User talk:Heimstern

This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

This talk page is automatically archived by MiszaBot III. Any sections older than 14 days are automatically archived to User_talk:Heimstern/archive 3. Sections without timestamps are not archived.

Archive:Feb-Nov 2006
Archive:Dec 2006-Jan 2007
Archive:Feb 2007-present

Congratulations on the successful RfA!

It being 21:30 February 16, 2007, your RfA is now past the seven day mark. With the result being 61 support, no oppose, and 2 neutral, you passed with flying colors :) See, that wasn't so bad was it :) I'm sure a bureaucrat will be along shortly to close the RfA and flip your admin bit. Congratulations on becoming an administrator! --Durin 21:30, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And here he is. Congratulations, have fun with the new tools. Make sure to re-read the policies and don't hesitate to ask questions. You've passed with overwhelming support, and I'm confident you'll do well. Keep up the good work, and again, congrats. (and go find two more people as qualified as you to be admins). - Taxman ^Talk 22:54, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both so much. I am honored by the trust the community has placed in me (no opposition is pretty dang good, I'd say) and seek to use these tools for good and for awesome. Durin: I'll be leaving a message for you soon. Well, time to go whack some vandals. B-) Heimstern Läufer 01:25, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

...And a great tremor was felt through the vandal community. Heimstern is an admin! --Durin 03:19, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations on becoming admin yesterday !! Daniel5127 | Talk 03:29, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A late congrats from me as well my fellow newbie administrator :).¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 08:13, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats Heimstern. Best of luck as admin, and if you ever need any help, you know where to reach me. =) Nishkid 64 18:15, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to add my belated congrats. :-) Well done Heimstern! Regards, Húsönd 04:10, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I thought I'd arbitrarily break the indents to add my congratulations on your new role. -- Chairman S. Talk ^Contribs 07:36, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations! I was going to send you a distracting message this morning so that I wouldn't keep internal error-ing with you at C:CSD ;) All the best. – riana_dzasta 06:40, 22 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, and you're welcome! --Kyoko 03:05, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Serafin

Serafin is evading block again. Special:Contributions/210.245.160.188 Unfortunately he is a very biased person, and seeing as you have a German username, it reflects badly, as it reinforces his delusion that there is a secret coalition of German people hating on Poles. eprhaps get a number of admins to help keep up on this, and block all of his IPs and sockpuppets, as he keeps creating more and more, here and on the German wikipedia. Is there no way to block his IP range so he can't go around it again?

--Jadger 06:37, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

again Special:Contributions/168.215.123.44

--Jadger 05:39, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not exactly sure if this is the same person, but Special:Contributions/206.117.32.31. he is editing Serafin's old stomping grounds Nicolaus Copernicus and Jan Dzierzon, making the exact same edits as Serafin had been doing previously. Also, making anti-German quips here: [1]

thanks --Jadger 03:53, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

thank you, I notice he also just edited Jan Dzierzon again, or whom I would believe is him. uses a similar anon IP and makes exact same edit.

--Jadger 03:57, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know if you did this intentionally, but you blocked one of his anon IP addresses for only one week, and he has begun "editing" again before the end of his ban. Special:Contributions/131.104.218.46

--Jadger 08:45, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I think User:Serafin is back with some random IPs again, check recovered territories Jan Dzierzon for example, a number of random IPs are reverting to the last version by one of Serafin's puppets, and using the same type of edit summary.

--Jadger 16:57, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, you are wrong

This is no content dispute, this is destruction of valuable information. Just have a look at the paragraph "Main sights". RCS 07:44, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I could as well talk to a brick wall, i guess. Any look at the gistory of the article will show you that R has never done anything else than making changes in wording, while i've written a good deal of the whole article. I'm the kettle, he's the pot, and a vandal too. Good night. RCS 07:49, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

He has been at it again. He has never ever improved this article, never ever, do you realize ? RCS 17:26, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

re:my talk page

Thanks for the comments. When you spend all day with the vandals, it's always nice to hear some positive feedback. On a side note, congrats on your recent RfA; looks like you're doing some great work already. auburnpilot talk 09:17, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

My request for adminship has closed successfully (79/0/1), so it appears that I am now an administrator. Thanks very much for your vote of confidence. If there's anything I can ever do to help, please don't hesitate to let me know. Also, congrats on your own RfA. :) IrishGuy ^talk 03:18, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

for reverting vandalism on my userpage. Natalie 04:44, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A7 Notability

Speedy criteria A7 is not meant to be an exhaustive list of the types of items that can have notability considered for speedy deletion. A7 is the catch all for notability. Just because an article covers something that isn't mentioned in the sentence in A7 doesn't mean it can get around the requirement that notability has to actually be ASSERTED in the article. Are you new at this? Blue Eyed OS is a perfect candidate for a non-notable speedy deletion. No notability is asserted anywhere in the article or on the talk page. Hatch68 06:22, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article is about a defunct website, as it states in the article. What else do you need to know? It doesn't matter anyway, since it was a repost from an article that went through an AfD in January, so now it has a db-repost attached. Hatch68 06:35, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could you close a merge proposal?

Hi. I have a favor to ask of you. Would you be willing to close a merge proposal that has been debated on the Independent evidence for Apollo Moon landings page? As you are aware, there is an edit war going on there, and some of the participants are becoming more and more incivil. I don't think that it would be a good idea for anyone directly involved with the topic to do this, as they will be accused of bias or not acting in good faith. Thanks for the help. Lunokhod 10:06, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rfa thanks

Thank you for supporting my RfA. It was (47/0/0) upon closure and now phase I is complete. I think the tools will aid both me and the encyclopedia. Feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, or if you think I'm misbehaving I'm always open to recall. Thanks, James086^Talk 13:32, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your RfA

I'm glad that you were granted the Admin bit; I saw no major concerns for you not to receive these privileges. The problem of burnout for all valuable Wikipedians -- both Admin & those who don't want the responsibility -- is something that I have been concerned about for a long time, & I hope that my question has helped you be aware of it. -- llywrch 19:26, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

3RR violation

Hmm ... so by breaking the 3RR rule, the other editor got what he desired? Interesting way to deal with this, IMO. Duke53 | ^Talk 04:48, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

edited to add: It would have been tough to give him a warning since he made all four edits in the space of 12 minutes. Duke53 | ^Talk 04:59, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't answer my question here or on my talk page. He got his desired action by breaking the 3RR rule ... is this now an effective tool to use when you want to make such changes? Duke53 | ^Talk 05:03, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

3RR warning

Thank you for the warning, and not the all out ban. I am attempting to resolve this through discussion, but I am skeptical based on the other party's discussion history. Can you offer assistance if he refuses to negotiate? Ebtunc2006 05:05, 26 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for February 26th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 9	26 February 2007	About the Signpost

Three users temporarily desysopped after wheel war	Peppers article stays deleted
Pro golfer sues over libelous statements	Report from the Norwegian (Bokmål) Wikipedia
WikiWorld comic: "Pet skunk"	News and notes: New arbitrators appointed, milestones
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:18, 27 February 2007 (UTC) [reply]

What about

This ? Reverting to a poorer previous version pretending the additions and changes made are "unneeded" (he never ever added something useful to the article, remember). Please do at least warn him to stop one and for all to behave like a destructive fool. Thanks. RCS 07:47, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Does that mean i could go mess around in any article i want, reverting randomly to prevous versions ? Or is he the only one allowed to ? RCS 07:55, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost updated for March 5th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 10	5 March 2007	About the Signpost

New Yorker correction dogs arbitrator into departure	WikiWorld comic: "The Rutles"
News and notes: Picture of the Year, milestones	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation


Home \| Archives \| Newsroom \| Tip Line \| Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:19, 6 March 2007 (UTC) [reply]

Thanks...

For blocking that anon-IP vandal. Much appreciated! --Tenebrae 05:31, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

With pleasure! BTW, judging from the term here, which I don't even want to repeat but which I'd never heard before he'd vandalized my User page, it looks as if

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

is the same as:

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

How does one guy get to so many computers? :-) Thanks again,--Tenebrae 14:05, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Spasmodic Dysphonia Sciencewatcher

Regarding what is below. A person named sciencewatcher keeps trying to add this in for self-interest. "Sciencewatcher" runs a clinic to cure this disorder and wants to be able to cite this in order to recruit patients. If you look the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders quote, you will notice it is in stark contrast to the article she misuses (regarding non-organic voice disorders) to talk about SD and stark contrast to the medical consensus on spasmodic dysphonia. SD is not a non-organic voice disorder, it is a laryngeal dystonia. As compared with other funcational dyphonias, spasmodic dysphonia patients do not exhibiti psychological features inconsistent with the population at large. It's not an editing war. It is simply a reversion back to the reliable and valid information that once was there, based on the information that is cited in hundreds of thousands of verifiable journal articles on Spasmodic Dysphonia. This person wants to charge patients thousands of dollars to attend a clinic with magical super power healing. And THAT is misuse of Wikipedia on the park of a professional for personal gain and patient harm. Arguing with sciencewatcher is useless, an therefore NO point in discussion with sciencewatcher and myself on edits and reverts. So that is why I cannot take that route.

Thank you, DebENT

You are clearly edit warring with Sciencewatcher. Please stop reverting his or her edits; instead, discuss it on the talk page. If you continue to edit war, you will be blocked from editing for disruption. Thank you. Heimstern Läufer 16:46, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Block of Pigsonthewing

I'd ask you to reconsider your block on Pigsonthewing following the report here. Notably, because the report contains several incorrect statements. For instance, neither the second nor fourth 'revert' restored the text, "The search result concerned is not removed from google.com", as claimed (in bold print)... simply clicking on the links provided in the report itself clearly shows that text was already present in both cases. Likewise, the second 'revert' did not restore the text, "She has also taken legal action against the search engine [[Google]" or "Details of the legal request can be read at ChillingEffects.org" as claimed - again, both were already present and the edit was actually adding 'ref' tags around them and rewording slightly. Et cetera.

Further, the supposed 'BLP issue' behind the edit war here is a statement to the effect that McKeith took legal action against Google... only that has been reliably sourced to The Guardian and Google (see note at bottom linking to documentation at Chilling Effects).

There was certainly edit warring, by multiple parties, but that 3RR report was less than accurate. A two week block of just one participant in an edit war, based on false statements from another participant, does not seem equitable. --CBD 02:46, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The Joker vandal is back

This time he's using User:209.53.181.24. You've been so helpful, and I hate to ask, but geez, some people.... Thanks so much--Tenebrae 05:05, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

NCLR

I would appreciate it if you would revist this page NCLR --evrik ^(talk) 22:06, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not looking to have the IP blocked, just to have people making some pretty slanderous statements come out of the shadows. --evrik ^(talk) 22:11, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
C'est la vie. --evrik ^(talk) 22:15, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to kick your butt. —Bill Conrad 22:46, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]