User talk:Kelly Martin/Archives/2005 June

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Thanks

Sorry I havent said Thank you sooner but I just noticed today that you rv vandalism on my to do list (you did it so quickly I didnt even notice) thanks again. Happy Editing (sorry for any grammar mistakes I have horrible grammar.) 578 (Yes?) 14:04, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] something about vanity pages

Re: debate on speedy delete subcat using other processes first. You opined humourously: "Oh, horrors. The poor servers, how will they... ", etc. The problem is not to THOSE servers, but to US Servers (or Servants)... but you knew that already. These vanity pieces are a huge WOT (Waste of Time). So far as I have discerned in lurking around Vfd the past five days, they are usually of juvenile origination... keeping them around more than the bare mininum is rewarding these inconsiderate (I'm tempting to say parasites <G>) youngsters by giving them how many ever days to nudge their friends and point out how They put one over on the serious devotees in the Wiki-community. My own view is these things need extremely fast and effective deletion as soon as monitors spot them occuring.

I wrote this sugestion in an UserTalk: Why the heck are the vanity pages tolerated for inclusion into the general Vfd que? If the behind the scenes 'monitors' would immediately tag such as nonsense. Save, then go through the Vfd tagging process themselves, or perhaps allow the the Next (another agreeing) monitor to tag it (as a check and balance kind of thing) A concurring admisistrator can then Speedy-Delete it within the current guidlines. (Lawyering, I know, but within current guidelines, unless I've missed something.) It would be nice to see this tried for a few days or weeks at least just to see if the impact on Vfd\Today goes as I predict.

The current process lets these self-masturbatory puff pieces hang around for five days as 'A kind of further reward' (Psycologically) for the juvenile thrill at the minor personal cost of posting the piece. Five days for them to elbow their friends and say: (wink, wink) look what I got away with! If they instead vanished inside a half-hour, it would certainly speed the processing on the Vfd/Today page to a more managable number of far more important votes. It would also hold their satisfaction down considerably, assuming they like writing as much as MOST TEENS. Which is to say, Not! (Like my two boys) The vanished 'joke on Wikipedia will bite them with a joke on them and disuade copy cats in their circle of friends at least, and the word will get around the web as well in general - even if the lesson is relearned locally by many different people. My time is valuable. How about yours? Fabartus 16:40, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for helping out with Alexander the Great. I haven't seen you around, so I'm pleased to meet you. I hope you stick around. ATG is plagued with such edits. Lectiodifficilior 18:56, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I didn't know there were people who did that. It's a good idea. Thanks. Lectiodifficilior 19:05, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Uh?

what did i do? don't think i did anything. Don't think i nominated anything for a speedy deletion. sorry, could you explain what i did. (unsigned comment left by Gazzapedia)

[edit] Mel Etitis

Look here, Mr Martin, please do not get my facts wrong. In the first place, I do not see why there are so many coincidental articles where my edits[1] and his clash[2]. And such behaviour show that he is stalking on my edits, in which I never did the opposite and I do not like at all. Secondly, you say that his edits are "good-faith". Before you comment on this war, I would appreciate if you could reconsider my attitude by looking at his contributions again[3]. In addition to stalking me, he has done a lot of reverts in a "dash-and-dart" manner. What warrant him to do that?

In Talk:Tsushima Islands#Do not revert he stated that he could not understand on my major edits, and yet he refuse to step out and ask questions about my major edits, instead attempting to deviate the topic from the mainstream discussion. Is this proper behaviour?

Thirdly, I would also like to point out that he stated that "and you've never responded". I do not understand on what ridiculous things does he mean, for I have in retrospect answered all, if not nearly every question and comment from him. I offered him what questions I did not answer, and he has no comments. Worse, look at the attitude of his talk in Talk:Zanskar. If you notice, many a times he either tried to deviate from the mainstream discussion to another topic, even going up to the extent of threatening arbitration without even answering the question in the first place. Worse, I have seen hypocrisy in him in Talk:Wee Kim Wee, he himself stated that

don't use someone else's comments as a way of avoiding mine, and do me the courtesy of answering my questions. If you've decided to ignore me (and your supposed example certainly ignores what I've said, as does your failure to address my points), then say so and have done with it. And that is what he is.

Fourthly, look at his horendous attitude on [4], either he is merely trying to vent his anger by making use of the 3RR, or he is trying to lie his way out (although he apologised after I pointed out that was not a revert), but his attitude really holds a strong platform of suspicion against his edits. I am already bery doubtful of his sincerity.

Tan 11:27, 4 June 2005 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Mr Tan. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:08, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] User Talk vs User Page

Re: Comments to other users

My appologies. I get so annoyed at my lack of a high speed connection (using 24K only), at time I forget where I'm placing templates on User/talk pages. Sometimes I wish clicking the username did take one to a talk page. I'll try to remember my error. Thanks for reminding me. …Guy M… L.V. (soapbox) 05:00, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Random anonymous comments

kellylynn0000: you seem more bored than sadistic wikipediasucks: very good wikipediasucks: I'm nuts too kellylynn0000: congratulations, then

(above is an anonymous comment by user Jon Porter's DNA) Kelly Martin 05:19, Jun 4, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Trigun characters

There are a lot of these redirects to anchors from this page. Now that you commented on it, I seem to remember reading somewhere that it doesn't work on Wikipedia. --1pezguy 04:19, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Talk:Jewish Task Force

Hi. I am curious as to why you removed previous talk comment on the Jewish Task Force discussion page (ie: Reverted edits by 168.209.98.35 to last version by 24.193.128.76) 24.193.128.76 has removed comments critical of the JTF organziation and 168.209.98.35 restored. By reverting back to 24.193.128.76 you removed the older comments other editors have made regarding the article. I am reverting it back to 168.209.98.35 168.209.97.34 12:05, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I restored comments which had been removed. Your edit removed comments; I restored them. I found it curious that your edit summary claimed to be restoring comments when it was in fact removing them, and as such identified your edit as probable vandalism. Kelly Martin 12:07, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)
The critical comments by other editors on top were placed back by my revert. Your revert of my revert left out the older critical comments and mostly left 24.193.128.76´s rebuttal. As soon as I noticed that I did the revert. Perhaps there was other stuff 24.193.128.76 added at the same time he removed the older critical stuff and that was lost in my revert. 168.209.97.34 12:11, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Your most recent revert removed a section of comments and restored nothing. Good faith requires me to conclude that you do not understand how to use Wikipedia. Kelly Martin 12:13, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)
Your rather rude message was uncalled for. In case you don´t know, some of us in the third world who have very slow internet connections accidently blank the article we are editing. It was meant to be a valid revert. I should have previewd it first, but I sometimes skip that since it can take over 5 minutes for the preview window to finish loading. Your ¨good faith¨ has failed you. 168.209.97.34 12:25, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Okay, I see where you are coming from. For some reason after I did the revert the article was as it should be, but if I refreshed it was clear. In any case I will not stuff with it again, but can you please revert the deletions made by 24.193.128.76 for me?

168.209.97.34 12:33, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Don't worry, Dralwik

Hi Kelly, I noticed you reverted some IP edits on my userpage a few days ago. I just wanted to let you know, the friend's computer I was using wouldn't let me log on. But thanks for the reverts, any way, in most situations it's a world of help. :-) And, since you're a suburban Chicagoan, you might like A large project on Chicago I'm doing. Happy edits, Dralwik 12:16, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC).

No problem. Thanks anyway, Dralwik 22:07, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC).

[edit] Comment from DJ Clayworth

Thanks for your help protecting my user page from the Bulldog vandal. DJ Clayworth 20:52, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] copyvios

Heya, I noticed you were on copyvio patrol, glad to see it. Did you know about {{nothanks}}? The text isn't perfect, but it beats typing out the warnings. --W(t) 06:18, 2005 Jun 8 (UTC)

[edit] Kelly

Hi thanks for putting the "Nazi Architecture" article back after it was deleted.

Who do we report 69.192.205.46 too for deleting the full Nazi Architecture webpage ??

I am new here, I do not know the procedure for having someone's IP address blocked.

You better respond to me by email spevans@sympatico.ca

Cordially

[edit] Thanks for covering my back

I was curious if anon 208.248.11.18 would hit me after I rv'd their vandalism in the Jim Croce article. -- Dave C. 04:23, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Re:RFA

That's interesting. I'm not aware that I have ever been reverted by an admin, but I will check my recent contributions to see. How recent does it have to be to still be on your temp blacklist? I had a run-in with Ed Poor recently, but I reverted him rather than the other way round. JeremyA 06:09, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

  • Well I've been through my last few days worth of edits and I can't see a revert by an admin. My guess is that there may be a bug in CDVF—there are a couple of times when I have been one of a number of people reverting a particularly persistent vandal, maybe one of those confused it. JeremyA 21:40, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Re: c&p moves

Yeah, they were a pain in the ass; but someone had to do it ;) I just *really* wished I had that nifty rollback link administrators do! Anyway, if I missed a few, feel free to let me know and I'll tackle it. Dewet 06:40, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Dittoboy?

Hi there! I'm sure you noticed this guy. I've given him a 24-hour block because he erased WP:VIP while I was editing it (and he had already been warned by you). Do you knkow what should be done here? I don't quite understand the guy. Yours, Radiant_>|< 11:27, Jun 9, 2005 (UTC)

  • Okay. I found his explanation at Jimbo's page. Strange guy. But if I understand correctly, blocking his username is different from blocking his IP. Anyway, what should be done here? I would not be surprised if after 24 hours he would come back and annoy people into reblocking him. Radiant_>|< 11:38, Jun 9, 2005 (UTC)
    • No problem! After the conversation above I thought you already was one :) Radiant_>|< 15:14, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Adminship

You're very welcome. And since you look like a shoo in, I'll welcome you now :) Just spend some time on the reading list and you'll be all set. - Taxman Talk 15:28, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)

  • I would also like to say you're very welcome too. Looking at the current vote total, I'll eventually have to add you to this silly list. Too bad you might have to wait until the 17th to try out those admin tools. See ya later. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 23:37, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • You're also welcome! I'm sure you will succeed; be bold with your new powers ;). Bratschetalk 5 pillars 00:45, Jun 11, 2005 (UTC)
  • Your courteous thanks only serve to emphasise that you are a most appropriate candidate. --Theo (Talk) 07:30, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)
  • You're welcome! Thanks also for the tip on "alternative rollback methods", it's a real help =). --Spangineer (háblame) 11:00, Jun 11, 2005 (UTC)
  • Congratulations, Kelly. Noticed your confirmation on the Admins list, and now look forward to your tenure. An encouraging welcome from an admin, ClockworkSoul, in February, was followed quickly by deletions and harsh rhetoric from an editor, Antaeus, who later seemed to encourage discouraging behavior by the likes of Geni and a certain anon engaged in repeatedly deleting a number of vaccine related articles. The lack of admin intervention didn't seem too surprising until today, when Uncle Ed lent a link to a list of 490 admins. It is unknown how best to assess whether one admin for every 1,000+ articles suffices, or if a non-admin editor's committee for monitoring admins has been organized yet. When admin accountability was mentioned in supporting your candidacy, Geni's status within the bureaucratic hierarchy was also unknown. The following, on Geni's user page, is typical of the sort of edits that may unduly cause one's contributions to pause (→geni's advice on how to avoid an edit war - change back to win I have no problems with people edit waring while following these rules since it is ulikely to require the attention of admins.) Huh? Editors unappreciative of null-A editorial perspectives certainly should be represented among admins, but as a group, such admins and editors appear in need of being reined in somewhat, on, for example, the mental health and vaccine related articles. Not that you should address such immediately as a new admin, but hopefully you will take it under advisement, for now... Ombudsman 03:39, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] 172.209.90.27's user page

I speedied it because I accidentally created it when I was trying to put the test template on that user's talk page. I sort of doubt the vandal cares whether or not he has a user page.—chris.lawson (talk) 02:15, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for repairing the attack on my talk page. I've taken the liberty of returning the favor, since the same anon had just done the same to your talk page. Some people just have too much time on their hands... Thanks again. Regards, Redux 05:01, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you!

Image:WikiThanks.pngThank's for taking out vandalism on my user page from the anon user. Dbraceyrules 20:58, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I reported him for vandalism, but he just doesn't stop. Thanks for helping me out!Dbraceyrules 21:00, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Me too

Mmm, thank you for the revert on my user page as well. I guess one has to expect to make a few enemies doing RC patrol. :-) ~~Shiri — Talk~~ 05:00, Jun 12, 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I just downloaded CDVF today. I'm still trying to get the hang of it, but its a very nice tool. ~~Shiri — Talk~~ 05:07, Jun 12, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] My (Darrien's) request for adminship

At my request for adminship you said you see me as pushing a pro-Microsoft POV. I'm curious, which of my edits led you to that conclusion?

Darrien 07:15, 2005 Jun 13 (UTC)

[edit] Islamist Vandalism

Please do not go around randomly reverting. BrandonYusufToropov's vandalism is getting out of hand and it is well within Wikipedia policy to remove personal attacks. (anonymous comment from 216.32.201.125)

Also, do not deface other users' pages. (anonymous comment from 69.57.130.8)

This issue has been ground to death already. I feel that the sockpuppet warning on User:Enviroknot is justified, especially since User:David Gerard has certified the sockpuppetness of this user (see [5], [6]). Kelly Martin 17:32, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Congrats

Congrts. I know you will make a great admin! utcursch | talk 07:08, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)

Me too! Congrats! -- Dave C. 23:30, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)


  • Conrats, it was an honor to vote for you. Your dedication to the project proved that you are an asset to Wikipedia. Take care and have fun with your "new" powers. Marine 69-71 01:00, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks and congratulations

Hi! Just a note to say thank you for supporting my successful candidacy for adminship, and also congratulations to you on being promoted to an admin. JeremyA 05:06, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Congratulations

You're very welcome and congratulations! You'll make an excellent administrator. But why didn't you get a message with the links to the administrators' reading list and so on? Oh well, I'm sure you'll figure it all out (if you haven't already). — Knowledge Seeker দ 08:10, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Congratulations too. Looks like the reason you didn't get a message with the links to the administrators' reading list and the administrators' how-to guide was that Raul654 processed your RFA and apparently forgot to send them. He also forgot to add you to the list of admins too (which I kindly did for you). See ya around. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 08:21, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Grats!--Tznkai 16:21, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

And again! -- Hoary 02:55, 2005 Jun 17 (UTC)

Congratulations on your adminship! Andre (talk) 20:04, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Theo RFA

Thank you for supporting my nomination. I am particularly grateful for your generous explanation.—Theo (Talk) 23:26, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for the congratulations. I appreciate that.—Theo (Talk) 13:54, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Sorry

Sorry I deleted you [7] I was heavy handed on the save, and then just did a mass deletion of the duplicate, and did not notice you hade posted immediatly afterwards. Giano | talk 07:31, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)


[edit] West Coast Range

Sorry for the incorrect tag. Would this be a candidate for Redirects_for_deletion? I just imagined there's probably a few west coast ranges out there. Thanks for the tip. Jgritz 08:49, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Disruptive opposition

I agree that such behaviour is mildly disruptive in the mundane sense. Within Wikipedia, however, disruption has a harsher arcane meaning because of WP:POINT. In that arcane sense, Boothy's oppositions are discourteous but not disruptive. Either way, I agree that any sanction would be inappropriate—grossly so, in my opinion—and Boothy has probably suffered enough from the consequent flashmobbing.—Theo (Talk) 10:21, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for the Revert

Thanks for reverting (twice!) the vandalism to my user page. --Canderson7 13:18, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] My Rfa

Thank you for supporting me! --Kbdank71 13:31, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for your support!

Hi Kelly! Thanks for supporting my adminship nomination! Sjakkalle (Check!) 13:31, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] You will stop vandalizing Wikipedia now. If you do not stop, you will be blocked from editing.

Yeah right. You've just been pwned. Knob 10:21, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC) PS: And I'd block that NazismIsntCool skiver if I were you.

[edit] SFDC article clarification

Greetings,

At your convenience, please refer to the Talk:Security Forums Dot Com page for a clarification post by myself, in the quality of SFDC staff member, concerning what happened with the article in question.

Regards, Capi

[edit] Thanks!

Thanks for supporting me on my RfA. It's always nice to get some positive feedback. I hope I can put my new abilities to some good use. -- grm_wnr Esc 17:44, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I wrote a new article on Kokomo High School at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kokomo_High_School I assume the old one was deleted.

[edit] MR.

[edit] Dear Kelly

Dear Sir,

Please take a look at the Rohingya Aricle .. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Ragib who had edit our article blankly and wrote a lot of misinformation. please try to stop this wrting.. he also wrote a lot of abusing of organization.

thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.138.47.21 (talk • contribs) June 19 17:20


Hi Kelly, the current content is a copyvio, I had removed parts of it and asked for restructuring the article in the talk page. The page itself had been cleaned of copyrighted material back in May, but someone again copied content from http://www.rohingyatimes.i-p.com/history/history_maa.html . I also would request you to take a look at the talk page or the page histories of the article. I haven't written anything/added anything at all, rather I asked the contributors to either provide proof of copyright permission or remove/reword copyrighted content, but all I got was some racial slurs which were even incorrectly placed!! Your look into the matter is much appreciated. Thanks. --Ragib 23:34, 19 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned Image

Hey Kelly, saw that you deleted the "maniac rapist" article; I was preparing to list it for VfD, and it disappeared! I checked on the two images that were included in the article, and I saw that one has already been deleted, but the other, Image:Happyman.jpg is orphaned. Can you delete it for the same reasons as the article and other image, or should I list it at IfD? Thanks! -- Essjay · Talk 03:45, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)

  • Holy wow you're fast! -- Essjay · Talk 03:56, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Cut & Paste Move

Hey Kelly: I've got a new user at the helpdesk who created an article in the Wikipedia namespace instead of the Main space. I went to move the article to the Main space, but he did a cut and paste move before I could move the article and give him an answer. I've asked him not to edit either article until we can get this straightened out. Honestly, I think the easiest thing would be to delete the article in the Main space and move the article from the Wiki space; the Wiki article has the longer history. Neither article has been edited by anyone but the new user who created it. I would do it, but of course, I'm not an admin. Can you help out? -- Essjay · Talk 06:26, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)

I'm a total moron...I forgot to give you links: Wikipedia:Tsunami PTSD Center and Tsunami PTSD Center. -- Essjay · Talk 06:27, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)

Kelly: For your amazing speed & attention to the needs of the Wiki's users, I award you this Barnstar of Diligence and a plenary indulgence. Great work! -- Essjay · Talk 06:56, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Congratulations

Congratulations on blocking that one first. Your prize is a userpage free of vandalism! :-) --Sjakkalle (Check!) 14:29, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Edits at Book of Mormon

I am somewhat shocked that you would equate my actions with those of User:Gabrielsimon. I know you probably haven't had time to review exactly what happened, but my first edits were accompanied by comments on the talk page on why I thought they were inappropriate - only later did I discover that he wrote all the language I had edited. His response was to delete my comments and revert the page immediately. See here for a list of relevent stuff. Frankly I see his deletion of my comments 6 times in a very short period of time to be nothing short of vandalism - I would appreciate it if you took a look and made any comments you feel appropriate. User:205.188.116.14 17:04, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Can you explain why you sign as User:205.188.116.14 when you are User:152.163.100.73? Have you considered registering so that it is easier to communicate with you? Kelly Martin 17:08, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
Sorry - I am using AOL - it changes my IP all the time - I wanted to make it easier for you to track who was talking - sorry - usually I don't care since I rarely make substantive edits. 152.163.100.73 17:45, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I would again encourage you to register for a username, if for no other reason that it makes communication easier. Kelly Martin 18:37, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
User:205.188.116.14 is an AOL user sharing multiple IPs with others. The current problem is being generated by User:Gabrielsimon who has taken to editing the article on Book of Mormon in the same manner as he has done on others (see his archived history), violating 3RR for which he has been blocked at least twice previously, making controversial changes without discussion on talk pages, making changes without edit summaries or marking them as minor, and generating heat along the way by using uncivil language on both article and talk pages. --Blainster 17:24, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I am explicitly not taking sides here. If you feel that this editor is not conducting himself in a manner consistent with Wikipedia's rules for editor conduct, I suggest you avail yourself of the dispute resolution process. Kelly Martin 18:37, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
I very much appreciated that you restored my comments on the talk page, and I thought that if you looked at the history you would see that I had not "...edit[ed] this article too aggressively." As a 3rd party who jumped in and claimed to have "examined the edits in question and in my opinion they do not constitute reverts." your words stand on the page condemning my actions which are completely reasonable especially since he outright deleted my comments 7 times. I reverted once (my personal rule re page edits) and this is the first time I have been told that was too agressive. 152.163.100.73 18:53, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I will agree that you reverted once. However, both of you were making rapid fire edits in quick succession, which is what I meant by "overly aggressive". It takes two to perpetuate an edit war. Kelly Martin 19:00, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)
Thanks - I see your point, I'll wait a little longer next time. 152.163.100.73 19:03, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Sorry about mis-attributing the vote....

Sorry I mis-attributed the Bob Burns vfd vote to you. I have corrected it. Wikibofh 21:34, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] My RFA

Thank you for supporting my RFA. Guettarda 00:26, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Afrocentrism

Thank you for your help. - Mustafaa 02:22, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Just to say Hi

Hi! I noticed your comment on blockmeandgetitoverwith's user page, and that you had been given 'my' barnstar on the same day. I just thought that means the universe wants me to say hello. Nice to meet you.Pedant 20:44, 2005 Jun 23 (UTC)

Since you were so quick to reply, I thought I'd find a project on your user page... I've added all of those unlinked images to what seems to me to be appropriate articles. If you find any more, I'll be glad to fiddle with them. See you around.Pedant 22:05, 2005 Jun 23 (UTC)

[edit] Amazing antivandalist

Kelly you are an amazing antivandalist. I've just been admiring your reversion work. Well done. Brequinda 10:03, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Society for the Protection of the Apostrophe

Greetings from a fellow member :) Wyss 11:10, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] And me

Yes, we should all learn to protect the humble and over-worked apostrophe. Meanwhile, thanks for the reference to the AntiVandal Tool, it looks good. The only thing is I can't connect to the feed from here, so I'll have to wait to get it home.... Brequinda 11:44, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] ArbCom

Can we reduce the block time or undo the block? -- Uncle Ed (talk) 15:08, Jun 24, 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Heya

I just noticed commented that you used to help develop the GIMP for a long time. I just wanted to say "Hey! That's cool!" and thanks. I think the GIMP is a really great program, so being able to thank someone in part responsible for it is great. Take care. --Ritz 18:55, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] vandalism by user: Erwin Rommel

Just wanted to let you know that user: Erwin Rommel has continually vandalized both your user page and my userpage despite repeat warnings. Jtkiefer 19:56, Jun 25, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Using Talk pages

When you do revert on outright vandalism, please add warning note to offender Talk page - e.g. with blanker [8] you reverted. While it is sort of nuisance it helps with establishing clear record for future dealing with the vandal. Thanks. Pavel Vozenilek 14:48, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)


[edit] Re: talk pages

Yea - I have been trying to put messages on people's talk pages but sometimes I am having to revert them so quickly that I don't get the opportunity!! I will make a concerted effort to do it more often :-) Thanks for the compliments btw. Will => talk 16:20, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Right you are. BTW, should I be leaving test1, test2 etc on talk pages after every time they vandalize a page, or should I wait for them to vandalize a page a few times to make sure before giving them each warning? Will => talk 16:26, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for keeping watch

Thanks for spotting my user page for vandalism. I am beginning to suspect several users with IP addresses starting with 139.55.xx.xxx are the same person with a grudge against Michigan athletics.

Now I can claim of suffering my first Wikipedia battle wound (sarcasm)! Pentawing 01:14, 27 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Solidarity

From your user page:

"I'm a self-professed grammar nazi..."

Sieg heil! Mr. Billion 03:55, 27 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] How about Category:Physical addiction?

It is not entirely clear to me what the decision is about, or what will happen to, Category:Physical addiction. It has been moved to the section of debated categories but I can't find the discussion. I think its contents should be moved to Category:Addiction. I would be willing to do that if that's okay. Dirk K. 28 June 2005 20:21 (UTC)

[edit] Request for Arbitration against User:JarlaxleArtemis

This message is to inform you that a Request for Arbitration has been initiated against the user JarlaxleArtemis. Since you have been affected by this user's behaviour [9], you are invited to join yourself to the proceedings and/or present evidence at Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/JarlaxleArtemis_2/Evidence. —Psychonaut 29 June 2005 15:46 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

Thank you for your support on my RfA. I promise to continue responsibly! Thanks, Bratschetalk 5 pillars June 29, 2005 16:17 (UTC)