User talk:Satori Son/Archive 11

---

Archive 5

←

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

→

Archive 15

AfD nomination of Banhammer

An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Banhammer. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Wikipedia:Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Banhammer (2nd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:16, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Result was redirect to Ban (law)#Banning in games and Internet Forums. — Satori Son

Deletion review for Jealousy Curve

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Jealousy Curve. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. 71.185.242.95 (talk) 03:35, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Reviewed at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2009 November 4. — Satori Son 19:20, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Planning Discussions Now Ongoing Regarding DC Meetup #9

You are receiving this message either because you received a similar one before and didn't object, or you requested to receive a similar one in the future.

There is a planning discussion taking place here for DC Meetup #9. If you don't wish to receive this message again, please let me know. --NBahn (talk) 04:58, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Mount Temple Entry

When editing the list of alumni on the Mount Temple page, you removed a number of (IMHO) genuine alumni of note. I'm not sure if this was by mistake or otherwise. Would you mind if I put some of them back, when I have time? (Note, I'm not the DrMalone that engaged in some vandalism...) 78.16.251.230 (talk) 21:29, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

(I was logged in over the https service, but somehow the talk page has directed me to the plain http version. I would usually edit as dwmalone.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.16.251.230 (talk) 21:30, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Ah - figured it out - your link to your talk page points at the http page, rather than a https page. David Malone (talk) 21:33, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Sorry for the very late reply, but should you come back, here it is:

While cleaning up this, I also removed some unverified listings. Please see WP:Write the article first. The alumni that are confirmed as notable are still there. Thanks. — Satori Son 19:32, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Planning Discussions Now Finished Regarding DC Meetup #9

• You are receiving this message either because you received a similar one before and didn't object, or you requested to receive a similar one in the future. If you don't wish to receive this message again, then please let me know either on my talk page or here.
• Planning — for the most part, anyway — is now finished (see here) for DC Meetup #9.

--NBahn (talk) 02:42, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:B&W Nautilus.JPG

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:B&W Nautilus.JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ZooFari 05:33, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Make love not reverts

There is no need to revert my edits. We should all work to get along. Went away to fly (talk) 14:36, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

There was a need. Welcome to Wikipedia, but if you continue to edit disruptively, your account will be blocked from editing. — Satori Son 14:39, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Prod

Would you be offended if I removed the PROD on Ephraim D. Zanger and sent it to AfD instead? Niteshift36 (talk) 18:57, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

No, not at all. Thanks for asking. — Satori Son 18:59, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

• Just trying to head off the predictable 2-3 day wait before the author contests the prod with no improvement and we end up at AfD anyway. Niteshift36 (talk) 19:13, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Yep, been there many times. Usually I'll just let the PROD notice sit there until they remove it and then take it to AfD, but I definitely understand where you're coming from. Whatever you want to do is perfectly fine with me. — Satori Son 19:18, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Reliable source

Why is Thinkers50.com not a reliable source? (I refer to this edit.) Their method is explained here. - Fayenatic (talk) 19:39, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia only uses information from "reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy".[1] You need to find a real source that has published this, not some for-profit vanity site with the plea "If you’d like to sponsor the Thinkers 50, please click on the link below." Shameful. — Satori Son 19:46, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

I have a copy of the printed version. Greenwood Publishing Group sounds a reliable publisher. - Fayenatic (talk) 20:02, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm sure you do. And you're still completely missing the point: We evaluate a source by whether it has "a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy," not by whether you've heard of the printing company. — Satori Son 20:09, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

I hope The Times is good enough. I've got better things to do than this as well. - Fayenatic (talk) 20:17, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

As well as what? — Satori Son 20:18, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

No, as well as who! As well as you. Fayenatic (talk) 20:22, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough. To be honest, I had a really bad day at work and your reverts just rubbed me the wrong way. The article's in bad shape, but you're probably right about this specific sourcing issue and I'm sincerely sorry for being a jerk about it.

You've been here as long, and worked just as hard, as I have, and you don't deserve me getting all pissy about a fairly minor issue. I'll defer to you on it, and please have a great night! — Satori Son 23:27, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Apology accepted! I thought you'd probably had one of those days. Glad you spotted my message. - Fayenatic (talk) 08:27, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Welcome back

Hi there SATORI, VASCO here,

Please read title of message!! Cheers, have a great weekend!

From Portugal, VASCO - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 03:51, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Sorry I had to leave on my break so abruptly last time, but something came up that took all of my spare time for quite a while. At least I was able to travel to some fascinating places.

Not sure how active I'll be even now, but it's nice to be back. — Satori Son 15:33, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Removal of PROD from Mooretown, Shreveport, Louisiana

Hello Satori Son, this is an automated message from SDPatrolBot to inform you the PROD template you added to Mooretown, Shreveport, Louisiana has been removed. It was removed by Phil Bridger with the following edit summary '(contest deletion - basic searches find loads of coverage in reliable sources)'. Please consider discussing your concerns with Phil Bridger before pursuing deletion further yourself. If you still think the article should be deleted after communicating with the 'dePRODer,' you may want to send the article to AfD for community discussion. Thank you, SDPatrolBot (talk) (Learn how to opt out of these messages) 14:22, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Excuse me, do you know who of Cornell South? Obviously not.

05:15, 8 September 2007 Satori Son (talk | contribs) deleted "Cornell South" ‎ (Expired PROD, concern was: "Article is incoherent and is likely a hoax.")

What about the article was incoherent, and who gave you the authority to judge it's authenticity? How is it "likely a hoax? How did you determine this conclusion?

Google it. That's ok, I did it for you:

Cornell South | Facebook Cornell South is on Facebook. Join Facebook to connect with Cornell South and others you may know. Facebook gives people the power to share and makes the ... http://www.facebook.com/people/Cornell-South/100000399171987 - Cached —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.167.7.17 (talk) 05:48, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Seeing you haven't edited in a few days in a few days, i think this related ANI discussion may be archived before you get back. Excirial ^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 10:53, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. Not every day that an uncontested PROD deletion I made two and a half years ago makes ANI. — Satori Son 14:01, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Mike Speedy

I've decliend the prod at Mike Speedy, since city councilmen for major cities are quite likely to be notable. Nyttend (talk) 01:16, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

The same goes for N. Susie Day. Nyttend (talk) 01:18, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

I'll be happy to submit these to AfD, but you may want to look at the following:

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bob Cockrum
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeff Cardwell
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/José Evans

And our current guidelines at WP:POLITICIAN state a local politician is only sufficiently notable if they "have received significant press coverage."[2] — Satori Son 14:27, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Expert assistance needed

Hi there SATORI, VASCO here,

Here's the following: given you promptly acted, shortly after your return, on Chapecoense's case - not a vandal but a very difficult editor to work with, i would like for you to have a look at this case:

User:Bort08 had an account (duh!), then said he would leave (he even asked someone how to delete an account), but returned as Filipão shortly after. After a while, he desisted on that and worked anon, as 99.235.160.143 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/99.235.160.143). Writes virtually no summaries, is somewhat confrontational (as seen here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Raúl_Oliveira&diff=270549021&oldid=270548795 and here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Freshfighter9#talk_page_for_99.235.160.143), and keeps reverting my good edits, without no explanations (i have sent him hundreds of messages, all accounts "accounted", receiving only one back, where he said he agreed on my approach, to find him doing the exact opposite).

Your views please, when possible,

Thanks a lot in advance, take care, from Portugal,

VASCO - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 15:01, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

I’m very sorry, Vasco, but I simply do not have the time to take on another problem editor in the Association football articles. Between trying to keep an eye on Bruno, the most disruptive editor there, and my own interests at the entire site (both editorial and administrative), my Wiki-plate is full. Oh, and real life stuff sometimes keeps me busy, too.

I know you have not had good luck with WP:AN/I in the past, but that is the usual venue for requests such as this. You can also request some back-up from the editors at WikiProject Football.

Sorry, again, and good luck. — Satori Son 18:33, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

• Understand it fully my friend, really appreciate your kind and prompt answer. Will try my luck elsewhere - it's not a "dangerous" vandal, so the haste is not at its fullest...

Take care, have a great weekend, VASCO - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 22:28, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

List of anime conventions#New England

These items i put on this list are real cons and shouldn't be removed or on a different list

• Another Anime Convention (in Nashua, New Hampshire in the fall)
• Bakuretsu Con (in Colchester, Vermont in the fall)
• ConnectiCon (in Hartford, Connecticut in the summer)
• PortConMaine (in South Portland, Maine in the summer)

—Preceding unsigned comment added by BunnyHareRabbit (talk • contribs) 17:04, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

As long as they all have articles (please see WP:Write the article first), that sounds fine to me. — Satori Son 21:36, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

And please keep a cool head when discussing this. Personal attacks against other editors such as this and this are only going to succeed in getting you blocked from editing. — Satori Son 21:41, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Following me?

You see that i've 'once again' started making nonsense pages? Are you one of those admins that follows the edits of wiki users that you don't happen to like? Don't answer that, i took a leaf out of your book and checked your edit log, yes you do.

Please don't, it's fairly rude and hostile.

Bully25 (talk) 13:27, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

PS

Thank you for not using a prefab message on my talk page — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bully25 (talk • contribs) 13:27, April 15, 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome. — Satori Son 13:31, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Talk page

Look, if i sent you a message that was for the most part well written and respectful but added a bunch of random swearing/abuse at the end, you'd likely remove just the last part right? Similar thing with your message. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bully25 (talk • contribs) 13:35, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Once again, you are welcome to remove my entire message from your talk page if you wish. But you may not edit the content of other editors' comments. — Satori Son 13:45, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Look, i'm sorry but i didn't 'change' it as such, i didn't try to make it look like you said something you didn't. I just removed a frankly uncalled for part of it. It doesn't change the meaning of it at all, and in fact makes you look like less of a douche.

It's nothing against you, understand that, but i'm not going to have people putting things like that on my talk page, i'm sure you'd do the same. The rest of your message was polite and respectful, that's why i didn't remove it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bully25 (talk • contribs) 17:29, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't really care if you think it makes me "look like less of a douche" or not. You may not edit the contents of my comment. Period. If you don't want that sentence there, please feel free to delete the entire post, as is your right on your own talk page. Thank you. — Satori Son 18:38, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

As you wish i guess —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bully25 (talk • contribs) 23:24, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm not understanding you. What false assertion? Bully25 (talk) 09:32, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

I did not request that you remove my comment, as you very well know. Putting my signature after your own comment stating so is deliberately misleading and disruptive. I am beginning to think you are just trolling me; even WP:AGF has its limits. Please stop. — Satori Son 14:39, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Sarabeth Tucek

Sorry, but I don't think that the ref to WP:BLPN has resolved the issue. I now have an unhelpful (and almost incomprehensible) reply there, plus two more hostile messages on my talk page, by the editor who has now also reinserted the contested birth date info on the article page. In my view his latest addition is contrary to WP:BLP (unverifiable primary source), but am not sure if WP:3RR rules apply. There is also the issue, if you check back the article history, of the article subject actively seeking not to have the DOB information included - which is her right, I think. Unfortunately I will be offline for most of the next 24 hours or so, so I would be grateful if further action is taken by an admin. Ghmyrtle (talk) 17:56, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Answered here. — Satori Son 18:32, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Re: The Lady Gaga mess

Even after/during the initiation of discussion on ANI and the withdrawal of the AN3 submission, User:CharlieJS13 has continued on to multiple 3RR breaches today on multiple articles today. I've handed down another 3RR block, during which hopefully the consensus of the issue will make itself clear, so that a ready "conclusion" (if one could ever say there is such a thing on Wikipedia) might be on hand when he returns to editing. I wanted to let you know, since it looks like you're helping to moderate this issue and I didn't want to step over you. If you think I'm off base here or strongly disagree, I think you're in a position at rights to undo this action of mine if you see fit. - Vianello (Talk) 20:26, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

No, this block was absolutely sound. Even after numerous warnings and second chances, they continued to war over the exact same edits. We wen't above and beyond WP:AGF on this one, but oh well. — Satori Son 20:33, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm glad you agree. I think you've been very even-handed and fair in dealing with this, and I feel the situation has been made quite clear to this user. I appreciate you being willing to handle moderating. It's not a task I'm very suited for, myself! - Vianello (Talk) 20:45, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the kind words. I'm sorry my efforts didn't seem to pan out in this case, but as I was just saying somewhere else earlier today, Wikipedia is not for everyone. It takes a fairly unique personality to successfully contribute to a wholly collaborative project of this scale and complexity, and not everyone has the proper temperament.

Anyway, thanks very much for your help in this as well, and have a good one! — Satori Son 21:11, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

HELP!

Hi there SATORI, VASCO here, hope all's fine by you,

Really urgent: i asked the chap which has been helping me, user/admin NuclearWarfare, but just discovered he will be on a one-week break.

Could you please read this investigation report (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations/Pararubbas#Clerk.2C_patrolling_admin_and_checkuser_comments), leave a comment and, perhaps, block the sock vandal? Pretty much like the case of User:Chapecoense - that guy is stubborn to the maximum but in no way a vandal, i guarantee - he has been banned, why can't this User:Pararubbas be banned too, when he IS a vandal?

Cheers, take care and thank you in advance,

VASCO, Portugal - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 11:35, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Hello Vasco. I’ve briefly looked into it, and here’s the current status:

• I have blocked Iklop890 (block log) as an obvious sockpuppet.
• A checkuser clerk has endorsed your request, so a sockpuppet check for sleeper accounts should occur soon. If that check discovers any other accounts, I will block them as well (unless another admin beats me to it).
• Pararubbas is effectively banned. Check their user page. They have been indefinitely blocked and are not allowed to edit Wikipedia using any account, and when a new account is discovered it is immediately blocked. Exactly like User:Bruno P. Dori.

On a related note, your lax attitude toward Bruno is troubling to me. Every single time he comes back to Wikipedia, he begins the same aggressive edit warring using multiple named account and IP address sockpuppets. That behavior is extremely disruptive and not at all welcome here. Yet when you learned he was back this last time, doing the exact same thing, you did not tell me or any other admin. You even had conversations with him on your talk page when you knew he was banned. To be honest, if I cannot trust you to look out for the best interests of the project all of the time, it makes me somewhat suspicious of other matters you bring to my attention.

I hope you understand what I am trying to say. You and I have always enjoyed a good working relationship, but I don’t always feel entirely comfortable acting on your reports when I know you have not always been candid with me.

In short, when Bruno returns next time, if he hasn’t already, I would like to be informed. It can be a confidential email if you prefer, but please let me know. Thank you. — Satori Son 12:50, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

• Thanks for the reply and the block. About the rest of your text, i simply did not expect that reaction, even though i understand the reasons you evoke. I'll try, again, to "defend" myself:

Pararubbas started out removing stuff (links, refs), doing so until the 10/15th sock, also gluing sentences in storylines and creating redirects after being told not to repeatedly, has ZERO English skills, writes no summaries and has engaged in ZERO talkpage conversations. He is, in my humble opinion - and i feel most of the admins', or he wouldn't be blocked - a VANDAL.

Bruno, however, is a different case: up until his third sock (and i am not saying i agree with sockpuppetry, i DO NOT), i thought he was a vandal, and even presented him with a "very poor choice of words", as with Pararubbas (should not have done that, i admit it). However, from there on, he started (unlike the other "user") talking to me as well as other users, so i opted to work with him on occasion. I do agree he is very problematic (three-revert rule, etc), but don't see him as a vandal - has never removed contents in articles. I often told him to "cool his approach" in several article discussions, have NEVER told him, "Keep it up, screw these dictators".

Still Bruno-related: Satori, i have no right to judge your arbitration skills, so if you want him blocked/banned, blocked/banned he is, but i find it very unfair the "...makes me somewhat suspicious of other matters you bring to my attention" and "...you have not always been candid with me" remarks directed at me. Also, talking to a banned user does not make me a "bad guy" (kind of like talking to a prisoner in his prison facilities, does not mean you are to be arrested as well); the minute after you told me Bruno was banned, i conveyed it to him, told him to switch to PT.WIKI, he agreed, then did the opposite...

I have lost your mail address but, if you send it to me again, will keep you posted if he makes a new account (i know he continues to edit with a large number of anon IP, but have not yet seen any new username(s)).

Sincerely, from Portugal, VASCO - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 13:56, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Vasco, I’m genuinely sorry if you are offended, but I felt it was important to tell you how things look from my perspective. If you had been communicating with Bruno off-Wikipedia, such as via email, then that would be similar to “talking to a prisoner in his prison facilities.” But he was not “in prison” – he was actively on Wikipedia, making edits using multiple sockpuppet accounts, including many in blatant violation of WP:3RR and WP: Tendentious editing. You should have brought it to an administrator’s attention.

But I know you are a good editor, and I am more than willing to let bygones be bygones. If you would ever like to email me for any reason, simply click on the “E-mail this user” link in the toolbox on the right side of this page. As always, happy editing. — Satori Son 14:14, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

By the way, no other accounts found, so we're good for now. — Satori Son 13:19, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Deleted page

What is inappropriate about that page?

I also included a link to back up the page. I had thought I had created the word, and then found out that others use this word, and provided a link.

Language is liquid.

I would appreciate an answer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vimalakirtri (talk • contribs) 14:52, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

There was no link in the article you created.[3] If you can provide me with a link to a reliable source, I would be happy to take a look. Thanks. — Satori Son 14:56, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

How do I delete my profile? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vimalakirtri (talk • contribs) 15:21, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

You don't really have a "profile". Besides this conversation, all edits you have made have already been deleted, so your history is clear. If you want to blank your talk page, you are welcome to do so. — Satori Son 15:38, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Actually, I've already courtesy blanked it for you. You are welcome to return and edit at any time. If you have any further questions, please don't hesitate to ask. — Satori Son 15:51, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

The Turbinado-Demerara Merge Discussion

How's it goin' Satori Son. Mind if I call you SS for short? No, wait... that carries certain connotations, doesn't it? I promise - it wasn't supposed to be a Nazi joke.

That's not why I called. Care to weigh in on the merge discussion? You've got a point - it is stale. But I thought I had a point too. A pretty good one at that. I was the last one to weigh in on the turbinado talk page and I was disappointed that no one responded. I put a little work into it. You could refresh the conversation by adding to it, if you're interested. Stagyar Zil Doggo (talk) 16:49, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't have a personal opinion as to whether they should be merged or not, so my participation in the discussion would not have been helpful. I simply did not see a consensus emerging to complete the merge, despite the proposal being made over a year ago, which typically means we maintain the status quo. I'm happy to reopen the discussion however, and have done so. — Satori Son 18:01, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Also - I don't think the "low-importance" tab is helping. What's the idea behind that, you admin you? Stagyar Zil Doggo (talk) 17:01, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

That "Low-importance" tag was placed there by Wikiproject Food and Drink. I'm not a member of that group, so I don't know what the criteria for such a decision would be. If you would like to discuss it, please ask them at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Food and drink. They might also be able to help you resolve the merge issue. Thanks. — Satori Son 18:01, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Proving a point

I was trying to prove a point, even if it was a tad harsh. And I understand this situation now, so I don't need further clarification. CharlieJS13 (talk) 21:05, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

I wasn't trying to clarify things for you. I was reprimanding you for completely unacceptable behavior. — Satori Son 12:47, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

CharlieJS13

Just got back from the gym and saw today's activity. I hope User talk:CharlieJS13#Completely and absolutely unacceptable and User talk:CharlieJS13#And a clarification address your issues.—Kww(talk) 20:43, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Yes, well said. Thank you very much. — Satori Son 12:47, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Possible changes to your discussion text at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zamora (musician)

As a courtesy note, Angelamuziotti (talk · contribs) has been striking the "Delete" text from your discussion points at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zamora (musician). You may want to review your comments to make sure nothing else in them has been miscategorized. —C.Fred (talk) 23:32, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the heads up. I've also commented at WP:ANI#User:Angelamuziotti and AfD tampering. — Satori Son 15:02, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

My article

Please stop deleting the redirects from Anthony Lacavera to Tony Lacavera and Anthony (Tony) Lacavera redirects. If you note in the Globalive article he is referred to as: Anthony (Tony) Lacavera. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Naymark2 (talk • contribs) 13:34, May 3, 2010 (UTC)

You need to read Wikipedia:Article titles. — Satori Son 13:38, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Planning Discussions Now Underway Regarding DC Meetup #10

• You are receiving this message either because you received a similar one before and didn't object, or you requested to receive a similar one in the future. If you don't wish to receive this message again, then please let me know either on my talk page or here.
  
• Please be advised that planning is now underway (see here) for DC Meetup #10. --NBahn (talk) 15:23, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

Reversion of contributions by banned user

Hi there, I noticed that you have been reverting all of the contributions made by User:Pararubbas. I must ask, though, isn't this a little counter-intuitive? If the edits that user made were disruptive, then I could understand it, but deleting {{Portuguese Liga Referee of the Year}} (amongst others) seems a little over the top. As far as I know, there is a Portuguese Liga Referee of the Year award, and it was awarded to the referees that were mentioned in that navbox, so perhaps at least that navbox should be restored? And if that is the case, then perhaps you have been a little over-zealous with your reversions and deletions, regardless of the blocked user's history. – PeeJay 12:57, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

I'm working on cleaning up all the navboxes, too. I haven't deleted anything that has had contributions from any other editor than User:Pararubbas. — Satori Son 13:01, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

As a little background, I and several other editors have been cleaning up after this guy and his 50 socks for almost three years. He is extremely disruptive, and for some time we have been reverting him on sight, even if the specific edit is not vandalism.

Unfortunately, while I was on a wikibreak he was able to create a large number of templates (and some articles) that I just discovered after seeing the latest report at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Pararubbas. Using multiple socks, he then proceeded to insert those templates into dozens of articles.

I appreciate your concern, but please rest assured that I was not hasty or “over-zealous” in my cleanup today. The templates/navboxes I deleted had only been edited by sockpuppets of Pararubbas and bots. But if you would like, I would be more than happy to have the members of Wikipedia:WikiProject Football, or any other group of editors you prefer, review my actions. Thank you. — Satori Son 13:39, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

I share PeeJay's concern. From my watchlist, I am seeing a lot of reversions that are simply the removal of navbox templates that were created or added to an article in good faith. Is there a reason that all of this banned user's edits need to be reverted (even though some are in good faith and appear to be accurate and serve to improve the project)? Best regards. Jogurney (talk) 15:34, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

This is a common debate that has come up many times. Should we revert even the “constructive” edits of an editor who has been banned? The consensus of the community, for the entire four years I have been here, is that we revert all edits of banned users. Please see Wikipedia:Banning policy# Edits by and on behalf of banned users, which gives the rationale for such blanket reverting: “Anyone is free to revert any edits made in defiance of a ban. By banning a user, the community has decided that the broader problems due to their participation outweigh the benefits of their editing, and their edits may be reverted without any further reason.” I strongly agree with that reasoning. If we allow any edits to remain that are made by a banned user, who has time and again proven that they are a net detriment to the project, then all we are doing is encouraging them to keep creating new sockpuppets and making edits. They are not welcome here. Period. — Satori Son 16:12, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough. My next question is whether it is acceptable for another editor such as myself to make the same constructive edit as the banned user had made and was reverted? I don't want to be disruptive, but at least for the articles on my watchlist, I can see a few dozen edits that appear useful that I would like to re-create. Please let me know. Thank you. Jogurney (talk) 18:29, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

Absolutely, there's no problem with that at all. Be aware, however, that most of the reverts I made today involved the removal from articles of templates created by the banned user. As such, those templates have been speedily deleted under WP:CSD#G5. So reinserting the template code into articles would not do any good.

Finally, if you do decide to "remake" some of those edits, please be absolutely sure they are accurate and verifiable. You should know that the banned user in question cannot be trusted to do so, and has introduced false information into articles and templates in the past. Thanks, and let me know if you have any other questions or need anything at all. — Satori Son 18:38, 21 May 2010 (UTC)

This is EXCELLENT news!! Or should i say "were"? I found this new (possibly Pararubbas) sock (see here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Av9309), which just re-created a template you removed, no words added in summaries (as Pararubbas would), writing club names as redirects (as Pararubbas would) and with very poor English skills (ditto). In case it's him, is he kidding?!?!

Cheers, from Portugal - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 21:10, 24 May 2010 (UTC)

Hello Vasco! Looks like NW beat me to this one,[4] but thank you very much for the heads up. — Satori Son 17:19, 25 May 2010 (UTC)

This will be a mammoth task! If you have forgotten some aspects of how this "person" operates, i'll refresh your memory: other than having 30 socks (and counting), sometimes creating more than one at once (!!), he also has a neverending supply of anon IP. Last one i found, this one (please see here, have already reverted some actions http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/92.3.114.49).

Cheers, have a nice week, from Portugal - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 23:43, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Wow, this guy - User:Pararubbas, who else - is getting really disgusting, another sock, ANOTHER!!!!!!!! (see here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/POLKJ890), i am a few steps away from losing it, i gotta leave WP - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 02:48, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Blocked and tagged POLKJ890 (block log). And with the IP, you're right: It's another of his Carphone Warehouse Broadband Services connections from Manchester, UK, so I've hardblocked for a week. Thanks. — Satori Son 17:17, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Just got 92.11.163.125 (talk · contribs · block log) as well. Thanks. — Satori Son 15:58, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Lost battle...

Hi there SATORI, VASCO here,

Incredible, INCREDIBLE!!!!! Vandal has two (!!) accounts running simultaneously, User:Av93089 and User:098av ("contributions" here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Av93089 and here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/098av), also found this IP, which has been active in several years, so it has a certain level of "dynamism" (here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/92.0.145.142), and this one just for today (see here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/92.3.220.59).

On a (somewhat) related note, i apologize for having again conversed with banned user Bruno Dori. It's not that i don't see your approach, it's just that i don't see him as a vandal (unlike the "person" above), he talks and tries to comment on stuff, also not like the "human being" above, but i agree 100% he is very disruptive. All in all - this is the moment you've been waiting for my friend - i PROMISE i will not engage in dialogue with him no more, and you, as administrator to the website, may damn well take the necessary steps with me if i do otherwise. Again, i apologize for any incovenience.

P.S. - Have already reverted some of PARARUBBAS' stuff, but not all. Cheers, keep it up - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 23:02, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Greetings, Vasco. Thanks so much for bringing these new socks to my attention. I’ll have to admit, I had not realized how incredibly disruptive Pararubbas had become, and I’m very sorry you have had to clean up so much of his mess lately. Hopefully, my efforts have taken some of the load off you. I’ve blocked and tagged these two accounts, as well as blocking the most recently used IP address and reverting many of the edits.

As far as Bruno goes, I greatly appreciate that you are trying to see it from my perspective. Even though some of his edits are fairly constructive, his total activity here is a net detriment to the project. As I have said before, some people are just not socially or emotionally equipped to operate in a collaborative, flat organization such as Wikipedia. I truly do hope he finds another outlet for his passion and energy.

And finally, best of luck versus North Korea on Monday. I will be rooting for you! — Satori Son 14:17, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your kind words my friend, hope your return was a safe one (wikiwise that is), and great patrolling job! Is it possible you protect, even if for only a week, Nikola Žigić's page? Vandalism afloat, just because he signed with a new club...Oh well, cheers man - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 20:50, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I've semi-protected for a week. Have a great weekend! — Satori Son 21:32, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

New Karmaisking socks

You blocked a fairly recent incarnation of Kik (BifurcatingBellCurves), and of course a few more have turned up. user:MisesVindicated and user:KeynesianCounterfeiters. If you wouldn't mind taking a look and blocking if you agree, it would be appreciated! Ravensfire (talk) 14:11, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, both were pretty obvious. Blocked and tagged. Thanks. — Satori Son 14:24, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks - always appreciated! And I see you're getting quite a bit of use out of RD too! Ravensfire (talk) 20:32, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

My hope is that if he learns his rantings will eventually be deleted, he'll be less likely to bless us with them. Wishful thinking, probably, but we'll see. — Satori Son 21:28, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Libel sourced from Blog of living person

Can you help on the Darrin McGillis page pertaining Libel of a living person.--Dymo400 (talk) 03:06, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

I've chimed in at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Darrin McGillis. — Satori Son 04:57, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Delete, really? I was one of the original creators of the article and I feel that it should be a keep. Any chance you will change your mind?--Dymo400 (talk) 05:44, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

I went back to the AfD, but it has now devolved into an unpleasant series of accusations of editors' personal biases, rather than a calm debate of whether this subject meets the WP:GNG. I'm trying to avoid any more drama than I already have, so I'm going to stay out of it. Sorry. — Satori Son 15:04, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Karmaisking

Hi, As you may know, I've been reverting Karmaisking's disruptive edits for quite some time now. Unlike most banned users, he doesn't seem to have become bored. In fact, his recent level of activity seems to have increased (unemployed perhaps). I'm wondering if we can ask for IP filters to be put in place? It seems like the obvious next step. LK (talk) 08:58, 22 June 2010 (UTC)

Sorry I haven't responded yet. I'm looking into that option as well as following up with another admin who has been in contact with some service providers used by KiK, including Unwired Australia and Optus. There's even been some talk of filing a police report with New South Wales PD. I'll get back to you soon (probably via private email). — Satori Son 18:29, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Bizarre edit summaries

Those edits seem in good faith; we indeed aren't supposed to list stores on mall articles. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 02:59, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

I agree, but the edit summaries were... odd. Just wanted to let you know. Take care. — Satori Son 18:18, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Inflation

Was it really necessary to delete content on 113 edits in Talk:Inflation. I mean, the edits may not be constructive, but some of those inappropriate comments may have been commented on appropriately. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 16:50, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Those purely disruptive edits by a site banned user should have been deleted immediately after they were made (see policies here and here), but unfortunately some were missed. I looked over them today before deleting and did not find any productive conversations, but I will definitely double-check them again. Thanks. — Satori Son 17:09, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

PARARUBBAS

Hi there SATORI, VASCO here,

Sent you an e-mail but, just in case: This "person" continues, new account is called User:Qazxcvbnm098 ("contributions" here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Qazxcvbnm098), lost for words...Also found anon 92.2.201.123, which undid my undoing in Jacques Pereira (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/92.2.201.123).

Cheers, keep it up, have a cool week - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 22:34, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Blocked them both and cleaned up the mess. Thanks. — Satori Son 13:50, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Raul Meireles vandalism

OK, sorry for that but I only retaliated against this guy - 80.169.161.122, who already polluted that entry with racist remarks and none of the admins was bothered to remove it. It was stupid from me, I admit, but I find it hard to understand that I was reprimended immadiately and yet some offensive comments of the aformentioned guy (who has a long record of vandalism BTW and seems to do it all the time) was kept untouched. Check the article's history and you will know what I'm talking about. Anyway sorry once again, won't happen again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.10.80.171 (talk) 21:41, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for that. And you're right: I don't know why that other vandalism edit sat there untouched for over six hours before you came along. Not cool.

I've given them a warning.[5] — Satori Son 00:13, 30 June 2010 (UTC)

Deleted pages

I'm a wikipedia user and you deleted my editing page,

can you explain why you done this. They where suppported by references and external links.

My editing pages: - F.C. Amares - Siaka Bamba

My email address is [email protected] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.1.73.107 (talk) 16:12, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

In case you haven't noticed Satori, this is User:Pararubbas, 99,9999999999% sure of it (when you see this message and my "analysis", please hook up with me, i'll fill in further details). - --Vasco Amaral (talk) 02:01, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Pararubbas (I do believe): Your contributions have been deleted because you have been declared banned by the Wikipedia community. If you wish to be unbanned, I would highly recommend you refrain from creating new accounts and read WP:Standard Offer. Regards, NW (Talk) 19:46, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Probably sock

user:FractionalReserveRobbery - probably the usual suspect again. Ravensfire (talk) 04:58, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Meetup/DC 11

Hey, just in case you missed it, there is an oppurtunity to get a free dinner this Tuesday August 11 and a chance to meet and hang out talk about Wikipedia:WikiProject United States Public Policy and WP:GLAM/SI. Sorry that this is so late in the game, I was hoping the e-mail would be a better form of contact for active members (if you want to get on the e-mail list send me an User e-mail ). Hope that you can attend, User:Sadads (talk)12:39, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

DC Meetup #12

An off-wiki discussion is taking place concerning DC Meetup #12. Watch this page for announcements.
—NBahn (talk) 04:38, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

P.S. You are receiving this message either because you received a similar one before and didn't object, or you requested to receive a similar one in the future. If you don't wish to receive this message again, then please let me know either on my talk page or here.

Wikipedia DC Meetup, October 23

You are invited to Wikipedia DC Meetup #12 on Saturday, October 23, 6pm at Bertucci's in Foggy Bottom. Special guests at this meetup will include Wikimedia CTO Danese Cooper, other Wikimedia technical staff and volunteer developers who will be in DC for Hack-A-Ton DC. Please RSVP on the meetup page.

You can remove your name from the Washington DC Meetups invite list at Wikipedia:Meetup/DC/Invite/List.

To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our mailing list.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:09, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

Amusement Park WikiProject

Hello Satori Son. Recently, the Amusement Parks WikiProject was reformatted and revived. As part of this process other related WikiProjects (such as Disneyland, Herschend Family Entertainment, Universal Parks & Resorts and Walt Disney World) were also revived and have now become part of the Amusement Park WikiProject as task forces. If you would like to remain listed as a member on these WikiProjects please re-add your name to the appropriate lists at the participants page. All names currently on the list have been cleared. If you have any queries, please do not hesitate to contact me directly. Thank you for your cooperation, Themeparkgc  Talk  08:25, 6 November 2010 (UTC).

Wikipedia DC Meetup 13

You are invited to Wikipedia DC Meetup #13 on Wednesday, November 17, from 7 to 9 pm, location to be determined (but near a Metro station in DC).

To keep up-to-date on local events, you can join the mailing list.

You can remove your name from future notifications of Washington DC Meetups by editing this page: Wikipedia:Meetup/DC/Invite/List.
BrownBot (talk) 13:46, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

User talk: 65.51.227.31

In spite of a stage 4 warning, additional vandalism has taken place. Pls. go in and look at this and block again for a longer period. Viva-Verdi (talk) 01:15, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

---

The above discussions are preserved as an archive. Please do not modify them. Further comments or new discussion should be started on the current talk page. No further edits should be made to this page.