Important note: If you wish to carry on a discussion with another user initiated by something they post on this page, please take it to their talk page, not here. I don't like seeing "You have new messages" every 5 minutes when they have nothing to do with me. A single reply to another user's comment is fine, as is anything directed partly towards me, but beyond that please don't use this page.

Old comments are at User talk:Nickptar/Archive 1.

Hey

This isn't vandalism. It's the next word in numa numa. Your page said I could edit it. Howabout1 ^{Talk to me!} 00:13, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

Thank you

...For repairing my article about religion and mental illness. Ketrovin 20:06, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

User:Assyria90

ABout the Assyrian Human Rights page

I didnt know what to do when it suddenly came up that it had been locked etc..Well the article i copied and made a new article here is copyrighted by AINA.org..But Terms of use of AINA.org

AINA Terms Of Use

Copyrights, Permissions and Rules of Conduct To request permission to use AINA content, click here.

Abbreviations:

Assyrian International News Agency: AINA

1. Use of Content

1.1 Permission to link to Content is implicitly granted provided that you

1. Maintain all copyright and other notices contained in such Content. 2. Properly cite AINA as the source of said link 3. Do not frame the link. Links must open in a new window or a new browser instance

So i made all that and still the page on wikipedia Assyrian Human Rights is closed..why???

WikiFun Round 9: Lightning Round Time

I have decided to attempt to advance and end the round quickly. Parts of the question will be revealed with more hints and/or be more elaborated on as every two days. I have currently provided more hints on the answer pages for the current remaining questions. --AllyUnion (talk) 08:33, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Of interest to me

I see you created a bot that's specific goal was to clean up all those Star Wars lists. I was wondering if you are into this stuff, for I may have a proposition for you. Over at Wikicities we have a Star Wars Wiki aka Wookieepedia, and I was just wondering if you might have been interested in helping out with the project. Once again, I only assume this because your bot worked on those lists. You may not even be into SW, but at least I'm asking. -- Riffsyphon1024 14:06, August 8, 2005 (UTC)

In response...

In response to your question at "Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Gabrielsimon/Evidence", I copied this from Gabrielsimon's user page. Quote "It has been said that I have a very open mind as well.... I have been called inhumanly patient... and inhuman. If you want to know more, ask. I'm on MSN, YIM and AIM. Leave a message at my email address to learn what the IDs are."

I have been watching this sad saga unfold like a slow motion car crash for several days now. Beyond the obvious squabble that has been going on, I have come to some conclusions (based strictly on my own personal observations) that much of this GS, Ketrovin, Khulhy, Gavin the Chosen (and who knows how many others) is a cry for help from a lonely person. I also feel that many of the typographical and grammatical errors are contrived so as to foster a sympathetic response. I am curious as to what lengths the editors and admins are willing to go to in "babysitting" this individual. I am a new user myself, but is it in the best interest of WP to coddle a person who seems to go out of their way to be obtrusive? I wait, with interest to see how the situation plays itself out. There are a few admins here who I have made positive connections with, and I am inclined to copy this memo to their talk pages just to get some outside opinions. Keep up the good work Nickptar, as a new user I can say I've been impressed with your contributions here. See you "round! Hamster Sandwich 23:30, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Good stuff

I saw your bot repairing links redirecting to lists etc on some of the articles in my watchlist, it seems to be functioning perfectly. Se, here you go:
Jacoplane 23:46, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Aw, shucks. Please tell me if you see any errors in the future - I'm sure there are still bizarre edge cases I haven't thought of. ~~ N (t/c) 23:48, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thanks for your speedy response to my memo:

If you're brave enough, perhaps you could leave a friendly note on his talk page?

~~ N (t/c) 23:46, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Hamster_Sandwich"

I don't think I want to establish a corespondence with this individual. Gavin the Chosen left a memo on my talk page today within minutes of my posting to the RfA page and I chose not to reply. I just don't think its prudent, at present to respond to that user. If it turns out that my observations are incorrect concerning that posting I will gladly and sincerely apologise to anybody affected by my comment. Thanks again! Hamster Sandwich 00:00, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well it all comes out in the wash, as they say. My opinion is hes a nut-job. He goes from user to user like a sad sack looking for help. "Whats a sockpuppet?" "Can you help me?" "I got an email from a friend who told me..." Its all very tawdry and pathetic. Sad. Well sorry to take up your time with this, I just saw a pattern and wanted to report it. Mr. Gavin should be very glad I'm not an admin, because quite frankly I wouldn't have the patience for these shenanigans. I hope he becomes a good editor, and makes the extra work you admins have done with him worthwhile. Thanks again. See you 'round. Hamster Sandwich 05:43, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Geez Louise! You have the patience of saint! Good for you man! Hamster Sandwich 07:50, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  - Insomniac wikiaddiction, that's what it is. ~~ N (t/c) 07:51, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Tell me about it, I just gave a guy a recipe for deep fried field mice.[1] Because he asked and I'm bored..[2] Peace!Hamster Sandwich 07:56, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I should like to Thank Hamster Sandwitch for the lovly personal attacks, found above, I wonder though, if such is something that can get a user blocked.Gavin the Chosen 08:45, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Gavin the sockpuppet

Did you protect that page? He changed it back to the one without the tag but there's no edit option so I can;t put it back. DreamGuy 06:34, August 9, 2005 (UTC)

SlimVirgin did so. I listed it on WP:VPA for comment. ~~ N (t/c) 06:37, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

anyway

As explained Before, If this is the only active account, then im not a puppet, as for asking what one was, its called trying to maintain cover.. Please thank Hamster Sandwitch forhte personal attacks.Gavin the Chosen 06:36, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thank you for reverting the vandalism on my Talk page. there are some bored people around. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 12:07, 11 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your work with TECO!

Thanks for the work you've done disambiguating TECO!

Atlant 22:36, 14 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. ~~ N (t/c) 02:14, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like you could use this...

For that pounding 3RR headache. :-) FreplySpang (talk) 15:20, August 16, 2005 (UTC) File:MedAcetaminophen.jpg

Why thank you. ~~ N (t/c) 15:24, 16 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Hiya. Just wanted to thank you for supporting my recent RfA. Cheers! --Ngb 18:51, 16 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wicca

Hi just thought I'd let you know that the tag you replaced on the Wicca talk page is part of a greater Christian "moral" attack on many different articles. Please see Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/WikiProject Wikipedians for Decency for the main body of the controversy. That tag may not be POV in and of itself, but it has a VERY POV agenda behind it that is in violation of WP:NOT and WP:NPOV.Gateman1997 23:45, 17 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

- I realize this, but I see nothing wrong with the tag being there - I see it as harmless (as nobody will take it seriously), and removing it as censorship. I won't revert you, but I suggest you put a replacement there so as to make the context of the following conversation comprehensible. ~~ N (t/c) 23:47, 17 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Fernando Rizo's RfA

Nick, thanks for your kind support of my RfA; I was promoted last night. I'll do my best to do the job right. Fernando Rizo T/C 18:06, 20 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

User:Was blocked

I'll get some of my admin friends on him, I stole your edit summary, I like it. Howabout1 ^{Talk to me!} 19:57, August 20, 2005 (UTC)

If you write an edit summary saying we shouldn't do something, very loud in caps, of course I had to see what the fuss was about. AAARGGHHH!!! Jacoplane 19:59, 20 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

ROFLMAO! I should have mentioned what it was, you're right. ~~ N (t/c) 20:00, 20 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Otherkin

Your revert to a version of Otherkin is being treated by a user as an authoratative statement that it was the consensus version, though you disclaimed any such knowledge. Allow me to request that you speak up at otherkin, or it's talk page, post haste? Thank you. Hipocrite 03:47, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

would youl ike to tell that user that being rude gets you called rude, and no matter how much you dislike it, IF someone treats anyone rude , its well within thier rights to make note of it and ask the other to stop? where does hipocrite get off telling me to apologize to him or her for telling them to stop being rude to me? ( or is it an act, to maintain the name)?Gavin the Chosen 03:57, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think the discussion at Otherkin may be about to flare up. I've done my best to treat civilly with DreamGuy and assume that he's editing in good faith, but it's finally beyond me. I'm sorry to ask this of you, but I suspect a neutral opinion and calming voice might help the discussion get back on track at this stage. Please? Vashti 09:04, August 22, 2005 (UTC)

And this statement is absolute nonsense. He claims to try to treat me civilly and puts personal attacks on my talk page and tries to escalate his personal conflict with me to an RfAr without even trying to do any other parts of conflict resolution process and he's trying to play the victim here... I've constantly tried to put the conversation on track but he simply replies by claiming that I won;t listen to anything he says and etc. when it's that I've listened and it's wrong and I've explained why over and over. comment by DreamGuy, 15:38, August 22, 2005

I have not opened an RFAr against you; I left a statement on one that had already been opened by a third party. Regarding your claims of personal attacks and ignoring what you've said, I am at this point happy to let the history speak for itself. Vashti 16:00, August 22, 2005 (UTC)

Hi Nick, I protected the page as you requested. Thanks for stepping in to help reach consensus. I think it might help the poll if you identified more clearly what wording is "DreamGuy's version" and what wording is "Vashti's version" - as it stands, pretty much only people who have been in the thick of it can participate. FreplySpang (talk) 15:07, August 22, 2005 (UTC)

Worse than that, Vashti has had multiple versions and his current version is factually incorrect and violated NPOV. I don;t think people understand what it is they are voting for because there's no way his version makes sense in the slightest. DreamGuy 15:38, August 22, 2005 (UTC)

Just because its not YOUR POV doesnt make it NPOV, and btw, this user DreamGuy is under arbitration for such flargrant use of incivil language as shown on the Otherkin talk page.Gavin the Chosen 15:42, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I am not "under arbitration"... Give it a rest. It's funny how you claim I am when I am not and skip over the fact that you are far enough along yours to know that you are going to be blocked for at least a month. Anybody can make a claim to start an arbitration -- as you have already done in the past under a sockpuppet and failed, remember. That doesn't mean anything. DreamGuy 21:37, August 22, 2005 (UTC)

sure ,your not under arbitration jus yet, but its getting there..Gavin the Chosen 21:39, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

assistance please

the chabges i was doing to otherkin were suypported, and hipocrite revertsthem for spite, as edidanced i the edit summaries. please help. i do NOT want to get blocked any more.Gavin the Chosen 14:57, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Look, by just going away you won. Hipocrite 21:28, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

Please take this barnstar in light of all the stress that you have been under during your tenure at Wikipedia, and know that most Wikipedians are usually friendly and lighthearted.

Take care, D. J. Bracey (talk) 21:42, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, man, I needed that. My Wikistress just fell a point or two. I hope to be able to return the favor soon. ~~ N (t/c) 21:45, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Hey Nickptar, thank you very much for my award. I appreciate the feedback very much, and the kind thought. ;-D Cheers, SlimVirgin ^(talk) 02:07, August 23, 2005 (UTC)

I'm not Fred Bauder but...

From the DreamGuy RFAr: "Sorry to butt into this section, but what existing case? ~~ N (t/c) 21:40, 23 August 2005 (UTC)"

I assume he means the Gabriel/Gavin RFAr, no? Since DreamGuy is active in it, and everyone active in an RFAr is potentially subject to arbitration. Cheers, FreplySpang (talk) 14:09, August 24, 2005 (UTC)

That would make no sense, to merge it to one with the opposite plaintiff and defendant. Where's the policy on everyone being potentially subject to arbitration? Or do you mean that the Arbs could decide in Gavin's case to impose restrictions on DreamGuy and him? I suppose, but that would be pretty clumsy. ~~ N (t/c) 14:12, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Template: (All participants are subject to Arbitration Committee decisions, and the ArbCom will consider each participant's role in the dispute.) I don't think the notions of "plaintiff" and "defendant" are distinguished in ArbComm proceedings as they are in real-life trials. Instead, the spirit seems to be more like "There's a bad situation here, how can we straighten it out." The current situation here is an example where the party bringing the complaint may wind up getting more, um, guidance, than the "defendants." FreplySpang (talk) 15:55, August 24, 2005 (UTC)

Do anything please

You are a wiki admin and I need your help. Can you explain about this changes to my page? [Insulting, abusing and vandaling language!]

Gavin

Hi Nickptar, I've posted a note on Gavin's talk page reaffirming the terms of my agreement with him, and making clear that there will be no further exceptions. It would help me a lot if you could let me know if you see examples of 3RR violations, personal attacks, or any other behavior that you feel is problematic. A brief note with a diff on my talk page would be great. Many thanks, SlimVirgin ^(talk) 03:35, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

sleeper sock

User:TexasAndroid added him to the WoW Hall of Fame:

http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AVandalism_in_progress%2FWilly_on_Wheels&diff=21883597&oldid=21882811

I asked him how he did it, but got no answer yet. I guess it mioght be possible with Special:Listusers. -- grm_wnr Esc 14:42, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Millennial Wikipedians

Category:Millennial Wikipedians has been listed on categories for deletion. Since you are using it on your user page please weigh in on the vote and that of the other generational categories here. Thanks. -JCarriker 20:39, August 26, 2005 (UTC)

N-Bot

Your bot seems to have problems with quoting. See this edit. -- Naive cynic 01:18, 28 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I love Fonzie Fan!

He's my hero and inspiration!

VFD Bot

The server in which the VFD Bot was previously running on was an hour late in its clock. --AllyUnion (talk) 08:51, 1 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Toby's name

Please allow me to suggest: Do me and you both a favor, okay? Bury the hatchet about Toby's name. Upset that now, and the whole damn thing churns again.

This is pragmatic politics. You and I both want something out of this proposal, and we just might get it. You have to ask yourself if taking a splinter position is worth losing the whole fish. Eh? This is meant kindly. — Xiong 熊 talk * 03:09, 2005 September 3 (UTC)

All right, I'll save that issue for later. ~~ N (t/c) 14:57, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence

Of course he has no evidence, except for the fact that he dosen't like me, and he dosen't like the IP address, and thus we are the same. He's on the cusp of filing a bad faith RFAr against myself and Lulu of the Lotus Eaters. He's a problem user who needs serious hands-on mentorship. Hipocrite - «Talk» 23:24, 3 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

RFA

I have noticed your vandal fighting on the administrator noticeboards, and would like to ask if you want me to nominate you for adminship. From what I have seen of your contributions, I believe you would make good use of the extra sysop abilities. --cesarb 02:03, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think I'd make good use of adminship, so if you think the same, feel free to nominate me. Due to my lack of substantial content contributions (almost all minor fixes, vandal-fighting, and discussion), I'm not sure I'd pass, but it'd be nice to get the feedback. Thank you for expressing your appreciation of my work - I didn't think it would happen so soon. ~~ N (t/c) 02:07, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Check out Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Nickptar. You have to indicate acceptance there. Also be sure to read the material at the top of Wikipedia:Requests for adminship. --cesarb 02:25, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Armchair Don

Hi Nickptar, I saw you talking to Don about the deal. He and Andy have reached an agreement and Andy has withdrawn his complaint to the arbcom. However, the arbcom hasn't formally withdrawn the injunction yet, so Don's still not allowed to edit flags, Canada, or fascism, including talk pages. However, that should be over very soon. Perhaps if you see anyone about to block him again, you could ask them to check that the injunction still applies. Cheers, SlimVirgin ^(talk) 06:56, September 4, 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Useful unix command

You say that you are happy to help. Please, then, create an account on Wikibooks, and start merging Wikibooks:Transwiki:Useful unix command into the existing Guide to UNIX commands (to which you can probably add a chapter on commands that are daemons) and Guide to UNIX files wikibooks. (Please ensure that you include "text merged from [[Transwiki:Useful unix command]]" or some such in your edit summaries where you merge text from transwikified article into the existing wikibooks, so that the GFDL is satisfied.) Wikibooks welcomes editors who help to move these wikibooks further along the path towards being complete books on the subjects. Uncle G 10:01:37, 2005-09-04 (UTC)

N-bot

Please see {{ml}}. I created it a while ago. It may make things easier for your bot. Superm401 | Talk 22:09, September 4, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, but I think [[Hufflepuff#Hufflepuff|Hufflepuff]] is less obscure, and in many cases the section name isn't the same as the displayed text. ~~ N (t/c) 00:26, 5 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alleged causes of Hurricane Katrina

Given your work on this article, I thought you might wish to express an opinion in the current deletion vote. Cheers! -- BD2412 ^talk 20:32, 5 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I already did (weak keep and allow to develop as more people rant, if not better in a month then AFD again). I'm guessing it's kept as no consensus. ~~ N (t/c) 20:34, 5 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

Dark Tichondrias I want to know what "soapbox meant" in the last reversion of the Caucasoid and Extra European Caucasoid page.

Template:MikeWatt

Wow. You didn't have to go post our defense at the Watt lovers forum or whatever it's called, but thanks anyway! Good job. Hopefully, we won't get another Flying Spaghetti Monster debacle. Tito xd 00:20, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ha, I'm going to have to have to second that. Thanks for your help, Nick. Flower party 06:09, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Troll on Jimbo Wales user page

I also wondered whether he was using Babelfish. He says that he is a native speaker of English. If so, I wonder whether he has some communication disability. However, your implication is more reasonable. If he is in fact clinically paranoid, then that is a form of schizophrenia, which is referred to as a thought disorder. He has been like this for months. I think you may have shed some light on the mystery of this editor. One possible reason why he may seem to be crazy is that he may be crazy (paranoid schizophrenic). Robert McClenon 14:37, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

ulayiti's RfA

Hi Nick, and thanks for your support of my RfA. I'm an administrator now, and I hope that I'll live up to the community's expectations as one. Your vote of confidence is much appreciated. - ulayiti (talk) 15:54, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Joolz's RFA

Hey Nickptar, thanks for your vote on my recent RFA, your support was appreciated :) -- Joolz 11:41, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations!

I'm pleased to inform you that you are now an administrator. Please consider reading all the material on the administrators' reading list before testing out your new privileges. Though everything you do, excluding image deletions and page history merges, is reversible, you should nevertheless be very careful with your sysop capabilities. For instructions, please see the administrators' how-to guide. Good luck! — Dan | Talk 03:25, 11 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, has it been a week already? Congratulations! --cesarb 04:35, 11 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Popups tool

Congratulations on being made an admin! I thought you might like to know of a javascript tool that may help in your editing by giving easy access to many admin features. It's described at Wikipedia:Tools/Navigation popups. The quick version of the installation procedure for admins is to paste the following into User:Nickptar/Archive 2/monobook.js:

// [[User:Lupin/popups.js]] - please include this line 

document.write('<script type="text/javascript" src="' 
             + 'http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User:Lupin/popups.js' 
             + '&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript&dontcountme=s"></script>');

popupShortcutKeys=true; // optional: enable keyboard shortcuts
popupAdminLinks=true;   // optional: enable admin links

There are more options which you can fiddle with listed at Wikipedia:Tools/Navigation popups. Give it a try and let me know if you find any glitches or have suggestions for improvements! Lupin|talk|popups 14:59, 11 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Help with turnipheads

I'm trying to post Turniphead.jpg (a mspaint cartoon that was uploaded as part of the Turnip Head attack page) on IFD, but I keep bungling the formatting. Since it's a nonsense image anyway, could you possibly do a speedy delete on it? Thanks. DS 17:59, 11 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it's already been deleted by Splash. ~~ N (t/c) 18:04, 11 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Things to do

Hi, if you're looking for things to do with your new admin powers, Wikipedia:Cleaning department has a list of things that need attention. I note that Wikipedia:Templates for deletion has something of a backlog at the moment. (Also, Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents and Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR need archiving at the moment, the former badly so.) Noel (talk) 00:15, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Bmicomp's RfA

Well, my RfA has not quite completed yet, but either way, I'd like to thank you for your vote and your support, regardless of the outcome. -- BMIComp (talk, HOWS MY DRIVING) 18:21, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

My RFA

Thank you very kindly for your support of my nomination. I promise your trust hasn't been misplaced; I will only be slightly buzzed with power, but never drunk. ;) · Katefan0^(scribble) 20:59, September 12, 2005 (UTC)

Android79's RfA

Thank you for your support on my RfA. android 79 22:19, September 12, 2005 (UTC)

What is your mission here?

— Xiong 熊 talk * 23:20, 2005 September 12 (UTC)

Contribute to a free database of knowledge for the benefit of humanity, and have fun and socialize in the process. Why? ~~ N (t/c) 23:36, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thanks for your support in my recent RFA! All those extra buttons might not be a big deal, but getting all this positive feedback sure is, please let me know if you have any problems or comments regarding how I use all these shiny new levers and cranks! Rx StrangeLove 00:30, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

TLAs

A proposal has been made at Wikipedia:Requested moves to move TLAs from AAA to DZZ and other related pages to Wikipedia namespace. Please visit Talk:TLAs from AAA to DZZ for the related discussion. -- Francs2000 | Talk 00:44, 16 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion/Proposal/Blatant copyvio material

I think a specific closign date and time should be set for this vote. Perhaps one week for the start of voting? -DES

You replied: There is a close date specified for the copyvio vote - two weeks from now. It's at the top of the page. ~~ N (t/c) 00:05, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

There wasn't when i left the above msg. My login cookie had expired. Bluemoose added a close date shortly afterwards. DES ^(talk) 00:22, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

Thanks for the support! Molotov (talk) 22:42, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

DreamGuy

Hi. The RfAr for DreamGuy has begun; are you still interested? ‣ᓛᖁᑐ 03:01, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NPA

Yes, now that I think about it, that was a personal attack. No more of that from me! Babajobu 15:47, 24 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Don't delete my comments

To quote you: "Editing other users' comments is an indefensible breach of wikiquette." Fred Bauder, an arbitrator deleted one of my comments wholesale. I later readded it in a different section. You then later removed it again in your revert. Please don't do this or I will get an admin to block you for vandalism. Nathan J. Yoder 23:56, 28 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oooh, sorry, that was a mistake. Corrected. ~~ N (t/c) 23:59, 28 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Modern Islamic philosophy

Hey, you deleted this page... and yes, there was copyviolation stuff on it. However, if you like at the deleted edits one of mine says to revert before copyright violations. That page a had decent amount of pretty good info on it before it was deleted and I was wondering if you would restore it to that version since... well, you deleted a whole lot that I don't think was supposed to be deleted. If I'm missing reason why you deleted it could you please just briefly explain. Much thanks, gren グレン 10:10, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Username blocks

Hmmm...I admit, Death omen might have been a stretch; I was thinking that it might be prone to causing conflict and might be construed as a death threat by some users (to have a message from Death omen might be construed to be a death omen.) I haven't gotten any email over it, so hopefully the contributor has found a different name, but I'll unblock anyway.

As for AutobotNo1, "Autobot" sounds to me like an un-approved bot, and even if it wasn't an actual bot, it would be confusing for other editors. Any unapproved bot is a potential threat, and I feel deserves a preemptive block. The user can't use the bot without approval anyway, so if they wish to seek approval for a bot, I'll be happy to unblock. If it isn't intended for a sanctioned bot, then it should remain blocked, as the only other options are being an unsanctioned bot or a user attempting to masquerade as a bot (sanctioned or otherwise).

The Big W!!!!, to me, fit the profile for being a potential Willy sleeper (since page moves are throttled, he has to wait about a week); with the creation of the user creation log, he's gotten more subtle with his usernames. If it is a legit contributor, they are welcome to email me and I will unblock. (Incidentally, I haven't gotten any email from any of the usernames I blocked, suggesting to me that none of them were legit contributors.) -- Essjay · Talk 21:58, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Mmmmm...You're right, some could be scared off, but I checked the contributions of those accounts before I blocked, and I don't think I blocked anyone that had actually started contributing (most of the accounts were created 12-24 hours before they were blocked; only a few were blocked as soon as they were created.) I certianly don't want any new users being scared off, but I don't want to expose the community to any more vandalism than I have to, either. I unblocked Death omen, by the way.

The Big W!!! still seems to me to be a potential Willy, especially with no contributions. As with any block I set, any other admin is encouraged to unblock if they feel it was inappropriate. I never want my judgment to replace that of the community, and I don't want inappropriate blocks to stand because other admins feel uncomfortable releasing my blocks. By all means, please unblock any you feel should not be.

I didn't get the Autobot reference, but I still think preemptive blocking of potential bots is sound practice; unsanctioned bots have such high potential for wreaking havoc. T.Jiang stuck me as being a likely Jiang-vandal; as with the Willy block above, please feel free to unblock if you disagree. I also didn't get the Arabic connotation to Nazira; I saw two areas of concern "Nazi" and "ira" potentially contracted into "Nazira". Finally, the Lupin block concerned the potential that it might be an attack against User:Lupin, as these sorts of long usernames frequently are. I apologize if I was overzealous; that particular block was the result of a flag from the #en.wikipedia.vandalism bot.

We all make mistakes occasionally, and as I've said, I welcome others to reconsider and rectify any mistakes I make. Since I'm possibly too cautious for new user patrol, I promise to stay away from the page in the future. -- Essjay · Talk 22:52, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This is horrendous...

Thanks for adding the image to IfD. If the image had been sourced and those were not the only contributions of that user, I would have probably left it in place. I'm still relatively new here, so I thought I would ask you for some feedback. Did I handle the incident correctly? --GraemeL ^(talk) 22:45, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Most certainly. Being bold is great. In fact, I would have removed the image even if it had been sourced and not a copyvio; IMHO, it's gratuitously pornographic and inappropriate for an encyclopedia. ~~ N (t/c) 23:48, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback. Though that image was certainly pornographic, it might be hard to judge others by that criteria. I suppose it's probably best to look at the merits of each one on a case by case basis. --GraemeL ^(talk) 00:17, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

re:Wiffle Bat

Thank you very much. I really appreciate that: I was feeling like I was getting kicked in the testicles several times a minute for having the audacity to question an admin. That cheered me up significantly, thanks again. Cheers, --Blackcap | talk 04:06, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

thanks

and btw, i am tryingto start fresh, as with how i did things on the otheerkin page this tiem.. please enjoy everyhingGimmiet 18:12, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

did the notification on the rfar page have to be huge?Gimmiet 18:18, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it is a pretty important piece of information. ~~ N (t/c) 18:33, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

questions on a couple VfD closings

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Sick_Happy_Idle and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adrian Shaw -it seems to be 2-0 in favor of delete with an IP (which shared all but the last three numbers of its IP with the author of the aritcle etc.) commenting... just wondering :). Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 21:40, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

IMHO, even though the IP was an IP and probably the author, its vote is valid because it was justified in detail. ~~ N (t/c) 21:42, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, thanks! Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 07:27, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

That George Bush stuff was just a joke. So you're from Cary, huh? It's all one big mall now, and is seriously the most boring place on the planet. Most of my family lives down there. 204.168.247.45 and all that other crap.

please help

pleaser help, please undo what DreamGuy reinserted in the Otherkinarticle, he does tihs without discussion, which cannot be allowed, and pursues a defamitory adgenda in the article, which is one of the main points of his arbitration. please remove what he inserted.Gimmiet 03:58, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Block

Nickptar, please do not undo my blocks. It's very discourteous, especially without discussing it first. Gabriel has to stick to the rules, and yes, a version from August 22 would be counted as a 3RR violation if he was the one who had reverted then, and before that too. This has been going on for months. I am going to restore the block. If you want it to be undone, please discuss it with me. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 05:25, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note. E-mail for you. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 05:34, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

otherkin questions

I think my latest edit to Otherkin is reakllty good. it makes some important assertions , aand it makes clinical lycanthropy into something other then a unexplained see also. what do you think?Gimmiet 17:47, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"Spirituality versus psychiatric illness" is POV and OR, but better than deleting any mention. However, I love this edit; it's just as NPOV, and much better said (i.e., non-weaselly) than my "allegedly". ~~ N (t/c) 19:04, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

why did you re insert his rude comment? it doesnt belong, its totally unencyclopedic, and unsigned, plus its in the wrong place.Gimmiet 23:23, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It's true, encyclopedicity doesn't matter as only editors can see it, it being unsigned doesn't matter, and it's considered perfectly valid to place comments in pages for editors to see. I can't understand, in the slightest, how it could be considered rude - it's not a comment on otherkin. Unless you still think that failing to claim a belief is true is the same as claiming it's false... please tell me you don't. ~~ N (t/c) 23:25, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

if i had done that mhy words would have vbeen instantly reverted, so why treat him any differently?Gimmiet 23:26, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You wouldn't have been instantly reverted if you were correct. Thing is, usually you aren't. I agree with DreamGuy that that paragraph is POV, so I'm leaving it in. And even if I thought he was wrong, I would have discussed it on talk first. ~~ N (t/c) 23:29, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

as i learned a few months ago, such comments in articles mess up articles, becasue they make differneces tht shoudnt be there for people who copy the article text.... so on that merit it should be removed.Gimmiet 23:33, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This comment is useful. Your fnords weren't. It is standard practice to include comments in articles for issues like this. See, for instance, the anti-vandal comment at the top of George W. Bush. End of story. ~~ N (t/c) 23:36, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

the utillity of that coment is under dispute here.Gimmiet 23:37, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

re: Just a thanks

O.K. I won't. Thanks again, mate. --Blackcap | talk 19:02, 7 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Gato Negro

Yep, that's what I was thinking. I asked in the vandalism channel, and the feeling was that it should be blocked. I'll unblock. -- Essjay · Talk 00:01, 8 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In the meantime, they've emailed me, and I've apologized. -- Essjay · Talk 00:14, 8 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Gabriel

Hi Nick, it's up to you about adding material for him, of course. My point is only that, if people agree to add material on his behalf while he's blocked, then he's effectively not blocked. If the blocks don't bite, then he won't care about them, and he'll keep on violating the arbcom ruling. Having said that, I feel he's going to keep on violating it anyway, and I've reached the point of thinking he should be blocked for another month. He's been blocked three times in three days since returning, and today, he actually violated the agreement twice, but reverted himself the first time, though with an edit summary that suggests he was doing it for the wrong reason. I just don't see the current situation as working or being sustainable. What do you think? SlimVirgin ^(talk) 00:46, 8 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I see your point with the "adding material on his behalf" - again, thanks for pointing it out. As to the greater issue, I concur, and will support another long block if he violates his 1RR a fourth time. Heck, maybe even now. If he can't change, he should be gone, period. ~~ N (t/c) 00:59, 8 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nick, I've just blocked him for a week for reverting twice at Otherkin as an anon IP, who reverted to Gabriel's version. Here's the history, and it's definitely his IP address. The arbcom said he could be blocked for up to a week for repeat offenses, and the use of his IP as a sock puppet just makes it worse. I feel he needs to be blocked for another month when the week is up. Do you agree? SlimVirgin ^(talk) 19:15, 9 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've also protected his talk page because he kept blanking it to delete details of the block and the sock puppets. I'd like to keep it protected for the duration of his block, in part because I think being able to use his talk page softens the blocks for him. I'm e-mailing you some more details. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 23:01, 9 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

On User talk:SlimVirgin you said, "He is just not immature enough to edit Wikipedia." Freudian slip? :-) FreplySpang (talk) 13:13, 10 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

LOL! SlimVirgin ^(talk) 07:23, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

MRAA

You may want to check my user-page, to find out who won the "Most Reverted Admin Award", and whats your rank. Any objection are welcome. Most reverted admin award 09:52, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your support on my RfA!

Thanks for your support of my adminship!! I was surprised at the turnout and support I got! If you ever have any issues with any of my actions, please notify me on my talk page! Thanks again! Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 03:13, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

IPs

Hi. As usual the simplest solution is the best! I shall delete them too from now on. :-) Regards, RobertG ♬ talk 16:32, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalbot

I noticed you're doing a lot of indef blocks on Curps-related usernames; just so you know, Curps is running a block bot that is also blocking all of those users. We've set up a live feed on IRC #wikipedia-en-newusers to monitor user creation and blocking. I didn't want you to have to take the time to block them when they're being automatically blocked by Curps. -- Essjay · Talk 00:34, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

More RFA thanks...

Thank you for supporting me. I'll try to only do a little bit of evil. :) Wikibofh 00:12, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Doppelganger

I left a note on the Help Desk about this but noticed you are about and wondered if you would look at User:V.Molotov who vandalised User:V. Molotov's page, I reverted the userpage, left the comment on the talk page as it was. Alf ^melmac 18:48, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Blimey, you're quick, thanks. Alf ^melmac 18:56, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Gee, thanks for blocking him

Molotov (talk)
22:07, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Otherkin Reverts

I just made the same revert as you, at the same time apparently. Yours is the one that showed up in history, but do you know if that counts towards 3RR for me anyway or not? (And for that matter, does me restoring the sources and information he unilaterally deleted count towards 3RR or just reverting vandalism? I'm not sure where the line is between the two in this instance.) Jarandhel (talk) 16:12, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure it only counts towards 3RR if it shows up in history. OTOH, his mass deletions, while quite annoying and IMHO inappropriate, are probably not simple vandalism. ~~ N (t/c) 16:17, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think I'm going to play it safe anyway and not revert anymore. Besides, it seems like there are more than enough people to overrule him until he would have to violate 3RR to keep this debate going. Even Friday has chimed in against him on this. Jarandhel (talk) 16:24, 20 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Skyring socks

Hey Nick,

I was told that sockpuppet IPs should receive those bans. I used to do shorter ones but was told they should be indefinite blocks. Because of the speed and sheer number of sockpuppets he creates it simply hasn't been possible for everyone to put in the sockpuppetproven template. When there is time people put them in. But as he is now at 60 sockpuppets+ the template has tended not to be used by people blocking him. BTW, check your email for more. FearÉIREANN\^(caint) 00:34, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nice to see you back at WP. Thanks for the e-mail, and I'll stay on the lookout. (He's already started spamming me.) While I agree with reverting anything he adds, I'd like to see the reasoning you were told behind indefinitely blocking any IP. ~~ N (t/c) 00:41, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

BTW good work as an admin. I see you are new to it. From what I can see on the admin incidents page you are doing good work. Don't worry if you misinterpreted the odd thing in other admin blocks. Everyone does it. Enjoy the 'pedia. It is a fascinating experiment in building an encyclopædia. And of course, as you found out tonight you meet all sorts of people, including the odd nutjob!!! lol Slán FearÉIREANN\^(caint) 01:25, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

POPBot

Wait a minute... why are you unblocking every open proxy you found? ~~ N (t/c) 12:37, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not putting any more time in the whole vandalfighting thing, and I couldn't find anyone to take over the support of the blocks. If you're willing to support them (a few emails a week with people who don't understand they're running tor or where there's an open proxy running through their ISP proxy and you need to contact the ISP) that'd be great, and I can give you a list of the IPs. --fvw * 12:42, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Bad Edits

Could you take a look at the list of bad edits in WP:ANI, assuming they stay around long enough, please?

What jtdirl has done is follow me around reverting my recent edits, in every case, restoring the mistakes I corrected. Kind of ironic, I suppose, considering that what got me banned was checking back on his edits and fixing them up. Here's an example of him reverting a bunch of my edits, and I wasn't banned at the time. I fixed up his "President of the United Kingdom", cut a few long sentences in half, made some clarifications, fixed a mistake that had the president's term end before it began etc. The ArbCom instructed him not to revert good edits, but they also believed his story that I was doing it to harass him.

Rightly or wrongly, I'm banned, but that doesn't mean that quality should suffer. --Pete

Gabriel

Hi Nick, Gabriel posted to a few pages using his IP address even though he's under a one-month ban. I've therefore reset the ban and extended it to two months, in accordance with the arbcom ruling. More details on his talk page. Cheers, SlimVirgin ^(talk) 07:22, 22 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No more David Bowie?

"The "party hard" image on your page is also marked for deletion... just so you know."

That was a gift from El C when I became an admin. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 22:00, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that, but I didn't mark it, I'm just the messenger. BTW, if you don't have RfAr on your watchlist, I made that request we talked about. ~~ N (t/c) 22:05, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent post to the arbcom, Nick. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 22:27, 23 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thank you very much for you know what. ;) --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 01:31, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You may want to keep an eye out for Skyring edits on [Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2005 October 24]. "Skyring" user image has to GFL permission to be on wp and as Skyring is banned he wouldn't be able to give it for a year. It is listed on that page. 'Anonymous' IPs are going beserck and targeting the page as a result. FearÉIREANN\^(caint) 01:38, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

All I wanted was an unbiased opinion.

See here for jtdirl's latest gambit, including publishing personal details.

Actually, his legal arguments have me at least somewhat convinced, so I won't be reverting either for or against you on the image page. I assume you have a copy of the image saved - just reupload it when your ban expires! ~~ N (t/c) 02:33, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Mmmm. Joining in the crusade of hatred against me? What do you propose doing about his publication of personal details on the image page? jtdirl's already published my name and address twice over - see those two deleted edits on his talk page.

I don't hate you, I just think you're wrong, and disruptive to Wikipedia, and paranoid. I don't see any "personal details" on the image page aside from your last name, which is in the third hit of a search for 'pete skyring'. ~~ N (t/c) 02:42, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

*sigh* Here we go again! I was simply trying to explain to Pete what the problem is with the image, one of ownership. BTW Pete includes both his full name and address on a website he promotes. So much for breaching secrecy!!! If WP needs to establish permission from him, and he can't edit under his own name, then they need to know what his actual name is to get formal legal permission. On the one hand he published it himself. Then on the other takes offence if anyone uses the name he himself reveals even though it is only given in an effort to enable the person deciding whether to contact him to get the licencing requirements to know who to contact (for verification). You can't win with the guy!!!

Technically even allowing him edit here or on the image page is breaching the arbcom ruling, but I'm not reverting to see can a solution be found. But even that won't satisfy. While being allowed to add in an edit contrary to the ruling on the image page, he uses the same IP to add in other edits elsewhere, even when he knows he is banned and not allowed to do that! FearÉIREANN\^(caint) 02:46, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Wikipedia:Banning policy only says that contributions by banned users may be reverted. And I don't think we usually demand real names from users uploading images. But given how much of an ass Skyring is being, and the fact that he can just reupload the image when he returns, I'm firmly on your side. ~~ N (t/c) 02:50, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The arbcom made it clear about the right of users to revert and indeed to propose articles created for speedily deletion. I've been told that he has so annoyed people that the attitude is not merely may but please do. As to the name, as they cannot communicate in the normal way with the user because he is banned, they will have to deal with as a reason person, so they need to know who that person is. It is a unique situation, but then everything about this guy is unique. He makes the reviled Wikitroll User:DW seem constructive in comparison.

I gave him leeway to be constructive on the image issue, but since he abused even that and did edits elsewhere as well as deleting the copyright notice I've blocked the IP. *sigh*. Acting the ass is all too typical of Skyring. He never seems to do anything less. Its a pity. He might be able to contribute useful things but he has burnt so many boats at this stage, and pissed off so many people, that he hasn't a friend in the place. Even people who a month ago were saying "give him a chance" and about vicious about him on AIM and on the wikilist. Everyone is so thoroughly pissed off with him there is talk of blocking entire ranges from Australia or reporting him directly to servers for his antics. He seems intent not just on making an ass of himself but on ruining the lives of everyone with his attitude. FearÉIREANN\^(caint) 02:59, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If you can find any coherent IP ranges, just block them like I've been doing. ~~ N (t/c) 03:01, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If we're talking asshood, perhaps you'd best check out jtdirl's other recent contributions, where he's vandalised a string of good edits. I can't see how this helps WP.

His reasoning above is specious. On the one hand, he attacks me for being Skyring, but on the other he says that I can't give permission because I'm not user:Skyring. That doesn't add up.

For services in dealing with vandals from Canberra, I award you this
**Rub Out Skyring** (ROS)
barnstar.

It is simple. Legally on [redacted], aka Skyring, can give permission. [redacted], aka Skyring, is banned from Wikipedia. Therefore the required authorisation cannot be given. Only the account used by [redacted] can give authorisation. That account is blocked, so authorisation cannot be given. Simple. FearÉIREANN\^(caint) 03:10, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Titoxd's RfA

Thank you for supporting me in my RfA. I never thought I would get so much support! Thanks to your help, my nomination was the 10th most supported RfA in Wikipedia history. Now, please keep an eye out on me while I learn the new tools, ok? Thanks again! Tito xd^(?!?) 17:19, 25 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute resolution on Template:Suicide

As Sn0wflake has ceased his attempts at informal mediation, I have composed an agreement at Template talk:Suicide#RfC/Editing pact for us to sign. As a show of good faith, I'd like us to all agree on a voluntary process to resolve this dispute. Instead of just having one of us file an RfC, I'd like us all to write one up together so we can demonstrate good faith and work harmoniously on this issue.

Once again, thanks for cooperating. — Phil Welch 03:30, 27 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Disambiguation pages with links/Challenge

The challenge has been put aside (for some time), but not forgotten! Do we still want to do this? BD2412 ^talk 17:50, 28 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding "important note"

Why? You insist that no one owns a page even if it concerning themselves. So who are YOU to make up your own rules? I'm placing bets on how long it'll be before you 'edit' this true comment right out. ROMATH

It's just a polite request, and in any case, I do own this page: it's in my user space. You, similarly, own User talk:Tach'Ara and have the right to delete comments from it (well, "right" as in you can't be blocked for it, but people will find it rude). Nobody, however, has special jurisdiction over articles or article talk pages.

BTW, please leave new comments at the bottom and create a section header for them. It makes things so much easier. And I would be quite the hypocrite (not Hipocrite) if I were to delete this comment. ~~ N (t/c) 20:26, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't take you very long to remove my HONEST statement, did it, nicker? hahaha! You know the one where I said: Why? You insist that no one owns a page even if it concerning themselves. So who are YOU to make up your own rules? I'm placing bets on how long it'll be before you 'edit' this true comment right out. ROMATH

You and your arrogance are a joke!

Read the whole diff. I moved your comment to the bottom and replied to it. Comments are supposed to go at the bottom anyway. Evidently you aren't blocked. ~~ N (t/c) 22:35, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Fitzmas

Hi! Could you please clarify your comment on Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Fitzmas, and who you were refering to? I'm a tad confused as to what you meant. Thanks!--Sean Black | Talk 22:22, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clarifying, Nick. Also, I wanted to say that I'm not particularly invested either way on this one, and do agree with the substance of your comments (re:obscurity). Thanks again!--Sean Black | Talk 22:44, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You are a hero.

You are a true wikipedia hero. Main page save for the win! Hipocrite - «Talk» 22:44, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Good save. →Raul654 22:45, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be forever proud to know this line is in Special:Log/delete:

22:42, 1 November 2005 Nickptar deleted "Main Page" (Deleted to make way for move.)

OMG I DELETED THE MAIN PAGE! ROGUE ADMIN! W00T! ~~ N (t/c) 22:47, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Compromise proposal on Template:Suicide

I have a possible solution to the dispute on Template talk:Suicide#Compromise proposal. When you have time, take a look at it and note your possible assent or not in the appropriate section. Thanks! — Phil Welch 22:39, 2 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

E-mail

E-mail for you, Nick. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 23:23, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Brandt an atheist?

The anon who claims to know Brandt has been an atheist for decades has provided no citation of a reliable source for this claim. Absent a citation, I'm going to restore the "Lutherans" category until either a source is cited or Brandt himself clarifies the matter.--chris.lawson 01:28, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thanks Nickptar for removing my indefinite block. I don't know how much I can thank you. 68.168.82.226 01:48, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

My RFA

Thank you very much for supporting my rather contentious request for adminship, but now that I've been promoted, I'd like to do a little dance here *DANCES*. If you have any specific issues/problems with me, please feel free to state them on my talk page so that I can work to prevent them in the future, and thanks once again! ALKIVAR™ 07:42, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Edit Summary Graphic

Hi Nickptar. I don't know what operating systems and browsers you checked in, but the new image you uploaded to Image:Edit Summary-2.png doesn't look anything like what I see using the default Wikipedia style sheet in either Firefox or Internet Explorer on Windows XP. The link is not underlined (as in your graphic) and the text input field is white (not gray as in your image). --Craig (t|c) 10:13, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

OK, my memory was faulty. Thanks for catching that. ~~ N (t/c) 15:47, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. --Craig (t|c) 16:07, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/MONGO

Make of it what you will.

WP:MIND

Hello. Round four of Wikipedia Mind Benders will open on Thursday, December 1. This round will be drastically different from round three; part one will consist of a creative project, and part two will be developed from there. The full details will be released when the round opens. Time and speed should not be major factors in this round; thus, there is no exact opening time for the round as speed will not factor into the scoring. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 22:44, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. Please add Wikipedia:Mind Benders/to do to your watchlist to receive further announcements; the NotificationBot is currently down and all notifications will be placed on that page. Sorry for any inconvenience.

Note: This message has been sent by Flcelloguy. If you do not wish to receive further messages regarding WP:MIND, please contact Flcelloguy. Special thanks to Fetofs for helping distribute this message.

Featured article for December 25th

I noticed you have listed yourself in Category:Atheist Wikipedians. That said, you will probably be interested in my suggested featured article for December 25th: Omnipotence paradox. The other suggestion being supported by others for that date is Christmas, although Raul654 has historically been against featuring articles on the same day as their anniversary/holiday. — BRIAN0918 • 2005-11-28 08:28

I wasn't sure who to speak to so chose you because you last edited the Main Page. Could you suggest to whoever inserts the "Selected anniversaries" to perhaps include the death of Roy Orbison for this upcoming Tuesday, December 6th? Thank you. - Ted Wilkes 19:21, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Wikifun

Hi, I've noticed you've taken part in Wikifun before.

Just to let you know, Round 11 begins today at 0900 GMT. Dmn 04:27, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

User Bill of Rights

You may be interested in Wikipedia:User Bill of Rights. (SEWilco 04:19, 10 December 2005 (UTC))[reply]

EffK is forced to Abandon a Corrupted Wikipedia

I refer you to my response of a few moments ago at 15 December [[3]],http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/EffK/Evidence#3_December_2005 EffK 02:11, 16 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

new

a response awaits.Gimmiet 17:44, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your Happy Holidays message

You forgot...Christmas?! Ha! I added it, hope you don't mind. ε γκυκλοπαίδεια* 03:36, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oops. My bias shows, eh? ~~ N (t/c) 20:25, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

John Conner 1967

Are you chr:User:John Conner 1967? Jon Harald Søby 11:51, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No, I don't speak... whatever language that is. But the similarity in our user page text is uncanny. I'll have to leave him a message. ~~ N (t/c) 20:27, 30 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The reason I asked was that the first version of his user page had amongst other things, this line: [[Category:Linux users|Nickptar]]. However, we found out that he was a con, running the several vandal bots that have attacked that Wikipedia lately (while at the same time he was requesting adminship to "help" us remove the vandalism)… Anyways, we've got rid of him now. Thanks. Jon Harald Søby 11:54, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My compliments

This was very well thought out and is a powerful statement. Nicely done! You might wish to see Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Talrias#Another_outside_view_by_Durin and Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_adminship#Wikipedia_riots. --Durin 19:51, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Page move

I notice you moved Wikipedia:Vandalism in progress/List of pages with "on wheels" added to/punned with "on wheels" or Willy. Did you notice that the page was listed for deletion, and in that deletion notice it asks that the page not be moved? Steve block talk 12:14, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm terribly sorry, it was just too good of a joke to pass up, and I was sure to subst the deletion notice and fix it to point to the real deletion page. Besides, the page was very much doomed anyway. Won't happen again. ~~ N (t/c) 14:34, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

IMSA & ArbCom

Hi, I would like to explain what I meant by that. By that I meant that for a little while I would only be able to devote time on the weekends [for the first quarter or so -- due to IMSA policies on IRN], and after that I will be able to devote time as well, but perhaps not for doing a lot of research on article namespace stuff. Either way, I'd be able to devote time to the ArbCom. —Ilyan e p (Talk) 01:55, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Addition: I'd also only end up going to IMSA in August, so I'd be able to serve 3/4's of the first year 100% of my free time if needed. —Ilyan e p (Talk) 01:56, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Merely Lackadaisical?

I have a lackadaisical view of the current arbcom voting process?

Surely you are mistaken, sir. My view is one of primal, visceral horror.

And yet I go through with it.

Have a nice day! Kim Bruning 03:15, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, I was a little vague. What I meant was, your candidate statement then seemed pretty half-hearted. But I may revise my vote now that you've expanded it. You have a nice day too. ~~ N (t/c) 15:48, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

*grin* So, have you looked at the candidate statement again? Do you have any tips as to what I might improve further? :-) Kim Bruning 20:42, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

67.177.137.7

Thanks for jumping in to block 67.177.137.7 for his vandalism over at Elevator levitation, hopefully he finally gets the message this time that he can't simply enforce his own opinions without regard to policy or law. *fingers crossed* -Lanoitarus _^(talk) .:. 20:02, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

definition of attack page

Hi Nickptar, I see you removed the {{db-attack}} from Dude mick. I don't mind; but would like to ask about policy. I suspected it was a tenuous label as attack page. However, I thought it would be tenuous because it might not be seen as an attack; your reason was that it didn't reference a specific person. Let's say an article is created with the content "John Smith sucks". I assume that would be db-attack. Are you saying "John sucks" would not be an attack page? —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-01-15 13:30Z

No, that would definitely be an attack. But this page isn't saying "Mick sucks"; it's saying "Mick is used as a term for...", so (a) we don't know that it actually is an eponym, and (b) if it is a real term (very unlikely), it doesn't matter, it should be documented. In other words, it's not unambiguously an attack - could be something else. ~~ N (t/c) 16:46, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I guess that's the same reason I thought it might not be db-attack (because it's not obvious that it's an attack page). I saw it as attack page because a dicdef for "That dude Mick" with content "(noun) the guy that nobody likes" is close enough to "Mick is a guy that nobody likes". Thanks —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-01-15 22:46Z

CVU Cfd

Based on the discussion on the Cfd page, I would ask you to reconsider your vote. CoolCat acted unilaterally and beyond his authority, without any kind of discussion or even a comment to those of us who are members of CVU. Please also see the discussion on the CVU Talk page. I appreciate your time. --nihon 08:47, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Category renaming for Category:United States Students' Unions

Hi. As an editor who participated in the discussion regarding renaming Category:United States Students' Unions, I am writing you to let you know that while there was consensus to rename the category there was no clear consensus for the final name. If you would like to revisit the discussion on Category talk:United States Students' Unions I am willing to consider an agreement there and rename the category. I won't be monitoring your talk page so if you have to reply to me directly please do so on my talk page. Thanks! --Syrthiss 19:52, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikifun round 12

This is to invite you to participate in the next game of Wikifun.
Round 12 will begin at 11:00 UTC on Friday January 20. 2006.
-- Ravn 17:11, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fictional octopi and squids

Your comments are requested at Category talk:Fictional octopi and squids regarding whether it would be best to move this to Category:Fictional octopuses and squids or Category:Fictional cephalopods. (I'm telling you this because you voted on the category's cfd.) All the best, – Quadell ^{(talk) (bounties)} 20:17, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

please vote here

hi,Please Vote here "keep" : Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rosario Poidimani (3 nomination). Regards, M.deSousa 24 January 2006 (UTC)

Your user page

Hi. Can you please remove that unnecessary and uncivil attack on Kelly Martin from your userpage. Cheers, Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 01:09, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging Image:Biology.2-Model.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Biology.2-Model.jpg. The image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of image pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. -- Carnildo 10:03, 4 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

misplaced comment

This was added to your User page at 14:09, April 5, 2006 by User:66.193.5.99 - I'm moving it here. FreplySpang (talk) 14:12, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Nickptar:

Who are you? Apparently you use the I.P. Adress that I am on, and I can no longer add to pages because of vandalization from this IP. Can you please explain what is going on?

Long time, no see

Hello there, mate. I was just taking a stroll down memory lane a wee bit ago and realized I hadn't seen you around for a while, and thought I'd catch up and say that I've always appreciated your measured, reasonable, intelligent tone, such as that you used on the Kelly Martin RfC. Thanks for all that. Hope you're well, and maybe I'll see you around again some day. Take care, Blackcap (talk) 08:55, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiHangman Tournament

I am attempting to revitalize the WikiHangman Tournament. Seeing as the page has been around since last year, I have decided to contact all interested users ("interested" being defined as one who had added their name to the signup list) and see if they are still interested.

Which is why I am contacting you today. If you are still interested in the tournament, please bold your name in the signup list. And if you aren't, no big deal, just remove your name from the list. Thank you for your time, and I hope to see you there! — Ian Manka Talk to me‼ 19:59, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Erm, archive?

Important: This talk page is becoming very long. Please consider archiving.

I think it is 80KB+. — Ian Manka Talk to me‼ 02:50, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

N-bot errors?

Dunno if anyone's brought this to your attention yet, but N-bot seems to be occasionally messing up, judging by Skope's fixes. Looking through the diffs, seems to be N-bot's edits which are responsible for the double brackets within double brackets problem. See [4] [5] [6] --maru (talk) contribs 02:59, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]