User talk:AmiDaniel/Archive4

This is an archive of past discussions. Its contents should be preserved in their current form. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Mirador Instant Mesenger

I have added a description for Mirador Instant Messenger since it is a server based instant messenger solution if i need to edit portion of the text then i will do it but there are descriptions for sametime live server etc so what should i do exactly to keep the listing —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Upswing (talk • contribs) .

Why even bother re-creating the article? If it is obviously an advertisement, and will just end up at AfD again, shouldn't WP:SNOW be considered? --Hetar 06:05, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Hmm ... I tend to disagree. 23.100 hits on Google means it has at least some notability; I feel the writing wasn't particularly encyclopedic, but it has a lot of room to improve. I certainly don't think that WP:SNOW would come into the question, but let's give the article some time and see where it's at in a week or so. If it hasn't improved then I will personally nominate it for AfD. AmiDaniel (Talk) 07:42, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Moderator offer

I'd love to be a moderator; however, if turning me into one causes too much stress and work, then I'd rather you don't for your sake. But if there is an opening, sure! P.S. Also, I like the edit summaries; especially the Rammstein. :P _-M ^o P-_ 06:03, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

And I noticed that my Awards page has been going around a bit. Nice to see that my evil plan for world domination on Wikipedia is working. >:) _-M ^o P-_ 06:03, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Note: These were posted above, but I think you missed them as they were hidden away.

Ahh ... sorry. I really need to get better at checking to see if more than one message has been posted for me lol. I forgot to add you to the mods. Let me do that in a sec, and it's no trouble at all. Oh, and I hope you don't mind, but I rearranged and modified the userbox you put on my userpage--it gave me a whole new row of boxes! lol AmiDaniel (Talk) 06:13, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Oh, it isn't any problem at all :) And just a question, do we get a manual? As if we do, I'd like to read it so I know what my tasks are. However, I should go sleep soon; good night, and thanks! :) _-M ^o P-_ 06:21, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Ditto here... I don't think I have been added either... sorry!!!Eagle (talk) (desk) 06:23, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Oh, and my Vandalproof, for some reason, doesn't want to let me use the top 8 rollback buttons; they're always grey. _-M ^o P-_ 06:38, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

(carriage return), yeah, thats another bug... The solution for me was to 1) go to file>startpage or 2) exit the program and reopen.

I get that every once in a while too, but I simply log back in... I really forgot to report that... :-(... don't kill me.Eagle (talk) (desk) 07:05, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

I reloaded Monobook twice outside of Vandalproof and inside it; exited and reopened 3 times; still no change. _-M ^o P-_ 07:09, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Uh, are you logged in??? and have you hit "update???". Else, you have a bug, and it needs to go on the bug page... Problem is that this program is not written in my primary language... I get the "gist" but the specifics, I can't help beyond recognizing patterns and bugs that I have had... such as the timers misfiring:-).(also because I don't have source code just a reason, not a request... sorry AmiDaniel:-))Eagle (talk) (desk) 07:17, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

I'm really sorry, but I am dead tired right now. I'll have to deal with this tomorrow--you can leave it here or add it to the bugs page. Good news is that I, more or less, finished the stub sorter. Parsing the fucking data from Wikipedia:Stub types into the tree was an absolute bitch (why does MS have to make all of their controls so goddamn complicated and illogical! and hasn't anyone on Wikipedia considered a table as opposed to a bunch of bullet points mixed in with random and irrelevant text when organizing 1962 various categories of stubs?!?!?!?!?!) But I'm done bitching now ... sorry, insomnia's catching up to me. Anyway, I'll do my best to get back to you (both) tomorrow. Sorry. AmiDaniel (Talk) 07:36, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

_-M ^o P-_ I will leave the choice up to you, though have you tried restarting your computer??? You deciede, bug list or not, if it is still here tommarrow, I will definately move it to the bug page, as that is where we should keep all of the critters.:-)Eagle (talk) (desk) 07:41, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Thus, I hereby order you to GO TO BED, we need you in good shape... at least for awhile:-) Eagle (talk) (desk) 07:41, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Mirador Instant Messenger

No worries, if you think it can be kept as notable I have no problems whatsoever with it, its cleaned up a fair bit and not exactly G4. -- Tawker 06:05, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Alright, thanks for your understanding. I'll check back on it in a couple days to see what shape it's in, as I feel this may just be a new user with good intentions who's editing at a slower-than-veteran rate. AmiDaniel (Talk) 06:10, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Next version

Sorry to ask, but it would be nice to have the next version, as least the bug fixes... that way I can dump about 3 more bugs on you!!! Eagle (talk) (desk) 07:35, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Cheers-- and good night!!!

Oh, and would you like me to archive about half this page for you??? It is getting rather long:-) sorry about that!!!Eagle (talk) (desk) 07:36, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

• falls asleep* Let me get back to you tomorrow, when I'm coherent enought to understand what the word coherent means. AmiDaniel (Talk) 07:44, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Edge hippies

AmiDaniel: the edge hippies article is straight vanity/OR/nonsense. I am putting it on VFD AFD and taking off the merge tags. This merge suggestion will just start a furore among sXe people who are unfamiliar with Wikipedia protocol, and will involve far more expenditure of energy than can be justified for some kid's narcissistic little project. Mgekelly - Talk 08:02, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Hey, I apologize about the Egdge hippies → Straight edge merger. I was just on my way to bed when I came across that article, and my first instinct was to speedy it but instead, for some odd reason, decided to propose a merger. Afterward, I looked into the topic a bit more, and it only returns something like 30 hits on Google, so I do definitely think it falls under WP:CSD. I totally agree that this kind of article should not be encouraged, and so I'll go vote to delete now. Thanks for your message, and again I apologize for the inconvenience. AmiDaniel (Talk) 17:06, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

That's completely cool. It is really nice to encounter a Wikipedian who is so reasonable! Mgekelly - Talk 00:26, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

My RfA

Thank you for voting at my RFA. Even though you did not vote for me, your counsel was appreciated. In the next few months, I intend to work on expanding my involvement in other namespaces and try a few different subjects than in the past. - CTSWynekenTalk

Moderators

So that is how you set the Mods! I assume it only works when you do it?

Prodego ^talk 00:30, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Yep, it only works when I do it. I don't do it that way to be dictatorial; I'm just a lazy programmer :-p. lol. AmiDaniel (Talk) 02:18, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I don't think it would not be smart to let other users add moderators, especially if it were the mods who could do it, because then one person could... Prodego ^talk 02:24, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

By the way, if it is the length of the summary that is the restriction on the number of Mods, you still have 70 characters left (edit summaries hold 200), so you can probably add a few more if you want. Prodego ^talk 02:29, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Page blanking

Hmm... I do know at that time I started up Vandalproof, but it kinda froze on me, so I used Alt+Ctrl+Delete to forcibly kill it. I can't remember making any edits to that page, and the summary is wierd, so I think it may be a bug. _-M ^o P-_ 02:36, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Edge hippies 2

i was just wondering why it is such a big deal and an opposing inconvenience to delete the edge hippies. i dont believe anyone has the right to call someone a sock puppet, as an insult. are the edge hippies discriminative in any possible way? (Talk) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Merchantofvenice (talk • contribs) .

It has nothing to do with whether the group insults anyone; it has to do with the fact that the movement is non-notable. A search returns 30 hits on Google, none of which are reliable sources and many of which have nothing to do with the movement itself. If you can find a reputable source to support the notability of the movement, it would likely sway many to your side. Frankly, I believe the article should have been speedily deleted, but in the interest of not insulting its creator (you) I did not tag it as such, which I've now recognized as a mistake. My tagging of these 3 accounts as sock puppets was not meant as an insult but rather as an attempt to prevent potential "ballot stuffing." You've created these accounts in an attempt to convice others that more individuals support the article's inclusion than actually do. Based upon the user creation log and the users' contributions, there is little doubt in my mind that these accounts are indeed sockpuppets, but if they are not sockpuppets then please substantiate your claim by requesting a CheckUser. AmiDaniel (Talk) 04:23, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Evil Grey

I was just wondering if you could shed some light on my problem; I'm forced to use VandalProof without any of the cool features, because for some wierd reason, the "Revert/warn" buttons are always greyed out. When a page loads, first the I.E. error thing flashes up, then the buttons flash from grey to black and back. I'm not sure how to correct this (have uninstalled and reinstalled a few times). _-M ^o P-_ 06:25, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Did this begin happening before I after I made you a moderator? It seems as though you've had a few difficulties since then, thus my question. AmiDaniel (Talk) 06:45, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

I believe it was happenening before, yes. _-M ^o P-_ 06:55, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Hmm ... are you also getting IE script errors frequently when VP loads pages (this should hopefully be fixed in the next version). I posted a temporary fix for this on the bugs page that might help here. Are you still able to use the tabs--recent changes, watchlist, etc.? AmiDaniel (Talk) 06:58, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

I can use everything except the rollback buttons at the top when viewing a diff, and these are the main method of reverting vandalism. And yes, I do get the annoying popup error thing, but I downloaded your application that kills it. _-M ^o P-_ 07:47, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Disregard my e-mail request

Hi, I haven't seen you have tests, or else I wouldn't have bothered you. Either way, I managed to salvage the bulk of my black list through my vandalism log, and VandalProof works fine after re-installing. Good luck with your exam! --Chodorkovskiy ^(talk) 06:42, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

No problem at all. I'm not on Wikibreak yet--starting this weekend (you can thank the collegeboard! lol). Anyway, I'm a little confused as this is the first I've heard of your problem. I'm glad you got it fixed, whatever it was though. AmiDaniel (Talk) 06:48, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

I sent you an e-mail yerstaday, asking for you to send me your black list, since I accidentally deleted mine. Maybe there was a glitch in Wikipedia. --Chodorkovskiy ^(talk) 06:53, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Oh, sorry. My junk mail filter weeds out every message from people not on my safe list. I hope others haven't tried to email me and not gotten any response; maybe I should put a note about that here. Anyway, glad you got it sorted out--The next version of VP will have global whitelists/blacklists, which I think will be an excellent boost to the tool's functionality. AmiDaniel (Talk) 06:55, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Re: delete please

To continue User_talk:AmiDaniel/Archive3#delete_please...

I didn't know about {{db-author}}, I've always used {{delete}}. I learn something new (almost) every day!

and now for something completely different...

I'm not doing much VandalProof stuff (since it keeps giving me script errors and not acknowledging my sign-in), but I've also had troubles with IE so I've deleted the IE .exe until I can resolve the issue (which isn't VandalProof) but I'll moderate the pages/requests for now and if there's anything you need, just let me know.

A plate of cookies while you're studying!

File:Champkitty.jpg

A cute kitten on your lap while you eat those cookies.

— nathanrdotcom ^{(T • C • W)} 07:17, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the cookies and the kitty! I actually should be in bed right now, but instead I'm reorganizing my new CDs (I have a serious addiction to new CDs... keep me away from the record store!) Today I bought:

• The Cure by Atreyu → Soooo emocore, but actually not that bad
• War Within → I've seen Shadows Fall live, met them, and have an autographed poster hanging in my room, but this is the first of their CDs I've bought lol.
• Two by Earshot → Not the best ever, but decent.
• and L.A. Woman → Who doesn't love The Doors?

Anyway more than you wanted to know lol ... so sleepy. But yeah, I'm sorry about your problems with VP; I think I've got the script errors cured in the next release, though the temp fix on the bugs page might help for now. It will likely be a while before I get 1.2 ready for download, but I am working on it. Thanks again. AmiDaniel (Talk) 07:46, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome. Yeah, I know of the bug fix and have it here. Something on my system is making MSIE connect to random ports on IP 1.2.3.4 (all spyware programs I have report nothing), so yeah..I deleted MSIE for now.

Don't attempt to talk and sleep at the same time, sleepyhead *puts a blanket over you* It's that time for me too. — nathanrdotcom ^{(T • C • W)} 08:00, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Enjoy your Wikibreak!

Enjoy your break Daniel, I have just returned from one myself (in case you were wondering why I've been so quiet!) Will hold the reigns in your absense. Have a great one! - Glen ^T_C (Stollery) 09:53, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Good luck with your exams...

...just wondering, it sounds like you'll be facing either GCSEs or A-Levels, which one is it? Good luck! -- gtdp ^(T)/_(C) 19:19, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

...for adding that comment to my post on WP:AIV. My first couple of posts there, so I'm still getting the hang of it. Anyway did you see the other post I made to the page? What do you think of that? Should I have reported that or sorted it out myself?

Thanks

Srikeit^{(talk ¦ ✉)} 21:06, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

No problem at all. I personally feel that Wankash (talk · contribs) is just a confused newbie trying to make a WP:POINT. It's clearly not appropriate for him to do that, but I wouldn't call it vandalism just yet. If you remove the tag and he replaces it again, etc., despite warnings then it may be worthing posting an alert. Typically WP:AIV is only used for reporting obvious vandalism, and in only in cases where the user has been sufficiently warned and continued to vandalize within two hours of receiving a final warning. 21:25, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Elvis Presley

I think we should remove the section "Mama's Boy" from the Elvis Presley page. There is no credible source to suggest that Presley had sex with his mother. No reputable biographer as ever made that statement and the user (Onefortyone) who is pushing the change has a history of citing to questionable sources, purposefully misinterpreting secondary sources, and overtly pushing his own agenda on the Presley page. I think we need significant evidence before we accuse someone, in an encyclopedia no less, of incest.

Lochdale —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lochdale (talk • contribs) .

Not vandalism: warning removed. See the user's talk page or Incorrectly Reverted Edits for more details. AmiDaniel (Talk) 22:34, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

It should be noted that Lochdale repeatedly removed content from the Elvis Presley article simply because the well-sourced paragraphs were not in line with his personal opinion. I think this is vandalism. See, for instance, [1], [2], [3], [4] and [5], etc., etc.Onefortyone 22:47, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

You are wrong, Lochdale. The section should not be removed, as it is well-sourced. There are quotes from a book by reputed Elvis biographer Peter Guralnick and many other books on Elvis. The claims by the singer's stepmother that Elvis had sex with his mother, are discussed by reputed Elvis expert Greil Marcus in his book, Double Trouble: Bill Clinton and Elvis Presley in a Land of No Alternativse (2000), p.3 and 6. Onefortyone 22:33, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Actually it isn't well sourced. You have twisted sources in an effort to push your own agenda. For example, of the 2,000 plus books written about Presley, you managed to find two that even come close to supporting your position. You have what can only be described as an obsession with Presley's sex life. The quotes from Guralnik that Elvis was close with his mother do not say, suggest or even imply that Elvis was having an incestual relationship with her. To say that they do is an out and out fabrication. Moreover, Elvis' stepmother makes these claims in an unpublished manuscript that is so out of left field that noone will actually publish it. Lastly, Marcus does not claim that Presley had an incestous relationship with his mother. You either misrepresent sources or provide less than credible sources. The section should be removed. Lochdale

This may be your personal opinion. Marcus clearly cites sources which deal with the claim. You cannot deny that I have quoted from several independent sources (books and articles on Elvis). Significantly, there was also the claim by User:Ted Wilkes, who has now been blocked for one year, that my contributions are fabrications. The personal agenda of Lochdale, who seems to be an Elvis fan, is to remove critical content from the article page. See his contributions: [6], [7], [8], [9] and [10], etc. But this is not the way it works here. Onefortyone 22:59, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Comment' Could you please move this discussion to Talk:Elvis Presley? I'm having to archive my talk page on a biweekly basis as it is and would rather not constantly be prompted that I have new messages everytime you two respond to each other about a matter in which I'm not involved. Thanks. AmiDaniel (Talk) 23:05, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Some amazing way to talk in private prior to 4/30?

--Avillia (RfC vs CVU) 22:40, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

• scratches head* Are you asking if I would be available to talk to you in private prior to 4/30? If so, then I'll probably be free tonight in IRC or wherever. AmiDaniel (Talk) 22:47, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

What's your IRC username? --Avillia (RfC vs CVU) 00:15, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Waiit :P

If you wish, you can take me off, but I figured out what was doing it. I opened up the moderator tools thing to approve users; both times, a bunch of messages flashed up which I closed. I think thats it. So if I avoid using that, I should be good. P.S. I use Firefox, not IE. _-M ^o P-_ 01:30, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

A less serious form of the Undefined bug just occurred, Stollery had the bug. Prodego ^talk 18:09, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Adminship

Would you accept a nomination, your additions have been amazing and the tools could surely help you out a bit. I noticed just today that you investigate AIV a lot, perhaps the shiny buttons would be of good use to you. Would you accept a nomination at this time? -- Tawker 05:01, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

I'd second that motion, but I don't think he has the time. Then again, who am I to tell people what to do... AmiDaniel! Whatever your decision is, I (and I'm sure everyone else here as well) will support you. --Chodorkovskiy ^(talk) 05:11, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Damn! we had an edit conflict of thoughts, Tawker. I was gonna do the same! Anyway, Daniel was very helpful to me last night in WP:AIV & I was wondering "Damn, why is this guy not yet an admin?" Anyway if you don't mind Tawker, I would like to co-nominate him. Of course, If you accept, Daniel.. Srikeit^{(talk ¦ ✉)} 05:16, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the offer, Tawker (and thanks for your support, Chodorkovskiy and Srikeit!), and I would most graciously accept the nomination in a couple of weeks; however, I'm just now going into some very stressful times with school (thus my WikiBreak above). I certainly feel that I could use SysOp tools for a lot of good (helping to stop vandalism, assisting new users with complicated page moves, speedily deleting pages, etc.)--if anything I could incorporate SysOp features into my app. I've actually studied the tools quite extensively in an attempt to find a way to incorporate them, but in the end found them too difficult to implement without being able to use them myself. I am a little concerned, however, that I don't quite live up to the RfA standards--it seems that most users like to see 6 months experience (whereas I've really only been around since Feb) and most oppose RfA's when the user has not helped to bring an article to featured status (which I have not). In any case, I'm quite humbled that you, the owner of the world renowned (or at least Wikirenowned) Tawkerbot and Tawkerbot2, as well as an excellent admin, would nominate me for adminship. Thanks! I will definitely accept once I'm done with my exams. AmiDaniel (Talk) 05:29, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi there - I'm pretty sure that < 5% of successful RfA candidates actually have done an FA. The time factor may be discounted in ligh tof Vandal Proof of course.ßlηguγΣη | Have your say!!! - review me 05:32, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Well, making a tool that is the next big Popups isn't a small thing. I'd gladly support you. _-M _o P-_ 05:33, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

From the Internal Edit Counter;

Total edits 5600

Distinct pages edited 3135

Average edits/page 1.786

First edit 07:01, 9 January 2006

(main) 1515

Talk 47

User 761

User talk 2992

Image 16

Image talk 3

Template 6

Template talk 2

Help 1

Category 1

Category talk 1

Wikipedia 205

Wikipedia talk 50

If anyone opposed that record, I'm afraid I would have to call a few hits. _-M _o P-_ 05:35, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

If/when the RfA succeeds, you've got to outdo Tawker; I expect cake and ice cream. Joe 06:07, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Well, VandalProof is in the same scope as Tawkerbot2, now if only I could fix this javascript error and get it to work :o -- Tawker 06:00, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

I was also going to drop you a message about nominating you for adminship. I was just waiting until the end of May when you'd be back from your Wikibreak. In my experience, editcountis is definitely there. Your numbers look fine to me, but I think having 300+ project edits would go pretty far in pleasing some. At your rate, you'll probably have that many if you wait until you get back from your Wikibreak anyway. You also certainly don't need FA experience to become an admin. However, people also look to your article contributions but your work on Sinzig and Götter Auf Abruf looks good to me. As mentioned previously, the other issue is time. Just ask Tawker about how people like to see time. That will probably be the only thing to get you any opposes, although I am very confident your RfA would pass. Personally, I'd love for VP to be able to integrate admin rollback and possibly a blocking mechanism. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 10:21, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

{{prod)} tag

Hi Daniel, just a wee heads up that the prod function needs to be changed to be {{subst:prod)} as it somes up with an error at mo. No biggie just FYI. God bless! - Glen ^T_C (Stollery) 18:57, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

AIV

➨ ≡ЯΞDVΞRS≡ awards this Barnstar to AmiDaniel for tireless vandalism hunting and putting in the hard work Wikipedia needs.

Thanks for helping out on WP:AIV. The extra hand is most welcome and appreciated. ➨ ≡ЯΞDVΞRS≡ 22:10, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the barnstar! I'm glad to hear that my actions on WP:AIV have been found to be helpful. AmiDaniel (Talk) 23:22, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

what did i do? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Chelseachav (talk • contribs) .

i didnt do anything wrong and you are giving me warnings. all i wrote was that he was a liverpool fc supporter and you have a go at me?????? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Chelseachav (talk • contribs) .

Many complaints have been raised about your contributions to these articles including a request for administrative intervention. Consensus among the major contributors to these articles is that you have been intentionally inserting false information into these articles, which constitutes vandalism. Please stop at once and do not make any more changes to these articles without discussing them first. AmiDaniel (Talk) 23:17, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

I went ahead and assumed good faith. Some of his earlier edits were clearly vandalism, but the newer ones seemed more like newbie mistakes and a genuine good faith effort. I have left a more detailed explanation on his/her talk page. However, if the user continues to make poor edits, please relist on WP:AIV. WP has had some great editors that have gotten off to a slow start and are now a real asset to the community, so I'm trying not to bite the newbie. --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 23:36, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Yep, I agree with your reasons. I sort of jumped the gun on the last two in light of history rather than assuming good faith. I also responded on his talk page in the form of an edit conflict lol. AmiDaniel (Talk) 23:37, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

BTW, I tend to agree that many of our better contributors got off to fairly rough starts--it takes a while to learn the ropes. I agree that blocking him when his intention was to contribute in good faith would be biting the newbie, so I think this probably is best. I just wish that he would slow down and try discussing these changes before implementing (and if he would use edit summaries!! grr lol). Anyway, thanks for your help. AmiDaniel (Talk) 23:43, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

Bug page

Do you mind if I put old (fixed on current release) bugs on an archive. This will make the bug report page easier to read, and shorter. Thanks for making me a moderator, I will soon begin to update bugs, right now I think we have most of them on the startup page.Eagle (talk) (desk) 00:18, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

P.s. Enjoy your wikibreak!!!.../ studying:-

rfa

thanks for your kind words on my RFA AmiDaniel. Heh, I always laugh when I see your name, because I AM daniel. Anyway, good luck on your exams. I hope you do better than I did on mine =P ⇒ SWATJester ^Ready Aim _Fire! 00:56, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Antarctica

It is a true statement that the geographic south pole is the magnetic north pole. Look up magnetism on a physics website. I'm in AP physics. I know what I'm talking about. 24.163.169.250 05:11, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Hate to tell you that's not true. I've taken a few MIT physics courses, plus these references: ref 1, ref 2, ref 3, ref 4, etc. It is a fact, though, that the magnetic poles flip occasionally (maybe every 10,000 years or so). But now, the south magnetic pole is indeed in the southern hemisphere. If you don't mind, please post your references. Nationalparks 05:19, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Thanks, Nationalparks! You got back to him with sources before I even had a chance to read his comment! In any case, if that edit had been in good faith it would have been his first (he just got blocked a few moments ago). AmiDaniel (Talk) 05:23, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

I made good edits to the Ann Coulter article.

--Daveinaustin 05:49, 29 April 2006 (UTC)--Daveinaustin 05:49, 29 April 2006 (UTC) I am going to bed now, but I will go through them line by line tomorrow, and I'll cite specific sources. For instance, it is very clear (established fact) that

• Franken's accusations against Coulter in the book Lies and the Lying Liars were 90 percent wrong! He got one tiny, silly error about Dale Earnhardt right, but was wrong on all else (and half right on a Newsweek editors father, who was confused with grandfather); I have read both Franken's book and all of Coulters. I know what I am talking about. I will cite chapter and verse when I make the changes again.

• All the other edits I made were responsible. For instance, there were a bunch of links/footnotes about alleged "racism" by coulter . . if you follow the links, it turns out they don't refer to racism at all!

I'll go through all the other edits, too. Whoever has been reverting my stuff on this, franken, and david remnick, is dead wrong. I have probably read more of all their stuff than virtually anyone on here. Really. I am not a crank.

If you were sincere, then you'll have my apologies, amongst those of others. But one hallmark of cranks and vandals on Wikipedia is their refusal to use the talk page and edit summary to gain consensus for their actions, or even to provide a justification. Please use edit summaries and the talk page in the future so you can demonstrate your good intentions. Kasreyn 08:03, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

RfC Help

Hi there. I'm a bit new to wikipedia so I was wondering if you could perhaps help me out. I'm sure that you've seen a few examples of what the user Daveinaustin has been doing as of late, and I'd like to have a RfC concerning this. Do you think you could help me out here? I'm a bit clueless as to how I should go about it.

Thanks!

Mister Mister 06:16, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I've seen what he's doing to the Ann Coulter article--adding POV statements and removing legitimate assertions. In looking at the page's history, he has indeed reverted three times (thus violating WP:3RR) but as he is now inactive a block would be quite unnecessary at this time. It seems as though he's just begun this today, so I feel an WP:RfC would be a bit of an overkill. If he continues with this again later, you should add {{3RR}} to his talk page and if he refuses to stop then report him to an administrator (though 3RR blocks are usually short--maybe 24-48 hours). Then you may want to consider mediation or opening an RfC, but for now I'd say to just try and open up a line of communication with him and explain what's wrong with his edits. He's a very new user with a very strong opinion who hasn't quite grasped that this is an encyclopedia article rather than a persuasive essay, so make that clear to him. I'm starting my Wikibreak tomorrow, so I likely won't be able to help you if you need to take the matter further; however, I'd suggest if you continue to have problems that you contact an administrator (I'd suggest User:PS2pcGAMER as he seems very level-headed and good at dealing with newbies). I'll still be available for a couple of hours though, so I'll be able to help you out as much as I can tonight. AmiDaniel (Talk) 06:27, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

AIV

I agree with your removing 206.207.158.202 from the list because it has not vandalized for awhile, but you were dead wrong in calling it a content dispute, see [11] and you might also want to see the rest of his contribs. Pegasus1138^{Talk | Contribs | Email} ---- 06:46, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I just went to look at his contribs after you posted this and saw that he has posted the same nonsense on Hillary's article yet again (after a one hour pause ... must be passing period or something). I totally agree that such edits are vandalism, and have relisted him on AIV. I merely remarked that many of his reverted edits were content disputes as some of them appeared arguably in good faith (though closer examination of his contributions to Nader and Clinton shows that he really was just adding nonsense). The lesbian thing is outright blatant vandalism, and his constant reinsertion of it should warrant a block. Sorry for my faulty edit summary, and thanks for pointing this out to me. AmiDaniel (Talk) 07:05, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

No problem, at least the vandals have a sense of humor, otherwise it would be boring... Though I can hardly say that the Hillary Clinton lesbian thing is original. Pegasus1138^{Talk | Contribs | Email} ---- 07:07, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Nope, not particularly original, though it is refreshing to see politicaly-minded vandalism as opposed to the typical "FALLOUT BOY SUCKS!" (can't get more unoriginal than that, although I have to agree). Who knows, maybe this vandal was Sean Hannity himself! lol AmiDaniel (Talk) 07:11, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

VP

Hello, I answered on my talk page. --Mbimmler 08:11, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Bestätigung auf deutscher Seite abgegeben. --Mbimmler 20:34, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

User:Mbimmler

Cool that he's been added just makes me look stupid for all my recommendations to him just yesterday I guess - Glen ^T_C (Stollery) 21:34, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

No, not stupid at all--you were totally in the right. I just recently saw a similar situation with an AWB user, thus why I decided to look into it a bit more. You're certainly not expected to research every possible account that a user could have on every possible Wikipedia, and if a user ever complains that he has a very active account on another Wiki and you would rather I look into it, please drop me a note. I really wish that all of these accounts could become more centralized so that when a user creates an account on en, it also works on Wiktionary, de, ru, etc.--it would make life a hellofalot easier. AmiDaniel (Talk) 22:14, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply :) I actually did look into his edits and even translated maybe a dozen or so and he is a good editor no doubt. I simply asked if he could do a bit more here first as he was only showing I think maybe 30 mainspace edits here (no antivan stuff) and I just wanted to be sure he had a polite manner about him in english. I would and do look at other wikis when brought to my attention but as i said just wanted to check we had no translation issues. After explaining all that to him it became obvious by his replies that this wasn't an issue in any case, so all's well that end's well :) Do you have your email enabled from wiki BTW? If not you may wanna flick it to me so you can get studying! :) you know we can hold the fort down here! lol - Glen ^T_C (Stollery) 23:51, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

GeorgeMoney

I just want to make sure that my approval of GeorgeMoney is OK with you, although this user has less then 250 article edits, his editing history seemed good, so I approved him. If you believe approving him was incorrect, remove him from the authorized users, and let me know. Thanks, Prodego ^talk 23:53, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

I think you made a good call here (+1500 edits in all namespaces means he's quite active), and edit count certainly shouldn't be the definitive standard in approving/not approving (keep in mind that it only takes two seconds to remove a user from the list if s/he abuses the tool!). I entirely trust your judgment and will leave it up to you and the other mods to decide who to accept or reject--just because I wrote the tool, I have no more say in who may or may not use it than you or any other mod (or user for that matter), and I'd hope that you'd challenge me when I make a bad call (which I'm entirely capable of!). Anyway, I completely trust your judgment, and there's no need to seek my permission to accept a user who does not entirely meet the guideline. Thanks for holding down the fort in my absence! AmiDaniel (Talk) 01:21, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

As requested...

Now, pretend that's real and get studying Mr! :) - Glen ^T_C (Stollery) 01:40, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

And, to help you in your quest for a true Wikibreak, I've added you to my VP blacklist (you're only the second non-IP editor there; having warned myself experimentally when first I got the program, I was added, and I've kept myself there, if only because oftentimes one personality will vandalize and the next will have to revert), so if I see a lot of contributions from you, I'll have to come here and castigate you. Then again, I've found that dropping out of school (in part) in order to devote one's time exclusively to Wikipedia isn't all that bad, notwithstanding, of course, that some employers, for whatever reason, seem to prefer actual college degrees to Wikipedia edit counts on a resumé. Joe 05:37, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Lol, yes the thought has crossed my mind to drop out. I think I'll try to finish the whole school thing though--may come in handy in the future. By the way, you may want to add this IP to your blacklist (I've blocked myself from logging in as AmiDaniel). 71.213.171.224 05:42, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Easy solution: Edit C:\windows\system32\drivers\etc\lmhosts (rename lmhosts.sam to lmhosts and edit that instead if it's there) and add:

127.0.0.1 en.wikipedia.org

127.0.0.1 www.wikipedia.org

...then you will never be able to get to Wikipedia during your break ;) (as long as you remember to edit it back) — nathanrdotcom ^{(T • C • W)} 03:19, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

This is kind of off topic, but here goes!

Wouldn't he have to add the file extension back on? And there is an easier way to edit a file without changing the extention.

Put the following into a text file and rename the extension to .reg:

Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00

[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\*\shell\gview]
@="Open With Notepad"

[HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\*\shell\gview\command]
@="C:\\WINDOWS\\NOTEPAD.EXE %1"

then, right click on the .reg file, and select merge. Then a menu will pop up that says, "Are you sure you want to add the information in the file "location of file" to the registry?". Press yes . Now, in the right-click menu of every file, there will be an option to "Open With Notepad".

--GeorgeMoney^{Talk  Contribs} 04:08, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

GeorgeMoney: No. You're missing the point. You need to learn a little of how Windows XP works. Windows XP ships with the file called lmhosts.sam. .sam means sample. You're meant to rename it (proof). No offense, but I crossed out your comment because you're wrong :p — nathanrdotcom ^{(T • C • W)} 01:16, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Welcome template

That's actually {{welcomeg}} (yes, the g signifies that it's the 7th of its kind; there are a lot of welcome templates), which happened to be someone else's personal welcome template and was moved to template space a bit ago. I do agree that a welcomebot would be great; the only downside is that it might somehow be slightly less meaningful than when I welcome people as fast as I can to annoy people in #vandalism-en-wp that have me on their blacklist. --Rory096 03:15, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Thomas the Tank Engine and Friends

I'm sorry for not providing an edit summary, but I only deleted those articles because there is no concrete proof of them. It was someone else who was vandalising the page. I was only fixing it. Please change it back to how it was after I fixed it. TOP 04:57, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

need a wikibreak but just can't leave?

Here is what you do,

1. take a deep breath
2. remove all the stuff about a wikibreak
3. and finally quit school

Then you will never need a wikibreak again. ILovEPlankton 05:26, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Here is how to stay on wikibreak

Just use this script to keep you on your wikibreak. --GeorgeMoney^{Talk  Contribs} 05:30, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! Makes me a little uncomfortable, but I'm desperate. Let's see how it goes. Goodbye Wikipedia! AmiDaniel (Talk) 05:34, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Alright, well now I can't log in, but I can still edit as 71.213.171.224. Hopefully it will at least help though lol. Thanks! 71.213.171.224 05:39, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Maybe I should suggest a range IP block, or, if worst comes to worst, an ICBM at your ISP. _-M _o P-_ 05:48, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

That may be the only solution. Okay, revert any edits I make using this account, and warn me each time ... maybe an admin will come along and block me :-). It's so sad, I can't even use my own VandalProof tool (not that I couldn't get by the security...). BTW, if you see anyone requesting permission to use it named AmiDaniel TestAccount (talk · contribs) or AmiDaniel TestAccount2 (talk · contribs) don't add them to the list, okay? 71.213.171.224 05:54, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

GAHH!!! The damn tool is too easy to hack. It uses local system time rather than Wiki time. Now my computer thinks it's May 21st and I'm back on Wikipedia. Okay, signing off for the very last time. AmiDaniel (Talk) 05:59, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

I caught you using VandalProof! --GeorgeMoney^{Talk  Contribs} 08:22, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

You have been naughty (try to picture someone with a whip). No cookies for you. — nathanrdotcom ^{(T • C • W)} 03:12, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Seems like you're really struggling to stick to your Wikibreak. My advice: pull the plug. That's the ultimate solution. All the other software blocks & script blocks have workarounds. That's what I do when I really have to study. Just pull the plug, hide the extension cord, put blinders on & study. It works wonderfully coz by the time you try to make the connections again you're too ashamed to go through with it!! Srikeit^{(talk ¦ ✉)} 04:25, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Super Toad

Hi, sorry about my early vandalism, i just wanted to add to the site to help it but an admin has deleted my Super Toad article. I got his username and here it is!! Adashiel!!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jlhc (talk • contribs) .

MoP RFA

I think you may have erased Blnguyen's vote in updating the tally. See [12] --Srikeit^{(talk ¦ ✉)} 01:39, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

MoP has restored it. --Srikeit^{(talk ¦ ✉)} 01:42, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Woops, thanks for pointing that out. (This is why I shouldn't edit on Wikibreak!) It looks like it may have been an edit conflict or something--but for some reason it didn't prompt me and saved my edit in place of his, maybe a bug? Either that or I was editing an old version and didn't notice it--all I did was change 57 to 58. I'm certainly glad to hear that MoP's up to 60 supports now though! I hope he succeeds. AmiDaniel (Talk) 01:46, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Wow, I think I've sorted out what happened. I was messing around with my IE settings last night to block me from using WP, and somehow I set my cookies very strangely. I had noticed that my watchlist hadn't changed in hours, whereas it's usually drastically different every five seconds--then I noticed that when I edited a page it was exactly the same as when I last edited it. I tried a hard refresh when looking at my watchlist, and viola! it changed. Apparently it was loading the pages out of memory rather than retrieving them from the actual site--I've now dumped all of my cookies and all of my tifs, and I'll see if I've managed to cure the problem. There's no way I can do a hard refresh every single time I load a page lol. Sorry about that. AmiDaniel (Talk) 03:56, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

If you want, you could have made a 'legal threat' against me...

--Avillia 03:03, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

*scratches head yet again* Que? AmiDaniel (Talk) 04:11, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

The best way to go on a Wikibreak is to get your IP range blocked for WP:NLT. --Avillia 14:34, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

I think you can safely ignore the above comment, there is not a chance in hell anyone is going to block for trying to enforce your software's copyright -- Tawker 15:45, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Sarcasm. --Avillia 16:04, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

I once again submit this as a ideal answer to the WikiBreak problem. I claim that AmiDaniel threatened to sue me for 'reverse engineering' of VandalProof, he agrees right here, he's indef banned, and then I later say that he has agreed to drop all current and further legal action. A effective abuse of WP:NLT to enforce a WikiBreak, no? --Avillia 06:37, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Shameless begging

I was just wondering if I could have my moderator priveledges back, pweeze. I promise to be good, and the main bug was with me accessing the user list; I think that if I only do it when there are users who want to be approved, nothing will happen. You don't have to give them back, of course, but I was just wondering. Thanks, _-M o P-_ 22:59, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

If the problem starts up again, please avoid using the update list function. If you accidentally blank the page please *immmediately* revert both User:AmiDaniel/Welcome to VandalProof and User talk:AmiDaniel/VandalProof back to their previous versions. AmiDaniel (Talk) 23:06, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

By the way, in case I didn't make it clear above, you're back on the mod list. AmiDaniel (Talk) 23:18, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Wikibreak. . . :-) does not sound like fun!!!Eagle (talk) (desk) 01:23, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

DON'T respond to this!!!Eagle (talk) (desk)

Signpost updated for May 1st.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 2, Issue 18	1 May 2006	About the Signpost

Campaign manager resigns over Wikipedia edit	Meetups And Newsworthy International Assemblages
Assorted honors for Jimmy Wales	News and Notes: 4 million articles, 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.

Wiki Break---- come on!!!!

I see you are having a hard time... my suggestion is this... comprimise:-)

1) Leave new users, forums, abuse, and updating the welcome page to the "moderators".

I can respond to any question that is posted on those locations... so should any other moderator:-).

2) respond to difficult bugs that require knowledge of the source code. (like the new user list blanking) ect. respond to other bugs... but if they are really easy leave them to me and other programmers. (I am competent in this area, as I just finished a C++ "pure" arbitrary number class, allows calculations with numbers as large as availible memery:-)---.

Please relize Wikipedia won't fall down just because you are not there!

Now be good, or I won't let you see my source code. . . (not to say that I have even started cleaning it up!!!... exams as well. . . but I only have 2 as I am still in H.S. :-).

sorry about the threat, but we have to find a way to enforce your wikibreak, your grades will hurt you in the long run! YOur absence from wikipedia WON'T

Oops . . . I am bad as well, forgot to sign.

Geeze!!! this time I will actually put the ~~~~'s Eagle (talk) (desk) 01:42, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Lol. Alright, well this will hopefully be my last edit for the night (I've only been at it for about an hour today, so that's not too bad). It's been a nice reprieve from the four hour test I took this morning that I have the feeling I failed :-). Signing off. For a short while at least. AmiDaniel (Talk) 01:44, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

You said so... now go study, or I'll use bot rollback... ;) Titoxd^{(?!? - help us)} 06:10, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Alfons Oscar Saligny

I modified your edits on closing this AfD to what I think is a more reasonable organization, per my argument in the discussion and my edit comments (if we should mention one member of the Academy in its article, I don't think it should be one about whom we, so far, know too little to even have an article.) Hope that's OK with you. u p p l a n d 07:00, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I actually just noticed that. I have absolutely no problem with it; since you seem to know more about the topic than I, or likely any of the "voters," I'm glad you knew what to do with it. AmiDaniel (Talk) 07:04, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi

Hi, I do not like Tom Cruise. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 64.231.241.72 (talk • contribs) .

Okay, thanks for letting me know... AmiDaniel (Talk) 01:14, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't like most root vegetables - Glen ^T_C (Stollery) 04:40, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

*gets on the bandwagon* Uhm..I don't like celery and pickles. — nathanrdotcom ^{(T • C • W)} 01:14, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Your wikibreak

Hey Mister! LOG OFF NOW!! --GeorgeMoney^{Talk  Contribs} 04:46, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

I understand one's making certain edits whilst he/she is on Wikibreak, but nominating an article for deletion?? Tsk, tsk... Joe 04:10, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm taking a break from my Wikibreak. I just had such a pain-in-the-ass day. From 8am to 12pm, I had an English Lit exam; then, from 12-4pm, I had a German Language Exam (with no break in between for lunch!). Yesterday was 4hrs of Calc, and monday was 4hrs of English Language--now I've got one paper to wrap up for tommorow, and another project also due tomorrow--so I'm pulling an all-nighter :-). Then we get to the easy exam week lol. AmiDaniel (Talk) 04:13, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, AmiDaniel = smart person. Who also loves kit kat. *pours Daniel some coffee and puts on "soothing" Rammstein* :D MoppEr ^Speak! 04:18, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Verifiability

Hi,

I have used this site a few times and i wish to inquire how you make sure your information is all completely accurate, due to the fact that anybody can access this website and add their own information, even if it is invalid. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 211.30.98.98 (talk • contribs) .

The factificatior! --Avillia 16:28, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Because we check our facts and revert nonsense? — nathanrdotcom ^{(T • C • W)} 01:11, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

To provide a more clear answer, Wikipedia maintains a set of policies and guidelines that strive to acheive unbiased, verifiable, and well-written articles. The credibility of Wikipedia's articles has been the subject of much debate for exactly the same reason you provided, and it was something that made me quite uncomfortable when I first starting using Wikipedia. Essentialy, Wikipedia is able to maintain the verifiability of its articles through the sheer number of editors, the vast majority of whom are devoted to producing factually accurate and helpful articles. Many users, such as myself, spend a great deal of time identifying and reverting vandalism, as well as developing tools to aid in that task. According to a (Harvard, I believe) study on vandalism some time ago, vandalism is on average reverted within five minutes of its insertion (you can find the link somewhere on Wikipedia:Statistics), and I believe this statistic has likely improved with the advent of tools like Vandal Fighter, popups, and (not meaning to gloat about my own tools) VandalProof. There are also factions of Wikipedians committed to fact checking, though the majority of source verification is done by the numerous contributors to each article. The inability to cite a source for a fact typically results in the fact being removed, as Wikipedia does not tolerate original research. The easiest way to understand how this seemingly incredulous idea of "the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit" actually manages to work is to get involved and start editing! Soon you'll come to understand how promptly inaccurate material is removed from Wikipedia (and it will likely frustrate you quite a bit when you have your first dispute over factuality). I won't deny that many articles out there aren't particularly credible, but the vast majority of articles (and especially the featured articles) are quite astonishingly accurate--and you can help by removing any inaccuracies you find. Thanks for your question, and I hoped this helped some. Feel free to contact me if you have any more questions, and I'll be more than glad to help. AmiDaniel (Talk) 05:24, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Aha, I found the stats link. For some reason it got removed from Wikipedia:Statistics, but I had it stored elsewhere. It was actually an IBM study, which can be found here. AmiDaniel (Talk) 05:31, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Regarding VandalProof

I got your message regarding the program, and I totally understand. I will become more experienced in editing and catching vandals, then I will reapply. Thank you for informing me that I was rejected, though. That way, I didn't have to worry about not finding out and just getting dissed. XD

Quadrius —Preceding unsigned comment added by Quadrius (talk • contribs) 19:10 3 May 2006 (UTC)

May the Force be with you.

Dear AmiDaniel/Archive4,

Thanks for voting on my RFA! I appreciate your faith in me, and was overwhelmed by the positive response to my RFA; for it shows that at least I'm doing something right. :) I've started working to improve myself already, and I hope that next time, things run better, and maybe, just maybe, one day we can bask on the shores of Admintopia together. Thanks and cheers, _-M o P-_ 21:50, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi

Aren't you on a Wikibreak? Anyway, I was wondering something about VandalProof. I spend almost all my time nowadays reverting vandalism (especially on the Green Day and RuneScape articles). I applied for using your VP once before, and I was denied approval because I did not have 250 edits. Now I have 249. But I read closely at what the admin sent me in my "denial" notice and it says in these exact words "... must have at least 250 article edits...". Now does that mean 250 edits in the article namespace or 250 edits anywhere? I was just wondering because I really want to use vandalproof. Really it looks like a great tool. Right now, I go and revert vandalism, then by the time I do that and go leave the user a warning message on his talk page, a few other people did more vandalism, which I once again must revert, warn the vandals, and so on. Cheers! Wikipeedio 23:39, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

250 article edits is the guideline. However, if a user has shown that s/he can be trusted, the rules are a little flexible. I am a little concerned about some of your early edits, namely this and this. Your recent push in fighting vandalism is commendable, but I personally feel that you could use a little more time to become familiar with Wikipedia policies and the like. AmiDaniel of course has the final say, but that is my two cents. In case you don't know about this tool, you can use popups to revert pages more easily. I also noticed that sometimes you'll revert vandalism but not warn the user. From an administrator's perspective, we can't block a user unless the user has been warned previously, so if you could try and do that a little more it would be appreciated. Happy editing! --PS2pcGAMER (talk) 00:02, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank You

For the Anti V barnstar. My vandal "slapping" has greatly improved since I got VandalProof. As a result, my User page is now a target of revenge. So I know I'm doing something right! Cheers and take care! Anger22 09:44, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Yo Its Codyman3

I wish to give u a app. for co-owner of Cody Inc.(last one just quit becuase i lowered his pay from $200 an hour to $94 a hour lol)(U WONT GET PAID) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Codyman3 (talk • contribs) .

HI

MWHAHAHA I OWN U MWAHAHAHAHA Just Kidding i thought was funny —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Codyman3 (talk • contribs) .

Hey you!

Stop editing or I'll attack! Get back to work. :D — nathanrdotcom ^{(Got something to say? Say it.)} 03:16, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

True Jesus Church in India

Hello AmiDaniel!

The articles Church in india and True Jesus Church india (which was created User:True jesus, who is a vandal) should be deleted because the original article already existed with the True Jesus Church in India. Jose77 21:23, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, I just figured out what was going on here and posted a message on your talk page about it. I replaced the fork with a redirect to True Jesus Church in India. AmiDaniel (Talk) 21:27, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

You just don't learn... get off!!!

uh... what the title says. You have better things to do!! Eagle (talk) (desk) 23:45, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Sorry!

Its the first time I ever used the Notify AIV function and I obviously messed it up as it added you instead of the IP address (you actually warned of the same IP anyway) - I quickly removed but not a good look. Oops my bad, sorry! - Glen ^T_C (Stollery) 00:08, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

It's no problem at all! I was worried about that being a little confusing--for future reference, it will report whatever user appears in the red/yellow/green bar at the top. I'm guessing you were probably looking at a diff on the IPs talk page where I added a warning, and then clicked report. The AIV function is a little buggy in that it will re-report users if they are already listed, but in my newest version it also checks for that. AmiDaniel (Talk) 00:12, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

I see said the blind man! Yes I was on the talk page as you guessed and assumed it would add that user. I shall not make that mistake again, thanks for the heads up - Glen ^T_C (Stollery) 00:16, 7 May 2006 (UTC) PS: What are you doing online anyway Mr! Maybe I should report you for a temp block! lol :)

Tsssk... what does the top of your page say:-)Eagle (talk) (desk) 00:18, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Reorganization of Bug Reports

I have begun to get rid of old bugs on the bug report page, I am not removing anything that may be of help to other users I put all bug reports that I deleted in an archive called User talk:AmiDaniel/VP/Bugs/Version 1.1.0 and older fixes. It is linked to at the top of the Bug report page.

P.S. You dont need to respond unless you have suggestions for me, else your silence is all I need.Eagle talk 02:38, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Uh, you just edited, stop please, you are driving me nuts!!!!Eagle talk 03:01, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Comply with what your talk page says, get off and study!!!! Have you willpower?Eagle talk 03:19, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Geeze. 3 more contribs after this...

Can you stop... plus why is your monobook blocked, I was going to impose you wikibreak on you!!!! by the wikibreak enforcer... Its a shame that you ask us to block you, but then give us no means to do so... Eagle talk 03:30, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm done for the night with this... just don't say I did not try:-)Eagle talk 03:49, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Lol. Exams can wait AmiDaniel (Talk) 03:52, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

---

Though I thought I would note that you have now exceeded 500 edits while on "wikibreak" and that is over less than 10 days, May I ask what kind of break is that???Eagle talk 03:56, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

And I thought it rather funny that you reverted my edit:User:AmiDaniel/StatusDiv (Revert to revision 51929387 using popups)... Don't I desearve at least an edit summery.... mabye some funny words... If you are breaking your wikibreak, please don't make it hard on us... let us laugh:-)Eagle talk 03:56, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

03:53, 7 May 2006 (hist) (diff) m User talk:AmiDaniel (→What am I to do - Such a heavy burden to be the one...)

• I failed and now you are rubbing it in... what a way to treat your friends!!!! lol:-)Eagle talk 03:59, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

He responded on the bug report pages... I found it because I have been doing some work there, removing old bugs

User talk:AmiDaniel/VP/Bugs#'Your log-in request failed' (back to square one)... Eagle talk 04:05, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Note the ones I had in green text, that signals that the info is useful to others and needs to be on 1) the welcome page or 2) elsewhere.Eagle talk 04:31, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Oh, I thought you just meant for green to mean that it had been resolved -- that's what the checkmarks mean. The lightning bolts mean that the next version has been fixed, and the red flags means that I have yet to address the issue. Sorry if I screwed up your system (and I'm really sorry for my edit conflict undoing of your archiving!). Feel free to modify it ... I just find simple symbols a lot easier to manage. AmiDaniel (Talk) 04:38, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Actually I don't really like and I don't like ... what should be the icon for "fixed in the next release"?

We will figure that out later, once you decide, let me know, and I will automatically replace the whole page, by bot user:Gnome (Bot), so it is not a big deal, as that can be done by automation.Eagle talk 05:10, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

AmiDaniel (Talk) 04:42, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

LOL, I would leave the red fonts though, I find them very attention getting for you, and perhaps more important, others who are putting bugs of there own in.Eagle talk

Yeah, I don't know. It's a work in progress; we'll find a happy medium. Thanks for putting up with all my bullshit indecisiveness! And thanks even more for all your help! AmiDaniel (Talk) 04:43, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Lol, I am working on the lightning bolt now... I am going to have to look over the green check marks... remember, If they are fixed, I am going archive them. If you noticed I did not archive any green titles, that is because they are a "user help" thing, Perhaps we need to make a page called trouble shooting???Eagle talk 04:46, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

We definitely need a technical FAQ ... or a help file for that matter lmao. I'll glance through the archives once you're done, so don't worry about archiving something important. Pretty much any conversation that is inactive and resolved should be archived, and perhaps a note left on Welcome or at the top of the bugs page about it. AmiDaniel (Talk) 04:49, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

I will be glad to write the FAQ, this is my thing:-) I will get to it in about 15 min... and I can tell pretty well what has been fixed, my suggestion to you is to look at some of those "red" flags, as some are really old, and you have not replyed.Eagle talk 04:52, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

What would I do without you?! Sorry I keep editconflicting out your edits -- it's not intentional, I promise! AmiDaniel (Talk) 05:02, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

lol... we really should not be editconflicting... because soooomebody is not even supposed to be here...

that aside, I just figured out your last revert, I will have to sort this out agian, please give me 5 minutes without you editing on the bug fix page...Eagle talk 05:07, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Please tell me what the four symbols are for....

04:58, 7 May 2006 (hist) (diff) User talk:AmiDaniel/VP/Bugs (New format ... hopefully without an edit conflict ... goddammit, sorry whoever's edits I just removed!) (top)

Funny, you could not tell it was me... who else would it be??Eagle talk 05:04, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

(EDIT CONFLICT!!!!!!!!!!) You never know ... Anyway, I put a box at the top indicating what icon means what. I think I got 'em all tagged though. I would really like to find a better icon for the "fixed in next release" bit though. AmiDaniel (Talk) 05:17, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Dont worry we will... and when we do, we can do it all at once by program. (my program)Eagle talk 05:20, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

P.S. is it not weird that only you are getting these conflicts, and not me... I have not had one yet.

Change the definition of check mark to potentally usefull to other users.... As under the current definition they all will go to archive:-)Eagle talk 05:16, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, don't archive all of them. Just old and inactive discussions. AmiDaniel (Talk) 05:19, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Those potentally usefull to others will end up in my FAQ. so I guess this will work. ---should I even bother to sign...---Eagle talk 05:21, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Okay. By the way, it's ~~~~ in case you didn't know :-P. AmiDaniel (Talk) 05:23, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Oh gee thanks... can you tell me how to edit a page too??? Oh and what about that "move" tag up there? (bunch of newbie questions for you)Eagle talk 06:19, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

when is which used, unresolved and uhhh not fixed are one and the same.Eagle talk 05:40, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Make note of it in the conversation... remember I or others can't read inbetween the lines!Eagle talk 05:57, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

New Buggie

Go and look please, Mod functions not recognizing my update to main program page(you know which one).Eagle talk 08:10, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

test

See if you can recognize my removal of the test edit.Eagle talk 08:37, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

I did, but it won't pick it up...Eagle talk 08:44, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

go have a look see

Have fun with it... By the way I successfully added a user... go figure, look it up in my contribs if you wish. And I need to sign Eagle talk 08:53, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Oh and no heart attack for you, It did not show... what the heck....

Hey try this, put me in with out the underscore, I will relog in if I must.Eagle talk 08:59, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Thats it!!!! reset the mods, with my name with out an underscore!!!! I was able to log in with out the underscore... just a spaceEagle talk 09:01, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

(edit conflict)That's what I just tried that didn't work. I can fix this in the next release with an Or statement--I know what's causing it. For now just request a null edit when you make a change. Sorry for the inconvenience. AmiDaniel (Talk) 09:03, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

HaHa edit conflict... I have not had one of those yet!!! honestly, not today

any way what I meant was reset the mods with my username with out an underscore

... which is what I just did... AmiDaniel (Talk) 09:06, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

let me try it agian....

have a look

nopeEagle talk 09:18, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

oh and if you did not realize I ADDED a user with no problems at all, and my name states moderator as well. Any way, good nightEagle talk 09:22, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

As I said before, That's what I just tried that didn't work. I can fix this in the next release with an Or statement--I know what's causing it. For now just request a null edit when you make a change. Sorry for the inconvenience. AmiDaniel (Talk) 09:22, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Hey sorry, thats no problem, I was hoping that you would not have to do anything, but thanks for listinig to me!!!Eagle talk 21:13, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

revesion

Oh and um, with all of those really nice features and fixes, such as no more popups, java, ect. Why not realease it now... you can always put out new revisions, but what you have is some MAJOR changes and would be very welcome to all.Eagle talk 09:11, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Esperanza Newsletter, Issue #3

Administrator Coaching The Administrator Coaching program is a program aimed at preparing Wikipedians for Adminship or helping them understand the intricacies of Wikipedia better. Recently, changes have been made to the requirements of coachees. Please review them before requesting this service. This would be something like the Welcoming Committee, but for people who have figured out the basics of editing articles; they're not newcomers any more, but they might want some help in learning new roles. Some might like suggestions about how to learn vandal patrol, or mentoring on taking an article to featured status, or guidance with a proposal they plan to make at the Village Pump, for example. In this way, Esperanza would help keep hope alive for Wikipedia because we would always be grooming the next generation of admins. Stressbusters The Stressbusters are a subset of Esperanza aiming to investigate the causes of stress. New eyes on the situation are always welcome! Note from the editor As always, MiszaBot handled this delivery. Thank you! Also, congratulations go to Pschemp, Titoxd and Freakofnurture for being elected in the last elections! An Esperanzial May to all of the readership!

The last AC meeting (full log) Posting logs of the Esperanza IRC channel are explicitly banned anywhere. Violation of this rule results in deletion and a ban from the channel. A disclaimer is going to be added to the Esperanza main page. We are humans and, as such, are imperfect. Various revisions have been made to the Code of Conduct. Please see them, as the proposal is ready to be ratified by the community and enacted. All members will members to have to re-confirm their membership after accepting the Code of Conduct. Referendums are to be held on whether terms of AC members should be lengthened and whether we should abolish votes full stop. Admin Coaching reform is agreed upon. Signed... Celestianpower, JoanneB, Titoxd, Pschemp and Freakofnurture 20:29, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Userfication

One thing I noticed is that when VandalProof loads the users for approval, if the user messed up the formatting, the program goofs. Here is a possible solution using regexes, (Machine generated VB code, best I can do:-)

Public Dim Userfication as Regex = New Regex( _
    "({{user2.*?}})", _
     RegexOptions.IgnoreCase _
     Or RegexOptions.CultureInvariant _
     Or RegexOptions.IgnorePatternWhitespace _
     Or RegexOptions.Compiled _
     )

This looks for {{user2|<the user's name>}} if it is in the user2 template the code will pick it up. Hope this helps.Eagle talk 22:03, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Sorry about that

Sorry about that, that was not intentional... (perhaps payback for your edit conflicts, oh enjoy comming up with other reasons:-)Eagle talk 00:04, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

My sig

Look at my reply to you at Wikipedia:Signature Poll/GeorgeMoney. GeorgeMoney (talk · contribs)02:11, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

AN/I reverts

Actually, that's the IP range used by the banned user Amorrow. It may be a little too broad to rangeblock. -- Curps 07:23, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Oops, well now I feel like a fool for referring to him as Avillia. My bad. Yeah, I thought the range might be too wide. It's registered to some tiny little ISP (SBC, if I remember correctly), but it would still probably be too much unnecessary collateral damage. Thanks for the response. AmiDaniel (talk) 07:26, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

AC Omonia

I am not vandalising, an opposing fan destroyed our page and I am removing all the stupid flags and words he used.

Thanks —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Airy (talk • contribs) .

Sorry, I see what was going on. I just reverted a whole mass of vandalism to the page, and then accidentally warned you as you were the last contributor and I could not determine who added what. My apologies. In the future could you please use edit summaries, as they will help to prevent your edits from being reverted. Thanks. AmiDaniel (talk) 08:01, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

np

I noticed an attack on all cyprus soccer websites and I hope so that will not last long.

Wanted to ask you a question

So I wanted to ask you if you thought I was experienced enough to use vandalproof. Other users are telling me that I am a little underexperienced, but I have over 250 edits. Just wanted to know what you thought. By the way, Ive been looking thru your talk page and see that you have a lot of exams and stuff. Are you in college or high school? Just curious. Wikipeedio 22:22, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

My rfa

thanks AmiDaniel for you comment on my rfa, after the concerns you raised i thought that it might bea good idea to answer them directly so that other pepole could also benifit from them, anyway thanks for the time you took to respond to my rfa, happy editing Benon 22:56, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

John, remove remarks

Hi Ami,

Would it be possible to remove my messages on your page. This page came up on the google search engine near my personal website. Did not realise this was a blogg. Can you please help with some other stuff that has cropped up online.

Thanks.

<name removed> 00:52, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

I generally observe very strict no censorship rules on my talk page, as it serves not only as a way for others to contact me, but also as a log of my previous actions. If, for instance, the process surounding the deletion of John LeKay ever came into question, these messages would come in useful. If you feel it necessary, however, I will remove any mention of your site's web address from my talk page, but I'd prefer to keep the rest of the messages intact. You should be aware that all of your contributions to Wikipedia will remain on the site in some form, such as in an article's history, unless the history is deleted from the article--this is necessary to fulfill GFDL requirements. AmiDaniel (talk) 00:30, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

You may want to look at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(assistance)#An_Email_I_Received, User talk:ElizabethMckenzie (and that page's history), and User talk:67.86.180.171. Nationalparks 00:47, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

you r mean —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.237.144.169 (talk • contribs) .

Gah, sorry about the revert. I usually respect your "Free speech rule" you state at the top of the page, but this time I was just stalking this guy and reverting his every edit. Sorry again! Mopper ^Speak! 02:26, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

No problem at all. I probably wouldn't have noticed if I wasn't in the process of refactoring his remark. And I thought I reverted his vandalism on your userpage, but you beat me to it! AmiDaniel (talk) 02:28, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Admin-type rollback tools, they always win. But thanks! :) Mopper ^Speak! 02:34, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Signpost updated for May 8th.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 2, Issue 19	8 May 2006	About the Signpost

New worldwide rankings show Wikipedia strength outside US	Meetups And Newsworthy International Assemblages
News and Notes: 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.

Legitimate change reverted by VandalProof user

I redirected CAD to CAD (disambiguation), but it was immediately reverted by User:ILovePlankton using VandalProof. That page was simply a less-comprehensive version of the latter page, and the redirection was totally in keeping with the sentiments expressed on its talk page. ILovePlankton should not be so trigger-happy. 86.40.156.73 19:50, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Redirected to User talk:AmiDaniel/VP/Abuse, As it will recieve attention faster.Eagle talk 23:59, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for responding on my talk page

As above, I'm shocked to see that you are watching my page! But thankyou, as I was not on last night... hence the lack of edit conflicts...I do do that to you rather often... that is weird:-). Please feel free to respond on my talk page anytime that you desire... I don't care, as long as the user gets the advice they need!!! Eagle talk 00:38, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Evil Things

Sorry about the evil thing on my userpage. I'll try to make it look more like a practical joke (link doesn't redirect to your talkpage)

--Primate^#101 01:55, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks Ami for instructing me, I am new to the Wiki ways and practices. By the way, what's your opinion in the "RAD Data Communications" deletion issue? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by John hyams (talk • contribs) .

No problem at all; the intricacies of Wikipedia's processes can be quite confusing, and there's no reason to feel embarrassed for not understanding (I often find myself baffled by some of the procedures as well). I'm going to abstain from voicing my opinion in the deletion review for ethical reasons; however, I tend to agree with the others in endorsing the AfD closure. It seems to be very borderline whether or not it meets WP:CORP, but it appears to bear with it a certain autobiographical POV that I'd rather avoid. Though I'm not much of a deletionist, I'm a fairly strong believer in WP:AUTO, and I really do not like the idea of Wikipedia being used to perpetuate advertisements. As it was tagged for over a month with advert, prodded, and AfDed with no real change in form, it seems to me that the article is unlikely to ever evolve into an actual article, at least not at this time. The suggestions of a copyvio also rub me the wrong way about it; even if fair use on the text is granted from RAD, that would then further affirm my belief that the article was meant as a promotion. Nonetheless, $100m-1b definitely suggests notability, so my endorsement of the AfD closure is rather week, though I still do not feel the article should be recreated. Anyway, those are just my thoughts. Please don't let this one article get you down--just the fact that you're already involved in a deletion review suggests that you could easily become one of Wikipedia's better editors, and I certainly hope you'll continue to contribute despite this. AmiDaniel (talk) 06:28, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

10,000 Days Album Cover

Glad you like it :) The things you mentioned were bothering me too. —kooo 06:54, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Control freak

Are you a control freak? Do I need to get a permission from you to create an accout on wikipedia? What about your username? What if I say your user name is highly highly inappropriate? If an article with title "tru jesus church" can be very appropriate, how come a user name "true jesus" is highly inappropriate? BTW, I don't give a shit to threat of blocking my user name. I knew 1000 ways to get around it. I have only edited a crap article "true jesus church". User Jose77 and a couple others were keep begging for the article translation. They bug me and my friends too. What do you I should do such article? Translate it saying "True jesus church" is the only true church and others are crap? Should I say that if you go to true jesus church, you can fly in the air. There is no necessity of car, bus, plane or anything.. Is that what you think? Does such article deserve any place in wikipedia. Did you do anything to stop it? I am not even warning you. Lets see if you keep, or delete my comment.

--True jesus 18:05, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Archiving of Abuse reports

I know there are only four right now, but I choose to go ahead and create an archive. User talk:AmiDaniel/VP/Abuse/May-June2006.

I set the policy for this as: Reports in which over 10 (ten) days have passed since the last post may be placed into archive.

I thought that this is most appropriate, as if nobody posts after 10 days, the issue is over.Eagle talk 20:13, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

AN/I and User: True jesus

Your AN/I note raises, IMHO, some interesting questions apropos of this user. I certainly don't think his user name to be particularly disruptive (I am generally of the view that all user names should be permitted, inasmuch as I cannot imagine that valuable contributors would ever allow their imputing impropriety to a user name to disrupt the collaborative editing process, if only because I would necessarily infer intellectual infirmity from one's inability to cope with a user name he/she finds offensive, but I know that my beliefs don't command community support), even as a different user name might lend itself to better community interaction. I think the user certainly has been altogether trollish in his/her contributions, and I think a short block is likely in order. Because the user is relatively new, he/she may change his/her ways (as you well note on the user's talk page) and become a good editor; the fact of the user's user name and the singularity of his/her contributions, though, suggest an intent to troll/disrupt and lead one to fear that good faith is not present. You might be able to find support for an "exhausting the community's patience" indef block, but I think perhaps a 24-hr block might be in order, after which perhaps an RfC would be in order should disruption continue (I suppose one only needs to go that route, though, if the community doesn't think an indef block to be appropriate; here, since the user has shown no intention or capability to contribute productively, the community might quickly find its patience exhausted). Joe 21:58, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

I totally agree with that decision. My issue with the username is honestly not so much that it may offend someone, but rather that it shows his trollish nature (especially since the articles he has been trolling have had similar names). I think a short block is quite necessary right now, if anything just to make it known that all of these warnings have not been jokes. I usually tend to oppose indefinite blocks on the grounds that I feel everyone is capable of change, and I would only support an indef username block (not necessarily an indefinite ban) if he continued with the same degree (or greater) of trolling after the block expires. Thanks for your lightning-quick response! AmiDaniel (talk) 22:07, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

But it would seem User:Syrthiss disagrees [13]. Well, I'm not going to contest the indefinite block; if he really wants to contribute to the encyclopedia he can get himself another account. Nonetheless, I won't stand in your way if you want to contest it. AmiDaniel (talk) 22:11, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

for having an open mind. TheJabberwʘck 06:32, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Lol, sorry. That's why I've stayed out of these userbox debates for so long: The honest-to-god truth is I don't have much of an opinion about any of them, so I'm quite easily persuaded by reading others' remarks. I sure have gained a lot of experience with <del> and <ins> though! AmiDaniel (talk) 06:39, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Request for VandalProof

Hi,

I've been doing a lot of RC patrolling recently on Wikipedia and see a lot of people use your VandalProof application- when I looked into it, this page sent me here to request it!

Hope your Wikibreak was relaxing,

Kind regards,

EvocativeIntrigue 16:48, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Right, so that means the link needs to be changed to User talk:AmiDaniel/VandalProof or User:AmiDaniel/VandalProof. The latter would be better, as then the user would know what is up, and what responsiblities he/she has when using it.Eagle talk 18:56, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

VP mod needed

Hi, I am Eagle talk, I am a fellow moderator on VP. Currently the program is not recognizing my user name as a moderator. As such the program does not always recognize some of the changes I make to the VP official welcom page. (you know what I am talking about). This problem has been documented on User talk:AmiDaniel/VP/Bugs#Moderator update is not working. I request a "Null" edit to that page, The reason is a user I added is having problems logging in.

To do a "Null" edit, just make a minute change to the page and save. Then it will accept all previous changes made to it. (which are my additions) ThanksEagle talk 20:45, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

P.S. this message is going out to all moderators on at this time of day.

No longer needed, I posted this becuase I figured you would be on, agianst your wikibreak:-(Eagle talk 22:25, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, just as I suspected

fisrt off... back to the usual. (you getting an edit conflict:-)

Second, thank you for confirming that, I suspected that you did that on purpose:-) No matter what, you have connect to the internet with an open browser, and you would rather your program work on connecting to the internet and checking the approved list, rather than generating some fancy graphic:-). I have done this also for similar reasons on programs of my own:-).

Just curious, but am I really that good to you that you will watch my user page?? I am baffled.Eagle talk 23:50, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Though I watch yours, it is one out of 6 distinct userpages I watch:-)