User talk:east718/Archive 19

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. Please contact me on my talk page.

Archives

Current Late 2004 and onwards March 2006 and onwards November 2006 and onwards July 2007 August 2007 September 2007 October 2007 November 2007 December 2007 January 2008 February 2008 March 2008 April 2008 May 2008 June 2008 July 2008 August 2008 September 2008 October 2008 November 2008 December 2008 January 2009 February 2009 March 2009 April 2009 May 2009 June–July 2009 August–December 2009 January–June 2010 July 2010 and onwards

Thoughts on moving User:east718/IP to Wikipedia:Database reports/Indefinitely protected articles? It would "centralize" the page and give it a less cryptic title. --MZMcBride (talk) 05:57, 5 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Bam! east718 // talk // email // 20:47, 5 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hey, could you take a look at the edit war over at Chuck Lidell? It's been going on since about September I think, and I'm not sure what should be done about it as it's not really vandalism and there could probably be made arguments both for and against the inclusion of the sentence in question. Thanks! --aktsu ^(t / c) 07:44, 5 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

What an asinine edit war. I've semi-protected the article on the version I found it on and will jump into the talkpage discussion. east718 // talk // email // 20:47, 5 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Good morning. Just to let you know, I've reported the repeated threatening messages left on this page by that anon user at the Admin's messageboard. Bettia (rawr!) 11:14, 5 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Page semi-protected for a while. EyeSerene^talk 11:21, 5 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the vprot, but I'd rather leave this page open to anon editing. Better that the /b/tards mess up this page and get reverted and blocked by a bot rather than annoy somebody else and keep me from receiving legitimate messages from anonymous editors. east718 // talk // email // 20:47, 5 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Fair enough. Noted ;) EyeSerene^talk 13:39, 6 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for participating in my RfA, which recently passed with 126 in support, 22 in opposition and 6 neutral votes. Thanks for your oppose vote in my RFA. I will look into DGG's oppose and try to act on what he has said. • If you want to reply to this message please use my talk page as watch listing about 150 pages is a bit messy • ·Add§hore· Talk/Cont 23:33, 5 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

As you protected the list up until November 8th, would you please yourself update Palacio's record tomorrow, if he wins, or write in the new WBC interim strawweight champ if he loses? Thank you in advance, claudevsq (talk) 01:07, 6 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

I'll try to get to it, but I'll probably be out or watching the fight. It'd probably be faster if you placed an {{editprotected}} on the talkpage asking for the record to be updated. east718 // talk // email // 01:10, 6 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

I'm not sure if I know how this works, I think I didn't get it, but I will try to post the update HERE as soon as it is there (probably in about 37 hours), otherwise, I wait until Saturday and do it myself... Thanks! claudevsq (talk) 01:15, 6 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Palacios is now 25-2-0-1 (20 KO). If you could update, please... Otherwise, I'll do it tomorrow evening. Cheers! claudevsq (talk) 14:14, 7 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Will go and update it, thanks Claude. east718 // talk // email // 00:02, 8 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Incase there is any doubt, this is a sockpuppet of a chronic abuser and troll. The evidence is stark. Editors stopped editting at 12:32, 27 October 2008, edit warring with User:Setanta747. Ιρλανδία started at 13:05, 27 October 2008, also edit warring with User:Setanta747. He stopped editting on 22:49, 30 October 2008, and User:Zzzzzozzzzz started on 17:10, 1 November 2008. He also edit wars with Setanta747 ([1],[2]). The style is the same as the Wikipeire troll, and he pleas innocence every time like this. Therefore I do not want this account unblocked without a checkuser analysis first. --Jza84 |  Talk  01:33, 6 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

I was planning on posting on your talkpage with questions about what was up with this user's block, but got sidetracked. Here's as good place a place as any though. I have a couple concerns: I looked at the contributions of both Ιρλανδία (talk · contribs) and EditTors (talk · contribs) and didn't find any significant overlap, except for a couple reverts of Setanta747 (who is a dime-a-dozen revert warrior across Troubles articles in my experience, so it's not surprising that they'd get reverted). It's also quite improper to hold somebody's account hostage until evidence that they are a sock is presented; this is wildly out of line with both current community norms and the blocking policy. And I'm not even considering that we have historically excluded the use of checkuser to prove negatives, due to the intricacies of network engineering. Lastly, use of the unblock template doesn't signify "knowledge of WP"; we spell out what to do in the "you've been blocked" message, and make it intentionally easy to find and use. I'm planning on unblocking this user and asking a checkuser to take a look at Wikipiere's sockpuppets as well as these three accounts, please advise on how you'd like to proceed. east718 // talk // email // 01:38, 6 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

I'd like checkuser first please. I've had the honour of working with this user many times and unblocking is not conductive to the good of WP. Overlap aside, this user knows templates, internal WP terminology and how to game the system way beyond any normal expectation. Failing that, I'd like a second opinion from someone with experience with him/her - User:Ddstretch or User:Alison perhaps. --Jza84 |  Talk  01:56, 6 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

I have found it useful in the past for completely uninvolved administrators to act as they see fit in places like this, tempered with the advice of those who are familiar with the situation (rather than taking their say-so as gospel). If you have the same two or three people looking at the same set of people or articles all the time, a dangerous echo chamber can form. I've been looking for a CU for some time now and will keep you posted. east718 // talk // email // 02:00, 6 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

East asked me to have a look at this; Zzzzzozzzzz, Ιρλανδία, and EditTors are all very  Likely the same user. Wikipéire is  Stale, unless there's a fresher sock to check against, or another checkuser more familiar with this one. Does that cover things well enough, for now? – Luna Santin (talk) 02:47, 6 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

I'll just leave them blocked on the basis that nobody needs three accounts to edit war. east718 // talk // email // 03:31, 6 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for this. He'll be back of course. :) --Jza84 |  Talk  11:43, 6 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

I'm here regarding your December 2007 semi-protection of the article about rapper Ja Rule. Last time any IP vandalism was April 2007. According to the article history from that month, it seems that you protected the article right after another admin unprotected it, even though no edits occurred in between.

A few days ago, I tried going to WP:RFPP to request unprotection, but admins Tanthalas39 and Horologium denied my request citing BLP concerns, given that rap/hip hop wikipedia articles tend to attract a lot of vandalism. But now that the Ja Rule article is a lot cleaner than it was back in 2007 when problems were persistent I'm requesting that you unprotect the page, as last night i went to RFPP but admin VirtualSteve told me to ask the admin who last protected the article. Thank you, Andrewlp1991 (talk) 19:45, 6 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Never mind, another admin unprotected the article now. --Andrewlp1991 (talk) 05:45, 7 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hey, this image was one I uploaded, and it was apparently removed by you after being orphaned by this edit. I wasn't informed (as the uploader) of either the orphaning or the deletion. As the image was in fact part of the critical discussion about production, it would be nice to have it back. As the deleting admin, could you take care of it, please? - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 21:39, 7 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

I undeleted both images and reset the deletion timer on them, good luck with the article. east718 // talk // email // 00:02, 8 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

I meant to come back and say thanks, but I was caught up with dealing with both a newb and an old hat stalkerish anon (I see you have some experience with that, as well). Thanks for undeleting. They have both been utilized. Hope you have a good day. :) - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 15:59, 10 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

New York City Meetup Next: Sunday November 16th, Columbia University area Last: 6/01/2008 This box: view • talk • edit

In the afternoon, we will hold a session dedicated to meta:Wikimedia New York City activities, finalize and approve bylaws, interact with representatives from the Software Freedom Law Center, and hold salon-style group discussions on Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects (see the June meeting's minutes and the September meeting's minutes).

We'll also review our recent Wikis Take Manhattan event, and make preparations for our exciting successor Wikipedia Loves Art! bonanza, being planned with the Brooklyn Museum for February.

In the evening, we'll share dinner and chat at a local restaurant, and (weather permitting) hold a late-night astronomy event at Columbia's telescopes.

You can add or remove your name from the New York City Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/NYC/Invite list.

To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our mailing list.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:10, 7 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

im not sure of the proper way to address you here on wikipedia but i dont appreciate your accusations. i am not abusing multiple accounts. i have one account. i realize that i was, mistakenly editing the liddell article and i fixed that. my addition to the article is legit and can be backed by numerous sources. please do not erase it again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Emex4 (talk • contribs) 01:00, 8 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

You should be discussing your changes on the talkpage, like the other involved editors are. And you really have only one account? So you aren't Emex420 (talk · contribs) or 207.47.231.15 (talk · contribs)? east718 // talk // email // 01:16, 8 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Yes that is my IP Addess. Like I said, It was my mistake that I was editing without signing into my account. I am not much of a computer freak, to be honest. Anyway could you explain to me what your problem is with my edits? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Emex4 (talk • contribs) 02:25, 8 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Responded to your email. east718 // talk // email // 01:57, 10 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hi! When will the list "re-open"? Abraham's match is less than 1 hour away, and then Calzaghe in 6, 7 hours... claudevsq (talk) 20:59, 8 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Sorry! It's done just now! Thanks! claudevsq (talk) 21:02, 8 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

East, I´m happy to see you have recovered from your illness and will contribute your valued experience and goodwill to this site again. I know many have missed you in your absence.

While I expect you have much catching up to do, hopefully you may find the time to visit my talk page here: Talk:Ray_Joseph_Cormier#References and incorporate in the article, in a way you deem appropriate, the information associated with Reference 24 in my biography.

Peace Ray DoDaCanaDa (talk) 04:45, 9 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hi Ray, and thank you for the good wishes! Those articles are undoubtedly going to be useful, but Facebook makes the pictures so small that they're almost unreadable. Could you upload the images of text somewhere else? east718 // talk // email // 01:57, 10 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

• Actually, my computer crashed and I lost all the information. My neighbour loaned me a little 7¨ laptop until I can afford a new one. I am using an external monitor, keyboard and mouse so I can at least see a page. If you click on any image in my Facebook album, it will expand so it can be read. Actually Eric I did e-mail you all those references so unless your computer crashed as well, you have them all. Peace Ray DoDaCanaDa (talk) 12:22, 10 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

• In the old article http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ray_Joseph_Cormier&oldid=220975243 there is one small typo error in the section Power, politics, religion I would like to correct. It reads ´Late at night on August 23rd 1978´ but the actual date is August 3. In attempting to edit it there is an advisory that everything written after that line would be deleted. Is this accurate? Peace Ray DoDaCanaDa (talk) 02:20, 11 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

You've got mail. — Rlevse • Talk • 20:43, 9 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Got it; responded. east718 // talk // email // 01:57, 10 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

See this, R says you might have JSTOR. What is there about Tai, Thai, and Land of the Free? See edit I just made to Thailand and what that paragraph talks about. Sawadee. — JoJo • Talk • 21:05, 9 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hi JoJo, I found some pretty good stuff in addition to that article pertaining to "land of the free" and emailed it all to R (the second page of the Harmon piece will probably be most useful to you). Good luck with the article! east718 // talk // email // 01:57, 10 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hello, you seem to be an administrator... I just warned a User:Poopooyou for vandalism. I don't think the person's name is in very good taste. Not quite offensive, but not in good taste either. Is there a policy or something about that, and if so, should the person be warned? Thank you. LovesMacs (talk) 03:35, 10 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

I've blocked that user for having an inappropriate name; in the future you can just make a report at WP:UAA (the relevant policy is WP:U). If the complex instructions there aren't really to your liking, finding an active admin like you just did is fine also. east718 // talk // email // 03:38, 10 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Garo925 not only changing flag, but he and an IP also changing the names of weight classes now... Can't you do anything about it, please? Cheers, claudevsq (talk) 10:42, 12 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

In this section also I have some suggestions here if you will like to take a look. I have been suggested to contact you about those. Thanks :). Raffethefirst (talk) 13:05, 13 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

I have left some comments on the talkpage for the both of you. east718 // talk // email // 00:29, 17 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

User:East718/Archive 19 has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, and therefore, I've officially declared today as East718/Archive 19's day! For being such a beautiful person and great Wikipedian, enjoy being the Star of the day, dear East718/Archive 19! Peace, Rlevse ~ A record of your Day will always be kept here.

For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:EVula/Userboxes/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:09, 15 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thanks R... won't be around for putting the finishing touches on Boyce though, I'll be away for a while. east718 // talk // email // 00:29, 17 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for your input at my successful Rfa. I'm already thinking about working on my content creation. Hopefully in a few months, I'll have passed the point where you would've !voted Support. If you have any more suggestions on how I can improve myself as an editor, I'd be happy to hear them. Happy editing!--Aervanath lives in the Orphanage 21:06, 15 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Could you hold up on the deletions of those images? I thought those weren't supposed to be deleted until Monday? Robert K S (talk) 00:03, 17 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hm, you must have a bot that went to work on it as soon as the clock struck midnight UTC, because it continues to chug away at the deletions. In such case, the notification template left on each image wasn't very helpful, as it left the impression I had a bit more time than I thought I did. "After [Monday]" makes me think that they'll be deleted Tuesday, and not at the stroke of midnight Monday UTC. I don't think the images were given the full seven days. Robert K S (talk) 00:12, 17 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

That's correct, it is a bot... the reason why it runs 12 hours to one day early is so it deletes the images before any humans clearing the backlogs get to them... the whole point of the robot is to save human time, after all. But I digress... I've undeleted the following five images and reset the timer on them:

• Image:1974Jeopardy!Podiums3.jpg
• Image:1990-06-16SuperJeopardy!Podiums1.jpg
• Image:2002-06-18Jeopardy!Podiums1.jpg
• Image:2006-07-28Season22Podiums1.jpg
• Image:1983-09-18JeopardyTrebekPilot1Set1.jpg - even though I undeleted this one, the image seems slow to show up, I'll see if it works later.

Let me know if I've missed any. Hope that helps! east718 // talk // email // 00:29, 17 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

There are many--anything with a redlink on my talk page. Thanks. Robert K S (talk) 00:42, 17 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Got them all. east718 // talk // email // 00:51, 17 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

In the section above, it appears you stated that you use a bot to delete images? Is this correct?--Rockfang (talk) 01:53, 17 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

yes; it and other bots with administrative rights have been the subject of a recent community discussion at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Adminbots and its talkpage. east718 // talk // email // 01:55, 17 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

I would like to request that you stop running a bot from your main admin account. It is currently against policy. I suggest you start a new bot account, and run the bot from there.--Rockfang (talk) 02:09, 17 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

I have to respectfully decline. Being a year old, my bots are grandfathered in (see the last sentence in WP:ADMINBOTS), and I have a grace period to get the approval of BAG which I am currently sitting on. I do not expect approvals to be difficult, being that I notified members of BAG whenever I deployed a new adminbot and they have generally approved of them (and shot down some other silly ideas of mine in the process too). Regardless, I simply do not have the time or energy at the moment to fill out the paperwork, but I do remain responsible for the bot's actions, and am committing to getting the formal approval done by December. east718 // talk // email // 02:34, 17 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

I saw the last line. And I figured it was pretty pointless to ask, but I gave it a shot. I honestly doubt many admins will actually submit a BRFA anyways.--Rockfang (talk) 02:40, 17 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Actually, two BRFAs for grandfathered bots have occurred—Cydebot and the FA template protection robot—both been successful so far. I'll make sure to drop you a line when I do mine since you've shown some interest. east718 // talk // email // 02:43, 17 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hm. Why do you keep deleting this page? Just curious.--Rockfang (talk) 02:24, 17 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

He's cleaning out particularly nasty vandalism revisions.--Maxim_(talk) 02:28, 17 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

(e/c) What Maxim said, I had to remove around 750 bad edits from the history. east718 // talk // email // 02:34, 17 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Ok. But the section I added requesting him to stop using a bot on his account was removed. So, I'll request it again. :) Please stop using a bot on your admin account. It is currently against policy. I suggest putting in a WP:BRFA.--Rockfang (talk) 02:31, 17 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

This should not have been deleted as it is a sockpuppet of Tasos90 per this checkuser. Is it possible for the page to be reinstated? MvjsTalking 20:37, 17 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

The talk page had no indication that the user was a sockpuppet. I've restored it and removed it from the deletion pending category. east718 // talk // email // 23:15, 17 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Would you please restore this image? I've now merged the material from the article about the DVD into Imaginationland Episode I. DHowell (talk) 08:44, 20 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Done; good luck with the article. east718 // talk // email // 19:31, 20 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. DHowell (talk) 00:34, 21 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hi, East. Please restore Image:BlackjackPizza.JPG, which you deleted on November 2 because it was a "non-free image unused for seven days." When I rewrote the article Blackjack Pizza in October, I used poor formatting that did not correctly imbed the image in the article. I've fixed the link now, so please restore the image so that it can be used in that article. Thanks, Cunard (talk) 08:03, 21 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Sure thing. By the way, great work on the article! east718 // talk // email // 08:06, 21 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for undeleting the image. By the way, why did you unprotect my userpage? Cunard (talk) 08:09, 21 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

I thought it was a bit bizarre that a non-sysop would have a locked userpage -- I've come across this before and it was always a mistake on the part of the protecting sysop. I didn't realize that you actually wanted it, so I just put the protection back on. east718 // talk // email // 08:11, 21 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for restoring the protection! I don't want a userpage right now, but I might create one in the future. Until then, I would like my userpage to remain fully locked to prevent creation by vandals like MATTISM rocks (talk · contribs). Thank you for your quick response! Regards, Cunard (talk) 08:18, 21 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Just FYI: "instalment" is the proper spelling of the word in UK English. See here. Don't worry — you're not the first to "correct" that, and you won't be the last. (I've added a hidden-text note about it to the TFI page and the article, for the benefit of the next "corrector".) —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 21:01, 21 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Since you took action in the past and are familiar with this case: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#1RR_violation_report. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 03:18, 24 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hi, I've just reverted your deletion of this page as I'm trying to lodge an abuse report for IP vandalism from this editor, and it's useful as evidence that they have been warned about their behavior. FYI, the report is at Wikipedia:Abuse reports/202.37.68.x and 118.92.x. Thanks, Nick-D (talk) 07:08, 25 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

No worries. I've removed it from the deletion pending category so hopefully nobody else will delete it again. east718 // talk // email // 07:46, 25 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for that. Nick-D (talk) 07:51, 25 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hello, these images - one of which was deleted recently by you as it was ophaned - I would now like to use again. would it be possible for you to restore them, please? The second image I believe got deleted due to an invalid rationale, which I would also like to fix a reuse again. They show the visual differences between a character now and 40 years ago.Image:Betty.jpg & Image:Bettyturpin.jpg Many thanks --GunGagdin^Moan 17:49, 25 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Restored both, good luck with the article. east718 // talk // email // 18:22, 25 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thankyou very much indeed :) GunGagdin^Moan 18:31, 25 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

East, an editor (User:Rockyobody) was unblocked recently but still couldn't edit. I figured he had just triggered an autoblock (he had) and clearing that would let him edit, but it appears that his IP address has been blocked by you for a month as a "sockfarm". I don't want to unblock this IP without talking to you. The block settings say it isn't a hard block, so I'm not sure how it is impacting him. All in all it is kind of confusing. Hopefully you can shed some light on this. Thanks. Protonk (talk) 00:27, 26 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

This IP address is unshared and relatively static, and it belongs to Rockyobody (talk · contribs) exclusively. Since you're the blocking admin there, I'll just defer to you on whether the IP's block needs to be adjusted. You should know though that Rockyobody tried evading their block with KenGriffeyJr17 (talk · contribs), which got blocked by pure coincidence for an unrelated reason. (By the way, the block is a hardblock, I messed it up initially and fixed both the duration and flags immediately after.) east718 // talk // email // 01:31, 26 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Ok. I didn't know he was operating the other account until just now. I'll unblock the IP because I don't think he was "evading" the block as he had been unblocked (or someone unblocked the account but didn't lift the autoblock) prior to the use of the Ken Griffey account. Protonk (talk) 02:04, 26 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Well, this doesn't inspire much confidence. I suppose they're your problem now though. east718 // talk // email // 02:11, 26 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hi, can you undelete this please:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image:Indonesia_1946b_1000r_r.jpg

It should have been referenced but a typing error meant it wasn't, but I have corrected it now.Sumbuddi (talk) 13:18, 28 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

 Done. east718 // talk // email // 02:54, 29 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Hi East. I've been following the various arbitration election user guides at Template:ACE 2008 guides, and I noticed what you said about me here (and the later correction discussed on the talk page). I can understand the concerns people may have about the MatthewHoffman case (though maybe you could check that you haven't confused me with someone else there), but I'm puzzled about the Badlydrawnjeff case comment. Could you point out where I advanced a bizarre position on BLP there? I've been looking but can't find anything. It is also possible that my views have changed since then. Carcharoth (talk) 08:01, 29 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Carcharoth asked me for advice and after looking into this briefly, I wasn't sure what you were referring to either. Do you think you could clarify this? Thanks! ++Lar: t/c 16:07, 30 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

I haven't read over that case in a very long time (probably since it closed, to be honest), but I remember a few people whom I found at the time to be suggesting problematic ideas. The specific proposal of yours I took objection to was that editorial methods must be exhausted before a deletion discussion/BLP discussion, which is not good enough of for libelous pages or pages that fail to meet our standards (QZ would be an example of this which you pointed out). I'll note in your defense though that WP:BLP didn't really advocate deletion as a solution back then ([3]); also, that case is around 18 months old, so your views have without a doubt changed.

I took a look at your questions page again, and although you still clearly favor using editorial judgment first, you're presenting it as one of many options, instead of something that must be tried before a BLP deletion. I was also pretty impressed with your answers to Lar and rspeer, and will end up supporting you. :-) east718 // talk // email // 01:13, 1 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thanks. I was a bit concerned because some people linked to your guide and one person has even commented on what you said. But I can't do much about that now. The election is fascinating to watch as it unfolds. Mustn't talk too much about it. My fingers are falling off anyway, after all those questions and my overlong answers. :-) Carcharoth (talk) 02:00, 1 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

User talk:Imnotdoinganythingwrong was a talkpage of a blocked historical user. Will you restore it? -- IRP ☎ 15:24, 29 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Sure. east718 // talk // email // 01:13, 1 December 2008 (UTC)Reply