User talk:Caden

Carrie Prejean

Hi! You might be interested in the discussion at Carrie Prejean. Thank you. Rico 02:44, 27 July 2009 (UTC) (Using {{Please see}})

Okay.

Jimbo declared the Carrie Prejean article an "awful" "coatrack". -- Rico 04:17, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Traditional marriage movement

An article that you have been involved in editing, Traditional marriage movement , has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Traditional marriage movement. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. - Schrandit (talk) 07:07, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks.

Signature

First off, I'm not picking on you, but Exploding boy was right. A recent request for comment on an unrelated user showed consensus that a signature must link back to either your user page, your talk page, or your user contributions. I know things have been rough for you around here, so please understand that this is only me attempting to explain what the community has decided our norms should be. AniMate^draw 02:19, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks dude, but WP:SIG is not policy. From my understanding it's a basic guideline. Correct me if I'm wrong but until there is consensus to make it policy, I see no issue here. On a side-note could you please give EB a warning to stop wiki stalking me? He's been harassing me for over a year. He stalks my edits as you very well know. He's followed me from E.O. Green School shooting to Jesse Dirkhising to Carrie Prejean to the Traditional marriage movement. He even stalks my talk page and leaves unwanted posts when he knows he's not welcome here. Digging through his history shows that I'm not the only editor he stalks, bullies and attempts to drive away. When he's faced with editors who don't approve of his POV pushing, he deliberately attempts to drive them off the project. He has bullied/harassed/stalked users like User:Rico and User:InaMaka to no end and is in my opinion a disruptive goof. As an admin you should be focusing on that jerk and not me. Ned ^ac 13:20, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Signature use that is intentionally and persistently disruptive may lead to blocking under the disruptive editing policy. –xeno^talk 13:23, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

There is nothing wrong with my signature man. Ned ^ac 13:25, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Your sig looks fine but I think HersfoldAniMate was talking about somewhere where you just signed as "NED" (no links or timestamp). Honest mistake? Then forgive the intrusion. –xeno^talk 13:27, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry dude but I can't seem to find where Hersfold said that. Could you give me the link please? Ned ^ac 13:33, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

oops, got confused there. Anyhow this is the example and I'm not sure what this was about either. Anyhow. Your sig as you are signing is nice. –xeno^talk 13:35, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Oh sorry about that man. I was fooling around with my signature and meant no harm. Glad you like my sig though. Ned ^ac 13:41, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

No worries. Cheers, –xeno^talk 13:42, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Just a quick followup, but your current signature is great. Thanks for changing it. AniMate^draw 22:32, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Once again, I've wasted my time assuming good faith with you AniMate. I was foolish enough to believe that you came here in goodwill. I was wrong. I asked you for help and you kick me in the face by ignoring my post. Is this what all admins do or is it just you? Thanks a lot man, you're obviously a buddy of EB's. Case closed. Ned ^ac 10:25, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Caden, you might want to take a step back here, you're falling into old patterns :( → ROUX ₪ 10:54, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

What are you talking about? I'm asking a question. I deserve an honest reply and that is not to much to ask for. Ned ^ac 11:16, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

You are right Caden, it's not too much to ask. And welcome back from summer recess. But remember the old saying that applies to all of us: "It's not so much what you say, but how you say it." — Becksguy (talk) 19:11, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Becks. I was away in Connecticut. Yeah dude, I know that's some good advice you give but I'm not so good at expressing myself in words. I try my best but I guess it doesn't come out right. Caden ^cool 02:46, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Also remember to assume good faith. I had a lot going on yesterday, and it slipped my mind. I've left Exploding Boy a note asking him to come to me with any problems he might have with you and to keep his comments focused on articles. AniMate^draw 21:07, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Also, the same applies to you. Don't make any comments about him and try to keep focused on articles instead. If either of you has a problem with the other, you can take it to an administrator's board. AniMate^draw 21:24, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

After re-reading your complaint above, you definitely need to refactor it. You've called EB a "disruptive goof" and a "jerk". That's not okay. No more personal attacks. AniMate^draw 22:10, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Okay thanks man and I apologize for this miscommunication. I didn't know it slipped your mind. Advice is taken but I ask that EB make no further comments about me as well. I disagree that I've made personal attacks but I will not argue with you since you're entitled to your own opinion. Could you refactor it for me? Caden ^cool 02:46, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Caden, to say you react poorly to editors who have different opinions than you is an understatement. You needed to stop the drama five minutes ago. I've tried to treat you sympathetically, but there is only so much hand holding that can be done. Nothing written by Exploding Boy comes close to what you wrote here. You. Must. Chill. Focus on articles and stop focusing on these petty conflicts. Now. AniMate^draw 07:42, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Dude please listen. I stopped ages ago. You don't understand man how upset I am at this moment. Keltie's causing serious damage to my good name on ANI. He's misleading editors by alleging that I'm associated with the KKK. It's not true. This is the second time I'm attacked with this KKK crap on ANI. Dude I'm at a loss here for words and I don't know what to do or think. I'm pissed off beyond words but I'm trying to remain cool even though it's getting worse as I see he's now canvassed 3 separate admins (including you) personally on their talk pages in order to sway a block. I'm going to be banned over his KKK allegations on ANI and I'm telling you it's not fair because I'm not a racist. I don't hate. It's not me. I have black buddies. Sure I have a temper but it's in no way as bad as some think. But dude the KKK? Hell no! None of what he's doing makes sense. I'm trying to take your advice to "chill" but how can I under these circumstances? Being accused of something I'm not is hard to take. I'm a big boy and I can take a lot of punches man, but what that dude is doing is just too much. Just please understand how this all makes me feel. I know you and I have had our differences but that doesn't mean a thing on Wikipedia. I still respect you and I have always appreciated your feedback. I don't know what else to say. I'm too upset. Keltie's going to end up getting me blocked or banned over this whole racist lie garbage. It's just not fair. So fucking unfair. Caden ^cool 10:48, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Question

{{adminhelp}} Could an admin warn User:KeltieMartinFan to stop making personal attacks? Please check his talk page and edit summary. I'm not asking that he be blocked. A warning should do. Also, I've noticed he edits any article to do with NBC which leaves me feeling there could be a COI here? Is it possible he's employed by NBC? Just for the record, I've had problems with Keltie in the past. Again, I'm not asking for a block. Please just read what I've said and look into it. Thanks. Ned ^ac 12:45, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree that some of there edit summaries were inappropriate, so I have placed a warning notice on their talk page. For future reference, you could do the same yourself, it does not require an administrator - see WP:WARN.

I cannot really speculate about possible conflict of interest - if this is a concern, I suggest that, in the first place, you (politely) ask them about it. Cheers,  Chzz  ►  12:53, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! I did try to contact Keltie with a warning to cease with his personal attacks but he reverted me. That's why I used the template here. I'm very concerned that Keltie may be employed by NBC which is a COI if he's employed there. However, I can't do anything because he will revert me if I ask. Ned ^ac 12:58, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Friendly note regarding talk page messages

Hello. As a recent editor to User talk:KeltieMartinFan, I wanted to leave a friendly reminder that as per WP:USER, editors may remove messages at will from their own talk pages. While we may prefer that comments be archived instead, policy does not prohibit users -including anonymous editors- from deleting messages or warnings from their own talk pages. The only kinds of talk page messages that cannot be removed (as per WP:BLANKING) are declined unblock requests (but only while blocks are still in effect), confirmed sockpuppet notices, or IP header templates (for unregistered editors). These exceptions only exist in order to keep a user from potentially gaming the system. Thanks, — Kralizec! (talk) 14:16, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Good call

Good call on turning the computer off and going for a run rather than speaking from anger. I take that back: excellent call. I'm actually going to do the same pretty soon, though I'm going for a ride on bike (the weather here is amazing today). When you get back to editing, try not to come from the prospective of "Caden vs. the gays" or "Caden vs. the liberals." It's not productive and can and will lead to more conflict. Instead, if you feel your voice isn't being heard try asking for a neutral opinion. WP:3O is a great place to start. If you're not satisfied, try going to the Wikipedia:Content noticeboard. If you're still not satisfied, you can always file an article WP:RfC. These are all great alternatives to airing past grievances you've had with editors in the past and are more productive than simply saying a conservative or heterosexual has no voice at Wikipedia. Finally, if none of that works, you can always take your complaints to the admin noticeboards. I would link to them, but I'm fairly certain you know where they are. ;) AniMate^draw 23:06, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks man, I'm glad you agreed. I take it you jog too? Good to hear you bike, I do a lot of that and love it. In regards to your advice dude, I appreciate it. But isn't WP:3O for situations where there's a dispute between two editors? For some strange reason the link you gave isn't working for me. All the other suggestions are good except for the admin noticeboard :) Caden ^cool 18:38, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Sandbox

{{adminhelp}}Can an admin please delete my sandbox for me? Thanks. Caden ^cool 16:29, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Admin help isn't needed, Caden. Just use {{db-u1}} on the page. → ROUX ₪ 16:40, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Assuming you meant User:Caden/sandbox,  Done. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 16:42, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Yeah dude that's what I meant. Thanks. Caden ^cool 16:46, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

BLP

Hey dude. (BTW, do you prefer Ned or Caden?)

To continue our discussion on BLP. Check out the arguments I used in Talk:E.O. Green School shooting about the article having been moved to "Murder of Lawrence King". Essentially I was saying that we can't use "murder" in the title since that implies an intent to kill by McInerney that's speculation, and therefore is a BLP violation. If and when McInerney is found guilty of murder, then it can be discussed. The article was moved back to the E.O. Green title. Anyway, let me know what you think. — Becks ^{Talk to me} 22:00, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi Becks. I prefer to be called Caden (I did mess around before with my name which spells out as Nedac backwards =]). In regards to your E.O. arguments, man I completely agree with you. "Murder" in that case would be a BLP violation. You were wise to have picked up on that. It's up to the courts to decide based on the evidence from both sides if or not there was intent. Until then man, the E.O. title is best. I must say you're one of the best editors I have ever seen. Dude I wish I was as good as you. I sometimes have difficulty with certain articles that hit a little too close to home. Anyway, sorry I haven't been on much lately but school, soccer and a few other things left me with little time. BTW my classic Mustang is now a awesome shade of blue. Man it took me weeks to find the right color but it's been worth it. Before I forget, checkout the link on my user page if you want a good laugh. It's no secret that I can't dance but I have a feeling the folks in the video are worse at it than me. Caden ^cool 00:56, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

I had a 71 Chevy Malibu 350 in a kinda metallic Green with a black fabric roof, and a Turbo 350 tranny, bucket seats, and console shift bar rather than a stick. Loved that car. Unfortunately never took pictures that I can remember. Why don't you post your car pictures somewhere, like FLickr. I'm not saying if I can dance better or worse that those in the video, but it was laugh. And thanks for those kind words about my writing. Becks ^{Talk to me} 16:07, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

The End of War

Hello Caden. I hope I haven't given you wrong information on the source of the quotation, but after reading this [1] I am less sure that Plato said it. Cheers. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 13:45, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

I didn't know there was debate over the quote, but thanks for giving me the link. Caden ^cool 22:34, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

You're right, of course

And I will take your advice. Seriously. Respectfully -- what would you do if someone posted a pack of noxious lies about you on a public noticeboard? I'm sorry I lost my cool, but I'm only human. Sometimes you need to stand up and say "bullshit." Anyway, thanks, I'm going to chill out now, and I'm quite serious. All the best -- Antandrus (talk) 00:43, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Dude I understand why you lost your cool and I respect you for having the balls to call it "bullshit" because that's exactly what it was. No need to apologize man. I just thought you could've handled it better. Basically when I told you to "chill", I was just trying to say to be careful when dealing with a difficult editor like him. You're a good admin and that is rare to see. Don't let him spoil that. Caden ^cool 14:21, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Tyson Ritter

Please use reliable sources. That article is already littered with enough unsourced trivia. k.i.a.c (talktome - contribs) 06:44, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I would think a official band site is official and reliable. Perhaps you should read it? It's made quite clear that Ritter has an injury. What part of this is too complicated for you to grasp? Caden ^cool 06:57, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

WP:UNCIVIL

WP:CITE

Learn to use references properly before you put on your macho suit. You made speculative claims with original research in there, not for Wikipedia - create yourself a blog. k.i.a.c (talktome - contribs) 07:56, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I made no such claims. I told you the official band site for the All-American Rejects specifically states that Ritter is injured. Caden ^cool 08:10, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Lets assume good faith here, please. Not every single fact or sentence in an article needs reliable sources. From WP:VERIFY "...material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation." That Ritter was injured does not seem highly likely to be challenged, at least to me, and it isn't controversial. However, once challenged, RS are required. The references there now seem sufficient to establish an injury by Ritter, so I assume this issue can be put to bed. However, it would have been better to work this out on the talk page collaboratively. — Becksguy (talk) 09:49, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Well, when you claim that someone may have had a tumor in their knee, I would like to see a source. Simple as that. Ended up he had just copy and pasted it from Contactmusic anyway. k.i.a.c (talktome - contribs) 12:06, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Nope I didn't claim, write, copy or paste anything. User:tyb222 might have done that edit but not me. What I told you was that Ritter was injured and that the official site verifies this fact. Anyway, Becks is right in that we should of discussed this on the talk page together. Regardless it's over dude. Caden ^cool 13:04, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Smile

Hey thanks Caden. Nice to hear off you. I've kind of retired actually, haven't edited properly in a while. Kind of lost my fire with the passing of Michael Jackson. Hope everything is going well though. Kind regards. — Please comment R² 11:00, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm sad to see you've retired. And I'm very sorry you lost your idol too. I know how much you admired him. I hope you can return soon man. The good article work you've done on Michael Jackson (and all the other music related articles you built) is too good to see you leave. Just take a break and then when you feel ready just jump back in. Good luck Realist :) Caden ^cool 13:19, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

MfD nomination of User:SheffieldSteel/Admin

User:SheffieldSteel/Admin, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:SheffieldSteel/Admin and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:SheffieldSteel/Admin during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. --Law Lord (talk) 18:10, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Undid

Hi!

Do you care to motivate these two [2] [3] edits? Gabbe (talk) 11:30, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Grrr...

Caden, don't ever agree with me. Aren't things much easier when we're at each others throats? </sarcasm> Seriously, thanks for the back up. And for the record, does this look anywhere in the neighborhood of 30? I'm kind of stunned that anyone would do this and think it was okay. AniMate 09:59, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

LOL I love you too man! But seriously that dude is so way out of line it's sad. And you're correct in that it's at least over 50 automated messages he left for Daniel. Caden ^cool 10:10, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

I knew I was smarter than you. Look closer. It's over 100. AniMate 10:15, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Yeah you're right. It's over 100 which only proves my point that it did borderline harassment. I've never seen anything like this before from an admin. I'm surprised he wasn't reported to ANI. Caden ^cool 10:22, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

If I wasn't doing three other very necessary things right now offline, I probably would have filed it myself. If a report was made, I would throw my support behind it, but I'm in the middle of several things and really tired. Even though it will be stale, I'll likely bring it up tomorrow. I'm honestly just kind of stunned and irritated. Were I more focused online I would have stepped in well before this, but now I just don't have the wherewithal to make a good report. Granted many, many of Daniel's images should be deleted. Yet he seems like a good enough kid, and some reasonable non-automated explanation should have been given to him. That said, I don't agree with all of the nominations and will hopefully have some time to do something tomorrow. This is why I hate automated edits and why it irritates me that some admins feel they're above actually dealing with "problematic" users on a personal level. AniMate 10:47, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

If a report was made I know I would support that. I don't think it's stale though as I've just seen that Xeno and other editors have noticed the situation and made comments on it. Many of Daniel's images are very good and worth keeping. He's a good editor. The majority of the nominations (by User talk:Fastily) were clearly made by a poisonous admin out for blood, and therefore most of his nominations are shit for the birds. It's a real shame that Fastily is allowed to get away with this type of behavior. As both I and Xeno mentioned on his talk page, it's time for the dude to step down as admin. Caden ^cool 23:36, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks man

Thanks! I really was about to quit until I saw everyone coming in on my side all of a sudden. Maybe you're not in on that yet and you don't know what I'm talking about. But thanks! Daniel Christensen (talk) 06:46, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome dude and hey welcome back! I'm glad you decided to stay. Your image contributions are good and very much appreciated here on wikipedia. But yeah I'm too aware of what happened to you. It's totally uncool the way Fastily harassed you to no end. But it looks like things will be okay now. If you ever have problems again with that guy just let me know.

Caden ^cool 07:31, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

I would probably find this discussion fascinating if I were actually watching Caden'S page. 0:) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 06:49, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Haha you're NOT funny:) Caden ^cool 07:31, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Yeh, yeh, I get that from the wife, too: "You think you're funny, but you're not!" Whatevuh. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 09:23, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Edit warring over images by Daniel Christensen

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. Binksternet (talk) 10:58, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Look here goof, YOU are the one edit warring over every single image of Daniel's without a valid reason. Take your warning and shove it! Caden ^cool 11:05, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Blocked: Disruptive editing

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for disruptive editing: large-scale reversions and a failure to communicate or discuss your actions. Please stop. You are welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below. PeterSymonds (talk) 12:19, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Caden (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Your reason here

Decline reason:

I am declining your request for unblock because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

• the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
• the block is no longer necessary because you
  • understand what you have been blocked for,
  • will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
  • will make useful contributions instead.

Please read our guide to appealing blocks for more information. Mr.Z-man 03:19, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Could an admin please put a stop to the this baiting of User:Baseball Bugs and User:Dave1185? This behavior [4], [5], [6] is just not cool and is harassment. I'm currently blocked and can't do anything about it. I have no clue why Dave went and left a warning 5 hours after I'm blocked on my talk page either. He told Bugs "I sense another block for him at the end of the current block, if my guesstimation is correct...)" on Bugs' talk page so it's possible both are trying to get me re-blocked after this block by trying to piss me off. Any help would be appreciated. Thanks. Caden ^cool 03:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Caden (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I'm not asking to be unblocked even though I disagree with 31 hours. I'm asking if you could please warn or talk to Bugs and Dave to cut it out. I'm blocked so why are they both allowed to harass me? Caden ^cool 03:33, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Decline reason:

"I'm not asking to be unblocked even though I disagree with 31 hours." Please do not post an unblock notice unless you seek to contest the block.. —Dark 03:54, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

I am not trying to get you blocked. I can't speak for Dave. But I think he's suggesting that if you don't straighten up and fly right, you risk getting indef'd again. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:19, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

I wasn't indef'd for edit warring before so what are you talking about? And if you're not so intent on causing trouble for me then explain to me why you're trashing me on your talk page and posting trash about me on the noticeboard? Yeah sure you're not trying to get me re-blocked! Caden ^cool 03:26, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

I don't recall what you were indef'd for specifically. And I'm really not that interested in your blocked-or-unblocked status. That situation is entirely within your control. One thing: If you keep posting frivolous unblock requests, you're liable to fulfill Dave's prediction. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:34, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Bugs what just happened to my page a few minutes ago?? Where did that edit come from?Caden ^cool 03:54, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

From an impostor account that was trying to get the both of us into further trouble. There was another impostor account created yesterday that was targeting me. I don't care about that. But when it tries to draw me into a deeper argument with another editor, I lose patience. It was probably the banned user Pioneercourthouse, who's been doing this kind of thing for years now, especially since last summer. He's done something good, though, by making me refocus, as he nearly fooled me. I would like to bury the hatchet with you and not take your name in vain again. I hope you'll do the same for me, but if not, that's understandable. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 03:59, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Okay dude, let's bury the hatchet for good. Caden ^cool 04:05, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Done. :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:10, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

• Would someone get this goddamn hatchet out of my back, please?! HalfShadow 04:12, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
  • It just occurred to me that my metaphor was not the best, as one of PCH's series of impostor accounts last summer was in trying to impeach the already-indef'd user Axmann8. In case anyone is interested, here is the so-called contribution log of the latest impostor:[7] ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:15, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

I know I'm blond and all so no jokes Bugs lol, but seriously man, can you please tell me how the hell did Pioneercourthouse post under both your username and mine? I can't figure it out. Caden ^cool 04:21, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Not both, just yours; I reverted my own responses to the faker. See below. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:33, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

What the fuck is happening? Where did that other page under my name come from? What's going on?Caden ^cool 04:27, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

(ec)He created a fake account called "Caden (talk page)" and then redirected it to your own talk page. Hard to see that now, since an admin just rubbed out both his user and talk pages. Actually that naming style is more the banned user Ron Liebman's style, but it doesn't matter. I consider all trolls to be the same guy. Anyway, he created that fake account and then started responding to my comments here. After the second one, I said, "Wa-a-ait a minute...!" and realized it was a fake. I then reverted back to my last posting prior to the faker's posting, and reported it to WP:AIV. He was quickly blocked, but he kept redirecting his talk page to yours, so I asked the blocking admin to take away his right to edit his own talk page, and dat was dat. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:28, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank so much Bugs for clearing that up for me. But what happens now? Is my name going to be okay or is his fake user page using my name going to cause me more trouble? Please tell me? Caden ^cool 04:34, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

It was blocked and deleted after I reported it to AIV as an impostor. I don't think there's any issue where you're concerned. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:40, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

This sequence of events is perhaps an illustration of "good faith" vs. "bad faith". Many of us are guilty of "bad faith" behavior at times. But generally, regular users are exercising "good faith", in that they think they are doing right, and that can lead to arguments. But an impostor like that is totally "bad faith". His sole purpose is to willfully cause disruption. That kind of user can get me a little riled. But I try not to get mad - just to get even, i.e. by having an admin slap him down. Until the next time, anyway. >:( ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:38, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

It also serves to illustrate why I wasn't all that unhappy about failing to win adminship. Sometimes I get pulled into these trolling situations, but I would rather do other stuff. Can you imagine spending nearly every moment on wikipedia having to deal with those bozos? blecch! ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 04:45, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Yeah I hear you. I think you're pretty good at catching them trolls. That's why you tend to piss them off and that's a good thing. Keep up the good job Bugs. I mean that. Caden ^cool 04:52, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. Yes, I do get on their bad side from time to time, and I'd rather they were firing shots at me than at an article. I sometimes call it "vandal hunting", and I don't do as much of it as I used to, but it's a necessarily evil of a website that "any moron can edit". Although I read an article recently by some guy talking about wikipedia and how he finds the occasional replacement of an article with "F.U." or some such to be kind of perversely charming. As a wikipedia editor, though, that kind of thing loses its novelty quickly. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 05:05, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

February 2010

This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive comments.
The next time you make a personal attack, you will be blocked for disruption. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Dave ^{♠♣♥♦1185♪♫™} 17:51, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

• And if you must know, you've grossly insulted User:Binksternet and the proof is in your edit summary, knock it off! --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦1185♪♫™} 17:55, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Dude what's up?

Are you actually getting blocked here? What is going on? Daniel Christensen (talk) 06:33, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Yeah man I was blocked but it's expired now. Caden ^cool 02:20, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Ah, actually, I'm still blocked for some odd reason? Caden ^cool 02:23, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Subpage move

Hi, I moved Caden/my shit-list to User:Caden/my shit-list, since that seemed to have been where you intended it to go. Best, MuffledThud (talk) 14:14, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks dude! That's exactly what I was trying to do. Caden ^cool 14:19, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Check this out

You are invited to join the discussion at User_talk:Jimbo_Wales#Attack_coatrack_we_discussed. -- Rico 19:14, 18 March 2010 (UTC) (Using {{Please see}})

Thanks for letting me know but I see no point. That hateful mob owns and controls that attack page. Personally, I feel the article should be deleted. Caden ^cool 06:13, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Hey now. I made some real improvements on the article today. Calling editors a "hateful mob" isn't helpful at all. AniMate 06:17, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Honestly I have not looked at her attack page in weeks. If you did improvements on it, then that's great. But I was not refering to you as part of the mob. Despite what you may think, I have always thought you were a good editor. Caden ^cool 06:23, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I hadn't looked at the page in months, but caught Rico's messages (to a very selective group of editors). I took a weed whacker to it, and it resembles a pretty neutral biography now. AniMate 06:25, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

I will take a look at it soon enough. As for Rico's message, it's pretty obvious that he wants and has always wanted a neutral article. That's what matters most. Can't argue with that. Caden ^cool 06:36, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

We'll have to disagree with each other about Rico, but my cold medicine is kicking in and it's bed time. Hopefully I'll feel better tomorrow and won't be around to edit. AniMate 06:45, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Okay we'll agree to disagree. Hope you feel better soon. Take care. Caden ^cool 06:50, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Speaking of things you disagree with, another post of yours makes me wonder what you think about this one. -- Rico 21:41, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Your edit was reverted.[8] -- Rico 22:32, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

The discussion has spilled over onto the BLP talk page, here.

Jimbo is now editing the article. -- Rico 20:01, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Jimbo Wales has posted on the Carrie Prejean talk page -- and wrote on his talk page, I'm "absolutely right on the content issue." And "Why Miss Prejean's entry should be a coatrack for that is the core question which has not been answered."

This has prompted editing on the Carrie Prejean attack coatrack.[9] -- Rico 15:10, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

InaMaka did. I began a discussion at the attack coatrack of a living person talk page that you may find interesting, since you have expressed interest in the subject before. -- Rico 19:33, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Vitamin C

Well sure. I'll get to it sometime today, hopefully. EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 16:18, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

All done! EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 17:44, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

That's because you have to look in the RIAA database, silly goose. And you're right, it was certified Gold, which you can see here. I'll add it in to the discography. EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 20:26, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Hey, no problem. Glad to help. EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 14:49, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

I added it in, and I don't see why it shouldn't be reliable. EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 20:29, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

3 users

Jack-A-Roe (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Flyer22 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Legitimus (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
Posting the userlinks as a convenient reference, and also because I haven't actually looked at them yet. I am not acquainted with these users that I can recall. Can you point to anything specific that looks fishy? ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 10:34, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

• What's specifically fishy is how they appear to work together as one on this particular [10] article and on its talk page [11], where their behavior appears to me as POV pushers. They also work together on other related type of articles. I don't know what to make of it. They could be socks or they could be working together for POV purposes to claim ownership of that article, or I could be wrong all together. I don't know. I'm not acquainted with any of these users. That's why I'm asking you if something seems fishy since you have the experience in identifying socks. Caden ^cool 08:31, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

User:Rockgenre

This user clearly has behavioral issues, considering that he has repeatedly reverted pages against consensus and sources, refuses to behave in a civil manner with other users, and does not want to listen to the rules and guidelines of Wikipedia. For you to take his side and claim that I made some kind of personal attacks I never made is, quite frankly, an insult to my intelligence and the intellect of anyone who would read these pages and look at my edits, where I have never done anything wrong, and RG's edits, where he has never done anything right. (Sugar Bear (talk) 20:28, 30 March 2010 (UTC))

"Graduation (Friends Forever)"

All done. I've added in a new section, "Digital singles". The song charted on the Hot Digital Songs chart, which is a component chart. But since it was the only chart it charted on the time of the digital release, it's acceptable. EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 22:04, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Well thank you for saying that. That means a lot to me. If you ever need anything, drop me a line and I'd be more than happy to help! :) EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 22:16, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Well sure. EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 22:30, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

All done, mister! EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 22:35, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

No problem. EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 00:30, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar

Thanks, Caden! :) EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 00:19, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

That was very nice of you to say, mister. I also appreciate the fact that I know someone that appreciates what I do, and sees what I do. Thank you again, Caden. Your a pretty cool dude. Lol. EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 00:32, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, that means a lot. And I do really mean that. EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 01:15, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Australian certifications

I've added the Australian Recording Industry Association certified awards to the singles table. However, I also do not know where to get the Recording Industry Association of New Zealand certifications, either. The only place I know to get them, only has them from 2007 to now. EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 00:00, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm sorry dude. I just don't where know where to achieve this information for you. And no, I have no idea about anything about Ireland, lol. EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 00:15, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Anytime. Oh, and I also removed the component chart's from a few of Vitamin C's song articles. Hot 100 Singles Sales is only to be used if the song failed to enter the Billboard Hot 100. Just thought I'd let you know for future references. EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 00:25, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

WP:GOODCHARTS

Saw your question on another editor's talk page. Any reliable certification archive I've been able to locate (including a partial one for Ireland) is listed at WP:GOODCHARTS.—Kww(talk) 00:23, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for that but it only starts at 2005 and I needed info from the years 2000 to 2002. Caden ^cool 00:31, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Cartel discography

Sure. I'll start when I have some extra time. Probably tomorrow or so. EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 23:08, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Okay. Thanks for the patience :) EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 23:18, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Any idea what this is about?

Apparently, I've done something really horrible to you. I have no idea what it is, but apparently it's "one of the worst, deliberate exhibitions of bad faith (Rico has) ever seen on Wikipedia." I've no clue what he's talking about, as you and I get on rather well these days despite our ideological differences. Little help? AniMate 21:32, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

"Joking." "Joking" left out. Caden reacts. -- Rico 23:09, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Wow. You really took a fine tooth comb through all of my edits. That was a year ago when Caden and I were in a heated disagreement, but please keep bringing relevant things to the table like this. AniMate 23:10, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

(Edit conflict) I believe Rico is talking about this [12]

incident from May 19, 2009, where you took my words out of context and turned my joke into a threat. In this diff [13] you will see that I had stated I was only joking when I mentioned I'd kick Keltie's ass. For some reason, you chose to not reveal this and decided to make me look bad. Here's what you chose to say on ANI: "As usual, Caden complains about a user being a bully, and he goes on to threaten to kick Keltie's ass". You then went on to say, :"Frankly, I don't think Caden is an asset to the project at all." Not only where you assuming bad faith, but you were deliberately being dishonest on ANI. I took offense to your posts back then, and felt attacked by you. At that specific period I was accused of edit warring with Keltiemartinfan and was blocked at the time of your comments to ANI, and therefore was unable to defend myself. It's all in the past now but I believe this is what Rico was referring to. Hope this clears it up for you. Caden ^cool 23:16, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

My point was, and is, AniMate, that you complained that I didn't reply to your request to mediate. Then you complained that you felt that people weren't replying to you because it was you that was proposing it. I felt a little bad, but my inner thought was that you didn't exactly inspire trust.

I think the incident above was really blatant. Sometimes people on the Internet accuse people of taking things out of context -- and usually it's not even true -- but in this case, it was very much true.

At the time, however, I was thinking of something else that you had been doing.

I'm sorry if I hurt your feelings. -- Rico 23:31, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Hurt my feelings? No, but you've annoyed the living shit out of me by continuing to simply complain about everything and the kitchen sink yet refuse to engage in any attempts at dispute resolution or article improvement. You're continued assumption of bad faith is duly noted. As for the ass kicking comment, I linked to it and left the word joking out. I would point out that the unanimous decision at AN/I was that Caden was harassing another user, and the comment I linked to was just one of many Caden had sent that user. It strikes me that this is pretty much all you do here, Rico. You dig up old edits, you insert comments into old discussions, you obsessively fix your date/time stamp, you bitch, you moan, you complain... but you don't do. You've stated several times that you aren't being paid to edit here, which sounds pretty close to "I'm only willing to do the easy stuff." It seems pointless to argue with someone who is only willing to complain, so I am going to disengage. I'm sure all of Wikipedia looks forward to your next rant that offers no meaningful suggestions. AniMate 00:05, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Not true AniMate! I did NOT harass Keltie. Furthermore, I did NOT send Keltie "many" messages. Please do not say untrue things about me. Thanks. Caden ^cool 00:10, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Caden, the consensus on the board says differently and I honestly haven't really looked to deeply into what happened last year. I will say that as an editor you've improved tenfold, and your willingness to now work with others who don't share your views is really impressive. AniMate 00:20, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks AniMate for the compliment. That means a lot to me dude. In regards to the consensus you mentioned from last year, they were mostly enemies of mine who wanted revenge. I was contacted off wiki about that. You'd be surprised what goes on off wiki in order to influence what goes on wiki. I know I was. Caden ^cool 04:30, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Saw_VII

Re. Talk:Saw_VII#Dean_Armstrong

Thank you for your input.

I would be grateful if you could kindly clarify where I have failed to remain calm, civil, or exhibited any negative behavior, if indeed this is your assertion.

Also, could you please reconsider your statement, Chzz, posting a block threat on Jordan's talk page when you very well know he's done nothing wrong, is not acceptable behavior.

I posted the warning for uncivil behaviour in accordance to WP:NPA, having checked my logic with several other very experienced editors in good standing. It clearly stated in the warning that the concern was over their comments on the talk page; specifically it was concerning the statement "You are just a troll".

I believe this is in accordance with Wikipedia policy, and if you do reconsider, I would be grateful if you would strike your comments on my alleged behaviour.

Many thanks,  Chzz  ►  06:10, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

You seemed to have forgotten to give a warning to Mike Allen? If you had taken the time to notice (or did you just miss it?), anyway Mike Allen called Jordan a "troll" first, and Jordan clearly was offended by such an attack and therefore he called Mike a troll. He only did that because Mike was taunting him on his talk page. You were quick to give a block warning (threat?) to Jordan. Yet, you turned a blind eye to Mike. Makes no sense to me why you would do that unless Mike is a friend? Caden ^cool 06:22, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Aw okay I see now. You chat with Mike on IRC. Case closed. Caden ^cool 07:06, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

The user visited the #wikipedia-en-help IRC channel using this link, and asked for help.

I reviewed the background, and I didn't spot anything too bad from MikeAllen (talk · contribs). I thought that the NPA warning was appropriate.

Looking into the background, Power Slave (talk · contribs) was suggesting that we should try to reference this junk.

At this stage, however, I will drop the stick; it's not worth wasting time on this, when we could be doing something more productive. Best,  Chzz  ►  06:57, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Codedon

Quick heads-up that I just dealt with a {{helpme}} shout from blocked user Codedon (talk · contribs) - the similarity in names, I thought it worth mentioning to you.  Chzz  ►  06:57, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Unblock

Hi iam unblocked now. I guess your words had a significant impact. So i wanted to thank u. Cheers Blablaaa (talk) 08:39, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Thats's awesome man! And you're so totally welcome! Caden ^cool 08:50, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

They will have an eye on me, but i think i will give no reason for any further block or something else. Blablaaa (talk) 09:15, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

That's okay if they want to keep a close eye on you. Many around here keep a close eye on me too. Hey, have you ever thought of getting a mentor or maybe getting signed up for adoption? I think one or the other could be good for you. That way an experienced editor in good standing could help you. Maybe Chzz could be your mentor? Just a thought. Caden ^cool 09:28, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes maybe. At least i will sometimes need some grammar check. Blablaaa (talk) 10:07, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Tears For Fears Discography

I'm afraid that edit-warring on behalf of your friend EnDaLeCoMpLeX does not make it a consensus, and if you persist in doing this I will report you both for sock/meatpuppetry (you have chatted on each other's talk pages and have intersecting edits on almost 30 pages so it will not be hard to prove a connection between you both). Furthermore, not only does the version of the intro that you keep reverting to merely duplicate information that is already in the discography tables below it (which is pointless), it is also wrong and has many inaccuracies. It was seemingly written from an American standpoint whereas TFF are a British band and the band's history begins there and should be maintained from that viewpoint. Now please leave it alone. 80.47.10.75 (talk) 11:10, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Excuse me? I'm not edit-warring on behalf of nobody. Do not accuse me of such nonsense. You are a sock. You jump from one account to another. You have been reverted by 4 editors in total yet you continue to edit war. You have been edit-warring and pushing your POV since December 2009. Report me all you want because consensus is clear on the article. The intro is the correct format for all discographies. I do not know what your issue is concerning Americans. But let me say this to you, God bless America :) Caden ^cool 11:37, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

It's obvious that you're an idiot so I'm not going to waste much more of my time trying to reason with you. And since you obviously haven't been paying attention, the current intro that I support has only been reverting by one user: you. EnDaLeComplex reverted a different version of it completely and after the current version was added, s/he left it well enough alone. However, if you continue edit-warring on this article and keep reverting it to a factually incorrect version, you will be reported and blocked - again. Now I suggest you go and play somewhere else. 80.47.8.98 (talk) 12:51, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

I may be blond and good looking but I'm no idiot. Look man, I have no time for your personal attacks, no time for your threats and I have zero interest in speaking any further with a sock. You're a sock who jumps from one account to another. If you want to report me, go ahead. I doubt you'll get far. After all you're a sock. Caden ^cool 13:00, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

And I have no time for people who try to vandalise accurate articles. My warning still stands. 80.47.8.98 (talk) 13:02, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Edits

i added 2 diffs, when u look them u will see it so undisputable.... . but please dont raise the issue, i only wanted to show u because u are interessted Blablaaa (talk) 11:45, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I had a look at both diffs and it's exactly what I thought. I can't press the issue now because it happened two months ago. I'm not surprised he got away with those horrible biased edits. Looks like he's been getting away for a very long time. That's just wrong. Anyways, if he does it again I'm doing something about it. Caden ^cool 12:15, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

The problem was, that i presented this facts to admin nick. I should have choosen somebody else, more neutral. But again: dont raise this issue please without new "problems". I will edit Battle of Kursk and if dapi returns i will edit with him. And then everything is fine i guess. Blablaaa (talk) 12:26, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Okay dude sounds cool with me. It's better for both of you to work together. It's healthy that way. Caden ^cool 12:35, 20 April 2010 (UTC)