User talk:Tedder

User:Erikupoeg

I have reported the ongoing issues with User:Erikupoeg - [here]. Thank you for your participation.--Rubikonchik (talk) --Rubikonchik (talk) 22:14, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Graham Norton

Tedder, I'm responding here to a message you left because I mistakenly made an edit without logging in, and would prefer that if you have a response, you do it in reference to my Kaihoku account, not the IP address. The edit was Graham Norton, regarding him being gay, and my IP was User:69.234.102.28. Basically, you told me I made an edit without sourcing or reference. However, had you looked 2 sentences down you would have seen the reference (where it describes two men that he has dated). Fairly obvious. I had simply put my edit at the beginning of the wrong paragraph. Surely it would have been far easier for you to make that connection and correct that error? Rather than revert it and call it a "vandalism", which it certainly was not, and avoid the hassle of putting a message on the IP page's talk page. Kaihoku (talk) 22:45, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi Kaihoku. Obviously, there's no way I could have known the edit was being made by you, not an IP editor. Having said that, an edit from (what looks like) a new editor stating "Z is openly gay" reeks of vandalism, even if it's true. This is especially true because you did not use an edit summary. For instance, if you said "adding sexuality to lede", it would have been straightforward. But, again, adding four words with zero context really looks like vandalism- especially in a paragraph that now says "Norton is openly gay. In 1988 he was mugged (..)"!

I used Template:Welcomeunsourced, as it's a very friendly greeting to a user- not "this is vandalism", but "a statement such as you posted should give reliable sources". As an experienced editor, obviously you are aware of that and WP:BLP's emphasis on sources; there was no way to expect an IP would be aware of that.

To prevent such an instance from happening in the future, I'd suggest posting a message to the IP talk page indicating it is your "accidental edit" account, and to post to User talk:Kaihoku. Cheers, tedder (talk) 23:47, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

Hello Tedder. All good points. I'm still surprised you didn't make the connection with the second paragraph-- that would have supplied context. Typically I try to read the whole section before making edits. Anyhow, thanks for the suggestions, reminders and the response. Kaihoku (talk) 03:59, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

photo request list

I'm going on a 5-week trip to Oregon's Mexico (thanks katr) and will hit a lot of southwest Oregon. Need a photo? Post it to the list below. tedder (talk) 18:52, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

• (in GPS) Glendale Jr/Sr High School the "pirate high school" tedder (talk) 18:52, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
• (in GPS) Buncom, Oregon LittleMountain5 19:32, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
• (in GPS) Golden, Oregon LittleMountain5 19:32, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
• (in GPS) Seven Feathers Hotel & Casino Resort These would be nice if you get a chance, but don't go out of your way. :) Thanks, LittleMountain5 19:32, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
• (in GPS) Register Guard building off I-5 at Belt Line, west side. That is if you are taking I-5. I didn't know it was there when I went to Eugene on Friday, and then I couldn't figure out how to get there. Aboutmovies (talk) 06:01, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
  • We may end up cutting over to the coast at Corvallis- if so, I'll do this in a different trip. tedder (talk) 16:17, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

I just went through that way but didn't stop. Pretty drive, very twisty=fun on a motorcycle? Oregon Route 34/U.S. 20, correct? So...Philomath, Flynn, Alsea, Tidewater, Burnt Woods, Blodgett, Waldport...there are a few other wide spots in the road along there. Alsea has that picturesque-derelict-main-street-buildings thing going on. Katr67 (talk) 21:16, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Usurpation at no-wiki

The old account has been renamed. Your SUL-account will be created next time ou visit no-wp. Haros (talk) 05:22, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, and  Done tedder (talk) 16:13, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Portobelo Ruins and bay.jpg

Hello. I just uploaded your image of Portobelo bay to Commons with your usernime as author, hope you don't mind. Can you remember which fort it was where the photo was taken? Gloria or? --Ukas (talk) 01:37, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi- I don't mind at all, thanks! The fort was the one on the west end of town, right by the boat launch/dock. I don't know there was more than one; if this isn't enough information, can you give me an EL with a map or info?

Oh, I sort of remember the second one- it's accessed through the city center to the north. Right? I don't have photos of that one. tedder (talk) 01:44, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

There were three forts to start with, recently uploaded this map. Todofierro (Iron castle) was in the North-West corner of the bay, most likely was destroyed, San Jeronimo the smallest fort, probably near the dock in north and Gloria I think south from the town. These forts originally continued as smaller fortifications with gun positions and such, and my memory of the place doesn't help me at all. I think your photo is probably from San Jeronimo. --Ukas (talk) 14:26, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Hmm. It's probably Gloria, though I'm not 100%. I remember that it was at the road entrance to town and there was some sort of ruins on thie hillside. Based on the map you indicated, that would be Gloria. Jeronimo still exists, but IIRC is partially submerged and used by locals to launch canoes and such. The port/dock is at the entrance to town, which also indicates Gloria. tedder (talk) 16:05, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

You're probably right. There's another image in commons Portobelo.jpg, which is categorized under Castillo Santiago de la Gloria. Does this look familiar? --Ukas (talk) 00:11, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Ukas, that looks like the same place. Obviously it's OR at this point, but I'd tend to believe it :-) tedder (talk) 01:09, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

With this information I feel pretty safe to use it in Finnish article of the battle of Portobelo, thanks for your help. --Ukas (talk) 03:46, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

HD notice

Hello, Tedder. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at WP:HD regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Tool to find all pages which two editors edited. Thank you. --decltype (talk) 11:38, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! replied. tedder (talk) 21:06, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

RFPP request

I am dealing with a sockpuppet abusing his IP talk page, the user is User:MaxPayne87 and the blocking admin is not available. Momo san ^Gespräch 21:05, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

I'll take care of it- in the future, make sure to mention if you've contacted the blocking admin. tedder (talk) 21:07, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

John Hughes

Thanks for the quick protection on this page. It will make my life much easier. Wperdue (talk) 21:15, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

No problem! tedder (talk) 21:16, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

More vandalism

The vandal is continuing to create socks or else using sleepers. Can you protect my userpage too? I asked at AN for someone to run a checkuser or block the IP. <>Multi-Xfer<> (talk) 03:25, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

 Done More than happy to do so. Looks like that user is blocked, we'll play whack-a-mole if more pop up. tedder (talk) 03:28, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks again. :-) <>Multi-Xfer<> (talk) 03:31, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Gladly! That's why the tools exist. tedder (talk) 03:32, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

the disney protects

Thx for doing that. Regarding your comment of Make sure to file a sockpuppet report for the socks, we have. The most recent one was rejected with the followup suggestion of protection the pages again. We're maintaining a list of related vandal edits here, so you can see some of the history and IP address range. SpikeJones (talk) 04:04, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Sweet- glad you've filed and are tracking it. I've been through the WP:LTA thing too- see Wikipedia:Long term abuse/Pioneercourthouse.. keep the vandallog up, warn all IPs and users, and report them as soon as they cross the bar. It's harder if it isn't obvious vandalism, and it's also harder when a sockpuppet investigation hasn't been completed. Once the latter occurs, it's easier to block them on the first hint of "jump in dot". I'd be happy to help out with page protection as necessary. tedder (talk) 04:14, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Advice always appreciated from those who've been there before. Will keep you posted, but usually the page prots seems to keep things at bay. We'll see. Thx again. SpikeJones (talk) 04:22, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Indeed. The one thing I forgot- know that it's a game of whack-a-mole, and it should take less work for "us" than for the sock. So keep your vandal report up to date, and don't burn yourself out. tedder (talk) 04:28, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

And they've hit again, from yet another IP in the range. This is fun, yes? SpikeJones (talk) 12:06, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

page protection requested.... and denied. Jah jah jah. SpikeJones (talk) 13:50, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

I see why it was denied- not much activity. Until a SPI is approved and everything is linked, it's hard to protect a bunch of pages. tedder (talk) 16:10, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Anon IP edits started up again, hitting other pages. (83.70.162.93). Same 83.70.x.x address as others and same page destinations. Suggestions on where/how to proceed for next steps? SpikeJones (talk) 15:30, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Hey

Thanks buddy ;) — Ched :  ?  02:44, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

De nada. Sometimes, I enjoy following RFPP more than sorting out the issues themselves :-) tedder (talk) 02:45, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Exotic Magazine

Hello Tedder. Thank you for assisting in removing the speedy deletion. I agree that the Exotic's entry needs to be turned into a stub as my original entry was upsetting many in the way it sounded like an advertisement. Truly, that was not my intention. I actually thought I was assisting to improve Wikipedia as when I was reading the Portland, Oregon entry and saw Exotic mentioned under the Media subsection with a RED link, I figured I should make a small page for people that wished to know more about it. I wrongly assumed that since there was an "intention" of a link but no page created, I should step-up to the plate. In fact, when I clicked the red link, it took me to a "no page exists.. create this page" and so I attempted to do so.

Obviously, the stub is very very basic now and if you need any further information to assist in adding to the stub, please feel free to ask me. At this point, I feel it is better to stay away from editing the page as it seems to spark massive COI rants. I will say that you can use the previous information that is NOT deemed as advertising (perhaps rewrite it a bit) as it is wholly owned by Exotic Magazine (assumed business name) / XMAG LLC. (the parent company) and I am the single managing member of XMAG LLC. If a formal email needs to be sent, please direct me as to what it needs to contain and where it needs to be sent.

My apologies for any early contention on my part but clearly, I'm fairly passionate about this. Not only because it is my "baby" but I feel it is being attacked unfairly. Initially, I assumed you were not being evenhanded in your approach as well, but now I have realized that you are just trying to operate along Wikipedia's guidelines. Thank you and again, any assistance, direction or advice you can offer will be greatly appreciated. bryan (talk • contribs) 19:16, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi Bryan -- saw your note here, hope you don't mind if I butt in. I can appreciate where you are coming from, and will readily admit that Wikipedia as a whole does not deal cleanly with this sort of situation -- frequently leading to frustration on the part of people in your position. If I'm one of the people who seemed to be attacking you, I hope you will accept my apologies -- that was not my intent.

As for reproducing material from your marketing kit, we actually have a procedure set up for exactly that sort of situation. See this page. Please note, however, that (1) you must release the text for use in any venue, not just Wikipedia (sounds strange, I know, but there are good reasons for that) and (2) providing this permission, as you probably understand by now, isn't likely to get the content included; it merely removes one technical hurdle to including some of it.

Feel free to contact me directly/privately if you like. -Pete (talk) 19:24, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi Bryan. Yes, having a redlink indicates people are hoping the article will exist, but it must still follow Wikipedia's standards. I may add information back, but I'll probably wait until the article for deletion wraps up. At least we can have a long discussion about it, rather than having it speedied. I can tell you are passionate about it, but Wikipedia's pillars must still be followed.

You'll probably still be needed to edit the article, but pay attention to the feedback you've gotten on the AFD and the talk page. It comes down to one thing: reliable sources are needed to establish notability. I suspect you're having trouble grasping what Wikipedia means by reliable sources- if so, feel free to ask. I'm more than willing to help you out.

Note it isn't a content issue- most of us are laissez-faire liberal types- but we are sticklers that Wikipedia isn't used to promote businesses, that new articles follow all of Wikipedia's standards, and so on. Cheers, tedder (talk) 19:32, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

the john fisher school

look at the talk. theres an argument —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.193.64.106 (talk) 12:35, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

To put this comment by 69.193.64.106 in context, this is one of the suspected (but alternating) IPs (beginning 69....) who has repeatedly engaged in mass deletion of text and, apart from one unhelpful comment on the The John Fisher School talk page today (I guess this happened because he was prevented from making his edit by the semi-protection!), has refused to engage in any dialogue on the issue.

Please know, Tedder, that Wikipedia editors such as myself and Sayerslle will appreciate the semi-protection you installed on The John Fisher School page. Let's hope for a period of calm. Thank you. Marlon232 (talk) 13:08, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Yep, it's pretty easy to sniff out. tedder (talk) 16:05, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

I have nothing to do with any other IP. I even checked the locations and their far away from me. marlon is making bad faith accusations and edit warring. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.193.64.106 (talk) 02:22, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Tedder, can you please take a look at The John Fisher School page when you have time. It appears the IP has now got himself a registered account and is creating havoc. Thanks. Marlon232 (talk) 13:54, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

I have had a registered account for a long time. stop assuming bad faith. Husounde (talk) 14:08, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

In any case, you are both violating WP:3RR. Leave it alone. Take the anything productive to the talk page, but stop edit warring. tedder (talk) 15:11, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Yes, sorry. I should of been more constructive earlier on. Thanks nevertheless.Marlon232 (talk) 15:47, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Bug

Hello. I saw on a talk page that a script you use marked a comment as being written by me. I did not write the comment, I only replied to it before your script found it. I think this is a bug in the script's logic. Thanks.--TParis00ap (talk) 18:53, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Hey, it wasn't a script, it was a human :-) I marked the first comment as being from someone else- your comment was signed, theirs wasn't. tedder (talk) 19:23, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

No problem. I fixed it to show the right person. I just figured you used one of those scripts to do it.--TParis00ap (talk) 22:30, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Nicki Minaj

I don't know why you rejected my rfpp request, I don't understand why you just reverted vandalism to the Nicki Minaj article yourself, I don't understand why at least 5 different IPs were vandalizing the page just yesterday alone, I don't understand why you don't think the obnoxious personal attacks are not block worthy, but would you please protect Nicki Minaj? Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 02:15, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

I understand the frustration, but ignoring the one blocked IP, the level of vandalism isn't very high. I started watching the page because you were frustrated. However, WP:ROUGH makes it clear what level of vandalism is required. tedder (talk) 02:39, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

The Way of All Flesh (album)

I would like to thank you personally for semi-protecting that page for one week. It is truly appreciated. I'm just going to tell you that I've never had the attitude that certain articles were mine, if that is what you were saying with the phrase "be careful of ownership". I did like reading that wikipedia page on ownership, though, so thanks for that. I did know that article ownership is not a good practice on wikipedia, but that page did make me more aware of this principle than I was beforehand. It is nice to know that I won't be likely to deal with such a dispute within the next seven days, and hopefully never again. Backtable^{Speak to Me}about what I have done 21:21, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. The reason I brought up WP:OWN is that it appears your time has been spent protecting the "right" version, even though the information is not reliably sourced. You appear to be entirely correct- but it'd be better to improve the article so the violations are clearer than "you haven't listened to the music". tedder (talk) 21:28, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Okay, that's cool. I own the album, and I plan on sourcing its liner notes soon to back up this information, along with information I plan on introducing from the liner notes at that time. I did source blabbermouth to back up my claim, but I do realize that that page needs more sources than just blabbermouth, which is something that I will fix with the aforementioned plans for the article. Backtable^{Speak to Me}about what I have done 21:43, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your Big Brother Help

I was really trying to fix that stupid chart so thanks for helping. I don't even know who though put down Natalie as having been evicted. But yeah, thanks :) User:Revan46 01:10, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't even know anything about Big Brother, the last episode I watched was sometime in the first season. But it came up on WP:RFPP, so I tried to help a little. tedder (talk) 03:49, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Backstreet Boys

Hi Tedder, I saw that you protected this article, while I wasn't involved in most of the edit warring, I did do one revert at the end because the one editor continual reverted an IP's edits for no good reason. I did leave a message at that user's talk page inquiring about why they continued to do so, as there was no discussion on the talk page about it. It is worth noting that the user did warn the anon-ip about test edits, however it looks like the anon-ip was right in making their changes. Just wanted you to know my role in the whole thing (hate to get in trouble for something I was only peripherally involved in!) Frmatt (talk) 07:55, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your bad faith Frmatt! Source used is a site map not an article (Therefore not reliable) and the Anon-IP keeps changing IP's so clearly disrupting the article. Bidgee (talk) 08:02, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Settle down, folks. The "article" listed appears to be a 404. So it should be removed. Period. Drop the stick and back slowly away from the horse carcass. In other words- move on, we are (almost) all on the same side, okay? tedder (talk) 08:05, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

The article listed was simply missing the letter "l" at the end of the URL, and a simple google search found the problem almost immediately. It appears to be fixed on the article now, so we should probably leave it in. Bidgee: In the future, if you could make comments to me at my talk page, and not on a third party's talk page, I would greatly appreciate it. Frmatt (talk) 08:09, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Look it's not up to me to see if someone did a typo in a source, same goes for when someone add unsourced content (It's not up to me to source it). And please don't tell me were I should or should reply or tell me what to do, thank you. This is the last comment I'll be making on this. Bidgee (talk) 08:15, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Settle down, Bidgee. You are a good editor who was right (in dealing with an incorrect link). Go take a coffee break, come back and work on this again constructively. tedder (talk) 08:17, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

(outdent) Both of you, go to Talk:Backstreet Boys and let me know if you need help as an admin or mediator (I can protect or unprotect, I can ban, I can love). tedder (talk) 08:12, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Black Veil Brides

Maybe worth salting? ^Bongo_matic 08:22, 14 August 2009 (UTC) Should you wish to reply, please do so here. I will watch this page for a few days, so no {{talkback}} or other comment on my talk page is required.

Yep, it'll probably start tasting salty soon. I'd prefer to wait another round, though. Especially if it helps us find out some details of the sockpuppetry that are setting it up. tedder (talk) 08:25, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

How about.......

What do you think about deleting this shrine? WP:DENY and all. I was going to bring it to WP:MFD but then thought I would boldly speedy it if you agreed. It can always be maintained in deleted history if need be. Wknight94 ^talk 14:14, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi Wk. I understnad why you'd feel that way, but my experience is that the socks come up often enough to cause trouble. With the page semi-protected, they'll come to the talk page and start engaging users who don't know about the situation. The LTA report is an easy, low-energy way to point AGF users in that direction.

Otherwise, we end up reinventing the wheel every time a sock comes along and asks why the page is protected, claiming to have some valuable information to add to it. tedder (talk) 16:31, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

It is rather tedious to have to explain what's going on to someone unfamiliar with the situation who is assuming good faith on the troll's latest sock. It can end up wasting a lot of time. But maybe enough folks are familiar enough with the situation that good faith has finally evaporated? Can y'all stash it in some secret admin-only place? But how to explain to non-admins? Katr67 (talk) 16:59, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

WP:DENY is fine in many cases, perhaps more than half of them. However, PCH has seen plenty of our reactions, so removing the LTA entry probably isn't going to do much. On the other hand, if the settings are left as they are, there's little he can do now, so maybe erasing the whole thing isn't a bad idea. Hmmmm.... So far, there might have been as many as one AGF editor who didn't turn out to be a PCH sock, so it turns out there's little need to explain it to anyone. —EncMstr (talk) 17:09, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

There needs to be a way for admins to retain this information in such a way that it can only be seen by admins (and maybe rollbackers - hint, hint), so as not to re-invent the wheel; but to not be seen by the general public, i.e. by the troll himself so that he won't derive any further ego-boost from it. Meanwhile, I see that PCH is branching out to anything that remotely sounds like "Pioneer Courthouse", so that he can try to slip his stupid comment in. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 17:27, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

I understand admin-only, and those kinds of things, but the real problem isn't the AGF editors who want to edit the page, it's the editors who take the sock comments at face value (i.e., AGF). There's always going to be a new editor who doesn't understand the saga- such is life with socks, especially long-term socks.

So I'm saying it's necessary for average editors to be able to see the LTA page. Sure, it's a shrine and all of that, but .. so? It allows us to expend less effort to explain and block the PCH sock than it does for the sock to do their work. tedder (talk) 18:07, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Okay. Never mind then. Now per WP:DENY, let's wrap this up too... Wknight94 ^talk 18:14, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

The average editor is not in position to block them. I don't have any problems with average editors. The problems I have are with some AIV admins, when you post that so-and-so is a sock of such-and-such, and they know nothing about the case, and of course they don't believe you, and they tell you to take it to SPI, not knowing that it's already been SPI'd ad nauseum. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 18:14, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

← Hi folks - friendly TPS dropping by and all. Just a few thoughts from someone who doesn't know one of these guys unless it comes up and kicks him in shin with its quacky webbed feet. The whole thing just seems a bit "beansy and all to me. OTOH, there's a real good point about being able to point to an info page pretty quickly to get someone up to speed. My idea would be to turn the page into a redirect. Redirect it to WP:SOCK, WP:LTA, WP:DENY ... whatever. The point being that those experienced in these cases will know how to quickly provide a "permalink" to a previous version of the redirect to someone who needs to get up to speed in a hurry. Those curious passerbys are just gonna get an essay, or guideline and kind of shrug it off. It doesn't leave out the rollbackers, it's not readily viewable either. Just a thought. — Ched :  ?  18:30, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

good idea, Ched. tedder (talk) 18:46, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Ibrahim Index of African Governance

Hi Tedder, The other day I removed the issues that you had highlighted with the Ibrahim Index of African Governance page after making some edits, and you put them immediately back. I understand why you did so, as certainly I hadn't fully addressed all the concerns, so I don't at all take issue with your action there. I would, however, like to argue a discuss of the points if I may. I am a new user so I apologise if I am wasting your time at all.

Firstly, you've said it needs more third-party sources or references. It already has 7 third party sources - how many more does it need to be sufficient?

Secondly, the notability - the Ibrahim Index is a very prominent measure of African governance, even though it is new - as demonstrated by the external links on the bottom of the page. There are plenty more references available, if necessary. Please let me know if adding more external references would solve the problem.

Thirdly, the fact that it is written like an advertisement - I've tried to clean it up a bit, but I find it quite difficult because I am very favourably disposed towards to the initiative! Any assistance in the regard would be much appreciated.

Thanks! MaritzburgUtd (talk) 17:05, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

list of best selling artists

It appears the main player in the 92 IP sock farm is back on the talk page again. He just edited within the last hour. Again saying the same stuff that the IP was saying. I don't know what to do about him. Momo san ^Gespräch 20:00, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

It's such a messy thing. Do you mind taking it to ANI? I assume there are other admins who have a better idea of how to handle it than I do. Give me the link, I'll monitor and contribute. tedder (talk) 20:03, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

It starts about here Talk:List_of_best-selling_music_artists#Simply_wow and going down. Momo san ^Gespräch 20:05, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Sorry- I meant a link to the ANI thread I'm hoping you'll create. I'm following the article talk already. tedder (talk) 20:07, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Oops, my bad. I'll have the link as soon as it's done. Momo san ^Gespräch 20:08, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Ok, the ANI report is made, it's here. Momo san ^Gespräch 20:16, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Have a great trip!

I'll expect nothing but the finest upon your return :) -Pete (talk) 17:08, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Have fun! We here in Idaho's Portugal can't wait to see the photos. Katr67 (talk) 17:30, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, both of you :-) I don't actually leave 'till Monday, but I'm really busy until then too. I'll touch in occasionally. tedder (talk) 04:33, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Outstanding videos about North Korea

A few days ago I added link to outstanding video about North Korea:

• Inside North Korea (47 min. video)

The link dissapeared. Today I restored the link and added another link:

• Children of the Secret State (45 min. video)

Both links disappeared. Quinacrine (talk) 01:12, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Tedder, there's a thread open at Talk:North Korea#Outstanding videos about North Korea about this. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 01:44, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Replied, edited the page slightly. Unprot/prot requests (and any other help) will need to be done elsewhere, since I won't be around enough for the next 1.5 months. tedder (talk) 03:06, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Chronic fatigue syndrome

I have removed the protection from the page after a request at WP:RFPP referencing a discussion on the talkpage. It seems there is agreement that the editing wasn't disruptive and hopefully the article can move forward. Hope you enjoy your trip, regards, Woody (talk) 08:46, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

List of best-selling music artists

The semi-protection that was supposed to re-apply after the expiration of the full protection (as you state in this edit) never got re-applied, could you please restore it as this page is a target for vandals. Thanks.--Harout72 (talk) 19:53, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Never mind, a request has already been made to re-apply the full protection before there is consensus. Probably the best for now.--Harout72 (talk) 19:57, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Get well soon

Hope you are feeling better after the crash. Hopefully no long term impact. Aboutmovies (talk) 06:32, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, AM. I'm a wee bit sore, and the head injury just means I have to be extra-careful for the next little while. tedder (talk) 06:51, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Glad to see you back editing already. Sorry about your head bonk. That's some brag-worthy road rash though! BTW, tell T we need her on Wikipedia--she's got a good head on her shoulders! Katr67 (talk) 22:43, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Katr :-) Mrs Tedder edits here once a month or so- she's certainly smart. FWIW, my score on the Glasgow Coma Scale was a 6. Good times. tedder (talk) 05:40, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Question?

On "Talk" page of Kiha Software... you wrote "No prejudice against recreation as a neutral article". Could you explain what your wording means here? I'm happy with the tone of discussion... and the little stub I created doesn't have any bias, as far as I can tell... so I'm a little confused by the statement? I'm also not sure if you meant "re/creation" or recreation (ie. play) ? Just learning Wikipedia.... can you explain? Many thanks. Nedhayes (talk) 00:02, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi Nedhayes, what I mean is that it should follow the neutral point of view of all articles on Wikipedia. If you have a conflict of interest with Kiha Software, note it's acceptible on Wikipedia, but should be stated. tedder (talk) 00:11, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Absolutely, I agree with the policy of neutrality. Thus my confusion.... as everything written there was attributed, and purely factual. (ie. Company located in Seattle, stealth mode, that's about it as far as info.... hard to bias 3 sentences) Yes, I have a conflict with the company, as I'm working with / for them... but attempted not to add information that would create bias in any way, and would not be positioned as "advertisement" or "endorsement." Stuck to public facts. Thus, the question on neutrality. Open to suggestions on what would make this info more neutral. Many thanks. Nedhayes (talk) 00:012, 1 September 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.42.105.97 (talk)

Woops -- somehow I deleted what you wrote.... anyway, I did read it. Thanks for the help. After reading the guidelines, I will be certain to state COI clearly in future. Many thanks. Nedhayes (talk) 00:012, 1 September 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.42.105.97 (talk)

No problem. Even if it gets deleted, feel free to bring it back when more details can be given. tedder (talk) 05:35, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Links Glenn Beck

• http://www.reddit.com/r/reddit.com/comments/9gbdj/did_glen_beck_really_rape_and_murder_a_girl_in/
• http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090901181557AAie9Wz
• http://www.ireport.com/docs/DOC-323336
• http://foxnewsboycott.com/glenn-beck/glenn-beck-raped-and-murdered-a-girl-in-1990/
• http://digg.com/politics/Glenn_Beck_Raped_And_Murdered_A_Girl_In_1990

Basically it got posted on these types of sites today. It was only a few hours ago, so I'm expecting the shit to hit fan hard soon. Soxwon (talk) 02:56, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Can you post it to WP:ANI and give me that link? tedder (talk) 02:58, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Ok Soxwon (talk) 02:59, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Done Soxwon (talk) 03:03, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Film Series

I saw you declined the protection for the list of... film articles, the IP in question has been adding specualtion to those pages for the last four months under different IP addresses, 86.178.84.117, 86.176.176.90, 86.178.153.2, 86.177.116.92, 86.137.191.17, 86.156.237.148, 86.154.81.24, 86.156.237.24, 86.156.235.250, and I have tried several times to tell them not to add films which have not been released but they refuse to discuss anything. The most recent edits include moving the Saw series from six films to seven, even though the sixth film has yet to be released. That is one small example of the hundreds of edits that they have made. I have all the film series on my watchlist but removed them because the constant additions became frustrating and this one editor's lack of communication compounded it. I have tried for community consensus, at the Film Wikiproject (to define what films should be listed) and even attempted to have the pages deleted. I don't want to have to go to RFPP but the current state of the IP adding films for the year 2011, and other editors reverting is not doing anyone any favours. Darrenhusted (talk) 10:34, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Great to meet you!

Tedder, it was great to finally meet you in person at Portland WikiWednesday! Pete (talk) 13:38, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Indeed, nice to meet you too Pete :-) tedder (talk) 15:19, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Dalton Highway

For some reason you seem to think that my citation was a spam link. While it does have a motel listing at the top, the page linked to contains basically known information about the area, including that the road is 414 miles long and the page itself is not selling any services as it is a local website containing information. If you feel there is a better page stating this fact, please remove my citation and link to a better page, rather than remove it all together and put citation needed. Right now I put in another citation that is very agreeable, that comes from the US Department of Interior Land Management.

http://www.blm.gov/ak/st/en/prog/recreation/dalton_hwy.html

--24.184.36.134 (talk) 21:53, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

No matter what, your site is not a reliable source. Please read WP:RS and WP:V to see what a reliable source would consist of. For instance, to verify the length of the highway, a government site would be sufficient. tedder (talk) 22:02, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

(edit conflict) The second citation is perfect- thanks. tedder (talk) 22:02, 4 September 2009 (UTC)

Mr Smith Takes a Short Trip to Tokyo

I am not sure how to approach you so I am writing this here. I see that you have deleted the description of the documentary film Mr Smith Takes a Short Trip to Tokyo... But as far as I can see it was a documentary [1] [2] [3] and I was using the wiki page as a very good reference guide to modern architecture in Tokyo, which does not exist elsewhere. I cannot understand why you deleted something that obviously adds to the sum of human knowledge and was verifiable... Perhaps you don't like architecture? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.107.205.148 (talk) 08:59, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi- this was deleted per consensus of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mr Smith Goes to Tokyo. One of Wikipedia's 5 pillars is verifiability; the information should exist outside on reliable sources outside Wikipedia. If it does, and you can meet the requirements for a new page on Wikipedia, feel free to recreate. tedder (talk) 11:39, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Pioneer...

...has really gone bananas today. But he's right, his original talk page is blocked. Maybe open that page up and let him speak out (assuming good faith where there is none, I realize...) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 12:10, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Done, assuming User:Pioneercourthouse is his original talk page, of course. It isn't like there are no other avenues of discussion open to him. Nice job, BTW, on replying to the 'source'. tedder (talk) 12:13, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Quick Question

Hi there, if you dont mind answering, how do you get modules to put on your user page? Thanks JocobFTB2 (talk) 18:19, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

I think you are talking about the userboxes. See Wikipedia:Userboxes/Gallery. tedder (talk) 18:23, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Eugene, Oregon

Hello? Are you from Eugene? I went to Willamette HS.--TParis00ap (talk) 22:10, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

So, do you say, "It's Willamette, you bet!" or do you say, "It's Willamette, dammet!" :) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 22:12, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

You? Gene? No, I've never lived in Eugene, just poking along with high school articles. tedder (talk) 22:14, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

I say "Willamette, it sucksette." :D. Ok, I saw that school, which I've never heard of after growing up in Eugene and only leaving 5 years ago, and I thought you may be from the area. Ohh well. Happy editting.--TParis00ap (talk) 22:16, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

I've been living at the north end of the Willamette River for a few years now (previously: SEA, SAN, etc). I'm just trying to fill out the redlinks at List of high schools in Oregon and User:Tedder/2008 Oregon high school graduation rates. tedder (talk) 22:18, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

So how do you say it? :) And what do you call citizens of that fair-to-middlin' city: Eugenics? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 22:19, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Rhymes with "dammit". The real question, what's the Pioneer Courthouse of Eugene? tedder (talk) 22:20, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

You mean, where do all the homeless hang out? Springfield. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots 22:22, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Eugenians, "Hey hippie"... I had a home in Springfield once. I didn't commit any felonious acts though, so I guess I'm mostly harmless. It's pretty much illegal to be homeless in Eugene these days, but there's always my old 'hood. I had a home there too. And again, no murders. Katr67 (talk) 03:21, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

National Film Awards

Actually, I looked at the history, and it looked like Tomjacobm (talk · contribs) was logging out and editing as an IP to evade being blocked for edit-warring. I blocked them both--the IP for 31 hours and Tomjacobm for 48 hours. Blueboy96 01:03, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for digging (futher) to catch that. tedder (talk) 01:05, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Lincoln

Can you give me a hand over at Talk:Lincoln on the basics of a DAB page? Erector Euphonious (talk) 14:02, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm not a dab expert, and it looks like there are enough eyeballs on it. tedder (talk) 14:05, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Mr Smith Goes to Tokyo

You deleted a wikipage on Japanese Architecture and then you deleted my question as to why you deleted it, without giving a reason to either. I am confused. Are you allowed to do this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Architectlover (talk • contribs) 15:56, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mr Smith Goes to Tokyo for why it was deleted. tedder (talk) 15:59, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Protection of Pittsburgh Pirates

I understand wanting to protect against vandalism, but I don't see any vandalism or edits against consensus. All I see is one slightly rude IP editor who was understandably angry that his correct edits were being reverted. Could you please point the "vandalism, edits against consensus" to me? (I'm sorry if I come off rude, I'm trying to multi-task right now, I don't mean it.) BAPACop (converse) 00:59, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi BAPA, by "edits against consensus" I meant there was some edit warring going on. It seemed like a lot of this happening- like some IPs were being directed at the article. It's not a big issue- your edits look just fine, and I was responding to a request at WP:RFPP. tedder (talk) 01:39, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for answering quickly! I guess I actually forgot about the edits like that occurring earlier. Sorry for bothering you. BAPACop (converse) 01:45, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

No problem. There were a few smelly events too- like this edit summary and this math issue you corrected. No worries- I'm just here to help. tedder (talk) 01:50, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Shirelive Church

You declined my request for unprotection, can you please give me some tips to get the article up to scrach Bunzyfunzy (talk) Bunzyfunzy (talk) 07:51, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi- have you seen Wikipedia:Your first article? tedder (talk) 09:33, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Katherine Knight

Dear Tedder, thanks for the effort on requests for protection, however it haas taken me hours to even get this far. I request you take over the reversion. MartinSFSA (talk) 10:15, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

75.47.153.191

What would you do about this? Obviously the same editor that you have recently blocked, but we don't want to start playing a game with him/her. I actually think the IP was trying to be helpful (the image had already been declined by an IfU reviewer) although obviously edit warring is unacceptable. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 10:32, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Oooh, a kitty!

TomCat4680 (talk) has given you a kitten! Kittens promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Kittens must be fed three times a day and will be your faithful companion forever! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a kitten, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Spread the goodness of kittens by adding {{subst:Kitten}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!

Thanks for protecting List of DirecTV channels but I never said I owned it, I'm just trying to stop disruptive IP vandals. TomCat4680 (talk) 22:43, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Talk:Sibel_Edmonds

1. thanks for looking at the Sibel Edmonds article and questioning the decision to block. Did you have knowledge beyond his work in the article of "conflict of interest" that you mentioned?
2. OCPD is handy for a programmer, except for Is unable to discard worthless objects ( Martin | talk • contribs 20:53, 9 September 2009 (UTC))

Couple things- first, new sections are usually added by the tab bar at the top. There's a "new section" tab, which lets the edit summary not reflect the previous section.

Second, as I implied on the unprotection, I'm not really forming an opinion about the sources or the users. I hope you can reach a consensus on your own.

OCPD- look! a shiny object! :-) tedder (talk) 21:08, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Sock Puppet

Hi Tedder, I hope you don't mind me contacting you.

Whilst I was working my way through my watchlist of pages tonight, I think I may have stumbled across the works of a sock puppet. The reason I think this is because for the EastEnders characters pages I watch (like the Lauren Crace one that I reported for protection) the edits are virtually the same, the IP address is listed to the same provider but the IPs are different each time. I investigated the IP provider (ripe network coordination centre) and from what I can find out this is possible. I'm starting to think that the person is simply changing their IP every now and then to carry on making disruptive edits?

I will now be keeping an eye on all the EastEnders cast wikis for this persons disruptive edits.

Anyway I'm just looking for your advice on the best way to handle this. If I do get any more evidence of sock puppet work I intend to report the IPs. What's the best way to report it? --5 albert square (talk) 22:54, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi 5A, I don't mind. I'll give you some basics:

• Create a page (such as User:5 albert square/EastEnders sockpuppet log), track the diffs, dates, and IPs that are being used. If the sockpuppet uses username(s), pay special attention to those. Also create an introduction, explaining the modus operandi of the sockpuppet (with diffs); this is useful for directing curious editors to.
• Use very little energy to revert sockpuppetry/vandalism (see WP:RBI), but make sure to tag your edit summaries with "sock" in some way, so other editors know why you aren't doing much. The goal is to expend less energy than the sockpuppet.
• If the behavior is egregious, severe, or settles on one IP, be prepared to file a sockpuppet investigation for it. This is a good time to checkuser for more usernames (if there are any).
• Don't be discouraged. Using Twinkle and rollback, you can spend little effort or frustration to revert the sockpuppet edits.
• Come back here if there's something specific I can do.

Hope this helps. tedder (talk) 23:49, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi Tedders

Thanks for the advice. I have now set up a Sock Puppet log for all Wikis related to Neighbours and EastEnders as it is those Wikis that have caused me concern recently. I've set up the log here [[4]]. Is there anything that you would suggest adding or changing in it?

Also can I ask what you mean by Twinkle and rollback?

Once again thanks for the advice! --5 albert square (talk) 01:34, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi- thanks for the log. It looks like a good start. Make sure to get diffs of the "evil" the sock has done. See WP:DIFF if you need help with that.

Twinkle and rollback: WP:TWINKLE, WP:ROLLBACK. It makes undoing changes easier. Keep asking questions! tedder (talk) 05:30, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

P.S. Make sure to let WP:EE know about it (on their talk page). In fact, you should be active in that group (not sure if you are or not). WikiProjects are where the "community" of Wikipedia is really at. tedder (talk) 05:32, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi again Tedders, I am already a member of WP:EE but have added this to their talkpage. Now just to see if Neighbours have a similar thing to this :). Thanks again for the advice :) --5 albert square (talk) 21:11, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Jim Hawkins

The page has been unprotected. Is this correct? Mjroots (talk) 05:55, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, look at that. How crazy has that page been? Anyhow, it is only semi-protected- the diff only shows the protection "sticker" being removed, the semi-protection remains. Removing it is a fairly goodfaith thing. I may comment on the AFD, though. tedder (talk) 06:06, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Ah, just the notice removed then. Thanks for that. Mjroots (talk) 06:10, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Would you consider extending the semi-protection to run until the AfD debate is over. I know there have been issues with IP vandalism to the article in the past (à la Ken Bruce) so this action would keep the article stable while the debate is going on. I've a feeling this could be quite and AfD discussion. Also, see WP:VPP where I have raised the issue of the right not to have an article about oneself. Mjroots (talk) 08:51, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Wow, that AFD has .. flourished .. overnight. I'll extend the semi-protection, but I'd prefer to let it lapse to prove there are issues with editing it. tedder (talk) 16:18, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Take care

In Template:World Wrestling Entertainment employees you should have taken into account the warnings on Template:Pp-template about noinclude tags. We had 50 articles in Category:Wikipedia pages with incorrect protection templates. Good luck, Debresser (talk) 14:56, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Since you're obviously an admin, could you null-edit Template:ISO 639 name cel for me, please? It is stuck in that same category for the second day now. Debresser (talk) 14:59, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Oops, my bad. Thanks for the admonishment about the pp template.

I'm not sure the ISO 639 thing is the same. It says "pictish", then everything else (including pp-template) is noincluded. So the pp-template is inside the noinclude. Let me know. tedder (talk) 16:17, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

EdNerd

Obviously a sock. Removing his junk on the talk page was a good idea. Dougweller (talk) 19:51, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Sock, troll, et cetera. Did you see the stuff on his talk page? Such as the threats? *laughs* tedder (talk) 19:53, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Ah yes, this is going to cost Wikipedia huge amounts of money. Maybe we'd better put 'JC invented the Caesar salad' in the lead? Dougweller (talk) 20:20, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

I'll start warming up the Ceasar Salad Controversy of 2009 article now. tedder (talk) 20:24, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Action theory

Having moved the article from "Action theory" to Action theory (philosophy), don't forget to sort out all the links to it, which now point to the disambiguation page at Action theory. It's your responsbility, as the editor who's moved the page. PamD (talk) 22:02, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

You might want to let Tomsega (talk · contribs) know; he was working on it, he'd moved the page (poorly), so I simply reverted his copy-and-paste and did it correctly. He's been working on the rest of the bits behind the move too. tedder (talk) 23:53, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Soviet war in Afghanistan

You protected this page in its current form.[5] See Talk:Soviet war in Afghanistan#Substandard English in lead.24.22.141.252 (talk) 01:56, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

 Done Asked for clarification at that talk page, I'll be watching it for your reply. tedder (talk) 03:24, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Schools

Ha! You beat me to it! Anyway, disregard the part that's now irrelevant:

Don't know if you've seen this?: Wikipedia:WikiProject Missing encyclopedic articles/High schools I just updated our completion rate, so we're winning! :) Hardly anybody updates that page, but still...besides which, we've added far more schools than the initial 247. You might want to save that diff for making redirs one of these days if you're desperate for something to do. Katr67 (talk) 06:30, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Just saw it, of course :-) (stalking your contribs, actually). Added it to my list of TODO. Sweet. tedder (talk) 06:41, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Block of User:Linas

Hello, I saw a thread on WP:WQA regarding this user. I note you blocked this user, but you didn't note the block on the user's talk page. A few editors on WQA were discussing the user without knowing they have been blocked, since there was no template stating such on the user's talk page. Just commenting here to let you know you forgot the template when you blocked Linas. Thanks. The Seeker 4 Talk 17:35, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

TS4, that's my fault, and I'm sorry for not placing the template. I thought it had automagically happened with the block. I should have checked. Placed it now. tedder (talk) 18:50, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

While I do not condone the use of four letter words, it's possible that Linas misunderstood what happened at Trace monoid. Your friend, User:Aboutmovies had just finished editing Beyond Words Publishing, and then he linked it in all articles having a reference that contained "Beyond Words" in it. Accidentally, he also linked it in some Math/Computer Science articles, that were citing a book published by Springer Verlag, but which happened to contain "Beyond Words" in the book's title; one of those article was Trace monoid. So, this was a mistake, not vandalism. I've reverted those edits of Aboutmovies to math articles, and left him a note on his talk page. Later Aboutmovies also tagged Trace monoid as needing inline references; like I explained on my talk page, this was not appropriate, but I would not call this edit of Aboutmovies vandalism either. But it's possible that Linas saw it as WP:POINT or retaliatory, while I prefer to WP:AGF. Pcap ping 22:16, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. It's nice to hear some of the context behind it. In any case, Linas was certainly attempting to escalate the situation- responding on his talk page, then responding on Aboutmovies' talk page. Since Aboutmovies had already warned him about WP:NPA, I immediately blocked for the (further) disruption and over-the-top breach of WP:EQ. Linas hasn't asked for the block to be removed on his talk page, so I figure I'll let it stand. tedder (talk) 23:03, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Tedder (machine)

After a bit of expansion, you're now nominated for DYK. If you got a minute, go over it and tweak or whatever; an extra pair of eyes is always welcome. I'd love to include an image or two from those 19th century books, but I haven't the foggiest how that might work. Do you have any suggestions? Thanks! Drmies (talk) 04:28, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Sweeeeeet. Nice work, Drmies. I'll ask a wpfriend about the photos- fair use/PD is certainly not my specialty. tedder (talk) 05:56, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Any photo you find that was published before 1923 is public domain in the U.S. (where it counts). Also, any photo whose creator died over 70 years ago (even if it was never published). Lots of stuff that was published after 1923 is expired copyright, but figuring out whether or not the copyright was renewed is kinda dicey. Aboutmovies is pretty well versed in that stuff, I think. Good luck, and boy I bet you're glad your name isn't Windrowner! -Pete (talk) 05:59, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Do you do contract work? I have an alternate account that wants an article in its name, too :) decltype (talk) 06:45, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Well, if it's not, say, feces-related. Bacon-related stuff I do for free; anything else will require lubrication and aeration (in the form of malt whiskey and cigars). Non-profits pay double. What's the alternate account? Thanks to all of you for the advice--I found one old image in Commons last night, so I think I'm good. Drmies (talk) 14:57, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

The account name is auto, and the article would be auto (C++). The article would be similar to decltype, but a bit more comprehensive (it has a longer history). While you seem capable of writing about almost anything under the sun, I would be very impressed if you could pull this off. I suppose I'll have to write it myself, when inspiration strikes me. Regards, decltype (talk) 08:56, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Whoa Decltype--that is SO over my head all I can see is vapor trails...I'm on it, but don't hold your breath, it's a steep learning curve for me. On the bright side, woohoo! Tedder is on the FRONTPAGE right now--Tedder, I think this will kick you right up into bureaucratship. Drmies (talk) 01:37, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Comment at RFPP

I really don't appreciate your comment that I "intended to ignore all rules" when I protected the naming conflict page. I stated that I intended to protect the "wrong version" because that's what we do any time we protect a page under dispute. Bad joke, I guess, but I certainly don't have a bias in the matter. I never take admin action when I am involved in something or have an opinion on it. The belligerents in this conflict, which has encompassed Wikipedia:Naming conflict, Wikipedia:Naming conventions, Catholic Church, and who knows what else for weeks, are quick to cry foul and this was no exception. Please don't cast aspersions at the admin who is willing to act on a difficult page. --Andy Walsh (talk) 16:46, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi Laser brain, my comment about IAR was definitely not meant to be taken in a negative way. I was trying to say "yes, LB probably knows about the guidelines related to page protection and made a concious decision to do it the way he did", not "LB is causing trouble". Okay? I'm sorry that you misconstrued it otherwise, and that it (obviously) could be misconstrued by others in that manner too. I certainly wasn't trying to belittle you or cast aspersions, I swear. Cheers, tedder (talk) 16:54, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Okay, no biggie. Thanks for the reply. Look who's quick to cry foul now. :) --Andy Walsh (talk) 17:17, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

No problem. It's all good! tedder (talk) 00:20, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

DYK nom

Yes, you pretty much sit back and do nothing at this point. At some point someone will come along a review the hook and the article to make sure it passes all the rules. They will then leave a symbol like the one already there and notes. If it is a check mark, then you need not do anything. If it is anything else, then address whatever problem the editor points out. Note, this process might be done in a day, or in a week, so you just need to check back every day to keep an eye on it. Good editors at DYK will let you know if there is a problem, but there is high turnover and newer folks may not now to do this. If you go there and the hook is gone, check the queue for it (link is in the nav template at the top right), as that means it will be on the main page in the next day or so. Aboutmovies (talk) 06:21, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

David Leslie Hawksworth

Hello. I noticed that you rejected the nomination for deletion of David Leslie Hawksworth's article. I understand there was some kind of form mistake. Could you explain me what happened? Cheers --Karljoos (talk) 16:06, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Hi Karljoos, when you created the AFD, you didn't follow the steps at WP:AFD. Specifically, the discussion page was neither created nor transcluded. In other words, you followed step 1, but not steps 2 and 3. Cheers, tedder (talk) 16:15, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

LHS

Thanks for noticing!! I was using Huggle to revert vandalism, (boy, is that an experience, I usually get my user page vandalised in retaliation) and unfortunately, the LHS page had some pretty nasty npov comments on it. Another editor started the rehab and I just tried to add what I could to the page. I'm not from there either, but it needed to be done! --Funandtrvl (talk) 16:44, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

For that... why do the links sometimes have a .2b or something similar (and why do they eventually get broken if I use them)?  7  05:06, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

2b is a "plus", like this: +

That means that if it's in the section header, it'll get translated to that. In any case, I think the difference was that the section header changed, which means the URL got changed. tedder (talk) 05:27, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

BTW, those had 28 and 29 in them, which is open and close parenthesis. I'm such a nerd, I had to go check. tedder (talk) 05:28, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm usually a geek myself - just wasn't expecting ascii codes without a percent or something.  7  07:03, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Autoblocks

Hey, just a quick note regarding that mix-up with Sesu Prime (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Looks like the user was unfortunately hit with an autoblock, even though you unblocked their account. A number of automated tools exist to help find autoblocks, but over time I've found Special:BlockList to be the most reliable. Unfortunately, removing a direct block does not remove any associated autoblocks. Anyway, just a note for future reference. Cheers, – Luna Santin (talk) 19:16, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Luna, thanks for fixing it, and thanks for following up with me. Hopefully I'll have learned my lesson, eh? tedder (talk) 05:43, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Hopefully! :) In my experience, autoblocks are probably one of the most voodoo-based aspects of adminly stuff. You're certainly not the first to run into that particular issue. – Luna Santin (talk) 17:38, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

Jack Sheppard

Please don't just undo my edits.

The novel Jack Sheppard is about Jack Sheppard. Indeed, it is one of the principal works about him (if liberally fictionalised, in Victorian melodramatic fashion). It makes perfect sense to include it in the hatnote - much more so than those other people already mentioned there. Perhaps it should be in the disambiguation page too.

If you think mentioning the novel once in the lede, once in an image caption and once in the main body of the article is ovelrinking, then remove one or two of them, not all three. -- Hyphen8d (talk) 20:00, 18 September 2009 (UTC)