User talk:Dfrg.msc/Archive 7

Hey Dfrg. I also wish you a belated happy Valentine's. Good to know VP is finally working for you. I've been using VP2 again as vpbot is now back on track. I haven't seen any funny vandalisim recently though. ;-) Cheers, Húsönd 20:42, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

There really is no such user. Please note that on there is no "user contributions" link for that user. Instead of treating my edit as vandalism, you should really be doing a favor by deleting that page. 128.2.247.153 10:06, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

To tell whether a user exists, simply look for the "user contributions" link on the left panel. If it does not exist, then that user does not exist. In addition, the creator of that page appears to have created that page for vanity purposes, judging by his contribs. 128.2.247.153 10:12, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Happy for the PROD tags to be removed. I will nominate the articles for AfD. Apologies for not notifying you. Nothing personal. Just an oversight. (There were a lot of articles!) I'm sure if the artists really are notable they will clear an AfD easily enough. regards Marcus22 11:36, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi Dfrg, it's nice to see you again. Feel free to use the barnstars if you want, but keep in mind that they were originally intended for humor purposes. :)--TBCΦtalk? 15:07, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Put in a table to save space, nomintead for deletion here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Civilian (street artist). Dfrg.msc 21:41, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Hello, An article that I created as a part of Wikiproject Cycling called Mountain Biking on Mount Tamalpais and linked to the Mount Tamalpais article, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mountain Biking on Mount Tamalpais. Thank you, Bob in Las Vegas -  uriel8  (talk) 10:56, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Do Handi-wipes come to mind? LOL

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Uriel8 (talk • contribs) 01:00, 18 February 2007 (UTC).

Hello, please don't change E@L's userboxes, as you did in this edit. It may not have been your intention, but your edit changed the contents of the AMA membership page. Her original status was "slightly busy" and not "available", as your edit made it seem. Thank you. --Kyoko 23:52, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Considering that it wasn't my page but E@L's, you really should apologise to her and ask her if she likes having other people change her page with hidden comments and other stuff. I tend to be a bit defensive about my page because of all the time it took to format it. I don't know how E@L feels, but it's generally considered bad practice to alter another user's page without their permission. That's why there's a list of vandalism warnings about it. And please, call me Kyoko. --Kyoko 00:07, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

No problem, I've made mistakes with copy and paste too... in the past week, even. Take care, --Kyoko 10:38, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

There is a general feeling by many wikipedians that articles are often deleted prematurely and without the valid reasons. We seem to have a lot of cases of people not having the opportunity to fix articles, admins don't bother putting up tags within the article (which by now should be compulsary for anything other than a speedy-delete), and there is a general level of unrest and frustration about article deletion.

In my case for instance, regardless of the validity for deletion, tags should have gone up, and had I been wiser and more experienced I would have put them up myself and asked them to give me some more time. Also in my case, one of the complaints was that it read like a how-to-guide (bulldust if you ask me) which was also very easy to fix.

Another completely bogus claim in my case was that the article should be deleted because it's a dicdef. What nonsense! I'd say articles like 'tenacity' or other such words should be called dicdefs.

You are in the fortunate position of being an experienced wikipedian, and have the knowledge and wisdom to argue for non-deletion. You may even ask for the input from some of the wiser admins (not that there are many on Wikipedia -- they're a mixed bag).

In your case however it seems to be primarily a notability/issue. As someone that is very clueless and uninitiated about graffiti I have to say I don't know if I would want every graffiti artist on Wikipedia - surely you understand that notability does factor here? (On the other hand there are many 'inclussionist' users that encourage notability leniancy because they believe having more articles is a good thing for wikipedia). We can philosophically ask questions like
"Would you want to find this article in an encyclopedia?" and
"Is it "fair" to the highly notable graffiti artists to include lesser known and mildly notable ones?" and
"How do graffiti artists compare with other street artists, do we start to include other run-of-the-mill street artists that have been reported on in their local newspaper but otherwise aren't very notable?".

The good news is that there may be some controversy at play here. You will probably find some admins and some users willing to lean to the inclussionist policy on this, while other bully-headed trigger-happy deletionist admins will insist that your articles simply don't meet notability requirements and should be deleted forthwith. In that case, try maybe adding a note on Jimbo's userpage for his feedback on this issue, and also try finding some prominent users that would support the inclussion of your articles. Another tactic is to separate your 10 or so articles into a rank of notability; find the ones that are the most notable and as a compromise, insist that those ones stick, while the least notable ones go.

In closing, one of the tests I do to determine notability, is to ask myself if I would find myself looking up that article on wikipedia in the first place. I believe there may be several users that would look up 'anal stretching' for example and expect there to be an article. So ask yourself, would there be users out there that may look up the graffiti artist known as 'Civilian'? To be fair, I don't think people outside Australia would, so the next question becomes, would Australians in general be expected to look up Civilian? If Civilian is only known to people in Canberra, or New South Wales at best, with only very limited notability, it becomes questionable whether the article should be included.

Rfwoolf 05:57, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

I am back with a vengeance, to battle! Culverin? ^Talk 08:34, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi Dfrg. You seem to be up on the subject, I'm trying to find out about an artist who has been stencilling short phrases onto hard rubbish (matrasses, couches, fridges etc...) that's left on nature strips in the St Kilda/Balaclava area. Been seeing it around for quite a while now and was just wondering if you'd heard of it, had any idea who it was, whether they were notorious or still anonymous. Thanks:) Vespine 00:06, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:11, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Thanks for the invite and I hope all goes well with the group AfD. I've added some reference links, but don't have time for much more. The good news is: it's incredibly easy to find quite a lot of info, photos, exhibitions on the web. CityLights has several, Rash, StencilArt shows up several of these artists names, Outside the Square 2004 has a few pages of photos and can be used to reference the artists that participated, not to mention several of these artist run their own flickr sites (like the Meggs link in the AfD discussions). Anyway, break a leg and I hope I helped these articles along a little. :-) --Greatwalk 07:18, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Congrats on the Afd, and breathing life back into the Graffiti project. I'd like to continue the discussion I started on the Afd about identification of these people; I'll take it to the project talk page. John Vandenberg 21:47, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry about messing up my pages, I've done it more than my fair share of times! :P I'll have to drop by unannounced some time and show my appreciation by vandalising your page in return ^_^ — Editor at Large^(speak) 06:39, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for promoting WikiLove. You rock out loud. =)

Not sure exactly why you reverted my own page? user:PeterMarkSmith...

Hi. I've just seen you've uploaded some pictures of Tau minis, licensed under a free license. Assuming these are of official GW minis, copyright subsists in the miniature as well as the picture, so they need a fair use claim to be used on Wikipedia. See Commons:Derivative works for the legalities of the situation and eg Ultramarines Dreadnought.jpg for an example of how to license these things on Wikipedia. Cheers --Pak21 10:21, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Looks good to me, although there are a couple of typos and the fair use rationale needs tweaking: "It adds significantly to the article by displaying a characteristic miniature of the vehicle being discussed" (my emphasis). Cheers --Pak21 09:04, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Very nice job quoting the Bhagavad Gita, that passage has helped me a lot in my life during the dark times. And it is nice to see that others also find peace there. Cheers. ~ Arjun 16:59, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

My change to that page was not an experiment. I own that episode of Futurama and the planet is pronounced Nintendoo, not Nintendo. I was merely fixing a small problem and the whole part about the Futurama episode should not be removed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.172.59.240 (talk) 04:12, 23 February 2007 (UTC).

Hey, Yeah I'd be happy to join. I got some info about some of the Melbourne, Swedish and Amsterdam scene that I can contribute with.

I just put up links on Phibs and Sixten to some videos MTV Asia made about a year or two ago.

And yes, I love my job, haha

Peace, Dan —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Daniel de Leon (talk • contribs) 10:16, 23 February 2007 (UTC).

Hello Dfrg.msc. You're still listed here. Would you still like a coach? I can try to match you up with one if you like. Thanks, Fang Aili ^talk 15:07, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

See User talk:Fang Aili for my offer of assistance here :) Glen 13:49, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Please let me know if this is acceptable, Dfrg.msc. Thanks! --Fang Aili ^talk 16:50, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Here we go! ;) It's a start anyway... take your time mate :) Glen 11:01, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Wow. Those are the hardest questions I've ever come across. I'll be a while. Thanks though, everything looks great. Cheers, Dfrg.msc 04:44, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Believe it or not every one of those questions has been asked in at least one or more past RfAs - gotta make sure you're prepared! ;) You didnt think I'd make this super easy did you? Glen 06:18, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm actually answering them now. The harder the question(s), the better. I've never really though of what I have done, more what I'm doing. This is interesting. Cheers, Dfrg.msc 06:22, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Dfrg.msc,

I've been busy and I never got a chance to thank you for your involvement. Much obliged for helping the situation to cool down. Please accept my personal thanks.

Regards, Snickerdo 05:12, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi defrag, I missed seeing the Afd for this but it seems that all of the Melbourne street artist articles you created got listed, then survived as it became a messy argument with no conclusion. Have you considered, as an article on one artist is never going to be very long, creating an article with a name like Street art in Melbourne. Then all the details from the articles could be in one place and the current ones changed to redirects. Otherwise I can see some of these revisiting AfD eventually. If one artist section like Rone gets large enough then it can be split out into it's own one and it gives you space also to talk about the art and it's evolution. As for Rone as a standalone ... the article is going well but I think GA is going to be an issue regardless of the effort put in. Unfortunately there is unlikely to be enough information published on him to allow the article to ever be broad enough although I could be wrong - Peripitus (Talk) 11:41, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the WikiSmile. I have been busy in real life for the past few weeks. I just got back from vacation in California. Hope all went well during my Wikibreak. S h a r k f a c e 2 1 7 02:38, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:13, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your support in my recent RfA which passed unanimously - thus proving that you can indeed fool some of the people some of the time. I'm still coming to terms with the new functionality I have, but so far nothing bad has happened. As always, if there's anything you need to let me know, just drop me a line on my Talk page. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 10:26, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

You've just left what I think is an unwarranted "test1" message on my talk page. I'm using Lupin's Anti-vandal tool and working through edits of the last 30 minutes or so. I clicked to revert Sharpy11's 20:47 edit of this page. Unfortunately, because there had been further edits since, involving the same sequence of editors, the effect was that it undid his last edit at 21:03, which was actually something constructive - so it actually looks as though I'm putting in the rude word, which I wasn't. I don't deserve a warning (look at my edit history if you want - lots of vandal fighting) so I'd be grateful if you remove it. Bencherlite 21:19, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

In fact, your reversion has accidentally left in "who makes kick-ass apple blossoms!" at one point and other nonsense - which was the 20:47 vandalism edit I was trying to remove! I'll stay clear of this page and let someone else sort it out. Bencherlite 21:23, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Ta - no hard feelings. Sharpy11 is misbehaving again, so I'll try and clean up what he's doing and probably end up with an AIV later! TTFN Bencherlite 21:26, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I saw that you re-created Category:Economic Left and Social Libertarian Wikipedians. However, there was a consensus to delete these categories here. I have speedy deleted the category as recreation of deleted material. I've asked the creator of the userbox to make it so it no longer adds people to the deleted categories (the code is complicated, and I didn't want to break it by doing it myself) so people wouldn't be tempted to re-create the categories but they haven't done it yet. If you have any questions feel free to ask them on my talk page. Thanks for understanding! VegaDark 03:41, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your revert on the recent vandalism to my userpage!--Xnuala 23:30, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the userbox! As you can see, I changed the number though! --Xnuala 23:45, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Great to hear, we don't need that kind of disruption. Thanks for all the help!--Xnuala 23:56, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Any time :) Hope admin coaching is going well. – riana_dzasta 23:57, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

• From: User:Badlydrawnjeff/DRV_is_Broken
  

About: Anal_stretching

I normally wouldn't contend this kind of decision, but I'm having a couple of problems with it. It was nominated for AfD by User:SamKinney with the justification: "Wikipedia is not a how-to guide nor is it a dictionary. Nothing within this article is actually referenced and the bunch of external links at the bottom are not valid citations so I say delete this and salt the earth.". The article is encyclopaedic. Even if it were not the case, the subject has the capacity to be encyclopaedic. The rest of the justification is concerned with referencing: deletion seems like a rather destructive way of dealing with a lack of references. The article now seems to have been protected from recreation so even if I wished to create a fully referenced encyclopaedic article, I can't (being an administrator I could, but I won't). The subject of the article is notable (375k Google hits, several mentions in scientific journals), it is verifiable and referencable (the journals). I hope to have this article recreated so that the community can deal with it in a constructive manner. Oldak Quill 17:00, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

• From: List_of_sexology_topics
  

amoebiasis -- amor lesbicus -- ampallang piercing -- ampulla -- amputation fetish -- amputee fetishism -- amputeeism -- amputees -- amygdala -- anabolic steroid -- anaclitism -- anal beads -- anal bleaching -- anal cancer -- anal contraction -- anal insert -- anal intercourse -- anal jewelry -- anal masturbation -- anal orgasm -- anal penetration -- anal sex -- anal sphincter -- anal stage -- anal stretching -- anal wart -- anal wink -- analinctus -- analingus -- analism -- Ananga Ranga

• From: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Anal_stretching
  

"Wikipedia is not a how-to guide nor is it a dictionary. Nothing within this article is actually referenced and the bunch of external links at the bottom are not valid citations so I say delete this and salt the earth" User:SamKinney 23:37, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

He said it is not a dictionary. This is wholly and completely irrelevant to the article on Anal stretching!!!

Do you think he has even read WP:DICDEF? Obviously not!

So then here it is, and you tell me how Anal stretching was ever like a dicdef?...

Click here to see how broken AfD is.

This page is an official policy on the English Wikipedia. It has wide acceptance among editors and is considered a standard that all users should follow. When editing this page, please ensure that your revision reflects consensus. When in doubt, discuss first on the talk page. [NOT TRANSCLUDED from Template:Policy] Part of What Wikipedia is not. Wikipedia is not a dictionary, or a slang, jargon, or usage guide. The goal of this project is to create an encyclopedia. Our sibling project Wiktionary has the goal of creating a dictionary. It is the "lexical companion to Wikipedia", and the two often link to each other. Wiktionary welcomes all editors who wish to write a dictionary. Both dictionary articles at Wiktionary and encyclopedia articles at Wikipedia start out as stubs — stub dictionary articles on Wiktionary and stub encyclopedia articles on Wikipedia. However, the full articles that the stubs grow into are very different. One perennial source of confusion is that a stub encyclopedia article looks very much like a stub dictionary article, and stubs are often poorly written. Another perennial source of confusion is that some paper dictionaries, such as "pocket" dictionaries, lead editors to the mistaken belief that dictionary articles are short, and that short article and dictionary article are therefore equivalent. Wikipedia articles are not dictionary articles, are not whole dictionaries, and are not slang and usage guides. The differences between encyclopedia and dictionary articles Wikipedia Wiktionary Articles are about the people, concepts, places, events, and things that their titles denote. The article octopus is about the species of animal: its physiology, its use as food, its scientific classification, and so forth. Articles are about the actual words or idioms in their title. The article octopus is about the word "octopus": its part of speech, its pluralizations, its usage, its etymology, its translations into other languages, and so forth. Articles whose titles are different words for the same thing are duplicate articles that should be merged. For examples: colour and color, squash (plant) and marrow (vegetable). Different words warrant different articles. For example: "colour" and "color" have very different etymologies, and are two individual words. Per the Wikipedia:Naming conventions (verbs), single-word article titles are usually nouns or verbal nouns (i.e. participles or gerunds), such as greengrocer and camping. Per the Wikipedia:Naming conventions (plurals), article titles are singular. Other inflections, if they exist at all, are redirects. Every inflection is a word in its own right, potentially with its own illustrative quotations. For examples: walk, walks, walked, and walking are all separate articles. Article titles are in the English language. All words from all languages are accepted. An article with a family name or a given name as its title is usually a disambiguation article, which links to all of the articles on people who are commonly known solely by that name, all of the places commonly known by that name, and all of the things known by that name. For examples: Hastings (disambiguation), Benedict, Bush The article will use {{wiktionarypar}} to link to the Wiktionary articles on the proper noun and any common nouns that have the same spelling. An article with a family name or a given name as its title is an article about a proper noun, giving the etymology, meanings, translations, pronunciation, and so forth of that proper noun. For examples: Hastings, Benedict The article will use {{wikipedia}} or interwiki links to link to the Wikipedia articles. Wiktionary also is case sentitive, so articles about (English) proper nouns are separate from articles about (English) common nouns. For example: Bush, bush However, note that dictionary and encyclopedia articles do not differ simply on grounds of length. A full dictionary article (as opposed to a stub dictionary article, which is simply where Wiktionary articles start from) will contain illustrative quotations for each listed meaning; etymologies; translations; inflections; links to related and derived terms; links to synonyms, antonyms, and homophones; a pronunciation guide in various dialects, including links to sound files; and usage notes; and can be very long indeed. Short dictionary articles are artifacts of paper dictionaries being space-limited. Not all dictionaries are limited by the size of the paper. Wiktionary is not paper, too. Fixing bad stubs A good stub encyclopedia article can and should begin with a short explanation of what the subject of the article — the person, place, concept, event, or thing that its title denotes — is. However, sometimes, a stub encyclopedia article will be badly written. Its introduction will say something such as "Dog is a term for an animal with the binomial name Canis lupus." or "Dog is a word that refers to a domesticated canine.". Such articles are not dictionary articles. They are badly written stub encyclopedia articles, that should be cleaned up in accordance with our Guide to writing better articles. Simply replace the cumbersome phrasings such as "is a term for", "is a word that means", "refers to", with the very simple "is": "A dog is an animal with the binomial name Canis lupus." "A dog is a domesticated canine." Sometimes, also, a stub encyclopedia article will be badly named. Its title will be an adjective or an inflection of a verb that isn't a noun. Such articles are only dictionary articles if they discuss the word or phrase, rather than what the word or phrase denotes. If they discuss what the word or phrase denotes, then they should be renamed or merged to the title that adheres to our Wikipedia:Naming conventions. For example: "supermassive" is an adjective, and doesn't by itself denote an actual subject. Supermassive black hole is an actual subject. Stubs with no possibility for expansion All stubs should have the potential to develop into full articles. A stub that has no possibility whatsoever for expansion beyond stub status is presenting the verifiable information in the wrong way. Wikipedia should not have single-fact articles. This does not mean that stubs that have no possibility for expansion should be copied to Wiktionary. They are still encyclopedia articles, not dictionary articles. Wiktionary is not an encyclopedia, and the solution for an unexpandable stub encyclopedia article on Wikipedia is not to create encyclopedia articles on Wiktionary. Per our Wikipedia:Deletion policy, stubs that cannot possibly be expanded beyond perpetual stub status should be either renamed, merged, or refactored into articles with wider scope, that can be expanded beyond perpetual stub status, or deleted. Dealing with mis-placed dictionary articles Sometimes an article really is a mis-placed stub dictionary article, that discusses the etymology, translations, usage, inflections, meaning, synonyms, antonyms, homophones, spelling, pronunciation, and so forth of a word or an idiomatic phrase. If Wiktionary doesn't already have an article for the word or idiom (which, with Wiktionary now having over 116,000 English language words is less likely now than it used to be), it can be copied to Wiktionary using the transwiki system, by marking the article with the {{Copy to Wiktionary}} template. However, after copying, the final disposition of the article is up to Wikipedia. If the article cannot be renamed, merged, or refactored into a stub encyclopedia article about a subject, denoted by its title, then it should be deleted. Wikipedia is not a usage guide Wikipedia is not in the business of saying how words, idioms, phrases etc., should be used (but it may be important in the context of an encyclopedia article to discuss how a word is used: e.g. freedom). Articles that have been heavily cut to avoid becoming usage guides include gender-neutral pronoun and non-sexist language. Articles with information on how a word is used include singular they, homophobia, and sexism, SNAFU. By a simple extension of the latter, Wikipedia is not a hacker/computer usage or other slang and idiom guide. We aren't teaching people how to talk like a hacker or a Cockney chimney-sweep; we're writing an encyclopedia. See meta:Knocking her dead one on the nose each and every double trey for a historical example. But see also jargon file; articles, even extremely in-depth articles, on hacker culture are very welcome, and insofar as guides to some particularly essential piece of hacker slang is necessary to understand those articles, of course articles on that slang would be great to have. Wikipedia is not a genealogical dictionary There are special reference works known as genealogical or, more often, biographical, dictionaries. These tend to focus primarily on the immediate family connections (parents, spouses, children and their spouses) of the article subject. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and as such focuses more on the actions and contributions of an article subject. This means that many genealogical details may be omitted in exchange for a better-flowing, more rounded article. Biography articles should only be given for people with some sort of achievement. A good measure of achievement is whether someone has been featured in several external sources. Minor characters may of course be mentioned within other articles (e.g. Ronald Gay in Persecution of gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and the transgendered). See also Wikipedia:Criteria for inclusion of biographies. Good definitions "A definition aims to describe or delimit the meaning of some term (a word or a phrase) by giving a statement of essential properties or distinguishing characteristics of the concept, entity, or kind of entity, denoted by that term." (Definition) A good definition is not circular, a one-word synonym or a near synonym, over broad or over narrow, ambiguous, figurative, or obscure. See also Fallacies of definition.

In Edit Summary, User:Guy has called me a Toss blanket. <-- Personal attack?

In Edit Summary, User:Guy has called me an Arsehole. <-- Personal attack.

A {{afd}} tag has been placed on Optic (street artist), requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. All Wikipedians can join the debate at Articles for deletion, where articles asserted to be inappropriate to Wikipedia are discussed. You are encouraged to submit your opinion, and remember that Articles for Deletion debates are not a vote. You can also leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the deletion tag yourself, but don't feel inhibited from editing the article, particularly if doing so makes it clear that it is a useful contribution to an encyclopaedia. John Vandenberg 15:22, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:13, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi! Just popping over to say thanks for your support at my RfA. Great level of support, humbling result. Thanks again. Bubba hotep 21:37, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello, I just wanted to say thanks for taking on my AMA Request. Please let me know if you need any more info or help. My email address is registered on Wikipedia so you can also reach me that way. Thank you. —Cliffb 05:33, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your through reply... Regarding:

I can't give you much help at all with the user on Wikipedia. It seems apparent that this came from an editor, and possibly an established one. It is possible though to find a user on Wikipedia with their IP address. For example, my IP is: 220.236.205.132. I think check user ect. can link the user with the IP address. I can get someone to look at this option if you request.

Here is the crux of where I'd like assistance. I'm not sure from a Wikipedia policy framework where to start on this. I know there are privacy implications cross referencing the two, so I understand that perhaps this editor could be contacted and counseled on this, even if I wasn't allowed to learn who the user in question is. -- so I guess what I'm saying is that could you have someone take a look at this option?

I of course will keep editing, but cowardly acts like this one just annoy me. —Cliffb 06:51, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

The IP number in question is 12.119.119.186 -- I'm working on a draft for a checkuser request over on the AMA page.. —Cliffb 05:16, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

To: Cliffb (talk · contribs) and Dfrg.msc (talk · contribs)

From: Kevinkor2 (talk · contribs)

I've taken the liberty of removing the names and e-mail addresses from your AMA case. The following are the changes I made:

• 08:34, 26 March 2007 (diff) Wikipedia:Association of Members' Advocates/Requests/March 2007/Cliffb (removed Personally identifiable information) (top)
• 08:28, 26 March 2007 (diff) Wikipedia:Association of Members' Advocates/Requests/March 2007/Cliffb (→Summary: - removed Personally identifiable information)
• 08:26, 26 March 2007 (diff) Wikipedia talk:Requests for checkuser (→Checkuser Request for AMA case - remove Personally identifiable information.) (top)

You can see the information that was originally there by clicking on the (diff) links above.

--Kevinkor2 08:58, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

FYI, I've responded to this on Kevinkor's talk page. —Cliffb 17:41, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. File:Smiley-Dancing.gif--TBCΦtalk? 09:00, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Great! Gimme a couple days to go through :) Oh, and see Category:Administrators open to recall to answer your question (I had a quick peek at your answers before :) ) Glen 09:47, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

The March 2007 issue of the Aviation WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Trevor MacInnis (Contribs) 16:04, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

My borther thinks he is a comedian. there are some other articles that you may need to fix (i dont know how). 216.30.197.250 23:41, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

I have returned from the webway. I see you are now a very popular and influential editor, do I hear admin bells ringing? Cheers Culverin? ^Talk 01:31, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:16, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm on a sort of quest to clear out old and broken categories, and one of yours (Category:AGH MY EYES) showed up. I was going to remove it (And the other redlinks ones), but I'll leave that decision to you if you want to. Logical2u_{Review me!} 23:42, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm sure there's a way to avoid them using .css files, but I don't have mine set up in such a way. Logical2u_{Review me!} 10:09, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your support in my recent RfA. I appreciate it. Shimeru 15:48, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello Dfrg.msc.

WikiProject Strategy games has finished it's first collaboration: Risk (game) ( ). We are now asking for nominations and input for a new one. Please voice your ideas at the talk page.

Clyde (talk) and WikiProject Strategy games.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:04, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

I would like to thank you for your support in my recent RFA. As you may or may not be aware, it passed with approximately 99% support. I ensure you that I will use the tools well, and if I ever disappoint you, I am open to recall. If you ever need anything, don't hesitate to leave me a note on my talkpage. Thanks again, ^demon^{[omg plz]} 20:42, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 13:44, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

 

A fair use image on your user page or user talk page, Image:10royals.jpg, has been removed in order to comply with copyright law. Fair use images can only be used in articles and nowhere else on Wikipedia.
Please do not replace it, and thank you for your cooperation.

A Train^talk 16:57, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Hahahahahahaha! :-D That was the best award ever!!! Thank you so much!!! Húsönd 00:16, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

 

Here's a self-conscious but joyously curious Christmas Island red crab for you! Self-conscious but joyously curious Christmas Island red crabs somehow promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving something friendly to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Make your own message to spread WikiLove to others! Happy editing!--Húsönd 02:20, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey dfrg.msc - I just thought I'd make sure you're aware of the poll taking place at Wikipedia:Attribution/Poll - check the top of your watchlist. By the by the by, it seems my edit for Anal Stretching in my userspace was deleted by (guess who?) Guy! Citing that it hasn't been touched since January - although he himself I believe made edits to it in February - although I could be wrong. Sigh, not that I'm coming to *you* for any help! I know an admin or two that strongly feel the article shouldn't have been deleted and that it should exist - they're both on haitus at the moment, so let's see what I can do - all I need is an admin to step in and unlock the article from recreation - it's been 3 months already - and there's no risk of *me* reposting deleted content. If nothing, concede that the article should be unlocked. Rfwoolf 21:06, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey Bernadette, it's great to hear from you. Stick it to the vandals today, mate! – Riana ^talk 02:24, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

 

 

 

 

You and Jilly shall starve no longer. Húsönd 03:49, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

By the way, Happy April Fools' Day to you too. I did one prank [1] but it lasted only 10 minutes... :-P Húsönd 04:22, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Happy April Fools for Yesterday Dfrg and thanks again for the show you put on in my talk page! It is was strangely amusing! I haven't talked on your page in ages! This is a great and momentus occasion that deserves a... I got nothing... Drizzt Jamo 01:59, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Oh wait I remember I was going to congratulate you on the funny user page for april fools day, very good!! I'll talk to you later! Drizzt Jamo 02:01, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Hello Dfrg.msc.

WikiProject Strategy games finished it's first collaboration on Risk (game). We have voted for possible candidates for the next collaboration, and three finalists have been selected:

1. . Stronghold (2001 game)
2. . Age of Empires
3. . Age of Empires II

If possible, please vote here on which of these articles to collaborate on. Thank you.

WikiProject Strategy games

Hi. Referring to your entry on WikiProject Lego's talk page, could you please help out in converting the sprawling lists to tables in the following articles: Lego Space, Lego Town & Lego Castle. I've already done so for a few in Space & Town, if you want examples.

I've used this general format:

Thanks in advance.

Aeons | Talk 17:52, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Would you like some pictures of melbourne street art? Crested Penguin 00:58, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 04:51, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Hello, Dfrg.msc! Since it has been a month since you nominated the Graffiti Portal for peer review, I hope you received good feedback on how the portal could be improved. If you would like, you could keep the portal listed at the portal peer review for more suggestions for improvement and ask the Wikipedians here for feedback. Also, if you think the portal is ready, you could nominate the portal for featured status. Either way, I hope you've received helpful reviews! Cheers, [sd] 15:37, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Dfrg.msc. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.