AniMate

Picture of the day

Colias croceus, also known as the clouded yellow, is a small butterfly of the family Pieridae, the yellows and whites. Its breeding range is North Africa and southern Europe and eastwards through Turkey into the Middle East, but it occurs throughout much of Europe as a summer migrant, sometimes as far north as Scandinavia. In Asia, its range extends into central Siberia in the north and barely into India in the south, although it is not found in Central Asia. The species can live in any open area in the countryside, including downland, coastal cliffs and fields containing the caterpillar's host plants, at an elevation up to 1,600 metres (5,200 ft) above sea level. Colias croceus has a wingspan of 46–54 millimetres (1.8–2.1 in), with the upperside of its wing being golden to orange yellow with a broad black margin on all four wings and a black spot near the centre forewing. This mating pair was photographed in Pirin National Park, Bulgaria.Photograph credit: Charles J. Sharp

My sandbox

Requests for adminship and bureaucratship update

No current discussions. Recent RfAs, recent RfBs: (successful, unsuccessful)

Natasha Yi vandalism

Hi there, remember the discussion about Natasha Yi's year of birth. So I check the article to Natasha Yi's article and I check the history on Natasha Yi's article and a different IP user is putting false information. I know I already found it's real source from AskMen.com. I am still not an administrator but I already revert edits to the correct year of birth. I found a different IP user by putting false information to 1981. The IP user's name is User:67.52.94.30. So the IP user is putting false information and disrupt the editing. So could you write a warning a different IP user the 67.52.94.30 not to change false year of birth. And remember to check the article of Natasha Yi all the time if you see a false year of birth on a different IP user kept on changing the wrong year of birth. The IP user that's User:67.52.94.30 kept on disrupt the edits the user will be blocked by editing. So I am letting to Thank You for resolving the issue from a long time ago, and I already talk to User:Matty on the same issue. So remember to write a warning not to make disruptive edits to a different IP user. So let me know if you write a warning to IP User:67.52.94.30 not to put false information. If there is problems on the article of Natasha Yi again to a IP user. I will let you know. Thanks for all your help and I will talk to you soon. Steam5 (talk) 05:49, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Roak here.

Hey man, do you want me to look for sources in spare time for the Shayne Lamas-carly thing? Can I ask you one thing, how's my editing? I did alot of work and I just want to know if im doing good or if I should just recess and read over some examples and stuff (like guidelines)? --Leslie Roak (talk) 23:58, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Hey Roak here. I need to talk to you about the policy thing. I read that the images of characters like Claudia Zacchara and Sami Brady in the articles are not good. Promotional images/ or images of the actors are not good. Like not good. So I looked at the Jasper Jacks article image in the infobox and that seems like a good example. It should be a screencap, right? So should I start looking for images to replace some of the wrong images I uploaded? Thanks dude. --Leslie Roak (talk) 22:32, 16 July 2009 (UTC)

Promotional images aren't too bad as they are official images that tend to show actors in a flattering light rather than a random screenshot. As for policy, keep reading up and learning. Things like calling minors sexy and frivolously tagging articles for CSD are against policy and can result in a block. AniMate^draw 01:29, 17 July 2009 (UTC)

Alright, gotcha man. --Leslie Roak (talk) 21:58, 20 July 2009 (UTC)

Tara McPherson page deleted?

I noticed the artist Tara_McPherson had her page deleted on July 12th (it appears to have been deleted by you). It mentions something about an ambiguous copyright violation and references her Facebook page. I contacted the artist directly and she's just as confused about what this might mean as I am. As far as she knows, there is no copyright violation. Thank you for the clarification. —Preceding unsigned comment added by CoveringMedia (talk • contribs) 08:43, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

The copyright violation wasn't from a facebook page, though the person who nominated it for deletion cited that. The actual copyright violation was from this page from McPherson's website. It was a word for word copy, and even should she release the text we still couldn't use it since it is a primary source and would be self promoting. Recreating the page with reliable sources is definitely allowed and encouraged. AniMate^draw 17:05, 18 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarification. I understand how the usage of primary sources could really get out of hand. Given that the policy does seem to give the option to use primary sources ("Deciding whether primary, secondary or tertiary sources are more suitable on any given occasion is a matter of common sense and good editorial judgment...",) couldn't it be argued that it would be better to keep the article intact with notes that it needs to be rewritten, as opposed to deleting it? I could understand if there were also a question of notability, but clearly that's not the case here. It should be noted that until I'd sent Ms. McPherson an email asking about the deletion, I'd never had contact with her, so I consider myself an impartial observer that appreciates her contributions to the arts, and not as a personal advocate.CoveringMedia (talk) 17:07, 18 July 2009 (EST)

In looking at the original article much of this is a bibliography. If the primary source material were still in question, perhaps the article could maintain the original opening paragraph, followed by the bibliography and remaining sections. This would at least keep Ms. McPherson's presence on Wikipedia, and also give someone time to rewrite the biography section.CoveringMedia (talk) 17:36, 18 July 2009 (EST)

I think a better idea is to start the article from scratch. If McPherson is notable, we should be able to easily find sources that discuss her besides her website. Ideally, a Wikipedia article isn't rewritten from plagiarism, it's written from a variety of sources by a variety of authors who don't have a conflict of interest. Unfortunately, the biography from her website isn't neutral and it is self-promotional. When I have some time I'll work on something, but the next few days are quite busy. AniMate^draw 00:47, 19 July 2009 (UTC)

Talk:Carrie_Prejean#Breast_Implants_.28again.29

Hi! You might be interested in the discussion at Talk:Carrie_Prejean#Breast_Implants_.28again.29. Thank you. Rico 03:18, 27 July 2009 (UTC) (Using {{Please see}})

I've given a statement on the article talk page. Unfortunately, I think there are two groups of people actively pushing their POVs on that page, and I have no desire to edit the article. Sorry, but between the rudeness shown to me by people who disagree with me and the rudeness shown to me by people who agree with me, I have no desire to edit in such an unpleasant atmosphere. AniMate^draw 03:49, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Page move

Can you undo our friend Leslie Roak's move of Port Charles to Port Charles (TV series)? It seems like an unnecessary disambiguation, as the TV series should be the primary topic over the fictional location.— TAnthony^Talk 17:19, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

To clarify, he then redirected Port Charles to Port Charles, New York (fictional city), not thinking about the fact that every link to it is meant to go to the series article. I fixed that, but ...17:24, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

I've undone the move. I can't believe this "new" user archived my talk page. AniMate^draw 19:48, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

LOL, I hadn't noticed he'd done that, but I was wondering why it was empty all of a sudden.— TAnthony^Talk 20:02, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

I love this guy. He's a 22 year old lawyer who attends the fictitious University of Malibu and gets married on a Tuesday and still finds time to edit every day surrounding his wedding. I can practically see it. "I now pronounce you man and wife." "Honey, I really need to go edit Carly Corinthos now." AniMate^draw 20:20, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Plus, not a lot of guys concerned with soap articles are marrying women. You and I should know!— TAnthony^Talk 20:34, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Dude, I thought you had a girl! AniMate^draw 20:40, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

LOL.— TAnthony^Talk 20:49, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

As an aside, I know how you feel about General Hospital articles, but if you can bear it, perhaps you'd like to contribute to a rewrite of the Claudia Zacchara character background. I'm running out the door, but the section (and likely the entire article) is a hot mess. Normally, "sexually lethal" would be my pet peeve (does that mean she has a poisonous puss?). However, describing her as "viscous" takes the cake. AniMate^draw 21:06, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

Sorry

Yo, i just wanted to help out the talk page (it was clutter) and I wanted to help you out so we can get over the anger over the images and the age things. So how's it going? --Leslie Roak (talk) 22:12, 27 July 2009 (UTC)

LOL

Dude, we have someone that seems to hate us mutually (TAnthony AniMate), I feel so close to you! — TAnthony^Talk 03:02, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Awesome. It's official. You complete me. AniMate^draw 06:31, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and we're the same person now too, see User talk:Clau5dia8 ;)— TAnthony^Talk 00:07, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Gee, I wonder who is responsible for User:TAnthony_AniMate? I'll likely work on getting together a sock investigation when I get back to LA. I guess Roak's two month honeymoon or whatever is off. Sad. AniMate^draw 06:21, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

You missed some stuff today; Roak's been blocked for 24 hrs for calling you an "ID*OT" after my warning, and I finally opened a sock investigation.— TAnthony^Talk 21:47, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

I threw down some evidence and informed him of the report. We'll see what happens, though his block should clearly be extended since he's editing with User:Leslie Roaker II. AniMate^draw 22:29, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Liz Webb age

if she is 26 and jason is 35, ten years ago when they began a relationship, he'z like 25/26 and sh'es 15/16. thats gross. thats a lie. --Clau5dia8 (talk) 01:07, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

Luke Spencer and Laura Webber article

Hey, AniMate. I know that you are busy. But since you are currently editing a little bit until you get back from your vacation, which means you are able to be addressed about this now, I felt I would go ahead and ask you for your collaboration on the Luke and Laura article. As seen in this link, Rocksey and I are currently working on it. If you watch her talk page, you may or may not already be aware of this. There, I said, "When AniMate gets back from his vacation, I plan to ask him if he would not mind cutting down on the article's plot; he is most definitely good at trimming plot sections. We would have three different editors focusing on three different parts of the article, which is good and may make this process go faster."

So what do you think? Flyer22 (talk) 00:47, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Editing time is rather limited, but I'd be happy to go over things once I get back home. AniMate^draw 16:35, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, AniMate. That is all I am asking for on this matter; I know that you are currently busy, as stated above. I do not know much about the history of General Hospital, except for what I have read or viewed on the Internet about it (and what I have viewed has been little) and in addition to watching a bit of the current storylines this year. I know of Luke and Laura, but I have not watched any of their storylines. I am concerned that if I were to try to cut down on the plot, I would cut out important or very relevant detail. Besides that, you are better at cutting down on plot than I am.

I have not forgotten your request of me to fix up the Sonny Corinthos article. It is currently much better now than it was when you asked me for help with it, but I will eventually add more real-world content to that article when I get a good chance to. Flyer22 (talk) 00:21, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

Silver state Trio

This is not the same Mark Gray that already has an article, so a redirect isn't any good. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 03:34, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Episode count GH

Hi. Another user with an ip number that starts with a 7 changed the episode number on the General Hospital template before the actual episode was uploaded on the ABC site. Please give him/her a little hint of not doing so.Wingard (talk) 19:54, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

I'll leave a note, but this is such a silly, pointless thing to get upset about. AniMate^draw 21:43, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

KSNEMC1

KSNEMC1 is clearly not getting it, and I would say is worse than TimothyBanks. At least TimothyBanks understood/understands WP:Common name; he simply did not always follow it. KSNEMC1, on the other hand, genuinely does not seem to grasp the guideline. Flyer22 (talk) 21:55, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Latest inappropriate actions by Caden

Earlier today, this user went to my talk page and falsely accused me of making attacks on another editor when I didn’t, and went on to cry foul to administrators about it. I noticed that you have been dealing with this particular person for the last couple of days. So perhaps it was best to tell you this. Caden and I do have a history spanning three months, a history I never wanted in the first place. Two such incidents occurred with both of us involved, and in both incidents, I came out on top of the argument (more or less). If I have to venture of a guess, this person still has EXTREME disdain over me over all that has happened between the two of us. And therefore, he has been keeping an eye on me, wikihounding me. A citation has been issued by an administrator in the past for his wikihounding offense on me. And here he is again. Whenever he sees something that is unjustifiable in his eyes, he will ruthlessly come in and intervene, getting involved in things that are none of is business to begin with, rehatching old wounds, and continuing in his old habits of causing disruption to other editors like me.

When I go on Wikipedia, I go on there to look up information on about anything. When I see an information that doesn’t look correct, I fix it in the most professional of ways. When it comes to Caden, I sense that he comes on Wikipedia to see what fight, disruption and drama he can cause today to any editor who oppose him in any sort or fashion. He is more focused on the animosity and hostility aspects of Wikipedia more than the productive aspect. His various history longs speaks for itself on here. I am sick and tired of editors such as Caden bothering me when all I want to do is look up information and do constructive edits on Wikipedia. KeltieMartinFan (talk) 22:42, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

I too have a history of conflict with Caden, so there's not much I can do other than ask him politely to lay off. I'd be happy to leave him a note, but cannot take any administrative action. AniMate^draw 22:49, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Fair enough. Thanks. KeltieMartinFan (talk) 23:13, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

If you want me to leave him a note, let me know. AniMate^draw 23:14, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

First off Keltie is not telling the truth. Earlier today he left personal attacks in his edit summaries towards IP 68.50.128.120 calling this editor "obnoxious". I left Ketie a warning to cease his personal attacks but he deleted my warning and called me "obnoxious" in his edit summary. I then placed a template on my talk page asking for admin help. Admin Chzz looked into it (see my talk page) and gave Keltie a warning to stop attacking the IP. Keltie then removed that warning from his page. I have no disdain for Keltie so I can't understand why he's here attacking me and asking you to take action against me. All it shows is that he's out to have me blocked. He's hated me for a long time I guess? Anyway Keltie has a long history of attacking newbies, established users and IP's. Look at his talk page, he's been warned by several admins and several users for his disruptive behavior. He's no choirboy and I resent him saying these lies about me. Caden ^cool 02:55, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

And I rest my case on Caden's unprofessional behavior. If he doesn't have disdain over me, then why is he getting into my personal affairs here on Wikipedia like he did the day before, and also three months earlier? How contradicting on Caden's part. Clearly there is motive involved as to his actions towards me. Am I going to have to to open up that huge can of worms again? Otherwise he should just simply mind his own business as I do to him. Clearly to him, mind his own business is harder to him than it is to most other editors. Do you see me get involved in Caden's other virtual fist fights, such as his current battle with editor Exploding Boy? I don't think so, because it is none of my business. Obviously Caden thinks he have to right to get involved in my and other editors business, as well as stirring havoc on various issues on the Wikipedia noticeboard, even when it didn't involved him initially, and he just comes in the middle because hostility and chaos is his game. I have seen first hand of such atrocious acts by him. That's is nature, looking to pick fights here on Wikipedia. Seldom does he do any type of constructive work here. He is seen on talk pages and noticeboards battling out with other editors. Those are not traits of a true Wikipedian, and time and time again Caden has demostrated that feat. I know a lot of other editors would concur with me on that. His various history logs speaks for itself. Perhaps leaving him that note right now would be the best of ideas. Thanks again, AniMate, for looking out for me and others whom Caden has endless issues with. KeltieMartinFan (talk) 04:58, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Keltie, calling another editor obnoxious is a personal attack. It's much easier to save the keystrokes and just type "revert". Also, on Wikipedia there are no "personal affairs". Anyone can get involved in anyone's affairs. Caden, you don't need to police Keltie's edits. You do have a history and you didn't need to become involved. If you don't like an editor, you don't have to watch their every move. You do quite well with your edits to bands and to Playboy models. Stop seeking out drama. Hope this ends this. AniMate^draw 06:08, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Indeed it is all that simple as a keystroke. Thanks again for words of advice. KeltieMartinFan (talk) 07:50, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

If you feel things have gotten too confrontational between you two, post to one of the noticeboards. If you don't feel comfortable doing that, let me know. I know some great administrators who are quite neutral (they've disagreed with me in the past and I don't agree with their stances now) who would be willing to sort things out. AniMate^draw 07:58, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

I have been posting complaints on the noticeboard. If it wasn't for Caden doing what he did the last two days, all I would be doing right now is going about my business, and focusing on the important things, the articles itself. And not focusing my time and energy on an editor who clearly cannot be civil towards other editors. To say the very least, I am very disapointed that Caden felt the need to disrupt my day, and other people's day of editing with his nonsense. And I said, enough's enough. I don't take pleasure going to the noticeboard. But it doesn't mean I won't if I feel that I'm serverely bothered. KeltieMartinFan (talk) 08:08, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

I won't be taking any action against Caden or against you. I'm clearly involved. Politically and socially I disagree with Caden. Completely. I'm pretty sure he knows that. That being said, if you find yourself in another conflict with him, let me know. I'll look at what's going on and will make, at least, a recommendation or I'll let some neutral administrators know what's going on. Oftentimes the boards get jammed with the drama of the day and more complex matters are ignored. That's the best I can do. Good luck with future editing and try to keep the drama on NPR level. AniMate^draw 08:18, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Note to AniMate

Thank you. Exploding Boy (talk) 07:44, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks isn't necessary, though it is appreciated. Right now things are on Melrose Place drama level. I prefer the Antiques Roadshow drama level. AniMate^draw 08:04, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Unblock

Re: User_talk:Daedalus969#Block
Note for 3RR there doesn't need to be a warning given, AN3 guidelines say: "A courtesy warning (such as {{uw-3rr}}) may be given on their talk page, though warnings are not requisite for a block." This is reinforced in the edit warring policy here.

Further, considering the page's edit history there most certainty was disruption caused by edit warring and a 3RR violation by the user. I do not block unless it's justified by policy. I would hope that unblock requests are to be discussed with the blocking admin before being granted. The wording at unblock requests says specifically: "Per the blocking policy and block appeals guidelines, unless exceptional or expedient circumstances apply, administrators should not unblock a user without prior discussion with the blocking admin." So please do explain why this hadn't happened, ie was this a case were it was an exception to the rule? Thanks. Nja²⁴⁷ 08:58, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

I have no problems with my unblock. Had I waited for you to get back online, the block would have expired. I'm not perfect. That's why I try to make it clear that any administrator can undo any of my actions. AniMate^draw 09:27, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

And I now realize that I haven't made that clear on my user or talk page. My bad. For the record, undo any administrative action I do. My judgment isn't perfect. AniMate^draw 09:33, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

I brought this up for two reasons, 1) the policies on blocking and unblocking both say to discuss with the blocking admin, unless it's an exception. I wanted to know if you felt it be an exception, and if so why; or if you just goofed? We all make mistakes, trust me. 2) I wanted to know why you thought the editor hadn't edit warred? Thanks. Nja²⁴⁷ 09:38, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

The editor in question wasn't blocked for edit warring. He was blocked for 3rr. Again, I'm not perfect, and I don't think I goofed. Basically, I saw a good faith editor who likely learned his lesson. AniMate^draw 09:48, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Well okay, then why they hadn't 3RR'ed then (as they had done so in my opinion). Either way it's over, I just wanted to know if I had done something incorrectly and you caught it, and why they were an exception to blocking policy as I wasn't contacted about it. The block is undone now, and would have expired at this point anyhow. Cheers. Nja²⁴⁷ 10:29, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry. Your interpretation of things was not wrong. It was different than mine, but not wrong. I haven't run into you before, but I'm certain you're better at this whole "admin" thing than I am. I hate stepping on toes and hope your's aren't too sore. AniMate^draw 10:34, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

I'm confident I'm no better at it :) I'm cool, it's just when I block someone I try to ensure it's within policy and is justified. Undoing the block with the reasoning you gave leaves me up to possible criticism by the editor once they return. Thus I wanted to get some info from you in case I had made a mistake. That's why I wanted to know why you thought they hadn't 3RR'ed and if you felt them to be exempted from the usual way of doing unblocks. I realise it may have came off differently, but I was honestly trying to double check to ensure I wasn't being a knob, not the other way around. Thanks for your quick clarifications! Nja²⁴⁷ 10:40, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Glad we're okay. I likely won't be taking anymore actions in regards to Daedalus969. Things are much easier when I don't. AniMate^draw 11:03, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

Explanation for undid revision

I undid the revision by that ip number because the episode hasn't been uploaded on the ABC site yet, and I left a note on that ip number's talk page. Wingard (talk) 22:21, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Groan. Such a silly and honestly pointless thing to care about... My advice to you is to stop watching these pages to see if someone gets to the edit count before you and to just let it go if someone edits it before ABC has uploaded the video. If it has already aired, then the episode count is correct. You've really got to stop controlling this so tightly. Maybe to fill some time you can even start updating the other soap operas that don't have a person to come every single day and only update the episode count. AniMate^draw 22:26, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Ted Kennedy header

Mind if I steal it to use? Until It Sleeps ^{Wake me}   06:33, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

NEVER! ALL FOR ANIMATE!</sarcasm> Of course you can. So depressing. AniMate^draw 06:35, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Oh, and nice sig. Same font as mine. :) Until It Sleeps ^{Wake me}   06:36, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

It's entirely possible I stole it from you. I'm not so great with the signature formatting and would probably end up destroying the entire encyclopedia should I attempt the shadow thing you did. AniMate^draw 06:38, 26 August 2009 (UTC)