A warm welcome to the English Wikipedia, dear Hexer! If you have questions, please don't ask on my talk page, because I'm not active here. Just ask one of these people. Most of them are happy to help (but only if nobody stole their passwords, of course). :o) We (I don't mean myself very much but rather the community of the English Wikipedia) look forward to your contributions! Have fun! --Thogo(Talk)22:07, 5 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
i don't know where else to post a message, but i want the page written about me deleted. you keep putting it back up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mpodd6 (talk • contribs) 20:34, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sceptre would like to nominate you for adminship![edit]
Sceptre would like to nominate you to become an administrator. Please visit Wikipedia:Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact Sceptre to accept or decline the nomination. A page has been created for your nomination at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/DerHexer. If you accept the nomination, you must formally state and sign your acceptance and answer the questions on that page. Once you have answered the questions, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so.
Well, okay. It's possible to start the RfA on July 14, before 2 o'clock pm UTC? It would be wunderful 'cause then I'll have vacations. :) Maybe you add some links, e. g. [1][2], [3] or [4]. I could do this, too, replying to the three "questions for the candidate". Greetings and thanks for your confidence, —DerHexer(Talk)22:51, 7 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sry, werde hier regelrecht belagert von vorschlagenden Benutzern. :| Wenn hier alle, die wöllten, und die, die ich dazu noch gern hätte, die Laudatio schrieben, hätten wir so sechs bis acht Personen. Aber freute mich natürlich über deine Stimme. :) Grüße, —DerHexer(Talk)14:42, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Id would have been better to ask me first so that I can't hardly deny it now. ;) … I hope that not any more co-nominators will appear here. Thanks for your confidence! :) Greetings, —DerHexer(Talk)15:25, 8 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe it's better if someone else will nominate you here - because here I'm not a "Star" *g*. Nearly nobody knows me and if I nominate you with my horrible english, they maybe laugh but dont give you the voice. So we will wait a longer time until I can nominate someone for adminship here afte at de:WP ;) (for the others: DerHexer is already Administrator e at the german-language-Wikipedia and I had nominate him there for the election). The interesting thing is - Hexer is
Many thanks! I want to thank all the people who supported me. And want to thank those ones who honestly raised doubts so that I'm able to improve my performance. Thanks! I'm looking forward to co-operate with you. :) —DerHexer(Talk)13:34, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Don't know that we've ever spoken, but I was watching your RfA and am very glad to see you were approved. Congrats! Douglasmtaylor 03:09, 23 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, yes - I am "a bit" too late. But nevertheless - congratulations from me. There is definitely a lot to do here with the buttons - but don't forget to come back to de:WP from time to time... ;-) --Tobi B. 15:26, 31 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I was just wondering whether explicit pictures are acceptable on Wikipedia. I have just come accross this articl Frenular_delta, and as you can see it contains a rather graphic image. Should this be removed or not? Thanks. --79.72.113.19 13:29, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Orphaned talk page redirects whose article page is a redirect, too, are totally unnecessary. They are basically hangovers caused by an article move where the moving person forgot to add a speedy deletion on the talk page. Regards, —DerHexer(Talk)08:29, 7 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hey please check the ROMANIA article under - Post Roman Romania and all around that area.. Its absolutely damaged.. plus the articles seems to be like for advertising the country.. really sad. and sorry for contacting you through here but i didint find any other way..
Thank you for supporting me in my recent RFA which did not pass at (18/27/10). I will be sure to improve my editing skills and wait until someone nominates me next time. Thank you for you comments! Tiptoety 00:06, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I was going to nominate Oxymoron83, but I wanted to nominate him while he was active, and every time I was on Wikipedia these days, I haven't seen Oxymoron active. NHRHS2010 talk 03:39, 12 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
So sorry for the late reply to this - I missed your asking of this question until just now. No particular reason, Der was just quicker then DerHexer. If it offends you, I of course won't do so again. Although in hindsight and after looking it up - calling you "Der" without the "Hexer" does seem ridiculous. Happy editing. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk18:09, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much for voicing your support in my successful RfA. I'm humbled to have the community's trust. As I master the ways of the mop and bucket, please don't hesitate to message me for any advice or corrections. Cheers! Spellcast23:03, 13 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I logged onto Wikipedia to search for something and found a vandalism warning, on I page I've never even visited before. I assume this wasn't an automatic thing because it had your name attached to the warning. I do have an account with Wikipedia, but obviously I'm not logged into it. Has this happened before, as 'last warning' is a bit strange this is the first one, and for seemingly no reason too. 86.147.102.31 20:43, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please have a look at the bottom of your page: This is the discussion page for an anonymous user, identified by the user's numerical IP address. 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 future confusion with other anonymous users. Registering also hides your IP address. Someone who used your IP has done this. Regards, —DerHexer(Talk)20:47, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Congratulations! You are now on my list of my favorite administrators, since you have reverted vandalism on my userpage more than once! NHRHS2010 talk 23:23, 14 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I was not blocked directly. I was autoblocked because I logged into User:My password is pass to check if the password was really 'pass' and changed the password. Now I can edit, finally. NHRHS2010 talk 00:02, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, when you are online there is no need for anyone else to even try and revert vandalism or tag articles for deletion, you do it within a blink of an eye. I have got almost 25 edit conflicts with you so far in about 10 mins. Good work! Tiptoety 22:57, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
(ec) Why everybody thinks that I'm a bot? … I don't have a bot, had a bot, will have a bot or even like bots. ;) I accept them and that's imho enough. —DerHexer(Talk)23:02, 15 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I considered not spamming talk pages but not saying "thanks" just isn't me. The support was remarkable and appreciated. I only hope that I am able to help a little on here. Please let me know if I can help you or equally if you find any of my actions questionable. I wish you well with your Rf... elsewhere (I've written my support out:)) Thanks & regards --Herbytalk thyme12:35, 16 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The admin that protected the page apparently accidentally restored the vandalism that led to its protection in the first place. Could you please remove it? Just64helpin (talk) 12:37, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi DerHexer! The article "Hampus Hellekant" is serious slander. He was not convicted of those crimes and many facts are wrong. Wikipedia is not for slandering and humiliate people! best regards —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.112.231.19 (talk) 23:13, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi DerHexer, I've just enabled you're script and I must say it's very impressive! I just have to remember not to click "back" one page after a block because it sends another block template. Spellcast (talk) 09:57, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Of course not. They are published under the terms of the GNU FDL so that everybody is allowed to use these these scripts. Just add importScript('User:DerHexer/monobook.js');. Thanks for your barnstar! :) Regards, —DerHexer(Talk)10:42, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This will make deleting things a lot easier, and faster. But I do have one question. I don't see templates for warning vandals where are they, or do they not exist? KnowledgeOfSelf | talk10:51, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, it would make it easier to navigate! Very nice script! I see why your so fast! Can you drop me a line so I know when to refresh my cache? Once again thanks --Chris11:06, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There are templates for warnings. You have used "rollback" and not "normal rollback"? Maybe your connection is too fast (or too slow) so that a time out bug happened. Please test it again. Thanks, —DerHexer(Talk)10:57, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
hmm I certainly got a different result. It reverted with lightning speed, opened the IP's talk page, but then instantly went to the block page for the ip and blocked it without my doing anything (turned out it was a good block - but as I didn't do it myself it startled me), and I still didn't see templates for warning lol. It's probably just me, I've always had bad luck with my monobook and using scripts. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk11:11, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No, that was totally correct. The script automatically warns and blocks. But you've had the bad luck to revert a vandal who should be blocked. —DerHexer(Talk)11:13, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ohhhhhh - now that's pretty cool. My mistake, that's über fast. Is there a way to tell it to block anon only, instead of both anon and account creation blocked? KnowledgeOfSelf | talk11:17, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
lol I think you misunderstand my question Mr. Wizard, when your script blocks an IP address it enables the autoblock and the prevent account creation features. Is there a way to enable only one instead of both? Thats my question. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk11:31, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, thanks for the help with it. In the mean time I'll go back to my old monobook for reasons that are supplied here. Basically I prefer to block IP's with anon only if the block is over 1 month. Have a nice day, and happy editing. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk11:35, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks—the ability to turn the quickbar on and off is nice. I do have one more request and if it isn't feasible I more than understand, you've already done more than I could have asked for. But would it be possible to include add tabs that would have a drop down list of templates to use whenever you are at someones talk page? Much like this version of my monobook. Again if not no big deal and thanks once more. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk19:48, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It would be no problem to add talk page templates. Generally this is a monobook for this function—I've changed the code to built an admin monobook. But I'd add this later. Kind regards, —DerHexer(Talk)20:08, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia is a worthless sh** and should be banned altogether from the internet, because it is misguiding people, especially the young ones, that believe it to be a reliable source - when the actually fact is that most if it’s stuff is stolen from other reliable encyclopedias such as the Britannica…
My opinion is that ignorance kids and hackers, that were not allowed to write into other reliable and recognized sources such as the Britannica, - are now making the Wikipedia; but what a mess they are making!
You should be able to judge sources. And Wikipedia is atm not a reliable source, that's true. But this allows you to vandalize? I don't think so. Regards, —DerHexer(Talk)19:19, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You're a great contributer to wikipedia and i feel at lot of people forget about you even though you are gret, welldone , keep up the good work Mr.whiskers (talk) 19:25, 21 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for letting me know, DerHexer (awesome script, by the way). Would you mind if you could drop me a line whenever you do a major update? I intend to keep my version forked off as I use custom CSD/block/protection rationales and plan on integrating TWINKLE and ((userblock))/((IPvandal)) with popups into the quickbar. Cheers, east.718at 03:00, November 22, 2007
If I want to add a final/only/blatant warning I'll do it. And I wanted to add one because it was deletion vandalism and a copyright violation. I've ignored the bot which can't judge vandalism better than a human like me can. Regards, —DerHexer(Talk)23:48, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well firstly, my apologies, but something strange happened. Maybe it was a lag, I dunno but when I checked the vandalism I saw only a page blanking. I figured a final warning for a probable test edit went too far. Now i see he replaced an article with a new one. Anyhow don't you think that if you decide to upgrade a bots warning then you should replace the warning rather than add a new one. Two warnings for one deed seems odd especially for a user with so little history. Theresa Knott | The otter sank23:56, 22 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I just wanted to thank you again for the modifications you provided for my use of your script, I really enjoyed the delete tools. Made clearing out CSD a breeze. I've reverted back to my old version because I noticed a few bugs that made my vandal fighting a little annoying. Sometimes when I would rollback it would leave a vandalism warning other times it wouldn't. (I was careful to use "rollback" and not "normal rollback") A7 (corp) and A7 (band) didn't work for me—I had to delete articles like that manually.
Overall it's a great script but I missed my custom templates and toolbox with it's links to AN/I, AN, RfA, helpme requests, unblock requests, a little too much. I do have a request if you have the time and inclination to do this for me. Would you be able to add your delete tools/quickbar box to my current monobook? User:KnowledgeOfSelf/monobook.js I'd do this myself if I knew how lol. I understand if you can't/don't have the time to do so. Happy editing Mr. Wizard. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk21:30, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your feedback. I'll try to fix these time out bugs (but normally if you go back in the browser's history the script goes on). I don't know what happened with A7 but I'll try to fix it, too. If you just want to use my rollback script you could add User:DerHexer/rollback.js. I want to start a stand alone version for my deletion/block/protection scripts in the future but it's a bit more difficult so that I'd leave a message on your talk page when I've finished it. Thanks and kind regards, —DerHexer(Talk)21:38, 23 November 2007 (UTC) Update: A7 fixed.[reply]
My username there is Addy btw, and it's definitely one of them vandalising it (almost certainly Syxx or Jaemi). It's very frustrating trying to get it into their heads that there's nothing pretentious, sad, or anything like that about having a UserPage!
Can I request a temp block be put on that IP by the way please, because this isn't gonna stop for a while.
I can't believe everytime I check out recent changes you are always there reverting. I think you deserve a ton of barnstars for your hard work making Wiki vandal-free. Do you use any specific tools like lupin, or do you do it manually at recent changes? Anyway, keep up the amazing work, and congratalations on your succesfull RFA! Cf38 (talk) 11:20, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Deleting all the talk page redirects as "Unecessary redirects"[edit]
Could you please point me towards the page where consensus is established for this mass deletion? As an editor who frequently 1) accesses Wikipedia by typing in the URL and 2) mispells article names often, including capitalisation, I find it rather disturbing that all these useful redirects were deleted. WP:R#DELETE makes no mention of such deletions, and WP:R#KEEP does make mention of my position. User:Krator (tc) 11:29, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Do you think that talk page redirects who are orphaned and their articles are redirects, too, are really necessary resp. useful? —DerHexer(Talk)11:44, 24 November 2007 (UTC) Btw, it's easier to move pages when the talk page redirect is deleted. Regards.[reply]
Please don't delete these as a mass campaign without establishing some consensus first. A little discretion needs to be used imho. --kingboyk (talk) 14:59, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I notice you are on WP one hell of a lot, is this like your full time hoby? anyway you seem to be doing a good job so that's cool. well done! --79.72.5.42 (talk) 03:11, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm? —DerHexer (Talk) 11:25, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry, but I think I have not noticed this one. However, I have just reverted the page to your last edit. It looks like my eyes got tired from patrolling vandalism in Wikipedia (since I'm doing this for hours straight already). I apologize for any inconvenience that may have caused you.—Preceding unsigned comment added by E Wing (talk • contribs) —DerHexer(Talk)11:38, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but I fail to see why all these redirects have to be deleted? Is there a consensus to do this? To me it seems to be pointless at best and I can in fact imagine that people end up misspelling the name of a talk page just as easy as they misspell the article name (I certainly do some times). Would you mind restoring the redirects? —Ruud19:09, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, DerHexer, Bukeparf vandalized the Wayne Static page and the VoABot II page. They were blatant vandalism and no one has done anything to revert them. The Wayne Static page still isn't back to the way it was before, which was perfectly fine. Not going to lie, it's pretty scary. I know there's a process for reporting this, but I'm a unfamiliar with the processes at Wikipedia. For future reference, could you direct me to where I would go?
Please explain why you feel that it's necessary for the Josef Mengele entry to have that text included and why you accused me of vandalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hellstomper (talk • contribs) 09:29, 2 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
These are, imo, even "better": [6][7], my old ED article or the person who spyed out my telephon number (and published it twice on my user [talk] page). ;) Regards, —DerHexer(Talk)20:03, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I put an article about EnigmaWarsaw urban game in Warsaw and it was in my opinion unjustly deleted by user Tone. I disagree with Tone's argument that there is no unbiased reference after Google test. The day afterwards you deleted the talk page for . How dare you delete talk pages??! It's dirty to erase other people's arguments. Tomazzz —Preceding comment was added at 22:22, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, you have a rule to stick to. It makes me think that if one user (writer) disagrees with a deletion and receives no reply from the second user (who deleted), then it must be an easy pray for a third person to come and sweep away the talk page, even if the talk page had been "orphaned" for one single day after article deletion. What do you suggest now? mfg, (Tomazzz (talk) 22:34, 5 December 2007 (UTC))[reply]
Tone has now accepted that the content can be verified and undeleted the article. In this situation it is understandable that the discussion page is not important. best, Tomazzz (talk) 22:51, 5 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Mr. Wizard, would you be able to modify the monobook you gave me, so that instead of giving out a "level 2" and then a "level 4" warning, could you make it give out a "level 2" "level 3" and then a "level 4"? I don't mind too much myself but I've received a few complaints about going to a level 4 warning so quickly. I thank you once more in advance. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk22:07, 6 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
The Roy Whiting talk page deletion may have been an unecesarry deletion in your opinion, but was being retained so as the history of that page could be retained. The page now cannot be archived as it had not been archived when the page was merged so useful information from the talk page has been lost, due to the deletion of the redirect page. I shall be requesting undeletion to retvieve the information lost during the unecssary deletion.--Lucy-marie (talk) 11:45, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there. You just deleted the talk page where a translation from a legal tempt was put in common to try to get the best and most accurate possible results prior to start the article proper. It would have been possibly nicer to advise prior to your deletion so that I could salvage the little work done, but I guess that is not stated in some rules, so that's ok.
The thing is that I am not particularly skilled with IT stuff and so I can't find the history of the deleted page (if that existed at all) to retrieve the small piece of work done. I would really appreciate it if you could retrieve this information for me and posted it in my talk page, it's not a big deal anyway, but I'd just prefer not starting over again. Thanks. • MountoliveJ'espère que tu t'es lavé les mains avant de me toucher20:18, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Why did you delete the Street Road Plaza talkpage? I know it was orphaned, but I had a question about if I can start an article about it and it was never answered. MikeM2010 (talk) 20:35, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, whilst browsing wikipedia I got 'new messages'. I clicked on the link and was taken to a page, apparently of my IP address, with a load of messages with 'last warning' and 'very last warning's about vandalising kids tv shows pages. :S
You wrote one of these, so I'm confused. Are these for me? Cos I thought IP addresses were unique to every person, and I've never had the desire to view the history of Teletubbies, nor edit a page on an internet site to gte back at 'The Man' or whatever the person's reasoning was.
Have a look at the bottom of your user page: This is the discussion page for an anonymous user, identified by the user's numerical IP address. 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 future confusion with other anonymous users. Registering also hides your IP address. Regards, —DerHexer(Talk)21:24, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, there. Would you please undelete and then userfy my talk:definitions of politicization of science page? I should have made a subpage in my own userspace, e.g., User:Ed Poor/definitions of politicization of science.
Please look into a violation of 3R by Penser who has reverted Alexander Graham Bell three times in a 24-hour period to his version. The issue of nationality was a "hot" topic on the talk page and a resolution in describing the scientist's nationality was decided upon. The lead paragraph is carefully written to indicate a main birthright as "Scottish" although an American citizenship was obtained. The amount of time spent in Canada is also discussed wherein all three nations have claimed Bell as their native son. FWIW, the user in question has also made some intemperate "attack" statements although I had earlier attempted to explain the issues on his talk page. Bzuk (talk) 13:11, 16 December 2007 (UTC).[reply]
Hey DerHexer! Next time you see text like this in an edit, you should block the IP as a zombie proxy that's been compromised by XRumer. Even though I have a bot that nails them, it goes into action only when they create a spam page. Cheers! east.718at 16:21, December 17, 2007
Listen men! I'm not vandalyzing the article, i'm working on it to make itself better... Did you just saw the article? There is lots of articles in the same page! You are pissing me off! Let the other people work and don't piss off... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.241.97.94 (talk) 23:47, 17 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Is there any consensus that those reversions should be made? Would be a shame to create another half-bazillion edits if the changes had to be remade. -SCEhardT00:56, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello DerHexer. I understand the reason for your rollbacks, and I'm not here to complain about that. But did you mean to revert changes such as this as well? This task was a routine chore that I don't think was controversial. – Quadell(talk) (random)01:24, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I think Polbot's edit summaries will make it easy for you to determine which edits are which (although the edits are interspersed). Good night, and all the best, – Quadell(talk) (random)01:31, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting. In order to undo thousands of edits made by a unauthorized bot (on a bot account), you have run an unauthorized bot on your main account to undo constructive changes (or will you claim that your 5000 edits in one hour were by hand?). That is, in one word, hypocrisy. The Evil Spartan (talk) 04:47, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
its called javascript, I have a button that would let me revert all of a users contribs, with the press of a single button, its part of VoA's toolkit, its not a bot. βcommand04:50, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No, are you? I find it interesting, btw, that you are so zealous to see the undoing of constructive changes to images by a bot, when your own bot has been marking them for deletion. It sounds to me like you've never been interested in actually getting the images up to date, only marking them for deletion in the first place (otherwise, why would you oppose this?) The Evil Spartan (talk) 04:53, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am no longer an admin, but the only works for users who have access to mw-rollback. (thus it would do nothing for you) My issue with the bot is that it made a huge mess adding wrong tags to a lot of pages. βcommand04:56, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
They're made by a bookmarklet which I have to add to every new contributions section: javascript:pages=document.getElementsByTagName('span');for(i=0;i<pages.length;i++){if(pages[i].getAttribute("class")){if(pages[i].getAttribute("class")=='mw-rollback-link'){if(pages[i].parentNode.innerHTML.search(/backlink/)==-1){window.open(pages[i].getElementsByTagName('a')[0].href+'&bot=1'))))) Regards, —DerHexer(Talk)07:22, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Wouldn't it be the Right Thing to block Polbot until it is fixed, rather than reverting its systematic mess-up? -- Ddxc (talk) 17:07, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, just to let you know I reverted your edit of Image:759303.138056.jpg. The rationale was added by a bot, but I checked it through and it was correct (I forgot to add it when I uploaded as I wasn't sure of the policy). Thanks for keeping watch though. :) Man from the Ministry (talk) 00:39, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the revert on the image used for the FIS Nordic World Ski Championships 2007. I thought the fair use rationale I had (along with the three copyright tags) were sufficient enough to avoid any issues with that image, but I guess that was not in the case of that bot. Nevertheless, it was appreciated. Chris (talk) 02:35, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I did...didn't really tell me anything. I have, though, reverted your edits to about 15 radio/TV logos as the F-URs are a TON better than what was there (I know, I wrote the original and it sucked) and I really can't see what is wrong with the one that Polbot added. - NeutralHomerT:C19:29, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Umm, I know in some policy it says that talk pages should not be deleted if there is a current, ongoing discussion, which there is (2 of them actually; a possible redirect and the DRV). The page just needs to be restored, not moved to userspace. - Rjd0060 (talk) 23:08, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Good man. No criticism on you, 95% of the time your deletion would have been wisest. This is the exception.--Docg23:12, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, but that's really irritating to see an orphaned talk page. Couldn't you discuss it in your user name space, in a portal or something like that? It would be very nice. :) Thanks, —DerHexer(Talk)23:17, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Not really, it is a high profile discussion. But the irritant will only last a few days until the DRV closes, at which time I imagine the article will be restored as a redirect. I can really see that as too irritating.--Docg23:20, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Can you please restore this? There's a growing consensus that the article should be made into a redirect. That's emerging on DRV and on the mailing list (even Jimbo is agreeing) - the details of that redirect were being hammered out by a number of admins on the talk page, when you deleted it. Would you mind restoring it? I don't want to reverse you myself.--Docg23:07, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Can you delete Fat stinky jew like Kyle's Mom calender that really sucks and Talk:Fat stinky jew like Kyle's Mom calender that really sucks, because they are vandalism redirects created after you reverted that page move vandalism earlier. 81.158.179.39 (talk) 12:14, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
For cleaning up after my bot's unauthorized run. . . for cleaning up after the cleaning up, when you found you had reverted too much. . . for being unceasingly civil in the midst of all of it. . . and for being willing to take needed, controversial action while running for Steward, I bestow on you a whole slew of barnstars!
Thanks for these barnstars! :) The steward election was finished before I've started to revert Polbot's changes. … Thanks for your congratulation! Regards and a Merry Christmas, —DerHexer(Talk)23:20, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
As a current or past contributor to a related article, I thought I'd let you know about WikiProject University of Florida, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of University of Florida. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks and related articles. Thanks!
I put a lot of multiple "citation needed" tags on Miss Universe article for the purpose of improving the verifiability since Wikipedia is an encyclopedia which is based on reliable sources not truth. I can see that you have reverted the changes made by an unknown user to Miss Universe, however, it did not go as far as the last edit in the article history on the 24th of December 2007 (05:24, 24 December 2007 by Alice) containing the multiple needed citation tags edit that I have put. I need your help, if possible, to revert to the edit where I put the multiple needed citation tags, and also your opinion on the matter. I have put the explanation in the discussion page of Miss Universe article why there's a need to put the multiple needed citation tags to the existing info about Miss Universe. Honestly, I'm not proficient enough to do the revert when there's a lot of intermediate edits. Thanks.
Ped Admi16:52, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for telling me. :) I still need have that impersonator on the Italian Wikipedia sorted out so I can take over that account. Hope you had a good Christmas. Regards. Acalamari18:05, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Dear DerHexer, here is a little note to say thank you for your kind support on my request for adminship which succeeded with a final result of (72/19/6).
Now that I am a sysop, do not hesitate to contact me with any queries you have. I would be glad to help you along with the other group of kind and helpful administrators.
I think I'm having a similar problem. The menu shifts from the left to around the middle of the screen and the font size increases quite a lot. Spellcast (talk) 21:04, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This was a copy/paste of a six month block notice I posted to a disruptive sockpuppeteer. I suspect the person you left that block warning to is the same person on a different account. I don't particularly mind dealing with the topic because I'm a woman, but some people would find the subject distasteful. You're welcome to discuss it with me or kick it over to WP:AN. DurovaCharge!22:18, 1 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hallo der Hexer - ich wollte mich nochmals bei Ihnen bedanken !
Die Seite über mich besteht ja immer noch, haben Sie ja doch nicht gelöscht.
Es wäre sehr nett, wenn Sie die antisemitischen Beiträge in den Diskussionsseiten über meine Mutter löschen Evelyne Marie France Neff !
Ob ich als user weiterhin zu wikipedia beitrage, weiß ich nicht, -
dahinter steckt nämlich die Frage - ob man das als Wissenschaftler überhaupt kann - und sollte ?
Ihnen wünsche ich weiterhin viel Glück und Erfolg im wirklichen Leben + im Studium !
herzliche Grüße Christophe.Neff (talk) 14:59, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
14:56, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If you're an admin please help with this- they moved the article to circumvent a discussion (there's been a sticking point over whether DOS should redirect to MS-DOS), couldn't move it back because they created a new page under DOS. 69.221.166.33 (talk) 22:47, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]