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

My point is that this IS an encyclopedia and not Hollywood Babylon. User: Felix F. Bruyns

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)

I don't know if any of the comments you have made included me as well in regard to the proxy rampage that has been going on, but I just wanted to let you know that I support blocking any and all such IPs. I myself wasn't around when they happened, but I would have gladly joined in in blocking them. I don't know if it's Wik, but even if it is I don't condone the actions. No one should be allowed to vandalise Wikipedia and do as they wish. I hope you don't feel alone in combating this. People should leave Wik's pages alone, and if this is Wik doing the mess, he should cut it out as well. Unfortunately, whoever it is seems to know every proxy IP out there, and it's not easy to block unless the automatic proxy blocker is enabled (which would cause other problems with the colo). Dori | Talk 03:22, May 27, 2004 (UTC)

I only protected User talk:Wik/Talk after blanking it so that it couldn't be recreated with more comments and would hopefully help diffuse the situation (then someone else went and deleted it). Dori | Talk 03:36, May 27, 2004 (UTC)

I note you were another reverter in the Yeti controversy in Jan.; i solicit your attention to the recent edits w/ an IP changing "illegible" and (my own version) "undecipherable" to "clear" on Noah's Ark. Thanks for your attention. --Jerzy(t) 03:17, 2004 May 27 (UTC)

Hey Rick - I was the one who unblocked Neumannkun yesterday. He emailed me, saying that it might look like vandalism, but it was part of a 3 step move: human -> humanss, human being-> human, humanss -> human being).

I responded with: Ok, sorry about the block, but page-move vandalism (or the apperance thereof) is treated *very* seriously because it's so time consuming to revert, and it requires an admin to do it properly.

I've unblocked you - IE, I have removed both blocks. However, I have a suggestion for you - moving common pages around like that tends to attract a lot of attention, and if it's suspicious, you could end up getting banned again very easily. Typically, it's a good idea to discuss major changes like that on the relavant talk page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/talk:Human in this case) ahead of time. Also, while you cannot make the move directly, an admin can, so you might want to get an admin to do it for you.

Apparently, he decided not to take my suggestion, and today he copy-paste moved human to human being. I reverted that and left an explination on the talk page. Subsequently, you blocked him. However, I'm willing to give him one last chance. So I'm going to unblock him a second time. If he doesn't cooperate this time, then I'm satisfied to let re-ban him permanently. →Raul654 02:06, May 28, 2004 (UTC)

Hello, RickK. No, I am not User:Quagga. I have always been upfront about my sockpuppet accounts. A full list of my sockpuppet accounts can be found here (with my confirmation below). So, please, kindly stop the nonsense. Thank you. --Cantus 02:07, 28 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

RickK,

Please don't call Wik things like idiot. I'm trying to talk to him. Try not to make him madder, if only for my sake.

Thank you

UninvitedCompany 02:37, 28 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

RickK, can you tell me what it is that Quagga is doing to Wik? I am having a hard time even grasping what the hell is going on here. I think there's a problem -- when pages are deleted, they don't show up in User contributions, so by the time I see the complaints, I can't figure out what the complaint it about. But can you tell me (on my talk page)? Jimbo Wales 02:58, 28 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

RickK,

Please don't call Wik things like idiot. I'm trying to talk to him. Try not to make him madder, if only for my sake.

Thank you

UninvitedCompany 02:37, 28 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

RickK, While calling Wik an idiot is humorous, it only makes the Wik issue worse. I poked fun at him myself. I even tried ghosting Wik, only to get blocked on one computer. Oh well. Let's not call Wik names from now on, shall we? Rickyrab 03:00, 28 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

I think you got confused about my Geo. Washington changes, as your comment on my talk page seemed off the point. You can see my reply there. MisfitToys 04:49, May 28, 2004 (UTC)

Hey Rick, I just noticed that you have not followed procedure with the last 3 things you listed on vfd. I fixed 2 of them, but third can't be as VfD is protected right now. Anyway, it makes it a lot easier if everybody follows the common plan, as evidenced by me and my date thing 2 weeks ago. Just wanted to give you a heads up. Burgundavia 05:38, May 28, 2004 (UTC)

• Why don't you want to create the mediwiki page. It probably makes archiving and viewing easier. Burgundavia 21:38, May 28, 2004 (UTC)
  • Rick, VfD has now changed, but my issue is still there. I respect your opinion about cumbersome processes but also realize that there was a fairly clear consensus about how to use VfD. I feel that all should respect this.

Now as for VfD in general, something does need to be done with it. Do you have any major suggestions. Burgundavia 23:51, 31 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just here to tell you that I am not Cantus. I am aware that people like Danny and others think that I am Cantus because I get into fights with Wik, but I have been here a long time before Cantus has. --Quagga

I would have been a lot more certain of that, had you not edited Cantus's User page. RickK 23:05, 28 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

An edit I immediately reverted. --Cantus 23:55, 28 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

I was just extremely bored. Sorry about that Cantus. --Quagga

Hello, RickK. I am the creator of the article (if it really deserves to be called that) that is the subject of this comment. You have recommended it for deletion. This is understandable, as it does not contain any useful information. The purpose I had in making it was to provide a forum for community discussion on Mammalian taxonomy. This was prompted by the comment posted by PlatinumX on the Talk:Marsupial page. When I read the comment, I realised that the articles varied greatly in which of the three main Mammalian taxonomic systems they used. I am not a taxonomist; neither I, nor PlatinumX is qualified to choose a system and implement it universally. However, with community backing, I can point out that a large number of people (and hopefully some with strong qualifications) back system number n. Also, on the user page I will be able to cite the vote as a strong reason to use the system I change it to. I realise that there are probably better ways to take a vote, but I don't know how to use them (if you'd like to enlighten me, I'd be much obliged). By September, I intend to move the links to my article from the articles to the 'Talk' pages, where they can keep getting input (assuming they haven't been moved already).

If you're worried about whether such a vote is somewhat dubious in quality, I intend only to count the votes from people who include a signature and time stamp, and will weight the votes of people whose user page says that they're qualified biologists or taxonomists (it doesn't count if they just say it in the vote).

If you wish to try contacting me, do it through the Talk:Placentalia-Marsupialia or Eutheria-Metatheria page. It's unlikely you'll be able to reach me on my user page.

P.S. I would be pleased if you could cast a vote as well on the page.

P.P.S. I'm impressed with your interests. I also am somewhat of a Tolkienophile. --Ingoolemo 07:15, 30 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

I reviewed your comments on my userpage, and I have changed the links to my voting article so that they are at the top of pages, not the bottom. I know it isn't the best thing to put in the article namespace, but from my logistical standpoint its better to have it as an article rather than as a discussion, for two reasons. Firstly, if it was on the discussion page for an article, a lot of other stuff not relevant to the topic would be presented along with it (especially on the Wikiproject:Tree of Life talk page). Secondly, it works better with its own talk page. For example, a number of comments on using the ICZN to make the decision were moved to the talk page, because I felt they were not really useful for readers of the poll-page.

As to using Meta space, I'm afraid I'm not sure how to use it, but I have no objection to using it if you could provide instructions or direct me to them.

I hope you won't interpret my comments (about placing the vote page on VfD) on my user page as overly adversarial. I just want to try to make sure that it doesn't get deleted. I hope I haven't offended, 'cuz I really have no beef with you personally. -- Ingoolemo 19:47, 2004 May 31 (UTC)

"After the Islamic Revolution of 1979 she escorted her husband until he died on July 27, 1980. She currently resides in France."

Need I elaborate?

--68.153.69.182 06:17, 31 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Please do! She was still alive 5 hours ago according to this article in the Gulf Daily News. If you have some further information, please update the Farah Diba article with it! --Stormie 06:25, May 31, 2004 (UTC)

No, I concede defeat. I saw her on C-SPAN and thought to myself "oh shit, she's alive." I misread the article. --68.153.69.182 01:37, 2 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Please modify the font on your user page to no longer use "comic sans ms". Samrolken 17:28, 31 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Hey RickK. The person User: Felix F. Bruyns who posted a message to the top of this page is clearly a problem user. I posted a note about him to User talk:Kingturtle which you might like to look at (KT isn't online at the moment). Take a look at the copyvio contribs for User:168.103.232.64 which was the name he used until being challenged yesterday and changing to Felix F. Bruyns. He needs dealing to. Moriori 22:27, 2 Jun 2004 (UTC)

    If you are refering to me, as I believe you are, when you refer to "that vandal", I will have you know that I am neither a vandal nor a copyright violator. Moriori is spreading lies about me, probably because of the censorship controversy. Whatever your views on pornography and obscenity are, I am sure that you will agree that Moriori is not justified in accusing me of criminal offenses because of a difference of opinion. Please stop refering to me as a vandal. I am aware that you are an innocent bystander, and that Moriori has been lying to you, but if you look on Moriori's own user talk page you will find a complete explanation of how terribly he is distorting the truth (unless he has deleted them because they make too much sense). I also want you to know that any political disagreements that you and I may have had are irrelevant to me now, my first concern being staving off Moriori's dishonest persecution of me. User: Felix F. Bruyns

You've got an impersonator running around, User:RíckK (note the i). Even copied your user and talk pages. I don't have much experience in that realm, so I just put in an infinite block as I can't see any non-impersonation use for such a user name. -- Cyrius|✎ 05:42, 4 Jun 2004 (UTC)