21:57, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Image:Sarah_Palin.jpg

Could you temporarily take this off the commons:User:East718/PT list so I can upload an improved version? The blue glow from the flash looks really bad in several places, most noticeably on her neck. Thanks. --InteriotAWB (talk) 20:02, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Hey Interiot, nice to see you around. Sadly, I am not an admin on Commons, but got this deleted to get problems out of the way. east718 // talk // email // 21:57, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Lee Hasdell image

I just tagged Image:Lee_Japan_1-1-.jpg with {{di-no source}}, which I believe is the right tag for an image I suspect is neither taken by the uploader nor released under the given license (even though I couldn't find it elsewhere on the web). I noticed you have cropped and reuploaded it so I just wanted to let you know. Cheers, --Aktsu ^(t / c) 15:46, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

I think that the image is plausibly self-made or created as a work for hire for the uploader, with them being clearly a promotional account and all - as such, I've removed the nsd tag. If you really still disagree, I guess you can bring it to WP:IFD or wherever else you feel is an appropriate forum. east718 // talk // email // 11:43, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Have you looked at his other image uploads? Lots of claimed PD/GFDL without the sources given for the images backing it up, which makes me a bit sceptical about this one too... --Aktsu ^(t / c) 12:25, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Tottenham Hotspur crest.png

Why was it deleted? Why didn't nobody post there was a problem in Talk:Tottenham Hotspur F.C.? Can you restore it? Govvy (talk) 17:21, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

The image needs a fair use rationale; I've undeleted it so you can provide one. east718 // talk // email // 11:43, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:TheStairsBand.jpg

COuld you please undelete the image (removed back in March) so I may add the required rationalle please? Thank you. Sa cooke (talk) 10:48, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Sure. Please keep in mind that if the band still exists, you won't be able to use the image solely to illustrate them. east718 // talk // email // 11:43, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which did not succeed with 47 support, 21 oppose, and 1 neutral. I appreciate both the supports and the opposes. Thanks again and cheers! TN‑X-Man 19:19, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Range block didn't take

FYI, looks like your range blocks didn't take. Maybe you can't use years as expiration dates? —Wknight94 (talk) 12:07, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

east718 is moving, so thanks for catching and fixing it. MBisanz ^talk 12:09, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing my goof, Wknight. east718 // talk // email // 19:22, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Why

Would you delete the talk page of an indef blocked user where the only edit was mine placing the indef block template. Not happy --Herby ^{talk thyme} 18:08, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

I am guessing randomly that your blocking template placed the page in the category Category:Temporary Wikipedian userpages. Every so many weeks an admin runs a deletion bot over all old temporary userpages of indef blocked users, so that is probably how east hit the page you had left. MBisanz ^talk 18:13, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Herby. I'm guessing you're talking about User talk:Sungate? I don't see how the page really provides utility to the project anymore... but if it's part a ring of spam accounts, or something that came under the jurisdiction of a crosswiki CU or whatever, please feel free to restore it. Just remember to remove the "Temporary Wikipedian userpages" bit, or some other admin will come along and delete it in a few days. :) east718 // talk // email // 19:22, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which succeeded with 71 support, 14 oppose, and 5 neutral. Thanks for your participation. I hope I serve you well!

--Smashville^BONK! 23:45, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Deleted talk page

Hi. I'm doing some research into indefinite blocks and unblock requests. Do you think you could make this user's talk page history available to me?

18:01, 24 August 2008 East718 (Talk | contribs) deleted "User talk:Varnooja" ‎ (Talk page of an indefinitely blocked user)

Thanks. Rabidfoxes (talk) 23:29, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

 Done - sorry about the delay. east718 // talk // email // 20:00, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

66.244.203.251

is causing more problems. Needs to be permanently banned as he just continually vandalises pages after being allowed back on. --24.64.32.57 (talk) 21:46, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Reference for east: User has been blocked for 6 months. Jennavecia ^(Talk) 05:20, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Undeletion request for Bmi.gif

File:Bmi.gif (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

On August 23, I reverted a large amount of presumed copyvio from Broadcast Music Incorporated (diff). Because there were intermediate edits complicating things, I inadvertently orphaned Image:Bmi.gif, which was an irreplaceable fair use logo for BMI. Would it be possible to undelete this image so I can undo my error? Matt Fitzpatrick (talk) 05:07, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

 Done Jennavecia ^(Talk) 05:18, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Lara! east718 // talk // email // 20:14, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Tor node block collateral damage

Two weeks ago you blocked 76.26.143.163 as a Tor node. ChloeMS (talk · contribs) is a registered user with minimal yet innocuous edit history requesting she be allowed to edit from that. I declined to lift the autoblock but said I would run it by you. Daniel Case (talk) 04:20, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

east718 is both ill and moving, so he isn't on Wiki. You might consider giving the user IP-block-exempt rights if you believe they can be trusted to edit from tor. MBisanz ^talk 04:31, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

I have instructed this user to formally request it first. They've made maybe five edits in the last couple of years, but none of them were problematic. Daniel Case (talk) 04:36, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

This is a static, residential address that is no longer TOR. I've unblocked it and will leave ChloeMS a note. east718 // talk // email // 20:08, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Next time you're online can you help ol' Libsey out?

Spotted another template troll type edits coming from IP 90.201.141.112‎. It has been vrought to my attention that there was already a similar IP doing parrot edits to the new IP and that there first IP was blocked for 3 months. First IP was 90.199.99.31. Both are based out of Paris. This is a cut n dry block evasion. I know how much you care for these types of editors... do you think you could take time to intervene the next time you're around the Wik? A million thank yous to you for any help. Have a nice day!. The Real Libs-speak politely 17:25, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Waaaaay stale by now. Sorry, Libs. :( east718 // talk // email // 20:05, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Indef-blocked IP talk pages

Hello East718. As someone who automatically deletes pages in Category:Temporary Wikipedian userpages without manually checking them, could I ask you to NOT delete talk pages or user pages of indefinitely blocked IP addresses.[2] Thanks. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 12:44, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Talk pages of indefed users are often deleted as general cleanup. They are only preserved in cases of confirmed sockpuppetry. Jennavecia ^(Talk) 05:09, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. IP addresses are not like users because they can change hands. Talk pages of indefinitely blocked IP addresses are kept for tracking purposes because they should generally not be indefinitely blocked and where they are blocked indefinitely the blocks should be reviewed periodically. See WP:IP and CAT:INDEFIPs. Like the sockpuppet templates, all the proxy templates etc contain the {{do not delete}} marker. Unfortunately some of the blocking templates - even if the block is not indefinite - sometimes place the IP pages into CAT:TEMP which is the wrong place for them. It would be trivial for a deletion bot to check if the page belongs to an IP before considering deletion. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 08:58, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh, good point. The IP didn't click. I'm just thinking indefed users! Yea, you're right. Jennavecia ^(Talk) 12:57, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

I wish somebody would modify all the sock templates so that they don't put pages into CAT:TEMP. Especially with IPs, things are often marked as suspected socks when they are in actuality confirmed socks. Those pages (in my opinion) should be kept indefinitely. EdJohnston (talk) 16:12, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

It would appear that Avraham added it here, why I don't know. MBisanz ^talk 16:36, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

zzuuzz, thanks for letting me know about this. I've made this change (and EdJohnston -- socks aren't deleted by me anyway). Fortunately, some kind sysop shut off the CAT:TEMP bot before it did too much damage. east718 // talk // email // 20:10, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Image deletion

I noticed that you deleted Image:Duke and gonzo.png yesterday for a lack of justification. While I can only assume you had the image-for-deletion tag on the image page for at least a week, I can't help but notice you failed to notify me, the uploader, that the image was being considered for deletion. Had I been alterted to the issue, I would have provided the proper justification and tags. Please try to tell me, and all other uploaders of images you plan to delete, of your intentions before you actually delete the image, from now on. VolatileChemical (talk) 06:30, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm really sorry that happened to you, that's a bit of a faux pax on the part of the person who nominated it for deletion. :( I've restored the image so you can provide a justification for its use. east718 // talk // email // 20:11, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much, that's all I could have asked for. Uh, might I ask where the restored image is located? VolatileChemical (talk) 00:35, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Whoops, that's a bit embarrassing. The image should be back now. east718 // talk // email // 00:45, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Yo

Your talk page is a hot mess... oh, and you have been missed. Hope to see you around this week! Jennavecia ^(Talk) 07:36, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

this talkpage has nothing on what I look like when I roll out of bed. ;) east718 // talk // email // 20:00, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

A hawt mess? Jennavecia ^(Talk) 21:24, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

zomg ur back. o/ hai2u. GlassCobra 14:22, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Missed something?

You blocked me, and I don't find reason. Note that Avi's only source was Wiki, which didn't address his claim (and you can't use as a reference), and he states that I can't contribute because I don't read Hebrew! Please follow the new discussion in Circumcision. I'll take one issue at a time.TipPt (talk) 15:36, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

east is away right now. To hopefully answer your first question, see this and this for the reason for your block. Jennavecia ^(Talk) 05:07, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, I'll study. Please participate in the circ discussion[3]TipPt (talk) 17:45, 18 September 2008 (UTC) So, having read I still don't understand. Avi's logic was clearly flawed (not scholarly). My text adds properly sourced info to the article. Seems like the accurate text should win.TipPt (talk) 17:52, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Tip, Yoreh Deah is a book, not a wikilink. Your comments here further underscore your misunderstandings and ignorance of Jewish Scripture, Law, and history. Please educate yourself before making further mistaken statements. Thanks. -- Avi (talk) 20:08, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Admin bots

Hello, I have recently had an encounter with an unapproved admin bot, and despite an extremely clear dictate by policy that these bots should be blocked, have been discouraged from doing so. Depending how this situation resolves, I will likely file an arbitration request to hopefully resolve this issue once and for all. You commented on Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Adminbots, stating that you ran an admin bot. To help get an idea of how widespread admin bots are, as well as get a uniform decision, I would like to ask: Do you still operate this bot, and does it operate when you are not present? Please reply on my talk page, thanks, Prodego ^talk 00:39, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

I am working on toys that provide complete documentation, source code, and the ability for anybody (not just sysops or "trusted users," whomever they may be) to shut off any bot I run. Watch this space. east718 // talk // email // 20:12, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Request for Arbitration

An Arbitration request has been made at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration regarding your running of an unapproved bot. Prodego ^talk 19:06, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Why was List of Fumblerules deleted?

Thanks, Dandv (talk) 18:53, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

The original page was at List of fumblerules and was deleted by John Reaves (talk · contribs) for violating copyright (specifically, it was a copy of this page). You should take it up with him if you have any more questions. east718 // talk // email // 20:13, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikis Take Manhattan

Wikis Take Manhattan Next: Saturday September 27

WHAT Wikis Take Manhattan is a scavenger hunt and free content photography contest aimed at illustrating Wikipedia and StreetsWiki articles covering sites and street features in Manhattan and across the five boroughs of New York City. The event is based on last year's Wikipedia Takes Manhattan, and has evolved to include StreetsWiki this year as well.

LAST YEAR'S EVENT

• Wikipedia:Wikipedia Takes Manhattan/Spring 2008 (a description of the results, and the uploading party)
• Commons:Wikipedia Takes Manhattan/Gallery (our cool gallery)

WINNINGS? Prizes include a dinner for three with Wikipedia creator Jimmy Wales at Pure Food & Wine, gift certificates to Bicycle Habitiat and the LimeWire Store, and more!

WHEN The hunt will take place Saturday, September 27th from 1:00pm to 6:30pm, followed by prizes and celebration.

WHO All Wikipedians and non-Wikipedians are invited to participate in team of up to three (no special knowledge is required at all, just a digital camera and a love of the city). Bring a friend (or two)!

REGISTER The proper place to register your team is here. It's also perfectly possible to register on the day of when you get there, but it will be slightly easier for us if you register beforehand.

WHERE Participants can begin the hunt from either of two locations: one at Columbia University (at the sundial on college walk) and one at The Open Planning Project's West Village office. Everyone will end at The Open Planning Project:

• Wikis Take Manhattan page at The Open Planning Project

349 W. 12th St. #3

Between Greenwich & Washington Streets

By the 14th St./8th Ave. ACE/L stop

FOR UPDATES

Check out:

• Wikis Take Manhattan main website

This will have a posting if the event is delayed due to weather or other exigency.

Thanks,

Pharos

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:02, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

IRC question

If you get the chance, could you please comment here (01:18, 25 September 2008 (UTC) timestamp). Yours came to mind as someone who might have an idea what I'm talking about. Giggy (talk) 01:19, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Done, good looking out. east718 // talk // email // 04:55, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Question about deleteion of User page

> This page has been deleted. The deletion log > for the page is provided below for reference. > * 19:25, 21 December 2007 East718 (Talk | contribs) > deleted "User:Thomas.Hedden" ‎ (CSD R1: Redirect > to nonexistent page) I noticed that you deleted this page. You appear to be very active at deleting other people's work. Could you explain why you do this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.217.225.199 (talk) 11:57, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

The author of that page pointed ("redirected") it to a non-existent location. They're free to recreate it if they wish. east718 // talk // email // 04:55, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Image deletion

Please undelete Image:ΜTorrent icon.svg so I can use it, thanks.--Otterathome (talk) 19:03, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Gladly, I've restored it. east718 // talk // email // 17:22, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Sherman Bergman

Hi East, i know you're busy with admin duties but i need your advice whats the best thing to do about this Sherman Bergman article. Each time i stumble on it makes me angry because i know for a fact that his fighting record listed there, specially kickboxing, the names and events are complete fabrication.Marty Rockatansky (talk) 01:57, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, the sources we dug up at the last two AFDs were real - although I don't recognize their legitimacy, with both being closed early by non-admins and the second being closed because of purported "disruption" on your part. *rolls eyes* I still think we're dealing with an orchestrated effort from a fan club - the only real solution here is to be diligent, demand high-quality sourcing beyond Sherdog and the dirt sheets, and to remove peacocking wherever you find it. east718 // talk // email // 17:24, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

It's this one guy using different names. The only sources he dug up, was that Bergman is a real person - which was not the point - and that he had a few amateur boxing bouts in late 70s. Another reason why hes been able to pull this off is because there's hardly any kickboxing contributors here in wiki. It would be impossible to fake it on other more mainstream sports like baseball, football or even MMA. He has deleted some crazy stuff like inventing the "sling-shot punch" but still overall just seems to keep reediting the article whatever he feels like at any given time. the latest is the fight at Ronald McDonald House about a month ago. funny that he seams to have access to all these little details about Bergman but lists the date of birth "unavailable". if Bergman was an amateur in early 70s he's gotta be pushing sixties by now, and still fighting at Ronald McDonald House???? Its ridiculous.Marty Rockatansky (talk) 20:25, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Is it sourced? No? Then remove it with prejudice. :-) east718 // talk // email // 05:04, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

thx East. I'll see what i can do. Another favor, is there any way you can put a temporary protection on Badr Hari's page from unregistered users. I'll start working on the overall article but we're getting a lot of traffic specially after yesterday's event. thx.Marty Rockatansky (talk)

I don't really see the reason why. Semiprotection is usually used when an article is being vandalized by anonymous users? Can you point out a couple unconstructive edits? (Oh, and if you think that's high traffic, try managing de la Hoya or Liddell's articles when they fight. :)) east718 // talk // email // 22:34, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Yeah i guess it's a minor compare to those two. I don't know how you can manage all this work . We would have a huge mess here without someone like you. A lot of this work goes unnoticed for many, i have a lot of respect for you thats for sure. Marty Rockatansky (talk) 23:11, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you kindly, Marty. That really means a lot, especially coming from an editor as conscientious as you. east718 // talk // email // 23:14, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

News

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2008_September_25#Image:Stpauli2003dergan.jpg Regards 78.49.56.219 (talk) —Preceding undated comment was added at 10:12, 26 September 2008 (UTC).

remember when....

Hey East. Remember Mr Uncivil 3RR guy User:Be Black Hole Sun? Look like he is getting multiple personality syndrome. Look at Fell on Black Days (talk · contribs) and Superunknown (talk · contribs). Along with a series of Norwegian based IP sock this guy seems to be creating his own personal army of "named after Soundgarden song" accounts. Not sure of the motive there. But an army of socks can be used to sway consensus and also be used to circumvent blocks and also edit pages that are in a prot mode due to edit warring. Circumventing blocks with socks and edit warring and something that BBHS is awfully good at. Any thoughts? The Real Libs-speak politely 16:00, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Libs, I know I'm awesome but I can't peer into the pipes of the internet just yet :D This stuff you should be good enough for requesting a checkuser - if you're like me and can't figure out how to fill out the paperwork, I'm sure Rlevse (talk · contribs) or Nishkid64 (talk · contribs) will be able to help. Of paramount importance is listing the IPs you think are him, detailing abuse with diffs (consensus falsification counts), and mentioning that this guy's sockpuppeted abusively in the past, and evaded blocks recently. Good luck! east718 // talk // email // 17:27, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks East. I am just about to head out with my Cub Pack for our first camp-o-tha-season. I won't be back into civilisation until Monday. If I don't get eaten by a bear I will revisit and see if I can't re-juve my inner Wiki-paranoid-schizo enough to drum out a sock search. Have a nice day! The Real Libs-speak politely 17:39, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

The best way to avoid getting eaten by a bear is to not poke one. That bear looks like a mean mutha! :O east718 // talk // email // 17:40, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to barge in but i'm Bruker:Superunknown on norwegian wikipedia and User:Fell on Black Days on simple wikipedia. I don't know why but i'm logged here as Fell on Black Days and Superunknown, but when i forget to log out on simple and norwegian i'm on of those users here. I didn't mean for this problem to start any way but sorry for making problems and i'm not trying to start an edit war wikilibs. If you didn't get what i meant just ask me. --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 15:04, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

That's an entirely reasonable explanation. If you don't want to be automatically logged in on other wikis, you can prevent it from happening in the future by asking a steward on Meta to delete your global accounts; see m:SR/SUL. east718 // talk // email // 15:53, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

I'll do that. :) --Be Black Hole Sun (talk) 17:17, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Tom Sayle

Hello, sir. Regarding this edit, I was wondering if I create some subpages with some pages I was planning on creating anyway. This is an IP edit, before you ask. Thomas Michael William Patrick Sales 17:52, 26 September 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.74.33.167 (talk)

First, please stop editing with your IP. Second, you can just improve an article on your talkpage - just start a new section and paste whatever you're working on there. If you put your work in a subpage, the next reviewing administrator may not be able to find it. east718 // talk // email // 17:55, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello, sir. I have a problem. When I log in, I get the block message every time I try to edit my talk page. Could you review the work I've done, please? Thomas Michael William Patrick Sales 14:48, 29 September 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.73.101.41 (talk)

Song samples

Do you know where I can find a source for the massive list of samples in Paid in Full (album)#Track listing. I can source everything in the article except the samples. Spellcast (talk) 04:51, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

I wasn't able to find anything online... except for a mention of another book in this journal article; it says that Signifying Rappers: Rap and Race in the Urban Present by Costello and Wallace details the samples used in Paid in Full. The book's long out of print though, and even the New York Public Library doesn't carry it. It's a longshot, but it only costs five bucks on abebooks.com - it might be worth grabbing it. east718 // talk // email // 05:07, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

That book has the sheet music and samples for the Coldcut remix of "Paid in Full", but I don't think it lists the samples for all the songs. Thanks for the suggestion though. There's good sources which mention the samples of a few songs, but not the whole album. The most complete source I could find was this, but it doesn't seem to be an RS (eventhough the info is probably right). Spellcast (talk) 23:47, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

My RfA

Thank you for supporting me in my RfA, which passed with a count of (154/3/2). I appreciate the community's trust in me, and I will do my best to be sure it won't regret handing me the mop. I am honored by your trust and your support. Again, thank you. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 19:39, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Image:Vinny Feeney.jpg

Just noticed that this and a few other of my images have been deleted recently citing no source information.

Can you please explain this because, as the creator of the images I am sure I labelled them accordingly and I never got a warning to say that they might be deleted.--Vintagekits (talk) 11:00, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about that, it looks like they were vandalized (by an IP in the same range as the one that just blanked your message to me too). I've restored three images of yours and will try to put them back where they belong. east718 // talk // email // 03:12, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Deleted Myst image

I know it seems like grave digging at this point, but I noticed you deleted Image:Narayan Age.jpg a long while back. If this file still exists in the realm of the deleted, would you be able to restore it so that it can be moved to the Commons? It is covered under {{Attribution-Ubisoft}}. Please let me know if you have any questions! — OranL (talk) 16:14, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Done, good luck with the article! east718 // talk // email // 03:12, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! — OranL (talk) 20:42, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for restoring Image:Nexus-Interface.jpg. I left a message for you on my talk page. — OranL (talk) 04:20, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Re: Heather Kuzmich

Hi, many moons ago you put this on my talk page:

Hi, Soarhead77! Unfortunately, using non-free images of living people is unacceptable except in special circumstances (see the non-free content policy for details). I know the policy sucks, but until somebody manages to create a free image of her, we just have to live without one

Well she emailed me about this! (We have some things in common!) Unfortunately she doesn't have anything... Soarhead77 (talk) 10:21, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Surely she must have at least one personal photo of herself? If you don't mind doing so, could you please forward your correspondence with her to info-enwikimedia.org? Maybe we can get a photo submission with enough gentle coaxing. east718 // talk // email // 02:26, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Erection

I notice that a vandal moved Erection to a different page title on 2008 August 13, and violated WP:PRIVACY in the title. WP:PRIVACY states: "Edits attempting to out someone should be promptly reverted, and an oversighter brought in to permanently delete them from the public record.". You restored the original page content, but the offending title still appears in the page logs. I made an oversight request and haven't received a response yet, so I don't know if you did the same, but I wanted to point out the guideline in case you weren't aware of it. --DocumentN (talk) 00:43, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

The "oversight" function cannot remove entries from logs, only a developer can do that. I contacted a member of the oversight team to get it passed up the ladder, but they declined to do so because it supposedly wasn't a privacy violation. I know, I'm pretty livid about it too. east718 // talk // email // 02:26, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:EastWindsorCTseal.png)

⚠

Thanks for uploading Image:EastWindsorCTseal.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? -Nard 01:01, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Lewis and clark college seal.png)

⚠

Thanks for uploading Image:Lewis and clark college seal.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? -Nard 02:00, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

718bot

a user has expressed a concern about the bot's functioning at AIV. Cheers, Dlohcierekim 02:20, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

The bot's working just fine. Replacing unoptimized JPEGs and GIFs with smaller PNGs that are kind on readers with slow internet connections are what it's supposed to do. As for the leaving around of orphaned non-free images, tagging those is outside of this bot's remit, but we do have another one which will do just that in a few hours. And then we have a third one which will delete them after a week. :-) east718 // talk // email // 02:26, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

{{ShouldBePNG}

Hi! Your bot is now working on jpgs of some nature, will it pick up {{ShouldBePNG}} tags? Thanks, Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 15:39, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Images tagged with {{ShouldBePNG}} actually been under daily care of the bot for several months now. Any old images that are left will need to be found again from a lossless source or redrawn -- conversion to PNG would not help reduce the filesize. east718 // talk // email // 22:06, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Got a minute?

Next time you're online can you look at 24.61.213.32 (talk · contribs) for me. Do you notice any sorta single purpose for that IPs edits. I lose count of the RRs but it looks like about 5 or 6 on at least 4 different pages. Do you concur. There is a sock tag on the talk page. The IP edits mirror those of the account it is tied to. Is there some sort of time clock that can be punched for this fella? Have a nice day! The Real Libs-speak politely 01:48, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Crazy edit-warring like that gets you a block, thanks for the heads up Libs. east718 // talk // email // 22:06, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks East!. Your 24 block was nice but it looks like the 24.X editor jumped ship and went to 86.136.1.162 (talk · contribs). Repeat edits to the same article the 24.X editor was doing and still inside the 24 hour block you imposed on him. The Real Libs-speak politely 13:25, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't think it's the same person. Both IPs are residential and unshared, and are on two different continents. I poked around and wasn't able to find proxies on either IP. Also, the lifetime of British Telecom IPs (the 86.136 user) are so short, that there's little point in blocking them. Sorry I couldn't be of much help this time. east718 // talk // email // 05:52, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

GIFs to PNGs

I am just curious as to why the GIF images are being replaced with PNGs. I personally don't mind, looks better, just was curious as to the reason. Take Care and Have a Great Thursday...NeutralHomer • Talk 09:00, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

The PNGs look exactly the same, but are smaller in filesize. It's basically to make the readers' experience faster if they have a slow internet connection, or are using a slow computer, phone or PDA. east718 // talk // email // 22:06, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Ah, OKie Dokie. To be honest, I thought PNGs and GIFs were the same general filesize. I learned something. Take Care...NeutralHomer • Talk 22:55, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Your 3RR Post

Yeah I'd like to know why you feel it's cool to reply to people in the third person and then threaten to block them for edit warring while at the same time indicating by silence that the actions of GlassCobra are kosher with Wikipedia policy. Tmore3 (talk) 00:22, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

I wasn't really threatening to block you. That would be excessively punitive given that another admin had just tried to counsel you. GlassCobra wasn't really innocent either, I approached him in private about the situation. I also wasn't trying to belittle you by referring to you in the third person - you'll notice that I spoke about Rjd0060 in that way too. I've found that keeping comments impersonal and focused on the matter at hand leads to less interpersonal conflict and faster resolution of disputes. east718 // talk // email // 05:52, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Bengali?

I and some of my friends were looking at the user pages of Wikipedias few months ago, and we saw your user page. We were impressed with your profile. "Structural engineer and amateur boxer currently living in New York City". Impressive. We are also engineering students. Today, I noticed that you are a native speaker of Bengali! :) I've been to West Bengal many times and I've friends there. I'm editing from an IP so that you can figure out where I'm from. :) This is a shared IP, so please reply on your talkpage. Cheers! 202.52.241.131 (talk) 11:16, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the praise. Yes, I was born in Bangladesh, but moved away shortly later. How's Nepal treating you guys? east718 // talk // email // 05:52, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

A Barnstar for you

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		For making my day by creating a .png file to replace the .jpg I had uploaded much earlier. Also, for using your powers to BLOCK another disruptive and abusive editor, cheers! ...Dave1185 (talk) 22:32, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, this really means a lot. east718 // talk // email // 05:52, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Blue SF

Just saw you blocked him. I'd templated him for vandalising. Did you checkuser him or something? Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 09:26, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

It's a throwaway attack account. Why waste our time trying to enculturate the person behind it? east718 // talk // email // 09:59, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, he's a sock to begin with, and socked a couple more times since the protection/block, and each account was blocked again, and each userpage was deleted for similar reasons. Thank you both for your help. :) Ncmvocalist (talk) 12:21, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

I had no way of knowing for sure though. Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 16:23, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

True, I just didn't know if that was really "allowed". Thanks, though! Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 16:23, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

If we're discussion what's "allowed" or not, then you're entitled to do whatever you feel is necessary to protect the encyclopedia and its integrity (and by extension, its editors). Unorthodox, inventive and unwritten solutions are most welcome, provided they actually work. east718 // talk // email // 18:55, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

PNG version available tagging by 718 Bot

{{PNG version available}} requests that {{subst:orfur|new version image page}} be added to non-free images when they are superseded, but 718 Bot doesn't seem to be doing so. Could the bot be configured to check for fair use status and tag images accordingly? --Paul_012 ^(talk) 12:25, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Those instructions must be out of date. To lessen the workload for editors, there's another bot which will take care of the {{orfur}} tag. I also don't think it's a good idea for me to do something which is covered by another bot, especially since mine will probably suffer from inaccuracies for the short-term future. east718 // talk // email // 12:31, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

This AN/I thread might be of interst to you--Wikipedia:AN/I#an editor is reverting to bad images

User:Rtphokie went through and undid the work of 718bot after getting orphaned messages, and tagged the png's for speedy deletion. (You must get this a lot.) User:192.30.202.21 went through and reversed him and so forth. Is there a policy I can point other editors to when this comes up? Is there a way to make the edit summary more educational so editors don't go through and reverse the bot's actions? Cheers, and happy editing. Dlohcierekim

I don't think there are any policies concerning this (and there probably shouldn't be, either). Just using editorial discretion seems appopriate. I don't know why anybody would choose the old GIF or JPEG though. As for edit summaries, do you have any ideas? How's "Replacing x.jpg with superior version" sound? east718 // talk // email // 22:16, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Works for me, but I think that's what you're already doing. Oh, well. Dlohcierekim 23:53, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Got another minute?  :-)

Next time you're online can you look at 24.61.213.32 (talk · contribs) again. He did not seem to learn anything from your previous block on his addy. I see he has returned today and is right back at edit warring all the same pages he was before (plus a few extra ones added in) Thankees. Have a nice day! The Real Libs-speak politely 22:38, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

taken care of, thanks. east718 // talk // email // 22:45, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

I didn't even hear the ricochet :-) ... yer fast! The Real Libs-speak politely 22:49, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Buosmgt

Why was Buosmgt blocked? If it was for making legal threats, which I heard, could you show me where they were? Tezkag72 (talk) 13:17, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Sure, there was a community discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive453#Legal Threat. east718 // talk // email // 18:33, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

?

I probably made a single revert today (if any). Why did you want to "block both users"? Squash Racket (talk) 18:47, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about that. I thought that [4] was a revert, but now see that it's just different wording. Keep in mind though that the 3RR is not an electric fence never to be crossed, it's just a gauge to determine if an edit war's taking place. You and Rezistenta look like you've been going at each other for a week or so now, with some pretty hostile conversation on the talkpage to boot (granted, you were far more polite though). When I'm in a dispute, I've found it helpful to take a quick break and ask other editors to weigh in -- something that talkpage needs right now. east718 // talk // email // 18:57, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Would you please modify your closing comment at the 3RR board? (You may remove my last comment while doing so.) Someone may use this "verdict" against me in an unjustified way. I used the talk page after his first revert. Did he answer anything? Squash Racket (talk) 19:04, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Sure thing. Again though, when dealing with difficult editors, I think a better approach is to get lots of opinions and try to form a consensus that said editor cannot keep fighting against. east718 // talk // email // 19:09, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

LoTE 3RR

The 3RR might be stale on this article but a glance at the article's history shows that LoTE is still currently edit warring there. He just hasnt crossed the 3RR fence yet. CENSEI (talk) 18:53, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't think one revert in the past two days constitutes monolithic edit-warring. They are already familiar with the relevant policies though (having been blocked several times for 3RR) - so I'll think about blocking if they keep it up. east718 // talk // email // 19:01, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. CENSEI (talk) 19:14, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Wakamusha's doing it again

Wakamusha has just moved the page, again. I have reverted it, however, if (s)he does it again can you block the editor and/or move-protect the article indefinitely? Lord Sesshomaru (talk • edits) 00:26, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

I move-protected the article in the same state that I found it. 15 or so moves in a day is pretty insane. Just work out your differences on the talkpage. east718 // talk // email // 05:13, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Botwork

Hi there, Maybe the bot should be able to detect images like this and realize the tags contradict each other? Or atleast not upload an image with a copyright tag and no rationale. §hep • ¡Talk to me! 00:31, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Images sometimes have legitimate reasons for carrying two copyright tags (for example, something that's PD in one country but not in the US, or a "free" image that has some restrictions on its use. For your latter query, a human should be given the chance to fix the source or rationale for the image. If it isn't, my other bot will get to it in a week. east718 // talk // email // 05:13, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Image:Te Rata.jpg

re: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Upload&wpDestFile=Te_Rata.jpg

IIRC: The original image was placed in wiki by the creator. All I did was crop the image.

The Copyright notice was: ((({{PD-release}} Photo - M Berryman, then clipped/trimmed by myself, derived from c.f. [5])))

By deleting this image, the prior image and PD-release permission was deleted as well. Was this your intention? Or did I miss something?

(I am only occasionally logged in to wikipedia, so for a quicker response please email me)

NevilleDNZ (talk) 13:36, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

You forgot to remove the {{PD}} tag, which is deprecated and automatically tags the image as lacking a source. I've restored the image and added a rationale, and will try to place it back in the appropriate articles. east718 // talk // email // 03:28, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

ThanX for the fix. Actually I had problems selecting the right license tag (from the Image upload menu provided), IIRC there was no selection for PD image modified (cropped in this cases) and the GPLed. This should be fixed.

NevilleDNZ (talk)

1RR

East- I noticed this. Could you elaborate for me where you believe I violated my 1RR restriction? Thanks. --G2bambino (talk) 15:48, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Revert one, and two. It's a bit late to block you though, so just be more careful in the future. east718 // talk // email // 03:30, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Yes, those are two reverts; however, the 1RR restriction on myself was only in regards to Canadian monarchy articles, and PoC's edits, not to other pages or other editors. Now, though I was technically within my bounds there, having later read MangoJuice's comments to PoC on reverting and entitlement, I realise that the same applies to myself, and would have applied earlier. That second revert was a kneejerk retaliation to a move that was purposefully irritating, and, though technically allowed, was just a continuation of a dispute, rather than an effort to seek resolution. Anyway, I hope that clears things up. --G2bambino (talk) 16:41, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Sorta like the 24.X fella

66.222.253.33 (talk · contribs) seems to be a single purpose IP editor.... reverting to his own version on several articles. A similar modus operandi to the 24.X IP fella you blocked the other day. Do you concur that this IP is a "my way or the highway" editor? And can a nail belt be thrown across his current road? The Real Libs-speak politely 00:08, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Again, I don't think it's the same person. The edit-warring sure merits a block though. east718 // talk // email // 03:32, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Oh I didn't think it was the same person. Just the exact same bad habits. As always... thanks for all your assistance! Have a nice day! The Real Libs-speak politely 09:50, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

User:EricV89/TeenWiki Cabal

I plan on taking this to DRV, just to let you know. The "policy" rationale given was without any explanation at all, as I pointed out in the discussion itself. Just saying it's so doesn't make it so. -- Ned Scott 05:06, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

And from the page creator himself: Keep - It's a humourous cabal nothing more. Not meant for socialization, only discussions on how to improve Wikipedia among teen editors. --eric (mailbox) 04:21, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

He made the intent clear. He even edited the page to remove some of the parts that people had concerns about. The deletion supporters have nothing more than an assertion without any evidence. -- Ned Scott 05:08, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't really think that flies. Some people in favor of deleting did provide explanations: "There is absolutely no intent [of improving the encyclopedia] here. It's purely a social page."; "makes no indication of how it will improve Wikipedia". Despite EricV89's claim that it was meant for "only discussions on how to improve Wikipedia among teen editors," this idea never saw a genesis, or even a mention on the page that this was its aim (granted, some content which was objected to was removed). Just saying something doesn't make it so. east718 // talk // email // 05:46, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

So the page was poorly designed, that's something that can easily be fixed with a simple edit. It still didn't violate WP:MYSPACE, even if it was an inactive page.

I'm sorry for not waiting for a response from you before opening the DRV. I'm just very frustrated with these situations on Wikipedia. I see it as a form of age discrimination, that simply because it involved "teens" it got labeled as a myspace-type thing. Editors have become paranoid about these kinds of things, and I've gotten tired of seeing reasonable pages deleted for fears of what might become, rather than what actually is.

From what I saw, it was nothing more than a contact list of editors who got along or had similar interests. That's not prohibited by WP:MYSPACE, so why isn't Eric allowed to have it? -- Ned Scott 20:55, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't really mind, it was reasonable to think I went offline after these edits. The page can still be fixed now; all that has to be done is for EricV89 to recreate it (and the "contact list" is right there for the reusing). I'm afraid I really don't share your concerns. east718 // talk // email // 02:40, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of User:EricV89/TeenWiki Cabal. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. -- Ned Scott 05:23, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Boodlesthecat's block

Hi East718,

I was wondering if you would consider reducing the length of Boodlesthecat's block. It's clear to me that he didn't fully understand the restrictions he was editing under, and he was also subject to some extraordinarily disruptive editing. As examples:

• Piotrus sticking "fact" tags on material that is cited at the end of the paragraph:[6] Later he starts removing such material entirely.[7] On the Talk: page he claims that every single sentence needs a citation, that you cannot cite several sentences to one citation.
• Piotrus adding "page number" request tags to citations that actually linked directly to the pages in question in Google books:[8][9][10]

There's lots more of this, but I won't bore you with it. In addition, on October 5 Piotrus recruited Polish editors not under sanctions to edit-war for him, and User:Radeksz and User:Vecrumba dutifully showed up to revert. It was reverting these two that got Boodlesthecat in trouble. Piotrus does this kind of thing quite regularly, and is extremely skilled at it; he managed, through disruption and recruitment to goad Boodles into violating his restrictions. Given the circumstances, I think the "remedy" here is unbalanced. Your thoughts? Jayjg ^(talk) 05:08, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm not really sure. I'm finding it a bit hard to believe that somebody's who's been blocked six times previously for revert-warring still doesn't understand what constitutes a revert. I'm open to the possibility that this can actually be the case, but then we're moving from a problem of possible disingenuity to one of competence. Either way, I feel that a block of some duration is still merited (although I always remain open to reducing it to a couple of days or lifting it entirely upon an assurance of more care to be taken while editing in the future). Lastly, if Boodlesthecat is being ganged upon, there is no reason to fight disruption with disruption. There is the option of reporting to ANI or a friendly administrator, perhaps starting an RFC on content, or if the pattern is sustained, conduct. Edit warring in response is the worst way to go about it. Perhaps you can give Boodlesthecat some advice on this - I think that they'd be more receptive of it coming from you, rather than the scrivener of criticism of their editing behavior on AN.
I agree with you that Piotrus hasn't been a saint through this. This is certainly a problem, and the notion that one must be able to verify sources themselves that's presented here is just bizarre. If Piotrus weren't an administrator, I'd consider warning them in some measure, but whatever resulted of it wouldn't stick for reasons which I don't like; reasons which are beyond my control. If the volume of the allegations you're making is so much and they all hold water as well as the three you've presented to me, hopefully ArbCom can put an end to this soon. east718 // talk // email // 05:47, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

I agree that a block is warranted, though I might have blocked others in the dispute for their incredibly tendentious editing. However, a 10 day block is huge. Long time editor User:Ned Scott has stated that his understanding of 1RR was the same as Boodles; I agree with you that their understanding is incorrect, but it's not completely out of the realm of possibility that Boodles misunderstood his restriction. Given all the extenuating circumstances, are you sure you couldn't reduce it to something more typical? Say 24, or even 48 hours? Jayjg ^(talk) 06:15, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

I didn't realize that the 1RR restriction was limited to just Piotrus. I don't really think a ten-day block is merited anymore, especially with such an opaque restriction, so I'll offer Boodles an olive branch and drop it down to time served. east718 // talk // email // 02:45, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

His unblock was declined by two other admins, but... let's see: his third edit since unblock: rv, fourth: accusation of Jew baiting, fifth: rv, sixth: accusation of stalking... right, he has learned his lesson and is a changed person now, no doubt. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 05:45, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

And I have broken exactly what rule with those edits? Do you recall reading that the terms of my unblock are that I make only edits that please you? In fact, the unblock was, in part, based on your canvassing against me. Now you continue to canvass against me. Who hasnt learned his lesson? Boodlesthecat ^Meow? 05:56, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

East, first - thank you for having to courage to deal with the disruptive user. Second, since you commented about my behavior (please note, per Radek and Peters comments here, that Jayjg - himself heavily invovled in the article - framed my actions with little good faith), I'd like to hear why 1) this is bad and why 2) enforcing WP:V/WP:CITE is bad, too. For 1), my message was on a relevant, public wikiproject forum, notifying of a destabilization of an article and citing the controversial phrase in question that lead to it, it invited comments, not any kind of POV pushing or revert warring (please read it with AGF in mind). For 2), for controversial statements, inline citations should be provided for every sentence, since a reader may not know whether a controversial statement in the middle of a paragraph with single ref at the end comes from that ref or from some unreferenced edit (I myself did not know that, and had to read the original academic article to verify it - and my citation request tags, asking editor(s) who added this content for clarification if it comes from that source were simply reverted, when they could have easily and in a civil way added the inline citations I requested). Bearing this in mind, can you clarify what is problematic in my actions? Thank you, --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 19:57, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

you shouldn't be making limited postings like that. The sarcasm of the message was inappropriate, the audience partisan, and the scope limited. Did you post messages asking for more eyes on the article elsewhere? For 2), I don't really buy that every editor has to be able to verify the exact content of references - if this were the case, all private scholarly repositories, books, etc. would be fair game for removal from articles en masse. Your main complaint seems to be that your university has no access to the article, ergo you cannot verify the content, ergo the article is somehow unreferenced...? Please correct if I'm missing something, because otherwise I'm afraid I don't see the sense in your concerns there. east718 // talk // email // 02:55, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Jayjg, please. You are involved in that article, you're supporting Boody's in mainspace and talk, and when I and others've asked you to intervene and stop his incivility and edit warring you blame others for "discussing Boody". Please, try to mentor Boody, not encourage him. Mentoring him may yet turn him into a good editor, encouraging him in his disruptive behavior won't. As for block length, well, Boody's block edit history speaks for itself - up to and including the fact that he has challenged every block as unfair, and went straight back to edit warring and incivility as soon as it expired. Talk to him, and if he shows on his talk page some remorse and regret, sure, we can consider shortening his block. Doing it now would only encourage him and give him a sign that he has done nothing (or little) wrong. PS. I find your very bad faithed accusations here against me very much unfitting an administrator: my request for citations for perfectly in line with WP:CITE/WP:V; I've asked for RfC on several forums, as advocated by our policies, and saying that I baited Boody into this... I'd highly recommend you read my essay on radicalization and think long and hard whether you should really be supporting Boody and spreading bad faithed slander about me. I have never complained about anything you've done - even through I find your unwavering support of incivil and edit warring Boody unbecoming of an administrator - and I'd really hate to see our relationship break down because of Boody. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 07:47, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Umm, for the record I reverted the controversial material ONCE when I first noticed it several days ago and after Boodles reverted me, including "discuss it in talk first" in his/her edit summary, I have not reverted him, or Jayjg, or anyone else on that article. Instead, as s/he suggested, I have been discussing it on talk (to be precise, lest I get accused of bad faith here, again, there were some other edits in other portions of the article but my sense of it was that we worked it out). And yes, I did notice the article through the board Jayjg mentions above but so what? I occasionally look at it for articles that I think may be interesting. Prior to this I think I've co-edited or talked to Piotrus or had any kind of interaction with him, like, twice, both of those being back in something like 2005 or 2006 when I first joined Wikipedia. To imply - wait, no - TO STATE, that I engaged in any kind of edit warring on this article with Boodles or anyone else is false and dishonest. To accuse me of doing so because ... I don't know, I was supposedly following orders of the Grand Leader Piotrus or something is insulting. Additionally, while I've been following the discussion on the relevant article I haven't had time to spend on whatever side shows may be going on that are related to it and I wasn't even aware that Boodles was blocked (hence I have no opinion on the righteousness of her/his block or its length). Obviously Jayjg, whose edits and work I've seen around before and who I previously had a good impression of, owes me an apology. But since I'm here - since someone started talking about me - I may as well throw my two cents in and state that Jayj is obviously being dishonest here, whether he realizes it or not. Take that as a piece of "character witness testimony". Oh. And yes, again for the sake of full disclosure, I found this little piece of defamation through a message Piotrus left me a few minutes ago and I want to apologize ahead of time to user East718 if this isn't the proper space to correct this crap.radek (talk) 08:34, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Do carry on, my talkpage sucks anyway and if venting here leads to more calm over at the articles, it's all for the better. east718 // talk // email // 03:02, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Exactly how many places are editors going to go to smear my reputation? It's quite simple. Yes, Piotrus already mentioned the article some time back. And yes, I then did investigate the article, not because I am Piotrus' recruit but because it's been an area of study of mine for years.

1. I did not "revert", I in fact left Boodlesthecat's reference to Gerrits intact. What I did was to NPOV the context in which it appeared in the lead together with the mention of another author who would be better known in that context. Mine was a completely new, completely unsolicited edit. Read the extensive edit comment.
2. I've dealt with accusations of being Piotrus' lackey here. Any of this new crop of Boodlesthecat defenders (none of whom I've dealt with before, such as Jayjg) are obviously unaware I value my reptutation. Since I did not "revert", left the reference to the disputed work intact (!), and indicated no problem in the body of the article, exactly how is that a "revert" and "edit warring"?
3. Finally, I'll spare you Boodlesthecat's repeated attempts to grossly mischaracterize and hatefully and (I believe intentionally, based on his sheer persistence) misconstrue my statements into clearly offensive anti-Semitic rants having nothing to do with what I actually said.

I'm quite tired of editors attempting to control article content by attacking other editors on the talk pages of admins. Whenever I've felt the need to descend to that level (contact an admin, etc.), I at least do the courtesy of notifying the editor I've implicated/with whose conduct I have an issue. What I see here is little more than back-stabbing under the guise of a plaintive complaint. Boodlesthecat indicated where we could discuss my edit further (the RfC section of the talk page), it's his problem that he ALSO lept at the speed of light to an accusation of bad faith on my part and just couldn't help himself to do a knee-jerk revert. Have I missed something regarding my appearance at the top of this thread? —PētersV (talk) 15:02, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

718 Bot

Hey. Probably not a common issue, but in this edit the bot messed up an unrelated image link while replacing a similarly named .jpg logo with a .png. Thanks, Prolog (talk) 20:16, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

That's a pretty rare bug which I knew about. I could modify the bot to replace only the first instance of an image, but that would likely cause more problems (missing images, possibly replacing the wrong image). I suppose we'll just have to live with one error out of thousands. east718 // talk // email // 02:38, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Block of User:Noroton

Hi, I wonder if you would be good enough to revisit the length of Noroton's block, please? I agree that a block is merited but 1 week seems too long. I am also bothered that he has been blocked from editing his own talk page which would restrict him from appealing the block. I have had a look at the AN/I thread but that doesn't seem to provide a consensus for a long block. My suggestion would be to remove the restriction on talk page editing, it can go straight back if he abuses it, and reducing the block to, say, 36 hours. TerriersFan (talk) 03:06, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

(e/c) The block was well within administrative discretion; Noroton really flew off the handle today (note that consensus isn't really required for an initial action by a sysop, just to modify or undo it). As for the talkpage thing, that must have been either my error or another bug with this new "feature", I've fixed that up. east718 // talk // email // 03:12, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Sure, I acknowledge that there has been an outbreak of unwarranted unpleasantness which is why I agree that a block is called for. Noroton's previous blocks are over a year ago and can be disregarded. Consequently, for what can be termed an initial block in recent times, then a day or two seems more appropriate. If this doesn't have the necessary effect then by all means impose a lengthy block and I won't intervene. If you still don't agree perhaps you would be good enough to seek a third opinion? TerriersFan (talk) 03:29, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

I disagree with the wisdom of blocking for short amounts of time just because unseemly outbreaks occur irregularly. Blocks should be as long as they need to be to help. My read of the situation is that Noroton's been slowly boiling over and finally broke - a day off is unlikely to be anything more than a short-term psychological blow rather than an actual solution to what caused this outburst. The issue is already on ANI, so I'm sure that more opinions and a review of this block will be coming in soon. east718 // talk // email // 03:38, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

718 Bot and image history

I noticed that, when uploading Image:Lyria logo.png, 718 Bot included the page history of Image:Lyria logo.gif on the new page but left out its upload history (which, in particular, happened to include my upload of a cleaned-up version over the original). While I don't particularly mind being left out of the history in this case (it was just a trivial modification, after all), I can see how this could create an issue for images with multiple substantial authors, some of whom are only attributed in the upload log. Is there any way you could modify your bot to also copy the old upload history when converting the image to PNG? Thanks, —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 06:00, 10 October 2008 (UTC)