User talk:Flcelloguy/Archive03

Hi Flcelloguy

Hi Flcelloguy!

I'm very surprised by the speed of your answer to my post. Are you sure you are not a bot?

A cousin of J.I. Siles 21:32, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

---

Wikipedia:RC patrol was a red link two minutes ago. I will read RC patrol some time because I have to go.

I thought you went to Special:Recentchanges and saw my post about List of dignitaries at the funeral of Pope John Paul II.

Regards
A cousin of J.I. Siles 21:46, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

Esperanza

Welcome to Esperanza, but you see the 40 times where I say Alphabatize yourself? ;) Redwolf24 (talk) 21:37, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

I'm not new.

Hi, but you didn't need to give me a welcome notice. I have been on the Wiki as WikiFan04, with about 800 edits to date and 19 months of experience under my belt. I'm not new! Sorry for the misunderstanding. --WikiFanatic^{Talk 17:13, 4 Sep 2005 (CDT)}

Esperenza

I saw the message you left on Redwolf's page. Would you be willing to help me draft something up then? It seems as though lots of contributors are quite busy with other stuff at the moment. I agree, the recent surge of WikiVacations is somewhat a cause for concern. --HappyCamper 23:54, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

Great! Now, for starters, we need two things: A framework, and plenty of ideas. I think what we need now is a good set of ideas of what we think should be part of Esperenza. We had that started but I don't think we have nearly sufficient material to put together something concrete. What do you think? --HappyCamper 23:59, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

Alright, we'll continue the discussion on the Esperenza page then. Goodnight! --HappyCamper 00:16, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

Hypnotize (also Mezmerize and System of a Down)

Hello Flcelloguy! I appreciate you having unlocked Hypnotize after the last edit war and I am trying not to re-start one despite my objections to the edits. Can you check it to see if I'm being unreasonable? Aren't Wikipedia rules being broken here (Wikipedia:No_original_research, Wikipedia:Verifiability, Wikipedia:Cite_sources)? User:Mike Garcia insists that I'm vandalizing despite numerous users telling him at Talk:Hypnotize that I'm not. Admin User:Rhobite has already warned Mike about these edits recently but he seems to be inactive as of late. 66.36.152.26 03:43, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your help with User:Mike Garcia. Pasboudin 16:40, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the midnight vigil. I'd suggest you archive the page. Lost of unnecessary stuff is getting loaded each time. =Nichalp «Talk»= 06:38, September 5, 2005 (UTC)

Mind-Benders

Any chance of putting the current round of Wikipedia Mind-Benders to bed? There is still one question unanswered but I don't think anyone's made any additions for a while now. The code was fun btw. --Spondoolicks 15:28, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

User:Mike Garcia ban evasion

Just thought I would let you know User:Mike Garcia is evading your 24-hour block with one of his famous sock-puppets, AOL IP User:205.188.116.10, at System of a Down. I've already reported it to the incident board. Thanks for your help. Pasboudin 23:26, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

I figured as much. Thanks though. :) Pasboudin 23:36, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

Kevin baas

I took a look and added my two cents. I don't think you were wrong to block btw, just there are probably better things we can do at this point on to reach a happy ending. Regards! Sasquatch讲看 23:37, September 5, 2005 (UTC)

DYK

Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Young People's Concerts, which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

==Be Forewarned== As a step in making peace with Moriori, I am deleting all of my references to him from both my user talk page and YOURS. You're not being vandalized, so don't be alarmed. Felix Frederick Bruyns 01:30, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Unremitting...

9/11_Bush_Administration_complicity_theory was recently unprotected, and blanked again by Carbonite:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=9/11_Bush_Administration_complicity_theory&action=history

What action would you suggest? Kevin Baas^{talk: new} 01:31, September 6, 2005 (UTC)

Please note that the blanking was actually re-directing. All page history is intact. Carbonite | Talk 02:42, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Ofcourse all page-history is intact. That's what happens when you blank a page. And sure, you put one line on it, whetehr it was "hello world" or "#redirect ..." it certainly was not a page move and didnt' really redirect to anything except the page that got you there in the first place, which is of even less value than "hello world". Please note, "9/11 conspiracy theories" is the referring page. Blanking would have been less obstructive. Kevin Baas^{talk: new} 02:47, September 6, 2005 (UTC)

I was making it clear that the page was not "deleted" as you claimed several times. A deletion would have made all history unavailable to any user except for admins. As for the double-redirect, it was fixed a while ago. No articles link to 9/11_Bush_Administration_complicity_theory. See Special:Whatlinkshere/9/11_Bush_Administration_complicity_theory. The only way a user will end up there is if they type it into the search box. Carbonite | Talk 03:59, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Un-Block condition

you said: "provided that you do not edit any of the relevant pages" would it therefore be a problem if i continued to try to get carbonite/jayjg/raul to discuss this at Talk:9/11_Bush_Administration_complicity_theory, as I have been trying to do for some time now? Kevin Baas^{talk: new} 02:13, September 6, 2005 (UTC)

Also 9/11 conspiracy theories, which I have not recently edited, but was indirectly involved via linkage, is that included? specifically, i would like to take part in a discussion there.

Also, regarding that comment, I'm assuming it only applies for 24 hours, as the ban did, and if not, i would prefer going with my original predisposition, and exercise my right to decline the leniancy. Kevin Baas^{talk: new} 02:38, September 6, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi Flcelloguy:
Thanks for strong support and comments in my recent RFB nomination. I'm now WP's newest bureaucrat. :) =Nichalp «Talk»= 18:59, September 6, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks 2

Thank you for taking the time to review my case, i had to spend 2 and a half hours finding out how i might be able to get back on wikipedia, i'm sorry for the harsh words in which i presented my case, but, i was very frustrated how sth. like that could happen.
But i am glad that Wikipedia is indeed a place which i took it for, a place for the people who want to help and are in good faith.
Thanks! --Larzan 13:26, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

Email

I noticed you don't have the facility set up for people to email you. It's generally good for an admin to be emailable...if you want a gmail account to use specifically for Wikipedia, email me and I will send you an invite. Guettarda 22:20, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

To tell you the truth, I'm not entirely sure of the advantage to an admin - I suspect that a blocked user could still email you to appeal a block, but I'm not certain if that's the case - I could block you and we could see if the facility works :) Mostly though, it allows access to the super-secret back-channels that the admin cabal use (or so I assume - I'm still waiting on my invited to the cabal...although, of course, I would have to say so ever if I had been). Basically I wanted to ask you a question "off screen" recently...public discourse is admirable, but not always wise. Guettarda 22:30, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Email function is necessary if someone wants to clarify something and not use the normal wikipedia channels. The disadvantage of using the wikipedia channels is that nothing is really 'deleted', admins can always see the deleted history. Another point is the fact that if you block a user, the facility enables him to contact you and sort it out. I've had this experience once, and I explained the person my reasons for blocking him. He accepted the decision and hasn't caused trouble in WP ever since. =Nichalp «Talk»= 06:32, September 7, 2005 (UTC)

>|<Rogue Bureaucrat>|<. I solemly swear I'm up to no good (clue If you're guessing) =Nichalp «Talk»= 06:32, September 7, 2005 (UTC)

Seems like I somehow missed your reply to me. As for the name - you wouldn't be the first to have an address like that, but why not flcelloguy@ - keep it simple, so if you choose to use that address to subscribed to the mailing list, people would know who you are right away. Guettarda 11:31, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

WP:MIND

When will round three of WP:MIND start?--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91($ |-| r 3 $ |-| t |-|) 16:27, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

Thankies!

Just a thanks for de-vandalising my user page.  :) Bushytails 23:03, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

Biff Rose Protection

Still having a good deal of trouble. Willmcw reverts any change I make. He asked me not to remove anything from the temp Biff Rose page. I agreed. I went to add some information, and saw that things that I had added, as well as those of another user, were removed. It is this double standard for which I think that willmcw should be removed form any editing in the least on the rose spot. I understand that everyone thinks he is a great editor, but when I've done what he asked, he continues to behave in any fashion he sees fit.

On to Sojmabi Pinola. This man is an admitted fan of Rose. No problem there, I think I even things out as an admitted critic of Rose. But... he also promotes Rose on his own website, and this is causing more problems at the temp Biff Rose page. He too reverts every addition I make, and erases quotes that Biff Rose himself puts up on his website, claiming I don't understand the intention of the quote. This could go on forever. I think there needs to be some kind of mediation, and agreement between willmcw and Sojambi Pinola to stop changing everything I post on the site about Rose. I have made an effort to stop changing everything they say, so that there can be a greater accumulation of all things rose. It seems he was pretty interesting early on, but clearly something changed, as his lyrcs become darker, angrier, and very anti semitic, he refers to any jewish person in his music biz as hook nosed, calls them kikes and jooz. I AM NOT MAKING THIS UP> he posts on his websites about them. PLease keep the page frozen until Willmcw and Sojambi Pinola stop reverting all edits not by them. Sojambi Pinola accuses every person that isn't him or willmcw to be a sock puppet of me. This is ridiculous. There has to be some kind of supervision. I need help in this. But in editing, there must be a cohesive read of the article. so there is that to keep in mind, with my most recent edits, as I realized I had to address the issues and the lack of clarity that Sojambi Pinola was afflicting the piece withJonah Ayers 07:37, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Here is a recent "improvement" to the article by Jonah Ayers. Please judge for yourself. [[1]]. - Sojambi Pinola 00:30, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

Rose page has been unprotected. It needs to be protected. There is no consensus on the temp page. PLEASE REVERT TO PROTECTION!!!!!!!!!!216.175.113.48 02:25, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

Can you help with a page layout question?

Hi there, me again, still a relative newbie. I'm working on Girl along with many others as the current COTW, and I can't get the pictures and whitespace to display the way I'd like. The last edits I made put one picture up front right after the lead paragraph, and it's hanging out on the righthand side of the space with the Contents box (autogenerated) on the lefthand side, which I'm happy with... but I don't like the way the Etymology section title isn't starting all the way over on the lefthand side. I know that I can use <br style="clear:both" /> to make the new section heading start on the lefthand side, but when I do that, the picture pops up above the Contents box. Can you suggest a solution? Do I need to make a template to display the picture, or something? Or should I just stop obsessing about the white space? :-) Mamawrites 08:13, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Nevermind... I figured it out, with a tip from Janke about __TOC__. Mamawrites 22:19, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

INHERITANCE TAX (UNITED KINGDOM)

Thank you for your welcome message. I've just written my first article - an almost complete rewrite of Inheritance Tax (United Kingdom). I thought it might be useful if an experienced Wikipedian had a look at it to see if my approach is more-or-less right. Obviously I vouch for the actual content. AndyJones 20:32, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Cool. Thank you for your help on this.AndyJones 01:28, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

Adminship (and your article)

I must thank you profusely for your support on my RfA. I am honored to receive the adminship tools, and promise to use them wisely. I was surprised at the near-unanimous support for it; thank you for voting for me. Also, thank you for all you do on Signpost- I appreciate the help that you've given me in recent weeks.

By the way, regarding the article you were going to write, Love Virus = MARMOT, for what it's worth. This has been confirmed. And Signpost should be on time this week, my internet's back up. Turns out it was user-error :) Ral315 03:33, September 11, 2005 (UTC)

Biff Rose

A person close to Willmcw unprotected the Biff Rose page before anyone got a good mix of the man down. Can you help so we can iron out our differences- by the talk page, and my posts to you, it should be clear that there has not been enough movement in the right direction. PLease protect before we get lost in the onslaught all over again.Jonah Ayers 03:36, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

I think the editing Tony Sidaway did to the Biff Rose article was great. And I say that even though he took out most of what I wrote. Simple, educational, and very NPOV. Plus, we were really at a standstill, and he supplied fresh blood and fresh perspective. I ask only that if you do freeze the page again at some point, you revert to an administrator's last edit beforehand, rather than leaving the page in a potentially controversial, vandalized, POV or libelous state. Thank you. - Sojambi Pinola 22:16, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

I appreciate your comments on my page; thank you.

I do believe I have made an effort to be civil, and I will continue to do so. I do not feel my efforts are reciprocated. Jonah Ayers has wiped your recent comments off of his talk page, along with evidence of his bullying. Thought you might want to know. [2]. He also consistently adds POV comments without discussing them, makes consistent efforts to put administrator WillMcW in a poor light, may be sockpuppetting as user:216.175.119.92 and generally acts in a bullying manner. It is surprising to me that you continue to see these as "disagreements," or "edit wars" rather than a guy who is abusing Wikipedia. Please take another look at the tenor of his contributions before freezing any pages in a form that he has written. [3] Thank you. - Sojambi Pinola 07:38, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

What's a good tag for...

...accounts which seem to have been made for the purposes of impersonation? --HappyCamper 13:44, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

Re. the Portal story

I wrote an article on the portal namespace in the August 29 issue. Ral315 14:19, September 11, 2005 (UTC)

That sounds like a GREAT idea. But that's an idea we should develop, not rush into this week's issue. And it perhaps should be closer to the elections, so that the last part is within a week or two of the start of voting. I'll write more later, but, seriously, that's a great idea. Ral315 15:02, September 11, 2005 (UTC)

Bmicomp's RfA

Well, my RfA has not quite completed yet, but either way, I'd like to thank you for your vote and your support, regardless of the outcome. -- BMIComp (talk, HOWS MY DRIVING) 18:22, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

My RFA

Thank you very kindly for your support for my nomination. I promise your trust will not be misplaced; I may occasionally be slightly buzzed with power, but never drunk. ;) · Katefan0^(scribble) 22:34, September 12, 2005 (UTC)

Heads up: minor edits on your paper to update it

Heads up: minor edits on your paper to update it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2005-09-12/Features_and_admins&diff=23135157&oldid=23133804

Hoping that meets with the approval of editor, wub, and assistant-editor, Flcelloguy.

--GordonWattsDotCom 01:28, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

• FYI, Ral315 reverted my edit here and gave this commentary: "revert; Signpost is not a soapbox to gauge public opinion." *I replied to him along these lines:

• • I saw your revert on the paper:

(diff) (hist) . . Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2005-09-12/Features and admins; 01:28 . . Ral315 (Talk) (revert; Signpost is not a soapbox to gauge public opinion.)

I did not post to estimate or measure or gauge public opinion:

Conversely, an editor myself, I posted to update the news. (Further, I could care less to estimate the public opinion; rather, it is important to educate readers so they can be an educated voting public.)

I respect your opinion, but you're only a 15-year old high-school sophomore, and I'm a 39-year old veteran, even to the point of being an old geezer. Why don't you run it by the editors before you revert -unless you can justify keeping the public in the dark; besides, I did not advocate or promote anything: I just reported on the news, about which I am expert.

--GordonWattsDotCom 01:35, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

In all fairness, I want to let you know I'm going to notify the editors about you, so you won't feel I'm talking behind your back. It's their paper, after all, and they can determine these matters.--GordonWattsDotCom 01:40, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

--GordonWattsDotCom 01:43, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

Mind Benders

FYR, a user solved the unsolved question of last round. Deryck C. 08:39, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

Mind Benders

The new questions are moved to the page you designated me to move to (similar to the previous 2 question pages) Deryck C. 09:01, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Nice articles in The Signpost this week, I appreciate the work from you and everyone else during my hiatus. --Michael Snow 22:42, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

My sig

Yeeeah... I hope it doesn't make me seem like I'm not the evil person I am. :) I just thought I'd try something new. Now your name on the other hand... I've been meaning to ask you, does it refer to the state of Florida and a big string instrument, or to a sexual practice that kind of sounds like your name? Or both? Cheers. --Lord Voldemort ^{(Dark Mark)} 21:42, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Well, if you just read your name kind of drunk, you can easily get fellatio. Well, you might not get fellatio, but you may read it as fellatio. Or is my mind just too deep in that proverbial gutter? --Lord Voldemort ^{(Dark Mark)} 21:49, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

ArbCom series

Question: Are you sure that all candidates will have submitted their name by the November 14 article? Even if we have two articles on candidates, we shouldn't write either until all of the candidates have submitted their filings- I think we should do candidates alphabetically, with no exceptions.

Also, I'm working on a few other things, that I'll post on the planning page. Ral315 22:17, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

I'd be happy to let you write as many as you want- all of them if you prefer- I'm very impressed by the first article. I disagree with all the bolding, because the titles will be links anyway (and since the page would link to itself, it would turn bold anyway. Also, I think we should remove the "next week" thing, and put a larger, more visible notice at the bottom of each article. These changes allow us to use a single, transcluded template, rather than having to copy text into the article or create more than one template.

Regarding the link to the 2004 ArbCom elections, do you think, rather than linking to the December ones, we should also note the July 2004 elections? (A few users on ArbCom were elected in July and have not ran since...)

I really look forward to this series, and thanks for all the work you've done (and, truly, for the thought of doing such a comprehensive series. I shall nominate you for a Pulitzer Prize upon the completion of the series. Ral315 04:43, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

Notification Bot

I have not fully implemented as it is still in testing phases. --AllyUnion (talk) 03:08, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Furthermore using the '#' is for commentation of your cron file. It is not necessary to have it. --AllyUnion (talk) 03:10, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

The bot is in operation, but is still in testing phases. Your one time message did not get sent, as the bot was not in operation at the time you wanted to send out that message. --AllyUnion (talk) 11:02, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Mind Benders

Hi, Flcelloguy,

I'd like to ask you to put my name in the list for the Mind Benders notifications.

Thanks,

Milena 19:46, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

WP:MIND 22:07, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Challenge yourself, and get ready to think!

Hello! Thank you for participating in Round Two of the Wikipedia:Mind Benders! The round will officially close on Friday, September 16, and round three (which is complete) will be open in the immediate days after that. A notice will be sent to you at least 48 hours before round three is set to open, to insure fairness. Round three offers 11 new exciting questions, this time written by Deryck C.. Please be sure to join in the fun! Also, congratulations to Riffsyphon1024 for winning our logo competition! Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 20:30, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Note: This message has been sent by Flcelloguy using the NotificationBot (thanks to AllyUnion for designing such a great bot!). If you do not wish to receive further messages regarding WP:MIND, please contact Flcelloguy. If there are any problems with the bot, please alert AllyUnion. Thanks!

Automatic notification done by NotificationBot ((talk). Any bugs or errors, please report to bot owner. --NotificationBot 22:07, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

NotificationBot

Notification Bot has been disabled. I will need to rewrite the script behind it. --AllyUnion (talk) 04:33, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

user:60.224.179.68

Thanks for reverting user:60.224.179.68's vandalism to my userpage. That IP was adding hoax allegations of child porn etc. to various pages, and seems to have resented that I has reverted him. He is now blocked. Thue | talk 20:03, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

user:Arrigo equals user:217.140.193.123

Hi Flcelloguy,

Below is the 3RR I posted on WP:AN/3RR

I see you volunteer for mediator, well, here's a good one for you this "split personality" user user:Arrigo == user:217.140.193.123 is making things quite difficult here at wikipedia, PLEASE, PLEASE have a look at User talk:Francis Schonken/Arrigo disruption and possibly also at User_talk:Scimitar#Hi_Scimitar.2C.

Again today he also was mingling in a discussion with his two personalities at talk:Victoria, Princess Royal and Empress Frederick, taking seemingly different stances with each of the splits of his personality...

I haven't posted the RfC preparation now at User talk:Francis Schonken/Arrigo disruption on RfC yet, well, one needs two "certifying" users, doesn't one. So here's a choice for you (if you haven't blocked 217.140.193.123 yet, which would also block Arrigo): could you please either:

• Negotiate with Arrigo, that he stops using his 217.140.193.123 "alias" so disruptingly

-either-

• "certify" the RfC proposal at User talk:Francis Schonken/Arrigo disruption

That would be a great help!

AN/3RR post:

---

Three revert rule violation on Victoria of the United Kingdom (disambiguation) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) and Princess Victoria of the United Kingdom (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Arrigo (talk · contribs) == 217.140.193.123 (talk · contribs):

NB: user:Arrigo == user:217.140.193.123, see, for instance, this and this

• Previous version reverted to:
• 1st revert: 18:53, 17 September 2005 and 19:25, 17 September 2005
• 2nd revert: 19:27, 17 September 2005 and 19:48, 17 September 2005
• 3rd revert: 19:43, 17 September 2005
• 4th revert: [DiffLink Time]

---

--Francis Schonken 21:31, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

For your information: User Francis Schonken created today a new disambig page at Victoria of the United Kingdom (disambiguation) and only a bit later he realized that there already exists another, essentially similar old disambig page Princess Victoria of the United Kingdom. When realizing that, Schonken started to fight against our GDFL terms, Schonken obviously wants to save his own creation and instead tries to have the old page merged into his creature (which will equal cut-and-paste move and will destroy the old page's edit history). I find his such conduct highly disruptive. As he is fighting against GDFL instructions, he probably should be blocked. Arrigo 23:09, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

Well, have you checked this item? Arrigo 00:10, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

Mediation Francis - Arrigo

Hi Flcelloguy, thanks for your offer to mediate. I accept it with pleasure. Note, however, I'm currently re-filing a 3RR, while reverts by Arrigo continue on both pages mentioned above. I hope I get it right this time. --Francis Schonken 00:48, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your note on my page. However, Arrigo appears to have been blocked now by another sysop, as a result of my second 3RR request. So maybe it's wiser not to reply to your question for the time being, applying discretion as long as Arrigo is not in the position to take part in the talks. --Francis Schonken 08:19, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

The charter is here. (Relating to Esperanza)

Hello Flcelloguy, the Charter for Esperanza is up. Take a looksie :) Redwolf24 (talk) 02:49, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

Notification Bot is back

The current cron job you have scheduled is for the bot to run every 13th of the month at 22:06 (UTC). Should you want the message to be sent another time, please make certain you reschedule the job accordingly. --AllyUnion (talk) 03:49, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

Proximity Effect

Thank you thank you! I didn't make a disambig page: there were only two topics so I did a hybrid: moved Proximity Effect to Proximity Effect (comic), made Proximity Effect the physics stub and added a note at the top with a link to the comic page. Hopefully that is acceptable? I fixed all the links to Proximity Effect (excluding my stuffs and a user page) and wrote a pathetic little stub. Now I am Desperate for a physicist. I know almost as little about physics as I do about comics. You suggested Peer Review, but that seems a little premature since I'm such a clueless idjit and the article is still stubby, so I'm thinking begging on Pages needing attention might be the next step? Please take a look at the current Proximity Effect and advise. And thank you again!!!

• bah had to add disambig anyway: the bands are nn, but there is an album by a noteable band. Ignore the "is this acceptable" above - thnx!

Sojambi Pinola

I quoted Sojambi Pinola aka Steve Espinola- a name he claims on wikipedia .. in a talk page, from another website, which is the property of the subject of the article we are discussing. But Sojambi. Steve has posted parts of another email address trying to link that person to me.. I think this is uncalled for an abherrent behavior. Could you look into it? Thanks.Jonah Ayers 23:28, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

Arrigo continues disruptive behaviour after block

Here's a piece of the text I just wrote on Talk:Victoria of the United Kingdom (disambiguation):

Moving a redirect page unneccesarily obfuscates its history. So Arrigo still today occupied in moving Victoria of Saxe-Coburg (a redirect page!) to Victoria von Saxe-Coburg (still a redirect page!) to Victoria von Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeld (still a redirect page!), somewhere along the line in an edit history noting "undoing a cut-and-paste move" (yeah, sure), littering the place with double redirects (as of writing this still not cleaned up, notwithstanding an invitation to do that [4]) is nowhere a "positive asset" to wikipedia's GFDL policy: it makes unclear whether the page he moved it to was just created today, or was a redirect page existing on wikipedia for ages, without anyone having changed it. It also obfuscates the true history of the "Victoria of Saxe-Coburg" page (now seemingly created "today"). You need to be really hard core to trace its history back over two page moves to "von" "Saalfeld". This anti-GFDL triple page move in itself is IMHO enough to get Arrigo banned again. --Francis Schonken 23:33, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't know how to handle this. I wished I knew how to handle this, but I don't. --Francis Schonken 23:49, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

Your question

It's not between "me" and "Arrigo". Its between "Arrigo" and the "wikipedia community".

That being said, I'm prepared to put some effort in getting this problem between Arrigo and the wikipedia community solved. Under whatever conditions. That is, as long as I believe in the method being offered leading to a solution.

So, if it leads to a solution, no problem, everything said during mediation will be kept there, unless mediation was only a delay mechanism for not getting the problem solved. If the problem does not get solved in this way, everything said is under GFDL, and can be used in whatever way most fit to get to a solution of the issue.

I don't know whether that's clear, but that's *exactly* how it is for me. --Francis Schonken 00:05, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

User:Mike Garcia death threats to me and 3RR violation

Hi Flcelloguy, just writing to signal that Mike Garcia has been making death threats to me at Hypnotize, as well as violating the 3RR rule a startling 7 times (versus 4 different users) in 1.5 hours and vandalizing User:Pasboudin. He hasn't been blocked yet as of this moment, could you please check my 3RR complaint to see if it's valid? Pasboudin 02:44, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Please don't block me. He has been vandalizing the Hypnotize page again. I've been asking me to leave since his attitude on the System of a Down-related articles has grown. And for you, Pasboudin: I am not trying to say I'm better than you, I am not trying to say you suck and I am not trying to say you're stupid. -- Mike Garcia | talk 02:47, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your continued efforts to help resolve the System of a Down article disputes. :) Pasboudin 22:20, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

WP:MIND 06:19, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Hello, Flcelloguy/Archive03! This message is to inform you that round three of Wikipedia Mind Benders will open on Wednesday, September 21, at approximately 22:00 UTC. While the opening time may vary by two or three hours, the round will open no earlier than 22:00 UTC. In addition, there are several rule changes, which will be detailed when the round opens. Everyone who answers a question correctly will receive points, but speed does give some extra points! Round three offers 11 new exciting and mind-bogglind questions, written by Deryck C.. These promise to be lots of fun! We sincerely hope you join us.

Also, congratulations to ROYGBIV for winning round two; it was an extremely close game, with the runner-up, Spondoolicks, only two points behind. Let's keep round three competitive! Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk 22:31, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

Note: This message has been sent by Flcelloguy using the NotificationBot (thanks to AllyUnion for designing such a great bot!). If you do not wish to receive further messages regarding WP:MIND, please contact Flcelloguy. If there are any problems with the bot, please alert AllyUnion. Thanks!

Automatic notification done by NotificationBot ((talk). Any bugs or errors, please report to bot owner. --NotificationBot 06:19, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Speed counts, but the thing opens at 3:00 am my time :( =Nichalp «Talk»= 06:22, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Spammed user page

I just recieved 3 copies of the announcement for mind benders - you may want to have a look at the bot :). Also, could you please place your "spam"/"ads" on my page designated for such announcements (i.e. here)? – ABCD✉ 06:27, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

That happened on my page too, as it has done on yours. I was meant to get on to you the last time, but could you just remove me from this bot, ie not send me more messages? It's good work but it is a bit spam-like. Thanks. Cormaggio ^@ 08:56, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for getting back - absolutely no problem, by the way. Cormaggio ^@ 20:56, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

WP:MIND

In question 2 of Round 2, you've given a point to Keith D for cleverness. In case you haven't noticed, I had given the same answer before him. --May the Force be with you! Shreshth91($ |-| r 3 $ |-| t |-|) 12:23, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks so much for the barnstar! And you know, that screencap is the first time I've seen the orange bar of death in a long, long time! (I have mine reset to be blue.) -- Essjay · Talk 20:53, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

The last time I'm spamming you all with Esperanza stuff

Hello Flcelloguy. As you may or may not know, there have been some troubles with Esperanza. So now, as a last ditch to save the community, please vote at Wikipedia:Esperanza/Reform on all neccisary polls. P.S. I'm very sorry for spamming you all with these messages, and this will be the last time. I recommend putting ESP on your watchlist. Cheers and please look at that, let's stop the civil war then. Redwolf24 (talk) 02:44, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

So, I'm starting to feel like I might be being had...

... is there any possibility that the original leader of Esp and the newly self-appointed pro tempore are sockpuppets, and the whole thing is just a diversion? See the edit summary of this entry. Mamawrites 10:42, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

No. Redwolf24 is not a sockpuppet of JCarriker. He's a highschooler from Washington State. -- Essjay · Talk 14:40, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

OK, even if I take your word for it, I'm starting to wonder if JCarriker is intentionally engaging in farcical diversions from real editing. I hope not; I want to believe his intentions are good. Perhaps I don't know enough about his history which led him to create Esperanza in the first place. Mamawrites 16:55, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

Hah, I was right! User:Paul August called it on the Wikipedia Talk:Esperanza page... definitely farcical intentions behind some of this. I even got a "cool as a cucumber" award from User:Redwolf24. Were you not answering because you knew about the inside joke? Mamawrites 11:16, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

PLEASE HELP AT BIFF ROSE

There is a revert war going on. Anytime someone writes about Rose's anti smeticism, it is immediately reverted. Rose posts racist and anti semitic rants on his website, and the lyrics of his later records are rife with them. Willmcw and Sojmabi Pinola seem ot be working in tandem with Rose4- Pinoila is actually directly linked, and mentioned by name on many of Rose's websites, in posts, and in songs. I think the article should be frozen for the time being until a true consensus can be arrived at.Jonah Ayers 01:19, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

All well and good, except that a detailed study of Mr. Ayer's contributions [[5]] will show that it is he and a user called 216.175.112.9 [6] who are being confrontational and making trouble. Jonah deletes others' talk page comments[[7]], and erases the history from his own talk page [[8]]. He titles his changes "Not an ally anymore," etc. I think you will find that everyone else contributing to the article is doing their best to be civil in the face of extreme goading and hostility from these users. I don't know how to explain this without pointing a finger, but I wish I could. I am content to continue trying to work with Mr. Ayers, but it is difficult when he keeps running around to other administrators' talk pages acting like he is being victimized, when that is certainly not the case.

If administrators try to help him and he doesn't like their attempts, he then turns on them. Here is the most recent example of this: part one: [[9]] and, after the guy initially tried to side with Jonah, part two: [[10]].

Here's a link to the talk page. [[11]]

I think user:Marcuse nailed what's going on that that page pretty well:

"I[t] seems like specific editors are deleting sentences pretty much at random in order to get other editors to break the 3 revert rule and get blocked. I don't think the content of the article has anything to do with it. Is there an official way to deal with this? Marcuse 11:25, 23 September 2005 (UTC) "

- Sojambi Pinola 17:21, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

• I'd like to chime in with one more thing here. The edits Jonah Ayers keeps reverting are not regarding anti-semitism or racism of Biff Rose, in fact those edits have remained stable for the most part. What he keep deleting is basically factual info from the article that has noting to do with the issues Ayers raises. See, for example Tony's comment on the talk page. I really think that this editor is simply out to cause trouble and portray himself as some kind of victim, wasting everyone's time, including yours. Marcuse 18:48, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

Mind benders

Thanks for the note. I noticed at approx 11:00 hrs my time (+5:30), the max no of wikipedians are on IRC. Perhaps that can be the base time? I notice Zscout (California, USA) and Evil Monkey (New Zealand) both present. =Nichalp «Talk»= 13:16, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

Request for chart

Thank you for the compliment! As for a chart for you; Ok, but it might be a few days. Currently trying to wrap something up here at my desk and head home for the day. Then, I'm gone for the weekend and may not edit again until Monday. So, if you don't see it for a few days please do not be surprised. If you don't get it to you by Tuesday give me a nudge. You're actually the first person to ask me for a chart who was not an admin nominee, so I don't mind. I just hope I don't get requests from dozens of people :-) --Durin 21:47, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

I've done the chart for you. You can view it at Image:Flcelloguy-edits.gif. I won't be placing it on my contributions subpage so please feel free to delete it whenever you're done with it or keep it if you want.

Some comments:

• Ok, you need therapy. 9 days since 5/14/2005 (your first edit) when you haven't edited on Wikipedia? You're a serious wikiholic. You need help, and FAST! :-)
• Average of ~32 edits per day is the highest average I've seen in the prior 12 charts that I've done, by far. Wow!
• I wish my chart looked as consistent as yours :-) Mine's pretty good, but the total edits line wavers more than yours, and my average is lower than yours. In fact, the only way in which I exceed you is that your highest edit count on a single day is 135. I've got 4 days over that (highest at 159). Still, I'm envious and not worth of your wikiness ;-)
• You use edit summaries 97% of the time, and 97.6% of the time in the last 500 edits. Bravo!

All the best, --Durin 21:06, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Request to remove me from Bot List

Could you remove me from the bot that automatically sends news updates to users. I don't really need a false positive created on my user talk page by the bot notifying me about every new contest. All I did was make the logo (which I hope you like), however I won't be contributing to the questions. Thank you. -- Riffsyphon1024 23:51, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

Jack Sarfatti

I've been trying to get him to discuss his objections to my rewrite of Jack Sarfatti (you might already know that I rewrote this article during a VfD and the result was to keep the modified version), but he's apparently too upset to listen to reason, and I might need some help until he calms down. He keeps reverting the 'Vfd approved version' (as it were) to his own highly biased version, and now he has placed this threat on my user talk page. What do you think? ---CH (talk) 00:14, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

On Sep 23, 2005, at 5:39 PM, Jack Sarfatti (sarfatti@pacbell.net) wrote to Tony Smith physicist/attorney:

OK Tony they locked me out. I will inquire with the Attorney General of Florida on Monday and if Wiki is incorporated there I fill file a formal complaint that, if successful, can result in the loss of their tax exemption with the IRS.

Cleanup taskforce

Hi, in case you did not see it, I have added a task to your desk. Andreww 05:16, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

Image Tagging Image:WSHS.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:WSHS.jpg. I notice it currently doesn't have an image copyright tag, so its copyright status is therefore unclear. Please add a tag to let us know its copyright status. (If you created/took the picture then you can use {{gfdl}} to release it under the GFDL. If you can claim fair use use {{fairuse}}.) If you don't know what any of this means, just let me know on the image description page where you got the images and I'll tag them for you. Otherwise, see Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use. If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have tagged them, too. Note that any unsourced and untagged imaged will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thanks so much. --Secretlondon 13:17, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

Q9 at WP:MIND

Yes, you're correct. What a good coder in both maths and compu. Deryck C. 14:48, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

lolhax

Maybe I should have left it. I've got 18 archives, starting at June 01, so yeah I get my fair share of em. You wanna handle em? ; - ) Redwolf24 (talk) 00:15, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Spoo!

Spoo has just been featured! Thanks for your support! --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 05:13, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Trading User Pages

Have just done and edited your user page, think it all works ok, go ahead with yours :D Alf ^melmac 14:45, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

There are lots of things that you have improved, not sure about the green though... Excellent job, there. Now I wish I'd had the inpsiration to be as daring with yours. Alf ^melmac 14:58, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

OK, I've done version two. Split up sections as you did mine, 'advertiboxed' the links. Couldn't force myself to use any of the web colours as a backgound against the changes though ; ) Alf ^melmac 23:49, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

This week's Signpost installment.

Your ArbCom piece is a bit long, so what do you think about adding sub-headings in a few places, to split it up a bit? Let me know what you think (it was a great piece overall, though)

Also, just wanted to thank you for the Wikipedia Signpost reference in my sig that I so crudely stole from you :) I wish I had thought about it earlier! Ral315 W_S 17:50, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

I like it!

I like the enew page :) Redwolf24 (talk) 23:56, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Jack Sarfatti

Hi, a few days ago you locked this article because of a content dispute between myself (and some other users) and User:JackSarfatti, User:Jackhorner and some others (possibly socks for Jack Sarfatti, the person, not that I much care about that).

I've tried and tried and TRIED to get first JackSarfatti (now an indefinitely blocked user) and then Jackhorner to discuss Sarfatti's objections on the talk page of the article. After much effort I managed to get JS(?) to confine his comments to that page, but I am finding it impossible to engage him in anything approaching rational discussion. I must have tried four times simply to teach him to properly sign, date and indent his comments on the talk page, but he can't even seem to learn to do that. In addition to refusing to distinguish his own comments from those of other users, he is pasting in emails in a manner which completely obscures who said what. This formatting issue is one reason why I find it essentially impossible to try to continue talking to him. I really can't discuss anything with anyone who seems to go out of his way to utterly confuse who said what when, especially when one of his major complaints is that I allegedly misrepresented who said or did what, or whatever. If you look at the Talk:Jack_Sarfatti talk page, I think it will be obvious what I mean. I would have been willing to ask for mediation or whatever (in fact I tried to suggest that to Sarfatti earlier in this dispute), but at this point I have to doubt that Jackhorner is capable of holding even a mediated discussion.

Anyway, the reason I am writing to you is that one of Jackhorner's principle complaints since the article was locked seems to be that I have not corrected one or two factual errors (noted in the talk page, if you can figure out what Jackhorner is trying to say). Of course, since the article has been locked, I cannot do that, and I tried several times to explain this to him on the talk page, but he just can't seem to take in anything I say. I'm ready to give up. It seems unfortunate to me that my attempt to get JS to discuss his objections to my edits, rather than simply reverting the article to his own version (which I thought was highly non-NPOV), has led to such a mess, but unless you can suggest a better alternative, I can only ask you to unlock the article so he can change the article to whatever he likes. For all I care, you can lock the page to his version.

---Disgusted with the whole affair, but hoping you can help me extricate myself from it, CH (talk) 02:15, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

Yes, please unlock the page and do everything you can to tell User:Jackhorner that he can make whatever changes he wants to that article. He's too obnoxious for me to deal with and I don't care anymore. I want nothing more to do with this, but he keeps harrassing me because he can't revert the article to his 'approved version' while it is locked. TIA---CH (talk) 21:03, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

Journalist's RFA

Thanks

I want to thank you very much for your vote on my RFA. Greatly apperciated, I owe you one! Journalist | huh? 30 April 2024

Shauri's RFA

You may want to vote here now that Shauri has answered the standard questions. I would urge an oppose vote per Grace Note. freestylefrappe 21:11, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

Durin has answered the questions, run, go, vote, now, comma, Redwolf24 (talk) 23:34, 26 September 2005 (UTC)