User talk:Aphaia/Archive03

Latest comment: 16 years ago by Aphaia in topic Agenda pushing?
Welcome to Paginam Aphaeae
Leave a message
Old talks: 01 | 02

Note: If I leave a message on your talk, I will go to read your response. You needn't respond me here on my talk. If you leave a message on my talk, I will respond you here, not on your talk. It is in my opinion the best way to follow the course of discussion.

Abraham edit

Sorry - the text is all still there and the redirect is malformed. I'll go and fix it now.--Poetlister 14:35, 27 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Oh, it was my mistake. Sorry for bothering you and thank you for your fixing! --Aphaia 15:21, 27 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the welcome message edit

Hi. Just wanted to say thanks for the welcome message! --J. Atkins (talk | contribs) 11:43, 28 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Again welcome! :) --Aphaia 13:45, 28 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Message from da Bug edit

Please see my response. Nanobug Locked Out! 21:06, 28 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Kanpai!!! edit

Hi there! Why is that stuff on my work artical? That was typed by me! There are no saikano quotes on the WHOLE internet for unknown reasons! so please tell me....why?!--Saikano 17:51, 30 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Cheers for creating new article. You may want to learn formatting Wikiquote:Templates. By the way, I have no clear idea from which you are citing (anime perhaps?) so put no introduction to the article. Since the original is released as manga, and they are different in details, it would be helpful for readers to make it clear which version you are citing. Cheers, --Aphaia 17:56, 30 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thank You edit

Thank You Very Much For The Welcome Message. Much Better Than Wikipedia Lmc169 15:21, 1 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

You're welcome, Lmc169. I wish you enjoy Wikiquote, both browsing and editing. --Aphaia 15:36, 1 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

? edit

The things on my saikano quotes, if there is a problem with it the very least you could do is help or recamend was to fix it!--Saikano 16:08, 1 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

so what was the problem with my saikano edit? i was not finish with that! I was doing what ya told me to do so what in the hell!?--Saikano 19:16, 1 May 2007 (UTC)Reply
Thank you for your question. It looks better now than the version I reverted. At that time I found several problems
  • No quote - article without quotation is not fitting our goal.
  • Not informative information as well your latest version - "you may find information on somewhere" is not sufficient.
  • Subjective information, not descriptive. What you feel it is not an issue here. Who created and published it when is needed here to state, not why you love it. See also WQ:NPOV please.

Have you given a look to Wikiquote:Good articles? It may help you to learn what kind of articles are preferred here. --Aphaia 19:34, 1 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Tarkan edit

Why are your everting when I've added perfectly acceptable quotes? and why is no one bothering with fixing pages that do need them? Instead of attacking this page why don't you go and fix other pages like the Robbie Williams page? 19:06, 1 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Estonian wikiquote edit

Hello! Could you please add a link to Estonian Wikiquote on the Main page.

saikano edit

on my saikano page, am i doing a fair job or is it likely to be removed?--Saikano 17:29, 2 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

You mean Saikano (anime)? I would like you to understand there is nothing of my page or yours, all articles are free and rather belongs to the project, still you are right to be credited as its main author. :)
As for the article, I hope we can improve it more and more, but the general direction of your editing seems to me fine. Go ahead, and make it a good article! --Aphaia 17:34, 2 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Saiyuki determination edit

Hello, by the main characters, Genjo Sanzo, Son Gokuu, Cho Hakkai and Sha Gojyo in the wikipedia article who are mentioned in the wikiquote article. --McNoddy 10:08, 3 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

I think it is not a strong argument. Since it is equal to all other versions, taken from the Chinese original. Please see the Wikipedia article on original version, w:Journey to the West; Saiyuki is a title for its Japanese rendering, so those names are equal to each Japanese adoptions, and there are over 10 versions even you limit to manga genre for searching. Unless "the quotes" are properly cited, your attribution is hardly acceptable. --Aphaia 10:12, 3 May 2007 (UTC)Reply
Its not an arguement, its a fact. am simply saying that these names are in the same article in wikipedia. Do what you like with it am just trying to improve the article --McNoddy 10:31, 3 May 2007 (UTC)Reply
Thank you for your attempt and explanation why you did so, but I don't think still it a proper action said as the above. There are other adoptations, and I would be happy you have counted them too. You'll be welcome to join the discussion on Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Saiyuki. --Aphaia 10:38, 3 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Could you teach me edit

If there is a diferent way that I should format my references please teach me how. Currently I use the Wikipedia format and was not aware that it was diferent on Wikiquote. Saksjn 12:18, 4 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Your way as the below is not welcome, as you guess:
You begin by always expecting good things to happen. [2][3][4].
Source should be explicitly shown on the contrary. Jimmy Wales may be a good example to learn the way. And ideally, if you cited a website, you are expected to record when you accessed it. Thanks. --Aphaia 13:50, 4 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Agree with us or get blocked edit

Well, that's one way to get consensus, isn't it? 20:52, 7 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for your message. Unless you persuade your way is better than the current practice, it could be a possibility. You may agree reverting without reasoning is always not considered a good manner. --Aphaia 20:58, 7 May 2007 (UTC)Reply
That's not what you said. 21:13, 7 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Question? edit

Why did you block my account (Mrs. Herntaq) and the account of one of my students (SA9 Student Account 9)? Am I violating policy? Thank you for your anticipated reply. 18:37, 9 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Strangeness edit

The usual "I was looking around"! You protected Wikiquote:Spam-whitelist and it appears I can edit it - that seems strange? If you want me to actually edit it (I decided not to annoy anyone who might not know me) let me know. Regards --Herby talk thyme 07:30, 10 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Soon after protection, I deleted it (I am not sure if we need it for now and confess how it works on the project namespace, not the MediaWiki one - guessing it doesn't work at any rate though), so protection was gone away, that is anyone can create/edit it :)
After some investigation, I expect we can decide if we really need it and whom we expected to edit it. Cheers, --Aphaia 08:59, 10 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Re: Imposter edit

I have confirmed that User:Vagish is indeed mine over here: w:User_talk:Vagish#Impostor 07:54, 10 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

I give in! edit

OK - please semi protect my userpage - I seem to be attracting attention (was attacked in Commons too yesterday)! Talk soon - regards --Herby talk thyme 12:13, 11 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Done. Sorry to see you bothered by a bad guy ;( --Aphaia
Thanks - I guess I must have been bothering some bad guys!! (<note to self>be nice to vandals!</note>) --Herby talk thyme 13:15, 11 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Carly Colón edit

Thanks, the thing is I am currently working on raising Carly's page on Wikipedia to good article, and followed a link to his page here and noticed that, so I left a message to help improve the page. I will see if I can do some cleanup after reviewing how the format works here, Peace. -Dark Dragon Flame 18:59, 11 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Congratulations edit

Congratulations, you are now a bureaucrat. Thanks for all the help thus far, and I am sure you will remain a major asset for the project. ~ Kalki 23:58, 11 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

CONGRATULATIONS, APHAIA!!! :) Cbrown1023 talk 02:05, 12 May 2007 (UTC)Reply
I would also add my congratulations, as well as my thanks for your increasing work on our policy pages. I hope I can catch up to you and Cbrown1023 sometime in the next few weeks! ~ Jeff Q (talk) 05:02, 12 May 2007 (UTC)Reply
Thank you guys! I wish to deserve your expectations, and to use the newly granted power for the project in the best way. --Aphaia 06:39, 12 May 2007 (UTC)Reply
Good luck with your new position, Aphaia! Majorly (hot!) 12:35, 13 May 2007 (UTC)Reply
Thanks! And how nice to see you around there :) --Aphaia 20:39, 13 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

A small question edit

I have a quote that i would like to add to wikiquote. It goes. "I'd rather be an educated fool, then an ignorant wiseman." Maxim Vlasselaerts How do i do this? 03:43 12/05/2007 —This unsigned comment is by Vlassus (talkcontribs) .

Thank you for your question. I haven't found "Maxim Vlasselaerts" on Google or Wikipedia. So I hesitate you to recommend to create an article, since we collect only quotes of notable sources, either people or works. If you would like to add it to our collection, you need to prove your author is worldwide famous. You are welcome however to keep it on your username, if you are a registered user. Cheers, --Aphaia 09:10, 12 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Brimstone (wrestler) edit

I saw you noted 'unsourced' on this article. I tried to enter the proper references, but it does not seem to be working for me? Would you be able to help me enter the proper codes so it shows a proper reference? I have the links to show the sourcing, but I am at a standstill with it... Please help!!! RingWars2007 18:31, 14 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hello, the urls put on Brimstone (wrestler) (numbered #4 and #5) has problems including:
it is uncertain which quote is cited from which url.
and if it is clear, the link is broken.

Please put the working url (see the reference section, your giving data don't work for now) at first and then put the reference to each quote. We ask editors to put source quote by quote, unless a whole section is cited from one sole source. Thanks. --Aphaia 18:38, 14 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Sorry edit

I was not around to help - I have requested CU on Meta again tho - I hope that is ok - regards --Herby talk thyme 10:13, 15 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Media site notice edit

Spotting yours and other edits around I started doing the same but I noticed on Meta that just the early registration bit has gone not the whole notice - do you know anything more? Regards --Herby talk thyme 10:33, 16 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Re: Buffy Season Eight edit

Noticed your suggestion that the Season Eight wikiquote should merge with the TV series page and thought I'd offer up my two bits. Firstly, the page as it currently stands has pretty much been maintained by myself and one or two other people, and due to my limited knowledge of the code it's fairly rudimentary at present.

Moving it to the TV page may help this, by allowing other more experienced people to clean it up, but therein lies two important issues: 1. the comics, whilst considered part of the same continuity in the eyes of the creative team, are of a completely seperate medium to the TV series, and some would consider it lazy to lump both together in one already long article. 2. There's no way of knowing how many of the people who transcribe episodes for the Buffy page read the comic series, and unlike television shows, comics aren't generally transcribed into script form.

In summary, whilst I'm all for improving the page, I'm not quite sure a merger is the best way to do it.

Radicaladz 11:18, 16 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for your consideration, Radicaladz. I didn't realize the article we're talking about was concerned comic strip, not TV series. And I nod you it would be problematic to merge works released in two different media even under the same title. Could you please make it clear at the top of the article? Cheers, --Aphaia 15:54, 16 May 2007 (UTC)Reply
Based on your comment, I've altered the lead-in paragraph to better fit the page. I hope to to start work on LWH Parts 3 and 4 shortly, so that when issue #5 (The Chain) is released I can transcribe it quicker. Do you still think the merge is necessary?

Radicaladz 13:39, 13 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

No personal attacks edit

If you doesn't share my opion you should avoid personal attacks like vand or troll --Histo 02:04, 17 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Help edit

Hello, Aphaia.

I also contacted some of our other fellow contributors on wikiquote. I'm worried right now because the same vandalising expert, Wiki-Star from wikipedia has come here. He has been nblocked under approximately ten names on wikipedia. As we know, I've been maintaining the sopranos wikiquote page for more than a year now, adding all the quotes and maintaining not to cross the ten quote maximum. Just recently, Wiki-Star came and reverted some words here and there. I reverted back to the real contextual version. I don't want to enter a revert war with this major vandaliser. He has also vandalised my forum and he keeps bragging about it on his user pages. He is also following me across wiki boards and reverting all my contributions out of spite. That is why I am requesting that you make sure to ban him in case he keeps revertig incorrectly. Thanks again, your loyal contributing friend. - Zarbon 15:14, 17 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Wiki-star: Excuse me? but I wouldn't be talking if I were you Zarbond[1]. i never "vandalized" anything here and on your "forum" do not call me a stalker! like you, i love Sopranos too and i can't believe you missed that on the subtitles! I fixed you. No one has to be banned here all i'm saying is that you CALM DOWN and talk it over, rather than tattle-tell. Wiki-star

Aphaia, thank you for keeping track of this person's activity. He has been banned from wikipedia over three times under at least ten names of which I can provide evidence. He is continuously reverting and vandalising my contributions. Please keep track of his activity and if need be, take action against him when necessary. Thank you again for your help. - Zarbon 17:50, 17 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for your attention, I am not familiar with the title so may be not a good judge, but apparently the broadcasting date was inappropriately changed, so I haven't been hesitant to revert it. You mentioned Wikipedia issues, so could you provide some reference pages? Wikipedia folks records known troublesome editors on a page, if I recall correctly. Or just a link to their w:WP:AN archives would be helpful for me to learn your concerns.
As for the recent edits on The Sopranos, I would recommend you to utilize talk pages as well discussion pages more and ask fellow editors for help, instead of jumping into revert wars. The latter is troublesome and annoying. It is always better working together than alone in my opinion. --Aphaia 17:55, 17 May 2007 (UTC)Reply
Wiki-star: What is going on here?! Zarbon is a sockpuppet master and yet he accuses me of vandalisation? Zarbon has been banned from Wikipedia also, i am changing my ways. he has not. I shall discuss more on those talk pages. Wiki-star
Aphaia, I have been banned from wikipedia in the past for trying to stop wiki-star's vandalism. Please don't let him get out of control here. He will continue to vandalize and I do not want to break the 3RR rule. Please trust me and ban him before it's too late. He will keep creating accounts and vandalizing. He has already reverted the sopranos page and he is not stopping the vandalism. I have contributed to both that page and the dragonball z page entirely. Every quote on the pages have been submitted by me. At this point, it is safe to say that he is purposely reverting one quotation to have me break the 3RR rule. - Zarbon 18:05, 17 May 2007 (UTC)Reply
  • Wiki-star: Don't try to tell others that dum lie! You were blocked for sockpuppets, not 3rr. I have already provided the diff and no it was my friends from your "Frieza Force forum" that vandalized Wikipedia. I am trying to fix your vandalism and all you do is tattle, tattle, tattle! You're not 22 as you claim to be, or else ou wouldn't be tellin' on me and trying to get admins to ban me! handle it yourself. Wiki-star

Just for the record, I recommend both of you to use the article talk pages primarily, instead of admin talks, if you would like to begin a discussion how they should be organized. --Aphaia 18:12, 17 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Aphaia, you can easily see that I have been contributing to the articles for years now. If you look at the history, you will notice that my name is practically the only one there, since I am the sole contributor to the articles. However, this wiki-star has been following me and vandalising the articles. Please do not lock the pages. I do not want to edit war. Please just ban this menace and allow me to continue to contribute to the pages as I have been for years now. Thank you. - Zarbon 18:21, 17 May 2007 (UTC)Reply
  • Wiki-star: Zarbon's sockpuppet said the exact same things for the articles Dodoria[2] and Zarbon[3] on Wikipedia. The user clearly has an attachement with articles he created and does not like to see them gone. He is intent on keeping the Sopranos article his own way and I am trying to make it according to the DVD, not his bootlegs. Wiki-star
Zarbon, use the talk. It is on every page. (in the voice of Obi One Kenobi). --Aphaia 18:24, 17 May 2007 (UTC)Reply
  • Wiki-star: hey buddy, thanks for the block! I needed ta cool down. Looking over the Sopranos articles, did you know that there are some sections where there are more than 10 quotes? I saw it! Could you remove some of them, it is copyrighted ya know, and the page is protected. Wiki-star
  • Please continue the conversation on the sopranos page. I stated clearly that if there is anything that needs to be depleted, let me know. As of now, however, I am certain that there are exactly ten quotes per page as I spent years making sure of it while I added them. Continue this conversation on the talk page, please do not bother Aphaia with this since it is irrelevant. - Zarbon 21:52, 17 May 2007 (UTC)Reply
  • Wiki-star: CALM DOWN Zarbond! geez, I was not bothering Aphaia, I'll have you know. I was simply telling something important. Ha! Wiki-star

Sockpuppet edit

Alright, let me be the first to point out here that User:H*bad is a sockpuppet of Wiki-star. if for any reason you see that he begins to revert and vandalize the same way Wiki-star does, please take action. Even his user page is of the same writing. Don't accuse me of blaming without acknowledging my claims first. Please look into it. I'm most certain it's another of his sockpuppets. As further proof, if he posts here for any reason at all, you will know most certainly its him since all he does is follow my contribs around and responding to them. - Zarbon 05:10, 23 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

I knew it. H*bad is on my talk page posting just like I knew he would. I told you he's a sockpuppet of Wiki-star's. And I know he created more accounts to avoid bans. - Zarbon 19:05, 23 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

I am not vandalizing. Plus I like to defend my honor, since I am not liar. I hate being called one. Cheers, H*bad 19:07, 23 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

I told you that he would come here and post didn't I? I warned you about him. Why aren't you listening to me. He has absolutely nothing better to do but go around and follow my contribs, post against them, and create multiple user accounts. I warned you about this person being a problem. He should immediately be banned for creating multiple accounts and abusing wiki members. - Zarbon 19:10, 23 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

He just created another username called H*Bad12345 and is replying to his own responses with his sockpuppet. - Zarbon 19:59, 23 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Please don't edit over my response. Thank you. Also, will you stop with the accusations? You have made your point, now just wait for an admin to show you how I am not Wikistar. Thank you, H*bad 20:01, 23 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

He just created another username called Klatsh. I am seriously getting sick and tired of this. Will someone please just ban these sockpuppets. - Zarbon 20:02, 23 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Forgot to mention, he just came and vandalized my user page again. - Zarbon 20:04, 23 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Experienced edit

I am experienced. It's just that I got really confused with what just happened. And unfortunately I like to preserve my reputation. Anyways, I have been on wikis for a long time now. And I know a ton about them. I am even co-founding a wikia wiki, in which I have written most of the coding that has been put on it. And I can fix most problems, that don't need sysop powers in order to fix it. Those are just scratch the surface.--H*bad 22:23, 23 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, I have a different opinion about that. Your recent behaviors shows your inexperience on THIS wiki community, its custom and experience (For example, you don't understand why subst is necessary there, right?). To avoid confusion newbies, I would love you not to be boastful. Otherwise, even if it is better for us all that you stop to welcome them. Technically we use a bot for welcoming people and it is not necessary as long as the matter is only if a user got a message or not. That is another example which shows how our project is running in my opinion. I don't refer to your WP unwelcome deeds now, but it doesn't mean you can be called an experienced user there. --Aphaia 05:56, 24 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

More Sockpuppets edit

I warned you about this. Wiki-star keeps creating more and more sockpuppets. He should be permanently banned along with all his ip addresses in order to prevent further moronic vandalism. H*bad is another one of his sockpuppets, along with a slew of other sockpuppets he has right now. I'm sick and tired of these stupid vandalisms. He also just came to my talk page and posted idiotic nonsense. - Zarbon 20:20, 24 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thanks edit

Thank you for the AdviceAFUSCO 13:39, 28 May 2007 (UTC)AFUSCOReply

adminship requests edit

If in the future I would like to make another request for adminship what should I include with my user name?—This unsigned comment is by AFUSCO (talkcontribs) .

If you are ready for request, you might know that. Thanks. --Aphaia 03:55, 29 May 2007 (UTC)Reply
Good answer, Aphaia!!! (really, that is a fantastic' answer!) Cbrown1023 talk 00:11, 30 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

My talk page edit

Thanks. The IP ( that attacked it may well be an open proxy according to this. Regards --Herby talk thyme 13:01, 29 May 2007 (UTC)Reply! edit

Sr. that was not a joke! My best friend was killed in a quake...i was just updated and it turns out that she was not killed on purpouse but it was the fault of a careless woker who didn bother to MAKE SURE THE CRANE WAS STABLE! --Saikano 16:09, 29 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Sorry to hear your loss. I hope however you realize Wikiquote is not suitable for this kind of personal experience. Please do not post your personal writing, thanks. --Aphaia 22:35, 29 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

insulting message edit

i received an insulting message with no signature and i do not know how to revert it or identify the senderAFUSCO 23:54, 29 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Replied on user's talk page. Cbrown1023 talk 00:08, 30 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

ilikepie edit

ilikepie has added an insulting message to my user page which i reverted but i dont think ilikepie will change their waysAFUSCO 01:47, 30 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

There is no such user, and it was an anon you edited your userpage. I meant, user talk, I have however still no way whom you refer to or why you could be so assertive. You can revert your page always, and if necessary, ask for semi-protection at WQ:AN. If you think it necessary, you can even ask for deletion at WQ:VFD.

I wouldn't ask you to explain why you are convinced about "them", unless it was obviously related to us (and you have no history here yet, it might be an incident on the other website.) Please note I have no particular interest in your personal life, while I would like you as well other editors to help Wikiquote editing in a constructive way. Also you are not encouraged to make me or other Wikiquote editors involve into your personal feud. If you feel this insult was related to the other website or somewhere and was brought to here, I recommend you to deal with your issue there the thing had happen. Good luck. --Aphaia 02:33, 30 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

/to catch_a quoter! edit

Maybe im going crazy but didn I create a quote yesterday?--Saikano 16:09, 31 May 2007 (UTC)Reply

Smile edit

AFUSCO 01:25, 1 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

Good faith & civility edit

That is the issue to me, sorry but you did not show them to me or another user --Herby talk thyme 18:54, 7 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

Another sockpuppet alert edit

there's another wiki-star sockpuppet running around again. It's YogaKing34. All the same types of vandalisms done by wiki-star, completely vandalising pages with curse words and nonsense. - Zarbon 23:05, 8 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

Mop edit

Thanks very much for the invitation. I apologise for the delay in replying: your post coincided with the beginning of some busy RL stuff. I have had to think hard about this, but I have decided I have to decline at least for the time being, and to see how things shape up for me in the future. Tyrenius 03:17, 23 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for replying, even delayed. And welcome back. You are a good editor and I am happy to work with you disregarding to your user status :) --Aphaia 16:50, 23 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

{{mergeto}} on Category:Items to be merged edit

Quick and easy way to do it: remove the ParserFunction and delete the items category :) A non-article for the merging is very rare anyway. Will {talk) 14:50, 29 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

Oh, and thanks for the blocking and the deleting :) Will {talk) 16:07, 29 June 2007 (UTC)Reply
No prob. :) --Aphaia 16:08, 29 June 2007 (UTC)Reply

Account creation edit

I'm afraid I must exhibit a bit of my ignorance of some of the technical details of the MediaWiki software. Where can I find the procedures to create an account as an Admin without getting the error messages? It is something I have never done. ~ Kalki 06:06, 11 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

It is tricky so not surprised you failed to find it too (I learned it from another sysop). Keeping yourself logging in, go Special:Userlogin, click "create account" aaand, voala :) Then we can make a new account. ["Remember my login on this computer" may be better to opt-out for this task]. If we have their email address, we can send them a notification through the interface directly, otherwise we have to let them thier (interim) password in other means. --Aphaia 07:24, 11 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for the tip. I just tested it to create "K'alki" as an account. That was a variant of Kalki that I considered using years ago. I will probably just let it rest dormant, but I might conceivably use it as a bot someday. ~ Kalki 08:15, 11 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Little help? edit

Sorry to bother you with this, but I am concidering getting a tattoo in kanji that reads "knowledge is power", but I want to make sure the list of kanjis I have is correct, so could you perhaps write the sentence in question in kanji here? :)

Kayvaan 01:00, 17 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Congrats... edit

on your checkusership. You need to contact Cary... see m:Requests_for_permissions#English_Wikiquote ++Lar: t/c 02:38, 19 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Congratulations you now (as of a few minutes ago) have CheckUser rights on this project. Please make sure you have read and understand the m:CheckUser policy and review the extension itself (Special:CheckUser).

If you are ever on IRC and need help, please do not hesitate to visit #wikimedia-checkuser or Please coordinate with the other CheckUser to see how you wish to handle CheckUser requests on this project (user talk pages; Village pump; new page...). Thanks for helping us with this and congratulations again!!! Cbrown1023 talk 19:35, 20 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, Lar and Cbrown1023! --Aphaia 23:26, 20 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Just adding my own brief message of congratulations and condolences to both you and JeffQ on acquiring check-user abilities. I expect you both will be more busy with tracking vandals and trolls down, but I expect it will diminish some of our problems to a significant degree. ~ Kalki 23:39, 20 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

CheckUser process edit

Hi, Aphaia! Cbrown1023 suggests above that we coordinate to establish processes, but I think this is a community thing. Since you're on wikibreak, I've been bold — my head already swelled with my own unimaginable power, nwah hah hah! — and posted a "CheckUser capability notice" to WQ:VP. I suggested that requests go to WQ:AN for now; that we need to work the processes out as a community; and that everyone should give you and me a little time to "learn the ropes". I'm thinking that, even if we get some joker who decides to test our abilities right away, our normal anti-vandalism and anti-disrupter practices are quite sufficient to serve the community until we two can be sure we understand how to use the tools and that we're following the policies. I'm hoping that specific coordination (e.g., who handles what and when) can wait until you're back and we have a chance to chat. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 00:59, 21 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Multiple people using a single username edit

Maybe I'm just not thinking too clearly, but I can't seem to find any policy on disallowing multiple people using a single username. (The user stuff I've been reviewing all talk about the reverse — one person using multiple usernames — but not this.) I know "one person per username" is standard practice, but given Mehmet Karatay's unusual situation, I'd like to review whatever history Wikimedia (Wikipedia especially) has on this issue. Do you recall where this might be? ~ Jeff Q (talk) 01:43, 23 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

As far as I know, there is no written rule about "group account". I know a group account for two people was used just for a fun (cf. w:fr:user:Antfish in the occasion of frwp 100,000 articles) but they were then established editors and this account has not been used for continual usage. I think it a resembling of m:Role account, and English Wikipedia prohibited it without identify verification (cf. w:User talk:USSTRATCOM PAO). For reference, as convention (I don't know where it is written), open account is prohibited (accounts for public use). All cases are concerned with the responsibility: it should be clear who is responsible, either individual or legal entity, and in my humble opinion we don't allow people to edit who say "we still cannot see how to say which individual should claim credit for this." (I think it a sign of serious moral hazard), unless we really know who are behind that account (you remember still the dispute arond Poetlister: we cannot say if Poetlister is she or he). And Tyrenius says, the person who saved should be responsible, the community cannot sustain with the people who cannot understand this. --Aphaia 08:30, 23 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for the pointers. I missed the "Sharing accounts" section in the current w:Wikipedia:Username policy. But it seems to be focused more on role accounts, which is not quite what "Mehmet Karatay" is arguing they are. I also notice that that section was added as part of a March draft revision and had virtually no discussion, except for a claim that sharing an account name somehow violates GFDL. After re-reading the GFDL, I don't see that indicated. I've asked for clarification on this issue at w:Wikipedia talk:Username policy#Sharing accounts, in the hope that we can get some more background to allow us to decide if we'd like to bring over the "Sharing accounts" clause to Wikiquote:Username policy. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 15:35, 23 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
By the way, my reason for not wanting to absolutely prohibit shared accounts, especially for the use that "Mehmet Karatay" is claiming, is two-fold. First, we have no way of knowing except through self-admission whether any account is operated solely by a single person. We can make inferences based on writing styles, but they're hardly conclusive. Second, from a practical point of view, we already have the processes in place to prevent abuse of usernames being shared. Open accounts (which this one does not claim or appear to be) are explicitly forbidden and blocked on discovery. Role accounts are discouraged because they are generally used for conflict-of-interest edits (usually disallowed) or attempts at public communication (not verifiable, so not acceptable).
All that's left are folks like this pair of editors who just share an account for convenience. (Legally, this is not uncommon in the publishing industry — see my "Franklin W. Dixon" example in the WP discussion — so it's unlikely to be a legal problem for wikis under GFDL.) But if shared-account users attempt to disown responsibility for the edits made by their username by pointing a finger at the other person, we should probably consider this bad-faith editing, and repeated incidents could incur a block or even a ban.
In short, unless we have a legal reason to forbid this that I'm not aware of, I don't really see the need for a prohibition against shared accounts. But I'm perfectly willing to go along with general Wikimedia practice if we decide that's better. I'd be happy to make the case against shared accounts to "Mehmet Karatay" from a pragmatic point of view. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 16:28, 23 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for bringing it up to the Wikipedia talk, I'll see the discussion later, then hopefully it attracts people and we can see matured opinions.

I think your first argument makes a sense. And my reaction, now I think, may have come from my involvement in organizing votes and elections. There edit counts are a measurement of involvement, and in this case, even unwritten, we shouldn't allow different people to allow sum up their edits to get eligibility to vote. As principle I think we shouldn't allow such summarizing, to avoid the possibility of takeover (the argument around membership concerns the potential takeover caused by purchasing membership by a hostile third party). Of course we are now discussing two individuals, at least so claimed, but I think there is something we cannot compromise as for governance principles. In this direction, I think shared accounts somehow horrible regarding to responsibility. And I have seen many disputes of credit in two authors who had once work under a shared name. In most cases they divide their past works under different individuality. We cannot foresee what will happen, and no one cannot say those who share their author name will go along harmoniously. But copyright will be an issue even after they pass away (currently after 70 years).

And as for GFDL ... I would like to note we don't allow each editor to utilize GFDL fully but put additional limitation which was originally allowed in GFDL. At least in some projects (I found we don't expel it though) as project policy, gratitude and some GFDL defined components are strongly discouraged (almost prohibited, I dare say). I think it is acceptable for us to restrain the user behavior in purpose of avoiding confusion unless it contradicts our mission, that is, unless such restriction prevents to spread free knowledge to the world. --Aphaia 20:54, 23 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Concerning the potential for arguments between the members of a shared account, I would suggest that any such argument that disrupts Wikiquote or otherwise interferes with its purposes, after the users have been cautioned about the inadvisability of shared accounts, would be grounds for banning that user at that point and requiring each person to start their own new account. This would be an "innocent until proven guilty" response, which also agrees with our "assume good faith" policy.
I don't see copyright issues as relevant. If I'm not mistaken, users cannot revoke their GFDL-licensed contributions once they have been made, otherwise GFDL couldn't be useful for free licensing. I'm afraid I don't quite understand what you mean by "additional limitation" and "gratitude"; could you please explain these? But I fully agree that Wikiquote is entitled to restrain some user behavior, and we may very well decide that we need to prohibit shared accounts for practical reasons. I'd just like to have more of a foundation before making this case. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 00:29, 24 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
There have been past incidents on WP, where it has been established that as a norm role accounts are not acceptable. However, there have been exceptions. One was a couple with one of the partners being blind. They were allowed to edit together under a single name. Also there was a company with four individuals using the account (there was some form of tie-in with WP with work the company was doing). My initial response was based purely on the response that would happen on WP. I personally do not see a problem in the current case and there is no reason why WQ cannot make its own decision here, especially as there is precedent on WP. Tyrenius 01:54, 24 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Sorry edit

You are of course correct. I guess most vandalism tends to be adding rather than blanking so my quick list has the obvious ones in. --Herby talk thyme 09:09, 27 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

By the way - there is a sense in which archived deletion votes should perhaps be protected? Commons do that will all RfAs and I do not see it adding to the work much. Of course if that sort of vandalism is rare it will not be worth it, regards --Herby talk thyme 09:18, 27 July 2007 (UTC)Reply
I agree on that it wouldn't be problematic to protect those pages, but I am personally reluctant to add one more step procedure. If some archived pages are vandalized, I think, we are better to be protect them, though. And someday we rely on an archival bot, it would protect the discussion pages as a part of procedure. --Aphaia 11:05, 27 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

Enjoy the trip edit

And take care - regards --Herby talk thyme 08:44, 28 July 2007 (UTC)Reply

"Innate" quote edit

I was cleaning up some articles edited by Al Kemmy (talk · contributions) when I noticed that you'd removed one of his personal quotes from Freedom and warned him about adding "innate" quotes. I am unaware of any meaning of the word "innate" that applies in this situation, so I believe this advice would be confusing. I'd appreciate it if you could either clarify this or just use something more likely to be understood, like "personal quotes". Thanks. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 18:40, 3 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for bringing up. I agree with you "personal quotes" are far better understandable. I'll try to follow your advice in the next time, if necessary (the best scenario is, of course, we won't meet the similar situation!) --Aphaia 02:54, 5 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thanks edit

It's much appreciated!--Poetlister 20:00, 12 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

Vandalism edit

Aphaia, you recently warned me to stop removing content from Wikiquote. Did you take the time to look at the material I removed? I assume you didn't because I removed a duplicate quote...and I'm a little offended that you would warn me after one edit, much less an obviously benevolent one. 01:32, 15 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

Please excuse me for jumping in here. I'm posting this message to the three people involved in this 30 April 2007 edit to Atheism: (who removed a quote without explanation); Écrasez l'infâme (who reverted it, calling it "vandalism"); and Aphaia (who posted a warning message to's talk page).
  •, please do not remove content without specifying a reason in the edit summary. Vandals routinely do this, but it is not at all unusual for well-meaning editors to do so, too. The latter, however, should not generally remove someone else's effort without a simple explanation (e.g., "rm duplicate quote", "rm unsourced quote from likely unnotable", "rm quote taken out of context", "rm copyvio material", etc.).
  • Écrasez, please do not call simple removal of a quote "vandalism". Vandalism is an unmistakable attempt to deface Wikiquote. Inclusion or exclusion of particular quotes is almost never vandalism, even when the editors fail to include an explanation. The best response to such a removal is to revert it with a more accurate edit summary (e.g., "rv unexplained removal of quote"). Please assume good faith.
  • Aphaia, I think we need to update our warning templates and/or our practices in using them, because it's not a good idea to warn editors who have made only a single contribution that their unexplained removal "is considered vandalism" when it isn't obviously so. Persistent unexplained removals, of course, can be, but even then they're often just content disputes involving someone who is unaware of how to deal with these disputes properly on a wiki. (I know there aren't many of us posting warnings, but I think they should reflect at least one attempt to help rather than scold.)
I believe we need to try to work together more instead of reacting negatively so quickly. Thank you for listening. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 03:24, 15 August 2007 (UTC)Reply
Thank you for your thoughtful comments, Jeff, and welcome I'm sorry you feel insulted, but it is your responsibility to give the reason of removal, so I think my message isn't unfair because of lacking the expected information in this case. From the diff of your edit[4], it seems a mere removal and due to its size, it is hardly to find the claimed duplication in a reasonable time. I would be happy if you had provided the reason of edit. Even on a good faith, removal of existing edit could be problematic, and I assume you could have expected to give the reason, then, the following conversation wouldn't have to happen.
Jeff, as for wording, I think we all would like to avoid false accusations. Andrew Lih and Brianna Laugher gave interesting presentations at the conference, respectively, they pointed out that messages generated with templates or even messages written by oldbies sometimes hostile or inhuman. I love templates for the sake of convenience, but also not want to be hostile toward other editors even unintentionally. Cheers, --Aphaia 17:34, 15 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the fix edit

Thanks for fixing my WQ:RFA duplication. Even as I've retreated, trying to save my energy to do a limited amount of work well, I'm still making dumb mistakes! ~ Jeff Q (talk) 00:19, 26 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

Poetlister edit

I've blanked my comments on Poetlister's talk page. If I have any further comments on the case, I'll keep them on Wikipedia. Casey Abell 20:09, 29 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for your consideration. I hope things go well for all involved parties. --Aphaia 20:41, 29 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

Bot edit

Sure! I'm waiting for the botflag to make it run here, because I don't want to flood the RC with interwiki changes. Cheers, Manuel Menal 20:13, 30 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for your note, please read Wikiquote:Bots and follow the instruction. Your request will be welcome there and just waiting for more days and let's see what's the next. Thank you for your cooperation. Cheers. --Aphaia 20:32, 30 August 2007 (UTC)Reply
Thanks a lot for the botflag ! :) Manuel Menal 07:45, 5 September 2007 (UTC)Reply
You're welcome :) --Aphaia 07:52, 5 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Request edit

I need an administrator to delete my old accounts userpage. I have given the sufficent evidence that account belongs to me in the speedy deletion request (I can't remember 2 year old passwords, but I will definetly try if you want me to), but my m:right to vanish under that name should be the same. Please help me with this. — Moe ε 08:21, 31 August 2007 (UTC)Reply

Oh, never mind. Thanks to User:Herbythyme for taking care of this one, and thanks to my great memory for actually remembering the damn password to the account :) Thanks anyways Aphaia. — Moe ε 08:30, 31 August 2007 (UTC)Reply
Oh nice and happy ending. You have indeed a good memory :)--Aphaia 08:32, 31 August 2007 (UTC)Reply
I should say so, or maybe it was just too easy :) — Moe ε 08:35, 31 August 2007 (UTC)Reply edit

I am not a vandal account, nor have I any malicious intentions. As for that thing on Meta, well, it was not me. Most edits on this IP will be me anyway... for the record. --SunStar Net 17:13, 3 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

recent post edit

i fixed the template already...whoops (not the same as wikipedia!) was that you? i put that there because the quote was removed without an explanation. Bouncehoper 16:53, 4 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

No, I was just curious. I am a sysop here. --Aphaia 16:54, 4 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Yoshida Shoin‎ edit

Aphaia, just a quick question. The intro you added to this page seems a bit long to me, but out of respect for your work here, I didn't want to just strike it from the page. I thought that we liked to limit a person's intro to a sentence or two, expecting users to visit the corresponding Wikipedia page to view more information about him or her. Do you agree? I certainly think this person is worthy of someone learning more about him, but it seemed to me that this intro is a little much. ~ UDScott 20:20, 4 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Point taken, but I think I have seen four paragraph introductions on some articles, and the first one line introduction seems to me too vague. Some of my addition could be better to removed again, like geographical reference, but I think some other elements worthy to be kept. "Scholar and teacher" is not a wrong description, but I feel it omits many elements (his activists-like element, related to modern politics etc.). --Aphaia 21:35, 4 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

User: saikano edit

I cant log on to my user! It say I put in the worng one! But I didn! Is it normal? Oh yea this IP is a citywide IP in the school systems so somebody may do vandalism!-- 14:29, 6 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Oiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii edit

Well thanks from trying to handle the situation with a modicum of niceness, anyway. I used to be an active member on the English Wikipedia but gave up. My real life is too much of a shambles for me to have time to devote to shrapnel online - which says something about me (grin), but ah well.

I will be attempting to leverage support for the beleaguered WH40KDOW article in the online community in general. God knows if I'll be successful. At any rate, thanks for your time and respect, both of which are difficult to get online these days.

-- 11:50, 7 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thank you for your message, I would like to remind we won't accept one time account vote as well as anon votes. Their comments may be considered, but in this case, it cannot be within "fairuse", and all anons' effort to keep the article as was seem to drive people to the opposite side. As a 15 year Warhammer RPG player, I feel it painful personally, but sustainability of the project is over my own personal favoritism. After seeing a project doomed because of copyvio, we have been very senstive to this issue. It is sorry most of commenting anons including you seem not to share this interest with us. Anyway, thank you for your interest to the project. Cheers, --Aphaia 11:56, 7 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

I have to go to work soon, but which project was doomed? Also nice title "first warning"...and finally, umm, I don't know how to spell it, but I know how I heard it said... kako innay "the pasta". Off-topic but delicious. Anyway. Have a good rest of your life. You seem okay. For a sysop (grin)

French. See m:Wikiquote FR/Closure of French Wikiquote for further information. Btw, thanks for your suggestion, I'll try it someday :) --Aphaia 12:15, 7 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Emrgency! edit

Is there anyway I can get my password w/o loging on? Im really going crasy now! Please respond! Im user: saikano-- 12:18, 7 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Why? edit

Why did you revert my edit to Wikiquote:Welcome, newcomers? The links that I removed were red, so they weren't helping anything. 01:43, 10 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Don't remove the link without consensus. We keep them for future posting. Thanks. --Aphaia 02:08, 10 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Akemi no vandal(Hoshi no hate) edit

Hi there its me user:akemi, the one you blocked for some reason! I know there is a BIG misunderstanding! I was not trying to cause any problems on the site! I just want to let you know im sorry for causeing any problems and I hope you can forgive me for any disruptions I caused! Im sorry! --Akemi2.0 14:23, 17 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Dear Aphaia! :) edit

It's so wonderful to see your friendly virtual face again, and even more beautiful to be welcomed back by you! I'll confess you something: in no small part, you're responsible for bringing me back to our beloved Quote, because your kind message at Japanese Wikipedia, which I saw just a couple of days ago, really made me homesick ;) I look forward to working with you here, again. Thank you, it's great to be back! :) Love, Phaedriel - 04:22, 19 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thanks, and query edit

Well, thanks for the note; I couldn't find the tildes on this system, having just signed up.

Having added some facts to the intro of Julian Huxley, I discover that links to standard terms in WP don't work on this system; is this not something to be addressed?! Macdonald-Ross 12:19, 20 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Request edit

Please change my username from User:Sefringle to User:Yahel Guhan to be consistant with my wikipedia username. Sefringle 04:46, 21 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Done. --Aphaia 04:54, 21 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

A haiku for my dear Aphaia edit

  Friendship Can Happen
In The Most Unlikely Place
Two Souls Become One
Stacie Dahlin

I haven't told you this yet, but in my vacation from Wikiquote, I spent my time writing articles about your beautiful country at Simple English Wikipedia! :) Love, Phaedriel - 00:29, 19 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

User:Fvasconcellos edit

Hi there. I'm Fvasconcellos, an admin at, and I've come all the way over to Wikiquote to ask a favor :) A few months ago, I was impersonated by a vandal on several wikis and, apparently, here as well. I would greatly appreciate it if you could rename the above account so I may be able to register here. I presume you'll need confirmation, so I'll ask our mutual friend to leave you a note :) If there's any problem, please feel free to contact me. Best wishes, 00:48, 22 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

I confirm this is the "real" Fvasconcellos, dear Aphaia ;) And let me tell you, now that he's here, we shouldn't let him return to Wikipedia, and keep him with us! ;) Love, Phaedriel - 01:08, 22 September 2007 (UTC)Reply
Done. You are welcome, Fvasconcellos :) And thanks a lot for your help, Phaedriel! --Aphaia 04:59, 22 September 2007 (UTC)Reply
Thank you so much, ladies :) Fvasconcellos 16:59, 22 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

User: edit

I suspect this is an open proxy... although I'm not sure. We really should have a page on dealing with open proxies etc. on here. --SunStar Net 13:12, 22 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

umm... so what? The user does not even have any contributions, why should we need to block it? Cbrown1023 talk 15:30, 22 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Moving pages edit

Thank you for your message on my talk page. I would have moved the page to the correct title, but I cannot. I didn't mean to say I moved the page, because I know that I did not. C&P is not my preferred way of getting pages to their proper titles, but I suspected another user might come along and clean it up. :-) But I promise, it won't happen again. --Virana 20:31, 26 September 2007 (UTC)Reply

Mail edit

Hello Aphaia! I've added a mail address to my user page. Thanks! ~ MosheZadka (Talk)

E-mails From A Madman edit

While I was doing some overdue maintenance to the maintenance templates , I ran across E-mails From A Madman, an article you had started to nominate for deletion but apparently did not complete. I removed the tag (as the rationale wasn't obvious, although I can think of some possible reasons without any research), but I thought I'd let you know in case you wanted to start it up again. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 02:26, 2 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for your notification. I'll take a look to it again, after I'm less occupied, if possible. --Aphaia 05:56, 2 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

CU request edit

The following editors have all been blocked for what appears to be tandem vandalism: CuteGirl, WilliamSucks KazerDragon and UDscottSuck. Perhaps a CheckUser search might yield useful results. Thanks. - InvisibleSun 17:54, 12 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

I'm on it. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 20:49, 12 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Closing RfA edit

Thanks - wasn't sure if I should have done it anyway or it required a 'crat but it was so obvious, regards --Herby talk thyme 10:47, 15 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Prod test? edit

Hi, just noticed your prod test page. Is that still serving any purpose? Cheers! BD2412 T 01:45, 27 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Ahhh, you can test to prod them for now, hopefully. Or just speedy. Thanks for poking me :) --Aphaia 12:53, 27 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Britney edit

Hum - apparently an en wp user tho not edited for a while. However - new user with some very odd edits on Meta! Regards --Herby talk thyme 14:02, 31 October 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thank You edit

Thank you for your participation in my Rfa. --CZac 23:10, 9 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for your concern edit

Hello, Aphaia. Recently, you asked me to join wikiquote under a username. Well, I had a username, Zarbon until I was very wrongfully banned for "arrogating sysop actions", which basically means I was telling other admins about other users who were vandalizing pages. I have been trying to get unbanned since last summer. I don't know, the admins here have been ignoring me. I don't want to open another username, I'd much prefer if my original username, Zarbon were allowed to be unbanned. If anything, I'm sure you can unban me. Anyway, you can see I am contributing to wikiquote as always and I'd like to continue doing so under my original username. I don't want to have more than one username, I'd prefer to do all my activity under one name. Please, if possible, unban me so I can continue editing with my original username. I await your response. - 06:10, 26 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hello again Aphaia, see this is what I'm talking about. I'm being ignored since last summer. I get absolutely no response from anyone here. Please let me know if its possible for me to be unbanned and continue to contribute with my original name, Zarbon. - 22:46, 30 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

I don't understand... What am I doing wrong? edit

I'm not typing a whole copy of copyrighted work, as you put it. All I'm doing is fixing typos and adding one or more quotes to Marvel: Ultimate Alliance. If there's an edit war with that article, let me tell you this: I'm not your man. 22:36, 26 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

Hello thank you for bringing it up. My message was intended to address the person who edited Monty Python and the Holy Grail‎. It may be you or not but we cannot figure it out due to technical reasons. As the page incidates "Some IP addresses change periodically, and may be shared by several users. If you are an anonymous user, you may create an account or log in to avoid confusion with other anonymous users. You may receive messages, including warnings or blocks, on this page that are intended for another user but still apply to you." Thank you for your understanding, and please consider to register: it help you to avoid mistook. --Aphaia 04:03, 27 November 2007 (UTC)Reply

I'm not adding anything, I'm correcting grammatical and spelling errors. That's all I'm doing. As I told you before, I'm not the one you're looking for (hey, that rhymes!) Link 486

לערי ריינהארט edit

Hi Aphaia! You are a « bureaucrat» at « Wikiquote:en: » . Can you please rename my account clicking here. Thanks in advance! Best regards Gangleri
‫·‏לערי ריינהארט‏·‏T‏·‏m‏:‏Th‏·‏T‏·‏email me‏·‏‬ 00:56, 12 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Done. While we have no official policy iirc, your addition of latinized transcription on your user page or signature will be appreciated. --Aphaia 04:57, 12 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
Great! Thanks! Added: "The transcription of « לערי ריינהארט » is « lɛʁi ʁɑjnhɑʁt » ."
to my user page(s). Best regards
‫·‏לערי ריינהארט‏·‏T‏·‏m‏:‏Th‏·‏T‏·‏email me‏·‏‬ 08:20, 12 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Link to Wikipedia edit

Things do disappear from Wikipedia, so a separate copy is a sound idea. And yes, it is relevant to Wikiquote because someone might ask the same question here. Anyway, it is a user page and not a mainspace page.--Poetlister 14:38, 24 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Name Change edit

Please change my name to AF32294 because of the right to vanish Wikiholic 02:06, 26 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Sorry declined. --Aphaia 15:40, 26 December 2007 (UTC)Reply
If you can't change my name can you block my account indefinetly and if its possible change my name to any available name. Thanks in advance. Wikiholic 18:03, 29 December 2007 (UTC)Reply

Probable troll-impersonator edit

There was an apparent dispute which occurred between User:Johney and User:; The IP has been used for previous linking to articles on the Finnish Wikiquote, so it's use by the Johney there might be genuine, but there has thus far been no confirmation of this on the Finnish user's talk page. The user "Johney" seems to have been engaged in nothing but disputing on the talk page of the IP and myself, and I blocked this username as a probable troll for 3 days after its request for a block on both itself and the IP. I afterwards deleted its user page which seems to have been created as an attack page by an impersonator. If you or JeffQ have time to check in on this any time soon it might be helpful. ~ Kalki 18:09, 5 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

Yeah, I'd noticed that and have been doing a little research on the Finnish WP. These two seem to be having a disagreement there as well, although I can't quite decipher Finnish well enough to understand what it is. Finnish "Johney" seems to be a substantial and serious contributor there, so I'm reluctant to do a CU that might tell me his IP (possibly the same across projects) without more background. I've asked him to explain on his Finnish talk page, in English, what he thinks is going on. If I don't get a reply or the explanation doesn't tell us enough, I'll do the CU. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 19:18, 5 January 2008 (UTC)Reply
Johney from fi:WP has responded that the IP is his, but the existing "Johney" here is not him. The IP behind that user happens to be from a network operated by a hosting service with a history of compromised servers, so I've blocked the IP for a year as an open proxy/zombie. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 20:35, 5 January 2008 (UTC)Reply
Fair enough. The IP address behind that account seemed to be used for vandalism on Finnish project from the log. I endorse this blocking. --Aphaia 20:54, 5 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

British Columbia edit

Thank you for your comment on the above new article. The content of the article is changed extensively as per comments at the AFD. Kind Regards SriMesh | talk 03:42, 17 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

Agenda pushing? edit

Don't know who else to go to with this question, well, aside from Jeff Q but I've been lobbing things at him enough as it is lately.

What should one do in the case of suspected agenda pushing? IE, adding/removing quotes from WQ for the expressed purpose of promoting a certain agenda, normally political, ideological or religious. I recall a statement somewhere that long-time WQ editors frowned on edits which pushed agendas.

I ask because of recent edits by two (probably the same) editors, Cdorman2 & I say probably the same since in the most recent editing posted two edits to Fox News Channel, an edit elsewhere, then minutes later Cdorman2 posts edits to Fox as well.

Between the two of them there is an exclusively extreme leftist bend to every edit that I have thus far reviewed. In the case above on the Fox page even readded a quotation that was removed by Kalki months prior. Basically if it casts someone on the right of the political spectrum in a harsh and negative light, they add it. In one case I have found thus far if a quotation casts a leftist in a negative light they remove it.

Now, one could say that I am simply a right-winger who takes issue with bad things being said about my party or my favorite news channel/commentator/etc. Problem is, I'm not a right-winger and dislike many of the subjects these two have taken to casting negatively. As I pointed out on this talk page I undid a seemly negative quotation about Jesus because it wasn't about Jesus even though I myself am an Atheist. The same goes with all the changes I have reviewed of those two editors. While I passionately dislike Rush Limbaugh I do not feel it is appropriate that every little sniping comment about him is dutifully recorded... especially from an individual who's exclusive edit history is to do just that.

Now, I did undo their edits on the Fox page because it was clearly against what the pages was intended, was a readdition of something another admin had removed and really was little more than cheap shots. However, I do not want to go through and clean up the other snipes this person/these people have made over the past several months without first checking to see what grounds there are for taking such action lest I stray into engaging in a dreaded editor war. -- Greyed 05:15, 17 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for bringing it up! I support for your revert. Like the "fan or not-fan" issue, it is a matter of our inclusion policy regarding WQ:NPOV, I think. Perhaps it is good time for us to use our own {{npov}} tag more largely, in case included quotes on current articles lack a balance. --Aphaia 23:54, 17 January 2008 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for the pointer to {{npov}}. A question about that, shouldn't it be modified to refer to Wikiquote's instead of Wikipedia's? WQ:NPOV starts off by pointing out that the standards are different between the two projects. -- Greyed 21:42, 18 January 2008 (UTC)Reply
Hello again. I am having a bit of a problem and having a hard idea on how to proceed. As I didn't want to dro a blanket delete of anything from the above mentioned User/IP I placed an NPOV tag on the Rush Limbaugh page with a reason for doing so on the talk page in an effort to get a discussion going on what to do in cases of agenda pushing. The result has been two IP accounts continually to remove the NPOV tag without any meaningful dialogue on why it should be removed or what to do in cases of agenda pushing. The edit histories of both follow the patter of hit-and-run additions of highly negative and. in my opinion, questionable quotes to people they do not like. I've undid every removal of the NPOV tag and Kalki even reverted one as well but they are continuing to remove the tag and continuing to not discuss it on the talk page. What more can I do other than either get frustrated and bang at my keyboard writing arguments to people who clearly do not care or shrug my shoulders and just walk away? -- Greyed 07:33, 23 January 2008 (UTC)Reply
Hmmm it is really a tough situation, and I appreciate you still keep your guts to sort it out. There are some tactics to involve them into a discussion, while it is no snake oil and leaves sometimes bitterness. We can protect the page for a while and urge all interested parties to have a discussion on the talk. Or before that you can raise the issue on a more visible place, like WQ:VP. If you think it appropriate to protect the page at this moment, you can request for it on WQ:AN. Cheers, --Aphaia 08:21, 23 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

What's going on here? Someone playing around? I didn't want to delete it in case it was something relevant to you. --Ubiquity 13:24, 22 January 2008 (UTC)Reply

Return to the user page of "Aphaia/Archive03".