This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Thanks for semiprotecting Rat, would you do me (and all of us) a favour and permanently blok a vandalism-only account of User:Niallooooo? User contributions Mieciu K 22:01, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• User contributions Mieciu K 22:15, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I responded on the talk page. I can copy it here if you wish. Usedup 22:09, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

whats your name

              Popcorn guy 22:18, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, sorry to bother you, but I have a quick question. I was wondering does other users have the right to warn and block others? because someone in my page warned me about being blocked, [1] and I don't know if he is a administarator on wikipedia or not, but I really don't think I did anything wrong in the Ordu article. Since I saw you were involved in the Ordu article discussion I thought I should ask for your help about my question. Thanks in advance. ROOB323 00:04, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed Oguz1's warning. He is not an administrator, and he was only warning you because you went against him at Ordu. He reported me, Artaxiad, Khoikhoi and you to WP:AIV in hopes to get us all blocked. Khoikhoi and I are both administrators, and his request was absolutely preposterous, claiming that we were vandalizing when it was just a dispute at the article. Also, Oguz1 violated WP:3RR and so he was blocked for a period of one week for the 3RR violation, personal attacks and slandering users. Thanks, and keep up the good work. Nishkid64 00:08, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh ok, thanks for clarifying for me. I appreciate it. ROOB323 00:11, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Much thanks for choosing an article I expanded for the main page of "Did You Know?" - it's much appreciated. LuciferMorgan 00:13, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ok, How did u get your page to be like that, i mean like mine is boring. how did u get the colored background, the "leave me a message", like i cant do that can u tell me how??????????????

thanks, --Juicy FUN1 00:24, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, take a look at the coding at my userpage. I use background colors and such and I used subpages to get everything to show. It's pretty complicated, and I had to figure everything out from looking at other userpages and such. Nishkid64 00:29, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you would reconsider semi-protecting it. 50% of the edits are vandalism and 20% are fixes. --Plankton5005 01:41, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is an admin named Khoikhoi that disagrees with the discussion page majority on whether or not a particular article should be moved.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Reggaeton

A contributor asked for facts which support why the page should not be moved, and those facts were provided. Rather than allow users to see these new facts, KhoiKhoi has decided to simply delete them with no explanation and has blocked the talk page in an attempt to prevent others from restoring them. Its irrelevant as to whether or not its a contributor with a screen name or an anonymous IP, the fact is that evidence was provided, and it was immediately deleted. I'm not sure where to report Adminstrators for actions unbecoming of Wikipedia's TOS, so I was hoping maybe you would have some insight, thanks. 68.155.86.174 03:03, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Two deletes is sufficient consensus to me (as unanimous). :) - Best regards, Mailer Diablo 10:42, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I see you are still hard at work taking care of DYK, plus all the articles you write. And I'm sure you are doing many more activities on Wikipedia. For all your hard work I would like to give you a gift -- some advice -- don't ever forget that we live on a gorgeous planet. Take time every day to go outside and breathe the fresh air! Please don't sit in front of your computer every night, go out with friends! Epousesquecido 16:56, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

2007/1  1563  
2007/2  16116

You've only been here two months!! 16k edits in one month! You're crazy. Keep up the great work, Qxz. I am considering nominating you for adminship, but I know many people would oppose someone who's only been here for such a short period of time. I'll offer in April-May, if someone else hasn't already. Keep up the great work. I appreciate the AIV reports (although Chris beats me on a lot of them). =) Nishkid64 17:25, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You may want to check a little more closely – I've been here for one month and a day :) I won't have anywhere near this much time later in the year, though, so enjoy it while it lasts – Qxz 17:26, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I was wondering two things. First, you say that you moved Telecommunications Broker to Telecommunications broker as per WP:MoS. What specifically in the MoS prompted this move? Secondly, was it your intent to blank the article as well? Just curious. Thanks! El Krem 18:06, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I moved the article per WP:NAME to be exact (which is part of WP:MoS). I then deleted the article under WP:CSD#G11 because it read like an advertisement for the job. There was a lot of POV words, and the whole fight over the links in the article was a bit suspicious. If someone can write a clean article that is referenced and meets WP:MoS, then I will allow for the article to be recreated. First, I would like someone to rewrite the article in a sub-page somewhere. If you are planning to do so, let me know and I can give you the last version of the page and you can work from there. Nishkid64 18:13, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info! I appreciate every opportunity to learn more about operating procedure here on Wikipedia. I agree with your assessment of the article as a likely advertisement. I suspect the two accounts with the frequent repeated edits are sock puppets of the same account, perhaps somebody who would benefit from such advertisement -- that or competitors within the industry who are vying for the advertisement to their sites. Again, thank you! El Krem 18:23, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just so I don't waste my time again, how much vandalism is enough to warrant semi-protection? The page is being regularly vandalized, and I am not a regular anti-vandal, nor do I wish to be. Caerwine Caer’s whines 19:03, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you obviously have a much higher tolerance for vandalism than I do. In any case, the article is off my watchlist for now. I only put it on my watchlist to observe the result of my nomination for semi-protection, and while I will revert articles I come across that have vandalism and post the appropriate uw messages, I don't keep pages on my watchlist that I'm not otherwise interested in for the sole purpose of being a anti-vandal guard. Caerwine Caer’s whines 19:18, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing that you are an active member of the WikiBiography Project, I was wondering if you would help lend a hand in helping us clear out the amount of [unassessed articles] tagged with {{WPBiography}}. Many of them are of stub and start class, but a few are of B or A caliber. Getting a simple assessment rating can help us start moving many of these biographies to a higher quality article. Thank you! --Ozgod 21:41, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For my part, I wish you would not take the protected status off the Courtney Love page. It is victim to vandalism literally almost every single day. It's an exceptionally tiresome page to monitor. Mistertruffles 22:47, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a way to search old AFDs (instead of just going through it by the exact date). I'm looking for two lists that I'm pretty sure went in AFD (and were deleted): List of Super Monkey Ball Banana Blitz minigames, and List of Rayman Raving Rabbids minigames. I need them for a recent AFD (to prove a point: that they were precendents set, that minigame lists aren't needed here). RobJ1981 23:59, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are no precedents set by AfDs, each is individual. Majorly _{(o rly?)} 00:03, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, well either way: minigame lists that were in AFD (and if I had the exact links that they were deleted) would help my case out. RobJ1981 06:39, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

You've deleted the page I started about Fletcher Findley. I think that he is an important and valuable writer. Read a few of his stories and you'll see what I mean. Please reconsider your decision.

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)

if yes than which one.User talk:Yousaf465

I have copied and changed your signature. I hope that will not be a problem? --- SAndT^{Lets Talk} 18:03, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My request for adminship has closed successfully (79/0/1), so it appears that I am now an administrator. Thanks very much for your vote of confidence. If there's anything I can ever do to help, please don't hesitate to let me know. IrishGuy ^talk 01:23, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for supporting my RfA. It was (47/0/0) upon closure and now phase I is complete. I think the tools will aid both me and the encyclopedia. Feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, or if you think I'm misbehaving I'm always open to recall. Thanks, James086^Talk 13:26, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I am the one who wrote the article. I suppose it could read like an advertisement but it is not meant to. The business segement of Telecommunications Brokers is very new and it is my intention to express what we do and define us from Telecommunications Agents.
The link to Aussie Phone Brokers (my company) next to the other link was meant as a comparison example. I used my company's website as the example because i don't know of any other site that does what we do - act as an actual telecommunications broker. I sincerely don't see any other way around this. (The other site added is a site with which i have no affiliation and which i think is the best example of a Telecommunications Agent. I know this industry, and I believe that they are the pinnacle example of that type of business.)

If you'd like to see the article up there again, I will put it there. I am willing to resubmit this information in good faith. I believe that the purpose of Wikipedia is to collect knowledge and i am providing it.
Two things though:
1)I will not spend a large amount of time justifying my entry. If wikipedia does not want the information I have provided, then so be it. Your loss.
2)I have recieved threats (on our company email) from the person whose link i took down (who was an actual spammer: no information supplied, just a http to his site, which was not a Telecommunications Broker site at all). If you would like me to forward the actual emails to you I will. He has stated that he will remove any information that I post. Even though he has been permanently banned in the last few days, I think it is likely that he will create a new account with the purpose of carrying out his threats. I have no interest in this sort of behavior, and if my article is sabotaged I don't think that I will spend any time 'fighting' it. Again, your loss: I am willing to supply specialised information, if that is too hard then why would I bother? .

I look forward to hearing from you and I suppose I look forward to contributing to Wikipedia (but my introduction has been pretty ugly so far). Sudsymate 02:35, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, first of all, to prevent any further problems, remove all links. This is not supposed to be a model page where we show what companies are great telecom brokers. I will restore the page, but I suggest you add references (see WP:REF!) or else the article will be removed. The whole article is not written in a neutral perspective, and it gave me the impression you were trying to advertise, whether or not it was intended. I will provide the copy of the article and it will be temporarily located at User:Sudysmate/Temp for now. Thanks, Nishkid64 18:16, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, links are gone. References might be a problem, since this is a new business area. (one reason for the example links). Oh well if it gets deleted too bad. Thanks for your help though. Now do you want me to put it back on the page? - or do you do that?

Thanks Nishkid64, I agree it does make sense to protect if someone really feels they need it on their User page. Crum375 21:01, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the Did you know... section of the April Fool's Main Page, I have an idea:

Did you know...

• ...that you can edit Wikipedia?

Even though this probably won't be on the page, I thought editors would a laugh out of this one. Happy editing! --S.D. ¿п? § 23:01, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, we have to keep with DYK guidelines even though it's April Fool's Day. Maybe you might find an interesting (and strange) article to write about for April Fool's Day. That would be most helpful. =) Nishkid64 19:55, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'll look around. :D Happy editing, S.D. ¿п? § 23:30, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, first off, thanks for the vote of confidence. However, I'm worried that a 3RR block I had about a month ago might blow any chance I have out of the water, and then having to wait another couple months before running again, as opposed to just waiting a month and then running. Thoughts? Veinor ^{(talk to me)} 03:05, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

On second thought, I don't think it'll be that much of an issue. I accept the nomination. Veinor ^{(talk to me)} 17:11, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, apparently someone's really gunning for that page. The next edit after you removed the protect, it was vandalized. It's a shame, really. --myselfalso 17:56, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

perhaps I have jumped ahead by voting: the RFA isn't complete yet is it? --BozMo talk 18:30, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hehe, great to see Veinor's already got support, but Veinor has not formally accepted the RfA, and he has yet to write the answers to the questions. Eagle 101 has not added his RfA co-nom yet, either. So, please remove your vote for the time-being, and add it back once his RfA page is transcluded at WP:RFA. Thanks, Nishkid64 18:32, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, have done. If you leave me a message of "reminder" or similar when you're done that would be kind. --BozMo talk 18:36, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

May I thank you most warmly on behalf of everyone who RC Patrols and does CVU here for sprot'ing Dora the Explorer. I have corrected and rv'd countless vandalism on this and other articles here (for some reason people have a fascination with vandalising articles about kids programmes), and I am glad to see a lot of them are now getting Sprotected, such as Dora, Superted and Thomas the Tank Engine which have been sprot'ed temproarily to deal with vandals. I think we need to get them under the scope of a wikiproject. Once again however, thank you for stopping IP vandalism. One barnstar coming up. Thor Malmjursson 19:53, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		I hereby award you the RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar for your efforts in fighting vandalism and your swift work on SProtecting Dora the Explorer. User:Tmalmjursson Tmalmjursson-Contributions - 19:57 26th February 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I see you've semiprotected my userpage. Thanks for doing so, but I realized that one user who repeatedly vandalized my userpage and subpage(s) is not an ip nor a new user, although I suspect he has also vandalized my page under an ip. Although the problem hasn't been 100% solved, your protection elimanated about (est.)~ 40% of potential vandalism. My request was denied earlier, so did you put your protection notice on the requests page? Thanks. AstroHurricane001^{(Talk+Contribs+Ubx)} 21:32, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Currently the vandalism is not a major problem, but if the vandalism persists and happens far more than it used to, then I may or may not request protection, and if I do, I would likely make a few last edits to it, but I think requesting edits to my page would be too excessive and take up everybody's time, so I hope that doesn't happen, and so currently I am not requesting full protecton, so I hope the problem subsides. Thanks again. AstroHurricane001^{(Talk+Contribs+Ubx)} 21:48, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 9	26 February 2007	About the Signpost

Three users temporarily desysopped after wheel war	Peppers article stays deleted
Pro golfer sues over libelous statements	Report from the Norwegian (Bokmål) Wikipedia
WikiWorld comic: "Pet skunk"	News and notes: New arbitrators appointed, milestones
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

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 08:27, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I blocked User:64.72.112.110 at the same time as you removed them from AIV for not having warnings since the last block. To clarify (as I was only sysopped earlier today and am very much still finding my feet), do warnings need to be given again for a returning vandal? Feel free to revert the block if needed. Thanks in advance. Trebor 15:12, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hehe, yeah. It's slightly weird going from experienced editor to newbie admin (bit like going from school to uni). Thanks for the response. Trebor 17:02, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is a school IP with sporadic edits. Nearly ALL of them are vandalistic. To assume that the same user would read the same last warning is a fault in logic. The last warning that was violated was 23 February 2007. I warned again today for the edit of today. A history of blocks must be established in order to get a long term school ban put into place. To refuse to block for not violating today's last warning defies common sense and the IP's long history of vandalism. Nardman1 22:03, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your views go against Wikipedia blocking policy. School IPs are not always used to vandalize by one or two people. There are usually a number of different people who do this. Given that the person may or may not be different than the person on the 23rd, they can only be blocked if they vandalize after the t4 warning. It's blocking policy, sorry. Nishkid64 22:11, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Per Wikipedia:Blocking_IP_addresses: "If there is persistent disruption or vandalism from an IP addresses, the block should be extended (with the 'anon-only' option selected) as long as is necessary to prevent further disruption." I believe the policy does allow blocking in this case Nardman1 22:17, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Sorry to bother you, but I was told to contact you about this. Full Impact Pro was deleted, and I was wondering if you could restore it? It is more then notable in the wrestling world.

http://www.obsessedwithwrestling.com/promotions/fip.html Full Impact Pro's Obsessed With Wrestling Profile http://www.fullimpactpro.com/main.htm Full Impact Pro's Official Website

Thanks, Kris Classic 01:08, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, judging from the previous version of the article, it looks like the page was prodded first as a "Non notable wrestling promotion, no third party sources, fails WP:CORP" and then deleted five days later per policy. From what I see, there aren't many sources to use for this type of article, and it seems to fail WP:CORP. Many of the Google hits I find just make a brief mention of Full Impact Pro, and I got only 20,000 case-sensitive Google hits. If you can show me other 3rd-party sources that describe the history of the wrestling circuit and other such info, that would be appreciated. For now, I believe the deletion should stand, but if you show me otherwise, I will restore the article. Thanks, Nishkid64 01:26, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not against Full Impact Pro: but I just want to point out Obsessed with Wrestling is a glorified fan site. I wouldn't consider that a reliable source. RobJ1981 02:08, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He is back to controlling articles. This is simply unacceptable: [[2]]. Making a big deal about a redlink (of non-notable thing to be exact) isn't helping at all. The article doesn't need to be made: it was a short lived team that didn't do much. Keeping the redlink only seems to be an issue to TJ. Alot of other wrestling event articles need de-linking as well, what's the point to keep redlinks for articles that aren't notable enough to be here? RobJ1981 10:55, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You said for me to contact you[3] if the anonymous IP accounts restart their vandalism of Pete Sampras, Andre Agassi, Marat Safin, Juan Carlos Ferrero, Rafael Nadal, Lleyton Hewitt, Bjorn Borg, Andy Roddick, John McEnroe, and Marcos Baghdatis articles. User:Lman1987 and his probable sock puppet User:66.4.209.194 and have done exactly this today (with the exception of the Juan Carlos Ferrero and Andy Roddick articles) and have added David Nalbandian to the target list. Once again, I am asking for semi-protection of those articles and if you would believe it appropriate, a block of the offending editors. Thank you! Tennis expert 16:49, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am not Vandalizing tennis pages. I am just updating score formats. The only thing we dissagree on is score formats. we have had a large disscussion on this topic and I have given him conclusive evidence. (check out the rafael nadal disscusion page.) Then make up your mind and see who is right. I am not a vandalizer at all. Just a perfectionist. If anyone is the vandalizer it is him. although he has highly contributed to tennis articles in every other way. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lman1987 (talk • contribs) 18:03, 27 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Nishkid64, you now have conclusive, self-admitted evidence that User:66.4.209.194 is a sock puppet of User:Lman1987. Best regards! Tennis expert 18:31, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly. As you can see from the above, I have left a few notes about these problems on your talk page already. Tennis expert 22:03, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That page needed a translation, not a deletion. Crengo 20:07, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The March 2007 issue of the Biography WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Mocko13 21:56, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've been getting better about checking warning times against edit times. In this case, though, it looked to me like it was probably the same person? If you'd like to unblock, no objection on my part (I'm usually not too picky about it, just as long as somebody understands my reasoning well enough to determine if I've made a mistake in judgement). – Luna Santin (talk) 02:29, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gotcha. Thanks. :) – Luna Santin (talk) 02:34, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As a minor request (Since you are the admin who set up page protection) Can you please change the template at the top of the page Unexpected (Heroes) to {{plot}} instead of the current cleanup template? I have no problem with the page continuing to be protected until people calm down over the minor issue. Thanks. -- Marcsin | ^Talk 16:11, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help. -- Marcsin | ^Talk 13:16, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but the requests WERE included in one request concerning Rafael Nadal. The request was granted concerning him but was apparently ignored concerning the other articles. Hence, the separate requests. Best regards. Tennis expert 21:59, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

These problems have already been to the administrators' noticeboard. See, e.g., [4] [5] [6] [7] [8]. To my knowledge, the format being pushed by the vandalizer has never been agreed to by anyone other than the vandalizer himself. This particular user has established numerous anonymous IP accounts and a few registered accounts, and even admitted that he had multiple identities for the sole purpose of making these changes. If you need confirmation, ask the numerous tennis editors fighting the vandalism. Do a city search on the IP accounts, all of which trace to Tennessee and the same Internet provider. The editors and the evidence will confirm what I am saying here. Tennis expert 22:15, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for your help! Tennis expert 02:05, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We need your help again. The Real Tennis Expert has been created and is apparently yet another sockpuppet of User:Lman1987, with the same vandalistic editing pattern as that blocked user. In addition, it appears that User:72.155.106.198 also is a sockpuppet, as this user has edited the comments of another user on The Real Tennis Expert's discussion page. Thanks! Tennis expert 19:06, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This account The Real Tennis Expert is vandalising throughout this site. Per Tennis expert above, I agree this user should be blocked. Woodsstock 19:14, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Nishkid, my adoptee recently brought a suspicious userpage to my attention. Ejanniger (talk · contribs) was blocked indefinately by you last November [9], but suddenly appears again today with a Userpage (in talk namespace), claiming to be an admin. What makes this so puzzling is that I can't find a record of him/her being ublocked! Anyhoo, seeing as you were the blocking admin, I wanted to give you the opportunity to act before I do, in case I'm missing something here. Rockpocket 02:37, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know! I deleted the user's talk page. Even though he is indefinitely blocked, he can still edit his usertalk page, since that would be their only form of communication if they wanted to say something or put up an unblock request. Thanks again, Nishkid64 02:40, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Doh! my brain obviously isn't in gear today. I was thinking he was editing in userspace (despite actually pointing out that it was in talkspace!) All is well with the world again... ;) Rockpocket 02:43, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You protected the article with the disputed "Rejected" tag in place, which seems arbitrary and infair. But even worse, I am unable to add any comment to the discussion page. With it blocked, how are we supposed to resolve differences or arrive at any consensus? Edison 06:41, 1 March 2007 (UTC) Update: today I can edit the talk page. Perhaps it was just the difficulties the Wikipdeia servers seem to be having currently. I still object to freezing the guideline with the "rejected" label on it, since that serves the purposes of those trying to eliminate most of the notability guideline proposals. Edison 16:43, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I believe Radiant! (talk · contribs) requested full protection of the page because of an edit war. I went ahead and processed that request, as it was evident that an edit war was brewing. Hope that answers the question. Remember that protection is not an endorsement of the current version of the page, and I have no prior involvement with this article. Hope that answers your question, Nishkid64 20:33, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. Given the speed of the edit war, it could just as easily have ended up protected in the other version. See also m:the wrong version. >Radiant< 10:25, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How do I become a administrator?Oh, and please reply on my page!Trampton 10:13, 1 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Well, before considering adminship, you must know if you qualify for adminship. Some things people look for is the number of edits, the type of work you do, participation in Xfds and AIV, civility and helpfulness, among other things. See WP:ADMIN. That should help, I believe. Also, see WP:RFA, which is the place where people can request adminship. I think you have a long way's to go before considering adminship. Keep up the good work, though. =) Nishkid64 21:58, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Recent new user: User:Cuntexploder, has an offensive name, and appears to be a vandalism only account as well. RobJ1981 15:46, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I have found two notable sources:

Here is a DVD review: http://www.pwinsider.com/ViewArticle.asp?id=20704&p=1

Here is an arena report: http://www.pwtorch.com/artman/publish/article_19144.shtml

Both links are from fairly large and notable wrestling websites.

Kris Classic 23:23, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There have been many edits since you unprotected it. But only the edits of Rracecarr (talk · contribs) on 27 February 2007 were substantive improvements which lasted. All others were either vandalism or reversion of vandalism. JRSpriggs 07:18, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blnguyen (talk · contribs) re-semi-protected it after I left my message here, so you need not bother. JRSpriggs 08:47, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your support in my recent RfA which passed unanimously - thus proving that you can indeed fool some of the people some of the time. I'm still coming to terms with the new functionality I have, but so far nothing bad has happened. As always, if there's anything you need to let me know, just drop me a line on my Talk page. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 10:21, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]