User talk:(aeropagitica)/Archive 29

This is an archive of past discussions with User:(aeropagitica). 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.

Archive 25

←

Archive 27

Archive 28

Archive 29

Archive 30

Archive 31

FYI - 69.206.229.231 is back editing the Tiny Toons and Animaniacs articles - stronger block may be necessary this time. TheRealFennShysa 23:18, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Can you report vandalism to WP:AIV, please? I'm going offline now as it's past midnight here in the UK. Thanks, (aeropagitica) 23:19, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

I've blocked after a quick review but the reporting to AIV is the better thing to do in future in case an admin is offline and the vandalism goes unchecked. Regards, (aeropagitica) 23:23, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

WAT UP i just like to know if i can put Man U 7 and Roma 1 on the man utd website or will i get blocked agian —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ian 101 (talk • contribs)

If you look at Manchester United#The_Treble_.281998-99.29, you will see that the result has already been recorded. (aeropagitica) 22:43, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Archive_29, thank you very much for your support in my successful RfA. I am thankful and humbled by the trust that the community has placed in me, and I welcome any comments, questions or complaints that you may have. Again, thank you for your support, and happy editing! Hemlock Martinis 22:17, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry... Ratónbat 18:00, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your helping of the issue on the Stewart Reive page. Keep up the good work! Stewy r 16:11, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Hey (aeropagitica). Thanks for supporting my unsuccessful RFA this week. It seemed by your comments that I almost may have had a different nom :). I hope to keep helping and improving Wikipedia alongside you. --TeckWiz ^ParlateContribs_@(Lets go Yankees!) 01:17, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I believe this user may have been blocked in error. I can't see deleted edits, but I can tell you that "Richard Mcbeef" is a reference to a play written by the Virginia Tech Massacre shooter -- it was not a personal attack. His other two edits are neither vandalism nor personal attacks. See also [1]. Thanks, Pan Dan 04:46, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Reviewed and unblocked. Regards, (aeropagitica) 05:08, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks :) Pan Dan 05:09, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Could you please explain your deletion of essential information from Cardington, Bedfordshire, as you made no attempt to do so at the time. I live within a few miles of Cardington, and Shortstown, and I consider the information I added essential to clear up issues that confuse even some of us locals. I note that you live in Gloucestershire, so it is quite unlikely that you have expertise on village san parished in Bedfordshire. Thank you. Beorhtric 17:00, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

This edit was to correct the title case of the section and my error was to also revert content that you added. I have corrected this now, thank you for the heads up. I used to live in Bedford and did so for fifteen years, so I do know about the areas in question! Remember to assume good faith on the part of other editors. All good contributors will respond to polite enquiries in a like manner! Regards, (aeropagitica) 17:05, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

I consider your inferences that I was impolite and did not assume good faith to be unwarranted, and i the light of this treatment, I may stop contributing to wikipedia. Beorhtric 17:17, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't think that there is any need to over-react or to leave the project. Words on a screen can be taken in any number of ways, unlike a spoken or face-to-face conversation. I didn't mean to imply abuse on either of our parts. It would be a shame if you stopped contributing with local knowledge as that can substantially improve an article. Regards, (aeropagitica) 17:21, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

The above mentioned is a sockpuppet of Mr oompapa so its not worth warning him and he has already created 35 accounts going by similar names so its easier for admins to block the user instead of warning him....--Cometstyles 17:14, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the information. I see that you have tagged the userpage accordingly, thank you for that. (aeropagitica) 17:17, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Excuse me but you wrote on my talk page dont introduce vandalism. what vandalism did i do Slap the fish 20:59, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Writing empty articles such as Jack-offism with edit summaries containing 'please don't delete' is not considered a constructive way of contributing to the encyclopedia. Empty articles do not serve researchers and are open to being speedily deleted in order not to waste peoples' time in visiting them. Develop your articles in a user sub-page sandbox and publish them when they are ready if you do not have enough time to develop what you have to say in to a stub. (aeropagitica) 21:03, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks so much for taking the time to comment on my my RfA, which was successful. I learned a lot from the comments, I appreciate everything that was said, and I'll do my best to deserve the community's trust. Thanks again! --Shirahadasha 04:13, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

When and if you have a moment, can you take a look at this article. I see nothing redeeming in it whatsoever. It is reposted content, I tagged it for speedy deletion, and the creator removed the tag. Now, he is leaving me messages, and basically making a pest of himself. Someone needs to explain to him the meaning of nonsense. Thanks for your time and efforts. ----Charles 04:41, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Done. (aeropagitica) 04:51, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. ---Charles 04:57, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't know if you remember, but a few months ago i had a failed rfa. Could you please tell me if you think i'm ready for another one? —Preceding unsigned comment added by DavidJJJ (talk • contribs)

I see that you have undergone an editor review since your first RfA and the advice given was sound. With only sixteen edits in the policyspace since your RfA - four of those to your editor review - and sixty-odd user Talk edits, a lot without edit summaries, show that you need to participate in more admin-related tasks and with a greater frequency too. You can force edit summaries in your user preferences at the top right-hand side of the Wikipedia window. Be careful to keep your comments civil though, as edit summaries such as this can be held against you as giving in to stress and biting an editor. We mustn't be anything other than polite and civil when dealing with vandals, the same as dealing with good editors in fact.

Contributions to the encyclopedia appear to be in order, but I would brush up on standards for stub articles such as Nathan Leone and ensure that you categorise and tag the articles appropriately, including sources and references to demonstrate notability where appropriate. Admins do patrol new articles and recent changes looking for such things to either delete, tag or improve. It's a job for you to do as well and where better to start than with your own articles? This would show confidence that you could talk with other editors about policies and guidelines with confidence, knowing that you were conversant in their application.

In summary, I wouldn't support you for administrator now but I would look favourably upon you in the future when I see evidence of a high standard of contribution in all of the main spaces in Wikipedia over a sustained period of time, four or more months off the top of my head. If you forget about adminship and concentrate on being a good editor you will find that the position tends to seek you out instead!

By the way, I'm the type of editor who likes to see evidence presented neatly for me to examine, so signing your Talk page edit above and linking to you RfA would really have made a better impression. It's an easy thing to forget when you're in a rush and we all make mistakes, but when you're asking about suitability for the admin tools this tends to stand out a lot. Use the 'show preview' button to guard against these mistakes in future, if you don't already. Regards, (aeropagitica) 19:16, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Id just like to thank you for revitalizing my faith in wikipedia. I have always considered it a viable source for information, but a friend of mine disagreed. To prove it, we made a few bogus pages and even added a line to a widely popular page. These bogus enteries were deleted within minutes! Very well done, I congratulate this website and its admin.

I look forward to contributing source based material in the future.

Thank you, xlledx

Could you add a notice about the usage {{Vandal|'name'}} and {{IPVandal|'IP address'}} on WP:AIV itself? I did not see one, and I cannot figure how to add it. Thank you. Rjgodoy 22:00, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Well... actually it is <!--commented-->. Could it be visible? Rjgodoy 02:39, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

I find the deletion of this article the first time completely understandable, however, the second time, it contained no personal attacks, and only information on a political figure, albeit a local one. I do not personally know the subject, but am aware of him due to local campaigning far in advance of his future presidential race. Just curious. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MLMonster (talk • contribs)

The promise of future notability does not confer present notability upon an individual. National and international political figures can be notable but local political people are usually not. See WP:BIO for details of notability. Regards, (aeropagitica) 04:55, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree that this guy Mtm8186 deserved a block, but how long is a "period of Kevin Joe"? ---Charles 04:59, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

I changed that slip to 24 hours immediately; you'll need to refresh the page. Regards, (aeropagitica) 05:01, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

I see it. I just thought I'd give you a hard time. Cheers! ---Charles 05:09, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi there - you left the following message on my talk page, but I don't think that I did create a page called Michael Josten - some mistake, perhaps?Gilesbennett 16:22, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

My mistake, apologies. (aeropagitica) 16:37, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Would you mind undoing it? Otherwise it looks like I'm blanking criticism! Thanks Gilesbennett 08:20, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

thanks, i will decline this invitation then, if u believe i should dio that whaoag 22:47, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting my talk page. Wow! I was accused of being a sockpuppet of Jimmy Wales! -Mschel 17:34, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

That notorious long-term vandal? Who would think such a thing? ;) No problem! Cheers, (aeropagitica) 17:35, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Please dont add the sock tag to Mr Oompapa's socks as per new deny policy to stop WP:MOV..Thanks..Its better to just Block and forget..Cheers..--Cometstyles 17:38, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi iam new to wiki in editing therefore i need some help learning what i can or cannot do and how to insert pictures and other things that are a bit confusing --Rws killer2 21:23, 26 April 2007 (UTC) Thank you for responding and i have a question. How come most admins seem to be on 24/7???--Rws killer2 21:28, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

The English Wikipedia is open for business 24/7, 365 days of the year. As there are over 1000 admins spread around the globe, you can be sure that at least one of them will be online at any given time of the day/week/month/year. It won't always be the same one. This is a voluntary position, so we can come and go as we please. You will find, as with most communities, that there exists a cadre of hard-core committed admins who come on and perform their duties most days on a regular basis. This is how we keep on top of the backlogs that build up. Regards, (aeropagitica) 21:39, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

This user has, I think, been caught in some collateral damage secondary to a block you have imposed elsewhere. His block-log shows nothing, but as a fairly new wielder of the mop I am a little hesitant to remove your block without checking with you that I am not missing something. Could I ask you to take a look?--Anthony.bradbury 22:25, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, the block you imposed was on User:Merkin5.0--Anthony.bradbury 22:27, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

If for some reason they were sharing the same IP address I have tweaked the block on Merkin5.0 to allow editors from their IP address through to edit Wikipedia. I can't think of another reason why one registered account being blocked would have this fallout for another registered user. Thanks for telling me, (aeropagitica) 23:13, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

AOL site, perhaps?--Anthony.bradbury 23:21, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Their IP addresses are randomly allocated with every page refresh, I believe. The block on that address would potentially affect many hundreds of users. (aeropagitica) 23:36, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Hello, as an admin will you do me a favour and indef block my bot account User:EMBot, until I rewrite the programming and properly build it, so it can't cause any harm in the mean time. Please remember to disable the autoblocker. Eaomatrix 18:05, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Done. (aeropagitica) 18:07, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi it's me again. I have a question, how do you make it so that even though a word is not capitalized, people can still go to the article. I made a article called Clan S4L but if you do not capitalized the L and make it s4l, it will not go respod asap thanks--Rws killer2 21:07, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Please add new comments and questions/requests at the bottom of my Talk page and not the top. If you want to link a word to an article then you have to use the pipe character, '|'. To link as you have mentioned above, [[Clan S4L|Clan s4l]] is the correct layout. (aeropagitica) 21:19, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

It's alright that u deleted my article because now i know a little about what i can't put in wikipedia. Thanks for the advice about putting my questions at the botton of the talk page--Rws killer2 21:27, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

I am a new user. I believbe you just deleted my new page entitled "Danversport Trust". Why did it get deleted? What did I do wrong? - —Preceding unsigned comment added by Edsanborn (talk • contribs)

The article was deleted because it did not assert the notability of its subject. Read through the links on the welcome salutation below to get more of an idea about contributing to Wikipedia. Also, please remember to sign your Talk page comments with four tildes, ~~~~, so that your questions can be responded to quickly and easily. Regards, (aeropagitica) 17:13, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

As I'm a newbie right now, I'd like to see how more experienced administrators would respond in my situation, so I learn off that. Thanks for the tip. bibliomaniac15 23:22, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Does this [2] allow me to give him/her a last vandalism warning? Thegreyanomaly 23:23, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

You can give a final warning at any point, dependent upon the severity of the vandalism encountered. The diff linked to AIV doesn't help me very much. If you have a diff that demonstrates vandalism after several warnings on the editors' Talk page then you can use that as evidence for a final warning tag. AIV is, I believe, for the reporting of vandals who continue on their reckless course past a final warning. Regards, (aeropagitica) 23:27, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

This is his major change that he has made many times http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Walking_with_Cavemen&diff=127359284&oldid=126996961

he/she has been warned on their talk page three times and they continued to full vandalize the page, removing all edits in order to get their non-ref'ed, original research criticism, so I'll give the user a final warning. Thank you for your explanation Thegreyanomaly 23:35, 1 May 2007 (UTC).

Actually, I feel I should not do it unless he reverts one more time —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Thegreyanomaly (talk • contribs) 23:42, 1 May 2007 (UTC).

Thanks for uploading Image:A home of your own dvd.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. (ESkog)^(Talk) 16:48, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Well first off, I kinda hate the way the message system works here, but I guess there's not much I can do about that. I believe you did delete the PBr page I made?

I was wondering if you could go more in depth about why you deleted it. It's my understanding that articles are meant for notable things - celebrities, groups etc. While PBr is indeed a small group, the fact that it is a nationwide fraternity that's recognized at more than one school should be enough for it to be considered notable. Yes, the page was crappy, but I was working on it, and I read that it's ok for pages to slowly get better.

Also, in the message that was sent to me by you I was directed to "criteria in WP:BIO" which is the notability of people. This doesn't make sense to me because I created an article about a group, not a person.

I am also not advertising the group - what would be the point? I'm not even advertising the chapter that I'm a part of. The links I posted in the article did not contain advertisements or banner ads, so there's no profit involved.

I'm very frustrated by this system, and I'd really like a better explanation than "you wrote about a person who is not notable." (especially since it was not about a person) Neutonnn 23:36, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

WP:BIO and WP:ORG both apply to your article. You admit yourself that it is small and the article didn't contain anything that asserted the notability of the group/organisation. If an article exists in the main space then it is subject to the policies and guidelines as all other articles. If you have evidence from reliable sources that the group is notable then I suggest that you develop the article in a user sub-page before publication and have someone review your efforts before commiting it to the article space. (aeropagitica) 23:47, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

OK, then. I guess that's that. Thank you.Neutonnn 00:09, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice and removing the admin request, I was actually just about to do it. Nuclearj 23:58, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Replied on my talk page. Rklawton 19:50, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

HalfShadow 20:29, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

According to the block log, this IP address was blocked for three months just a few minutes ago. I can protect their Talk page from being edited by anons if they are removing the warnings. (aeropagitica) 20:34, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

User:Jhfireboy/Admin Opposer Thanks

I'm backed up on Wikipedia work to do, but I was just sort of wondering where your username came from. Cool Blue^{talk to me} 13:58, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Areopagitica? That's what I thought it was :) Majorly (hot!) 14:11, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

The origin of my username. Thanks for the interest! (aeropagitica) 18:45, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you (aeropagitica), for voting on my RfA. Although it failed, I will try to improve in the ways pointed out to me, and maybe I will become an admin next time. If you have any comments, questions, etc., you know where to go. ¿SFGiДnts! ☺ ☻ 21:47, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Hey (aeropagitica); long time no see ;) you might or might not have noticed, but I'm not armed with a mop to help me with my duties around the encyclopedia. More to the point, I've been actively using them (you just beat me to a block not two seconds ago ;) so if I slip up, kick me and tell me where I went wrong!

Regards,
Anthony 23:53, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Hello! That's funny - your user page says that you are an admin here! I get beaten to blocks a lot of the time too - guess it shows that we have lots of busy admins about the place, which is a good thing! Regards, (aeropagitica) 00:01, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Hehe, I was afraid someone was going to beat me (again!). I spent so much time fiddling around with the template because I kept writing it wrong. It was Template:RfA talk and I typed in everything but that. Guess I should have used Copy and Paste. :-P Nishkid64 (talk) 00:29, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

1. Shoessss (talk · contribs)Ready to move to the next level, but would like some advice and help on the best possible way to avoid any and all land mines. Will let my record speak for itself.Thanks in advance for any and all help.Shoessss 02:35, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Hello. I am a fairly regular visitor to Wikipedia. Although I do not often sign in, I did create an account under the name Warwolf. However, I have been unable to log on, as the stored password I had on my browser did not work when I tried to sign in today. I tried to remember what said password was, but unfortunately, it's been a long time since I had intially used it during account creation, I have since forgotten it. My ip address, according to the website is (at the moment, though I've seen my IP address listed as different numbers before on here, is 72.228.38.42. Please help! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.228.38.42 (talk • contribs)

I think that if you forget your password then that's pretty much it. I don't know of a way of finding out what it would be legally. You'll more-than-likely have to create a new account if you want to keep on contributing in a logged-in capacity, sorry. (aeropagitica) 21:08, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Can you please help me with the right licene for that picture?
Thanks --D-Kuru (17:58, 8 May 2007 (UTC))

Question reposted on to the Help Desk. (aeropagitica) 21:33, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

I would like to kindly ask you to restore the damage done to the page Libertyville High School. Nearly half of the page has been deleted. Thank You, Libertyville 01:31, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

To what? To this? This was the version that you left behind. You can revert vandalism on an article yourself by looking through the edit history of the article and restoring at a point prior to the occurance of vandalism. Regards, (aeropagitica) 04:57, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

I have recently applied for an Rfa. it didn't go that good, as you know! I was wondering whether you would be able to Admin coach me. Leave your answer on my talk page. Thanks! -Billy227 ^{talk contribs sndbx usbx} 15:09, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

I think that following the advice that I left on your Talk page will be enough for you for a few months. Get some experience behind you first of all and admin coaching can come when you have definite ideas and experience of the areas in which you would like to contribute. Regards, (aeropagitica) 17:18, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

I've been adding a definition for IHST, but it has been already deleted ... May I know if I did anything wrong ?! --- With Regards dNetGuru —Preceding unsigned comment added by DNetGuru (talk • contribs)

Firstly, please sign your Talk page comments with four tildes, ~~~~, or use the sig button at the top of the editing window . Secondly, articles that contain nothing but red links are of no value to researchers, as the links to items that they purport to explain are empty, so following them through is a futile experience. Disambiguation pages exist to differentiate similarly-titled articles to save confusion. Perhaps if the articles to which you wanted to link existed and were notable according to the policies and guidelines the disambiguation page would be valid. As it stood, an empty page with red links was of little-or-no use so it was speedily deleted. Regards, (aeropagitica) 21:10, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, I was just writing definitions for each red link ! Anyways, thanks for keeping this site clean :) Regards --DNetGuru 21:14, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

I would kindly request you to undelete the page 2on.com the article in question is definitely not intended as spam. It puts forward a simple test case of the psychological phenomenon of cognitive dissonance through the means of a website which is daily visited by approximately 15000 people. I was hoping others would elaborate on the brief description I provided about this interesting subject. Dewaal 20:53, 11 May 2007 (UTC) John de Waal

If you think that your article has been deleted contrary to the policies and guidelines then please take your business case for restoration to the deletion review section, where it will be assessed and actioned accordingly. A website with an Alexa rank of >48k is not notable according to WP:WEB, so it was deleted accordingly. Regards, (aeropagitica) 21:16, 11 May 2007 (UTC)