User talk:Goodshoped35110s/Archive 11

This is strange, judging from the username, he is a sock. Should anything else spring up, he ought to be reported for a checkuser and perhaps a long block on his account creation. Marlith ^T/C 03:37, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you are right. But I don't think merge is a good thing since 19th ave is an important Sf street. Chris! _ct 05:05, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's true. I may be going around there to get some pictures for the article, as well as for Van Ness Avenue (San Francisco). -Goodshoped 05:09, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I will see what I can do with Van ness ave. Chris! _ct 05:11, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This site here seems like a good source to begin with. Chris! _ct 05:13, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK. -Goodshoped 05:17, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your recently reported 67.167.84.64 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) on WP:AIV for WP:3RR on Thomas Negovan. If you would more carefully review the 3RR policy, the process for reporting on WP:AIV, and the user edits, I think you will agree that this report was in error:

• 3RR says more than three reverts in 24 hours. In the case of this editor, he never made more than 3 edits in 24 hours to the article in question. But, more importantly, none of them were "reverts" as described in 3RR. They were in fact vandalism (for which the editor was not ever warned.)
• If the editor had in fact violated 3RR, two procedural items. First, the editor needs to be made aware of the policy. This editor has a total of 10 edits, the last on November 8, so would likely not been aware of such a policy. Second, there is a 3RR noticeboard, WP:AN3RR, for reporting 3RR violations.
• None of the user edits would fall under 3RR. They have all been vandalism. Please, when you note vandalism, it would be helpful to leave a warning on the editors page. Often, that is sufficient to cause the editor to stop.
• Note that for reporting on AIV, the page asks that "the vandal is active now, has been sufficiently warned, and has vandalized after a recent last warning, except in unusual circumstances." In this case, it had been over a week since the last edit.

While it is appreciated that you report potential vandalism to WP:AIV, a more careful review of the edits would be helpful to admins. Thanks. — ERcheck (talk) 06:05, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I am trying to put together a checkuser request in relation to the "Pee Wee Herman" vandal, with a view to getting the underlying IPs blocked (I have range blocked some IPs used by the vandal(s) with limited success). I am putting together a list of sockpuppets and their edits here. As I see that you have been involved in dealing with this vandalism, I am letting you know and please feel free to contribute to the list. Cheers TigerShark (talk) 23:33, 18 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You know I will. -Goodshoped 01:02, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks. Cheers TigerShark (talk) 20:47, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I have submitted the request here. Cheers TigerShark (talk) 23:28, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Got it. -Goodshoped 00:23, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

		The Excellent Userpage Award
		This is for one hillarious userpage!  Penubag  01:24, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! But, wait, you mean my userpage? -Goodshoped 01:32, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand it. That anonymous user called me a nerd like as if he meant it as an insult..! Thank you for reverting the vandalism on my talk page! Bobo. 01:45, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. -Goodshoped 01:46, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Take a look at the article now. It looks good now after I add more to it. Take care. Chris! _ct 03:06, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know. I was watching it. And thanks! -Goodshoped 03:09, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I see you taking a lot of pictures. So I am wondering if you can take one picture to show the alley by any chance. I can't find a free one on flickr. Thanks. Chris! _ct 03:22, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, no, I can't. (Yes, I'm a minor, and I won't be taking any pictures anytime soon.) You can try requesting on on the WP:SFBA page. -Goodshoped 03:24, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that's fine. There is no rush anyway. :) Chris! _ct 03:27, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Goodshoped35110s, for supporting my RfB, which I withdrew at a final tally of (33/12/1). I failed to overcome the not unforeseeable opposition, but I am humbled by some extremely supportive, encouraging words I could read. In order to honor your trust, I once again vow to continue working and improving. Please contact me should you have any advice or recommendation to give. Or, should you need assistance. I am, as will always be, at your service. Again, please accept my most sincere gratitude. Best regards, Húsönd 03:07, 19 November 2007 (UTC) [reply]

You're welcome. Like the calligraphy. -Goodshoped 03:08, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your encouraging message on my talk page. :-) Best regards, Húsönd 03:20, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

{{helpme}}Is it OK if I started a Wikicompetition like a funniest userpage competition?}} -Goodshoped 05:08, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We've had similar competitions before that have ended up being deleted. See Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Best User Page Contest (2nd nomination). GlassCobra 05:15, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

oh boy. Thanks for letting me know. -Goodshoped 05:19, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re your message: The 31 hour block that I issued for the editor has expired and he has not returned. Since he has not returned, I don't think an indefinite block is necessary at this time. Sometimes a short block gets the point across and the person stops. If he does return and recreates the same strange articles, then report him to WP:AIV and another admin will take appropriate action. Make sure that if you leave a report to note that the admin reviewing the report should look at the deleted contributions. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 06:18, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sweet. Thanks! -Goodshoped 00:24, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Happy holidays, --Gp75motorsports (talk) 17:17, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Check these beauties out:

{{Template:AccInsure 1}} produces:

This page/section's accuracy needs to be insured. Please review the information and add citations. Thank you.

and {{Template:AccInsure 2}} makes:

WikiProject AccInsure is proud to announce that this page has been examined and found to be completely true. Congratulations to whoever has contributed to this article, and keep it up!

Cool, huh? They're for my new project, WikiProject AccInsure. Still not past proposals, so it needs some votes. Best, --Gp75motorsports (talk) 20:45, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the support at RfA, and for the congratulations! I looked at your mole, and I think I'll watchlist it and keep an eye on it rather than blocking it for now. There's an argument for leaving one sockpuppet alone; if it becomes active, the sockmaster can be caught in an autoblock once it's been blocked. Let me know if you see any activity from this guy, or another similar sock. Acroterion _(talk) 21:03, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, I'm in. Tell me what I need to do and consider it done. --Gp75motorsports (talk) 01:11, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if you want, you can review the case here, and kind of check out if there's an connection, that's what checkuser is about. Oh, and do you still need me at ARBCOM? -Goodshoped 04:13, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, we still need you at ARBCOM. --Gp75motorsports (talk) 11:52, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you revert the edit? The external links are filled of inappropriate sites. Please explain why they are appropriate for that article

Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 47	19 November 2007	About the Signpost

An interview with Florence Devouard	Author borrows from Wikipedia article without attribution
WikiWorld comic: "Raining animals"	News and notes: Page patrolling, ArbCom age requirement, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	WikiProject Report: History
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

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

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 10:09, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately I had to withdraw your second request for adminship because it had absolutely no chance to succeed, to prevent further grievances from oppose !votes. It's no way pleasant to see two your good-faith RfA failing, so please accept my humble advice: read up the reasons for oppose, and try to follow them. It means that you shouldn't run for the third time too soon, or it will turn into simple bashing. Wait a little, three or four months of active contribution would be enough. Try to get involved into other aspects of Wikipedia, learn the policies (many people opposed you because your first answer suggested that you don't understand WP:CSD). That's all - and please don't be disheartened, everything's gonna be alright. Happy editing! MaxSem^{(Han shot first!)} 12:28, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I have read them, and I don't think I'll be ready soon, in fact, I even got to "experience" how to be an admin from other users like here. (Just being civil, no offense). But, anyway, I know what's CSD, and I actually wanted to re-answer most of my questions this morning (yes, it's 10:12 PST right now). -Goodshoped 18:13, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do note that people will oppose RfA's because they went through it too many times, and it has happened before. My advice is for you to come back in half a year, meaning in May. Yeah, I know it seems like forever, but hey, I became an admin almost a year after I created my account. Wait a while, gain some experience, get absolutely attuned to most of the workings here, and you'll be fine, unless you get into a huge controversy in which you were in the wrong. —Kurykh 18:48, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I noticed. -Goodshoped 18:50, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Marlith ^T/C 17:27, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the smile! -Goodshoped 18:08, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		I'm awarding you this barnstar because this is a great example of good humor. I'm still trying to stop laughing. Ioeth (talk contribs friendly) 18:52, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. If you want to know why I did it, you may want to see the username and the userpage. That's why. Normally, I won't do it that way. -Goodshoped 18:53, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I did, which is why I thought it was so funny. Then I went on to block them indefinitely for violating the username policy. Keep up the good work! Ioeth _{(talk contribs friendly)} 18:54, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! -Goodshoped 18:55, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kubura made a comment on Giove's RFARB, but he's been blocked for warring with him over the Milano article. I smell something coming, and I don't like it. Let's be ready. Best, --Gp75motorsports (talk) 01:08, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]