User talk:Dave

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Welcome to Wikipedia!!!

Hello Dave! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. You may also push the signature button located above the edit window. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. This is considered an important guideline in Wikipedia. Even a short summary is better than no summary. Below are some recommended guidelines to facilitate your involvement. Happy Editing! --  Netsnipe  ►  05:46, 11 September 2006 (UTC) Getting Started Wikipedia Tutorial How to edit a page The five pillars of Wikipedia Manual of Style Be bold in editing How to write a great article WikiProjects Getting your info out there Cite your sources Neutral Point of View Point of View Verifiability Uploading images Image use policy Getting more Wikipedia rules Policy Library Getting Help New contributors' help page Where to ask a question Help Desk Frequently Asked Questions Getting along Wikiquette Civility Sign your posts Wikipedians Conflict resolution Getting technical Cleaning up vandalism Pages needing attention Peer review Utilities Village pump

[edit] Unblock request

{{unblock|Still blocked: Your user name or IP address has been blocked from editing. You were blocked by Doc glasgow for the following reason (see our blocking policy): Your username has been blocked indefinitely because it is either inflammatory, deliberately confusing, designed to impersonate legitimate users... ... Note that this can only be done before you create the new one. For more information, please visit Wikipedia:Changing username. In many cases (especially if your account has few or no edits), it is a lot easier to create a new account. Your IP address is 84.9.83.105.}}

P.S. There's no evidence of me being blocked in the block log ???? Dave 11:26, 11 September 2006 (UTC).

It's possibly collateral damage from annother persons block. thanks/Fenton, Matthew Lexic Dark 52278 Alpha 771 12:28, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm 95% certain that it's to do with one of the accounts I created before getting this username. The accounts were Reformed Vandal, RVTA, RVTAB, and R.V. Temp Account.

Ah ha! That was the information we needed. Having searched on each of those old accounts, I eventually found an autoblock. I've lifted it. In theory, you should now be able to edit. Shout, using {{unblock}} again, if I'm proved wrong. Happy editing! ➨ ЯEDVERS 18:55, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

{{unblock|Nope, still blocked I'm afraid - same message as above.}}

Everything I can think of at the moment has been done. Do you want to give it another try - attempt to edit a page that certainly isn't protected, like User talk:Redvers - drop me a note and just say "I'm saying hello, like you asked" or something at the bottom of the page (a limerick would even do). If you can't do that, quickly copy-and-paste the entire text you see that explains why you can't edit.

Paste it here, and drop another {{unblock}} on the page. There might be a clue to help. We'll get there, and sorry for the time this is taking. People are trying to sort this! :o) ➨ ЯEDVERS 20:12, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Could this be to do with the way that, as I understand it, this account is Reformed Vandal renamed, rather than being a brand new account? I think the message I'm getting is the same as I got with Reformed Vandal. Message follows: Dave 20:20, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Your user name or IP address has been blocked from editing. You were blocked by Doc glasgow for the following reason (see our blocking policy):

Your username has been blocked indefinitely because it is either inflammatory, deliberately confusing, designed to impersonate legitimate users, or otherwise inappropriate (see our blocking policy for more information). You are encouraged to create a new account and contribute to Wikipedia under a more appropriate username, and in a constructive manner. See Wikipedia:Username for guidance on selecting an appropriate username. You may also edit Wikipedia without creating an account. You are not allowed to edit Wikipedia under an inappropriate username. If you would like to discuss the block, you may edit your talk page or email the administrator who blocked you.

Due to Wikipedia's mechanism for enforcing name changes, your IP address may be temporarily blocked. Unless you have also been engaging in vandalism or impersonation of another user, we will remove that block as soon as possible — if this doesn't happen within an hour or so, please email an administrator and explain the situation (see the list of administrators).

If you want to keep the contributions from your old account for your new username, please follow these directions: (1) Add {{unblock-un}} to your user talk page. This is possible because even when you are blocked, you can still edit your own talk page. (2) Soon, an admin may come to unblock you. (3) You will have 24 hours since the unblock to file a request on Wikipedia:Changing username before you may be re-blocked. Note that this can only be done before you create the new one. For more information, please visit Wikipedia:Changing username. In many cases (especially if your account has few or no edits), it is a lot easier to create a new account.

Your IP address is 84.9.83.105.

I suspect you are correct, I've only seen it once before that a user got their account renamed whilst it was blocked and I tried everything to get that unblocked. Can't remember the outcome now, if we just suggested they get a new account or whatever. Really with only 5 edits you would have been far better off getting someone to undo the autoblocks, logging out and creating a new account. --pgk 20:24, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Sorry I undid another autoblock and unblocked the IP again. See if that helps. --pgk 20:25, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Still blocked atm. I didn't explicitly ask for an account rename, I just asked to be given this username (as it was previously taken by a non-user), and I think that for whatever reason it was easier to rename the r.v. account... Have you tried blocking me and then unblocking me? Dave 20:29, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes. This was a usurping of an old account, and that changes the variables. I have one more trick here, but I'll have to put you on your honor, Dave. I'm going to unblock User:Reformed Vandal to see if that works. I don't want to seem like I don't trust you, but that's not the point: can you promise me not to log-in to the old account? I'm protecting myself, not you :o) and edits from the old account would lead to both accounts being permablocked anyway. But I still need your word, for the sake of others. Thanks ➨ ЯEDVERS 20:32, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Yep, of course - I'm quite happy with this name ;) Dave 20:34, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I just unblocked it and released the other autoblocks. The old account can't be logged into as it doesn't exist anymore... --pgk 20:35, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Sorted, thanks guys - have a barnstar each! Dave 20:41, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Yay! Congrats! Wow, but that took some collective effort! Happy editing from now on! Oh, and one of these 2-a-penny "welcomes" to mark a new world for you!...

[edit] Welcome, Dave!

➨ ЯEDVERS 20:43, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Negative Syndicate

Thank you. I just fucked up when I created the article and I did not mention that it was an article split (or it was fictional). Ryūlóng 22:11, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] speedy tags

Hi Dave, I see you tagged Enervated for Speedy deletion. Unfortunately WP:NOT is not one of the criteria for speedy deletion. Please only tag articles for speedy deletion if they meet one of the criteria. I have converted your tag to a prod instead. Thanks, Gwernol 02:45, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Yep, I think I found out about prod tags a little bit after that, although I'll probably still use them incorrectly occasionally by accident. Cheers for the heads up! Dave 02:46, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Sure. Thanks for all the help fighting vandals and tagging bad articles. Best, Gwernol 02:49, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Praise for Dave

Just had to say that I loved this from the [Soundrive] edit summary so I had to preserve it here!

I see your prod and raise you a speedy - tis classic!! Lsjzl 01:04, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Shit

I have nominated your template/redirect, {{shit}}, for deletion. here. Please don't take offense. I understand the frustrations of new page patrolling and all the spam that gets put up, but I don't think something like this is really going to do anything but serve as a source of antagonism. There are other options for tagging articles for speedy-deletion. Irongargoyle 01:14, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Minor edits

Please read Help:Minor edit. For example, adding a whole new comment to an AfD or removing a paragraph of text are not minor edits. Do not mark them as such. —Centrx→talk • 22:27, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Spider-Man 3

Ocelot006 blatantly vandalized the film article with his edit, "There is also some speculation that Peter will have anal sex with Harry." In the future, be upfront and insert a "blatantvandal" warning template instead of a "test" warning template. --Erik 23:13, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Comment moved from User page

Comment moved from your user page. -- Gogo Dodo 23:32, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

dude, i am probably the biggest atreyu fan to talk to planet. i was just doing something to show my friend you could edit wiki's chill out. ill pwn anyone i want =D —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.76.153.211 (talk • contribs).

[edit] Report edit summary

Please be civil.. They will fix it when they see it, no need to use profanity and being uncivil. Havok (T/C/c) 23:57, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WP:AIV

This edit summary, however funny you find yourself, is not exactly appropriate. --ⁿɡ͡b Nick Boalch\^talk 23:57, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

If you really believe that 'CUNT CUNT MOTHERFUCKER TWAT SHIT' is an appropriate way of attracting an administrator's attention, I don't see much point in continuing a discussion. However, you should consider this a friendly warning about continuing with that kind of behaviour. --ⁿɡ͡b Nick Boalch\^talk 00:05, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Some thoughts on talking to children who edit Wikipedia

Hey Dave. A few weeks ago I witnessed an all-out edit war between a self-described 35 year old Wikipedian and an editor who (while I could not see anything totally indicating her age besides some child-like references to "going to school") gave me the overwhelming impression that she was probably an 11-13 year old girl. It got ugly (as things will when one bickers with children) and it made me pay closer attention to how adult Wikipedians (to me, anyone over the age of let's say around 16) interact with children. Anyway, this is in reference to your recent comments on User talk:Tom 2811. Basically, even though children can certainly be vandals, I do believe that assuming good faith is particularly important when interacting online with children. I mean, if Wikipedia existed when I was 13, I probably would have written a page about my own religion too. A kind or firm word would have taught me about how wikipedia works more quickly than mockery. Your comments were funny, but I read the exchange as being about a boy genuinely feeling attacked for creating his page. (I could be being a total softie here, but again WP:ASG). Teasing him isn't the way I would have approached it. Please let me know if you totally disagree and why. Cheers. Dina 17:34, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mr. Steak

Hello. I deprodded Mr. steak because I think it is notable. Mr. Steak is/was a substantial (if questionably tasteful) chain. There seems to be at least one other apparent reference to it at Langham Place. I also moved it to proper caps. ENeville 16:57, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] With regards to a recent edit

I really don't think that this was at all appropriate. Yes, the user is a vandal, but that doesn't give us permission to ignore WP:NPA. -- Merope ^Talk 19:08, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tagging {{db}}

Please read WP:CSD, it contains all the valid reasons for deleting a speedy. Not-Notable is not a valid speedy reason. The article Skewampus, is however speediable vie WP:CSD#A1. Just thought you might want to know, and keep up the good work with New Pages Patrol. —— Eagle (ask me for help) 19:43, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] VandalSniper

Thanks for applying to use VandalSniper! You have been approved. If have not already done so, you may find instructions to install VS on the project page.

As some of the libraries VandalSniper runs on are currently in transition, there have been a few issues reported with setup. At the moment, Linux is the most compatible platform for VS. If you have questions or problems, you may find help on the project page or its talk page. Please also feel free to contact me for help and I will do my best to assist you.

Thanks for becoming a part of one of Wikipedia's best new software tools! -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 22:41, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] factory farming

hey dave if you had looked around a bit more on the discussion, you would have seen that there is an ongoing discussion about changing the article. i'd prefer some input, rather than popping in and just putting a pov template in without even looking at what is going on. trueblood 19:06, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

heya Dave, I removed the NPOV template because you gave no specific reasons for it. I've read the article and it seems reasonably NPOV to me. Perhaps you'd care to suggest some specific changes that you feel would make the article more NPOV or even just make those changes. Barnaby dawson 09:06, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] I assume you were joking, but...

Please do not use words like "feminazi" to describe other editors--it could be construed as a personal attack. The user you addressed has a history of insulting other editors based on their gender (which is strictly against WP:NPA) and has been blocked accordingly. If you disagree with the block, you can address it on the administrators' notice board. (The relevant section is here.) -- Merope 15:53, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

I had assumed (and hoped) as much. I didn't take offense, so everything's cool. -- Merope 02:42, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Countersteering

I'm a farily experienced (motor)bike rider, and at very low speed, say walking pace, you do not countersteer (or at least it's optional), even to lean. Dave 04:23, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

How then do you create the necessary lean? -AndrewDressel 03:13, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

At the lowest speeds, you don't lean. Dave 17:01, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Then how do you counter the Centrifugal force? -AndrewDressel 19:54, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't see why it needs countering - tyre sidewalls should surely take it, as far as I know there's no reason why resultant force on the bike need be vertical (with respect to the bike). Dave

The reason the resultant force (sum of all forces) needs to be vertical with respect to the the bike (exactly coincident with the plane defined by the two wheel contact points and the combined center of mass of the bike and rider) is to keep the bike from falling over. I don't know what you mean by "tyre sidewalls should surely take it." -AndrewDressel 22:01, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

On reflection, as counter intuitive as it seems you must be right, as I can't see any other way there wouldn't be a resultant moment around the centre of mass. Dave 13:34, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Cool. Your intellectual honesty during our discussion has made it enjoyable. I think what trips us all up is how at lower and lower speeds the necessary but decreasing countersteering becomes overwhelmed by growing adjustments required simply to maintain balance. We are able to unconsciously take advantage of random, minute leans in the desired direction. I guess one could argue, in that case, that conscious countersteering becomes unnecessary. However, in the ideal case of well maintained balance, as I argued with you, there is not a point at which all countersteering become unnecessary. -AndrewDressel 18:20, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome to VandalProof!

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Dave! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. Prodego ^talk 15:58, 27 November 2006 (UTC)