User talk:Neurophyre

Dwarf galaxy

DO you have a list that you can post on my talk page? If necessary, the difficult ones could be posted on WP:RM en bloc. -- ALoan (Talk) 16:56, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

About Zhan Ziqian

You added a cleanup tag on that artical and Dong Yuan. Would you like to tell me what the reason is. You did not list them on the Wikipedia:cleanup.--Fanghong 01:30, 7 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Brandy Ledford

http://www.classictvhits.com/cast.php?id=3188 This article even CREDITS WIKIPEDIA, so THEY COPIED US!--AAAAA 23:44, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

UMassWiki

I never said I wouldn't! Just seems more prudent to edit the UMass article on here since these people don't already go to UMass. :-) UmassThrower 13:27, 29 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RfC Comair Flight 5191

I just wanted to say that there has been a RfC. regarding Comair Flight 5191 Since you have been a contributor to the article, I encourage you to add to the debate and to contribute to the article, in the future. Mytwocents 05:48, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bot source code

Sure, all the bots I write are open source. If you'll just send me an email or give me your email address, I will send you the source code. Cheers--Orgullomoore 14:10, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

troublesome editor

I would like you to compare those two edits [1][2]. Maybe it's just me, but I think there is cause for concern, as this user has edited the latter article in the recent past expressing his unsatifaction with the article while I voted on the delete site of VfD on an article he created. It's fairly minor but does express a clear pattern. I figured I'd pass it on to you since you seem to have the matter in hand. Jean-Philippe 22:13, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh boy this is annoying, for a minute there I was totally lost, both our pages where vandalized, hehehe :) Jean-Philippe 22:19, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User has done so. [3] Jean-Philippe 22:29, 29 September 2006 (UTC) Wrong diff but you know what I mean. Jean-Philippe 22:29, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed your email is disabled, can I catch you on irc? Jean-Philippe 23:24, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Personal talk pages

Could you please tell me? What is a user suppossed to do with his Talk page. Is he supoosed to leave all the commentary there indefinatly. Archive it? Flat out delete it when he doesn't like what has been written? What is the appropritae policy? Much appeciated.--DocEss 22:52, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please be clear - The policy that you mentioned only applies to removing warnings. When any mention of the person or persons related to the editor e.g. parents, beliefs, mental health etc then that's much more personal and can legitimately be removed especially when the matter has been mentioned in no uncertain terms that it is closed. As everyone knows it's in the history. Even the wikipage http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Talk_page#Etiquette mentions that some people delete comments after they have replied to them. I think I have replied to every one of the comments. Ttiotsw 23:48, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Note: The above two comments were left unsolicited by users with no prior connection to me shortly after a vandalism dispute with User:Mrpainkiller7 --Neurophyre^(talk) 00:28, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Neurophyre: I came across you by following my nose and clicking through - I could see that you have administrative knowledge and privileges. Nothing Sinister, here. I only wanted to know how to treat and clean up a talk page.DocEss 16:29, 30 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mrpainkiller, Neurophyte and Jean-Philippe

After a complaint at intervention against vandalism, I protected the article VampireFreaks.com. It was either that, or block all of you for disruption and personal attacks. I will unprotect the article in the morning. In the meantime, please consider the following:

Reverting another user's talk page is pretty rude. There is a policy conflict between the user talk page policy, which says users can blank or archive warnings (although archiving is preferred by the community) and the vandalism policy, which says that removing warnings given to you is vandalism. I don't agree with the vandalism point of view, and I haven't seen a lot of support for it lately except among people who are fighting amongst themselves for other reasons. If someone deletes a warning they've obviously seen it. If you are concerned about someone's edits, use a verbose edit summary so that even if the warning is removed the edit summary will be visible.
I understand there is a view among two of you that Mrpainkiller7's edits are detrimental to the article. There are lots of right ways to deal with this, including editing by consensus, Request for comment on the article or the user, Mediation, and third opinion. I'm not going to judge the content, but fighting (wherever it occurs) is the wrong way to deal with the problem.
Personal attacks are not to be tolerated. Please deal with the content of edits, not character.

I'm leaving this message with each of you. If you keep fighting over talk pages, I suppose I or another admin will eventually figure it's time to block someone. Unless you are positive that you are 100% right and the other guy is 100% wrong, you should probably try and work this out peacefully in case the admins don't see things your way. Thatcher131 23:02, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect you might have me confused, here. I'm no sockpuppet or whatever. I'm controversial, to be sure. Bur jeez - I don't ever hide. I think something's amiss.DocEss 23:42, 29 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No Vendettas

Stop vandalizing work by Mrpainkiller7, you are violating our policies on personal attacks. If you continue, as you have in the past, then i will recommend that you be banned. Vactor66 17:40, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep your rhetoric up & you'll be banned, & il laugh —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrpainkiller7 (talk • contribs)

I already reported his distruption on WP:ANI. Jean-Philippe 23:53, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He's just a pitiful troll. That's why I didn't bother reverting his edits in the first place. If it was me I'd just let an admin handle it, but do what you think is appropriate :þ Jean-Philippe 00:00, 9 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Germans

Do you hate Germans? Kingjeff 02:22, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This was actually about your vandalism to the Tim Borowski talk page. So don't complain to me about unconstructive comments. Kingjeff 19:57, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[4] Kingjeff 20:01, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've noticed. I can't seem to get over how similar they are. Kingjeff 20:04, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RFCU redirecting

I went through and fixed all the links which went to the now-speedy deleted page using Special:Whatlinkshere/Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Mrpainkiller7. Anyways, you can't redirect to a specific section, so it wouldn't have been possible anyways. Cheers, Daniel.Bryant ^{[ T · C ]} 00:41, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:John_evander_couey.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:John_evander_couey.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 08:56, 5 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

BLP issue at critical mass

Please take a moment to reread WP:BLP in view of this material you propose to insert.[5] Sworn police statements, and reports of eyewitness accounts, are not reliable sources. This material names private individuals (who are not public figures) and accuses them of crimes: a cop committing assault, a cop accusing a civilian of assault. Per BLP we don't repeat unproven allegations of crimes like that, whether or not a reliable source reports that the allegations were made. Wikidemo (talk) 07:47, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Medicine/Dermatology task force

I wanted to know if you (or any friends of yours) are interested in dermatology, and would be willing to help me with the WikiProject Medicine/Dermatology task force? Kilbad (talk) 13:46, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:49, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Neurophyre. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. Mdann52 (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Neurophyre. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Neurophyre. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Neurophyre. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:04, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:17, 24 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]