User talk:MER-C/archives/18

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page .

Why have you deleted the links that I have added ? Because they're in French ? The Fender Bass VI notice is in english language, the information about original colors are useful even in french. This is the same with the strings available, it doesn't matter the language. I really don't understand why to delete useful information for Internet and Bass VI users ... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.27.212.146 (talk • contribs)

This quacks like spam as far as I can tell. MER-C 12:33, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply. I corroborate that's not spam. Too bad for people who are looking for information about Bass VI because theses pages are the most complete on the web about this instrument !!! I will try to add another time, but if the link are still deleted, too bad ...

This user-User:Wikiking123 has falsely claimed to be the owner of the copyright of this image. Ths image is property of "Univision" see:[1]. Plus all other imgaes uploaded by the user about the subject in question are false since the subject is nither married nor has a child. Please take a speedy delete action. Thank you Tony the Marine 16:21, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I tagged them as

possibly unfree images. MER-C 09:09, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

Look will you stop it. I don't want to spend all my day restoring images i added to articles which other people have unrightly removed. I appreciate your efforts but please stop harassing me. I'd rather you gave me a list of orphaned images rather than sending me a full automated message each time ok? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦ ^{"Expecting you?" Contribs} 12:07, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

		The Editor's Barnstar
		I noticed that your edits were impressive and so I've decided to award you this Editor's Barnstar! Wikidudeman (talk) 12:54, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you on this marvellous day! MER-C 13:22, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,
I'd like to ask you a question please. This nomination was not promoted, but why? 2 people supported alternative 1 and only one weak opposed it. All otheres opposed it before alternative 1 was introduced and never bothered to oppose it one more time. I wonder what the rulls are? Thank you.--Mbz1 16:24, 13 August 2007 (UTC)Mbz1[reply]

Well, was there

consensus for promotion? Approximately seven days had elapsed since the nom was made. I'll let you decide this one. MER-C 12:08, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

Note for Wikipedia added August 13, 2007 As instructed by Wikipedia, I placed the following notice on [www.314th.org] (in a bright yellow box at the end of the home page)

"The following copyright information is added pursuant to notice placed on [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/314th_Infantry_Regiment_A.E.F. I hold the copyright to this text and permit its use under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License."

Thank you for your time to tell me if I did this correctly...

- Tony —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.30.254.195 (talk • contribs)

Yes you have. MER-C 12:15, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Given your extensive Wikipedia experience, I'd appreciate your input on the following:

User:Sidatio/Conversations/On list guidelines

Thank you in advance for any thoughts you may have on the topic. Sidatio 00:59, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note. There were requests for getting the separate images uploaded - what do you think? They're all of different aspect ratios (heights), so combining them with wikimarkup may nor be easy. Send me a word, and I can upload the separate next week. --Janke | Talk 13:26, 16 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: replied at User talk:Janke. MER-C 12:15, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done. However, the layout of the links on the composite image page needs to be tweaked to horizontal. I'm not very familiar with wikimarkup, could you please fix it? Thanks, --Janke | Talk 16:43, 19 August 2007 (UTC) PS: I copied the text, including the FP tag, from the composite to the individual images. Was this correct? If not, please edit, thanks. --Janke | Talk 07:25, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for your help! I don't (yet) know all the tricks of the wiki trade... --Janke | Talk 17:32, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MER-C. Since you're doing 60% of the archiving lately, I decided to check if you favor bot archiving. The system that I helped to set up in July at

{{User:MiszaBot/config

  | maxarchivesize = 100K

  | counter = 19

  | algo = old(14d)

  | archive = Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts/archive%(counter)d

}}

Ours would be the same, except the counter would be set to '15' since that's the currently active archive. Athaenara and Jehochman are OK with bot archiving. Your opinion is sought. EdJohnston 19:06, 17 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree, as I archive stuff when it is dealt with, not on some arbitrary time frame as determined by a bot. I'd flush the current backlog first, then think about it. MER-C 06:04, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I notice you made some changes to

User:Howcheng/quickimgdelete.js and User:AzaToth/twinkleimage.js edited (admins only) to reflect this change. I know of no way of finding using wiki markup of finding out whether an image is in a certain category or not. MER-C 08:32, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

Thanks for the reply. I have made a test version at

Contact/_Contribs 22:01, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

I tested it on Image:V.jpg (diff) and Image:Hatchings.jpg (diff). Looks good, you can move this into the real template. MER-C 12:03, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi There,

why did you delete the DAZ links on several artists? At these artists there are also links to AllMusicGuide, Discog, Freedb etc. These are simular sites as DAZ, DAZ is non commercial and a big music resource which could be interesting for music lovers.

BR, Joyce OE —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Joyce oe (talk • contribs) 10:05:05, August 19, 2007 (UTC).

It was fairly obvious that the site was

WP:SPAM#How not to be a spammer. MER-C 11:07, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

Well I have the same problem as drummerzone. Why are there links to allmusic, discog, myspace etc but don't you allow DAZ. If you take a look at the music resource websites you will find that DAZ is not as commercial as the others. All other site show advertising, but if you register with DAZ you won't see any advertising anymore. This feature others don't offer. So I don't agree with the fact you've deleted all the links. The links which were added are links to artists pages on DAZ which are very rich and offer more background information then other music resources. F.e. all the live performances are listed. And please see also that DAZ links to wikipedia at every artist page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joyce oe (talk • contribs)

Dear Mer-C,

You consider some external links I've added to Wikipedia as inappropriate. I know Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion (and I fully agree with that). However, I don't think that it is inappropriate to add a link to an external web site where people can find more info, pictures and videos - including relevant data not found on Wikipedia. I feel you've been too strict. Take Thomas Lang why would a link to Drummerworld be allowed, and not to Drummerzone? I find the latter a non commercial and huge music resource, specialized in drums and percussion. I'm looking forward to your reply. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.12.0.194 (talk)

Your only mainspace contributions this year (7, 5 of which were made in 4 hours) consisted of adding that link. That set off the spam radar. And I'm not the only one who feels it's inappropriate. MER-C 13:40, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for the warning, i had not even noticed that i had spelt it wrong. i tryed to upload it again but there was a copyright problem. i am not going to do it again because the image is not even being used (not even by me). File:FireFlames.jpgYes, I really am a Sith Lord ^(Comms) 15:07, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• oh, sorry. i think i found it on google image search. search for "Iani Chaos" -wikipedia File:FireFlames.jpgYes, I really am a Sith Lord ^(Comms) 18:16, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MER-C, Just re a couple of recent FPC closures, I think you've moved TFS Firefighter to the archives without a decision (obviously it's not promoted), and closed Fields outside benambra but left it on the project page. BTW, great job on the closing of candidates you've been doing. Cheers, --jjron 01:58, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I closed the one I archived ahead of time. I'll archive the other one on my next closing run. MER-C 09:40, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know you have more experience with templates, what's your opinion on this one Template:SK Group? seems to be related to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SK Holdings. thanks--Hu12 10:06, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I mentioned it in the deletion discussion. If it doesn't get deleted when the discussion is closed, you could probably speedy it under csd g6 (housekeeping). MER-C 11:39, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for the rply. Looks like both Category:SK Group and Template:SK Group are on the block.--Hu12 12:32, 24 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but i dont see the why you have put this image up for speedy deletion. After reading your comments and the criteria the image is listed under i am still none the wiser as to why you listed, could you please explain? thanks --Childzy ¤ Talk 09:09, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

From the closing procedure: "[I]f any of those images were on Commons, be sure to tag the description pages with {{missing image}}". MER-C 11:32, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This deletion. It probably does have too much perosnal information. --Tbeatty 02:08, 26 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed you reverted vandalism done by the anon. user to Copyright. I have checked the block log and talk page and found out the IP address has already been blocked for vandalism before. When I encounter a previously-banned vandal, what warning should I give? Do I give a 4 or 4im warning? Also, is it severe enough to report to AIV? Optakeover 12:47, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not yet. I usually start with a level 2 warning unless given a good reason. The block log allows the blocking admin (if it escalates) to give a longer block. That said, it's a school. What would you expect? MER-C 12:56, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see, thank you. Optakeover 12:59, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that you sent me a message back in June pertaining to a image called 'Image:551602686_l.jpg'. I don't remember uploading a picture with that file name nor putting it on a page. Could you respond back to me on how my name was attached to this pic. Thanks. CRocka05 19:05, 31 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You did upload the picture, see [2]. MER-C 03:19, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep up the hard work!--Hu12 23:41, 3 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. :) Back to work... MER-C 11:53, 5 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have received this message from you.

Why do you suppress my link www.freewebs.com/clickforcharity ? If you think the website doesn't "comply with the guideliness for external links" then you won't see any objection if I suppress the link charityusa.com since this is the same kind of site that I mentioned? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.115.241.5 (talk)

It

Freewebs. MER-C 11:27, 6 September 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

See under "links normally to be avoided" - personal sites. MER-C 09:19, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well this is written "NORMALLY" and the site doesn't have any "personal dimension" since I just presents links... I'm not "telling the story of my life"... It's stupid to apply the rule in a strict way because we can also consider that the site http://charityusa.com doesn't really respect the guideliness for external links since it presents commercial sites, which i don't do on my website...

Hi MER-C,

Just checked the recent FPC promotions. I wonder if the Tree Lion promotion shouldn't have been the first version rather than the second one?

Even after the second one was added, the remaining votes were 'support either', other than one, and that was to 'support original'. No one who voted earlier changed their vote to the second version either.

Cheers, --jjron 09:01, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I preferred the version that was less blown. MER-C 09:11, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MER-C, you recently made a minor change to the Business Bay article. I wanted to discuss this change on the Business Bay Discussion Page. Since I am not sure if you constantly check the pages you have edited, I have decided to inform you of this. Please do not respond on this talk page. Instead, please respond to my message on the Business Bay talk page. Thank you. Leitmanp 05:25, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry, but I do not understand how the image is a copyright violation. It is an image of a board at the Business Bay site. On the Business Bay Talk page, you said that you think it is a copyright violation by the advertiser. How is this possible? A company cannot violate its own copyright. Or are you saying that the image is a copyright violation because it is an image of an advertisement? At

The image is a derivative work of the advertisement, hence it is a copyright violation. MER-C 07:20, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Metrioptera roeseli male Richard Bartz.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Chris B • talk • contribs 20:14, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MER-C. Just an oddity - saw you rv'd a spam link but something odd happended at the same time and the article lost a bunch of text. I've rv'd one version back. Don't know if it was a tool you were using that cuased the issue ? Pedro |  Chat  11:35, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I clicked the twinkle rollback link twice. MER-C 11:39, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I do not understand what is wrong with the external links to more Detroit Pistons statistical information that is very insightful and interesting.

This is from your What To Link Section:

What should be linked

1. Articles about any organization, person, web site, or other entity should link to the official site if any.

2. An article about a book, a musical score, or some other media should link to a site hosting a copy of the work if none of the "Links normally to be avoided" criteria apply.

3. Sites that contain neutral and accurate material that cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to copyright issues, amount of detail (such as professional athlete statistics, movie or television credits, interview transcripts, or online textbooks) or other reasons.

4. Sites with other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article, such as reviews and interviews.

The links I provided are very accurate and insightful Pistons statistics. I do not consider this as spam and it is not violating any policies.

If anything the need4sheed.com link on the Detroit Pistons entry ie the #1 Pistons Website on the Internet" that is spam. She is promoting her wallpapers and Rasheed Wallace site all over your site, but that seems to be fine. Check out your Rasheed Wallace entry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.181.102.85 (talk • contribs)

The link was added in a way consistent with spamming. MER-C 12:02, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So MER-C, I'm curious as to how I add a link in a way that is not "consistent with spamming" so you do not remove the links inadvertently? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Paspn (talk • contribs)

Your username registration indicates you have a

Wikipedia is not a vehicle for self promotion, so I am justified in removing the links. MER-C 09:40, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

Spamstar of Glory

		The Spamstar of Glory
		Presented to MER-C for persistence in fighting spam on Wikipedia, day in and day out. --A. B. (talk) 20:30, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do you ever sleep?..LOL--Hu12 20:35, 12 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I sleep while you edit and edit while you sleep. Thanks anyway! Back to work... MER-C 12:14, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You may have noticed that I have closed a couple of FP noms recently. I've been following the process correctly, right? -- Chris B • talk • contribs 16:09, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think so, yes. MER-C 09:36, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good. -- Chris B • talk • contribs 11:20, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the guidance at the featured picture. I have tried peer review but it is way too slow. I request a favor. Could you please see if the picture of the periwinkle is suitable for nomination. Muhammad Mahdi Karim 17:40, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Parts of the flower, especially the top, are blurry and out of focus. Also, the image is not used in any articles. Therefore, I don't think the picture is likely to succeed. MER-C 05:50, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The current picture in the periwinkle article is not very good. I can replace it with this one. I just wanted your feedback whether once it appears in articles, it can be nominated or not. Thanks,Muhammad Mahdi Karim 07:03, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I reverted your edit to Talk:Adjective, as it looked like vandalism. As I don't think you're a vandal, I can only assume it was a mistake on your part; please be more careful in the future.

Thanks!
—Ruakh_TALK 21:21, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's a Twinkle bug, because that's the second time it happened to me in 30 minutes. See

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject User scripts/Scripts/Twinkle/Bugs#TW-B-0013. MER-C 06:10, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

Wow, crappy bug. Well, until it's fixed, please make a point of always checking your Twinkle edits to make sure they did what they were supposed to. Sorry for the bother. —Ruakh_TALK 07:25, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reverting my bad revert on Iran. Guess it was an edit-conflict that caused the revert to go bad. --Hdt83 ^Chat 08:18, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Twinkle, I guess? MER-C 08:19, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm assuming the ip edits on the (Meta) spamblacklist are you (I'll get them done shortly)! Your username there has no edits on it, I'm sure a 'crat would look at usurping it? Cheers --Herby ^{talk thyme} 11:28, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can't really be bothered going through the processes over there for what would be about an edit per week. I'm waiting for SUL to do the hard work for me - apparently it is somewhat close with a working mockup - I have an account with edits over at the test wiki. MER-C 13:17, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough - I guess the problem is that an unknown IP requesting a blacklisting on Meta may not get to the top of the pile compared to a known user. I'm human, I respond more easily to those I know & trust. When you do post there using the template as mentioned here would be good --Herby ^{talk thyme} 13:29, 15 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am aware how busy you are however if you continue to post from an IP could I remind you of the above message please out of courtesy to those who do have quite a bit to do on Meta and elsewhere, thanks --Herby ^{talk thyme} 11:01, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the revert(s) on my user page :) - Myanw 12:21, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. MER-C 13:31, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for notifying me about the promotion of the Neutrophil image I nominated for featured picture status. I've been busy and hadn't had time to monitor it; I'm glad to see the discussion went in favor of the nomination and the picture got promoted. Lumbergh 15:27, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I think you overlapped your reverts with someone else (DerHexer) and inadvertently deleted some text from the article, please check it, if you meant to edit out about 40k of text in the process please accept my apologies and revert my rollback. DMcMPO11AAUK/Talk/Contribs 13:05, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's a script bug, see

WT:TW#TW-B-0013. MER-C 13:39, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

Cheers, --jjron 02:29, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Phalacrocorax aristotelis desmarestii.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Chris B • talk 20:07, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Da Vinci Vitruve Luc Viatour.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Chris B • talk 15:16, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You haven't seen this have you? I have only just noticed. -- Chris B • talk 15:16, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dealt with. MER-C 03:38, 22 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just a hint for next time; if there is a clear case of sockpuppetry that is supported by checkuser or another admissions, you do not have to bring it up to the

Hello MER-C. See my proposal above at #Bot_archiving_at_WP:COIN. Your response to bot archiving was:

I disagree, as I archive stuff when it is dealt with, not on some arbitrary time frame as determined by a bot. I'd flush the current backlog first, then think about it.

The backlog has improved; in a recent edit, you got rid of 13 old reports. Is it now time to think? Thanks, EdJohnston 13:41, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I doubt there is a bot that can cope with the unusual archiving system at the noticeboard, most archive the stuff in between the start of a section and the start of the next one, missing the coi top template that encloses the debate. So if we can find one, then go ahead. MER-C 11:04, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I propose MiszaBot, a conventional bot, since it is so reliable. The folks at

WP:WQA, who do use MiszaBot, place a template at the top of each report that can be used to state the 'resolved' status. The flags are enumerated here

. An extra virtue of their system is that changing status to resolved doesn't reset the timer on the archiving, so 14 days after the last actual comment is made, the report will go away. (You can keep a report active longer by making a trivial comment).

If losing the show/hide boxes is a deal-breaker, I'm thinking how scripts might be written that could make it easier for humans to do the manual archiving. EdJohnston 13:30, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I read MiszaBot's description and I think it may be possible to keep the status quo method. It isn't hard to find the start of the coi top template with regex as I added a little comment to the top of the template. MER-C 12:34, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, a trial run of one night, per [3]. See if it works. EdJohnston 01:41, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MiszaBot archived

WP:RS/N on Friday morning, 28 Sept, and did not touch COIN, so it doesn't look good. Maybe MiszaBot is not recognizing the threads on our noticeboard... I could add a trial entry to COIN, without a box, tweak the signature to make it look more than 14 days old, and see what happens. EdJohnston 14:59, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

The archiving worked last night. EdJohnston 16:35, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Please come and participate in the discussion of Image:US Government most-wanted Iraqi playing cards.jpg. Thanks for your prompt attention to this matter.   — Jeff G. (talk|contribs) 00:56, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Javier Solana (2007).jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. - Hadseys 18:32, 25 September 2007

• Hadseys made a few minor mistakes in promoting this picture, and I went ahead and fixed them. I have never promoted a picture before, so please forgive any careless mistakes I may have made. My edits should be at the top of my contributions list. Thanks, thegreen J Are you green? 00:51, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Both of you forgot half of the

closing procedure. I won't do it today as I find it's only worthwhile doing if 2 to 4 pictures are promoted in one go. MER-C 11:44, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

MER-C, I have finished off the incomplete closing procedure and the awful mess of a template that was left just above. I also think the wrong version was promoted, consensus seemed to be in favour for the other. -- Chris B • talk 21:13, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is a brazillian school IP. So this may be as well banned, since most of the students are "vandalists". 200.162.36.226 16:21, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hey man sorry about the corliss williamson thing.i was trying to talk to some one else and accedently clicked on your talk page by mistake.User:Cowboycaleb1Cowboycaleb 22:00, 26 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I noticed you were working on getting rid of the backlog on the whitelist. While you are at it, could you please take a look at the WBIG-FM website "idigbig.com". It is the official website of the radio station, but it is on the blacklist, which is odd since it has been in use by WBIG now for about 7 to 7 1/2 months. If you could add "idigbig.com" to the whitelist, I would greatly appericate it. Take Care and Have a Good Weekend....NeutralHomer ^T:C 19:06, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The url digbig.com is blacklisted at meta because it is an

regex wrong (it should be \bdigbig\.com). You'll have to go over to meta to get this fixed, as you have an account there but I don't. MER-C 03:14, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

Done and Done :) To be honest, I actually forgot I had an account over there. Thanks for your help. Take Care....NeutralHomer ^T:C 05:16, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please comment.[4] --יודל 20:09, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That is correct, and I quote (emphasis added is my own):

The right to vanish does not necessarily extend to pages retained for the purposes of protecting the website against disruption; for example requests for arbitration, requests for check user, or sockpuppet categories.

— m:Right to vanish

It does not necessarily extend; not that it is forbidden to be extended. I did request guidance from ArbCom, and got a response from one of the members of Arbcom (copied to the Arbcom list) that I could use my judgment; which I have. My judgement is not perfect, of course, but I firmly believe that this is one of the times where m:Right to Vanish may be applied, and if it turns out that this group engages in meatpuppetry again, I shall be the first to reinstate any warnings or blocks. -- Avi 03:51, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reverting vandalism on my user page (22 September, but I just noticed it now). Carlossuarez46 02:57, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! For some reason, the time when I am the most active (0900 → 1300 utc) happens to be the spammiest time of the day. I have no idea why... MER-C 06:56, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reverting the vandalism to my page. --Nlu (talk) 15:51, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MER-C!

You have uploaded a higher resolution version of Image:Attack on carrier USS Franklin 19 March 1945.jpg.

For this I am very, very grateful!

If am very curious where and how you managed to find that image, since I tried to do so myself. I would appreciate to find out on my talk page.

Thanks again, and my very warm regards!

--Dna-Dennis 19:29, 3 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The real culprit is commons:User:3am. I tend to avoid uploading large pictures because of what I like to call fraudband. MER-C 05:50, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I do have a list of 722 wikis which are monitored by the linkwatchers. If you send me an email I can send it to you. Regards, --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 11:21, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Human skeleton front.svg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Chris B • talk 14:24, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Human skeleton back.svg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Chris B • talk 14:25, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]