User talk:PhilKnight/Archive23

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

lil' kim mixtape cover

the reason why there are two covers is because the mixtape is yet to be released and the artwork for the cover is yet to be confirmed, its either one of the two, i will remove one of them when the mixtape comes out or when the cover has been confirmed. thanks User:Lil' kim187 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.68.26.144 (talk) 13:11, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for the help with the copyright on this image: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Rlowell.jpg. I really appreciate it. :-) BBhounder (talk) 22:03, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

An Administrator is I!

KoL images are copyrighted, so I'll use this PD one instead.

Adventurer! The Council has identified a number of strange occurrences (such as "vandals" and "articles for deletion") in the surrounding wilderness. The Council would check it out, but they have important Councily-type things. But never fear: brave adventurers known as "sysops" roam the lands!

Thank you for your support in my quest to become a sysop. Although I am now wielding the keys to my very own Bitchin' Meatcar, I promise to uphold the laws of the land, martini in hand, in a way that would make Saint Sneaky Pete proud. I will do my best to be a Jack of Several Trades (although I may be a Master of Nuns). I promise to Heart Canadia. And I will make it my goal to Make War, Not ... er, Wait, Never Mind.

I am glad to serve my guild, the League of Wikipedians. If I can be of any assistance, or you have any questions, suggestions, or criticisms in the future, please let me know. And if you are at a loss for what any of the above actually means, see this website.

Thanks again.

An Encyclopedia is We! - Revolving Bugbear 22:06, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

case question

Hi. could you please tell me why no one took on the mediation case for Palestinian people? thanks. --Steve, Sm8900 (talk) 01:42, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi. i'm really sorry to bother you. i am not trying to be confrontaional in any way. i would simply be interested in any thoughts which you might have on this matter. However, i would really apprecaite any inoput or thought which you might care to provide on this. If the answer is simply that people were busy, and just that no one had gotten around to it, but they would have eventually, i can totally accept that. i just wanted to ask. thank you, and i really apprreciate any help which you could provide. thanks. --Steve, Sm8900 (talk) 14:44, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I should have replied earlier. I was thinking of taking the case myself, but wasn't sure if I would be considered impartial, because I have given Tiamut a barnstar. Regarding your very reasonable question about why nobody else has responded, I guess it's because of the holiday period - Wikipedia slows down in August and late December. Again, sorry for not replying more promptly. Addhoc (talk) 16:19, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi. that sounds totally fine. i really appreciate your answer. i totally understand. By the way, i posted a note at the article talk page as to why i deleted my own request. Briefly though, my only reason was that we were already getting some new input from an editor from Wikipedia:Third opinion, and it created a further discussion. I wasn't sure that we would want to have two third-paty processes at once, so i deleted the medcab one. besides, i also didn;'t want to have all the resolution efforts going through me, so once the WP:3O one came through, i figured i'd delete the other one. I figure that anyone else is always free to resubmit it themselves. So I really appreciate your help and your reply. your thinking sounds very logical. it's quite possible we may be in touch about this again. see you. --Steve, Sm8900 (talk) 16:24, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

AFD: Manchester Cathedral Gardens Subculture

Regarding Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Manchester Cathedral Gardens Subculture 2 — would you agree to application of WP:SALT as suggested by Mike33 in the discussion if I were to close the action as 'delete'? If yes or no, could you indicate that in your opinion summary please? Thanks --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 04:32, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Hello

Hello Addhoc. I was User:Librorum Prohibitorum, who sent you a message some days ago. I had disputes mainly with two editors (Administrator Dbachmann, and Hornplease). Now the admin Picaroon (talk · contribs) has blocked me indefinitely, claiming I was a Hkelkar sock without any evidence at all. He has done this witout even leaving a message or explanation somewhere. If you look at [1], I don't edit the same articles. In my last edit I was writing something (positive) about Jews [2]. This is the only reason that I can think of that someone would think that I am Hkelkar. Picaroon (or the editor who asked him to do this) thinks that every Hindu editor who says something positive about Jews must be a Hkelkar sock (Hkelkar was a Hindu/Jewish editor).

This is a grave Adminstrator abuse. Librorum Prohibitorum2 (talk) 15:39, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi, on my first day, I was blocked, and the blocking admin said he thought it was probable that I was a sock of somebody who had founded a new religious movement. I wasn't indefinitely blocked, and kept the same account with the block log. In this context, I would suggest you don't worry about the previous account, and create a new account with a completely different user name. From there, I would advise you avoid conflict, and concentrate on improving articles. I found joining the Harmonious Editing Club useful for advice on resolving disputes through consensus. Addhoc (talk) 17:11, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

But I liked my Username, and I had some discussions open that weren't finished. Librorum Prohibitorum2 (talk) 17:51, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Ok, have a look at Wikipedia:Appealing a block.--Addhoc (talk) 18:34, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Mediator help requested

Please see: Wikipedia_talk:MEDCAB#Mediator_help_requested. Thanks. —Viriditas | Talk 20:40, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

Requesting old version of a page

Addhoc, you deleted a page entitled "National Socialist Party of Great Britain" and now we wish to rebuild it, but with neutrality being paramount - however, we do not have the all the material that was written on the page at the last known version at our disposal - so we would appreciate it, so that we may retain the information, and strip away the advertisement. Thankyou in advance. Bellringer1 (talk) 01:15, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Have a look at:

Find sources: National Socialist Party of Great Britain — news, books, scholar

Apparently, the party doesn't exist. Addhoc (talk) 12:59, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Sorry to jump in, but this article is now at AFD. But it is not even registered as a party with the appropriate authorities, so does it not meet criteria for speedy as non-notable organisation? Whitstable (talk) 18:05, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Request information on delete

Hi Adhoc,

Can you tell me why you deleted the foreign language equivalents section on Rufous-tailed_Rock_Thrush without discussion?

Reasons why I added that information:

There is nowhere else on Wikipedia to provide that information.
People looking for the Japanese and Mandarin equivalents of this English bird have no other resource.
It is important information that adds value to the page.

If you have a suggestion for an alternate place to put that information, I am happy to put it there. TIA. Wakablogger (talk) 31 December 2007

Sorries

I didn't know that an invisible comment edit would matter, especially on a page that hadn't been edited recently. I won't do it again. 216.83.145.130 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 19:53, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

I reverted lots of vandals, I think. Does that make me a good user again? 216.83.145.130 (talk) 20:17, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Yup. Addhoc (talk) 20:19, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

I'm starting a list of administrators that volunteer to help at User: ScienceApologist#Administrative helpmates. Thanks. ScienceApologist (talk) 22:39, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to my world

See what's going on at Cold fusion and its associated talk page. Maybe you can help? ScienceApologist (talk) 23:05, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

New York Times reference

Hi. I'm working on the page for eCommerce Industries, and I appreciate your help in cleaning up the formatting. But I do have a question about a reference that you included: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ECommerce_Industries#_note-1

I checked the link, and the New York Times brief doesn't refer to our headquarters or Fort Worth, TX. Let me know what your reasoning is, or there's a better reference for this fact.

Cheers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Markinget (talk • contribs) 20:20, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

I've moved the reference. Addhoc (talk) 20:25, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Template:User Wikipedians against monarchy

Just a quick note - I've had a look and have removed the tag, as I don't think the template falls under the speedy category you cite. My reasonings are set out on the talk page. Giles Bennett ^{(Talk, Contribs)} 21:26, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi there - I've replied here. Off to bed, so I won't be able to respond until the morning if you wish to continue the discussion. Regards. Giles Bennett ^{(Talk, Contribs)} 23:02, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

MedCab

I am back to a solid activity level and will be resuming my work with MedCab. Cheers! Vassyana (talk) 09:34, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Splendid! Addhoc (talk) 12:33, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

RfA Thanks

Dear PhilKnight, Thank you for voting in my RfA, which closed successfully with 34 support, 2 oppose, and 0 neutral. I appreciate your support! I promise I will wield the mop wisely, and do my best to improve Wikipedia.

-- AKeen (talk) 15:21, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

a technical question

i've got one technical question for you and then i'll try not to bother you for a good long while. in the infobox on the ecommerce industries page, i can't get the first bullet under subsidiaries to display correctly. the bullet by "Advantage" appears as an asterix, not a good-lookin aqua square as it should. what am i doing wrong? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Markinget (talk • contribs) 16:08, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I had a look, and I don't know either. You could replace all the bullet points with a copy and paste character such as • however beyond that I don't have any suggestions. Sorry. Addhoc (talk) 13:15, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts#User:Ahering@cogeco.ca

FYI and input if you have time. Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts#User:Ahering@cogeco.ca. Fireproeng (talk) 08:18, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Addhoc (talk) 13:15, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Elonka 3

Thank you for your participation in my RfA. It was definitely a dramatic debate that landed on WP:100, but ultimately was deemed a successful declaration of consensus, and I am now an admin. I definitely paid close attention to everything that was said in the debate, and, where possible, I will try to incorporate the (constructive) criticism towards being a better administrator. I'm taking things slowly for now, partially because of the holidays and all the off-wiki distractions. I'm working my way through the Wikipedia:New admin school, carefully double-checking the relevant policies, and will gradually phase into the use of the new tools, with my main goals being to help out with various backlogs. I sincerely doubt you'll see anything controversial coming from my new access level. :) I also fully intend to keep on writing articles, as there are a few more that I definitely want to get to WP:FA status. If you do ever have any concerns about my activities as an administrator, I encourage you to let me know. My door is always open. Have a good new year, --El on ka 01:48, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Request

I have special request for you. Can we please take down the ECi site just for a while until we're able to verify all the information in there? I just found out that I made a few serious errors in coming up with the text, and we'd like to get it straightened out before we continue. Would you please - for all intents - delete the page for just a few days until we get our answers?

Of course. Addhoc (talk) 14:36, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

BITEy ????

In what way is it WP:BITEy to report a user to AIV when they have repeatedly deleted a speedy tag. This guy had gone right though the range of warnings for removing the template (two different users issued him with warnings), yet he took a decision to ignore these warnings and do it again. WP:BITE is all about treating new users properly (for example, by going through the full range of warnings rather than going straight for a level-4im, it isn't about giving every new user a free pass to break every rule in the book for a couple of weeks. Mayalld (talk) 14:43, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Yup, we have different views about this. In my humble opinion removing a speedy delete tag isn't the same as vandalism. Also, if you just restore the {{hangon}} tag, the page is still listed at candidates for speedy deletion. I personally don't think we should encourage high speed revert wars over tags. Addhoc (talk) 14:49, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Most of the removals (particularly the later ones) were not the classic newbie mistake of replacing {{db-whatever}} with {{hangon}}, they were plain and simple deletions of the speedy tag from the article. As you say, it isn't the same as vandalism, but I have to ask what you think we should do where a user is attempting to subvert due process? Should we ignore it, and just let people remove speedy tags if they want to? Should we revert them, but not warn them? (and probably get 3RR clobbered in the process). Should we issue every warning level twice to give them more chances? If somebody has been repeatedly warned about their actions, and has been warned right through all the levels, which progressively make it clear that if they carry on action will be taken, the next step must be admin action. In a case like this, I would suggest that admin action ought to be rather more limited than the action which was actually taken by another admin at the same time as you removed the report (indef block), and that a 1-2 hour block would have been an appropriate action to ensure that the user was aware that warnings are not idle threats, but will happen if people break the rules.Mayalld (talk) 16:20, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your thoughtful and measured response. Addhoc (talk) 16:26, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

"Your quoting WP:NPA?"

Sorry mate, I think there was a little confusion on Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/International_PEN_(2nd_nomination). I was the one that said "Your quoting WP:NPA?" but I was refering to Mayalld quoting it to you after having just accused me of playing "Silly games" sorry about that. Fosnez (talk) 15:50, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned Madam Rosmerta Image

Hi. Got a note on my talk page that you'd marked Image:Madam_rosmerta_hp.jpg as an orphan. I checked out Minor Harry Potter characters, the article to which it had previously been attached. Apparently there's a very heated argument/edit war going on over whether that particular article should have any images at all, and the result is that until next Monday the article is locked down in its most recent state, which happened to be the "no photos" version. I'm not getting into the argument, but I hope this photo won't be deleted before a decision is rendered one way or the other?--Zequist (talk) 07:11, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Yep, I added an orphan tag, and for the reasons you have explained this was reverted. I also don't want to get dragged into a heated debate, so I'm not going to reintroduce the tag. Addhoc (talk) 12:40, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

UK Fulbright Commission

Greetings, I would really appreciate it if you could give me more detailed advice on how to edit my article in a way that it doesn't look as an advertisment. Thank you! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Faithportis (talk • contribs) 15:23, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

A dispute with which you may be able to help

Check the last two sections of User talk:PeterStJohn and also the second-to-last section of Talk:Quackwatch. ScienceApologist (talk) 20:52, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the un-block

Thanks, i will create a account —Preceding unsigned comment added by 159.191.12.24 (talk • contribs) 16:05, January 8, 2008