m Dating comment by Angusmclellan - "→L33t OTRS sk11lz plz: new section" |
|||
Line 340: | Line 340: | ||
Hello Riana. Can you check that an OTRS ticket is genuinely giving permission to use the images, such as [[:Image:Sushmita_Sen.jpg]]. [https://secure.wikimedia.org/otrs/index.pl?Action=AgentTicketZoom&TicketID=1087514 This one]? Thanks! So, you were one of the <s>mugs</s>brave editors who decided to nominate KM at RFA? Hmm, not sure what I think about that. Every time I start looking at Kelly's edits, esp. in wikispace, my blood pressure starts to rise. Not a good sign. Still, NYBrad said what I feel, only much better than I could, so I doubt if I will comment. [[User:Angusmclellan|Angus McLellan]] [[User talk:Angusmclellan|(Talk)]] <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|signed but undated]] comment was added at 19:48, 30 September 2007 (UTC)</small><!--Template:Undated--> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
Hello Riana. Can you check that an OTRS ticket is genuinely giving permission to use the images, such as [[:Image:Sushmita_Sen.jpg]]. [https://secure.wikimedia.org/otrs/index.pl?Action=AgentTicketZoom&TicketID=1087514 This one]? Thanks! So, you were one of the <s>mugs</s>brave editors who decided to nominate KM at RFA? Hmm, not sure what I think about that. Every time I start looking at Kelly's edits, esp. in wikispace, my blood pressure starts to rise. Not a good sign. Still, NYBrad said what I feel, only much better than I could, so I doubt if I will comment. [[User:Angusmclellan|Angus McLellan]] [[User talk:Angusmclellan|(Talk)]] <small>—Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|signed but undated]] comment was added at 19:48, 30 September 2007 (UTC)</small><!--Template:Undated--> <!--Autosigned by SineBot--> |
||
:I can confirm that the OTRS ticked does indeed point to permission to license the image under CC by 3.0. ([[User:Until(1 == 2)|(<font color="blue">1 <font color="maroon">==</font> 2</font>)]] ? ([[User talk:Until(1 == 2)|('<font color="maroon">Stop</font>') : ('<font color="Green">Go</font>')]]) 19:58, 30 September 2007 (UTC) |
Revision as of 19:58, 30 September 2007
User talk:Riana/Archive 33/Talk header
Unnecessary talk page filler
...just because a naked talk page is sad to see. -- Flyguy649 talk contribs 16:52, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
- ...in case you are wondering, the picture on the left, is one of my three cats. Her name is Peppermint (Mom named her). I swear she is smiling for this picture. - NeutralHomer T:C 17:55, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
- Oh Flyguy, that's all killer, no filler ;) And that cat does look very happy :) ~ Riana ⁂ 04:49, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Hee
I can revert vandalism faster than he can vandalise! — Timotab Timothy (not Tim dagnabbit!) 08:40, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
- Just as well you both look like you were going for some record of sorts :( SatuSuro 08:40, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
- Not a problem! And next time you want to thank someone for reverting userspace vandalism, feel free to use {{subst:vangel}} (shameless plug) — Timotab Timothy (not Tim dagnabbit!) 08:43, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
- ~*gigglefits*~[1] — Timotab Timothy (not Tim dagnabbit!) 08:53, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
- Not a problem! And next time you want to thank someone for reverting userspace vandalism, feel free to use {{subst:vangel}} (shameless plug) — Timotab Timothy (not Tim dagnabbit!) 08:43, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Same vandal as described here, probably from somewhere in the 91.108 block. I'd suggest asking a checkuser to find the new IP range to block, the war of attrition against socks is tedious. Sorry about your userpage, it's one of the dozen or so most popular lightning rods for this sort of thing. ˉˉanetode╦╩ 08:58, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
MfD comments
You do realise my comments on this MfD were intended as humorous? Both you and ^demon seem to have taken them somewhat too seriously - [2] [3]. I wasn't trying to make editcount a big issue; it was a comment intended to lighten the mood in a somewhat contentious MfD (in which, incidentally, I didn't have a strong opinion). WaltonOne 09:20, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
- I see. ~ Riana ⁂ 16:02, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry, did I say something to offend you? If so, I didn't mean to, and my post certainly wasn't meant to be hostile. WaltonOne 16:04, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
- No, not at all! Sorry... I didn't meant to be curt, I just saw a message unreplied to and couldn't really think of what to say apart from that. 'I see'. lol... ~ Riana ⁂ 16:10, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
- OK, no problem - I mistook the shortness of the reply for curtness. To clarify, I'm certainly not an advocate of editcountitis (at RfA or elsewhere); indeed, my comment was kind of intended to highlight the irony of judging people by editcount (since I'm a few places behind User:Terryeo, who has been community-banned). :-) WaltonOne 16:26, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
- No, not at all! Sorry... I didn't meant to be curt, I just saw a message unreplied to and couldn't really think of what to say apart from that. 'I see'. lol... ~ Riana ⁂ 16:10, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry, did I say something to offend you? If so, I didn't mean to, and my post certainly wasn't meant to be hostile. WaltonOne 16:04, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Interwikis
Hi, I Just wanted to ask you about interwikis. If there is an available article on the Simple English Wikipedia, should it be linked in the interwiki section on articles. I have seen them linked in many articles before but another user has a different opinion (see here). Just wanted the opinion of an admin to avoid a possible edit war. Thanks! --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 12:17, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
- No, we do add interwiki links to Simple. ~ Riana ⁂ 12:24, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
- Ok, Would it be ok for me to link here in the my edit summary saying that we should add Interwikis to Simple? Thanks --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 12:25, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
- Sure, go for it :) ~ Riana ⁂ 12:27, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks. --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 12:30, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
- Sure, go for it :) ~ Riana ⁂ 12:27, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
- Ok, Would it be ok for me to link here in the my edit summary saying that we should add Interwikis to Simple? Thanks --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 12:25, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Why does it say
"In other languages:
- Español
- Simple English"
then? Maybe you guys should change that, since Simple English is not a different language. I don't care if it says interwiki or whatever, it says DIFFERENT LANGUAGE, so someone should explain that to me, because Simple English is not a different language. --- Who's the one you call Mr. Macho? The head honcho, swift fist like Camacho 15:07, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
- Actually it is a different language edition of Wikipedia. "Simple English" is written differently than "English". Cbrown1023 talk 15:54, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
- The words displayed under that heading is the language's name in that language, which is why es: is "Español" (Spanish), ja: is "日本語" (Japanese), ru: is "Русский" (Russian), etc. "Simple English" is the name. EVula // talk // ☯ // 19:23, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
- Dead Wrong, It may not be a different language, but it is a different version of a language. it is another edition of wikipedia and should therefore be linked. Where else would we link it? --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 21:10, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
- Man you didn't even know how to explain that without this dude's help, and did you see me replying? Did you see me reverting your edits? No, that means I understood what
RianaCbrown1023 told me. --- Who's the one you call Mr. Macho? The head honcho, swift fist like Camacho 23:08, 22 September 2007 (UTC)- Wow, no need to jump to the defensive, I only thought that maybe you didn't understand seeing as you said that it should be changed. --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 16:12, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
- Man you didn't even know how to explain that without this dude's help, and did you see me replying? Did you see me reverting your edits? No, that means I understood what
- Dead Wrong, It may not be a different language, but it is a different version of a language. it is another edition of wikipedia and should therefore be linked. Where else would we link it? --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 21:10, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Randomnessism about your page format
Hey, random Q - So I was mindlessly browsing Wikipedia and I somehow came across your Talk Page. To the point - How did you learn about formatting your page to look the way it does, with the borders and headers etc? I think it's a sweet layout, though it has that blatant hint of girlishness haha. Just curious - HOOK A FELLOW INDIAN UP!!! :) => Harish - 23:02, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
{{editprotected}}
plz be adding "Not so sexy user" :P Will (talk) 23:12, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
I owe you a big thank you for supporting me in My RfA, which was successful with 67 supports and 20 opposes. - Penwhale | Blast him / Follow his steps 23:46, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
WP Zimbabwe
Hi Riana, please kindly assist Mangwanani who has been working almost single handedly on Wiki Project Zimbabwe. Most of us lack technical ability like yours. Many thanks for your consideration.
Part 12:03, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
- Hey, sure, sounds interesting. I'm not really on the English Wikipedia too much these days, but I'd be glad to help out where needed. ~ Riana ⁂ 12:06, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
- Many thanks!!! Part 12:14, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks
..for blocking Michaelbryson. Auroranorth 12:47, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
- You might want to consider protecting Michaelbryson's talk page from editing.--Just James T/C 12:54, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles
Hi Riana. You removed the {{db-c1}} tag from this category "for record keeping". However, the category contains no pages, someone manually added those users to the category text. Is it really necessary to preserve this empty category? His former alternate accounts are listed on his userpage anyway, so the category would appear redundant to me. Cheers, Melsaran (talk) 13:17, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
- I'd rather not. Feel free to relist. ~ Riana ⁂ 13:19, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Please block - multiple 'final warnings'. Auroranorth 13:31, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Now exists as United Provinces Of Sergana. I nominated to AFD before noticing the subtle spelling difference. Feel free to work with the AFD or delete as before, if you have that right. - CobaltBlueTony 18:54, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Gennay Roepoc
Oops, did I hardblock & change it to a softblock? Doh! Thought I'd done it the other war round... (slaps head) — iridescent (talk to me!) 19:50, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
- Shouldn't worry too much about it... Riana is all bark and no bite :) *runs* --DarkFalls talk 07:56, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
IRC
I am sorry but I am not able to function this site properly. Is it all right if we contact by e-mail? Ulises Heureaux 21:07, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
Move vandalism
Riana... --DarkFalls talk 10:29, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
something you should know
I just sent something to be aware about to your inbox. --Kyoko 14:43, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
- Eh, thanks. Replied. ~ Riana ⁂ 14:51, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi
Hey again, if you have a bit of time to spare please kindly make my user page sexy (I lack the technical prowess). I have confidence that whatever you decide will be sexy, just playing my part, if you see what I mean. Many thanks. Part 17:36, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
User:AussieJr
Hi Riana. I have some concerns with your unblocking of User:AussieJr. I suspect sockpuppetry is continuing.
- User:Muitint78 appears to be claiming to be Peter Franklin Jr (see this website linked from his userpage).
- User:Peter Franklin Jr is a suspected sockpuppet of AussieJr and User:Franklin Racing Team is a confirmed sockpuppet.
- Muitint is already considered a sockpuppeteer - see User:Amy Veal.
- And upon unblocking this message appears on AussieJr's talk page.
It may be worth reviewing your unblock. Please let me know if you need more information. -- Mattinbgn\ talk 00:13, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Vandalism
All the Tibetan/Chinese infoboxes have been affected by vandalism on a template or something see Dhingri -it blanks or ruined 800+ articles can you sort it thanks ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ "Talk"? 15:18, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
- It looks like your reversion on the Infobox Settlement template has fixed it... are any still showing up wrong? Pinball22 15:22, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi Riana! I've finally started working on RFPP again (I said I would in my RFA, read the policy, went over a few requests...and postponed it until now), but I was wondering if requests like this one (userpage requests by the user) should be protected or declined; it isn't specifically mentioned in WP:PPOL. Thanks! · AndonicO Talk 18:26, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
- Oops, never mind, it's under semi-protection. Sorry to bother. · AndonicO Talk 21:27, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
User:Internetcoffeephone block
I'm just trying to understand this username block[4]. I assume that you understand what the original reporting user meant by "The "Internet Coffee Phone" vandalism", so I'm just trying to get my head around how/why this username was a violation. SamBC(talk) 17:55, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- Hiya Sam, the 'internet coffee phone' thing is a recent 4chan meme. There's been a bit of vandalism surrounding it lately and a few usernames created referencing it. Hope that helps ~ Riana ⁂ 17:58, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- As a side note, CSCWEM blocked a name that was a blatant reference to the "So I Herd You Liek Mudkipz" meme last week on the same basis. -Jéské (v^_^v Kacheek!) 19:57, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- The coffee phone thing indeed seems to have resurfaced today. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 19:59, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- Ah, a 4chan meme. I was honestly confused at how exactly the username was bad (as per my note on UAA), especially given the odd warning placed with it. EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:01, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- I was the reporter -- I realize it wasn't exactly descriptive, but I couldn't think of how to explain it, and hoped the admin that looked at it would know what I was talking about. What should I have said to explain better, in case something like this comes up in the future? Gscshoyru 20:13, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- 'Tis fine, someone would have come along eventually - and judging by that user's unblock request, they were up to no good anyway ;) ~ Riana ⁂ 20:22, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- Eh, reporting it as being related to the meme (with a diff or a link) would have been nice. I wasn't aware of the vandalism being mentioned in the report[5], and the user's contribs (including deleted ones) were completely clean, which is why I was rather confused. Moot point now, but in the future, providing links rather than just mentioning things would be welcome; had I known it was tied to a stupid 4chan meme, I would have blocked immediately. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:31, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- Problem is, I didn't even know about the meme-- all I knew is that a bunch of users were replacing parts of articles with INTERNET COFFEE PHONE. I couldn't think of a link to any explanation or previous user either -- I hadn't dealt with any for a while. So what I did was the best I could think of. Gscshoyru 20:35, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- I was the reporter -- I realize it wasn't exactly descriptive, but I couldn't think of how to explain it, and hoped the admin that looked at it would know what I was talking about. What should I have said to explain better, in case something like this comes up in the future? Gscshoyru 20:13, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
- As a side note, CSCWEM blocked a name that was a blatant reference to the "So I Herd You Liek Mudkipz" meme last week on the same basis. -Jéské (v^_^v Kacheek!) 19:57, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Thank you!
Thank you for banning that vandal :) Now the vmk board does not have so much vandalism its annoying. Once again thank you :D —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dacheatcode (talk • contribs) 20:55, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Vandalism
Hello Riana! Someone using the IP address 125.26.56.63, vandalized my user page. Can you find about this IP? Thank you. 02:30, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
- They vandalised yours and another around the same time and then stopped [6], so there's no need to block. You can find out about the IP by clicking on the Whois link on the bottom of the IP's talk page. The IP is in Thailand. -- Flyguy649 talk contribs 02:40, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for the reply. All the best. RS1900 03:27, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
An MfD closure
Greetings, Riana. I'm a bit astonished to see you close Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Asteraki/Pascha as "no consensus". The way I see it, there were four unambiguous "deletes" (including the nomination statement), one "keep" (by RucasHost (talk · contribs)) that was so poorly argued/worded that it wasn't even discernable what page he was talking about (the description "a well designed userpage with references to various historical figures" doesn't remotely match any of the five pages involved, let alone all of them, and he didn't respond to a request for clarification, so I'd have expected that vote to be discounted); and one opinion (by Geo Swan (talk · contribs)) who first said keep but then changed his mind to delete with respect to at least two of the pages (User:Asteraki/Pascha and User:Kamikazi2/Greek macedonian of german wiki). These two are GFDL violations anyway, because they mirror deleted content from de-wiki. (Okay, I admit I didn't bring forward that argument in the discussion.) Moreover, a third one turned out to have been a copyvio in most of its parts too.
Would you reconsider? Thanks, Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:05, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
- Huh! Now how did that happen? I don't think I was concentrating at the time, I knew I was going to close that one as delete but something got rewired up there, apparently ;) Deleting. ~ Riana ⁂ 16:15, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
- Heh, happens easily I suppose. :-) No problem. Perhaps you were mixing it up with another user-page MfD that's currently open, with partly the same people arguing on it? There's one where I actually can see it going towards a "no consensus". Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:21, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
- I think it must have been, I was trying to read them all at once. Bad idea. Hope it's all good now :) ~ Riana ⁂ 16:23, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
- Heh, happens easily I suppose. :-) No problem. Perhaps you were mixing it up with another user-page MfD that's currently open, with partly the same people arguing on it? There's one where I actually can see it going towards a "no consensus". Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:21, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
quick unprotect request
Hi, could you please unprotect my userpage so I can make a quick adjustment to it? I plan on making a revamped page in the future, but for now I want to swap out quotes for something more optimistic. Please protect the page when I'm done, OK? Thanks! --Kyoko 17:12, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
- All done for now. We can maybe see if semi-protection is sufficient, or if full protection is again needed. Whaddya think of the new quote? :) --Kyoko 17:17, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
My Userpages
Hi, I just wanted to request if you could protect all of my userpages? I wont be editing as much and will therefore not be able to check them that regularly. Thanks! --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 17:26, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
- I can semiprotect your userpage and user subpages for you, but I'd rather not fully protect it - or your talk, just in case people leave messages for you that others can resolve even if you're not there to do so. ~ Riana ⁂ 17:27, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
- Could you fully protect my userpages but not my talk page. I would prefer my talk page to be left fully unprotected to allow me to receive messages from anon users. It is just my userpages that I am concerned about. Thanks --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 17:32, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
- Done :) ~ Riana ⁂ 17:43, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for all of your help, but now I cant edit my userpage :(? --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 19:45, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
- Is there a protecttion which allow me and admins to edit my page but nobody else?. If not could you please leave it on semi-protection?. Thanks--¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 09:26, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry, I didnt notice that you had already changed it :). Thanks --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 09:28, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for all of your help, but now I cant edit my userpage :(? --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 19:45, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
- Done :) ~ Riana ⁂ 17:43, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
- Could you fully protect my userpages but not my talk page. I would prefer my talk page to be left fully unprotected to allow me to receive messages from anon users. It is just my userpages that I am concerned about. Thanks --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤ 17:32, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
OTRS notice on Vice-Admiral of Cornwall
I believe this notice has been placed in error. That page was created by myself based on Sir John Sainty's lists of Vice Admirals of the Coasts placed online by the Institute of Historical Research and duly linked as a reference. The page referenced in the OTRS notice deals entirely with the history of one particular holder of the office, and, indeed, gives a date for his appointment (1632) conflicting with Sainty's information (apptd. 14 September 1638 in succession to James Bagg, dec'd. 26 August 1638). In short, the content from the page in question is not reflected in Vice-Admiral of Cornwall and the notice is not correct in asserting that it has been. Thanks, Choess 19:07, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
- Hi Choess, the notice isn't for the content that is currently on it - the OTRS ticket is from another user requesting to use someone else's content, and they have given permission to use their text under the GFDL. I assume the editors have not placed this text in the article yet. Perhaps I can comment out the confirmation notice until the text is actually there? Regards, ~ Riana ⁂ 19:09, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
- Oh, that's OK, then. Sorry if I was a little curt; I thought that referred to the current content. If it refers to changes someone's going to make, that's no problem. Choess 19:40, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
- Not at all, I should have stopped to think that it might look that way :) ~ Riana ⁂ 19:42, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
- Oh, that's OK, then. Sorry if I was a little curt; I thought that referred to the current content. If it refers to changes someone's going to make, that's no problem. Choess 19:40, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
Slightly homosexual tiger
What happened to it? I miss it :( Will (talk) 19:17, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
- I just felt like a bit of an austere userpage. Frankly my favourite was the one which just said Riana (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) o.o ~ Riana ⁂ 19:20, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
- Also, I needs music recommendations. Hence why I numbered my post. Will (talk) 19:47, 28 September 2007 (UTC)
Barnstar
The Original Barnstar | ||
for all your hard work! Phoenix 15 21:09, 28 September 2007 (UTC) |
- Thanks :) ~ Riana ⁂ 18:03, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
DYK!!!
--Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 00:53, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
- I just remembered something else about the song too - when we used to play it, when you're assigned numbers, if you forgot your number you were out of the game. Lots of variations possible here. ;) ~ Riana ⁂ 18:04, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
Wikipedia Weekly Episode 31
Oh, boy! Wikipedia Weekly Episode 31 has been released!
.mp3 and .ogg versions can be found at http://wikipediaweekly.org/2007/09/26/wikipedia-weekly-31-return-of-the-panel/ and as always, you can download old episodes and more at http://wikipediaweekly.com/.
Please spread the word about Wikipedia Weekly. We're trying to spread the word so that people know about the project!
For Wikipedia Weekly — WODUP 02:38, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
If you do not wish to receive such notifications, please remove yourself from the list.
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:SanFrancisco49ers 1000.png
Thanks for uploading Image:SanFrancisco49ers 1000.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 03:55, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
- Dealt with :) Daniel 12:14, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
- Cheers Daniel! :) ~ Riana ⁂ 18:04, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
Box of links
You're welcome. It s nice to know I'm doing something useful around here. ;) —Moondyne 04:32, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
IP vandal User:87.10.23.32 returns as User:87.17.210.145
Hi, Riana. It appears an anon user you blocked has returned as User:87.17.210.145 and has resumed vandalizing.
I note that this user, or perhaps a group of users who share an ISP and a remarkably similar set of preoccupations, make similar edits to this set of articles on a fairly regular basis:
- Special:Contributions/87.18.234.253
- Special:Contributions/87.17.232.146
- Special:Contributions/87.17.224.70
- Special:Contributions/87.17.225.129
- Special:Contributions/87.16.232.141
- Special:Contributions/87.17.234.101
- Special:Contributions/87.11.234.17
- Special:Contributions/87.16.217.43
- Special:Contributions/87.17.211.48
- Special:Contributions/87.17.231.154
- Special:Contributions/87.18.209.45
- Special:Contributions/87.16.237.62
This isn't by any means a complete list.
Have you any idea what the "docg" that appears in the user's edit summaries refers to? I'm fairly certain it's not this, even if the editor is in Italy :)
--Rrburke(talk) 14:43, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
I've protected two of those articles for a month for repeated vandalism and certainly for preventing him of starting over again.--JForget 17:59, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for that JForget. The range seems too wide for a range block so I suppose the best I can do at this point is file an abuse report with the ISP and semiprotect his targets as they come up. ~ Riana ⁂ 18:34, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
Restore please
You deleted the List of stuff article by the argument "The result was speedily deleted". I remind you that more people voted for Keep then for Delete (7 Keeps, 4 Deletes), so please restore it. The discussion can be found [here]. Thank you. M.V.E.i. 20:41, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
- I remind you that AfD is not a vote count, to actually read the keep comments before mentioning them, and that deletion review is that-a-way. ~ Riana ⁂ 20:45, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
Oh thank you!
User:Raja-Hindoostani has vandalized my page several times. [7], [8], and the last one today [9]
I've sent him several messages but he has removed them. I'm really not a sock puppet. Thanks, regards, --Shahid • Talk2me 21:46, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
- I know you're not ;) I saw 'behn chode' in the edit summary and left a final warning, but then I actually saw how ridiculous the sock tags were and just blocked anyway. ~ Riana ⁂ 21:48, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
I think you need to keep your socks in line ;) Gscshoyru 22:43, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
Random complaining message
Honestly, I don't know. :( Nishkid64 (talk) 02:07, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Greetings!
Please refer to the above page for a suggestion on getting this article back on track.
Cordially, Drieux 03:28, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
- Hi Drieux, thanks for the note. I'll keep an eye on the discussion as it progresses, your note certainly seems, well, sane enough. Hopefully others will agree. ~ Riana ⁂ 04:12, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Regarding Alcoholics Anonymous
I'm offended that you templated me. As you know, the three revert rule does not apply in cases of vandalism. I have attempted to use the talk pages for the Alcoholics Anonymous and Twelve-step program articles article to discuss these edits with the user to no avail. If you have other suggestions, I would appreciate them. If not, you should semi-protect the article. -- Craigtalbert 05:02, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
- Your assertion that it is 'vandalism' is false, and you said so yourself. Directly quoting WP:VAND, What vandalism is not: "NPOV violations - The neutral point of view is a difficult policy for many of us to understand, and even Wikipedia veterans occasionally accidentally introduce material which is non-ideal from an NPOV perspective. Indeed, we are all affected by our beliefs to a greater or lesser extent. Though inappropriate, this is not vandalism in itself unless persisted in after being warned". Reverting what you claim to be POV-pushing is not an excuse for breaking the three-revert rule, contrary to what you claim above ("the three revert rule does not apply in cases of vandalism").
- Furthermore, if the article was to be protected, it would be fully-protected, as this is a content dispute, not vandalism. Daniel 05:42, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
- Okay, those are fair points. I could have sworn I read that blatant POV edits were considered vandalism. If I did, I can't find the policy saying so now. But, be fair, not only did I ask 207.232.97.13 to stop reverting and discuss the matter on the talk page, he/she was also warned by Tiptoety. 207.232.97.13 was reverting after being warned, and continued to post the blatant POV edits without discussing them on the talk page.
- I did misinterpret the semi-protection policy. I thought it was appropriate to request semi-protection for all POV-pushing, but after reading it again, it's clear that it's just for biographies. I apologize for that. -- Craigtalbert 07:16, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
- And, look, I hate to sound entitled. But being templated by an admin really rubs me the wrong way. I've spent hundreds of hours researching the articles I've written. I've done my level best to follow wikipedia policies and write good, neutral, well-researched, encyclopedic content. I'm at 3403 edits. I deserve to be treated a little better than a shared IP address. -- Craigtalbert 07:32, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
- The IP address is not shared - take a look at the talkpage. I'm sorry if you felt offended by the 3RR template, but it conveys information that I would prefer not to make up on the spot for fear of leaving something out. ~ Riana ⁂ 08:51, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
- The real issue is that when there is someone trying to do good work on an article, this kind of drive-by templating obscures what's actually going on. Now it looks like there's a sock-puppet address attempting to restore the same information [10], [11]. It's pretty clear what the score with this article is, if you take the time to look. Templates threating to block me doesn't solve any of these problems. -- Craigtalbert 19:33, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
- The IP address is not shared - take a look at the talkpage. I'm sorry if you felt offended by the 3RR template, but it conveys information that I would prefer not to make up on the spot for fear of leaving something out. ~ Riana ⁂ 08:51, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Wow!
I've been welcoming users for the last 20 mins, and during my travels, I've seen your name pop up so many times, it's not funny! You really are a tireless contributor Riana - I look up to you. :) See you around. Spawn Man 10:23, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
- Ooh, a spinny one! Thanks Spawny, haven't seen you around a whole lot lately. Take care! ~ Riana ⁂ 10:24, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
- Nah, I've been behind the scenes editing my FAC and Vampire with another editor - hopefully that'll be my next FA. Other than that, I've been voting on AfDs and keeping my nose out of trouble. No arguments for the last 6 months (Knock on wood). ;) Anyway, there's a possible impersonator of you I reported to UAA which you might want to take a gander at. See you around Riana. :) Sincerly, Spawn Man 11:45, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
You've got mail!--Porcupine (prickle me!) 12:27, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
L33t OTRS sk11lz plz
Hello Riana. Can you check that an OTRS ticket is genuinely giving permission to use the images, such as Image:Sushmita_Sen.jpg. This one? Thanks! So, you were one of the mugsbrave editors who decided to nominate KM at RFA? Hmm, not sure what I think about that. Every time I start looking at Kelly's edits, esp. in wikispace, my blood pressure starts to rise. Not a good sign. Still, NYBrad said what I feel, only much better than I could, so I doubt if I will comment. Angus McLellan (Talk) —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 19:48, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
- I can confirm that the OTRS ticked does indeed point to permission to license the image under CC by 3.0. ((1 == 2) ? (('Stop') : ('Go')) 19:58, 30 September 2007 (UTC)