User talk:Wikidudeman/Archive 9

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Wikidudeman. 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.

Check out earth radiation and geopathology. Since you're more familiar with pseudoscience than I, I thought you might have something to add. WLU 18:49, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Someone vandalized my Userspace! But a little angel came along and fixed it! Thank you! You can thank others by using {{subst:Vangel}}! Triwbe 19:10, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I really appreciate it. STORMTRACKER 94 20:27, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

...wow, thanks!--AgentCDE / Talk / 20:39, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Are you in charge of WikiProject Paranormal? If so, could you have a look at the Discussion page? If not, do you know who is in charge? brickdude 06:10, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Who do u think u are to judge my judgement on ben skywalker, i happen to know for a fact thats what happened. the author told me so but just didnt put it in his book. Just like J K Rowling and dumbledor....so who do u think u are! Oatsyfrompdc 15:52, 6 November 2007 (UTC)Oatsyfrompdc

I've seriously considered the possibility, however after looking at and participating in other RFAs, I don't feel like I have nearly enough edits or experience. Maybe one day. Jauerback 15:58, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

I seriously know that he is gay and by not letting other people know it makes my heart hurt because i want to and am going to tell exactly what happens to him to everyone! Oatsyfrompdc 16:00, 6 November 2007 (UTC)oatsyfrompdc

Thank you very much for awarding me another barnstar! Bobo. 19:35, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

You'll make me blush, did you know you're responsible for 50% of my barnstars? Thanks! WLU 19:39, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, thank you, what exactly did I do that caught your eye? — Rlevse • Talk • 19:57, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the co-nomination WDM! It's going well so far... VanTucky ^Talk 03:53, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Hey Dude man! Thanks for the barnstar. I really appreciate it and believe you deserve tons of them as well. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 13:13, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

My apologies for the delay in this reply, and my thanks for your thinking that I deserve such recognition. I was honestly thinking of responding in kind, but couldn't find anything to add to your impressive record of well-earned recognition. I know as a non-admin my word won't carry much weight, but as I indicated elsewhere, if you were to ever seek adminship, I know my word wouldn't necessarily carry much weight but you would have my unequivocal, probably excessive support. The fact that you deal with several articles which are of a contentious nature and help improve them as much as you have would I think possibly get a few opposes, but that would be reasonable and I think expected in such instances. I am however honored that you saw fit to think I merit such recognition as you and others have given me, and will work to earn it, as I'm not really sure I have yet. John Carter 14:01, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

I was trying to "install" the complete "monobook suite" jss and css (the full version), and I can't. I copy the code here but it doesn't work. Can you help me to do that or show me a page that I can read to learn how to do it? I work in the spanish wikipedia and my username is RoyFocker too. Thank you very much! --RoyFocker 16:32, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Hey WDM, hope you don't mind me forwarding questions like this to you - they're well out of my league and you seem very knowledgeable. WLU 18:16, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Hm, that's odd. Well, make sure you're using firefox and make sure to clear your cache with ctrl + shift + r. I'll take a look at it. Ρх₥α 22:30, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

A bit belated, but this edit on November 5th has an edit summary of "Reverted edits by Ultimus (talk) to last revision (144082361) by using VP". In fact the edit that was reverted was by 207.4.68.179, and the version reverted to was by Ultimus. -- John Broughton (♫♫) 01:38, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Click there to open your card! → → →

Dearest Wikidudeman,
Thank you for your participation in my RFA, which closed successfully with 137 supports, 22 opposes, and 5 neutrals. Your kind words of support are very much appreciated and I look forward to proving you right. I would like to give special thanks to The_undertow and Phoenix-wiki for their co-nominations. Thank you again and best regards.

Lara❤Love 06:06, 8 November 2007 (UTC) Credits: This RFA thanks was inspired by The Random Editor's RFA thanks which was inspired by Phaedriel's RFA thanks.

First off, let me say thanks again for the conom! I just thought you should know that Annalisa is slinging mud about the paraspychology rewrite, trying to call me uncivil (again, back in July for pete's sake). Not your problem, but I did say that you would vouch for my conduct on the rewrite page as the coordinator. If this isn't something you want to do, I'll retract that. Just let me know, VanTucky ^Talk 22:07, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks wikidude I like you too. Best Regards ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^"Talk"? 12:14, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 12:21, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 18:01, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi WDM, do you think it's time I withdrew? The question in my mind is: would you still support me? If, as nominator, you've found yourself feeling that I'm untrustworthy, then it's time to shut it down. I've put the same question to Tim. Thanks again, VanTucky ^Talk 21:36, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Hey thanks for your vote of confidence. However, considering it continued to go downhill in to less than 70%, I don't see any reason to continue. Thanks again WDM. VanTucky ^Talk 19:39, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

On the page User talk:68.151.48.217, you started off with a level 2 or 3 warning. I suggest starting with a level 1 warning in the future. Nick Garvey 23:05, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

I disagree. As per WP:VANDAL, if you are confident that a user is aware of the disruption he is causing, you may start with a stronger warning such as {{subst:uw-test2}} or {{subst:uw-test3}}. Judging from the anon users vandalism, it's quite obvious they were well aware they were disrupting Wikipedia. There's nothing wrong with starting off with a 3rd level warning in this instance.--Yankees76 23:20, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Yankees is right. Depending on the type of vandalism and the amount of vandalism prior to the warning, You can even start with a level 4 warning. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 14:04, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:35, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

I've got a profile on TechSupportGuy.com that's called "Wikiman". I just wanted to ask you if it's okay, or if I should shut it down. --Gp75motorsports 18:12, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

If you voted in my RFA...

...thank you for your participation. I withdrew with 83 supports, 42 opposes, and 8 neutrals. Your kind words and constructive criticism are very much appreciated. I look forward to using the knowledge I have accrued through the process to better the project. I would like to give special thanks to Tim Vickers and Wikidudeman for their co-nominations.

Thank you again and, best regards. VanTucky ^Talk

This RFA thanks was inspired by Lara❤Love's

Ahem, "if you are here from TechSupportGuy, I am Wikiman. Wikidudeman is someone completely different. If you want to tell Wikiman something, please visit my talk page. Thank you." --Gp75motorsports 02:54, 14 November 2007 (UTC) (aka Wikiman)

I'm all for it, but I'm really concerned at the liberties DBachmann seems to take in interpreting what I think are good faith edits as trolling behavior. This is why I would agree, but would defend that nothing be exempt from the 1-revert rule, except of course extremely blatant vandalism such as blanking and the insertion of non-sequitur comments. Otherwise, I'm afraid this page may be held hostage to some editors' POV.--Ramdrake 15:22, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Stop trying to block me from putting up a group at my high school... do you have any evidence against norml being at fitch high school? NO so you don't know whether this club exist or not... stop using your position as an editor to omit ideas YOU do not agree with —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.235.16.204 (talk) 15:57, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

I forgot my password and tried to retrieve it, but no such luck. I should probably just start another account and say I'm not you. Sound good? --Gp75motorsports 17:30, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

I noticed you requested speedy deletion for User:Wikidudeman/vandalbarnstar as a CSD G6 request as non-controversial maintenance, but I'm not sure what the maintenance task is. Did you want something moved into its place, or a history merge or something? Or did you just want it deleted as a subpage of your user space? That'd be a CSD U1. I'm not a stickler for the reason -- I can delete it -- but I wanted to know if I needed to complete a move or anything afterward.

By the way, thanks for reverting the vandalism at my talk page. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 17:44, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

I probably should have selected CSD G7. Sorry about that. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 17:45, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

No problem. It looks like Ioeth (talk · contribs) took care of it. I'm just being diligent. --Elkman ^(Elkspeak) 17:51, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Sounds good. I'll check it out as soon as I get home, as this school internet is doing the best it can to imitate a crippled turtle. Thanks! :) Master of Puppets ^{Care to share?} 19:57, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

It should be C#, but you should ask Martinp23. As it's written on NPW's homepage, the developers are Martinp23 and Reedy Boy, I'm only a moderator. Contact the first, you can usually find him on IRC in #npwatcher. One thing... why creating other tools? There's NPW. WikiMonitor, AWB, VP, VP2, WikiBrowser... speaking only of stand-alone tools for windows... are you sure that another tool is needed? Anyway, I have no idea of which editor he used to work on NPW, but it's a personal choice. If you're on Windows, I think that Visual C# Express should be the IDE to go for. Bye, Snowolf ^{How can I help?} 20:14, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

I do, being a developer. However, without Martinp23 saying i can, i cant/wont hand the code out. I'll speak to him when i see him —Reedy Boy 18:39, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

I would've thought so, he usually does to people who ask. I just dont want to do so without his permission —Reedy Boy 18:52, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Afrocentrism has been unprotected, for better or for worse.--Ramdrake 20:14, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Hello, an RfC procedure has been opened regarding the behavior of User:Dbachmann, here: [1]. Please feel free to contribute if you wish.--Ramdrake (talk) 23:59, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

I hope that you will comment. I think you have a fair view of all of this juding by your comments on DBM's talk page. futurebird (talk) 04:10, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Wikidudeman, I recognized your name on the Editor Assistance page, looked at your Contribs, and saw that you had recently made a remark about a COI editor.[2]

The situation I'm facing also regards a COI editor of the article, Instant-runoff voting. There are a number of policy and content issues. An RFC tag has been placed to gather comment on one, the question of using an advocacy organization, FairVote as a reliable source. The COI editor in question is User:Tbouricius. This user is an SPA registered, apparently, to support preserving the article in the form preferred by a cabal of sock puppets and an anonymous 3RR-violating editor who turned out to be the Executive Director of FairVote, and he promptly began edit warring. He was blocked indefinitely with almost all the rest when one of the sock puppets attempted to get me blocked for 3RR violations, which, to say the least, did not fly; however, because he was, I thought, an expert in the field, a published author, and he had not done anything more than edit warring as a newcomer, I thought he should get another chance and argued for his unblocking, and that argument was used as a justification for the unblock (the blocking admin remained opposed).

None of the above, by the way, is an exaggeration or polemic. I.e., it could all be sourced.

However, I'm beginning to regret my support for the unblock. He has recently begun edit warring, and has violated 3RR. I've issued the required warning, but am reluctant to push for a block myself; it's my opinion that no individual should, alone, and absent emergency, take strong action like that when personally involved. In any case, this is just background, the help I'm requesting is about this:

Assuming that this user is, in fact, a COI editor, I think he should be warned about using a heavy hand on an article where he is specifically interested. Based on my study of similar cases, one likely outcome if this were to go to Arbcomm would be that he'd be prohibited from editing the article. I've warned him, but he sees me as a "POV-pusher" and has called me that. He generally discounts what I've written as only coming from some alleged anti-IRV bias. The situation is complex and, even though it could be easy to make snap judgments that might be incorrect, I'm not going to detail it all here, at the outset, so, please, if you are interested in helping and if you find anything unclear about what he has done or what I have done when you look into it, ask.

As to the help, it could be advice to me, advice to him, or other action as you see fit. Thanks for your offer to help on Editor Assistance. --Abd (talk) 02:53, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

Hello, I am relatively new at this, so forgive any missteps...editor Abd and I have had countless email exchanges outside of Wikipedia, as well as lengthy debates on the IRV article discussion pages (though I cannot compete with his sheer volume of typing). Abd has a powerfully motivating Point of View with a goal of denegrating instant runoff voting (I gather because he is an advocate of another voting method that he sees as being in competition). He has managed to now delete(because I gave up restoring) many sourced facts about IRV, such as reference to the fact that IRV is discussed in Robert's Rules of Order. He is also selectively inserting facts that satisfy his POV, while deleting others. He argues that the fact that he does his advocacy work as a hobby, and that I am a part-time policy analyst working on a variety of election reform issues, means that I am suspect, while he is pure. There are few other people who know as much as I do about IRV, and without the defense of a neutral article by the likes of me, the IRV article will quickly become as biased as the Range Voting article, whcih is essentially an advertisement for that method (favorted by Abd). If I am to "tread lightly," and not revert his inappropriate edits, and am not supposed to urge others to do that ("meat puppetry"?), is there nothing to prevent the biased distortion of the article to meet Abd's POV?

Tbouricius (talk) 21:40, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

You're allowed to edit the article, Tbouricius, but you should try to refrain from making controversial edits and should absolutely refrain from edit warring. If Abd is making problematic edits then discuss it and reach a consensus before changing it. If you're unable to reach a consensus then request for outside comments. I can help with that if you want. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 21:47, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

I could, indeed, write a great deal about what Tbouricius has written above, for it is, shall we say, his POV on the topic of my participation, and on that topic I have my own POV and more. But there is no need to contradict him at this time.

A few comments, though: the Range voting article is in poor shape, in my opinion. I've contributed very little -- if anything -- to it. If Tbouricius thinks it improper, he could certainly help improve it. I am, in some sense, showing him how he might do that. However, he should also, there, tread lightly, for the same reasons. Nevertheless, I believe that if he raises, in Talk, policy violations in the article, those would have to be corrected.

I welcome Tbouricius participation, for my understanding of POV is that we all are afflicted with it, and we can discover NPOV by interacting with good faith; it's essential for this, to be other than superficial, for all points of view to be a part of that. Wikipedia articles on difficult and controversial subjects become more than "advertisements for or against" this or that precisely by the seeking of consensus among participants, and for any individual to insist on their own a priori interpretation of what is relevant and balanced prevents that process from discovering agreement.

Tbouricius has now done an edit of my text which appears to satisfy him (though he still thinks it irrelevant) and it seems fine to me. It's wordier than what I wrote, and conveys the same information as far as I can see (with more thorough explanation, which I actually prefer), but I have no objection at all to it. It satisfies my perception of balance.

As to the matter of Robert's Rules, it was actually quite a similar situation. Originally the article had, featured in the introduction, "Roberts Rules recommends IRV for mail elections," or something like that. Sounds pretty good, eh? The source was, of course, FairVote, which had a section copied out of Roberts Rules on the topic, introduced by an explanation that would lead a casual reader right into the conclusion that was in the article. I'm familiar with the rules and with election methods, and I looked at this FairVote page more than a year ago, and I came up with that same conclusion. (This example highlights the problem of using advocacy sites hosting copies of reliable sources, as the source. How information is framed can alter its interpretation.) However, on closer investigation, much more recently, it turns out that the claim is misleading as stated. In order to make the statement in the article unconditionally true and not taken out of context, there are lots of other facts which must be stated, such as, for starters, that Roberts Rules does *not* "recommend" "IRV."

What it describes, instead, is an example of what is allowed (and used by some organizations) for special situations where better alternatives can't be used; it *resembles* IRV (or *is* IRV of a special kind, *not* what is often implemented as "IRV") but the difference, though small, is crucial. Mr. Bouricius argued tenaciously against all this and was unwilling to accept a complete description in the article; one could see this in the article history and Talk. There are two possible reasons for this that I can see. [WP:AGF] would lead me to thinking he sincerely considers all this detail simply irrelevant; but a more sinister thought would be that including the detail brings attention to problems with IRV, one of which the Robert's Rules reference specifically talks about. Given that he thinks these edits to be "POV pushing," I fear that the latter is also at least partially true. I think the Robert's Rules reference *is* relevant and should be in the article, *but* it can't be simply a piece of promotion, for if the source is both positive and negative, both sides must be included. Since no compromise language could be found, at that time, I simply took it out, pending reinserting when some agreement could be found. It is not essential to the article, and my position is that non-essential information, no matter how "interesting," does not belong in the article if the editors cannot come to a consensus about it. Certainly there are exceptions, that's why Arbcomm exists. But my opinion is that we don't need to go to Arbcomm, we just need some good advice and to follow it.

So I also thank User:Wikidudeman for his advice to Tbouricius and his offer to help him prevent me from making over the article into my own image, should this help be necessary, and perhaps we can put more effort, all of us, into making the article truly interesting, informative, *and* balanced. Really, if we and others who help the project do our work well, both proponents and opponents of IRV will say about the article, "Yes, that's how it is." --Abd (talk) 23:53, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

This arbitration case has now closed, and the decision may be found at the link above. Martinphi and ScienceApologist are subect to an editing restriction for one year, and ScienceApologist is limited to one account. For the arbitration committee, David Mestel^(Talk) 18:06, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 10:54, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi I saw a scan photo on Lesnar´s talk article and I was wondering if you can scan the whole magazine and give me the links beacuse I would like to see his training routine and diet.--Easyhit (talk) 22:45, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Well i dont have email but i figured you can (when you have time) put links of the magazine pages on my talk page like you did with one with Lesnar´s talk page.--Easyhit (talk) 13:07, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

WE ARE MAGNET MAN'S RECORD LABEL AND ALL PICTURES that exist in the press of Magnet Man are free to use as they aRE WHAT';S CALLED press shots, WE ARE ALWAYS DELIGHTED WHEN SOMEONE USES A PICTURE ANYWHERWE , AS RECORDSING ARTISTES ALL NEED CONSRTANT EXPOSURE IN THE PRESS AND ALL MEDIA. THE PICTURWE THAT GOHAN WAS MADE TO DELWETE WAS COMPKETEKY FREE ( AS ARE ALL PRESS SHOTS) FOR HER TO USE., i THINK ITS A SHAME THAT PEOPLE DONT U NDERSTAND PRESS SHOTS AND NO-ONE IN THE MUSIC INDUSTRY IS GOING TO MIND ANY PROMOTION, QUITE THE OPPOSITE, WE WERE DELIGHTED THAT THIS YOUNG FAN TOOK THE TIME AND TROUBLE TO DO THE Page at all. Well done to her. Pkease inform her she can use any press shot AND WE HACE HUNDREDS , all PICS OF mAGNET mAN OUT THERE HAVE BEEN SUPPLIED BY US AND WE OWN ALL PRESS SHOTS AND THATS WHY PRESS SHOTS Are called press shotrs, becasue they are feee to use! CaroBrenin Magnetic Image Records

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:51, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

G'day Wikidudeman. I've just loaded up your script to trial. Do you have a "how to" page on it please? Sting_au Talk 22:46, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Incidentally, if you want me to stop referring people to HP, let me know. Alternately, if you want me to proselytize, I can do that too. WLU 19:10, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

I have filed a case here, I just listed myself an Dbachmann as the involved parties, because I was unsure how to do it, if you would also like to be listed as an involved party and make a statement, please feel free to add your name and statement. futurebird 19:27, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Wi;ll you please come back to the Wiley Protocol and lend a hand for a minute? I've done what you ask, but it's spinning out of control again. Thanks. Neil Raden 06:15, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

SandyGeorgia is trying to keep a lid on it, but she could use some help. Neil Raden (talk) 21:48, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 10:23, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

WDM, I have taken the material we worked out before and distilled some of it into a draft at User:Filll/homeopathyscales. Please take a look at this admittedly very rough text and let me know where I have made some mistakes. I probably should have some more references as well I guess. I want this to explain the potency scales as clearly as we can. Any other material that should be included? Other scales? Even if obscure?--Filll (talk) 16:42, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

The Wine Project Newsletter! Issue VII - December 8th, 2007

Thanks for catching the fact that I missed one vandalous edit. Deli nk (talk) 18:40, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:15, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 19:50, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:44, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 06:36, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

The Wine Project Newsletter! Issue VIII - December 22nd, 2007

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 14:10, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Hey, you asked if it was possible to revert vandlism and warn with one click, well... It is :) Replace all the twinkle javascript in your monobook.js with:

 importScript('User:AzaToth/morebits.js');
 importScript('User:Oxymoron83/twinklefluff.js');
 importScript('User:Oxymoron83/twinklewarnauto.js');
 importScript('User:AzaToth/twinklearv.js');
 importScript('User:Oxymoron83/aivreporthelper.js');
 importScript('User:AzaToth/twinklespeedy.js');
 //importScript('User:AzaToth/twinkleimage.js');
 importScript('User:AzaToth/twinklediff.js');
 importScript('User:AzaToth/twinkleprotect.js');
 importScript('User:AzaToth/twinkleprod.js');
 importScript('User:AzaToth/twinklexfd.js');

TwinkleConfig = {
       revertMaxRevisions              :       50,
       userTalkPageMode                :       'tab',
       showSharedIPNotice              :       false,
       openTalkPage                    :       [ 'agf', 'norm', 'vand', 'blank', 'source', 'spam' ],
       openTalkPageOnAutoRevert        :       false,
       openAOLAnonTalkPage             :       false,
       summaryAd                       :       "",
       deletionSummaryAd               :       "",
       protectionSummaryAd             :       "",
       watchWarnings                   :       false,
       watchSpeedyPages                :       [ 'g1', 'g10' ],
       watchProdPages                  :       true,
       openUserTalkPageOnSpeedyDelete  :       [ 'g1', 'g2', 'g3', 'g8', 'g10', 'g11', 'g12', 'a1', 'a3', 'a7', 'i3', 'i4', 'i5', 'i6', 'i7', 'u3', 't1' ],
       watchRevertedPages              :       [ ],
       markRevertedPagesAsMinor        :       [ 'agf', 'norm', 'vand', 'torev', 'blank', 'source', 'spam' ],
       deleteTalkPageOnDelete          :       false,
       markWarningsAsMinor             :       true,
       markAIVReportAsMinor            :       true,
       markSpeedyPagesAsMinor          :       true,
       markProdPagesAsMinor            :       true,
       confirmUsernameToAIV            :       true,
       offerReasonOnNormalRevert       :       false,
       orphanBacklinksOnSpeedyDelete   :       {orphan:false}

Make sure you include the }; at the end. You can then change the preferences. It will only auto warn IPs. The level of warning is determined by warnings previously received, the type is determined by what button you press (you will understand what I mean once installing it). If IPs go over a recent level 4 warning, you will be given the option to automatically report to AIV. Hope this helps, Tiddly-Tom 07:45, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your support in my RfA. It was definitely a dramatic debate, that landed on WP:100! I paid close attention to everything that was said, and, where possible, I will try to incorporate the (constructive) criticism towards being a better administrator. I'm taking things slowly for now, partially because of the holidays and all the off-wiki distractions. :) I'm also working my way through the Wikipedia:New admin school and double-checking the relevant policies, and will gradually phase into the use of the new tools. My main goals are to help out with various backlogs, but I also fully intend to keep on writing articles, as there are several more that I definitely want to get to WP:FA status! Thanks again, and have a great new year, --Elonka 04:53, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

The Wine Project Newsletter! Issue IX - January 7th, 2008

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:41, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Huh? You're not an administrator, like really? :) That really is astonishment. (And thanks for your support in my last RFA, which did help me in my second RFA which closed last week successfully at 113/11/4). Regards, Rudget. 16:54, 15 January 2008 (UTC) Sorry, we weren't able to suggest any articles for you. Something is probably wrong on our end.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:16, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Thankyou very much! Your kindness is very much appreciated. Happy editing! :-) Lradrama 18:26, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi WDM, congrats on your upcoming adminship! I look forward to pestering you with even more questions :)

Just a comment, and feel free to ignore it. My understanding and observations from other RFA's that I've seen is that candidates usually don't reply to the opposes in many cases (usually it's editors who supported responding 'for' the candidate, if it's a troubling objection). It looks odd to me to see you commenting on every oppose vote (again, my opinion only). I believe at your first RFA it was also commented on that it looks defensive. You're going to sail through the RFA and into super-admin territory. You may want to just leave the opposer's to themselves, since their objections are pretty spurious anyway. WLU (talk) 19:48, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

I just tried it with Agnicourt-et-Séchelles. Tell me how I did. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 23:34, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

I might be missing something, but I don't see the connection to my previous comment. I looked at the article - right now it's at risk for CSD as it's lacking notability and sources. The MOS and stub type looks fine.

Regards your RFA, I think given the comment that was posted, it's a silly objection and pretty obvious (to me anyway) that your intent is being mis-represented. Basically, I don't think it's worth dignifying the current opposes with responses. As I said, it's just my opinion, so feel free to ignore it, it won't hurt my feelings : ) WLU (talk) 00:05, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations on making the WP:100 list. You certainly deserve it. John Carter (talk) 18:20, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

<RI>I wanted to add my 2 cents worth (or schillings, or euros, whatever). I was strongly opposed to your RfA #1 which I recall failed. A lot of important editors (myself not being one) stepped up against your bid. The reasons were many, but mine was your attitude on Homeopathy. I'm not sure if I moved my opinion or you shifted a bit in response, but in the end you did a great job there. You ARE the type of individual who should be an admin. I don't like the recent batch of admins who wouldn't know a controversy if it slapped them in the face. I expect you to be a leader in this project, not just a mop and bucket person (I can do the mop and bucket and I'm not even an admin). I hope that we have kissed and made up, but if not, I hope you know I respect you immensely. OrangeMarlin ^{Talk• Contributions} 18:27, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi Wikidudeman, I'm adding infoboxes myself now, both for German and Austrian places, and could do with some help. But if you want to create articles, I'd suggest you take a look at France, there's still many municipalities missing there. See Wikipedia:WikiProject French communes/Status for more details. Markussep ^Talk 23:11, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Could you provide me with some examples that I can use to copy for autowiki? Wikidudeman ^(talk) 23:13, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Well for example, take Aubigny-en-Laonnois for the Communes of the Aisne department. The disambiguation method for French communes is rather simple: if it's ambiguous with anything, add a comma and the department name (for instance: Leuze, Aisne). Have fun! Markussep ^Talk 23:26, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

I just tried it with Agnicourt-et-Séchelles. Tell me how I did. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 23:34, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Fine! Do check fr:Catégorie:Commune de l'Aisne to see which communes have disambiguated article names, fr: uses the brackets method "Leuze (Aisne)". Markussep ^Talk 23:47, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

I just did all the ambiguous ones in the Aisne departments, so all the red links in Communes of the Aisne department are ready for you now. Markussep ^Talk 15:22, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:21, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very kindly for the recognition and acknowledgment. Cheers! Wisdom89 (talk) 17:26, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Are the comments left by deeceevoice on the race of ancient egyptian. In the new nubian section intimidation or in violation of wikipedia policy. As I understand urban lingo they seem to be such in my opinion.--207.14.129.217 (talk) 02:58, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I'll look. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 02:59, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Lessee... It's locked down because a few people are trying to get individual positive studies added and put on the same weight as the more major studies, and has been for the last month. There's a few new problematic editors, Whig's back, but Peter's temporarily blocked. That's about it. Adam Cuerden ^talk 03:14, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I didn't know Peter was temp blocked. What would you suggest for improving the situation? Wikidudeman ^(talk) 03:16, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the barnstar you awarded me,I've finally gotten sick of spam and vandalism on WP and decided to do my bit to help remove it :) --Astral (talk) 03:39, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Just think... one more day and you won't have to send reports anymore... you can just take care of it yourself. :) Trusilver 03:41, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Unless my RFA fails. Wikidudeman ^(talk) 03:43, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Hello. You may have seen that some Wikipedia articles lack sources to given dates, timelines and chronologies.
If you feel that you could like to help in making all articles more reliable and well sourced in this regard, we would like to encourage you to use, as part of your daily editing and when {{fact}} is not enough for requesting clearly and specifically a citation or source for dates, timeline or chronology, the following inline tag:

{{Timefact}} displays ^{{chronology source needed}} for requesting timelines, dates and chronology sources. Click here for more information

At WP Timeline Tracer, we thank you for using these tools and for helping to make Wikipedia articles more accurate and reliable.

Daoken 10:23, 21 January 2008 (UTC)