User talk:TigerShark

Talk Archive 17th April 2005
Talk Archive 4th April 2006
Talk Archive 22nd May 2006
Talk Archive 11th June 2006
Talk Archive 23rd June 2006
Talk Archive 15th July 2006
Talk Archive 3rd February 2007
Talk Archive 10th March 2007
Talk Archive 31st August 2007
Talk Archive 8th September 2007
Talk Archive 7th November 2007
Talk Archive 14th February 2008

Would you mind if I gave a username hardblock to User:Cornholio the Woooo? The name is too far over the line, IMO. --Bradeos Graphon Βραδέως Γράφων (talk) 22:05, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Good old Beavis and Butthead! Thank you, --Bradeos Graphon Βραδέως Γράφων (talk) 22:11, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There seems to be a bug in Huggle. (It's reporting them) Twice at least. - Milk's Favorite Cookie 23:05, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to start reverting each time it reports any user. Sorry for any confusion, frustration, ___________ (place your verb there) - Milk's Favorite Cookie 23:09, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(Actually you mean noun) 68.101.160.213 (talk) 08:49, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Posted to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Milk's_Favorite_Cookie#Editors_gone_wild

Hey - how about not reverting every change? Just a thought... I was going to edit the Conjugate Gradient article but every little thing got reverted right as I was doing it. This is very counter productive. Unless your 13 year editors can fill out articles like this then please let users work on it. You can check in the next day and see if you want to revert the article then. This has been a very sour experience and I doubt I'll contribute monetarily or scientifically again. I heard google actually _wants_ experts on their Knol site.

I notice that "Hollis01" has created a Soiloc-PAM page, advertising his product, and the revision history shows attempts to plant comments about dust control in ways designed to attract traffic to his pages. See Dust, Soiloc-PAM, Polyacrylamide, Erosion control, and Erosion control blanket. I'm not enough of an expert in deletion procedures to know the right approach, but it seems like you've dealt with this annoyance before. Can you give a look, and maybe also let me know the proper procedures and steps so that I can deal myself next time? Tb (talk) 20:50, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind; I've figured it out myself. Thanks! Tb (talk) 21:03, 19 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Buy.com. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article, speedy-deleted it, or were otherwise interested in the article, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Superm401 - Talk 10:20, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what you mean. I'm not the one that undeleted this. I obviously did contact you, right after starting the deletion review. Superm401 - Talk 18:49, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In the future, I'll try to address these kinds of issues on on one. Superm401 - Talk 10:12, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please restore this statement: [1] This neutral sourced statement is clearly not "Greek POV" as Rockybiggs unreasonably asserts. --81.79.239.155 (talk) 00:26, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please see this comment on the 3RR noticeboard. Thanks TigerShark (talk) 00:28, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rockybiggs is being totally unreasonable. He is trying to own the article and describes any reference to the Cypriot government position as "Greek POV". --81.79.239.155 (talk) 00:53, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As i have insisted on from the start there was a discussion on this matter on the talk page, and the General Concensus was not to have these comments mentioned. Any further agruements should be addressed on the talk page. Rockybiggs (talk) 10:49, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That was due to an extremely weird bug in Huggle. Apparently as I've been running it a while vandalism that it found three hours ago finally popped up and then after reverting it reported the vandal as he had received a final warning, ignoring the fact that the reverted edit took place long before the final warning. In any case, please see WP:DTR. I've made over seventy edits to AIV with little to no error, and made significant contributions to Wikipedia:Guide to administrator intervention against vandalism early in its existence. I do not appreciate getting a condescending template message because my software acted up. I don't particularly blame you, as I'm not exactly well known and the situation sure looked like a newbie making a stupid mistake, but please try to pay at least some attention to the experience level of the people you template.--Dycedarg ж 05:37, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry that you took offence, and hope it is clear than none was intended. I do not remember encountering you before and so I had no idea if you were a new user or not. To be honest, I do not think that it is reasonable for you to expect me to determine how experienced you are before leaving you a message, in this situation. I also feel that you should not take offence simply because somebody left you a message with a template, regardless of whether I know your level of experience. You had already taken up my time, and probably that of others, by leaving at least one incorrect report - so expecting me to take more time to write you a note that pays due respect to your experience seems a bit much to ask. In other words, you choose to save time by using a tool that causes others more work, so don't be surprised if people save time notifying you of the fact by using templates. TigerShark (talk) 21:56, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I notice that you've speedily deleted the Green Bay Harvest article and I understand the reasons for the deletion (or at least I think I do). Was there something this article - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twisted_juice - did that so that it avoided the same fate.

No problem! To be honest, i thought he'd vandalised more than that. Its been a busy night! Have a nice day. Thanks TheProf | 2007 23:19, 4 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Any word from our favorite vandal lately? I admit, I was almost looking forward to combatting the waves of sockpuppets that he claimed he would unleash. Too bad his bark was worse than his bite. GlassCobra 11:05, 16 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am ok with your better researched decision. Thank you. --User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 23:27, 18 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

With all due respect, did you not just authorise deleting content from pages just because users don't like it? A user has repeatedly deleted a well-sourced fact from the article Chile and has freely admitted that the only reason he deletes it is because he is Chilean and he doesn't want anything negative about Chile in the article. Consequently, could any user now delete anything he wants, even whole sections, no matter how well-sourced the facts may be? All that is needed is to say he doesn't like the fact or that he thinks it gives a negative impression of his country/party/city/religion/culture/school? This would have rather profound effects on many Wikipedia articles, and not necessarily to the better. My apologies if this sounds a tad bitter, but I honestly believe you made the most erroneous call I've seen an administrator make during my two years here. Having said that, I'm of course open for the possibility that there really is something I've missed in all this, and that's why I'm genuinely interested in hearing your opinion. Cheers! JdeJ (talk) 00:05, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for yet another quick answer! I disagree with you about the nature of the user's edits, but what would life be without some disagreement from time to time ;) I am, after all, one of "those stupid people" "without a life" "making things difficult" [2] So yes, my question is answered. JdeJ (talk) 00:13, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I understand the reason for AGF, but AGF also said good faith no longer apply if there are evidence otherwise.

Well, I'm asking what I should do about Asdfg12345. The past 2 month have given me ample evidence to not AGF.

All I'm doing is trying to add notable facts to the "Falun Gong and Organ Harvesing" article that is so blatantly POV'd that they may as well be FLG promotional material. And I'm not the only one if you take a look what's happening in the "Falun Gong" page with other editors. His MO is pretty clear - anything he doesn't like he blank/move down the article(and hope people don't read it), dream up sucky reason to drag it out in Talk, hide for a week and comeback and DE all over again.

What should I do? Bobby fletcher (talk) 03:12, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for catching that! I didn't realize it. iMatthew 2008 20:49, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The block and unblock of User:Piotrus has been raised at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Piotrus_incident:_policy_corrections_needed_either_way by User:Irpen. Thought I should inform you. Regards, Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 20:57, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've taken a look at the Lithuania matter that has recently been discussed, since some users have expressed concern over what went on. link. Thanks, and let me know if anything's in need of correction! FT2 ^{(Talk | email)} 09:09, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

But please, I didn't stick that yellow floaty bar in my talk page for no reason, you know. Use User:21655/Mistakes. 21655 ^τalk/ _ʃign 23:49, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean, chastise?

Anyway, I have a script in my monobook that alerts me of new entries in my watchlist, so it's a bit like an orange bar. And yes, the mistakes page is watched.

I created that subpage because, let's face it, there's a better place for WP:TROUT slaps than my talk page.

PS: That link redirects to User talk:21655/Mistakes, actually. I was too lazy to change it on YOUR page... 21655 ^τalk/ _ʃign 00:28, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Content moved, more details added & only content edited was defamatory comments. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Train2046 (talk • contribs) 14:19, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

After discussing the block with Libsey himself, User:142.166.250.98 is a residential IP address. Libsey doesn't edit through a residential connection. Libs has told me that that isn't him. Has he still edit warred if that IP is now struck from the record of the incident? Scarian^{Call me Pat} 16:35, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I will continue to monitor those two account's contributions for vandalism. Gary King (talk) 23:07, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've responded back at Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Gary_King#Oppose; also, a similar conversation is being made at User_talk:Wisdom89#Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship.2FGary_King. Cheers! Gary King (talk) 08:22, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My RFA that you weighed in on earlier has closed as no consensus to promote, at a final tally of 120/47/13. I thank you for your feedback and comments there, and I'm going to be considering all the various advice and comments presented. I might end up at RFA again some day, or not. If you see me there again in the future, perhaps you might consider a Support !vote. If not, not, and no hard feelings. The pen is still mightier than the mop! See you around, and thanks again. Lawrence § t/e 18:24, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, i have created a section on my userpage for other users to find administrators recommended by me. I would like you to add yourself to the list so it can have your unique signature! Please use ~~~ to add yourself, as this will omit the date. If you do not wish to be on the list, thats okay! I respect the choice of every administrator/user on wikipedia. Have a nice day :-) TheProf - T / C 20:32, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've moved this here from Tiptoetys talk page as its unfair on him to continue this discussion there.

Although I see what you're saying, to just simply unblock gives the impression that its okay to vandalise Wikipedia and its admins are actually quite soft. If I were a vandal, I know thats how i'd see it. Maybe the better thing to do would be to keep the block, but make it a timed block as opposed to an indef block? Thats my thought on the matter anyway, but i suppose the admins know best :-) TheProf - T / C 19:34, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]