Misplaced Pages

Samuel_Blanning_On_Wheels!!! (talk · contribs)

Sorry for any inconvience. I just saw the words "On Wheels!!!" in my IRC vandal bot, and blocked on sight. Will (_@) T 14:31, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

That was disturbingly fast. Doesn't matter much, I can use this account to edit its stuff, but thanks for unblocking anyway. --Sam Blanning 14:32, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Less than twenty seconds, probably less than then. I swear I'm not a blocking bot! Will (_@) T 14:35, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

For blocking 83.104.237.137, it was the first time I used WP:AIV and the response was good. I have cleaned up another site the vandal went after. Dabbler 14:42, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

A real thank

I convey my real thanks to you for your help. Actually, I was getting very nervous yesterday. I use Internet access from a public place, and my inability to edit was making me really sad. Thanks. BTW, I had also sent you an e-mail. --Bootblack 15:01, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

thanks for the cleanup

Hm, I just noticed that my user talk page took a little trip to User talk:YOU FUCKING GREASER a few days ago, and you cleaned it up. Thanks !! FreplySpang 18:55, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

Otserv deletion

Was it really necessary? We had previously stated that we were in a state of fixing it up (thus most of the information was gone) before we started fixing it up...

The editors who believed that the article should be deleted did so on the basis that Otserv was not sufficiently notable for an article in an encyclopaedia, not that the article was poorly written. --Sam Blanning 10:34, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Middle East Media Research Institute

other half of this conversation is at User talk:84.191.246.229
Dear Sir, I'm trying to modify Memri's page with a longer and offical one, as there are a lot of mistakes such as the relations with wumser. I did not have the time to finish to add things that immediately someone was chaging it again. I don't have much time to waste. Please, — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.191.246.229 (talk • contribs)

User:motorox

You think that he is a sock puppet of me and should be banned indefinetly because I am banned indefinatly. However, Im not, and this is not fair. Please see to his unblock. thanks--AppleJuicefromConcentrate 15:08, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

I apologise for that mistake, I was going on what was in the block log. However, the account appears to be a sockpuppet with no legitimate purpose, and I will not be unblocking it. --Sam Blanning 15:11, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

I think you should unblock him. He ain't done nuthin' wrong.--AppleJuicefromConcentrate 16:47, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

He repeatedly recreated the nonsensical article you created at a different name from the original in a transparent attempt to avoid deletion. As such his contribution history exactly matches yours, and he counts as an 'obvious' sockpuppet. Trying to get your sockpuppets unblocked does not sit well with your promise to Mike Rosoft that you'll stop creating silly articles, so I would strongly suggest that you drop it. --Sam Blanning 16:53, 29 May 2006

(UTC)

He's not a damn sock puppet of me. He's an aquaintance of mine. Jeez just unblock him. He already promised not to do it again.

Autoblock

Thanks for the unblock, shared IPs are a pain I only discovered today. Regards. SeanMack 15:37, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

User:Tyler-07

Hi, I was wondering if you could help...I warned this user for a few vandal edits a couple times in the last 24 hours. The user was, at the time, contesting a block, apparently claiming that he "shared ip with someone else" and that vandal edits weren't his. You eventually unblocked him. Since then, Tyler-07 has removed all warnings on User talk:Tyler-07, only to be reverted by another editor & myself. I explained that Removing warnings can be considered vandalism, and that if an admin were to verify his claims, that I would removem the warnings myself without prejudice. I'm not prepared to accept Tyler-07's argument that "my name is already cleared. If my name hadn't been cleared, the admins would not have unblocked me" without hearing from an admin about the process.

Sorry about the petty annoyance, but if you don't mind offering some advice, I'd greatly appreciate it. Thanks, Scientizzle 19:05, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

I appreciate your weighing in on the matter. Thanks. -- Scientizzle 00:25, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Possible semi-protect required

there has been increased volume of recent vandalism on theBritish National Party page please have a look at history and consider for semi-protect.

thanx Lucy-marie 19:40, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

There aren't enough people vandalising it to justify semi-protection. I've blocked User:Shweeny666 for two days for continued vandalism. He's the only one to vandalise the article today, and he's a mature account anyway so semi-protection wouldn't have stopped him. Thanks for bringing it to my attention though. --Sam Blanning 19:47, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the unblock help

This policy of blocking AOL users with shared IP's is ridiculous. I can never tell which pages I'm going to be blocked from editing - sometimes it's my own User page or pages I have created.--Hokeman 19:48, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

It's got nothing to do with the pages you edit - it's purely which IP you happen to be using. AOL IPs are never blocked manually for very long, but sometimes the software blocks them automatically for long periods because an account which uses that IP gets blocked. Only two things you can do, I'm afraid: 1) switch to a decent ISP, or 2) grit your teeth and wait for WP:BPP to come on stream. --Sam Blanning 19:54, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

• I guess I'll have to wait for WP:BPP to come on stream. Leaving AOL at this point would cause too many problems in my life.--Hokeman 20:51, 29 May 2006 (UTC)

Protection while arbitration is ongoing

Robot Wars Razer (Robot) Tornado (robot) and Panic Attack (Robot) Lucy-marie 12:45, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

I don't think your edit war with Lenin is disruptive enough to justify preventing everyone from editing those articles. With Robot Wars, for example, neither you nor Lenin have edited the article in over two weeks. You can list this at WP:RPP if you still disagree. Please sign your posts to talk pages with ~~~~ to produce the name and the date. --Sam Blanning 12:52, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your speedy reply i accept your verdict, but please keep the page under watch in case either of us decide to revert back to the edit war. I will not instagate a new round of this war.Lucy-marie 13:33, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

OITC

Would you care to connect me with the person who claims has connection to the OITC and/or Dr. ray C. Dam ? I am very curious as to why the trustee of the Gold and Wealth under the Green Hilton Agreement is "hidden"; and what gains do they get in return of lending the wealth via the United States ?— Preceding unsigned comment added by Is born (talk • contribs) 13:22, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

I'm not a switchboard operator and I've no idea who and what you're talking about. It doesn't sound like anything to do with Misplaced Pages. Please explain what you want in more detail, or try the editors at Talk:Office of International Treasury Control. --Sam Blanning 13:33, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Autoblock

Thanks for unblocking me it was real helpful Mahogany

Craig Reedie

Hi There,

I am a Wiki freak, probably not unlike most everbody else. My cousin Craig Reedie is the retired Chairman of the British Olympic Association and is being Knighted by the Queen of England for his part in securing the London Bid for the 2012 Olympics. I would like to get his info into Misplaced Pages but don't know how. 36,000 hits on Google... any help here? (email address removed to protect from spam) Thanks. Lisa Sunnyvale, California — Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.226.173.68 (talk • contribs) 23:00, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

(removed press release - sorry, it clogs up my page)

posted to IP's talk page but cc'ed here

For information about starting a new page, see Help:Starting a new page and Misplaced Pages:Your first article. The first thing you'll need to do is create a new account with your own username.

Creating articles about people you know personally is often a bad idea - see WP:AUTO - but in this case, you'd almost certainly be doing Misplaced Pages a favour. We have a number of pages that link to Mr Reedie already, so by creating an article you'd be filling in a gap.

The most important things to keep in mind while writing an encyclopaedia article are - verify your information with reliable sources, and write from a neutral point of view. If, for example, you know that he prefers wine to beer because he told you, that can't be put in the article because people can't verify your personal experiences - you'll have to find a magazine interview or something instead.

I hope this is the sort of information you're looking for - if you need more help, let me know. Creating your own account is the first thing, it's difficult to communicate with numbers :-) --Sam Blanning 23:23, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Unblock 202.156.6.54

Thanks, yes it is Singapores largest broadband ISP, simmilar to AOL but Singapore have this funny proxy/filter/firewall that 'protects' us from bad, bad things like playboy :-), so really it is not a good IP to block, thanks a lot! Stefan 00:35, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Apartheid (disambiguation)

Okay sorry, if I was wrong about your position then I apoligize. However while you did say that Calton was correct, you also later seem to have retracted that position with the statement: "Actually, it may be that the existence of this disambiguation page is in fact wrong". So I thought I had ample reason to believe you were expressing agreement with my conclusions.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 09:20, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

I said immediately after that, in the same post, "That doesn't mean I'm reversing my position on the Israeli links above though - as long as the article is, rightly or wrongly, a list of articles which contain the word 'apartheid', it should contain all of them." I'm sorry, I don't think I was being unclear. --Sam Blanning 09:30, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

I wouldn't be stupid enough to purposely misrepresent your position on a talk page that you have visited as much as that one.- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg | Talk 18:55, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Territorial divisions in Oceania

Hey Sam, can I get a consult? A dispute at South America seems to have spilled over into Oceania. An anon who edits in the 142.150.134.* range wants to change a table of territories at South America to reflect official UN subdivisions, and User:Alinor seems to be contesting this (I'm not really following the dispute there). Now the dispute is happening at Oceania where it is disrupting a long standing consensus: the article has used "Australasia" for Australia and New Zealand, 142.* wants to use Australasia but pipe it as "Australia and New Zealand" per some UN map, and Alinor is insisting on using "Australia" alone. There have been many, many discussions about Australasia and that's what the article uses elsewhere, but now we have this three-way revert war going. Neither of the new editors will communicate except through snippy edit summaries, where 142.* writes mini-diatribes about POV and Alinor refers discussion to Talk:South America. I don't really have a dog in this fight except that I thought the old consensus was fine. I'm pondering ways of centralizing this discussion, but in the meantime I'm wondering whether it would be good to revert to the consensus version and then protect for a day or two until some productive discussion can take place. If you have any advice, or can wave your magical admin wand somehow, I would appreciate it. Thanks. · rodii · 14:09, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Looking at Talk:Oceania, there seems to be a consensus against the anon made up of several editors. You're right that there needs to be productive discussion, and for that the anon should at least register an account. I'll leave him a message to that effect. But given the numbers against the anon, is protection really necessary? --Sam Blanning 14:54, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Hard to say--I would have said no until the third leg of the dispute got involved. This has all the signs of an entrenched dispute where everyone is happy to keep reverting. But I'll keep plugging away and see how it goes. Thanks. · rodii · 15:25, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

My sig.....

other half of this conversation is at User talk:Xchrisblackx
Sam, I really have no idea why I don't use the timestamp it's just a bad habit lol, but I'll start using it and thanks for reminding me --Mahogany 14:26, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

AfD

is a nice line of argument, especially the part about Australia :-) Tintin (talk) 16:10, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks :-) --Sam Blanning 16:12, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

I told you to stop reverting my edits.

I'm the fucking king around here. Revert my edits again and I'll fucking sue, (Personal attack removed). --59.13.220.92 11:08, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

HAHA (Personal attack removed) I JUST GOT ME A NEW PROXY. I TOLD YOU YOU COULDN'T STOP ME. STAY THE HELL AWAY FROM MY ARTICLES (DD-WRT, Sveasoft, WRT54G) AND (Personal attack removed). (Personal attack removed). --200.123.130.42 11:16, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

YOU JUST CAN'T STOP ME! LOL CLICK HERE! :) --67.86.57.116 12:04, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

lol-ocle

*monocle* :) Syrthiss 11:39, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

It couldn't last...

My page and others have been hit by User:Irate again, under the unsubtle guises of User:GrahamPP, User:84.9.193.230, User:84.9.210.112 and User:87.75.131.146. I'm got an incredible amount of stuff on in real life at the moment, so can't keep a close eye on things - can these IP's be brought under the existing ban? Many thanks in advance for any help that you can give. Aquilina 11:45, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

All blocked. If he keeps coming back with new IPs I would recommend asking on WP:ANI for another rangeblock. --Sam Blanning 11:53, 1 June 2006 (UTC)