User talk:Fahadsadah/Archives/5

Wikipedia Signpost: 13 April 2009

License update: Licensing vote begins
News and notes: WMF petitions Obama, longer AFDs, UK meeting, and more
Dispatches: Let's get serious about plagiarism
WikiProject report: WikiProject Color
Discussion report: Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
Features and admins: Approved this week
Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 16:15, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

YOU?

>=( CWii_{(Talk|Contribs)} 22:04, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, me. Problem? fahadsadah (talk,contribs) 07:18, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's a problem in it's own. CWii_{(Talk|Contribs)} 00:36, 15 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I thought you were gone. Either contribute constructively, or stay gone. fahadsadah (talk,contribs) 12:22, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See that's the problem with you, you act as if you run the place. CWii_{(Talk|Contribs)} 19:31, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your problem is you troll. fahadsadah (talk,contribs) 08:38, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also, use edit summaries. CWii_{(Talk|Contribs)} 19:33, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

My lack of edit summary usage is not the issue at hand. You are. fahadsadah (talk,contribs) 08:38, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Adminship

i want to nominate my self as a admin. pls advice. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Talkshawk (talk • contribs)

Please see instructions at WP:RFA/NOM. However, it is unlikely you will pass - adminship candidates should really have been at Wikipedia for several years. fahadsadah (talk,contribs) 12:10, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's an opinion, most candidates are from several months to just over a year of editing. CWii_{(Talk|Contribs)} 19:36, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

thankyou very much.--Talkshawk (talk) 09:20, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Attacks

You said something but I couldn't quite make it out? What? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.195.165.162 (talk • contribs)

I upgraded your warning from level 1 to level 4 immediate. That means one more personal attack to anyone, and you will be blocked. fahadsadah (talk,contribs) 17:21, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Help

First of all, I beg your pardon if I am wrong but it is mi first time, so I hope you to be patient. What should a person have to do in the case that someone put the warning on a voice "this voice of a living person does not have any references ...". In the case I am speaking of, the person is a died one... I have put the references demanded and the external links as suggested but the warning still remains... can't you please help me as to pass this "problem? Thank you in advance. Arturo Guerrieri —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arturo guerrieri (talk • contribs) 11:47, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you are certain that the person is dead, please add an appropriate death category to the page. Otherwise, use the category Category:Possibly living people. For more information, see WP:BLP. Thanks, fahadsadah (talk,contribs) 12:21, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I still continue not to understand. The person I am speakin of is Sergio Noja Noseda. The date of death is precised in the box on the right of the voice.

I did put the references and the external links as demandes but everything still continues to be as before.Arturo Guerrieri —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arturo guerrieri (talk • contribs) 18:34, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I will remove the Living people category, and add an appriopriate death category. fahadsadah (talk,contribs) 19:16, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your help.Arturo Guerrieri —Preceding undated comment added 19:51, 16 April 2009 (UTC).[reply]

You are welcome. By the way, you should sign posts to other peoples talk pages; see WP:SIGN. Thanks, fahadsadah (talk,contribs) 06:59, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You mean, if I do participate in a discussion. Isn't it? Thank you in advance for making me better understand.--Arturo guerrieri (talk) 15:07, 18 April 2009 (UTC)Arturo Guerrieri[reply]

Sockpuppetry

sir, i am a victim of shock puppetry but i have no multiple accounts such as Manchester boy etc. however i do login a public in the net cafe please suggest me a way to get rid of this situation. thankyou.--Talkshawk (talk) 11:35, 17 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can change your password in your preferences. fahadsadah (talk,contribs) 06:34, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

sir, i have got no multiple accounts such as Manchester boy i do use public computers but i dont know how come i a victim of shock pupperty case. pls advice.--Talkshawk (talk) 15:25, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sock puppetry is when you have multiple accounts. If you do not, then that is that. If you have been accused of sockpuppetry, you will have received appropriate instructions. fahadsadah (talk,contribs) 15:28, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

can you please tell me an example of 'appropriate instructions' as you said on the top.--Talkshawk (talk) 15:31, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Click here fahadsadah (talk,contribs) 15:48, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

page deletion

Thanks for the quick response. It's not really whether admins can see it, but whether people in general can search and find it (which they can). I'm trying to lock down all my holes, as it were.

Thank you again for your response. --HubHikari (talk) 06:56, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. Just a hint: Nothing on Wikipedia is private. Don't add embarrassing stuffs like that. fahadsadah (talk,contribs) 07:00, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

reported for vandalism on the sandbox

You've been reported. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.184.38.148 (talk • contribs)

The sandbox is for testing. I was testing. fahadsadah (talk,contribs) 16:57, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

~~And you didn't report me. fahadsadah (talk,contribs) 16:58, 18 April 2009 (UTC)~~[reply]

You reported me, it was removed. The sandbox is for testing. fahadsadah (talk,contribs) 17:03, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In order to avoid possible issue in the future (though I agree, the sandbox is for testing), might I suggestion play around in User:Fahadsadah/Sandbox? This way no one can tell you what to do in your own sandbox. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 17:12, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I'd best do that for controversial edits. fahadsadah (talk,contribs) 17:13, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It just avoids unnecessary hassle. I mean, I can understand where the IP is coming from (though you could technically see the "edit this page" button), it can be frustrating. It's always safer to create your own sandbox (which you apparently already did, given the blue link). I think any closing Admin will understand the issue is not real "vandalism", especially given our warnings for true vandalism always tell people to go to the sandbox. BIGNOLE (Contact me) 17:16, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I know. This was probably just one of the trolls that stalks me. Many do, given the huggle work I do. fahadsadah (talk,contribs) 17:17, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In response to your message on my talk page, your edit to the sandbox was disruptive. Disruption isn't tolerated anywhere. People do get blocked for disrupting the sandbox. However, it's clear you're generally a positive contributor and I'm sure this won't happen again. Toddst1 (talk) 17:30, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please can you cite precedent? I'm pretty sure no-one has ever been blocked for disrupting the sandbox. fahadsadah (talk,contribs) 17:32, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll tell you that I've been known to do it for a precedent. I'm not sure you need to make this Wp:POINT. 17:35, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

WP:NPA

You should know better than this. Watch the PA. Toddst1 (talk) 17:34, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That was not meant as a personal attack. fahadsadah (talk,contribs) 07:04, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That being said, it appears the editor has abused multiple accounts for disruption and is now blocked. Perhaps a better way to put it. 8-) Toddst1 (talk) 17:45, 18 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I told you - nothing but the average troll. fahadsadah (talk,contribs) 07:04, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sure - whatever. Toddst1 (talk) 04:52, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

April 2009

Hello, Fahadsadah, and thanks for your advice. Though, I'm afraid, my edit was constructive: adding "like every literary ballad" was meant to prove that "composed in...folk song" is part of the definition of a "literary" ballad (in contrast to a "folk" ballad), which is common literary knowledge and so, I think, does not need any citation for further evidence. With kind regards, --Fewskulchor (talk) 16:32, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, sorry. It looked like vandalism. I'll be more careful next time. fahadsadah (talk,contribs) 16:49, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]