User talk:Mo0

Archive 1 -- October 20, 2004 - November 9, 2005.
Archive 2 -- November 9, 2005 - January 4, 2006.
Archive 3 -- January 4, 2006 - March 1, 2006.
Archive 4 -- March 4, 2006 - November 7, 2006.

As a note, I tend to reply to messages here on the talk page of the person sending them. If you'd rather I reply here, let me know. Thanks!

LOL[edit]

Found your wiki page boi, you goin down now!

Seriously though, lolin at the extreme amount of UBs. What is this, myspace.

( ; _ ; ) ~ Roflfox

Please review the deletion of article Stripy[edit]

I don't have an account on english wikipedia, but I have it on Croatian edition. My user name there is hr:User:SvekY. I hope you won't mind answering me here, on this Talk page.
Please, keep in mind that I am confused with your forrest of deletion policies, ways of deletion, etc. My wikipedia is by far smaller, so we don't have the need for all that yet.

A quote of my text to User talk:Mike Rosoft follows:

Deleted article "Stripy"
You deleted an article Stripy at 09:52, 19 November 2006 for the reason "(Web cartoon, no claim of notability)". Stripy is is not a web cartoon. I've seen it, and on an official web page [1] you will see that, though short and low in count of episodes, they are not for download. Look it up on IMDb, and you will see it is a regular movie.

Besides, I don't see why should the article be deleted even if it is "just" about a web cartoon. In that hipothetical case, it could be merged with some other article. --Cartoon-lover896 83.131.111.47 23:35, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

So, what's your verdict? Thank you for your patience. --Cartoon-lover896 83.131.174.12 02:26, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, I'd have to say that I agree with the ruling that was made, because, as the article was written, it doesn't cite any actual notice of significance or notability. I'd read up on notability guidelines before re-making the article. To be honest, the fact that it did actually air on TV may make it notable enough for an article, if it aired nationally, but others may disagree with me on that. The article should use information from iMDB and other neutral sources (such as a media mention somewhere) to back up the article and provide a reason why the cartoon is notable. Also, it may be best suited for an article on the Italian Wikipedia, because the cartoon aired there but apparently hasn't aired in America. You may find more people who know what it is over there rather than here, on an encyclopedia that focuses mostly on English-speaking subjects. 22:44, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. Well argumented and informative. --Cartoon-lover896 83.131.173.68 02:57, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Editting of 'Jew'[edit]

Hello, I was cruising Wikipedia today without logging in and got a message saying I'd vandalized an article 'Jew'. I'd never even seen the article myself, so I looked and realized I wasn't logged in and the usertalk was for 69.43.65.27

I fear this is my COLLEGE'S IP, and that some moron (read: countless, countless many) at my school is the one responsible. I'm more afraid however if they keep it up (read: they WILL) I'll also be banned and unable to edit articles. Is this a real possibility? If I log in will I be safe or will banning of my school's IP block us all out? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rett Mikhal (talk • contribs) 03:01, 14 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

To: User MoO[edit]

I am trying to find out some information and I was wondering if you could help. Today (3/28/07), I added some material to the Jason Voorhees listing (concerning his abilities, weaknesses, etc.). Several hours later, I have reviewed the page, and the entire entry I posted is missing; it was accurate, grammatically correct, contained to obscenities, and was an overall quality contribution. I cannot think of any reason why it would be removed, nor can I locate and History listings claiming to have removed it.

In addition, I made a modification to the death of Professor Lowe under the Jason X listing; in it I included his last words, which were humerous; however, an individual removed them, stating that they were not related to the plot. In addition, they removed the details added prior to this line, basically reverting it to its original consideration (as was done with the Jason Voorhees entry).

I came across your name while checking the History, and was wondering if you could assist me. I am frustrated that this is happening (it is also not the first time a modification to a Jason Voorhees page posted by myself has disappeared). Could you please advise on how I should approach this problem (Example: was there anything wrong with posting the joke, and how can I determine who erased the Jason Voorhees material, so I may discuss it with them?).

Thank you for any help you can provide,

bluewiki3

Thank You[edit]

Thank you for you quick response and perspective; your explanation helped me to see where you were coming from. Also, I was not aware that there was a group contribution section; thank you for making me aware of this.

It must be tricky working a setup like this, due to different writing styles, preferences, persepectives, etc. Kudos, and thanks again for you timely and mannerly response.

Sincerely,

bluewiki3

P.S. If you'd like, I can go in and delete the previous note I set.

Killers kill Kill Everyone[edit]

Sadly, the anti-web forces have deleted the The Kill Everyone Project page. — Randall Bart ^(talk) 00:55, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:CVU status[edit]

The Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism Unit project is under consideration to be moved to {{inactive}} and/or {{historical}} status. Another proposal is to delete or redirect the project. You have been identified as a project member and your input as to this matter would be welcomed at WT:CVU#Inactive.3F and at the deletion debate. Thank you! Delivered on behalf of xaosflux 16:25, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Bach Alive on Normal (O2JAM).jpg)[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Bach Alive on Normal (O2JAM).jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 20:14, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Differentworld-cast.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Differentworld-cast.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it may be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 13:47, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

???[edit]

wut r u talkin about??????? im not a abusesr —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.238.148.242 (talk) 22:27, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Trying to clean up the discussion area to make it easer to follow....[edit]

I am trying to make the page easier to follow... see my reason for editing... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anappleadaykeepsthedocaway (talk • contribs) 04:12, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks....[edit]

Ok, will do that. I just think it is a long winded argument that is between to posters and not very productive in the grand scheme of things on that page. Will move it to an archive... Anappleadaykeepsthedocaway (talk) 04:21, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

see you're coming back to the mop[edit]

In the last two years, the major things you may want to check are WP:CSD for the current wording of the requirements, WP:BLP, which has gotten rather complicated-- and fair use images, where practice seems to have gotten baroque beyond human understanding--at least, beyond mine. DGG (talk) 04:35, 23 September 2008 (UTC) (saw your note about this on a user page I was visiting) DGG (talk) 18:14, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Stanton[edit]

Please, excuse me, but where can I find the archived version of Michael Stanton? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.228.89.2 (talk) 19:36, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks...[edit]

for stepping in at the List of science fiction. I don't know if it was from my report at edit war noticeboard, or random browsing, but it is a relief! And i'm glad you reverted his lovely final msg - i never refactor others talk pages, so thought it might remain for ever. A testament to my evil desire to add citations!Yobmod (talk) 10:33, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

CSD of Luke Boyd[edit]

Hi there, just wondering how bad the Luke Boyd article was to make it a CSD:A7? The guy was an Olympic Boxer who got a fair bit of publicity pre-Beijing about his training attire. It might be borderline on the WP:ATHLETE requirements, but should easily pass A7. Could you please userfy it for me and I'll see if I can make it a decent article. I only noticed it as I had the Olympics article on my watchlist - not normally interested in boxing articles. Thanks The-Pope (talk) 13:34, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks... I guessed it must have been something like that (or worse!) I'll try to find more than just the press coverage on him training in pink and getting waxed (yep, a metrosexual boxer) before I recreate! Cheers, The-Pope (talk) 14:28, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Userfy the LearnNB Page[edit]

Hi. Can you please send a copy back to me of the LearnNB page, so that I can re-examine it, and see if we can build the page properly so that it fits the criteria for Wikipedia inclusion. Kreimer12 (talk) 02:54, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Interop Vendor Alliance[edit]

Hi, someone deleted the article Interop Vendor Alliance. The IVA has more members than for instance the Open Handset Alliance. I'd like to try rewriting it again and document its notability and also add some external references (there are about 32.000 hits on Google). I'd be very thankful if you could restore the last revision under my user namespace User:Ghettoblaster/Interop Vendor Alliance. Thanks. Ghettoblaster (talk) 18:21, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Arts and Crafts Movement[edit]

I'm trying to improve that page and to add citations, but I have no knowledge of the movement in the USA. As you started the section on that topic a while ago, I wonder if you could add citations, which it still lacks. Thanks. Marshall46 (talk) 09:22, 26 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Deletion of Nick-Thomas-Webster[edit]

Hi

I wonder if you can help please. During my vacation the Wikipedia page Nick Thomas-Webster was both noted for deletion and then subjected to Speedy deletion by B Wilkins in Canada - I was unable to note the tags since I was away and it all happened so quickly.

I messaged B Wilkins through the deletion review system and he stated that the external references given were user editable IMDB, Hollywood Reporter etc. I responded copying policies from IMDB and listing additional external sources to prove my points. He is now not responding. I have again placed a note on the deletion review page to ask other editors to look and review please. I have received an email suggesting I contacted you. I hope you can help.

Please feel free to contact me for any further information you require. nick@nicktw.com

Regards

Nick —Preceding unsigned comment added by Nicktw (talk • contribs) 10:56, 20 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

moosock2[edit]

can i have the sourcecode to mooSock2.ocx? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.98.49.230 (talk) 23:40, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Notification of pending suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity[edit]

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next month. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e., as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Xeno (talk) at 16:50, 3 October 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Notification of imminent suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity[edit]

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions will be removed pending your return if you do not return to activity within the next several days. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated should this occur, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e., as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts.

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Xeno (talk) at 13:10, 31 October 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Suspension of administrative permissions due to inactivity[edit]

Following a community discussion in June 2011, consensus was reached to provisionally suspend the administrative permissions of users who have been inactive for one year (i.e. administrators who have not made any edits or logged actions in over one year). As a result of this discussion, your administrative permissions have been removed pending your return. If you wish to have these permissions reinstated, please post to the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats' noticeboard and the userright will be restored per the re-sysopping process (i.e., as long as the attending bureaucrats are reasonably satisfied that your account has not been compromised and that your inactivity did not have the effect of evading scrutiny of any actions which might have led to sanctions). This removal of access is procedural only, and not intended to reflect negatively upon you in any way. We wish you the best in future endeavors, and thank you for your past administrative efforts. –xeno^talk 12:39, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of change[edit]

Hello. You are receiving this message because of a recent change to the administrator policy that alters what you were told at the time of your desysopping. The effect of the change is that if you are inactive for a continuous three year period, you will be unable to request return of the administrative user right. This includes inactive time prior to your desysopping if you were desysopped for inactivity and inactive time prior to the change in policy. Inactivity is defined as the absence of edits or logged actions. Until such time as you have been inactive for three years, you may request return of the tools at the bureaucrats' noticeboard. After you have been inactive for three years, you may seek return of the tools only through WP:RFA. Thank you. MBisanz ^talk 00:20, 4 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

RC Patrol-related Proposals in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey[edit]

Greetings Recent Changes Patrollers!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about technical proposals related to Recent Changes Patrol in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:

Further, there are more than 20 proposals related to Watchlists in general that you may be interested in reviewing. (and over 260 proposals in all, across many aspects of wikis)

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Note: You received this message because you have transcluded {{User wikipedia/RC Patrol}} (user box) on your user page. Since this message is "one-time-only" there is no opt out for future mailings.

Best regards, Stevietheman — Delivered: 01:12, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]