User talk:Nlu/archive8

Can you examine this article for any problems ? It is about a bigfoot that has beena problem for Fouke,AR since the 1940s.Martial Law 07:52, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

In my opinion not notable enough. Perhaps add a section in Fouke, Arkansas dealing with it instead? --Nlu (talk) 07:55, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Tried that and someone threw it out.Martial Law 07:57, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

In addition, have been there myself.Martial Law 07:58, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Not as far as I can see. All your edits to the article are still there. Now that you're an established editor, people are less likely to throw your edits out. But in your edits adding it, explain why it's notable -- perhaps it attracts tourist? Perhaps it leads to periodic panics? Explain. --Nlu (talk) 07:59, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

It does both, and the last reports were in 2000. Does'nt mean its gone. The town may use this as a tourist attraction, just as Roswell,NM had done w/ a UFO crash, once a Interstate highway is completed. It goes CLOSE by Fouke.Martial Law 08:07, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

In the middle of town, is a some kind of depiction of the creature, w/ artwork of it all over the town.Martial Law 08:09, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Will add the section.Martial Law 08:00, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

OK, and then once you finish doing so, you might want to put a speedy tag on the separate monster article. --Nlu (talk) 08:01, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Section placed. How do I have seperate article terminated ?Martial Law 08:34, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Add a {{db}} tag on it. In this case, {{db-g7}} will tell the admin who sees it that you want it deleted. --Nlu (talk) 08:36, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Done so, as persuant to what was indicated.Martial Law 22:22, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Since you're a Admin., can you throw it out ?Martial Law 22:23, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

I would have, but I hadn't been able to get on until now (due to work matters). Looks like someone else already took care of it.  :-) --Nlu (talk) 01:09, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Appreciate the help. How can I have a article deleted, especially if it is nonsense ?Martial Law 02:17, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Add an appropriate CSD tag. When you get a chance, read through WP:CSD, which provides guidance on it. --Nlu (talk) 02:18, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Appreciate the help.Martial Law 23:24, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

No problem. Thanks. --Nlu (talk) 23:25, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

My pleasure!  :-) Antandrus (talk) 02:22, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

I'll second that it was my pleasure. After all you've done for me it is the least i could have done lol :-D KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 02:23, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

And I follow: thanks for the welcome and tips! DSedrez 17:54, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Thank you.  :-) --Nlu (talk) 18:39, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

You may be interested in Wikipedia:User Bill of Rights. (SEWilco 04:22, 10 December 2005 (UTC))

Thanks for the pointer. --Nlu (talk) 05:47, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Curps, blocked my IP for greeting new users...something I was told I could do. I left a few messages on both the IP page and my regular talk page...he didn't reply to either although I happen to know that he was online. To try to get his attention I started to trail banners of text from my edit by using the user summary, which probably wasn't the best approach for it got my talk page blocked. I eventually called my IP provider and they gave me a new IP...and while it is against wiki policy to do such things I hope it will be forgiven. I also would like your help. I don't exactly know how you can...but is there any way I can file a full complaint? Thank you, Chooserr

Your actions aren't exactly the best way to win back goodwill. I'd say that if you wish to explain yourself on WP:AN, you'd be listened to, but please be ready to be contrite. If you believe that Curps' actions were unreasonable, you can consider WP:RfAr, but under these facts I can't see you having much success. --Nlu (talk) 06:17, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for getting to my request on the AN so quickly. That's certainly one of the odder things that's ever happened to me... ESkog | ^Talk 07:21, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

No problem. --Nlu (talk) 07:22, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi Nlu!

I did not warned him I suggested him to create an account!Thank you. Diyako Talk + 16:40, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

OK, thanks. Still, please do it at least bilingually so people can tell what's going on. --Nlu (talk) 16:41, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

67.155.41.98 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log), last blocked by you, seems to be causing more disruption. A longer block may be in order. Jkelly 00:15, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

I added new warning. If he/she doesn't stop, yes, I'll put in a longer block. Thanks for alerting me to the situation. --Nlu (talk) 00:18, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

WowOkok I dunno might be a long shot but I read somewhere that if a user name has Wow in it it's at least worth checking out. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 06:54, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Appears unlikely. Some other admin may block it anyway, but I won't. Thanks for bringing to my attention, though. --Nlu (talk) 06:55, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Np like I said might be a long shot. I'll keep an eye on it see if it starts doing vandalism. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 06:57, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. --Nlu (talk) 06:58, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

If someone is reverting POV comments and they do it more than 3 times is that still a violation of the 3RR? KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 07:43, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

In my opinion, no. But to be on the safe side, if you're going to go past three reversions, ask for help on WP:AN. --Nlu (talk) 07:45, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Thats great advice, the reason I ask is because I've been observing a situation where a logged in user has reverted an anon user 3 times citing POV reasons for the revert. I just wanted to know if that is a violation of the 3RR. Since in your opinion it's not, what about community consensus? Thanks. Sorry if im bothering you with my insignificant questions. It's just curiosity :-D KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 07:50, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

• P.S. man these typo's are killing me I need to get some sleep lol KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 07:51, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

I am not sure, to tell the truth. 3RR itself is silent on the topic. --Nlu (talk) 08:27, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Wow, that was fast! I'd just barely finished saving the nominaiton. After I made the nomination, I was thinking maybe I should have just requested a db-bio, but you got to it first... Jamie 09:04, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

:-) --Nlu (talk) 09:13, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the revert on my user page. tregoweth 09:32, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

No problem. My pleasure. --Nlu (talk) 14:50, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Who are you? I put text on that page - there was an invitation to do so. I thought what I put was pertinent as the userpage looks like a bot sockpuppet -max rspct 16:21, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Before you assume that, check his/her contributions first. --Nlu (talk) 22:31, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

I did

thanks again. just to make it clear, the numerous things he's said about me (eg that copyrighted picture thing) are all completely unfounded- in fact, i'm fairly sure that he actually did upload a pic and lie about the copyright, judging from the accusations against me and Image:RUSH-display.jpg, before accusing me of doing such. you can see his talk page for more allegations against me and his responses. i decided to step back for a day and see if he hung himself, and it looks like he did it. he's clearly associated with allaboutpoppers.com and his actions have not in any way suggested that he wants to be a productive part of this community. so if you make a request for arbitration please let me know . . . --Heah ^talk 21:03, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Probably not. Thinking about it, if he comes back and continues to act unreasonably I may simply progressively block him longer and longer. --Nlu (talk) 22:32, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Could be wrong, but i think he's back with a new sock- 68.251.158.126. its just kinda suspicious. --Heah ^talk 02:39, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Probably. Has there been a 3RR violation yet? --Nlu (talk) 03:57, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

nope, only been two so far. --Heah ^talk 05:38, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

ok, five reverts in a 24 hour period. [1] i gave him a warning when he got to three. he then called me a vandal and reverted. --Heah ^talk 00:49, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

A User:Beckjord has claimed that everytime he adds anything to the Bigfoot article, someone claims it is vandalisim and his material is removed. Anything to this ?Martial Law 22:49, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Ignore him. (See Erik Beckjord and the AfD for more information on the guy; the guy's a nut who's also been sock-puppeting.) --Nlu (talk) 22:50, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Appreciate THIS info. Did'nt know I had been vandalised. Appreciate the corrections to remove the vandalisation.Martial Law 22:59, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

He must have heard about the Fouke Monster. Just found out that this thing is still in the area as of2004. Maybe he is trying to get a lead on this thing, to kill one. If so, he has competition from the locals. As the Fouke,AR., Trivia article says, everytime this thing is seen/encountered, the men grab their guns and go hunting this thing, much to the displeasure and disapproval of law enforcement. Bossier Parish,LA has had one involvement with this thing, so has some other AR counties with similar creatures.Martial Law 23:32, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

I've seen what you have referred to. This guy might get himself and/or someone else killed trying to get a Bigfoot.Martial Law 23:52, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Again, do appreciate the info, and the clean out of my user page of the indicated vandalisim.I listen to Coast To Coast AM, never heard of this guy until now.Martial Law 00:17, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

What is it, and how is it reported/dealt with ?Martial Law 00:29, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Can this inquiry, answers be moved to my User page ?Martial Law 00:32, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Got another one. This one is User:66.217.125.94. This one removed a lot of material on the Article Bigfoot. I was placing print source on the bigfoot article when the vandalisim hit.The print source was, before section removal(of several print sources) The Ten Creepiest Creatures IN America by Allan Zullo.Martial Law 01:59, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

This was in relation to the Fouke Monster, other Bigfoot related material. Looks like a war of some kind is going on between the above party and other Wikipedians as the Edit history section indicates, and the above party has been warned by another Wikipedian.Martial Law 02:02, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Really appreciate the assisstance in this matter. This guy should know that law enforcement frowns on bigfoot hunting, especially with guns, due to the lethal consequences, and he should know that the property owners do NOT like intruders of any sort, human as well as Bigfoot.Martial Law 05:12, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I wonder why you don't want this IP blocked indefinitely - the Communism vandal most likely isn't going to reform himself, so why give this person future opportunities to vandalize here? --Metric1031 05:45, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

The reason is that the Communism vandal may only have brief control over this IP. In the past, he/she has vandalized from a large number of IPs, and blocking a single one isn't going to stop him from switching to another. Meanwhile, whoever gets that IP next (and IPs do get reassigned eventually) will get stuck with an indefinite block. --Nlu (talk) 07:21, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Go to User:Beckjord. He has said that I and you have insulted him. Should I contact "The BOSS", and lets keep this coded. ?Martial Law 07:19, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Still have some onsite glitches.Martial Law 07:19, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't care what he says, actually. Best policy is to ignore, for now. --Nlu (talk) 07:20, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

He said he had peaceful intentions.Martial Law 07:42, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Based on his past behaviors (both here and elsewhere) there is no reason to believe him. --Nlu (talk) 08:37, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

See the latest on his talk page.Martial Law-and all of the other ones. He even told ME to take notice of some matters.Martial Law 10:12, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

I just intend to ignore him until and unless he again calls for vandalism. Then, he'll get an even longer block. --Nlu (talk) 10:20, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

I noticed you have previously warned User:216.20.118.37 that he would be banned if he continued to vandalize Wikipedia. Well, surprise, surprise, he's back at it. Perhaps you could do the honours. —Psychonaut 15:43, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Actually, he/she hasn't been warned for a month, so I'm not going to block, but I'll warn again. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. --Nlu (talk) 16:08, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

User:216.20.118.37 has ignored your warning and continued his vandalism. —Psychonaut 20:00, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

This vandal has received a last warning some days ago and is around again. I recommend that you block him. Caesarion 16:25, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Blocked. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. However, try to avoid insulting him/her. --Nlu (talk) 16:28, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Maybe you're right. But I think I tolerate vandals even less than you do... Caesarion 16:43, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

This is'nt vandalisim: You need some alka-seltzer and tylenol.Martial Law 09:44, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

You were not vandalizing, but he was calling on you to. It's clearly disruptive. As others have noted on the AfD, these are thinly veiled threats to violate Wikipedia rules. If you believe that I've acted in error, you are free to file a request for arbitration. --Nlu (talk) 09:46, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

No. You have not. Thought I could rehabilitate this guy.Martial Law 09:48, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

I have set up a page on my User page for Wikipedians who has had paranormal experiences and/or is interested in paranormal matters. How can I get the word out ?Martial Law 09:52, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

It will just kind of have to go by word of mouth. I suppose you can mention it on talk pages, but it's somewhat frowned upon to call attention to personal pages from talk pages (although not a rule violation), and certainly you shouldn't directly link from article text. --Nlu (talk) 09:59, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Did'nt know this.Martial Law 10:25, 13 December 2005 (UTC)That is why I need @ least 4 guides, to AVOID trouble. Appreciate the info,help.Martial Law 10:34, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

W/ you, now I need 3 more guides, in case you get ill or have other business, and something comes up.Martial Law 10:41, 13 December 2005 (UTC) :)

:-) Well, I don't think you need guides as much as just general reading up. When you have the time, just observe more of what people do as a matter of protocol here on Wikipedia and try to follow the examples of those who appear to act properly. Remember that Wikipedia is not a blog, and should strive for accuracy of information. (That appears to be what Beckjord was trying to steer you away from.) You can do yourself a lot of favor by simply observing. --Nlu (talk) 10:44, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Appreciate the info, and help.Martial Law 22:59, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Did find s real shocker. A paper claims that SETI is a "alien" portal to ET hackers. Thought you might want to examine this link BEFORE I insert it into a UFO/ET Article, in gase it is'nt what this link claims. It is:Scientists believe the SETI Project allows Space Aliens to hack into People's ComputersProblem now is that you have to go into the paper's archives. Maybe a Wiki-tech can handle this one. I was reading it when the article went into the archives.Martial Law 23:02, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

I would say that you shouldn't insert it. Wikipedia is not a place where every wild theory gets promulgated. --Nlu (talk) 23:13, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Appreciate this info. This was a newspaper article.Martial Law 04:00, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi. I noticed you refused my vandalism block request recently. I figure I'm not understanding the policy correctly. I saw a warning that looked final on the IP address' talk page. Was he already blocked and on another cycle of warnings? How can I tell if that was the case? Thanks!  :) wknight94 19:26, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

We are not supposed to block if he/she hasn't been warned lately -- and in this case, he/she was recently warned but with a relatively mild message, and the last instance of vandalism was a while ago. Therefore, no block. Sorry if that was a bit confusing. --Nlu (talk) 20:18, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

No, that's fine. Just want to be sure I understand the policy. I guess I'm too fascist and just want to block people immediately!  ;-) wknight94 21:44, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

I just wanted to give you a long-awaited thanks for helping me get back and editing on here. You're the best. Mcfly85 20:41, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

No problem. Glad to help. --Nlu (talk) 20:45, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Howdy. I don't know the ins and outs of the various dialects of Chinese, so I don't know if you can read the references provided in Wang Sichao, but if you could take a look at it and weigh in on the AfD, I'd appreciate it. The author asserts the notability of the subject without any proof that I can read. Thanks! android79 23:12, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

So, is their any merit to the claim that this guy is notable? android79 02:13, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm going to look. Wait a little bit... --Nlu (talk) 02:14, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Okay, I assumed by your delete vote that you had already... sorry. Take a nice break from AIV, why dontcha? :-) android79 02:15, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

In my opinion, not notable (and even if notable, we don't need this article). The single reference is a newspaper article in which he was quoted about his UFO theories, and this newspaper itself does not seem particularly notable (its Chinese title translates to "Beijing Technology News"). No, I won't throw this person in yet with Erik Beckjord (whose article really should get deleted even though it looks like the deletion vote is losing), but simply Wikipedia is not a depository for wacky theories. --Nlu (talk) 02:17, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

I've waked up. You said the only reference is not notable, huh? Don't you ever heard of 新语丝 and zh:方舟子 (the external link)? (btw, this site is notable by the government and was blocked since 2002/2003), article at sina.com, btw, 你到底会用Google么，这么多大网站找不着竟找那些小报链接，今天真是出了怪事了！ — Yaohua2000 02:49, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

The only reference on the page is to the newspaper. If there are prominent news media links, add those. As it stands, the article is not worthy to be preserved. --Nlu (talk) 02:56, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

你搜索的什么关键字，你试试这个Google:王思潮，真是奇怪。btw，你可以不同意他的研究方向，可以说他不务正业，甚至可以骂他乌龟王八蛋这都没问题，但是你不能否认客观事实吧。那19400个Google结果都是小报？！今天真是出了怪事了。 — Yaohua2000 03:04, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Please write in English. While I can read Chinese, few users of this wiki can, and it's discourteous to them.

And as I said, the main issue is that the article Wang Sichao itself does not cite proper references, and therefore failed to assert sufficient notability. --Nlu (talk) 03:06, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

You can say the current version of Wang Sichao is not notable and does not cite proper references, I agree. But if you mean Wang himself, I can't believe how can you get this result. — Yaohua2000 03:09, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

When someone is blocked, as I've seen all over the place, what happens ?Martial Law 03:22, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

He/she will be unable to edit any page except his/her own talk page during the duration of the block. --Nlu (talk) 03:22, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Appreciate the info. Hope it was not a idiotic question.Martial Law 03:25, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

No problem. --Nlu (talk) 03:25, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

What happened, the whole site was locked down, permitting no further communications. Is THAT similar to a block ?Martial Law 03:49, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't know how "similar" it is (since I've never been blocked :-)), but the database lock is different in purpose; it happens to allow a major database save or revision. --Nlu (talk) 03:51, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Again,appreciate this info.Martial Law 03:53, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Having been a past participant in the User:Braaad / User:68.112.201.90 "incident", I was hoping you could take a second and add any input you might have to an RfC I've written at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Braaad. Thanks. McNeight 05:34, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Should I place this site Cryptomundo's Homepage on to the bigfoot article and other cryptozoological articles ? Martial Law 07:21, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Can you examine the Article: The Legend of Boggy Creek for any problems ?Do'nt want to end up in trouble.Martial Law 08:59, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi, Nlu. I've been meaning to drop you a note to compliment you on your handling of the disruption caused by ROHA in the Hitler article. I thought you dealt with it very well. However, maybe I'm speaking too soon. See the history of the Bob Dylan article (for 13 December), and also this section of the talk page! Regards. AnnH ^(talk) 09:59, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I'll look into it, but I know much less about Bob Dylan than I do Hitler. I'd actually prefer that someone who knows more about Bob Dylan step in and get involved, but I'll try to look at it. --Nlu (talk) 15:07, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

He didn't have a label, so I decided to give him one so, others like him could find him quicker. Also how about you do something about his selective quoting on the Muhammad bin Qasim, and Islamic conquest of South Asia, articles? I've told this guy so many-times to show some unbiased sources to the letter he quotes out from, or even post a link to the letter in full but he never does, the only source he has is, a website that is owned by a Hinditva activists who are considered terrorists in many western nations. Who have been known for making false information up, these people destroyed a mosque (Babri Masjid) because they believed their mythological and I repeat mythological god Rama was born there. --Street Scholar 15:59, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Well, you really shouldn't play with other people's User pages unless there is a very, very good reason to (such as to revert a vandalism). As for the content issues -- talk it over in the talk pages without using personal insults and then, if you get no resolution from that, consider a request for comment or a request for mediation. I am not sufficiently familiar with these subjects to make a judgment on these issues, nor should I even if I were. --Nlu (talk) 16:01, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Thank you Nlu for reverting the vandalism. I just wanted to reply to Street Scholar's post from above.

"his selective quoting", "to the letter he quotes out from": Almost the only thing I did in the Qasim article was reverting Street Scholar's vandalism. I didn't add the quote from the letter to the article.

"to show some unbiased sources to the letter": The letter is from The Chach-Nama. I'm not going to claim that its author was unbiased. But the Chach-Nama, a Muslim medieval chronicle, is the most important primary source to Muhammad bin Qasim. Then I have also personally looked up the letter in the Chach-Nama and verified it. Street Scholar on the other hand some days ago even claimed that the Chach-Nama doesn't exist at all (!). Then I also added another reference from Elliot and Dowson's standard work (of course Street Scholar is also disputing this source, which is frankly ridiculous). More on Talk:Muhammad bin Qasim.

"or even post a link to the letter in full but he never does" The whole Chach-Nama may not be online, but extracts are. A link to the letter was always in the article as an additional reference. [2]

"a website that is owned by a Hinditva activists": According to Street Scholar. Others may want to see for themselves: [3].

Then Street Scholar also makes personal insults and attacks like "Can you stop editing the Bin-Qasim article, you clearly have no idea of what you're talking about...You clearly have lost your finger tip-grip on reality haven't you?" or "Shut up man I wasn't even talking to you or even taking you into consideration. Just shut up " [4]

--Kefalonia 12:18, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

You indicated that this user self-reverted the obscene image. This is not true. Capitalistroadster did it, today. Zoe (216.234.130.130 17:32, 14 December 2005 (UTC))

No, what I meant was that his last vandalism that was not self-reverted was two days ago (when he inserted the obscene images) -- unless there is a deleted edit history I am unaware of. --Nlu (talk) 17:33, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

He vandalized a page TODAY with an obscene image. http:https://www.search.com.vn/wiki/index.php?lang=en&q=Brooksville%2C_Florida&diff=31340802&oldid=30194459 What am I missing? Zoe (216.234.130.130 17:43, 14 December 2005 (UTC))

Somehow that wasn't showing up in the contribution history I was looking at. Meanwhile, it appears that he's been blocked indefinitely as an imposter, anyway. --Nlu (talk) 17:45, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

When a article is selected for deletion, what is the protocol, and how long does it take for one to be deleted,or kept, should a disagreement arise about deleting one ?Martial Law 20:39, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Do you mean by WP:CSD or by WP:AfD? If it's by CSD, then it's up to the admin who's evaluating it; if the admin believes that it fits into CSD, it's deleted immediately. If it's by AfD, the discussion is supposed to be open at least seven days. Afterwards, if there is a consensus, the admin can delete it as soon as he/she has the time to count up the responses and handle it properly. --Nlu (talk) 22:05, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Appreciate this info. Now others know what this is about.Martial Law 23:15, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Hope this was'nt a idiotic question.Martial Law 23:16, 14 December 2005 (UTC):) :)Martial Law 23:25, 14 December 2005 (UTC)Too many questions ?Martial Law 23:32, 14 December 2005 (UTC) :) :)

Nah. (To all of the questions). --Nlu (talk) 23:34, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Hello, you removed the under-construction tag on 2005 in Africa. However, if you scroll down the page of the article, you'll notice that it is only one third complete, the remaining 2/3 only have the outline of the article present.Translation of the article is not yet finished. I suggest to reinsert the tag (or another, more appropriate tag). Thanks, LucVerhelst 08:48, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

All right. Reinserted. Sorry. --Nlu (talk) 09:53, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for watching this with me. It looks like it will be a messy one. -- Dalbury^(Talk) 12:04, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

No problem. Thanks for your diligence as well. --Nlu (talk) 12:08, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Nlu, did you set my page as a sock puppet? I don't know what the deal is with the slate user, but my user page is my user page. Please revert it. I suspect it's purely a vandal trying to screw with me. Thanks. Elblanco 01:34, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Also, could you please revert my image? It is part of my userpage. Thanks. Elblanco 02:17, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Elblanco, are you denying that you are also User:Slate? If so, I'll assume good faith and take the tag off. --Nlu (talk) 05:43, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Nlu, I don't know who Slate is. As far as I'm concerned he can be banned. Don't need the bad apples in here. 65.79.145.252 14:04, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

hmm...I think that last one was posted *by* Slate....this is distressing. Elblanco 18:52, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

I went ahead and removed it...sorry but it's causing me reputation problems. Just thought I'd give you a heads up Elblanco 19:41, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting vandalism to my user page. I got hit twice today, once again about 20 minutes after your reversion. howcheng [ t • c • w • e ] 21:21, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Can you place both my User page and my talk page on your watch list, in case of any more vandalisim were to take place ? This is to avoid any more vandalisim: RE.: to "User page vandalisim"Martial Law 01:57, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

You may want to archive this page. I apologise if I was being offensive.Martial Law 02:07, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

No problem at all. The reason why I haven't been responding is because I was quite sick today. (Still am.) --Nlu (talk) 05:42, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't have spoon for you, but they didn't need spoons a millennia ago right :-D. Get better soon.

KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 05:58, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Glad to help out. Hope you're feeling better. Maybe a cup of green tea would help?

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Ohnoitsjamie (talk • contribs)

Thanks, guys. I appreciate it greatly. --Nlu (talk) 06:00, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

What happened ? Heard you caught something. Flu(NOT Bird Flu) ? Hope you get better. I use garlic and jalapeño peppers, should I even suspect a viral infection trying to take me down.Martial Law 06:18, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Hopefully not the flu. (I was vaccinated, so unless the vaccine doesn't work...) --Nlu (talk) 06:27, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Try the jalapeños and the garlic. Should help. Once in a while, I try oregano oil and horseradish myself. Hope you have no allergies to these.Martial Law 08:05, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

I have a uncle who eats habanero peppers, the hottest pepper on this planet.Martial Law 08:07, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Been eating this stuff for YEARS, never been ill. Also helps to be militant.Martial Law 09:05, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

You have to liberally mix these together in your favorite food, like nachos or pizza, so the taste does'nt get you down. Two of these have been cited here in Wikipedia to have anti-microbial properties.Martial Law 09:08, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Again, hope you feel better.Martial Law 09:10, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

:-) Thanks. I'm just getting a lot of rest -- as much as possible. --Nlu (talk) 18:53, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Good. Be careful w/ the oregano oil. any more than a drop is a real killer - of people.Martial Law 20:47, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

There is some truth in the old "chicken soup" remedy for a cold, but the reason I had suggested the jalapeños is that these things will literally un-congest your nose and sinuses,throwing up and out infected material, while the garlic helps kill the bug internally. Its like spraying mace or pepper spray on a vandal. By the way, a image of a can of pepper spray would be a appropriate symbol of the final warning to a vandal just before he or she is blocked. It would be like hitting a crook w/ this stuff. Did not mean to "gross you out" w/ what jalapeños will do. That is how they work,especially if you catch the illness in its early stages.Martial Law 21:10, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

:-) but I really do despise really spicy stuff with two exceptions -- Japanese curry and a kind of Taiwanese dried tofu. I'm going to see how things are... --Nlu (talk) 21:13, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Interesting.Martial Law 21:42, 16 December 2005 (UTC)What do you think of garlic ?Martial Law 21:43, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Don't particularly care for it. I can tolerate it if used in moderation, but I have no particular liking for it. --Nlu (talk) 22:00, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

How do you feel ? Feel better ? Martial Law 04:50, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

I do feel better. (Incidentally, had some curry this afternoon.) Hopefullly regain enough of my strength to teach Sunday school this Sunday... Thanks. --Nlu (talk) 04:52, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Do'nt take any chances. Stay in bed. Maybe by next Sunday, you'll be better.Martial Law 07:26, 17 December 2005 (UTC)Think so ? Get someone to substitute for you.Martial Law 07:30, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Unfortunately, there isn't anybody to substitute with. I'll have to do it somehow. If I really, really can't do it, I'll prepare the lesson and have somebody read it to the class. --Nlu (talk) 07:32, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Have your lesson plan prepared and let someone else do it. No sense in you getting in worse shape.Martial Law 10:12, 17 December 2005 (UTC)By the way, how are you doing ?Martial Law 10:13, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Better. Thanks. --12:37, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Do'nt overdo anything.Martial Law 03:33, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

I just hope I'll have enough of a voice tomorrow. Thanks. --Nlu (talk) 06:02, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Have someone else do this. What is your current status ?Martial Law 07:35, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Have you seen a doctor yet ? If you got what I think you have got, the best thing you can do is stay in bed, follow your doc's advice.Martial Law 08:26, 18 December 2005 (UTC)If your voice is affected, definately have someone handle the lesson assignment. No use causing/aggravating any inflammation.Martial Law 08:29, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

The common cold usually lasts 3 days, the Flu(NOT Bird Flu) usually lasts for 14 days. This depends on the environment, the patient's biological defenses. Ask your doctor for more info.Martial Law 08:35, 18 December 2005 (UTC)What is your current status ?Martial Law 23:52, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

How are you doing ?Martial Law 05:06, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Hello, Nlu. Hans Rosenthal is back, and I have exhausted my limited patience with him. If you have the time, give this history a look and take whatever action you feel is appropriate. Perhaps I am actually out of line here; if so, just let me know, and I'll desist. —HorsePunchKid→龜 2005-12-16 08:22:21Z

Given that this is an argument that I am unfamiliar with substantively, I'm going to try to ask for help on WP:AN. However, please let me know if a 3RR violation happens. --Nlu (talk) 17:36, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

I blocked him for 1 hour, but I'd like to extend the block. --Syrthiss 18:58, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

I blocked him for 24 hours, which hopefully should do. If he comes back, we can block him longer. --Nlu (talk) 18:59, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Well, he's kind of an endemic problem. I've seen him doing this stuff before, reverting articles and giving edit summaries with hostile language. He signs his edit summaries and comments as '-Anus'. Thats why I'd like to see what others feel about it. --Syrthiss 19:01, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

I think the block didn't work because the shorter time takes precedent. I had blocked him for 1 hr, you had blocked him for 24, so he came and vandalized here after the 1 hour wore off. Because you have since reblocked him, that should be for the full 24 hours. --Syrthiss 21:03, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Per WP:RFA policy, I've removed Moe Epsilon 3 RfA until Moe Epsilon accepts the nomination. In general, I agree with your desire. The sock puppetry was a bane to the earlier RfA. However, Moe Epsilon does need to accept this new RfA prior to it's posting at WP:RFA. Thanks, --Durin 20:00, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

All right, thanks. --Nlu (talk) 20:01, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

I already accepted the nomination and put on WP:RFA. I would like to thank you so much for beliving in me and seeing through the objections put up by Mcfly85 and his sockpuppets. Thank you. — Moe ε 20:31, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

No problem at all. My pleasure. --Nlu (talk) 20:37, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Regarding thre Mcfly85 sockpuppets, shouldnt they be blocked? — Moe ε 23:28, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

I am not sure, and I'm waiting for cue from more senior admins on this. --Nlu (talk) 23:37, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Sorry to disturbe you agian but Mcfly85 took off the delete mark off his nomination as it was previously put on there, is he allowed to do that? — Moe ε 03:02, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't think he is. Let me look into it. --Nlu (talk) 03:44, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

On the section for "data analysis", the whole section is blank. only the section header is present.Martial Law 23:50, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

No -- if you look at its edit history, you'll see that the section was never written in the first place. --Nlu (talk) 00:05, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Alerted its creator to this. Appreciate the assisstance.Martial Law 00:11, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Read this link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:SWD316#Discounting_Mcfly.27s_vote —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcfly85 (talk • contribs)

I've read it. I disagree with it, and Howcheng was the admin who initially struck your vote, anyway. I'm agreeing with Howcheng. --Nlu (talk) 03:59, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Nlu, this is Mcfly85, I am so sorry for all of this. I don't want you to go through any extra work. I would like to be blocked indefinetly if you don't mind. I deserve it. You are a great admin and you do a rocking job here, I was just upset, I deserve to be banned. 63.18.160.93 04:28, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the compliment, but I am not asking for a permanent block; I believe you can be a contributor to Wikipedia, as you have been before. However, I do not want to see any further perversion of the process. The ArbCom will either grant the injunction or it won't; if the consensus is that my actions were incorrect, your vote will be restored. In any case, I do hope that you will contribute positively. --Nlu (talk) 04:30, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Umm, Nlu, please help me. What do I say. I've never used WP:RfAr before. What do I do? Am I on trial? I don't even know mcfly - I just stood up for SWD on his talkpage - and stated the opinion that his vote should count. I don't want to get involved with the ArbCom. I'm in way too deep. --Celestianpower ^háblame 22:05, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

I'vce withdrawn my name - I don't want to participate at all, sorry. --Celestianpower ^háblame 22:24, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

Sorry about it. Didn't mean to get you entangled. Just wanted to get your opinion if you had any. Certainly there was no intent on my part to suggest that there was anything wrong with what you did. --Nlu (talk) 01:03, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi there Nlu, Im sorry to say this but my current RFA is failing, pretty much. (22 support/ 13 oppose/ 3 neutral) That many oppose votes never go threw. Anyways, Im thinking of closing the RFA so no one, or me, is bothered by it. If this was attempt at having an honest RFA without Mcfly85, it honestly failed to tell you the truth. There is still to much influence from his comments posted above, and the links provided my Howcheng and freestylefrappe. Technically, it is my fault those links are working against me. I posted a message at the bottom under the comments sections but no one seems to care, they all think I'm this horrible person who deserves an RFC. Oh well, I guess I can be renominated some other time. So, do you think I should close it? — Moe ε 03:29, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

In my opinion, no; I think you should let the RfA run its course; you and your supporters deserve that, an straight up-and-down vote. (Now, am I sounding like President Bush or what? :-)) But it's your call. --Nlu (talk) 06:01, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

I demand a recount! Alright, I guess I an wait. — Moe ε 14:53, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

I want you to see the comment under the "comments" section I left at My RFA. It partially involves you. — Moe ε 22:32, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting vandalism on my userpage!

FireFox 16:42, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

No problem. My pleasure. --Nlu (talk) 16:43, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for your attention on the mass addition of Grampa Bill's site on LDS leader pages. Although it may have looked like someone swamping the wiki - Grampa Bill's General Authority Pages are generally quite good bio summaries of LDS leaders and are often referenced. So, they may be appropriate on some of these pages after all, and our anon editor thought he was doing us a favor. As LDS sites are often vandalized, your diligence is appreciated. Best wishes. WBardwin 18:37, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi, your user page was vandalized and the edit was reverted. However, it was intended as a message to you, and so, I felt it appropriate to let you know what it said:

Nlu- I ask you to back off on these accusations against me at the Martial Law page. I find you (and others on wiki) tend to try to punish people for errors in using this complicated site, claiming vandalism when someone is screwing up, not knowing the system. Newbie errors are not vandalism, which are deliberate acts. You are overzealous in your protection of Wiki. You assume malicious intent when often people are just confused.Be good or Santa will put a piece of coal in your sock.If you have the guts, call me 510-633-2526. Talk as a real person, to a real person.beckjord205.208.227.49 18:50, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Sorry to be the bearer of this news, CanDo 19:02, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. --Nlu (talk) 19:05, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

And the response to Beckjord: you have made absolutely no attempt to make your conduct at all civil. I give people the benefit of the doubt, but not when they act like bulls in china shops. --Nlu (talk) 19:20, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Deborah has contacted the help desk saying that you placed a block on her for vandalising the Kingdom of Enenkio. She cited the following IP. Can you remember anything about this ban and would you recommend lifting the ban? Capitalistroadster 02:49, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

It's a WebTV address, and I am not sure if those are shared, per se. (The Whois entry shows that it's "direct allocat[ed]" and "non-portable," but it could be a proxy address.) If she requested, I'd say assume good faith and unblock the address. Do you want me to do it, or do you want to do it? --Nlu (talk) 02:55, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

The anon. user keeps removing the AfD notice, at least half a dozen times in the last hour. The AfD is due to be closed, but this guy is not an admin. -- Dalbury^(Talk) 03:21, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

I blocked the IP that he, presumably, used, for 24 hours for 3RR violation. That should slow him down, and if he swtiches IP, I'll block the user name. --Nlu (talk) 03:58, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for looking into it. The whole thing was rather pointless, as the AfD was due to be closed (and has been, now), but the user's attitude was a problem. -- Dalbury^(Talk) 11:20, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

What are they, and how to you destroy them ?Martial Law 05:10, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

We don't "destroy" sock puppets -- but fore more details, see WP:SOCK. --Nlu (talk) 05:11, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

What is the protocol for dealing with these things, so that no one else uses them ?Martial Law 05:15, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

You're asking a question that basically the entire Wiki doesn't know quite for sure. For severe violations as listed in WP:SOCK, we ban them, but sock puppetry is not a per se offense, let alone a bannable one, unless the prohibited activities are carried out. --Nlu (talk) 10:06, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

What do you think of my museum ?Martial Law 06:07, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

What's the link? --Nlu (talk) 10:05, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

I placed it on my User page, no link. May serve as a shortcut to notify different Admins of various problems.Martial Law 23:58, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't see a problem. --Nlu (talk) 01:10, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

How do I place these things, such as "Barnstars", that sort of thing ?Martial Law 07:04, 20 December 2005 (UTC) :)

For placing barnstars, I use the {{award}} template, but a lot of other people just use the ordinary image links. It's really based on your preference. --Nlu (talk) 10:05, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

This is NOT vandalisim. What happened ? You O.K. ?Martial Law 09:14, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Feeling better, but still a bit sick. Reducing Wiki time, but not completely. --Nlu (talk) 10:03, 20 December 2005 (UTC)