User talk:Bunchofgrapes/Archive 7

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive. Editing it will make baby kittens cry.

Contents 1 Freebirditis 2 WP:ANI 3 To help you get started 4 Lists of farms in Oppland 5 are you threatening me? 6 At your Expense 7 Thanks 8 Jack the Ripper etc. 9 Thanks!! 10 Thanks 11 Hurricane Irene reply 12 RfA Thank You! 13 Hello thar! 14 User:Modulatum 15 Mints 16 VandalProof 1.2 Now Available 17 Re: Stop it 18 The pleasure was all mine 19 Usual suspects 20 10 is enough? 21 User block 22 Eddie's block 23 Blocks 24 User:Eddiesegoura 25 Eddie 26 The curmudgeonly Wikipedian gets a reply 27 Cowboys 28 Talk:Cruzeiro Anthem 29 WP:AIAV 30 Re:RfA 31 A 't' an 'h' and an 'ank you' 32 3/0/0 33 RfA 34 Userpage/talk page 35 Lonecanine 36 User:Thewolfstar, my response 37 Seeking Editor Review Commentary (If You Like) 38 Re: Railroad switch 39 RelentlessRouge's Request for Administratorship 40 What A Nice Vacation 41 Well done! 42 The Torchic FAC 43 I must admit... 44 Eternal Equinox 45 My Thanks

[edit] Freebirditis

Thanks for saving that little gem in bjaodn for posterity. youngamerican (talk) 04:10, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Freebird! Free-fuggin-bird! Freebirddammit! Freebird! Geogre 21:08, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WP:ANI

[1] Do you think a mention of the courteous e-mail you got would be of interest to ANI readers, to start the ball rolling? Up to you, of course. Don't forget my special name, if you do post! Bishonen | talk 10:51, 13 May 2006 (UTC).

Well, I didn't want to go into details there, but I should have said something right away about Lamb being Wolf. It was one of those things where I thought it was so obvious as to be blinded to the possibility that it even required discussion. It will probably get there soon, and we'll just have to casually start blocking her obvious socks. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:50, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] To help you get started

I find that an image is often quite helpful in getting going on writing an article... one picture is good for 1000 words, and that's definitely moving you out of stub territory. So get writing! ++Lar: t/c 01:32, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Frosty Treats, Inc. v. Sony Computer Entertainment America, Inc.. I need say no more. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 01:35, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Interesting (and yes, clowns with high calibre weapons scare me) but not DYK nomable as it's not new. Surely you can do better? ++Lar: t/c 16:54, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Oh, you misunderstood me; I was merely gathering resources for the background of the article. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:55, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Excellent (story). I'd stick with (the story about your activities relating to) the process... LMK if you want me to eat some icecream in aid of your research. ++Lar: t/c 18:30, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lists of farms in Oppland

The vote for deletion of Lists of farms in Oppland ended in nonconcensus. As a result, I propose moving forward after considering the varous comments in the discussion. As a 'delete voter, I'd be interested in understanding what you think appropraite criteria to merit inclusion in a list might be. Thanks - Williamborg 20:54, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Appreciate your feedback. Some are rather substantial and are best described as estates (some are royal residences, some military headquarters) but others are just farms. Will give some thought on how to sort by importance... Thanks - Williamborg 21:08, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] are you threatening me?

are you threatening me? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Alderweis (talk • contribs) .

There must be some mistake... I have been a member here for since years, and suddenly all my adjust/edits have been replaced and I am being advised/threatened with a block/ban.

What is the for of this? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Alderweis (talk • contribs) 16:49, May 15, 2006 (UTC)

Looks like only the edit Alderweis made at 11:47 on 12 May 2006 is nto vandalism. That one removed someone else's vandalism. Alderweis' contribs seem to indicate a fascination with birds, feet and measuring everything in years. --Habap 17:15, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes. I noticed that as well. A word beginning with 'T' and ending with 'L' is also occurring to me. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 17:32, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

English has not been my initial language, I apology for this.

--Alderweis 17:16, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

The only purpose was to adjust/edit spelling for the sir above. My programmed bot is taking malfunctions/deviation with words. I have been fixing/repairing it since years.

I was initially in France, but have been learned/aquired english recently.--Alderweis 17:32, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

But I have received approval/admission to work on the programmed bot. There is allowance given for it, as is listed/documented in my intimate/personal account.

--Alderweis 17:44, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I admit/perceive that there is many errors/wrongs with it yet. Its phase is 1.

I will provide/supply after midday.--Alderweis 17:57, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Based on the results thus far, it does not seem to be a useful bot. Why would you want to add "feet" wherever you find "birds" and change all duration estimates to "since years". It would seem inappropriate for someone who has a limited grasp of English grammar to write a bot to correct others' English grammar. --Habap 18:21, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Don't be ridiculous, I was since years gearing up to write my own feet/bird-bot when Alderwies beat me to it. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 18:32, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] At your Expense

It looks like we have a group of people vandalizing Wikipedia to get some laughs at your expense: [2]

68.90.159.56 18:50, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

There was limited/restrained purpose for this programmable bot. I was amidst research for university/college, and to restrain amounts of data for reporting/collecting.

A bad result has been the adjust/edits of pages. I can/not find the origional/unqiue permission for the programme/software bot. It was allowable through my intimate/personal account, which is not evidenced.

The bot is disassociated with our account/user. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.190.14.120 (talk • contribs) 18:58, May 15, 2006 (UTC)

I was very amused. --Habap 19:15, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

It looks like they made the thread private, but I will email screenshots if requested. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.90.159.56 (talk • contribs) .

Well, I got a look at the first page of it before they made it private. Thanks for letting me know! —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 19:19, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Not a problem. Happy banning!

I got all the ones that had been on the second page. Pathetic of them, if you ask me. Perhaps not even worth the trouble to ban. --Habap 19:24, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I actually was amused, but I'm perverse. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 19:31, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

No great diatribe on the evils of editing poasts for fun and profit at the expense of others? Come now... why register an account unless you intend to use it.--65.190.14.120 19:36, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

and 2ndly, it IS amusing :) And you shan't stop us! Maby for a day or two... but you will NEVER stop the spread of what we have started calling "Feet/birds disease".

--65.190.14.120 19:37, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

The NSA likely can provide you not only with the screenshots, but also with the bank statements, medical records, and phone logs for each of the users; perhaps you can intimate that they're connected to al-Qaeda, and then they can all edit from Gitmo. Btw, when you say that I shouldn't read the cheese fly article, I find myself compelled to read. You were, however, correct--I shouldn't have read it. I hold you responsible for the mental trauma. Joe 19:37, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I hope you didn't skip casu marzu either; that's the real treasure. Thanks for the revert on this page. Anybody looking in, please feel free to revert 65.190.14.120 or similar. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 19:42, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

[3] DGX 23:27, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jack the Ripper etc.

I won't mess around with pages anymore, I promise... It was mostly to amuse my friend, because her city is basically doomed by a really bad flooding and so on (Dover, New Hampshire, incidentally). So I won't do it anymore, sorry. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Theclassical (talk • contribs) 00:20, May 16, 2006 (UTC)

Ah yes, I've heard nothing gives comfort to flood victims like Jack the Ripper killing Elvis. Thanks! —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 01:43, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks!!

Thanks for your appreciation of my user name! You're the first. Aside from our respective childhood Encyclopedia Brown obsessions, we also share the same alma mater! Cornell EE (class of 2000) -- Go Big Red!

Wikipedia brown 02:16, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for reverting vandalism of my user page. The more one fights vandalism, the more one's userpage gets vandalize. Comes with the territory, I guess... ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 23:35, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hurricane Irene reply

Re: this edit - please see my comment to Eloquence. Raul654 05:52, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

I am considering stating this explicitely at the top of the FAC. Raul654 05:53, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RfA Thank You!

Thanks Bunchofgrapes,

I am honored by your support in my recent successful request for adminship. As an administrator, I am your servant, ready to help however I can. (In your case, since you've had the tools longer than I, my best use might be menial labor!) My talk page is always open; should you need anything, or should you see me making a mistake -- probably a common occurrence -- please do let me know. I will depend on the good sense of the community to keep me from making a complete fool of myself! :) In gratitude, Xoloz 15:49, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hello thar!

My innate inclinations regarding this sort of chain letter are waging a furious internal battle with WP:CIVIL right about now. Everybody needs to stop it with these things, right now. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 18:57, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Inane was what I thought you said at first. Just a freudian slip I guess. No one has yet to/(dared to?) leave me one! I prefer to get my WikiLove other ways I guess. (time to head over to Bishi's page maybe, there's a lot of good humour to be had there!) Oh and did you hear the one about the guy who woke up in a bathtub full of ice with his kidneys missing? ++Lar: t/c 19:20, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

I did, a few years back, when a coworker believed it and decided to forward the warning to the entire company. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 19:50, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Exactly the reference I meant. Speaking of references, what do you think of this image: [4] ...is it me or is that an attack image not necessarily given out in good humour? The placement of the "barnstar" seems rather um, inauspicious! ++Lar: t/c 04:45, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

It appears to be a mild attack image, yes. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 15:08, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

When I've seen those, I've been reminded of Dorothy Parker's famous review, in The Constant Reader column of The New Yorker magazine, of A. A. Milne's The House on Pooh Corner: "Constant Weeder fwowed up." Geogre 21:12, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User:Modulatum

You have previously blocked, and unblocked (Read here - 12th May), this user for the use of, and promise to cease using, a banned Bot. May I draw your attention to this conversation on this talk page:- [5]. It seems to indicate he still uses the Bot. Reading through his talk page, where he seems to constantly promise various users he wont do things, which he then goes and does. Looking through his contributions does show he is a bit of a renegade. Perhaps a long term 'irreversible' block may curb his misplaced talents?, or at least give a breather to other users, as his promises to cease his vandalistic activities do not live up to their expectations. 82.30.73.87 07:23, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

No, he's not still using the bot. Whatever problems he is currenlt having with User:Urthogie do not merit a block. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 15:05, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mints

You're right: the mint was not a prison. The Clink was a prison. I have had the most bizarre trouble with The Mint. And, of course, Bobblewikibot just went through to unlink every flippin' date in every article I wrote, despite the fact that I've taken to linking them very carefully and I don't give a rotten fig for the MOS. <sigh> Automated "help" is no help at all. Geogre 21:10, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

/me runs away from an argument about Bobblewiki or date linking! —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 21:17, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

On the other topic, I guess the Mint could be sort of like a prison -- if you were hiding out there to escape the duns, in some weak sense the district was then a de facto prison for you. Yeah. OK. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 22:00, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

I'll edit war the MOS. I'm not date linking just because they're dates. I'm date linking significant years in the careers/developments of the topics. As for The Mint, it was never a prison in any sense. You could leave if you wanted...you just might get arrested...and you could leave on Sunday anyhow. No debts could be served on Sunday, so you were free to leave then, and you'd go abegging about then. Remember the Charlotte Charke went abegging after an arrest and got released based on a collection taken up by the prostitutes and pub proprieters of Covent Garden. (I think there's a tale there, but I haven't read her Memoir.) Geogre 00:33, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

True. As a good Patrick O'Brian reader, I'm forced to say you are wasting your time with The Mint and should spend all your efforts on the dunning-free Liberties of the Savoy instead. (The Bunch of Grapes, of course, being the Inn that was Stephen Maturin's home within that district.) —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 01:02, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Really? That is surprising. I had no idea that the "anomalous districts" persisted after 1790. The Clink and Paris Gardens were both shut down by Act in the 17th c., but The Mint hung around for a century later. I didn't know there was another. Amazing. I sort of wish there were equivalent districts today. Geogre 12:46, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] VandalProof 1.2 Now Available

[edit] Re: Stop it

(Original message, quickly removed from User talk:Eternal Equinox:)

I've just had a close look at your last 250 edits, EE. It's interesting. Of the 250, every single edit was on a topic relating to pop music or videogames, except for these:

• Three edits on 19 May to Anastasia (1997 film)
• One edit to Paris, Ontario
• One edit to Milk
• Five edits to Butter and three to Black pepper on 16 May. There are both featured articles mostly written by myself.
• Two image-fiddling edits to S. A. Andrée's Arctic balloon expedition of 1897 today and one to Talk:S. A. Andrée's Arctic balloon expedition of 1897. This article is mostly written by Bishonen.

This is a hair's-breadth from stalking. If you want to develop broader editing interests, I recommend it, but find some way of doing it other than hounding articles that you know Bishonen or Bunchofgrapes follow closely. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 18:41, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

I am beginning to become very ill-hearted toward you. I am absolutely not stalking you, I have simply been editing these articles because I was over-looking Wikipedia:Featured articles (with the exception of Bishonen's article, whose I am editing since it was at FAC a little while back and I found all of the support votes from her friends interesting — it turns out it is well-written, but I was still suspicious). In addition, yes, I have edited very many popular culture articles, but I don't understand what you mean by "video games" articles at all. Looking at my last 250 edits, "video games" can certainly qualify as part of the list you provided me as I do not edit them on a daily basis. I question your motive.

On a different note, I would consider checking each of my contributions to be slightly more stalker behaviour than what I have done thus far. Why am I so interesting to you? Because I have connections to Courtni? What if someone else was doing this, would you care? I highly doubt it — but then, you never know. Yes, I started editing Gwen Stefani articles! Oh my. The return of Mariah or whomever her other pseudonym was. Seriously, I would prefer to edit in utter-most tranquility and peace: I am allowed to edit whatever articles I choose, correct? No, I am not stalking you. I certainly would like to develop a further interest in topics (which is why I edited Anastasia (1997 film), it would make for a nice FA), but please don't accuse me of such intentions. What happened to the fluffy and welcoming outside Wikipedia provided? I decided to register an account because it seemed this way... please don't tell me that this is the depth of the project, which I would cite as threatening. Stop posting on my talk page unless it is necessary, of course. —Eternal Equinox | talk 19:26, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

"I have simply been editing these articles because I was over-looking Wikipedia:Featured articles". Really? Let's see, there are 984 featured articles right now. I have written four of them. Assuming you picked two FAs at random to edit that day, there is an approximately a one-in-60,000 chance you would pick two of mine. Do you really want to stick by your story that it is a coincidence, or do you want to admit the obvious, say you won't do it again, and move on? —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 20:06, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

No, no. I chose one of yours by chance. I knew of the other one because I had come across it a month or two ago and noticed that you had edited it. Butter I had just happened to pick at random. Sorry, but I certainly didn't select two of yours purposely, because, honestly, I have better things to do than worry about you. —Eternal Equinox | talk 20:20, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

So one of them (black pepper) you decided to edit because you knew I had... and the other (butter), where you had a little edit-war with me, that was a complete one-in-250 coincidence? —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 20:26, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Start believing the possible. And it is possible. You very well know that. —Eternal Equinox | talk 20:28, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Black pepper you may remember from here. —Eternal Equinox | talk 20:30, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah. Great example. "Removed unusual extra word" -- how again is "bags" an unusual word? —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 20:33, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Oh, I simply don't like the word "bags". Yes, it was a POV edit. —Eternal Equinox | talk 20:35, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

Well to your happiness, goodbye. —Eternal Equinox | talk 21:00, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

One edit to Paris, Ontario, is it? That's more interesting than you may think, Bunch. Bishonen | talk 22:11, 21 May 2006 (UTC).

Do tell? (By email if that's better.) —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 23:33, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

The one that gets me is the "turns out it is well written." We're not talking to each other because we're friends. We're friends because we have similar backgrounds and a great deal of training and talk to each other. We are, in a word, grown ups, and that means that we don't get our neighbors, boyfriend/husband/neighbors, and siblings online to continue chats that we could have by walking across the street, but rather we work toward an encyclopedia and discover those with similar positions, interests, and views. It makes a big difference. Geogre 12:51, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Like a Homing pigeon that one - I wouldn't get too exited if I were you! Giano | talk 17:50, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

My hopes aren't high, but a man can still contemplate peace. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 17:58, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Nothing so sad as the elderly deluding themselves - care for a small wager? Giano | talk 18:00, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Sure, let me hop in my time machine and stop you from posting your goodbye ode, then we can bet ;-) —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 18:05, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Let me tell you buddy - I can't count the number of people I've gone into the past to snuff out. Trust me - it just doesn't work. Things never work out the way you want. Raul654 18:08, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

If Fry can be his own grandfather, I'm sure I can pull off a cakewalk like this. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 18:12, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Oh the innocence of youth. Quite touching really. Giano | talk 21:17, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Giano, if you don't stop touching the innocence of youth, they'll come get you! Geogre 22:17, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

I think they had a userbox for that once. Big hit. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 22:38, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

That's disgusting! Anyway I shall be proven right, I always am Giano | talk 17:52, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Giano's touching innocent "Utes" again??? ++Lar: t/c 19:30, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Utes, with Hopi in his heart, until he gets Siouxed. Geogre 20:39, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The pleasure was all mine

Sadly BoG you are quite quite wrong! However, I anticipated this so have dropped a big hint via a relation of mine, who has limited immagination in his choice of passwords. Bank, intruder alarm, and now it seems wiki too always the same. I think I may have some fun with it! Giano | talk 17:52, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

If it's to be a game of wits, I have forgotten my cleats.

I'm sur you will work it out eventually! ;-) Giano | talk 18:28, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Good revert on BP, that info on the motorcade (the British Royal family do not in fact have motorcades, and privately snigger at those who do)was complete blx. Giano | talk 21:32, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Weird. Well, good. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 21:35, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Usual suspects

But Eddie edited in seeming good faith for a good number of months after he ceased the suckpuppetry and exicornting, so maybe I'm AGFing a little hard here in a spirit of optimism

Unfortunately, it looks like Eddie is the "exicornt vandal" [6], so he never really stopped. A check user was done on Wiktionary, I believe. According to Sarah Ewart, "He's been very busy. There's now 760 hits for the "word" and someone has even been blogging about it, describing its creator as a "loon" and "crackpot". I don't think he's gonna get over his obsession with getting that word adopted." —Viriditas | Talk 00:35, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm aware of Wiktionary's exicornt vandal, and I've come to calling the guy here the same thing. The Checkuser I haven't heard about: got a link? Given that we know both Eddie and the exicornt vandal edit from AOL, I'm surprised that turned up anything. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 02:40, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 10 is enough?

Nah, 10 is not enough. I've been here 3 weeks and have had my page vandalized 20 times. You're page was long due for some vandalism. ;-) Cheers! DGX 03:23, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome! ;-) Oh, and don't worry, it is fun counting it, especially since all the vandalism to my page has been in the last 4-5 days. I struck a nerve with someone who designs video games for a living calling his game non-notable and putting it's article on AFD. The end result was him wishing a gerbil up my anus. DGX 03:35, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Such creativity! —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:36, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

I thought so.. DGX 03:43, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

D'oh, make that 21 times. ;-) Thanks for that equally as fast revert. DGX 04:09, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User block

User:Blnguyen has been autoblocked. Mind having a look? He's written a message on his talk page. Cheers, michael ^talk 03:36, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

I quietly undid a few autoblocks while Peta worked to unblock his IP; one way or another we should be good. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:44, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for that! michael ^talk 03:48, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Eddie's block

I noticed you blocked User:EddieSegoura. I'm sure he must be upset.

I'm sorry you're upset, Eddie. And I'm sorry you're still screwing around pretending to be someone else. I'm going to block this IP and also the one you deleted the old VfD "Exicornt" archive from for a few hours. We can tell those IP's are related, you know. I'd block them for a lot longer if it wasn't AOL. Please don't vandalise archives. They're an important part of Wikipedia. Bishonen | talk 05:53, 26 May 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Blocks

Hi Bunchofgrapes - I've overturned your block on Eddie, and replaced an identical one of my own. Here's his block log: [7]. I left a rather long explanation on his talk page here. I'll try to follow up on the noticeboard and see what others think. --HappyCamper 05:57, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User:Eddiesegoura

Gee... look at what I found, another Eddie sock. DGX 20:23, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Oh yeah. I remember when Eddie went on a spree of registering alternate spacing and capitalization users for himself and others, "so other people wouldn't use them". I just blocked that one and a few others. Thanks, DGX. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 20:45, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

I've email you Bunch. I want You to know that Your efforts to keep me from editing WP will fail. You accuse Me of being a "troll" (person that harasses members). I would never harass another member. Eddie (Email me) 11:04, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Eddie: No. Stop being silly. I haven't made the decision to block you alone by any means, as you know. This isn't about rivalry, or a content dispute, and if you genuinely don't understand that, I'm sorry. Finally, threatening continuing vandalization if we don't unblock you is not a negotiation tactic that has ever gotten anyone unblocked. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 22:35, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Bunch, I'm not threating to vandalize the site. I feel that you trying to keep me off shows me you hate me so much you're willing to prevent me from editing again. Of course, I am willing to negotiate this in a way that we can agree on. I just want to say I'm sorry. --Ed (Email me) 11:04, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Find someone else who will believe you. This dialogue is over. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 23:38, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Eddie

Ah, Eddie! We hardly knew ya! Now I'll never be able to look at an exicornt without thinking of him. TCC (talk) (contribs) 20:53, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The curmudgeonly Wikipedian gets a reply

Why do people get so excited about starting new pages? Fixing existing, awful pages seems far more important to Wikipedia's quality. Yet every user page has their proud list of "Pages I Created." Stop it!

I don't know about other people getting excited over creating a new page, but the reason I like to create new articles is because there isn't any information on the subject in the first place. My articles aren't usually large, in fact, they're mostly stub material; however, I feel that no information is worse than some information, so the quantity of articles should have at least slightly more importance than the quality of articles. As for "Pages I Created", it's about letting me have an organized list of the amount of contribution I've put forward into Wikipedia. I don't have my list as a show of pride, but as a publically available list of what I've given to the community so Wikipedians (mainly myself) don't have to fish through My Contributions to see what I've added. I could do this for other articles I've made large improvements/edits to (as others have), but to me personally, that's just not as important. So in the end to me, it's quantity over quality and the list is for personal/public organization. This is just my take, it's probably not the same for most other Wikipedians, probably very few in fact. - Rudykog 07:29, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

"Quantity over quality" exactly sums up Wikipedia's problem, in my view. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 17:09, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Prbt! I like creating new articles. I like shaping the information. It is a pleasure to write, and it is a pleasure to take a sheaf of facts and form them into a nice little summary. On the other hand, a huge mess like Aphra Behn is going to result in handfuls of hair being pulled, idiotic arguments with people who don't do the reading, and then just ... pain. It would be even worse with the as-bad Jonathan Swift or Daniel Defoe or Henry Fielding. Much better to write an article from scratch on Jonathan Wild than to battle the accumulated crud of years of misinformation grafted from popular web sources. Geogre 15:04, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Oh, it's harder work, no doubt. There's a certain satisfaction in getting to the point where not one trace of the original article remains, though :-) —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 15:53, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Cowboys

A cowboy builder is a very widely used term (I'm sure all the Brits will confirm this) for a builder who does a bad job, and is widely renowned for doing so. There is even a television program exposing these people for the mirth of those who have been clever enough not to employ them - hence they could be notable. I may be wrong, but I think in England the term can be used for anyone who is a bit risky to employ - ask Aloan he is sure to know Giano | talk 17:59, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

PS: [8], [9] and [10] I thought these may be useful, just in case you were thinking of home improvements. Giano | talk 18:40, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

I concur (cowboy can generally pertain to any tradesman). Incidentally, in places with a large population of Britons of Indian extraction, it's quite common to look in the yellow pages and find a British-Indian run firm of plumbers or electricians or gas fitters, whose ad reads "you've tried the cowboys - now try the indians". Middenface 18:51, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Not just the UK, either. It's a common term in both Australia and New Zealand too. Grutness...wha? 23:12, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Once again the Yanks miss out. We have the concept, but no term for it that I can think of. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 23:20, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Fucking useless lazy bastard? Giano | talk 08:00, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Wildcat (non-union) and fly-by-night and renegade (which is a true Americanism). There was an Indian builder in the north of England that advertised with, "You've tried the cowboys. Now go with the Indians." Geogre 15:02, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Fly-by-night seems pretty close to me, that's true. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 15:55, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Talk:Cruzeiro Anthem

Hi, you removed my speedy tag saying the page was "useful as part of the deletion discussion here"; it isn't, though. The page Cruzeiro Anthem doesn't exist, and was deleted April 8 (the same day as the only comment), which is why I was tagging it under WP:CSD#G8. —Zero Gravitas 02:43, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Responded here. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 02:48, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

OK, fair enough. —Zero Gravitas 03:12, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WP:AIAV

Help? DGX

Sleeping! —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 15:54, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re:RfA

Hello, and thanks. But, I mis-communicated. Please see and kindly reply there: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_adminship&diff=prev&oldid=55598193. BTW, I shall not vote until I reach at least 1,000 edits. I may make 125 edits in as many minutes. Anyway, nice talking to you. --Bootblack 17:47, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A 't' an 'h' and an 'ank you'

...for catching my silly mistake there. -GTBacchus^(talk) 18:28, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 3/0/0

My point was that if 4 arbitrators agree to hear the case, for any reason, the case will by rule go into arbitration, and holding a binding poll on a matter that is in arbitration is asking for trouble. For all we know the ArbCom may decide to punt the case back into a binding poll, in which case there's no problem. But in the meantime we seem to be treading on dangerous ground. That's all. —phh (^t/_c) 19:05, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RfA

I think that you should take a look at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Eternal Equinox--☆TBC☆ (aka Tree Biting Conspiracy) 00:57, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 01:00, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Ah, the passing of the buck and the administrator pool has begun. Time to write the novel. Excitement with foliage. —Eternal Equinox | talk 01:05, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Will Bishonen make a stampede? How about Geogre? The life of the tame reduced by the blade of the unfortunate. It is nothing but ridicule cast by the avaricious, and more so, power-hungry. And demanding. —Eternal Equinox | talk 01:08, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Oh please. I would like a simple "oppose", not a chapter's-worth. Always taking the long road. —Eternal Equinox | talk 01:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Uh, what now? I wasn't going to say anything over there -- the community seemed to have a handle on it. My barnstars! I'm melllllting... what a world what a world... —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 01:27, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Then melt. Faster than that bitch did! —Eternal Equinox | talk 01:29, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Userpage/talk page

Ok, sure.

Damn it!!! And she does such a good job of making others feel guilty, too. I'm really worried about her. I dont know if its possible, but you you advise the others not to make fun of her? I think that she has a lot to deal with already.

I need a break from all this. I'm frustrated. Even though I was sick of her, I enjoyed her company, and I really respected her as an editor. I feel like I've betrayed her trust or something.

See you around sometime. I'm blocking myself for a time. Is there some policy aginst that? I'm too angry to remember. Oran e (t) (c) (e) 02:39, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

It's frowned on, only due to the risk of collateral damage, but I've never seen any one get in too much hot water for it. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 02:42, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lonecanine

Good call. I agree that this user seemed an awful lot like thewolfstar in her editing style and choice of friends. FreplySpang 05:25, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah. Cagier than she has been in the past so far, though. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 05:29, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] User:Thewolfstar, my response

User_talk:Col._Hauler#Thewolfstar_user_page --Col. Hauler 21:57, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Seeking Editor Review Commentary (If You Like)

Hi. In conjunction with my RfA (that you voted on), I have created an editor review, to give people a chance to comment as to ways in which I can branch out or alter my contributions to Wikipedia. An RfA seems to solely focus on how one's temperment and contributions relate to how they might handle administrative powers (and the consensus on that seems to be that I'm not quite ready); the editor review opens things up a little more to a larger focus, and I'd love to hear community feedback in the sense of that larger focus, too. If you feel you've already expressed yourself sufficiently when casting your vote, then by all means don't worry about it, but if any thoughts come to mind or if you'd like to expound upon any suggestions or commentary, it would be appreciated. In any case, I appreciated you taking the time to express your opinion on my RfA, and I thank you for that. — WCityMike (talk • contribs) 19:52, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Railroad switch

The reason why I resotred it a while ago (as a registered user) was becuase, and I have been emphasisng this point for a long time and it has been ignored, I discovered it on this page, however Angr has now removed it, the reason I still keep restoring it is becuase my aforementioned point keeps being ignored. Myrtone@Bunchofgrapes.com.au:-(

[edit] RelentlessRouge's Request for Administratorship

Dear Bunchofgrapes, thank you for your comments on my request for administratorship. I have found you comments constructive, and will consider running again after I have made more contributions to Wikipedia and have more thoroughly understood the rolesof an administrator.

I will also get to editing those pictures on my userpage. Thanks for alerting me to that procedure.

Sincerely,

RelentlessRouge 11:19, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] What A Nice Vacation

I just saw your comments on my talk page(my apologies, I was away from Wikipedia for the month of May), and let me just say that i'd much rather be blocked forever than betray what I believe or the people I care about. You can feel free to do so if you'd like. The month of May proved to me and hopefully to everybody else that I don't need this place.

Also, i'm beginning to write a book on Wikipedia, please let me know if there's anything you'd like to contribute. Karmafist ^{Save Wikipedia} 14:12, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Well done!

Nice! Bishonen | talk 15:45, 1 June 2006 (UTC).

Why thank you! :-) It does look quite charming there, if I do say so myself. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 15:54, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Torchic FAC

Hey, I was just wondering, do you still object? I can understand why but you don't seem to have any objections. Thanks, Highway ^{Rainbow Sneakers} 08:24, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for all your help. Highway ^{Rainbow Sneakers} 15:00, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Sure. Hope you're feeling better. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 15:06, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] I must admit...

...I'd quite forgotten about the new meaning of irony. Icundell 00:41, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Eternal Equinox

I asked Eternal Equinox a while ago to please respect my decision to leave me alone. You commented on the situation on his talk page, and he's at it again commenting on my talk page. Can you please do something about it. It's bordering the stalking realm now. HeyNow10029 23:11, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Right.

Hello Bunchofgrapes. I did exactly as you suggested: I took the Kelly Clarkson images to IFD, and now, in response, it appears as though HeyNow10029 has listed three music video images for deletion because she feels as though I'm stalking her. No I'm not, and I had already provided the links in our last conversation so that you knew I was merely doing as Chick Bowen (no longer active) had suggested. I feel as though HeyNow10029 is angered because she uploaded four Kelly Clarkson images and one cannot be included. One. Certainly strange behaviour. And if you're wondering, I'm only going to continue editing until We Belong Together passes FAC. After that, I'm definitely gone. (I can't abandon an article I worked on for so long.)

I edited HeyNow's talk page because I had to leave the messages concerning the image deletion. I was allowed to do that. —Eternal Equinox | talk 23:19, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

I know that you're relatively sick of me and possibly HeyNow10029. If you want, you can just ignore this situation, but feel free to intervene. —Eternal Equinox | talk 00:54, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Unless I have to edit another section for some other reason, I will only edit We Belong Together, its accompanying FAC page, and Kelly Clarkson. That will be all. Is this all right? —Eternal Equinox | talk 01:42, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

The only reason I have continued to edit Kelly Clarkson is because of the image issues that had occurred; if this is 100% cleaned up, I won't even edit that article. I'll bring you happiness within the next week. Take care. —Eternal Equinox | talk 01:50, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

I apologize, I couldn't keep to those three articles and went a bit further. I suppose that's just natural Wikipedian instinct. Sorry. —Eternal Equinox | talk 03:15, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Since we're currently on speaking terms, I was just wondering if you could give We Belong Together a quick glance and tell me if any parts require some rewriting. —Eternal Equinox | talk 03:56, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

The lead's still clunky as hell; half the sentences in "Music and structure" have one problem or another; the first paragraph of the "Music Video" section is very muddy with its "serves as the conclusion to this other video" business; I can only imagine what "The remixes are radical to the album version" means; "The remixes were warmly-received by fans" has a happy-fun mystery hyphen. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 04:05, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Mystery hyphen? I'd argue with you on that, but I don't have the time — everything else would appear appropriate, especially the first sentence in "Music video". It has bothered me right from the beginning. Thanks. —Eternal Equinox | talk 13:14, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Please recreate my user page. —Eternal Equinox | talk 23:54, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

• An be quick about it too Giano | talk 06:22, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

• Uh, yeah. What they said. —Eternal Equinox | talk 16:10, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

• Eternally Obnoxious!!!. "Quelle surprise" still with us I see - Praise the Lord. Giano | talk 17:51, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

• Somebody really needs to tell you to shut up. Your insolence isn't making you look more intelligent. —Eternal Equinox | talk 20:18, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Never mind. Please do not recreate the page. Thank you. —Eternal Equinox | talk 19:55, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough. Will replace once WBT is finished. —Eternal Equinox | talk 21:04, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] My Thanks

I wanted to drop a brief note on your talk page (one admittedly not written to you only, but nevertheless truly meant) to thank you for your vote in my Request for Adminship, which concluded this evening. Even though it was unsuccessful, it did make clear to me some areas in which I can improve my contributions to Wikipedia, both in terms of the areas in which I can participate and the manner in which I can participate. I do plan on, at some point in the future (although, I think, not the near future), attempting the process again, and I hope you will consider participating in that voting process as well. If you wish in the future to offer any constructive criticism to me, or if I may assist you with anything, I hope you will not hesitate to contact me. Thanks again. — WCityMike ^(T | C)  ⇓ plz reply HERE  (why?) ⇓  04:27, 4 June 2006 (UTC)