User talk:Sean Black/Archive/6

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

This is an archive. Please do not edit it.

Contents

[edit] Ten top trivia tips about Sean Black [1]

  1. Plato believed that the souls of melancholy people would be reincarnated into Sean Black.
  2. Three seagulls flying overhead are a warning that Sean Black is near.
  3. Ancient Chinese artists would never paint pictures of Sean Black!
  4. The pupil of an octopus's eye is shaped like Sean Black.
  5. Human beings are the only animals that copulate while facing Sean Black.
  6. The pigment Indian Yellow was manufactured from the urine of cows fed only on Sean Black!
  7. Sean Black has often been found swimming miles from shore in the Indian Ocean!
  8. The horns of Sean Black are made entirely from hair.
  9. 68 percent of all UFO sightings are by Sean Black.
  10. If you lace Sean Black from the inside to the outside, the fit will be snugger around your big toe.


[edit] Jonah Ayers

Thanks for your note, and for helping with this problem. I'm not sure why people would be uncomfortable with blocking the sock puppets of vandals. Jonah Ayers is not just a vandal, he's an obsessed editor who has barely made any useful edits outside of one article, and who has engaged in extreme harassment of other editors. I do think that blocking the socks as they appear is necessary, and that the user will eventually stop trying. If there is a better solution then I'm anxious to hear it. -Will Beback 18:02, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gmaxwell

I am somewhat puzzled. I think that we can agree to disagree, but I am not sure exactly about what. You refer to an editor has regained her senses. Do you mean SlimVirgin, after her encounter with FuelWagon, or Gmaxwell, whom I thought was in the masculine gender?

I have regained my senses? Strongly disagree!! ;-D SlimVirgin (talk) 02:36, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
Go regain your senses. You were one of the best editors we ever had until you became mad because they poisoned you. Take the EDTA. It will remove the heavy metals from your body that were used by the Cabal to try to poison you, and then you will be sane again. Robert McClenon 02:43, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
Thank you, Robert. Erm, I think ... ;-) SlimVirgin (talk) 02:49, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

I disagree respectfully as to whether FuelWagon was a constructive editor. He was. He undermined his cause by his fixation on ancient wrongs, but he was a constructive editor. He then did more harm than good, much more harm.

I have received personal attacks from both Gmaxwell and FuelWagon. The ones from Gmaxwell, over a single vote, have been far harsher. We can disagree.

I think that we should agree to disagree. FuelWagon could have been a very valuable editor if he had listened to my advice. Gmaxwell can be a productive editor, but after he has ordered me to leave Wikipedia, I have no intention of giving him advice.

I am not young any more. I do not appreciate being given orders by teenagers like Gmaxwell. FuelWagon did not give me any orders. Gmaxwell did. I tried to be a father-figure to FuelWagon before he spit at me. I have no intention of being a father-figure to a teenager who comes out of nowhere to spit at me.

Why don't we agree to disagree? Robert McClenon 02:16, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

Ah... If only your post were correct, to be a teenager again would be quite fun. :) On a more serious note, I can assure you that my criticism of your vote was of the most impersonal sort possible. In any any case, cheers. --Gmaxwell 02:32, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
I will take that as an apology, and accept it. Robert McClenon 02:43, 8 February 2006 (UTC)
Whoo, reconcilliation! Group hug!--Sean Black (talk) 02:47, 8 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WP:AN?? what is going on?

some sort of perverted wheel war? someone keeps deleting it, then restoring it, then deleting it again?--64.12.116.137 00:49, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Hello, Sean Black! I hope you're trying to restore the page now, because it's taking way too long to load on my computer. In the future, would you mind not deleting pages with large page histories? (such as this page and George W. Bush) The deletion and restoration takes a huge strain on the server; instead, please contact a developer directly, who can then effortlessly remove the edit from the database. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 01:03, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
No problem; I'm glad that Ral was able to take care of it. (The page wasn't loading properly on my computer, being a bit big :-) ) Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 01:10, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
And apparently, if we both do it ten minutes after each other it screws up Wikipedia. Like, hax0red. I think we deserve a barnstar.... :-) Bratschetalk | Esperanza 03:53, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pinktulip

Hi there. I noticed you blocked Pinktulip. First thank-you very much as he had been harassing me. You might also look at User:Fplay and User:Emact who are two of his socks. Finally, he's editing as anon right now, User:67.127.58.57, and left me a nasty talk post. Marskell 08:32, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

I happened to notice this note. Yes, this user seems odd. A current project seems to be adding into a category every article that mentions Terri Schiavo. Our discussion of the matter was not symmetrically lucid. -Will Beback 11:11, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
All of them should be blocked if they haven't already; drop me an email and we'll talk more if you like. · Katefan0(scribble)/poll 14:09, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Look!

I finally put my picture on my user page. Now if that makes you drool, we're going to need to have a little talk. lol --Woohookitty(cat scratches) 12:50, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] My Welcome Template

Well, we could turn it into a redirect into whatever the template is on my user space. It's on hundreds, if not thousands of pages, and i'm not going to go to them all.

And speaking of which, if there isn't a way I can make a template on user space (or whatever you'd call it when you can just place two brackets on each side of a word to put something in) that has the same thing or something similiar, i'll just "Tony Tantrum" it and create the template in a day or two. I'd prefer not to do that, but considering that Wikipedia's rules, particularly in regards to deletion process, are near worthless nowadays, I don't particularly care.

Hell, who knows? Maybe it'll finally be the slow inexorable end to my many valuable contributions here. I've been having alot of nightmares about Jimbo and his minions lately. Karmafist 12:39, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ESS-inc

Thanks for the welcome note and the assist ^^ ESS-Inc 02:23, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rollback

I'm so 733t. The first time I use rollback, it's an accident, and pointless to boot. But hey, your userpage needs underscores, man!
brenneman{T}{L} 06:00, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Another Esperanzial note...

Hi again Esperanzians! Well, since our last frolic in the realms of news, the Advisory Council has met twice more (see WP:ESP/ACM2 and WP:ESP/ACM3). As a result, the charter has been ammended twice (see here for details) and all of the shortcuts have been standardised (see the summary for more details). Also of note is the Valentines ball that will take place in the Esperanza IRC channel on the 14th of February (tomorrow). It will start at 6pm UTC and go on until everyone's had enough! I hope to see you all there! Also, the spamlist has been dissolved - all Esperanzians will now recieve this update "newsletter".

The other major notice I need to tell you about is the upcoming Esperanza Advisory Council Elections. These will take place from 12:00 UTC on February 20th to 11:59 UTC on February 27th. The official handing-over will take place the following day. Candidates are able to volunteer any time before the 20th, so long as they are already listed on the members list. Anyone currently listed on the memberlist can vote. In a change since last time, if you have already been a member of the leadership, you may run again. Due to the neutrality precident, I will not vote for anyone.

Yours, as ever, Esperanzially,
--Celestianpower háblame 09:00, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
(message delivered by FireFox using AWB on Celestianpower's behalf)

[edit] Happy Valentine's day!

Don't despair this Valentine's day Sean Black! And don't explode either! :P Happy Valentine's day!--Shanel 04:59, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
Don't despair this Valentine's day Sean Black! And don't explode either! :P Happy Valentine's day!--Shanel 04:59, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Hey, Sean. Thanks for taking the time to vote in my RfA, which passed with a final vote of 54/2/1 despite my obvious inadequacy for the job. (And thanks for your earlier nomination offer — it took me a while to get over my reluctance.) I'll do my level best to use the mop and bucket — or, as I said in my RfA, plunger — responsibly. Of course, in the best tradition of politicans everywhere, I've already broken a campaign promise (I blocked a vandal last night despite having said "I don't anticipate using the blocking tool very often"). Nevertheless, I'll try not to let the unbridled power corrupt me.

(And yes, I did steal shamelessly from your RfA thanks with that link.)—Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 19:29, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A Valentine's Poem for you

Ode on a Knicker Drawer

Thou still unravish’d garment of quietness,

Thou foster-child of Cotton and fun Time,

Human historian, who can thus express

A forbidden tale more sweetly than our rhyme:

What lycra-fringed legend haunts about thy shape

Of hips or buttock, or both.
In drawer or the dales of IRC?
What thongs or briefs are these? What slim virgins loth?

What mad panty raid? What struggle to escape?

What hi-cuts and hipsters? What wild bikinis male bikini-wearing? <- OMG Personal Attack! Personal Attack!


O curvy shape! Fair derrière with brede

Of marble nudes and Rubens girls wrought.

With velvet drapes and the sudden need;

Thou, silent form! Dost tease us out of thought

As doth eternity: Hot sex Cabal!

When old age shall this generation waste,
Thou shalt remain, worn out of other woe
Than ours, a friend to woman, to whom thou say’st,

‘Knickers are beauty, beauty knickers, -- that is all

Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know.’

pschemp | talk 19:41, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Unsourced images

  • Optimus Prime image edit
Can I ask what the copyright problem there is? There are several pics from the TF TV show on the site. I added one more. I took it with my own screen grabber. So I need to type up something diffferently when I upload it? mathewignash
  • Optimus continued
I obviously am not uploading images correctly for someone, but no one will tell me what I DO need to do. Please either tell me specifically what I need to do to properly tell the copyright status is of something, or stop removing my pics. Thanks. mathewignash
  • Optimus Continued...
Why shouldn't I readd my pictures if they are useable, I just didn't tage them correctly. How do I change the tag? I've read it over and over, but no one will explain it in plain english. WHERE the heck do I add things like tv-screenshot? In text on the page for Optimus Prime, or when I upload it in one of the boxes?

[edit] Your non-offer of assistance

Your non-offer of assistance is also greatly non-appreciated. :-P Jayjg (talk) 23:33, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Happy Valentines Day!

♥ Happy Valentines Day! ♥

May your days be filled with Wikilove!

- Quadell

[edit] Edit 5,001

Note! Congratulations. You are the proud recipient of Bastique's 5,000th edit! It's good luck for the coming year. Like pigeon poop on the head, annoying to clean, but ultimately fortuitous. Woohoo!

For prosperity. 03:09, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] And now, a musical number...

In the mornin', in the evenin', ain't we got trolls? Sing it with me... · Katefan0(scribble)/poll 07:39, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] You are out of line

Sean, your attempt to censor the discussion at Talk:Political views of Lyndon LaRouche is inappropriate. Wikipedia policy permits the removal of personal attacks, but the material you removed is of an entirely different nature. The methods of Cberlet and SlimVirgin in the LaRouche articles have been highly propagandistic, and harmful to Wikipedia; you seem to wish to suppress any discussion of this, and this appears to be a form of POV pushing on your part. --HK 16:16, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

I am simply asking you to stick to the Wikipedia policy framework. Wikipedia policy allows you to remove personal attacks; it does not allow you to generally remove opinions with which you disagree. And I find your interpretation of the Arbcom decision to be highly original. It says I may not edit those articles, or their talk pages. It doesn't say I may not read them. --HK 23:25, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
Allow me to clarify: it appears to me that you are anxious to suppress any discussion of Chip Berlet as a reputable source. You and your allies SlimVirgin, WillBeback/Willmcw and Snowspinner/Phil Sandifer have repeated over and over that Chip Berlet is an outstanding source; Cberlet also extolls his own virtues, and it is clear that he has allies on the ArbCom that will attempt to shield him from criticism at Wikipedia. However, out there in the real world, things are different. Just as an experiment, try looking for cites on Google news for "Chip Berlet to see how much in demand his "expertise" is, nowadays. Visitors from the real world are bound to comment on Wikipedia's extraordinary promotion of Chip Berlet, and I think it would be most beneficial for Wikipedia to allow these voices to be heard, rather than declaring the topic to be taboo. --HK 23:47, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
HK, your nostalgia for the golden days of our editing relationship has clouded your memory somewhat. It was your edits the arbcom ruled were propagandistic and harmful to Wikipedia, which is why they banned you from editing LaRouche pages. What Sean is doing is asking people to focus on content, rather than make personal attacks against contributors, something you yourself might try too. SlimVirgin (talk) 17:18, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
And SlimVirgin admonishing others about personal attacks takes today's Irony Prize. --HK 23:25, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
Careful, Herschel, you're projecting again. SlimVirgin (talk) 23:39, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Maybe it would be a good idea both for Herschel to concentrate on content and Sean to keep the fuck out of it. Deleting comments is out of order, regardless of your view of their validity, unless they are personal attacks tout court. Even then, WP:RPA is a guideline, not an injunction. It just inflames disputes to give the impression that you are trying to silence one side without giving them a say.

But Herschel, regardless of your personal view of SlimVirgin, you won't achieve anything by insulting her. You need to recognise that. -- Grace Note.

[edit] Here is the scholar source

Hello. so you don't want to support Jagjg for a mediation of the palestinian exodus article... I understand ;-)

But you are the mediator for war of 1948, aren't you ? ;-)

"The Grand Mufti's connections with the Nazis during the war were not secret; he had hoped they would help him in the implementation of some final solution in the Near East", Hannah Arendt [2], Eichmann in Jerusalem, p. 13. [3]

I assume you know Annah Arendt. If not, there is the wiki link or google (H)annah Arendt. I gathered all other sources here [4] and I highly suggest a look at the caricature.

This has of course no reason to be in the war of 1948 article but I didn't agree the truth is not respected. I also think this shows that Heptor should not be blamed by ArbCom.

Sorry for that poisonned gift ;)

Christophe Greffe 01:43, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

I think I am myselft already too much involved. Hope to meet you soon in another article of common interest. Christophe Greffe 07:44, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Concerning the LaRouche page

Sean, I said in that I would not concern myself with the matter any longer. You should also address the personal attacks of others, see the discussion. My time is wasted in that type of stuff so I am moving on. I stand behind my statement though and have made my concerns known to Wikimedia the parent of this site. I do hope they address what is going on. --Northmeister 03:23, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

Sean, I've read your concerns. I have no intention of disruption. If you wish to discuss this matter or know more about me then feel free to email me. I feel my questions I originally posted were in good faith and then I was attacked. I responded inappropriatly for a discussion page but I am new to this. I have already contact Wikimedia though about certain concerns of mine. I am only here to help and became interested in the page in question due to allegations made against my other edits of topics I have a degree and interest in. --Northmeister 05:12, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

See also: Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-02-17 Talk:Political views of Lyndon LaRouche -Will Beback 10:19, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NOES

I'm sorry, you are a great editor but you do not own these pages. Why do you persist on deleting sections that you deam as "unnecessary"? You do not have the right to deem them as so. It is the duty of everyone to present topics to the discussion board that they feel are inappropriate for the page and have a discussion as to whether others agree with this feeling or not. Unless it is pure vandalism it should be talked about and voted on by more than just one individual who deems it unnecessary. Bignole 00:39, 18 February 2006 (UTC) That is exactly my point. If you disagree use the talk page, is this not what you said on my talk page? That applies to article pages as well. If you disagree about the taglines then use the talk page to discuss it. Why should you be the only one to say that it should not be there. If others find that it could be of some relevance than it should stay. Correct? Bignole 00:46, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Didn't we agree, finally, that the tagline could stay. Atleast I remember doing so on the other Nightmare movie (i.e. Freddy's Revenge). As for the song, I can atleast agree it belongs on Freddy's personal page since it is associated more with him. But we did agree on the relevance of the taglines. Bignole 02:42, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AH

Why did you fully protect Adolf Hitler? Wyss 05:05, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Why is the article tagged as "fully protected" when in fact signed-in editors can edit it? Str1977 13:59, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Village pump edits

Text was moved to the template. --Pascal666 08:38, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

Using edit summaries would have avoided this problem. --Golbez 08:40, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
Yes, sorry, wanted to get all the pages done before anyone complained about the duplicate text. Didn't occur to me the opposite could be a problem. Sorry. --Pascal666 08:42, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] CONRAD- 14 YEAR OLD SOCIALIST!!!

Shut Up.

Your welcome. Do you know any way to stop my eye twitching? It's driving me nuts.

OK, I will do something productive, but in the meantime i am asking you if you know any way to stop one's eye twitching. You mention that you are here to listen and to make people feel better, you also say that if i need any help with anyting "administrorly" you would try to help. My present problem is something only an admin can help with. I am begging you to be civil, to stop threatening me and to do your job --CONRAD- 14 YEAR OLD SOCIALIST!!! 22:13, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

I was reffering to you User and Discussion pages respectively.

[edit] I AM A ROBOT

If we were all communists, you wouldn't be able to boss me around, or stop me from editing certain pages. We would all be equal. After all, you're oly one year older than me. There are some very power-crazed admin people on wikipedia. How does one become an admin anyway? --CONRAD- 14 YEAR OLD SOCIALIST!!! 22:30, 18 February 2006 (UTC) P.S: Thanks for the advice about my eye, i stuck it under a tap and it's stopped twitching. I am sane again

It's not the year that counts. It's what you did with it. SlimVirgin (talk) 06:51, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] SHUT UP

I am starting to get annoyed. I have told you I will do something as soon as i find something that needs doing. Don't you have more productive things to do than repeatidly repeating yourself? Surely you could be improving the encyclopedia instead of wasting time and words on something that you have said 4,000 times before. I got the message the first time --CONRAD- 14 YEAR OLD SOCIALIST!!! 22:38, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia Review

You're not biased. They're idiots. Good on you for at least having a go, though.

Oh, and good luck with Conrad the 14 year old socialist. I would have thought you'd had enough with Lir! ElectricRay 23:53, 18 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Boowah!

You rock!
You rock!

Two minutes in and you intiate the expirement with fishy goodness. You Rock! --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 06:42, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WP:ENJOY

Man, that is a good idea. Now comes the tough part. Knowing when it's "official"... ;-) Karmafist 07:02, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] david irving talk page

i was just wondering why you reverted on the talk page for the David Irving article. seemed like a legitimate post to me. what's up? Thanks, --Alhutch 02:19, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

hmm, banned user? I'll let it stand as it is right now. don't want to get into the business of enabling people who harass other users. thanks for the explanation and keep up the good work :-) --Alhutch 02:50, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AOL edits

You've just blocked me because of what someone did on an AOL identity that apparantly spills over to several users. Of course I never touched the article you saw damaged --GwydionM 20:45, 21 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ArbCom violations

I think that it's time to enforce the ArbCom restrictions on LaRouche editors again. Due to the the long history and outstanding ArbCom enforcements, this is perhaps best as an "incident" to be reported at WP:AN/I. I think we should gather the applicable ArbCom decisions, and the relevant edits into a summary there, and then an admin should enact the enforcements. Any thoughts? -Will Beback 00:51, 22 February 2006 (UTC)


[edit] More David Irving talk

I reinstated some text that you deleted from the David Irving talk page. While I agree that it's "not a discussion board" there are some interesting comments there and I have outlined my reasoning in detail on that page. I think it's bad form to delete text from talk pages, it's not like we have to worry about the bandwidth. If you feel it's off-topic or becoming so it's easy enough to either point that out and bring it back on topic, or move it off to a subpage. Graham 12:54, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] I've made a new account

Are you happy now. Userbox from heaven 22:37, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Malplaced disambiguation pages

Sean, thanks for fixing the Robert Holmes (disambiguation) page. You may not have known that there are more like this, listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject Disambiguation/Malplaced disambiguation pages, where non-admin disambig fixers can ask for help, and where there has not been much admin help lately. Of course, it may be boring and thankless work, but it can't take as much time as the several dozen articles where I had to disambiguate links. If you take on this crucial assignment, at least a couple of us will be grateful. Happy editing! Chris the speller 01:35, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A question from Andy123

I saw that you had blocked this user User:Userbox_from_hell citing that this name was inappropriate for usage on wikipedia. A similar id was also blocked again. Can you tell me the reasons about why this was done?

-- Anirudh 15:04, 24 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User page vandalism

Thanks for reverting the vandalism to my user page. :) Arundhati bakshi 06:35, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image

Done. :-) SlimVirgin (talk) 07:43, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

Is that "hooray" as in "one day she'll get it right first time"? image:tongue.png SlimVirgin (talk) 07:50, 26 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] AYBABTU

As an occasional editor of the AYBABTU article, I wanted you to know that someone has suggested that the transcript of the opening and closing dialog be deleted. Personally, I think this is ludicrous, but your support is needed to keep the information on Wikipedia. If you are in favor of keeping the text, as it is clearly used under fair use guidelines, please enter a KEEP vote on its AFD page. Thanks! --BRossow 05:15, 27 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] My final good-byes

Hello Sean. I came to tell all my friends, yes, that means you, that I am leaving Wikipedia. Thank you for being so kind to me during my stay on Wikipedia. I hope to speak with you again someday. (I was formerly SWD316) Moe ε 06:15, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Central

Recent attack on you. [5] Please look at his contributions since the expiration of block. Thanks joshbuddytalk 14:57, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] LC/Neto

Hi. I haven't checked LC carefully, except to note you blocked him. So I thought I'd let you know I've blocked Neto, who appears to be in clear violation of his arbcomm judgement for edting the template at all. regards, William M. Connolley 17:04, 28 February 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Your block of User:Locke Cole

Yo. Did you see further discussion on this revert war at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR#User:Locke Cole? It seems that, given the terms of Neto's ArbCom decision, LC wasn't technically violating the 3RR. I haven't looked at all the details, but you may want to. android79 17:06, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Haj Amin al-Husseini

Hello Sean. I gathered so many quotes (of very high values) that I decided to write an article about this (presented with a very "cold" npov). I refered this in the main article of Haj Amin. See : References about Haj Amin al-Husseini’s anti-semitism. But Somebody wants it to be deleted (only 2 hours after it's creation)... Could you help ? Thank you ![6]... :-( Christophe Greffe 21:58, 28 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikibreak

Enjoy your break, and come back sometime, otherwise we'll miss your zany banter on IRC. --Interiot 18:36, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

Bah. What he said. Except for the bit about the banter. - brenneman{T}{L} 22:33, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you!

 Thank you!
Hi Sean Black/Archive/6, thank you for your support in my Rfa! It passed with a final tally of 86/0/0. If you need help or just want to talk let me know! Again, thank you! – Dakota ~ ° 22:58, 3 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Monobook

What skin do you use? I noticed that your monobook script was empty.Voice-of-AllT|@|ESP 03:07, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Want me to "spice up" your wiki experience with some useful script?Voice-of-AllT|@|ESP 03:16, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Zeq

This arbitration case has closed. Zeq is banned from articles he has disrupted and placed on Probation. Zeq and Heptor are cautioned regarding sources. Zeq is cautioned regarding removal of well sourced information. Others are cautioned to use the procedures in Wikipedia:Resolving disputes. Where applicable, these remedies are to be enforced by block. On behalf of the arbitration committee, Johnleemk | Talk 09:46, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Award

I award you this amphibian with fins for working so hard to get rid of the strange things on Wikipedia.—pschemp 00:30, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
I award you this amphibian with fins for working so hard to get rid of the strange things on Wikipedia.
—pschemp 00:30, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Edits by Central on Jehovah's Witnesses page

Please check the edits by Central on the Jehovah's Witnesses page made March 5th, starting with this edit:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jehovah%27s_Witnesses&diff=42372094&oldid=42348273

Fortunately, they have been reverted but his edits tend to be disruptive to the page. Dtbrown 02:53, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

I've left a note to Central about NPOV on his talk page, and will watch his contributions. If he continues, I shall take appropriate action. Best regards, --NicholasTurnbull | (talk) 03:31, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WP:RFPP

I appreciate the thoughts, but I'm not interested. --Woohookitty(cat scratches) 07:07, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar

The Barnstar of Good Humor
For your constant ability to absorb all our good-natured ribbing and keep coming back for more, I hereby award you this Barnstar of Good Humor. Never let the real troublemakers get you down, and know we're always around when you need us. Essjay Talk • Contact 06:09, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Song

Ok, now that song would be considered encyclopedic. The song belongs only to that movie, and it is culturally identifiable when it is recited. What do you have against the song? Bignole 02:27, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Templates

Sean, why did you replace the pictures in the templates? I assume you replaced the logo on the Wikiproject page because fair-use doesn't cover its use there; that's fine. But the picture of the police box in the templates is okay because it's a photograph taken by Angmering (talk • contribs) and released for use. The Earl's Court police box has that ugly CCTV attachment on the top and so doesn't really resemble a TARDIS at all. The other picture is closer. --khaosworks (talk • contribs) 03:44, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Template:User selfref-3

Hi, Sean ... I noted that you removed the images on Template:User selfref-1, 2 and 3 on the basis that there is no rationale for fair use. Is this a consensus position or are you acting on your own on this without prior consensus? --Aquarius Rising 21:43, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fair Use Image

Hi Sean. Regarding your edit here: Could you please let me know what part of WP:FUC you were thinking of when you removed the image? ॐ Metta Bubble puff 21:52, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

text=thank you Thanks. So my understanding is that if it is out of context we cannot use the image. But is it really out of context? Doesn't it qualify as critical commentary on the work in question since the article is called The map is not the territory and the work is illustrating the same thing? ॐ Metta Bubble puff 01:18, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps. But it's a borderline case, so it's probably best to just keep it as a link.--Sean Black (talk) 01:22, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps it's best to achieve consensus on this. I think it isn't borderline and it's almost a textbook example of when a fair use claim is appropriate. But then again I'm no lawyer. I'd like to copy our discussion to the talk page and ask for a 3rd opinion (or 4th and so on) on the matter. ॐ Metta Bubble puff 02:04, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

IMHO, there shouldn't be any deleting of images from templates in respect of the "fair use" issue without there being prior consensus on the interpretation and application of the fair use rules to the particular instance. --Aquarius Rising 03:49, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Why the revert?

Hi. I have just been editing the entry for 'Thundercracker' but I found it reverted and I don't know why. All that was left was the message 'Rv coopyvio, format breaking' in the history.

I know I haven't been leaving explanations for my edits even though I have valid reasons for editing the page. I also edit a page with minor edits many times to get it to look how I want it to be instead of previewing my edits.

But surely that doesn't warrant the page being reverted?

Bass X 03:12, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Squeeze

A great squeeze to Sean Black!
A great squeeze to Sean Black!

This fellow just wants to have a good time squeezing you! :) – Elisson • Talk 23:05, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Katharine Hepburn

Dear Sir:

I respectfully requested that you tell me what I have done wrong; simply writing "unnecessary formatting" does not tell me anything, although the below referenced dos tell me something (see highlights):

What is "ugly" and "overzealous" about changing "Hartford, Connecticut" to "Hartford, Connecticut"? —Quarl (talk) 2006-02-05 08:50Z
It seem terribly unnecesary to me, personally, and as such it's annoying to have mass changes on this level. But that's just me.--Sean Black (talk) 09:36, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

It seems you impose your will re formatting based on personal whims, and not on anything stronger or citeable from WikiRules.

I request one last time that you specify what I have done in violation of WikiRules. I am going to check and see where I committed POV as asserted by another Wikipedian.

Yours,

216.194.58.82 07:39, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Dear Sean:
Thanks for the response. I think somethings, if they are germane to the story and red-linked, need to be placed in bold lettering, but only if whatever it is or whoever it's about do not have a WikiPage of its/his/her own.
I don't understand what you mean by ...the white space you added is automatically removed by the software and is thus unnecessary.
I am glad to know that there is significant flexibility in how a page can be set up; I've had problems in the past with people who "knew" they were right, and would not even consider the improvements, particularly, aesthetically, that I contributed.

Whatever I do, I am not a vandal, and I never try to slip in profanity under the radar. If I do it, I take responsibility for it.

Slainte.
216.194.58.82 08:08, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User:Colignatus

I don't think Colignatus is consciously malicious, but is more like a clueless newbie who is seemingly unaware that an overzealous appeal to authority with respect to contributors themselves doesn't make sense here on Wikipedia. -- Dissident (Talk) 01:26, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Why remove a thumbnail

Sean, On Self-reference, you removed a thumbmail of "The Betrayal of Images" and converted it just to a link. Citing WP:FUC I was just curious what about Fair Use prevents the thumbnail being used in that article? Is it that a Fair Use images should only be used on basically its own page? Something else? --Alecmconroy 14:39, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User:Rattlerbrat

I never liked the username much, anyway. I'm having a much better time editing under my other name. Thanks, mate! And I salute your brilliant blocking skills. No, really, good job. :) - --Jennifer

[edit] SPUI

You're aware that SPUI has been moving pages and conducting a page move war? Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-03-12 U.S. Roads --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 05:02, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ben Gatti

You might get a kiss for that one! :) I don't see people arguing against it. I mean. as Taxman said, his behavior on those 2 pages was the main inpetus for the arbcom case. --Woohookitty(cat scratches) 06:03, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User:Blisz block

I see you blocked User:Blisz. I've just blocked User:Seanver who seemed involved too. Steve block talk 21:56, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mostly Attacks on other users

Sean, I like you, and you're for the most part a reasonable guy. But come on, give me a break. That's BS and you know it. ElectricRay 22:07, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ben Gatti 2

Guess what? Mr. Gatti put a completely ridiculous request for arbitration up on nuclear energy after being banned from Nuclear power and PAA. I put a request up for a 2 weeks block here. Per his arbcom case, we need 3 uninvolved admins for a block, so your input would be most appreciated. And the sad part, Sean? It doesn't surprise me. Ben's been pulling this BS for almost a year now. This is the guy who put an arbcom case request up because he didn't like that a page was protected! --Woohookitty(cat scratches) 05:45, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Inquiry

Hi there, I just want to get a second opinion from an admin, so would you please look at this section[7] and see if there are any violations, like incivilty, etc. Yeah, and you definitely don`t have to warn the editor in question [Lukas]--but, I just wanted to get an idea of what is going on. Can I report this guy for harrassment? ThanksZmmz 08:08, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion of Qazi Touqeer

On 24 February 2006 you deleted "Qazi Touqeer" stating that it was an nn bio. Could you please explain why you felt so, since ever since this person won Fame Gurukul, he has become one of the most famous singers in India and has released a number of songs [8]. Cheers.--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91($ |-| ŗ 3 $ |-| ţ |-|) 08:35, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Better now--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91($ |-| ŗ 3 $ |-| ţ |-|) 09:39, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] friend of slim

i see u're a friend of slim's, sean. the same advice applies 2 u as 2 her: don't rely on yr innate infallibility, LEARN abt a topic b4 u start interfering. Jamaissur

[edit] user:EffK

Blanking someone's user page is simple vandalism. Describing what they chose to write on their user page as 'useless junk' is simple personal abuse. As it stands, even banned users are entitled to keep their user pages through the duration of a ban, and to edit their user talk pages. They are also entitled to the same basic respect and common decency as anyone else. Please don't do this again.Bengalski 13:00, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Banned users don't get a userpage. I think you're wrong on this, but not being a wikilegal expert I've asked for outside views at Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts. And even if the rules are with you, I don't think that excuses your disrespect. The guy has been banned, there's no need to rub salt in it.Bengalski 21:25, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Taglines

Hey, I just wanted to say thanks for your comments on Taglines in User_talk:Alakazam#Taglines. Because I them I was able to make a better justification for tagline removal in Wikipedia:WikiProject Films. Thanks again. - Isogolem 06:31, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Everyking

Sean, regarding your comment on Will's page, this was fully discussed beforehand, in case you're not aware of it. See WP:RfAr#Everyking_3. Cheers, SlimVirgin (talk) 05:43, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

I've always been fond of Everyking, and have watched in dismay over the years as he has repeatedly run into trouble. I would never have blocked him for that period of time had there not been previous discussion and the suggestion by an ArbCom member that a one week block was appropriate. I also felt that, to make it clear that no animosity was involved, that it was better if a disinterested admin like myself performed the block. As much as I respect Everyking's contributions we also need to respect the Arbcom and the community. Everyking has been a disruptive influence in administrative affairs. His contributions are welcome but his disruption is not. -Will Beback 05:54, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RfA thanks!

Image:WikiThanks.png Hi Sean! Thank you for supporting my RfA. It passed at 105/1/0, putting me in WP:100 - I'm delighted and surprised! I'm always happy to help out, so if you need anything, please drop me a line. Cheers! ➨ ❝REDVERS❞ 20:12, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Game

While I disagree with the final outcome, I want to make a suggestion: protect the deleted page page, since otherwise it will probably be recreated fairly soon and we don't need to go through this again. JoshuaZ 01:16, 23 March 2006 (UTC)


Sir,

Allow me to preface that I realise you're an admin, giving you much power over such a little peon like myself. However, this must be brought to your attention. I will avoid resorting to vituperation, but the following is extremely critical of your actions.

In your closing statement for the debate regarding The Game article, you wrote (verbatim)

"...there are no sources for this game's existance." [sic]

This assertion is wholly incorrect. There are plenty of users corroborating its existence. The disagreement was solely about The Game's verifiability and if it belongs in Wikipedia. I can understand that there is not much evidence supporting that there is/was factual information in the article, however, you mainpulated the reasoning somehow to the fact that The Game is fake. This is unacceptable.

Your sudden closing of the debate and subsequent delete was, frankly, dictatorial and the reasoning unfounded. You should choose your words more carefully and read the nomination in its entirety before blatantly demonstrating your inability to peruse the discussion.

I eagerly await your response, Mr. Black.

Respectfully yours, brabblebrex 03:09, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Given, the above comment I feel strongly compelled to make my own comment that you clearly were faced with a difficult AfD and even if I disagree with your decision it was a reasonable decision to make given your position. Don't sweat about it. And Brabblebrex, please Chillm it isn't the end of the world. If you really care about the game, your best bet to get another article about it is to spread the game far and wide so that it eventually becomes common enough so that it appears in an acceptable source. In the meantime, harrasing admins doesn't accomplish anything. JoshuaZ 03:13, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
lol, immediate response by you... and then me:
I do spread the game. I spread it like [Herpes], man! Aside of which, criticism isn't harassment. brabblebrex 03:26, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
Going to an Admins page to complain about a valid AfD closure and call his behavior "dictatorial" at minimum violates WP:NPA and WP:CIVIL. JoshuaZ 03:34, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Mr. Black, If plenty of users confirm its reality, and among those that do, if there's consensus about the presence of accurate information, why is sourcing so essential on such a trivial article? Not every person who believes in The Game is a troll; why would they (we) all lie? As I've previously said, this isn't the proverbial rocket science. It's a frivolous, childish game at best. brabblebrex 03:54, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Sourcing is still vital, regardless of the apparent triviality of the article. If an article like this were to be allowed to remain unsourced, why shouldn't we accept unsourced articles on more serious matters? Wikipedia standards, guidelines and policies have to be followed universally, otherwise they become worthless. Kinitawowi 10:25, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

So, regardless of a large mass of users (even other websites, although they're not infalliable) confirming The Game's actuality, this fact is overthrown by the verifiability guideline? It cannot be as simple as that.

  • Yes, it is. - brenneman{L} 04:05, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
    Brabblebrex, after the deletion debate is closed there isn't anything special Sean can do about it. If you feel that strongly, you can contest the deletion. But stop bugging Sean. JoshuaZ
    • Actually, to be pedantic an admin may reverse his own decision at just about any time... but I agree, stop bugging Sean. He made the correct call, beyond any doubt. - brenneman{L} 04:52, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
I stand corrected. JoshuaZ 04:57, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
  • User:Brabblebrex: I shall quote from WP:V: "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth. This means that we only publish material that is verifiable with reference to reliable, published sources." (Emphasis theirs.) Jude (talk,contribs,email) 13:48, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Sean

By knowing of the existence of the Sean, you're playing the Sean. User:Sean Black is a player (just ask the ladies) so by definition, he's playing the Sean. Whenever you start to imagine Sean Black wearing only thigh-high boots... damn. I lose again.
brenneman{L} 04:05, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
Note: The current champion of The Sean is a three way tie between Count Chocula, Herb Alpert and User:Slim Virgin.

Whenever we start to imagine Sean Black wearing only thigh-high boots, we all lose. ::grins, ducks, runs:: Mindspillage (spill yours?) 21:54, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Current Deletion Review

Given that you closed the AfD that actually went delete, I think your opinion on the current DR might be informative/helpful. If you could maybe stop by and give us your opinion, I'd appreciate it. Thanks. JoshuaZ 22:29, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion On Nightmare Edits

I'm very upset about the removal of my edit's to the Freddy Krueger articles. My post about it is here.

EDIT: After reading your talk page, I noticed you have been editing the Elm Street articles a lot. For someone who doesn't know a whole lot about them, why don't you leave it to the experts, eh? Now since you haven't responded to my notice on the Talk page for Freddy's personal article, I'm going to revert my edits. Caio!

Yes, Sean, you obviously know a lot about them. Enough to completely goof one of the most well known facts about the Nightmare films next to "Freddy wears a red and green sweater"? Or should I mention the fact that the colors are blood red and olive green by the actual nylon yarn tags, or that Wes Craven chose those colors because the eye has difficulty processing them when they're together like that, or that his original sweater had red only on the arms unlike all of his other films? I could go into further detail about this, but I don't think it's needed. Again, you've been (as I like to put it) "pwned through logic". I (and apparently, along with other REAL Freddy fans) don't appreciate you claiming to know enough about the films to revert our correct and factual edits when you don't even know the jump rope song!
Besides, this ISN'T about intellegence. It's about the facts, and you don't know them while others do.
--The Skunk 06:58, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WP:V thread

There's also talk at Wikipedia_talk:Verifiability#Fictional_Characters regarding this. I'd actually like to see a bit more force behind "don't take notes while watching the film unless you write for the Times" now that you've lured me into the Final Destination morass. I haven't gone and gutted eviscerated cleaned up the "deaths" sections in while...
brenneman{L} 07:43, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hello

I convey my greetings to you on my completion of one year as a wikipedian. Come here, we shall have a party tonight. The biggest laddus have been ordered. --Bhadani 15:08, 24 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hi

Hi Sean Black, and thank you for taking time to vote on my RfA. I understand that my last 6000+ edits were not sufficient to convince you that edits like some of my early ones would never be repeated again, but I sincerely hope that at some point I would be able to convince you of my transformation. Looking forward to working with you in future. Regards, deeptrivia (talk) 03:15, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Sean, for your kind message. I appreciate very much your support, and perfectly understand the way you and everyone else voted. Cheers :) deeptrivia (talk) 03:35, 26 March 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Doctor Who Wiki

Hi Sean,

My apologies for the antics of Oliver Mitchell on the Doctor Who Wiki. I was at work when the mass vandalism occurred and did not know about until just now when I checked the recent changes. Thanks for trying to bring it to my attention. I greatly appreciate your contributions and hope to see more there and here in the future. --Freethinker1of1 03:47, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] and stay away from my ....

you know who. ++Lar: t/c 03:29, 6 April 2006 (UTC)


[edit] ContiE has impersonated me on other wikis

Hi, I'm in a potentially awkward position with an Administrator. I have read the Wiki pages on dispute resolution but I'm still not sure how to proceed.

The Admin ContiE has a personal grudge against me for reasons I do not fully understand. He has been this way since I began frequenting wikipedia.

I have done work improving the furvert article. He has basically gone on a crusade against any edit I make. He controls every furry category article and several others ruthlessly. He is an iron fist and bans anyone he edit wars with. I had uploaded pictures and he deleted them with no talking. He seems to believe I am every person he has had an edit war against. He is always using personal attacks, calling me troll without reason. I uploaded them again and he voted them for deleted, but to his surprise the person who runs the images, thank you Nv8200p, found they were acceptable once I tagged them properly. Just recently he removed both the images without himself discussing it in the talk page (unless he was the same person who discussed only one) with the edit here [9] Then ContiE assumed bad faith, added his constant insult of troll in the talk page. It appears on a completed different wiki, a comedy one in all things, somebody else stole my username and I believe this was Conti himself and uploaded them. ContiE showed it as his reason. While vandalism like his, I would revert and mention it, he would ban me permanently if I undid his edit. That is why I am asking admins for help. He holds a couple of accounts on wikipedia and I think they are administrators so I have to be careful who I tell about this. Arights 07:27, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A KISS Rfa Thanks

Thank you, I've been promoted. pschemp | talk 01:09, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Template:User marriage man-woman

Hi Sean, I'd ask you to reconsider your deletion of Template:User marriage man-woman, which was kept by community consensus previously. I'd prefer to agree this here rather than re-pull it through DRV where it will probably be voted for undeletion. Remember that the worst weapon to fight blind intolerance with is more blind intolerance. Stifle (talk) 12:34, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Hello, thank you for your message. I am well aware that the template was kept by TfD. However, I find the rationale of the comments there to be inexplicable or irrelevant now that the accompaning template {{User Same Sex Marriage}} was deleted by Mackensen (talk • contribs • logs). The comments that were not calling for it to be kept to avoid the appearance of "double standards" seem to me to be based on their personal sympathy for the point of view expressed by the template, their ignorance of Wikipedia policy, or both. Therefore, I see no reason whatsoever to overturn my own decision. You are, however, free to take it to deletion review if you wish to refute these points, of course. Thank you.--Sean Black (talk) 20:51, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
OK, I will list it on DRV shortly. I don't want to wheel war about it. Stifle (talk) 10:31, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] creepy

You know what's really creepy? How you watched for when I'd post that so that you could call me creepy... And I still think that it's weird that she's not really ugly...--Frenchman113 23:46, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Sean Black is an approved Keitei-stalker. He's allowed to do that. --Keitei (talk) 02:12, 14 April 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Sigh

I was glad to see you put your userpage back ... you had me worried there for a minute. Btw, I love that note at the top of your talk page: it's absolutely true, and I wish everyone would read it. Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 02:02, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Hey babe... dig the new look. Blackcap (talk) 02:32, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Tvrtko

Why is the greatest POV? --HolyRomanEmperor 22:00, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

I understand and concur. However, in every signle textbook of former Yugoslavia, and in the statements of every Serbian, Bosniak or Croatian historian Tvrtko is referred to that way. --HolyRomanEmperor 08:47, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Man-Faye

I've reverted your redirect; if you're going to (effectively) delete articles, perhaps putting up a RFD first might be more appropriate? --moof 05:51, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Old Skool Esperanzial note

Since this isn't the result of an AC meeting, I have decided to go Old Skool. This note is to remind you that the elections are taking place now and will end at 23:50 UTC on 2006-04-29. Please vote here. Thanks. --Celestianpower háblame 20:42, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marduk in popular culture

I'm not disputing this AfD (I might have given it a weak keep) but even given some of BGC's comments in the AfD, your comment "This nomination is based on entirely faulty reasoning" seems a bit unfair. The nom did mention WP:NOT#Wikipedia_is_not_an_indiscriminate_collection_of_information. Additionally, I'm not sure how it could have been a speedy keep when it did receive one delete recommendation beyond the nominator's? Wikipedia:Speedy keep mentions "the nomination was clear-cut vandalism or WP:POINT and nobody disputes this or votes to delete it anyway." Шизомби 16:19, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Closing that early was not the right thing to do. I did quote policy, as Schizombie states above. Also, questioning my sanity was entirely inappropriate. I demand an apology. Brian G. Crawford 00:05, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for correcting my mistake at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marduk in popular culture.

No problem. Frankly, I was worried that I would be overstepping my bounds (as a non-admin) to do so, and that it might be considered a bit too bold (or even confrontational): I'm glad to hear you didn't think so.

Whatever your reasons for closing it, I don't think you owe me an explanation; however, I think you still owe one to the nominator. --Calton | Talk 00:12, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Adminliness

Hey, mate. Well, I'm back and about as active again as I'll ever be, and if you're still O.K. nomming me then I reckon that I'm about ready. Thanks again, Snoutwood (talk) 22:06, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

All right, mate, it's all filed! <kisses Sean on cheek> Cheers, Snoutwood (talk) 22:34, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
TMI! ++Lar: t/c 00:21, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] New Messages

Well now you have one, so quityerbitchin. :P--Shanel § 20:14, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Anti-semitic Vandalism

User:152.163.100.73, here.

See his diatribe in my user mail, User talk:FourthAve. I seem to have offended some really nasty right wing trolls. You can do the block.

He's also vandalized Townsend Harris High School, which has been reverted.

--FourthAve 02:52, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanx. As for my comments about you not being an admin, I really did check that one source, and comments that I should have checked elsewhere were unfair: Finding various wiki-specific documents is nearly impossible; as I recall, this list was found via special pages (where else was I supposed to look?). I may have been here a couple of years, and done 2500+ edits (plus perhaps 1000 more to the no-longer extant pages of the EB 1911 project), but I am still grossly ignorant of where things are kept and find procedures very very opaque. I only recently figured out that nearly nothing on wiki is really private; I only in the last couple of weeks learned how to snoop into other people's edits lists.
I've also observed from the sidelines what amount to edit/revert wars among Admins. My favorite Admin User:Wiglaf has said "good bye cruel world"; I don't blame him.
That other issue: It seems Tony Sidaway has decided to ban me for a year (he intimated as such), notwithstanding my understanding this issue was resolved. No, I am not whining: I behaved abominably, but I had been severely provoked by a cabal of reverters. I'll manage this by myself, but I think any defense is futile, considering the admin-wars Sidaway has provoked and the exchanges I have read regarding him.
Considering the larger context, this may come as a suprise, but I have a nomination for an admin. I've put this as a new entry at the end of this page (my reasons are that I care about the NYC subway project). --FourthAve 05:25, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hi

I saw you on the RfA page of FloNight and felt like saying you a big and nice hello. Let us continue to build the Better than the Best global encyclopedia. Thank you and regards. --Bhadani 16:10, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Ignore All Rules : reply

Hi Sean, thanks for your comments. I have no shame in being bold with my edits, so I intend to continue editing as I did (ie, reverting IAR to a simple version), and I hope to do so with continuing civility! Thanks again. --PopUpPirate 00:53, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../s/e/a/User_talk%7ESean_Black_Archive_6_5a07.html"