User talk:H/Archive 21

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search
The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.

Six Laws of Adam on deletion review

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Six Laws of Adam. Since you closed the deletion discussion for (or speedy-deleted) this article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. frummer 02:38, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 02:40, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Blocking of the entire country of Qatar?

Reddit has this story and it's climbing steadily. Wikipedia has so much tolerance for the GNAA and yet the entirety of Qatar gets the shaft because they all have to share one IP? Can you please let the other Admins know about this and figure out how to keep an eye on the IP instead of banning the whole country? Just a thought. And Happy New Year! DelPlaya 09:43, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gee if you can point out a single IP the GNAA are on we will block that IP, but unlike Qatar, they can change their IP. Not much we can do when thousands of people share 1 IP, we either block them all or give vandals free reign. Maybe the future will see a better internet. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 16:42, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
[2]It has been modified so you can create an account and only anon users are blocked. That will help a bit. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 17:06, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the speedy reply & fix! DelPlaya 03:10, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:ColScott

Hey there. Just so you know on his "Official" blog there are some pretty slanderous statements about us. I already talked to Blogspot on my behalf (I said I didn't represent you or anyone else just in case) and requested that the stuff be removed. I don't want to do ColScott any favours so I am not going to post the link. Cheers, Philip Gronowski Contribs 22:15, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ya, just a childish rant. Free speech is an issue when you run your own website, but when it is hosted by Wikipedia or Google, then it is not a free speech issue anymore. I have a method of relaxation that stops these things from bothering me. The way I see it, if someone says mean things about me because I won't let him advertise his blogspot page then let him grumble. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 22:18, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, that is a good way to look at things. But if his blog gets removed then he'll grumble even more. Cheers, Philip Gronowski Contribs 22:24, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I took a look at the diffs that you put on his user talk page. I guess I can't be 100% sure that it is the same user, but his actions definitly warrent a longer block. Until the relationship between the users is determined, perhaps a longer, but not indefinite, block is appropriate? His continuous incivility, spamming, and personal attacks certainly warrant it. -- Natalya 22:34, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There was a pretty nasty posting he made on his blog, which is now removed. Mostly talking about the stupid admin HighInBC on shittypedia. And it does seem his primary purpose here is to promote his blog. However, I will respect whatever decision you come to regarding this user. I put the unblocked request up myself so I could sanity check my decision. Thanks. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 22:40, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have protected User talk:ColScott due to continued personal attacks. User:Zoe|(talk) 23:10, 1 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

His continued behavior considers me to change my initial thoughts; he was blocked multiple times previously for personal attacks, and his behavior is rather unacceptable. I've [somewhat reluctantly, but working on AGF] shortened the block to on month, but if it continues at all, putting the indef block back is certainly appropriate. -- Natalya 01:58, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yep. No question that it's appropriate. Shouldn't have questioned your decision in the first place, then. ;) I'll put it in, and let him know. -- Natalya 22:53, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please, always question my decisions. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 23:27, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hahahaha. -- Natalya 02:13, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the encouragement

Thanks for the encouragement. I appreciate it. Sometimes there are comments, and I am quite saddened by them, not so much because they are opposes but because they reflect how some people view me. The other side is that I have been treated very warmly by some of the opposes and that has lifted my spirits. I don't know if you have ever run in an any sort of election before. I haven't. It's all very unfamiliar to me so I am busy trying to keep my focus on what is true and real, despite the emotiions which pass through me. My lack of political experience also shows up in lots of ways. I expected some controversy, but didn't really expect the sorts of things that came up. It certainly would have helped if I had read some of the other RfA's before answering the questions on my own RfA. Then I would have had an idea of the concerns that some people have. Perhaps, given that sort of newbie mistake, it wouldn't be that inappropriate that I get so many opposes. Thanks for dropping me a line. It was nice to hear from you. --BostonMA talk 00:57, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I will e-mail you with some advice, but you already got my main advice, which is to read many RfAs before running. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 01:02, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem

Heh, I get that all the time. ;-) Khoikhoi 03:42, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

lol. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 03:43, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RefBot review

No, I won't post to WP:AN/I. Last time an admin invited me to do that I was blocked. (SEWilco 04:43, 2 January 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Ok, good luck. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 06:28, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Archive index

Hey, that's pretty cool. :-) Thanks, Khoikhoi 07:02, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:KBWalsh

I am trying to assume good faith, but this user hasn't proven that they are who they claim to be. Maybe this should be referred to at the conflict of interest/BLP noticeboards??

Keep your good work up HighInBC, you're a great user. Your work is always appreciated! --SunStar Nettalk 01:00, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is either a conflict of interest or an invalid username. If the user does not respond with some type of evidence to their name then I will give a username block. If the user does prove she is KBwalsh and continues to ignore our COI policy, I will also block.
Thanks for the encouragement. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 01:02, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe take this to the COI noticeboard?? Thanks for your response! --SunStar Nettalk 01:55, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see the need, I am watching the user. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 01:59, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Edit summary

This made me smile. Lift empty. :=) --Deskana (For Great Justice!) 01:18, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ya, I type too fast sometimes. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 01:19, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BOT

I really like the (1) edit that your bot has done. I've made a couple of suggestions for it over on your request for approval. Keep up the good work! alphachimp. 04:36, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:172.132.218.188

He seems to have something against you, just check his contribs. You might want to watch out for him in the future. He's got a BV warning, so block away next time. -Royalguard11(Talk·Desk·Review Me!) 06:17, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just some guy mad he can't advertise his blog, no big deal. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 06:18, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Have Another Barnstar!

Hey thanks, I love tinkering with bots. I used to make some IRC bots for various purposes and this is very similar. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 16:07, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your support

Thank you for your support in the RfA on my behalf. It is an honor to have received your expression of confidence. To be chosen as an administrator requires a high level of confidence by a broad section of the community. Although I received a great deal of support, at this time I do not hold the level of confidence required, and the RfA did not pass. It is my wish that I will continue to deserve your confidence. Sincerely, --BostonMA talk 16:04, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Shut off

I just shut off the bot. It's blanking AIV completely right now. Metros232 16:10, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some diffs of it [7] [8] [9]. Metros232 16:12, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry about that, working on it. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 16:13, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting A Block

I thought I followed all the proper proceedures......Is there something I missed? Thanks for the help Shoessss 17:49, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the instructions ask that you use the {{vandal|name}} or {{IPvandal|ip}} templates. This allows our bots to function. It also asks that you provide a reason. That is all really. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 17:51, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I got it...sorry for the mix-up....Thanks for the help Shoessss 18:28, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No worries HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 18:29, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The New Bot

I for one, love it, it looks like it will be a great asset to AIV. Thanks for making life easier(and drastically decreasing my future number of Project space edits). Cheers. Canadian-Bacon 19:27, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. It was bugging me. Every other time I checked a user the user was already blocked. And having to go back and remove the name of a person I have blocked was a hassle too. By the time I leave a note for the user I blocked it is already taken care of.
Glad it is helping other people too! HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 19:29, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for blocking that User. I came across them in the automatically generated list of new Users, and I decided to report them. Acalamari 20:10, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Obvious username violations can go to WP:AIV. Thanks for reporting it. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 20:12, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Really? I didn't think that was for reporting Usernames; I thought that was for vandals who had been given several warnings. Acalamari 20:13, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Only if it is blatant. If it is not clear cut then the RFC page is perfect. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 20:14, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I understand. Acalamari 20:15, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bot

Hi. I blocked the AIV bot because it seemed to mistakenly remove a valid, but badly formatted, request here. I can see that you are around, so I only blocked for 15 minutes. Cheers TigerShark 23:10, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

While testing I am actively watching it. I am stopping it past each edit and repairing any damage made by it. I have not been able to repair the damage because others are doing it so fast. I am aware of the problem and will unblock the bot. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 23:12, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://mdwiki.org/wiki/User_talk:H/Archive_21"