Welcome to my talk page! I will reply on your talk page unless you prefer otherwise as usually noted on your talk page. If you are an anonymous editor, I will reply here. When leaving messages, please remember these easy steps: Use a descriptive subject/headline Use [[wikilinks]] when mentioning users and pages If you are continuing a conversation with me, please edit the relevant section instead of starting a new section Sign your post with four tildes ~~~~ to leave your name and date Please also note that I have a problem with dropping things, but I am working on it, and have made progress. If you are going to use {{talkback}} templates, date them, so they can be archived properly. Click here to leave me a message

Archives

2007 December 15, 2007 – March 17, 2008 2008 March 17, 2008 – March 26, 2008 March 26, 2008 – March 31, 2008 March 31, 2008 – April 28, 2008 April 28, 2008 – May 5, 2008 May 5, 2008 – May 31, 2008 May 31, 2008 – July 17, 2008 July 17, 2008 – November 5, 2008 2009 November 5, 2008 – January 5, 2009 January 5, 2009 – February 27, 2009 February 27, 2009 – April 14, 2009 April 14, 2009 – May 22, 2009 May 22, 2009 – June 26, 2009 June 26, 2009 – September 4, 2009 September 4, 2009 – November 3, 2009 2010 November 3, 2009 – January 2, 2010 January 3, 2010 – March 14, 2010 March 14, 2010 – July 6, 2010 July 11, 2010 – Present

This page has archives. Sections older than 7 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 1 section is present.

Hello, Daedalus969. You have new messages at Livitup's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, Daedalus969. You have new messages at MathCool10's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Uh, he does have a link... :S — neuro^{(talk)(review)} 20:56, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's not his signature, it would seem he just tried to straight copy paste it from one page to another without realising that the edit box strips WYSIWYG formatting. — neuro^{(talk)(review)} 20:59, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming you posted that on my talk before seeing my above comment, if not, message me back. Thanks, — neuro^{(talk)(review)} 21:01, 18 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there. For each new filter, we have them run log-only for a while to make sure they're accurate enough to set consequences for tripping them. Looking at the logs, it seems pretty accurate, though, so I'll write up a warning and set it to warn/disallow in a moment. Thanks. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 08:21, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

 Done! See Mediawiki:Abusefilter-warning-userpage-blanking for the warning. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 08:48, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

you are not allowed to remove block notices while blocked - Sure you are. You are not allowed to removed declined unblock requests, but there is no reason to revert a removal of the block notice. WP:BLANKING. --Onorem♠Dil 13:45, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Saw this flash by on my watchlist, yep, Viktor can skive off whatever he pleases from his own talk page but for declined unblock templates whilst that block is still on. Gwen Gale (talk) 14:54, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

replied — Ched ~ ^(yes?)/_© 15:50, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The reason for my ext.link was to allow people to see the spelling errors on the newly designed www.whitehouse.gov website. What is the proper way to allow people to see it within Wikipedia.org? That is the freebie rather than a service. Would a direct link to the report be allowable? I can't copy it off that website because it's not mine.

If there is no way for people to be able to find this information on Wikipedia.org then I think it's a real disservice to the public! If you think the report is not real then lookup the misspellings on www.whitehouse.gov to verify, because they are real.

I noticed that Spellr.us is allowed an external link on the "spelling" page and sells it's service?

surfersurfer20022002 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Surfersurfer20022002 (talk • contribs) 23:41, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for giving me a better understanding of how wikipedia.org works. I thought it would be interesting for people to be able to see the over 700 spelling mistakes on www.whitehouse.gov. It would have provided a real life example of spelling mistakes on a major website. Correct grammar and spelling on our government websites tells our allies we are reliable and our enemies that we are competent. Do you know of any other websites like Wikipedia.org that might be interested in posting such information? Also why didn't you remove the spellr.us link if it's in violation. I don't have the status you have for deleting such entries. When something doesn't make sense it is usually a red flag for corruption.

Disappointed,

surfersurfer20022002 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Surfersurfer20022002 (talk • contribs) 00:27, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I know you're trying to do good over at User talk:El Machete Guerrero, but I suggest that you might find it better to just disengage, as I did earlier. It's pretty clear you weren't intending to attack Machete, but to some it might seem that your continued conversation with him is an attempt at antagonizing someone who doesn't really understand our policies. I don't think this is the case, but I thought I'd leave you a message all the same. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 08:08, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that you're trying to participate in the best way that you can in this situation, but you are only making things worse at this point. Please, please step back from the situation. Machete is clearly taking your involvement as a personal vendetta at this point, regardless of what your intentions are, and that doesn't help things. He's already de facto banned (since, with a CU-supported sockpuppetry block, no admin is likely to lift the block), and there's little opposition to the imposition of a formal ban. Per WP:BAN#Dealings with banned users, continuing to deal with Machete at this point when it's clear your involvement just antagonizes him will just put your actions in a bad light. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 17:07, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I noticed that you used {{discussion top}}/{{discussion bottom}} to archive the ANI thread about Viktor. Just wanted to let you know that you should have put discussion top under the level 2 header instead of above, since doing so breaks archival bots. No big deal really- I've fixed it, just thought I'd let you know. :-) —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 19:44, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Thank you for filing Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/BeenieWeenie969. This is an automated notice to inform you that the case is currently missing a code letter, which indicates to checkusers why a check is valid. Please revisit the page and add this. Sincerely, SPCUClerkbot (talk) 21:49, 21 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Daedalus969. You have new messages at MathCool10's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello. Thank you for filing Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Wallflowers98. This is an automated notice to inform you that the case is currently missing a code letter, which indicates to checkusers why a check is valid. Please revisit the page and add this. Sincerely, SPCUClerkbot (talk) 22:47, 22 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your reversions at User_talk:Polystyla were altogether excessive. It is generally accepted that users can remove any post from their own User Talk page, and you should not revert them to restore remarks of yours. In the case of removing what you consider to be personal attacks, either use the MfD process or post at WP:ANI to gain consensus support for the removal. In the worst case scenario (i.e. assuming that no one agrees the remarks should be removed), simply ignore the remarks and leave the page alone. In this particular case, I decided that the best course of action was to protect the page since it was apparently being used as a soap box, and an unblock should really only be considered for the master account. Bear in mind that this page being protected is the only reason you haven't been blocked for edit-warring (since blocking would serve no preventative purpose). SHEFFIELDSTEEL^TALK 14:27, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 03:52, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for setting up a transclusion. :) Durova^Charge! 02:26, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I blocked your threat-spewing friend as a patently obvious sock. If he follows through and creates more accounts, a checkuser can be amazingly effective for n00b sockpuppeteers, so I would recommend it if it gets worse. Should that happen, if you want, just let me know that it is happening, and I can ask a CU to take a look.

Have a good night! (or morning, afternoon, evening...)

J.delanoy^gabs_adds 05:52, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

1. Well, I wasn't watching your talk page before, although I am now.
2. Redsred Without The Puppet Strings (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is fairly obviously a sock of Redsred (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). How I found him and his vandalism is a bit complex. There was a massive flood of account creations with abusive usernames by a vandal using proxies and a script. After getting everything sorted (at least what I can do), I was looking at Special:Log/newusers in case he repeats, and I happened to see a username mentioning "puppets". So I looked to see if User:Redsred existed, and if it was blocked. Both returned true, so I blocked the new account and then reverted his contribs.
3. With regard to chess, it is hosted on Yahoo, and I'd love to play, but it is 02:15 here, so I really need to get some sleep. I apologize for that, and I hope to be able to play with you sometime in the future. For now, cheers! J.delanoy^gabs_adds 06:17, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

While I appreciate your efforts to keep the pages on Wikipedia clean, the edits I made on the "Spelling" article clearly were constructive. It stated that "Hercules" is a common misspelling of the "correct" "Heracles." This is factually incorrect.

Is this OK then??? "C.U.T.K.D ^{T | C}"