User talk:Theresa knott/archive7

Welcome to my talk page. If you've come to complain, whine, moan, question my judgement, my intelligence, my sanity, or tell me off in anyway, that's fine. I'm a big girl who can take it.If you've come to chat, compliment me, have a laugh, or discuss articles that's even better.

33451—troll?

Theresa, I don't know why you have stooped so low as to undeleting pages on the grounds that I am a troll, but I obviously want to put these things behind me. I have given away my old sockpuppet and I would greatly appreciate it if you could delete the old versions in the history. Thank you.

Also, could you explain how it's being a troll to oppose someone who would make a good admin? — i386 | Talk 19:43, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)

No I cannot explain why I think it's trolling to vote no to adminship of someone whom you believe would actually make a good admin. Who knows why I think that? Only the gremlins of my mind I suppose. Perhaps I am crazy? Who knows.

As for the undeletion. I didn't undelete on the grounds that you are a troll I undeleted on the grounds that you have been telling lies. Theresa Knott (Nate the Stork) 19:54, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Huh? Telling lies? I'm giving away the sockpuppet! Why is it so hard for you to understand that? — i386 | Talk 15:10, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I don't 'not understand it'. I fully understand what you say you are doing. I just don't believe you. The reason that I don't believe you is that you have been telling porkies. On the talk page you wrote

"Hi Shquid. You should probably know that some people not only claim that you vandalized the Wikipedia logo, but that your user account is a "Sockpuppet" of myself. I think you should know and be ready to defend yourself at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/33451. As you are a newcomer, I hate to do this to you, but I believe you have the right to know. — 33451 | Talk 14:09, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)"

that was a lie. You were talking to your own sockpuppet account in such a way as to make it appear that it wasn't you.

You also said on the VP that the account had "no contributions" that was also a lie. Yes I know there are no contributions visible, but that's because when something is deleted rather than blanked or reverted the edit get's lost from the contributions list. I know however that there must have been contributions because there are two messages from other wikipedians on the page. Now we don't get to see when new user accounts are created. Only when they make their first edit, so you see you must have made at least one edit on that account to receive the welcome message from Meelar and you must have made a vandal edit to receive the "Don't vandalize" message from Infrogmation.

On David Remahl's talk page you wrote "No, I've never changed my username once. I've always been 33451" yet you've had at least one sockpuppet account namely Shquid. So there you are telling fibs again.

No, that's not a lie...I don't consider sockpuppets name changes. This account has always been 33451. — i386 | Talk 11:38, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I don't care what you consider as "name changes". I consider using two differently named accounts as the direct opposite of "I've always been 33451". So I therefore don't trust you at the moment. Of course if you stop with playing games, and stick to just making good edits, my opinion of you in the future will change. I hope that's what happens, I would like to say "oh he started off as a bit disruptive, but he's settled down into a solidly good editor now." But it'll take quite some time to regain my trust. Theresa Knott (Nate the Stork) 12:23, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)

When I say "I've" been 33451, I mean my account, not me. My account has never changed. As for regaining your trust, I think I'll try that, but how long till I can get Shquid's talk page deleted so that I can give it away? — i386 | Talk 12:25, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)

When an account changes it's name it becomes a different account, so clearly the 33451 account cannot by definition ever change name. I'm glad though that you plan to try and regain people's trust. As for the Shquid page, you can give it away now! I've removed the discussion from the village pump, and just left your welcome message. Provided your friend doesn't vandalise no one will ever have a reason to go through the page history. Theresa Knott (Nate the Stork) 13:22, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Now don't get me wrong. I'm not saying you are not actually giving the account away. You may well be for all I know. But there is an element of doubt in my mind. And while that doubt remains I believe the history of the talk page should remain as well. You can blank the talk page and replace it with a welcome message. That's fine by me. But the history needs to stay - just in case. Theresa Knott (Nate the Stork) 22:38, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Semi-policy

don't know if you saw this before archiving, sorry to bother you if you did zoney ▓ ▒ talk 20:02, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)

As regards all these "proposed policies", is it possible the perpetrators (OK, perhaps a different term would be more appropriate) could use a subpage of their user-page to do so? Or is it just that having them in the "Wikipedia:" namespace draws more attention? Where would one make such a suggestion? (On a user-subpage to set an example? :o) On VP? zoney ▓ ▒ talk 13:30, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)

(Thanks for reposting. I didn't notice it earlier)We need to talk specifics here. I assume you are talking about moving Wikipedia:semi-policy to Snowspinner's name space? I've checked the "what links here" and no actual policy pages link to it. So if you want to be bold and just move it you have my support. You should tell Snowspinner though. If he objects then I dunno, VP or mailing list or a quickpoll maybe. As for other proposed policies - they need to be dealt with on a case by case basis. In general, if a proposed policy is being actively debated and/or voted on then it should be high profile IMO Theresa Knott (Nate the Stork) 21:23, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I should have been less ambiguous. I was referring to "proposed policies", indeed such as the "semi-policy" page, but that is only one example. Apparently things are just put as if an actual policy with a "this is only a proposal" disclaimer. zoney ▓ ▒ talk 21:43, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)

But the disclaimer says it all really. I suppose it depends on who is proposing it. If a large group of people thrash it out on the talk page until they get it so that they are reasonably happy, then the Wikipedia namespace is appropriate IMO. However if the proposal is one persons idea, and if no one else appears to support it, then moving to that one persons namespace pending community support seems sensible? Theresa Knott (Nate the Stork) 08:25, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Range blocking

Thanks for your note. I'm trying to get rid of User:B-Movie Bandit. They seem to be largely working, but he's managed to get around them a couple of times, and I'm not sure how to prevent it from happening again. Ambi 08:17, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I'm not all that familiar with this particular annoying user so I don't know his habits. If he is the sort to go on an editing rampage then you can try this.

Range block all his known accounts for one hour. For example

SBC Internet Services - Northeast SNET-CIDR002 (NET-64-252-0-0-1) 
64.252.0.0 - 64.252.255.255

can be blocked by putting 64.252.0.0/16 in the IP field. (the 16 means only use the first 16 bits (i.e. all addresses beginning 64.252 will br blocked)This will block thousands of IP addresses in one foul swoop and will catch innocents as well so keep it short and make the summary polite. You'd then have to go on to

PPPoX Pool BRAS1 MRDNCT SBCIS-041403120525 (NET-64-252-160-0-1) 
64.252.160.0 - 64.252.175.255

this is more difficult but a /25 will include all those in the range (plus a few extra unfortunately) See meta:range blocks for details on how I calculated these numbers.

and then on the next range and the next and so on. If you do all the known ranges you will block hundreds of thousands of IPs (hence the very short duration that I have suggested).

If he doesn't edit in massive spurts but instead takes his time then the above is pointless. We cant justify blocking huge numbers of innocent people to deal with one problem user. Just go on a massive reverting/ deleting spree instead. HTH Theresa Knott (Nate the Stork) 09:03, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Bookipede

Hi, Theresa. I was wondering if it would be alright for me to use your Wikipede on my user page. I am a rather graphics-challenged person. :) func(talk) 19:03, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Of course. I'm flattered that you'd want to use it. Theresa Knott (Nate the Stork) 21:25, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Thanks, it's there. I'm still trying to come up with something witty to say about it. :) func(talk) 21:30, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Editing my comments

Thank you very much for letting me know about the edit. Since situations like this have great potential to exacerbate conflict, I think being "hypersensitive about niceties" is perfectly appropriate. Based on our previous communications, I think VeryVerily does recognize that I have no desire to belittle him, but your change only helps make that misunderstanding less likely. Therefore I will let the edit stand and adopt it as my own words. Rewriting other people's signed comments should obviously be rare, but I'm glad in this case to have someone as sensible as you to fix what I really meant to say.

By the way, thank you also for your work on dealing with the Shquid situation. I totally support your decision there. I will try to stay alert in case new problems develop, but it's nice to know that someone else is also watching. --Michael Snow 23:03, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I'm not that sensitive. ;) V V 06:47, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)

No it's me that's sensitive. Theresa Knott (Nate the Stork) 08:12, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Canvassing

Hello, can I persuade you to vote for seafood at WP:COTW? Only if you believe in it, of course. I need one more vote in the next 2 days otherwise it'll be knocked out ;o) --[[User:Bodnotbod|bodnotbod » .....TALKQuietly)]] 01:42, Sep 9, 2004 (UTC)

Sig

That's the most hilarious signature ever. --Merovingian✍Talk 02:04, Sep 9, 2004 (UTC)

I'm glad you like it.

Robert Brookes

As I said on the mailing list, I've warned him regarding personal attacks. If they continue, drop me a note, wiith a link to the offending comment and I'll take care of it. (That is to say, I'm not actively policing the situation, so if I'm needed, let me know) Snowspinner 16:08, Sep 10, 2004 (UTC)

Cheers Theresa Knott (Nate the Stork) 19:04, 10 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Eugeniusz Bodo

Yup, it was me (as the history of the image would suggest). The basic idea was that the Template:Infobox Biography doesn't work if the image is not named "Name_Surname.format". The actual format doesn't really matter so I simply converted the image to .png. If you don't like it you can convert the .jpg to the name the .png has and delete the other two. [[User:Halibutt|Halibu tt]] 22:44, Sep 10, 2004 (UTC)

You've not yet shown me what I am doing that you consider vandalism. I am outraged by the way I am being treated, this reeks of having and initiation rituals, and this has no place in a mature setting. Husker007 18:01, 11 Sep 2004 (UTC)

You're a [Delete personal attack]

You're stupid as all hell and know *nothing*! Butt out of the business of your superiors!

Note to anyone reading this. Ths is banned user Mr Treason. Theresa Knott (taketh no rest) 19:34, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Mr. Treason

Thanks for the note. I will keep that in mind. Mike H 19:53, Sep 13, 2004 (UTC)

Merci

I would like to thank you for your efforts reverting vandalisms of my user page. blankfaze | (беседа!) 20:54, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

172.155.0.3

COuld you please block User:172.155.0.3? He's on a massive vandalism run. Rick K 20:57, Sep 13, 2004 (UTC) Yeah it's Mr Treason again. I've blocked the whole range for 2 hours. (AOL proxies). He'll probably be back Theresa Knott (taketh no rest) 21:03, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Sig

Hello Theresa, just wanted to say that I've seen your sig around the place and I consider it exceedingly clever. Lacrimosus 08:09, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Thank you Theresa Knott (taketh no rest) 09:53, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

you do so well with penises!

Theresa - you seem to be a calming balm upon those who come to Wikipedia to work out their penis problems. Do you feel like having a look at Traumatic Masturbatory Syndrome to see if something can be done with this steaming pile of monkey crap? - Yours, Nunh-huh 08:49, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Oh my good god! That has got to be one of the worst articles I've ever seen. I honestly think deletion is the best thing to do, i can't see how such a non notable idea could ever be NPOV'd. Would you support deletion? Theresa Knott (taketh no rest) 10:14, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Yes, I was tempted to nominate the sucker (oops) myself. - Nunh-huh 22:48, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

That's funny! Dunc_Harris|☺ 10:18, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I thought so too. i quite like the idea of me being some sort of Penis guru. I have this terrible temptation to start to reuse my animated signature, but instead of a creepy anagram, use something a little more apt in the light of recent developements. My how the complaints would rush in ;-) Theresa Knott (taketh no rest) 10:23, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Would "penis wrangler" work for you?<G> - Nunh-huh 22:48, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I would be willing to model my longfellow for you... func(talk) 17:39, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

You and your euphemisms! OK i've animated your "longfellow" but I can't decide if I like it better in and out or up and down :-( Take a look here Theresa Knott (taketh no rest) 19:12, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

LOL! I would be willing to help you decide which you prefer... um, never mind. ;-) Btw, do you think Longfellow needs a cut, um, you know, of his hair? ;-) func(talk) 19:25, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Oh no you don't. I'm not going to be drawn into a POV on his "hair". If he wants to have a little snip that's fine. if he'd prefer to leave it intact that's fine too. Theresa Knott (taketh no rest) 00:20, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

WikiLove

I hereby present you with this cool as a cucumber award for acting cool when the editing got hot

A girly version of the cucumber dude. I modelled her on the "rough guide" presenter **Magenta De Vine**. Personally i thought she was just plane weired, but she thought she was really cool.

Theresa, I've noticed that a lot of users have a Wikistress graphic, in the shape of a thermometer. I was thinking that an appropriate Wiki-love image to give to someone who's wikistress is very high might be a stylized ice cube, to help cool them. Any thoughts? func(talk) 17:39, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC) Yeah sound good although an ice cube is a bit of a dull shape. What about a snowflake or a cucumber (cool as a cucumber). Theresa Knott (taketh no rest) 19:12, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Either a snowflake and/or a cucumber would be brilliant. :) func(talk) 19:27, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Well I'm not too good with cartoons - diagrams are my thing but this is what I've come up with so far. Theresa Knott (taketh no rest) 00:21, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

It's great, Theresa. :) Mr. Cool! (or Ms. Cool). Maybe there should be a smile, though, as befitting WikiLove. :) func(talk) 12:45, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Do cool people smile? ever? I'll try my best though give me a few days. Theresa Knott (taketh no rest) 12:57, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

When they work with you on Wikipedia, they can't help but be happy and smile. func(talk) 13:12, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

I have no idea who Magenta De Vine is, but her likeness as a cucumber is fantastic! :) func(talk) 23:07, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Those are great, but what if I'm as hot as a jalipeño? - Nunh-huh 23:54, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

About opposition of User:Kate on RfA

Okay, I gave up on this a while ago, but I think that the time is right for one last explanation. So, here it is.

I think Kate would make a good admin, yet at the same time, I don't think she's ready to become an admin quite yet, I think she needs a bit more experience. Look at it this way: Someone once told me I would make a good lawyer, but becuase I'm not even a sophomore in high school yet, I'm not ready to become a lawyer. I think the same thing applies to Wikipedia administrators. If Kate had had more experience, I would have supported her.

By the way, I'm also posting this on Chmod007's talk page. — i386 | Talk 14:02, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Tanks for explaining. Theresa Knott (taketh no rest) 21:01, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

As for my statement &ldquo:I've always been 33451”, I consider that to be true in the fact that the contributions assigned to this account have never been transferred to another name. The contributions of User:Shquid are not the contributions of 33451, and is therefore not a name change. I'm not quite sure that I see your logic, considering that Shquid was only used once and that there was no proof that I ever used that name as a sockpuppet. As I stated on the VP, it was intended for a bot. — i386 | Talk 15:03, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

You said that you created the Shquid account. The Shquid account was used to vandalise Wikipedia. Therefore you used the Shquid account to vandalize Wikipedia. That's why I don't want the talk page history deleted. Theresa Knott (taketh no rest) 21:01, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

More anti-circ advocates

An anonymous user (207.69.139.10) has been trying to insert anti-circ content into other pages. I tried to get him to talk on the articles talk page but he just ignores it and reverts saying the text was vandalized. Can you RfC anonymous users? I'm not really sure what someone is supposed to do in these situations. --Starx 22:27, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Anagram

I did an anagram of my signature once, but nobody noticed. -- SS 04:22, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)