User talk:Theresa knott

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

archive 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Welcome to my talk page. If you've come to complain, whine, moan, question my judgment, my intelligence, my sanity, or tell me off in any way, that's fine. I'm a big girl who can take it. If you've come to chat, compliment me, have a laugh, or discuss articles that's even better.

1 Time

[edit] Time

Before the wanton deletion of images beggins can I please ask for 5 days in order to sort out the copywright info on them? If I don't have them by then I will delete them myself.

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Geronimo57 (talk • contribs) 17:24, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Can I delete my own talk page or must that be kept recorded for future media exposure when I become Foreign Minister (I intend to) and be mocked by the public? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Geronimo57 (talk • contribs) 17:48, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Mutchas gracias senhorita. May the peace of God be upo ye. Salam Aleikum. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Geronimo57 (talk • contribs) 17:50, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mmbabies

Not to revive contraversy or anything, but I'm still noticing what I would like to call "personal attacks" on the Mmbabies page uncensored. Not that I'm looking for a fight or anything, but I just don't think it's fair, whenever anyone has made an attack at Mmbabies it's been bleeped. Not to bite at Rio or anything, but if you look carefully, I think you'll see a lot of the "superhero" style on Rio's part, not mine. For instance, it was him that said "Hey dude, thanks for doing that. I was researching info about that idoit boy people tried to file reports and where declined to help. Man dude you finally stop this prick from his games. Thanks for all your help. You may have stoped one of the wrost Wikipedian vandal in history. Oh it should be added in the books; that user:rio de oro , and user:GO-PCHS-NJROTC stoped user:Mmbabies from making threats aganist people. Thanks for all your help man" and "Spread the word that Mmbabies is gone from here" on my talk page, not me (see Archive 3). Immediately after, I mentioned barnstars, but that was just a question out of curiosity, nothing else. There's been many other vandals just as bad or worse than this fool, I realize this. Also notice that I told Rio "Don't get your hopes too high, we don't really know yet. Lets wait and see what happens." I don't feel that I have had that uper hero attitude; I've known for two years that abuse reporting is messy business, there's a 50-50 chance that an ISP will totally blow a person off. The same applies to government agencies. Why sure, I've played along with Rio and his overreaction a little bit; I think he's been trying to contribute in good faith, so I've been trying to comply with WP:BITE on the matter because of his intention to help, not hinder, but I've always known some of what he's been doing crosses the line (and not the equator either, get it?). Now I don't want to take sides (or tick anyone off at me), but I don't think it's fair for you to associate me with his actions when all I've been doing is acting within the guidelines set out by WP:BOLD, especially after I left comments like "Seriously Rio de Oro, you can't go sayin' crap about the hackers like that. I think all hackers and spammers should be fed to the alligators, but I never (well, never say never) make attacks (other than the usual, acceptable vandal fighting) at them. It gives them too much joy, and hacker/spammer joy is a mess. If you're gonna threaten vandals, at least try to be civil about it (like me, try using the {whois} template) and make it more of a promise, not a threat, because threats are for Mmbabies and LBHS Cheerleader, not vandal fighters." and "It's because everyone knows Mmbabies is full of BS." Once again, I don't want to point the finger at Rio or anything, but one of the big reasons I made such a big deal out of the case is because of constant pushing from him; I had slowed to just simply reporting new IPs to abuse AT att DOT net, but people have been really beating up on me to try to get the FBI and the police to tell me what was going on, which I know would have just encouraged them to ignore us and ignore me on all future cases as I've done that with similar cases and they already told me they don't diclose information on their cases, so I came up with the creative plan (which worked) to complain to the Better Business Bureau; I figured that would force an answer from AT&T which would calm the rage a little bit. Now I was uncertain myself about contacting the news, that's why I proposed it instead of jumping in immediately. I wanted to reserve that as a last resort, I knew I had to do something or I'd never hear the end of the constant pressure. At times, I regret even getting involved in this one, it's been a bit of a circus, especially recently. I say, we (we?) need to start that Mmbabies page with completely clean, delete the talk page and the main page (this removes the logs, which I think give this troll too much glory as is), rewrite the main page, removing any unneeded trivial information, ban Rio and I from it if you desire, and keep a look out for not only AT&T socks, but socks from other Houston, Texas ISPs as well as he'll be returning on another ISP if he returns. Just as R. Baley said to me, you should realize who your "friendlies" are; I'm on your side if you're here to fight IC (internet crime), and I think the "superhero" comments is kind of like "friendly fire." GO-PCHS-NJROTC (talk) 16:13, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

I've archived the comment. Actually I've archived the who section, no need to have it on the page. Is that OK? Theresa Knott | The otter sank 09:54, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Yep. Thanks! GO-PCHS-NJROTC (talk) 23:51, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Btw, you don't think the comment I left at Rio de oro's talk page is going light him up like a firecracker do you? GO-PCHS-NJROTC (talk) 17:37, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

No, he may well listen to you better than he will me. Theresa Knott | The otter sank

[edit] Re: Zachary Jaydon

Theresa, I am still having an issue with user "thegingerone" and her rants on various pages about me, about Zachary Jaydon, about my supposed identity etc. I am at my wits end. I don't want to continue having these rants. I was stupid enough to respond, and would like to delete my comment to end the argument. At this point I don't care about having the last word. I would just like this nonsense to be finished. It has been going on plenty long enough. She says she's over it constantly after leaving putrid messages on my talk page and the talk pages of articles I've worked on, but keeps continuing to rant. She had an admin reprimand me for giving out "personal information" but is doing the same by claiming to know me and saying I'm this person or that person, etc. The information is completely inaccurate, and I honestly don't care much, however the principle is the same. Long story short... please let me know if it's fine to delete my comments from "The Mickey Mouse Club" page or if it's not. I know as soon as I put up my next article, it's going to be butchered and probably AfD by her immediately... It's just frustrating. I'd like to eliminate myself from this mess completely. It's insane. Thank you, Theresa. I am coming to you because I know you're level headed, knowledgeable and get back to me quickly. Skyler Morgan (talk) 21:04, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Id just like to respond as this is just more dribble against me. Giving out my personal information is against wikipedia as I am not editing articles about myself. Me saying Skyler Morgan is Zachary Jaydon is revelant because he is editing articles about HIMSELF thus violating NPOV policies. I dont want the last word; I just wanted to correct something I said as I believe I left you a message awhile back on it. Skyler Morgan was not a real person; it was an alias he and Bledsoe used well at 44th Floor Records. I have an email to prove this. So yes Zachary Jaydon is Skyler Morgan; does not like the fact I called him on it, and is editing articles on himself. I mean why would anyone sit there and edit articles about this nobody? I might as well go write articles about myself too! Id like to see him banned from Wikipedia again (as he once was) because Im just tired of it. All he does is self promote; overembellish; and slander. It gets old. Not to mention he constantly has left me dirty messages on my talk page; then runs crying to admins when I get fed up and respond telling him to knock it off. There is only so much I can take. I've ignored him since November but apparently hes been watching me ever since; which is quite creepy. He needs a life. If you would like my proof feel free to ask. Im not overtly concerned though; all his claims are either false or grossly embellished; anything he writes will be deleted in no time by anyone other then myself. Id appreciate any help in this matter. Thank you.--Thegingerone (talk) 02:12, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Id like to add now I have written a new blog (to beat him to posting it) following Jaydon's claims. And Therea dear I have some damning proof Skyler Morgan is J.aydon (and thus should not be editing on himself). First up (Im sure by the time you read this he'll have edited it) on the Close to Home band page (which he claims in his article) if you look under influences it says Zachary Jaydon manager; Skyler Morgan legal. Now EVEN IF they were seperate people that would be a conflict of interest. To top it off I have an email from 44th Floor Records stating Skyler Morgan is not real and an alias used by both Bledsoe and Jaydon at various points. I have screenshots of both. If you want them Id be happy to provide. Something needs to be done; and he needs to be blocked from editing about himself. Im sick of his slander and self promotion. Please help. Thanks--Thegingerone (talk) 05:54, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

OK I made this point a while ago but I'll make it again. It doesn't matter who he is as long as all statements are sourced. Both of you please read WP:COI. Secondly I think it would be best if both of you agreed not to post anything on each other's talk pages at all. Thirdly, no posting of personal information please. It' not nice. Skyler. I think deleting your comments in order to diffuse the argument is fine. Thegingerone instead of trying to prove who skyler is or isn't instead insist everything he adds has a good reliable source to corroborate it, because if it doesn't it can't go in. OTOH Skyler if you can provide good independent sources to back up your claims then it certainly can go in. Is that a good plan for you both? Theresa Knott | The otter sank 09:30, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree a persons information should not be posted on Wikipedia. However when they are posting about themselves it is slightly important. And on that note I never posted anything personal about 'Skyler Morgan' which makes that claim hilarious. He didnt delete my comments to difuse an argument; he deleted them because he did not like them and posted something slandering me in return. I'll agree to your terms. It's quite simple; he has no sources and everything he posts is PR bull. I've proven my point; I dont need to reprove it.--Thegingerone (talk) 10:34, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I have posted my article on Zachary Jaydon, omitting anything unsourced sufficiently for the time being. Thank you for your help. I'm sure I'll be asking for more in the next day or two. You don't know how much I appreciate it. Skyler Morgan (talk) 08:02, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

That was quicker than I expected. We shall have to see what happens next but the article certainly needs more work. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 08:12, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

If you can show me how to cite a magazine, I can add a number of other good sources. I just need the code, so that it shows up correctly. Skyler Morgan (talk) 08:17, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Citing sources and examples for newspapers. These two pages should tell you what you need. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 11:00, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

So, what do I do since my article was nominated for speedy deletion? I have cited reliable sources regarding Jaydon as a noteable songwriter. Can you help me with that? I covered my bases as far as what the previous admins asked for. Skyler Morgan (talk) 18:38, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I'd put it on Wikipedia:Deletion review with a link to previous AFD explaining that this isn't an exact recreation as you have now provided evidence of notability and ask for a new AFD instead. 19:29, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. I couldn't find the discussion, but I trust you knowing what you're doing. Let me know if there is anything I need to do, as far as explanations go. Skyler Morgan (talk) 19:45, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Hang on a min. I haven't done anything. I'm advising you to do it. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 19:47, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh. That was my bad. I'm not sure how to go about doing that, but I will try to figure that out. I read your last post wrong. This is the part of Wiki that confuses me. Skyler Morgan (talk) 19:54, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: thegingerone

This article (Zachary Jaydon) is under-construction and has been well sourced thus far. I will be providing quite a few additional sources in the next day or two. User thegingerone has spent the past several days writing libelous and irrational crap about Mr. Jaydon nearly non-stop. See http://popstressbabble.blogspot.com/ for verification. No, really... If you take even 30 seconds to read any part of the writings at that link, you will see exactly where I'm coming from. I am asking for help to please have her cease editing this page, as it is a blatant COI. I have been obliging in your request to not write anything on her talk page, and have been avoiding articles that I know she has worked on. I think that given the circumstances, she should be smart enough to do the same. I feel like it's obvious that she is stalking pages I work on/create. Thank you again, Theresa. Skyler Morgan (talk) 03:30, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

She does have a COI, but so very clearly do you. Unless her editing of the article becomes detrimental to the article, and I haven't seen any evidence of that then I see no reason to ask her to stop editing it. If she was vandalising then that would be another matter but she appears to be keeping you on your toes and forcing you to improve the article, which although annoying for you is actually a good thing for Wikipedia. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 07:14, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Well spoken. I have done quite a bit more work on it, and included sources I never would have looked for. I wish her intentions were good, but no harm no foul. Thank you once again, and I'll let you know if I need anything else! Skyler Morgan (talk) 07:28, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I've left a comment at the AFD asking the people there to be wary of anything either of you say and to double check all statements. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 07:32, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I understand you position on the matter. I do hope you feel like I have sourced this article well. I've certainly tried. Again, thank you for your help. I really do appreciate it. Skyler Morgan (talk) 09:02, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Woah. I mean... woah.

I just read everything there was to read regarding a certain persistent vandal, and I sincerely wish I hadn't. Madam, your poise is remarkable and your hide rhinocerine. I automatically reached for a Surreal Barnstar, but since you've already got one of those, here's an (almost) equally appropriate one:

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		omgz, Mmbabies. Fullobeans (talk) 01:15, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! Theresa Knott | The otter sank 09:55, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] ...shaking head, deep sigh...

Would I be correct in my belief that something needs to be done about our friend Rio? [1] (Having just had a quick walkaround through the relevant pages, I see you've already found that edit. All the same, though.) I know he's supposedly just a kid, but I've AGF'ed til I can AGF no more. He's been told. Repeatedly. And he's so strident that WP:DENY wouldn't work--there'd invariably be someone who'd bite when he said something else outrageous. So what are our options here? Gladys J Cortez 00:41, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Well I've taken action over the Mmbabies page, and I will enforce it if he pushes his luck. However over the padelophillia thing, he's just a kid full of his own importance. But I'm not willing to do anything yet. I'll watch his edits for now. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 08:01, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough; he just wears me out, is all. Gladys J Cortez 15:20, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] oops...

Sorry 'bout that. The text Googled back to several sources, but I didn't see Wikipedia among them. Thanks for pointing that out. :) --PMDrive1061 (talk) 07:46, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

No problem. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 07:50, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Dorkmo

I just noticed the message you left for User:Dorkmo in the time between my short block of the user and my block message. Feel free to unblock (or not) as you see fit. -- Ed (Edgar181) 19:36, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I'll see if he replies. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 19:37, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tor nodes

Aren't they supposed to be blocked on sight? HalfShadow (talk) 19:45, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

As far as I am aware yes. Although the situation is fluid, and things could have changed since I last looked. Why are you asking me? Theresa Knott | The otter sank 19:48, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

No particular reason; you're online and I'm likely to get a more immediate answer if I ask you. It just seems that nodes are found and then just left until they do it two or three times before they're actually blocked. This has been going on almost all week. HalfShadow (talk) 19:55, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Ah another cryptic message. Looking though your contributions list a see what you are talking about. Truth is, I didn't notice it was a tor node. I blocked as soon as I saw the post to the ANI to cause the vandal inconvenience quickly. I didn't check the IP or even the talk page. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 19:59, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Hey, there's something to be said for cryptic messages. Generally it's 'What the hell did he just say?' but still... HalfShadow (talk) 20:25, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Copyvio or mirror

My instinct is to delete a copyvio, as the burden of proof is on the creator to show it's not a violation. 17:01, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

P.S. If I can possibly try to fix it, I will, as with Xavier Neptus. Bearian (talk) 17:11, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

So you are telling me that all a person has to do is tag it, and you don't even bother to make sure that is was tagged correctly? That's terrible! As an admin your instinct should be to check. Our articles are widely copied all over the net, we can't simply go deleting all our articles,just because someone copied from us. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 18:10, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

No, I am not saying that. I recall checking the other site, which by the way was NOT labeled as a mirror, noting it was clearly a word for word copy, and then deleting it. I always open the alleged original page in another window, then compare and contrast, before deleting it. I have a sub-page on my user page listing every article I've ever deleted, and if it was an AfD or copyvio. In that sense I take my duties as an admin VERY seriously, and also take responsibility for every action. I think this was an honest mistake. In a few cases, I take the time to try to remedy the problem. I have a whole list of my contributions, the copyvio repairs listed specially. I am an attorney by profession. We are trained to be conservative - not in the poltical sense, but in the trust but verify sense. We are also trained to make quick, but not snap decisions, with the facts presented. I also know a bit of Intellectual property law and defamation law, so I am very vigilant about copyright violations and libel. This situation was a "horse of a different color" - it looked like an exact copy of (c) material, but was in fact, a copy of another WP article. I've only recently run into a variety of mirrors, and so I will, in the future, have to take an additional step of confirming that it's not a copy of part of an existing WP article. An example is Gene Malin, another is my user page. Thank your for pointing out that I need to take one more step before hitting that delete button. Sadly, that will make me wary to get involved in such matters. Bearian (talk) 00:19, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I'd hate to make you feel that wary about carrying out deletions! It is impossible to do anything in life without ever making an error. I should know, I've made plenty. My original post to you was to simply point out an error, for if we don't have our errors pointed out how are we ever to learn from them? Your reply above lead me to believe that you were cavalier in you attitude towards deletion, but I can see from your latest reply that you are more diligent than I am. So that was a complete misunderstanding on my part, for which I apologise. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 08:31, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

That is O.K., I just took a badly-needed three-day wikibreak. Anyway, the list of my deletions is here. Bearian (talk) 18:28, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Green & Red Numbers

Can you tell me what the Positive (Green) numbers or the Negative (Red) Numbers mean next to a title of an article in your watchlist? I've been wondering, but can't figure it out. I wondered if you would happen to know. Thanks! Skyler Morgan (talk) 09:36, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

They give an indication of whether the artlce was added to or reduced on that last edit. So If I edit an article and make it longer there would be a green number, with the bigger the number the more I added. Likewise if I delete something, the article would be shorter and the number red. It's useful when scanning for vandalism, as vandals often delete large chunks of articles, and you can see this easily on your watchlist. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 10:17, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Could you also tell me what a sock is? You said it in a seemingly negative context. I am not trying to accomplish anything negative regarding the creation of my article or the ones that I edit. I spent a bit of time citing and cleaning up Craig David's article today. I'm honestly not sure why such a big deal is being made of it, but I do know that you spend a huge amount of time on here, and respect your opinions, I'm just trying to understand everything that goes on here. Skyler Morgan (talk) 20:19, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

A sock or sockpuppet is an alternative account of someone. Using two accounts to back each other up on a talk page to make it look like an idea has more support than it actually has is prohibited on wikipedia. If the IP was you not logged in then you double voted on the deletion debate and you need to strike the comment. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 13:21, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I have been reading up on Wiki policy, etc. I pointed out the AfD to someone that I knew shared some of the same opinions about certain aspects of the debate as myself. Although I didn't solicit a 'keep' vote from anyone, I don't want a meatpuppet argument later on in the AfD. I struck the vote as it didn't add anything additional to the debate as well as to maintain a fair objectivity. I want to play fair, and am continuing to clean up the article. The past few days have been extremely busy for me, but I have some excellent magazine sources to add as soon as I have a free minute. Thanks again for the information. Skyler Morgan (talk) 17:22, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] London Meetup - April 13th

Hi Theresa

London Wikipedia Meetup number 8 is happening next Sunday lunchtime (April 13th 1pm) in Holborn. Come along!

-- Harry Wood (talk) 09:27, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you for your comments to Rio de Oro's reply

I wanted to start off a discussion by placing the issue in a larger context. Perhaps Rio will find the time to debate the real issues some day. I'm too tolerant to say to someone that what they write is unacceptable. I guess that fits in with my liberal ideas. I'll tolerate anything as long as people do not physically hurt me... Count Iblis (talk) 13:41, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Can you please help me with a question

Am I allowed to delete messages from other users from my discussion page, and is there any reason a user should put them back up on my discussion page? I am not so familiar with all the rules for my page etc. If I ask someone please to not do that, is it considered bad or rude? (I have not yet, but I would like to.) Thanks. Basejumper2 (talk) 01:42, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Generally speaking, it is not considered polite to delete a message from your own talk page, and I would not recommend it, but it is not prohibited. Personally I never worry about rules and simply try to behave in a way that is likely to make things better rather than worse. Deleting a talk page message is a bit of a slap in the face directed against whoever left the message, so is usually a bad idea. Of course in any given situation, things get complicated so you need to judge what is best. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 13:15, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Talk page protection

Thanks,

That orange message bar was getting old. I'd considered doing it myself before, but had to choose between that and responding at ANI before leaving for a bit. --barneca (talk) 14:47, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Can't believe you locked that guy's talk page. Surely a woman of your interlect, who studied at the same institution as ghandi, realises the importance of dialogue. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.77.251.12 (talk) 15:07, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

No I don't. You are trolling him. In fact you are trying to bully him into allowing you to vandalise, and he's not falling for it. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 16:40, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Theresa, please believe me, I have nothing to do with DARK3345

I don't know what I can say to get you to believe me, but im really upset that everyone know thinks that was me. I'm getting myself into quite a state here, as I explained to barneca earlier I have ADHD so i know i carry on sometimes, and i guess that's why nobody will ever believe me know, but i'm almost in tears now because it seems like all the admins are against me (they may have just cause to some extent) but now also i am being accused of something I had absolutely nothing to do with. If you want to formally accuse me of being that user then i am prepared to make an official complaint to WP, hand over my pc if need be. as i said to other users. this dark 3345 is either:

1 - Tottally unrelated conincidence
2 - Another editor read my comments and set up a hoax
3 - Barneca himself may have done it - i very much doubt it, but i cant tell for sure.

Or 4 - You are lying. If you are almost in tears then simply stop editing. Problem solved. I've helped you out by blocking this latest IP. Stop trolling and you will stop making yourself upset. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 19:02, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Aw, Theresa, you just ruined a perfectly good scientific experiment: [2]. Although it's pretty telling he switched to the account again 2 minutes after your IP block, so I guess you altered the experiment rather than ruining it. --barneca (talk) 19:13, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh I'm sorry I didn't know that.Theresa Knott | The otter sank 19:25, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Do you think I'd get in trouble if I deleted the sock IP's topics?

Or should I leave that for one of you? HalfShadow (talk) 19:35, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Leave it for now. See what happens. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 19:43, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Well i don't know what more to say

I guess we'll never be able to prove my innocence either way. You seem sure that i am lying, and for me, everytime you call me a liar i cant believe that 2 admins have made such a thunderous error. I guess it must have been a hoax by somebody reading the admin noticeboard today. I am worried tho that it may have actually been an admin. I dunno. Anyway i feel well and truly stitched up - you might think i deserve it anyway - but i've lost all faith in wiki admins now i think.

Anyway on a different note, as i mentioned earlier, i notice you were at UCL. Fantastic institution let me say, i'm hoping to be studying in london in sept, either at UCL or KCL, they are my first two choices. So i'll let you know in future if I do end up going there and maybe you can give me some tips if you forgive me for my past behaviour on here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.77.133.250 (talk) 19:38, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

O course I would forgive your past behaviour as long as you stop. I'd be happy to give you some tips. London is a great place to study, you will enjoy it no matter if it's UCL or Kings. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 19:43, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

cool. Well rest assured i'm completely done with complaining on here. TBH i was done before, but then i checked barneca's edits and saw he blocked this other user Dark3345. When I saw that you and barneca thought it was me, it launched me into a whole new tirade. Anyway now i don’t really care, if it was another editor who made that account then i can see the funny side, but I have a horrible feeling it was an admin hoax. Something stinks that’s for sure, but i’m not offended that you called me lame, because i am sure that the hoaxer was trying to impersonate me. Anyway I guess that's what you get when you bring so much attention to yourself, but it's still horrible to be falsely accused and not be able to prove otherwise :( —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.77.133.250 (talk) 19:54, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

BTW if you didn't believe me before, somebody has already apparently proved i'm not related to that person.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Dark3345 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.77.133.250 (talk) 20:03, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

It's impossible to prove that you are not related I'm afraid. Still I apologise for jumping to conclusions. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 20:07, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

NP, i think it was a clever hoax, so i don't blame you for thinking that. 79.77.133.250 (talk) 20:17, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Theresa, in light of your continuing conversation with Dark3345, thought I'd let you know that I asked Thatcher a followup question by email, and although (for obvious privacy policy reasons) he wouldn't divulge much more information, he's convinced me that they truly aren't the same person. i.e. it's more than just a case of "can't confirm", there is strong reason to be very confident they simply aren't the same person playing games with open proxies or something. I'm still quite surprised, my spidey sense usually works fairly well. I've thought about it a little, and the short version (which I may expand on someday, if I feel the urge, at User:Barneca/Thoughts on vandalism): one reason I thought they were the same is their similar response to being blocked "early". Same thing happened to me with User:Dem5844 the day before. What I now believe, and one reason I started blocking obvious, blatant vandal-only accounts earlier, is that I think many such accounts are created by return vandals, who have been thru the routine before, and believe they have a God-given right to four warnings-worth of vandalism, and are quite offended when this right is abused. Since I've only just become confident enough to start blocking earlier than after level-1 thru level-4 warnings, it's a new attitude I haven't seen previously, so it seemed more similar and uncommon than it really is. Interesting (at least to me). Anyway, thanks for some of the moral support yesterday, I do feel it's reinforced my belief I'm not blocking way outside normal guidelines. --barneca (talk) 17:02, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] FYI

I reinstated the block of WikiGod000 (talk · contribs) after created an attack page, vandalized another article, and made personal attacks. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 00:37, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Please consider taking the User:Filll/AGF Challenge

I would like to invite you to consider taking part in the AGF Challenge which has been proposed for use in the RfA process [3] by User: Kim Bruning. You can answer in multiple choice format, or using essay answers, or anonymously. You can of course skip any parts of the Challenge you find objectionable or inadvisable.--Filll (talk) 20:45, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] It was nice to meet you

I too am a teacher, at a school on a "challenging" estate outside Portsmouth.Bashereyre (talk) 10:16, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

It was nice to meet you too! Although we didn't get a chance to speak to each other personally. Next time perhaps? How do you find working in a challenging environment? Theresa Knott | The otter sank 16:17, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Next time indeed! Get yourself signed up for Wikipedia:Meetup/London 9. Sunday lunchtime again, May 11th. Not sure if there is enough interest to get something happening monthly, but let's see how it goes. -- Harry Wood (talk) 15:51, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] An idea regarding Mmbabies issues

Here's an idea that I don't think you will find to be "ninja" style. Why do we let Mmbabies disruptive edits remain in the edit history of the pages he vandalized? I mean, isn't that just what he wanted, to fill up the edit history for those pages with endless nonsense? I say removing those edits from the edit histories would serve a good purpose. What do you think? GO-PCHS-NJROTC (talk) 00:20, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Well we could delete all his edits but it's an awful lot of work for someone. I suspect knowing that he's made an admin follow him around in order to delete him would be much more satisfying that having his edits in a page history that nobody ever reads anyway. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 16:03, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, you may be right; it'd probably be good to wait a couple more months and make sure he doesn't come back on another ISP. I'm pretty sure AT&T disconnected his account, I haven't seen any more socks since I received that fruitful reply from them. GO-PCHS-NJROTC (talk) 19:34, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hdayejr again

He's at it again here. This can't be a coincidence. -TPIRFanSteve (talk) 16:00, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

And again here. Nut. -TPIRFanSteve (talk) 01:35, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

And again here. -TPIRFanSteve (talk) 22:42, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Wow, and also here. -TPIRFanSteve (talk) 22:47, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

And again here. -TPIRFanSteve (talk) 22:58, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Wow, all anonymous ip users are him and all are trolls? You got me bent, I am on a wireless connection, and resent your remarks that insinuate we are trolls. Fact is we have jobs and lives outside of this site, and need to take our laptop computers with us. It's call life, you might try it by hitting alt f4. Thank you for your idiotic remarks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.210.110.144 (talk) 18:48, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Don't you think this would have been slightly more credible if you'd submitted it from one of the accounts I'd already accused?

(...and why am I giving him advice? Oh well.) -TPIRFanSteve (talk) 22:58, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] User:Jessicamackinnon

I reverted some vandalism by this editor. When I checked the user contributions from this new editor, I saw that there weren't any useful contributions. Count Iblis (talk) 16:31, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Vandal Warrior

I considered changing my name. I don't know how to... If it's simple and won't wipe clean all of my edits and talk page then that'd be cool. Maybe "The Vandalism Warrior" would be more appropriate? The Vandal Warrior (talk) 21:35, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

No it has the same probplem. Consider a newbie editor who makes a simple test edit to one of our articles. You revert and go to the his talk page to tell him about the sandbox. Your message may be very neutral but your username effectively calls him a vandal none the less. You've only been here a couple of days and quite frankly don't have enough edits to worry about yet. Just create a new account with a neutral name. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 21:39, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

My user name wouldn't call him a vandal. It represents that I'm fighting against vandalism, not against the people who commit vandalism (the vandals). My current user name does say that, however. The Vandal Warrior (talk) 21:43, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

But it would indirectly. "I am a vandalighter", "I am talking to you about your edits", therefore "your edits look like vandalism" why else would they attract the attention of a vandal fighter? That's what I mean by bitey. You can deal with vandalism with a softer name just as well. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 21:46, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

It says in the template that it constitutes as vandalism, so the name The Vandalism Warrior isn't such a bad idea. The Vandal Warrior (talk) 21:48, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

No a {{test}} template says no such thing because making a test edit does not in fact constitute vandalism. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 21:51, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I never use test templates. Only vandalism and page blanking level 1. If there are other types of vandalism then I'd of course use other templates, but haven't found any yet. I doubt it's really a test edit though. To delete information someone actually has to press delete or backspace and then save changes. If it's vandalism then they obviously know it is not welcome. The Vandal Warrior (talk) 21:59, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

So you are telling me that you have no intention of ever talking to a newbie, for any reason ever? And that accidental page blanks never ever happen because of software glitches or human error? Theresa Knott | The otter sank 22:03, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

No and to the second question - no. Please read it again. The Vandal Warrior (talk) 22:11, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean by read it again. Deletions can happen by accident I assure you. But If you won't change your name I'll simply keep an eye on your edits instead. Any sign of newbie biting and I'm on your back, but stick to clear and obvious vandals only and you'll here no more from me. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 22:15, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Okay. I have plenty of edits already, if you want to review them... If you deam any of them as newbie biting then please let me know. I'm not 100% sure on stuff like this. I am fairly new and want to make sure that all my vandalism fighting is fair and proper. The Vandal Warrior (talk) 22:18, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] User:SacKing‎

Hi. According to the bots on the vandalism noticeboard you have blocked this user, but he doesn't seem to have been blocked, or else he has recreated the account. A clear vandalism only account. Thanks. Harry the Dog WOOF 12:17, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

No he's blocked all right. Blocked users are able to edit their own talk pages. 19:04, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

It's just that there has never been a block notice on the page. So it's unclear whether he is blocked or not. Harry the Dog WOOF 07:16, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Generally speaking, in a case like this, I prefer not to give them the satisfaction. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 11:45, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] I is a VERY good letter

especially when it's THIS letter I. Dangershistrollname doesn't need any more feeding... Toodles! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 13:36, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Good point. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 14:08, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] London meetup tomorrow

Just a reminder about Wikipedia:Meetup/London 9. Hope to see you tomorrow Theresa! -- Harry Wood (talk) 15:42, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Blocked user requests courtesy blanking

Hi. I know you have had some involvement in the case, so I thought I would ask your advice. A user you blocked has popped up again, apparently distressed that a Google search still returns many references associating her real name to her rather unsuccessful involvement with Wikipedia (including one higher up on this page). Now we cannot control Google's caches, but we can go some way towards courtesy blanking. I blanked one section[4], but felt uncomfortable doing the rest. What do you think? By the way, for obvious reasons, I am avoiding further use of her real name here. Thanks, Bovlb (talk) 06:51, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Well we can certainly blank everything out no harm in doing that. I'll make a start by removing her from above. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 14:31, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

OK. I did a few more, and I see you handled the rest. Thanks for your help. I'm not sure how long it will take Google to pick up the changes, but we've done about as much as we can. Bovlb (talk) 14:59, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Aha! I found a URL removal tool for Google, so I ran them all through. Do you have an email address for this user? I'm reluctant to start up her talk page again. Bovlb (talk) 15:14, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

I've sent you a wikipedia email. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 14:52, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Google seem to be dragging their heels. Bovlb (talk) 15:04, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Hmm I deleted her talk page again today. That;s the last time I'm going to do it as it is getting ridiculous now. If she wants to disappear she needs to go away. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 20:18, 25 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Isis Gee again

Hello Theresa, could you look at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#User:PrinceGloria again and perhaps at the checkuser. I'm finding new users popping up everywhere all trying to insert "fake tan cyborg" and other comments in living persons articles (or songs from living people but still the same). -- Ricky81682 (talk) 19:53, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

There is nothing I can do until someone with checkuser takes a look and determines what is going on. I've semiprotected the song page and blocked the latest sock. List any new socks here and I'll deal with them. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 20:06, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

As you understand, verifiability is important. As such, the media response to the manipulation if Youtube and wiki was sourced to a Polish magazine published by edipress.com. As a respected magazine with a large circulation in Poland this is considered to be a reliable source). The statements in question were proven in the article and cannot be considered to be rumours. The comments sourced as per reliable source by BBC host who is well respected as a commentator of eurovision who has been written up in UK newspapers over the past few days were written in a non-POV manner and provide more sources for her performance which came last. As Eurovision is a contest that Isis Gee tried to win her results ( place and critic of performance ) are not given undue weight. The article already went through WP:3O and User:Kevin Murray supported removal unless sourced. This was not completed as User:PrinceGlora and yourself have not responded to my points. In face, although User:Kevin Murray removed the false and unsourced Polish mnationality of Isis User:PrinceGlora and yourslef reverted versions that included a unsourced material and false statements about her position in the contest which violated WP:BLP.

I ask Ricky81682 to add to the WP:3O initiated by User:Kevin Murray and stop wasting admin time with entries such as this. Would some other admin like to get involved and settle this again?

Eurovisionman (talk) 20:19, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

As per my comments, noone has replyed to my messages explaining the sourcing and non-POV of my comments for 2 days. As such I have reverted as the majority of users agree that my version satisfies BLV. Please feel free to revert but you must participate in the dispute resolution process and respond to the point of other users. Eurovisionman (talk) 10:19, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Restoration

To Theresa: to let you know who I am, I was the one formerly known as ESCStudent774441. On some meditation, I went to the administrator I know who has dealt in my case before with my apology and my offer to resign from the project. He accepted me back, on the basis of a deal I concluded with him but didn't accept my resignation. You can read the details of the deal on my talk page. This is the account he has allowed for me to make a fresh start with Wikipedia independent of my past and hope for a new beginning. I messaged Mr. Wales, and he sent me a message stating he forgave my past and wished me to have the best. Well, what's your opinion of me returning Ms. Knott? Let me know willya? ForeverSearching (talk) 02:12, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Hmm still looking for drama I see. Why do you want my opinion? You've been unblocked already. I'm not going to give my blessing yet. Do some productive editing first then come back and I'll welcome you with open arms but for now I will view you with suspicion. Sorry if that's not the answer you were looking for. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 09:30, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mark Hanau

After a lengthy debate decided in favour of keeping this article, why have you deleted it ? RGCorris (talk) 10:44, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Because Mark Hanau himself the original and main author asked for it to be deleted and i felt, with the clear COI that was marring it that deletion was the best option. I am aware that this would be controversial but I felt that this option was best for wikipedia. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 18:13, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi Theresa. I am concerned that your deletion of this article (with the edit comment "Lets be bold here") does not comply with Wikipedia's policies. Was Mark the only author to add substantial content to the page? If not, policy does not allow the page to be deleted at his request. I recognize there have been problems with Mark self-promoting on Wikipedia, but this is not actually justification for deleting an article. Rather, unsourced material should be deleted, and the subject should be evaluated for notability based on the sourced material that is available. If the subject is notable the article should be edited for NPOV, etc. Failing all that, it is beneficial to discuss deletion of articles like this one at AfD. Short-circuiting the process does not help Wikipedia. I suggest you reconsider your decision to delete this article.--Srleffler (talk) 16:42, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Further to the above, I see that this article was the subject of an AfD discussion with a "keep" result, just five days before you deleted the article. --Srleffler (talk) 22:24, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] User: Vandal: Mahaakaal

Hi Theresa,

Thank you for noting my concerns regarding the above user.

Here is one example: The first complaint is that if you look at his first complaint about me, regarding Nanak the founder of Sikhism, he states repeatedly that Muslims revere Guru Nanak in Punjab. Now 2/3 of Punjab is in the Islamic state of Pakistan, in 1947, India was partitioned where Muslims formed the Islamic State of Pakistan and Sikhs remained in India so by by definition Muslims revere Their Prophet Mohammed as well as Christ, David and Noah, but not Nanak - its simply biased POV to state that they do revere him. I do accept that Sikhs and possibly Hindus revere Nanak since Nanak was born into a Hindu family, but to suggest Muslims revere Nanak in the same fashion or context as Hindus/Sikhs is blatantly biased and false.

There are many attempts by this user to twist original definitions of Deh Siva Var Mohe, Waheguru all the cited references I have provided have been deleted by this user. I have even provided many references from srigranth.org where the user deleted those references, yet they are used in many other wikipedia articles for referencial material.

I copied and pasted your reply back to the Admin noticeboard so that others can see it, please reply there but I'll repeat my request here for the sake of completeness. You need to actually show us what he is doing wrong rather than talk about it. A diff looks like this you get them by clicking on the page history or by the user history and selecting "Last" from next to the edit in question. Once you do that copy the URL from the adress bar and paste it so we can all see it. If thast is too technical just go to the page history and tell us the time and date that he made the edit and I'll put the diffs in for you. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 18:32, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Request for appeal: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/SevenOfDiamonds

This is to notify you that I have filed a request for appeal on an arbitation case you initiated. Please see here. -- Kendrick7^talk 23:11, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Zachary Jaydon

He's back, and needs discussion. Kww (talk) 10:31, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Reminder Sunday Lunchtime

Just a reminder about Wikipedia:Meetup/London 10. It's this Sunday 1p.m.! -- Harry Wood (talk) 00:35, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Phases of Venus diagram

Dear Theresa

Please see recent discussion of need for geocentric phases of Venus diagram in Nichalp and Logicus user talk. Can you or your daughter possibly help ?

Logicus--Logicus (talk) 17:50, 12 June 2008 (UTC)