User talk:Camaron/Archive 4

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 3 |

Archive 4

| Archive 5 →

Arnold Murray Page

You protected the wrong page, this person and another started changing it on 10 Dec 2007. Previous to that, the page has been unchanged for a long time.

Anon '208.127.154.159' and now 'Crusader777', gutted the article and references to other articles, like the one on 'roy gillaspie' were also gutted.

By protecting the wrong article, there is no dispute, they are happy to have the gutted, 'sanitized' version up on wikipedia.

That is why the donations are so low, so many personal agendas here. Tss8071 (talk) 13:10, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

I protected the article upon request at WP:RFPP. Whatever is going on the edit warring by multiple users had to stop. I protected the article on the version the page it happened to be at, it is not an endorsement of the current version. Camaron1 | Chris (talk) 13:15, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Then maybe you should have looked into it further to see which article belongs there. Prior to 10 December 2007, the article was fine and remained unchanged for a long time.

I noticed you put a dispute tag on it, why? The user gutting the article is happy to see the gutted version on wikipedia. There is no dispute now. You can remove that tag.

Another anon user participating in this also gutted the 'roy gillaspie' article down to one line because it related to 'arnold murray'. I reverted the changes but perhaps you could protect the 'one line' version as well.

It is incidents like this that make it hard for wikipedia to be considered legitimate.

I am going walking, have fun. Bye.Tss8071 (talk) 13:35, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

I cannot revert the article to a particular version per WP:PROTECT. Once an agreement is reached, and it is shown that the dispute is over, the page can be unprotected. Camaron1 | Chris (talk) 13:40, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

The user doing this is happy to see the gutted version on wikipedia, he is gone. Good job. Dispute is over.65.87.185.73 (talk) 13:58, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

I have requested the dispute tag to be removed. The users doing this are gone. Their, 10 Dec 2007, gutted version of the article is locked on wikipedia.

Since they are gone and it appears the admins will not do the right thing, where is the dispute?

Let me repeat that, the users doing this are gone. I can't have a dispute with myself and the admins locked the wrong article.

Nice job. Thanks for the good work. Oh, they also gutted the 'roy gillaspie' article to one line because it relates to 'arnold murray'. Maybe you can have someone lock the one line version as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tss8071 (talk • contribs) 14:39, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Just an update, since you locked the wrong page, which is the gutted version, the other users are gone. So, now it is a one person dispute. Things are going really well with my dispute with myself.Tss8071 (talk) 16:56, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

I have seen no evidence that the moment the article is unprotected, the edit warring will not just re-start. The user(s) you are disputing with seems quite active to me. Why don't you assume good faith and try and agree with the user what version of the article Wikipedia should have? The page will automatically unprotect itself in five days, that gives you some time. I would like to point out that your edits to the article today came very close to violating WP:3RR, if you continue to engage in edit wars with other users, you are likely to find yourself blocked from editing. Camaron1 | Chris (talk) 20:01, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

And that is exactly why wikipedia has trouble being considered legitimate. His 'gutted' version is on the main page, locked. It will unlock in five days and you say if the gutted article is reverted back to its original then it could mean being banned from editing.

Explain to me again why it has a dispute tag? All he has to do is wait it out to keep the gutted version in. If you took the time to look, the versions previous to 10 Dec 2007 were the legitimate, ungutted versions and remained unchanged for a long time.

If you also took the time to look, these users gutted the 'roy gillaspie' article down to one sentence. Is the resolution the same for that article as well? If it is reverted then the user is banned from editing.

Again, nice job, thanks for the hard work. So, lets see, his answer to specific facts (detailed in the discussion page) is, 'it is propaganda', your comment is, 'the article will unprotect in five days . . . if you continue in edit wars . . . you likely will find yourself banned from editing'.

I ask again, why is the dispute tag there? You protected the wrong article, the gutted one, and any reverting of changes can result in being banned.Tss8071 (talk) 23:48, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Here is a comment from your recent edit:

'Adding reasonable expire date, to give the dispute a time to resolve and avoid keeping the page protected for to long.'

All you are doing at this point is playing a game. You basically said the gutted article is in (the post 10 Dec 2007 article).

If this user is going to delete all information except favorable information, what edits can be made on the article exactly? Any comment about murray's minister license, deleted, comment about him pulling out a gun on his tv show (video on google), deleted, comments about the name of a white supremacist on his web page, deleted.

I do have a resolution for you though, since you seem to be mindlessly doing this, go ahead and ban me from editing and the article can't be reverted (at least by me).

Since they also gutted the 'roy gillaspie' article down to one sentence, he is the person mentioned on Arnold Murray's website, perhaps you could jump over there and lock that version as well. You are doing fine work.Tss8071 (talk) 00:06, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

No one is playing a game. The article was protected to avoid edit warring, and to avoid people been blocked for doing so. Your comments left on this page have far from motivated me to unprotect the page; please try and keep cool and disengage from editing a page if you find yourself edit warring with someone else. Now see my comments on the article talk page. Camaron1 | Chris (talk) 11:12, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

By leaving the article as is, the net effect is, you have allowed three people to nullify the the work of many people, work which continued for over a year. In one swoop, all of that has been wiped out. You said my comments have not motivated you, they were not intended to motivate you because by allowing the current article to stand, you have legitimatized vandalism. With those kind of results from you, there is no motivating you. Wikipedia is has lost something today and you helped Wikipedia lose it.Tss8071 (talk) 12:20, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

What these users did was not appropriate, since it does not follow policies such as WP:NOT#CENSORED, but it is not simple vandalism - these users have good intentions, and hence policies such as WP:3RR still apply. Once again, I am not endorsing a particular version of the page - if you want to restore the article to the version you like, go ahead, just do not engage in edit wars. If you want assistance or advice ask for it - but leaving personal attacks telling me I am mindless e.t.c here will never help and is not the purpose of this talk page. Camaron1 | Chris (talk) 12:41, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

The original article is restored, thank you.Tss8071 (talk) 13:12, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. Camaron1 | Chris (talk) 13:15, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Hello, well, that did not last long, 12 hours by my count and the same users went back and gutted the article again of any negative content. What is the next step?Tss8071 (talk) 02:52, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Cluebot caught some of the vandalism and reverted it but all they did was go back and re-gut the article. Under wiki policies what is done next? Gutting articles like this falls under vandalism, not editing.Tss8071 (talk) 03:02, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

So, what they did is realize cluebot reverts the article if too much is cut out at one time, so, they are removing any negative content, a piece at a time. The same people are doing thisas before, when the edit war started (or one person with 2 or 3 accounts). One year of work, with contributions from many people, wiped out in minutes. Thanks anyway.Tss8071 (talk) 11:47, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the notice, though please bear in mind as I live in the UK (in the GMT time zone, the one Wikipedia uses) I am generally asleep and offline at 3:00am GMT, and I am not normally available in the mornings on week days. Fortunately, Crusader777 (talk · contribs) has been blocked by another admin for 31 hours already, even if his edits are no simple vandalism, he is still being disruptive, edit warring, and ignoring warnings. I will keep an eye on things for when he returns, hopefully he will not continue this behaviour. Camaron1 | Chris (talk) 19:11, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Hello, I uploaded the license of Arnold Murray to wikipedia and updated the links. However, I am not sure I did the copyright correctly. The copyright categories seem rather odd. The license, as noted, is from the Benton County, AR Clerk's Office and no copyright applies, it is public record. Can you check it and make sure it is correct? Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tss8071 (talk • contribs) 13:05, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Hello, I assume you are talking about Image:Arnold murray ministers license.jpg. It looks like a sensibly reasoned upload to me, though to be honest I am not an expert with copyright laws. If it was created before 1978 and you are sure no copyright has been put on it (which looks likely), then it is correct. Camaron1 | Chris (talk) 19:21, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, thanks.

I guess user 208.127.154.159 is not going to stop. The other user helping to get the article more wiki-fied did a good job but the anon user went back and started deleting again. The article is so sliced and diced now that parts of it are disjointed sentences. Thanks for trying though.Tss8071 (talk) 06:41, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

His/her edits seem to have been reverted, I have given a standard WP:3RR warning for now. Camaron1 | Chris (talk) 19:31, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I have the IP 69.11.88.137. I have no idea who Tss8071 is and I am not a sock puppet account. Please remove that designation from my IP, —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.11.88.137 (talk) 22:47, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

If you are not Tss8071 then please register a account to avoid further irrelevant notices which do not apply to you. However, edits have been made by this IP in the past which are suspicious, particularly this: [1] same tone, word use and opinion as Tss8071. It is also interesting that this IP user knows exactly where to go for posting comments on templates added to his/her user page - even the same section was used on my talk page as Tss8071. Camaron | Chris (talk) 18:45, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Belated...

...Happy Christmas, New Year and congratulations and thanks on your award to me! Good luck with the mop, please don't hesitate to get in touch with me if you need some guidance in the early days... But well done, you deserved it! The Rambling Man (talk) 21:09, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Happy Christmas and new year to you too! Thanks and you're welcome. Camaron1 | Chris (talk) 21:19, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

A request for your consideration regarding CAT:AOTR

Hello fellow Wikipedia administrators open to recall category member!

I am leaving you this message because recent events have given me concern. When Aaron Brenneman and I, and others, first developed this category well over a year ago, we visualized it as a simple idea. A low hassle, low bureaucracy process. We also visualized it as a process that people would come to trust, in fact as a way of increasing trust in those admins who chose to subscribe to the notion of recall. The very informal approach to who is qualified to recall, what happens during it, and the process in general were all part of that approach.

But recent events have suggested that this low structure approach may not be entirely effective. More than one of the recent recalls we have seen have been marred by controversy around what was going to happen, and when. Worse, they were marred by some folk having the perception, rightly or wrongly, that the admin being recalled was trying to change the rules, avoid the process, or in other ways somehow go back on their word. This is bad. It's bad for you the admin, bad for the trust in the process, and bad for the community as a whole.

I think a way to address this issue is to increase the predictability of the process in advance. I have tried to do that for myself. In my User:Lar/Accountability page, I have given pretty concrete definitions of the criteria for recall, and of the choices I can make, and of the process for the petition, and of the process for other choices I might make (the modified RfC or the RfAr). I think it would be very helpful if other admins who have voluntarily made themselves subject to recall went to similar detail. It is not necessary to adopt the exact same conditions, steps, criteria, etc. It's just helpful to have SOME. Those are mine, fashion yours as you see fit, I would not be so presumptuous as to say mine are right for you. In fact I urge you not to just adopt mine, as I do change them from time to time without notice, but instead develop your own. You are very welcome to start with mine if you so wish, though.

But do something. If you have not already, I urge you to make your process more concrete, now, while there is no pressure and you can think clearly about what you want. Do it now rather than later, during a recall when folk may not react well to perceived changes in process or commitment.

Further, I suggest that after you document your process, that you give a reference to it for the benefit of other admins who may want to see what others have done. List it in this table as a resource for the benefit of all. If you use someone else's by reference rather than copy, I suggest you might want to do as Cacharoth did, and give a link to a specific version.

Do you have to do these things? Not at all. These are suggestions from me, and me alone, and are entirely up to you to embrace or ignore. I just think that doing this now, thinking now, documenting now, will save you trouble later, if you should for whatever reason happen to be recalled.

I apologise if this message seems impersonal, but with over 130 members in the category, leaving a personal message for each of you might not have been feasible, and I feel this is important enough to violate social norms a bit. I hope that's OK. Thanks for your time and consideration, and best wishes.

Larry Pieniazek

NOTE: You are receiving this message because you are listed in the Wikipedia administrators open to recall category. This is a voluntary category, and you should not be in it if you do not want to be. If you did not list yourself, you may want to review the change records to determine who added you, and ask them why they added you.

...My guinea pigs and the "A"s through "O"s having felt this message was OK to go forward with (or at least not complained bitterly to me about it :) ), today it's the turn of the "P"s through "S"s! I'm hoping that more of you chaps/chapettes will point to their own criteria instead of mine :)... it's flattering but a bit scary! :) Also, you may want to check back to the table periodically, someone later than you in the alphabet may have come up with a nifty new idea. (I think I missed you the first time round when I did the "C"s as you weren't an admin yet, congrats on your passing RfA) ++Lar: t/c 04:20, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, yes I think your concerns are very valid - I have already had a taster of the controversy surrounding this category at my RFA, but I still agreed to put myself in this category as I have done. I am currently writing my own criteria which will be placed at User:Camaron1/Admin recall/Policy, it will be a personalised mix of ideas people have put in their own criteria, including yours. Camaron1 | Chris (talk) 19:36, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

User:81.144.184.82

Just as a courtesy, I feel you were a little bit heavy handed in a six month block. I had already commented to WP:AIV that this user had not been given any kind of warning before being sent to AIV. While I certainly appreciate swift justice for vandals going back to their old games only days after returning from a block, should they not at least get one warning...per policy? Trusilver (talk) 20:32, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Unblocked, I think it was timing. I blocked the user before I could see that comment on WP:AIV and after you left the warning on the talk page by the looks of things. Hence, I thought the user had edited after a final warning, and 6 months was given as standard as previous block was 3 months. Thanks for telling me. Camaron1 | Chris (talk) 20:55, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

No worries, I'm still keeping an eye on him as that I have a pessimistic feeling that the block will be back in place come this time tommorow. Have a good day. Trusilver (talk) 21:04, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for a swift response

Thanks very much for a quick response on my AIV submission of 204.248.123.2 (talk • contribs • deleted contribs • WHOIS • RDNS • trace • RBLs • http • block user • block log). Nice to know that there are people watching the boards regularly, keeping the vandals down. Keep up the good work. —Vanderdecken∴ ∫ξ φ 19:08, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome, I will try. Camaron1 | Chris (talk) 19:15, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Slightly belated gratz

Congratulations. Here are what pass for words of wisdom from the puppy:

Remember you will always protect the wrong version.
Remember you must always follow the rules, except for when you ignore them. You will always pick the wrong one to do. (See #5)
Remember to assume good faith and not bite. Remember that when you are applying these principles most diligently, you are probably dealing with a troll.
Use the block ability sparingly. Enjoy the insults you receive when you do block.
Remember when you make these errors, someone will be more than happy to point them out to you in dazzling clarity and descriptive terminology.
and finally, Remember to contact me if you ever need assistance, and I will do what I am able.

KillerChihuahua^?!?

DISCLAIMER: This humor does not reflect the official humor of Wikipedia, the Wikimedia Foundation, or Jimbo Wales. All rights released under GFDL.

Thanks for the info :) Camaron | Chris (talk) 18:49, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

You have to know these things when you are ~~King~~ Admin! (Monty Python Holy Grail ref for those who I'm confusing) KillerChihuahua^?!? 19:21, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

thx

Hi Chris, I'm warmed by your notice. Thanks. Rollback tools look useful. Cheers Victuallers (talk) 16:56, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

OK, I have added you to the rollback group. Please use the tool carefully i.e generally only for vandalism. Camaron | Chris (talk) 17:05, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Sock

You're welcome, glad to help! The sockpuppetry was obvious, as was the harassment and abuse of editing privileges. Let me know if you have any further issues with this one. Dreadstar † 20:01, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Hello

Song Duk-ki It is POV pushing version. You keep Wrong version. please, rever this. and keep Based on FACT version. Manacpowers (talk) 20:56, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Dispute is not exist. What is the dispute? He is a POV pusher. Manacpowers (talk) 21:00, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

This is reason that i think RogueNinja is a POV pusher. for example, 1. His arts became the basis of the original form of Taekwondo. -> he changed this sentence like this, Later, his style helped inspire Taekwondo. 2. thus clearly distinguishing Taekwondo from the Japanese karate. -> He deleted this sentence. 3. He major delete imortant article. At that time 14 terms of techniques were used, representing 5 kicking patterns, 4 hand techniques, 3 pushing-down-the-heel patterns, one turning-over kick pattern and 1 technique of downing-the-whole-body. Also noteworthy is the use the term "poom" which signified a face-to-face stance preparing for a fight. The masters of Taekkyondo were also under constant threat of imprisonment, which resulted in an eventual of Taekkyondo as popular games. This is important article. It is cleary Karate JPOV pushing edit.(he try to hide TKD influenced by tekkyon) not english matter.(it is an ostensible reason) Plase, check my edit from reference source. my edit based on fact. his changing is not based on fact. also he did not offer counterpart source or FACT.Manacpowers (talk) 21:02, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

The dispute is over the content of the article, if there is not a dispute, then why was there an edit war going on? Please see my comments on the articles talk page on the version I protected. Also, please stop making accusations against people, review WP:AGF. Camaron | Chris (talk) 21:06, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

RfA Thanks

Hi Camaron - thanks for your participation in my request for adminship. It passed 52/0/0, and I'm now in possession of a shiny new mop (and pleased to join you as a member of the Admin class of January 2008). If I can ever help you with anything, please don't hesitate to contact me. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 09:06, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Well done, I wish you the best of luck with the tools - use them well! Camaron | Chris (talk) 18:48, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Rudget!

Dear Camaron, my sincere thanks for your support in my second request for adminship, which ended with 113 supports, 11 opposes, and 4 neutral. I would especially like to thank my admin coach and nominator, Rlevse and Ryan Postlethwaite who in addition to Ioeth all inspired me to run for a second candidacy. I would also like to make a special mention to Phoenix-wiki, Dihyrdogen Monoxide and OhanaUnited who all offered to do co-nominations, but I unfortunately had to decline. I had all these funny ideas that it would fail again, and I was prepared for the worst, but at least it showed that the community really does have something other places don't. Who would have though Gmail would have been so effective? 32 emails in one week! (Even if it does classify some as junk :P) I'm glad that I've been appointed after a nail biting and some might call, decision changing RFA, but if you ever need anything, just get in touch. The very best of luck for 2008 and beyond, Rudget . 16:24, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Looking at your recent admin actions, I think you having adminship has already been a benefit to Wikipedia. Good luck! Camaron | Chris (talk) 18:49, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Renaming of schools

Congratulations on being made an admin. I would have voted for you if I'd known you were going to stand. I wonder if you might be able to help. There is an editor who has started a mass re-naming of schools. A number of English schools have been affected. There does not appear to have been any discussion and in view of the fact that the naming conventions policy had no consensus there seems to be no rationale for moving them. I'm now not sure of the procedure to move them all back again. Is it something you might be able to help with. You will be able to pick them up at Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/WikiProject Schools articles by quality log. The editor has already had a few comments on his talk page but you might like to keep an eye on the situation. Dahliarose (talk) 21:14, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I am glad you support my adminship, also thanks for letting me know. The user behind this seems to have stopped - after realising his actions are controversial, however I will keep an eye on the log. Camaron | Chris (talk) 12:06, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks. Is there some way you can use your rollback tool to revert the changes that the user made to the English schools so that they all go back to their original names? Dahliarose (talk) 17:23, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Per policy, I can only really use rollback in cases of vandalism or if the user agrees for me to make the reverts. I would for the time being rather to see how WP:NC(S) turn out then make further page moves in-line with what will hopefully be an accepted guideline, as a particular version for this proposal has not been agreed upon yet. For the English schools, I would suggest we encourage the user to self-revert if he has not already done so. Camaron | Chris (talk) 19:42, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I see you have reverted all the page moves for the English schools, hopefully this user will not object and that will solve the issue. Camaron | Chris (talk) 13:18, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

It was easier than I thought and there weren't that many. I've left a note on the editor's talk page and asked him to discuss page moves first before proceeding. I think he realises his mistake and is now steering clear of the UK schools. Dahliarose (talk) 14:09, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

thx

I have the mop but can you search the RFA meeting shown to find the bucket?

Thanks for your support, my request for adminship passed 60/0/0 yesterday!

I want to thank Mrs.EasterBunny and Royalbroil for nominating me, those who updated the RfA tally, and everyone for their support and many kind words. To paraphrase a president ... I wish my mum and dad could see the comments made. My dad would be so proud to see the comments ... and my mum would have believed them". I will do my best to use the new tools carefully and responsibly (and you may be surprised to find that I have not deleted all of the pages by accident..... yet).

Thanks again, Victuallers (talk) 20:51, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

An early RFA meeting to decide if Victuallers can be included as a sysop - use cursor to identify.

This is certainly one of the best RFA thanks cards I have received! Camaron | Chris (talk) 17:48, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Question

If I were to copy the protect code from a page and apply it to, say my page, would it still protect the page, even though I'm not an admin? Just curious. Dusti^talk 19:52, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Hello again. In answer to your question no it wouldn't, the code on the page is only for the templates used to mark protection of the page. You need to go to a special page and press a few buttons to actually protect a page. There would be a big vandalism/disruption potential if anyone could protect a page by adding a code. Camaron | Chris (talk) 20:34, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. Just wondering, and no, I don't have an evil plans in the future ;). Thanks again... Happy Editing, Dusti^talk 17:09, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I have a kinda odd question. An editors family member just died, and I was wondering if there was something taht i could place on their page to let them know I'm sorry about their loss. Like the smiley faces from wikilove and all that. Any suggestions? Let me know on my talk page please. Happy Editing, Dusti^talk 18:23, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Replied at User talk:Dustihowe as requested. Camaron | Chris (talk) 10:47, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the response, and I will do as you suggested. Happy Editing, Dusti^{talk to me} 17:00, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Question for you

Hi Camaron, thank you for closing the WP:AfD on Hidden Valley High School (Grants Pass, Oregon) - My question is as follows, while I've participated in many of these AfD discussions, I've never really come across this particular scenario - what happens if the nominator (myself) realizes after the fact that the nomination is not appropriate - is there a non-administrator way of closing the debate? If so, how exactly does one do that? Thank you again. Cheers! Wisdom89 (talk) 21:11, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. Non-administrators can (and are welcome to given the common AFD backlog) close AFD discussions, most of the information you need is at Wikipedia:Deletion process. Follow the steps at WP:DELPRO#AFD in the event you want to close a discussion. You can use WP:DPR#NAC on the same page as a guide to when it is appropriate for non-admins to close AFDs, such as in non-controversial nomination withdrawals. Camaron | Chris (talk) 21:23, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

History deletion on school AFD

When the consensus is to delete outright or if there is no mergeable content, I usually delete the history before placing a redirect. In this case, there was no mergeable content. Go on and undelete the history if you want; however, I generally wait until someone has reliable sources and tries to recreate the page with an assertion of notability before doing that. --Core desat 23:00, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

I think I will leave it for now, though if the article is recreated (for a good reason) the history should be restored. Camaron | Chris (talk) 10:44, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: Opps!

No problem, Grawp decided to spam this link on 4chan tonight... you know the rest of the story... :-D east.718 at 12:07, February 3, 2008

Re: Kaohsiung Municipal Jui-Hsiang Senior High School

Camaron, thank you very much for giving me this advice, and I'm really sorry about rating it to a higher grade without comment and contacting with other users. I won't do anythiing like that anymore. Thank you and happy Chinese new year. Gon-Hsi-Fa-Tsai Demic1210 (talk) 09:14, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

You are welcome, I don't want to make anyone afraid to assess articles - it is not ultimately a big deal, and if you make a mistake it can be quickly corrected. I see you borrowed my "leave me a new message header", I am glad you like it - it is based on the one User:Jimbo Wales had on his talk page. Happy Chinese New Year to you too. Camaron | Chris (talk) 17:49, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Editor Review

Could you please comment on my Editor Review? I trust that you will be honest on how you think I have been performing here at Wikipedia. Thanks a lot! Happy Editing, Dusti^talk 19:01, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

I would be happy to; I will put it on my list of things to do and will try and do it during the weekend. Camaron | Chris (talk) 21:17, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

To Camaron

Thank you very much, Camaron. I'm just a senior high school student, and a new user of Wikipedia. I'm glad to learn something of it from you. I like to share my experience of editing Wikipedia with my friends and classmates although I'm busy with the study in my school. Happy Chinese new Year. Demic1210 (talk) 10:05, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Genie

Hi,How am I vandalising when I added specific information from The Sims 2 into the genie page about the Genie in The Sims 2--Erhama (talk) 09:32, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

You are not vandalising as far as I can see, and as far as I see know no one has accused you of it. Camaron | Chris (talk) 18:48, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

for info. dyk

...that Gordon Parks High School, an alternative school, is named after the famous photographer, because he dropped out of education locally in Saint Paul, Minnesota? by Eóin

I agree with your Barnstar! We need more like this Victuallers (talk) 16:43, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, he requested assessment and I found he was the single author of this good quality article. I say add it DYK, it is the perfect candidate. Camaron | Chris (talk) 17:06, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Re:Paul Wight

Don't worry about it. If the vandalism does heat up, then there would be need for protection, but when anon vandalism/good contribs are about 50/50, we should leave it unprotected. That same situation has happened to me once also (protecting the article, going to put a note of it on the WP:RFPP page, and finding that another editor denied it =]). Happy editing! Malinaccier (talk) 16:22, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, yes that is a slightly annoying problem with WP:RFPP! Most cases like this are complicated and different admins can come down to different reasoned conclusions. You convinced me to change my mind, which was helpful, as I am still getting the hang of the tools. Camaron | Chris (talk) 16:30, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Giratina and the Sky's Bouquet: Sheimi

I believe it is convention that "fan translations" – unofficial ones – are not permitted on Wikipedia and that it's "Japanese or no English at all." Other party claims that it's the official Japanese titel but I doubt that; stuff gets translated and the precise title isn't always the one used in Japan.

I know that protection is not an endorsement of the current version, though. hbdragon88 (talk) 00:58, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

No the protection is definitely not an endorsement of the current version, and I am leaning towards agreeing with you on the title. The page move warring had to stop though, and it seems to have stimulated discussion on the talk page. I deliberately set the protection to expire after a week, which by then I hope the dispute will be resolved - the page can be unprotected earlier if an agreement is reached. Camaron | Chris (talk) 11:36, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

My Recent Edits

Can you take a look at my recent closings of AFD conversations and tell me if you agree with what I did. I stopped closing some past convo's and thought maybe I should ask you what you think of my current status with it. Thanks and please let me know here. Thanks and Happy Editing, Dusti^{talk to me} 18:54, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Done Camaron | Chris (talk) 21:36, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Piedmont, California / Piedmont High School / User:Akhamenepour

thanks for the revert, any chance of speeding up the RFP I just submitted? Zedla (talk) 10:38, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Done - I have also blocked the socks for a short time to prevent any further problems. Camaron | Chris (talk) 11:13, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I am akhamenehpour, and I wanted to apologize for my poor behavior last night. Where I live, which is Piedmont, Ca, it was after 2 AM, and I was having a very bad week. I know that that is not an excuse for my mistakes, but I just wanted to ask you to forgive me. I now understand not to vandalize Wikipedia as I did to Piedmont + Piedmont, Ca, but I really wasn't doing it to vandalize Wikipedia, it was because I was having problems with the city and school administrations, and I saw this as a way of getting back at them. I know no that I shouldn't have done it. Chris, if I wanted to continue vandalizing, I wouldn't be writing this right now, I could have created another account to vandalize with. Besides, if I was really a vandal, I wouldn't have only been dealing with Piedmont, Ca and Piedmont High School. If you look at my edits before that, some were very productive, including one on the discography of Hassan Shamaizadeh. Please give me another chance. Block me for a week, two weeks, a month, but not indefinitely. You can always track changes I made and easily block me again. I am sorry and understand that last night I acted childish and immature and I shouldn't have unloaded my tensions and anger onto you. Even if you decide not to unblock me, please forgive me in your heart, as that is what counts. PS, I want to admit that last night I mad akhamenehpour1 and akhamenehpour2 mostly for vandalism. You can delete them now, as I don't need them and aren't going to use them. I also apologize for some of my vandalism on Alameda County and Piedmont Unified School District, last night. Thank You, Akhamenehpour —Preceding unsigned comment added by Akhamenehpour2 (talk • contribs) 20:59, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Replied at User talk:Akhamenehpour2‎. Camaron | Chris (talk) 10:31, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Stalking?

LOL what did I miss last night? Do you have any idea why I was being accused of stalking this person User:Stew Pedfar King Fool? Redfarmer (talk) 12:30, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

I think (s)he has probably noticed you adding sock puppet templates to the appropriate talk pages and has decided to complain to you about it. Anyway, the account is a obvious sock puppet and troll account of User:Lol I love moi car, who seems to cause disruption once at around the same time every day either using an IP or a new account. Camaron | Chris (talk) 12:57, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Longshore Sailing School

I was just adding extra comments to the AfD and conflicted with your Keep, which is okay by me. I think the Keep may have been premature, since it was a consensus of only one editor and the COI creator of the page, but there wasn't a whole lot of discussion and time had expired, so no harm/no foul. The cites/refs added were weak and I have added my review of those on the article talk page. I suppose someone else might renom it for AfD, if it's decided that WP:N hasn't been sufficiently met. I'll leave it as it is for now as I was unable to find and add any reliable, verifiable sources to support the claims made. Other editors can review at their leisure. Regards -Daddy.twins (talk) 19:46, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

I have already re-listed it. I closed it as Keep not because of voting counting, but because I thought consensus had been reached that the new version was notable - your comments were based specifically on the old version, so were arguably superseded. Also, the AFD was well overdue closure. I would advise in the future to try and respond to later comments in AFDs and changes to the articles, to help those that come to close the AFD. Camaron | Chris (talk) 19:54, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

help those that come to close the AFD - will do. I was just revisiting (and adding new comments) today, so I was a bit late in re-reviewing and will try to take a break from 'real life' a little more often to hop into WP Life, especially for AfD's I'm participating in. Regards - Daddy.twins (talk) 20:08, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for understanding, and happy editing! Camaron | Chris (talk) 20:17, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Your help please...

On December 19, 2007 User:Kingboyk deleted eight articles I started. I didn't get any heads-up that there were concerns over these articles. So I didn't have an opportunity to address them.

I asked Kingboyk to userify them but they haven't been online for over three weeks.

Could you please move these articles, their histories and talk pages?

Sarfraz Ahmed (unnumbered Guantanamo captive)	User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/rescue/Sarfraz Ahmed (unnumbered Guantanamo captive)
Jan Mohammed (Guantanamo detainee)	User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/rescue/Jan Mohammed (Guantanamo detainee)
Mohammed Sadiq	User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/rescue/Mohammed Sadiq
Hamid al-Razak	User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/rescue/Hamid al-Razak
Alef Muhammad	User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/rescue/Alef Muhammad
Abdur Rahim (unnumbered Guantanamo detainee)	User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/rescue/Abdur Rahim (unnumbered Guantanamo detainee)
Mohammed Al Amin	User:Geo Swan/Guantanamo/rescue/Mohammed Al Amin

Thanks! Geo Swan (talk) 18:35, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

OK, I have userfied them all for you. Just be aware of WP:BLP as it still applies in the user space and only retain deleted articles in your user space if you are going to continue working on them to avoid complaints. Also, make sure the userfied articles remain out of any main space categories. Camaron | Chris (talk) 19:44, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Please accept my apologies. I am afraid I may have made an inadvertent lapse from policy. In the interests of brevity I didn't mention that I had made a request for userification for three of those articles, on DRV, prior to making my request to you. I had no intent to deceive anyone. Geo Swan (talk) 17:40, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

I am sure you didn't - I missed the deletion review, but as you requested the move and were the author of the articles and deletion review - it still was reasonable to userfy them on your request. They can easily be moved back if necessary anyway. Camaron | Chris (talk) 19:48, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

WP Schools Article guidelines

Hi there, wonder if you wouldn't mind giving a bit of assistance. There's an AfD going on for a middle school in Bedfordshire which is deemed secondary by the local authority. Looking at the proposed WP Schools Article guidelines, it falls in both the proposed notable and non notable camps. So as one of the two participants listed on the page (and the only UK based one!), I was wondering if you would clarify where a school like this one would stand. I should point out that I haven't given a 'keep' or 'delete' at the AfD, I was just wondering as there seems to be a few schools with thier own article listed at Middle Schools in England. Many thanks --Starrycupz (talk) 23:04, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Hello, In terms of general notability, middle schools are not generally considered notable enough for their own article except in special cases, like with primary schools. Middle schools do overlap with both primary and secondary education, but AFDs I have seen seem to lean towards treating them as primary schools. Camaron | Chris (talk) 22:54, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Categories: User talk archives