User talk:NonvocalScream/Archive 2

issues

1. See my edit summary for my undoing of your edit to WP:DP, 2. the simpleWikt link you added to WP:BLP (titilating [or something similar]) does not exist at simpleWikt, and 3. spell check the top of this page. Griffinofwales (talk) 16:07, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

1. Can you place it in a more appropriate place on the page rather the just remove? Also the general criteria does not specifically refer to pages... that would be the A criteria, not the G criteria.
2. Someone needs to go make the Wikt entry. :)
3. The top of my talk page is spelled correctly, can you let me know what word is in question, I'll do my best to correct it.

Thank you for checking! Best, NonvocalScream (talk) 17:22, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Reply to 1, I don't think selective deletion should go on that page (or did I read your response incorrectly?), Reply to 3, Djsasso just fixed it. Griffinofwales (talk) 17:45, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

On more thoughts... selective deletion should be used sparingly. So I agree, and won't be placing it there. NonvocalScream (talk) 17:56, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Taraff1

So it wasn't a neutral point of view violation, but advertising? Mythdon (talk • changes) 05:01, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

You are correct, the assertion was not neutral. However, it read like spam to me. I believe it was more spam, than a legitimate change. NonvocalScream (talk) 05:08, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Shouldn't spam be considered non-neutrality in WP:NPOV? I agree that it read like spam. I'd suggest blocking the editor if he/she keeps spamming Nintendo DS or other articles. Mythdon (talk • changes) 05:11, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

An example of an NPOV issue would be, in a page on ketchup... Ketchup "A" tastes better than Ketchup "B". I tink in the DS article, that was a service provider trying to sell things. NonvocalScream (talk) 05:17, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree. To bring it to your attention, there is also an account called "Taraff1" on the English Wikipedia, who made this edit to it's Nintendo DS article at the same time he/she was spamming Nintendo DS at this Wikipedia. Perhaps you can revert the edit (if you have an account there), since I'm currently blocked on the English Wikipedia. Mythdon (talk • changes) 05:51, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

I got 'im. EVula // talk // ☯ // 05:53, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. If I weren't blocked there, I would have done it myself. Mythdon (talk • changes) 05:56, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Well, I also indefinitely blocked him, which you couldn't have done even if you weren't blocked there. ;) EVula // talk // ☯ // 05:58, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

I saw that. Are you also going to do that to Taraff1 here, or have you already done that? Mythdon (talk • changes) 05:59, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't see a need to. On enwiki, he'd had a lengthy(ish) history of unhelpful edits, whereas here, he hasn't edited since being warned. If he comes back and spams again though, I'd probably indefinitely block him. EVula // talk // ☯ // 06:04, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

So, in other words, you're going to act as if it is "preventative vs. punishment"? I can see a need for such a block should Taraff1 spam again. If I see Taraff1 spamming again, I'll tell you, or the administrators' noticeboard. Mythdon (talk • changes) 06:06, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Caution

I have responded to your caution here. Mythdon (talk • changes) 23:51, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Ok. NonvocalScream (talk) 04:52, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Question

Is there a way to blacklist edit summaries? Mythdon (talk • changes) 04:34, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

No. NonvocalScream (talk) 04:52, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Okay. I wish there was a way, and if there was, you and the other administrators could further prevent these IP's from harassing users such as me, you, Griffinofwales, etc. The IP's seem very determined. Mythdon (talk • changes) 04:56, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

The abuse filter can prevent users from using certain words in an edit summary, but it isn't installed on this wiki. SUL (talk) 21:42, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Notification

This is a notification that the article you have proposed for good article status has now reached the two week deadline. Please move the article to the voting section or remove it from the list. Thank you, Griffinofwales (talk) 21:19, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggestion. When you feel an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the change this page link at the top. The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes — they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. You don't even need to log in. :D NonvocalScream (talk) 22:45, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

I don't know what you want to do. There are two options, and I didn't nominate it. Griffinofwales (talk) 22:47, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Look at the article. If you think it will pass GA, or VGA, then it can stand for a vote. :) Or if not, remove it from the list. Very best, NonvocalScream (talk) 23:04, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

After a reading of the article, the PGA, and the talk page, I have determined that the article in its present state would probably not pass a PGA. There are still at least 20-30 redlinks, and that will be a big deal in the PGA process. I will go ahead and archive the request now. Griffinofwales (talk) 23:17, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Rollback Accident

I just rollbacked your edit to Either Ways talk page by accident. Sorry! I didn't mean to :L FSM ^Noodly? 19:12, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Moving

Why not just make an account and give yourself rollbacker and IP exempt whilst you are mobile? Saves you having sysop removed and readded. :) fr33kman ^talk 04:38, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

• I thought about that, but I really do want all my contribution attributed to this account... :D I can be vain like that. NonvocalScream (talk) 04:39, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

NP, good luck with the move! fr33kman ^talk 04:44, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you... and if anyone complains about the IMEXEMPT permissions, please remove it... it is a sensitive permission, however, I don't expect there to be any issue... but if there is, do remove. Thanks, NonvocalScream (talk) 04:47, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

Copyedit

Hey there, thanks for agreeing to look over my article. Regards, —MC8 (b · t) 18:17, Wednesday August 26 2009 (UTC)

The mass deletion tool..

..is good fun, no? ;) Regards, Javert (talk) 18:14, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

It saves time. Best, NonvocalScream (talk) 18:15, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. Especially with the amount of pages you had to delete. Regards, Javert (talk) 18:19, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Cascading on Main Page

I recommend you undo your revert until consensus is clear. If you do not, I will start a thread on AN. Please consider doing it, and we can talk it out on our TP as it could potentially create unecessary drama. Thank you, Yotcmdr ^{=talk to the commander=} 22:31, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

I also see no consensus. NVS, please relax a bit. The Rambling Man (talk) 23:41, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Re: Peter Ham

Thank you for your offer. I am not interested at all in "mediating" with whatshisname; I would rather see an admin take action, and I would hardly call this an "edit war", after over a year. What I see is a single-topic (single article, really) editor, who is essentially anal about his own POV, and blind to the fact that his "simple" article isn't simple at all, nor is it neutral as per Wikipedia expectations. (Glad you noticed.)

I have said this before, and I will say it again, hopefully for the LAST time: If he truly is the author of the "definitive Badfinger biography", as he has claimed on other talk pages... 1)Why has he never made a SINGLE edit to the Badfinger page, on either here or English Wikipedia, in all this time? and 2)Why does he constantly reference an online version of "his" book? Didn't he keep even ONE print copy, he could use to reference specific page numbers, instead of putting [1] throughout his monstrosity bastardization version? Every published author I have ever known (and I know several) got at least a case of copies of their book, for their own use, and kept at least one copy for themselves. (Couldn't he at the very least reference chapter and paragraph numbers in an online version, if that's all that remains?!)

The last author I knew who used Wikipedia to essentially plug their own work, while they argued and copped a 'tude with other editors, nearly got himself permabanned for doing so (and also for sockpuppetry, pretending to be at least two other people), and has been inactive since. (Though he did use Yahoo! Groups to personally trash me behind my back, afterwards. Sour grapes.) I haven't seen this person receive a single warning about his conduct, in all this time, but I have seen him hound and intimidate at least one other editor (Tholly) into silence.

Situations like this are what has made me all but inactive both here and on English Wikipedia; life is too short for such nonsense, and I have better things to do. Writing and editing so other people can learn should be a pleasure, not a chore, and it has become a chore. (And a thankless one, at that.) I have already wasted more than enough of my time on this particular matter, and all "mediation" means to me is more of my time wasted. If other people are content to have an un-simple, non-neutral article... they can have it, and I will continue to turn my attention elsewhere. Zephyrad (talk) 00:42, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

P.S. I also notice that, despite so-and-so's previous complaints that "this article is about Peter Ham, not blablabla" (see the edit history)... his latest version includes more blablabla than information about Peter Ham, and pretty much ignores the facts put in by previous editors, myself included. Whaaaaaaaaaatever. Zephyrad (talk) 03:14, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

CalUpswing

[his contribution on enwik] he has actually added... alot to the Badfinger article contrary to what Zephyrad was saying and it's lasted there since January but holy lord... I almost removed most of it right then and there but I'll probably wait and post something on the talk page/content noticeboard tomorrow to see what people say. if you go down to the reference tag he has something like 30 references to his book (all with just the googlebooks link) and I'd like to be able to find where he said he was the author as Zephyrad claimed.. cause if that's the case then original research. I'm starting to think quack quack in more ways then one. Jamesofur (talk) 06:19, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

I wish I'd seen Jamesofur's reply sooner. re: Badfinger author Zephyrad (talk) 13:31, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

User_talk:Promethean

Hi, noticed you deleted a few revs on my TP.

Can you please email me they're content. Thanks Promethean (talk) 07:32, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

The content was libel. I'm not going to email those revisions. I hope you understand. Best, NonvocalScream (talk) 10:55, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Ok, since the worst part was removed, I've restored the revisions. They no longer contain, what they did, which has been oversighted. NonvocalScream (talk) 13:49, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Message

I just wanted to let you know, last night I left a message on User talk:Bluegoblin7 for ya regarding the templates. Afkatk (talk) 13:54, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you want me to do. NonvocalScream (talk) 21:19, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Oh it was just that you replied, I don't really know who's Admin and who's not on here, so I assumed you could. Afkatk (talk) 21:26, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Back?

Hmm... Looks like NonvocalScream is finally back! —Mythdon ^{[talk] [changes]} 20:30, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Page deleted

I just found out that you simply deleted the page Explanation, which I had created. It would have been nice if you had given me a fair warning. It's really not a good experience when the first page you create in good faith gets deleted in such an impersonal way. SebastianHelm (talk) 21:02, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Apologies. I will restore it, if you need more time to bring it beyond a dictionary definition. Will this work for you? NonvocalScream (talk) 02:02, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, but that's not it. I'm not too worried about this one particular article; not if an experienced editor like you feels it's not needed.

I'm concerned about people. Remember that other people are volunteers here, too. People are proud of what they're contributing here, and it hurts if that is deleted. Even more so when that is done without any acknowledgment of their work. Most sensible volunteers will decide to put their labor of love elsewhere, when their first contributions gets nibbed in the bud. It is very sad when Wikipedia loses goodhearted people. SebastianHelm (talk) 16:15, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

I did not mean to cause offence. I normally leave personal notes. But I was interrupted, my child was calling for me. I'm really sorry that happened and do hope that you will not permit this to interfere with your contributions. Your volunteer-ism is needed. Best, NonvocalScream (talk) 17:45, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry about me; I'm not asking this for myself. I'm an admin on en:WP, and for me the world doesn't end if an article gets deleted. Also, it's not so clear if my time is really best spent here; any time I spend here is very likely time taken away from en:WP.

I appreciate that you volunteer your time here, and I understand that your child has to have priority over WP. I'm not in your situation, but if you permit, I would like to make a suggestion for next time: Maybe, instead of with the deletion, you could start with the investigation. That way, it won't be a problem if you get interrupted.

One way of doing this would have been to check What links here; you would have seen that there are several articles linking to that page. One of them is from a user page, who was proud of having created that page. (Not me.) Four are from pages where editors had added the link in good faith, thinking that the word merited an article. What I do in such cases is first think about why people may feel that need, and how it can best be addressed.*

Another way of doing this would have been to ask the page creator. In my case, I would have told you that I joined this wiki because I imagined to be writing for a child. When I came across the statement that evolution is an explanation, I felt that not every child might understand that right away. I would have told you that it simply hadn't occurred to me that simple:WP also has its own Wiktionary, and I would have proposed the below.* More generally, we could have talked about how best to write for our target audience.

* I know that you felt it should be a wikt: article instead. That distinction is an unfortunate and IMHO unnecessary complication - especially for a Wiki that specifically targets "children and adults who are learning English." But we have to live with what we got. Simply deleting the page doesn't solve the problem, it only creates a number of redlinks, which are an invitation for anyone to create a new article. You could have replaced each link with "[[wikt:explanation]]", but that would have not been the most efficient way. In the en.WP, we simply put en:template:Copy to Wiktionary on the article, and eventually replace it with a en:Wikipedia:Soft redirect. If you don't have such a system in place, I would strongly encourage you to do the same. SebastianHelm (talk) 18:52, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

I stopped watching this page. If you would like to continue the talk, please do so here and let me know. SebastianHelm (talk) 18:29, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

PBP89 Block review

As I have said over at AN, you should return the block settings to what they originally were until a consensus has been found for what the block should be. There is nothing suggesting a 2 week block, most the only length cited has been a month or so. You have acted inappropriately and outside of the policies set out - it is impossible to get a consensus on the block time in less than 2 hours; this discussion needs to last at least a week (and there won't be any block less than a week, so that's fine) for everyone to be able to comment. You're on thin ground, scream, this is by no means the first mistake or diff that I have of inappropriate admin actions... Goblin 08:29, 2 October 2009 (UTC) I ♥ Fr33kman!

While I agree that there is a clear consensus that indef was a bad one, nothing has been decided with regards to the block duration. I have reset the block duration to indef. Until we have more input regarding that, please keep it that way. Thanks. Chenzw  Talk  08:38, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Goblin... don't threaten me? So your collecting diffs? I doubt it. Your threats are empty. NonvocalScream (talk) 10:25, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Chen... there is no support for an indefinite block. I'm not going to involve meself in it, so whatever is decided, I'm good. NonvocalScream (talk) 10:23, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

kruzkin

Indef with talk page disabled please. He is a sock. Griffinofwales (talk) 02:54, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

 Done. NonvocalScream (talk) 03:00, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Request

Would you mind creating user:Katerenka/vector.css for me? I'm going to try Beta and have some custom CSS to port over. Warmly, – Katerenka (talk • contribs) 00:28, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

I have done this. Very respectfully, NonvocalScream (talk) 00:30, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much, NonvocalScream. :) Yours, – Katerenka (talk • contribs) 00:31, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Any time.  :) Regards, NonvocalScream (talk) 00:33, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Message

Per request. Maximillion Pegasus (talk) 19:58, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

User:Pure-newzealand

I saw you were on and deleted the advertising page :), not sure if you wanted to block the user as an ad account? up to you. Jamesofur (talk) 06:27, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

I'll wait to see if it happens again. Best, NonvocalScream (talk) 15:42, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Uncle Jerk

So far this dude's living up to part of his nick; not sure about the "uncle". He has mostly just added nonsense to the Mark David Chapman article (which I keep rolling back), and his own talk page. I was in the middle of putting him on the WP:AN page as a garden-variety vandal, when suddenly one of his edits (a big deletion of valid discussion) could be seen as legit. A report now might read like sour grapes. Mind looking into this?

(Oh, yeah... I got "warned" by another local busybody recently about "continuing to abuse my rollback privileges", for doing one on an anonymous edit that added nothing. Speaking of sour grapes.) Zephyrad (talk) 13:25, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Excuse me! I was removing some content from the Mark David Chapman page as it certainly does not fit with the BLP rule: and you put it back! As for my user page, it is not nonsense: it is my story! Uncle Jerk (talk) 13:28, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

FWIW, I found a rather useful source here which seems to deal with everything that Uncle Jerk objected to. Hurrah! Oh, and UJ, your userpage should not be used like MySpace. If it ain't relevant to Wikipedia, it shouldn't be there. "Your userpage is for anything that is compatible with the Wikipedia project. It is a mistake to think of it as a homepage: Wikipedia is not a blog, webspace provider, or social networking site. Instead, think of it as a way of organizing the work that you are doing on the articles in Wikipedia, and also a way of helping other editors to understand those with whom they are working." The Rambling Man (talk) 13:34, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

I would use the talk page of the article, and try to work together on this. I can protect the article if that will help you two talk. Best, NonvocalScream (talk) 15:44, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

question on your edit on Talk:Bookcrossing

I am new to simple-en and just want to ensure that I am doings things correctly. I created Bookcrossing from en:Bookcrossing following the instructions at WP:CW and inserted in the first edit comment start article using information at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=BookCrossing&oldid=319201319 as you can see on this edit here. Was there something that i did incorrectly? Thanks. --Captain-tucker (talk) 15:46, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

That perma link you pasted above... to be honest, I would place it in the talk page. And if you want it nice looking, we have a template you can use. It is used like this... {{Enwp based | url= http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=BookCrossing&oldid=319201319 }}

Which will look like this...

Article based on English Wikipedia

This article or parts of it were created based, in whole or in part, on this version of the English Wikipedia article. The complete history of the article can be found there.

I hope this helps.

Best, NonvocalScream (talk) 15:48, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Seems like this should be included in WP:CW. Thanks for the pointer. --Captain-tucker (talk) 15:55, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Bulit Timah

Copyvio is a strong term! Surely there should be intent and no evidence of attribution... which in this case there was. Do be careful. I suspect Simple should have a policy of using EN ... but I have enquired and cannot find one. Cheers Victuallers (talk) 21:40, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Oops, I'll change my term. It is shorthand for me to remember my edits. From now on, I'll use the term, att for attribution in my summaries. I'm told there is a guide at WP:CW? I'll look it over to make sure all steps are there. Best, NonvocalScream (talk) 21:47, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Your bot

Is your bot going to be doing just cosmetic_changes.py, or is it going to be doing things like doing interwiki at the same time or something like that? I need to know so that we can avoid flagging two bots with the same purpose. Thanks, Razorflame 00:59, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't know. All my botting it is devo phase right now. NonvocalScream (talk) 04:04, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Your RfCU withdrawl

I've been busy with exams the past couple days so I apologize for never getting to post my vote. I actually went to get ready to do that when I saw you had taken it off. I'm sad to see that you did it even if I agree that it would have been hard to get 25 with 4 opposes given the size of the community. In my opinion sysop is less of a "big" deal then alot of people make it out to be, to be honest oversight is to though it's a little bigger. Checkuser on the other hand is generally a bigger deal then people pretend it is. It is one of few jobs that you not only have little oversight but also get enormous access to personal information that can never ever be taken back completely once it's out in the open. To that extent it is one of the few wikijobs where you can directly, negatively, effect the offwiki life of a user. I know we've talked at length so some of this probably doesn't surprise you but after researching deep into your background for almost 8 hours all told (including talking to you) I am confident you would never abuse your CU powers and believe me when I say I looked as deep as I possibly could. You've had your disagreements, your conflicts and your out right fights. To be honest you've had more then your fair share of drama, both caused by you and not caused by you. I'm also sure that you will have your fair share in the future, I would probably not vote for you for ArbCom with the worry that you would have to recuse yourself to often :) That being said I honestly believe you would not allow those issues to spill into your Checkuser actions.

As always if you want more let me know :)

When more time has passed, if you still want it, I will be happy to nominate you myself for your third try. Jamesofur (talk) 02:35, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

I was about to change my vote when you withdrew... I'll be happy to support another nom. Pmlineditor ∞ 12:22, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

• Thank you for the kind words. NonvocalScream (talk) 04:03, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		For work on fixing the broken convert template, a task that required a lot of time and expertise.And thanks for the quick response. Jamesofur (talk) 14:46, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Shamelessly stolen from Peterdownunder!, thanks for your help with all the imports :) Jamesofur (talk) 14:46, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Anytime, and thank you for the kind award. :) Best, NonvocalScream (talk) 03:02, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Admin's Barnstar
		For your recent administrative help in regards to the ongoing vandalism that the Simple English Wikipedia has received. Thank you. – Katerenka (talk • contribs) 01:08, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

I value people, and their contributions. :) I will gladly help. Best, NonvocalScream (talk) 03:03, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

VGA help

Hey Scream,

This is the article. I've got a list on the talk page from TRM.

AdThanksVance,

Goblin 00:20, 26 October 2009 (UTC) I ♥ Yotty!

Ok... I will get to it.  :) NonvocalScream (talk) 00:22, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

come back

NO!!! Please come back, Scream. I'll miss you :( Griffinofwales (talk) 22:29, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Are you saying NonvocalScream is leaving the Simple English Wikipedia? —Mythdon ^{[talk] [changes]} 22:36, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Admin flag removed

Hello NonvocalScream,

in accordance with your request at Meta, I have removed your "admin" flag, and added you to the rollbackers group. Thanks for your time as an admin. --Eptalon (talk) 22:39, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Jeremiah

I reverted your several-months-back change of Book of Jeremiah from an article to a redirect to Letter of Jeremiah. The book of Jeremiah is a book in the Old Testament, the letter is generally regarded as extra-Biblical literature. Davidwr (talk) 21:42, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Sorry.

Hello,

I know you probably will not be reading this anytime soon, but I felt this was something that needed to be said. Today I spend some time creating a talkpage archive for myself, and in-doing so was rereading some of the older comments, many concerning you. Looking back at this thread, I feel I must come here and apologize for my mean and rude comments. Clearly I should not have been so aggressive towards you. A huge mistake. I truly hope you will forgive me. Thanks, --Gordonrox24 | ^Talk 23:55, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Welcome back

Hey Scream, welcome back! --Bsadowski1^{(Talk|Changes)} 05:03, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you. NonvocalScream (talk) 05:03, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Oh my god it's an NVS! How are life and your other projects treating you!? Jamesofur Public (talk) 05:19, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm so glad to see you again! :) Lauryn (u • t • c) 05:21, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, it is good to see our project is still here. :) Best, NonvocalScream (talk) 05:22, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Part of me wants to slap you for leaving, and the other part wants to hug you for returning! :) fr33kman 05:24, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you :) NonvocalScream (talk) 05:25, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
Great to see you back, NVS. :D Pmlineditor ∞ 10:02, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Welcome back. Griffinofwales (talk) 12:40, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

• I'm really happy to see you back! Barras ^talk 16:12, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you NonvocalScream (talk) 16:38, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

Re.

Thanks for the note, I appreciate it. I'm sorry to have created so much work for you. Seeing as how I owe you one, let me know if you ever need anything. Cheers, Lauryn (u • t • c) 20:52, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

You are totally fine. :) The had I not used the feature, this would have been alot of work, in the area of 1:3. But... don't be discouraged... bold is ok sometimes and I don't think you did any harm. Keep up the good work! NonvocalScream (talk) 20:54, 26 February 2010 (UTC)

PGP

If I wished to create a PGP key to sign my emails with.. how would I go about doing so? Thanks in advance, Lauryn (u • t • c) 02:15, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Sure thing. You can sign them (the signature can inform others, that yes in fact it is you, if your key is also signed by others (Min for example is signed by some known wikimedians, including c.bass, so you know my key very most likely is me, NVS), see en:Web of trust) and the signature guarantees the contents of the email (or whatever document, data) are unaltered in transit. If they are altered, the signature will not match.

You can also use GPG to encrypt emails (data, or text) in addition to signing. But first, what OS and email client are you using. If I know that, I can help you down a tailored path. Best, NonvocalScream (talk) 02:24, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Hmm, this may be more difficult than I though, ha. I use Mac OS X (10.6.2) and for email I use web-based Hotmail. Lauryn (u • t • c) 02:28, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Here lies my next question. It would be best if the email provider permitted you to use a standalone email client. The one I recommend for GPG (PGP) usage is Mozilla Firefox's Thunderbirx. Will hotmail permit you to use a standalone client to check you email and send email?

Ah, I see what you mean. Hotmail will let you do that, but it costs money (something that I'm not too keen on providing them). My OS came with a client called Mail which is similar to Thunderbird; so I would have to get a compatible e-mail address (such as gmail/googlemail) which isn't really an issue except that I'll have to update my mailing list subscription. Lauryn (u • t • c) 02:33, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Your first step is to find an email provider that let's you use the standalone client. I have good news.. Thunderbird is available in mac If you can, grab this one. Most compatible with what you want to do. Let me know, and we can move on to the next step. Which is key generation. :) NonvocalScream (talk) 02:36, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the link. :) Okay, so I've downloaded and installed thunderbird and have it set up with a compatible e-mail client. So, I'm ready for the next step when you are. :) Lauryn (u • t • c) 02:41, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Compatible email provider you mean? :) Next step it to equip Thunderbird to handle gpg (err... pgp) Enigmail was specifically designed for this purpose, and for this email client (thunderbird). I believe they have a Mac version. We will use this extension for signing, encrypting, and decrypting. We will also use it to generate your key. Let me know if you have problems getting it. NonvocalScream (talk) 02:51, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Okay so I had to install something called MacPorts for SnowLeopard. Anyway, I downloaded and installed Enigmamail and got it all set up with Thunderbird, so I think I'm caught up to where you are now. :) Lauryn (u • t • c) 03:00, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Now we generate your fist public and private key pair. NonvocalScream (talk) 03:07, 28 February 2010 (UTC)

Imports

May I ask why you're deleting imports and restoring them sans the imported revisions? I'm afraid I don't get it. Lauryn (u • t • c) 03:38, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Just coming to ask the same thing since one of them was an import I did. Either way (talk) 03:39, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Er, I'm sorry. I was a bit late in the explanation. I've placed the explanation on the Admins noticeboard. :) Best, NonvocalScream (talk) 03:41, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Aspergers

Just checking out the definition of Autism. Will fix that one, as well. Amandajm (talk) 06:28, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

New messages :)

Hello, NonvocalScream. You have new messages at The Obento Musubi's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Sig

There's not a way to make the font color change as well as the underline when you mouse over, is there? Purplebackpack89 ^{(Notes Taken) (Locker)} 17:29, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Courtesy note

Wikipedia:Simple_talk#QD_A3. Cheers, Lauryn (u • t • c) 05:27, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the note. Best, NonvocalScream (talk) 05:32, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

RE:Scale Model

 Done I-on|^{I-Гalk |I-PrФjecГ} 13:44, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

have a wonderful and good night see-ya tomorrow around the same time of 6:00

--Sonicwrap (talk) 23:54, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

You have a good evening as well. Thoughtfully, NonvocalScream (talk) 23:55, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

thank you, and what are References? --Sonicwrap (talk) 23:57, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

References are sources. Take a look at Wikipedia:Reliable Sources for me information. Best, NonvocalScream (talk) 23:59, 3 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

I left you a message back at my talk page. Thank you for caring. :) obentomusubi 08:56, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

The last thing I want to do is cause drama here, believe me. I left in the past because I felt that it wasn't really a "free" encyclopedia that "anyone can edit" since whenever I tried to change something, somebody would tell me I'd have to get approval from everybody else or I'd have my rollback privileges revoked (which happened; true story). I came back with the mentality that the community would be open to my ideas, and if they disliked them, they would rollback or undo them. All I've gotten so far were a few compliments from people I hadn't seen before and a lot of trash from people who remember me from my old days here. It's like politics here. There are "conservatives" who want to keep everything the way they were, and there are "progressives" who want to look for ways to change things around. And in order for anybody to get anything passed, it has to be agreed upon by the whole community, much like the gridlock in Congress right now. It's frustrating, I guess, that there have to be all of these formalities. I understand people will read this, roll their eyes, and accuse me of not wanting to conform to rules. I just hope they realize that had they given me a nice welcome instead of "Frankly, I'm a bit tired of Obento disappearing for ages and then just popping back to redesign the Wikipedia without discussion", I would be more apt to compromise. Thank you for not being one of them and for putting up with my craziness. obentomusubi 09:34, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

I think you need to also realize that if you were more apt to compromise instead of "redesigning Wikipedia without discussion", people might be more apt to compromise...But your changes without discussion bother a lot of people. Either way (talk) 11:16, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry for bothering all of you. I will try my best to propose ideas in the future, although I feel that change doesn't happen quickly enough. But that's just me. :) obentomusubi 18:48, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

Some people need change discussed, tis the wiki way! Best, NonvocalScream (talk) 07:34, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Sorry but I had to comment because I find "I feel change doesn't happen quickly enough" to be amusing. A very large portion of this wiki find that change happens here all too quickly. If you think we are slow, don't ever edit at English Wikipedia. haha -DJSasso (talk) 13:17, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice

Hi, NonVocalScream! Thank you for the kind advice, I certainly appreciate it and will keep it in mind in the future. You're right, things can get quite confusing, and on English Wikipedia they blocked Belinda because they thought she was my sockpuppet or vice versa. :) Thank you once again, and I hope you keep up the lovely work here! You sincere and ever-obliged, Classical Esther^♣ 07:33, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

No problem, and you are welcome. NonvocalScream (talk) 07:33, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

User:Christianrocker90/Story

I kinda agree with you deletion reason that Wikipedia is "not a webhost" but I have to disagree with QD'ing it, I mean the story has been on my userpage for longer than you've been here with no objections (2 years+) so may kindly request if you want it deleted you restore and put it through a RfD?--  † CR₉₀  06:15, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I don't think so. I will email you the deleted contributions if you like. The page however, is in violation of our userspace guidelines. However, you can place this for review on the noticeboard, or deletion review, if you like. Best, NonvocalScream (talk) 06:26, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Courtesy note

Wikipedia:Deletion review#User:Christianrocker90/Story. Cheers, Lauryn (u • t • c) 06:41, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Great job!

		The Original Barnstar
		Hi, NonvocalScream! I'm very glad you've come back, things go so much more smoothly with you here, and you're so hardworking and helpful! I couldn't find the right barnstar to give you, so I just decided on the "classical" original barnstar. I hope you keep up the lovely work! Yours sincerely, Classical Esther♣ 05:24, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the kind words. :) NonvocalScream (talk) 05:25, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps of interest to you

Wikipedia:Simple_talk#Template:This_week_in_history.E2.80.8E Cheers, Lauryn (u • t • c) 01:48, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for bureaucratship/NonvocalScream

Best of luck. :) Lauryn (u • t • c) 06:29, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you :) Jon@talk:~$ 06:30, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Congratulations on your successful RFB!

Congratulations, NonVocalScream! I know you'll be a great 'crat here! :D Hurray, I'm the first to congratulate you... Classical Esther^♣ 00:33, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Félicitations! :) As Esther so succinctly put it, I'm sure you'll do fine. Cheers, Lauryn (u • t • c) 00:37, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

축하해요!! :) Thankyou for always being so nice to me! Congratulations! Hehe, I'm the third one... ♥ Belinda ♥ 00:39, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

I have found your T-shirt. Don't lose it. Chenzw  Talk  02:25, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

• Thank you for your kind words :) Jon@talk:~$ 02:27, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

• Congrats! Let me know if you need anything crat-related. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 02:33, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Sure thing, and thank you! Jon@talk:~$ 02:35, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

• Congrats. Have fun with the tools. Barras ^talk 14:22, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, NonvocalScream. You have new messages at Airplaneman's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Airplaneman ^talk 14:33, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Notability guidelines

Hi Jon, did you mention at some point recently that you were writing a proposed draft for what constitutes notability? I agree with you that it's a topic that would be good for us, as a community, to address. Kansan (talk) 03:29, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Surely this has already been dealt with and decided? fr33kman 03:45, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

@ Kansan, yes, if there is interest, I would like to see some notability guidelines specific to athletes and software. @Fr33kman, that is a general notability guideline. We are permitted to make more specific guidelines/criteria (A Subject specific guideline)for certain subjects. Jon@talk:~$ 04:16, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

But since we default to en's guidelines in such cases, why bother? I mean, en has already done all this, and for just about every category of topic known to man. fr33kman 04:22, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

I don't necessarily think we should be defaulting to en's guidelines as per the first section under WP:What Wikipedia is not, the two projects aren't necessarily supposed to have the same scope or the same articles. As I read it there, it seems that this project should probably have more stringent standards for what is kept and not kept. Philosophically, I'm not sure how I feel about that, but what I read there is probably enough to at least consider having separate standards, especially for some topics. Kansan (talk) 04:27, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

If we do that, I would recommend we also make some notability guidelines for bands/singers, since they seem to frequently appear in the list of proposed deletions. Kansan (talk) 04:18, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

I agree that such a guideline would probably be helpful, I often get rather confused at RFDs at what constitutes "notability". Classical Esther^♣ 04:29, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

If we don't have a local policy or guideline, we defer to enwiki's version. That has been standard for years. fr33kman 04:36, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

(outdent) Having ignored the orange bar long enough! Ok... We defer to enwiki on things where we don't have an established policy or guideline, so currently we do defer to their subject specific notability guidelines. They don't have a software specific one, they do have a person (athletes) one. The subject specific guidelines may not work for our scope, and per Kansam, we should probably have separate standards. Jon@talk:~$ 04:42, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Scream, ... you have been around WMF-land far too long to not know what makes a topic notable. If you want to make local guidelines, fine; but what makes a topic notable is already known. It's multiple citations to reliable sources. There are no "levels" of notability, notable it notable. fr33kman 04:48, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

This is an area of increasing complexity. If you note the "academics" notability guideline, there is "for sure" established criteria that notability is presumed. Now... I'll use hyperbole here: There is a pond in my back yard, it is cited in a small article in the town newspaper... you know what I'm getting at. Best, Jon@talk:~$ 04:53, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm not opposed whatsoever to local guidelines (heck I've written a few myself). If you want to localise an enwiki policy, or guideline, or even disent and make a brand new one for here, fine. However, the pond in your backyard is already covered by the N guidelines (on enwiki) about notability for a single event. If your pond was mentioned in a few newspapers, I'd be sure to create an article on it here on simplewiki :) xoxo :) fr33kman 05:00, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps I need to ease up on my stance. I'll think to myself. Sometimes we do get away form the core values, so I'll take some time to reread our notability guidelines. Perhaps I am being to hard on these subjects. Jon@talk:~$ 05:04, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Bot flag

Could you (or a crat talk page stalker), please, grant my bot the bot flag? PiRSquared17 15:17, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

And done. Best, Jon@talk:~$ 18:20, 22 May 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, NonvocalScream. You have new messages at Thesevenseas's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Thesevenseas (talk) 15:31, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Hello, NonvocalScream. You have new messages at TeleComNasSprVen's talk page.
Message added 20:55, 24 July 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

:| TelCoNaSpVe :| 20:55, 24 July 2010 (UTC)

Christianrocker90's usersubpages.

Hello Scream. As you deleted User:Christianrocker90's usersubpages, I wanted to ask you if you would be alright with the restoration of these pages if the community decides to allow CR90 back onto the wiki if he requests so after one year is up. Thanks. --Gordonrox24 | ^Talk 16:59, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

There is also a request here. Thanks!--Gordonrox24 | ^Talk 17:17, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

If he's unblocked, then he can request that they be restored. The deletion reason implies that, as does the criteria. In most cases, banned users leave us alone (unlike this one). Griffinofwales (talk) 17:20, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

If he is unblocked the restoration occurs, and can occur without even asking me. ...But I don't really see that happening, he can't stay away, since whilst he was banned, he decidedly posted to his talk page. I'll of course restore everything if that is desired, whatever the community wants. Best, Jon@talk:~$ 20:57, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

Sarah Geronimo

I think my edit summary sums things up. I had to remove a lot of content as it isn't fit for the Simple English Wikipedia, besides the fact that it was a complex article copied from another Wikipedia without any conversion. The subject was notable, though, so I decided to make it a short one instead. Blakegripling ph (talk) 01:03, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

You are corrent in that the article is quick deletable under QD:A3. Thank you for pointing this out and for changing it into a stub. fr33kman 01:09, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

Test QD

I tested TW's QD tab on the Sandbox. You were the original creator of the page, so you got a message. I reverted it. πr² 00:17, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Quick deletion of Ailihphilia

The page you wrote, Ailihphilia, has been selected for quick deletion. This is because the page was a test page. If you think this page should be kept, please add {{wait}} below the line {{QD}} and say why on the talk page. If the page is already gone, but you think this was an error, you can ask for it to be undeleted. πr² 15:37, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Pardon, say wha? Jon@talk:~$ 15:39, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

It is a redirect to itself. πr² 15:41, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Then fix it? Jon@talk:~$ 15:42, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

What is it? πr² 15:42, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Fixed :) Jon@talk:~$ 15:44, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry. It was confusing. Sincerely, πr² 15:46, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks and a Private Request

I forgot to thank you for rollback rights. I also noticed that I was an admin for a few seconds. Would you please consider making me an admin again (but this time, not for seconds; for years)? I noticed there were inactive and semi-active admins. Can the inactive and some of the semi-active be desysoped? Their rights (which are probably not needed or used at all) would be better in the hands of some of our most active contributors, including myself. I remember once reporting a change of the location of an external link to an administrator. If I fell under that category, I could do more scanning, and be more active in the articles requested for deletion. I also had an idea in mind to make a Wikiproject, but I need to think more about it before I start it. I don't want any duplicates of other such active Wikiprojects. Also, I have been teaching myself about the wikitools here. Some of my co-wikipedians also helped me from time to time. I hope to achieve a lot if I become an admin.  Hazard-SJ ^Talk 08:42, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

SJ, even very highly respected bureaucrats such as Scream usually don't have the ability to make someone an administrator right away. ;) I think he made you an administrator for a few seconds by a mistake. You need to pass an official Request for Adminship to become one. :) Kindly, —Clementina talk 08:46, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Ok. I'll resubmit the request to RFA.  Hazard-SJ ^Talk 07:04, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Please don't. Hazard, frankly, you are not ready to be an administrator. I would also point out that you do not need to be an admin to contribute greatly to our project. Regards, sonia^♫♪ 07:09, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Question about protection

Could you please explain why you protected Hoots' talk page as "inappropriate use...while blocked"? I don't believe I've seen the policy behind this before. Thanks, PrincessofLlyr ^talk 21:24, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

• Basically, blocked editors are not permitted to edit. Now, when the editor placed an unblock request, it was declined, that was that. To appeal again, after a declination is an abuse of the unblock process... also, the editor is abusing the talk page by continually editing the talk page via IP, evading the block while blocked. Thus, abusing the talk page. The policy is located here where is states full protection can be used when Preventing abuse of the {{unblock}} template or other disruptions by a blocked user on their user talk page. I hope this helps. Best, Jon@talk:~$ 21:28, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
  • Thank you. I understood that it was done sometimes, but had not seen the actual policy stating the reasons, etc. PrincessofLlyr ^talk 21:30, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
    • No problem at all! Yours respectfully, Jon@talk:~$ 22:01, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

IP Surpression

It generally falls under "inappropriate personal information" and has for years been considerd a valid surpression reason. IPs as you are aware can be dangerous, which is why we have such heavy restrictions on what Checkusers can do. As such its completely valid to hide IPs from everyone but the people who are able to see oversighted information. -DJSasso (talk) 19:14, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

I hold that it is a very liberal interpretation of the m:oversight policy, however, I am singular in that view. I will not challenge this. Thank you, Jon@talk:~$ 20:50, 29 July 2010 (UTC)

User:TeleComNasSprVen

? If the information in parentheses seemed attacking, I apologize, but I meant to include the rest of the DYK as a compliment to Fr33kman, who appears to be the father figure among us. Could I have it restored (without the info in parentheses)? :| TelCoNaSpVe :| 01:17, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

The problem isn't that it's perceived as insulting toward Fr33kman, but that the wording implies that those who are dyslexic tend not to write well. Kansan (talk) 01:25, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

I see. I'll remove the parenthetical info in the restoration, then. :| TelCoNaSpVe :| 02:20, 30 July 2010 (UTC)

TB

Hello, NonvocalScream. You have new messages at Purplebackpack89's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Changing comments

I don't see how this is acceptable. Surely someone is entitled to a point of view, and I think you should have at least told Eptalon on his Talk page before doing it. ;) Regards, Yottie ^=talk= 11:49, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Er, a header is a discussion header, not a comment. I have elected to defer to this guideline. Yes, someone is entitled to the opinion. but should not use topic headers to do so. It is acceptable to change headers. Thanks, Jon@talk:~$ 11:52, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough... Didn't know about that, because I don't check policies/guidelines on enwiki; why don't we import those guidelines/policies? Yottie ^=talk= 11:54, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Oh my... it would take far too much effort to simplify.  :| :) Jon@talk:~$ 12:00, 1 August 2010 (UTC)

Hazard-Bot

Seems so. I clicked something and a command screen came up, so I closed it and reverted the edits.  Hazard-SJ ^Talk 05:32, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

How and why was the sandbox changed? I have to uninstall pywikipedia (again) and not reinstall it.  Hazard-SJ ^Talk 05:35, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

You should probably not call up the bot (I'm assuming your running it from the command line.). Jon@talk:~$ 05:42, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Complete (my computer is freezing).  Hazard-SJ ^Talk 05:46, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

What do you mean by "call up the bot"?  Hazard-SJ ^Talk 05:46, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

Perpetual motion redirects

I wish to recreate these several redirects:

1. Perpetual motion machine
2. Perpetual motion machine of the first kind
3. Perpetual motion machine of the second kind
4. Perpetual motion machine of the third kind

as they are not "implausible redirects/typos" because they have been mentioned, even bolded, as subjects of the article Perpetual motion, as well as being mentioned in the DYK nominations. :| TelCoNaSpVe :| 16:44, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Current events

Am I still allowed to defend myself from the charges brought against me on AN, and to what extent? I also want to know the specific time that the remedies go into effect; you gave me a reasonable "24 hours or so" last night. And I just want to point out that the edit histories for our talkpages are actually quite interesting. :| TelCoNaSpVe :| 15:14, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

They go into effect immediately from what I can see, and your edit histories are like that because he posted the comments logged out so his IPs been hidden. Nothing unusual, its been done for you in the past. To be honest there isn't much to defend, a large number of admins wanted to just block both of you. You won't get much more lenient than what these restrictions are. -DJSasso (talk) 15:23, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

1. I don't think you represent the rest of the admins.
2. I'm not talking about the restrictions.
3. You didn't mention my name in this discussion; why choose to do so now?

:| TelCoNaSpVe :| 15:29, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

I never said I represent the rest of the admins, what I am saying is that a number of admins want to block you because of your constant confrontational mannor. Which you are showing me proof of right now. Secondly, I didn't say when it was done for you, I do it often so it could have been at any time, its you who has now linked that discussion to yourself. -DJSasso (talk) 15:32, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Please answer my relevant questions; otherwise I want to discuss a few things with NonvocalScream. As you were involved in a lot of our disputes, I wish to seek help from a more levelheaded and uninvolved admin. :| TelCoNaSpVe :| 16:21, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Question/Comment

Why did you hide to place the note on my talk page? Oh, and thanks for telling me who made those rogue edits on my Challenge Cup that I had to revert! Purplebackpack89 15:45, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

He posted it logged out by mistake and his IP was hidden. -DJSasso (talk) 15:48, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

I suggest you adhere to the AN findings, i.e. not commenting about User:TeleComNasSprVen. 16:43, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Avatar

I am a new user. I want to complete an article about an adventure and fantasy film, and I need this image. It's the logo of Avatar: The Last Airbender's show. Nataly8 (talk) 10:10, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

It looks lie there is already one started... here, but you can still change it up, if you want to improve on it. best, Jon@talk:~$ 10:13, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

I know it's exist. I wrote it recently in Greek Wikipedia. I am a fan of this show. Who are the administrations of this wiki, and were are the featured articles? Nataly8 (talk) 10:14, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

The Featured articles here, are called "Very good articles", and are located WP:VGA, there is also a by date listing here. You can view a listing of administrators at the userlist or on this page listing. Thanks, Jon@talk:~$ 10:19, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. I didn' t knew it. Thanks for help. I want to complete it from Greek and English Wikipedia. What template I must put? Nataly8 (talk) 10:22, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

You want to "interwiki" link the Regular English and Greek version on the right side of the article? Jon@talk:~$ 10:24, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

No. I am not about the interwiki. About the transation. Or you don't have it? Nataly8 (talk) 10:26, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Nataly8 (talk) 12:50, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

I only know of the Regular English and the Simple English, as well as the German you said... but I don't know of any other. Thank you, Jon@talk:~$ 17:23, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I create the Template:Infobox Television Season. But it have problems. Can you correct it? Avatar Constantinos (talk) 17:24, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

I can help fix it. In the meantime, bring your article to WP:peer review. :| TelCoNaSpVe :| 18:01, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

Good morning. I need help in the simplification. Nataly8 (talk) 11:53, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I put 5 articles in peer review. Did you have some comments to do? Nataly8 (talk) 14:54, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

I will take a look, thank you. Jon@talk:~$ 15:56, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Tsunami

Please restore. 75.137.149.46 (talk) 00:29, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

There was no real content to restore, you can create the page. Best, Jon@talk:~$ 15:56, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

NCPF

Like this: "Hello, NonvocalScream. Would you like to join the New Changes Police Force?" Hazard-SJ ^Talk 15:08, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

No thank you, but thank you for the offer. Jon@talk:~$ 15:56, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Don't worry. I'm "ripping" it down. (keeping a few, and merging a few, and also, "QD U1"ing a few).

Template:Busyweekend

According to QD#T2, this template has been "deprecated or replaced by a newer template" and if so was subject to quick deletion. I don't see a newer one, so I don't think it warrants QDing. So could you please restore it? :| TelCoNaSpVe :| 20:36, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

{{Wikibreak}}? Jon@talk:~$ 20:41, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Exactly, and on Twinkle, it is further explained as "T2: They are deprecated or replaced by a newer template and are completely unused and not linked to." Hazard-SJ ^Talk 20:44, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

And as I remember, while tagging it for QDT2, that was a redirect to {{Busy weekend}}. Hazard-SJ ^Talk 20:45, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

I know the QD criteria, and I don't have to use twinkle. The other one was the redirect, and you don't have to double paste your twinkle message on my talk. Thanks anyway. :| TelCoNaSpVe :| 20:47, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
OK. I'll disable that when tagging them. I had a similar problem earlier. Hazard-SJ ^Talk 20:51, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

"While you are on"

I came upon this list while checking "What links here" for an unused template: User:Juliancolton/Convert subtemplates Should they be deleted? ("Why keep them?" NO REASON "Why not delete them?" ITS A LONG LIST AND WOULD DO EXCESSIVE FLOODING, AND THE FLOOD FLAG ISN'T FOR SUCH PURPOSES.) Its very long, although some seem to have already been deleted (as shown by the many red links seen). Hazard-SJ ^Talk 20:41, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

I just checked the first one on the list, it is being used. I went no further. Jon@talk:~$ 20:44, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

I could give you a more specific list with a few unused sub-templates related to the template {{Convert}}. Should I go ahead and tag them? Hazard-SJ ^Talk 20:48, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Forum Shopping

What is this? Nataly8 (talk) 08:59, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Ask Mom for candy, she said no. So I ask Dad if I can have candy... he said no. So... I go the teacher/neighbor/fireman if having candy is ok... Best Jon@talk:~$ 09:02, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

And what actually Hazard-SJ did? Nataly8 (talk) 09:03, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Firstly, he asked eptalon for rollback which was declined by Peter. Then he asked me and I've declined. Now he asks again. That's what he has done. -Barras (talk) 09:07, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

A, OK. Thanks for the answer. Nataly8 (talk) 09:10, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Avatar: The Last Airbender

Help with the simplification! Nataly8 (talk) 10:27, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Cyberbullying

Hi NVS, I am going to "undo" your change to the essay on the need to RevDelete. I will put your comment on the talk page, so that a discussion can take place about it there. I think it is an important change that needs discussion.Peterdownunder (talk) 05:02, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

I've made some comments. Jon@talk:~$ 14:28, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

protection of ST

I disagree with the protection. 1. It prevents legitimate anonymous users from editing this page (which is one of its most important purposes) and 2. the vandals will simply find somewhere else to vandalise (AN, admin's tp). We can't protect all of them. Revert, block, and if necessary, revdel isn't that hard, especially for all the admins with adminactionitis running around :) - Please reconsider. Griffinofwales (talk) 13:10, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

 Done Jon@talk:~$ 14:03, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

revert

What is wrong with the revert you reverted here? The account is not registered as Hazard points out, and even if it was, reverting a non-vandalism edit is not appropriate. Griffinofwales (talk) 22:09, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

We don't treat new users like that, we address them on the page, not in edit summaries. Also, I did not intend to rollback, but, let us not get too wrapped up around that. Best, Jon@talk:~$ 22:20, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Protect.

Hey NVS. Should Wikipedia:Requests for checkusership/Djsasso be unprotected? I guess you protected it for closing/crat chat, but I don't think we usually keep requests protected. Thanks.--Gordonrox24 | ^Talk 18:21, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

oops. :) Jon@talk:~$ 19:15, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Dwen jang nyeoh

You deleted Dwen jang nyeoh per G11 (advertising), but perusing the Google cache of the article, I find nothing that indicates promotional intent. Please consider restoring the article pending discussion at Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2011/Dwen jang nyeoh. Thanks, Goodvac (talk) 06:45, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Rechecking... Jon@talk:~$ 07:35, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Oops... I meant blatant hoax. I'll leave it deleted since it meet criteria. Best, Jon@talk:~$ 07:38, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I looked at the sources in the RfD through Google Translate, but there's nothing significant. Goodvac (talk) 08:32, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

CR90's ban review

I've undone the copypaste and transcluded instead, for the sake of the history being in one place as well as CR90 being able to respond to any questions. Feel free to revert if this doesn't work for you. sonia♫ 07:58, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

This works for me. Jon@talk:~$ 20:06, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

For this edit. I didn't notice! --SEPTActaMTA8235 (talk) 19:24, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

No problem. Jon@talk:~$ 20:07, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Block of 95.54.20.108

The account's already globally blocked. --SEPTActaMTA8235 18:47, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

By the way, you don't need to give me the "bot" flag. --SEPTActaMTA8235 18:54, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

I don't usually check the global lockings when I do a local block. Redundancy does not hurt. Jon@talk:~$ 20:07, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

31st century

Why did you decline the QD? The 31st century is obviously a crystal ball. --SEPTActaMTA8235 20:28, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

I found no applicable quick deletion criteria. That means, usually, the article needs to be listed at RFD. Best, Jon@talk:~$ 20:37, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

PW barnstar

		The Professional Wrestling Barnstar
		for your help importing wrestling articles for me, thanks. chris†ianrocker90 04:30, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for deletion/Requests/2011/Nomi Sunrider

Why? No extension? --—SEPTActaMTA8235— (t — c — l) 12:25, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

I also have to disagree with this closure. There is one single vote only and it is in favour of deletion. Your decision was to keep it. In such cases you need a very good reason for this decision. You didn't give any and thus you should reconsider this closure or explain your move. -Barras (talk) 21:29, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Per Barras, there was a vote to delete plus the nomination, IMO, it should have been extended or closed as delete, what is the keep rationale? chris†ianrocker90 22:09, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Two comments do not make a discussion. Two comments do not a consensus for deletion make. I'll need more than two comments to press the delete key. Very respectfully, Jon@talk:~$ 23:21, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

• You want to relist it, then change the end time to five days from now and remove my closing comment, and the templates, that is fine. But I did not close this as a delete, so anything other than relisting, I'm going to ask be done at deletion review. Jon@talk:~$ 23:26, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

While it is true that you need more than two votes to delete, you also need more than two votes to keep it then. Or simply a good reason for the decision. -Barras (talk) 07:58, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

No. No consensus = No Delete. The default is keep. (or no change). Jon@talk:~$ 22:52, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

your edit to my userpage

Now, I don't want you to construe this as drama or whatever other than confusion. Why did you remove it exactly? It wasn't something controversial, it's almost universally accepted that you should be keen on your health. So, I'm just confused. Why? chris†ianrocker90 16:35, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Come on Scream, you should know better. Warn him on his talk page before editing his user page... Yottie ^=talk= 16:46, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Indef block

In future, I suggest you allow the discussion to run for at least 24 hours. Closing it out with an indef block within 8 is not helpful, particularly to those who aren't on-wiki at the time. I have re-opened the discussion. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:22, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

It bothers me not how long the discussion runs. I had not closed it. I did however, block the account for socking/block evasion as has been general practice in the past, and in the will of the community. Now, if consensus has changed, then I'm sure it will reflect in the discussion. But for now, he is blocked to prevent disruption, as has been a pattern in the past. Thus, there is a propensity. And a prevention (block). Jon@talk:~$ 16:09, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

For sure. And more so. However, block notwithstanding, more discussion would have proved.. Useful. As such, and in that way, it would have been better to pause. And reflect. Thus there would and should be calm.. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:44, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, NonvocalScream. You have new messages at BarkingFish's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

BarkingFish (talk) 12:59, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Hi! about Dave Murray Talk...

Hi NonvocalScream! i change the talk of Dave Murray (musician) because you said that the article was based on the English Wikipedia, when in reality is mostly translated from the Spanish one and only in a small part of the English (i know it because i do it), i hope you do not have a problem with it. Thanks for your attention --Remux (talk) 08:03, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, NonvocalScream. You have new messages at Christianrocker90's talk page.
You may take off this notice at any time by getting rid of the the {{Talkback}} or {{newmessages}} template.

chris†ianrocker90 01:33, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

I myself can file formal charges against you in a court of law for your failure to give me the right to act in the way of the truth and Qaddafi. — Preceding unsigned comment added by LatuffRemembered (talk • contribs)

Fixed

I fixed one of your usersubpages a bit and five minutes later a bit more. Hope you don't mind! If something is wrong with it, feel free to revert. -Barras (talk) 22:53, 18 July 2011 (UTC)