User talk:Calabe1992/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Dohezarsersdah

Dohezarsersdah has been blanking the warnings on his talk page. Should have been blocked a couple days ago.--Louiedog (talk) 22:11, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Well, I am not an administrator, and I can't do that myself. FYI, he can blank the warnings on his talk page per WP:BLANK but his behavior on Theocracy is not acceptable. An RPP on that page is still pending. Calabe1992 (talk) 23:08, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Oneinfo

Sorry I was unable to provide a source for the info I had posted. I will get the source next time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OneInfo (talk • contribs) 13:45, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

re: your message

Hi Calabe1992, I've left a reply to your message on my talk page -- Marek.69 ^talk 15:52, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Your RfA

Hi Calabe1992. I have closed your RfA early as it did not appear to have a realistic chance of passing. Please don't take this personally; many admins (including me) needed more than one try at RfA before being granted the mop. Hopefully the comments provided will give you some guidance as to the areas you'll want to focus on in order to have a successful second attempt. Best, 28bytes (talk) 18:28, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

I'm not taking it personally; I actually reviewed numerous others who had multiple attempts before succeeding. Like I said, it's not a big deal. Calabe1992 (talk) 18:43, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Good to know. :) 28bytes (talk) 18:51, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

If you want an admin-mentor-kind-of-thing, I'm willing to help. WilliamH (talk) 18:32, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

I appreciate that. Suggestions welcome. Calabe1992 (talk) 18:43, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

How about User:WilliamH/Calabe1992 as a place to work? WilliamH (talk) 18:59, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Let's run with it. Calabe1992 (talk) 19:00, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Sorry I missed it, but I'm afraid I would have opposed too. You are on the right track, but need a lot of work in other areas. There is a precedent for vandalism-only admins to be promoted, but you need to have a hell of a lot of experience and a near-flawless record. It's been done before, but it would probably be easier for you to round out your knowledge and experience other areas. I wish you best of luck next time, though. Trusilver 21:42, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

I missed the RFA too, but hang in there. You just need more experience. If you have any questions, feel free to drop me a line on my talk page. Take care! Dayewalker (talk) 00:06, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

If you're looking for ways to move forward, please consider reading User:Sven_Manguard/Failed_RfA_Advice. I talked about how I didn't see you as being rounded enough; well this is a guide that, in part, offers advice on expanding your horizons. Personally I find it quite a good guide (although, I was the one that wrote it). Cheers! Sven Manguard Wha? 08:37, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

I just noticed your RfA, and I wanted to suggest that I don't think a "well rounded" set of contributions is as important as some people are making it sound here. It isn't why this RfA failed. You need a couple buttons to more efficiently do the good work that you enjoy doing here, so we want you to have those buttons. I'm confident that if you work on the issues brought up at the RfA (accurate tagging, user warnings, etc) then that will happen. But my main point is that I think you should contribute to Wikipedia in whatever way is you are good at and is enjoyable and rewarding for you. I would hate for you to spend a lot of time doing things that you hate just to become a sysop. Not that you'll hate writing, for all I know you love it. Thanks!!! ErikHaugen (talk | contribs) 18:11, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments, guys. I'm not going anywhere; continuing to work on things and will be adding new content hopefully soon. Thanks. Calabe1992 (talk) 15:48, 31 October 2011 (UTC)

Lives of The Mayfair Witches

Hello, I am new to editing Wiki and my contribution has been rejected twice by you. Please explain why if you would please. The link to my FLICKR page with pictures of the house described is my own origional content which i sanction the use of, and recieve no monetary compensation for. I have seen many other links on Wiki to FLICKR, and do not understand why this is being rejected in this instance. Besides the link, I also added to the page in strictly content form and do not understand why you rejected this as well. I understand Wiki must be policed, but do not understand why my contribution has been thus rejected. I certainly am NOT a spammer. Thank you for your attention. J JDHRosewater (talk) 02:05, 2 November 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by JDHRosewater (talk • contribs) 01:59, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

First of all, you removed other content with your edit. Please see WP:LINK. Calabe1992 (talk) 02:01, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

ok - so I should have inserted the link below all of the following external links text - ??? J JDHRosewater (talk) 02:07, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Correct, but make sure it meets the guidelines and isn't promotional. Calabe1992 (talk) 02:07, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

thanks, I have read the guidelines and the FLICKR page linked to falls within the guidelines. Is linking to FLICKR ok as a rule? JDHRosewater (talk) 02:10, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

I'm going to re-edit just the text portion of the page. Please let me know what problem you have with just this portion. JDHRosewater (talk) 02:16, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Since you have not further rejected my contribution to the page "lives of The Mayfair Witches", I am assuming you have no further objection to the text portion of the edit... As to the link I attempted to attach, and you twice rejected: I have exhaustively read through "Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Linking" from the link you provided as well as a series of subsequent links from that page and can find no reason stated within the guidelines for not including the link. To the contrary, since the link does in fact expand the readers knowledge of the specific subject at hand providing useful visual information which will be greatly appreciated by readers of the series as well as interesting data to those unfamiliar with the books; I find the literature within "Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Linking" does in fact encourage the inclusion of the link. Nothing I could find in the literature specifically mentions FLICKR either pro or con. I will however wait to hear back from you on this point before attempting to include the link for a third time. If you agree that the link is acceptable, I will take care to do so properly and in the correct form. As mentioned, I am quite new to the experience of editing WP. and do not wish to do so incorrectly. Your help in doing so is appreciated. Thank you. J JDHRosewater (talk) 04:13, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

also, will be sure to complete the "edit summary" field in future edits. J JDHRosewater (talk) 04:32, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi, well, I actually went to bed last evening, which is why I didn't review your addition. However, I would definitely cite a source for the text that you added (otherwise it appears as original research). Since you're working with me on this page I will leave the text alone for you to work with. Regarding the Flickr page, are they your photos? I don't know if you noticed, but the first reversion was actually performed by a bot, which subsequently flagged your edit as spam when you re-added it, hence my removal of it. If the link you are posting does not relate to you, then you can feel free to add it to the external links section. Calabe1992 (talk) 19:50, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thanks for reverting the vandalism to my userpage Sparthorse (talk) 21:22, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Editing Muammar Gaddafi

WP article? Really? You do know Mathaba has been around since 1982? You even have a wikipedia page on them with the information I wanted to add to Gaddafi's page. Same thing that is on there.

reset_the_planet — Preceding unsigned comment added by Reset the planet (talk • contribs) 03:26, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Per the instructions at the top of this page, please use the discussion on Jeff G.'s talkpage, not here. Calabe 1992 03:40, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Say goodbye to (a few) of your little friends...

Just fyi...

Cheers!

J.delanoy ^gabs _adds 05:06, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

Lovely. Thanks. Calabe 1992 05:08, 3 November 2011 (UTC)

User talk:Alf.laylah.wa.laylah

Done Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 01:08, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Leslie Halliwell

If you check websites like Amazon,it will confirm the book Halliwell's Horizon is a published biography.Thankyou.Nov 6 2011,18:43.

Then you need to cite it as a source. Calabe 1992 19:47, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Dusty the klepto kitty article

Greetings!

In reading the notes on the Dusty the Klepto Kitty article, it appears that you put the tag requesting cleanup tag on before I was actually done with the article. I hit "Submit" instead of "Preview" and submitted an incomplete article that was flagged by you and one other moderator. Can you review the article again and tell me if it needs any other changes?

Thanks.

Carschmn (talk) 21:33, 6 November 2011 (UTC) ^Figured out what the top note meant this time. I'm new.

Hi, I tagged the article more specifically now. I would recommend reading WP:CAPS and WP:LEAD. The WP:MOS will also probably be helpful. Calabe 1992 21:55, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

The Liberties

I don't see whats wrong. The liberties are in the south Inner city in Dublin. 89.101.31.24 (talk) 14:57, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

I don't see that you cited that. Calabe 1992 14:59, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

You want me to cite google maps? Fair enough.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.101.31.24 (talk • contribs)

I don't think that would be a valid source. Calabe 1992 15:00, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Dusty the klepto kitty article

I changed the capitalization to match the Wiki rules. Let me know if it needs anything else. Does it need anything else?

This paragraph is meant to be the lead in:

"Dusty the Klepto Kitty is a domestic cat who gained notoriety in early 2011 for his acts of "cat burglary." As of his February 2011 appearance on The Late Show with David Letterman, Dusty had stolen - 16 car wash mitts, 7 sponges, 213 dish towels, 7 wash clothes, 5 towels, 18 shoes, 73 socks, 100 gloves, 1 pair of mittens, 3 aprons, 40 balls, 4 pairs of underwear, 1 dog collar, 6 rubber toys, 1 blanket, 3 leg warmers, 2 Whammos, 1 golf head cover, 1 safety mask, 2 mesh bags, 1 bag of water balloons, 1 pair of pajama pants, 8 bathing suits and 8 miscellaneous objects."

Carschmn (talk) 01:51, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Undisputed Champion

I have placed a couple of range blocks on the IPs. I think that is better than page protection, because (1) a number of pages are affected, and (2) it considerably reduces collateral damage on other IP editors. I am confident that all or virtually all editing from the IP ranges involved are from one person. However, if this does not stop the problem I will be willing to reconsider the matter. Also, do let me know if the problem returns when the range block expires in a couple of days, and I will consider whether or not a longer block is justified. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:47, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Will do, thanks. Calabe 1992 15:48, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

I see that someone else has semiprotected the article, anyway. Even so, I think it's still worth keeping the range block, as the IP editor has attacked other pages, including at least one user talk page. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:58, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Saw that as well. How long did you set the rangeblock for? Calabe 1992 15:59, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

There are two blocks on different ranges, both due to expire at 03:40 on Sat, 12 Nov 2011. JamesBWatson (talk) 16:02, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

OK, I'll watch for them after that. Calabe 1992 16:03, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Fumitol

Question: Who edits on the accounts he creates? Some of those accounts create pages that have been speedily deleted.--1966batfan (talk) 00:49, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

He's an account creator, someone who creates accounts for people who have issues creating accounts by themselves. Therefore, he wouldn't have anything to do with the edits, unless something really unusual was going on (which I doubt). Calabe 1992 00:52, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Reverting the redirect on Frgt/10

There's a deletion discussion going on about the article, so it's not proper for the article to be redirected in the middle of it (especially when no one has mentioned redirecting the article in the deletion discussion so far). In general, the deletion discussion tag shouldn't be removed until the discussion has been closed by an administrator. I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 01:04, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Re: Edit summary

Thanks for the barnstar, dude. Was just doing my job, although I had to admit that I was venting over some user who has been uploading copyrighted images of people despite warnings from peeps not to do so. Blake Gripling (talk) 04:17, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Well, it sure was a pleasant way to see you doing so. Calabe 1992 04:18, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Frivolous reports

Please stop making frivolous reports over at this page, many more and it could be considered disruption. Weakopedia (talk) 06:34, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

I don't see anything frivolous about any of them. Goodness knows what Weakopedia has in mind. 79.123.73.255 (talk) 10:25, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Based on the fact that you are not an administrator or rollbacker, and your contributions don't seem to involve issues such as those at UAA, I don't see how you can individually make a judgment like that. Calabe 1992 17:20, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Georgina Baillie

In the discussion page on the Russell Brand telephone row page, the subject of Georgina having her own page was discussed. I think it would be useful if there were a page just about Georgina herself as opposed to just the Russell Brand incident, what do you think? She is currently quite successful as a professional musician and frequently mentioned in the Guardian. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.26.2.0 (talk) 01:16, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

I'm not generally a content creator, so I wouldn't be able to give very helpful advice as far as this goes. Calabe 1992 01:20, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Oh, that's fine, I think you misunderstood me though. I was messaging you because on your page it said to send you a polite message if I think that you have inadvertantly deleted a recent edit, which is what happened when I tried to delete the automatic redirect. The redirect is causing one to go immediately to the Russell Brand controversy page when typing "Georgina Baillie" in the search bar. I was trying to change it so that there would actually be a seperate page for Georgina. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.26.2.0 (talk) 01:30, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

That's fine, but you'll need to first create the content elsewhere and then move it onto the page. Otherwise, the page would be blank. Blank pages are not kept. Calabe 1992 01:32, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

The Puzzle Place

An unregistered contributor has been repeatedly vandalizing The Puzzle Place page by adding an episode list with clear vandalism. Are you able to block him? --Parstin32 (talk) 01:24, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Warned user. Calabe 1992 01:25, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Just to let you know, the user returned to the page while I was away. The bot caught him and he was blocked by an administrator. Calabe 1992 04:22, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Moved

Did you even look at the edit? Because I think you should. Your useless trawling of "vandalism" edits angers me with the moronic way you are going about it. It is common courtesy to do some slight research before making accusations. 128.138.224.237 (talk) 05:12, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

First of all, you're bordering on WP:PA. Second of all, even if you're trying to be helpful (see the edit history), many users don't appreciate others changing their userpages. Calabe 1992 05:13, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your thoughts.128.138.224.237 (talk) 05:16, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Hello

I have added some valuable, research inputs and you claim it as vandalism!!! Please don't jump into conclusions...Sorry to know that you are too an editor> :-( — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.99.66.155 (talk) 05:36, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

You added an obvious copy>paste. Calabe 1992 05:42, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

Ya. Because I didn't have time to retype all the information i have already typed. If you don't appreciate our unselfish efforts, then good bye gentle man.

Reverted edits

Why have you reversed my important edits and given me two warnings?

This should be an open source of information, edited by the public. If I make an edit you have the power to reverse it and block me from making more changes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jane1222556 (talk • contribs) 16:44, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Your edits were biased, unsourced additions, and should not be included. Calabe 1992 16:47, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!

To give you a moment's rest from fighting vandals, here's some coffee. WikiPuppies! (bark) 17:35, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Ahhhh... thanks so much. Calabe 1992 17:37, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Comment

I made an WP:AN/I that involved a different user and had mention you. Just leaving a note :) Best, Jona yo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 21:17, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Addressed. Calabe 1992 21:25, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. Best, Jona yo! ^{Selena 4 ever} 21:27, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your help

Thanks for your help regarding the Iaaasi case. I greatly appreciate it that you took time to comment. (ANI posts sometimes have problems getting any replies at all). Hobartimus (talk) 08:35, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

DB removed

I have removed the DB tag you placed on Drug use in songs. The duplication detector reports that only the list of 100 songs is a copy from the gloriousnoise.com content. As a simple list, with proper citation, copyright violation is arguable in this case. The rest of the article appears to be a well researched and original article.WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 14:49, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

No problem. Calabe 1992 14:50, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Sock?

Re [1]. Interesting - I'm having problems with this users edits too. Sock of whom? William M. Connolley (talk) 15:14, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Scibaby, one of the most notorious sockpuppeteers in the history of the site. Calabe 1992 15:16, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I must be getting rusty William M. Connolley (talk) 15:17, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Just spotted it turns out they're socks of someone else, actually. Calabe 1992 15:18, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

AIV

Hey, when you're done clogging up the vandalism boards, maybe you can turn Steel Belt Wrestling into a GA! Enjoy, Drmies (talk) 19:22, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

LOL, thanks. Calabe 1992 19:23, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Tagging is not writing! Drmies (talk) 19:35, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Hey, you have to wait a minute, while I revert Freddy Spaghetti. Priorities... ;) Calabe 1992 19:37, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Well, I guess this did actually end up being useful - what in the world has Huggle done to my edit summary there... Calabe 1992 19:39, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

You don't have to worry about this one for the next two weeks. Drmies (talk) 19:44, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Why, thank you... Calabe 1992 19:45, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

I tell you I am sorry.

I am sorry for him. Why is that unconstructive? I am not lying. --77.49.184.233 (talk) 19:44, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Sure. Drmies (talk) 19:46, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

Thanks for your help on List of Cobra characters! Most of the information there is OK, but I was just about to leave a message for an IP address, which has added the same unsourced info after being reverted twice, and you beat me to it! Fortdj33 (talk) 21:36, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks - no problem. Calabe 1992 21:44, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Bad revert

Why was this reverted? FinalRapture - † ☪ 18:27, 19 November 2011 (UTC)

The user's only contributions (other than a few kittens sent randomly) were all vandalism, and I subsequently reverted them, so it went with them. Calabe 1992 00:43, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Just curious, how did you find this edit, and was there a particular reason why you are concerned? Calabe 1992 00:44, 20 November 2011 (UTC)

Michael Lewis

What do you mean it is not "NPOV"? "A prime criticism of Lewis is that he loose with facts". One can find this criticism EVERYWHERE because HE IS loose with facts - in fact he routinesly MAKES THINGS UP. The cited article notes multiple instances of this. How is this not NPOV? Senence # 2: Lewis falsely claimed - even though he alleges he was actually present in parliament - that "everything" within their parliament is spoken in English and then in Gaelic. This is NPOV and taken from his own article. I previously had linked to a youtube clip of debate in that parliament disproving Lewis' claim but that was "not allowed" by some over-vigilant wiki-editor. How do you prove what language is spoken in a foreign parliament other than youtube videos clearly indicating the facts? I am in the process of working with the Irish Parliament to obtain some proof that I intend on publicizing and formatting so it may be cited in the Wiki article. In any event no problem with NPOV in that sentence. Sentence #3: He DOES USE theat false claim as a premise for another bogus claim - READ THE ARTICLE. Again, this is delivered in NPOV. You can't be specific in your critique because you are wrong. Sentence #4 is also a FACT, it is CITED and delivered in NPOV. Even the paragraph as a whole cannot be construed as something other than NPOV. It is a series of facts delivered nuetrally and with citation; same as saying Hitler oversaw the murder of millions, or Newt Gingrich has been reported to have left his wife while she had cancer in order to carry on a secret affair with another woman.

As a prior editor astutely pointed out, there is no rule that these pages are to be hagiographies. Nor should there be one. It is not my fault that Lewis is a dangerous bigot operating surreptisiously - whether he is concious of this or not. But guess what? I do not call him a bigot. THAT would NOT BE NPOV. Instead I deliver, in a nuetral manner, FACTS. I am not drawing conclusions within the article in spite of the conclusions I have personally reached. I know you and other editors will not be specific. It is apparent from the lack of specific response and/or friendly assistance - in spite of the fact that many of you spend most of your lives roaming these pages - that I am dealing with intellectually dishonest and/or intellectually immature people — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mattmcds (talk • contribs) 16:31, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

December 2011

I did try to discuss the changes on the Talk page, but the other user still reverts the changes to fit his POV. Someone963852 (talk) 03:36, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Regardless, what you are doing is not the way to go about this. Calabe 1992 03:36, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

The other user and I tried bringing this up a few weeks back at the Dispute Resolution board, but no one took interest. The discussion was then archived as unresolved. Someone963852 (talk) 03:38, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

I am sick and tired of Someone963852 pushing his weight around and acting like he owns the article. As evidence of this, if you go to the edit history of the zoophilia article, you'll see that at the end of every dispute, Someone963852 always has the last word; in other words, he wouldn't mind reverting to infinity. I'm sick of his personal attacks and bullying; I am also sick of the fact that any edit I make will be reverted by him, no matter how small. He "solves" disputes solely by reverting. This dispute has been on the WP:DR noticeboard for weeks, but nobody has stepped in to mediate.Plateau99 (talk) 03:48, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Personally I don't care about whatever has gone on in the past; you do not solve a dispute like this by warring like you did. The article is now protected so you can figure out what to do. Calabe 1992 03:49, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Akhenaten

It wasn't a mistake, read the last line of the intro of Kiya. Kiya is not the mother of Tut, The Younger Lady (mummy is the mother. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.159.247.193 (talk) 19:40, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Good enough. Calabe 1992 19:42, 1 December 2011 (UTC)

Regarding additions to sites regarding hospitals in Singapore.

Dear Calabe 1992

The additions to the sites of a number of Singapore hospitals regarding them not being accredited by a recognised international accreditation scheme, such as JCI, ACHS, QHA Trent and others, are not vandalism. The additions are true - but the evidence is "negative", so to speak, as these hospitals do NOT appear on their web sites as being independently accredited - they would if it were to be so - and are not logged by the accreditation schemes as having been accredited by them.

There is a knowledge value, and public interest, in this information being added to these particular sites in light of the well-recognised function of hospitals and clinics. When hospitals are successful in becoming independently accredited, this is generally clearly flagged on the wikipedia site!!!! There is nothing controversial about this - either the hospital is, or it isn't.

Please therefore remove the comment regarding "vandalism", and please stop reverting the changes. No doubt someone else more closely associated with these pages (many of which are stubs) will change, add or remove such data if there are genuine reasons justifying such a course of action.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.176.105.144 (talk) 16:45, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Regardless, you clearly added the content without citing any sources, despite persistent warnings. Calabe 1992 17:02, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

If anyone more closely associated can add the change while properly citing a source, that's a whole different ball game. You didn't cite any sources, so the addition was reverted. Calabe 1992 17:05, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

How can you cite a source when it is the absence of such a source which is the key issue and is the reason for including the information? The absence of such a status among these hospitals is the vital factor here, and it is the lack of evidence to the contrary which is important and makes it viable to include. If someone comes up with a source providing evidence to the contrary (ie. a reputable newspaper article stating that a hospital is in fact, or has become, accredited), then this would no doubt trump the former.

If you cannot accept the approach above as a valid one, what do you suggest as the best way to get information of this type in accurate way into the public domain in Wikipedia? In science, it is often the absence of a piece of information rather than the presence of sources which is the vital factor - just take a look at the "Higgs Boson" page!!!!.

Please give this some thought and come back to me when you have a viable answer for me. To simply dismiss without looking at whole picture does not take us forward one iota. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.176.105.144 (talk) 17:10, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

All this doesn't matter. You can't add content like this without citing it. Sorry. Calabe 1992 17:13, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Have you ever been on a "wikipedia course for editors"? It sounds like one is badly needed. I don't mean that to be personal, I genuinely don't, but there is no evidence here of constructive logical thinking. Have a good weekend. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.176.105.144 (talk) 17:18, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Don't resort to attacks in an attempt to resolve your own problems. Calabe 1992 17:21, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	For your all you recent change patrolling. Especialy at the momment with ClueBot being down. You the only other editor I'm seeing on Huggle at the momment so well done. Oddbodz (talk) 16:47, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, you're the only other one I've been seeing as well. Good work... Calabe 1992 16:47, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Beluga whale

I am part of the Karyn White TEAM! Are you kidding me? This woman asked me to publish her damn biography here so stop trying to block me for it. Sorry I didnt know that it had to be wiki first or nothing i didnt steal the damn info she sent it to me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Majesticbelugawhale (talk • contribs) 17:24, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

You're bordering on making a personal attack, so I'd take a step back and reconsider yourself here. Calabe 1992 17:33, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

My apologies. Please tell me how to fix this issue as you would not even take the time to consider another point of view. I really need this information on here today, any recommendations would be greatly appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Majesticbelugawhale (talk • contribs) 17:36, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. You're such a wonderful person to take all of that time out of your day to assist me in this problem. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Majesticbelugawhale (talk • contribs) 22:23, 2 December 2011 (UTC)

Test edit

Sorry about my previous edit: "I am just editing this to see how quickly it will be acted upon." I was just so curious how fast it would be taken care of, and wow! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.249.138.127 (talk) 00:05, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

If our anti-vandal bot weren't down, it would have taken less time than me even. So now you know, and please don't test it again. Calabe 1992 00:08, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Ok I am sorry, I was just curious because I trust Wikipedia and I have heard claims all throughout my school life about how there is false information on here, my argument would be that it is edited constantly so that that isn't possible, but this event reinforced my belief so I'm done! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.249.138.127 (talk) 02:06, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Good. Now that you know better, how about you create an account and help us out w/ something constructive? Calabe 1992 02:14, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

64.229.83.61‎

The guy he targeted, user Cookiehead, does not think the IP is NPrice. What the IP did was to restore a warning from NPrice which Cookie had deleted, and during that restore he included an offensive edit summary. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:26, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Good enough, feel free to revert me or whatever. :) Calabe 1992 01:29, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

It was me that raised the issue, and Cookie said no, so I think that's good enough for now, and I will revert it. But we'll also keep an eye on it. P.S. No talkback template needed. I watch talk pages where I've commented, at least for awhile. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:32, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

No problem, thanks. :) Calabe 1992 01:42, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

You didn't have to remove it, either. That was just for future reference. :) Some editors have complicated rules about where to post and where not to. I'm a bit more flexible. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:48, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Calabe 1992 01:50, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

User:Jotism

Hi,

I amended my old profile a "friend" found, to link to my new one, is this OK? Thanks, John T, JOT. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnOThomson (talk • contribs) 22:20, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Yep, you were reverted because that wasn't clear at the time. Just make sure to indicate on the old account that it is no longer used and you are instead using this one. Calabe 1992 22:30, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Reverting to old Information on HMS ROOK 1806

Why do you keep reverting back to old information when i try and improve the information already given on HMS ROOK 1806? You keep saying my input is "unconstructive" or "vandalism" how is it? I am not deleting any information, i am just making the sentences sound and flow better

Willrook95 (talk) 23:04, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

The tone you were writing in is not very good, frankly; there were even some spelling and punctuation errors. Also, see WP:CAPS. Calabe 1992 04:00, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

...For reverting those vandalic edits on my talk page Greetings мιѕѕ мαηzαηα (talk) 23:34, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

No problem. :) Calabe 1992 01:35, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks from me too! Yossiea ^(talk) 05:39, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Too quick?

Hi Calabe, You may be too quick with your controls. I had just started a new article on "Shifting" in grammar and was in the process of creating example sentences. When I went to save my work, I got an error message, and now the article has already been tagged as incomplete/insufficient. This experience reduces my interest and motivation to contribute. It shouldn't be like that, right? Timothy Osborne — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tjo3ya (talk • contribs) 04:13, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi Timothy, what I would recommend doing when you start an article is to first create it in your own userspace (for example, User:Tjo3ya/examplearticlename), build on it there, and then move it into the mainspace once it's more complete. Out in the mainspace, if it's incomplete, it's more likely to get tagged for deletion (especially without sources). Since this article is already in the mainspace, by tagging it, I acknowledged that someone other than the page creator (you) had reviewed the article, and determined that it does have a place in the encyclopedia. It's now less likely to be tagged for deletion, and you can build on it from here and remove the tags as you fix the issues. (Also, the article will show up in the category for articles needing cleanup, so others can help out as well.) Calabe 1992 19:20, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi Calebe,OK, I understand. Thanks for the tip.Best,Tim — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tjo3ya (talk • contribs) 19:35, 12 December 2011 (UTC)

New Page Patrol

I never really counted myself as part of the new page patrol. I'm wondering if my editing style automatically makes me a member.

--Thebirdlover (talk) 03:32, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

That's just part of the template. I just came across a page you speedied and didn't mark as patrolled, so I thought I'd let you know. Calabe 1992 03:33, 13 December 2011 (UTC)]

I can not find a template to indicate that. --Thebirdlover (talk) 03:29, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

It's Template:uw-patrolled. Calabe 1992 05:01, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

I mean to tell people I patrolled the page. --Thebirdlover (talk) 05:02, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Oh, misunderstood. :) It's down at the bottom right of any new page - "[Mark this page as patrolled]". Calabe 1992 05:04, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

User:The Icon Sean Foreman

Consider nominating it at MfD as a stale draft. It doesn't really belong there, it's a fake article, and it's a BLP violation. Take care, 207.157.121.52 (talk) 18:43, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

But blanking is not the way to go about getting rid of it. Calabe 1992 18:44, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Edit Tecmo Super Bowl

There is no spamming of the Tecmo Super Bowl site that hasn't already been done, I have tried to correct these and my edits get undone. If you deem the tecmo.us external link as unneccessary and spam, the same thing must be done with the puretecmo.com link as it adds nothing additional to the site. The original external link to tecmo.us was not set up my me, I am just the one to correct it as there are external factors of immaturity that tightly control this fact based article including at times 3 links to the same website, which is in itself spam and misuse. All I ask that if this is to be a fact based article it be done so 100% and certain users be addressed that prevent this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by InformationalONLY (talk • contribs)

You need to further read over the guidelines for external links, and discuss this in the talk page if you want. Calabe 1992 18:51, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Gary, you did add the original Tecmo.us site. Please stop lying. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Butttoucher (talk • contribs) 02:39, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Changes to Jeffrey Epstein's profile

Dear Calabe,

Thank you for your editing note. My colleagues and I are hoping to change Jeffrey Epstein's profile as you can see. You mentioned that there is a conflict of interest but we represent a large group of people who have been aware of his work, background and contributions for more than twenty years.

Jeffrey Epstein is a very important contributor to the sciences around the world but most critically in universities in the United States. He is also a philanthropist to numerous foundations. All of this can be verified. We are trying to post information on him that is accurate, verified and dignified and does not include all the slanderous and obscene press about him in the tabloids.

The current profile is clearly anti-semetic, slanderous, immaturely written and demeaning. It comes across as a tacky tabloid.

Jeffrey Epstein in our view should be depicted accurately and with the dignity that he deserves.

Could I please resend you and the other editors involved, our summary for your review and approval?

Many thanks, stgeorge12 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stgeorge12 (talk • contribs) 21:02, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi, in short words, you can add other things that are sourced, but you can't remove sourced material. If you believe that a source is not a reliable source, then you should discuss it on the talk page. Calabe 1992 21:04, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Review of sources

Hi Calabe,

Okay thank you for your reply. We will review the sources that are posted and get back to you. We will suggest adding new sources as well.

sincerely, stgeorge12 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stgeorge12 (talk • contribs) 21:12, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Well, I'd recommend the article talk page so that anyone can help you. I won't necessarily be around at that time. Calabe 1992 21:20, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Aga Khan IV deletions

Hi,

Thanks for your comments, and references. I have worked to edit my contributions to Aga Khan IV to have a neutral POV. I will note that several deletions of what I believe is now neutrally written and reasonably well sourced content have occurred, including one after your NPOV addition to the page. I welcome corrections to, content, my writing, choices of words, and discussion as to what is necessary content.

67.193.116.113 (talk) 21:23, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Question

Hi Calebe, You provided a helpful tip for me above. I have an unrelated question. A number of the pages I have revised are marked as "Stub" at the bottom. In many of these cases, I have added sources to an extent, where I would think that the article has grown beyond a stub. How is the "Stub" seal removed from an article? Thanks, Tim (Tjo3ya) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tjo3ya (talk • contribs) 01:25, 15 December 2011 (UTC) I just found the answer to my question. Matter taken care of. Thanks, Tim — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tjo3ya (talk • contribs) 01:42, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

That other one with my name is a "friend" trying to pull a prank, but if he does itanymore I wouldn't mind you reporting him.CLICK...if you dare! (talk) 15:22, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Funny you say that, I reported him at UAA the second I saw him. Calabe 1992 15:22, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Re: J Epstein and sources

Hi Calabe,

How does someone like Prince Andrew, who has had numerous scandals, easily sourceable in the press, get away with having a stellar wikipedia profile? I really would appreciate any thoughts on this. Thank you kindly, — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stgeorge12 (talk • contribs) 19:37, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

If any negative material is added that is unsourced, it will not be kept. Obviously, the negative material you are referring to cannot be reliably sourced. Calabe 1992 19:44, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Also

Sorry to bother you Calabe, but does all content need to be sourced in order to be posted or edited? It seems that's not the case when I read through numerous profiles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stgeorge12 (talk • contribs) 19:39, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Depends. There's still lots of unsourced stuff floating around. Whatever is added can be removed rightfully by editors if it is unverified, yes, and especially in biographies of living people it probably should. Drmies (talk) 19:41, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
What he said. Calabe 1992 19:44, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

User talk:Bigdogmaier

I've removed the warning you left this user for blanking Jacob Maier. As the user was the only author the blanking should be taken as a G7 (which is what the article was deleted under) rather than an act of vandalism. Regards, Bazj (talk) 21:06, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Missed that one, thanks for catching it. Calabe 1992 21:07, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Dear Calabe,

I know that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and as such should be objective and neutral. However, there is a clear imbalance of information on Jeffrey Epstein. Yes, he has been involved in sex scandals and was convicted, but a huge part of his life is also involved in legitimate and extremely important scientific research and funding around the world. And I'm talking about truly cutting edge science, not to mention the millions that he has donated to science institutions and to scientists. There is a ton of interesting and compelling press on this. His support of cutting edge neuroscience and M-Theory. Important for the encyclopedic reader. So my question is: who decides what should be portrayed first? The scandals or his science career? And if the latter is critically important, shouldn't it at least carry half the weight of the article? Who decides how to weigh the information? I would like to review this and have a more true balance of the man displayed. His science work is very important around the world.

My second question is, how do some people like Prince Andrew, get away with a completely stellar Wiki profile when it is clear that there are tons of reliable press sources linking him to sex scandals. Please look at his profile and you will see that it is unbelievably whitewashed, despite all the reliable negative press out there. Even Bill Clinton's profile is remarkably stellar. And though it touches on his scandals, there is no mention that he was impeached or that he was convicted of lying to a Grand Jury. So how do these people get away with it? Is there a secret Wiki protection team that allows this?

Thanks for your thoughts, stgeorge12 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stgeorge12 (talk • contribs) 17:12, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

I saw this post and was curious about the Bill Clinton allegations. The word "impeach..." is used in the article 18 times. The first time is in the 3rd paragraph of the article where it says "... he was impeached for perjury and obstruction of justice in a scandal involving a White House intern ...". I can not find anything in the article that says he was convicted of lying, but then I also can not find anything on the web that says he was convicted of anything. At least that article does not look like it is being whitewashed at all. I do not know anything about Prince Andrew and the allegations there, but if you have reliable sources that discuss these allegations then bring them up on the article's talk page. GB fan 17:35, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Sultan Muhammad (Badakhshan)

While your CSD nom was technically correct at the time it was made, I was easily able to establish a context by searching the name Sultan Muhammad. It was then very easy to come up with a short stub on this ancient king. When doing CSD nominations or new page patrol, it is important to keep an open mind and not just look for the next thing to delete. Oftentimes, as in this case, a new user is simply unfamiliar with how things work here, and what is expected from a new article. In this case they seem to have found a notable subject that we did not have an article about yet, they just did a rather poor job of presenting it. So, you didn't break any policy or anything and as I said your nomination was technically accurate, but it is important to consider the possibility that new articles, even those of a very poor quality, have the potential to be easily fixed and need not be simply swept away as worthless without even trying to fix the problems. There is also the issue of systemic bias which is something we should all be aware of and try to reverse when possible. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:01, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

No problem. Calabe 1992 17:02, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Mahmud Shaterian

Hello Calabe1992. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Mahmud Shaterian, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: The article indicates Shaterian had a leading role in preserving Azerbaijani music in Iran. This is a credible claim of importance. . Thank you. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 21:31, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Roger. Calabe 1992 02:53, 20 December 2011 (UTC)

User: Tommer Spence

Hi, you sent me a message because I deleted the contents of the User: Tommer Spence page. Tommer Spence is actually me (as you can see from my username) and I really don't want that page up there anymore. Unfortunately I can't remember the details for the Tommer Spence account, and for some reason Wikipedia doesn't recognise the username when I try to reset my details... Please can the page just be deleted? Thanks Tommer312 (talk) 19:54, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

An administrator has deleted the page. Calabe 1992 01:11, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! Tommer312 (talk) 02:23, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

Parasuco

Hi. ~~Jeremy's WP:POINT edit aside,~~ the fact remains that Parasuco is so blatantly promotional -- and significantly edited by a corporate COI account -- that I think G11 applies. I've speedied it accordingly. thanks, Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:28, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

In retrospect, he was entirely correct. I've struck through my comment, above. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:31, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Hamlet

The talk page for Hamlet has been locked or blocked. Therefore, it is impossible to discuss the issue, as you suggest. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bobevanssausage (talk • contribs) 03:36, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Re: Your Warning

Your template warning that you left on my talk page doesn't constitute as nonconstructive. Perhaps you should research into the topic more approrpiately next time before you hastily slap templates on people's talk pages. --97.100.176.192 (talk) 03:47, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Obviously he didn't revert the edit for no reason. Calabe 1992 03:50, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Why don't you let him decide that and continue the discussion instead of having it deleted by someone random. --97.100.176.192 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 03:55, 1 January 2012 (UTC).

I'd recommend you take some advice you've already received. Calabe 1992 03:59, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

So you provide me a link to a disagreement I'm already having and consider that advice? That seems like instigating to me. The discussions are active, the input is being actively read and doesn't require template warnings. Simple enough. Have a great evening! --97.100.176.192 (talk) 04:06, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Oh yeah, you too. Calabe 1992 04:06, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Happy New Years

	Happy New Years!
	Happy New Years! I hope 2012 will bring joy and happiness to you and the whole Wikipedia community. -- Luke (Talk) 05:39, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Why, thank you! Calabe 1992 05:41, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Re:A barnstar for you!

Hey, no problem. Thank you for the barnstar. :) -waywardhorizons (talk) 19:19, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Your report of Hr.mysr (talk · contribs)

Your report of the user here at AIV was early. Users are reported even if behaviour continues after final warning or if there are sufficient edits to indicate a role account. Thanks, — Abhishek ^Talk 14:48, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Well, personally I don't think there's much hope for that one. Calabe 1992 14:50, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

If you notice, as of now, the user has stopped after the 3rd warning I gave. So it is pretty early to judge that. — Abhishek ^Talk 14:52, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Good enough, will monitor. Calabe 1992 14:53, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks...

...For reverting vandalism on my talk page; it's really appreciated! Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 15:07, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

No problem. Looks like someone definitely has an issue there! Calabe 1992 15:08, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Indeed! But he'll get tired of it eventually, they all do... Thanks again! Salvio ^{Let's talk about it!} 15:10, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

user:Ncmustangs

I am a bit worried by your report of this user (never warned and no obvious vandalism), and by such reverts. Cheers. Materialscientist (talk) 04:02, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't think I intended to revert that one, that's my mistake, but then since he's listed at UAA already, Huggle decided to automatically report him at AIV. I've complained about that before, but apparently it hasn't been fixed. Sorry for the mixup... Calabe 1992 04:05, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for heads up (I don't use Huggle and thus don't think much about its glitches). Materialscientist (talk) 04:08, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

User:Ikswodasb1

When you posted to my talk page suggesting this user should be blocked, I was just about to block the account. However, someone else beat me to it. JamesBWatson (talk) 20:20, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Good enough, I see it was apparently a sock, anything by chance to do with the recent massive dynamic IP invasion? My talk page even got hit by it so I am curious. Calabe 1992 20:21, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	For the quick revert on ClueBot's talk page. Many thanks! - On behalf of the ClueBot Admins -- Rich(MTCD)^T\|C\|E-Mail 20:49, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

FYI

Saw the question from Sogladtomeetyou at the help desk. It's me she's inquiring about and, IMHO, we have a WP:FORUMSHOP situation. May want to drop a line to admin User:Mike Cline, look at his interactions with her from last summer, and review the talk at Talk:History of Montana before this goes off the various drama boards. Montanabw^(talk) 22:37, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes this is the person I was refering to and I think that this persons edit history speaks for itself. Thank You Soglad Tomeetyou (talk) 00:04, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

I think this needs to be addressed at a more suitable location, such as WP:ANI. Calabe 1992 01:59, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

I wanted to let you know that I did take this to WP:ANI Thank you for the help

Soglad Tomeetyou (talk) 05:02, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks a lot Calabe. Next time, can you be so kind as to investigate a little first before recommending the sledgehammer? Looks like Franamax is on it, though, so no harm, no foul, but now I have to take more time from editing articles to deal with drama. Sigh. Montanabw^(talk) 18:29, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

ANI isn't a sledgehammer, it's a place to work out disputes. As I'm not an admin, I'm not going to personally address every situation myself. Calabe 1992 19:14, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

ANI is not for petty matters, it is for serious issues. That's all. Montanabw^(talk) 23:22, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Calabe1992. You have new messages at Talk:Francis Hastings, 2nd Earl of Huntingdon.
Message added 05:06, 6 January 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Due to editing issues, some of your edits may have been reverted. Please consider restoring them as necessary, according to the recommendations. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:06, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice, looks like what I attempted to do was revert an unconstructive edit, but, man, that is a mess, and it looks like I may have even accidentally reintroduced some unwanted business. Do what you have to do to get it cleaned up. Calabe 1992 14:21, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Well, I won't personally be doing anything (other than eventually protecting the page) - it's not my subject area. All I've done is revert back to the most recent diff that wasn't a mess, and without pointing a finger at anyone in particular, because I'm sure that most of the edits were done in good faith, I've appealed to everyone to go back and have a look and see if they can help straighten it out. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 14:45, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for reverting my talk page! -- RandorXeus. 15:25, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

No problem. Calabe 1992 15:26, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

When reverting vandalism...

...make sure you revert to the last clean version. You missed some with this edit to Brooklyn. Acps110 ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:44, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Ah, thanks for catching that one. Saw the bot was the previous editor so I figured it probably had already gotten it. Calabe 1992 15:46, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Sure! Acps110 ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:49, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Re: January 2012

Howdy. Thank you for remind me, but someone has make an article with the same title, you can refer here. I beg your help. Thank you. Aamuizz (talk) 15:50, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Well, that's still at AfC, so we'll need to wait on removing the redirect until it actually hits the mainspace. Calabe 1992 15:52, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Please receive the award

		The Good Friend Award
		For you.

Why, thank you. Calabe 1992 16:23, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

The Christians' Hour

Yes, sadly CSD:A7 only applies to exactly those subjects listed in WP:CSD. As radio programs aren't explicitly listed, A7 cannot apply. However, I've taken it to AfD. Sparthorse (talk) 20:56, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I stepped on you in the process of doing that as well. The user now removed the template, so I've reverted them. Calabe 1992 20:57, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting. Best, Sparthorse (talk) 20:59, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Suspected sockpuppet

Please see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Mmann1988. This user has engaged in continued edit warring and if my suspicions are right is the same user that was blocked for two weeks only two days ago.Keizers (talk) 22:17, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Cheers, I wasn't entirely sure because last time it happened, I reported it then reported a suspected second sock and no one saw that amendment for a while. Just being sure cause this is all happening in real timeKeizers (talk) 22:31, 6 January 2012 (UTC)

Pwnage

Thought you may be happy to learn that the Jeff Epstein lot (or probably one chap) have or has been pwned Egg Centri c 23:45, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Help me

Hi Calabe1992, I need your help here. —Preceding undated comment added 14:18, 9 January 2012 (UTC).

Lori Beth's FB profile

Why do you think the link is fake?

Moreover, could you make your "X" on the userpage partly transparent so that we can read the text behind it? Thanks. --70.179.174.101 (talk) 19:03, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

WP:LINK. And no, I'm not changing the X. Calabe 1992 19:04, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

How do you expect us to read the text behind it? Would you not show extra hospitality to visitors by not making us have to click "View Source" to read the text that's hidden? Really, how does it hurt to make the X partly transparent?

(Yes, I oppose SOPA as well. It would overcrowd jails, which would overwhelm funding issues that are getting stretched as is. ) --70.179.174.101 (talk) 19:57, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't. If you want to read the extra text for now, highlight everything except for the X and copy>paste it into Wordpad. Calabe 1992 19:58, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Brute Labs

What do you think? It's possibly somewhat notable, at least it claims it is. Drmies (talk) 14:34, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Agreed, although I think it needs a good re-write, not just for POV but also for simply making sense (right off the start, where is Silicon Valley?). Tagging it for now and planning to work on it. Calabe 1992 16:18, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

u got beef w/my edits to eastwood mall?

did u even read what i wrote in the eastwood mall talk page? probably not. you had no reason to revert my edit. don't do it again w/o explaining why — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.189.43.216 (talk) 22:37, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

You changed the content with no source. Calabe 1992 22:39, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

u reverted it to an edit that "changed the content with no source" lol...... & I posted in the talk concerning that content & my edit. explaining why i did what i did. my edit didnt even add any new facts. it only removed opinion. y did the burden of referencing a source for that content suddenly fall on my edit? b/c it fell into your crosshairs... u should focus on contributing to pages that u know. or take a closer look at pages u edit. then u can KNOW if its vandalism instead of assuming bad faith ;) then again maybe huggle didnt show u the big picture? 76.189.43.216 (talk) 02:18, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

It won't go over good if you go around telling users which pages to and not to contribute to. Calabe 1992 02:27, 17 January 2012 (UTC)

A cup of coffee for you!

Thank You Calabe SPARK8 (talk) 04:03, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

Rollback Jimbo Wales Talk Page

Hi! Just because you support the blackout, that doesn't give you the authority to rollback topic discussions on Jimbo's talk page. Thanks! Stubbleboy 02:59, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

That isn't because I support the rollback, but rather is because the reverted comment was rather disruptive. I see I caught one other comment also, which was accidental. Calabe 1992 03:01, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

Oh, so now that you personally feel a comment made on someone else's userpage was disruptive, that gives you the right to delete it? Stubbleboy 03:04, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

Read over WP:BEANS, and understand the point. Also, it was on a user talk page, not a userpage. Calabe 1992 03:04, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

WP:BEANS!!? That is your reason for the rollback? WP:Beans is a humorous essay, it is not a Wikipedia policy or guideline. Stubbleboy 03:08, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

WP:AGF isn't an official policy either, but I can say right now you've violated it. Calabe 1992 03:11, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

I saw that a couple of admin's set you straight. Nice to know. Stubbleboy 04:14, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

"Set me straight"? You'll notice I didn't revert you after you reinstated it. Calabe 1992 04:15, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

I had time to think about the edits I made to those talk pages before the blackout, and I was honestly just messing around a little. I didn't really agree with the blackout completely, but in the end it was probably a good thing to raise awareness about SOPA and how damaging it would be if it passed the way it's written now. Hope you have no hard feelings. Thanks. Stubbleboy 05:20, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

No damage done. Calabe 1992 05:21, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Also, I see that you've been here since April of last year, and you already have over 21,000 edits. Do you believe you would consider the possibility of becoming an administrator here on Wikipedia en? Stubbleboy 05:51, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

I applied once back in October, and didn't make it by a country mile. But typically one (or more) failure(s) is the way it goes before you get in. I'll apply again sometime, probably this year. Calabe 1992 05:53, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Look forward to offering my support. Stubbleboy 06:19, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Appreciated, although I don't know for sure when that will be. Calabe 1992 06:19, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Everyone, and I repeat EVERYONE in Palm Springs knows who Gavin Servelle is.

A Wikipedia article about Mr. Servelle is currently being created by a group of gay/bi/transgender volunteers, as he has done massive amounts of work in the community to help bring about gay/bi/transgender awareness. He is a household name in and around Palm Springs, California. I do not appreciate you attacking me, claiming I attacked another member who blatantly spat in the face Mr. Servelle and everything he has worked for. Quite honestly, I'm disgusted.

Spirit In The Sky Paul (talk) 06:28, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

You clearly attacked the IP, you added an entry to a list without an article. Somehow, I'm doubting the article will assert importance, and if that's true, it will be deleted. You need to review guidelines before jumping into what you've done. Calabe 1992 06:33, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't think I quite like your tone. You assume that just because he is homosexual, an article about him will not have importance? I myself am not writing the article, but I figured I would jump the gun and add Mr. Servelle's name to the list. The article is also referencing multiple news articles about Mr. Servelle in Palm Springs. I am quite offended by you, Calebe1992.

Spirit In The Sky Paul (talk) 06:37, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

I like how you assume that I believe importance will not be asserted only because he is a homosexual. Read over WP:AGF and then come back. Calabe 1992 06:39, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

I like the line, "It is important to be patient with newcomers, who will be unfamiliar with Wikipedia's culture and rules, but may nonetheless turn out to be valuable contributors." You don't seem to be very patient. I'm just here to learn Calebe, but evidently you're a bigot.

Spirit In The Sky Paul (talk) 06:42, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm not going to patient with someone who blatantly attacks another user when they were the one enforcing policy. Calabe 1992 06:45, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

How was that an "attack?" I merely told them I was offended by their removal of Mr. Servelle's name. I've seen numerous notable residents pages where the person being referenced has a "red name." I see on your user page that it says you're straight. See? I can use italics too. It doesn't make my point any more justifiable. It's quite evident you're purposely targetting me because of my defending of a homosexual rights activist.

Spirit In The Sky Paul (talk) 06:48, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

You just don't get it, and with your accusatory attitude, you're not worth my time at this point. Calabe 1992 06:49, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Accusatory? What's that supposed to mean?

Spirit In The Sky Paul (talk) 06:52, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Edits to School Holidays page

Initial edit modified the ref and was marked as spam.
Second edit added a new ref and was marked as spam.
Third edit removed a ref and was marked as vandalism.

Please consider your approach to handling these edits in the future.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnyma22 (talk • contribs)

You replaced a ref with a spam link, got reverted by someone, then removed the ref, got reverted by me, then replaced it with the other link again, and now someone else has reverted you. Read over the link guidelines. Calabe 1992 06:43, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry but that's not a spam link. It is the most reliable source for information and much more reliable than the current existing ref. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnyma22 (talk • contribs) 07:04, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Read over WP:Reliable, that wouldn't fall into it. Calabe 1992 07:07, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Then for the sake of consistency please remove the other ref because that has the same issue. Thanks Johnyma22 (talk) 07:14, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Any particular reason why you would want one and not the other? Calabe 1992 07:15, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes, the initial link has the incorrect dates for the school I work at, the link I replaced it with allows users to submit dates that are then peer reviewed. Thanks Johnyma22 (talk) 07:17, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Fair enough, but since you can't actually cite the dates (other than on that site) I've replaced the ref with one that credibly states that dates vary. Calabe 1992 07:19, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Userpage Shield
		Thanks for helping out. Kinaro^{(say hello)} ^{(what's been done)} 06:41, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, no problem. Calabe 1992 06:47, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Trying to add Blogs to a couple of sites on Wikipedia

Hi Calabe, I have been trying to add my personal blogs to the Wikipedia sites, and they keep being thrown out, I have tried on one occasion to "undo" but still it gets took off. The sites of my own and probably have far more information on the subjects that Wikipedia have got already so I do know they would be a useful addition. Furthermore I do see that other organizations or blogs have been accepted. So I am struggling to understand what I am doing wrong. Can you help it would be great. birderbryan. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Birderbryan (talk • contribs) 16:46, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

You would have a WP:COI with your own site, and it would likely fall under WP:SPAM. Calabe 1992 16:50, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Canidae

Hello Calabe1992, On the subject of Canidae at JamesBWatson's talk page, I would like to ask you to mind your own business and not interfere. I was asking him a question myself and not anyone else. Thank you. JoJaEpp (talk) 06:29, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Doesn't matter. You can't revoke rights to participate in a discussion. Calabe 1992 06:33, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

I have also posted a note about this at User talk:JoJaEpp. JamesBWatson (talk) 08:47, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Sorry Calabe1992, I did not mean to be rude, I just have a tendency to being particular to who answers me. JoJaEpp (talk) 00:54, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

Kharwar

Can you block that IP and or protect the page. This edit war has been going on for over a year.Andrew Kurish (talk) 02:04, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

I am not an administrator. Otherwise I would. Calabe 1992 02:06, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Sorry about that!Andrew Kurish (talk) 20:07, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

Sorry this is a little late...

...But thank you for reverting the vandalism on my userpage! I really appreciate it! :D Queen of Awesome (talk) 23:41, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

No problem. Calabe 1992 01:43, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Madchen Funk

Your A1 speedy deletion tag of Madchen Funk was not correct- A1 only applies to pages with truly no context, and the criterion actually lists what that means. If you can identify what the article is about, it has enough context. However, since no claim of importance was made, the article was deleted under A7.--Slon02 (talk) 02:06, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

I think I tried to tag the previous one as A1, and somehow got the next one as well; I don't remember tagging one by that name. Calabe 1992 02:11, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

JamesBWatson

What possible business is this of yours ? Obviously you are not at all familiar with the background so I would suggest that you refrain from interfering.

90.199.27.113 (talk) 19:41, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

It's anyone's business when you write like you are. Calabe 1992 19:45, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Apparently "anyone" means only those content to blindly follow the herd.

90.199.27.113 (talk) 10:54, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

USS OAK HILL

I do not use wikipedia often and know how to use all the tools to talk, so i hope your getting this, but i keep changing the oak hill post because i WAS in attendance that day. The page makes it seem as if everyone in attendance was applauding for these two girls and accepted this. Thats not neutral. The other half were not clapping AND many were disgusted by this. thats the neutral position. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Liquid cells (talk • contribs) 01:51, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

You're not citing any sources; see the ANI discussion. Calabe 1992 01:55, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

The source is me. The local media did not allow the other people who did not agree with the event or applaud. This is false representation. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Liquid cells (talk • contribs) 02:09, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Please see WP:OR. Calabe 1992 02:11, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Made me laugh

"I revert people who aren't British." - Calabe1992

Just wanted you to know that I glanced at this edit and initially read it out of context. I was somewhat concerned at first, until I realized what you meant wasn't what I read. So thank you for getting soda up my nose. :) - Sudo Ghost 03:02, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

I love it when I do things like that. ;) Calabe 1992 03:06, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Wait, did I just write a WP:TPH? :) Calabe 1992 03:07, 25 January 2012 (UTC)

Niggle the First

I knew it was simple. But I am even more simple sometimes. Thanks very much for doing the honours. I'll try to remember the tweak. - Sitush (talk) 00:47, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

No problem. ICYW, the bot that updates the CU status on the main SPI page only runs every 15 min - I asked about that when I had to the same thing you're doing for the first time. :) Calabe 1992 00:49, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

The case has been in the queue for a few days. 15 minutes is not going to make any odds. The entire situation is basically a slow edit war involving multiple IPs and a few registered users. I could get the article semi-PP'd but I am more concerned about the general promotional trend & the fact that when someone gets a warning, someone else pops up etc. - Sitush (talk) 00:56, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Hey Calabe, don't feed the trolls. Let them hang themselves. In fact, the more they are fed the more difficult it can be, sometimes, to block them as a vandalism-only account if someone rises to the bait. Peace, Drmies (talk) 03:27, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Oh yeah, that one was a little too hilarious. Calabe 1992 03:33, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Recent Reverted edit on The Beach Boys

Please note that the post by 70.91.133.209 indicating The Beach Boys were known as The Pendeltons prior to 1961 was completely accurate and should not have been reverted, rather incorporated to the bands history on the page more appropriately. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.72.154.119 (talk • contribs)

I don't see a source. Calabe 1992 00:56, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Warning on User talk:116.250.94.250

I read your reversion warning, and it was given incorrectly. The information is verifiable, if you had followed the link (Triple J Hottest 100, 2011). --JB Adder | Talk 03:38, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I think I meant to hit "advanced" and give a custom reason, but obviously hit the wrong one. Calabe 1992 03:42, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

What reason were you looking for? I would understand insignificant, but not unverified. --JB Adder | Talk 03:44, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

I was going for the "advanced" button to type a custom message (in Huggle), but hit the one above it (which is "unsourced") in error. Since the box did not appear, I figured someone else had reverted it already. Calabe 1992 03:46, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Ahhh, so you were going for "insignificant". That's cool. --JB Adder | Talk 04:08, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Congratulations!

Is this an insult? Reaper Eternal (talk) 17:42, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

No it was supposed to be nice. Androzaniamy (talk) 18:55, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Judging from the attitude I've seen on my talk pages and others, my guess is yes.Wikipelli ^Talk 18:04, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

No it wasn't. Androzaniamy (talk) 17:42, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes, it was. Calabe 1992 18:40, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

I should know because I wrote it. Androzaniamy (talk) 17:42, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

No it wasn't it was a thank you. Androzaniamy (talk) 18:46, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, sure. Calabe 1992 18:47, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Don't you believe me? If this is the reaction I get when I do something nice for someone I probably won't bother anymore. Androzaniamy (talk) 18:54, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Trust me, you don't have to. Calabe 1992 18:55, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't have to what? Androzaniamy (talk) 19:05, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Bother. Calabe 1992 19:06, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

I think I'll just go and check my userpage and talkpage if it says 'hate this user and be as mean as you possibly can to them' on it. Androzaniamy (talk) 19:10, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Not sure how that relates to me. Calabe 1992 19:11, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

How you behave towards me suggests it does. Androzaniamy (talk) 19:13, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Then you need to read over WP:AGF and other policies before assuming things. Calabe 1992 19:15, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Found something you might want to take a look at: Accusing others of bad faith Shortcut: WP:AOBF

Although the assumption of good faith is dictated by Wikipedia policy, there is no corresponding policy requiring editors to act in good faith. Thus accusations of bad faith serve no purpose. They also can be inflammatory and hence can aggravate a dispute. It can be seen as a personal attack if bad faith motives are alleged without clear evidence that the others' action is actually in bad faith and harassment if done repeatedly. The result is often accusations of bad faith on your part, which tends to create a nasty cycle. Androzaniamy (talk) 19:20, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Looks like you need to take on the idea of practicing what you're preaching. Calabe 1992 19:22, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

And that means...? Androzaniamy (talk) 19:23, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

WP:STICK. Calabe 1992 19:24, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Excuse me but I would never, ever, by all the suns of Gallifrey beat a horse, dead or alive. I am extremely, very, sorry that you thought that way. That picture on the article just made me feel rather ill. My most hearfelt and most sincerest apologies for ever making you think that I would ever do such a horrible thing. Last question: Why did you find my certificate insulting (and please, no more links to any pictures of dead animal carcasses)? Androzaniamy (talk) 19:34, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

An apology

Sorry for trying to be nice. I now see you don't like it. Please, don't bother replying for I am not worth your time and effort. I am not trying to be sarcastic, just thought I'd let you know. Androzaniamy (talk) 20:36, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't see you trying to be nice. I see you trying to bend and twist your way through what you've done. Calabe 1992 20:37, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Bend and twist? If you think that of other people then let me tell you that I am not one of them. I have never in my life done anything that is bad-faith. I see that even my apologies can't get you to see the truth. Androzaniamy (talk) 20:47, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Calabe1992, there is no point in responding any further. Eagles 24/7 (C) 20:51, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Been offline for a brief time, I unfortunately agree. Calabe 1992 22:08, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Finally! Androzaniamy (talk) 23:21, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

lol. Eagles 24/7 (C) 23:22, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Hahaha Androzaniamy (talk) 23:35, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

I don't think you understood what Calabe1992 was saying at all. Eagles 24/7 (C) 23:36, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Hahahaha, I love it when people think I do not know something when I do. Androzaniamy (talk) 23:39, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

And you clicked the blue link "agree"? Eagles 24/7 (C) 23:41, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Um...no? Androzaniamy (talk) 23:44, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

That's why I found your comments... rather ironic. Eagles 24/7 (C) 23:46, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

You...see...well...ever...since...I...saw...that...dead...horse...I...got...scared...of...blue...links...so...I...stopped...clicking...on...ones...that...look...suspicios. Androzaniamy (talk) 23:50, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

If you want to know what we're talking about, click the link. If not, I don't care. Eagles 24/7 (C) 23:52, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

I will click it if it doesn't have any dead animal pictures on it. Androzaniamy (talk) 23:54, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

It doesn't, and this is my last reply. Eagles 24/7 (C) 23:55, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Some people just can't function well in this particular collaborative environment. We can't change Wikipedia to suit them, so if they're unable to change themselves, they'll need to be shown the door. Androzaniamy (talk) 17:35, 27 January 2012 (UTC)

So true. You seem to be one of them. Calabe 1992 01:54, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you

For cleaning up my talk page! Jim1138 (talk) 02:28, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

No problem. :) Calabe 1992 02:29, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Lisa Raymond edits

I forgot to log in and you sent me messages about Lisa Raymond update I made. I have worked hours on that page and people do not care about me updating it. I put most of the new information on in the past few months. No one seemed to add her new info this year and seem to care about it that much. I do not understand why you would not let me make the change. The information I changed was outdated and its funny that someone cares about the page after I made a helpful revision. I dont appreciate your tone after how helpful I have been on this website.

-Dredding929

I don't see a reason as to why you removed all the text that you did. Calabe 1992 03:10, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

31st century

Your undo of the anon's was clearly correct, but why did you revert yourself? — Arthur Rubin (talk) 09:01, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Oh geez, I think I reverted the wrong edit/subsequent warning there. Thanks for catching it. Calabe 1992 17:51, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Vatslav Vorovsky

Hi, I have trouble with this page, please move to Vatslav Vorovsky, Vatslav Vorovskiy was wrong,

thanks, --PjotrMahh1 (talk) 18:08, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

- See also V. V. Vorovsky

--PjotrMahh1 (talk) 18:12, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

OK, I'll try to help you out here. I see we have three articles here, Vatslav Vorovskiy was the original and needs to be moved to Vatslav Vorovsky. V.V. Vorovsky was originally a redirect to the first and needs to now point to the latter. Is this all correct? Calabe 1992 18:13, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Today morning V.V. Vorovsky was the original, I have moved wrongly to Vatslav Vorovskiy, it must be not -kiy, but -ky only as Malinovsky, Dzerzhinsky -ky ended words, thanks,

--PjotrMahh1 (talk) 18:19, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

OK, I have tagged the correct spelling for deletion to clear the space so we can properly move the typoed version to it. A bot should take care of redirecting the V.V. version. Calabe 1992 18:20, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Well, the end name must be Vatslav Vorovsky, thank You very much for help,

--PjotrMahh1 (talk) 18:27, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

That's what we'll be getting it to. No problem. Calabe 1992 18:28, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Hiya-- Who the heck moved this page to Vorovskiy? The common Western spelling is "Vorovsky" — and I can produce a dozen or two dozen published sources of this versus zero for the transliterated name as it now sits... See Leon Trotsky vs. Leon Trotskiy for analogy. I tried to move it back and the move was refused. Carrite (talk) 18:35, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

The user shown above did that - it was a typo and I've requested it to be moved to the correct spelling (which was taken up with a redirect that I've requested deletion of, then we'll move it properly). Calabe 1992 18:37, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

I'll avert my eyes for now. No idea why it can't just be switched back, since the page was started under the correct name and got moved out. Carrite (talk) 18:41, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

There's a [now blanked] redirect that's taking up that space, which I've requested to be deleted so we can move the article there. Calabe 1992 18:42, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Are you sure "Vorovskiy" is wrong? WP:RUS suggests -ий → -iy in case of non-Russian origin. We are dealing with Polish origin here. Perhaps filling in a a requested move would be a good idea. 88.196.241.249 (talk) 18:44, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

I am very sorry, I was unable to move to Vorovsky directly,

--PjotrMahh1 (talk) 18:48, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Requested move is

Done. Calabe 1992 18:48, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

I see template only, "db-reason|1=needs to be deleted for clean move from wrong title Vatslav Vorovskiy",

--PjotrMahh1 (talk) 18:58, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

The requested move is at the talk page for the wrong spelling. The correctly spelled version is taken up by what was a redirect, which I tagged for deletion so we can move the actual article to it. Calabe 1992 18:59, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

I can't move: System answer: The page could not be moved: a page of that name already exists, or the name you have chosen is not valid. Please choose another name, or use Requested moves to ask an administrator to help you with the move. Do not manually move the article by copying and pasting it; the page history must be moved along with the article text.

--PjotrMahh1 (talk) 19:14, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Correct. You're getting that message because there was a redirect taking up that name already. The redirect is tagged so it will be deleted. Wait for admin involvement at this point. Calabe 1992 19:16, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Ok, I thought, You are admin, sorry, thanks,

--PjotrMahh1 (talk) 19:21, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Excellent, done. Thank You,

--PjotrMahh1 (talk) 21:08, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

No problem, glad I could help out. Calabe 1992 22:08, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

SWAT_Team_(process_model)

Yes, I effectively blanked a completely empty article. There's no need for book references or banner warnings on an article that has been completely empty for years. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.208.122.50 (talk) 20:12, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Content has been restored now. Calabe 1992 20:13, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

Thank you...

...for watching out for me. :) Freakin' neo-Nazis. >:( ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:49, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Heh, no problem. Calabe 1992 18:50, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Did you ever see the first Blues Brothers movie? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:52, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Nope... Calabe 1992 18:53, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Here's the scene I was thinking of.[2] It's a hoot. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:00, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

That's great. Calabe 1992 19:02, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Flan

Have semi-protected that, thanks for sorting! Worm^TT · (talk) 15:44, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

No problem. Looks like classmates or perhaps even one person on a variable IP to me. Calabe 1992 15:45, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

I'd go with classmates, since at least one seems to be trying to fix it. Hopefully shouldn't have more troubles. Worm^TT · (talk) 15:47, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, looks like we're done. I've tagged the IPs for what it's worth. Calabe 1992 15:53, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	For all your Anti-Vandalism work on Wikipedia :). TheGeneralUser (talk) 13:06, 4 February 2012 (UTC)

A few changes

To all users who think I'm trouble,

I have been thinking carefully and have come to a final conclusion as to why some other users seem to absolutely hate me and everything I do. These are a list of things I will try to do when I edit Wikipedia. From now on I will:

Not trust Wikipedia when I use it for my own purposes.

Continue editing it for as long as I shall live!

Ignore rude messages to me and report them.

Ignore users that call me names.

Continue fighting vandalism.

Accept all help whether I need it or not.

Ask for help from users that are helpful and polite.

Give help to users who ask for it.

Spend more time on editing Wikipedia instead of trying to persuade others that I don't mean to be mean.

Not give thank you messages to users who do not recieve them well.

Never edit another user's user page.

Continue being polite and competent.

I have sent you this because I think you might benefit from reading it. Androzaniamy (talk) 12:23, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

Spooky edit conflict, I think

This was interesting: [3].

I'm guessing your Huggle edit conflicted with my manual edit and reverted it. Worth us watching for in future, I guess, since nobody seemed to get a warning about the conflict (I happened to "hover" your diff in my watchlist, with NavPops, and would probably never have noticed otherwise. I've seen similar "hiccups" before. Begoon ^talk 04:50, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Weird! That might be worth me mentioning at the feedback page. Thanks for pointing that out. Calabe 1992 04:53, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

I think it's a good idea to report it. As I say, I think I've seen Huggle do similar "odd" things very occasionally in the past, and I think edit-conflicts were usually to blame, but I don't use HG, so no direct experience of it myself. Begoon ^talk 05:03, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, there are definitely some issues. One that I can't stand is that if any user is reported at UAA and then I hit the standard revert/warn button, it reports them at AIV regardless of how many warnings they have (even if they haven't been warned at all). I'll post a note about this odd one over there as well... Calabe 1992 05:27, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Ugh, the AIV thing sounds horrid. I actually saw your comment at Wikipedia:Huggle/Feedback about that. TW does pretty well for me, but I only really monitor a watchlist, so I never did much with HG other than try it out. Begoon ^talk 05:49, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, it's nice for general vandalism patrol (actually quite fast and efficient at it), but for watching specific pages, using the Watchlist and normal rollback or Twinkle is far easier. Calabe 1992 05:51, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I rarely use the default revert-and-warn button in Huggle, because often Huggle's idea of the right thing to do is different from mine. Clicking on the drop down list, going to "Advanced...", and selecting an appropriate warning level and type of warning message takes a couple of seconds more than just clicking the big red exclamation button, but it is worth it for the greater control it gives me. JamesBWatson (talk) 08:39, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

Twinkle

Ahh, got it! Thanks for the heads up. LegacyOfValor (talk) 16:13, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

No problem. Calabe 1992 16:13, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Proposed Update on the One-child Policy Page

Hello,

Since you've recently edited the One-child policy page, I was hoping to get your input on an update that I've proposed. It's concerning the population pyramid, and it's on the talk page under the heading "Proposed Update". I hope to hear from you - cheers! (Shredder2012 (talk) 17:24, 6 February 2012 (UTC))

Email

Hello, Calabe1992. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.— JamesBWatson (talk) 15:59, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Not seeing anything yet. Calabe 1992 16:06, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

If it doesn't appear within a few hours then let me know. I will be offline for quite a while now, though. JamesBWatson (talk) 16:14, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

OK, thanks. I'm sure you now see why I was contacting you. ;) Calabe 1992 16:15, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

I was assuming that "Not seeing anything yet" meant that you had not yet received my email. If so, have you received it yet? If not, I can send you another copy. However, it occurs to me that you may have meant "not seeing any activity related to the points raised in the email yet." JamesBWatson (talk) 08:28, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

I hadn't gotten the email yet, but it arrived a short time later. Thanks. Calabe 1992 16:21, 7 February 2012 (UTC)

thanks

Hi just wanted to drop a quick note of thanks for explaining the AIV situation. It doesn't matter how long I've been here there is always something new to learn so I appreciate the time you took to fill me in. Cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 22:57, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Hah. Your talkback crossed with my post here. Thanks again. MarnetteD | Talk 22:58, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

Heh, no problem. Yeah, if a page gets deleted, the user's contributions to that page fall into the deleted contribs, which are only viewable by admins. Calabe 1992 23:02, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

not vandalism

just knew he was logged in , that's why. Jawadreventon (talk) 01:06, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

I hit the wrong button and tried to revert myself but it obviously didn't work. Think I got it now. :) Calabe 1992 01:08, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

CSD

Regarding Alphabet Prison, A7 specifically states that "this criterion applies only to articles about web content and to articles about people, organizations, and individual animals themselves, not to articles about their books, albums, software, or other creative works." It also cannot be deleted under A9 as there is an article on the band, Pleymo. Please be more careful in the future. Thanks. —Dark 02:27, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

I believe I meant A9 at the time, I didn't see a link to the artist so intended to tag it as such. Thanks. Calabe 1992 02:38, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

I would appreciate it if you checked to see if there is in fact an article on the band before you tag it for deletion. It doesn't take that much effort to check, I would rather that you tag the article correctly rather than quickly. —Dark 07:41, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	This is a gift for your ever so hard efforts in combatting vandalism! $Abhijay$ ^{What did I do this time?} 15:40, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Thanks...

You were about 10 seconds ahead of me on that talk page. I had just finished reading the history. Thanks! Wikipelli ^Talk 21:03, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

No prob. Calabe 1992 21:03, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

^{(Piggybacking thread)} ... and for this. Cheers - DVdm (talk) 16:39, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

^{(There's room on this piggy for two)}... and for looking after this! Haploidavey (talk) 16:08, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

No problems, peoples. ;) Calabe 1992 16:57, 12 March 2012 (UTC)

Rollback

Nobody accused you of vandalism. However, if you're interested as to why your edit was reverted, it was because there was no reason for you to revert. The material added was perfectly valid. There's nothing controversial about it and it could be easily verified with a quick Google search. It would have been more productive to check the claim, instead of reverting and leaving a spurious warning for the editor who made the original edit. I've added a reference because you (implicitly) asked for one, but the combination of revert+warn on a trivial matter does not help to retain new editors. Maxim_(talk) 01:54, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Actually, I left no warning, but rather the welcome message template concerning verifiability. I'm actually not interested in why it was reverted, but having dealt with rollback issues for some time, I do not see that using it in a case like this is appropriate. Calabe 1992 01:57, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Would you prefer that I use "rv" or "Undid revision (...)" as an edit summary next time? Maxim_(talk) 01:59, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, since it has been pressed into me previously, I would say yes, and I quote:

"Use of standard rollback for any other purposes – such as reverting good-faith changes which you happen to disagree with – is likely to be considered misuse of the tool. When in doubt, use another method of reversion and supply an edit summary to explain your reasoning."

Calabe 1992 02:01, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Alright then, when I revert you the next time I will use the edit summary "rv", even though it arguably conveys less information than if I press [rollback]. Maxim_(talk) 02:02, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Just using "rv" wouldn't help anything, as it doesn't explain anything (at least if we can hit Twinkle's revert we can type why). However, hopefully you won't be reverting me in the future. ;) Calabe 1992 02:04, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Moved

I agree. You know nothing about renju and its rules, but you edited a page deleting the essence; moreover, the page you noted has different content than was on page. Please think twice before deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Renju player (talk • contribs) 13:32, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

You clearly copied the instructions from the other page (which the bot tagged). That is not permitted. I do not believe the pages you're creating are notable either, hence why it was tagged. Calabe 1992 13:35, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

OK, let's try once more.

At first, let's make this talk on the talk page without vandaling of the page with content. And some additions.

This is a set of game rules. The game has different sets of them due to historical reasons.
You miss the point; these rules (Yamaguchi on the page and Johnsson via your link) are different.

The difference begins on the 1st step: with Yamaguchi 1st player offers the number of 5th moves immediately; with Johnsson it is done on the 3rd step by the 2nd player and the number is strictly limited.

Since you don't see the difference - why are you comparing!?

And once more - let's go on the talk page (Yamaguchi opening rule). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Renju player (talk • contribs)

Go ahead and keep it for now, but it still appears as though you copied the content from the site and then formatted it for your needs. Calabe 1992 14:08, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

OK. But why only Yamaguchi rule? I've created a couple of pages about different opening rules (namely RIF, Taraguchi, Tarannikov, Taraguchi-N, going to create Sakata and Soosorv, maybe I'll add Johnsson too even it isn't a rule adopted officially) - but only Yamaguchi was marked as a "copy". Why so? What do I have to do to prove that it isn't a prohibited copy but just a rule citation? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Renju player (talk • contribs) 14:26, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict)What brought my attention to this page was the bot tagging. As for the others, I haven't reviewed them. I personally would worry more about getting notable sources at this point, rather than primary ones. Calabe 1992 14:32, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

That's enough

...out of you: I'm taking your Twinkle away, and there will be no dessert tonight. Drmies (talk) 15:25, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Lol. Yes, I managed to push down too hard on my laptop's "mouse" and trip the rollback on your page... :) Calabe 1992 15:26, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Talk

Hi Calabe, when you send me a message, do I reply here or in my talk page? Thanks, sorry for the confusion!--Eronfalbo (talk) 16:47, 15 March 2012 (UTC)

Your talk page works best, since it keeps the conversation all in one place. You can use the {{talkback}} template to indicate to another user that you've left messages for them elsewhere. Calabe 1992 00:28, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Sorry

I thought nonsense was ... nonsensical. =/ Something that makes no sense? My bad though. Ncboy2010 (talk) 22:32, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, technically that text did make sense, it just gave no indication of importance or truly identified who the subject was (there's plenty of attractive young girls out there). Calabe 1992 22:34, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Edit

Hi Calabe - I made that edit because the IP belongs to me. I have since registered and no longer use the IP to make edits. If you read the edit that you undid (which I have edited again), you will see that Andy tells me to delete the message if I no longer check the page. I will not be checking the IP page since I am now registered. Hope this makes sense? Les Etoiles de Ma Vie (talk) 13:02, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks!

		The Userpage Shield
		Salvidrim! 02:00, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

No problem. What was his issue? Calabe 1992 02:01, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Surprisingly, I really have no idea! Would seem to be the same user as 140.198.45.63 and that he's somehow reacting to this discussion. Salvidrim! 02:16, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Heh. Perhaps he should just explain rather than troll userpages in the first place? Calabe 1992 02:20, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

*shrugs* That's the kind of folks that breed over at /b/. :| Salvidrim!

Lol. Calabe 1992 02:28, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Deleted page: Ted Robinson (Special Effects / Invisible Man)

Hello,

My name is Vitali Zatroutine, and I am a New Media student at Ryerson University, in Toronto, Canada. I work on media projects, and for one of my final exams, I have been instructed to create a false identity for educational purposes only. This is to help me develop skills on narrative, and to fully understand authenticity of an identity online. You deleted my page on Ted Robinson, an identity i created for a supposed "Invisible Person". This page was created entirely for my final examination. I understand you are very strict on creating a trustworthy community of information, but I do not plan on displaying anything offensive, or anything that might interrupt the flow of other pages. This is strictly educational. I would highly appreciate the opportunity to work on my assignment, and create a page for my false identity (even temporarily).

Thank you so much, this means a lot to me.

Vitali Zatroutine, New Media student at Ryerson University — Preceding unsigned comment added by LoadingShoe (talk • contribs) 02:35, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)Wikipedia does not suite that purpose.Jasper Deng (talk) 02:37, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
- Like Jasper said, and I also previously explained on your talk page, Wikipedia is not the place for this. Also, your page was actually deleted by User:Explicit, but there is not a lot that can be done at this point. I hope you find an adequate place for this. Calabe 1992 02:38, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Marseilles Mill Ruins

I own the website of descent, so there is no copyright infringement intended. HappyWheeler4Life (talk) 01:58, 26 March 2012 (UTC)HappyWheeler4Life

WP:DCM Calabe 1992 02:01, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

So, can the page stay or not? I am also looking to make more pages entirely out of my website's content. HappyWheeler4Life (talk) 02:15, 26 March 2012 (UTC) HappyWheeler4Life

Not until you release the content. Calabe 1992 02:16, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, I have, so, I guess I'll be contributing to the WP4M (WikiPedia 4 Million movement. HappyWheeler4Life (talk) 02:27, 26 March 2012 (UTC) HappyWheeler4Life

Reverting Sandbox edits with Huggle.

Thanks for your message clarifying this matter. In response to your comment, I have written a message about use of Huggle to the user, at User talk:Krenair#Sandbox. JamesBWatson (talk) 08:40, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

No problem. Looking back I wasn't that clear at all the first time around. Thanks for helping out. Calabe 1992 17:56, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

that's kinda weird.

my recent edit @ User talk:Drmies didn't seem legit? I was trying to let him/her know about a hasty reversion he made. is that not cool? did you read the msg or was it just flagged by a bot or something? thx 24.154.87.90 (talk) 20:04, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

~~Seriously dude. I took a look at the edits. Blatantly promotional.~~ Calabe 1992 20:06, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

I see the edit you're referring to now, but come on. Be WP:BOLD and fix it. Calabe 1992 20:13, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Copying from website

I daresay he misunderstood you, but HappyWheeler4Life (talk) claims at User talk:JohnCD#Regarding the deletion of the Gudmund Jensen Bridge that you told him it was OK to copy from a website on the basis of his asserting that he owns it. That isn't enough, because we can't be sure that someone on the end of a wire is who he says; he must either display a CC-BY-SA release on the website itself, or email from an address connected with it. The procedure is explained at WP:DCM. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 13:39, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, that's not what happened. Here I tagged his new page for deletion (someone ended up redirecting it), and at the discussion at the top of this page, I directed him to WP:DCM and told him it wasn't acceptable to post it until he released it. Calabe 1992 15:20, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

OK, good, you gave him the right message, I thought he was probably hearing what he wanted to hear. I see RHaworth and DGG have told him the same, so perhaps it will get through... JohnCD (talk) 21:03, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Alright, cheers. Calabe 1992 21:04, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Thx

For that comment. Always welcome as a TPS. Cheers. - DVdm (talk) 21:27, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

N/P. After all, a talk page stalker really does have a life. ;) Calabe 1992 21:28, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Your edit to my talk page

I disagree with your revert here on my talk page. It seems a legitimate request for opinion. Thanks though, Dismas|^(talk) 17:51, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

It's a block evading Hershebar (talk · contribs). Calabe 1992 17:52, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Hershebar for more. Calabe 1992 17:54, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Ah, I see. Mentioning that in your edit summary would have been helpful. Thanks, Dismas|^(talk) 17:59, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Most of the talk pages he hit were users who were already very involved in this, so I mass-rollbacked him. He seems to have access to a wide range of IPs. Calabe 1992 18:03, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

See my response to the IP if you like. I've seen this before though. Supporter(s) of Ms. Adams come by every few years to try to push her relevance or make her out to be something that she thinks she is versus what the reliable sources actually maintain that she is. Dismas|^(talk) 19:58, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Please explain

Hello there. Can you kindly explain why a relevant, factual edit containing a cogent quote from the article subject's own subsidiary's work product commenting on the antitrust implications of the article subject's acquisition by a cable conglomerate (as discussed in the existing article) was preposterously classified as vandalism and reverted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.28.10.142 (talk) 20:56, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Your edit is unsourced, and also the quotes do not adhere to WP:MOS. Calabe 1992 21:17, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for the note about the vandal. I'm glad the block was revised quickly enough. Keep up the outstanding work! --TeaDrinker (talk) 22:17, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Will do, thanks. :) Calabe 1992 22:18, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/camio54321

As a general rule, AfC submissions aren't deleted (even copyright deletions) for a variety of reasons. The main one is that these submissions aren't in the mainspace, so they don't hurt anyone. Of course, even the most non-notable appearing or promotional submission can be cleaned up, so its better not to delete the editor's work so they can continue to work on it. FWIW, people who submit work to AfC seem to be slightly more likely to steadily work towards acceptance, rather then those who just paste the same crap over and over into mainspace until they are blocked. Cheers, Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 23:01, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Looks like I made a Huggle blooper there, probably didn't spot that it was an AfC. Thanks for the note. Calabe 1992 00:52, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Ahh, I understand. Thanks for the work :) Nolelover ^Talk^·^Contribs 03:10, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

AfD

Please keep the templates off of the articles, it may confuse the readers. →Σ τ c. 05:35, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Oh yeah, didn't think about it. Thanks. Calabe 1992 05:37, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

BTW, I'm keeping an eye on Snotbot for the joke deletions at the moment. Calabe 1992 05:48, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

That can be easily solved by making edits similar to this on the AfD pages. →Σ τ c. 05:50, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

Being

Done on any articles found. Calabe 1992 05:56, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

MikeHasIssues

I noticed you initiated a SPI regarding the aforementioned username. I suspect this user is related to the following SPI. Going to add it to the SPI. Just letting you know.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Hershebar/Archive

Fasttimes68 (talk) 21:53, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

OK, excellent. I've opened a new investigation under that title, so we'll see what that brings. Calabe 1992 15:04, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Please email me if you would like some background history. It might clear some things up.Fasttimes68 (talk) 15:26, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Done. Calabe 1992 15:29, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Looks like a new sock is back. I noticed the last sock was indef blocked. Is that pretty much the same thing as a ban? wow Fasttimes68 (talk) 22:49, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

A block simply does not allow an account from editing - a ban is a community consensus that allows a user's contributions to be reverted on sight - the person who is operating the accounts is prohibited from editing, and blocks will be used to enforce a ban. I will probably propose a ban based on what has taken place here. Calabe 1992 22:53, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 4

Hi. When you recently edited Feud, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Traveller (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:37, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

AfD vs. db-a7

Hello-- regarding this edit, I recommend taking that from a speedy to an AfD if you believe it merits such action. A number of IP editors have contested your tag. It's on my watchlist because it's been through this cycle several times before. Might be time to get consensus. Thanks! Jokestress (talk) 07:10, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Done, thanks. I see it was deleted once in October, but will go ahead and leave it for the community to decide. Oddly, the bottom IP on the talk page actually left a misformatted message basically saying it should be deleted. Not sure they understood what they were doing. Calabe 1992 14:24, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Template: Seether

I was looking at Seether's template and I noticed the demos weren't on there. I attempted to put them on there myself, but for some reason they don't show up. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:Seether&action=edit&oldid=486124382 Do you know how to put them in? And also, I was looking at [[

Template:Bullet for My Valentine|Bullet for My Valentine's template]] and I noticed the singles were organized grouped by the albums they were released from. Do you know how to put that in as well? (They contributed "I've Got You Under My Skin" under His Way, Our Way album so I don't know where that would go in the template.)

Thanks. How may I serve you? Marshall Williams2 Talk Sign Contribs 21:02, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Hey. I made an edit to the template to make the demos appear properly (it was just formatting). I will start building a new template for Seether's singles by album. For those that would not fall under any specific album, they would fall under "other singles" or similar. See Template:Linkin Park for another example. Calabe 1992 01:25, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Done. Tell me what you think. Calabe 1992 01:52, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Helperbot

Total mistake. Didn't mean to do it, would be stupid to revert a bot that will just remove it again anyway. Didn't even realise i had done it.Edinburgh Wanderer 13:43, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

No problem. Figured that was what happened, but wanted to make sure. (I've reverted it when it has edit conflicted and removed the wrong reports, but didn't see that as the case here.) Calabe 1992 13:44, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Moved

Not sure what has happened, have previously successfully added to and edited text. Now looking to add an authority page with references on one of my specialist subjects and this has not been permitted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alert Publishing (talk • contribs)

You have a WP:COI with the subject you are editing. Your WP:Username also indicates that you are using a role account. Calabe 1992 14:55, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

ANonymous_carl

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

I did not attacked him. I stayed very polite, and invited him to a debate. Please, there is a difference between an attack and a polite invitation to a discussion. Of course, I must express my disagreement on his method, consisting of instantly remoove a contribution that took days to do, without talking about it on the discussion page. If this is a free encyclopedia, everyone's contribution should be handled the same way and not dismissed because a wikipedian with higher priviledge say so. Thank you very much. If i'm banned because of this message, than It will mean wikipedia is no more the free encyclopedia that it sworn to be. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.204.239.254 (talk) 20:47, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

You accused him of violating his privileges. First, read over WP:AGF, and then look around WP:HELP to learn more about this encyclopedia. Calabe 1992 20:50, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you, but I read these rules, which I entirely approve. I am a big wikipedia fan and I have great hopes for this encyclopedia in the future. But you should read about the whole matter before sending me a warning like if I was a delinquent . He removed a whole 5 days contribution ( it took 5 days to find all the sources), that was well sourced (more than 10) and veridic. I don't think he has the rights to do that without discussing the matter in the discussion page. If he can do this without having any penalties, this means that he can subsequently do whatever he wants on this encyclopedia and undo/ban whoever he wants or whatever contribution he wants without giving the concrete proof that something his wrong. This means that he can write lies and undo true facts without being edited himself : this is not and should not be the case, I red all the wikipedia rules. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.204.239.254 (talk) 21:00, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Well, instead of assuming bad faith, I would politely ask him why it was removed. Taking a look at the edit, it was performed with an automated program, and could even have been a mistake. I would recommend you politely ask why the edits were reverted, rather than accuse him of wrongdoing. Calabe 1992 21:04, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Indeed, I was a bit nervous because it took me 5 days, but now i have calmed down. I just wanted things to move quickly, but now I know it's better to reamin calm. I will ask him to go debate on the discussion page, and to stop undoing my contribution, before proving its wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.204.239.254 (talk) 21:18, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Continuing to revert is only going to get you blocked for WP:Edit warring. Calabe 1992 21:21, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Hello Calabe1992

I noticed that you have "Reverted addition of dubious unsourced content" on the Christianity page. Please contact me on my talk page if you are having trouble understanding the source. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ghostprotocol888 (talk • contribs) 21:14, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

As previously stated, WP:OR should not be included here. Calabe 1992 21:15, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Deletion of "will Darwin come" page

Hi Calabe, I deleted this short page and put the summary of it in "Luc Perino"'s page, on which I am working again. It's only a few lines and I thinks Luc Perino's bioagraphy is already short. I took note of AllyD's helpful comments. Hence the deletion. I think it is appropriate. Daceton (talk) 21:48, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I overlooked that you were the original author of the page. Happy editing. Calabe 1992 22:21, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Template: Seether

Beautiful work on the Seether template. Thanks. How may I serve you? Marshall Williams2 Talk Sign Contribs 22:03, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

No problem. Calabe 1992 22:21, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

I didn't post anything offencive.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Whether there is a need or not to conduct spell checks, he has been BLOCKED~!

I changed the word 'bag' to the word 'sack' on the cockles page. I am now subject for ban. This is not fair. The End. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Idontneednospellcheck (talk • contribs) 14:13, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Nice try. Anymore and you'll be blocked. Calabe 1992 14:15, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

(talk page stalker)Mother of god... NO~!!! Why is my Gerbil here~??? --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 14:50, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
- Hmmm... wonder where I could have gotten that idea from??? ;) Calabe1992 14:51, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
  - Oh boy... would you consider using this {{GERBIL}} instead to replace the one on top? --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 14:53, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
    - Is there a way to decrease the size of the template? It's huge. Calabe1992 14:56, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
      - 600px is just about right, my old eyes got trouble reading them text at 400px. --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 14:58, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
        Done. Calabe 1992 15:01, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
        Alrighty~! --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 15:06, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Something

		The WikiJaguar Award for Excellence
		I believe this is yours. ItsAlwaysLupus (talk) 17:52, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Why, thank you. Much appreciated. Calabe 1992 18:46, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

You're welcome. ItsAlwaysLupus (talk) 19:24, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

For cleaning up my user page

		The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Thanks for cleaning up my user page and generally taking care of vandalism around here. Jncraton (talk) 03:47, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Not a problem. :) Calabe 1992 03:47, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Reopened ANI discussion

Back on 28 March I closed a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents, which I thought was finished with. You were one of the contributors to the discussion. Another editor later posted a further comment below the closed section, and, having read that comment, I decided that the issue was perhaps not as unambiguously finished as I had thought, so I reverted my closure. Nobody posted any more comments to the section, and it is now archived at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive744#Wiki user:Fasttimes68 is vandalizing pages referencing celebrity model Stephanie_Adams. However, an editor has now suggested that I should have informed those who contributed to the discussion that it had been reopened, so I am doing so. It is very likely that nobody had any more to add, but if you would have done so then I apologise for not informing you at the time. If you do wish to say any more about it then it will be necessary to open a new section at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents, since the old one is archived. JamesBWatson (talk) 09:48, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Quick question here... is that really necessary? --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 15:04, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

No further comments here, long done with that one. Thanks for checking anyway, however. Calabe 1992 18:10, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Bad Faith?

Hello, sir. You made an edit on my page indicating that I had engaged in "bad faith." I am not sure what that means. I merely asked for a better explanation. In the edit summary there were links to wikipedia policy on source reliability, point of view, biographies of living persons. I read them all and still don't understand the issue. In my edit I employed quotations from the subject in order to insure accuracy. The sources were from the Toledo Blade, the website for the Cleveland Plain Dealer, the International Business Times and a video of the subject's press briefing.

Everything is verifiable and everything is accurate and everything is neutral. Really, the objections are mystifying. I make these comments in good faith. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.14.36.165 (talk) 18:54, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Take the advice on Collect's talk page. Also, read over WP:EW - you obviously aren't aware of what it consists of. Calabe 1992 18:57, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of File talk:Shimshal lake.jpg

Hi, In good faith I was just curious what you needed from me regarding the deletion of that picture. I noticed [[4]] post on my talk page. I don't own it or nothing. It seems like a good pic, though. Best regards; assalaamu alaykum. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.14.36.165 (talk) 20:54, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

You created a talk page for it that was meaningless, only talking about how awesome the image was. Calabe 1992 20:56, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Henry Archacki

BLP does not apply, as Henry Archacki is not a living person. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 15:07, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

My bad - overlooked it. Thanks. Calabe 1992 15:07, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Corrected to standard PROD. Calabe 1992 15:09, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Over reaction

The edit left on my user page regarding my edit on Elle Fanning was totally unnecessary. Generalpompeyo (talk) 15:39, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Please assume good faith in situations like this. You inserted the example image, and upon reverting you, the warning was auto-issued. You'll see I have since restored the page to a clean version. Calabe 1992 15:41, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

I did not insert the image. The image was inserted by the user Drew24526 3 times and incorrectly, I just undid his revision and moved the image to the info box. You can see what happened here Elle Fanning: history. On top of that, you reverted my edit as "editing tests" or "vandalism". I guess Huggle isn't that awesome after all. Generalpompeyo (talk) 17:11, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Here you inserted the image into the info box. That's the edit that displayed, and subsequently was reverted by me. Why put the example image into the info box about a person? Calabe 1992 22:15, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	For your great work fighting back against the vandalism tide at Consol Energy Center. RA0808 ^talk _contribs 03:03, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

No problem, thanks to you as well. I finally contacted User:Materialscientist since he's online. Doesn't appear that anyone's patrolling at RPP currently. Calabe 1992 03:05, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

It doesn't seem like it gets patrolled that often. Thanks for getting his attention to the article! RA0808 ^talk _contribs 03:26, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
	Thanks for asking for my usertalk to be semi-protected! MONGO 05:50, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Living Things (Linkin Park album)

Hello Calabe1992. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Living Things (Linkin Park album), a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: doesn't seem like an implausible search term. Redirects are cheap, with redirect there is no need to fix the link here. Thank you. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 12:53, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Well, at this point it seems to be irrelevant since the album name is now confirmed. Thanks. Calabe 1992 15:16, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Good catch

Sneaky date change. Thank you for reviewing it, I've had a few of those. Didn't go back far enough it seems! ChrisGualtieri (talk) 00:37, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

No prob. Calabe 1992 00:44, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Re:Copy>paste

Hey wait, in the last try I have corrected and adjust the version in the name of the article, so I want to know somethin': what was the motive of deletion? -- Well, I have as argument that on spanish version the name says: Mercado Central de Concepcion and it means translating to english: Central market of Concepcion -- It's only a theme of a little mistake of translation, do you understand me?. ok, greets ----XVRE (talk) 01:59, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

I nominated the copied version for deletion so that the original version can be moved to the proper name. Calabe 1992 02:01, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Well, If you are saying it, no problem. The translation and/or developing of the article can be better. greets ----XVRE (talk) 02:05, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

It'll stay tagged until an administrator comes along; then it'll be deleted and the correct article moved to it. Calabe 1992 02:07, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Attacks by IP

Hi, thanks for reverting the attack on my talk page so quickly. If you view the history of Cybermud's talkpage you'll see such abuse has being going on every so often for some time now, all from UK IPs.--Shakehandsman (talk) 00:25, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

No problem, but oddly enough, looks like I missed some of it. Now

Done. Calabe 1992 00:27, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Whoever's behind that IP seems to have issues tonight. ;) Calabe 1992 00:38, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

They'll be back to harass Cybermud one day. The previous IPs I know of are User:109.144.229.69, User:109.144.208.183, and User:109.144.255.187. All BT IPs in the UK.--Shakehandsman (talk) 00:45, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Interesting. I've watchlisted the talk pages for now. Cheers. Calabe 1992 00:48, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

I see Cybermud's topic ban was scheduled to end on the 10th and he's ceased editing completely for it's duration. It looks to me as if the attack was timed purposely so he'd see it on his return in the hope of angering him.--Shakehandsman (talk) 01:15, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Good lord. I'll keep an eye on the page. Calabe 1992 01:16, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks, I hope you don't mind me asking but would you might watching mine as well? I'm really not having a pleasant time of it at the moment on Wikipedia and you're the only person who's actually offered any sort of assistance.--Shakehandsman (talk) 04:04, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	I shouldn't have let it, but that Huggle error yesterday really did bother me. This is for you for tracking down the source of the problem! Thanks and well done! Wikipelli ^Talk 09:33, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Hey, no problem! I came upon this a while back when Materialscientist asked me if there was any specific reason why I reported someone with no warnings (and only one revert in history). I then realized they were already at UAA, and sure enough, every time someone is already reported there, Huggle feels free to report them at AIV as well. I saw the thread at ItsZippy's talk page and saw the strange similarities... sure enough. Calabe 1992 15:52, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for removing the vandalism from my User page!

You got the vandalism before me! Thank you very much. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 02:53, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

No prob. The benefits of being a (talk page stalker)... ;) Calabe 1992 02:54, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Haha. I've been plowing through STiki so I am not used to the attacks, but I'm using AWB to do lots of assessment and its been going off every time. This is what... the second time you've helped me now? Makes me wanna barnstar you. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 02:58, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Heh. Just generic watchlist monitoring going on here, and for some reason I seem to have a habit of checking user talk pages when I see an IP edit with no edit summary. Sound familiar? ;) Calabe 1992 02:59, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Oh so you don't use Huggle then? Due to the risk of counterattacks like that I use it sparingly. Besides I am way too slow to respond to the vandalism, wish I could watch as effectively as you do. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 03:04, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Poor choice of words there on my part; I do use it but am not at the moment. Many of my edits are made with it, actually. Typically if someone attacks someone due to them being reverted, Huggle will pick it up and display it, allowing you to revert them quickly. Calabe 1992 03:06, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

He's blocked now. Love those ones that make it so obvious that they are trolling. The sneaky date changers and multiple IP and user account socks are the ones that get past me on occasion. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 03:15, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, what's funny is when people put in invalid or futuristic dates. Make it too easy. Calabe 1992 03:17, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

PLEASE READ THIS

Stop deleting posts that people have made in the talk pages. Why are you doing that? Very un-Christian like.174.19.139.81 (talk) 05:14, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Deleting posts isn't 'un-christian like' as you assume them to be. If you are referring to the edits of the IP 24.247.147.67 , Calabe did the right thing because those were personal attacks directed towards a group of people.. Soviet King : Talk or Yell 12:29, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Media in Cleveland

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

I could be wrong, but it seems like 76.189.114.101 and User:Vjmlhds are the same editor: non-overlapping edit times, both from Cleveland area, similar edit summaries, hostility, etc. Please advise how I should approach this situation. Levdr1lostpassword (talk) 02:11, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

First thing would be to approach the editor with the concern. If he has an account, he should edit with it. I've advised him against taking ownership of the article like he attempted to do. Calabe 1992 02:19, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Whether or not you beleive me is up to you...I'll argue content all day long, but I don't use personal attacks on people. Vjmlhds 02:54, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

You've made it clear that you're misusing the IP address. Plus, you're using it to make personal attacks. Stop it. Calabe 1992 02:56, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

I've made over 10,000 edits to Wikipedia, and I've put my name on everyone of them...I don't need to hide behind an IP. I know the rules, and I don't go places I shouldn't go. I got burned by letting someone use my computer and now I'm paying for it. Vjmlhds 03:02, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

You also have a history of edit warring, here, and elsewhere. Conclusively, I'm not going to buy your story about your cousin misusing the IP, and if further abuse comes from it in the future, it will reflect on your account. Calabe 1992 03:08, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Going back and forth over content, I've done that. But I don't call people names, and I don't attack people personally. I bought a brand new laptop computer 2 days ago, and everyone wants to play with the new toy. That's all there is to it. Vjmlhds 03:16, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Adams sock is back

User:74.101.6.158/251 is back on Louise Vyent. Whqt happend to your ban proposal? Did it fizz out? Fasttimes68 (talk) 20:27, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

cu The ban received some support, but was archived. I think the puppet ring has gone far enough at this point, however, that no administrator would allow this, so we can revert and report. Calabe 1992 20:30, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Not sure if you are aware, but another editor is working on rescuing the Adams page so the sock has actually showed some restraint. I expect things to go downhill once the Adams article is pulled into main. Fasttimes68 (talk) 20:38, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Well, we'll see how it goes. If the Hershe sock edits that page, they will be reverted. I personally do not oppose the article being created if reliable sources are used, but am not going to allow the puppet to abuse the system. Calabe 1992 20:39, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

RS and GNG certainly apply. If the page can be rescued, I'm all for it, as should every Wikipedian. I have my doubts that this will actually happen, but I hope to be proved wrong. Fasttimes68 (talk) 20:52, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, guess we'll see. I won't participate with the page creation, but will keep an eye out for the socks. Calabe 1992 20:56, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

FYI, I opened a Long Term Abuse case for this sock.Fasttimes68 (talk) 18:57, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Sweet. I've put in a move request to have the SPI moved to An-Apple-A-NY-Day as well. Calabe 1992 22:22, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Looks like we have a sleeper account. User:UnderGODsHelp. I'm not sure how to reopen the SPI. This user is editing the model space again, using "god" related username (see OnlyGodTheFatherKnows), claiming "I'm new here", adopt me. Also I was reading the old talk pages and think I found a pretty good link between the sock masters if someone wants to challenge that they are not related. I'll burn that bridge if it comes up. I've asked an editor who worked in those pages several years ago to comment on the LTA case. Fasttimes68 (talk) 03:27, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

I reopened the case, and they were

Confirmed as a puppet. Calabe 1992 22:06, 20 April 2012 (UTC)

Possible threat

Is this ("would get you decked") something I should contact an administrator about? Is this a threat? I've tried to be patient and give User:Vjmlhds the benefit of the doubt, but his/her blatant disregard for Wikipedia editing policies, not to mention outright personal attacks, is making things increasingly difficult. Levdr1lostpassword (talk) 21:19, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) You are kidding right with this question about whether that is a threat? Did you read the part right after "would get you decked" where they continue on and say "I'm not threatening you"? GB fan 21:39, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm not kidding at all. That is just the latest in a series of increasingly hostile posts from User:Vjmlhds. Is it a direct threat? No. Is that user indirectly threatening me, a sort-of read between the lines type situation? You tell me. That's why I sought advice. Just because someone says "I'm not threatening you" doesn't mean he/she isn't. Regardless, this is only part of a larger ongoing issue. Levdr1lostpassword (talk) 21:50, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

So do you know the real name or location of Vjmlhds? Do you have any reason to believe they know who you are or how to find you? If no how would they ever deck you? GB fan

I know nothing of Vjmlhds, other than he/she lives somewhere in the Greater Cleveland area. Apparently you do not think this qualifies as a threat, and since you're an administrator, that's good enough for me. Thank you for answering my question. Levdr1lostpassword (talk) 22:07, 23 April 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Remix EP

The article Remix EP has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Fails WP:NMUSIC, no coverage.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. mabdul 08:53, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

RE: Blocked user votes...

Since you are the one who nominated me (thanks again by the way), I thought I would ask you about an oppose from a not-in-good-standing user. The oppose has no rationale, and the user is now indef-blocked. Is that really considered a true oppose? Calabe 1992 14:47, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

A bad-faith oppose from a blocked vandal is not considered a true oppose. I have seen admins or other users indent (and even fully remove) opposes that are placed by not-in-good standing users, including vandals. NHRHS2010 the student pilot ✈ 16:53, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

unfortunately, the oppose from this not-in-good-standing user is still there because Reaper Eternal unstriked it and told me not to strike it because I am the nominator, and especially if the opposer is not running a sock farm... *facepalm* NHRHS2010 the student pilot ✈ 18:40, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

No prob. Calabe 1992 18:56, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

RE: this! Nik thestoned 20:38, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

No prob. It was an IP who decided to copy my warning to them and plaster it wherever they could. Calabe 1992 20:42, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Remix EP for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Remix EP is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Remix EP until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. mabdul 11:15, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Catty vandalism

Thanks for catching and cleaning up the lion on my pages. :) - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 17:05, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Hey you. So it seems as though that's something from a city council in Montana? Their IP came back to somewhere in California, which I found interesting. Calabe 1992 17:07, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

As far as we can tell, it's a buncha schoolkids (since the IP traces to educational IIRC) who are bound and determined to say there's Panthera leo in this one little town in Montana, and will stop at no ends to push it (to the point the article in question is full-protected now). Apparently they don't realise that old books call Felis concolor as just "lion" and think Peterson, Kaufman and Audubon are all wrong when they say no lions in the US! - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 17:10, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Hilarious! Unfortunately for them, they don't seem to have yet gotten the idea to try to not be obvious. Calabe 1992 22:20, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

166.147.70.44

Regarding your warning of this IP — you could have had it blocked quicker. It vandalised four times, so you could have gotten it blocked for 3RR :-) Nyttend (talk) 20:00, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

You know, I thought about that, but unfortunately each comment about him being a porno star or who he had sex with or how it did it didn't strike me as being the same content. Hilarious, none-the-less. ;) Calabe 1992 22:19, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Seether Awards

User: Randomnia added a list of awards that Seether has been nominated for/won. However, its lacking citations and I’m not completely sure where to get them. Additionally, this number of award nominations/wins needs to be listed above the chart and won’t this also need to go in the Seether discography template? How may I serve you? Marshall Williams2 Talk Sign Contribs 23:54, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

And do you think the Billboard awards like “#1 active artist” and the others are really awards?

Adminship?

I've seen you around on whenever I come to Wikipedia to fight vandalism, and I do not think you would be a problem if you were an admin. Would you be interested in me nominating you for adminship? NHRHS2010 the student pilot ✈ 20:13, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Why, thank you for such an offer. Let me sleep on that for a short time here. I'll get back to ya. Calabe 1992 21:26, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Well, let's start here. Have you reviewed my talk page archive and CSD log? The only reason I ask is I don't want to make another bid yet if I don't have a true chance. Let me know what you think. Calabe 1992 21:38, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

I'd support. I've only been stalking your talk page for a short while but what I have seen mostly convinces me. :) Salvidrim! 21:44, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Doing some further review and looks like I'm nominating you. Good luck. NHRHS2010 the student pilot ✈ 22:02, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you Calabe 1992 22:31, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm curious, why did you withdraw? I thought you were very close to putting everyone's concerns to rest. I think you should take an article through Peer Review, GA, and ideally FA, then you would be a sure bet, IMO. — GabeMc (talk) 02:49, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Wikibreak

Don't let this second RfA get to you too much, mate. :) Salvidrim! 00:19, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Sorry to see how that went. Hang in there and edit the topics you like. PumpkinSky talk 00:56, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

When you get back and you are ready, I will be happy to help you work on some edit work, and you can teach me how to work vandalism better, which would benefit us both. I know you are going to make a great admin, even if it isn't this month. The memory of my eventful RfA is still fresh in my mind, I know the stress you've felt over the last week. Hope to see you soon. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 01:01, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Agreed with Pumpkin, I'm sorry to see what happened. Keep on doing what you were doing, especially vandalism fighting. I'll be sure to support your next RfA. All the best. -- Luke (Talk) 01:05, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

I can only add my support. Would that we had more editors like you. --TeaDrinker (talk) 01:14, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Why did you withdraw? It's not like you were going through WP:SNOW like your first RfA. You still had more supports than opposes so you could have waited until the end of your RfA period. I nominated J.delanoy for his first RfA, which failed due to WP:SNOW but after his next RfA not only it was successful, he eventually became a checkuser and a steward. NHRHS2010 the student pilot ✈ 12:19, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

It takes courage (possibly the wrong sort) to soldier on when the outcome is clear. It takes courage to admit defeat. You'd probably have got 'No consensus', but a lot more stress. It takes no courage to go into Retired mode as some have done. I'm with Dennis about helping you - if you want, feel free to tell me to 'Bog off!' - and I too could do with a bit more knowledge of the vandalism field. Give it six months or a year (if a year, don't do what I considered for a wild moment: tagging the Main Page for spam - well, it is promotional and unreferenced into the bargain...). Get a wider spread of edits - I scraped through on content. Make your CSD tagging spot on - I can possibly help there. You know the rest. Note that the majority of your supports stayed despite. Look at the opposes and learn from them. And get back to the anti-vandal work before I have to get into it and rooster it up... (Worded to avoid offending Americans who can't face the good old fashioned name for a male hen...) Peridon (talk) 18:22, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

just wanted to say that I certainly hope and expect to be able to support you next time. DGG ( talk ) 19:59, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi

Hi, I'm sorry that your RfA didn't succeed. Don't take it too hard. Sometimes rejection is the best way to identify our flaws and improve upon them, just as vandalism often highlights flaws within an article. If you need help, let me know. I may have half the number of edits you have, but I can help you out in any way. --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 12:48, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the words, guys. I'll be back. Just needing to take a break. Calabe 1992 02:47, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Completely understandable.PumpkinSky talk 21:26, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

Seether Awards

Did you get the message I posted on your talk page about Seether's awards? If you did, I didn't know. If you are going to respond to it now, please do the talkback thing on my user talk page. Thanks. How may I serve you? Marshall Williams2 Talk Sign Contribs 00:28, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Thomas John Barnardo. User talk:2.221.111.112

Hello there. This is with regard to a message I had received through the wiki talk pages.

I am not an editor. I am simply one of the many millions of users who use Wikipedia daily. As such, I have no knowledge of any edits made to the Thomas John Barnardo article and I think this is a case of mistaken identity. 2.221.111.112 (talk) 10:19, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

The Olive Branch: A Dispute Resolution Newsletter (Issue #1)

Welcome to the first edition of The Olive Branch. This will be a place to semi-regularly update editors active in dispute resolution (DR) about some of the most important issues, advances, and challenges in the area. You were delivered this update because you are active in DR, but if you would prefer not to receive any future mailing, just add your name to this page.

In this issue:

Background: A brief overview of the DR ecosystem.
Research: The most recent DR data
Survey results: Highlights from Steven Zhang's April 2012 survey
Activity analysis: Where DR happened, broken down by the top DR forums
DR Noticeboard comparison: How the newest DR forum has progressed between May and August
Discussion update: Checking up on the Wikiquette Assistance close debate
Proposal: It's time to close the Geopolitical, ethnic, and religious conflicts noticeboard. Agree or disagree?

Read the entire first edition of The Olive Branch -->

--The Olive Branch 18:53, 4 September 2012 (UTC)