User talk:Redvers/Archive39

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 17 August 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 03:45, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:A username graphic for Chili14 v1.png

File:A username graphic for Chili14 v1.png is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:A username graphic for Chili14 v1.png. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:A username graphic for Chili14 v1.png]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 21:15, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

User:BlackpoolKickboxer2008 sandboxes

Just noticed that there's an additional sandbox here. Could this be deleted or will I need to list it again? Dale 10:22, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia SignpostWikipedia Signpost: 24 August 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 04:10, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

VENENUX GNU/Linux Deletion

hello please know that may remove item venenux--Manganelli mario (talk) 14:42, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, what? ➲ REDVERS The internet is for porn 15:11, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Rorry i don't know why i did wrote like that.

I want to know the reason of deleting the article venenux, venenux is a linux distribution and i thik nedd to be documentated just like all others —Preceding unsigned comment added by Manganelli mario (talk • contribs)

Sorry, I'm still having trouble understanding you. Are you asking why VENENUX GNU/Linux was deleted three times for not asserting notability and reading like an advertisement as it says in the deletion logs? ➲ REDVERS The internet is for porn 15:33, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

i'm writing perfect i don`t understand why appears like 8 years old writing. mmm the notability of this article is on gnu.org and fsfla the two most important organizations of the free software on the world if you see that references yo will understand.

only about ten distributions are recommended by these organizations and is one of them venenux from thousands I wirte this article becouse i cant find sources of information in English and and i translate everything to help anyone looking info about it --Manganelli mario (talk) 16:09, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

No, I don't understand how your writing is coming out like that either. Perhaps your keyboard is faulty, although there could be other reasons. It's worth getting it fixed, as communication is key at Wikipedia and a keyboard fault, or some other reason, makes it quite difficult to understand you, let alone communicate efficiently.
As for the article, it did not assert the notability you're now claiming for it and read like an advertisement. Perhaps you'd like to recreate it in your userspace - User:Manganelli mario/Venenux - and work on finding several third-party reliable sources that prominently mention this distro, then write the article in plain, non-promotional language, bearing in mind that Wikipedia is not a method to gain notability, is not a how-to guide (so no instructions for installation, downloading or use) and must be free of conflicts of interest - which you appear to have with this subject. ➲ REDVERS The internet is for porn 10:27, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Re: Say no to Commons

Hi -- I don't remember seeing your essay before, but that & your lengthy explanation to Lars for the essay sounds depressingly similar: there seems to be an increasing tendency to focus on trivial things -- the Wikipedia equivalent of counting paperclips & arranging sharpened pencils in the proper direction -- over attention to what matters, namely the content. In my case it is a lengthy, fought-in-my-spare-time feud with some of the regulars over at WP:MoS, who are under the delusion that they are writing Policy Which Must Be Enforced. (Yes, you too can be banned from Wikipedia for incorrectly linking a date!)

Maybe I ought to address this distressing trend in a Wikipedia essay, Wikipedia: You won't score points forcing people to dot their I's and cross their T's. (Wanna guess which happens first: someone argues that any valid points this essay has is covered by "Ignore all rules", or complaining that I misused the apostrophe to indicate a plural instead of a possessive?) -- llywrch (talk) 19:50, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Cork Graham

I recently made extensive edits to the Cork Graham article, and would appreciate your taking a look at it as an admin and someone with history on it. For your background, I recently stumbled across it (don't ask how) and rather follow my first instinct and put it up for AFD I researched the topic and essentially rewrote the article (I'm not even sure why). I think the article is now well cited and reasonably stable, a run in the mill "b-class" article. But I'm concerned that a host of single editor-anon ip's will come out from the woodwork sometime in the future and take it in another direction. And so I thought I'd ask you to take a look at it now.--Work permit (talk) 04:02, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Short term range block needed

Please see Special:Contributions/98.247.79.203, Special:Contributions/98.247.79.99, Special:Contributions/24.16.36.129, Special:Contributions/24.16.63.53, Special:Contributions/24.16.62.183, Special:Contributions/24.16.60.112, Special:Contributions/24.16.36.51. Thank you. 152.16.59.102 (talk) 10:39, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

User talk:Brandnewfanx and User talk:68.80.36.236

Near as I can tell, Brandnewfanx (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) got annoyed with me because (1) I turned his IP address 68.80.36.236 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) in to AIV [1] for vandalism; and (2) having assumed all his recent edits were vandalism, I reverted 2 or 3 of them where "rollback" was possible; and then (3) his sock Brandnewfanx continued the attacks. Having possibly gone too far with the assumption that all his edits were vandalism, I could go back and look at the very few that I reverted. However, his IP is on a 1-week block and his named user you have indef'd. So I'm not altogether sure what to make of this situation. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 12:49, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

One of his pet articles I had reverted was Marc Minardi, which is a poorly written article anyway. Its author(s) keep calling him "Mark", which is both unencyclopedic and mis-spelled. Ugh. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 12:56, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
Another one I reverted was Degrassi: The Next Generation (season 9), which has been significantly modified by both the registered (and now blocked) user, and by another user, so I can't really revert myself on that one without causing further trouble. Unfortunately, when you issue a revert against a page not on your watch list, it doesn't add it to your watch list, so I don't know how to find any others. However, I'm thinking it was just those two, so hopefully that's the end of it. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 12:59, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
I should point out that I try to use rollback cautiously, and I might have got a little carried away with this one. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 13:01, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
I should further point out that my labeling of these guys as socks of each other is also an assumption, based on behavior. It was a long week, and I might be making too many assumptions for my own good. Luckily, this is a 3-day holiday weekend just starting. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 13:04, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

<-The straw that broke the camel's back was Brandnewfanx reporting you to AIV. You and I have rarely interacted, but I know that you ain't no vandal. Such editing is disruptive and not indicative of a useful user. Add in the IP action and some throwing of weight around on other editors' talk pages you've got a block, at least until the editor shows they understand why they're going wrong. I'd still like that from them, but if you'd prefer an unblock, just say and I'll do it. ➲ REDVERS The internet is for porn 15:19, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Kind of a chancy call. My first reaction is to think he needs to chill for awhile, because of his belligerent attitude. And I'm still not convinced he and the IP are not the same guy, as they have the same interests and same attitude, even before he got blocked. However, if he felt the block was unfair, his after block attitude is understandable, even though it seems excessive. If he posts a reasonable unblock request, an unblock could be fair. And even if he doesn't, an unblock could be considered. Let me think on this for a little while. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 16:11, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
OK, I've thunk on it. How about unblocking him and see what happens? Just the registered user, not the IP. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 19:36, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
Not gonna happen. [2] But I appreciate your good faith, even if they are a tad too [self-censored] to have been worth it. I think that's that, alas. Sociopath's paradise, this place, sometimes :o( ➲ REDVERS The internet is for porn 21:57, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
Yikes. Well, if he calms down and decides he wants to edit, he can always file an unblock request. Otherwise, it's "see ya". Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots 22:09, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Nominations open for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process has started; to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on 12 September!
Many thanks,  Roger Davies talk 04:24, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing Valentine de Saint-Point

It works now, thanks. Acr8tiv (talk) 08:18, 11 September 2009 (UTC)Acr8tiv

You're welcome! ↪REDVERS The internet is for porn 08:38, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

User:KJTRGKL

Hi, yesterday you acted on this ANI report by blocking the user. Today, the user has come back as an IP and added the same content directly to the artcle Khatri. I've reverted the add on Khatri, but this is getting a bit tiresome. Since the thread has been archived already, didn't post there, but thought I'd alert you. Not sure what you can do about it though, since a range block might be a bit excessive for this as a good chunk of contributors from Delhi are likely to be in that range. cheers. -SpacemanSpiffCalvin‡Hobbes 21:58, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLII (August 2009)

The August 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:01, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Question/help

Sorry to disturb you, but is it possible for you to block 202.70.61.148 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). He seems to be the vandal who operated from the 118.137.x.x range, as well as the IPs 202.70.61.146 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) and the currently blocked 202.70.61.133 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log). I know this because of his MO of misinformation by connecting movie studios and anime, etc. It should be noted that he continued his vandalism soon after the level 3 warning was issued. I've reported him to AIV, but right now, it's going stale. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 09:48, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Ipbreason-dropdown

First of all, congratulations on your upcoming marriage. Best of wishes to both you and your soon-to-be spouse!

Secondly, I made a comment on MediaWiki talk:Ipbreason-dropdown about one of your edits; do you think you could check it out when you have the time? Thanks, NW (Talk) 16:11, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Question/help

Sorry to disturb you, but is it possible for you to block 202.70.61.148 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). He seems to be the vandal who operated from the 118.137.x.x range, as well as the IPs 202.70.61.146 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) and the currently blocked 202.70.61.133 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log). I know this because of his MO of misinformation by connecting movie studios and anime, etc. It should be noted that he continued his vandalism soon after the level 3 warning was issued. I've reported him to AIV, but right now, it's going stale. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 09:48, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Ipbreason-dropdown

First of all, congratulations on your upcoming marriage. Best of wishes to both you and your soon-to-be spouse!

Secondly, I made a comment on MediaWiki talk:Ipbreason-dropdown about one of your edits; do you think you could check it out when you have the time? Thanks, NW (Talk) 16:11, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Trying to create Strøm page - you seem to have blocked it

Hi Redvers, I've created a Strøm {{surname}} page but I cannot edit Strøm – you deleted a page called that, and now it seems to be locked. Can you unlock it please?

My page is parked at User:Hebrides/sandboxstrom but I'd like to move it to its rightful place, especially since I first created a link to Strøm from Strom since I didn't expect this problem.

Thanks. Hebrides (talk) 19:20, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Now unprotected. Was originally a piece of annoying spam, back in July 2008. Your use is far better. ↪REDVERS The internet is for porn 21:36, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
Thanks. I've moved the content into Strøm. Cheers. Hebrides (talk) 07:31, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Military history coordinator elections: voting has started!

Voting in the Military history WikiProject coordinator election has now started. The aim is to elect the coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of sixteen candidates. Please vote here by 23:59 (UTC) on 26 September!
For the coordinators,  Roger Davies talk 22:09, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 21 September 2009

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 23:53, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Firelord1114

What's wrong with this username? He's requesting unblock, and I can't see anything in his edits that implicates it as promotional. Daniel Case (talk) 14:19, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

I replied over on the talk page, you may have to check the history if he removed it. @Redvers - congrats on the nuptials! Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 22:13, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

MIL

Hi. Since you're an admin and a member of the Military History WikiProject, please consider listing yourself here. Cheers, –Juliancolton | Talk 19:44, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 28 September 2009

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 02:47, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:BBC Broadcasting House 532073098.jpg

File:BBC Broadcasting House 532073098.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:BBC Broadcasting House 532073098.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:BBC Broadcasting House 532073098.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 20:39, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Hello, it looks like this was deleted, then restored by you as not on Commons. It isthere. Maybe you restored it for a different reason but I thought I'd mention it if for some reason you just didn't pick up that it was available at Commons now. Thanks. Unusual? Quite TalkQu 16:14, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
No, not restored as not being on Commons; restored as I don't want my images to go on that awful project but, being unable to prevent it, I prefer to keep a local copy here that won't be fucked around with as much as Commons chooses to. Hence the {{nocommons}} tag. Hope this helps! ↪REDVERS I dreamt about stew last night 19:49, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIII (September 2009)

The September 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:37, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 5 October 2009

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 05:22, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Elektra records logos

Okay, so a two-week cooling off period. Thanks.

Can I also ask you to protect the logos in question from deletion for that two week period? Otherwise they will no longer be there to discuss, once everybody has cooled off. Jheald (talk) 11:07, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Start the discussion somewhere and I'll link back the images to it so random admins and bots will hold back. (Also, deletion of images isn't permanent any more, so if it happens, it can be undone should a discussion agree.) ↪REDVERS I dreamt about stew last night 11:13, 12 October 2009 (UTC)
In my view the best place for such a discussion is WP:FFD -- it's what WP:FFD is there for, and it means the discussion can get some drive-by input. The advantage to WP:FFD is it's focussed to a decision, and it's open to the community. Otherwise it's very hard to see a way forward from one side saying "all the images should go", and the other side "no, they're valuable, they should stay". I tried to engage in rational discussion at WP:NFCR, and this [3] [4] is all the civility I got from User:J Milburn for my pains. Jheald (talk) 11:29, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you!

for both your welcome message and for having split Broadcasting in East Germany!--Nero the second (talk) 21:02, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 12 October 2009

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 04:19, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Redvers/Archive39&oldid=1166522758"