User talk:Hersfold/Archive 16 (April 2008)

← Previous archive - Archive 16 (April 2008) - Next archive →

This page contains discussions dated during the month of April 2008 from User talk:Hersfold. Please direct all current discussions there. Thank you.

---

April 1 - 8

re:ani header

Hi, sorry about that, and same to you. - Bobet 00:35, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

ur april foolz

o hai ummm u seem 2 hav mayd sum unkunstructiv chaynges 2 sum yooserpayges. if u hav 2 expuriment u kan yoose teh sandboxx. plz stop thiz tomfoolery at wunce or i r going 2 blox u. kthx. GlassCobra 03:30, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Hai o sry I stopz now. Hapi Aprl Foolz. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 03:34, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Your April Fool

For the hell of it I put it on my userspace. That ok with you? Rgoodermote  12:02, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Fine by me. Just make sure to take it down at the end of the day - such things don't normally go over too well. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 15:17, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I remember the incident with User:Certified.Gangsta. I see he still has it up to. Rgoodermote  15:20, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Block evasion

An IP user you blocked is now editing from a different IP. Would a soft block of 70.108.xxx.xxx (w/account creation) be too extensive? This is the third IP in two days this person has been disruptively editing from (the first was 70.108.82.109). —Hello, Control ^{Hello, Tony} 18:25, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

This is linked to the protection request. If you won't block the range, please semi the page.Kww (talk) 18:38, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm semi-ing the page. I'd rather not do a rangeblock on that big a range if we can avoid it - that resolves to Verizon's network, and would affect a ton of people. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 18:41, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Pls unlock the page. Id like to respond 2 User_talk:Golbez. HC was allowed to so i should be.
2nd, HC is not w/o fault. He is repeatedly following my comments. Anywhere I type soubrette asking 4 help he edits with [redacted]; like here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3ACassie_%28singer%29&diff=202601532&oldid=202600689 .
Let he who is w/o sin cast the 1st stone. 70.108.133.81 (talk) 18:49, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

No. You're being disruptive, and have been through multiple IP addresses. You're welcome to take this up with the users on their talk pages, however if you continue to harass them as well, you will be blocked again. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 18:51, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Parser Function?

Hi, somewhat random question. I see from here that you understand the parser function. Could you help me when you have a moment with Template:WikiProject Museums? It's a hacked together mess, and I can say that because I was the one who did most of it. We tried to fix it but it's still returning 'stub' for both rather than the appropriate class, see Talk:Staten Island Children's Museum, for example. Thanks! TRAVELLINGCARI^{My story}_{Tell me yours} 20:35, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Sure, I can take a look. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 20:53, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

It's fixed, you guys just had the wrong parameter in there. [1] Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 20:55, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you so much! If you don't mind, I may come back if we try to do anything else complicated and it doesn't work. TRAVELLINGCARI^{My story}_{Tell me yours} 20:58, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

No problem. :-) Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 20:59, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Knew I'd be back. We seem to have an overabundance of italics in the template. If you look at Talk:Lewis H. Latimer House, you'll see what I mean. We tried to fix this, and I thought I had but it doesn't appear to have worked. No rush on this, just figured I'd ask since I know you're good with this. Thanks!TRAVELLINGCARI^{My story}_{Tell me yours} 01:56, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

It's fixed. Sorry it took so long, my internet was being fritzy again. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 03:57, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Ahh your connection is taking lessons from mine? So irritating to try and do research (I'm writing my thesis in between Wiki procrastination) and constantly have my network drop out. Thanks again for your help. It's clear I have no understanding whatsoever f the parser function. Have a good evening, or whatever time it s where you are TRAVELLINGCARI^{My story}_{Tell me yours} 04:41, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Me again! I'd love to promise this is the last question, but that would be a lie. If you look at Category talk:Museums in Adelaide you can see the Australia tag has a note that says since it's a category it doesn't require assessment. Is there a way to do that for the museums template? And short of pestering you every other day, is there anywhere the parser function is explained in clear English, not code? Thanks again for all your help! TRAVELLINGCARI^{My story}_{Tell me yours} 17:55, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Sure, I can get that in a few minutes (in class right now, and I do have to pay some attention). I'll also either find a good explanation or write one myself for you. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 18:04, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

A snack for class, thanks for your help!

Thanks, no worries and no rush. Enjoy class, I'll be in one later. Love the program, but I can't wait to graduate. TRAVELLINGCARI^{My story}_{Tell me yours} 18:20, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok, the template's fixed up. I added a few more things than you asked, but I'll throw in some documentation for you to see what all I did. Check it out: User:Hersfold/Hersfold's Sandbox Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 19:16, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh wow, I'm totally in awe. Thank you *so* much. I don't know how to do it so you still get credit per GFDL but could we move that to Wikipedia:WikiProject Museums/Assessment so the project is aware? We're all learning as we go and I think being aware of the options that we have for the template would be useful. Feel free to say no, since it's your own work. Thank you again! TRAVELLINGCARI^{My story}_{Tell me yours} 20:14, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Alright, I've added a link to the template on the assessment page - that's probably the best way to deal with that, and I tried to make all the parameters as intuitive as possible - You'll see I only listed four different ways to classify a disambiguation page in the documentation, but really there's six, just because nobody ever abbreviates it in quite the same place. I only listed four because the table in the documentation looks ugly enough as it is.

As for the ParserFunction guide you wanted me to write, the actual official help page is on MetaWiki, at m:Help:ParserFunctions. However, this isn't always the easiest thing to understand, so I'll try to write a simpler guide tonight and over the next few days. I'll let you know when it's ready to go. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 00:57, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you so much! That was the guide I found, or a shorter version of it on en.wiki and I got lost part of the way through. I'd really tried to work my way through Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Guide/WikiProject but I got stuck somewhere. I, and the rest of the Museums WikiProject really appreciate your help. No rush on the guide, I know what it's like when school eats you r time. Grad school is doing that to me TRAVELLINGCARI^{My story}_{Tell me yours} 14:19, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Here you go! It's a bit long, but should be a bit easier to understand than the Meta version. Let me know how it is! User:Hersfold/Adopt/AdvancedTemplates Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 21:27, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

(outdent for legibility), just letting you know I haven't forgotten about the info you wrote up, I've just been flat out and plan to read it at the weekend TRAVELLINGCARI^{My story}_{Tell me yours} 15:29, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a Ton!

Thank you for all of your help! Much appreciated! JDGraves (talk) 04:12, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. Glad to help. :-) Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 04:13, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Yep

Yea, in my haste to finally review a block I didn't re-read it. Thanks. MBisanz ^talk 04:50, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

We were wondering on IRC if you intended to say that or not, kinda confused us for a moment. Quite welcome. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 04:53, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I wouldn't have declined unless I agreed with it, but since he emailed me, I decided to look further, and only saw more red flags of bad behavior. And there is just something I have against giving my email willingly to a blocked user, so thats why I reply onwiki. MBisanz ^talk 16:12, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

The reason...

I posted on AIV is because I was reporting vandalism and PA, not SSP. There's no point of jumping through the WikiHoops when a short block is in order for those comments. AgnosticPreachersKid (talk) 05:22, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok, my apologies. He's already been blocked anyway. Sorry about that. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 05:24, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 31st, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 14	31 March 2008	About the Signpost

Wikimania 2009 to be held in Buenos Aires	Sister Projects Interview: Wikisource
WikiWorld: "Hammerspace"	News and notes: 10M articles, $500k donation, milestones
Dispatches: Featured content overview	WikiProject Report: Australia
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 21:07, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

RFA

How long does that page stay up? Due to a very busy schedule. I won't be able to work seriously on that page until later this week. --Sharkface217 21:40, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

The RFA runs for 1 week, starting from when you officially accept the nomination and transclude your candidate page onto the main RFA page. So it's up to you when it actually starts - if you won't be around enough to answer questions until later this week, I would highly recommend not transcluding until then, as you will be bombarded by questions early on, and people will expect answers to them in a timely manner. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 00:19, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Motto of the Day

see here. Enigmaman (talk) 02:14, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Fixed it. You can always do that yourself in the future. ;-) Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 02:21, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey, c'mon. We were just being cautious. Or maybe we didn't even know where the page was to edit. :) I would think it's better to point out the problem and not fix it, than not to point it out at all. Enigmaman (talk) 02:26, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

No problem, it's fine. As you no doubt saw, I also make a note there whenever I mess with the mottos for some reason. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 02:31, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Help Me

Just like on your page where you look on the right hand side and you can see what you have got on your wikipedia area. Chris19910 (talk) 20:34, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I moved it over for you. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 20:41, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks very much has been puzzzling me for the last few days so thought I had better get a more experienced person to help. Thanks for the help Chris19910 (talk) 20:43, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Sure, no problem. :-) Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 20:46, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

My RFA

Just a heads up, I'll be accepting my RFA tomorrow between 6 and 8 PM EST. --Sharkface217 03:15, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok, thanks! Make sure to update the timestamp like I showed you. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 04:10, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Xgmx

Hi. I looked at this page, and it appears this user is using 4.245.73.222 to get around his account block. Could you review this and advise? Thanks. ArcAngel (talk) 14:49, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

It's already been blocked. This user is frequently using IPs for this purpose - if it continues, we may be forced to block the entire range of IP addresses he's using. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 15:47, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

how to delete uploaded images

i see you tagged a few of my images. can you tell me how i can delete them? --Caponofrio (talk) 17:19, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

If you'd like them to be deleted, you can add the code {{db-author}} (which marks the image for speedy deletion) to the image description page. Myself or another administrator will see the tag and remove the images for you. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 17:22, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Unblock of God Save the South

Could you please reconsider your unblock of this user? He had been blocked for less than 8 hrs for edit warring on a featured article that has seen it's fair share of strife. His "participation in discussion" is proposing the most ludicrous change to the article that could possibly be proposed. The only thing this unblock is going to do is infuriate those editors who actually try to work on the article. Baegis (talk) 23:24, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

How is suggesting that we follow MOS:ID which states "Use terminology that subjects use for themselves (self-identification) whenever this is possible. Use terms that a person uses for himself or herself, or terms that a group most commonly uses for itself." --God Save the South (talk) 23:42, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Two editors have already said it is a ridiculous proposal. I am quite sure more will weigh in on that. The only thing you are accomplishing is being a thorn in the side of the KKK article. Baegis (talk) 23:47, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

As it stands only one other editor has had a chance to comment, so perhaps declaring a consensus is a tad premature, Baegis? --God Save the South (talk) 00:04, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

He was blocked for edit warring without discussion. He imposed, upon himself, a topic ban on the article for the remainder of the block, which I am holding him to. So far, he has held to it. I can't tell that he is being particularly uncivil in his discussions, either - in fact, he appears to be remaining quite calm considering how he is being treated. While I also don't agree with the change he is proposing, there's no reason to block him again when he is trying to engage in discussion to reach a consensus. Should that consensus turn out to be against it, I would hope that he would abide by that decision. If he does not, then he will be blocked again. We don't apply blocks simply because User X thinks User Y is wrong - that's what dispute resolution is for. I would direct you to that point: I have no part in this discussion, nor will have any part in it. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 00:11, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Edit conflict: You two can also stop fighting on my talk page now before I block the both of you. Take it to DR or drop it. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 00:11, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Nothing whatsoever can come from this. When someone comes here to push a pro-KKK agenda, unblocking them is an unbelievably bad idea. --B (talk) 04:18, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

FASEB

I'm not sure why you removed all backlinks to Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology. Even if the deleted page was a copyright violation, it is still a notable organisation and redlinks should have persisted until a non-copyvio version was recreated. JFW | T@lk 00:13, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I was requested to do it by User:Rjd0060 - I can undo the edits if you like, but I'd suggest speaking with him first. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 00:17, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I have undone the edits, hoping that you wouldn't mind, but I will contact Rjd0060. JFW | T@lk 00:38, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok, no problem (I really don't care either way). Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 00:40, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

(cross posted) Sorry to the 3 of you for the confusion. Yes, I deleted the article as a complete copyright violation. The links that were removed by Hersfold, was after I had asked him to do it, as my tool wasn't functioning properly. In this specific case, the links did not have to be removed and it may have in fact been best to leave them, to allow for recreation of the article without copyright violations. My apologies for this error. - Rjd0060 (talk) 03:01, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Dear Hersfold, it really makes things more difficult for other editors if you remove redlinks to perfectly valid and important articles (as indicated by the number of wikilinks) simply because they were deleted due to copyvio issues. E.g. the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology was recreated immediately with non-copyvio content. Please take your time to check each case before letting TW loose. Thanks, Сасусlе 02:41, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I did not see the above section. Сасусlе 02:42, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

No problem. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 03:52, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Hiya

Can you check my request to use NP Watcher - itll make my life easier patrolling the new pages. Thanks Fattyjwoods ^{(Push my button)} 03:55, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry I never got around to it - as you can see below, I had quite enough on my hands as it was. Good to see you got approved, though. Best of luck with it. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 18:56, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

No problem - just thought ill ask every single admin because I lost all my patience :D Fattyjwoods ^{(Push my button)} 03:51, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Your Own Article

Thanks for the clarification on the help desk, when I added that response the conversation was unsigned and smashed up with the topic above it, so I thought it was somehow a continuation of Qwanell Mosley discussion. I thought the editor was asking if they could make a more accurate article because they had a relation to the topic because of the formatting problem.--Torchwood Who? (talk) 05:24, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

You've got to be kidding

Calm down, all three of you. A screaming fight isn't going to help the situation further. Come back tomorrow, and discuss this then. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 18:49, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
This comment is so laughable that I'm thinking you must have a sense of humor so beyond mine that I'm incapable of understanding it. You unblock an avowed racist, which means you hold civility as a higher moral authority than keeping a racist off the project. Please explain your humor? Oh, it's not humor, you think racists should remain editing an FA article on a racially explosive topic that uses reliable historical references? Defending racists and being an apologist for them--hope you're proud of what you've done. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 08:18, 6 April 2008 (UTC) I'm sorry, Herfold, that all this is spilling onto your page. I think I will take it upon myself to initiate Dispute Resolution or an RfC after the duration of my block. Some editors have stronger personal feelings to do with this subject than I had anticipated when I began editing it. --God Save the South (talk) 09:23, 6 April 2008 (UTC) I am a little dismayed here Hersfold, you should have discussed this unblock with me before unblocking based on the contributors promise. We can't change the past however, so let's see how this plays out. Rudget (review) 09:55, 6 April 2008 (UTC) Wow, what can of worms :x I'm glad I sticked to my "ok I can't review that kind of edits" policy... Orangemarlin, this is not a question of letting or not letting people we despise edit. That person was blocked for edit warring and agreed to stick to the talk page and discuss. This would not have made much sense to let him sit on the bench for 2 days while the article was in the middle of a major rewamp. I wish you could refrain from calling this unblock "defending racists". (I agree with Rudget that we should have poked him before. Well, it's done now :/ ). -- lucasbfr talk 12:18, 6 April 2008 (UTC) OrangeMarlin, I do hope you at least bothered to read my comment, and the related discussion further up this page, before being so horribly offended by it. You may have noticed that I said things such as "I also don't agree with the change he is proposing" and "We don't apply blocks simply because User X thinks User Y is wrong". The unblock was made to allow a user to openly discuss the matter he had been edit warring over. It was not made because I am racist, and I strongly suggest you retract your comment above in which you accuse me of defending such bigotry. You may have also noticed, had you not flown into a rage, that I am enforcing a topic ban on GStS for the remainder of the block time, which effectively keeps the block in place. He is not to edit the article while he would have otherwise been blocked, and so far has not and has made no indication that he will. We apply edit warring blocks because it is disruptive to have people continually reverting articles back and forth without discussing things. When someone blocked for edit warring wants to discuss things, we try (if past actions don't prevent us from doing so) to assume good faith and allow them to do so. "Edit warring" is not "vandalism," so it is assumed that they were making an honest effort to make a potentially constructive contribution to an article that merits some discussion to determine if it is indeed needed or not. The viewpoint they may hold is somewhat irrelevant; we have over 2 million articles on this project, so chances are there's an article somewhere that even the most racist person alive can edit without offending anyone. If they do choose to edit an article that does put them at the risk of offending someone, then a willingness to discuss it beforehand still helps prevent actually making that offense. It is in the best interests of keeping a neutral point of view that we allow such discussions to take place - even if the change is unnecessary as it was in this case, allowing people from both sides to discuss their viewpoints can help everyone come to a broader consensus on what the article should contain, and better inform people on both sides as to what that consensus actually is. I'm not beyond admitting my own mistakes - as Rudget noted, I should have discussed this with him, something I have made a mistake with in the past. I will never again unblock anyone without trying to contact the blocking admin first. I could have tried to work with GStS myself before actually unblocking him. I could have done several other things. I still feel, however, that the action I took was the right choice to make, and I would have tried to work toward that choice even had I discussed it before hand. I repeat again, I am not racist; I do not support the KKK, their actions, or racism in general; and I strongly resent being accused of such. My whole post can essentially be summarized by lucasbfr above - this was done to facilitate discussion where discussion had not yet taken place, in a timely manner so as to provide the best benefit to the project we could. If that's not how you saw it, that is completely understandable, however it is no reason for charging around like an angry mastodon because you think I'm racist. If you truly feel I do not deserve to be an admin, you are more than welcome to open a recall petition, but your accusations have no place there either. Hersfold (t/a/c) 16:20, 6 April 2008 (UTC) You are supporting racism in the project. You should resign as an admin, and leave. That's my opinion, and I stand by it. Supporting racist editing on the KKK is reprehensible, and you should be immediately dismissed, but if you had any honor, you'd spare us the waste of bandwidth. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 16:22, 6 April 2008 (UTC) You know what happens when you assume, Hersfold. If you took even one second to actually look at the edits made by this user, you might have actually used your head on this unblock. Just to update you on the discussion that your little unblockee proposed....he got crushed when he tried to propose his change. Absolutely crushed. But good job on that unblock. Really, really helped the project. Cheers! Baegis (talk) 16:35, 6 April 2008 (UTC) In that case, one or both of you should look through the procedure I've outlined at User:Hersfold/Recall. I will not respond further to these offensive comments here. Hersfold (t/a/c) 16:55, 6 April 2008 (UTC) Unblocking a member of the KKK is offensive. Questioning that unblock is not. My disagreements with Orangemarlin are well documented, but in this she is 110% correct. --B (talk) 17:02, 6 April 2008 (UTC) Then the same option is extended to you. Open a petition for recall. Hersfold (t/a/c) 17:05, 6 April 2008 (UTC) Hersfold, I suggest not taking the poison being spewed here to heart. One failure to check with the blocking admin first is not grounds for desysopping and burning at the stake - it's just an experience to learn from. :) krimpet✽ 17:28, 6 April 2008 (UTC) No, your right. Maybe next time he can unblock some Willy on Wheels socks or some Awbrey socks. You know, so they can "contribute to discussion". Seems about right. Baegis (talk) 17:32, 6 April 2008 (UTC) Agreed with Krimpet here. Anyone can make mistakes, it's a wise person who learns from them. In a personal sense, although their ideology and values run deeply counter to my own, I don't have problems with even nazis or whatever editing as long as they adhere to our policies. If they engage in personal attacks, issue threats whether legal or personal, add chronic POV to articles or vandalise then they get treated like any other user who does those things. Someone who has such radical views that they can't hold them in will probably find themselves with an express ticket to the sin bin for the above reasons anyway. If they can work with others to build consensus and improve the article, then there's no problem and no reason to block. Orderinchaos 17:33, 6 April 2008 (UTC) That is a very good point. It is too bad that those were the exact reasons the editor in question was handed his 2 day block which Hersfold revoked with nary a care as to the reasons why. Changing cross burning to cross lighting? Pretty sure that is the definition of injecting chronic POV into an article. Baegis (talk) 17:42, 6 April 2008 (UTC) Baegis, I'm going to put this very bluntly since I've already tried to indicate it to you. Either open a petition to recall at User:Hersfold/Recall or shut up. You've made your position very clear, and the horse is very well beaten at this point. Unless you actually intend to do something about it, there is no reason to keep harping on the same points again and again. Thank you. Hersfold (t/a/c) 17:46, 6 April 2008 (UTC) By the way, I'm in a very bad mood after all of this, so please don't push me further (I swear on pain of desysopping and permanent ban I will not block you or protect this page) Hersfold (t/a/c) 17:47, 6 April 2008 (UTC) Oh how brave of you. How moral of you. A topic ban. I'm so impressed. Thank you for being an honorable admin. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 18:11, 6 April 2008 (UTC) Did I say I was topic banning anyone? No. I was just informing Baegis, as I will now inform you, that his point was quite well made, and unless he had something new to say, there wasn't much need to repeat it. Again. And again. It's called courtesy, which I've linked there for your personal benefit. :-) Hersfold (t/a/c) 18:15, 6 April 2008 (UTC) You apparently cannot read (and since I can, I get to accuse you of the same thing). You got the avowed racist and KKK apologist God Save the South (talk · contribs) unblocked and agreed to a topic ban. He should be indefed. You should be an honorable person and resign for supporting racism. And you should get the hell off this project for supporting a racist. There is no "consensus" when one person, just one, is a racist little cretin, and everyone else supports simple, but useful Wikipedia guidelines like WP:RS, WP:NPOV, WP:WEIGHT, and the such. Apparently, you have no clue about anything except WP:CIVIL, which does not trump anything else. So, it really would be best for the project that you climb back in your little "Civility trumps Racism" hole, leave the project to smarter and more moral individuals, and say goodbye. Supporting racism is disgusting. In fact, I have no clue if you are a racist little creep or not. I don't care. Supporting it, even by stupid decisions, is abhorrent. So, go away. Please, for the good of the project. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 18:24, 6 April 2008 (UTC) Look, I can understand both sides of this position, but I think I'm going to have to suggest that both of you take a day off to calm down. You aren't going to do anything productive while you've got your gander up this high. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 18:47, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Hersfold, if it is any consolation (at all), I can understand your mistake. I wouldn't worry too much, I made mistakes when I was a new administrator, and continue to make mistakes in all matters of degree. I just wished you had discussed this with me first, I would have been willing to reduce to thirty-one hours at least, because of the extent and his severe edit-warring which was conducted on the article. Undoubtedly, he'll get blocked again, so for this once, you're okay. I'm sure you and OrangeMarlin have to sort out a few differences now, but at least you can use this as a form of a learning curve, that's what I did with my mistakes. If you feel you need any other tips about adminship (which you'll probably get from Orderinchaos :P) just ask. Regards, Rudget (review) 20:51, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

For the talkpage note, I'll monitor the thread :) (Well, when i get done with cloverfield I will) -M^ask? 02:20, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Request to stop a page from being deleted and ending a stupid deletion request

WhatIfGaming is a notable site in the gamer world, and its biography should not be deleted just because a few people believe it's not "cut up" to the standards of WP:N. Please help and protect it--as it's all just FACTS about the site. Cold hard descriptor facts. 76.246.210.66 (talk) 06:32, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, but if you want the page to be undeleted, you'll need to log in and request a deletion review. We have our notability standards for a reason, and there needs to be good reason to ignore them. Hersfold non-admin (talk) 11:45, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks and a Follow-Up

Hello Hersfold. I wanted to thank you for responding to my New Wikipedian "help me" request last month. I've just posted an announcement about my little ol' research survey on the miscellaneous village pump, as you suggested. If you have a few moments, would you consider taking the survey? Please visit my User page for details. Thanks very much! AMQ815 (talk) AMQ815 22:59, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome, and I'll make sure to take a look. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 01:17, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

edit to your post on Wikipedia:New contributors' help page

Hi, Hersfold. I fixed a bracket in your post to the "Page Not Needed" topic of the Wikipedia:New contributors' help page that was affecting the afd piping. Just wanted to let you know that I wasn't changing your response. -Gwguffey (talk) 02:36, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Oops. Ok, thanks for the notice. :-) Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 03:41, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

Glad to help. Best wishes. -Gwguffey (talk) 13:44, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

April 9 - 16

User:Chicksnatural

Hi Hersfold,

I noticed that you blocked this user with account creation disabled. Since username blocks are typically softblocks, I was just wondering if you meant to do this or if it was a slip of the mouse. Thanks! --jonny-mt 03:43, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Hehe...2 headings with the same title...sorry Hersfold. Tiptoety ^talk 03:46, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

I meant to do it - This user twice created a copyvio, spam article (Chicks natural) despite receiving a whole long list of warnings, so either they can't read or they have no intention of doing anything except advertising their company. If they request an unblock, I wouldn't say no to changing the block terms, but I don't see them being very constructive. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 03:49, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey there, not sure if you are aware of a new username policy change. A better idea before blocking may have been to attempt to get the user to change their username before blocking, and moving the username here, at least that is what the policy change is kinda sorta suggesting we start doing. Just FYI. Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 03:45, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Bah for edit conflicts. I wasn't aware of that particular change, but again, this one seems pretty blatantly obvious - take a look at his deleted contribs and image uploads. I'll do that from now on, but it seems a bit bureaucratic to me. :-/ Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 03:49, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I agree that this case should have been blocked. But I just wanted to let you know that according to this we need to start assuming more good faith when dealing with users that are not really disrupting the project in hopes not the bite so many newbs. Tiptoety ^talk 03:51, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok. Good thing I made that {{UAA}} template the other day, then, I guess. :-) Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 03:52, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Yep, was just thinking the same thing. Tiptoety ^talk 03:54, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Whoa; nice work on the template! Are the bots going to be able to interpret it as they do on WP:RFPP? --jonny-mt 05:55, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, they're not set up to, but it shouldn't take much work to get them to do so. You can ask the bot operators to add that - I guess they should leave the reports there for about half an hour after the template gets added? Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 13:55, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Welcome

No problem. And thanks for the level-headed reply to her talk page. After playing whack-a-mole with G11 pages, I think I can use a break to go do something relaxing :) Cheers, --Bfigura ^(talk) 04:53, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Enjoy yourself. Hopefully that will be the end of the page-blanking, but we'll see. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 04:54, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

User:PalaceGuard008

Hi, I saw your decline of my request for review. Just wanted to point out one thing: the informal mediation is nothing to do with the complaint further up. The informal mediation was due to another user wikistalking me - perhaps you can trace the threads to the WP:AN/I report I made. As to the complaint further up, perhaps you can have a look at the history of that page. What you will find is that I made no personal attacks against the person of User:Blnugyen, but a comment about his disruptive editing on that page. As far as I can see, my comment was perfectly clear when User:Blnguyen engaged in repeated and persistent mass reverting without even any attempt at discussion. The three things are completely unconnected, and right now I feel as if I am being persecuted by a coalition of Indian-flag waving users (see User:Blnguyen and User:Nishkid64). --129.78.64.105 (talk) 07:16, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

First off, I'm not going to unblock you because by coming here you're evading your block, which is not allowed. Using an IP address to get around a block on your account is considered abusive sockpuppetry and is in itself grounds for blocking. Further requests to be unblocked should be made by using the {{unblock}} template, on your talk page, while logged into the blocked account. This is partially so that other administrators, as yet uninvolved in the case, may have the chance to review the block and offer additional opinions on the case, but also to ensure that your block has its intended effect.

To address your actual reason for coming here, this edit, which I assume is the one you're referring to, is not a constructive complaint. Sarcasm, particularly when used in controversial situations, is not considered constructive or helpful. It's often very harmful and prevents useful discussion from taking place.

The fact that you're continuing to accuse other users in bad faith is also not helping your case at all. Looking at your block log, I see you've been blocked once previously for edit warring. While that was by the same administrator, I can't help but notice that User:Nishkid64 has never made a single edit to Gedhun Choekyi Nyima or its talk page. It is not uncommon for administrators to watchlist the talk page of users they have blocked in the past - page histories and user contributions are kept public for specifically that reason, so that any user may act as a check against any other user's possible violations of policy. You'll notice that WP:STALK specifically mentions that this is acceptable; it does not become "wikistalking" until the user monitoring your contributions makes an effort to undo your work specifically to harass you. In reviewing your contributions and Nishkid's, I don't see this as being the situation.

Now, again, using your IP address to edit while you are blocked is not permitted. I can see from your contributions that you've been using your IP to continue the dispute on Two Chinas, and for this reason have blocked it as well. (Note that I would not have blocked you had you only come to speak to me.) The block on your IP address will expire close to when the block on your account will. Any further requests to be unblocked should be made while logged in, on your account's talk page. Thank you for coming to clarify your reasoning to me, however I again suggest you read through our policies and guidelines and wait out your block. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 13:50, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

How long will the block last? User:PalaceGuard008 has been heavily involved in a discussion over at Talk:China. Please respond here rather than on my talk page so that any discussion is in one place.Readin (talk) 14:29, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

The block is set to expire at 00:58, April 10, 2008 (UTC) (see block log). That should be in about 10 hours, assuming my math is correct. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 14:39, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the info.Readin (talk) 17:38, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Ouest Side

Hallo, You say here that you've Speedied this, but there's no sign of the tag! I spotted this while PRODding another article by same editor. PamD (talk) 09:48, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

The article has already been deleted once - you'll notice the time stamp on my notice was in January, and the first edit of the current version of the page is from the end of March. I'm actually deleting it myself, this time, as I'm now an admin and it still meets speedy criteria. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 12:53, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: Wikipedia Time

Thank you for that near immmediate response to my question:).I also got info from another user about adjusting the time in my preferences but I figured Wikipedia is supposed to be an international project so UTC time seems good.Again thank you.It was a very friendly welcome.I have recntly been accused of vandalism.To be specific adding fa stars to articles when they weren't featured.However I did that after seeing a page where editors discussed wheter an article should be promoted.Because there was all support opinions I thought that made the article featured.I then added the stars only to find out that was vandalism.I panicked as I'm only 12 and have never recieved anything like a detention or gotten into serious trouble!.It was a case of a relatively new user(I don't remeber how long I've been on Wikipedia but I never really read all the policies as I never was bold) not knowing a policy then breaking it and instead of being told the policy was warned that a block would result.I lost some faith in Wikipedia.Instead of this great big book of knowledge a few edits out of line kept you contributing.So when I wanted to learn more about Wikipedia I was hesitant to ask.But when I did ask I got quick useful answers and a great welcome.Again,thank you.Xp54321 (talk) 01:03, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Hello again. Sorry to hear you got warned for vandalism - I know it's tempting to jump in at some cases, and we do encourage it in some instances, but we usually expect users to have a little more knowledge of how things work before they begin participating in processes like deletion debates and featured article discussions. This helps to avoid some confusion, both on the part of the new user (you) and whoever's job it is to close the debate. We've had problems in the past, and still do, with "single purpose accounts", sockpuppet accounts that are created simply for the purpose of promoting a single point of view. We try to assume good faith as much as possible, but sometimes people slip up; I'm sure they don't mean any harm in doing so. Anyway, feel free looking around; the welcome message I posted above has some good links for you to get started at. Let me know if you ever need help. :-) Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 04:34, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 7th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 15	7 April 2008	About the Signpost

April Fools' pranks result in temporary blocks for six admins	WikiWorld: "Apples and oranges"
News and notes: 100 x 5,000, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Dispatches: Reviewers achieving excellence	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 16:10, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm sure you know that block tags must be subst

I noticed that you placed {{usernameblocked}} on User_talk:Sundown_Records back on 24 March. I'm sure you know this should be {{subst:usernameblocked}}, as with all block and warning tags, it should be substituted. Just a remimnder. Thanks.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 16:52, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I know, I must have slipped up there. I generally copy my block messages from here these days, which already included the subst: code. Hersfold non-admin (talk) 18:43, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Nice table, I'm going to link to that!--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 18:52, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Requests for page protection

I hope I'm not putting you through the paces with the requests for page protections! :) Gary King (talk) 19:40, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

There are rather a lot... I'm probably not going to do all of them, just hop through and clear out the really backlogged ones. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 19:42, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm scavenging through articles that have not had any recent protection but have been heavily vandalized and therefore making it an unattractive article to edit by established editors because of their volatility. Gary King (talk) 19:45, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Uncivil?

OrangeMarlin's been baiting him like a fish, along with anyone who doesn't agree with him. HalfShadow (talk) 05:02, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

That's how I feel too, see the collapsed discussion above. However, I'm trying as much as possible to stay as neutral as possible to prevent it from getting worse. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 05:06, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Regarding J. K. Rowling

Thanks for sending me to the right page to request protection of the page. I need to know the right page for the right job ;-) --CanadianLinuxUser (talk) 13:40, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

No problem, it happens, and as it turns out, you helped me find some sockpuppets of a user that's been causing us no end of trouble lately, so it all worked out quite well in the long run. Welcome to Wikipedia! Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 13:46, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

I thought it was bad policy to protect the article of the day? Even if there's a lot of vandalism by IPs, it's dealt with. Protecting a page just alienates potential new editors. I really thinks it needs unprotecting. GDallimore (Talk) 15:18, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't agree with the protection either. Per WP:MPFAP, the article should only be protected for extreme circumstances and then only for a limited amount of time. While there was a period of heavy vandalism it had already stopped when the page was protected. KnightLago (talk) 16:23, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

The article was being heavily vandalized, with no less than 37 vandalism edits today alone. This is a BLP, and with that much vandalism, temporary semi-protection was necessary. The reason the expiry is set to the end of the day is because MP featured articles are move protected - setting a different expiry time would cause the move protection to fail earlier than expected. We've already had two sockpuppets of a known page move vandal edit the article, so the removal of the move protection is not an option. We can remove the edit protection earlier, but it will have to be done manually to avoid losing the edit protection. I'll leave it up for another hour or two just in case, but then I'll remove it if someone else hasn't already. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 16:57, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for the explanation. KnightLago (talk) 17:08, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't feel that we can justify edit semi-protection on this article, and think that it is damaging, as I mentioned on ANI. Do you have strong objections if I remove it? TigerShark (talk) 21:49, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

My RFA

I will continue to improve as an editor of Wikipedia by taking the advice given to me in the RFA to heart. Even though this RFA has failed, I thank you for your efforts. --Sharkface217 22:55, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for helping me out on my question about re-attribution! Jozsefs (talk) 05:07, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Sure, you're welcome. :-) Happy editing! Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 05:10, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Your question at WT:ACC

Here's the present approved userlist.

• User:SQL
• User:SXT40
• User:Soxred93
• User:Rjd0060
• User:John Reaves
• User:Stwalkerster
• User:Thehelpfulone
• User:Snowolf
• User:Werdan7
• User:Tra
• User:Prodego
• User:GDonato
• User:Shell Kinney
• User:FastLizard4
• User:Chris G
• User:Luna Santin
• User:compwhizii
• User:Cometstyles
• User:1568
• User:slakr
• User:Riana
• User:Daniel
• User:E
• User:Milk's Favorite Cookie
• User:Blow of Light
• User:WODUP
• User:Alexfusco5
• User:Animum
• User:OverlordQ
• User:Steve Crossin
• User:FunPika
• User:Hersfold

While it would be easy enough to figure out, I'm not 100% on who's an admin and who's not atm. SQL^{Query me!} 05:50, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

I've got a script installed that highlights admins in blue - so according to it, only 18 of those (including me, although I haven't done anything yet) are admins. SXT40, Soxred93, Thehelpfulone, Werdan7, FastLizard4, compwhizii, Cometstyles, 1568, Milk's Favorite Cookie, Blow of Light, Alexfusco5, OverlordQ, Steve Crossin, and FunPika are all not admins. So almost half. Thanks! Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 19:39, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Hehe, nice :) User:SXT40 us me, btw :P SQL^{Query me!} 12:56, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Help with images

I asked a question at the help desk, and they said that you may be able to help. Some chess articles show images of the pieces involved in the upper right corner, such as rook and pawn versus rook endgame. On pawnless chess endgames I'd like to have the red "no" symbol over the pawn. Is there an easy way to get that effect? Thank you. Bubba73 (talk), 14:39, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Remind me to smack User:Dendodge when I get the chance... (kidding). Anyway, I can take a look at it, although I generally don't like putting code like this into articles. I'll let you know what I come up with. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 19:44, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok, it's done! I checked, and it *should* work in both Firefox and IE, and the code is written so that other screen resolutions won't cause problems either. If you ever need that sort of code again, feel free to steal it from that article, my awards page, or this section of WP:RIBBON (the latter two undoubtedly being the reasons they sent you to me). Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 19:52, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks! I just looked at it, and it looks fine. Bubba73 (talk), 19:55, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

RFA Thanks

Thank you for your comments on my RFA. Even though it failed with 28 supports, 42 opposes, and 15 neutrals, I am grateful for the suggestions and advice I have received and I do hope to improve as a Wikipedian. If you ever need my help in any endeavor, feel free to drop me a line. --Sharkface217 19:31, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Best of luck, Sharkface. Again, sorry things didn't work out this time. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 19:54, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Soleja k‎

Hi, I noticed you protected User talk:Soleja k‎. FYI, the user's page lists him as indef blocked, but the block log has him as blocked for 24 hours. NJGW (talk) 22:50, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Hm. That's odd. Ok, thanks, I'll update the expiry time. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 22:57, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: Impersonator

Thanks for your help. By the way, can something be done about the (fairly obvious) socks User:DbelangeF, User:DbelangeG, User:DbelangeH (see [2])? nneonneo^talk 00:09, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Oops, sorry, thought I'd already blocked those. I'll take care of them now. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 00:17, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

User:Ipodsrus

Hi. You may wish to look at the deleted contributions of User:Jazzbass2000, User:7thfred and User:Metallica134 as well as the above to see a pattern. All editors have made similar contributions to articles all around the topic of the John Smith Quartet John Smith Quintet, a non-notable band. These include creating articles on its non-notable members and adding these members to various lists.

The evidence points to them all being sockpuppets of the indefinitely banned blocked User:Chris funk bass, who made exactly the same edits. When I have an opportunity, I will put forward my evidence in a more formal form however I though I needed to act quickly to prevent further vandalism.

Thanks for asking for my opinion before unblocking and if you require further information please let me know. Cheers, Mattinbgn\^talk`

Ok, thanks for the info. I'll keep an eye out for other unblock requests. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 01:26, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Parser Function?

Thanks so much for your tutorial. I really found it helpful and I *love* your sense of humour: If you try too hard to convince it, #time: will get mad at you and throw a temper tantrum. Don't try it. I imagine this gets written over as you do other adoptee lessons, how long can I expect to see it up to refer to or would you be willing to share it with the project? Thanks! TRAVELLINGCARI^{My story}_{Tell me yours} 14:59, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

The way I do my lessons, that page should never be edited - I transclude my lessons onto each adoptee's page separately. It'll be up as long as you need it, and you are more than welcome to share it around. Thanks for reviewing it, and I'm glad it works for you. :-) Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 16:41, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi Hersfold. :) Just wondering, I ask Tip today if I could use the adoption program he borrowed from you (I now do adoption too, and he originally adopted me). I was wondering, is it alright with you if I borrow the parser function lesson as well? I also think I could use studying that too, as I make templates as well, but I'm not an expert as of yet. I'd appreciate it a lot. Thanks for your time, Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 17:04, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I just offered it to him, as you probably noticed. Sure, go ahead, I'm sure he wouldn't mind. Tip may want you to get some sort of exercise with that, which I don't have there, but you're more than welcome to look them over and give them a try. Enjoy! Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 17:07, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, I'm not adopted anymore, I graduated from adoption, now I'm getting admin coaching. I'm sure that lesson will teach me a lot. Thanks again. Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 17:11, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

USER EDJERSEY

Hey, um ok thats ok to delete my page, im worthless neways, lol ok you can delete this too if you want —Preceding unsigned comment added by Edjersey (talk • contribs)

I think you may have missed the point... I didn't delete your page because I felt it was worthless, I deleted it because it didn't contain any encyclopedic content. An article comparing the two might be of some use in the future, but it will need to contain some more information to meet our inclusion criteria. See WP:1ST for some more help. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 20:55, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

nonono I know that i get it its just thati wasnt done but if you would please give me a link to helping me on how to make pages and stuff, then i could get my page not deleted.

The link I gave you above (WP:1ST) should give you some helpful tips on writing an article. Also, you may want to start writing your article on a subpage of your user page so that you can move it to the main article space once it meets our criteria. On a side note, please remember to sign your comments on talk pages with four tildes (~~~~) so everyone knows who they're talking to. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 21:08, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

thanks a lot for your help hersfold, youve helped me alot. 68.197.129.199 (talk) 23:13, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Quite welcome, let me know if you have any trouble. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 00:39, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Bombshell

Hey, you blocked me (User talk:Bombshell) for reverting 2008_Olympic_Torch_Relay instead of User talk:Huaiwei. He started the edit war:

• He keeps on putting Hong Kong and Macau in mainland China.
• He keeps fusing the international route and the mainland China route, though the article 2008_Olympic_Torch_Relay becomes totally unreadable and the official webistes separates the two routes: http://torchrelay.beijing2008.cn/en/journey/map/
• I think he does this because Hong Kong and Macau are on the international route: http://torchrelay.beijing2008.cn/en/journey/map/ and not on the mainland China route: http://torchrelay.beijing2008.cn/en/journey/map/ which begins at Sanya
• He keeps removing the Hong Kong (Hong Kong) and Macau (Macau) flags from the relay and replaces them with the PRC-flag (People's Republic of China)
• He changes the names Hong Kong and Macau into Hong Kong,China and Macau, China, whilst the official website does not

User talk:Bombshell

I don't really care what the argument is about - you clearly violated WP:3RR, and now you're using an IP address to circumvent your block. That's called sockpuppetry. When your block expires, you may discuss the issue on the talk page before continuing to make changes to the article. If discussion doesn't work, seek dispute resolution before edit warring. To request an unblock, you should use the template {{unblock}} as is specified in your block message. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 21:26, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't want to be unblocked, I won't change the page, I just want you to block User talk:Huaiwei. As you can see on the history page of 2008_Olympic_Torch_Relay, he's been doin' this all week. I think he's some kind of PRC-government dude.

No. And stop vandalizing my talk page. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 22:31, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I note from Bombshell's editing history, that creating sockpuppet accounts is likely to be a habitual occurance. I note, for instance, the appearance of User:Lafcadio Wluiki soon after his ban, and that the sockpuppetry warning was removed from his user page by another user at about the same time [3]. Perhaps more punitive action will be required since he has ignored numerous warnings in the past?--Huaiwei (talk) 15:32, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

It will happen if this keeps up. Creating sockpuppets to argue your block is probably the worst or second worst way to get unblocked. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 16:19, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

I believe he has created yet another sock (User:Wen_Jiabao) and is now revert-warring in the article[4].--Huaiwei (talk) 18:49, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

And one more User:Amédée Fleurissoire.--Huaiwei (talk) 18:51, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Removed Eric Greitens Page

Hey you removed the page I created for Eric Greitens. I do have GFDL license to do this. I sent all applicable information and authorization from Eric Greitens and the Center for Citizen Leadership to the two Wikipedia permissions accounts. I was busy setting up the page while you deleted it. The information posted was simply a Biography written by Eric Greitens. He sends this biography out to everyone to use on their own websites, for newspaper articles, etc. Eric asked me to create a Wikipedia page for him. Once again, I underline the fact that I have already emailed wikipedia showing this authorization. When will admins stop deleting this article when I have license to post this information? Please respond on my talk page.

Benchmark.stl (talk) 21:34, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I just checked with an OTRS volunteer, and they haven't received that confirmation. Please send it again - once it is received, they will undelete the page or request unprotection for you. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 21:35, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Forgot to repost this here - OTRS actually has received it, and has recreated the page. Sorry. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 00:38, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Another annotated bibliography?

Remember High school dropouts: an annotated bibliography? I've got another one: Environmental Impact on Human Health: An Annotated Bibliography. I don't think it's suitable for speedy, and I wouldn't know a good reason for prodding it. Maybe you have an idea? nneonneo ^talk 15:25, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

It's already been prodded, but my reason for the original one works here too. I might look at those again later, something smells oddly like copyright. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 16:21, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi

I was beginning to think that...Ugh. I know who all of these people are too...Very, very annoying. You know, they could contribute constructive;y but nooooo. Sorry. the_ed17 18:48, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

No problem. If necessary, we can always get a checkuser to block the IP for a while. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 19:03, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

April 17 - 24

Your UAA template

Just dropped in to congratulate you on the excellent template. I actually decided to help out on WP:UAA just so I could use it! (If you still want to smack me, you can have my address). George D. Watson (Dendodge).Talk^Help 22:01, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Just keep in mind admins reserve final decision on these, so if you're ever not sure, it may be best to just ignore them until an admin comes by. (And I've reconsidered the smack, your referral was well-intentioned. ;-) ) Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 22:29, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Hope you don't mind but I've added a couple of extra parameters. George D. Watson (Dendodge).Talk^Help 07:38, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Template help

I appreciate your attempted help on {{GFDL-Armenica}}...however, it doesn't seem to have worked. I tried subst'ing the template on Image:Saghmoa.jpg and the error message was still included, along with some stray characters ("{{subst:empty template|"). Kelly ^hi! 23:17, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Oops. Sorry, I missed a couple brackets. It should be working now. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:23, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

		The Template Barnstar
		Thanks so much for fixing the problems with {{GFDL-Armenica}}! You are truly a template master! Kelly hi! 23:47, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

You're quite welcome! Thanks for the star! :-) Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:52, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

the edit conflcit that wasn't

Hi,

Just checking to make sure this was an edit conflict of some kind, and not that I did anything incorrectly. That was would have been my first unblock request, if I did it wrong let me know. --barneca (talk) 01:33, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, that's weird. I didn't get an edit conflict, and I'm pretty darn sure I removed the original {{unblock}}. Sorry, no, what you did was just fine, it looks as though WP glitched up for some reason. You can get the new one. :-) Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 01:39, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

WTF?

What the hell is going on? What happened to Byzantium!!!! Tourskin (talk) 05:56, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

That would appear to be the result of an accident resulting from an attempt to fix some page move vandalism. I'm fixing it now, thanks for notifying me. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 06:00, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

No probs, so long as its reversible lol. Tourskin (talk) 06:03, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, if it wasn't, we'd have kinda been in some trouble there.... >_> Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 06:06, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

But hey at least we get to redesign the article. Tourskin (talk) 06:11, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

*laughs* Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 06:13, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Adoption

I hope you got my pseudo acceptance of your offer of adoption and a bot just took it where it was supposed to be if not I will repost it tomorrow. ThanksEoag (talk) 06:25, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

According to the page's history, this is your first edit here - but that works for me! Good to hear back from you. I'm actually about to head off for the night (I'm up late due to multiple little admin emergencies), but I'll be more than glad to get you started off tomorrow. Sounds like you'll be more active then anyway. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 06:29, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 14th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 16	14 April 2008	About the Signpost

From the editor
Interview with the team behind one of the 2,000th featured articles	Image placeholders debated
WikiWorld: "Pet skunk"	News and notes: Board meeting, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Dispatches: Featured article milestone
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:32, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

RE: Wilson High School

Most likely it was. Right now the best way to handle the situation is revert and give polite warnings to those adding the encyclopedia style version and block the ones adding the threat-like version on sight.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 02:06, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok. I've been refreshing the page every few minutes to make sure nothing new gets added, same as you, it seems. If any new information regarding the threat itself, I can make the call. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 02:08, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Block?

I'm sorry to question your judgment, but I really feel a block is unnecessary here. Have a look at this diff [5]. The user removed what constituited vandalism, and they were indef blocked? Would you mind explaining? Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 16:27, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Ahh, I've just noticed they've gone and made inappropriate pages, as documented on their talk page. I could only see one edit here. Sorry about that. Something I lack without the mop is the ability to see deleted contributions. (blush) Regards, Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 16:29, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Was just about to say that. Yes, their page creations had a similar pattern to the IP edit, so I figured I could get two vandals with one block through the autoblocker. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 16:31, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes, its an error that was inevitable for me to make without being able to view deleted contributions. I didn't mean to question your judgment at all, just when I did what I'd call a "poor man checkuser", comparing the contributions of the IP to the contributions of the user, that wasn't deleted, it didn't appear there was any reason to block. I'm sure if I could've seen the deleted edits, this wouldn't have happened. My sincere apologies. Steve Crossin (talk) (anon talk) 16:36, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Re:AIV

Problem is, they DON'T STOP. I don't want to argue, but you have to admit that report had a shred of reason behind it. They started vandalizing RIGHT after account creation. 21655 ^{ωhατ δo γoυ ωαητ?} 23:00, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

And you do have a point, but we get tons of reports every day, and I've seen other reports of yours that were a tad premature. Your help is appreciated, but don't get too trigger-happy. Thanks again. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:05, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, I'm not trying to come across as trigger-happy, but okay. Point taken. 21655 ^{ωhατ δo γoυ ωαητ?} 23:06, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

72.187.96.201

Hello Hersfold. Just a general observation to guide you on your admin path ... I know you weren't involved in what came before it, but in the future this would probably merit a note on my talk page. Thanks. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 11:04, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Ack. Sorry, my apologies. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 16:30, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Re:AIV

I see, that makes sense. But I still think that at least an edit summary, or at best a talk page message, would have been optimal. No big deal. Thanks, toresbe (talk) 11:46, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Why I made a point to come by. Sorry about that. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 16:38, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Trip Johnson block

I highly endorse this block. Without posting several dozen diffs to you here, I have had it with this user - so much that I temporarily stopped participating in the MilHist project because Trip was so insanely difficult to work with. Many other users have had the same problem; just this morning I was debating escalating it to a RfC or something similar just to start documenting the disruptions, policy violations, personal vendettas and maverick attitude that he has. Anyway, long story short, thanks for stepping in here and taking a look at what's going on, I really appreciate it. Tan | 39 18:46, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Just reviewing unblocks. It is helpful to know he has a history of this, though, and I'll keep it in mind if he requests again. Thanks. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 18:49, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Yep, I saw that. I posted an (almost) identical message on the blocking admin's page, too. Thanks again, I appreciate your attention here. Tan | 39 18:52, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

One parser fcn. question

Hiya, quick question as I've had more time to look at this and play around some. Near the bottom it says: #rel2abs: Converts a relative link to a direct link - for example, /Subpage is a relative link which can be converted to the direct link, User:Hersfold/Adopt/AdvancedTemplates/Subpage.

Using the Museums Wikiproject as a template, I could theoretically use that for a future sub-project/taskforce of Galleries and it woul d be WikiProject Museums/Gallery for example? Thanks again for all your help with this TRAVELLINGCARI^{My story}_{Tell me yours} 22:43, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeesss... I think. I haven't used that one very much (as in, at all), I just know it's there, and it works. But I'm pretty sure that's what you could use it for. If that does ever happen, and you can't figure it out, let me know (as I'm sure you will anyway :-P) and I'll play around with it some. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:43, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Whoops, never saw this. Yep, definitely noy shy about asking for help :) Thanks for all you've given TRAVELLINGCARI^{My story}_{Tell me yours} 21:33, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Image deletions

Hey, no problem about the image deletions. To make a long story short I got a hold of a flickr user and asked him to change the CC licenses of a couple and he did, but then switched them back after a disagreement. Like I said, long story. I never got a chance to ask for them to be deleted, so I figured I'd just wait for a good samaritan like yourself to come along and delete them. However, two of the images you deleted are genuine GFDL images: Image:International School of Amsterdam.jpg and Image:Riga summit security.jpg. I'm not really sure why you lumped those in with the others, since those were GFDL while the others were Creative Commons. The first should already have an OTRS ticket, the second is brand new and I just sent a letter to the OTRS system today, so it'll take a while to get read and updated. Both should have their papers and what not taken care of, so like I said I'm not really sure why those got deleted too. Please get back to me about those two. Thanks. Drewcifer (talk) 21:37, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

The Flickr pages for both of them said they were under copyright, not the GFDL. If there is an OTRS permission ticket in for them, the volunteer should be able to undelete them once it comes up. Sometimes those tickets take a while to process. If it takes a while, you can send in another email asking what's going on. Sorry for the confusion, and thank you very much for being so amiable about this. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 22:20, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

The ISA photo was uploaded (and tagged, if I remember correctly) months ago, so no OTRS volunteer is going to come across it any time soon (I presume because it's already been filed away, or something). As for the other photo I literally sent the GFDL permission today, so it's still waiting to be read and confirmed. But in my experience with as many GFDL photos I've uploaded, a photo won't get tagged unless it's already up and running. I've never had a photo un-deleted by an OTRS volunteer, I've always had to get it reinstated before the fact, obviously by an administrator, so that the OTRS volunteer can come along eventually and confirm the ticket. Also, as far as I know, WP policy tends to assume good faith of the uploader in letting an image stay up until GFDL permission is confirmed. Hence the instructions that I've read say upload the image, send the permission to OTRS, and wait for the image page to be updated. Therefore, by definition, there's going to be a period where the image is in no-permission limbo. I'm not sure if that's the best way to do things, but there's plenty of precedence and that's what I've experience 99% of the time myself. So, in both cases, I think the best solution would be to un-delete the images, since the first one should already be tagged, and the second one won't get tagged unless it's up and running. If you prefer I'll avoid putting the images up onto any page until everything is sorted out. Drewcifer (talk) 22:34, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Neither image was tagged - I just double-checked the deleted pages. I'm checking with a volunteer now to see what's going on. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:00, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I've restored the Riga image, as the volunteer confirmed that they had permission for it. He should be tagging the image soon, if he hasn't already. As for the ISA photo, he couldn't find any record of the ticket, and there is no OTRS tag in the file history. I'd recommend you send it in again - once it's received, it'll be undeleted (they do undelete things where needed, don't worry). Sorry for the confusion, but again, we can't have it up here unless it's "on the books." Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 23:25, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I just resent the GFDL permission for the ISA photo. Let me know if there's any hang-ups. Drewcifer (talk) 23:29, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

My helpme template

Many thanks for your assistance. Erechtheus (talk) 04:03, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. You know what to do if it goes wrong again for some reason. :-) Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 04:04, 22 April 2008 (UTC)

Protection

How do u protect pages? I've noticed vandalism in the histories of some pages but found adding protection templates didn't work.I could still edit even when logged out.Xp54321 (talk) 01:58, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Only admins can place protection on pages - so please don't add protection templates to articles yourself, they won't do it and should never be used as a bluff. If you feel a page needs protection in accordance with policy, you can request it at WP:RFPP. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 02:22, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Commenting out Commons images

Hi Hersfold...I saw this edit - why are you commmenting out images from the Commons? When the local copy is deleted we want the Commons copy to show through. Kelly ^hi! 20:16, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

I accidentally left a box checked when I used Twinkle - I thought I'd managed to stop it before it kept going. I'll undo all those edits, sorry. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 20:23, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment at User talk:72.0.36.36

But I would like to note that WP:3RR lists clear violations of non-free content policies as being exempt from 3RR. This was an exceptionally clear case. In fact, "Yankee for Life" hasn't even been released yet (note pre-order status at [6]), making it also violate WP:NFCC #4. That said, I don't exceed three removals anyways in doing this work, and only butted up against three twice, seeking outside input on both occasions. Thanks, --Hammersoft (talk) 21:19, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

I know - I didn't say anything about 3RR violations. Thanks for bringing it up. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 22:11, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

Motto Project Question

I've seen your involvement with the project and was wondering why no one has said anything about the motto I put in the nominations section. Its been there for at least 4 days.    Juthani1    01:57, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

It looks like you placed it in the wrong section, where we put mottos that have already been voted on and are waiting to be archived or added to the schedule. I've moved it back up to the "In Review" section and left a comment. You may want to work on the motto a little - mottos are supposed to relate to Wikipedia somehow by reflecting the spirit of the community, and I'm really not seeing how the motto as it currently stands does that at all. I'd suggest adding some links, and perhaps providing a funny or witty answer to the question, to both give the motto some meaning and make it "pop". Thanks for your suggestion, though. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 04:28, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for relpying. I will fix it up or change it.    Juthani1    19:33, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

April 25 - 30

Nice close

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		Brilliant close of the Giovanni di Stefano AFD fiasco.--WaltCip (talk) 23:00, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks very much. I was worried I was going to get shouted at by someone for keeping it, but this is definitely much better. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 00:42, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Definitely agreed. You read my comments, so of course you know I am biased, but I must say that the closing rationale was well-written and got to the meat of issue. I think the lack of a challenge is a testament to that. Best regards, SorryGuy  Talk  02:36, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Thirded. Very nice job and well-written closing arguments. Enigma ^message 02:54, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Giovanni di Stefano

I was just wondering if you intended to remove the "IMPORTANT" message. I don't have an opinion one way or another, but clearly someone does. :) Enigma ^message 07:23, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

I sort-of-kind-of did - the main reason for keeping the article is that editors shouldn't have their editing affected by legal threats, and I feel as though that needs to be reflected in the article. If someone feels like adding it back in, I don't care enough to stop them, but I'm not going to add it back in myself either. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 12:08, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

OK, just wondering why you didn't leave something in the edit summary. I think it's a silly warning because it's a frivolous attempt at bullying. Enigma ^message 13:15, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

<Excellent close, Hersfold. And one of the best "closing statements" I've ever read. It should easily eliminate the need for a high-drama DRV, which I initially thought was inevitable, Thanks to you, a DRV is no longer inevitable, but rather, it is ill-advised. Excellent work, Keeper | 76 | Disclaimer 14:52, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. :-) Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 15:04, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Stop

I am requesting you have no further interaction with me. You should be embarrassed that you unblocked GSTS who was recently indefinitely blocked for racist commentary, which whether intentionally or unintentionally, enabled and provided succor to a horrible anti-Semite. You should find something else to do instead of stalking me. Goodbye. OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 15:34, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Question concerning harmful community members and their edits

I have a question about drawing community attention to one or two members of the community who I believe to be harmful and intentionally biased in their editing. These members make repeated edits to the same article, removing anything they deem to be undesirable without engaging in community discussion. All attempts to communicate with these members 1-on-1 have been ignored and I'm left with little recourse. Understand, I'm not seeking punishment but rather want to know whether there is a forum to make these members actions visible to others so that their actions are recognized, letting the community make a decision as a whole. What would be your recommended actions in this case? I will refrain from mentioning names and specifics at the moment but am prepared to do so at a moments notice. Thanks. --Novan Leon (talk) 15:49, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Hello, you might try opening a Request for comment about the conduct of these users, which would help gather some consensus on what's going on. If these editors are breaking the three-revert rule, you can report them at the 3RR noticeboard. If you don't feel either of those would be appropriate, you could post at the incidents noticeboard. Without more specifics, though, I'm afraid I can't help you too much. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 16:01, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Column

Thanks a lot! I knew it was something like that, but I couldn't get it right. Thanks, Grsz^talk 16:03, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 16:07, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 21st, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 17	21 April 2008	About the Signpost

BLP deletion rules discussed amidst controversial AFD	Threat made against high school on Wikipedia, student arrested
Global login, blocking features developed	WikiWorld: "Disruptive technology"
News and notes: Wikimania security, German print Wikipedia, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Dispatches: Monthly updates of styleguide and policy changes	WikiProject Report: The Simpsons
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 16:49, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Andy Ennis

Well, speedy-deleting is only for articles that don't claim notability at all (at least, that's the criterion you used), so your deletion was inherently invalid. This article clearly claims notability - whether it is sufficient notability is a separate question; speedying is only for articles that do not purport to be about a subject of any importance. In any case, being a member of a notable band does meet WP:MUSIC, criterion #6. Two separate independent references also qualify under #1. If you still think it should be deleted, you should bring it to AfD (or you could prod it, but I'll dispute it, so it'll go to AfD anyway). Tuf-Kat (talk) 04:57, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Criteria 6 applies to bands, not to individuals - at least, that's what the wording of it would seem to imply. After double-checking, though, I guess I owe you an apology - for some reason I thought the article had been created by someone else, looking at it on newpages. If I'd noticed you were an admin (and I would have, I use a script for that), I'd have spoken to you first. I'll not AfD it, but would strongly encourage you to expand the article ;-) Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 05:06, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

The wording's kind of weird, but it's not meant to apply strictly to bands (all criteria apply to any individual or group). The criterion says the subject "contains a member who..."; in this case, the subject consists of only one person, who is the member who... Anyway, #1 still qualifies. I am planning on expanding - I'm working on music of Baltimore, and am making some stubs at the moment. I hope to fix up most of them soon. (You might have been confused because there was an article with the same title, created and deleted as non-notable some time ago, but that was about a different Andy Ennis, and it didn't claim notability.) If you want to be reassured, you can look through Google Books at "Ray Charles: Man and Music" By Michael Lydon, which contains some pretty significant content about Ennis and his influence on the obviously very notable Ray Charles (I can't really expand the stub based on it now, because it's a bunch of kind of isolated tidbits and the article would read very disjointed, but anyway, you can see some more detailed evidence of notability there). Tuf-Kat (talk) 05:21, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, I could have sworn there was a different article in the deletion log, but I don't see it now... I checked it when I created the article, cuz sometimes somebody created a bad stub that was rightfully deleted even if the topic theoretically deserved an article, but it was just something about a Australian student whose only notability was all the girls at his school admiring his muscles, maybe I'm mixed up with one of the other stubs I made. Tuf-Kat (talk) 05:25, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Help

Can you help me help wikipedia by making me a Wikipedia rollback? --Megapen (talk) 18:47, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay - I've taken a look at your contributions, and I can't see that you've had much experience in dealing with vandalism yet. Take some time learning the ropes manually first - since rollback is intended to be used only for cases of obvious vandalism, I'd like to see that you know what you're getting into first. I noticed that you'd also been declined rollback fairly recently, presumably for the same reason. Do some manual reversions for a while, and come back when you've got some experience. Happy editing! Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 20:42, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Question

How do you add those pictures on users' talk pages when they commit vandalism?Xp54321 (talk) 20:50, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

You can find a list of the warning templates we use here. Don't forget to sign your posts! Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 20:47, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!!!Xp54321 (talk) 20:50, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Adoption

Hello, I'm User:RyRy5. I am asking if I can be adopted by you. I have been here for 2 months and 1 week but I believe I still need alot of experience. But I don't think I will participating in your program you created because I'm alraedy in one. Please look at User:Steve Crossin/Adoption/RyRy5 to clarify. Do you accept?--RyRy5 (talk) 20:58, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

I already have an adoptee, unfortunately, Eoag (talk · contribs). At this point, I'm not sure I'd have the time to finish things up with you, as I'll probably be going on an extended wikibreak starting in mid-to-late May. I'll probably only just barely manage to finish up with Eoag as it is. I've been talking with Steve recently, though, and it looks like he's getting a good program set up for you. I know he's a very competent Wikipedian, and there's plenty of others around who will be able to help you if you need it. If you've got a question and Steve isn't around, feel free to ask me, but I'm afraid I'm not really able to officially adopt you just now. Sorry. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 21:05, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

I understand, and I do have one question. I would like your opinions on Turn 2 Foundation, if it is ready for WP:DYK nomination. I would also like your opinions if it needs improvement.--RyRy5 (talk) 21:08, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

It's way too short. An article should be a minimum of 1,500 characters, excluding lists, tables, references, and infoboxes. You'll need to expand it considerably within the next few days to meet that. As for other improvements, you really need to find some references that aren't related to the foundation. A source is not considered reliable if it has a relation to the subject, and DYK will not accept your "hook" unless it is backed up by a reliable source. It also reads as slightly promotional - you may want to try to work on the tone of the article somewhat to work on that (one thing in particular would be to refer to Jeter by his last name throughout). Hope that helps some. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 21:27, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

I noticed that it was too short but I didn't really notice the others. Thanks for your time.--RyRy5 (talk) 21:38, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Talk: Richard Sternberg

I apologize if this is asking too much but I wanted to get your input on a change I've made to the Richard Sternberg article. I've explained this change at the bottom of the Talk:Richard Sternberg page under "Opening Paragraph". The primary reason I'm asking for input from a third party is that I've already run into conflict with several rather adamant contributors who have already removed my contributions and refuse to discuss the matter with me. --Novan Leon (talk) 14:14, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Looking at the article history, it would seem that one of the reasons people are reverting your edit is because of the reference - while it is good that you're providing one, it needs to be from a third-party site, not affiliated with Wikipedia or Mr. Sternberg. Also, WP:NPOV does not means that you have to "balance" an article with pro- and con- points of view: giving undue weight to a minority concern can alter the neutrality of an article significantly. For example, if 9 out of 10 dentists say that Crest toothpaste is the best brand, you may want to mention that dentist #10 doesn't say so, but there's no need to explain in too much detail why he feels that way, or mention which brand he considers to be the best (or why). Based solely on edit summaries, those seem to be the main reasons, however a discussion on the matter would certainly help out. Just remember, don't keep fighting over it during the discussion - let a consensus come out, then act accordingly. I probably won't get too much more involved in this, due to some past conflicts I've had with one of the editors involved that I would rather not risk accidentally inflaming again (for everyone's sake), but I can keep an eye on things if you like. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 15:32, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the insight. My concerns are multi-facetted. First, several of those making the reversions are refusing to discuss the changes with me, and one in particular has been especially hostile to discussion (maybe you know who I'm referring to), even to the point of deleting my requests for discussion from their talk page without so much as a response. I'm now attempting to draw in conversation with third parties not directly involved with the changes. Second, in this instance there is no clear majority/minority. Each side of the controversy claims their side is in the majority, with a number of facts to support either side. Third, the reference supporting the statement against R. Sternberg's position on the controversy is taken directly from the party involved. Fourth, the reference I provided presenting R. Sternberg's position on the issue is presented as his opinion only and makes not unsupportable claims. That said, I digress. I respect your desire not to be too involved and I will do my best to facilitate a discussion before taking further action. --Novan Leon (talk) 18:38, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Dun Mihaka

Yeah I can do you a translation. On a quick glance its about his standing up for the right to speak Maori in courts and other official situations. Kahuroa (talk) 04:11, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Yay! Good, that'll help a lot. From other sources, I was able to figure out that he had been put on trial for something (or was at least in court) in 1979 - does it mention why? I know the first of the anti-royalty incidents didn't happen until 1981, so it can't be that; but given this guy's interesting history, it could be any number of things. Thanks for your help! Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 04:24, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Answer:

Its actually a translation of the Waitangi Tribunal's findings given here which you already have.

The caption of the photo

Dun Mihaka, the raiser of causes (= protestor), standing outside the house of Parliament in the camp of the Land March to Parliament, in the year 1976.

Darn it. Ok, thanks for your help, I really appreciate it. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 17:00, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

WP:U

Reply at User talk:staffwaterboy @ 17:27, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Do not put {{talkback}} back on here. I keep removing it for a reason. Thank you. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 17:54, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

.5

Thanks for that! ++Lar: t/c 16:29, 30 April 2008 (UTC)