User talk:Only/Archive 11

Welcome to my talk page! I tend to reply to messages directly on here, so I suggest watching my page if you're looking for a reply. I watch user talk pages I comment on so we can keep conversations organized. I reserve the right to modify excessive signatures left here.

Archives
I − II − III − IV - V - VI - VII - VIII - IX - X

Grey Griffins: Lets get it to B

I dont know if you've ever read a book in the series but I REALLY REALLY want to get the Grey Griffins article to FA. But we have to take one step at atime. Do you have the time to help me raise the article to B grade?User:Kingrock 03:53, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

no. Metros (talk) 03:54, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks anyway.User:Kingrock 04:02, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Even though you dont have time to help me I need a admins point of view, is the article NPOV, that it contains reliable refrences, focuses on the topicUser:Kingrock 14:04, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

the AN/I thing on your talk page comments

Kudos to you. There was nothing wrong with your statement, and I both see where you were going with it and agree with it too. ⇒SWATJester ^{Son of the Defender} 06:22, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotect article

I would like to request that the Sri Lankan civil war article be unprotected. The edit war between me and Watchdogb has been partialy resolved, we have decided to continue our edits of Wikipedia through discussion and to not start a brawl. Thank you. Top Gun

ER

Please check out my editors review, thanks!User:Kingrock 03:12, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Enforcer removed

Per an e-mail request to unblock-en-l, the wikibreak enforcer has been removed. Happy editing, GDonato (talk) 20:17, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! :) Metros (talk) 20:20, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome Back

I hope your exams went well. I'd like to say that quite a bit happened to me. I have created a DYK, baseball uniform, and I have 2 other DYK's. Comments?--User:RyRy5 20:22, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You need to stop going around saying that you've had "2 other DYK's". Simply listing an article for DYK isn't really close to being on the level of actually writing it. You've had 1 DYK, and you nominated two other articles; there's a big difference. You also really, really need to stop asking people to look at your contributions, give their opinion on how you're doing, and go to your review. If people want to do it, they'll do it. You don't need to beg everyone to do that. You also don't need to tell every single person about your DYK's and your edit count. To quote the slogan: "Just do it." Let your actions speak for themselves and the commentary will arise out of that. Metros (talk) 20:27, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. So if others feel like doing something, they'll do it if they want to. I says something like that in WP:CANVASSING somewhere. -- User:RyRy5 20:31, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Metros, just wanted to welcome you back, how were the exams? King Rock ^{Go 'Skins!} 21:11, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Vampire Warrior

Hi. That unblock request is a bit strange; I think as the blocking admin you are most qualified to evaluate it. Best, Sandstein (talk) 23:46, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If that one remains blocked, Vampire Warrior II (talk · contribs) should probably be blocked as well for block evasion. On the other hand, apart from generating needless drama (and no useful edits that I can see) there's not much to block this kid for. Sandstein (talk) 23:52, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've blocked the alternate account and tagged it as a sock. I, personally, think the block should not be lifted, but, then again, I'd probably be a little biased to ask because I was the subject of this beauty. Metros (talk) 00:21, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, yes, after seeing this I do concur that he probably should stay blocked. Sandstein (talk) 07:17, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

The user blanked the page. It was vandalism. --RyRy5 (talk ♠ Review) 02:04, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, no. The IP took out the significant unnecessary, unsourced text tacked onto the end of the article. Metros (talk) 02:06, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Grey Griffins (book series)

Hey Metros i have nominated the page for GA. I have put the article under PR but I want more feedback but the article may be ready anyway. So can you review the page dude? King Rock ^{Go 'Skins!} 02:09, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

no, sorry. Metros (talk) 02:09, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks anyway. Happy editing! King Rock ^{Go 'Skins!} 02:21, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Email

Sending... « Milk's Favorite Cookie ^{( talk / contribs)} 02:28, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sent. « Milk's Favorite Cookie ^{( talk / contribs)} 02:34, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Received and replied. Metros (talk) 02:35, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As with me. « Milk's Favorite Cookie ^{( talk / contribs)} 22:11, 13 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Block Request

I have a request that 72.66.94.86 should be blocked. He has already been given a final warning and then continued to vandalize pages. King Rock ^{Go 'Skins!} 01:28, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oops

In both cases, it appears I mistook good-faith edits for vandalism. My apologies. --Sharkface^T/_C 03:17, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

While I respect your decision to remove my rollback rights, I ask that you do a more thorough review of my rollback usage. For example, there are several other prominent (and, if I may be so candid, more disastrous) examples of when I accidentally used rollback to undo good-faith edits that were not vandalism. For examples, see here and here. While these egregious errors are obviously apparent, I ask that you consider them in light over 2000 other times I used rollback successfully to combat vandalism. And while my mistakes will still stand as ugly blemishes on my vandal-fighting record, (and if I may be so audacious) I question as to whether I should lose the rollback tool for less than ten instances out of 2000 edits? For mistakes that occur less than 0.5% of the time? I humbly ask you to weigh my mistakes against my achievements and reconsider your decision. --Sharkface^T/_C 03:44, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback is a one and done thing. If you misuse it, it gets taken away. You misused it at least twice in the last two hours. Metros (talk) 03:48, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, my vandal fighting for the time being will not involve the use of rollback. --Sharkface^T/_C 03:57, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here are 4 other rollbacks of concern in your last 50 overall edits. That was a legit edition of a character/actor. It's questionable about whether this would qualify as a significant event or not, but that's for discussion, ot rollbacks. This appears to be unnecessary trivia. According to this, it actually looks like there is a album that you took out here. Metros (talk) 04:04, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I will fully admit to being in fault for at least three of those edits (much to my consternation, I assure you). The Superbad edit especially reflects poorly upon me, as a quick check over at IMDB could have confirmed the existence of that character. Regarding y use of rollback for the anniversary of the Columbine massacre, I felt that, as there are currently no major plans in place for the 10th Anniversary of the event, the anniversary wasn't particularly notable. As such, I went ahead and removed the addition. While anniversaries can and do appear in pages regarding years, usually they are accompanied by some sort of explanation as to why that date is significant. For example, the February 2009 planned celebration for the 200th anniversary of Darwin Day includes a bit about how the National History Museum in London will commemorate the event. Not to downplay the scope and significance of the Columbine tragedy, but unless there will be the opening of a significant monument on the 10th anniversary, I'm not sure why it's on that list. And while I understand that rollback is to be used for primarily vandalism, I felt that the anniversary blurb was nonproductive enough to merit the use rollback, in accordance with WP:ROLLBACK. Again, apologies for the mistakes. --Sharkface^T/_C 04:29, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

American idol

I am requesting that American Idol be semi-protected if you look in the history section you will understand my request. King Rock ^{Go 'Skins!} 02:03, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:

Because I just assumed it was a newsletter for all of wikipedia. S. T. H. 00:46, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you pick out RyRy5? And I don't need a reason. S. T. H. 00:53, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because he joined it just before you. And no, you don't need a reason, but to add "I have no idea what this is" when joining a list is really, really pointless. Metros (talk) 00:58, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Check your email

You have mail. Nwwaew (Talk Page) (Contribs) (E-mail me) 19:26, 18 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio of San Jacinto College

It seems the article's history section is a copyvio of the home website. I will provide more evidence shortly.--RyRy5 (talk) 04:29, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It should be somewhere around this website. I can't search thouroughy at this moment. You should probably check Google also. Like I said, I can't do it myself at this moment.--RyRy5 (talk) 04:34, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for the reversion of vandalism on my userpage. Much appreciated ——Ryan | t • c 16:52, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I didn't think you were a "fart"... Metros (talk) 16:56, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I thought BoL and I were topic banned...?

Help me figure this out. How can I go and edit my userspace, and then BoL edits ACC without getting blocked? I'm confused. And I don't mean to rat on BoL, but still...--Gp75motorsports ^{REV LIMITER} 18:27, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I swear Metros, like moths to the candle, you are just a magnet for this sort of thing. How do you manage it? ➪HiDrNick! 18:35, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, I apologize. It's not fair that you edited user spaces and Wikipedia spaces without getting blocked. Because of that, I have blocked you for one month. As for BoL, see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Archive133#Removing_topic_ban_on_Blow_of_Light. Metros (talk) 18:58, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bomb threat at Wayne Valley

Here's the proof of the more recent bomb threat http://www.northjersey.com/news/19127789.html

Well cite the source in the article, don't just add the statement to the article without a source backing it up. Metros (talk) 00:12, 22 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

I understand your concerns. Is there any way I can persuade you otherwise?Xp54321 (Vandals Beware!!!,Contribs) 01:42, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely not. Metros (talk) 01:43, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Very well. Nothing personal.Xp54321 (Vandals Beware!!!,Contribs) 01:43, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stop contacting every single person who opposes your RFA trying to change their minds. This is not appropriate. Metros (talk) 01:45, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As for the answer to your question the editors didn't provide edit summaries. I was unsure but rolled back as no harm would come the article in its previous form.Xp54321 (Vandals Beware!!!,Contribs) 01:48, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That is possibly the worst answer I've ever seen. Given my previous warning to you for this I'm removing you from rollback; if I see any further abuse of AWB I'm also removing that (I haven't yet checked). — iridescent 01:53, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I already took it away. And I agree with your assessment of the explanation. Metros (talk) 01:55, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not my ip. My mistake.Xp54321 (Vandals Beware!!!,Contribs) 02:10, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Begging to run checkuser. Please. No I'm not crazy. Not puppets and if so. Block me indefinitely. This is a total insult.Xp54321 (Vandals Beware!!!,Contribs) 02:45, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also know one alternate account. User:Mr.Xp Public login account. Never used.Xp54321 (Vandals Beware!!!,Contribs) 02:48, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I just love the way I'm the one who gets blamed for this... — iridescent 02:50, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback

I find it a little hypocritical of you to go round removing people's rollback right when you frequently misuse it. Please reconsider your use of it, as it cannot be taken away from you like it can for non-admins. Al Tally ^talk 02:07, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

none of those are misuses as far as I can see. I reverted a sockpuppet avoiding a block in the first two. The third is also a sockpuppet of a recurring vandal. The forth is a user adding block templates without the ability to actually block which is an inappropriate action, so I rolled it back (and then explained why on the user's talk page). Metros (talk) 02:13, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

None of them are vandalism though, which is what rollback is for. Al Tally ^talk 02:15, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A sockpuppet avoiding a block is certainly a reasonable use of rollback. If you read WP:ROLLBACK, you'll see that it states it's for edits that are blatantly unproductive. Edits of banned users avoiding blocks are blatantly unproductive in our policies. Also, it's a good idea to consider the "when not to use" rollback definition which says don't use it if there's a question about whether the edit should or should not be undone. Is there any doubt that those four edits needed to be undone? There is no doubt. Metros (talk) 02:20, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

By my explanation I did not mean lack of an edit summary made me roll back. I meant it confused me and made me unsure see rest of explanation.Xp54321 (Vandals Beware!!!,Contribs) 22:10, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well that's even worse. If you look at an edit and can't tell if it's inappropriate or not, you do not rollback. You only do so when you know it's inappropriate. Metros (talk) 22:13, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also please define future:)Xp54321 (Vandals Beware!!!,Contribs) 22:15, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In a long while (I'd say at least 3-4 weeks) when you demonstrate the understanding of the appropriateness of reverts but clearly you don't see that right now. Metros (talk) 22:18, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ok?

It's ok with me that you did nothing about that Modocc person. But are you saying if I ever see something that I disagree with in a talk page or article, that I can just delete it. For example, I don't agree with someone's suggestion so I just delete it instead of discussion? Sceapo (talk) 16:54, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion he took away has absolutely nothing to do with improving the article. Talk pages are for discussing how to fix parts of the article, not to attack or speculate about things the subject of the article does. Additionally, he was not blocked because he was never warned for any inappropriate behavior or had any other behavior that looked inappropriate. Metros (talk) 17:22, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion (see second half) did have article improvement suggestions including getting references for the statement. It all seems very subjective in Wikipedia that some are called vandals and are punished and others can delete stuff and have an excuse. Odd to me. I am not pro or anti that statement that was removed but it's bothering to see deletion like this. Sceapo (talk) 17:31, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see. Warning is the key. Please warn him. Thanks. Sceapo (talk) 17:44, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For what? There is no vandalism here to warn about. Metros (talk) 17:46, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fortune Global 500 edit war

Hi Metros, I just wanted to suggest a talking with User:Signsolid about this and this (if that's him). -- Ricky81682 (talk) 21:22, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know why someone has wrote I have other accounts. If I did have sock accounts I wouldn't be advertising they were mine like they have. Seems like an editor who I must have upset sometime. Signsolid (talk) 22:19, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Huggle and rollback

Is there any chance that the edit summary can be changed? The "reverted edits by...to last version by..." format currently used is same that is used for rollback edits. This means it is impossible to distinguish between a Huggle revert and a rollback revert (which can be an important distinction in investigating roll back abuse). Thanks, Metros (talk) 00:53, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Huggle uses rollback where possible; abuse of rollback through Huggle is still abuse of rollback. The non-rollback reverting message doesn't have a "talk" link after the user's name. The problem with changing the summary used for rollback is that you lose information. The rollback summary gives the name of the user being reverted to, which isn't always available to Huggle when reverting; retrieving it would mean an extra page history request which would slow things down – Gurchzilla (talk) 10:36, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, but if I see inappropriate reverts out of a user using Huggle that doesn't have rollback, I have to go double check if the person has rollback. Or leave a message on their user talk to say "I've noticed you're using rollback inappropriately" only to find out they're not. So, either way, it's creating extra steps for administrators in investigating abuse of rollback. If I knew right away it was Huggle abuse and not rollback abuse, I could approach it differently. Metros (talk) 14:32, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be consensus to limit Huggle to users with rollback, which will be implemented in the next version. So this should become a non-issue -- Gurchzilla (talk) 21:59, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well that'll be good (as you can see through these issues I've had today with a user who just lost rollback who's been using Huggle inappropriately). Metros (talk) 22:05, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Accident.i'll go strike out the warnings now.User:Xp54321 15:20, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!I'll explain to the user now and apologize.User:Xp54321 15:28, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I watch American Idol (season 7), a page I edit, and saw Xp's huggle/rollback (cant distinguish), twice he reverted absolutely non-vandal edits, actually reverting to an incorrect version of the page. I've warned over on his talk, but I noticed he just recently had his rollback removed. Can an editor than immediately just go sign up for huggle to circumvent this? Gwynand | Talk•Contribs 16:16, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) Really, just because you don't have rollback anymore soesn't mean you can still make many mistakes with other reevrting tools. If you keep misusing other tools, why would anyone give you rollback again if others know that you would misuse it due to your misuse in other tools repeatedly. You should try learning more about vandalism through your adoption like I am currently. --User:RyRy5 16:21, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Understood.Am I still allowed to make legit reverts?User:Xp54321 16:36, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, so I suggest you double check your reverts before you save the page. Metros (talk) 16:38, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay.User:Xp54321 16:42, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Could you specify the mistakes?User:Xp54321 20:22, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Or more accurately.What mistakes?(Gordon Greer not mistake,was removing content,at least one other user also rved it)Xp54321 (User talk:Xp54321 20:27, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gordon Banks is the biggest mistake I've noticed. There were also several others like Battle of Jutland and Sweet About Me where you reverted inappropriately (though you went back to correct yourself). At Weezer you undid vandalism, then, for I don't know what reason, decided to put the vandalism back in. Metros (talk) 20:31, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly! I undid myself a few times when I was unsure figuring better safe than sorry. How was gordon banks a mistake. Please check! Battle of jutland? Sweet about me? Specify.I have a right to explain my actions!User:Xp54321 20:33, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you wanted to be "better safe than sorry" you should have never done the revert in the first place. Gordon Banks is clearly a bad revert. The user condensed the dozens of lines of the squad list into one template; how is that vandalism? Metros (talk) 20:35, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Two other editors also reverted on that gordon greer page.User:Xp54321 20:34, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Only one warned about huggle and not about this!STOP picking on me!!!User:Xp54321 20:36, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And does this explain why you reverted? Metros (talk) 20:40, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes.When unsure I look for bot or other editors' reverts.User:Xp54321 20:41, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You were the first person to revert there; you weren't just following others. Metros (talk) 20:44, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh forget this.There's no persuading you.User:Xp54321 20:48, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you removing the rest of my signature?User:Xp54321 20:49, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"no persuading you". Did you have those mistakes? Yes. Were you warned that you would have it taken away for further mistakes? Yes. Therefore, it's taken away. It's that simple. As for your signature...I don't like excessive crap on this page such as several lines of signatures. Metros (talk) 20:52, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tyw7

I sometimes edit without logging in. My non logged in user name is 81.86.68.253. Tyw7, formerly Troop350 (talk) 11:04, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Talk Page Message

Hi; please read WP:DRC, and note that I have no interest in discussing anything with you at my talkpage. 81.86.68.253 (talk) 11:50, 25 May 2008 (UTC) Registered as User Tyw7 Tyw's Talk[reply]

And why not? Do you actually believe that you have a right to create pages in other users' subpages? Metros (talk) 12:02, 25 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No I don't. I just wanted to help them make a user box other users has been badgering them to make. The user box is a barnstar for finding the hidden page. 81.86.68.253 (talk) 17:08, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If they want the barnstar, they'll create it. There is no need to create one for those users unless they ask you for help to create it. Metros (talk) 17:14, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Check the number of edits I did as Troop350. 81.86.68.253 (talk) 17:41, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And since then? 186 edits, 3 to articles. Metros (talk) 17:47, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And as anonymous user. User 81.86.68.253-- 81.86.68.253 (talk) 18:10, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That brings you up to 8 article edits since the 8th over a total of about 320 edits overall. Metros (talk) 18:12, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No User

You put on WP:CHU, that there is no user by the name of Connor Turnbull. THAT'S IS WHY I WAS ASKING FOR MY DOOPLEGANER ACCOUNT TO BE CALLED CONNOR TURNBULL. SimpsonsFan08 ^{talk Sign Here Please and get Award} 12:53, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay...there is absolutely no need to yell. That was just a note there pointing that out. If you want it to be there and there is no such user, why don't you just register as that? Why'd you pick the other account and ask it to be shifted to the Connor Turnbull one? You could have just registered Connor Turnbull and be done with it. Metros (talk) 13:06, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My Talk Page

As per your edits on my Talk Page -- that is my Talk Page, thank you. The message in question was a perceived insult and I removed it because I don't wish to be insulted on my Talk Page. Thank you. Ecoleetage (talk) 16:08, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That is no where close to being an insult or personal attack. If you believe it is, discuss it with the user and ask that user if they could explain the intent of the line and if they are okay with you editing what they left you. Otherwise, it is just plain rude to do that. Metros (talk) 16:12, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rudeness is subjective, and you don't know anything about what transpired regarding the history of that line. If I am not violating specific WP policy, please stay off my talk page and leave me alone! Ecoleetage (talk) 16:15, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I should add that I genuinely understand where you are coming from. I am impressed with your efforts to maintain order here. So...

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		For your dedicated efforts in bringing order and civility to Wikipedia. Ecoleetage (talk) 21:59, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Suddenly

Only add audio samples (User:Deinaked) 15:58, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What? Metros (talk) 20:02, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I thinj s/he means this? « Milk's Favorite Cøøkie ^{( talk / contribs)} 20:04, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Which is weird because that wasn't just adding an audio sample. Additionally, why do we even need an audio sample, let alone two audio samples in that article? Metros (talk) 20:07, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:Deinaked is currently trying an edit war and submitting false references and deleting text on wikipedia. Fourth vandellism action today. I have given some warnings to this user but he/she still re do's my work and ignore my warnings. Deinaked also reverted my work on the Headstrong album page where i found over 5 kilobytes of false references and text. And then in Brenda Song's I'm Not That Girl article dienaked reverted the chart positions which where referenced and when i remove chart positions by dienaked that are not referenced she/he reverts my edits.IntoCreativeJan) 20:07, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your comments

I am in receipt of your comments. While I am sure that your intentions were well-intended, your choice of words can be perceived as something less than helpful. I appreciate your efforts to be helpful, but I must ask (again) to please stay off my Talk Page. Thank you. Ecoleetage (talk) 02:23, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You really, really need to grow thicker skin if you perceive anything that I said there as anything less than helpful. You really need to stop being so confrontational with other users. Everything people say you take as an insult, an attack, or otherwise degrading to you. Metros (talk) 02:25, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Look, I said that I appreciate your efforts to help me. Unfortunately, I disagree with your diagnosis and your choice of words.

If you read what I had posted elsewhere, you would've seen that I've been confronted out of the blue in the past few weeks by people who have been rude and patronizing. I am not making this stuff up. I don't go barging into people's Talk Pages insulting their research skills (that's happened to me), I don't call people names in article discussions (that's happened to me), I don't openly insult people's choices for AfD nominations (that's happened to me) and I don't start conversations about other people when they are not present to defend themselves (that also happened to me). When I have been rude (which I admit has happened on occasion), I've apologized and tried to make amends. I did that today with you (see above), though it seems my gesture here may have been taken the wrong way.

As for "begging" for an award -- I am sorry, but I believe you completely misread what I wrote. This was part of an overall statement that I feel that my contributions to WP are not appreciated. I see no reason to go into details here on this matter, for reasons that I hope are obvious, and I was simply venting frustration that I feel no one cares about what I am doing here.

I am genuinely sorry that my commentary angered or irritated you. I have no wish to have a fight with you, nor with any person on this site. The sum of what I was after is very simple: I just wish people would show more respect to me. Thank you for listening, and be well. Ecoleetage (talk) 02:46, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE: little help...

I do agree that it seems like begging, which I don't think he should be doing because he's a pretty good editor (and sorry, Eco, for "talking behind your back" - I know you're going to read this, but we're just discussing the situation). I'll leave him a note about civility; sorry he responded that way, though I think he didn't mean it harshly though it does come across that way.

Anyway, sorry for letting this situation leak out of my talk page; I didn't intend for it to become anything big. Cheers, Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP! :)} 03:17, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For Metros and MoP, I am genuinely sorry that I gave this impression. This is clearly not what I hoped to achieve in speaking aloud about how I felt about my WP time. I was strictly stating my frustration over a perceived lack of respect, and it appears that my rambling went off in directions that resulted in impressions that I never intended. I genuinely hope that you can take my apology to heart and consider the matter closed. Thank you, both. Ecoleetage (talk) 03:43, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And also, for Metros, I am deeply sorry for creating offense by labeling your message as "nonsense" when I deleted it. That was uncalled for -- you obviously had my best intentions in mind and it was puerile for me to act that way. This will not happen again, trust me. Ecoleetage (talk) 03:54, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings

Hello Metros, you may not know me, but I was someone who you dealt with in the past. I admit I have been confrontational and rude, to you, to Scientizzle, to Mr. Wales and those not named herein. I have been in reflection since my last time when we fought. After my last church service where I received the sacrament of Holy Communion (I'm Congregationalist Christian) I realized, that not only have I wronged you, but I violated the word of my God, in the way I threatened legal judgment against this project. I don't expect I will be forgiven by you and the others, but I seek it as I sought forgiveness of Christ when I received Communion. I withdraw all legal challenges and threats of legal action against Mr. Wales, you and Wikipedia. I know I likely will not be unblocked, and won't be likely believed. But I am sorry to you all, and I will resign from Wikipedia. I love you all as my brothers and sisters in Christ's kingdom. Let Him decide between us. God Bless you, Metros. I wish you long life and good health. ForeverSearching (talk) 17:48, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And who are you? Metros (talk) 17:52, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's ESCStudent774441 (talk · contribs)... — Scientizzle 18:28, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I just noticed it after the post to Bolvb's page. Any thoughts? Metros (talk) 18:32, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See my response. I've no compulsion to block now, considering the withdrawl of the legal threats, but I won't be particularly patient without a good signal-to-noise ratio. Considering this is, like, the fifteenth "retirement" from this user's accounts & IPs, we'll see if it sticks. — Scientizzle 18:37, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just so you're aware, check out User_talk:Scientizzle#Greeting. — Scientizzle 21:30, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gee, it makes my apology look anemic in comparison. Can I do a rewrite? LOL Ecoleetage (talk) 18:20, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism only account?

Sorry, barkign up the wrong tree here :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by FelisLeo (talk • contribs)

Okay? Metros (talk) 20:29, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah sorry I already asked the question to Less heard van U. I did a good job misreading the AIV history. FelisLeo^Talk! 20:34, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Admin

I have already asked my mentor for advice on what I should get involved with, and he gave me great advice, but now I want even better advice especially since your and admin. My question is to become and admin in the future what should I get started and involved with right here and now.User:Gears of War 21:49, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't give advice on how to become an administrator, sorry. Metros (talk) 22:04, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay?User:Gears of War 22:09, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Metros (talk) 22:14, 27 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Xp54321

You'd better have a look at this and this. I'm inclined to let him carry on editing - I don't think he can be blamed if there's a bug in the software - as long as there's the proviso that one error and he's blocked. I imagine the events of the past week have at least driven home how important it is to be careful; blocking him seems a bit harsh. — iridescent 00:56, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I already gave a short block (15 minutes) so we can sort this out. I've posted at Gurch's page. Metros (talk) 00:59, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You might also want to offer words of advice to Realist2, who seems to be giving him (and others) impressive amounts of very bad advice ("the Barnstar of Editcounting"?); I'm not inclined to get involved with him since my sole interaction with him to date has been him issuing a ridiculous borderline-threat to me regarding my "hassling" Xp.

Yeah, I saw the total WP:DICK behavior of Realist2 with the barnstar. That's in response to this edit count discussion at Xp54321's talk page. What do you think should be done? It is just being a dick and nothing else obviously, Metros (talk) 01:06, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I dont consider it DICK, more POINT. --Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 01:20, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(ec) As you've probably seen, I've warned him both on Xp's talk page and mine; his latest gem is "get your block log wiped". Although Xp might not believe me, I do think he's a genuinely good faith editor - but Realist's encouraging him to treat Wikipedia as a MMORPG is doing him no favors at all. — iridescent 01:21, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's both. I request that you "take it back" with the barnstar because it's extremely uncalled for, it's disruptive, and it brings the wrong example to Xp54321. Metros (talk) 01:22, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Im not taking the barnstar back, its cruel but i will encourage him to avoid editing counting. Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 01:23, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Then I have taken it away anyway. It is disruptive and uncalled for. Metros (talk) 01:27, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fine, as you please. Realist² (Come Speak To Me) 01:28, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Test wiki

Hey, Metros. I noticed your request at User talk:Misza13 and unprotected your account at the test wiki. User:Xp54321 protected your account so as Xp54321 said "He will not harass/bully me here." Metros, do you happen to know any connection to why all this is happening? If you don't want to reveal it here, then please E-mail me. Will be waiting for a reply. -- RyRy5 (talk) 02:28, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd prefer if you'd let Misza13 deal with this. This is why I asked Misza13. Metros (talk) 03:43, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Misza13 seems like a user who can handle the rest of the situation. Thank you for your civility and WP:COOL handeling the situation today. Best, RyRy5 (talk) 03:49, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

...Yes, I know that. That's why I asked that he take care of it and why I didn't go to you to ask you to do it, because he can handle it. Metros (talk) 03:52, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Misza13 is more experienced in handeling tough situations. It's okay if I unprotected your user page there, right? That's something I can handle quickly. -- RyRy5 (talk) 04:09, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE: Help Desk

I would say in huge letters the exact reason, you could even block SimpsonsFan08 afterwards so I never come back. Really, I don't want this username any more. Or can I take away unified logins. SimpsonsFan08 ^{talk Sign Here Please and get Award} 13:18, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

floral park memorial hs

what is the sources simply dont exist? Cherokee40 (talk) 00:53, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've updated the one link that probably just shifted. Anything else? Metros (talk) 01:03, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

:) thanks for the prompt attention and response Cherokee40 (talk) 20:49, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That deletion

You're probably right, for archival purposes. (I'm a historian; I grok archiving!) --Orange Mike | Talk 14:15, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Huggle

I am formally requesting huggle back.Xp54321 (Vandals Beware!!!,Contribs) 04:15, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely not. You'll have to wait longer than one week to get it back. Try again around July 1st after proving you can accurately access vandalism. Metros (talk) 12:05, 31 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

aj

i dont understand why you removed my link from the degrassi high wiki. i have been running that site since 1997 and the majority of the original degrassi cast members find it entertaining. pat mastroianni invited me to his stag party! come on. please restore it.

AJ's Degrassi Universe website

thanks.

Gp75motorsports

Hey there! The grapevine told me that this guy was blocked for a month, and I was wondering if you'd be ok with lessening his sentence if he agreed to some very strict rules about what he can't touch. Maybe, as a consequence for breaking this deal, he'll get a month and a half? Sorry, I'm just a bit sympathetic and I think he's a good editor, so I'd like to give him another chance. Thoughts? Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP! :)} 02:23, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What "very strict rules" did you have in mind? Don't forget, he's under a topic ban as it is (user talk, article, and talk pages only) and the reason he keeps getting blocked is because he can't stay within those rules. Additionally, what evidence being a "good editor" have you seen? Metros (talk) 20:55, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Taking a look at the block log (which I hadn't done; I was only just aware that he was under a topic ban), I can't believe that anyone would be discussing lifting the block. He's got an established track record of not playing within the bounds being set; why expect the behavior to change when lowering the penalties? EVula // talk // ☯ // 21:20, 3 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Metros: Mainly, private communications with him. That doesn't make me biased, but I'm fairly sure I can get him to stop his bad behaviour if I reinforce the notion that this is his ultimate last chance. Of course, I'll take full responsibility in dealing with him if he does end up violating his topic ban (though again, I find that unlikely).

EVula: because sometimes people will stop caring when they're just continually turned away. I've got a feeling that giving him another chance could be beneficial. Of course, I may be wrong, but the sun may whisk the earth into a black hole at any moment for all we know. I'd like to take the chance. My terms would be his block being terminated, but with the risk of a six-month break if he violates his ban in any way, shape, or form. I dunno, I think he could be a good contributor. So, what do you guys think? Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP! :)} 01:31, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I oppose any unblocking or lifting of his topic ban in any way. If you wish to bring this to the incidents noticeboard, go for it, but I definitely do not support it myself. Metros (talk) 01:41, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to have a conversation with you.

Do you have IRC? I'd e-mail you, but you don't seem to receive messages that I send to you. Ziggy Saw dust 01:15, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

no thank you. Metros (talk) 01:16, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Would you be willing to respond if I send you an e-mail? Ziggy Saw dust 01:25, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

nope. Metros (talk) 01:39, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you wish to appeal your ban, you can contact the ArbCom just like is suggested for every other banned user. Creating sockpuppets for the umpteenth time is just adding to the reasons not to unban you. I have no desire to engage in conversation with you because you have done absolutely nothing to gain my trust and just continuously return to causing issues. Any conversation with you will just be circular as they have been in the past. Find it rude, find it bitter, whatever, but engaging with you in the past has gotten no one anywhere. Metros (talk) 02:24, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Block Request

I would like to request a block for 65.10.112.223 because he already got a final warning and then vandalized here.Gears Of War 00:24, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In the future, report vandals to WP:AIV for administrator action. Contacting individuals is not as effective since they're not necessarily always around. Metros (talk) 02:43, 5 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your thoughts welcome....

Can you see any good-faith explanation for this? — iridescent 01:25, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

See this discussion, too. I am really reluctant to block him — let alone hardblock — since I do think he's a good faith user, but this is starting to take up a ridiculous amount of sound & light. — iridescent 01:43, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sound and light?User:Xp54321 01:46, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Before block let me have a chance to say sorry.:)User:Xp54321 01:47, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, just...wow. Metros (talk) 01:48, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow?<confused>:)User:Xp54321 01:48, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Iridescent, I think you should bring this to the incidents noticeboard to get other administrator input on this. Metros (talk) 01:52, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My thoughts as well - I'm doing it now. As I said on Xp's talkpage, I really don't want it to look like we're running him off the project. I'll notify you (and him) once I've composed it. — iridescent 01:54, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Replied.User:Xp54321 01:55, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

?'s have yet to be answered.:)User:Xp54321 01:58, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Only. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion here regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. — iridescent 02:05, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Per above:Delivery!!!:)User:Xp54321 02:10, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

sorry

im sorry why i created that i have no idea why i did nor remembering creating it. Electrical^{Vandilize Me} 13:27, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Software Leadership arguement

We don't need "leaders" of a WikiProject of three people. Large WikiProjects like Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history have coordinators because of the size of the project, but one for a group of three is unnecessary. Please take out the leadership categories. Thank you, Metros (talk) 15:22, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because I was hoping of more participants. Tyw7, formerly Troop350 (talk) 16:15, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Let's keep this at the project's talk page. Metros (talk) 16:17, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Email

I have emailed you back.User talk:Electrical Experiment 19:40, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've replied. Metros (talk) 19:46, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ive replied again Electrical^{Vandilize Me} 22:37, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Cool Award

You are always cool about what you do. You are always civil no matter what the situation. Everytime I see you edit you know what your doing and you do it perfectly. You are helpful and awesome, you deserve this.Gears Of War 23:33, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gears Of War 23:33, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Rollback

That's not what I said. I have a userpage. I have userboxes. And I had a signature, but I took it away not to offend Keeper76. He said that I was using it for social reasons and to be noticed, and if I eft it on, he would ignore me from now on. I don't want that, because he is an extremely wise admin, but I want freedom of speech. What should I do? Shapiros10 Talk 12:08, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You keep saying he said he'll ignore you if you don't; can you please provide a diff as to when and where he said that? I can't find where he said "change your signature or we're not talking anymore." Metros (talk) 12:15, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

He apparently assumed I was using my signature for social reasons, so posted a notice saying that I will stop using Wikipedia as a social site (which I'm not, my user talk edit count is high because I had 2 adopters, and revert vandalism), and stop using it to be noticed. If so, he would ignore me. It's the long-ass sentance. Shapiros10 (talk) 12:18, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are you talking about this? At that point you had already changed your signature as he notes. But no where in there was there a threat to ignore you if you didn't change your signature. I don't think anyone objects to you having a custom signature, just as long as it's not over the top like your previous one. Metros (talk) 12:28, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is this better? Shapiros10 ^{Say "Hi"}_{My work} 12:31, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's better, but I think you should ask Keeper76 for his input on it since it appears that he's the one with the biggest objections. I think there will be objection to the "Say hi" aspect of it since that could be seen as being for social purposes. But, like I said, talk to Keeper76, Metros (talk) 12:47, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keeper has already stated he wants me to have a plain signature. I will change the say hi part. Shapiros10 ^{Say "Hi"}_{My work} 17:36, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Slight problem

Hello Metros, every time I try to log on and edit whilst at University, I simply cannot. I'm not really familiar with autoblocks and whatever else but if the IP for my Uni has been blocked, will that prevent established users from editing too? ——User:RyanLupin 11:41, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Depends on the block on the IP. If it's "soft" blocked then you should be fine to edit (that means that only anonymous users are blocked while registered users can edit. A "hard" block would block all users on that IP. Metros (talk) 00:08, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So it sounds as though my Uni has been 'hard blocked,' then right? Is there any way I can get around this or will I have to accept that I can't edit whilst at Uni? ——Ryan (talk)

You could try to edit from there with your account, then when the block message shows up, post it to your talk page and an administrator should be able to change the block from hard to soft to allow you to edit. That would probably be the easiest way, Metros (talk) 12:11, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thanks very much for your help ——Ryan (talk)

Excuse Me? I need this answered!

Yea, um, if posting a fact about Zac Efron on the talk pages isn't the appropriate place, then where am I supposed to post it? Empezardesdecero1718 (talk) 03:39, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A fan forum about Zac Efron? What you posted has nothing to do with improving the article and is just fan discussion. Talk pages are only about the article, not for discussion about the subject like that, Metros (talk) 12:09, 19 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What Just Happened?

Why did that weird balck and white stripes pattern appear behind the Wikipeida logo no matter where I went?--User:Xp54321 02:02, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have no clue what you're talking about. Metros (talk) 02:13, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bug?

I just changed my config page so that "rollback:false" but I could still access huggle. Bug?--User:Xp54321 17:27, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"rollback – true/false. Use rollback if available. Default: true." What the false option does is it reverts the edits without using rollback. So only people with rollback can use Huggle, but they have the option of reverting without using rollback through Huggle. I don't know what benefit is gained out of not using rollback through Huggle though. Metros (talk) 17:32, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So is that why my reverts were much faster than my previous experience with huggle?--Xp54321^{(Hello!,Contribs)} 17:36, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I read it the same way Metros reads it - e.g., you need rollback to use Huggle, but you don't need to use rollback. The program should work at the same speed whether or not you're using rollback; Huggle "banks" the edits you make and does them as-and-when it gets the chance (which is why you can get sudden spurts of 10-20 edits in a minute in your history). It's better to use rollback, as it's much kinder on the server. – iridescent 15:03, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SSP case

Yep, they're the same. Similar activity, and this makes it clear. It wouldn't be thought of as evidence, but each sockpuppet has exactly the same style of userpage. I've blocked indefinitely pending the outcome, but I don't see much need for checkuser attention here. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 21:08, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

re: oren0's RFA

Yeah, I noticed that as soon as I clicked save. Slightly embarrassing... I had been looking over some of his contribs, and I neglected to pay attention before I saved the page. Right now, I am framing some questions regarding his answers. Thanks for the heads up, though. J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 18:57, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete these pages please

Hello, can you please delete these articles: Grayson Maximillian Sumner III, Ernest Bartholomew Tweeny, Natalia Felicia Anastasia Romanov , Thank you. All of there content is being moved to one big article.User talk:Gears of War 20:49, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think these should deleted without discussion. If you do create this other big article, these can be turned into redirects to that article. Metros (talk) 22:11, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I created these articles. So what your saying is that when I finish the bigger article, redirect these articles to the big one? User talk:Gears of War 22:16, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Metros (talk) 22:18, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay thanks.Gears Of War 22:18, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:67.119.131.122

Hi, you have blocked that IP adress in March for 3 months (User:Mewtwowimmer sp). Can you please have a look at the new contribs? I believe he is continuing where he left off. Special:Contributions/206.117.150.6 is probably the same user. He is (under these IP adresses) vandalizing in many different wp-projects (de, es, fr, it to my knowledge). Is there any easy way to prevent that?--80.145.110.244 (talk) 23:42, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've blocked both IPs. Blocks here, though, don't affect contributions on other languages, so you'd have to bring this up at those sites. Metros (talk) 23:58, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Don't know if you're still watching my talkpage...

...but the signature here kind of puts XP into perspective, doesn't it? (I know I'm being a bit bitier than it probably warrants, but he needs enough of a kick up the backside about it to change it now; he'll be flamed off the project altogether if he posts something like this on one of the Defenders of the Wikis' talkpages.) – iridescent 20:33, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was already on it after seeing the header "MySpace" on your talk page on my watchlist. Metros (talk) 20:35, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well at least his talk page is soothing now. How the hell do you get sucked into these things lately? Geez. Metros (talk) 20:46, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You think that's bad...

The really weird thing is I didn't get a single flame for taking the Hugglers' toy away from them — but this gets me to the point where I have to protect my talkpage. I feel like suggesting he ask Giano for advice, just to see what would happen. – iridescent 20:58, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I need your support

Metros there was this big discrimination and we have to stop it(the cabal). Please Metros, I know our past has been bad, but please!, I need your support. User talk:Gears of War 23:16, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly not. Metros (talk) 23:23, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

*Sigh*, alright Metros, then I guess we go our sepperate ways on this contriversy, but remember, this is wrong and we will change it.Gears Of War 23:26, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

G.20 USA

About the block, you should ban Ecoleetage,too for helping with sockpuppetry. Wikidude57 I am Stinky Stanley! 23:51, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion without Notice

Per File:Stewie-Normal-Head.png, why did you delete this when not notifying the uploader [me]? User:StewieGriffin! 10:22, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because it was a speedy deletion. Metros (talk) 11:27, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But it wasn't. User:StewieGriffin! 18:41, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, yes it was. It was an unused, non-free image. Such images are speediable under policy. Metros (talk) 20:22, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for the revert. =) -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 23:02, 6 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Monorail Shop.jpg removed from Walt Disney World Monorail System due to Fact Tag

I had to remove the image as someone was looking for a citation for the image on what it is called. I saw the image listed as Monorail shop, aka The Roundhouse or Monorail Barn, but someone does not believe that is the real Monorail image from Disney World and challenged it with a fact tag. I do not know if its even possible to find a published source to fix this so I had to remove the image. I am contacting you as your were the one that initially placed the fact tag there so I would like to hear your side of it if possible. You can discuss the removal at Talk:Walt_Disney_World_Monorail_System#Image:Monorail_Shop.jpg Removed From page due to Fact Tag Sawblade05 ⁽^{talk to me} ^| ^{my wiki life}⁾ 19:28, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RFA comment

Copy-pasting this, with slight editing, from Mr. Tally's talk page. In re-reading the RFA thread, I saw that my statement could be - and may well have been - read as saying, "seeing YOU, Mr. Majorly Orly Albert Tally, of all people, responding to opposes here and in person, would point to MySpace tendacies". That was not my intent. I was simply saying that seeing anybody in the (de facto self-appointed) role of Oppose Opposer could be seen as being indicative of an over-emphasis on social networking. I believe the remainder of the thread is res ipsa loquitur. --Badger Drink (talk) 21:56, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

So you're saying that any attempt to have discussion about opposes in RFAs is inherently social networking? Do I understand this correctly? Metros (talk) 22:10, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There's a difference between discussion and seeing one particular user employ a shotgun approach to opposes, while claiming to see nothing WP:MYSPACEy about it. If you cannot agree with that, then I would say you have a different understanding than do I, yes. --Badger Drink (talk) 22:29, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]