User talk:Ryulong/Archive 15

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 10

←

Archive 13

→

I'm a softie...

... it's true. But you really ought to read meta:User_talk:Lar#The_English_Wikipedia ... there is a chance this user can be turned around. He owes you more of an apology than he's given so far, in my view, but unlike some very intransigent users (such as Tobias Conradi) who think the world is out to get them, he seems to understand what he did was wrong, and understand how he needs to change, at least partly. Would you consider dialoging with him to see if there is a chance you'd give him another chance? I suspect that I will not unblock or support an unblock, without you being bought into it and on board, because he really did try very hard to be annoying to you, so if you cannot see how it would work, it won't. I will watch here for a while, you can answer here. ++Lar: t/c 22:03, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

He sent me harassing e-mails, impersonated me with a hotmail account, and harassed me on Wikipedia with sockpuppets not two months ago. I am not going to change my mind about him. I went through three g-mail accounts because of him.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 22:06, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

I understand. I have counseled EE/KB to think long and hard about how to make amends, if such is even possible, and then to send one note, which I will forward on to you. At that point that will be the end of my assistance unless you choose to dialog yourself. I won't be overturning or supporting the overturn of your block unless you yourself support it, because you have gone through too much. Some things can be forgiven and some cannot, and it is within each of us to know which is which in our own case, not for others to dictate. ++Lar: t/c 00:47, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

May I remove warning?

Ryulong,may I please remove your warning on my talkpage?--Xterra 1 (talk) 01:07, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

It is generally ~~improper~~ discouraged to do so.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 01:14, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

I made a lot of minor tweaks to an article-PLEASE,CAN I REMOVE IT???--Xterra 1 (talk) 03:48, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

It should not really be this much of a pressing issue. So long as you focus on articles more, do as you wish with your user talk page.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 03:50, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Although if my message is the only thing you are removing, I would be a little angry.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 03:52, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

I'll delete some other stuff,too.--Xterra 1 (talk) 04:56, 1 August 2007 (UTC)PS-like my new signature?

CSD Tonny_and_tanya

I can't mark the page with a CSD as my username is known among the people who created that article, but you'll see that the article was already speedily deleted and should be again (and probably salted too).

jddphd (talk · contribs) 01:37, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Never mind. I see someone else has done it. Saw that you were active, which is why I pinged your talk page. Sorry for the bother... jddphd (talk · contribs) 01:39, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

User:Selfworm/VandalizeMe

Hello Ryulong,
Why did you delete my user page: User:Selfworm/VandalizeMe? selfworm^Talk) 03:24, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

It doesn't really do much for the encyclopedia.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 05:23, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Of course it doesn't do much for the encyclopedia, it's a userpage! If not doing much for the encyclopedia is sufficient cause for the deletion of a page then all userpages should be deleted since none of them do much for the encyclopedia, which of course would be ridiculous. And although it doesn't do much, it does do a little; in particular it helps to lighten the mood of many Wikipedia users by allowing them to have some fun by committing permissible "vandalism". selfworm^Talk) 06:12, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

If it's something that does not further the encyclopedia in a constructive manner, then it should not be. Just like the autograph books, they're pointless pages that detract from encyclopedic edits.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 06:16, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Hello again,
Firstly, you did not address any of the points that I mentioned above, you simply rephrased your original statement. Secondly, please direct me to the official Wikipedia policy that states that any userpage that does not "further the encyclopedia" is to be deleted. And lastly, your claim that the page did not "further the encyclopedia" in any way is debatable as the page falls under WP:FUN. selfworm^Talk) 08:13, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

WP:CSD#G1. WP:FUN is not policy.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 08:28, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Hello again,
I would like to point out that I never once said that WP:FUN was policy. I simply said that because the page falls under WP:FUN it consequently does help the encyclopedia in the ways that are described on WP:FUN.

I would have to disagree with you that the VandalizeMe page falls under the scope of Patent nonsense, since it explicitly says that "Vandalism is not necessarily the same thing as patent nonsense and not all patent nonsense is vandalism." Due to the nature of the VandalizeMe page, it is one of the exceptions. selfworm^Talk) 20:31, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

4chan Page

Though the part about Alex Wuori may have been out of line, the fact remains that the video does contain a few factual errors and should be added back into the page. Mr.hotkeys 05:55, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not the place to talk about the factual errors in the video that are all unsourced (and probably based on your own personal experiences with the pages). Wikipedia only publishes (effectively) information that is supported by second party sources. The 4chan article can only use information supported by the video, despite the inaccuracies within it.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 05:59, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

So then are we just to ignore the fact of how the video makes 4chan look like some sort of evil hacker website when in reality it's just a gathering place? Everything in the factual errors section I had added was not based on my opinions or personal experiences but on facts. If you've ever taken the time to go to the website then you'd see the inaccuracies as well. To anyone familiar with 4chan, these inaccuracies could very well be considered common knowledge in the same way that an American knows a penny is worth less than a dollar when someone from another nation may not. The section is not meant to simply point out the inaccuracies but to show the bias some have against the website. Mr.hotkeys 06:05, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

I know about 4chan. I know the video got shit wrong. But my knowledge, your knowledge, and any other's knowledge is not something that can be used as a source in an article (everything needs to be backed up by some sort of textual source). Just because we know it does not mean it should be in the article. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that relies on verifiability, not truth. If another news outlet releases information that says "FoxLA was wrong about..." then we can use that in the article.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 06:11, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Alright, I understand. So by these standards "It is implied that all Anonymous posters are hackers, while most are likely not. Also implied is that *chan websites are based solely around hacking, though the major *chans are not." cannot be in the article. However, "In the report, the *chan imageboards are referred to as "secret websites," though the major *chan websites are public and require no password." and "Another error in the report is that all users must post anonymously. Very few boards have forced anonymous, and even this is sometimes temporarily disabled." can both be backed up. The first sentence is just fact, like saying fish like water, and, hell, could be backed up (if it's really necessary) with a link to the website. The second relates to something already mentioned previously in the 4chan article, so it must be true or else that part should be removed by your logic. Mr.hotkeys 06:20, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Any assertion would need to be supported by a textual source. If there were no publications that called George Washington the first president, then hypothetically we would not be allowed to say as such in the Wikipedia article on him, even though this is common knowledge for Americans.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 06:38, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

So then how does that work out? If I create a Freespace website that says these things, would they then be allowed? Why does somewhere need to say "No password is required" when you can go to the website and it's the first thing you'll notice? If this is the rule, then you've got a lot of work to do to Wikipedia. Mr.hotkeys 06:44, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

I did not make these rules. I just know that they exist. Freespace would fail WP:EL. Just going to the site where there's no password is WP:OR. Any assertion made needs to be backed up. Wikipedia is not a site where you can post whatever you want. It needs to be supported.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 06:46, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Alright, though I don't agree with it I'll let this rest. Sorry for the trouble, I'm not familiar with all these guidelines.Mr.hotkeys 06:50, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

I could put a massive box on your usertalk that will allow you to read up on anything you may not know, but it's the newbie welcoming template.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 06:57, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		I'm awarding you this RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar for your great contributions and for blocking or banning vandals and other problematic editors. Great work! Wikidudeman ^(talk) 09:17, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 09:17, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Hip Hop

Hi Ryūlóng--I just wanted to make sure that you meant to change Hip Hop from redirecting to the disambiguation page. The material from the page ~~has~~ had been merged per consensus, but if you believe the consensus poll should stay open longer, no problem, just checking. Please just let me know how to proceed. Thanks!-RoBoTam^ice 13:09, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

There was a load of confusion going about with hip hop and hip hop music and the redirect. There is too much history, and there were copy-paste moves going on.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 21:04, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Discussion notice

This discussion was sparked by my learning of some of your subpages. You may wish to participate in the discussion. GRBerry 18:57, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Request

Hey, my dear friend. I'm an administrator on the Spanish wikipedia, and we have talked more than once concerning vandalism in both wikipedias. I've blocked Tokoblue several times, as you asked me to do so. Now, I need a favour. Can you help me? There is one annoying guy on Spanish wikipedia, who hates administrators in general, calling them fascists. The same guy has been blocked there for violating WP:Etiquette. Unfortunately, he took his revenge with the user who rightly blocked him, Siabef. If you look at his page, you'll see how he insulted him and talked him badly. I hope you understand Spanish, in order to be aware of this serious fault. Here you have, for instance, some diffs that can help you: this, and this one. I hope you can block him. Thank you in advance. Kind regards, --Gustave - May I help you? 20:30, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

He was insulted here and there. I hope you can do something, because I'll be absent tomorrow and perhaps a couple of days more. I leave all in your wise hands. Greetings, --Gustave - May I help you? 23:58, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

24.186.41.57

Hello again, Ryulong. It has come to my attention that the user 24.186.41.57 has been making unsavory edits to the various PR character articles. Messing with infoboxes, mostly. Not necessarily vandalism, but it's on the verge of being so. After I noticed and reverted many of said edits I went to his talk page to warn him. And in doing so I noticed that he'd been warned several times before over various things. As such, I was wondering if you could do something about him. A stern warning, or perhaps a blocking if it has to be done. Thanks --Venomaru 2.0 00:22, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

NBAonNBC block

How did you determine that NBAonNBC (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is actually Tecmobowl? Checkuser? This account's behavior would be a very odd twist for Tecmobowl. —Wknight94 (talk) 01:21, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Look at the contributions. Nearly all to Tecmobowl's subpages.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 01:30, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

He was on some odd crusade to reconstruct Tecmobowl's talk archives. Odd yes, but Tecmobowl was more inclined to erase his talk pages, not reconstruct them. This behavior is very un-Tecmobowl like. I am going to request a checkuser for this one because it doesn't feel right at all. —Wknight94 (talk) 01:33, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

It is too blatantly obvious. I don't know why you cannot see it.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 01:35, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I understand what you're saying and don't blame you for blocking. It just doesn't seem to fit the Tecmobowl pattern. I'm probably wrong but I want to be sure. —Wknight94 (talk) 01:38, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

In case you still care, Vassyana (talk · contribs) and I were apparently investigating the same avenues and both concluded that NBAonNBC = User:Sarah Goldberg. That is sitting much better with me. Sorry for the bother. —Wknight94 (talk) 02:16, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, I knew it was someone evading, but I was just watching the account because I couldn't decide just exactly quite who it was as it didn't seem Tecmo's MO. Good catch all around.--Isotope23 ^talk 02:45, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

User talk:Baseball Bugs

Thanks for your concern, but please don't delete stuff from my talk page. I like to keep it all together and then archive it from time to time. I don't know what's up with User:NBAonNBC. I just assumed he was trying to do something semi-useful, albeit water-under-the-bridge by now. Baseball Bugs 02:43, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Banned users' edits are to be removed on sight.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 03:28, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Understood. In any case, I'll be archiving the latest megillah soon. Baseball Bugs 03:50, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Your advice on editing some of the Power Rangers pages

Concerning the listings of the monsters for Mighty Morphin Power Rangers Season 1-3, it's been noted on the occasions when a monster would appear in a video game or comic in the section for the monster. That said, would it be more appropriate to leave it as is or put up a section for their Appearances In Other Media? 71.115.195.228 02:52, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry

Ha, sorry about that. Just wanted to get a screencap of that for a friend. Wondering how long it would take someone to change it. MB 05:33, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, there's now a permanent link to it, which is better than a screencap.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 05:34, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Proxy servers

How can you tell when one is one? Do you have something that specifically shows it to be one, or is some guesswork involved?

I Google a questionable IP, and find it on an open proxy list.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 05:58, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

So a bit of both, then. I just wondered, because I often see 'proxy servers' being perm-blocked and was wondering how you knew they were. HalfShadow 05:59, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

WTF Dude

You deleted my Penix article. What gives you the right? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bacta (talk • contribs)

I'm an administrator. It was nonsense. And the site you linked to was probably improper. You have done nothing but create nonsense pages since you registered your account. I am reblocking you.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 09:07, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

I need a second opinion.

Is pig-headedness of this magnitude impressive, frightening or sad? HalfShadow 09:58, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 10:00, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Kenma

Though "X Kenma" is a title, it doesn't need to have "the" before it if it's followed by the name, much like "King Richard". Fractyl 16:28, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

It looks better to me.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 18:50, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

It doesn't in terms of a title, in the Kenmas' case is like the title of a prince or a king, you don't add the to the name if a name follows, or would you prefer "The Prince Charming". Now, if it was like a summary, that'll be different in certain cases, but not in a profile. Fractyl 21:49, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Okay.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 21:52, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

What?

You deleted 68.224.239.145 notice, and you restored the old talkpage. Why did you do this? In retaliation? Don't do that, please. ionas68224|talk|contribs|email 18:51, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Someone else may use that IP in the future.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 18:52, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Why did you restore the old talkpage there? I am not a vandal. ionas68224|talk|contribs|email 19:01, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Because it is never common practice to do what you did.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 19:03, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar, and a funny one

		The ass-kicking barnstar
		In recognition of your vandal ass-kicking!

Danke—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 00:28, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Looks funny (sorta)-- PNiddy Go! 0 01:06, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

LOL--Xterra 1 (talk)(Work) 02:14, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

I want to set up my own cabal

I want to set up my own cabal, but I couldn't figure out how you did that penguin; since it links up to a subpage. Could you tell me how to do it? Thanks. Lighthead 20:59, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

There is no cabal.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 21:05, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

There is no cabal. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 21:07, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Yo, man, TINC. —« ANIMUM » 21:07, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

No such cabal exists.--Jersey Devil 21:08, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

What cabal? Spartaz ^Humbug! 21:13, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

No seriously! Lighthead 22:01, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

There is no cabal.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 22:08, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

Cabal? What's a cabal? --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 02:23, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

I apologize for my fellow Wikipedians' secretiveness above. You can find detailed information on the cabal at User:Krimpet/Fake link. Good luck =) --Krimpet 03:17, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Pfft. Sattelite is far better than cabal any day. HalfShadow 07:31, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

I hate you sometimes Krimpet :P Oh, by the way, the Cabal is in Australia ;) Giggy ^{Talk | Review} 07:46, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

No it isn't. It doesn't exist. It's all my ugly sockpuppet's fault... --DarkFalls ^talk 07:57, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Will someone please tell me what's going on here? It's like the Americans claiming that there's no Area 51. -- Alt iris Exeunt 13:06, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

There is no Area 51. (WP:TINC by the way). Giggy ^{Talk | Review} 22:09, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Actually, Americans are very clear that there's an Area 51. They're also very clear that if anyone gets close and isn't invited, they get shot. [1] ~Kylu (u|t) 05:33, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Ah-haa, I can understand the blatant 'there is no cabal' now. Does that imply that this page is just for display? -- Alt iris Exeunt 08:41, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

光線の発射はご遠慮下さい—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 09:19, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

...sorry, what's that? I apologise, but I've yet to learn Japanese and Babel Fish translated it as 'Discharge of the light ray modesty'. -- Alt iris Exeunt 10:00, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

That's about right.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 10:00, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Award

I noticed your RfCU (Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Ryulong) and commented on it.

I say: block first and ask questions later. You seem to be an administrator with the balls to do it. -- Petri Krohn 01:19, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Here We Go Again...

Sorry to bother you, Ryulong, but could you please check this page and confirm that this image can be used? Thanks. -- Alt iris Exeunt 13:09, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

They can use whatever image they want.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 20:34, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Template:/header

A template you created, Template:/header, has been marked for deletion as a deprecated and orphaned template. If, after 14 days, there has been no objection, the template will be deleted. If you wish to object to its deletion, please list your objection here and feel free to remove the {{deprecated}} tag from the template. If you feel the deletion is appropriate, no further action is necessary. Cheers. --MZMcBride 19:05, 5 August 2007 (UTC)

Your RfC...

Alright then. I'd better beat it into my head. -- Alt iris Exeunt 09:55, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Why?

Why? Why if I helped you everytime you asked me, now you leave me alone? I asked you a favour, that's all! I didn't even assume you were going to block that guy but, at least, I long for an answer. Anyway, I guess you had your reasons, but I insist, you could have answered me and you didn't. Greetings, --Gustave - May I help you? 19:02, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, nevermind. He was blocked by another administrator. However, I didn't mean Tokoblue, I was talking about User:Quantumleap, who insulted User:Siabef on the Spanish wikipedia and, since he was blocked there for that action, he took his revenge here and was also blocked for two weeks, in consequence. I asked you to block him because we have talked several times before and because I had helped you everytime you asked me. Anyway, I'm not upset, maybe a little bit disappointed, since you didn't answer me nor gave me any explanation. Now you did so, and I understand you could have missed that part out. I have read some of your messages and, as I could see, you were not having your best week. Well, have a nice week! Kind regards, --Gustave - May I help you? 21:00, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Blocking user:75.176.32.12

Thanks for dealing with this user's edits just now, and blocking him -- he seems to be the ip of a small group of socks that make the same edits to these articles in defiance of everyone else, see Wikipedia:Suspected_sock_puppets/JJonz, and he's somewhat annoying to deal with, so thanks for your help! P.S, I want that admin revert-user-edits tool you seem to have that reverted all his edits in a flash... either that or you're just a fast mouser. Gscshoyru 10:01, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

User:Goldendeity

See Special:Contributions/Goldendeity. Just happened upon this user while flipping through Bobobobobosomething's sock puppet page. His first edit blanked the page, while further edits seemed to mirror editing behavior by the original. Sock? Not sure, but just giving a heads up. Floria L 21:26, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Ah man, Bobabobabo's back? Damn it....The Clawed One 21:48, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

There was another user, XiangWong who was also a blatant sock.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 21:50, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject Japan taskforces

In order to encourage more participation, and to help people find a specific area in which they are more able to help out, we have organized taskforces at WikiProject Japan. Please visit the Participants page and update the list with the taskforces in which you wish to participate. Links to all the taskforces are found at the top of the list of participants.

Please let me know if you have any questions, and thank you for helping out! ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 01:32, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Need some help on articles

Some people are adding inaccurate information to Super Sentai related-articles. I am reverting them and making them accurate as possible. I need a little more help if you don't mind. Thanks. Greg Jones II 13:14, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Protection

Thanks for your comments, both on WT:TOKU and my talk page. I did not quite understand why this semi-protection happened. Once again, thanks. Greg Jones II 23:58, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks...

WikiThanks

...for adding that bit of syntax to Today's Featured Article, so that the image doesn't display on the user pages that have it transcluded. That helps bolster the argument for keeping the image considerably, and I wouldn't have known how to do it. I appreciate the tweak. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 06:32, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Welcome :P—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 06:52, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

There is some vandalism in some Super Sentai articles - i.e. Seijuu Sentai Gingaman (in which the narrator, Norio Wakamoto, is changed to Toru Ohira). I have now reported it at WP:ANI just to let you know. I suspect the IPs of sockpuppetry. Greg Jones II 14:14, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

The user IPs who are vandalizing the articles are User:210.213.240.27, User:210.213.240.28, User:210.213.241.7 and User:210.213.243.198. Greg Jones II 14:37, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

We have usual problems with anonymous editors from Manila and Quezon with the Sentai articles. Their edits are intermittent and does not require ANI (I think) because I do not want to block one of the islands of the Philippines.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 21:07, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

If the problems rise again, I will revert them, but I will need some help. Maybe we could semi-protect the Super Sentai articles from anonymous editors? Just a suggestion. Greg Jones II 21:12, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

That is not feasible or necessary.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 21:13, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree. If that is the case, I apologize for my comment above. Greg Jones II 21:21, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

I usually copy the info from the Japanese interwiki sites for Super Sentai shows, so I feel that it is necessary to add them. I also apologize for my bad comments. Greg Jones II 21:32, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Rant

You may want to have a look at this edit [2] I've already deleted it but you may want to have a word with the user who posted it. Kelpin 18:05, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Hey, dude! Just a question

How will you know if an IP address is a proxy server or not? PNiddy Go! 0 03:05, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

That's a secret.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 03:22, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

hey, Scryulong

Why can't I remove it from my userpage? It is not important, and it is an eyesore (to quote you) to my well-designed userpage. Maybe you have a personal grudge against me or something, maybe just angry. Whatever it is, stop it. I am trying to forgive you and be nice, but we need both sides to agree and it seems you are biting the newbies and continuing the conflict. ionas68224|talk|contribs|email 05:10, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

You have experience at simple:. You have been at en: for a whole month now, and you are well learned in the policies. You randomly decided to comment on my RFC calling for my desysopping despite never ever hearing of me before nor knowing absolutely any of the issues at hand. You were blocked for that disruption. You actively sockpuppeted during your block with your IP, Tres apropos (talk · contribs), and Jdmorrison (talk · contribs). And because of that I put the template on your userpage. You are lucky to be allowed back to edit at all at the English Wikipedia.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 05:14, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Ryulong, this is pitiful. Just forgive, okay?:) I will try to reënter as a new person, as I have the privelige to be allowed back in. Hopefully, things such as philosophies won't limit us from getting along, right!? I would like to get along. I will stop the personal attacks and bury the hatchet if you bury yours. It is the strength of forgiveness that heals the mind, soul, and body. Although I call for your desysopping to teach you not to block users like that, hoopefully we'll get over that stuff and focus on similarities not differences. We can stop the conflicts and get along, but you have to be in this plan too. I am eleven years old. I am not a troll. Get over old, small stuff like sockpuppetry that's not currently happening. The reason that I want that removed is that 1. It gives me a bad reputation as an editor, and 2. It is ugly. Be forgiving. Be free.And overall,

ASSUME GOOD FAITH

with me and other fellow editors. Stop conflicting, 'kay? Calm down:). Cheers, ionas68224|talk|contribs|email 05:33, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

I only assume good faith unless the evidence shows me otherwise.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 05:34, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

What?!?!?!??!?!? What evidence are you talking about?I told you, I'm 11, I don't understand the doublespeak. Now get along, alright! ionas68224|talk|contribs|email 05:39, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

I assumed good faith until you called for my desysopping, started this thread with "Scryulong," called me a Leninist "Kabbalist" (I have no clue what that is supposed to mean), and were generally disruptive and being a sheep for Wikipedia Review under this and your other accounts at the English Wikipedia. Shape up, or ship out.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 05:42, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

I was trying to "Shape up", but you refused and were cynical with my plan to just "Get along". Sorry "Scryulong" was offensive to you, but you were trying to screw me out of my dignity. I have made some words about you. Are you cynical also that I'm a kid? Well, that's the truth. As for WpR and Daniel Brandt, well that's a perfect example of the "differnces" I said to forgive. I am trying to become a new person.ionas68224|talk|contribs|email 05:50, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Please respond. Don't be an ass like this. I'm 11 years old. ionas68224|talk|contribs|email 06:15, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

For an 11 year old you know a nice variety of big words. Heed jpgordon's warning.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 06:23, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Adam Park/Retro Rangers

Ryulong, I noticed you removed the succession box addition that was made to the Adam Park page, and even though I didn't add it to begin with, I think it has merit. It is my belief that the "Retro Rangers" have as much right to be in said succession boxes as say... the Alien Rangers. Even though the Retro Rangers didn't replace the PROO Rangers for very long, they were still counted as their replacements. In the eyes of the Sentinel Knight, they were the official longterm replacements, even if the OO Rangers, and in fact the Retro Rangers themselves, made it so that didn't come to pass.

As such, instead of reverting your edits and getting into some sort of misunderstanding-based edit war, I've come to you directly to appeal the revision, given that the source material clearly states they were replacements, and not just a visiting team. --Venomaru 2.0 01:06, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Not really. They're only temporary (really temporary).—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 02:30, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Ah yes yes, but that's sort of my point. They were temporary in the grander scheme, to the production company, to the series in general. But the succession boxes are about the in-continuity aspects. And within the context of the show and the continuity, they were meant to be the longterm replacements. As was clearly stated by the Sentinel Knight when he called them the replacements (I'm paraphrasing, of course).

What I'm saying is that if we make the distinction of temporary here, we have to make the same distinction for the Alien Rangers, who only succeeded the MMPR Rangers for 10 episodes. And then if you really wants to get into semantics, all modern PR teams are "temporary" only lasting one season each. My point being, sure they had only been a team for two episodes. But they were still designated as the official replacement team within canon, and as such, should be given the relevant succession boxes for their pages stating as much. --Venomaru 2.0 02:48, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

It would be hard to keep anything as being sequential for the group due to the fact that their color scheme did not mesh with PROO's (it is more like Liveman's). They were there for a special episode, and that's really that. And it adds too many succession boxes that have the same before and after.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 03:00, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Hm, perhaps you're right. The color scheme and before and after Rangers do needlessly complicate matters. Alrighty then, no succession boxes it is~ --Venomaru 2.0 14:35, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Hello Ryulong

Saw you on and thought I'd pester you to circumvent AIV. Israelian (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is going nuts on the vandalism and a blocky would be useful. Thank you for your consideration. 69.59.17.25 09:32, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Kay, and you might be?—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 09:33, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Probably best to block this IP as an open proxy also. See ya, have a good night. 69.59.17.25 09:34, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Request for unprotection of "Comparison of file systems"

Hello,

I noticed that the Comparison of file systems page is semi-protected. It seemed strange to me that I couldn't edit the page; from the "view source" page, I found out that the page was protected, and discovered that to request unprotection, I should refer to the administrator that locked the page at first.

The page was locked almost five months ago, with the intent of doing it temporarily, I presume. By reading the protection policy, I understand that the number of protected pages should be kept to a minimum, to encourage edits by occasional visitors like me. This is why I prefer to see the page unlocked rather than requesting minor edits in the talk page, unless there are compelling reasons to do otherwise.

I searched the archives in your talk page and found this request on the same subject. Your response to that earlier request was that the page is a "common target" (I assume you referred to vandalism). While I can understand that locking a page can be a response to a high volume of vandalism on a disputed topic, I don't see the point in doing that on a page that displays a summary of factual data based on references to technical sources.

The opinions above are dictated by common sense; maybe there are some issues involved in unblocking the page that I'm not aware of, but in this case I'd like you to explain your motives clearly, considering that I'm new to Wikipedia and my thoughts are based just on a reading of the policies. At first I also thought that the page was protected to limit the chance of introducing inaccurate data; thinking it over, I concluded this is unrelated with the reasons for protection.

Thank you for your attention,

87.15.20.138 14:49, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Another IP used for automated vandalism.

202.93.233.68 also uses 217.141.249.203 - please also block 217 indefinitely to reduce the whack-a-moling. -- Jeandré, 2007-08-12t16:53z

UsernameHardBlocked and Baron von Banhammer-Krapenhoeffer

I am responding to an unblock request at User talk:Baron von Banhammer-Krapenhoeffer. He was username blocked with autoblock, account creation disabled and e-mail blocked. The block log does not explain why you think this name needs to be given a hard block, and no message was given to the user.

I assume the name is blocked for being to long? Is there some reason I cannot see that this warranted a hard block? Until (1 == 2) 20:11, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

A username like "Baron von Banhammer-Krapenhoeffer did not seem like one that was done in good faith.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 21:47, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

History certainly knows longer barons. And even if it alludes to the "banhammer" phrase, it seems more hilarious than bad faith. And certainly not worthy of a hardblock with disabled account creation - WP:BP#Setting block options - this is only to be used "when blocking malicious usernames"; and neither an email ban, which "should only be used in cases of abuse of the "email this user" feature". Миша 13 21:57, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

The name does not appear malicious, this user should be allowed to create a new account. I would like to change your block to a soft block, what do you think about that? Until (1 == 2) 22:16, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Sounds alright.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 22:16, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. Until (1 == 2) 22:20, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

Sandanbara Imagin

You seem to forget, a Imagin's form is based on a legend/myth the host has in the mind. But noting the show's nature, I can't doubt the legend to be something immoral. Fractyl 22:19, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

I do not think that there is a Japanese legend that features characters with three asses. I'll also be looking up Buriburi to add to the page, since he is the "legendary Himajin"—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 22:22, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

It may not be a japanese tale, but I was aiming more to the monkey-style appearence. As for Buriburi, it makes sense due to Shin-O's appearence. Fractyl 22:25, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

If you want to find where it comes from, be my guest. Until then, let's leave it translated.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 22:34, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

User:78.129.131.27

I was about to block this user myself but discovered you had beaten me to the punch. I was suprised to see that you had blocked indef. You haven't indicated whether it was an open proxy and otherwise the block seems excessive and contra policy. Is there a reason for this? I also see that you haven't left any block messages - this makes it very difficult for any passing stray admin reviewing an unblock request. Spartaz ^Humbug! 18:09, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Meetup

Wikipedia:Meetup/St. Petersburg 4 Raul654 18:52, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Deleting the QuakeSim User Page

I was not aware that I was editing my user page rather than the actual page for QuakeSim. The information I had was not for advertisement or anything of the sort. QuakeSim is a NASA Project about earthquake and gelology studies. We merely wanted to have a wikipedia page about QuakeSim the project. I was told by another user that I had edited my userpage rather than the actual QuakeSim encyclopedia page and was planning on fixing this.

QuakeSim 22:01, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

You moved the article back into your userspace, and wanted to control its content. If there is to be a page on the QuakeSim project, it should be at QuakeSim and not User:QuakeSim.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 22:21, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Additionally, it needs to read like an encyclopedia article and contain secondary resources. If the only mention of QuakeSim is at quakesim.org and nasa.gov, that doesn't really mean it's notable for inclusion.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 22:24, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

Well the resources are quakesim.org, desdyni.org, and a couple of brochures that were created here by JPL employees. I don't understand what the problem is. QuakeSim is a NASA project that we JPL employees work on and wanted to have a QuakeSim wikipedia page with a brief explanation of the project and its components. What would I have to do to ensure that the QuakeSim article is not deleted? QuakeSim 22:30, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

I also have sources to different websites like the National Science Foundation and SCIGN. QuakeSim 22:45, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

There is also an inherent problem with being an employee and writing the article on your own project.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 23:41, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't see what the problem is. There is no conflict of interest present. Yes I am an employee and writing the article on the project I work with but I am nto the only one working on the project. Also, a conflict of interest as I understood it in the link you provided me is if I am an employee or have an affilliation with the article topic and am creating the article so that I can promote my own personal ideas and gain my own personal benefits from providing this information to the public. I get no benefit from this. We decided to create this page because we wanted to provide the public with another way of learning about the QuakeSim project and its components. This article is designed ONLY TO BENEFIT THE PUBLIC and not the people affilliated with the topic. If you were to read the article before deleting it you would have realized that nowhere in the article is there any information that remotely implies that we have written the article with any purpose or intent of self-promotion. All the information is there so that YOU and the public who do NOT work on this project are informed about what is going on and know where you might be able to get more information about it or related topics.

QuakeSim 00:16, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Ahh... no, you really do have a conflict of interest. That doesn't necessarily mean everything you say should be removed (I haven't read up on this), but you have a stake in how this group is presented. – Luna Santin (talk) 00:19, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

FYI: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:Ryulong.--Chaser - T 00:46, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Very lau(d/gh)able.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 00:46, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Another sysop restored. I'm taking it to AFD. No reason having a wheel-war over this nonsense.--Chaser - T 00:56, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Question: Ryulong, why did you delete the userfied version of the article? We routinely userfy articles when they are deleted. Of everything that happened in this series of events, that one I do not understand at all. Thanks much - KillerChihuahua^?!? 10:28, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm...

You say that Sixth Rangers don't have the series name in their ranger title, but as defined in the Other Ranger and Ranger-like Allies page, the Omega Ranger is technically a White Ranger. Shadow, Kat/Cat, and Nova Rangers all have S.P.D. in their names, and the lady rangers are by definition Other Rangers, so by definition, Sam should have it as well. And if you're going to use the official Power Rangers website as referance, I suggest otherwise, as it is seriously flawed. There is only slight mention of the Green Power Ranger, and no mention of the Gold Ranger, Silver Space Ranger, S.P.D. rangers besides the core 5 and Doggie, Wolf Warrior, and refers to the Lightspeed Rangers as Rescue Rangers, where they were always called by the former in the show. I hope that the expressing of my opinion doesn't have my account cancelled.CrystallixRed 00:47, 14 August 2007 (UTC)CrystallixRed

The Omega Ranger was just the "Omega Ranger," as far as I remember. The Silver Ranger was just the "Silver Ranger," etc. The official site is a little conflicting, and the "technically a White Ranger" thing does not carry over to PR.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 00:48, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Actually, when he first shows up in present S.P.D. time, he says to Morgana, "It's only going to take 1 ranger to stop you; S.P.D. Omega Ranger!" Also, I've recently been seeing Dr. Manx as the Cat Ranger, but I've only ever seen it spelled with a 'K'. Do you know which is the correct spelling of her ragner designation?CrystallixRed 01:09, 14 August 2007 (UTC)CrystallixRed

Okay, then it is "S.P.D. Omega Ranger." And it's "Kat Ranger"—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 01:51, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of Sinhala Slang -> Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Sinhala_Slang

As the orginator and primary editor of above article, I understand and totally agree with the decision. I am not going to campaign for undeletion, as I do understand that there are two major issues with it. (WP is not a dictionary, and WP is not for OR). However, I want to publish this work in few Sri Lanka sites. (with credits to all its contributors, and WP and also stating the reason why it was deleted from WP) I have been getting backups of the article content, and the wiki sources, but I may have missed last few edits on it. I was under the impression that deleted arcticles can be accessed, but unfortunately it does not seems to be the case. Can you let me know if there is a way in getting copy of the article (and the wiki source for it) just before the deletion? Please reply on my talk page Ritigala Jayasena 05:31, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Could you kindly e-mail me the wiki source for the article? (as when it was deleted). Thanks a bunch in advance Ritigala Jayasena 08:44, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: Lucky Star (manga) note

I undid them because of what I said; English should always be first on an English Wikipedia. There's a naming convention you can read at WP:ENGLISH which expresses this. You said yourself that most anime fans would not be as familiar with tokusatsu as they would be with anime, and that is reason enough for me to pipelink the foreign term. To back up my claim, I had no idea what tokusatsu meant until only 6 months ago or so, and that was only after I saw the Wikipedia article on it, and I've been watching anime for nearly three years now. Not only that, but if a reader has to read through prose that has English and foreign terms, it will be jarring to the reader and they may be confused. The point is to keep them in the article they are reading instead of having to go to the tokusatsu article to find out what it is if they do not know. Thus, I have reverted your most recent two edits.--十八 16:46, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

User:Nirelan and User:Irelann and the Dave Winer article

Hello Ryulong. You're the admin who was following the activities of Nirelan (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) some time back. He is the person who was edit warring at Dave Winer. You last blocked him on 18 February, for one month. You protected the article itself on 23 February to prevent him from continuing to edit the article as an IP. The semi-protection was removed on 3 August. Nick Irelan has now returned as Irelann (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) with similar edits, and is approaching 3RR at Dave Winer. Can you advise what we should do next? It is possible that his block evasion and use of multiple accounts would win him an extension. Thanks, EdJohnston 21:08, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Irelann is blocked indefinitely for continuing to edit war under another name. Nirelan is not blocked currently.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 21:38, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for addressing this so quickly. Since I wrote to you last, an IP editor 68.254.80.12 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) who is presumably also Nick Irelan, has been making some of the same edits to Dave Winer. Do you think it is time to restore the semi-protection? It was in place from 23 February through 3 August, if I recall correctly. The trouble started up again after protection was removed. EdJohnston 18:57, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

The cabal came to the rescue and now we have semi-protection extending to 16 September. Do you think it would be worth going to WP:CSN to try to get Irelan on the list of banned users? In practice, admins have been very helpful, but it would simplify the future reporting process if he were banned (since he'll just keep coming back as an IP, I assume). EdJohnston 23:43, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Indef block

Can I ask you why you posted a message stating that I have been indefinitely blocked for violating the user name policy, my user name was changed by an admin. Clearly you must be mistaken? IvoShandor 09:25, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

I guess that wasn't you? Sorry. IvoShandor 09:27, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Yep, wasn't me.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 09:36, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

Check out Special:Contributions/Uifjei. Someone seems to be trolling in your name.

Peter ^Isotalo 09:26, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Very hillarious.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 09:36, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

User dispute

Since your the only administrator I can find that is involved with Tokusatsu articles I'll address this too you. The user User:Naruto134 keeps recreating the Keizer_Ghidorah article and making threats and hyperboles on the talk page when it was agreed that the article was unnecessary on the Ghidorah talk page. He has also done the same on my own talk page as well.--CLS 22:42, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Tratare

I strongly suspect that user Tratare is another sockpuppet of EverybodyHatesChris due to a similar, almost identical, edit history between the two accounts and other socks:

to name a few. Edits that tipped me off were on Talk:The Undertaker (diff) (diff) - Deep Shadow 03:11, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Blocking User:Zasdcxz

Could you explain please your decision to block indefinitely User:Zasdcxz? He is a new user and probably blanked a page just by an accident. He never did any "POV forking" which you cite as a reason of his block. Thank you. Biophys 05:57, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Welcome back

Other than some things you didn't accept(Like Gaoh), I made sure the pages were'nt mess with. By the way, I must ask you able Gon-Gon Fist? I think the "Gon-Gon" as actually "ゴンゴン"(The first letters in GONgu) as "Stern/厳" is "Gen". Fractyl 22:41, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

another anonymous proxy

User:69.4.133.124 Check my talk page history for why. It's a TOR server. --Tbeatty 07:11, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Good call

Good call. Who do you think he was?Proabivouac 07:13, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Zer0faults/SevenOfDiamonds/SixOfDiamonds/NuclearUmpf—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 07:15, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Should I take him off the Alienus RfCU queue? As I said, that was just a guess.Proabivouac 07:17, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Maybe I'm wrong. It's just a hunch, and it is 3 am here.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 07:18, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Okay, goodnight.Proabivouac 07:28, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Pokémon films

I found this list pretty useful, why was it removed? There must be another reason other than only because it was made by a user that's now blocked (or banned). TheBlazikenMaster 09:28, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Solely because the creator and primary editor is a banned individual.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 18:12, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Social space user User:BleedingJustice

This user looks like a "this is my Myspace page" user. Most of this user's mainspace edits (also under anon IP User:71.213.82.37) seems to be adding names of bands s/he likes to articles -- I found this person through coming across this inappropriate edit to the Kansas article. --Yksin 18:08, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

97.99.126.217

Are you sure its a proxy? It doesn't look like one to me, it seems to be a residential road runner address. (While someone could be running a proxy or have a compromised system, it fails my usual tests.) Thatcher131 20:59, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

I'd venture it's not a proxy -- it's a single abusive editor (so far, about 15 blocked usernames, no unblocked usernames, dwell at that IP.) --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 21:07, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
- I'd venture that 97.99.126.217 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) is Bobabobabo's new home address.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 21:47, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

OK, well maybe we should change the reason. Thatcher131 22:59, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Pokémon films

I was just fixing this article to remove the FU galleries, when I noticed you'd deleted it this morning, and it had been re-created. I haven't re-deleted it, as with the FU fixed it does look like a serviceable article - is there any reason why it was deleted other than being a product of a banned user? Cheers, ELIMINATORJR 23:02, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Again, it's a banned user's creation and solely a banned user's creation.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 23:08, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Deleting Paulie's World Entire Userpage

Hiya! I logged in today to find my userpage completely gone with the message "We are not a free webhost for someone with very little contributions." This was also speedily deleted which is very surprising for a userpage. The content of my page may have been questionable, but it was in upwards of 75% Wikipedia related, well within guidelines. It was also vandalized to contain a sexual picture (the original complaint against it) that I had nothing to do with (and the history confirms this). I think it's ridiculous that I got deleted this fast just for being a low contributor and a victim of vandalism. Seems like Wikipedia should be more equal and tolerant than this considering that this is a user page and not an article. Holla! LOLHI IM PAULIE 01:59, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

There is nothing against you recreating it. However, please change your signature so there is no blinking feature.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 02:05, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I see why you deleted it now. You didn't like the rainbow blinkies. Is deleting a userpage you don't like standard practice? Holla! LOLHI IM PAULIE 02:28, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

It's a practice not done on Wikipedia.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 02:55, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

82.148.96.68

Hi Ryulong. 82.148.96.68 (talk · contribs · logs) seems to be here to post non-sense. 82.148.97.69 (talk · contribs · logs) is not much better and 82.148.96.68 tried to unblock [3][4] 82.148.97.69. I do not have enough experience dealing with such matters. Would you please look into this? Thanks. -- Jreferee ^(Talk) 06:41, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Question

Just curious, when you become an admin, do you have to download anything? Cheers, JetLover ^(talk) 22:58, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

No.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 23:00, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

User:207.7.163.83

Just letting you know I reversed a block you inappropriately placed on this IP address. 1 week with blocked account creation for accidentally blanking a page, whilst trying to fix a delete tag? Please use more good faith next time instead of reaching for the banhammer.

It's also customary (and courtesy) to warn the user before blocking, and then place a block template. You failed to do either of these things. Did you not learn a thing from your very recent RfC? I'm hoping there's no more of these ridiculous blocks from you, as I have no time or desire to go through your block log. Majorly (talk) 00:36, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

I was just blocking based on the edits deleted within.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 01:42, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Well you can't have checked the edits then. Also, why the lack of warning? And why a week? That's pretty excessive for a non-offence. Majorly (talk) 01:48, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

~~One week is not that excessive in light of the provocational attacks made against User:Eyrian.~~ El_C 01:55, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Huh? What attacks are these? He blanked the page on one edit, then fixed a delete tag on another. Where's the "provocational attacks"? Majorly (talk) 02:00, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh yeah, that's right. I'll just count it to an honest mistake (seeing how I made the exact same one just now); I think this matter is resolved, unless Ryulong has something further to add. No real harm done. El_C 02:10, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it was all a mistake in the block. I just went through every IP that editted the page and blocked for a week (there were no other edits from any of the IPs involved at the time). I should have looked further in, but why else would anyone be editting anything resembling that page title?—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 01:26, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Recall

You are, according to your userpage, open to recall. How many users do you require to request this before submitting yourself to a revote? I want you to stand for a new RfA, I want my request to count towards a fixed total, and I don't want it to be forgotten when you archive your talk page or anything like that. Everyking 11:02, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Why am I to stand for a new RfA now?—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 21:26, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

You very frequently misuse admin powers to block people for excessive lengths of time, often for things that are done in good faith and call for no penalty at all; for example, see the section immediately above this one. I do not believe you will change this, because you have promised to do so many times but continue to use admin powers inappropriately. Furthermore, your original RfA did not reach the accepted minimum level for promotion, making it highly questionable whether you ever had the community's agreement to become an admin in the first place. Everyking 00:25, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

All of this was covered in length and I have been changing my methods and ways in response. The fact that my RFA had a below average passage rate is of no necessity in requiring that I go through it, again, as it's not supposed to be a popularity contest or a majority vote. Unless there's some major and incredibly idiotic thing that I did in the last 24 hours with my bit that I am not recalcitrant about, I don't see any reason why I should bend to your sudden whims for a lynching. I stated that my block of the IP above was a mistake, as I was going solely by the links in the Special:Undelete, without checking anything other than that (which was a minor mistake that should be completely fixed by now). Unless you have something new to add to this issue that I am not working on fixing, I am not going to agree to a recall at this moment in time.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 01:31, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

I did not expect you to say that you agreed with me that you should face a new RfA, nor did I expect you to submit yourself to a new RfA based on my request alone. I only hoped that you would count my request towards some set number in favor of a recall, and that you would honor your openness to recall if that set number is reached. Are you saying that your openness to recall depends not on the number of people requesting it, but on your feelings about the legitimacy of their reasons for requesting it? Doesn't that undermine the whole spirit of it? Everyking 01:50, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

I have yet to flesh out those things. Right now, I have electromagnetics homework to worry about, so Wikipedia bureaucracy is on the backburner.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 01:59, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

BJAODN subpage deletions

Hello! I have some concerns about the deletion of certain BJAODN subpages, and raised them at Wikipedia talk:Silly things#Additional subpages deleted. I wanted to invite you to comment there. Please note that I am not accusing you of doing anything wrong. Thanks for your time, and your efforts. Wikipedia benefits from those who care. —DragonHawk (talk|hist) 14:15, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

On this note, I've undeleted those subpages - they were deliberately spared in my close. Note that I would not consider a nomination of some or all of them querelous in the least - I went for a relatively narrow close in the hopes of reaching a non-contenious position on as much as possible. Phil Sandifer 15:54, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

I didn't know what was supposed to have been deleted or not. It was said that they were to be deleted.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 21:25, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Unsure why my IP was blocked by you until October

I am unclear as to why you blocked my IP from editing. COMP: 24.70.95.203, block ID: #558455. The reason given was Abuse from the IP. I received no warnings and at this point I am still not sure what was edited from this computer that justified blocking it from editing. I await your explanation. Moisanite 11:32, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

I am not sure what the block was about, but so long as you can edit now, there is no issue.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 17:53, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

A-Squad

I noticed that on the S.P.D. Rangers page, the rangers' succesion boxes don't include the A-Squad. Similarly, there are no succesion boxes in the A-Squad Rangers page. Shouldn't they be added?CrystallixRed 02:36, 26 August 2007 (UTC)CrystallixRed

No, as they were not primary characters nor would they really fit in to any sort of chronology.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 03:22, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

True, they didn't play a very important role, but neither did the Wild West Rangers, yet they appear in succession boxes. The A-Squad were still rangers, so, shouldn't that somewhat entitle them to being listed?CrystallixRed 04:12, 26 August 2007 (UTC)CrystallixRed

They do? Where are the Wild West Rangers listed?—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 04:14, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, they did. But I feel that the A-Squad should be listed, and the Wild West Rangers as well. Although some don't necessarily acknowledge them, they're rangers (or rather, were), and they did precede the B-Squad (according to Beginnings), so they do fit chronologically.CrystallixRed 04:31, 26 August 2007 (UTC)CrystallixRed

Not very well, though.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 04:32, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

I see your point. Still, do they deserve a spot? 'They' also includeds the Wild West Rangers.CrystallixRed 04:36, 26 August 2007 (UTC)CrystallixRed

Chronologically, no. Encyclopedically, yes.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 04:38, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Excuse my naiveness, but is that a yes?CrystallixRed 04:43, 26 August 2007 (UTC)CrystallixRed

No succession box changing.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 04:44, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Was that a challenge?

:-) -- But|seriously|folks 07:11, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Just an observation.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 07:32, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

user:YourLord

You indefblocked this user as a sockpuppeteer in May of year; an action which I can only applaud. He has now shown up on my talk page as user:81.152.188.27; as you can see, he is asking who fingered him as a puppet master, but does not appear to have any recent vandalism to his name. He appears to have overlooked the point that if he wishes to argue about his block, appearing as a sock is a poor way to do it. Do we leave him alone, or block his new IP? I assume that his original IP was blocked in May. --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 22:39, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, it's not really sockpuppetry if they're IPs. Just let him be, and tell him to request an unblock on User:YourLord through the proper channels.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 23:18, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

I've got a problem

Hi again,Ryu. Could I add a hyperlink to my signature? It leads to a site for the Maxthon browser.Xterra 1 (talk)(Work)(?)

No.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 01:15, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

'K. I know WP has different standards. I won't add the link.Xterra 1 (talk)(Work)(?) 01:34, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

It's actually built into the software that you can't.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 01:38, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

That's honestly a shock. On another wiki I have that very link.Xterra 1 (talk)(Work)(?) 02:00, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm fairly sure it's disabled here.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 02:01, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Super Smash Bros. Brawl

Whatever the hell was going on back there, kudos on fixing it :) Guess too many admins spoil the sauce, huh? Fvasconcellos (t·c) 01:33, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Yep.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 01:38, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

A merge

Hello Ryulong, I came across your recent merge mentioned above. Would you mind looking into a deletion/merge request on Pussycat Dolls, please, if you're not too busy? It's a page with a large history, and since I've never performed a delete/merge before, I thought I'd better ask an administrator with much more experience than me about this. Thanks. Acalamari 02:02, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Doesn't seem to be necessary.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 02:07, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

I didn't think so either. Thanks. Acalamari 02:10, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

And Z-man wasted some time...—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 02:11, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Not that hard (would have been easier without the db lock in the middle though) Mr.Z-mantalk¢ 02:14, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

But it wasn't needed. There was no history or authoring at the redirect to require it.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 02:15, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Z-Man, it was the history merge that caused the db lock. That's why we don't do them if GFDL does not require it. Its not that its too difficult, its that there's a knock-on effect on everyone editing Wikipedia for no benefit. WjBscribe 02:17, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

I was unaware that the deletion of a page with a large history did that. That explains the occasional locks. Thanks for mentioning it. Acalamari 03:31, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Negroid

Please explain to me, why use an outdated image, that one may think serves as a term for a Negroid type, in this 21st century? You're POV is just that. It does not matter what the source says, in fact it is not clear that the text supports the image in question. Now the page is again protected. This is not helpful nor constructive for Wikipedia articles, which should be up to date. Not based on some 19th century's version of what is or what isn't. Unless, or course, it is stated as such. - Jeeny ^Talk 05:32, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

The term itself is archaic and that fact is stated in the first sentence of the article. So why should there not be an image that represents the anachronistic value of the term. The page is protected due to edit warring, which did happen. If you need to argue over the whole concept, do so on the talk page, as I could easily crack open my physical anthropology textbook and find descriptions of the terms and how they are outdated. I am not going to discuss this issue any more.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 05:36, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, OK. Thanks for your response. But, that you will not discuss it further is disappointing and suspicious. This is not a history book, nor a paper encyclopedia, as you well know. So, just because the first sentence may say this, it is important to point it out in other sections. Not propagating a myth. You should have discussed it on the talk page. As it's an ongoing issue. I'll assume good faith that you "clicked the wrong button" when deleting my post, but .... - Jeeny ^Talk 05:43, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

What does the fact that Wikipedia is not a history book or a paper encyclopedia have to do with anything? Encyclopedias have information on everything, including historical topics. And those historical topics are illustrated by whatever means there are. If this means using an early 20th century image in the public domain to illustrate a term that is rarely used except in a historical context, then we, as an encyclopedia, should cover the topic as such. You are supposed to go beyond the term and topic and focus on the encyclopedic value the image brings to inform the reader about the topic at hand.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 05:49, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Exactly. I totally agree. But, the image has to state this is a historical term. If it does or cannot, then it should not be in the article. - Jeeny ^Talk 05:56, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

And how does the caption (stating the image is from 1914) or the text of the article not do so?—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 05:57, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Because the plate says, "Native Africans". And that does not mean they are Negroid types. That's why. - Jeeny ^Talk 06:00, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

And the article states that the term "negroid" is an outdated term for the general morphology of the native African peoples, does it not?—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 06:01, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

??

Why did you remove the comments by Hakozen on my talk page without my chance to read or address them? Rarelibra 12:47, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

He was forum shopping and pursing an anti-Armenian agenda. We don't need more people like him nor his attack filled messages.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 19:06, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Reverting edits on talk pages?

Hi, I don't know if it's within the duties of an administrator but you deleted a user's message from my talk page. I have no intentions of indulging in the activites THAT user is but I would like to have the option to decide myself.

tl;dr: why did you delete stuff from my talk page?

Regards, --Suleyman Habeeb 18:32, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

He was forum shopping and pursing an anti-Armenian agenda. We don't need more people like him nor his attack filled messages.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 19:06, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

I still don't think you or anyone should delete stuff from people's talk pages.--Suleyman Habeeb 08:55, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Wikipe-tan/Temple

I noticed you deleted Wikipedia talk:Wikipe-tan/Temple, which is a talk page archive for Wikipedia talk:Wikipe-tan, with the reason "MFD results". However, there is no link to the MFD on the deletion reason, and I couldn't find a link to any MFD discussion in the deleted revisions of the page itself. Whatlinkshere also didn't return any MFD page. Could you tell me which MFD it was? If the archive is to be kept deleted, the discussions would probably have to be restored to the talk page, but I cannot tell without looking at the deletion discussion. --cesarb 02:05, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry about that. It was the BJAODN MFD that I thought that was supposed to be deleted under.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 06:05, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

User:Hakozen

Dear Ryulong, I awared that you reverted a message in my talk from that user, after following suitable links also I saw that you blocked -indef- that user due to (mainly for this Turkish message). I think you had a misinformation about this message(except the fact that to distribute to many user as a spam);

There is no any political POV pushing in this message such an invitation to keep/save Turkey related pages from attacks of fanatic Armenien Users.

Here is a translation of this message; arkadaşlar merhaba-Hello friends-, şu sıralar wikideki ermeniler iyice azıtmış durumda-these days,Armenien wikipedians are going too far-, türkiye ve türkler hakkındaki tüm kaynakları referanslarıyla birlikte imha çabası içerisindeler- they are making efforts to destroy the all sources and related references about Turkey and Turks-. özellikle "Turkey", "Turkish People" ve "Turkic peoples " sayfaları ve bunlar ile bağlantılı sayfalar hiç olmadığı kadar tehdit altında-especially; "Turkey", "Turkish People" ve "Turkic peoples " articles and linked articles are under threat as never become before, türkiyenin neredeyse tüm şehirlerinin sayfalarına kendi ulusal reklamlarını eklemek üzereler-they are about to add their advertisements to almost all cities of Turkey-. bununlada yetineyip kendileriyle hiçbir alakası olmayan "tarihteki türk uygarlıkları" ile ilgili makalelere saldırma çirkinliğinide atlamıyorlar-they are not contented with this(adding advertisements..); also they are not forget/leave out their uggly attacks to the articles related with "Turkish civilizations in history" which are not any relations with them-. lütfen aşşağıdaki bu ve bunun gibi wiki bağlantılarını kullanarak bu tehdite karşı koyalım-Please, lets resist to this threat using following and similar wiki links. sayıları bizden çok daha az yeterki organize olalım- number/amount of theirs(armenian users)is less than ours, just we need to organize-. saygılar-respects

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion
Wikipedia:Requests for page protection
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism

--hakozen 01:15, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

As you can see , he just invite Turkish users to have an organizing effort to save Turkey related pages-resist to illegal POV pushing- using wiki rules. There is no any illegal/POV invitation.In other words I think to block this user indefinitely is not suitable, a punishment for sending spam messages may be acceptable. Sorry for my intervene and Thanks for your understanding. Regards Must.^T ^C 20:54, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

I think an indef is absolutely warranted here at this point simply for the level of spamming that editor engaged in. If he commits to not spamming again perhaps his block could be refactored, but at this point there is no reason to simply impose an arbitrary timed block if he is simply going to come back and spam again.--Isotope23 ^talk 21:00, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
- I gave him exact instructions on how to request an unblock. I am not going to unblock him at this point, because he doesn't really look like someone we can trust on editting Wikipedia.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 21:31, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree, I tried to comprise with him but he just harrases other users by there ethnicity. --Vonones 22:10, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

The issue here is that Hakozen is clearly trying to make Wikipedia a battleground, and, if I may, Wikipedia is not a battleground. Any user trying to encourage otherwise is clearly going to end up disrupting Wikipedia more so than this pointless Turkish vs Armenian dispute already is, and unless the user explains himself clearly and understands that this is not a place to hold a grudge against a group of people, I strongly support the indefinite block of him. Cowman109^Talk 18:25, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Gekiranger Lessons 25-26

"Just my Shigeki"
- Covered the episode's relation to the plot

"Consulting your Worries"
- The Rinki Soldiers are more like the terracotta soldiers in the 1st Emperor's tomb.

Fractyl 23:09, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Zaido in Metal Heroes

Hi there! I just want to ask why you reverted the entries i added on Metal Heroes section regarding Zaido. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kyupayb (talk • contribs) 05:37, August 30, 2007 (UTC)

It's unsourced as far as anyone knows. You have to support the information you add to articles.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 15:22, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

America's Next Top Model, Cycle 9

I saw that you were the admin who deleted the page back in April, when it was just a crystal ball article. The CW has begun heavy promotion of the new show now and they've released information on the contestants, so the article is now able to be created in earnest. Can you please restore the article so work can begin on it?Rebochan 12:55, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

If it exists, then it can be written about.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 15:20, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Beg Pardon?

I haven't uploaded any images. User:Zappernapper has yet he stopped early this month. -WarthogDemon 17:29, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

You added them all to the articles.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 17:30, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

I added a few. The reason for the change was that the previous ones DIDN'T have a fair use rationale. It started with the problem here and the solution here. Anything else beyond that I do not know. -WarthogDemon 17:35, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Why

Why did you change my message board? --Kızıl Şaman 21:12, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Read #User:Hakozen—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 21:13, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Offical Show Art: Denliner

You can use the these. The offical art used in the movie's trading card series.

Fractyl 00:45, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Less pictures showing many things in context (the eyecatches, the movie preview stuff, the Denkousekka) is better than multiple pictures.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 21:20, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Maybe, but the pix are offical art work, you might combine the pix and use them for the DenLiner section. I also found pix of ZeroLiner & GaohLiner(Both in respective Rider talk pages). Fractyl 23:29, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

The thing is that we need less copyrighted works, and having all characters in the same image with descriptions of them and whatnot in context in the series (actually appearing on screen together) is better for the project than those pix.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 04:36, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

America's Next Top Model, Cycle 9

As the new season is starting, and there is verifiable information (contestant information, premiere date, etc), I believe that this page can be unprotected now. Can you please do so? Thanks in advance. SKS2K6 05:16, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Oh, didn't realize that, sorry.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 05:21, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Pokémon movies

Hey Ryulong. Just FYI - I took this out of your cascading prot page per user request on WP:RPP, the rationale given that this would probably make a good redirect. I'm inclined to agree here - Alison ☺ 12:28, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

The protection was due to a banned user's edits.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 22:03, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I understand. Thing is, though, the article had never been created & we had an irate editor over on WP:RPP as a result ("what the hell is going on here?") - Alison ☺ 22:38, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Bubba The Love Sponge

The page is currently nothing more than a stub, and with the protection, this can not be improved. I intend to begin rewriting the page, and not participate in the revision war, which I believe will end as soon as the page began to get rewritin from the ground up. --JLennox 17:43, 31 August 2007 (UTC)