Loading AI tools
When blocking this user, I noticed ya had previously blocked them for block evading. Since I'm not familiar with them, I wasn't sure if they warranted a longer block. If ya could clarify, or reblock if you feel necessary. —[DeadEyeArrow – Talk – Contribs] 08:19, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
You'll remember, we thought there had been an IRS audit of DLM in 1976. There's an account by Dettmers of that audit here (if you weren't aware of it). Not an RS, obviously, but perhaps useful as background. Cheers, Jayen466 14:56, 1 August 2008 (UTC)
FYI: Marvin Diode has started a thread about you here.--chaser - t 07:54, 2 August 2008 (UTC)
EXCELLENT CATCH!!! I missed the link and thought it was only four paragraphs long. Thanks!!! — BQZip01 — talk 05:42, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
Will, could you do me a favor and move Image:Wiki-rob clores.jpg to Image:Adam_MacDougall-Newport.jpg? When I originally uploaded I both misidentified the subject and forgot to change the filename from what I had on my machine. Thanks! DickClarkMises (talk) 17:18, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
- I guess I learn something new every day about Wikipedia. I've uploaded the image to the following location, so please delete the misnamed version at your convenience: Image:Adam MacDougall.jpg. Cheers, DickClarkMises (talk) 18:55, 4 August 2008 (UTC)
Am soliciting comment from various editors that have previously worked on this. If you have time, and inclination, please review a proposed re-write draft on my personal page and compare with current version. Comment on article's talk page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Calamitybrook (talk • contribs) 20:24, 5 August 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for edits. Hope you can comment on draft found on my personal page. It aims for more concision while retaining all content.Calamitybrook (talk) 07:25, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
A month ago you warned User talk:Jonsuh, you might be interested in what's going on at Talk:First Baptist Church (Hammond, Indiana). Feerzeey (talk) 23:36, 6 August 2008 (UTC)
Would you mind if, only after I've set things up with the involved editors through talk page discussion, I unprotected the page? Cheers, Gwen Gale (talk) 14:03, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
Ok, I'm going to try unprotecting the page because I'm going to be watching things very closely. Please let me know if you have any worries. Gwen Gale (talk) 17:55, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
?? Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Serial_Reverts_by_2o345h.C2.A0.28talk.C2.A0.C2.B7_contribs.29 Jayen466 14:17, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
He's requesting unblock. Your block message was "block evasion". I actually am not thinking of accepting it, but I just want to know: was this basically sockpuppetry? What's the master or puppet account? Daniel Case (talk) 14:22, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
- Hi Will, I spotted both of these editors who seem to be giving you some trouble, La Secta All Star (talk · contribs) and 2o345h (talk · contribs). They're both blocked, but I think there may be an underlying IP. I was going to send it to checkuser, but I thought I'd ask your 2 cents first. Steve Crossin Contact/24 16:44, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
- Yea, I thought it was Primetime too, after seeing this, I just thought they might have been using a new IP, so that should probably get an IP block (but they might be using open proxies, which doesn't help) =/. You should probably have a look at this thread as well, it's been rather active today. Steve Crossin Contact/24 16:55, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the comment. I appreciate it. --Rosiestep (talk) 02:23, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
I notice that in the history of Talk:Sahaja_Yoga where I asked why you had reverted the other user's edits you refer to me as "banned user", but I am confused as to why. Please answer these questions before deleting my edits in future. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.171.18.51 (talk) 03:18, 12 August 2008
- Speaking of Sahaja Yoga, doesn't that article contain rather too many primary source refs? Jayen466 01:35, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
- I'm aware Judith Fox (= Judith Coney) has written quite a lot about SJ, that's probably the one you mean. Jayen466 02:16, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
 |
A Request for Mediation to which you were are a party has been accepted. You can find more information on the case subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Prem Rawat 3. |
This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management.
If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.
If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.
Hi Will: You removed the significant earthquake template from the 1971 San Fernando earthquake, but there was no edit summary and I wasn't quite sure why it was removed. Was it accidental or is there a concern? Thanks, Alanraywiki (talk) 00:59, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
The renaming of Immigrant deaths along the U.S.-Mexico border is up for a new vote. Terjen (talk) 02:58, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
See 98.149.127.13, I think that he is User_talk:Rorry1, sock of User:Ericsaindon2. Before he was blocked as a sock, he was editwarring with you on one article , and he was making disruptive edits about the demographics of several US locations --Enric Naval (talk) 03:23, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
...again, for the assistance with image issues. Cheers, DickClarkMises (talk) 08:56, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
 |
The Special Barnstar | |
| This is in recognition of the many times since my first edit in March 2005 that you've answered my questions, cleaned up after me with your mop and bucket, and generally made me a better Wikipedian. DickClarkMises (talk) 09:24, 14 August 2008 (UTC) |
I'm no part in RfM/Prem Rawat 3. That means: no delegation either. Now Jossi is writing all this nonsense about me on the RfM talk page. Please deal with it. --Francis Schonken (talk) 20:38, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Hello! Please look at Laskarina Bouboulina article. An administrator revert a 6-month well-groomed article to a poor edition. - Sthenel (talk) 19:35, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
- The admin (User:Future Perfect at Sunrise) claims the Laskarina Bouboulina article was plagiarized from a website he names in his edit summary. Much of the WP article was clearly derived from this website, and there are repetitions of phrases here and there. I only examined about half the article, but my impression is that no entire sentence was copied, and the structure of the article differs obviously from the website. This is not a case of "copy a sentence, change a word or two, copy the next sentence, change a comma, and so on" RedSpruce (talk) 21:49, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Excuse me for bothering you again. I added two more sources, I added material throughout the article, but User:Future Perfect at Sunrise reverts again and again my edits and threatens me with block. This administrator is always extremely severe with me as if I'm a vandal of wikipedia and this behaviour exists during my 1,5-year presence in wikipedia. He is always aggressive to me like he wants me to leave wikipedia. What's wrong with me? - Sthenel (talk) 01:54, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
Dbachmann made a bold article move of "Christian cult" to "Christian-oriented cult", and edited the redirect to be a disambiguation page under the original name.
I explained the undiscussed problems with this move on talk, and tried to implement a compromise move reversion in the bold, revert, discuss cycle, by moving the disambiguation page to "Christian cult (disambiguation)". He prevented this by reverting over the maintenance deletion with a technical edit summary that evaded discussion of his intent (logged on the talk page).
I think he is edit warring to get his way without a consensus discussion of his actions that have problems. He has previously stirred up controversy - an October 2007 3RR block log entry, three RFCs (RFC Dbachmann 3), and an incomplete Dbachmann RFAR (Nov-Dec 2007) - with actions in which edit warring was considered.
I think that Dbachmann is attempting a backdoor AfD of an article on a notable but non-academic phrase ("Christian cult") by technical moving and splitting maneuvers. While he may have intended this on scholarship grounds, it has the side-effect of promoting fundamentalist POV. Fundamentalists dispute any use of this well-known phrase (69,900 hits on Google) as an oxymoron, given their ideological definition that Christians can't also be cults. Fundamentalist Christians clearly can be cults under other definitions. My impression is that Dbachmann is throwing his weight around on superficial scholarship grounds while seeming unfamiliar with the many homonym definition complexities of the cult topics.
Given his subtle evasion of consensus discussion by preventing the revert, the article is now in a slightly in-between state. I don't know what to do next, unless perhaps you take an admin delete-and-move action to complete my intended BRD revert: (db-g6|wording=delete and revert Christian-oriented cults (and talk page) back to Christian cult - see talk "Merge or move") Milo 21:45, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
I have nominated Bill Lawrence (trademark), an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bill Lawrence (trademark). Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Shell babelfish 21:49, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi, Will. Is there an established procedure here at wikipedia for contesting a speedy deletion, and asking that the page be undeleted? The page which I am concerned about is (or rather, was) Postville Iowa Raid (Agriprocessors Kosher Meat Plant), which generated not just local coverage here in Iowa, but national and international coverage as well. --Ramsey2006 (talk) 01:42, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks. I have submitted a DRV --Ramsey2006 (talk) 18:28, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your many contributions to California-related topics. Wikipedia ia a better encyclopedia due to your efforts. ·:· Will Beback ·:· 21:58, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
- You're welcome! Just missing la Patria vieja from the shores of the Mighty Ontario. TriniMuñoz (talk) 02:17, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
It seems that all these users that are reverting your edits are using a proxy. You may want to contact a checkuser and ask this to be checked... ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 19:59, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
Some 12 months ago now you suppoted my adding a new section to the Sauna Article called Therapeutic sauna which cited about 100 medical science papers. That section is now under attack by apparent disruptive elements who completly reverted it on some POV comments, with the intention it seems of removing it completely rather than improving it. I would have no objection if the other party was interested in working to improve it, but that does not seem to be his intent. I wonder if you would mind commenting on matters hereso that a resolution might be found. Jagra (talk) 07:10, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
I have to take exception to you protecting a page with a PROD on it. It makes it difficult to remove the tag, as the template says, if you can only do so when you're autoconfirmed (PROD is supposed to be contestable by anyone so long as it's in good faith). I understand the previous removals were vandalism, but now that the vandals have passed, perhaps it could be unprotected? --UsaSatsui (talk) 07:17, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
Yes, I thought something like that was happening. Thanks for the info. De728631 (talk) 21:26, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi Will, I see you're having some issues with Primetime. Add these to your monobook, it should help. It's a revert all edits script. The code to initialise it is "rYes". Hopefully it makes things easier for you.
importScript('User:Steve Crossin/revertall.js'); //Revert all script
Best, Steve Crossin Contact/24 18:36, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
As a heads up, I made the Biden article a full 24 hour protection, extending your previous protection. Simply a proactive measure. Happy editing to you. Keegantalk 07:56, 23 August 2008 (UTC)
You misunderstand the situation. Jennavecia (Talk) 04:23, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
- There's nothing to be done on-wiki; it's being taken care of, but thanks for the offer to help. Jennavecia (Talk) 05:01, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
You placed a "citation needed" template after the statement "His relationship with the former colonial power, the United Kingdom, has been particularly contentious" in Robert Mugabe. As you may recall, the lede is intended to be a summary of the article. If you will take a few minutes to read the article you will find, for example, that Mugabe accuses the United Kingdom of promoting white imperialism and regularly accuses opposition figures to his government of being allies of white imperialism; that Mugabe withdrew Zimbabwe from the Commonwealth to protest a prolonged suspension by the Commonwealth; that When British Prime Minister Gordon Brown attempted to intervene into the election controversy, Mugabe dismissed him as "a little tiny dot on this planet"; and that the "Criticism and Opposition" section is dominated by commentary in British media. These are only a few examples. I might add that Zimbabwe, as Rhodesia, was at one time a British colony, but later rebelled. --Marvin Diode (talk) 20:50, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
I have been, unfortunately, foolishly I suppose, in a quasi-edit war with another editor there. We're totally hung up. I want to shape the article to conform with available research, and to place the subject in its larger context. I can't characterize his intentions and he doesn't seem to want to discuss them. We could definitely use some help, certainly on the little minor hang-ups, but also and much more especially, on the big picture. Calamitybrook (talk) 22:30, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
Will, the revised Safe use. draft is complete but i would prefer someone else to check the copyedit changes before it is reinstated, thanks Jagra (talk) 11:08, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
As pointed out on the talk page, AnkaraCity has been confirmed as a sock of an indefinitely blocked/banned user. I'm inclined to take the suggestion there and de-list/resubmit. What do you think? Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 13:04, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
- After further discussion, I've closed the GAR on the article in favor of a new nomination. If you're available and since you were the primary editor, could you head on over to renominate? If you're not available, I'll renominate in your name in an hour or so. Xymmax So let it be written So let it be done 20:46, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
I'm not going to immediately undo your edit to Aesthetic Realism, but there's a dispute here that remains unresolved. There were no new comments on the talk page that justified your edit. I'd strongly urge you to seek involvement from other editors, rather than continuing to act unilaterally. Skoojal (talk) 06:49, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Would you mind explaining your latest edit to Conversion therapy? It seems wrong to me, and I plan to undo it. Skoojal (talk) 23:21, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
Will Beback, I'd like to ask you again why you have not added the Conversion therapy category to Psychoanalysis. It's just as "relevant" to psychoanalysis as it is to aversion therapy, so by your own logic you should add it. Why haven't you? Skoojal (talk) 01:05, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
- I would strongly urge you to answer this question. I've asked it several times, and consider it perfectly reasonable. If you create a category, it is your responsibility to explain what articles (or kinds of articles) it should and should not apply to. If the Conversion therapy category is kept, the question of adding it to Psychoanalysis will arise sooner or later; you may as well adress the issue now. Skoojal (talk) 21:42, 31 August 2008 (UTC)
Will Beback: this is a formal request to not place comments by me on talk pages where I did not place them. It makes it look as though I deliberately made certain comments in a place where I did not make them and have no wish to make them. Modifying other user's comments is usually inappropriate. It is certainly inappropriate in this case, and also very unhelpful and unwelcome. Skoojal (talk) 07:39, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I saw Niels' page linked back to it and your question. I have no idea who that guy is, and I didn't create the essay for any one specific group/school/conflict/cabal/theme/topic/anything. It and it's redirects were just a general observation and essay. :) rootology (C)(T) 21:19, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
Wikiwand in your browser!
Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.
Every time you click a link to Wikipedia, Wiktionary or Wikiquote in your browser's search results, it will show the modern Wikiwand interface.
Wikiwand extension is a five stars, simple, with minimum permission required to keep your browsing private, safe and transparent.
