User talk:The Rambling Man/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 2 of my Discussion

This is an archive of my Discussion page from May 12, 2006 to August 24, 2006:

U.S. EWHA

You changed some links for me but now my new and old page are gone. Dleivestad 17:19, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I checked this out for you, and it appears that your page was deleted as a result of it being considered a violation of copyright. See [1] link. This most commonly occurs when someone has copied a chunk of a website external to Wikipedia and pasted it into a new page. If this is not the case then you could discuss the issue with the Wikipedian who removed your page, Conscious. I can't get more info than that I'm afraid. Budgiekiller 06:42, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting vandlism on my page. Siddiqui 17:19, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Not a problem! Budgiekiller 17:24, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Could you pl. explain...

...this edit of yours - the blanking was done by an admin because the user started attacking posters on his talk page with appellations such as "abusive admin's melodrama", "troll's melodrama" etc. This was pointed out as bad behavior by several users on WP:ANI, which you may want to have a look at. Please self-revert your edit or get the user to drop those appellations and unnecessary boldings etc. --Gurubrahma 10:19, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Sure. Your blanking actually removed links to Anwar's archives, his work in progress etc. I'm not attempting to defend what he has written elsewhere on his talk page but I think if you're trying to remove sections in which he attacks others, you should be more selective. Budgiekiller 10:29, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Could you pl. show me the diff where I blanked? I've not blanked the page, some other admin did. I only alerted you to the fact that you've reverted that edit and the possibility that you may not have realised that the blanking contained some personal attacks. --Gurubrahma 09:28, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Yup ;), other users have already alerted that admin to his excessive blanking and I've alerted him to our conversation here. Keep up the good work. --Gurubrahma 09:33, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Conversely, you should be more selective about what you revert. My intention was to blank one section, which apparently went awry. There was absolutely no need to replace personal attacks. Please be more thoughtful in the future when helping out. Thanks. .:.Jareth.:. ^babelfish 11:29, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm afraid I have nothing to do with the dispute you all seem to have with this particular user, all I did was revert what appeared to be vandalism, blanking a very large section of a Talk page. I'm surprised that an administrator is talking to me like this, whatever happened to assuming good faith? Budgiekiller 16:53, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Why have you removed my link to www.hatters-forum.co.uk , its a forum an information center for luton town fans , I think your reasons for removing my link is wrong , If you are going to remove my link as " just a forum " why are you not deleting other links which feature loads of advertising ??? . The forum is in its early days but has plenty of relevent information about luton which is not present on wikipedia . And as for not contributeing anything else i tried adding some info on some of the players but it was not accepted for what ever reason ? if you can also tell me why that was i can resolve it an sort it so all the players have info on them .

Blocker dab

Nice work. Dweller 07:10, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

My pleasure! Budgiekiller 08:53, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks.

Thanks for your words of support during my wikibreak, they were much appreciated. Also, I understand why you voted your oppose, and accept your reasons (and will take them on board). I'm just sorry that more people didn't have reasonable reasons :/ -- 9cds^(talk) 15:29, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

welcome

Sounds great, didn't notice that I wasn't on the talk page. Thanks a lot --MorrisS 19:02, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

No worries, I've done it a few times myself! Get in touch if you need anything else. Budgiekiller 19:03, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Also...I'm finally getting arouns to making a User page for myself, and i stole your idea for places traveled. haha.

Thanks,

--MorrisS 19:23, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

I feel so welcome! whoda 19:42, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome to feel welcome! Budgiekiller 19:49, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

my talk page

Cheers dude.

A warning from a racist vandal.

Ho hum.

Dweller 12:49, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

No problem. I warned him back. Budgiekiller 12:51, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Ta

Thanks for your kind words regarding my work on helping to stamp out vandalism on Henry's article. Some would say it's sad editing wikipedia, but I wouldn't. It's the vandals that have no life! You keep up the good work too! hedpeguyuk 20:18, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Indeed, the more of us there are, the less they stand a chance. Good working with you. Budgiekiller 20:18, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

Campanology

Thanks for some good edits and your message on my user page. I moved the latter to the Campanology talk page, please find my reply there. -- SomeHuman 2006-06-26 23:10 (UTC)

Group of Death and Group of death

Job done. Appreciate it if you reviewed it in case I've done a hatchet job. btw have you ever heard of a "Group of Life"? --Dweller 09:00, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Looks fine to me. And, no, I haven't heard of the "Group of Life"...! Budgiekiller 09:23, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Please also see Talk:Group of death and chime in. --Dweller 09:48, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Blocked vandal

I've given the vandal a short block (since it's an AOL IP) and semi-protected your user page. The JPS^{talk to me} 11:10, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Vandals

At 11:09, 30 June 2006 (UTC), Budgiekiller wrote: "Cheers for helping out with the vandalism on my pages... F****rs... "

And the same to you sir! Anand^(talk) 11:13, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

The Strickland-meister

crossposted

Hey, just noticed you've added a bunch of wiki-links to Earl Strickland but most of them are red. Are you going to write the articles required to turn these red links blue or find appropriate links existing in Wikipedia to link to, or (3) none of the above? Budgiekiller 20:21, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the note. I had been editing the page when I had a minor RL disaster involving a cat and a large stack of boxes. I think I must have hit save as I jumped up, even though I hadn't finished. I probably would have forgotten the article if you hadn't dropped a note on my page. I killed all the redlinks for now and the article looks good again :) --Doc Tropics 20:30, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Wow, sounds disastrous! Remind me to place the cat and the boxes in a spare room and close the door before I edit pages!! No problems, thanks for pleasant discussion. Budgiekiller 20:33, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Copyvios

Yes, all those pages are copyvio. Even if he got permission, the text must be licensed under the GFDL or he must forward the permission to Wikimedia. So until that happens, all the pages that were copied from the website are copyvio. I'm going to wait on the stubby ones, if nothing happens on this matter for a few more days I'll tag the rest. SCHZMO ✍ 23:11, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Category/Sri Lanka

I will try to change the categories to history of sri lanka and would stick to that in the future. Will also consider Category:Archaeological sites in Sri Lanka. Cheers. /-

ela112 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ela112 (talk • contribs).

Categories and subcategories\Sri Lanka

ok i am confused as well ..hehe .. i will rename the constructions of sri lanka .. and then add the future articles to that category. im sorry i got nothing of the sub category issue ../

ella112.

Garbage

Doesn't your userpage and the 3D stress meter count as WikiGarbage? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lfcfan06 (talk • contribs).

• Possibly. Thanks for your advice. Budgiekiller 14:39, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Tone

Thank you for your suggestions, I'll keep that in mind for future editing although if you don't mind I will continue doing Trivia and Famous Fans sections on as many football clubs as this encyclopedia is also intended to teach people and showing celebrity fans to a certain club can only be a good thing, right? Nuggets 19:40, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Removing other users comments

Hey -- removing other users' comments is a form of vandalism. You did so here. Also, referring to edits that are clearly made in good faith as vandalism is very uncivil. Is there an explanation for this? I know MaitresseMarlene was making a first edit to Wikipedia in an AfD debate that had attracted a lot of edits from anons, but in such a circumstance, you should simply add a note to the AfD remarking that the previous commenter was a new account; don't remove their comments. Mangojuice^talk 16:21, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, very good point. I was trying to remove the link to the porn she was trying to peddle in the AfD and made a mess of it. I wasn't sure adding an external link to porn was part of the AfD process for a London DJ. Thanks for bringing my erroneous edit to my attention, rest assured vandalism was the last thing on my mind. Apologies. Budgiekiller 16:48, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Stub Template

How do I add one to new stub I've created?? Nicholassharland 14:54, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Although both are acceptable...

It seems to me that it is far more normative to have it as "links" than "link" from what I have seen. I also tend to agree with the below:

1. Experience shows that future editors often add links without changing the section heading.
2. Some contributors may be dissuaded from adding links to a section titled External link, since it seems to suggest that there should only be one link.
3. Using External links gives greater stylistic consistency to Wikipedia.
4. Changing a heading breaks any links directly to the External links section.
5. The purpose of the section is to provide External links rather than a single External link, so it does not matter how many actual links are listed.

Therefore, I feel that the collaborative nature of wikipedia is encouraged with the temporary inaccuracy of the added "s." Thus, no revolution, just a nudge toward the type of community I believe in. Peace, Kukini 21:46, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Your response made me grin. =) Kukini 21:59, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Although you were welcomed long ago...you might like these links

Yeah...I know..you are old hat at this...but the welcome template is kinda cool, no? Kukini 22:04, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Heh...now I feel stupid. Oh well. Thanks for taking it in good spirit. Glad my "virgining wand" still functions well. Kukini 22:07, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia!!!

Hello Budgiekiller! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. If you decide that you need help, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Below are some recommended guidelines to facilitate your involvement. Happy Editing! -- Kukini 21:59, 4 August 2006 (UTC) Getting Started Wikipedia Tutorial How to edit a page The five pillars of Wikipedia Manual of Style Be bold in editing How to write a great article WikiProjects Getting your info out there Cite your sources Neutral Point of View Point of View Verifiability Uploading images Image use policy Getting more Wikipedia rules Policy Library Getting Help New contributors' help page Where to ask a question Help Desk Frequently Asked Questions Getting along Wikiquette Civility Sign your posts Wikipedians Conflict resolution Getting technical Pages needing attention Peer review Utilities Village pump

Stub

Thanks for fixing the stub for me on a recent article. I'm not sure why I couldn't find a proper category or stub for the article in question, but nothing was clicking for me. Erechtheus 17:20, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

My thanks for the list. I'm sure it will be helpful. Erechtheus 18:43, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Re: Refusal to block

The user hadn't vandalized for thirty minutes when the warnings were issued, nor since the last warning was issued. If the user continues to vandalize again, a permanent block would be justified. theProject 17:55, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

As I said, if adding images of penises to kid's TV show pages doesn't deserve a block, I don't know what does. Budgiekiller 17:57, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

Someone else did it anyways. Cheers! theProject 17:27, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, and now he's had a sockpuppet banned for similar behaviour too. Looks like I called him right. But thanks for the update. Budgiekiller 18:18, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar

I, Dweller, award Budgiekiller this Barnstar for outstanding contributions to football-related Wikipedia articles. I make no comment whatsoever about his personal taste in supporting a team from Suffolk Dweller 15:10, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

*blushing* Flattery will you get you nowhere budgie boy! Thanks for the award! Budgiekiller 16:36, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Minor Barnstar Awarded!

This barnstar is awarded to Budgiekiller for minor edits of utmost quality, particularly in the arena of stub sorting. -- Kukini 17:15, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Wow, two in two days! Much appreciated! Budgiekiller 17:26, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Civil

Hi Budgiekiller, I was just wondering if this comment: [2] was directed at me or the person above me in the discussion? If it was directed at me, can you please explain why you thought I was uncivil? Regards, --Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 09:38, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Budgiekiller can speak for himself, but as a 'neutral' observer, I'd say it's quite clear he tagged a comment on to the end of your own... i.e. it's directed at the unpleasantly uncivil person you were addressing. --Dweller 09:47, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Thats also what I hoped for :). But I have had some Wiki contact with really uncivil people recently so guess I am a bit edgy on being called uncivil :). No offence intended towards Budgiekiller anyway, he did a great job also on the london plot article... Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 09:50, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Morning all! Indeed, Dweller is correct, the comment was most definitely aimed at the preceding commentator who seemed to be going 'off on one'. Please accept my apologies, Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr), if I made you even edgier! Budgiekiller 10:09, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

No apologies necessary in that case :) and a good morning to you too! The london plot article has increased again a lot, we are now well over 70 references.... Time for some cleaning again I am afraid. Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr) 10:11, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

The Canaries

What do you think about this article having had a prod slapped on it? --Dweller 09:42, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Interesting question. It's not a precedent, see The Blades, but a number of similarly titled articles merely form a redirect to the club page (e.g. The Gunners, The Wednesday). The problem is that most of the content of this page has been covered in the one of the opening paragraphs of the History section of Norwich City F.C. so Fuzzy510's comments seem justified. If you can make the article stand alone from the History section of the NCFC page, I'll happily remove the prod on your behalf. Budgiekiller 11:45, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Agreed. So how about now? You might also be interested to see this article! --Dweller 11:52, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Okay, well the more the better, but you've got to admit that there's quite a bit of repetition between the two articles. What can we do about it? Is there anything more you could add? Budgiekiller 11:59, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

August Esperanza Newsletter

Thanks

Eeek ack sque'ek ook kkkk'k squeek. --Daniel Olsen 08:42, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Fair use images on stub templates

Greetings, I noticed you re-instated a number of coats of arms to stub templates, for example [3]. The status of these images is unclear, and their current license does not permit their use on templates. Please see [4] and [5]. I'd like to request you not re-add these images back into the stub templates until this matter has been satisfactorily resolved. Thanks, --Durin 05:21, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I blew it. I realise that now. I'm sorry that you had to go over and revert my foul-ups. I (naïvely) thought coats of arms were public domain and had no licence issues. I most certainly won't re-add the coats of arms again. Thanks for being patient. Budgiekiller 15:37, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for August 21st

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 04:01, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for the support! I'm still nervous but it looks good right now. :) NawlinWiki 20:59, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

War on Terrorism template

I changed it so it matches the World Wars templates. The end is near 08:36, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Please consult talk page next time, thank you. --zero faults ^{|sockpuppets|} 09:40, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Re:School stubs

Hey, I see you've added a number of school stubs lately. It would be useful to other editors if you added a more relevant stub to them than just {{stub}}. I use this list to help me. Feel free to contact me if you wish to discuss this, or anything Wikipedia-related! Budgiekiller 11:43, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

User:Budgiekiller - I appreciate your comments. I am familiar with the various stub sections. I primarily added the schools not for their sake, but because each was a member of the Round Square. I knew nothing of these institutions than their name and location. I would not feel comfortable adding anything more for fear of mislabeling. I can assure you that my actions were not intended as an attack or any other provocative measure.

What may irk some about your comments is the fact that I did not add the {{stub}}. (See here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here for some examples.

A majority of the "troublesome" {{stub}}s were added by User:Bluebot. This is an automated "bot." From Wikipedia:Bots: "Robots or bots are automatic processes that interact with Wikipedia as though they were a human editor." This means, 1. that I do not have control over these edits, or indeed, do not even own that account, and 2. the changes to which you have taken exception were created not through direct human action. In this case, the robot or "bot" is controlled by another user of wikipedia. Some research on my part has led me to believe that the account that controls the "bot" is titled User:Bluemoose. My primary source is the main page of User:Bluebot, which can be found here:User:Bluebot.

Some more (admittedly much less detailed) research indicates that, as of yet, you have not made User:Bluemoose aware of his mis-actions as you have mine. I would suggest delaying no longer in bringing this issue to the attention of User:Bluemoose. To leave a comment, you can edit the "talk page" is the same fashion you would edit a normal page. User:Bluemoose's talk page can be found at User talk:Bluemoose.

By all means, User:Bluemoose is not the only offender, as seen here. I would suggest back-tracing through the pages to find each separate violator, and then leaving a similar comment to the one that you have left for Bluemoose.

As for your comments regarding my talk page, the above comment specifically did not request a response. Quoting the page to which you directed me, "Others delete comments after they have responded to them." I would classify myself as one of these others. I have no qualms responding, it was merely the case that a response was not elicited.

If you have any troubles, feel free to ask a question, and I will reply. --Coolhandscot 15:39, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for your very informative reply. The reason the bot added the {{stub}} template to all the pages you created was because you hadn't added any stub whatsoever, nor any categorisation. While I understand you don't 'feel comfortable' mislabelling articles, it is typical that should an editor add a new page, he or she should at least have a broad idea of the categorisation of such new pages.

Hence, the bot was acting perfectly correctly by alerting other users to the fact that the new pages you had added were, in fact, stubs. If you knew you were adding schools, it wouldn't have been a problem to add the {{school-stub}} template to each article since, as you said, you are familiar with 'the various stub sections'.

My original post was not intended to 'irk' anyone, nor did I claim your actions to be an 'attack' or 'provocative'. I simply wanted to bring your attention to the fact that by adding stubs without a relevant stub category, you make work for others, especially if you know what type of stub you're adding.

While not actively requesting a response, it is usual and polite to respond to comments left on your User page.

I apologise unreservedly for 'irking' you. Good luck in future edits, I hope you continue to edit successfully and thoughtfully. User:Budgiekiller 16:12, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. It should be observed that "usual" and "polite" are subjective terms. It is very easy to reply to everything because otherwise one is seen as "uncivil." However, in many cases it is not required. Your tone and sincerity are noted and appreciated. --Coolhandscot 16:45, 24 August 2006 (UTC)