This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 72.228.38.45 (talk) at 00:48, 27 February 2010. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 00:48, 27 February 2010 by 72.228.38.45 (talk)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)I hold the SUL account for NuclearWarfare
| |||||||||||||||||
| This is NuclearWarfare's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments. |
|
|
Wait! Are you here because your article was speedy deleted? Click here before leaving a message to find out why. |
 Archives | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 3 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III. |
Hipstamatic
Hello, I've just come across your name on the deleted page for the Hipstamatic camera. I'd like to see what Misplaced Pages has to say about this product but because of your selfishness and self-centered world view I can't. I don't care about your stupid rules and beaurocracy surrounding notability or any of that crap. All I know is that there *was* an article but I can't see it because you decided it wasn't worth my time. You make Misplaced Pages a poorer place. Josh. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.13.179.233 (talk) 23:21, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
like minds on 2010 Austin plane crash
We both protected the article in the same second. Well synchronized agreement, wouldn't you say? —EncMstr (talk) 05:23, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- Great minds think alike? ;)
- Incidentally, are you sure it was in the same second? I've heard people say that before, but I have never figured out how they could get the accuracy down to more than a minute without using some sort of IRC monitoring feed. NW (Talk) 05:25, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
- You actually did:
- 2010-02-19T00:20:07 NuclearWarfare (talk | contribs | block) protected 2010 Austin plane crash (indefinite) (Move warring) (hist | change)
- 2010-02-19T00:20:07 EncMstr (talk | contribs | block) protected 2010 Austin plane crash (expires 05:20, 5 March 2010 (UTC)) (current article name is descriptive and neutral) (hist | change)
- (One of the options under "Preferences" -> "Date and time" enables you to see the seconds.)
- But I came here to say thanks for fixing the mess I created by moving the redirect. There were lots of great minds there I think. :) Ucucha 05:33, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Block of 72.152.37.124
Hi there. You blocked 72.152.37.124. Is this a mistake? He vandalized once, and I gave him a warning, but don't you usually give about 4 or 5 warnings before blocking? When you blocked him, he wasn't even warned until after he was blocked. Was this a mistake? --The High Fin Sperm Whale 01:38, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
- To be honest, if someone is editing in bad faith (not test edits, but something clearly showing that they aren't here to edit productively), then they need to be shown the door immediately. I'm not going to bother wasting the time of volunteers reverting someone over and over again just so we can be absolutely sure that they aren't going to be productive. If they wish to reform, there is always the unblock template. NW (Talk) 01:41, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
- But he wasn't even warned once, that was his first edit. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 19:48, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
G10 vs. PROD
NW, when you're dealing with unsourced, negative BLPs (like a few I'm in the process of deleting), please either delete the G10-able statements and PROD what's left, or blank the page and use {{csd-g10}} instead. There's no good reason for these correctly-identified BLP assertions to remain in the article for a week. Feel free to hit me up on my talk page if someone else declines a G10 like this and you don't think it's been appropriately handled. Jclemens (talk) 19:04, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
- Hey there Jclemens. Normally I'd agree with you, but Beeblebrox declined one of the first G10 taggings that I did in this case. Perhaps we could continue the discussion on his talk page? NW (Talk) 20:23, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
- Sure, that works for me. Jclemens (talk) 01:11, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
Wow, that was close!
Hi there my friend NUKE, VASCO here,
This time i thought i was in for a period of detention, when i saw this message (http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk:VascoAmaral&diff=cur#Response); were it true, it could only be attributed to my (sometimes) uncivil summaries.
But then, i had the idea of checking my talkpage's history and...VOILÁ!! A vandal, using the appropriate template and signing as YOU, did the "funny deed". He has been, with a (seemingly) neverending supply of IP, been on my case, reverting stuff just because, sending me stuff to my user/talk page, vandalizing, ever since (1 year!) i did what? Report him for vandalizing WP!!
I do not wish (it's in your hands tough) for you to do anything (block, warn, etc), i just wanted to share this funny moment with you. Would not be (THE LEAST!!) surprised if he "visits" me today, especially if/when he sees i sent you this message (no one likes a smart ass, and VASCO AMARAL a smart ass being is...).
Take care, cheers,
VASCO - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 22:13, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
Filter
I have reactivated 294 (again) due to attacks on you while you were gone. (I think you're not around, not sure.) Feel free to disable it when you get back. --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 22:37, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
Michael Riley (film producer)
Thanks for the head up, but what notability is claimed? Woogee (talk) 00:30, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
- The production of the ten-part series as well as a 15 year CEO-ship indicates that there might be some notability. Do you want to follow up on it, or shall I? NW (Talk) 00:31, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
- His production company and his latest film are listed for deletion. Do you think they're notable, too? Note that the articles are created by a person who works for his production company. Woogee (talk) 00:33, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
- I'm not sure; I'm just saying there is a case to be made that they might be notable. Perhaps you could change the speedy deletion tags to prods? And who the article was created by has no merit to whether we should keep it or not in most circumstances. NW (Talk) 00:34, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
- His production company and his latest film are listed for deletion. Do you think they're notable, too? Note that the articles are created by a person who works for his production company. Woogee (talk) 00:33, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
- The film is an afd, there's no speedy delete criterion for films, but I hate prod with the passion of a million flames, as far as I'm concerned it's totally worthless, so I really don't want to go that way. Woogee (talk) 00:39, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
Sumbuddi
Hi NuclearWarfare (hmm, didn't you intend to rename your account?),
blocked user Sumbuddi asked that you be made aware of the discussion on his user talk page. Voilà.
Cheers, Amalthea 00:49, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
- I will! I promise! One day :( I feel really bad about it actually; I really should get on that
- And thanks for the notice. I'll be sure to post there. NW (Talk) 00:55, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
Living Persons task force
Hi, here are a couple of things you or the task force might want to consider.
1. I'm working with a few people to make it easier for BLP subjects and non-editors to correct or otherwise address concerns about material WP publishes about them. Mainly, we want to make it easier for these people to find out who to contact. We're aware of a few related page and are drafting material to streamline one or more of those.
One thing we're considering is whether their main recourse (point of interaction) should be e-mailing OTRS, posting their concerns at a special page, or something else. That discussion is here We invite wider discussion.
2. It would be good to get research on BLPs, such as comparing unsourced with sourced, etc. Let me know if you'd like more thoughts or info. Maurreen (talk) 08:07, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you very much for these ideas. I'll be sure to look into these in greater detail later today. :) NW (Talk) 12:48, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
- Your post on making it easier for subjects to get help is something that seems to be a great idea. Do you happen to have any suggestions that the task force could use as recommendations?
As for statistics: Any would be very well welcomed. You would probably want to talk to Keegan about that though. I think he's handling the statistics end of things. NW (Talk) 20:29, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
89.195.18.43
That was funny. You, Nihonjoe and I tripped over each other trying to revert his vandalism. You wanna double check and make sure we didn't overwrite someone's commentary? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • 20:11, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
- That was indeed amusing. I think everything got cleaned up properly; if not, I say we blame Nihonjoe ;) NW (Talk) 20:13, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
Can you relist these debates too
These need relisting Meteorbs,Jitsu (Masters of the Universe),Ninjor (Masters of the Universe),Scare Glow and for future reference how do relisting because I can't seem to do step 3 I can never find where to put it. Dwanyewest (talk) 20:33, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
- Someone will get to them eventually. As for relisting AfDs, there is no real reason for you to need to be able to do it. I use a script, but it is something that probably should be left up to the reviewing administrator. NW (Talk) 20:35, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
BjörnBergman
Hey there.
I understand that you were concerned about how Björn seemed not to understand advice to provide sources for the BLPs he was creating and giving him a serious warning was probably appropriate. However, I'd recommend to go easy on the block threats in cases like this. It was pretty obvious that Björn was a newcomer acting in good faith and he was certainly not adding dangerously speculative, slanderous or damaging information.
Björn has had a really bad experience on Swedish Misplaced Pages which was to a large extent caused by his being rather young, inexperienced with these things and not terribly patient. But I'm trying to coach him as best I can. Hopefully he will learn from the advice provided to him and continue to make useful contributions.
Peter 22:20, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for the heads up Peter. I left a note on his talk page. Please let me know if there is anything further I can do to help. NW (Talk) 22:28, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
A request
Hello there, Nuclear, and thanks for blocking that user. If you could take a look over at Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#SockPuppet/Vandalism, I would appreciate it - you can find the full story of the account there, which I believe is one of many sockpuppets. - I.M.S. (talk) 04:08, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Indef blocked them both, though you may want to get a checkuser to take a look at who that is. NW (Talk) 04:10, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for your quick response. I'll let the matter stay for now - hopefully, whoever is doing this has learned his/her lesson. If it pops back up, should I refer to the list of checkusers? - I.M.S. (talk) 04:17, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
- Yep; that sounds like a plan. NW (Talk) 04:18, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for your quick response. I'll let the matter stay for now - hopefully, whoever is doing this has learned his/her lesson. If it pops back up, should I refer to the list of checkusers? - I.M.S. (talk) 04:17, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Calvary Cemetery, Billings, Montana
FYI, you contested the PROD on this one and suggested I take it to AfD, and I've finally gotten around to it. Regards— Glenfarclas (talk) 06:20, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
User:Иван_Богданов
Just to inform you, I have modified the block setting for User:Иван_Богданов to indefinate due to additional problems. My rationale can be found here: User_talk:Иван_Богданов#February_2010. As a summary, in addition to the impersonation/sock-puppetry you blocked them for, they have engaged in rather troubling personal attacks/attack pages, which has lead me to believe they are not here to help build an encyclopedia. There is a thread at ANI that is also relevant: Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Possible_use_of_userpage_for_some_sort_of_attack_in_Serbian.
Hope this helps, just thought I would inform you of the circumstances, feel free to give me a poke if you think indef is too long. --Taelus (talk) 14:43, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
User talk:Jéské Couriano
See the top of the page, "NOTE: I do not wish for other administrators to protect this page. If you see a 4chan revision attack, then edit the abuse filter.. --Jac16888 00:55, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
- never mind, you already reverted yourself, ignore this--Jac16888 00:56, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
68.237.83.18
68.237.83.18 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
You might also want to block Justin4952 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), an apparent sock of the IP, before he actually edits anything. ←Baseball Bugs carrots→ 03:00, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
- He already has vandalized once (it's deleted) That's good enough for me. Indefblocked. NW (Talk) 03:03, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
Block of 68.237.83.18
I was putting a warning on the captioned IP's talk page for vandalism to User talk:HalfShadow and had an edit conflict with you. Do I put my warning above or below your block, or just forget it? Oberonfitch (talk) 03:02, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
- If he's blocked, it's probably best to just forget it. NW (Talk) 03:03, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
User:Hammersoft/monobook.js
There was a just a typo in the file local to my userspace that it was calling. Corrected. Thanks :) --Hammersoft (talk) 15:29, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
lalalalalala 5 4 3 2 1 blast off