text:
User talk:Hirudo

 Note: If i left a comment on your talk page, please don't reply here but instead below the original comment. I will be watching your page for replies. Thanks.

Houston Youth Symphony Orchestra
Hi, I just saw your copyvio notice on the above page, but you didn't provide the URL with the source material. When tagging a page as a copyright violation, please use the following format:, where "http://www.foo.com" is replaced with the address of the site that has the original material on it. Thanks! | Klaw ¡digame! 19:56, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Hey, thanks for the reply. You can reply to me on my user page or yours; I usually watch a user page where I've just asked a question. Anyway, I wasn't questioning whether it was a copyvio, but was just explaining the procedure. Including the URL is important, as - for example - a misguided editor might try to tag his own edits with a copyright notice. I hope that makes sense. It wasn't meant as a criticism of you in any way. | Klaw ¡digame! 05:08, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Yup it makes sense. As I said I didn't have a URL to put in since I have no idea where the text came from. Is there anything I should put instead in a case like this? And I didn't take it as criticism. It's always nice to get feedback from someone more senior. Hirudo 07:11, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Ah, OK. In that case, take a phrase from the article - preferably one with some longer words - and google it. You'll probably find the source page at or near the top of the rankings. I just googled "conducted by Clifton Evans" with "Philharmonia" and got two results, one of which is the source for your copyvio! | Klaw ¡digame! 16:28, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Request for assistance
I'll need to know the name of the article. --Phroziac. o ºO (♥♥♥♥ chocolate!) 22:36, 30 December 2005 (UTC)
 * I can't really say if it's a copyvio or not from a casual glance, make sure you have the right URL in the notice. Anyway, I have reverted and protected the page, it really should go through the WP:CP process. It appears you did the right thing, thank you. --Phroziac . o ºO (♥♥♥♥ chocolate!) 22:55, 30 December 2005 (UTC)

perfect article
Read this Wikipedia words:

 * ...is nearly self-contained; includes and explains all essential terminology required in the article, such that someone could completely understand the subject without having to read many other articles.
 * ...branches out; contains wikilinks and sources to other articles and outside materials that may add new meaning or background to the subject or give relevant, connected information, so readers may easily understand where they should go for more background or information.
 * ...acknowledges and explores all aspects of the subject; covers every encyclopedic angle of the subject.
 * ...is an appropriate length; article size is long enough to provide sufficient information, depth, and analysis on its subject, without including unnecessary detail or information that would be better suited for a child article ("subarticle")... (AND THAT'S WHAT THIS ARTICLE DOES!!!!!!! - T)
 * ...reflects expert knowledge; fact-based and rooted in sound scholarly and logical principles.
 * ...is well-documented; reputable sources are cited, especially those which are the most accessible and up-to-date. (in this case the ones with the producers word - T)
 * ...includes informative, relevant images, each with an explanatory caption (...) to add to a reader's interest or understanding of the text(...)
 * ...is engaging; uses varied sentence lengths and patterns; language is descriptive and colorful while still maintaining encyclopedic tone.

(from the perfect article) ... Just trying to make you change your mind about my bat-embargo page. Throw me a word if you want. Greetings--T for Trouble-maker 05:06, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
 * I still don't think that the subject is important enough to spend an article on. In a few years it'll be just another footnote in history and that's exactly the amount of space it's worth. Now don't get me wrong, there's plenty of articles out that that merit deletion more than this one in my opinion (all the individual digimon/pokemon ones come to mind), but just because consensus is to keep that (expletive deleted) around doesn't mean I'll stop trying to keep it clean. Hirudo 05:31, 21 January 2006 (UTC)

Thangkhangin
Hi. You tagged this article (Thangkhangin) for cleanup. Wasn't sure what you found wrong with the page (but I made my attempt), and so I will leave it to you to decide if the clean up tag can be removed. Shabbs
 * Lacks a proper introduction sentence, needs linkifying, and copyedit (trail-blazer should be plural, ZNC needs a comma after it to name a few obvious ones) Hirudo 02:41, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

I'm now wondering if this article was initiated by the subject, himself, or not. How is this checked, or verified? How much does it matter? Shabbs
 * I have no idea. I considered putting it up as an Afd, but Google does show some hits for ZNC and there's a few related articles on Wikipedia already. Hirudo 14:10, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

I have gone ahead, despite reservations, and made a more serious attempt at clean up. input and feedback is appreciated. shabbs 19:57, 1 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Looks a lot better. I wonder if it should be moved to Thangkhangin Ngaihte though, since that seems to be his full name according to your edits. Hirudo 14:20, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

While researching the subject, I happened to uncover an online article written by Thangkhangin, which included his yahoo email address. Would it be inapropriate to to seek his input on the question of the proper presentation of his name as an article title?shabbs 22:12, 2 February 2006 (UTC)
 * all right, the guy turned out to be a relative. According to him, the article, as it appears now, is factual. And he recommended adding "Ngaihte" to the title, so I did. shabbs 14:23, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Seven Days Battles - typo?
In the "opposing forces" section is this bullet:

Maj. Gen. Thomas J. "Stonewall" Jackson, having just arrived from his victories in the Valley Campaign, commanded a force consisting of *his own division* (now commanded by Brig. Gen. Charles S. Winder) and those of Maj. Gen. Richard S. Ewell, Brig. Gen. William H. C. Whiting, and Maj. Gen. D.H. Hill.

Shouldn't that be "his own *brigade*", which would be more in line with the other bullets? Alternatively, if the text is correct, perhaps it should be mentioned that his part of the army was as big as the others combined (or his divisions were very small?). Hirudo 17:53, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

 * Update*: In the Battle of Beaver Dam Creek article it also says divisions, so I assume it's not a typo. I'm still curious as to the relative troop numbers then though. Hirudo 18:01, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

 * I don't have size info available at the moment, but you can check out Stonewall's OR for more details on the brigades assigned to each of the divisions I cited. Be aware, however, that early in the Civil War about the only unit that was really well understood was the regiment, and all other larger organizations sometimes had sizes that were not directly related to that same type of organization later in the war. Hal Jespersen 19:37, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Did you know? prod can have a parameter.
Hello there. You have proposed the article Mithril (runescape) for deletion without providing a reason why in the prod template. You may be interested to know that you can add your reasoning like that:. This will make your reasoning show up in the article's deletion notice. It will also aid other users in considering your suggestion on the Proposed Deletions log. See also: How to propose deletion of an article. Sandstein 14:36, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Yup. Must have been tired when I added that one. Sorry. Hirudo 15:45, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Date notation in Temple in Jerusalem
Hi Hirudo, thank you for pointing out my inconsistency. Yes, looking at the article's history, I must admit that you are correct. My edit of March 27, 2005 - as far as I remember, that was good old time when I didn't know about the eras controversy. Since then, many things have changed, including Requests for arbitration/Jguk and Requests for arbitration/jguk 2 (see also ). Sorry if my recent edit summary looked arrogant. As you know, anons and new users often unknowingly violate rules. You are very kind noting that "it's been changed long enough ago that a wholesale change back to BC/AD doesn't make sense". Thank you. ←Humus sapiens ну? 08:47, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Battle of Actium image
Hi, thank you for the comment on the image. I noticed also that the colors are quite difficult to see on the image, but unfortunately I have lost the original picture with the text layers so I can't change them very easily. I will try to build a better picture soon Sinerma 18:23, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Bad faith AfD noiminations

 * Nonsense. Nothing in the official policy, and next to nothing in the related discussions, calls for this. The speed with which Eusebeus is making these mechanical nominations, his identification of the individuals disputing prods presented as though it was evidence for deletion, and his regular failure to deal with the substance of the prod objections is inconsistent with good faith, and quite a few of the nominations are clearly headed for sound rejections. This is disruptive behavior, in exactly the same way that mechanical, unresearched removal of prod tags it. And where did you get that "very convincing reason" standard, which quite definitely isn't part of the official policy or consensus guideline. Monicasdude 14:42, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

AFD on J. D. Montgomery
Hello there Hirudo, I'm always welcome to interested parties voicing their interest on discussions taking place on pages. I'm also glad to hear you agree with how I feel about the subject; there's nothing that I would like to see more than Wikipedia to become a standard and accepted (read: encyclopedic) source of information in the future. On a side note, I see that you've garnered a comment from Monicasdude above. I've recently been whipped into the tizzy of his actions on which there's a whole to-do going on at Requests for Arbitration, and I've been trying to mediate between him and Eusebeus, mostly trying to keep heads cool, which is a pretty heavy task. By any means, I just felt the need to encourage you to speak out, be it on talk pages or whatever, and to make yourself heard as part of the community here. :) Cheers, -Kuzaar 04:13, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Requesting Transwiki
I noticed on Articles for deletion/XM maintenance that you said you had problems locating instructions on how to nominate a transwiki. To do so, you can tag a page with move to Wikibooks, move to Wikisource, or the like. However, bringing the page to AFD is also acceptable and in many cases will cause the move to be faster. Stifle (talk) 01:31, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Much appreciated, thanks! -- Hirudo 03:01, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 02:50, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

Tomato Adventure
Why does this article need to be deleted? Is it because of the grammer? Is it because it is too minor? Is it because it doesn't have enough good info? Tell me what is the problem with this article? User:Parrothead1983

 * Because it's just another video game. It's not genre-defining, it didn't have any cultural influence. I don't think articles on minor videogames are encyclopedic. -- Hirudo 01:36, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Hey Hirudo. Just as a point of interest, I don't think all published videogames necessarily deserve articles of their own (though really, modern published videogames tend to be so large undertakings that they become at least somewhat notable simply because of the money and effort involved), but I do think that videogames created and published by major manufacturers, such as Nintendo, do. It's a little like dealing with music by huge stars -- even if Madonna puts out an album that is completely irrelevant in itself, it's still an album by one of the most important figures in pop music and thus inherently notable. Also, I think that the fact that even relatively insignificant video games tend to be far more widely distributed than, oh, albums by small garage bands or self-published novels is something of a factor here. -- Captain Disdain 01:38, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Which will get Wikipedia flooded with articles about games which no one will care about in 5 or 10 years... -- Hirudo 02:23, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, yeah. Unless you're looking for information about games published by Nintendo, of course, which isn't a particularly unlikely scenario, considering how many people are into gaming. I mean, Wikipedia is already flooded with articles about, say, various types of moss I don't really care about. I don't think you're supposed to find everything personally interesting. Point is, a video game by a significant company automatically has a certain degree of significance, just like a book by Stephen King automatically has some significance, even if it it's one of the ones he squeezes out on the crapper... -- Captain Disdain 05:27, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
 * "Someone might be looking for it" is not sufficient to warrant a Wikipedia article; otherwise we might as well just put up all the cheats and walkthroughs and everything else. I probably wouldn't make too much of a fuss about a List of games by Nintendo article, with a paragraph or so about each game. If people want an in-depth description/review, they should go to a gaming website.
 * And grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr on your second remark. Heaps and heaps of articles being on Wikipedia that really don't belong is NOT (and I was thinking about using a +20 font on that not) a reason to add more.
 * As for the remark about being interesting, that's irrelevant. I am interested in things like this and I enjoyed the article (heck I even went looking for more info since it seems like something I might want to play), but that still doesn't make it worth an article.
 * Regarding books by Stephen King, my opinion there is the same as for singles/albums/bands. Significant books/singles/albums should get their own article, insignificant ones by a significant author/singer should get just a mention on the author/singer's main page (or a list of works by... page if the main page gets too long)
 * (I'm sure I don't have to tell you that all the comments above are obviously my opinion only. I believe that most of my opinion is a valid interpretation of the Wikipedia guidelines, but I realize all to well that plenty of people disagree with it) -- Hirudo 11:57, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh, no, no, you misunderstand me. My point is most emphatically not that just because we already have crap, we might as well have some more. That's one attitude that I seriously dislike. I'm just saying that just because I personally don't really give a damn about a lot of the articles on Wikipedia, that doesn't in any way mean they are about non-notable subjects.
 * But, y'know, the funny thing is, I find myself very often talking about notability and whether it's a valid criterion for inclusion -- and I think it's a very important criteria for inclusion, because otherwise I might as well write an article about my left big toe, as long as I could prove it exists. So really, on that level, I agree with you 100% -- it's just that where we appear to disagree is the level of notability that is required for inclusion. You seem to demand a comparatively high level of notability from the subjects of Wikipedia articles. That's where we disagree, obviously, but having been in exactly your relative position very often before, I honestly find myself very sympathetic to your view here. =) -- Captain Disdain 20:27, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I know the "I don't care about it so it shouldn't be here" attitude, and I think/hope I've been mostly successful in not acting that way.
 * As for the required level of notability... that's why there's Deletionists and Inclustionists I guess :) My main concern is that the more cruft gets in, the harder it will be to find the real information. I'd much rather see Wikipedia have 100 articles about schools with something special about them (and yes "something special" is rather vague) than those 100 articles and another 10000 about schools where the only difference is the name and location. I think I'll update my user page in a bit with my thoughts on what I like to see in Wikipedia and what not. -- Hirudo 23:18, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't think you have much to worry about on that front, really; you make it clear enough that your problem with Tomato Adventure, for example, isn't that you don't care about the topic but rather that you don't think it's important enough for inclusion.
 * Anyway, personally, I'm not a big fan of the whole deletionist/inclusionist split; it seems like a pretty inaccurate generalization to me. I mean, I've put up a lot of things for AfD and I've voted to delete many articles. Does that make me a deletionist? Maybe it does, but it's a silly label in that it implies that I want to delete everything, when in fact I'm all for keeping most of the articles that are in Wikipedia at the moment.
 * Generalisations aren't always bad, as long as you don't get caught up in them. I think one of the reasons why a deletionist label fits me pretty well is because I'm (at least for the moment) more interested in improving Wikipedia by cutting out the warts than by adding new content.
 * I think it is, at least to some extent, an issue of credibility. If I read an encyclopedia, I expect it to be accurate and meaningful. If I see articles about some guy who lives down the street, that doesn't really fill me with confidence towards the publication I'm reading. It's not that I mind an encyclopedia containing obscure items (quite the contrary, really), but there's a huge difference between obscure and insignificant...
 * One of the things that's probably getting me into some disagreements on Afds is that I believe Wikipedia should be a general encyclopedia. In other words I think for example that there should be an article about the TV show Friends, and perhaps if the main one gets too big one about the major characters, but not full episode lists or pages about each episode. Those should go into a TV-oriented wiki. Ditto for all the pages about individual characters in video games and all the pokemon stuff (with a few exceptions perhaps)
 * Of course, as we often like to point out, Wikipedia isn't paper. Listing information about, say, somewhat obscure video games and whatnot isn't really a problem as such; it's not like we're going to run out of space here. Personally, I think I have a lot more problems with listing passing local fads (which tend to be extremely subjective by their nature) and projects such as bands that exist for six months and then fade away and never really manage to be anything but obscure and insignificant, at least in the eyes of the world at large. At least with published products (books, games, movies, whatever) there's something concrete there that is rather easily handled.
 * Sounds somewhat like the old "how important will this still be 5 or 10 years from now" attitude; slightly modified perhaps. I'm all for that.
 * That said, I must admit that if I see an article about a book, I'm more likely to take it seriously than I would an article about a self-published CD from a random garage band, so it's not like I can claim to be completely unbiased here (though being aware of my bias, I do my best to at least be fair about it). I do think that any situation where a legitimate and serious researcher is looking for information about a topic and can't find it on Wikipedia is an unfortunate one and should be avoided where possible -- and to get back to games like Tomato Adventure, here, I can think of a situation where someone would have a serious and legitimate, quite possibly professional interest in a game published by one of the most famous and influential video game companies in existence, whereas it's far, far less likely that someone would have a similar professional interest in the self-published CD by a random noninfluential garage band. Clearly, not all publications are created equal.
 * Guilty as charged on that kind of bias myself as well, with the awareness as well. Assuming Tomato Adventure really is genre-defining (though I somehow doubt that wacky RPG is a real genre), I'd agree with you. Still it's debatable how much information someone should be able to find out about it. I'd argue a full article for the really important games, a paragraph in a page with a list of game for lesser ones, and just a sentence for the forgotten ones.
 * Anyway! I'm just thinking out loud here. It's an interesting topic. Thanks for indulging me and sorry to bend your ear. =) -- Captain Disdain 00:59, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry it took me so long to reply this time. And yes it is interesting, and probably also the topic of much of the heated and uncivil debates that rage here occasionally. It's good to see it doesn't have to be that way :) -- Hirudo 22:48, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

It is genre-defining. It carried out the wacky RPG genre into the next era of gaming. It was also created by the same creators of the Mario & Luigi RPG series. User:Parrothead1983
 * That's not the impression I get after reading the Gameplay section. But you're more knowledgable than me about this so I'll assume you're correct. -- Hirudo 03:29, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Deprod
I have removed the prod tag from Bitter & Twisted, which you proposed for deletion. I am leaving this message here to notify you about it. I have merged this album back to the band article at Area-7. In the future, if the band page becomes too long, the history of Bitter & Twisted might be useful. If you still feel the article should be deleted, please don't add the prod template back to it, as Proposed deletion is only for non-controversial deletion. Instead, feel free to list the article at Articles for deletion. Thanks! Mango juice talk 20:12, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm fine with a redirect. -- Hirudo 21:10, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Comment?
Did you see the comment on my talk page? Thetruthbelow (talk) 00:24, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Yup. I was offline most of last night so just took me a while to reply -- Hirudo 13:05, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

Imposter
My first imposter! Thanks for the heads up. This vandal has been indef blocked. --F a ng Aili talk 16:39, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Treehouse (Drake and Josh episode)
The page better be recreated before the episode airs. Or I will do it and revert any vandalisim by any user. This is the worst and I mean the worst article for deletion I have ever seen. There is no reason to delete it. Can you think of any? ForestH2
 * Not aired yet, non encylopedic to begin with, not important enough to have its own article. Someone really should put up the rest of that series on Afd as well, or at least get it merged into an article per season (which really should happen to a bunch of other series too)
 * But on top of that, since the above is my opinion only, the article went through Afd which decided it should be redirected. If you disagree with that, fine, bring it up on Deletion Review, but don't subvert the process by unilaterally putting back the article. -- Hirudo 03:00, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

 * When it's aired I'm going to put it back. --ForestH2

 * Why do you have a problem with following procedures? If you want it restored, bring it up to Deletion Review as I suggested. I find your attitude of "I know what's best for Wikipedia no matter what everyone else says" rather disturbing. -- Hirudo 03:07, 3 June 2006 (UTC)

Hidden Link
Hey just saw your message. Actually, before they were the size of a "period" but no one was finding it. To tell the truth, the link is more of a signing space then a hidden link. Thanks, Thetruthbelow (talk)  23:03, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I was just being a smartass. I think it's pretty cool actually -- Hirudo 01:11, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks man, I appreciate that. Trust me, I know alot about being a smartass ; ) Thetruthbelow (talk)  01:13, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

Seth Yurdin
Ok, thanks for letting me know. Cheers! The King of Kings  22:35, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Anytime. Now, at the risk of sounding arrogant, how much bigger do you think I need to make the notice at the top of my talk page before people will actually notice it? :) -- Hirudo 22:38, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Treehouse (Drake and Josh episode)
My reply: Put all the rest of your comments on the Treehouse (Drake and Josh episode) talk page.

 * Hmmm...I don't see how it's inappropriate. But I think because of this very unneeded and maybe even stupid discussion I've had enough of this encylopedia ForestH2

 * Because there was a consensus on Afd to redirect. I'm not sure what's unclear to you. If a consensus is reached on Afd or similar pages, rejecting that consensus is not something an individual user should do. If you want the page to be restored, you should seek a new consensus, not ignore the current result -- Hirudo 03:46, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

 * Furthermore I think this encylopedia is going no where at all, and I hope maybe sometime I'll think different. I am quite fed up with why we need this page deleted and I'm about to think about leaving Wikipedia. ForestH2

 * I almost agree with you. The amount of non-encylopedic stuff that is in here nowadays (such as articles about individual TV episodes) is discouraging. -- Hirudo 03:46, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

 * Hirudo, give me links to where I can ask that the page be restored please. ForestH2

 * WP:DRV and/or WT:DRV appear to be the best place for it. You can read here for a discussion about challenging a redirect after I asked a few admins for input -- Hirudo 16:22, 12 June 2006 (UTC)

User:Burnley Masher
(italic part copied from Zoe's talk page)

''Could you please take a look at Special:Contributions?target=Burnley Masher (ok so that's not how you can link to a contrib page apparently. this link should work) ? His only contribs seem to be adding links to one specific site to a heap of WW1 articles. While the site may actually be appropriate for a good deal of them, it still smells like linkspam to me, and out of place in at least the Treaty of Versailles article (which is where I first noticed it). -- Hirudo 14:26, 23 June 2006 (UTC)''

 * The link would seem to be appropriate at World War I, but spamming it all over the place seemed excessive, as was the advertising he was using to describe the link. User:Zoe|(talk) 00:55, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Treehouse
Material getting used again for newly created article Season 4 episodes for Drake & Josh See List of Drake & Josh episodes for more. Just wanted to let you know. Your message is covering my message. ForestH2 | + | √+ | √ | √- | - 21:47, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I have no objection against the new article or the inclusion of Treehouse in that article. I assume you took care of adding/changing the appropriate redirects. Great work. -- Hirudo 13:00, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
 * I just did some minor cleanup on the new article, mostly removing redundancies. -- Hirudo 13:11, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
 * And, if you want you can help by going to List of Drake & Josh episodes and redirecting them all to Season 2 episodes for Drake & Josh and Season 3 episodes for Drake & Josh I'm busy right now but after my trip I'll redirect them unless another user does. ForestH2 | + | √+ | √ | √- | - 21:05, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Call Accounting - Copyright
Hirudo, I notice you tagged the Call Accounting article as having a copyright violation. I went to the site that had the similar text and was dismayed. What I know for a fact is that the original text is from wiki and the other site seems to have copied and pasted the text onto their site. I know this for a fact because I was the one who revised the paragraph. You can verify that it is the other site that is copying by comparing how the site describes "Call Parking", "Call Conference" (and maybe other terms) and then compare it with the respective articles in Wiki -- the same wordings. I don't care too much one way or the other how this gets settled, but it is setting a dangerous precedent where a site takes from a Wiki article and then the wiki article gets banned from using its own words. Vincehk 09:28, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I suggest you bring up this issue on the Copyright problems; I'm not sure if the copyvio procedure allows you to revert the page in the mean time, but if it does please go ahead.
 * The best way to avoid this is probably to make sure the sources used to create the page are clearly mentioned in the article, which wasn't the case here. Without those, I think it will be hard to avoid similar incidents in the future since there's no way of knowing who copied from who. Hirudo 17:17, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Mary Morstan - Sherlock Holmes
Took your tag for merging Mary Morstan into Doctor Watson off, as no comment for over six months, and I believed, by virtue of her position as a key character/client in a Sherlock Holmes adventure that she merits her own position. However, the article could, I agree, do with some sorting out - which I will apply myself to. All the best Stevingtonian 21:44, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
 * No objection Hirudo 18:11, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Pete smyser-scene-is-clean.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Pete smyser-scene-is-clean.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 07:10, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

 * File history shows it was uploaded by you on April 24, 2006, it replaced another fil uploaded under the same name earlier in April. Could you have editted the image to like crop it and then uploaded it?  MBisanz  talk 19:37, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

 * That's a long time back lol. Yes it was most likely a crop then. Thanks for looking into this. Hirudo (talk) 20:28, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Meaning of Names
Do you, by any chance, know what your username means? Pvamp (talk) 21:23, 7 October 2009 (UTC)Connie
 * Leech Hirudo (talk) 20:03, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference
Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to  in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and you will still be able to manually mark your edits as being minor in the usual way.

For established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. With the script in place, you can continue with this functionality indefinitely (its use is governed by WP:MINOR). If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 18:56, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

You're invited! New England Wikimedia General Meeting
Message delivered by Dominic at 08:40, 11 April 2012 (UTC). Note: You can remove your name from this meetup invite list here.

Nomination of List of papabili in the 2013 papal conclave for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of papabili in the 2013 papal conclave is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/List of papabili in the 2013 papal conclave until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. -- --JamboQueen (talk) 17:16, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

2nd Annual Wikimedia New England General Meeting
You are invited to the 2nd Annual Wikimedia New England General Meeting, on 20 July 2013 in Boston! We will be talking about the future of the chapter, including GLAM, Wiki Loves Monuments, and where we want to take our chapter in the future! EdwardsBot (talk) 10:10, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

New England Wikipedia Day @ MIT: Saturday Jan 18
(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Boston-area events by removing your name from this list.)

You're invited!
(You can unsubscribe from future notifications for Boston-area events by removing your name from this list.)

This Friday: Women in Architecture edit-a-thon @ Cambridge, MA
You are invited to join the Women in Architecture edit-a-thon @ Cambridge, MA on October 16! (drop-in any time, 6-9pm)--Pharos (talk) 18:28, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:09, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:33, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

JavaScript RegExp problem
I noticed you have experience in JavaScript. I'm hoping you can help me with a problem I've run into writing a userscript.

Please see my post at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject JavaScript.

Thank you. The Transhumanist 12:19, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Sunday July 16: New England Wiknic @ Cambridge, MA
(You can subscribe/unsubscribe from future notifications for Boston-area events by adding or removing your name from this list.)

title: User talk:Hirudo


text:
User talk:Kungfuadam/Archive 3

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2

Congrats
Congratulations on your successful FRA. i think you'll make a good admin. see ya 'round the IRC's. Vulcanstar6 18:51, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

but its true!
but it's true about kennedy! it should really be on there, because its a really funny fact that not many people know. i swear on my life its true. you can verify it. for example: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/low/programmes/letter_from_america/3167810.stm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.81.200.62 (talk • contribs)

Re: Question
That's absoultely fine! :) — FireFox • T [14:35, 2 April 2006]

Re: Signing your posts
ok thanks...

research in motion
adam - you may want to remove the last 2 edits by Nowa (who seems to have some legal experience) for the same reasons you removed the RIM edit on march 10th. This is a long story and this addition is only one small piece of hearsay. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.29.22.85 (talk • contribs)
 * I agree, I removed it.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]](talk) 11:34, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Adam and unsigned, I'm afraid I have not been a part of the previous discussion.  Is there any paticular reason that you do not want more extensive background on the RIM NTP litigation in the article?  As far as "hearsay" goes, please check the links provided for documentary support.  --Nowa 16:43, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

 * hi nowa and adam, there are literally thousands of articles that I’ve read over the past 4 years on this topic. For every journalist that implicates RIM as arrogant, fraudulent or stubbornly stupid, there are just as many who characterize NTP as trolls, extortionists and skilled manipulators of the system.  Doing a simple google search will yield this insight.  However, I don’t believe it is the role of Wikipedia articles to reiterate such polarized views, especially when the real truth is buried deep in corporate and courtroom non-disclosure.  Nowa, it is a slippery slope when you include the wittings of one newspaper.  It’s an invitation for edits from all over the map.  I believe the last paragraph covers the three main points of the topic and is sufficient – Rim lost in court – a settlement was reached – and the USPTO did a re-examination.  On this basis I ask you Nowa to please reconsider and remove your edits. 70.29.22.85 22:57, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
 * May I remember everyone to review the policy on Neutral Point of View. This is an encyclopedia so we cannot bias. Just be careful and don't get into an edit war with each other.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]](talk) 23:00, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

 * Adam and anonymous, Good point about reviewing NPOV policy.  Also good point about there being thousands of articles relating to the case.  That suggests that perhaps we should start a separate Wikipedia article on it.  We could use the current longer version of the RIM patents section as a beginning stub.  Others could add additional important information, such as the behavior of NTP, to flesh out the history.

 * Once the article was started, I would be agreeable to reduction of the patent section of the RIM article back to its shorter form. Comments?  Builds?--Nowa 23:38, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

 * Nowa that's a great idea!! what should it be called "RIM NTP Patent Dispute" ... I have no idea - you guys know better - i'm just a beginner. the link to it should be at the end of the litigation section in both NTP and RIM pages. i think many will contribute because its not on the corporate page. 70.29.22.85 01:22, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Nowa, I will let you take care of that- I don't really know about the subject. I just became involved when I saw the article on Recent Changes. That is a good idea! Now- anonymous, can I suggest that you create an account for yourself? That way no one can see your IP and you can do things like create articles, watch pages etc.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]](talk) 02:13, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Nowa, Adam - Thanks, I've signed up as you can see. There is a sugestion on RIM talk that the NTP page and a link to it has been used for all the litigation information - I agree with this since there is much more to RIM than litigation and the page may get filled with patent stuff.  Nowa, have you seen the links in [], there is much more neutral reporting here than the Globe article you comment on. PDAgeek 18:15, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks
Kungfuadam, thanks for reverting vandalism to my user talk page! Cheers, Tangot a ngo 00:54, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

board of biffo
You have put a deletion notice on the page I created for The Board of Biffo with the reason nn website. Please explain this reason to me, and also how I can improve the article. Russ 19:02, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Apparently it was speedy deleted by someone else. Please refer to WP:WEB--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]](talk) 19:05, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Oops, my bad, it is was not. Please refer to the link I just gave. Also, I edited your post to make the link show up.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]](talk) 19:07, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I have deleted the content of the page. It has been reported in one magazine only, and this probably doesn't count as notable content. Russ 19:11, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Mello-Leitão
Thanks for editing M-L page. But the widely use plural of genus (when used in the zoological taxonomic sense) in "genera", not "genuses". Cheers, Vae victis. -- Vae victis 16:38, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Ok, thanks.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 16:40, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

blocking the article
(copied from Talk:Katie Holmes)

Shouldn't articles on the main page be blocked? So we would have avoided vandalism. Mr.K. 15:51, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
 * We never want to block main page articles unless absolutely necessary. When articles are featured on the front page, they get a lot of improvement. There are many editors watching the featured articles and revert vandalism pretty soon after it happens.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 16:04, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, but those countering vandalism need to watch more carefully, some of the vandalism is getting overlooked because of the constant changes and, apparently, edit conflicts. --67.77.201.22 16:09, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
 * For example, this edit by User:Timbarajas was not corrected by User:CambridgeBayWeather(Who's edit summary states: "CambridgeBayWeather m (Reverted edits by User:24.172.195.239 (talk) to last version by User:Timbarajas"). CambridgeBayWeather actually reverted to a vandalized version, so I had to go back and manually correct it. The page should be locked, and anyone wishing to contribute should come here to [the] talk page [Talk:Katie Holmes] and suggest changes. --67.77.201.22 16:26, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Hello
I wrote on my talk page. I don't think that asking someone to calm down and to stop being a WP:DICK can be considered to be a personal attack. Do you? The guy was starting problems over an issue that was resolved in December 2005, and insisting on going back to a vandalised version of an article, and generally being pretty silly about things. Asking someone to calm down and stop encouraging vandalism shouldn't be considered to be a personal attack, should it? I thought that personal attacks were supposed to be personal, and, secondly, attacking. It would also help if when you make warnings for you to link to what you are warning about, and why you think it is wrong. It doesn't really work if you don't tell us what you are accusing us of doing.

Thanks. 59.167.131.8 17:03, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Why did you revert edits on talker? Do you disagree with them? Are you assuming bad faith? 59.167.131.8 17:19, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I felt there was a considerable amount of link spam, so I reverted back to the last version before you. My decision was not based on the reasons you stated.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 17:33, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

RFA
I think Hoary (who was the one who added it with his AWB message) was trying to tell you to change his topic (but leave his image), because now it's just empty with his thing on the sidebar, or something like that. -- Rory 0 96 15:57, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

???????
Who are you and WHY are you marking my article for DELETION?

The article is written from a 3rd party and infotmative perspective.

This isn't a vanity article, it has nothing to do with me. My name is mentioned no where.

This isn't a commercial advertisement, this software is FREE and OPEN SOURCE.

This article gives FACTS about the application.

PLEASE STOP adding the DELETE header. This has been RESOLVED. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dhanks (talk • contribs)
 * I did not nominate the article for deletion. I was simply reverting the afd removal. The article must reach a concensus with the community, even if it is a second time.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 02:44, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
 * According the the discussion at Articles for deletion/Enterprise Audit Shell, this article doesn't have much of a chance of survival.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 02:47, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

EAS Discussion
Adam,

I've added my comments about EAS. This isn't simply "Joe's Personal Editor" that only 2 people use. The reason Google doesn't know much about the search term "Enterprise Audit Shell" is because it was released about a week ago.

I've added links to the EAS Deletion Discussion showing the software announcement on the sudo mailing list itself, which clearly demonstrates the importance of EAS. The moderator of the sudo mailing list doesn't just approve random announcements.

Please understand that EAS is the NEW VERSION of the software Sudosh which is wide-spread and commonly used. The software has a strong background, but the only confusing aspect is that the new release has CHANGED NAMES.
 * Well, give it some time and then it will gain some notability and perhaps it will have a place on Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a platform in which to advertise products.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 10:23, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations!
Congratulations! Consensus having been reached, it is my pleasure to inform you that you are now an administrator on the English Wikipedia. Please take a moment to review the Administrators' reading list and the Administrators' how-to guide before using any of your shiny new buttons. :-) If you need assistance or advice, please feel free to request help from other administrators at the Administrator's Noticeboard and Administrator's Noticeboard for Incidents, or to leave a talk page message for me or any other admin. Again, congratulations! Essjay Talk • Contact 04:46, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

 * Congratulations on your promotion!   _-M     o     P-_     04:47, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Wow, some nice champagne to go with my breakfast! Thank you very much!--The newest administrator on Wikipedia [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 10:25, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Congrats! What a day for you and good luck for the future! -- S iva1979 Talk to me  15:25, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

What can I say, you sound like great admin/jungle adventurer material. Good luck in the future! --InShaneee 21:05, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the help with the Manlius Pebble Hill entry
I'm the computer teacher there, and we seem to have a few students who have decided to have a little "fun" with Wikipedia now that they know that it exists and that anyone can edit it. Unfortunately, since they're not using registered accounts, we can't really catch the cretins. All we really have is the IP address, and that's usually the school's.

One of my student assistants told me that username of one of the vandals is also the IM screen name of a certain student, but we have no way to verify whether it's actually that person or someone impersonating him.

Once again, thanks for your help with reverting the entry to what it should be.

Keith13206 05:53, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
 * You're welcome. Normally we give more latitude to shared Ips (less likely to block)--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 10:21, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

about rv on South India
The anonymous editor simply removed stuff that should really not be there on a page describing the general area of South India, since more detailed information are present in each subregion's article page. Besides the economy section is disproportionately too huge. In this context, is it ok if I revert back your revert? --h y dka t 10:55, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Sure, go ahead.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 10:56, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Andrew Marquez
Man! Why'd you delete that shit. Andrew Marquez has ***** for less

Prince Sameth
You put the reason patent rubbish when you deleted my work. If you would so kindly tell me why then I will correct it. If the problem is it goes sideways for too long then I don't know how to fix it so could you please tell me how. Thank you for your time.
 * The article's text was patent nonsense, not the formatting. Don't put indents in your text and your text won't go clear to the other side.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 20:13, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

A Special Invitation
Hey, screw you Adam. Some of us bored non-Portuguese people need entertainment to fill the hours. Who the hell are you to tell me how I can and cannot do that? Go research the rape of nanjing or something, kung butt. Sincerely -Kung Fu Me P.S. If you actually know kung fu, disregard this message
 * Adam doesn't know kungfu but is nonetheless disregarding this message haha.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 21:44, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Frankie Nicholas
Why did you deleate Frankie Nicholas. who are you to say he is not important? there are many people who want to learn more about this man.
 * We can't have articles on every person on the planet. Then we would have billions of articles. This a person that is not notable.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 22:08, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

are u saying a dog [] is is more notible than a person. if there were an article on every animal i think that would be significantly more than a billion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.234.107.227 (talk • contribs) 06:55, 9 April 2006

Ready for a Second Course?
Hey! I'm not finished with you Adam. Now that you admit you do not know Kung Fu, I may attack you with renewed fervor. This is a travesty! I want you to go back through your extensive Internet archives and paste that article you so callously rejected onto this message board so the world may see what brilliance has been denied by your nerdy little fingers! Yours truly, Kung Fu Me
 * Wow, nice for a laugh!!!--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 22:34, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

No problem :). It would be nice if you edited once more in order to leave a note about your real opinion on the article though so that the edit fiends will not be encouraged.

Revert Mistake
No problem :). It would be nice though if you edited again in order to make a note about your true opinion on the article so that the edit fiends will not be encouraged.

=Axiom= 02:26, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

As predicted, someone has indeed already taken your edit to be an intentional one and used it to further an edit war. Refer to the history of the gunpowder article to see for yourself. Please step up and enlighten the other editors on that article to the truth of your edit as you have done for me. Thank you in advance.

=Axiom= 02:48, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't have any opinion on the article. Originally I interpreted your edit to be in bad faith, but then I realized that it wasn't, whether it is true or not. I prefer to stay out of this, because I don't know anything about the subject.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 02:50, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Kindly reveal your neutrality on the subject then because as I have said someone has already taken your edit to be opinionated. All I am asking is that you present the truth. Sincerely, =Axiom= 02:56, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Talk Page
Why can I not edit my own talk page? The history is there for those who want it; what is wrong with cleaning it up?? Silversnake020
 * You shouldn't cleanup brand new warnings.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 02:51, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Some of those are a month old. - Silversnake020 02:54, 9 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I care more about the ones that are half an hour old...--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 02:55, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Re: Good is Good
Thanks. Extraordinary Machine 15:39, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

"Michael DeWitt"
Posso saber porque apagou a mensagem sobre Michael DeWitt ???
 * Apaguei a mensagem porque não pertence no "article space". The only content was "Michael Dewitt".--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 00:36, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

A KISS Rfa Thanks
Thank you, I've been promoted. psch e  mp  |  talk  01:36, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

My RFA
Hi, this is Matt Yeager. I wanted to thank you for your vote on my request for adminship. The count was something like was 14/20/5 when I decided to withdraw the request. My decision was based on the fact that there are enough things wasting people's time on the Internet that doomed RFA's shouldn't be kept up for voters to have to think about. Regardless of the rationale behind your vote, I hope you will read this note for an extended note and discussion on what will happen before I make another try at adminship (I didn't want to clog up your userpage with drivel that you might not be interested in reading). Thank you very, very much for your vote and your time and consideration of my credentials--regardless of whether you voted support, nuetral, or oppose. Happy editing! Matt Yeager ♫ ( Talk? ) 01:55, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

My user page
Thanks for reverting and giving it some short term protection from wichever AOLer I managed to annoy. --GraemeL (talk) 14:25, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting my userpage!
Much appreciated. -- gtdp (T)/(C) 22:15, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Darth Vader
I was trying to put a merge template on. There is no need for 2 pages about Anakin Skywalker/Darth Vader. Dudtz 4/11/06 8:29 PM EST
 * please state your intentions in the edit summary because it looks like vandalism.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 00:31, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

If I was a Vandal I would put stupid info on. Dudtz 4/11/06 8:34 PM EST

Dalip Singh Vandalism
Racist wrestling fans are vandaling the Dalip SIngh webpage, I get all my facts from using google, and reading online articles, and stupid western people are making dumb comments, and untrue information.
 * It's not Wikipedia's policy to keep pages protected forever.--A Stupid American western person [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 04:16, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I just took a semi-protection off. It was semi-protected for more than four days. Semi protection is not used to handle content disputes, it is used to stop vandalism. Check WP:Vandalism, and I quote Any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism. Apparent bad-faith edits that do not make their bad-faith nature inarguably explicit are not considered vandalism at Wikipedia. For example, adding an opinion once is not vandalism — it's just not helpful, and should be removed or restated. I will watch the page and if there is any vandalism out of the ordinary, I will protect.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 04:24, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Graphic Standards Manual and whether to speedy
I notice that you removed the speedy deletion tag from Graphic Standards Manual saying that "I don't want to speedy delete because so many pages link here" - the only reason that lots of pages appeared to link there is that GSM was trying to be a redirect to two different places. I've fixed that by disambiguating, so if you were only keeping it because of the apparent large number of links maybe it's not worth keeping. -- AJR | Talk 11:46, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Ok, now that you have fixed it, far less pages link to this article. I have put a proposed deletion tag which will give the editors five days to expand it, otherwise it will be gone then.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 12:46, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Move
Please perform your merge on One shot (comic), it is ready for you.--Adam (talk) 11:27, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I restored the page because I am not sure what needs to be done here- there is a disambiguation page. I will let a more experienced admin take care of this.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 15:00, 12 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Ah, no, that was a history merge that was required. A user had copied the contents of One-shot to One shot (comic), and turned One-shot into a redirect to One shot. See the One-shot history for what I mean. The right thing to do is merge the history of the old page into the new one, for reasons of clarity and GDFL etc. Seems we've lost the (comic) c/p move now (which isn't the end of the world), so I might just move the dab over it and revert the redirect. If you're bored at some point, bug an old-time admin into explaining it to you. --zippedmartin 21:23, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for supporting me in my RfA. I really didn't think people appreciate my work here that much, but it's nice to see you do: my Request was closed with 66 supports and 4 opposes. I'll do my best not to turn your confidence down. If in any point in the future you get the feeling I'm doing something wrong, do not hesitate to drop me a line. --Dijxtra 11:56, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Permanent block template
It's vpblock (which stands for vandalism, permanent block, I think)  Sceptr e  ( Talk  ) 17:31, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Spokane "Neighborhoods" entry
This section was, at one point, fairly accurate. It's been replaced, repeatedly, by nonsense. Nothing in the section is verifiable; it's entirely mis-information and opion. I'd recommend removing it. As an information source, it's an embarrasment.
 * Please tell me the exact name of the article so I can take a look at it.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 18:35, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Ok, I found it by your contributions. Don't blank the neighborhood information. Please discuss your intentions on the talk page of the article. There is already a discussion on neighborhoods.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 18:37, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

help!
User:Mir Harven has made two personal attacks on me, he said that I'm in a sick state of mind, and that I live entrapped in my own perverted mind here. He was also highly disrespectfull towards my story about the brutal murder of my gradfather in WWII by the fascists. These are probably the worst things anyone has ever said to me... Plase block him or something... --serbiana - talk  23:16, 13 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I have given him a cooling down period. Hopefully he will be nicer when he comes back.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 23:28, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank You
Hola, Kungfuadam

I see that the Flattbush band article discussion page was yet again vandalized by randirice. I don't like what is there in my name, because of the fact that randirice makes statements and then erases his own statements among vandalizing the ones I and others have made as well. So, unfortunatly, it looks as if I'm talking to myself there...Can I get some kind of a summery of what they did this time and to which post of mine they picked this time to vandalize? I thank you for your honest efforts.

truly yours best wishes Stabinator 19:01, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I reverted your recent statements because they are inflammatory. Please remain civil. I don't see where this user vandalized the talk page. The user blanked the article page which already has been reverted.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 19:28, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh wow.again?...Oh, I posted my message to you onto the page there. I wanted to let everyone know what they (flattbush ) are doing to their own wikipedia article page.  Yeah, Randirice makes statements and then erases his own statements among vandalizing the ones I and others have made. It looks as if I'm talking to myself on the discussion page.  Vandalizing what has been checked by others as the truth is their main goal, as they are Communists.Since they have blanked out the article and discussion page over 20 times, maybe they should get banned from wikipedia.Stabinator 19:38, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

PIGUI deletion contested
G'day, please see PIGUI talk page for protest against deletion of PIGUI --Webaware 22:23, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Demented Wildlife
Why did you delete the Demented Wildlife page? If you doubt its existence, then I can prove you wrong. Myself, Sam Brinton, and my colleague, Quin Parthasararthy, have a date planned in mid-June for a concert at the local school, Frost Middle School.

List of shock sites
Someone has put this up for deletion yet again. Care to cast your vote? Skinmeister 86.128.222.36 12:35, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Chanlord
Just a notice; User:Chanlоrd was an imposter of User:Chanlord. — Deckill e r 13:43, 15 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I didn't know the other user, but their actions got them blocked anyhow.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 13:46, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

WISE TV
I am not vandalizing the WISE TV page. I worked there for 16 years and many of the facts are incorrect. Also the Kitco contribution has very little to do with the stations history. Do you want to be accurate in your assesment or not.
 * You should use edit summaries because we have no idea what you are doing.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 14:15, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

I am new at this so you'll have to forgive me for not really knowing what I am doing here.
 * No problem, happy editing.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 14:23, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you!
Thank you for your help in fighting vandalism! Dragonbones 14:35, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Username blocks
Hi Kungfuadam. I just saw you blocked a user with an inapproprite username that was called User:◊. Well, I think the same person is making more accounts, I think he also made:

 * User:Œ
 * User:Π
 * User:€

I think these might also qualify for the same block. M o e  ε  22:56, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

 * And User:¯ M o e   ε  22:56, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

All blocked, thanks Moe.--Adam (talk) 23:03, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Again
Sorry to disturb you again but I think he returned again, User:•. M o e  ε  23:26, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I got that one too.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 02:41, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Account blocks
Greetings, I've been reviewing the Category:Requests_for_unblock and made a comment or two on some of the blocked users pages but I didn't fully understand why User:• was blocked, particularly given what is shown on his/her talk page... why is that user blocked? Netscott 04:26, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi, good morning. The user is blocked, because this is a string of account creations with Greek and other mathematical symbols. Given this, you have to wonder if the intentions are good.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 11:17, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
 * That's understandable, I actually wondered as much as well.. but I did notice that this particular user's first edits were of a mathematical nature which corresponded well with their name... maybe that person chose to register their name at an inopportune moment? Also I thought that the point about the several other single character names was well made. Netscott 11:43, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Nonsense articles
goodevening, whats the deffinition of Nonsense?

hey dude, you've deleted some of my articals because they're "nonsense" so, whats nonsense? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Itwontbelong89 (talk • contribs).
 * Please refer to WP:PN for the definition of nonsense with respect to patent nonsense.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 11:18, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Unblocking, Vandals
From looking at your talk page above, you're probably right about the other names. Happy to have been of service regarding vandals. Such a pity that they are AOL based... I'm a bit of a vandal fighter from having worked on Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy and appreciate a good blocking when a vandal merits it, but we can get no joy from AOL vandals! :-( Netscott 12:38, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Deleted article
Yesterday, you deleted Avila (journalist) after it was nominated for deletion. The article is back in full. How do we handle this? Thanks. SDC 12:40, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
 * It fell under speedy criteria of patent nonsense yesterday. Now it falls under speedy deletion criteria of reposted content. It has been deleted.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 12:43, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!
Thank you for unblocking me. I couldn't help but admire your signature and was wondering if there was a special WikiTrick I could employ so that when I sign my signature it will automatically make it how I want it (similar to yours)? Is there a wikipedia tutorial you can send me so that I might learn to make my own? Thanks again! • Talk 14:09, 17 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi, no problem. Now about the wiki signature, it is pretty easy, if you know basic wiki coding. In your preferences, click raw signature. Then, put in the coding for what you want your signature to look like. My signature is this: Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) in raw code.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px|  ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 18:18, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Master Jay's RfA
Hey Adam, thank you for your support at my recent RfA. If you have any concerns, feel free to post them here. Thanks -- Jay  (Reply)  00:47, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Request
Hi, I listed a 3RRvio, but no one replied. Would you be able to do the block? Thanks. —Khoikhoi 03:18, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the vandal block assist
That didn't take long! ;-) Netscott 03:24, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Stop it!
Hello. I am distressed that you are deleting my post without any reasearch. please look at my other posts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Javabrain (talk • contribs)
 * Article name? I deleted about 80 articles today.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 03:58, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Conrad Hubbard Article Edits
Hello - I've recently undone the changes you made to Conrad Hubbard - while I believe you may have had a complaint about the article, the information provided is true, accurate, and relevant. I can understand why you would make the changes to the article, but I believe your decision to be incorrect. My work is cited, factual, and contains no original research, complying with Wikipedia's policies on the matter. If you would like me to cite more thoroughly or if you need clarification on any of the points in question, I can be contacted at sally.winnfield at gmail.com. Conversely, if you feel that your edits need to stay you can also contact me and explain your position. Perhaps there are some details I'm not aware of. —Preceding unsigned comment added by sally.winnfield (talk • contribs)
 * When checking the article history, I find that I have never edited this article. I think you've got the wrong person.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 11:11, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Eternal Ace
I'd like to know why exactly my article was deleted, the "Eternal Ace" article
 * It's a non-notable vanity page. A good indicator is when the band's webpage is on myspace...--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 11:14, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

"Vandalism" accusations
Hello:

I'm Jason Lynn, at email redacted.

I'm perplexed by the claim that I have "vandalized" any pages of your enclopedia, as all I do is read it: I have never once added any writings nor commented, nor had any activity other than mere perursal.

Therefore, I request that these silly and mean warnings be stopped.

JL
 * You are an AOL member which means your computer address can change. For that reason, I recommend you make a Wikipedia account to avoid these irrelavent messages. Someone with your IP vandalized.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 20:10, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

Unblocking
Hi - At 00:02, 19 April 2006 I (AYArktos) unblocked #143290 (not a sock puppet as far as I am aware). You had blocked him as a sock puppet.If you have any evidence of his sock puppetry please make it clear. I had been watching his user page and there were no warnings of sock puppetry.--A Y Arktos\talk 00:04, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
 * What was the user name blocked?--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 00:06, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, it was a mistake, I associated him with a "judge sockpuppet" problem we had going on at the same time. I apologized to the user :( accept my apologies.--Adam (talk) 00:11, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
 * User:For great justice.--A Y Arktos\talk 00:08, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Are you able to fix the Autoblock?--A Y Arktos\talk 00:19, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I think it's fixed.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 00:22, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you.
Thanks. For great justice. 00:23, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

My RfA
Thanks for the kind words at my RfA. Do you have suggestions as to what added experience would convince you to support next time around, if there is one? I've thought wading into conflicted, edit war-prone articles and helping to bring about consensus and peace there was such involvement, but it appears many users disagree. Can you help me understand? --CTSWyneken 02:01, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Some users think you need more participation in the Wikipedia community, such as projects and things. Also, your editing of articles is in a very narrow subject. This is fine, I concentrate on articles that interest me. However, being an admin requires wider knowledge of the community. It is more than being an editor. An admin needs to have knowledge of the community and policies. I think more interactions in these areas would help you next time around. Also many of the voters on your rfa believe that you push point of view, which is healthy, but an adminstrator must have a neutral point of view, regardless of personal beliefs. --Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 15:56, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Imagem para Frankenstein
Kung,
 * Colocamos uma imagem do Frankenstein na wiki lusófona. Tem como carregares para o verbete em inglês?

André Koehne Favor confire seu discussão na wiki lusófona. Repostarei aí.--Adam (talk) 17:56, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Greenpoint, Brooklyn
Please do not remove comments on the Greenpoint, Brooklyn discussion page. I have just resoted the deleted comments from the sections area. Thank you.162.83.236.121 19:33, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Your edit summaries were misleading, and you have been blocked for 48 hours. I was restoring content that you blanked.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 19:49, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Reverting
Be a little more careful when reflex reverting. My edits to Chile were not vandalism. —Cantus… ☎   00:17, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Ok, thanks I am sorry.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 00:18, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Xavier Douglas Quaid
why did you delete our page on Xvier Douglas Quaid!! You dont know who he is and what he has done for humanity. You have no right to do that.

User:Ruminations of a Racial Realist
Hello -- this user has just emailed me asking why he was blocked, and suggesting that if someone found his username offensive he would be happy to change it. He said he had been having trouble getting in touch with you. In the block log, your reason for blocking was that it was a vandalism only account, and that you weren't sure about the name. I can understand the name part, but two edits to add a link to his blog and one polite comment on a talk page isn't really vandalism of the sort that ought to get someone blocked without any kind of warning, forever. Were it me, I would have warned him about adding his blog to articles and maybe asked him to reconsider his name. I won't lift the block, but I am asking that you reconsider it, at least long enough to explain why you blocked him indefinitely. Thanks. · Katefan0(scribble)/ poll 01:10, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Block of User:Ruminations of a Racial Realist
Hello Kungfudam. I am concerned about your block of User:Ruminations of a Racial Realist. I think an indefinite block was not the right approach because (1) The user's edits are not obviously vandalism. The user made one edit to an article talk page, then 2 edits to add a link to external website to articles. At worst the links were not significant enough for inclusion, but that is a content issue, not vandalism. (2) I see no record you provided the user with any warnings prior to the block. (3) You state you have a concern about the user's username, but you did not contact them to ask them what the name means before you took action on your concen. (4) Even when you blocked the user, you did not leave any justification for it on their talk page. Leaving a note explaining your actions is common courtesy to the blocked user, and also to others such as myself who come by to try to understand the situation. Based on what I can see so far, I believe the block should be completely removed. I look forward to your thoughts. Best, Johntex\talk 01:39, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

 * Hi -- I looked into it and unblocked her, just FYI, I think it was clearly just a mistake. Let me know if for some reason it was not. I don't think she's a vandal, but I understand that with a username like that (and no user page) it is easy to be suspicious. --Fastfission 02:54, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi, sorry, I was out. Unblocking is fine. I felt that the username was inappropriate paired with the edits that were there, that there was some bad faith there. Adam needs to assume good faith. Happy editing.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 03:22, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

YanMill
Hi Adam- if you could check out this incident report and share your experiences or whatever with this set of socks that would be great. . . This user is getting really out of hand, and i'm not quite sure what to do about it, as it's almost all throw-away socks. . . Any thoughts? -- He ah?  06:39, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

User talk:146.145.148.209
I blocked for 24h you blocked for a week, appears to be a blank-o-bot, do you want me to reset block to a week? -- Tawker 14:44, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
 * There was another admin that also blocked for a week. The user was blocked 48 hours before. I think a week is ok.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 15:02, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Carroll Broadcasting Company
Hi. You just removed a speedy tag I added to Carroll Broadcasting Company saying the author needs time to improve it - the article was written 3 months ago and the author hasn't made any edits for 2 months. Do you really think the article will get improved? Even if it is, it will be a complete rewrite. --Tango 17:10, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Ok, I agree and I deleted the article.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 17:12, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Cheers. --Tango 17:16, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Why was Lars Kestner article deleted?
I'm a newer editor and might be missing something, but I dont' understand why the Kestner page was deleted.
 * The information given is not notable. I have restored it so you can expand upon the article. Please expand it because someone else might delete it.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 18:38, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Sockpuppets on Afd
Yeah, I had reported it on the AN/I Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Fake Votes on Afd. It was this IP,68.48.32.65 ,that did it.--Jersey Devil 23:45, 20 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi, I am blocking all of them as we speak.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 23:46, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

Martial Law - All Apologies
Please accept my apologies. I meant no harm to you or this website. Have a nice day. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.80.89.56 (talk • contribs)

AOL Related autoblock
Please be aware that when you or the autoblocker targets "common" proxy numbers, you are unlikely to block your target and are very likely to block innocent users who are randomly assigned the number by AOL or other providers. I am often impacted by this problem. Please see User:WBardwin/AOL Block Collection. I would appreciate a prompt release of this block. Thanks. WBardwin 04:19, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

 * Your user name or IP address has been blocked from editing.

You were blocked by Kungfuadam for the following reason (see our blocking policy): "Autoblocked because your IP address has been recently used by "CalifornianCroat". The reason given for CalifornianCroat's block is: "vandalism only account"." Your IP address is 207.200.116.137.
 * Hi, that auto block has been lifted.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 04:23, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

 * Thank you -- appreciate the prompt attention. WBardwin 04:24, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry to butt in, but please be careful when you block an IP to ensure that it's not within the range used by AOL. If it is, we can really only block those IP's for very short times -- meaning no more than 15 minutes at a time, generally. This is because AOL recycles its IP's virtually every time someone loads up a new page. A retarded system to be sure, but it's what they use just the same. · Katefan0(scribble)/ poll 04:25, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
 * The user that was blocked was an actual username- CalifornianCroat. He happened to be using AOL. I had no idea of his IP address until this autoblock came up.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 04:28, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Englishmuffinsattack
I did an indefinite block on that account, all it's contribs are vandalism. The block needs to be indefinite and yours was temporary. If you don't mind you or I can unblock then block indefinite.--Dakota ~ 04:33, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I saw the block conflict and I took care of it. Happy editing!--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 04:35, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Thank you. --Dakota ~ 04:39, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Request 2
Hi Kungfuadam,

Would you be able to block someone for violation of the 3RR for me? Thanks. —Khoikhoi 04:51, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Please post on 3RR page. I am going to bed. It is 1 AM here.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 04:52, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

 * Ok, thanks. —Khoikhoi 04:54, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Dark Lord's RfA
Your vote says support but its in the oppose section. Clarification would be appreciated. (Also, while I'm here, you may want to read what WP:SIG says about images in signatures). JoshuaZ 14:02, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

your comment
it is not only English encyclopedia. There are a lot of pages in Bulgarian here. I just wanted to enter the biogrphy of a BULGARIAN physicist on his maternal language. I will find a way to do it if there are other pages in Bulgarian, so it is possible.
 * The proper place to put Bulgarian is at, not . I, for one don't read a word of Bulgarian.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 23:49, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Cybermohalla
comrade, why are my posts getting deleted? login cybermohalla. check the logs for nangla maanchhi. thanks.

 * They are deleted according to Wikipedia's Speedy Deletion Policy--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 03:57, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Nangla Maanchhi
Hi

Sorry about the incomplete msg before.

It seems the entry is a biographical account.

Please see http://nangla.freeflux.net

and would be great if it doesnt get deleted!!

best shveta

Cybermohalla 22 april

 * The problem is that the person is non-notable. One indicator is that the source is a blog. I have a blog about myself, but there is no article about me on Wikipedia.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 04:01, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

User block on anon IP
That user (or someone operating in the same way) had been repeatedly inserting links to a blog in several articles, where they weren't appropriate. Rich Farmbrough 12:19 22  April 2006 (UTC).
 * That's why I blocked the user, if we are talking about the same user.--Adam [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Brazil.svg|25px|  ]](talk) 14:32, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, Adam, wrong talk page! Rich Farmbrough 15:49 22  April 2006 (UTC).

Thanks

 * Just wanted to say thanks for reverting the vandalism on my talk page! It's much appreciated. - pm_shef 02:27, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Edits to Bernard Rudofsky Article
Hey,

I wasn't trying to "deliberately introduce incorrect information" to the Bernard Rudofksy article. It's hard to see how you could think I was trying to do that, since all I did was correct some minor grammatical mistakes and try and make the prose of the article a little bit easier to read.

Anyway, since you appear to want to protect your grammatical mistakes and lumbering prose at all costs, I'll just leave it as is. But please don't accuse me of doing something I couldn't possibly be reasonably thought to be doing. (If you bother to look at my edits, you'll see that I didn't add any additional information whatsoever.)

That said, I like your article. I too am a big fan of Rudofksy and think his work deserves to continue to be read.

Charles

Zarbon
You blocked Zarbon on the 19th for 3RR. He is currently using 207.38.253.161 to get around the block and continue to edit articles. He has a tremendous amount of sockpuppet IPs that he cycles through, but last time he was blocked, restarting the block once on his main user name got him to accept it. Could you restart it, please? Hopefully that will be enough for this time, too, although I'm beginning to doubt it. Kafziel 05:41, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

No reply necessary,
I just wanted to thank you for supporting my RfA. If you ever need anything, don't hesitate.--Rockero 23:43, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Nonsense that I am not causing
Hi,

I just clicked on my "new messages" link, and found out that I had vandalized at least 10 times in the past few months. This is completely untrue, because I dont even have a acccount to edit pages, so I dont know what this about. I have a virus, and im thinking that maybe someone is using my AOL IP adress to vandalize pages on wikipedia. I'm sorry for any inconvinence on this site, but I just want to let you know that its NOT me. Thanks!
 * You don't keep the same AOL IP address. Sometimes your AOL IP address even rotates during the same web session. The way to avoid irrelavant messages is to create an account.--Kungfu Adam (talk) 22:18, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

 * (edit conflict) Hi, IP addresses on AOL are not static, that is, they bounce from AOL user to AOL user. So what you are seeing are warnings that were given to other AOL users. One way to avoid this is to register an account. I hope that this clarifies things. JoshuaZ 22:19, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks a ton for clarifying. I actually thought it was someone who was using my computer to make these ridicious remarks on pages!

Thanks, in a sense
Thanks for un-blanking my user talk page; just so you know, the blanking was done by me, I just wasn't logged in. Still, it's good to know someone's paying attention. Thunderbunny 05:50, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

ickle pickle
Ahhhh, if you call pickled cucumbers 'pickle', what do you call other pickles? Cokehabit 15:25, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Why have you reverted it to pickled cucumber? There are hundreds of pickled products only the US knows pickled cucumbers as "pickle". Please revert it to the page beforehand

There already is a disambiguation page. In the US, other pickled products are known as pickled (the item that is pickled). We never say pickled cucumbers. No US user will search for pickle by typing in pickled cumcumber because it just isn't known as such. A page exists for the other uses of pickle at pickle (disambiguation) and a template for this is on the Pickled cucumber page.--Kungfu Adam (talk) 16:02, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Bill Gates vandal
He blanked it!!! - CobaltBlueTony 17:37, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I have semi protected it. Thanks!--Kungfu Adam (talk) 17:42, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for voting on my RfA
--M e ts501talk • contribs 01:48, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Spam in Portugal
Why did you removed the IP address I reported for spam without blocking? An address from the same range had been blocked previously for adding the same links and it will continue adding them, everyday I clean spam from the article. Could you explain me the reason of not blocking it? Afonso Silva 12:59, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Desculpe, eu não vi que teve outros IP envolvidos. O IP somente fez duas mudanças naquela hora, e não é sufficiente bloquear.--Kungfu Adam (talk) 13:06, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Eu não percebo ainda muito bem os processos dos administradores, mas é evidente que este novo IP, que pertence à gama do que tinha sido bloqueado anteriormente (e isso estava referido na minha queixa), está a continuar o trabalho de colocar spam, provavelmente até pertence ao mesmo utilizador. Além disso já tinha sido colocado na página de conversação dele o aviso de que não é correcto adicionar spam na wikipedia e mesmo assim ele continuou, é só por isto, não é nada de grave, mas é chato ter que remover o mesmo spam todos os dias e a minha experiência diz-me que ele não vai parar, a menos que seja bloqueado. Afonso Silva 13:18, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Faz duas horas que esse IP não colocou spam. O artigo de Portugal estará no meu watchlist, e se eu ver mais spam igual esse tipo o usuário será bloqueado. Infelizmente a policia é que bloquear (IPs principalmente) é prevenção e não castigo.--Kungfu Adam (talk) 13:27, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

thanks
Hey kungfuadam. Thanks for your support, and kind words on my RFA. Unfortunately, I wasn't promoted this time, but it was a valuable learning experience for me. You've been a good mentor for me on IRC, and on wikipedia, and hopefully in a couple months I'll be successful. As always, if you ever need anything, holler at ya boy. ⇒ <font face="Euclid Fraktur"> SWAT  Jester    Ready    Aim    Fire!  01:12, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Question about Wikipedia.
Hi, Kungfuadam. It's me Daniel5127. What kinds of advertisement is not allowed in Wikipedia? Some of them advertises something in Wikipedia. I think that Advertisement is also not allowed in Sandbox. For Sandbox, Everyone Can add anything whatever thay want. So, What kind of article must not be in Wikipedia? Please, Send me Message so that I could read your response. Daniel5127, 02:58, 29 April 2006(UTC)

Blocked User:Regional Pop?
Hi Kungfuadam. You indefinately blocked User:Regional Pop for what seems to be trivial vandalism. Isn't that a bit harsh? I have a mind to undo the block, so I'm curious if there's anything that's not readily apparent. Thanks. ~MDD4696 03:20, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
 * You can undo the block if you would like. The account was created for vandalism only. --Kungfu Adam (talk) 14:31, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Help from a native English speaker
Hi there, I see you are a native speaker of English language and I would like to ask you to help us make a decision about a name of an article. If you wish to help, could you join the discussion here? --Dijxtra 13:53, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

2006 NFL Draft
I removed the semi-protection from this page. Reviewing the edits, some of the edits were from IPs and they were helpful edits. Just keep the page on your watchlist and revert the vandalism. Thanks. Pepsidrinka 22:29, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Not Vandalizing
I haven't been on Wilkipedia before today, I just created my username and it says that I'm blocked from editing stuff! I haven't vandalized anything, I'm not the kind of person to do that. Why is it saying that I did?
 * It may be an autoblock. Please include the exact message you received when you saw that you were blocked.--Kungfu Adam (talk) 23:28, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

KKK
Why would you revert my edit to the article? The KKK is an anti-Catholic organization. 75.3.4.54 03:57, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Sorry, you're right, it was my mistake.--Kungfu Adam (talk) 04:00, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

U did it
I was patrolling thru orang0tan and welcoming the newbie.. After that, i found it deleted by u, thanx

Tux the penguin 12:56, 30 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, this "newbie" was created to make vandalistic pages (probably about 20 vandalism pages) This "newbie" knows what he has been doing and has been blocked indefintely.--Kungfu Adam (talk) 12:58, 30 April 2006 (UTC)

Apology
My brother recently vandilized your, and many other pages on wikipedia, and i am very very sorry for his immature behaviour. I hope there are no hard feelings :)

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/

title: User talk:Kungfuadam/Archive 3