User talk:Ryulong/Archive 4

This page 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.

The picture I posted was not to be about Jason. I thought it would be a better idea to have a picture of the original Red Ranger than of the Turbo Red Ranger. —The preceding

) 06:48, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Except that is not what the page is about. I had chosen several images of various Rangers to post on those pages, simply to use as an example of a Ranger of that color. For example,

Pink Ranger has the Pink Galaxy Ranger. Additionally, the picture you uploaded cannot be used on Wikipedia because you found it on quizilla without any information as to the original copyright holder, and it can be deleted for being unencyclopedic. Ryūlóng

06:51, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Clean up in aisle Xiaolin Showdown

I've noticed that too. It is quite bothersome considering I've been trying to remove the trivia and goofs sections from the articles. The only problem is that whenever I remove something, it gets added right back in. Jay32183 18:47, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi Ryulong, Thanks for reverting the apparent vandalism on one of my user subpages. I commend your dedication to vandal fighting; I'd just like to note that it was in fact me making the edit (complete blanking and a redirect, as it may seem), I'd just forgotten to log in. I'll put the redirect back in, just thought I'd let you know so that we don't accidentally breach 3RR. --Draicone ^(talk) 22:57, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Oh, okay. I just find it really odd sometimes when IP editors make such drastic edits to pages like that. Ryūlóng 22:58, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

I wanted to tell you that I will post in UTC again. 24.121.73.22 00:00, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Good. Ryūlóng 00:00, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Oh, Yeah, I've seen some places that it is "

00:06, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Also good. Ryūlóng 00:06, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Please compute the smallest CIDR range when blocking vandalism coming from a range to minimize collateral damage. I noticed that the Ashdod blanker had addresses in the 89.1.32.0/19 range, which is much smaller than the 89.1.0.0/16 range that you specified, so I narrowed it down. Thanks. Jesse Viviano 01:56, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Okay, admins just prefer multiples of 8. Ryūlóng 01:57, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Admins used to require only /16 or /24 because the MediaWiki software only allowed /16 and /24 at one time because it was too taxing to compute subnet masks for anything but /16 and /24. However, they eventually upgraded the software to support CIDR ranges from /16 to /31. They either found a software shortcut or upgraded their hardware, allowing all CIDR ranges from /16 to /31. By the way, I had to copy this discussion out of your archives to respond. Jesse Viviano 03:46, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, I know that the other ranges are supported, it's just that administrators at the IRC channels prefer the rangeblocks in multiples of 8; I have often tried to say "hey, this vandal is operating out of this /21" or something similar, and they do like 6 /24s. Ryūlóng 03:47, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

And if you started this anew (as a re:) I would have more than likely just made it a level 3 heading, but this works, too. Ryūlóng 03:49, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Hello. Excuse the intrusion, but what on earth are you doing? Thanks. El_C 02:21, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

I've stopped. Ryūlóng 02:23, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

I would hope so, but please answer the question. El_C 02:32, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

I thought that blanking the user talk is frowned upon in all cases, however that may just be deletion. Ryūlóng 02:32, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

It is not. But on what did you base that thought on? You need to better ground your notions of what constitutes policy in something (anything) in the future; avoid needlessly inflaming a conflict; avoid revert warring; and avoid breaches to 3RR. TIA. El_C 02:37, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Mkay... Ryūlóng 02:38, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry, what? Please write in comprehensible English. El_C 02:45, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

I based it off of

Wikipedia:User page, but even that shows that blanking one's own user talk is a grey area. Ryūlóng

02:47, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

For future reference, unless pressing administrative notices are present, I treat —and censur— the repeated un-blanking of an established user's talk page against their wishes as

disruption, as do many other admins. El_C

03:03, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Okay then. Ryūlóng 03:04, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Deleted conversation

Hello again. Since you purged the discussion, I will be noting its removal on my own talk page. Feel free to remove this comment as well. El_C 03:53, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Fine, I will archive it. Ryūlóng 03:53, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. They were blocking me!! I just tried to make an archive for FPC talk page that's all. Thanks 66.36.148.132 04:50, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

No problem at all. In the future, though, please make an edit summary to state as such. That's why they were suspicious of you. Ryūlóng 04:51, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Good job. I seemed to have trouble articulating myself enough to remove the link (I said "Holy crap you porno' to the link)... once again, good job Tinlv7 19:27, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

...for putting quick links to those ranges. I was trying to narrow them down further but you gave me an easy pair of clicks. Cheers! Antandrus (talk) 23:27, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

No problem, btw, there's a new one up. Ryūlóng 23:28, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Hello Ryulong. I'm serving as an expert on Hawaiian language for the Hawaiian language article. This was arranged through a Wikipedia administrator on 23 May 2006. I'd like to share with you some information relating to the so-called "okina" symbol.

On 20 April 2006, a user, Hvn0413, made some edits to the Hawaiian language article. The edits introduced this symbol --- ‘ --- whatever it is. Before that symbol was introduced, the article looked terrible to the majority of users, because the okina template produced an empty rectangle. Because of the excellent result with ‘, I used it throughout the article. I replaced the apostrophe-okina, the backquote-okina, and the template-okina, because the ‘ gives a better result than any of those. It also has the advantage of being visible and obvious in the edit box. A 2nd advantage is that it is a single character. The sequence { { o k i n a } } takes up 9 characters. So the ‘ saves 8 characters every time it is used. A 3rd advantage is that it has its normal appearance in the TOC box, while the okina template does not. A 4th advantage is its appearance in italic font. The ‘ is properly positioned, midway between neighboring characters. The result of the okina template is inferior in that respect. In italic, the okina template result is way too far to the right. It's so bad that it makes an improper gap. Even worse, it crowds so close to the next character that it forms a ligature with it.

Apparently you had something to do with improving the operation of the okina-template code. That's good. But the character which is now resulting from that code is definitely not as good as the ‘. Therefore, if you have the technical ability, and the permission to edit the okina-template code, I very strongly recommend that you improve the code by making it use the ‘ instead of whatever it's using now.

Also, since that change will make the okina template and the ‘ produce the same result, there is no need to replace the ‘ with the okina template. In fact, the ‘ is more economical, because it is 1 character rather than 9 characters.

Since I'm serving as the expert for the Hawaiian language article, and for Hawaiian language in general, I will restore the ‘ to that article, and to related articles. Please contact me on my user talk page if you have any questions or concerns. Thanks. Agent X 20:43, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Oh by the way, if you know the "name" or "identity" of the ‘, please tell me what it is. I know it's not apostrophe, and not backquote, but what is it? Whatever its name is, it is better than all of the other symbols. Agent X 20:43, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, there had been issues concerning the box, and I thought that I had fixed them by changing the template that the box was in by emmersing the ʻokina symbol in a font that it existed in. The okina template is utilized by WikiProject Hawaii, and is mentioned on the article about they symbol itself. As you can see now, the ʻ is viewable by users of Internet Explorer and Mozilla FireFox, which is what I had done sometime this summer. The ‘ symbol or ‘ is not the symbol to be used, and I had fixed that usage in several articles where they had been used. It is not that you are an expert on the Hawaiian language, but you can now see that the okina in its template form is utilized. There is no importance to the size, but merely the correct usage of the Hawaiian alphabet in articles about Hawaii. Ryūlóng 20:52, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Let's see if I can demonstrate this for you. Check out the following two lines.

1. a‘a --- e‘e --- i‘i --- o‘o --- u‘u
2. aʻa --- eʻe --- iʻi --- oʻo --- uʻu

Can you see that the lsquo (line 1) is correctly centered, but the { { okina } } (line 2) is incorrectly too far to the right? If you look at the TOC box in your last version of the Hawaiian language article, you should see that the okina is a rectangle. By contrast, the lsquo gives the correct result in the TOC box. Don't worry, I'm not blaming you at all for the problems. I will visit the WikiProject Hawaii and make some contributions there. So don't worry, it's not your fault. I'm just explaining it so you will understand why the lsquo is causing the best results. Agent X 21:28, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, in the TOC box, the Okina should probably be removed (I had probably done the changes in Microsoft Word). However, the symbol used in {{Okina}} is one that is used by Wikipedia:WikiProject Hawaii in all of the articles associated with them. Ryūlóng 21:30, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Examples with uppercase vowels.

1. A‘A --- E‘E --- I‘I --- O‘O --- U‘U
2. AʻA --- EʻE --- IʻI --- OʻO --- UʻU

Do you see the difference? Agent X 21:38, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I see the space. I have also suggested something to fix this issue on your talk page. Ryūlóng 21:39, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

The solution you made during the summer was successful, in that it fixed the rectangle problem of the okina template for article text. But it gives the bad result for (1) italics, and (2) the TOC box. That is NOT the fault of your code. Instead, it is the fault of the choice of the character. The lsquo gives the correct result in (1) italics, (2) the TOC box, and (3) article text. In other words, the results are 100% correct with the lsquo (three out of three contexts look correct), but only 33% correct with the "whatever character" now pointed to by the template (one out of three contexts look correct). Obviously, the simplest and best solution is to just use the lsquo as the okina, because it always gives the correct appearance, and no special work is required, right? It's very easy. It also saves memory space and disk space, and keeps articles shorter in size. As a fluent speaker and expert on the Hawaiian language, with a PhD in Linguistics, I know that the lsquo is just as "correct" as any other symbol. The people in WikiProject Hawaii are not experts on Hawaiian language, and do not have doctorate degrees, but I will help them to understand that there is really no such thing as "just one 'correct' symbol". In the Hawaiian Bible, APOSTROPHE is okina. In some Hawaiian-language textbooks, APOSTROPHE is okina. In some other Hawaiian-language textbooks, LSQUO is okina. So it is very foolish to believe that only some unicode character could be okina. People are free to make the best choice. Under the current conditions, the LSQUO is the best choice. It's also the easiest. Thank you for noticing my communications. I hope the issue will become very simple and easy for everybody. (By the way, what kind of name is "Ryulong"? It looks sort of Vietnamese.) Agent X 22:23, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

But that is not what I believe WikiProject Hawaii prefers. The lsquo does work, but it is not what is considered to be the true okina, which is what the template does. Seeing as the body text is where the okina is used most, then it should probably be where the template is used. In the cases of italics or section titles that appear in the table of contents, the lsquo figure should be used in its place. It's easier to type {{okina}} than it is to find the lsquo figure. I would take this up at the WikiProject Hawaii talk page and see how they all feel about it before a unilateral change is performed. Ryūlóng 22:28, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

I checked out the WikiProject Hawaii pages, to see if your claim was right. You are mistaken. There is no established consensus posted there. I posted the issues there which I explained to you. I expanded the Manual of Style there. It now states that LSQUO should be used for the okina symbol. It did NOT previously state that 02BB should be used. Therefore, my contribution on that point constitutes the ORIGINAL and ONLY policy on okina-symbol guidance for WikiProject Hawaii articles. Since (1) I am serving as the expert for the Hawaiian language article; and (2) I am the major contributor to that article; and (3) WikiProject Hawaii now states that LSQUO should be used for okina; and (4) WikiProject Hawaii did NOT require, did NOT prefer, and did NOT recommend 02BB for okina; I will restore LSQUO for the Hawaiian language article. Because I am the major contributor to that article, and I've spent more time than anyone else working on it, you need to respect Wikipedia policies and guides regarding deference to the style choices of the major contributor. The Okina article is NOT more important than Wikipedia policies and guides. The Okina article is NOT Wikipedia policy, NOT a Wikipedia guide, and NOT any authority of any kind whatsoever. It does NOT control the Hawaiian language article. I am politely requesting you to refrain from changing LSQUO to 02BB in the Hawaiian language article. However, if necessary, I will call in Wikipedia administrators. At first, you said you would follow WikiProject Hawaii. Now, you are acting as if the Okina article is an authority. Frankly, that's ridiculous. If you are an admin, and if necessary, I will seek to have your adminship revoked. You are failing to acknowledge the point that there is NO SUCH THING as "the true okina". Get real, bro. Agent X 00:32, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Glad you are not an administrator.

It's good you are not an admin. Perhaps the user who should get blocked is you. Agent X 01:52, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

I am an administrator and more uncivil comments like this will get you blocked. Straighten up. pschemp | talk 01:55, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

The

) 00:34, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Supercentenarians vandalism

Ryulong, just to let you know that user 68.904.29 (who has been vandalizing the supercentenarians page) is not me. My IP address is 68.219.137.236.

Ok, and so I was a little irate the other day...if you were given a speeding ticket and you weren't speeding, how would you feel? 'Can't sleep, clown won't eat me' violated several Wiki ethics guidelines, including blocking me without warning and mis-labeling edits as 'vandalism.' Moreover, I originally didn't intend to delete the sub-categories. Instead, I wanted to keep the original 'supercentenarians' category. The argument by the Clown was that the 'supercentenarians' category was made superfluous by the addition of the sub-category. I disagreed because:

A. Persons like the 'world's oldest person' are universally significant B. Just because someone is in a list of Memphians doesn't disqualify them from a list of Tennesseans as well. So, because the main category and the sub-category have two different uses, why not list both? One is for those just interested in nationalist categorization; the other for 'global' categorization. C. The category of 'supercentenarians' was well-established and maintained for several years. It is disrespectful for someone to come in and arbitrarily decide to change it without listening to others. For example, putting 109-year-olds and 'longevity claims' in the category as well did not fit the original category definition or purpose and served to water it down.

Ok, so this was a 'tempest in a teapot' but the Clown is one of the most notorious users of the 'block' on Wikipedia. Quick to bludgeon doesn't really translate into the Wiki ethics of compromise, discussion, and trying to work things out and listen to the other side before a major overhaul of an article is made. Conversely, the 'Surviving Veterans of World War I' engaged in a lively, sometimes overblown discussion, but it came down to a vote and everyone more or less accepted that as fair. Except for one case: Robley Rex appears to be unfairly cast out, as he says he joined the military in May 1918 (and those that claim he joined in 1919 haven't cited sources, while those who supported 1918 did).

I do admit that when I 'presumed' that the Clown added himself to the supercentenarians category, I was mistaken. Unlike you, he did not explain why or how it happened. I can be reasonable if given a reason for something. In fact, I have been a long-time Wikipedian, far longer than the 'clown' who did not sign up until Nov 23 2005. My user ID goes back to Feb 2005 and I edited for several years before that. Perhaps you would like to re-consider your assessment of what I bring to Wikipedia. Just today I uncovered and fixed vandalism in the 'Atlanta Metropolitan Area' article (someone had made up fake population numbers, and no one noticed...see talk page for details). Thus, while 'supercentenarians' is my forte, I do far more than that.

Also, when it comes to 'supercentenarians,' I generally do not even start an article unless the person is 112 or has a significant story to tell (such as WWI veterans). If someone starts an article like 'Bertha Cheney,' maybe we really don't need that. She did live to 110 but I have current over 1,000 supercentenarians, 990 on the verified lists and 200+ on the pending lists. And maybe a thousand more on the claims lists. So, I pick and choose. I think 112 1/2 is a good base point to start, as we see most people this age in the 'top 15' worldwide.

Sincerely, Robert Young →

} 08:09, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi Ryulong, thanks for all of your CV work and reporting vandals to AIAV.

However, I noticed that you put this user on

) 13:15, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Not vandalism, as you pointed out. Seems like a young user. Maybe you could mentor a bit. Tyrenius 23:41, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Mentoring is something I am not good at/have time for. >_> Ryūlóng 23:44, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

OK, but good faith editing is not vandalism, so not for AIV.

Tyrenius 23:46, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

• 68.185.243.91 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) - Unconstructive edits right after block expired --Ryūlóng 23:27, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

  I don't understand the article enough to work this out. Is it a young person trying to do useful edits perhaps, or deliberate interference? Tyrenius 23:44, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

  The user has been continuing to make unconstructive edits at various articles that I watch, and was blocked yesterday for repeating his actions despite several warnings issued to him. He is trying to be helpful, but his massive amount of unhelpful contributions (linking to non-existant pages, making redundant edits) make him harmful; think of him like the Spongebob/Power Rangers version of

  MascotGuy. Ryūlóng

  23:51, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

Protection

I keep all protected pages on my watchlist, and will unprotect when necessary. In this case it was going to be a couple of hours until that guy went to bed. -- Samir धर्म 02:46, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

What about extending the block on the IP? He doesn't look apologetic. Ryūlóng 02:47, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Agreed he doesn't look apologetic. I'll keep an eye on him tomorrow -- Samir धर्म 02:52, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

How about downing the protection to semi-protection? Ryūlóng 02:57, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

He's blocked, his page is protected, I'm undoing the page protection in a bit. I don't see the issue. -- Samir धर्म 02:58, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Again, this isn't an issue. I don't like sprotecting pages in general, and particularly not IP talk pages. -- Samir धर्म 03:14, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Ok. Ryūlóng 03:16, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

who are you what are your qualifications in mathematics? —The preceding

) .

The article was not about mathematics. It was about you and your attempts at getting an article about yourself on Wikipedia. There are no qualifications needed to list an article for deletion, which the article about you was done twice. Please come back to Wikipedia and have an article when you've become governor of Florida. Ryūlóng 05:36, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Why did you make this edit? That wasn't vandalism, the user was correcting the usage of the adverb. --Cyde Weys 05:16, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Because "reported" and "reportedly" are two different things. Ryūlóng 05:16, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

I agree with the revert you did, but it's inappropriate to call it vandalism.--Father Goose 05:35, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

It didn't look like vandalism at all. It looked like a comment "in good faith". Mefanch 05:52, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

I have been dealing with users who have been editting the article as such for the night. Still, there is a difference between a "reported dead" and "reportedly dead". I was wrong in tagging it as vandalism, yes, but the revert was justified. Ryūlóng 05:54, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

That is fine. I know things get vandalized here a lot. That was one of the reasons I went right to the history of this page when I heard on the news. However, it looks like he made a typo or just mest his words up. Now he has a tag by you on his talk page insinuating that he is a Vandal. If anyone checks him now, they will see that and might think ill of him, when it looks like he was making an honest contrib. It would be polite to note on his page that it wasn't truely vandalism. Mefanch 05:59, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

I will downgrade the warning I had issued him (if it was bv, I will more than likely make it a t1, and give him a welcome thing). Ryūlóng 06:00, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

And done. Ryūlóng 06:01, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

You also gave a vandalism warning to Harwood for this edit. Reverting the edit was certainly appropriate, because the claim was not backed up by the source; but calling it vandalism seems dubious. Kickaha Ota 06:07, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

That one I would call vandalism, perhaps a t2 or a v2 would be better depending on what I gave him. Ryūlóng 06:08, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

I did give him a t2... I will downgrade it to {{

verror}} Ryūlóng

06:09, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Recent vandalism at

Miles "Tails" Prower

Thanks for helping out with reverting it; I didn't notice that it had gotten hit by two vandals in a row. I've warned both of them with

) 05:36, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

No problem. Ryūlóng 05:52, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Sorry about that, I did not know that. DXRAW 08:21, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, I could be extremely wrong, too. It's just best to leave that to someone else's discretion, instead of the two parties involved. Ryūlóng 08:22, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough, How do i get it removed to the archives? DXRAW 08:27, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

That is a good question. Again, it is best to leave that up to the administrators at

WP:SSP. Ryūlóng

08:24, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

While im here asking questions :-) How do i get the nice archives folder thing and links on my talkpage. DXRAW 08:27, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Check out

WP:TUSER#Images (just scroll up a bit from there; this is about as good as I can link it for you). Ryūlóng

08:29, 4 September 2006 (UTC

Thank You! DXRAW 08:31, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

No problem at all. Ryūlóng 08:47, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

I NEVER accept and concede the "blocking" and blocking aginst me!

Then, I can take part in discussion. You and Kusma are a flint. --Sheynhertz 09:49, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

You have been banned for your actions. You can contest your block if you just sign into User:Sheynhertz-Unbayg and say why you should be unblocked; not by evading this block by doing all of this. Ryūlóng 09:53, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi. I was a bit concerned to see you listing 3 new user accounts at

10:16, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Kay. Ryūlóng 10:16, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. Please keep up the good work though! The Land 10:24, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

No problem at all. Ryūlóng 10:24, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

) 12:52, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive56#Ban of Sheynhertz-Unbayg. Ryūlóng 21:04, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Hello, I deleted a passage from the entry related to the 1986 film "Iron Eagle" last night. I was not logged in at the time, thus an IP address was given as the editor I.D. My justification for removing this passage is that it has nothing whatsoever to do with the film itself; it's an outright ADVERTISEMENT aimed at directing traffic to a songwriter's personal website. If this sort of content is allowed, wikipedia will become rife with contributions solely aimed at generating traffic at outside sites and not serving the purpose of providing information. I suggest that this entry include a hyperlink to this songwriter's wikipedia entry and nothing more. For crying out loud, the irrelevant paragraph about a throwaway song that never even made it onto the soundtrack accounts for something link 50% of the total entry! Thanks. —The preceding

) .

I will check this. Ryūlóng 21:01, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Please stop removing external links based on things that are "normally to be avoided." In the case of several external links that you have been removing, I do not see any reason as to why they are necessary to be removed, especially those on Power Rangers, which there is a specific warning concerning other external links. The forums that you have been removing are well documented and well seated towards the subject of the page, and they are in fact unique resources to the topic. The message that states "In keeping with Wikipedia's policy concerning advertising, please do not add any links to this list" is to limit the list to those links that are important to the subject. Before you go about continuing to remove these and other external links, please re-read the Wikipedia:External links guidelines. Ryūlóng 05:09, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

If you have a conflict over the links as regards to the Power Rangers article, I urge you take up this topic with Paul E. Ester, as he is much better informed on this than I. -- MakeChooChooGoNow 05:21, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

It is just that the external links at the Power Rangers article are not those that can be removed per

WP:EL as they are forums that have been around for a long period of time (at least some of them) and do serve as a useful resource (while not a reliable source) to the subject at hand. Even though forums should normally not be linked to, these more or less are an exception. Some are pertinent, while I have not been to all of them. I will cull whatever ones may not be as useful, but the ones I may leave are fairly useful. Ryūlóng

05:26, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Inadequate warnings

Hi Ryulong, thanks for you hard work fighting vandals, but I've seen quite a few {{bv}}-only warned reports coming in from you on

06:03, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Okie-dokie. Ryūlóng 06:04, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

I loved the way you put it here! Emotions are obviously running high for some right now. Ansell 06:05, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

I know, but talk pages are for the discussion of articles, not about how the subject killed a television icon... Wait...what is it that you are commenting about? Ryūlóng 06:20, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

I wasn't saying you did anything wrong. I was commenting on your edit summary. :) The way it got to the point without reacting to what just happened. Ansell 06:28, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Yay! A compliment :D Ryūlóng 06:37, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

If you weren't so friggen quick with your watchlist, I was about to move it (but thanks for assuming my newbiness). And thanks for the heads up on the move function on pages, completely ignorant.

07:06, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

That's all right. I should have known better cause they're both sprotected. :P Ryūlóng 07:08, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

An additonal question, though, if you have time. When I attempt to use the 'move' function to move

Jarfingle

07:15, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

I'd either use

speedy deletion. Ryūlóng

07:16, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Advice on listing at AIAV

I'll use 220.245.232.182 as an example. Before we can block a user on AIAV, the user needs to be given at least 2 warnings (with the 2nd warning being a final warning). And you can't assume that this is the same person who was blocked or warned previously. The majority of the IPs we deal with are dynamic. Unless the IP is hitting the same articles over and over again, it's probably dynamic, in which case the person you are warning now is not the same person who was vandalizing previously. For dynamic IPs, they get a different IP address every time they sign on. So they could be using say 128.3.2.5 one time and then 128.3.2.28 the next. So please make sure that users are warned twice before listing them at AIAV. I appreciate your zealousness, but if we don't follow certain guidelines, we end up blocking people without them knowing that what they are doing is wrong. Thanks. --Woohookitty^(meow) 09:39, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

AIAV 2

In regards to User talk:129.59.97.206, again, for IPs, we need to warn and then warn again and THEN they can be blocked. Putting a user up who has edited once and has only been warned once is wasting our time and yours. Thanks. Registered users will be blocked after one piece of vandalism. IPs aren't. --Woohookitty^(meow) 05:55, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Okay. Ryūlóng 05:55, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Why does that link not belong in the lead. An equal number of IAU members to the ones who voted on the final ballot don't feel the redefinition was correct. That's a big part of the general information about Pluto at this time. The definintion is likely to be overturned next year. JohnnyBGood t c VIVA! 22:05, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

I know. I have moved it under the controversy section, where it fits much better. Ryūlóng 22:11, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Please refrain from taking a confrontational tone. I'm not supporting a "pluto is a planet" position. Just trying to remove the bias in the article that seems to blindly accept that it is a dwarf planet when a large body of scientists and scholars are currenlty rejecting that notion. Over 400 of these are members of the IAU who didn't get to participate in the final vote in Prague. The definition hasn't been completely settled and the article should reflect this. JohnnyBGood t c VIVA! 22:15, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

It is just hard to do so when there has been so much idiocy (no offense) concerning this decision in the past few weeks, to the point that someone tried to get me blocked for 3RR because I had changed his diction back to a way that was much more legible. There are just so many stupid emotions about a chunk of ice 2.8 Billion miles away. I am sorry for the tone I took, it's just that the controversy needn't be so much in the lead as in the rest of the article. Ryūlóng 22:20, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

Nice catch -- but nicer revert :-) thanks.

May I ask, are you following up on the allegations by Spring3100 on Wikipedia:Requests for investigation? bikeable (talk) 04:43, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

No. I saw a posting on

WP:ANI about the user who posted it by Spring3100. Ryūlóng

04:45, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

DaffyDuck has been incredibly annoying as of late on the John Cena article. I've had to get rid of the word "huge" countless times after they came to an agreement in mediation on the language ages ago. I'm fairly certain they have am IP sock puppet to boot. I was just looking up how to report them and I saw you went ahead and had them blocked for a while, thanks. - Bdve 07:12, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

DaffyDuck's also been a nuisance on

14:11, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Buck's Rock Page??

You're obviously a more experienced editor than I; can you find out how to ban 70.107.9.98 / 70.107.41.59 from continuing to remove information fro the Buck's Rock page? Every day I see content massively deleted. UnderPressure 00:47, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

I have requested for you that the page be

this page, where you can request protection for pages if you find it necessary. Ryūlóng

02:36, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

WP:BITE

You are one of the greatest vandal fighters on En-Wiki, but please separate vandals of newbies. Hit vandals hard but do not bite newbies, just teach them a trick or two, OK? abakharev 06:29, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Fixed it. Thanks for your quick cleanup. --

07:10, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

No problem. Ryūlóng 07:10, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

08:00, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

But he wants an article he wrote about himself userfied to his second username now. I'm not userfying it again when it's a repost. Ryūlóng 08:01, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

• Reposts only apply to article namespace. If he's not contributing anything more, I will delete it, based on Wikiepdia is not a free webhost. - Mgm|^(talk) 08:18, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

But it had been recreated in the article space after userfying. Ryūlóng 08:18, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

He's been warned now. I'll keep an eye out for any new contributions. - Mgm|^(talk) 08:16, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Okay. Ryūlóng 08:17, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Don't revert may edits! You are fool!!. --'uggoth 07:53, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

You are

WP:BANNED Sheynhertz. Please read that policy. Ryūlóng

07:55, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm not Sheynhertz. --'uggoth 07:56, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, but your edit to include a link to one of the onomastics pages was a dead give away. Ryūlóng 07:58, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for deleting the vandalism on my userpage. Routine, I know, but it was the first time my page received such attention, and it was nice to see that it was gone even before I read it. Regards, Newyorkbrad 01:12, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

That's why I have these tools. :) Ryūlóng 01:12, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

but I cannot resist saying this - Scooby_doo would have got away with it, if it wasn't for pesky kids like you. --

23:02, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Why did you revert valid, not vandal content added to the Canyon High School (Anaheim, California) article? —XSG 23:04, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry. Ryūlóng 23:08, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

The thing is I want to remove the section and he is rv my own page. I don't want to have it. I could do the same to him. Specially since, the feeling is mutual, and I'm honest. But I'm trying to forget and move on. Do you really think it is well intended not letting me move on?

I really think they might be in some sort of puppet relationship. No offense intended, it's just that they team up too much. How can I put it without sounding like I'm attacking? I don't like that on my page. I think I should only take that kind of warnings from an administrator not from regular people. You know what I mean? The comment bothers me, it comes from no authority and I want to take it off. Can you please take it off from me? That's what I'm asking. Please. Really. If I'm supposed to keep it, can you quote the rule stating so?--The Judge 23:33, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, you can

test2}} warning. If you really want them off your talk page, read the archiving link. Ryūlóng

23:36, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, thanks That was what I needed to hear. However, from my understanding, I *should* archive, but it is not obligation, you know what I mean? I don't know that to do about those two. Do you see the mean intention in forcing me to keep it?

I recently put an "underconstruction" tag on a page I've been editing, Implying I'm not done up untli 3-4 hours. But CovenantD periodically rv me. How am I supposed to work with that? I see CoventD's poit but I can't continue from the point he is forcing me to. Actually, right now, it is a collection of raw material I noticed another user started from copypasting other articles. I want to work on it and give it some shape. Now I dn't know if I can keep working... It's not fear I put the tag, and according to my understanding he was supposed to respect it.--The Judge 23:56, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, I would suggest conversing with him. And I realize that you just made an archive in my usersubspace, and I have moved it into yours (before you link to it). Ryūlóng 00:02, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

[1] I'm not really sure why you think this person is a vandal, removing a {{

23:15, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

The user had removed one ref and I thought he had removed two of them. Ryūlóng 23:20, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

But he didn't remove any refs, your revert removed a ref, his edits added them, am i not seeing something?--205.188.116.13 23:25, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

It was just a little odd. From what I saw, I thought he had removed one ref and replaced it with {{

fact}}. Ryūlóng

23:28, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

I realize that you're using Lupin's RC filter, so his first edit probably was flagged as a blanking, but that wasn't the edit you reverted, you reverted his 3rd edit to the article. Which means you were the one who replaced a source, with a {{

fact}}, and then warned him, without even looking at your own edit first--205.188.116.13

23:30, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Actually, I tried to see what he had done, and it looked a bit off to me; this is why I rolled back everything. Ryūlóng 23:33, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough--205.188.116.13 23:34, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

No problem at all. And may I say, for an anonymous AOL user, you are very well read concerning Wikipedia. Ryūlóng 23:39, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

There's nothing that says you need a username to be a constructive editor, and AOL only gets a bad rap from the one or two morons who tend to ruin it for the rest of us--205.188.116.13 23:43, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

I realize that; it's just that one bad apple spoils the barrel, or something like that. Ryūlóng 01:33, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Archive

Sorry, I just copypaste it from yours and forgot to change the names. :P . I can't dialogue with him. Actually I'm kinda scared. A lot of what I've been writting lately has been considered as attacks by Chris, CovenantD, you and I think somebody else, so I'm not gto him ot chirs anymore. I'm afraid they can really block me somehow. They don't talk too much in their talk pages. Chris just refuses to accept any responsability (even though a user besides me told him to chill the first time he attacked me) and ConeventD barely talks. Actually I'd like to avoid them. And I say them because they act almost as team.--The Judge 00:12, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

I would suggest bringing this up at

third party to help you. It's a really tough situation. Ryūlóng

00:20, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't know, that sounds hard. I repported him to the 3rr noticeboard. But I don't care, I just don't want to see him anymore. He has been following me to edit war over several articles. The problem is that there is no clear WP rule for or against either of us.

Actually I'm going to confess something to you. I made a big mistake after the first time he was blocked beacuse of me. I noticed several users had similar complaints to mine on his talk page. I talked to them to make them aware there is several people in the same 3rr situation with him... big mistake. They thanked me, but CovenantD got help from chris and started being more "agressive" towards me. It was a very big political mistake on my part, but I thought some sort of intervention would be a good idea since that was a recurring behavior that bother many other people before. But now, I don't want anything to d with him anymore.

Do you know if there is a rule against more than one infobox in a single article? He seems to go by that rule. I go by something I read somewhere in the introduction articles that it is good to use tables and infoboxes to organize the information better. According to what I undesrtoos that's better than ussing only paragraps.--The Judge 00:37, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

This is definitely a situation that needs

mediation. Ryūlóng

00:38, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, you've been great. I'll walk away from the project for a couple of days, it's a shame to let him win specially considering he followed me there to continue the original editwar from last weekend. I was working on that article a lot and he poped out just now. Imagine how bad I feel about that. I'm going to talk to the creator, I think he might have asimilar perspective of mine.--The Judge 00:46, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Still, try and go to

WP:RFM. It will definitely help. Ryūlóng

00:47, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

I think it looks like an atractive idea, but it's Saturday and I have to go out. The problem is that it looks too dificult. Well maybe because I'm tired, but maybe it will provocate them further.

What's the deal with canvassing? I mean I see how it backfired me, but technically there is nothing wrong with it. That's how you gather an intervention in real life. I felt CovenatD was being unfear to several of us, so I comunicated. The other guys even thanked me knowing what I was doing. I relly felt identified with the way CovenatD treated them.--TheJudge 02:23, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Just so you know, The Judge has been confirmed as a sockpuppet of banned user T-man the Wise Scarecrow[2]. CovenantD 03:54, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Can you just revert the edits, and claim them as your own. I mean, I worked on those edits on my sandbox before my ban even started, and had to move them here under an IP after it was too late. Please, just on this page. They are constructive edits, and I only ask that you put this on the page, and claim it as your own work, or state that this was made prior to my ban like it was. Thank you (ps, respond at User:Ericsaindon2)

I have responded on that user talk, but I'm afraid I cannot do that. I will see what I can do though. Ryūlóng 05:32, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

User:Ryulong/db-myspace, lovely, love the modification. May have to use this myself in the future! :) --Andeh 23:41, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Hell, I've used it only a few times, myself. Spread the wonder of db-myspace! Ryūlóng 23:44, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

It should be added into {{db-band}}. :D Though it may not look to good to the average newbie.--Andeh 23:47, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Justinian I Award For defending us against the Vandals, you are awarded the Justinian I Award. --Nlu (talk) 01:34, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Ooh... Puns... Ryūlóng 01:34, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for taking care of that. My fingers were about to die. How I miss my rollback button. Everyking 06:37, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

VoA has a non-admin rollback tool. Tis what I use. Ryūlóng

06:38, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Piotr Blass

Dear Ryulong, I wish to request arbitration with regards to your editorial work on Zariski surface and also the Piotr Blass biographical articles. Please advise me how to proceed. Best regards Dr Piotr Blass ps1 I am copying Jim Wales as to this issue as I am sure he wishes to have high scientific standards and due process. ps2 I reside in Boynton Beach and would be happy to meet with you at any time to clarify the scientific issues and possible misunderstandings all the best shalom dr piotr blass —The preceding

) .

The issue lies in your disruptive edits to the article on the Zariski surface, as well as your constant postings of your personal biography. You can keep your biography on your user page (where it is now). Perhaps if you tried to conform to the formatting and mark-up of Wikipedia articles, did not utilize Wikipedia to publish your own personal research, and let other editors write about it or you. And I would rather not meet up with you, nothing personal, I just have issues meeting up with people who I am in minor conflicts with online due to recent emails from an unrelated user. Ryūlóng 07:13, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Dr Piotr Blass

Dear Ryulong, At the University of Miami I work very closely with mathematics professor Chris Cosner who is an expert in applications to marine biology. You may wish to ask him about my work and about the Ulam Quarterly Journal where he was very helpful from the beginning.He will tell you how we influenced electronic publication in Florida since 1988. I have lectured several times at your school and have even been considered for chairing the math department. Again nothing personal but my write up of zariski surfaces was intended to be quite deep informative and pointing out directions of past and future research. It makes sense to request arbitration including algebraic geometers since you greatly reduced the scope of the article and reduced its value and usefulness. I suggested meeting you just to chat and clarify matters. I do not insist of course but will let you know when I visit U of Miami again. Perhaps you will decide to attend my lecture. I find it very strange that you do not use your real name. I hope to be a good influence on your work and values. All the best Shalom Dr Piotr Blass ps I am copying Jim Wales on our correspondence perhaps he will suggest some due process best —The preceding

) .

Again, it is nothing against you, it is just that Wikipedia should not be used to publish your mathematic research or your autobiography. I can tell from your fervor that you are well knowledged on these subjects, it is just that it is one of the precepts of

what wikipedia is not. And even if I did use my real name, it would be way too common for any value of being unique. I prefer this username. And, maybe, I will go to your lecture, if my current schedule permits. I am afraid, though, that my current level of mathematics may not allow me to comprehend such a concept. Ryūlóng

07:46, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Dear Ryulong, Thank you for your carefully considered reply. While I fully understand your philosophy let me suggest a couple of issues. First of all Zariski surface article was created before I had any knowledge of Wikipedia. I was just delighted that my invention had been reckognized by the community. I have simply tried to make the article more complete and more profound by including developments from 1970 till 2006. This is not research but rather an exposition of the entire subject. I feel that the mathematical community would benefit from this write up. Perhaps we should restore it and have it expertly refereed by an algebraic geometer. Mark Spivakovski from Harvard and Picard Institute in Grenoble wrote to me volunteering to do just that. The deeper issue here Ryulong is that it is not proper for non mathematicians to make such decisions. That is why our Ulam Quarterly Journal was peer reviewed and published at the highest level. As to my biography I shall request that others write it up. I hope that the future will be even more interesting. As usual I shall copy Jim Wales. Let us pause this dialogue and give it all some deep thought and prayer shalom piotrek dr piotr blass candidate for florida governor 2006 write in —The preceding

) .

Again, I realize that you wish to have this information in its fullest state on Wikipedia, but Wikipedia is not a text book (that's what

Wikipedia is not the place to publish your personal research, even if it is something that you yourself have created and are an expert in. Mathematics may not be my field of expertise, and it is your own, but I still think that it is a little wrong that you are publishing your research on Wikipedia, where it can be editted by anyone. There are surely many mathematics journals that will benefit from your research on Zariski surfaces, whereas Wikipedia is not the best place for such discourse. Ryūlóng

08:14, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Dear Ryulong, I shall try to use the tildas as you advise. I am an old professor from the pre typing era keep in mind. While I understand your concerns I must objectively tell you that I did two things in my zariski surface write up a) described most of the field as it has been developed by numerous experts from my humble beginnings during 1970-1986 b) I stated some open problems to stimulate the younger generation of geometers

I would propose that so directed articles by creative inventors in science could be very cool in wikipedia.

I am learning a great deal from our correspondence. I am copying Jim Wales and I shall discuss with him joining the scientific advisory board of Wikipedia. I hope to help Wikipedia outshine our original Ulam work. I wish you every success as a scientist and as a enthusiast of the web. Please forgive me for experiencing a bit of the Pigmalion effect..... if you know what I mean Piotr Blass 08:35, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

If I remember my Greek mythology correctly, then I understand your connection to your creations. It's just that it's frowned upon in the Wikipedia community to write about yourself in such ways. Ryūlóng 08:47, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Although they have an unusual style and could do with some serious copy editing, Piotr Blass's edits to Zariski surface are (mostly) correct and are not vandalism, and there is (usually) no need to revert them. R.e.b. 17:12, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

You are an experienced editor and I know you know about this but I must warn you that you are close to breaking the 3RR. I think you are correct in your assertions of notability but if you continue in this manner you will be blocked. Joelito (talk) 22:23, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Very well then. Ryūlóng 22:24, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, but how is this vandalism? --Mr. Lefty _{Talk to me!} 00:54, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

A single user is spamming a band across many articles. All of his images, I deem, as vandalism as well. Ryūlóng 00:54, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Ah, I see. Thank you. --Mr. Lefty _{Talk to me!} 00:55, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

And now the user is dealt with. Ryūlóng 01:01, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I was just wondering what MG was up to, since he wasn't showing up on my watchlist... —tregoweth (talk) 04:59, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for reverting the vandalism on my user page. Dougg 07:08, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for reverting vandalism on my user page.--Andeh 08:00, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Howdy, just wondering, how'd this happen? My Alt Account 08:30, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

There are tools that users can put into their javascript files and utilize various vandalism fighting tools. I would suggest that you, as a newbie, use

popups. Ryūlóng

08:34, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

What I mean is, you shouldn't revert an AfD template. My Alt Account 08:37, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Oh, it's a bad faith nom. User's first edit was to tag that page for AFD. Ryūlóng 08:38, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Maybe so, but that can be settled in the AfD discussion. You may actually increase the chances of a bad faith nom succeeding by removing the AfD header, since the people who are most able to defend it (the article's editors) may never notice it was up for deletion. In any case, normally, removing an AfD template is considered vandalism, and so is removing the entry from the AfD log. Again, neither action decreases the potential harm of a bad faith nom. My Alt Account 08:44, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Okay... Usually, bad faith noms are dealt with quickly, leading to a speedy close. This one was not the case, yet. Ryūlóng 08:51, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

While I commend you for dealing with the Oversized article problem on

18:44, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I will try to find a way to shrink those articles down. I am thinking that in Dekaranger, Special Police Dekaranger can get their own section, and the Alienizer will also get their own section. I will test this out later. Ryūlóng 21:11, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for getting my message and just so you know the reason why I mentioned those two series is that they take the highest priority for now when I compared them with other sentai pages. -Adv193 21:59, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm in the process of splitting them up, now.

Negative Syndicate now exist. My only problems is naming the GaoRanger character article. Ryūlóng

22:01, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Okay and remember on the top of the pages to make sure to note that page is from a fictional series I had already performed an appropriate treatment of that on the Dekaranger character page. -Adv193 22:05, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Fixing that now. I'm going to go over to

Negative Syndicate was almost speedied because I forgot to mention the article split). Ryūlóng

22:10, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Anyhow If there would another sentai article to split up that are over 50 kiyobytes, two good candiates that I found after an extensive search on all Sentai series pages are

22:34, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

I think those are safe for now. They're a little older. Ryūlóng 22:43, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Oh well I am sure this two will eventually have the potential, anyway back to the matter of Gaoranger I was thinking that one solution is that if there is already a redirect called

Hyakujuu Sentai GaoRanger page. -Adv193

01:04, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, generally, the main series name is left as a redirect. There has to be a general name for the GaoRangers. Ryūlóng 01:23, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

How about the title of The Gaorangers or something similar to that. -Adv193 01:27, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

I've messaged someone about this, and he'll probably help us out with this. I just don't think that some of these are good ideas. Ryūlóng 01:28, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

If you are talking about Sean Black then check his talk page he posted a response...Of course I wasn't trying to intentionally steal his idea either. -Adv193 01:29, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Hmm... Ryūlóng 01:33, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Done at

Ogre Tribe Org. Ryūlóng

02:23, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

The only small complaint is that with the expception of Power Animals which can be considered as characters, wouldn't the Gaorangers Arsenal section seem to be slightly off-topic. What is your opinion? -Adv193 02:45, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, it goes in line with the other separated pages. The title can be changed later on, and the arsenal can be made a subsection of GaoRangers. Ryūlóng 02:46, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Okay but just so you know I also feel the same way for the

Ozu Family page, Dekaranger and Boukenranger's character pages are exceptions because the topic is more towards an organization-style page. -Adv193

03:14, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Adminship

If you want me to nominate you for adminship in the future, don't forget to drop me a message.--Andeh 22:56, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

It may be best to wait for a month or two first. ;) --Andeh 23:13, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Yeah. At least until I'm somewhere in the middle of my new semester schedule. Ryūlóng 23:14, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

You redirected my new request which (I can understand) but the new possible sock was lost in the transfer. Æon ^{Insanity Now!}_EA! 02:50, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Fixed it. Ryūlóng 02:50, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! This one was a little obivious once I checked the contribs. Æon ^{Insanity Now!}_EA! 02:55, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Can you say "community ban" yet? ;) Ryūlóng 03:00, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

I know! I wouldn't have bother to investigate if she hadn't been so blatant about it. Æon ^{Insanity Now!}_EA! 03:02, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

The only problem is that we cannot fight her since she uses dynamic IPs. Ryūlóng 03:05, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

I saw well I will just keep watching (the articles are on my watch list and I had added a few of the IP's to my black list on VP) Æon ^{Insanity Now!}_EA! 03:07, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, you'd be watching any editor from the Chicago area, it seems, though. Ryūlóng 03:07, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

I have gotten good at recognizing her style (She edits and basicly tlaks like an 11 year old) and she always talks to the same users. Æon ^{Insanity Now!}_EA! 03:10, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

That's true. Just keep that certain user's page on your watchlist then. Ryūlóng 03:28, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

They are and all praise to the autoblock. Good thing those autoblocks Æon ^{Insanity Now!}_EA! 04:13, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

You should see the note she left on the socks talk page, I don't think I will be getting a christmas card from her Æon ^{Insanity Now!}_EA! 06:26, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your concern but the living subject himself clearly disagrees with this posting [3] and thus this should be taken down under the Wikipedia Rules for Living People Biography. COL SCOTT

All right then, but the {{us-film-stub}} thing should have been left as it was. Ryūlóng 06:37, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

That is my bad. I did not see it. Apologies. COL SCOTT

No problem... And please remember to sign your postings with ~~~~. Ryūlóng 06:40, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi Ryulong,

Thanks for your recent block of user:Ryanlong and the rest of the lovely user:Frys104 sockpuppet accounts. You know, the accounts had been inactive for so long that I didn't think they'd ever come back. I had run-ins with the puppet-master many months ago. Just yesterday, on a lark, I took a look and saw they were still inactive. Imagine my surprise today when I saw activity on their userpages! Anyway, thanks for a job well done. :) Best wishes, Firsfron of Ronchester 17:04, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi Ryulong,

Just want to say your efforts on the Wiki Power Ranger pages are much appreciated! As a fan I really think your up to date contribs are awesome. I was wondering if you can help me find details on casting for Operation Overdrive (i.e. how to go about appplying...) since you seem to be quite knowledgeable on PR-related things. If you can get hold of me on my talk page it would be great.

Cheers, JZamps 17:15, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

My apologies - it just looked like a random selection of text from somewhere. Much better now.

Springnuts 20:17, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Eris needs to be a dab page because the naming of the dwarf planet creates a very public reference to the name. It's not an easy choice - the Greek Mythology buffs will want Eris to be for the goddess, and the astronomy fans will want Eris for the dwarf. Either way, it sets the stage for an ongoing series of reverts, moves, and squabbling. (There's been enough of that with Pluto!) --Ckatz^chat_spy 06:56, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

No; a separate dab page can be made into a soft redirect, which I had done. Ryūlóng 06:57, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia custom is to disambiguate on the "name" page if there is good reason. I feel there is, and that doing so would head off potential problems. I stand by that assertion. --Ckatz^chat_spy 07:01, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, it is better to make a disambiguation page without moving stuff around in the process. Generally, disambiguation pages that do not have (disambiguation) in the title are for things that share many names. Eris (and Dysomnia) are not in this group. Ryūlóng 07:04, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, Ryulong, for voting in my RFA, which succeeded 95 to 1. I like the idea of how established editors such as yourself would confuse me for an administrator; it means they have trust in me. I hope to live up to these standards. —

08:33, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

...that "tape baking" is for real? As magnetic tape ages, the lubricants dry out. Baking the tape reactivates the lube. Weird, but true. Article really needs a bit of a tune-up, though. - Lucky 6.9 06:35, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

That it does, I just need a {{wikify}} tag in JS :P Ryūlóng 06:36, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

And I had the most fun of all. Zena Dhark…·°º•ø®@» 06:43, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

I've never editted there? Ryūlóng 06:43, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

I am new and just put up a page or suggested addition which had a suggestion to delete less then 2 minutes later (Legal System Flochart)my I ask why? —The preceding

) .

Well, it was because it just contained the word "Flowchart", which is a reason for

speedy deletion. Ryūlóng

06:48, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

watchlist

why did you add my name back into the watch list and say it was vandalism, i did not vandalize the page i removed my name which i dont want on there which i am entitled to do it is not vandalism thank you very muchLil crazy thing 10:00, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

24.12.189.115 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) - Page blanking --Ryūlóng 22:14, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I noticed that you put this announcement on AIAV, but this user has had only one edit in the last couple of weeks. Please wait a little longer until putting someone up on AIAV. At the very least, please wait until the user has vandalized after a final warning. -- Deville (Talk) 22:20, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

It was extreme vandalism, though. Page blanking and replacing it with some sort of derrogatory commentary is pretty bad vandalism. Ryūlóng 22:20, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough, give the blatantvandal warning, and if they vandalize again, send it up. -- Deville (Talk) 22:29, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Ok, this guy France91449144 (

) 22:32, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

But his edits were also extremely vandalous and did not require warning. Such edits like "ITALY IS FULL OF MAFIA HOMOS" do not require warning, and such a user should be blocked on sight. Ryūlóng 22:35, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

I'll grant you that in the case of a username, one can be a little more fluid with the blocking of the vandal. But believe me, if you see vandalism, please revert it, and put a warning on the talk page. For example, had you done so the two times you did it, it would be clear to any admin that this was a repeat vandal and they could be blocked. Just putting the name on

WP:AIAV actually makes the process slower in many cases. --Deville (Talk

) 22:41, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Deal. Ryūlóng 22:41, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Cool! thanks, Deville (Talk) 22:49, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Also, I notice that you reverted this user twice and did not put a warning on his talk page. Had you done so, he would already be blocked. Please warn the users in the correct order when correcting vandalism, it makes admins' jobs much easier, and it leaves a record of their past offenses, which allows admins to set longer and longer blocks in the case of violators.--Deville (Talk) 22:37, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

• 18:30, September 15, 2006 Pathoschild (Talk | contribs) blocked "France91449144 (contribs)" with an expiry time of indefinite (Vandalism) Ryūlóng 22:40, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

User talk:194.46.231.96

The guy has already been blocked, and can't edit anything but his user page. Since then he's blanked it about eight timnes and has had six different people warn him not to blank it or he'll get blocked. Kind of pointless game here. Fan-1967 02:47, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

There is the sprotection, but that hasn't appeared to happen yet. Ryūlóng 02:49, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Modern pharmaceutical manufacturing techniques

Hi Ryulong. I'm afraid I've removed the

WP:AFD if you still believe it should be deleted. Thanks, Gwernol

04:13, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Dr Who1975

Ryulong, a user (started editing super-c articles Sept 5 2006) is quickly having an impact on the supercentenarian articles...and he tends to make mathematical mistakes or misquote information. For example, Jeanne Calment reached 120 years 238 days on Oct 17 1995 (not Oct 4 1995). And Thomas Peters died March 26 1857 (not June 25 1857). At least according to Guinness! If DrWho has information that Guinness is wrong, he should discuss it with us first, not make the changes without explanation.

Also, DrWho awarded himself a barnstar--isn't that a conflict of interest?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Dr_who1975

→

yakł_talk

} 10:54, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

I've fixed the barnstar issue, and I would suggest trying to talk to him and tell him what you told me. Ryūlóng 21:14, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Walter Emanuel Jones

There's some guy (or perhaps, two separate IP addresses) who are constantly adding a tidbit on WEJ forgiving Austin St. John for attempted murder with an ax. Obviously, this is just stupid vandalism. As the guy who seems to be most Wiki-informed, you're much more qualified to take care of this than I reverting it numerous times.

Also, some guy keeps adding a tidbit about him losing his finger during "Food Fight", but I'm thinking he actually believes that, so I'm waiting for a source. JPG-GR 02:50, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Finally found

WP:RFP, and put in a request for semi-protect. Don't know if it's enough for it, but worth a shot. JPG-GR

03:19, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, that axe murderer thing is complete bullshit. The finger thing I also question, but I'm going to look into that. Ryūlóng 03:25, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Many sites mention the missing part of the finger, but I have removed the "why" thing, as that can never be sourced except to Wikipedia and its mirrors. And it is one person, just on two different IPs (the same first subrange, but different secondary subranges). Ryūlóng 03:30, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Agreed on all counts. JPG-GR 05:49, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Pokémon I Choose You!

This is the correct title. If you watch the episode from youtube, you will notice that there is no "," -ragnaroknike

Youtube is not a reliable source, however the episode titles are. Please give me the link to this, and then I may reconsider. Right now, what you are performing is a form of vandalism. Ryūlóng 03:47, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

You may consider looking into "tv.com". —The preceding

unsigned comment was added by Ragnaroknike (talk • contribs

) .

TV.com isn't any more reliable. It's made almost like Wikipedia. Ryūlóng 03:55, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

BNN

What was up with the JS: Requesting speedy deletion (CSD G1)-thing for BNN (television)? JackSparrow Ninja 03:57, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

I apologize. I just don't feel that it qualifies for notability within Wikipedia's guidelines. I should have tagged it differently, but I did not think that it was db-group material, but if you can show me that the television station is notable, I will apologize for ever tagging it for speedy deletion. Ryūlóng 03:57, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Its about hte story of exe 7, as well as armor.

A renegade staff member posted this beta information, and I am merely trying to prevent the game from being canned. That information is not meant to be there. Delete it please. —The preceding

unsigned comment was added by Megaman3 (talk • contribs

) .

Actually, the article may be deleted from Wikipedia, soon, anyway. It doesn't fit the notability for inclusion. You can say you want the entire article

here. Ryūlóng

04:19, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Pokemon speculation problem

One thing that I should give you the heads up on is that with the change to the new series in Japan there is some speculation going around about what happens to May and Max with their departure for the series if you can could you help with this issue until it can be verified what happens to them so there won't be any false rumors in those two character pages? -Adv193 07:54, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

I'll see what I can do, but I don't keep up on this very much. Go try talking to the people over at WP:PCP. Ryūlóng 08:26, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Regarding Talk:Roronoa Zoro

In your entry, you said "Fans should not dictate how articles are named on Wikipedia. If the most common English source uses a spelling that is different from the original Japanese source, then the English source should be used." Is that the way the rule's always been meant to be? Like, have you taken part in moves similar to this where the decision was to move despite popular fan opinion? The Splendiferous Gegiford 22:25, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, it's generally following guidelines such as

Gougou Sentai Boukenger (轟轟戦隊ボウケンジャー, Gōgō Sentai Bōkenjā), where both spellings are also used. Ryūlóng

22:42, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

So then despite the fact that the name "Zoro" is used more by fans of the series (there's an actual reason for that; the manga artist has written the name in English as "Zoro" several times) it's still best to move it to the name used by the English manga and anime due to WP:UE? I do agree that page names shouldn't be dictated by fans, no matter how popular a name is. The Splendiferous Gegiford 01:46, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, but still reference the original Japanese name within the lead. That's what they do at articles for other such characters like

Maito Gai for the longest time). Ryūlóng

01:48, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Pokemon DP Page

Hey this is Justin here, I know what I'm doing I was using the main page as a template and will edit accordingly, my project is to make DP seperate so that the main anime page doens't get cluttered. I don't get it House, Buffy, and other series have seperate pages for seperate seasons so why can't Pokemon dude? I would ask for you to support me, as I knwo what I'm doing I just needed to get a frame work up.

Thank you PMJ. —The preceding

) .

Well, there's no need to focus on such a page since the series is still in the Battle Frontier stuff in Japan. I would suggest you work on this page in

a personal sandbox first, and then work on it in the main article space. Ryūlóng

01:06, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Right ok but it was just a template, and I was going to be adding more once the series takes off as it is doing so soon...I have everything typed out I just needed a frame work and I was going to edit from that. House, Buffy, everything has seperate season pages with episode guides. I want you to support me on this project, as it will be a subdivision of the main series article. —The preceding

) .

That is all right. Just make your tests and whatnot within a personal sandbox like the one I gave you a link to. Ryūlóng 01:11, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Ok dude all new and saved, please help me protect it from vandals...I know it's very "betaish" at first, but I promise to keep it a central hub for DP anime info. Thank you, your the best. —The preceding

) .

Well, I've moved it to your sandbox (I forgot to make a subpage, sorry) so now you can work on it as much as you want. Ryūlóng 02:05, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you very much, I'm new to wiki, and you've been a great help :)

No problem at all. Just remember to sign your posts by typing four tildes in a row (~~~~). Ryūlóng 02:14, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Please make yourself aware of the difference between blanking

02:17, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Okay... Ryūlóng 02:18, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I reverted your unblock review of 217.160.230.142 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log), because while you are certainly correct in your decline reason, you are not an administrator. Better to let an admin put the review in. -- Gogo Dodo 06:50, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

I know. But, what if it was supported by the blocking admin? :P Ryūlóng 06:51, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

I can understand your previously stated preferences for the article, but the current text was agreed upon following an involved discussion. If you want to see changes, please bring it up on the talk page first before revising. (I have to retire for the evening, but I'd like to continue this discussion tomorrow. Thanks.) --Ckatz^chat_spy 09:05, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, I did not realize about the discussion that led to that, but now I have given the minor planet numbered name more prominence in the lead (as that is the article's title). Ryūlóng 09:06, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

That is contrary to what was agreed upon, which was to use the common name first, followed immediately by the full name. The same thing is in the lead over at Pluto. --Ckatz^chat_spy 09:08, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

But the title of the article is not "Eris" or "Eris (dwarf planet)", it is the numerical designation. Ryūlóng 09:09, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Articles don't have to start with the exact text used in the page name. If the article was moved to Eris (dwarf planet), we certainly wouldn't have to rewrite the lead to say "Eris (dwarf planet) is the..." --Ckatz^chat_spy 09:18, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm not saying that. If the page is moved to Eris (dwarf planet) then the lead is fine as it is. But since it isn't, I felt that the lead should start off with the numerical designation. Ryūlóng 09:20, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough - you're certainly entitled to your opinion on the matter. However, given the recent decision to go with the lead as is, and given the energy currently being expended on the page name issue, it wwould probably make sense to let this go for a bit, at least until things stabilize and the article location is sorted out. --Ckatz^chat_spy 09:25, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, that is probably the best. If the article isn't moved, then maybe the lead should be changed to the version I had, with "136199 Eris" first. If it is, then the lead needn't be changed that much. The piping to other articles was a bit much, though. Ryūlóng 09:27, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

If you're referring to the piping to the asteroid list, I could not agree more. That was the idea of one editor who insisted on repeatedly adding the links, even though one was to a massive list of minor planet numbers. He actually got pretty upset about the whole thing, so I let it be. You can probably expect that he'll try to add them again, though. --Ckatz^chat_spy 09:37, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Exactly why did you revert that? Punkmorten 09:52, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Can't exactly remember, sorry. Ryūlóng 23:55, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Curse you for beating me to reverting the blanking of numa numa! Cuuuuuuurse yoooooou! :) --Niroht 00:26, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Quel damage. Ryūlóng 00:28, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Uhhhhhm....what? --Niroht 00:32, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

It's French for "Oh well" Ryūlóng 00:33, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't know what happened but I was making additions to a section and suddenly lost contact with wikipedia (I could still reach other webpages) and when I got back in I was logged out and found a mess. Thanks for the reset.--Smkolins 01:54, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

That's all right. Ryūlóng 02:31, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

I think Nbound has already given him a message abakharev 04:41, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

This is just going beyond anything now. Ryūlóng 04:45, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Soiherdyoulike (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) - Another 4chan vandal --Ryūlóng 05:00, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi, am I missing something? You put this user on AIAV, and this user has no (non-deleted) contributions, and their talk page is a redlink. What would be the reason that I would block this user? -- Deville (Talk) 05:11, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

The name itself is a

Ned Holness (Carlos Mencia). Ryūlóng

05:14, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Ok, honestly, I have no idea what you're talking about. Are you saying he should be blocked because of an offensive username? If so, you should mention that in the AIAV notice. --- Deville (Talk) 06:18, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, it's hard to explain. Let's just say it is an offensive username. Ryūlóng 06:24, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Speaking of which, the redirect that was

Ned Holness should now be sprotected. Ryūlóng

05:17, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

It's probably best to put a notice on

WP:RPP then, and see what they say over there. FWIW, it doesn't look that bad to me; I've seen much more vandalized pages....:) --- Deville (Talk

) 06:18, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

New Page

What on earth should I name the orignal Pokemon series season page so you don't delete it :p

I'd use something along the lines of "Pokémon (first anime series)" since it was just "Pokémon". Ryūlóng 20:33, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Removing other's comments is not something for you to do. Nor is it your place to put value or take value from other's comments. I was trying to lighten the mood on Sept 14 which is when that comment was placed there in the middle of a heated debate. I'll thank you to leave it be. Any futher attempts at removal will be considered vandalism. JohnnyBGood t c VIVA! 21:49, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Specifically I would like to direct your attention to:

"Talk page vandalism Deleting the comments of other users from article Talk pages, aside from removal of internal spam, or deleting entire sections of talk pages, is generally considered vandalism. Removing personal attacks is often considered legitimate, and it is considered acceptable to archive an overly long Talk page to a separate file and then remove the text from the main Talk page. The above does not apply to the user's own Talk page, where users generally are permitted to remove and archive comments at their discretion, except in cases of legitimate warnings, which they are generally prohibited from removing, especially where the intention of the removal is to mislead other editors."

I would say "LA LA LA LA I'M NOT LISTENING LA LA LA LA" is good enough for removal. Ryūlóng 02:00, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

JohnnyBGood wasn't. Lucky if he didn't get a warning. Tyrenius 22:45, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

You restored the nonsense that MPearson85 has vandalised the Citroen AX article with after I deleted it and have noted my changes as vandalism. I find this surprising. The rubbish that this user added was of no use and was simply a long rant about his own experiences. This is what I would term vandalism and I don't understand why it was restored when it has no place on this site? This user has had their additions deleted before but they persist in putting it back each time. --Phil 21:10, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

I apologize. On my end, they just look like extremely large text removals. I usually tend to read over the removals, but I was going on overdrive due to massive blankings. Ryūlóng 21:35, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

No worries - is this user grounds for getting the page locked? Seems like the only way they will stop doing this.--Phil 22:00, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

If you have moment, look at Irene Padkowsky and tell me what you think. --ArmadilloFromHell 05:40, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't know. That was probably during one of my "doesn't look that bad" nights instead of a {{

db-bio}} night. That and the editor who I reverted is Repmart who just seems to have a vendetta against me after I reverted his wiki-stalking at Jeremy Clarkson. I frankly don't care if this article is deleted, which is why I've listed it for speedy deletion. I should know better that people who are two years older than me and always younger than me are rarely notable. Ryūlóng

05:50, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Flying Model Simulator

Hi. Trying to work a somewhat more detailed version that I'd done on another Wikia project into this title. Thanks for patrolling, though.  :) - Lucky 6.9 06:44, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

I know; I just thought I saw your screw up. Silly admin, double redirects are for newbs. Ryūlóng 07:23, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

...for reverting vandalism on my talk page within the same minute. That's good! Tyrenius 22:45, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		For reverting gross vandalism on my talk page within the same minute, and all your other good work against vandals Tyrenius 22:45, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

I've lost count on how many of these I've gotten :P. Thank you, and you're welcome. Ryūlóng 23:00, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

I just removed this entry from

02:47, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

The only edit to date shows the insertion of "\'" when it should just be an apostrophe. This is extremely common in open proxies. Ryūlóng 02:49, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Yea I saw that, but ran an open proxy check, and it was inconclusive, since we indef block open proxys I'd need more to go on, if they make more bad edits please relist. thanks, — xaosflux ^Talk 03:00, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

The "\'" thing usually gives them away. Ryūlóng 03:26, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Have you ever considered an RfA? JoshuaZ 03:52, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, but, needless to say, I might not yet be ready. Ryūlóng 03:53, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, again. Ryūlóng 03:55, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Hmm, I must have missed that. It looks like reasonable concerns were raised there. If you have correct them (especially the AGF issues and being careful about you call vandalism) then I suspect in a month or two you should pass with flying colors. JoshuaZ 04:01, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I've been working on those issues. Ryūlóng 04:01, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Since you seem to have taken some interest in the topic you may want to see what I put on the talk page. Bert of course misintrepted it. JoshuaZ 05:01, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, I'm about to list the guy for 3RR. Ryūlóng 05:02, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

I've blocked BertWoodall (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · nuke contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) for 24 hours for vandalism, disruption, and NPA violations. Regards, alphaChimp^(talk) 05:12, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Damn... So that

3RR report was for naught. Ryūlóng

05:14, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Meh, I watched that page and closed it. Sorry about that. Good countervandalism, btw. alphaChimp^(talk) 05:18, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. How many more edits until my 7th RickK star? XD Ryūlóng 05:19, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

I dunno, but it's soon. I almost gave you a barnstar once, but you have like 10e99 of them. Others sort of beat me to the party :S. alphaChimp^(talk) 05:23, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

I should make a subpage... Ryūlóng 05:26, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

The anon blanking was likely the user (not logged in) updating their user page and intentions. See previous edit. No harm done, just wanted to give you a heads up. - RoyBoy ⁸⁰⁰ 06:25, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

I know i removed it from the images. I did it on purpose. That User:Abu badali and I had a discussion about the images. Check our talk pages. These images are fair use and they should not be deleted, and u know it. I will remove the deletion tag. Abu Badali thinks he's the highest authority on fair use images, which he is not. - Ivan Kricancic 03:50, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

Actually, that is still not right. Do you know where the fan site got those images? If you don't then they in no way qualify for fair use, despite whatever raionale you may use. I will be putting those IFD tags back, as the IFD may or may not go through. Make your case there, not by removing the tags. Ryūlóng 04:18, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

This may seem a bit random, but some of your edit summaries give me a good chuckle (user talk ones)! I guess it's just the way you describe things, keep editing. Thank you for the laugh.--Andeh 20:20, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Er... Could you give me an example of such? Ryūlóng 20:21, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Your like an automated anti-vandalism bot; "replacing one older warning, and issuing a new one".--Andeh 20:53, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Oh... Yeah, I think that was just an assholish anon that I was dealing with earlier. He removed my NPA, and then was issued a different warning, and then gave me a second personal attack. Ryūlóng 20:56, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

But still, if a bot did that it, the edit summary it would leave would be just like that.--Andeh 20:57, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Bots aren't smart enough to know how to revert and issue another warning :P Ryūlóng 20:57, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I do realize that this edit was done a long while ago, but whenever I visit Wikipedia I'm rarely logged in and did not realize that it was reverted back. The edit I am mentioning is one where the website 7chan.org was mentioned. I believe it was just one small sentence that stated "Shortly afterwards there was a hard disk failure on one of 4chan's two servers, causing most of the boards to go down. Websites such as 7chan.org sprang up to accomodate /b/ users." I do believe that all I did was change 7chan.org from just text into an external link. Regardless of my actions, all one had to do is copy/paste the url into their web browser, I had just assumed making it an external link would be better. I would hardly consider that "vandalism", and I extremely resent the fact that I am labeled a "vandal" for simply creating an external link to a website that users could just as well visit anyway. The entire portion of the sentence mentioning 7chan was later completely removed, even though I do believe it was relevent to the article. --Bkid 22:26, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, relevance to the article was only such for that period of time, when everyone on /b/ got pissed that the rules were being enforced. It was just a bad day to edit the 4chan article. Ryūlóng 22:50, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

I was trying to list the same user as you - page updated at the wrong time. I tried to remove it, but you beat me to it and I got an edit conflict. --After Midnight ⁰⁰⁰¹ 04:14, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

That's okay. Ryūlóng 04:15, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

I beg to differ with your deletion of the Bindi Irwin article. The page is not "nonsense" as you called it, and its subject is the high profile daughter of a well known celebrity, Steve Irwin, also known as the Crocodile Hunter. At the present time the article is little more that a stub, but I am sure that it will grow as time goes on. Please give it a chance before jumping in and deleting it simply because it is not "long enough" or does not contain enough unformation yet. Thanks! Romtobbi 06:50, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

First, there were several deletion debates concerning an article on the daughter, but she is just not notable on her own to garner mention. Second, please post new messages at the bottom of my talk page, not in the middle :( Ryūlóng 06:51, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, I respect your decision, but I doubt you live in either Australia or the USA where Bindi is a hugely popular public figure. If this article is to be deleted, could you please ensure that the information from it is inserted into the main Steve Irwin article?Romtobbi 06:55, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

I am from the USA. I know who Bindi is. She is just not important enough for her own mention on Wikipedia, yet. When/if she does get a show, then by all means she has a mention. Right now, her page should remain as a redirect to that of her late father's. Ryūlóng 06:56, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Alrighty then, I suppose we'll wait till she becomes more famous. But still, I must protest to how you described the creation of the article: "Please do not add nonsense to Wikipedia; it is considered vandalism". It took two hours of internet research and collation to make that article.. "Nonsense" and "vandalism". I mean, come'on;) Romtobbi 10:53, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, it's just that the page has been made so many times, that it's technically vandalism, even if you do not know the whole discussion behind it. Ryūlóng 20:13, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Ryulong, I am one who has been quite vocally against a Bindi article, but I too must object to you labelling this edit as "nonsense" and "vandalism." I think you're really pushing

Talk

) 20:42, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Just out of curiosity, as I'd been reading this page for my own discussion... googling her turns up a variety of articles about her specific to her pending television show, and also from before Steve's death. Wouldn't that count as making her notable enough for her own article? Just seems odd to wait for the premiere of her television show, as it's already set and slated to launch, since the amount of press will just naturally grow and grow each month as January approaches. · XP · 20:53, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, I have not checked into any of that, realizing that any of the deleting admins had chosen to do as such. I just knew of the whole situation that occured before, during, and after the AFD, which I believe occurred. If Romtobbi wants, he can get rid of the message. I can't do anything after the fact. Ryūlóng 20:58, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

I have already removed the vandalism warning from Romtobbi's page.

Talk

) 21:11, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

I just broke the main Afd template inclusion page by leaving off a bracket or three, didn't I? · XP · 08:36, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, it's just that level 2 headings are a bit bad for where such pages are transcluded elsewhere, especially when a level 3 heading is used in such XFD discussions. Ryūlóng 08:38, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Sorry about that. You know, we should make it a rule that on long AfDs every 10 or so comments people just add arbitrary breaks. Editing them is ridiculous. · XP · 08:39, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Usually, AfDs don't get that long. I'd, in fact, attempt to move the discussion that does not contain a "Delete", "Keep", or "Comment" prefix off to the talk page, unless the comments there are relatively new and cannot be replied to any further. Ryūlóng 08:44, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Probably best to just leave it and keep applying breaks as it inevitably grows. There's already been lots of nastiness in this one and two blocks over editing others' comments... · XP · 08:50, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, you should at least discuss such a movement with MONGO, as he did start the AFD. Ryūlóng 08:50, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Wouldn't it be better for all points/counterpoints/facts to be out in the open, so that new people reviewing it over the 5 days have access to all the info in one spot? · XP · 08:52, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, I personally can't remember what had happened in the AFDs that I have taken part in (I usually just browse the ones that end up on

its second nomination, both of which lack a talk page, it seems. Ryūlóng

08:55, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Contaminated

The contaminated notice *is* important for the simple fact that new players will not find out about it until usualy 50 hours or more into their first character. It might not be important to you, but it is an important issue for a lot of the hardcore players. —The preceding

) .

It does not have any encyclopedic value.

Wikipedia is not a gameguide. If you want something like that, go to ParagonWiki or some other City of Heroes Wiki. Ryūlóng

23:25, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Character ownership

This has nothing to do with the marvel lawsuit, and everything to do with creating characters. [Is this you?] Carterhawk

First, I have no idea why you're linking me to

WP:OWN; second, the ownership of the characters has nothing to do with the creation of the characters, and a link to the EULA has a much better placement under the Marvel lawsuit, where it is mentioned. Ryūlóng

23:52, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

first, because your gaurding the article like a mother hen; second, it is impossible to create a character without it being owned by NC Interactive, the two are inseperable. Carterhawk 23:56, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, then that is slightly incivil. I am merely saying that the two additions you have made have better places elsewhere. And character creation, as it is described in its section has nothing to do with the legal rammifications, which is why I had moved that link down to the Marvel Suit section. Ryūlóng 23:58, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

You reverted the vandalism to my talk page almost as quickly as I noticed it. --

01:49, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

No problem at all :P Ryūlóng 01:50, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

• I think you have the story wrong. First of all,
  WP:3RR. Finally, my last edit of his page ended up in an edit conflict which i corrected. I don't know what prompted you to comment on my page, but you should get all the facts first. --evrik
  03:07, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, it looked like you just superimposed one article over another. I can see that Kintetsubuffalo is in the other side in this situation. I apologize. Ryūlóng 03:09, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

• Thanks. --evrik 03:22, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Saw you report on AIV regarding Evrik. Not sure it's vandalism, but what is going on? -- Samir धर्म 03:16, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Mistaken identity as seen above. Ryūlóng 03:17, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying. -- Samir धर्म 03:19, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

No prob. I wondered why I had seen that picture at the VOTE page. Ryūlóng 03:20, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

• Sorry about the problems. Good night. --evrik 03:22, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Ryulong, would you mind jotting a quick note at User talk:Alex Bakharev? Looks like Evrik was blocked from sequelae of template messages. Thanks -- Samir धर्म 05:05, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
    • Done. Ryūlóng 05:09, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

If you look at his contribs, specifically this, it appears to be a sockpuppet of a banned user. –– Lid^(Talk) 05:38, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

I have a feeling, but could you perhaps email me as to whom? Ryūlóng 05:39, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

I have no idea as to whom, it was just an observation I made following the first ANI post. –– Lid^(Talk) 05:45, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

As are the question I posed on his user talk, as well. Ryūlóng 05:46, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Just wondering if you've tried

11:50, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

I like the javascript in conjunction with the IRC channels just fine. Maybe later on, but I think my set up is good for now. Ryūlóng 21:13, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi,

I jjust tried to archive the Protest Warrior talk page, and screwed something up. Bad. Any way you could help?

[4]

I was trying to move everything before =Protest Warrior down for an indef period= to an archive 12

Thanks if you can! If not, where is a board that I can ask?

NBGPWS 05:23, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

I moved it back. Generally, archiving isn't done to that extent. I would just make a new archive by going to Talk:Protest Warrior/Archive 12 and copy any old conversations from the talk page to there. Ryūlóng 05:25, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Oops! I think I edited it too. It's now OK except for archive 12!

NBGPWS 05:33, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

What? Just copy all of that over to the page I just linked. Ryūlóng 05:34, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

OK - I'll try. This is the content that archive 12 should consist of [5] NBGPWS 05:38, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

CRAP! I tried moving the edit in the link above to 'archive 12' and screwed up again! NBGPWS 05:41, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Someone else fixed it. DON'T PANIC! Ryūlóng 05:47, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your help sorting that out. NBGPWS 22:03, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

i'm sorry for the vandalism i had no idea.--Kenshin -Himura 20:56, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

You moved several pages for no real reason without discussing it first. I would suggest you go to

WP:MOS-JA to see why the pages were as they were. Ryūlóng

20:56, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Administrator intervention against vandalism

I saw that you listed User:80.6.32.80 at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism for changing the spelling of globalization to globalisation in the globalization article. Isn't this a bit harsh? They only made one edit to the article. I'd have placed a comment on their user page requesting them not to make such changes without discussing them first, but getting them blocked seems over the top. Globalisation is a perfectly legitimate spelling, after all. Cordless Larry 21:09, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, it's just something through the whole "Don't change from one MoS to another in the entire article" RFC(Ar?) thing. It's generally wrong to take an entire article and replace every "globalization" with "globalisation". Ryūlóng 21:11, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Sure, but I still think getting a new user blocked for that is escessive. Cordless Larry 21:22, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Please don't use the bv template as a universal warning. {{lang0}} should be used for UK-US spelling changes.

Talk

) 21:40, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Didn't know that one existed. I've never had to deal with such an edit before. Ryūlóng 21:41, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Then you might want to have a look at {{

13

21:51, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm curious as to why you are so eager to jump on the above user for simply creating a speedyable fan page about a character in a video game. Certainly we should not be so quick to

}}.

Also, why did you tag

02:58, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, he also blanked his entire talk page and replaced it with "SHUT THE FUCK UP NIGGA!, especially with warnings from an administrator himself, and reposting that fan page three times, when the first two times it was a copy-paste from another page. Ryūlóng 03:00, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Would you have gotten that response if you tried using something more personal than {{

blatantvandal}}? Isopropyl

03:02, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

He did that after you gave him the welcome. He has made no other real contributions (yet) and he does not show any signs that he is going to change (at least under this username). Ryūlóng 03:04, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Someone else removed this from

) 03:39, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

All right then. Ryūlóng 03:42, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the assistance. Not-quite blatant vandals are such a pain. I was about to go head off and ask someone to revert the guy, but you got to it first. Good work. --

07:18, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

No problem. He'll be dealt with soon enough, too. Ryūlóng 07:20, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

Regarding hold warning and article deletion

I believe the warning placed on my Talk page related to the new entry I have posted under

) .

The deletion of New Noise

Both the entries for New Noise and New Noise (website) have now been deleted. I do not feel this was at all reasonable, since there are a multitude of other music websites and magazines that have thriving and informative wikipedia entries, and I can see no reason why this would not have been the case with New Noise. The site is well established and has tens of thousands of unique visitors every month, proving that it is a reliable and trusted source of independent music reviews. I would very much appreciate it if, as a matter of courtesy, you could let me know the reasons for the deletion of this page in light of my comments above. If you really do not feel that New Noise's entry was appropriate, then the same philosophy should be applied to entries for other webzines, many of which are now run as businesses, which New Noise is not. —Added by Newernoise (talk • contribs) .

Response

Based on your username, it was obvious that you were utilizing Wikipedia to promote the website/magazine. This is in direct violation of Wikipedia's guidelines on

21:17, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

I certainly understood that that might have been a factor, but without meaning to seem unduly peeved, I'm not sure that my username was justification for deleting the pages. I believe, as I stated above, that the page content was valid and as I also mentioned, there are many pages about similar websites on Wikipedia. Your role carries with it a certain responsibility and I believe that includes decoupling your supposition about my motives from your objective judgement of the content I post. Without meaning to get into a deep philosophical debate on this, editing or adding content to Wikipedia in any way is an act of vanity. The intent of this Wikipedia policy is not to rule out people posting information about things they are themselves involved in per se, but rather to ensure that if this happens, it is in the interests of the wider Wikipedia community. Would a page on a respected, well-read cultural resource be in the interests of the wider Wikipedia community? Yes, I believe it would. If you disagree, I can see no other course of action but for you to root out every page covering similar sites. And I should reiterate once again that those sites are run as businesses, whereas New Noise is not. I look forward to hearing from you again as I am afraid I still do not feel comfortable with the actions you have taken to date. —Added by Newernoise (talk • contribs) .

I had assumed that because of your username being strikingly similar to that of the name of the article and the content it discussed. As such, both articles are now deleted for being about websites in which it was written by a biased editor (perhaps even the owner) and they may have not passed

Wikipedia's guidelines for the notability of websites. Ryūlóng

22:24, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

No, I understood that and I think that assumption was perfectly valid. However, I in turn would have assumed that you would have read the page content prior to deleting it. Your supposition that the content 'may not have passed' Wikipedia guidelines seems to be a leap of faith that is inevitably going to result in valuable content being deleted, as was the case this time. I cannot put the question any more simply than this: Do you believe that the actual content of those pages, irrespective of what my username may or may not have been, was against Wikipedia policies, not to mention its overarching ethos? And if so, why? —Added by Newernoise (talk • contribs) .

Hi. Sorry about those moves. I was just trying to clarify things. —The preceding

) .

Actually, you just made a bigger mess, sorry. All of those objects needn't be disambiguated, as they take precedence over their respective deities. Ryūlóng 21:38, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

I was archiving the talkpage, and forgot to put the archive box in... sorry. Abby724 22:52, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Just be careful concerning that in the future. Ryūlóng 22:53, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

I removed the speedy from

23:26, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

Pokemon images

Please refrain from undoing other people's edits repeatedly. If you continue, you may be

revert

a single page more than three times in 24 hours. (Note: this also means editing the page to reinsert an old edit. If the effect of your actions is to revert back, it qualifies as a revert.) Thank you.

There was the template message, please take it into consideration. I'm giving this same message also to Bobabobabo, and taking them off AIV. This may have been many more than 3RRs because the same issue carried over to many pages. Don't undo eachothers edits continuously, discuss it on talkpages or take it to

03:54, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, the user appears to have stopped, as he was directed through to a discussion that he had no idea of it going on. Ryūlóng 03:55, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi Ryulong,

If you want to undo my edits, at least have the curtosy to explain why.

The explaination for your last edit was regarding the use of the terms for digivolution stages "(well, "Fresh" and whatnot are the Japanese terms for the stages; the English games/anime used "Baby" so on and so forth)".

This is wrong.

The "Fresh/Intraining/Rookie...etc" is the english version. And it should be used. All the guildlines at the Digimon System Update project recognises this version as being the version to use. The Japanese names are only included in brackets, or included second (i.e. Fresh/Baby I on the template, not Baby I/Fresh.)

For example, the

says to use Fresh as the first stage of digivolution, not baby.

Using "Adult" instead of "Champion", or "Perfect" instead of "Ultimate" is wrong.

I'm simply correctly all the articles to follow the guildlines. Now if you think the guildlines themselves are wrong, you should go to the talk page for either the

.

Similarly, you shouldn't just revert edits without providing for explainations. Or at least checking the guildilnes yourself. For example, i turned "|japname=Arkadimon" into "|japname=", because the useage guildlines for the info box state that the "japname=" variable should ONLY be used when the Japanese is "significantly different" from the english one.

If the japanese name and the english name are identical, then there is no point including both.

Similarly, i am willing to explain any of the edits i have been making to the baby digimon articles, and back them up with either guildlines or reasons. And if not, i am happy to defend for them on the talk page.

So please don't revert my edits without explainations.

Thank you --Saintmagician 04:51, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

That was my explanation. You were utilizing the mostly Japanese terminology for the stages of Digimon evolution, but I can see that that mode is the preferred version for the Digimon Wikiproject. I apologize, and I will not revert you in the future. Ryūlóng 04:53, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

I see. I apologise if i sounded too harsh before then.

I do, however, want to point out that the terminology i use (and the one that the Digimon Project supports) is not the Japanese terminology.

Digivolution has the list. Further more, i can assure you that those terminology is used in the english dubbing. http://www.geocities.com/atlas_anime/season1.html <<< here are some scrips for the english dub of digimon season one, if you do not believe me. --Saintmagician

05:12, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

And I realize that the WikiProject does use the terminology for Fresh, etc. Ryūlóng 05:14, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Actually, i have no idea what's going on with Fresh/Baby/Baby I. The Digivolution page says "Fresh (Baby in the English dub, Baby I in Japanese)". I thought the only versions were the Japanese ("Baby I"), and the English dub ("Baby"). So if "Fresh" is neither...i honestly have no idea what it is. And i can't remember whether "Fresh" or "baby" was used back when i watched digimon.

But they say to use it, i'm sure the people decided it had their reasons. And it makes all the articles consistent if nothing else. --Saintmagician 05:29, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

I frankly can't remember either :P Ryūlóng 05:29, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

So let's just go ahead and keep following the project guildlines like sheep XP --Saintmagician 05:38, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, let's. Ryūlóng 05:43, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

I apologize for the momentary page blip. As you probably can see, I expanded the article to a rather definitive one. I am working on subsections for progressive, punk, and other areas to eventually 'shrink' the main article. It will take me a couple of days.

I have a question: How do you make the 'notes' (all the citations) show at the end of the article? Thanx. The dugout 06:33, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

That's okay, and I believe you are talking about <references/>. Ryūlóng 06:45, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

So do I create a "References" sub-section and type that code and that's it?? The dugout 06:47, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Yep; and you might also want to use <div class="references-small"><references/></div> instead. It makes the refs tiny. Ryūlóng 06:48, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Hey, before you use your bot, try reading the "reasons" for the moves. you have no consensus for using your bot and mass moving articles. when i moved articles, i moved them "back" to the way they were. people had moved them without consensus and i was moving them back to their original titles. Masterhatch 06:54, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

It's not a bot. It's an actual move. There is no consensus needed for these things, as there has never been a set out policy for the names of Czech/Finnish/etc hockey players. Ryūlóng 06:55, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Why does it seem to matter to you so much that diacritics are not used in the names of these people's articles? Ever since the

WP:NC(UE) when these are people's names, nor the diacritic/hockey proposals. Ryūlóng

06:57, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Re: Lolicon

Here, you moron. I wonder why your user page is semi-protected?--Jreem22 07:07, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Indefblocked him.--

Konst.able

07:28, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you. Ryūlóng 07:30, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Hello, There are two different editors which are both erasing entire sections of this article. Please oversee the history page and article.

I am a new user that does not know what to do in this situation. I think removing large sections of the parabens article may be vandalism.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Parabens&diff=78477710&oldid=78447944 Thank You. --63.17.32.188 19:30, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, apparently there was a discussion as to why those sections are being blanked. I believe you should check

Talk:Parabens to find out why he is siting that. Ryūlóng

22:24, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Left-aligned text

Images

Are we going to use the images so they can help identify episodes visually and identify key moments?

(Bobabobabo 23:17, 29 September 2006 (UTC))

I'm trying to fix the template so that the images are shown. Ryūlóng 23:17, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

O.k. Listen I'm very sorry about all of this crap. I just want the images there (not for my entainment) but for people to understand what happens in the episode. Please forgive me. I am a good contributor. This has gone out of hand. I was'nt notified about the changes, I have never read the Pokémon Collaborative Project until last night. But did know about the seperete episode pages, which i agree not do the pages (440+ pages to keep from vandals). So Thank you for trying to keep the images.

Thank you for taking anishitive.

(Bobabobabo 23:21, 29 September 2006 (UTC))

That's all right. I'm trying to figure out how to work the template right now so I can make it so that the images do show up. The parameter is there, just not active. Give me a few hours, and the images will be up. Ryūlóng 23:28, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

I just was trying something out... (Bobabobabo 01:19, 30 September 2006 (UTC))

Just leave it alone for a bit, kay? Ryūlóng 01:20, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

So what did you Mean by rationale? (Bobabobabo 01:44, 30 September 2006 (UTC))

Check the image on Pikachu. Ryūlóng 01:46, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Also I didn't upload some of them, a user named Mitsumasa did some of them (we were working as a team effort http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Mitsumasa#Pokemon ). (Bobabobabo 01:49, 30 September 2006 (UTC))

Just give them fair use rationales. Say why, according to

the fair use criteria, the images can be used on the page they are. Ryūlóng

01:51, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

CSD G4

Hey, just FYI,

23:55, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

It doesn't? Thank you for informing me. Ryūlóng 00:01, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Yeah. It's a pretty common misconception. However, if the article was CSD before, it'll most likely be the same CSD again. Keep up the good work! alphaChimp^(talk) 00:02, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Okay then. Ryūlóng 00:03, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Hey, I am not sure what exactly you refer to. Do you mean the images on

Yes. Those. Ryūlóng 00:47, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Those are screenshots of a program that I wrote myself; however please do delete them if you feel it's not contributing to the article. I had great many difficulties understanding the article, so I thought it might help

It's not that. It's just that they might have been tagged incorrectly. Ryūlóng 00:54, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Could you tell me the correct tags? Also I have been pestered by people asking for the program using a name I left out in the screenshots, so if you need to delete them, that will be great. gfxguy

Try {{software-screenshot}} Ryūlóng 01:01, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately it's not a copyrighted software; I have already "created the work and released it into public domain". It's copyleft.

You can change the tag you put on it like you were editting an article. Did you copyright your work? Ryūlóng 01:06, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

No, it's public domain; it's a very small trivial program that illustrates a beautiful idea developed years ago. I will change the tag then. Thanks. gfxguy

I have declined to delete the article and I did not block the user. The page is not nonsense and does claim notability. The page moves weren't nonsense either, although excessive.--

01:12, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

All right. It was just getting ridiculous with the moves and whatnot. Ryūlóng 01:14, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

P.S. I think he just moves the page to create redirects.--

Konst.able

03:23, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, there were no linked pages to begin with. Oh, and have you met your twin? Ryūlóng 03:24, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Username may be silly, but we've had worse. :) RadioKirk (u|t|c) 02:28, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

You mean like FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK FUCK? :P Ryūlóng 02:31, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Nice catch! --

03:28, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

I was wondering why an admin was showing up as whitelisted through the bot readings :P Ryūlóng 03:28, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

I just wish I caught him earlier; he emptied AIV a few times. Ryūlóng 03:29, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

I second that—I didn't even notice! :-) —Khoikhoi 03:31, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

When I saw the block warning, I stared at it for a few minutes wondering "Ok, what am I missing?" On my screen the "I" looked exactly like an "l". Then I looked in the Firefox address bar and noticed that it was an uppercase "I". Sneaky little bugger. --

Jim Douglas

03:33, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Wow, thanks. Those fonts where I and l are the same should be banned.--

Konst.able

03:43, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

No problem; and that's why I had regged RyuIong a while back :P Ryūlóng 03:48, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Wow, do you think I should preemptively block

Jim Douglas

03:52, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Er...it's hard to block someone who doesn't exist :P. Just register the name and use {{doppelganger}} Ryūlóng 03:53, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Right, that's what I meant. I've never heard of the doppenganger tag before. --

Jim Douglas

03:56, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Ok, took me a while to stumble through it...did I get it set up right? User:Jim DougIas

Looks good :P Ryūlóng 04:31, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't think a pre-emptive range block would be a good idea since it may cause a lot of collateral damage. (Usually range block last for 15min - 1 hr only)--WinHunter ^(talk) 06:33, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

You are correct, this is better wording for Ceres, since there are smaller known objects that may be designated dwarf planets. However, Eris actually is the largest known object in the solar system that isn't a planet or moon, and Pluto the second-largest. Until other objects larger than Pluto that might qualify as dwarf planets are discovered, then both these should be "known". _└ 

 ^┐ 20:22, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

I have to disagree - "currently designated" is speculative. The "known" text is more accurate - there may be other objects under consideration, but we cannot speculate as to whether or not they will eventually receive such a designation. As well, there could certainly be other potential dwarf candidates far out in the solar system that haven't been discovered yet. --Ckatz^chat_spy 20:32, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

But they're not "the nth largest known dwarf planet." It's just that they are the two largest objects currently designated as dwarf planets. It's not that we don't know of other dwarf planets, it's just that the other objects have not been designated as dwarf planets. Ryūlóng 20:25, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Wait, I get it now. Out of all of the known objects that could be designated as dwarf planets, none are larger than Pluto, and therefore none are larger than Eris. Ryūlóng 20:28, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Not entirely accurate - until they are designated as a dwarf planet, they aren't dwarf planets. --Ckatz^chat_spy 20:33, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Right on. _└ 

talk

 ^┐ 20:33, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, "known" and "currently designated" are both pretty speculative to me. Right now, there are a dozen or so objects that can be classified as dwarf planets that are both larger and smaller than Ceres. I realize that "currently designated" on Pluto and Eris are pretty useless, but on Ceres it works for now. Ryūlóng 20:36, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Again, I have to disagree with you on this. The same logic that dictates it is inappropriate for Pluto and Eris applies to Ceres. (Sorry about the apparent non-linear conversation, but my first comment was to the comment immediately above it, and ran into an edit conflict). --Ckatz^chat_spy 20:39, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, why don't we just eliminate "known" from all three articles? Eris is the largest dwarf planet, Pluto second-largest, and Ceres smallest. No "current designation" or "known". Ryūlóng 20:43, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

That's certainly a possibility, and one that I was considering as well. After all, we don't say "known" or "currently designated" for the planets or moons. (Admittedly, the odds of finding a larger planet are pretty slim though :) - but redefinition and new discoveries could affect the lower end of the scale.) --Ckatz^chat_spy 20:53, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

So would you mind doing that change? I'm updating an article elsewhere that requires translation from Japanese. Ryūlóng 20:58, 30 September 2006 (UTC)