This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
What's wrong with that username? Is ShadowpuppetKing better? עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 11:03, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Animum, I need someone who is good at code to help me fix a portal. Could you help me? HarrisonB - Conributions 01:03, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi there: Sorry, I'm not sure what happened with respect to the above-captioned article... I tagged it with db-bio but then noticed that you seemed to be putting it through AfD, which was fine with me -- I went to remove my tag and I think you had by then deleted the article. I'm fine whatever happens, I just wanted to apologize if I caused you extra trouble. Accounting4Taste:talk 22:35, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
That was becoming an annoyance!
Compwhiz II 23:29, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | ||
For you hard work against vandalism. --Maxim(talk) 00:57, 6 January 2008 (UTC) |
Many thanks for your good work on 31 December to my user page, which seems to have become a playground for the retarded when I wasn't looking. I've only today noticed the changes, with witless IP numbers adding crap and a couple of good people (who should have spent their time partying or similar) clearing it up. -- Hoary (talk) 07:29, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Can you make a handy script like count.js with a direct link to Special:Listusers for a user? That would be useful in easily detecting who's an admin and who's not. -- Mentifisto 09:36, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
importScript('User:Voice of All/History/monobook.js');
Hey, I found that you deleted this users talk page for being advertising. I can't access the pre-delete history, but I have the sinking suspicion that their userpage is also similar advertising. I only notice and wonder because everything after == See also == is a copy and paste from Web Design - I only caught this because this user copies the categories also. I was wondering if you'd mind taking a look? (I also find it odd that the only contribs from this user are their user page). Regardless, Thanks. --ShakataGaNai (talk) 06:47, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
I have received the MILHIST WikiProject newsletter for December twice with this bot. What's up? Dreamafter ⇔ 23:21, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi Animum: So far I have only subscribed to and received the link-only delivery of the military newsletter, yet yesterday I got the full version from your Anibot. Please make sure that I receive the "link only" version and please change the last one on my talk page to that. Thanks, IZAK (talk) 00:05, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Two questions, if I may:
Thank you. Kirill 02:49, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
I knew this question would be asked sometime. :-)
I hope those two answers are sufficient enough to answer the two questions well. Regards, —Animum (talk) 02:58, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
You were the admin who reverted an edit made by 67.184.25.212 on the entry "Brian Larsen". Since your revert, user 67.184.25.212 has made two additional edits to the page that appear to be vandalism. Furthermore, another user, Truthserum1, has made similar edits to the page that appear to be vandalism and have been reverted. Furthermore, the page history shows numerous vandalisms from other users. Can you mark the page Semi-Protected? Thanks. Lsdevbarb (talk • contribs) 04:51, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Please stop delivering the Military History newsletter (and any other newsletters) to User talk:Catalyst in Society because the user has left the project (see the edit summary).
It would be convenient if you would put, on your bot page, a link to simple instructions how to remove oneself (or a user) from the delivery list. After some searching around, I found a list of names receiving the newsletter, but it isn't clear whether removing a name from the list will cause delivery to cease.
Thanks! --Coppertwig (talk) 13:28, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Is there any problems? The WesternArmenian and EasternArmenian spellings have little differences, so my addings were good. Andranikpasha (talk) 23:14, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
The da Vinci Barnstar | ||
For adding features/fixing my bugs while I'm away. GracenotesT § 00:37, 13 January 2008 (UTC) |
[3] :-) ScarianCall me Pat 01:15, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
Since Barnstars aren't edible:
Compwhiz II(Talk)(Contribs) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching! Keep up the good work!
Spread the goodness of cookies by adding ((subst:Cookie)) to their talk page with a friendly message.
Eye have only a question...How is it deemed slander or vandalism to correct an error made in the depiction or interpretation of an event that happened?? Please answer whenever you have the thyme..--Eye was <<BuTT>>now Eye am Not (*_*) (talk) 18:56, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
I was just going to put the ((subst:Uw-pinfo))
template on 69.158.17.177's talk page about adding non-public personal information (such as phone numbers, home addresses, workplaces or identities of pseudonymous or anonymous individuals who have not made their identity public). I then noticed that you had already blocked him (rather quickly might I add), so I didn't add the template message.
I don't know if you had done this or not, but I went ahead and made a request for oversight to the email address provided at Wikipedia:Requests for oversight regarding the revision in question. Lightsup55 ( T | C ) 20:52, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
What tool do you use for vandal fighting. You are so fast! Compwhiz II(Talk)(Contribs) 19:59, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
/*** Make old AfD's appear or disappear - from AmiDaniel's monobook ***/
function hideafd()
{
var divs = document.getElementsByTagName("div");
for(var x = 0; x < divs.length; ++x)
if(divs[x].className.indexOf("vfd") != -1)
divs[x].style.display = "none";
document.getElementById('footer').style.display = 'none';
}
function showafd()
{
var divs = document.getElementsByTagName("div");
for(var x = 0; x < divs.length; ++x)
if(divs[x].className.indexOf("vfd") != -1)
divs[x].style.display = "";
document.getElementById('footer').style.display = '';
}
function morelinks() {
var tabs = document.getElementById('p-cactions').getElementsByTagName('ul')[0];
if(document.title.indexOf("Wikipedia:Articles for deletion") == 0 && location.href.indexOf('&action=') == -1)
{
addlilink(tabs, 'javascript:hideafd()', 'hide closed', 'ca-hide');
ta['ca-hide'] = ['', 'Hide closed AFDs'];
addlilink(tabs, 'javascript:showafd()', 'show closed', 'ca-show');
ta['ca-show'] = ['', 'Show closed AFDs'];
}
}
addOnloadHook(morelinks);
Thanks for unblocking my account. I was surprised at how fast you blocked it, I was hoping to get a tag up on it before it got blocked but you beat me to it ;-). Thanks again!
Gonzo fan2007 talk ♦ contribs 23:51, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
I was mistaken, i thought the Country of France was a famous resident of Preston. Thankyou for correcting my mistake.
You speedy deleted this article, but it was recreated by the same author. So I have now listed it at AfD. I guess this is the correct thing to do in this situation? MSGJ (talk) 16:34, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
((db-spam))
. Regards, —Animum (talk) 16:37, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Hey Animum, just wanted to tell you that this user's contribs are all vandalism or very close to it. I'd suggest a re-block, to be honest. I don't think a name change will help here. GlassCobra 18:01, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
I appreciate that. Jehochman Talk 18:26, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
I am concerned with your unblock of Jehochman because:
1. You haven't discussed your unblock.
2. Your quick unblock has resulted in Jehochman not contemplating his violation of policy.
3. Your reason is incompatible with the block reason. The block was not punitive but meant to encourage reflection and to prevent further damage to WP. See where I write "This block is done to prevent further damage to WP by preventing your edits"
4. Your quick action may lead to gloating (Jehochman notes that he has been unblocked) and empower him to violate even more WP policies.
5. If you would have discussed the matter with me, I may have shortened the period substantially.
6. This case was a prime case of showing that there is no cabal. Now this case can be cited by critics as evidence of cabal.
Archtransit (talk) 18:28, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
You may which to look at this, which was put on the IP talkpage after your warning. You may consider it a personal attack. D.M.N. (talk) 17:34, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
↑ = self-explanatory. Hope you're doing well; say hi to people for me. I'll be back eventually... :) Nihiltres{t.l} 19:21, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
This script is nice but, could you add support for the sandbox talk too. Its also something that would need resetting. Compwhiz II(Talk)(Contribs) 01:49, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi! Thanks for the unblock. I'm hardly the person to cite WP:AGF and WP:BITE, but may I offer a rule-of-thumb suggestion as a possible barometer of "seemingly random"? Compare lengths of usernames to other things folks memorise. Definitely we could agree that seven characters (the length of a North American phone number, for instance) is within that range. The question of course is--when does it become confusingly random? I can't be sure, but I think we have to send the shorter ones to WP:RFCN or just ignore them sometimes. Thanks again for your reconsideration. MKoltnow 03:58, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
NHRHS2010 talk 01:33, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
I don't know if the anon's comments one his talk page are vandalism or what - they seem somewhat stalker-esque. I don't think I'm going to revert them again even though it seems to be coming from multiple IP's. --Veritas (talk) 04:28, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello,
This article was speedily deleted. It was written in a very neutral voice (like Panther Express and Akamai Technologies). If it is not acceptable, then please edit or provide guidance on how best to post.
Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeffkim511 (talk • contribs) 17:58, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
What was wrong with them? Why did you make the comments? I would appreciate if you reverted what ever criticisms you have, unless you can recheck them and still find them to be valid.
Keep up the good work. 90.192.179.178 (talk) 20:34, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
Sorry it happen accidently.I was in malayalam wikipedia accidently I saved it in the wrong window. Once again sorry
I like the automatic font on your talk page - how did you set it like that? --Veritas (talk) 04:30, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
thanks animum much appreciated--Thevardonrushes (talk) 18:23, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
You deleted the article on YouthLaw far too quickly. I had just started it.
YouthLaw is an excellent source of easy to understand information about law in NZ. I have no personal connection with YouthLaw.
Please reinstate what you deleted and let me finish the article. Romiben
Of couse it doesn't after one paragraph ! But once I had finished it it would be sufficiently "notable". —Preceding unsigned comment added by Romiben (talk • contribs) 02:32, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
NZ newspaper journalist's turn to Youthlaw for legal advice when they need it for their artices about issues of relevance to childen/youth in NZ.
Two examples of articles where YouthLaw's soliciters are quoted: http://www.stuff.co.nz/4236643a6442.html http://www.stuff.co.nz/4364664a6442.html
This meets Wikipedia' criteria for notability.
A company, corporation, organization, team, religion, group, product, or service is notable if it has been the subject of coverage in secondary sources. Such sources must be reliable, and independent of the subject. The depth of coverage of the subject by the source must be considered. If the depth of coverage is not substantial, then multiple independent sources should be cited to establish notability. Trivial or incidental coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not sufficient to establish notability. Once notability is established, primary sources may be used to add content. Ultimately, and most importantly, all content must be attributable.
The "secondary sources" in the criterion include reliable published works in all forms, such as (for example) newspaper articles, books, television documentaries, and published reports by consumer watchdog organizations —Preceding unsigned comment added by Romiben (talk • contribs) 02:49, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
I sent one at you just now. · AndonicO Hail! 02:23, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
Could i also request you delete the talk page for the same reason? Simply south (talk) 03:09, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm not sure this is a malicious vandalism only account - just someone who is lost a bit. I am not sure a permanent block is indicated here. --NrDg 04:13, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi Animum. I see that on 14 January 2008 you deleted "Warren S. Brown" because "PROD left uncontested for 5 days". I'm the article's creator and I had no idea the PROD was on the article (I've been very busy and whoever placed it didn't inform me). The stub article said "Warren S. Brown is director of the Lee Edward Travis Research Institute at the Fuller Theological Seminary and Professor of Psychology in the School of Psychology. He also served as the principal editor and contributor to "Whatever Happened to the Soul?: Scientific and Theological Portraits of Human Nature" (1998) and was editor and contributor to "Understanding Wisdom: Sources, Science and Society" (2000)." He's a member of the International Society for Science and Religion which is strong prima facie evidence of notability, and in fact he has written 5 books and has over 190 published papers 3 some of which are cited over 50 times. Could you undelete please and I'd be happy to expand the stub? Many thanks NBeale (talk) 04:15, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your patronizing comment but I suggest you review your opinion. 172.159.209.28 (talk) 01:58, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
I edited the article Master-slave (technology) from the IP address 87.116.176.242 (I forgot to login) and you immediately reverted the edit. It looks like it was reverted automatically for some reason, but I can't be certain. Was it accidental or did I make some mistake? BytEfLUSh (talk) 04:12, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Why did you delete it. I just said its a commercial and the athletes who are in it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ee master (talk • contribs) 17:36, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Nice to have you. · AndonicO Hail! 22:28, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
I wanted to know that should not there be a mention of the 1992 attack by muslim terorists on Karnak temple complex ? I guess you have worked on this page. Jon Ascton (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 02:32, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
What happened? Yours and mine are not displaying correctly. « ₣M₣ » 01:14, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
NHRHS2010 (talk · contribs) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding ((subst:Smile)) to their talk page with a friendly message.
I am extremely curious as to why you removed my corrections to the terminology in the article on the Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution. The term "privilege" is the standard legal idiom, and is technically accurate. It is the standard term used in all of the major cases cited in the article, and is therefore properly sourced. For example, the first Supreme Court case listed, Malloy v. Hogan, begins "n this case we are asked to reconsider prior decisions holding that the privilege against self-incrimination is not safeguarded against state action by the Fourteenth Amendment." Brown v. Missippi refers to "the privilege against self-incrimination." Miranda v. Arizona begins with the statement that it deals with "the necessity for procedures which assure that the individual is accorded his privilege under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution." In general, rules of law which limit a person's obligation to provide testimony or evidence are referred to as "privileges" -- attorney-client privilege, priest-penitent privilege, spousal privilege, and so on (even "executive privilege" follows this practice). Rule 501 of the Federal Rules of Evidence is simply captioned "Privileges," [4] and the accompanying interpretive notes discuss "the privilege of a witness not to testify." Other encyclopedias follow this practice; note the britannica online entry here [5]. I would appreciate it if you allow me to again refine the text of the article to reflect standard usage in the legal field. I am quite certain that there are many less carefully written sources which use the term "right" in this context, but I would think Wikipedia strives to maximize technical accuracy. Minos P. Dautrieve (talk) 04:28, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for that unblock looks like I was caught in some crossfire! Æon Insanity Now! 00:35, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi Animum, I believe you are using my AVT tool, it has been updated. Please place
var vspeed = 1000;
on the top of your monobook.js to allow it to continue working. (If you could make the default 1000, unless otherwise declared, that would be great. Thedjatclubrock :) (T/C) 03:46, 31 January 2008 (UTC)