User talk:Rlevse

——————————————— MY TALK PAGE ———————————————

Home	Talk	About me	Awards	Articles	eMail	Contributions	Images	Notebook	Sandbox	Todo	Toolbox

My Admin Policy: I trust that my fellow admins' actions are done for the good of Wikipedia. So if any of my admin actions are overturned I will not consider such an action to be a "Wheel War", but rather an attempt to improve Wikipedia. If I disagree with your action, I will try to discuss it with you or with the admin community, but I absolve you in advance of any presumption of acting improperly. We should all extend the same benefit of the doubt to our fellow admins, until they repeatedly prove that they are unworthy of such a presumption. For every editor, I try to follow WP:AGF and WP:CIVIL and expect the same in return.

Extra bit

w00t! Jehochman ^Talk 03:43, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

congrats on being promoted to bureaucrat! Enigma ^message 03:44, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations for your successful bureaucratship! --Caspian blue (talk) 03:45, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

'tis a shame. You signed off right before Deskana promoted you. Anyway, I removed the notice from your page and added you to the category. Hope you don't mind. Enigma ^message 03:53, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks to all! — Rlevse • Talk • 08:24, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Your Request for Bureaucratship was successful

Congratulations from Mizu!

Congratulations Rlevse, I have closed your Request for Bureaucratship as successful. I remember how scary it can be at first since suddenly you're not unable to undo all your mistakes easily, so remember that us other bureaucrats are here to help if you want it. Feel free to mail me at any time, for instance. Best of luck. --Deskana (talk) 03:47, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations, buddy! Good luck. :D GlassCobra 03:48, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations, Rlevse! - Rjd0060 (talk) 03:55, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations, Rlevse! Nishkid64 _{(Make articles, not wikidrama)} 03:59, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Yay, I'm not the newbie anymore! :P EVula // talk // ☯ // 04:03, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

• Congrats Rlevse. I actually thought it had longer till it was over :). Time flies, doesn't it? Steve Crossin (talk) (contact page) 04:12, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

I'll join the Congrat.s, R! - now was it cigars, or red wine you were after to make me an admin? :-) Privatemusings (talk) 04:35, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Now if I was you, I would be taking Húsönd up on his offer... I mean you might as well stretch this whole 'crat thing for all its worth right? Tiptoety ^talk 04:41, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations, indeed!! Excellent news .... I know you'll be awesome :) - Alison ^❤ 04:46, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

So which means more... being an eagle scout or a crat?---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 06:52, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks to all, truly. Balloonman-being an Eagle Scout of course. — Rlevse • Talk • 08:27, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations R! Ariel♥Gold 08:39, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

LADY ARIEL WOW!!! — Rlevse • Talk • 08:43, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

I had to log in to see how the RfB went! You did not think I would forget, did you? Miss you! ~*Hug*~ Ariel♥Gold 08:48, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations Rlevse, I was supposed to be the first one, though I was to lazy sleeping this morning heh, other then that get a RfA today and close it! Best wishes to you. Regards, --Kanonkas :  Talk  08:58, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations! We have high expectations on you ;-) --Apoc2400 (talk) 09:17, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations on your successful RFB ... Best of luck ! -- Tinu Cherian - 09:31, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Hey Rlevse, didn't see your RFB, but nice to see you passed without my help. :) · AndonicO ^Engage. 09:30, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations, admincoach. :P Cheers, —Mizu onna sango15^Hello! 09:31, 29 July 2008 (UTC).

Me, eiher! (Why, Tangobot? Why?) Congratulations. :) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 11:41, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Even though its a bit belated, congratulations. Synergy 09:33, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

See, Rlevse, you're already getting lazy. ;P Hurry up and add some sort of 'crat UBX to your userpage! Yes, you! —Mizu onna sango15^Hello! 09:48, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

I see congratulations are in order!! Good luck! Wildhartlivie (talk) 09:56, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations and best of luck from me too, thank you for your message. Camaron | Chris (talk) 10:05, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

woot indeed. who'd have thunk that a sensible person could become a crat? user:Everyme 10:27, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Well done. See, the wait was worth it. ++Lar: t/c 11:34, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

You crack me up Lar. — Rlevse • Talk • 11:41, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Congrats from me as well!! FloNight♥♥♥ 11:45, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Flo! — Rlevse • Talk • 11:46, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

GOAL! MBisanz ^talk 11:46, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

And the crowd goes wild! — Rlevse • Talk • 12:31, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

• Congrats! Ecoleetage (talk) 12:28, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Note to self, Tangobot is fired -- Congrats! I would have voted, but it appears that Tangobot's RFA counter no longer shows RFBs... --Admrb♉ltz (t • c • log) 15:17, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

I know I'm a bit late but I think a huge congratulations are in order! Best of luck as a new crat, --Mifter (talk) 15:21, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

WAY COOL! Couldn't have happened to a more deserving editor!Sumoeagle179 (talk) 17:23, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations! Wonderful news, and well deserved! Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 23:59, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

I KNEW IT! And he did good! My hubby the crat !!! YIPPEE!!!! — Jojo • Talk • 00:05, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

User:Newcastleind/User:Nyannrunning

Hi. I guess I thought from the discussion last week that was between you and User:Thatcher that the User:Newcastleind had been permanently blocked, although it's possible it was just the IPs that were blocked, and not the new account? Nevertheless, she's back tonight and is up to her old tricks. This time, it's on Gertrude Lawrence, an article that Nyannrunning and her troops has diddled with before. Thanks. Wildhartlivie (talk) 07:44, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

There are lots of ways for blocked users to sock. Please provide user names and evidence. — Rlevse • Talk • 08:29, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

BOR

I demand your recall - in the 37 seconds since you joined the category, you have been completely inactive as a bureaucrat! Franamax (talk) 08:00, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, count me in, too. Rlevse, you slacker!! Go close an RfA or something - quick! :) - Alison ^❤ 08:11, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

You guys are a riot! ROFL ROFL! I plan to close the RFA that ends today. I'm off work so I can instantly close it. — Rlevse • Talk • 08:26, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Grr - I'm requesting recall too!!! Seriously though, good luck, and best wishes. I'll be sure to jump on you if you screw up ;-) Cheers mate. —Giggy 08:58, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Glad I can count on you Giggy ;-) — Rlevse • Talk • 08:59, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Well done and welcome to a world of pain! The Rambling Man (talk) 09:06, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

You haven't even made an admin action as a bureaucrat!! I demand you rename yourself to Rlevse-the-Slacker. Maxim_(talk) 12:12, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

I say close it now... and close it as unsuccessful... that way you can prove that RfA isn't a vote and that you won't be tied to some artificial constraints about how people !vote!---Balloonman ^PoppaBalloon 14:01, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations! If you need any help with CHU issues, just ask me. :) Rudget 16:12, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Sure thing and I'll undoubtedly need help. — Rlevse • Talk • 16:18, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Re: User:Newcastleind sock

You blocked Nyannrunning sock puppets after this sock case on July 12. The user came back with a new name, and again restored content on the Pamela Courson article. The paragraph regarding an Esquire article was added in by the sock User:Debbiesvoucher on Revision as of 22:18, 31 May 2008. The sock User:Seth4u2nvcs returned it at the advent of the last sock case on Revision as of 11:47, 24 June 2008. Then the newly created username, User:Newcastleind, returned it again here and here. I contacted you above on July 20 and you and Thatcher discussed it and I thought the username had been blocked along with the IPs related to it.

She created the account here and made a note on the Courson talk page that she was going to restore Babitz material two minutes later, then actually restored it three minutes after that.

Tonight, User:Newcastleind returned and reverted changes made to Gertrude Lawrence back to a nearly identical version contributed by one of the User:Nyannrunning socks, named User:Dooyar (which was actually the first name this person used on Wikipedia) here. The few differences were the tabling of the filmography/Broadway appearance table, a few minor removals of wikilinking on dates, and two references. She also made changes on the Richard Calvin Cox page here, although it wasn't a revert, this is another article User:Nyannrunning also made additions to earlier in May here.

All the earlier sock work established that this sock is in the Los Angeles area. On the last sock case, Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Nyannrunning (3rd), one sock account made use of the name of one of the Senators from my state, User:Evanbayh. This current username is the name of the town near where I live (New Castle IN). When I looked at the block log on User:Newcastleind, it hadn't been blocked on the 20th, although Thatcher said that he'd hard blocked something in relationship to it. All of the other socks are blocked. Thanks. Wildhartlivie (talk) 09:26, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Blocked Newcastleind. Are there more? — Rlevse • Talk • 12:45, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

The only one I'm not sure about being blocked is User:Downonme. Thanks much for following up on this. Wildhartlivie (talk) 13:30, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Keep an eye on that one. — Rlevse • Talk •

Vanishing

Thanks for replying. I still don't know how to vanish after reading the link you sent me. Please help!!! --Fabrice Wilmann (talk) 12:32, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Notes on your talk page. — Rlevse • Talk • 12:47, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Clarification needed

hey, I would have liked a more clear admin consensus before the ban was applied. However, could you clarify the matters I inquired about here?Xasha (talk) 13:17, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Talk pages are okay, posted to both talk pages and the Digwuren page. — Rlevse • Talk • 15:43, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

About your RfB

Congratulations on your successful RfB! I know it's probably not what you were quite expecting, but here's the admins' T-shirt! Evidently, you've been an admin for well over a year, but as far as I know, you haven't received one of these yet. :) According to this, you now have the third highest supported RfB of all time. It's nice to see that you've been doing some bureaucratic work already. Best wishes. Acalamari 15:23, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

The admins' T-shirt. Acalamari 15:23, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Tks. — Rlevse • Talk • 15:46, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Second'd - contratulations! UltraExactZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 17:34, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Congrats!! America69 (talk) 20:26, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

User:Hew

Hi there Rlevse. I see you renamed User:Hewus to User:Hew for SUL reasons. There's a slight problem with this - he doesn't hold the right to the name with regards to SUL - if you take a look at this, you'll notice that a user on ja.wiki has the most number of edits on one project, so they hold the right to the name. When SUL is expanded, User:Hew here is going to lose his account (as accounts which have the most edits will automatically take over all accounts sharing their name on different projects), and he'll have to have another rename. Just something to ponder when doing future renames. :-) Ryan Postlethwaite 15:54, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

AGH, Maxim was training me and he said it was okay. He trains all the new crats in renames. I'll advise the user. Thanks for the tip. — Rlevse • Talk • 15:56, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

I've learnt not to listen to Maxim when he's offering advice - it always ends in tears! ;-) Ryan Postlethwaite 15:59, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Tear I can deal with, it's mistakes I don't like. — Rlevse • Talk • 16:00, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Right... d'oh!!! I totally forgot to check for that... Meh, Ryan's comment at 15:59 makes sense though :p Maxim_(talk) 17:27, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Re: RFA

Congratulations on joining the cabal. :) I see no reason why not to close it 30 mins early. I have closed some RFAs 6 hrs prior to closure, so 30 mins is ok. Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»= 16:39, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

If I close RFAs early, (up to 6 hours), I usually keep these points in mind: 1. Support > 90%, no drastic change in !voting in the past few hours; or if the candidate is gunning for a record such as 100 or 200. =Nichalp «Talk»= 16:41, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll start working it up. — Rlevse • Talk • 16:42, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Ummn no, none that I know of. The last time there was some off-wiki bureaucrat discussion was when WJScribe contacted each of us personally through email to look at an RFA. =Nichalp «Talk»= 16:48, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Mr Crat

Concrats (!) on your first promotion. Keep up the good work. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:56, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Rambling Man! — Rlevse • Talk • 17:09, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Are you going to welcome the user on her talk page? Some folks is waitin' to hand out t-shirts and back-slapping congrats and all...  Frank  |  talk  17:07, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Give me time! I just did that ;-) — Rlevse • Talk • 17:09, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

I dunno, just because you're new doesn't mean you aren't expected to be perfect! ;-)  Frank  |  talk  17:10, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

HarHar. — Rlevse • Talk • 17:11, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

I was waiting for you to let her know too, actually...

[13:00:05] >Rlevse< you know, when you close someone's RfA, it's usually best to leave them a note saying "oh by the way you're an admin now" ;)
[13:02:03] >Rlevse< bah! I know you're there, you old coot. I see you making edits still :P

Haha. Congrats and well done, buddy. :) GlassCobra 17:15, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry, Mr Crat, I have your back! Enigma ^message 17:16, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Enigma! GC-it's the last step on the procedure list and I did them in order ;-) — Rlevse • Talk • 17:18, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations, you'll be great. Sorry I missed your RfB, I would undoubtedly have supported. --John (talk) 17:41, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Your RfB thanks

Like sending out thank you cards after a party, the obligatory thank you talk page posts after a successful nomination have become a perfunctory part of the Wikipedia nomination process. While I am deeply disappointed at your unwillingness to directly respond to the specific issues I had raised at your RfB, I do hope that your commitment to "have read every word of the RfB and taken it all to heart" is reflected in your apparent efforts to resolve the outstanding issues at George Thomas Coker. These issues can be completed in minutes if you would like to see them through to a conclusion. Please let me know what I can do to help resolve them as quickly as possible. Alansohn (talk) 17:20, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Re: Sockpuppetry Case

Dear Rlevse,

I am writing in good faith to appeal the decision made in my sockpuppetry case.

I have not opened a new account in the name of Plasmons. This is a different user.

The references to IP addresses used as evidence against me are not valid. The reason they are not valid is that they were not new accounts but merely anonymous postings. I freely admit to posting without signing in, in those cases.

However, again, the sockpuppetry definition is about opening a new account and in my case specifically the account Plasmons.

Finally has the IP location of Plasmons been identified as per the discussion on the sockpuppetry page.

I look forward to hearing from you in due course

Justinmarley (talk) 17:46, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

I cleared the tag on Plasmons page. How do you explain you two using the same singularly unique way of signing? — Rlevse • Talk • 18:05, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Dear RLevse. This is a coincidence. I have not created the Plasmons account. Please confirm the IP addresses of my account and Plasmons. This should settle the matter. I am innocent of this accusation and must continue to seek justice. I appreciate your task is a difficult one. However, under these circumstances, there must be additional options available yours sincerely Justinmarley (talk) 20:49, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

I am not a CU, I can't confirm the IP addresses. Try User:Thatcher or User:Alison. — Rlevse • Talk • 22:08, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you Justinmarley (talk) 05:39, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Dear Rlevse, Would you please reconsider the sockpuppetry case. I have confirmation from Thatcher that I have been editing from UK and that Plasmons has been editing from India - (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Thatcher#Request)- I look forward to hearing from you in due course Justinmarley (talk) 09:11, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

1) have Thatcher confirm with me and 2) if such is the case, how do you explain you two having the same unique signature? — Rlevse • Talk • 09:28, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Dear Rlevse, as per your instructions I will request Thatcher to provide you with the information. As for the latter point, I am responsible for my actions alone. Again, I am writing in good faith Justinmarley (talk) 11:35, 3 August 2008 (UTC)justinmarley

I saw his talk entry. Yet, you still haven't explained what was going on with you two having the same very unique signature trait at the same time. The sigs and other evidence in the case still make it highly suspicious that something was going on. You were merely warned, not blocked. There are no sock tags on either user page, yours or Plasmons, so I don't see exactly what you want. — Rlevse • Talk • 11:54, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

The Wikipedia definition of sockpuppetry is clear (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sock_puppetry) - a separate account opened deceptively. On my user page - (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Justinmarley) - it states falsely that I am a confirmed sock. It also states that I am a suspected sockpuppet. These statements are made on a page which is displayed publicly. Furthermore in my usertalk I am erroneously given a warning. If I am vindicated since the two IP addresses are separate then why am I being warned. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Suspected_sock_puppets/Justinmarley). The end result is that despite proving that I have not opened Plasmon's account, the false statements remain and remain publicly. I would like these amended please Justinmarley (talk) 15:46, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Just remove the tag on your user page and talk page. — Rlevse • Talk • 16:09, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Surely it would be improper for me to do this myself as I am the one that was accused Justinmarley (talk) 16:15, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Users are free to remove whatever they want from their talk page, it's considered admission they saw it. If anyone asks about you rm'ing your user page tag, tell them I said you could. You won't like this, but the evidence in the SSP is very very suspicious--things in it are way above chance level, therefore, I won't rm it myself but won't object if you do. Keep in mind meatpuppetry falls under socking. My advice is put this behind you and keep on editing productively. — Rlevse • Talk • 16:18, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Firstly the meatpuppetry accusation is a new allegation - is that what you are alleging? I am at the current time dealing with the accusation levelled clearly by Collectonian namely that I created a separate account under the name Plasmons. Collectonian declared as a statement of fact that I had created the account Plasmons and did so publicly. Your comments on the page detailed below are made in this context. Secondly the term meatpuppetry is also a derogatory term that according to the sockpuppetry page 'should be used with care'. Thirdly you have archived the following page - as far as I am concerned given the above this page should be revised by you - it is both public and it implies that I am a sockpuppet - you have added none of the new evidence and the page states clearly that it should not be modified http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Suspected_sock_puppets/Justinmarley Justinmarley (talk) 17:21, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Would you answer the above points please Justinmarley (talk) 18:00, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

I updated the SSP case with the CU evidence. Now simply remove the tag from you user page and thread from your talk page. — Rlevse • Talk • 18:04, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Dear Rlevse thank you for your help in this matter yours gratefully Justinmarley (talk) 17:50, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

OK

I'll repost when the candidate has accepted. Cheers, JACOPLANE • 2008-07-29 23:15

Your RfB

Congratulations! Masterpiece2000 (talk) 02:47, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Bot needs flag

I've left a bot available for you to promote. :) =Nichalp «Talk»= 10:24, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

warning?

This wasn't vandalism. He was the initiator of the case, so he was blanking it to withdraw the request. Ryan Postlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 16:58, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Then it gets put on the withdrawn cases list. He didn'tput an edit summary, so how to know? — Rlevse • Talk • 16:59, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Because it's obvious! Put it on the wihdrawn case list then, no need to revert him - I'm guessing he doesn't know the ins and outs of arb clerking. I've seen many users in the past withdraw their request by removing it. Ryan Postlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 17:00, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

We're supposed to list all withdrawn cases, not just delete them. — Rlevse • Talk • 17:01, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Well, that's cool - just do it for him. As I said, he can't be expected to know the ins and outs. Ryan Postlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 17:03, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

I did, and I posted a 'oops' on his page. — Rlevse • Talk • 17:04, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Ah right, thanks. I just think the guys had a rough time over the past couple of days and it's not really fair to pile it on even more, not that that was your intention. Ryan Postlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 17:05, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Indiana Jones

Hello, I wanted to point out that Image:IndianaJ.jpg was not the image that was kept at IFD and DRV. The other one, Image:Indiana Jones and the Cross of Coronado.jpg, was -- see IFD and DRV. The image of Indiana Jones and Henry Jones, Sr. was removed based on a separate discussion at WT:FILM and was not related. In addition, the Cross of Coronado image was moved to be more adjacent to the relevant context since it could not be immediately established the significance of the image with its placement in the Plot section. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 21:23, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Good points. Thanks, but it does appear he was edit warring with several editors. — Rlevse • Talk • 22:36, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

I know, but I just wanted to clarify that particular difference. Congratulations on becoming a bureaucrat, by the way -- I noticed the thankspam going around. :) —Erik (talk • contrib) - 01:22, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. — Rlevse • Talk • 01:24, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh man

Congrats on the RfB, I'm sorry I hadn't noticed it while it was on-going. Its what I get for not looking at RfA too much these days. I know you'll be a great one. Cheers. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 05:47, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks KOS! — Rlevse • Talk • 09:10, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Age groups in Scouting and Guiding

Is Age groups in Scouting and Guiding according to the Wikipedia policy a galley? All images were removed on that basis. --Egel _Reaction? 12:38, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

He's right about the non-free not going in galleries, but those aren't galleries. See my post on his talk. — Rlevse • Talk • 12:53, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Oh, come on, the fact that they don't use the code for 'galleries' does not stop them being galleries. How is this any different from album covers in discography pages and screenshots in episode lists? We do not need to have pages with a non-free image for every entry- that clearly is not the 'minimal usage' required by the NFCC. J Milburn (talk) 12:54, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Let's keep this on your page to keep it in one spot. — Rlevse • Talk • 13:09, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Replied on my talk. J Milburn (talk) 13:15, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Replied. J Milburn (talk) 13:49, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

If it's any help, here is the pivotal discussion on screenshots in episode lists I was referring to. J Milburn (talk) 20:48, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Re: CHU

Thanks! (Now you know the real reason I !voted for you in your RfB :P ) J.delanoy^gabs_adds 13:57, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

/me chuckles. — Rlevse • Talk • 14:16, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

• Thanks alot!

Amirreza (talk) 10:32, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Alextwa

What do you make of User talk:Alextwa's unblock req? I see no IP, autoblock, or direct block? But it does seem odd he'd give the old "someone else had my computer" reason. MBisanz ^talk 14:11, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

My first thought was rangeblock but I don't find that either. Ask either BC, Luna San, or Lucasbfr. That's who I go to on these sorts of things. — Rlevse • Talk • 14:20, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Insane Clown Posse FAC

Copyediting has been completed on the article and it should be ready for FA status. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 17:58, 31 July 2008 (UTC))

Image:GranadaBoyScoutBand.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:GranadaBoyScoutBand.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:08, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

RfA

What do you think of the latest RfA? People were discussing at WT:RFA whether it should be early closed. My initial thoughts were no, but now I think I'm leaning towards the opinion that it should be closed to prevent further... Enigma ^message 21:52, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Has anyone asked the candidate? — Rlevse • Talk • 22:00, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

Two did. Waiting for a response. Enigma ^message 22:03, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

User:Pabopa

Hi, Rlevse. I come to seek your opinion on the new user, Pabopa (talk · contribs) and 2channel related case. The user in question has been topic-banned by Fuf.Perf since two days ago because the new user appeared to be making disruptive edit warring over Korea-related subjects; Samjeondo Monument (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), Taekwondo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), Kowtow (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views). Yesterday, an open proxy user edited one of the disputed article between Pabopa and Manacpowers, whose edit is exactly same as Pabopa's edit.[1] The open proxy is caught up by WP:OP so being banned for 5 years. Today the edit by the OP was reverted by Manacpowers, and then Pabopa reverted it again.[2] Since Pabopa is not allowed to edit Korean related topic, he breaks his given restriction. Pabopa alleges that I made a personal attack against him because I speculate the open proxy may be him per the circumstance. Pabopa also appeared to edit here after 2channel began discussing the three articles on their forum.[3] Since Fuf.Perf is not active, can you review the case as looking into User talk:Pabopa#Topic banned?? Thanks.--Caspian blue (talk) 01:16, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Update: Pabopa is a sockpuppeter confirmed by checkuser as well as Northwest1202 (talk · contribs). Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Pabopa. They waste my time a lot. The bigger problem is unrevealed 2channel meat/sockpuppetry within Wikipedai. --Caspian blue (talk) 02:04, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

RfB

Congratulations, and best of luck with the tools :) -- lucasbfr ^talk 12:56, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Lucas! — Rlevse • Talk • 13:05, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Belated congratulations from myself as well, Rlevse. Use the tools wisely. ;) Anthøny 15:03, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks Anthony! — Rlevse • Talk • 15:08, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

SUL

I've never handled such requests before, so had to sit down and think. To begin with, I'm not happy with IPs making the address without any security check. So, I would like to amend the policy so that the IP who made the request, also place a confirmation request on his home wiki. This needs to be brought up on BN. Plus those points on meta about usurping. =Nichalp «Talk»= 13:06, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

re on your talk to keep in one place. — Rlevse • Talk • 13:14, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Warning

Where did I threaten to RV him? - Kuzain (talk) 17:51, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

That is to day, I commented on editing an article and feeling that changes needed to be made which I may always do. We then spoke outside of the talk page and reached an agreement as is the ideal consensus. My advice would be to be careful of getting involved in issues too early. You do not do the community any good when you do so. - Kuzain (talk) 18:03, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Getting involved early is the best time, it heads things off at the pass. Waiting only makes it worse. — Rlevse • Talk • 18:08, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

I disagree. When you are needed is the best time. Jumping into a situation, especially one half resolved, does not suggest you were looking to head anything off. - Kuzain (talk) 20:27, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

I am needed now, or there would not have been a request at AE. Heading something off is exactly what I'm doing. — Rlevse • Talk • 20:46, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Nah. By the time you'd made this last statement the issue had been resolved. You were at best a victim of someone who doesn't have any faith in this community's ability to resolve its issues and at worst a little too trigger happy. I'm just suggesting you read the comments made regarding an issue or not jump in if you lack the time to do so. - Kuzain (talk) 04:37, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Ping

See my reply to you here. Ryan Postlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 21:09, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Deutsche Freischar

Hello Randy, could you please transwiki import the history of de:Deutsche Freischar and merge the histories? Thank you. --jergen (talk) 08:56, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Never done this, but will try. Did you do the export? — Rlevse • Talk • 09:02, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

PS, read that link, it says it's disabled on most wikis and appears so on en.wiki as Special:Import gives "No transwiki import sources have been defined and direct history uploads are disabled." — Rlevse • Talk • 09:05, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Well, it did work de.wp. But it seems to be disabled on en.wp, the respective log shows only one entry [4].

I was one of the main contributors on de:Deutsche Freischar, so I'd like to be mentioned here... de.wp sees most translations without previous import as copyright violations. But I should not think in the lines of de.wp when in en.wp. --jergen (talk) 10:22, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Jergen#Generic_trefoils

Randy, please get Jergen to slow the heck down. He's called me a liar today, and is now removing images without replacing them. If I am in the wrong, I will accept that, but he's going about it in the complete wrong way. You know my present situation, this is one more thing I do not need. Sorry for writing you here, my e-mail is down. :( Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 09:53, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

He has now removed Image:Scout mongolia badge.png

Image:Scout centrafricaine badge.png Image:Scout guinee badge.png Image:Scout burundi badge.png Image:Scout antigua and barbuda badge.png Image:Scouts uruguay badges.png Chris (クリス • フィッチ) (talk) 10:04, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Lucyintheskywithdada and Carl Daniels

Hi, Rlevse. Can you take a look at Carl Daniels (talk · contribs)'s talk page and WP:AN#Lucyintheskywithdada: Indef blocked user's trolling and revenge? Lucyintheskywithdada (talk · contribs) or Documentingabuse (talk · contribs) evaded his indef. block again and spread this personl/racist attacks against me over to multiple users whom he think would likely side his malicious revenge. Per Wikipedia:BAN#Enforcement_by_reverting_edits and WP:NPA, I removed such attacks from the users' talk page. Regretfully, among such users, Carl Daniels (talk · contribs) reverts to keep such material [5][6]. I requested him to remove it, however he refuses. He even cites that I have to follow a certain official rule that I've never heard of before.[7], and even says to support the banned user's scheme.[8]. I want the attack messages from Lucy to be removed. Can you help me on this? Thanks.--Caspian blue (talk) 13:50, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

• Their IPs are unrelated. Thatcher 14:26, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

  I just want the attack message from the blocked user from Carl Daniels' talk page to be removed.--Caspian blue (talk) 14:35, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

It's his talk page, not worth edit warring over. I was going to block the IP for disruption, but Ryulong beat me to it. — Rlevse • Talk • 14:51, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

I read WP:BLOCK and WP:BAN, but I don't get what is difference between indef.blocked user's evasion and banned user's. Admin, Lifebaka's comment[9] sounds like Wikipedia allow any contributions including personal attacks from indef.blocked user during his block. Is the policy worth to be mended? --Caspian blue (talk) 14:56, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Banned users are formally forbidden from editing by Jimbo, community or arbcom. An indef block is a defacto ban, but it's easier to get it overturned than a formal ban. — Rlevse • Talk • 16:08, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

IP RfA

My question was intended to show how seriously I am taking this nomination. Tim Vickers (talk) 01:31, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

So you were being facetious? — Rlevse • Talk • 01:35, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, very. I see this nomination in much the same light as I see this nonsense. Tim Vickers (talk) 01:42, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Wow, hadn't seen that link yet. Bet this is someone's sock. — Rlevse • Talk • 01:47, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Drama, drama, drama. Pah, what a waste of time, I think I'll go and spell-check something! :) Tim Vickers (talk) 01:57, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Opinion

Hi, Rlevse. Am I too late to start an RFCU with these IP-s?

• 62.63.212.2
• 62.63.212.10
• 62.63.212.143
• 62.63.212.13

I suspect that these IP's are sockpuppets of banned user:Justiceinwiki (you've banned him, [10] that's why I'm referring to you) due to following reasons:
Interest:Prebilovci.
IP-range:62.63.212.xx.
Compare to edit from 17:46, 21 Dec 07 [11] (author defends banned user:Justiceinwiki. See his comment "Read Justiceinwikis arguments, because their're the same as mine.", and of course, accuse the opponent for vandalism - typical behaviour pattern of IP-vandals)
Some of these edits are open revert-wars [12] .
Sincerely, Kubura (talk) 13:40, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, the data that CUs can see only stays about 3 months. These guys are all inactive now. — Rlevse • Talk •

Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Issacharoff (2nd)

Thanks for the blocks you doled out based on Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Issacharoff (2nd), but I don't understand your comment in the closing: "Red Udvar was blocked and tagged the first time, nothing to do here". Was there another report of this? I just filed the case yesterday. User:Red Udvar is only a few days old and not involved in the previous Issacharoff sockpuppetry case. Thanks. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 14:26, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Yes, see his block log, I did it yesterday. Maybe I forgot to close it and thought the report reappeared. — Rlevse • Talk • 14:36, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Unneeded

A admin has already voiced that, another is not needed. Also that user has done nothing but talk down to me and make false accusations. I will call him a lier if he tries is going say he's treated me fairly when all he does is say i'm out to hurt the article and censor it.

That user is not following the good faith thing by repeatably saying I'm censoring. Also i haven't made any edits to that article today and also those users were also edit waring. If you're going post on my talk page about my actions then you have to do the same on their talk pages.Yami (talk) 22:56, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

I've full protected it for 3 days to let things calm down. If these behaviors persist after that, the problem editors will be blocked. — Rlevse • Talk • 23:06, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Well Wikipedia has a problem on their hands since Atom who is the main problem has been hovering over the article for 7 years or so as he has said. He is contently making accusations that i find the images pornographic and want to censor them. He even goes so far as saying hiding the gallery is censorship when all it does is keep navigation easy and stop the scroll bar from jumping like a idiot.

Two editors have hidden it myself ans Asher and he's undone both 3 times which is see as being a 3RR violation but did not issue him one, though i probably should but that might hurt any peace you wish to gain through the full protection.

Yami (talk) 23:27, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

The article isn't fully protect still. Yami (talk) 23:28, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

oh ok i see now the edit this page button is gone. the lock icon tat read semi protect threw me off. Yami (talk) 00:53, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Award

Hey, thanks for the barnstar! What a nice surprise. Thanks for your help on Commons and Wikisource! For that help, I think you deserve a barnstar too:

		The Guidance Barnstar
		For providing invaluable assistance and teamwork in uploading and formatting the Coker military documentation on both Commons and Wikisource, I salute and present you with this award! Dreadstar † 02:15, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

User:Neuropedia Chu

Thanks; have updated my CHU request with info you asked for. —Neuropedia (talk) 04:19, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

FYI

Last time (Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_arbitration/Archive_22#Question) you and Ryanposs said to contact you if PM started going back to BLP edits. So I'm contacting you re: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Giovanni_di_Stefano_and_the_GFDL and User_talk:Sarcasticidealist#before_you_hop_in_your_Kia. MBisanz ^talk 14:42, 5 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi

Long time no see. How you doing? See WP:CRAT, I'm a crat now. Long way from those early days huh? Let me know if you ever need anything. — Rlevse • Talk • 21:19, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Hey, Randy. I'm doing pretty well, though I guess I haven't edited much for a while now. Congratulations on becoming a bureaucrat -- I guess everyone finally dropped that whole, oh-no-we-don't-need-any-more-'crats thing, huh? -- RG² 02:02, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Yea, we've had a couple new crats this year. Keep in touch. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:28, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

New antisemitism

You appear to have locked the article without the disputed image which was under attack. I appeal to you to restore the image to the article. Thank you. Malcolm Schosha (talk) 00:32, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Work that out on the talk page during the coming week. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:37, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

I have not been involved in the mediation, and I am sure that others understand the current difficulties better than I do, but it appears that locking the article without the image is giving one side of the dispute what they did not get in mediation. That seems unfair, and it seems to be contrary to the mediation agreement. Malcolm Schosha (talk) 00:52, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

If I locked it with the image, the other side would say the same thing, just in the opposite direction. I simply locked it at the point I discovered the edit warring. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:55, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

I am not sure I understand your point. It was my understanding that the mediation only decided to move the image for the location of the article it was in, not to remove it from the article altogether. Perhaps I have misunderstood the decision. Malcolm Schosha (talk) 11:20, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Then I suggest you ask an admin mediator about this. Try Daniel. If an admin mediator wants to change the protection, I won't object. But there was clear edit warring and I merely prot'd the version in place at the time. In the meantime work it out on the talk page. — Rlevse • Talk • 11:34, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for changing my user name! /Oddjob (talk) 10:38, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Np. — Rlevse • Talk • 11:33, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Question

Hallå, Dreadstar and I were discussing whether it'd be appropriate to extend Yami's block. Would you be partial to this? He does appear to be refusing to abide by our policies. Or would you be more inclined to let the block lift naturally and see if that sets him straight? I'm okay with either, but he does seem unrelenting, to be honest. Wondered what your opinion was. Thanks. Hejdu! Scarian^{Call me Pat!} 14:48, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

I think an extention is in order as he's refusing to see the problems he's causing and he's ignoring consensus. Feel free to extend it yourself. — Rlevse • Talk • 14:55, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

SUL

Hello Rlevse, I've confirmed that the username Macy on eswiki is mine. Thanks, doña macy [talk] 20:03, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Dodgechris

Well, so much for my good faith... Tiptoety ^talk 20:00, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Sigh. No one, not even yours truly, gets them all right. As long as you're right most of the time, ok. And in this case you gave him a 2nd chance. — Rlevse • Talk • 20:08, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I just really messed up on this one. Oh well, just thought I would let you know that your suspicions on the SSP case were confirmed. (Oh, someone was looking for a 'crat on IRC) Cheers, Tiptoety ^talk 20:14, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

Coaching

Good day Rlevse, I'm currently trying to reply to all of the coaching lessons. I was wondering if you could comment on it (just want to know how I am doing it) Thanks! Regards, --Kanonkas :  Talk  22:10, 8 August 2008 (UTC)

1RR violation on SLDR

Please see this incident. Per SLDR, violators should be dealt with harsher than normal. Watchdogb (talk) 13:55, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

seems he rv'd himself — Rlevse • Talk • 15:34, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Discussion about the next DC Meetup

Greetings! You are receiving this message because you said you wanted to be reminded about future DC meetups on Wikipedia:Meetup/DC_4. We are planning the next DC meetup in late August/early September at Wikipedia:Meetup/DC_5, and would love to have your input. Staeiou (talk) 15:22, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

WilliamH RfA

Hi, Rlevse. The archived discussion Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/WilliamH indicates that you closed it on 2nd June. Axl (talk) 19:11, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Oops, thanks, fixed. ;-) — Rlevse • Talk • 19:13, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

More trouble with User:Moldopodo

Hi. You asked me to let you know if Moldopodo was continuing his earlier disruption after his one-month block expired. Well, I think that time has come, as he's begun moving and messing with pages again, in violation of consensus. I'm referring to Moldova (disambiguation)‎, Principality of Moldavia‎ and in particular Moldavia‎. For the last page, he made a move request in June - no consensus to move. He made the same request on August 3; that closed with no consensus yesterday, but he went ahead and implemented the move anyway today.

And, might I add, he's still filing frivolous ANI reports. Biruitorul ^Talk 19:21, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

In the history of Principality of Moldavia, he alleges 'move per consensus', where is the talk the move if any? Same for the dab page.?? And who put those bogus protect tags on the page? — Rlevse • Talk • 20:39, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

The protection tags are old but never got removed. The "consensus" he cites is here, but in fact that debate closed without consensus. Biruitorul ^Talk 21:17, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I see, it was a multiple request. — Rlevse • Talk • 21:28, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

More trouble with User:Biruitorul

Hi. Please see how the aforementioned user violates the reached consensus that the article Moldavia is about geographical region (see the talk page at the requested move section). User Biruitorul continues his disruptive contribution being unpunished till now, also denying anything that pertains to Moldova, its nation, culture, history, people, language. (see the talk page for Moldavian language). I wonder when will be the Digwuren arbitration enforcement applied to User Biruitorul by you?--Moldopodo^talk 21:08, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Moldopodo, since your one month block expired, you have falsely claimed consensus here, here (both today), filed and another friviolous ANI report, filed Talk:Moldavia#Requested_move_1 and Talk:Moldavia#Requested_move, both of which were no consensus to move the articles which you chose to ignore. You've made several false statements, disrupt the encyclopedia, ignore consensus, and appear to only push your own POV. You leave me with no choice but to indef block you on standard wiki principles and policies. Last time I did this and changed to one month to give you another chance but you've clearly shown you are not here to be productive in building the encyclopedia. I'm listing this at the Digwuren case logs too since there is so much overlap therewith. — Rlevse • Talk • 21:55, 9 August 2008 (UTC)