User talk:Anomo/Archive1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] AHHHHHHHHHH END OF WORLD

lol hi. Anonymouses 07:13, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome to Wikipedia!

Hello Anomo/Archive1, welcome to Wikipedia!

Here are some tips:

If you feel a change is needed, feel free to make it yourself! Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone (yourself included) can edit any article by following the Edit this page link. Wikipedia convention is to be bold and not be afraid of making mistakes. If you're not sure how editing works, have a look at How to edit a page, or try out the Sandbox to test your editing skills.

If, for some reason, you are unable to fix a problem yourself, feel free to ask someone else to do it. Wikipedia has a vibrant community of contributors who have a wide range of skills and specialties, and many of them would be glad to help. As well as the wiki community pages there are IRC Channels, where you are more than welcome to ask for assistance.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me on my talk page. Thanks and happy editing, Alphax τεχ 05:57, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for the heads up.

Thanks for letting me know that somebody had posted as me. It was me, actually. I forget to log in a lot :-O . But I'm glad that you were keeping an eye out, that was very considerate! :) --JCipriani 04:35, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] limecat AFD

Yeah, I was actually making my comment while being constantly interrupted at work; when I started it, the page hadn't been deleted yet :) But when I finally got around to finishing my comment and hit save, I got a conflict page, and just went in and stuck my comment in before reading the new changes (which of course indicated that the final decision had been made). But I liked my comment so much, I decided not to go back in and remove it. Because it really is less about limecat specifically (I mean, I don't think I'll ever forget limecat) and more about the general principle of the thing and Wikipedia policies. But thanks for responding! --Ojh2 23:32, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Let us never forget limecat. Anomo 23:34, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikia

I noticed you run a lot of wikis, all on Wikia. I am curious why you chose them and not a different wikifarm that gives you more content control. Looking at Wikia it seems that once you sysop someone, you can't de-sysop them and they have the same power as you--true or false? Also they will merge your wiki at any time and you will lose control of it that way, too. And I also think it can't be offensive to minors, with means no sexual stuff, not even ASCII art? I don't know if I am right about any of this so can you please answer back and let me know. Thank you. Anomo 10:40, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi Anomo! The reason Creatures Wiki is on Wikia is because it was initially founded there by another person, Sgeo. The reason I chose it for WikiFur was because I had had a good experience with Creatures Wiki and I felt it was the best place to be.
Wikia will indeed merge or even retire wikis if they prove to be unsuccesful in gathering contributors on their own. It basically only happens if you fail (or possibly if your wiki was never suited for Wikia in the first place, for example if there were only a handful of people who would ever be interested in the topic). If you succeed in making a good wiki - or even a not particularly good wiki that still has contributors - then it is not going to happen.
I believe you are incorrect about being inoffensive to minors. See prohibited content and terms of use. You should read them and interpret them liberally, as that is how they have tended to be applied. Obviously, if you're looking to create PornoWiki, then you might want to talk that over with them first - if you include large numbers of pornographic or erotic images then that will mean that Wikia cannot use AdWords on your community's wiki. However, WikiFur has one or two pieces that are of a "mature" nature (appropriate to articles) and that has not affected our status on Wikia.
It is true that when you give sysop status to others, then they technically have the same powers as you (except the power to grant other people sysop access - you have to grant that separately). However, most contributors will tend to defer to the founder to some extent, regardless of actual editing and administration powers. If you have a good reason to de-sysop someone, then you should be able to convince Wikia of that.
The question is, are you making a wiki for yourself (which seems somewhat contradictory to the idea of a wiki), or are you making one for your community? If you represent your community well, it is very unlikely that you will lose control of the wiki, and also that Wikia will be a good place for you to build a wiki for that community. If in doubt, get on the "Live chat and support" (later this week, we're all at Wikimania right now) and talk about it with a Wikia staff member. :-) GreenReaper 15:19, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for your information. The one thing is, I wanted creative direction for the wiki. The other thing is that I'd like to be able to de-sysop someone if they abuse their power. The only benefit I see of wikia is that it gets a better alexa ranking. You also run the Galactic Civilizations wiki, which looking at its recent changes, gets little contributions and looks like Wikia would merge it. Anomo 20:00, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
Being on something.wikia.com does not, as far as I know, get you a better Alexa ranking. However, their help may enable you to get it for yourself. Wikia staff have technical and community staff that know what they're doing - often the same people that have taken part in running Wikipedia in the past. They have people around in IRC to help out, pretty much 24-hours. They also have significant server resources, and with their background they know how to use them to make MediaWiki fast.
GalCiv could indeed be merged, though it's hard to see where it would be merged to. I doubt they would do it, as it has almost 500 pages on its own (plus it gets rather a lot of hits). It has demonstrated that the concept of that wiki is valid - it just lacks a leader, as I've been occupied with other tasks. Merging tends to happen only with those where that is not the case.
It sounds like what you want is not what Wikia is offering, though. In particular, if you demand creative direction (and do not allow the possibility that other members of the community may overrule you), then it is no longer a community's wiki - it is your wiki. I therefore suggest you look at other wiki hosts. I do not think you will find one with the services provided by Wikia, but I could be wrong, and you may not need these services anyway. GreenReaper 01:13, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi, how do you do Checkuser? Like on this one: http://furry.wikia.com/wiki/User:Jewbo_Wales you found out the IP (which is a match with Blu Aarvark on wikipedia--of course his list of sock puppet names give it away, though. I told an admin on wikipedia who promptly ignored it.). It says you're a Bureaucrat, but not Checkuser and I don't see any of these places giving Checkuser. Is there a way to do Checkuser and how do you do Checkuser as just a bureaucrat? Anomo 01:34, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

I asked a member of staff on the live chat and support, who was more than willing to look up a vandal IP for me so it could be banned. They will do such things as long as the reason is good. They would not, for example, look up the IP of a user that was just disagreeing with the founder on a point of opinion. GreenReaper 03:56, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WoW and Slashdot

This is what I'm talking about. See also this. Editor88 00:51, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re : hi

Thanks for the compliment! :) - Cheers, Mailer Diablo 13:43, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Wikifur

That was indeed me. I wrote something about it on the talk page at WikiFur. --Conti|✉ 16:38, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] answer

Hi, I answered your questions on the talk page of WP:RECALL. rootology (T) 01:48, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A Clarification

While defending an innocent who is being persecuted by the powers that be, one Capn Crack, you apparently took offense to something I wrote on the talk page for User: Jimbo Wales. You posted a reference to WP: SALT on my userpage, I was actually using a figure of speech; "rubbing salt into a wound," to describe the admins treatment of a friend. Slowcheetah 07:08, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

I did not take offense, I was criticizing wikipedia by saying "rubbing salt into a wound" is a their official policy at WP:SALT (it was sarcastic humor). Anomo 07:55, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Subst:'ing

When using template tags on talk pages, don't forget to substitute with text by adding subst: to the template tag. For example, use {{subst:test}} instead of {{test}}. This reduces server load and prevents accidental blanking of the template. Thanks, — FireFox (talk) 12:22, 14 August '06

Oh, so I put {{subst:welcome}}? Anomo 12:25, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bot name

I have always been curious... Did you make your name Tawker beforehand with the intention of running a bot that reverts talking? Or did you change your name after you made it so you could be Tawker who runs bots that revert talk-vandalism? Or did the person who made the bot choose you to run it specifically because of your name? Anomo Hour twelve:fourty-two minutes, fourteenth of August, year two-thousand six (UTC)

Nope, there was no foresight whatsoever in the name, it just turned out that way (originally it didn't do talk page vandalisms) -- Tawker 14:25, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
That's like destiny. Well the bot is a talker-bot though because it always removes the type of vandalism that is in essence, talking. Anomo 14:29, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] the joke

Er, no, I uh didn't get it... what? I'm afraid I'm not up on these things... I think I don't wanna know, though...Herostratus 07:45, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

OMG. Sheesh. Herostratus 07:50, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your comment/accusation

From this comment [1] and your edit summary "rv new user without even a talk page and anon IP who changed the article purely so someone could quote it" [2], it appears you're accusing me of changing the Internet troll article so I could quote it? You can't be serious. Are you really suggesting that I altered an article because I might quote it 20 hours later? That's one way to throw assuming good faith right out the window. To be perfectly clear, I have no idea who edited that article, nor any idea that the line I quoted had only been there for a short time. However, I still find the quote to be a rather accurate description of a troll's goal. Aren't I Obscure? 16:26, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Internet troll definition accusation

edit summary: "rv new user without even a talk page and anon IP who changed the article purely so someone could quote it" - I'd be the one who made the modification. I changed the wording of the opening paragraph to make it a bit more clear and thorough. I had no intention of quoting it, nor knew of anyone who wanted to, before reading this page. I find Anomo's reaction and insinuations patronizing and insulting, to be honest. Anomo, was there a real reason to revert my modifications aside from snobbery directed at a 'new user'? If there was a legitimate reason I'd like to hear it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by somebody? (talk • contribs).

Tossing a timestamp in for Werdnabot... it was around 16:26, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Use an edit summary please

Recently you put up an article, I am a Japanese School Teacher, for AFD without noting you did so in the edit summary. Please do so in the future on any articles you AFD per the procedure outlined in Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion. --Chan-Ho (Talk) 20:45, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Yeah I forget. Even Jimbo Wales forgets edit summaries (see). Anomo 20:58, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] I am neither single purpose account holder nor a sockpuppeter

I first became acquainted with you in the Choral Public Domain Library AfD discussions. After looking around some more, it appears to me that you are prone to overreacting on the matter of single purpose accounts and sockpuppetry. I get the feeling that you see a sockpuppeter in every corner. Really, this is a form of paranoia that you might do well to (self)examine carefully.

Yes, I have fewer than 50 posts, although I've been a registered user since October of last year. My posts have been about equally divided between Mathematics and Music. Does this make me a single purpose account holder? No, it does not. Does it make me a sockpuppeter? No, for I post only under Chuck.

Why so few posts over a period of about 10 months? Well, for one thing, I'm a busy person, even though I am officially retired for five years now, after 35 years of teaching and research in mathematics at a major university. This retirement has enabled me to pursue more avidly a lifelong interest in music - as a composer/arranger, editor, conductor, performer. These retirement years have been very busy, as I also teach and tutor part-time, work on home improvements and remodelling, be a father to 8 widely scattered sons and daughters and a grandfather to 7 young children. I'm also heavily involved with such things as bread-making, cooking, and (during the summer months) gardening. I have a vast number of friends and correspondents which deserve my attention (although perhaps at times they receive too little).

All in all, compared to you, I feel that I have a fulfilling life, whereas you seem to be involved in pitiful and arbitrary designation of users with fewer than 50 posts as single purpose account holders. I'm taking you to task here, because I think you deserve to be called to account for your rash behavior and actions.

As for the accusations of sock puppetry in the CPDL discussions, I can assure you (as a contributor to CPDL of early music scores and some of my own works), that you are way off base, here. The (presumed) candidates which you have in mind for sock puppetry in the CPDL deletion discussions are overwhelmingly distinct individuals, albeit mostly individual contributors of scores to CPDL. You would only have to take a look at the CPDL Editors list to find them (You'll find me as the only Editor whose initials are C.H.G.). I challenge you to provide the massive evidence of sockpuppetry you claim. If indeed, as I suspect, you cannot provide such evidence, then you owe a lot of people an apology.

Chuck 15:57, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

My bad. Don't take it personally. Anomo 15:58, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Satan image

Re: [3]. At the time I removed it, it was still tagged at {{bookcover}}. See [4] and timing of [5]. It's fine now. --Durin 16:27, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/MONGO

Hello,

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/MONGO. Please add evidence to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/MONGO/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/MONGO/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Thatcher131 (talk) 13:48, 26 August 2006 (UTC)


[edit] STOP EDITING 7CHAN'S PAGE

I do not like that link and I don't think it has a place there. If you wish to add any links to 7chan's page please use the talk page. I do not wish to be rude, so please do not take it that way. Thank you. Lordvervex 68.39.114.92 07:29, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

If you are Lordvervex why aren't you signed in on that name? I explained on the talk page that the article was copy and pasted from another site and you remove the site. Anomo 07:42, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
....who would pretend to be me? We have edited the page, that is not the problem, must you post it in the "bad joke" page also? That was my joke. I understand the copy right concern but becuase the same group of people wrote both articals I did not see a problem, if you still think it violates copy right rules reply if not simply remove your link. Thank you again. Lordvervex 07:47, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
The site it was copy and pasted from is GDFL and according to it, "Specifically, the authors of prior versions have to be acknowledged and certain "invariant sections" specified by the original author and dealing with his or her relationship to the subject matter may not be changed. If the material is modified, its title has to be changed (unless the prior authors give permission to retain the title). The license also has provisions for the handling of front-cover and back-cover texts of books, as well as for "History", "Acknowledgements", "Dedications" and "Endorsements" sections." Anomo 07:50, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Understood, see how easy it is when people just talk? I will blank the page and write it from scratch. Facts will sadley remain the same however, for they are facts. Lordvervex 07:56, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
I'd rather you just leave the link in with whatever caption you want. Anomo 07:59, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Only if I can remove the link from the "bad joke" page permanintly. That was my bad joke I deserve the credit, when I saw the link there I was very hurt, if not I will write the whole artical over. Lordvervex 08:02, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] About sockpuppet tagging

I noticed that you tagged a certain account as a sock of Bobby Boulders. Wikipedia has reached consensus that such accounts should not be tagged as sockpuppets of these attention-desperate vandals in order to avoid giving them the "glory" they desire. Thank you.--Lorrainier 06:54, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

So what's the whole process and procedure now? Is there a document somewhere? Anomo 07:07, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] About your message on User talk:Jimbo Wales

I'm not certain that incident should be brought into the discussion - unless you know something I'm not aware of, that might not even be a case of pedophilia (which implies the cause of the attraction was that she was 15) as opposed to attraction to someone who happened to be 15. —AySz88\^-^ 20:42, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

I know a lot about the case. I read the stuff on it at ED, wikitruth, wikipedia review, the 30 year old's blog, and stuff on wikipedia about it. I figured that since I didn't name anybody in my comment, it would be fine, almost like a hypothetical. Hmm... I read she was an admin, though. Anomo 21:05, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Steve Irwin

If you would like to pay tribute to Steve Irwin, who tragically died on September 4th 2006, just feel free to sign your name on Mil Falcon's userpage under tributes. 49Untouchable 18:09, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] sig

Hey, my sig isn't messy, it's colorful.  ;) •Jim62sch• 13:51, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

I mean in code. Hey see the WP:RFA for Netsnipe and the sig comments. Funny stuff. Anomo 14:34, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image tagging for Image:Justuploadingthisasatest53534.png

Thanks for uploading Image:Justuploadingthisasatest53534.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 18:06, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Randy Constan

You said in an edit summary that the description "effeminate" was cited on Randy Constan's website, but I can't find it. Can you cite it directly in the article (and correct the spelling)? Powers T 21:36, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

I think so. Or a word very similar. I think the pictures of him alone rule out "effiminate" as being original research or POV. I mean seriously.Anomo 10:29, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] angrygoatface

I haven't posted on 7chan. 7chan is for cockmonglers and people B& from 4chan.


AIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

Angrygoatface 14:46, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mind NOR and stuff

([6])

Google AdSense text-ads may be added to the right sidebar - these require javascript enabled to see

Google AdSense text-ads require javascript enabled to see anywhere.

The owner of the site also runs a blog at zone-mr.net

Nobody cares.

communication attempts from either do not get a response, although rare reports sometimes come in that the owner may answer just once.

This is original research. Bad.

So I reverted. Cheers. --logixoul 10:44, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Depending on pickiness, the entire thing is original research under how sometimes this counts as viewing a website mention in the article and putting down what it says rather than seeing what a media source says. The no communication answer is verifiable. Anomo 00:09, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
The no communication answer is verifiable if you email them and wait a week. That doesn't count as verifiable - verifying involves more than just looking at something. On the other hand a claim like "has ads" is verifiable directly by looking at the site. Therefore "has ads" and such is not original research - the site itself is a citation. --logixoul 17:01, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] {{lame}}

The unfortunate premature deletion of this template was indeed, lame. -- Malber (talk • contribs) 12:15, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes, but mine had (slightly) more lulz. -- Malber (talk • contribs) 20:52, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for nomination.

Thanks for the nomination, but I'm not presently interested in adminship. - Stephanie Daugherty (Triona) - Talk - Comment - 13:13, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] My RfA

I will accept. I do need to take some time to fill out the questionaire. I expect the lolicaust to be of epic proportions. Thank you. -- Malber (talk • contribs) 16:53, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Done, let the fun begin. -- Malber (talk • contribs) 20:36, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
BTW, thanks for the nomination, it was a lot of fun. I've closed it. User:Dina seemed to have a problem with my comments above. Feel free to nominate me again in six months. I think self noms are pretentious and I won't do it myself. -- Malber (talk • contribs) 14:35, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
What template did you use for your nomination notice on my talk page? I want to nominate someone. -- Malber (talk • contribs) 18:10, 9 October 2006 (UTC)
Go to WP:AFD see the how to nominate someone place and there's this form with a button for nominating someone else. Anomo 01:40, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] No u

I'm not a 4chan moderator anymore, and I'm afraid I can't launch an attack on WP:RS without the assistance of other admins. Ashibaka tock 23:39, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Jimbo in India

Your message of 11.10.06 to me:I think you should upload those pics as GDFL on Wikipedia or at least one maybe as it would look good on Jimbo's userpage.

Nice meeting you. In fact, the pictures are not in my blog, and were taken by another participants. I will request him to upload some of them under GFDL. I also thank you for your kind words. --Bhadani 02:52, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Me, the cabal

LOL!! Thank you. SlimVirgin (talk) 05:12, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RfB With A Smile :)

      

05:12, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Concerning Habbo

Anomo, can you tell me the date of the first raid or around when /b/ first noticed or started entering habbo? I have have found a very valuable source that would depend on when 4chan first started growing its presence on Habbo. (and I mean earliest; not necessarily the first major raid...didn't this "pool's closed" theme start as early as May?--Dch111 01:03, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your question on my RFA

Hi, just to let you know that I've answered your question on my RFA. You can read my answer in this diff, enjoy :) Cynical 07:42, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Serious business

Lulz. I've redirected it again to Internet. Interiot originally changed it to the records article and removed my speedy tag. It'll be interesting to see what happens now. By the way, I also created Serious fucking business, but it was deleted twice and salted by User:Journalist out of process.

Asking about Review and Truth would be fun. IAR and SNOW has caused a stir in a few nominations. I'd like to see what would happen if you asked about ED. —Malber (talk • contribs) 12:11, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WP:RFA/Cynical

Thank you for contributing to my RFA. Unfortunately it failed (final tally 26/17/3). As a result of the concerns raised in my RFA, I intend to undergo coaching, get involved in the welcoming committee and try to further improve the quality of my contributions to AFD and RFA. All the best. Cynical 14:58, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/MONGO

This case is now closed and the results have been published at the link above.

PrivateEditor (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log)and Rootology (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log) are banned indefinitely from Wikipedia. No action is taken against MONGO for any excessive zeal he has displayed. Links to Encyclopædia Dramatica may be removed wherever found on Wikipedia as may material imported from it. Users who insert links to Encyclopædia Dramatica or who copy material from it here may be blocked for an appropriate period of time. Care should be taken to warn naive users before blocking. Strong penalties may be applied to those linking to or importing material which harasses other users.

For the Arbitration Committee. Arbitration Committee Clerk, FloNight 03:29, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Hoax

This is a serious template. Please refrain from adding humorous links. Thank you. —David Levy 02:40, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Other people have done stuff in the history. I thought truthiness better defines what hoax is. Anomo 02:42, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
Yes, someone previously inserted this joke, and it was reverted. As I assume you're aware, "truthiness" is a satirical term popularized by comedian Stephen Colbert of the television program The Colbert Report. It is not a mainstream word suitable for this purpose. —David Levy 02:59, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] My RfA

Hey Anomo,

I just wanted to thank you for your support in my recent request for adminship, which passed unanimously with a final tally of 38/0/0. I appreciate your trust, and will do my best to uphold it. Don't hesitate to let me know if you ever need anything. — TKD::Talk 05:47, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User:Smeelgova

What happened to Smeelgova's talk page?? How did it get blanked out and all history removed too? wikipediatrix 21:52, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Who knows. I just saw someone with a blank talk page and welcomed them. Odd, though that the person has been around for a while. I just figured nobody bothered welcoming them. Anomo 21:55, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Stickam

Hi Anomo. I noticed you asked on DragonflySixtyseven's talk page about Stickam. Did you ever get a response, or come across any explanation for the deletion of the article? A bit iffy 04:45, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

Never a response. It was deleted due to AFD while I was reading it. I wanted to see the history for something and now I forgot! Anomo 06:04, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
Ah, sorry about that. Things were a bit busy, and you slipped my mind. In response to your question about was there anything decent about it: no. No, there wasn't. It was pure spam, through and through. There was nothing on the page that was not in the "About Stickam" page on their website. Go read that if you want. DS 23:47, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Apologies

I must have missed your message the first time around. My apologies.

About your query, I'm currently not entirely comfortable with cutting and pasting deleted histories, so if you are still curious about it, I'd suggest asking another administrator. I haven't seen this happen too often on Wikipedia to feel good about doing it yet.

However, here's a reasonable compromise I've seen someone else do for an article like this - the article On Wheels has 5 deleted edits. The first, by an registered account with a single edit to the article, essentially creating a list. The second is an AfD nomination, again by an account with a single edit. The third, is another single edit account for vandalism. The fourth, is a reversion by an administrator. The final edit is a bot edit to update the AfD tag. --HappyCamper 04:05, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

Yup. You nailed it. --HappyCamper 04:17, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] self portrait

That would be kind of full of myself to do that. Besisdes I don't think I am any more representative of the whole class of people than any other individual. --Hfarmer 03:04, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Why's it matter? Your picture is just an example, not a representation. Draw a picture if you want. Anomo 03:06, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Last Measure

Thanks for letting me know --Justanother 14:39, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Bebacks

Thanks for the note. The Beback clan is growing. In addition to user:Willy Beback there's also User:WillNotBeBack. Those two are not the most productive members of the family, as they've only made a few edits each. Despite my warm welcome to each neither has replied. Hmmm. PS - I archive monthly, which barely seems often enough though it does keep the archives tidy. Maybe I should archive more frequently. Cheers, -Will Beback 06:38, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RFA Thanks

Thanks!
Thanks for your input on my (nearly recent) Request for adminship, which regretfully achived no consensus, with votes of 68/28/2. I am grateful for the input received, both positive and in opposition, and I'd like to thank you for your participation.
Georgewilliamherbert 05:51, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hillarious user page

I loved it. ★MESSEDROCKER★ 05:53, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

I love your userpage bro! Check out my userpage, tell me what you think!! Cocunuthead 04:35, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

I was bored and I stumbled onto the WP:AN where I read about Ryulong, then I started looking at his contributions, which lead me here, where I see that he saw it fit to edit your user page without your knowledge. Perhaps you should drop him a note on his user page about WP:CIVIL, or consider commenting at the WP:AN thread. Oh, I love your user page too! Vampyragurl 20:55, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Ryulong has ALWAYS done that. I saw someone asking for help with abuse on Wikipedia's IRC channel something about ops abusing their power and also ops were doing denial of service attacks and Ryulong and others blanked it out again and again. So of course it ended up on wikipediareview.com and several websites because Wikipedia chose to hide the issue. Somebody did that was Blu Aardvark on my talk page and Blu Aardvark went crazy thinking I couldn't see it (when I did) and I thought that was funny (Blu Aardvark is a funny angry person) so I left it alone. Anomo 21:47, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Kicking them while they're down

I've not heard of this policy and would be most grateful if you could direct me to it. - Samsara (talk • contribs) 13:11, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Stickam

Remember how, last month, you asked me for the text of the deleted article on Stickam? A non-spam version has finally been created. DS 14:02, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ...

Hi, sir, thanks for your suggestion, I'll update my website soon and try that extension again. I just wonder if I should contact with the website service provider for them to help me to gain a shorter URL? And do you know how to realize the edit bar in this website? I mean it provides more tools than that default version?--Test1124 02:00, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

You installed mediawiki yet you don't know the difference between a userpage and a talk page? Anomo 04:41, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Can'tStandYa

The main problem with Can'tStandYa is edit warring and his addiction to sockpuppets. I think I'd convinced him to stick with his IP address, user:155.84.57.253, at one point but then some admins didn't like the way he was editing blocked that account so now he's back to puppetry. For more (though somewhat old) information see Wikipedia:Long term abuse#Shran/CantStandYa. I don't recall that he was especially involved in plagiarism. Are you thinking of user:Primetime? -Will Beback · † · 06:57, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Plagiarism and copyright violations are similar but distinct transgressions. Primetime was guilty of both. Plagiarism is claiming the words or ideas of another as your own. Even a single phrase, a set of research, or an idea can be plagiarized, even if the material is in the public domain. Copyvios involve taking the expression that belongs to another and using it for commercial benefit (or impacting their ability to use it commercially. Copyright laws often have a "fair use" exemption that allow small quotations of a piece for critical purposes. Wikipedia gets tons of copyvios, by people who innocently think they can copy material from other websites. But it's pretty rare to get guys who actually claim to have written it themselves.
The bottom line is that there is no easy way to de-plagiarize copied text other than using the magic words, "this material is copied from ..." Primetime refused to ever do that, always insisting he was the author even when caught red-handed. We've never been able to determine his motives. On the one hand he claims to be doing it to help Wikipedia. On the other hand he's regularly condemned Wikipedia as a horrible project while idolizing the Encyclopedia Britannica and other print encyclopedias. Just recentluy he was found uploading pictures to the Wikicommons claiming that he'd taken them himself, pictures which have been found on sites like, you guessed it, EB.
As for taking copyrighted material and converting it to usable material the rules are much more lax, especially for text. Text that was fully re-written would probably be acceptable, even if it parrots the ideas and research of another writer. Just changing a few words wouldn't be sufficient. Does that answer your question? -Will Beback · † · 07:30, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WOTTA Violation!

OMG! You are violating WP:WOTTA!

Keep up the terrible work! :-P

Kim Bruning 22:36, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] re: ArbCom Questions for Paul August

Hi Anomo. I've answered your questions. Thanks for asking. Paul August ☎ 21:58, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

On a side note - desysopings by the arbcom are at an all time high so I think they are prepared to come down on misbehaving admins. --Spartaz 22:45, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Warning

This is to warn you not to vandalise my userpage. I don't find you interesting at all. NKH 17:41, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

You didn't have a userpage, so I made a simple one with a pic of Martin Luther and Martin Luther King Jr. to show an oddity of names--one is racist and the other is anti-racism. By the way your sole contributions are to complain on Jimbo's talk page about racism and have it removed as a personal attack.
17:45, 3 December 2006 (hist) (diff) User talk:Jimbo Wales (→Racism) (top) 
17:41, 3 December 2006 (hist) (diff) User talk:Anomo (top) 
17:37, 3 December 2006 (hist) (diff) User talk:Jimbo Wales (→Racism) 
17:37, 3 December 2006 (hist) (diff) User talk:Jimbo Wales (→Racism) 
17:31, 3 December 2006 (hist) (diff) User talk:Jimbo Wales (==Racism==) 
17:22, 3 December 2006 (hist) (diff) User talk:Persian Poet Gal 
17:13, 3 December 2006 (hist) (diff) User:NKH (←Blanked the page) (top) 
22:41, 1 December 2006 (hist) (diff) User talk:Jimbo Wales (==Racism==)

17:51, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

--removing flame war (see this diff)00:02, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Regarding the edit mentioned above, I just noticed it in User:NKH user page history. It is considered vandalism regardless of User:NKH recent contributions. Please remember that we must all stay cool when the editing gets hot under any edit dispute circumstances.¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 00:02, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

He had no user page. I made him a creative one. He just didn't like it. That's not vandalism. But I believe blanking talk comments is. I also I think I had reached an agreement and understanding with him, which you erased. Anomo 00:49, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Mostly the conversation after the initial first two comments was leading more along the lines of flame warring; which is usually removed from talk pages (see WP:RPA). Just try not to create/edit userpages in a way which vandalizes the content or adds content which is vandalism please. Thank you.¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 01:07, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
If you read my removed edit, I explain how I thought I was making an interesting thing considering NKH's battle for racial equality. And I thought my "you speak in riddles!" helped calm him immensely. Anomo 01:20, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Note

Saw a comment of yours in an AfD, just letting you know that SchmuckyTheCat is by no means a furry. I wouldn't bother (you may have even heard this already), but he's expressed in the past it's insulting to say so, so I thought I'd let you know. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.231.130.203 (talk • contribs) 07:46, 4 December 2006 (UTC).

Oh, sorry. It said on his website, Encyclopedia Dramatica, that he was and because he's a sysop there and left it... so I figured it was true. Anomo 13:31, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Your neutral ArbCom votes

Hello. Because the ArbCom votes do not make provision for neutral voting (only support or oppose), I have shifted your neutral vote to the discussion pages of the respective individual vote pages, where all discussion other than questions to the candidate should go. Sorry if this is an inconvenience to you. - Mark 14:51, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I saw somebody did that and so I did the rest later. My main mess-up was I put an oppose vote for a candidate that I meant to put on another candidates voting page and so I erased it and I don't know if someone's going to be all like "leave it and strike it out" but I don't want that. Anomo 15:01, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Questions

All of them have now been answered here. Thanks.Voice-of-All 16:16, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Query

Perhaps I have misunderstood your questions, but it is obvious to me that admins can abuse their power and that if/when this happens it should be dealt with firmly. For instance, I have stated among my responses that "one policy that I would like adopted relates to administrator accountability ... It states that any admin who engages in wheel warring ... or edit warring on a protected page, is immediately demoted without prejudice, while it is decided how to further deal with this person."

I have simply not seen the frequent practices you refer to (of deleting the pages to pester blocked people, or protecting pages to stifle discussion), but I fully agree that such is bad practice. In fact, regardless of whether or not I become an arbiter, please do point out to me any such pages deleted or protected, and I'd be happy to investigate and undo any deletions-to-pester and protections-to-stifle. (Radiant) 16:27, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] My RfA

Hi. Thank you for voting in my RfA. Just to let you know that I have replied to your concerns. Thanks again. Wikiwoohoo 18:49, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] My RfA Nomination

I'm flattered that you thought to nominate me! However, at this time, I feel I must decline. Due to my lack of participation in things like XfD and RfAs, I'm almost certain the nomination would fail. Thank you for the thought! Best, Hagerman(talk) 01:54, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../a/n/o/User_talk%7EAnomo_Archive1_b02a.html"