I did not vandalize the page. I made a copyedit. I was not signed in because I had decided not to actively edit anymore. I made some notes on the talk pages about edits which I don't believe are yours.

By he way, no one's going to come copyedit the article from you having put a "copyedit" tag on it. Especially not if the article is about anything relating to black people or black music. I'm sorry, but that's just how Wikipedia is. I wouldn't call it racism: most editors here just aren't all that concerned with these topics. I labored for a few years with only a few editors helping me, and burned myself out on the project. If you personally ask one of the copyeditors, they may do it.

If you need some help with the article, email me (do not reply on my talk page. I'm not even supposed to be here; I came here looking for a link I put into the Dreamgirls article). I've got a copy of the film's script, and plenty of Dreamgirls, Motown, and Supremes references. --FuriousFreddy 01:38, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Will look into it. However, please don't take off tags, because I and others are trying to make this article look good for FA nom. Thanks. Sorry about the mistake. Real96 03:45, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Anytime! Let me know if you ever need any help with anything. futurebird 05:09, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

The March 2007 issue of the Biography WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Mocko13 22:02, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

This story was really meant for MrDarcy, Ccson, Robotam, Real96/Bearly541 (the edit's to the links and Real's edits to bearly's talk page gave it away) since they were always wondering as to what drove MyKungFu. Initially it was to spread the message of some of the ills that went on with some greek organizations. It later became some of the ills (that had factual basis) of other groups. After a while it was simply the joy of the debate (sentence by sentence as it seemed). Even if you don't know who I am, you are like a family. We've been debating for over a year. The cat and mouse, it honestly has been fun. Some of the article that were initially created were in good faith or eventually became good faith, Gamma Phi, Charles C. Poindexter, Walter M. Kimbrough, Holcombe Rucker, Sigma Pi Phi, and Alpha Kappa Nu. I learned strong references and loved to debate them. I know that many organizations like to be seen in a good light especially when they have their members editing it. That though shouldn't stop Wikipedia as being a source of the whole truth. Which is what I feel was being stopped from being shown. E.g. the hazing incidents of many greek organizations. The ban was a ban; and I asked for the account to be unblocked after a few months. It never happened. Oh well... Many of my screen names were caught, but in the chase there were a number of screen names that you mistakenly thought was MyKungFu. I can tell you that Vkmayes and Mukokeri weren't mine. I really laughed when I saw Real96 labeled a sock; MrDarcy than did a checkuser on her and when it was found false wouldn't apologize. Also how JeffGent was almost labeled a sock by Ccson on Robotam's page. It's funny how so many IP's were labeled socks when they weren't socks at all. Anyway, I am writing because I am currently going thru a family crises. My brother was seriously injured in Iraq by a rocket attack. I found out today on my way back home. I won't be on Wikipedia for a long time. In all it's been a lot of fun. All the best...

MyKungFu MyWingChun 05:20, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I am not Bearly541. I just reverted a message on her archives which shouldn't have been there. Anyway, you are in my prayers. Real96 06:02, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps it doesn't like the change from Latino to Hispanic? I think Latino is more accurate here, at least in terms of what the two articles say. | Mr. Darcy talk 04:53, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't know. But the "white" usage needs to be Caucasian, since the word "white" redirects to the color. Real96 05:56, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Agreed, and I was wrong anyway b/c I think the bot "accepted" your last edit where you only changed the races up top. If you can, try to make the rest of that edit and see if the bot reverts you - if it does, leave me a note and I will make the change myself, since it won't revert an admin. Then I can leave VoA a note about the problem with specifics on what the bot did. | Mr. Darcy talk 23:21, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for assessing so many WPBiography articles today. Before you hopefully continue to do so: are you sure that the living=yes flag should be applied to band articles too? I doubt it - please see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Musicians#living=yes_flag_in_project_banner_of_musical_groups'_articles?. Best regards, BNutzer 22:35, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Hmm. I tag the article, per the WP:BIO policy if members or members are living (including one or more), because libel can be introduced into the article as well, concerning break up of band members. Real96 22:38, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Maybe you should/wanna state your view on the musicians project talk page too? BNutzer 22:52, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

OT: I noticed you add various *work-group = no flags. Isn't that more of a waste of server space than a useful addition? No offense meant. Regards, BNutzer 22:56, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

(reduce indent) 1.) I may do so later. 2.) It is not a waste of server time, but moreso to categorize the articles into their specific subjects related to the WP:BIO project. Real96 23:01, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

2.) Maybe this is a misunderstanding. I referred to the all the lines ending with "work-group = no ..." that you left in the banners you added. {{WPBiography}} says for all work-groups: Answer yes if the article is in the scope of the ... work group, otherwise remove this line. Regards, BNutzer 22:24, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

This is in order to categorize the topic in which the subject falls under. (i.e. Marvin Gaye falls under the musicians project). Real96 22:57, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Of course, a line like "|musician-work-group = yes" is good for that, but it is useless and resource-wasting to include additional lines saying "|some-other-work-group = no" - and that is what you had done some days ago and what my original post was about. But that's history now ... Case closed as far as I am concerned. Cheers, BNutzer 00:36, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

I am trying to categorize the article into specific categories. "No" means that the article doesn't belong in the specific category. Anyway, the case is closed. Real96 02:27, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Hmm... I don't understand. I've been doing the A section for ages now. Auroranorth 11:58, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

I guess the A section overlapped with my sections. Anyhoo, it's done! Thank goodness! Real96 23:00, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for helping out with the Biography assessment drive. Good news. Outriggr recently designed a script that will cut your biography assessment time down by about ten fold (what took ten hours now may only take one hour with Outriggr's script). For more information, please see the 'assessment from article page' discussion. -- Jreferee 20:08, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

This is awesome! I can now use this as well for albums assessment! Real96 23:28, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		Thanks for all your hard work around here. You are an invaluable asset to Wikipedia. -Mschel 20:12, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! Real96 23:29, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your assistance. Leafyplant 01:01, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Anytime! Real96 05:39, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Great job reversing vandalism on the Rosie O'Donnell page! KrewBay 18:32, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome Real96 22:57, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

If you don't use the WP:UWT warning templates in numerical order (1, 2, 3 4) WP:AIV generally will not act to do anything about the disruptive user, unless they are incredibly blatant vandals (multiple page blankings, etc.) Also, it is generally better to use more specific templates (uw-defamation, etc.) where they apply. Hope this helps.  :-) — SMcCandlish [talk] [contrib] ツ 01:26, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip. However, when an IP vandalizes two or three times in the same period on the same page, I skip from test 1, to test 3 -- depending upon the severity of the crime. However, if their last three edits were vandalism, I use test 4. I am so used to using test templates instead of UW templates. But, since I have TWINKLE, I can use UW automatically. Thanks for your help. Real96 05:20, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Real96. First of all, thanks for your support at my RfA. The level of support was fantastic and very humbling, in fact. Secondly, backlog: yeah, why not? I should have these personal "RfA thanks" messages done by then! Bubba hotep 08:29, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay, let me know when! Real96 02:14, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

It's OK, 68.39.174.238 00:01, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Fly on bold IP. :-P Real96 02:26, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey... how are you getting those more customized subjects/placements on your TW usage...? Mine aren't like that. Also, you're getting all the vandals hella faster than I am, good work... - Denny 00:31, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

1.) See my Monobook. 2.) Ethernet, baybee! :-P Real96 00:51, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I got it, thanks. :) Your speed is impressive! - Denny 01:51, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello, Miranda! I've seen you a TON in the new articles section, and I just want to say that you are a reaslly great Wikipedian. So you think that you could sign my autograph book? Thanks! Cremepuff222 (talk, sign book) 01:23, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I did. Thanks. Real96 02:02, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I'd ask you to watch over mkil, he has been after marciano, floyd patterson, bob baker pages, screwing thigns up, deleting lots of important info, also marciano talk page, it was very messy, so people agreed to move that, it's all under archives, make sure that vandal is not allowed to screw with it, we are in the process of banning him, getting some action against him, but honestly, his actions can not be tolerated. If you are open minded, give me email and I will show you all the evidence.

You have made personal attacks before, and you were blocked before for vandalizing a talk page as well as being a indef. blocked user. According to the policy, you may be blocked for causing disruption and your edit summary here is seen as an NPA. You have also deleted comments, and that could warrant a block from an administrator. Also, please sign your posts. Thank you! Real96 02:13, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Question...do you EVER use anything under a level 3 warning when you warn users? I was looking at your contributions and even when it was the user's first warning you went straight to at LEAST 3rd level (I saw some where you went straight to the final level on the user's first edit). It's a tiered system, try giving users some of the first levels first, Metros232 01:35, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I do. However, the vandal has vandalized the page at least two times before I gave the 3rd level warning. And, in other cases, people revert and don't give a warning to the person. This shows that the vandal is assuming bad faith. Real96 01:42, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I do not understand why Kooon66770000000000 (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log) is bad. Another administrator removed this username from Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism after not understanding this either. Please take it to Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User names. Jesse Viviano 01:36, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

It's racist. Koon is another word for nigger. Real96 01:40, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

The user is already blocked indef. Real96 02:31, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Just so you know, I have removed IMFAKEANDY (talk • contribs) from WP:AIV because it is not a clear violation of the username policy. Before I removed it, this fact was pointed out by an administrator. If you think the username should be disallowed, please take it to WP:RFCN. I've noticed that you like to help out with User creation patrol, thanks for the help! Inappropriate usernams damage the community. --Nick—^Contact/_Contribs 01:47, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

I did :-P Real96 01:49, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Howdy! Quick question from RFC/U, we can't tell what the personal attack is supposed to be, could you help out? Thanks! - CHAIRBOY (☎) 01:59, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I updated the page. Thanks. Real96 02:01, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 10	5 March 2007	About the Signpost

New Yorker correction dogs arbitrator into departure	WikiWorld comic: "The Rutles"
News and notes: Picture of the Year, milestones	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:36, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Greetings! It's not all that easy to explain. First of all, I'm not as good at it as some people who have learned music entirely that way (for example, many jazz musicians). If the style is one with which I am unfamiliar, such as most rock or pop styles, I have a harder time, since the musical expectations are different (which chords follow which and so forth). If I hear something in a more-or-less classical style, I can usually get it on a few hearings. I think most people try to "play by ear" by making sense of the source first at the phrase level, i.e. building blocks about the length of a human breath, and then they fill in the notes--the details--secondarily. Hope this helps! Antandrus (talk) 17:03, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! I know some people who play by ear, and was wondering how they have the capability to perform . . . Real96 22:12, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Please sign my autograph page. A•N•N•Afoxlover PLEASE SIGN, ANYONE!!! 19:27, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Done. Real96 22:13, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

No worries; just renaming users. I've not gone mad. Regards — Dan | talk 03:39, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

can you recover my poem the garden i need it back thank you —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Darksagga (talk • contribs) 04:55, 8 March 2007 (UTC).

Sorry, it has been deleted. I cannot restore pages, because I am not an administrator. Please contact an administrator for assistance. Real96 04:57, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

I love 'em! Real96 01:44, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

You know what? You should make a banner on sockpuppets, WP:AIV, WP:BLP, vandals and assuming good faith. :-) THAT WOULD BE SO FUNNY! Real96 01:49, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggestion. I'm not entirely sure that something about sockpuppets or vandals would be a good idea, or what it should say if I did make one – the last thing we want to do is encourage them, after all. One about assuming good faith might be useful, though – Qxz 12:59, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry to interrupt your blizzard of edits, but you didn't bother to respond to my question earlier on the talk page. I hadn't created a Wiki account at that stage. You labelled my edit of Andrew Bolt as vandalism, when it was made in good faith and in accordance with WP:Bold. I asked you to explain why you did this, but you ignored me. I have reinstated my edit. A little courtesy would come in handy. LTSally 09:18, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

The edit summary was kind of odd. Also, the controversies containing a person's life can be placed upon wikipedia, as long as it doesn't contain libel, properly referenced, and goes according to the Biographies of Living person's policy. I labeled your removal as blanking, because 1.)It was a large removal of text. 2.) Your weird edit summary. And, I have I don't generally read talk pages of vandal edits I revert, but I will try so in the future. Thanks! Real96 10:08, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Odd? Weird? Why, thank you. You are becoming even ruder with every comment. Can I point out: (1) I removed three paragraphs from a very lengthy article. (2) Two of those three paragraphs have very little to do with Andrew Bolt. (3) Can you please desist from calling my edit vandalism. I made a brief description of the topics within the three paragraphs I deleted, explained they had little do with the subject of the article, and then as per your talk page (If I begin a topic on your talk page, I will respond on your talk page) I left you a request to explain why you so promptly reverted my edit. Which you ignored. I don't consider my edit blanking. LTSally 12:10, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm not being rude. I am just following Wikipedia policy. And, no I don't think that ...xxx....yyy...zzz is a good explanation summary. And, I didn't begin a topic on your page, I left a warning on your talk page, which must have been shared at the time. You can be bold in editing, but not reckless. Cheers! Real96 16:57, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Greetings! A recent change has been made in the clerking system at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser. There are no longer any obstacles to editors who wish to help out in this areas, as the standby list has now been deprecated. You were listed as a volunteer on the standby list before it was deprecated. If you are still interested in helping out in this area, please:

• Consider adding yourself to the list of active clerks at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Clerks.
• In helping, please make sure you follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Procedures as it is very important to the process there to follow these instructions for smooth operation.
• Please remember "Trust between the clerks and the checkusers is essential. Clerks who persistently make problematic comments on requests or otherwise violate decorum may be asked by the checkusers to cease contributing here."
• Add Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Clerks/Noticeboard to your watchlist to stay up to do date on the latest communications happening regarding this role.
• "Be aware that this position is rather dull and carries no particular prestige; status-seeking will not be looked upon kindly."

I am not involved with the checkuser system. I am acting only to inform you of this change. Thank you. --Durin 14:33, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Certainly. :) It's mainly busy-work, really -- a lot of it is covered at the clerking guide. Now that our bot is gone, we need to periodically check unlisted requests and add new requests to the pending case list (the checkusers frequently only look at /Pending, if they're in a rush). Make sure the case is in good order -- {{checkip}} is used for IPs, {{checkuser}} is used for users, {{rfcu box}} is present and in good order, and everything else checks out. If it's a repeat request (regarding the same alleged sockpuppeteer), it should be placed on the same page as the original request -- very common mistake, so if it isn't, we merge the pages. If pages are malformed or badly named, we can fix/move them. Once a checkuser completes or declines the request, we remove it from /Pending and place it in the appropriate section of the frontpage for awhile (usually 2-3 days) before archiving.

Archiving is a bit more tricky. We place {{subst:rfcu top}} at the top, and {{subst:rfcu bottom}} at the bottom (rfcua and rfcub, if you prefer) -- but the key thing is, we only want one archive template at the very top, and one at the very bottom -- any duplicate archive templates in the middle should be removed. Then we list the page at the archive, and remove it from the frontpage.

So, mainly, we take care of all the maintenance and upkeep. Since we only have so many active checkusers, and the task is fairly intensive (I'm told), I figure our main goal is to "line up the targets" for one or two checkusers to come in and make their decisions. We shouldn't make the decisions, but we do get cases ready for the CUs to make those decisions. *nod* It's a bit abstract, but that's the main goal, to be a neutral custodian.

As far as IRC, I don't know what's going on, with that -- the clerks channel was originally invite only, and I believe it still is, at the moment. That may be changing, but I don't know for sure. In the meantime, I use mIRC -- connect to the freenode network, join a few channels like #wikipedia (/join #wikipedia), and you're all set. There's a channel listing at m:IRC.

I hope that covers most of your questions. Let me know if you need help. – Luna Santin (talk) 22:00, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Why hello there! =D --72.130.208.225 06:58, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Oopsies, forgot to login! --CableModem^_^ 06:58, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, glad to meet you on IRC! Real96 09:47, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

I am Real96 on freenode and I would like the cloak wikipedia/real96. Thanks. --Real96 09:47, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Could you please make a banner which advertises this? We need more help! Thank you so much! Real96 21:23, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

I'll see what I can do. Give me until this time tomorrow. Thanks – Qxz 21:26, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

I'll do one about assuming good faith or reverting vandalism at the same time, per your earlier suggestion – Qxz 21:27, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

This any good? I've added it to the rotation; it'll come up one time in seven on any page with {{User:Qxz/ad.css}}. I guess you can use it on its own elsewhere if you need to – Qxz 04:15, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Wow! I love it! Thanks! Real96 04:44, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Do you want to do an IRC one as well? Real96 11:12, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

It's on my to-do list – Qxz 12:31, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Error: Image is invalid or non-existent.

IRC one. This OK? – Qxz 13:05, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

(reduce indent) I like it! I put a notice on the community noticeboard in order for people to comment upon whether or not the banner ads should be distributed throughout Wikipedia. Cheers! Real96 20:39, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

You tagged Paige typesetting machine as a copyvio. In this case, I think the copyright on the article expired a long time ago, so that the article (like the 1911 Encyclopedia Brittanica) is now in the public domain, and the typesetting machine itself is a notable piece of printing history. I didn't contribute to the article, but I would encourage you to remove the copyvio tag. --Eastmain 04:00, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

For this, I placed db-copyright, because the article was a direct copy (word for word) from this website. It wasn't from encyclopedia Britannica, but from an unaffiliated website. Please see the copyright policy if you have any more questions, or ask me. Cheers! Real96 04:10, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but if the article was first published in 1901, the copyright has expired and the article is now in the public domain. The fact that the article appears on another web site doesn't change the fact that the copyright on it has expired. According to Wikipedia:Public domain, "In the U.S., any work published before January 1, 1923 anywhere in the world is in the public domain." --Eastmain 08:12, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

The article may have been published 100 years ago, but directly copying text from a website is a WP:Copyright#If_you_find_a_copyright_infringement, because the website, may have commentary which is solely the ownership of the user on the original website. Real96 06:27, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I removed those to username block requests. List them at WP:RFC/U. I can see User:Peeweeland being blocked put some opinion should be heard first, but I don't see a problem withUser:Squirrelinyourmouth.John Reaves (talk) 05:39, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Squirrel in your mouth refers to nuts or balls in your mouth, since Squirrels theoretically eat nuts. I will not file this request to the community, because this user hasn't given me a suspicion (valid) of vandal behavior. But, I thought that the name was weird. Real96 06:04, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Real96, despite not supporting the notion of using them I wanted to let you know (and those you've worked with) that what you guys came up with is pretty awesome from a coding standpoint. Cheers. (→Netscott) 20:00, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your comment! I can see why some users don't want them, because of the whole WP:SPAM issue. Real96 20:38, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Hence the need to restrict them to userspace. If I recieve complaints, I may also look into adding a CSS class to them so that users can hide them altogether, even on other peoples' user pages – Qxz 11:56, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Qxz, sorry for presenting the idea to the community without your permission. I thought it would be great for the community's imput, but eh, I should have asked you first. Real96 20:36, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, it is a wiki; you can pretty much do anything you like, so I'm not that annoyed. However, advertising (as in, commercial, paid-for ads on article pages) has been and still is a very uncomfortable issue for the community. There are many who would not accept such advertising in any form (myself included; I would leave without a moment's hesitation if this happened). There are many others who would accept it, but only as a last resort to raise funds after all other options had been exhausted. While I'm always open to new ideas, I really don't want to get involved in the wrong side of this kind of issue; while you were making the suggestion, my name is on the ads and their template, and I do not want people getting the impression that my intention is to try to do anything other than a stricly optional, userspace-only template with content done entirely by community request. Thanks – Qxz 21:04, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

I would be glad to be adopted. Sodaplayer ^{talk contributions} 01:09, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

How do I get on IRC. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sodaplayer (talk • contribs) 01:24, 13 March 2007 (UTC).

Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 11	12 March 2007	About the Signpost

Report of diploma mill offering pay for edits	Essay tries to clarify misconceptions about Wikipedia
Blog aggregator launched for Wikimedia-related posts	WikiWorld comic: "Cartoon Physics"
News and notes: Wikimania 2007, milestones	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:41, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Heh! Bit of a shock to be told that I can't log in because my username doesn't exist! :) – riana_dzasta 08:03, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

For RaiseCapital, you used the speedy deletion template: {{db|advertisement]}}. However, a more specific and correct template is {{db-spam}}. --Theunicyclegirl 02:45, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

db-spam and db-adv are the same thing. Please see this. Thanks for your help! Real96 03:44, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but one adds the page to the proper speedy category and one does not. If at all possible, it's always best to use the specific template rather than the generic {{db}}. —bbatsell ¿? ✍ 15:19, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Sidenote: I use Twinkle. db-spam and db-adv are listed under the same category. Real96 16:16, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the post on my talk page re User:Qxz/Ads in order to help improve the assessment drive. Do you remember that banner that appeared on ever page during the Wikipedia Foundation fund drive. Do you know who we would ask to can get User:Qxz/Ads to appear on every page in the same way? -- Jreferee 14:35, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I do. I remember them. You can leave a note on the community noticeboard for your support here. I may even ask Jimbo what his opinion is on the matter. Real96 20:07, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

I won't ask Jimbo, since this issue isn't serious enough. :-( Real96 20:14, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Real96, please do not try to push the use of my work in such an inappropriate context. It reflects badly on me. Thanks – Qxz 11:50, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I won't. Real96 23:58, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

For rv-ing that v to my user page! delldot talk 02:00, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Real96 02:41, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

my creation of Dave helvarg was supposed to be serious. My mom knew him. I was dissapointed when his article was deleted. So my point is that was not nonsense.Maxman23 02:16, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Please see the policy on Notability Real96 02:41, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

By the way, this shows your true colors. Real96 07:47, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I've added the Albums template to the script (User talk:Outriggr/metadatatest.js). So if follow those instructions to install it, set the Albums template as your default, you can assess away! –Outriggr § 02:34, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! Real96 07:47, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I removed the username report of User:Jakejakejakejake as I didn't think it was a clear violation of WP:USERNAME. For cases where it's not so obvious, you can report the username to WP:RFCN. Thanks! -- Merope 03:37, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

If the user commits any type of vandalism with the account, I will report. Real96 07:47, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't know if I'm doing this right, but I just wanted to thank you for being so vigilant with my bio page. It means the world to me. I hope you feel better. -Lillster

You're welcome! Real96 07:47, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I hope you are doing OK too! Happy editing!! Tellyaddict 16:55, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Come on, be a man. "OOOOH... I am going to block you...". Go ahead. i can make a new account, plus Its not like I care if I cant edit Wikipedia —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Max.coke (talk • contribs) 22:33, 14 March 2007 (UTC).

Original Question to Seraphimblade: Why are you removing AIV names when the names clearly violate the username policy? Real96 07:28, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure which ones you're referring to. With the Natalie Erin/Naconkantari ones, I certainly did go to block them, only to find out that there was no such user in existence to block! It's possible the offending usernames were removed altogether by someone who can do that before I got to them, but in any case, I can't block someone that doesn't exist! With EbonyDeathAngel, the name doesn't clearly violate the policy to the point of an "on-sight" block. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 07:31, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

I tried to block this and this as well but they just don't exist. It seems twinkle may have caused an error; I believe you meant to report User:User:Aww, isn\'t Natalie Erin HOT? and User:Naconkantari is Freakofnurture\'s brother. (notice the \). Both have been blocked auburnpilot talk 07:39, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! Slowking Man and I were just talking about that on IRC! Real96 07:41, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

(reduce indent) I'm sure it's the same idiot pulling all of those, I'll make sure to look for that next time one pops up. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 07:43, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Pls do not blind revert, you didnt even look. I added a reference for the content and you came and deleted it, you also deleted a big refernce section. this is vandalism, explain your edits.--Halqh حَلَقَة הלכהሐላቃህ 10:24, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

I understand. However, please use proper edit summaries. What you placed was not a proper edit summaries. If you are having conflicts, discuss on the article's talk page. Thanks! Real96 10:26, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Sadly, it's not going to happen. My request to run a bot that did exactly that was rejected last month. Unfortuntately people seem to misunderstand the user warning process; it's supposed to be temporary for IPs because the link between IP and user is a very fragile one and (thanks to shared and dynamic IPs) is frequently broken within days, let alone months. I'm not the first person to have such a bot request denied, either. I think it's one of those things we're just going to have to live with – Qxz 18:24, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

That's sad that there won't be a bot for this. Most IPs are used more than one person and are reconfigured per log-in. Hint: AOL. Cheers! Real96 22:50, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

You got a Wikipedia cloak, that broke your invite. I'll have that fixed in a moment. – Luna Santin (talk) 01:27, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! Real96 03:03, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Real, I hope you aren't giving up on the project. You make great contributions around here, a bit of sanity in an increasingly insane world. --Selket ^Talk 02:34, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

No, I am not leaving. I just had a wiki-spasm. I will be okay. Real96 03:03, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

That's cool. It happens. -- Selket ^Talk 04:31, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

[1]. The edit [2] removed a paragraph that I considered irrelevant and unhelpful. You reverted it and warned me as if it were vandalism, with no reference whatsoever to the merits of said removal. Don't use antivandalism tools for content disputes. 138.130.165.178 03:27, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh, for goodness' sake, why do you insist that I need a dirty great big vandalism warning on my discussion page? I read it, ignored it, and removed it. Why does it need to stay there, and why did you just remove it instead of giving me some indication as to why? I am not re-removing it, as I don't want to descend into a ridiculous revert war, but I would expect somebody of your reputation to apply a little more Assume Good Faith, a little less (undo) [I find it ironic that you revert me using a feature I developed]. 138.130.165.178 03:36, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Your edits were considered as vandalism because you 1.) deleted a mass amount of text, and 2.) gave a weird edit summary. If you are are having an edit dispute, please discuss it on the relavant talk page, rather than blatantly blanking a huge text in the article. And, please be civil with your comments. I have removed the vandalism warning since it was a content dispute. Thanks! Real96 03:37, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

You reverted my talk page too -- where is this "vandalism". Removing fallacious warnings from my own talk page is not vandalism. --71.112.7.212 04:56, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

The user 71.112.7.212 simply doesn't understand how Wikipedia works and as such has made lots of "friends". The claims are all baseless and contain nothing but the same trollish ignorance of their disruptive behavior. --BaseballDetective 05:04, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

I misread. I thought the editor removed warnings regarding vandalism. But, he/she instead removed warnings involving content disputes. Whatever the case, the case is solved! Real96 07:52, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. 190.10.0.111 07:22, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

I think it would be wise for you to register for an account, because you will have so many benefits! I could help you with wikipedia if you decide to continue editing as either an IP or a registered user. Real96 07:56, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll think about it... 190.10.0.111 08:02, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

You told me to leave a message here, correct? YazzaMatazza 08:21, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, what do you need help on? Real96 08:22, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey. Yes, it's me. I'm just wondering if you would like to help me in the making of my forst userbox. I'm jsut just having a hard time understanding what to do. Thanks. Please reply on my talk page. YazzaMatazza 09:48, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Sure, please look at WP:USERBOX. Real96 09:53, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

I have made one, but I need a border, and I'm not clear on how to do it. If you know, would you please put a border in? I would prefer black, 1px.

Here's the code:

Thanks. YazzaMatazza 10:26, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Ooo...That didn't work... :S YazzaMatazza 10:26, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Try inserting |border-c=#000| in the box. Real96 10:29, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

(reduce indent) For more info, go here. Real96 10:31, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
---
I finally made it, and I entered it into the place where they....comment it...yeah.

Tell me what you think. Thanks. YazzaMatazza 10:45, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, you too.. Illyria05 (Talk • Contributions) 17:11, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Following your advice on my [4], I sent my complaint to [Charles Matthews: Wikipedia e-mail] as being one of the members on the list. I have not received any response. I have forwarded a copy of my letter to your WP email, FYI. Please advise me again if I am not following your advice correctly in bringing up my complaint. Have I made a mistake by picking a random name from the list? Should I send this complaint to every member on the list? Barefact 17:43, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, you have made a mistake in telling me, because I am not an oversight member. I have told you to report the incident to the oversight committee via email (oversight-l@lists.wikimedia.org). However, I forwarded your e-mail to the oversight committee, and they will have the information removed. Cheers! Real96 00:34, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey, Thanks again for your help so far. I have really appreciated it. My question today is this: how does one go about uploading a picture without having it deleted shortly afterwards? I e-mailed the author Jimmy McDonough asking for a photograph of himself that I could put up on his article and he personally obliged me. But now I can't get it up there! When uploading it, I chose the "the subject has allowed usage of this image only for Wikipedia" option because it seemed like the closest to the truth. This may be a really dumb question, I realize. But I have to ask it nonetheless. Thanks alot. -BurtonM 01:18, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

The picture was probably speedied, because a license wasn't provided. In this case, since the author gave you permission, you need to put this tag: {{Cc-by-sa-2.5|Attribution details.}} in details box. Replace "attribution details" with "the author gave me permission to upload this file." So, you would place in the 'Summary (author, source, URL, fair use rationale if applicable, extra {{tags}}, etc.):

(name of picture), by Jimmy McDonough. And, place this tag: {{Cc-by-sa-2.5|the author gave me permission to upload this file.}}. Hope this helps! Real96 01:48, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

That helps a lot. Thank you so much. It's ever so slightly depressing realizing how much I have to learn.

My further note/question is this: I think I didn't make this clear at all but, the author didn't take the picture but, rather, is the subject of the picture. He did give me permission to use it however. Is it a neccessity to have the photographer's name in there? Thank you so much for your help. Let me know if I ever get to be too much of a pill.

p.s.--Oh, also, what do I put in the license scroll down?

-BurtonM 02:16, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Even though the author didn't take the picture, he did buy the picture from the photographer. Theoretically, the author owns the rights of the photographer. The license still would be: {{Cc-by-sa-2.5|the author gave me permission to upload this file.}}. Put that on the scroll box. Yes, it is a necessity to have the photographer's name on the information page, because the photograph gives attribution to the photographer as well. Real96 02:35, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

i removed a message on my talk page about signatures, it is not vandalism to do so. please be more cautious when reverting. thanks. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.112.7.212 (talk) 06:38, 18 March 2007 (UTC).

However, you have blanked warnings before. Real96 06:42, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

i removed "vandalism" warnings that were incorrect. an editor harrassed me with 12 "vandalism" warnings on my page, though i had committed no vandalism. anyway, it isn't your place to reinstate any warnings on other's talk pages. editors are free to remove messages, archive their pages, whatever.

When the user has committed acts of vandalism which warrants a block, and has removed the warnings, yes, it would be my obligation as well as other users' obligations to revert the blankings. Also, please sign your comments as well as be civil with your comments. Thanks! Real96 07:02, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Could you please both calm down a bit, stop throwing boxes and acronyms, maybe even ignore each other for a while and go do better things? 71, it's possible that somebody else has been using the same IP you are using now, and that the warnings are for them. In general, removing messages is not frowned upon, but it's a little different for anonymous editors. Keeping warnings on the talk page helps us track whether an IP is often used by vandals. If you don't like seeing messages that are intended for other people, you could register a username. Zocky | picture popups 07:15, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

		The Original Barnstar
		I would like to give you this barnstar for your general excellence on wikipedia, since late January when you became a member you've made an excellent 4000 edits here, have went from being my adoptee to an adoter and generally work really hard on checkuser and other tasks. This barnstar for you is LONG! overdue! Thanks for your contribs!!!!!!! Tellyaddict 18:57, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! It means so much to me. Real96 05:39, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Having had to deal with his garbage for such a very long time, I have a finely tuned instinct for him. I picked him the moment he edited an article on my watchlist, and posted a brief message about it here. Obviously I was lacking in any concrete evidence, so I couldn't act. But I knew it would come eventually, and it did: when he logged in this morning, his dynamic IP reverted to one he was previously blocked under, and he posted an {{unblock-auto}} confirming that he was sharing an IP with Auroranorth. Hesperian 02:39, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I was wondering how you knew his sockpuppet. Real96 05:39, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I can't improve much on "having had to deal with his garbage for such a very long time, I have a finely tuned instinct for him." The first thing to catch my eye was the obviously disingenuous edit summary for the edit to Western Australia. Some other edits strengthened my conviction that this was someone trying (too hard) to act like a newb, rather than a genuine newb. The choice of Western Australia for his first edit made Aurora the obvious candidate. Subsequent edits were consistent with Aurora's modus operandi: the obsession with tagging, the stupid application of them e.g. suggesting a merge of Drogheda United into Drogheda, the obsession with documenting every action in user space, a few other things. Hesperian 05:54, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for removing the personal attacks. Better a neutral party then me or Moondyne. Do you feel like sanitising the links in RickK's quote too? Hesperian 11:53, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

(reduce indent) Sure. Real96 11:56, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Your recent edit to Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/However whatever (diff) was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to recognize and repair vandalism to Wikipedia articles. If the bot reverted a legitimate edit, please accept my humble creator's apologies – if you bring it to the attention of the bot's owner, we may be able to improve its behavior. Click here for frequently asked questions about the bot and this warning. // MartinBot 04:56, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

An honest mistake made by the bot. Real96 05:39, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi... on Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/However whatever, I'm guessing the speedy tag was a Twinkle mistake... but could you explain why you would move it to IP check? It's a username CU. - Denny 05:09, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I had asked on the RFCU page as well, if easier to answer there. thanks! - Denny 05:11, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I moved the page down to the IP request section, and speedied the old page. I took off the speedy tag, later, because Luna (or other admin/clerk) could have the page deleted later. Per A, IPs must be listed below in the IP section. Cheers! Real96 07:14, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Got it, my bad. :) - Denny 12:06, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! Real96 03:27, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I am copying this here so that it notifies you. DvonD 03:04, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Please review this before alleging others of committing WP:NOR. For example, "cocksure" was a violation of WP:NOR. Real96 02:27, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

That's another issue. Cocksure was not original research, it was a descriptive word based on his perceived behavior. I conceded it could be judged differently which is why I did not return the otherwise correct word to the article.

"Real cries" is correct. The current language that you added is also correct as he did profess his love. The previous language (" and revealed his true love for New York."), as it cannot be judged from what he actually says whether there is "true love" in fact or only in confession, was O.R. in agreement with the no original research clause. There are also clauses regarding primary source-editor contributions.

This discussion has also taken on a tone with which I am uncomfortable. I hope that none of my edits nor my discussion has been read as uncivil as that was never my intention. Your contributions, Real96, are rightly valued. Let us both bear in mind that we both hope to make the articles that interest us better. Cheers! DvonD 03:04, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the help with the ro-0 thing. Entbark 06:22, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

You recently tagged this article as "A" class, using the Outrigger script. My question is if you actually looked at it yourself and agree, or if you just relied on the script to make the decision. I changed it back to B, as there has been little to no substantive work done since it was changed from GA back down to B. Jeffpw 08:39, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Jeff, as a non-assessor and a worker on this article you can't change assessment grade once an independent party has assessed the article. Second, according to the scale. For example, Fidel Castro is an A article, but one section lacks cleanup. In B articles, original research occurs as well as lack of citations. For the time being, I changed the assessment to back A. If you have any questions, leave a note on Jreferee, Mocko13, and/or Ozgod's talk page. Cheers! Real96 09:12, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Please see my comments at the Judy Garland article talk page. Your message contains some worrisome elements. Feel free to respond to it here or there, though I think here would be better. It has more to do with your understanding of policy here than the article itself. Jeffpw 09:14, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

And I've changed it back to B-class again, with comments as to why it wouldn't even pass GA-class which is a certain criterion that it isn't A-class. Errabee 09:19, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I've also been looking at other assessments you made to see what your criteria are. It worries me when I see that you assess a 7-line article with 3 infoboxes (Denny Landzaat) as start-class (and I've rerated as stub). I believe you're being far too generous. Perhaps a further clarification of class should be discussed in a central place. Errabee 09:24, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

(reduce indent) I didn't see the stub tag at the bottom of the page. I know some articles have been assessed "start" class because they had appropriate infoboxes and headers. However, when you assessed Lucille Ball as start class, when it should have been B class according to the scale was inappropriate. Yet, I used the grading scheme to assess articles. Real96 09:35, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I've been going through his contributions, too, Errabee, and have come to the same conclusion. If you look at the timestamps on the assessments, you'll see he doesn't even read them. It's either an over-generous script or a bug in the script. I am going to message the script operator about this. My personal feeling is that humans should be doing the actual assessing, and just let the bots do the tagging itself. Jeffpw 09:30, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I open each article with tabs using Firefox, eyeball the criteria for stub/start and assess. Most of the military articles were stub/start class anyway. I also use alt-shift-s to save the assessments. Jeff if you have a problem with how others assess articles, then perhaps you can sign up for the assessment drive as well. Cheers. Real96 09:35, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Real96, I have been assessing articles for ProjectBiography since before you were editing here. I am a member of the Biography Project. I have a FA Biography to my name. I also assess for the LGBT Project. In short, if you look through my contributions, you'll see that I do my bit for Wikipedia. I have several thousand edits here, all with my own hand. But thank you for the invitation; it's nice to be wanted. :-) Jeffpw 09:39, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

This time I disagree somewhat with jeffpw on the way how to assess articles. The script itself is only usable on the page itself. You have to look at the article to be able to assess it through the script. And stubs are very easily rated, so a large number of edits in little time can be explained.

On the other subject: anyone can assess articles (even GA or FA). The only thing you would have to do is sign up on the project page. And that is open to anyone. As per WP:SNOW, I wouldn't make an issue out of it when someone assesses articles without signing up first.

BTW, Real96, my apologies for all the messages. Errabee 09:42, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

please stop your bot, 3rr rul is not in effect if to undo vandilism such you bot is doing 69.132.199.100 06:47, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

This was in response to 3RR on Shelby Young, and I responded with this on your IP page. You were blocked for 24 hours for violating this rule. Real96 07:19, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

yes only because of your bot. this is in many admin now, so please just go away! 69.132.199.100 03:35, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I am not an administrator. Real96 08:58, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

what i write above not personal attack, maybe you think it but it not, now go away and leave me alone, you page have ALOT of people complain about you, now go away and leave me alone69.132.199.100 04:13, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't have a bot. And, I am a human being (believe it or not). Note: The above comment spurred me to file a request for check user shown here. Real96 08:58, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey Real96, I just wanted to say thanks for your help so far. I've really appreciated it. Also, the design of your user page is really pleasant, I thought I'd mention that for no particular reason. If and when you feel like it (and you've returned from your wiki-break) maybe you could have a look at the article on Jimmy McDonough that you've helped me with and just let me know what you think of it. You know, a sort of critique I suppose. Thanks again, enjoy your break. -BurtonM 20:32, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I tweaked the article and added the official site of the author, an infobox, as well as added a BLP policy/assessment tags to the talk page. Thanks for the compliments about my userpage, and I think the article looks great. Could you ask the author for his birthdate and his birth location in order to complete the infobox? Thanks. Real96 02:56, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Listed for AfD rather than speedied, if you are interested in participating.--Isotope23 20:38, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Participated. Real96 02:56, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your help.

I'm done with my main copy-edit of User:The Transhumanist/Virtual classroom/Yuser, on fighting link spam. Please take a look, and touch-up anything that needs it. It goes live on Wednesday (tomorrow). The Transhumanist   22:20, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

I have made further copyedits. Thanks. Real96 02:56, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

it states that apocalypse now was heavily influenced by agguire the wrath of god which is not true agguire and aocalypse were based on the novel the heart of darkness so i have removes that part

You should have mentioned that on your edit summary rather than blanking the entire citation. Also, mention this on the article's talk page. Real96 04:01, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

i'm currently trying to gather more info on the watchables, but resources are few...however, i do think they deserve stub status :) --Sammarlowe 06:21, 21 March 2007 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sammarlowe (talk • contribs) 06:20, 21 March 2007 (UTC).

i have made changes and mentioned it in the edit summary and also reffered that in the discussion page

wrong title -- name should be Watchimals, which is why it's hard to find info on them...this page should be deleted, new page to follow

--Sammarlowe 06:34, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

(in response to copyright violation) i believe i did write the article in my own words - nothing is taken directly from either of my two sources...so, i'm not sure i understand...

--Sammarlowe 07:58, 21 March 2007 (UTC) (reduce indent) The slogan was copyrighted, and some of the words were copyrighted. I had to rewrite almost the entire article in order for copyright from this website not to be violated. Real96 08:23, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

oh, i see what you mean...sorry about that and thanks... --Sammarlowe 08:24, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I was just wondering what it takes for me to add an entry. I keep trying to add the following: Paperrock But it keeps getting deleted... Paperrock is a record label aka Paperrock Records. It is the independent arm of the Flipmode Squad, co-owned by Spliff Star and overseen by Busta Rhymes. It is listed under Spliff star's wikipedia entry, and now Im trying to create its own entry...How do I prevent it from being deleted? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Paperrockrecords (talk • contribs) 07:09, 21 March 2007 (UTC).

Please see WP:NOT, specifically on organizations. Real96 07:15, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 12	20 March 2007	About the Signpost

WikiWorld comic: "Wilhelm Scream"	News and notes: Bad sin, milestones
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:26, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your welcome message. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nigh (talk • contribs) 18:15, 21 March 2007 (UTC).

No problem. Real96 23:36, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

It's good to see you have changed your signature back to blue again, no offence but I think it looks much better than the green one! Regards -Tellyaddict 18:34, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

I am experimenting with my signature. Now it's purple. I will change it back to pink in April. (see archive codes above). Real96 23:28, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Where's Selketbot? Real96 21:05, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Should be running. May have stopped about 24 hours ago. I'm not sure why. --Selket ^Talk 22:31, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

No, I take it back -- 48 hours ago. I'm not sure what went wrong but it's running now. --Selket ^Talk 22:32, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I was wondering were it was, especially during the Sports vandalism incident where two people from an Oregon school were talking to each other (seen here) Real96 23:33, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

"Nippon" is not "racist for" anything! It's the romanization of the Japanese word for their own country; it's on the postage stamps, etc. --Orange Mike 22:57, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

I talked to people on WP:IRC to see if the word was racist or not. We couldn't come to a consensus. So, I reported the name to AIV. Thanks for your imput. Real96 23:46, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

"Nip" (which presumably comes from "Nipponese") is offensive. But google images for Japanese postage stamps, for example, and you'll see "NIPPON" on every one. (One of the rules of the Universal Postal Union is that every country's stamps must have the country's name in the Roman alphabet, in addition to whatever writing system is in use locally; makes stamp collecting less cryptic.) --Orange Mike 23:55, 21 March 2007 (UTC) (sometime philatelist)

Thanks so much for informing me about this. I will try to be more careful next time I report a suspicious username. Real96 08:16, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Hello, you might want to have a look at All Nippon Airways. Social Studiously 11:38, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

We've done great work so far on the WikiProject Biography Spring 2007 Assessment Drive, reducing the 135,345 backlog by 38,626 to 96,719 as of March 20, 2007. We have only 6,720 more to go to get below 90,000. That would be outstanding and any extra effort that you can offer in these last few days of the drive (which ends March 24, 2007) would be much appreciated. If you haven't already, you may want to load Outriggr's assessment script in your monobook.js. If you have any questions, please feel free to post them on my talk page. -- Jreferee 23:19, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

OKay, whenever I have time, I will assess. I have assessed 500+ so far. Real96 08:29, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Minor issue: You reverted vandalism from Wind power, but you overlooked some. Has happened to myself before, so nevermind, just wanted to notify you. —KNcyu38 (talk • contribs) 01:33, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I was trying to revert the vandalism quickly via twinkle, but didn't see the hidden vandalism. Thanks. Real96 08:21, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

You were looking for WP:POINT I think. - Penwhale | ^{Blast him / Follow his steps} 05:48, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I updated it with Disrupt. Same thing, though. Real96 05:50, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

A request for comments has been filed concerning the conduct of CineWorld (talk · contribs). You are invited to comment on the discussion at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/CineWorld 1. -- Real96 07:49, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Looks good to me. I endorsed it and will comment later. But, I don't believe the 67.--- IP is him. I think it was proven to be the user Marie/Lykwoah, who created the Shelby Young page to begin with. Ispy1981 14:31, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Oops, never mind. Mix up there. Ispy1981 15:57, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

The Southern Cali. IP can be an open proxy. Thanks for your endorsement. Real96 23:49, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

!wdefcon edit level=N info=Description

Where N is a digit between 1 and 5 that determines the level and Description is the text that will be put as the info= parameter of {{wdefcon}}. Миша13 15:23, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I was wondering how to change it via IRC. Real96 02:48, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Original posts (on pgk's talk page)

Why isn't helpmebot or Tangobot in IRC not working in the Wikipedia boot camp room? Thanks. Real96 17:23, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay, it works now. Thanks! Real96 23:15, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Just my luck, I was out for a couple of days (and not that active at the moment anyway) and the toolserver got rebooted for some reason. I'll try and make this more robust so helpmebot will start up on its own in such a situation, though that won't help when the bot loses connectivity to freenode, I'll look into that also. --pgk 07:19, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

I see it on IRC now. Thanks! Real96 07:46, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the message. Please see the discussion page on Mirza Ghulam Ahmad for the full history. Khokhar976

Instead of reverting each other's edits, please talk about the discrepancy on the talk page, instead of going onto a revert war. Real96 09:47, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi! I noticed that you rated the Tool article with a "B", which means that there is still a lot of room for improvement. Sadly, you did not recommend any yet. Over many months I have been asking people for feedback on the article, but to hardly any avail. Please add your two cents if you can spare them here or add your thoughts to Talk:Tool (band) so that the other authors of the article can participate as well and the article can eventually grow to achieve GA status. Thank you! Johnnyw talk 10:03, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

I rated this article as a B because of original research in the quotes mainly in the "New tour" section. I also rated the article B because of the "Trivia" section. If you want more advice, seek a WP:Peer Review before submitting this article to WP:GA. Cheers! Real96 01:39, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

I read your comment on my talk page. Thanks. I did as you suggested. But, I still have a specific question. Can you assist? Thanks. (JosephASpadaro 01:02, 24 March 2007 (UTC))

If you have any questions, place the "help me" template along with your question here. Thanks. Real96 01:11, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Check this users contributions and this user and this user. They are all one guy, and it all started when I told Gluestick22 that he posted a bad image on a school article. He posted the same image of a fish up his butt on my page, and said "I came on your mom." He continued to say this basic thing over and over again. I reverted alot of his edits, and he has continued attacks on me after being banned on his account. This is a desperate act. If you can help me change my username, and he can't track it, I will be most happy. I just joined Wikipedia. And I'm already sick of the disrespect the vandals give. --Meaneager 04:30, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Could you please give me an answer. I am desperate. --Meaneager

I know, but you shouldn't give personal attacks to other users. Just because someone is giving attacks shouldn't mean that you should do so. If the person is continuing to make personal attacks to you, keep a cool head, and report the incident to administrators intervention. Real96 04:40, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

I didn't know where to go. I was backed into a corner, even though its a computer. --Meaneager

Again, if the person is continuing to make personal attacks to you, keep a cool head, and report the incident to administrators intervention. Real96 04:44, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry about the change to "Central Philippine University". I was actually going to translate the article, and inadvertently copied the translation into the English version. That was a mistake rather than an intentional act of vandalism. Katimawan2005 04:39, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

If you wanted to make a translation of the article from English-to Filipino for Filipino Wikipedia, create a sandbox here, edit the article in the sandbox, register with Filipino Wiki, post the translation into a new article, and you are all done! Cheers! Real96 04:49, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

It seems you may have been right about the Southern Cal IP. 76.173.44.237 is now asserting that they are the real Shelby, and offering a pic, seen on her personal webpage, with words identifying themselves as the real Shelby Young, photoshopped in. It doesn't APPEAR to be CineWorld, as this user is ADDING credits, credits which Shelbyyoung has verified, though I can find no other source for them.

Thanks Ispy1981 14:53, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

And, the drama continues. The article has been semi-protected. Real96 03:13, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I can use some help. Please see my question (below) and please let me know if you can help me. Thank you! (JosephASpadaro 19:37, 24 March 2007 (UTC))

My Question Concerns: Adding A Link Within Another Link

This is my Original Question: Please, can anyone tell me the proper format to create a link within another link? (Or, is this even possible?) For example, let's say that I want the text to read exactly: Arnold (The Governator) Schwarzenegger. What is the proper linking format that would create this exact text so that it links to both the "Arnold Schwarzenegger" article and the "The Governator" article? Please help. Thanks a lot! (JosephASpadaro 05:21, 13 March 2007 (UTC))

This is a response that I received: Well, you could do Arnold (The Governator) Schwarzenegger as Arnold (The Governator) Schwarzenegger. That's a little weird though. Max 16:54, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

This was my response to the response above: Thanks. Yes, I thought of that -- but it's certainly not an elegant way to achieve what I need. Furthermore, it's not quite accurate to have the text of the person's first name only (e.g., Arnold) link to his full name (e.g., Arnold Schwarzenegger). These types of nicknames happen all the time (e.g., Michael "Air" Jordan, Jesse "The Body" Ventura, etc.). I would think that there is an easy way to accomplish this. Any ideas? Thanks. (JosephASpadaro 03:00, 16 March 2007 (UTC))

Can you assist? Thanks! (JosephASpadaro 19:37, 24 March 2007 (UTC))

Yes. Per, Arnold Schwarznegger, the link within another link is unnecessary because a redirection page to the page has already been created. Real96 03:15, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

The reason that the protection page says that a template shouldn't be added when a time limit has been specified is that it's often not removed when the protection automatically expires. I've come across a few cases of this recently; I think that, unless an editor is prepared to ensure that an {{sprotected}} template is removed at the correct time it shouldn't be added. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 22:18, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

I didn't see where NYBrad placed a time limit on semi-protection. Shouldn't there be a notification where IP addresses can't edit a page, even if a time limit is defined? Real96 03:19, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Where did you look to check for a time limit?

Until very recently, if you looked at the page that comes up when you protect an article, it said that pages protected for a finite period shouldn't be templated — I assume because too many pages were being left with the template in place though the protection had expired. This message seems to have disappeared, and I've raised it at Wikipedia talk:Protection policy.

Whatever the result of that, I think that it should be incumbent on a templating editor to check back and remove the template when appropriate. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 12:14, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Pssst... :) – Riana ^talk 16:01, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

No, my bad. Ignore the above... – Riana ^talk 16:02, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you:-) Please delete this note when read--Archolman 01:12, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

I am still keep getting the message shown here:

Invalid raw signature; check HTML tags.

Will you please help me? LegoAxiom1007 (talk · contribs)

Right now, I am kind of busy (I logged in to remove the {{sprotection}} on the Alpha Kappa Alpha page. Check your tags (i.e. <b><i></i></b>) to see if your tags are closed appropriately. I noticed that you got blocked for 31 hours for abuse of Twinkle. Although vandalism can be at a high rate on Wikipedia, there are other ways in contributing in Wikipedia, such as copyediting and creating requested articles. Twinkle is a very powerful tool. In my opinion, intermediate and advanced users should use the tool, since reverting vandalism can be tricky at times. Cheers. Real96 22:50, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

I would like to thank you for your support in my recent RFA. As you may or may not be aware, it passed with approximately 99% support. I ensure you that I will use the tools well, and if I ever disappoint you, I am open to recall. If you ever need anything, don't hesitate to leave me a note on my talkpage. Thanks again, ^demon^{[omg plz]} 20:35, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Hey Real96, any reason why you reported this guy to AIV? I checked his edits and nothing seems to be wrong. – Riana ^talk 06:27, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Repeated deletion of content, despite warnings. Real96 06:27, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

I see now that the user was trying to reformat the page without describing edit summaries. However, I thought despite the user's warnings that he would vandalize rappers articles via blanking. Real96 07:01, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi Real96. What on earth was your idea of suggesting a speedy deletion on McMullin??? Since you are very new to WikiPedia I really suggest you slow down and don't splurge such things around. I'm sure you have a lot to contribute but rushing to delete other editors content doesn't help. NBeale 06:56, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

In my opinion, I really don't see the notability of the subject. Theoretically, each user from a college or a university can make a page about their teachers or a professor. Real96 07:01, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Visting profships at n major Us, loads of books at 26k ghits - come off it!NBeale

NBeale is perfectly correct; there is simply no way that this was a speedy-deletion candidate. An article must make no claim to the significance of its subject in order to qualify for speedy deletion; that's clearly not the case here. Please don't waste the time of admins with this sort of thing; we already have a serious backlogs on the CSD page, and this doesn't help. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 10:02, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

(reduce indent) One speedy deletion article won't crash Wikipedia's servers. There are 1,000+ administrators and there isn't a deadline on when the speedy candidates have to be backlogged. Time in essence isn't really a factor in this case. However, I agree with the above posters claim that notability has to be taken in a case by case basis. And, yes, I will go on Wikibreak now... Real96 11:08, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

That sort of misses the point; it's not about crashing servers, but about admin's time. Moreover, it's not just this one article, but the principle — we come across many similarly wrongly applied {{db}} templates. But there's no need to go on Wikibreak; we need people who are prepared to help keep Wikipedia free of poor-quality articles and vandalism — it's just a metter of getting the policies and guidelines right. --Mel Etitis (Talk) 11:13, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Me too supporting NBeale (and the article). The WP:TW script seems to leave a nasty footprint with its condescending tone of voice such as this edit [5]. That ends up rather demeaning with the "...please use soapbox" on high-edit count users. NBeale has many hundreds of edits and what he adds is certainly not without consideration as to what is WP:NOTABLE and what will "stick" in Wikipedia (isn't that right ;) . The script should really look up the users' mainspace edit and page count and tune the comment to suit based on heuristics of what we would think people could stomach. Ttiotsw 19:41, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Just ask Aza about Twinkle concerns, because I can't do anything concerning scripts. Real96 02:08, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

I just noticed you changed WikiDefcon from 3 to 3 [6]. —KNcyu38 (talk • contribs) 02:33, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

The message wasn't detailed enough. AIV is clear really doesn't tell me anything about the current state of vandalism on pages. Real96 03:20, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

I see. So "vandalism increasing among shared IPs and new users." adds significant information to the standard level 3 message "Significantly elevated levels of vandalism from shared IPs and experimenting users."? My bad. —KNcyu38 (talk • contribs) 03:25, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

On IRC, we don't see "Significantly elevated levels...etc." We just see what you write. Real96 04:03, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh, now I see. I'll keep that in mind. —KNcyu38 (talk • contribs) 05:45, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 13	26 March 2007	About the Signpost

From the editor: Tardiness, volunteers, RSS
Patrick and Wool resign in office shakeup	WikiWorld comic: "Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo"
News and notes: Board resolutions, milestones	Features and admins
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 14:20, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

I've added more material to my RfA since you last posted your position. It's about to close, most likely without a consensus. Even so, any chance on reconsidering your Neutral position in my RfA to one of support in view of the new material? I am a good egg, perhaps fried too much in one or two spots. It would be nice to have 50 people give me support, and I think the new material I added might be enought for you to change your position back to one of support. Either way, I do appreciate your participation in my RfA as I do value your opinion. -- Jreferee 15:04, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Hmm...? Real96 23:27, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for considering it anyways on such short notice. -- Jreferee 04:34, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

My message was not hidden. I thought you were canvassing for a vote. However, I was (and still am) on Wikibreak. Thus, I wouldn't been able to have voted for your RfA. Real96 06:55, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your support on my Request for adminship, which was successful, with votes of 49/0/0. Lemme know if you need help on something I might know a little something about....(check my userpage).
cheers, Casliber | talk | contribs 14:03, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Real: just got a message from you regarding Luke Brugnara page... Brugnara is very noteworthy and jealous vandals have removed his original page.Please restore this very noteworth man as he has had 10 national magazine covers, hundreds of published articles and is the top real estate businessman on the West Coast.

Response, please see Wikipedia:Notability on subjects. Thanks! Real96 06:55, 29 March 2007 (UTC)