Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Enigmaman (talk | contribs) at 02:34, 1 May 2008 (→Notice: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Archives

/Archive 1 /Archive 2 /Archive 3 /Archive 4 /Archive 5

Question

Hi, I would to know what is the promotional material that I wrote. If you see the page of youtorrent or btjunkie, there is the same structure:

• Explain that is a meta-search engine
• Features of the search engine
• Link to the site

What is the problem to write this things? Since they deleted my article, may I ask you why didn't they delete youtorrent and btjunkie article?

Regards —Preceding unsigned comment added by PiTo (talk • contribs) 14:47, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

The page was deleted because the article did not make any assertion of notability. The content doesn't show why it's important. What you can do to show importance is find reliable sources, which can assert notability. The other articles may not have been deleted because no one has assessed them yet. They too might also be deletable. Please don't be discouraged from editing. If you need anymore help, please leave me another message. Seraphim♥ 14:59, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm not discouraged, but I don't want to be dealt unjustly. I think that the importance of articles is the share of information, isn't true? Other articles are there because they explain how to take the torrent file, so they are a complementary information of the bittorrent protocol section. My article has the same scope. Can I let you read the article? There isn't anything promotional. And if it's possible can I rewrite it? Otherwise, can I ask you to assess others?

Thanks in advance. —Preceding unsigned comment added by PiTo (talk • contribs) 15:24, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Because I'm an admin I can see the article in its deleted state. I should also let you know that there is a conflict of interest guideline which I would advise you take a read through :). I'll see what I can do :).Seraphim♥ 15:34, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. I'll wait :) Anyway I know the COI guideline but the article is neutral, and moreover it's taken from killerstartups that is the blog that is linked in the external link section :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by PiTo (talk • contribs) 15:45, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I've taken a look at the article. It is neutral, however, it doesn't state anywhere why the site is important. Also, that external link isn't reliable because it is a blog. I'll have a search on google to see if I can find any news sources that discuss the website. If I can't find anything, it's probable that I won't be able to restore it. I've also taken a look at the two other articles you mentioned. One of them (Youtorrent) was recently nominated for deletion but it was decided that it should be kept. I've just tagged the other one (BTjunkie) as needing references but if you take a look at that one, you'll see that it does make a claim of notability. It says it is the "largest torrent site indexer on the web". Seraphim♥ 15:57, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

But if I write that there is a system that makes the site "the fastest way to search all the popular torrent sites" such as some blog says, they delete the article with the reason COI. And if I write that it looks like youtorrent but it's better because there are other features it's the same. Anyway the site is important because is one of the sites that scans 15 torrent tracker sites: this is a big news. ;) However there are some reliable sources as torrentfreak that talk about the site. However I want to thank you for your help :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by PiTo (talk • contribs) 16:10, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

No problem :). The best thing you can do is try to find some news sources. I'm here if you need anymore help :). Good luck! Seraphim♥ 16:21, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Some other sources are here: http://www.pizzatorrent.com/in_the_press.php (You can delete the link when you have read), and others are in google when you search for "pizzatorrent". so now.. what should i do? can i restore the article and put more external links/reference or i risk a ban? xD ..otherwise can you help me to write a good article? :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by PiTo (talk • contribs) 16:31, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

That source would be defined at a self published source and the use of self published sources is discouraged. Ok, I have an idea. Any sources you can find, post them here and I can tell you if they would be suitable. No one is going to block you; they only have to read this conversation to understand that you are trying to contribute positively :). Seraphim♥ 16:40, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

• http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/7-apps-to-make-most-of-torrents/
• http://torrentfreak.com/new-and-promising-bittorrent-sites-080214/
• http://www.tambayan.ph/2008/03/02/multi-search-torrents-through-pizzatorrent/
• http://123beta.blogspot.com/2008/02/pizzatorrent.html

are these sources ok? i know that they are self published source, but there isn't for example a newspaper that talks about a torrent's site. if you read other search engine articles it's the same.. it's also for this reason that it would be useful an article on wikipedia where other users can contribute :) however how can they read this conversation? right now the page of pizzatorrent says me that i'm unauthorized to write anything..—Preceding unsigned comment added by PiTo (talk • contribs) 19:08, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

←(Un-indent)Unfortunately I don't think those sources are going to be enough to satisfy the relevant notability guideline (WP:WEB). A person would be able to read this conversation by looking at my talk page and also through your contributions and mine. One other thing, to sign your posts add ~~~~ :). Happy editing! Seraphim♥ 00:10, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Synagogue speedy tags

OK, sorry, my bad! I'd forgotten the 'all places are notable" thing and didn't realise that a synagogue is notable in that respect! I shall instead prod or AfD them at some point! Thanks for pointing out my mistake!--Voxpuppet (talk • contribs) 00:53, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

No problem. Thanks for being so understanding :). Seraphim♥ 00:58, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

t3h dramaz

Turns out White Cat was right. (but it doesn't mean he acted any less of a dick). Sceptre 18:05, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

:( and I thought he was being paranoid... Seraphim♥ 18:12, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I think we're going to get a lot more merges reversed just because Jack enacted them. Oh dears :( Sceptre 18:28, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I hope not... :(. In this case, the edits should be judged on their merits and not judged by who made them. Seraphim♥ 18:57, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

BAN says otherwise..., though practice sometimes allows exceptions. Sceptre 19:10, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm with Dycedarg on this one (his post at (WP:AN) and the point he made about how reverting 8000 edits would cause more disruption than Jack caused in all his time here. This is what WP:IAR is for... Seraphim♥ 19:21, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Do me a favour? Don't cite IAR in reverting reversions. Doesn't work like that ;) Sceptre 20:03, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Lol, don't worry :). I haven't been actively involved in editing episode articles, just the discussion side of things. This is something I'm staying out of :). Seraphim♥ 20:15, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

By the way, you're a bad influence on me. For god's sake, I'm using smilies in posts. :p Sceptre 22:29, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

A bad influence? Lol. Perhaps smiling is contagious :) :) :) :) :) :P. Seraphim♥ 22:36, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

{un} Oh, I almost forgot: check it. Sceptre 04:19, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Lol! He's probably already gone to make another sockpuppet! Seraphim♥ 15:39, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Apparently, removing warnings is cleanup. Wrong way to do it; we should stick {{cleanup}} on his user talk just for the irony. Sceptre 18:18, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Question

I have a question. Earlier today, this happened to my userpage. The IP was blocked, and then later, this happened, but from a different IP. I believe it's the same person, as the IP is very similar, but I'm not sure exactly what to do in this situation. Unless somebody with a similar IP came along, randomly viewed the history of my page, thought the first diff was amusing, and then did it again, I think it's the same person. If so, he has multiple IPs to use. My question is, what should I do about it? I don't think it's too significant, but if a user has access to multiple IPs, and vandalises from them, wouldn't that be another form of sockpuppetry? Thanks, FusionMix 21:06, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok. That is definitely the same person as the ip's both have the same first 8 digits (137.49.177.xxx) and resolve to the University of Hartford. Every time they disconnect from the internet, they'll be re-assigned an ip address from that pool. This sort of thing is quite common if you vandal patrol so I really wouldn't worry about it too much for now. If it does continue, let me know and I'll protect your userpage :). I hope this addresses your concerns :). Seraphim♥ 21:19, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Alright, thanks. I dropped a final warning on his page after he vandalised NawlinWiki's page, so I'll see what happens from there. Again, thanks :) FusionMix 21:35, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

PizzaTorrent

I beg your pardon for boring you...in wikipedia's guidelines for publishing i read: "Any content which is distributed solely on the Internet is considered, for the purposes of this guideline, as web content." "Self-published material may, in some circumstances, be acceptable when produced by an established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications."

So the dispute here is really on what can, and what cannot, be called "reliable". Blogrunner ("http://www.blogrunner.com/snapshot/D/5/0/46C5ABEE001A5A0D") has a very good collection of articles on the "reliability" of Misplaced Pages - but far be it from me to think badly about an "open" initiative like this: I like wikipedia. I use it everyday and for me it has great value: we live in the first era since the library of alexandria in whichT all the knowledge of the world is concentrated in one single place. It's truly great.

Still though on "reliability": as much as it seems that the Misplaced Pages's reliability is compromised for articles that conceal economical interests, it also seems that reliable here should be intended as a synonym for "commercial". Hence reliable sources would be really the same sources that might compromise the reliability (truthfulness?) of information. ...it happens in nearly any "system".

As for Pizzatorrent it's just a simple torrent site. There's no gain from it. It's an open service offered to the global community, like Misplaced Pages, and - if you had a look at Pizzatorrent you know - just as Misplaced Pages, Pizzatorrent is all about spreading information freely. That's why there's no "reliable" (no commercial) source of information that might be quoted to assure the reliability of the details I published: Pizzatorrent belongs to the global community. Hence the reliable sources are made of every single little person that wrote something about it on the web. If you want something that's really popular and valuable I could bring Torrentfreak as an expert in this field/reliable: not only I have good esteem of the owner for his ideas, but the site also has about 30.000 readers. Other popular websites such as Lifehacker.com wrote about Pizzatorrent. But, and I state it again, every single bit of information that's published matters and if you just google the name "pizzatorrent" you will find a lot of people enthusiastic about it.

We will put those as references. All we ask you is to unblock the article and let the information about Pizzatorrent get on the internet, where it belongs.

I hope you understand the value of what's written here.

Thank you.PiTo (talk) 22:03, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok. Following the discussion here and your thoughtful message which shows you are dedicated to improving it, I'll unprotect the article and re-create it. This should give you and others a chance to improve it. Good luck! Seraphim♥ 22:08, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

The article can be found here PizzaTorrent. Please bear in mind that although I'm giving you a chance to make this article better, in the future, someone else might think this does not meet the notability guideline and suggest deletion. Because this is a borderline case, I just need you to understand before you spend lots of time on it, that it could still be deleted. I would hate to see your effort go to waste. Seraphim♥ 22:16, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you lots PiTo (talk) 22:17, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Your welcome. Seraphim♥ 22:25, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh, did I steal him from you?

Call me sentimental ... or just behind the times, but I love lolcats. Thanks! - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 11:46, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Question: Part II

Mkay, sorry to bother you again, but I have another query. Just today, though I haven't reverted any edits by the IP, they did this. Another establish user reverted it, and then a completely different IP reverted that revert. I'm confused now, as these IPs are all doing the same form of vandalism (revolving around the phrase 'Epic Failure), but the most recent two are completely different IPs. Is it possible for one user to have access to such radically different addresses? It's obviously the same person with a chip on their shoulder, though why they seem so dedicated to labeling me a failure, I have no idea :). I don't think protection of my userpage should be in order, but a short range-block would be impossible giving the disparity between the addresses. What should be done in this case? FusionMix 21:36, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Given that the ip addresses are so different, it could be that someone offsite has instructed people to vandalise your talk page with that message. You are always welcome to revert vandalism on your userpages, so you don't have to leave it up there. I think user page protection would really be the best thing in this situation. I'll semi-protect it for a few days and we'll see how things go. Seraphim♥ 12:27, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Alright. Thanks a ton for the protect; I appreciate it. Perhaps 'I am Epic Failure' is becoming some sort of new 'net meme. Anyway, thanks. Cheers, FusionMix 13:01, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

That should give you a break :). Seraphim♥ 16:05, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for protecting my user page once again. It's starting to get a little frustrating, being on the receiving end of this backlash. I suppose if you're going to fight vandalism here, you have to expect it a degree, huh? Anyway, thanks for the help :) --Thrindel (talk) 16:51, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Lol, don't worry about it :). I'm keeping an eye on the situation. Seraphim♥ 16:05, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 31st, 2008.

Weekly Delivery

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) 22:01, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of PizzaTorrent

Hi there, just to let you know that no work has been done on thsi article since you kindly restored it following its deletion so I have retagged it for speedy per failing to assert notability. Kind regards, nancy 14:28, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know :). Seraphim♥ 14:48, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Response

My comment Seraphim♥

Maybe you should take a break if you are all that bothered by what I said, I have done nothing that is against policy. Several other users on that same page said much worse than I. Why don't you worry about your own edits, and I'll worry about mine. It really isn't your business until I violate policy, then you can throw your two cents in. Landon1980 (talk) 22:57, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm an admin and you made a report commented at the administrator's noticeboard so I'd imagine that it is my business. I took a look at the situation and found the tone in your last comment to be unnecessary. And I would argue that you have violated a policy; WP:CIVILITY. Accusing another editor of "stirring up shit" is not civil. I don't know if other editors have said worse but it doesn't give you an excuse to say what you like. I would prefer that the situation not escalate and that was the purpose of my comment. It's your choice to ignore it but if you continue on that path, it wouldn't be long before you ended up just the same as the person you came to report about. Seraphim♥ 23:06, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

I did not file that report, I just commented. Also, I am so happy for you that you are an admin, your parents must be so proud. Landon1980 (talk) 23:21, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

I only have one parent :). I can't see that any good is going to come if you keep commenting in that tone :(. It's best if we discontinue our conversation here. Seraphim♥ 23:28, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

That tone? So there is a tone policy? Landon1980 (talk) 23:30, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes. — Κaiba 23:32, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

You are way too touchy, I've not been incivil toward you. Now you comparing me to hoponpop is a different story. Landon1980 (talk) 23:35, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

No more please. Seraphim♥ 23:36, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

You act as if I am taunting you or something. If I came across as incivil I apologize. I'm not trying to make enemies here. If you care to check my contribs you will see I don't have a habit of incivility. One can only take so much, I am only human. Excuse me if I did not respond to the heckling the way you would wish for me to on talk Flyleaf. Maybe you can "tell me a bedtime story" as well, or Get me to shut up" Landon1980 (talk) 23:41, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm not really sure how to take that comment. I'll just repeat what I said above. My intention was purely to prevent the situation from escalating. I honestly think the best way forward right now is just to take a short break from editing and resume when there's no possible chance someone could think you were being uncivil. Seraphim♥ 23:50, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Are you sure you "don't have a habit of incivility"? — Κaiba 23:47, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

yeah and like what I was responding to was "civil." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Landon1980 (talk • contribs) 23:56, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

I see your nice and civil comments just keep coming... — Κaiba 00:25, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

My approach to AfDs

Hello! Just to clarify to those with whom I have discussed AfDs today (sorry for copy and pasting, but my one hand is still injured), going with my AfD participation for today, in the instances in which I argued to delete (Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/W.I.T.C.H. The Movie: The Ultimate War, Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Funeral For My Chemical Valentine, and Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Alhaji sani labaran), I provided evidence that I conducted a search for sources on multiple venues and made efforts to still do whatever I could to improve the article just in the off-chance that during the AfDs sources are indeed found and the article now has a start on being improved. In other words, I did not just throw down another repetitive “vote.” In cases where others already provided appropriate policy shortcuts like WP:HOAX, I did not merely repeat what they wrote. Once somebody has already provided a policy or guideline reason for deletion or keeping, there is no need to restate it as anyone reading the discussion should see it. After all, in a discussion, not a vote, the participants should advance new arguments and ideas as the discussion progresses. Now in the two instances (you read right, so far I argued to delete three articles today versus only two keeps) in which I argued to keep, consider them successively. Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/The Melting of Maggie Bean was nominated as a non-notable book with four rapid delete votes claiming “no coverage” in secondary sources. Despite such assertions, KittyRainbow and I found SEVERAL sources including ones in which the article was given high reviews (Five Stars, Gold Award). I in turn used these sources to drastically revise the article by adding new sections and multiple references to an article only created four days ago anyway. And that is just with two of us conducting source searches in one day! So, here is an instance where you have a nom plus four delete votes with false claims and no evidence that searches for sources were even done to substantiate those claims only to have myself and another find a slew of sources with which I was able to significantly improve a four day old article. It frustrates me to no end to see so much of that in AfDs, i.e. editors just posting repetitive and false claims that could outnumber those keep arguments from editors who actually went out and found sources and spent time revising the article under question. Now, anyone approaching AfDs as a discussion would revisit his or her initial post taking into account the article’s development, but a minority of participants in AfDs ever do that. But my larger concern is still, why wouldn’t the nominators or initial delete voters just do what KittyRainbow and I did, i.e. look for sources and improve the article accordingly? Think how much would be accomplished, because then instead of KittyRainbow and I doing it here, we could be doing it to another article(s) without having to also post keep rationales in the AfD. The other AfD I argued to keep (Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/1349 Woking Squadron) was based on the First pillar and I offered some suggestions after checking the web to see if sources suggest legitimacy of the topic. Anyway, I hope that helps illustrate where I am coming from. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles 03:18, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

New note

Thx for the message

here: de:Diskussion:Emo. But "de" stands today for "de:Deutsch", not for "en:Dutch". Dutch language is spoken in the Netherlands in the north of Germany, Austria and Switzerland. The Language for the german Misplaced Pages (de:WP) is the German language. To understand your text i translated it with an automatic translation program from dutch to english (dutch-german ist not available). :-) --Franz (Fg68at) de:Talk 00:28, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank-you kindly. I'd opened so many browser windows I wasn't sure what went where! I'll remember that for future edits though :). Seraphim♥ 00:46, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations on becoming and editor and administrator

Re: Alcohol Rub Article

Thank you for removing the image of a liquid alcohol rub. I really appreciate it. I also think the insertion of the colorless alcohol gel image is very funny. You have great sense of humor. I hope you don't mind. I added the liquid alcohol rub image back into the gallery. Have a great day. Your friend.JSHibbard (talk) 00:31, 11 April 2008 (UTC)JSHibbard (talk) 00:37, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm confused; I'm not sure where the joke is. That image doesn't give a very good visual rendering of what alcohol gel actually looks like as the bottle is opaque and covered with a label. I'm not sure here, but wasn't it you who insisted I re-upload that image minus label in the first place? Because you said that the label was advertising? I'm not sure what's going on here. Seraphim♥ 00:50, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

In addition, alcohol foam would be better demonstrated out of the bottle; even better would be a picture of someone using an alcohol foam on their hands. Seraphim♥ 00:51, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

I've suggested a compromise on the talkpage. You may wish to comment. Benea (talk) 00:53, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the note :). Seraphim♥ 00:54, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		Thank you. ≈Tulkolahten≈ 17:57, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm assuming this was for the fast protect this morning :). Thank-you for bringing it to the board :) Seraphim♥ 18:38, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

For that. seresin ( ¡? ) 22:21, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

No problem :). Seraphim♥ 14:58, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

You used to be cool pt. 2

:P. But seriously, thanks for the protect and deux emails :) Sceptre 14:44, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

:( Lol...I've been doing some work at the commons and I transferred my images over. I've ruined my rep!! I'll have to redeem myself and go edit The Postal Service :P. Thank-you too :). Seraphim♥ 14:58, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Although you appear to be a kettle - I've edited Amy Winehouse (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) four times. Then again, I am sandboxing some good music article, so it's all kosher ;) Sceptre 15:03, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Hehe. The only article I'm sandboxing is one about Alexis Taylor :(... lol. Seraphim♥ 15:12, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

BTW, get on chat. Sceptre 15:14, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Good, bad, and the ugly

Email, your interpretation whether I mean one or three. Sceptre 21:17, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

What next?

Hello, hope you don't mind the post, but I'm not sure what the next step is.

An indefinetly blocked user has had another sockpuppet confirmed by checkuser - what, if anything, do I need to do next?

Thanks, Darkson (BOOM! An interception!) 14:45, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

It seems Kuru (talk · contribs) has beaten me to the punch :) and taken care of things by indefinitely blocking the account. If you need anything else, I'm around a lot of the time :). Seraphim♥ 14:58, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for April 7th and 14th, 2008.

Sorry, it seems that the bot quit before completing its run last week. Here is the last two weeks' worth of Signpost. Ralbot (talk) 09:09, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Weekly Delivery

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) 09:09, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Forgive me, Ms. Whipp, for I have sinned

I made a hip-hop reference :( Sceptre 20:19, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

:O and you used to be so cool! :P Seraphim♥ 10:31, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, I'm not one to usually make those references, because I listen to it like... never. Sceptre 10:37, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah yeah :P. I bet you're at home listening to Tupac right now...rapping along...doing a little gangster dance :P :) Seraphim♥ 10:45, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Nah, I just woke up, I'm a little too tired to be doing a gangsta dance... besides, you owe me that Doctor Who natter, do you not? ;) Might as well get online while I'm rewatching it :D Sceptre 10:47, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Lol. Yes I do! I'll just get some pom bears first :). Seraphim♥ 10:53, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

I swear I read that as porn bears... dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 11:15, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

:O Lmao. I was referring to the crunchy bear shaped snack :). Seraphim♥ 11:24, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Which have an article :D Oh, and giggy, you're a dirty dirty man. Get a bathrobe now. Sceptre 11:25, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't see no article! And I will if she does! dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 11:35, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

A favour?

Seeing as you were kind enough to restore the protection on my talk page, it's just a fair warning that a) I'm running up close to archive time, and b) I hate violating the GFDL on my talk page. You might want to keep my talk on watchlist too; I have yours on watch (because I converse here way more than I should and to keep an eye out for (thankfully low/non-existant) vandalism). Thanks, Sceptre 23:20, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Already watchlisted :). Seraphim♥ 09:44, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Thankee. Sceptre 11:30, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Pokity poke hintity hint ;) Sceptre 15:28, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Done! :) Seraphim♥ 16:05, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

<3 Sceptre 16:12, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

Impersonate

Quoth the Daleks: BAN-I-NATE! (er... per WP:USERNAME) Sceptre 17:28, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

And caught by the Spartan Warrior Boi. Sceptre 17:38, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

:). Also I think it's pretty clear that it was operated by the same person I warned. What do I do there? ...Can't you tell I'm a newbie admin... :( Seraphim♥ 17:38, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

RFC/U to make sure, but if you really are 100% positive, you could get away with a ban for being a sockmaster ;) Sceptre 17:39, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Excellent. I think I'll make a report just to be sure :). Hehe, Persian Poet Girl is good! Seraphim♥ 17:44, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Probably for the best... any admin action that is just one fingernail out of line (and some that are so behind the line it circumnavigates the globe and appears in front of the line) is often abuse. Sceptre 17:48, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

I know...I had to question my initial judgement before I even blocked for impersonation! Take what happened with Gooddays....s/he was calling for the "revision of my adminship"... Seraphim♥ 18:16, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Gah, don't even mention the word "revision" to me. It's a bit silly that my RFA was withdrawn failing... I'm obviously qualified enough, but people get too uppity over civility. Sceptre 18:23, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: Revert

Signpost updated for April 21st, 2008.

Weekly Delivery

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) 16:33, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Block

I don't see why i was blocked for providing truthful information, the article i edited is full of lies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Thefactualtruth (talk • contribs) 18:47, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

You weren't blocked. Seraphim♥ 09:29, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Eyeliner Tale

I have on watch. Had to revert twice :/ Sceptre 22:47, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm still watching it :). Seraphim♥ 17:33, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

And not doing much... tsk tsk. Sceptre 17:43, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

:O The vandalism on that article is manageable at the moment :P. Seraphim♥ 17:56, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Still, I'm not here to do your dirty work - I can't do your dirty work, I have no dustpan. Sceptre 18:01, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Ah but there are reasons for why I'm not as active here of late *poke*...What if my dustpan gets rusty? :( ...Seraphim♥ 18:15, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

I can rv stuff, but that's it :/ though I have several contacts who can do some blocking if I want ;) Sceptre 18:20, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh no! The Misplaced Pages Police will have you for saying that! Seraphim♥ 18:33, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

I am the Misplaced Pages Police. Sceptre 18:47, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Health

1. :(
2. Waste of disk space - CSS could've made it prettier
3. Health issues don't change editing one iota from my POV... it takes excruciating pain to stop me from even touching my computer. Sceptre 23:05, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

I know I know... but I'm crap at code lol. Hopefully things will get back to normal (or whatever my variation of normal is :P) over the next few months :). Seraphim♥ 23:20, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Sigma-squared. Hey, don't blame me, I have a practice exam paper in Stats to do tommorow, might as well revise. :P (Email too). And consider a pretty banner a freebie from me :). Sceptre 23:41, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Pretty banner? Alright then...that image does look quite ugly... Shouldn't you be revising though :P? Seraphim♥ 23:48, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Do I look like the guy who needs to revise? :P (I know, arrogant, arrogant). Sceptre 23:51, 28 April 2008 (UTC) (Bibendum: pretty-ised. You really should get a helpful list too, so people know where to turn to. Sceptre 23:52, 28 April 2008 (UTC))

Thank-you for that; it looks much better. To be honest, there isn't all that many people who ask for my help :). Seraphim♥ 23:58, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Blocky colorised boxes are my speciality... and shame on you for thinking blue looks good on pink. Didn't you learn anything from the eyebleeding that was last week's Doctor Who? And the 55kb length of this page suggests otherwise to the second. Sceptre 00:03, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

:O Does that mean the blue on pink on my userpage looks ugly? I thought it looked nice being such a pale shade...Seraphim♥ 13:16, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

It does, actually. By the way, thanks for messaging Pixelface, but beware the people so easy to shout "COI!". Still, the reason I removed his posts and stopped replying to him was because he was wasn't getting the point and was starting to annoy me. Sceptre 15:36, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

No problem, though I would step in for anyone I see in that situation. Continual badgering like that is not conducive to a good working environment, which is something I always strive for where possible. In addition, if you don't tell someone how their edits look from the outside, there's the chance (AGF) that they honestly couldn't see how it looked. Thanks for the fix :). Seraphim♥ 15:43, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Ah, so we're BFFs because we like Death Cab? While Death Cab is sometimes instrumental in forging friendships, you're not getting my PSP once I become Heaven's version of Keanu Reaves... because I don't have a PSP :P Sceptre 11:37, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Crystal Castles is on watch, and I'll have a look at the edits. Sceptre 18:19, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

As I promised

I've written it up just because of you. :) Also, Pixelface is on ANI because he's still ranting :/ Now, I need to get to bed as it's 3:15am (so for that reason expect an email before lunch) Sceptre 02:14, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Just caught as I was finishing up: Pixel got blocked by someone who you can't find any attachment to me at all, so watch out for an unblock template :) Sceptre 02:19, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

Notice

Since you have expressed an interest, the thing in question appears to be a few weeks away, still. I am carefully avoiding using the words (letters, really). I'm sorry to hear about your health issues and I hope you'll get back to normal shortly! Enigma 02:34, 1 May 2008 (UTC)