→Thanks!: RfC |
→Vandalism: new section |
||
Line 103: | Line 103: | ||
==RfC== |
==RfC== |
||
I've started drafting a user conduct RfC that you might be interested in [[User:Cla68/Sandbox/RfC draft|here]]. There's a lot of evidence to sift through and present, so I think it will take awhile to get it put together. If you'd like to participate, please feel free to do so. [[User:Cla68|Cla68]] ([[User talk:Cla68|talk]]) 06:35, 28 March 2008 (UTC) |
I've started drafting a user conduct RfC that you might be interested in [[User:Cla68/Sandbox/RfC draft|here]]. There's a lot of evidence to sift through and present, so I think it will take awhile to get it put together. If you'd like to participate, please feel free to do so. [[User:Cla68|Cla68]] ([[User talk:Cla68|talk]]) 06:35, 28 March 2008 (UTC) |
||
== Vandalism == |
|||
You just vandalised [[User:Hersfold]], please don't do that. Aren't you an administrator? Or have you been hacked? Happy editing --[[User:Atyndall|Atyndall93]] <sup>([[User_talk:atyndall|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Atyndall|contribs]])</sup> 04:42, 29 March 2008 (UTC) |
Revision as of 04:42, 29 March 2008
Semiprotection of DRV page
I've requested that Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2008 March 18 be un-semiprotected as the debate that you were dealing with has moved to its own page. Thanks, Andjam (talk) 13:51, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
CSD I8: San Diego-Tijuana metropolitan area
If you are going to remove pictures due to CSD I8, please be respectful and fix the image links that were on the pages that will become effected. The images you deleted are not appearing of this page, please fix images on the page and in the future be respectful and do the same in the future.
User:Cjhard
Cjhard (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) just reverted an edit of mine in a manner most like User:Grawp. You have previously given Cjhard a final warning, so I thought I'd leave it to you. See [1] [2] [3] and, of course, this;
Cheers, Jack Merridew 12:53, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
It just got a lot more interesting; [4] [5] [6]
This tag-teaming IPs with the second one undoing vandalism is certainly Grawp. Taking it to ANI. Cheers, Jack Merridew 12:59, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
You blocked the IP for vandalism on the 18th. Mind if we switch it to anon only because this block has caused Erik the Red 2 to be blocked as well. Please comment at User talk:Erik the Red 2. Thanks. Rjd0060 (talk) 19:50, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
- On second thought, there is quite a lot going on over there and I'm a bit confused by it. If you get a chance to take a look at the situation, I'd appreciate it. - Rjd0060 (talk) 19:51, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
Hensel page
So, um, we let people go around now chopping 3kb out of pages by revert -- including *all* the references -- for undocumented reasons? And it wasn't a revert war, no one reverted more than once that I can see. "There are good reasons and I'm not going to tell you what they are", though, is not itself a good reason. I fully expect the reverts to pick right back up again, unless someone posits a *rational* (to the denizens of that article) reason why whacking 174 edits is considered reasonable. You set the protect flag -- do you have one? --Baylink (talk) 19:13, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
- We don't want, need, or allow information on the intimate anatomical details of two teenage conjoined twins a penned by a banned sex criminal. Full stop. krimpet✽ 22:33, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
- While I'm not going to make any accusations of criminality here, I will state that the edits were made by a banned editor who is about as banned as they get. I am highly uncomfortable reverting to his version wholesale. I've already seen this editor's comments regarding other people's children. By all means, please pick through the reverted edits piecemeal and try to make sense/add what you think necessary but we cannot allow this banned editor edit articles, especially BLP ones - Alison ❤ 23:10, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for closing
Thanks for your help wrapping up the Don Murphy afd. DurovaCharge! 19:19, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
- No problem :) I actually agreed with your nomination and would have !voted delete myself - it's a shame the community seems overwhelmingly adamant on keeping the article. :/ krimpet✽ 22:30, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I'm investigating a request for unblock of the above user. You had placed a CU-Confirmed sockpuppet template on the user's page, however I can't find any discussion that led to the checkuser involvement. Could you provide a link to that discussion or any evidence you may have regarding it? Thanks! Hersfold (t/a/c) 03:06, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
- I contacted the checkuser, Dmcdevit, on IRC after blocking User:Four Thirty-Nine as a obvious puppet of MyWikiBiz - he or any other CU can confirm that the checkuser was run (note also the associated IP blocks in his admin log). Daniel and Flyguy649 were also in the channel at the time, and beat me to blocking the accounts. :p krimpet✽ 04:20, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
Image:Melissa Auf der Maur.jpg
I just now noticed this like 6 months after the fact, but you speedy-deleted Image:Melissa Auf der Maur.jpg citing CSD I8. However, I'm unable to find any bit-for-bit copy of the image on commons, so I'm not really sure why it was deleted in the first place. I went to alot of trouble gaining GFDL permission for the use of the image, and I think it's much better than the current image on her page, so I'm wondering what the heck happened. Any clarification you could give me would be great. Drewcifer (talk) 19:01, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
- I apologize - it seems the copy on Commons was actually deleted just last week as a copyvio, most likely because the OTRS request does not seem to have been confirmed. I've restored the image on Commons, and will gladly verify the permissions for you - would you happen to have the OTRS ticket number you were given when you sent the permissions e-mail? :) krimpet✽ 21:43, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
- No worries. Unfortunately I don't know what the OTRS ticket number was, or if I even got an email confirmation at all. That was a while ago. Anything you could do would be helpful. Thanks. Drewcifer (talk) 00:53, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
Ned sucks at the internet
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AKrimpet&diff=200816985&oldid=200795397
I'm sorry that you felt I was trolling you. I really wish that you would consider what I wrote, but I would never troll or harass you about it. I'd like to repeat my first comment in that thread:
"I don't hold a grudge about this, and I don't take it to reflect on your judgement over-all. I can understand how you came to the conclusions you did. But I wanted to let you know that this really bothered me."
My frustration tends to leaks through in my messages sometimes, but please know that I was sincere when I wrote you. I have a tendency to get re-caught up in things when I start to write about them, but I don't intend to further any dispute with you. I wrote those messages with the hope of gaining some form of understanding, but I'm not very good with these kind of things, and I guess I screwed that up too. -- Ned Scott 23:04, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
Thanks!
Thank you for supporting me! | ||
Many many thanks! Cream (talk) 02:24, 28 March 2008 (UTC) |
RfC
I've started drafting a user conduct RfC that you might be interested in here. There's a lot of evidence to sift through and present, so I think it will take awhile to get it put together. If you'd like to participate, please feel free to do so. Cla68 (talk) 06:35, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
Vandalism
You just vandalised User:Hersfold, please don't do that. Aren't you an administrator? Or have you been hacked? Happy editing --Atyndall93 (talk | contribs) 04:42, 29 March 2008 (UTC)