User talk:Tnxman307/Archive 10

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

Thanks

Thanks for handling 86.174.115.50. Elockid ^(Talk) 15:24, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

No problem. Those are the easy ones. TN X Man 14:26, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

59.184.0.0/18

The vandal on this IP range came back today and made the same edits. See Special:Contributions/59.184.1.22 and Special:Contributions/59.184.58.56.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 16:23, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Blocked for two weeks again, anon only, account creation enabled. Thanks for catching that. TN X Man 14:31, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

The Lincoln Club of Orange County

user LCOC1962 surely is a promotional username? The Lincoln Club of Orange County founded in 1962 has also recreated a deleted on The Lincoln Club of Orange County —Preceding unsigned comment added by Teapotgeorge (talk • contribs)

I am generally of the opinion that acronyms aren't blatantly promotional (how am I supposed to buy something/donate to someone if I don't know who they are?). I would suggest taking this report to WP:COIN, as it is the more appropriate venue. TN X Man 18:37, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

We have a policy against usernames that give the impression that the account represents a group, organization or website and this one clearly does.Teapotgeorge^Talk 20:32, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm giving you the Barnstar for hilarious unblock declines

Not often that administrator responses to unblock requests make me laugh. (This barnstar doesn't actually exist per cabal regulation, of course, but we'll both know it's there.) elektrik SHOOS 17:36, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! TN X Man 02:01, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

User talk:CleanCoolingSolutions

Not only blocked but deleted as well by the looks of it, leaving an orphaned TP. Harry the Dog WOOF 15:32, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

While I have blocked the account, it is impossible to delete it. I did delete their userpage, as it was spam (i.e. userpages are not like article pages, where deleting the main page should also include a deletion of the talk page). I hope this helps. TN X Man 15:39, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Specific Carbohydrate Diet

Hello, I noticed you deleted my recent writing about SCD. The following paragraph was removed: "After Elaine Gottschall wrote Breaking the Vicious Cycle, there has been renewed interest in SCD. Several books written by doctors and dieticians recommend this diet. [8] [9] [10] [11] [12]"

I provided detailed proof that a number of doctors are recommending SCD. I gave the name of the books, the authors and the page number. Are you able to let me know where I went wrong, as in where do I need to make changes? I am willing to add more books that recommend SCD if that is needed. Thank you in advance.

A research study was removed because the term "Specific Carbohydrate Diet" was not used but the diet mentioned used EXACTLY the same types of carbohydrates (monosaccharidesas) that the Specific Carbohydrate Diet recommends. How can I add this research study to Wikipedia? Can I make a separate page with a different topic? The new entry will be about diets that use only monosaccharides and the scientific articles that back this type of diet.

I want to thank you for all your work in helping make Wikipedia be the best encyclopedia! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Glida7 (talk • contribs) 18:10, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

I removed these two sections as original research. Your edit here says that "After Elaine Gottschall wrote Breaking the Vicious Cycle, there has been renewed interest in SCD." But there are no reliable sources that support. The fact that several books mention the diet does not indicate renewed interest, as correlation does not indicate causation.

Original research also applies to your edit today. If the research doesn't use the term "Specific Carbohydrate Diet", then it shouldn't be mentioned in the SCD article. I hope this helps. TN X Man 18:39, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Specific Carbohydrate Diet

Thank you very much. I agree that the books might not prove the popularity of SCD.

I will just write about the books without mentioning the renewed interest in SCD. Can I mention the high sales ratings of the book Breaking the Vicious Cycle on Amazon? Glida7 (talk) 19:38, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Orangemike

Thanks. In error. Ty 05:27, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

No problem - I've done that before! TN X Man 11:44, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of Sona Rele page

Just wondering why this page has been deleted. She's a signed artist who I've seen in concert, deserves a mention at least I feel. Ok if I start afresh? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdfirth (talk • contribs) 11:46, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Feel free, but do please try to avoid writing it like an advertisement, which is why I deleted it before. Let me know if you have questions as you go. You may want to read this guide to writing your first article as well. TN X Man 11:48, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Heads-up re: 80.42.235.17

This IP blocked by you was previously blocked by zzuuzz as 80.42.227.142. Might want to keep an eye out for more IPs falling in the same pattern. --Skywatcher68 (talk) 15:53, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I'll keep an eye out. TN X Man 16:26, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

WikiLove

File:Pie.jpeg

MR. PreZ has given you a fresh pie! Pies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a piping hot pie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Bon appetit!

Spread the tastiness of pies by adding {{subst:GivePie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Just spreading the love! MR. PreZ 21:51, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Hilary Easton

Wow, that was close! I almost tagged it for CSD but decided to search first and found out she had press in NY Times. I started adding refs and suddenly the page was gone. On next refresh though, it was back. I'm beginning to think non-blatant articles should be given at least 30 minutes before deleting so someone can have time to add a ref or two. Anyway, take care! Piano tech 22:26, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Actually, you did a great job with the descriptive edit summary. I saw it, put the article back, and started doing general formatting. Good catch! TN X Man 22:30, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! Nice meeting you, by the way. Happy editing! :) Piano tech 22:36, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

404 error

Hey, I'm just wondering why you reduced my recent protection of 404 error from full to semi. I'd deliberately opted for full protection because the redirect itself seems to be a spambot target and the spambots that have attacked it so far seem to be autoconfimred, so semi prot wouldn't be of much use. I'd appreciate it if you could reconsider. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:47, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

How very odd. I guess it's because you can't edit-conflict on a protection? :) You'll notice my protection went in one minute after yours. I'll go change it now. Cheers! TN X Man 02:51, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

Ah, happens all the time. I hadn't noticed it was pretty much the same time, but I think full protection is the best way of handling it (short of finding these morons and getting their ISPs to do something). Thanks, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 02:56, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

checkuIP

Cheers Spitfire^Tally-ho! 19:31, 20 July 2010 (UTC)

A distant relative of the mudkip, the checkuIP is a rare and strange creature... TN X Man 00:12, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Tnxman307. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ihgyqxfs.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

TEK (talk • e-mail) 00:00, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

I've replied there. TN X Man 00:12, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Viadeo corporate website

I'm curious why you removed the link to the corporate website. This business networking company operates the public site viadeo.com for their members; but for corporate info, which would be more use as a means to verify the article, you need to visit corporate.viadeo.com which is not easily accessible from the main site. Astronaut (talk) 14:13, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Brine shrimp

Would you like to explain your edits at brine shrimp? I specifically invited you to engage in discourse, an invitation you appear to have ignored, preferring instead a cursory edit summary which gives no indication of your thinking. --Stemonitis (talk) 14:36, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

I apologize, I thought the reference was pretty clear. The Islamic reference only states an ancient geographer mentions finding a worm and the author surmises this was brine shrimp. I didn't feel this was reliable research (just conjecture) and replaced it with a reference to Schlosser's drawings in 1755. TN X Man 14:54, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

The reference is being used to back up the claim that Schlösser described and figured Artemia in 1775. That part, surely, is not disputed. Your replacement reference would also be OK, if it were properly formatted (I can deal with that later), but to repeatedly revert with no explanation and no apparent intent to discuss contentious matters is a little worrying. I would also note that it is in no way an "Islamic reference"; it is written by an Iranian, probably, and concerns Iran, but makes no mention of any religion. --Stemonitis (talk) 15:09, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Her631 SPI

Hi

Just a quick note that I completely concur with your action at [1]. I'd actually forgotten about the report. At the time of the report it looked like an old edit war stirring up again, but it seems to have just died away. Maybe there's some value in "seeing what happens" for a while, after all. :) Thanks Begoon^talk 16:51, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

No problem, happy to help. Looking into it though, I saw User:Gvogas, who registered on 7/4 and has been poking around on those articles. You sound more familiar with the situation, is there anything there with which to be concerned? TN X Man 17:25, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

My impression (from limited contact) there is of someone with a genuine interest in the area who's trying to help. He seems happy to engage in sensible dialog, and comfortable with consensus the couple of times we've crossed paths. One of the difficulties in that area in general can be language. It can be a genuine barrier, or it can be gamed to disrupt. You know how that goes :) ... Begoon^talk 17:44, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Note: I added another IP to the archive just "for the record". I'm not suggesting any action at this point - not particularly disruptive, but identical behaviour in contribs. Begoon^talk 00:01, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Resurrecting this thread, to ask, if you have a few moments, whether you might get a chance to glance at this talkpage discussion and this thread to see if you have any thoughts. It's becoming a nuisance, and, because of the nature of the disruption, difficult to decide what to do next. I'm fairly certain this is all related, but some of it is almost surreal. Any thoughts or input appreciated. Begoon^talk 05:28, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Glancing at the talk page and related article section, it seems as if you are correct. If the IP insists on re-inserting the edit without discussing, they may be eligible for a disruptive editing block. It's clear you are trying to discuss the change appropriately. TN X Man 11:48, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks - the article has had semi-protection applied for a week, now. That's not an ideal solution, because it inconveniences other anonymous editors, and likely just postpones a long running problem for a week. That said, there may well be no better solution. I'd actually prefer it if they would discuss the change. It's not impossible that they have some kind of valid point of view that should at least be explored, but are not expressing it well enough to be understood. It's also not impossible it's pure disruption. I guess time will tell Begoon^talk 12:06, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

He's now engaged in discussion on the talk page, and I'm 99.99% certain, duck-wise, he's the same user as the SPI. Same discussion style, same approach of endlessly quoting bits of huge documents that don't support his argument, presuming you can actually discern an argument. I think we really are just looking at pointless disruption. Is there any real point in reopening the SPI with the new IPs? Seems like the range blocks might be just too silly to even contemplate. Happy to do it if you think there's any point. Begoon^talk 14:22, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

You're right about the rangeblock - it's too large if we just look at the last two IPs on the talk page. I've left the IP a final warning. If they edit the talk page or article unconstructively again, please let me know. TN X Man 14:39, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

RPP report

Hello, just wanted to let you know that the IP I reported yesterday has decided to hit Storm Shadow per this diff page. Then there's the legal threats he's made on my talk page due to my 'harassment' of this blocked editor. I'm going to bring this up on ANI and see if the community wants to a) ban the user and b) impose a rangeblock. Vedant (talk) 05:19, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. If there's anything I can do, please let me know. TN X Man 11:52, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the support but I don't know if there is much any one individual can do (any action should be taken by the community as a whole). Nonetheless, I have posted a note on ANI as well as launched an SPI investigation into yet another sock of his. Only time will tell what the response is... Thanks, Vedant (talk) 06:59, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Discographies!

Hello Tnxman307. God your funny! What an incredible sense of humour! I just happen to enjoy discographies when they illustrate a musician's diverse body of work. There are so many others (some very, very extensive) scattered about the wiki pages. Sorry old chap, I'm a bit of a completist. That is all. Mr. Mull4mulligan (talk) 20:51, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

WP:RPP question

Hello Tnxman, I'm Airplaneman. I saw your edit to RPP - something about semi-auto clerking. How do you do that? Airplaneman ✈ 20:40, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)I believe it is this script. Mauler90 _talk 21:15, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

That would be the one. It's a pretty simple add-on to your .js page, but be sure to read the instructions first. TN X Man 22:19, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Only thing I'll add is that make sure you add it to your correct .js page. I added it to monobook and couldn't figure out why it wasn't working. Forgot I needed to add it to the vector one

Facepalm. Mauler90 _talk 22:23, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, guys! Will do :) Airplaneman ✈ 04:11, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/100110100

He appears to be back on a new IP, but the SPI hasn't been approved for CU yet? -- AnmaFinotera (talk ~ contribs) 04:55, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Those IPs are on (almost) opposite ends of the country. Also, a checkuser won't publicly tie an IP to an account. I'm sorry I couldn't be of more help, but I don't see much for the SPI to do. If there is further problematic editing, you could report them to AIV or AN. I'm sorry I couldn't be of more help. TN X Man 11:55, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

No worries...I'm mostly thinking of the original CU (not counting the new IP) as this is the first time he's jumped to a named sock, which makes me think he may have made sleepers as well since he likes to edit from at least two locations that we know of. -- AnmaFinotera (talk ~ contribs) 13:12, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

RenesasEurope unblocked

I've unblocked RenesasEurope temporarily (a user you blocked), in order for them to request a name change, as they've stated they won't edit the COI article. Hope this doesn't tread on yours or anyone else's toes. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 13:57, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Not a problem. In fact, I like seeing my username blocks undone, because it (hopefully) means the user wants to contribute constructively! TN X Man 14:01, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Jock Merridew

Hi again - any reason for this block? I don't see anything wrong with it, unless I'm missing something. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 20:15, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

It appeared to be an impersonation of User:Jack Merridew (contra the username policy). Of course, if Jack has no problem with it (and Jock can put a note on his userpage indicating he is not Jack), I have no problem with an unblock. I hope this helps. TN X Man 20:21, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm - could be coincidence. I'd suggest a soft block rather than hard block, and give him the option of a name change. (He has made one good edit) I'll leave this to you if you don't mind, as I'm logging off soon. — Tivedshambo (t/c) 20:27, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

I find the one letter difference a little too close for comfort, however, I've altered the block to allow a username change. TN X Man 20:54, 23 July 2010 (UTC)

Not pleased with you at all

No moron the reason I mentioned Light Currant is that my previous IP was blocked for being him anyway you're fucking me off right now so either apologise or I'm going to make your time on wiki very unpleasant. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.180.19.16 (talk • contribs)

I apologize if my joke was misunderstood. I am curious though - how would you "make [my] time on wiki very unpleasant"? TN X Man 13:30, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Please see below \/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Frank the rabbit (talk • contribs) 15:34, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

User:Jock Merridew

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/I dropped the soap

He's a long-term troll who should have account creation *disabled*. Cheers, Jack Merridew, who's legit, 06:44, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Sigh - I hope your right. I'd hate to have to readjust this block again. :) TN X Man 13:49, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm rather sure. I'm a sock myself, as you seem to know from the thread ↑↑↑. The nakal socks like to dog me, and this all serves the project well. We've a huge SPI backlog because we've too few CUs, and the community hosed the last election. Much of this place is non-functional. ArbGov is going to appoint some moar soon, so it'll sort, a bit.

—Sincerely, Street-Legal Sockpuppet Jack Merridew

05:08, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Are they? The RFC was archived with no evidence that anything was being done.

p.s. I knew Jock Merridew was phony the instant I saw him, and would have said something, but I figured there was nothing I could do that would help.

p.p.s. I have no connection to this "I dropped the soap" fellow and as far as I know his name is not meant to refer to me in any way. —Soap— 11:25, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

I thought they were gonna; I'll check, but it's what I was told. Anyway, Davenbella was just blocked by Deskana. And no, I doubt dopey even knew about you; it was a gym-shower joke; mebbe in-teh-joint. He's a long-term lurker. I have a bunch. Cheers, Jack Merridew 11:46, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

SPI closed and moar were nailed ;) Jack Merridew 12:12, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I was just coming back here with the update. I've blocked and tagged them all. By-the-by, there is going to be another CU/Oversight election, the announcement is here. Thirdly, I've never suspected, Soap - I've seen him around and and he seems pretty trustworthy. TN X Man 13:01, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

It just got much more interesting, and moved:

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/ThinkEnemies/Archive

This is a whole different crowd, and I think this is not over. Cheers, Jack Merridew 13:30, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean - these are different than Nakal? I only tagged them as ThinkEnemies' socks since that was the oldest account listed. In any case, they're all blocked, so that should (hopefully) be the end of it for a bit. TN X Man 13:34, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

I'm thinking, aloud, that this is related to the global warming case, as I stuck a toe in a few of those articles recently. I don't think it one of the usual socks that dogs me; this is new. The facts on the ground, now, are that it's ThinkEnemies, whoever that is. I also think it may be the User:Libertas/User:TDC cloud from five years ago. I've been here a very long time and have tangled with most of the sock farms. There're lots of layers to most of these onions. Oh, nakal is just the Indonesian word for mischievous, not a user or sock. Cheers, Jack Merridew 13:45, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

This is what happens...

File:TNXMan.jpg

...when you're on the list :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Frank the rabbit (talk • contribs) 15:34, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Oh, well, now I know I guess. TN X Man 15:35, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

May I have my apology now then please? Then I can get back to offering Bugs information. Frank the rabbit (talk) 15:41, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

I've apologised here. TFOWR 15:47, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm sure this isn't the last of it, if you check Frank's upload log you'll see a pretty juvenile attack on me as well. TN X Man 15:49, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

No quite bloody right it isn't the last of it, to reiterate I am nothing to do with that Light Currant person, you are wasting your time and you are forcing me to dedicate quite a considerable amount of my time correcting you because of your arrogant intransigence. 109.144.212.31 (talk) 16:32, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Nice. Since they feel they're being "forced" to do this I guess it's back to "whack-a-mole". TFOWR 16:42, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Seems that way. Eventually, they'll move on to something else. TN X Man 16:45, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

What a nonsense. Let's be clear about the course of events here:

1. I leave a humourous comment on Baseball Bugs' talk page

2. I am then blocked for six months as a sock of Light Currant.

3. I then protest this with another IP. Am then blocked once again.

4. Now I'm angry, and you know the rest of the story yourself.

I am NOTHING to do with Light Currant. What the heck do you want me to do here? I'm a perfectly nice guy being driven to extremes. We can easily sort this: just acknowledge your mistake, stop blocking me, and let me banter with bugs. What's the problem? 217.41.230.102 (talk) 18:03, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Just out of curiosity - why you? I thought 86.178.201.66 was the first one (and another admin got that one). Was there another before that one, one that you blocked? TFOWR 18:08, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

No the first one was 79.75.171.154 and the reason I'm annoyed with you bunch especially is because you know I'm not light currant but you're continuing this petty crusade for adminidstratve convenience or something when you can sort this out easy peasy. 217.41.232.75 (talk) 18:11, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Tnxman307, I semi'd your talkpage. No objection to you lifting/changing the protection (it's your talkpage, after all). I just felt this nonsense showed no sign of stopping anytime soon (and the IP tells me in their latest unblock request that they're "busy", so maybe the semi has had some effect). Apologies if I've mis-stepped, and - as always - I won't consider it wheel-warring if you undo any admin action I take. TFOWR 18:25, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
- Oh, and this is now at ANI... TFOWR 19:04, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
  - I seem to have stepped into it here, which apparently set the IP off. No objections to the semi-protection (again, hopefully, they'll get bored and wander off). Cheers! TN X Man 20:06, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Joe cell

Hi. You protected Joe cell following my RPP, for which many thanks. But you also restored the redirect to Perpetual motion and I'm not sure why. Perpetual motion doesn't contain any information that's directly about the "Joe cell" so it seemed to me that the current content of Joe cell, which explained that it was a hoax and gave some details, might be a good starting point for a proper article - which is why I asked for semi protection not full protection. My idea was that Joe Cell would be fully protected and would redirect to Joe cell, but Joe cell would only be semi protected so it could develop over time. andy (talk) 22:40, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

I restored the redirect because the content that was there wasn't really enough to keep. If there is was any sort of reliable sourcing (or really, anything beyond an unsourced definition) I could understand restoring it. Perhaps the best idea is to insert a brief, sourced mention in perpetual motion, allow it to expand there, and split it out once it develops? TN X Man 23:09, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Sockpuppet investigations

Hi Tnxman. I don't know who I should contact but as we seem to share the same problems with a particular Celine Dion maniac, this thread could be useful to you. We blocked him five times and I think there'll soon be a sixth ! Regards, --Voxhominis (talk) 01:08, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for that notification. I've reviewed the findings from the French Wikipedia and here (please correct me if my summation is incorrect): LegatoXxXxXxXx has been blocked, both here and on fr., for abusing multiple accounts. There was a checkuser case on en. for F6Coloratura80, leading to blocks for User:F6Coloratura80 (2 weeks), User:Soar (only blocked on fr., username registered here some years ago), User:LaTraviata1453 (indef), and User:Lully 2010 (indef). Now there is another user, User:TheBeautifulOnes, making the same sort of edits on fr. as Legato, and leading to a checkuser request there.

I will certainly keep on eye on the en. contributions of TheBeautifulOnes and the results of the fr. checkuser case. Thank you for letting me know about this and if I can help in any way, please let me know. TN X Man 01:55, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Could you have a look?

Stephen Pierce's MRMI Free Report Weekly Program. I CSD'd it as G11 twice, and twice the tag was removed. Do you agree with the G11? Thanks, Pianotech ^{Talk to me!}/_Contribs 13:15, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Yes - I've deleted it as such. Let me know if there's anything else. TN X Man 13:22, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! It really irks me when article creators simply remove tags without any attempt to address the issue. Thanks again... Pianotech ^{Talk to me!}/_Contribs 13:26, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Divas Of Destruction recreation

Divas Of Destruction has been recreated by a new user less than 30 minutes after you blocked the original creator User:DivasOfDestruction. ----moreno oso (talk) 00:21, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

I've re-deleted it. I see you've notified the creator about the deletion, as well as our guide to writing proper articles. That's about all we can do - if they continue to recreate the article, we'll deal with it as it happens. Cheers! TN X Man 00:32, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

The second user has been blocked as a sockpuppet of the first user. I *luv* these sockpuppet plays. Kind of wish they were good magna. ----moreno oso (talk) 00:41, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

ArbCom

Renewing the process of filing in ArbCom against you from the incident in which we were both involved. Just advising you of my plan of action as a matter of judicial courtesy. 68.236.155.129 (talk) 04:45, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Just an addendum: I doubt we'll ever be able to settle things diplomatically, so what other option is there? I want my honor restored, even if it means making the dirty laundry public. I honestly, do not see how we can settle this as an internal matter. I may even make this issue public outside Wikipedia on other Wikia and other websites. 68.236.155.129 (talk) 04:57, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

It's been so long that I'd honestly forgotten who you were. If you'd like to file an ArbCom case (which will probably be denied, by the way, they stipulate that all other methods of dispute resolution must be tried first), well, more power to you. TN X Man 11:46, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Woohoo!

We deleted Main Page! And they said it couldn't be done. =) -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 20:21, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

To boldly go where no man (or dodo) has gone before.... :) TN X Man 20:24, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Okay I give up. What did you just do?? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:37, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

To be perfectly honest, I have no idea. It took me five solid minutes to sort it out, but I think this is the relevant page. TN X Man 20:43, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Is there a different kind of space between the two words or something? — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:50, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

I don't know. I can't tell if there are some letters from a different character set or the space is different or what. Maybe it's magic? TN X Man 20:54, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

I think maybe it's a different letter "a". This page is also quite interesting. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:01, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)It is a different letter a: if you view it as ANSI in Notepad++, it reads Talk:MÐ°in Page Begoon^talk 22:23, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

Huh. I tried pasting it into Notepad, but it didn't look any different. Well, it would have been a shot in a million for anyone to have typed a Cyrillic "a" and everything else in Latin characters. TN X Man 22:43, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

I used Notepad++, not Notepad, and converted the view from UTF to ANSI. I think basic Notepad preserves the UTF/Unicode. The redirect gives the odd character for the 'a' when you use Notepad++, the real Talk Page doesn't. I'm just looking at the Main:Talk Page example above, the other undelete link is admin only. Begoon^talk 23:09, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

adding: but the undelete link looks like this if you right click copy/paste destination from browser: Special:Undelete/M%D0%B0in_Page so looks like the same thing. Begoon^talk 23:24, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

I've asked at WP:VPT. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:06, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

My brother/sister/errr... some relative did it! -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 21:55, 26 July 2010 (UTC)

And I guess I blocked them so hard it made a block wall - another first! TN X Man 22:43, 26 July 2010 (UTC)