User talk:Fish and karate

Wikipedia ads	file info – show another – #98

Archives:

2005 - 1, 2, 3, 4, 5

2006 - 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12

2007 - 12a, 14

Please place your comments at the bottom of the talk page.

I may reply on here, or on your talk page. It depends how whimsical I'm feeling.

This talk page is archived when I feel like it. Usually when it goes over 50k.

Wheeeeeeee.

---

Old name - if you are feeling confused, I was formerly known as User:Proto. It's a rebranding on a par with Opal Fruits, Consignia or Marathon, only less stupid.

New administrators - please direct your RFA thanks message (or the messages where you curse me for opposing you, whatever) to User talk:Neil/RFAs. I will read it, don't worry.

New to Wikipedia? - hello! See Wikipedia:Welcome and Wikipedia:Help for useful advice to get you started. If that doesn't help you, then by all means come back and ask me your question(s).

Did I delete your page? If it was through Articles for deletion, and you knew about it, kindly proceed directly to Wikipedia:Deletion review. I'll just direct you there anyway. Why not save time? If your page was speedily deleted, read Wikipedia:Why was my page deleted?, and if you still don't see why it was deleted, then please do ask me here.

Here to complain or talk about anything else? - yes, this is the right place. Note that I reserve the right to amend any abuse to make you appear unintentionally dumb, lame, or funny, and I may even resort to disemvowelling.

---

Query of Deletion :Treasure Beach

I have just noted that this page has been deleted apparently for Blatant Copyright Violation. Here is the entry I found in the deletion log.

16:52, 27 February 2007 Neil (Talk | contribs) deleted "Treasure Beach" (G12)

I am very sorry I missed any discussion that was held on this, since I usually watch articles to which I have contributed. Certainly when I last looked which was probably sometime ago I was not aware of major plagiarism/copyright problems. Unfortunately I cannot now find any trace of the article, because I would like to rescue parts of it that were not copyright violations and restore them. If it is not appropriate to restore the article for me to work on, could I ask for a copy of the deleted material so that I can work on it and make sure it is up to standard before recreating the page.

I note that deleting the page has created several red links which of course need addressing.

Thanks in advance for any help you can give. Op. Deo 23:12, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Adoption?

Hi Neil,

I'm looking to be adopted. If you would be so kind as to review my userpage and see if you'd be up for helping me out? Thanks in adv. TearJohnDown 18:50, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for accepting my request (you can call me John, BTW - my handle is a bit pretentious)!

My first order of business - a good number of articles in the area I'm doing a lot of work in (Music of New Jersey) are being vandalized by a non-registered self-promoter. What steps should I take to get this action to stop?TearJohnDown 23:35, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

You can ask him nicely to stop. If he doesn't, you can report it for attention at either WP:AIV (for simple vandalism) or WP:AN/I (for cmore complex cases. The end result could be anything from no action (this would be if your case was unwarranted) to the articles being temporarily semi-protected (so only signed in users can edit them), to the self-promoter being banned from editing. Neil (not Proto ►) 22:28, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

so I just leave a comment on the IP address' talk page? That seems to be the only way i would be able to get a hold of him...

TearJohnDown 20:47, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, although this can be tricky if he keeps changing IP addresses. You can also try explaining why his edits needed to be reverted in either the edit summary or on the talk page of the article(s). Neil (not Proto ►) 23:21, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I left a comment on the userpage in question. Let's hope that's all it takes. TearJohnDown 04:03, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

I hate to bother you again...

I've been trying not to call on any one admin for too many favors with editing protected pages,so I'd put another request over at User talk:Daniel.Bryant#Templates handling usernames with equal signs, back at 13:01, 11 March 2007 (UTC) ... and here it is 00:49, 14 March 2007 (UTC) ... and Daniel now has a "backlog" note atop his talk page. Clearly it was a poor decision on my part to add to his inbox.

Wincing somewhat, I return with hat in hand to beg another favor of you. If (and only if) you have the time; and if Daniel's still had no chance to do the edits by the time you can look over there; would you be willing to tell him not to bother, and then make the edits yourself?

Considering that the problem with user templates not handling equal-signs has led to a call for blocking such usernames, I'd really prefer to get the code-and-documentation updates made sooner rather than later, so the username issue becomes a non-issue.

And I'm beginning to think you're right about the sysopping. Quite aside from speeding up such upgrades as this, it would lessen the workload I keep turning over to already overworked admins. I still doubt that such a short track record as mine will be very assuring to RfA voters, but at worst I'm left with status quo, and at best I get to do needed upgrades faster -- so it's worth trying, if you still feel that way.

But if there's a way to turn off "blocking" powers and just let a poor codesmith keep tinkering, I'd still be happy with that. I don't like having power-over-others; I just want the ability-to-do-things-myself. -- Ben ^TALK/_HIST 00:49, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

Hi Proto, I mean Neil. I'll try to be a pirate, I mean ninja, now and you can rest assured that I heard every voice loud and clear during the discussion, and will strive to use the mop carefully and responsibly. Thanks for your support, and please don't hesitate to give me constructive criticism anytime. Xiner (talk, email) 02:21, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Rfa thanks

Hey, just popping by to say thanks a bunch for supporting my sucessfull Rfa, I'm honoured to serve the community, andif you ever want any assisstance, you know where to find me Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 18:01, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

WP:RFA/Ben

Before Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Ben goes live, you might want to spell-check it. See "equual" and "criticismn". If you are using Microsoft's Internet Explorer, you can use the Google toolbar, but I recommend using the v.2.x version of Mozilla's Firefox internet browser, which includes a spell-checker (with several different English dictionaries available as add-ons). BlankVerse 07:01, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Internet Explorer 7 is an awesome program. I tried Firefox, but it's too slow. And in the time you spent writing this message, you could have fixed those two typos, if you'd been using IE7, which doesn't take 10 seconds to change a page when you click a link, or five minutes to start up. Sorry, I don't like being evangelised to about Firefox (or about Linux, which is a piece of shit system). Neil (not Proto ►) 23:42, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Accepting RfA nomination

According to what we technicians technically designate the little box thingy, I'm to "contact [you] to accept or decline the nomination"; and (draws self up all formal-like) I wish to state, sir, that I am honored by your nomination, and I gratefully accept it in the hope that I may be worthy of your and the community's trust.

Next, let's see here, "If you accept the nomination, you must formally state your acceptance and answer the questions on that page." Oh, wait: does that mean I wasn't supposed to be formal here? Or does it mean I have to be even more formal there? -- Ben ^TALK/_HIST "Hello, tuxedo rental?" 09:31, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

• In view of BlankVerse's suggestion above, I hesitate to list the RfA on the main page until you've had a chance to do whatever spell-checking or other cleanup you decide to do. (I'm willing to do it myself if you like, but it might not be thought appropriate for a nominee to polish the already glowing praise of himself.) When you feel it's ready to list on WP:RFA, would you please either let me know that, or else (if you so choose) list it yourself? Thanks! -- Ben ^TALK/_HIST 19:16, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Template:Unsigned2

Could fix the template? Your recent change is causing some unwanted line breaks. Dancter 22:28, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: Protected edit requests on protected templates

Hi Qxz. The templates are tagged with the {{permprot}} tag on the talk pages, which is how they should be (I actually started making a few of the changes then realised it was unnecessary). I have used rollback to revert your edits; please don't take offence to this, but there were a lot of pages you made the same request to. Neil (not Proto ►) 22:27, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi. Yes, I can see the talk pages are all tagged with {{permprot}}; in most cases that's because I put it there. :) However, I was under the impression that protected templates were meant to be tagged with {{protected template}} as well. Two reasons for this; first, {{permprot}} is on the talk page, not the template page, and second and more importantly, {{protected template}} puts the templates into a category (Category:Protected templates), which I assume is necessary in order to keep track of which templates are protected, and {{permprot}} doesn't. (Even if it did, it would categorize the talk pages, so that would be no good). Apologies if I've misunderstood, but if so could you possibly clarify for me in which situations {{protected template}} does need to be used and when it doesn't? Thanks – Qxz 22:32, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

I've asked for clarification on Wikipedia talk:Protection policy ... I'm not sure myself! Neil (not Proto ►) 22:43, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Luna Santin has very kindly handled the requests for me. Apologies for taking up your time – Qxz 04:35, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Ben RfA

Hi Neil, thanks for your message. At this time I see no reason for me to change my statement/vote. I think that it is all too human for someone to start out well and then hit a rough spot. We need to see how Ben does when he hits a rough spot. "So-far-so-good" only works if "so-far" is a pretty good length of time. Why not give people adminship after just one week? For that matter, why not just give everyone the admin tools when they join? After all, a new user has not done anything to lose our trust.

Any criteria for adminship are subjective. Personally, I think one-year is a good period of time to truly understand the community and to have encountered enough bumbs in the road for us to see how the candidate will behave on a bad day. I don't hold to one-year as any sort of absolute. I will support giving someone adminship if I see massive evidence of their good works earlier: say 9 months or maybe 6 months. 3 months is just stretching it too far for me.

Besides, you certainly knew that the nomination would be controversial, you even mentioned it in your nom. You must have expected or at least suspected that there would be some opposition. Johntex\^talk 23:50, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

I have a strange suspicion you are trying to compare me to a Noob but I'll let it slide. If anything, I would expect those of us who have been here the longest would be the most likely to object. We have been here long enough to see the horrible abuses that certain admins have committed, and we know that it is next to impossible to get rid of a even a horrible admin. Johntex\^talk 00:17, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

User Adoption

Hey Neil! I was interested in looking for an "adoptee" on WikiPedia. I am fairly new... or should I say extremely new. I would consider myself a rather quick learner. I am really looking forward to have a adoptee or mentor that could help me out and teach me stuff about WikiPedia. I do have a user page. I think you just type in http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?User_page:ccc999ccc999. Its not so great but as I said, Im still learning ;). Hope to have a response.

And I do believe I check back here for a response. :)

No problem - I have replied on your talk page! Neil (not Proto ►) 22:58, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Contacted Lancaster University

Hi Proto Neil,

I've contacted the abuse department at Lancaster, and hopefully they'll identify and "talk to" the vandal in question. I wouldn't go through all this trouble if I didn't know they actually do something about these guys, but they do, so I do. :-) --Deathphoenix ʕ 02:38, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

FYI, my contact at Lancaster has identified the user responsible for the vandalism and has passed the complaint along (he actually did so 10 hours ago, but I didn't read his email until now). --Deathphoenix ʕ 19:22, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Follow-up

Please see Template talk:BirthyrJerry 03:55, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Reply

I've done my best to ignore Henchman, but he keeps at it. I put a normal warning (that any person violating a rule would get) on his page: and he clearly thinks it's false. He also thinks it's just me trying to get him in trouble. The fact of the matter is: he shouldn't be doing any attacks (and if does do any, he should own up to them, instead of claiming it's not an attack). RobJ1981 04:23, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Template Esoteric

Hi Neil / Proto. After my initial suport of your suggested 'Complex' name, I thought of an even more appropriate one: 'Intricate', and I presented a renewed template on Template Talk:Esoteric#Move?. Would you mind inspecting it and the several comments underneath your own: I placed once more a request to unprotect, please leave a note there [as 'Proto']; else we're going to get stuck with 'esoteric' forever, I'm afraid. I also think that my suggested term is about the middle ground between your 'complex' and 'conditional logic' (suggested by Doug Bell), at the low end, and AsoToth's concern for some of the more esoteric templates. Kind regards. — SomeHuman 17 Mar2007 05:11 (UTC)

Deletion Query

I see you deleted [Overture (notation software)]. I read it and it did have some problems but I didn't think it was that bad. With older sofware like this it's sometimes hard to track down verifiable references. Is it really better to have no article rather than one that needs editing? Connectionfailure 12:24, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

If it fails to assert why the program is notable and reads like advertising, yes, it's better to have no article - if the program is notable, perhaps we will shortly see an adequate article. A red link will poke people into action. Neil (not Proto ►) 17:36, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Why was the List of Japanese Surnames page deleted?

Why?

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lists of surnames. Neil (not Proto ►) 17:38, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Bold

How bold. I think the informing of the user being discussed should be enforced better, so I support this. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 17:36, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. WP:U says to ask first, the header of RFCN says to ask first, and if they haven't been asked first, I am going to start removing on sight. Neil (not Proto ►) 17:38, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Given the recent penchant for hairtrigger complaints on WP:RFCN, I support 100% your move to remove reports where the user was not consulted in advance. However, you need to perform more thorough investigations before blanketly stating that a user has not been consulted or warned. In the case of User:Ombudsman, he had multiple previous warnings about his username and requests to change it or to place a disclaimer on his user page. Bringing up his username on WP:RFCN is therefore entirely appropriate at this time.

On second thought, it would help things immensely if the WP:RFCN instructions for creating a new report included something like "Please post evidence that you have tried to resolve the problem with the user directly." Perhaps this could even be incorporated into a template for editors to use when posting a new report, provided that people don't think this is instruction creep. —Psychonaut 19:31, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

That may go too far, sometimes it is better to talk to the user first, other times it is better to tell them that the discussion has started. I think it is enough to ask that there is a recent thread on the users talk page leading to the discussion, that would be more in line with current practice. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 22:20, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Adopt-A-User program

Hi, Neil. I joined WP a few months ago, and did a bit of editing, but it seemed a bit overwhelming. Having seen this program, and searched through the adopter list, I was hoping you'd be willing to adopt me. Lara Taylor 05:38, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, ok, but do you really think you need it? :) I think you'll be 'leaving the nest' very quickly indeed. Neil (not Proto ►) 22:48, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Neil! I have formatting down (for the most part... lots of looking at other pages for help... you'd probably be surprised to know how long it takes me to do some edits), but I have a few questions about bringing info in. For example, I'm wanting to vastly expand the articles for Goodfellow Air Force Base and Wake Forest University Baptist Medical Center, and I want to create a page for Forsyth Medical Center. There's tons of great information on each of their websites, but I'm not sure what's the right way to pull it. I see the notice about Copyrights and I have these flashbacks to elementary school and the plagiarism warnings! I know to cite my sources, but is that enough? Do I have to reword everything or can I just pull paragraphs and bullet lists as long as I give credit to the site? I know I can't just copy a page as it, but how much alteration is necessary? So that's what I most want help with... How to pull information and the best way to organize it. Lara Taylor 05:08, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh, yes. And I have issues with images. Not only do they never show up when I try to add them to an article, but I'm not sure what images are okay to use considering Copyrights. Lara Taylor 19:44, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Responding on your talk page ... Neil (not Proto ►) 22:03, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Please check my talk page for a reply. Lara Taylor 04:02, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Neil. I was hoping you could check over Emerson Radio and tell me if it looks good. I took it from a stub to what it is now and want to know if it looks all good. Any suggestions for improvement are appreciated. Thanks. LaraLove 03:58, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks so much for your comments! I'll be working on creating Forsyth Medical Center next. I'll update you once it's finished. It's exciting to be creating a whole page! LaraLove 16:45, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your assistance on the Emerson Radio page. I'm learning a lot. If I only had more time! LaraLove 17:46, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your help with the picture of the Celtic Cross in Constantine. === Vernon White (talk) 22:35, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

No problem Vernon, you're welcome and happy editing! Neil (not Proto ►) 00:20, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

At this rate...

... it begins to look like I may have to pester admins about protected-page edits for at least a few more months. When, or even just before, that starts to become a bother to you, please let me know, and I will immediately shift "your share" of that workload over to some other poor, unsuspecting, and no doubt equally overworked admin, on the principle that the best person to get the job done quickly is someone who's already busy. (If at that time you have any suitable candidates in mind, please point me in their direction.) Thanks for all your help and support already! -- Ben ^TALK/_HIST 01:31, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't mind, please do continue asking me. If I were to point you towards other admins if I get swamped, a lesser, petty part of me suggests I should be pointing you in the direction of all the admins who voted 'oppose' to your candidacy. As far as the RFA itself goes, don't worry about it ... the mantra was just 'more time', not 'HAH! Never!'. Around about mid to late May would do it. Although, editing a few articles wouldn't help ... there must be something you like and know enough about to polish up a few articles. Even if it's porn stars. Neil (not Proto ►) 17:37, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Deletion review of Kings of Chaos

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Kings of Chaos. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. 129.174.184.3 08:55, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Matrixism Deletion Review

In your comment when you voted on the deletion review of Matrixism you suggested writing and article on the Matrixism talk page. Unfortunately the administrator who deleted and salted the Matrixism article also deleted and salted the Matrixism talk page. It looks like an attempt to railroad the Wikipedia process by removing transparency. Again it is not possible to write an article on the talk page. What action do you suggest now? 206.188.56.24 19:18, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

User:Neil/Matrixism. Start putting it together there. I'll even help out, there's a viable article there somewhere. Put all the references and a few neutral sentences if nothing else. Neil (not Proto ►) 20:29, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

As I said the Matrixism talk page has been deleted and protected. It is not possible for me to start an article there. Apparently one would have to be an administrator to unprotect the talk page. Are you an administrator?

Also your comments have been edited out of the deleteion review of Matrixism. Did you do this or are people playing games there? 206.124.144.3 22:12, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I am an administrator. Use the link above - User:Neil/Matrixism - and create your first draft of the article there. If it is okay, I can move it into article space. We have the tools, we have the technology. We can rebuild you (it). No idea what happened with the deletion review, although as of now, all comments are there. And I am trying to help you, but being rude - mostly unfairly - to people isn't helping your case, man. Neil (not Proto ►) 00:19, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

I apologize for anything rude that I might have written. I am generally a very polite and civil person. I imagine I must have become a bit fustrated by some of the procedural abuse. I promise I will not let it happen again.

I found a Wikipedia article for creation while doing a Google search for Matrixism. It seems to be a good article. I will post it with additional references where you have suggested. Thanks. 206.188.56.24 02:02, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of Longmont Potion Castle

For this reason alone, you are an irredeemable tosser. —The preceding unsigned comment was tossed in by 74.138.228.238 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) 21:08, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I do love making pancakes. Neil (not Proto ►) 00:16, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

User:Hellfreezesover666

I don't know if you realised, but the above username was taken to AIV twice, thats why it was brought to WP:RFCN - just thought I'd throw in some reasoning for it being there! Fully agree though in general, people should have a discussion with the user first - its simply biting otherwise Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 22:29, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

I didn't nominate it by the way, I simply let the user know as no-one had Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 22:30, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Doh, I do apologise. It was User:John Broughton. Sorry Ryan. This is my own personal little crusade, and so help me I will make sure that people ask the new users first, not just send it to RFCN and expect them to know where to go and what to do. Neil (not Proto ►) 22:37, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Ha, easy mistake to make, to be honest with you, I always use the tag now, got a few I've given out and I'm waiting for a response, had one today in fact, and the user simply requested a new username, and had one within 5 minutes! (He had his email address as his username). Certainly better to ask first, I'll help you out in the future with this one, think its important Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 22:41, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

RfA.

I responded to your neutral. Acalamari 22:36, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

• I gave a suggestion here. I hope it helps. Acalamari 23:10, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Aloha (+ an AfD)

Dear editor formerly known as Proto (you'll always be Proto to me...). I'm out of the loop on recent AfD consensus. What do you think of this: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Emin Salla? Crackpots who are notable amongst crackpots are keep-able? Marskell 19:30, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, as it stands, I'd close that as a delete. No reliable sources on the article or provided in the discussion. Neil (not Proto ►) 01:35, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Adoption?

I would like to be adopted please. (See it is asking nicely!)I've been working on the stubs I've found by doing random article and the stubs in the Video Game category. GhostWritten§ 13:45, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

No probl;em, see your talk page. Neil (not Proto ►) 16:51, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Adoption

I have been doing a few stubs and have signed up for the Album project. I've learned that I probably need some tips and tricks and I hope to get them by being adopted by you. Will you please adopt me? Sorenw 15:59, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Sure thing. I think adoptions are now closed, that's enough to keep me busy! Neil (not Proto ►) 16:51, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi Neil. Thanks for adopting me :-) Would you please have a look at the pages I have worked on so far and give me some coments on what I should do differently and what (if anything) is done right? Best regards Sorenw 19:33, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

WP:RFCN

Neil, I'm sorry, but is it really necessary to be insulting and sarcastic in some of your edits to WP:RFCN? I refer specifically to this, among others. RJASE1 ^Talk 20:44, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Not really, I am sorry if describing things as "policy wonking" upset you. I am starting to lose patience with people who value policy above common sense trying to get new editors with user names such as "Z356363" or "Fartymcgee" blocked ... it is horribly bad faith and biting to new users. Neil (not Proto ►) 20:46, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Actually, it's terms like "loon" and "lame" that I think are problematic. And I don't believe the nominations are in bad faith - at least mine weren't. RJASE1 ^Talk 20:49, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

No, yours weren't so bad. And you used {{UsernameConcern}} first, hooray! Neil (not Proto ►) 20:49, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi Neil. Thanks for your review and comments. I'll make it my project to make pages for the people involved with the two albums.

Deletion Query: Gone With The Blastwave

Hi, a while ago you were the closing admin for http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gone_with_the_Blastwave It seems that the article was salted as well as deleted? It seemed to be consensus that it wouldn't be salted, and about 50/50 that it should even be deleted, and you made no mention of a salting in your closing statement (though I do strongly disagree with the outcome, we seemed to have at least 2 verifiable sources, but I am not going to bother taking it to deletion review because it would probably be deleted anyway), but when I looked up the article just then to find out if anybody had remade it in the meantime, I found out it had been salted. I wanted to know your reasons for salting it (assuming it was you). If I am mistaken, please correct me. Thankyou Darkcraft 13:26, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Hi Darkcraft. I didn't salt it, it was User:Centrx - see [1]. Neil (not Proto ►) 18:58, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I will ask him about it then.Darkcraft 11:15, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Matrixism Article

The Matrixism article at User:Neil/Matrixism seems to have shaped up pretty well. You might want to take a look at it to see what you think. 206.188.56.88 02:28, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Mr. Lady Records

Are you planning on completing my total humiliation by going to FAC when you get back? :) Seriously, it's good to see an article so far improved, I hope you go for it. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 00:00, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Adoption

Hi There! Do you think you could adopt me please? I will learn much more with a mentor. --pizza1512 15:55, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

New & Expanded articles

Hi, Neil. I hope you're doing well. And I hope you're not overwhelmed when you get back. I greatly expanded Golden Corral and I'm going to add some pictures this weekend. I'd like to know what you think. Also, please check out Forsyth Medical Center. Tell me if I went overboard with information, relied to heavily on one source, incorrectly did anything... that kind of stuff. I know I need pictures, I'll get around to taking them in a few days. But other than that; like it, love it, hate it... let me know. And suggestions for improvement. I look forward to your comments. --LaraLove 03:30, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for adopting me :)

Hi Neil. Thanks for adopting me. I guess I have a lot to learn. And yes, you can call me ccc999 or just ccc. Wiki markup is very interesting and also convenient.
I will be sure to read the help pages and tutoral pages. I love being a Wikipedia. Its really fun :).
I hope I can contribute more to Wikipedia and make more people come here to learn and maybe, like you and many others, also contribute.
It is also very interesting how Wikipedia gets its content on search engines like google so high. I don't know if you know too much about this, but how does Wikipedia get its pagerank so high?
I was also wondering how I could create a whole new page, not just editing pages that are already created.

Thanks again for adopting me :) (I see you are on a WikiBreak)
Seajay 17:50, 15 April 2007 (UTC) (Hope it works)

Fair use rationale for Image:WEEE Man.gif

Thanks for uploading Image:WEEE Man.gif. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Remember the dot ^(talk) 20:58, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

The image has already been replaced by Image:WEEE man.png. Neil (►) 13:40, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Wikidaddy

It didn't sound that dirty in my head, but typed out... eh, whatever. Anyway, just wanted to comment that you are taking the longest short wikibreak ever. I'm beginning to fear intergalactic war at this point. I've been adopted and abandoned! I think I'm doing alright, but I do look forward from some input from you... my wikidaddy. Someone really should write that article. --LaraLove^Talk/_Contribs 05:44, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

My lovely adoptees ...

I will check back from time to time to see if anyone has left any messages, so if you do have a problem that doesn't need attending to urgently, or need some advice, whatever, leave it here still, and I'll get back to you the next time I check this page (seems to be every couple of days). My new job is taking up a lot more of my time than I thought it would, bah.

Please rest assured that there has been no intergalactic war. Yet (looks to the stars). Neil (not Proto ►) 15:48, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

So glad to hear that you haven't been abducted and probed. Congrats on your new job, btw... hopefully it at least pays well... to compensate for lost Wikipedia time, of course. I wrote a couple of articles--one of which is still a stub--then started playing around with different things here in Wikipedia. Decided I like reviewing Good Article nominees and realized my articles suck. So I must work on those. Anyway, not sure what is needed to graduate from the program, but let me know what you think of my progress. --LaraLove^Talk/_Contribs 16:27, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Image:Tawfeeqalmansoor.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Tawfeeqalmansoor.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Abu badali ^(talk) 16:35, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Matrixism Article Situation

Neil, I think the Matrixism article that we have been working on is finished and up to snuff. If you could take a minute to move it to the Matrixism article space (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matrixism) it would be most appreciated. I would do it myself but as we discussed the article space (also its associated talk page) has been SALTed and only an administrator can change that. Thanks for your help. 206.188.56.88 18:02, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Done. Neil (not Proto ►) 17:02, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for unSALTing the article. Unfortunately the new artcile was immediately nominated for deletion with no reason given for the nom. Your input into the ongoing deletion vote process would helpful and appreciated. 206.188.56.88 19:18, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Although the results of the AfD vote was "Keep" it appears that someone who's username is Guy decided to rule the result as Speedy Delete and then he deleted the new article out of process. Is there anything we can about this apparent abuse of administrative power?206.124.144.3 03:22, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Sigh. Why is it always Guy? I have reversed Guy's unilateral and incorrect action. It's at AFD, which is the correct place to assess the encyclopaedic viability of new content that doesn't come under WP:CSD. Neil (►) 13:37, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

The article has been deleted and SALTed once again. Is that the end of the Wikipedia process for this article? Is there some other appeal process? 206.188.56.88 01:19, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Niel, there is appeal being aired at WP:DRV#Matrixism. Could use your input once again. Thanks. 206.188.56.88 02:07, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Not good. Not good at all.

• You created the article
• You reposted it without deletion review, depspite presumably knowing that dleeiton had been endorse drecently
• You undeleted it after another admin (me) speedied it as G4, rather than taking it to DRV
• You did not declare that you were the creator when doing that
• You then removed the deletion tag because the debate had been "closed" - but it was closed as delete, so you unilaterally reverted closure in favour of deletion of an article you yourself had created.

That does not look too good, does it? Guy (Help!) 12:10, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Most all of what you say is factually false. Everything that Neil has done has been consistent with WP. It seems that others, perhaps yourself, are trying to subvert the Wikipedia process.71.112.17.109 12:15, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Proof by assertion isn't. Guy has some very good points here, and it would be good if Neil were to respond to them. >Radiant< 12:27, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

It does not look good, Guy, if you misrepresent what happened in such a manner:

• The original article on Matrixism was deleted, quite rightly, and salted due to a recreation. I created a placeholder at User:Neil/Matrixism to see if an article on the topic could be viable.
• Over the past few months, a referenced article evolved. Even ignoring the geocities reference, which I would remove due to being crap.
• I did not repost the deleted article - I moved the new article from my sub space to article space. This is not breaking new ground.
• I undeleted because another admin (you) promptly ignored the criteria for speedy deletion and deleted it under G4, despite it not being a recreation of deleted material, rather than taking it to AFD. It was, of course, already at AFD, which didn't seem to stop you.
• I did remove the deletion tag, because you had already and incorrectly closed the associated AFD as a speedy delete. If you wish to repoen the AFD, I have no problem with this. I believe you unilaterally deleted in the first place - contrary to the community discussion on the AFD. Did you feel you were justified in ignoring the criteria for speedy deletion because your deletion summary consisted of "No."? Neil (►) 13:36, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Neil, it appears from the information that I have that you are using your admin tools to win a content dispute. It is not appropriate for an article editor to use their admin tools to gain an advantage in an dispute. Looks to me that is what is happening here. Please refrain from doing this in the future. FloNight 15:11, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

No, I wasn't. Neil (►) 02:23, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Brian.Burnell

I was visiting Brian's page recently just to see what he'd been working on in the past. I have worked on a number of articles with him before, just by luck essentially, as we are interested in the same sorts of topics. I was astonished to notice a block on his account. The block log had a single issue noted in it, this edit [2]. While certainly in poor taste, I think the interpretation as a "personal threat" seems suspect to me, notably for a first offense. I see no history of prior warnings by you or anyone else (this might have been taking place elsewhere, I don't know), nor do I see any temp blocks which is generally acceptable in this cases. As far as I am aware, personal threats are warnable, and in my five years of wiki'ing I have not seen an insta-ban for this unless the user had a prior record of bad behavior. Brian, on the contrary, has made amazing additions to the wiki on many occasions, and some of the articles are the best that can be found anywhere on the 'net.

So frankly I'm extremely surprised to find this, although it does offer an explanation as to why I haven't run into him lately. I'm rather inclined to allow him back on the wiki, unless there is extenuating evidence that I am unaware of.

Maury 19:19, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Niel, I am still looking for some sort of explanation about this. While certainly short-term blockable, the action above does not appear to warrant a permanent ban. Unless there are extenuating circumstances that have not been shown, I am going to unblock. Maury 12:09, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi Neil

Hi Neil, I guess you go by that now huh? But anyways can you find the time to explain how to create those templates with the "Show" and "Hide" buttons becuase I think my page is too big now. Oh can you reply on my talk page becuase I'm doing other Wiki stuff at the moment.Sam ov the blue sand 21:53, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

I got it working now. Thanks though. Sam ov the blue sand 21:37, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

WP:ADOPT input

Hello, Neil. The Adopt-a-User program is looking for new ideas and input on the program. If you are still interested please stop by the talk page and read some of the ideas being floated and give a comment. If you want to update or change your information on the adopter's list page, now would be a great time! Thanks! V60 ^{干什么？ · VDemolitions} 03:47, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

User Page Deleted

My user page was deleted by Radiant. Is there anyway I can recover it? Is there any way I can keep this from happening again? Matrixism 13:57, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

Gamecruft articles

If you see any gamecruft articles or sections tag it with {{Move to gaming wiki}} so I will move most of them to a gaming wiki within a week. Then it can be deleted. This way if it is really "significant" it can be archived or saved. --Cs california 06:49, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Leaving the nest....

Kicking me out, huh? I see how it is. No love. :D I do think, thought, that I am ready to become wikipendent... or something. Yea. Whatever. Thanks, Neil! <3 --LaraLove^T/_C 03:26, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Welcome back

Welcome back from your wikibreak. Hope it was restful. User:Neil

Fair use rationale for Image:Hp dh hangman.JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Hp dh hangman.JPG. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. User:Panser Born

Rationale added. Don't you have anything better to do? Neil (►) 21:01, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

(check your history:there was a screwup with page formatting andf I have just edited these posts to make the last two posts show up Sandpiper 07:11, 18 May 2007 (UTC))

Dropping by the nest for some tea...

... and a question. Is it, in your opinion, or by any policy, inappropriate to use the American English term "sophomore" when referring to the second year of college for members of, or the second album released by, an American band? And what about American colleges; Considering they refer to second year students as sophomores, is that acceptable usage? If so, why is it also not acceptable for American bands, whose second albums are referred to as sophomore albums, to use the term? Wikification leads to an explanation for anyone who isn't familiar with the word, so I wonder. Regards, LaraLove^T/_C 06:23, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Re:Thanks

Not at all, Neil. Have a good day/night :) Take care, PeaceNT 13:56, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Huh!

...so I see you are getting bored in work these days ;p PeaceNT 18:57, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Cool Cat MFD on DRV

Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 May 30#Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Cool Cat -- Ned Scott 05:21, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Images rationales

Neil, it's not enough to simply state "it's fair use to depict TV show". Please take a look at WP:FURG. Cheers. --Darkbane ^talk 18:56, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Sigh. Yes it is. That's as detailed a rationale as is necessary. But, because heaven forfend we should actually spend our time doing anything useful, I have wasted some more of my time to make it more detailed, to prevent your wasting even more of it in future by dragging this on. Neil (►) 18:57, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Or heaven forbid you actually assume good faith on my part, huh. Well, it will have to do for now, since you value your time more than established guidelines. --Darkbane ^talk 19:38, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes I do. As should we all. If we did, we'd only have guidelines that added value to the project, because we wouldn't keep creating pointless ones that just waste everyone's time. Neil (►) 21:27, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Think you may have deleted the wrong file

Neil, suspect you may have deleted the wrong file. You have deleted the 'Ygo Gales Galama' file when I think you intended to delete only the 'Ygo III of Galama' article. They were written by two different individuals. The Ygo III article refers to a different individual and was full of errors and I agree should have been removed asap or corrected. The Ygo Gales Galama file was accurate and quoted traceable legitamate sources and included a link to one infact. There was no indication that this file was under any consideration for deletion. Assume this was a deletion error. Cheers, Ezza Ezza61 09:45, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for restoring Ygo Gales Galama

Is the problem that the references are in Dutch and require a translation to English?Ezza61 10:19, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

It needs inline citations. See WP:CITE. Neil (►) 10:42, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

The Galamas-article

That article wasn't fit for deletion; it is perhaps better to restore it; the crsaders article was deletable. But the family is historically documented and important. Can you restore it? I don't now how to restore articles. Can you also tell me how to do that? Murlock 10:38, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, no. The article was correctly deleted through community discussion. It was unreferenced and I don't think it should be restored. Neil (►) 10:44, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

When Ygo Gles Galama excisted and has referenced article, and the same goes for many frisian heroes, all part of the family, than rises the question; why doesn't their family, an important and wealthy noble-family, not deserve an article? I think they do. Besides, the community agreed in deleting the Ygo III Galama article, not especially this one! I think, you might have acted to soon deleting it; you should gve it some time, I've read in some books about 'em, a might give you the names and more ref's. Murlock 10:50, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Please see what it says at the top of my talk page. You will have to go to WP:DRV. Neil (►) 12:20, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

You are too quick in deleting articles that should be in Wikipedia. Deleting an article because it is written in a sloppy style is no reason. The lack of "google-able" sources is also NOT a reason. What happened to the Frisians is similar as what happened to the Scottish. The Dutch tried to erase the history/culture of the Frisians, just as the English did with the Scottish. Bornestera 20:18, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Igo Joukes Galema

There was enough information on this person, this crusader, Ygo Youkes Galama or Igo Joukes Galema, to "grant" him a place in Wiki. You have most definately not read the discussion. The article was not quite good, and I gave some suggestions. There were sources mentioned in the discussions, I did some searching and placed my findings there, and now it's gone, and I don't want to spent time on it again. So I request you replace the article immeditly, so I can re-edit it. Bornestera 20:12, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Pier Roelofs Donia

Hi Neil, I am trying to add in the supportable staements about Harings Harinxma. However you have removed it. They may have been added by a sockpupet, however this bit was correct and supported by Historical records from Fiesland, and from genealogies. How about if the sentence is reworded to not use the sockpupets terminology? GB 22:28, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for considering what I am doing! I also am definiately not the Mrlob or Murlock who seems to be a teenager from the Netherlands. I will also add back in the supportable parts of the Haring Haringxma article! GB 22:36, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Can you tell if sock puppets are being used on the Dutch and Friesian wikipedias to produce bogus articles in the same series Haring Harinsma Igo Galama? I would like to use a translation of the content there, but not if is produced by the same people. GB 22:59, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

You are really a "homo non sapiens" aren't you ? You allready made up your mind, qoute "bogus articles". Increadible ! Your goal is clear, you want to delete some more articles...... And yes I started the articles in the dutch Wiki. And yes I discovered that somebody else had also started articles in the English Wiki on the same persons, based on a different source than I used. And that really draw my attention. Again: medieval history is one of the most difficult ones. We have true stories about things that never happened, and lies about real events. History has allways been rewritten, censored and coloured, mostly by the "winners". How do you find the truth ? At first you have to collect all the stories known. Then compare, and if it's stil not clear: put more then one point of view in the article. Putting a doubt label on a midieval article is double. no article on a midieval subject will ever be 100% sure. Reconsider your approach. And on my articles, if I'm not sure i mail/contact a historian (and they do also not allways agree) or go to a librairy. Bornestera 17:50, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

It looks like Bornestera is confusing me with Neil! I was opposed to deleting the articles from the English wikipedia, and I am in favour of recreating the articles with supportable content. I was only asking if the articles were bogus or not, I was hoping for a not bogus! But instead Neil has no special access for Dutch and Frisian wikipedia, so I can check myself as well as Neil can. GB 00:38, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

That sounds like original research. Wikipedia is not the correct venue for original research. Neil ╦ 17:56, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

That sounds like pre-judgement, that sounds like a search for a reason, that sounds like censorship, that sounds like the deletion of a terrible lot of articles. I use publised articles, and if one publisher writes/concludes different than another, who will make the choice wat comes in Wiki ? YOU ? Well mr Welshman, I don't make a choise and prever to have the subject enlighted from different sides. Historians do not allways agree, sometimes because they are on different sides of borders (that is border between nations and religions) So think again. Wiki should collect as many articles as possible, and just control likelihood and plausibility, no more, no less. Bornestera 18:14, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Good faith

Hello, Neil. Regardind this edit, I must tell you: assume good faith :-)

I never said that the questioner is not acting in good faith. I could decide to answer that question myself. I just thought that other people might feel uncomfortable spending a lot of time answering that question, when the OP has contributions like those. A.Z. 22:48, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

As it's an IP address, we have no way of knowing if it is the same person ... please try and bear that in mind. Neil (►) 22:51, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

OK. But it's not a matter of assuming good faith, then. It's a matter of recognizing that we don't know whether they are the same person. A.Z. 23:06, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Friday Night Live 2007 (Big Brother Australia) redirect page

Hi. I noticed you protected and redirected the Friday Night Live 2007 (Big Brother Australia) page to Big Brother Australia#Friday Night Live. Seeing as I'm not an administrator, and you were the one to make the redirect, I was wondering whether you could change the page so it redirects to Big Brother Australia 2007#Friday Night Live, seeing as that was what the article was about. Cheers, 97198 talk 01:15, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Makes sense... done! Neil (►) 08:19, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Cheers. 97198 talk 16:32, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

goping bezerko

funny expression, what does that mean? ;-) thanks for protection, anyway (btw, there's a long thread on the Admin's noticeboard on de.wp regarding this issue, that's why I found it) --Ü 19:02, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

It means I'm still getting used to a new keyboard! ;) Neil ╦ 20:14, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

errr, no idea what you wanted to type then, "getting berserk "? Anyway, we really smiled about this protection reason on de.wp, because it sounds (if read loudly with a hard German pronunciation) as if it means exactly what most of the users feel about this whole issue, just in another language *g* --Ü 21:01, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

I meant "going bezerk", yes ... wenn ich sprache auf Deutsch, mein worter seien sie freier? :) Neil ╦ 21:05, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Fitty vandal

Thanks. Tayquan ^holla _{My work} 21:19, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

No problem. I threw a bottle of piss at 50 Cent once, at Reading Festival. Ah, the memories ... Neil ╦ 21:21, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

?? Well, you wouldn't do that if you were alone in an alley with him. Thanks for putting your bias aside on this one. Tayquan ^holla _{My work} 22:04, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Probably not! See the 2004 section of Reading Festival, and [3] if you're interested ... it wasn't just me, I was part of a very large mob! Good times. Neil ╦ 22:09, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Armedblowish and proxies

Hi, I noticed your comment on this RfA and thought I should explain the reasons behind my decision to nominate. Our policy on open proxies has resulted directly from dealing with vandalism. Jimbo has made it clear that we don't have anything agianst Tor and other such providers of highly private internet access, other than the vandalism that is caused by them (see the response to Q.4). Hardblocking the proxy solves that problem. The question as I see it is whether we can trust editor who edits from such a proxy enough to allow their account to continue editing as an administrator and I think this is such an example. I discussed the theoretical issue of an admin editing from a Tor proxy with several checkusers and Arbitrators before I went ahead with this nom and they did not raise an objection to the concept of an RfA for someone in that position (provided that the community trusted the editor in question with the tools). I note than someone on ArbCom (Morven) has now supported the request. I realise that the circumstances of this RfA are pretty unique and need to be looked at fully. I would suggest that you consider the support, opposition and Armedblowfish's history with the project and decide whether the fact that Armedblowfish will be editing from a Tor node tips the balance for you. Our policy as regards blocking proxies to deal with vandalism is not to my mind affected. Do let me (or Armedblowfish) know if you have any questions we might be able to help with - beyond the success or failure of the RfA, both of us would like people to be as comfortable as possible with the issues raised by the request. WjBscribe 21:32, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Um, see the 23rd support vote(!), but thank you for the excellent message. ;) Neil ╦ 21:37, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

lol. You're right - I hadn't seen that you'd made your mind up already :). Just trying to make sure that people's concerns are fully discussed. This is in some ways "the first time a blocked edior has asked for adminship since Willy on Wheels" (Blowfish's rather self-depracating way of putting it) and I'm keen to make sure the issues are thoroughly explored - whether people decide to support or not in the end. Still, I can always copy and paste the same text to others so not entirely wasted ;). WjBscribe 21:45, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Reply

Well, to start with, what was the issue about? Perhaps it was my incorrect action that I addressed Biophys, but user Biophys interests me much from psychological point of view, as he's a Russian American. Why do I need it? Many people of my generation, including several my fellows had emigrated to the West, so perhaps I'm interested to know how they should feel themself. And, how much possible is it to track spirit of the country if you are living far away.

I asked Biophys how he understands some slang of 1990s. Perhaps again, I was incorrect, because besides pure interest I showd off. Let's go.

Пацанские распальцовки на стрелках -- всё-таки цивилизованнее, чем заточка в бок

Is "it is better to come to an agreement than to be killed by a knife" an accurate translation of this?

Not so. Let's move. Perhaps as you know, in 1990s many of arising Russian businesses had criminal coverage, partially due to bad working of the legal system. When such criminal businessmen had tensions, instead of settling question in the court, they met somewhere -- on so-called "стрелка"s -- and settled the issue with weapons. But often it was enough to show how cool you were and how much powerful. Status was illustrated by crimson jackets, costly gadgets and a characteristic gesture, with all fingers set far aside from each other -- so-called "распальцовка".

But how pure criminals set questions among themselves? In prison colonies, at least, according to books of Solzhenitsyn, if criminal heads consider some man's acting wrongly, just some "subordinate" is sent to thrust a sharpened bar of metal in his side -- and at the dawn this man doesn't wake up. That is the reference used in the second part of my statement.

Perhaps it's a weak sentence, but the sense I put into it was -- "Methods of criminal businesses of 1990s (showing off), after all, are an advance (more civilized), if compared to pure criminal methods used in Soviet time." Bitter irony. Indeed, somehow strange. But I was more obsessed with lexic.

Next, "Западло не отвечать за базар" Does that mean "someone must be punished for making too much noise"?

This sentence consists of two parts. "Zapadlo ne otvechat' za bazar" 1) What means "otvechat' za bazar", "be responsible for your speech"? Simple example, if you adress a small criminal, "you, the motherf**ker", he would reply with, "would you be responsible for your speech?" It means, are you powerful enough to stand for your words, and if you aren't you'll be treated badly. Of course, if used by people without criminal background, this expression loses it's bloodthirstiness. But it may be used, e.g., to make the things utterly clear -- "Za bazar otvetish?" = "You are not joking, not making me wrong. You mean exactly what you've said. And I want to know that damned seriously."

2) Zapadlo. What does it mean. Also a slang word. *There's an old joke -- at least I understand this word from that. An alpinist is climbing on a cliff with a rope, on the last meters of it he sees an old man with an axe in a hand. He asks, "Are you also an alpinist?" The old man answers, "No, I'm zapadlo", and cuts the rope.* So, it means unexpected trouble. In fact my sentence was composed incorrectly. One can't use this word in so way. One can say "I created him great zapadlo", or "I met real zapadlo". But it's wrong to say e.g. "zapadlo to do something you shouldn't do".

Also zapadlo is a special notion, used by criminal bosses in their system of what's right and wrong. Zapadlo means "wrong" in criminal world, but it doesn't mean exactly "wrong". This meaning can't be considered, if interlocutors have no criminal background.

I exactly wanted to say, "It's wrong to speak out false, wrong statements", but I used wrong lexic for that.

ellol 22:18, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry that with my not careful actions I put you into this and made you to lose your time digging in all that culturological stuff. I lost also my time, but it's my trouble. ellol 22:22, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Reply by Biophys

Please note that ellol did not provide you his version of precise translation of first phrase (and also two preceding phrase in his message: "Anything can be done for money" and "I am not satisfied with Putin").Biophys 01:19, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

His version of second phrase was: "It's wrong to speak out false, wrong statements". My version was: "Someone must be punished for making too much noise". Why I am right? Because combination "Западло не отвечать" means that someone (I assume me) must take responsibility (be punished) for his actions. It does not simply say "wrong". It tells: "someone must be held responsible". Word "базар" in this context means:"making too much noise", exactly. Biophys 01:19, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh, fuck off. ellol 03:46, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

What he is telling you is completely misleading, to tell this politely! Ellol meant exactly what I told at ANI noticeboard. You must ask a translation from a neutral person who understands Russian criminal slang. Can you find such person? That is precisely why he is using this language for threats.Biophys 01:19, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Hendrick Jacobszoon Lucifer

I have restored the article on Hendrick Jacobszoon Lucifer that you deleted as a hoax. If you would have read the referencess section you would have seen a reference substantiating this article. I actually have the book and helped the orignial editor (Haggawaga) create. I am also reviewing the other deletions associated with this so called "sock" case. I was involved with the orignial kermanshi/Mr lob check user case and believe that Haggawagge is not MR lob through conversations I have had with each of them. If you hvae a problem with this restore, please let me know. Thanks. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 22:22, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Neil, I have some concerns over the recnt block of User:Haggawaga - Oegawagga whatever his name is. I have had off wiki discussions with this individual (as well as mr. lob) and from all of my interaction have every reason to believe that they are not socks of each other. I know that they know each other personally and as from what I our discussions use a common internet source. I have worked with Haggawagga very regularly and have every reason to believe all he does in in good faith. Before his blocking did he engage in any serisouly detrmiental/blockable behavior other than sharing the IP address with somebody else? I know that haggawagga is the same person as kermanshi used to. He tried to start again after the orignial failed RFA which I have helped him with. In short, I have worked closley with this individual and believe him to be harmless (and not indef blocked). DO you have a serious objection to my unblocking of him and keeping a close eye on him (as i have done for the past month or so anyways?). Thanks! -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 22:29, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Checkuser was definite that hagga, mrlob, kermansahi, murlock, blowhart etc are all the same person. If you are willing to monitor his activity, ensure he properly references his articles, does not restore those deleted validly, restricts himself to this one account from now on, and stops using socks to abuse AFDs, and if you think despite all that he can be a good user, then feel free to unblock. But I'll be watching him too. Neil ╦ 22:44, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Ok, that works for me. But remeber, checkuser can only prove they edit from the same IP. It could be like where I work, we have the same IP address. IF the guy in the cubicle next to me started editing a checkuser would say we are the same people. Please feel free to keep an eye as I will be. -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 22:58, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Australian companies deletions

I think the current AfD's on all the articles you referred to on my talk page clearly explain the matter. Australian companies articles are a mess, and at the moment i'm the sole Aussie project member making a concerted two stage effort to clean the whole cat up. First we remove the crap, then everything else gets brought into line with WP:MOS including adding relevant infoboxes, correct categorisation, and a whole bucketload of other stuff. This has been one heck of a process, as i've spent nearly two months on and off trying to knock this thing on the head. Thewinchester ^(talk) 01:36, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Jancko Douwama deletion

Neil, appears you have deleted another legitimate article: Re: Jancko Douwama

This article contained genuine information and references and was not written by the individual that has seemed to have resulted in anything with Frisian content being removed from Wikipedia. I would appreciate it if this article was restored, a quick search on the internet will find that Jancko Douwama has a legitimate place in european history and is held in high regard in Friesland.

Cheers59.101.182.191 08:53, 4 June 2007 (UTC), sorry forgot to sign in on this Jancko Douwama requestEzza61 08:57, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Nice work, Einstein

And when iss my block supposed to pass? You didn't even learn the case, an Administrator, as a judge, shoild listen to both sides befor blocking. You are populist, not than you didn't learn the case, you also blocked a user who contributed to Wikipedia. Enter my page and see for yourself, theres a list there. M.V.E.i.

Your block will pass on the 31st of February. And I appreciate you have contributed some good to Wikipedia, but by creating a poisonous editing atmosphere through your continual hate speech, you did far more harm than good. Or did you think it was okay to describe people of different races as "Nazis" or "not really human"? Please feel free to continue this dialogue. Neil ╦ 16:48, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

This is somewhat unorthodox, but could you please look at least cursively at my contributions - and if you spot vandalism, then block me or give me appropriate warnings. Both M.V.E.i. and Beatle Fab Four ([4], [5], [6], [7]) have accused me of vandalism and trolling, so I would like those accusations to be either confirmed or discarded. DLX 17:09, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Why did you revert my edit w/o comment?

The tag I added to Category:Female porn stars seems to me quite legitimate and was done in good faith. How do these women satisfy WP:BIO? Is having sex on film sufficiently noteworthy to merit inclusion in an encyclopedia? Why did you simply revert it as if it were vandalism? 151.203.18.206 18:31, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Because the tag you used is for articles, not category pages. Note I didn't remove any of the tags you placed on articles. Neil ╦ 18:39, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for that info. Would you happen to know if there's a similar tag for category pages? 151.203.18.206 19:19, 4 June 2007 (UTC)