User talk:Redvers/Archive09

3475:" (19:27, 17 August 2006), to be serious falsifications of the original. The purpose of the original entry (20:52, 11 August 2006) was to describe a smear campaign organized against one particular individual, which, ultimately, has expanded to provide a license for hate speech and Internet intimidation more generally. However, the net effect of the revisions introduced by "64.50.38.194" has been to transform an entry about hate speech into what now reads as an entry about a sincere project on the part of a couple of individuals “to unite sports fans throughout the city ,” with “Critics of the blog” simply “point to the posts in the comments section as being excessively abusive.” In short, the revisions constitute an historical fabrication. 1794:- "Accents - This is a redirect from a title in basic ASCII to the formal article title, with differences that are not diacritical marks (accents, umlauts, etc.) Use this redirect link (without piping) when the page concerns language translation or English language equivalents. Other pages using this link should be updated to replace text with the redirect target (again, without piping). For more information, follow the category link. Kurt Goedel and Kurt Godel redirect to Kurt Gödel." Why you think that 1744: 1720: 4561:

individual's spree of page blanking vandalism which happened almost a month ago and has been stopped. As for death threats, that's another matter that I'm sure they would be concerned about. But I cannot report any death threats because... I see no death threats in the edits! I gather they were deleted, no one cares to tell me where they were and from what I understand they were not made from this IP address.

3431:, not the copyright. I spent a few years working for a photographic retailer, and this was made clear to us. Indeed, disciplinary action could have been taken had we allowed the reproduction of such material. Most customers were unhappy when told that they didn't own the copyright, leading to some arguments in a busy shop on Saturday afternoons. Ahhh, happy times. Mmmm. 1006:. This quote on my talk page, "Hi I'm sorry tht you've mistaken someone else for me. But you've got the wrong guy. I just copy and pasted his userboxes because I know him because I'm very good friends with his brother who used to be on here but he took a 6-month vacation. Sorry for the inconvienece sir, Thanks a lot." from the user only confirms my suspicions. 2091: 2829:

with the use of anecdote (one: a story about three men in jail; second: about running Iran (some sort of imagery for Knowledge :S) and they way they both signed off as ~~~~. It may just simply be the naïveity of it, but I fell confident that my block was correct. Anyway, thanks for keeping me up to date with all of this. Glad to hear from you. Thanks!

4836:. However, the article I wrote was not a vanity article and did not concern my own band or a friend's band. In fact, I live on the opposite coast. I'm merely a fan trying to give them their place in the encyclopedia, which I believed is legitimate and deserved. I looked around and found that there were existing articles in this site concerning one 1120: 3753:” is an anonymous user, and since this user appears to have come out of nowhere on August 17, with the effect of his/her revisions being (a) that the Jaythejoke.com website was made to sound benign, and (b) that yet another alleged episode was added to the already terribly biased entry for the Sun-Times’s Jay Mariotti, I have my doubts. 4454: 4020:

volunteers here and a busy queu I imagine). They told me I could assume good faith and restore the articles (without them having the permission). That seemed a bit excessive so I told the editor to wait and having him send me a copy of the permission me when he recieved it. I also asked an admin for advice. See

3150: 4379: 2213: 635:

poll. This appears to be going against him too. He also tried to argue with the supporters of the other side. I responded, and he tried to draw me in to a confrontation, again against your specific intructions. Now he has called you in to support him, and will try again to force his anti-German ideas.

3946:

We certainly do need a better system, since I was the one that tagged them all to begin with. When that happened, it was also a fiasco, since some of my tags were reverted on the basic of "give the guy a break he said he owns the text" - so in the end some articles were deleted, some were reverted to

3515:

hey, I was wondering if it is possible to create any kind of simple javascript which would run on my user page, I wanted to create a background that would change colour when double clicked, or a prompt that would ask you for your name and then greet you personally. I don't expect javascript will work

3202:

My personal attacks in the past have proven to be controversal, however i will take my comments back to settle this matter, but please explain why you have nominated Dave Thomas as a copyright vialation. You can clearly see that it doesn't resemble the article on the website at all. I spent a lot of

2353:

In my opinion, in order for anyone to raise a reasonable and fair objection to my proposed entry, the subject’s lack of noteworthiness in another person’s eyes is simply not sufficient. After all, facts are one thing. But who is to have the power to determine noteworthiness within the context of an

1877:

Yes, maybe Knowledge search engine can acts better (when searching word with no ASCII character and no article found) and suggests searching for ASCII version article name (or search for ASCII version article name immediately). I think people are to lazy to create article with bad spelling. Or found

1706:

I have restored the article. If it needs sources put in a template in requesting them. Simply deleting articles that have no sources, when the topic is a historically significant grade 1 building, was an astonishing abuse of power. Articles are not deleted because of lack of sources. If they were at

1690:

As I have already explained I wasn't referring to you, but to the vandalism by user 80.169.161.162. It is not up to you as an admin to arbitrarily delete an article that doesn't come under the CSD criteria. You have abused your position an are now attacking me by accusing me of calling you a vandal,

1551:

It already has an AfD tag on it... Just so I can learn from this, what makes it not fall under CSD? Seems like an obvious case of Vandalism, but I don't know all the nuances so I must be missing something. I'm not being facetious, I really want to know so that I won't bother admins in the future for

608:

a) replacing the words 'gay' with 'homosexual' whenever she can (why, for goodness sake!?) b) disrupting articles about gay or lesbian subjects c) creating articles explaining her anti-gay views which then, after a lot of difficulty, are deleted. d) long, non-sequitur, and rather paranoid debates on

2717:

I was nomming that one guy for block because his username seemed like gibberish. And hey, if you don't want to block him, you can just take the temp off. And for questioning its existance, well...I'm quite firmly adamant that it stays. Because I'm going to run for admin in a while and I ned to help

3935:

then tagged but soon untagged. Now it's your turn. I think we need a better plan for posting a more detectable notice that an article has received permission--maybe a template for an article's talk page. Course it would help if these two articles didn't so loudly scream that they're copy and paste

3426:

Hiya, I'm having a discussion with our mutual friend about copyright problems and school photos. I've replied to him on my talk page, but I think it's worth mentioning to you, since you've told him something different. The copyright holder for school photographs is the photographer (or the company

634:

I'm afraid I have to differ on your approach. Nixer has called you in. But it is he who is causing the latest problems. He has a very strong anti-German bias to my mind. He tried to push this by reverting the article, after being warned specifically not to by you. When this didn't work, he tried a

2828:

Aloha Redvers! Glad to hear from you. I think that, not only is it possible and Truthseekers is a sockpuppet, that I am fairly confident that they are the same person. I received an email from them (both Kmaguir1 and Truth) both asking about the block etc. and the writing style is very consistent

1632:

I wasn't accusing you of vandalism, it was vadalism from user 80.169.161.162 that hadn't been reverted,you must have missed that bit. I reverted that and added a reference and link. You deleted this article out of policy, it should be restored, you are an Admin it is your responsibility to follow

3785:

as possible copyvios. I've already looked at those pages (they were speedy deletion candidates), and on the talk pages, they have got permissions from the relevant sites. Will you please remove the copyvio tags? They need wikifying and some sourcing, but they do not appear to be copyvios, if I'm

3068:

I will explain in more detail later but i have to go now! Just briefly yes i did take the photo. I borrowed my dad's expensive camera then printed them out and scanned them through. If you don't beleieve me search the entire net. you won't find it at all and the picture was zoomed in. He was not

3031:

i wrote "took photo myself". I was not implying i photographed the person myself, i was implying i 'took' the photo from elsewhere. I'm sorry if it seemed a bit ambiguous. I am unaware of where the subject was photographed but as far as i know it is just a normal family photo. I have changed the

2074:

I just wanted to remind you how much I treasure my little barnstar you awarded me. You know, I have shifted my attention away from the English newpages to the multlitude of accounts in other languages that I have. You see, I believe that the key to growing Knowledge overall lies in helping the

598:

I feel her actions might constitute vandalism and I'm really not sure how to bring this to the attention of an unbiased third party. I would go through the mediation route, but checking back through Ros Power's history, it seems that she does not respond well to such measures. She is currently

4034:

tag to the talk. But I didn't expect that the editor would suddenly make a whole lot of new pages, and then again people (rightly) suspect a copyviolation. So for now I tagged all his new articles with the confirmation tag. But to get back to the original point, a clear (or clearer) permission

4019:

I agree with that statement, but I couldn't find a clear permission process. I also tagged a bunch of articles from that editor as a copyvio and asked the user to send a mail to permissions. They took a while to respond, I even mailed them what the current status was (not blaming them btw, all

3802:

I have an email from the permissions folks at Knowledge. I am going to post it here for all to see - this is were I granted Knowledge permission to use any and all material from my web site (www.destinationdoowop.com) and they responded that I could go forward with posting my material. You can

3343:

I see you've identified a sock in our straw poll - I don't suppose you would be able to have a quick look through the other single use accounts (they should all be marked) who also voted and see how many others are also socks? I think its probably a combination of socks and recruitment of new

653:

Whoops. This has become a major disaster. Nixer called you in and started this poll. You bought in another version, which has now split the vote. If Nixer's version gets in, this will be a disaster. I should have seen this coming. Once a version is voted in, it will be "set in concrete" as the

4856:

Anyway, I was only trying to do my (very) small part to improve the networking here. My REAL question is not so much WHY my article was deleted, but how can I write the article so that someone doesn't get the impression that it is either vanity or non-notable? Would my best bet be to include

3069:

performing to the camera. i was lucky enough to 'click the shutter' when the player was controlling the ball. As it says on my homepage i am a Bognor Regis town F.C fan so i regulary travel to their matches to watch them play so taking a photograph at their ground is well in my capabilities.

1405:

Thanks for correcting my mistake - again just seemed weird having LWT at "London Weekend Television" and HTV at their initials when mostly only the intials LWT were used in on-screen idents for most of that station's life (then again for most of Thames's life they just used "Thames" in their

4560:

can be seen clearly, and none has been pointed out to me despite numerous requests. I'm beginning to think it does not exist. You may be aware that this is a large university with tens of thousands of students, so you cannot serious expect network administrators to have to bother over one

3373:

Thanks for blocking me without explanation, and then editing and locking my user talk page to make it seem as though you had done so originally. As you are fully aware, you have left me unable to even request a username change now, nor to complain about your actions. Daniel Brandt is right.

3087:

AMIB has abused his power (frequentley) making threats he would block me if i reverted his changes. I ask for an administrator not involved in this dispute to review this block. Also 31 is overly extremley seen as administrators who are blocked for more serious offences recieve only hours.

616:

While I freely admit I do not understand her views (people's private lives just don't interest me) she is of course entitled to them: I am just not sure that this is the place to argue them nor that they should be imposed on other editors. Her history shows that she is not open to rational

3253:

I am no longer a vandal. However, three hours ago, I was making sock puppets like crazy. Some of the user names were "Sakura avalon, Fascist Knowledge, I am Weasel, SAKURA AVALON IS GIVING UP, to name a few. I'm really glad some people won't show prejudice toward me because I was a vandal.

3434:

Other similar 'professional' prints we had to contend with were from a 'makeover' place, where chavs where made to look like slightly better looking chavs. That particular shop issued a letter to their customers allowing permission. (It was OK to reproduce if we saw such permission.)

2900: 2053:

is real why are you deleting him, Check wales v fiji november,2005 or cardiff blues website in player profiles ive even added a link at the bottom with the signing of ben blair and scott morgan along with him :S Don't delete it it took me ages to find all that info out, :(

4327:

Churcills, Winstons, The 21 club, coconut grove, Pigalle,colony club,Astor,Stork,I would really appreciate any input or info you might have, or know of another site that I could get info from.Knowledge does'nt have any. Thank you so much. MB 00:35, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

2390:

if either side is "right") but I'd like to ask that you both take a step back and cool off for a few hours. If you still have a conflict after that, please feel free to use me as a mediator. On the other hand, you may already have resolved matters sufficiently.

2357:

Instead, in all fairness, and in the spirit of Knowledge’s core commitment, for an objection to lead to deletion, I blieve you would have to show that the substance of the proposed entry is false—and not only false merely, but false in some non-trivial sense.

4833: 572:

Small improvements, that's me. Before it was mostly typos & punctuation, but I've gotten into finding and converting citations lately. Your acknowledgement is sincerely appreciated. Based on your recent UK contributions, I assume you came across me on

2885:

Hi Redvers! I am starting to get alarmed as, everywhere I look these days, there seems to be one of your graphics! They are in great demand at the moment, and I can see why. Why, you may even be able to start your own wiki-business ;). Nice work!

3958:

There is a template {{confirmation|url=}}. I did suggest to Yukonjack that he put the information on the talk page of each article that it was not a copyvio - but I didn't know about this template at the time. I'll tell him about this template.

3500:

I would like you lay some comments about him down. I'm not sure the precedent for vandalspammers as being 'banned' or not, so I'm asking for that too there. Given the new level of subterfuge, a lot of attention ought to be paid to this guy.

1707:

least half of Knowledge would have to be deleted. We simply put in a template asking for sources to be added. BTW threatening a user that you will delete his article if he restores it if he doesn't do as you say is a serious abuse of power.

2343:

If I understand this method of comment correctly, you have nominated my nominating my August 11 entry 'Jay the Joke' for speedy deletion, on the grounds that the subject of the entry, the Jay the Joke website, is a “non-notable” website.

4288:

or shortly thereafter, and the entry ever since has become so riddled with baises against its ostensible subject that it now reads like an expression of these biases, rather than an entry about the individual under whose name it appears.

4491:

of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

3931:. When asked for confirmation of this, he posted the text of an email confirming such permission on his talk page and on both of the above articles' talk pages. I then restored the articles and removed them from today's copyvio listing. 3543:

Hey Redvers. This is what gets me confused... I was working on a template, pressed preview and was blocked (lovely AOL, you see...). One re-launch of AOL later and I'm back, then autoblocked, back, autoblocked...Thanks for the response.

3495:

Universe Daily seems to like you a lot. I've been tracking his spam as of late. His spam redirect links are no longer redirect links to his spam site, but insted to valid ones. (probably to be retargetted later back to spam) I got a

1084:

Autoblock now lifted. For future reference, please include the entire message you saw when you tried to edit, rather than assuming what information the unblocker needed - that would have saved me a good 15 minutes of both of our time.

3748:

Please note that I would be happy to accept the natural course of editing and revision. But in order for me to do this, I need to know (or at least have a reasonable degree of confidence) that I am dealing with honest people. Since

591:

I am having a little difficulty with an editor. I have tried a 'helpme' but the reply wasn't that useful. Going back through the editor's records, I see you have run up against them before and I was wondering if you had any advice.

3926:

This is starting to become a comedy of errors, if a bit painful for the user in the middle. First I tagged both articles as copyvios. The author then explained that he had recieved permission to use through the process suggested at

1730:

BTW apologies if I sounded a bit bossy in the above comment. I do was having a stressful day and it left me grumpier than usual. You and I both had an off-day. Dealing with vandalism all the time does that to we admins sometimes.

2006:

you deleted my entry on Tyler Curtain before I had a chance to include the information on why he is a notable academic in sexuality studies and theories of evolution. literally, it had been up minutes. why so quick on the draw?

2854:

After looking at the length of the block issue, (which you did first ask me and I blabbed on to you about the socks myself!) I think I will keep the ten day block duration in place. Thanks for contacting me further. Regards,

2738:

Would you prefer that Knowledge go rampant with nonsense, personal attacks, spam, and sock puppets? I think that someone needs to get these usernames taken care of! Why does it bother you that I'm trying to help the project?

1482:

while I'm waiting for the speedy to go through. Vandals on the former article keep posting the subject's phone number, and the latter is a nasty attack page. Could you please extra-speedy these? Please? Thank you! --

4857:

cross-article links, add more emphasis on their popularity or significance, discuss their influence on other bands, or to do something else entirely? If you could help me out with this I'd greatly appreciate it. Thanks!

1577:

Haven't heard back from you... Article is still up and wondering why it doesn't qualify for speedy delete? Please help me understand since this person clearly is trying to circumvent the speedy delete process per their

3221:

there is a small similarity between Clarets and Knowledge but as as you can see the rest of the article has been painstakingly re-worded. I can adjust the highlighted sentences further to conform with your standards.

4630: 4063: 2490: 2096:

Redvers, you're such a sweetheart. :D I've always admired your username graphics, so thanks a bunch for making one for me as well! Your message was the loveliest surprise that's popped up on my talk page recently.

715: 51: 4268:

Indeed, not only the revisions to my original entry, but also the merger of the revised version into an separate entry, give me cause to contemplate raising some kind of challenge to the resulting Knowledge entry

3718:

My question deals with “good faith” issues. Since the smear-slash-hate campaign that I originally described under the proposed entry relied so much on anonymity, and since both the article in the Chicago Reader

505:

I do like what you have done with your user page can you please help me redesign my uer page from what It currently Is . I am not quite sure how I should go about It so any help and I would be very grateful.--

4590:

hello dear old Redvers. In order to leave my mark further afield i was wondering how you link english articles with articles of a different language. Also i was unable to login in the french version of wiki

3454: 612:

The overwhelming majority of her edits get rv'd causing other, well-intentioned editors a lot of work. She's just repeat rv-ing at the moment, but her record suggests that she'll just go on and on and ...

3999:

Probably the way to implement this better would be to have a prescription at wherever it is that administrators are informed of the permission process, that once they grant permission, they should add the

1542:'s bio (the director of The Lake House). I've had vandals repeatedly change Agresti's name for Walia since the film came out, but today is the first time someone's created a Walia article. Hope this helps 4819: 2809:. I was just trying to AGF, since I reverted their original edit, but perhaps I was a bit naive. I guess maybe that's why I'm not a admin.... lol, but, hey, I'm slowly getting the hang of things. -- 2693:

Jiminy Jillickers! Having gone nineteenth months without anyone appreciating my contributions, I really didn't expect someone to throw a barnstar at me for a paltry few paragraphs that I added to the

2768:

vandalised the bishop luffa page earlier and looked into the history of his edits, it apperas that quite a few of his edits have been vandalism and I was wondering what your views were on the matter.

1057:

I understand. My issue was with the block evasion; but yes the user has not clearly admitted to it with a new account. I'll trust your judgement, and help keep an eye out. Thanks for your time :)

3091:

On behalf: 31h is overly extreme (PS: It would help if you unprotect MF usertalk then you coudl talk directly) -- 6 or 12 hours sounds fair as he ahs not violated any policy except an imposed "law"

1449: 1387:

Just to clear this up for confused other readers of this page: I know this user is not new and is an admin even, but he never got properly welcomed and this is a better late than never thing :D --

1254:

I tried to upload an image i scanned through. It was a 'tif.' file and it didn't work when i uploaded it so i changed it to 'jpg.' but then when i uploaded it it said it had a incorrect extension

4480: 1598: 2934:

I am most certainly not disrupting Knowledge to make a point - I'm trying to help the project. But I don't even see how that could even convey a point, besides that I'm willing to help. Thanks,

1921: 4487: 2140:

Would it be possible to get it with just the first letter capitalised, and with a kind of watery feel which would go with my userpage? I hate to be picky and all, but since you offered... --

3184:

Why have you nominated this article as a copyright vialation? It is clearly not and in my eyes it is an attempt to undermine my hard efforts in retaliation for uploading the picture earlier

4413: 2977: 3484: 256:

Hello, I have recently found this article about a dedicated website to the channel ABC1 and I was thinking are these sort of articles permitted on Knowledge, can you help. Thanks.

4250: 2361:

Therefore, unless you can meet these last conditions, there is no good reason to prevent my proposed entry from becoming a part of this encyclopedia’s growing family of entries.

4854:

telling me that my article had been deleted because it was an article about a non-notable band. (I would have messaged him back, but his talk page is temporarily semi-protected.)

4556:

I'm not sure what you and Pgk expect me to do in terms of contacting the university network administrators. All I see is some page blanking vandalism - no evidence of a link to

1432:

Excellent, thank you! Colours, I don't mind, preferably something which would fit in with my userpage design. Maybe orangey red? Spelling and caps, just FireFox. Thanks again, —

945:

scrupulously but I never read those two lines near the top! Good to meet another Great War contributor. Spending your time in Ieper must be very handy in pursuing your interest.

4861: 3282:

Yes, I read that on your userpage and came to congratulate you on the same thing. Congratulations, and good luck – don't believe all the nasty things they say about quitters :)

1931: 787: 3662:

There are around a dozen of these that I have put speedy tags on. Are you going to take them all to AFD? If so, it may be easier to do them as a job lot. Do you need a hand? --

2968:

page concerning the inclusion of an external link. I orginally removed the link and explained why on the talkpage. However a user posting through IP addresses (and possibly as

2347:

In response, please note that as of the present moment, the Knowledge encyclopedia now boasts a total of 1,316,476 articles in English (i.e., Monday, August 14, at 17:27 GMT).

1991:

Well ok, I know... but it just looks nothing like a good faith making of a new article. Now someone has AfD'ed it - I just thought a speedy delete would save a lot of time :-)

971:. His claims of having a friend and a friend's brother are the same claims to dodge blocks that the other users have made. Hell, the userboxes are even the same. Please see 4609:

anyone to actually speedy it. Admins SHOULD take responsibility for what they delete regardless of whether it was tagged, or by whom- are you actually suggesting otherwise?

3297: 3103:

BTW Redvers - while I am not going to take action on this unless he edits more pages while blocked, this clearly looks like Insanity13 is a sock account of Matthew Fenton.

913: 3050:

i will upload a photograph that i have taken to replace the one that has been deleted. How are you able to respond to my comments during working hours? Are you unemployed?

4501: 4393:

This one ought to say "Barnstar of Vigilence" though, it's close enough ;) Thanks for watching the funny bunnies making the accounts, and patrolling release blocks too. --

768: 2227:

Thank you so much for giving me the moral support I so desperately needed after all those vandalism attacks. Your light-hearted replies helped me cheer up - and yeah, it

1945: 4723: 4140: 2567: 823: 676:

a few months ago. I'm thinking of a semi-protecting the article; it seems that most of the copyrighted edits are coming from the same group of IPs. What do you think? --

135: 4728: 4468:

Kudos to you, Redvers! You have reverted my vandalism to the point where I decide to give up. Congratulations on managing to get a persistent vandal to switch sides!

4152: 2861: 2835: 2579: 828: 140: 4147: 2574: 4528:

Hey. Asking you to delete the deletedpage. I will be writing an atricle about a different Matt Gregory, Attorney General of the Northern Mariana Islands. Thanks. -

4704: 4699: 4687: 4123: 2550: 2543: 1860: 1856: 1852: 804: 799: 763: 116: 111: 4512:

Thank you for the unblocking Redvers. It must be complicated learning all these rules and things on Knowledge. Good luck on catching vandals, and thanks again! --

3530:

thanks redvers, I can see that the sort of script i wanted is not really useful, so am going to use some pre-made scripts which will make my editing life easier!

1783: 4679: 4116: 3646: 3505: 3028: 2538: 2400: 4824:

Sorry if this inquiry turns out to be an old one, but I haven't been able to find the answer for myself anywhere else. My question concerns an article of mine (

4711: 4469: 4339: 4128: 4111: 3689: 3427:

employing them). On the reverse of most school, and other professional portraits, the imperative 'do not copy' can be found. The parent (i.e. customer) buys a

2555: 2418: 811: 780: 342: 123: 4299: 1814: 1810: 1806: 4356:

I just got blocked, on both my Padme829 account and my anonomous account. I have no idea what i did wrong! It just suddenly said I was blocked! What do i do?

4296: 3762: 3490: 3481: 2415: 2371: 2368: 2335: 2025:; I'm following the procedure (I think!?) and I've done the AfD thing before but it's not working out...I'll try later I guess, but thanks for the feedback. 1622:

isn't notable then you should have put it up for AfD. It was also extremely rude and another breach of policy that you didn't inform me of this deletion. --

3355: 1135: 1508:

Wasn't sure why you took that off? It's vandalism, most definitely. I can give you the history of this if you need it to determine the case, let me know.

4716: 4692: 4135: 3765: 2765: 2658: 2562: 1836: 1832: 1828: 1824: 1820: 816: 775: 128: 355: 4844:) and about four of his side projects. However, this particular band didn't have an article written about them, so I decided to go ahead and write one. 2969: 2753: 1475: 654:

supporters will now allow changes, and naturally they have the right to enforce this. It is also a pity you have chosen to take his side against me.

336: 4752: 4176: 3920: 3375: 3097: 2981: 2980:

has started, but seems to have stalled as the mediator is busy. I've been polite, but now the other user is attacking me. I've asked for help at the

2603: 2001: 1896: 1871: 852: 792: 164: 99: 2011: 1886: 1846: 1842: 1799: 1779: 4311: 2443: 2076: 2008: 1066: 1041: 1015: 984: 104: 4042: 4014: 3171: 4605:

I suppose this is getting off-topic for AN, but to me it sounded like you're forgetting something- someone tagging an article for speedy doesn't

3132: 2055: 416: 3983: 3951: 3362: 2996: 2956: 2683: 1753: 1597: 972: 458: 250: 4420:

This is for brightening up not only your own userpage (which looks great!) but also those of many other users with your graphics. Great work!

3940: 4890: 3140: 2976:) has taken a very er... robust disagreement with my edit. The debate has been going on with other users, as I've tried to stay out of it. A 2874: 2321: 2315: 1608: 1535: 1138: 448: 1927: 931: 561: 2656: 2144: 1502: 1479: 624: 297: 1995: 4789: 4213: 3994: 2640: 1394: 1058: 1033: 1007: 976: 889: 201: 4799: 4580: 4223: 2650: 1420:

They look really cool! I was wondering if you could make one for me, if you have enough time. If not, don't worry about it :) Cheers, —

372:

Other admind said on my talk page that I had acted too hastily, so I ageed to unblock, but just wanted to check that was OK with you. --

3963: 1695: 1685: 1585: 1572: 1556: 1546: 1359:

who have a wide range of skills and specialties, and many of them would be glad to help. As well as the wiki community pages there are

899: 423:

and added a lot of POV words such as "best-selling", "unparallel success" and more. I wanted to revert it to the previous version, but

4572:

linked to this IP address, but no one can say why he is linked to this IP and no one can say where the death threats were nor provide

3666: 3449: 1258: 581: 318:

Thanks for taking care of that Redvers, I was called away from the computer and didn't check my email before I left. I appreciate it.

211: 4756: 4180: 3643: 3619: 3203:

work on that article and i am proud to have written it. I hope it will be reverted as soon as possible to the last constuctive edit.

2607: 2476: 1637: 856: 404: 168: 2029: 4881: 4621: 4054: 3622: 3258: 2481: 1496: 1487: 1049: 1023: 905: 544: 1930:

election has begun. We will select seven coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of eleven candidates. Please

4886:

I very much appreciate your unblock on my IP. It was kind of you to do it so fast, my account is now working fine. Best Wishes -

4331: 4010:

template to the talk pages of the articles for which such permission is granted. Anyone know where that relevant page would be?--

3164:

Thank you so much for blocking those pesky sockpupperts from vandalising the work of thousands of good people here at Knowledge,

3112:

I blocked Insanty13; no sense leaving him the temptation, and Insanity13 has been used as votestacking and 3RR-violating sock. -

2948: 2311: 2043: 1307: 706: 3107: 2697:

article. I really can't accept it. However, I will continue to work on the article, maybe expand it up to a Good Article, and

3497: 1916: 1107: 1101: 280: 42: 4595: 4472: 3416: 1381: 4748: 4744: 4548: 4172: 4168: 3915: 3657: 3421: 3396:

I'm not sure about the "vapourising" bit though :P I'd really need the block button for that. -- 11:48, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

2848: 2599: 2595: 2034: 848: 844: 160: 156: 3697:

Given that you are an administrator with the Knowledge project, I would like to ask you a question, as well as your advice.

2782: 949: 4439: 3348: 3303: 3127: 2918: 2412:

from imminent deletion. But who would have so speedily nominated my entry for speedy deletion as a “non-notable website”?

2296: 2268: 2134: 2058: 1787: 3727:” both appeared on the same date, August 17, I find myself not trusting the motives and intentions behind the revisions. 3684: 3378: 376: 4265:

I strongly protest this merger of my proposed entry for the JaytheJoke.com website.--Was an explanation provided for it?

2890: 2732: 1469: 586: 480: 431:

that "Please DO NOT revert article back to previous (with more information). The staff at NetGuide have requested this."

4875: 4543: 4516: 4399: 2985: 644:

Update. Things seem to be moving in the right direction now. My intention is to see a fair article from all viewpoints.

4661: 4314: 4094: 3520: 3293: 2694: 2521: 2471: 1791: 1301: 746: 272: 82: 3792: 3344:

editors via an external site to stack the poll, but it would be great if you could sort this out for us - many thanks

312: 4245: 3574: 3553: 3358:

project - am I to assume that the contributor has been identified as a sock puppet? This stuff is doing my noddle in!

3307: 2395: 2330: 1212: 518: 509: 226: 2079: 1244: 1228: 1203: 1187: 1171: 1155: 680: 595:

I am seeking advice on how to deal with a nuisance editor, Ros Power (also now contributing under IP 82.70.132.246)

4343: 3898:

Your permission is enough for publishing your information. For information about contributing to Knowledge see <

1626: 1249: 1074: 992: 701: 658: 648: 639: 567: 539: 4814: 3392: 1512: 514:

Well my favourite colours are pink and orange. So IF you want to create that I wolud be most pleased to let you.--

2677: 2453: 2287: 2259: 2198: 2182: 2166: 2120: 2100:

So how've you been? I'm doing quite well, just trying to finish up some summer assignments (alas, I'm a bit of a

917: 906: 4616: 4276:

Of the approx. 178 different versions of this Knowledge entry that have existed through the present moment (see

3017: 495: 473: 399: 4564:

So at the best case my report to the admins would be something like: "Some people tell me that someone who has

4363: 4021: 3700:

As you recall, it was your intervention that prevented an entry of mine from so-called “speedy deletion.” (See

3354:

Ah! I had noticed a quantity of reverts of edits by one contributor in respect of articles that fall under the

3333: 3082: 2439: 1985: 1079: 4024:. All went well, he mailed me the permission mail, I removed the copyvio tag from the articles, and added the 2818: 2688: 3639: 3615: 3319:

Just a note to say how nice your userpage and graphics are. I would sure like to whip things up like that :P

2465: 2016: 1263: 964: 553:

Np, thx for fixing my fix. I admit, I didn't read the entire article, I thought it was a single monument. —

3268:

Good to see you've given up smoking Redvers, nasty habit that one! Hope you dont give up giving up! your pal

695: 4539: 3248: 1352: 1280: 1269: 924:

icon set and it's naming convention doesn't match. I am trying to reduce usage of it where I can. Thanks.

2291: 2263: 1902: 1566: 3797: 1410: 37: 4629: 4319: 4277: 4259: 4062: 3472: 3399: 3338: 2880: 2823: 2489: 1958:

Hi Medico. "Spam" is not a recognised speedy delete criterion. A full list of criteria can be found at

1604:

Was that some kind of cross-site scripting SQL injection attack, or what? Anyway, you got rid of it. --

1356: 714: 487:

and another, Paul Melville, (my mother named me after him) was a producer for commercial stations like

50: 1618:

You deleted this article, by your own admittance, in contravention of policy, if you belive a Grade 1

2926: 2125: 2048: 1579: 1290: 331: 2377: 4585: 3635: 3611: 3269: 3123: 2943: 2788: 2772: 2748: 2727: 2244: 1029: 673: 369:. Was that to achieve a more effective implementation of the block I did, or is it your decision? 4310:

I just picked up your message, but it was fixed in the intervening days. Thanks anyway, though! -

3701: 222:

i wrote an article about an Actress but it has vanished since my last visit. Has it been deleted?

3502: 3467:: I want it understood that I regard the extensive revisions to my proposed Knowledge entry for ‘ 3197: 2022: 1658:). Therefore I will not restore the article as it stood. Again, I invite you to recreate it with 1562: 959:

There is not a doubt in my mind that the user you just lifted the autoblock from is blocked user

3720: 533: 4369: 3604: 3579: 3368: 3289: 3236: 3223: 3204: 3185: 3070: 3051: 3033: 2992:

article for a few months and now it's all going wrong. What do we do? Please help! Thankyou! --

2706: 2408:

My mistake.—Thanks, then, are in order for your having rescued my proposed Knowledge entry for

1771: 1755: 1332: 1325: 1314: 968: 942: 237: 3947:

remove his copyright additions, and some were left as is. Seems like a total waste of time. --

2718:

the community. This is easy work, but nobody else seems to be doing it. Thus, everybody wins.

2460:, then within a few hours of registering made one of the changes Kmaguir1 had been pushing on 2350:

Note moreover Knowledge’s fundamental open-source commitment—a “💕,” which “anyone can edit.”

1272:

to Knowledge! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay.

4444: 4028: 4004: 3976: 2806: 2301: 1527: 954: 921: 4550: 4535: 4521: 4305: 4240: 4011: 3937: 3773: 2759: 2383: 1912: 1613: 936: 928: 558: 523: 373: 319: 249: 3179: 1882: 1795: 1775: 1518:

Sorry, have never done this before :-) It qualifies I believe under "3. Pure vandalism" -

8: 4872: 4851: 4829: 4795:. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. 4427: 4285: 4281: 4219:. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. 3712: 3711:” made significant revisions to my original entry. (For the latest revised version, see 3671: 3569: 3549: 3531: 3517: 3359: 3273: 3113: 2935: 2872: 2846: 2792: 2776: 2740: 2719: 2673: 2646:. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. 2447: 2423: 2283: 2255: 2193: 2177: 2161: 1345: 1318: 1239: 1223: 1198: 1182: 1166: 946: 895:. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. 629: 621: 464: 3599: 1966:

deleted, you will need to find a criterion that applies. Otherwise you will need to use

1565:

on one of these user's talk page saying this copying was done in an attempt to revert a

484: 479:

That's ok. For what it's worth i'm from a media family - my uncle Tony Melville was the

207:. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. 4769: 4513: 4397: 4193: 4039: 3681: 3558: 3538: 3255: 3216: 2973: 2702: 2620: 2433: 2114: 2107:

Be sure to let me know if there's anything I can do to repay your kindness. ;) Cheers,

2040: 2026: 1893: 1868: 1654:. When an editor asked for these sources the result was a personal attack from you (cf 1501: 1286: 999: 869: 600: 546: 309: 181: 1415: 4858: 4811: 4592: 4507: 4407: 4324:

Hi There! Do you know, or have any information on the old nightclubs of the 50s/60s,

4229: 3445: 3285: 3240: 3227: 3208: 3189: 3074: 3055: 3037: 2964:

Hi there. I hope you can help. There is an increasingly angry debate going on on the

2814: 2712: 2066: 1975: 1767: 1675: 1539: 1531: 1391: 1378: 1371: 1360: 1255: 1146: 1096: 685: 578: 500: 381: 360: 293: 241: 223: 27: 17: 3867:

for redistribution under the GFDL or into the public domain, or in the case of : -->

3861:

If you wish for your information to be included in Knowledge, you must release : -->

3823:

enjoy reading them and learning more about the great artists from the world of : -->

3820:

I am releasing to Knowledge any and all content from the Streetcorner of Stars : -->

4887: 4866: 4613: 4600: 3884:

Disclaimer: all mail to this address is answered by volunteers, and responses : -->

3839:

web site. I hereby grant permission for any and all of our group histories to : -->

3837:

I am Yukon Jack from www.destinationdoowop.com. I own all the content on this : -->

3822:

Please allow our group histories to be included on your site. The public will : -->

3803:

confirm this with Garion96 or Michal Zlatkovsky of your permissions group as well:

3383: 3314: 3168: 3015: 3001: 2326: 1448: 1119: 677: 669: 3866:

If you provide us with a clear statement that you are releasing this content : -->

3412:. Can you tell me, what is going on? Is there a discussion somewhere? Regards, 1878:

correct spelling when creating article body. But maybe you have other experiences.

4530: 4335: 4235: 3885:

are not to be considered an official statement of the Wikimedia Foundation. : -->

3868:

images and other media, a similar license (such as certain Creative Commons : -->

3782: 3510: 3413: 3328: 3263: 2927: 2457: 2101: 2084: 1908: 1619: 1209: 925: 663: 554: 515: 506: 455: 445: 393: 303: 217: 3988:

You do not appear to be on, so I went ahead and removed the copyvio tags. Best,

4825: 4773: 4577: 4557: 4497: 4197: 3631: 3587: 3580: 3564: 3545: 2866: 2856: 2840: 2830: 2669: 2624: 2386:

seem to have a conflict. I have not looked into this situation at all (I have

2278: 2250: 2232: 2188: 2172: 2156: 2150: 1967: 1951: 1941: 1667: 1666:

this time, however, I will be willing to delete it again if you cannot provide

1659: 1643: 1234: 1218: 1193: 1177: 1176:

I did not enter my e-mail adress.....Do you have direc acsess to the database?

1161: 1152: 873: 574: 435: 424: 366: 257: 185: 3862:

it for publication under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License : -->

3094:

PS: On request of MF please check your inbox as a private email has been sent

1743: 1719: 4394: 4360: 4350: 4036: 3989: 3932: 3821:

portion of www.destinationdoowop.com for redistribution under the GFDL. : -->

3787: 3389: 3104: 2965: 2958: 2800: 2461: 2429: 2274: 2141: 2131: 2109: 2063:

thank you i just noticed :D sorry about that i have now added some thanks XD

1992: 1971: 1959: 1519: 1338: 960: 691: 428: 352: 3750: 3731: 3724: 3708: 2075:

smaller wikis. Wenn du willst, antworte mich auf Deutsch, mein Freun'. -

1650:. The previous article did not do this and therefore was unsuitable for our 920:

on your welcome template. Ktip was uploaded seperately from the rest of the

469:

Thanks - it just seemed odd - so i took out the comma. Many apologies mate.

308:

Just testing to see if I'm currently unblocked again! Thanks for your help!

26:

This is an archive. It is no longer live. Don't reply here, I won't see it.

4805: 4522: 3928: 3680:. I don't understand why these scammers think they can get away with this. 3663: 3436: 3345: 2993: 2810: 2701:

I'll hang up your barnstar for all to see. Until then, I'll keep it in my

2307: 1979: 1763: 1679: 1651: 1523: 1456: 1433: 1421: 1388: 1375: 1297: 1090: 529: 488: 284: 31: 617:

discussion, at least not as far as the subject of sexuality is concerned.

4796: 4610: 4453: 4220: 3980: 3960: 3948: 3677: 3149: 3010: 2647: 2354:

open-source encyclopedia that contains not less than 1,316,476 articles?

1732: 1708: 1671: 1663: 1647: 1582: 1569: 1553: 1543: 1509: 1493: 1484: 1400: 896: 655: 645: 636: 386:

Lol thanks for the barnstar. :) And the same to you. Good to see you. --

208: 4762: 4412: 4378: 4186: 3886:

For official correspondence, you may contact the site operators at : -->

3063: 2988:, but nobody has replied. I've only been quietly helping to improve the 2613: 2130:

Erm, yeah. If it's not too much trouble, would I be able to get one? --

1642:

As I say, feel free to recreate the article in question from anew, with

862: 174: 4841: 3320: 2915: 2887: 2392: 1907:

Thank you very much for your quick response in blocking the impostor.

1692: 1634: 1623: 1605: 536: 388: 3745:

How does Knowledge handle concerns such as this? And how should I?

2212: 1538:

which was speedy deleted and also this one, which is an exact copy of

4651: 4112:

Politician's staff criticizes Knowledge after being caught editing it

4084: 3916: 2511: 4834:

Why did you delete my article about my band/my friends' band/a band?

3739: 2456:). This new user made a few edits (that look reasonable enough) to 769:

False death information survives for a month in baseball biographies

528:

Hi! I need your help to resolve the case with Nazi apologism in the

4820:

Deleted article: can it be salvaged by means of links or redirects?

3594: 3409: 2989: 1534:

today, which have been reverted, they also created a nonsense page

1407: 736: 492: 470: 420: 405: 4788: