This is an archive of my talk page from March to April 2006. I don't keep any sort of eye on this page, so if you want to get in touch, try my talk page. Thank you! —BorgHunter —BorgHunter

Archives: Greeting | 2005 | Jan–Feb 2006 | Mar–Apr 2006 | May 2006 | May 2006–Nov 2015

It's really pretty simple:
- remain neutral - - don't be a dick - - ignore all rules -

As far as I can tell, if things don't change due to deletions or what have you, Quinton McCracken may very well be number 1 million! :) Semiconscious • talk 23:18, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alas, no one else agrees. —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 23:19, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quinton McCracken Not the 1,000,000th but Steve Cox I belive was, if I'm correct congrats --Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 23:23, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not that either. It appears to be Jordanhill railway station. —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 23:25, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's the press release says. Hopefully some knowledgeable folks will bring it to FA status! This is a big day for WP. Semiconscious • talk 23:31, 1 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your article on Aaron Ledesma does receive a mention in this press release on MetaWiki. NoSeptember ^talk 00:14, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ha, nice. —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 00:18, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I've really been considering your offer. I really think I could take on the task of being an admin now, so we'll have to see how the next few days go ^_^ thanks for the message! Deckiller 21:06, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Borghunter. I was going to nominate User:Deckiller but noticed you had already offered. I've spoken with him and he says, he's ready. Nominate away! :-) Gflores ^Talk 21:11, 2 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, sorry, i'm just learning how to use it. Thank you for offering help, but i'm not needing it for the moment

Thank you anyway —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Steiger (talk • contribs) .

No problem! —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 03:35, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the nomination! Deckiller 03:45, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I appreciate it.

I heard you'd queued up an article to hit the 1,000,000th new article... bummer about not getting there mate! But at the same time, good on you for giving us great new articles :-) In my mind, that's just as special as hitting a million :P Ta bu shi da yu 07:00, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Check out this page. Pass it along. Nudge nudge. -- evrik 20:03, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey BorgHunter/Archive 3, how is it going? Thank you for supporting my Request for adminship! It passed with a final vote of 73/1/1, which means that I have been granted adminship! I look forward to using these tools to enhance and maintain this wonderful site. I will continue regular article/project contributions, but I will also allocate a sizable portion of my wikischedule toward administrative duties :) Thanks again, and if you have any questions/comments/tips, please let me know! — Deckiller 04:22, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for the nomination ^_^ I owe you one! Deckiller 04:22, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, you are receiving this message because your name is on the list of members of the Association of Members' Advocates. There is a poll being held at Wikipedia talk:Association of Members' Advocates for approval of a proposal for the revitalisation of the association. You are eligible to vote and your vote and input are welcome.Gator (talk) 14:48, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to alert you to this edit RJII made on his/her userpage and removed a minute later. [1]. Just thought you would like to know about it, considering his recent behavior and subsequent blocking. It seems to me as if he is threatening to continue this behavior and I think a more extensive (perhaps indefinite) ban is in order. The Ungovernable Force 04:43, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed this already myself, his page being on my watchlist and all. I'll keep my eyes peeled. —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 04:45, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

LOL. That was my girlfriend. That's why I immediately deleted it. RJII 04:53, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, by the way, that reminds me. The Ungovernable Force vandalized my user page a couple weeks ago. [2] I think a ban might be in order for that. RJII 04:57, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that was certainly not very nice. I'd give him a 24-hour vacation if it was more recent, but it was a month ago, so there's not much I can do anymore. —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 04:59, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's ok. I don't usually report people for things like that. Not much into being vindictive. Maybe I should. Otherwise I leave myself a sitting duck waiting to be attacked and banned by others, as we have seen. RJII 05:01, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, that was my girlfriend. The Ungovernable Force 05:02, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On second thought, I'm going to report it right now. RJII 05:03, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey you damn kids, get off my lawn user talk page! ::turns on sprinklers:: —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 05:05, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

yay! sprinklers! *frolic* ;x — User:Adrian/zap2.js 09:19, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

• Move to BJOADN - this is too hilarious. -- infinity0 16:53, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't appreciate you stating on the Administrator Notice Board that RJII has "disrupted nearly every article he has touched, including ANI." It's not true. Take a look at all the articles I've worked on. If there's a disruption, it's a good disruption, brought on by bringing in sourced information that the status quo doesn't like. The best thing about Wikipedia is that it's a way for the mainstream to have access to information that in the past has had to pass through filters and expurgated of anything that might challenge the establishment. What we have here is the indoctrinated victims of the establishment trying to supress information that I bring to the table, by any means necessary, including filing arbitration cases. They panic because it conflicts with the false reality they've been living with --I bring in information and intelligence that was not in their textbooks. I'm appalled that you and other administrators would condemn me for defending myself against false charges on the Notice Boards. I'm equally appalled that you would fall for the false claims from "infinity" that brought you to ban me for two weeks from an article. You arbitrators need to wake up and realize your main purpose --to keep verifiable information from being suppressed. With a few exceptions, you guys are doing an abysmal job as a whole. RJII 21:59, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Er, what? What exactly has recently changed? —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 23:08, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It may have been a little late to put the notice up, but I am referring to the decision to have all potential good articles nominated. joturner 23:34, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As the one who originally placed a month-long block on the "BBIH" account I DEMAND you to unblock it this instant! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by SW200 (talk • contribs) .

Gee, and it sounds like such a reasonable request...—BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 02:47, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stop wasting my time. I am not actually trying to troll using sockpuppets but the accout needs to be able to edit. I actually have pretty good plans of editis done by it.

Note: This account will mostly be used for good edits. I do not pan to make bad-faith edits with it. This will all work out much better for both of us if you unblock.

I wouldn't be opposed to shortening the block and keeping an eye on him, if you wanted to do that. He does have a few productive edits. (ESkog)^(Talk) 03:54, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, one of us should revisit him in a couple weeks. I wouldn't shorten the block at this point; just eliminate it in a couple weeks if he's behaved. —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 03:57, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. Every sockpuppet that drops by my talk page makes me less and less willing to mess with it... (ESkog)^(Talk) 03:58, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Great to see someone else with energy taking up the IIT page. Getting to featured page status would rock. As you can tell, I did a ton of work around Christmas getting the page into a much better state, but am pretty swamped at the moment so it'll be summer before I have a good deal of time to devote to side projects like this. On another note, I've floated the idea, after seeing success with the page here, of building a wiki entirely for IIT. I've seen some other schools do wikis, but haven't been too terribly impressed with the ones I've seen. A wiki that is used by everyone could form a giant fact base, yearbook, student/staff/faculty/organization/alumni directory, and more all in one. Initial support seems to be there from the right people, it's just a matter of getting things set up, setting a good system of templates, and having enough initial time to populate the basics to get everyone interested. Anyway, thought since you're obviously into wikis you might be interested in taking part or helping out in the fall - just email me at my staff address if you are: duncanr@iit.edu -Duncanr 05:45, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, it's an idea. Keep in mind that I'm not there yet, so I don't have the knowledge of the school that you would, for instance. But in the fall? Sure. And I'm still waiting on my notification of my Camras scholarship...can't you slobs in the admissions office hurry it up a bit? :-P —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 00:06, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get you up to date then in the fall if things move forward. Mostly I'm hoping that the wiki method will be easy enough for everyone else to add their knowledge about the school, and then those of us with at least some wiki experience can watch over things. And the Camras notifications should go out soon - though knowing us slobs in the admission office, we might forget to tell you or something ;) -Duncanr 02:59, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey BorgHunter,

I'm really ok either way here, but I wanted to make sure you were aware of the issue: Theodore7 had several days left on the one-week block I gave him (apparently uncontroversially) for violating his personal attack parole. If you feel the arrangement you've come to regarding the legal threats is best served by leaving him immediately unblocked though, I'd understand that -- though perhaps I'd ask you to attempt to impress on him that he is still under the various arbcom paroles, if you have not done so already. Thanks! —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 05:28, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Right, well, we have talked through email. I unblocked him with the understanding that he would cease not only the legal issues, but the rest of the undesirable behavior as well. I can forward you that email if you want. If he regresses, however, he would of course be blocked once more. —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 13:05, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good to me. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 16:17, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

You speedy-deleted the "Allah-kitten controversy" page. At the time you did so, the deletion discussion was unanimous that it the page was a hoax.

Hoaxes are specifically excluded from the WP:CSD, which you must realize, as you mentioned deletion criterion A3 in your edit summary. Unfortunately, A3 does not apply to hoaxes either.

I think this kind of speedy is a bad idea. Once the article has come to AfD, it makes little difference whether it is deleted now or 5 days from now; and these kind of irregularities call the credibility of the deletion process into question, especially during contentious AfDs during which unhappy people can point to prior violations of policy as precedent for assuming the deletion process is flawed and unfair.

I'd like to request undeletion of the page and unclosing of the AfD, then, on the grounds of WP:PI.

Thanks, -ikkyu2 (talk) 22:24, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto for Charles "Chaz" Miller. You summarized the page deletion reason as "CSD A7, nonnotable." Non-notability is not a criteria for speedy deletion. Failure to assert notability is, and the AfD nomination very clearly points out that notability was asserted. Community consensus - in the form of the Wikipedia deletion policy - is important on Wikipedia. Please consider reviewing the Wikipedia:Deletion policy and the Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion, undeleting the article, and reopening the AfD. -ikkyu2 (talk) 01:59, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Alrighty. The first, I had meant G3, not A3, which was my mistake. Vandalism. I assume good faith all the time, but the kinds of edits that user was making proved bad faith to me, and so I deleted that as G3 and potentially as a subset of A7 on the Chaz Miller page. The second is a speedy category, specifically, A7: "Unremarkable people or groups. An article about a real person, group of people, band, or club that does not assert the importance or significance of its subject. If the assertion is disputed or controversial, it should be taken to AFD instead." Please also note that, at the time I speedied the articles, the AfDs were 100% delete save the article creator. In addition, calling these speedies contentious is beyond ridiculous: I deleted them in line with the speedy criteria, but also per WP:SNOW, WP:NOT, and, yes, WP:CON. If you're interested in taking this further (and negating my attempt to avoid wasting time on obvious garbage with an AfD), you always have deletion review. Cheers. —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 03:23, 14 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

File:Saguaro2.jpg

Thanks for your support and kind words on my recent RfA, which I am pleased to say passed with a final tally of 80/1/1. If you ever need any help, or if I mess something up as an admin, please let me know. Cactus.man ✍ 20:21, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Borg I was just wondering, why the inclusion of that particular Roll the Bones citation? Was it intended to satisify the claim that "Where's my Thing?" contained jazz? Wisdom89 15:22, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually no, it was the hip-hop reference a bit earlier in the sentence. You could move the tag over a bit if you want. Sorry for the confusion. —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 15:23, 18 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So far the people on this site have been so nice... Thanks for all of your help. I really appreaciate this. —This unsigned comment was added by Soloflying (talk • contribs) .

No problem! Most Wikipedians are more than happy to help newbies out. After all...we all were new once too! Take care. —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 02:29, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If Durin had firstly asked politely to remove the fair use images from my userpage without barging in and editing at free will I would not have reverted his edits. Also, if you had asked politely I would have stopped adding them. Since I'm now being forced, because nobody around here can simply ask things like any normal human being, I am agreeing to stop adding the fair use images. Thank for your time and I expect my user page to be unblocked as soon as possible. — Wackymacs 14:08, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• BorgHunter; since he agreed to stop using fair use images on his userpage, I have unprotected it. Thanks for your input on the matter. If he continues to insert such images on his userpage, I will not take direct action but refer it to other admins for review. Any continued efforts on my part with regards to removing these images from his userpage will just be fuel for the fire, so its best if I just refer it on in his case from now forward. --Durin 15:46, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• Okey doke. I was at a Spring Training game, so it's good that you came around and unprotected it, as I just now got home. Thanks for the note. —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 21:14, 19 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There are now something like three sockpuppets of Zeus'. Can we get a checkuser run now? --maru (talk) contribs 03:10, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm on IRC with Essjay right now. —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 03:11, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have not done anything of the sort. Get someone to check the ip's... I have nothing to do with people concuring with my valid statements... I have provided full back up for my statements... Why would you accuse me of something like that?

Zeus69962 03:12, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Add [Nat18327] to the list of socks for Zeus69962 Justin Johnson 05:26, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note. I issued that account an indef block and further blocked Zeus69962 for disruption (24 hours). I hope he'll soon realize that his socks couldn't fool a bacteriophage, much less intelligent people already on the lookout for socks. I'm doubling his block for every new sock we find, too. The sad thing is, he could be right, for all I know...I haven't so much as looked at the dispute on the Frank Herbert page, and moreover, I don't care to. That sort of disruptive sockpuppeteering is just plain annoying. I'm uninvolved in the content dispute. —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 13:19, 20 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to nominate CSCWEM first :P. I was gonna hit him on March 31st before you guys got to him.. Guess i never got the chance. Ahh well - time for pile on support. Werdna648^T/_C\^@ 11:18, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs Chevrolet Uplander Rock'n Clothing Buick LeSabre Grottammare Mike Howard Brad Delp Girl (band) Küssnacht Infiniti QX56 Bolulla Guaiacol Mercedes-Benz Sprinter Rigi Oakland Athletics/Players of note Douglas, Chicago Volvo S80 San Francisco Giants/Players of note Mike Lansing BMW 3 Series

Cleanup Randy White (porn star) VAIO Man-Bat Merge Labyrinth of Evil Weimar culture Praying mantis Add Sources Chevrolet Impala Daniel Spill Fang the Sniper Wikify Igo Etrich Dr. Martin Luther King Memorial Bridge Webmaster Expand Tokelauan language PC card Washington Wizards

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways, from comparing articles that need work to other articles you've edited, to choosing articles randomly (ensuring that all articles with cleanup tags get a chance to be cleaned up). It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 13:57, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, done. _{§τοʟĿ€ʀγ}^Ť_č 16:32, 24 March 2006 (UTC) (PS: Say, you don't happen to live near Clearwater, Florida do you?)[reply]

I do, in fact. Pinellas Park, to be precise. —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 01:27, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I recently joined Wikipedia, and I don't really know who best to ask, but I found your name via AMA, so I figured I could ask you. People keep blanking out Set_Free_Care, what should I do about this? Just keep restoring it if I notice it being blanked out? How long should I keep doing this before an official request for arbitration or whatever I should do? Thanks -- Opblaaskrokodil 04:43, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's just one vandal. I'll keep an eye on the page and block the guy if he does it again. —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 23:39, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seriously, how are we supposed to DISCUSS on Talk-Pages, when my very arguments there are being vandalised. Still, some still dispute my arguments for being "false quotes", but when I back them up with FULL REFERENCES, my edit is repeatedly reverted. (Again, on the TALK-PAGE, the very place where we are supposed to discuss that). I'm waiting for an approval to revert again to my edits. Hope you'll provide me one. Here is a link to the questionable revert [3]. Thank you in advance. Zadil 00:39, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted the revert, though I don't fully comprehend the history of the situation. It looks like a heat of the moment revert, which is unfortunate. You yourself should probably take a breath or two, have some tea, calm down, and return. Edit wars suck. And there are more important things to worry about. Everyone, just be happy! —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 02:30, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I appriciate it very much. Thank you for kind words. Zadil 02:34, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

thanks borghunter, ive also slipped a note by both talk pages :) Benon 02:40, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Borghunter, you have not examined the discussion yet saw it necessary to revert my move. I take your accusation of vandalism very seriously. If you'd read the page a bit better you would have seen that I replaced Zadil's further incitement with a diff, giving immediate access to his contribution. Most other editors on Talmud are annoyed by Zadil's behaviour. You are welcome to comment on the discussion. JFW | T@lk 07:21, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They're annoyed, fine. This means that there's a conflict of interest, and it is not appropriate for them to remove comments on the basis of alleged "trolling". I further have not accused you of vandalism, even going so far as to post a note on your talk page saying as much, "though I know your intent was to avoid [disruption]." Your revert was in good faith but was generally a bad idea. Please avoid removing talk page comments under the "trolling clause" when you admit being "annoyed," as that very much does not suit an editor on Wikipedia, much less an admin. —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 16:10, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Zadil is a troll. His comments, however clever they sound, are being posted purely to cause disruption. I'm not in the mood for some stupid wheel warring about this.

Do everyone a favour and talk some sense into Zadil, so no further conflict will arise as a result of his despicable behaviour. Thanks. Alternatively, I will need to report him on WP:ANI, in which case progressively longer blocks for disruption will be issued. JFW | T@lk 21:02, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Get him blocked on ANI, then. Not any concern of mine. —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 04:35, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi BorgHunter! how are you? I hope you don't mind me seeking your advice again, regarding the same Talk Page.

It Seems like some user has distressfully distorted my comments on a TALK PAGE. As you may observe, not only were my links REMOVED, but even the very REFERENCES - which was the all purpose of my comments - (given allegation of "fabrication" and "false quotes"), were to disappear, leaving the impression of my edit as another long tedious boring list of SOME ALLEGED quotes (without any means for verification) which have already been cited just a few lines above. I find this revert as pure distortion, as he mysteriously "hided" the major lines in my comments.

Finally, the revert was applied without any notification, and I got it only in some miraculous way, which is again very disturbing. Would you be so kind to look into the matter, please. sure I wish to revert that section again to my edit. Thanks in advance! A link is provided here Zadil 23:07, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One revert is the maximum I do when I've assumed good faith on both sides. I'm content to let other channels resolve the issue and not bother myself further with it. —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 04:38, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Or as I like to call it, "Run away! Run away!" ;-) PS I've been waiting over here. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 04:48, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks anyway for looking into the matter. I appreciate it and respect your comment above. Zadil 05:02, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, maybe {{test}} was too harsh. Is there a more welcoming template (besides welcome)? I can't think of one off the top of my head. Gflores^Talk 07:19, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why be stuck with a template? Should have left a note welcoming him, but noting that that sort of precision was not ideal in the intro to the article. As Karl Marx said, templates are the opiate of the masses. —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 07:21, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, I should've left a welcoming note. I'll send him another message now. Although I would think it'd be obvious that that level of precision (30+ digits) is too much. Gflores^Talk 07:26, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

BorgHunter/Archive 3, thank you for supporting me in my recent RfA. Although it did not succeed as no consensus was declared (final: 65/29/7), I know that there is always an opportunity to request adminship again. If and when that day comes, I hope you will once again support me. If at any time I make any mistakes or if you would like to comment on my contributions to Wikipedia, you are more than welcome to do so. Regardless of your religious, cultural, and personal beliefs, I pray that whatever and whoever motivates you in life continues to guide you on the most righteous path. --- joturner 02:28, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion, all admin must be well versed in everything in Wikipedia which includes explain to the newbies, or at least point to who can help them the process of photo uploading. Photo uploading and displaying is part of Wikipedia, given Admin may delete photos, an understanding of the process is included in my requirements.

Thanks for "being" Spangineer and jumping in to answer my question. I'll put my 2 cents in over there right away...cheers! Anger22 01:15, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Never a problem, good sir! —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 01:22, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dear BorgHunter,

I liked reading your philosophy for being a Wiki advocate. Please help me. I started to put a short bio about myself on Wikipedia and made a terrible mistake. I cut and pasted the bio from my website into Wikipedia. My intention was the edit from Wikipedia, but before you know it this big scary COPYRIGHT sign went up and prevented me from doing anything. Evidently I am "under investigation."

The page said I could write my entry "from scratch" on a Temp page (see it by putting in "Sharon Dotson"), which I did, but I am still in no man's land.

Could you be my advocate and get this removed? I didn't mean to commit a grievous error -- and by the way this was my own copywrited material. BNut you better believe I will never cut and paste any material to Wikipedia ever, ever, ever again.

Would appreciate hearing from you. Thank you.

Sharon Dotson

Well, you can put that text on Wikipedia if you agree to license it under the GFDL. Or, we can put that text you wrote on the temp page in. Which would you prefer? —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 18:29, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and incidentally, I would highly recommend you register an account, though this is by no means required. —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 18:38, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I got the notification of your message just as I was saving my change to support. :) Looks terrific - different style than I used on Pink Floyd but equally effective. Nice work, and hope it makes it. - dharmabum 21:49, 3 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi BorgHunter. Just a quick note to thank you for your support in my RfA, which recently passed 62/13/6. I will do my very best live up to this new responsibility and to serve the community, but please let me know if I make any mistakes or if you have any feedback at all on my actions. Finally, if there is anything that I can assist you with - please don't hesitate to ask. Cheers TigerShark 03:42, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A watered-down version of the proposed policy against censorship is now open for voting. Will you knidly review the policy and make your opinions known? Thank you very much. Loom91 11:32, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

May I ask why you protected my page? I had replaced the fair use images. ROGNNTUDJUU! 12:33, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Could you have a look at User talk:ROGNNTUDJUU!#Protection? --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 13:23, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NicholasTurnbull now blocked ROGNNTUDJUU! indefinitely after he had already been told that his deletions were wrong. This needs to be undone immediately. I wonder how he comes to the conclusion ROGNNTUDJUU! did not help the project as he had many valuable edits in the article space. And this is not on a single admin to decide. De mortuis... 15:09, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It never was. We're already discussing the block on WP:ANI, hop on in! —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 15:10, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for removing the fair use image from my page. I was not aware of the rules on fair use.--Adam ^(talk) 12:44, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi BorgHunter- thanks a lot for your support on my recent, (barely) successful rfa. Please feel free to leave me any comments or criticisms on my talk page! --He:ah? 22:37, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello BorgHunter. Please don't undo my changes to TomYumGoong's userpage - we are friends engaging in a bit of harmless silliness. Thanks! --quo 14:18, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, sorry, I didn't know. —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 14:20, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The use of the image in conjunction with the text "genital integrity" and its copyright is allowed by noharmm.org. It is not fair use, but rather is explicitly licensed as such.

So I could upload another copy of the image with a proper tag, and then use it? Tomyumgoong 06:38, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You have to choose the legally correct license. If it's copyrighted but they allow you to use it for any purpose, edit the existing image description page to reflect this. —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 15:41, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, this is Matt Yeager. I wanted to thank you for your vote on my request for adminship. The count was something like was 14/20/5 when I decided to withdraw the request. My decision was based on the fact that there are enough things wasting people's time on the Internet that doomed RFA's shouldn't be kept up for voters to have to think about. Regardless of the rationale behind your vote, I hope you will read this note for an extended note and discussion on what will happen before I make another try at adminship (I didn't want to clog up your userpage with drivel that you might not be interested in reading). Thank you very, very much for your vote and your time and consideration of my credentials--regardless of whether you voted support, nuetral, or oppose. Happy editing! Matt Yeager ♫ (Talk?) 01:28, 11 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, BorgHunter/Archive 3!
	...for voting in my RFA. It passed with a result of 58/2/0. If you have any comments, or for some reason need any new-admin help, please let me know here. Regards, ProhibitOnions 22:59, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Borg for your note. No problems, the purpose of the RfA process is to vote out the people you have doubts of and I can understand perfectly well why somebody could have valid doubts about my candidature. Besides while I believe that I did nothing to be particulary ashamed of I did not anything so far to be particulary proud of either. Lets work together to make the place cleaner. abakharev 06:49, 13 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you're finding the warning toolbox useful. I've made a few minor changes to it that you might want to be aware of. --Kbh3^rdtalk 20:47, 14 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Never Cry Wolf 10:02, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you had some interest in this article. You can check over my finding here.--Fallout boy 09:51, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

BorgHunter, thanks plenty for your vote of confidence in my recent successful RfA. I have made a note of your two concerns, and I will strive to improve upon them as best as I can. If you have any comments, you can reach me here. Regards, Jay(Reply) 00:23, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You called me a Sock puppet on my birthday. What are you going to do at christmas, try to shoot me? I hope not, because I've already had two people take shots at me and it's usually third time lucky around me.--JamieBattenbo 18:44, 18 April 2006 (BST)

I'm sorry, I did? Where? I don't recall ever seeing you before. —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 18:20, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

here.--JamieBattenbo 20:23, 18 April 2006 (BST)

Funny, I see myself saying I thought you seemed suspicious, then saying I thought you were a disparate person. —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 19:26, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wasn't there 3 votes on "support" for every 2 "oppose" votes for the "hemophilia" change? Why did you think there wasn't? 207.179.172.217 20:45, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I received a "This is your last warning", but I have not changed any pages. This IP address is on a school computer and is therefore shared between a bunch of comps. I would ask that this IP not be banned because there probably are legitimate changes that are made from this IP.

thanks

It was a while ago, you needn't worry about it any longer. —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 14:35, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that the "haemophilia" page wasn't moved even though there was a consensus, so I corrected some things. I know who Buziollover and Clubpenguinfan are, and they aren't sockpuppets. 156.34.52.28 13:39, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They are meatpuppets. In closing the requested move, I discounted their votes. Wikipedia is not a democracy, and a bunch of newbies voting on a requested move don't sway the vote one iota. —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 14:33, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why not? 207.179.172.217 12:37, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If Wikipedia isn't a democracy, then what is it? Random the Scrambled 01:28, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NOT —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 02:00, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry if the initial information on the review-page wasn't clear enough, but the case in point is that the page deleted wasn't a revived old version of the deleted page. It was a _completely_ new page, submitted by yours truly and updated and improved by several others. Zarkow 15:39, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is it posible for you to upload them to commons under a free license following the same/similar naming convention as images with red bg? :) --Cool Cat^Talk|@ 20:29, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ack you already done that... nm :) --Cool Cat^Talk|@ 20:31, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is it posible for you to color the updated images? Take the rank insignias on Data (Star Trek) and you'll see the slight difference. :) --Cool Cat^Talk|@ 20:35, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also if you can create Image:Star Trek TNG OF4 Ops.png :) --Cool Cat^Talk|@ 20:39, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The latter I thought I had done. The former I can do, maybe in the next few days. If they're not done in a week, yell at me and I'll do them. ;) —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 02:03, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can I yell early? Since I have no one to create the images for me. I used paint to draw my insignia images and would prefer the other divisions to have identical size. You can simply edit the insignias with red bg. See: Ranks and insignia of Starfleet. --Cool Cat^Talk|@ 07:16, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am seeking a RfC from User:Woggly but have been told that it has not been filed. Could you kindly assist me in filing this RfC and defending me / being free of her and her friends' open, destructive harassment which now includes my first block! As a professional international journalist of 25 years I have never been censored in any forum (except for Syria and Iran), till now :< Thank you. IsraelBeach 21:22, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thank you! All the best! --HolyRomanEmperor 13:34, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy! Any reason you're substing {{deletedpage}}? Seems wasteful. - CHAIRBOY(☎) 17:21, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, but not having {{deletedpage}} substed is wasteful. In general, boilerplate text like it, as I understand it, should be substed. —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 17:24, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nope. When you subst it, the size of the database increases because suddenly the article goes from 12 bytes to a few hundred, defeating hte purpose of deletedpage. Embedding it keeps the database small. Subst should ONLY be used for high-traffic articles, or articles that people are likely to visit at least more than once. Most of the deletedpage items are super low traffic, so you're actually wasting a bunch of server space and slowing the DB down because there's more data to index. Please stop. Regards, CHAIRBOY (☎) 17:50, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hm...I'm almost done, but I'll stop now that I see my actions have objections. My only question is, if subst is bad, why do bots exist that go around substing {{test}} and the like? —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 17:52, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Because test templates are left on talk pages that could potentially be visited a bunch of times. {{deletedpage}} is used on pages that are unlikely to get any traffic. Glarg, you subst'd all of them? Sweet jesus.... well, I understand that you were trying to help but... crikey! Did you do it manually? Or with a bot? How many were there? A big disadvantage to casual substing is that nobody can update the template and have it reflect on the existing pages. Well, something to remember for the future! Regards, - CHAIRBOY (☎) 18:14, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That was all manually. No AWB, no bots. It looks like I did upwards of 300 of them, which I hope didn't screw anything up. (Especially considering I try to remember to subst mine when I use them every time.) As for updating the template, I don't think any change made to the template would be urgent enough to be required on all protected deleted pages. —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 18:19, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What do you guys do about editors like this guy who continue to replace POV statements and incorrect info no matter how mant times they've been rv'd? Better yet...who/how/where does a user such as myself(who'll go 3RR if I try to clean him up any further) go to report a user such as this guy? ("That" guy may also be an anon IP who is basically repeating the same re-adds as the user I have indicated) As a sidebar to my first question(s), the "persistent editor" has been adding a myriad of images which are bound to be orphanbot turfed( I haven't looked to deeply into the iamge sources). How long does an image of unknown origin sit before it gets the hack? Thanks and Take Care! Anger22 00:00, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick rv! BTW the <cough> IP <cough><cough> version you rv'd back to...may just <nudge>be<nudge> the Puppet O' Meat. Just in case you were keeping track. Cheers! Anger22 00:21, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the support on my RFA. Unfortunately, it did not achieve consensus. I look forward to your support in a couple months when I apply again. Holler at me if you need anything. ⇒ SWATJester ^Ready Aim _Fire! 19:18, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clearing out the backlog at CAT:CSD :-) --HappyCamper 02:19, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Pages in category 'Candidates for speedy deletion'

There are 0 pages in this section of this category." —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 02:29, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nice speedy delete. That was really fast! No wonder they call it speedy... Freddie 02:55, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, come again! —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 02:56, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hehe, thanks! --Rory096 03:11, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, you deleted the article. Please also close the AfD. Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Art_De_Vany. Cheers! - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 03:47, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Since you asked, I will, but you can close the AfD yourself if you want to. I am not required to do so. —BorgHunter ^ubx (talk) 03:48, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice, I have decided to withdraw my nomination and will probably re-nominate myself in a couple of months (unless I get nominated before then by someone else). Lcarsdata ^{Talk | @ | Contribs | My RfA} 15:28, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, my bad, and no, I didn't realize I'd made more than three reverts. I did figure I was reverting simple vandalism, though, since it was a link to a deleted page that the author was saying, in no uncertain terms in the edit summary, that he was reinserting it to make a point. I will try to be more cautious in the future, though, and thanks for the heads up. --InShaneee 16:32, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]