This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page
Remaining
Hi AngelOfSadness, I was wondering when you were going to answer the remaining three questions. I don't want to rush you, but after those three, I have a few more, but they're ones which I'm sure you'll sail through. :)
Acalamari19:05, 3 March 2008 (UTC)reply
Wow you're timing is great as I was swamped for the last two weeks and I get to do some editing tonight. They should be completed within the next few minutes :)
AngelOfSadness talk 19:12, 3 March 2008 (UTC)reply
Heh, heh, amazing timing. :) I understand you're busy, and didn't want to rush you, but don't worry, the final six questions after the current three, while relatively easy, will still be important. :)
Acalamari19:23, 3 March 2008 (UTC)reply
On a related note, I just came across
this page. Would you like me to delete it? Declined nominations are usually deleted, and keeping that RfA around makes it look like you've had an unsuccessful RfA when in reality you haven't.
Acalamari19:36, 4 March 2008 (UTC)reply
Well AngelOfSadness, I'd like to congratlate you on completing your coaching. You've been an excellent student, and were easy to coach. Your answers showed excellent knowledge of policy, a willingness to learn, and also showed that you're unlikely to abuse or misuse the tools. :) You have also been sent an E-mail. Also, you were my first coachee. :)
Acalamari18:19, 5 March 2008 (UTC)reply
Yay I passed. :) Double yay I got an e-mail :D. I feel honoured that I was your first coachee and once again thank you for taking me on as your coachee. And now you have an e-mail :)
AngelOfSadness talk 18:46, 5 March 2008 (UTC)reply
Well, pretty much for reasons like vandalism is a huge problem on Wikipedia and that many people come to this site for information (that's hopefully factual and reliable), so if they see vandalism instead of information and take is as being factual..well that can lead to a lot of problems. I know that vandalism can't really be stopped so don't worry if you think I'm fighting a lost cause, but if I can help reduce vandalism in any way, I will.
AngelOfSadness talk 21:26, 8 March 2008 (UTC)reply
Why must the page on Victory Pill be deleted? They are a good new band and as of yet, they surprisingly do not have a page on the wikipedia database. I will reference all information about them if needed. Please inform me the steps needed to make the page halt a deletion.
Raidon04 15:26, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
The article does not assert why the band is notable per
WP:MUSIC. If the article asserted any of the critera outlined in
WP:MUSIC then the article wouldn't have been filed for
speedy deletion. Simply having a band doesn't merit a wikipedia article, they must have some grounds of notiblity e.g charted on a national chart, won a prestigious award like a Grammy etc. and any claim of notability must be backed up with reliable third party sources that are independant of the subject. Hope this helped.
AngelOfSadness talk 15:30, 16 March 2008 (UTC)reply
(ec)I am kicking myself because I promised myself I would only accept an Rfa nom from June onwards. My admin coach,
Acalamari, I believe will nominate me (and it might possibly be a co-nom if
Nishkid64 and
Rlevse are still interested). Although with the amount of vandal fighting I have do in the last two days, my how the tools could have come in handy (dynamite backlog in
WP:UAA for about two hours *starts nodding*). But the trail mix is very very tempting :)
AngelOfSadness talk 21:03, 17 March 2008 (UTC)reply
errolockerby
Dear Angelofsadness,
The user page errolockerby is not posted by the actual person but talks about my personal matters and my family. How do we go about removing and tracking the IP or user who created this page?
Kaini (
talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{
subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Just a quick question: when you use the MediaWiki rollback feature that I gave you, does it come up with an "Action complete" screen?
Acalamari22:47, 18 March 2008 (UTC)reply
Okay, thanks, same thing here. I was just curious to see if it did the same with non-admins. After any admin action, there's an "Action complete" screen that comes up.
Acalamari22:52, 18 March 2008 (UTC)reply
Oddly enough I can't see the block button anymore but possibly it's only when the rollback gets stopped if someone else reverted the edits. I'll go and see but I definately saw it earlier when
this was happening.
AngelOfSadness talk 23:09, 18 March 2008 (UTC)reply
Ah, that group of vandals. That explains
this then. Nice one: that's two useful things you've just told me, one being the solution to a small mystery. :)
Acalamari23:17, 18 March 2008 (UTC)reply
I think there was two groups of sycronised vandalism: One writing "nice site" on random pages and the other doing things like
this on user talkpages, archivies of usertalkpages and archivies of wikipedia tackpages. It eventually stopped so I'm guessing they got tired
AngelOfSadness talk 23:23, 18 March 2008 (UTC)reply
Yup, the block button only appears when the rollback failed:
Rollback failed From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Cannot roll back edit to Rutgers University by 71.250.129.31 (talk · block · contribs) because someone else has edited the page.
The last revision was by Elliskev (talk · contribs).
The edit summary was: "Reverted edits by 71.250.129.31 (talk) to last version by BuddyJesus".
This edit seems really extreme. The article very clearly needed work including context-setting, but not all articles that need to get cleaned up should be speedily deleted. Even if you've never heard of a
Banach space, just entering those terms into the search box or into Google would tell you something right away.
Michael Hardy (
talk)
17:14, 20 March 2008 (UTC)reply
Sorry, clearly by then I should have given up for the night as it was nearly three in the morning. I don't think I had ever worked that late doing RC or NP patrol on wikipedia before and now, I have decided after that, I will never again as mishaps like that hardly happen if it was the middle of the afternoon. Thanks for making me realise something that could have done a lot of damage later on in the future.
AngelOfSadness talk 17:31, 20 March 2008 (UTC)reply
One thing, it would be best if you didn't write about people you know as that presents a clear
conflict of interest. Second, the article asserts no significance or importance of the subject. And also I did a quick google check and it seems none of the article may not be expanded much further as none of the information can be
verified. Maybe I'm making a mistake with the information, is there any references that assert significance that are availible or could you assert the importance of the subject. Without any assertions of significance the article qualifies, currently, for speedy deletion I'm afraid.
AngelOfSadness talk 20:27, 22 March 2008 (UTC)reply
I was thinking the exact same thing and I was going to comment on it while Pokegirl was still on the noticeboard but then they were blocked before I could click "save page". To see if they are the same person/same IP it would be best to make a
checkuser report and then it would be up to the deciding admins to decide whether to block the IP for some time. But I have the most vandalised pages on my watchlist incase our little friend decides to return.
AngelOfSadness talk 16:14, 23 March 2008 (UTC)reply
Unfortunately the sockpuppet case was closed a few hours ago as all of the accounts were already indef blocked. But the category of his sockpuppets is defintely news to me. Thanks for letting me know about that :)
AngelOfSadness talk 20:46, 23 March 2008 (UTC)reply
No problemo. But he should know that we're not giving up either. The appearance of new socks seems to becoming less frequent as the first day there was about five socks and now there's about one/two a day. Eventually he'll give up and find something else to do but it just depends on how bored they really are to stick around for several months. By now, we know what his socks look like so they're not that hard to find :)
AngelOfSadness talk 18:44, 26 March 2008 (UTC)reply
It might be best to keep some of them unprotected just so we'll be able to revert his edits because if we get the pages protected, he'll move on to vandalise other articles in the same way and we may or may not have those articles on our watchlists and the misinformation could stay in those articles for weeks before someone realises it. Maybe get the Pokemon templates protected anyway as they are transluded onto multiple pages and so it's like vandalising 10+ articles with one edit.
AngelOfSadness talk 19:16, 26 March 2008 (UTC)reply
This Template was the only one I could find that's being targeted by his sockpuppets. Requested semi-protection at RPP, semi because he's using new accounts and not sleeper accounts.
Momusufan (
talk)
19:26, 26 March 2008 (UTC)reply
This template was also vandalised by one of his socks but it was only the one time know that I'm looking at the edit history. I think he used up all of his sleeper accounts on the first day. I'm guessing he has a dynamic IP that he can reset as every sock account has been blocked with "(account creation blocked)" and yet he returns with new accounts.
AngelOfSadness talk 19:33, 26 March 2008 (UTC)reply
I am sorry for taking up your time, but the reason I created that page was to give due credit to on of my closest friends. I know that it wasnt taught to many people and only to his 2 sons, but they also deserve credit. I beleive that if people are to know the capabilities of the fighting arts then they should know that there is in fact a way to create your own style. Baguazhang was taught to me as a small child, and my dear friend who has since died created this style so his memory can live on in his children. People should know that there are more than just the basics in this world. There is more to fighting than just throwing punches. They should know that peope leave legacys behind for there children to follow so that the memory can live on. If you would I would greatly appreciate it if you could let me keep this site. I know that I put up "not much is known" but not much is. This great man died before he could actually teach anyone and i beleive that it could benefit those who wish to learn of the rarer martial arts in the world.
But if the article doesn't assert the
significance of the style and is not backed up by
third party independant reliable sources or the information can't be
verified then the article, chances are, will be deleted. If the style becomes notable in a few years time you are more than welcome to re-create the article asserting it's significance(why it's important) and back it up with sources. As
Wikipedia:Your first article states to avoid articles about non-notable(significant/important) topics and articles about someone you know. But, you should know, it's not me who decides if the article stays or is deleted, it's the deciding administrator. You can show your argument of why the article should not be deleted at
the article's deletion discussion.
AngelOfSadness talk 18:20, 23 March 2008 (UTC)reply
Ok
The problem is that no-one made a website about it. I a trying to make it known by placing it here. If you give me some more time, please just till people can know about it. Please? I beg of you. I have many people that can vouch for me but they dont have websites. If you could just give me a week, I will accept this deletion. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
BaguazhangMaster (
talk •
contribs)
20:57, 23 March 2008 (UTC)reply
But see, wikipedia doesn't accept articles whose primary existance is promotion of a non-notable topic, such articles get deleted on sight all the time as
wikipedia is not a soapbox. You could make your own website and if from there, the style becomes notable by it's own accord then that might merit it's own wikipedia article in future providing it's been covered by independant sources etc. all that I have described before. But really, you should make your argument at the link I mentioned in the last post as there is really not much I can do at this point regarding the article's future.
AngelOfSadness talk 21:10, 23 March 2008 (UTC)reply
I'm guessing the "Acalamari would like to see Natalie Erin's...." usernames were all the same user. So does that mean I should be hopeful that Felipe Garcia/SaneOfGladness will return with another tribute to me? Ahh sugar, now that I've jinxed it, they probably won't return.
AngelOfSadness talk 19:23, 25 March 2008 (UTC)reply
Yeah, they're the same. :) Don't worry about not getting more spoofs: they'll come. :) There was one time where I was getting a new spoof every three or four days.
Acalamari20:20, 25 March 2008 (UTC)reply
At least some of the spoofs were at least somewhat imaginative. I hope I won't get something like AngelOfEmoness or something as it's been done before except the editor just changed my signature on talkpage to that then proceeded to creating the page "User:AngelOfEmoness" with "CUT CUT CUT". Strange because if I'm emo then all emos would love
this even though I was fairly sure that song would be like, for them, how daylight is for vampires :)
AngelOfSadness talk 21:22, 25 March 2008 (UTC)reply
Ohh I wonder what they'll come up with? I'm really looking forward to that now :) Wow created three times, at least there was one version that was not an attack page :)
AngelOfSadness talk 16:19, 26 March 2008 (UTC)reply
Woo this one is a clear tribute. Two in three days. I don't know whether to be proud that this is happening or to be afraid that so many are appearing all of a sudden.
AngelOfSadness talk 00:22, 29 March 2008 (UTC)reply
Semiprotection
Someone has requested semi-protection for your user talk page. I'm inclined to do it, but wondered if you had a view one way or the other? GBT/
C21:37, 27 March 2008 (UTC)reply
For some reason, I have been getting a lot of attacks/vandalism on this page lately mostly from sockpuppets of various users so I agree with the semi-protection but I think only for a few days it will be needed :)
AngelOfSadness talk 21:42, 27 March 2008 (UTC)reply
Done - 3 days. I've put the padlock sign at the top, but feel free to remove it if you wish. You might want to link to a scratchpad (say
User talk:AngelOfSadness/Scratchpad for non-autoconfirmed users to use if they're legitimate and want to leave you a message. GBT/
C21:46, 27 March 2008 (UTC)reply
Great. I'll add the scratchpad now and then I'm done for the night as I've had quite and eventful 45 minutes of reverting the sockpuppets, reverting the misinformation of an IP on two articles and was accidentally blocked then unblocked. Yup, I'm done :)
AngelOfSadness talk 21:53, 27 March 2008 (UTC)reply
Just a note that you don't need to leave these abusive sockpuppets vandalism warnings - just report them to
WP:AIV with a note saying it's a sockpuppet and they should get blocked straight away. Hut 8.521:47, 27 March 2008 (UTC)reply
What happened? looks like you're getting attacked by someone else besides Felipe Garcia sockpuppets. Actually, one of his socks came back to my page about a few hours ago when I was gone, but someone took care of it. The name was
User:QueryPixie. I did make that report at checkuser but it's not getting any attention, I was wondering if you make a comment at it so someone could look into it and do something about this. Thanks for your help.
Momusufan (
talk)
03:29, 28 March 2008 (UTC)reply
Apparently, he came back again despite the IP blocks under
This name. If you saw his edit summaries, he is clearly admiting who he is. I need my talk page protected to stop him now.
Momusufan (
talk)
14:14, 28 March 2008 (UTC)reply
Further up in your talk page I have the link to the sockpuppet category, I think its 26 now. Also, he used yet another open proxy to commit racist vandalism again.
Momusufan (
talk)
01:28, 30 March 2008 (UTC)reply
At least he know it's him and anyone can see his edits are non-constructive if they know that the anime Pokemon isn't Mexican but Japanese and same goes for most of the characters of the Simpsons. I say most because there is
Bumblebee Man who is indeed Mexican but our friend hasn't edited that section of the page yet to my great surprise.
AngelOfSadness talk 16:58, 31 March 2008 (UTC)reply
My apoligies, after I warned them the final time I reported the IP but it took a while for the block to be placed (The IP was making four edits a minute at one point). I was actually in the middle of filing for page protection for those two pages but along came multiple sockpuppets attacking my talkpage the very same time the IP was putting clearly incorrect information in the article and then I was accidentally blocked(explained two sections above I think) then was unblocked but my IP remained autoblocked so I never got the chance to complete filing the page protection. But isn't reverting BLP violations an exception to 3RR but either way, I'll be faster filing the page protection in future.
AngelOfSadness talk 12:25, 28 March 2008 (UTC)reply
Article on Maria Rivas
AngelOfSadness, I think I'd better give you an early warninig: I fear I'm about to engage in an edit war with unruly
User:Maria rivas.
He (or she, whoever, NOT the realMaria Rivas, whose command of English is far better) replaced my photograph (which I took only a week ago) with a photo of a poster (see
Image:Pepi4.jpg), origin unknown, which is an illustration and not a real portrait, and having Copyright problems, even.
His/her English stinks. I've had to correct his/her edits, as they degrade the article.
I am ready to embark in an complete overhaul of the
Maria Rivas article, after preparing myself with a huge mass of information about this notable artist. I must filter/translate/condense/etc. all of it, which means a non-trivial effort. But I fear that if
User:Maria rivas is loyal to his/her tradition, an edit war will probably ensue next, and I might need your help to call for an Admin's intervention.
In view of your past interventions, are you willing to help me? I'd appreciate your backing.
I know from past experience, it would be best to avoid edit warring but I do think you should be
bold and make the edit/s. If your edits get reverted, try and discuss the article with the user and don't revert to your version. But then also because they have the same username as the article doesn't mean they
own the article. It's a lot easier to discuss the article if an edit war didn't occur. If worse comes to worse, it might be appropriate then to get
the dispute resoluted using a
third opinion unrelated/unconnected with the matter. But if the editor becomes uncivil then you could bring that up at
Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents and if they are constantly posting copyrighted text and images from other sites (which is how I got involved with them) bring it up at
WP:AIV only if they have been warned sufficently e.g. after final warning. Also remember to focus on the content of the article when discussing the article with the other user even if they aren't exactly doing the same.
But the username, as now that you mention it, could be violation of
username policy (not a completely blantant violation but still a violation) which states You should not edit under the name of a well-known living person unless it is your real name, and you either are that person or you make it clear that you are not. Such usernames may be blocked as a precaution, until it can be confirmed that the user in question is using their real name. But it may or may not apply here as I remember back in September that the account user
admitted they were Maria herself but if it is or isn't herself, it's best to
assume good faith as much as possible. Hope this helps.
AngelOfSadness talk 00:15, 29 March 2008 (UTC)reply
I wanted to quickly inform you that I have reverted a previous change you have made to the Epygi wiki. Thank you for taking the time to investigate the content that DiHudson had uploaded. She is however part of the Epygi Technologies Ltd. Corporation and has permission to use the copywrited material from our main epygi.com website. I am also a member of this company with approval to use the material on our corporate website. Thank you again for the help. Hope you are having a great day.
I work for the Raconteurs management company and the band wanted me to edit their page with the press releases that I posted and you took down. I have permission to use these releases from both Press Here and the band since we are their management. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me.
George Karalexis
Monotone Inc.
office: 323.308.1818.
george@monotoneinc.com
I completely agree with you. But the band wanted the official biography up as well as the correct information as well as the press release from the band regarding the new album. Jack just wants to make sure that there is consistency with the information that is being provided to the fans. —Preceding
unsigned comment added by
75.36.79.146 (
talk)
19:35, 1 April 2008 (UTC)reply
But even if the content was added to the article, it would still have to be modified to adhere to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines and also nothing can be done to keep the content intact as anyone can edit the article. The article was and is created as a community effort and no-one
owns the article and that includes the subject of the article. What I mean by "own" is that no-one has control of the articles content. However it might be best if you read
Wikipedia:Copyrights over the copyrights of the content submitted.
AngelOfSadness talk 16:18, 2 April 2008 (UTC)reply
Cheers for the barnstar. Wow the amount of vandalism your user talkpages have suffered in the last day but at least it isn't the same person each time by the looks of it. Anyway thanks again :) 17:44, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz
Ignore the headline, or feel free to change it if you like. I was simply very bored. ;D I wanted to award you this barnstar, and to once again poke you to just mop up already! :D Cheers.
Now I never got that barnstar before in all it's wonderful and shiny gloriousness and so thank you very much for it :). But I wont start running for the mop until June (48 days if you wish to start a
countdown :D) And I'm definite about it being June for sure. By then I would have been editing Wikipedia solidly(nearly every day) for about a year. My how time flies
AngelOfSadness talk 16:09, 13 April 2008 (UTC)reply
Thanks, I really love warheads though, its just well in florida the apple didnt taste right so i had to mess um up a bit. SIT (stay in touch) if u didnt no.
I'm sorry but just because the product didn't taste right isn't a valid excuse to vandalise Wikipedia - FYI, there are no valid excuses to vandalise Wikipedia. It probably would have been better to call up their customer services if it really bothered you. Just refain from doing that in future. Cheers
AngelOfSadness talk 19:26, 19 April 2008 (UTC)reply
No an admin deleted the Clique series page, but I notified you of it's deletion as you created the page. It did not assert enough context to establish the subject of the article which made deletable per the A1
critera of speedy deletion and so I tagged the article as such. Cheers
AngelOfSadness talk 13:36, 23 April 2008 (UTC)reply
But I still find it odd that I was editing Wikipedia pretty much every day for about eight months without getting any spoofs whatsoever and then I get four within about three days of each other. I know that the 1st and 2nd ones were apart of a huge(there was about 25 socks by day four) sockpuppet/dyanmic IP vandalism but I can't explain the third and fourth ones just yet :)
AngelOfSadness talk 17:38, 25 April 2008 (UTC)reply
It's true that userpage vandalism can get nasty but the odd time it can be humourous (it's true it has happened to my userpages a handful of times) so it's not always so bad but of course it depends on the user page vandal doing the deed.
AngelOfSadness talk 17:21, 30 April 2008 (UTC)reply