User talk:Blue520

This user may have left Wikipedia. Blue520 has not edited Wikipedia since October of 2019. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

Welcome!

Hello, Blue520, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!  Nufy8 01:49, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing's wrong, I just noticed that you seemed relatively new and were lacking the welcome template that is usually given to new users. Nufy8 02:45, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia! I would like to apologize on behalf of all respectable Wikipedians for the person that vandalized your user page. I can assure you 99% of us aren't so mean or stupid. I hope your time here is both productive and enjoyable!PiccoloNamek 14:11, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I actually borrowed it from someone else myself. :)PiccoloNamek 09:02, 6 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you restored the prod tag on The Golden Sabre of Muji after the author removed it. Actually, the author was right and you were wrong. The correct way to object to a prod is by removing the prod tag. Prod is exclusively for uncontroversial deletions, and even though the creator didn't explain their reasoning, they clearly objected. If you think the article ought to be deleted after someone objects, you simply move the discussion to AfD where everyone can say their peace.

Please see Wikipedia:Proposed_deletion#What_this_process_is_NOT_for for the guidelines. NickelShoe 17:16, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Valid point, thankyou for your input--Blue520 09:27, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for moving it to AFD and letting me know! FreplySpang (talk) 16:09, 9 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

now that i showed you just what a cool word skux is, with its multiple applications, try and help save it!. Skux is not a word simply made up in a school day. It took many years of deliberation, and intense concentration / numerous failed attempts to produce that word. DON'T LET THE EFFORT GO TO WASTE!!! join the fight today, by asking that skux remain, and telling everyone you know to do likewise!!!!

• Well if you don't put you signature to messages and vandalise user pages, you can piss off and waste some one else's time.--Blue520 11:09, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I apologise. I was unfamiliar with the new proposed deletion policy at the time I picked up the article in Category:Stubs while stub sorting (although I knew the {{prod}} template existed) and read the message as "This article has been proposed for deletion; if you feel this should be deleted, request its deletion, otherwise protest this proposition". I apologise. Clearly this was an uncontroversial deletion candidate, and was probably worthy of speedy deletion in the first place. ProD was indeed the right way to go with this article. I'm sorry, and have now acquainted myself with WP:PROD. Thanks, and apologies. haz _(user talk)^e 09:25, 19 March 2006

• Thanks for replying, please see the message on your talk page.--Blue520 10:03, 19 March 2006 (UTC)\[reply]

I noticed you added a prod tag to this article and write to explain my subsequent removal of the tag. Consistent with WP:PROD, after a tag has once been removed, it should not be re-added, irrespetive of the propriety of the original removal or the (arguably) untoward behavior of the remover in failing to explain his/her removal on the talk page or in an edit summary. Even as I likely will vote to delete the article should it be listed on AfD (I'm not convinced that it's original research, at least in view of our general tendency against ascribing that appellative to sundry video game summaries, notwithstanding some of my objections to that [ostensibly settled] policy), I don't think we should act contrary to policy here, and I expect you simply didn't notice that the prod tag had already been added and subsequently been removed (I, myself, having made that error on two occasions now review edit histories to ensure the tag hasn't already been applied). In any case, I left a note on the talk page of Rmhermen, the original prodder, to the effect that he may want to list the article for deletion, so likely the page will be taken care of in any case. Cordially, Joe 05:16, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for the note, please see your talk page for a response.--Blue520 06:29, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My reply is on my talk page to keep the thread together and readable. --Kbh3^rdtalk 04:44, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks...still a bit new at the deletion gig... -- Mkamensek ^(talk) -The LeftOverChef 16:05, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please see your talk page for a response.--blue520 16:19, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Terribly sorry, just trying to help where possible. It looked like vandalism to me. I will try to ask next time. Dessydes 10:31, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for making the redirect. I was going to do it after I finished with the deletion process, but my connection started acting wonky on me locally. Smerdis of Tlön 16:22, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Blue520. I'm here to offer apologies! I forgot to watch the AfD on Foxhole Campsite and deleted the section of the other article you'd referenced in the AfD. Sorry - I wouldn't had I known you'd mentioned it as a proposed solution!

The section was deleted (together with a raft of similar ones from related articles) because it was a "what I did on my holidays" thing - all recommendations for pubs to eat in, places to stay, things to visit, that type of thing. POV and OR, so it had to go.

Apologies if I offended/appeared to ignore you. ➨ ❝REDVERS❞ 10:10, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I think i meant to do WP:CSD, but now i figured out how to do it, thanks Bill Sayre 16:03, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This time is was step 2, I guess fix whatever I did wrong. Bill Sayre 05:31, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

hi there, i edited the honesty company entry to make it neutral point of view, using the Hallmark and American Greeting card entries as templates. i've never used wikipedia before. do you have any more suggestions for me? i'd really appreciate it! thanks~ kimberly

Hi, Kimberly (Hoco)the message left on User talk:Hoco by Mareino sums it up very well and there is nothing that I can add without sounding redundant. All the best.--blue520 04:26, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, this is a question over your removal of the speedy deletion notice from AnimA (JK2) with the edit comment of "no speedying once AfD has begun". This is the first time I have seen this, so I have had a look around and could not find it or the like written down any where or something similar given for a direction, but it is easy to very easy to be text blind. Could you please point me in the right direction. Thanks.--blue520 09:33, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Blue520. Wikipedia:Deletion_Policy#Lag times states that "Once a page is listed for deletion by listing on one of the different pages, the nomination is kept open for a period of time to allow for community comment." We'll have to wait 5 days for an AfD to end. I might skip that if there is copyvio or clear vandalism. How's that ? -- PFHLai 09:36, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I guessed I had missed it some where. It was just the first time I had seen it.--blue520 10:12, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

About the stifillis article: I was the one nominating it on AfD. I didn't know it was already deleted once at AfD. It's been speedily deleted at least twice already. It qualifies under CSD as a repost. I've withdrawn my AfD nomination, there's no need for it to be up there anymore. Therefore, I've reverted your addition of the AfD tag. ⇒ SWATJester ^Ready Aim _Fire! 07:15, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for the message, please see reply on your talk page.--blue520 07:22, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How you gon' play me like that? Maybe you should discuss my article before deleting it for good.-JizzyJonII 11;45, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

I did not delete it, that would have been an admin. The most likely reason that it was deleted this time was that it was a repost of deleted material. As for deletion of the original article form memory was it had problems with verifiability WP:V but you will have to check the deletion log for the page [1] and ask the deleting admin.--blue520 01:21, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well done on the search - it wasn't apparent from your vote, and, yes, the key words are all on google! I was concerned about the votes before mine. I know one should assume good faith, but there seemed no indication that other people had done any research before casting their vote. I am concerned that the statistical emphasis on RfA, for example, encourages quantity over quality on these matters. Tyrenius 17:13, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, quantity over quality is very important. I was annoyed at my self for misssing out that search combination (+ knife) for I tried a number including pasting large sections of the text into Google. Some of my response in the AfD may not have made sense, WP:W was suppose to have been WP:V - Again quality. Thanks to you and PaddyMatthews for finding that it was verifiable.--blue520 04:57, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, you removed the AfD notice from the page Galinda Hobsquatch and replaced it with a {{prod}}. I was just wondering why? --blue520 07:37, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, I was clearing out the speedy deletes and I think I thought someone subst'ed in the speedy template. Thanks for putting the AfD back, I'm leaning towards delete but I didn't think it was CSD A7 'able -- Tawker 14:36, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I presumed something like that, but thought to ask just in case I was missing something. I also can't see a strong argument for CSD A7, any way by the looks of it not speedy deleting it will not do any harm and it give people a chance to make something good out if it (may not possible though).--blue520 16:04, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ooh, thanks for spotting that one! Luckily I still had the tab open - there was a "this edit was not saved due to a loss of session data" error. Another click and the AfD header is now in place. Cheers! ➨ ❝REDVERS❞ 10:38, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi earlier this month you deleted a number of articles created by Ryan Lanham as copyvio, such as Charles Goodsell and Max Stephenson. I was wondering what was the source of the material? Thanks.--blue520 13:39, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That author created an entire series of articles based on copy ripped from academic university websites. For example, his article "Barry Bozeman" was a copyright violation of http://cns.asu.edu/about/people/bozeman.htm. Since I pointed out to him that this was not allowed, he recreated several of the articles with his own copy so the recreated versions are not copyright violations. Is this what you needed. Best, --Alabamaboy 14:03, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that was help full, thanks. Looks like I might still have to do some checking. It was I had noticed that a number of the articles in this joint AfD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Refounding Public Administration and previously been deleted (or one with a similar name had) and was just checking. Thank you again for taking the time.--blue520 14:15, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there, I've updated the link in the article, and moved the two votes to the correct AFD discussion. Hopefully that's everything :-) If you need anything else, be sure to let me know. --lightdarkness ^(talk) 14:17, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for voting! Thanks so much for voting on my request for adminship. I have decided to withdraw my nomination as it seems that consensus will not be reached. If you voted in support, thanks for putting your trust in me to be a good admin. If you voted in opposition, thank you as well for your criticism as it will only help me be a better Wikipedian and perhaps help if/when I apply for adminship again sometime in the future.

--Mets501^{talk • contribs} 01:48, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My bad, it's getting late here in NZ obviously! Thanks for the heads up and apologies again - Glen ^T_C (Stollery) 09:43, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just noticed you're from Oz. Small world :) - Glen ^T_C (Stollery) 09:45, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yep one thing I've noticed is that once you've been here awhile and seem to be known as an active wikipedian then your edits are often just taken for granted to be error-free and not double checked... well done for picking it up :) - Glen ^T_C (Stollery) 10:11, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the (initial) support, and later constructive criticism, on my RFA. Unfortunately, it did not achieve consensus. I look forward to your support in a couple months when I apply again. Holler at me if you need anything. ⇒ SWATJester ^Ready Aim _Fire! 01:14, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Blue520,

Thanks for voting on my RFA! I appreciate your faith in me, and was overwhelmed by the positive response to my RFA; for it shows that at least I'm doing something right. :) I've started working to improve myself already, and I hope that next time, things run better, and maybe, just maybe, one day we can bask on the shores of Admintopia together. Thanks and cheers, _-M o P-_ 21:51, 3 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, I am happy I could explain it to you. Kim van der Linde ^{at venus} 16:22, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Blue520,

Thank you for any constructive criticism you may have given in my recent unsuccesful RFA. I will strive to overcome any shortcomings you may have mentioned & will try & prove myself worthy of your vote in the future.

Cheers

Srikeit^{(talk ¦ ✉)} 09:54, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, there is a strong tendence to critic and take away articles and information on Wiki right now... Lets try to work together and develop Wikipedia and have a positive approach to build information. --Swedenborg 09:55, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please under stand that the article EcoTheology was empty and contained no information, it normally is a good idea to have an idea on the information to be included before starting a page so the information can meet the criteria of cited, verifiable and reliable sources. Posting articles with no content just on the basis of they could be a interesting project is not the way to build a informative Wikipedia, it is the basis of building a Wikipedia with a huge number of articles containing no information. Also I am not clear by what you mean that there is a "strong tendance to critic and take away articles and information", if you mean that article/information that do not meet the guide lines/criteria for inclusion in Wikipedia or a clear consensus has been reached trough a AfD are deleted, then sorry I don't agree with you. I am happy to work with other editors to build and expand wikipeadia, as long as that dose not preclude consensuses of other editors or ignore guide lines/criteria. --blue520 11:19, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I understand. Trying to follow the rules and policies and I am learning quickly. Have some bad experiences just, a lot of besserwisser and happy to take away info not only on my few articles that I try to start but all over the place... In this case I was just starting and was writning when you posted the speedy delete notion... I hope that people who are involced in Wikipedia is focused more to contributing with new information and developing better then just take away --Swedenborg 11:28, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What do I do to move it into my namespace? ForestH2

You set an article for deletion for a reason that didn't apply.—Preceding unsigned comment added by ESF KRIS (talk • contribs)

Per the article «500» Clan, I think you will find that CSD A7 does apply, but that is up to a admin to decide.--blue520 02:25, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

how it is possible to vandal a page 0.129 time? I'd like to vandal it 0.871 time. __earth ^(Talk) 05:54, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

see reply on your talk--blue520 07:06, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's just that I have problem seeing something that should be a natural number being not a natural number. 10 or 11 would be nice instead. I'll bring this case to the arbitration committee if you refuse to change it to a whole number! =p __earth ^(Talk) 08:48, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

see reply on your talk page--blue520 10:24, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Beside that, umph, no. But you must allow me to vandalize your page 0.871 time! (the number 0.129 is haunting me! Have mercy!) __earth ^(Talk)

see your talk.--blue520 12:52, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry. I was just joking. Will leave you alone. __earth ^(Talk) 13:38, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I missed that. --Dakart 06:03, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blue520, thank you you so much for validating my RfA! I am grateful for all the supportive comments, and have taken both the positive and constructive on board. If I can ever make any improvements or help out in any way, please let me know, ditto if you see me stumble! Thanks again for your much appreciated support.

Deizio talk 18:07, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No worries - I keep doing the same thing myself. Vizjim 12:15, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know about the mistake. I think I made the mistake as a result of pure exhaustion (it's around 1:30am now). Cheers, --mdmanser 15:45, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Haha thanks again. I believe those mistakes must be my cue to go to bed. --mdmanser 15:56, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The count is in, and now I join the crew who wield the mops and pails. Thanks for your support! I pledge to serve both you and Jimbo Wales. If you have anything you need, then please don't think to hesitate. For I am the very model of a grateful admin designate! ♫Bucketsofg✐♪

Hi mate, if you're a fan of Aussie rules, I suggest you take a look at WikiProject AFL (join by adding your name to the list of participants). Also take a look at Category:VFL/AFL players and feel free to drop me a line with any questions, or on the WP:AFL discussion page. Cheers!

Rogerthat ^Talk 13:42, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks blue520 for keeping me straight with the wrong names on my pages. I hope I can keep all this straight before I crash your server:) Do I need to do something to delete the pages that i messed up? --Dematt 17:37, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See your talk for a reply.--blue520 17:44, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi blue520! Thank you for your support of my request for adminship. I look forward to seeing you more around the project. Thanks again, and if you ever see something that I could be doing better, feel free to leave me a message. EWS23 | (Leave me a message!) 02:00, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Blue! I was well aware of the Notability guidelines, just had to cut my writing short when I last left the computer. I am seeing what I can find in the meantime before I have to leave again as far as more citations. Thanks for contributing, I am having fun as a new Wikipedian! Parsssseltongue 03:20, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here, have a flower for tagging that misleading piece of rubbish. I've deleted it as a POV entry of the CSD A7 variety with misleading claims. With those 3 put together, I think that's a valid speedy. - Mgm|^(talk) 09:52, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey thanks for letting me know, it's the first time anyone had said anything! Apparrently I was just being stupid and forgot to close it.--Joe Jklin (T C) 17:15, 2 June 2006 (UTC) (see it's fine now)[reply]

Thanks for labeling the misplaced mediation cabal page for speedy deletion. The user in question has been editing at about 5 posts a minute and I can't exactly keep up - I intended to label it for speedy deletion and got distracted by more responses to his talk page - and from what I hear they are a sockpuppet of an indef-blocked user, so I am looking into that and then will probably go to WP:ANI. Cowman109^Talk 02:13, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your support

In my RfA, which passed!

Wise I'll try to be.

-- Natalya 04:57, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the trust that you had in me when you supported my Request for Adminship. The nomination ended successfully and I am actually overwhelmed by the support that I received. Thanks again! -- Kim van der Linde ^{at venus} 06:48, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, please can you remove the deletion tag from this page. I found this project on the requested articles page, under celebrities. This woman is a celebrity in the UK. Type her name into google... you will find lots of sites. It takes me a while to load the info, and every time I do the page is deleted. I hope you understand this is frustrating!

thanks a lot Murph murph 01:32, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done.--blue520 01:43, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This list has just been splitted from the long time well reputed article House music becouse it was longer than 46 kb. Connect yourself to the Wikipedia, not only to the "recent changes" page, before trying to destroy others' hard work, please stay calm and nice.Brian W 01:33, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note, I think we both reverted at the same time. The page is listed on today's AFD, so hopefully it will get the attention it needs. Ckessler 02:39, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Greetz,

I've checked out the Wikipedia Notability page for music. It appears that you are right. Shad does not qualify as per the rules, eventhough he comes close on numerous counts.

I do have an issue though:

I actually do disagree with this policy to a certain extent. In my case, I heard this artist on the CBC radio podcast and I immediately went to Wikipedia to find out more info about him; but alas, there was no entry. And that's the whole point about Wikipedia: it's a source of information.

What do you think? thx. Big Z 18:01, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See your talk for a reply.--blue520 12:42, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blue, I apologize here (as I did on the CfD page) for my phrasing of the nomination. I didn't mean it to be accusatory or a personal attack, though it clearly came off that way.--Kchase02 (T) 06:38, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I thought it over and withdrew the nomination. However, I also found some interesting new evidence, posted at the CfD page. (I am still withdrawing, anyway.)--Kchase02 T 05:41, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Blue520, and thank you for the supportive vote on my recent RfA! With a final vote of 84/1/4, I have now been entrusted with the mop, bucket and keys. I will be slowly acclimating myself to my new tools over the next months, but welcome any and all feedback and suggestions on how I might be able to use them to help the project. Thanks again! Kukini 05:10, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sir, tank 513 meets every requirement for speedy deletion. Therefore it is not necessary to list it for regular deletion. The user that listed it for regular deletion agrees with me, so please do not reinsert it. Thetruthbelow 07:40, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do not remove AfD tags, even if it meets the grounds for speedy deletion.--blue520 07:41, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If it meets the ground for speedy deletion, no afd tag is needed. The person who nominated it for afd agrees with having it listed for speedy deletion, and you are only duplicating the deletion process. Thetruthbelow 07:43, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Untill the AfD is closed, the tag needs to remain.--blue520 07:45, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am tired of this. Leave it there if you wish, but it is not the proper way. I don't see how you need it up for afd when it is up for speedy deletion. You should read over Wikipedia's policy. Thetruthbelow 07:48, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Even though it is redundant, once a discussion is started the AfD tag must remain on the article until the discussion is closed. Even if it meets the grounds for speedy deletion. I am interested to see how this and my replacement of the AfD tag is contrary to Wikipedia policy.--blue520 08:18, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your support in my RfA, which ended with the result of (74/0/0). If there is anything I can help with feel free to ask. Also, if there is anything I am doing wrong, please point that out as well. I look forward to working with you in the future. Highest regards, DVD+ R/W 02:08, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

heh. thanks for fixing my bumbling first attempt at an AfD nomination. back to reading the instructions before next time i think... W guice 17:05, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I'm the person that nominated Survivor 15 for AFD. On the AFD discussion your vote is Redirect. However, I wrote a comment below it and you said you would just be happy with delete. If you have changed your mind from redirect to delete, please put a strike though redirect and put Delete in bold.TeckWiz^TalkContribs_Guestbook 16:09, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for clearing you vote up so quick.TeckWiz^TalkContribs_Guestbook 16:26, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for voting! Hello Blue520, and thank you so much for voting in my recent RfA. I am pleased to inform you that it passed with a final tally of (119/1/3), into the WP:100, so I have now been cleared for adminship and will soon be soaring above the clouds. I was overjoyed, shocked, and humbled by the tally, and, most importantly, all the support. Thank you. If there is ever anything you need, you know where you can find me. Take care.

--Pilot|guy 22:43, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fine I reduced it! lol Your one true god is David P. A. Hunter, esq. III ^{Talk to me!} 07:53, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello blue i was wondering y you put the jedi order clan description page up for deletion as to be honest it is not biased and is mearly describing the clan which this site is designed to do. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JediMasterHunter (talk • contribs) 16:35, 29 June 2006

I doubt you will be back to read this due to your indefinite block, but the speedy deltion notice was quite clear, the grounds were notablilty. I see that it was taken to a Afd Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jedi Order: Online Gameing Clan with "The result of the debate was speedy delete".--blue520 07:48, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Thank you, Blue, for your support in my RfA. I appreciate your trust and support, and I will do my best to further help this great encyclopædia and community of ours. If there is anything that you feel I can do to help, please let me know. -- Avi 01:47, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The final two lines of the lead have been added (which to me are entirely unencyclopedic) and there's been some capitalization changes, but basically it's the same as the previous copy. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:37, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• By the way, thanks for asking :) - Mgm|^(talk) 10:40, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your vote in my RFA, which succeeded with a final tally of 66-0-4. If there's anything I can help you with now that I'm an admin, please let me know on my talk page. Again, thanks! Mangojuicetalk 21:44, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Blue520, and thank you for your support at my Request for Adminship, which succeeded with an overwhelming final count of (105/2/0). I was very pleased with the outpouring of kind words from the community that has now entrusted me with these tools, from the classroom, the lesson in human psychology and the international resource known as Wikipedia. The Free Encyclopedia. Please feel free to leave me plenty of requests, monitor my actions (through the admin desk on my userpage) and, if you find yourself in the mood, listen to some of what I do in real life. In any case, keep up the great work and have a fabulous day. Grandmasterka 06:30, 19 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I added some to this article that voted for deletion. If you have the time please read the expanded article and reconsider your vote to delete.

Thanks so much for voting, Blue520! Thanks so much for your support vote on my request for adminship! With a final vote count of (82/5/0), it succeeded, and I'm now an administrator! I am thrilled with the overwhelming positive support from the community, and sincerely thank you once again for taking your time to voice your opinion. Feel free to contact me with any comments/suggestions in the future! —Mets501 (talk) 03:46, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies if you're already aware of this, but the Inaugural Adelaide Meetup will take place on Thursday 24th of August at Brougham Place Uniting Church, thanks to Alex Sims. Please indicate if you will attend or not.

This message left by May the Force be with you! Shreshth91($ |-| ŗ 3 $ |-| ţ |-|) on behalf of [ælfəks], 09:43, 13 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Love the table of templates. Your userpage is now my bookmark! __earth ^(Talk) 03:46, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Blue520,

Apologies if you're already aware of this, but I'd like to let you know that the second Adelaide Meetup will take place on Monday 23rd of April at ZUMA Caffe, 56 Gouger Street, Adelaide. The meeting is at 7:30am for breakfast with Wikipedia founder Jimbo Wales. Please see Wikipedia:Meetup/Adelaide/Meetup 2 for more details and indicate if you might attend.

Thanks,–cj | talk 14:13, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
NB: The above message is being delivered to users who are listed at WikiProject Adelaide or in Category:Wikipedians in South Australia with AutoWikiBrowser.

Adelaide Meetup Next: 15 November 2024 Last: 6 March 2020 This box: view • talk • edit

Hi Blue - we're planning a third meetup in Adelaide sometime in the coming weeks, and would love to have you there. If you can, please help decide a location, a date and a time here. Thanks! ~ Riana ⁂ 11:55, 16 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Adelaide Meetup Next: 15 November 2024 Last: 6 March 2020 This box: view • talk • edit

Hi Blue520 - after some planning we've decided to hold the third Adelaide Wikimeetup on Sunday, 17th February, 2008. The meeting will be held at Billy Baxter's in Rundle Mall at 11:30AM. Further details and directions are available on the meetup page. Please RSVP here by 20:00UTC on 15th February 2008 (that's 6AM Saturday for our time zone) so that we can inform the restaurant about numbers. Hope to see you there!

You are receiving this message because you are in Category:Wikipedians in South Australia or are listed at WP:ADEL#Participants. If this has been sent in error, please accept our apologies!

On behalf of Riana ⁂, 11:24, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your efforts on Bellerose, New York. This was my first time placing the hoax template on an article, mostly to see how it works. Obviously I could have done a revert myself. I am curious how you came upon the article to make the correction. I have looked at most of the articles currently flagged as hoaxes, but I have done nothing about them beyond some comments on deletion pages. No matter how many techniques I learn to do on Wikipedia, there always seem to be more to be understood. --DThomsen8 (talk) 13:25, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I came across the article from Category:Wikipedia suspected hoax articles which I occasionally keep an eye on to see what is new. Checked the talk, then the history as it would be uncommon for such information to not have been spotted by other editors and the hoax vandalism edits came clear. Does this help with your curiosity? Have any further questions? Keep up the good work.--blue520 16:16, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I just came across some of your work at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Unaware Ghost and found a fellow 520. Someone other than me is crazy enough to put that number in their Wikihandle?!? :-) For me it represents my birthday. Later, DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 01:32, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Blue520. I declined the speedy deletion you suggested for this article, as I did not believe it to be an uncontroversial deletion. Please feel free to bring it to AfD if you believe the notability is insufficient. Thanks, Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 04:15, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the message, a substantial amount of information was added to the article post my nominating it for speed deletion and you are right with the declining of speedy deletion. --blue520 07:06, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there jibay (shibai in old Tolterian)! Thanks for the notice regarding the rather new article on Komvaey Etëten. Yes I agree there lack references, but Im trying to get details out of the museums, since VELKT was disestablished in 1997, and up to 2001, our parliament have no web site, and even the present web site does not talk much about its socialist past.

Landzhäo laä kannina jaojibay (Thanks anyway), well this is my very first article, you assistance is much appreciated! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dilhet.svoecitey (talk • contribs) 10:16, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User blocked as hoaxer. DS (talk) 12:07, 19 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I saw you reverted the blanking of User talk:89.195.75.39. Per WP:REMOVED, deleting the warnings is permissible and taken as indication that the editor has read and acknowledged the warnings. Regards. -- Whpq (talk) 13:34, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You are right, for some reason I thought it was allowed for registered users only and not for anonymous users. Thank you for pointing out my error.--blue520 13:49, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the club! I didn't know that either until it was pointed out to me by another editor. Regards. -- Whpq (talk) 13:57, 24 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I see you undid some of the changes on a wikipedia entry i made. Are you an admin for wikipedia? I am new to here and have some questions. (dkoshea) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dkoshea (talk • contribs) 19:53, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Sorry I am not an administrator, just an editor like you. How ever feel free to ask questions and I will try to help if possible. I will put a longer reply on your talk page.--blue520 08:43, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I protected that talkpage as per your suggestion. As you revert a lot of vandalism I was wondering if you would like Rollback? If so have a read of wp:rollback, drop me a note confirming your understanding of you can and can't use it and I'll enable it on your account. ϢereSpielChequers 18:08, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note on your talk page.--blue520 18:41, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to weigh in at Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2010_February_2. Thanks. Drmies (talk) 16:37, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, the easiest way to find a simple number is by going to "my preferences", and it will have an edit count there under "number of edits". There are also a number of tools which give you interesting graphs and whatnot, I personally like Soxred93's counter, which you can access here, and wikichecker. Hope that helps! :) - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 15:17, 16 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Will u please stop reverting my edits for no reason?? Mastadon10000 (talk) 14:51, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Your additions are vandalism and you have been warned--blue520 14:57, 25 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Blue :). I've changed the link back since you changed it by accident, and it should point to the article nominated for deletion. As to the other editors, there's not much evidence against them, just new editors !voting the same thing at AfD, which isn't unheard of. I'd suggest tagging them with {{spa}}, and then the closing administrator will know to check them out. You are of course free to open an SPI case, I'm not really that savvy with SPI, but all the users appear to have similar editing. And is they are they would be "acting in a disruptive or forbidden manner". I'd suggest you ask an SPI clerk if you want to know if your case has merit. - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 10:28, 3 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. Courcelles (talk) 05:15, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I just wanted to let you know that Liam Wyatt is in town, so we were thinking of doing a quick meetup at Brunelli's cafe in Rundle Street (at the Rundle Mall end, near the car park) Adelaide, at 6pm on Sunday, with a possibility of drinks afterwards. So if you're interested we hope to see you there. :) - Bilby (talk) 12:55, 9 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made to Bomb threat: you may already know about them, but you might find Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned. Thank you. I don't know if you were in the process of doing it but I've given them one now. Chip123456 (talk) 16:42, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for the message. Yes I do know about templates, after doing a revert I next check the user history. If there is a history of ongoing vandalism, warning goes up. If there is not and as in this case with 73.77.121.40 I don't see the point, there is a chance that the next person on that IP Address that comes to wikipedia is not the same person that did the vandalism (addresses get reissued). Or the same person actually does come back, looks to see if the vandalism is still there, sees that it has been simply reverted, thinks "well that was pointless" and goes on and does something constructive (basically WP:GOODFAITH).--blue520 17:26, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, understand where your coming from! Although, you can just leave general note, which in this case I did on their TP. I'm not sure if you do, but if you don't, get Twinkle, it's really easy to give a quick warning/note after reverting an edit. Thanks! --Chip123456 (talk) 18:39, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I know I find it useful after "rollbacking" a non constructive edit! --Chip123456 (talk) 18:42, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings Recent Changes Patrollers!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about technical proposals related to Recent Changes Patrol in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:

1. Adjust number of entries and days at Last unpatrolled
2. Editor-focused central editing dashboard
3. "Hide trusted users" checkbox option on watchlists and related/recent changes (RC) pages
4. Real-Time Recent Changes App for Android
5. Shortcut for patrollers to last changes list

Further, there are more than 20 proposals related to Watchlists in general that you may be interested in reviewing. (and over 260 proposals in all, across many aspects of wikis)

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Note: You received this message because you have transcluded {{User wikipedia/RC Patrol}} (user box) on your user page. Since this message is "one-time-only" there is no opt out for future mailings.

Best regards, Stevietheman — Delivered: 01:11, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As an Australian Wikipedian, your opinion is sought on a proposal to advocate for the introduction of Fair Use into Australian copyright law. The discussion is taking place at the Australian Wikipedians' notice board, please read the proposal and comment there. MediaWiki message delivery MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:08, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This message has been automatically sent to all users in Category:Australian Wikipedians. If you do not wish to receive further messages like this, please either remove your user page from this category, or add yourself to Category:Opted-out of message delivery

Hello, Blue520. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Blue520. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Adelaide Meetup Next: 6 March 2020 Last: 19 May 2018

WikiProject Adelaide Meetup 22 has been hastily arranged, spread the word!

DATE: Friday 6 March 2020

TIME: 5.00–6.30 pm

VENUE: Cafe Amore, 162-170 Pulteney St, Adelaide

Celebrate the long weekend with a meet-up and discuss what you'd like to see in the world of Wikimedia in 2020. Sign-up and RSVP here.

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject Adelaide at 22:16, 5 March 2020 (UTC). You received this message because your user page is in Category:Wikipedians in South Australia. If you do not wish to receive future notifications, please advise Wikipedia talk:Meetup/Adelaide.[reply]