NOTE: IF YOU ARE ANONYMOUS, AND POST ANYTHING ON THIS PAGE, YOU WILL BE DELETED WITHOUT CONSIDERATION.

Oh, I removed your note from RfC / 172 because Danny changed the text. :) By all means reinstate it if you like, but I didn't want you to be misrepresented. Martin 23:34, 24 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

I have an idea of what we can do to stop Wik from messing up our user pages. We can talk to Jimmy Wales, who has already talked with Wik long ago about reverting articles. I'm sure he'll know what to do. --Quagga

Howdy, RickK. I wanted to ask your opinion as to whether or not I'm ready for adminship. I thought to ask you because you seem to be a pretty accomplished Wikipedian. I realise I've only been a registered member for little more than a month and a half; but I have very close to 1000 edits, and I'm the primary author of several (in my opinion) nice articles such as Ron Brown, Henry Lee (criminologist), Kid Gleason, and Jimmy McHugh, among many others. I've also made varying contributions to a lot of nice articles. I'm a regular voter at VfD, and regular RC patroller. I'm quickly becoming quite the Wikipediholic; I figure if you're gonna be an addict, why not go full-blown with it. So... opinion? blankfaze | &#9835 01:47, 25 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

• Yeah, I figured that'd be the case, but what's the harm in asking? I just spend so much time on WP, and get peeved when I have to wait for other people to do all these things. Haha. Yet I understand nonetheless. Standards. blankfaze | &#9835 01:53, 25 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

I've undeleted Star of County Down which you deleted soeedily as a copyvio while it was on VfD. Also moved it to its correct title Star of the County Down. Please let me know if you still think the lyrics of this old Irish ballad are a copyvio after looking at the cite I've added to the article and doing a search for other references to it. Please also follow the copyvio process instead of misusing speedy deletions - it is intended in part to stop mistaken deletions of works apparently long out of copyright. Jamesday 02:40, 26 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Up to you if you want to list it on VfD this time. On a different matter, per the Wikipedia:Quickpolls policy, which requires requests to follow policy prior to a listing there, please do not violate the copyvio, deletion or quick deletion policies in the future. You original out of process quick deletion of that article as a copyvio on the first day it was listed on VfD violated all three. Jamesday 03:12, 26 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

hey Rick, I have asked usedbook to provide sources. Is that a problem? Isn't it helpfull for the wikipedia? So, don't play boss around here. And you should read an article before reverting. The articles I've reverted did not compromise NPOV.

PS: I didn't delet other people's contribution. Please cite examples of your accusation. I may have edited it and I have every right to do so. And you can't revert my edits cause u disagree with me. Hiwamy 03:03, 26 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

I'm the one who put all the pictures in the Laura Bush page, not that anon who thinks he is helping, but isn't quite... WhisperToMe 04:28, 26 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

See the revised Halfman for the full explanation, but they're from the Wheel of Time series. I've rewritten, and will move to Myrddraal (the proper name) now. Meelar 04:33, 26 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Rick, you have again broken one of your own laws. I have explained my reason for deletion of the statement in the talk page of Christianity and World Religions. You have not done so but reverted my edits. I understand that it is from your dissatisfaction with Islam. This is not helping NPOV and it proves that you are maintaining double standards. I have again removed those lines. Hiwamy 20:00, 26 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

• Special:Blockip asks for those who don't know what they are doing to refrain from implementing range blocks.
• /48 range blocks do not exist in IPv4.
• You have blocked two /48 range blocks.

Thanks for any and all concern regarding this affair. - Fennec (さばくのきつね) 01:52, May 27, 2004 (UTC)

I also notice that User:Guanaco is unblocking some blocks with the reason "idiot". Perhaps you should explain more thoroughly, and clarify WHICH idiot, and WHAT idiocy. - Fennec (さばくのきつね) 02:15, May 27, 2004 (UTC)

Consider. There are 65536 <x2 or x3> IP addresses which you have blocked. What if someone not familiar with Wikipedia comes along randomly in one of those ranges and sees something like "idiot" or "re-blocking the idiot" et cetera? They're lost and confused! Block reasons are not places to send messages to other sysops. Perhaps you should list instead something like "Range appears to be used by User:Wik, who was banned at the request of the arbitration committee." -Fennec (さばくのきつね)

Well, if it's not becuase of (reason above) substitute in your reason- just explain it so J Random Passerby understands the rationale. There's nothing to be gained by being opaque. Personally, I remain unconvinced that it is Wik, myself, but that's another matter which I am not pursuing and I am not currently unblocking the address. - Fennec (さばくのきつね) 02:40, May 27, 2004 (UTC)

Who is this Wik you speak of? I am just annoyed at Rick, as he makes changes to articles to suit his POV. When I change the changes back he bans my IP saying i'm vandalising. I have seen him revert and then be proven wrong by another user. He then proceeds to bring up a completely different argument as to why he was right. 219.88.219.37 03:03, 27 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]