User talk:Gwernol

Hello. Welcome to my Talk page. Feel free to leave a comment at the bottom of the page. Please sign your comments by putting ~~~~ at the end. Thanks, Gwernol.

Archives

• /Archive 1 April 2005 through early March 2006
• /Archive 2 March 2006
• /Archive 3 April 2006
• /Archive 4 First half of May 2006
• /Archive 5 Second half of May 2006
• /Archive 6 First half of June 2006
• /Archive 7 Second half of June 2006
• /Archive 8 First half of July 2006
• /Archive 9 Second half of July 2006
• /Archive 10 First half of August 2006
• /Archive 11 Second half of August 2006
• /Archive 12 First half of September 2006
• /Archive 13 Second half of September 2006
• /Archive 14 First half of October 2006
• /Archive 15 Second half of October 2006
• /Archive 16 First half of November 2006
• /Archive 17 Second half of November 2006
• /Archive 18 December 2006
• /Archive 19 January 2007

vandel

hey, some one destroyed the norse page, I dont know how to revert it back to what you had edited last, as I'm kinda a newb. If you fix, can u maybe drop some hints as to how?

Cheers--24.83.107.101 05:47, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks...

...for blocking 64.20.34.88 (talk · contribs). You're right on top of things. =) →EdGl 03:09, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Pie man, or whatever his name is today

Thanks for the help with him. I really appreciate it... --Mhking 13:07, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Vandal

By my reading of the times, the vandalism on your userpage by User:Lollylollylollygetyour took place after they got their level 4 final warning. I am not yet qualified to block, but it si clearly now appropriate.--Anthony.bradbury 17:55, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Gosh we need a bot for this.

Gwernol, the IP you recently blocked is from a shared school in Michigan. User:198.110.53.252. Thanks. Real96 18:56, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

User Sparspost

He changed the article Poles to a version that an IP vandalize many times. I tell him, that he has to discuss about this kind of changes but he does it again. I don't want to do an edit-war, so I tell you about it. Can you tell him that he has to talk about this change before he editing again? And can you reverse his change in this article, please? I don't want that someone think that I do edit-war. Thanks in advance!--Plk 19:57, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

New Award

Hey Gwernol, I just made this award and thought I'd give it to you first! §†SupaSoldier†§ 23:24, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

File:Photo 369.jpg

I award Gwernol the Baseball.....I mean Anti-Vandal Cool Admin Trophy! YaY!

Protection

Gwernol; in the face of the torrent of vandalism to which your user page has been subjected recently, I am quite certain that no-one would feel it wrong if you were to fully protect it. The irrational and unwarranted level of attack is beyond anything in my experience by whole orders of magnitude. And while it is clear that the attacker is psychologically deranged, that does not mean that you have to tolerate it.--Anthony.bradbury 23:22, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

User:68.55.106.131 blocked

Hi. You recently blocked subject user for vandalism. However, he also violated 3RR (after I warned him). He had many more than 4 reversions. Now that he's blocked, should I bother with a 3RR violation report? -Amatulic 23:31, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

HE'S BACK! On a different IP now: User: 70.17.235.208 -Amatulic 23:56, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

My mistake - 'twasn't vandalism. -Amatulic 00:01, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for all the advice you have given me so far and your Support, it is much appreciated. I am sure that I will look to you for help in situations that i feel uncomfterable handeling, etc etc. Thanks again for the unofficial editor review which you obviousley took sime time to peruse my edits, it was very much appreciated. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 00:29, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Is there a template for indef block due to innapropriate usernames per Wikipedia:Username? -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 02:53, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Sweet. Thanks much. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 02:55, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Hello

Hello, Gwernol. I was just browsing through a list of random admins when I found your name and looked at your contributions. I said to myself, "Wow, this is great!" Thanks for making Wikipedia a happy and reliable place! Cheers, --Jimbo Herndan 04:27, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

User:Eedo Bee

Has stated on ANI they will continue to vandalise the talk pages of articles he considers to be inappropriately tagge. I gave him a {{test4im}}, but he blanked it and is continuing to remove tags. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeffpw (talk • contribs)

He's blanked the warning given to him by another editor yet again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LuciferMorgan (talk • contribs)

Thank you for looking into this situation. I hope that I've been acceptably calm about it, and I appreciate you - someone who isn't directly involved in this disagreement- helping to mediate it. Reading your explanation, I realize that I shouldn't have been so quick to return the vandal4 tag to Eedo's talk page, and I won't do it again. -FisherQueen (Talk) 14:05, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I wanted to thank you, too, for your help, and apologize if I made your work harder. That was not the intention. I had limited time before I had to leave for work (on a break, now), and wanted to see it resolved before I left. Thank you for helping out! Jeffpw 16:36, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

User:GymLeader_Dalton

Thanks for un-vandalizing my boring page which hardly ever gets vandalized. I turned in the user [1] to an admin already. I don't bother fighting with them anymore. Wahkeenah 17:01, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks for un-vandalizing it again. I see he picked up on my comment, so I'm assuming he's watching with glee. He'll be blocked soon. Wahkeenah 17:07, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

RfA

Oppose, eh? Well, that can be expected, what with our rather...unpleasant business a few months back. I'm sorry about that. ~ Flameviper ^{Who's a Peach?} 17:25, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for undoing the Revision as of 02:42, 12 December 2006 (edit) by 64.107.190.194 on Edward Szczepanik. I appreciate your work as a recent changes patroller! Tom Szczepanik 23:23, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Spamming accusation

I'm not quite sure if this is the right way to message you. I got a message from you saying i was spamming because I posted an article about a book i just wrote. Why is putting a link to my book any different from the other books there on the same subject? I thought that it was ok to include links to books that related to the subject? The Anatomy of Mona Lisa is about the Mona Lisa, why is it considered "Spamming" to include it as a book on the mona lisa page? If it's ok could you please list it? I am not spamming —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Itsjustlife (talk • contribs).

User:Eedo Bee

Thanks for stepping in and blocking Eedo Bee. I had hopped that he had merely misunderstood what project tagging meant and that the argument could be resolved through discussion. It is a shame he decided to re-emphasise his hostility to LGBT issues on his userpage and tag the Pedophilia article in response. He could no doubt have been a valued contributor had he stayed away from areas in which he had such strong feelings. Ah well, his choice. You made the right call, regretable though it is. WJBscribe 02:25, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Eedo's Matmice article

I notice you Prodded it. While he is not one of my favorite editors, could you consider removing the PROD until his block has expired? I have no doubt that the article will never survive Afd, no matter how long anyone works on it, but at least he will have had a chance at it. Jeffpw 10:26, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Another thanks (you seem to be collecting them)

Thanks for reverting vandalism to my userpage! —Remember the dot (t) 03:47, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank You and Semi Protection

Hey Gwernol, Thank You for reverting the Vandalism on my Userpage and also....do you think you could Semi-Protect the Ninja article because of Non-stop IP Vandalism! §†SupaSoldier†§ 19:52, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Range block

Do you know of a way to do a range block? There is an ip that keeps replacing juimbos pages with a mans ass. the first 3 octets are the same only the final number is changing. I am going to assume the subnet has 256 possible address. 59.91.253.80 , 115. I am not saying that a range block is appropriate here but should the same ip address patern continue, is there a way to impose a short term range block? Thanks! -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 20:49, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! I found the reading useful and all those networking classes actually paid off (i.e. i understand it!) Thanks, i will exercise extreme caution should I choose to use such a block. Thanks for the ptompt reply. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 21:06, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Great job

You must do a great job because you piss off vandals and get your page vandalized all the time! The vandals are cowering in fear! Keep up the good work (I am sure the userpage vandalism does not even phase you. lol). -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 01:03, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Gwernol, I have said it before and will say it again. In the light of the amount of vandalism coming your way, fully protecting your userpage would be wholly reasonable.--Anthony.bradbury 11:40, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism Reversion

Hey. Thanks for reverting the vandalism to my user page. I appreciate it. Kriak 00:00, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Indef block

Not sure if you saw this, but User:ReggiN kcid's last placement of the block template was done before your post (3:10 vs. 3:11). Thus he didn't disregard your warning (since he didn't add it again between the time you warned him and the time you blocked him). If you knew that already, sorry to be a bother, but I personally don't see a problem with giving him another chance. --Spangineer^ws (háblame) 03:20, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Hah, never mind. I just saw his last comment; keep the block on him. --Spangineer^ws (háblame) 03:22, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Just to add to this, this gay just left me a, banned from editing label...odd Gavin Scott 03:31, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism and warning

Just a heads up that I reverted a vandal attack on your page, and gave the offender a level 3 warning. Akradecki 04:24, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Review

Gwernol, thank you for your comments. You highlight two failings which I was aware of, and am working to overcome; a tendency to get annoyed with vandals who attack pages which I regard as sacrosanct, such as Auschwitz concentration camp, and a tendency not to sign if I get excited (though I usually go back, sign and apologise). I shall get there.--Anthony.bradbury 22:25, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi.

You're an admin, right? Can you please delete the page Team environment? I put the prod template on a few days ago, but it was taken off (despite the article being patent nonsense). Thanks for your help. Abeg92contribs☃ 02:38, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

OK, thank you for your policy guidance. Your help is appreciated. Abeg92contribs☃ 03:27, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

How to site my sources?

i was just wondering how do i site my sources? because i thought they meant put it on the wikipedia page but i guess i thought wrong... please fill me in on how to site my sources you wrote me saying i added spam and advertisement wich was not my intention please write me back and let me know! thanksMatteo747 05:49, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for the revert of my userpage (again!!) and for the sprotect - much appreciated! :) - Alison^✍ 11:27, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

64.107.220.161

Can you please put an end to this nonsense? You blocked this person, but take a look at the talk page history. (jarbarf) 15:56, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Sock of User:Jeff Dorlean

I noticed you were the blocking admin for User:Macdaddys, a sockpuppet of Jeff Dorlean. I've come across another editor with identical edits who I believe is also a sockpuppet of this person. User:Ashley Chiles has already been blocked for 24 hours, but may need another look. Being unable to find a sock report, I hope you can take a look. Thanks, auburnpilot talk 18:35, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Block of 207.228.211.35

On Friday, I reported User:207.228.211.35 (see debate User_talk:TigerShark#Barry_Bonds_et_al_). It had been 3 hours since his last edit so nothing was done. I see you must have caught him today. I am guessing that admins have some kind of tool to flag an IP adress so that when it edits you immediately check the content of the edit. Thus, I am guessing that my efforts are a part of the reason you finally caught the guy. Is it correct for me to claim any credit for catching this guy finally. Also, did you block his sock that I reported on Friday. Please respond to my talk page. TonyTheTiger 19:03, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Hey Gwernol

Hey Gwernol, How are ya? ;^) §†SupaSoldier†§ 01:27, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

I noticed your revert of Squared World, and I was wondering...

Hi. I think you are perhaps more experienced than I in Wiki. Could you explain for me, either here or here, the reason why Squared World has a semi-protected tag, when it seems to lead to a web site consisting of a black holding page, no possibility of checking out notability or member stats, and does not Google in its own right when put into a search? Come to that, why isn't it on the rocky road to speedy delete? I've no axe to grind in particular, I just can't get over its transparent lack of notability. Any throwing of the smallest amount of light would be appreciated. Thanks. Refsworldlee^(chew-fat)(eds) 20:04, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Wow! That WAS speedy! Forget it, and well done. Refsworldlee^(chew-fat)(eds) 20:07, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply on my Talk. I have only just got used to the procedure for reporting serial vandals, I still have to get to grips with speedy delete nomination. You've a head start on me, of course, being Admin... Cheers. Refsworldlee^(chew-fat)(eds) 20:12, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

=why does my tourism section keep on getting deleted?!

hi i made the changes you wanted me to make i got sources and everything BUT WHY DOES MY TOURISM SECTION KEEP ON GETTING TAKEN OFF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! i really dont understand at all so if you could tell me what else did i do wrong.... because i really dont think i did anything wrong and im thinking that if you dont want to allow me to put some truth on that article that contains so much inaccurate information then you should just completely erase it the whole page! because im not just offended im am angry because whats true is not allowed on but the bunch of lies that are on there are welcomed.Matteo747 21:34, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Re:Vandal tagging

Thanks for message dear. I will try to be better then I am doing now and will work on your guide lines .Yeah some time I open too many windows so I often forget to sign.Next time i will be carefull .Thanks

Khalidkhoso 21:48, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Dear i can not identify some "subst". if you could help more regarding it . Khalidkhoso 21:57, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Got Your Point. Thanks Cheers Caio

Syndromeofadown 21:55, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Why you were blocking my friend? Now he will be deported because made unemployment by you and he leaving for Kyrgyzstan again next day. Maybe you abuse your administrator power. And stop doing that please for my friend he maybe never I see again. He is maybe tried for making more account and you dont again block him. I am angry for you already.

Askar

I'm sorry I write such things in my userpage, but my friend is deport now and maybe never I see again. I did not for personal attack. I dont know you yet maybe and I dont mean for attack.

Askar

3RR

Gwernol, will you please fully protect your userpage NOW, before I get caught for 3RR.--Anthony.bradbury 13:34, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

3RR doesn't apply to vandalism reverts. Personally I don't think there's any need to protect the page, there seem to be hundreds of people watching it for no apparent reason, myself included. Regards, CiaranG 13:37, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

I posted a message on Antohys talk page about it. I also blocked the ip address. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 13:39, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

OK, whatever you say. I have been here for only a year (nearly), but have never seen such a concerted attack on anybody. As you are clearly aware, many of us are waqtching your page. --Anthony.bradbury 13:45, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

No problems. In fact I have protected it for a short while mainly to give all you very kind folks who have watchlisted my page a break. I have seen worse attacks (check out poor User:Metros232 for example) but do seem to annoy some vandals. I take it as a sign I'm doing a good job here :-) Best to you and a huge thanks to everyone who has been reverting the vandalism on my user page. Gwernol 13:49, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

OK boss.--Anthony.bradbury 17:54, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism??

You accuse me of vandalism of AIDS yet all I did was clean up to paragraphs to make them more readable and consise? I find you are very rude to say that my edits were "unhelpful and non-constructive".

Please do not add unhelpful and non-constructive information to Wikipedia, as you did to AIDS. Your edits could be considered vandalism, and they have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Gwernol 10:53, 7 February 2007 (UTC) Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Hne123"

Kindly explain why you consider my changes to be vandalism or else undo your revert. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hne123 (talk • contribs).

Thank You

Thank You for Reverting the Vandalism on my Userpage, Gwernol! :^) :^) :^) §†SupaSoldier†§ 16:26, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

yeah, me too! Philippe Beaudette 19:00, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Why

Why shouldn't I vandalize? I tried to help by uploading pictures to Mandisa only to have them be deleted without a reason as to why. It's not fair that the hard work I went through trying to find them was WASTED. -MFan3 01:31, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

The article Arnold Schwarzenegger is vandalized multiple times by different people. Would you consider protect or semi-protect it? Wooyi 04:07, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

DURAN DURAN

I feel extremely offended for being blocked from editing. I am not aware of my errors or as you call "vandalism". It would be greatly appreciated if you could unblock me and and give me a reason for you actions!! Thank you DuranDuran 06:26, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

User:Lucas

Hello Gwernol. You were very kind to help with blocking Ludvikus last week. Just to let you know, as you were probably aware, there were actually two problems editors in this case, namely Ludvikus and Lucas. The latter has also been a problem lately on other philosophy-related articles. He has a history of blocks and disruptive editing, summarised here. Is there anything you can do? There are a number of good editors that I am trying desperately to keep on the philosophy project, but it is getting to much for them. Again, the page I referred to has full details. Thanks Dbuckner 07:29, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Editing the AIDS article

I see that some changes to the wording have been happening, and reversion of those changes, apparently without any discussion on the talk page. When there is disagreement about the wording of a section, please discuss the changes on the talk page. It's helpful to put descriptive edit summaries, which can refer to the talk page e.g. "see talk" or referring to a particular section of the talk page where those edits are being discussed. Editors are not supposed to just revert other people's good-faith changes without discussion or explanation. Rather than repeatedly reverting others' edits, editors are supposed to discuss until consensus is reached before making changes to disputed sections. See Wikipedia:Resolving disputes. I would appreciate seeing the disputed wording discussed in an organized manner so I can see what's going on. I'm putting this same message on a few users' talk pages. --Coppertwig 11:45, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

I apologize; since you had already reverted your own reversion, directing the above comment to you was unnecessary. I was telling you things you already know. I think the other two users I directed the same comment to were new users -- it was intended more for them. I retract the above complaint and apologize for any inconvenience. --Coppertwig 13:43, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

By the way: from my reading of the page history, I think Hne123 was editing the wording, not just re-ordering citations as you said in your edit history. --Coppertwig 14:05, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

64.107.220.164 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

When I saw the proxy block tag, I added it to Wikipedia:WikiProject on open proxies and indef blocked it per the open proxy policy, pending investigation. If you are sure that it is not an open proxy, then please unblock, and re-block for a time commensurate with protecting the vandalism. Also, I IPprotected the user talk page since the IP was vandalising the talk page as well. Thanks. -- Avi 16:23, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Ludvikus again

Would be grateful for any help. The community is utterly exhausted. See KD's message on User_talk:FT2. Many thanks. Dbuckner 19:28, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Gwernol. I know Ludvikus would like to perceive it as stalking, but I think you can understand other editors hoping that the agony will be less prolonged this time around. KD Tries Again 22:33, 8 February 2007 (UTC)KD

Dear Gwernol

The issue was the Frankfurt school. The two historical figures you objected to pertain to the reaction of that school. The Frankfurt school was disillusioned by the prevalence of irrationality in Europe at the time. Anyway - I'm deeply disappointed by the level of attacks upon my person, and that this is not recognized. I'll do my best to keep away from Wikipedia - the behavior against my person is deeply disappointing. --Ludvikus 23:16, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Protection

Gwernol, although you say that you have wholly protected your userpage, this does not appear to be the case. I have checked, and am able to edit it, though I obviously have not done so. Now, as a special favour, just for me, please totally protect your user page. It is not a lot to ask!--Anthony.bradbury 20:38, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Possible semi-protection and he states it's whole or temporary full-protect. BuickCenturyDriver 01:06, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Zoey 101

I did not express personal opinion. It was proved facts. Why did you feel the need to remove it? Babygurl13573 01:52, 9 February 2007 (UTC)