User talk:Alison

User	Talk	Contribs	Images	Sandbox

Start a new talk topic.

Archives
August 2004 · August 2005 September 2005 · April 2006 April 2006 · July 2006 August 2006 · November 2006 November 2006 · December 2006 December 2006 · January 2007 January 2007 · February 2007 March 2007 · ...

[edit] User page

I just thought that I'd drop by and give a quick thanks for licensing the layout of your user page under the GFDL. I really like it (in fact I liked it so much I used it myself) ;) Oh and congrats on your recent RFA! --ImmortalGoddezz 18:51, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! I'm honoured and, if I may say, I think your userpage looks a lot nicer than mine :) - Alison^☺ 18:58, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

I saw it too. I told ImmortalGoddezz that you would be flattered. :) Acalamari 19:02, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Talk:Main Page

Well that was a tough one, eh? Thanks for your help, much appreciated :) --Spebi 22:07, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

• No problem! Thanks for your diligence in dealing with them - Alison^☺ 22:09, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] FSU vandal

Hi Alison. As noted above, I've already range blocked 512 of the FSU IP addresses today for 1 month. This covers the set that the FSU vandal usually uses (presumably a frat house or computer lab range). Hopefully this will stop this minor irritant for now. Best, Gwernol 00:17, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

• Excellent! Thanks :) If I find any more, I'll individually block for a month - Alison^☺ 00:20, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Male/female admin reactions

Interesting point raised by Riana and yourself. I think an experiment should be conducted to see how much more abuse female administrators/vandal fighters get compared to their male counterparts. I think a male admin should volunteer to be renamed Susan for a month and report back on how different an experience they have :-). WjBscribe 01:25, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Excellent idea! Who do you propose we 'volunteer' for the experiment? I volunteer Ryan for the job! :) In seriousness, I'd say there's quite a difference. Prior to my admin days, some editors got shockingly patronising about certain edits. Such is life ... - Alison^☺ 01:30, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

I've always like the name susan, I'm game! :-) Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 01:33, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Tsk, tsk, Ryan :) - Alison^☺ 11:43, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, even without the Admin target painted on my back credentials, I'm shocked at some of the patronizing crap I've gotten. I vacillate between wanting to change to a gender-neutral screename or stay obviously, defiantly female so it hurts worse when I kick their asses :-) - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 01:46, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

True indeed :) - Alison^☺ 11:43, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

• I believe Riana was saying it in jest. It doesn't matter what gender you are. No one cares. Vandals will see you as a threat no matter what. This is an issue over nothing. As I'm being told on my RfA at the moment: ignore it. Acalamari 01:49, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

After tomorrow, I will become User:Susan for a month, assuming my change of username is acceptable, I think it will be a very interesting study Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 01:51, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

You get a lot of vandalism anyway. I say you will get less. I note how my RfA has suddenly become a discussion board for discussing this subject. Interesting. Acalamari 01:55, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, my apologies for that, we should try to keep it somewhere else ;) – Riana ^ঋ 01:58, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Plus, as I said: ignore it. Users have told me to ignore silly issues. WP:POINT. Acalamari 02:00, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

• I firmly believe that they actually do care. Trust me - the world in general and WP specifically is so NOT a level playing field when it comes to gender. I can think of dozens of examples. You'd be surprised. - Alison^☺ 11:43, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

• Sorry to butt in and bump an old topic, but I strongly agree with you, Alison. Some of the discussions on the Wikichix mailing list and the comments on the site also support your observations. It was interesting reading about the experiences of people with gender ambiguous usernames and those whose usernames imply they are male and how their treatment and experiences changed when they revealed they were actually female. I think most people who think that we are all equal and that no one here cares about gender are male or are generally thought to be male. Of course, the good people don't care and treat each other as equal, regardless of gender, age, education etc, but there is definitely a undercurrent of gender bias and sexism and if there wasn't, the idea of Wikichix would never have even been conceived, let alone come into existence with 122 women becoming members. Sarah 04:37, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

As a procedural note, user:Susan is taken but is a candidate for usurpation. So Ryan would have to wait at least a week before assuming the name. In fact, if logged today the request would be performed on April 1st! Oh, and I'd get a promise from the crats that they'll be willing to change your name back again afterwards ;-). WjBscribe 02:14, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Ha, ultimate april fools! But on a serious note, I really think it would be interesting to look at - do you think the crats would accept it? Might even be better to change my name on April 1st to a completely new name; User:Susan Thorpe??? Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 02:22, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

I think it would be a fascinating study and an excellent essay candidate. It'd certainly be an eye-opener for you :) - Alison^☺ 11:43, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Quimby

Feel free to add your side here—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 01:30, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

• Done - Alison^☺ 09:49, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] those cute icons at the top of the page

I was hoping to copy/steal those cute icons you have at the top of your user & usertalk pages (user; talk; sandbox; &c) but when I tried to copy & paste the source text I couldn't find the right bit. Is it protected or admin only or something? Thanks --Turangalila (talk) 06:00, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

• It's on a subpage. Check out User:Alison/Bar and steal what you want :) You'll also need User:Alison/Imagelink (looks blank but it's not) - Alison^☺ 09:48, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

cool. thanks for your help. I also copped the code for my new sig from your sandbox. Hope that was ok :) --Turangalila (talk) 10:35, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Heh! Even better :) Glad I could help - Alison^☺ 10:39, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] You're not angry at me are you?

Just wondering since I voted neutral at your RfA... Sorry again; I can't stand it when people are angry at me... Sorry... :( Spawn Man 09:16, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

• Of course not! I voted "support" on your subsequent nom of someone else afterwards. You voted honestly according to your belief and with absolutely no malice. How could I fault you for that? I just hope that as the RFA carried, I don't disappoint. Seriously - not angry at all - Alison^☺ 09:20, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

 :D -- Spawn Man 09:32, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

You're too kind! It's been ages since anyone's given me a flower thingy. Thanks Alison. Hope to see you around, you seem nice... :) -- Spawn Man 09:38, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Intense Pulsed Light

I read a lot on IPL hair removal sofar. Can anybody, however, tell me what is meant by Pulse sequence, pulse intermission and pulse width. What do these parameters mean? Best regards, Sigrid —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.177.20.121 (talk • contribs).

Hi Sigrid. You musy have read my contributions to the above article. It's been a day for talking about my work history so I'd better admit that I also worked on medical and industrial lasers, which is somewhat related to IPL. Both IPL and laser depilation works by momentarily applying one or more bursts of high energy to hairs which are to be removed. This energy is absorbed by the dark hairs and not the surrounding tissue (in theory) and it is transported into the dermal layer where it hopefully damages or destroys the germ cells in the hair root. This pulse of energy (light or whatever) is controlled by the three parameters below;

• Pulse width - the duration of the energy or light pulse which is applied to the target area. This is usually measured in milliseconds. The quantity of energy the target area absorbs is related to the energy pulse in joules times the pulse width in mS.

• Pulse intermission - in the case of where more than one pulse is fired at the target area per 'hit' (some IPL machines can zap an area a number of times within one second of application) the time between these pulses is the intermission. It's also measured in milliseconds.

• Pulse sequence - this relates to the number of pulses of energy applied per firing of the lamp/laser. Sometimes, it's one pulse but it can go on up to 6 or 7 rapid firings per application.

This stuff should really end up in the IPL and Laser hair removal article, but this should give you a rough idea of the three parameters. Hope this is of some help. Let me know if you need any further info. (Jokestress - if you're reading this, feel free to correct me. You're the expert!) - Alison^☺ 03:24, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Transsexual

Hi there;I see that you have this article on your list for cleanup. Having just ploughed through the article, may I wish you the very best of luck! In my professional view it needs a total rewrite, and achieving this without offending any pressure groups will be a real triumph, if you can achieve it. In my opinion sexual dysmorphism is only a subset of somatic dysmorphism, and should be treated, sympathetically, but in the same way (i.e. you don't cutthe leg off). This is, of course, a minority view, which I do not flaunt. If I can help with this, or any other medical article, let me know. Am I right in assuming that you have a medical qualification?--Anthony.bradbury 01:50, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi Anthony. Yes, it's on my to-do list as it's a complete mess on a number of levels. As I said in my RfA, I spent a couple of gruelling hours digging out all the refs and cites and putting them into some order. Messy :) The article is on my permanent watchlist, along with related ones as they're vandal-magnets.

As with many WP articles, it's a POV battle and right now it's loosely based around a mix of the WPATH and Free Univ. Hospital of Amsterdam Standards of Care for treating transsexual people. Some of the sources quoted are unreliable to say the least & a lot more primary sources need quoting i.e, psychiatric, endocrinological, psychological. Alternatives such as reparative therapy are given scant mention. Nowhere does the etiology of somatic dysmorphism get a mention although I'm aware that some, including yourself, hold those views (comparisons have been made to apotemnophilia). It's unpopular in the extreme amongst transsexual people but if you can provide good refs, I'd be delighted to see it added. The article as it stands is somewhat unbalanced so do feel free to dig in and have a go at putting it to rights. That article needs diverse inputs. Oh, and you might also want to check out Gender Identity Disorder while you're at it :)

Re. my background; I've formal qualifications in electronic engineering and software engineering. I work for a rather well-known 'fruit' company and have no formal medical qualification. Having said that, I worked for Cooper Technicon in the past (now Bayer Diagnostics) where I was involved in medical diagnostic R&D. I picked up far too much knowledge of haematological and endocrine matters than is healthy for an amateur. It was part of the deal back then and it kicked off a lifelong interest in such matters. I don't normally mention that stuff over on WP but there ya go! - Alison^☺ 03:02, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Paradox

So someone vandalised Persian Poet Gal's userpage by incrementing her vandal count... Doesn't your reverting that mean her count is now incorrect?!? Ahh, my head hurts... :-) WjBscribe 04:09, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh no!!! I'd not thought of that. So only if the count was incorrect in the first place would it be considered not vandalism. If it was correct, then it was vandalism and thus the counter needs to be incremented. Which they did. D'oh - now my head hurts!! :) - Alison^☺ 04:14, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Request

Can you please indefinitely block Geminemini (talk • contribs)? All the user did was vandalize multiple pages. The short block will allow the continuation of vandalism, but an indefinite block will stop it entirely from this user. I don't think the project will be at any loss. The Behnam 05:19, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

• I've reviewed the nature of their edits (repeated racist comments). Now indefblocked - Alison^☺ 05:38, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you!!!!

For blocking that madeinchina person. Turok 1 just keeps getting worse. The Behnam 07:51, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

• I'm learning :) Knew straight off that it was Turok as they'd made references to PPG. What did she ever do?? - Alison^☺

[edit] Thorpe

I think we're still on the main page. Best not to protect at all. — coelacan — 08:19, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

• It's been fully protected by a bot two days ago but it just expired. It's being beaten to death by anon vandals - I'd been considering full prot! Comments? - Alison^☺ 08:22, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

• Main page articles are supposed to be fully unprotected for the duration of the main page display, because that's the first thing people can edit when they get to "the free encyclopedia anyone can edit". It's some people's first time here, every day. This is very commonly accepted consensus as I understand it. The bot's protection earlier was probably to prepare for main page... which is why it expired now. — coelacan — 08:24, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

• Point taken. I was unaware of accepted consensus (insert newb admin excuse here) I've unprotected it so expect the onslaught! :) Thanks for the advice - Alison^☺ 08:27, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

• No problem. Since it is on the main page, most reverts happen pretty quickly too. Keeping the backlog on WP:AIV down, and warning/blocking is usually the best thing you can do for the featured article. =) — coelacan — 08:30, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

I should clarify that when I said "main page articles are supposed to be fully unprotected" that only applies to today's featured article, AFAIK. If any other article on the main page shows up at WP:RFPP, there's no reason not to protect, again, AFAIK. If it comes up and you're not sure, WP:AN, of course. — coelacan — 08:41, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Ah! Thanks for clarifying that. I note that vandalism has taken off again too. 2am here and I'm still watching WP:AIV :) Thanks again - Alison^☺ 08:55, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Another request

216.248.68.143 (talk • contribs • WHOIS) has kept adding libelous and inappropriate information about a living person despite numerous warnings. If the IP doesn't get it by now, I don't think he ever will. He'll probably just start at it again in 31 hours. Can you please extend to indef? The Behnam 08:34, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

• I'm a bit concerned about indefblocking an IP address for fear of collateral damage and blocking policy recommends against it. As they seem dead set on just one or two articles, I could simply extend their block and they'll probably give up - Alison^☺ 08:40, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Plastic Paddy

Sorry to go on about Tesco, Alison. I'll desist. Actually I was getting a lot of stick from "IrishGuy" (an American) and he wound me up rather. I even got a Warning. Bill Tegner 09:00, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

• No problem. - Alison^☺ 09:09, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wow

		The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		Damn girl, I can't get in a word at RFPP without edit conflicting with you... maybe we should just redirect it to your talk page? :p Keep up the good work! – Riana ঋ 09:47, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

• Oh my!! Thank you :) That was most unexpected. Did you notice the vandalism of {{RFPP}}? Is nothing sacred? Thanks again - I'm only a newb at the job and am over-eager - Alison^☺ 09:51, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

I sat there staring at that for a while trying to figure it out... I'm a little slow today :) – Riana ^ঋ 10:10, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah. Freaked me out, too. Then again, it was 2am and that was an hour ago! - Alison^☺ 10:12, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Prob worth protecting that template- especially know AzaToth's admin so will still be able to edit it. WjBscribe 14:45, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

True, but seeing as it's never in articlespace and only admins use it, it's easy to revert/fix - Alison^☺ 16:33, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Brock Lesnar

Hi there, you said that the article was protected beacuse of an user, Verdict. I saw that account and it has been blocked by some sort of community thing so it wont be back. Can you atleast give the article a try? Things may have calmed down and i dont think any admin will do any edit any time soon. I just created this account beacuse i couldnt edit that page. I saw it was protected so i thought if i create an account i could edit but i couldnt. Please give it a try, it really needs update as well as improvment. Tiger

I would advise you to disregard this; User:Tiger131 is evidently permanently banned vandal Verdict. McPhail 14:41, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Obviously, yes. Which is why I disregarded the request at WP:RFPP. Not fooled :) - Alison^☺ 16:30, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User:Antholog1793

Hi Alison, I've changed this user's block to "indefinite" because 100% of their edits were inserting profanity. Do you have any qualms about this? --Wafulz 03:43, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

• Nope! Sounds good ... sometimes my AGF goes a bit too far - Alison^☺ 03:44, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Alison, I'm posting on your talk page since you left the blocked noticed for Antholog1793. I thought (s)he was blocked indefinitely? How come (s)he is able to revert his/her talk page? -- Semper discipulus 00:36, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

• Editors that are blocked (indef or otherwise) still have write access to their talk pages. That's how they can communicate to request unblocking, etc. However, this can be abused by the editor and when that happens, the page can be protected from editing. Not something I'd like to do as they're left with no recourse, but it does happen ... - Alison^☺ 00:39, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
• Thanks, Alison, I wasn't aware of that (altough it undoubtly makes sense ... :-) ). I had a bookmark for the user contributions page for Antholog1793 and was surprised to see his revert there. I was going to fix it but you already had done it earlier. -- Semper discipulus 01:10, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re. Rick Sanchez

Hi, no problem, these things happen all the time on WP:RFPP. It's ok to have a different analysis of a protection request. :-) Regards, Húsönd 04:05, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Oh well...[1]. Húsönd 04:23, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Oops - Alison^☺ 04:28, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: My Talk Page

Hi Alison. I just wanted to check to see if the message you left on my talk page was directed towards the unlogged IP or towards me. I'm confused because I thought I've remained civil the whole time! Thanks for taking a look :) Kntrabssi 04:33, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

• Actually, you have remained incredibly civil throughout. That comment was directed at the IP editor who'd decided to rub it in as I noticed your comment on their talk page. Furthermore, I note that the paragraph that they are reverting is well cited and, to my mind, meets WP:BLP as the sources are reliable. Keep up the good work! - Alison^☺ 04:36, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
  • (Sigh) Thanks! You had me nervous that I had done something wrong! Thanks for taking the time to look everything over and for your judgement on the sprotect :) Kntrabssi 04:41, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] comments left at my talk page for Finkelstein anon editor

I assume the comments you left on my talk page were actually intended for anon editor 4.239.138.147. You might want to leave comments on that user's talk page. I already explained the situation to him at his talk page, but you may have something to add. You also might want to redact the WP:AIV posting, as it appears this user has legitimate concerns ( WP:AGF ) about the article in question, and is merely handling it wrong. This is probably not real vandalism, but an editor who doesn't know the system. WP:BITE may apply here. --Jayron32|talk|contribs 05:10, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks for the followup. I totally agree here and have already removed your entry from WP:AIV. They have issues with some of the criticism on that page and, as they have apparently done their research, I feel they just need to be pointed in the right direction. I'll add a further message to their talk page. Thanks for not biting :) - Alison^☺ 05:13, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Laser hair removal

The article you cite actually lifted all that content from my site hairfacts.com, which I donated here as my first article to Wikiepdia in 2004. Jokestress 06:23, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks for that! Problem is - it's under a license from that site, which the article fails to meet. Can you possibly write that up on the talk page and I'll remove the {{copyvio}}? It'll mean more coming from you, given your expertise! I'll followup with the details re. external links - Alison^☺ 06:26, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit]  :)

Hola, Alison! Thanks for signing my page! Have a great day! DTD

[edit] Tempting fate

And you were worried about tempting fate... Have you seen the state of my talkpage!?!?! WjBscribe 22:06, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

• LOL!!! Excellent :) - Alison^☺ 22:29, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your message on me making disparaging comments

Dear Alison, please explain what my comments are "disparaging", becuase it is serious accusation of me. Biophys was given a number of warnings for his uncivil behavior [2]. He publishes rumors and hoaxes, please see some points here Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biophys. Moreover, Biophys himself does edit warring over me. You could actually help us both - please see the mediation Cabal case on Boris Stomakhin. Respectfully. Vlad fedorov 06:44, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

• Vlad - your edit history speaks for itself. Your labelling other editors "liars", regardless of your differences, is just not on. - Alison^☺ 23:23, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Please also, see there how Biophys covers his deletions of texts diff. He deleted from the article well-sourced information that Albats father himself was from KGB bodies, because it weakens her reliability. But it is a fact. And no valid explanations were presented by Biophys.Vlad fedorov 07:44, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

This example (diff) was related to violation of WP:BLP by Vlad. He inserted poorly sourced defamatory statements about a living person he disliked (women journalist and researcher, Harvard graduate). I posted my comments here: Talk:Yevgenia_Albats#Violation_of_BLP_rules and here Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard#Yevgenia_AlbatsBiophys 20:12, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Since you are probably not familiar with Russian politics, I have to explain that Vlad inserted also unreliable negative information about another female journalist who was in opposition to Putin's government: Anna Politkovskaya who was recently killed. See my comments here: Talk:Anna_Politkovskaya#Arutunyan_claims_and_POV. I am telling this because negative information about both women, Anna Politkovskaya and Yevgenia Albats came from the same unreliable source. Actually Yevgenia Albats tried to protect her murdered colleague, Anna Politkovskaya from defamation after her death. Vlad disseminates all this defamatory disinformation in Wikipedia, in my opinion. Biophys 23:12, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Alison, I did discussed everything with Vlad on numerous occasions. But he follows all my edits on Russian political topics (during last several months!) and reverts my well-sourced texts. He made my life in Wikipedia miserable. User:Colchicum filed an RFC about his behavior. That did not help. Please see: Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Vlad_fedorov and Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_comment/Vlad_fedorov#New_episodes_of_wikistalking_by_Vlad. You can simply trace my edits and Vlad's edits to see. Sorry for bothering you with this. Biophys 14:57, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

My last negotiation attempts can be found here: Talk:Nikolai_Koltsov (see (Nature(journal)), Talk:Persecution_of_political_bloggers#Vlad.27s_claims, Talk:Active_measures#We_must_find_a_compromise. I believe that Vlad's actions after these explanations and attempted negotiations constitute clear vandalism. Biophys 15:05, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RfC

• RIght now, I see that both of you are using the WP:RFC process to bring this matter to the attention of neutral parties. This is probably the best approach right now. I recommend both of you cool off and try to avoid situations where you interact with each other and just let the RfCs run their course. From both your edit histories, I can see that neither of you is particularly innocent in all this. I also agree that both of you should try to follow whatever the MEDCAB ruling was. - Alison^☺ 23:23, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Ok - Vlad - I've just rolled back your comments here. This is not going to get into a flamewar here on my talk page. Please go through the RfC and/or arbitration process and cool off going for each other all the time. I'm not interested whether or not Biophys speaks Russian or not or whether it makes him a liar or not. Point is, you both need to cool off, back down and quit slinging insults at each other, least of all over here. Ok? - Alison^☺ 03:57, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Alison, I appreciate your advice. It seems that an increasing number of Russian editors do not like my articles. Last of them has been deleted (it was about FSB teams that operate in the Internet). The deletion is currently under review: [3]. I have tried to improve and recreate this article under a different name (see User:Biophys/tutorial), but the subject should be probably more general. Do you think I am on the wrong track? Biophys 16:31, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Garda Band

Thanks for restoring the proper image. I don't know my way around the 'media' areas of Wiki as of yet :-) Bastun 09:57, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Had previous bolocks"

Shall I quote the Sex Pistols for you? A Train^{take the 18:42, 27 March 2007 (UTC)}

LOL!!! - Alison^☺ 18:46, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User talk:64.234.19.110

Sorry about the edit-conflict. DMacks 19:13, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

No problem! Thanks for reporting the vandal - Alison^☺ 19:15, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mr.Brightside14.

I seriously doubt they would vandalize Wikipedia. :) Acalamari 19:29, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

• Wow!! Didn't know about the name reference. Showing my age :) - Alison^☺ 19:30, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
  • That vandal was less obvious in the sense the user didn't vandalize articles related to The Killers. Most of the time, when someone names after a notable person, song, etc; they vandalize articles related to the subject of their username. Acalamari 20:05, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

I appreciate blocking 70.16.208.83. He was a nuisance. You are great!!:)--70.111.231.43 19:53, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

No problem :) Glad to help - Alison^☺ 19:54, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

• My new account is DGS43825. I took your advice. Thanks;)--70.111.231.43 00:15, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

• Excellent! Welcome again - Alison^☺ 00:17, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism

Please look into a user before reporting that they are committing vandalism. Your report of me to AIV was highly insulting. I have been an established editor on Wikipedia since 2004 and have not had any problem. Therefore, to suddenly find myself accused of "a massive vandalism campaign" is quite alarming. Please read and familiarize yourself with the guideline WP:AGF before accusing any others of vandalism.

While it may seem unlikely that Babe Ruth, Ty Cobb or the boxer, James J. Corbett appeared in vaudeville, all of them did and, with the exception of Ruth, did so successfully. They are all on the List of vaudeville performers that I have spent massive amounts of time creating. Thank you. *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 21:14, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

• Check the edit history. I was the admin that investigated the vandalism report and decided to dialog with you instead of block you outright. In short; I questioned your edits but I did not report you. See this entry in WP:AIV - Alison^☺ 21:25, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Forgive me, I acted in haste. I'm still upset about the incident, though. But thanks for the response. *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 21:42, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

No problem :) Keep up the good work - Alison^☺ 21:43, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know about this and I've expressed my sincere regret to User:Ganymead who was upset. But, in my defense, when I suddenly saw multiple Vaudeville Cats popup on such improbable persons as Babe Ruth, Commissioner of Baseball Ford Frick and even a pancake mix trademark (Aunt Jemima) without any explanation in the articles as to the subject's connection with vaudeville, it appeared to be a spreading BOT-type attack of unknown dimensions possibly from a spoofed account. Not being an Admin. myself, I felt that an alert to AI/V was in order before further damage possibly ensued. I've suggested to [[User:Ganymead]it would be a good idea to explain in the article what the subject's connection is to vaudeville, as otherwise the categorization just kind of hangs there in mid-air leaving the nonplussed reader scratching his head. JGHowes ^talk - 00:13, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] FFS

What is that people don't get about reporting vandals AFTER a final warning. I mean what is the logic of:

1. Well they stopped vandalising after my warning, but I thought I'd report them anyway
2. Someone gave them a warning last week/month/year so I didn't think I'd bother
3. Well they only vandalised once- but it was to my favourite article

I mean serious- can we block people for stupid AIV reports? WjBscribe 21:46, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

That gets my blood boiling aswell! Reporters need to chill it out a bit, also, a test3 warning ISN'T a final warning! Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 21:48, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

I know!! Gotta keep checking those dates. There's a template somewhere for warning folks about how to properly report to AIV. Can't remember where it is, though. And hey - welcome to the job. Dirty, isn't it? :) - Alison^☺ 21:51, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

{{uw-aiv}} Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 21:53, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

That's the one! Thank you again, Ryan - Alison^☺ 21:55, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Warning

Thanks for tagging User:24.88.62.175's talk page with level 4 warning. Someone using this IP address vandalized my user page twice. Amos Han ^Talk 00:08, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] New clash on WP:RPP

Sorry Alison, we took care of this one at the same time, but took different decisions. I hope it's okay. :-) Regards, Húsönd 00:12, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

No problem at all. Thanks again - Alison^☺ 00:14, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for reverting the vandalism of User:Mist25 to my homepage. If you see his edits, he has been trolling across articles and talk pages with extremely racist (Anti-Brahman/Dalitstan-type) vandalism and personal attacks. Can anything be done here? Mihirtheone 04:33, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

• No problem. I saw his nasty comment on your userpage & that's where he stepped way over the line. If he vandalises articles again, warn him & explain what's wrong. If he persists, report his actions to WP:AIV and he will get a longer block until he learns to be civil and co-operate with others. Don't, though, blindly revert his edits or you will end up being blocked for WP:3RR - Alison^☺ 04:36, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RFA Thanks

Thanks for your support on my Request for adminship, which was successful, with votes of 49/0/0. Lemme know if you need help on something I might know a little something about....(check my userpage).
cheers, Casliber | talk | contribs 14:03, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Nicely done ^_^

Hi, just wanted to give a thanks and a kudos to some pretty speedy work on the WP:AIV. I've had to report a fair few today and yesterday evening, all of which seem to have been taken on board by yourself. Cheers! Gekedo 16:12, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] DD214

Hello Allison,

My cry baby competitor Steve Jones is complaining about DD214.us, which is a purely information only website (He is even favorably mentioned there). The mere fact that I sponsor the site seems to irk him. Did you bother to review the site? It is not spam, but provides useful information (that Mr. Jones doesn't want his prospective customers to see.)

You've fallen into his trap. Review the site on its merits, not by a competitor's self-interest.

Thanx. Martin dd214.us —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.73.178.52 (talk • contribs).

• Hi, Martin. The first thing to point out is that your site is a commercial link and you are promoting it here. Please read WP:EL to understand why that's not a good thing. Note also that you're misrepresenting it as a "useful information" site, which is misleading. Finally, you are also revert-warring on that article, which I am now watching. You're just about to get your first warning for [[WP:3RR] - Alison^☺ 17:52, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

• Hi Alison. How is dd214.us a commercial link? Did you bother to review the site? So it has a sponsor, but what site doesn't? It is useful information collected at one site, that would take a user many minutes of Net hunting to discover - show me what's misleading. Geesh. dd214.us is perfectly in accord with "Sites that should be linked" under:

1. Sites that contain neutral and accurate material that cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to copyright issues, amount of detail (such as professional athlete statistics, movie or television credits, interview transcripts, or online textbooks) or other reasons.
2. Sites with other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article, such as reviews and interviews.

• So read the site, and you decide. Thanx. Martin —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.65.140.148 (talk • contribs).

• Just how many IP addresses have you got?? Please read WP:EL and WP:3RR. It's nothing but a spam link/site for Touchstone Research. Yeah, I've read it - Alison^☺ 18:13, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

• Lots, dozens. Oh well, it's perfectly in accord with the guidelines. But that's your decision. On another note, I notice that you're into Irish Maritime issues. Did you like Wiki's RMS Republic article? Martin —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.65.140.148 (talk) 18:19, 28 March 2007 (UTC).

• I presume that's this one. I'd not seen it before. It looks like a nice article at a glance (references are a mess, though) - and yet another H&W ship to end in tragedy. Did you work on that article? - Alison^☺ 18:23, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

• I added a bit here and there. If the references could use some help, and it's in your area of interest, your talents would be welcome. The underlying research at rms-republic.com is all mine. Best, Martin. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.65.140.148 (talk) 18:59, 28 March 2007 (UTC).

• I have a question for Alison. Why is dd214/us not ok and rms-republic/com is? Rms-republic is referenced about 20 times in the wiki article on the rms republic. Rms Republic is just a site promoting investing in a salvage business? I think you should look at that. After spending a bunch of time on it it is a business trying to raise big bucks. This guy must have a business plan that involves Wikipedia. Another Dubber.4.249.33.150 19:36, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

• That's simple enough. RMS-Republic/com is original research, evaluated by many experts including the US DOJ. It is a historical site, and a historical endeavor - with information concerning this historic shipwreck that cannot be obtained elsewhere. Even Wiki rates it as a high value site. And, incidentally, where do you see a request for investment on that site? Such a request would be illegal and should be reported to the SEC. Martin Bayerle —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.73.178.52 (talk) 19:19, 31 March 2007 (UTC).

[edit] WP:CIO

You mean there isn't a Wikipedia guidance policy on the Congress of Industrial Organizations? (Hey, I'm a labor activist, I make that typo all the time; but usually I catch it 'cuz it gets redlinked.) Thanks for backing me up on this case. --Orange Mike 18:46, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

LOL!! Hey, maybe we should get an Admin's Union going. Our rates of pay are abyssmal! :-) - Alison^☺ 18:48, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, you admins, like all workers, are welcome to join the IWW, of course; and if you edit and write in real life (as I do; I'm playing a bit of hookey), you're eligible for the National Writers Union! (Do you work at One Infinite Loop?) --Orange Mike 18:57, 28 March 2007 (UTC) (IWW I.U. 660; NWU At-Large Chapter; a unionist in the American, but never the Irish, sense, and a Republican in the Irish, but never the American, sense!)

I do work there (actually in Bldg 5)! Not in a union, though :) Your Unionist/Republican comment made me chuckle - you know your social history. Big Jim would have approved! - Alison^☺ 19:04, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

I hope Big Jim and James Connolly would approve of my knowledge of the twin long struggles of labor and of Ireland. The one and only time I visited Dublin, I went straight from the train station to the GPO, then to the site of the original Liberty Hall; then to Trinity to look at the Book. I try to be more than a Plastic Paddy. (You should see me on Sundays at Milwaukee's IrishFest, dressed as I am on my User Page, from morning mass to The Scattering; the idjits from INA have learned to leave me alone by now, though my poor weary Manx wife has long since tired of my canned rant on Great Patriots and Martyrs for Dear Ireland's Sake Who Were by God Protestants.) --Orange Mike 20:39, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thank You.

		The Working Woman's Barnstar
		Thank you for all your hard work in updating my tally. Acalamari 18:46, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks, dude. And I'm so sorry it didn't happen. Trust me, though, it will! - Alison^☺ 18:49, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Don't worry, I'm fine.:) Here's an edit that will brighten your day. Acalamari 18:51, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
    • LOL!! Dude - is there something you'd like to share with the class? :) - Alison^☺ 18:54, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
      • Well, according to the vandals, I have a WikiCrush on Persian Poet Gal and Natalie Erin. I just hope those two brilliant women don't get jealous of each other; or worse, call for a community ban on me. :) Acalamari 18:56, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
        • I think a block for disruption is coming on for you Acalamari if you carry on this behaviour, causing 2 admins to fight!? Ryanpostlethwaite contribs/talk 18:58, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
          • Yeah, and I can see a third joining in the fray. Definitely a community ban required here, methinks! :-) - Alison^☺ 19:01, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] dd form 214

Alison,

Thanks for reviewing the "dd form 214" article. Sorry if I botched the wrong request for protection. There is a lot more that could be said, about the dd 214 form, but since I am in the business of obtaining them, alhough most of my business is historical military research, I have avoided editing the subject, because I didn't want to be prejudicial (sp). The independent researcher list is helpful to some extent, but most of the people on the list don't actually have researchers at that facility so I didn't add it. I think that the link to the NPRC is the most important link and should either appear in the text or at least ahead of the researcher list. Unfortunately most of the "Researchers" that do get records actually charge customers for faxing the request in themselves, which it what the NPRC actually tells them how to do on the link to the NPRC (Archives) that I posted. In reallity these " Researchers" are not getting the record, just charging to fax the request in. I am not skilled enought to edit, so if you want a better explanation, and want to edit the text to warn customers, I would be happy to discuss it further. Steve at lyonresearch dot com

Thanks

Steveljones 20:11, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

• Steve Jones wants to have users search the net where he has a distinct advantage. His business spends a ton of money on all the search engines, so he ultimately gets the business in any "search the net" proposal. Going to the independent researcher list gives those reputable researchers an equal opportunity. If he believes that any researcher on that list is fraudulent, then I'm sure ever-watchful Steve will contact NARA. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.73.178.52 (talk) 19:27, 31 March 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Question

Can you tell me how to make that signature you use, for my account? If possible please leave me a message at my account. Thanks! --DGS43825 20:24, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

• Answered! - Alison^☺ 22:32, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

• I got it, thanks for your help. You are the best!!!!!!!!:)--DJ^{tell me more...} 22:42, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Minor comment

Hello. You probably know this already seeing as you've been doing this much longer than I have. For edits like the one you commented on here User talk:69.230.178.81, I usually use {{subst:test-self}} because the user reverted his or her own test. ~a (user • talk • contribs) 22:30, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

• I didn't now that, actually :) Thanks for the tip! - Alison^☺ 22:32, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Hi, thank you for blocking the vandal and protecting my user page! --KFP (talk | contribs) 00:10, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

No problem! Thanks for fighting vandalism - Alison^☺ 00:16, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] More vandalism by User:202.180.87.231

I noticed you previously blocked this user (User talk:202.180.87.231#Your_edit_to_Template:Med-stub). Today this user vandalized Help:Reverting. Thought you'd like to know. JBazuzi 00:37, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Blocked again for blatant vandalism, hours after the last block expired. Thanks for that. - Alison^☺ 00:51, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RE:

Yeah that's the reason I only started with a frienly talk page warning, but his actitude was irrelevant and irritating, either way I didn't really violate WP:Civil, but he should have been warned by an admin they are the only users he seems to respect according to his edit but meh I won't keep a meaning less conflict like that alive I really don't care,I have to much work on other aspects of Wiki to mind that, Cheers! -凶 05:10, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I know. To get around that, just stick to boilerplate warnings like {{subst:uw-test1}} and the like. That way, it doesn't get personal. Thanks! - Alison^☺ 05:18, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Ok. -凶 05:27, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

That was my first posting to AIV. Thanks for acting on it quickly. YechielMan 05:23, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

• No problem! Thanks for reporting it :) - Alison^☺ 05:25, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] No prob

I'm laughing quite hard at that one actually ;-). I think Acalamari's been getting quite a lot of that lately- I think I remember something along similar lines on Persian Poet Gal's talkpage... WjBscribe 05:33, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

• He's such a little studmuffin, really. Myself, Natalie Erin and Persian Poet Gal will have to fight it out for his attentions :) I swear, these vandals are getting more and more creative! - Alison^☺ 05:41, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if this is the same user who created names like: User: Yamla has a crush on Kate McAuliffe and User: Ryulong has a crush on Kate McAuliffe. I had a run-in with three of that user's sockpuppets. If this is the same person, they are using "WikiCrush" as opposed to "Crush", and they are using names of female users I interact with a lot instead of "Kate McAuliffe". The vandalism is similar too. Acalamari 16:35, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
• I just reverted this too. Acalamari 20:05, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sock Puppet

A sock of User:Mickie fan has appeared. User:Trish Stratus fan same exact edits to Melina Perez Bmg916^{Speak to Me}_{Leave Your Mark} 00:13, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

another User:Stratusfaction101 Bmg916^{Speak to Me}_{Leave Your Mark} 00:13, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User:Psychodeathman

Thanks! I've fixed it. Rklawton 04:02, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] username

Usernames with the prefix Wiki are not in violation. I don't imply official role in Wikipedia, nor do I imply authority, such as sysop or bureaucrat. Wikipedia would be in violation. I reported that username because of the word pshycotic and death. It has become appearent that I don't understand the username policy enough to report blatantly inappropriete usernames at WP:AIV.--Wikipedier (talk • contribs) 04:05, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

(editconflict) What I was pointing to was that yours is awfully close to WikipediA which would be an immediate disallow. I felt bad (which, of course, is neither here nor there) because that user was making good edits, wasn't warned and who's probably left now. I tend to hang out on WP:RFCN and usernames can be so subjective - Alison^☺ 04:13, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

I did not know that Wikipedia terms were not allowed, and I think I at least chose a good-faith username, as I looked at it as one. I am requesting to have my username changed, but I don't know how long that will take.--Wikipedier (talk • contribs) 04:22, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Username

Well, it seemed inappropriate, anyway maybe I was wrong, apologies! Tellyaddict 15:58, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

• No need to apologize! You're doing a great job reporting vandals (I've seen you a lot on WP:AIV). The user's edits seemed newbie-ish but they weren't vandalism/attack so I'd AGF here and maybe put the name over on WP:RFCN if you're unsure. Thanks again! - Alison^☺ 16:01, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Username

[4] I hope you were joking. You do realize that such usernames are usually created solely to disparage their subject? --May the Force be with you! Shreshth91 16:32, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

• I maybe tend to WP:AGF a lot. There's nothing inherently wrong with the name (WP:U makes a vague reference to "implies [...] sexual orientation" which it could possibly fall under). I check that editor's edit history and their one edit wasn't explicitly vandalism [5] though was POV-laden. Am I possibly under-reacting here? - Alison^☺ 17:04, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 2nd opinion

Hi, could you take a look at an unblock request for me. I blocked Falcon866 indefinitely. He's generally quite a good contributor but has on two occasions gone on vandal sprees (including page moves that have needed admins to fix). He says he won't do it again but frankly I don't believe him. Would you mind taking a look at his talkpage and seeing if you agree? WjBscribe 17:41, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

• Done, and I agree. I've left a message on their talk page. The page moves say it all - Alison^☺ 17:46, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Looking through your contribs I see nothing out of the ordinary. I think people are trying to force far too many borderline username issues through WP:AIV because of the amount of bureaucracy that has been (probably necessarily) introduced into WP:RFCN. I agree that ideally username issues should be discussed with the user first but its a lot to ask of people who would rather spend their time fighting vandals or writing encyclopedic content. I think your calls have been correct. I agree about the Gay Jew from Portland- this could be a pride statement as much as to disparage the subject. Those accounts definitely need to be given a chance to clarify before their blocked- though I think vandal edits tip the balance in favour of blocking. Lets remember most accounts created never edit- its possible to make far too much out of username blocks (one way or the other). You're doing a great a job as far as I can see. WjBscribe 23:06, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Userinfo.

I see you've put the {{userinfo}} tags at the top of your talk page. I put them on mine a few days ago. In fact, I got the idea from Natalie Erin, as she had the {{userinfo}} tags on her talk page. :) Acalamari 17:58, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

• Ha! I got the idea from your edit this morning!! - Alison^☺ 18:05, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Which edit was that? Acalamari 18:07, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Where you deleted the extra ones. You're on my watchlist for userpage vandalism :) I looked and thought "Wot's that, then?", then checked out the template - Alison^☺ 18:09, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
      • Oh, that edit. :) I should have realized. Yes, I think I mistakenly created the extra two the other day when I put my thank you banner on the talk page. Acalamari 18:13, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks, Alison!

Thanks for the welcome, Alison! As it happens, I'm already a Wikipedian. I just wanted to make a few quick edits, you see. Thanks anyway! --194.125.94.156 19:59, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] My Userpage

Why did you revert messages left as vandalism? The ones you removed, i was well aware of, i have even replied to them. Cheers, Jonomacdrones _(talk) 23:12, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry. I reverted this on sight as I was going through the editor's changelist. My apologies ... - Alison^☺ 00:13, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Dont worry about it, it just threw me at first- i just wondered if there was any reason which i wasn't seeing. Have a nice day, Cheers, Jonomacdrones _(talk) 00:16, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Congrats

Hey, I've seen you around WP:PHARM and stuff, and just wanted to say congrats on your adminship. I think you'll do a great job. :) --Galaxiaad 05:41, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] My RfA

Thank you for your support in my recent successful RfA, and for your subsequent congratulatory message. Scary at first, isn't it!--Anthony.bradbury 10:19, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] My page

Thank you for the reversion, which I failed to spot - testing my new mop and bucket. That makes 51 vandalisms to my pages.--Anthony.bradbury 12:26, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Article deletion

I am curious as to why you chose to delete my article about the Pasatiempo Golf Club in California on 31/03/07. Reason cited was "blatant advertising". I am very disappointed in your descision. I had been adding some information about a place and an important historical golfing figure (course designer and golfing professional Alister MacKenzie) which was not available on wikipedia. I am not connected to this golf club in any way so i can assure you advertising was not my intention. Steve Bell 18:53, 31 March 2007

• As part of C:CSD patrol, this article was speedy deleted as it had a {{db-ad}} tag on it. I reviewed it and deleted it along with dozens of others. Right now, it does read like a blatant advert and it needs serious re-work if it is to be kept as a viable article. I've undeleted it (it was Pasatiempo) and moved it to Pasatiempo Golf Club. However, if it's not reworked it'll probably get speedied again. - Alison^☺ 18:58, 31 March 2007 (UTC)