User talk:KnowledgeOfSelf/Archive18

Hey, would you mind taking a look at Ben deignan. I did not tag the page for deletion, and do not know if a speedy tag belongs or if it should be put to AfD. Either way the creator of the article keeps rm the speedy tag from the page, and i do not want to keep reverting it unless it is actually CSD material, if it is would you mind deleting it, and if not i would be happy to create an AfD. Thank you :)  ! Tiptoety 23:21, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Greatly appreciated! Tiptoety 23:24, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No worry, it was an A7 - if the user recreates the article be sure to tag it again, as A7. I'm signing off for the time being, might be back if I can't sleep. If the user continues to remove the speedy tags, list him at AIAV, someone will take care of it. Thanks for the hard work fighting vandalism. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 23:27, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks. And will do! Goodnight! Tiptoety 23:32, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again! Tiptoety 23:36, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LOL. Alright I'm really off to sleep this time, I deleted the page again and gave the user a final warning. Please list at AIAV if he does this again. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 23:37, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, i will do! Okay....we will see if you really go to sleep. lol. Tiptoety 23:38, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I get the feeling you're Alf's father. IS THAT TRUE??--Rory666 05:33, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

lol, no it's just a long running joke between me and Alf. I'm not really his father. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 08:05, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Phew...--Rory666 10:00, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hehehe, love the linking on talk + contributions.--Alf ^melmac 11:20, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

LOL. Yeah, A+ for effort though! KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 17:54, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

HEY!--Rory666 20:22, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well they made me chuckle, so no offence meant, it brightened my day.--Alf ^melmac 20:28, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Right. I changed the talk link...(How do they do that here? Far out.)--Rory666 09:43, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

HELLO?--RoryReloaded 09:44, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey! You insult me, my first account wasnt for vandalism i demand it unblocked! besides the mailman article was a joke. Greenjuice3.0 13:33, 23 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Joke or not, edits such as these are unacceptable. You were told to stop, you did not, therefore you were blocked. Your other account Greenjuice2nd was blocked, Greenjuice3.0 will be as well, since it is block evasion. You're use of these accounts violates our sock puppet policy. See Wikipedia:Blocking policy#Evasion of blocks and Wikipedia:Banning policy#Evasion and enforcement as well. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 22:35, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you kindly ma'am. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 22:35, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the tardiness in sending the Signpost this week. --Ral315

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 14:22, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Huh. what do you mean? I thought that a subuserpage was for your own views as well as other edits? User talk:McDonaldsKing —Preceding comment was added at 22:54, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Huh? What do you mean? this edit was not to a user sub-page of any kind. That is vandalism. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 22:58, 30 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey would you mind hopping into this issue please, as we have got no admins to give their opinion yet. Tiptoety 00:14, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind, the problem has been resolved. Thank you! Tiptoety 00:21, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I'm not sure what I could say, there has been precedent for this type of situation before, which has cropped up a few times if memory serves me correctly. I do believe the police were contacted in each instance. That would be the best course of action in my opinion. (Edit conflict) Ahh I see I was rather slow in my response, anyhow I'll lay it out anyway! :) KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 00:23, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thank you! Yes that was going to be my next step, contacting the police. But i was going to request her IP so that they could trace her comp. I was unsure if that was allowed. Tiptoety 00:24, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Halloween!--Rory666 09:40, 31 October 2007 (UTC) Oh, how I love Halloween :)--Rory666 09:40, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both, happy Halloween to you as well. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 23:54, 31 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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 05:47, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. The Preity Zinta article has recently achieved A-class status. Due to the wealth of support I have decided to now nominate for an FA class article which I believe and judging by the comments of others is pretty much up to. In my view it is better than some existing FA actor articles. I would therefore be very grateful if you could give it a final review in your own time and leave your comments and views at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Preity Zinta. Thankyou, your comments are always valuable. ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^"Talk"? 10:57, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou very much! And thankyou also for your support in my RfA. I look forward to getting started. Best wishes, Lradrama 08:41, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not revert my edit on this article.

The "DJs" and "Former DJs" sections were deleted by me (and have been, MULTIPLE TIMES!) per "Wikipedia is not a directory."

Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.67.94.238 (talk) 21:46, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I reverted it due to that obtuse "NOTE: THIS SECTION REQUIRES CITATION, IN PARTICULAR THE APRIL 5, 2007 INCIDENT. THANKS." note that you replaced the content with, which was just as harmful as the section you were deleting. You'll noticed I haven't reverted since you simply removed the harmful content. Thanks for the message, happy editing. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 21:52, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article "History of Logic Programming" seems to consists of edits by Carl Hewitt, who is banned from editing the Logic Programming article. This History article is an attempt by him to circumvent the ban. It consists mainly of his earlier edits to the logic programming, which were reverted by consensus. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.241.139.122 (talk • contribs)

I don't know who Carl Hewitt is, nor the specifics of that case, I won't undo your edit again because it isn't vandalism as far as I can tell. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 22:18, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. :) I see that I inspired more than the anon to correct gender ;) —  $PЯINGεrαgђ  22:09, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Steve ;) Please forgive me for my stupid changes with the drinking straws and music. I was bored and mad at my sister. Would you like to talk to me now? -Ashley —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lettersfromspace (talk • contribs) 02:21, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I knew when I saw Alfie with sticky fur, chewing floor gum, that I had to drop by. :O--§hanel 07:10, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mmmm well you were a little late, where were you when this was going on? Mm hmm. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 07:17, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was off doing stuff, so there.--§hanel 03:55, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, it's nice to be remembered! Everything's pretty good -- I've written some 80 biographies of comics professionals, including a lot of legendary Golden Age and Silver Age veterans that were missing. (The young whippersnappers don't know Syd Shores or Wayne Boring? Ai-eee!). I hope all is well at your end — and thanks for your volunteer vigilance!--Tenebrae 23:01, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh my goodness! Thank you! (And wait till you hear this: The 84 bios are just the biggest section of about 150 articles. Check out User:Tenebrae.)

It's an addiction, perhaps, but it's nice to feel we're contributing to knowledge. Getting an acknowledgement is frosting on the cake! Thanks again --Tenebrae 23:13, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You can say that again lol. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 23:21, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! - Rjd0060 23:12, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You are very welcome. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 23:21, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, why did you remove this user? I had just given him a final warning and was leaving him listed so other admins checking AIV could keep an eye on him also. You didn't block the IP, so I'm curious. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 22:59, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You said you were keeping an eye on him, so I took it down to make room for the other entries that have been coming in. However, you're correct, I should have left him up. My apologies, you're more than welcome to put him back if you like. GlassCobra 23:16, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No worry, I was just wondering. No need to re-add him, I've been checking, and he appears to have stopped. Like I said I was just curious. Thanks for the reply. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 23:21, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sure thing. I'm new, so give me a little bit of slack. ;) GlassCobra 23:22, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So how are you liking the new tools? Have you zapped a few vandals, deleted nonsense pages, and experienced the wondrous admin rollback? Does it not bring a smile to your face when you are able to block that rude vandal instead of listing him at AIV, and hoping that an admin is around keeping an eye on it? Isn't it? :D KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 00:27, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Most definitely. It makes everything so much faster. Quite nice! GlassCobra 00:44, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You know, I can think of few other folks who would make me log on to this screwball site other than you. Thanks for the message over at the R/C wiki!

Steve, I loathe what's happened to this site. There are users and administrators who need to be run up on RfC sooner than later. I've never seen such abuse of an established user on this level like I just experienced. The samples of work I'd provided the user who clobbered my final article with a speedy delete tagged the examples of similar work I gave him as being written like ads. What a slap. I used to write award-winning ad copy. I know the difference between an ad and a Wikipedia article. I'm not completely unsold on this outfit, though. Danny Wool just activated an account for me at Veropedia and the wiki you left word at is a Wikia project. That poor site is basically abandoned. I've dusted it off and have begun the cleanup and expansion process.

I'll be writing reviews for a hobby-related site which will take up a great deal of time anyway. They provide the stuff, I build it and write about it. I just reviewed a model which I purchased and which they requested I do as a first review...and it's already past 2000 hits, more than I'd ever get here for an encyclopedia entry on the same model (which I happened to do anyway). A new model plane arrived on my doorstep just this morning and I expect another with a new radio and accessories to arrive any day now. Ironically, I wouldn't have time for Wikipedia anyway.

For some reason, I was unable to get my e-mail account to accept the e-mail verification from this site no matter what I did. However, it's active at the R/C wiki if you wish to establish a temporary account over there and contact me via e-mail. It would be great to hear from you again.

Talk to you! --PMDrive1061 23:40, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• OK, try it now over at R/C. I hadn't enabled e-mail from other users. My boo-boo. You should be good to go now! Talk to you real soon. The ex-PMDrive1061 via --74.62.174.104 02:00, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Success - Thanks my friend. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 02:05, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there. I like the anti-vandalism template you used on User_talk:66.203.60.35, but I can't find it. Did you make it? – Scartol · Talk 00:03, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No I didn't make it - the template is {{bv}}, please keep in mind, if you are going to use it, it should be treated as a level 4 warning which should usually only be given for obviously obscene/vulgar vandalism. Happy editing. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 00:07, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thanks for blocking that guy. I was wondering, even though this request may be a bit out of line, could you semi-protect my talk page for a short time (24 hours)? Looking at the whois data, I think I know who this guy is, a kid at my school. Thanks, --FastLizard4 (Talk•Links•Sign) 05:45, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, would you mind deleting this for me? Thanks! Tiptoety 06:39, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Tiptoety 06:44, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heya back at you, that one seemed close, but as the most relevant hit I recieved from google was from myspace, I went ahead and nuked it. Happy editing. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 06:46, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yep same here, and so i decided it failed CSD-A7, thanks for everything! Tiptoety 06:47, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Apparently some people think it's funny to create a username just to give me grief, but I take solace in knowing there are admins patrolling userspace. DodgerOfZion

You are welcome, take solace in the fact that "if a troll or vandal attacks your userspace, you are probably doing something right." :) KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 17:41, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

An indefinite block, citing for vandalism was highly inappropriate for this user. Please be mindful of the circumstances. On retrospect, the user had a limited command of English and was making attempts to respond to the users who left notes on his page.

Indeed, he was inserting advertisements into an article; and may not have anything ultimately to contribute... or he may turn into a worthwhile contributor. But have a care in blocking such people in the future.

At least some time to explain the issue would save telephone calls to the Foundation offices. Cary Bass ^demandez 20:50, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, that is an unfair representation of my block -

" 19:21, November 6, 2007 KnowledgeOfSelf (Talk | contribs | block) blocked "Pkrev (Talk | contribs)" (account creation blocked) with an expiry time of indefinite ‎ (Spamming links to external sites: vandalism) (Unblock)"

maybe the vandalism at the end was overly harsh, and my use of {{test7}} to inform the user of the block was wrong as well, but it is clear in the block log that the user was blocked for spam. The user made one single attempt to respond to the warnings on his talk page. I'm sorry if the people warning him didn't respond to his lone attempt adequately, but the simple fact is he continued to insert his advertisements after receiving third and fourth level warnings. Unless I'm very much mistaken that is blockable behavior. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 22:45, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Would you consider reducing your block to a week or so and trying to explain on his user talk page what the problem is? Fred Bauder 22:19, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't even mind if you want to unblock completely, by all means be my guest. But I'll keep watch on the user and I will re-block him if he continues to spam Wikipedia. Thanks KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 22:45, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since you don't seem to be watching I went ahead and reduced his block to 17 hours, struck the indef block message and replaced it with {{advert5}}, good day. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 23:10, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I'm doing lots of things. Fred Bauder 03:01, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I understand, happy editing. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 03:06, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I appreciate it very much. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 20:49, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Better luck next time Tip, cheers. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 00:28, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It seems that User:Everetthighschool is back again with defamatory edits. The article was fully protected for two whole months and a dozen of his socks were indef blocked but he keeps coming back. Should an abuse report be filed? --Hdt83 ^Chat 04:53, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah that kid doesn't know when to quit, go ahead and file one if you like. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 04:57, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ramzih4x0r (talk · contribs), pwned! Errr... given a break. =) -- Gogo Dodo 08:52, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yeah! Just 24 hours though eh. Maybe I am too harsh sometimes lol. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 08:55, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm in a forgiving mood, so I kept it short. =) Either that or I'm tired and just need a nap. -- Gogo Dodo 08:58, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A well rested vandal whacker is a happy vandal whacker. ^_^ KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 09:02, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you look at WP:ANI#User:Savignac.E2.80.8E and voice your opinion? I really am quite tired and the whole thing is a mess and I don't have enough energy to sort through the whole mess. I put a quick stop to it, but perhaps it needs a longer stop. Thanks. -- Gogo Dodo 09:16, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I'm commenting now - lot of nonsense going on there. I just had to check my watchlist one more before I went to sleep. Oh well, vandalism was slow anyway, and I wasn't all that tired to begin with. :) KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 09:33, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for helping out with that (and the cookies and coffee, too!). =) Sorry about keeping you awake a bit longer. It's hard to tell who is up and or who is just around at "normal" hours, though after looking at your user page, it's obvious you were up way late, too. D'oh! -- Gogo Dodo 00:19, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there,

if you would like to, please can you comment on my response to concerns about my survey attempt here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Message_from_Zhan_Li_regarding_Survey

I am contacting you as you were part of the original discussion.

thank you very much Zhan Li Zhanliusc 21:21, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Would you mind deleting G.H.O.S.T. of Pinellas‎, Thanks! Tiptoety 03:15, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh red! KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 03:16, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

lol, thanks again, of the user re-creates it may be time to salt. Thanks for your help! Tiptoety 03:17, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

got another one for ya, Bower Ashton Campus. Tiptoety 03:37, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi!

I've now nominated him. Please add your co-nomination now. ;) Regards, —DerHexer (Talk) 14:07, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Btw., why do you call me Der? —DerHexer (Talk) 21:47, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So sorry for the late reply to this - I missed your asking of this question until just now. No particular reason, Der was just quicker then DerHexer. If it offends you, I of course won't do so again. Although in hindsight and after looking it up - calling you "Der" without the "Hexer" does seem ridiculous. Happy editing. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 18:09, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to say thanks for reverting the vandalism done at my user page =) Zodiiak 22:30, 11 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, this is the last unvandalised revision. MER-C 09:31, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for digging that up, I appreciate it. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 09:32, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. From your prot comments, I think you may have meant to reduce this to semi but it's still fully-protected. Just so's you know ;) - Alison ^❤ 09:41, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, no I just forgot the word "length". What I meant was "reducing protection length since it's no longer semi" :) KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 09:46, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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 07:54, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've been watching this article more or less since its inception and we've had a very high proportion of contructive edits from anons. Today in particular we've had one persistent IP vandal whom you blocked. (Thank you.) I'd like to suggest taking off the sprotection -- no need to lump all IPs in with one jerk.--Father Goose 20:05, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've been watching that page. There's only been one ongoing vandal, User talk:67.176.180.22 who is already blocked. There have been a lot of productive IP contributors otherwise. Since he's 86ed, can unprotect the article? -- Kendrick7^talk 21:28, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, yeah, I mean: what FatherGoose said. -- Kendrick7^talk 21:30, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I wasn't around when you made your original request. The article is unprotected now. Sorry for the inconvenience. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 00:44, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, thanks for lifting it again. That page has had the most ruly bunch of anons I've ever seen. Must be a roving bunch of writers with a lot of time on their hands or something.--Father Goose 05:35, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Incidentally, I'm very heartened by reading User:KnowledgeOfSelf/That Whole Admin Bit. I wish more admins approached the job with such conscientiousness.--Father Goose 05:42, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why I thank you, I appreciate that. :) KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 07:15, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Would you mind taking another look at the edits at Young & Restless? TheBestPart continues to add a laundry list of unlikely song collaborations to this and another article, and even after digging through a number of related articles, I can't figure out what's notable (or even reality) in this area...am I missing something? Flowanda | Talk 00:05, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've reverted the edit - it was non-sense. When you see

Excellent joke. Thanks for the laugh. :) IrishGuy ^talk 04:00, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I try. :) KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 04:01, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalisim reverted at Eagle Rock High School (Los Angeles, California), this is about the third time I've had to do this. Please see the vandalism comparison Here. Thanks in advance for your assistance. Timmccloud 04:29, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The user(s) are not currently active - and you may want to list future reports at AIAV as you are more likely to get a quicker response. I reverted the users edits that appeared to be bad faith - or vandalism. Happy editing. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 04:58, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Seems to be working OK now, so far ;) Voice-of-All 06:05, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it does, and it reverted vandalism to my user page twice. Can life get any better? :) Thanks again. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 06:21, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I actually requested protection via RFPP but wasn't familiar with the policy on user talk pages and asked for a log protection period, so it was denied. Anyhow, an hour should do it, hopefully. Thanks again, Rjd0060 07:24, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome, just know that if you are getting vandalized that much - you are probably doing something right. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 07:27, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've got to admit, I've never thought of it that way. Thanks again. Rjd0060 07:29, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, this has to be the weirdest coincidence ever, because I was about to give you this!

Ha ha ha - Great minds think alike! KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 07:43, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Most definitely. :) Well I've got to get to sleep, carry on soldier! GlassCobra 07:58, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm off to bed myself. Happy editing. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 08:19, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please block the munchkin from OZ, 222.155.40.101, it is an IP sock of User:Hayden5650. Thanks. ~Jeeny ^(talk) 08:00, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Already blocked by GlassCobra, I'm signing off the mean time, you might want to take future reports to AIAV as you are more likely to get a response. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 08:18, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I see. Thanks, but he's returned User talk:222.153.96.79‎ Diff. and here. It's User:Hayden5650 ~Jeeny ^(talk) 08:25, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Already blocked - by Alison. lol I'm really heading to sleep this time though! :) KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 08:34, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User(s) blocked. - (ec) this one's on me ;) - Alison ^❤ 08:34, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Sleep tight. I should have been in bed hours ago. :/ ~Jeeny ^(talk) 08:53, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ahh, I had a refreshing nap thank you very much! KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 11:18, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Mtralston (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log) asked for an unblock, and apologized for what he'd done to you and elsewhere on his talk page. Yamla declined with a second chance edit recommendation, which Mtralston appears to have honestly followed up on.

Per the requests and a bit of discussion on unblock-en-l, I think it's reasonable to give Mtralston another chance here; he's demonstrated article edit good faith here since he was blocked. I don't think that your original block was wrong in any way, but I'm unblocking at this point. I will follow their contribs for a while... and if they go back to causing problems, feel free to block them again and let me know... but hopefully they have learned their lesson and are positive going forwards.

Thanks. Let me know if anything happens or if you have any concerns about this. Georgewilliamherbert 00:38, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine no quarrels here, I believe in second chances and wish him well. I truly hope he has learned how to start contributing to the encyclopedia. Thank you for notifying me of your unblock, I appreciate it. Happy editing. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 05:38, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for reverting my talk page. cheers! West Brom 4ever 17:43, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your welcome, happy editing. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 18:19, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

THOSE CATS WERE FAST AS LIGHT-NING! (talk · contribs) posted an unblock request at their talk page. I assume your username block was due to the length of the name, but I'm not absolutely sure. Could you explain? Nishkid64 (talk) 18:03, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Nishkid, I blocked the account for two main reasons:

• 1) the length of the account -
• 2 see EVERYBODY WAS KUNG FU FIGHT-ING!!! (talk · contribs). I felt it was an obvious bad faith account when those two names were created one after the other. If you think a unblock is in order, I won't object, happy editing. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 18:08, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, okay. I'm perfectly fine with the block, then. Thanks for the quick reply. :) Nishkid64 (talk) 18:10, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

=) KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 18:19, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You reverted what I erased from the page. Why? A reporter commenting about the sedentary life style of europeans , hooligans that attack when their club loses and neonazi views, how is it regarded as lusophobia? Those are isolated cases, or from extreme radicals. There is a difference between lusophobia, xenophobia, and racism.It seems you can not tell the difference.

Also, Madeleine case that I though it could be lusophobia is a case of xenophobia the same comments are being made against a case in Italy Meredith or Madeleine: it's trial by media.

A lusophobe only targets portuguese, a xenophobe will targets anyone who is different from him. The brazilian lusophobia of XIX only targeted portuguese people, it is a correct input, the rest is mostly nonsense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.180.12.5 (talk) 18:11, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've really no idea about anything in the article, so you'll have to take your issues to the article's talk page. As you can see I wasn't the only one who reverted your edits. Whose to say you are right, and who is to say you are wrong? Take it to the talk page, find a consensus and work on it from there. Happy editing. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 18:19, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How come you dismantled the wikitable I put on Fort Myers? It was supposed to make the info more visible and organized. Now it is, like, totally unorganized.66.99.216.3 02:48, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey thanks for letting me know, I hadn't realized I did it. I remember checking that edit while on RC patrol. (Your ip address is grey/black listed because of it's history of vandalism) I must have hit my rollback button while trying to switch to an other tab in my browser, sometimes my mouse doesn't cooperate with me. I'm sorry anyhow, and I've reverted myself, back to your revision. Happy editing. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 02:54, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, it is greatly appreciated! And no, the heading is unique better than just "Barnstar" or something like that, it will stay! Hey i think i was listening to that song a little while ago... :). Cheers Tiptoety 03:01, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Check your external Links on the Jim O'Rear page more closely before deletion... The copyright release is on there. Sarcophagi 12:29, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm All content included on this site, such as text, graphics, logos, button icons, images, audio clips, video clips, digital downloads, data compilations, and software, is the property of IMDb or its content suppliers and protected by United States and international copyright laws. The compilation of all content on this site is the exclusive property of IMDb and protected by U.S. and international copyright laws. IMDb does not release their text under the GFDL, therefore you can not copy it straight to Wikipedia. Maybe the other links allow you to use their text. jimorear.com simply says "All Website Contents Copyright (c) UNDERGROUND ENTERTAINMENT" I see nothing that says the text or media is released under the GFDL and therefore we can not accept it. (Unless you have express written permission - in that case you'll have to prove it by email). Therefore the article is a copyright violation. Period. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 14:17, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your reverts to the Blankey Jet City article is vandalism. Stop your nonsense! 122.49.156.166 (talk) 10:02, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ha that's funny. Sorry mate, but this is the English Wikipedia - not the Japanese. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 10:03, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Look at the Wikipedia policies mate! 122.49.156.166 (talk) 10:07, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]