User talk:Wknight94/Archive 19

Archive 15

←

Archive 17

Archive 18

Archive 19

Archive 20

User :Television Radio, His IP socks, and his filter (177)

It may be time to re-enable the filter, see contribs for 76.237.206.84 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), 64.107.1.20 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), 64.107.0.193 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). He's back strangling the grammar in the CTA articles again. WuhWuzDat 02:13, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Done. Wknight94 ^talk 03:18, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Deletion of Material

Hi. A fellow editor persists in deleting proper, properly sourced material, such as [1]. I know that you are an experienced baseball editor and wikipedian; perhaps you can help out if the behavior persists?--Ethelh (talk) 06:47, 21 July 2009 (UTC) Thank you.--Ethelh (talk) 15:19, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Agree with most of your edits, but think these two deserve insertion, are appropriate, and would like to put back in ... OK with you?:

"It's not the strikeouts that's bothering me, it's just that I'm not having productive at bats," Davis said.[10]

On July 12, Davis said he felt he was is ready to return to Texas.[11]--Ethelh (talk) 19:45, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Those seemed like trivial cliche things that everyone in his position would say. Not really worth adding to an encyclopedia. Wikinews maybe, but not here. Wknight94 ^talk 23:15, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Actually, I read them differently. The first quote -- you would expect the fellow to say he the opposite, that he is focusing on cutting down his strikeouts, which is what I would assume Texas management would be telling him. And the second one is interesting, that after he get sent down a mere 7 days later he is saying he is ready to return (which apparently his management doesn't agree with).--Ethelh (talk) 01:28, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Semiprot at Whitey Ford

Hey, there. While looking into Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ron liebman, I noticed you set an indefinite semiprot at Whitey Ford; any chance you'd be willing to set some expiry date, there? I'd hate it if we forgot about the protection sometime down the road. I notice this page has been protected, before, but otherwise I assume you're more familiar with the issue at hand. – Luna Santin (talk) 23:01, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Well he's been at that article for over two years now, so I don't know what a good expiry would be. An abuse filter might be better for his favorite haunts. I'll look into that in the next few hours. Wknight94 ^talk 23:10, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Oof, I hadn't realized it was quite so bad. Whatever you think is best. – Luna Santin (talk) 23:25, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Our mutual friend

Thanks for reminding me of the need for cleanup. --Orlady (talk) 03:40, 24 July 2009 (UTC)

Have you interacted with Special:Contributions/208.83.212.19? --Orlady (talk) 23:59, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

No, and no one else will for a while. Looks popular among the banned user community from the previous edits. Nice catch! I didn't have that article on my watchlist. Now it's gone. Wknight94 ^talk 01:27, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Ah, yes. Good conclusions. I didn't go so far as to figure out who else was using that IP, and after being accused of being unkind to children (etc.) in a couple of AfDs, I had completely forgotten that the entire history of all those school articles was from that one source. --Orlady (talk) 02:06, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

EF 175 help

Need help with EF 175 via email. Mind emailing me so we can discuss? tedder (talk) 18:32, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm also in e-mail discussion with Tedder, and I think I know why it worked as it did. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 18:35, 25 July 2009 (UTC)

False positive - 177

Hi, could you take a look at this? It was reported on the false positives page, and looking at the changes, I don't see anything wrong with the edit. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:18, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

This is another IP sock of Television Radio (talk · contribs). I really haven't determined what is going on. He goes back and forth between a rash of non-consensus edits that he's repeated for months or more - and edits that actually appear to have validity. I might think it's a case of mistaken identity except that, in your example above, the same IP followed that up the next day by adding a link to the 177 abuse filter on my user page. If it's someone else sharing Television Radio's IPs, that person needs to create an account so we can separate the good edits from the bad. Wknight94 ^talk 16:44, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Looks like filter worked as intended, that WAS TV Radio. Notice the extreme overlinking of CTA. WuhWuzDat 16:57, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Special:AbuseFilter/153

Hi, I've disabled this filter because of the low number of hits. One hit per month doesn't seem to be worth the 1.5 ms (though one of our smaller filters). -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:36, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

And I assume you are going to re-enable it when he returns? Wknight94 ^talk 00:41, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Sure. Or you could if you catch him first. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:03, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Userpage

The immense amount of pictures on your userpage really lagged my computer when I tried to open it. Would you please consider moving them over to a subpage? Thanks, NW (Talk) 00:34, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Trimmed a bit. Were you looking for pictures or something else? Wknight94 ^talk 18:25, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Note regarding reverts

I confess to not spending too much time regarding the Mike Lupica; after reviewing the diffs, I chose to block the user for disruptive editing. However, per the unblock request, I reviewed the edits further and found that there was an edit war between both you and the user on two separate occasions. The edits bordered POV but were not problematic enough to be reverted per WP:Vandalism or WP:BLP. I'm merely suggesting that you should careful when reverting in future. Thank you for your time. PeterSymonds (talk) 00:37, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

I'll accept that if you'll agree to keep an eye on that article. I've spent months or more fighting off people who use blogs and biased anonymously-substantiated reports by competing newspapers to foul Lupica's article. And I am not even a Lupica fan! I've never read any of his books or anything. I do know that he has been a prominent sportswriter since I was a child, but mudslingers here want to make me believe that one blow-up by one blow-hard talking to one blog, and getting himself fired, deserves an entire paragraph on Lupica's article! On the blow-hard's article, sure, but Lupica's?! Come on. And now an anonymous reporter on the web site of a free competing newspaper calling Lupica morally indignant over two years ago. How much of a reach is that?! And Lupica's isn't the only sports reporter's article being polluted with such nonsense. Look at almost any of them and you'll find something that will make you say, "wait, that's NPOV?" Wknight94 ^talk 03:08, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

not at all important

Wha'? Sir D'Gloe of Orange? My eyelids are fracturing! LessHeard vanU (talk) 19:55, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Mets rule! Well, maybe not this year, but usually they do. Wknight94 ^talk 19:58, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Block_User:Barack_Obama.3F

What?! Why did you resolve this without dealing with the User I mentioned? Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 05:44, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 05:47, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Next time just bring such things to WP:UAA, k? Wknight94 ^talk 05:50, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

I did report it to UAA, but since there was an appropriate discussion on ANI, I decided to add to the discussion. Your blowing me off without even so much as a mention was uncollegial, Let's try being a little friendlier, hm? And I did thank you above. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 05:54, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Not being unfriendly, I didn't see your original comment through double edit conflicts. Then you undo my attempt to kill that ridiculous thread. We all need to try to clean up WP:ANI and redirecting things to appropriate places and heading off ridiculous threads like that one are key. Wknight94 ^talk 05:58, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Talkback reply

Hello, Wknight94. You have new messages at Chuthya's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Chuthya (talk) 16:55, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

IP

I requested a check on that IP at Wikipedia:WikiProject on open proxies. JV does not solely use open proxies; he has often edited from normal ISP-issued IPs, too. My guess is that this one is a normal ISP-issued account that he'll have access to for at least a couple of months. --Orlady (talk) 20:25, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Off-site checkuser agreed with you - but also said it was definitely JVolkblum. Wknight94 ^talk 20:42, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

I have no doubt that it was Jvolkblum, based on behavior. --Orlady (talk) 21:49, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Aaron Black socks

I made a checkuser request to see if an IP or IP range can be blocked, see here. Looks like GT maybe involved here. Momo san ^Gespräch 21:10, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Most certainly. Wknight94 ^talk 21:11, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure what happened with the abuse filter on him, looks like it's been disabled for now. Momo san ^Gespräch 21:27, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Oh that abuse filter would have been useless in this case. This is brand new crazy behavior so that filter would need to be re-tooled. Wknight94 ^talk 21:29, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Pioneer Courthouse etc

Thank you for re-protecting Pioneer Courthouse Square and its ilk. I think that is the right thing to do too. —EncMstr (talk) 20:27, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Yeah I don't want to play anymore. In reality, no one was being adversely affected by protection anyway. Wknight94 ^talk 20:33, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

XEUser! / 66.30.164.2 / Boyhere

Thanks for finally taking care of this user! Now, is there a quick and easy way to rid Wikipedia of all of those new redirect-articles he created, or do we need to go through the RfD process for each one? -Sme3 (talk) 12:11, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Do any seem like obviously deleteable? I saw the one speedy request was declined by another admin. Wknight94 ^talk 12:15, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Premature removal

Giving no edit summary is not approperiate, especially if you want to persist in revert-warring. Given that no adequate description was given to prematurely or suddenly delete the discussion (no indication was given that it was being archived), I am expressing disbelief that you are removing it without discussion or as much as an edit summary notification. I presume that this error will be corrected, or at least archived properly (lest you want me to archive it). seicer | talk | contribs 21:53, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

There was an edit summary given here and it was ignored, so why bother? Take Jehochman's advice and e-mail him if you want more info. Wknight94 ^talk 21:56, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Dougweler

• I don't understand, I'm Galician Wikipedia contributor, at en.wikipedia I only put interwikis from gl. Have I change my name in gl.wikipedia too?. --Dougweler (talk) 08:53, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

...for this bit of house cleaning. I saw that you blocked the IP. I had undone my reversion that sent the report as it appeared the IP was restoring original article content. I don't think the "editor" was here to be constructive, but I do apologize for being too quick with the button. I do try to be careful and I don't want my AIV reports to be unnecessary. Regards Tiderolls 06:05, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

That was content added by a very similar IP and unsourced. I assume it's the same person and, given the blatant vandalism of its other edits, it was worthy of reverting as well - so I reverted your reverting of your revert. Wknight94 ^talk 12:32, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

I've often faced a similar set of circumstances. An editor will add "poo" to a BLP four times and then on the fifth edit will change the DOB by one day. I revert (99.9% of the time) and warn based on the same logic, i.e., one hundred percent vandalsim previously translates to no desire for constructive input. But there's always that nagging doubt that I might have just been baited into a revert that might not stand scrutiny. It's not paranoia if they're really after you....right? Thanks for the response and the quick action at AIV. See ya 'round Tiderolls 15:11, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Playing dumb

You just closed this[2], which is good. But seriously, was Ruslik "playing dumb" or not? Also my latest block by YellowMonkey, was completely uncalled for, and someone unblocked me early, could you tell me who that was? I am preparing an ArbCom case on this, and it would be useful information.

I am seriously trying to improve the articles on Wikipedia - look at structured document, it's a pretty good draft, it was needed, and even in it's present, unreferenced, state it adds a good deal to Wikipedia; if I may say so. HarryAlffa (talk) 21:00, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Hmmm, I don't see where you unblocked early - it would show up here. Maybe he reconsidered the length of the block before actually doing it? As for Ruslik, I don't know - I didn't delve too far into the history after noticing that almost all of the diffs were more than two months old. I totally believe that you are trying to improve Wikipedia. What many people need to learn - and I had to learn myself - is to back away from the keyboard for a while when things get heated. The angrier one gets, the longer one should back away. Maybe they should take a whole day off if need be. I've taken weeks or months off at times to clear my head. When people respond too quickly, what gets typed into the computer can wind up being far more caustic than they even intended. I've re-read posts of mine and thought, "Wow, I sound like a dick!" Maybe that is a lesson you need to work on too - I couldn't say for sure since I only know you from the diffs Ruslik provided. Wknight94 ^talk 21:16, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

I must be mistaken, I thought the "you have been prevented from editing", or whatever, message stopped coming up earlier than the date it said it would, no matter - ArbCom here I come.

I hear what you say, and I have done exactly as you describe. I've looked over some of my comments and thought Hmm, a touch too much perhaps, but then I've looked over others comments which prompted my "disruptive editing" and thought... Let's just say I find myself agreeing with my past self nearly as much as he did at the time (if that isn't too convoluted!!). HarryAlffa (talk) 15:37, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

But at the Talk:trans-Neptunian object#Trans-Neptunian & alternate Trans-Neptune page, I would really like your straightforward honest opinion. Is it a particularly difficult problem to analysis? I thought it was spectacularly obvious that you just can't use a ratio/percentage/comparative measurement to decide if an alternate term is "useful". You certainly can't present a small percentage as - "That's it settled then", which I think is a reasonable description of the argument presented by Ruslik. Even if you hadn't thought of it that way before (I know I hadn't) I thought I'd done a reasonable job of explaining why it is not sensible to use a comparator. Was Ruslik "playing dumb"? HarryAlffa (talk) 15:37, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Uh-oh, you got me over to that talk page and there I see your comment, "I must confess that I knew Ruslik would have difficulty understanding the RfC, and I asked it that way to illustrate his capacity for scientific debate". That's a textbook example of what not to say around here. As to the issue itself, I'll gladly admit my ignorance to all things astronomy. And if that is what I think it is - an "expert astronomer" vs. "Google real world amateur astronomy buffs" argument, then I have to stay out of it lest my allergies to such arguments flare up. Painful rashes and all - I'm sure you understand. Wknight94 ^talk 15:49, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

That was one of the things I thought, "perhaps too much?", and I won't give reasons why I did go with the sentence here. Leaving that to one side, I think it is a generalised problem; it doesn't make sense to use a comparator as an indicator of alternate use. Unless I've become a genius, and I haven't noticed (both highly unlikely), I think; if I can understand this, then so can most people. But seriously, perhaps I'm in need of calibration - I usually mix with some very, very smart people, and I'm no slouch in the thinking department myself (forgive my immodesty). Am I mistaken in my belief that most people can see the logical fallacy? HarryAlffa (talk) 16:20, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

User liberty hotel

I understand liberty hotel was just blocked, but I'm kinda doubting he is trying to advertise a lone hotel in Boston, but I may be wrong.(Zaxby (talk) 02:19, 20 August 2009 (UTC))

Why not? It makes money, right? If not, why did he put it on his user page and not in article space? Wknight94 ^talk 10:46, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Harmon Killebrew

Got an image :) Wizardman 02:34, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Fantastic! How did that not come up in searches before if it was uploaded in 2007? Weird... Wknight94 ^talk 03:04, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

It was copywritten originally; I asked the guy to change the license and he did. Wizardman 13:14, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

An exciting opportunity to get involved!

As a member of the Aviation WikiProject or one of its subprojects, you may be interested in testing your skills in the Aviation Contest! I created this contest, not to pit editor against editor, but to promote article improvement and project participation and camraderie. Hopefully you will agree with its usefulness. Sign up here, read up on the rules here, and discuss the contest here. The first round of the contest may not start until September 1st-unless a large number of editors signup and are ready to compete immediately! Since this contest is just beginning, please give feedback here, or let me know what you think on my talkpage. - Trevor MacInnis ^contribs 06:19, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Edit filter 183

Hi. I've reactivated this filter. It was working very well for us and I see no reason to disable it. If you have further concerns, would you mind consulting us at WT:WPAFC? Many thanks — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:01, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

I have done so. [3] Wknight94 ^talk 14:23, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Filter 17

Could you take a look at Wikipedia:Edit filter/False positives#Hourai Rabbit, since you're experienced with the runshit vandal? Thanks. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:34, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Ty Cobb

Hi-de-hay. Guess what? I believe Ron has crawled out from whatever rock he was under, as witness here. Just FYI. Happy nearly end-of-summer, btw. :) --Ebyabe (talk) 16:52, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Hard telling, but there's a continual debate over .366 vs. .367 and 4189 vs. 4191, which I have gotten tired of dealing with. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 16:57, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, the IPs don't match at all, do they? AOL and one from Canada? Who knows... Wknight94 ^talk 16:58, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

I put a note on the article's talk page, to let the masses know of the wonder of Ron. I feel like I'm the Historian of Stupid sometimes, ya know. The Archivist of As... I'll stop there.  :) --Ebyabe (talk) 17:13, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Reminds me of that Gershwin song: "'S Ronderful". Ugh. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 23:04, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Islands

It's that season again: a new IP from a familiar ISP. --Orlady (talk) 19:12, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Leonese language

I want to thank you for protecting Leonese language article. I'm a member of Wikiproject Languages and there is a trouble with an user. He's called Karkeixa and reverts and reverts at least ten times in the last days. I think he has a behaviour against the three revert rule, and the only he makes is telleing he doesn't speak english, spaming web pages, destroying referenced paragaphs, and he acuses eveyone without respeting nor the etiquette neither the good faith policies. I think he could be calified as a vandal, and actues in that sense in a lot of wikis in the lst day, where he just destroy references and promote webs. I have contrasted that he reverts in all the wikis he can, at least 50!!!, promoting spam. Could you please verify that he's a vandal? Thank you.--Auslli (talk) 17:49, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Eldrewitsch. Wknight94 ^talk 22:40, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Moved from above

Sorry about moving my talk page to general wikipedia space again! I thought I had done things as you outlined for me in an earlier communication, but I obviously did it wrong! I think I have the idea now.... Best, Mark Wick --Mrwick1 (talk) 02:58, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Message received about uploading images. I will not upload any more pending resolution of questions that I have, and further tutelage. The first question-- is there a relatively straightforward "chain of command" for getting permission from possible copyright holders to use images on Wikipedia? In hard-copy publications, for example, there is usually a form that is filled out by the original author and/or publisher giving such permission. I have to say that the instructions for this process on Wikipedia seem very arcane to me and I have obviously not grasped them. Can you help me with this?

Thanks as always for your input,

Mark Wick --Mrwick1 (talk) 19:59, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the first complete and understandable explication I've gotten on Wikipedia's image-use policies! I NOW have a clear idea of what to do and what not to do... And, I'm suspecting that law school was somewhere in your background.

Warm regards, Mark Wick

--Mrwick1 (talk) 18:17, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Old habits die hard... I moved the piece I was working on into my user-page space. If you would be so kind as to check it, I think it's ready to move out into general viewing space.

Thanks! Mark W. --Mrwick1 (talk) 22:25, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

When?

When am I going to be unblocked?--66.30.164.2 (talk) 22:22, 14 September 2009 (UTC)User:XEuser!/User:66.30.164.2

admin question

Regarding this: Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/A new name 2008 - Is it possible for a user's previous name to be changed to something else, i.e. something "anonymous-sounding", without the general public knowing what the old name was, and hence allowing scrutiny of his edits? Although to those who know him, that might give something away anyway. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 20:48, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh sure, it's possible. Happens quite a bit I imagine. I'm even aware of a few people who left behind long block logs and assumed new identities. Now is it good when that happens? Depends on the prior identity. Like you said, people are not supposed to avoid community scrutiny by changing accounts. But if someone doesn't really have much to negatively scrutinize, there's probably not too much harm. Wknight94 ^talk 21:48, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

The apparent issue is that the admin candidate's prior identity had too much personal info, a problem compounded by his somehow having entrusted the now-banned sock user "Pastor" Theo with even more personal info. I just think an admin candidate should be above-board about his prior identity. But maybe I'm wrong. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 21:51, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Need your admin attention at Commons

For example, see this image. --Orlady (talk) 14:19, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Hmph. I am consulting with the cabal. Stay tuned. Wknight94 ^talk 14:38, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, I blocked the user here, and I removed the images from the article. Meanwhile, Ward Elementary meets the usual criteria for being kept (because the school won a blue ribbon school award), and I've verified the content at various times. I'm inclined to restore it. Would you have a problem with that? --Orlady (talk) 14:50, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

That's fine. It's on my watchlist now. Wknight94 ^talk 14:58, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Restored. FTR, there's a lot of history associated with these schools. I have several on my watchlist. ----

Any chance you're verified 1838 Peter Augustus Jay House and Peter Augustus Jay and Boston Post Road Historic District (New York) and Minard Lafever and Blessed Sacrament-St. Gabriel High School? They seem to have a few things in common as well. Wknight94 ^talk 16:34, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

The school stub checks out as OK. The others are far more complicated. --Orlady (talk) 16:56, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

I find myself impressed by the camera data and authorship claim on this image and the mysterious descriptions on this image and this image (how does a person photograph something that's missing? and why are these "original photos" screened for print publication?). Also, it's interesting to see the diverse variety of camera dates on photos of the mansion. --Orlady (talk) 17:09, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Are you familiar with Covad? [4] --Orlady (talk) 19:21, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

No, I can't say that I am. And yes, some of those images raised an eyebrow. Wknight94 ^talk 19:30, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

70.171.239.21‎

Thank you for taking care of that. It has been alleged that the IP is the underlying IP for User:Taxa. If that's the case, will the block of the IP also block Taxa? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 13:10, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

At the moment, no. Should it? I'm not familiar with Taxa and I don't see that s/he's ever been blocked. Wknight94 ^talk 14:02, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

It would be interesting to do so and see if Taxa disappears. There's a debate about Taxa and various alleged trolling sockpuppets on ANI right now. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 14:08, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Londo06

Hi. You were helpful in removing a serial sockpuppeteer User:Londo06 last year. Now he's back as User:Lando09. I was wondering if you knew what to do about this: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Londo06/Archive. I'm at a loss.--Jeff79 (talk) 21:46, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Do you suspect more socking? Wknight94 ^talk 02:29, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Well apparently because the previous account is dormant it's not two at once, so essentially not sockpuppetry. But still it's deceptive and disruptive so I figured there must be some way to put a stop to it.--Jeff79 (talk) 23:56, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

HMS King Edward VII in 1907 image

I received your note on my talk page regarding the HMS King Edward VII image (File:HMS King Edward VII (1903) in early 1907.jpg). As you can see at the image page, the claim copyright tag says that an image created by an author who died 70 years ago or is more than 70 years old if the author us unknown is not longer under copyright. The image is unattributed -- it almost certainly is a Royal Navy photo, but that appearently is unrecorded -- therefore the author is unknown, and the photo is 102 years old. Therefore it no longer is under copyright per U.K. law. As for where it was scanned from, it was scanned from a book, specifically from British Battleships 1889-1904 by R. A. Burt, Annapolis, Maryland: Naval Institute Press, 1988. ISBN 0870210610. At that time the photo was unattributed and already 71 years old, and therefore already in the public domain per U.K. law; the Burt book provides no attribution of any kind for the photo, which would be odd for a photo used by permission or under copyright elsewhere. I see no justification for removing the photo on the basis of it being a copyright violation. I have added the source nformation to the file. Mdnavman (talk) 18:38, 24 September 2009 (UTC)mdnavman

HMS Vengeance image

In your response about the HMS King Edward VII image, you also asked about the HMS Vengeance image. That image comes from exactly the same source and, given the photo's age, has exactly the same logic to it regarding the copyright tag. In fact, if you are combing through image files I uploaded a year ago (when I was a less sophisticated Wikipedia contributor than I am now, so I may have not included enough source information here and there) that are photos of Royal Navy predreadnought battleships -- all linked to the predreadnought articles from the Royal Sovereign-class and its individual ship articles through various other classes and their ship articles right up to and through the Lord Nelson-class battleships and its individual ship articles -- they all come from that source and have the same non-copyright reasoning (and tag). Let me know about any questions you have or any actions you might think I need to take, and I'll do so -- but please don't make the deadlines too tight, as I only do this as a hobby and have a lot of non-Wikipedia priorities to deal with as well! It's best to reach me at my talk page, as I am not well-versed in using talk pages and finding comments elsewehere. Thanks! Mdnavman (talk) 14:39, 27 September 2009 (UTC)mdnavman

Request for removing protection of Template:Domestic cat

There have been several requests for changes made on the Template talk that have not been addressed for several months. Beyond those requests, I'd like to make some structural changes to improve the layout. I don't feel that the template is in too much danger of vandalism as it appears that the accounts of the main vandals have been blocked. I think it's time to remove protection, or at least down-grade it to "semi-protected". --Kpstewart (talk) 01:52, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Yeah sure. It's done. Not sure why I did that actually... Wknight94 ^talk 02:18, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! --Kpstewart (talk) 03:17, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

thanks for your fast action

at Augustus Saint Gaudens. He was a good man and deserved better that what we (wikipedians) were doing to him. Einar aka Carptrash (talk) 18:46, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

My pleasure. Sorry, I meant to drop you a note but got distracted. If that continues, you might want to try WP:RFPP. Wknight94 ^talk 18:47, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Hopefully this will not continue here, but as Gilda Radner used to say, "It's always something." Carptrash (talk) 00:51, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Request for mediation not accepted

A Request for Mediation to which you were are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the case subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/User:Linas. For the Mediation Committee, Ryan Postlethwaite 23:30, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management.
If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

Oops.

You beat me to the SPI. Oh well, two reports are better than one... Tony Fox (arf!) 20:19, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

User:999pingu111

Hey, Wknight94. This user came into the unblock channel on IRC earlier trying to figure out why he was blocked. I took a look using checkuser and didn't see any other accounts on this connection, and all of the other socks seem too old to make a comparison. Would you mind adding some comments to his talk page about what tipped you off? Thanks. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 05:04, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

I've temporarily unblocked and will personally keep an eye on him/her until such a time that you can give the case for the prosecution, else it seems a little harsh on this newcomer. - Jarry1250 ^{[ In the UK? Sign the petition! ]} 14:45, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

How did I manage to miss your post on Hersfold's talk page?!? That was indeed very stupid of me. Okay, so now I get it. OTOH, I've had a chat with the accused on IRC, and I am tempted to stick with the unblock conclusion, given the difference between the creations: when Mister Pitt started the page, he did so with an element of skill, picking an infobox, edit summary and so forth, whereas pingu's attempt strikes me much more as a newbie's go at things. So maybe probation will work out, after all. - Jarry1250 ^{[ In the UK? Sign the petition! ]} 14:56, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

This looks to me like it may be a case of mistaken identity. The username looks like one that Jvolkblum might pick (but he has picked a LOT of user names) and the article interest is similar, but otherwise the style is different. --Orlady (talk) 15:04, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

The timing is quite a coincidence too, but that's fine. I suggest a checkuser look for a slew of open proxies tied to the account, but otherwise go ahead and leave unblocked. You might want to restore the article too if not already done. But there was already some IP editing there so keep an eye on it. Wknight94 ^talk 15:17, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

BTW, Jarry1250, don't forget to undo autoblocks after undoing main blocks. I undid this one. Wknight94 ^talk 15:21, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the list of blocks. I compared MisterPitt's, and some of the proxy's, edits and technical details, and I don't think this is the banned user. Do keep an eye on the account, as I'm not 100% certain, but from a technical standpoint the relation is quite  Unlikely. Again, though, thanks for your help. Hersfold ^(t/a/c) 21:01, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Okay, thank you. Wknight94 ^talk 21:02, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

From User:Zhanzhao

Hi there, thanks for protecting my page, but jsut wanna check, the origin of the attack was from IP:218.186.12.243 and 128.186.12.250, not the 224-247, was this a result of Checkuser? I don't want anyone innocent to get blocked because of this. Zhanzhao (talk) 01:54, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

There is also 218.186.12.230. If he is able to change IPs within that same small range, it's probably safest to block the whole thing. Wknight94 ^talk 12:30, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

hi again, sorry I had a typo on my previous post, I meant to point out that you are blocking 224-227, (224,225,226,227), I typed 247 by mistake above, when the harasser is 243 and 250Zhanzhao (talk) 15:43, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that's the smallest single CIDR range that would catch 230, 243 and 250. Wknight94 ^talk 15:55, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Linas

Back off for a bit, please, let me see if I can work with him. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 17:26, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Can you say "not helpful at all"? I knew you could... --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 19:05, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm going to point out glossing over of the facts. Apparently you think sarcasm would be more helpful, so you can contribute that. Wknight94 ^talk 19:08, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

note

I just sent you an e-mail on a matter of some urgency. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots← 15:27, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Ha ha, nice catch. Dealt with. Doubt it's him though - more likely one of your other friends. Wknight94 ^talk 15:39, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Pardon me for channeling Norm Crosby: "With friends like that, who needs enemas?" →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots← 16:13, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Rocky Colavito

I may be jumping the gun and being paranoid, but this edit seems very you-know-who-like to me. Just to letcha know. :) --Ebyabe (talk) 21:51, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Maybe, except he's right, according to retrosheet: [5] →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots← 21:57, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

The original posting of 9/27 appears to have been in this edit [6] by a still-active editor. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots← 22:05, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Agreed that it's a little familiar, but we'll see how the account proceeds. I have a few others I'm watching too. Wknight94 ^talk 22:24, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

I was wondering if I should ask the original poster where he got his info, since it's unsourced. He might have mis-read or mis-typed something. Although, since that was 2 1/2 years ago, he might not recall. →Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots← 22:32, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Oversight on user talk:Pathoschild

Hello Wknight94. Thanks for semi-protecting and oversighting my talk page; I seem to have gained a rather overzealous fan. —{admin} Pathoschild 04:21:17, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Certainly. Don't mention it. Wknight94 ^talk 10:18, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Oops

I was attempting to undo edits by Special:Contributions/Lawrence saliba that were nothing more than advertising. Damaging the article was never my intention! Ελληνικά όρος ή φράση (talk) 14:18, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Hah! Thank goodness you caught the mistake. I'll curb my enthusiasm in future. Ελληνικά όρος ή φράση (talk) 14:43, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately....

It can't stay at that talk page because this compromise will be used to try and change that article as prescedence, and I need to make it clear my support for the compromise is for this article specifically. There will be no bending on my part when it comes to the Montreal article because I clearly intend to eventually have them move to your original proposal once they see its not such a bad thing being split. -DJSasso (talk) 03:39, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Like I just said there, if you want to state a concise fact like you just did here, go ahead. But a long drawn out session of chest-thumping and sniping at each other is not a constructive use of anyone's time - esp. on the wrong talk page. Wknight94 ^talk 04:05, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

My ex-girlfriend

It really is difficult doing these things when I have that irritant making silly little changes to everything I do. John Stearns set an NL record for most stolen bases for a catcher during his playing career; for some reason that is not considered "Infobox material" by Yankees10, and he removes it.

Who the he is he? Stearns played his entire career on a last place team; he never went to the World Series and his career had very few highlights. I don't see why he INSISTS on removing the one thing the guy accomplished in his career from his infobox. The fact that Dave Kingman led the league in home runs, he removed that too. His explanation is that no one else has that.

I try to do good work. Someone please just get my stalker off my back.--Johnny Spasm (talk) 10:49, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Alright this is riduculous, do you no how many times he has called me this, that is a personal attack and despite numerous times people telling him to stop, he continues to refer to me as this and no action has been made. A block should be considered for his comments.--Yankees10 15:20, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

And now he just left this:"Don't wanna be called an ex-girlfriend? Quit acting like one" . Im sorry but action needs to be made.--Yankees10 15:35, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Actually he just left a whole spew of personal attacks on my talk page, check it out--Yankees10 15:37, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Clearly my talk with Johnny to cool it with personal attacks, didn't work. *sigh*--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 15:43, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

All I care to do is fix up the occassional article. I'm currently working on Jerry Johnson (baseball). If I'm left alone to do my work, I will do good work, and Wikipedia will be that much better for it. Is being left alone too much to ask for?--Johnny Spasm (talk) 18:39, 25 October 2009 (UTC)

Check out Charlie Williams (pitcher). I added the link to the 1968 Major League Baseball Draft to his article. I added a link around his birth year. Without even bothering to read the changes I made, Yankees10 just undid my work. Then I get called uncivil. Is there anything civil about that? Is this not acting like a crazy stalker? Review the facts; then tell me who is acting uncivil.--Johnny Spasm (talk) 09:27, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

See my response to both of you here. Wknight94 ^talk 11:38, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

I was reverting because of the discussion at Talk:Pete Rose, It proves he has ownership problems, despite a discussion, he continues to add NL in front of the All star selections and things like that. I do plan on going to WP:Baseball after the World Series. By the way Johnny reverting edits is not being uncivil, calling people your girlfriend and other things is, which many people have told you not to do. Also im not being a stalker, its called a watchlist, I have told you this about 10 times.--Yankees10 15:42, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

I'll take a look at that when I get some time. Wknight94 ^talk 15:54, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Questions

Hey Wknight94, possible favor and question. One: would you possibly mind semi-protecting List of World Series champions? It's quiet right now, but it turns into a riot every so often, and with the World Series beginning tonight, it is likely to continue as a rampant hotbed for IP vandalism, as it has been for the past few days. Second, since I've been involved with the above disputing users that have spilled over onto your talk page, might you be able to point me to the current location of any discussions regarding their edits? I'd like to be involved, or at least see what's happening. Thanks. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 15:05, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

I semiprotected it for a week. As for the above, there really isn't a centralized location to my knowledge. I guess I need to look over Talk:Pete Rose - that's the closest I've seen to a long discussion involving other people. Wknight94 ^talk 15:44, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

The man, as always. Thanks a lot. I tried looking to the supposed ANI discussion but that seemed to be a dead-end. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 15:50, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Yep. And like I told them, the silence there means no one is going to strike a truce for them. It will be frontier justice instead - blocks until there is peace. Wknight94 ^talk 15:54, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

I didnt respond the the post because I really had nothing to say and I really didnt no we were supposed to respond I thought it was for admins to decide what is done. Also so what you are saying is im going to get blocked--Yankees10 15:57, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

If someone decides you are both edit warring, neither of you have consensus, and/or you're both being uncivil, then both of you are likely to continue getting blocked. OTOH, if it looks like there is clear consensus for what you are doing, then you might escape an edit warring block - although continued swapping of insults would still get you both blocked. Standard procedure really. Wknight94 ^talk 16:24, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

IPs 99's refusal to sign-in...

...can only be seen (IMHO) as being evasive (at worst, a banned editor, evading his ban) or (at best) an editor merely refusing to sign-in, out of spite towards those who wish he'd sign-in. GoodDay (talk) 19:21, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Do we have a chronology of blocks, etc. to the various IPs? If he gets blocked for three days on one IP but continues editing the next day from another IP, then that would be actionable IMHO. Wknight94 ^talk 20:59, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Apparently (according to his last IP account), he's retired from Wikipedia. He was stubborn (refusing to 'sign in') to the end. GoodDay (talk) 21:23, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Nah, he's not retired. He just created an account (or went back to using his account) and didn't want to admit it. It's the right thing to do. Wknight94 ^talk 22:14, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

hello

thank you for the welcome! Wigorigo (talk) 15:16, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Hmm... a new user recreating articles about New Rochelle, New York. Didn't Jvolkblum (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) do stuff like this? Just sayin'. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 20:59, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for the welcome and for helping me out. I promise I'm not a long-term vandal! Daytonasplendor (talk) 18:15, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Kamen Rider × Kamen Rider Double & Decade: Movie War 2010

Thank you for protecting it. Some people don't understand why I requested protection. If you would, I would like the protection extended to at least after the film's premiere.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 13:07, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

If they return after a week (I know - they probably will), let me know and I'll extend to December 12. Wknight94 ^talk 13:34, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Only took him about 12 hours to realize he could change it.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 00:43, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Re-protected til 13 Dec. Thanks. Wknight94 ^talk 01:13, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

I've contacted the ISP.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 01:59, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Arizona delegation to the 110th Congress

Template:Arizona delegation to the 110th Congress has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 16:08, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Hands

That's pretty funny!--Epeefleche (talk) 05:03, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Wknight94 ^talk 05:04, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

User:Television Radio, again....

See contributions for 75.3.158.195 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), he hit Merlin Santana, and the Chicago Transit Authority, this combination of edits, along with his geolocation, and ISP scream SOCK to me. WuhWuzDat 20:09, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

I tweaked the filter. May need more too, we'll see. Wknight94 ^talk 20:15, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

216.124.113.16 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) looks to be him (edits to Merlin Santana, and the CTA) ... Judging by the domain of the IP, it looks like our little friend is in college now (geolocation says Springfield, but the school is actually on the near NW side of Chicago) ...they grow up so fast, but still refuse to learn anything!...sigh... WuhWuzDat 06:55, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Sheesh. I tweaked the filter again. Let me know if it happens again. Wknight94 ^talk 12:13, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Same IP, similar edits: 216.124.113.16 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), IP resolves to domain "Kendall.edu"...would a school block be appropriate? WuhWuzDat 17:58, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Sheesh. Well I blocked for another month and added an IPsock tag. Looks like no one else edits from there so I'll keep increasing. Wknight94 ^talk 18:05, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Happy Wknight94's Day!

User:Wknight94 has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, and therefore, I've officially declared today as Wknight94's day! For being such a beautiful person and great Wikipedian, enjoy being the Star of the day, dear Wknight94! Peace, Rlevse 00:17, 9 November 2009 (UTC) A record of your Day will always be kept here.

For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:17, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! Wknight94 ^talk 02:14, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Vandal

67.170.19.144 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Can you look into blocking the IP:67.170.19.144 he continues to vandalize.--Yankees10 00:19, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

What is he up to? I notice some of his edits have not been reverted though. Wknight94 ^talk 01:39, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

He keeps removing info from Sosa, McGwire, and Palmeiros infobox and continues to add that players are retired when they are not.--Yankees10 01:47, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

I see. Next problem is he didn't have a single warning. I left a warning. If it continues, let me know. Wknight94 ^talk 01:58, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Looks like he ignored your warning and is back at it.--Yankees10 06:49, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

I gave him a few days off. Wknight94 ^talk 14:35, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks--Yankees10 16:17, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Our favorite sock

Thanks for the speedy sock service! Katr67 (talk) 20:33, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

My pleasure. Wknight94 ^talk 20:33, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

That big issue over at ANI

I should be grateful if you would redact or strike through your comments at the Vk/Irish Editors vs. Nearly Everybody, to which I responded here. Some of us are old enough to be aware of both the gravity of the war crimes for which Tojo was executed, and the use of the name as a racial epithet. Whatever the rationale of your comments, it was ill served by the example used. Thanks, LessHeard vanU (talk) 21:48, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Woops, that's not who I was referring to. Hopefully this clarifies? Wknight94 ^talk 21:53, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

My humble apologies (how very Japanese...) A good example, as I mentioned on the ANI page, how real world and WP world realities can conflict and create confusion. LessHeard vanU (talk) 22:16, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Not necessary. I hadn't considered the dual connotation. In fact IIRC, User:General Tojo was given a hard time for using the name, but was allowed through. Usernames were less strict back in 2006. Wknight94 ^talk 22:40, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Re:User:Moin.nabi

Hi Wknight94. I blocked User:Moin.nabi for tripping the edit filter (page move vandalism). Looks like it could be a sockpuppet of some sort. But sure, I'll keep an eye on the talk page and see what comes up. Regards, FASTILY ^(TALK) 22:51, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Agreed

[7] - Something very sketchy is alledged regarding the initial request, actually. Hipocrite (talk) 20:08, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Mt. Blanco Fossil Museum move

(Move log); 12:58 . . Wknight94 (talk | contribs) moved Mt. Blanco Fossil Museum to Mount Blanco Fossil Museum

May I ask why?

If you check their official site, http://www.mtblanco.com/ you will see it says "Welcome to Mt. Blanco Fossil Museum". --GRuban (talk) 18:30, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

My only rationale is that Mt. is an abbreviation for Mount. The article for virtually every actual mountain here begins with Mount. That said, if consensus arises that prefers the abbreviation in this case - despite Wikipedia:WikiProject Mountains#Naming conventions - then I don't care enough to fight it. Wknight94 ^talk 19:19, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Surely WikiProject Mountains conventions don't affect the way museums are named. Anyway, since you acquiesce, please move it back; since your move created a redirect, undoing it requires your admin flag. --GRuban (talk) 19:49, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

When the museum is named after a mountain, why not? And undoing doesn't require admin flag. See WP:MOR. Wknight94 ^talk 19:52, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

By that logic, why not move it to Mount White? That's what Blanco means after all, and this is the English language wikipedia, not Spanish... It's a name. The fact that it was inspired by a mountain is nice, but irrelevant. In the end, the founder of the museum gets the right to choose the name without consulting WikiProject Mountains. Even if they had named it "Muont Blonca Fosil Musseum", with multiple blatant misspellings, that would be its name.

Thanks for telling me about WP:MOR - I'm an old timer, and remembered back when you needed the mop to move over a redirect. Done. --GRuban (talk) 20:05, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

That's mixing issues. Language vs. abbreviations. By that logic, we'd rename San Jose, California to Saint Joseph, California. Wknight94 ^talk 20:18, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Mount Angel, Oregon

Hi, the city of Mt. Angel refers to itself as "Mt. Angel" and local usage is definitely "Mt.", not "Mount" but I see that according to GNIS, the civil, populated place, and post office feature names are all "Mount". (I'm too lazy to do the links properly, but the search page is here.) Anyway, I don't feel that strongly about it, but have we decided that we go with GNIS over local usage? Because "nobody" refers to it as "Mount Angel". Katr67 (talk) 18:39, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Ditto Mount Hood Community College--it refers to itself as "Mt. Hood". P.S. Please change the text in the articles to match the page names, if you would. Katr67 (talk) 19:17, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

My only rationale is that Mt. is an abbreviation for Mount. The article for virtually every actual mountain here begins with Mount. That said, if consensus arises that prefers the abbreviation - despite Wikipedia:WikiProject Mountains#Naming conventions - then I don't care enough to fight it. Wknight94 ^talk 19:18, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

I don't want to beat a dead horse, but I don't see that that naming convention extends to things named after mountains? (Or, in the case of Mount Angel, buttes.) I think for things that aren't actual mountains, we can go with WP:COMMONNAME. Unless there's a naming convention that says these are always spelled out? If so, I would defer to that guideline. A Google test on Mt. vs. Mount Angel, Oregon (-"wikipedia") shows 489,000 hits vs. 11,800 hits. I'll think about it some more before moving anything back (might need an admin to do that now)--I'm actually more concerned that the article titles match the lede sentence. I don't want to be a consensus of one--where would be the best place to ask about this? WikiProject Oregon might tend to agree with me but it would probably be good to have a project-wide guideline. We also have things like St. Helens, Oregon. Should it go on the naming conventions talk page? Katr67 (talk) 19:56, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Don't need the admin bit - see our discussion just above here. --GRuban (talk) 20:06, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Shouldn't need an admin to move it back. See WP:MOR. Or to modify the lede. I guess I'm combining the naming convention with WP:SENSE. St. is a different thing and appears to be adhered to less often. See St. Louis, Missouri. I didn't even look for a naming convention for that. I suppose WT:NC is as good as any. Wknight94 ^talk 20:08, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Of course I don't need an admin to change the lede. :) Sorry if my sentence read that way. (Um, I have over 50,000 edits...) But thanks for letting me know the page move thing has changed. Katr67 (talk) 20:15, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Re GA approved by sock of a banned user

Hi, Wknight94. First, apologies for not yet adding a followup reply to the GA discussion thread. Looking through all the related material took longer than 20mins it turned out. Second, I notice you're currently deleting articles they'd produced, which also happen to be included on the list on MuZemike's talkpg. Please would you stop? I commented on that separate discussion and'll of course comment back on the GA thread matter. Just wanted to comment quickly here so the visible banner would alert! After discussion to allow us all to take stock, any necessary deletion can resume of course. Thanks again, –Whitehorse1 00:05, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Hmph, I didn't notice that discussion. They can all be restored without a problem. But is someone actually looking over the articles? Looks like that discussion is a couple days old but I didn't see a single line of discussion in the talk pages while I was deleting. It's been my experience that people like just keeping articles just to get the article count up, but never actually want to check them. If we're going to keep these, we need to move to undo the ban of this user. Wknight94 ^talk 00:21, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi, at least couldn't "list" articles be restored since the banned user just moved already existent contents from already existent articles contributed by other editors? --Caspian blue 02:39, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

This discussion mostly moved over to User talk:MuZemike#ItsLassieTime article creations part 2... Wknight94 ^talk 02:43, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletions

Hi Wknight94

I note that you deleted a large number of entries per {{db-banned}}. Each of these entries had already had the G5 template removed at least once (almost all of them at least once by me). Per Wikipedia:Deletion#Speedy deletion, once one editor disagrees that an article shouldn't be speedily deleted, a deletion discussion—not a renomination and speedy deletion—is appropriate.

Accordingly, could you please restore the articles and (if you believe that the articles merit deletion) initiate an AfD?

Regards, ^Bongo_matic 06:32, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

It also says the article may still be speedy deleted. Regardless, there is discussion at User talk:MuZemike#ItsLassieTime article creations part 2. Wknight94 ^talk 12:14, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Your view is noted. Please see next section. ^Bongo_matic 17:58, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

I opened a new discussion at WP:ANI#ItsLassieTime banned or not? Wknight94 ^talk 18:42, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Deletion review for The Storks

An editor has asked for a deletion review of The Storks. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. ^Bongo_matic 17:58, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Mt. Lebanon, Pennsylvania

Hi, I see you have moved a lot of articles concerning Mt. Lebanon, Pennsylvania to Mount Lebanon, Pennsylvania. Whilst I can understand why you have done this, it is in this case an error, as for reasons best known to themselves the township officially changed their name to Mt. Lebanon in 1975. Could you undo the moves? Thanks. Scillystuff (talk) 11:52, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

filter 81

Please re-enable filter 81. It has too high of a false positive rate to even set to "warn", but I examine its output on a daily basis and revert all failing edits that it has detected. To perform the same task manually requires substantial effort.—Kww(talk) 01:32, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Ugh, that one? That had the worst performance of the ones I disabled. Hmph. Okay, re-enabled. Wknight94 ^talk 01:38, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Is there a way to track why it consumes so much? It's only supposed to go through the main sequence on articles that contain "album" or "single", but based on filter editors' comments, it seems to perform far more than those two checks on a typical article. As I type, it occurs to me that changing the logic to search only for "chart" instead of searching for both "album" and "single" would remove a check from the typical case.—Kww(talk) 02:03, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

I don't know of a way to break down exactly where the performance is going. It's checking for any of the following anywhere in the article: "discography", "musical artist", "infobox album", "infobox single". Is that what you were asking? Wknight94 ^talk 02:16, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

That could be simplified by checking solely for the word "chart". It would run through the full sequence on more articles, but the simpler check on the rest would probably pay off.—Kww(talk) 02:29, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

I tried it. I didn't see any immediate effect, but we'll see. Wknight94 ^talk 02:34, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Mt. Pisgah State Park

Just wanted to let you know that the move of Mt. Pisgah State Park to "Mount Pisgah State Park" ignored the official name used by the Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (DCNR), which is Mt. Pisgah State Park. Please see the official DCNR Mt. Pisgah State Park website and here is the picture of the park entrance sign. The official Penn DOT map also refers to it as "Mt. Pisgah" - see here. The article is back at "Mt. Pisgah State Park" with "Mount Pisgah State Park" as a redirect. Thanks, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:41, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Changing Mt. Baker Ski Area to Mount Baker Ski Area is not correct

Mt. Baker Ski Area is the proper name of the resort. Mount Baker refers to the actual volcanic mountain. For proof look to www.mtbaker.us. The official ski area website never refers to the resort as Mount Baker, only Mt. Baker. This is an intentional naming differentiation on the part of the resort. Please revert both the ski area page and the Banked Slalom page. Flovalflyer (talk) 19:51, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

"Intentional" naming difference? Why in the world would they intentionally do that? Wknight94 ^talk 20:07, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

It is an intentional name change that is supported by facts: http://www.bellingham.org/index.php/communities/mt-baker-corridor/lodge http://www.fs.fed.us/r6/mbs/recreation/winter-recreation.shtml Please revert. Given the other discussions surrounding changing mt. to mount it might be worth doing some fact checking on other revisions you have made. There are many instances where mt.* becomes the proper name of an entity and indiscriminately changing names is counter productive. Flovalflyer (talk) 21:00, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I think there are very few - if any - cases where someone only answers to Mt. You note the two or three other cases here but that is out of the 120+ pages that I moved. Very low percentage. Wknight94 ^talk 21:25, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

In this case the "mt." in question refers to the registered name of a business: Mt. Baker Recreation Company dba Mt. Baker Ski Area. Please revert. I also have to think that your percentage of error will increase over time and what you are seeing are the leading indicators, those pages in which individual editors have a particular interest and are quick to monitor and respond. Flovalflyer (talk) 21:38, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

It's available via a redirect already. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:53, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

True, but the redirect should be in the opposite direction, as it was before wknight94 (talk) incorrectly changed it. As it stands now the page name does not match the content on the page or the actual name of the resort. Please revert. Flovalflyer (talk) 22:09, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Also, reverts are still necessary for Mt. Angel, Oregon and Mt. Hood Community College, both proper names, where the article name does not match the article content. Flovalflyer (talk) 22:24, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I think this is a little nitpicky. Wikipedia standards are to render "Mt." as "Mount". I'm not totally sure why, but I suspect it's got to do with the assumption that readers may not know what an abbreviation means. Hence, "Saint Louis" instead of "St. Louis", Missouri. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:28, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I wholeheartedly agree with the naming conventions in Wikipedia:WikiProject Mountains#Naming conventions, conventions that apply to articles pertaining to actual mountains. In the case of the previous naming discussion, none of the names are applying to actual mountains, and in at least two cases are referring to legal entities conducting business by a particular proper name. As for nitpickiness, I feel that the content of the page should match the name of the page as well as the actual registered name of the entity it represents. Flovalflyer (talk) 22:39, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

For additional rational on naming conventions that apply in this situation refer to the MOS on common names, particularly "the name that the subject uses to describe itself or themselves." Flovalflyer (talk) 23:55, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

(unindent) For the record, I didn't want to revert Mt. Angel, Mt. Hood Jazz Festival and Mt. Hood Community College without consensus, since I'd already moved them originally. There's a discussion on the WikiProject Oregon talk page if anyone is interested. I've already reverted all the other Oregon ones since WKnight didn't seem to feel too strongly about it before. With all due respect, WKnight, I think you had better take heed of the leading indicators and propose a MOS change to the larger community before you move any more pages. Katr67 (talk) 22:43, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I've already moved all the pages I intended to move. The reverse moves should still be possible and I won't revert if anyone does them. If any are impeded, let me know and I will remove the impediment. Wknight94 ^talk 23:57, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Edit Filter 135

Hi - I see that you disabled EF 135 saying it was not productive. For me, at least, this was one of the most frequent categories of tagged RCs that I would patrol. Do you think there is any chance to optimize it and turn it back on or is it just too much on the servers? If it can't be turned on - which would you suggest for a more useful tag for me to patrol. Thanks.  7  23:00, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Re-enabled. Wknight94 ^talk 00:02, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks - is that okay? I don't want it turned on for me if nobody else uses it and it causes problems.  7  00:08, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, if nothing else, in the first 6 minutes it was turned back on I found two different edits worthy of reversion. Thanks again.  7  00:14, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that's fine. If anything it counts as filter hits and will contribute to Mr.Z-bot reports at WP:AIV/TB2. Wknight94 ^talk 00:32, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

67.170.19.144

The Ip is at it again. Although hes not vandalizing this time, he is not listening and continues to remove things from the infobox despite me telling him twice not to do it.--Yankees10 00:06, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

I would have to agree, though it is not "vandalism" and we must assume good faith, it seems that it's becoming a major problem. --Brian Halvorsen (talk) 00:48, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

I left a message and the IP hasn't edited since. If it continues, I'll apply a longer block. Wknight94 ^talk 02:05, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Josh Bell

Can you move Joshua Bell (baseball) to Josh Bell (baseball). Its Josh according to MLB.com--Yankees10 23:29, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Done. Wknight94 ^talk 02:35, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks--Yankees10 19:59, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Semi-protected Bangalore

From the Bangalore article... {{pp-semi-indef|small=yes|expiry=January 18, 2009}}. Should I remove the protection template? Or does this have to be done by an administrator to disengage the protection level?
 —  Paine's Climax  10:00, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

You could have removed the template, but not actually unprotected the article. I have done both now. Wknight94 ^talk 12:14, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

I figured it might take more than just rm'n the protection template. Thank you for your help!

 —  Paine's Climax  16:16, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

An editor (non-admin) added the template back to the article. I reverted the edit. Could you please keep a watch on the page? Regards, SBC-YPR (talk) 12:17, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

That was General Tojo (talk · contribs) following me around like a jilted lover. Wknight94 ^talk 14:10, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Maybe you noticed - he continued trying to hijack everything I edit. Like some sort of a pirate. Wknight94 ^talk 18:18, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Reply

No doubt in my mind. --Orlady (talk) 16:28, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

The verdict is "yes." Queen Victoria's namesake is the clincher. --Orlady (talk) 01:47, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Meat puppets

I see whatcha mean, now. An editor persuades friends to join Wikipedia & back him up on edits, discussions etc. Different editors acting as one. GoodDay (talk) 15:35, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

That's best case. Worst case - and more likely IMHO - is that someone already on that side of the eternal dispute creates a new account pretending that it is a brand new person. In some cases, you see that new account welcomed as a new recruit in the fight against evil and tyranny - when, all the while, it's just one of the regulars pretending to be a new person. Classic WP:SOCK. And I don't even keep track of which side is which since both sides of every eternal dispute like this engages in the same deception on a regular basis. Wknight94 ^talk 15:41, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Indeed, all socks stink. GoodDay (talk) 15:44, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

separate warnings

As you see from my last remarks at the AN/I, upon reflection I agree with your implication that I should not have left multiple warnings. I frankly didn't realize it at the time (thinking that as there were different edits, each warranted a warning). But I realize now that that's not how we operate. In the future I understand that even if I come across edits that are clearly vandalism, and no matter how many such edits are made, editors should only get one warning. I'll do better in the future. Thanks for your input.--Epeefleche (talk) 19:12, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

National Register of Historic Places listings in the Alaska Panhandle

I noticed that you changed this page to transclude the related borough/census area lists. I know it was good faith, but I had actually created the Panhandle list to be a merged page to combine all the shorter lists. I just didn't redirect the others yet. No pages link to it. I really should have taken care of that then because now there are surely discrepancies. Reywas92^Talk 18:37, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

You can do what you want, as long as there isn't content being duplicated. They were already getting out of synch with each other. Thanks. Wknight94 ^talk 18:42, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

"Missing" person?

I'm not sure what to make of this rather odd entry: [8] It could be just a joking reference to the editor, or it could be something sinister. In any case, the link posted doesn't work, and I reverted it. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 12:41, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

I tried this link and it worked: http://projectjason.org/forums/index.php?topic=7102.0e.ogg. Wknight94 ^talk 13:10, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

Aha. So it was probably a sincere attempt to post a missing-person notice. I would say that (1) this ain't the place to do it; and (2) the missing person probably fails wikipedia notability standards. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:16, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

True and true. Wknight94 ^talk 14:48, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

ANI notice.

Hello, Wknight94. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Harassment directed at User:Wknight94. Thank you. The thing that should not be 17:30, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

66.135.109.66

OK; the notice at the suspected sockmaster's page says it was a Checkuser-based block. Daniel Case (talk) 20:41, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Thank you...

...for reverting. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:17, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I appreciate it too, and the quick block. Nice work. --John (talk) 16:47, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, that's one we're all too familiar with. Wknight94 ^talk 17:27, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Maybe he's missing us around the holidays. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:08, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Mail

You too ;) -- Chris 73 | Talk 15:39, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Translation

Thanks to English Wiki for warning.
F.Pavkovic, 21:15, 5 December, 2009 —Preceding undated comment added 20:16, 5 December 2009 (UTC).

The general

Hi Wknigh94, fyi: I think this may be our friend too. Wutsje (talk) 15:53, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

I blocked where I could and added to the list. Wknight94 ^talk 16:33, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

This may be him very well too. Wutsje (talk) 20:54, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

That looks more like some other moron. Wknight94 ^talk 21:02, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

That might very well be, you know him better than I do. But what about: this one? Wutsje (talk) 15:11, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Canvassing

Crossposting messages in Russian Wikipedia is usually discouraged. Especially in English or in autotranslated Russian. Please report such people to local admins or checkusers. I've blocked all his puppets I know about. vvv^t 13:04, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Well you might want to reconsider how militant you (all) are being about the issue given that you are literally the only wiki putting up a fuss. Wknight94 ^talk 14:13, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry if the message of vvv looks too harsh. Certainly we are thankful to you for your warning (see also [9]). Because of it we have succesfully blocked all his sockpuppets and I have added this articles to my watchlist to prevent adding in the future.

The only small thing is that I have reverted your warning at all pages other then ru:Обсуждение:Магеллан, Фернан because they were written in (let say it so) not the best Russian and can confuse other users. I think that vvv only tried to point on it.

But once again - its only a trifle. Thank you again for you notification! --D.R (talk) 18:12, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Well feel free to rewrite, especially the one-sentence messages I had added. On other wikis, we have had a few people get confused - and once we explain the situation they are happy to help. We are just trying to make sure others can find the information easily to prevent future confusion. Thanks. Wknight94 ^talk 19:04, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Beat me to it

Guess I should have been bold and blocked that IP at AIV. I was thinking about it... KV5 (Talk • Phils) 02:03, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Hey, look at you with buttons! Congrats. I don't pay much attention at RFA or I would've pitched you a "s". Yeah, I see "Extended report" in the edit summary and I move quick. Feel free to ask for any advice, online or off. Good luck! Wknight94 ^talk 04:18, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Your invited!

Wikipedia:Meetup/Miami 3 is coming up in the near future, you are invited to participate. Thanks Secret ^account 17:45, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

User:121.6.236.4 abusing unblock request

Hello, you had blocked this IP user but the user is repeatedly abusing the unblock request and posting personal information. Could you please protect the page or change the block settings? Thank you. LovesMacs (talk) 04:08, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

This has already been dealt with, you don't need to do anything now. LovesMacs (talk) 17:31, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I saw the re-block. And I requested the WP:Oversight. Thanks. Wknight94 ^talk 17:38, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Request for unprotection of Talk:Global warming

Hi there. There's a request at RPP for this page to be unprotected. As you were the protecting admin, could you have a look at it please? Thanks. GedUK  08:55, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. GedUK  12:20, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

thanks

for the talk page protection. A8UDI 04:24, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Your friend

...has learned of the joys of open proxies. Amusingly, he hasn't learned the joys of XFF headers. If you get tired of being a living honeypot, feel free to protect. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 04:26, 12 December 2009 (UTC)