User talk:Adolphus79/2009

Complaint

Sorry about the vandalism. I just want you, if you can, to contact PepsiCo and ask why they would want to do such a ridiculous thing. Abbreviate Mountain Dew to Mtn Dew? What's next? The world is going to be abbreviated? Please respond when you can and get my questions answers. Bob--99.141.171.4 (talk) 02:18, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

The move

Hay Adolphus it's me Ninjalemming, could you drop me a note on my talk page when you have finished moving, and say how it went to; so far (I write this on January the first) nothing much seems to have happened. I am so bored! sorry to waste your time. --'The Ninjalemming' 17:34, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you!

I award you this funky thing as a sign of appreciation for helping me with all my trivial questions, and hope that you continue to be as kind and friendly as you have as I may have some more questions needing to be answered. Hope the move went well. I just need to be right! !!CHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEERRRRRRSSSSSSS ADOLPHUS!! --'The Ninjalemming'

• As with xeno's i didn't know were to put it so it went here, it is also almost the same as xeno's, sorry about that. --'The Ninjalemming' 17:33, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

No problems... thank you for the thankspam... feel free to let me know if you need any more help in the future... - Adolphus (talk) 17:28, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

Service awards

You know you can display this to show how brilliant you are.

This editor is a
Veteran Editor
and is entitled to display this
Iron Editor Star.

Unfortunately I can only display this, I need more edits; especially to the mainspace. Remember you can see all your edits here [1] and what to aim for here.

This editor is a
Novice Editor
and is entitled to display this Service Badge.

Oh and how in the hell did you manage to change your background on your user page, I could really use having the ability to do that, and brighten up the place. --'The Ninjalemming'

Thanks for the heads up, but I already have a service ribbon on my page (above my picture)... I also have a link to the editcountitis bot down with my userboxes (directly under the userbox that shows my number of counts)... As far as the background goes, I did not actually design my own page, I had help, so I couldn't tell you how to change the background, etc... - Adolphus (talk) 14:33, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Oh yeah. Oh well I have to aim for this any way, can you check this out and tell me what you think so far, also if you have any info on what happens with the other factions from Endwar then please say. Cheers --'The Ninjalemming' 18:11, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Where are you?

I haven't seen you anywhere lately, normally you are hanging aroung AN/X, but you haven't been there in almost three months. Whats up mate? you alright? --'The Ninjalemming' 20:48, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, just not as active as I used to be... I have recently moved, and am quite busy in real life at the moment... - Adolphus (talk) 21:16, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

I knew that :) --'The Ninjalemming' 17:53, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Resi 5

We need your opinion on the resi talk page here, as we are having a discussion as to wheather we should get rid of part of the article; I am against this how ever as I think that it is part of the game's history so I just needs to be edited. Cheers! --'The Ninjalemming' 18:14, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: Odious Mortem/Decrepit Birth

Former members of Decrepit Birth were also members of Nile, Suffocation, Dying Fetus, Chimaira and Hate Eternal. I realise that criterion #6 applies to current band members, but surely if a band is deemed notable at some point in time, then they cannot later become non-notable.

130.159.248.222 (talk) 09:17, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

They are always notable, mainly as they are still part of it's history; never get rid of something like this, just edit it to make it more up to date, of course on some rare occasions you may have to delete it but this is not one of them. Keep it! Oh and don't expect Adolphus to resond anytime soon he seems to take AGES because he moved recently; when will he come back properly? --'The Ninjalemming' 11:47, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

What happened to your barnstars?

Award moved here

And now the pictures buggered off! I will fix this!

Lets try this then. Feck, that didn't work. Nuts, for now just keep it as it is; I am asking for help on it's discussion page. Hopfully they can help. That is, if you don't went to try your self.

'The Ninjalemming' 12:12, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Wewt... my second barnstar! I went ahead and fixed it myself and moved it over... Thank you... - Adolphus79 (talk) 04:02, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

What the hell was wrong with it? 'The Ninjalemming' 19:41, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Heh, no idea, I just used the template from my first one and plugged in your image and text... - Adolphus79 (talk) 20:01, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Cheat! 'The Ninjalemming' 09:37, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the welcome

Alas, I've been with Wikipedia for years with RCP and whatnot. Just retired my former account so I could start over. :D --Angelus Delapsus^Talk 02:14, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Queensland Election Pages

Thanks for your welcome to wikipedia. I apologise for not giving a full reason on the Aiden Mclindon page, I've rectified that error. I'm questioning your re-request of deletion of the Mark Wood page even after posting a valid reason to ignore the deletion? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pvan88 (talk • contribs) 04:01, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

If you read WP:POLITICIAN, you will see that none of the people you have created articles for qualify under the criteria... - Adolphus79 (talk) 04:04, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Theatre East and Judson Jones issue...

For some reason these have been tagged and are pending removal. I think I saw something about Conflict of Interest and lack of verifiability? Is that correct? Exactly what do I need to put up there? Do I need to post contracts or pictures or meeting notes or what? I'm not sure exactly how to verify it. Perhaps reviews would help. Just let me know what you need and I'll send them to you.

Many thanks,

Judson Jones —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.65.220.228 (talk • contribs)

I'm not sure why you felt the need to log out to leave me a message, but if you log back into your account, and read the messages that have been left on your talk page, you will find all the information needed... specifically information about WP:COI, WP:AUTO, WP:V, and WP:RS... - Adolphus79 (talk) 03:18, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Template:Henry County, Ohio

Just curious why you removed Shunk, Ohio from {{Henry County, Ohio}}? The GNIS supports the existence of such a place: see here. Nyttend (talk) 00:11, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

I was back-tracking through the contributions of a user who has made some questionable edits (will not call them a vandal just yet), and it was a redlinked town added to the template... I know that not every single town has an article on Wikipedia yet, but seeing a redlinked town name added to a template by a questionable user made me think it might not have been real... feel free to restore it... - Adolphus79 (talk) 00:20, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

R.O.O.T.S.

I AM NOT VANDALIZING THE WEBPAGE!!!!!!!!!!!!

* "Touch Me" <ref name="Proof"> ''[http://elbo.ws/post/1422944/new-flo-rida-touch-me-and-right-round/]''</ref>

This song is freakin real. Im trying to add it with referrence. Vandalism is screwing with webpages. Look up the definition for youself.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Unrealkitten (talk • contribs)

Firstly, a blog does not count as a reliable source... Secondly, adding it the first time is not vandalism, but adding it the third is... Especially considering the first was unreferenced, the second used the ref name "FUCKIN PROOF" and Youtube as a source (Youtube is worse than a blog), and the third time it was again unreferenced... you made no mention of the above reference in your edits to the article, and therefore your edits were received as vandalism... and with your continued edit-warring with several different editors about this, you have now broken 3RR, and are close to being blocked (if not already)... if you are serious about editing Wikipedia, please take the time to read what others are writing as edit summaries, and just a moment to read up on policies such as WP:V, WP:RS, WP:3RR, and WP:AGF... please do not take offense to the reverts, but please do take the time to find out why your edit was reverted, instead of warring over it... feel free to leave me a message here anytime if you need futher help... - Adolphus79 (talk) 04:36, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Rollback removed

I've removed your access to the rollback feature. Your two reverts of Unrealkitten were both misuses of the rollback tool; those contributions were not vandalism, and as you know rollback leaves no edit summary and is thus taken as a revert of self-evident vandalism. In your comment immediately above this one, and your comment to Unrealkitten, you acknowledge the first of Unrealkitten's edits as good-faith but you characterize the 3rd as vandalism when it was nothing of the sort. Edit warring is not vandalism. On inspection into the history, I found that several admins expressed reservations about exactly this same concern back when you requested rollback: [2]. I feel that you were substantially responsible for an escalation of this situation in which a user was trying, in good faith, to update an article and ended up blocked with no idea what was going on. Mangojuice^talk 15:53, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Um... I only reverted Unrealkitten's edit once,[3] which was the third time he/she/it had inserted the information. There is a comment on that part of the article that states "PLEASE DO NOT ADD TRACK TITLES TO THE "CONFIRMED TRACKS" LISTING UNLESS YOU INCLUDE A CITED REFERENCE" because we've been having a serious problem with people adding songs to the "Confirmed Tracks" section without any confirmation... I'm not sure how you can feel that I was substantially responsible for an escalation of this situation, considering I reverted once, left a level 3 warning on the user's talk page, then went so far as to restore Unrealkitten's comment (that someone else had removed) to my talk page and take the time to write a detailed reply in an effort to help her... by the time I was done with my reply, she was already blocked for vandalism (not my doing), at which point my very next edit was in Unrealkitten's defense regarding the block/unblock... I would like you to please double check your logic here, as well as the Revision history of R.O.O.T.S. and my contributions regarding this situation... - Adolphus79 (talk) 16:31, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

My apologies, you did only revert kitty's third edit, not the first one as I had originally thought. Other than that, though, my understanding of the situation was correct. Please take the time to review Wikipedia:Vandalism and reacquaint yourself with what is vandalism and what isn't: understand that edit summaries should always be used when reverting someone, with the exception of actual vandalism. If you think my judgement is wrong I'm happy to take it to WP:AN, but what I recommend is that you try using the undo feature for a while, and fill in additional edit summaries every time the summary wouldn't be, simply "vandalism." Mangojuice^talk 16:50, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

I do understand what is and is not vandalism, but considering that...

1. there is a clearly written comment on the secion she was editing stating not to include unreferenced additions.
2. two other editors (one being ClueBot) had reverted her edits, and left warnings on her talk page
3. her only other edits to Wikipedia so far had been clear cut cases of vandalism

I did revert her third edit as vandalism... It may not have been a clear cut case of vandalism, but due to the above 3 reasons, hopefully you understand why I thought this might be vandalism. I really don't care much whether I have rollback or not, considering I rarely use it anyway, but I would prefer my actions in this situation not be labeled as escalation when I was the only one trying to help a new user understand why their edits were being reverted... - Adolphus79 (talk) 17:06, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

I might be convinced to change my judgement if you could assure me that this kind of mistake won't happen in the future. Mangojuice^talk 17:05, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

This "mistake" was a fluke... if you look at my past contributions, you will see that 95+% of my vandalism reverts are manual, with the edit summary "vandalism/test revert"... on the rare occation that I do decide to use my shiny button (when I don't forget it's there), I use the exact same judgement as I do with my manual edits... Like I said in my edit conflicted reply above, I don't really care if you take rollback from me... but I would prefer if in the future you looked into a situation a little better before jumping the gun like that... - Adolphus79 (talk) 17:12, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

I think it's fair to say that your revert itself and the vandalism warning you left did escalate the situation. I will give you credit that you tried (after escalating) to make things better in your comments on Unrealkitten's talk page. I also fully understand how you could have misconstrued the edit as vandalism at the time before you looked into the situation, but what really troubled me and what led to my decision to remove rollback was that in this comment you said that Kitten's 3rd edit (the one you rolled back) was vandalism even after fully understanding the situation... and so far as I can tell, you still think it was. Honest mistakes I wouldn't worry about unless they were way too common or something. But this looks more to me like you don't understand the difference between vandalism and other edits people might disagree with. Mangojuice^talk 17:47, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

I reverted what appeared to be vandalism (as explained in the 3 points above) and left the next level warning on the (apparent) vandal's talk page (which is SOP, I believe), my next edit was trying to explain to the user why her edits had been reverted. In my reply, I even explained why her edits had been received as vandalism. By the time I had finished that explanation, the situation had escalated to her being blocked for vandalism, so obviously I was not the only person who thought her edits might be vandalism (including an admin in that list). When I noticed that she had been blocked for vandalism, I left a comment on her talk page for the blocking admin stating that I thought she was editing in good faith, and just did not fully understand policy. I then waited for her to reply, and was hoping to help her understand the situation, and possibly get the block lifted...

The user that reverted with huggle, the user that reverted with undo, and ClueBot all reverted with no explanation... Even the blocking admin may no attempt to discuss the situation with Unrealkitty, and blocked her for vandalism... I was the only person involved in this situation that actually tried to help the new user understand what was happening, and yet I'm the one that was reprimanded? Has the admin been desysoped, or ClueBot shutdown?

Yes, I realize now that her edits were not obvious vandalism, but at the time, none of the people involved did... I do fully understand the difference between obvious vandalism and edits people might disagree with, and that was why I tried to help her. You say it is an "honest mistake you wouldn't worry about", but obviously you were quick to worry about it and sentence judgment without even fully comprehending the situation (as referenced by you originally claiming I reverted her twice)... I'm not sure what exactly to say to sway you (or if that is even possible), but I believe I was in the right in this situation, and am insulted by your actions and treatment...

I unfortunately have to leave the house now (stupid real life), and so will not be able to immediately answer any reply, but hope to resolve this situation (if at all possible) later... - Adolphus79 (talk) 18:23, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

This is probably none of my buisness (and I can't even spell that) but I do think Adolphus did the right thing in this situation by treating 'possible' vandalism as vandalism, and then explaining why. Because the other users didnot do this I do not think it is right for his 'shiny tool' to be taken away, but at most get a 'slap on the wrist', told he did it wrong and left to go on with is wiki life, mainly as this is just one thing. I also think that the escalation was only caused by the new user not understanding the situation and Adolphus failing to say what was wrong, and talking about escalation, you are kind of escalating the situation here with out taking it up with the other users involved who did not explain in any way. It is (in a very slight way) like arresting the some one who shot some one and explained with evidence it was in self defence, but letting other people get a way with just shooting some one in the face and walking a way. I know that was a bad example but I had a much better one then forgot it, sorry. Also, what the hell does desysoped mean? 'The Ninjalemming' 18:46, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Please, let's not compare this to being shot. :) I think at heart Adolphus is a good guy and wants to understand what my concern is. He's already said he doesn't really care about rollback, after all. (And being "desysopped" means taking away someone's Admin status.) Mangojuice^talk 18:59, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

(undent) FWIW, I do intend to talk to the admin about their block, but to my mind the block is justified by the edit warring. Plus, it must be an honest mistake, I mean, Unrealkitten did get 3 vandalism warnings over these edits, one from a bot, and had vandalized previously. ClueBot's revert was appropriate, and any escalation that happened from that one was really Unrealkitten's fault for the obscenity. SE King was the one using undo, and I don't see any problem with it; one of the undos should have had an edit summary (the first) but SE King's second did (finally) explain the objection. As for the user using Huggle, I removed his rollback access; he's the one who used Huggle to revert Unrealkitten's comment on this page. While removing rollback may not do anything, he should not have access to that tool if he misuses reverts in this way. Anyway, here's how to move on from here. Just answer this question with a simple yes or no: when you think about it now, was the edit you reverted with rollback some sort of vandalism, or was it not? And if it was not, what makes you think differently now than you did in your comment to Unrealkitten? You've said a couple of times that it was not "obvious vandalism", without making it clear if you think it was some sort of non-obvious vandalism or whether it was simply not vandalism. Mangojuice^talk 18:59, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

(no I am not Adolphus) Thanks for the info and sorry about the 'shot' thing, especially if it offened you, I just tryed to make a point (and still haven't remember the other thing). My new point is that this 'friendly' argument is becoming anything but friendly, I think maybe some people need to calm down abit (or if you are calm then just stop being slightly...errrr...angry prehaps, no wait that isn't being calm, nar screw it, you may know what I mean). Actually I can use this new funky thingy:

Hi, strong positions don't need hard attitudes, the best solutions are sometimes meeting half way or giving chance to the other to understand your point. What about taking a day or so to think how better make your point ?

Propose friendly resolution to others by adding {{subst:TruceAndTalk}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Maybe it doesn't have to be for a day but you know what I mean by this. 'The Ninjalemming' 19:11, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Hindsight being 20/20, yes, I realize now that her edits were not vandalism, as I stated previously, but I'm not sure what I should feel differently about...

If I had not used rollback, I still would have manually reverted with the edit summary "vandalism / test revert", still would have given her the {{uw-test3}} warning (not {{uw-vandalism3}}), and still would have tried to help her understand her error... Maybe the wording on the test templates needs to be changed to not use the word vandalism...

I told her at the time that her edits appeared to be vandalism, and I AGF, trying to work with her to figure out the problem (and to help her understand why her edits were being reverted)... I'm not going to fall down on my knees, beg for forgiveness and lie about how I felt about the situation... I (among others) thought her edits could possibly be vandalism, and took the appropriate action (revert, warn, then try to help), if you truly feel that I was in the wrong for this, so be it, it is obvious that you are not going to change your mind... But I feel I was completely justified in my actions...

The only thing that bothers me is that I'm still not sure why the only person in the situation that tried to help the new user is the one being punished... An admin mistakingly thinks another user is in the wrong, and jumps the gun without checking the facts, and there's nothing the non-admin can do about it... I am now starting to understand why so many people have walked away from Wikipedia for this same reason...

I will assume at this point (and from your comments) that there will never be any real resolution from this, and am going to move on with my life... Some trigger happy admin taking rollback away from me, and then expecting me to beg for forgiveness is not going to make me change my thoughts on the situation... Bottom line is that a number of editors, bots & admins thought her edits might be vandalism, and I felt she deserved an explanation and an offer for help... I will make an honest attempt to not revert (what appears to be) vandalism or offer to help a new user in the future... - Adolphus79 (talk) 21:48, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

All I wanted to hear was that you recognize now that the edit wasn't vandalism. That puts this firmly back in the "honest mistake" category. In retrospect, I should have had this discussion with you before removing the tool: I think that would have left you feeling much less persecuted. For that I apologize. Mangojuice^talk 22:38, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Yeah argument resolved, did my funky thing help in any way? at least it's a happy ending :) 'The Ninjalemming' 21:18, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

The Firm (group)

What can i add to it to make it a better article?

Dan56 (talk) 02:12, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Hmm... it a fairly decent article as it is... and now that I look at it again, I think it could easily pass for a C-class article, maybe even a B... I would be more than happy to rate it C for you, but am not comfortable enough with my own assessment skills to rate it any higher (due to the specific criteria required for B)... my recommendation would be to re-submit it to Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Assessment for further assessment... good luck, I really can't find any major faults with the article as it stands... - Adolphus79 (talk) 02:34, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

You beat me to assessing The Firm while I wrote a review. However, you forgot to remove it from the assessment page and I also stole your BOINC userbox, ha! Best wishes Hekerui (talk) 01:30, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

I actually assessed it a while ago... the re-assessment request was new (after the above comments)... I think it could possibly qualify for a low B, but did not trust my own assessment skills to rate it that way... - Adolphus79 (talk) 02:12, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Aha... I see you did assess it and leave comments on the talk page... thank you... - Adolphus79 (talk) 02:45, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Do you think this a good source to use? Hot Spot or ReverbNation

Dan56 (talk) 15:48, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

They look fine to me (I think I've used reverbnation before myself), but as the assessing editor, I left a message for Hekerui‎... the two of you can feel free to use this space and keep all of the discussion in one place... - Adolphus79 (talk) 16:23, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Adolphus, for keeping this together and signing my assessment (shame on me!). Dan, what you seek to source is that she got her recording contract in 1996. Simply use the source <ref>{{cite web|last=Bush|first=John|title=Foxy Brown - Biography|url=http://allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=11:jpfuxq85ldfe~T1|publisher=Allmusic|year=2008|accessdate=2008-02-28}}</ref> from her article. I also saw you changed the last sentence of the article. Now it conflicts with the previous sentence. It should become clear that no "real" reunion apart from that one performance was planned. If you want to use "Nas's" instead of "Nas'" then it should probably be changed in every sentence. Best wishes Hekerui (talk) 17:11, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

aligning images

how do you align Images to sides of userbox type thingys, xeno isn't responding to anything, and he hasn't since before March the 6,^th =(! Thanks =) 'The Ninjalemming' 21:24, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

within an inforbox, I think it's just going to be centered (that's the way most infoboxes are coded)... but within the article, you can add the left or right parameter to the image code... see WP:IMAGES or WP:INFOBOX for more info... - Adolphus79 (talk) 21:34, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Jonathan Alder

On March 10, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Jonathan Alder, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Royalbroil 02:59, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Explain

Explain what you're on about. Chubbennaitor 07:43, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Your "The Exemplary Adoptee Barnstar" here... at the bottom says "courtesy of Adolphus79"... just trying to remember what I did to garner the courtesy... LOL - Adolphus79 (talk) 14:17, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

I think you had one and I copied the idea. Chubbennaitor 21:03, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Aha... that would make sense... - Adolphus79 (talk) 21:13, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Jonathan Alder reassessment

I'll do a review tomorrow. Hekerui (talk) 21:44, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you... - Adolphus79 (talk) 22:03, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Jonathan Alder passed GA

Congratulations, the article has passed GA. Certainly do add the new pictures when you get them. I'm not sure much more could be added/expand on the article, so I don't personally see this as a possible FA unless you come across more sources. You may consider changing from the person infobox to the military person infobox {{Infobox Military Person}}, as that would allow for it to have his brief military career added. Lastly, if you feel up to it and have good grasp of the GA criteria, people are encouraged to review other GA articles. Good job. Aboutmovies (talk) 19:48, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! I do not believe that it would ever make it to FA, due to the fact that all resources have been completely expended now... I added a couple image just now, of his gravestone and marker, and hope to get a pic of his cabin soon... I may change the infobox, thank you for the recommendation... I think I have a basic understanding of the criteria, but think I only have the assessment skills yet to cover stubs, starts and C's... again, thank you for the review and the help... - Adolphus79 (talk) 19:51, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations! The photos really bring this article to live! Hekerui (talk) 00:34, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you... and thanks again for the copyedits... - Adolphus79 (talk) 02:44, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for the welcome to Wiki. Much appreciated. :P BritneysBetch (talk) 01:34, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

No problem, let me know if you ever need help with anything... - Adolphus79 (talk) 01:39, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion

... is where I'll put the autobiography by this woman. Hekerui (talk) 18:31, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

LOL... I was considering it myself, but thought I would give her a chance to prove notability... - Adolphus79 (talk) 19:00, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

I like your pinhead

Very chic. Snort Barfly (talk) 00:42, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Uh... not sure if that's supposed to mean something, or just be an insult, but thanks... - Adolphus79 (talk) 01:20, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

Cheers

For this - much appreciated! Gonzonoir (talk) 10:57, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

No problem... - Adolphus79 (talk) 13:25, 22 March 2009 (UTC)

Not Appreciated

Excuse me, but accusing me of adding "nonsense" to the page List of Micronations was an unfounded and entirely unappreciated claim. North Mexicorea is a new micronation founded by a friend of mine who took the title Supreme Leader Ken Jong-Il. It is not imaginary. It is not nonsense. Constructive criticism is one thing, but picking on the new guy? That's just cold. dorigod (talk) 22:21, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

With absolutely no mention of references, your friend's new micronation does not pass notability or verifiability concerns... your attempting to add it to Wikipedia also appears to be a breach of our conflict of interest policy... please read the above pages, and you will know why your edits have been reverted... - Adolphus79 (talk) 02:25, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Enoch Kelly Haney Article

Thank you for your assessment of the Enoch Kelly Haney article, which I created. With respect to your question on the article's reference formatting, I am not very familiar with in-line reference formatting procedures and will need assistance from my fellow Wikipedians such as yourself. --TommyBoy (talk) 04:59, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

The most basic way of doing inline refs is to use the <ref> - </ref> tags... for example, at the end of a sentence, add <ref>Lastname, Firstname, ''Book or article title'', publication, date</ref>, and that would add a footnote down in the references section... Check out WP:FOOT for more info... if you get lost, just let me know, and I'll help you with it... - Adolphus79 (talk) 05:10, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for explaining the process of reference formatting. I have converted the references in the Enoch Kelly Haney article to the in-line format. --TommyBoy (talk) 23:27, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

No problem, but you could probably use a couple extra references... his personal website is a primary source, and therefore not a reliable source... try to find a few newspaper articles written about him, that would help a lot... also, if you notice, I added a ref name to the seminole ref, making it easier to use multiple times (and not clogging up the references section)... see WP:REFNAME for more info on that... - Adolphus79 (talk) 23:42, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

Mannfield

Here are some references. I don't know how to add to page.

BTW, the proof was there all along. *Gonzales, Suzannah (2003-10-12). "County seat hits road again". St. Petersburg Times. http://www.sptimes.com/2003/10/12/Citrus/County_seat_hits_road.shtml. Retrieved on 2008-03-16. *

You can make Wikipedia more enjoyable by reading what is presented to you first before making assumptions on what is correct and not correct - got it? --12.108.255.76 (talk) 22:14, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

http://www.ghosttowns.com/states/fl/mansfield.html http://fcit.coedu.usf.edu/florida/maps/galleries/county/citrus/index.php http://www.keywaves.com/default.asp —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.108.255.76 (talk) 19:26, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

I had reverted what I thought was vandalism because the title says "Mansfield", while the article says "Mannfield". It appears that you moved the article from "Mannsfield, Florida" to its current "Mansfield, Florida" in February, but the sources I see show "Mannfield". Do you have a confident explanation for these discrepancies? Alansohn (talk) 22:23, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

The reference that I used for the footnotes said Mansfield, and when I searched Mannsfield, Manfield, or Mannfield online, I couldn't find anything... I am not debating any name change, so long as it's properly cited... if there are more reliable sources that say it's Mannfield instead of Mansfield (or any other spelling), then that's how the article should be spelled... - Adolphus79 (talk) 00:49, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

follow up: Mannfield, Florida

NOTE: I've moved it. Tricky one: the Google hits are misleading on this one, and the original "ref" has town misspelled. (See notes on the talk page.) Cheers! Proofreader77 (talk) 00:53, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, so I noticed... the article had originally been moved because of the discrepencies in the refs provided (and what could be found online)... I was originally half tempted to redirect to Lecanto, Florida and merge what little info there was on this page, but decided against it at the time... - Adolphus79 (talk) 00:59, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Excuse the presumption — I was making amends for my own patroller semi-sins. As for split-second decisions of how to handle such ... we patrollers do the best that can be done, in the moment, amidst the infinite noise. (Or something like that.) Cheers. Proofreader77 (talk) 01:22, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Moe's

The menu is a valid entry and it is your opinion calling it "nonsense". In no way am I vandalizing Wikipedia. --12.108.255.76 (talk) 00:01, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

The menu of a restaurant is unencyclopedic... there is no need for it on the restaurant's article... why do you think make the menu would notable or encyclopedic? - Adolphus79 (talk) 00:14, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Do you know what a Joey Bag of Donuts is? How about a Puff The Magic Dragon? The Moe's article could tell you that if you would stop erasing it because you believe it is "nonsense" and "unencyclopedic". I'm sure Wikipedia appreciates what you do, however, this is a matter of opinion and needs to be handled in a dispute forum since we can't agree. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.108.255.76 (talk) 00:30, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

No, I don't know what they are... and unless those specific menu items have been mentioned in a newspaper or are notable on their own, they should not be included in the article... please discuss this on the article's talk page... - Adolphus79 (talk) 00:34, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Here is 1 article - several others out there about Moe's. http://charlotte.citysearch.com/review/35469537?reviewId=21011481

Would you know what a Triple Lindy was after reading link?--12.108.255.76 (talk) 00:55, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

That is not a newspaper article, that is an online review/blog... that does not pass notability or reliable sources concerns... please read the above, and explain to me why the menu is notable... - Adolphus79 (talk) 01:30, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Moe's Southwest Grill

Hi. I removed your third opinion request because several editors are involved. 3O is typically used when there is a dispute between 2 editors. You might want to consider a request for comment instead. Thanks. --RegentsPark (My narrowboat) 02:16, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

OK... thanks... - Adolphus79 (talk) 02:20, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Micronations page

in response to your message about me "vandalising" the list of micronations page. What defines a notable micronation? (Astgenator (talk) 04:52, 28 March 2009 (UTC))

Please read the message I left on your talk page... feel free to ask me any questions... - Adolphus79 (talk) 04:57, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

This reminds me of Jscarr (talk · contribs); he was making up micronation pages. I'm loath to call this guy a sockpuppet (AGF and all that), but he seems to know a lot for someone an hour old...HalfShadow 05:07, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Chat

what did i say--Nascar09 (talk) 03:10, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Article talk pages are for discussing the article itself, entries like this, this, or any of your other contributions are not useful to the project... - Adolphus79 (talk) 03:13, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Rebecca Love

Just wanted to stop by and thank you for your help on the new Rebecca Love entry. Hopefully, if I keep contributing I'll get a little better at this. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Attybjm (talk • contribs) 22:59, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

That's fine... feel free to leave me a message any time if you need help... - Adolphus79 (talk) 00:05, 30 March 2009 (UTC)

More Moe's Silliness

You wanted to take it to the discussion page - well here it is. I suppose you are going to tell me there are rules to be followed here as well - that's fine. You may win and get your way, gives you bragging rights and your next D & D game, but someday, someone, somewhere will come across all this and see the light. You and others can claim that the menu section of Moe's is unencyclopedic all you want, however, there will be times in life when you have to look outside the box and make a judgement call. I think it is better to have something there instead of nothing. Given that Moe's hasn't been around that long, there is not much to right about it. Yet, a very small majority of the Wikipedia community has to do everything they can in their power to keep information out of an information website. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.108.255.76 (talk) 15:18, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

No... I asked you to discuss it on the talk page, not continue to paste a copy of the old version on the talk page without discussing anything... And I think you are still missing the point slightly... first, assuming good faith and civility... and secondly, just because Wikipedia is online and paperless, does not mean you can add whatever you want to it, it is still an encyclopedia... I don't know why you are crying about this, it's not exactly like anyone said it's your fault, and you are a bad person (unlike the claims you've made)... we just said the information you added was not needed... get over it and move on... try being production and useful to the cause instead of just sitting on one page and whining that you didn't get your way... If you keep up this nonsense, you are probably going to get blocked, and that wouldn't help your cause much at all... - Adolphus79 (talk) 15:28, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

What are you like the owner of this site?

Really. I always here you talkin' like know-it-all on Hip hop articles. It's getting annoying. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Flo Rida's Biggest Fan (talk • contribs) (Since CHU'd to User:HipHopfan4life (talk · contribs))

Wow... the, what, 4 or 5 hip hop related articles that I've edited? What is annoying, my use and knowledge of Wikipedia policies and guidelines? Or my reversion of vandalism on said articles? Either way, thank you for the compliment... - Adolphus79 (talk) 01:50, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

P.S. Let me guess your IP is 76.171.60.119 (talk · contribs) (the IP that said basically the same thing to me this morning)... - Adolphus79 (talk) 01:57, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

Stop it with these [citation needed] links on musical articles.

because you nothing about the music charts. acharts.us, chartsinfrance.net, charly1300.com and billboard.com are reliable music charts. now please get away with these citation needed, troll.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.171.248.246 (talk • contribs)

Please provide citations, and the tags can be removed... as I've told you a couple times now, all information must be verifiable, using reliable sources... and as for the troll comment... please stop making personal attacks against me and harassing me... - Adolphus79 (talk) 19:31, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

lmao! Trolling is not a harassment, its a definition of a person who keeps posting non-sense on websites and that's what you are exactly doing. FYI: I will continue to keep on "harassing" you until you leave Flo Rida, Soulja Boy and GS Boyz articles, stan. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.171.248.246 (talk • contribs)

Fact Checking

WHOIS is still incorrect, I don't care what it says. If you are so worried about it, go to the company website and get the current information. Until then, please do not edit pages that you do not know about. I can see from your talk page that you have a history of doing this and annoying other users with it. Medication is available for your condition. Any warnings posted to this IP will also be posted to you as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.50.173.206 (talk) 01:02, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

What you are discussing is called original research, and should not be used... we will use whatever information is stated on the WHOIS listing, until that information is changed... I'm not sure what you are trying to do, using 2 different IPs to remove warnings from another IP's talk page... I'll assume (based on your contributions on these two IPs) that this is the same user who was using the IP 12.108.255.76... do you have any point in editing this page, or is it just to waste the rest of our time? - Adolphus79 (talk) 01:07, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

Do you have any point to putting out of date info on talk page or just wasting our time? WHOIS is not a "know it all", just like you. If you are too lazy to fact check, leave it alone. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.50.173.206 (talk) 01:10, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

I'd rather use reliable out of date information, than original research from a sock of the user who was blocked for 3RR and incivility... why not just give up and go play on MySpace, you obviously can't understand (or follow) the rules around here... - Adolphus79 (talk) 01:17, 10 April 2009 (UTC)

M98 Article Reply

Sorry I took so long in responding, but the rifle that I wrote about, the M98Bravo is different from the rifle that had already been written about. The M98 Bravo in my article is a bolt-action rifle. In the first article, the M98B is a semiautomatic weapon firing the same round at a different velocity. I understand if you don't consider these valid reasons for keeping my article, I will continue to write for wikipedia as I love the challenge of finding new weapons and military technology, old and, new to write about. --Bismarck43 (talk) 12:11, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Yeah... the 98 bravo is a bolt action... the original design was the M98, which was semi (and never went into production... the 98 Bravo is the new one... maybe I didn't link you to the correct article, it's Barrett M98B... - Adolphus79 (talk) 12:16, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Puzzled

Do you know why two messages from you, dated 14 Oct 2008, concerning The Simpsons project has turned up on my User Talk page? The last two times I came to my Wikipedia site (I'm working on a entry on Gerald Epstein), I had a message that I had a message -- and on both occasions the messages were from you, dated 14 Oct 08, etc. Why doesn't my looking at them make them an "old" message? David Hollidays (talk) 14:50, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I'm a litle puzzled myself, as I've never even edited your talk page (history here)... could you show me a diff of the message you're talking about, and maybe we can figure out what's going on? - Adolphus79 (talk) 16:48, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Dukes of Hazzard

FYI, I edited this page and tried to add an external link as verification. The external link is not showing up properly and I haven't been warned for vandalism yet - is everything ok? Can you fix this instead of reverting and slapping me with some kind of warning? Thanks--24.131.43.223 (talk) 15:13, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Because you did not name the link, you only provided the address... I have moved it from the External links section to a ref for the Atlanta statement... let me know if you need further help... P.S. I won't revert and slap you with a warning if you're edits are productive (like this)... - Adolphus79 (talk) 16:48, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for letting something I do stick. I've tried to be productive before with Mannfield and was met with resistance, even when I posted the references on this talk page (since I didn't know how to add them to the article). Biting the hand of newbies can set them off - I am proof of that. I can also be civil when given a chance, especially when my good intentions are recognized and not labeled vandalism. On that note, you can let Jayron32 know that he was mistaken on his talk page about all those IP's not being related, they are. I can also assure all of you that I am not going to blank out Doral's talk pages(you lost that bet :)). Now, if I tell you WHOIS is incorrect and Fiserv Atlanta has moved and not used that address since 2004, would you believe me?--24.131.43.223 (talk) 17:24, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

Your Mannfield edits did stick, once you provided references for the changes... No one bit you, until you started being rude to others... with the Mannfield edits, all I did was ask for references, and once those references were provided, everything was OK... it was your bad behavior regarding Moe's that got you bit... I truly hope that you have learned why we did what we did, and can move on from this to be productive... You have to admit, though, that your previous edits (Moe's and Towne Lake) do not exactly show an effort to be productive... as far as the WHOIS info goes, just like Mannfield (and anything else here on Wikipedia), we would prefer to use slightly out of date information from a reliable source than original research of an editor... this is because of the coding of the templates... If you are seriously interested in changing your ways, and being a productive editor, let me know, and I'd be more than happy to help you... - Adolphus79 (talk) 18:14, 13 April 2009 (UTC)

WikiBirthday

I saw from here that it's been exactly three years since you joined the project. Happy WikiBirthday! Keep up the good work, rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 23:35, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you... 3 years, eh? wow... that's a good chunk of my life wasted... - Adolphus79 (talk) 00:35, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

And a happy birthday from me too! May your next three years be just as pleasantly wasted. :) – Quadell ^(talk) 03:44, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

.2 version

Sorry this is late, I was hecking every day but forgot yesterday; damn it (froooooooooog) -).

Well hello there it appears to be your birthday or maybe even your wikiday Adolphus. Hope you have a good one and make at least 100 good spirited edits on this fine day. !Happy Third Wikiday, Cheers with a pint of cold beer!even though technecally we both still can't drink being eight months old and three, hehe --'The Ninjalemming'

or I wasn't late and the time tag thing lies! Today is you WikiDay, I checked your service thing. Bye =) 'The Ninjalemming' 14:46, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Adminship

Hey Adolphus, why don't you apply for adminship; you seem perfectly capable to do so. Of course the purpose of this was mainly just to get your attention again as you havn't been hanging around AN/X lately (meaning for several months I think) and you havn't really been acting how you use to, which is weird; I just like to check up on people who I haven't seen in a long time. See ya -) meet one eyed jack 'The Ninjalemming' 19:38, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

I did once before, it was a scary process which helped me see why I would not make a good admin (not enough articles created)... I have considered running again, but to be honest, I am not very active at the moment, and would probably not pass for that exact reason... Maybe one day I'll be more active again, and will try running again... I've just been busy in real life lately... - Adolphus79 (talk) 19:57, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

Real life ah, whats that all about; please inform. If the admin thing involves article creation then I'm out, I don't even know anything to start an article on. Oh well, I have many a year left before applying for admin is even considerable. bye 'The Ninjalemming' 13:13, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Nothing is actually required to be an admin, but it just so happens that one person opposed my request for the reason that I did not have enough article writing experience, and a number of other people decided to oppose for the same reason... each request is different... some people have become admins after only being here 3 months, there is no real time limit or requirements... - Adolphus79 (talk) 22:44, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Have you seen my spelling? This would be the main reason I would not be allowed to become an admin. I need tim to grow up and sort the spelling out, this is way I have a time period of needing to be on the wiki for three years. Oh and Xeno will have been an admin for a whole year in a few days as well as be three years old in about a month; I have got to to do something to saythank you. See ya =) Bow-Chika-Bow-Wow 'The Ninjalemming' 13:48, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

CZ 511

Do you know anything about this rifle, if so can you help please inform me of any relvent info. 'The Ninjalemming' 18:13, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

User:Adolphus79/UBX/druck

I might be wrong, but does this say "druck"?

Warning: This user is a homebrewer, and is probably editing while druck.

-M.Nelson (talk) 05:20, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes it does but that is the point isn't it, editing while drunk/druck. 'The Ninjalemming' 14:07, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Yes, a purposeful mistake... it's a bit of an inside joke carried over from homebrewtalk.com... (note that it still correctly links to Drunkenness) - Adolphus79 (talk) 14:13, 30 May 2009 (UTC)

Images

Hey Adolphus. I was wondering if you could tell me how you add images to articles (I think mine could use a little brightening up). Since all of my articles are about cars (especially since most are about concepts), I know that the people who read them will wantto see pictures of what the cars look (or will) look like. If you could just give me a shout on my talk page (or my userpage I'm not picky) that'd be great. Thanks!!! (and by the way, the deletion of my M98 Bravo article wasn't offensive to me but I appreciate the courtesy)--Bismarck43 (talk) 21:19, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

try WP:IMAGES... that should have all the information you need (and probably even more than you want)... - Adolphus79 (talk) 22:36, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Francis Drake Histograph

I am the author of "Francis Drake in Nehalem Bay 1579, Setting the Historical Record Straight" which was printed in late 2008. The Oregon Archaeological Society December 2008 Newsletter gave it an outstanding review. I have a seperate nineteen-page Historiography (not covered in my book) about how California has incorrectly been identified as a Francis Drake landing site. As a new use; where do I get started in posting my Historiography and how do I start to place this new information on the Francis Drake page so that it will not be deleted? Fortnehalem (talk) 17:00, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Hello... firstly, Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for wanting to contribute! Feel free to add any information you want to the article, so long as you properly reference such additions. Also be sure not to include Original Research, anything that can't be double checked by another person. It sounds like you have a meaning ful bit of information there for us, and I am glad to see you interested in adding it to the article. If you have any questions about formatting, etc., feel free to ask me, but I will (probably) check your edits automatially after you are done, and fix any minor formatting myself... Again, welcome, and feel free to ask me any questions you have. - Adolphus79 (talk) 17:11, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Hello

Just sent you an email. --Gene_poole (talk) 01:32, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Update: check out this. --Gene_poole (talk) 02:51, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I saw that, but was less concerned about FL status as I was deletion... - Adolphus79 (talk) 02:56, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm a bit confused by your comments re the [[Category:Micronations]]. Unless that cat is added to all micronation articles, how is it possible to see a 1-page list of all the micronation articles in WP?

The sub cats by country are fine as far as they go (which is not very far, given that a number of them only include 1 entry), but they don't permit a 1-page article list of all articles - unless I'm mistunderstanding something fundamental. Unless I'm missing some major policy directive, I propose to restore [[Category:Micronations]] to all micronation articles.

Also, restoring [[Category: nations and states established in ....]] does not apply to micronations, as they are definitely not nations or states. The correct category should therefore be [[Category:2004_establishments]] etc.--Gene_poole (talk) 03:24, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

I've been bold, and recategorised all WP articles about micronations that I'm aware of.

In the process I found 2 articles about non-micronations, which I've decategorised.

All articles are now tagged with Category:Micronations, so a 1-page snapshot of WP micronation content is now achievable.

People interested in the subject then have the option of drilling down on a country-by-country basis via the "Micronation by country" categories that I've also included, wherever relevant.

I think this provides a good basis for moving forward with improvements to content, addition of citations etc to these articles.

Let me know what you think. --Gene_poole (talk) 08:58, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Normally, if it's in a subcat, it should not be in the main category either, but I understand what you are thinking... I will not change it myself, but someone else may come along in the future and do so... RE: your email, I agree, and had already stated pretty much the same thing in the deletion discussion... we'll have to see what comes of the AfD first, and take action afterwards... - Adolphus79 (talk) 13:03, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Is there a specific policy that relates to how categories should be structured? Surely the purpose of any category is to make it easier to find articles of like type - and not obscure them? If we/someone removes the "micronation" cat, we will be left with a whole pile of "micronation by country" cats - most of which have only 1 or 2 articles in them. Particularly ludicrous examples include "micronations in finland" and "micronations in bosnia and herzegovina" (1 article each). If this is so, would it not make more sense to delete the "by country" cats, and go back to just the main "micronation" cat? After all, there are only 76 articles about micronations in WP,and that's hardly likely to change very much from this point, as all the major ones are covered.

Re the AFD, it seems that common sense will probably prevail; in any case I've just posted a detailed rebuttal of the nominator's latest screed. --Gene_poole (talk) 07:45, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

WP:DUPCAT covers this rule... but you're also correct that the the content is small enough we could probably remove the by country subcats, and leave everything in the parent category... give me a couple days to get this AfD (and pending AfD drama) over with, and I'll take a look at the cats to figure something out... - Adolphus79 (talk) 12:46, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm going to be travelling intrastate for the next week; hopefully things will have gotten back on an even keel by the time I return. --Gene_poole (talk) 03:49, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Olive branch

One man's screed, is another man's logical argument George. In any event, Adolphus, I'm not arguing for the deletion of Micronation. Nor will I do so in the future, although I am fairly certain I have made such an argument in the past. I'm also not out to delete every micronation article, though I can understand how it may appear that way to you based on my continued involvement with the various micronation lists. Such is not the case, and I think I have a very demonstrated history of working collaboratively throughout the encyclopedia. Even in situations where I am engaged in heated rhetoric I have a proven history of listening to reason, and I think my involvement in the micronations related articles over the years is an excellent example of this. I bring this up, because I find your comment above ("RE: your email, I agree, and had already stated pretty much the same thing in the deletion discussion... we'll have to see what comes of the AfD first, and take action afterwards") to be particularly disturbing. Are you suggesting that you take action against me for not agreeing with your view of micronations, or for nominating anything in the micronations family for deletion, or for having a long standing history of reducing the cruftier parts of the micronation family of articles? To my knowledge, none of these is even remotely a violation of Wikipedia policy. I bring this up because I think you are a reasonable and valuable editor here with whom I have no grievance. In other words, just feel free to have a discussion with me about your concerns, and I would be happy to address them in a civil manner. That we might disagree on the subject of micronations is not a cause for acrimony, and I think my own editing history has shown that I have evolved over the years from someone who advocated the removal of all micronation content from Wikipedia, to someone who fully supports the inclusion and value of micronations on Wikipedia. I still think they are bizzare, but bizzare is not a reason for deleting them. Rather, those things that I do attempt to clean up or delete are peripheral components of the micronation topic which undermine the credibility of micronation notability in general. This should not be misconstrued as an subtle, long term intention to give micronations a death by a thousand cuts. I give you my word that I am acting in good faith, and am completely open to hearing your thoughts on this, or any other topic. Hiberniantears (talk) 12:56, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Then why is it you are still making comments like "I think the concept of Micronations is not worthy of inclusion on Wikipedia.", even in the middle of the AfD discussion? You can't repeatedly say you don't think Micronations belong on Wikipedia, then come here and tell me differently. Also, I was strictly using your past actions and comments to draw my conclusions, not assuming anything, when I made my comments. If your intention was to better the micronation coverage on Wikipedia, why have you not made a single post at the WikiProject? Why have you consistantly claimed to dislike micronation articles? Why have you deleted (or caused to be deleted) several of the articles under the project's scope?

Furthermore, why do you assume the email had anything to do with you? Guilty conscience, maybe? Although, now that you mention it, I am starting to have a problem with the way you are editing micronation articles (and your history of editing them), especially considering your very obvious dislike for the subject... I would love for you to explain the reasoning behind your edits... - Adolphus79 (talk) 13:29, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

I thought I just explained that... My honest opinion is that micronations, as presented on Wikipedia, are an embrassment to this project. I have always felt that way. I have constantly maintained this position, because this is what I think. At no point have I told you differently. In the past, I coupled that opinion with action towards deleting all micronation content. In doing that, I encountered numerous reasonable editors, yourself amongst them, who convinced me that I was wrong for pursuing that action. It doesn't change my opinion, but it does make me respect the differing opinion and reasoning of those who pursuaded me that I was, in fact, wrong. Since Micronation isn't going anywhere, and because I care a great deal about the integrity and viability of Wikipedia, my intention is to actively participate in content revisions that make the micronation topic as strong, focused, and informative as possible. If this action involves merging or deleting some articles in the micronation family, I don't see what the problem is. I think it is fair to say that if List of micronations is deleted, that if I were to also nominate Micronation or Sealand for deletion that other editors would rightly call me out for acting in bad faith. My taking action such as that would, in fact, be bad faith. However, I feel that deleting or combining a number of articles in the micronation family will make Wikipedia's presentation of the project more credible, since it will remove the types of long term abuse that has plagued this category.

As for the email, why shouldn't I assume it has anything to do with me? The other participant in your thread returned as soon as I nominated the article for AfD. Said editor has a long track record of sneaky, duplicitous behavior. That isn't exactly Sherlock Holmes calibre detective work.

In regards to the Wikiproject, I addressed this in the AfD. Personally, I think Wikiproject's are a relative waste of time. I've joined a few over the years and found them to be either non-responsive, or filled with editors who are only like minded, thus the Wikiproject acts only as an echo chamber. I'm not required to join the Wikiproject of every topic I chose to focus on. In fact, I couldn't even tell you which Wikiprojects I've joined, because I don't have an inkling of an idea as to which ones I have signed on to.

Lastly, if you want to have a problem with my editing of micronation articles because I do not share your viewpoint, doesn't that seem like a poor sale for joining the Wikiproject? If something was deleted, and remained deleted, that demonstrates that their was a lack of support for the existence of that article. Rather than address generalities, I will address specific instances of micronation articles being deleted by me if that would help you understand my reasoning. I think it is important for you to recognize the difference between someone acting in bad faith versus someone acting differently from you simply because they don't share your point of view. Hiberniantears (talk) 14:02, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Heads-up

Hi there. I'm shortly going to propose that this site be added as an WP:EL to both List of micronations and Micronations.

As the site includes the most extensive, up-to-date listing of micronations currently available from any source, I believe that it is directly relevant to the subject of those articles, and that its inclusion within them would significantly complement the existing content, and enhance their usefulness and the level of informativeness they communicate to the general reader.

However, before I iniate that discussion I firstly wanted to disclose that I'm the owner and primary author of www.listofmicronations.com. Secondly, in order to avoid any suggestion of WP:COI I intend to refrain from adding the link myself, should the eventual consensus support my proposal. --Gene_poole (talk) 02:32, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Engvar

Saw your comments ... think of the sentence like this: "(the guys from) England defeat (the guys from) "Germany". England and Germany are plural "they". I think it's actually correct in US English too. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 17:40, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

That's understandable... but I was not thinking about the plurality of it... I was looking at it like "In sports news, Bill defeats Joe 10-1", or even defeat-ed... After explaination, I was more than willing to accept that it only looks funny to me, and everyone else thought it was O.K... - Adolphus79 (talk) 17:48, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Peadar Ó Guilín

Hello Adolphus79, and thanks for your work patrolling new changes. I am just informing you that I declined the speedy deletion of Peadar Ó Guilín - a page you tagged - because: Article claims importance/significance of the subject. Please review the criteria for speedy deletion before tagging further pages. If you have any questions or problems, please let me know. SoWhy 10:07, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

I know the criteria, and I thought an author who has only just published his first book, and has no other history, did not pass... he obvioulsy does not pass WP:AUTHOR, so I guess I will prod it or take it to AfD... - Adolphus79 (talk) 14:42, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Online

Well mes things that you are finally back properly after about nine onths of semi-activeness, so HI. (Well thats my welcome back message complete) =P 'The Ninjalemming' 18:18, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

I don't know how "back" I am... I've had a lull in my busy schedule recently that has allowed me to get some editing done... not sure how long it will last, but thanks all the same! - Adolphus79 (talk) 18:30, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

What line of buisness do you work in to only jst have five minutes free? 'The Ninjalemming' 18:45, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

It's not just work, my home-life has been very busy as well... and it's not a matter of only having 5 minutes free, it's a matter of have a day that isn't packed full of work, chores, errands, etc... - Adolphus79 (talk) 19:41, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Yo-ho-ho

Hail, Adolphus79. I'm posting to let you know that I have listed you as an editor who had an unsuccessful RfA in the not-too-recent, not-too-distant past on the talk page for RfA's here. If you are interested in running for administratorship (or not), or if you would like to make any comments, feel free to join the discussion. If you might be interested, but would like some private confidential feedback from experienced observers, I would be happy to propose this via the new vetting service. Regards,  Skomorokh  18:21, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Arrr... that be a good deal... I will be checking out yer offer, matey... - Adolphus79 (talk) 18:34, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Sorry for the above, I'm a true observer of today's holiday... I have been keeping up on the assorted "we need more admins" discussions on RfA's talk page, and I read your proposal, and it seems like a good idea... I would not mind if the community wanted to nominate me again, but I am a little worried that I have not changed my editing style enough for them. While the first complaint was article writing experince (and I think that's been taken care of), a number of the opposes were also because I do not argue talk enough in the Wikipedia talk namespace, and my original statement was that these discussions are in regards to assorted policies that have nothing to do with my areas of interest. To be completely honest, I would prefer that you and DGG discuss my nomination first, both of you review my previous RfA (and your comments therein), and see if your concerns have been met. After my last RfA, I would be much more comfortable accepting a nomination if I had the knowledge that the primary opposer's concerns had been met (or at least his/your standards had lowered a little)... - Adolphus79 (talk) 19:01, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

That's very understandable. Shall I add an entry for you at WP:VETTING and ask DGG to whip me an email?  Skomorokh  19:03, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Sure... - Adolphus79 (talk) 19:04, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

How would you do with my favorite optional RFA question? "Point us to a conversation where you did a good job of explaining or supporting a policy or guideline; or if you prefer, point us to a conversation where you made a good argument against a policy or guideline." (Watching) - Dank (push to talk) 21:25, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

P.S. FWIW, I think the "not enough article experience" argument last time around would not sink you now; you have a GA and a lot of shorter articles under your belt. (There was also another article related to Blizzard Games that apparently was a GA, but since it's just a redirect now, it would be better not to claim that one at RFA.) You may get a few opposes for only the one GA, but I very much doubt it would affect the outcome. - Dank (push to talk) 21:28, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Have you seen my talk page archive? I have helped (or tried to help) many users understand assorted policies and guidelines... Also, the assorted answers on my coaching page... Out of my thousands of edits, it would take me forever to go back and find one or two specific edits... - Adolphus79 (talk) 21:53, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

And the list on my article gallery that you are discussing didn't have a GA symbol, it has a redirect symbol... not sure if the same logic applies or not, but I will leave your change there... - Adolphus79 (talk) 22:14, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

I just thought of one particular conversation that (I thought) showed my understanding of policy pretty well, Talk:List of micronations/Archive3#Add Awocka.21... - Adolphus79 (talk) 22:24, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Okay, that's good enough for me. Your next stop should probably be Biblio, since he was your coach ... see if he has any follow-up questions. - Dank (push to talk) 23:54, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

I don't see a problem in renominating you. I see good work from you since your last, and I'll be happy to renom you. A quick question though: Do you think Wikipedia still has potential to grow, or has it reached its peak? bibliomaniac15 00:46, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

As I sit and patrol the new pages, I know that it is still growing... hell, I've even created a few articles this year myself... I think we've reached a peak as far as growth rate goes, but tomorrow will always have another notable person, and if not, next month will... I believe (and hope) that Wikipedia will always continue to grow... - Adolphus79 (talk) 01:01, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

More feedback

I looked at your contributions, your deleted contributions, and the oppose votes in your last RfA, and I would vote support. In your last RfA, several voters expected more experience with policies, so I would recommend having something to prove that you have done that since. But I don't think it's worth much of your time, since it is not that common for voters to expect that in an RfA. Moreover, I feel you have a better understanding than even many admins, as apparent from your correct prodding of Regional Information Center for Science and Technology, which had been incorrectly speedily deleted three times by administrators. (That happens a lot, I just talked about similar cases here and here.) — Sebastian 21:49, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

P.S.: Bonus points for your handling of the troll who recently insulted you repeatedly on your user page. One of the prospects whom I had to tell that I couldn't support them failed precisely because they had handled a similar case by going ballistic; even to the point of insulting others who tried to intervene in good faith. — Sebastian 22:04, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, that is all good to hear... - Adolphus79 (talk) 23:09, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Very impressive handling on that. Good luck, and let me know if you go up for RfA. Sephiroth storm (talk) 05:34, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Update...

If anyone is still watching... Due to the above positive feedback, I have been thinking about this whole running again thing... I realize that trends and patterns change at RfA, and I also think that I have done a good bit of work on the areas that my opposers had pointed out as my shortcomings... pending input from DGG, and/or feedback from WP:VETTING (which seems to have completely stalled), I do intend to run again in the near future... - Adolphus79 (talk) 19:34, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

there is more article writing than there was last time, but I still do not see anything much in the way of policy discussion: almost nothing in WP Talk space. As for WP space, at AfD, I see at least one recent major error [4]. And another error at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shield mate, while it may or may not have been worth an article--I did not comment there-- a hoax it certainly was not. I'm also concerned by the absence of anything in WP space from April 09 to Sept 09--accompanied by little work generally in that period. . You are trying to become an admin, with short bursts of work instead of regular work. I am quite unhappy i have to say this, because I think you're a good & sensible WPedian generally. If adminship were a trophy, I'd vote you a trophy, but it's for doing admin work. DGG ( talk ) 03:46, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

April thru August was due to priorities IRL... a work schedule that did not allow for much time at the puter at all... As far as the two AfDs you linked, I fully admit that the book was an error on my part, and was about to withdraw it when it was closed... And the "shield mate" article was very hoaxy... the term is found nowhere in history, although the concept is plausible, and there were absolutely zero sources (reliable or not) that used that term specifically... either way, those are what they are, and are water under the bridge at this point... as far as policy discussion goes, no I do not fight with other editors in WP:T space about changing policies or making new ones... But, I do know them, have them on my watchlist, and double check/re-read them from time to time... and always try to teach them to new editors or those that do not know them (per my answer to Dank's question above)... I think that a look back through my talk page archives will show that I know the assorted policies that I deal with on a regular basis very well, and if I don't know it, I look it up before I even bother to open my mouth... I am more than willing to admit that I do not know every policy and guideline on Wikipedia (does anyone, really?), but the ones that I deal with on a daily basis (WP:N, WP:V, WP:RS, WP:CITE, WP:CSD, etc.) I know very well... I am also not planning on wandering around showing off my new shiny tools, but to continue editing as I do, and only use them when I see a need for an extra hand (e.g. CSD tagging and finding a backlog there, or making a report at AIV, and finding a backlog there), and I can assure you that I will never delete an article I have tagged for speedy, close an AfD that I started, or block a vandal that I reported to AIV/UAA... Hell, I don't think I'll even close many AfDs at all, unless they're snowy... There may be some occasion that I get to feeling a little slothful, and wander over into some other admin backlog, but not until I fully understand the policies and guidelines involved in that area... - Adolphus79 (talk) 04:24, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

P.S. Thank you for your comment... As I originally stated, it was very important for me to hear you input before moving forward... - Adolphus79 (talk) 04:24, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

This guys full of it

Unreliable sources my ass. What more do you want? Thats where they came from, and thats the ONLY place.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Chao19 (talk • contribs)

Please read WP:RS, sources need to be reliable, third party, publications... myspace, youtube, and twitter are all unreliable first-person sources... please find this information in a book, newspaper article, or the like... - Adolphus79 (talk) 18:19, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Hey asshole

Whats your problem? THOSE ARE SOURCES! I dont care if theyre not third party, quit being a dick because they LINK TO WHERE CREED SAID THAT STUFF! ARE YOU FREAKING SERIOUS?! TELL ME, WHERE AM I SUPPOSE TO FIND THE SAME THING SOMEWHERE ELSE? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chao19 (talk • contribs)

please see my reply above... - Adolphus79 (talk) 18:26, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

bullshit! if anyones doing vandalism its YOU —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chao19 (talk • contribs)

If you believe that is the truth, please feel free to show me a diff in which I vandalized in any way... - Adolphus79 (talk) 19:19, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Several things one being I changed the language just incase three year olds read it, two fixed the grammer, three Adolphus has never vandalised before and four sign your edits, just incase your some strange monkey from Venus whos writing it (maybe not quite so drastic) 'The Ninjalemming' 16:23, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Whoops missed a bit. 'The Ninjalemming' 16:24, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks all the same Ninjalemming, but Wikipedia is not censored for children... Plus, I'd rather leave the statements as they were originally posted, for possible future reference... - Adolphus79 (talk) 19:52, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Ah, like reports for..erm, AFD? I can't remember 'The Ninjalemming' 16:31, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

I think you meant the assorted AN boards... kinda... but just in general, I try keep all conversations on my talk page original... - Adolphus79 (talk) 17:03, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Right, gotcha ;D 'The Ninjalemming' 17:10, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Ummm...

Why do you keep shoving citation needed shit all over the Creed - Rain and Creed - Overcome page? It doesn't need a ref now, it all happened already. Get your facts straight... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.167.33.47 (talk • contribs)

Everything on Wikipedia needs a reference... see WP:V, all facts that could be challenged need to be cited... please get your facts straight... - Adolphus79 (talk) 01:23, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

I should make a Worst Admin Ever award and give it to you. Theres a shitload of other articles that need your shit more than Creed ones and your worrying about simple references? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.167.33.47 (talk • contribs)

Firstly, while I would be overly grateful for such an award, I am not actually an admin... Secondly, I realize that there are several articles on Wikipedia that need references, and I am slowly but surely working on finding them all... please point them out to me if you find one, thank you... - Adolphus79 (talk) 02:33, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Point out more great articles for you to fuck up like the Creed ones? No thanks!—Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.167.33.47 (talk • contribs)

RIGHT ON! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chao19 (talk • contribs) 01:03, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

The way I see it, you've got two options here... read and learn the policies, or quit bitching... I will continue to tag unreferenced articles with the appropriate templates, if you can't follow policy, you can just put up or shut up... - Adolphus79 (talk) 02:17, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

I'd rather YOU stfu and quit fucking with everything. No wonder you're not an admin.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Chao19 (talk • contribs)

Wow, so much for you learning civility from your last block... - Adolphus79 (talk) 03:11, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Ouch, that hurt. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chao19 (talk • contribs) 23:35, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Why do you expect everything to be referenced? Jesus... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chao19 (talk • contribs) 00:24, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Because, as I've told you before, that is Wikipedia policy... read WP:V, WP:RS and WP:CITE... - Adolphus79 (talk) 01:11, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

And from what ive seen over the year and a half ive been on here, your the only once who truly gives a flying fuck about the unreferenced stuff.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Chao19 (talk • contribs)

Considering your 622 edits (only 579 live) on a staggering total of 65 unique articles, I would also come to the conclusion that you have seen and/or edited a large amount of the 2 million plus articles... and in "the year and a half" that you've been on here, you made 2 edits in May 2008 and zero edits again until January of this year... Not all that much experience compared to the average Wikipedian... and add to that the fact that the last month's worth of edits have all been either harassing me or vandalizing assorted Creed pages, that lessens your experience further... If I were the only one that cared about references, it would not be one of the big three policies on Wikipedia (WP:N, WP:V, and WP:NPOV being the big three)... I would seriously recommend you go and read the assorted policies that I have linked for you over the last month, before you put your foot any further into your mouth... - Adolphus79 (talk) 03:48, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Alright, well do us all a favor. FUCK OFF! No one wants to read these articles and see that citation bullshit all over the page. That stuff has been there for years and no one gave a rats ass until now. Seriously dude, fuck off. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chao19 (talk • contribs)

You are one fatass nerd. Fuck you, I'm putting the twitter and youtube refs there anyways. I really don't give a fuck about the policy that YOU follow, I don't know how you expect me to find that shit anywhere else. Use your fucking brain. Oh, and stop undoing the changes I made by hitting the god damn undo button everytime I do something. Fucking cockmuncher —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chao19 (talk • contribs)

And I will remove your refs, and restore the maintenance templates, again... please find a reference that passes as a reliable source... This is not a policy that only I follow, this is a policy that everyone must follow... Please learn to follow policy in your editing (oh yeah, No Personal Attacks is another one you should read)... If you can't find the information in a reliable source, maybe it should not be on the article? - Adolphus79 (talk) 15:04, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Remove my refs? I should place YOU with vandalism templates. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chao19 (talk • contribs) 19:47, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

I assume you did not learn anything from your second block either? Did the message on your talk page to leave me alone mean nothing to you? I guess you don't really want to be a Wikipedian... - Adolphus79 (talk) 03:37, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Kynaston

Hi, I'm sorry for the cut-short comment, I didn't mean to sound harsh. Regards Hekerui (talk) 22:53, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

No worries, I know better than that from you... I was kind of glad that it was you that left the comment... With our working before, I know that you know what you're talking about... - Adolphus79 (talk) 23:01, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

P.S. Do you think this artcle has any chance at all of maybe one day being GA? - Adolphus79 (talk) 00:48, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Let me check my crystal ball for that ... The article is interesting, perhaps a legacy section (if he has some cultural references) could be added. I don't know if there's more info about him, but if there is it should be added to make the article a little longer. And perhaps you can find a free picture of the cave on the internet or ask someone for permission to use one. And what about "the cave is real"? Is that a quiz? :) The ultimate judgement of GA potential is with a reviewer but I think, why not? Hekerui (talk) 07:39, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Bah... you & yer darn WP:CRYSTAL... fine, we'll discuss GA later... do you think it's a B right now? - Adolphus79 (talk) 23:34, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Al Parish

I've bashed this article into shape and added references, and I've removed the prod tag. I think he is notable, but whether he passes WP:BLP1E or Wikipedia:Notability (criminal acts)#Perpetrators is open to debate. Fences&Windows 22:58, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

It's a very good article now, but I agree with you that he still probably fails WP:BLP1E... I'll look into in the next couple days, and get back to you... - Adolphus79 (talk) 23:15, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Jimmy Breslin

Just wanted to let you know I found a conflict of info on the Jimmy Breslin page. The beginning paragraph says he was born in 1929 and the photo on the side says he was born in 1930. I don't know which one is correct - just wanted to point it out to you. --12.108.255.76 (talk) 17:30, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Cool... a quick check of IMDB (while it is not completely reliable), shows 1930 as correct, so I have changed it... I'm not sure why you brought this to my attention, as I've never touched that page before, but thanks... Let me know any time you need more help... - Adolphus79 (talk) 17:34, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Brought to your attention so it would get fixed right the first time - didn't feel like going through the process all over again :) --12.108.255.76 (talk) 17:39, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Aha... after checking your contributions page, I now know who you are... I am glad to see you back editing again, but that was an easy fix that you could have done yourself... - Adolphus79 (talk) 17:46, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Small communities

No, they're worth much more than the bandwidth they're printed on (I love that wording :-). In case you're confused — while we disambiguate communities by COMMUNITYNAME, COUNTYNAME, STATENAME, it's different if one community is a municipality and the other isn't; you can see another example of this at Northwood, Ohio and Northwood, Logan County, Ohio. Do you have access to a camera and a chance to visit these communities? If so, photos would be quite helpful. I'm within bicycling distance of northwestern Union County, but not close enough to get many actual communities. You could also consider trying to get and use some county histories, as bits of history would help to improve these. Nyttend (talk) 03:17, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I do, and I am... I've taken many photos so far, but always seem to forget to take my camera whenever I see something cool (like the new Historical Marker for V.P. Fairbanks in Unionville Center, been meaning to take a pic of that since they put it up)... I have several things in the Union County/Madison County area that I want to photograph, just need to find some time in my busy schedule to take a day to go around the area and shoot it all... If there's anything in Southern Union (or Northern Madison) that you can think of that we need a pic of, let me know and I'll add it to my list... - Adolphus79 (talk) 03:43, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Really, yes, I believe that we do need such a source. Do you have a detailed atlas, something like DeLorme's Ohio Atlas and Gazetteer? This is a highly detailed Logan County map produced by the county engineer's office; do Union or Madison counties have anything like it? Nyttend (talk) 23:49, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Also — could you try to fill out the picture column of the National Register of Historic Places listings in Madison County, Ohio? Unless you have a high-quality camera, you'll not be able to get a better picture than is already present for the courthouse or for the downtown historic district (I wish I had as good a camera as the guy who took these pictures has!), but one building has just a black-and-white photo, and the other eight sites are missing photos altogether. Nyttend (talk) 23:51, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Looking for one now... does Google not work? - Adolphus79 (talk) 23:55, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

I have a great map here, but that does us no good online... would any of these do the trick for you? - Adolphus79 (talk) 00:19, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Not at all, but that's because I get an error message. What is it? Moreover, I'm curious — what do you mean about "that does us no good online"? The "Atlas and Gazetteer" series is printed, not digital. Nyttend (talk) 00:57, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

OK... so you're saying that I could use the Rand McNally Road Atlas as a source... so long as the statement is cited somehow? If so, how would you recommend I cite it, just "Rand McNally, The Road Atlas 2006, Pg. 80"? - Adolphus79 (talk) 01:03, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Most certainly. Do you have the 2009 edition of the atlas that you buy at Wal-Mart? If so, this is your citation:

<ref>Rand McNally. ''The Road Atlas '09.'' [[Chicago]]: [[Rand McNally]], 2009, PAGE.</ref>

Replace "PAGE" with the page number; and if you have a different year's atlas, simply replace "'09" and "2009" with the correct year. If you have a different atlas, simply change the name within the italics. Nyttend (talk) 01:11, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your help... hopefully they are now a handful of decent articles... - Adolphus79 (talk) 03:15, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. I'm changing your citations somewhat; please don't take the edit summaries as criticism, but as a simple way of saying that the citations can be improved slightly. Nyttend (talk) 04:10, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

No problem... if you are are wanting to be completely thorough in your checks, the list is here... - Adolphus79 (talk) 04:21, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

gotfrag

how come you keep undoing the gotfrag page? o_O

i don't use wikipedia much, and i just realized you've been leaving notes during the undo process lol, what's so bad about having that information there? if you search on gotfrag.com in the forum posts, all of those users are well known and actually have reputations on there, such as mods and such, and there were a few mods on the list as well, so i don't understand why this is a big deal, sorry for undoing it so much though lol, i thought adolphus79 was someone on gotfrag playing jokes on us, we take our site very seriously and many people supported the idea of having said users on the gotfrag wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Danielvutran (talk • contribs) 09:04, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

It is a list of non-notable people from a non-notable website... please read our original research and notability policies, and you will know why that list should not be there... none of these people are notable outside of your forums, and none of the information included in their entries is verifiable... any list on any page should only include notable entries that are easily verified by reliable sources... - Adolphus79 (talk) 14:48, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

oh okay so what time should i bring katie over? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Danielvutran (talk • contribs) 01:04, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Eh? Who's Katie? Where you bringin' her? Is there booze involved? - Adolphus79 (talk) 02:10, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the revert

Much appreciated. Too bad they didn't have the courage to log in. GlassCobra 03:26, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

No worries... maybe that will put off my EfD for another week... LOL - Adolphus79 (talk) 03:31, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

{{gnis}}

Just wanted to note — when you use this template, it displays as "USGS GNIS: [pagename]", regardless of the GNIS entry being cited. It's not a problem when you're using the GNIS entry for the community, but when you're citing another page, it's not the best formatting. For example, consider Chuckery, Ohio: it's good to have simply {{gnis|1039100}} (entry "Chuckery"), but {{gnis|2074270}} (entry "Chuckery Post Office") should display otherwise. You can make it display anything else by adding the text you want after the GNIS #; accordingly, I've caused it to display as "USGS GNIS: Chuckery Post Office" by changing the citation to {{gnis|2074270|Chuckery Post Office}}. Nyttend (talk) 00:31, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

I just noticed your edits, and didn't know that perimeter was available... I don't know that I will do it right now, or tonight even, but I will go through my list indirectly and update those that need changing... thanks for pointing that out... - Adolphus79 (talk) 00:34, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Just wanted to say thank you for the welcome - snowpup^talk 05:34, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

No worries... feel free to leave me a message anytime if you need help... or, just leave a message on Xeno's talk page... I watch his talk page too... - Adolphus79 (talk) 05:39, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Note to self...

Ohio Scenic Byways... - Adolphus79 (talk) 02:01, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Andreisme

In regards to Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Andreisme, I blocked them all. Nice work. Hiberniantears (talk) 03:54, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks... - Adolphus79 (talk) 04:31, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

IP User 99.9.34.235 - and apparent clock discrepancy

Hi! I'm the one who reported the IP vandal. When I revert obvious childish vandalism like that, I go through the user contributions and revert/warn any others I find that have not been reported or found yet. This one was three hits in a row.

Am I doing it wrong?

--Manway (talk) 07:43, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Kinda... If it is not recent, then you can't warn them for it... You can't give sequential warnings unless the editor continues editing after the last warning was issued, and since this editor had stopped editing before you even came upon their edits, I personally would have checked the time on the last warning (which in this case was before the final edit), and then checked the time on the last edit (half an hour before you came upon it), and probably issued the next level warning for good measure... but certainly not multiple warnings on a stale editor, and reporting to AIV... check out the guide for more details... - Adolphus79 (talk) 07:52, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Appreciate it. I'll check it out. I've been doing it wrong for two years...... --Manway (talk) 07:56, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

No problem... glad to help... although I am a little surprised that no one has noticed in two years, LOL... let me know if you have any other questions... - Adolphus79 (talk) 08:14, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Damn it Adolphus! You spend way to much time looking around other people's talk pages. Oh well I guess I have no choice. Thanks and Cheerio!--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{S†rawberry Fields (sign)} 21:56, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Award moved to awards page...

Wewt... my third barnstar in as many years... thanks! - Adolphus79 (talk) 00:23, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Hey I promised a barnstarn and I gave you one, thanks for all the help man!--Ezekiel 7:19 ^{S†rawberry Fields (sign)} 12:33, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Regarding your comment at AIV

We only need go through the four tiers of warnings when there is good reason to, for example, if the user may not realize that their test edits are causing harm or that the links they are adding are against policy. If there is obvious bad faith "penis" vandalism, a block can be administered immediately subject to admin discretion. Hope this helps. — Jake Wartenberg 03:41, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

It's not immediate if their last edit was 3 or 9 hours ago... - Adolphus79 (talk) 03:54, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

"Immediately" in that context meant "without further warning". — Jake Wartenberg 04:06, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

I actually had already started a thread on this at WT:AIV, before I saw your first message here... feel free to comment there... - Adolphus79 (talk) 05:26, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Creed DVD

Was unable to find anything about this DVD in any reliable source, nor about the supposed guinness record that came from it...so I've deleted it on the discography and the band pages. Just an FYI. Frmatt (talk) 03:56, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

No worries, I was about to do so myself... - Adolphus79 (talk) 03:57, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

And was given a slap on the wrist on my talk page...any advice? Frmatt (talk) 04:32, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

None at this point, your "removal of unreffed stuff" was the edit summary on the discography article, not the main article... either way, Chao19's edit are vandalism, because he is making them on purpose (read his whole section here, above), he has no intention of following policy, and does not care about them... I'm a little dismayed at the fact that this is an ongoing case, and was not treated as such, it seems the blocking editor did not review the user's history, and see that the user had been warned against harassing me any further, and simply blocked him for the disruptive editing... I know for a fact that I will need to report this user for harassment again a day or two after this block has lifted... - Adolphus79 (talk) 04:39, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

I have reviewed the history of Chao19 (talk · contribs), and the most recent edits do not quality as vandalism. I do agree that Chao19's previous comments towards you were completely unacceptable, but that's why he was (previously) blocked. For new blocks, we have to go by new behavior, not by past behavior. For best results, please don't refer to him as a vandal (or really any name, but especially not vandal) his edits as vandalism, because it weakens your case. You can say that an editor is "disruptive", "is repeatedly adding unsourced material", "is editing tendentiously", "is adding non-neutral edits", etc. But when you call them a vandal their edits vandalism, even though they haven't been vandalizing, it unfortunately just looks like name-calling. And when two editors are calling each other names, to an administrator, they really don't care "who started it", they just see two people equally at fault. So please, in the future, avoid using the word vandalism unless it's truly blatant, and that will make administrators' jobs much easier.  :) --Elonka 04:59, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

And in reviewing his history, did you see the last blocking admin's comments? Chao19 was specifically told to leave me alone, and make productive edits, or else to "find somewhere else to edit"... How much more clearly can you say indef block? - Adolphus79 (talk) 05:06, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

P.S. Please show me where I have referred to him as a vandal, I do not believe I have ever done so... I am going to sleep at this point, as this situation is obviously not going to actually be resolved any time in the near future, but would love to continue this discussion later... - Adolphus79 (talk) 05:25, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

You are correct, you did not refer to him as a vandal, you simply referred to his edits as vandalism. I have amended my comment accordingly, and apologize for the error. --Elonka 16:18, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

And the first part of my comment, reviewing the block log, and the warning given to him by the last blocking admin? Or are we just going to pass this off to the next blocking admin 5 days from now (after further disruptive edits and incivility/harassment)? - Adolphus79 (talk) 16:21, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

And/or my comments on the ANI thread? Why is it Chao19 was blocked for 72 hours, Frmatt was "counseled to read WP:VAND", and I and the case history were completely ignored? - Adolphus79 (talk) 16:33, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

I am sorry that you feel ignored, since that is not the case. I have reviewed all parts of the history here, including Adolphus79 (talk · contribs), Chao19 (talk · contribs), Frmatt (talk · contribs), the talkpages of all involved, and the history at the various Creed articles, especially Creed (band), Creed discography, and Full Circle (Creed album). I am in agreement with administrator Ultraexactzz that Chao19's previous behavior was unacceptable, for which Chao19 received a 55-hour block. With the latest behavior, Chao19 was blocked again, for 72 hours this time. However, a mitigating factor in Chao19's favor, is that he was being goaded, by having his edits reverted immediately as vandalism. If he would have been treated with more civility, he might not have lashed out as he did. I also looked at Chao19's edits to the Creed article, and I saw nothing that looked like vandalism. What I saw, looked like good faith (if a bit misguided) attempts to improve the article. Look at it this way: If you were excited about an album, logged on to Wikipedia to add what you thought was interesting and exciting information, and then immediately had your edits reverted as "vandalism", might you not be a bit annoyed as well? So that's why Chao19 is being given another chance. It's my hope that when the block is up, he will try harder to edit in a civil and collegial fashion, and we should give him every opportunity to do so. Instead of seeing him as a disruptive influence, try instead to see him as an over-eager student who just needs some guidance on how to improve their editing. We definitely need all the good editors we can get! There's a limit to how many second chances we'll give him though. If when he returns, you and everyone else treat him with calm, civil, and encouraging behavior, but Chao19 still acts in a disruptive manner, then he will definitely be looking at a longer block. --Elonka 16:58, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

That's exactly what was said regarding his last block, and also to leave me alone... both of which he failed... also, his edits were vandalism, per the first line of WP:VAND, "any addition, removal, or change of content made in a deliberate attempt to compromise the integrity of Wikipedia"... his template removal was done on purpose... even after extensive discussion regaring WP:RS, WP:V, and WP:CITE, to which his reply was "No one wants to read these articles and see that citation bullshit all over the page ... no one gave a rats ass until now."... That's "blatently removing content in an attempt to comprormise the intergrity of Wikipedia" if I've ever seen it, and add to that the repeated attacks and incivility, and I don't know what else to do... The last time he was blocked, he was told to leave me alone or find somewhere else to edit... He came back and immediately was back on my talk page, and yet only recieves a 72 hour block, not 1 week, not 1 month, not indef... How many second chances (this will be his second "second chance" now) are you willing to give him, for him to prove to you that he will never edit in a civil and collegial fashion? Three blocks in the space of a month, with him not changing his habits in any way between blocks, shows me that he doesn't plan on changing... I have tried to help, if you read my talk page you would have seen that, and I treated him civily, and gave him a wide berth after the last block, just as recommended... He, on the other hand, paid no attention to the recommendation to leave me alone and be a productive editor... I have never called him a vandal and I was never bitey... I reverted unproductive edits, left {{tl:test1}}, etc. templates on his talk page, civily tried to explain what was needed even after his uncivil and attack comments to me... and now I am being told to be nice to him? BULLSHIT! show me once where I was not civil towards him, show me once where I called him a vandal or his edits vandalism (unless they were blatently vandalism), show me once where I was not completely helpful and trying to help him understand policy, even though I was met with nothing but incivility in return... he was not goaded at all, until after the ANI report, and other editors became involved... at which point, he had already broken the recommendations set down by the previous blocking admin... he's not an over-eager student excited about a new album, and logging in to add information, he's a disruptive editor that does not care about policy, even after it's been explained to him several time, and he's been at this for 2 months now... he's doing it on purpose because he thinks he can get away with it... and he is getting away with it, as well as the incivility towards me... Tell me, what should I do? Let this block expire, re-start the process again in 5 days, see him get another short block, come back from that, continue his bad faith editing, report again, short block, block expires, disruptive editing, etc., etc., etc.? Never mind that mess... I'll just put up with the incivility and disruptive editing on my own if I'm not going to get help elsewhere for it... let his attack section above just keep growing, and maybe someone on the 3RR board will pay attention... - Adolphus79 (talk) 17:30, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

His edits were not vandalism. See WP:VAND#NOT. Repeatedly referring to his edits as vandalism, is not helpful. Also, are you aware that you're complaining about his incivility, by being uncivil yourself? Anyway, as regards the length of the current block, look at it this way: If he is disruptive again, he will be blocked again, and rapidly. If he returns and is not disruptive, then that's a good thing, right? I agree that what he did in the past was absolutely unacceptable, but the wiki-way is to give people chances to reform. It's only when they prove that they're incapable of working in a collegial manner with other editors, that we proceed to an indefinite block. Our policy when dealing with an established editor who has a history of constructive edits, is to follow a pattern of of steadily escalating blocks, we can't just jump straight to indef. --Elonka 22:09, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

LOL... how in the hell can reporting incivility be a violation of WP:CIVIL? That's rich... Please show me where I have been uncivil... - Adolphus79 (talk) 01:52, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

I was referring to this comment (and edit summary).[5] --Elonka 05:36, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

How was that uncivil? I don't see anything in WP:CIVIL that says I can not complain, and become disturbed by the lack of cooperation... I have not been rude to anyone, I have not been overly harsh in my statements, I simply called you out on your claims... If you consider that edit summery and comment a breach of civility, then you are just as quilty due to your belittling me and lack of care in the situation... claiming that I goaded him on, and that I should be nice to him in the future, could both be considered misleading or deliberately asserting false information, since I have done nothing but be nice to him throughout this entire ordeal (it's been over a month now, if you're keeping track, and I have not been rude to him once)... so, if you think calling bullshit when someone is trying to bullshit you is uncivil, please show me exactly where I broke a policy... - Adolphus79 (talk) 14:07, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

I regard using profanity towards someone else as uncivil. Wasn't that your complaint about what Chao19 was saying to you? Where exactly do you draw the line on civility? Or is it a matter that it's okay for you to say it to other people, but not okay for others to say it to you? --Elonka 14:12, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Profanity is one thing, but personally attacking and harassing another user is altogether different... Statements like "I'd rather YOU stfu and quit fucking with everything. No wonder you're not an admin", "Alright, well do us all a favor. FUCK OFF!", "You are one fatass nerd. Fuck you...", and "Fucking cockmuncher" are personal attacks, and that is where I draw the line, and why I reported him... If I had said something out of line, and he had called "Bullshit", but had remained civil about it, I would not have done anything...

Per Wikipedia:Harassment#Dealing with harassment, "If you feel you are being harassed, first and foremost, act calmly (even if difficult) ... For more serious cases where you are willing to address it on-wiki, you may request administrative assistance."... Which is exactly what I did... I was never uncivil about anything... Yes, your belittling me (showing you did not fully read and understand all of the case history) did make me angry, but telling someone who is wrong they are wrong is not uncivil... - Adolphus79 (talk) 14:31, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

I agree that what Chao19 said to you was far worse than anything you said. My point is, that profanity is uncivil. It's not helpful to complain about someone being uncivil, while being uncivil yourself, as it tends to just look like a double-standard. Now please, do not take this as me accusing you of being routinely uncivil, because you're not. I've looked at your contribs, and the vast majority of the time, you're a helpful, patient editor. You usually respond calmly, even when provoked. That's good stuff! I was only pointing out the irony in that one of your complaints to me about him being uncivil, included you using uncivil language yourself. But please, can we drop this and move on? I don't think it's worth that much energy debating it any further. If I offended you, I do apologize. I see you as a good editor, and would like to maintain a positive relationship with you. :) --Elonka 14:39, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

I call an end to that =) Although I would like to point out, not to raise yet another argument, but some people use profanity naturally and not uncivily or to relieve stress. Just a point nothing big, this thread has now been finished. 'The Ninjalemming' 15:00, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you Ninja, but I'm afraid this was actually over before it ever even began... Even though Wikipedia is not censored, some users are more sensitive to profanity than others. Had I known that Elonka was one of those editors, I would have chosen my wording a little more carefully before telling her that I thought she was wrong... Elonka, you are an obviously very intelligent woman (and, might I add beautiful as well), and I am sorry that you had to be the one to recieve my wrath... As far as I am concerned, this is dropped... - Adolphus79 (talk) 15:32, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

What a good laugh... Chao19 (talk) 11:50, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

What a surprise... our favorite editor comes off his third block to start his disruptive editing again... have you learned nothing? have you no intentions of being a productive editor? - Adolphus79 (talk) 05:00, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

XM500

How do you know XM500's effective range? User:Madcaptain-896 —Preceding undated comment added 13:08, 30 October 2009 (UTC).

He made it 'The Ninjalemming' 13:10, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't know it... but whatever you add to the article as the maxeffect range needs to be cited... I find it damn near impossible for a 50BMG rifle to have a range of 6800 meters... - Adolphus79 (talk) 15:48, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Ah, a fellow SoCal denizen!

I remember when I created that article on the 60. Wikipedia has sure filled up a lot since then. I think pretty much the entire California state highway system is covered now. In fact, I did the article on Highway 111 between Palm Springs (Whitewater, actually) and Calexico. For that matter, I was floored that the Ridge Route wasn't covered, but with the help of a now-retired user in the Antelope Valley, we made us a featured article. That's when I found a red link to the Automobile Club of Southern California as well. Ah, the good old days.  :) --PMDrive1061 (talk) 03:05, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Not really a denizen, if you didn't notice on my travels page, I've been everywhere... I used to live in Riverside, and did a lot of partying in either MoVal or Hollywood, the 60 was very kind to us... Then I moved up to Bakersfield... I almost thanked you for 99 also, but then I realized it was the US route, and not the state route (5 bypass near Bakersfield)... Actually, Isabella Dam was one of my first articles... Thank dog I'm not there anymore, I hated Bakersfield (120 for a month straight in the summer sucks!)... - Adolphus79 (talk) 03:10, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

LOL! Sounds like the desert.  :) Actually, State Route 99 is the old alignment of US 99. A lot of the signs on the southbound side which give the mileage to LA actually date back to the pre-1964 US 99 days since 99 doesn't go through LA anymore. There's an old sign like that in Coachella as well. You're right about my not checking your userpage, tho.  :)) My brother briefly had a business in Bakersfield and not only was it hot, but muggy as well. I remember a place out there which made homemade ice cream which was the most incredible I'd ever eaten. Don't remember where it was, unfortunately. I want to say it was on Ming Avenue, but I may be wrong. Gotta split; talk to ya soon. --PMDrive1061 (talk) 04:01, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Sure... drop me a line anytime... - Adolphus79 (talk) 04:05, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Xeno may be ill

I do beieve xeno is ill so have left a message on his talk page, maybe you'd like to leave your own; and if you say 'I've been ill before but never got one' it's because I don't have to repeatedly ask you questions and I could think your working, so next time say your ill and I'll give one to you too. And the pictures awesome! See ya =P 'The Ninjalemming' 19:24, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

User:Piper987

I just wanted to say that I appreciate the spirit of forbearance that led you to issue another "last warning" to this youthful editor; I've been keeping an eye on her for some time, that was the third "last warning" she'd been issued, she'd already been through a temporary block without any apparent improvement to her behaviour, and I'm sorry to say I'm just fed up and have permanently blocked her. I dislike stifling the enthusiasm of one so young but I'm also tired of cleaning up after her. My apologies for overruling your judgment here and, if you have any questions or problems, I'm at your service. Accounting4Taste:talk 22:15, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

No worries... I added the new final because I saw the history of the talk page, and know that other editors don't always check the history... - Adolphus79 (talk) 22:20, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Creed Full Circle

Ok, Adolphus...then I guess I'll have to explain.

I don't know what you think of Creed, but I don't think I'm writing nonsenses. I never do and I always check before posting. Now, the page says that Toro magazine reviewed Full Circle with a 1.5 out of 5, and that's true ! But the thing that doesn't say is that that same review has been slaughtered by dozens of comments of angry people claiming that the review was horrible and partial ! In the same link you can read the comments that attack the review and the reviewer finally closing the possibility to comment and writing :

Jesse Skinner

I've disabled further comments with this piece. It's time everyone including me did the adult thing and got on with our lives.

Best wishes.

Now do you think that someone who does something like this can be put on Wikipedia as a confidable source ? He did this because he was literally overwhelmed by people disagreeing with him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.88.86.4 (talk) 23:01, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

I could really care less one way or the other for Creed... I care about the article, and trying to keep it encyclopedic... Anyone is going to disagree with any review, even the UG reviews have complaints regarding them... It's simply un-encyclopedic to include the fact that assorted random internet users disagreed with the one review, unless we also mention that people disagreed with the other reviews, which would be an endless, and pointless, motion... I just don't think it is necessary to the article, and also smells of WP:POV... - Adolphus79 (talk) 23:16, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Is it Possible to know why you tell me that comments are PERSONAL and for this you cancel them BUT you let that "commenting "Full Circle is big and dumb, obviously, but it’s also unforgivably boring, as few really big dumb successful bands are, and unlikely to fool again those who fell for the trick so many years ago." on the review ? Eh ?

THIS IS PERSONAL ! THIS IS A POINT OF VIEW ! It doesn't smell as it, it stinks as it ! And as you proudly say, you should CANCEL it ! Why do you cancel the good comments but keep the bad ones ? Eh ? If you were fair, you should just let the vote (1.5 out of 5) and cancel everything else ! I protest for this !—Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.88.86.4 (talk • contribs)

I more or less agree with Adolphus. The purpose of the article (and pretty much all articles on Wikipedia for that matter) is to present information relevant to the topic in an encyclopedic format. If random internet reviews were included or listed as sources in the article, then, in the course of neatly completing said article, internet users' opinions may have to be listed for every one of the reviews in the article. ISmellDonuts (talk) 03:42, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

THEN WHY Jesse Skinner's personal opinion is still there ? Are you kiddin me ? Are you faking not to hear me ? "IsmellDonuts" ! Didn't you read what I wrote !?!?!? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.88.86.4 (talk) 03:51, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

The Toro review is a professional review, made by a member of the staff of a magazine... the UG reviews are all made by anonymous users of the website... that is the difference... If I went to UG, and wrote the first review for the album saying that it was absolutely terrible, and the worst thing I had ever heard, would you want to quote that on the article? Would you want to add a line to the encyclopedia article about that my review sucked? Of course you would, but anything other than a professional review (including comments about the review itself) are personal points of view from unreliable sources (anonymous users)... That alone is the reason that the Toro review is quoted, and nothing else is... You may feel free to quote one of the other professional reviews (Entertainment Weekly, or any of the others listed in the infobox), but please do not add unprofessional opinions from anonymous users to the article... - Adolphus79 (talk) 04:14, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Got it. - 200.88.86.4 (talk) 05:13, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Awesome, thank you... I hope you don't feel like I was picking on you, but this article has had a large number of people trying to push it either one way or the other, and I have had a hard time trying to heep it neutral... please feel free to leave me a message here any time you have questions or need help in the future... - Adolphus79 (talk) 05:20, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

"Obvious sock of previous editor"...who? Sluggo | Talk 05:32, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

[6], [7], [8]... 200.88.86.x has been trying to remove the Toro review, or add POV comments about it for a few days now... I did not mean another user completely, but that this user keeps coming back with a different IP each day, and making the same edits without discussion... now that we've talked though, I feel a little less concerned about the multiple IPs... - Adolphus79 (talk) 05:38, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Here comes your damned press release, cancelling-maniac...http://guitarinternational.com/wpmu/2009/11/24/creed-brings-reunion-tour-%E2%80%98full-circle%E2%80%99-with-first-ever-live-concert-dvd-%E2%80%98creed-live%E2%80%99/ Was it too difficult to wait two weeks ?200.88.86.73 (talk) 04:38, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

And I said two weeks because the date of the press conference is 24 November...200.88.86.73 (talk) 04:40, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

User:Juliancolton/Project

The project now has a more defined idea of what we plan to do. Basically, we're calling for individual proposals on how to improve Wikipedia. Please help by posting your new ideas! –Juliancolton | ^Talk 21:17, 7 November 2009 (UTC) (Cross-posting)

Album ratings...

Hi.

My pleasure to take a look at your list, but the articles are already assessed, you want my take on how to improve them?, you want me to reassess them? or you want me to work on them?

If i can i`m gonna work on the stubs first, if this isn`t what you wanted, excuse me and let me know immediately. Zidane tribal (talk) 06:22, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Do whatever you want... I was thinking the two you assessed as start were only stubs myself... take a look, reassess, work on, and/or suggest improvements... all of the above are appreciated... thanks... - Adolphus79 (talk) 06:29, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Cary Village Site

You're welcome. I don't know what township it's in, because the only other source that I have that would potentially give a location — C. Wright Mills' Archeological Atlas of Ohio — has no markers for any village sites in northeastern Madison County. Nyttend (talk) 04:46, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Are there lat/lon coords, or any unique topography? Near any creeks? No one into the historical society has even heard the name before, but there are 3 or 4 "old indian village sites" in the area, no one knows the names though... I'm waiting for the one guy at the HS who is the "Indian expert" to get back to me... he's trying to place names on the different sites... I know one was just WNW of town, and they had to delay the building of the 42 bypass so archaeologists could excavate it, but now one know what the name was... - Adolphus79 (talk) 04:57, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Creed Rain

who the heck is choa19?? and why do you keep reverting my change in creed - rain? I was improve that line and you keep undoing it, your vandalising yourself. why cant you just place a fact tag over that instead of undoing improvement?/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.163.32.144 (talk) 03:24, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

The anon has been blocked for 30 days, sorry it took me so long.  :) Sorry I can't do an indef, but we have to give every possible benefit of the doubt to anons, since they may transfer from person to person. If Chao19 starts IP-hopping though, I recommend starting a page at WP:SPI, to keep track of the IPs so we can look into doing a range block. Plus it will make it easier for you to request blocks from any admin, not just me. --Elonka 03:52, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you again, ma'am... I'm keeping track myself right now, but this is only the second IP he has used so far... I was thinking a more logical step would be semi-pp the pages in question first... at least then the encyclopedia is protected, even if my talk page is not (and I have no plans on having it protected in the near future)... the only problem is that then we're discussing an entire topic's worth of protection just because of one user, and I don't like that idea any more than the range block... at his current rate, it's not bad enough to make any further motions, but if he finds some way to circumnavigate the block (continued IP hopping), I may look into it... - Adolphus79 (talk) 04:27, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Woodstock Georgia

Can you please take a look at "Woodstock, Georgia" and read about the famous people from there? It notes "Comidean Jeff Foxworthy lives in Woodstock down on Putnam Ford Rd in a "Huge Mansion". You could see It with the closed gates and brick walls". I can not find this validated on any website, almost seems non-notable/unencyclopedic. The last I knew, he lived in Alpharetta in a gated community. I think this should be removed, however, I am unsure and that is why I am presenting it to you. Thanks--24.131.43.223 (talk) 04:12, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

 Done - But why do you keep coming to me for these items, when you and I both know you could've fixed that yourself? - Adolphus79 (talk) 04:32, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Chances are your edits won't get questioned or scrutinized like mine would, given my history. Thanks Again, --24.131.43.223 (talk) 04:52, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

I doubt anyone would even look at your history if your current edits were constructive enough... And, if nothing else, just register a username... edits from IPs are inherently more scrutinized than edits from registered users... that's just a suggestion though... you can do whatever you want obviously, and I will continue helping you so long as your edits are not disruptive... Just remember to be bold, if you are actually trying to help the 'pedia, no one will question your edits... and if they do, let me know... you have shown a good bit of good faith since the Moe's incident, and I would have no problem helping you in the future... - Adolphus79 (talk) 04:59, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Creed (band)

Nice edits! I didn't know you did clean-ups of overlinking and under-referencing: two crying needs on WP. Thank you. Tony (talk) 15:18, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, admittedly, I don't do the overlinking work very regularly... That article just happens to be on my watchlist at the moment due to recent vandalism, and I was giving it a once over when I noticed the overlinking... Although, I am quite a stickler for overlinking, and do generally fix that problem whenever I find it... And as far as under-referencing goes, that's probably my biggest Wiki-pet-peeve... I have had more IP users and new users complain about my {{Unreferenced}} and {{fact}} tagging than anything else... If you ever need help with either, feel free to let me know... - Adolphus79 (talk) 17:13, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Your PROD of Ledford Middle School

While I don't necessarily disagree with the deletion of Ledford Middle School (on the basis of not meeting WP:GNG, your PROD makes reference to WP:SCHOOLS, which is a failed proposal. It also indicates that the information cannot be verified, which I'm not sure is true. Would you be willing to change the PROD so that it refers to WP:GNG instead? That way, there is less liklihood for another editor removing it, and having to go through an AfD. Thanks. Singularity42 (talk) 02:33, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Feel free to change it... I know that WP:SCHOOL is a failed proposal, but it gives the reader a chance to understand why it would not pass notability concerns... - Adolphus79 (talk) 02:49, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Lafayette, Madison County, Ohio

You wrote that Lafayette was laid out by a "William Mnter". I assume that "Mnter" is a typo...could you fix it? Nyttend (talk) 00:53, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, checked the atlas again, it's supposed to be Minter... fixing now... - Adolphus79 (talk) 04:54, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! I've not before seen it; when I first saw it, I thought it was the printed volume you were using when you wrote about William Mnter. Looks like quite the find! Nyttend (talk) 04:58, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Actually, the 1875 atlas I used was the printed version... PC library had a copy... I'm gonna try to make it down to London tomorrow, and see if they have any other atlases / gazettes... I'm gonna strive to get a few of my community articles past stub... the link I just gave you was a different book, the 1854 gazetteer... the 1875 was just Madison county, the 1854 is all of the US... - Adolphus79 (talk) 05:06, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

I've never before heard of a utility company with nine customers; that's quite the find :-) Nyttend (talk) 15:32, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm finding all kinds of great & useless information while searching Google books for atlases / histories of Ohio/Madison County/Union County... I laughed when I read that, then immediately added it to the article... - Adolphus79 (talk) 15:48, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

User rights

Being granted the autopatroller user right changes nothing for you. It changes things for me.

Autopatroller was added pretty much to make things easier for me, because apparently I'm the one who does more NPP than anyone else.

It means a) Adolphus79 can be trusted to know what he's doing when he creates new pages, they don't need to be approved by a human, and b) Adolphus79 does this often enough that it's more efficient to just mark everything he creates as approved by default. DS (talk) 12:33, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Oh, I know what it's for and how it works... I was thanking you just the same... It's just not every day that you have rights randomly given... - Adolphus79 (talk) 16:26, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Battle Of Armagideon album Lee 'Scratch' Perry credit updates

Hi there,

It was brought to my attention that the wikipedia entry for this album was slightly mis-credited. I updated the credits earlier today, but found the updates deleted this evening. I have now updated the credits once more.

The album credits are clearly legible on the original album sleeve notes, and as I was closely involved in the recording and production, as well as the design of this record, I am perfectly qualified to make these updates.

I would appreciate it if you would allow these updates to remain, as they are now accurate as to the personnel involved in the project.

I am not a crank or hoaxer wishing to take false credit, as a cursory glance at the original sleeve notes will confirm.

Thank you.

Mark Downie (AKA Marcus Downbeat) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcus downbeat (talk • contribs) 21:15, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

No worries... like I said originally, if you could just reference your changes... by your username I figured you knew what you were talking about, and not just a prankster, which is why I left the message on your talk page... the content can stay for now, but I have made a few minor coding/MOS changes... thank you for the information, and feel free to let me know if you ever need help in the future... - Adolphus79 (talk) 21:34, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

i solve problem abouit sporting

ok —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.189.219.231 (talk) 18:56, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

please not put that templates because i post links on page too!!!!!sporting clube da praia seasons —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.65.194.11 (talk • contribs)

The maintenance templates have been restored once again... If you read the templates that are on the page, you will understand why... the templates have nothing to do with a lack of references, but with the fact that there is no lead paragraph or inline citations... Please do not remove them again unless these issues have been resolved... - Adolphus79 (talk) 16:17, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Requesting oversight

Hi there. As I mentioned at WP:ANI I blanked your request for oversight and forwarded it on to the oversighters' mailing list. It has since been oversighted. The reason I did this was because, until oversighting occurs, the goal is to minimize the amount of attention the page gets. That means reverting the page with a generic message and quietly sending the request directly to oversighters through the means specified by WP:RFO. Posting on ANI is likely to draw attention which is undesirable. Anyway, it's been dealt with, and thanks for bringing it up. If you have any questions let me know. --Mpdelbuono (talk) 19:41, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

I didn't even think about that... I have made a couple requests before via ANI, but will take to RFO in the future... - Adolphus79 (talk) 19:45, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Rap Rebirth

Hi Adolphus. Thanks for helping me out with the Rap Rebirth article. I'm adding references to it now so I'd like a few minutes before you add the speedy delete tag (aka the wiki kiss of death). Thanks. (By the way, big fan of your work, keep doing what you do. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sochill33 (talk • contribs) 01:52, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

I have replaced the CSD template with a prod... This gives you 7 days to build your article... I ask that you please do not remove the prod yourself... I will keep an eye on the article, and help with minor coding, formatting, grammar, etc... feel free to let me know if you need any help with anything... - Adolphus79 (talk) 02:58, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Appreciations...

For THIS, I thank you. I'll be adding more as I am able. Best, Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 06:14, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

No problem... like I said in the AfD, I've been fighting with myself over that article for the last 2 months... I'm glad that bringing it to the attention of the rest of the community helped the article grow, you've done a great job on it... - Adolphus79 (talk) 15:54, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Many thanks. If you come across other such, feel free to bring them to my attention. I'm happy to help be proactive before AFDs as well. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 23:03, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

There are many on my watchlist that are in need of rescue / a lot of work...

• A.Y.P. Garnett - has been under discussion since it's creation (via edit summaries)... is copied almost word for word from a source that is in the public domain... could also use a few more refs...
• Ajay Mahajan - survived an AfD, but needs expansion using the new found refs at it's AfD...
• Chris Rager - one of many voice actors employed by FUNimation Entertainment, about a dozen or so total... most are close to going to AfD due to lack of notability, lack of references, etc.
• Corky Evans - an article that's been on my watchlist for a while, but I never got around to working on... a member of the Canadian parliament, yet the article is completely unsourced...

That's just the first few I got too, there's probably a good couple dozen biographies that are in need of help... and a few dozen non-bio articles also... and you may always feel free to take a look at my articles... - Adolphus79 (talk) 03:27, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Facepalm listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Facepalm. Since you had some involvement with the Facepalm redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Cnilep (talk) 20:13, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

C M Eddy Jr

I have a few items that might be useful. This is my first 5 minutes on wikipedia and I would never begin to "touch" anything. However, I keep most of these CM Eddy items on my Lovecraft blog: www.chrisperridas.blogspot.com. Or I can email them, etc. -Chris Perridas.

The link tot he bio on wikipedia if needed is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C._M._Eddy,_Jr. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ChrisPerridas (talk • contribs) 16:40, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

You have a few items on your personal blog? Are these items of original research, or links to reliable sources? Please feel free to give me a link to something from a reliable source, as I am always interested in expanding an article... - Adolphus79 (talk) 17:40, 15 December 2009 (UTC)