User talk:Planetary Chaos

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This talk page is automatically archived by Werdnabot. Any sections older than (5) days are automatically archived to (User talk:Planetary Chaos/Archive/01). Sections without timestamps are not archived.

Contents 1 Thanks 2 Your sig 3 Necrotizing_fasciitis 4 St Crispin's School 5 FactChkr 6 War_of_1812 7 Works of Anthony Burgess 8 Vandalism: changing xB's to xiB's 9 RE: User:SGA SARVER 10 WP:AIAV 11 John Adams 12 Barbara Walters 13 In response to your revert on SpongeBob SquarePants 14 Talk American Pie 6 Fraternity Row 15 Tacna Region 16 who are you? 17 Adding sig 18 User:OCDpatient a sock? 19 Mea culpa 20 Edits to Princess Charming 21 Huh? 22 Thanks 23 Kerrang! 24 What? 25 Single-Party state 26 Uncategorized articles 27 PathConnect 28 Sorry 29 6th American Pie (RE) 30 Sock puppetry case notification 31 Sockpuppetry case 32 User:Megan787 33 Ockenbock 34 what did i do 35 Ararat arev 36 Gratitude! 37 Moers Festival 38 User talk:Disney World Live 39 Frogger 3D 40 username policy 41 Name change 42 Cunt 43 Note 44 Urban Hellraisers (CSI Episode) 45 Comparables comment 46 WP:AIV 47 NAVFAC Edit 48 Dinner 49 Sock puppet case 50 It wasn't a test!!! 51 The lack of contrast on your signature 52 I am not Vandalizing Anything! 53 why do you think i'm a vandalizer? 54 MR. Planetary Chaos... 55 Miss_Venezuela_2001 56 User:nerd32768 57 Sockpuppet Temporary Block 58 Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (dates and numbers) 59 RV Edit To My User Sub-Page 60 No Topic 61 User:Seraphimblade 62 Autoblocked 63 Welcome back

[edit] Thanks

I've been around for a while. There is still vandalism on the Giant Panda page and given its history it merits protection. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by ICECommander (talk • contribs) 18:44, 16 January 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Your sig

Can you "please" remove the image in your signature, as it is against WP:SIG. Thank you. Arjun 20:50, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Sure,didn't read that far into it at first,thanx.  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  21:00, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

No problem. :) Arjun 21:13, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Necrotizing_fasciitis

Thank you for experimenting with the page Necrotizing_fasciitis on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you may want to do. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. ...

Actually, it wasn't a test. It was an addition.

Why revert it? It was a useful discussion of the subject at hand. dougmc 22:55, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Rotten.com = spam link. No real notablity there.  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  22:57, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Says you. I've found the page to be one of the best discussions of the topic available anywhere. I know, rotten.com is a strange place to find useful information, but there it is. dougmc 15:10, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] St Crispin's School

Sorry I thought you were a vandal. The page has been plagued with vandals tonight. However, roll is the correct spelling (in British English anyway!) in this particular sense meaning the number of children on the school register or roll. Role has a completely different meaning. Thanks for helping out with the earlier vandalism. I hope they've now got the message! Dahliarose 23:18, 16 January 2007 (UTC) No problem,I didn't read it as a whole...silly me..that will teach me to read!  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  23:20, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] FactChkr

Thanks for the notice, but it's his talk page so I think it's acceptable for him to blank it if he wants. I don't have a problem with it since he didn't remove the tag from the image, that's probably the bigger deal. This way too we know that he actually saw the notice. But again, thanks for the notice. --MECU≈talk 18:18, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

• You are most welcome. -- Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  18:19, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] War_of_1812

To justify your deletion of what I have written, you need to do more than just call me names.

If you disagree with what has been written, or have concerns, then you should state your concerns so that we can have a civilized discussion.

I could simply replace what has been deleted, but let's instead discuss this. What points do you disagree with? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tingkai (talk • contribs) 18:44, 16 January 2007 (UTC).<!

Sweeping Changes as you did on War_of_1812 should be first discussed on the Talk:War_of_1812 pages first.  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  18:47, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Again, the question is: what points of my addition do you object?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tingkai (talk • contribs)

The correct place to discuss these changes is the above mentioned talk page and please sign your post by typing four tildes . Thank you. Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  19:03, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Works of Anthony Burgess

You're quite right to guard against vandalism on pages detailing specific works of Anthony Burgess.

However, the recent posts to Earthly Powers and The Kingdom of the Wicked are direct quotations from the authors' novels. The extracts may contain obscenities and may appear nonsensical, but so does much great literature (for example, Joyce's Finnegans Wake). The extracts were submitted in good faith.?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 145.246.240.14 (talk • contribs)

[edit] Vandalism: changing xB's to xiB's

I saw you issued several warnings to the user Sarenne, but s/he refuses to stop changing "MB," "GB," and "KB" on dozens of Wikipedia pages to "MiB," "GiB," and "KiB." No other sites reviewing computers, no manufacturer sites, and most importantly, no other encyclopedia sites, refer to MiB of RAM, or GiB of hard disk space; they all refer to MB of RAM and GB of hard drive space. These are the accepted units, the only units used, and the only units recognized by non-experts. Several of us have tried to ask him/her to stop, but s/he will not. Just thought I'd let you know. Thanks. Sjenkins7000 06:39, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RE: User:SGA SARVER

Yes I know he has one. I would suggest to place {{sockpuppet|Sgs SARVER}} on the sockpuppet page since there is no sockpuppet report filed on him yet and it is to early to do so. Keep up the good work.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 22:55, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok, thank you.  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  22:57, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:AIAV

While I appreciate your vandal fighting...

When you state that you a user has vandalized past the final warning on WP:AIAV, first ensure the following:

1. The user has been warned with a "final warning" template
2. The user has vandalized past this final warning (check timestamps of warnings, and check user contributions pages)
3. The user has been appropriately warned. Don't add a final warning vandalism template just for a simple test.

If all of the conditions have been met, then list the user at WP:AIAV. Otherwise, it's just a hassle for administrators to remove improper request. Thanks. If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 23:57, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough. A little extra time checking the facts and ensuring that the user has been appropriately warned and whatnot will go a long way in saving time for the admins, as well as being a little nicer to the newcomers. Cheers! If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 00:01, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] John Adams

Vandalism I was adding somthing that I believe and know have you ever read a 300+ page biography on Adams? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by CP TTD (talk • contribs) 19:32, 26 January 2007(UTC).

Please read WP:NPOV  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  19:35, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Barbara Walters

What are you talking about? it's not unhelpful?? I'm trying to spruce up the page with a photo. She's BARBARA WALTERS for crying out loud. She needs a picture! And I fixed the info box so it didn't say her ethniticty was Jewish. That's a religion. And in the talk section someone mentioned that we should add something about how 3 people called her a liar, so I added it. I am NOT vandalising anything! Ilovebabawawa 18:08, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

• What you entered was lier lier pants on fire (barbra walters) and together nude (judge judy) is concidered vandalism Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thank you.  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  18:13, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Removed trolling messages.  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  18:43, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] In response to your revert on SpongeBob SquarePants

Well, it's mentioned in the article Squidward Tentacles in the lead. If you look at the histories of both articles, you can see that other editors have reverted similar changes. Squirepants101 23:25, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

See.. Squid_on_Strike  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  23:47, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

OK, you may have a point, since Nick.com's description of Squidward says that he is a squid, but reliable sources, such as Time Magazine and MSN say that he's an octopus. Squirepants101 00:26, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

It's ok for Time and MSN to have their own POV.However it is their POV.As you have pointed out Nick says he's a squid (sponge bob's only network) and the episode that I pointed out says he's a squid. Now, who would you first believe, an out side news publication or the show it self?  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  18:58, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Talk American Pie 6 Fraternity Row

Dude their is no proof that their is a 6th movie so i proposed deletion —The preceding unsigned comment was added by GunSlinger360 (talk • contribs) 21:24, 28 January 2007 (UTC).

• Your comment as seen here diff is not accepted on Wikipedia and is concidered vandalism Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thank you.  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  21:37, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tacna Region

Thank you for your recent contribution to the mentioned article. However, the center of this dispute is not about the Peru and Chile historical rivalry, but rather of POV. The last Peruvian-Chilean dispute was already solved when it became know in both countries, and it involves more of a local dispute (the constitutionality of a Chilean law creating a new region) rather than an international dispute. Messhermit 01:11, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

There is no such thing a border dispute between both countries because each one recognizes the established frontier as demarked in the Treaty of Lima. This Treaty is recognized by International Law. The War of the Pacific ended in 1884 and the Treaty of Lima was signed in 1929, 40 years later. Stating that the current dispute can be directly related to (as of 2007) an incident that happened more than 150 years ago. Such a broad argument can be used to include the dispute that both countries have regarding Ceviche, Pisco and Soccer, just to name a few. Should we also include those ones in the article about the war? Messhermit 01:11, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Now, the inclusion of this "supposed territorial dispute" as presented by the other party involved in this controversy is merely based on POV. Chile doesn't have to ask whether it can create a new province or not in its own territory, and neither Peru can unilaterally declare part of the new Chilean XV Region as part of its territory. The Constitutional Tribunal of Chile already addressed that the law defining the borders of the Chilean XV Region was unconstitutional on the grounds that it didn't follow the proper procedure, and at any moment ordered or asked the Chilean Government to define its frontier with Peru. Messhermit 01:11, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Issues like the mentioned above can happen at any moment and had indeed happened before. It just need a badly written law (in either Peru or Chile) to once again invoke nationalism. The same can happen in Bolivia, and in many other parts around the world. Messhermit 01:11, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I will be waiting for your reply. Thanks Messhermit 01:11, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I totally agree.  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  01:14, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] who are you?

why are you reverting my things? and stop adding things on my page, I have Obsessive-compulsive disorder, but I am not paranoid! stop doing that! god. I don't want to take any more OCD medicine. thank you very much. they make me sick! --OCDpatient 20:41, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Adding sig

That was a little cheeky of me :-). But it was easily done and I didn't know if you'd ever visit the page again... WJBscribe 19:26, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I am monitoring that page.It seems(Imay not be correct) but the IP is two other registered user that has vandalized that page today. again, thanks.  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  19:32, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User:OCDpatient a sock?

Hi, I noticed you tagged User:OCDpatient as a suspected sock of User:SummerThunder. A quick glance at the contribs doesn't clarify what the evidence is. Is it because some of ST's socks also refer to "OCD"? OCDpatient mainly edits UCLA-related articles and it is not clear that any of his(?) edits are bad-faith, although he'll likely be blocked soon for the username. --Ginkgo100^talk 20:47, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Please see: Suspected_Wikipedia_sockpuppets_of_SummerThunder  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  20:53, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I did see the category, and there was no evidence there implicating OCDpatient as a sock save the username similarity to some of the established socks. Is there any other evidence? Also, please stop reverting OCDpatient's edits at least until it is clearly established he is actually a sock. --Ginkgo100^talk 20:55, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

sorry. here it is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Suspected_Wikipedia_sockpuppets_of_SummerThunder  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  20:57, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Last night the banned user was out of control several Admins had a hard time keeping up with him/her several new user names ect...  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  21:01, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

All right. But I still don't see any evidence that OCDpatient is a sock. The category is not evidence, since the name is automatically added to the category when you place the sockpuppet tag on the user page. --Ginkgo100^talk 21:05, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

see user name User:YouhaveOCD and these diffs... [diff] [diff] If you look into it further you will see User:OCDpatient is a sock. A banned sock.Also his/her first edit under this name starts off not so good.  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  21:21, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't see a problem with OCDpatient's first edit. Also, as far as I can tell, the other evidence you cite consists solely in the similarity of the user names. Many legitimate users have the misfortune to have names similar to those of abusive and even banned users; superficial similarity alone is not sufficient grounds to consider them socks. --Ginkgo100^talk 21:26, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Ok, even though the time fram is right I will leave it alone.There is another one that has not been blocked User:OCDkhoibitch  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  21:31, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Betacommand got it. Cheers! --Ginkgo100^talk 21:39, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your excellent detective work linking OCDpatient to SummerThunder. I greatly appreciate it.--Amerique ^dialectics 21:22, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, I still think there is another but im not sure.I am watching though.  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  21:33, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mea culpa

I found evidence for the sockpuppetry you first picked up on. I was trying to follow WP:AGF, but in this case you were right! Indef blocked. --Ginkgo100^talk 22:43, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

WOW,Thank you. Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  22:48, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Edits to Princess Charming

Why did you revert to unsourced version? 202.128.36.37 00:58, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Ref link does not work,please find another ref and add and cite the article.untill then the unsource tag MUST remain.  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  16:26, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't know if you have browser problems or what your specific problems are with the reference links but the reference links DO work. (I just tested them myself). I've since removed the unsourced tag. 202.128.36.37 23:31, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Why do you keep insisting that the page is "unsourced" and needs to be wikified when clearly it does not? Please state your reasons. 202.128.36.37 23:56, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Read edit summery of Princess Charming  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  23:58, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Check the discussion page. Leave a message if you still insist it's unsourced. 202.128.36.37 00:13, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I read your message and took you up on your offer. (It was very edifying to say the least.) Here's what I got:

4 Links normally to be avoided

4.1 Advertising and conflicts of interest

4.2 Sites requiring registration

4.3 Foreign-language links

4.4 Redirection sites

4.5 Rich media

The Malaya.com article is none of these so now I don't know why you referred me to the WP:External_links page. I don't even know why you consider my edits "vandalism". You can leave your message here or at the Princess Charming discussion page. 202.128.36.37 00:36, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Look, if you can't give a good reason for the "unsourced" and "wikify" tags, they'd have to be removed. They don't belong in the page. 202.128.36.37 00:58, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Removed WP:TROLL [diff]  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  01:15, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Please be careful about referring to good-faith contributors as vandals or trolls. The anon was trying to have a discussion with you about the edit, not trolling. I've replaced the reference; I don't see anything wrong with it, and it's better than a citation needed tag. -- Vary | Talk 01:33, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Vary, the diff above clearly is Troll and I do believe that the page may have been deleted in the past by XfD. Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  01:36, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

No, it isn't. The anon is clearly frustrated, but s/he is not trolling. Yes, the page was deleted in the past, but the deletion was overturned at Deletion Review after an improved version was written. -- Vary | Talk 01:41, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

I guess sock puppets has some thing to do with the article at hand.But nun..the..less I do see you are trying to AGF. Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  01:52, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Also,Vary,If you feel that the tags on the page could be removed then by all means go for it.  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  03:16, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Huh?

Eh, I Don't know what you're talking about. I haven't removed anything from such page...could you tell me what page you are talking about?--69.154.108.225 02:11, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

See [diff]  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  03:13, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thank you for reverting vandalism on my user page! :') Rockvee 18:35, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

You are most welcome!  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  19:45, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kerrang!

I did not remove the content, I replaced the files that somebody else removed and replaced with 'Kerrang sucks emo kids balls'. Sorry if there was any confusion, I was jus trying to help restore Wikipedia. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 91.84.23.241 (talk) 22:25, 2 February 2007 (UTC).

That had already been fixed,The part that you removed was Origins as seen in this [diff] here.  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  15:21, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What?

Can you please explain to me what the hell you're talking about in your message to me because I don't appreciate being harassed over vague accusations like that.Velps 18:16, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

My apologies,Anal sex is a highly vandalized page and when I seen the diff to your edit it look as though you blanked it. But also please consider being WP:Civil next time.Thank you. Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  18:51, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Single-Party state

My edit to the article "single-party state" has been deleted, with the edit summary "Nonsense". Please can you clarify why it was "nonsense", seeing as the point has already been discussed and proven on the article's talk page. Matt. P 23:03, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Nothing was "proven" on it's talk page.The article must comply with the WP:NPOV Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  23:18, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

I do not see how explaining information was breaking the neutral point of view policy, nor any wikipedia rules at that. If I had said "Single-party states are great places and really democratic", then it would break said rule. As it is, you have still not explained why it was "nonsense" and hence important information is missing from the article. Matt. P 09:56, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

== Revert one more time and I report ==

Got it?Postcard Cathy 18:00, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Uncategorized articles

An article in Category:Uncategorised albums is categorized. It's categorized in a subcategory of Category:Albums. It could be placed into a better category, but adding an "uncat" tag isn't helping matters any. Instead of edit warring with other users over tags, why don't you spend your time finding the appropriate categories? Kafziel ^Talk 18:25, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

I have a better Idea articles with Category:Uncategorised should be moved to the proper spelling of Category:Uncategorized don't you think?  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  18:30, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

That's the British English spelling. American English wins out on a lot of stuff on Wikipedia, so why not give a cookie to the Brits now and then? Kafziel ^Talk 18:36, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Just trying to follow the WP:MOS and rout out block evading IP's. Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  18:54, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

What block evading IPs? Fill me in and I'll look into it. Kafziel ^Talk 19:01, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm mystified why you keep uncategorizing schools and tagging them with uncategorized? What insane version of bizarro logic does that make sense in? Nardman1 18:47, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Though not blocked this IP is clearly the same as the one we are talking about now ( User:172.161.143.32 ) he may think he is blocked under User:172.128.196.220 but the edit style and comments are pretty much the same as User:SummerThunder see comments above about User:OCDpatient I have not been wrong yet.But then again, there is allways a first time being wrong on tracking Baned users.?  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  19:16, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, if you think a block is being evaded, you can always report the IPs at CheckUser to see if they are related. But I still don't see what that has to do with removing categories from articles. Kafziel ^Talk 19:53, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

"Any edits made in defiance of a ban may be reverted to enforce the ban, regardless of the merits of the edits themselves. As the banned user is not authorised to make those edits, there is no need to discuss them prior to reversion. Users are generally expected to refrain from reinstating any edits made by banned users. Users that nonetheless reinstate such edits take responsibility for their content by so doing."

"It is not possible to revert newly created pages, as there is nothing to revert to. Such pages may be speedily deleted. Any user can put a db ban to mark such a page."

"Wikipedians are not permitted to post or edit material at the direction of a banned user, an activity sometimes called "proxying." WP:BAN

as for the CheckUser in this case it is almost certainly not going to connect the dots If he is accualy using differant IP's and not spoofing them. Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  20:05, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Well that doesn't mean you can just go around guessing and reverting the edits of every IP address you see. And I'm sorry, but I still don't see what that has to do with uncategorizing articles. This is the edit that brought me here. It wasn't by an anonymous or blocked user. Kafziel ^Talk 20:12, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Thatedit I did revert wrongly Opps it happens.The other edits I feel VERY justified in my actions. Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  20:20, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

You're not justified unless there's proof that those IP addresses are sockpuppets. I can tell you from experience, it's pretty rare for a user to be blocked for vandalism and then return under another IP address to perform thankless tasks like properly categorizing articles. Lots of IPs are shared by multiple users. If the entire IP hasn't been blocked, you can't just revert everything that comes from there without proof. Use a little discretion. If the edit was good, let it go. This isn't about the letter of the law; it's about common sense. There's no need to damage articles just for the sake of principles. Kafziel ^Talk 20:32, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

See contribs for User:OCDPatient good edits but nuntheless s banned sock. Now check the contribs for the IP's in question definitely not shared. as per the "letter of the law" yes it is as you seem to want to feed this behavior.You may also want to try WP:AGF with me as I am trying to prevent banned users from who are bad hand good hand editors. Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  20:42, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

You don't seem to understand. This isn't about assuming good faith. I was referred here by a report at WP:AIV where a block request was issued for your activities. I assumed good faith by not blocking you on the spot.

I understand that your intentions are good. I need you to understand that you're being too heavy handed with the reverts. Blocks are not meant to be punishments; they're meant to curb bad behavior. If a blocked user is bound and determined to make good edits with an IP address, there's no point in hurting articles to try to stop him. Kafziel ^Talk 20:58, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

That I do understand,However A banned user is not the same as a blocked user. Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  21:02, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Bans should not be confused with blocking, a technical mechanism used to prevent an account or IP address from editing Wikipedia. While blocks are one mechanism used to enforce bans, they are most frequently used to deal with vandalism and violations of the three-revert rule. Blocks are not the only mechanism used to enforce bans. A ban is a social construct and does not, in itself, physically prevent the user from editing any page.WP:BAN.  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  21:04, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

What are you talking about? Yes, I know a blocked user is not the same as a banned user. I'm an administrator. Look, I'm kind of busy, so here's the bottom line: just say you're sorry to the person whose edit you incorrectly reverted, stop reverting other ones without proof of sockpuppetry, and you won't get blocked. Simple as that. Okay? Kafziel ^Talk 21:06, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

As for saying "sorry" I never say im sorry how ever I do apologize as I did above in my own way. As for you being an Admin.You are still fresh (new) and should take time out to learn what is going on rather then saying "I'm kind of busy" And making threats does not behoove you. Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  21:13, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

I didn't make a threat. I said I'm not going to block you. And you don't need to apologize to me; I was suggesting you apologize to the user whose edit you reverted, in the link I gave you above. That user asked me to block you. Since I'm not going to do that, because after talking it over I can see that your intentions are good, it wouldn't kill you to drop them a line to apologize for your mistake. It doesn't cost you anything. You'll gain a lot more respect for apologizing than you will for refusing to.

I've taken more time with you than any editor has since you've been on Wikipedia, and certainly more time than you took with any of the IP addresses whose contributions you reverted. But I do have other things to do (like blocking actual vandals) and I need you to understand that you can't just remove the contributions of others without a solid reason. I direct you once again to CheckUser. If you don't want to use it, and insist on reverting valid edits, your fate is in your hands. Kafziel ^Talk 21:20, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

See [diff] that user has not yet responded. And as I said before CheckUser is not wholly accurate and yes other admins as well as my self have been reverting The ban evading sock and or IP's with out CheckUser I think the case the number of Admins and number of users pretty well speak for them selves. For this particular case that is. Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  21:29, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Okay, then. Keep it up. Kafziel ^Talk 21:31, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you...even though it does seem to be rather sarcastic. Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  21:36, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] PathConnect

Thank you for your feedback. Sorry for removing the intent-to-remove tag. I am having some difficulty understanding the process here. If Wikipedia lists dozens of other websites and their descriptions/relevance...then why is PathConnect up for removal???

In my opinion the description is un-biased and based on fact, which I am happy to back up.

Any feedback/advice would be much appreciated.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Awescott (talk • contribs) 23:18, 8 February 2007(UTC).

[edit] Sorry

regarding my civility, you are correct... i'd been watching this page all day, and had no problem with people saying the new coaching hire was unofficial/unconfirmed. but an hour after the hire was confirmed, an hour after watching news conferance on television and even citing the team's website article on the wiki page, there were folks changing my "official" changes back to unconfirmed... so yeah, i blew a gasket.

i have yet to familiarize myself w/ the talk feature, where i could probably direct my disapproval more pointedly at the uninformed users. i intend to learn how to do so, and this communication with you is a start.

i am indeed sorry, thank you for the reminder planetary chaos.

yours, jam —The preceding unsigned comment was added by J.A.McCoy (talk • contribs) 00:18, 9 February 2007(UTC).

[edit] 6th American Pie (RE)

ok, i may be wrong but get a few links on the page otherwise anyone could delete it. i still think its fake, im sorry you cannot pursuade me. GunSlinger360 15:08, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sock puppetry case notification

[edit] Sockpuppetry case

You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Planetary Chaos for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me Please review me!} 22:53, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

Basically, what it looks like is that you are a sock of User:Piratesofsml, and in turn have engaged in sockpuppetry with the anonymous accounts listed in the report. However, remember that checkuser is not definitive, in terms of establishing or ruling out sockpuppetry. For example, someone could sock puppet through a proxy, and checkuser wouldn't show that. Conversely, if they ran a checkuser on me, they'd turn up everyone that's ever edited from my school, but those wouldn't be my sockpuppets.

The reason it looks that way is more due to patterns. Piratesofsml used anonymous IP's from those ranges (63. and 209.) to push his desired edits on matters of interest to him. Now, those same ranges show up on a matter you're interested in. Piratesofsml got into trouble over the Doberman Pinscher article and the religious beliefs of the Founding Fathers, and you've been involved with both of those too. Piratesofsml commonly made some unusual and idiosyncratic typing and punctuation errors, and you frequently make the same ones. Piratesofsml at one point stated he was from Virginia, and one of your userboxes shows the same. Put all together, it sure paints a picture that the two accounts are the same person. Of course, if you'd like to request a checkuser, you're welcome to do so. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me Please review me!} 21:12, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Coincidence at best.As you may or may not know looking at my contribs would place (connect)me with several IP's and many users.However,this is due to me being a Recent changes patroler.Yes Piratesofsml may be from Virginia and so am I but in the end that means nothing.As for the founding fathers.I ran across a POV edit in recent changes if you look at the diffs between Piratesofsml and my self you would see there is no connection. If you still want to believe that I am a sockpuppet of Pirates of sml or any IP,that's fine,I harbor no hard fellings over this mistake.In the end it is just coincidence.  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  21:25, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

I do RC too, and that can result in getting to a lot of things at once! I'm still a bit curious about the John Adams bit though-what was reverted there isn't obvious vandalism. (If it had been I wouldn't have even thought twice, everyone hopefully reverts vandalism if they find it.) If I am wrong, I certainly do apologize, but all the parallels-location, typos, interests (the Doberman article doesn't look like RC brought you to it), and all that just seems to add to it. You've got your piece in now, so it's up to admins now I guess. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me Please review me!} 22:45, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

This I just left at the evidence page. I was corrected labeling some things as being vandalism, that is why on my talk page you will see I used WP:NPOV now I just use the fact tag. And if I run across a vandle in rc that was on Thomas Jefferson and I corrected the edit would that make me Piratesofsml because the interest was there?No,I don't think so,but hey every one is entitled to their own beliefs.If you still think that I am Piratesofsml or any IP that you listed the go ahead and keep my User name here. But I would like you to fix this this mess. Thank You.  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  22:53, 12 February 2007 (UTC) Ok,about Doberman.I have an intrest in that article infact I have an intrest in alot of them look at my user page at the templets,I have altered them to reflect the names of my animals. My typing,no one is perfect.I have to say my typing is better now then two years ago. Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  22:58, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

I have got to go to the store,big ice storm on the way.I may be back on here tomorrow (if we don't loose power) to talk some more. Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  23:00, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User:Megan787

I thought it was just too early. 23.15 PM created user account, 23.49 PM made that userpage, 23.52 PM immediately a speedy delete tag. Let's wait what that user will do in the future. Garion96 (talk) 16:07, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Sounds fair enough. Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  16:09, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ockenbock

I don't really see a pattern between Ock and Summer Thunder, but why do you say so? (As far as I know, these guys really are Ockenbock, and they're just out to harass Metros). Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me Please review me!} 20:31, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

True,I don't see a pattern just the name similarities.When he came back as "I am Ockenbock" brought back memories of the socks that I was chasing awhile back. Most likely nothing to it.just wondering.  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  20:35, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] what did i do

i did not do any thing p.s whats belindas number —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 209.244.31.25 (talk) 01:48, 15 February 2007 (UTC).

You may need to speak with Natalie.That is the user who gave you the notice.Thank you. Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  18:13, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ararat arev

I don't think it's him. What makes you think so? Khoikhoi 19:24, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

You have delt with him in the past and the time and dates from last edit to current coincide with User:Ara88 on same page Azerbaijani peopleand the name is about the same.Weak evidence, yes but I have not been wrong yet. Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  19:31, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but the behavior doesn't match. Please let me know if he/she makes any Ararat arev-like edits though. Khoikhoi 19:34, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Ok. Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  19:35, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gratitude!

Thank-you for reverting the vandalism on my userpage! --Xnuala 14:54, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

• You are most welcome. Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  16:39, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Moers Festival

hi, I wrote the moers festival article. how do I add the source? I'm the author of the german article, too. living in moers and I visited the festival since 1977. beside my own knoweldge, my sources are old programm brochures and the history website. also know the origin founder and other involved people etc. help appreciated. thanks in advance. michael Michl 17:37, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

When the tags are added to the article they attract other users who may be more knowledgeable about that article then I am.Relax you have done a wonderful job in creating that article. Great job!. Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  17:42, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User talk:Disney World Live

I'd like to commend you for the text that you left on User talk:Disney World Live about the username. I think it's really well written and friendly. Great job! Philippe Beaudette 21:33, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

I can not take the credit for that.It is a templet from WP:RFCN.But thank you.  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  21:40, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Some notes on using these templates:

{{subst:UsernameConcern|reason for objection}}

{{subst:UsernameDiscussion}}

{{subst:UsernameAllowed}}

{{subst:ArticleConcern|article name|nature of concern}}

{{subst:ArticleDiscussion|article name}}

{{subst:ArticleResult|article name|outcome of RFC}}

{{subst:ConductConcern|nature of concern}}

{{subst:ConductDiscussion}}

{{subst:ConductResult|outcome of RFC}}

You can click on the bluelinks to see the template texts and instructions.

When you "subst:" these templates, they automagically include your signature (so you needn't add the four tildes). Subst'ing also makes the message text (rather than just the template tag) visible in edit mode so the user can reply point by point.

Filling in the "reason for objection" or "nature of concern" lets you specify just exactly what the problem is, in more detail than just "See WP:U", for instance "I think this name too closely resembles the obscene word 'xxxx' in the 'yyyy' language." With the "article" template, you must also enter the article name.

I hope you find these useful. -- Ben 22:23, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Very useful.Thank you. Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  22:49, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Frogger 3D

I did not vandalize User talk:71.204.234.53 He vandalized an article (frogger 3d) and I was warning him to stop.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Frogger_3D&diff=108521045&oldid=103576764

Please tell me, how telling him to stop along with quoting the place he vandalized, vandalism. You are out of your mind.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Napalm22 (talk • contribs) 02:21, 18 February 2007 (UTC).

It may not have been your intention, but you left this comment (the same comment the the IP left on Frogger 3D) "that is the gayest, most retarded game of the 20th century". It appeared to be vandalism. Please don't reederate the comments the IP vandles make on their talk pages. Also, if you could please sign your post, that would be much appreciated.Thank you. Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  16:31, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] username policy

i just want to take note that the username policy has undergone revision and reverts more than thrice or four times in just a single day, so i guess i can categorize that as an edit war. please feel free to join in the discussion at talk WP:U. thanks and more power. --RebSkii 18:12, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you,I just might do that.  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  18:13, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Name change

Apologies for the poorly chosen name. I have tried to change it and hopefully will be successful. I hope this resolves the matter. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Wikipediawonder (talk • contribs) 19:04, 18 February 2007 (UTC).

Don't worry about it. The policy is not yet set in stone so feel free and stop by to help us set the policy.Even the Admins are having a tough time getting it done. Every voice can have it's day and today might be your chance to have a say in how Wikipedia policy is written. 19:08, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cunt

nonsence? pull your head out of your ass. You obviously dont know the complete history behind the term cunt. I was in the military for 25 years, same as my father, my grandfather and my great grandfather. The term CUNT is for Cadets under Navel Training. It is a foul curse to be uttered by ranking officers to new cadets. "Did you see the new cunts they were dragging in today, what a sorry bunch they are"

But then I should know that Wikipedia wouldn't know fact from bullshit..—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Pantharen (talk • contribs) 20:08, 18 February 2007(UTC).

This diff says it all. Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  20:19, 18 February 2007 (UTC) http://www.arrse.co.uk/cpgn2/Forums/viewtopic/t=19577/start=105.html

[edit] Note

Please assume good faith; a random string of letters does not necessarily mean they are a vandal, which is what you suggested at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User names#Qazxswedcvfrtgb (talk • contribs). I've blocked plenty of vandalism-only accounts, and very few of them were a random string of letters. User:EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:14, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Planetary_Chaos"

I was AGF when I added the note to the users talk page rather then taking it to AVI. Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  20:23, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Saying that they're probably a vandal, when you have absolutely zero evidence to back up that claim, is not assuming good faith. EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:29, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

I didn't say "they're probably a vandal" but rather "may be a user that will vandle" but in anycase you are right and i will AGF. Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  20:32, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

That's all I ask. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:41, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Urban Hellraisers (CSI Episode)

I kinda made the page of urban hellraisers. i can't see what you edited. User:Darth Lemonhead 20:41, 18 February 2007 UTC

I added the merg tag. Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  20:48, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Comparables comment

Thanks for your comment. It may be the case that the agents function as appraisers, but, in doing so, they must be licenced (as appraisers AND as agents) and subject to rather different rules from "estimates of value" done by agents. That is why I basically talked about the two methods - one, less formal done by agents; the other, more specific and produced on a standard appraisal form, done by appraisers. I'll look and see if this needs expansion. Viva-Verdi 21:32, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

GREAT! Nice to see you have an open mind. Happy editing! Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  21:34, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:AIV

Thanks for your report to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Can you make sure you use edit summaries in the future? It makes it easier on us who have the page in our watchlist. Thanks! ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 23:57, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Sure I can do that.  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  23:58, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] NAVFAC Edit

I disagree with your removal of the historical information added to the NAVFAC page. You state that you suspected copyright infringement. While on the surface I agree it does appear to be an unlawful reposting of material from the NAVFAC website, such a reposting is in fact lawful because it was authored by a US Gov't employee as part of that employees lawful duties. This is expressly not guaranteed copyright protection and considered public domain.

I am not sure how it was written in an improper "voice". It is an accurate depiction of the history of this gov't agency and does not convey an opinion. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.205.203.232 (talk) 00:17, 19 February 2007 (UTC).

Please read welcome page.Thank you. Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  00:20, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dinner

[1] LOL, I have to admit that one made me laugh out loud. I never know what to expect when I log on here after being away for a bit. Thanks, Antandrus (talk) 05:19, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sock puppet case

I've been watching over the past week or so. I still think I was right in what was figured out, but you're also doing quite a bit of good. I propose we say, if I'm right, and you are Piratesofsml, you've come a long way and deserve another chance, and if not, you have my apologies. Fair enough? Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me Please review me!} 12:57, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough, but I am still not the dreaded Piratesofsml.  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  18:20, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

I almost forgot, Do you still think that I am those IP's? I have been watching out for them.  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  18:25, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] It wasn't a test!!!

<Planetary Chaos wrote> Thank you for experimenting with the page Homework on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you may want to do. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing...

It wasn't a test! I was adding useful info!! 75.33.203.237 19:00, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

You mean this diff this diff is not a test or nonsense? Ok it is sure vandalism and against Wikipedia policy Please do not make these kinds of edits thank you.  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  19:04, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

You know what!!! It was NOT a test!!! I put effort into that y'know!!! It was not vandalism or nonsense.

======Planetary Chaos just doesn't get it====== :-( (people today are so narrow-minded!!)

[edit] The lack of contrast on your signature

Greetings sorry to bother you but I caught a glimpse of your signature on WP:ANI. I'm not sure if you are aware of it but for some people (including myself) it is impossible to read your username without select-highlighting it. I would recommend that you make the two colors you're using on the primary part of your signature more contrasting. Thanks. (→Netscott) 23:11, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

I tried to make the lettering in Planetary Chaos white but failed, maybe you can help.  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  23:14, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

That should get it... thanks. (→Netscott) 23:17, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Ok, that was quik Thank you, very much appreciated great job!!  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  23:20, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome... now all you've got to do is adjust your preferences. Take it easy. (→Netscott) 23:21, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Done! :0)  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  23:22, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, looking good now... take it easy. ;-) (→Netscott) 23:24, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Looks alot better. Once gain, Thank you!  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  23:26, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I am not Vandalizing Anything!

I was fixing something on General Hospital and it disappeared. I fixed that too. All is well now! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Aharri29 (talk • contribs) 20:08, 20 February 2007 (UTC).

[edit] why do you think i'm a vandalizer?

I already fixed the mistake and even told you i hadn't meant to erase in the first place. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Aharri29 (talk • contribs) 20:11, 20 February 2007 (UTC).

When you remove the links after being told not to and you do it any way is vandalizing.Please do not remove the links.Thank you. Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  20:15, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

• Comment. Please sign your post using the 4 tildes. Thank you.  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  20:15, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] MR. Planetary Chaos...

I am sorry,

Someone took all the links of my Comings and Going section and I was trying to put them back. I am Writing the Bio's now for the new characters and they just couldn't wait an hour!

I don't know how i messed up C&G or how to fix it! But when I did it the firs time it was perfect!

I think its right now... Please check...

Don't mind the new pages i'm not done yet... I need an hour! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Aharri29 (talk • contribs) 20:24, 20 February 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Miss_Venezuela_2001

Hi - I've just AfD'd Miss_Venezuela_2001 thru Miss_Venezuela_2006. I notice you've speedied Miss_Venezuela_2000. Shall I push it onto the AfD stack or just leave it? EliminatorJR 00:41, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Keep tag on page and wait and see if the Admin who is doing sd does.  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  00:44, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User:nerd32768

is there any way to remove the user talk for my account (nerd32768)? i tried to delete it, but it shows that you put it back up.

if so, thanks..—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 209.169.76.202 (talk • contribs) 00:42, 21 February 2007(UTC).

The Administrative notice on the talk page must ramain. Please do not remove it.Thank you.  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  00:51, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sockpuppet Temporary Block

This block will expire in 1 month. -- Heligoland 18:29, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

OK, Blocked? I throw down my vandal fighting sword and walk away.I will be back after the block expires to delete my user page.Thanks to those who gave me good advice. As for the rest???  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  20:54, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Before I go, lets do this the right way first.

Please stand by as I contact the blocking admin. Sandstein 22:30, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Ok, Also a note that may or may not help. I have made over 1,500 edits and I have 645 mainspace edits and 1 article. Does this sound like a sock puppet or puppet master to which I am accused of? There are over 100 editors that have the same typing stylistic similarities if not over 1,000 so it is a little unfair to lable me a sock of any kind based on this.  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  22:35, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Sandstein, this is why I was labled a sock or sock master.here  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  22:43, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Planetary Chaos indicates that you have edited as a number of IPs to make repeated changes to binary prefixes in various articles, such as MB -> MiB. Can you please explain whether or not these changes are in keeping with the WP:MOS and, even if they are, why you think that this editing practice does not violate WP:SOCK#Avoiding_scrutiny_from_other_editors? Thanks, Sandstein 07:03, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

The main IP in question is User: 209.247.23.17 and this annon has edited some of the same articles (also in question) and page blanking while I was on RC patrol If you can look at some of these you will see I also reverted this annon's reverts and page blanking diff diff diff. I stand firm on this. I am not the annon. Yes I gave a user ( User:Sarenne) some vandal warnings only because I had at the time thought that user was being a vandal, I had at that time never herd of the new binary prefix so I felt that my reverts and my warnings to that user were justified. Once again I saw the reverts on RC patrol. After joining in on the discussion at the MoS talk page I saw that there was not going to be a consensus change and I suggested that if we are going to use the new prefix that all articles with MB and GB be changed to the new style. After that I was done with subject. I must reedirate that I am not the annon.

According to DNS and WHOIS the location of the annon is City: Storrs Mansfield, Connecticut [2] I live in Roanoke, Virginia. Thank you for your time, hopefully this can be worked out.  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  16:13, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

It sure don't feel like any one is WP:AGF with me on this even though I am asked to WP:AGF with other users I come into contact with on RC patrol.  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  19:53, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

It's my estimate from the checkuser evidence that, with a high likelihood of probability, you made the anonymous edits at issue. Please try to answer again. Few will think less of you if you admit you behaved wrongly and promise not to do it again. Sandstein 21:02, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

• • I saw this here, so thought I'd respond as well as I filed the case. Quite realistically, that bit on the IP addresses is still geographically very similar. Keep in mind RDNS is not geographically exact-I live near Seattle, but my IP actually will backtrace to Canada! (Get Google Canada when I bring up google.com, the whole bit.) That being said, the reason I (and several admins, apparently) believed you were using those anons as socks is for many reasons. The anons were obviously socks of someone (they claimed to be meatpuppets, but it's highly unlikely meatpuppets would've come in with advance knowledge of the undo button and warning templates), and regardless, ArbCom has already stated that if the only question is "is it meatpuppetry or sockpuppetry" it may be treated as sockpuppetry regardless. This being said, there are a lot of things that still indicate to me that you were the anons. If just one of the anons had exhibited your characteristic typing error, use of the undo button to revert, interest in binary prefixes, etc., etc., I wouldn't even have thought of the possibility it was you. The thing was, though, every one of those IP's did. They trace to the geographic region you say you're from. They share your interests. They share your typos. They share your choice of reverting method. They conveniently showed up where you would've on your own violated 3RR. They didn't participate in the prefix discussion, they just started off reverting (how'd they know?) They scrupulously followed 3RR, at least in letter if not in spirit (how'd brand new editors know that?) (And by the way, I didn't see you stop the binary-prefix reverts on this main account until after the sock case was filed.) I AGF'd for a long time with those anons, despite their edit warring and harassing. I suspected for a long time they were all controlled by the same person, but I did continue to deal with them as though that were not the case, because, well, you can't ignore AGF on a hunch. However, once a ton of pretty clear evidence came in, it's not a violation of AGF to bring up that evidence and ask others to review it. Several people did, several people agreed.

• • That being said, you really do seem to want to turn it around, and have been doing vandalfighting and the like. I hope that whether the one-month block remains or not, you continue that, you seem to be pretty good. It's your choice, but quite often, I've found that when a person takes responsibility for an error, agrees not to do it again, and has already shown clear signs of turning things around and contributing positively, the admins here do tend to be a pretty reasonable bunch. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me Please review me!} 21:12, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Sandstein and Seraphimblade, I honestly don't know what to say except I am not the annon's you are looking for. but if it means admitting to being those IP's in order to have the block lifted then ok. I (under duress) admit to being the *cough* annons. Wait, no scratch that. NO check user was done so this is all here say and circumstantial evidence. I will not ever bow down to some thing I did not do. I see the unblock will not be granted right?  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  21:24, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Also, Seraphimblade, If I am those IP's then how did I revert the IP 209.247.23.17 when that annon blanked your page? Im not feeling the love here.  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  21:37, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

That would be trivially easy to do. Look, I don't know why you're not "feeling the love", but despite being blocked and all that, no one wants you to pack up! As Sandstein and I have both said, if you'll just agree not to do it anymore (especially given that you stopped voluntarily before being blocked), there's a good chance your unblock would be granted, and no one will hold it against you-we've all done things we probably shouldn't have, I don't have an empty block log either. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me Please review me!} 21:58, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

First of all I didn't stop because I didn't START thats all there is to it! I will be back after the block to delet my user page. This is not how Wikipedians should treat each other.  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  22:04, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

• Conclusive? There was no check user done so it is not conclusive it is all here say and circumstantial evidence. HINT HAVE A CHECK USER DONE.  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  22:08, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

BTW, Seraphimblade, I know the answer to The mormons vis-a-vis death-do-us-part. :0)  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  22:16, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, I'm pretty sure I know the answer, it's sourcing that's been a pain (and that article's pretty contentious, so putting anything in without sourcing is pointless, it'll get removed). Don't happen to know where I might find a source for that, do you? Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me Please review me!} 22:19, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes I do, My mother is mormon.I know all about it.  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  22:22, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)

I see the debate is back on again.Hope no one says I'm a sock of any of the currant user over there. I obviously can not edit anywhere but here, now I'm kinda liking this block. Cheers!  Planetary Chaos  Talk to me  23:21, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RV Edit To My User Sub-Page

Thank you for taking the time to patrol the user sub-pages for possible vandalism. Users like your self have helped me clean my user pages before and I appreciate it every bit. I just wanted to let you know that the RV edit you made to my Japan sub-page was in error, as the particular IP's edits whom you have RV'd where actually made by me, from the public library. I RV'd it back to normal and wanted to let you know that I appreciate you taking a look for unwanted edits, all thou this one was made by me, I still appreciate your help. Thank you and continue the good work! :) --Turbinator 20:08, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] No Topic

why you deleted my link on en.wikipedia.org/hacker ? it was my personal Website about hacking .. ! Playqoy

[edit] User:Seraphimblade

Congrates on your new adminship hope you do well and wish you the best of luck.  Planetary Chaos   Talk to me  20:38, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Autoblocked

Please note that the autoblock locating tool is showing no current autoblocks operating against that user. However, there were two on the 24th. If you are still autoblocked, please rerequest an unblock. --Yamla 16:00, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

I have requested both unblock and unblockauto.User:NetsnipeDeclined unblockauto as "You have not been autoblocked. However, you have been blocked directly as stated in your block log. Since you have not provided a reason for being unblocked, your request has been declined. and User:Yamla declined unblock. Why I don't know my bock has expired any help here?

A liitle help here.  Planetary Chaos   Talk to me  16:36, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s): Autoblock of 63.3.11.130 lifted or expired. Request handled by:  Netsnipe  ►  17:49, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

I've just tried to force an unblock. See if that helps. --  Netsnipe  ►  17:49, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome back

I missed your congratulations earlier, but that's much appreciated. Before you were blocked, you were getting things turned around. I sincerely hope that you'll continue with what you were doing at that time, and will consider sticking around. Regardless of whether you stay or go, I do wish you good luck. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 20:34, 30 March 2007 (UTC)