User talk:Gadfium/archive7

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Barnstar 2 Magneta Lane 3 Not vandalism. 4 User:Uthar Wynn 01 5 Spanish translation of the week 6 re:Page blanking vandal 7 How to Program a Computer (From WP:RD) 8 thanks for supporting me 9 Art Wikiportal featured picture 10 Thanks 11 Blocking user 12 Block clash 13 Hellllpppppp 14 Virtual New Zealand 15 City of Sails 16 Thanks 17 Personal Attacks 18 Mistake or Willful Vandalism 19 Nzfooty 20 New articles page 21 Spanish Translation of the Week 22 Voting on jonquil flowers 23 I give in 24 Hi :) 25 "Genuine contributor?" 26 Hello 27 Bill Andersen

[edit] Barnstar

Thank you! *blushing* --Fenice 4 July 2005 08:35 (UTC)

[edit] Magneta Lane

Hi! Thanks for the note on my page. Good call. I've changed my vote to keep and redirected the "Lexi Valentine" page since it had been blanked. Best, Lucky 6.9 00:03, 10 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Not vandalism.

Please refrain from indiscriminate reversions and discuss why you think my contributions are not appropriate on the talk page. I do not believe my edits contained any factual inaccuracies and I would appreciate it if you would not classify my edits as vandalism so readily, you really should make justification before allegations of this nature.

I think it's pretty clear to any reasonable person that what you are adding is nonsense.-gadfium 03:45, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps, but all of it was true nonsense, now wasnt it? --Uthar Wynn 01 03:47, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] User:Uthar Wynn 01

Hi Gadfium, I just went to block the above indefinitely, but I notice he's negotiated a shorter block with you. My perception of this user is that he's a troll. He has repeatedly added nonsense to Terri Schiavo, material that constitutes vandalism e.g. these edits [1], he's vandalized a user page with the edit summary "spelling fix," [2], and when I blocked him for 24 hours for it, he e-mailed me in a very contrite, reasonable way, asking to be unblocked early. When the block expired, he went straight back to Terri Schiavo and continued his vandalism, admitting to another user that he knew he was adding nonsense, but that it was "true nonsense." [3] Would you have any objection if I made the block indefinite? SlimVirgin ^(talk) 15:39, July 14, 2005 (UTC)

I've promised to give him a chance, but if he goes back to his old ways then I would have no objection to your blocking him indefinitely. With both of us watching him carefully, he should be aware that he's on thin ice.-gadfium 19:54, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

Okay, that sounds fair enough. I sense this one enjoys living on the thin ice. ;-) SlimVirgin ^(talk) 23:29, July 14, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Spanish translation of the week

[edit] re:Page blanking vandal

An hour sounds good. I just go through a "standard proceedure" of blocking someone for 24 hours the next time they vandalize after being warned with {{subst:Test4}}, but if you feel that an hour block would be better in this case, I'll go with that since we can always reblock if they vandalize again. Y0u (Y0ur talk page) (Y0ur contributions) 23:24, July 18, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] How to Program a Computer (From WP:RD)

Thanks for your thoughtful response. hydnjo talk 15:41, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] thanks for supporting me

Hello, just a quick note to express my gratitude for your support of my RfA. I'm sure I'll become a familiar face on places like the Administrator's Noticeboard and Requests for Adminship, as well as the murkier parts of my new job. "From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked." (Luke 12:48, NIV) Never was a truer word spoken. I feel empowered, yes, but not in the "oooh cool delete button!" way I was kind of expecting. Already I feel the weight of the responsibility I have now been entrusted with, a weight that will no doubt reduce given time. Thank you for believing in me. :) Garrett^Talk 10:07, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Art Wikiportal featured picture

I happened to check my Makonde elephant picture today for the first time in months and found it was a featured picture on the Art Wikiportal. I'm incredibly flattered. Thank you.-gadfium 03:14, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

You are most welcome! The Art Wikiportal is quite informal about posting features -- whenever someone gets the impluse to post something, they do, and I've come to adore that elephant. Thanks for making it available. >>sparkit|TALK<< 03:59, July 29, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thank you for your attention[4], I can assure you I have no intention of using wikipedia to cause trouble. I just want to correct mistakes, like all good users. Plautus satire 23:28, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Blocking user

Hi Gadfium - I've just blocked a user fr the first time... and the regulations about it are somewhat convoluted. Can you please check that I haven't made a mess of it? (see User talk:Grutness#A flavor for details). Cheers, James Grutness...wha? 02:09, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

Looks like a successful block to me, the length is appropriate, and I see you told them about it on their talk page. They need to have been warned about their behaviour first, and I see a number of warnings in the last week on their talk page, and they also need to continue their bad behaviour after having been warned. I haven't tried very hard to establish the truth of this last matter; I did look at a few of their recent edits and didn't see a problem.

Given the suggestion on your talk page that it might be someone with a learning disability rather than a vandal, I'd suggest treading carefully with this one. The block may well be appropriate to force the user to discuss what's appropriate, but they may just need detailed explanation about how things work. You might like to discuss this with User:Lucky 6.9 who has experience of dealing with this sort of user, or if you don't want to get further involved, pass this advice on to User:BlankVerse-gadfium 02:37, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll pass the info on. Grutness...wha? 02:44, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

I'm the user who asked Grutness to do the block. I can vouch for the fact that the user does some good editing. The problem is that he also does a lot of very weird edits (changing "is" to "was", for example) and puts in bogus info into articles that looks like it might be true. I was out in my car the other night listening to the "Hamster Dance" because Ronald20 has put in the KDIS article that the radio station had switched formats. I can tell you that he has already been blocked several times at various IPs, and he has been warned multiple times at the IPs and at Ronald20. I've also warned him in comments I've added to articles that he regularly edits (that I know that he's seen because he's deleted them). I even put a warning about possibly violating WP:3RR, but he went ahead and did the 4th revert as the IP.

The reason that I asked for the block is that the user seems to have escalated his behavior recently (more edits, page blanking, edit warring), and I was getting no response from official Wikipedia channels (see WP:VIP where multiple editors had reported his behavior, plus WP:AN/3RR). BlankVerse ∅ 08:45, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

Lucky has an extraordinary patience in dealing with people like this. If anyone can turn this user into a productive one, he can. He may not thank me for the referral though.-gadfium 08:50, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Block clash

I see you blocked User:195.92.168.173 one minute before I did. My block was only for an hour, since the IP address comes from (or claims to come from) one of Britain's biggest ISPs. Since my block will cancel yours when it expires, do you want to remove mine and reblock, or shall we both just be vigilant when mine expires in an hour's time?-gadfium 00:54, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

Better let yours stand, since I was working with incomplete information (I had just checked with the AOL/NTL list). Besides, I had no real preference as to how long to block, and chose the "standard" 24-hour block by default. See also Wikipedia talk:Administrator intervention against vandalism#Working TOO well for an amusing take on this problem ☺. --cesarb 01:00, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Hellllpppppp

As one who supported my admin nom (ta), I wonder if you could have a look at George Adamski. I think I am being set up in athree revert trap by a couple of anons . What they are reverting to is unencyclopedic POV claptrap. What I am trying to defend might need improvement, but it is far, far more objective and substantiated. Can you have a look now and then? Cheers Moriori 03:45, August 8, 2005 (UTC)

I doubt that you're being set up, but I agree that you should avoid going beyond three reverts. I've added the page to my watchlist, and will scrutinise any further changes.-gadfium 03:50, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Cheers. You still leaving NZ end of this montht? Moriori 03:53, August 8, 2005 (UTC)

Oops, that statement on my user page was ambiguous. I'm leaving the company I've worked at for the last seven years; I'm "retiring", which means I'll become a full-time student at Auckland University next year.-gadfium 03:58, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

I think I may have anticipated it correctly when I said I was being manouvred into a 3RR corner at George Adamski. The IPs look remarkably similar. Can you take another look please. Moriori 09:59, August 11, 2005 (UTC)

I have reverted it once, and will continue to do so. Your version is clearly superior. Since there are at least three of us reverting, I think the article will stay in a decent state. You have several options if this is not satisfactory:

1. Protect the page. Since you've been involved with it, it might pay to ask an uninvolved admin to do so. Now that I've made a revert, I'm no longer uninvolved. This is a solution only if you think the group of anons will become bored with the reverts. Most likely, they're following advice given on some UFO forum.
2. Add a WP:RFC on the article. This will attract more Wikipedians to get involved in the debate.
3. Add the article to WP:MVP. Many admins use MVP to keep an eye on controversial articles, and any edits to articles on this page get more attention than those elsewhere. This would be my favoured action, although the RFC comes a close second.-gadfium 20:00, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Virtual New Zealand

Your message to me about refraining from vandalism is entirely inappropriate and doesn't foster goodwill among the Open Source community. My links from the Wellington/Auckland/Christchurch pages to hundreds of photos from those cities is not inappropriate, rather complimentary. My photos are for the benefit of those who wish to see what those places are like, they are clear an unrestricited (no watermarks), and free to use on other sites if you adhere to the rules I have in the license page. What is it if I make a bit of dosh on the side. Open Source is open as in 'free beer', it is not adverse to making a profit albeit a small one. But as it stands I now do not give permission for use of my images on Wikipedia in any form due to the spirit of uncooperation you have shown.

My question to you is if it is wrong to link to commercial sites, then why have all those commercial links to "whatzon.com" etc. You appear to have a double standard. Not one rule for all, but for some (at your discretion). Is that not predjudice, lack of consistency, even hipocracy.

You then say that it is OK for me to contribute photos to Wikipedia. I have considered making many of my images free, but I feel that giving them to you for free in the spirit of meanness you have shown is a little bit unrealistic.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.54.120.42 (talk • contribs) 15:00, 9 August 2005

You are welcome to make money from your photos, but you are not welcome to use Wikipedia to advertise them. You also don't appear to be making any other contributions to us.

You've now had three different users explain to you at this IP address that spamming of Wikipedia isn't acceptable, and I seem to recall you've had other IP addresses as well. If you continue to spam, we will continue to remove your links to virtualoceania, and you may receive long term blocks.

You say that you don't give permission for your images to be used on Wikipedia. We take copyright very seriously here; if you find any of your images on this site, let us know and we'll remove them.

I'm not aware of any links to "whatzon.com" within Wikipedia, nor do I know anything about that site. If you find commercial links being added, you are of course free to remove them - as I do.-gadfium 04:05, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

Virtual New Zealand

I first added my site a while ago and couldn't understand why it was being instantly removed so I added it again. Then I got that message which showed why. I just assumed that the editor in charge didn't know what he was talking about as the other links there were also commercial. Can I suggest that instead of shooting contributors down with rude messages, that you give a reason why in a good manner. After all, good manners from others is why people give their time here in the first place.

I still think the links are appropriate when compared to the current range of links. If you visit those sites they are either businesses or government websites that are commercial and selling things. Come on, if the Hurricanes website is not a commercial business, then surely I am less so.

I do contribute to Wikipedia articles, but not usually from this IP. This one is from the Ministry of Education.

I really do not like the manner which you have taken to show that my site cannot be added. I resent being called a spammer for a start. There is a good way to go about things and a bad way. You should treat people with respect, not as criminals, that is my opinion.

[edit] City of Sails

Thanks for the instruction Charlie. Small world! Dave A

[edit] Thanks

I can't begin to tell you how much I appreciate the kind word on my talk page. I have long admired your work and your opinion. I've been having a blast catapulting vandal bot stubs to kingdom come. I gotta tell ya, that's theraputic as all get-out after enduring these stupid things for so long! I promise not to burn out. Really. And...I plan on picking your brain so I get this admin thing right! Best, Lucky 6.9 05:24, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Personal Attacks

Thank you for your comments. Now go away.

P.S.: Removing one set of "personal attacks" while leaving the other is not exactly kosher, is it? Or are there two sets of rules (not even official rules, at that) for editors here? --Calton | Talk 06:13, August 13, 2005 (UTC)

I would reply on your talk page, but you've told me to go away, so I won't push it.

I did think about removing more material, but it was hard to know where to stop. However, being the target of a personal attack does not justify making one.-gadfium 06:16, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Mistake or Willful Vandalism

You made a mistake in reverting my edits en masse. You should look more closely at them, and note that I disambiguated "liberal" to the appropriate parties, to classical liberalism, to liberalism, and to left-wing politics. The last was only used when referring to leftism and was entirely appropriate where used. Note I have also contributed to other disambiguations, and your mass revert was abusive. 67.173.181.67 23:44, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

• • You say you are not reverting all, and I suppose I am confused as to how you can decide some edits are appropriate and others are not, when I am applying the same mechanical standard to all edits. There is seriously a logic tree going on for my edits which is routine disambig. 67.173.181.67 23:51, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Nzfooty

Thanks for the comments. I still have lots to learn. Will try to do my best.

Regards. Nzfooty

[edit] New articles page

Thanks for drawing my attention to that page (and sorry for not replying earlier). A lot of my work these days is minor edits to things such as the 2005 candidate lists, but I'll see if I have anything interesting to add. On the subject of the 2005 elections, thanks for that picture of the billboards — it's nice to have an image for the article. -- Vardion 08:22, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Spanish Translation of the Week

[edit] Voting on jonquil flowers

Hi Gadfium!

Please vote on my latest indecisions! Hope you like them --Fir0002 10:22, August 20, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] I give in

A thousand times over - I give in. I created new article (Rising Fast) today and no matter what cat I tried to insert, it came up with something entirely different when I went to "show preview". So, tks for getting some semblance of reality. Now, remembering that I am definitely NOT a compugeek, I would be grateful if you could explain to me the origin of that thingy "For more information, see the article about Rising Fast" which appears at the bottom of the article! Why would something in XXXX article refer people to see XXXX article when they are already reading XXXX article? I'd remove it if I knew how too, but as I said........Cheers. Moriori 08:33, August 24, 2005 (UTC)

I've fixed it. You used squiggly brackets (properly called curly brackets or braces, I believe) for the category. Squiggly brackets include the text of the contained object; they're intended to be used for templates. You should have used square brackets, which form a link to the contained object, or in the case of categories, put the article in the category. Does that make sense?

I'd actually edited that article without noticing the problem until you pointed it out here.-gadfium 09:17, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

As to why it said "See the article about Rising Fast": it was including the text from category:Horse racing, which contains the template {{catmore}}. That contains the text ''For more information, see the article about '''[[{{PAGENAME}}]]'''.'' and is intended to be used on a category page to point to the main article on the subject when the main article has the same name as the category.

It can get worse than this; I suspect Grutness has had to deal with some shockers at times.-gadfium 09:24, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Hi :)

Hi i hate to bother you so late but I noticed this User:Paul_Klenk has been following my articles around posting malformed tags on them, finally getting it right then posting mean spirited and hateful comments about me. I never heard of him before just now but i checked his talk page and see he's been warned a lot for personal attacks and has been blocked before for it too. i am just wondering how i should handle this.Wiki brah 08:16, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

I'll leave it to your best judgement on this user. He's created articles about single scenes from movies; created templates such as "This is a stub for actresses who excel at anal sex"; and then when his articles are tagged VfD, he deletes the tags and runs around looking for attention. Do a bit of research on him and I think you'll agree he needs to be watched carefully. Kind regards, Paul Klenk 08:23, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

I've had other articles tagged before I didn't remove the tags it was simply your tags were malformed sorry if you got offended but i thought it appeared to be vandalism since the vfd tag was red-linked for so long after all i've never seen that. And do a bit of research on you and you'll see a clear history of personal abuse that goes back for months while i've always been friendly and willing to learn, ask my friend Lucky_6.9. Obrigado Wiki_brah (talk · contribs)

Glad to see you've been to Brasil!  :) And I like creating arts and drawing so I made those templates just to do it, I am not planning on using that anal sex template on any articles, could I just keep it for my own self, like on my page or something, like an example of my work? (It took me a long time to make after all). And i'm not too concerned about the VfD's themselves but more so at Klenk's somewhat rude and nasty comments he's making about me in his edit summaries etc. he's got a history of disruption like that I see (I spend quite a bit of time just reading Wikipedia pages and procedures every day now)Wiki brah 08:33, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] "Genuine contributor?"

Genuine something. Whatever. Paul Klenk 14:40, 26 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Hello

Your recent message to me in connection with user Wiki bra: I thank you for your useful suggestion. I have posted my apology on his as well as on my talk page. I never intended that, and in any case, I regret my behavior. Thanks again. --Bhadani 13:43, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Bill Andersen

Thanks, (heard that at his funeral). Wonder if I should add in something about Muldoon during CER negotiations staying in a hotel underneath Malcolm Fraser's room - he got the Aussie PM so frusttrated he got out of bed at 2am to jump up and down on the floor to annoy Muldoon - who was still up drinking anyway :-).