User talk:Luna Santin/Archive 17

Talk – Sandbox – Suggestions

This is an archive of past discussion. Please do not modify it. If you need to continue or revive one of these discussions, feel free to start a new thread on my talk page.

Archives 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28 1 « [[User talk:Luna Santin/Archive 17|‹See Tfd›17]] ‹ Archive 17 › [[User talk:Luna Santin/Archive 17|‹See Tfd›17]] » 28

Unblock Templates

Luna Santin, I was reading up on unblocks, and I saw you were makin' new ones. They're nice and all, but why unblocks? AR Argon 02:43, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

The current suite of unblock templates includes {{unblock}}, {{unblock reviewed}}, {{unblock-auto}}, {{unblock-auto reviewed}}, {{unblock-un}}, and {{unblock-un reviewed}} -- changes to any one of these templates need to be duplicated on all of the others, to maintain a constant feel. It's fairly common to forget the "reviewed" part of the template name, when reviewing a request, when really the "decline" is the more important factor. Also, the current use of {{unblock-auto}} on MediaWiki:Blockedtext and MediaWiki:Autoblockedtext is confusing, both for new administrators and (more importantly) for new users who tend not to know the difference between account blocks, IP blocks, IP range blocks, and autoblocks. The proposed replacements are intended to mitigate all of those problems. A few other minor improvements were made, as well, but they're not really worth discussing (they'd probably get implemented, even if the old suite is maintained, regardless). – Luna Santin (talk) 05:47, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

So you're just fixing up the unblocks so the guys who check them won't forget the reviewed part and won't be too confused how to use them. Well, they look good, I guess. AR Argon 20:46, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Could you please comment?

Hello Luna Santin. Could you please comment on this? Thank you in advance, RJ CG 16:29, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm aware that you consider the prior block questionable, and that you apparently consider this more recent block questionable, but the real questions I'd ask are more along the lines of why you believe that, or perhaps whether other Wikipedians agree with you (and why, or why not) -- those are open-ended questions, not intended to judge or imply anything. I see that you were involved in a dispute, but my net time is unfortunately a bit short, these days, so I don't have quite as much time to go digging as I may have, previously. – Luna Santin (talk) 05:25, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

You completely missed the essence of my grievance. I do NOT oppose block itself at this point. I was in technical violation of 3RR, so block was warranted. I do oppose block's reason. Accordingly, I'd like either to see change in block's reason spelled out loud and clear (to prevent future occurencies of recent situation when obviously POV-leaning admin copied it to establish bogus "trend") or to see specific examples of the "crimes" I had been accused of (although I've seen notes of experienced wikipedians recently who are stating that "OR block" and "SYNTH block" were virtually unheard of before). On the related note, I have newbie question. What's the standard avenue to file grievance against actions of an admin I consider partial and to appeal his/her decision? TIA, RJ CG 12:54, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

You'll have to forgive me for being unable to read your mind. If you agree the block was valid, why is this still a hot issue? Blocking for reasons like "OR" and "SYNTH" sounds unusual, but without seeing the specific incidents you're referring to, it's difficult for me to offer any insightful comment on the matter. Which bogus admins are you referring to? Please be very specific. – Luna Santin (talk) 17:05, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Excuse me, but I provided [link to my talk page] (which contains the whole saga) in my original message. Let me explain it again with a bit of a timeline:

1. FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} 16:46, 16 July 2007 (UTC)}} -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up®} blocks me "for tedious editing at Russo-Estonian relations while violating WP:NPOV, WP:SYNTH and WP:OR" 16 July 2007

2. 16 July 2007 I file an unblock request and asked for proof of violations WP:NPOV, WP:SYNTH and WP:OR.

3. You denied the request same day, citing 3RR violation. I admitted violation and accepted punishment. But, in the same time, 3RR justification efectively wipes out initial accusation of WP:NPOV, WP:SYNTH and [[WP:OR], isn't it? One who had been tried for murder and ended up jailed for theft can't be called "convicted killer", can s/he?

4. ProhibitOnions ^(T) blocks me August 25, 2007 "for tedious editing at Bronze Soldier while violating WP:NPOV, WP:SYNTH, and WP:OR, again". Note the bold part. Therefore he uses an original explanation of the previous block. Since I found out about his block AFTER it expired, I could not follow the standard "unblock request" path. But his "again" remark (together with what I read as bias against the information I contributed, it all on his talk page, if that saga strikes your curiosity) leads me to believe that he's trying to establish "trend of technical violations" to be used against me in the future. Therefore it became crucial for me to have WP:SYNTH and WP:OR striken out from the 1st block (July 16, 2007). I kinda sorta don't want to discuss POV accusation at this point, as such controvercial and politically charged topics are POVish by nature and it seems pointless to discuss mine (or any other involved editor's POV). POV presence is evident.

Thank you for your patience. RJ CG 14:26, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

RJ CG admits that he was absent for the duration of his 48 hour block, so it had no material effect on him. Yet he continues to harrass ProhibitOnions on his talk page long after the event [1] --Martintg 20:50, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for August 27th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 35	27 August 2007	About the Signpost

WikiWorld comic: "Helicopter parent"	News and notes: Court case, BJAODN, milestones
Wikipedia in the news	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

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 06:16, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

7500 edits

I just made my 7500th edit today. NHRHS2010 ^Talk 01:57, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Tonic Water

I have edited the last paragraph relating to an alternative to quinine as a bittering agent in Tonic Water. The alternative bittering agent is quassia, not quercetin. The article requests a citation and I should like to offer a couple that refer to what quassia is, namely:

Dictionary of Science & Technology, Academic Press, London, 1992, p1772.

or

The Extra Pharmacopeia 29th Edition, The Pharmaceutical Press, 1992, p 1609.

--Edward Willhoft 15:02, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

page move

I need help from an administrator. The page Bayani was moved to Azali with a copy and paste move. Could you please move the history of Bayani to the new Azali page? Thanks Cuñado ☼ - Talk 18:36, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Fixed that one. Thanks. – Luna Santin (talk) 17:44, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

WP meetup

	In the area? You're invited to
	San Francisco Meetup 3
	Date: September 16th, 2007
	Place: Yerba Buena Gardens, 3pm
	San Francisco Meetup 2

-- phoebe/(talk) 05:37, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Ooh. That would be tricky. Will see if I can manage it. ;) – Luna Santin (talk) 17:37, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for September 3rd, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 36	3 September 2007	About the Signpost

From the editor: Interview with Jimbo Wales
WikiScanner tool expands, poses public relations problems for Dutch royal family	WikiWorld comic: "George P. Burdell"
News and notes: Fundraiser, Wikimania 2008, milestones	Wikipedia in the news
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

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. R Delivery Bot 04:01, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Tonic Water

I'm not familiar with the precise mechanics of installing a citation. But I notice that at the end of the article on Tonic Water and referring to Quassia, an alternative to quinine when used as a bittering agent, a citation is requested. In one of my User Talk communications to you I provided a couple of references which have not been attached to the required location of the article. I will repeat the citation and would request if you would very kindly attach it to the end of the article. The reference to quassia is: Dictionary of Science and Technology, Academic Press, 1992, p 1772, ISBN 0-12-200400-0.

I should also like to ask why my article on the hazards of exploding bottles containing carbonated drinks, has not been accepted/included into Wikipedia. Are you able to correspond using my e-mail address? I assume that you have full access to the list of my contributions for verification and location of submitted articles.

Regards,

--Edward Willhoft 13:09, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

I've slipped that reference in, for you (more information at WP:CITE and related pages); as for your other question, I suggest you have a look at Wikipedia:Your first article for help on that. – Luna Santin (talk) 17:35, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

questions

Hi, Luna. I'm doing research on a project that involves wikipedia (tangentially) and was wondering if you would mind answering some friendly questions I have about a few of your comments and administrative decisions. My e-mail is researchfg[at-sign]gmail.com. I'd really appreciate hearing from you!LinLang 04:08, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

User: five panthers

Hi Luna, I am regarding in nfo on HOW i become a moderater i have another user on here and he's done 20 changes and 70 reports!

Yours thankfully Matt —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fivepanthers (talk • contribs) 23:58, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

You can find some more general information about what admins do (and how to become one) at Wikipedia:Administrators; at this early stage of your Wikipedia career, however, it would probably be much easier and faster for you to get help from a current administrator. I'm not entirely sure what you need help with, though? Could you link to specific pages, users, and possibly diffs that might explain the situation? – Luna Santin (talk) 17:31, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Concerns over Negima!? article

I know that the semi-protection for Negima!? will expire tonight at 12:51 am GMT. Is the article in your watchlist? It's just because I'm concerned that as soon as the protection expires, the massive vandalism on it might start again, even if the semi-protect template is still up. And I won't logging in around that time until afternoon here (that's morning GMT) because where I work doesn't have an internet connection. Will you keep watch on this article for me? - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 11:19, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Hm, looks like they haven't noticed (yet). I'll try and check in, periodically; if not, you can probably get some help from other administrators familiar with the page (the protection log should show a few, I think) or ask for help at WP:RFPP. – Luna Santin (talk) 17:29, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

It has happened again. Seven times or so I think for the last two or three hours or so. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 02:33, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Never mind my last note, the article has already been protected by someone else. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 03:26, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Hmm. The kids'll move on, eventually. Just a matter of time. Thanks for your effort, though, it's very much appreciated. – Luna Santin (talk) 05:47, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't think they're just kids. KyuuA4 (talk · contribs), who is also helping me develop the article, apparently found a source of inspiration for the culprits (and fanboys) from this site, but he also mentions that it is just conjecture at this point. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 06:08, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

They are displaying an unusually long attention span, for a vandal meme. Unfortunately I don't speak enough Spanish to understand much of that forum, though. =\ Sometimes there's interesting stuff to be found, out there, people planning raids and such. – Luna Santin (talk) 17:47, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Do you know any active admin who does? I'm sure his expertise in the language can help us against this crusade. I know this vandalism on this article can never be stopped. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 11:28, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't recall for sure, but I'm thinking Ryulong knows some Spanish, and is quite active on vandalism patrolling. – Luna Santin (talk) 20:26, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

No responses to questions!

Dear Luna,

What is the point of submitting questions relating to submitted/edited articles when you do not respond to any? Am I wasting my time contributing to Wikipedia?

--Edward Willhoft 16:57, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Because she hasn't logged on for almost a week now. That's what. - 上村七美 (Nanami-chan) | talkback | contribs 23:53, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

That's correct, I haven't had too much time for Wikipedia, recently, between moving, classes, and organizing the associated activities therein. Will see if I have a quick answer to your questions, above; you may have more luck directing further questions to the help desk. – Luna Santin (talk) 17:32, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

"She"? O.O – 217.44.23.69 12:52, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for September 10th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 37	10 September 2007	About the Signpost

From the editor: Interview with Jimbo Wales
An interview with Jimbo Wales	WikiWorld comic: "Godwin's Law"
News and notes: 2,000,000, Finnish ArbCom, statistics, milestones	Wikipedia in the news
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

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. R Delivery Bot 20:34, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

The Newspaper Team

This is the creator of the newspaper team. I would like to know why you deleted the article. Someone i know started messing with it, and i understand if you deleted it for that reason. You could have notified me instead of deleting the article. Fix it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.102.108.21 (talk) 21:11, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

PLEASE ANSER —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.102.108.21 (talk) 17:40, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Could you be more specific? Which article? – Luna Santin (talk) 01:51, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

It is called The Newspaper Team you deleted it for lack of notability. Can you raise it from the wikipedia article dead? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.102.108.21 (talk) 17 September 2007

After reviewing the deleted content at The Newspaper Team, I've confirmed this is not an appropriate article for Wikipedia; you may wish to review what Wikipedia is not, in particular that Wikipedia is not a free webhost nor an indiscriminate source of information. There are a number of websites around the net which provide free content hosting, you may have better luck there. – Luna Santin (talk) 19:25, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

But didn't it get deleted because my friend edited it into a strange version of its former self? And basically all the celebrity articles is just free webhosting for them>:(. Anyways, the Newspaper Team is practically a celebrity all throughout Los Angeles. You would know that if you lived here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.102.108.21 (talk) 21 September 2007

Again, please see WP:NOT. Unless you can provide reliable, third party verification of your claims, this conversation is as good as done -- feel free to do so. – Luna Santin (talk) 17:32, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

PoofyCat3 10:38, 21 September 2007 (UTC): i am from south east la and dey r unbeleevably popuular derre pleez bring back the article!!! PoofyCat out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.102.108.21 (talk)

Smile!

WarthogDemon has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

-WarthogDemon 07:18, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Whew, thanks! I'm hoping to get a bit more time for wiki business, soonish. :) – Luna Santin (talk) 01:52, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

:O

:O–+<

– 81.153.158.137 21:00, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

That is awesome. – Luna Santin (talk) 17:31, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

I just came by and have to ask . . . what the heck did THIS come from? O_o -WarthogDemon 19:53, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Caribbean Medical University

Information submitted by the user constitutes allegations therefore as a representative of the school, I'd like to request you to remove the content. All necessary documents you can find on our website http://www.cmumed.org. Caribbean Medical University is legally operating medical school on the island of Curacao, therefore such a negative propaganda will require our Legal Department to initiate legal action to resolve the issue. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rlewkowski (talk • contribs) 22:57, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Replied to user's talk page. – Luna Santin (talk) 17:31, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for being so pronto with blocking 70.17.2.2. I've had to revert vandalism on Bacon's Rebellion way too many times today and you just made my life easier. =D (People pick the weirdest articles to vandalize...I'll never get it.) --iriseyes^talk 01:44, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for September 17th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 38	17 September 2007	About the Signpost

From the editor: Reader survey
Wikimedia treasurer expected to depart soon	WikiWorld comic: "Sarah Vowell"
News and notes: Template standardization, editing patterns, milestones	Wikipedia in the news
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

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 03:17, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

Thanks for removing some vandalism from my talkpage, much appreciated. Davnel03 15:54, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Of course, glad to help. – Luna Santin (talk) 21:06, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

unauthorised change

soz —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.67.202.25 (talk) 17:55, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but I'm not sure what you mean? – Luna Santin (talk) 21:06, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

I appreciate the speedy response. Thx, R. Baley 05:07, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Glad to be of some service. :) – Luna Santin (talk) 21:06, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Serafin

Serafin has been active sockpuppeting again, currently at Nicolaus Copernicus with his known IP and new account User:Buggo1. I'd addressed it at AN/I, after which his account User:Lodz1 and soon after his follow-up account User:Sanos1 were eventually blocked, but nothing has been done about Buggo1 so far and taking it to AN/I seems less practical than having a small group keeping a watchful eye. For example, a small sub-page where a number of two to four admins keep watch on and where suspects can be reported to it with a status (not yet checked, blocked, unrelated) would save the trouble of always bringing up the case anew. May I use User:Luna Santin/Sockwatch/Serafin for that? Sciurinæ 17:28, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Aha, I've gotten a bit out of practice after my break, but after a quick review, that one seems more familiar, and I've blocked the account accordingly. Beyond that, feel free to use the sockwatch pages as you like. :) It'd be a thrill to see them used productively. – Luna Santin (talk) 17:44, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I have now changed User:Luna Santin/Sockwatch/Serafin but if you prefer another format, please don't hesitate to change it as you think fit. I picked 'usercheck', yet if you believe CheckUser is not appropriate here, then I'd recommend 'userlinks'. Can I suggest the page to several users? Sciurinæ 19:44, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Sure, go for it. – Luna Santin (talk) 19:48, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Need your opinion

Hi. After spending several days gathering information, I put together Wikipedia:Long term abuse/Madman C. I am concerned about the number and specificity of the threats this user has made, as well as his mental state. Further, I am pretty sure I have tracked down the person's real-world identity. Do you think I have enough here that we should report this to law enforcement? If so, is there some formal process that we or the Foundation can use to report this? Thanks, NawlinWiki 21:12, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

I may have more time to look at this, in detail, later on. For now, I have to admit that's not an area I've got any experience in... I'll see if I can ask around a bit, once I'm back at home. Until then, if there's anybody else you had in mind to ask, feel free. – Luna Santin (talk) 21:20, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. NawlinWiki 21:26, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Onlylying

Just popped by to say I have absolutely zero objections to you unblocking if that seems indicated. No need to courtesy inform, ask, or discuss. KillerChihuahua^?!? 23:15, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

I appreciate it. :) I generally agree with your read on the situation, though I guess it can't hurt much if we see what they have to say... which probably won't be anything friendly, but it's a small chance to take. – Luna Santin (talk) 23:52, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Well in my experience 99% of these type vandals never even try for unblock, so i was surprised this one did. If he offers anything remotely reasonable, I don't see any reason why not to give him a chance. I'm with you - small chance to take and easily remedied if we're just trusting fools. KillerChihuahua^?!? 01:29, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations!

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Thanks for reverting vandalism on my user page!--Just James T/C 11:49, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

AfD nomination of RepliGo

An article that you have been involved in editing, RepliGo, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RepliGo. Thank you. --B. Wolterding 14:43, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Concerning being accused...

Ah piss off for all I know one of you fuckers signed up hacked my ip address from whenever I've made some changes to pages i.e. On American Head Charge's page I modified the former band members section as some people were left out of the list, so save all your bullshit. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.106.168.243 (talk) 23:40, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Beg your pardon? You're welcome to make productive edits, but if these sorts of outbursts continue, I'll have no choice but to block you again. – Luna Santin (talk) 23:43, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Nehrams2020 RfA Thanks

Thank you for your participation in my RfA, which closed successfully with unanimous support. I appreciate you taking the time to stop by and ask a question (I was surprised there weren't any others by other editors!) I have enabled my e-mail, so hopefully I can continue to assist those that need help. Again, thank you and happy editing! --Nehrams2020 07:22, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Glad to hear it, congratulations! :) – Luna Santin (talk) 06:15, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

72.159.14.130

I saw where you had blocked 72.159.14.130 previously and just wanted to let you know he is back at racist edits, vandalism, etc. Perhaps you could take care of that? --otduff ^t/_c 22:17, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Blocked. Thanks for bringing that to my attention. – Luna Santin (talk) 19:59, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

User:Newky

It says in the archives of User talk:Newky that you blocked an IP adress indeffinetly for Newky sharing same IP as someone else... This is The/a Freeston Business + Enterprise College IP adress. And there are 30 Wikipedians from that school.OsirisV 19:36, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Eh? You might want to be a bit more specific. I assume you're looking at this diff. If that's the case, you may want to read a little more closely, I never blocked that IP address (see log), but rather the account User:Newky (see log), which was a very new account sharing an IP address with the recently blocked User:Mysthax (blocked by another admin, see log), thus the autoblock on their IP address -- autoblocks last 24 hours only. Incidentally, the 172.x range is a well-known AOL range (see WHOIS) of dynamic addresses, usually used by household broadband customers -- it is possible that this address may at some point represent any given user or set of users, but it will not do so for any prolonged period of time. – Luna Santin (talk) 19:58, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for September 24th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost

Volume 3, Issue 39	24 September 2007	About the Signpost

From the editor: Survey results
Wikimedia announces plans to move office to San Francisco	WikiWorld comic: "Ambigram"
News and notes: Times archives, conferences, milestones	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

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. R Delivery Bot 02:18, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

Bagerlover69 (talk · contribs)

User is vulgar and belligerant. Please consider blocking from editing own user talk page. Warn first, though, right? (I've had a Wikilapse&#0153;, so I forget how these things go...) - CobaltBlueTony 21:30, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Depends how obviously they should know better. In this case, there's not much chance we could talk the chap into reforming, so I've just gone ahead and protected the page. Thanks for letting me know. – Luna Santin (talk) 21:32, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Excellent. - Hopefully he'll move on to better and more ridiculous things before that block expires. ;-) Cheers! - CobaltBlueTony 21:34, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for October 03, 2007

The Wikipedia Signpost

Volume 3, Issue 40	1 October 2007	About the Signpost

WikiWorld comic: "Buttered cat paradox"	News and notes: Commons uploaders, Wikimania 2008/2009, milestones
Wikimedia in the News	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Automatically delivered by COBot 02:34, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to swahili wikipedia

Hello Luna Santina, I would like to welcome you in swahili wikipedia. --Mohammed Lupinga 12:25, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

account hacking query

I posted a message on a help page re this problem, and was advised that a checkuser might be applicable... I'm not sure how to go about this, however.

Essentially, my problem is as follows. I logged into my wiki account this morning to discover that a dozen or more spurious, non-existent, and in some cases offensive pages had been added to my list. I duly deleted these and changed my password immediately. However, as a few other people do have access to my computer, I'd simply like to establish whether this was an 'inside job', as it were, or the work of some third-party, external hacker. Is there any way of establishing the ip address used when the unwanted alterations were made to my watchlist, and also, the time/date at which these changes were made? Any advice greatly appreciated.Snowbunni 20:00, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

That doesn't sound like the sort of problem checkuser would be able to help you with, unfortunately. – Luna Santin (talk) 03:53, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Yo

You asked why I made the edit to Odin's Beard user page, it was my little brother messing around on my computer. Sorry about that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ThisGuy62 (talk • contribs) 03:58, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Why is the article Barcelona protected?

I do not get it. It is very random. I mean there are tons of other articles which are not protected which deserve to be way more than a city. It's a city! Now if i wanted to edit it I could not, it is a waste of an article if it is protected. --Estadosunidos 22:55, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

p.s. its been protected forever! not just like a day, months... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Estadosunidos (talk • contribs) 22:57, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Looks like the page was semi-protected by DarkFalls in early September; because it is semi-protected, any established account should be able to edit the page. Anonymous or new users can request edits by placing the {{editprotected}} template on the article's talk page, along with a description of the request. Beyond that, I'll leave a note with DarkFalls about this, since I don't believe I'm familiar with this particular incident. – Luna Santin (talk) 20:17, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

The article was semiprotected due to an influx of vandalism and sockpuppetry by a disruptive editor. I've now unprotected the article (with an exception of move) so you should be able to edit. --D_arkF_alls ^talk 08:38, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Hmph

Well, so much for my attempt to assume good faith with a vandal...[2]... Dreadstar † 06:40, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

It happens. :) You made a judgement call with the information that was available at the time, it's the best any of us can do. – Luna Santin (talk) 20:20, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

ATTN : Luna Santin

Madam I am not-so-regular contributor to Wikipedia. Today when I logged in I found that I have been blocked. Let me reiterate that I have in no way vandalized any of WikiPedia's articles or been a nuisance in any way. The message which appeared was : ((unblock-auto|1=195.229.242.84|2=changing to soft block for Szayat|3=HighInBC)) Soft block; you should be able to edit while logged in. Luna Santin 10:15, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

I presume that this is due to some misunderstanding. My I.P address is a dynamic one (I think). I appeal to the authorities to take the necessary action at the earliest.

Thanking You Ecthelion 8

Looks like the IP address is currently "softblocked," meaning that anybody with an account should be able to edit while logged in. Users without accounts can request them through the unblock-en-l mailing list (mail:unblock-en-l). – Luna Santin (talk) 20:23, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

"Madam"? O.O – Gurch 23:43, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

I actually thought for a while that Luna was a girl :) -- lucasbfr ^talk 20:02, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

LUNA SANTIN

Okay, Luna Santin. Why did you block me from editing "minivans"? In case you haven't noticed, I actually helped the article, instead of vandalizing it. So just to let you know, you don't just block people from editing articles if you don't even know what they are doing. The only thing I did was just that I added some information about minivans. And no, not anything about the GM minivans. So, if you think I'm vandalizing, think again before trying to block me. Just letting you know. Bye.

Apparently he's a [fan ;) -- lucasbfr ^talk 20:50, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

ZOMG LUNA SANTIN

Because apparently writing your name in capital letters gets your attention faster. Fnord – Gurch 02:54, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

It works for some people! – Luna Santin (talk) 17:55, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

User:58.165.142.10 and Trolling

Dear sir, if you actually bothered reading the unblock rationale you would have realised that the editor was merely trying to revert vandalism and bring other users attention to the sneaky tactics used by IP vandals. The Anome tried to justify his ban by claiming he was looking at the "context" of the actions, however if this was the case he would have undid his reversions here and here which he failed to do even though it was brought to his attention twice. He has since locked the talk page to prevent any further criticism of his overzealous actions and the excuses made to justify them, and this has prevented any form of an unblock request. I trust that you will look into the matter accordingly. 58.164.7.68 08:55, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Thing is, if you were a reasonable person being misunderstood, you would have just realized that and moved on. The fact that you haven't is what labels you as a troll, for me. Have a nice day. – Luna Santin (talk) 17:55, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for October 15th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 42	15 October 2007	About the Signpost

From the editor: Brion Vibber interview
Wikimania 2008 awarded to Alexandria	Board meeting held, budget approved
Wikimedia Commons reaches two million media files	San Francisco job openings published
Community sanction noticeboard closed	Bot is approved to delete redirects
License edits under consideration to accommodate Wikipedia	WikiWorld comic: "Soramimi Kashi"
News and notes: Historian dies, Wiki Wednesdays, milestones	Wikimedia in the News
WikiProject Report: Military history	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

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 09:48, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

recent developments

Thanks. DuncanHill 00:33, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Userpage Question

Hello...I have a slight problem that maybe you might be able to help with. The little "menu" at the top of my userpage that has a time, links to my talk page, contribs and the like, and a little saying is normally right in between the line at the top of the page, for some reason it is slid way down (you will see what I mean) and I am not sure how to fix it. If you could help, I would appericate it. (Sorry for the bad explanation). - NeutralHomer ^T:C 00:41, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

I asked User:Ryan Postlethwaite, since you were offline (no worries there) and he fixed it right up. Many thanks though :) - NeutralHomer ^T:C 01:51, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Ah, sorry to keep you waiting. Glad to hear your problems have been resolved, though. :) – Luna Santin (talk) 06:25, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

No worries :) Thanks though :) - NeutralHomer ^T:C 09:25, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Bimbo Wales

Bimbo wales, death to jimbo (talk · contribs · count) is no less than the fifth account sporting the name "Bimbo Wales" in as many days. I requested an IP check to see where they keep coming from; she makes socks and immediately uses them (I came across them while on username patrol) to vandalize user pages with swastikas. Please keep an eye out for more Bimbo Wales accounts until the IP check clears and semi-protect your user pages in case she comes after you. -Jéské^{(v^_^v)} 07:22, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Ah, interesting to know. I'll keep an eye out, if I see any more. Thanks for the attention. :) – Luna Santin (talk) 07:24, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Archiving Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/IP check

What is going on here?

this edit says that moved the following "old reports to archive":

=== Open proxy ===

=== Alinob77 ===

===User:Starwars1955===

===User:Reasonablelogicalman===

===User:E. Dunin===

===User:Chatterson===

This edit says that you archived Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/IP check/User:HarveyCarter and SPs.

But, if you look in the archive, they are NOT there. It looks like you are just deleting them, and not moving them. What's the scoop poop? IP4240207xx 19:06, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Thought I may have missed them, but here's the completed archival. IP checks do follow a different archival process than other checkuser requests; as detailed by Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Procedures, they're sent to Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/IP check/Archive immediately after checkuser response, and are deleted after seven days. If it seems important to track any of the mentioned users, sockpuppet categories should still be pretty effective, and you could provide a diff link on their userpages to assert the checkuser evidence. – Luna Santin (talk) 19:21, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Well that is confusing if you are on that project page and click "Archive" in the box at the top of the page on the right-hand side. Can you RE-DIRECT this one to the actual archive for that page? IP4240207xx 18:08, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Hm, that's a fair point. I'll see if I can figure out a good solution to hopefully resolve that issue. – Luna Santin (talk) 21:20, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

User:Luna Santin

In case you miss it, there's kind of a rever war going on there... -- lucasbfr ^talk 13:10, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh, dear... I see things are getting as political as ever. Not sure what to make of it. Wikipedians will be Wikipedians, I suppose. ;) – Luna Santin (talk) 01:51, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Inproper signature

Hi Luna Santin, thank you for fixing my signature.(Back in January, on Daniel's RfA, when my username at that time was User:Wikipedier) Please accept my apologies for the error.--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. 05:11, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Glad to be of any service. Thanks for taking a moment of your time. – Luna Santin (talk) 01:52, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Smile

Hello Luna Santin, NHRHS2010 has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

NHRHS2010 ^Talk 21:55, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! :) – Luna Santin (talk) 01:52, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

semi-protection on User:Jack Merridew

Thanks for locking-down my user page. Given the attention it has been receiving I think it best to leave it this way for a while. Unfortunately, I expect that this will move things back to the talk page. I'm most impressed with the speed that defenders have shown. From my point of view, this is a great way to meet new people. Hi! --Jack Merridew 08:42, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Heh, glad to be of service. :) Haven't checked, yet, but if they stop by again, feel free to let me know. – Luna Santin (talk) 21:53, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

just a taste.

hey honey i have a question. how do you put images on wikipedia?--Savetheeggs 19:59, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Just a taste? Honey? o.o Ah, anyway, you may want to have a look at WP:TUTORIAL and/or WP:IMAGE for help. – Luna Santin (talk) 01:02, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

thanks sugs.--Savetheeggs 03:14, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

:O

zomg – Gurch 21:51, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Lies! – Luna Santin (talk) 21:52, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the vandal watching

I'm glad to see you're still fighting the good fight. Doggone, I'm back under a new username after promising myself I wouldn't do NPP, especially after requesting de-adminship. Yet that's what I'm doing. I must be nuts. I'm glad to say that I have done some real editing, so perhaps I'm not a totally lost cause.  :) See you 'round. The former Lucky 6.9 via PMDrive1061 01:41, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Ahh, I'd been wondering where you got off to. It's good to see you! Looks like neither of us is quiiite as active as we used to be, but it's tough to ever really quit, I think. ;) Will look forward to seeing you around, definitely. – Luna Santin (talk) 01:45, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. Great to see you as well. There are a couple of users whom I suspect are Daniel Brandt meatpuppets who basically tried to drive me into the dirt. One hasn't edited in a long time and the other still does with a few idiosyncratic edits here and there. I'm not one for conspiracy theories, but these guys really are out to get the admins. Scary. Anyway, I'm trying to give CPR to the nearly abandoned Radio Control Wiki and it's drawn a couple of new users. I guess R/C fans don't write wikis...except for maybe yours truly. Keep on keepin' on. Take care. --PMDrive1061 01:58, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Smile and my 10K edit

NHRHS2010 has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

I just made my 10,000th edit today, according to My Preferences. That number includes deleted edits as well. This is my 10,008th edit. NHRHS2010 talk 00:26, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for October 22nd, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 43	22 October 2007	About the Signpost

Fundraiser opens, budget released	Biographies of living people grow into "status symbol"
WikiWorld comic: "George Stroumboulopoulos"	News and notes: Wikipedian Robert Braunwart dies
WikiProject Report: League of Copyeditors	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Sorry for the tardiness in sending the Signpost this week. --Ral315

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 14:26, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Tapas

have you seen the Petit Bateau article. I think its just fabulous. swell job wikipedia, i myself quite fancy Petit Bateau. I do feel that it could be expanded.

On another note my dear, would you like to join me at Jose Lucias Caliamente's Espanol Resturante? They have some swell Catalan delicasies and I would just love you to join me. Maybe we could chortle while sipping our cava. Get back to me gorgeous. --Chunckymonkey 18:46, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for October 29th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 44	29 October 2007	About the Signpost

From the editor: Florence Devouard interview
Page creation for unregistered users likely to be reenabled	WikiWorld comic: "Human billboard"
News and notes: Treasurer search, fundraiser, milestones	WikiProject Report: Agriculture
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

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 05:51, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Hey Thanks!

Thanks for reverting my talk page. I really appreciate that! Au revoir and happy editing! Icestorm815 04:16, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Glad to be of any service. See you around the wiki. – Luna Santin (talk) 04:17, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Ralph Nader

I have no idea what point you might have been trying to make on talk:Ralph Nader. Here is what the reference says "Nader's presence on the ballot proved crucial". Can you get more clear than that? It goes on to say, "in at least two states". However I suspect the writer didn't take the time to check the results for all 50 states, as there are no other states other than those two, which you can confirm from the other reference. The same reference goes on to say "John Pearce, a California activist who launched a Web site called RalphDontRun.net, said that even if Nader's numbers for the 2000 election were correct, he still tipped Florida and New Hampshire to Bush. If Gore had won either state, he would have won the election." 199.125.109.32 05:33, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

The page is protected to prevent edit warring; it would do little good to continue the edit war through administrators. Instead, I encourage you to make use of Wikipedia's dispute resolution process to establish consensus among your fellow editors regarding the most appropriate article version. If you feel that such a consensus has been reached, then feel free to submit another {{editprotected}} request. Beyond that, I'm acting as an administrator in this matter, and because of that, it wouldn't be appropriate for me to comment on the merit or lack of merit of any particular contributor's opinion. I can advise or perhaps decide on policy matters, but that's about my limit. Hope that makes sense. – Luna Santin (talk) 06:03, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Whoops, mixed up pages I'd replied to, recently. In short, it seemed to me that a lot of people were expressing their own personal opinions -- all politeness aside, I'm sure everybody's opinion is great, but that's not what we're here for. See WP:V for more information. – Luna Santin (talk) 06:08, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Review request for block

Hi Luna--would you take a peek at this conversation and let me know whether I'm handling this correctly? I'm trying to play it by the book, but I understand the concerns being raised here. Dppowell 06:08, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

By my understanding, the primary reason for the "user is active now" instruction is that we prefer to assume good faith, either figuring that a given anon IP address may be a different person, from week to week, or that a new user was just trying things out, and will hopefully come around to contributing productively in the future. With accounts, some of those possibilities are moot -- exceptional situations aside, we can generally assume that one account will be used by the same person, from one day to the next; this allows us to build a more complete picture of an individual's behavior, and to take that information into account. If a particular account is repeatedly causing problems, especially after having been given several chances to improve, we at some point need to consider shifting from a tone of "you're new, it's cool, let us help you out," to something more like, "please shape up or leave." Weighing the pros and cons, do we gain or lose more by asking this user to stay or go? I only took a quick glance at their contributions, I see some edits that look helpful at first glance, but also some odd sprees of vandalism. Block log is empty, talk page sports a few final warnings. No obvious sign of strong administrative response, whether by blocks in the short or long term, or in some try at a conversation with the user. Looks like some admin action is in order; the particular form of that action might depend on how patient we figure we can afford to be, with this person. – Luna Santin (talk) 06:19, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

So, maybe a 24-hour (or shorter) block? Given the editing pattern, they might not even be back before the block expires, but they'd see the block notice on their page and maybe get the message? Dppowell 06:28, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Might be worth a shot, yeah. :) Just brainstorming, if you check your email frequently, you could also give a longer block but make it clear you'd consider unblocking after having a talk with the user. Comes to mind since, as you said, they may not even come around inside the duration of the 24 hours or so the first block might last. So... probably that or a short block plus checking in at a later date, whatever feels most appropriate to you. – Luna Santin (talk) 06:34, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

This admin business is trickier than it looks. :-) Thanks! Dppowell 06:36, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

If you do well, I hear they double your salary. :) Hope that works out well. – Luna Santin (talk) 06:40, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

IRC

How come I never see ya there Luna? I miss the chats. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 06:43, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

/me pours a glass of rum over Luna :P

Blargh, I have a new mistress, and she is harsh with my time. :'( Hoping things will settle down by next semester, though. With luck, these setbacks are temporary. – Luna Santin (talk) 06:47, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

She stole your first love, shame. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 06:52, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Don't tell Shanel! – Luna Santin (talk) 07:11, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Tsk, tsk, and she just stopped by me talk page too. You'll have to bribe me for that one bud. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 07:13, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Looks like another one bites the dust... unless you want a trip in my time machine, plus tickets to the next Queen concert? – Luna Santin (talk) 07:15, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Honestly, I'd settle for a shot of tequila on the rocks.... KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 07:18, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

It may be a bit watered down, by the time it reaches you, but I'll have my people send it to your people. – Luna Santin (talk) 07:26, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

But I don't have any people! :O KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 07:28, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Of course, nobody has people. -- lucasbfr ^talk 10:10, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

Nobody is the most connected of them all. After Lucas, of course. – Luna Santin (talk) 21:24, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

You forgot him – Gurch 08:12, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Terribly sorry, sir. :( I'll be passing somebody who knows how to get in touch with him, on the streets, tomorrow, so I'll make things right, then. – Luna Santin (talk) 08:26, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

I never got that shot. :p KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 08:28, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

It's in the mail, and the mail always goes through. – Luna Santin (talk) 08:30, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

In Remembrance...

--nat ^{Alo! Salut! Sunt eu, un haiduc?!?!} 01:12, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Trolling

I am trolling your talk page. :o --CableModem^^ 01:39, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for the assistance with the IP vandal who consistently vandalized Kappa Alpha Order. After warnings were issued, he continued to vandalize, and you had blocked him. Thank you. Maser ^(Talk!) 07:29, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Of course. :) Glad to be of service. Thanks for your efforts, as well. – Luna Santin (talk) 07:30, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

All in a days work! MASER FLETCHER, AWAY!!! Maser ^(Talk!) 20:47, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

This is fudging rediculous

In the article, Wherever You Are (movie), it has been vandalized for two days now and no one has edited it. This prooves what a disgrace Wikipedia is boo.--Savetheeggs 22:10, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

(1) {{sofixit}}. (2) Articles which remain vandalized probably aren't being read very often. – Luna Santin (talk) 07:42, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Pecking order?

User Calton, diffs

14:42, 8 November 2007 (hist) (diff) User talk:66.35.123.205‎ (Nope: this is an IP address, not a user account, so you don't have the same "rights". Maybe you ought to sign into your real account.)

CausticX 18:07, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Looks like the comment has already been removed by Isarig. – Luna Santin (talk) 00:36, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

I was wondering if it's true. Seems this user Calton is pretty active. Do IP addresses not have the same rights on Wikipedia? Is it okay to be uncivil, under certain circumstances? Seems like this guy is and it's okay. Thanks, CausticX 22:09, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Strictly speaking, the only rights anyone has on Wikipedia are the right to leave and the right to fork. That said, I strongly prefer that we treat all users as fairly and equally as possible. It appears there's some history here, that I'm no aware of -- without being aware of that history, it's difficult to offer insightful comments. – Luna Santin (talk) 01:25, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the input, CausticX 01:36, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

c'mon man...

Don't be a spoil sport! Vandalising is what makes Wikipedia fun! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Billyjimbo78 (talk • contribs) 20:12, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Luan santin your are not the owern of wikipedia.org.en

some els is you can not block me my reason is that i had to copy Info on George burns for a paper and not typ it

thank you aiden thieriot —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jake0111 (talk • contribs) 20:36, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

*ahem*

The previous message was a test. Please ignore it. And this one -- 144.32.58.192 20:49, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

I was kinda wondering. :p You beat me to that revert on Uranium, though, nice work. – Luna Santin (talk) 20:50, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Hehe... and that was despite having to solve a captcha before the edit would save! (the bane of anonymous editing, for sure) – Gurch 21:09, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

My "fans"

Thanks for the offer, but I like to have a history of such vandalism in case there is a pattern that I can report. Have a great day! Ward3001 23:55, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Regarding User:EpicFlame

Hey there, I responded to the recent concerns on this user's talkpage. I did quite pointedly ask the user not to recreate his douchebox userbox, but he went and did so anyway. Like I said on EF's talk page, I do apologize if it seemed a bit hasty, and the block can reduced to a definite limit, but I stand by my judgment that the user was doing more harm than good. GlassCobra 01:35, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for November 5th and 12th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 45	5 November 2007	About the Signpost

Wikimedia avoids liability in French lawsuit	WikiWorld comic: "Fall Out Boy"
News and notes: Grant money, fundraiser, milestones	WikiProject Report: Lists of basic topics
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Volume 3, Issue 46	12 November 2007	About the Signpost

Unregistered page creation remains on hold so far	WikiWorld comic: "Exploding whale"
News and notes: Fundraiser, elections galore, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
WikiProject Report: Missing encyclopedic articles	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

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 07:57, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

ACW

You told her you were 'concerned' about a personal attack (WP:NPA) in an article (WP:VAND)...? I'm sorry, no, I want an explanation for why that doesnt result in an immediate block. Jose João 10:01, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Please explain how there could be two sides to this. In what situation do the actions of one editor justify attacking the other editor in an article? I'm trying to think of a situation but I'm finding it pretty difficult. I'm finding it pretty difficult to understand why she hasnt been banned for stalking me. Notice the page history of Angolan Civil War, Neal Blair, History of Angola, Rhodesia, et cetera, et cetera. Jose João 10:08, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

It's a work in progress. This is the first time I've run into either of you, so I'm going to spend a few minutes looking into things. Please be patient. – Luna Santin (talk) 10:21, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Use of Humor

well i was surfing around on wikipedia, and came across this..

i was looking for Acura RSX...

while there, something caught my attention..the first line that the page reads is-

"DRIVEN BY HOMOSEXUALS LIKE MAAACY SMITH"... funny..yes...accurate...maybe...hurting...yes...

i tried editing it by logging in..but as soon as i log in, it disappears..i mean just that line disappears.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tutusinghsohi (talk • contribs) 18:58, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Re : Unblock

And for some reason it works... :o) - Cheers, Mailer Diablo 22:52, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

• P.S. Thanks! - Mailer Diablo 22:52, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Ah! Block evasion!

And, of course. :) – Luna Santin (talk) 22:56, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

My error - I meant to block User:Mattjblythe who has since been blocked by others for uploading a misleading obscene picture and replacing an article with it. Mailer Diablo had merely redirected another article to correctly point to this vandalized article. My apologies. - DavidWBrooks 01:28, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

User:Willywonka2008

Why would you possibly unblock this obvious vandal? Corvus cornix (talk) 04:23, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

As was pointed out by a good-faith user, they haven't vandalized since their last warning. A vandal likely won't check back to see if they've been unblocked. If they keep at it, they're easy enough to reblock. Mostly, though, because it was a reasonable request from a longtime user. – Luna Santin (talk) 05:45, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

They're obviously a returning vandal, but if you want to take the chance, have fun. Probably User:Gsabogal. Corvus cornix (talk) 05:46, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

A brief message from user 71.239.133.107

Thanks for not attacking me. 71.239.133.107 (talk) 08:29, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes very admirable of you Luna. :P KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 08:44, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

You betcha. Assume good faith and all. – Luna Santin (talk) 18:08, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Is "I solemnly swear I am up to no good"[3] an expression of bad faith?   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 07:47, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

It's a bit odd, but probably not bad in and of itself. It's also a line from the Harry Potter series (especially coupled with "mischief managed," in the same diff, the reference is pretty solid). Anything else going on, besides that? – Luna Santin (talk) 07:55, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Nope, sorry I didn't see the connection to Harry Potter.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 09:36, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

I thank you again, Luna Santin, for not engaging in petty fault-finding. I only made the Harry Potter reference as a way of making light of that entire dispute (if that's what it can be called). If it's bothersome to other users, I will happily blank the entire page, because I acknowledge that a User Talk page for an unregistered user doesn't provide any real value. Just let me know...71.239.133.107 (talk) 21:36, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

[lost edit in progress] Regarding your edit to the talk page for talking about that IP Address, that user specifically allowed me to post in what evolved into the "Jeff G, friends of Jeff G, and amused bystanders please post your comments here" section[4], and some of the warnings I restored for the first time because the user had not admitted to reading them. Now that they have admitted to reading the warnings, it is fair to leave the warnings in the past. I'm sorry if I have been too zealous in restoring deleted warnings to user talk pages.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 01:10, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I see, now. Thanks for pointing that out. :) – Luna Santin (talk) 09:52, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 09:36, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

User talk:Pagrashtak#The_Legend_of_Zelda:_Oracle_of_Seasons_and_Oracle_of_Ages and Turd the Borg (talk)

Thanks for helping out here. You might want to leave a message on his talk page as well. Thanks, Pagrashtak 18:05, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Probably if they keep at it; trying a slightly less confrontational path, first, in the hopes that'll work. If somebody else tries a different tack, that's fine with me. :) – Luna Santin (talk) 18:08, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for November 19th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 47	19 November 2007	About the Signpost

An interview with Florence Devouard	Author borrows from Wikipedia article without attribution
WikiWorld comic: "Raining animals"	News and notes: Page patrolling, ArbCom age requirement, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	WikiProject Report: History
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

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) 10:22, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

RUM!

		The Original Barnstar
		For your cognizant understanding of Wikipedia, and your numerous helpful contributions to AN/I, as well as here, among other places. I award you this barnstar! Which incidentally doubles as a shuriken for use against vandals. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 16:56, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Suh-weet! I'll sleep with it under my pillow, always be prepared. Danke. – Luna Santin (talk) 21:37, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Be careful not to slide your hand under your pillow, you might prick yourself and that would be bad. Happy turkey day Luna. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 12:58, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Dumb new admin question

I thought hardblocking only had an effect on registered accounts; the documentation's pretty thin about soft/hardblocking in general. I assume that a hardblock on an IP will have a follow-on effect from other IP's? Acroterion _(talk) 22:59, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

When you "hardblock" an IP, you block both registered and unregistered accounts ("softblock" = "anonymous only" checkbox). When you softblock (AO, usually with Account Creation disabled), people that are already registered can edit, but anonymous users can't neither register nor edit. Now, if you're talking about blocking registered users, enabling the Autoblock will effectively block every user that tries to connect or register, and all anonymous editing for 24 hours. -- lucasbfr ^talk 23:04, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

(ec) It's all a bit complicated, yeah. It may help to distinguish between IP blocks, account blocks, and autoblocks. IP blocks are associated with a particular IP address, regardless of what particular account uses the address (if a hardblock, it will affect all users on the IP; if a softblock, only logged out users). An account block is associated with a particular account, regardless of which particular IP address the account uses. Autoblocks are a third creature, entirely: when an account is blocked with AB enabled, the server will automatically issue a 24-hour autoblock to the last IP the account used... this block won't show up in the IP's block log, though -- WP:AUTOBLOCK should do a decent job explaining that whole affair. Hope that makes sense. :) – Luna Santin (talk) 23:07, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

So, in the context of the IP that was bugging Crockspot, changing the IP block (which I set as AO, ACB) to a hardblock was a better option because ... ? That's the part I'm not quite getting (and therefore the "dumb" heading). Acroterion _(talk) 23:30, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I see. Most times, it won't really matter much, either way, but it can be more important for persistent troublemakers who (sometimes) register sleeper accounts ahead of time to evade anon-only blocks or semi-protection, or may be using open proxies, or may have gladhand accounts which might be using the same IP. I'd call it a combination preventive measure and fishing expedition, to see if any interesting {{unblock-auto}} requests show up. – Luna Santin (talk) 23:37, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Ah - understood now - a strategy. Thanks for the explanations! Acroterion _(talk) 23:43, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: Barnstar

Wow, such kind words! I don't know what to say beside that I'm happy not having destroyed anything yet (even if I'm starting considering using the cluestick on some editors, lately) ;) I can't take all the credit for the unblock mailing list, I almost forgot about it for a while, and just cleared some backlog when I remembered I was supposed to hang there. Yamla is doing most of the work (I know, it's rude to point at people). Just... Thank you for your appreciation, it means a lot! (So, when are you dropping school to be fully back? :p) -- lucasbfr ^talk 23:00, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Theoretically I'm off school, this week, but for some reason my laptop isn't cooperating with the network, where I'm at, so I'm stuck on some old box that has none of my pretty toys installed, until I fix that. XD Gives me a brief respite from the joys of assembly language programming, though! – Luna Santin (talk) 23:10, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

My eyes still bleed from my last assembly course, 2 years ago (already!). Best of luck for your recovery ;). -- lucasbfr ^talk 09:32, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Hard block?

Does this need to be a hard block? John Reaves 08:04, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Possibly. It stems from what looked like sockpuppetry, possibly involving gladhand account(s), if you take a look at the talk history, there was a revealing unblock-auto request (also from a block to do with socks). My thought at the time was that the IP had socks on it, looked at least fairly static and not particularly shared, and it looked like at least East and Clowns felt the same way. If new information has come to light and you think the block should be modified, feel free, so long as you look into it and consider things. :) – Luna Santin (talk) 08:10, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

I was asking because of User_talk:RedNeckIQ55#Unblock. He seems like a legitimate user. John Reaves 08:21, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

I saw that myself and was about to comment. Kwsn (Ni!) 08:24, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I think that's another sock. If you dig a bit, several users have been mentioned and/or blocked as socks, here, including:

• 24.6.161.54 (talk · contribs)
• BigFrank102 (talk · contribs)
• Tony360X (talk · contribs)
• Cockmaster500 (talk · contribs)
• BigFrank100 (talk · contribs)
• Tony300 (talk · contribs)
• BigFrank101 (talk · contribs)

Several of them all registered to participate in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Controversial literature and to harass a few people, back in February. A few more showed up in October. I notice RedNeckIQ55 (talk · contribs) was most recently active on 15 November, the same day some of the other socks were registered... and started editing back in February, about the same time all this socking began... and was editing at Controversial literature during that period, and the Category:Survival horror video games CfD other socks were used in. Not to mention several of them are editing in very similar subject areas. They all seem to have a lot in common, more than can be explained by any common coincidence. – Luna Santin (talk) 08:34, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Wow I can't believe how many sock puppets are in some way connected to my blocking from the current IP Address. I really would like not to be entangled into all this so I will just wait out the 2 weeks block of this IP Address. I would also assure you Luna Santin that I'm no vandal or sock puppet and I will respect your opinion on the blocking for the entire two weeks or when this issue has been resolved. - RedNeckIQ55 (talk) 19:47, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

LOOK

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard%2FIncidents&diff=173009827&oldid=173008017

This is clearly administrator abuse.

1. Admin is mad at a checkuser request. Blocks the person. Then uses the excuse that the person is already blocked so no checkuser should be run. A very convincing and specious argument. 2. Admin then page protects the user's talk page so the user can never ask for unblock by uninvolved admin. 3. Complaint appears on ANI so the admin deletes the ANI post and blocks the person who made the edit AND page protects their user page so they can't seek unblock. 4. Admin then calls the complainer a sock of the person that the RFCU was filed against! By calling him a sock, that's a guarantee that nobody will look further.

I saw the ANI then saw it disappear causing me to investigate.

I have a suspicion that the admin is the sock and doesn't want the RFCU run.

I'm a deadman for telling you this. That's what wikipedia is becoming. Do the right thing and be killed (like the others I saw). Jeske needs to be de-sysoped. He's the next Ryulong, a very controversial and savage admin. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eyeopener (talk • contribs) 00:13, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

You're mentioning a lot about this admin, that admin, some checkuser request, and apparently really blatant abuse, but you're not taking any trouble to link any of this so that I might actually look into it. You'll need to be specific. Which admin? Which user? Which request? What abuse? Who, what, when, where, why, and how? And why are you registering sockpuppets to spam all over the place? Probably better off emailing ArbCom. – Luna Santin (talk) 01:46, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

User talk:86.139.179.254

Woops I was reviewing this guy's contribs and blocked while you were discussing on the talk page. Feel free to revert my block :). -- lucasbfr ^talk 13:31, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Nah, they pretty much deserved it by then. ;) I was only hesitating as long as I was to make sure there wasn't something else afoot. They look pretty trollish and were bound to get booted out soon enough, anyway. Appreciate the thought, though. – Luna Santin (talk) 13:32, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Porcupine (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

I demand block for this user. Look deeper to see his behaviour. --Sambure (talk) 15:13, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Both of you just need to breathe for a minute and calm down. Instead of looking for ways to escalate the conflict, let it simmer for a bit so things improve. Let the AN/I thread handle things. – Luna Santin (talk) 15:15, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

All right thank you. That man was jeleous because all the people agree with me to keep the large series of articles.Sambure (talk) 15:19, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

I wasn't that jealous, actually. I was more annoyed that you kept posting badly-spelled messages all over my nice clean talkpage.--Porcupine (prickle me! · contribs · status) 15:28, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

ANI - I agree

I applaud your plan; thanks very much. However, I would like Sambure reprimanded over this indescribably childish edit.

I would like to suggest a solution: we both get blocked for two hours, followed by which we don't come back. How's it sound?--Porcupine (prickle me! · contribs · status) 15:23, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

We'll see. ;) Would like to get out of this without pressing those buttons, but that depends on the two of you, mostly. – Luna Santin (talk) 15:25, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

I am a constructive and not a destroying person, (like others, I will not tell you the name) I write articles and not fill the other pages with rules and quations to support my inability to write...You know who I mean, I will not tell the name.Sambure (talk) 15:26, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

The problem is, Sambure presses my buttons. Like that comment above, for example.--Porcupine (prickle me! · contribs · status) 15:27, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Many other pushed your buttom I suppose. Than your place is not here pal.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Sambure (talk • contribs)

Well, you are intentionally trying to piss me off, admittedly... Porcupine (prickle me! · contribs · status) 15:32, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&type=block&page=User:Porcupine

I forget him, Oh God he was blocked many times..But I hope my article will not be deleted. Sambure (talk) 15:30, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Ooh, what's that doing there?--Porcupine (prickle me! · contribs · status) 15:32, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

If you keep fighting on Luna's page, I will block the both of you. You are, however welcome to argue on my talk page. east.718 at 15:34, November 22, 2007

Apologies on behalf of Sambure for abusing this talkpage. I actually came here to chat to Luna and found this other guy's harassment of me here - check the history!--Porcupine (prickle me! · contribs · status) 15:35, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

S prot

No problem, open proxies are a specialist subject :), cheers --Herby ^{talk thyme} 16:34, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

RFCU clerk

I have signed up to be an RFCU clerk. I'm an admin and done lots of SSP work and some minor stuff at RFCU. Can you add me to the IRC RFCU clerk room and grant me the bot access? Thanks. — Rlevse • Talk • 21:52, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

You should be good to get in. Pretty quiet channel, these days, though... I think the bot's on "vacation." :< – Luna Santin (talk) 22:02, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

2007 Australian Election discussion page thing.

Thanks for your input. I was beginning to think I was going insane... Duggy 1138 (talk) 10:45, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Probably drowned in the attention going to the election, itself. Ultimately, it's not going to be a huge deal, either way. Might be best if everybody moves on in some salvaged spirit of cooperation, but that's just my take on things. – Luna Santin (talk) 10:46, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm a little burnt on the election pages myself at the moment. You know that kick in the gut feeling you get after something like this. I'm just surprised by the behaviour of certain people, normally there are arguments of fact, a debate, but the "don't care" or the "some people are more important than you" attitude in this incident really shocked me.

However, your support (rather, you unbias position) has made me feel a lot happier about what has happened. Once again, thanks.

Duggy 1138 (talk) 10:53, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the help in getting my IP unblocked (70.52.172.145). xD

--Syst3mfailur3 (talk) 03:40, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Replied to your talk page. :) – Luna Santin (talk) 09:59, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Redirections for Deletion

Hello there,

I see you know how to delete redirect pages. Can you please get some deleted for me? On this template, there are a few inconsistencies. Every presidency page should not, in theory, link to the president himself. For example, the article Presidency of James Monroe does not exist, and consequently, does not redirect to James Monroe. However, a few presidency links on here due indeed redirect to the actual president, and these redirection pages should be deleted. The following articles are:

• Presidency of John Adams
• Presidency of James Madison
• Presidency of Andrew Jackson
• Presidency of Franklin D. Roosevelt
• Presidency of George H. W. Bush

Thanks! =) --MosheA (talk) 04:57, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

While admins technically can delete pages at any time, it's usually a good idea to keep to procedures in usual circumstances -- I don't think these are quite speedy candidates, unless I'm missing something. ;) Would be happy to help compile a redirects for deletion discussion, if you wanted to bring up your request there, though. – Luna Santin (talk) 10:04, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, please. =) That would be great. --MosheA (talk) 16:21, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Sure thing, the nomination is currently up at WP:RFD#Presidency redirects. – Luna Santin (talk) 21:19, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Re: that autoblock

I remember why I had this blocked. It's the individual in Canada who whitewashes all mentions of Saban's productions from articles they belong in and has also changed dates and whatnot on several other pages. I have tried to contact the ISP, but they have not replied, at all.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 03:49, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Regarding Britney Spears on Wheels

Luna, I hope you didn't think I was impersonating an administrator. I just didn't think any administrator wanted to waste their time with that kind of unblock request. Maser ^(Talk!) 06:49, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Oh, by the way, ever consider becoming a mediator? Maser ^(Talk!) 07:09, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Not at all, some unblock requests are just really stinkin' obvious. :p As far as mediating, I've tried it a few times, I usually go for cases with multiple people involved. Something I can practice on a smaller scale, probably. ;) Appreciate the note, though! – Luna Santin (talk) 22:15, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for November 26th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 48	26 November 2007	About the Signpost

Arbitration Committee elections: Candidate profiles	WikiWorld comic: "Cursive"
News and notes: Ombudsman commission, fundraiser, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
WikiProject Report: Education in Australia	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

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) 08:18, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

important

– Gurch 09:55, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Kitty! :D Is that how they get all those "interns" down in Florida? – Luna Santin (talk) 22:16, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Sorry.

I'm really sorry. I was not the one messing with the page. I am working on a report on The Enlightenment Period and my friend was messing with my computer while I was preparing something for me to eat. I'm sorry, it won't happen again. This apology might be unnecessary, but I don't like people thinking of me as a bad person. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TheManInTheBox66 (talk • contribs) 01:49, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Replied to user's talk. – Luna Santin (talk) 04:17, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Arbcom

I'm just curious, would you be interested in running for the arbitration committee elections? I think you would make a great canadate!--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. (talk) 02:44, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Awhoops, missed replying to this one. I had thought about it, but wasn't sure if I'd be able to commit the time and effort this upcoming year. There's still plenty for me to do, without being an arbitrator. :) – Luna Santin (talk) 21:12, 4 December 2007 (UTC)