User talk:Ryulong/Archive 2

• 1
• Archive 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• 6
• 7
• 10
• 20
• 30
• 40
• 50
• 60
• 70
• 80
• 90
• 100

Your edit to Puffkins

Your recent edit to Puffkins (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // Tawkerbot2 05:17, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

In regard to my edits to Power Rangers: Zeo

I was in the process of doing so, check the reason for why I did Zero X Marquis 01:22, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Manticore

Okay, my mistake, thanks for giving a clear reference...l8r. -CaptainJade9

3rr

You are in danger of violating the three-revert rule on a page. Please cease further reverts or you may be blocked from further editing. abakharev 07:49, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Windows "Fiji"

This appears to be a content dispute, not vandalism. I'm going to ask everyone involved to read WP:V: "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth." Unsourced data can be removed at any time by any editor. Thanks. :) RadioKirk (u|t|c) 07:38, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

It just seemed odd that he had removed information, and replaced it with what he claims is true. I was merely working off of what is deemed to be vandalism. Ryulong 07:42, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

It's not vandalism if the editor is making a good-faith attempt to improve an article. If a user has been advised of policy or guidelines and continues to make the identical edits, then it can be considered vandalism or a violation of WP:3RR. Happy editing! RadioKirk (u|t|c) 07:45, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Okay, but what about the personal attack inserted in the hidden text of WP:AIV? Ryulong 07:47, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm the one who reverted it; it was a response, misguided or otherwise, not a personal attack. RadioKirk (u|t|c) 07:50, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Very true. I guess it's just that I don't really trust IP editors when I check the recent changes list. His edits just struck me as odd to begin with, and that's why I did what I did. Ryulong 07:53, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Sounds good. Meantime, after reading this edit, I'm inclined to point out that User:SchmuckyTheCat is absolutely correct; without a verifiable source, we cannot include specifics of what may or may not be true. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. RadioKirk (u|t|c) 07:56, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Even if the specifics are mutliple? With the use of multiple things that may be predecessors/updated, I'd say that's being vague, while being specific. Ryulong 08:00, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Again, there has to be a reliable source for the information, no matter how "multiple". If the entry engages in supposition of any kind, it's guesswork; if it's fact and you can't demonstrate it as so, it's original research. Wiki is an encyclopedia and, when spotted, is very particular—because we all have to be. :) RadioKirk (u|t|c) 08:05, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

All right then. Ryulong 08:14, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

4chan eddit summaries

Can you please remember to sort out your differences with other editors using the discussion page rather than getting into an edit war. (Same message left at other talk pages) -- Francs2000 File:Flag of Buckinghamshire.png 09:51, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

3rr

You are in danger of violating the three-revert rule on a page. Please cease further reverts or you may be blocked from further editing. abakharev 07:49, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Silk Spitter

This is megasean3000, telling you that i was wrong about Silk Spinner and that it's Silk Spitter, and for those mistakes, i apoligize. If that's okay? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Megasean3000 (talk • contribs)

Melee FC

The AfD tag was removed because the original creator of the tag tagged the article due to bias against the user. However if the tag was replaced by a non-bias user the tag will not be removed. The initial AfD was vandalism, therefore I was inclined to remove it. However, now it will not be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.248.218.111 (talk • contribs)

Picture Upload

Hi, it's megasean3000 again, if you don't mind can you show me how to upload images onto wikapedia. If you don't mind. Because i have some interesting images of Xiaolin Showdown ready to upload. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Megasean3000 (talk • contribs)

Concerning your query about usernames/e-mail

Yes, there is a policy forbidding exactly this; see here. Cheers and happy editing. Lectonar 08:14, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Even the bad usernames shouldn't be listed at AIV, as they are, strictly speaking, not vandalism. The correct page would be WP:AN/I, but I deal with them at AIV anyway. Lectonar 08:21, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Possibly because the email address username you listed wasn't a blatant inappropriate username. Usernames that are likely to vandalise and contain swears should probably be listed at WP:AIV. This is my opinion though.--Andeh 08:22, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

TPIR Talk page

Sorry about any confusion I may have caused with my little rant. The meatpuppet accusations are just a major sore spot with me -- they're completely false, but I have no way to actually prove it. -TPIRFanSteve 05:02, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Now

Ive Got a Better picture of Kimiko in my pictures, how do I get it on there?— Preceding unsigned comment added by SerpentsTail (talk • contribs)

How do I get it on the page?— Preceding unsigned comment added by SerpentsTail (talk • contribs)

I got it on Google.— Preceding unsigned comment added by SerpentsTail (talk • contribs)

Ok, but I got it at a place I dont remember the name.— Preceding unsigned comment added by SerpentsTail (talk • contribs)

Truth

sorry for having the truth bud,I hope I dident offend you or make you think for a second. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joelsmades6 (talk • contribs)

E-mail

E-mail me and i will destroy you with words joelsmades6@yahoo.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joelsmades6 (talk • contribs)

Fear

why are you so afraid — Preceding unsigned comment added by Joelsmades6 (talk • contribs)

Adding specials on List of Super Sentai episodes

I added specials to List of Super Sentai episodes, from the articles of both Sentai series. July 7, 2006 15:09 Philippine time — Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.213.94.83 (talk • contribs)

ZyuRanger

Sorry for accidentally reverting your change to Kyouryuu Sentai ZyuRanger re: Zyu2 while reverting the episode list blanking. It was not my intent. jgp (T|C) 07:58, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Categories for Userboxes

I tried to add categories to two Userboxes I created, {{User City of Heroes}} and {{User City of Villains}}. I can see that the categories are listed on my user page, but when I check the category (at least for the City of Heroes one) it only lists one user, and no others. What did I do wrong? Ryulong 08:30, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Note: the Categories are Category:Wikipedians who play City of Heroes and Category:Wikipedians who play City of Villains

Er--I'm assuming the second one should be Category:Wikipedians who play City of Villains? Anyway, my best guess is that it's taking time for the database to be reloaded, due to the transclusive nature of templates. jgp (T|C) 08:39, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, the second one should be that. Stupid Copy-pasting. So the only thing is that it's taking a while for the database to be reloaded? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryulong (talk • contribs)

That's my best guess. Note that some other usernames are starting to show up in the category... jgp (T|C) 08:41, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I can see that now. I'm finally listed in the categories. Ryulong 08:42, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Dummy edit

How exactly do I make a dummy edit? The help page isn't that clear. Ryulong 07:11, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

The page does say how: you added some extra spaces within the article text (eg put some extra spaces above a paragraph). However there is rarely any reason to make a dummy edit (I have never needed to make one in my Wikipedia career), what are you trying to achieve?--Commander Keane 07:16, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't know. I found the page one day, and wondered what it meant, exactly. Ryulong 07:35, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Question about an AfD I listed

I recently listed the article Kyoryuu Sentai ZyuRanger 2 for deletion because of copyvio and the lack of notability due to a much more well written section on the subject of the article placed on another related article (Mighty Morphin Power Rangers). This afternoon, I found that another article, this one entitled Zyu2 (which is the more widely accepted term for the content in the first article) was linked to the section of the Power Rangers article, and I put an AfD on it and added it to the currently ongoing AfD for the first article. It was essentially a copy and paste of the section about Zyu2 in the Power Rangers article, and I'm wondering if this was the right thing to do. I don't know if I should have instead listed it for speedy deletion, or perhaps made it a redirect to the currently AfD'd "Kyoryuu Sentai ZyuRanger 2". For the more established editors, what should I do? Ryulong 19:39, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

That looks exactly right - it's clear you've added a 2nd article onto the nomination, and you've said why. I can't see any problems with it :) -- 9cds^(talk) 19:44, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

(No heading)

Um, why we're my changes problematic? That page was not organized correctly. Catastros did not need to be a heading, it should either be put in a new scetion, or be a bold title to go along with the mention of all other megazords. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.23.108.15 (talk • contribs)

but

It from devient art. a website that has fanart. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SerpentsTail (talk • contribs)

Yes

Yes that was I was talking about. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SerpentsTail (talk • contribs)

Thanks

Thanks for putting the copyright on it, pal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by SerpentsTail (talk • contribs)

Tommy Oliver

Hey about those edits to Tommy Oliver, I didn't realize that they divide the section so that you could edit single season. I appreciate you sending me a message though and getting it out of the way, otherwise, we would just be deleting each other's work for no reason. I am an avid Power Rangers fan and am looking forward to making the Power Rangers section the best it can be. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Unclerico89 (talk • contribs)

Power Rangers Characters

{{Power Rangers Characters}} Yea no problem. Hey I have a question. I have no idea how to edit the above box. Can you tell me? Thanks for the help.--Unclerico89 03:45, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Re:Editing the Power Rangers Characters Template

Well, I wish to add more characters to it, namely Kira Ford and Ethan James. I am a huge Dino Thunder fan and am currently expanding their files. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Unclerico89 (talk • contribs)

Ah... I'll do that for you, not much of a problem. If you want to edit it in the future, you can do so at Template:Power Rangers Characters. Ryulong 03:52, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Oh, I get it now. Thanks a lot, man. Hey one last thing, how come whenever I go to change the picture of Tommy Oliver (the one in his infobox), the image won't show.-- [User:Unclerico89|Unclerico89]] 04:02, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Image for Tommy

I wanted to put a Dino Thunder pic of Tommy in to make it more up to date. The pic is Tommy89.JPG — Preceding unsigned comment added by Unclerico89 (talk • contribs)

Sebastian the Ibis

Sorry I don't have any photos of Sebastian, but I'll keep my eye out. Only one I've seen is the more a drawing than a photo, and I think you included that on the page (which, by the way, is quite good!). MiamiDolphins3 23:46, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

New blocking software?

So, what's up with the new blocking stuff that's mentioned on WP:AN that people are thinking of permablocking all of unregistered AOL editors? Ryulong 01:33, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

{helpme} can't answer this question. Continue discussion at WP:AN. A good rule of thumb is that {helpme} should only be used for building the encyclopedia,--Commander Keane 01:39, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

AIV

Heh--I was just adding a sockpuppet/meatpuppet warning about 202.163.208.50 when you made your edit to WP:AIV mentioning his presence, but I got caught by the edit conflict. How's that for coincidence? jgp (T|C) 05:26, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

A recent AfD I started...

I was browsing around a category and found some pages that didn't seem notable: Power Rangers Theme Tune, V-Lancer, and The Best of the Power Rangers: The Ultimate Rangers. I listed these pages for deletion, with "Power Rangers Theme Tune" as the main article that the others were listed under as a multiple AfD. Where I originally found the first article about a random single non-notable, it was revealed through the AfD discussion that this single hit #3 on the UK Singles charts and passes WP:MUSIC and is notable. I rescinded my delete for that article, but I now feel that the two articles I listed with it may also be considered as part of the Keep reasons as they are now unrelated to the header article. I attempted to relist the articles as {{db-context}} but they were subsequently removed because I have them still listed as AfD for the Theme Tune article. I do not know what to do now. Remove the other two articles from the AfD and relist them as db-context, start an entirely new AfD for them, or do nothing. Ryulong 01:35, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

I would suggest relisting the others. They aren't really related and shouldn't have been listed together in the first place, IMO. You should relist the second two in separate AFDs for a total of 3.—WAvegetarian•(talk) 01:42, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

...But, wait until it closes, then relist. Let the current one run its course. You can always relist them and they aren't hurting anything by hanging around for a few more days. —WAvegetarian•(talk) 01:46, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Now you tell me. I've just editted V-Lancer to reflect a new AfD. Besides, the mass of the conversation at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Power Rangers Theme Tune has segued more to the single, and not the other ones. I'll still continue, and make a not at the current AfD to reflect my changes. Ryulong 01:48, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

And now that is done at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/V-Lancer and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Best of the Power Rangers: The Ultimate Rangers. Ryulong 01:57, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Power Rangers AFD

It doesn't do much good to respond here and then immediately archive. :) Anyway, the ...but... comment was paraphrased from User:Dawson's suggestion on the irc channel #wikipedia-bootcamp. I think what you did was fine. —WAvegetarian•(talk) 03:06, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry about the archiving, and thank you (if you didn't see, I also listed that they were once part of the first AfD). Ryulong 03:07, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Super Sentai talk page

Yeah I looked at that note and your submission awhile ago and I just found that Ninja Sentai Kakuranger has descriptions in their mecha page and possibly in some of their character description page which I traced back to that same user have descriptions from a former Sentai page that is no longer active called Skull Corps which I reconize since I used to travel to when I started on gathering data on Super Sentai, the descriptions can also be found and that the summary was posted last April. -Adv193 01:38, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

ok

ok. SerpentsTail

AIV

I do not see any real vandalism in the contributions of the 202....IP's you reported, only changes which could be made in good faith (see here). Have you tried talking to the user(s) who are making the changes?. Cheers. Lectonar 07:22, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

The various changes that the 202 IPs made were deleterious to the Super Sentai articles, and probably could have been warned using the {{verror}} template series. The IPs changed the names of various official translations, and they constantly repeated these edits, despite being warned as to what had they had done with {{test-n}} type templates by another editor. While good faith should have been assumed, they still repeated their actions despite being warned that they were doing unconstructive edits. Ryulong 07:28, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

The one edit which was reverted mentioned a high popularity in Brazil; it could be that the users are not getting the message at all. Let's see what others have to say about this, but please at least try to sort things on the article talk-pages. Regards. Lectonar 07:34, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

The primary problem with this IP range is that they (probably not deliberately) insert false information into the articles by the method of replacing "Robo" with "Robot". These edits are the ones that are being reverted and listing as vandalism. In fact, an editor in the range that was blocked last night recently did such an edit to Chikyuu Sentai Fiveman, the diff of which can be seen here. It is these edits that are harmful, and repeated by the range. I have left a message on the first IP (the one that was blocked last night) explaining the "Robo" and not "Robot" dilemma, and I hope he will get the message. Ryulong 07:38, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks and userbox?

Thanks for putting the sock puppet thing on Bluecanoe, I forgot. Also, what's the tag for the American English userbox, I'd like to put that on mine? Thanks. --Awiseman 20:19, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I found the code for it. Gracias! --Awiseman 20:20, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for fixing my entry in the Articles for Deletion log. I should have previewed. ... discospinster _talk 02:16, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Welcome. Ryulong 02:17, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

A well-deserved award...

For your continued maintenance of the Mighty Morphin Power Rangers article, I, Michael, award you, Ryulong, the Working Man's Barnstar. Keep up the good work! Michael 04:40, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Is there a way to remove an edit history from my User page's history?

I know that vandals generally don't revert, but is there a way that recent vandalism to my User page be removed completely from its history? I really don't need the threat of the anus image back through an asshole's (no pun intended) reversions. Ryulong 07:26, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

After finding out this vandal's MO, I know I want the history removed permanently. I was vandalised by a sock of User:WatchtowerJihad. Ryulong 07:31, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it is possible, but unlikely. If the image exists legitimately on Wikipedia it could be added back manually anyway. History deletion is usually reserved for removing personally identifying information ans such.—WAvegetarian•(talk) 07:33, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

But I've found out that this vandal does reversions, as seen at his list of suspected sockpuppets. Even though it can be manually added, I don't want it back through reversions, regardless. Ryulong 07:35, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

If you don't mind losing the earlier record of edit's I'd be fine to delete your userpage and restore only the last good version, though this would make some of your edits counts as deleted edits (which might bother some). --Alf ^melmac 07:39, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

How would that bother some? Ryulong 07:41, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Some people like their edit count to go up instead of down ;) I could also just delete the page after you have copied the code and you could then start it again after it's deletion. --07:43, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

The delete and then you restore would be fine. A lot of the early stuff is full of Userboxes until I put them on a subpage. But I'll copy the code to one of my talk archive's user pages until then, just in case. Ryulong 07:44, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Ryulong, I'm removing the helpme as it's not a general indicator for people who want help. Please contact Wiki alf directly on his talk page for more about this. I'm also open to any help you may need on my talk page. Thanks, Tangotango 07:45, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Okay. If either of you will still be reading this, is there any way you can help me with sprotection? Ryulong 07:46, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Yes I can sprotect after you've reposted the content, make sure you have copied the code and I'll delete the page in the next couple of minutes. --Alf ^melmac 07:48, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Code's been copied, pasted, and saved at User:Ryulong/Archive 1 and User:Ryulong/Archive 2. :D Ryulong 07:49, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Also, I'm pretty sure that I'll be able to edit the sprotected page. I've had an account since February. 07:50, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Content reposted. 07:51, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

And now sprotected, up to you whether you want to use the sprotected label or not I guess. Hope it goes better/they go away soon. --Alf ^melmac 07:53, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

I think I'll leave the sprotect label off. I think the idiots will just find that they can only view source. And they might resort to vandalising here, which wouldn't be a very good thing, but I guess it would be wrong to sprotect a User talk page, even if there are idiotic vandals. Ryulong 07:55, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations

Nice job, Junior. Ninja Storm Power Rangers looks good. You really showed dedication and follow-through. ACS (Wikipedian) 07:39, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. The only problem is that there's probably a good sized chunk of redirect links. Now I just have to wait for another requested move to go through before I end up doing it myself. Ryulong 08:04, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Feh. Redirects abound. Don't ever let anyone convince you they're a bad thing. Abusable? Sure. Overusible? Yea. To be avoid at all costs? Heck no! Ahem. Forgive me if this comes off as over zealous, but I'v noticed a raising Anti-Redirect sentiment in the community. Anyway...good luck with the Mystic Force thing. Uniformity is key. ACS (Wikipedian) 08:28, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Brett Stewart (actor)

Ninja Storm, as a minor Guest star and SPD as Omega Ranger. Found out back when I was on RB. He's noted as actually looking like the kid who played young, human Sam. Still, they eventually just used some stunt guy who didn't even have the right hair color in the end. I guess we're to assume Sam takes to dyeing it. >.> ACS (Wikipedian) 08:28, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

See ye talk page. Ryulong 08:29, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

4chan

Hi not sure if you are aware but:

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly, as you are doing in 4chan. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert a single page more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the effect of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you.

Others are watching the page for vandalism Regards--A Y Arktos\^talk 23:57, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

4chan 3rr

• Notwithstanding your edit summary and your top of page header, I find your archiving a little prompt. While, because you archive, you may fall outside the scope of the warnings in the series {{wr0}} - in my opinion you are cutting a pretty fine line. In looking at the reversions on the 4chan article, I don't think they can be fully characterised as "vandalism/non-verifiable content". Non-verified content is dealt with by adding tags such as {{fact}} in the first instance or discussing on the talk page (which you have done) and waiting for response (which you did not). Reversion of vandalism is usually clear cut - as in the "DESU DESU DESU" vandalism. Edits such as [1] are not removal of vandalism. They are in my view directly covered by the 3RR, regardless of how provocative the edit summary appended to the addition of the content appears. You will need to leave it to the judgment of another editor if they continue to remove within 24 hours. There seems no problem with this approach in this case.--A Y Arktos\^talk 00:25, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Okay then. It's just that content such as invasions have been in question of their notability for some time. The changing of "Anonymity" to "Anonymous" is not really necessary, as the near-good faith editors have done so. The "Sourdough breads often reach store shelves at speeds in excess of 70 mph" picture with its caption is patent nonsense. And the /b/radio section was deemed by another editor to be non-notable. I will leave your latest message here for a period of time, although I will still copy it over to my archives. Ryulong 00:33, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

• I understand your frustration. The point is it is not mere vandalism and you need to abide by the 3RR and other Wikipedia guidelines, especially if you want to be protected by them in turn. If other editors agree with your editorial stance, they will also revert poor content additions. I have no difficulty with why you are objecting to the editorial changes, nor what you are disagreeing with - it is the how you are managing content changes that can be a problem :-) Regards --A Y Arktos\^talk 00:37, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

I also do not want to be a target for the users of the boards. I had my User page sprotected because of WatchtowerJihad sockpuppets, and I don't need my talk page or any subpages to be vandalized by /b/tards. The mentioning of my user name specifically in several of the edit summaries was a final straw. Ryulong 00:40, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Semi-protection should work, and established users can be blocked for personal attacks. Is targetting your user name a problem because it is used elsewhere as a username (ie non-wikipedia sites)? If so, you know you can change it - keeping all your edit contributions intact - if you wish to increase your anonymity. See Wikipedia:Changing username - just a suggestion if that is the problem. Regards--A Y Arktos\^talk 00:48, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

I do use this username elsewhere, but it is what I have been using for a while. And I doubt that they would be able to find my username elsewhere due to various numbers I use after it. I believe I am safe, for now. Ryulong 00:56, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Joseph Patrick Moore

I have placed this article under Wikipedia:Deletion review if you would like to be involved. Thanks! OSU80 02:10, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Tyler111

This is Tyler111, how do you archive things. Thanks for the info if you can help. Tyler111

User:Bluecanoe2

Looks like another sockpuppet. I reverted this puppet's edits to Joseph Patrick Moore. And to think they are going to actually keep the article around when obvious puppets are attempting to advertise. blah! OSU80 00:09, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

I've listed him at WP:RFCU. We'll see what happens there. Ryūlóng 00:18, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

All of the accounts listed have attempted to edit the same sites. I'm sure they're sockpuppets. Hopefully they'll all get blocked. OSU80 00:35, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, supposedly the first attempted to get "our" (referring to the company) account deleted. Ryūlóng 00:35, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

67.22.6.175

User's behavior is not simple vandalism. Try to talk to the user or bring it up on WP:ANI not WP:AIV. Thanks. JoshuaZ 02:10, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

User:Doctorteddynewman

smells like a wet sock(puppet) to me. Shows up on Wiki today (7/18), makes a lot of trivial edits to articles about various notable bassists, and then spams Joseph Patrick Moore with a ton o' links. Oh, and on the talk page, he claims that Moore was "endorsed by the Weather Channel". [2]

What think you?

--EngineerScotty 05:52, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Me thinks I just reverted and it be time we tag this guy for sockpuppetry. Ryūlóng 05:56, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

CheckUser

Yeah it's funny how they've already ran the check user for user:Blnguyen here but have yet to give yours attention which was posted the day before his. I've been given the impression on IRC that they play favorites there. There aren't even any clerk notes yet. OSU80 00:01, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

And then there are the additional users I've listed. Is there anyway to go onto IRC and get someone to checkuser? Ryūlóng 00:05, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm going to drop User:Blnguyen a line, he's a buddy of mine. Maybe he can help. I don't want to make any of the users with checkuser rights mad, you know what i mean? OSU80 00:13, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. And I may be finally able to use the crappy Blue Canoe Records logo if this set ever gets a WP:LTA entry XD. Ryūlóng 00:14, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for fixing my WP:AIV report. [3] I need to report that as a bug. -- Gogo Dodo 00:15, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

S'okay. Ryūlóng 00:16, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Vandals

You know what happens when vandals can't get a rise out of you anymore...? ..they get bored, and realize it's more productive to fix things, rather than break them--AOL account (205.188.116.200) 00:54, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Dino Thunder

If you happen to actually look at the show, you will find out that they were called by their dinosaur name: Red Tyranno, Yellow Ptera, Blue Tricera, Black Brachio & White Drago - not Red Dino, Blue Dino, etc. Please check your facts, Ryulong, and get off my back about this... Sonic_Shadow 11:16 July 20, 2006 (UTC)

Well, the website is wrong... take for example Power Rangers: Ninja Storm; Shane, Dustin & Tori were called the Wind Rangers (Wind Morphers/Wind Rangers); Hunter & Blake were called the Thunder Rangers (Thunder Morphers/Thunder Rangers); and Cam the (Green) Samurai Ranger (Samurai Morpher/Samurai Ranger). The names go by the respective power source/morpher, not by the fact that they have dino powers. Sonic_Shadow 00:08 July 21, 2006 (UTC)

That's what I'm trying to tell you, Ryulong; some sources have not updated the facts. The morphers on Power Rangers: Dino Thunder are named after their respective dinosaur: Tyranno Morpher (Conner/Red Tyranno Ranger), Ptera Morpher (Kira/Yellow Ptera Ranger), Tricera Morpher (Ethan/Blue Tricera Ranger), Brachio Morpher (Tommy/Black Brachio Ranger) and Drago Morpher (Trent/White Drago Ranger). They've even been called so on the show... in several episodes, I might add! So, please, rely on the show itself... not these so-called "sources". Sonic_Shadow 00:19 July 21, 2006 (UTC)

So will I... let's update, Ryulong... Sonic_Shadow 00:21 July 21, 2006 (UTC)

Your Power Ranger edits

Hi! Please remember that a minor edit is a spelling or grammar change, or punctuation correcting. If you change part of the article content - as you've done, it should really be marked as a normal edit. Thanks. HawkerTyphoon 01:49, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Kay...even if it was changing the use of the phrase "Dino Ranger". Ryūlóng 01:52, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Check User

And then there are the additional users I've listed. Is there anyway to go onto IRC and get someone to checkuser? Ryūlóng 00:06, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. And I may be finally able to use the crappy Blue Canoe Records logo if this set ever gets a WP:LTA entry XD. Ryūlóng 00:14, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi Mike. Not sure why my new request skipped past your request. Perhaps the case is more complex and they are still analysing the dat? Mine only involved Anwar and two IPs. Thanks, Blnguyen | rant-line 01:49, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Ryulong fyi, my response from Blnguyen. OSU80 01:54, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Danke for showing me. Ryūlóng 01:56, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

No problem man. I thought about that too though. Maybe it is just taking one of them longer because it is more complex than what we believe. I don't understand why though, it seems obvious to me...OSU80 02:00, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, it might be harder to prove Doctorteddynewman, as he appears to have a (semi)-unrelated IP (although still based in Atlanta, where Mr. Moore and Ms. Frieske call home). Ryūlóng 02:03, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Requested Move disappeared

I have been trying to move Mystic Force Rangers to Mystic Force Power Rangers. After a week on the talk page, I went to check the Requested Moves page and it has been removed and not placed in the backlog. Should I chalk this up to the move being in process, or has it been ignored and should I go through another Requested Move process, or be bold? Ryūlóng 21:24, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Looks like someone messed up here when adding a new request. I'll fix it. --pgk^(talk) 21:37, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Nookdog

Sorry I rarely use IRC and don't have any special admin rights on any of the channels. I'm sorry we've pushed Nookdog out to there. I'm not sure who owns the IRC channels, you may need to track them down. Gwernol 01:35, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

I would advise you not to believe this "a vandal got my password" nonsense. Its fairly clear this is the user Nookdog trying to get himself unblocked. He's admitted he's a vandal, has created sockpuppets and I personally have given up on assuming good faith after having been burnt several times in the last few days. This one is trouble and nothing he says is trustworthy. I rarely give up on good faith, but this one has pushed m past my limit. Best,Gwernol 01:39, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Request for investigation processed

Hello Ryulong. Please note that your recent request for investigation concerning Mjc0961 has been processed. The administrator commented "Archived; no edits since 24-hour block". Thank you. // [admin] Pathoschild (^talk/_map) 04:16, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

vandalism

How was this edit reverting vandalism.... you removed a celebrity infobox.... I don't understand. gren グレン 10:01, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

You are quite right. I just pasted the wrong link which happened to be a diff on another article. This edit has you removing a celebrity infobox as vandalism on Shilpa Shetty. I was curious why you did that. Although, some of the text seems to deserve to be removed. Sorry about pasting the wrong link. gren グレン 20:12, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I just wanted to make sure there wasn't a specific reason that I shouldn't have done that. Thanks. gren グレン 20:15, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

New Power Rangers Page

Hey I created a new page called Enhancement Modes in Power Rangers. I was wondering if you would contribute your knowledge to this page. Thanks, --Unclerico89 03:51, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

How do you think it looks? I mean I know it will get better but the concept of the page is a good idea though.--Unclerico89 04:04, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Hey do you think we could link the Battlizer and Enhancment Modes in Power Rangers pages to the Power Rangers Characters Template? Or do you think it would be best to not do that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Unclerico89 (talk • contribs)

Xiaolin Showdown in Thai WP

Hello, just answering your question, in Thai Wikipedia the picture's claimed as a fair-use image in the category of manga/anime picture. --Manop - TH 08:03, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

But it is neither manga nor anime. It is an American animated series. Ryūlóng 08:03, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

why revert to ragnarök

What is the reason to that? --Comanche cph 10:05, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Joseph Patrick Moore

On the chop block once again....OSU80 15:52, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Werto IP unblock

You unblocked RumDuck (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log)'s IP address which had been recently used by Werto (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log). The commonality might not be coincidental [4]. Phr (talk) 04:21, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Um, I didn't do any unblocking (isn't an admin). I merely answered him on {{helpme}} and I found out that he was a sockpuppet, and I posted it on WP:ANI. Ryūlóng 04:24, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

RumDuck is a brand new user and this account has not been unblocked, let alone blocked, by anyone. Of course, his sock was blocked, but I guess he was "allowed" to create another account. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 04:39, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Above message copied over to Phr's talk page. Ryūlóng 04:47, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Other Ranger discussion

If you read my post in thad discussion, you´ll see I´m sincere. That was a smart way do add everyone who deserves to be there and still keep them apart from the ones who are really considered Rangers by the fans.DinobotTM2 05:01, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. And I apologize, it's just hard to discern such things over the internet. Ryūlóng 05:02, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

I Know. And never mind...

P.S.: Now i need to talk someone into writing an article about the Psycho Rangers, hehehe... ;)DinobotTM2 05:05, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Villains_in_Power_Rangers:_In_Space#Psycho_Rangers Ryūlóng 05:08, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

I´ve seen. Still, they´re far more important to just be in a generic "Villains of" article. They were the most dangerous Evil Rangers, plaged through 2 different series and caused the death of a Ranger (what none ever did before). But that is just my thought.DinobotTM2 05:13, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Why not make one yourself? Just edit the redirect that's in existance. Ryūlóng 05:16, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Maybe later. I´d rather talk about it in a discusion page before doing it.DinobotTM2 05:18, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

BE BOLD Ryūlóng 05:21, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Gary Frill and sockpuppets

Hi, I have moved the discussion from WP:AIV to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Gary Frill. Please report there any more evidence you can find. Thanks. Mushroom (Talk) 13:28, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Speedy Delete bot warning

I noticed that you tagged the page Image:Autism.jpg for speedy deletion with the reason "image name has nothing to do with subject". However, "image name has nothing to do with subject" is not currently one of our criteria for speedy deletion, so I have removed the speedy deletion tag. You can use WP:IFD if you still want the article to be deleted. Thanks! Stifle (talk) 15:05, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Bluecanoe?

Did they do the checkuser thing on User:Bluecanoe? What's new with all that. It looks like nothing else has happened. --Awiseman 18:15, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Fictional teleporters

I have removed the various Power Rangers characters from this category because their method of teleportation can be likened to the Star Trek teleporters. They did not have the power to do so; they merely used technology to do so. If you take any random Star Trek character, you can see that they are not listed under "Fictional teleporters". Ryūlóng 18:38, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Regardless of how someone ascertains their powers, they still belong to them, right? Is Iron Man the hero or is it his suit? If the power of Red Ranger itself teleports and not Rocky DeSantos or whoever, then what's to discriminate between earlier series in which they could and later in which they couldn't? That's why I added all the MM and Zeo rangers. In Star Trek, they use the ship to teleport. In Power Rangers, it is thier own powers, and only some specific rangers. Zythe 18:54, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

But they didn't get the ability to teleport from their suits. They had a watch/communicator that allowed them to teleport, whether they were in their civilian or Power Ranger suits. And I'm not that sure that the Zeo Rangers teleported. Ryūlóng 18:57, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

And Green Lantern has a ring. I don't see why they should not be included, they are teleporters, later ones aren't. It's not like Star Trek where I assume everyone does actually teleport all the time.Zythe 19:02, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, I originally removed the entry from Tommy's page because I thought it was a mistake in his powers through Dino Thunder, where they got abilities that were not unlike those that would allow for inclusion in categories such as "Fictional speedsters" or the like. However, in the Mighty Morphin era, I doubt that their technologically driven ability to teleport would surmount to inclusion into the category. Ryūlóng 19:06, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Ok, whatever, I don't care enough to revert them back and I haven't watched Power Rangers since Time Force, and really I feel it should have ended at In Space. While I feel technological and mystical powers sources equate to roughly the same thing. Didn't some of the Ninjas and others since have innate powers, from their coins or whatever the power source was that year? Should they count? Zythe 19:11, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Those are different powers that they utilized as part of their training that weren't derived from a device. If a Power Ranger has the ability to manipulate the wind or electricity, that warrants inclusion into the respective categories. However, I believe that listing "Category:Power Rangers characters" into "Category:Fictional teleporters" would be sufficient, as several of the characters that have their own pages are in the category, and it wouldn't include any of the Ranger teams that didn't teleport. Ryūlóng 19:16, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Noah's ark

Why are you reverting the removal of AD as vandalism? That's a content dispute. KillerChihuahua^?!? 01:07, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

It's not a content dispute, it's a sock of a banned user trying to revert back to earlier versions. See Panairjdde (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Ryūlóng 01:08, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Ahh, glad I asked. KillerChihuahua^?!? 01:29, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

And now the IP has been blocked, however a little longer would be better. Ryūlóng 01:30, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

It is not, it is a content dispute over the interpretation of Manual of Style: nobody reads it, everyone is eager to revert/block, however. It is the victory of form over content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.44.82.159 (talk • contribs)

ADs and BCs

To return to the matter:

1. The Manual of Style says ADs and CEs are both acceptable, but this has nothing to do with our case;
2. In the same section, it is clearly written that "normally" you should not use AD/CE in front of the years, except when "events" span over the era change. What does this mean? As far as I know, the example given is about an interval: 1 BC-AD 1, not as an article dealing with both eras but no intervals;
3. In the section about years, all the examples have either BC/BCE or nothing.

This should be interpreted (as far as I know) as "never use AD/CE, but when writing intervals".

Now look at my edit at Mark 12, [5]. Apart a matter of formatting I do not understand why you reverted (the center tag), my edit was changing "If one accepts [...] dates for Jesus' death of AD April 7, 30 or April 3, 33" to "If one accepts [...] dates for Jesus' death of April 7, 30 or April 3, 33". I do not understand why this edit is wrong or, by your words, vandalism.--Brunetti 20:03, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

More AD/BC IP stuff

"At WP:DATE, there is nothing under years that states that AD should not be used when it is the only era in an article."

I that case, what does Normally you should use plain numbers for years in the Anno Domini/Common Era mean, according to you? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.44.91.151 (talk • contribs)

Ok, stay calm. You put a remark in my talk page, and now you are angry because I am answering? It is strange, however, how you are dodging my remarks.

You just don't leave me alone. In one of the articles where you removed "AD" from, the use of a BC year was in the same paragraph. And it says "Normally you should use...", that doesn't mean they have to be omitted everywhere. Ryūlóng 22:40, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

You reverted articles with no BC at all. How do you plead? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.44.89.89 (talk • contribs)

Either we block him when he betrays himself by his actions, or we step back & give him free reign. I've tried talking to him, & it hasn't worked. If you have a better idea, I'm all ears. -- llywrch 22:49, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

You know my conditions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.44.89.89 (talk • contribs)

Your conditions are ridiculous. Now, LEAVE ME ALONE. Ryūlóng 22:55, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Fine. As far as I don't find you anymore in my edits, I shall leave you. I still wonder to what "conditions" are you referring thou. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.44.89.89 (talk • contribs)

And I don't know what conditions you were referring to in the first place. You just seem to be interpretting WP:DATE as you think it should be. Ryūlóng 23:00, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

The Vandal range

Well, to give you some peace & quiet Ryulong, I blocked one range at Infostrada for an hour. I'll have to document this at WP:AN/I, but if no one else using that ISP is inconvenienced (who knows, maybe none of them actually want to edit the English Wikipedia), we can keep extending the block until he goes away. -- llywrch 23:15, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

I just checked: he beat me to it. -- llywrch 23:24, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Someone beat me to blocking that one, too. He's definitely not very popular nowadays. -- llywrch 23:29, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Stalkers

You cry I am stalikg you, yet you don't answer me and, worse, revert my edits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.47.77.48 (talk • contribs)

Making points

You think I am making a point? All of this time and you still did not understand anything? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.47.87.229 (talk • contribs)

Well, perhaps you can answer my question. If you can give an INDEPENDENT reason as to why AD should not be used, then by all means say so. Do not quote WP:DATE. Ryūlóng 00:52, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

And there is nothing at WP:DATE that prohibits or suggests that AD should never be used. Ryūlóng 00:54, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

1. My independent (?) reason is that is typically redundant, typographically cluttering, and prone to create disputes.
2. When it says that "normally you should use plain numbers as year", it means that it should be never used except when in intervals. Is it so difficult to understand?

--151.47.87.229 01:00, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

How is AD redundant when the year in question is (for example) 9 or 200? Ryūlóng 01:01, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

• "The Jewish temple in Jerusalem was burned for the second time in 70", "Paul the Apostle (c. 9 – c. 67)", "Britain, c. 500.", "it passed in 226 to the Sassanids," "In 525, New Year's Day was set at March 25". Where do you see ambiguousness? If there is not, then using AD to specify it is redundant. Just like writing 2006 AD.--151.47.87.229 01:08, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Specifying it to be AD is not redundant. Especially when it's like year 9 AD or year 70 AD. Those dates are way too early to discern a difference between BC and AD. While 2006 AD is redundant, as there are few dates that can be determined to be 2006 BC, the fact that you are going against the edits of others as well as bypassing several blocks placed on your accounts for going against the arbitration committee, that is why I am reverting your edits, because you constantly undo others work, and make things less exact. Ryūlóng 01:11, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

3RR

You are way over 3RR on the Noah's Ark article, in fact you are at 9RR. You are only permitted 3 reverts (see WP:3RR) on an article in a 24 hour period. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing for a period of time. Additionally, you engaged in edit-warring with an anon, this too is a blockable offense.
Bottom line, I understand your frustration (and I think I know why that change irked you), but is it really important enough to risk getting blocked over? Sometimes with anons it's best to ignore them -- they usually lose interest and go away. Cheers.
PS -- I didn't leave a note for the anon because he hasn't a reserved IP -- he's editing via IUNET-BNET in Italy, and if the range is blocked, other users suffer. Just hang in there. •Jim62sch• 11:38, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

*clears throat* Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Panairjdde (2nd) Ryūlóng 19:42, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

You may have noticed that the latest Panairjdde sock is again edit warring tonight, has repeatedly placed a spurious sock template for one of his socks on my talk page, and made arguments all over the place. None of the admins from last night seem to be around ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 01:50, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Diacritics in hockey player's names

Since you're pretty determined to move Czech player articles to titles that have diacritics, I would like to point you to Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ice_Hockey#page_moves and Talk:Marián Gáborík to explain why people are undoing those moves. --NeoChaosX 01:24, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

For cleaning up the vandal on my talk page! I appreciate it. All the best, Ziggurat 01:42, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Manual of Style and dates

I noticed you reverting an anons edits regarding the removal of AD. The wikipedia guideline states that AD/CE is only necessary when used in a range of dates that begin in BC/BCE. While you may not like the current guideline, and there can be discussion to change that, I urge you to respect the standing guidelines and not revert such edits in the future. I personally dislike edit wars having to do with dates (especially AD vs. CE issues). I wish there were a way for each user to be able to choose which format appears on their computer, but until that date, I feel removing the redundent ADs and CEs (per the guidelines) helps nip these issues in the bud. (the AD/CEs are redundent because any wikilinked positive number goes to the year article such as 5, or 226, or 2006, etc)--Andrew c 02:20, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

However, I am reverting the removal of those edits because it is constant returning 3RR vandalism from an anonymous IP range. This user has constantly unilaterally changed such information in the past, and had claimed that he would stop for a month, but he went against his word. Unfortunately, the range cannot be blocked for any length of time. Ryūlóng 02:22, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, I apologize for not being familiar with the past issues. That said, going through the users contribution, I can find nothing that would qualify as WP:VAND. Maybe I am missing something, but these edits are per the guidelines, no? The user isn't changing the dating format of an article, simple removing the redundent ADs as stated by the guidelines. While anon users are encouraged to register, the great thing about wikipedia is that ANYONE can edit it. I believe AGF applies to anons as well. Anyway, I still urge you not to revert helpful edits that are not against policy (vandalism and edits that break policy should clearly be reverted though). Thanks for your time and concern.--Andrew c 02:27, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately, this anonymous editor cannot be put under AGF. He is utilizing his IP range to evade a block, and continue doing the various edits that he was blocked for in the first place. There have been various blocks put on his IP addresses, but he just disconnects and reconnects to a new IP address and continue to undo everything that people have issues with. Ryūlóng 02:28, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry it seems I have come into the middle of things here. Could you point me towards any archived discussion on this users behavior, and discussion going against the stated guidelines of Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers). It seems strange to me that someone was blocked for implementing the MoS, but maybe I have read the policy wrong (as this user did). Anyway, I'm just curious in reading more of the background information concerning this issue.--Andrew c 02:33, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Try Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Panairjdde (2nd) ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 02:34, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

As well as the conversation centrx had with him on the last IP he used prior to this evening User talk:151.47.87.229. Ryūlóng 02:35, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism revert

I noticed you reverted an edit on Montanism which was duly discussed on its talk page, saying only "rvv". Please check the Talk page in the future before assuming an edit like that is vandalism. I'm reverting your revert. Thanks. Fagstein 05:57, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

User:Research79

I blocked the user for three and a half hours. If you have any questions or comments, please post to my talk page. Happy to be of service, RyanGerbil10(The people rejoice!) 06:55, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Er...Tawker did an indef block. Ryūlóng 06:57, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Darn it, I'm new at this. Every time I block someone, it seems like someone else changes my block length... I'll get the hang of it eventually, I guess. (I was just made an admin about 30 hours ago) Thanks for the message! RyanGerbil10(The people rejoice!) 06:59, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

That's okay. The user had no useful edits, anyway :D. Ryūlóng 07:00, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Dopplegangers

Yeah, I guessed that... eventually. Cheers ➨ ЯEDVERS 20:34, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Panairjdde

Thanks for your help! This guy is giving me a headache! --Ptkfgs 03:05, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Your modification of my user page

Thank you very much for reverting my user page. However, 66.169.178.110 is my IP, and I had merely forgotten to log in before beginning to edit. Thanks for the help, but just to let you know, it's me. ;)

--Scorpion 03:45, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, it was just an odd edit. Didn't mean to revert your own edits. Ryūlóng 03:46, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Succession box at Bulbasaur

I happen to feel that the list of pokemon at the top of the page is counter intuitive becasue you read the whole article and want to look for more information. In addition... I'm not sure about you , but I find that particular information almost illegible at the top of the page. In additon, several other articles have succession information repeated at the top info box and at the bottom succession box such as the articles on the US Presidents and the Queen of the United Kingdom. Blong 12:26, 28 July 2006 (EDT)

Well, it is the common MoS that WP:PCP follows that the succession is in the pokeinfobox. Besides, there are more than 400 articles on separate Pokémon; do you really want to add a succession box to all of them? Ryūlóng 04:32, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I am aware that there are 400 articles on separate Pokemon, and I was planning on working on it one bite at a time. I though it would be a good and usefull contribution to the feature article and all pokemon articles because currently navigation is bland. And I would be done with at least 10 of them had I not had to go back and forth over this issue. BLong 04:36, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

But the pictures are not at all necessary for the succession box. I will concede that the succession box would be useful at the bottom, but please do not link the pictures, as all 400 images would have to be put under fair use doctrine for where they are used. Ryūlóng 04:37, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough. Eventually I (or someone else) could also add other usefull successions at the bottom such as evolutions and what not. BLong 04:41, 28 July 2006

Where as that could be useful, generally the evolutions (except for pre-evos and new evos added during the latter generations) are redundant, and would have very little to add, as the evolutions are often cited. Ryūlóng 04:42, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Hey

Hey, I justed wanted to know why you deleted the cartoon I put up, It is a good example of a RoadKill Bill script. --ForbiddenCheeseburgerofDoom 07:34, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Xyzzyplugh

Xyzzyplugh left you a message (click here to see it) on my talk page possibly accidental.--Always Gotta Keep it Real, Cute 1 4 u 16:18, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Regarding the Cartoon Image

Basically the image is copyrighted, but according to the law of the USA you have fair rights to use the image as a method to identify the cartoon with. User:Billybobmac

Request for mediation

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers), and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FosterMe (talk • contribs)

A Request for Mediation to which you are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers). For the Mediation Committee, Essjay (Talk) This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

This message delivered: 20:45, 28 July 2006 (UTC).

Your edit summary in the featured article

Good day!

I saw that you considered an edit by an unregistered user a minor vandalism in your edit summary while reverting it. I would like to remind you that any good-faith effort to improve the Wikipedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism (see WP:VAND) and (WP:AGF). Good faith should always be assumed and I think that calling that vandalism was not necessary, since the user was only changing a singular verb to a plural one.

With best regards, Introgressive 22:19, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Noah's ark

Why are you reverting the removal of AD as vandalism? That's a content dispute. KillerChihuahua^?!? 01:07, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

It's not a content dispute, it's a sock of a banned user trying to revert back to earlier versions. See Panairjdde (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Ryūlóng 01:08, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Ahh, glad I asked. KillerChihuahua^?!? 01:29, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

And now the IP has been blocked, however a little longer would be better. Ryūlóng 01:30, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

It is not, it is a content dispute over the interpretation of Manual of Style: nobody reads it, everyone is eager to revert/block, however. It is the victory of form over content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.44.82.159 (talk • contribs)

ADs and BCs

To return to the matter:

1. The Manual of Style says ADs and CEs are both acceptable, but this has nothing to do with our case;
2. In the same section, it is clearly written that "normally" you should not use AD/CE in front of the years, except when "events" span over the era change. What does this mean? As far as I know, the example given is about an interval: 1 BC-AD 1, not as an article dealing with both eras but no intervals;
3. In the section about years, all the examples have either BC/BCE or nothing.

This should be interpreted (as far as I know) as "never use AD/CE, but when writing intervals".

Now look at my edit at Mark 12, [6]. Apart a matter of formatting I do not understand why you reverted (the center tag), my edit was changing "If one accepts [...] dates for Jesus' death of AD April 7, 30 or April 3, 33" to "If one accepts [...] dates for Jesus' death of April 7, 30 or April 3, 33". I do not understand why this edit is wrong or, by your words, vandalism.--Brunetti 20:03, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

More AD/BC IP stuff

"At WP:DATE, there is nothing under years that states that AD should not be used when it is the only era in an article."

I that case, what does Normally you should use plain numbers for years in the Anno Domini/Common Era mean, according to you? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.44.91.151 (talk • contribs)

Ok, stay calm. You put a remark in my talk page, and now you are angry because I am answering? It is strange, however, how you are dodging my remarks.

You just don't leave me alone. In one of the articles where you removed "AD" from, the use of a BC year was in the same paragraph. And it says "Normally you should use...", that doesn't mean they have to be omitted everywhere. Ryūlóng 22:40, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

You reverted articles with no BC at all. How do you plead? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.44.89.89 (talk • contribs)

Either we block him when he betrays himself by his actions, or we step back & give him free reign. I've tried talking to him, & it hasn't worked. If you have a better idea, I'm all ears. -- llywrch 22:49, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

You know my conditions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.44.89.89 (talk • contribs)

Your conditions are ridiculous. Now, LEAVE ME ALONE. Ryūlóng 22:55, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Fine. As far as I don't find you anymore in my edits, I shall leave you. I still wonder to what "conditions" are you referring thou. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.44.89.89 (talk • contribs)

And I don't know what conditions you were referring to in the first place. You just seem to be interpretting WP:DATE as you think it should be. Ryūlóng 23:00, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

The Vandal range

Well, to give you some peace & quiet Ryulong, I blocked one range at Infostrada for an hour. I'll have to document this at WP:AN/I, but if no one else using that ISP is inconvenienced (who knows, maybe none of them actually want to edit the English Wikipedia), we can keep extending the block until he goes away. -- llywrch 23:15, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

I just checked: he beat me to it. -- llywrch 23:24, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Someone beat me to blocking that one, too. He's definitely not very popular nowadays. -- llywrch 23:29, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Stalkers

You cry I am stalikg you, yet you don't answer me and, worse, revert my edits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.47.77.48 (talk • contribs)

Making points

You think I am making a point? All of this time and you still did not understand anything? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 151.47.87.229 (talk • contribs)

Well, perhaps you can answer my question. If you can give an INDEPENDENT reason as to why AD should not be used, then by all means say so. Do not quote WP:DATE. Ryūlóng 00:52, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

And there is nothing at WP:DATE that prohibits or suggests that AD should never be used. Ryūlóng 00:54, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

1. My independent (?) reason is that is typically redundant, typographically cluttering, and prone to create disputes.
2. When it says that "normally you should use plain numbers as year", it means that it should be never used except when in intervals. Is it so difficult to understand?

--151.47.87.229 01:00, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

How is AD redundant when the year in question is (for example) 9 or 200? Ryūlóng 01:01, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

• "The Jewish temple in Jerusalem was burned for the second time in 70", "Paul the Apostle (c. 9 – c. 67)", "Britain, c. 500.", "it passed in 226 to the Sassanids," "In 525, New Year's Day was set at March 25". Where do you see ambiguousness? If there is not, then using AD to specify it is redundant. Just like writing 2006 AD.--151.47.87.229 01:08, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

Specifying it to be AD is not redundant. Especially when it's like year 9 AD or year 70 AD. Those dates are way too early to discern a difference between BC and AD. While 2006 AD is redundant, as there are few dates that can be determined to be 2006 BC, the fact that you are going against the edits of others as well as bypassing several blocks placed on your accounts for going against the arbitration committee, that is why I am reverting your edits, because you constantly undo others work, and make things less exact. Ryūlóng 01:11, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

3RR

You are way over 3RR on the Noah's Ark article, in fact you are at 9RR. You are only permitted 3 reverts (see WP:3RR) on an article in a 24 hour period. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing for a period of time. Additionally, you engaged in edit-warring with an anon, this too is a blockable offense.
Bottom line, I understand your frustration (and I think I know why that change irked you), but is it really important enough to risk getting blocked over? Sometimes with anons it's best to ignore them -- they usually lose interest and go away. Cheers.
PS -- I didn't leave a note for the anon because he hasn't a reserved IP -- he's editing via IUNET-BNET in Italy, and if the range is blocked, other users suffer. Just hang in there. •Jim62sch• 11:38, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

*clears throat* Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Panairjdde (2nd) Ryūlóng 19:42, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

You may have noticed that the latest Panairjdde sock is again edit warring tonight, has repeatedly placed a spurious sock template for one of his socks on my talk page, and made arguments all over the place. None of the admins from last night seem to be around ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 01:50, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Diacritics in hockey player's names

Since you're pretty determined to move Czech player articles to titles that have diacritics, I would like to point you to Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ice_Hockey#page_moves and Talk:Marián Gáborík to explain why people are undoing those moves. --NeoChaosX 01:24, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

For cleaning up the vandal on my talk page! I appreciate it. All the best, Ziggurat 01:42, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Manual of Style and dates

I noticed you reverting an anons edits regarding the removal of AD. The wikipedia guideline states that AD/CE is only necessary when used in a range of dates that begin in BC/BCE. While you may not like the current guideline, and there can be discussion to change that, I urge you to respect the standing guidelines and not revert such edits in the future. I personally dislike edit wars having to do with dates (especially AD vs. CE issues). I wish there were a way for each user to be able to choose which format appears on their computer, but until that date, I feel removing the redundent ADs and CEs (per the guidelines) helps nip these issues in the bud. (the AD/CEs are redundent because any wikilinked positive number goes to the year article such as 5, or 226, or 2006, etc)--Andrew c 02:20, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

However, I am reverting the removal of those edits because it is constant returning 3RR vandalism from an anonymous IP range. This user has constantly unilaterally changed such information in the past, and had claimed that he would stop for a month, but he went against his word. Unfortunately, the range cannot be blocked for any length of time. Ryūlóng 02:22, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, I apologize for not being familiar with the past issues. That said, going through the users contribution, I can find nothing that would qualify as WP:VAND. Maybe I am missing something, but these edits are per the guidelines, no? The user isn't changing the dating format of an article, simple removing the redundent ADs as stated by the guidelines. While anon users are encouraged to register, the great thing about wikipedia is that ANYONE can edit it. I believe AGF applies to anons as well. Anyway, I still urge you not to revert helpful edits that are not against policy (vandalism and edits that break policy should clearly be reverted though). Thanks for your time and concern.--Andrew c 02:27, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately, this anonymous editor cannot be put under AGF. He is utilizing his IP range to evade a block, and continue doing the various edits that he was blocked for in the first place. There have been various blocks put on his IP addresses, but he just disconnects and reconnects to a new IP address and continue to undo everything that people have issues with. Ryūlóng 02:28, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry it seems I have come into the middle of things here. Could you point me towards any archived discussion on this users behavior, and discussion going against the stated guidelines of Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers). It seems strange to me that someone was blocked for implementing the MoS, but maybe I have read the policy wrong (as this user did). Anyway, I'm just curious in reading more of the background information concerning this issue.--Andrew c 02:33, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Try Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Panairjdde (2nd) ፈቃደ (ውይይት) 02:34, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

As well as the conversation centrx had with him on the last IP he used prior to this evening User talk:151.47.87.229. Ryūlóng 02:35, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism revert

I noticed you reverted an edit on Montanism which was duly discussed on its talk page, saying only "rvv". Please check the Talk page in the future before assuming an edit like that is vandalism. I'm reverting your revert. Thanks. Fagstein 05:57, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

User:Research79

I blocked the user for three and a half hours. If you have any questions or comments, please post to my talk page. Happy to be of service, RyanGerbil10(The people rejoice!) 06:55, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Er...Tawker did an indef block. Ryūlóng 06:57, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Darn it, I'm new at this. Every time I block someone, it seems like someone else changes my block length... I'll get the hang of it eventually, I guess. (I was just made an admin about 30 hours ago) Thanks for the message! RyanGerbil10(The people rejoice!) 06:59, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

That's okay. The user had no useful edits, anyway :D. Ryūlóng 07:00, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Dopplegangers

Yeah, I guessed that... eventually. Cheers ➨ ЯEDVERS 20:34, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Panairjdde

Thanks for your help! This guy is giving me a headache! --Ptkfgs 03:05, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Your modification of my user page

Thank you very much for reverting my user page. However, 66.169.178.110 is my IP, and I had merely forgotten to log in before beginning to edit. Thanks for the help, but just to let you know, it's me. ;)

--Scorpion 03:45, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, it was just an odd edit. Didn't mean to revert your own edits. Ryūlóng 03:46, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Succession box at Bulbasaur

I happen to feel that the list of pokemon at the top of the page is counter intuitive becasue you read the whole article and want to look for more information. In addition... I'm not sure about you , but I find that particular information almost illegible at the top of the page. In additon, several other articles have succession information repeated at the top info box and at the bottom succession box such as the articles on the US Presidents and the Queen of the United Kingdom. Blong 12:26, 28 July 2006 (EDT)

Well, it is the common MoS that WP:PCP follows that the succession is in the pokeinfobox. Besides, there are more than 400 articles on separate Pokémon; do you really want to add a succession box to all of them? Ryūlóng 04:32, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I am aware that there are 400 articles on separate Pokemon, and I was planning on working on it one bite at a time. I though it would be a good and usefull contribution to the feature article and all pokemon articles because currently navigation is bland. And I would be done with at least 10 of them had I not had to go back and forth over this issue. BLong 04:36, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

But the pictures are not at all necessary for the succession box. I will concede that the succession box would be useful at the bottom, but please do not link the pictures, as all 400 images would have to be put under fair use doctrine for where they are used. Ryūlóng 04:37, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough. Eventually I (or someone else) could also add other usefull successions at the bottom such as evolutions and what not. BLong 04:41, 28 July 2006

Where as that could be useful, generally the evolutions (except for pre-evos and new evos added during the latter generations) are redundant, and would have very little to add, as the evolutions are often cited. Ryūlóng 04:42, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Hey

Hey, I justed wanted to know why you deleted the cartoon I put up, It is a good example of a RoadKill Bill script. --ForbiddenCheeseburgerofDoom 07:34, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Xyzzyplugh

Xyzzyplugh left you a message (click here to see it) on my talk page possibly accidental.--Always Gotta Keep it Real, Cute 1 4 u 16:18, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Regarding the Cartoon Image

Basically the image is copyrighted, but according to the law of the USA you have fair rights to use the image as a method to identify the cartoon with. User:Billybobmac

Request for mediation

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers), and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by FosterMe (talk • contribs)

A Request for Mediation to which you are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers). For the Mediation Committee, Essjay (Talk) This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

This message delivered: 20:45, 28 July 2006 (UTC).

Your edit summary in the featured article

Good day!

I saw that you considered an edit by an unregistered user a minor vandalism in your edit summary while reverting it. I would like to remind you that any good-faith effort to improve the Wikipedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism (see WP:VAND) and (WP:AGF). Good faith should always be assumed and I think that calling that vandalism was not necessary, since the user was only changing a singular verb to a plural one.

With best regards, Introgressive 22:19, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

3RR Warning

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly, as you are doing in Insane Clown Posse. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert a single page more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the effect of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you. αChimp ^laudare 03:17, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

If it's vandalism, you should probably just back off and let another user deal with it. That's just my 2 cents. αChimp ^laudare 03:18, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

It is vandalism. I'm just seeing every single revert through the IRC channel. Ryūlóng 03:18, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

YaR GnitS

Hey, I'll stop if I know Kasreyn won't be able to pigeon hold the ICP page(s) anymore.

3RR

You have been blocked for 24 hours for a 3RR violation on Insane Clown Posse. Please do not edit war. --Cyde↔Weys 03:43, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

My reverts at Insane Clown Posse were to undo vandalism by another editor, an abusive sockpuppeteer. My reversions were clearly covered by exceptions to 3RR. --Ryūlóng 03:45, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

My appologies. I was the one that put this up at the administrators noticeboard, and this was an unintended consequence. I've argued for your unblocking at the noticeboard section.--Rosicrucian 03:53, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

I have been unblocked because I was first notified of the block at #vandalism-en-wp, and I have also left a message at WP:ANI in the discussion. I have been told to try and stop at 3 reverts, even though it is blatant vandalism. Ryūlóng 03:55, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

As I said, I'm rather sorry for any inconvenience I've caused. I was scrambling to go after a vandal I'd thought we'd banned, and I probably was overzealous in how many places I put notification on. By the time I was done writing the noticeboard post, User:Can't sleep, clown will eat me was already responding to my note on his talkpage by putting the semiprotect back up. I'll be more patient in the future, but the way this guy acted at the AfD for this stuff really rubbed me the wrong way.--Rosicrucian 03:59, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

It's okay. I should probably get to work on an RFA so these things do not happen in the future. >_> Ryūlóng 04:00, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Redirect to Biped

Hi Ryulong.

I am redirecting the Savanna theory article to Bipedalism#Evolution because that aritcle has a more NPOV treatment of the topic, not a strawman written from an AAT POV. Thanks JPotter 07:18, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

However, there doesn't seem to be anything wrong with Savanna Theory. The article was even peer reviewed. Ryūlóng 07:21, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Take a look at the talk page. Plus the peer review was merely copy edit suggestions not on the validity of the page. Since you disagree with the redirect, I'll put it on AfD. Consensus is already there that the article is NPOV. I was going to rewrite it but its so bad it just needs to go. The term is solely used by propopents of AAT to discredit it. JPotter 07:25, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

What is "AAT"? Ryūlóng 07:26, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Aquatic ape theory. Google savanna(h) theory/hypothesis and you'll see the term is really only used by AAT proponents. I've never seen the term used in any anthropological text or journal. Bipedalism#Evolution gives a better treatment of both hypothesis plus several more, so I thought that would be the best place for the redirect to go to. Like I said, its either that or AfD. THat article is hopeless. CHeers JPotter 07:29, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Ah... I've heard of that theory. Just remember to redirect to "Biped" and not "Bipedalism" as you'll do a double redirect. Ryūlóng 07:31, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! JPotter 07:33, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

The Dutchess (album)

Hi, the reason made those edits is because a person made manuel page moves that lost the history of the original article. I'm going to submit a WP:RM to fix the article title properly because of the redirects created. Crumbsucker 10:04, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

It's already done. Ryūlóng 10:05, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Yup, nevermind. Crumbsucker 10:09, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Time After Time (1)

It's have an article.Is an stub, but it's an article.See: Time After Time (1) — Preceding unsigned comment added by ForumUser (talk • contribs)

What's in a name?

His obituary used "Frederick De Cordova" which is the name he used in all the movies he directed. But he used "Fred De Cordova" for TV work. It sounds like I have to move the article from Frederick to Fred and back(!!!) to get both names to direct to it.Edison 19:33, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Re: Welcoming Messages

Okay, I'll try to be more careful but how do I know who to leave welcome messages to? How am I supposed to identify sockpuppets and things of that nature? --Tuspm^{(C | @)} 21:17, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Ambulance Chaser

I just deleted the talk page and the article, and moved it to WIktionary , per discussion. Could you explain why you reverted it? According to Wiki instructions, I now need to delete the article, but do not know how.jawesq 21:38, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

You cannot delete pages like that. Right now, I have rewritten (partially) the article to reflect an encyclopedic entry. Ryūlóng 21:39, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

That is what the instructions suggested. The article is now in Wiktionary. Please tell me why now we can't do this - it was discussed on the talk page, and nobody objected.jawesq 21:40, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

But that is not how pages are transwikied. They are done differently. They are done at an adminstrative level, as your method of moving fucks up the GDFL. Ryūlóng 21:41, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Essentially, this is duplicated on Wiktionary. So how is it done?jawesq 21:42, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't know, but it's not done like a copy-paste move. Ryūlóng 21:43, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I was following the instructions, because there is not a trans-wiki transfer process, according to what I read. jawesq 21:47, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

There has to be a process that copies the history. Ryūlóng 21:45, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

I cannot find it. I was following the directions on Wiktionary. What else can be done? jawesq 21:47, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

I do not know. Leave the page alone, and I will seek help. Ryūlóng 21:48, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. I have also asked on Wiktionary "beer parlour" and I have asked the user who 'welcomed' me to WIktionary. Between the two of us, perhaps we can figure this out.jawesq 21:57, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

I do not really know anything about transwiking. I'll see if there's anything on WP. Ryūlóng 21:58, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

m:Transwiki and WP:TW. Ryūlóng 21:59, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

I will look at that; maybe I missed something. By the way, I see you went to UM. I graduated from law school there, and live in Boca Raton.jawesq 22:00, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

This is what I found there:

As there is currently no way of moving pages across wikis, the transfer must be done using cut and paste. If there is anything valuable on the talk page, this may be moved in the same way, though in many cases the talk may not be relevant to the wiki you are moving the article to. The original page may be deleted as soon as it has been moved to the transwiki area. You must enter in the log that the article has moved. The log can be found by going to transwiki which will be a redirect to the log page. The deletion log will also provide a record, and any transwiki article can be undeleted if the move was considered "out-of-process" or if someone requests undeletion (via Deletion review at en for example).

That is why I did what I did. jawesq 22:02, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Ah...still, perhaps the page can stay on En-wp, as it can still be contributed to and fixed. Ryūlóng 22:04, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

And I'm still a UM student, btw. Just starting my sophomore year this August. Ryūlóng 22:04, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

It was discussed at length. We already tried that. Besides, there is no reason to 'fix it'. It should be moved.jawesq 22:05, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Still, I editted the page so that it follows the formatting of other Wikipedia articles. "Ambulance chaser" is bolded, and whatnot. Ryūlóng 22:06, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Ok. I have moved it again. I will try to figure out how to copy the history, as that is the next instruction, before deleting the article. There really is no way to make this into an article. We already tried. The only thing it ends up being is a rant. There is nothing more to say about the subject, other than defining what it means,as a slang term. I have added the instructions on the talk page, for now, so others know this is not vandalism.jawesq 22:08, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

UM is a good school. I got my undergrad (in engineering) at Univ of Colorado.jawesq 22:12, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Still, "ambulance chaser" is a slang term that has its roots 100 years ago. It deserves a mention on Wikipedia. Ryūlóng 22:13, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

If you object to moving it to WIkipedia, you can say so. Nobody else has made an objection. That is why I moved it. It is more appropriate on Wiktionary, and it is mentioned there. I wrote this history of the term - it wasn't there before. And yes, I think it is interesting. Also, thanks for the redirect. I am tired and a bit frustrated now, so will wait for further help in figuring out how to do the rest.jawesq 22:29, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't know how else to do anything. :( Ryūlóng 22:32, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, I have formatted it for Wiktionary. I am learning too, so that makes two of us. There really should be a better way to transfer trans-Wiki, like a move within Wiki-en. But, I am asking help from some admins, so we will see what we can do. And now I am taking a break -- sick of this~! jawesq 22:44, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

There probably is...we just haven't found it/it requires more than sysop status. Ryūlóng 22:48, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

your bot

I was wondering, are you planning on using your bot to move all those pages back to where they were? It would be much faster if you used your bot as it will take me a long time by hand. Oh, i am not talking about those 10 or 12 i moved shortly before i got blocked, i am talking about all the ones from before. Masterhatch 00:45, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Those pages are staying where they are, as they are named fine. I had to manually revert your moves because you moved all of those pages based off of a suggested guideline at WP:HOCKEY. If anyone wants to look up one of those hockey players, they can type in the English name and go to the page with the diacritics. Ryūlóng 00:47, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

It is fine that you think that way, but other people have a different view than you. It is common practice that in the event of a dispute on wikipedia, the original rendition, or they way it was before the dispute, is to be used until the dispute is resolved. The way i see it, most of the articles didn't have diacritics before the dispute started and pages i reverted back months ago were left alone and fine. And i love how you put "they can type in the English name and go to the page with the diacritics". Wouldn't it make more sense to type in the "English name" and go to the article with the same English name? If one was to type in the name with diacrtics, they should be taken to the English named article. but that is not what i want to discuss here with you. I want to discuss what needs to be done: restoring the pages back to the way they were (except for the last 10 or 12 i did the other day). Masterhatch 00:58, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

But the dispute did start with your unilateral moving of several pages to the English spelling of Czech/Finnish/etc hockey players when many others feel that diacritics are important and that when they are the original spelling, that there are redirects in place for alternate spellings. If WikiProject Hockey's diacritic guideline is accepted by the whole of Wikipedia, then the pages can be moved back. Until then, it appears that whoever moves whatever is doing page move vandalism. Just leave the article as they are, and when the requested move at Teemu Selänne is decided, then the outcome of that will affect the outcome of every other hockey player with diacritics in their names. Ryūlóng 01:02, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually, you are dead wrong. The dispute started back in late 2005 or so when users started moving hockey articles from non-diarcitic form to diacritic form without discussion. Me, along with a few other users kept reverting them back. Many users gave up holding the fort (so to speak), but i didn't. I wanted to keep status quo until discussion could run its course. I didn't go around every day and keep tabs on all the players with diacritics, but every once in a while i would go around and "restore" the articles. I was "restoring" articles the other day and you went and undid everything without looking at the history of the dispute to see what i was doing. Funny thing is, if a user was to go around adding diacritics (such as user:Travelbird did one day) without discussion first, he mostly gets ignored. But if someone was to "restore" the articles to the way they were, they get in trouble. Not to harp on it, but the Wikipedia:Naming convention strongly favours the most common English spelling. Masterhatch 01:15, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

However, just as WP:HOCKEY feels that diacritics should not be used Wikipedia:Naming conventions (standard letters with diacritics) is also a proposed guideline that states that they should be used. Until one is taken as precedent over the other, all articles should be kept as they are (even though this is against the wishes of WikiProject Hockey). Ryūlóng 01:22, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry about my little AOL-based friend

Thanks for following him around a bit. He's a handful. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 02:50, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Meh, there's a shit load of them tonight. Ryūlóng 02:51, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

on the same page

I am a little confused. you said that Wikipedia:Naming conventions (standard letters with diacritics) and the hockey one contradict each other. That is not so. Both are clear that if the most common form of that person's name in English uses diacritics, the diacritics are kept and if the most common from in English omits diacritics, diacritics are to be omitted. And as you say it should remain as is, why is the mass moving that you did to be kept and not the original article titles? What makes your moves so special? Masterhatch 05:12, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

"If the most common form in English uses diacritics, then diacritics are to be kept and if the most common form in English drops the diacritics, then the diacritics are dropped." I found a website that uses Selänne's name with diacritics, and that's in the discussion for the requested move. If a person's name is originally spelled with diacritics, then most people just use the name without diacritics for ease. Unless you have absolute proof that the name is spelled in English resources (official NHL roster, etc.) as "Teemu Selanne", then do the moves. Ryūlóng 05:20, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

And the two suggestions are contradictory; one says to omit them completely, the other says to use them when they are used commonly. And I find that the resources are contradicting themselves this article on NHL.com uses "Selänne" where the player's page uses "Selanne". Frankly, if "Selänne" is the man's name in his home language, then that should be the name used on any Wikipedia (this reminds me of the edit war at Ragnarök complaining that the umlaut is not used in the English language). Ryūlóng 05:26, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

A quote from the hockey proposal: "Hockey articles in which the most common and customary way to spell the subject in English involves the use of diacritics and other non-English characters should retain that spelling. In other words, this is the "exception to every rule". True it could be worded better, but it still is clear enough that if the most common way of writing someone's name in English uses diacritics, then wikipedia (hockey wikipedia too!!!) shall follow suite. It is interesting that you have your pov and i have my pov. But when i edit wikipedia, i remove myself from my personal pov. For instance, it is clear here wikipedia:Naming convention that the most common form in English be used for an article title. To be an effective wikipedia editor, one must respect policies already in place. If one disagrees with policies, then one should go to that respective talk page and try to have the policy changed, not make exceptions because it goes against one's POV. Masterhatch 05:38, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

But do you have proof that "Selanne" is the most commonly used iteration of his name? Or any of the other names of other Hockey players of Czech/Finnish/Norwegian/Russian/etc. heritage? Ryūlóng 05:44, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Now you are being argumenative. So, if i had this "proof" that Teemu Selanne (without diacritics) was the most common way of spelling his name in English, would you change your vote? Masterhatch 05:48, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

I am sorry that I got involved in this. I have no care anymore as to whether or not the umlaut is kept. It's just that the Hockey guideline is just a little extreme when it comes to a person's given name. The NHL spells it both ways on its website. Google provides around 200k hits with the umlaut, over 400k without it, but that is more than likely because every fan of this guy doesn't know how to use the character map. Please stop contacting me on this. I have made my decision, and I am going to stick with it. Ryūlóng 05:57, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Blood for blood

Hello there, Not to be forceful or anything but blood for blood are an important band and was very annoyed after you deleted it. they have a page at blood for blood however, I was updating the page and moving it to blood for blood (band) as it is a neater solution... I hope you can friendly discuss this futher in the future if you have any other problems. Thankyou, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aaron J Nicoli (talk • contribs)

The band has an article already. Go to Blood for Blood. Ryūlóng 06:51, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

I understand that it does... I am changing it to Blood for Blood (band) as it will seperate the article, and show that IT IS A BAND.

That is not how you do those things. Fix the article at "Blood for Blood". Do not make a separate article at Blood for Blood (band). Ryūlóng 06:54, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I have just adjusted the blood for blood main page... I did not understand the move option, now I do... Also, is it ok if we delete the blood for blood (band) article and then move the blood for blood article to the blood for blood (band) article that is exactly what i was hoping to achieve?

It is not necessary to move Blood for Blood to Blood for Blood (band). There are no other "Blood for Blood"s on Wikipedia, so the "(band)" is not necessary. Just leave it at Blood for Blood and edit there. Ryūlóng 07:03, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Mindrot

The entry for mindrot was a work in progress and they are a notable band. Their record label Relapse Records has an entry, and they released 3 albums on the label Forlorn Ep Released July 1995, Dawning Released October 1995, and Soul Released March 1998. --Ambiguousfrerak 07:08, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

That article was created and deleted four times since it was created. It is obviously spam and non-notable. Ryūlóng 07:09, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

I was not the original creator of the other entries. The band is notable and does deserve an entry on Wikipedia.--Ambiguousfrerak 07:14, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

If you have external sources that state such a fact, then by all means provide them at a Deletion review. Ryūlóng 07:15, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

And don't use their site. They haven't even sold over 5000 albums total. Ryūlóng 07:16, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

The band Eyes of Fire currently have 2 former members from mindrot Matt Fisher and Dan Kaufman. Eyes of fire On 06-17-06 EYES OF FIRE's video for IT ALL DIES TODAY was BANG OF THE WEEK on HEADBANGERS BALL. Jamie Jasta spoke about the album, showed an image of the front cover and started the show with the video. that was the 3rd week in a row that EYES OF FIRE had been played on HEADBANGERS BALL. IT ALL DIES TODAY, was the #3 most requested Metal song on the MUSIC CHOICE NETWORK. Due to the requests the song was added into rotation on SIRIUS SATELITE "HARD ATTACK" station. The Obscurity of a band does not decide its notability, take Snot for instance. Influential to many bands but few mainstream people had even heard of them till a band like Sevendust does a song in tribute to the deceased lead singer. The notablilty of Mindrot also stems from the sucsess of it's members in other projects. --Ambiguousfrerak 07:47, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

• Has released two or more albums on a major label or one of the more important indie labels (i.e. an independent label with a history of more than a few years and a roster of performers, many of which are notable)

Still, the article was not written in an encyclopedic tone, and even if the band was notable, the subject matter had been deleted many times prior. Ryūlóng 07:50, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

And the bands and/or musical artists that you mentioned are also not featured on Wikipedia for notability reasons, as well. Ryūlóng 07:51, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

If the article is written "in an encyclopedic tone" will it be accepted? Mindrot is noteable and deserves an entry.--Ambiguousfrerak 07:52, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I do not think that Mindrot is notable for inclusion in Wikipedia, even if it is written in an encyclopedic tone. Eyes of Fire, Matt Fisher, Dan Kaufman, and Jamie Jasta are not notable artists/bands, and Headbanger's Ball has become extremely esoteric in recent years. Ryūlóng 07:54, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

• Has been featured in multiple non-trivial published works in reliable and reputable media
• Has released two or more albums on a major label or one of the more important indie labels (i.e. an independent label with a history of more than a few years and a roster of performers, many of which are notable).
• Contains at least one member who was once a part of or later joined a band that is otherwise notable; note that it is often most appropriate to use redirects in place of articles on side projects, early bands and such.
• Has been placed in rotation nationally by any major radio network.

Eyes of fire meet all these criteria for entry, therefore with 2 members from Mindrot they are noteable. --Ambiguousfrerak 07:57, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Then go make an article for Eyes on Fire and state that two of the members are from Mindrot. Just make sure you write it in a formal encyclopedic tone, and explain as to why the band Eyes of Fire is notable for inclusion for Wikipedia (do not quote WP:MUSIC in the article space, though). Link to their website, link to something from MTV2's Headbanger's Ball. Just make sure the article asserts notability, and asserts it correctly. Ryūlóng 08:01, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

I am a fan of Mindrot and feel that they deserve an entry, I only know about Eyes of Fire because of the 2 members from Mindrot. Since the band Eyes of Fire qualify for entry Mindrot should as well.--Ambiguousfrerak 08:07, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Just because you are a fan of the band doesn't mean that they "deserve an entry." There are many articles about bands that are put up on Wikipedia that are deleted because they are not notable.
If you want the article undeleted, you can go to Wikipedia:Deletion review. List the article there, follow the instructions there, list Mindrot for undeletion, and try and prove your case infront of the Wikipedia community. If they feel that Mindrot is a notable band based on the case you give, Mindrot will be undeleted. If they feel that Mindrot is not notable, then ask for assistance after that. I cannot undelete the article; only administrators can. Ryūlóng 08:11, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually, it appears that Mindrot can be undeleted. The original articles were not related to the band, and Mindrot may be considered for inclusion, but I still am not sure if they are notable. Ryūlóng 08:19, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Oops?

Did you make a mistake here and revert a comment by mistake?

Just letting you know, that really looked like a valid comment to me. — Nathan ^(talk) _{/ 18:28, 30 July 2006 (UTC)}

I've been watching that user's comments, as she's just at Wikipedia to make friends first, and improve the encyclopedia second. Ryūlóng 19:24, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Effort deserves recognition

You seem to have a great record of dealing with vandals on Wikipedia, and I felt you should be recognized, so... The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar

The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar I Chuchunezumi award Ryulong this barnstar for dilligence in patrolling spammmers and vandals. Chuchunezumi 20:28, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Mr. Smart pants, can you mind your own business?

When I delete my pages because I want out, can you stop your pompous self-important meddling in my affairs? I am not deleting other people's pages, but my own. You got a problem? Can't mind your own business? WikiSceptic 05:35, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

You still cannot delete your talk page. Ryūlóng 05:36, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Oh, really? And why is that? If I want out of Wikipedia, I cannot? And, apparently, that also goes for my original pages created as subsidiaries to my talk page? Wow, this is fantastic! Has Hitler come back to life? Or is it Stalin? WikiSceptic 05:38, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

If you want out of Wikipedia, then just leave. Never sign back in. Just do not blank your own talk page. Ryūlóng 05:39, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

I have had enough of the criminal insolence and arrogance of you lot. Nguyen was not the first, and you will certainly not be the last. It is my right to remove my personal pages, and in preventing that, you tresspass on my rights. This, in civil law; I do not care for Wikipedia's internal rules. I not only want out of Wikipedia, I also want my personal pages out, and that is my right. I am not asking for any charity or privileges but to mind my own business. Please stop meddling in my affairs - although, from my long experience, I know that you will not cease your present outrageous encroachments on my rights. WikiSceptic 05:43, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

What rights do you speak of? --Chris (talk) 05:56, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

I can recognize criminal insolence when I see it. WikiSceptic 05:54, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Totse

Hi there- see you are fighting the vandalism on Totse and have added it to the admin list. Since the attacks are coming from multiple sources, do you think it's possible to get a semi protect on it? I'm not sure if the requirements are there. Thanks! --Cabiria 06:36, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Going to try. Ryūlóng 06:39, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Cool! Thanks again. --Cabiria 06:40, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced message

kindly mind your speech when addressing. I am not a vandal. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.116.229 (talk • contribs)

Thanks for reverting my userpage!

You and Kchase02 appear to have zapped the vandal that was going after my userpage... and I didn't even realize it until I was looking at the edit history! Thanks for doing the reverts while I wasn't online. Dark Shikari 18:04, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry!

Hey, sorry, I was editing The Violent Bear It Away article and accidently deleted a bunch of it. I realized right after I did it that it would look a lot like vandalism, and wasn't sure how to revert it. Sorry about the mix-up! Caesar 21:07, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

That's okay. Ryūlóng 21:08, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism of Talk page from Lkadvani

User Lkadvani is vandalizing talk page of 2002 Gujarat Violence with baseless allegations and slander of myself. He is quoting from sites off wikipedia that have no bearing on myself or anyone here. That is why I deleted it. I hhave warned him twice and, if he reverts a third time, I will report vandalism. Please understand. Thank you.Netaji 22:48, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Pokemon Red and Blue

Hello. I'm not too adept at the Wiki coding yet, so I apologize if I mess up your page here. I noticed that you removed the external links on the "Pokemon Red and Blue" article, and you noted that they smell like spam. Well, I added the first link, which was to the IGN Guide (<http://guides.ign.com/guides/16708/index.html>). I don't know about the other link, but that link was not spam. I have no affiliation to the IGN company, although I do use their guide often as a reference while playing the game, which is the exact reason I added that link. I'm not an expert on Wiki rules yet, but I think that link was valid and that other players could benefit from it. Would you just explain your reasoning some more?

P.S. I noticed that you study biology. I, too, like biology. Just read 'Parasite Rex' by Carl Zimmer and 'Wonderful Life' by Stephen J. Gould. I highly recommend both if you haven't read them. Maybe we could chat some more... Talk to you soon.

Chris Dubey 23:30, 31 July 2006 (UTC)