User talk:Redvers/Archive26
 | This is an archive of past discussions about User:Redvers. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Your sig
At last. One I know. Morrissey? GBT/C 21:08, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
- Give that man today's star prize! You win a quick flash of this lovely pair of puppies :o) ➨ REDVEЯS is now 40 per cent papier mâché 21:10, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
- A fine pair. One's always bigger than the other, apparently... GBT/C 21:17, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
Good faith
Of course you have no good faith, Redvers, that's obvious! Now, would you be interested in this gorgeous 3-acre beach from property I have for sale in Paraguay… 
. Chin up, my friend :) -- Avi (talk) 12:53, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for May 2nd and 9th, 2008.
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 18 | 2 May 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 19 | 9 May 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 06:30, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for May 12th, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 20 | 12 May 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:32, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
Very well
Since you've decided to go down the "I'll avoid being accountable" route, I would direct you to my reply, which is located at my talkpage, and also encourage you to respond to Durova's point(s) here. Yours with the deepest respect, honour and gratitude —TreasuryTag—t—c 10:50, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
- Hello, Redvers. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Yours, Enigma message 17:42, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
- Saw. Treated it exactly how it deserved to be treated. Moved on to actual editing rather than faux drama. ➨ REDVEЯS is now 40 per cent papier mâché 18:38, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
A few things
Try not to replace all discussions on a user's talk page with blocking notices after blocking the user. It makes others confused and think that the user wasn't warned, which is wrong. And when looking at User talk:70.241.67.204, I see that that user wasn't warned properly before being blocked for one whole week. That's probably why the user hasn't come to his/her senses yet. I'm not saying that you are the wrongdoer; it's just that there is a misunderstanding here. I hope this helps. Leave any comments you have on either one of our talk pages. Marcus2 (talk) 18:23, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
- On an IP address, warnings of more than a few days old are pointless, since the person on the other end is more than likely to be a completely different person to who the warnings were issued to. No judgement can be made from those warnings, only from the evidence of the recent contributions history. Also, warnings are not the Mark of Cain, to be displayed always. Nothing is learnt from warnings going back months or years. And, most importantly, nothing is learnt by the user on the other end: they vandalise because Wikipedia is open; they get an orange bar and visit the talk page, only to see five or six screen of old warnings. Ah ha! The warnings are meaningless: look, plenty of people get them, and here I am, still editing! F*** you, Wikipedia! Or similar thoughts, anyway. No, I'm afraid I don't agree with you - stacked up ancient warnings on IPs are pointless and removal harms nobody and actually makes the warnings more useful. And, in this case, the plain block notice caused a potential return vandal simply to be removed again after one edit, sparing Wikipedia the whole four-strikes-and-you're-out-for-a-bit routine. Net benefit to us. ➨ REDVEЯS is now 40 per cent papier mâché 18:35, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Block of Aloisius Bluxo
Hi. Thank you for blocking this account, which has been used as a possible sockpuppet to vandalize my talk page and talk pages of others. NHRHS2010 | Talk to me 19:04, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
- No worries. Pelican Shit Vandal - possibly Wikipedia's most boring vandal. ➨ REDVEЯS is now 40 per cent papier mâché 19:05, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Hey Redvers
What gives? You deleted an entry about a new, noteworthy service (Mobilephoria.com, the first Bluetooth-enabled cell phone customization service) last fall, but lo and behold, another, Mobile17.com has been posted since not long after. Have the standards changed? Is there something noteworthy (-er?) about Mobile17 that makes it special? Should I tell my friends at Mobilephoria to try and post again? Wikiwallace (talk) 02:19, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
- I'm not the only administrator here, and don't police all new pages (there are, after all, several thousand each day). If you have an issue with a page, there are two options: tag it with {{db-spam}} if you think it is a clear spam entry; if it's not clear-cut, nominated it for Articles for Deletion discussion (full instruction on the linked page). Remeber that WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a good rationale for inclusion of articles; neither is the lack of an article on one thing reason for the lack of another.
- If you want me to take a look, you'll need to provide me with a wikilink to the article in question. Thanks. ➨ REDVEЯS is now 40 per cent papier mâché 19:57, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
ANI
Hello, Redvers. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion can be found under the topic Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Redvers_failing_to_AGF. Yours, naerii - talk 12:45, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
- Scroll up :o) ➨ REDVEЯS is now 40 per cent papier mâché 19:58, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
uw-welcometest
I notice you recently created {{uw-welcometest}}; I would have participated in the original discussion, but I was on a wikibreak. The uw templates are an attempt to create a set of warning templates that have a common style, and the template you created doesn't (and probably can't while maintaining its purpose) fit that style. Would you consider renaming it to something like {{welcometest}}? Thanks. Anomie⚔ 13:31, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
- Feel free to rename if you wish. I really don't want to get tied up in the red tape that creating a template obviously causes. ➨ REDVEЯS is now 40 per cent papier mâché 19:59, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
- You fully protected it, and I am not an admin. Anomie⚔ 02:03, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
- Unprotected. ➨ REDVEЯS is now 40 per cent papier mâché 07:31, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
Hihi...thanks for taking a look at Thanos Papalexis now that User:Nemesisman is blocked, this IP 76.109.213.244 decided to remove the tags...and a look at the IPs contributions shows its an SPA just editing the same article...same user? If he's unblocked now (was only 31 hrs) then its not avoiding a block, but could it still be slo motion 3RR? No idea...this stuff makes my head spin :) Just thought I'd ask if you could take a look? Thanks! (feel free to tell me to bug off too) LegoTech·(t)·(c) 18:43, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
- I'd be 99.9999% sure it's Nemesisman under his/her IP. S/he clearly doesn't quite understand how we work (the transparent IP-socking and the lovely null edit to somehow break rollback [they wish] give it away) and think we don't see this every minute. I've watchlisted the article, and will block the IP if they war with you. I believe you're right to identify this as just vandalism - the user has been warned, told what to do, blocked, ticked off and explained to patiently, all to no avail. The point has been reached where they should be uninvited from editing if they carry on. Revert and warn if you see it first (you're not breaking 3RR) and tell me about it if I don't see it. I'll block and/or protect as a last resort accordingly. You're doing well, hang in there! ➨ REDVEЯS is now 40 per cent papier mâché 20:07, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you...WP can be a confusing place sometimes :) LegoTech·(t)·(c) 23:10, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
RE: Welcome
Hey, thanks for the welcome! It's nice to know my first article is appreciated :-)--Serviam (talk) 21:02, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
NPOV
hellooo
surely to say someone is a kind man is not necessarily unencyloperdiac? SDLexington (talk) 10:44, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- It is not encyclopaedic, because it is an objective judgement. Therefore it breaks the following Wikipedia rules: Neutral Point of View and No Original Research. ➨ REDVEЯS looks at danger and laughs his head off 11:00, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Question
First, thanks for helping with my archiving trouble. Second, I see you said in the edit summary that it is a frequently created page... was this problem due to my error, or a system error? I guess I'm questioning myself, but I was quite sure I followed the archiving instructions, typing /Archive 1 to create the page. Just trying to understand where I stumbled here. Gwynand | Talk•Contribs 12:10, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- Frequently created by dozens of editors, not just you. I've locked the page so it shouldn't happen to anyone again (they'll get an error message). I know the instructions say to type and click
[[/Archive 1]]to create, but to be honest that has never worked for me, so I always do it in full ([[User:Redvers/Archive01]]and the like). ➨ ЯEDVEЯS looks at danger and laughs his head off 12:15, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
- Oh I see. I'll think I'll do it your way in the future as well. Gwynand | Talk•Contribs 12:19, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Hey guy – how about sending a copy of the article Orange bellied pike to Nogard just to show to his teacher and I am sure it would make his day, Nogard that is not the teacher, there by helping us. Personally, I would give him an A+++++, and no harm was done. In addition, I would love to see these guys on board helping Wikipedia versus pulling off other stunts like this. Just something to consider. Thanks. ShoesssS Talk 22:56, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
- I'm terrified that giving them a copy would encourage them to do more, whilst taking it away permanently shows that we mean business. I too would like people who can write to that standard to join us, but I really don't want to encourage this sort thing. Perhaps we can seek wider consensus somewhere (although I can't think where! There must be somewhere...) ➨ ЯEDVEЯS looks at danger and laughs his head off 08:52, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
my RfA - Ta!
Thanks for supporting my RfA, which went through 93/12/5. I'll be steadfast in this trust the en.Wikipedia community has given me. Cheers! Gwen Gale (talk) 01:11, 25 May 2008 (UTC)
Redirect Finnieston station → Exhibition Centre railway station?
Now listed at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2008 May 30. --Stewart (talk) 12:02, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
- Cool. Thank you. ➨ ЯEDVEЯS looks at danger and laughs his head off 12:03, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
- Section title corrected as I got confused with the multiple titles myself. --Stewart (talk) 12:05, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
- Diambig page created which this article now redirects to. --Stewart (talk) 07:24, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
- That seems a good compromise. ➨ ЯEDVEЯS looks at danger and laughs his head off 21:35, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for May 19th and 26th, 2008.
|
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 21 | 19 May 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 22 | 26 May 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:20, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
Would you like your comment in the AfD taken as a third !vote to merge? Gwen Gale (talk) 21:45, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free media
Thanks for uploading Image:Nederlandse Omroep Stichting logo.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. 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 all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 08:30, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
- All replaced by SVGs (which I still maintain are against both the spirit and the wording of the NFM policies, but there we go). Deleted. ➨ ЯEDVEЯS looks at danger and laughs his head off 08:51, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVII (May 2008)
The May 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:52, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Why did you delet my Chen_Hsong_Holdings_Ltd. page?
Why dun you delet Arburg page then? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arburg User talk:Rolfwong —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rolfwong (talk • contribs)
- Chen_Hsong_Holdings_Ltd was clear advertising - WP:CSD#G11 applies. This does not apply to Arbung. Hope this helps. ➨ ЯEDVEЯS used to be a sweet boy 08:42, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
- It didn't need more information, it needed to not be advertising - it contained lines like "After half a century of endless efforts...", which is advertising; it also didn't assert notability and had no third party reliable sources. ➨ ЯEDVEЯS used to be a sweet boy 08:48, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
So are you happy with that if i write like this? Chen Hsong Chen Hsong Holdings Limited was established by Dr. Chiang Chen in Hong Kong in 1958. After half a century, Chen Hsong has grown from a small machinery workshop to one of the largest manufacturers of injection moulding machines in the world. With a customer base covering more than 65 countries worldwide including China, Taiwan, U.S., Canada, France, U.K., Brazil, Argentina, Mexico and most S.E. Asian countries. The clamping force is from 20 tons to 3,500 tons and injection rate is from 28.4gram to 30,000gram. Chen Hsong is the only plastic injection moulding machine manufacturer of its kind that serves customers 24 hours a day, 365 days a year in after sales and maintenance service in China. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rolfwong (talk • contribs)
- Yes, but it could do with at least one third-party reliable source that agrees with what you have written, otherwise the article will be tagged as problematic and may be subject to deletion again. ➨ ЯEDVEЯS used to be a sweet boy 09:05, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
- no problem, i understand. But, could you take Aruburg Page as an example to show me what third-party reliable source in that page? cheers dude. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arburg User: Rolfwong —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rolfwong (talk • contribs)
- No. WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. But you are welcome to tag it for clean-up or deletion yourself if you can justify it. ➨ ЯEDVEЯS used to be a sweet boy 09:11, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Block
Thanks! Alientraveller (talk) 10:16, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Chrisdru
Good call. If this was a short-term case of spam, that would be one thing. But two years of linkspamming, across several projects? Uh-uh. Blueboy96 11:54, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Commons
Dude, what's your gripe about the Commons? Or is my humour probe malfunctioning? BigBlueFish (talk) 16:35, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
- Commons is a sore point with me. In my experience, it is inhabited by the biggest bunch of officious jerks you could ever hope not to meet. I spend time (and sometimes money) traveling somewhere to get a requested picture, upload it and get silence. A year later, someone templates you: you didn't categorize it or you categorized it very very faintly wrongly, or it is on a subject that has "enough" photos or whatever. These templates never begin "thank you for uploading..." or "can I help you with...". They're just nitpicking templates from people who only nitpick and move images from one category to another, unable to decide between them where they belong, but unanimous that the uploader is an idiot for not getting it right first time. That was hard enough to take on Commons, but they're now increasingly active here and bring their nasty habits with them, templating regular users to complain of the same imaginary problems, again without even the most common of courtesies. Stuff Commons and its officious jerk editors - I'm helping Wikipedia by uploading free images, not damaging it, so they can fuck that for a game of marbles. And I'm showing no signs of getting over this! ➨ ЯEDVEЯS used to be a sweet boy 17:35, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
- Yikes. Well if they're coming here anyway, couldn't you upload to the Commons regardless? It's not like one group of people belong to one project and another belongs to another. Have some consideration for all the other languages of Wikipedia. They are the bravest, trying to construct a new encyclopedia out of a smaller userbase. Also consider the spirit of WP:POINT and that the Commons people spend their days dealing with an endless flow of copyrighted material which represents a liability to Wikipedia. I'm sure they're not all bad inside! BigBlueFish (talk) 22:05, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
- Nah, I'm not persuaded. What would be the point of uploading to Commons for me? When I upload to EN, I get nice talk page messages saying "great photo!" and "thanks for taking that image!" and so forth. When I upload to Commons, I get "Warning: this image was not correctly categorised" and "Warning: ensure that images on X subject are put in Y place". There's nothing in it for me, you see: EN uploads give me a nice, warm, collaborative-editing feeling. Commons uploads get me pricks with too much time on their hands moaning on about images upload over a year ago. Just because the officious jerks at Commons have to run around chasing copyvios (just like here) doesn't mean they have to spend all day templating regulars and being officious jerks. And they don't need to then turn up on my EN talk page and be officious jerks here as well. It may not be helping the smaller 'pedias... but it's not me that's not helping - it's the Commons officious jerks that are damaging the project, by being officious jerks. ➨ ЯEDVEЯS used to be a sweet boy 07:38, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
- Well if you want appreciation why not upload to deviantart or something. I assumed you contributed here to be helpful, but all's well. If I spot one of your images I'll make sure I thank you for it and then transfer it to Commons on your behalf. I'm happy to take on any flak that comes my way as a result. BigBlueFish (talk) 11:54, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
- I never said I wanted appreciation, just that I get appreciation here, but nothing but anal warnings at Commons. The joy of free media is that you're perfectly entitled to re-upload it to Commons if you've got nothing better to do (although, equally, I could just stop uploading free images at all and be just as happy as I am now, of course). To be honest, you've not convinced me to help Commons. Quite the reverse, actually. ➨ ЯEDVEЯS used to be a sweet boy 12:01, 5 June 2008 (UTC)