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.

How do you add the "friendly neighborhood admin" to the title of your userpage? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ignatzmice (talk • contribs) 13:46, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Answered via IRC. Nishkid64 (talk) 13:53, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Did too sign it! There was something weird with the page. So there. —Ignatzmice^talk_contribs 13:54, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, MiszaBot messed up. It added <pre> to the page, which is why your signature was not recognized. Nishkid64 (talk) 13:55, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

209.211.184.198 15:39, 4 October 2007 (UTC) thank for the unblock ^_^[reply]

Many thanks to you too for the unblock. :) One qusetion though, do we leave the notice that said I was unblocked on my talkpage? ~ Bella Swan 21:39, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if I confused you, but everything's fine now. Thanks so much for your help! ~ Bella Swan 13:26, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again! This user is asking to be unblocked (You blocked him as too lengthy). Personally since the username actually means something, I'd be willing to unblock (Can't be worse than a certain clown we know :) -- lucasbfr ^talk 20:22, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have unblocked this account. I think it at least deserves a WP:RFCN. —Wknight94 (talk) 20:30, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ahhh, I see. S/he created a whole bunch of similar usernames. I re-blocked. —Wknight94 (talk) 21:09, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Himhifi has been blanking out large portions of this article without explanation. I guess such a large scale deletion needs no explanation, other than the obvious. Please warn him. Thanks.Dineshkannambadi 03:32, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I get the impression that one week was the maximum length prescribed by ArbCom for up to the fifth block for violating the ArbCom rulings. This appears to be the fifth block for such an occurrence, so I believe we are technically supposed to (not necessarily should) block him for seven days, at the longest. Was this taken into consideration during the discussion about the block length? -- tariqabjotu 06:15, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Responded to your (You, not Tariqabjotu) comment on my talk page. To Tariqabjotu, had I seen that, I would have done a different block length than I had originally. But, you bring up a good point that "technically" and "should" are different. AFAICT, it has been reduced to 2 weeks, and I don't see that as being bad. ⇒ SWATJester ^{Denny Crane.} 18:26, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To receive this newsletter in the future, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. This newsletter was delivered by the automated R Delivery Bot 15:51, 7 October 2007 (UTC) .[reply]

Sir, IP: 61.2.212.101 has been making exteremely abusive comments and deleting large chunks of cited data from Kannada language, Rashtrakuta Dynasty, History of Karnataka. Please block the IP permanently. Here is his latest mesasge [1]]. He has also abused User: Naveenbm similarly [2]. thanks.Dineshkannambadi 17:21, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcme to do so. A bunch of rogues and crooks whose business is not history have distorted Indian history wholesale in WP. Maharashtrian history is Kannad history now. You may ask me to give evidences. I cannot do so as I have my job to do. These crooks are employed in ICT industry and the only work they do is to sit on WP 24 hours a day and write Kannad-centric history. All I know is that these bastards joined together and created false history based on a few books written by Kannad "historians". If you are a good adm you would see the history of their contributions, talk pages, spats with many users, how they work together etc. I saw your user page and found that you are probably not in league with these rogues. Spend some time, analyze these crooks, their malafide intentions and more importantly their efforts to create a wedge between various linguistic groups by inciting passions through history falsifcation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.2.212.101 (talk) 17:42, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above abusive comment by the vandal shows he is not new to wikipedia and is perhaps one of those users who has been banned permanently.Dineshkannambadi 17:53, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the quick reaction. I however feel a short block for such an abusive user, that too an old hat at that, may be a slap on the wrist. He is not a new user but a repeat abuser (as he quotes in one of his messages how many users there are in the Karnataka work group). Users like him have no respect for citations, hard work that has gone in to bring them. He will only come back and start more edit wars and blanking with no valuable content to add. From his language, I believe he is a user you banned for 3 months at one time. thank youDineshkannambadi 18:32, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you help at Invisible Man (band)? It is undergoing an AfD yet User:Chazbutcher is insistent on placing a hangon tag on it despite being reverted and told not to do so multiple times. -WarthogDemon 23:17, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Odd thing is he's already commented on that page (as have several SPA accounts). It's really quite a mess at this point but hopefully that'll help. :P Thanks again. -WarthogDemon 23:26, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What was wrong with his name? Orthodoxbush 01:28, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about the block. I clicked the wrong username while looking through the pagemoves. :S Nishkid64 (talk) 03:38, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OMG you blocked me? lol. It's fine. Don't worry about it; didn't even notice. Orane (talk) 03:42, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The link I placed in the Nikno D40x adhered to all the requirements for an external link. It provides users the exact links they need for product details, product support links, and user documentation. Please let me know how I can help the Wikipedia community with useful information about the product they own or are considering as a purchase.

All the best,

Documentation —Preceding unsigned comment added by Documentation (talk • contribs) 01:58, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Doesn't assert significance" does not mean that you, who are ignorant of the topic, fail to understand the assertion of significance. It means there isn't one.

You deleted this after a "hangon" template was put there by the person who created the article, who would soon have edited it further, adding much more material. That is predictable, considering who created the article. Very few Wikipedians are as world-renowned as the creator of this article, and I'm being very cautious and conservative when I predict that if you take this or any other article that he creates to AfD, you'll lose.

Use some common sense. Michael Hardy 04:10, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sir, as I had predicted, the abusive vandal is back on his rounds. Please lock up the concerned articles. He has also abused you in a previous message.Dineshkannambadi 14:08, 8 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sir, IP 59.93.123.51 is back with his vulgarity on my user page. That IP is very familiar and from a banned user. We need to keep track of his IP's.Dineshkannambadi 12:53, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Someone finally noticed! I contacted a bunch of editors and admins, and even posted the article talk on RfC but no one seemed inclined to participate. Thank you for taking a look into the issue! :) --vi5in^[talk] 16:09, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A quick question. Are you aware of anyone who is an expert in the linguistics of Dravidian Languages, on Wikipedia? This would help us settle the content dispute currently going on in the article. --vi5in^[talk] 16:30, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have just posted the article about Derrick Gardner, a musician from michigan. The article was almost immediately deleted. I am new to wikipedia and am not sure why it was deleted. if its because i didn't post enough sources, i can post many more. Thanks

Jamjahal 17:58, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I find a notice on the deleted page accusing it of violating the copyright of the page at this site. It says it's "unquestionably" a copyright violation, and that conclusion seems irrational to me unless there's a lot of evidence that's not cited there. That it would be suspected of copyright violation seems reasonable since there's substantial verbatim identical text, and in such cases the page could be replaced with a standard Wikipedia notice used for such occasions. User:Nishkid64 has on previous occasions deleted pages within minutes of their creation, in one recently pointed out case (see above) unreasonably. Michael Hardy 18:06, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see anything wrong with these deletions. -- But|seriously|folks  04:54, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It has come to my attention that the article deleted earlier was brought on by the similarities between it and the biography of Derrick Gardner at CDBaby.com. This is because i used Mr. Gardner's Bio from his website, which i am authorized to do by Mr. Gardner, and it is the same bio that CDBaby has used. If it is necessary to reword the bio, i will gladly do that if that will help speed up the posting of this article. Thank you

Jamjahal 18:48, 9 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Documentation is at it again as User:ProductResource. They have been adding links again. Gh5046 00:32, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Before I do anything, could you explain to me what's so bad about the links he's adding? They seem quite resourceful, actually. Nishkid64 (talk) 13:13, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

At the time they first started adding links the site required registration to view detailed information, and the pages (the ones I viewed) didn't have as much information. This is a new website, according to their front page and doing a search on archive.org, and it looks like the owner of it is trying to drum up traffic and new user registrations.

Even though the pages are more informational now the person resumed posting the links by creating a new account to circumvented the block, instead of bringing the matter to discussion.

If it's better now and does meet Wikipedia's guidelines then let them go at it, but the way that user has been doing things appeared unscrupulous to me. Gh5046 15:20, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for accepting Runa ABC for DYK.--Berig 14:18, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to disturb, but are you by any chance available to update the main page DYK template? The next update is ready to roll, and it is quote overdue. -- !! ?? 15:07, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

...deleting all my CSD R1s? :D Phgao 15:28, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here [3]! Phgao 15:36, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ooops! Pasted wrong one... [4]. That's better! Phgao 15:50, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, saw the list that needed to be done when I noticed I hadn't been credit spammed too. :) IvoShandor 16:25, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ha, reminds me of me. Good luck with that! -- But|seriously|folks  16:25, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What a great DYK pick. I thought mine was weird, but you had the double barrelled British eccentric and the controversy of the history of racism. Good pick!!! Victuallers 16:38, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

*Ahem!* Thanks for putting the update through. -- !! ?? 16:56, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WHY DID YOU DELETE THIS? It's a bona fide article! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ginosesto (talk • contribs) 18:30, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate you looking into the blocking of User:Quizimodo, but you really should have discussed it with me first before unblocking him.

The routes to resolve a block are agreement by the blocking admin, a (very rare) override by other admins in the case that the block was clearly unjustifiable, or appeal to the Arbitration committee to make a formal ruling on the matter. [5]

Thanks. TigerShark 18:57, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nishkid64. No problem, thanks for your response. All the best TigerShark 20:43, 10 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for notifying me that William H. Wilbur was selected for DYK, I didn't even know it was nominated! If it's not too late, could I propose a slightly modified hook? Within the U.S. military, it is considered objectionable to say someone "won" the Medal of Honor, since that implies it is a competition. "Recieved" or "was awarded" are preferable. Also, he wasn't exactly successful in arranging the armistace, so can the hook be changed to:

...that Colonel William H. Wilbur of the the United States Army received the Medal of Honor for attempting to arrange an armistice with Vichy French forces in Casablanca and then leading an assault on an artillery battery during Operation Torch?

Or anything similar. Thanks, jwillbur 00:02, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate the thoughtfulness that went into your notification, but I'm afraid I'm undeserving — I never contributed to that article. It seems to be the work of someone named User:Terrypin. Thank you in any event, and I hope some of the articles that I have done merit the attention sometime as well! Happy Wiki'ing, -Tenebrae 02:43, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My cock-up - I nominated it at the same time as Lady Luck (comics) (which was by User:Tenebrae) - I copied the nom format (including the author) but forgot to change it! Sorry. -- !! ?? 09:22, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Finally found a picture for Lee Smith. Gotta love WatchFlickr. —Wknight94 (talk) 03:00, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's actually a cropped photo. The original had the back of someone's head prominently featured. I uploaded the original to commons as well as one I cropped vertically instead of horizontally. I couldn't decide which was better to use in the article here. —Wknight94 (talk) 03:20, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry you felt it necessary to oppose my recent RfA, which did not succeed, just seconds before it was put on hold. I will attempt to get more experience in the main namespace and the Wikipedia namespace and will try again for RfA in two month's time. I hope I will have satisfied your concerns by then, but if not, please comment as you feel you should. Thanks for participating in my RfA. -- Cobi^(t|c|b|cn) 09:01, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. Just a quick message to say thanks to anyone who helped to place Züschen (megalithic tomb) and related articles on DYK: "Thanks". athinaios 10:53, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop deleting the Midreshet Moriah article. It will take a little while for this article to develop but will eventually be on par with other similar articles such as Midresher Harova and Midreshet Lindenbaum. It will take a little bit of time because alumni and students of this school will have to develop the page. PLEASE PUT IT BACK UP

Please stop deleting the Midreshet Moriah article. It will take a little while for this article to develop but will eventually be on par with other similar articles such as Midreshet Harova, Nishmat and Midreshet Lindenbaum. It will take a little bit of time because alumni and students of this school will have to develop the page. PLEASE PUT IT BACK UP

Many editors feel that using the word dominion in the lead to describe Canada compromises the neutrality of the article. Until that issue is resolved, it should be mentioned that the neutrality of the article is in dispute. Thank you. --Soulscanner 11:05, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One editor feels it compromises neutrality: Soulscanner. The article is locked until disputes are resolved; thus, a neutrality tag is not currently necessary. --G2bambino 15:20, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A couple new episodes - we're posting the infobox to save duplicating info.

For the podcast crew -- Tawkerbot 20:31, 11 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For your work as an admin, especially your comment ("Also, issuing legal threats are not tolerated.") on User talk:Manduck2k3. What a night I had with that user....ex-user (atleast until he comes back as a sock, which he already stated he would on his talk page). I don't know why he would say that stuff and want to be unblocked. Wierd. - Rjd0060 01:42, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I guess thats Wikipedia for ya. On to the next one! - Rjd0060 01:46, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

		Ready to swab the decks!
		Another motley scallawag has joined the crew. Thanks for your comments at my RFA. Arrrgh! - - Jehochman Talk 05:18, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

		The Original Barnstar
		Thank you for your guidance in helping me continue to expand my knowledge about Wikipedia (on irc). --Μ79_Šp€çíá∫횆tell me about it 16:42, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've summed up some of the evidence at User talk:Psycotics1454. -- But|seriously|folks  17:09, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

		With thanks!
		Thanks for participating in my RfA, which closed successfuly. I leave you with a picture of the real Blood Red Sandman! Note his 'mop' is slightly deadlier than mine! - - Blood Red Sandman (Talk) (Contribs) 18:43, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You either nominated a WP:FLC or closed such a nomination recently. As such, you are the type of editor whose opinion I am soliciting. We now have over 400 featured lists and seem to be promoting in excess of 30 per month of late (41 in August and 42 in September). When Today's featured article (TFA) started (2004-02-22), they only had about 200 featured articles and were barely promoting 20 new ones per month. I think the quality of featured lists is at least as good as the quality of featured articles was when they started appearing on the main page. Thus, I am ready to open debate on a proposal to institute a List of the Day on the main page with nominations starting November 1 2007, voting starting December 1 2007 and main page appearances starting January 1 2008. For brevity, the proposal page does not discuss the details of eventual main page content, but since the work has already been done, you should consider this proposal assuming the eventual content will resemble the current content at the featured content page. Such output would probably start at the bottom of the main page. The proposal page does not debate whether starting with weekly list main page entries would be better than daily entries. However, I suspect persons in favor of weekly lists are really voicing opinions against lists on the main page since neither TFA nor Picture of the day started as weekly endeavors, to the best of my knowledge. See the List of the Day proposal and comment at WP:LOTDP and its talk page.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 19:35, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oxymoron warned this user in september a few times and you temporarily blocked him. in october he started vandalizing again and Cluebot is only warning him. 64.8.139.123 vandalized 2 days ago again. i suggest another block, but not a temporary one (just a suggestion). could you take another look into this user again? his latest vandalizism is to "Cathedral of Toledo". interestingly enough, the user 65.9.68.168 also mentioned his mom in this article, but quickly deleted it. i left him a message, telling him about the Sandbox and to not practice on articles, but my comment has magically disappeared. i hope i didnt break any wiki rules by taking the initiative and tactfully warning him myself. i didnt report him as a vandal cuz he reverted his own vandalism. but 64.8.139.123 is still out there. thanks. Ivansevil 01:47, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Nishkid, but Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Auckland/archive1 will mess up GimmeBot; can you also delete it so that GimmeBot can archive it correctly once Raul does close the FAC? Gimmetrow and I have both been busy, turned our backs for a few weeks, and the archives are all out of whack with people removing and not archiving correctly. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:42, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again ! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:50, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion has been continuing on the Malayalee page regarding the origin of Malayalam. A couple of people agree with the accepted (linguistic) view that Malayalam originated from Tamil. Dayaanjali and Tulu War still seem to disagree although it is rather obvious that their points are completely wrong and without merit. What should we do now? They just don't want to concede to the point. --vi5in^[talk] 23:57, 13 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I can see that if this was a "grey area". But honestly this is very cut-and-dry. Malayalam originated from Tamil, and that is a linguistic fact. I do understand why you cannot take sides due to your position. The problem is that these two editors keep asking for "references" when we have provided them a bunch. A typical argument goes like this:

Us: See, your position is wrong because of blahblah, and this is supported by these references (Reference1 ... ReferenceN).

Them: You are wrong. Please give references.

In a situation like this, I am at a loss as to what to do. --vi5in^[talk] 01:18, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is of international significance as this disrupts the economy and transportation of the second largest city in the U.S. --Rschen7754 (T C) 00:42, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

--Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 04:31, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Username53 (talk · contribs)(alias - Malfunction (talk · contribs)) is back at it over on the List of thrash metal bands page. 202.160.48.156 17:21, 14 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A user is insisting on adding the DVD covers to the article even though the consensus is to use the promotional poster if it's available. Now he is adding both, which I am pretty sure violates WP:FU to have both the poster and the DVD cover for the same event. Would I be violating my 1RR agreement by reverting it? If so, could you handle it? TJ Spyke 00:15, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Really? I can proove that he wasn't known as Hornswoggle though, and it seemed obvious that he was just doing a blind revert (i.e. reverting my entire edit rather than just what he wanted to put back in). I will be more careful in the future. TJ Spyke 02:25, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Nishkid64. I received your notification that the article Michael Crabtree had been featured on the main page as part of the DYK section. Those entries must change swiftly since I never saw it. I also can't find it listed in the DYK archives. Can you let me know why that might be? This is only the second article I've had listed in the DYK section so I'm not sure how it all works. Thank you! →Wordbuilder 14:03, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you very much for your help. I appreciate it. →Wordbuilder 15:53, 15 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]