User talk:Geni/archive 1

Hello Geni, welcome to Wikipedia. I am user 83.70.245.37 I will not stop vandalising this website,i am not sorry for any damage I have caused. You might find these links helpful: How to edit a page, How to write a great article, Naming conventions, Manual of Style. You should read our policies at some point too.

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump, or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

• You can introduce yourself on the new users page.
• You can find lots more information, including open tasks and daily tips, at the community portal.
• You can sign your name using three tildes, like this: ~~~. If you use four, you can add a datestamp as well.
• Before saving a page, it's a good idea to use the Show preview button to review your edits. Also, consider writing a summary for each edit.

Again, welcome! Chris Roy 03:01, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Three reversions

You are playing the games of three ? Calling this an argument ? Com'on Geni, be serious, will you ? This is Wiki, not Theresa's playground - irismeister 22:17, 2004 May 19 (UTC)

Apart from an argument from MNH Which I have delt with no one has adress my points as such I can't see any pother way of going forward. Perhaps I will be able to think of a compramise in the morning. But for now I can't think of one.Geni

Chelation therapy

Many thanks, Geni, re my query "chemically toxic", the chemically seems redundant. Think I'll remove it. Dieter Simon 23:19, 25 May 2004 (UTC)

Arbitration request re: Mr-Natural-Health

I've put in an arbitration request re: Mr-Natural-Health. You may or may not wish to add to it. - David Gerard 11:04, 1 Jun 2004 (UTC)

:I hope you shall contribute, Geni. Please present your frustrations at what is happening at World Health Organisation on the evidence page. Clearly WHO History will help you a great deal.

:However, if you would rather not contribute, please let me know and I will sift through it --bodnotbod 14:23, Jun 9, 2004 (UTC) It's OK, I've done it myself: Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Mr-Natural-Health/Evidence It was, strangely, quite a laugh. --bodnotbod 23:54, Jun 9, 2004 (UTC)

Cambox removals

yeah, we all know they don't belong and need to be removed, but it has been shown time and time again that MNH just reverts with "rv vandalism" every time someone does. Until the arbitration thing has finished, would you consider leaving them, but changing them to the less obtrusive camtiny entries, as It seems he doesn't revert when they are changed to those, but if someone removesd it completely he reverts back to the large box always..... once the arbitrtion has been completed I am certain that we shall be able to remove them in relative peace... - Xgkkp 01:41, 11 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Right, I know what you mean, (and I've seen some comment on his talk page where he says to put them on as many pages as possible) but the way I see it, a ban is probably coming from the arbitration process (and a longer one probably, as the previous didn't work). if he's not there to instantly revert, the removals can be made in peace. Perhaps after, looking what pages link to the camboxes and going from there. - 02:01, 11 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Croydon Canal

Damn. I was sitting here planning to cycle it next weekend. Moved to Category:London history; thanks. --Tagishsimon

Low-level insult vandal

Your "friend" struck again; his damage is gone now. -- Grunt (talk) 21:38, 2004 Aug 21 (UTC)

He struck here too actually... -- Grunt (talk) 21:41, 2004 Aug 21 (UTC)

Canals

Glad of your help in expanding the British canals page. It seems to have been much maligned compared to the American Canals pages, and even the British rivers pages. Perhaps we can realise your aim of an entry on every related page? :) Grunners 13:43, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Meningitis Mixup

Wow... here less than a week and I already violated the NPOV. My bad.

The serogroup/niche thing is only a hypothesis at the mo, although one people are working on, so with any luck there should be some evidence one way or the other soon. Anyway, I edited the article to make it clear that it's only been postulated, but there's no evidence either way as yet. I hope it meets with your approval! If not, I can fiddle it some more, or you can if you think you've got the gist (gist=hypothesis currently being tested). It was really only intended as an illustrative example.

For your delectation and delight, though, the book I read it in is "Modelling Epidemics" by Paddy Farrington. ISBN 0749256605, page 53. Not that I would expect you to look it up! Just trying to back myself up!

Thanks for pulling me up on that. I'll be more careful in future. --Viki 20:09, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)

---

animal testing

try the internet for info, i didnt use specific sites, i just have previous knowledge and didnt wanna name names. Selphie 08:00, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC) **

it depends what you search for, i seem to remember getting on to a site, then following links from that site to others and so on Selphie 12:01, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC) **

205.188.116.149

Thanks for reverting my user page! The anon vandal moved on to vandalized your user page, which I reverted. FYI, this person is known as User:Mr. Treason. Andris 23:19, Sep 16, 2004 (UTC)

Thank you for the reverts

I know who the vandal is, it's User:ClarityMS07, who is a) convinced that the "Catholicism" article was utterly incomplete before he graced it with his conspiracy theories about the Roman Catholic Church; b) convinced that when he vandalizes a page when he's not logged in, no one can tell it's him, even if it's the exact same IP that he's used before and since. sigh. Thank you for the reverts; he also vandalized the talk page for the article in a similar manner, and it's very reassuring to know someone out there (unlike him) recognizes that it's not the right way to pursue discourse. (And forgive me if I'm a bit rambly, I'm off to bed.) -- Antaeus Feldspar 07:59, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Also thanks for reverting my user page Sietse 10:13, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Geni, c'mon !

removed unback assertion that is not part of defintion anyway Frankly... Please reconsider! - irismeister 19:21, 2004 Oct 10 (UTC)
Hi, Geni - it's me again. Please write in the AM talk page where I left a place for you! TIA - irismeister 19:56, 2004 Oct 10 (UTC)
To spare you the voyage there, please find attached:

Geni

(placeholder for his alleged substantiation of his/her/its proven desubstantiation).
Geni, please do one or more of the following:
01. refer to my substantiation of my substantiation above
02. write here in the AM talk page BEFORE you write/revert/cut in the AM page
03. use reason, not deceit and treason, or, if you don't like reason, ban me :O)
Now please don't CENSOR the thing I put in there cauz' it's a fact, pal, and encyclopedias are all about facts, not your fictive definition of medical fiction!

Use of {{test}}

For future reference, official guidelines seem to indicate that it is prefrable to use {{subst:test}} instead of just {{test}}. This actually emebds the message in the page (less potentially confusing to an anonymous user who responds), prevents the message from changing, and may have additional load-related benefits as well (regarding template inclusion). This seems to be the standard for most messages of this nature. -Fennec (はさばくのきつね) 02:25, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Archiving Talk:Alternative medicine

Thanks for undertaking this chore, but Archives 11 and 12 show up as red links for me. JamesMLane 10:01, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I tried to fix it and encountered the same problem you did. I have absolutely no idea why. I came here to suggest to you that we should call for help. Then I had a brainwave and checked your contributions, discovering that you'd already done so without needing my advice. Good move! I'll await the outcome of your query. JamesMLane 18:55, 27 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Your edits on Parsi religion

That's a bunch of bull. If the Muslims are so oppressed by the Hindus, how come there are 100 million of them in India and none in Pakistan. First of all, the alleged oppression was done by nationalist leaders like Nehru who care more about being the first prime minister of India than caring for Hindus. Nehru was a nominal Hindu and didn't care about Hinduism as Jinnah cared about Islam. If Hindus were so intolerant, there would be no Parsi, Muslims, and Jews in India. Secondly, Hinduvta or Hindu nationalism is not Hinduism and does not represents Hinduism.(see discussion)

I can agree with you about not putting in Hinduism because this is a Zorastain article. Are you Muslim? You seem to ignore likewise Muslim oppression against Hindus (which is far more than alleged Hindu oppression) Secondly, Buddhism was not so tolerant as you suggest. For ages, when Buddhism was a state religion, devotional Hinduism was in decline. Only with the rise of the Advaita movement and bhakti movement, did Hinduism arise. Also Sri Lankan Buddhists have persecuted Hindu Tamils even today.

So Learn more about Indian history before you make such blanket statements. I am not reinstating my comment as I agree with you on the point about this being a Zorastian article.

Secondly, Hinduism is not polytheistic (common misconception by outsiders; please read the wikpedia article) but rather either monist (i.e. Advaita) , either pantheist or panenthestic or monotheistic(i.e., Vaishnavism and Shaivism). Ok, I agree with you on the Buddhist point as well.

If you want to reply, reply in the talk section of Zorastianism.

Helmuth Weidling

I am not sure what you used as a source but please google on [Helmuth Weidling] you will see that he was a "General der Artillerie". I can not find the very good biography of him which I saw on the net, but he was a decorated WWI officer who, if I remember correctly, died in Soviet captivity after a long imprisonment, because of his premotion to commandant of Berlin of a couple of weeks. Philip Baird Shearer 12:17, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)

The german version of the wikipedia was my main source (and a book I read about four years ago). The german wikipedia uses the Helmut spelling but I don't know how that shifts over to english. The only reason I wrote that substub was that the comander of the berlin forces was wrong in an article so I corrected it. If I get time I'll dig through my uni libiarly for more info but I can't promise anything Geni 13:00, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)

It is not translated into English. Please do the Google search. Most of the refernces on the net are in German! I think that the German version is Wiki must be wrong, but I am open to being corrected. A seach on Helmuth alone shows that others (slightly dated) have also used it as as first name. Philip Baird Shearer 13:28, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Thimeresol not in MMR

Thanks for the above correction in the MMR arcticle--Grist2mill 09:58, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Checkers

How do you know the White Doctor opening is a tournament opening? -- Dissident (Talk) 20:16, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

A quick note to say thanks

I just wanted to drop you a quick note to thank you for your support in my request for adminship. It was certainly a wild ride, and I really appreciate you taking some time out to contribute. ClockworkSoul 16:26, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)

taken from user page

Well done, Geni, keep up the good work. Dieter Simon 18:49, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Partition of India

You voted for Partition of India, this week's Collaboration of the week. Please come and help it become a featured-standard article.

The Humungous Image Tagging Project

Hi. You've helped with the Wikipedia:WikiProject Wiki Syntax, so I thought it worth alerting you to the latest and greatest of Wikipedia fixing project, User:Yann/Untagged Images, which is seeking to put copyright tags on all of the untagged images. There are probably, oh, thirty thousand or so to do (he said, reaching into the air for a large figure). But hey: they're images ... you'll get to see lots of random pretty pictures. That must be better than looking for at at and the the, non? You know you'll love it. best wishes --Tagishsimon (talk)

Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 2000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

• Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
• Multi-Licensing Guide
• Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

midget submarine

As far as I know, the image at the Midget submarine page is a Ko-hyoteki class submarine, as they were the only submarines used for the attack of Pearl Harbor. I got the picture from here: [1]

Your comment

Click on the link in question, scroll down and follow the link supposedly pointing to "Foundation for Biomedical Research"

--Selket 22:02, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Chemical warfare

You've done some work on chemical warfare, so I thought you might be interested to know that I've nominated it to Featured article candidates. I was hoping you would take a look at what we've done, and maybe help me perfect the article into something that we can all be truly proud of. -- ClockworkSoul 02:14, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Congratulations, Geni

Congratulations! It's my pleasure to let you know that, consensus being reached, you are now an administrator. You should read the relevant policies and other pages linked to from the administrators' reading list before carrying out tasks like deletion, protection, banning users, and editing protected pages such as the Main Page. Most of what you do is easily reversible by other sysops, apart from page history merges and image deletion, so please be especially careful with those. You might find the new administrators' how-to guide helpful. Cheers! -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 20:21, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Well done! Take it slowly at first, be very careful of range blocks, and blocking ISP proxies, and do not delete images unless you are absolutely sure 100% about it. Note that the link table broke a while back and cannot be fixed, so do not assume an image is an orphan just because no page appears to link to it. If you need any help give me a shout or ask at the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard Theresa Knott (The snott rake) 20:43, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Hi!, Wha Happen?

Why did you delete that?

Supercool Dude?

You deleted from this page.

I started it and I was adding to it and you deleted stuff! Why?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pelhams%2C_New_York

Supercool Dude

talk pages

Hey there. Please make sure you leave messages on users' talk pages rather than their user pages...most anons will never view their user pages. I'm sure it was an accident, thanks! (btw I was referring to the message you left at User:24.128.46.82) -Frazzydee|✍ 03:44, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Test

For various reasons subst:test is perfered to test mostly beacuse it is less confusing for new users when they edit the page.Geni 19:22, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm aware of the discussion, but personally I prefer making it obvious that it's a standardised message which costs very little effort to give, in the hopes that this will make clear a) that people putting stupid stuff in articles is a very common occurrence and that (as they can see) they don't stick around, and b) if they're trying to cost us time and effort on purpose, that they're costing themselves much more time than us. --fvw* 19:29, 2005 Jan 22 (UTC)

Vandalism

Hi there. Thanks for sorting out the United Kingdom vandal - the server was so slow we were trampling each others' reversions. I've blocked the vandal for 24 hours, though I see it's a repeat offender... -- Arwel 15:48, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Changes made today

Why did you revert the article on SHAC? The replacement was more to the truth. The text you replaced it with references irrelevant events that are not directly linked to SHAC but instead to people who (sometimes) are linked with people who support SHAC. The campaign is non-violent.

I am also wondering about your changes to the SHAC page. I moved "Direct action used by SHAC supporters has included violence, harassment, intimidation with death-threat letters and hoax bombs, arson, trespass, vandalism and destruction of property. Despite SHAC's stated policy of non-violent direct action, isolated physical attacks have occurred, such as the assault on Brian Cass, manager director of HLS, who was attacked outside his home in February 2001 by three men armed with pickaxe handles and CS gas. [2] (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1494924.stm)" to the "criticisms of shac" section and reworded it. You have moved replaced it in the "organization" section and changed it in the "criticisms of shac" section. It is not necessary to have it in both sections and I feel that it fits better into the second.

Do you have a reference that shows that Dave Blenkinsop was a "SHAC activist"?

"SHAC's use of public records in the sending of malicious threats to all investors in HLS" SHAC do not send 'malicious threats'. Maybe some people do; can you prove that they are SHAC? And the use of the word 'malicious' here seems biased - what is a malicious threat as opposed to a non-malicious threat?

"However, destruction of property and the intimidation of HLS supporters is deemed acceptable." Do you have a reference to show that this is deemed acceptable by SHAC? SHAC state on their website that it is not - http://www.shac.net/disclaimer/disclaimer.html

"SHAC critics claim that the campaign decorates its stands with images of animal psychology experiments from the 1960s, now banned, rather than bona-fide images of animal medical testing." Which critics have stated this? Which pictures from the 1960s do they use? All of the pictures I have seen SHAC use are from HLS investigations. Can you show otherwise? "Use of great apes is banned" Have SHAC ever used images of great apes or claimed that HLS use Great Apes? If not then this is not relevent and should be deleted.

I put reasons for some of my changes on the "Talk" page; it'd be useful if you checked there in future and counter-argued before simply reverting changes.

WP:AN/Navbox

You might want to check out WT:AN#Navboxes. If you have a superiour suggestions, I'll cheerfully listen, but so far nobody seems to have a better idea. That being the case, I put the short (main) Navbox back to one line again. I have gone through and done most of the changes discussed there (made the longer navbox, and switched the archive pages, and the Incident Index page, to use the longer navbox), but I have decided to hold off tweaking the short Navbox to refer to archives 3-6 (I decided it would be too much of a hassle to update it for every new archive, and thought I'd do it two at a time) until I actually start putting stuff in 5. Noel (talk) 02:47, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

PS: I don't usually check other User_talk: pages (so that I don't have to monitor a whole long list of User_Talk: pages - one for each person with whom I am having a "conversation"), so please leave any messages for me on my talk page (above); if you leave a message for me here I probably will not see it. I know not everyone uses this style (they would rather keep all the text of a thread in one place), but I simply can't monitor all the User_talk: pages I leave messages on. Thanks!

Request

Hi Geni. I wonder if I could ask for your help with something. A few days ago, User:Fvw set a block on me, which I believe was inappropriate. As far as I can tell, I didn't violate any policies, and the owner of the page concerned has since affirmed my beliefs. I'm trying to discuss this with Fvw, but I'm not having much luck. Please could you have a look at my attempt to discuss this, and tell me if I'm being unreasonable. If I'm not, could you try to talk to him on my behalf? Thanks. - Jakew 21:36, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Autofellatio poll

Hi. There is a poll going on at Talk:Autofellatio. We'd appreciate your vote. —Cantus…☎ 04:20, Feb 4, 2005 (UTC)

Baha'u'llah photo

nice try. We'll see how long it lasts. I appriciate the internal link i wasn't sure how to format that. Rick Boatright 03:28, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Geni: the passport photograph would have been taken shortly after Baha'u'llah's December 1852 release from the Siyah-Chal dungeon and before the start of His exile on 12 January 1853. Adib Taherzadeh, in The Covenant of Baha'u'llah, writes "...His neck badly injured and His back bent by the weight of heavy chains..." which would contribute to why Baha'u'llah appears as He does in the photo. I am minded that it is probably best to let the dispute about the photo come to a resolution before offering this information. What do you think? I am asking Rick Boatright, Tomhab and Paul Hammond too. --Occamy 07:34, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

That's rubbish. That photo is one of the two photos from his Adrianople days, and is acknowledged by the Bahais authorities. Even one look at the hat he is wearing is enough to know it is from his Ottoman days, not from his Iran days. --Amir 12:35, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Fingerprint - the Communist Territory

You are now being reported to the military police. Watch that page to see yourself added.--212.100.250.217 13:34, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

But no. I am the commander.--212.100.250.217 13:37, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Sathya Sai Baba

You seem to be fast at reverting the Thought of the Day posters. May I suggest that you also make a comment on the user's talk page about it? Maybe one of them will budge. —Mar·ka·ci:2005-02-10 14:05 Z

Baha'i Faith break for Paul Hammond

Geni,

First of all, let me say thanks for you help on the Baha'i articles, a subject I am sure was only of passing interest to you, if that. Your efforts to be an even-handed and reasonable editor and work towards an acceptable compromise have been greatly appreciated by myself, and I am sure several others involved in the recent conflicts.

I'm taking a break from editing the Baha'i articles for a few weeks - a combination of factors really - I'm busy sorting out a real life move to a new city and job, and I found myself getting angry yesterday with another editor who I respect and admire - not good.

So, I'm just letting a few people know about this. If you need my support or comments on anything Baha'i related in the mean time, drop me a line on my talk page. Otherwise, I expect to be taking an active interest in the Baha'i articles again sometime in mid-March. Hope to see you around the Wikipedia elsewhere. - PaulHammond 14:59, Feb 14, 2005 (UTC)

btw - If you're a Mornington Crescent fan, then we really must talk further. And maybe meet up for a round of One song to the tune of another. I think, if we can agree on Southwell's revised version with the notes agreed by Garden for play on the internet, I can make my first move. Hmm. Putney Bridge PaulHammond 15:06, Feb 14, 2005 (UTC)

Bahá'í pages vandalism

I will leave it up to a duly adjudicated decision of the Wikipedia community as to settling the Bahá'í (or actually more the Amir) issue of constant POV intrusions and reverts based on his hostility, rather than anything to do with facts. If you are an administrator, could I request that some decision be made on the policy of pictures being added to irrelevant pages (much less the dispute about it going on the Bahá'u'lláh page itself) and what I and others (seemingly yourself as well in at least some cases) perceive as hostily POV? If it is decided as policy to include (and not simply link to, etc.) the image, I for one will strive to see that it is honored, even though I disagree with it. It is not just this, of course, but his constant reverts of relevant information and addition of irrelevant and manifestly biased information. And, if it is agreed that someone is transgressing policies, might they be warned about being blocked from doing so in the future? Brettz9 02:40, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Oh, though I doubt you really need any further evidence for it, Amir has responded to my changing the use of first names in the article Shoghi Effendi (of "Mary" and "Shoghi") by saying: "(nobody is using first name only, don't lie. this is not about first names, and you know it. this is about bahai bigots like you censoring correct information out of bahai related articles here)". If you check out the edit, you will see that it is in fact (only in this case) about the first name. Brettz9 02:48, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your quick response and action concerning WP:3RR. It is sad that these blocks are needed at all :-( -- mkrohn 02:08, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Stop Blocking

As an admin you keep blocking the IP address used by User:JonGwynne for 3RR. Great! Only problem is it blocks me, and no doubt others, as well. If you must block this user how about blocking his User ID instead of his IP. That way you won't inconvenience anyone else. Also, I tried to e-mail you about this but you don't have an e-mail address listed. As an admin perhaps you should consider having an alternative method of communication. Thanks. Arcturus 13:58, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

OK. Thanks for the information you've left on my talk page. Arcturus 21:19, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Advice on...

OK... I'm sure you're completely fed up with the Baha'i pages of late, but all I'm asking is for advice on what you understand what needs to be in wikipedia and what is irrelevant.

If you look at Bahá'u'lláh's family, theres a section dedicated to the controversy of his third marriage. That section in itself I'm not sure if it should be up anyway (since I've actually not read about any real contraversial debate on the issue anywhere but from Amir), but I'm wondering more about the "Gawhar was pregnant" section. Its completely unfounded, unsourced and I've never even seen anyone suggest it apart from Amir. The only reason why I've not taken it down already is that there isn't anything to say she conclusively wasn't pregnant.

What does wikipedia consider on unfounded speculation. Obviously if Amir is thinking about it, others might, but there really are no papers on it, no sources that I can find and no defence made against it by the Baha'is (and Baha'is are good at putting up defence to attacks on their religion) which implies that no challenges have been put to the Baha'is.

I don't want to get you involved in this as you've already got enough on your plate dealing with the guy anyway but... whats your opinion? Definitely shouldn't be there, Probably shouldn't, Not sure, Probably should be there, or Definitely should? -- Tomhab 20:18, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

So... Whats to stop him quoting himself? -- Tomhab 20:48, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Revert Rules

Hello Geni,

How would you deal with someone that continually just reverts an article with no explanation on the talk page until I manage to get others in the loop? It was actually quietening down when you intervened.

Aberglas 00:10, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC) aberlgas

Thanks

Sorry for accidentally buggering up Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR; edits here seem to take about 10 minutes or so each to go through, and often fail.

James F. (talk) 22:18, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Vialotion of the 3RR rule

I believe that User:Tabib and User:Cantus are in vialotion of the 3RR rule. Please, see Nagorno-Karabakh:Revision history. These users must be banned. Ray Walker.

Geni, I ask you not to delete this comment above by anon User:64.136.27.228, who calls himself "Ray Walker". This anon IP is a sock-puppet used by User:Rovoam, a notoriously well-known Armenian user who "distinguished" himself in Nagorno-Karabakh talkpage and whom you blocked for 24 hours for his violation of 3RR (in fact, I think, 3RR is nothing compared to what he did to push his propaganda in Wikipedia). This is an important factual evidence, which I intend to use in future arbitration against this user. --Tabib 13:39, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

172?

Hi. I saw your comment on going to "incedents" on the 3RR page re 172's protect of the global warming page. Could you tell me exactly which page you mean by incidents, I'm not familiar with it.

Respecting other people's decisions

So much for respecting the decisions of other admins unless there's an egregious problem. Since you have seen fit to inject yourself into how I handled this case, please look forward to me injecting myself into cases you handle, and reversing your blocks in cases I disagree with. Noel (talk) 04:36, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Itai block

Special:Log/block - looks like you mistyped "2" instead of "24". Thanks. -- Netoholic @ 18:37, 2005 Mar 4 (UTC)

24 hours block

Well, you're right about Template:Sisterproject (I really hadn't thought about it - I've dedicated most of my time and energy to keeping it used). Still, I am of the opinion that this does not fall under the 3RR, as Netoholic's actions amount to simple vandalism - this template has been on WP:TFD twice, and voted to be kept on both occasions. Netoholic's first tried to turn it to a redirect to an unrelated template, than to hijack it by changing its content to unrelated content, defying the WP:TFD resolutions in the process. — Itai (f&t) 08:04, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Well, at least you know what Netoholic's been doing... No hard feelings on my part. Not to mentions that blocks are a wonderful thing that allows me to get a good night's sleep. (I would that I could set up an auto-block to block me for 8 hours a day.) Presently, I am of the opinion that it's all quite pointless, that the community does not care, that Netoholic will win through unscrupulous persistence, and that maybe I should simply quit Wikipedia. Gloomy, I know. — Itai (f&t) 09:18, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Civettictis @ Wikispecies

Mot me! - just checked in the page history, it was UtherSRG who listed it for deletion - MPF 20:05, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Why?

Why are you screwing with my user page? I thought User pages were free to be edited by the user, at their own will?--195.7.55.146 11:06, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)

RE: Your answer

• Why not? whats the criteria. How come you can, but I'm not allowed?
• Considering I can't log in properly, its all I can do. - And If it's not a User page.. why does it say "User Page" ?--195.7.55.146 12:43, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)

WP:3RR

Hi, you reverted my change on WP:3RR with the edit summary "they can't do that they have been blocked". I'm not sure what you're referring to. The section reverted reads as follows:

Demanding an apology or the de-adminning of the admin has not tended to impress. Editors should, however, take egregious misapplication of this rule to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR, or for more serious cases to Wikipedia:Requests for comment in the section under "Use of administrator privileges".

Well a 3RR block is only for 24 hours at a maximum, so of course they can and sometimes do all of the above. Email is not blocked when editing is blocked, and specific 3RR's are fairly often discussed on WIKIEN-L. I've reverted to my original edit but will not push this further. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 12:33, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Capitalism

I am not complaining about your having blocked me for violating the 3RR. However, it seems that RJII was not blocked -- why? "reverts," as you know, may be accomplished through other means besides hitting the revert button. On the day in question RJII reverted changtes that I made, and that Ultramarine made, far more than three times. Slrubenstein | Talk 20:41, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for undoing my block; I'm glad you and a few others recognized that it was unfair. Zen-master and I are working on an agreement on the Democrat article. -R. fiend 15:18, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Me too, thanks. Kelisi 17:42, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Mediation

I have suggested to Martin2000 to seek mediation with you. Not that my hopes are high... I have also raised an RfC which might help him along to try mediation, when he - hopefully - sees he is pretty alone. It might be good if you gave your comments to itRefdoc 16:59, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Maps

This issue potentially effects every country article on Wikipedia. I think that changes which potentially effect so many articles should not be implementend in this ad-hoc fashion. A few days ago I raised the issue of maps on Rfc. Please don't revert these pages until the issue has been resolved through dicussion. I think Wikipedia:WikiProject Maps or Wikipedia:WikiProject Countries are the best places for this discussion. I don't think we would want to get into the situation where every single country article was using a completely different style of map would we? Jooler 21:42, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Abdu'l-Baha photo

the black and white photo of a smiling Abdu'l-Baha taken at what is now Green Acre Baha'i School in the US during his trip here is actually a rather nice image, and I have added it ALONG with the color (retouched, colorized) image already posted. Rick Boatright 22:54, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

April Fools

I was unaware the 3 revert rule qualified for April Fools Jokes. I will continue to unblock myself, because this is stupid. If you block me again, I will seek arbritration against you for such a questionnable action. Please, I am not in the mood for these games. -- Earl Andrew - talk 23:44, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Blocking both violators of 3RR

Hi Geni, I notice that on April 3 you blocked Corax for violating the 3RR on NAMBLA. The 3RR policy says that "In the cases where multiple parties violate the rule, administrators should treat all sides equally." Adam Carr also reverted 5 times, but you did not block him. silsor 18:14, Apr 5, 2005 (UTC)

Because I rely on people repoting stuffGeni 18:40, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

If you're not planning to look at the page histories involved, may I suggest leaving the 3RR page to people who will? silsor 18:54, Apr 5, 2005 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Thank you for the vote at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Henrygb2. It has made my week. --Henrygb 01:58, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Copyright

Just raising this question: [2]. My initial impression is it is in breach but wanted someone more experienced to check...? -- Tomhab 20:02, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Smirking Chimp

In case you have an interest in the fate of Smirking Chimp [3]. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 02:15, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)

PWOT

Great work on fighting off the vandals at the VFD page. You earn a Barnstar for that. I'll give you one this weekend. BTW it's vandalism instead of vanderlism ;) Mgm|^(talk) 21:11, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)

• That was quite a non-event, huh? I expected more :) – ClockworkSoul 01:34, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Regarding the one-day-old conflict of Key

Regarding the fight I was having over Key a day ago, it derives from my speculation that the word "vandalism" is identical on purpose to the word for Wikipedia vandalism. Well, I found out later on that it is a different meaning of the word. Here is a message for you:

I'm very sorry for reverting Key 7 times. I'm very sorry for reverting Key 7 times. I'm very sorry for reverting Key 7 times. I'm very sorry for reverting Key 7 times. I'm very sorry for reverting Key 7 times. I'm very sorry for reverting Key 7 times. I'm very sorry for reverting Key 7 times.

Do you apologize?? I promise you I won't do this again. Georgia guy 23:00, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks. silsor 01:29, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)

3RR

Hey man, I think your getting close on going over your reverting limit for the Benedict XVI article. Why not let some of the other guys in the talk board do the reverts for you. I reverted the page twice already in a span of an hour. Zscout370 03:25, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

A quick question

Could you tell me if there is a specific reason why no ban was applied to WMC after the streak of reverts reported here? Thanks. — Cortonin | Talk 03:49, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

He reverted to this. — Cortonin | Talk 04:19, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

3RR: thanks

(William M. Connolley 19:28, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)) Thanks for your demi-mercy over the 3RR. I'll try to be better in future.

Thanks

Thanks for reverting my page. I was thinking it felt like a long time since Mr. WIC had been around. Much appreciated! — Knowledge Seeker দ 06:21, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Requests

Where can I put requests up on Recent changes?

• Thorpe • 14:30, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

172.128.118.157 vandalism

You put a notice on User talk:172.128.118.157 that if s/he vandalised again, s/he would be blocked. Well, s/he vandalised Racism (again) and my user talk page. If you're still around would you wave that magic mop and block this user? Thanks. FreplySpang (talk) 03:14, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

3rr, arbitration

on the page for vampire lifestyle, user dream guy uses his opinion to change the article and then accuses me of that same thing, yet he has tripped the three revert rule, so i wouls suggest that he be blocked for some time to think about his actions (if you wouldnt mind reading the talk page and arbitrating that debate, id appreciate it as well) Gabrielsimon 00:10, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

the fact is that he dislikes me, and seems to try to contest much of what he sees me putting into the encyclopdia, no matter what... i have tried to find out why he does this, but every time i ask him, he reverts his user page and calls me a vandal, or a harrasser. i would like it very much if it could be explained to him to stop constnatly reverting my additions, becasue, as in the case of vampire lifestyle, it is groundless. this is why i ask for arbitration. Gabrielsimon 00:14, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

SHAC deletion

Thanks for catching the weird stuff that happened when I added content - my net connection has been buggy for 48 hours. Will leave edits until that's fixed. Adhib 13:40, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

paranoia

look at whats happened with a user and this dream guy fellow, he thinks evryones out to get him, this makes me think hois cries of vndal should go unheeded and he should grow up, the other user tried to make peace but got rebuked. Gabrielsimon 00:04, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)