User talk:Zsinj

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Talk Page Vandalism Count

Archives: January 2006, February 2006, March 2006, April-June 2006, July-August 2006

Contents 1 Talk Page Vandalism Count 2 CFD talk pages 3 Barnstar!! 4 Screw barnstars 5 Block 6 Deletion Review of Brody Ruckus 7 Facebook 8 141.151.86.197 9 User talk:62.189.193.28 blocked after my test 3 10 relayed unblock request from 62.189.193.28 11 AO block option 12 You Incorrectly Deleted My Article 13 Facebook 14 CSD I7 15 Regarding IP blocks 16 Torrent project impact assessment 17 Fair use rationale for Image:Vs-dec-pdp-1.jpg 18 Cuban bank note 19 Esperanza User Page Award 20 Reversion of Dracula edit 21 Jim Clark full protection 22 Facebook 23 Re: Your block of User:Kungfujesus 24 Reverting Vandalism On Userpage 25 Who Do You Think You Are? 26 Who Do You ThinkYou Are? 2 27 Johan Deprez 28 Embry-Riddle 29 Block after 1 vandalism?

[edit] CFD talk pages

Hello. I just noticed that you deleted some of the categories that I cleared out. Can you please also delete the associated talk pages that are currently redirected to the renames, or do I need to tag them for speedy deletion? Thanks. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 21:46, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for zapping those. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 23:25, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar!!

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		I award you this barnstar for your excellent work reverting vandalism, great work, you really deserve it! Jam01 00:46, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Screw barnstars

Here's a cookie!

		Administrative cookie
		For your oustanding efforts in dealing with the block evading vandal, I, Ryulong, bestow upon Zsinj a cookie. Ryūlóng 02:09, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Block

Go for it. But be sure to check out Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/3RR#User:213.249.155.239_reported_by_User:Crossmr_.28Result:24_hours.29 first. I felt like a block was in order, but I didn't see the entire pattern of vandalism (I really just blocked for the page blanking yesterday). alphaChimp^(talk) 01:52, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

If you want the information we've derived here, we have our suspicions that every IP involved with the article in the last little while is very likely the same individual, except this one 69.232.46.20 (talk • contribs). No idea who this is, but they've shown up twice in the last couple days and reverted the vandalism. All the socks are here Category:Wikipedia_sockpuppets_of_Dipslime. As well as brief MO. Everything else is obvious in the history and talk page.--Crossmr 02:00, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion Review of Brody Ruckus

First of all, I could really care less about Brody Ruckus. I just feel like Wikipedia is a cool place for those random little facts that you can't really find any good information on anywhere else.

And as for Mulliken, MI... I didn't actually vandalize anything because everything I posted was true. I admit it was out of line but truth be told the population breakdown I actually knew exactly who was of what race. OBVIOUSLY out of line but Mulliken being such a small town that I have been in for all my life I was thinking about the population and such and it just made me laugh and I did that out of impulse. I apologize for that and do not intend to do anything of the sort again. Keeping in mind that I did add the truthful fact that Robert G. Piercefield is the "president" and I kid you not that is what he is considered in the small Village of Mulliken.

Please accept my apology and the only reason I posted anything about Brody Ruckus is because I thought input was welcome. If it is not please let me know and I will not give my input on deletions in the future.

In the meantime, I am concerned about the Genetical Engineering topic which is in dire need of a face lift and such. There is some definite vandalism and misinformation going on there, being that it is a controversial topic.

Once again I apoligize for my past and I was only attempting to undue the past by getting involved in the present. I am sorry if I have dont something wrong in the process. Thank you for you time. VroomanGL 00:52, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Facebook

Hey Zsinj. Just responding to your Facebook message for confirmation. :) --ⁿɡ͡b Nick Boalch\^talk 08:53, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 141.151.86.197

Hello. I was glad to see that you blocked this IP vandal as I had a request at AIV rejected about 8 hours earlier on this same user, but I am confused as to what led you to do so. I probably shouldn't look a gift horse in the mouth or run afoul of WP:BEANS, but I don't see you in the edit history of the AIV page and I don't see anyone notifying you on your talk page. Can you please enlighten me? Thanks --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 03:51, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi, again. User:141.151.86.197 returned from their block and started back where they left off. Can we go for a longer block? --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 04:16, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User talk:62.189.193.28 blocked after my test 3

Hi, the test 3 I gave may have been an over-reaction, and by the tone of his note on my talk, this may nt be the same person that was vandalising Robbie Williams. Could you look at the War on Terror edits and see if you think they were vandalism? This may be an innocent bystander that happens to share IP's with someone else. Cheers, Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 16:21, 20 September 2006 (UTC) Thanks for your note. I feel bad though if a good-faith editor got blocked 'cause I was trigger happy with a warning.Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 16:29, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] relayed unblock request from 62.189.193.28

Hi, I had a request from another user to unblock User_talk:62.189.193.28. I just assumed the block had expired by now, but I left an unblock request in case. Thanks. Cheers, :) Dlohcierekim 18:29, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AO block option

• 2006-09-23T10:59:50 Zsinj (Talk | contribs | block) unblocked Jade59 (contribs) (unblock to change block attributes to AO)

Friendly reminder... AO and AC work only for IP blocks. ;) Awyong Jeffrey Mordecai Salleh 03:03, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] You Incorrectly Deleted My Article

You innappropriately deleted and blocked my attempted new encyclopedic entry "Gabrielangel". You cited it as a vanity article. It is not a vanity article, as it was not about myself nor does it mince facts. This story was carefully reported and is 100% the truth and no fluff. It was also about a significant subject, and I clearly explained the significance of the article. The topic of the matter is very similar to Leeroy Jenkins, which is an article on wikipedia. I would appreciate it in the future if you would follow the guidelines for administrators for deleting articles. Also, it's only proper respect to contact someone personally and clarify for them why you deleted an article, or tell them how they can improve it. I would appreciate it if you would follow the guidelines in the future and discontinue your harassment of me. I have recorded the details of this event and am prepared to bring it to higher attention if you continue to harass me. -GamingScholar, 9-22-06

[edit] Facebook

I just searched Facebook to see what/how many WP groups there were. I discovered a shit load, but none of them seemed to fit my level of involvement. I was then about to create and admins' group but thought I should check first. I see that it has been recently created. I have sent a join request. I'll pimp it in the admin channel on irc.—WAvegetarian•(talk) 05:05, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Hey there, I am the Keegan that requested to join. Peterzell, admin here on the en. only. Verifyin' for ya! Teke^(talk) 03:21, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

I second this response. :D My name there is Ryan Wetherell, of course. --Merovingian - Talk 07:31, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] CSD I7

As CSD I7 is not so clear cut I would be interested which images I tagged, that weren't/aren't such (in which categories were they...?). This would help my work on such images. Thanks, feydey 13:21, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

For Newspaper covers and CSD I7 see this: Template_talk:Newspapercover. feydey 13:24, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding IP blocks

From [1], if an IP has only vandalism contributions or is otherwise evidently rather static, it can be blocked for long amounts of time. In this case, using WHOIS, it is the IP of a high school; in such cases, I usually block anon only with a block message that the person should create an account at home and they can use it at school (or just allow account creation on the IP), and then to block it for a relatively long period of time. —Centrx→talk • 06:12, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Torrent project impact assessment

Metrics on our project performance are pretty hard to come up with, but I have taken a run at it. If your BitTorrent client keep tracks of file-specific accumulated upload, please tell it here. -- Paleorthid 16:16, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Vs-dec-pdp-1.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Vs-dec-pdp-1.jpg. The image description page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 14:12, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cuban bank note

Well, I have no idea whether or not Cuban currency is protected by copyright. (And you were probably right; if it can't be verified that the public domain claim is correct, it's better to get rid of it.) - Mike Rosoft 18:30, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Esperanza User Page Award

[edit] Reversion of Dracula edit

Hello. Please excuse the mistakes in formatting that I'm bound to make; I joined yesterday and don't yet know the ropes, despite having read many pages of instructions and guidelines.

You undid almost immediately the minor changes I made to early portions of the Dracula article. Why? I see you're on an antivandalism squad. I'm sure this work is valuable, but my changes weren't vandalism. "Dracula" had comma errors (in both directions), which are now restored. Before finding out that this batch of changes had vanished, I worked on much of the rest of the article, doing the same kind of thing. You can trust me at it. I have 30 years of editorial experience, and I simply made line-editing corrections without touching the content.

"Dracula" is an important article, the kind that's likely to get many views. Removing errors in punctuation and so forth makes it a better model of prose; education doesn't end with English class, and people get a sense of how to write from what they read. Now, however, I wonder whether any further efforts of this kind are worthwhile. Cognita 03:20, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jim Clark full protection

• This edit war is an ongoing sockpuppet case; the latest open case is at Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Pflanzgarten (4th). The dispute started in June, and Pflanzgarten got his first short block, for 3RR, in September. Each new identity gets indef blocked for block evasion, and the puppetmaster is on a new one month block—he will be welcome if he discusses his concerns on the Talk page when his block expires. Please block User:Lotus 48 —a single purpose account with an identical edit pattern to User:Pflanzgarten. Full protection will help maintain the existing article, but will discourage new editors.
• By the way, the existing editors (including me, who only added it to my watchlist a few weeks ago) are not paying attention to the 3RR—a large scale reversion with a misleading edit summary from a single use purpose account will get reverted on sight, and a WP:SSP report made.
• Perhaps it will help if we ask at admin noticeboard for a few admins to add Jim Clark to their watchlist. What do you think? --Hroðulf (or Hrothulf) (Talk) 10:48, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Facebook

Hello. I am Mark Ryan. I am an administrator here on the English Wikipedia, and also over at Meta. - Mark 01:36, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Your block of User:Kungfujesus

Hey, I just saw your block of User:Kungfujesus for username because I was looking at the same person (and report on AIV apparantly). I don't think a block is needed in this situation, as this user's only edits have been to his/her high school's article. I don't think that this person has the intention of impersonating Kungfuadam. What do you think? --Zsinj^Talk 17:12, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

If you look at WP:USERNAME you will see that one of the reasons for indef-blocking a username is the use of religious figures. The thought of an impersonation hadn't occurred to me. (aeropagitica) 17:49, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reverting Vandalism On Userpage

Thanks for the revert there. :) -WarthogDemon 04:21, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Who Do You Think You Are?

it says on your profile you are 19 years old so what little punk do you think you are deleting my only article on wikipedia?

it was true it was short (i would've added some to it)

in two words: why delete it?

i added it to wikipedia as i thought it would help people to find out more about it (isn't that the definition of an encyclopaedia?) i spent nearly 2 hours on it and was dead pleased when it was finished - it was my very first article

so if you're 19 years old and are a 'wiki-holic' (addicted to wiki) what do you do? you just destroy everyone else's work

did you even take the time to check any of it was true by going on the links i placed?

Why Don't You Think About All The People You Have Wrongly Deleted Their Articles?

I'd like it if you contacted me and explained your foolish actions

Have Some Consideration Please

Mfallen (page deleted: furboxes.com) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mfallen (talk • contribs) 15:22, 10 December 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Who Do You ThinkYou Are? 2

One other thing:

beacuase it has been deleted my article can no longer be seen in the sense of it took me hours to make and now that time has just been waste! i know you live in the sunshine state and love being totally irritating by sometimes not thinking about your actions

Have Some Consideration And Try To Contact Me On This Issue

Mfallen (deleted article: furboxes.com) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mfallen (talk • contribs) 15:33, 10 December 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Johan Deprez

I saw you dismissed the speedy delete on Johan Deprez. Just this note to let you know that I nominated the article on WP:AFD. Did you actually investigate the matter, earlier ? --Luxem 17:30, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Then I think you forgot the notability tag... --Luxem 18:01, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Because I really believe the subject doesn't merit a Wikipedia article, which therefor should be deleted. --Luxem 18:25, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Embry-Riddle

So wait, you go to Riddle? I work over at the IT building with Desktop Support. I'm going to try and help it's wiki out some so any input would be greatly appreciated. Longbowe 17:35, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I just noticed this. I started when I got bored over in the shop one day. Me being a Freshman doesn't give me much experience on campus, but I try. Longbowe 05:15, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I think this article helps out a lot with prospective students. Anything in particular you think should be removed? I say we just work on DB right now and I'll find a Prescott contact.Longbowe 05:42, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Ok, so I just found sources for all I could, as for the rest... I'm not exactly sure where they would actually be documented. Longbowe 06:15, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Block after 1 vandalism?

Hi, I noticed while looking through my watchlist that you indefinitely User:LOZ616 indefinitely with the reason "Vandalism-only account" (or something like that). Now, I don't condone vandalism, and replacing a page with something like that is not likely to ever lead to constructive contributions, but don't you think that was a little harsh for a first edit? Or were there some other circumstances here? I'm just curious, and I'm sure you have more important things to do. Bduddy 03:06, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Ah. Well, I somehow missed the other edit... FYI, the edit summary was automatic. I probably would have done the same thing, but I just wondered if there was something else. I'm quite curious (nosy), you know ;) Bduddy 03:18, 15 December 2006 (UTC)