Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Syrthiss (talk | contribs) at 17:24, 19 July 2006 (refactor page and reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

If I posted on your talk page, I have it watched so you can reply there.

Archived pages: July 2005 - Jan 2006 | Jan 2006 - Feb 2006 | 20 Feb 2006 - 3 April 2006 | 3 April 2006 - 7 June 2006

An inspiration

I appreciate your kind words. I was going to wait until after the 9th to say this, but I think it is ok to say it now that you have weighed in. Your approach with me, giving me corrective feedback as well as a wlecome with links was KEY in inspriing me to learn more about what wikipedia is all about. I appreciate the way you approached me (and the way you continue to approach others) with civility, warmth, information, support and clarity. I hope to be able to live up to the example you have set. Thanks again. Warmly, Kukini 19:56, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Awwwwwww. What a great comment. :) Syrthiss 20:02, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

I meant it. If the RfA continues positively for the next few days, I will be seeking mentoring on occasion to be sure that I do good and do no harm. I hope you will be willing to serve as one of my mentors for me. Kukini 12:32, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Gladly! Syrthiss 12:35, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Lindsey Graham

Thanks for helping deal with User:72.242.65.58, but now User:65.4.73.246 is making essentially the same edits. Do we deal with this as a sockpuppet situation? Any help/advice is appreciated. thanks. --mtz206 (talk) 14:28, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Yah, thats how I treated it. If we see another unconnected ip doing it I'm going to semiprotect the page and block them all as open proxies/zombie computers. I wish the confirmation tools weren't down. Thanks for keeping an eye on this. Syrthiss 14:32, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

It appears we have another IP in the mix: User:65.87.132.70, . --mtz206 (talk) 23:45, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Looks like semiprotection has been applied to Lindsey Graham, and I've blocked that ip as an open proxy pending confirmation. Syrthiss 12:18, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

User Stemonitis

You have posted a final warning on my userpage. Can I ask why? I have made a factual alteration to an offensive insert on Stemonitis's userpage, he referred me to have a discussion about it to which we did have a civil discussion and continue to do. Why are you making such a belligerent threat towards me. If you make any more belligerent threats toward me, I will consider reporting you for hassling and offending me unduly. Can you explain your rash, ill-conceived and under-investigated actions please? I am now officially warning you off my userpage as I don't appreciate unfair and unreasonable forms of aggression and threats against me. You have the right to reply on this but only on this userpage. Thank you for your attention. Bazzajf 15:25, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

He asked you to stop. Its his userpage. If you find it offensive I suggest you don't go looking at it. You can view my comments however you wish but I wanted to make it absolutely crystal clear that what you were doing was vandalism and will be considered as disruption, in case you seek other outlets. Syrthiss 17:39, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Me not looking at it doesn't stop it being offensive. DOES IT???? So as I am a new user, can you suggest to me what outlets I should seek to report offensive terminology rather than churlishly give me a final warning for attempting to address offensive terminology. I look forward to your assistance. Bazzajf 17:54, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

If I may, there's not much you can do about the content of anyone's user page. You're free to edit it, of course, but doing so repeatedly, when the owner has explicitly rejected your change, is very poor form. Syrthiss was just letting you know -- in a very even-handed manner, I might add -- what would likely happen if you persisted. Powers 18:12, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Notification at protected talk page

You turned down the request to unpotect User talk:JackSarfatti, however do you think you could add to that page that such a request was filed and rejected, and include for instance this permanent link of the WP:RFPP page or an archive of the dialogue in that regard if such exists? __meco 17:43, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Done. I modified the permanent link diff you provided by one step later in the version history so that the change is highlighted on the left (and the archiving is clearer). The version you supplied, while still having the discussion, tended to highlight the archiving of another section. The "unclear why" isn't meant to be snarky, I really don't understand why...and if you can (if you care to) explain to me I'll remove the ()'d comment. Syrthiss 18:03, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Firstly I think that all such administrative measures should be documented, i.e. any formal enquiry that calls for a decision of granted/denied should be documented at the proper location (in this case the page that was being proposed for unprotection). Secondly, Jack Sarfatti and/or online communities adopting his case seem to imply there is a conspiracy to deny him the right of free speech afforded to others, other conditions being equal. In that spirit I am of the opinion that transparency of proceedings is beneficial. (Just to make sure I will mention that there is an encyclopedia article, Jack Sarfatti that should not be confused with his Misplaced Pages user account now in question.) __meco 18:46, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough. I have modified the notice. I am aware that there is an article on him here, and it looks from his talk page that he is blocked indefinitely because of legal threats per WP:NLT. Syrthiss 12:12, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

Nu metal

I'd say it's worth a shot, but please do keep your finger on the 'semi' button should those anons start up again. --InShaneee 23:32, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. Looks like VoA has already lifted the protection. Syrthiss 12:12, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

User:Andy5190

Thanks for taking this one. Unforunately, it isn't quite done. The user is apparantly confused about what constitutes an unfree image. I doubt that further pointers to Misplaced Pages:Fair use from me will be helpful. Thanks again. Jkelly 20:06, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Blocking 88.80.193.30

Hi, just a bit confused why you blocked 88.80.193.30 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) for 6 months on their first offence? Seemed a little over the top to me.--Andeh 16:54, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

I would typically block a registered user account indefinitely if their very first edits were vandalism. Since we shouldn't nessecarily block ip's for indef, since the next person who might have that ip should have some chance to respond, I block them for ~6months. If that really is Blu Aardvark, they'll know enough to place an {{unblock}} on their page or something. Syrthiss 17:02, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

OK, just seemed a bit harsh. Keep up the good work.--Andeh 17:05, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm typically very very very harsh on people who screw with official pages. :) Syrthiss 17:08, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Blagojevich

Tdl1060 said on the Judy Baar Topinka history page that it was only meant for talk pages after I tried to put one on there. He deleted it. Why should one belong on Blagojevich's but not on his political opponent? That is biased. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hikiaroo (talk • contribs) .

Misplaced Pages:Miscellany for deletion/User:Grlutz

This user's page was deleted per the above MFD nom. The user is requesting that the deleted text be sent to him via email (glutz@epicsys.com) on the MFD's talk page. I saw you online & thought that you might be able to help him out. Thanks --Srikeit 12:38, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I sent it to him. Syrthiss 12:43, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks :). --Srikeit 12:45, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

FYI, the user reposted the entire thing to his Talk page.  RasputinAXP  c 23:50, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

I support your re-deletion of it. If he reposts it, salt the earth. Syrthiss 12:25, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Ronnie Miller

Precisely. --Zpb52 15:15, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Ok, looks like they were indefblocked by Deskana and the userpage was deleted by Radiokirk. Syrthiss 15:27, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

RE:Urgent rename request?

Hello! I hope you are feeling fine. As for your question, I realized that I made a mistake. I have since deleted them and moved them for discussion. This is the first time I am doing this, so bear with me! In the mean time, please comment on the proposed renaming under the discussion sub-section of this article. Your views would be deeply appreciated. --Siva1979 16:01, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi! Yes I do need help for nominating them for speedy rename. However, in that page under the subsection of Speedy renaming, it is stated that only 5 types of category titles are 'strictly' limited to this. MOSNUM does not seem to fall under this process. --Siva1979 16:06, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for blocking the user who was vandalizing my talk page! — Super-Magician (talk • contribs • count) ★ 16:11, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

6 month block on User:172.163.83.110

I noticed that you blocked an AOL ip address for six months. When it comes to dealing with AOL ip addresses it is better to block for only a few days or hours as they are dynamic and many users can be affected. I suggest that you reduce the block significantly (Maybe to a few days).--SomeStranger 16:17, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I'll gladly remove it in a few hours when I know our rotating ip aol vandal is gone. Syrthiss 16:18, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Very well, I was just making sure. Blocking for 6 months seemed a bit out of line in this case.--SomeStranger 16:20, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

I was actually enjoying the vandal being all concerned for the other aol users. Syrthiss 16:21, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

The upside is I got to block one of their vandalism registered accounts that had been around long enough to get past a semiprotect. =D Syrthiss 16:40, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

Another upside is that you learned a very valuable lesson about abusing your admin tools. I'm very happy for you!  :) 172.128.217.130 13:57, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

lol, do you see any admonitions against me? Syrthiss 14:21, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

DUDE, I like TOTALLY had to look up the word "admonition" in the dictionary, and I've almost got a Master's degree in English! Nice work, you crazy freak!!! To answer your question: yes, see above. All the best to you. 172.147.118.175 15:50, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for moving the post to Xtremeruna21; you were indeed correct that it was intended for the talk/discussion page. John Broughton 12:27, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

A belated thank you re. my RfA

Hello, Syrthiss/Archive5, and thank you for the supportive vote and very kind words on my recent RfA! With a final vote of 84/1/4, I have now been entrusted with the mop, bucket and keys. I will be slowly acclimating myself to my new tools over the next months, but welcome any and all feedback and suggestions on how I might be able to use them to help the project. Thanks also again for the great example you set as an administrator! - Kukini 17:01, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

User:Bazzajf

A while ago you gave User:Bazzajf a good, stern warning about interfering with my pages . Well, he's at it again, not the user page itself (because that's protected), but on the talk page. I don't mind his comments, but I don't see that the order of the sections is any business of his . Perhaps another prod would help. --Stemonitis 11:01, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

His calling you a bigot is over the line into personal attacks, and I've warned him to not go near your talk page if he can't be civil. My apologies. Syrthiss 11:54, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you're apologising for; I certainly don't think you've any reason to. Thanks for your help. --Stemonitis 12:08, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Anytime. :) Syrthiss 12:14, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

I see you've taken to deleting my contribution here which was in context I might add, what a fair-minded approach you have. Bazzajf 12:23, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I was pleasantly surprised that it was in context and coherent...but as my edit summary said, my talk page is for discussing matters with *me*... not talking to another editor. I don't need more orange boxes. I would suspect that were you to place the comment you made here to Stemonitis on Stemonitis' talk page perhaps, then he/she would know that you left a message for them and could reply / blank / whatever it on their own. Syrthiss 12:27, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Speaking of personal insults, in fact the most underhanded personal attacks of them all, those that are veiled - "Actually, I was pleasantly surprised that it was in context and coherent", Well done, give yourself a pat on the back for being a hypocrite, a devious one at that.

Getting back to your point, one can't reason with bigots, believe me I have tried if you read his userpage but this is why these people are bigots, they don't stand to reason. Bazzajf 12:39, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Comparing your reply to my last warning on your talk page to the reverted text here, your text here was less angry. Ergo, it was pleasant to read inasmuch as you weren't calling me or him a f@cker or a clown and it was "coherent". I'm blunt, and will continue to be blunt. Syrthiss 13:20, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

I think you are backtracking now. On an aside, I never called anyone a "fu*ker" so please get your facts straight. Bazzajf 14:14, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Syrthiss

Strange strange admin, very strange decisions.... (unsigned comment)

• I agree. I'm not saying for sure that there's a cause for alarm, but just to be on the safe side, somebody should really look into this guy. 152.163.100.202 20:23, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

Bazzajf

He can submit evidence privately to the arbcom via email, if he so desires. That is standard procedure for arbitration cases where any interested parties are blocked from editing. We generally do not unblock editors merely to allow them to contribute to arbitration cases, although should they assure us that they will refrain from the behaviour that got them blocked and/or confine themselves solely to the arbitration case, they might be unblocked. (In short, it's up to you really, unless the arbcom intervenes.) Johnleemk | Talk 14:49, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

The Infamous Rob Steadman

I understand that this guy has been the focus of multiple blocks involving you as an Admin, under many names and false names. He has been reported as a troll today. He has been harrassing the entire Ice Hockey WikiProject. Here is our investigation request: . He has also declared that he plans to eliminate all sports articles below the Pro level due to his personal belief that if HE personally (without any reason other than his unnotability belief, and with no consensus) does not find an article notable, it therefore does not belong on Misplaced Pages. He has started with multiple AfD's on a stub article , with the hope of generalizing it to all amateur hockey articles -- and then all sports articles. The WikiProject feels that this does not remotely pay justice to Canada's incredibly popular junior hockey systems or their cult followings. Also, his personal harrassment and often stocker-ish "contribution watching" has put many people on edge in the community. I am saddened to think that a user that has been blocked as many times as this guy still has free reign to bother whomever he pleases. I feel that he has abused our "assumption of good faith" and we no longer want him in our lives. DMighton 00:08, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm still on wikibreak, but I feel I have to address this. First, your statement on RFI is incorrect: I am not acting in any way to mentor Robert Steadman. I have a very simple connection to him as the admin who lifted his indefblock. With that said, and without taking the time into digging into his interactions with the Hockey WikiProject et al, though I personally disagree with his stance that the hockey / sports articles do not belong on Misplaced Pages my assumption of his good faith in trying to improve the encyclopedia is not damaged. I still believe that the afd process won't result in any good article being removed, so his nominations of the articles will produce no fruit unless they are indeed bad articles. As for the stalking, I would need to investigate it...which I cannot do atm due to IRL work. There are several other admins watching the situation so as long as both sides put forth their arguments without personal attacks we can all continue to work on the encyclopedia. --Syrthiss 13:00, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

I really don't know anything about the whole mentor thing, I didn't post that little bit of news. Thank you for the response. Just wanted to know what was going on around here. DMighton 14:55, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Syrthiss - I am not, as you suggested on the RFI, against sports articles on WP - not at all. I am against WP being filled up with pointless articles about non-notable things - such as JUNior sports teams that play in jevenile leagues. Are you really saying that EVERY teen team should be listed on WP? If so, where does it stop? Secondary school, Primary school, KINDERGARTEN? That is my whole point. DMighton and his club have overreated and been name calling, using personal abuse and creating a situation out of a genuine desire to keep WP full of only that which is worthy of inclusion. So much that he has written is overreatction misleading and untrue and, I believe that someone else has been asisting with info. I'm sure you know who. That situation is ridiculous and urgently needs to be looked into. Thanks for your time, sorry that you have had to be bothered but, really, I just WP to be better and not filled with junk. I never said wanting to spread it all ice hokery articles or all sports - that is an outright lie. I would also like Dmighton and his club to stop libelling me on as many pages as they can on WP - that is absolutely unfair and unreaosnable when I acted in good faith and have done nothing wrong. Robertsteadman 16:29, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Can you do me a favour and give RobertSteadman a chat about appropriate behaviour? He is currently clogging up the checkuser page with requests but has not provided links diffs or sock names. Please explain the purpose of this page (he should really know considering how many times he has been referrred himself). He is unlikely to listen to anyone else and, after all, you did unblock him despite the indefinite block against him. Don't forget the native american philosophy about being eternally responsible for the future actions of a man whose life you have saved...... Neuropean 19:49, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

(from Neuropean's talk page...) Actually, I'm very sure you are a sock account created solely to create WP:POINT disruption. Desist and find other ways to constructively contribute, or you'll be blocked for disruption. Syrthiss 12:21, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your opinion. Please assume good faith and remain civil in all dealings. CheersNeuropean 18:29, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Syr - I've asked for a RFCU on this guy, writing style, etc. just too familiar.... Robertsteadman 17:46, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

• • Please AGF.Neuropean 18:32, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Please seethis - this is someone out ot make a POINT and, quite possibly, pursuing a vendetta. What can be done? Robertsteadman 19:46, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Category rename request for bot

I'm looking to rename articles in Category:Cults to refer to Alleged Cults because labeling an organization a cult is highly subjective (see Category Talk:Cults and the CFD entry. I'll probably add the request to another bot owners page or two so you might want to check that it hasn't been done yet. If you do get to it, please leave a message. --Antonrojo 01:32, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

The category needs to go through the official process at CFD before any bot can undertake that change. I added an official {{cfd}} template to the category in addition to the discussion notice that another user placed there. :) Syrthiss 12:53, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

I am fed up

I am fed up with user: Neuropean]] and the Hockey guys - all of whom are having a go, making apoint, getting their own back on Anne Frank's cats. Sadly some are not seeing through the sockpuppet and those getting their own back. What do you suggest? As a teacher I have known kids ask about this subject, it is verifiable, it is sourced, it has quotes.... and yet, oddly, these people want it removed..... Robertsteadman 20:38, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

My RFA

Thank you for your vote in my RFA, which succeeded with a final tally of 66-0-4. If there's anything I can help you with now that I'm an admin, please let me know on my talk page. Again, thanks! Mangojuice 21:33, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

I think you've been impersonated

Your name was added to this page (a user talk page) by user Syrlhiss. I am not sure quite what is happening on that page, it is getting some strange tags added. I have reverted it to the last obviously good page. I am not sure of the 'form' here; I cannot find any boilerplate text to send to Syrlhiss, and anyway, it's their only edit. Regards, Mr Stephen 11:22, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. JoanneB already indefblocked them. My first impersonator. *single tear*. Syrthiss 12:31, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

No problem. It's the first time I've ever seen an impersonation, I wasn't quite sure what was going on. It's obviously a banning offence, but do you know if it happens often? Regards, Mr Stephen 09:50, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Yeah it happens every so often, though it happens more often with adminstrators than standard users. It also depends on the name whether its easy to substitute characters and make it appear to be the same person. Syrthiss 19:53, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Amazing!

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		I have become convinced that Syrthiss may well be God, or at least a supernaturally-blessed being. Truly, he is everywhere at every hour! That merits recognition. :) Xoloz 13:57, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

So, Omnipresent One, mind checking in at DRV while I'm away! ;)

Best wishes, Xoloz 13:57, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

and Kent... Stop playing with yourself! Syrthiss 15:18, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Re: lmao

Well, at least we got the job done in the end, but your unblocking summary was definitely the best. :D Cheers, Sango123 18:02, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Beer & brewery notability criteria discusion document

A discussion document has been opened up. Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Beer/Notability Criteria. Please put in your views either on the main page or on the attached talk page. SilkTork 16:43, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar

Thank you, much appreciated :) Conscious 18:52, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Woohoo!!

Congratulations, ubiquitous one, on both your wiki-anniversary and the completion of your "real-world" work. If you're 1/100th as fast in the outside world as you are in the wiki, I expect you to discover warp drive by next week! :) Best wishes, Xoloz 23:34, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Category:Wikipedians who prefer rare steak

You closed the CfD discussion of Category:Rare Steak as Rare-name which I assume is a variant of rename but didn't rename the category or remove the CfD template from the category. I assume this is an oversight of some kind but would like to see the matter resolved. Thanks. Eluchil404 19:52, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

No oversight. It is in the queue on WP:CFD/W to be renamed. It'll be closed out whenever one of the bots gets to it, tho you can of course work on moving the articles in it to the new category name as well. Syrthiss 19:57, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick reply. I obviously have more to learn about categories than I realized. Eluchil404 20:01, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Not a problem. Yes, categories are weird beasts - even administrators can't just move them like normal pages. Each article in them has to have the link to the category changed to point towards the new name. :/ Syrthiss 20:04, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Re : Welcome back!

Indeed, I'm back...thanks for your well-wishes! :) - Cheers, Mailer Diablo 04:26, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

User:Ivan Grizov

User:Ivan Grizov imitates User:Oquanbo! - CobaltBlueTony 20:58, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Thats why they are both indefblocked. Syrthiss 20:59, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, the block notification hasn't/hadn't shown up yet. Otherwsie I wouldn't have bothered you. :-) - CobaltBlueTony 21:03, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

heh heh heh. :) Syrthiss 21:03, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Following denial of semiprotection

Referring to: The Road to Reality: A Complete Guide to the Laws of the Universe (edit|talk|links|history|logs) I appreciate your quick feedback on this although I am not happy about the outcome. Misplaced Pages is quite an inspiring place in global cooperation and I would appreciate if you could explain: I saw the article in question and I find out that a credible e-commerce site has certain postings. I think this may be useful to the reader and I make the edit. Some users just reject it (do not change) and their only explanation is Misplaced Pages guidelines. I spent some time reading the policy and to my understanding my edit is much more compatible with Misplaced Pages than some of the arbitrary opinions that they have posted. So your denial confuses me and I would greatly appreciate some discussion on that. I want to be a contributor in wikipedia and their reactions is very dissapointing. If you find it more convenient we could discuss this by email. --Book-worm 17:20, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

Lets discuss it here, but I'm about to run out for a bit to a meeting... I'll update here and leave you a note when I'm back. Syrthiss 17:24, 19 July 2006 (UTC)