Jump to content

User talk:Dgies/Archive 3

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Shadowbot3 (talk | contribs) at 20:24, 15 May 2007 (Automated archival of 15 sections from User talk:Dgies). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5

Thanks

Thank you for reverting the vandalism on my talk page. IrishGuy talk 00:24, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Anti-Colbert sentiment is not appropriate

Wikipedia needs to take into account popular culture. It is ignorant for you to delete any entry without fully considering its validity just because the source of it happens to be someone like Steven Colbert. Steven Colbert is a great man and brilliant thinker. Plus, his wife is hotter than the cyber chick you masturbate to every 16 minutes. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.162.136.179 (talk) 02:02, 1 April 2007 (UTC).

My RfA

  • Thanks for the support position. However, I've decided to withdraw my acceptance because of real WP:CIVIL concerns. I will try again later when I've proven to myself and others that my anger will no longer interfere with my abilities as a Wikipedia editor. Thanks again, and I'll see you around here shortly. :) JuJube 04:12, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

Thank you for your support in my recent successful RfA. --Anthony.bradbury 14:05, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

I have semi-protected your user page...

...for a couple days and blocked that last vandalizing account. Let me know if you want it unprotected before a couple days. —Wknight94 (talk) 20:40, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Re:Your signature is broken

It's not broken, I'm just using the easy, "fake wikilink" signature, popular a while back. --[[User:Pie Man 360 | UserPage Talk about me!]] 21:35, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for fixing up my user page. I have no idea why I got hit with that.... --Wafulz 22:03, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Infact...

Re: http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3A24.177.47.40&diff=118560763&oldid=117027675 15:44, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

This is a school computer. I apologise for anything my idiotic siblings may do. --Digipatd —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.177.47.40 (talk) 14:55, 2 April 2007 (UTC).

You have a fan...

Not sure where this came from... [1]. -- Gogo Dodo 21:21, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

It's some guy from Toronto who has been trolling me and Meaneager. —dgiestc 21:45, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

For getting rid of that ASCII art on my page. --Wwwyzzerdd 22:13, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Thank you for your Support on my recent nomination for adminship, which passed with a final tally of 89/1/1. If there's anything I can help with, then you know where to find me. Cheers.

RFA

Hey Dgies, good to know you've finally decided to take the plunge. I'll write you a nom right after lunch. :-) See ya shortly. --Húsönd 12:03, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

It's done! :-) Don't forget to change the Scheduled-to-end-date before launching it, and please let me know when you do so that I may support before getting too beaten. ;-) Good luck! Best regards, Húsönd 14:33, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
I'd err on the side of the user, maybe a 1 day block will get him to change. Many admins started out as "vandal-only" accounts. Yes your attitude complies with policy, but I feel it's too extreme. Jeff Defender 17:05, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

With all due respect...

I brought up your first edit to my RfA to show how I think you found Cremepuff's pages. Xiner (talk) 18:28, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Dgies, I never once questioned your motives in posting my edit details. Xiner (talk) 18:41, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

I merged the votes.

Yes, I made the translation. I know it´s very literal, in fact as you can see I wrote in the edition page this note: !--Correct translation?--. That´s all I can make with my low level of english and over all my scarce knowledge of english poetic resources. Feel free to introduce changes.--Uhanu 18:10, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much for reword my translation, obviously it seems more natural now. On the other hand, of course I´m up to date with the article Cantabria/Translation, thank you for the note :).--Uhanu 23:29, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Reply to Speedy deletion tagging of Justice league episodes

I see you have tagged many redirects from titles of Justice League episodes with the deletion reason "Just because it's the name of a Justice League episode should not mean that it should redirect there". This does not appear to reflect any of the speedy deletion criteria. Please don't use speedy deletion tags for things you simply think are bad. If you really think these should all be deleted, you may list them at WP:RFD, but I should mention it is common to keep redirects like these to help people find the closest-related article currently available. Thanks. —dgiestc 05:36, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Reply: ok, then what about reedirects like The Terror Beyond, In Blackest Night, Injustice For All, and other redirects like that, I don't think they should redirect here, because another page about those topics could be written, so do you think those redirects should be keptGman124 17:15, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Those specific cases have a stronger justification for deletion because they have more generic titles, but it's still not a speedy deletion criteria. They should be listed at WP:RFD if you want them gone. You may with to read WP:CSD a bit to see what qualifies for speedy deletion. —dgiestc 17:18, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
I added them at RFD, and i have a question, there I found the tag {{db-redirtypo}}, so can't i use that to speedy delete the articles Gman124 17:51, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
No, because these are not typo redirects, they are related topic redirects, which need to be debated. A redirect like "Listt of justic leege spisodes" would be a good candidate for that tag. —dgiestc 18:00, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
Ok, thank for the help Gman124 18:03, 8 April 2007 (UTC)—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Gman124 (talkcontribs) 18:03, 8 April 2007 (UTC).

Hey

Thanks for helping with Steptrip's coach. :-) It's a fact that you have some very good material on your admin coach subpage. By the way, your RFA seems to be going (unsurprisingly) very well. Way to go! Best regards, Húsönd 01:42, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: Non-notable birthday warnings

Yeah I pointed it out on IRC. It's just a copy of Gurch's text not a template I'm afraid. Also, as he pointed out, I don't think the manual of style is right and I can't find a correct one (if it exists) yet. I'd support someone making a template for it though! Will (aka Wimt) 18:35, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

I've tried making a template that might do the job at User:Wimt/nn-birthday if you're interested. Regards. Will (aka Wimt) 18:56, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

re:rfa

sorry, but my english is not very good, I change my vote in support, sorry  :( --dario vet (talk) 15:02, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Your RfA

Hi, I noticed your RfA is ending within the next hour and half (in GMT time?? - what am I talking about) and It seems to be going well and I have no doubts that you will be given the tools, so I'd just like to wish you the best of luck and Happy editing.Tellyaddict 13:38, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations!

Wield me! Wield me!

Congratulations on becoming an admin, Dgies. Use you tools wisely. Enjoy! :-) Festive regards, Húsönd 16:23, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Well done and good luck! The Rambling Man 16:26, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Yes, indeed. First RfA I've ever been the first to vote on. :-) I'm sure you'll do a great job. Do be sure to kick some vandal butt for me. Heimstern Läufer 18:09, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Congrats! I'm very happy to see you get the mop, and I know you'll do great things. Good luck! *Vendetta* (whois talk edits) 18:33, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

General thanks

Oh dear! Look at this mess! Thank you to everyone who supported my request for adminship, which passed with a final tally of (75/1/1). If you ever need a hand, drop me a line. —dgiestc 21:12, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

re: rfa candidate

Alright, I'll keep an eye on him.--Wizardman 18:29, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! :-)

Thank you so much for the sandwich! It was a very kind gesture of yours. I'll be honored to co-coach a to-be-admin with you in the near future. "Co-coach" sounds funny btw. Best regards (and once again congrats), Húsönd 00:32, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations on passing your RFA! Thank you for the sandwich. I'm enjoying it. :P I am looking forward to do admin coaching with you one day, we shall see how things go first. If you didn't know why wasn't I editing the past few days, it was because I was in a place far from 21st century civilisation. See you around on IRC or here. Cheers Terence 08:25, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Hey - I recently noticed you removed the Speedy tag that I placed on the above article. As professional as the article may be written, it is indeed nonsense, and is a copy of Live Bait for the Dead, if you look at the track listing. The article will inevitably be deleted in the future anyway, so a speedy deletion would be the quickest and the least hassle. Thanks ≈ The Haunted Angel 17:22, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Huh. I based it on the Amazon sales page for it, as well as other vendor sites. Is this some sort of DVD re-release? If so, it should be replaced with a redirect to Live Bait for the Dead, not deleted. —dgiestc 17:25, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Hmm, it seems that what Amazon is selling there is Heavy, Left-Handed and Candid under a different name - if you check that article (Heavy, Left-Handed and Candid is the DVD, and Live Bait for the Dead is the CD) you'll see it is divided into two sections. The live concert on disc one is called "Eleven Burial Masses", which is also the CD Live Bait. There isn't gonna' be another Cradle release (The Cradle website makes no mention of a new release) under that name, as that concert has already been released twice, once as the CD, and once as the DVD. ≈ The Haunted Angel 17:33, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

User:Steel359/Salt

Anything I can help with? – Steel 19:08, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Was testing the use of Twinkle for salting, not sure why it modified that page. Any suggestions? —dgiestc 19:09, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Transcluding an article onto that page prevents creation, have you seen [WP:PT]]? – Steel 19:16, 12 April 2007 (UTC)


My request for speedy delete

Hi. The user created the page while trying to contact me on my talk page. I've moved his comments to my talk page and informed him of the move and gave him a link to my actual talk page. If you could please delete the subpage, that would be great. Thank you Darry2385 01:52, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Nevermind. The page has been deleted. Darry2385 01:53, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Yeah I deleted it. I got confused for a second because the only contributer was not the person who tagged for deletion, but then I realized it was in your user subspace... —dgiestc 01:53, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: Thank you

[Copied from my talk page, on the assumption you're a bit busy with the new bucket. Congrats.] Thank you right back!  :-) PS: Any criticism in your RfA was intended only and absolutely constructively. I'm sure you'll make a fine admin around here. — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] 20:58, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

You're a sysop!

Hi, Dgies/Archive 3, Congratulations on Becoming a Sysop!

Hey there. I'm pleased to let you know that, consensus being reached, you are now an administrator! You've volunteered to do housekeeping duties that normal users sadly cannot participate in. Sysops can't do a lot of stuff: They can't delete pages just like that (except patent nonsense like "aojt9085yu8;3ou"), and they can't protect pages in an edit war they are involved in. But they can delete random junk, block anonymous vandals, delete pages listed on articles for deletion for more than 5 days (provided there's a consensus), protect pages when asked to, and keep the few protected pages that exist on Wikipedia up to date.

Almost anything you can do can be undone, but please take a look at The Administrators' how-to guide and the Administrators' reading list before you get started (although you should have read that during your candidacy ;). Take a look before experimenting with your powers. Also, please add Administrators' noticeboard to your watchlist, as there are always discussions/requests for admins there. If you have any questions drop me a message at My talk page. Have fun! =Nichalp «Talk»=
 PS Please add you name to WP:LA!

=Nichalp «Talk»= 16:21, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Congrats...--Cometstyles 16:22, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

A late, but better late than never, I hope, congratulations from me too. You have shown excellent judgement to be an administrator.--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. (talk) 05:36, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

thanks for your help moving my template to the personal space... 1013-josh 17:23, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

Archive_3, thank you very much for your support in my successful RfA.

I am thankful and humbled by the trust that the community has placed in me,
and I welcome any comments, questions or complaints that you may have.
Again, thank you for your support, and happy editing!
Hemlock Martinis 22:39, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Personal attacks

Hi Dgies, I think that it may be a good idea to extend the block to indefinate, for this IP you blocked, because of continued vile personal attacks on talk page, and it appears that no constuctive contributions came from this IP. Do you plan to give the IP more warnings first, assuming good faith that they will stop?--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. (talk) 23:49, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

As a rule, IPs are not indefinitely blocked because they may be shared by multiple people or reassigned to innocent users. This IP only had a single day of attacks so for now I'll treat it as a one-time occurrence. If they continue after the block expires, they will warrant a longer block. —dgiestc 23:53, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

OK. I have another illrelevant question. If a talk page of an permanetely blocked user is fully protected, as oppose to semi-protected, but then an administrator deletes the talk page, would that blocked user still be unable to edit their talk page, by creating it again, or would they still be unable to edit their "deleted talk page", being a "blocked user".--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. (talk) 01:35, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Page deletion removes and existing protection, so it would be unprotected. It would only still be protected if it was transcluded onto another page with cascading protection enabled. For more information, see WP:SALT. —dgiestc 02:15, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

username

Hi again. Polakworrior, who you blocked, doesn't seem to agree that the name is inapproprite, nor do I understand why it would be. I gave additional advice, restating some things that were already said, and trying to say it in a way it would be understood. Perhaps, you can give addition information from here.(You're doing a great job as an administrator, and I hope you are enjoying the extended service to the community. Keep up the great work.)--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. (talk) 03:57, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Polack is an ethnic slur, and WP:UN prohibits those usernames. ("Slurs, profanity and obscenities") I will unblock and file a WP:RFCN case so they can make their case. —dgiestc 04:05, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Ah, yes, those kind of names should be immediately blocked without consideration. I had no idea what Polak meant, but now I completely understand the situation, and if you haven't already, I will let the user know on their talk page.--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. (talk) 04:08, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

But I was not fast enough to do it, running into the edit conflict that you got it covered.--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. (talk) 04:13, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

It was Wikipedier. I guess I should have mentioned that earlier. Yes, I remember you from when I reported Iwasdeadforever, and you said that you didn't think it was inappropriete, exerising good judgement, and why I supported you. I didn't see it coming, my username being inappropriete. This was hard for me to swallow. So I was in a hurry to change it pronto.--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. (talk) 04:41, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

I meant User:Wikipedier when I said Wikipedier.--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. (talk) 21:40, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Polackwarrior

It seems fairly clear that this name is in violation of the policy, I think you can go ahead and reblock. HighInBC(Need help? Ask me) 17:20, 14 April 2007 (UTC

Your Award

Well here is what I have. Only preliminary concept material, so let me know what further specifications you would like.

Image:Mopnbucket.jpg

Aequo 23:26, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

It's a good start. The "drawing" part especially is just about ideal. I was looking for something which looks more like an actual manual than an award. So it wouldn't say award, and it would look like a book. Perhaps you could use either Image:Sermon.jpg or Image:Ralph Chaplin IWW booklet.jpg as a base and then using transparency, add on the picture and "MOP & BUCKET OWNER'S MANUAL" in a blocky font. —dgiestc 00:26, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
Let me know what you think. Image:Mopbucketmanual.jpg Aequo 18:35, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

right to vanish

I foolishly used my real name to edit articles, this has led to problems in my real life - please allow the deletion of the user and talk pages thankyou SallyBoseman 16:35, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Glass of oil!

You stole my idea! you bastard! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Krazykenny (talkcontribs) 18:07, 17 April 2007 (UTC).

Congrats!

Congrats on the successful RFA.  ~Steptrip 00:32, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Ditto. Well, I knew what I was getting into when I saw those opposes, but thanks for remaining civil. Good luck with the mop. Xiner (talk) 19:42, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

14:43, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry

Oh Ok! WikiMan53 t/s Review me! 16:45, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Ichträgtkeineschuhe

You beat me to blocking his sock by just a moment. However, your block summary said banned user, and I don't think he was ever banned. Picaroon 19:06, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Whoops, you're right. I haven't gotten the hang of the new interface on the block page. Aside from minor confusion, no harm done I suppose. —dgiestc 19:08, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you so much for fixing my talk page! I had no idea what to do, and it was driving me crazy. It was such a big help to me. Thanks again! --PAK Man 20:46, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Re. Trade awards?

Well, I seem to like this Mop & Bucket Owners Manual so I guess that trading would be ok (although I'll really miss the sandwich). :-) Regards, Húsönd 22:49, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Done! —dgiestc 23:26, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

re: New admin coaching award

I was thinking that there should be a special "thank-you" award for people who have been helpful in the admin coaching program. By chance I met someone on IRC who wanted to make a Wikipedia award in Photoshop. Through consultation Aequo made Image:Mopbucketmanual.jpg for me. Do you think it should be listed on any of the admin coaching subpages? I'm not quite sure where it should go... —dgiestc 15:00, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Cool image. :) You could add a 4th bullet under "Instructions" on the main page (Wikipedia:Admin coaching). Or I'm open to other ideas. --Fang Aili talk 14:36, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Re. Your block of Louispgagne

Yeah, both for 3RR. I wasn't going to block any of them for vandalism. Especially because the user that was reported had been attempting to discuss the changes on the talk page. I was considering protection as well, but decided to watchlist the article instead. :-) Best regards, Húsönd 02:21, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Arbitration enforcement

I've responded to your report on WP:AE. Would you like to follow up on this, or should I? Regards, Newyorkbrad 01:48, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Yeah too late for a block now but I left a warning explaining the arbcom ramifications. —dgiestc 02:02, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

re:talk page blanking

Why not? Seems a slightly odd way of going about things especially as there is the {{subst:uw-tpv1}} warning message. Surely blanking out recent warnings to avoid other editors doling out the appropriate warning does constitute vandalism as per any other form of blanking? Maybe that's just my opinion, but as I detest vandalism, I would see it that way! --Samtheboy (t/c) 06:48, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the follow-up. It's just rather frustrating when people do blank valid user warnings (i.e. ones that have resulted in a block) as it makes my life (as a recent changes patroller) more difficult! Ho hum, thanks for your time! --Samtheboy (t/c) 06:56, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Don't know what (if anything) is appropriate for this, but that same IP has removed most of the warnings from his talk page since your last edit. Nyttend 09:09, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

WP:AIV

Re: [2] 16:05, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Revert warring on Kosovo articles

What the... ? I did not break 3RR and there is no need to block me, late or early response. Nikola 19:20, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Replied: [3] 21:45, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
You might note that fourth revert was to another version of the article, in which I added source for the part that kept getting deleted[4]. Nikola 08:17, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Is Sanantonio Productions a well known company? The username seems to be appropriete. The only thing that left me in question was the "productions", and I certainly did not report the user at WP:AIV.--U.S.A. cubed 04:23, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

If you're asking for purposes of a possible user name block, I'd say no, leave it be unless they show signs of spamming. The top search hits I find for it are just some MySpace account. —dgiestc 15:34, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Request for Help

I and others are having problems with two users, User:Kd lvr and User:Kdkatpir2. These two user accounts were made within three hours of each other on September 18th, 2006 (so sockpuppetry is suspected) and the users are personal attacking, violation of WP:OWN, among other rules I am not aware of and causing a ton of problems on KDKA-TV and related pages. Some help is requested. Thanks...SVRTVDude (VT) 21:44, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

It's a tricky situation. First, aside from a couple snarky comments, I'm not seeing anything that's an overt personal attack. WP:OWN is policy, but not directly something a user can be blocked for. I'm not seeing WP:3RR violations (but if they exist, please show me the diffs). As for sockpuppetry, while they are almost certainly related, it's hard to tell if they are the same person or just, say, coworkers at KDKA, which would be "meatpuppetry". Even then, aside from double-voting in AFDs, they're not doing major no-nos like block evasion or 3RR gaming. I will cross-post to WP:ANI for a 2nd opinion. —dgiestc 21:58, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks....I and a couple others are keeping a very close eye on both of them so no vandalism or edit wars break out. I will look and see if there have been any reverts today. Thanks again...SVRTVDude (VT) 22:09, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
If you look at my talk page, You will see some evidence. His "curtain is falling down". I suspect he will start to get sneaky and try to make it look like two people; so I suggestion action be taken. Thanks, --TREYWiki 02:17, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
It's obvious that the 2 accounts are related, and it doesn't really matter whether they are the same person or just friends. Let me know if you see misconduct besides just the use of 2 accounts. —dgiestc 02:22, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Hogan vs. Paul Wight

Is this source reliable enough for you? [5] JAB5 22:20, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Done —dgiestc 22:37, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Somewhat puzzled at your removal of the article for deletion tag. It is poorly referenced because it doesn't exist! (Read the talk page). (Sarah777 23:20, 28 April 2007 (UTC))

OK, my bad. I saw Killiney on a map and assumed it was legit. I'll let someone else handle it... —dgiestc 23:25, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

No prob. Its a hoax (I think) - designed to look plausible! Regards(Sarah777 23:37, 28 April 2007 (UTC))

Re: MAC Cosmetics

Received your note. I was the one who reported the editing war originally. I'm sure you'll see from the history that what I edited out was Spam and Vandalism. One of the users perpetrating the vandalism was warned to stop, so he posted on a message board and encouraged the other users to post the same. Regardless, thank you for intervening and locking the page. 24.46.123.100 00:41, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

No prob, and don't forget: "Protection is not an endorsement of the current version". —dgiestc 00:44, 29 April 2007 (UTC)


I this case, should the account creation block be lifted, so that the user can have a chance to create a new account with an appropriete username, unless it's a sock.--U.S.A. cubed 02:21, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

No. Account creation is allowed and the autoblock is disabled when a good-faith user (or future user) inadvertently chooses a name that violates the username policy. There is no way that someone believed that "Judas Is Getting Ass Raped In Hell" was going to be an allowable username, and in fact this is one of at least 15 similar names that have been blocked within the past hour or so. Newyorkbrad 02:24, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
For username blocks, you'd generally be correct, but there's been a rash of blasphemous accounts so it's probably all one person and we shouldn't let them make more. —dgiestc 02:25, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Your comment on User talk:Kkrouni.

You said that Raul should Checkuser Kjrouni. The fact Raul checkusered Cowboy Rocco is why Kkrouni was blocked actually. Funpika 23:01, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Also, I recommend you go to that user talk page and a comment on the block again. Funpika 23:19, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the info, but I've made up my mind and I don't think there's much he could say which would convince me or any other admin it was just a coincidence. —dgiestc 23:42, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

ACN inc. talk page

Hi, may I remove all comments (including mine) made on the talk page of ACN inc. that have nothing to do with the content of the wiki? The talk page is full of off topic posts (of which I am partly responsible) and could do with a clean out.

Tristan.buckmaster 06:41, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Sure, or better yet, just archive everything stale. See Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page. —dgiestc 16:33, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Stale AIV reports

Okay, I'll do that next time. Thank you very much for the tip! · AndonicO Talk 16:31, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

There's a discussion at AN/I regarding the above user making death threats, I'm a bit concerned that you've blocked the IP for this, it's not a threat, it's just simple nonsense which could have been dealt with via a warning. Was there any other reason? Ryan Postlethwaite 17:31, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Never mind your on AN/I now anyway. Ryan Postlethwaite 17:32, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
I treated it as a (admittedly improbable) threat because they kept making the same vandalism and having it removed, so it was clearly directed at the person removing vandalism. I was under the impression threats are to be treated very seriously. If you think it was overly harsh you can unblock/warn. —dgiestc 17:33, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
I'm not undoing one of your blocks, I just fail to see how that was threatening the user that kept removing it, did it mention his name? Ryan Postlethwaite 17:34, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
This is moot now as its on AN/I so I'll respond there. Ryan Postlethwaite 17:36, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Your comment re: 3RR violation by me

Dgies, I appreciate your relaying of my unblock request to the admin that installed the block. However, I am concerned because I do not understand the basis for your comment that I "clearly did violate 3RR". May I ask your basis for saying this? My edits in no way attempted to delete the work of others, and it is my belief that the material I introduced was authoritative, reliable, and verifiable. The users involved in the dispute -- in particular the one that filed a 3RR violation report -- made no significant attempt to engage on the talk page. Your further response could be very valuable in helping me better understand the 3RR policy. If you want to leave it here, a message to the effect that you replied would be appreciated. A response on my talk page would also be fine.--68.54.18.57 04:23, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

You added the same content 4 times in under 24 hours. That's WP:3RR. 3RR doesn't make judgements about whether someone's edits are authoritative, reliable, or verifiable, it only makes exceptions for obvious vandalism, copyright violations, and unsourced libel. —dgiestc 04:29, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of DNSKong

Done & done. Thanks for the heads up. Cornell Rockey 20:07, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Vergina's subpages

Thank you for the advice on listing of these pages. However, I did not nominate them. I merely was the first voter. However, I will make sure to make use of this advice should I ever delete a large group of subpages. Thank you again for your advice! Captain panda 20:33, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

RFA thanks

18:21, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, Dgies, for your constructive comments in my recent RFA, which passed with 86 support, 8 oppose, and 5 neutral !votes. I will keep in mind all your suggestions and/or concerns, and will try to live up to your standards. Please, if you have any comments or complaints about my actions as an administrator, leave a note on my talk page, and I will respond as soon as I possibly can, without frying my brain, of course.
Thank you once more,
· AndonicO Talk

Recent block

Hi, I tweaked the block on User:DickBeater2000 to a full block since the only contribution indicated an obvious throwaway vandal account. --Wafulz 18:12, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough. I was tempted to do that anyway but they only made one edit. —dgiestc 18:13, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Re: Restoring prod tags

The reason I reverted the prod tag, was that the person who removed the tag was a vandalism-only account, and while in hot pursuit I assumed this one was an act of vandalism as well. His opinion shouldn't be taken into account at all, but yours is a different matter, and since you think the Golden Bear Stadium shouldn't have a prod, it shouldn't. Peace, Maurog 22:08, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Honestly I think it should be deleted, but that prod removal doesn't look like vandalism to me, so it is a valid, if unexplained objection. —dgiestc 22:10, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Re: Social cycle theory (Sarkar) AFD

I'd strongly suggest relisting, considering that majority of votes were cast by new users / possible socks. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  07:13, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I noticed the socks, but I also noticed that the main deletion arguments were a lack of notability/sources, and a suggestion that it be merged, but no consensus on what parts or where to merge it to. Since several (apparently reliable) sources were added later, that kills the main deletion argument, and if someone with more subject knowledge wants to merge later, they can still do that. —dgiestc 07:19, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

The basic issue is which article has claim to the title Social Cycle Theory

See also: Social cycle theory (Sarkar)

The important thing is that Piotrus chose Social cycle theory as a name for a page he created about theories of social dynamics. He is now trying to kill the Sarkar page because it upsets this arrangement by laying claim to the name. Indeed, it is a fact the name first came with Sarkar's theory. Before that no one referred to the theories on this page as social cycle theories. As a compromise, on the Talk:Social_cycle_theory I have proposed the article created by Piotrus be renamed to the plural Social Cycle Theories and the Sarkar page named in singular Social Cycle Theory. Piotrus, however, has wasted no time to oppose the proposed solution. Now he is trying to rally support elsewhere to relist the Sarkar page for deletion in the vain hope of getting rid of the problem that way. That is not going to happen simply because Sarkar's theory is too important and has become too well known. To have to enter a debate like this is no fun, but I´m afraid the issue will not go away until the correct solution is finally adopted.Ramayan 19:27, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

You two are having a dispute about page naming conventions and ownership of a theory. I don't know who's right and frankly I don't care, but neither of you have articulated a good reason to delete the other's page. Until you can come to an agreement on page naming, you get the status quo. —dgiestc 19:45, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

I have joined WikiProject Userboxes and plan to help Wikipedia with this WikiProject aswell as with WikiProject Clinical Medicine, WikiProject Catholicism, WikiProject California, WikiProject Anime and Manga, etc. --ISOLA'd ELBA 13:11, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

WP:ADOPT input

Hello, Dgies. The Adopt-a-User program is looking for new ideas and input on the program. If you are still interested please stop by the talk page and read some of the ideas being floated and give a comment. If you want to update or change your information on the adopter's list page, now would be a great time! Thanks! V60 干什么? · VDemolitions 03:42, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Adoption

I am looking for adoption after i closed my old account and i am making a fresh start. will you adopt me RedSpike101 07:11, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Adopt-a-User

Um, I noticed your userbox requesting to adopt a user, and you seem like the best one for me, as I was looking to be adopted. If you except adopting me, I'd like that. - Thekittybomb 15:46, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank You for the adoption

i have added a userbox that says you have adopted me —The preceding unsigned comment was added by RedSpike101 (talkcontribs) 16:14, 7 May 2007 (UTC).

Good job on that one, are you some kind of article-writing dervish? Did you have some preexisting source you wikified to make the new version? —dgiestc 16:47, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Its a bank holiday, it was raining (so no gardening or motorcycles), and some subjects you just get into. I had some material from previous articles, so it wasn't too hard. Rgds, - Trident13 19:22, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

RE: Email to school district

Dgies, any response back from the school district? I received a call from the FBI wanting to know if anyone locally there was informed, and I advised them you contacted them by email. ReviewCASCADIAHowl/Trail 21:52, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

No response. If you want to follow up, they have a raft of contact info available here: http://www.canyon.cv.k12.ca.us/Teacher/ —dgiestc 22:11, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
No need to seek out a response. It's out of our hands now, and under the responsible jurisdictions. ReviewCASCADIAHowl/Trail 22:16, 7 May 2007 (UTC)


Can you please lift the account creation block for this user, being that fact that you blocked the user for having an inappropriete username.--U. S. A. 22:19, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Their only edit was a personal attack on someone's userpage, which suggests this is a sockpuppet account for block evasion. I suppose I should have been more clear in the block log, but was there any particular you wanted them free to make a new account? They didn't place {{unblock}} on their talk page... —dgiestc 22:27, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
They did not continue after their warning, and I thought inappropriete usernames shouldn't have the ACB. If the user is a sockpuppet of another editor, that would be another case, but I'll trust your judgement.--U. S. A. 22:36, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
For a run-of-the-mill vandal, yes, they shouldn't be blocked without continuing past warning, but this strongly suggested to me they had already been blocked and were only going to use the account for harassment. In general, username blocks should not have ACB set, but when it is clearly intended to be disruptive I consider some account creations essentially vandalism in their own right. —dgiestc 22:42, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of Ashley Beedle

This is a bit inexplicable. Google's cached page gives the prod reason as "Unsourced biography, has existed in unsourced state for substantial amount of time", yet you cite A7 in the deletion log. AFAIK being merely unsourced has never been a speedy criterion, and a search at the usual venues will turn up more than enough to satisfy notability. –Unint 22:44, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

It was prodded for being unsourced, but I deleted it under speedy deletion criteria A7: non-notable biography. There was no assertion in the article of why this person is a notable musician. Now that I dig through it, it had links to other articles which could have been used to assert notability, but they didn't and it was deleted. If you can show why this person is notable and want to add that to the article I will restore it so you can work on it. —dgiestc 22:50, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
Would a profile in The Guardian be sufficient? Otherwise, I'm not about to adopt the article or anything, but I'll see if others are interested. –Unint 01:37, 8 May 2007 (UTC)