On 16 February, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Lyman Reed Blake, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Just long enough, and as you could pick your own nom I thought it a little unfair to expire it. --Yomangani^talk 10:43, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

		The Hindu Firestar Thank You Award
		Namaste! I, Buddhipriya, humbly thank you for helping to advance Hinduism content on Wikipedia. If you have any further advice or comments for me, please post me a message at my talk page. Thank you for your kindness! -- Buddhipriya

Hello! I won't say it's "nice," such a subject is rather sad, but it is a good thing to see interest in such a thing. I don't know if it's worth precising that the flights were actually called "crevettes Bigeard", or "Bigeard shrimp," as explained in the article: but the method employed certainly was death flight, and the really sad thing about it is to see that French veterans and intelligence agents taught that to Argentine militaries, who have the "credit" for coining the term "death flight" (vuelo de la muerte), as demonstrated by Marie-Monique Robin's investigations. Another, little, precision: it wasn't "torture", rather illegal executions, or "forced disappearance" (a nice article to do would be on the recent United Nation Chart against forced disappearance - see here for ex.). In any cases, thanks for noticing me, I don't know if you nominate it or not, but it's good. Maybe you would look to review syntax & things at United States and South and Central America, and add or correct any thing you think deserves to ? Cheers! Tazmaniacs 00:29, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and thanks for the deletion of Mitch putnam. I was wondering if you would be able to block it from re-creation, as the user has no create the attack page twice. If not, please let me know why, and Thanks for editing Wikipedia!--Vox Rationis 01:43, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I noticed that you are able to work with deleting pages. I have a few that are fully protected that need to be deleted. They are broken redirects, and I am not able to tag them. They are: User talk:Fourstrings@earthlink.net and User talk:I think I just stuffed a toy truck up my ass I thank you for taking the time to help me with this. --Willy No1lakersfan (Talk - Contribs) 02:31, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, my RfA closed today with a final count of 61/0/2 and I have been made an administrator! I am honored at the trust the community has placed in me and hope to prove myself worthy of this trust. As for you, your role in my promotion was greater than most, as you helped me gain more experience as my admin coach. For that, a big hearty thank you, danke, xiexie, grazie and whatever other ways there are to say it! I intend to use the tools as well as I can to make Wikipedia better. I'd be glad to receive any feedback you might have on my use of my admin privileges. Thanks again! Heimstern Läufer 02:52, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know is 10 Hours old --Hirakawacho 10:23, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nishkid64,

I've now updated DYK twice since becoming an admin. I would just like to ask for some feedback from a more experienced DYK editor on whether I did everything correctly and what I could improve.

Thanks for your support on my RfA BTW,

--Carabinieri 11:51, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you are a member of the Wikiproject National Football League, I'd like to ask a favor of you. I've done a lot of work recently to improve the Lawrence Taylor article and recently made a request to have it peer reviewed. Would you mind looking it over and giving me advice on what to do next? The peer review page is here. Thanks in advance. Quadzilla99 13:08, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"deletion is for cases where an article does not contain useful content" WP:CSD#R1. I have seen no Usefull information in those articles so i nominated those artilces for deletion. Khalidkhoso 23:00, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for Notifying me. Khalidkhoso 23:39, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can see how Khalidkhoso could consider List of Filipino Victoria Cross recipients as "not containing useful content", as it is total rubbish and a hoax - no Filipino has ever won the Victoria Cross, the article was created by a troll who also edited many other VC-related articles to push this nonsense (all other articles since reverted). It's currently up for AFD. -- Arwel (talk) 20:46, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See what I mean?[1] — coelacan talk — 19:16, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On 18 February, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Peter Böhler, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Did you mean to tag it for semi-protection without actually protecting it? :) james ^(talk) 00:07, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Now it is User:Rbj who is threatening meatpuppetry.[2] I have already made it clear that these threats are unacceptable, at User talk:Rbj#threatening meatpuppetry. That user doesn't seem to care. — coelacan talk — 19:35, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Read the links I provided at User:Rbj, they make it clear. This one, actually,[3] where he says "I can arrange for that to change." This is simply a continuation of that, and Rbj knows it (because I made it clear to Rbj, just in case). — coelacan talk — 19:45, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think your template from your namestamp looks handsome, dude! You love MY namestamp, right (note: you might go to DaFont to see the new font)?
----Invader Soap^{Evil Jokes}_{Gir's Dog}February 21^st, 2007 (UTC)

Now it is User:Rbj who is threatening meatpuppetry.[4] I have already made it clear that these threats are unacceptable, at User talk:Rbj#threatening meatpuppetry. That user doesn't seem to care. — coelacan talk — 19:35, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Read the links I provided at User:Rbj, they make it clear. This one, actually,[5] where he says "I can arrange for that to change." This is simply a continuation of that, and Rbj knows it (because I made it clear to Rbj, just in case). — coelacan talk — 19:45, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nishkid, since you're a regular at WP:RFPP, I figure you can help me with this: what's your general rule of thumb for when an article is being vandalized enough to warrant semi-protection? Heimstern Läufer 03:59, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:26, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You have responded to one of the indviduals revert warring be rewarding his activites by locking the page with his version of wiki. He even filed the request himself. Just wondering if you are aware of this, as it seems obvious that was his intention by reporting it after he inserted his version, thus this makes you an implicit in the edit warring yourself. Should not the contentuous be removed and the POV flags put back on the article if you are intending it to be locked.Ernham 00:09, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry Ernham. You'll be free to destroy the article as only you can once it's unprotected. I'm checking out. Your wonderful attitude and pointed removal of citations you don't like, and replacement with whatever you in your infinite wisdom decide is clearly the way to go. Of course it's obvious I'm out to get you, I must be an Anglo-Saxon plotter. The fact (sorry, it can't be a fact if you don't like it, right?) that I suggested they even protect your version after the initial request was refused shouldn't get in the way, right? Never let a good fact get in the way as you say. Anyway, you win, Steffi and Michael are the best, Barack is not what people say he is, and those vicious Herero clearly were asking for it when they stirred up trouble. :)

Apologies Nishkid64 for us spouting all over your page :) It looks like you should have waited until Ernham changed history before protecting the article. But this is my last hoorah. Wonderful human beings like Ernham here have made me see the error of my ways. Research and balance are not welcome here. Stamina and pig-headedness are all it takes, not facts. Goodbye. Greenman 20:28, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Nishkid64, can you please tell that user giving me false warnings to back off? he is vandalizing a page accusing of Khoi and other editors including me of being terrorists. It's on my talk page, thanks. Artaxiad 21:39, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You probably won't read this but here it goes...

"Sneaky vandalism Vandalism which is harder to spot. This can include adding plausible misinformation to articles, (e.g minor alteration of dates), hiding vandalism (e.g. by making two bad edits and only reverting one), or reverting legitimate edits with the intent of hindering the improvement of pages."

In the Ordu page, they cite a source that says genocide and Ordu on the same page. It never says "genocide in Ordu". I also provided valid sources that disprove which they erased for no reason like "newspapers not a good source".

Furthermore, I pointed out in detail the reason why the BBC source is considered "misinformation" on the Ordu discussion page. And I pointed out why it was vandalism in my warnings to the users. You obviously haven't read any of it, I understand you must be busy doing admin stuff.

And since when are 2 warning are considered spam? And who am I disrupting, Khoikhoi? Seems like he can revert my edit - the one I spent 3 hours researching - in a split second so I haven't seen any disruption there.

And now you say it's content dispute - read the BBC article (the link is in the Ordu article) and get back to me on where it says there was genocide in Ordu.

I am now officially asking you to resolve the content dispute by showing where in that BBC article says there was genocide in Ordu. I will stop my dispute if you consider that article to be verifiable and indisputable and NPOV or show me where it says "genocide in Ordu"...even that I'll take.

If you choose, you may also put a disclaimer on top of the page saying the information is disputed. But then again there are so many articles like that on WP aren't there. Maybe that's why so many people don't take WP seriously.

I think "respected" editors would try to argue their point and show some proof instead of trying to find a WP rule to silence the editor who doesn't agree with him or her. So I don't know who you were calling "respected editors"...respected by who - other Armenians? you? who are you? I thought you were suppose to be unbiased. Were they giving Nobel's to WP editors without me knowing. Are you serious? Maybe you read the news where schools (http://www.computerworld.com/blogs/node/4598) are banning WP as a source, there's your respect.

Read the BBC article and get back to me on what I said above. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Oguz1 (talk • contribs) 00:18, 21 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Oguz1, I have dealt with you before. You tried to convince me to believe your point of you. This discussion is about whether or not a link is usable for the article. Discuss with the people that you are edit warring with at the article's talk page. I personally agree with you because the link does not say that the Armenian Genocide occurred in Ordu. However, I believe the other users think it is implied, since this is one of Turkey's largest cities, and there is no doubt that some Armenians were massacred in this area. I will remove the link and add {{fact}} and see what Khoikhoi and the other editors say. That is not the correct reference for that statement.

From what you quoted, their actions would not be considered vandalism. This is indeed a dispute of whether or not that link is a valid reference for the article. Discuss with others, and don't make accusations (warnings when not justified) at user talk pages. And I said "respected" because they are. And yes, people do take Wikipedia seriously. There are millions who use this encyclopedia for research purposes, and a good deal of it is completely accurate. (disputed articles have disclaimers, and people are well-advised about that) They have earned a reputation for being prolific contributors on Wikipedia. I am also well aware of that bill proposal. The bill will most likely fail in the US Congress. Nishkid64 00:37, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

When you cut and paste to Next Updates for DYK, can we give credits at that time? Or do we have to wait till it comes on main page? Check my Next Update at DYK! And how do you know how much characters are in the article? --Parker007 00:26, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it looks like you're doing it right. Basically, on T:DYKT the person who has the DYK article will say who to credit the article to. When transferring DYK items to Next Update, just add the credit for each corresponding article. When it's time to update Main Page DYK, admins can use Next Update to make crediting much easier and faster (since we know who to credit to). Keep up the good work, Parker007. =) Nishkid64 00:45, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, you don't need to write (credits not given) on the page. An admin clears the credits once they have credited all who have written or nominated articles. Also, use the {{user}} template instead of doing "User_talk:Camptown". I'll fix it right now, and you can see what I'm talking about. Nishkid64 00:48, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you :). --Parker007 00:49, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. You blocked HandsomePrints (talk · contribs) with a username block. He has stated in an unblock request that it is not a company name, but, rather, a longstanding online nickname. He had an unrelated commercial link on his userpage, but said that he did not know it was not allowed. I have listed this name on WP:RFCN, but if you have no objections and there are no objections there, I suggest an unblock as this name, assuming good faith that this is not a commercial name. --BigDT 01:02, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for blocking this user. ~Steptrip ^(talk) 01:58, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for vandalising the page.. my friend was pissing me off by putting comments mocking me. I will not vandalise the page again.. thank you —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 60.52.46.24 (talk • contribs) 05:47, 21 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Saying "Wikipedia rules" is arrogant?

No, but having a name that can be taken to mean that you are the embodiment of, or have some especially close relationship to, wikipedia rules, can appear arrogant. -- just another nobody 09:43, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

According to [6], you protected this page in November. I don't know if it was your intention to leave it semi-protected for this long, and if it was, sorry for my mistake, you may disregard this message. Otherwise, you might want to consider removing the protection. Thanks a lot!!! - Hairchrm 02:54, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the article is ready to be unprotected. It has been vandalized 5 times by anons in the 5 minutes that it has been unprotected. Thanks, Cacophony 04:27, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The page is obviously going to be vandalized after I unprotect the article. However, we shouldn't keep articles protected for extended periods of time, and that's why I had to protect, even if it will be protected shortly thereafter. Nishkid64 18:11, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, You've deleted Eamonn Walsh among a list of Melbourne councillors marked as being non-notable. However, I contend that the page referred to the Irish politician and not to the Melbourne councillor. Can you check this please, and restore if I am correct. --Rye1967 12:19, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for deleting that article. It was under the list at the AfD, and I went ahead and deleted all since no one had said anything about any particular politician. I have now restored Eamonn Walsh. Nishkid64 18:08, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Nishkid, I have dealt you before as well. And you have unfairly accused me of using sockpuppets without evidence. Meanwhile, Nareklem and Artaxiad seem to be same people, as you yourself slipped and almost called him Nareklem (Good job, Narek Artaxiad. [Narek being crossed out, see [Talk:Ordu#BBC_link] ) You have also given them praises for doing a "good job" when they provided a self-admitted biased Armenian author as a source. As you being an Admin, I expect you to be neutral. Also, I have always posted my discussion - as you can see on this page - and complained about that BBC link - which is more than they have done. Only thing they have done in the past is revert the part where it says "genocide" (see the [Ordu:history]) which originally was posted by "anonymous". Also, the page 176 of the book that is now being provided as a source, does not contain the quote that was used. The entire book itself does contain that quote. Plus, the entire book does not contain any reference to Hafiz Mehmed. I don't know where and how you were able to verify that quote. (I used the Google's "search this book" tool and also read pages 175 through 176 just in case). Moreover, the book does not source where it gets it's own information - that's English 101! Regardless of any of this, it's by an Armenian who is biased and the book is disputed http://www.tallarmeniantale.com/burningtigris.htm. That source can not be used within Ordu page. --Oguz1 15:48, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I had my evidence. Someone came out of nowhere and made an account and supported your claims at Ordu's talk page. That's fair evidence. That's why I tagged the other user as a suspected sockpuppet. Also, Nareklm = Artaxiad. He had a name change, genius. As for the source, you clearly did not look it over. I am trying to get to Page 176 on Google Books now, but it won't let me for some strange reason. But when I looked at it yesterday to verify Artaxiad's reference, I saw that the book gave a list of cities along the Black Sea where the Armenian Genocide occurred. Also, when we cite a book, we don't have to cite where the book got their information. That's just absolutely ridiculous. And the link you provided...you can't be serious... That is some random guy's views on the verifiability of the author's book. That link is so biased and slanted (you can tell from the article title) You just showed me a more biased link, instead of showing me a NPOV link. Anyway, Balakian might be considered a biased source to some, but what he said has been verified by many other sources through the course of history. Nishkid64 17:55, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for the protect! -Cquan 18:18, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well done. The page was mentioned on ESPN's Cold Pizza -- causing the (arguably accurate) vandalism. --DNL 18:19, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Nishkid64. We worked together with Alexander Litvinenko article. I am in a kind of trouble now. One of users wikistalked me for months and effectively blocked all my work on political subjects in Wikipedia. See Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Vlad_fedorov. He continues reverting all my changes. Three my articles are already blocked by administrators. What should I do? Could you give me a piece of advice? Biophys 19:16, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lovely, Biophys. Could you look here though? Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Biophys.Vlad fedorov 19:24, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Its that time of the day again; I am giving credits; you can move it to the main page. :). --Parker007 19:19, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What if the admins add to "Next Update" templates? I want to be an admin too :). --Parker007 19:34, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If an admin (sometimes I do it if no one else has done it) adds to Next Update, then they don't credit unless they actually put the DYKs up from Next Update on the Main Page. And don't think about adminship yet. With the current requirements, I'd say you'd have to wait a few more months. In the meantime, you might want to go to WP:ER and see where you can improve on, and such. Thanks again, Nishkid64 19:38, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

:). --Parker007 19:42, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, I frequently block after test3 (if they've had prior warnings and are obviously... that sort of editor), but checking my recent blocks I haven't (yet) found somebody unwarned. Do you remember which one(s) they were, by chance? – Luna Santin (talk) 20:15, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Argh. Will be more careful about checking warning/edit times, in the future. As far as block messages, I usually don't add those (I know a few others who don't, either), on the rationale that they'll figure it out soon enough, and it doesn't seem to accomplish much, anyway (there are exceptions) -- I'd be open to a larger discussion about whether we (in general) should, though, since I gather some people feel differently. Village pump, mebbe? – Luna Santin (talk) 20:25, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Also, do you reckon we should change where {{IP}} redirects to? :p Your use of it seems a bit more intuitive, but it could just be me. – Luna Santin (talk) 20:28, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

so paisley didn't collect bull semen. And you're trying to tell me his doctorate wasn't from a cornflakes box ? I suppose you'll tell me he's not a fascist bigot who should have retired decades ago. Jararm 21:29, 21 February 2007 (UTC)Jamjar[reply]

Sorry if i am wrong but did you just remove my barnstar :@

Whats up with that man

Please put it back please

King Dracula 22:14, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nishkid. I read your !vote at Scharks' RfA. I don't have any personal interest in Scharks, and I didn't know him/her before reading this RfA. But I just wanted to say that it would be easy for him to start out with the easy XfD decisions, and work his way up to the harder ones. The fact that he doesn't have much experience with it now doesn't mean he'd be bad at closing a unanimous keep, for instance. I just wanted to bring this up because it's my belief that RfA standards have, in general, increased so greatly that we might be preventing good and dedicated editors from becoming admins. I respect your opinion completely, but just wanted to give my 2 cents. Cheers, Fang Aili ^talk 22:25, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your opinion, but I respectfully disagree. From my own personal experiences, I know that if I hadn't been involved in XfDs prior to becoming an admin, I would not have been able to help out much in that sector. You learn a great deal about policy while participating in XfDs, and I feel participating in XfDs would help Scharks be prepared when he has to close XfDs in the future. I will no doubt support his next RfA if he keeps up the good work, and just makes those minor improvements that I stated. Nishkid64 22:32, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have researched and I believe it is User:Anwar_saadat as previously similar threats have been left on my talk page.

Anyway thankyou for your knowledge!

King Dracula 22:26, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reverting my talk page :) - Myanw 23:04, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ha ha! That's smashing, cheers for telling me! It was something my History teacher mentioned to me just in passing years ago and then about one year ago I loked into it but never got around to writing it until Sunday. I think it's really interesting and was surprised no one really knew about it. Great.--Crestville 15:21, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I was wondering if you could help out with a vandal problem. User:Lil Nanna is a sockpuppet of user:The UPN Vandal, a user that has been adding completely false information regarding the Simpsons Movie and its soundtrack. Said user has created dozens of soundtrack pages (using variations, such as The Simpsons Movie (The Soundtrack)). Anyway, I was wondering if you wouldn't mind deleting and protecting all the pages that the user has created [7]. And possibly banning the account (and the related IP User:69.217.236.88) before they can make more pages. Thanks, Scorpion 20:38, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I blocked Lil Nanna and the IP. I also deleted all the pages Lil Nanna made, but I haven't protected anything just yet. This user will most likely made a little rendition to the title of another soundtrack article, and I don't see the point of protecting if he's going to do that. Let me know if you need help dealing with this guy in the future. Best, Nishkid64 22:34, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help. -- Scorpion 22:36, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The vandal is back, this time under user:Lil' Demeo and a different IP [8]. -- Scorpion 21:11, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, when you downgraded the semi-protection on Avatar: The Last Airbender back to page-move protection, you didn't set a deadline for the protection to end. The article's off the main page, but still protected against page moves. Not that it matters a great deal, but I thought I'd let you know for procedure's sake. --Herald Alberich 05:01, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm...that's strange. I didn't know I had to reset the expiration date to make the page-move take in effect. Thanks for letting me know, and I have now unprotected the page. Nishkid64 17:42, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I'm not too bummed out. I think that I am going to give it a couple of months of consistent editing and perhaps try it again. I appreciate your comment, take care! Wikipediarules2221 18:07, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was keeping an eye on WP:AIV and thought you might find this interesting. auburnpilot talk 18:39, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you take sides? It was 10 against one. You know that source is POV and completely biased and did not belong there. I know you do. I am very very dispappointed that you would do that. Alas, a sad day for ALL people of Ordu who protected and lived with Armenians for centuries. You have no idea the damage you have caused for people of Ordu, especially the Armenians that live there. They will probably go the way of Hrant Dink becasue some nationalist will read your false accusations. You have no idea whatsoever. I'm truly amazed at your ignorance! I gave you guys too much credit. Have a nice life...and when some poor Armenian gets blown away by a jackass Turkish nationalist after reading you b.s. about Ordu, you ARE responsible..solely you and you only. Have nice life! --Oguz1 20:02, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You told me to take sides. I went on the side that I feel is correct. I only agreed with you on the BBC link. That's it. I don't think any Turkish nationalist is going to read Ordu and kill someone. I can assure you that will not happen. You seriously need to get your priorities straight, and stop making allegations toward other users (AIV reports, vandalism warnings, etc.) Nishkid64 20:39, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Get his IP blocked cause it's me again. don;t worry I'm not going to insult you or change the article, I give up. I may even get fired becasue of this, because they posted my name and IP on the block warning. By the way, I am Armenian on my dad's side. It's easy for you to say "don't worry, nobody will get hurt", you're not the one who has relatives there and visits. "Allah sizin belanizi versin!" Oguz1