User talk:Ziggy Sawdust

[edit] re Bloobu

Please explain how this page is less relevant than the netvibes page.

[edit] talk page move

Hello Ziggy Sawdust, please don't move your talk page to inappropriate titles to try to get rid of it. It is now located at User talk:Ziggy Sawdust/Archive. --Oxymoron⁸³ 07:59, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

I've declined speedy deletion another time. Please let it be. --Tikiwont (talk) 11:30, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

On second thought, I've rather decided to merge back the histories, thus undoing the talk page move completely. Let me know if you have any questions or concerns about this. --Tikiwont (talk) 13:15, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] AN/I discussion

I don't know if you already know, but there's a discussion regarding you at WP:AN/I. Figured you might want to take a look. --clpo13_(talk) 03:40, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Metal

From WP:HD. Hmm, yes, textbooks are a good starting point but you will need more than that for GA/FA. Textbooks give summaries, and usually brush over the main points, which will make it more difficult when you expand certain sections. I suggest reading as much reliable material as possible, perhaps by popping by the local library. A good variety of sources (and inline citations will greatly increase your chances at GA/FA. Hope this helps, and drop me a line if you need me to look over anything. Thanks, PeterSymonds | talk 16:42, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

A library, eh? Why, how convenient, I seem to be in one at this exact moment! *gets to work* Ziggy Sawdust 18:17, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Hehe, excellent! PeterSymonds | talk 18:18, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ref Desk Questions

I'm sorry for asking rhetorical questions. If you don't know my insane roommate block my .coms and .nets because he didn't want spam. He made sure it was on my computer as well so that way he didn't get spam (we share e-mail). Therefore sometimes I have to ask questions that are stuck in my head. I won't do it anymore. I really am sorry. I will try my best from now on.

Always

Cardinal Raven

Cardinal Raven (talk) 04:54, 6 May 2008 (UTC)Cardinal Raven

It's not that I mind your questions, it's just that others do, and because of the nature of en.wp, well-intended actions can cause shitstorms and bans. But best of luck with hitting your roommate in the head with an adze editing Wikipedia. Ziggy Sawdust 18:05, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tungsten Compounds

At some stage during your extensive edits of Tungsten, the following section has been removed. You appear to have done that without explanation or discussion, and the result is that the Chemical properties and Compounds sections of the article are badly degraded.

Aqueous polyoxoanions

Aqueous tungstate solutions are noted for the formation of heteropoly acids and polyoxometalate anions under neutral and acidic conditions. As tungstate is progressively treated with acid, it first yields the soluble, metastable "paratungstate A" anion, W7O246−, which over hours or days converts to the less soluble "paratungstate B" anion, H2W12O4210−. Further acidification produces the very soluble metatungstate anion, H2W12O406−, after equilibrium is reached. The metatungstate ion exists as a symmetric cluster of twelve tungsten-oxygen octahedra known as the "Keggin" anion. Many other polyoxometalate anions exist as metastable species. The inclusion of a different atom such as phosphorus in place of the two central hydrogens in metatungstate produces a wide variety of heteropoly acids, such as phosphotungstic acid H3P W12O40 in this example. Plantsurfer (talk) 22:53, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about removing that section. I didn't intend to take out content, I must have been distracted and not paying attention. I'll be more careful from now on. Ziggy Sawdust 18:06, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Apology accepted. But I think you are (IMHO) in danger of being too obsessive about sources for most of that stuff. Citations are only required when the content is contentious. We don't need to cite a source for the use of tungsten for circular saw teeth, or light bulb filaments. Wikipedia:Verifiability which is policy, says that attribution is required for "direct quotes and for material that is challenged or likely to be challenged." There is also a process here, of allowing time for citations to be added. I don't see you raising the fact that citations are lacking with the active editors. I suggest if you have a problem with a statement you should not immediately remove it but tag it and allow time for a response from other editors. Plantsurfer (talk) 19:16, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion of User:Ziggy Sawdust/Woody Brown

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Ziggy Sawdust 00:19, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Hmm. Well, it appears that due to me being in the middle of synching 4 articles (original, new, moved original, and disambiguation), I accidentally wrote over your speedy delete tag via the miracle of copypaste of my offline text, not expecting changes in a new minor article in under a minute.

Please reinsert it if you think it appropriate.

I would ask, though, that you first consult this weekend's Financial Times (which was explicitly referenced), wherein the subject of this article was the featured Obituary. The Financial Times has a better record for solid journalism than even the Wall Street Journal. While no newspaper is immune to hoaxing (the Hitler Diaries spring to mind), I would suggest that in this case it is extremely unlikely. Saltation (talk) 00:45, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

De-SpeedyDelete-d. Many thanks to whomever (no obvious place to find discussion/decision thereof). Saltation (talk) 21:07, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 12448 Mr. Tompkins

I don't think that this article is patent nonsense. An article on an asteroid is certainly encyclopedic and notable. I think thast you may want to reconsider the G1 tag. Captain panda 02:22, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Script problems

You might want to recheck your script.

The change from

[[Category:FooBar|]]

to

[[Category:FooBar|{{subst:PageName}}]]

should probably be changed to

[[Category:FooBar| ]]

to properly adjust the sort key. If the vertical bar is included, a sort key was probably intended.

Also, you might consider adjusting

[[foo (modifier)|foo]]s (where the "foo"s are exactly the same) to

[[foo (modifier)|]]s rather than to

[[foo (modifier)|foos]]

— Arthur Rubin (talk) 04:10, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Looking at your edit history, I believe a block should be in order, as your latest run has nominated 6 or so articles a minute for speedy deletion. That's too fast to read them. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 04:35, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] GA's

When an article is up at WP:GAN, please review it properly against WP:WIAGA. I have reverted your promotions for Brock Lesnar and Acolytes Protection Agency. D.M.N. (talk) 20:04, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Script questions

Hi Ziggy, a couple of questions about your script:

1. Looking at one if the recent edits the script appears to have made a lot of differences without a change to the text. What's going on there?
2. Is it appropriate to label the change in the edit summary "uber-god script"?

Astronaut (talk) 10:55, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Signature

Hey, Ziggy. I noticed a post of yours at the help desk, and saw that the markup for your signature takes up about 5 lines in the edit window. Signatures should ideally be kept to around one line of markup, as per WP:SIG#Length and WP:SIGHELP#A note on long signatures, since it makes the page harder to read when editing. Could you please consider modifying your signature to take this into account? Thanks!

Also, your user talk page TOC is currently viewing your talk page headers as sections, due to the use of the <h2> tags; you can fix this by using <div> tags instead, and using CSS to replicate the style of the original header. Hope that helps! haz (talk) 15:35, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] GAN on hold

Hey, I wanted to make sure you noticed I put Tungsten on hold a few days ago. Normally, articles are held for a week. Sorry, I should have left you a note right away, if you need more time let me know. delldot talk 20:17, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Hi again, I put Tungsten on hold a week ago, and it doesn't look like my concerns have been addressed yet. Normally articles are failed if the concerns don't get addressed within the time allotted for the hold. Do you need more time, or should I go ahead and remove it from WP:GAN? Thanks, delldot on a public computer talk 00:30, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reply, replied on my talk. delldot on a public computer talk 00:42, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Chris Ramirez

thats funny, because i am at school right now —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vegan cannibal (talk • contribs) 17:26, 13 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Request Speedy Deletion BIT ISP

please see Discussion Page of BIT (USP) for a feedback on your request. Tks, --JanT (talk) 20:14, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your recent edits to Lutetium

Hi!

I started a thread over on WP:ANI about your edits on Lutetium, most specifically this one. Please don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to get you in trouble, I just came across the edit and, in my extremely limited knowledge of chemistry, had no clue as to the need for a section titled Nonsense in the article so I just wanted a second opinion. Please let me know if I'm completely off base here even trying to meddle in this subject and, again, accept my apologies if I'm coming across as trying to make you look bad for anything.

Peace! SWik78 (talk • contribs) 20:23, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] GA Review on Flowers for Algernon

Just wanted to give my two cents on this GAC. I, for one, am not sure it's ready to pass yet, though a week on hold might encourage improvement. The writing isn't solid (simple things like "37 year old" should be hyphenated, and bigger things like single-sentence paragraphs and even single-sentence sections or subsections). I think the themes section should seriously be expanded to be broad in coverage. Under adaptations, further prose is needed - certainly the adaptation Charly merits further discussion rather than just a bullet on a list? --Midnightdreary (talk) 03:25, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Just saw this comment and wanted to put in my thoughts.

• Simple writing errors can be easily fixed. A single sentence para or section is not bad writing if the sentence covers the thought of the paragraph. Example - only one sentence is needed on the publication history of the novel and the publication history of the novel is a separate thought from the publication history of short story so has its own para.
• I agree the themes section could be expanded, so the article is not comprehensive. But that's an FA requirement, not a GA requirement. The article already "addresses the major aspects of the topic", even if they are not discussed comprehensively. I will be working on the themes section when I have the time, but this won't be for a while as I have RL issues. Hence the GA nom now rather than the FA nom in two months.
• There is a separate article on Charly. No further information is warranted in the article on the book, particularly since the film is only notable for being the surprise winner of a best actor oscar and has little merit otherwise. Why would more discussion of any of these adaptations be necessary unless some source has discussed the adaptation in connection with the original book? What's interesting from the perspective of the existing article is the large number of adaptations there have been, not the content of those adaptations.

Thanks for the time spent looking at this article, but I stress again that "comprensiveness" is not the same as "broad coverage" and "well written" under GA is not as demanding as standard as in FA. GDallimore (Talk) 11:00, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

I have a couple FAs and GAs under my belt, so I feel like I have an okay understanding of them. My hope was to help a relatively-inexperienced GA reviewer (unless I'm making a bad assumption, Ziggy?) GDallimore, you'll note I never suggested the article be failed; in fact, I suggested it be put on hold - hold implies that these things can be easily fixed, just as you yourself said. Looking at the MOS, regarding bulleted lists: "Do not use lists if a passage reads easily using plain paragraphs." That was where my suggestion came from. Certainly, a notable adaptation like Charly merits summary style discussion of it. In my own Wiki-history, for example, though there is an entire article on "The Raven", it gets at least a mention in the article on Edgar Allan Poe... it would be incomplete without it, wouldn't you think? Also, under the GA criteria, it must be broad in coverage and address all the major issues. A list of themes with no additional discussion does not seem broad, in my opinion. But, then again, neither of us are the GA reviewer (and at least one of us is biased, don't you think?) so I leave it up to the reviewer. --Midnightdreary (talk) 15:44, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh, by the way, there is a policy on single-sentence sections: WP:Layout#Body sections, viz "The number of single-sentence paragraphs should be minimized, since these can inhibit the flow of the text.". --Midnightdreary (talk) 15:48, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Silver ant

You rightly boxed silver ant as needing work. I gave it the once over. See if you think it's ready for prime time. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.224.226.1 (talk) 08:12, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] User:Ziggy Sawdust/lolwut

What the hell? Why on Earth did you create that? J Milburn (talk) 19:24, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion

Please give legitimate reasons for deletion. Your reason at article "R4pc radio" is not sufficient in determining the reason. M173627 (talk) 19:56, 16 May 2008 (UTC) for

[edit] Celine Speedy Deletion

Hi, I just created a page for Celine (brand) that you marked for speedy deletion one minute after I created it. I am in the process of editing it and I think that you acted a little hasty for this warning. I could be wrong, but one minute tp mark something while someone is in the middle of editing is a little extreme to me. This page is linked to LVMH as well as other designers already represented on wikipedia. I am working on a project to create pages for the brands represented.Krushdiva (talk) 20:03, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion nomination of The truth about Orpheus

Hello, Ziggy Sawdust. Thanks for keeping an eye out on article quality. I'm dropping you a note to let you know that I have removed the speedy deletion template that you placed on The truth about Orpheus because the article does not seem to fit the speedy deletion criterion. WP:CSD#A1 is for articles that lack sufficient context to understand what the article is about. In this case, the subject of the article seems clear. Even were it not, though, please remember that WP:CSD suggests not immediately tagging articles for deletion on length concerns (A1, A3 for example) as many editors create articles over a series of edits. While we want to be sure that articles that do not meet inclusion guidelines are address, we should try not to discourage creators from contributing usable content, which sometimes means waiting to see how an article will develop before tagging it. Please consider other means for addressing ongoing concerns. Feel free to let me know at my talk page if you'd like to discuss this further. Thanks. Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 20:23, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Robin McLaren

Hi, I got your message about Robin McLaren being taged for speedy deletion. I have since made edits to the article and now believe it meets WP standards, so I hope the article will not be deleted now. Many Thanks. Jamesmh2006 (talk) 20:34, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Avril

Hello Ziggy Sawdust. You are my hero! Thank you for providing an area for Avril questions. From now on all Avril questions will be asked here, not on the Reference Desk. Youlipo (talk) 12:23, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your signature

Hello. I noticed that your signature is a bit long (character-wise) at the moment.

The current code is:

[[User:Ziggy Sawdust|<font color="#339900">'''Z'''</font><font color="#009900">'''i'''</font><font color="#006600">'''g'''</font><font color="#336633">'''g'''</font><font color="#003300">'''y'''</font>]] [[User talk:Ziggy Sawdust|<font color="#666666">'''S'''</font><font color="#999999">'''a'''</font><font color="#CCCCCC">'''w'''</font>]][[Special:Contributions/Ziggy Sawdust|<font color="#CCCC99">'''d'''</font><font color="#CCCC66">'''u'''</font><font color="#CCCC33">'''s'''</font><font color="#CCCC00">'''t'''</font>]]

What about merging all of the bold tags into one?

[[User:Ziggy Sawdust|'''<font color="#339900">Z</font><font color="#009900">i</font><font color="#006600">g</font><font color="#336633">g</font><font color="#003300">y</font>''']] [[User talk:Ziggy Sawdust|'''<font color="#666666">S</font><font color="#999999">a</font><font color="#CCCCCC">w</font>''']][[Special:Contributions/Ziggy Sawdust|'''<font color="#CCCC99">d</font><font color="#CCCC66">u</font><font color="#CCCC33">s</font><font color="#CCCC00">t</font>''']]

It's 54 bytes shorter, yet produces the exact same result. And, of course, using fewer colors would also reduce byte count, but that's a different discussion. : - ) Just a thought. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 23:36, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Medical advice, edit summaries

Hi Ziggy. I've pulled your question ([1]) from the Ref Desk, as we can't offer you advice on the possible severity or meaning of your symptoms. (If you're not sure about what constitutes 'medical advice' on the Reference Desks, see Wikipedia:Reference desk/guidelines/Medical advice.)

Incidentally, you might want to be careful with your use of the 'minor edit' tick box—posting a whole new thread on the Ref Desk isn't a minor edit. (See Help:Minor edit for guidance.) It's also a good idea to use a descriptive edit summary—posting an edit with the summary "HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGG" is kind of confusing to other editors. Happy editing, TenOfAllTrades(talk) 01:08, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Please don't restore your question again. If you do, you may be blocked. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 01:30, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

You may also want to read this article on vertigo. DigitalC (talk) 00:49, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RfD nomination of SNUPPERS

I have nominated SNUPPERS (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) for discussion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 16:47, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Speedy deletion of You wack discipwine

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 17:52, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Don't kid yourself

If you're having physical symptoms that are recurring and worth asking about, it isn't necessarily a lol matter. Do yourself a favor and learn what to take seriously so you'll have the benefit of bona fide medical advice. Wouldn't you rather get this checked out and find out it's "nothing" than not check and find out (the hard way) it's "something"? Editors here (like myself) are generally well-meaning but unqualified to give you anything but vague speculations. Please take care. -- Deborahjay (talk) 15:54, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

(diff) (hist) . . User talk:Ziggy Sawdust‎; 15:54 . . (+665) . . Deborahjay (Talk | contribs) (→Don't kid yourself:  new section)

It's the Antichrist! Ziggy Sawdust 19:21, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] what do u mean

What do you mean, I'm a Wikipedia admin in training, its just htis 1 guy don't get the point that vandalizing Wikipedia is wrong. One I'm out of the admin school, I'll back you up on that claim. Sincerely, xgmx.--4.244.36.149 (talk) 01:30, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Xgmx's extensive admin schooling:

• Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive416#Summary: Xgmx's spam and misbehaviour on Wikipedia

--A. B. ^{(talk • contribs)} 04:42, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] User_talk:4.244.36.149

Hi,

I wish to advise you not to lower yourself to a vandals level by posting remarks such as,

"Hey When you mess with one of us, you mess with all of us. Don't toy with my komrades. Ziggy Sawdust 01:28, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

This phrase by itself violates the conduct of wikipedia and only aggravates the vandal you were warning. My suggestion is that you follow the accepted procedure on warning vandals (as much as i got a laugh when i saw this, being an anti vandal)

Cheers, Prom3th3an (talk) 11:38, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Speedies

1. G4-repost can ONLY be used after a previous Afd. if someone removes a speedy tag, just put it back and warn them. 2. In any event, UK Ambassador to the Philippines is unquestionably notable, regardless of the quality or COI in the article DGG (talk) 16:22, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Robin McLaren, on May 16. [2]

incidentally, when you tag articles for multiple issues, it helps concentrate attention on the important ones if you dont both with trying to find everything that can possibly be wrong, as in Structural Abuse, where you seem to have tagged " cleanup, confusing, context, copyedit, essay-like, expand, expert, non-free, npov, original research, primarysources, refimprove, tone, unencyclopedic, unreferenced and wikify,. You also tagged "totally-disputed"--and that certainly does make sense. You seem to be tagging many arricles that way & its perhaps not really as helpful it it might be.

But why did you use an edit summary reading "I suck cocks" -- i think it was intended to be self-deprecatory, but even so it was inappropriate. DGG (talk) 23:03, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Science desk - RE: question that was removed

I saw the question you posted on May 18th about your head and it was removed due to requiring medical advice. I don't believe this was the case and I think you were just seeking an idea (i'd still recommend you go to your doctor)

From what you've described, it sounds like orthostatic hypotension, which in a nutshell is essentially where, as you've been sitting down for a while, blood collects in your lower limbs and you have insufficient oxygen being supplied to the brain. This isn't usually anything to worry about and it's quickly fixed by your body (as explained in the article). If you faint when you have these episodes, i'd definitely recommend seeing your doctor as they can put you on drugs to help speed up your heart rate and other such things. Hope this helps. Regards, CycloneNimrod^Talk? 17:07, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for May 19th and 26th, 2008.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:02, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sylvie Bélanger

I'm familiar with Bélanger--she is a significant and notable artist and there should be plenty of sources available--the creator of this article is new and probably needs some time to work on it. I have tagged the article for expansion and can work on it myself tomorrow. Cheers. freshacconcispeaktome 16:39, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Penis removal

I reverted your removal of an image because there doesn't appear to be consensus for this on the talk page. Your edit summary states "Removing one of the erection images per discussion; no need to have every possible permutation of the dong represented on the page," but I can't find the relevant discussion on the talk page. It appears that the discussions you were involved in came to the opposite conclusion. Feel free to revert, but please link to the relevant discussion. Thanks. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 17:36, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] A friendly request

Hi Ziggy. Please dont be sarcastic to the newbies like you were here. IMHO, it amounts to an infringement of WP:BITE. If I wasn't aware of the fact that all caps means shouting and I asked a good faith question only to be faced with your witty comment, I would be a bit annoyed, wouldn't you? Cheers, Zain Ebrahim (talk) 00:44, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] On the Miscellaneous Reference Desk

You replied, "WHILE YOU'RE AT THE COMPUTER STORE YOU MIGHT WANT TO GET YOUR CAPS LOCK FIXED AS WELL". Excellent! Thomprod (talk) 02:39, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] User:Emotionalnerd

Haha, yeah I'm quick:-P. Cquan ^{(after the beep...)} 18:38, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Refdesk manners

As tempting as it may be to have a bit of a go at the sometimes-less-than-brilliant questions and the even-less-so questioners, it is established policy for Reference Desk volunteers to try to be perfectly professional and carefully polite at all times. Well, almost all times. It's OK to make little jokes after the OP has gotten at least one decent answer, but we never pick on the OP unless it's all in fun and he starts the fun. Believe me, I know better than most how hard it is to be that way when they set themselves up so nicely, but I'm finding it educational to train myself to be neutral. Just a heads-up from a fellow smart-ass. --Milkbreath (talk) 19:14, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] CSD of Natalia And Natalie Trentonburg

Hey, I saw you put a db-nonsense tag on this article. You may have more luck with db-bio or db-band. --Non-dropframe (talk) 21:02, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Cool. Thanks. It just didn't seem to fit the criteria. --Non-dropframe (talk) 21:08, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/PLIERS89

I closed this report. In a "suspected sock puppets" report you need to list two users who you think are the same person. You listed only one user. If you have a second user in mind, please tell me on my talk page. Shalom (Hello • Peace) 22:34, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Qliktech

I added some references to Qliktech, so I think the article now demonstrates notability. You may want to revisit Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Qliktech. --Eastmain (talk) 22:40, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Representative John LaBruzzo

You added a notability tag to Representative John LaBruzzo, which has been moved to John LaBruzzo . WP:BIO states that "Politicians who have held international, national or sub-national (statewide/provincewide) office, and members and former members of a national, state or provincial legislature" are automatically notable. --Eastmain (talk) 22:40, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ziggy played guitar....

-) I added myself recently to the editor review page, and noticed you also added yourself; I think you should answer the two questions in the space provided, so that people won't just ignore your review request. Regards. Fribbler (talk) 00:10, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RfA

Your RfA has been closed per WP:SNOW. Better luck next time! SwirlBoy39 00:36, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your post

I boycott IRC because of misgivings over the admin channel, so you won't find me there. My e-mail is enabled. I do use gmail chat and Skype. Best wishes, and I do hope to help you return. We need a better system for this. Durova^Charge! 01:42, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Blocked

I've blocked you. If consensus at the noticeboard calls for unbanning, one of your accounts will be unblocked, but there's no reason to allow you to continue editing while the ban still exists. Metros (talk) 01:50, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

If you wish to appeal your ban, you can contact the ArbCom just like is suggested for every other banned user. Creating sockpuppets for the umpteenth time is just adding to the reasons not to unban you. I have no desire to engage in conversation with you because you have done absolutely nothing to gain my trust and just continuously return to causing issues. Any conversation with you will just be circular as they have been in the past. Find it rude, find it bitter, whatever, but engaging with you in the past has gotten no one anywhere. Metros (talk) 02:10, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Typo redirect P0n0s

[edit] Metal

See: Talk:Metal Jcwf (talk) 02:09, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for June 2, 2008.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:25, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] IRC, eh?

[20:35] <MZMcBride> Ziggy_Sawdust: Do me a favor, eh? Make an edit to your talk page, please. It can be anything. :)