User talk:Rodhullandemu/Archive/30

Don't stifle discussion, and watch your ad hominem attacks please

Please read this page which you don't seem to be familiar with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:TALK If you disagree with someone's opinion of how an article can be improved which is posted on an appropriate discussion page, you can respond on the discussion page. Don't just edit the discussion page as if it is the article, and don't threaten the person with a block or attack what the person has written as 'crap'. As it says on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:TALK editing of discussion pages is controversial and not agreed upon. If you don't like my question, have the character to respond on the page, don't just delete comments because you don't like them. The discussion page is for discussion of the article, it's not the article itself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.4.132.165 (talk) 00:48, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong location, and you've been here long enough to know that new threads begin at the bottom of Talk pages. There's even a button at the top of this page for so doing. But your "proposal" was not only unsupported by any reliable sources, was therefore hideously biased, and I would have responded to your comment, but on the face of it, it had no encyclopedic merit. And Policy on biographies applies in all Wikipedia spaces, not just articles. I've taken much trouble to direct you towards our policies and guidelines, but if you will not comply with them, blocked you must be. Rodhull andemu 00:54, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

" I would have responded to your comment, but on the face of it, it had no encyclopedic merit." That could have been your response, if that was your opinion. Frankly your tone towards me is quite hostile and uncalled for. I am not vandalizing the article, and I am not as immersed in WikiLore as you seem to be, which doesn't make you the final arbiter of all opinions. I won't keep editing the discussion page because frankly I'm not interested in a war with you or anyone, but I hope you can pause for some personal reflection as to how you conduct yourself, at least. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.4.132.165 (talk) 01:03, 8 January 2010 (UTC) By the way, I apologise that I actually was not aware of the correct procedure for starting a new thread. It was not intended as disrespectful.24.4.132.165 (talk) 01:14, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that your edits were removed, and the associated edit summaries, should have given you some clue. The "History" tab isn't invisible. As for personal reflection, I've been here long enough to know that that is futile, and yet despite all the attacks on me here and elsewhere, I still have trust of the community to remain an Admin, and still occasionally manage to write articles within the guidelines and assist good-faith editors who are prepared to take the advice of the more experienced here. Sorry if that seems arrogant, but editing here involves a steep learning curve; steep but not insurmountable, if you're prepared to adjust. Rodhull andemu 01:22, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You come across as such a prick when you say the above. Were you bullied in school? I hope so. TheHurter (talk) 13:41, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One last thing is that it actually would be pretty easy to provide sources for what I was claiming, the subject of her lack of talent is even discussed in the article already, just not anything about the Beatles....which I don't have sources for and was asking about. Perhaps I was not clear enough?24.4.132.165 (talk) 01:16, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I now need sleep and will address this tomorrow. Rodhull andemu 01:22, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What Happened?

Did someone delete all the talks or did you get rid of them because they took up too much space? Xavier The Second (talk) 16:02, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's recommended to archive talk page messages to avoid cluttering up pages. I do this once a month, and previous ones can still be read by clicking on the numbers in the archive box, top right of this page. Rodhull andemu 16:06, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

UAF

cheers. Leaky Caldron 21:33, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

About time, I think. Rodhull andemu 21:34, 31 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Gordon Ramsey Article

Apologies - been drinking - he may be a massive cunt but it does not need saying on Wikipedia - fucking hell though mate you were quick - I didn't even have time to print ot out (been drinking) York alumni too Vanbrugh - you?

In approximate order; Yes, No, Thanks, OK, Yes, VA/214, Oct 1982 - Jun 1983, then Edens Court (83 - 84), Garrow House (84 - 85), and when I got my Research Fellowship, Fishergate, York.

Sorry to hear about the discharge, hope you get better soon. Take it easy Rodders, would not be the same around these parts without you 21st CENTURY GREENSTUFF 00:48, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; normal service will be resumed as soon as possible. Sadly, some vandals might have escaped my watchlist; but they will eventually fall foul of the watchers. Regards. Rodhull andemu 00:55, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wallington County Grammar School

Why did you prevent anyone from editing the page for 3 months? Don't you think that's a bit too harsh on the users of Wikipedia? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.169.128.70 (talk) 18:49, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The users of Wikipedia, in general, have not been kind to that page. In particular, this edit, which came from the IP address you are currently using (and it is a fixed Broadband address), was typical. Registered users in good standing may still edit the page; others may request changes on the article talk page. Rodhull andemu 18:58, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The page has seen worse as well, when I found this as aprevious edit: [[1]] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.169.128.70 (talk) 19:04, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly so; the more vandalism there is, the stronger is the case for semi-protection. Rodhull andemu 19:06, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:Waterspaces (again)

Hi,

I'm pretty certain that User:Waterspaces has turned up again, although this time using the alias of Liverpool-8-boy (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · proxy check · block user · block log · cross-wiki contribs · CheckUser (log)). I notice that you've already come across him at Talk:Liverpool#Transport, but at least his tendentiousness hasn't returned yet. Oh, and if you don't remember who he his, you might like to refer back to our last conversation regarding him. :)

Anyway, I realise that I can't prove that it's actually him, but I'm pretty sure of it based on some of the same articles being edited, e.g. Merseyrail and Tunnel - articles that I would relate to having quite specific interests. I also notice the same use of the incorrect term 'Merseyrail metro', a term that I had never come across before seeing Waterspaces' use of it. More possible evidence can be seen at Talk:Liverpool#Railways due to the same writing style as used further down the page, and the IP address of the user which seems to be in a similar range to that of Waterspaces (see our last discussion).

As 'Liverpool-8-boy' hasn't committed any offenses similar to those of Waterspaces yet, does that mean that he shall be left alone, or punished provided the evidence is just? I also notice that he's uploaded a copyrighted screenshot of an aerial photo: [2], so I shall nominate that for speedy deletion (if I can work out how to, or unless you get there first!).

Looking forward to your opinion.

Regards, Raywil (talk) 03:28, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In the absence of concrete information, we have to assume good faith unless the same sort of behaviour arises. Problem with a sockpuppet investigation is that Waterspaces' IP information from over three months ago is no longer available, so a Checkuser would not be of much use, and he used multiple IPs anyway. I suggest we keep an eye on this for a behavioural pattern to emerge. Rodhull andemu 17:00, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah right, okay. Most of the pages he edited are on my watchlist anyway, so I'll get back to you if I notice any problems arising. Raywil (talk) 17:15, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Alternate Account

I was wondering it would be OK if I could make user:pday2 my alternate Account, I already own that account and was wanting to use it for maintenance work, and use user:Paul2387 for normal editing and minor clean-up work. Thanks Paul 2387 15:34, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's OK, as long as you tag it as a legitimate alternate account, and link to your main one. Rodhull andemu 15:59, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

An idea

It might work... Majorly talk 15:53, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I've taken the liberty of making it crystal clear ( hope). Let's see... Rodhull andemu 15:58, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Threat of vandalism

Hi, can you look into this: Vandalism threat. Since you have been the admin who dealt with this before, you might take appropriate action. Thanks. - DonCalo (talk) 16:30, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've reviewed this; the guy clearly is not participating in dispute resolution processes, is not discussing, and has indicated an intention to continue edit-warring, so I've blocked the IP for three months. Rodhull andemu 16:56, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, they might pop up as User talk:24.18.251.8. We'll see what happens. - DonCalo (talk) 17:23, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can you help?

This editor[3] continues to remove references[4][5][6] that state Ali Riza Efendi was of Albanian descent. I've posted numerous warnings[7][8][9], to no avail. Thank you. --Kansas Bear (talk) 22:23, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

These editors[10][11][12] appear to be the same person, intent on deleting the talk page of Ali Riza Efendi[13]. --Kansas Bear (talk) 22:23, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've given the first guy a 31-hour break. I'll take a look at the Talk page now. Rodhull andemu 22:27, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see the volume of disruption on Talk that would merit semi-protection just yet, but I have watchlisted the article. Rodhull andemu 22:33, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Elvis Presley

Instead of earnestly discussing the questions I have raised on Talk:Elvis Presley, there are now commentaries such as this one: "Critical voices are not needed in an encyclopedic article about a deceased person. He's not a living politician, he's a dead singer. There is nothing to be gained by being critical of a deceased person." This sounds as if the fans do not like critical remarks about their star. What do you think? Onefortyone (talk) 04:58, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Belatedly, cobbling together events and opinions of minor importance to resist an otherwise fairly-sourced article on the grounds of neutrality is intellectually weak; the only one that has anything near a reliable source is the FBI stuff, and that, in retrospect, is more damaging to the FBI as it was then than it is to Presley. The logical corollary is that we should add to Adolf Hitler that "he liked dogs", but WP:NPOV doesn't work like that. Rodhull andemu 01:07, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dani Harmer.png

Hi Rodhullandemu here is the fair rational Dani Harmer.png [Harmer Fair Use] if find anything else i need to add please message me. Sfxprefects (talk) 20:38, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, still fails WP:NFCC#1, and is always going to, since this image can be replaced by a copyright-free image. Rodhull andemu 20:40, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot find a free image for the person unless i ask her for a free image of her facebook to be up-loaded on flicker Sfxprefects (talk) 20:51, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That won't do either; here facebook image is very likely to be copyrighted; if anyone has taken an image of her themselves and put it on Flickr, with an appropriate licence, that would do. It's not whether you can find a free image, it's whether one can be found. But a screenshot is copyright of CBBC. Rodhull andemu 20:56, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AWB

Hi

Sorry to trouble you about this.

You recently granted me rights to AWB and I've a quick question about usage of it. Can I perform an AWB 'check' on one page only? I did try to work this out the other day but could only work out how to get it to check my entire watchlist.

I hope you're feeling better :) --5 albert square (talk) 23:49, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Paradoxically, I've never used AWB, but I am pretty sure that when you set it up for yourself, you can specify pages to be watched. However, AWB is really meant for multiple edits of an uncontroversial nature across multiple pages, so it would seem a tad silly to use it for monitoring just one page. I'm not really sure what to suggest, and it may be that some other tool might be better for you for just the one page even if it's only your Watchlist. Cheers. Rodhull andemu 23:58, 4 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice. Yes, on the day I got granted access I did perform AWB checks on a number of Wikipedia articles, not just those on my checklist. It's an article that I've since said I would review for good article status that I thought might benefit from it. Never mind, to check it manually is probably better. Again, thanks for your advice and get well soon :) --5 albert square (talk) 00:18, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's about right; reviewing for GA is not really what AWB is for, although there other tools for that purpose. My experience of GAR is that it requires some detailed involvement that automated tools are not really geared up for. Rodhull andemu 00:23, 5 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 1 January 2010

News and notes: Fundraiser ends, content contests, image donation, and more

In the news: Financial Times, death rumors, Google maps and more

Features and admins: Approved this week

Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 23:51, 6 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tesco reply

Hi, the vandalism tag was incorrect, I was expecting to get an opportunity to write a more fitting edit summary. Basically the edit was POV (the source doesn't say anything about the core part of Tesco's expansion strategy), incorrect (the source for one of the first stores using self service was written in 08 and doesn't say anything to that effect), and not noteworthy (most stores will have a 'Tesco in a box' approach). Sourced content is OK, but aslong as the sources back up what's being added! raseaC^{talk to me} 22:07, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK. The guy seems like a bit of a spammer, but without going into it in depth, it did look like he was adding valid content, even if all from one source. I'll keep an eye on this one. Thanks. Rodhull andemu 22:13, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dr Who Page "spoken" template

Greetings,

I was wondering if you might be able to remove the spoken part on Doctor Who I was going to do it, but my mic is just too good, and my heater is too loud when I try and fix it it comes out all echo like.

If you're wondering, yes I am new to this side of Wikipedia.

--Snowboy83 (talk) 22:21, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No problem.

Done Rodhull andemu 22:23, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re: User Neustradamus

Hi, I had hoped your closure of that WP:AN thread would be the end of the matter, but unfortunately Neustradamus (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is now engaging without discussion in wholesale removal of hyphens from lots of articles containing "open-source licen*e", contrary to MOS:HYPHEN#Hyphens_in_adjectival_phrases. This is very disruptive because of the large number of articles, and particularly tendentious because he is ignoring previous discussions on this topic both at Talk:Open-source software and elsewhere at MOS and WP projects. He seems to talk past anything I say, as if he either doesn't understand or doesn't want to engage in proper discussion. A little word from you might help resolve this. 91.187.66.243 (talk) 23:39, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I requested a debate — Neustradamus (✉) 23:42, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Where? And pending the outcome of the debate, we stick with what we have. Rodhull andemu 23:49, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I requested a move, in return, I wait comments, so I open the debate — Neustradamus (✉) 23:55, 7 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Läuft gut, nicht wahr? Wie klar ist es für Sie? Rodhull andemu 00:07, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

not clear because there are license articles and 2 licence articles ... — Neustradamus (✉) 00:17, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See your own Talkpage as to why you are wasting your time right now. Rodhull andemu 00:22, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry to say I think Neustradamus is simply not listening to any advice (latest example) and is becoming increasingly tendentious, e.g. this edit comes after many pleas and a clear warning to stop this sort of thing. I am seriously thinking he might benefit from time out of WP to consider his position. 91.187.66.243 (talk) 01:10, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I followed Michael Hardy (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Open-source_software&action=historysubmit&diff=336500020&oldid=336499819) about open-source and like your position (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AOpen-source_software&action=historysubmit&diff=336494830&oldid=328618961) — Neustradamus (✉) 01:38, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe so, but I have now re-opened the discussion at WP:AN for independent review, as I have hardly slept properly in a week, nor eaten, and badly need some proper rest; I will leave it up to someone else for now. Rodhull andemu 01:43, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wrong button

Did you accidentally hit the rollback button, or wss this edit intentional? You appear to be undoing both constructive edits (conversion of underscore to space in wikilinks, proper lowercase usage, removal of empty template parameter) and unimportant formatting changes (spaces after asterisks), rather than the vandalism that the use of rollback implies. —David Eppstein (talk) 03:51, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

PS after leaving this message I saw the discussion above. This is a great example of why rollback should not be used in such cases: if you had used undo, you could have left an edit message that explained the issue and linked to the discussion on open-source hyphen removal. —David Eppstein (talk) 03:52, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cathy Lesurf

Hello, since you messaged me last year about the article in my userspace, I thought I'd let you know that I've created it today in the mainspace. If you can expand it, please do. It's very short but I don't think it's bad for somebody I actually know absolutely nothing about! AnemoneProjectors (talk) 15:43, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Jackson

Hi Rod, when you can, could you answer in this page? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Michael_Jackson#Michael_Jackson_Albums_Discography_page Thanks. Simone Jackson (talk) 22:25, 8 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really have an opinion here; if it's about reliability of sources, see WP:RSN, otherwise try some sort of dispute reslution. Cheers, Rodhull andemu 18:44, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your Welcome

<div class="user-block"> [[File:Stop x nuvola with clock.svg|40px|left]] You have been '''[[Wikipedia:Blocking policy|blocked]]''' for a period of '''48 hours''' from editing for {{#if:|{{{reason}}}|persistent [[Wikipedia:Vandalism|vandalism]]}}. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to [[Wikipedia:Five pillars|make constructive contributions]]. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may [[Wikipedia:Appealing a block|contest the block]] by adding the text {{tlx|unblock|Your reason here}} below; but you should read our [[Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks|guide to appealing blocks]] first. <font color="navy">'''[[User:NuclearWarfare|NW]]</font>''' ''(<font color="green">[[User talk:NuclearWarfare|Talk]]</font>)'' 01:31, 9 January 2010 (UTC)</div></div>

Disagree? Give me one good reason why. Xavier The Second (talk) 19:07, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

1. Because you give me no content for this notice. It would help. Rodhull andemu 19:14, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You turned my block of my block notification into a bunch of codes. That means you vandalised my work. Xavier The Second (talk) 19:25, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No it isn't:see WP:TPNO and WP:TPO. Placing false notifications on users' talk pages is considered vandalism itself and I suggest you don't do it again. Rodhull andemu 19:29, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am very sorry. Xavier The Second (talk) 19:33, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just a Minute

86.164.60.145 (talk) 17:45, 10 January 2010 (UTC)Dear Sir, I wondered if you could please tell me which was your favourite regualar panellist on the original line up of the popular BBC radio show 'Just a minute.' Just to remind you, the members were Clement Freud, Derek Nimmo, Kenneth Williams and Peter Jones. Many thanks.[reply]

I didn't listen to it, so I have no particular preference. Rodhull andemu 17:48, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pity, I had you down as a Peter Jones man. 86.164.60.145 (talk) 17:50, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Assistance Required

Can you help me get the lid off a jar please?86.164.60.145 (talk) 18:23, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, not from here; but I can arrange for another block if that is what you are really looking for. I think 253 hours would be about right. What do you think? Rodhull andemu 18:27, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think you can make a case for blocking me for that length of time without good reason. You have been given powers on wikipedia and they have gone to your head, you are acting like a dictator. I feel that your actions go against the grain of constructive contributions and one only has to look at some of the other problems people have had with you to see how contentious your behaviour really is. 86.164.60.145 (talk) 18:34, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think I can; see this. I have yet to see much in the way of constructive contributions here from you, and to protect this encyclopedia, I have not only the power, but also the duty, to block disruptive users. Meanwhile, go and edit constructively, stop being silly, and do not post here again unless you are actually keen on being taken seriously as an editor. Your history is already against you. Rodhull andemu 18:39, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have turned over a new leaf. I have not disrupted anything since my last ban, I am just trying to make friends and you are acting in a very high-handed manner if I may say so. 86.164.60.145 (talk) 18:42, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You have yet to show that you have turned over a new leaf. Your only edits since your last block expired have been nonsense edits here. As for trying to make friends, I choose my own, thank you, and you are now formally banned from this Talk page. Rodhull andemu 19:05, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Would you stop banning people unnecessarily?! I think your behaviour to this individual is not in the Wikipedia ethos of letting people express their knowledge. Let the user speak! “Wikipedia is open to a large contributor base, drawing a large number of editors from diverse backgrounds. This allows Wikipedia to significantly reduce regional and cultural bias found in many other publications, and makes it very difficult for any group to censor and impose bias. A large, diverse editor base also provides access and breadth on subject matter that is otherwise inaccessible or little documented.”- Wikipedia 86.164.60.145 (talk) 19:17, 10 January 2010 (UTC) Ooops I meant to use another IP!!!!86.164.60.145 (talk) 19:18, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop posting here. Rodhullandemu has already asked you to stop.Abce2 (talk) 19:20, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Moat on the Ledge

It's blue is it? Strange... mine's green. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:56, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm. Since it came from Amazon, it's probably the US cover. I prefer to use the originals, so I'll look into that. You might want to take a look at Bruce Rowland (drummer), which I started yesterday, but info is thin so far. Cheers. Rodhull andemu 19:58, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, mine's most definitely an original, I bought it in about 1983 or 1984 (a period when I had my first regular cash) at Music Market, Banbury (a small Oxford-based chain of record shops that got swallowed up by Our Price, but not before they'd opened a Manchester branch) - it's vinyl, the sleeve is a two-colour printing (black and green plates only) and the back shows "Woodworm Records, PO Box 37, Banbury, Oxfordshire" but has no catalogue number. The labels are brown, cat. no. WR 001, and show in white outline a hand with outstretched finger pointing at the centre hole... presumably to denote where the woodworm lives. Being vinyl, it's too big to put on the A4 flatbed scanner at Didcot public library, which is the only scanner available to me. --Redrose64 (talk) 20:13, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re Bruce Rowland - I've added a bit more from Humphries, but I should really read it properly. I also fixed two of your web links - if there is a right square bracket in a link title, the Wiki markup thinks that's the end of the title. The only way I know to get around this is to use <nowiki>]</nowiki> but I expect there's a proper method. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:00, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, good work. I've had a quick look round and the CD cover appears to be mostly yellow or mostly blue- did find a green one but of v. poor quality. Since they all use the same photo, it looks like we're stuck with it. Rodhull andemu 21:08, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In view of certain discussions below which are clogging my watchlist (not your fault), I'm unwatching this page (lest I wade in with ill-informed and unwanted comments). I am still watching Moat on the Ledge and Bruce Rowland (drummer) however, so that when necessary, the discussions started above may be continued on the relevant article's talk page. Sorry. --Redrose64 (talk) 21:14, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

Thank you very much for removing my IP check from my user page!
— Paine (Ellsworth's Climax) 01:37, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Rodhull andemu 01:39, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jane Morgan

Could you take a look at recent edits on this page. I suspect there is an element of copyvio, POV, and lack of sources all rolled into one. However, the clearly newbie editor does seem to be generally acting in good faith. Thanks,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 10:49, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

B'day

Thanks for the note. Sent you e-mail--Phyllis1753 (talk) 15:48, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Skanderbeg

Hi, Rodhullandemu! Can you please look at these, and advice me? That will mean a lot! :)

Talk:Skanderbeg#Protection.2C_again

Thanks!

--Tadija (talk) 17:41, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Advice left on article Talk page; admins do not get involved in content disputes. Cheers. Rodhull andemu 17:47, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Neustradamus again

Neustradamus (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) is back from his recent block and he is already up and running again rapidly editing articles to change "licence" into "license", e.g. here, here, here, contrary to WP:ENGVAR and WP:RETAIN, and with the misleading edit summary "bot mistakes". He is also continuing to edit other people's comments on talk pages despite having been warned not to do so, e.g. here, here, and here. And undoing a WP:MOS change made by User:Michael Hardy here. This is all very tendentious after all the warnings he has had. It looks like he is refusing to listen to previous advice and warning of longer blocks. 91.187.66.243 (talk) 19:49, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

hello, it is only good ! you can look ! — Neustradamus (✉) 19:56, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I added easypeasy request move, re add slax, ... — Neustradamus (✉) 19:58, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

About license and opensource it is only the good page of the article, not a redirection ;) — Neustradamus (✉) 19:59, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That doesn't matter. You still don't have consensus to change variations of English language. Stop it now. Rodhull andemu 20:01, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unexplained revert

Why did you make this revert? It appears to me that the edit that you reverted corrected two errors, and you restored the errors. Likewise, this other revert undid corrections of wikilinks to the correct target pages.—Finell 20:11, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See above section. I can no longer trust this editor's contributions. And I need something to eat. Rodhull andemu 20:20, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You may not be aware that Neustradamus was recently blocked for disruption after discussion on WP:AN. Regarding his edit here, I do not see any "errors" being fixed. He changed [[Free Software Definition|definition of "free software"]] (a piped link to the article, which was not broken) into [[The Free Software Definition|definition of "free software"]] (a piped link to a redirect). What was the error fixed by that change? I don't see it as an improvement.

He also changed [[History_of_free_and_open_source_software|free software]] (a working piped link) into the functionally equivalent (MediaWiki treats _ and space as equivalent in links) [[History of free and open source software|free software]] (a working piped link). It seems like a pointless change. 91.187.66.243 (talk) 20:44, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am aware, I blocked him. I've given him a last warning on his Talk page and other editors are advising him. He is now making proposals on Talk pages, so hopefully, he's got the message. I'll keep an eye on it. Rodhull andemu 20:47, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

R, sorry I wasn't clear that I was replying to Finell's comment above. Glad to hear N might be listening to advice. 91.187.66.243 (talk) 20:53, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

it is not good ? I removed "_" and I did the official name of The Free Software Definition — Neustradamus (✉) 20:51, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not good, not bad, just pointless, as you've been advised. Rodhull andemu 20:53, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: before my block, I have already done move requests ! — Neustradamus (✉) 20:52, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

12 January

Dear Rodhullandem: I don't want to get involved in any disputes you have with Neustradamus. I don't know anything about either of you. However, if someone is allowed to edit Wikipedia (that is, anyone who is not blocked or banned), one editor's distrust of another editor is not a sufficient reason to revert edits. If an editor has a history of problematic edits, that is justification for examining that editor's edits, but not for reverting them without legitimate cause. An editor should not revert an edit unless the edit being reverted made the article worse. There was nothing harmful in the particular edits that you reverted, and it is preferable to link to the actual target rather than a redirect. Also, a couple of the edits that you reverted had the advantage of using correct rather than incorrect terminology. Yes, eliminating underscores from a piped link is pointless (Neustradamus: please pay attention to this), but reverting that change is equally pointless, and just increases (slightly) server load. Please be careful. Thanks.—Finell 04:11, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comment — Neustradamus (✉) 04:36, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Neustradamus: I was not trying to do you any favor, so thanks are not necessary. Your talk page is filled with miscellaneous complaints about your behavior, you were recently blocked for 72 hours, and you do an extraordinarily large number of page moves for one editor. I suggest that you pay more attention to your own behavior and reflect on Wikipedia:Consensus and the Wikipedia:Five pillars, rather than trying to score debating points in this conversation.—Finell 05:24, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

still problem, you can look here : http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Cramer%E2%80%93Shoup_cryptosystem&action=historysubmit&diff=337459575&oldid=337227853 and http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Portal%3AFree_software%2FTopics&action=historysubmit&diff=337458563&oldid=337231348 strange — Neustradamus (✉) 21:30, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see either of these being a problem. In the first case, the style manual mandates use of non-breaking spaces to keep logical sections of text together, and in the second, this is a matter for discussion and consensus between editors. In either case, you should take it up with the editor who reverted your changes. Rodhull andemu 21:40, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For example it is MIT License not MIT license it is not a problem with "s"/"c" and the this article is a list and & nbsp; is a space — Neustradamus (✉) 21:46, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And about this http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AColslee%2Fonce%3Aradix&action=historysubmit&diff=337459085&oldid=337231195 it is a system page and there is double for one, the best is [[example]] not [[example|example]] — Neustradamus (✉) 22:11, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That was a completely inappropriate edit to another user's Talk page- see WP:TALK and has rightly been reverted, twice. The Manual of Style does not apply to this situation. Meanwhile (1) you have raised the matter with Jimbo, and I have nothing more to say on the matter; (2) I still have other work to do, which you are interrupting. Take this elsewhere, please. Rodhull andemu 22:16, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Rodhullandemu : I had no idea I was opening a can of worms like this. Sorry!—Finell 00:41, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not your problem; his. I initially thought this would be a simple issue of WP:MOS; but, like Topsy, "It's just growed", and I have little time for those who will not even take "yes" for an answer, let alone those who will not take a step back to objectively evaluate their own position. But thanks anyways. Rodhull andemu 00:46, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 11 January 2010

From the editor: Call for writers

2009 in review: 2009 in Review

Books: New Book namespace created

News and notes: Wikimania 2011, Flaggedrevs, Global sysops and more

In the news: Wikipedia in British schools, Hitler's Downfall meme, and more

Features and admins: Approved this week

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 09:13, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

File:EnidBandPic.jpg listed for deletion

The image, File:EnidBandPic.jpg has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please join the discussion at Wikipedia:Files for deletion/2010 January 13#File:EnidBandPic.jpg. Aspects (talk) 23:10, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Micheal Jackson Page

Hello Rodhullandemu, This is Buffaloxoldiar you left me a message a bit ago suggesting that i use the talk page. Thanks for the advice. I made a change to the micheal jackson page where i added that he is a cultural icon the same as it is on Elvis page. I also included different links newspapers from differnet countries around the world as evidence to support. The fact is Micheal Jackson was a Global Icon his music became popular across the globe in places such as Africa, Asia and the Middle East, places where it was hard for any American, let alone western pop artist, to gain a foothold. and hes changed pop culture like no one else. this user by the name of A Star is Born keeps taking it off why i cant understand please help resolve this issue.

http://www.guide2.co.nz/politics/blogs/chris-ford-michael-jackson-a-capitalist-cultural-icon/83/8996

http://vodpod.com/watch/1925032-exclusive-michael-jackson-cultural-icon

http://harlemworldblog.wordpress.com/2009/07/19/exclusive-michael-jackson-cultural-icon/

http://news.movieretriever.com/article-1G1-203752317/tv-land-honors-memory.html

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/entertainment/hollywood/news-interviews/Michael-Jackson-was-1st-black-cultural-icon/articleshow/4704554.cms

http://www.rabble.ca/news/2009/06/michael-jackson’s-death-20-modern-mourning-icon

http://www.waveletblog.net/2009/06/michael-jackson-a-genious-a-cultural-icon-a-legend/

http://www.taylormarsh.com/2009/07/07/coverage-of-a-cultural-icon/

http://www.timesherald.com/articles/2009/06/26/news/doc4a445c2c715f5882856217.txt http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/06/pop-star-michael-jackson-was-rushed-to-a-hospital-this-afternoon-by-los-angeles-fire-department-paramedics--capt-steve-ruda.html http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2009/06/26/2609102.htm http://yemenpost.net/Detail123456789.aspx?ID=100&SubID=953&MainCat=12

thats just some of the many articles online.

Thank You Buffalo January 2010 (UTC)) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Buffaloxoldiar (talk • contribs) 02:04, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's all very well, but you don't have to convince me. Other editors are reverting you, and you should take it up on Talk:Michael Jackson; I'm not going to intervene in this content dispute, because it's not what I am here for. Rodhull andemu 16:52, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"edit warring"

How are animals notable?LifeStroke420 (talk) 20:17, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:GNG. Rodhull andemu 20:19, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok,I'll leave it alone then but that guy was having a edit war with the other guy I was only trying to find a peaceful solution.LifeStroke420 (talk) 20:21, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Probably a good idea to take look at WP:BRD too. Cheers. Rodhull andemu 20:24, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rod, can you help?

Are you involved in the Fairport Convention article? Some Admin. was, last I checked. There's a nice graph someone made listing all the various musicians from the last 40+ years and I'm adding photographs. Problem: Alun Davies (formerly first guitarist in Cat Stevens' band, along with Gerry Conway, the drummer, throughout the 1970s, has returned to playing with Stevens/Yusuf Islam, after 30 years of not playing together, and Islam, they've all remained tight friends! Yusuf's return to pop music lost our GA ranking, since the piece isn't up to speed, too... but I digress. If you check Davies' page, he's been a member of Fairport Convention for a few years, and Conway has for many more as well.. but Davies isn't listed on the article, or on the graph. Also, I've tried for three years to find a CC-BY-SA photo of Davies, and the few on the article of Stevens/Yusuf took a lot of scraping- I found each one. I've uploaded a couple hundred photos and placed all but six. So, in a nutshell, can you communicate with whomever is involved in that Fairport Convention article that Davies is in the band? (When time permits from Cat Stevens/Yusuf, I suppose). Also, I never learned how to devise Categories in Wikimedia Commons as I am close to computer illiterate except for Wikipedia and email, and please, would you create a Category for Fairport Convention on Commons for me? And maybe another one for Folk rock musicians? I'm uploading a lot of members' photos now. Thanks.--Leahtwosaints (talk) 21:39, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've created Category:Folk rock musicians, and Category:Fairport Convention already exists on Commons. I've moved several images into those categories already. AS for the lineup, there is a screenshot of a spreadsheet, but I think it's not up to scratch aesthetically. I did come across an image "Fairport lineups.png" on someone's talkpage, but I can't find it any more; it's better quality, but still needs a few tweaks. I'll keep looking for it and let yuo know when I do. Rodhull andemu 22:05, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Found it; it's here, although it's a table rather than an image; I think it could be made a subpage of Fairport Convention and transcluded as necessary. Rodhull andemu 22:23, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AWB request

Please update the page Sasank Sleeper (talk) 23:32, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why? We normally don't flag backlogs until 48 hours have elapsed; it's not an "on-demand" service since we have other things to be doing. Rodhull andemu 23:35, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK Sorry ! Sasank Sleeper (talk) 00:07, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

94.6.9.140‎, et al.

You beat me to the punch on a couple of rollbacks. :) In any case, he's down for a month. I hope he found that amusing. 0:) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:24, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Meh. He's an IP-switching vandal who's got it in for me. He dead man, mister! Rodhull andemu 00:27, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

He needs to be switched. Maybe with a hick'ry stick. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:36, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ahem. I see what you mean. Basically a mosquito to be swatted. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 00:59, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Whack a Mole, perhaps. It's easier for me to wait until he gets bored, or find a girlfriend. I'd put my money on the first of these two. Rodhull andemu 01:04, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why would I get a girlfriend when I have your flabby cheeks to pound? 90.217.162.69 (talk) 01:15, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm guessing the IP wonders what it's like to be with a woman. It's sad, ain't it? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:19, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it's patently obvious that he isn't, otherwise he wouldn't be pissing about here. Rodhull andemu 01:24, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was just kind of picturing him as the "Nudge-nudge, wink-wink" guy from Monty Python, if you remember that bit. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 01:29, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One of my favourite sketches at the time. He reminds me of the saying that "Those that can do, do, and those that can't do, teach". He seems to have an inflated impression of his own intellect, which makes me think he's a failed teacher, and since then has probably been unemployed. That he resorts to cheap sexual innuendo also gives me the impression that either he is about 15 but still thinks that this sort of insult will actually work on someone about forty years older, who has actually had more sexual experiences that he could ever imagine, or is desperately trying to find some chink in my armour. Poor try, and no cigar. I shit these people before breakfast. Rodhull andemu 01:45, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Woody Allen added to that old saying with, "...and those who can't teach, teach gym." It's tough being a computer science major nowadays. Most of the ones not from India or China are ending up working at a Subway; or living in one. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:09, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well I remember in my CS undergrad times, the whole of the Internet as it then was, was covered in a one-term course "Networks, Interfaces and Real-Time Systems". Laughable these days, and dealing with now-obsolete technologies such as CAMAC crates. It wasn't until I worked for Lucent Technologies in the late 90s that I actually came up to date, and even so I am now a user, rather than a creator, of digicomms. Rodhull andemu 02:18, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If the IP were to actually land a job by some miracle, he would be in for a rude awakening. You can't get away with being a jerk nowadays. You can't be like Wayne Knight's character in Jurassic Park, at least not for long. Too many people are computer savvy. And jerks, especially in this economy, are very expendible. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 02:24, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is hilarious. I'm really getting to you, aren't I? I think it's because you're an overweight 56 year old who doesn't get any. Don't make ridiculous assumptions, I'm not unemployed. There's no way you have a job, you're on here far too often, unless wikipedia pay you to act like a moron that is. You even admit you're "not very employable" on your page, so don't throw that one at me. I don't believe for a second you have had more sexual experiences than I could ever imagine, not if that elderly picture of you is anything to go by- unless you're Benjamin Button of course. You're pathetic. You think you "shit these people for breakfast" you'd have to do that whilst looking at your computer, which evidently you are glued to. I don't think that mental picture is going to find you a 56 year old woman is it? 'Cos if you had one of those, you wouldn't be "pissing about on here" would you?81.154.192.156 (talk) 20:56, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Methinks he doth protest too much. 0:) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 21:00, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm wondering why he isn't out getting laid. If he were that bright, he'd also have realised by now that nobody cares what a sockpuppet of a blocked user thinks. Rodhull andemu 21:04, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

He's too busy fantasizing about his non-existent career. If he has any connection with Harvard, it's probably delivering pizzas to their dorms. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 15:03, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dramatica

In the news today: Encyclopedia Dramatica has run into legal problems in Australia: [14].--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 08:50, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Baxendale-Walker

Can you please stop trying to hide Pauls involvement in the pornographic film market. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DrunkTomsk (talk • contribs) 14:01, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

When you source it properly, it can go in, appropriately written. Also, when you stop throwing round accusations of corruption. Rodhull andemu 14:06, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Define "neutral"?

Who are you to pontificate what neutral means? I see you've a bit of a reputation for upsetting editors on here. Listen, Rod, I know it's hard living in Emu's shadow but don't take your frustration out on my edits. Okay? Just don't. King of Mercia (talk) 17:52, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your exact edit was: "Bleakley, despite her mature appearance, is only 30 years old!". There are several things wrong with it. (1) It's your own opinion whether she is "of mature appearance", but clearly as a 30-year old woman, I wouldn't expect much else, but she might well object to that term herself. because it's a term far more frequently applied to women aged between 40 and 60. (2) "is only 30 years old" is meaningless, because of the word "only". (3) Terminating the edit with an exclamation point implies that the reader should be surprised, and there's nothing in the text to support this, not least because you didn't cite any source beyond her date of birth, but also because such punctuation breaches our Manual of Style. (4) Such statements date. Will this still be true in ten years time?

Your whole edit was an invalid piece of original research, and your own opinion, better suited for some fan-blog than an encyclopedia. And what qualifies me to express an opinion on neutrality? Over fifty years of using the English language, over two of which have been spent here adding more than 70,000 good edits, including some Good Articles, and as an admin here, it is my right and my duty to ensure that edits stay within guidelines. Any more questions? Rodhull andemu 18:09, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The sentence cited is dripping with original research and subjectivity, and he wonders what's wrong with it. Oh, the kids these days. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 18:42, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Now then! I'd guess he's from Birmingham. Cut him some slack, please. Rodhull andemu 18:50, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also, having access to a dictionary doesn't make them smart. And using caps! Just makes them look! Like a 15-year old girl! HalfShadow 18:55, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I recall adding something to an article, early on in my work here, where I referred to an actress as "exotic looking", and it got reverted. That's when I started to learn about OR and NPOV and such. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 19:01, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Can you help?

This editor[15] continues to place his/her "signature" at the beginning of their edit which consists of largely contentious and unreferenced material. And now, this individual is placing comments directed at me within the body of the article.[16] Can you help? Thanks. --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:20, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly a language issue, but I have left advice for him. WP:SOAPBOX springs to mind, and I will keep an eye on the article. Rodhull andemu 23:29, 16 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DocKino's attitude towards me

May I ask you to have a look at this edit by user DocKino: [17]. I think these and some other insults are not in line with Wikipedia policies. Onefortyone (talk) 13:22, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If it doesn't already, maybe the Elvis article should come out and say what I've often heard: "The King died on the throne!" ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 13:43, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User talk page revert

Hi Rodhullandemu, thanks for your efforts on my user talk page, however my personal preference is to leave any comments made by users as long as they aren't directly abusive or somesuch. If a user has vandalised the page then a revert is fine, however edits like the one you reverted I'd rather keep... they're amusing to read again when I look through my archive! Cheers. Cpl Syx ^[talk] 00:21, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

OK, but I've blocked anyway. There must be something in the water tonight. Rodhull andemu 00:24, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No worries - I agree with the block anyway, as things only ever get worse once the user page comments start! :) Cpl Syx ^[talk] 00:27, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

re Feedington

I saw that you unblocked this user, which was fair enough except that they just made this comment and I wasn't entirely sure what to do about it--Jac16888 ^Talk 23:45, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Apart from the vandalism, which I haven't looked at, I've left some options regarding shared accounts. Thanks for letting me know. Rodhull andemu 23:57, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, still editing and hasn't addressed the concerns--Jac16888 ^Talk 02:00, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Reblocked until he does. WP:AGF has its limits, and he's arguably already run out of that commodity. Rodhull andemu 02:09, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good call. Considered doing it myself, but figured I'd leave it up to you--Jac16888 ^Talk 02:28, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please help me

Hello, I don't know too much about wikipedia, but you obviously do, so I ask for your help to remove the lies about me. User name "Aslpt" is accusing me of a crime under the talk page of Marilyn Monroe. I am a living person, and he gives no citations or refrances. Everything he wrote is a defamatory lie. I own and operate the user ID of fine-estates7 on ebay which sold the Marilyn Monroe copyright. I have been in business for 25 years and have sold on ebay for many years (as you can tell by my user id date on ebay). He is accusing me of a crime which is shill biding and price fixing. I am NOT related to "Historical-items", Morgan, or his Gallery. I WAS NOT SUSPENDED and did NOT get involved in shill biding as he falsely accuses me. I have not paid my bill and have to get a new credit card, thats all. The news articles were about the original film that Morgan bought for $275,000. not the copyright that I sold. He just wants to badmouth and libel Morgan, and is doing it to me. PLEASE HELP, Thank you--Fine-estate7 (talk) 10:04, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 18 January 2010

News and notes: Statistics, disasters, Wikipedia's birthday and more

In the news: Wikipedia on the road, and more

WikiProject report: Where are they now?

Features and admins: Approved this week

Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 15:22, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Did you get my other message?

Did you get my other message???

Also the item was NOT removed by ebay, so everything he wrote was a lie. I placed my new credit card on file and you can see the auction did very well and ended and is still up. Plus, this is not about Marilyn Monroe, this is about him making up crazy lies and spreading them. Can you please remove all the lies, this is not about Marilyn, and I can prove I am not suspended, the auction was not removed, I am not related to the producer Morgan, nor his account or anything. Thank you!! Tom--Fine-estate7 (talk) 00:07, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. It's difficult to get into this without any links, even to relevant articles. However, it is late here for me, and I am not particularly fresh. If you can be more specific, perhaps I can help tomorrow. Cheers. Rodhull andemu 01:06, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the user and his defamatory and libelous lies about me [[18]] He also defames Michael Jackson's friend Producer Keya Morgan, and he even makes the crazy claim that my user id on ebay fine-estate7 belongs to the Producer. To make a long story short, everything he wrote is a lie and defamatory. He does not use citation or anything, and does not adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons as he is accusing me of a crime. Please remove it, as it is all lies, not correct, without any citations. Ps-I am willing to swear under oath in court that everything this person wrote is a lie and that I am not related to the producer. Thanks--Fine-estate7 (talk) 11:41, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The guy made two edits, the last over three weeks ago. I suspect he won't be back, since he's had his say. I will leave a warning on his talk page, but I don't expect him to see it. Apart from that, there's nothing I can do unless he comes back and does it again. Rodhull andemu 14:58, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mikal in all his manifestations

Just to be clear, I don't expect Mikal (US artist), Mikal (UK artist), or Michael Gurry to be notable artists when all is done. I'm only trying to sort out who hasn't done what so that I can make a cogent case for deletion at AfD. If you think they can go as-is, then hallelujah and pass the ammunition! That is, don't hesitate simply because you saw me editing the articles. Yappy2bhere (talk) 01:56, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No, you carry on, all of them are thinly-sourced as they stand, but Googling "Mikal" is something I haven't time to do at present. TBH, I wouldn't miss any of them since the people who created these articles don't seem to be bothered about them to the extent of establishing notability. Rodhull andemu 01:59, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ron Paul

Not sure why you removed the talk page comments of an IP on Talk:Ron Paul. Restored them. Falcon8765 (talk) 04:40, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looked like a WP:BLP violation to me. Do senators allow themselves to be filmed calling people "queers"? Astonishing. Rodhull andemu 14:58, 20 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks...

...for this [19]. Apparently he doesn't, infact, rule. raseaC^{talk to me} 00:54, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers. Looking at his history, it seems you have crossed paths previously. Perhaps 48 hours off will concentrate his, er, "mind". Rodhull andemu 00:56, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]