Archive 5

←

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

→

Archive 15

Ryulong, I am disappointed you made the decision that you did. Those pages were exclusive for evidence gathering. I am not sure if you are aware of that, but several changes were made as to remove any ambiguity of my purpose. As stated before, my only intent here is to rid those who view themselves above the policies of Wikipedia. This, of course, is not restricted to Raul654 and William M. Connolley. The purpose was to make the pages available to other users who joined me in my dissent against abusive use of administratorship, to continue my cataloging of evident edits that are explicitly contrary to Wikipedia policies. My own personal view is that we here at Wikipedia should not discriminate on the basis of administratorship, especially in reviewing cases in which infringements upon Wikipedia policies occur. Wikipedia does not, and shall not, endorse elitism. The time when others turn their shoulders to abuse by administrators is to come to an end. I wholeheartedly believe that all rules should apply to all users, and the ability of performing that ultimate task should not be hindered by the select few who think otherwise! ~ UBeR 05:01, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

The ways the pages had been written and designed were to list attacks against the administrators, as well as ways that they have slighted you. That and the consensus at the MFD discussions were all at "Delete, speedy if possible." I merely followed this. If you feel that there should be a radical change, go through WP:RFC or suggest it at WT:RFA. The way you perpetrated this was more of an attack than a suggestion or statements of wrongdoings with relevant links.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 05:04, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Well I'm sad you feel that way. The bureaucracy that is shall not reprieve the actions, as the bureaucracy and I do not see eye to eye. It's apparent the few who have been chosen do not yearn for pluralism, but rather favoritism. In that type of society is one in which one can only be hindered. My ideas are not radical; I am here for the betterment of Wikipedia. But to be shunned for the opposition of those who are highly regarded and favored, and for that reason alone, is an abomination. I can say nothing other than that you are wrong. ~ UBeR 05:22, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Fine. You may request that my deletions be reviewed. The bureaucracy, as you put it, has a place for that.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 05:23, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I was wondering if you could tell me about any "hidden minorities" - Power Rangers that are of other minorities but are easy to mistake as being "white". For instance, I was surprised to learn that Tommy was at the "white end of his Native American ancestry" and Rocky was white Hispanic.[1] From Time Force on, are there any other minorities besides the obvious ones - Max (WF), Shane (NS), Ethan (DT), Jack (SPD), and Nick (MF)? Hbdragon88 06:38, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

The "hidden minorities" solely existed in early seasons. At some point between MMPR and Zeo, Tommy was deemed an American Indian. At the same time, Rocky was made Hispanic.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 06:44, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

All latter seasons had clearly defined nationalities/races/whatevers. It usually went along the lines of "Two whites, one black, one Asian, and at least one 'other'", the "Other" being Hispanic, Pacific Islander, or humanoid alien.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 06:47, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

The "black person" seemed to disappear in Ninja Storm; I think Shane was both the "black person" and the Asian/Pacific Islander. The black person was also not there in Mystic Force, either. And the last Asian I can recall is Chad from Lightspeed Rescue, unless I missed someone in the later ones (I don't really count the A-Squad, as they were a side series, not the main cast that was seen in every episode). IIRC, the past four seasons are now "four whites, one minority" (I'm not counting PR:OO as I haven't seen anything from it). Hbdragon88 07:08, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

PROO has two whites, one black, one Asian, and one Hispanic.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 07:16, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Cool. But you agree with my assessment of the previous four series? Hbdragon88 07:30, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

You recently indef-blocked this user.[2] He immediately opened a new account, User:Imheretohelppeople2 and used it to make the same sort of random date change vandalism on the article Gunpowder that User:Imheretohelppeople was making. KarlBunker 11:32, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I caught a couple more when one of them made a vote in an RfA that looked fishy. —Dgies^t c 16:59, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh, they're very much confirmed now.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 19:30, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Considering this [3], you sure do have a follower, they must love you and your crazy penguins, which I adore. Haha. Retiono Virginian 20:03, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Woah! I hope there's a good reason for that one? =\ – Luna Santin (talk) 22:20, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

SummerThunder (in other news, the school's ethernet network won't connect to freenode :( )—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 22:23, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Ah, that's a name I recognize. Old and busted: Cplot. New contender: the next troll. I haven't ever looked to see if I can get on IRC from the school computer labs -- I'm guessing not. :p – Luna Santin (talk) 22:28, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

• Oh him again? Why won't he troll me anymore, doesn't he like me? ;-) —Dgies^t c 22:37, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh, let me rephrase myself. The ethernet network has been down for the past two hours. I'm on wireless, and Wireless Canes doesn't seem to like IRC.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 22:42, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I believe he's probably the most prolific sockpuppeteer since PoolGuy (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). I believe CheckUser action would be needed on him soon... Scobell302 09:06, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

I privately requested one and the underlying IP was deemed as an open proxy and blocked.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 09:07, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Given your position of authority here, I think it was inappropriate for you to suggest that my editing privileges be limited, and you gave people the false impression I don't have any history here other than this debate when my edit history demonstrates otherwise. I'm not an outsider jumping in to take shots, as you can see from my user page. Rcade 14:05, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

You might want to do the needful. Vandal-only SPA, obvious. – Chacor 16:34, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for speedy closing the power ranger afd. Can I ask you to step in at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aasulv Olsen Bryggesaa. I've been trying soooo hard not to bite the newbie. Maybe I failed. Anyway, his newborn wikilawyering is sending up my stress levels, so I'm going to stop discussing. Happy for you to disagree with me there, by the way. Just wanted an admin to chime in on policy/guidelines. Thanks, --Dweller 16:36, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

User:Mr. Wikipedian 22 --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 17:00, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I wasn't using the TV Nihhon title, "Niki-Niki! Geki Jyuken!". I was using just "Niki-Niki! GekiJuuken!". I still think there are still some words, especially martial-arts, that should let untranslated and explained in "name/puns". User:Fractyl

• I did just that with "Juuken" explainations on Notes. User:Fractyl

  We are translating "Juuken" , "Rinjuuken", "Gekijuuken", etc as "Beast-Fist" as it is Kanji usage. If these were written in katakana, then we'd transliterate it. It looks slightly more professional.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 01:47, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

  Ok, but you didn't need to remove the new info I laid out on the Geki Juuken Beast Arts, GekiChangers, & GekiBeasts. User:Fractyl

  I did not mean to remove that.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 01:55, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

  Well, that's the kind of thing you be weary of. I'm still new to signatures, so I'll try better.—Fractyl (Fractyl)

Ryulong, the discussion and warning you reverted on my talk page has already been settled, two months ago. There was a miscommunication/misperception on my part, and the dispute between EnglishEfternamn and I has long since been resolved. Correct me if I'm wrong, but judging from the first entry here, this action you've taken appears to be a habit of yours. Please don't repeat it. I chose to blank my page to put the EnglishEfternamn incident in the past and make the page readily available for any new comments, and although I understand that "archival is preferred to removal," my own skimming of Wikipedia's policy pages and Jeffpw's comment here have led me to believe that there technically isn't anything that says I can't blank my own page. Which is good, because the incident with EnglishEfternamn is hardly worth the trouble of archiving. 69.129.195.198 02:41, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

I only get notified of such massive page blankings while going through vandalism. I will not undo your removal, again.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 02:50, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I see, so it's some sort of generic notification. Sorry if I came off harsh. 69.129.195.198 04:32, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Ryulong, I am so sorry. I only meant to copy your quote - I had no idea that I had copied a link to your user page also. Please accept my sincere apologies. -- Brittainia 07:04, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, that's what putting the brackets around something is. I do not fault you for it.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 07:05, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Michael Gill, Class of 2006 has not been protected properly, since the vanity content is still there. Can you fix this? 128.2.152.133 07:24, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

It's gone now.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 07:26, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Really, one can't really check to see if an article asserts notability if the article is not there. KP Botany 02:48, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

I read the article when it wasn't deleted. I saw no assertion of notability.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 03:36, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Very good idea protecting that page. Though I admit I was inappropriately amused by the premise of this article upon stumbling upon it, I was quickly horrified to discover a certain vandal appears to be insinuating the name of an unrelated living person into the article. Thanks for keeping an eye on things.--The Fat Man Who Never Came Back 05:12, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi! As you can see at the admin noticeboard and the template messages talkpage, I was asked to develop {{rfcu}} by Akhilleus, a regular at WP:SSP. Since WP:SSP uses {{User5}} extensively, I'd suggested adding {{rfcu}} to {{User5}} (again at both WP:AN and WT:TEM, where no-one objected), made the request at Template talk:User5 since I can't edit an editprotected template, and even notified the admin who'd protected that template. Another admin updated {{User5}}, and the feature worked.

Now, however, I see that you've reverted the update, and I have no idea why. I haven't found any discussion, complaints, or requests for reversion -- though of course Wikipedia's a big place, and I haven't looked absolutely everywhere... not yet this century, at any rate. Would you please give me a hint? Was there a problem? Is there anything else I need to do to get that update re-installed? Please advise. -- Ben 09:29, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, then I would suggest developing a template solely for WP:SSP. I found {{User5}} used within one of the RFAR evidence pages, and found that the link for the "rfcu" was especially unnecessary for users who have not had a request for checkuser against them. Either that, or you could play around with the m:ParserFunctions found at {{sockpuppetcheckuser}} that has a link to a relevant checkuser page appear if it exists. Other than that, the addition is a bit ugly, and really does not fit for a template that is used so extensively.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 09:36, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, I could swear there was a parserfunction used there...—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 09:38, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, thank you, I do know how to make a link simply disappear if the page isn't found; for instance, I wrote the conditional {{socks}}, with two separate "disappearing" links to confirmed or suspected sockpuppet lists, that can be invoked by {{ssp}}:
     {{ssp|Mykungfu|list=y}} → WP:SSP page on "Mykungfu"^{confirmed socks}_{suspected socks}
     {{ssp|Jimbo Wales|list=y}} → There is no WP:SSP page on "Jimbo Wales"
If an SSP subpage isn't found, the link turns gray, and instead of taking you to a nonexistent subpage, it takes you to the main WP:SSP page, where you can either search for names that don't have pages of their own, or file an SSP report.

That same feature's in {{rfcu}} and several others, as I carefully documented on the template pages. In this sense they serve like both the {{blocklog}} link that lets you look for records and the "block user" link that lets you create a record.

Another template I developed, {{usercheck}}, gives almost a career snapshot of good and bad events, ranging from RfAs and RfBs to RfC/Users and RfArbs, checkusers and sockpuppet reports, giving a quick opportunity to see roughly how praised or criticized a user's record has been:
     Cplot (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfa · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks confirmedsuspected)
     Cool Cat (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks)
     Mykungfu (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfa · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks confirmedsuspected)
     Monicasdude (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfa · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · socks)
     Willy on Wheels (talk · contribs · count · logs · block log · lu · rfas · rfb · arb · rfc · lta · sockssuspected)
Notice that just by hovering your cursor over the links you can learn that Cool Cat's had three RfAs, Monicasdude's had two RfC/Users, and Mykungfu's had five separate SSP reports. These links find the highest-numbered subpage in each category, so they can tell you something before you even click on them.

Since WP:SSP already relies heavily on {{user5}}, adding the four letters "rcfu" to help them out seemed not likely to harm anyone else. But if you feel that "the "rfcu" was especially unnecessary for users who have not had a request for checkuser against them", may I point out that the link shows they didn't have such a request against them? It separates the never-reported from the once-, twice-, or in Mykungfu's case five-times-reported.

Really, the fact that {{user5}} has "block user" and "block log" links in it must be even more unnecessary, for users who have never been blocked nor done anything to get blocked. It's a shame that such an inappropriate template gets used for innocent people, when {{user7}} (talk • contribs • count • logs • email) carries no such implication of guilt.

May I suggest that you advocate {{user7}} be used for those innocent people and circumstances, and let {{user5}} -- with "block user", "block log", and a restored "rcfu" -- be used where misbehaving users are discussed? That way you needn't be offended by such "ugly" links. Meanwhile, others whose work benefits from having them would not be deprived of useful functions due to the aesthetic objections of people elsewhere. Doesn't that sound fair and reasonable?

Let the gentle {{user7}} be used for the peaceable Eloi (or Elves), and let the more severe {{user5}} be used when dealing with the Morlocks (or Orcs). To everything there is a season, and a time for every purpose under Heaven. -- Ben 15:06, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeesh. Well, for some time there was one template that simply did not show the link (it wasn't gray) at some template. I feel that would be more useful in this situation. And MY GOD MANY D: THAT'S A LOT OF TEXT. And some of those other templates are large and overbearing. I commend your work, but is it absolutely necessary to create a template for everything to be linked? I think someone's suffering from templatitis D: And the only cure is more cowbell.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 21:10, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

"Templatitis" is an odd remark from someone who's just asked me to create either another version of {{user5}} just for WP:SSP, or another version of {{rfcu}} with only half the functionality. But I'm happy to oblige you anyway. {{rfcu-cond}} simply returns nothing at all where the original {{rfcu}} would return the gray-link. If you add the following code before the final parenthesis of {{user5}}, you should get the results you want:
     {{rfcu-cond|{{{1}}}|&#32;<small>•</small> rfcu}}
Then try {{user5|Cool Cat}} (note result "") and {{user5|MyKungfu}} (note result " • rfcu") to see the difference. I'll set up similar "-cond" versions of the other templates, on the same reasoning. Does that satisfactorily resolve the issue? -- Ben 22:25, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

I'll implement it.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 22:30, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

• Wait a moment, I can make this even simpler! -- Ben 22:37, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
• I've added the conditional option to the original {{rfcu}} as cond=n: just add the following code before the final parenthesis of {{user5}}, you should get the results you want:
       {{rfcu|{{{1}}}|&#32;<small>•</small> rfcu|cond=n}}
  Examples: {{user5|Cool Cat}} (note result "") and {{user5|MyKungfu}} (note result " • rfcu"). Then Template:Rfcu-cond can be deleted (please!). One less template in the world is a good thing, right? -- Ben 22:45, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
• I have now added that cond=n option to these other templates so you can insert them in {{user_}} templates and they'll only show up when the subpages are found:
       {{rfadm|{{{1}}}|&#32;<small>•</small> rfa|cond=n}}
       {{rfbur|{{{1}}}|&#32;<small>•</small> rfb|cond=n}}
       {{rfarb|{{{1}}}|&#32;<small>•</small> rfarb|cond=n}}
       {{rfcuser|{{{1}}}|&#32;<small>•</small> rfcuser|cond=n}}
       {{rfcu|{{{1}}}|&#32;<small>•</small> rfcu|cond=n}}
       {{ssp|{{{1}}}|&#32;<small>•</small> ssp|list=y|cond=n}}
  No space needed between these templates; the space is built-in (so it disappears too). Enjoy! -- Ben 23:39, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
• Uh, Ryulong, you've added {{rfcu-cond}} without any parameters to {{user5}}. That will not accomplish what you want. Please see the exact code given above. -- Ben 23:43, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

You reverted this [4] but author of this image DONT allow commercial licence. It's cc-by-nd-nc!! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Stanmar (talk • contribs) 22:12, 4 March 2007 (UTC).

I saw the original flickr image link, and I saw that license used.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 22:13, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

So?? you saw licence and what? licence is NOT commercial so must be deleteted! it's not cc-by-sa only ss-by-NC-ND
another image [5], there is " not used for commercial purposes" so it's CANT be cc-by-2.5 only cc-NC so it must be deleted! Stanmar 22:21, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

It's fixed now.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 22:22, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

The March issue of the WikiProject Tropical cyclones newsletter is now available. If you wish to receive the full newsletter or no longer be informed of the release of future editions, please add your username to the appropriate section on the mailing list.--Nilfanion (talk) 22:14, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Actually, there seems to be a conflict: The kana don't match with the said names of the Bakuryuu. As they were refered on the show as "Tyranno", "Kera", "Ptera", "Brachio", Etc. Fractyl (Fractyl)

Well, that is how it's used at the Japanese article... It's a bit strange. I'd check tv asahi's pages.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 00:30, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Thought I'd just show you this. The websites valid, but isn't it Waaaaayyyyyyy too early? Floria L 21:49, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Yargh. Thanks for notifying me. Both are listed on my personal version of WP:PTL.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 21:57, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Is it alright if I remove the {{Indefblockeduser}} tag? I noticed that the directions at Category:Temporary Wikipedian userpages state that user pages of identified sockpuppets are not to be deleted or placed into that category. Also, the {{SockpuppetCheckuser}} tag makes the {{Indefblockeduser}} tag redundant. Jesse Viviano 15:29, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I would also like to add a link to the CheckUser case in the {{SockpuppetCheckuser}} tag. I am requesting in order to comply with the protection policy. Jesse Viviano 15:33, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Go ahead.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 19:51, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, any particular reasons why you would delete entries on my userpage by another user?Dpilat 18:48, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Because he was being disruptive.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 19:56, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, but I am fortunately mature enough to decide what stays on my userpage and what doesn't. So, please be so kind and focus your without question exuberant energy on other, more worthwhile things. I am sure there are other parts of wikipedia that need your attention. Dpilat 20:29, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi! Just to say thanks for the anti-vandalism patrol, Ryulong. -- Picapica 20:48, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't understand why you reverted the edits made by 66.194.114.163 on the Power Rangers Operation Overdrive Rangers page. 216.54.173.172 23:18, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey, I unblocked Meisterchef after he wrote me a nice email about the issue.

I think he probably is not a sockpuppet or meatpuppet of the banned user, but just someone who has been watching this controversy and taking the same (wrong, IMHO) side of the debate. I have chatted with him a bit about WP:NOR policies and I think he will be a good user. Still, I respect your block, and I am of course not placing Meisterchef under any special protection. :)--Jimbo Wales 06:27, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Duly noted.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 06:47, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

The reason for translating is due to the name formula. Through translated the name formula is the same, Sharkarmarguerito (Shaakurumargaretto) for example...

• Shark: Shaaku
• Car: Kuruma
• Marguerite: Margarette

Same principle for Fatshonedile (Yatsudenwani).

• Fats/Fatsia: Yatsu
• Phon/Phone: Denwa
• dile/Crocodile: Wani

Fractyl (Fractyl)

For Yatsudenwani, it's kana, not kanji. As such, this should only be transliterated, not translated. If something's like Shākurumauerite, then it can be transliterated to be Sharkargerite or whatever it is.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 20:52, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

sprotection should only be used for vandalism, not for content disputes. While undoubtedly the last anon edit was blatant POV-pushing and soapboxing, I don't think it warranted sprotecting. Just my R 0.02. Zunaid©® 11:15, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

There is something wrong with Jasmine's picture on that page and I can't figure out how it was changed could you take a look into it. -Adv193 15:42, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Someone uploaded over it.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 19:29, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

I did some checking and found that due to the upload the Dekaranger Jasmine Picture is now on the Pinoy Big Brother (season 2) page. -Adv193 19:37, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Fixed everything.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 19:43, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Ahem; look what I found in the user creation log off a few minutes ago. RyulongfuckedSunstarnetonwheelsagain! (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Retiono Virginian 17:44, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

• Who is this schmuck? And why is he obsessed with Kate McWhocares? JuJube 21:17, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

  Ask Dragonflysixtyseven.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 21:17, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

The unwarranted block on me as an unregistered ip editor has been lifted. However, the talk page is still protected. Please unprotect the talk page. Thank you.67.167.130.247 22:12, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for lifting the unwarranted block, now how about lifting the unwarrantd block on the user page?????????02:10, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

I've done all I could.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 03:35, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Why can't I edit anymore? I'm not doing anything wrong What made you think that? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Quetzal123 (talk • contribs) 00:41, 9 March 2007 (UTC).

What?—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 03:36, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

I contend that his account is not a vandal only account, and that given the amount of discussion for "Steak and a Blowjob Day," including controversy (and thus, implying enough support that it) about it warranting its own article, his attempts to list it under the day page for March 14 were not vandalism. Further to the point, I've opened the page for deletion review. I would ask that you remove your indefinite block of his account. Autocracy 04:56, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

The most common response to WP:OTHERCRAPSTUFFEXISTS is to say "well then nominate those for deletion too." The idea that someone who actually does so is in violation of WP:POINT is ridiculous. There is nothing disruptive about wanting there to be a consistent set of criteria for inclusion. --Random832 14:05, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

I must say I agree here. This block looks unjustified. The guy is maybe misguided, yes, picking controversies to "test the waters", yes, hasn't yet grasped the deletion criteria very well, yes; but what is really missing for making it WP:POINT is the element of bad faith. POINT is when you do something which you know shouldn't be done, just to make other people feel what it's like having this thing done to you. If he really thought Wikipedia would be better off by applying the same standard to the one article as to the other, then that's not POINT.

Besides, there was no prior warning before the block, and no clear need of prevention (the situation could easily be remedied by simply closing the AfD, as you did). Unless there was evidence that he had an intention to continue making more and truly bad-faith nominations or the like, the block looks punitive.

I'm considering lifting this block. Feedback welcome. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:19, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

I was unaware of the other essay, and I was reacting with the mindset that, "He just put something up for DRV by proxy for a constructed holiday, and then he made an AFD using the same basis of those endorsing deletion." But I do not see the difference between picking controversies and making a point. It's too much of a grey area.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 21:21, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, don't forget that WP:POINT is not about "making" points. It's about disrupting Wikipedia, to illustrate a point. Making a single AfD, which could be considered arguably borderline justified, is not "disrupting Wikipedia". Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:56, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

That's all too often forgotten, though. I've nominated WP:POINT (the shortcut, not the guideline) for deletion. --Random832 22:06, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

There's no reason to do that. That'd produce so many damn red links. If anything, I see this is as making a point.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 22:14, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Q.E.D. :-) You just misapplied it. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:23, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Damn. Does this go to ArbCom now?—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 22:25, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Only if you don't let me unblock that poor sinner I was advocating for. Of course, we can also opt to climb on some public building in fancy costumes and fight a duel. Fut.Perf. ☼ 22:38, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Then a duel it shall be! I would suggest a fine archway at the College of Engineering.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 23:04, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

D: Unblock conflict!—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 23:09, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi,

I'm trying to copy your User:Ryulong/CPenguin to my user page on Dutch Wikipedia, but for some reason the penguin keeps appearing on the left in my user page instead of the top right (like yours does). Still, the code seems to be identical? Do you happen to have any clue as to what I'm doing wrong?

Should you want to have a look: the Dutch penguin template is at nl:Gebruiker:Erik1980/pinguin. Thanks!

Kind regards, Erik1980 19:00, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

(Dutch Wikipedia: Erik1980 - talk)

You'll see I unblocked a public IP in a certain borough of New York, because a reader emailed asking to be allowed to create an account. I've warned him to create it ASAP, in case the vandal comes back and we have to block the IP again. Might try week-long or 24-hour blocks if there's more collateral damage. (I know it's a PITA ... cleaning up crap after the fact is the Wiki Way! Apparently.) - David Gerard 19:34, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 21:16, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Could you please use Hepburn romaji (using macrons) when writing about series and whatnot? It's the manual of style for Japanese articles. Also, while the monster descriptions are good, it's not really entirely necessary to use a monster's description as an episode summary, as has happened with Negative Syndicate and is starting with Gekiranger. List of Jūken Sentai Gekiranger episodes was developed to avoid this massive list effect in the monster descriptions.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 02:55, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

• I make sure to keep the Hepurn Romanji in the Romanized spelling, but japanese names don't really need to romanized unless in the "nihongo" part. Example: Gyuuya (ギュウヤ, Gyūya) or Hiroshi Yagyuu (柳生比呂士, Yagyū Hiroshi?). There's alot of examples, but we can agree as long as the romanized version is still seen, it should be no real issue. Fractyl (Fractyl)

  I'd prefer that we do use "Gyūya" instead of "Gyuuya" though.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 03:17, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

You just blocked John G. Hephaestos (talk · contribs · logs) for trolling by blocked user. I have other related usernames listed on a User sub page here. Flyguy649^talk_contribs 05:04, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Category:Administrative_backlog Can you delete lots of stuff? :) --Parker007 05:05, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Who was the vandal who harassed you via bot edits from California? I have reason to suspect that he may do another movebot vandalism edit via this blanking of welcome notices and creation of User:Disney2007 and User:Universal2007. Thanks! Real96 06:17, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure who you're referring to right now...—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 06:18, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

The vandal who said that you were gay, and was making threats against you, while using a bot. Real96 08:04, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh. That may have been multiple individuals.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 08:07, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey you prevented anyone from editing 4chan by linking it from Wikipedia:Protected_titles/February_2007. Just don't do it again.--The Negotiator 18:41, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I didn't do anything. The Longcat redirect was not deleted. Now it's fix'd.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 19:30, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Anything linked from that page cannot be edited and you linked 4chan from it [6]. Understand now? Just making sure you know so it does not happen again.--The Negotiator 19:48, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Linking is not how cascading protection works. Anything transcluded like a template is protected from editting, which is how the pages are protected. They are transcluded onto that page. And there have been several hundred edits to 4chan between February 7 and today. The error was that longcat was redirecting, but it is now deleted.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 19:50, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't really get it, but I guess you fixed the problem. Why do you have japan symbols in your name?--The Negotiator 19:53, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Cause I can.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 01:50, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Dude, why the hell did you reverse what I wrote? The information trivia is obviously true. Reverse it back again.Icebreaker104 19:17, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

How is it harmful? They're just facts and what I wrote is true so if you can delete mine, might as well delete everything. Icebreaker104 19:58, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Its in the public domain.--CltFn 03:30, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Can you prove it? Is there no copyright on it?—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 03:31, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Its not a copyright issue , where are you getting this idea. The Manifesto is by design released for broad public consumption.--CltFn 03:31, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes it is. Copyright violation is a serious issue. Just because it's "released for broad public consumption" does not mean that there is no copyright.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 03:32, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Prove it--CltFn 03:39, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't have to prove there is a copyright. You have to prove there is none.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 03:42, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi Ryulong, I think you've gotten a bit trigger happy here. Easynet is a huge UK ISP! Please be a lot more careful with range blocks in future. --  Netsnipe  ►  15:05, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Was this in my massive range blocking yesterday? I was going off a Bulbapedia IP block list to get some proxy ranges, and this one may have been caught in the crossfire.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 19:11, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey Ryulong. While I'm not an administrator, the number of IPs that you blocked as open proxies: [7] seems to be way overboard. I seriously doubt whether it's wise to be blocking entire /16, /17, and /18 ranges as open proxies at a time. Do you really think they're all open proxies. See [8]. Patstuart^talk·edits 21:58, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Add 70.85.0.0/16 to the list, I'm removing this block since I guess from the above you've no real basis for believing it's an open proxy range. --pgk 22:17, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

My block list came from here, as a Bobabobabo thing. Several there were already blocked here, too.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 22:22, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Ryulong, one of your old friends has returned. For such a ridiculous name, he seems rather attached to it. User:Gen. von Klinkerhofen. — MichaelLinnear 01:50, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. He's dealt with.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 02:07, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

BTW, the reason why he was able to create socks again was because he posted on meta, where Paul August (talk · contribs) reversed the IP block. I suspect that he will probably do this again, so you may want to add a note there. TML 07:07, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Duly noted and mentioned what's going on.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 07:26, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I think Geki, Rinki, & the Gekiranger Gekiwaza should be as they are in japanese with the same translation explainations as Gekitohja.—Fractyl (Fractyl)

But it's Kanji that we know the English meaning of. "GekiTohja" is written in katakana and has meaning from kanji. There is no reason to leave kanji as romaji when there is a translation that we know of. Things like "激獣拳" have known translations. Whereas something like "ゲキワザ" is left as it is. If it was written as "激気技" then it'd be translated.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 20:05, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I get that it should translated, but like in "name/puns", like we did with the likes of Daizyujin, which was written in kanji, & many of the mecha seen in shows like Abarenger. the energy the Gekirangers draw from, Geki, is really a double pun as it is translated as "Fierce Spirit", but it also pun on 'Fierce' alone, "Geki". And Ki is the japanese term for "Chi", the energy harnessed in martial arts. And for "Rinki" to match up with Geki. —Fractyl (Fractyl)

Well, I made it so "Geki" is "Fierce Spirit." There are times when it's good to translate and those when it's not. And why is it that your posts aren't time stamped?—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 00:17, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

I guess, but I still prefer using terms like Gekijuuken. As for the time stamp, no idea.—Fractyl (Fractyl)

Well, are you typing ~~~~ (four ~'s)?—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 03:25, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

I believe so, it worked last time. By the way, I added Lesson 4 Info. —Fractyl (Fractyl)

I'm editing from a school IP right now, and its contributions are nothing but vandalism. May you add 206.117.237.56 to the #vandalism-en-wp blacklist? See Special:Contributions/206.117.237.56 or User talk:206.117.237.56 for the repeated blocks. {Slash-|-Talk} 16:33, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello. Now that I see that he was I guess impersonating a living person, I see the reason for your swift action and it no longer seems absurd. But I'm not a sockpuppet of his, I just thought he was a confused newbie whom I tried to help along. --Tractorkingsfan 21:55, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

The issue was brought up on WP:ANI and it was a compound factoring. No edits to the article space in 3 months. Several hundred edits to his user page instead. And apparantly he was impersonating a professor at UC Davis. He's not here to contribute to the project (at least not anymore) and if he's actually that professor, he's violating some policy by pretending to be a child.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 22:00, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, where's the debate on this topic going on? I saw your closure of the MfD, and I'd like to know more. Cheers! bd2412 T 06:54, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Ah, never mind, I found it. Unfortunately, your deletion of his user page has also deleted the links to the evidence raised in the AN/I discussion. If the page is to be protected as a blocked user page, I'm not sure I see why the history should stay deleted (particularly where it is linked to as evidence in a discussion). Cheers again! bd2412 T 06:59, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello, and I sincerely have no interest in bothering you. I don't think that the information provided by User:Jreferee has any basis in reality. The diffs he provide do not prove that such a professor even exists, nor do they show evidence of impersonation of a professor. Also, there is no evidence of such a professor online. I must ask: how heavily, if at all, did the information regarding the professor weigh in your decision to block indefinitely? It seemed that user space deletion was what was on the table, not blocking. You've explained your rationale regarding his lack of mainspace edits, call me stubborn, but I think that is fixable and in itself warrants less drastic of a block. --Tractorkingsfan 23:41, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

The professor stuff was not what led to the block. I have a firm belief that if you are not here to contribute to the encyclopedia in any way shape or form, then you should not have a user space. The fact that Stevenstone93 made absolutely no contributions to the article space in a span of 3 months yet made several hundred edits to his user page since then was my reason for the deletion and the block.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 23:43, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

I am unaware of any policy that permits a block based on a user's failure to edit outside of user space, an certainly not a permanent block. If you wish to propose such a criteria, start a discussion at WP:BLOCK (which I request you read very thoroughly now) or at the Village Pump, but please do not presume to create such a policy. Either we have rules and we stick to them, or we have anarchy and the encyclopedia devolves into it. bd2412 T 03:32, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Users who are not here to contribute to the encyclopedia are not given the privelege of having a user page. See WP:NOT#WEBSPACE. That is why I deleted his user page. The fact that he was also racist, homophobic, and had other polemical statements on his userpage led me to block him, as well as the suspicions that he was impersonating another individual.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 04:05, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Ok, but I would still impose only a temporary block. If he comes back and makes trouble afterwards, then a longer block would be justified, but I simply don't see how this user has earned a permanent block. In the year and change that I've been an admin, I've seen a number of young contributors come around after a bumpy start. Of course, I've seen some earn a permanent block as well, but this one is too early to tell. bd2412 T 05:22, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm somewhat surprised, first, that you don't understand how naming conventions work (our conventions override the conventions of other sources, as do the Manuals of Style of any publication), and secondly that you edited the article and then protected it in your version. I'll be raising this at WP:AN/I; you might want to reconsider your actions. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 22:11, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Look at what I placed on the talk page. And this is already mentioned twice on WP:AN at the two threads I listed there. Why the hell should our conventions override an actual name?—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 22:16, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Why you're so aggressive I don't know — but there is no "actual name" as regards capitalisation. All publications follow a manual of style. Some capitalisae all articles and prepositions, some none, some only those under a certain length. in all cases this is independent of what a record company or publisher does. You need to familiarise yourself with our guidelines and policies. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 22:30, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Name used by artist > MoS. That is what is being upheld at WP:ANI#User:Ryulong and at Talk:Straight Outta Lynwood.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 22:33, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello, Can you please unprotect the David Westerfield article now? I have agreed not to revert the edit 196.15.168.40 wants in. I will only add a few important words to it. Thank You. Fighting for Justice 00:44, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Please use the {{editprotected}} or go through another method of unprotecting the article.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 00:53, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Just wondering why you deleted C.M. Sigmon page from the site??? There was no given reason or good explanation as to why is was deleted.

I was doing a lot of deletions tonight. That was one I will be looking back at.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 05:45, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

I am a fan in Knoxville, TN, and was hoping you would reconsider putting it back up since it met the guidelines and he is a rising star in the wrestling world.

The page you deleted was officially made by the college it self. The college has a single Public IP address and a large local network spreading over 10 labs.The vandalism you detected was probably done by some miscreants from the college.Please undo your actions.And could you suggest us methods of further preventing this form of vandalism. Thank You —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 125.99.89.206 125.99.89.206 06:14, 15 March 2007 (UTC)WIEECT Web committee

Thanks for deleting the KiaSu Speedcar and other hoax articles. Could you help to move the article Kiasu (singlish) back to the original title Kiasu? The hoax poster User:Wiki United had made the earlier move to accommodate one of his hoax articles. [9]. Thanks. --Vsion 06:22, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

This page needs fully protecting: User talk:Yamla has a crush on Kate McAuliffe. The Kate McAuliffe vandal is at it again with unblock abuse. Acalamari 23:34, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

This guy has vandilized wikipedia in many places as like all these [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17]. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Justinpauloberg (talk • contribs) 01:19, 16 March 2007 (UTC).

request an administrator

for "Kuākini"--Wikipedia is blocking it since it's so close to my original account of kuakini.

thanks!

140.247.240.154 04:10, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

I have done so. You may log in with the password which Daniel.Bryant has sent to you via email and then change it to your wish.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 04:18, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Ryulong, when making accounts for people, please follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Request an account/Administrators to avoid posting the password on Wikipedia (which is extremely insecure). Even if you don't do it "via email" (see point 6), at least email the user with the temporary password rather than posting it on Wikipedia. I have emailed Kuākini with the temporary password, and cleansed the IP talk page history. Cheers, Daniel Bryant 04:40, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Never done so before. Sorry :/—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 04:50, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

MrigeshKalvani (talk · contribs) was blocked by you and has requested an unblock. You stated that this user is blocked indefinitely for spamming but I think in this case, you may have been mistaken. I couldn't find any instance of spam. I could be looking in the wrong place but could you please check this out. I'm worried that you blocked the wrong person by mistake. Thanks. --Yamla 15:02, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

There were several pages that I deleted the other night that may have been home to the article where MrigeshKalvani editted and solely contributed to. I am currently unsure of which one it was.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 18:18, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

In hopes of finding out why this user was blocked, I reviewed every deletion you made within 10 mins prior to the block. In doing so, I was unable to find a single deleted image, article, category, or template that was created, editing, or uploaded by MrigeshKalvani. With no evidence to support a spam block, I suggest this user be unblocked and would be happy to handle the request. Thanks, auburnpilot talk 03:26, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Very well. It may have been an accidental block, as I have no memory of the page, either.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 03:29, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

User talk:Jibal ( | user page | history | links | watch | logs)

This guy's responses to you[18], and to me, both in actions [19] and on his talk, where I left him a request about his refactoring[20], he ignored it with more misfactoring, to which i responded [21], and finally, after suggesting at AN/I that he go walk away and find other things to edit, I left him this:[22]. His replies at my talk got worse and worse,[23], [24], andeven after being asked to just go away,[25] are frustrating, and hostile. Can you take a look? Thanks. ThuranX 03:47, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Ryūlóng, stop vandalizing my user page. You removed my own additions to it, which is very clearly against policy. -- Jibal 03:55, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

And I replaced them, too.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 03:56, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

What's "them"? You have no business replacing or removing material from my talk page, nor do you have any business threatening to block me for future actions I haven't committed, vaguely described as "disruption". -- Jibal 04:10, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

What were the 20 some odd edits to the section at ANI?—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 04:21, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

They were all legitimate, substantive contributions. And since that section was about your own actions, you're treading on some pretty thin conflict-of-interest ice here. -- Jibal 04:24, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Because I matter-of-factly asked you to kindly stop and you ignored that request?—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 04:25, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

You asked me to stop editing WP, not just that section, after I had made those comments and they had been archived by Naconkantari. In any case, asking someone not to edit an ANI entry about themselves is a rather obvious conflict of interest, no matter how "matter-of-factly". You say I have "lost good faith", but all my actions have been made in good faith; I'm not so sure about yours, but I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt from here on out, per policy, so I suggest that you drop this. -- Jibal 04:32, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

That was my second request. I asked you to take a break because it's getting out of hand. And while your actions were surely made in good faith, my patience is wearing thin regarding this whole situation. Nothing was going to precipitate from the ANI thread other than more useless and unnecessary drama, which is why I linked you to the comment I made to ask you and anyone to stop posting in the thread. I will drop this, and so long as you do, as well, I won't use any administrative tools against you (unless something gets extremely out of hand).—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 04:35, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

You're right that it was your second request; sorry about that. But I didn't see the first one until long after you made it -- the message alert is scrolled off the top of my screen most of the time; so my failure to react was not any sort of bad faith. And I don't appreciate even the suggestion that you might use administrative tools against me -- I have never done anything on WP to warrant that, and such talk is inappropriate. As for "as long as you do", I have no interest in pursuing anything with you, and in fact have mentally added you and ThuranX to my list of WP editors that I hope I never again encounter. -- Jibal 04:49, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

I hope your future Wiki ventures are fruitful.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 04:50, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I take back my comment about hoping never to encounter you again -- that was unwarranted, and I apologize. Peace out. -- Jibal 05:16, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Which while annoying, is probably meant to provice alternate route for unblock requests. Unless it's already been checked into... -- Consumed Crustacean (talk) 04:55, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello. You recently blocked Stevenstone93 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log), and they have asked to be unblocked. It appears they genuinely want to contribute this time around... would you object to an unblock? Thank you, Sandstein 07:05, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

The user's user page (Special:Undelete/User:Stevenstone93) is why I performed the block. The user had not contributed to articles in nearly 3 months, and his userpage was a mess. I am currently unsure as to whether or not an unblock should be performed right now. I will contact you once I am done with things tomorrow.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 09:02, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey, come on now, as far as we know this is a thirteen-year-old kid. I'll bet you made an error in judgment or two when you were thirteen. Cheers! bd2412 T 19:59, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

I think we should unblock as well. Unblocking can't hurt, and everyone deserves a second chance. Prodego ^talk 19:32, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello again. Since no message from you has arrived, I have granted Stevenstone93's unblock request. Feel free to re-block if he misbehaves again. Sandstein 22:12, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

64.92.162.10. --Benten 15:47, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

• Been dealt with. But needs upgrade to indefinite block like the others. --Benten 15:56, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Done.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 00:27, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, could you take a look at some strange behaviour by 151.197.30.31. The user seems to enjoy filling its talkpage with warnings from other IP's talkpage. Which gives the impression of a long history of vandalism and blocks when the account hasn't vandalised or been blocked [26]. I've already had the talk page speedily deleted once before when the same thing happened. Anyway I'm about to sign off so won't be able to keep an eye on the account. Thought I'd let an admin who's around about this odd behaviour first. WjBscribe 06:22, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I've served out my block. Could you please unprotect my talk page? I won't put any more fake warnings on it. Actually, I was drunk when I did that. 151.197.30.31 20:25, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

So long as you remember that you should always have a friend be your designated editor and never edit under the influence.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 20:36, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks 151.197.30.31 20:41, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

There's a user who continuously changes Tyranno Hassleberry's dub voice actor, both in the article and in the Yu-Gi-Oh! GX article. We know this to be incorrect because Maddie Blaustein (who does Sartorius' voice) was the one who first confirmed his actor to be Sean Schemmel.

To "justify" his/her edits, the user (Ghostysshow) is claiming to be/impersonating David Wills (Just look in the contribs). --Benten 14:24, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Edit: Another account is being used for impersonation: 209.196.192.7.

For the assist. Much appreciated. I find such sockpuppetry disturbing particularly as it allows for avoiding scrutiny from other editors. (→Netscott) 07:46, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I've just sent you an e-mail detailing this situation.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 07:46, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Understood, still that type of puppetry is not allowed per avoidance of scrutiny. (→Netscott) 07:49, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

What is your suggestion? He has done a right to vanish, I believe.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 07:49, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Right to vanish doesn't mean come back as a sockpuppet to be gunning for blood over a user he was previously involved with prior to his vanishing as he has been. I believe the right to vanish clause is negated once an editor reinvolves themself with editing of the same nature as the previous account. (→Netscott) 07:52, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I have had such situations before (see my actions at this AfD). However, as the original account was not blocked, I'm unsure as of what should be done.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 07:54, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Well your block was proper per the fact that User:HEWatch was the same user and HEwatch has been indefinitely blocked. If this editor wants to retain his right to vanish he shouldn't be coming back like this. It isn't right (which is why HEWatch was blocked). This user has already had another sockpuppet blocked and lifted over nonsense surrounding this. Enough is enough. (→Netscott) 07:56, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I would bring this up in the proper forums on Wikipedia (mostly cause I should go to sleep and more input is necessary).—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 07:58, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

That sounds sensible. Sleep well then. (→Netscott) 07:59, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I'll try.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 08:04, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and as you can see from the last e-mail, he does not want to be referred to by name whatsoever for some reason.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 08:06, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Right to vanish doesn't allow for avoidance of scrutiny from other editors. If he doesn't want his name mentioned then he shouldn't be avoiding such scrutiny and should just step away from it all. (→Netscott) 08:11, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Right to vanish is for editors who've left the project. Obviously this editor hasn't left the project. (→Netscott) 08:14, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I have made the associated pages for this fiasco.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 08:44, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I was just checking that. Let me be upfront, if this user wants to come back under his account and make these types of edits then I've got no problem with that. But socking as though he's some third party is just wrong. (→Netscott) 08:47, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Ryulong, would you kindly delete the indentifying content (revisions) from the concerned pages that involve this user? I made him agree to in the future seek the assistance of admins in case material referencing him needs removal rather than do so himself directly through sockpuppets. I stipulated that if he came back the tags would go back up and he understands this. Thanks. (→Netscott) 23:10, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I am not sure what you are requesting.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 00:19, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, just to delete the tagged puppets and the category. This user has agreed to not sockpuppet further and to contact admins in the future if information pertaining to him needs removal from the Wiki. (→Netscott) 00:45, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Got it.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 00:46, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

(Resetting indent) I was just coming to your page to make that request, but have just looked at your logs (having seen your "got it"), and I see that it's unnecessary. I think the problem is that TU registered an account under his real name (assuming that it is his real name), and HE just used a username. So HE wasn't as vulnerable in real life to nasty things that might be said about him and that might show up in Google searches. I wasn't in any way involved in the arbitration case, but I think that I did comment in it, having seen some of HE's particularly vile attacks. I knew TU from another page, and while he could be critical of other users, he never descended to the kind of abuse that HE descended to. He was not blocked or banned, but I think he became concerned about the use of his real name, because a lot of very abusive things had been said about him, and would forever show up in Google searches. He left Wikipedia, and requested that his pages be deleted. Tom harrison deleted them, and some time later, when he made a single edit, and was welcomed back, he requested that his talk page be deleted again — which I did for him.

My understanding is that TU is anxious not to have HE making attacks against him using his real name, and that he registered the sockpuppets with the intention of removing those attacks. Since HE is banned anyway, anything he posts should be removed. TU is not banned, so technically he has the right to discontinue the account that uses his real name, and register another. (The only problem with that is that he's on a one-year civility parole, if I remember correctly, and sockpuppetry could help him to avoid detection in breaking that parole. But, while I haven't read everything that these sockpuppets or alleged sockpuppets posted, a brief look didn't show any violation, and showed rather a concern to have attacks made against him by a banned user removed. I can understand that he wouldn't use his main account. The one time that he did use that account after his disappearance, he seemed quite displeased at having his talk page recreated, because he didn't want any record of him to remain on Wikipedia. So I'd fully support his right to vanish, and thanks for deleting the pages. This is not a standard case of a sockpuppet used for double voting, multiple reverting, or block evasion. And while I don't have the right to speak for Tom harrison, I suspect that he would agree with me. Also, I'd be happy to deal with any cases of HE puppets posting negative things about TU, so he's welcome to e-mail me if he has any concerns. (I'm sure he's reading this page!) Cheers. Musical Linguist 01:24, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

User:Selfworm/HiddenLinkAward _selfworm_ ^{( Give me a piece of your mind · Userboxes · Contribs )_} 20:15, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Ryulong, What follows is what I've just wriiten to Makemi:

Makemi, Thanks for getting back to me (and unblocking me). I'm relatively new to contributing to Wikipedia and the procedures around here are baffling to say the least. To answer your question...YES... this IS Davd Wills the voice actor. My ID and e-mail address is "ghostysshow" because, aside from my voice acting career, I also host a show on Sirius Satellite Radio on channel#32 Sirius Disorder and a Saturday night show on WFDU fm out of Teaneck, NJ under the on-air name of "Ghosty"...hence "Ghosty's Show"...get it? Here's what happened over the weekend. While trapped at the radio station as a result of the snowstorm, I began browsing around online. While I was aware of various forums and websites related to another TV show I work on, Viva Pinata, I decided to see if there was anything about Yu-Gi-Oh GX. Well, yes indeed there was, but on all of the aforementioned sites and forums I was not credited with playing Hassleberry. Now I'm not really one for self-promotion (especially true when GX is heading into season 3 and I've never bothered to look and see what's out there). Research into how and why this incorrect information has spread all over the internet led me to Wikipedia. I logged in and made the correct changes where applicable. Of course, my corrections were undone and the false information has once again reappeared. While not getting credit for the role of Hassleberry on Wikipedia will probably not be injurious to my career in the long run, I do take a certain amount of pride in my work and at the very least would appreciate having the correct information listed on both the Hassleberry and Yu-Gi-Oh GX pages. As a disc jockey, I've often used Wikipedia for show prep purposes but now after having been the subject of bad information, I'll refrain from taking Wikpedia's word as "gospel" (something I'm sure the other sites, forums and fan pages made the mistake of doing too).

I don't know what else you need from me (and is this OTRS?) but I hope I've made it clear who I am (although I'd hardly call myself "notable". LOL

If you have any questions feel free to contact me either via e-mail or phone which I can also give you.

-David Wills —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ghostysshow (talk • contribs) 20:20, 19 March 2007 (UTC).

Oh good grief! Ghostysshow 20:24, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Third season? I've ALWAYS played Hassleberry since season 2. This is getting ridiculous. I'm at work [phonenumber removed] (don't worry, it's WFDU and anyone can contact me) Just ask for David Wills or Ghosty.

I really don't watch GX, so I would not know about any cast member stuff. Discuss this with Benten.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 20:52, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, if anything it's been good fodder for my radio show on Sirius :) Ghostysshow 21:25, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello - quick question, I am trying to find more info on College Works Painting. You protected it from being recreated. I am curious as to why you did this? Any information would be awesome. It is certainly a notable organization, in excess of 100million annual revenue and is the largest residential painting company in the country. Thanks alot Brett 03:41, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

The article was created over 4 times and deleted each of those 4 times as it is a company that has no reliable sources to show that it is notable. Seeing as the article had absolutely no sources to back up the subject's notability, it was deleted each of those times. If you can find sources that show that the company is indeed notable per WP:RS then you can list the article at WP:DRV.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 03:50, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Just so you know that page is now 56 kilobytes long and an idea I have is to move the Power Animal information to it's own page and a small request I also have is that if you want to take a look at that page before you make any decsions. -Adv193 17:09, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

That'd probably be a great idea. Just so long as you refactor the page a bit when you do make the move thing, then by all means do so.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 18:06, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

My plan is to leave the the Power Animals Header in that page but leave a link to that page and I'll name it The Power Animals because in my opinion Power Animals would not sound as strong for a page name. If you don't like the name then by all means move the page. -Adv193 18:36, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Anyway I am done The Power Animals page is created and I also added the Super Sentai characters category to it as well as an opening sentence as best as I could design it. I also added a link in the Ogre Tribe Org page and I am considering on adding another link as well to the main page. Anyway I should let you know the Power Animals details alone are 34 kilobytes long and I'll leave it to you to deal with any more modifications that need to be done. -Adv193 18:49, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

One last thing that I am thinking of doing is to slightly improve the first sentences of the seperate subarticles for the mecha combinations so it would improve the quality of the page abit. For more info on what I have in mind check out my minor revisions to GaoKing, GaoMuscle, and GaoIcarus subsections and I would like to know your opinion since this is about quality improvement. At the moment I am not going to consider doing this to the seperate Power Animal descriptions. Also I have to complement your moving the GaoKing Sword and Shield profile down to GaoElephant since I was also intending to do the same thing myself. -Adv193 19:43, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

By "subarticle" you mean section? If so, then by all means rewrite them to your heart's content. :) Any mecha entry you find could probably use a great rewrite. And be sure to use {{cite episode}}. Maybe we can get it featured :D—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 21:16, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

My last message on this matter is that my goal is that other than describing the combinations besides it's components and special attacks I also wanted to describe a little bio info mainly on explaining when they first appeared on the show and any other noteable info as well. My only reason for telling you this is if you were to come up with an idea on rewriting the summaries yourself.-Adv193 16:42, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

That'd be fine. I've never watched much of the series myself (I only found Fire Mountain Howls recently)—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 18:41, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I have a question? What is the differnce between a block and a ban? How is the user affected between either one of these? Is it the same thing? I would like to know this? Thank you. King Lopez ^Contribs 08:25, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

A block is a temporary restriction on editting due to disruption imposed by administrators. A ban is a restriction on editting put forward by the community, the Arbitration Committee, or Jimmy. Users who are blocked may return by requesting an unblock. Banned users are not allowed to return unless they appeal their ban to the Arbitration Committee. If a blocked person edits with another account, it is usually dealt with on a case-by-case basis. If a banned user edits with another account, they are reverted immediately (upon discovery) and their ban reset.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 08:30, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Ok Thanks. King Lopez ^Contribs 08:51, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for protecting File:Rank-navy-1-.gif ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)! Note that it was already semi-protected per my request, along with File:Rank-army-1-.gif ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs), so could you please protect the latter as well, for consistency? Also, I was just about to change the license to {{Military-Insignia}} - it's actually sourced from the Soviet Military Encylopaedia circa 1975. Could you please apply this license so the image is not deleted as unsourced? Thanks again! --Dmitry _{(talk •contibs )} 09:06, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Damn. I'll do so.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 09:08, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Looks like our friend has created some sockpuppet accounts way in advance...

• Alefti (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Silviya (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)
• Gjhgk (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

He probaly has already forgotten them by now, but was able to recover the names from looking into Category:Suspected Wikipedia sockpuppets of Roitr :( --Dmitry _{(talk •contibs )} 17:07, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Could you please delete the copies of the already images uploaded by these sockpupped accounts? --Dmitry _{(talk •contibs )} 10:50, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Just to let you know: Wikipedia:Community noticeboard#Community ban on User:Roitr. --Dmitry _{(talk •contibs )} 22:13, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

to Doktor Who: Why is it that you're using a cedilla in place of a comma in some of your comments?—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 07:16, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for reporting to me this prob, my computer's ports were malfunctioning, indeed I didn't write at all for several days, though I edited using copy and paste a few times.--Doktor Who 16:35, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Updated with Lesson 5 info, new Gekiwazas(re-translated few of the old ones), and a new plot device: Madoku.--Fractyl Fractyl

Hmm?—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 03:00, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

This article, which you deleted {{db-corp}}, just got reposted. I have tagged it.--Anthony.bradbury 21:38, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

May you please semi-protect the page. I've notice that there has been a lot of meatpuppet/troll vandalism going on. Thanks! The Evil Clown _{Please review me!} 21:45, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi there; anon editors from this site have been posing a serious vandalism problem, largely but not exclusively to User:Gwernols userpage, for a long time. Is it not now reasonable to apply a long term block? I know it's a shared site, but I can find no posts from the site except vandalisms, so a block should surely be all good news, no?--Anthony.bradbury 22:02, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I have a feeling that there is someone from FSU that is banned. I will have to ask around.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 22:02, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

If there is, I will give you good odds that he is not a botany professor from Oklahoma University!--Anthony.bradbury 22:09, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Really? I would have not thought that.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 22:13, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Can you please block him? He's vandalised Kzrulzuall, mentioning you blocking a prevous account too. --The preceding comment was signed by User:Sp3000 (talk•contribs) 22:19, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

We spent over an hour cleaning up after him. He thought it'd be cute to go on a sock spree, and I'm still not sure he's been completely stopped. It's your business of course. HalfShadow 22:21, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

In fact, he's gone right back to it:72.155.110.67 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) HalfShadow 22:24, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Dealt with.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 22:25, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, Ryu. We literally can't get rid of this guy. I give it five minutes or ten before he's back. 22:27, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I'll figure out how to deal with him later on. I'll have more IP knowledge by then.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 22:29, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Back again:72.150.239.65 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) Toldya. He's just too damn stupid to stop.HalfShadow 22:30, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Dealing with it. When he comes back, again, inform another administrator and point to this thread.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 22:33, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, boss. He just won't quit. We can't get rid of him for more than 10 minutes. HalfShadow 22:35, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Real96 23:42, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

What gives with the instant revert? There's obscure ballplayers, even more obscure businessmen, Herb's a famous business journalist.Piperdown 00:09, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

I didn't revert——Ryūlóng (竜龍) 00:10, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Some using your account did. Accident? See this: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=University_of_Miami&diff=117636158&oldid=117635641 Piperdown 00:21, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

That's not a revert. That's ALPHABETIZING—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 00:23, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

I apologize for my harsh tone. I was out on a boat all day and got a wee seasick and sunburnt.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 00:23, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

And I ordered take out over an hour ago and it's not here yet :( Anyway, I did not revert you. I saw that the individual had an article and was not in alphabetical order with the others.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 00:25, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, just saw the gap and thought some sort of automated bot was reverting. Didn't see it up higher. My bad, sorry to bother! Piperdown 00:26, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Not a problem.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 00:27, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Why are you removing my report abvout the bot called shadowbot?--172.167.245.115 00:28, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

It's currently irrelevant. Shadowbot is designed to do what you are accusing it of what it should not be doing.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 00:29, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello Ryulong. Recently there has been a persistent sockpuppeteer about known as User:Turok 1. Some of the edit histories of the pages his socks had edited had some IPs appearing in them that were most likely his. I blocked around three of the IPs if you look at my block log. This guy seems like he is utilizing a dynamic IP and that a range block may be of some use. I'm completely clueless in regards to range blocking and I hope you don't mind me asking for your assistance. Thanks.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 00:51, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Yargh. Too big of a range. The alpha numbers are different. :/ At this point, I'd semiprotect.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 01:24, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

• I went for the sprotection. As you can see I am clueless when it comes to ranges :P.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 01:25, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

You may want to see User:Marketus's page..it seems like an advertising service. (not)(listening)

Why did you revert User:Kzq9599's post raising BLP concerns regarding Heather Wilson from ANI? Newyorkbrad 23:57, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

I pressed the wrong button. :( Bit busy tonight.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 23:58, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Understandable as hard as you work, but could you restore it please? I don't want to do it and look like we are quarrelling about whether it belongs or not. Thanks, Newyorkbrad 00:25, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Did so right after you I had posted the original message.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 00:30, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks very much. Now back to your regularly scheduled vandal-whacking. :) Newyorkbrad 00:35, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Do you know how ridiculous it is to see "response to Ryulong" in an edit summary for this talk page? :P—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 00:37, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

I will try to do better next time. Newyorkbrad 00:40, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

I won't hold it against you. Now, let's be off to article writing.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 00:42, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Volunteers are being sought to help enforce the community ban on Panairjdde. I know that he's frequently crossed your path while editing, so I thought you might be interested. Drop by the page. Thanks! --Palffy 02:29, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello. I've seen that you're pretty much the "head" person for Tokusatsu on Wikipedia, and I know this is against the rules, but please help me. Do you know anywhere that I can download Bakuryuu Sentai Abaranger? I've really exhausted all of my resources, I have nowhere left to turn. If you are allowed to tell me, can you please email the links to toransu [at] gmail.com? Thanks. orz 171.66.188.90 07:13, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Putting some cats in strange places (user pages). I've reverted, please fix - cheers --Herby ^{talk thyme} 10:13, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Could be a vandal bot - feel free to let me know - thanks --Herby ^{talk thyme} 11:06, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

OK vandal bot with W o W connections I think - indef blocked- cheers --Herby ^{talk thyme} 11:23, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey Ryulong, just letting you know, whenever you get back online, that I've sent you an email. Cheers, Sarah 15:26, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Please sign my sig book! DTD

I'd rather not get involved with that stuff.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 20:04, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Just got your message, but you should consider keep GekiWazas mostly untranslated around the "word-word" area. It seems to go in hand with Jan's manner of speaking. See this at WikiProject Tokusatsu. Fractyl (Fractyl)

But we know that Hō is Cannon :/—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 20:50, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

True, but it's "Hō-Hō" and the attack really has nothing do with a "cannon", just a standard "aura projection" attack. Ten-Ten Dan (Intent on finding a batter english term for "Dan") sorta counts as GekiJaguar does spin in this move. As for "Kyaku", it seemed more of romanized "kick". As for Gekitohja's Big Gan-Gan Fist, it's not really a "punch attack" from my perspective. Fractyl (Fractyl)

---

To add, can't we translate the Gekiwazas like this? As all attacks have a "Word-Word" theme in the show, I though to bring it up. I have some good examples for this.

• 1. Double-Double Clone Fist (ゲキワザ 倍倍分身拳, Bai Bai Bunshin Ken)
  2. Gun-Gun Bullet (砲砲弾, Hō Hō Dan)
  3. Spin-Spin Bullet (転転弾, Ten Ten Dan)
  4. Dance-Dance Strike (舞舞打, Mai Mai Da)
  5. Strike-Strike Bullet (打打弾, Da Da Dan)
  6. Dance-Dance Dash (舞舞走, Mai Mai Sō)
  7. Bloom-Bloom Bullet (花花弾, Hana Hana Dan)
  8. Geki-Geki Cannon (激激砲, Geki Geki Hō)

Fractyl (Fractyl)

When there are two of them, it reminds me too much of One Piece. I think that it's best to use the gerund form if it exists.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 21:08, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

I can agree with you there in the comparison, but the use of Gerund seems to ruin the "intended punning" none the less. (Fractyl)

Hey, if you're deleting Yu-Gi-Oh images based on fair use, shouldn't you do that for all other anime episode lists too? I had just started to think it was okay and was making some for Zatch Bell. :/ JuJube 02:43, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

There were over 250 at the Yugioh page. I'll deal with Zatch Bell a night that I don't have physics homework.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 02:45, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

If you're doing that, mind going through List of Virtual Dungeon monsters? This one has over 50 images. I'll go for an IFD in...ah, a week unless an admin decides to do ADMIN ABOOSE and delete them outright. Hbdragon88 08:26, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Old thread is ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooold—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 08:26, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Also, take a look at my clock.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 08:27, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I know it's 4AM. That's why I was all, "Holy ****!" when I came back to my contributions to see that the (top) has already disappeared. Hbdragon88 08:29, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

I'll get to it after I'm done with work tomorrow...today...twelve hours.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 08:30, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Just so you know I noticed the same user whos unneccessary edits you reverted on the Super Sentai page has struck again but I took care of it. I am just letting you know because that same user might try again. -Adv193 16:27, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for your actions regarding Mayor Quimby, who made legal threats against Wikipedia and its editors. However, the same user is back as User:216.174.134.2 ( please see User talk:216.174.134.2) and is stirring up trouble again by inserting inappropriate data into the Regina neighbourhoods article and getting into revert wars. -- Mumun 無文 16:30, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Was blocked indefinitely...Mumun 無文 17:57, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Other than a change in the profiles of Retsu & Moriya, two new Gekiwazas debuted: Mai-Mai Shou & Hana-Hana Dan, which I translated as "Dance-Dance Artisan"(May be wrong with Artisan) & "Bloom-Bloom Bullet". Tell me if I have translated wrong. Fractyl (Fractyl)

Thought you might want to know - [27] is an ANI thread that I created regarding a user you originally blocked. May want to put your 2¢ there. ~Crazytales (Hasta la Pasta!) 00:37, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 00:58, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

You might want to update your anti-crystallballing page per this [28] report. BTW, thanks for your support with the nomination for a permanent ban! --Dmitry _{(talk •contibs )} 12:05, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

In the course of a systematic cleanup of WP:BANNED, and specifically WP:BANNED#Banned by the Wikipedia community, I have been going through the various noticeboard archives and adding links of the ban discussions to the banned-user entries so that readers can get more details. Many entries had these links already, so this was merely a matter of bringing the remaining entries to the same standard of citation. To make sure none get overlooked, {{specify}} tags mark where links are still needed, so they're not lost in the mass of text to be edited: as the links go in, the tags come out; and when "Find {{specify}}" comes up empty, that task will be done.

The {{specify}} tag was appropriate, because -- unlike all the other {{fact}}-type tags -- {{specify}} asserts the claim is "likely true" but "needs citations to make it complete".

Today "Find {{specify}}" came up empty; great news, someone's filled in all the links! Errr, no, someone's merely deleted all the {{specify}} tags, which is like helpfully removing all those messy bookmarks from a book. It has just made the cleanup job a little harder.

And now, if I go through the effort of recreating all those tags to make sure the job is done right, I'd be engaging in a revert war.

I don't want to play Revert War, or Edit War, or any other such game. I want to finish cleaning up the page so that all the "banned" and "sock puppet" and other major factual claims about banned users are linked to the supporting documents. Since these users are living people, and these claims are inherently somewhat derogatory, the principle behind WP:BLP has some bearing even though this isn't a mainspace page: the claims should be sourced. The need to do that is genuine and not merely a personal aesthetic preference on my part. Was there a genuine need to remove those {{specify}} tags, other than a personal aesthetic preference? If so, please let me know. If not, please either undo your removal and let the cleanup continue, or fill in all the missing links yourself so the tags aren't needed.

Thank you. -- Ben ^TALK/_HIST 19:57, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

I've went and undid it, as well as find a Bobabobabo sock to clean up after.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 20:48, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you tremendously. As for the Bido x 3 sock, Newyorkbrad has blocked it, I've added it to User:Interrobamf/Bobabobabo, but no-one had put a sock template/category on the userpage. Not knowing whether this user is simply handled differently -- Interrobamf's list page replacing the categories -- I didn't add anything to the userpage either. -- Ben ^TALK/_HIST 21:22, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello again. You removed the {{specify}} tag from WP:BANNED#SummerThunder (regarding his having been banned from Chinese Wikipedia) with the comment "we're not linking to his page on the Chinese Wikipedia". That's nice, but what would be even nicer is to link to wherever in English Wikipedia the claim was first asserted, and preferably documented. Again, it's an inherently somewhat derogatory claim about a living person, so it should be sourced if at all possible. If we can't do that, we shouldn't make the claim ourselves. -- Ben ^TALK/_HIST 17:44, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, I am completely unsure as to where we would be able to find the link from the Chinese Wikipedia, and the red link isn't necessary in the lead. I am currently unsure as to where SummerThunder was banned at the English Wikipedia. I would ask Khoikhoi. And this is getting into WP:OWN areas, right now, with your constant comments about my removals.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 21:12, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Do you know if this person has been operating puppets as a different puppeteer? I couldn't find anything so I just clumped them in Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of The Right Honourable Bonney Eberndu. —dgies^t_c 21:16, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

It's just easier to say it's a banned user. No need for different templates or reasons for protecting.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 21:18, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I just prefer keeping things like this organized so if they change their mode of operation slightly, having a centralized listing of past behavior makes the new sock easy to recognize. —dgies^t_c 21:22, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

• AIV took care of it, but the blocking period on 72.55.148.82 needs to be extended to indefinite like the rest. --Benten 00:45, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

You just indef blocked that Wiigirl2006 (sp). I had to laugh. "you can't stop me!!!" and then less than a minute later she is stopped for good. THANK YOU! --Xiahou 01:14, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks man. I owe you a lot already. Because of this, I think I might have to make some minor adjustments to my WP Awareness program. ;) Ed ^{¿Cómo estás?} 02:14, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Just keep an eye out for an editor who has decided to come back en mass recently.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 02:16, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

I used an external link for that edit because every time I tried an internal link it displayed the photo. I do know how to link, as a brief glance though my almost 5,000 contributions would show you. I found your edit summary both uncivil and patronizing. As an admin you should try to set a better example for the community. Cheers. And by the way, thank you for your help, though it was not asked for and unnecessary. Jeffpw 08:48, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

I really find that people don't know how to link to images or categories correctly. I apologize if it came off wrong :(—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 19:57, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

I, Rylong, i'm Proo, and I mean to you that the series Power Rangers: Beast Fist if it will exist, the official page has been confirmed in pages of Gekiranger and, the one of Jetix, so it is not an invention and nor a bad creation.

Proo

Give me a verifiable link that says the next season is to be called Beast First.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 20:42, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Watch: [29] , [30], [31]

All fansites, and the one that redirects to Disney doesn't prove anything yet.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 20:50, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Please, unprotected, since it is not an invention, gekiranger.com have complete data that sometimes have occurred Jetix them. And in addition, true sera, in order year was verified. Me you could conseder, of user to administrator

I am not unprotected until there is something more official from Disney. Last year, at this time, we had "Power Rangers Drive Force" as the title. I'm not unprotecting at all.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 21:00, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

I blocked this one, just in case... Regards, Húsönd 03:47, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Good catch.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 03:50, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

You might remember this, that you closed at MfD and deleted. Well...see for yourself :| Daniel Bryant 06:57, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Not exactly MFD, but it was an issue at an ANI post. I've redeleted it and asked him to start off from scratch.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 07:34, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

I acknowledge what you are saying, but what would you say as an appropriate level of my own information on Wikipedia? I do not have a problem with placing my own name in public, but I do want to know what is appropriate to place on a User Talk page. Good Day, -- Steven Suttles Stone 17:30, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Tagging because I might want to use that scrolling code one day. --Wasted Sapience 12:20, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Hmm? Which scrolling code?—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 21:10, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Your userboxes. --Wasted Sapience 15:49, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Ah. Just copy the formatting of User:Ryulong/Userboxtop. In fact, I could work with it so you would be able to use it, and the username would be based on what page it's on.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 19:57, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Regarding [32], was it something like what I described in [33]? —xyzzy_n 21:38, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

You hit the nail on the head. I replied to him saying that I would not add them, and I also removed them from the article.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 21:39, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

I've commented on the article talk page. Seeing that he didn't e-mail me, and the sources seem legitimate, I say that I am not acting as a proxy to a banned editor and that we can include them. --tjstrf talk 22:33, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

I take it I was not happy with his remarks? I also see that he understands English. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 22:58, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

He's saying nonsense. Blocking him.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 22:59, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 23:02, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Sigh! Thanks. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 00:17, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

He seems determined tonight. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 00:28, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

• I re-uploaded the images after checking on the Fair Use policy and seeing other anime episode list pages with images, emulated their format, but you erased the images without notifying me first. I'd like to know why you haven't deleted the images on things such as List of Naruto episodes and List of Code Geass episodes. JuJube 02:09, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

  You've been bugging me for the past week to delete them there.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 02:10, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

  Someone else deleted them, but then after I looked up Fair Use laws, I put them back. :( JuJube 02:12, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

  What fair use laws?—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 02:13, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

  I'll rephrase, I looked up what constitutes valid Fair Use rationale, and put in the summary when I uploaded the images; Image:GashKiyomaro.jpg has an example of what I used. JuJube 02:16, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

  It's not fair use if there are 100 on one page.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 02:17, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

  List of Naruto episodes has over 100. JuJube 02:18, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

  I'm not going to pick a fight with Narutards—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 02:37, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

What is the context? Where in the MMPR timeline does this episode fall? I'm kind of confused here, but it's vital info because I'm doing a speech on ninja Power Rangers. Hbdragon88 05:22, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Season 3 premiere.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 05:23, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh, for ra's sake...I jumped again when I came back to my contributions and saw that the (top) had disappeared...you never fail to amaze me. Hbdragon88 05:24, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

I never sleep.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 05:26, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, well, I added the context, I can only hope it is correct. Hbdragon88 05:34, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi Ryulong

If you're editing at such a speed that you're reverting other admins' edits, you're editing too fast. Please consider slowing down and looking at what you're doing, especially on protected pages, before you click and start annoying people.

No offence intended. RΞDVΞRS ✖ ЯΞVΞЯSΞ 22:00, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

:/ Was this the AFD tagging?—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 22:01, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah. I was well peeved for about 5 minutes. I'm over it now :o) RΞDVΞRS ✖ ЯΞVΞЯSΞ 22:42, 31 March 2007 (UTC)