User talk:MZMcBride

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



May 2005 – July 2006 August 2006 – February 2007 March 2007 – May 2007 June 2007 – August 2007 September 2007 – October 2007 November 2007 – December 2007 January 2008 – February 2008 March 2008 – April 2008 May 2008 – June 2008 July 2008 – August 2008 September 2008 – October 2008 November 2008 –

[edit] Deletion of my User Page

Hello, I understand why my page has been deleted; but can you temporarily restore the page or point out to me where I can find the page so that I could copy it and put it on my blog?

--Bernadeta (talk) 06:31, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

The current revision is available here: http://paste2.org/p/124760 Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 02:14, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Sakshama

please unprotect the page Sakshama, when wikipedia is having articles for techfest, techniche and other technical fetivals. then why not a article for sakshama, a technical festival which was started from a small town of india in the year 2007 and now it is going to celebrate it's third version and it has been said as no #1 technical festival of north india. so i want to write a page for it please unprotect it. you can find more at http://sakshama.org or you can find the same communities on orkut and other social web Aashish K Mahaswary (talk) 15:59, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

You can ignore this; I have pointed the user to WP:RFPU/WP:DRV. He didn't know how to reach an admin and so left talk messages for a page-full of recent changes editors. Stifle (talk) 16:05, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Haha. Thanks. :-) --MZMcBride (talk) 16:12, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] tartansoxdundas

And my article from tartansoxdundas was removed as well - in September 2008. Could you please undelete this as soon as possible?

tartansoxdundas

I don't see any logs for that: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=&user=&page=tartansoxdundas&year=&month=-1 Perhaps you have a link? --MZMcBride (talk) 01:09, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Why have you deleted Richard Wilson from Michelle collins page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.211.168.125 (talk) 18:00, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

I have no idea what you're talking about. Do you have a link? --MZMcBride (talk) 18:02, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Ok. the link is below...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Wilson_(1974) hope you can help..!

Ahh, that was a broken redirect. The actual content was located at Richard Wilson (landscape designer), which was deleted by Gwen Gale (talk · contribs). You'll have to ask her about the actual content, though from a cursory glance it appears the article didn't assert notability. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 23:29, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] CalPOP

I don't understand why you deleted the CalPOP article "CalPOP article was removed 6:15, 22 September 2008 by MZMcBride" The appropriate references were in the article.

Sorry, no idea what you're talking about. The log for the page you linked to is empty. Perhaps I'm just missing something obvious? Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 06:28, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Evidence

Vandalism study showed IP adding vandalism 31 times, removing it once. That's matches my experience.

Note that I simply said that they're more likely to vandalize than fix vandalism. I doubt anyone questions that—do you? Normally the debate is whether IPs should be blocked because most IP edits (95%+) are benign, which I think is also plainly evident. Cool Hand Luke 12:14, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

I agree that it's one of the things that makes our site special. I started contributing here after clicking on a red link, which opened up the editing window. It blew my minds. I was hooked by that experience, yet we don't even let new users write articles any more. In general I think it's important to retain "everyone can edit."

However, in the area of BLPs, I think our obligations to living people trump our aspirations for attracting new users. It's a very real trade off, but I think it's justified in this one area. And it's not just obvious vandalism either. Passing editors often write damaging statements that have enough plausibility that no one questions them—sometimes not for days. These Siegenthaler-type errors are the ones I hope to reduce. Cool Hand Luke 19:43, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mass deletion of talk pages

I see that you are mass-deleting IP talk pages, posting the edit comment "CSD G6". Could you please explain your rationale for these deletions, and how you feel G6 applies?--Srleffler (talk) 06:01, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Standard housekeeping. Deleting old IP talk pages where the user hasn't edited in over a year, never been blocked, no templates, etc. Cheers. :-) --MZMcBride (talk) 06:39, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

I too noted this, because you've deleted a couple that were on my watchlist (presumably because I warned them about vandalism in the past). Is there a policy somewhere on this? Cordless Larry (talk) 12:46, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Also, what was your reasoning behind blanking User talk:Skope? Cordless Larry (talk) 12:48, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Inactive user with far too many warnings for fair use problems (over 400?!). I really probably should've indefinitely blocked the user, but that point seemed a bit moot given the timestamp of their last edit. As for the old IP talk pages, it's just standard housekeeping. :-) Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 17:06, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Could you please point me toward the policy or guideline that prescribes this standard housekeeping? Thanks, Kralizec! (talk) 17:07, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

I answered this at AN/I. Though as a counter-question, is there any policy or guideline that says all admin actions must be written somewhere before being done? (I know there are policies that say the opposite...) --MZMcBride (talk) 20:14, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Could you please not do that? This is not a CSD G6, since it's not "Non-controversial", and I don't see any advantage in doing this, while there definitely are disadvantages. There might be incoming links somewhere which will now point to nothing, people might want to investigate past actions by IPs, etc. Additionally, please don't continue to delete these pages while people would like to discuss the issue with you. --Conti|✉ 18:26, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. Though I haven't seen anybody really willing to discuss (only block). ;-) The advantages to this are that we don't confuse the hell out of new users. Imagine getting on Wikipedia, clicking around, and eventually hitting Special:MyTalk where it tells you you've vandalized somewhere. Is there any advantage to keeping these pages around indefinitely? (Especially when the user has never been blocked, hasn't edited in a year, etc.) I know other Wikipedias do this type of housekeeping regularly. (And the assertion that this is non-controversial is a bit silly on a site where everything is controversial to someone. ;-) --MZMcBride (talk) 20:14, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Your statement that "I haven't seen anybody really willing to discuss (only block)" is rather disingenuous as I tried three time to engage you, and only escalated the issue to ANI when I got zero replies (but the deletions continued). Not only did I not block you myself, but no one blocked you until you until eight messages here had been ignored. --Kralizec! (talk) 20:36, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

I was kidding (note the emoticon?). I assumed because I had explained my deletions on my talk page three times already that it would be clear what the situation was. Evidently, I was mistaken. But don't think for a moment that I blame you for stepping in and posting your concerns here. That's not the case at all. :-) --MZMcBride (talk) 20:38, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Block

Since you're online right now, and you're an admin, could you please block Big Brown Boogers of Fury? S/he's being extremely disruptive. ^Chocolate _Bar 02:28, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Done. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 02:30, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. ^Chocolate _Bar 02:32, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Don't forget to delete the rest of the vandalism pages s/he made. ^Chocolate _Bar 02:34, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Taken care of. --MZMcBride (talk) 02:36, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again. ^Chocolate _Bar 02:37, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gabriella Ambrosio

I've withdrawn the nom, as notability has been demonstrated. Please could you close the AfD. Thanks. --Dweller (talk) 09:12, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Done. Though you could've just done it yourself. ;-) --MZMcBride (talk) 09:19, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Curiosity Question

I have been watching the Recent Changes page for a couple and noticed you deleting alot of talk page of anon users. Just curious, why? - NeutralHomer • Talk • December 25, 2008 @ 08:55

Just housekeeping of old IP talk pages where the user hasn't edited in a year, has no templates on the page, no blocks, etc. Cheers. :-) --MZMcBride (talk) 08:57, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

The User talk:141.155.148.48 page had a template on it, but was deleted anyway. --Kralizec! (talk) 17:00, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Err... no it didn't:

== [[WP:VAN|Vandalism]] ==

{{{icon|[[Image:Information.svg|25px]] }}}Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits{{{{{subst|}}}#if:Arab League|, such as the one you made to [[:Arab League]],}} did not appear to be constructive and has been [[Help:Reverting|reverted]] or removed.  Please use [[Wikipedia:Sandbox|the sandbox]] for any test edits you would like to make, and take a look at the [[Wikipedia:Introduction|welcome page]] to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. {{{{{subst|}}}#if:{{{2|}}}|{{{2}}}|Thank you.}}<!-- Template:uw-vandalism1 --> --[[User:Kralizec!|Kralizec!]] ([[User talk:Kralizec!|talk]]) 02:24, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

--MZMcBride (talk) 19:20, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

I think there's a different interpretation of 'template' going on here. Kralizec! is including vandalism warnings as a "template", because vandalism warnings are also templates. You must be referring only to the header templates, like shared ip or repeat vandal. Enigma ^message 19:31, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

The templatelinks table doesn't really see any ambiguity here. ;-) Either does any part of the software, really. A page either uses templates or doesn't. In this case, the template was substituted long ago... --MZMcBride (talk) 19:33, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Concerned

Past experience with you has shown you to be a very responsive admin. However since my first post on your talk page 30 minutes ago, not only have you not responded, but you have deleted over 150 more talk pages. I am growing ... concerned. --Kralizec! (talk) 17:31, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

This very uncharacteristic unresponsiveness has me concerned that something might have happened to you and/or your account, so I have opened a thread at WP:AN/I. --Kralizec! (talk) 17:52, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

While I think you are right doing so (I noticed this a few days ago), please stop now that users have raised concerns about it. IAR is not exactly a suicide pact :) -- lucasbfr ^{ho ho ho} 18:56, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

All concerns alleviated? --MZMcBride (talk) 19:27, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for responding to my concerns; I am glad to see that you are in control of your account. Could you also answer my above question [1]? --Kralizec! (talk) 20:08, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Please reply

MZMcBride, several users have voiced their concerns about your deletions (both on your talk page and here). If you do not reply, we have to assume that you are either running a bot without controlling or are not in full control over your account. Once again, please reply. — Aitias // discussion 18:59, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

My guess is he's running a bot, and has left his computer running. I very much doubt he's lost control of his account. Majorly talk 19:01, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

In full control of my account. --MZMcBride (talk) 19:18, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Does that mean you left your bot running unsupervised? Spartaz ^Humbug! 20:11, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

I don't really know what to make of that question. But, yes, the script does run without input for each action. --MZMcBride (talk) 20:16, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

It would be more convenient for us if you get an approved bot account. You are all over recent changes. 59.95.109.231 (talk) 15:25, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

I filed a bug about this; and there's always the option to "hide logged in users" ... --MZMcBride (talk) 18:57, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Blocked

Hi there MZM - I've blocked your account for 12 hours because people have been voicing concerns about your deletions and you've continued to do them. I suspect you've accidentally left your bot running on your account and left it. As soon as you're back under direct control of your account I'll lift the block or any other admin can. Take care and I hope you're having a good christmas! --Ryan Postlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 19:07, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Agreed, don't hesitate to unblock yourself as long as you don't go running the bot without agreement ;) -- lucasbfr ^{ho ho ho} 19:11, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, I think another admin should be the one to unblock in the circumstances :-) Majorly talk 19:15, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Seen as you're now in control of your account, I've unblocked you. Please stop the deletions for a bit so we can discuss there merits? --Ryan Postlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 19:17, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Merry Christmas to you too. :-) --MZMcBride (talk) 19:26, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Now now Marybelle. What have you been up to this Christmas? --Deskana (talk) 22:30, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

Hahaha. :D --MZMcBride (talk) 22:39, 25 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Whoops

Thanks for catching that and fixing it for me. :-) --MZMcBride (talk) 02:30, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

No problem. Happy holidays! —David Levy 02:34, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, you too. :-) --MZMcBride (talk) 02:39, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Deleting User:Rbraunwa's galleries?

What was the purpose of deleting User:Rbraunwa's galleries? [2] Your reason says "orphaned subpage for indefinitely blocked user." Is this protective or is there a problem with the galleries that they need monitored? Please explain. Thanks. And, yes, it's me. --KP Botany (talk) 23:19, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Is there a reason to keep them around? Is the user planning on returning or something? --MZMcBride (talk) 23:21, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes, there is a reason to keep them around, I use his galleries to look for interesting characters when I edit his articles, and I want to work on some of his articles. No, the user is not planning on returning, he passed. --KP Botany (talk) 23:22, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi MZMcBride -- I second that; the galleries are useful (he found a lot of good images for me) -- it's not a "typical indefinitely blocked user" as he is dead. He was an e-mail friend of mine, fwiw. Happy holidays, Antandrus (talk) 23:24, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Being dead. Now there's a perfectly valid reason.. Page restored. Apologies for any inconvenience. --MZMcBride (talk) 23:42, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. There's a handful of others. Gallery 1 |

Done. --MZMcBride (talk) 00:27, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Cathead ship templates

Hi MZMcBride, a couple of months ago you tagged a number of templates which were originally created by User:Joshbaumgartner for deletion. I also find that these templates are too detailed. Do you know why they were not deleted. Inwind (talk) 23:21, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

Do you have links? --MZMcBride (talk) 23:24, 27 December 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Joshbaumgartner#Speedy deletion of Template:Cathead age of sail ships of the line of the Inwind (talk) 06:48, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Looks like pure process wonkery. They can probably be nominated for deletion at TfD and it won't be an issue. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 07:15, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] If You Have a Moment

I have a couple vandal reports on AIV waiting, if you have a moment would you mind taking a look? Thanks...NeutralHomer • Talk • December 28, 2008 @ 08:40

Sorry, not really my area. I try to avoid user blocks as much as possible. :-) Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 08:43, 28 December 2008 (UTC)

Not a problem. Thanks for the response though :) Take Care...NeutralHomer • Talk • December 28, 2008 @ 08:45

[edit] How to find old IP talk page

Hello MZMcBride I'm Bencmq from zh.wikipedia. I'm just wondering how to find old IP talk pages easily? Thanks. —Bencmq (talk) 03:16, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

I ran a database query on the Toolserver and then filtered the results. Now I'm running the list through a Python script that checks for certain conditions (no templates, no blocks, etc.) and if the page meets those criteria, the page is deleted. Let me know if you'd like more info. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 08:53, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] TfD nomination of Template:Vote-Neutral

Template:Vote-Neutral has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. - ✰ALLST☆R✰ ^echo 04:30, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] User: Political Dweeb's reply

Hello user:MZMcBride I want to explain to you that when I deleted the American Centrist Party link on the list of political parties in the United States I was only doing that in order for me to construct a new article on that party. I want to explain that I did not delete this link as a form of vandalism and I do apologise if you may have intepreted my actions in that way. I was only going to just construct an infobox for the article on the American Centrist Party and then say on its discussion page that I would not be able to add any content because I am going to the gym with my family. I think I've hope these are good and suitable reasons for my actions here. Would it be possible for you to allow me to construct this article now as long as I do so responsibly? Thank you. .Political Dweeb (talk)

I have no idea what you're talking about. Do you have a link or something? --MZMcBride (talk) 18:51, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

"Would it be possible for you to allow me to construct this article now as long as I do so responsibly?" Erm.. sure? Be bold, but not reckless? I don't see any reason you'd need my permission to edit (or how I'm involved at all, really) but go ahead! Edit away! And if you run into problems, the article's talk page is the place to be. :-) --MZMcBride (talk) 22:22, 29 December 2008 (UTC)

When I right clicked onto the American Centrist Party link that was in red and clicked on "Open in New Window" which created a page with a deletion log showing Wikipedia user's who previously deleted this page for any type of reason [3], of the two I clicked onto "Start the American Centrist Party article" rather than "add a request for it" I got onto a page called "Unauthorized".[4]

I clicked onto a phrase called ( "protection log" from one of two Wikipedia tags [5] ) which lead me to this page [6] where on "December 28, 2007" you had protected the American Centrist Party link I deleted. I therefore want to ask you if its possible for you to let that red American Centrist Party link become unprotected so I can transform it into a new article on that party. Political Dweeb talk —Preceding undated comment was added at 12:56, 30 December 2008 (UTC).

Unprotected. Please be sure to assert notability and cite reliable sources. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 16:23, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Request

Hello MZMcbride. Can you delete http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mangalore&diff=259327349&oldid=259181557 and http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Crazysoul&diff=259347967&oldid=239830717 revisions permanently. It reveals my personal identity on Orkut? Please do not block the user. Thanks, Kensplanet^T _C 10:47, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Looks like someone else has already taken care of this. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 16:16, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks anyway. Kensplanet^T _C 16:47, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:OLDIP

Hi there. I notice you are deleting a lot of talk pages and am concerned that perhaps this needs to be discussed more. As I mentioned at Wikipedia talk:User page I believe that the only process through which pages are (or should be) deleted without discussion is speedy deletion. I don't believe these pages meet any of the speedy criteria (please correct me if I am wrong). Therefore I ask that you could stop deleting these pages until there is consensus to make a new CSD. Furthermore, there are a lot of people not online at this time of year, so please allow a little more time for discussion to take place. Thanks a lot, Martin 12:24, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

I'll have to respectfully disagree with you. This was discussed at WT:UP and I've replied to you there. While I respect your view that discussion-less deletions should only fall strictly under speedy deletion criteria, that view simply isn't accurate for this project. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 16:14, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi again. I do not accept that pages should be routinely deleted unless they meet criteria for speedy deletion. (There are occasional cases when rules can be ignored, but that does not apply in a case such as this when so many pages are being deleted.) Therefore I do not see that WT:UP is the correct venue for the discussion. The deletions are controversial: from the discussions I have seen both there and on AN, it seems there is a significant opposition to these actions. I ask you again to stop deleting user talk pages until you have obtained consensus for them at WP:CSD. Martin 22:36, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

I believe at this point multiple people have told you quite clearly that you're wrong. I'll refer you again to CAT:TEMP as a primary example. --MZMcBride (talk) 22:53, 30 December 2008 (UTC)

I may well be wrong. But you also don't seem to listen to the (multiple) people asking you to slow down. I must admit I am not familiar with CAT:TEMP and any precedent that it may have set. I have posted a question on WT:CSD asking for further opinions on this matter. I am trying to avoid going to AN at the moment; I dislike its drama as much as you do. Cheers, Martin 12:27, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Are you saying that pages can only be deleted without XFD if they meet one of these 40 descriptions? Honestly, I think these are simply g6 but can you give at least one reason why these pages should not be deleted? Surely you realize a page cannot list every possible scenario that could ever arise and surely most of our admins aren't stupid; after all, they were picked for their judgment. It seems you're just arguing this for the sake of arguing which is quite counterproductive. - Rjd0060 (talk) 01:26, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi and happy new year :) After reviewing the discussion at WT:CSD I am starting to recognise that these deletions do have support. That at least alleviates some of my concerns. (To be clear, I never had a strong opinion either way about these deletions; I just wanted to make sure they had support and was worried that proper process was being ignored). Would you have any objection to discussing a new possible speedy deletion criteria U4? (You seemed to be amenable to this idea in your post.) Could I just say that in future it would be good to discuss first and delete later rather than the other way round :P Best wishes, Martin 18:17, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

Still waiting for a reply, thanks. Martin 11:15, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

No objection from me regarding a new CSD criterion, though personally I think it's a bit unnecessary. As I said at WT:CSD, all that's needed is to change where WP:OLDIP points to. Happy new year to you too. :-) --MZMcBride (talk) 01:40, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Matt Lee new DRV

This is a courtesy notice as you were involved in AFD, DRV or CSD's regarding various Matt Lee articles you may want to comment on the new DRV. Also, if you haven't already, you may also want to check out Wikipedia talk:Criteria for speedy deletion#Redirect question and "Need history check for Matt Lee" ANI thread. Thanks. Soundvisions1 (talk) 18:15, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Missed pages

You missed these pages as they were linked this maintenance page which I blanked to fix the problem. The following all meet WP:OLDIP criteria:

O.--Otterathome (talk) 20:45, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. I'll get 'em on the second pass. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 20:47, 31 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rollback

Can I be a rollbacker ?--—Raunaq (Discuss ) 09:55, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Best place to request this is at request for permissions where an admin will look at it and decide if you are eligiable for it. Corruptcopper (talk) 15:37, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Happy New Year!

Dear MZMcBride,

Wishing you a happy a new year, and very best wishes for 2009. Whether we were friends or not in the past year, I hope 2009 will be better for us both.

Kind regards,

Majorly talk 20:58, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. You too. :-) --MZMcBride (talk) 21:23, 1 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Please undelete my talk page

—Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:11, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

I handled that for you, MZMcBride. - Rjd0060 (talk) 23:13, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

User talk:ThylekShran also got deleted as OLDIP. Why are you deleting these pages? Martin 11:15, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

It was an edge case, the redirecting OLDIP talk pages have been deleted properly. BJ^Talk 20:35, 4 January 2009 (UTC)

Damn software bugs! Taken care of. Apologies for any inconvenience. --MZMcBride (talk) 01:37, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Complain about a user behaviour

Can you please tell me where and how I can complain about a user behaviour? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Oliviu (talk • contribs)

Try the user's talk page? If that doesn't work, try the Administrators' noticeboard or one of its subpages. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 01:42, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] WP:ANI thread

There is a thread that you may be connected to on WP:ANI, here. » \ / (⁂ | ※) 16:51, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. I forgot to say so yesterday. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 19:31, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Unblock request of Frothy Sloth's IP

Hello MZMcBride. Frothy Sloth (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · block user · block log), whom you have blocked, is requesting to be unblocked. The request for unblock is on hold while waiting for a comment from you. Regards, —Travis ^talk 17:03, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Well, actually the user isn't blocked, but his Comcast IP is: 68.87.42.110 —Travis ^talk 17:03, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

I think from the block log it's pretty clear that the block should not be lifted without consulting with a CheckUser. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:16, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Just consulted with Sam Korn off-wiki. He told me that the IP should not be unblocked. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:34, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for confirming that for me. Cheers! —Travis ^talk 22:11, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] User Page

I think my user page is no longer under any vandalism threats. Could you please unprotect it? Thanks! --Yankees76 (talk) 14:48, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Done. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 19:15, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Obviously somenone had been waiting for this day. [7]. Delete my page again please and protect it. Sorry to waste your time! --Yankees76 (talk) 21:37, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Done. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:39, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Beta's chat

I moved it to AN here. Honestly, I can't see this ending anywhere but RFAR. :( rootology (C)(T) 18:42, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up. I left a note with LessHeard vanU regarding all of this. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 19:30, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] RFCU

Please comment if possible, thanks. Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Wanceez67--Quarte t 00:11, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Bulgarians in Turkey

Hey there, I see you've deleted the Bulgarians in Turkey article today. That it was deleted doesn't impose any restrictions on its recreation, right? Me and a few other users are willing to work on that topic and create a neutral, well-sourced article. We were actually doing quite well, but the Turkish users obviously followed an agenda in their voting and continued to vote "delete" even after the arguments they cited had been long addressed.

Anyways, that doesn't really concern you, just wanted to know if it's okay to recreate the article, whether from scratch or from universally approved old content :) All the best, Todor →Bozhinov 13:31, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

The content can be re-created in a user subpage and then be brought to Deletion review (at least I'm fairly certain that's the process these days). If you would like me to restore the article and move it to your user space, let me know. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 16:49, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion Of My User Page

Hi, Sorry to bother you but I'm curious to know why you deleted my user page. Thanks, davidzuccaro (talk) 21:52, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Looks like you made your user page at User:DavidZuccaro; User:Davidzuccaro was a redirect to User:DavidZuccaro. I've restored and moved User:DavidZuccaro to User:Davidzuccaro. I moved User talk:DavidZuccaro to User:Davidzuccaro/Archive 1. Cheers. --MZMcBride (talk) 22:23, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks davidzuccaro (talk) 23:36, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Flagged Revs

Hi,

I noticed you voted oppose in the flag revs straw pole and would like to ask if you would mind adding User:Promethean/No to your user or talk page to make your position clear :) - Thanks to Neurolysis for the template «l| Ψrometheăn ™|l» (talk) 06:32, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

No thanks. :-) --MZMcBride (talk) 06:35, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:MZMcBride"