Thanks for taking care of the vandalism on my user page. :) I'm really grateful. By the way, just how bad was it this time? G.He 22:51, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Even though the IP address 125.236.44.43 is a school one, it has done too much vandalism to the wikipedia pages. Please request for a long block. E.g one month. Thank you. Purerified

2006-06-29 23:15:47 King of Hearts blocked "125.236.44.43 (contribs)" with an expiry time of 1 week (vandalism) (— xaosflux ^Talk 04:05, 1 July 2006 (UTC))

Ok thannk you. Purerified —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.118.182.212 (talk • contribs).

Thanks for voting! Hello Xaosflux/Archive16, and thanks for your support in my recent RfA. I'm pleased to announce that it passed with a final tally of (96/0/0). I was overwhelmed by all of the nice comments and votes of confidence from everyone. Thanks again, and see you around! OhNoitsJamie Talk 22:21, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for finally closing Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 June 19/Wikipedians by politics. Other administrators were less willing to complete the closing while discussion continued, but it had never reached a consensus.

Unfortunately, see Wikipedia talk:Deletion process#Removing SUBST instruction for result templates. You accidentally just subst'd in the {{tfd}} tags when you subst'd the obsolete {{oldcfd}}. Needless to say, that bolluxed the listings and categories. (heavy sigh) I'm fixing them now.

As to {{oldafd}}, that was replaced by {{oldafdfull}} many months ago (2005-09-02). See Wikipedia:Deletion process.

Likewise, {{oldcfd}} was replaced by {{cfdend}} (2005-10-14), and {{tfd-kept}} by {{tfdend}} (2006-03-31).

Please correct your opposition at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 July 2#Template:Oldcfd based upon this new information.

--William Allen Simpson 22:39, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm used to the oldxfd format, as I primarily do MFD's and it's the current practice; as is subst'ing the template. I also commonly subst in the template if I want to add somethign custom to it, and becuase its one less esoteric function to remember the syntax for. I did update my Keep! to a redirect if feasible vote. As you may have noted from the history on that cat; before I added them, none of the old cfd discussion results were posted at all. — xaosflux ^Talk 00:12, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Actually, you aren't supposed to subst the template at MfD, either. The instructions are fairly clearly written.

Thank you for fixing your Keep, and thank you for finding the missing CfD discussions. Sadly, not all administrators are thorough.

--William Allen Simpson 13:40, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Please read the talk page for the GOF film discussion. We're trying to follow the Wikipedia guidelines. - Raditzu 02:50, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

No problem. I'm glad we got it all sorted out. - Raditzu 02:52, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

I wanted that deleted because I merged archives 2, 3, and 4 to make one big archive. GangstaeB 13:26, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi Xaosflux, please read WP:ANI#General_Tojo and Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Toxic_causes_of_Parkinson's_Disease if it's not clear to you that Todd_50 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is a sock puppet of the very disruptive sock puppeteer General Tojo (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). --  Netsnipe  ^(Talk)  13:55, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Could you semi protect the page so I can work with it to both improve its wording and to add links to online versions of the references. Due to the fact that the page in question is under debate I would request some urgency, not as a sockpuppet of any kind of the disruptive user in question, simply as I see the page as a legitimate fork from the main page to reduce bloat, particularly given the large number of references. Thanks, Ansell 03:17, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm not withdrawing my MfA for the Portal:Thinking. The Proral proposal page is Wikipedia:Portal/Proposals. -- Koffieyahoo 07:40, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

I've seen him many times on the Maury show.  Denelson83  00:24, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Replied on your talk. — xaosflux ^Talk 01:00, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

One of those diffs is a death thred (on Head) albeit perhaps imaginary. Would indefinite be appropriate? -- Avi 04:09, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Reply on your talk. — xaosflux ^Talk 04:14, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Portal approval process counter to Wikipedia's aims? Discussion opened. SilkTork 08:29, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

• As requested, I provided a link to the previous AfD for this article. Danny Lilithborne 03:01, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

A user in MediaWiki:monobook.js mentioned that, with using userlog.js, it sometimes appears to load itself into the toolbox twice. I've looked at it and tinkered a bit and can't figure out why it'd do so. Any ideas? ~Kylu (u|t) 15:14, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I saw that too, I haven't been able to duplicate it. As with any local monobook changes, you have to be sure to have cleared out your cache, it never hurts to delete all your temporary internet files and restart your browser too. Didn't they say it was ok after a reload? — xaosflux ^Talk 18:22, 14 July 2006 (UTC) (copied from kylu's talkpage)

That was User:Gimmetrow, and I hadn't checked yet. I think I'll wait for this RfA business to be over before contacting him though. Personally I just meta-refresh and it takes care of it all happily, but I know most windows users don't have that kind of option. :( (I'll watch this page btw) ~Kylu (u|t) 18:43, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I was wondering if you would please get rid of the categories listed here and at other places. Part of the German solution is making clear that userboxes aren't endorsed by the project, which involves moving them out of official namespaces like Template:, Wikipedia:, and Category:. Thanks. --Cyde↔Weys 19:31, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I thank one and all - Jarandal, Antandrus, Titoxd, Xaosflux, TenOfAllTrades, mboverload, PseudoSudo, Knowledge Seeker, Haukurth, Deathphoenix, Zzyzx11, Tyrenius, Zscout370, AnnH, Rick Block, Tyrenius (again), Zscout370 (again) and NoSeptember for your support.

To Jeffrey O. Gustafson who initiated this block request I ask why? We have had no interaction until now so how do you come to this requested action at WP:AN? Did you come across my account during your own research or are you acting as a proxy for another admin/user with whom I've caused to be angry with me? In reviewing your contributions I see no such "letter of the law" before now and so I feel singled out by you and I have no clue as to why - that to me is most disturbing. If you've come to this action on your own then should I be always wary of another admin challenging the legitimacy of my account?

For TenOfAllTrades who advised me not to worry and Rick who made me laugh I give special thanks, you've helped me to not take this so personally. And to Jeff, thanks for being courteous in informing me of your action and for letting me feel that your heart wasn't for blocking me.
Except for my one explanation above, I haven't edited for a few days now so as to allow y'all to comment about this based on my history of contribution rather than my reaction to it.

I wanted to say all of this before it all goes to archive heaven. I still have a lingering concern that this may arise again and don't want to go through WP life looking over my shoulder or worrying that I might piss-off some admin and cause another inquiry about the legitimacy of my account. If any of you who have been so gracious as to take the time to support me here have any suggestions to prevent such an action, please drop your thoughts on my talk or by email.

Finally, on a personal note to all, I never ever expected so much supportive response from all of you. I know that I've been moody at times and have spoken in ways that I have regretted the next day. I hoped otherwise but it seemed that those unfortunate responses might end up being my legacy as they were the foremost in my mind. And so far as this being a "role account", I think that I'll let the descriptions of AnnH and NoSeptember (both above) stand as the most intuitive descriptions of this account. My (and our) warmest regards to all of you for your understanding and outward support for the continuation of hydnjo's user account and future contributions. Again, my delighted and humble thanks :-) --hydnjo talk 02:03, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

addendum: Jeff, I was confused at the outset in that I wasn't aware of the "role account" policy and then after becoming aware I was frustrated that I had made so many edits which could mislead someone to the conclusion that my account was a role account. I'm sorry that in my zeal to understand your actions that I posed the possibility that you were acting at someone else's behest. I have no evidence of that and it was improper of me to even mention that such a bizarre conspiracy was possible. I find myself guilty of "blaming the messenger" and posting an inappropriate comment about your motivation.

As for my account, I want to state that it is not a role account and I apologize for leaving the impression that it is one. "hydnjo" is the signature that I commonly use for much of my correspondence and thought it to be appropriate when I first started my WP account. The portmanteau is an acknowledgment of our shared existence and not an indication that Heidi and I share in editing at WP.

I thank you for your courtesy in informing me at the outset of the discussion at WP:AN and for your compliments about my contributions. The comments in my response were made in the shadow of my own frustration with my having left a trail of edits that could easily be construed as having come from either Heidi or myself. I sincerely apologize to you for making any suggestion as to your motivation in bringing up a legitimate policy question. You have a genuine concern for the orderly behavior of our editors and I thank you for initiating this discussion and providing me the opportunity to explain the nature of my account. --hydnjo talk 18:55, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Xaosflux, I want to thank you for your actions to maintain some form of administrative integrity in the userbox controversy. Because of your action to restore User:Xaosflux/UBX/Sexuality in userspace, I also want to delete the unnecessary User:Rfrisbie/Userboxes/Sexuality page. The pages should be the same with only minor new edit histories. Are you willing to help me do this? Regards, Rfrisbie^talk 08:21, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

I just got the okay from MiraLuka, blast away! Please delete.

Rfrisbie^talk 19:56, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Rfrisbie^talk 14:22, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi Xaosflux,

I have a proposal for setting up optional userbox archives and directories in userspace. Because of their locations, I assume the only way they will have a chance of surviving deletion attempts is if an involved admin supports them. I’ve outlined the basic steps below with suggestions of who could do what.

• Set up User:Box as an optional userbox archive: I’ll set up this page similar to User:Rfrisbie/Userbox. I’ll also move boxes to it that are listed under Category:Templates to userfy (see Wikipedia talk:Userboxes# GUS move tag? and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Userboxes# Userfying userboxes).
• Set up User:Boxes as an optional userbox directory: You unprotect the page.
  • Merge/move User:GRBerry/German userbox solution to User:Boxes as main layout: You and GRBerry work out the technicalities of how to merge/move (?) User:GRBerry/German userbox solution over to User:Boxes so the important content and histories are maintained.
  • Move User:Rfrisbie/Userboxes and User:Xaosflux/UBX/Sexuality directories as subpages under User:Boxes: I’ll move my directories and you move yours.
  • Move User:UBX/Userboxes/General Nav as a subpage under User:Boxes: I’ll ask MiraLuka to move User:UBX/Userboxes/General Nav.

Even though this will be seen as controversial by some, I believe it’s one of the best ways to establish some long-term userbox stability that the vast majority of parties can live with. Let me know what you think. Regards, Rfrisbie^talk 20:42, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I think I'm about done with trying to move this thing forward for now. Rfrisbie^talk 00:10, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

For restoring my user page...after you deleted it as vandalism 3 weeks ago. I hadn't realized, but I imagine I would have been fairly upset had it been removed. Alphachimp ^talk 17:53, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

no worries. I'm just glad it was undeleted. Alphachimp ^talk 00:46, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Ah, OK, I looked over the change. I didn't realize that removing a revision was a sysop ability. Thanks a lot! Regards, Alphachimp ^talk 01:08, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

I've been having some trouble with Vandalproof, which resulted in this report of myself to WP:AIV. I'm reporting it to the VP forums. Sorry about that. Alphachimp ^talk 05:08, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Greetings -

I bring this to you because of your previous undeletion of this page. Please take a look at the logs. Cyde & 1ne worked together to empty the page of its content, then 1ne immediately deleted it under CSD G6 (noncontroversial housekeeping). Looking at the userbox debates, I can't see any deletion of a userbox directory as noncontroversial. I have no trouble believing that they think they're doing the right thing, but process is important, and controversial deletions should at least adhere to the CSD or PROD process, which gives them a chance to be brought to MfD and dealt with by consensus. I've asked one of them to undelete & revert the page. I'm waiting to see what comes of it. Please look into this in the interest of heading off a war. --Ssbohio 05:47, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

This is what I requested on 1ne's talk page:

I would ask either Cyde or 1ne to undelete & restore Beliefs and place it at MfD, if the belief is that consensus supports its deletion. Clearly, from the logs, consensus among admins concerning this deletion can be questioned. Process is important. --Ssbohio 05:47, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

• <Cross posted reply to this ForestFire> If someone would like to have this page german-ified| to their userspace to maintain the index, preserver the history, and/or work on box replacements; let me know and I will restore it to your userspace. Emerging consensus (in many places, including the last mfd on that page) are to userfy all of this stuff. I disagree with the last speedy deletion, but not to the point of reversing it. (The last time I reveresed it it was still full of active boxes, this time it was links to box soft redirects). Any sysop can overturn the speedy deletion, and then anyone can relist this on MFD, (although it was there recently, it has signifigantly changed since last time). — xaosflux ^Talk 14:32, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

I only got to that page from a report at WP:AIV, so I'm not really sure of the background, but it seems that it was vandalism rather than an edit war, and that the vandalism was coming from IPs and newly-created accounts. I may be wrong, of course, but if I'm right, should it not have been semi-protected, and the {{sprotected}} template used instead? Cheers. AnnH ♫ 06:59, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

This is indeed the case. WikiProject Avatar is having a hell of a night trying to keep on top of this guy's edits. The evidence is being organized at Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Father's Wish. -- Ned Scott 07:22, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

I've decreaed the protection on this from protected to semiprotected, and will remove that in a few days. — xaosflux ^Talk 01:04, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! -- Ned Scott 01:30, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi, are you aware that Fluxbot only does partial GUS subs, e.g., [1]? Rfrisbie^talk 03:51, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

I use AWB find/replace myself. I don't know if this table helps with regex, but here it is. It gets the "common" situations. False positives is the biggest problem. I don't know how a bot handles those either. About the only pages you'll see "tl" code is on directories, not too many, but it's hard to tell what's been userfied without "watching" or editing the pages. It's not the first time this has happened, and the pages are so screwed up by now anyway, I wouldn't worry about it if you can't find an easy fix. Regards, Rfrisbie^talk 04:22, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Find	Replace
tl|User <n>	[[User:Rfrisbie/Userbox/<n>]]
Template:User <n>	User:Rfrisbie/Userbox/<n>
User <n>	User:Rfrisbie/Userbox/<n>
|<n>	|:Rfrisbie/Userbox/<n>
| <n>	| :Rfrisbie/Userbox/<n>

Seriously though, I've got a bot, Fluxbot that I've got working on several WP:GUS replacements (replacing the Gus to template with the new GUS'd one). If you have any LARGE replacements needed, let me know. — xaosflux ^Talk 05:46, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Ooooh, really? I'd love it if you could do Template:User male to {{User:UBX/male}}. There were over 2500 links last time I checked. Do I need to change the redirect into a GUS box first? —Mira 05:55, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

I can do some of this stuff to lighten Xaosflux's load if needed. — Nathan ^(talk) _{/ 23:00, 26 July 2006 (UTC)}

You made a small change to my userpage, may I ask why. It was one of the userboxes, it looks exactly the same as before so why change it? --pjb007 09:43, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

xaosflux: I answered for you at User_talk:Pjb007#Userboxes. — Nathan ^(talk) _{/ 23:03, 26 July 2006 (UTC)}

If you want some help doing userbox stuff with AWB, let me know on my talk (I did a little of that on Sunday and Monday). I wouldn't mind something to do, even for a while. — Nathan ^(talk) _{/ 22:59, 26 July 2006 (UTC)}

Added some more comments to you on my talk. — Nathan ^(talk) _{/ 23:37, 26 July 2006 (UTC)}

I just realized <facepalm> that you aren't in the bag; I had just kinda assumed that you were, and never checked the page. With the level of activity you have on the page, if you're interested, I'd be happy to add you. Ping my talk page if you're interested. Essjay (Talk) 01:57, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I nominated a bunch of UBXs last night for CSD G4, but all of the tags were removed by Stifle, saying that they hadn't already been deleted. I dunno dude...do what you want. I was just following instructions. For most of them, I've eliminated all of the transclusions. A partial list is below (some of them were deleted, but by someone else). [2] [3] [4] [5]. I think the rest were deleted...I nominated about 10. αChimp ^laudare 11:54, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Also. [6] I suspect he didn't delete them because I didn't remove the direct links, but I thought that changing links on people's pages was much more vandalistic. αChimp ^laudare 11:57, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Xaosflux, sorry for being fiddling with your talk page, but nathan did it, so I guess I can :). Alphachimp, read CSD G4, it says recreation of deleted material. Now check the deletion logs of all the pages you nominated. I hope you guess the reason why Stifle is removing them by now. We would need a new CSD to do it, as this one obviously doesn't apply. fetofs ^Hello! 13:44, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I understand that. I had read CSD G4 before I nominated them, but Xaosflux had advised that we should put the pages up for CSD G4. It didn't really make sense to me, but I figured that he's an admin and maybe he knows some loophole in the CSD that I don't. Coincidentally, when I've been tagging them as CSD WP:GUS, they've all been getting deleted. Should I just start doing that? αChimp ^laudare 14:46, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

"Process" around here is a joke anyway. Just make sure Cyde knows about them. Rfrisbie^talk 15:12, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Indeed :-D Cyde↔Weys 15:15, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Bingo!

Rfrisbie^talk 15:18, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

lol. I'll do that then. αChimp ^laudare 15:40, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

lol. But it's safer to tag as CSD WP:GUS. Even if it doesn't exist, there's no mistaking in the actual reason for any admin :). fetofs ^Hello! 18:16, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Here's an empty one: Template:User Australian English. What to do with it? Rfrisbie^talk 16:27, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I put it up for CSD GUS like Fetofs mentioned above. Good catch. αChimp ^laudare 19:09, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

"CSD" seems a bit arbitrary, but it worked. Process, process, process... ;-) Rfrisbie^talk 19:28, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Eh. As long as my "process" works for Cyde...lol. I guess that's the new tag then... αChimp ^laudare 21:00, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

And the beat goes on [7]... Rfrisbie^talk 21:48, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm only going to reply here so as not to start a forestfire...The cat directions for C4 were a mistake, and was meant to say C6 (housekeeping)...this may or not have full support at this time (wow can't believe people are fighting to KEEP userboxes though!) — xaosflux ^Talk 00:29, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't know if I have the lingo right on these, but I'm going to try {{Db-g6}} on something. If I'm wrong, please point me in the right direction. Rfrisbie^talk 02:14, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

The correct tag is "Please delete XXXXX". Counterintuitively, this is placed in a new section on User talk:Cyde rather than on the template itself. --Cyde↔Weys 02:20, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I've got no problem deleting these, if they are really migrated, have done some as Userbox since migrated to userspace under [[WP:GUS]] which now has no incomming links, and is a cross namespace redirect or a redirect to a deleted page. ([[WP:CSD#G6]] - housekeeping deletion). — xaosflux ^Talk 02:22, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

How about we just create a category: "Userboxes migrated in need of deletion" or something like that, and you and Cyde can just go through and delete them. As it is right now, Stifle is just removing a lot of the tags. αChimp ^laudare 02:41, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

You can just list them on Category talk:Wikipedia GUS userboxes. — xaosflux ^Talk 02:45, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

I've listed a ton more for deletion, if you're interested. Check the category talk page. αChimp ^laudare 00:55, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Even more listed. αChimp ^laudare 01:53, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Greetings. There is a Barnstar for stub-sorting up for proposal here. If you'd like to participate in the discussion, we'd much appreciate it. Thanks, and have a great days. :) SynergeticMaggot 18:17, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

So I misinterpretted your comment and had already done a bunch of edits with my bot (>1000). I'm sorry about that, but you might want to go back and either extend the trial or approve the bot. I just thought since you were in the BAG, your comment meant something totally different. Regards, αChimp ^laudare 01:44, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

How does one become an AG member, out of curiousity? It seems like an interesting task.Voice-of-All 05:08, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

You and Essjay seem to be running the page mainly, its like RfCU and WP:PP now. Where are the other AG members? The list has many listed as "active".Voice-of-All 17:10, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Why were these removed? They should have been moved down for discussion and not totally removed. Vegaswikian 07:53, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for letting me know. I will watch the discussion, but I doubt I'll get involved further - now that there are more knowledgable people discussing it. I just wanted to raise the issue for review. Cheers TigerShark 14:09, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for approving Wherebot and for your extremely valuable feedback. I will be trying to implement your suggestions today. Thanks again! -- Where

I nominated the category under A7 after discussion on #wikipedia. Most of the pages have been deleted already for A7, or are in AfD. They, along with the category, were created as JammXKids spam. If A7 isn't a worthy category for speedy deletion, what would be? --DarkAudit 17:36, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi, please do not edit User:Andypandy.UK/Serenity Smith, it is a fake article and AfD used as a test at an RfA. Thanks.--Andeh 02:48, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, it's probably best it's left how it is as changing it may have changed the the users answers to the Qs regarding it.--Andeh 02:53, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Just a heads up on the existence of the {{WOW}} template. Please use this template for marking blocked WoW related accounts rather than the generic username block template. -- Longhair 03:17, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

I'll give you a hand as I can. Juggling many things here at once. Keep up your good work. -- Longhair 03:19, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

One more thing. Whilst it's usually encouraged, please remember not to subst: the WoW template, as described on the template itself. It's a common mistake I sometimes make myself. -- Longhair 03:22, 1 August 2006 (UTC)