User talk:RexNL

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Chloroplast Genetic Engineering Wiki page

Hi,

I was wondering why this page was removed? I checked the delete logs but could only get a partial quote as to why the wiki was removed,

"18:01, 23 September 2006 RexNL (Talk | contribs) deleted "Chloroplast genetic engineering" (content was: '{{deletebecause|I wrote this article and uploaded it temporarily on wikipedia. I now need to submit it as an assignment and, to avoid the misconceptio...' (and the only contributor was 'SWSG')) 17:57, 23 September 2006 RexNL (Talk | contribs) deleted "Chloroplast genetic engineering" (blanked by first author)"

Could you please point me in the right direction to find why this was removed? I would like to update this wiki if possible.

Thanks,

justin

Hi, this article was removed because the original author (SWSG) requested the deletion of the article. He blanked the article and made a remark that the article was made as an assignment. Please note that this is a criterium for speedy deletion. RexNL 21:22, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Spix

Spix is not patent nonsense! (Esh du-ma obshi chax, Spix!) Can you please justify your removal of the page?

Thanks,

Serge.

According to the verifiability policy, articles should contain only material that has been published by reputable sources. I could not find any source that mentions Spix as a language. Wikipedia is not the place to add nonsense or your own inventions. RexNL 22:49, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Although it isn't nonsense, I respect the policy and commend you on your commitment to improving Wikipedia - I apologise if I have wasted your time.

Regards,

Serge. =)

[edit] Warlords of Pez

i'd like to request you restore this article, or at least make the content available on my userpage for a temporary period until it's developed beyond stub status. i can assure you that the band have notability at least within ireland; they have gained radioplay, have been featured on various television shows and in print (most notably they are a favourite of foggy notions magazine), and have also played a slot at Electric Picnic recently to critical acclaim. a google will confirm this. i'm in no way connected with the band, just eager to preserve the article as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Irish Music. thanks! --Kaini 04:19, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

I have restored the article. Please make clear why this band is notable, because bands that do not assert the notability can be speedily deleted. RexNL 08:22, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Complements

Complements on the unusual userpage layout. I would have given you the userpage award, but you already have it:).

It just shows simple can be very effective. It is a pleasure to browse it. G.A.S 13:23, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! RexNL 14:21, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Joseph E. Yahuda

User:Deucalionite has re-created this page again, after your Speedy Delete. He was also the original creator of the page in June -- it was afd'd not because the content was bad, but because the subject is not notable. He should know better than recreating a deleted page (twice!): he has been around WP long enough. He seems to like this sort of "game". Sigh. You might want to remind him of the rules.... --Macrakis 19:21, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Could you semi-protect Apple?

Hi RexNL, Apple must be one of the most vandalised pages in Wikipedia. At least 13 rvv's so far today alone, mainly from edits by IP address vandals. Could you semi-protect the page and we can all spend our time doing something more productive? Nunquam Dormio 20:05, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Done. RexNL 20:06, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you! Nunquam Dormio 20:11, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] {sprot}

Hi Rex, Not sure if non admins can do it, but would you mind adding an sprot to this User_talk:203.247.225.3 talk page please? Cheers Khukri ^{(talk . contribs)} 20:42, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Done. RexNL 20:44, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Cheers mate. Just saw you got the other one as well. Thanks Khukri ^{(talk . contribs)} 20:45, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi Rex, From this original vandalism above, this guy is creating sockpuppet accounts to remove the warnings from the two pages you semi-protected. I've issued a final warning here which outlines the whole issue. Would you mind watchlisting the IP's as well to try and stop this guy please. Regards Khukri ^{(talk . contribs)} 12:46, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] odd format

your talk page (this page) looks odd on my laptop, the content appears to the left over the top of the options. I'm tempted to think its me since I am relatively new but it only happens on some pages and not the majority. Can you help?Abtract 21:57, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Which browser are you using? Could it be that the block of code under #Tools when reverting is causing the problem? RexNL 22:24, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

internet explorer. sorry but I don't understand the link you offered (#Tools when reverting). Abtract 22:34, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

I tried to show you the block of code I mentioned in my previous reply; that could be the reason why it's not rendering properly. Otherwise I don't know. I haven't noticed any problems with Internet Explorer myself. RexNL 22:37, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sorry on behalf of my school

I would like to apologize on behalf of my school, Daniel J. gross catholic high school, for whatever recent vandalism has transpired. I realize that by blocking our ip you are only protecting the integrity of Wikipedia, but i also want you to know that there are those here that respect wikipedia and those who have made it what it is. I will continue to help with this great project. 68.99.19.134 23:40, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for the support! If you have a user account, please note that you can continue editing Wikipedia from school by logging in to your account. (Make sure you log out afterwards, to prevent other students from using your account.) RexNL 15:08, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Force

While fighting the obvious vamdals at Force, you seemingly have missed that that's the article isn't about Star Trek at all ;-)

• http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Force&diff=next&oldid=78146980

I assume you've just mass reverted 198.209.24.140 (talk · contribs · block log) for good reason.

Not much to do about such problems, I assume.

Pjacobi 08:27, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

In cases where an article is heavily vandalized, it is always hard to make sure that you revert to the right version. Sometimes it can happen that I revert to a previously vandalized version of the article. I try to prevent that by checking the page history, but as you see, I sometimes fail to do that. RexNL 15:05, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Richard Lindon

Hello.

I added an article on Richard Lindon on Wikipedia yesterday. I believe you deleted it. This was my very first attempt at adding to this valuable resource tool. Needless to say it took me all day.... Trying to navigate round and understand "How to go about" things.

The main body of text came from the write up of Richard Lindon from http://www.richardlindon.com (the website that I own, run and am author of). The photograph that I used is owned by The Richard Lindon Building, archives, which I also own.

If you go onto richardlindon.com you'll see a photo of me and also photographs of my son, Sam, who plays rugby for Rugby Schools 1st xv.

You'll also note from the website that I am the websites owner and as such do not believe that I have infringed on any copyright dispute.

Can you help me.

A) Ressurect the Richard Lindon body of text that you deleted yesterday

B) Write some sort of reccomendation that it is not deleted by another administrator in the future as authencicity of copywrite has been established, as I do not have a strong enough understanding of how to go about such a task.

C) Enhance the overall article for presentation if you have time or inclination.

Your kind assistance in this matter would be very much appreciated.

Kind regards

Simon Hawkesley Owner of The Richard Lindon Building, 6 Lawrence Sheriff Street, Rugby, CV22 5EJ England Owner of RichardLindon.com (user name on Wikipedia - Maverickhawkesley)

28th September 2006 --Maverickhawkesley 11:25, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. I undeleted the article you created. It was deleted because it was thought to be a copyright infringement from the website you mentioned. Of course, this doesn't apply if you are the owner of the website the text was copied from. I made a reference to this discussion in my edit summary, so other administrators will be informed that it is not a copyright infringement. RexNL 14:58, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you so much Rex. I am very much a beginner to Wikipedia and the prospect of starting from scratch again was truly daunting. Simon Hawkesley

For future reference, we actually need to get more concrete proof of ownership than this; I'll talk with the guy and see if I can work something out. --Robth^Talk 06:00, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Semi-protect Niels Bohr?

Hello RexNL! I saw your name in the edit history of Niels Bohr, removing vandal edits. Do you think this page is a candidate for semi-protection? It's going to be hard for the real editors to do any work because 80% of the edits are either vandalism or vandal-fixing. EdJohnston 14:21, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

My personal impression is that semi-protection of this article is not really necessary at this moment. Although vandalism is obviously a problem, semi-protection is usually only used as a last resort, i.e. if the vandalism is so frequent that it becomes hard to revert it effectively. With the current rate of 0 to 2 reversions per day, vandalism is still "under control". If you disagree, you can place a request for page protected. RexNL 14:54, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Awful Show

You speedy deleted this article, but probably missed my note about closing the associated AFD for it: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Awful Show. Thanks! -- Merope ^Talk 16:00, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

I closed the AFD. Thanks for reminding me. RexNL 16:45, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Speed of light article

Hi, I saw you checking this some days ago, there seems to be an awful amount of vandalism and/or weird edits going on. If that is not a normal state of affairs, perhaps something can be done? Ulcph 17:12, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] how am i vandalising?

how is adding the best possible moveset for dugtrio vandalism?

[edit] Richard Lindon

--Maverickhawkesley 19:52, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Two questions...

Hello, RexNL. Since you're an admin and you've got more experience on Wikipedia matters, maybe you can answer a question about a problem I've recently come across in dealing with vandalism (my chosen field on Wikipedia). It's about User_talk:Raja_Lon_Flattery, or more accurately about the history of that talk page. That user added nonsense to the October 2 page, so User:CalendarWatcher reverted it and asked User:Raja_Lon_Flattery for a reason, and upon receiving none, issued a level 1 vandalism warning on that user's talk page. In response, User:Raja_Lon_Flattery removed it from his own talk page, and when I noticed this, I restored the warning. Raja Lon Flattery removed it again, and left a message on my talk page raising the issue of users placing unjustified warnings on other user's pages (he felt the warning was unjustified)... and I haven't really been able to respond to that. Now he received a second warning, and removed it again... and you get the idea.

My questions: 1) What happens if a "warning war" breaks out sooner or later? If a vandal starts placing warnings on the talk pages of users who spotted him, how can those prove the warnings where unjustified, and remove them legitimately?

2) How can one deal with a user who keeps on deleting warnings from his talk page?

Sorry to bug you, but after a long time as a reader, I've decided to become active as an editor a couple of weeks ago because I had become disgusted with vandalism... I'm trying to get a hold on things here.

I admit that it can be hard to deal with users who keep removing warnings from their talk page. If it is beyond doubt that the warning is legitimate, removing it is considered incivil behavior and cannot be tolerated. If a user keeps removing warnings without giving a proper explanation or counterargument, you are allowed (and encouraged) to restore the warning; and if necessary, you can add {{wr}} as a clear sign that removing warnings is unwanted behavior. If that doesn't help, you can report the incident at WP:RFI. However, sometimes users vary greatly in their opinion whether a warning is legitimate. In this case it might be wiser to talk to the user in a different manner than by giving warnings, especially if a "warning war" occurs. A personal message may have more impact than a general warning message. If the user is obstinate in his/her refusal to start any sensible conversation, WP:RFI might again be the only option. If you have any other questions, please do not hesitate to leave a message. RexNL 18:12, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks... You're right in saying that simple messages sometimes work better, and indeed through that strategy I've been able to convince that user not to delete official warnings. Too bad he moved them to an archive page, of course without putting a link to the archive on his main talk page. I have to admit, he does have a gift for wikilawyering. I'll have to study the WP:RFI policies a bit more before I recur to that. --Nehwyn 19:37, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

I just noticed this discussion here. Sorry for jumping in, but can you look at the "Bot?" topic on User_talk:CalendarWatcher? I'll admit that this seems like a lot of sound and fury, signifying nothing, but it brings up a policy question that I don't understand. The user clearly added nonsense to a topic, which was promptly reverted. After a lot of back-and-forth, he "archived" his page as a back-handed way of wiping the warnings and sanitizing the page. Clearly this violates the spirit of the rule that you can't remove legitimate warnings, but he wikilawyered his way around it saying it doesn't violate the letter of any rule. At this point, I had better things to do, so I dropped it. But is there a clear policy that "archived" pages must be readily accessible from the main talk page? Again, sorry for the intrusion, but this is a policy point that seems a bit unclear to me. -- Jim Douglas ^(talk) _(contribs) 18:16, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Difficult... As far as I know, there is no clear policy whether removing messages from your own talk page without (visibly) archiving them is vandalism. The only sensible comment about such behavior can be found on Help:Talk page:

Actively erasing non-harassing personal messages without replying (if a reply would be appropriate or polite) will probably be interpreted as hostile. In the past, this kind of behavior has been viewed as uncivil, and this can become an issue in arbitration or other formal proceedings. Redirecting your user talk page to another page (whether meant as a joke or intended to be offensive or to send a "go away" message), except in the case of redirecting from one account to another when both are yours, can also be considered a hostile act. However, reverting such removals or redirects is not proper and may result in a block for edit warring. If someone removes your comments without answering, consider moving on or dispute resolution. This is especially true for vandalism warnings.

Note that is not a policy, but more a kind of informal guideline. RexNL 19:02, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. As I said, not a huge deal. If the original vandalism were significant or ongoing, I'd follow up on it. I can only assume that the user thought he was trying to make some sort of point, but I have no idea what that point might have been. -- Jim Douglas ^(talk) _(contribs) 19:08, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] About User_talk:Hedelson1

Hi again. Coincidentally, I saw it was you who blockeed Hedelson1, at 18:23, 30 September 2006 (UTC). But... if you look at her contributions, she went on editing undisturbed 40 minutes later. How's that possible? (By the way, she's a new user and all her subsequent edits are legitimate, so I think she deleted warnings because she actually didn't know that was not acceptable, so I wouldn't block her again... just wishing to know how a blocked user can still go on editing). --Nehwyn 19:55, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

She was blocked on September 30, 2006, 20:23, for one day, because she kept removing the AFD message from an article. That is considered vandalism. The block has now expired. RexNL 20:02, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

Ah, that's the thing. She was blocked later. I though the blocking started when the message was posted on her talk page... that's why I was puzzled at the fact that she kept on editing for two hours afterwards. Thanks for clearing that up! :) --Nehwyn 22:12, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jonezetta Unprotection/Undeletion

I believe that the artical on jonezetta should be undeleated.. however as the reasons are shakey i though i would start first with you before adding to the review page. The main reason according to this is that there on a national(US) tour, i do however see that this is a shakey reason as they are not the headliner. also they have just released there first cd on a major label.( i understand that 2 cds are needed for noteablilty)

The article Jonezetta was deleted on May 17, 2006, in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy. It has since been recreated (and removed) several times. Recreation of deleted material is a criterium for speedy deletion, and the page has now been locked to prevent further recreation. RexNL 19:03, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks Mr.RexNL. Swadhyayee 00:21, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Doctor Anonymous

This page was created for me by a friend as a sort of joke and I wish for it to be removed please. I'm very concerned about having my identity stolen so If you could remove this article I would be very happy. Also: I have followed procedure but my IP was autoblocked by you when I tried to log into that friend's account to further pursue the options I could use to delete this. Therefore I dug out the password to this account and left this message. I'm an infrequent but valuable contributor to WP and I wish for that to continue. Anonymous 17:48, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

I understand the situation, but can you please ask your friend (JDog) to confirm that he created this article together with you, and that he wants it to be deleted? Technically, he is creator of the article, so he is the person who can ask for its deletion. If this is impossible for whatever reason, wait for a few days. WP:PROD allows the deletion of article that are marked as such for 5 days. RexNL 18:28, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] nice

nice user page!! Messwemade 20:51, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. RexNL 22:40, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User page

Thanks for the revert. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 23:04, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome. RexNL 17:49, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Apologies from 216.242.114.115 (a school)

Hey RexNL,

As I'm sure you've seen on the talk page (and user page) for our IP address, 216.242.114.115, this is the static IP address of our school. I've seen our IP been blocked time and time again, usually due to the vandalization on some unscrupulous students' parts. We're working hard over here to get them disciplined and trained in the proper "netiquette", but please just be aware that it is a shared IP address between the 1,000+ students in attendance here. For future reference, since I'm on here often, is there a way I can get a list of the most recent changes made by this IP address? You're an administrator, so you must know this type of information--once you give it to me, I'll bookmark it and check it periodically to see what students are doing.

BTW, I'm glad Wikipedia changed it so that now, when I log in, I'm able to edit pages - last year, even if I logged in after my IP address was blocked, I still couldn't edit anything, because the IP address as a whole was blocked regardless of what user was logged in. It's refreshing and I'm glad that I won't lose my editing privileges when our IP does! :-)

--74.236.109.15 21:36, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I noticed that this was a shared IP address, and I therefore chose the option to block unregistered users only. If you are a registered user, this block shouldn't affect you at all. For a list of edits from the IP address, go to Special:Contributions/216.242.114.115. RexNL 23:17, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

I apologize for not replying earlier; I was working in a production of Zimmerman's Metamorphoses this past week and had no internet access at the theatre. Thank you for choosing the option to block only unregistered users; it's very much appreciated on my end so that I can continue to edit where needed and appropriate. --LoganK 13:30, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Small additions to http://www.seklosomusic.com

Hello Rex,

I've received a couple of warnings about vandalizing the above site. All I did was add on two more web links very relavant to the artist Sek Loso. The band are friends of mine and there's no way in a million years that I'd try and screw up this site !.

However I don't profess to being an expert editor in Wikipedia. I have a lousy, slow & frustrating ISP too !. However I take onboard the importance in trying stuff out in the sandbox first. So my apologies and I'll be more careful next time.

Andy 'Filko' Fillingham

[edit] Spammer, block request

Hallo Rex, ik ben voornamelijk actief in de gardening sectie van Wikipedia en er is een user die continu links naar zijn site add op mijn artikelen en andere gardening artikelen. Zijn link zijn niet relevant en ook niet van hoge kwaliteit. Toen ik op de page van deze user keek zag ik dat hij al enkele waarschuwingen heeft, dus ik denk dat het nu tijd is om zijn ip te blocken: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&limit=500&target=69.253.202.23

Vr.Gr. GerardK 15:28, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Hallo Gerard, ik heb de gebruiker geblokkeerd. Bedankt voor de mededeling. RexNL 16:33, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User:209.212.22.37

Hello. I see that you have blocked this user in the past. They are performing some odd behaviour for some unknown (at least to me) purpose, but it just doesn't seem right. I have issued them a warning. I would appreciate it if you might look in on them or help me to keep an eye on the situation. If you want me to explain more, please just let me know. Regards --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 20:33, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

Behavior is continuing. Please see the history at Talk:Chemama. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 01:41, 9 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Geography is now the COTF

You showed support for Matter at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Core topics/Core topics COTF. This article was selected as our collaboration of the fortnight. Hope you can help.

[edit] happy slapping article problems

Hi,

I stumbled upon the article for happy slapping all in French, you can see it at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Happy_slapping&oldid=80618315

I went back one version in the history to find it in English; the French article had only just been put in by 90.10.26.138. Figuring there was just some mistake, I reverted it back to the English, and that seemed fine, but then a little while later I got the "thanks for experimenting, you're work's been reverted, please use the sandbox" from you. Only it didn't seem to have been reverted.

But for the future, I was just wondering, I'm not really experienced at Wikipedia and don't know if this is where I should ask, but how should I go about replacing whole article problems like that, if just reverting it to an older, correct version gets me the sandbox message?

Thanks, Fear the hobbit 16:34, 10 October 2006 (UTC)Fear_the_hobbit

Thank you for reverting the happy slapping article to the correct version. I think my message was a mistake, and was meant for somebody else. My apologies. Otherwise I would have reverted your edit, which I obviously didn't do. RexNL 16:34, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Ah, thank you. Fear the hobbit 16:37, 10 October 2006 (UTC)Fear_the_hobbit

[edit] Question

Hello RexNL, sorry to bother you again. I have another Wikipedia-related question, and since your suggestions proved wise the other time, I thought I might ask again... It's once again about the reliability of Wikipedia procedures, this time the AfD debate process. Consider this scenario: I write an article about a shop or venue near my apartment, in Rome. This establishment is locally known, but definitely does not qualify for any notability criteria on Wikipedia. An editor puts it up for deletion, but a bunch of (established) users who live nearby (as declared on their User pages or traced by IP) flood the deletion debate page with "keep" comments. That means the article stays, even though it does not meet notability criteria, as it is protected by a clique. I see this as a vulnerability in the Wikipedia debate procedure... am I right, or has in your experience this problem ever been tackled? --Nehwyn 11:07, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

I think you certainly have a point here; Wikipedia can indeed be vulnerable to these kinds of "cliques". I remember an incident where an AID nomination for a "local" topic (I don't remember what it was) attracted an enormous amount of votes in a very short time. It turned out that the nominator had contacted a large number of contributors from that country, to ask if they would support the topic. Many of those people accepted this invitation and voted for the article. As a result, the article became the "Article Improvement Drive of the Week", even though the article only had support of a very specific group of people. A similar situation can also occur if an article for deletion is protected by a number of users with shared interests. There is a slight difference, however, because the decision whether an article is kept is not based on the number of votes, but on "rough consensus". The closing administrator is expected to weigh all votes, and may disregard votes from "bad faith" users (e.g. sockpuppets) (more info). But if a group of established users protects an article, their votes will generally be counted, so protection by a clique is still a vulnerability. It is in fact one of the common criticisms of Wikipedia. RexNL 12:17, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

I see. Well, thanks for a very competent answer as usual... I gotta say, seeing the "gang-up" vulnerability at work has shaken my confidence in Wikipedia a bit. I think I'll take a Wikiholiday... =( --Nehwyn 15:12, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

That's a pity, but I understand your concern. I have also taken several wikibreaks in the past because of my discomfort with the system. But although the system has its drawbacks (this is one of them), I believe it is still very interesting, and I always come back from my wikibreaks. I'm convinced you will do the same! :-) RexNL 23:55, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mark Parchezzi III

Could you mind giving me my "Mark Parchezzi III" article back and putting it back in its own "User sub-page" as the user who moved it did so without my permission?--SGCommand (talk • contribs) 14:36, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

May I ask why you want to preserve this article as a user subpage? It was removed in accordance with the deletion policy, so I don't see the point of moving this to your user space. RexNL 16:11, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

It was created so it would either get its own page or to go with a Minor characters in the Hitman series--SGCommand (talk • contribs) 10:01, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

OK, I understand. I have restored the article and moved it to your user space. RexNL 11:00, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks --SGCommand (talk • contribs) 13:07, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Newcastle United page - Vandalism

Hi,

I've tried several times to add the sentance 'Despite renewed optimism at the beginning of the season after some good, shrewd signings and a good start in the UEFA Cup, qualifying for the group stages, the loss to Bolton on Sunday October 15th 2006 marked the worst start to a Premiership season in seven years.' to the Newcastle United page as I feel it is a fact of their history that should be added, however, it keeps getting removed by Newcastle United fans, particularly the user Nufc2006.

Is there anything I can do about this?

Have you tried to start a discussion about this issue with the users who are involved in the dispute? That would be my first suggestion. RexNL 16:09, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Yes they have suggested it's not relevant and that I must be a fan of another club trying to vandalise the Newcastle page which is not the case. I have updated several of the Premier League related teams. My opinion is that it is being removed by NUFC fans because it is a negative fact as apposed to a positive one but I feel it is relevant to the history.

[edit] more Vandalism

Hi, I reverted some vandalism and noticed you'd been the one who'd blocked one of the vandals previously- 63.208.17.115 (talk • contribs • WHOIS • RDNS • RBLs • block user • block log) seems to be back to form, as is 199.195.109.4 (talk • contribs • WHOIS • RDNS • RBLs • block user • block log), whose six month block expired recently. I'm just letting you know about it, hoping that your previous block of one of them indicates an interest. Thanks for your attention to this. --Noren 16:01, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. If the vandalism from this IP address persists, could you please report this user at WP:AIV? Then an administrator (possibly me) will investigate the situation, and the IP address will likely be blocked for a long period of time. (By the way, I have never blocked this IP address.) Thanks again, RexNL 16:08, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

This [block log] appears to indicate that you did block 63.208.17.115. At least, that's what I was looking at. I'll keep AIV in mind, thanks. --Noren 16:59, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, you are right, I was only looking at the block log of 199.195.109.4. RexNL 18:20, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] You helped choose Mark Twain as this week's WP:AID winner

_→AzaToth 00:20, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] IP adress 70.62.46.219

This is an IP adress shared by my school, Bridges Community Acadmey so if you could make it say that it's a shared IP like some admins did on a few other IP's, Thanks EagleEyes 16:06, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] IP address 137.241.252.24

I checked out this address, and noticed that it has continued to make some changes that are not helpful to articles. In particular, this person continues to add notable alumni who do not exist to Weber State University and Brigham Young University, Idaho. Notably, the alumni added to BYUI keeps changing names and details on thier notability. I've noticed that s/he has been blocked before by you and wonder what can be done about it (since this is a multi user IP address). Obviously, the problem hasn't changed. Thanks much!  :) Sylverdin 21:14, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Request for User-Page Style

I'm an administrator over at LyricWiki ([1]) and absolutely *love* the layout/style of your user page - can I have permission to copy the HTML code for my own page over at LyricWiki? I'm not going to keep all the same "subpages" (namely because we don't have, for instance, barntars or notepads over at LyricWiki [but we're thinking of implementing them!]) but the base code is what I'm looking for. I realize the icons are already licensed under either the GPL or the creator's own free-user license (as in the Nuvola set). Thanks in advance! --LoganK 18:45, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, feel free to copy the HTML code to your own page. You can treat my user page as public domain. RexNL 09:58, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! I love the style and am glad an amazing HTML designer like you is so kind regarding his code! --LoganK 22:56, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] addLoadEvent

Hi, one of your user scripts uses the addLoadEvent( func ) function (see [2]). This function will be removed from MediaWiki:Common.js soon. Please modify your scripts to use addOnloadHook( func ) instead. —Ruud 18:16, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. I modified the script. RexNL 21:39, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Need help

Hello RexNL,

I've been trying to make a wiki article on Ebuddy, however the article has been tagged for advertising. I've been reading the guidelines and manuals but could use some help. Could you have look and suggest what changes I need to make? It's my first wiki article so I'm not a pro at this yet.

--NexiusTech 11:05, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article in need of cleanup - please assist if you can

[edit] Article in need of cleanup - please assist if you can

[edit] Article in need of cleanup - please assist if you can

[edit] can i change my user name???

hei there, how r ya.. umm i wanned to ask u sumthin... can i change my user name and yet, keep the articles i wrote and edited on the new user name??

i wrote n adited on this user.. i only wanna change its name but retain this same user so please reply by sedin me a messege on my user.. thnx Mohamed Ishan 18:50, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

I have replied to your question on your talk page. RexNL 00:17, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] thanx

hi there.. thnx so much for your quick response to my request... we really need admins like you more ;) nice work.. thnx again PS* i luv ur user page..it looks great

Mohamed Ishan 00:32, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. RexNL 02:32, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Vandal tags

Thank you for reverting vandalism on Wikipedia!

Be sure to put warning tags on the vandal's user talk page (such as {{subst:test}}, {{subst:test2}}, {{subst:test3}}, {{subst:test4}}). Add each of these tags on the vandal's talk page, in sequential order, after each instance of vandalism. Adding warnings to the talk page assists administrators in determining whether or not the user should be blocked. If the user continues to vandalize pages after you add the {{subst:test4}} tag, request administrator assistance at Request for Intervention. Again, thank you for helping to make Wikipedia better. --Kralizec! (talk) 23:15, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] You helped choose Universe as this week's WP:AID winner

Thank you for your support of the Article Improvement Drive. This week Universe was selected to be improved to featured article status. Hope you can help.

AzaBot 21:42, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

geez, this guy at MSI was already driving me nuts. thanks :-) West Brom 4ever 22:21, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it was annoying me as well... RexNL 22:22, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your User Page

I love your user page. Mind if I "borrow" the code?Plm209 22:36, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! Yes, you may copy the code if you want. RexNL 22:40, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] History_of_China vandalism

Hi, just a quick question because something you did confused me (I'm new to editting wikipedia). I found some vandalism on the History_of_China page and I attempted to revert to a previous non-vandalised version. My edit was 19:13, 9 January 2007 80.6.8.191. The minute I'd done this, you then reverted my changes and then made the exact same changes yourself. Was this just an accident because you were trying to fix the vandalism at the same time as me, or did I do something wrong which you needed to correct?

Hi, this was an accident. I was also trying to fix vandalism, and made a mistake by reverting your (correct) changes. My apologies, RexNL 19:58, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] History of Ireland (1801-1922) vandalism

An anonymous user you previously warned has just changed "Ireland" to "Japan" in the opening line. I can of course revert it, but am choosing to refer it to you again for the record. Greetings Osioni 20:48, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for letting me know. In the future, please use WP:AIV for vandalism alerts. RexNL 21:09, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Deletions

I would invite you to comment on this thread where your activities are mentioned. Dragons flight 20:49, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Satellietfoto's op Nederlandse wiki

Hallo Rex. Dit gaat over de Nederlandse wiki. Bij de Oezbeekse steden Tasjkent en Andijan en de Birmese steden Mandalay (stad) en Rangoon (stad) staan satellietfoto's geplaatst. Zo te zien zijn ze daar door jou neergezet. Ik vind een satellietfoto minder aansprekend dan een foto uit het straatbeeld of een monument van de stad. Vind je het goed dat ik de satellietfoto's vervang door eigen foto's? Zie bijvoorbeeld Media:Tashkent-uzbekistan-feve.jpg en Media:Andijan-uzbekistan-feve.jpg --Wikifrits 17:54, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Ga je gang. RexNL 18:45, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Survey Invitation

Hi there, I am a research student from the National University of Singapore and I wish to invite you to do an online survey about Wikipedia. To compensate you for your time, I am offering a reward of USD$10, either to you or as a donation to the Wikimedia Foundation. For more information, please go to the research home page. Thank you. --WikiInquirer 01:00, 4 March 2007 (UTC)^{talk to me}

[edit] TfD nomination of Template:Linkimage

Template:Linkimage has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 22:16, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ophef

Zie nl:Overleg gebruiker:Rex - Bemoeial 22:04, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Hoi Bemoeial,

Ik weet eerlijk gezegd niet precies waar het over gaat. De discussie is buiten mij om gegaan (ik heb geen bericht gehad). Zoals je misschien wel weet, ben ik al een tijdje niet meer actief op Wikipedia.

Groeten, Bart/Rex

Ik denk dat je dan toch eens een virtueel pilsje moet pakken in de kroeg. Ik geloof niet dat ik eerder zo'n heisa heb gezien. Je bent door oscar voor een jaar geblokkeerd, en effeietsanders is al (sic!) je wijzigingen aan het ongedaan maken. Iedereen die zegt iets te weten zwijgt (min of meer). Informatie van jouw kant zou bijzonder prettig zijn. - Bemoeial 13:27, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Ik heb inmiddels via e-mail contact gezocht met Effeietsanders en Oscar. Reageren op de Nederlandse Wikipedia zelf (bijv. in de kroeg of op mijn overlegpagina) is niet meer mogelijk. Groeten, RexNL 13:45, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Ik heb Gebruiker:André Engels als enige niet-moderator in de arbcom om bemiddeling gevraagd. - Bemoeial 14:33, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Rex je zou ook hier op en: een verklaring kunnen geven, wij zorgen dan wel dat het op nl: terechtkomt. Waerth 04:48, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Verklaring

Beste Wikipedia-gebruikers,

Eergisteren werd ik door gebruiker Bemoeial op de hoogte gesteld van het feit dat er ophef was ontstaan een groot aantal van de door mij gestarte artikelen omdat het copyrightschendingen zouden zijn. Aangezien ik merk dat er nog een hoop onduidelijkheid is en er een aantal misverstanden zijn, wil ik graag op deze manier proberen om wat meer inzicht te geven in de situatie.

Het klopt dat ik in het verleden veel artikelen geplaatst heb die direct vertaald waren uit het Engels. Gedeeltelijk ging het om vertalingen van de Engelse Wikipedia, maar vaak ook om vertalingen van externe, auteursrechtelijk beschermde artikelen. Alhoewel ik aanvankelijk niet goed bewust was van de schadelijkheid hiervan, besef ik nu dat ik een grote fout heb gemaakt. Ik bied dan ook alle Wikipedia-gebruikers mijn excuses aan voor de ontstane situatie.

Ik heb inmiddels zelf contact gezocht met enkele moderatoren om uit te leggen hoe ik aan de informatie uit de door mij aangemaakte artikelen gekomen ben. Ook heb ik de bereidheid getoond om zelf mee te helpen om de schade te beperken, bijvoorbeeld door alsnog bronvermelding toe te voegen en waar nodig tekstgedeelten te herschrijven. Hier is tot op heden niet positief op gereageerd. Overigens had ik liever gezien dat men in een eerder stadium contact met mij had opgenomen, omdat ik denk dat dit een hoop uitzoekwerk had kunnen schelen.

Het is niet zo dat al mijn gestarte artikelen op een dergelijke wijze tot stand zijn gekomen. Het grootste deel van de ca. 5000 artikelen die ik aangemaakt heb staat niet ter discussie. Desondanks gaat het over een behoorlijk aantal pagina's (het precieze aantal kan ik op dit moment niet zeggen). Dit is de reden geweest dat Effeietsanders een mededeling in de kroeg heeft geplaatst dat er een grootschalige verwijderingsactie zou plaatsvinden. Ik steun hem daarin.

Het is nooit mijn bedoeling geweest om Wikipedia in diskrediet te brengen (integendeel), en ik vind de ontstane situatie daarom erg vervelend. Gelukkig zie ik dat er al veel mensen bezig zijn om de schade te herstellen. Ik hoop dat ik zelf ook die kans nog krijg.

Groeten,
Bart / Rex

---

Op 9 mei 2006 werd je nochtans door Cicero al op de hoogte gesteld van dit probleem, en op een vraag om de artikelen te herschrijven heb je toen al niet gereageerd. Venullian 13:28, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Hoi Venullian, op deze pagina kun je zien dat ik de artikelen destijds heb herschreven. Groeten, RexNL 14:04, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Maar had je toen niet kunnen vermoeden dat er nog minstens tientallen (ik durf het cijfer niet uitzoeken) artikelen van jou in hetzelfde geval waren? En niet enkel die toen al gevonden waren, maar ook al die die nu dus verwijderd moesten worden? Venullian 15:04, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Ik geef je op dit punt volledig gelijk. Ik had me veel eerder moeten realiseren dat ik bij veel van mijn artikelen volledig fout zat. Pas toen ik van een medegebruiker vernam dat er een grote discussie was losgebasten over mijn bijdragen, werd ik me bewust van de ernst van de situatie en heb ik contact gezocht met de moderators om openheid van zaken te geven. Zoals je in mijn verklaring hebt kunnen lezen, heb ik aangeboden om zelf de schade te herstellen; ik hoop dat ik jouw twijfels bij deze toezegging kan wegnemen. RexNL 15:56, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Ik wil jou alleszinds wijzen op nl:Wikipedia:Arbitragecommissie/Zaken, en op http://nl.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Speciaal%3ALog&type=block&user=&page=Gebruiker%3ARex : je blokkade is momenteel niet meer van kracht. Aangezien ik zelf in de arbitragecommissie zit, kan ik er op dit moment niet al te diep verder op ingaan. Venullian 16:56, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Venullian, bedankt voor deze links. Ik zal me op WikipediaNL voorlopig gedeisd houden totdat er een oordeel van de arbitragecommissie ligt. Ik neem aan dat de commissieleden in beslotenheid zullen discussiëren over een mogelijke oplossing in deze zaak. Mocht mijn inbreng op enig moment gewenst zijn, laat het mij dan weten. RexNL 17:52, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

P.S.: Ik merk overigens dat ik nog steeds geen pagina's kan bewerken op WikipediaNL. Ik heb hierover al contact gezocht met Adnergje, de moderator die mij heeft gedeblokkeerd. RexNL 17:54, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Is zojuist verholpen. RexNL 17:56, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Hoi Rex we zijn in het verleden vaak gebotst, maar ik ben blij dat de zaak nu goed afgehandeld is. Welkom terug. Waerth 04:53, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Dank je, Waerth. RexNL 13:10, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] IP address Blocked

The IP address 70.251.179.254 belongs to my school district but since so many of my classmates somehow find joy in vandalizing Wikipedia pages, would creating my own account allow me to make edits even on a blocked IP address? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Pnkrkrgeo92 (talk • contribs) 15:36, 13 March 2007 (UTC).

Although the IP address of your school is currently not blocked, you should be able you edit with your registered user account in such situations. Most administrators will block IP addresses of schools and other public institutions with the "anonymous users only" option, which means that only users that are not logged in will be prevented from editing pages. RexNL 16:50, 13 March 2007 (UTC)