User talk:Acalamari/Archive 033

Time to revert?

Hi. It's now April 2 (UTC), so is it time to revert your page back to normal (your retirementship request was scheduled to close 38 minutes ago)? Also, this seems to be some kind of in-joke I missed out on, but why did 11 different users on your page have almost identical signatures? I myself didn't have time to redecorate my page :-( (ah well). Thanks. ~A H 1^(TCU) 00:36, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll revert it tomorrow when it's April 2 in my time zone: no harm in doing that. :) As for the signatures, take a look at this and every section under it. :) Acalamari 01:50, 2 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks much

I never realised you helped protect my userpage from vandalism, thought I'd drop by to say a big thank you. AyrtonProst ^{Sign Here}/_Contact 13:15, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome! Acalamari 16:10, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome thanks

Thank you for your welcome. I made a suggestion at Barack Obama and hoards of people attacked me and didn't even address the 2 very specific suggestions. What a place Wikipedia is. You're nice, though. G7error (talk) 20:44, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. The Barack Obama article is, unfortunately, prone to a lot of angry discussion, and will be for a long time. You have one group of people trying to POV push one way, and another group trying to push an opposite POV, and both groups have to be countered: as such, new editors who try to make good-faith suggestions often get thrown in the "troll" category, even when they're trying to help. Don't let it discourage you though; Wikipedia is a big place, and not everyone is angry. :) Best wishes. Acalamari 20:50, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Compliments

Thanks a lot for the nice comments. I actually plan on having an RfA relatively soon - but I am interested, you are the second person to suggest that you didn't think it would be for a while. Is there an issue which I am missing? Thanks again. :) — neuro^{(talk)(review)} 17:39, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. :) Regarding your next RfA, I merely assumed that based on the current RfA standards and atmosphere you were waiting a little longer before running again. I don't believe you're "missing any issues" at all, as you've done a very good job in addressing past concerns. It is, of course, totally up to you when you run, and I'm not someone who opposes based on a "not enough time since last run" basis. Best wishes. Acalamari 17:46, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I figure the worst that can happen is that I don't get the bit. I wouldn't have thought that seven months was too short of a time between RfAs, and I don't recall seeing anything to that effect, at least recently. Whilst you aren't one to oppose over it, would you consider it to be a reasonably short amount of time between RfAs (or is it because of the circumstances?) — neuro^{(talk)(review)} 17:51, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In all fairness, I didn't realize it's been seven months since your last RfA: I actually thought it was more recent (I didn't check the dates). No, seven months is not too short, and even under your circumstances, that amount of time is reasonable, and it's even more reasonable as you have admitted you've made mistakes and have worked to improve them. My original comment on time, however, was that I wasn't expecting an RfA straightaway (i.e. running right now), with no prejudice towards an RfA that begins a few days or more from now. Not that I would oppose if you suddenly went for RfA now; I'm not bureaucratic in that way either. :) Acalamari 18:00, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, ok. Thanks a lot. :) — neuro^{(talk)(review)} 18:02, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome! Acalamari 18:05, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just thought I should correct my own mistake - it's actually 3 days over 6 months, not 7 months. Oh well, I've never made that mistake before! ;) — neuro^{(talk)(review)} 18:08, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Meh...six months isn't that bad either. :D Acalamari 18:11, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

change on the christina aguilera article

May I be enlightened as to what is so "disruptive" about my edit to the christina aguilera article? Acalamari (talk | contribs) m (92,243 bytes) (Reverted disruptive edit) (undo) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gjuteriet00 (talk • contribs) 17:32, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You undid someone's edit for no reason at all, and the fact that from the page's edit history, the accounts revert-warring there are either sockpuppets of each other, or a load of people meatpuppeting together. Plus, another one of the accounts then reverted my edit for no reason at all as well. This is blatant disruption. Acalamari 17:37, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Aguilera

Yes, it's getting out of control. I think it's time for a checkuser. I've never requested one. You're probably more adept at it and as an admin can get it done more smoothly. Thanks. Ward3001 (talk) 18:40, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, based on new evidence since my above post, checkuser will be useless: the is a case of meatpuppetry, rather than sockpuppetry. The source of the problem seems to be from this forum, where someone decided they didn't like the current image. Since all the accounts most likely come from different parts of the world, checkuser won't work here. It would be abusive for me to hand out blocks. I'm trying to work out how to deal with this one, though currently there's a discussion on the talk page, which is a start. Thanks. Acalamari 18:48, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I would assume such meatpuppery, if done sufficiently to votestack a consensus, is against policy, right? Can you get a neutral admin to intervene? And one question about my personal editing: If I revert more than three times in 24 hours to remove an image that is added against consensus, is that a 3RR violation? It may come to that if more reasonable editors don't get involved. Thanks. Ward3001 (talk)

Yes, it would be votestacking, and it wouldn't really be consensus. I can get a neutral admin to intervene too, and one who is much better with images than I am: I'll contact him in a minute. With 3RR, this is a borderline case, and I probably would refrain from reverting beyond the limit. Acalamari 22:27, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Intervention

I've protected the page and explained why on the talk page. I'm naturally suspicious of the new image, but, if it can be proven to be free, I have no preference either way- that's a matter for discussion and a RfC, if needed. If it cannot be proven to be free, I'll follow it through and make sure it winds up deleted. J Milburn (talk) 22:54, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you: Ward3001 asked about getting a neutral admin involved, and I wanted one to intervene before blocks got thrown around (not by me, mind you, as that would be abuse given my involvement in the article). I'd rather not have this dispute end with all the people from that forum getting indefinitely blocked here. Acalamari 22:59, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: E-mail

Y Replied. Thanks, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 17:46, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Aitias

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Aitias/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Aitias/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, [[Sam Korn]] ^(smoddy) 23:06, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Question

Done. Thanks for letting me know; I forgot that the discussion went further than that. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 17:13, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Certainty

I'm a big fan of certainty myself. Anything I can say that would help restore yours?—Kww(talk) 21:39, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate the follow-up. To be honest, I've read the supporting and opposing arguments on your RfA, and I'm not sure how to vote on it any more. I don't want to offend you at all, but from the opposing arguments, I don't feel I can comfortably support your RfA, but from my personal experience of you and all my observations of all the very good work you do where you participate, I'm certainly not going to oppose either. As such, I decided to leave the RfA as quietly and as drama-free as possible. Acalamari 22:31, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback

Thank you for granting my account rollback rights. I'll have to do some learning on how this works and how it's supposed to be used, but it could be quite useful. Michael Patrick (talk) 18:23, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome! Acalamari 18:38, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RFA thanks

My RFA passed today at 61/5/4. Thanks for participating in my RFA. I appreciate all the comments I received and will endeavor to justify the trust the WP community has placed in me. Have a nice day. :-) AdjustShift (talk) 21:31, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Easter!

On behalf of the Kindness campaign, I just wanted to wish my fellow Wikipedians a Happy Easter! Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 06:19, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, A Nobody! Much appreciated. :) Acalamari 15:28, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Hey there

Hey Acalalmari, I'm Good, I can never stay from this site. :P Been here almost 3 years strong. Have a good day. :) Quasy Boy 22:23, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, thanks: I've been here some 2 1/2 years myself now. I'm not as active as I was in 2007, but I'm still around. Glad to know everything's fine with you. Acalamari 02:27, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks :) Quasy Boy 22:30, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Acalamari's Day!

Acalamari has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian,
and therefore, I've officially declared today as Acalamari's day!
For being one of our most respectable administrators,
enjoy being the Star of the day, Acalamari!

Cheers,
bibliomaniac 1 5
04:31, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you'd like to show off your awesomeness, you can use this userbox.

Thank you, Bibliomaniac15, for my own day. :) It's nice to know I'm still appreciated. :D Very best wishes to you. Acalamari 14:51, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sturridge?

Hi, Acalamari. I have come across Sturridge, which I suspect to be a hoax, but I'm not sure. Can you have a look? It's short. Thanks. --Anna Lincoln (talk) 09:40, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No doubt now, I CSD tagged. --Anna Lincoln (talk) 09:45, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine. For the record, I took a look at the deleted revisions, and I endorse both your CSD tagging and the decision of the deleting admin. Good call. Acalamari 14:54, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Acalamari

Hey its been a while since we last talked. Is my sysop training page still active to edit? // A Raider Like Indiana 21:29, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

Hi there A Radier Like Indiana, good to see you again! :) As for your coaching page, you can edit it if you want, but since you last edited the page, I decided to put an end to my coaching program, mainly because it was more of a way to help users pass RfA than to become better admins, and also because being coached became a reason to oppose RfAs. That all being said, it's nice to see you again. Acalamari 21:36, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Socking editor disrupting WP:MISS

I noticed you reverted here. This has been going on for months. AdirondackMan quits, demands to be listed. When that fails, he goes to Jimbo and asks Jimbo to make sure he's on the list. Then when that failed, he started using his IP and pretending to be someone else. I gave the IP a warning for edit-warring, and it responded by continuing to edit war over WP:MISS and it threatened to take me to ArbCom. History shows the edit-warring and checking the contribs of AdirondackMan, this IP, and this IP tell the rest of the story. As you can see, the IPs are clearly the same, and I am very confident that a checkuser (if it came to that) would show that the IPs are socks of AdirondackMan (among other things, both go complain at Jimbo's talk when things don't go their way). Please block the IP for persistent edit-warring. Thanks, Enigma^msg 16:49, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The most recent IP has already been blocked by me for a week, and is my third block of them, and the other one I blocked over a week ago for a day but has not come back yet, so I'll leave it. Do you know what his goal is out of all this? Acalamari 16:54, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

To gain recognition for himself, of course. It's obviously him, so since he hasn't left, the longer he keeps adding himself, the longer it will take for him to even be there legitimately. Majorly talk 16:57, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As Majorly said, he's clearly desperate for attention. He contributed very little while he was here, but he apparently wants to become "famous" by being listed at WP:MISS. He's tenacious, that's for sure. Normal people would have given it up already. Since edit-warring and complaining to Jimbo didn't work, the next step apparently is ArbCom. I bet ArbCom would be plenty surprised to see a request for arbitration on someone wanting to be added to WP:MISS. :D I didn't notice you had blocked, because the only message on its talk page was my edit-warring warning. Thanks. We'll have to continue to keep an eye on him. Enigma^msg 17:03, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As for the other IP, it does not need to be blocked. It was his old IP. Blocking it would not accomplish anything. He switched to another IP in the same range, and if he has the technical know how, he'll change IPs again, which will make it all the more bothersome. I'd recommend blocking the account and any future IPs that appear. I can give the user a final warning. Enigma^msg 17:06, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

With continued socking and disruption, he's actually more likely to end up in CAT:TEMP than on the missing Wikipedians list. I see in this edit summary he tried to throw us off course, but that didn't work. I'll keep blocking the IPs when I see as you say. When you refer to the account, do you mean blocking the main account?

As for the ArbCom case, that should be very amusing. I can't believe he's edit-warring to remain on Missing Wikipedians... Acalamari 17:13, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, the Adiron [sic] account. Should be blocked. As for throwing us off course, it's nothing new. One of the old IPs went to Jimbo's talk and pretended to be a "friend" of Adiron... who knew he wasn't coming back. He figured he couldn't do it himself (WP:MISS says not to add yourself), so he'd sock and pretend to be different people very interested in making sure this user got added. Never seen anything like it.

By the way, can you block this vandal? It's been blocked three times before. Look at what I just reverted: [1] copied and pasted entire article onto talk, [2], etc. It's been at it for a long time. Enigma^msg 17:29, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Both are blocked. I'll let you tag AdirondackMan as you see fit. Thanks. Acalamari 17:34, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Will do. Got one more IP for you. It's been blocked 6 times, it looks like, last time for two weeks. Keeps coming back and vandalizing. Enigma^msg 18:53, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

After you take a look at that IP, come over to my talk. You know who is socking again. He's again threatening to take me to ArbCom. Should I encourage him? "Either YOU stop interfering and allow him to be listed, or we WILL go to the Arbitration Committee over your objection. Your objection will not rate, and if needed we can seek outside of Wikipedia remedies, mediatorial or abitrational outside Wikipedia and anything else the law allows us." I'm confused. He's mentally ill and is demanding to be listed on WP:MISS or he and his other personalities will sue Wikipedia and me? ArbCom will be delighted to know that they can just pawn this one off on the court systems. Enigma^msg 19:02, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Starting to think checkuser is warranted

Special:Contributions/138.116.138.132, Special:Contributions/68.236.155.108, and Special:Contributions/67.246.40.144 all geolocate to the same region. FYI, I just used rollback on my talk. This was the friendly message I received. Enigma^msg 19:06, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Someone else revert this, please. Enigma^msg 19:23, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've only just logged in and seen this: for the record, I've just blocked the IP you were reverting just now for a week. I'm about to log out again now (I'll be back in a hour, as it's lunchtime here), but I have to say that the recent disruption shows a clear intent to, well, disrupt. I think this is a case of block on site. Can you please tag all his suspected socks? Thanks! Acalamari 19:40, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Funny you mention it. I was just about to go create a category for him. Enigma^msg 19:42, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

E-man, I'm pretty busy IRL atm, so it's gonna be a struggle for me to find time to do much on Wiki. Sorry dude. Scarian ^{Call me Pat!} 19:51, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good, that'll help us keep track of the socks. Acalamari 20:32, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

138.116.138.132 -> seems to be owned by Empire State College [3]. I'm amused by the amount of IPs, different ranges, and ISPs. Apart from that, it seems this user is mostly relying on Verizion IPs. Yes, I do believe a check is justified. --Kanonkas : Talk 20:10, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I actually thought that Checkuser wouldn't be necessary here, as these are clear socks, but I don't object to a Checkuser request being filed if you reckon one is needed. Acalamari 20:32, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He isn't being too clever about it, so point taken. I just thought a check might reveal other accounts/IPs, as he's operating some kind of sock farm here. I'll just track the known IPs with the category. I added three today. Might be more. Scarian, no problem. It's no big issue now that the latest sock got blocked. Can someone semiprotect my talkpage temporarily until the dust settles? I'm leaving for the weekend anyway. Thanks, Enigma^msg 21:16, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The thing is, this user can pretty much just evade the block. By doing a check, we may get more information on how to get them blocked, and further info, etc. Possibly making it easier to determinate if there are more socks (sleepers), and/or if a range block is possible, or needed for that matter. This seems to be a persistent vandal, and a CU is being used to limit disruption. You've tried blocking, but it doesn't seem to be working, at least not from what I've seen. Attempts to minimize the disruption at administrators level have been tried, but to possibly minimize more disruption, we may want to get in a check user. --Kanonkas : Talk 21:34, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine then, Kanonkas, thanks: do you know how to file a Checkuser request? Despite my many, many encounters with sockmasters and their puppetry, I've never filed a Checkuser request before.

As for your talk page, Enigmaman, I have protected it for a week. Acalamari 22:06, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I will file the checkuser request now. Enigma^msg 22:09, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome for the protection, and thank you for filing the request. :) Much appreciated. Acalamari 22:11, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm used to RfCU, but it's similar. I think I did it properly. Feel free to chime in. Have a good weekend, Enigma^msg 22:23, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good work, thanks for creating it. You have a good weekend too. Acalamari 22:27, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I was offline. I'm glad Enigma solved this meanwhile. Unrelated to this situation, thanks for all your hard work with BLPs, and in general Acalamari. Best regards, --Kanonkas : Talk 23:19, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Don't apologize; we don't expect everyone to be online all the time. :) Thank you for the compliments, those mean a lot. Best wishes to everyone. Acalamari 23:23, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thoughts about an article?

Fujian Pocket. Enigma^msg 22:43, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm...it appears to be an infobox at the moment and lacking in any content other than that. Have you done a search for the battle at all? Acalamari 22:49, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. I'm just wondering what to do with things like that. Enigma^msg 23:07, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd first look it up in Google, and if that comes up with nothing, either take it to AfD or, better still, perhaps look and see if there's a WikiProject that covers battles in Eastern Asia and see if someone there can help with the article. Acalamari 23:11, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Thanks, Acalamari! Mylesgray (talk) 02:09, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome! Just be careful. :) Acalamari 02:11, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re Smile!

Here's a house for you! Houses somehow promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving something friendly to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Make your own message to spread WikiLove to others! Happy editing! Acalamari 18:53, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks and appreciated Acalamari. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 03:54, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome! Acalamari 15:07, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:Mdw2009

This user has habitually altered the main image of Poker Face (Lady Gaga song) to what appears to be an alternate cover rather than the official. The constant revert is becoming tiresome and the alternate image should probably be deleted. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 20:08, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unless the image is blatantly a copyvio or vandalism, I can't just delete it outright, as it would classify as an out of process deletion. This being said, I am familiar with Mdw2009's image disruption on Lady Gaga-related articles, and I suspect a block is coming to that user should they continue this. In the meantime, could the image go in an "alternate cover" part of the infobox? If not, I wouldn't see any problem with nominating the image for deletion, and if it's kept out of the article for a certain amount of time, a bot should come along and tag the image as an "unused non-free image", and will end up being deleted after a week. Acalamari 20:55, 30 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alternate covers have sort of become discouraged among music related article in order to reduce non-essential non-free images. The problem seems to be that the user will lie low until the bot warns him of its deletion and he resumes his edit war. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 03:04, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely agree with Book in this case. The user is really starting to become a disrupt. If I'm correct the user is a sock of a banned user.

Re:Compliment

Wow thanks Acalamari. I'm happy to receive your compliment. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 09:42, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Block needed

Special:Contributions/Rosa530 - Vandalism only, repeatedly vandalizing a page. Enigma^msg 18:44, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Already blocked: see the log. Thanks. Acalamari 18:47, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Barely beat me to it. I brought it to you because my AIV report was declined, despite there already having been a previous block for the same behavior. Enigma^msg 18:51, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It was a good block and a good report. Acalamari 18:54, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Danity Kane#Rise and Fall of Danity Kane

Do you mind commenting on this? Icevirgo99 wants it added to the article, but has been reverted by me and another editor[4][5] due to the reasons I stated on the talk page about it. Flyer22 (talk) 23:48, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that it is about settled now. But if it becomes an issue again, feel free to weigh in (of course). Flyer22 (talk) 01:21, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I shall do. Thanks for letting me know. Acalamari 01:39, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:NickDanger68

I see you deleted the above and why. I noticed while culling my watchlist. And per this, I'm sure you're right. Account is unblocked, however, which should mebbe be fixed. Cheers, Jack Merridew 07:10, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked. Thanks Jack Merridew! Acalamari 01:37, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Same, same (bahasa Indonesia for The same to you — pronounced Sama, sama). Cheers, Jack Merridew 06:49, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

hey hi

Your userbox says you are willing to grant rollback requests so yeah! :)

PirateSmackK (talk) 14:11, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, you had rollback granted and removed only a couple of days ago, and since that removal was that short a time ago, you're better off asking the removing admin for it back. Thanks. Acalamari 01:37, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Damn, everything that happened to me has been recorded here :-o

INTERESTING! PirateSmackK (talk) 17:56, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's because things that happen to your account (blocks, userrights changes, etc,) get recorded there. Unfortunately, you were requesting rollback rights, and I noticed that they were removed from your account only a short time ago. It would be inappopriate for me to overturn another admin's decision so quickly. Acalamari 18:06, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary unprotection of Buttocks

I propose that you unprotect the page buttocks, just long enough for me to FfD nominate some files I believe to be inappropriate on Wikipedia, judging from the fact that they are pictures of human buttocks. Please reply ASAP! Veraladeramanera (talk) 20:33, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unless the images are vandalism, and assuming the images are portraying what's said in the article, they are appropriate in accordance with WP:NOTCENSORED. You can discuss the images on the talk page of the article, however. Acalamari 01:37, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I see. Since the images are indeed portraying what is in the article, there is obviously no reason to Ffd Nominate them, even though they are highly inappropriate to display on the internet. Thank you for the explanation, although, there is still a bit of reason to nominate them for deletion: They are portraying people's buttocks, of course! I would still like to nominate them for discussion, for this reason. Thank you! Veraladeramanera (talk) 21:18, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What a great section title. –thedemonhog talk • edits 05:11, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't it? :) Acalamari 15:06, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Special Barnstar
		You're a really good general contributer to Wikipedia! Keep up the good work! Advanceforward (talk) 12:44, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

While this barnstar was awarded by a sockpuppeteering vandal, I appreciate the gift anyway. Acalamari 15:06, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		For quick response, and fairness esspecially when newbies accidentally vandalize pages and dont read guidelines Alankc (talk) 05:09, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Alankc! I appreciate this barnstar. :) Acalamari 15:06, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A little help

This IP is continuously vandalizing the If U Seek Amy page by deleting a line without consensus. When warned and reverted, the IP has started calling names to me and User:Realist2 making personal attacks and racial slurs. Can you please take a look? --Legolas ^(talk2me) 04:18, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I nominated the madonna song "4 Minutes" for GA after developing it. Could you please take a look and tell me if I have missed anything? --Legolas ^(talk2me) 12:50, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there Legolas2186, unfortunately, the IP's disruption took place after I logged out last night, so it's now too late for me to do anything at the moment. With that IP, it would have been better to have reported it to WP:ANI instead, as there are always admins watching that page, and one would have come along. Thanks. Acalamari 15:09, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

He's causing trouble under a different IP now. Edit warring against consensus and issuing bigoted comments. Might be worth filing a protection request at WP:RFPP. — R ² 15:13, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed my mind: both IPs are blocked for disruption. Acalamari 15:17, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, just letting you know about the other IP :) — R ² 15:26, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For your eyes only. — R ² 15:59, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked. Acalamari 16:14, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd just like to take issue with Legolas2186's claim that I used racial slurs - I did not. If he could cite where I used racial slurs, that would be great (I don't think he can). I said he was a porn photographer, and as you can see from he is, with quite a few disturbing, deviant (in the classical sense of the word) fetishes. He seems to have panicked and played the race card a bit early, IMHO.--159.134.99.123 (talk) 16:55, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Acalamari. But I believe the IP has come back under a new address. And I can't believe that the IP will go to that extent to create a page about me in flickr?? Sick! --Legolas ^(talk2me) 04:24, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've run into you so many times....I thnk this is only fair.

		The Template Barnstar
		Deserved...has done too many template edits and creations not to have this. tsunamishadow (talk) 16:06, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

		The Admin's Barnstar
		Take a good look at his contributions, then you'll see why I gave him this. tsunamishadow (talk) 16:06, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Assuming you are male of course...your user page didn't manage to give much away about your gender.

Thank you very much for the two barnstars, I appreciate them. Oh, and you assumed correctly, though I have been referred to as a "she" on countless occasions. :) Best wishes. Acalamari 16:16, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback Request...HELP!!!

Hi Acalamari... i have a slight problem..

I have recently encountered the problem that people in my class wil vandalise any page they see i am refering to in lesson. It started to annoy me after the 1000th time and i admit it has peaked my intrest in anti-vandalism work. I don't have this in my edit history as i have not been logged it whilst doing so but have done so many anonymous edits to revert it that my fingers hurt.

It is unlikley that this will be ending anytime soon, but i intend to get involved in anti-vandalism work, so this tool will be very useful.

Thanks

c7rky C7rky (talk) 21:00, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi C7rky, unfortunately, you don't have many edits at the moment, so I can't really judge how well you'd use the rollback tool. That being said, if you practice reverting vandalism with the undo feature for a short time and do well with that, come back to me in a day or two to a week or more and I'll reconsider your request. Best wishes. Acalamari 21:58, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Understood...i will do that for a few weeks...i got many messages from admins with the same message when i posted on your page. Thanks anyway!

Whoops!!!!

Sorry... double post!!!

Re: Protection

Heh, indeed. :) And I was concerned that my three-month protection was too long! –Juliancolton | ^Talk 23:42, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks ...

... for the barnstar! It's great to get a friendly message instead of the usual compaints from vandals. Have a great day! Ward3001 (talk) 02:23, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. :) You deserve it. Acalamari 02:28, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RE Megastrike: Glad to help. You admins have your hands full and need all the help you can get. Thanks for all you do, janitorial and otherwise! :) Ward3001 (talk) 18:35, 10 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

1994 protected

For what particular reason was 1994 protected-edit war, vandalizing, dispute? The reasons we ask is that our college class at UWEC edits years whenever major or priority subjects shall be included (politics, disaster, tragedy, other things of major priority, music, films).

The UWEC Class at 173.26.80.178 (talk) 02:37, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm...it seems I didn't leave a reason for protecting that page. Sorry about that: I believe the reason for protecting it was due to vandalism. Thanks for asking. Best wishes.

Re: Nomination

Thanks so much for the very kind (and very speedy) nomination! I'm just asking SoWhy if he minds adding to the RfA that I go by Boriss on IRC (because hell, that'll be worth a few opposes, and we don't want to make this too easy), and after his answer I'll be good to go. Thanks again! Flying Toaster 15:46, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, glad to see it's up: I'll get around to adding my actual support soon. As for my statement, it's 9:00am here where I live, so I hadn't long been up when I wrote it; I'm glad you like it though. ;) Acalamari 16:08, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Morning noms are the best noms (it's 9am here too). ::goes to nom on bacon:: Flying Toaster 16:09, 11 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RfA Thank You

My RFA passed today at 75/2/1 so I wanted to thank you for your participation in it. Special thanks go to GlassCobra and FlyingToaster for their nomination and support. Cheers! --Rosiestep (talk) 01:19, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RfA Thanks

Thank you for supporting me in my recent RfA, which unfortunately did not pass with a final tally of (45/39/9). I plan on addressing the concerns raised and working to improve in the next several months. Special thanks go to MBisanz, GT5162, and MC10 for nominating me. Thanks again, -down load ׀ sign! 03:56, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback request

Hello there, I've been on wikipedia for a couple of years now, but was only recently informed about the rollback feature. Considering that you are officially listed as a sysop willing to grant rollback rights, I was wondering whether you would care to consider me as a potential suitor. I've been relatively active in reverting vandalisms and believe the tool would allow me to edit more efficiently. Feel free to inquire about my activities. --m3taphysical (talk) 04:33, 14 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi M3taphysical, I have granted your account rollback rights in accordance with your request. Please remember that rollback should be used to revert vandalism/spam, and that using rollback to revert-war or to revert edits that you simply disagree with can lead to its removal. For practice, you may wish to see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback. Good luck. Acalamari 16:04, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! No need to worry. I'll only use it when needed, according to WP:ROLL guidelines. --m3taphysical (talk) 17:31, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Aubrey O'Day performing At Last image

Would you please comment on this? I simply feel that this editor is wrong. Perhaps if you weigh in on it, or suggest something, such as more critical commentary be added, to further validate the image's use within the article, it will help my points about this. You are often battling the improper usage of non-free images here at Wikipedia, but even you did not seem to have a problem with this image. Will you explain why that is within the discussion about it? I mean, we have had this image in Aubrey O'Day's article for the longest now. Flyer22 (talk) 06:39, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Plus, I feel that this nomination is only a grudge or "proving a point" nomination (due to another debate I was having with this same editor). Flyer22 (talk) 06:41, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I added a comment. I don't know how much help it'll be though, as you're more familiar with the issue than I am. Acalamari 16:58, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I appreciate it. Anything else you feel you can state on the matter that may help, please do not hesitate. Flyer22 (talk) 18:34, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Smanu

R u online? If so please ping me ASAP. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 13:58, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, no, I wasn't online when you posted this, but I see that this has been reported to AN/I. Acalamari 16:13, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Greeting

Hi there; yes, I am well. Just got back from a cruise in the Far East, and just getting back into the routine here. --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 19:17, 18 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds like fun: I hope you had a good time. Acalamari 15:13, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Great fun; I can heartily recommend it. I expect to make a number of wiki articles from it, if I can get past the no original research factor! --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 18:26, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Shameless thankspam

Hello Acalamari! Thank you so much for your nomination in my recent RfA, which passed with a tally of 126/32/5. I am truly humbled by the trust you placed in me, and will endeavor to live up to that trust. Flying Toaster

hi

hi,i was wondering if u could help me with a small problem —Preceding unsigned comment added by JustarR24 (talk • contribs) 14:18, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What do you need? Acalamari 15:13, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What he needs is evidence that he is not a sockpuppet, which will be difficult because he is!! --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 18:28, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thanks! Didn't realize he was a sock. Acalamari 18:46, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Cherrytree Sessions (Lady Gaga EP)

Can you please take a look at this? User:Smanu is again deleting valid sourced information from the article without a consensus, inspite of being asked to comment at teh talk page. He/she doesnot provide edit summaries and is getting increasingly difficlut to aassume good faith to his edits. Others have explained to him about verifiability and WP:NOT but alas, all our pleadings is falling to deaf ears. Please take a look and judge to your best wishes. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 12:27, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Legolas2186, it looks like Kww's on this one, and got to it before I even logged in this morning: take a look at User talk:Kww#Cherrytree_tracklist. Thanks. Acalamari 21:14, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Happened across your user page randomly. Nice work on the Cyndi Lauper and Laura Brannigan templates. Nevard (talk) 14:29, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome for my work, but thank you for noticing it and commenting accordingly. :) Acalamari 16:07, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Huh?

Acalamari,
I recieved your message. Did you notice that I"d left you a message about your "test" (I never called it vandalism). I noted that it showed up (using Lupin's tools) with a link to typepad.com. That's what I was reverting. I added that into the template I put on your page. KoshVorlon 17:45, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand what you mean: I didn't add any external links, and my edit wasn't a test...I don't really need to make test edits. As for why I thought that you thought my edit was vandalism, using rollback to revert implies an edit was disruptive. Acalamari 18:42, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]