Revision as of 21:11, 14 October 2008 editNishidani (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users99,504 edits →Note re Ceedjee← Previous edit | Revision as of 21:43, 14 October 2008 edit undoPhilKnight (talk | contribs)Checkusers, Oversighters, Administrators125,350 edits →Note re Ceedjee: replyNext edit → | ||
Line 47: | Line 47: | ||
Just noticed that on ]'s user and talk page, he appears to have withdrawn after the ] threat to 'link up the dots' and out people they have blacklisted as 'extreme anti-Israeli wikipedians'. Most of us thought this comical. He is visibly upset and has apparently withdrawn permanently under a public threat to expose his real-life identity. Some damage then to the encyclopedia, and the JIDF's first real victim. Personally I think these things should be ignored, since counter-measures only stoke publicity for those that crave it. Still, I thought it best that some administrators should take note, if only for the record. He has been a fine, productive and intensely hard-working, knowledgeable editor and if he keeps to his promise of withdrawing, one will miss his presence, esp. as he is a strong pro-Zionist who however sticks to the rules and sources of quality, something which solves most editorial conflicts in I/P articles. Regards ] (]) 21:06, 14 October 2008 (UTC) | Just noticed that on ]'s user and talk page, he appears to have withdrawn after the ] threat to 'link up the dots' and out people they have blacklisted as 'extreme anti-Israeli wikipedians'. Most of us thought this comical. He is visibly upset and has apparently withdrawn permanently under a public threat to expose his real-life identity. Some damage then to the encyclopedia, and the JIDF's first real victim. Personally I think these things should be ignored, since counter-measures only stoke publicity for those that crave it. Still, I thought it best that some administrators should take note, if only for the record. He has been a fine, productive and intensely hard-working, knowledgeable editor and if he keeps to his promise of withdrawing, one will miss his presence, esp. as he is a strong pro-Zionist who however sticks to the rules and sources of quality, something which solves most editorial conflicts in I/P articles. Regards ] (]) 21:06, 14 October 2008 (UTC) | ||
:Hi Nishidani, thanks for telling me. ] (]) 21:43, 14 October 2008 (UTC) |
Revision as of 21:43, 14 October 2008
This is PhilKnight's talk page, where you can send him messages and comments. |
|
Archives | |||
|
|||
|
RFA Thanks
PhilKnight, I'd like to thank you for voting in my RFA. Thanks also for expressing your trust in me, and I hope that I live up to your expectations. Don't forget, if you have any questions (or bits of advice), please leave a message on my talk page. Thanks again, Spencer 02:16, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Downgrade to Semi?
Would it be an idea to downgrade the protection on Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani to semi instead of full? Problem is not a content dispute, but rather a POV pushing multi-ip user/vandal which is now blocked. Excirial 19:17, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
- Hi Excirial, I'll unprotect, however please note that pov pushing isn't an exception to the 3 revert rule. PhilKnight (talk) 20:33, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
- My involvement with this article is simply vandalism patrol. What i saw was a user who removed a section that seemed properly sourced after being already flagged for page blanking. Seeing the page history itself made it pretty obvious it was a different IP for the same person, who had been warned by other patrols before :). Excirial 22:17, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, I appreciate your involvement was purely vandalism patrol. PhilKnight (talk) 22:21, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
- My involvement with this article is simply vandalism patrol. What i saw was a user who removed a section that seemed properly sourced after being already flagged for page blanking. Seeing the page history itself made it pretty obvious it was a different IP for the same person, who had been warned by other patrols before :). Excirial 22:17, 11 October 2008 (UTC)
RfA thanks
Hello PhilKnight. Thank you very much for your support in my recent Request for Adminship, which was successful with 111 supports, 0 opposes, and 0 neutral. I have to say I am more than a little overwhelmed by this result and I greatly appreciate your trust in me. I will do my best to use the tools wisely. Thanks again. Regards. Thingg 00:15, 12 October 2008 (UTC) |
Image:Region Guadeloupe.svg
Dear User:PhilKnight,
' To begin with, thank you for writing up the fair use rationale for the Guadeloupean Regional flag. I know such symbols are of vital importance in humanity understanding and connecting with one another. Now, I happen to be trying to find where else this image is used on the web or otherwise in public, so I'd like to know how you found its source. I looked up http://www.guadeloupe.pref.gouv.fr as you suggested in the aforementioned rationale, and searched its entire sitemap, http://www.guadeloupe.pref.gouv.fr/sections/plan_du_site/ , but failed to find it. Neither could I find it on the Flags of the World site, http://www.fotw.net/flags/gp.html . Additionally, I asked the uploader, User:Shandris. If you have any leads left, I'd really appreciate them.
' Sincerely, ':)--Thecurran (talk) 03:31, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
Unbalanced response
I am trying to collaborate. Why have you not responded to Langdell on his talkpage for his conduct? Edit warring 3rr. You make it as though it appears that you are taking sides. Why have you not responded to my postings on the talkpage? Speaking of implying why did you imply that Voegelin was fringe as your first act as an arbitator? LoveMonkey (talk) 20:21, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
- Hello LoveMonkey, I'm sorry that I've given that impression. I've now left a note on Langdell's talk page, requesting the entire debate about bigotry is discontinued. I've also acknowledged your input on the talk page. Regarding Voegelin, and WP:FRINGE, I'll clarify what I meant on the article talk page. PhilKnight (talk) 23:08, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
Can something be done for this?
I've been extremely annoyed by random people CONSTANTLY VANDALIZING the "Pro Wrestling X" (video game) article. It is almost done and will soon be released as you will find if you go to their website (www.prowrestlingx.com) still some immature @#$^@% keep editing the page providing 10000% false information (that the game has been cancelled and that its makers are already on different projects and such nonsense). I have been re-editing the way it should be as much as I've been able to. Since I'm not too familiar with wikipedia and wanted to contact and admin, and seing that YOU are one, please is there something that can be done to prevent vandalism? Perhaps locking the "edit" option for a while? Or tracing the vandals and warning them? Much appreciated --MarkosChR (talk) 14:01, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
- Hi Chris, I've semi-protected the article. PhilKnight (talk) 17:21, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
Note re Ceedjee
Just noticed that on Ceedjee's user and talk page, he appears to have withdrawn after the JIDF threat to 'link up the dots' and out people they have blacklisted as 'extreme anti-Israeli wikipedians'. Most of us thought this comical. He is visibly upset and has apparently withdrawn permanently under a public threat to expose his real-life identity. Some damage then to the encyclopedia, and the JIDF's first real victim. Personally I think these things should be ignored, since counter-measures only stoke publicity for those that crave it. Still, I thought it best that some administrators should take note, if only for the record. He has been a fine, productive and intensely hard-working, knowledgeable editor and if he keeps to his promise of withdrawing, one will miss his presence, esp. as he is a strong pro-Zionist who however sticks to the rules and sources of quality, something which solves most editorial conflicts in I/P articles. Regards Nishidani (talk) 21:06, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
- Hi Nishidani, thanks for telling me. PhilKnight (talk) 21:43, 14 October 2008 (UTC)