User talk:Edokter

If you leave me a message, I will respond here and will let you know on your talk page using the {{Talkback}} template.

AfD nomination of Truth & Consequences

I have nominated Truth & Consequences, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Truth & Consequences. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Jackaranga (talk) 13:47, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

UKTV - FYI

Is here, but searching their website gives no reference to Torchwood. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 01:15, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

What??

You posted on my user page, claiming I had made a personal threat. I never did, your link doesn't show that I did. What are you talking about? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.133.124.199 (talk) 02:53, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I did not say you made a personal threat; you accused Pgagnon999 of making a personal threat. That borders on a personal attack. However, in case you are someone else, please note that the IP you are posting from may be used by more then one person. — Edokter • Talk • 02:59, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

His personal threats

He IS engaging in personal threats. He posts that he can uncover who people really are and report them to relevant authorities. I could look up his IP and get his home address in about two minutes. I don't, because I'm not a jackass. Other people apparently don't have those kind of scruples. You say you're an admin. Clearly you should be aware of these issues. Do you support people running around wikipedia making these kinds of threats and accusations??? This idiot started several days ago on this article and has been making threats and accusations from then. When another admin REFUSED to go along with his rants, he's since had to take this route. Again, apparently that's fine with you. Excellenmt job. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.133.124.199 (talk • contribs) 03:15, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

He did not make a thread of any kind; you are posting from a shared, public IP, whereas he has his IP hidden. He speculated your IP's origins, but there were no "threats". Now please discuss the subject further at the talk page, throwing wild accusations and disrupting Wikipedia by editing arguments directly in the article itself does not help your case. — Edokter • Talk • 03:21, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

You're completely wrong. He did. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.133.124.203 (talk) 03:27, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

This is where Pgagnon999 started with a threat to report someone to their system admisinstrator.

With regard to Middletown, Connecticut, your removal of the Neutrality tag constitutes conflict of interest as your IP address is a state website. If you would like to dispute the tag, please open a discussion on the talk page for the article. Otehrwise, you'll end up on the Wiki list of organizations/ agencies that self edit--a pretty embarassing place to be. --Pgagnon999 (talk) 20:06, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

This is where he was engaged in further activity to intimidate a poster: Also interesting is a history of edits from user at the Connecticut gov. (Middletown gov?) state IP address and a seemingly related Wesleyan Univeristy IP. --Pgagnon999 (talk) 00:28, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

This vicious and underhanded behavior is threatening and abusive.

He does not engage in civil behavior, he deletes QUOTED material and then posts garbage from lame sites that support his narrow and partisan beliefs. ---That's nasty behavior. And astonishing to me that you support him in it.

He's pushing point of view, he's violated neutrality, he's deleted referenced material, he's certainly does not assume good faith. I mean, he's out there attacking people and all but terrorizing them. And that's the guy you've put your support behind. Great.

Thanks

Thanks for stepping in RE Middletown, Connecticut. Besides the behavior evidenced in editing the article, the user has also left harassing comments on my user page. . .looks like they were just blocked. Again, thanks.--Pgagnon999 (talk) 03:46, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Nice try, but people can see what you did. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.133.124.203 (talk) 03:54, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi, the problem user signed on again & deleted via 66.19.34.88. Sorry this has turned into such a nightmare.--Pgagnon999 (talk) 06:14, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Notice

I have asked for a deletion review of Image:TheEmptyChild.jpg Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Fasach Nua (talk) 22:16, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Torchwood

Perhaps we'll now get a well-earned rest until the 16th? --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 01:39, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Defenitely... I'm sleeping in tomorrow! — Edokter • Talk • 02:09, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Partners in crime

Hello Edoktor. I noticed you, quite rightly, made this edit [1]. I don't know if you noticed that the anon IP that made it has done a bunch of editing at this page Partners in crime. The lack of a "C" in the title is only one of the pages problems. I don't know if you will want to move the page or do something else with it (and it may get deleted, also), but, I will leave it up to you whether something should be done. The younger Doctor Who fans do love to enter as many rumors to the articles as they can don't they? Thanks for all your hard work on the various DW pages to try to keep them encyclopedic. MarnetteD | Talk 14:50, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Right, the page should ultimately be move to Partners in Crime (Doctor Who), which already exists as a redirect to List of Doctor Who serials#Series 4 (2008). However, looking at the content, it should probably deleted for now; it is full of speculation and original research. I'll put it up for AfD. — Edokter • Talk • 15:11, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry, I've got it watched. Will ^(talk) 15:44, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: contentSub

I'm well aware that it's not a hack; it wasn't displaying in the same place as the software-generated text would. I'd be happy to upload a screenshot if you'd like. Also, personally, I like the text below the redirect as it is more noticeable and it makes it clear that the redirect is intentionally un-functioning. --MZMcBride (talk) 00:31, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

I know the text was a little too low. However the redirectText class (big font) did work. Do you mind if I put that back? — Edokter • Talk • 00:40, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh, not at all. : - ) --MZMcBride (talk) 00:53, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Love & Monsters

You as an admin know better than to revert war over content disputes, which is what that looks like to me. I'm no admin, but I'll say this: Since the user keeps going against the current consensus of the article, it could probably be blocked, right? Obviously you are involved so shouldn't block the user yourself, which is probably why you put a note over at WP:AN. So, clearly, you are correct in your reverts, but since it isn't "vandalism", then it probably wasn't a good idea to keep reverting. - Rjd0060 (talk) 16:47, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

I never called it vandalism, and since I reverted once per 24 hours, 3RR isn't really an issue. I did stop reverting and asked on AN for someone else to have a look. — Edokter • Talk • 19:28, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

I count more than once: Jan 5 (19:56), Jan 6 (07:54), Jan 6 (19:46). That would be 3 reverts within a 24-hour period (with 10 minutes to spare). I'd like to AGF on the IP account, so I am not going to say it could be a sock, however I completely agree that the user hasn't been communicating, and that doesn't help. - Rjd0060 (talk) 19:42, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Image:Doctor Who The Christmas Invasion.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Doctor Who The Christmas Invasion.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Fasach Nua (talk) 12:37, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

RFC

I'm not entirely sure what you are trying to do, the desired outcome is the status quo, but I think you might have missed this one Wikipedia:Images_and_media_for_deletion/2008_January_6#Image:3doctardis.jpg Fasach Nua (talk) 10:16, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Rudget!

Dear Edokter, my sincere thanks for your support in my second request for adminship, which ended with 113 supports, 11 opposes, and 4 neutral. I would especially like to thank my admin coach and nominator, Rlevse and Ryan Postlethwaite who in addition to Ioeth all inspired me to run for a second candidacy. I would also like to make a special mention to Phoenix-wiki, Dihyrdogen Monoxide and OhanaUnited who all offered to do co-nominations, but I unfortunately had to decline. I had all these funny ideas that it would fail again, and I was prepared for the worst, but at least it showed that the community really does have something other places don't. Who would have though Gmail would have been so effective? 32 emails in one week! (Even if it does classify some as junk :P) I'm glad that I've been appointed after a nail biting and some might call, decision changing RFA, but if you ever need anything, just get in touch. The very best of luck for 2008 and beyond, Rudget. 16:10, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for January 14th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 3	14 January 2008	About the Signpost

Template:S-sTemplate:S-sTemplate:S-sTemplate:S-sTemplate:S-sTemplate:S-sTemplate:S-sTemplate:S-sTemplate:S-sTemplate:S-sTemplate:S-sTemplate:S-s

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 (talk) 08:13, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

If you find a badly phrased sentence, adjust it, don't delete it.

That's in the Wikipedia guidelines anyway. Nuff said.