This is an archive of past discussions with User:Ryulong. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

→

Archive 10

Why did you revert my edits. Putting the North/South as a suffix as opposed to a prefix makes it easier to locate constituencies. You may not have noticed that the majority of the constituencies have the North/South at the end, I was just tidying it up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rob.derosa (talk • contribs)

Because that is not how you do moves. Ryūlóng 05:16, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Okay I will request a move for the page, I was unaware about that cut/paste rule. That doesnt explain why you reverted the table. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rob.derosa (talk • contribs)

To fix the redirects that you put in place. And sign your messages with four tildes. Ryūlóng 05:19, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I will rename the constituencies in the table to eg Devon North, but keep the link to North Devon. Then request a move by an admin. OkayRob.derosa 05:21, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Better. Ryūlóng 05:21, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

And yeah, work on your people skills; you didnt need to shout at me here [1], I'm not a baby Rob.derosa 05:22, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

It got your attention, didn't it? Ryūlóng 05:27, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Actually it was the one I noticed last, the much politer message I recieved on my talk was more than enough.Rob.derosa 05:34, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, I got to the talk page at the WikiProject first, and then I went to your talk page. Ryūlóng 05:35, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Why are you moving pages realting to psychedelic trance? Psychomelodic User:Psychomelodic/me 05:44, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Because I thought that you had done a vandalous move. I apologize. Ryūlóng 05:45, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

For the revert to my userpage. I realize that I warned you for 3RR a few days ago...I hope you realize that it was nothing personal. Thanks Again, alphaChimp ^laudare 07:33, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

No problem. Ryūlóng 07:34, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Please look at the Talk section of the 'Irish Fruit Cake' article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LttS (talk • contribs)

I noticed that you tagged the page Image:STW-Trucker.jpg for speedy deletion with the reason "Orphaned". However, "Orphaned" is not currently one of our criteria for speedy deletion, so I have removed the speedy deletion tag. You can use WP:IFD if you still want the page to be deleted. Thanks! Stifle (talk) 16:29, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Do you need any help? —Minun ^{Spiderman • Review Me} 19:21, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

I can understand the verifiability problem; that's why I linked to a video of an incident in progress (which verifies that raids happen and that they're from 4chan) as well as a screenshot that also proves they happen. My understanding is that the 4chan Habbo raids are similar in notability as the various GNAA attacks. Even more so than GNAA, in fact, because the Habbo raids involved the mass mobilization of a large body of people. Would forum posts from Habbo itself about the raids provide verifiability (especially as mods posted on the raids' impact on the servers)? My interest here is documenting what appears to be a surprisingly structured and coordinated attack from a group of people who pride themselves on being random. It also provides evidence that /b/ might be more than just an image board, which is interesting from a social science post of view. Also, the raids did impact the online experience of many people. What do you think? (And feel free to reply here or on my talk page.) Xuanwu 03:47, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

The problem does not exist in the verifiability problem, perse, but more of the fact that such raids don't really need to be mentioned in a serious encyclopedia that Wikipedia is striving to be. There have been long discussions about whether or not to include them in Talk:4chan and Talk:Habbo Hotel and both discussions have unequivocally stated that such information is not for Wikipedia, despite the wishes of /b/tards everywhere. Ryūlóng 03:51, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip on the where the hangon goes... I am sort of new at this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by VelvetGeisha (talk • contribs)

No problem. Ryūlóng 09:48, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

May I ask what makes habbo hotel and anime/manga so much more worth writing about that a actress/model? Just wonder. — Preceding unsigned comment added by VelvetGeisha (talk • contribs)

Because they are internationally renowned and this model you are writing about is not. Ryūlóng 19:51, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi, Ryulong. It looks like you replaced the original disputed text in the Rabbit starvation article, that had been removed by the author. I'm not sure what the usual procedure is with pages that need a rewrite, but shouldn't the author's removal of copyrighted material stand? Regards, --Pappa 10:34, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Heh, I suspected that might happen. What we need is some way to wave a wand over an article once in a while to signify that otherwise suspicious edits previously have been 'blessed'. :D Regards, CHAIRBOY (☎) 21:22, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, I've asked for the user talk to be sprotected. We'll see how that works out. Ryūlóng 21:24, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

My personal thoughts on this are that it should be fine to leave it as is for a few days, it's not hard for us to revert. Since the user is blocked, if we sprotect it then the actual SC (if it was him) would be unable to post. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 21:44, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, after a few days, he would be able to reply. Ryūlóng 21:44, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting vandalism on my talk page! HawkerTyphoon 22:55, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

No problem. Ryūlóng 22:55, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

I've posted a similar quote (with citation) and edited the page to accommodate it, which should suffice I think. - Blah3 05:32, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. However, the moron returned, it seems. Ryūlóng 05:35, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

The Barnstar of Diligence I award thee this barnstar for going beyond the call of duty when dealing with a non-native speaker. —— Eagle (ask me for help) 07:58, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Hey, that user page you deleted was mine... I removed the speedy deletion because I thought the comment was funny, it was from a friend... why did you say I was vandalizing my own user page? 68.59.61.237 17:58, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

It was not funny. Death threats never are. Ryūlóng 17:58, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

He wasn't serious, and as it's my user page and I knew he was joking, what's teh big deal? What difference is it to you? 68.59.61.237 18:01, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia has rules against death threats, and attacks of any kind. Regardless of who left it, it is still a problem. That and IP users can't have user pages. Ryūlóng 18:02, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Really? I'm sorry, I didn't know that. Why is that, do you know? 68.59.61.237 18:04, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Please read Wikipedia's No Personal Attack policy for more information. Ryūlóng 18:06, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

THanks, but I meant, why can't IPs have userspaces? Hope I'm not bugging you, 68.59.61.237 18:20, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

It's just a general rule. I'm not sure where it is, but it has been enforced. Only in rare instances do IP users have user pages. Ryūlóng 18:21, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

You reverted my edits to the Ignatieff page without actually looking at them. If you did, you'd see I was simply removing PURE DUPLICATION. With your reversion, the same block of text now appears twice. 72.139.185.19 18:05, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

I apologize. From where I got that diff, it was massive blanking. Ryūlóng 18:06, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Howdy! Please see Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#User_talk:Stephencolbert, I'd like to revisit your protect suggestion and have requested admin coordination. Regards, CHAIRBOY (☎) 18:22, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Okay. :D Ryūlóng 18:24, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Dear Ryulong,

I did an rvv for "Meera Jasmine" because I felt a previous version was more well-written and some of the info in the newer version was incorrect (for example, Meera Jasmine was not born in Mangalore). I assure you that this was not vandalism. I appreciate your attempts to weed out vandalism, but there's no way this was vandalism. So pls let me rvv in peace.

Regards, Zojoji 18:54, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Then merely change the information, do not blank everything to fix it. Ryūlóng 18:55, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Please lock the page if you can. The propagandists are relentless.

I am doing the best I can. Ryūlóng 18:56, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting that recent vandalism to my user page. Canderson7 ^(talk) 21:43, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

No problem. Ryūlóng 21:44, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Hello, I left you a comment at Talk:Radio Habana Cuba--Jersey Devil 22:29, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Suggestion, minimize your involvement in your RfA. Let other people revert vandalism, and let it work itself out. Some editors react poorly to admin candidates who are too involved in the process. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 23:51, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

I apologize, it's just that I'm getting these pings in the Vandalism channel. Ryūlóng 23:52, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Dude, seriously, leave it alone and rely on other folks to keep it clean. You are WAAAAAY to involved in reverting, your best bet is to sit back and let it work itself out. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 23:58, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm done now. Ryūlóng 23:58, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Reverts are rude, use them sparingly. If you have a comment to make, do so on the talk page. Calling someones edit a diatribe is an epithet and violates WP:CIVIL. Welcome to Wikipedia. -Ste|vertigo 00:10, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I apologize. The edit seemed longwinded, and I am sorry if I offended you. I was just alerted to it through some bots. Ryūlóng 00:11, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Have you read this gem in the help section? I quote:

reverting such removals or redirects is not proper and may result in a block for edit warring.

Blanking a page is, contrary to whatever you believe, NOT against the rules. Especially if it's harrassment, such as what you're doing at the moment. I feel that you're acting due to a certain someone pushing you to, and I feel that this warning will be enough and I don't have to place a vandalism warning here. However, consider this your final non-"real" warning. I've repeatedly asked you to stop, please be civil and stop vandalizing my user page. MonsterOfTheLake 02:51, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I am sorry, but talk pages should not be blanked. If anything, they should be archived. Ryūlóng 02:52, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

That's your opinion. Check up the definition of the word. I have given you fair warning. Until I break the rules, you are free to (and quite encouraged!) to stay free of my user pages, just like you are able to delete this section if you wish to. Good? Great! MonsterOfTheLake 02:55, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Except I will not delete this section. It will go into my archives, and I will not discourage people from posting on it. Ryūlóng 02:57, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

It's completely legal to shave my head, except I will not shave my head. Yet it's also completely legal to eat lasagna, and I WILL eat lasagna. Works out to the same end. I hope we're on the same wavelength here, because following rules is awesome. Hooray for proper discussion. Now, feel free to stay away from me (and my pages)! MonsterOfTheLake 03:03, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Fine. Ryūlóng 03:03, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

MOTL blanked his talk page (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:MonsterOfTheLake&action=history ) and added a "warning" - he's under the mistaken impression that user pages = user talk pages. WhisperToMe 04:41, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I cannot do anything, as he has cited a guideline that can be seen in my archives. Ryūlóng 04:46, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't believe that script works anymore. If you want rollback, you may want to look into this[2].Voice-of-All 07:36, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. Ryūlóng 07:38, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Given the number of times I've run into you, in the midst of CVU business, your talk page is probably like mine, in terms of its two most popular topics: (a) "Screw you for reverting my edits!" and (b) "Thanks for reverting those edits!" With that in mind, a belated thanks for your rvv at my userpage. :) Luna Santin 08:10, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you Luna :D Now I won't have "rvv" but whatever the script says :D. Ryūlóng 08:11, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Looks like some users voting on your RfA expect that out of your 10,000+ edits you've never made any mistakes or bad edits. Don't let it get to you though.--Andeh 12:52, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Hello Ryulong : - ) I put a question on your RFA. FloNight ^talk 15:53, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I do have a problem. Some maniac has nominated you for ADMIN. That's nuts. nobody is being harrassed. Why does the truth hurt you so bad? your bullying aint working out for you on this one huh? awww.

You tried to say that ALL AMERICANS HAVE INCEST on the Jeremy Clarkson page and went to great lengths to make it stay that way... I HAD YOU REVERSED... you're burned. You were wrong. Now it has the correct quote AND the source. I was suspended for my troubles. You tried VERY hard to prevent this. It's all there in the history. You are a weasel. I'm sorry that they picked on you in school, but picking on me is gonna make your life much worse.

When I tried to start a discussion about it, you repeatedly deleted my TOPIC. you even had your little friends wrongfully block me.

So.... FUCK YOU and Eat shit.

I WILL make sure that your NOMINATION page reflects the truth.

Fuck you very much.

You bullied the wrong person.

YourCousin--86.29.121.113 20:13, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Did you just send me a user attack warning? Well go fuck your mother. This time, picture it... imagine your mother.

F.O.

YourCousin--86.29.121.113 20:16, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

It was not saying that all Americans have incest. He was citing a stereotype that Americans in rural areas have incest. And you cannot edit my RFA nomination page any more, and if you continue to harass me because I had done the right thing (by reverting your blanking and constant tirades that slandered me) then the Wikimedia Foundation will contact your ISP and have you pulled from their services. It has been done in the past, and it may be done in your case. Ryūlóng 20:17, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I found YourCousin's ISP - It is NTL. I can contact it if YourCousin continues. WhisperToMe 20:47, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. After I found out one of the IPs actually vandalized a page I watch, this guy needs to be dealt with. Ryūlóng 20:48, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

See http://bbplus.ntlworld.com/NetReport/index.php WhisperToMe 21:13, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Except we do not have his email, and he has had so many IP addresses that it is near impossible to track him as such (unless you can prove something that I cannot find). Ryūlóng 21:24, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I've tried resolving it with him, hopefully this should work out! --TheM62Manchester 21:49, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

And I too have found out that the clip that was cited for the quote that he has complained the most about does not have any mention of "sexual acts" yada yada yada, and I have mentioned that on his talk page. Perhaps he can stop with the "ZOMG RYULONG SUCKS AND IS A BASTARD" remarks now. Ryūlóng 21:50, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I hope so, too. --TheM62Manchester 21:51, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

The obscenities have been all over (saw your edit summary). Ryūlóng 21:53, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I haven't seen his obscenities, but yes my edit summary was (obscenities??), and I hope this dispute can be settled amicably. --TheM62Manchester 21:55, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Isn't "bastard" an obscenity? Ryūlóng 21:56, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it is an obscenity. Anyway, you're a good editor... keep the good work up! --TheM62Manchester 21:58, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Gracias. Ryūlóng 21:58, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

“

I watched the clip that ChicosBailBonds cited as to have the comment about "when you buy an American car..." and the quote was not in the video clip. I have removed that quote, per your constant wishes and (constant) attacks on my status as a good editor. However, the "Whatever they do..." from the Ford F150 clip will remain, as that is explicity stated in the clip. I hope that now that I have discovered the truth about this whole nonsense (for now), that you can stop slandering me. Ryūlóng 21:47, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

”

dont get all buddy with me...

I tried to communicate with you yesterday...

you made your own choices...

i will see your nomination shot down...

youre a bully and a thug

YourCousin --86.29.112.67 22:01, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

I have finally apologized to you, and this is your response? Ryūlóng 22:03, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Like I said to you, you table turning dumbshit... If you keep harassing me I will not only shoot down your nomination which is now my number one goal in life, but I will also undo everything you do from now on. I am handicapped... in bed... forever,... 31 ISPs... DARE ME! --86.29.119.4 22:14, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

You have to stop slandering me. NOW. You will have your ISP pulled because of your constant harassments. You also have to stop putting words in my mouth. Read the quote that you cited from me. I removed the quote from the Dodge Charger segment, because the video that it was cited to does not mention the quote in it. However, there is a separate and (slightly) different quote mentioned in the Ford F150 segment, where Clarkson does make a statement about rural Americans and incest. Ryūlóng 22:18, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

(YAAAWN) huh? what me?

oh fuck off you dumb cunt!

You got buuuuuuuuuuuuuuuurned!!!

Not done with you yet!!

Dodge charger.....zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

(yawn)

damn youre a dumb dumb huh?

Go on... block me...

pull my 31st ISP...

yawn...

fuckin dumbshit!

you made up that stuff and didnt get away with it.,..

why not just admit defeat and go away?

pride too big?

I've just seen your photo... youre not a real texan are you?

night night asshole!

YourCousin --86.29.119.4 22:30, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

peace :) --Striver 23:59, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, you're in error assuming that 10 or 20 minor edits validates the content of an article. Next time please read the talk page and familiarize yourself with article content, before you revert.--Scribner 00:35, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

o_O which page is this, now? I apologize, I've been attacked today. Ryūlóng 00:36, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh...Shock and awe. Sorry. Ryūlóng 00:37, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Hello :D UberVash 03:40, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi you said you received a nasty email from Repmart (talk • contribs • page moves • block user • block log), if you still have the email could you post the header it came with? Might be able to get more info on the person then as it's not from your usual website. If you need help feel free to email me.--Andeh 17:17, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

You said "Based on that... Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing.", but I haven made any personal attacks for about a week or 2 but you said I do.----Always Gotta Keep It Real, Cute 1 4 u 04:27, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Please do not leave messages in my talk archives. Leave them on my talk page. I left you the No Personal Attacks warning because Shakim impied that you had, which turned out to be partially true, as you did leave a comment on the user talk page of the person who had put up User:Raven Symone up for deletion. Ryūlóng 04:30, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Okay...but are you saying I'm a sockpuppet of User:Raven Symone?Just cause I'm a fan? I know another user whose a fan of Raven, but she's not the sock puppet...i don't think she is.----Always Gotta Keep It Real, Cute 1 4 u 04:52, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

I am not saying that you are a sockpuppet of Raven Symone. In fact, it was proven that you are the creator of the Raven Symone account. That account is your sockpuppet. Ryūlóng 04:53, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

If for whatever reason the RfA doesn't go as it should, please remember to drop me a line when you're up again. You'll make a good addition to the team, sooner (hopefully) or later. JDoorjam Talk 06:37, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you very much, JDoorjam. Ryūlóng 06:38, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading Image:Synapse-CoH.png. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, 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 files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sherool (talk) 09:34, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I see you reverted me and reinstated the "free use" template on those images. So I took a look at the City of villans/heroes fansite kits just in case, and as I suspected the material is not relased for free use. Along with the images the zip files contain license file that clearly states that you are only allowed to use it on "your fansite" (wich I don't think Wikipedia qualifies as) anything beyond that:

"NCsoft and its licensors own all of the right, title and interest in and to the Game. Your right to reference the Game is limited to the license grant above, and you may not otherwise copy, display, perform, publish, or use any of the Game elements. You may not modify, reverse engineer, disassemble, create derivative works from, license, transfer, distribute, or sell any materials from the Game, or use the Game to further any commercial or unlawful purpose. Without limiting the foregoing, you may not use your references to the Game to sell advertising, to promote another product or business, or on any site that operates or promotes a server emulator. You may not make materials from the Game available by download from your City of Villains Fan Site (without prior written permission of NCsoft)."

So basicaly you are only allowed to use it for a very spesific kind of website (basicaly promoting theyr product), and it's restricted to non-commercial, non-derivative use only. Hardly a free license now is it? Low res versions of the character images will probably qualify as fair use under {{character-artwork}}, but the {{CopyrightedFreeUse}} tag is clearly inapropriate as it essentualy claims there are no restrictions at all on what you can do with those images. --Sherool (talk) 22:48, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

I suspected it would be as such. I will tag them with {{character-artwork}} (unless you have already done as such) and I will revert my edits to userbox templates that I have used derivatives of the images in. Ryūlóng 22:50, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I have the episode on my computer and am viewing it as I type this. Here is the line, starting roughly 19min 30sec into the episode:

(camera goes from C&W bar back into studio, shot of Hammond, Clarkson and the Charger R/T)
CLARKSON: It's not the line dancing that's the problem, and nor is it the fact that if you buy an American car you're gonna have to commit acts of love with your cousin. (some laughter)
HAMMOND: So what's the problem?
CLARKSON: Charger--wrong Dodge. You need a Challenger... (goes on to talk about chase scenes)

If you torrent the episode yourself from finalgear.com, watch it and see for yourself. Thanks for taking time out to clear this up. --ChicosBailBonds 01:55, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I cannot torrent (it will be largely useless to me when I am at school because of the blocks my University's network places on certain ports, particularly those related to illegal downloads). Perhaps you can take the entire segment about the Charger and upload it to youtube/another easily viewable video website, the incest joke included, that way it can be cited correctly. Ryūlóng 00:46, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

I'll try that, though I am very Youtube/capturing things from Real noobish in regards to uploading things.--ChicosBailBonds 01:55, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

That's okay. I have no idea how to clip video files, either. Ryūlóng 01:58, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your help! What I'm beginning to believe, is that his first wife had already been married once, and that the NYPL gives her last name at the time of her marriage to Riis. I'm going to use both names, I guess, since I know I'm not going to be finding any Danish marriage licenses from the late 1800's, heheh. Cheers! --Chuchunezumi 00:58, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome :D and yeah, a late nineteenth century Danish marriage license would be a little hard to find XD Ryūlóng 00:59, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting vandalism on my page. --Siddiqui 13:27, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Wow, you're fast. Thanks for reverting. Thistheman 21:33, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

No problem at all :D Ryūlóng 21:34, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

I added the feature to use IPVandal yesterday, and as for spaces in the usernames, I thought it already did that. I'll take a look. --lightdarkness ^(talk) 12:26, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Should be all set now, do a hard refresh and it should work correctly. --lightdarkness ^(talk) 22:16, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

[3] Thanks! --Durin 12:31, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't think it was vandalism- this was most probably a user editing their own talk page. Friday (talk) 01:17, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Still, the mass blanking and mass manifesto looked bad. Ryūlóng 01:31, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

• 
  Ryulong is hereby awarded the Vandal Whacking Stick for putting up with vandals for so long without losing their cool.

--Andeh 01:18, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I saw my mistake and was about to fix it : ) - Jc37 03:59, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Sokay, it's now in a better place now :D Ryūlóng 03:59, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

KOS | talk 05:46, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I was wondering why those pictures you removed on the Tommy Oliver page were unnecessary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Unclerico89 (talk • contribs)

The images were deemed unnecessary and disruptive to the flow of the page on the talk page for Tommy Oliver. We don't really need a picture of when he was fighting himself or Lord Zedd. Ryūlóng 03:18, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for removing the vandalism to my talk page, that user who went to everyone's page with a "whassup" or "you rock" flabbergasted me, it was nice that he was giving compliments but it seemed like vandalism/spam at the same time; very weird. Thanks again and best of luck in the future! - Patman2648 08:40, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

No problem :D Ryūlóng 08:40, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I'd recommend against your reversion of that edit, because I don't think it was vandalism; I think it was removing vandalism. You're not Canadian, so you might not know that the entry in question, saying that a former teacher at the school was hard at work on 'The King of Kensington - The Next Generation' is extremely dubious. First, 'TKoK' is about 30 years old, its principal actor, Al Waxman, is dead, and the CBC almost never does sequels. Also, I googled the name of the supposed author and the supposed TV show, and got nothing. I think you should investigate it further before committing to a reversion. IMO this might be a sneaky, sneaky vandal (there's been a lot in the news about the supposed untrustworthiness of WP), seeing if they can trip up admins by catching them restoring vandalism.--Anchoress 09:01, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I apologize. I was going through the edits of someone who had done a hell of a lot of other vandalism that I reverted. I will revert the edit if it is necessary. Ryūlóng 09:03, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Cool. Yeah all the other edits were clearly vandalism. Personally I think the etobicoke entry is either vandalism or original research. First, the entry was from an IP with like four edits. Second, there has been quite a bit of vandalism of the article. Third, I googled the whole title of the supposed new project and got only one hit, a blog entry from last year. Fourth, I googled the name of the teacher before it was changed, and didn't find anything about TKoK. Fifth, the original entry said the math teacher was working on a script for the new show, so I think it's at least possible that a) the teacher really is working on it (as their own project) and mentioned it to someone who added it, or b) it's just vandalism. Either way it's not verifiable, not on the net at least, so you were right to kill it.Anchoress 09:15, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi there! We don't really know each other, but I've seen you around quite a bit on recent changes and in the #vandalism-en-wp IRC channel and from what I can tell, you do good work. I hope you don't become discouraged by the results of your RfA and continue to produce at the level we've all grown accustomed to. I also hope you'll consider another go at RfA in the future, as I believe that both you and Wikipedia would benefit from enabling you to fight vandalism more effectively. I noticed that you go to the U, so hopefully you won't be too engrossed by the upcoming football season to edit! Also, if you're ever looking for a break from vandal fighting and are indeed a football fan, I'd love to collaborate with you on fleshing out some of the 'Cane alumni football stubs in the upcoming months. Cheers! hoopydink^{Conas tá tú?} 00:43, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Heh...I doubt that I'll go to any of the games this year, either, unless my new roommate and suitemates decide to drag me out to one. I'll definitely try to go through the RfA process, again. It's pointed out my WP:AGF and WP:BITE faults. Ryūlóng 02:42, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Shakim67 has sent me many personal attacks on a different site.--Always Gotta Keep It Real, Cute 1 4 u 05:28, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Regardless if he posted personal attacks through youtube, you still should not retaliate. You should keep a cool head and remain civil. Ryūlóng 05:31, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Hey bud, not sure if you should be doing this as it is specifically cited as a job for sysops? I have been in the IRC channel before and seen a couple of raised eyebrows from admins who've seen you do it before. Just thought I'd let you know, thanks! - Glen 06:23, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

I was told that I could deny username blocks by Naconkantari recently. Ryūlóng 06:24, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

I can't say that I think this is a good idea. The whole point is to have another admin review the block. pschemp | talk 06:29, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Even in the cases of username blocks? Ryūlóng 06:29, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes. Not that clear cut ones wouldn't be obvious to you, but the system is set up to make sure another admin sees it. If you deny it, another admin won't see it. Its not that you aren't capable, its just the way we review blocks. pschemp | talk 06:33, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Okay then. At least I did not help the idiot change his meme by using the regex that I put in place at the cvu channel. Ryūlóng 06:35, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Sheesh, either he's really clueless and likes Ronald McDonald, or is totally mocking us. —tregoweth (talk) 16:24, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi. Trouble user has been blocked; if the situation persists, we'll see about the article. Thanks for pointing out the issue. Taragüí @ 15:21, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi Ryulong

You appear to have left an unsigned {{bv}} warning on a new user's talk page. I can see no vandalism in this user's edits. I can also see no welcome message to them. All I can see is a frustrated new user experiencing some vandalism for the first time, and you threatening to have them blocked. Under WP:BITE, please consider removing the warning (perhaps replacing it with one of the welcome templates) and having a little more WP:AGF? Not a requirement, just a suggestion. ➨ ЯEDVERS 22:36, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

This user's sole edits are to WP:AIV (as well as only a few edits to AOL IP talk pages) where he is filing false reports on AOL users who have not been given warnings in several days. This user registered today and only has edits there, not to vandalism reversions. Ryūlóng 22:37, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Then tell him that. You appear to be abusing {{bv}}. Please stop. Try a little WP:AGF and help a new user rather than just stamping on them. ➨ ЯEDVERS 22:40, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

I did, and his actions have proven that he is solely registered for disruption of AIV. Ryūlóng 22:47, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

I feel it necessary to point out that the user had something like three edits when he was reported, all of which were good-natured (albeit misguided) attempts to help out. Thus, I don't feel he deserves punishment, and I'd like to help avoid another AIV "edit war" if possible. Sorry to butt in, but I figured I might as well do it here since I already did it here as well. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 22:48, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

While the user only had three edits, they were only to WP:AIV and to give false warnings on a user talk page. If anything, it appears he was that IP editting the hidden message on AIV and then registered to make a point. Ryūlóng 22:53, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Please present your evidence for this astonishing lack of faith in a new editor. His actions amount to four edits, none of which appear to be in bad faith. Your actions, Ryulong, appear to be entirely bad faith: you didn't once consider WP:AGF, nor WP:BITE. You quite possibly put off an (over)enthusiastic new editor for life. So please be warned: do not abuse {{bv}} and do not bite newcomers in future. Repeatedly doing so after being warned may lead to you being blocked from editing. Thanks. ➨ ЯEDVERS 22:56, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

I realize that it is an extreme bad faith accusation, but this user was reporting IPs who had not been warned in several days (until he did so himself and even used a page that the IP had not editted as evidence). He then reported me (copying and pasting my signature) because I reverted his false warnings. He may have been misguided, but he had no other edits, registered within the hour, and was more than likely just trying to get an AOL IP blocked (one in a similar range had been reverted many times for inserting a message in the instructions on AIV to try and say something about AOL IPs). Ryūlóng 23:09, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Whatever your suspicions of his motives, you use of {{bv}} was clearly against WP:BITE and WP:AGF. Further more, suspicions of motive do not indicate the actual motive of a user unless you have proof. You must start assuming good faith of your fellow editors. ➨ ЯEDVERS 23:19, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Regarding your edits to Talk:Power Rangers: Mystic Force. Please don't change the comments of others just because you don't agree with them. In a discussion or a poll, people are entitled to their views even if they don't accord with your views on how the discussion or poll is run. ➨ ЯEDVERS 23:07, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

I realize that it was wrong, however they all appear to be copying one other user's vote. Ryūlóng 23:09, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

I know it is not my place to state as such, but they are not "strongly supporting" the change, but "strongly supporting" one user. Ryūlóng 23:13, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

They could all appear to be marching over a cliff in double time. That would still be no reason to alter their comments. Again - WP:AGF in your fellow editors. I really can't stress this enough. I've had little or no contact with you before now, so I assume you are having an off day (we all have them, mine was the day before yesterday) and normally you are a respectable editor here.

If, however, this travesty of an hour's edits was normal, I would be appalled.

Perhaps you should stop editing for the night, put your feet up and have a nice cup of tea? ➨ ЯEDVERS 23:19, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

I think I will take a wikibreak at least from major edits. It's probably the novocaine left in my system from my new fillings. Hell, I'll be on forced Wikibreak on Wednesday and then on hiatus when school and work start up, again. Ryūlóng 23:22, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar For nailing several Vandals today I Aeon award you your 3rd Anti Vandal Barnstar Æon Insane Ward 04:07, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Curiousity -- are you following me around on Wikipedia? Because I'm starting to wonder... JPG-GR 20:59, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I have several pages that I watch that your edits are found on. Ryūlóng 21:00, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Please do not tell me that you expect me to believe that you have Matt Fleming on your watch list. JPG-GR 21:03, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Granted, your knowledge of the deletion policies of WP is probably more extensive than mine, but there's no way you got there other than through my contributions page. JPG-GR 21:04, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

This is an almost completely public site. He is a recent changes patroller, so he sees most of what goes on here. What's the problem? -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 21:05, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

No problem. Just a curiosity. JPG-GR 21:09, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Both are true. Because you are consistently on my watch list, I decided to browse through your contribs and decided to help you out on that page. Ryūlóng 21:06, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

In that case, thanks. And, btw, you're a pretty good debater. (Damn stubborn, but I believe we both share that quality.) Keep up the determination. JPG-GR 21:09, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

And, keep an eye on RangerKing. I think between the two of us, we've reverted most of his colon changes, but can't be too sure. (I may not disagree with the colon usage, but I agree with keeping everything consistent at any given point in time.) JPG-GR 21:09, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I've already been in contact with RangerKing through email. He knows how I feel about the issue, but there had not been any contact about consistency. Ryūlóng 21:15, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

I was browsing across wikipedia, when i came across your user page. I fail to understand that how was it vandalised 15 and a quarter times. either it should have been 15 or it should have been 16.nids 15:01, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

There was an instance where a user accidentally left me a message on my user page instead of my user talk. That's a quarter of a vandalism. I downgraded it from a half. Ryūlóng 23:08, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

What was the basis for removing his request?

I'm in the process of telling him that I'm not an admin but will look into the situation, but nuking his request seems a bit odd. Is this a sockpuppet incident? What's going on?

Georgewilliamherbert 23:45, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I used my javascript rollback function, and it rolled back more than I thought it would have. Ryūlóng 23:46, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

What did they do which required rolling back? What incident is going on that caused all this? Sam Freedom asked for help, and I don't see anything in his (or the IP's) contributions or the block log note which explains what this was all about. I am extremely confused. Can you help clarify the situation? Thanks... Georgewilliamherbert 23:59, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I tried to rollback his erroneous message; I did not realize that there was no other user who editted in between. My actions accidentally reverted his postings entirely. Ryūlóng 00:03, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Why did you delete a large contribution to the University of Minnesota Duluth article by 209.240.246.18? It needs a little help but how on earth is it vandalism? Rlitwin 02:18, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

The user had blanked a large portion of the page, and my rollback undid all of his edits. Ryūlóng 02:27, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

You claimed that 209.240.246.18 blanked a portion of the University of Minnesota Duluth page and you rolled back his edits. That is simply not true. If you are using some assisting software, maybe it's not working right. If you check the history of that page, you will see that that user did not do any blanking. Your explanation (archived under the same heading in your talk archive yesterday) is not correct. Rlitwin 12:38, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

That is what the edits appeared to be through bots at the vandalism IRC channel. A large blanking or removal; and in the process of my rolling back that information, the user's other edits were undone. Either that, or it was a large addition to the article, and I deemed it to be slightly questionable. Ryūlóng 14:33, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

There was a large addition to the article. It was poorly written. I reworked it and incorporated it into the article. It needed help, but wasn't vandalism. I think you were overzealous there in enjoining the editor to "please not compromise the integrity of pages." He or she is a new wikipedian and probably found that very discouraging. Just thought I'd mention that. Rlitwin 14:36, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

That "please do not compromise" thing is merely something built into the script for reverting vandals. And I seriously doubt that IP editors know how to check page histories to see such information directed at them. You had reverted my reversion, and have now reworked that section into the article. Is there any other problem? Ryūlóng 14:44, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

No, no problem, I just felt I should let you know. Rlitwin 15:01, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Okay, then. Ryūlóng 15:02, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting vandalism on my user page. utcursch | talk 05:51, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Tis User:EddieSegoura AKA the Exicornt Vandal. Sarah Ewart (Talk) 07:37, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. Ryūlóng 07:38, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the help with that, my first time filing a CheckUser. =) --Palffy 21:49, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

No problem :D Ryūlóng 21:52, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I noticed that you placed a speedy tag on John F. Whealon. Since he was an archbishop of the Roman Catholic church, I think that he should automatically be regarded as notable. TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 23:25, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

It appeared to be a memorial instead of an actual article. That is why I tagged it. Ryūlóng 23:32, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi Ryulong, I see you've tagged Megan Hilty for speedy deletion. I'd urge you to remove the tag - Hilty starred on Broadway as Glinda in Wicked the Musical from May 2005 to May 2006, which meets the name recognition/fan base requirements under WP:BIO, at least among followers of Broadway. I saw her myself when she performed the part alongside Idina Menzel, a Tony award winner, back in December of 2004. Fabricationary 00:58, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I believe I had removed the tag. There was a fan editting the page, and I did not realize that the article had existed. Ryūlóng 01:42, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I've been finding lately that it's usually a lot quicker to userfy articles like this and leave them a note that it's been done, rather than spending 20 minutes going through the db/hangon/discussion route, and eventually getting them to use the user page. Nine times out of ten they don't try to recreate it in article space. Fan-1967 02:56, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, sometimes these people have user pages already and that's a problem in userfying. Ryūlóng 02:59, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

From UserTalk:DirGenZhugeLiang Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia under the three-revert rule, which states that nobody may revert a single page more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the effect of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you. Ryūlóng 03:08, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, that's pretty strange that you hammer me for such actions, when you yourself have done it seven times in one day. Dirgenzhugeliang 03:39, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism reverts are something else entirely that are not covered by 3RR. Ryūlóng 03:15, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Additionally, the information is questionable, and even if it is written in an encyclopedic tone, it still does not have any place in the article, just because /b/tards are getting affected by rules that are no longer weakly enforced. Ryūlóng 03:16, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, what I was doing was not vandalism. /b/ is 4chan's main draw, comprising more posts daily than many of the other boards have ever had. So if it has to do with /b/, it has to do with 4chan, simple as that. Dirgenzhugeliang 03:39, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Still, the article is about 4chan as a whole, not /b/. Ryūlóng 03:19, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm well aware of that. So, according to your rule, if suddenly, say, every state West of the Mississippi River disappeared, mentioning that in the article about the United States would be vandalism? Dirgenzhugeliang 03:39, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

No, it would be misplaced, which is what the /b/ stuff is, currently. Ryūlóng 03:24, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Yet the civil war is mentioned, which is a different scenario, yes, but similar. Dirgenzhugeliang 03:39, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

It is? I could swear I had removed that. Ryūlóng 03:36, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Was there a need for serious conversation to disolve into sarcasm? Dirgenzhugeliang 03:39, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

No, that was a serious question. Ryūlóng 03:39, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I apologize. I thought we were going to have a serious discussion. But that wasn't your intentions, I see. Dirgenzhugeliang 03:49, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Check out my commentary at the talk page of 4chan. I have agreed to your terms, somewhat. And my intentions were not sarcastic on this page. Ryūlóng 03:50, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I'd also like to ask you to leave me to work on my user page myself, and for you to be left to work on your own. I was planning on putting those back up, but I was in the midst of setting things up. The only reason that Welcome remained up there was that it contained many resourceful links from a user who seems to enjoy helping new members, instead of discouraging them. Dirgenzhugeliang 04:16, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry. It's just frowned upon to remove such stuff. You can archive it, though, and keep what you want to keep on the talk page. Ryūlóng 04:17, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the apology, we're making progress now that we don't have our hands on each others throats. I was planning on reposting it as an archive. If you knew me in person, particularly my self-loathing manner, you'd know that I'll probably create a section devoted too such warnings. Dirgenzhugeliang 04:24, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Let bygones be bygones, then? Ryūlóng 04:27, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Indeed. Let this go down as my first rumble in the streets of Wikipedia. Good luck with the marine biology, an ambitious goal, though it seems you have the determination and grit required to achieve such a goal. Dirgenzhugeliang 04:33, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

The last IP that you listed on AIV is apparently an AOL IP. This means that the person who is attacking you has been using AOL the whole time, making it harder to stop him. Academic Challenger 06:20, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, but now the idiocy is a pain in the ass to deal with. This moron keeps using AOL proxies to edit and vandalize, and I don't think that trying to get the pages sprotected because of this moron would be sufficient. Ryūlóng 06:21, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Moron? You wouldn't say that if you read his supposed homepage. oh, ok, you might. [/me tears his hair stems out and wonders if it's just one guy doing this much in the last two days.] —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 22:15, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

It's either that, or someone pissed off pretending to be him. Ryūlóng 22:16, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Certainly always a possibility, and indeed one I used to sweat quite a bit. It's more a philosophical than practical concern at this point, though, because we don't need to worry about hurting the original User:EddieSegoura's reputation, since a checkuser did at one point definitively tie him to some blatant exicornt vandal accounts. Then again, I did just get an email from the same email address the original Eddie always used, and it didn't put up a stink about the giant web of imposters -- so I guess it's still him. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 22:21, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Very true. What the fuck is an "exicornt" anyway? Ryūlóng 22:42, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Eddie's extremely fringe protologism for a double Crossover (rail). See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Exicornt. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 22:47, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Okay then. Ryūlóng 22:47, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I just wanted to thank you for salvaging Viola Bauer. Why anyone in their right mind would delete an article on a skier whose career in cross country skiing is still ongoing? Chris 15:13, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

That was just massive vandalism from one user who was doing his best to perform a Denial of Service attack on several AOL IP ranges. Ryūlóng 21:03, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

You're a mind reader?!!? :) went to post id deleted and you'd beaten me (somehow???) :) - GIen 22:11, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi, Ryulong. While I can see the problems inherent in gibberish usernames like Mnbvczxvlkjhgfdas (talk · contribs), I can't find anything in Wikipedia:Username that forbids them, so I'm reluctant to block a user just because his name is random characters. Centrx (talk · contribs) left Mnbvczxvlkjhgfdas a polite note on his talk page, which I think should suffice. The two edits from the account don't appear to be vandalism, and I'd wager that the individual won't even remember the username he chose next time he edits. If he comes back, he can change to a better username, but I don't think he needs to be blocked right now. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 06:29, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Okay. Ryūlóng 06:29, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Many thanks for helping fend off the vandals while Gregorian chant was on the main page. I wasn't prepared for the level of vandalism. It's heartening to know how efficient and diligent you WP admins and editors are to revert it! Peirigill 07:02, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome. Ryūlóng 07:03, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For catching so many vandals and making so many reports to AIV, you are awarded this barnstar Blnguyen | rant-line 07:21, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Yay...that's the fourth one? Ryūlóng 07:22, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

I saw that you tagged Image:Crest design.jpg for speedy deletion. Unfortunately, "bad image" is not a valid criterion for speedy deletion. I have this image on my watchlist, and plan to IfD it in a couple of days if it's not used in an article, but if you want to IfD it before then feel free to. Your speedy delete nomination made me smile, though, as I often wish there was a WP:PROD for images, or much looser speedy deletion criteria for orphaned images! --Icarus ^(Hi!) 07:32, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

It's not that the image is orphaned, but it is corrupted. That is why it should be deleted. Ryūlóng 07:33, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Ah, yes, I see what you were going for now. It seems our browsers work differently, because I can see the image just fine with Safari. I was somewhat puzzled by why such an experience wikipedian as yourself would make such an odd speedy deletion request, but this makes much more sense! Thanks for giving me yet another laugh, even if the first one was unintentional ;-) --Icarus ^(Hi!) 07:43, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Hmm...Well, it was still uploaded by a user who is now blocked. Ryūlóng 07:46, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm leaving your speedy tag there anyway. If an admin doesn't buy your reason, there's always ifd. It'll get deleted one way or another. And, totally off-topic, it's nice to know I'm not the only Power Rangers-loving biology major out there, lol. --Icarus ^(Hi!) 07:52, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Doesn't look like a db-bio to me. She's a producer and director of some notable stuff (which have articles in Wikipedia themselves). Can you tell me the reason you tagged it? I will remove it for now. - Mgm|^(talk) 08:32, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Many other edits by that user in one night. Ryūlóng 08:33, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

...someone really loves you at the moment... Daniel.Bryant 08:46, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

It's almost as good as when Repmart sent me a death threat :D. Ryūlóng 08:46, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

• Well deserved -- Samir धर्म 08:53, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • That's five, now. Ryūlóng 09:08, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Your thoughts requested at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Dealing with EddieSegoura. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 15:22, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Your request for full page protection for User talk:Ilovecutelittlepuppies582 had been completed. Thanks. — ERcheck (talk) 02:29, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I notice your putting a lot of IP's on the vandalism in progress page, some of them have one warning, or no warnings at all. Take a look at the top of that page, editors need warnings, including a final warning before being listed. I generally just remove IPs that haven't been warned at least twice....anyway, thanks for all the vandalism patrol! Rx StrangeLove 04:07, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, several IPs I list have done extremely egregious vandalism. I usually do not list them immeadiately unless I feel that their vandalism is harmful and needs fast attention. Ryūlóng 04:08, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting my userpage. Some people never learn... :) -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 05:13, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

No problem. Ryūlóng 05:15, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Look for yourself: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Black billionaire (2nd nomination).--Ezeu 05:37, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

The link was wrong. That's why I reverted. Ryūlóng 05:37, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) I've moved that to a new page name: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Black billionaires (2nd nomination). -- ADNghiem501 05:51, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Okay then... Ryūlóng 05:51, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Hello Ryulong.

In Memoriam is now a disambiguation page, so I was trying to blank the page Talk:In Memoriam (without edit summary though, my mistake!) Should we still keep the redirect to Talk:In Memoriam A.H.H.? Thanks for your attention. Korg (talk) 05:49, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

I apologize. If it is now a disambig, then it can be blanked, just put something in its place like {{talkheader}}. Ryūlóng 05:49, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

1. I find it odd they have not logged in.
2. They are not really attemptting to hide like a spammer would. It would be really stupid to keep using the same IP.
3. It is almost like they do not understand what vandalism consists of. The revert I saw for the Bill O'Reilly page suggested that 68.75.92.211 simply did not understand that the change would not help. I think he or she really thinks they are being helpful.

What do you think? Will 06:14, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Er... I have no idea what you are talking about. All I know is that they blanked a user page, which is vandalism in itself. Ryūlóng 06:16, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi -- the user who removed the prod from that page gave what looked like a pretty legitimate reason for it. Would you agree that perhaps this is a matter that should be discussed on the article talk? You're also free to AFD it if you want. -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 06:36, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, the article was created tonight by a single user, and the IP who removed the speedy tag also did so on the other article that I had tagged for the same reason. Ryūlóng 06:38, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi! Please stop revert-warring, otherwise you may get blocked for the violation of the 3RR rule.--Nixer 08:13, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

I may get blocked? More like one of the two of us, if not both. Ryūlóng 08:22, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, you are both at the limit of 3RR. Revert warring is disruptive. Please take your disagreement to the talk page and agree how to proceed. The next revert from either of you will result in a block unfortunately. Thanks. --Cactus.man ✍ 08:27, 26 August 2006 (UTC)]'

You already violated the 3RR limit dispite the warning. According the rules, you should be blocked and your edit reverted by an administrator.--Nixer 08:39, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

This is a content dispute that I did not repeat my edits again at, I had in fact only changed a few words around the first time, then realized that the sentence structure was funky, that you continued to revert back to. You are the one that has been blocked for these things in the past, more than once. I even explained myself in my last edit summary, and the contents of which are entirely different. Ryūlóng 08:41, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

You can edit the article, not neccessary revert, for examle, you can delete the diouble wording if exist. You did not explain why you do not agree with the edits on the talk page, only stupidly reverted.--Nixer 08:47, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

I explained myself, though, and even the diffs that are shown aren't even the same. You, of all people, should know how 3RR works. Ryūlóng 08:49, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I know. You reverted the article four times. The 3RR works even if there are some small differences between the edits. My edit also were not exact the same.--Nixer 09:07, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

I keep seeing JS in your edit summaries, just wondering what it is. Thanks.--Andeh 10:03, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Javascript. Check User:Voice of All's pages. Ryūlóng 10:04, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

OK, thanks.--Andeh 10:06, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up on User:Nixer's WP:AN3 edit, although I'd already reverted it and left a further note / warning. Do you have any past history with this user? He is teetering towards a block of his own sadly. Regards. --Cactus.man ✍ 10:54, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

I haven't even heard of this guy until I did the editting at Pluto. Ryūlóng 10:56, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

He changed it from "Not blocked" to "No consensus" now... Even though it got me into this trouble, I've reverted him. I don't understand what I did to this guy. Ryūlóng 10:58, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

I've reverted your most recent edit to the 3rrv board. If the report should be removed it should be removed by someone other than you. JoshuaZ 19:19, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

I am sorry. It's just that this guy is bent on getting me blocked. Ryūlóng 19:21, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, frustration is understandable in such circumstances. I would also make one other request: please don't mark reversions as minor. Almost by defintion if one is in conflict with another editor it is not minor. JoshuaZ 19:25, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't think I marked it as minor...it must have been the Javascript. Ryūlóng 19:26, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Ok, just be careful of that in the future. As for Nixer's continued behavior, your best bet is probably ignoring him. Since it isn't going to lead anywhere I wouldn't be too concerned. JoshuaZ 20:21, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, it appears he has been blocked for 24 hours for both 3RR and continued disruption of both 3RR cases that he filed against me. I don't know why he calls my edits reverts. Ryūlóng 20:22, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Ryulong, yes I blocked Nixer for disruption and 3RR violation. I would suggest that you perhaps consider some commentary on the talk page regarding your "consolidated paragraph" and grammar improvements, to seek consensus - always difficult to achieve - but it would help stabilise the article somewhat. --Cactus.man ✍ 20:42, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Okay then. Ryūlóng 20:43, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Was this edit done with much thought, or did you just go "anon removing material must be vandal"? I think the material removed was, not to put too fine a point on it, worse than useless. This had been discussed on the talk page; I had suggested the removal, but said I didn't want to act singlehandedly. On the other hand, if you really think this amounts to vandalism, I'll let your version stand.

A reply on my user talk page would be appreciated. - Jmabel | Talk 21:50, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Ryulong, why do you consider his edits to Juliusz Nowina-Sokolnicki to be vandalism? They are POV and possibly copyvio, but I am not sure they are vandalism? Are we biting a newbie? abakharev 01:50, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, there was just a hell of a lot going over there, that required something to be done, I didn't know which one was right, so I had reverted to whichever one wasn't huge and removed a spam link. Ryūlóng 01:51, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

It was just hard to see whose edits are worse in this situation. Ryūlóng 01:55, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

fyi i was just trying to edit the wrong info because hilary is not 18 she is 19.--Cutie 4 life 03:06, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

But that is not how to fix the template that you were editting. You were doing more damage to it than helping it. Ryūlóng 03:06, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Also, unless her birthdate is wrong, she is still 18 years old. Ryūlóng 03:07, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

well maybe im a new user and maybe im trying.--Cutie 4 life 03:16, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

I can see that, but I needed to get your attention to the edits you were doing, so you could learn more about what you were doing. Ryūlóng 03:18, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Hello. I had shortened that page a few days ago, and was going to reshorten it (after User:Ericgaffney repopulated it with the contents of his MySpace page) + adding a reasonable discography. I don't know him or his music, but from some research I did he seemed notable enough in indie rock that an article (not his MySpace content) would not be out of place. I was in the process of editing the article and placing an explanatory note on his talk page when you moved it to his user page and speedy-deleted the article. I think that action, while technically justified, might have been a bit premature. Would I be stepping on toes if I recreated the article in a shorter and more encyclopedic way? -- ArglebargleIV 03:41, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

You can move the article back to where it was and leave his user talk intact, I did not realize that the article was about someone who is notable, merely that it was a massive amount of text added, and the user's name is the same as that of the article. Ryūlóng 03:44, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Ok, thanks -- and thanks for moving the article back. I'll try to deal with him and explain to him what he did wrong. (and yeah, the text dump was suspicious.) Thanks again. -- ArglebargleIV 03:51, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

No problem. Just make sure that this guy gets that he can't write about himself on Wikipedia. I've been involved with such disputes in the past. Ryūlóng 04:09, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

The edit was related to this user acxting without consensus and merging articles. You could have asked before rolling back. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 05:06, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Because the talk page was redirecting to an article; that's why I reverted. I've reverted his edits to the main article so that it is a redirect, but the talk page should not be a redirect in this case. Ryūlóng 05:07, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

OK I will fix it. Thanks. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 05:07, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

I suppose I too should ask why. Why do you take Jossi's side in this argument? Have I done anything other than try to improve the article, with nothing but resistance from him who thinks he owns it? Dicklyon 05:10, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

I did not take either of your sides. I just saw a large addition/removal and I reverted it. Ryūlóng 05:13, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

But after that you reverted my restoration of his removal, this diff: [4] Dicklyon 05:23, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

I do not know who is right or who is wrong in this situation. As such, I am going to recuse myself from it from now on. I will archive this discussion, but any other discussion about my accidental involvement in the revert war between the two of you I will delete. Ryūlóng 05:24, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Please don't use "Idiot" as a reason for a block, when posting at AIV. It can be seen as a personal attack (see WP:NPA) and isn't very helpful for us admins when it comes to blocking someone (as "idiot" isn't a good description of what someone did to deserve a block). Thank you. -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 06:08, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

I realize that, but sometimes idiocy is the only way to describe the actions taken. Ryūlóng 06:10, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

I see that too, but it's not very helpful to us admins, especially when someone's actions may not necessarily be seen as vandalism. And calling someone an idiot doesn't help matters should the person decide to respond to that; it may escalate things. -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 06:11, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, it's not like some of these editors really do see the AIV listings on them, but I understand your concerns. In the future, I will be clearer to the idiocy involved. Ryūlóng 06:13, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Not sure what the hell happened there - did you post just before me? It seemed to merge into my post. --Charlesknight 19:21, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Probably. I'm finding idiots faster than the null edit page vandal. Ryūlóng 19:23, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Please don't report anon IPs at AIV unless they've recently been given a test3, test4, or testblatant warning and have vandalised after that. For example, User:70.191.165.213 only vandalised once, was given a warning, and had nothing after that. Even though it was Colbert vandalism (which I hate, too), we shouldn't block anon IPs without giving them a chance to behave in accordance with the warnings. Thanks, NawlinWiki 04:40, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, when an anon's first edit is vandalism, something should probably be done about that. Slightly tangential, I find it odd that some IPs that have been blocked repeatedly, and that further (permanent) precautions are not taken against them (save for the proxies). Ryūlóng 04:58, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

I have protected this page because there seems to be edit warring taking place. The revert rule exists to stop edit warring and at this point you (and others) have gone past 3 reverts and so could be blocked. I have protected the page instead.

If you have disagreements concerning content the best way to resolve these is through discussion on the articles talk page. Thanks --pgk^(talk) 20:08, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

I have no problem with the article's protection. I was getting tired of having to revert the IP's page blanking spree. Ryūlóng 20:09, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

I've also put this up for review at the 3RR noticeboard, if you want to comment.  (aeropagitica)   (talk)  20:37, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Commented on it. Ryūlóng 21:14, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

How do you know they are his sxockpuppets? Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 01:02, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

WP:LTA/MG and I've been studying his username creation MO. He's made accounts that use "Goof Bally" and "Guy" at the end. Ryūlóng 01:03, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

No, that icon does not belong on my webpage. The people who I was suspected of being a puppet-master for, they're blocked, and no accusations have been reported since that occurred. So, it's not suspected that I am--it's confirmed, incorrectly and incredibly hastily, that I was. -Kmaguir1 06:17, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

I apologize. You can remove it (that is why I stated that I did not know if I should have placed it). Ryūlóng 06:19, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Greetings, I saw the tag you placed on his page. I (and others) have wondered about his using an IP to try and influence an AfD. I'd be interested in seeing what you think, perhaps by visiting this page: User_talk:Kilo-Lima#Return_of_the_socks. Thanks,--Anthony Krupp 06:39, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Your efforts at wiping out vandalism is very, very appreciated, but you need to avoid reporting people for blocks when the level of vandalism that the user has done is relatively minimal. Blocking should be a last resort, not a first resort. Thanks. --Nlu (talk) 07:01, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Duly noted. Ryūlóng 07:02, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

I think I things straightened out. --Golbez 09:36, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, now that we know the cyclone project requires the strongest strength to be named. However, that Eddie Segoura/AOL sock did throw me off. Ryūlóng 09:36, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

You reported that user to AIV. The user had not been informed of the mistake they made. In future please drop a friendly note pointing out their mistake, then warn if they continue, then think about reporting. Remember please do not bite the newcomers :) Thanks, Petros471 09:54, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

The user repeated his mistake just now. Ryūlóng 09:55, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Don't bother. I'm of the camp that it gives him the attention he's looking for. -- Samir धर्म 10:19, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Meh, it's giving me something I shouldn't be doing at 6 in the morning. Ryūlóng 10:20, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

I know. I'm choosing to ignore the emergency department tonight (not really) -- Samir धर्म 10:24, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

I should have gone to sleep x_X. Ryūlóng 10:25, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your support of my RfA, which has passed with a final tally of 76/1/1. With this overwhelming show of support and approval I am honored to serve Wikipedia in the task charged to me and as outlined in my nomination. Happy editing to you! Teke ^(talk) 17:37, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Just so you are aware, the copyright violation notice is not the one to use when the source is Wikipedia itself. Probably best to just leave a notice on the talk page. You can do redirects yourself, but please make sure you are not interfering with a move in process. DJ Clayworth 22:16, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, the merger to the other page is not all that necessary, as the information is duplicated from that section I linked to. Ryūlóng 22:19, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

And the redirect is not all that necessary in itself. Ryūlóng 22:19, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

You recently put Nicoleyoulazy (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) up on AIV for uploading unlicensed images, but Nicoleyoulazy hadn't been warned. Please ensure that users have been warned before putting them on AIV. Thanks. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 23:53, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry I'd missed that function. Will not do again. GSTQ 03:27, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

That is all right. For the pages that you made, you can list them with {{db-author}} and then you can move the pages to the new title. Right now they are redirects, but I will give you permanent links to the pages so you can edit them. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Magistrates%27_Court_of_Victoria&redirect=no and http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Magistrates%27_Court_of_Victoria&redirect=no Ryūlóng 03:04, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Please don't be calling me a blatant vandal when I really am not one. Thanks. Vivelequebeclibre 03:33, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Editting a Wikipedia guideline page to say that "Wikipedia is not an encyclopedia" sounds like vandalism, to me. Ryūlóng 03:34, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

He's right. It's not. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:42, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

No... Wikipedia is not a paper encyclopedia. I am referring to this edit, Bunchofgrapes. Ryūlóng 03:43, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I know. I meant that edit wasn't blatant vandalism. Not even close. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:45, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Then, what sort of vandalism was it, if any at all? Ryūlóng 03:45, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't think it's vandalism at all -- it isn't manifestly bad-faithed. It was a disruptive revert to an obviously non-consensus version of a core policy page, though... still a very bad thing. Rollback was the right choice. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:50, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Okay. Oh, can you go through the HALF HOUR BACKLOGS AT WP:AIV? Ryūlóng 03:51, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Yessir. Will do. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:51, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you :D you get a cookie later. Ryūlóng 03:52, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

In my honest opinion, that edit warranted a test2 at most. bv is reserved only for those who've made 4 or more vandal edits in a row. --  Netsnipe  ►  10:41, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

right|thumb|200px|Me like cookie! C is for cookie. That's good enough for me. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 04:11, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

*gasp* Fair use images on my user talk? XD Ryūlóng 04:12, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

True, that was bad of me. Me no get cookie next time. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 04:15, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Depends on tomorrow night when I start tacking up another backlog. Ryūlóng 04:18, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

After seeing the changes that Olive Garden Guild made to your user page, I find myself thinking that user pages should be protected so only you and admins can edit that page.

Also, I am a Methodist and disagree with the contents of that post. Olive Garden Guild was extremely irresponsable and not acting in a Christian manner. Will 05:09, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

First, I do not have any sort of ideas either way to make a decision based on such a proposal, yet. Such vandalism is easy to deal with. Second, what about Methodism and disagreeing? Ryūlóng 05:13, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Hello Ryūlóng, I have removed this user from WP:AIV. Nominating articles on AfD is not vandalism, even if he is a new user. He may a long term anon contributor. Just keep an eye on his contribs and report anything that IS vandalism. Thanks. --Cactus.man ✍ 10:07, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I've got two people watching him. Ryūlóng 10:08, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

For the heads up. It actually looks like the page has been a problem for quite some time. Stubbleboy 18:42, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

That's because the subculture it talks about is hated by many. Sorta like Emo (music) or George W. Bush. Ryūlóng 18:43, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Gotcha, well I apologize. I promise I was just trying to do the right thing. Next time I'll check up the history first. Thanks again. Stubbleboy 18:51, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Mea culpa, I'm tired, forgot to check. Wildthing61476 18:44, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

As you are a serial vandal fighter and contact anons/new users a lot, may I suggest you create an additional sub-page in your user space for anons/new users to leave messages? Assuming your normal talk still needs protection of course. What do you think?--Andeh 18:45, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I have tried to attempt that, but where I want to put it is a little difficult. I want it to be at the bottom of my page, or if I cannot do that, I want to try and force level 3 headings. Ryūlóng 18:47, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, I think it's best not to have a tranclusion of it here as vandals that make a real mess of it will affect your protected user talk. Some users just have a bright link at the top to the additional page.-Andeh 18:50, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

All right then. Ryūlóng 18:51, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I've started Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Kmaguir1; if you're familiar with this, please join in. (A second five-tilde signature is necessary as well.) Thanks,--Anthony Krupp 19:48, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I do not know that much about the situation, however I will look into it when the process has gone on a little longer. Ryūlóng 19:54, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

		A good ol' Kiwi Pav!
		I, Glen give you Ryulong this delicious traditional Kiwi Pavlova in thanks for both your fantastic vandalism efforts, but most of all for being part of our fricken crazy vandal killing spree last night! With thanks (I think! :p), - GIen 20:44, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

PS: Should your talk page be protected???

I prefer it would stay that way. I make a few enemies vandal fighting. Now they have a place to all hate me at. Ryūlóng 20:47, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm somewhat new to wikipedia and I saw those userboxes on your user page, and I was just wondering how do you get them?--Manfro 91 23:21, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

They are userboxes and can be found at Wikipedia:Userboxes. Ryūlóng 23:24, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

ok, thanks. --Manfro 91 23:26, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, that does make sense, though I don't know why you'd use such a large setting. Indicate such things with an edit summary next time. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 02:30, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Will do so. And I use a large setting because I have a 17" wide screen. Ryūlóng 02:33, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

That would be a good reason then. – Someguy0830 (Talk | contribs) 03:09, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

References are bugged currently. Please don't blank the article to try and fix that, though? Ryūlóng 05:25, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry about that. I tried tweaking references but the [a] [b] superscript kept showing up. I tried copying the entire article to my sandbox and the references worked there so I thought maybe quickly blanking it was the only way to fix it (and by the time I tried to replace it, had your edit conflict). Kuru has since pointed out Purge which I'll use in the future. Again, sorry for the trouble! —L1AM (talk) 05:37, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

That's all right. At least it's fixed now. Ryūlóng 05:38, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for reporting this (and telling me), I only accidentally happened to check out WP:AIV. Happy vandal-hunting, Kusma (討論) 07:29, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

		You are enlisted
		I hereby place this award for your thankless vandal fighting and place you as a honoray member of the wikipedia vandal-fightng army. Betacommand

Pretty... Ryūlóng 20:00, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Hello, I noticed that you edited the tag for the image Bill_Davis, and I was wondering if you have any idea why Wikipedia does not allow images used with permission of the copyright holder. It seems to be a universal rule here, but I can't figure out why. Thanks, --Arctic Gnome 23:20, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, it's just a default thing that they need proof or a better tag for; not really sure as I've used that reasoning and seen the same results. Ryūlóng 23:34, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I was unaware in regards to the help button there. How would I go forward with what you were talking about? Thanks for your assistance.Vice President In Charge Of Office Supplies 23:20, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Before adding a {{Db-notenglish}} tag to an article, please check to see if the article is in the proper Wikipedia. Otherwise, either use the {{Notenglish}} tag and list it at WP:PNT, or find another reason for speedy deletion and tag it with that. Thanks. Jesse Viviano 05:45, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, there's no db-notenglishnn. Ryūlóng 05:47, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

I will create it, but using the title Template:Db-bio-notenglish. CSD A7 requires that no assertion of notability whatsoever is present. If the article states a ridiculous claim of notability, then CSD A7 does not apply, but then CSD G3 will probably apply. Jesse Viviano 06:00, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Which is G3 (the shorthand word)? Ryūlóng 06:01, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

G3 is vandalism. Use {{Db-vandalism}} for that. Jesse Viviano 06:14, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh... Thank you. Ryūlóng 06:15, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the revert on my userpage. Big-time vandal right there. I had to revert him again when I got back home; I wonder what I did to tick him off... -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 01:21, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

No problem. Ryūlóng 07:19, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

I'll direct my question to the Village pump (technical). Thanks again. -postglock 07:37, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

No problem, at all. Ryūlóng 07:38, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

The latest thing is after the failure of his malicious AfD's, he's taken to repeatedly deleting the portrait image from Danny Yee... showing an ongoing hostility to the bio because I wrote it. Any thoughts? LotLE×talk 18:00, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

I just wanted to say thank you for all your antivandalism efforts. Best wishes, E Asterion ^{u talking to me?} 22:03, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Are you an administrater? I am again requesting that the voting stop on my Richard Family page and that it be deleted immediatly. I no longer want to contribute and I want my work to be removed. Since I wrote it and I want to remove it I see no further need for voting. Thank you. Vaio12 03:43, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

No, I am not. All you have to do is put "{{db-author}}" at the top of Richard Family and it will be dealt with. Other than that, the AFD process will continue until an administrator deletes it. Ryūlóng 03:48, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I'm not sure how this works, but I saw that you edited the Brad Armstrong page a while back to revert vandalism. It looks like it needs some correction again. Thanks, Stephen

Thank you for you assistance on the Morehouse College Mock Trial page. Is there a way that the portion dealing with Mock Trial can be prevented from being edited or deleted from non-registered users. The IP address that continues to edit the page shows that it is coming from the school's computer lab, which means that it could be ANYBODY in that computer lab editing the material. Any help or suggestions that you can give will be appreciated. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TruOne (talk • contribs)

I would suggest taking the case to Wikipedia:Requests for page protection and state exactly what you have told me. Ryūlóng 22:03, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

A perfect repository for anything suggesting that you are Cactus Man. Cheers -- Samir धर्म 23:46, 31 August 2006 (UTC)