User talk:Fogster

I have archived my old talk page, which can be seen at User talk:Fogster/Archive 1. Please place new comments below (on this page), and remember to sign them with ~~~~.

This is my talk page, for leaving me comments. You can click here to leave me a comment. Please remember to sign your post with (~~~~) (just to the left of the "1" key) so I know who you are. If relevant, I'll respond on your talk page, not here.

Santa Fe Preparatory School

I am very confused about why my edit was considered vandalism. I have a long history with this school, and I can assure you that the "controversy" section has no basis in fact (not to mention that it makes no sense from a legal standpoint - private actors cannot violate the 5th Amendment of the US Constitution, only state actors can do so). It seems to have been added by someone with a grudge against the school and/or its headmaster, so I deleted it. If this was not the correct approach to take, please let me know how to go about having this inaccurate information removed from the page. Thanks!

71.213.139.224 (talk) 02:09, 1 May 2008 (UTC)kgfisher[reply]

Thank you so much for your quick and helpful response (and for the advice about how to add comments to the bottom of these talk pages - I'm very new at this, obviously!). I really appreciate it. :)

P.S. Am I out of the wiki-doghouse on the vandalism charge?

Kgfisher (talk) 04:26, 1 May 2008 (UTC)kgfisher[reply]

That explains it! For some reason when I was trying to figure out why the edit I made was reverted I ended up on that warning page for User talk:207.66.36.66, and I thought it was referring to the change I had made...

I really appreciate your kindness and taking the time to help me learn the ropes. I've used wikipedia for years, but just got up the courage to become more actively involved after working on a wiki as part of a grad school class this semester. I still have a long way to go before I really figure out what I'm doing, but I'm looking forward to being a more active part of this community in the months and years to come. So thanks so much - you rock! :)

Kgfisher (talk) 03:21, 2 May 2008 (UTC)kgfisher[reply]

SameMarriage

Hey Fogster, thanks for the heads up! Do you think Marriage#Same-sex marriage would be a more appropriate target? GlassCobra 16:33, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, tweaks made. Thanks for your help. :) GlassCobra 21:22, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

IP Reply

Hi! Thank you for your quick and helpful message. I was somewhat paralyzed with fear that my IP address was giving me a bad reputation. I'm relieved that it's probably a Dynamic IP situation so it was some clown that had the same address (since I share a connection with other people). Should I leave the comment on Cluebot's page? It might be helpful to others. Thank you again for your help! 132.238.170.145 (talk) 04:49, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

Hi! I was the user who recently vandalized the WBC (Westboro Baptist Church) Page, and I'm sincerely sorry for what I did. I felt a sudden urge of hatred, and therefore did what I should not have done, considering this is supposed to be an encyclopedia. But thanks for the warning, and I'll try my best not to do it again.

Avirji (talk) 05:04, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Satan/Lord Ambiguity

Hello,

I would argue that my edit to link the word "Lord" within the WBC page to the article Satan does not in fact constitute vandalism; this on grounds that the Biblical definition of "Lord" or "God" includes traits and qualities such as loving one another, forgiveness, acceptance, and other inclusive attributes. As the WBC quite clearly evidences, they are not in favour of inclusion, forgiveness, or loving one another. As they also quite publicly announce, they believe they are doing the work of God (read: Lord) by spreading their (inarguably) hateful message. As such, their true "Lord" must in fact be the antagonist to the "Lord" identified and worshiped by standardized Christianity. This antagonist, as literature will prove, is a being known as Satan.

Swamilive (talk) 00:52, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Postmodernism

Yes I've been watching with amusement you guys are sharper than I would credit, well some of you. You saw the thing on Wales' page, yes? The idea was to make a series of good and much-needed edits, but leave clues as to my identity (for I truly am an evil banned user, permanently evicted from Wikipedia for being rude to a senior member of the Arbcom). Anyway, I have some more material on postmodernism so I can reference it a bit more - but I may be banned very soon of course. 86.133.180.53 (talk) 16:57, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message. I was a contributor for 4 years (since 2003) to Wikipedia, and built up much of the material (such as it is) in Philosophy and particularly medieval philosophy. But what you are suggesting is against policy. I have been strictly forbidden from editing under another account (the last time I tried, on Medieval philosophy, I was blocked the same day). I would rather be honest about it. If you are an admin, you should block me. Otherwise you should report me immediately! Anyway I have tidied up the Postmodernism article quite a bit. Best 86.133.180.53 (talk) 17:26, 27 April 2008 (UTC) [edit] I shall certainly stop the edit comments - the point was simply to draw attention to the fact I was banned, and also, well, get a sense of humour! With every kind wish 86.133.180.53 (talk) 17:32, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

There. Two splendid brand new articles. Villa Carlotta and Villa Cetinale. Not a suspicion of rudeness. Hinnibilis (talk) 20:14, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

E kala mai, if I was out of line

I see you have done great vandalism fighting, so I went ahead and asked User:Acalamari to grant you rollback privileges. I hope you don't mind. I saw you missed one version in a recent revert that I believe rollback would have caught for you. And I think you can be trusted. If you don't want it, my apologies, and just mention it to Acalamari. Mahalo, Fogster. :-) --Ali'i 17:25, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I had a look at your recent reverts, and you are indeed a good vandal-fighter. I would be happy to grant you rollback if you understand it's purpose is to revert vandalism, see Wikipedia:Rollback feature. Acalamari 19:03, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback granted. :) For the record, you can either request rollback at Wikipedia:Requests for rollback or at any administrator's talk page, but I see nothing wrong with one editor suggesting giving rollback to another editor, providing that the "candidate" would make good use of the tool. I guess that, since you're already familiar with rollback, you won't need to visit Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback for additional information and practice. :) Good luck. Acalamari 19:19, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome! Acalamari 19:31, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

Thanks for the welcome. The business letter I wrote - which was the one on that page - only got a 60%. Pheonex (talk) 00:08, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

about the taunton galleria

there is a LARGE percentage of sexual offenders in the area and I am trying to make this known, for the safety of the community. I would like to repost with your permission. I promise not to be as graphic this time. Thank you for your time and consideration. 71.233.120.118 (talk) 21:39, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help

I'm back officially. Thanks for helping. Hinnibilis (talk) 06:46, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your New Userbox

So, technically, that was a constructive edit?

Damn....I think thats a first for me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 156.34.180.177 (talk) 04:04, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I do try to keep you guys on your feet...the same ol' Vandalism gets boring after awhile.

Full disclosure: I (User:Fogster) have removed an image from this comment. Fogster (talk) 04:31, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your Help on the Helicos Entry

Hello Fogster! I just wanted to thank you for your help on my entry. I'll get to work fixing it right now, and appreciate the tips you sent along. Dana75.144.182.61 (talk) 14:54, 20 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hunting

It looks like on April 20 it was semi-protected for a month, so the protection just expired this morning, and I guess no one got around yet to removing the tag. jj137 (talk) 00:38, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem. If he does vandalize again and I don't notice it, just tell me and I'll block him. (He's already been warned 4 times.) jj137 (talk) 00:52, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Toolserveraccount

Hello Fogster,
please send your real-name, your wikiname, your prefered login-name and the public part of your ssh-key to . We plan to create your account soon then. --DaB. 14:52, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

E-mail sent. :) Fogster (talk) 01:13, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

image:Barack Obama in New Hampshire.jpg

see it here -- 85.176.211.227 (talk) 11:17, 7 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

NowCommons: File:MarthaCoakley.jpg

File:MarthaCoakley.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Martha Coakley speaking at Faneuil Hall.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:Martha Coakley speaking at Faneuil Hall.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 09:06, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Accra Kotoka airport photo

Hello,

I love the photo you posted of the terminal building at Accra, Ghana. In fact, I would like to include it in my documentary on how Pan American Airways built-up airport facilities like Accra for the British in 1941-42. The license online does not state whether such use is granted. May I use it?

Thank you.

Regards,

John F Schwally Producer JFS Films, LLC john@jfsfilms.com

www.jfsfilms.com/prodSahara.htm

72.89.98.46 (talk) 16:31, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference

Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was true. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to false in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and you will still be able to manually mark your edits as being minor in the usual way.

For established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. With the script in place, you can continue with this functionality indefinitely (its use is governed by WP:MINOR). If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 19:11, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Possible removal of AWB access due to inactivity

Hello! There is currently a request for approval of a bot to manage the AutoWikiBrowser CheckPage by removing inactive users, among other tasks. You are being contacted because you may qualify as an inactive user of AWB. First, if you have any input on the proposed bot task, please feel free to comment at the BRFA. Should the bot task be approved, your access to AWB may be uncontroversially removed if you do not resume editing within a week's time. This is purely for routine maintenance of the CheckPage, and is not indicative of wrongdoing on your part. You will be able regain access at any time by simply requesting it at WP:PERM/AWB. Thank you! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 23:36, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

RC Patrol-related Proposals in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey

Greetings Recent Changes Patrollers!

This is a one-time-only message to inform you about technical proposals related to Recent Changes Patrol in the 2016 Community Wishlist Survey that I think you may be interested in reviewing and perhaps even voting for:

Further, there are more than 20 proposals related to Watchlists in general that you may be interested in reviewing. (and over 260 proposals in all, across many aspects of wikis)

Thank you for your consideration. Please note that voting for proposals continues through December 12, 2016.

Note: You received this message because you have transcluded {{User wikipedia/RC Patrol}} (user box) on your user page. Since this message is "one-time-only" there is no opt out for future mailings.

Best regards, Stevietheman — Delivered: 01:09, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Bown v. Gwinnett County School District

The article Bown v. Gwinnett County School District has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Can't find any indication that this is a particularly notable "Moment of Silence" type case. First source is a tripod page, not WP:RS. Second is entirely offline and there's no preview available on GBooks, so no way to tell if it is covered in-depth at all. Most other GHits are non WP:RS personal blogs. Other than that, I found only one source (here) that discusses the case, but one single source does not WP:GNG make.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 21:29, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Fogster. 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, Fogster. 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]

Rolling Stone College Papers moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Rolling Stone College Papers, does not have enough sources and citations as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. While this may be notable, you need in-depth coverage of the magazine from independent reliable sources to show it.(?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 19:25, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Rolling Stone College Papers concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Rolling Stone College Papers, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:26, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Rolling Stone College Papers

Hello, Fogster. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Rolling Stone College Papers".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! UnitedStatesian (talk) 21:28, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinators and help needed

Hi, if you are active on Wikipedia and are still interested in helping out with urgent tasks on our large Schools Project, please let us know here. We look forward to hearing from you.

Sent to project members 13:58, 29 August 2021 (UTC). You can opt of messages here.

ArbCom 2024 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2024 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 2 December 2024. 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 2024 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) 00:07, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]