Misplaced Pages

Thanks and belated congrats

Thanks v much for dealing with that porn-spammer last night. When I checked up this morning after reading his snarl on my talk page, I was pleasantly surprised to see you as the blocking admin, because I didn't think you were an admin ... and then I found your RFA. Drat! I'd have given the proposal my strong support if I had seen it, but I'm glad to see that it passed nearly-unanimously. Sorry these congrats are late. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:02, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Always a pleasure... Deliberately didn't mention the RFA to you, Ali etc as I knew Certain People watch your talkpage & would see it. RFA is enough of a trainwreck already without a six-month-old stale argument spilling across onto it. — iridescent (talk to me!) 14:36, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Probably wise, and in any case a mention might have been regarded as canvassing. But still, it's good to have you as an admin. Someone else to share the headaches ;) --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 12:47, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Broadwater Farm photograph

Dear Iridescent

I am publications manager for east London charity Community Links (see )

We are in the process of completing production of a book of essays "Making Links" where various contributors reflect on the issue of "community" one of the articles in the book discusses the community on Broadwater farm - as well as other issues and to illustrate this piece I would like to use your photograph ()

The book is a not-for-profit project and will be produced in a short-run edition of 1,250 copies. Please confirm that you would be happy for your picture to be used in this way and let me know how you would like to be credited in the publication.

Thank You Richard McKeever Publications Manager Community Links 105 Barking Road Canning Town, London E16 4HQ

t: 020 7473 9671 (Direct line) t: 020 7473 2270 (Switchboard) e: richard.mckeever@community-links.org w: www.community-links.org —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.157.87.93 (talk) 10:44, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Replied via email with explicit authorisation — iridescent (talk to me!) 10:51, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Kenarchism

Excuse me but i would like to know why the article on my religion was deleted...could you tell me why it was deleted? Because if it was because of the content I wont remake one, but if the creator simply did something that caused the deletion I would (maybe) like to make a different, appropriate entry on it. Kenarchist 12:11, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

i would also wish to know why it was deleted. I made* the entry because i couldnt find any article ON my religion. i dont believe i did anything inappropriate like the person above may have suggested, but if so, please tell me. And to the person above me, personally, i find the name to be somewhat offensive towards my religion (which is also yours). in my opinion, it is very much like naming a child God, which to some people is viewed as a taboo. Anyway, please tell me if i did anything wrong, thank you. *I created a new acount because i dont know whether i can simply change my username* Seiji-Reiskin 12:41, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Why do you continuously delete my Kenarchist article? I dont understand why you constantly feel the need to delete an article on my religion simply because you dont believe in it. Has Satanism or Christianity been deleted from this encyclopedia? In fact, even Zoroastrianism is allowed on this site even though its a dying religion. I dont see what's so wrong about my entry unless it has some vulgarity or it has insulting content, which i did not add. Seiji-Reiskin 22:16, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

• Christianity has reliable sources
• Satanism has reliable sources
• Zoroastrianism has reliable sources
• Kenarchism has no sources whatsoever. Misplaced Pages is not for things made up in school one day. — iridescent (talk to me!) 22:22, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

I find that insultive as it is both MY and my family's religion. I find this to be very intolerant of other cultures and religions. Simply because something may not have been open for seven year olds to view our beliefs on the internet or in public libraries, does not mean it is simply a hoax and that it isnt a religion. As you can clearly see, i am NOT the only follower of this religion and that i did not create a "cool little club" one day when i was at school. Seiji-Reiskin 07:12, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Are there reliable sources that this religion exists? Provide two and it's more than welcome to stay. Otherwise, please stop reposting this article. — iridescent (talk to me!) 20:07, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

How do I show you the book? like, online? Kenarchist 22:09, 11 October 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kenarchist (talk • contribs)

Provide at least some of: an ISBN/ISSN/LCCN number; a DOI number; an OCLC; an author; a date/place of publication; pretty much any other information listed in the {{cite book}} template, and thanks to the Magic That Is Teh Internets you can indeed show me that it exists online. Since this book is not listed in any catalogue - including the copyright libraries - I am highly unconvinced that this information exists but am willing to be convinced. If you can't provide reliable sources, then please stop uploading this article as the joke is wearing very thin. — iridescent (talk to me!) 22:19, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

I cannot find a single source for "Kenarchism" either. Nonetheless I can find a lot of source for "Jedi". This link ] tells me that in the last UK census that there were more "Jedi" than Sikhs, Buddhists and Jews!! Canterberry 23:06, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

SSR spellchecker thanks!!

Many thanks for fixing the spelling problems on the sosuishi-ryu page!

Thanks! — iridescent (talk to me!) 16:24, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Hrmph. Two in one day! I'm awarding it anyway. :)

I am a particular admirer of your work at CSDs. Truly exemplary, in my opinion, is your balance between tagging and responding to tags. Go you! --Moonriddengirl 16:54, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, I'm certainly building up an odd mix - thank you! — iridescent (talk to me!) 17:01, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Deletion

YOu deleted the article under the band CaRiMi. The same band that has been referenced in the following wiki articles.

http://en.wikipedia.org/Levitasyon http://en.wikipedia.org/Kompa http://en.wikipedia.org/Haiti

Another band that has less sucess then them in the same genre was able to create a[REDACTED] entry. Why? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mp231 (talk • contribs) 20:15, 8 October 2007 (UTC) Mp231 20:19, 8 October 2007 (UTC) Mp231 20:20, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

No, User:NawlinWiki deleted it. Before you recreate it, read WP:N and WP:RS, both of which the article currently fails. — iridescent (talk to me!) 20:19, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Block user Iomegacorp

I think blocking him temporarily is not a good idea. Maybe could you try to block him permanently because it is a corporation name? It's a violation of the username policy. Bigtop 21:42, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

As I said on AN, the 24hr block was a placeholder whilst it was reported to UAA; I've no doubt it will be extended to permanent as they're editing articles on Iomega products so it's a clear promotional name — iridescent (talk to me!) 21:46, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Apologies

I apologize if I've been escalating to lv4 if it wasn't appropriate. I admit that I don't always view the talk pages carefully, and I'll try to do a better job of it in the future. The third example you provided of me doing this, though, was just a level three warning given after a level two. And about my proposal, you seemed upset that it might prevent legitimate shared IP editors from editing. I only proposed it in the case of user accounts, because a vandal might just log out of the account and create a new one when he receives the final warning.--Avant Guard 17:39, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Admin

Thanks! Although whack-a-mole blocking is, in all honesty, not the hardest thing in the world... — iridescent (talk to me!) 22:22, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

The Pam Stone Show

Just a notice. The edits to the Pam Stone Show was a result of the talk about the Pam Stone wiki on the Pam Stone Show... The edits are by Show listeners and are not hoaxes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 152.15.81.227 (talk) 14:56, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Please read WP:BIO before you continue to reinsert this material, or I will reprotect the page and/or block you from editing as necessary. Misplaced Pages is an encyclopedia, not a fan club. — iridescent (talk to me!) 20:27, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

So if Pam Stone herself were to make the changes, how would that be handled?

Exactly the same as if anyone else were to; they'd be reverted unless she was able to provide reliable sources. Misplaced Pages is not Myspace. If anything, they'd come under more scrutiny as a conflict of interest. — iridescent (talk to me!) 21:00, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

So unless she provided a photo of her funky "claw" toe, it could not be posted? Also, her frequent viewings of "Bleak House" have been referenced on the show multiple times, so is that admissable?

Also, could it be mentioned that on the October 6th show, Pam and crew referenced the[REDACTED] article, Anthony Michael's ban from[REDACTED] for posting his Gastonia website on the Gastonia page and that the administrator Iridescent was also talked about on the show?

If you provide a reliable source. How many times do I need to say this? — iridescent (talk to me!) 21:07, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

I understand that, no need to be snippy, I am just wondering how to go about this. Should I pop a link to the podcast up there? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.68.58.109 (talk) 21:10, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Will you please actually read the policy I'm repeatedly referring you to. If there is not multiple, independent, non-trivial coverage of a topic it should not be on Misplaced Pages. — iridescent (talk to me!) 21:16, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

So in sum, Pam is not a reliable source about herself? Ok. Thanks.

Kenarchism (Again)

could you please reply to my questions on the Kenarchism subject above? Seiji-Reiskin 22:23, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Just saw it

I urge to you withdraw the afd on Antonio in the Merchant of Venice--regardless of article quality, we wlll look like fools if the media sees it. DGG (talk) 12:17, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page — iridescent (talk to me!) 20:23, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Smile

Moonriddengirl 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. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Great follow-through with the Kevin Erskine situation from you and User:Into The Fray. :D --Moonriddengirl 00:11, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Give JGordon (I think it was) the credit for cutting the waffle and just deleting the whole mess. I look forward to its recreation...and again... — iridescent (talk to me!) 00:12, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Sigh. Killjoy. :P (We'll deal with it when it happens.) --Moonriddengirl 00:14, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

In the spirit of all things wiki-joyful, I came over here to toss a smile at you too, Iridescent. But, you know, I think one smile per person per day is enough. So I'll just...uh. Yeah, say, you know. Thanks. Into The Fray /C 00:24, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, since you're both experts at closing cans of worms, maybe you can suggest a solution to this trainwreck which won't end up with someone being blocked? — iridescent (talk to me!) 00:30, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Though I don't always agree with him, DGG's corrected me a couple times and I have great respect for his opinion. Hence, I have his talk page in my watchlist, because his ideas of notability are generally strong ones that I find myself agreeing. So, blahblah, I had already looked over that dispute when you posted to his talk page and, really, I agree word-for-word with everything he said. Some, if not all, of the articles are notable, but written in a very slanted, unacceptable way. I can add a comment to that effect, if you like, but I don't see it resolving anything. That editor is here to push an agenda, clearly. I don't think that we could find a resolution acceptable to them. Into The Fray /C 00:56, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I put in my two cents. (I'm guessing it's worth about two cents. :D)--Moonriddengirl 01:21, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

My recent RfA

Thank you for supporting my RfA, which unfortunately didn't succeed. The majority of the opposes stated that I needed more experience in the main namespace and Misplaced Pages namespace, so that is what I will do. I will go for another RfA in two month's time and I hope you will be able to support me then as well. If you have any other comments for me or wish to be notified when I go for another RfA, please leave them on my talk page. If you wish to nominate me for my next RfA, please wait until it has been two months. Thanks again for participating in my RfA! -- Cobi 01:43, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Shawish

Hi there. I see you deprodded Shawish. Are there any other articles on Misplaced Pages about whole families? Also, can you help me get the author to find resources to corroborate the claims, as none of his references source the claim to notability for the entire clan, and only one individual seems to be verifiably notable? Thanks. - CobaltBlueTony 13:31, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

It's not an article about a family, it's an article about a surname, and there are hundreds if not thousands of such articles. Smith (surname) is the most obvious (and probably the best written) example, but they certainly don't all need to come up to this standard - plenty such as Arbuthnot (surname) consist solely of a laundry-list. I disagree that only one seems to be verifiably notable; the physicist & the PLO commander for Ramallah would certainly pass. Remember that most sources for these people will be in Arabic or Hebrew so won't be showing up on a Google search. As I said when deprodding it (for the second time!), take it to AfD if you want, but I can't see this not being kept. — iridescent (talk to me!) 13:42, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

History of nationality in Cyprus

I tagged it again. Phgao 15:31, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Someone else beat me to it. Even though it's horribly bitey, I think I (or you, or someone) needs to go through all his contributions as he seems to be a prolific creator of worthless content forks — iridescent (talk to me!) 15:34, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

I've left a message on his talk as well, I think you were fine and explained yourself, so it doesn't seem bitey to me. Phgao 15:59, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Just had a look at AN/I. You also mentioned . It seems you've gotton yourself into a few contentious issues, but I believe you're acting in good faith and I would be inclined to delete them as well. (opinion having not read all of the arguments) Phgao 16:07, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Worth pointing out that of the seven AfDs I was of "harassing" Billy on, I only even commented on three of them, and every single one resulted in a unanimous delete vote... — iridescent (talk to me!) 16:10, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Read through...you do hold a very clear case for AfDing them. I just made the click (ok it's late at night) the username MurderWatcher1 is a bit well spooky (can't think of a better word). And i'm off to sleep... Phgao 16:19, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

FAC Golden Film

As a native speaker of English, you recently helped reviewing the article Golden Film. Currently this article is a featured article candidate. Maybe you are interested in commenting to the article or supporting/opposing the candidacy. – Ilse@ 15:41, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

I'll have a look, but I'm not particularly good at FA reviewing. You might want to approach User:Malleus Fatuarum, who is very good at cleaning up articles to get through GA/FA. — iridescent (talk to me!) 15:44, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your effort. I will contact User:Malleus Fatuarum. – Ilse@ 16:42, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Confused by editor behavior

Hi. :) If you get a minute at some point, would you mind taking a look at User:Ashtoman3333? I'm not sure what this fellow is up to, but he's been busily about it since the middle of September (according to his talk page). Just take a look at his deleted contributions. For a while I wondered if he was content forking. Now I wonder if he isn't gradually attempting to create an article on a faux-musician, lifting a bit from the career of Chamillionaire. What do you make of this? --Moonriddengirl 23:32, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

It looks to me like an elaborate hoax - there's enough that is verifiably untrue that I think he's well past the good-faith limit. Personally I would say the huge pile of warnings on his talkpage constitutes a de facto final warning, and since there doesn't seem to be a valid edit in their history there's no reason not to block as a vandal/troll account. — iridescent (talk to me!) 14:26, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for taking a look. Since I've been involved in deleting so many of his articles, I'd feel a little uncomfortable blocking him personally. Should I report this at WP:AN/I, do you think? (Never done that before. :)) --Moonriddengirl 14:31, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

I think it would be a good idea - neither of us are experts & it's possible someone will defend the contributions. (Can't see it happening myself.) — iridescent (talk to me!) 14:34, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

All righty. I'll try to engage him directly first. He's so far not answered anything on his talk page, but who knows? Thanks for the input. :) --Moonriddengirl 14:36, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

You know, that's way easier said than done. :D I consider myself a relatively diplomatic person, but it's hard to find a diplomatic way to phrase this. Having started about four letters and stared at the page for a while, I think I'll wait and address him when he next creates an inappropriate article. His history suggests it may not be long. --Moonriddengirl 14:49, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Your opinion needed :)

I've involved myself in this sticky AfD, I would dearly like and value your opinion here. Thanks and good day! Phgao 03:28, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Put my 2c worth in — iridescent (talk to me!) 14:35, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! Oh can I ask why I see one on your user page? Phgao 14:50, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

No particular reason - there just aren't many images on Commons where the interesting part is at the correct point not to be obscured by the WP logo or the navboxes (although I've a soft spot for this version of it as well). — iridescent (talk to me!) 14:55, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

OHHHHHhhhh (edit conflict) After closely looking at it, it is one of those famous experiments! Um... I can't remember by who though. Phgao 14:56, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Léon Foucault — iridescent (talk to me!) 14:57, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

(edit conflict; yes that's it!!) Yes indeed I do like it too... satisfying in a way. Also I found the pendulum experiment; I thought I'd read it somewhere; here! Phgao 14:59, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Sweet, that fact is gonna stay with me forever now... it's doomed to fester in my brain... *evil laugh* Phgao 15:00, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Did anther user take offense to the bomb on top of wiki logo the reason we have to be amused by a pendulum now? ;) Phgao 15:02, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

No - I got irritated by the grainy resolution & jerky animation. If someone uploaded a better quality version I'd probably restore it — iridescent (talk to me!) 15:04, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

I believe that is a justifiable reason to let one of them loose so we can get a good gif sequence. For Iridescent <end bad joke> Phgao 15:13, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

<- I think I've found the editor that has been blocked the most without being perm banned. Phgao 15:55, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

In some defence of Rex, the reason he has so many minor blocks is because following an incident last year, he's on 1RR and so has a lot of automatic block triggers for actions that wouldn't get you or I blocked, not that he's a particularly bad editor. Most of those blocks are down to a group of pro-German POV-pushers who deliberately needle him until he lashes out - see this, this or this for example; there are dozens more. — iridescent (talk to me!) 16:07, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Antebellum Bulldog

Regarding the copyvio, the text has been rearranged in the article versus the web page, but the sentences are verbatim. For example, look at the Appearance section in Antebellum Bulldog and compare with the Appearance section on the web page. Note that the beginning and end of the section are identical, but the middle of the section in the wiki article has extra information. However, that text was copied from the last parqagraph of the Confusion with other Breeds section in the web page. Also look at the Temperament section for each where you will find again copying, but with some text from the web page missing from the article because they are personal observations. Regards. -- Whpq 18:02, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree and have redeleted it — iridescent (talk to me!) 16:23, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Iridescent,

Thank you for responding to my inquiry. The Antebellum Website is my own. I thought that I released all of the material under the GFDL aggreement, it should have appeared that way, however being new to this Wiki work, I was obviously mistaken. I was intending to introduce a reestablished breed of dog, which has taken 10 years of work to do. This has been substansiated by the Animal Research Foundation as well as Genetic Monotering. I am not selling the breed, just introducing it to a big world of dog lovers. I did copy and paste material the wiki site, it was easiest for a novice like myself. It is my material in whole and I have full ownership, which I gladly share with whom ever would like it. What do I have to do? Thank you again for looking and helping, I know that you are very busy, especially with all the lists on your talk site. Thanks Very Respectfully, Cole Maxwell —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cole maxwell (talk • contribs) 01:21, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Iridescent,

Kurki has agreed to let me update the material (remove copyright infringments and/or correct them)and has made a site for me to work on it. I appreciate your interferance and Hope that it has not caused a problem for you. You were initally the only one I could get a hold of and I did not mean to drag you into it.

Your professionalism and endulgence is greatly appreciated and I want you to know that I am greatful that you stepped in, even though what you stepped in smelt funny. I will work on it to get it right. I will keep you posted on my progress.

Thanks Very Respectfully, Cole 13:33, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

If the website's yours, and you mark it to show content is valid under GFDL, then it is valid for Misplaced Pages as well - but be aware you're granting anyone the permission to use and modify it. Alternatively, follow the instructions here to email consent to the Foundation. — iridescent 15:22, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

That is what I was hoping someone would say. I will follow the instructions. Thank you for the warning. Hopefully my contributions will not attract enough attention to have it modified in a negative way. I do not mind sharing. That is what Misplaced Pages is about. Thanks a million, - Cole 01:19, 18 October 2007 (UTC) p.s. How do I modify my username with the neat fonts I see every where?

The instructions are at WP:SIG, but they're not easy to follow. Basically, design the signature, then go to "My Preferences", paste the HTML into the "Signature" box and check the "Raw signature" box. For example, my signature is:

<font face="Trebuchet MS"> — ]]</font>

which displays as — iridescent, and for a complicated signature like User:Hmwith's the code is:

''']]'''

which displays as нмŵוτнτ. It's generally good practice to keep the signature to less than three lines of code; plus, while you can include links to anything you like, at least one of the links has to be to either your user page or your talk page. The easiest thing to do is find someone else's signature you like the look of & modify it - WP:RFA and WP:AN/I generally attract a lot of people with custom signatures.

If you do customise your signature, don't get offended if people modify it back to the standard "short" version, particularly on long talk pages.

Further warning re copyright violation - even with permission, the page may be automatically tagged by CorenSearchBot, which automatically compares Misplaced Pages pages to google searches to tag possible copyright violations, so be prepared to keep defending it. If it gets tagged and deleted, let me (or any other admin) know & we can undelete it. — iridescent 16:46, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Ambiguous films

According to the Netherlands Film Festival Flesh & Blood is a film from the Netherlands, since the film won two Golden Calves which are awarded to films from the Netherlands ("Nederlandse films"). The film The Alzheimer Case is a film from Belgium. The film is correctly categorized in Category:Belgian films and Category:Dutch-language films. As you might know, 58% of the Belgians speak Dutch (Flemish). – Ilse@ 18:52, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Lorelei7

The bizzare image on your user page has one problem – all images uploaded by that user Lorelei7 (talk · contribs) say educational use on Misplaced Pages.org. It does not explicitly allow for commerical use, which was prohibited on May 19 2005. Can you use leet admin tools and just delete all of these, per WP:CSD#I3? Would rather not want to muck around IFD. hbdragon88 07:35, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

I'll take it off the user page as it's status is unclear, but I won't delete it altogether at this stage. Although it's got a dubious copyright status, it's a relatively high-profile image (used as an illustration for Misplaced Pages-related articles on a number of WT:BADSITES), and deleting it out-of-process would set off a firestorm of bad-tempered recreate-delete-recreate-DRV arguments. It's worth pointing out that it has been manipulated & edited ruthlessly for use by a wide variety of other sites (this for example) with no complaint from the uploader. — iridescent (talk to me!) 15:38, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

I'd nominate it for IFD, but I don't want you to hate me. Your work on saving Antonine Centre was...brillant. Heh heh. hbdragon88 02:55, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

"Mindnumbing" is the word you're after there, I think... (Although I've managed to get another shopping centre to the verge of GA status - it is do-able!) — iridescent (talk to me!) 23:35, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

No Brilliant, as in Brilliant, lustrous, or colorful in effect or appearance. It was a play on your user name. hbdragon88 07:25, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

POTY

It's open! --Dweller 20:20, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Wasn't clear about that - I checked the template doc page and it didn't say you had to be an administrator, although I thought I read that somewhere. Toddstreat1 23:27, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Your Comment and my Response below

October 2007

Welcome to Misplaced Pages. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, we remind you not to attack other editors, as you did on User talk:68.249.7.59. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. — iridescent (talk to me!) 17:53, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

This user had vandalized my userpage. I wouldn't do that to you.--MurderWatcher1 19:13, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

This user hadn't vandalised your userpage; while I think they took it to extremes (I won't delete content from userpages unless it's actually offensive/libellous), your userpage undoubtedly does violate "What may I not have on my user page?", and they were making a good-faith attempt to remove inappropriate content as per WP:SOAP, and didn't warrant an attack on their talk page. The Jimbo-commandment in question, if you're looking for a source for the policy, is "Using userpages campaign for or against anything or anyone is a bad idea". — iridescent (talk to me!) 19:42, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Collision on Fashion Designing And The Career

It appears we had a TW edit collision on Fashion Designing And The Career. You added {{prod}} and I added to AFD. If you feel the Prod is more suitable (and will stick), let me know, and i'll withdraw AFD. Toddstreat1 00:02, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

May as well leave the AfD up. While I can't see anything on Google, it reeks of a copyvio as well — iridescent (talk to me!) 00:04, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

My RFA

Thanks for voting on my RFA! Although ultimately it was unsuccessful, I do appreciate the feedback. The "obnoxious template" issue you mentioned is certainty legitimate. As I have said it was a mistake to create that template, an honest attempt to create a template that would apply to all unencyclopedic list (i.e. be general in that it would apply to not only a References in Pop culture list, but also a trivia list, for example), but still be firm enough to get the point across just came out horribly.

As to the edits to articles that were deleted - well I obviously addressed that on the page, I presume to your satisfaction.

Thanks again for the feedback and hopefully if I ever decide to run again I will have improved enough to gain your support. Thanks again!--danielfolsom 22:36, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry my comments seemed so negative - I think a lot of the problems stemmed from the word "obnoxious" (I honestly don't see how using the term can't be considered a personal attack on whoever wrote the material you tag with it). I appreciate you want to keep a list of everything on your userpage, but I really would recommend removing it. If/when you run again, I'd also recommend explaining the deleted edits right from the start - one of the first thing RFA reviewers (those that have the access, anyway) do, is check deleted contribs to see if the editor's tagging articles correctly and if they've written a lot of invalid content. As I think a lot of people said, no-one seems to have raised any issues that aren't easily resolved. — iridescent 22:42, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:Pont Champlain from Mont Royal.JPG

Hi. I finally got around to looking at these pictures and I expanded on some of the descriptions, just to give a few hints about what's what. Cheers, Pascal.Tesson 00:15, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for that - given that Montreal's such a creative & media hub, it's always puzzled me how few photos there are of it compared to other cities of similar size — iridescent 20:24, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Lucy-marie

You were right, the other account definitely is the tip of the iceberg. While looking at Talk:British National Party (which I stopped editing a long time ago due to disruption and trolling, apart from a brief comment on the current state of the article recently), it's obvious she's also been taking part in the same discussions logged in and as an IP.

84.66.110.223 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) was the IP being used. For example there's this edit and this edit from the IP in one discussion section, and there's this edit from Lucy-marie in the same section, note the identical arguments. Similarly in another section there's this edit from the IP and this edit from Lucy-marie. The IPs limited contributions also overlap with Lucy-marie on various articles as well - Lancing College, Template:G8 nations‎, Rounders, Declaration and forfeiture, Eurozone, Murder of Amanda Dowler - can you hear quacking? It's probably a bit late for anything preventative to be done, although it might be worth you pointing out the sockpuppetry on Talk:British National Party? One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 18:33, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

I'll keep an eye on it. By an amazing coincidence, the IP's not edited since Misplaced Pages:Suspected sock puppets/Lucy-marie, so it may have given up. — iridescent 21:43, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Jim Murphy

I've added a comment to Talk:Jim Murphy, which I hope may help move this article forward. I'd be grateful if you'd look at it and if necessary add comments. Grblundell 09:05, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

I'll have a look at it, but my only edits have been minor edits such as typo fixing (the repeated changes to the article tend to rack up a lot of typos & style changes). It's a WP:WEASEL way out, but as long as the article can stay stable for a week or so the issue will hopefully be in the past. — iridescent 19:16, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

???

You womped Itub's comment. Was that intentional? - Jehochman 14:06, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

No idea how that happened - must have inadvertently highlighted his paragraph and overtyped. Sorry! — iridescent 14:10, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

User:Canterberry vs User:SouthernElectric

I am a multiple account user, and I admit to being a pedant and a vandal in respect of SE. The account names should be obvious by now User:ALECTRIC451, User:Sheepcot, User:Canterberry, User:Electrostar and User:Four Ceps (I loved the play on words of that one). I think that I also created User:Maidstone as well. I also admit that I got a little frustrated with SE over some recent articles, and I did do naughty things to his talk page, but nothing nasty. To be fair, he gave as good as he got, and did much the same to my talk page, so I call that "evens". I am going to stop, because I do believe in "consensus", but I also believe in "action not words", so perhaps I use WP:BOLD a little to often when I should apply restraint. My creation of multiple accounts has never been to indulge in sock-puppetry, but more to "walk away" from edit conflicts so that I could resume my (hopefully) productive work in peace. I admit to straying over the line with SE, but thats simply a clash of personalities that I refused to back down from (some people want, and deserve a good confrontation). Anyhow, I want to bring this to a head, and end it. I consider myself (through all of my accounts) to be a positive contributor, and want to continue. I pledge to cease my attacks on SE and to behave properly from now on. Naturally, I shall need to create a new user account to mask my past, but thats just me. Adios amigo, and please be kind if you are asked to block me for being a "sock puppet" ... that just ain't my style (though like smoking, I have tried it in the past, and it did nothing for me). Canterberry 00:02, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

I found another account for you to block (it ties up the loose ends) and thats User:Miner2049er.Miner2049er 00:22, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

I have tidied all of my accounts, and put the text My IP address is about to be hard-blocked, so its "goodbye" on all of them. When I "quit" as User:ALECTRIC451 I really did think that editors should be registered before being allowed to change articles. Under one of my other names, I felt that editors should not be allowed to edit articles unless they belonged to a particular Project, and I feel that even stronger as I face the guillotine. This place cannot survive if it is simply a place/podium on which to conduct an argument. Anyhow, my time is up and I wish this place my best wishes. Canterberry 00:46, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Unilateral renaming of every LU line

User:Sunil060902 has just renamed every LU line from Northern Line to Northern line etc with no apparent discussion or consensus to do so other then this festival of sockpuppetry , breaking dozens of links in the process. As there's no consensus as to what the proper form is - Capital Transport always uses upper case, TFL uses the lower case form, and Misplaced Pages policy would normally be to capitalise it as a proper name, does anyone have any opinion on this? I'm willing to rollback all the changes made, but don't want to do do so without a consensus as - while I don't agree with it - a case could be made for keeping them in this form. — iridescent 16:49, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Please could you provide a list of which links are broken in the above articles? I'll gladly reinstate them. Once again I remind you: it's mixed upper/lower case on all London Underground-branded literature, maps, signs and even some trains! Moreover, disambiguation does exist in relevant cases (eg. there are other Northern Lines around the world). Should we refer to c2c as "C2C" to provide a counter-argument? Regards, Sunil060902 09:27, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

What entails sockpuppetry in this case? - 194.80.106.135 12:21, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Four participants in the discussion; Ninjainabowlerhat (talk · contribs) with five edits, four of which are to LT related articles; Mr Thant (talk · contribs) with around 20 edits, almost all of which are to this discussion and to carry out some of the page moves agreed in the "discussion"; Sunil060902 (talk · contribs) with an edit history starting at exactly the same time as User:Mr Thant; 194.80.106.135 (talk · contribs), with an edit history consisting solely of edits to the same pages edited by User:Sunil060902, plus edits to the article on the name Sunil. Assuming good faith is one thing, but there comes a WP:DUCK point. If you honestly believe the first priority of two simultaneously created new accounts and a new IP is going to be bulk unilateral page moves of London Transport related articles, with no consensus and no attempt to contact the relevant projects (this discussion is the first time the matter's been discussed on WP:UKT and this is the first time it's been raised on WP:LT), I'm more than willing to have a checkuser run & see what it flushes out. — iridescent 17:21, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

I have found a discussion from back in the past about this, May to be precise. See Talk:London_Underground#Names_of_LU_lines. Simply south 18:15, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Interesting, it must have completely passed me by... As there were three participants in that discussion arguing for lower case, two of whom were indefblocked earlier today for abusive sockpuppetry on railway articles, not sure I'd take any "consensus" reached there very seriously. — iridescent 18:20, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

I have also added the LU link to WP:LT, but before i saw your reply. Simply south 18:34, 25 October 2007 (UTC)