User talk:Tnxman307

This is Tnxman307's talk page, where you can send messages and comments to Tnxman307.

If I left you a message: please answer on your talk page. If you leave me a message: I will answer on my talk page.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. Sections on this talk page are archived automatically after 10 days without new replies. If this happens, please start a new section and include a diff to the last replied-to version in the relevant archive (see the list of archives below this box). If you feel I have made a mistake, please feel free to leave me a note. I'll be happy to discuss it with you. Similarly, if you believe that one of my admin actions should be reverted, I will not consider it wheel-warring if you do so. However, do please leave me a note here informing me of it. I am not here everyday. If you leave me a message and I don't respond immediately, don't panic! I will get back to you the next time I am online and see your message. Finally, welcome! I enjoy editing here and hope you do too. Cheers!

I am NOT here to troll

You seem to be the ring leader here. How about I give you some edits that need doing and then you decide about whether this block is fair? I cannot understand why you keep blocking me when I'm clearly being the opposite of disruptive; I'm making every possible effort to engage with Wikipedia authorities on the level. 86.181.45.27 (talk) 21:43, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

No, what you're doing is evading a block. TNXMan 22:24, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Patricia Grossman

I'm assuming you canceled edits because you judged them to be promotional. And yet there are other entries on the page that can be considered biased, both for and against. So what's the explanation? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pagross (talk • contribs) 19:49, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#99.30.226.124

Thank you for your action on this issue! - Ahunt (talk) 17:45, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

No problem. Let me know if further issues arise. TNXMan 17:47, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

A cookie for you

Shearonink has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can Spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

This delectable cookie has been awarded to you for your quick work on the November 14th socketeering submitted here.

Thanks! -- Shearonink (talk) 18:06, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Block of User:Foreclosurepedia

Hi! I responded to this user's unblock request. While I agree that the username suggests promotion and/or a group login, I can't see any evidence that this use has actually been spamming Wikipedia. Could I ask you to give it a second look? Maybe we could make the same point in a less bitey way. Thanks, Bovlb (talk) 08:02, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

I have checked every one of the user's edits. At first glance it looks like a spam account (user name which is the name of a web site, edits which add links to that web site) so I can fully understand why you blocked it. However, looking closer, it is clear that this impression is misleading, and the account is perfectly legitimate. The user name is against policy, but I see no reason not to unblock and allow a name change. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:10, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough. I've unblocked them so they may request a new username. If there's anything else with which I can help, please let me know. TNXMan 12:47, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

The Payne Native American Center

Hey,

I am new to Wikipedia, but I'm trying to write my first article on the Payne Family Native American Center for my news editing class at the University of Montana. I would love some help! Thanks,

Steele —Preceding unsigned comment added by SteeleWilliams (talk • contribs) 20:35, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

regarding article

i am a new wikipedia user from uk. i am trying to erite an article about a company Taj Pharmaceuticals and it shows past history and my page got deleted 2 times. if u can help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.234.252.65 (talk) 02:02, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

You've been spamming this article persistently, even after being asked to stop. You also created several accounts to try and market your company on Wikipedia (the case is listed here). Wikipedia is not here to help you advertise for your company. TNXMan 04:03, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

User:JorkMoller

Why did you block that new user account after only two edits as "‎Vandalism-only account"? -- Matthead  Discuß   08:48, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

They had some deleted edits that were vandalism. I also suspect they are someone evading a block - it's not often new users start by editing the pages of indefinitely blocked users. TNXMan 12:44, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Well, o. k. then. In general, a mere mortal user like me would prefer if deleted edits would be visible to non-admins in the contribs list as greyed out, or stricken. Same for edits to deleted articles, which are not shown in the contribs list. -- Matthead  Discuß   15:50, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/RK Drollinger

Hey. On that SPI, you listed "R drollinger" as a confirmed account, but.. there's no account registered with that name. Is that a typo or did something else happen? Just curious. (Also, side note: for these sort of issues, do you prefer a message on your talk page, or via email, or something else?) — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 17:14, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

A message here is probably best. I've fixed the report - thanks for letting me know. I feel like this guy. TNXMan 17:25, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Manifesta

Hey Tnxman,

You mind having a look at Special:Undelete/Manifesta? A request to undelete it came up on WP:REFUND and while I'm not going to revert your speedy unilaterally I think it would be better if you reversed it and sent the article to AfD. It looks big enough and integrated enough to merit an AfD, not a CSD. That's just my opinion, though. Thanks for looking in to this. Protonk (talk) 20:16, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

I've restored it, but I'd like to get your opinion. The article really either needs to be deleted or massively stubbified. It's a mess of promotional material, poorly sourced claims, and original research. What do you think the next step should be? TNXMan 20:52, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

The next step ought to be a massive stubification. If that fails or runs into trouble, then we might want to consider AfD. I agree with you that it is problematic. I'll drop by later tonight to attempt pruning. Thanks for the quick response! Protonk (talk) 21:38, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

You need to undelete the talk page of the article as well. "Stubification" should be discussed at the talk page, but older discussions about the page, if there have been any, should be brought back from the dead. --Hegvald (talk) 23:31, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Whoops, missed that. I'll bring that back too. TNXMan 23:35, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

SPI

Excuse me - you have marked the DPeterson SPI/CU case as closed following checkuser. Who is going to consider the duck evidence? The user is an indefinitely banned prolific socker on this article and a number of others. Checkuser alone is insufficient as he has a history of proxies and travelling to other IPs. Is more evidence required? Fainites ^barleyscribs 15:37, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

He's on a different continent than DPeterson. That's why I marked it for close - they're unrelated. TNXMan 16:46, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

He's now been blocked as a sock - presumably on behavioural evidence. He quite often creates brief socks when abroad. Fainites ^barleyscribs 19:17, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Smuconlaw IPBE?

Hi Tnxman307, I wanted to drop a note and ask if there's any Checkuser-y reason why we wouldn't be able to extend an IPBE to Smuconlaw (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki). Looks like they've been hit with two autoblocks in the past month, and then enquired if there was any way to avoid that happening. If there's some more appropriate channel please let me know and I'll go post there. I usually ask Hersfold, but they appear to be offline...and I know you and I usually overlap in time. Thanks! Syrthiss (talk) 16:02, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

I don't see a problem. There are some other IPBE users on that range, which appears to be home to a vandal. The autoblocks are still floating around, which is probably what they're seeing. TNXMan 16:32, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

ok, thanks. I'll go enact it. Syrthiss (talk) 16:34, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Why did you delete my companies profile?

I created the page a few weeks ago only to come back and find out that you deleted it. Why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.219.240.166 (talk) 21:25, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

You'll need to be a little more specific - about which page are you talking? TNXMan 21:28, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Snarkosis

Hi Tnxman. Regarding your block of Snarkosis (talk · contribs), I think this editor has made a reasonable unblock request on his talk page. The only warning he got before the block was a template message. His response was thoughtful and included a promise to change his insertions of external links to make them refs (he did that in some cases, but not all). The presence of other edits also suggest to me that this is not the traditional serial spammer. Finally, the website itself seems to be a legitimate resource--it reminds me of WP:SCOTUS's long-term use of Findlaw for Supreme Court opinions. Although I agree that the inclusion of information about an invention's patents is probably not great. I'd like to unblock him on the condition that he initiate a discussion somewhere about including that information (perhaps at Talk:patent). What do you say?--Chaser (talk) 21:49, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Sounds perfectly reasonable. I'm heading out the door of my current location, so if you would like to unblock, feel free. If you or Snarkosis have any questions, please let me know. TNXMan 21:58, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Chaser and Tnxman -- I will definitely follow-through on that (and I'll check out Talk:patent). And if I'm ever unsure of a proposed edit, I will bring it up on the Talk page to discuss before adding anything. Snarkosis (talk) 22:39, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

IBM Redbooks Edit

Tnxman, I understand your concerns and am in discussion with Chaser to resolve them. However, there is one of your reverts that I disagree with, and I think it just got caught up in the fray:

(diff | hist) . . m IBM Redbooks‎; 20:06 . . (-173) . . Tnxman307 (talk | contribs) (Reverted 2 edits by Snarkosis (talk) identified as vandalism to last revision by 87.78.21.82. Using Twinkle)

The page has a "[citation needed]" tag next to the sentence, "At approximately 500,000 downloads per month, they are the most downloaded books on the internet." I simply added a citation link to a page on IBM where they report that "6 million Redbooks are downloaded each year", which works out to the 500k/month mentioned in the article that needed citation. I think this citation that I added is valid, should not be tagged as "vandalism", and the deletion of my citation should be reverted. I don't want to reverse your edit without clearing it with you first -- or should I just post the IBM page URL to the Talk page for this article, and let somebody else either add it back in or reject my suggestion? I just want to get the protocol correct from here on out -- I obviously still have a lot to learn! Thanks for your help and your hard work, I appreciate it. —Snarkosis (talk) 23:44, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

I've restored your edit. It's clear you're editing in good faith. As a general rule, it's a good idea to discuss edits on the talk page if you feel that other editors might disagree. I hope you enjoy editing here and if you have questions as you go, let me know. Cheers! TNXMan 01:46, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I appreciate the vote of confidence, I have taken to using the Talk pages, and it looks like GDallimore (talk · contribs) came up with a better, more accurate reference link anyway, which is great. —Snarkosis (talk) 19:09, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

FYI

Hi.

I left my 2 cents on the IP.com link issue at User talk:Chaser#Snarkosis. I remain a bit skeptical. --A. B. ^{(talk • contribs)} 02:45, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Yet another sock of Franklin.vp

Hi Tnxman307 At least one more sock of of Franklin.vp was found on on Commons. He made at least one contribution on English wikipedia too. Maybe you could fina few more socks of that and block it. Thanks.--Mbz1 (talk) 05:30, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing this up. It was noticed at Commons as well. I've checked to make sure there weren't any sleepers lying around. Cheers! TNXMan 13:55, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. It created one more account on Commons today, becomes really abusive. The account was used on English wikipedia as well, but it was a long time ago, so was not picked up by the CU runs. Best wishes.--Mbz1 (talk) 16:44, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm trying to cleanup, but a bit puzzled

I'm going to take you up on your offer.

I just completed a requested page move. Seemingly innocuous, from "Stars and Stripes Forever" to "The Stars and Stripes Forever". I'm looking through what links here to make sure I clean up after myself. I note that many pages with a wikilink to the old article name have been updated, as expected. For example: Matmos although it occurs to me I don't know how to tell whether the link has been updated, or was originally written as a wikilink to the old redirect.

However, Piccolo did not update. Nor did Vladimir Horowitz.

As a guess, is it because when a term is surrounded by quote marks, it isn't updated?

More importantly, I don't get why "The Stars And Stripes Forever" is listed as an item in this list

That page was a redirect, but is now the main page, not a redirect.

Did I do something wrong?

(I know I need to remove the move request from the talk page and close it, but I want to clean up first.)--SPhilbrickT 19:34, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Sorry I couldn't get back to you yesterday. When you move pages like that, you create double redirects. To clean these up, it's generally expected you fix the most important double redirects (most common search terms, etc.). A bot will clean the rest. This already appears to have happened, as the page here is empty. I hope this helps! TNXMan 17:12, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, I guess there's a delay, because that page had entries yesterday. I know that new articles take overnight to get indexed, I thought that renaming would be more or less immediate, but perhaps there's no good reason to think that. However, when I look at Vladimir Horowitz, I see "and ''[[Stars and Stripes Forever]]'' by [[John Philip Sousa]].". Why didn't it update? Why isn't it in the list of pages with links to Stars and Stripes Forever?--SPhilbrickT 20:56, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Ah, I see it now. Compare this link with this link (one page has "hide links" enabled). I'm not sure how often the bot runs, but it does look like there are several articles left to be updated. I wonder if the bot only runs when there isn't much server load? TNXMan 03:49, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

If you don't mind, I'm going to ask at VPT - just so I have a better understanding. --SPhilbrickT 21:40, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

No, it's no problem. Let me know if anything else comes up! TNXMan 21:41, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

You may want to put this on your user page

When I was on youtube I found this video. You might want to add the link to your user page. Inka⁸⁸⁸ 02:55, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

I've seen that before. I got worked up to the point of "meh". TNXMan 17:15, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Xtinadbest

I'm a little concerned. I respect the checkuser vow of silence, so I understand if you have to avoid answering some of my questions directly. From editing patterns and tracking checkuser blocks, it's pretty obvious that Xtinadbest has strong ties to Malta. Based on the Sept 7, 2009 report, I'm aware that Xtinadbest is bilocational, and has edits arising from a second distinct geographic location.

Recently, User:DidiWeidmann got caught up in a sweep for Xtinadbest. From his protests, user page, etc. it would seem that he is located in Uster, Switzerland (see his statement here). This was eventually undone as a false positive.

I was a bit uncomfortable when that block was lifted, as the overlapping interest in {{Malta-LocalCouncils}} seems a bit of a stretch. Other than that, though, I had nothing to go on as the accounts do seem behaviourally unrelated in all other respects.

Still, the implication is strong that Xtinadbest's second location is in or around Uster, Switzerland. Your recent blocks strongly imply that she is currently in Malta. It seems worthwhile to check that DidiWeidmann is not editing from Malta right now. If the two accounts move together, I don't care how behaviourally unlikely things seem: that would be too strong of a correlation to dismiss as coincidence.—Kww(talk) 19:57, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

I've rechecked the results and I'm pretty sure it's two different people. I'd certainly welcome another review, if you'd like to ask someone else (I can point another checkuser to my findings and explain what I saw). As you say, I can't comment on user's IPs. Cheers! TNXMan 04:11, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Your email

I've replied. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:30, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

As have I. TNXMan 18:50, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of the majority of the FN FAL

You have removed a significant amount of material from the FN FAL page. I and others have spent a signifianct amount of our personal time over many years contributing to this page. The random deletions you have made now renders the page confusing, incomplete, and of much less value.

What are you plans to correct this?

Why should we contribute our time as a Subject Matter Expert if our effort is to be deleted?

Please explain. G. Scott 23NOV10 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scottgs (talk • contribs) 18:57, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

I've removed most of the material because it was not sourced. Wikipedia is not a place for original research and all material in articles must be reliably sourced. If you have reliable sources for material, let's discuss it on the article's talk page. TNXMan 19:02, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

User: Spartan

Since I can only reply on my talk page, it's unlikely you'll go back to see it, so I'd just thought I'd let you know I've replied to your decline. 96.50.86.207 (talk) 19:51, 23 November 2010 (UTC)