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

Valuable editor

That's not true. I do think you're a valuable editor. I think you're a bad admin. A very bad one because you have been here a long time and because of that you make other admins feel it's okay to be aggressive and unpleasant to achieve their goals. That's not to say your goals are necessarily bad, just that the path you take to them is not always the smoothest. If you truly had the interests of making a great encyclopaedia at heart, I think you would relinquish your admin powers, avoid contention (you have to admit, you are like a fuckhead magnet) and concentrate on the really good editing that you do do. You would also avoid VfD. It's not good for your blood pressure. Dr Zen 23:28, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Please review [1]. Mmk? Thanx. - Ta bu shi da yu 01:13, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Editing this evening for several hours -- when suddenly a numerical user (152.163.100.201) block is placed on my work. Please look things over -- no vandalism. WBardwin 04:36, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I was wondering how long it would take one of you to dispatch of him, BWT thanks. --User:Boothy443 | comhrÚ 07:00, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Never tohough of that, kinada glanced at it from time to time, considering i dont have privilges. --User:Boothy443 | comhrÚ 07:05, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Some body has blanked out the page Anthropology, i tried reverting it. But it was not saving. dont know why?? please revert the wiki-vandalism on that page. thanks Robin klein 07:26, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I fixed all of the items you enumerated. Bluelinking those directors paid off: Gordon Douglas and George Sidney are quite notable for their work outside of Our Gang. --b. Touch 07:27, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I noticed that you deleted the matrix norm article after it had been vandalised. However this was previously a very respectable mathematics article. Please check the edit history and talk page before wielding your administrative powers so hastily.

I have recovered what I could find on a clone site at Matrix norm/old although it lacks the proper edit history, so I'm not sure if it may have licensing problems, and I have no idea how old this revision is. Following your deletion, a new (different) page has been started at Matrix norm.

Can you recover the original content with edit history? If so, please don't overwrite the existing page, but put it in a subpage so that it can be properly merged. If not, think twice next time. Lupin 14:08, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I am being accused of breaking the 3RR's rule in relation to Javier Solana. Can you look at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR, and comment if you like, as you were also reverting this vandalism. --SqueakBox 16:30, Mar 11, 2005 (UTC)

User:Cumbey has now engaged in an identical edit war at [2]. Any help would be much appreciated. --SqueakBox 17:18, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)

Hello! I notice that you have (unsurprisingly) blocked User:Dick Witham; twenty-three minutes later he vandalised Chadbryant's Talk page using his other account, User:DickNWitham. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 22:42, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

He's not only been at it again, as 'DickNWitham', but a new account, TruthCrusader has just turned up making the same edits that Witham has been making... Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 23:11, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

AnaleaseBryant seems to be another of his sockpuppets. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 20:20, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Some time ago, you posted a comment on Talk:Golden Arches. I dropped in a response, but figured I should notify you, since you may well have given up checking for an answer some time ago. Have a good one. - Vague | Rant 02:04, Mar 13, 2005 (UTC)

Hi, I was clicking on the random page function, and I came across a page for a porn star. Is there a consensus for where the notability bar lies for porn stars? The google test is nigh useless for porn stars. Considering how many porn stars there are out there, should we have a looser criteria than we do for actors and actresses? DaveTheRed 06:38, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I'm not going to go into a long speech, but reverting User:216.153.214.94's comments on talk page just looks like a cover-up of dissention. Rex is not banned from editing, and if he wants to comment on talk pages, let him. -- Netoholic @ 07:04, 2005 Mar 14 (UTC)

He is not making personal attacks. He is making critical comments. There is a difference, and just because the compliants are being put to an admin does not elevate them to personal attack status. As to whether he should log in, I agree. Try writing to the IPs talk page. -- Netoholic @ 07:09, 2005 Mar 14 (UTC)

---

Thank you for reverting Rex's vandalism. Regards --Neutrality^talk 07:48, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I saw. Netoholic has a penchant for injecting himself into petty disputes and defending bad users. It's part of his effort to stalk, troll, and harass people for some perceived slight. His motives are transparent. Neutrality^talk 07:54, Mar 14, 2005 (UTC)

Rick,

You have accused me of copying content from a web-site, and pasting it into a new page, (Malibu Stacey band page).

I have never seen the original page or site that is quoted, so cannot have copied from it. as a new user, who WAS keen to become involved in the community, I feel disappointed that you should take this approach, without first asking whether I had or had not copied data!

Awgj13 14:16, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Apologies for the confusion on this. The info placed on the page was sent to me by a friend who is a Malibu Stacey fan. He lead me to believe that these were his words! I have since spoken to him, and he has confessed that the details were plagiarised from the bands' website, (which seems to be a variation on the pogomotion.co.uk page. Please remove the page, and I will create another one, when I have time to come up with some original content. Awgj13 10:47, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I was moving Mystery-shopper to Mystery shopper but seemed to get caught up in a database error of some kind. I was coming back to finish the job, but others have already taken care of it. Cheers --Rlandmann 03:04, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I do not understand why I have been accused of copyright (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highway1) when this is a company I work for, they have asked me to add this text to wikipedia and the text is taken from our own website.

You got some funny ideas about copyright, buddy.

You shown me the writing on the wall. I know when I am not wanted. Good Bye.--198 07:47, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Bye. RickK 07:48, Mar 15, 2005 (UTC)

Though I might have disagreed with you sometimes, I valued you as a straight shooter. Every site needs one :-) Have a good one Rick, and don't let the trolls and vandals get you down! - Ta bu shi da yu 08:25, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I assume you mean the autoblock? Clearing the autoblock should do it. The username block remains. In practise those accounts are throwaways anyway, so the value of blocking them is questionable. We need to go to the ISP. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 08:35, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Hi RickK,

Just went through Newpages and I thought I wanted to let you know that there is a template {{POV check}} for articles that may be biased/POV to be used rather than {{POV}}, which is usually reserved for POV/biased articles that are disputed between editors.

- Mailer Diablo 10:49, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for rv'ing those changes to Katharine Hepburn. This person has actually regularly been deleting material from the KH article and you now represent about the third person who has RV'ed their completely unexplained and unwarranted deletions. I have left three messages now on separate talk pages in response to the most recent deletions but some of the problem may be that this person logs in from different IP's, so I'm not sure they're getting the message. It is most likely the same person as they make virtually the exact same changes every time, and their IP's all trace back to PacBell Internet. It's not vandalism exactly -- nothing profane added, entire page not blanked -- but it certainly is disruptive and goes against the guideline of logging in before making drastic changes to existing articles. The IP's in question seem to be: 63.202.235.24 ([3], 63.202.233.235 ([4]), 64.169.233.195 ([5]), 63.207.141.97 ([6]), and others. Looking back through the history page before I got involved, it appears that this person has in fact deleted the same information about 6 other times. I'm relatively new to dealing with problems with Wikipedia caused by uncooperative users, so I'm not exactly sure if there's something else I should be doing. I spoke with Hadal about this not long ago and he suggested just keeping on top of it and hoping this person gets tired of the game. The odd thing is that this person's only edits, literally, are to KH and Spencer Tracy. Whoever it is will randomly show up about once every week or two, delete a ton of information they feel shouldn't be in the article, and happily go on their way. Very odd. Anyway, thanks again and if you have any pearls of wisdom feel free to drop them my way... Katefan0 18:50, Mar 15, 2005 (UTC)

MS-13 is a gang with international connections, however the event described, happened only in the United States. The individuals in the gang may send money back to to El Salvador, but it is a US domestic issue. The gang members were apprehended by US authorities on US soil. — J3ff 22:51, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

MS-13 is a gang with international connections, however the event described, happened only in the United States. The individuals in the gang may send money back to to El Salvador, but the arrest of the gang members is a US domestic issue. The gang members were apprehended by US authorities on US soil. — J3ff 22:51, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Also, if you read the comment on the very top of the current events page, it's above all the various dates, it specifically says that current events that fit better on the various pages such as British and Irish current events or Indian current events should not go on the current events page. — J3ff 22:53, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The reason I didn't move the Bangladesh smoking article is because it does not have its own current events page. — J3ff 22:55, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

It is not my "personal opinion". I am following the guidelines outlined in the comment on the current events page. Please read it. I'll do you a favor, here is the comment copied and pasted from the top of the current events page:

NOTE: PLEASE LOG NEW EVENTS IN THE PRESENT TENSE. PLEASE PROVIDE LINKS TO NEWS STORIES AFTER EACH ENTRY. NEWS STORIES WITHOUT LINKS MAY BE REMOVED. NEWS STORIES MUST BE IN ENGLISH. PLEASE DO NOT LINK TO SUBSCRIPTION-ONLY SITES SUCH AS AOL, WSJ OR THE NYT (except in the unlikely event that a story is covered substantially better therethan anywhere else).

NOTE: For each item, please update the most relevant linked article if appropriate.

Only stories of INTERNATIONAL INTEREST should be added here. Consider whether each story would be better placed on the USA CURRENT EVENTS, CANADIAN CURRENT EVENTS or BRITISH AND IRISH CURRENT EVENTS pages before adding it here.

Even if the gang members were in the United States illegally, it is a domestic issue, as it involves US laws. The article says nothing of those apprehended being deported. Even the article you linked to classifies the event as "US national". — J3ff 23:03, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

are you saying *ALL* dates and years *MUST* be wikilinked under current wikipedia policy? I think many people would disagree with that, and fortunately most articles on wikipedia don't wiki link every year, especially when it comes to the same year mentioned over an over again inside an article. zen master T 23:44, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

When will the "neutrality disputed" heading be deleted from the entry on Bart McQueary? Everything in the article is true and accurate; there is nary a difference between he and Fred Phelps' political and religious views. McQueary is almost a young clone of Phelps; everything he says and does is taken by example from Phelps. Large portions of his webpage are verbatim from godhatesfags.com; often things will be posted on Phelps' page and then show up paraphrased on McQueary's page a day or so later. As far as his involvement with pornography, it's common knowledge at the Annoyatorium forums, where Bart is a frequent poster. The quotes attributed to him come straight from his own webpage and his posts at the Annoyatorium. Because a public figure wishes parts of their past or self to remain anonymous, does that mean that they are allowed to dictate their own history and identities? McQueary pretty much says on his webpage in so many words or less that it's his mission for as many people as possible to know about him and his message; I would say that he has made himself into a public figure, and therefore subject to the same (objective) scrutiny that all public figures are subject to. (Sorry about the lack of sig) Mistergrind 23:45, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Phelps most definitely expresses a strong hatred for the USA. He is the owner of the domain www.godhatesamerica.com. In his sermon on the Indian Ocean Tsunami, he stated, "let us pray that a tsunami with one hundred foot walls of water, going one hundred miles an hour, will strike America." The American Heritage dictionary defines Acolyte as "2. A devoted follower or attendant." McQueary is most certainly a devoted follower of Phelps.70.243.33.146 05:15, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't know this was a former VfD subject, so I was trying to make it look better (while expressing some doubt as to whether it ought to exist at all), and getting some edit conflicts with Mr. Anon, so after you deleted, my edit finally went through, and it's back again. Feel free to blow it away again, if you wish. --John Owens (talk) 08:35, 2005 Mar 16 (UTC)

Ooo, sneaky. I kinda like it. :) --John Owens (talk) 08:38, 2005 Mar 16 (UTC)

We met on Jeff Gannon about Wikipedia policy on "External links". I just now saw your changes to Oliver North. I believe very negative things about him, but your changes are very POV. My father was a USAF LT.Col. and I assure you that the rank is continued after retirement (e.g. unless the commission is resigned, they can reinstate you even AFTER your "retirement".) "Former" is WRONG. "President Carter" is NOT called "former President Carter". Its a POV insult to do so. Please RE-EDIT your edits. I know you can. I saw your ability to adjust in Jeff Gannon. Please do whats needed to make Oliver North NPOV. Your last edit did NOT achieve that goal we both have. Thanks. 4.250.198.147 09:53, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)