User talk:RickK
NOTE: IF YOU ARE ANONYMOUS, AND POST ANYTHING ON THIS PAGE, YOU WILL BE DELETED WITHOUT CONSIDERATION.
Range blocks
Hiya I saw you recent post at the village pump, and thought I'd come an teach you how you could have done it.
Firstly do a reverse DNS check to see the internet provider. If it's AOL give up. AOL is far too large, has far too many computers for you to ba able to block the vandal.You'll sucseed in blocking loads of legit users and probably won't get the actual vandal.
Assuming it's not AOL then proceed as follows,
64.12.116.10 through 64.12.117.22
Set the last digits to 0 64.12.116.0 ->> 64.12.117.0
do two /24 blocks 64.12.116.0/24 and 64.12.117.0/24 that will block a total of 512 IPs
Stick to /24 only if you are at all unsure about what you are doing. Note that /31 will block fewer than /24 and /16 will block a lot more. Never go lower than /16 ( I don't you you can in actual fact anyway) Also since range blocks catch innocents as well as vandals keep them short. Policy is 24 hours only I think.
HTH theresa knott 22:28, 21 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Stress
You always seem to be under a lot of stress, what with dealing with trolls and vandals and people who just don't get it. Relax and have a cookie. You'll feel better (food allergies excepted). -- Cyrius|✎ 06:18, 7 Aug 2004 (UTC)
unverified image
Thanks for uploading Image:RobertATaft.jpg. I notice it currently doesn't have an image copyright tag. Could you add one to let us know its copyright status?.
See [1]
Thanks so much, Duk 09:24, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- so what's the copyright? see Wikipedia:Image copyright tags, Duk 09:30, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- the site you note specifically says ...Not all images are in the public domain
Also - Image:RobertLaFollette.jpg
I've killed most of the redlinks in the primary and secondary education section (and can probably do the rest tonight), some of the 'attractions' redlinks (most with free-use pics), and used a variety of methods to greatly reduce the number of long lists. About the only thing keeping me from switching to support is the city council member links. I was wondering if it's getting close to that for you. PS, the article now mentions the Electric Light Tower now, tho' I haven't gotten around to starting the actual article. Niteowlneils 19:39, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- I'd just as soon see it disappear altogether, but if you think a sub-page would be a more widely accepted compromise, that'd resolve my objection. Niteowlneils 21:02, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- I've got the govmt section open to add sister cities, but can't think of a good name/fmt for the sub page. Did you have anything specific in mind (doesn't have to be perfect--we can always tweak/move/rename/whatever later. Niteowlneils 21:16, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Had a brainstorm just after I clicked Save: Current leaders of San Jose, California. Seems like current leaders aren't really necessary for the main article in an encyclopedia meant to cover centuries. Niteowlneils 21:46, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- FWIW, there've been more switches to Support, and new votes, and now you're the only non-Support, and the article's seven days is about up. Niteowlneils 05:53, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Cool. Thanks. I've killed a few more red links today, and have taken pics to go with some more tonight or tomorrow. Niteowlneils 01:50, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Hey, you were involved in this dispute deeply and certified the RfC. Some of us feel that the proposed decision against Everyking is insufficient and too weak for a user who has abused Wikipedia so badly. I hope you can weigh in at Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Everyking/Proposed decision having read the proposed decision and discussion and share your opinion with us, whether it's that the decision is too strong, just right, or too weak. Johnleemk | Talk 06:08, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)
AMC
Now that Ruth Warrick has died, I think we should probably make the final push and finish the history articles. I updated the 1970s as much as I could, and the 1990s and 2000s were great due to your work. Now the only incomplete article is History of All My Children (1980-1989). Are you up to the task of finishing this...or at least starting, and I can help? Mike H 22:44, Jan 21, 2005 (UTC)
Pearl
Thank you for the kind words. I am working mostly on historical articles here in Virginia. PearlWashington 00:11, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
In my view it is vandalism to interrupt a discussion on a merge by redirecting the page, it is pointless having the discussion if it is pre-empted. I would prefer you not interact with me further after your breach of the blocking policy. I notice I am not the only person troubled by your persistent breaches of Wikipedia policies. Thank you. Ollieplatt 00:34, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
What's going on here? Why did you undo my rollback? —Charles P. (Mirv) 00:35, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for the explanation; I suppose even the mechanism that usually catches rollbacks of intervening edits must fail now and then. —Charles P. (Mirv) 00:53, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Iasson
Please don't permaban him until we've figured out what to do with him. I know this might seem like being a little too nice, but being the, what, 100th odd most visited site on the web, we have to put up with thinks that are a little borderline. I personally would be happy with a ban, but there might be a good contributer in there. OK, really deep down there...But that's part of the wiki, in my mind: Deep Mining Operations! hfool/Roast me 00:37, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- Your warning sounded pissed enough to do so if he tried to do it three times. Don't worry about it. hfool/Roast me 00:42, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Unexplained reverts
Can you please explain why you're reverting my edits? Ollieplatt 01:12, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
a Ollieplatt crime
Hi Rick, You might want to check this Ollieplatt diff; a massive deletion. — Davenbelle 01:20, Jan 22, 2005 (UTC)
RickK, oh paragon of administrative excellence, you should note the changes made remove blatant commercial promotion for a privately owned web business that happens to be about politics.
It removed four paragraphs quoting directly from the website and generally scaled back a very long article about a very minor subject.
Davenbelle of course reverted my changes without explanation of any kind.
Ollieplatt 01:27, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Ollieplatt
I don't think you need worry about ollieplatt warning others any time soon, see this. And after the case is done it looks like he's going to get a year-long ban. --fvw* 20:57, 2005 Jan 22 (UTC)
Steve Dalkowski
Thank you for your comments. I wrote as of 2003 because the last information on him I found was dated 2003 (I have written to the Baltimore Orioles asking for more). Do you still think I should change it to 2005? Zerbey 01:42, 23 Jan 2005 (UTC) (trying to be accurate!)
Request
Hey Rick - there's something I'd like to discuss with you off-wiki. Since you understandly don't have an email specified and don't use IRC, could you email me (mine is enabled) so I can contact you. →Raul654 07:20, Jan 23, 2005 (UTC)