User talk:Nixeagle

My account on the english wikipedia, I am an administrator there. (with 1000 others) en:User:Eagle_101.

Congrats on becoming a sysop! I expect you to set Talk:Spam blacklist as your homepage with immediate effect :D I think you'll be an asset here, good luck. --Majorly 19:22, 10 February 2007 (UTC) Reply

Would you please clarify its relevant to WMF/meta more closely? In this circumstance it is so vague it could be a speedy candidate in my opinion. --Aphaia 02:19, 12 February 2007 (UTC) Reply

I think I goofed -- see Talk:Spam blacklist#nolico.com. --A. B. ^(talk) 03:32, 12 February 2007 (UTC) Reply

Already done. Eagle 101 03:34, 12 February 2007 (UTC) Reply

There's some discussion on the Artistic Language page regarding Langmaker. I've looked at the reasons for blacklisting it here and I'll agree that for independent conlangs it should be considered spam or better said, self-promotion, but it is a great resource and nexus for con-langers. Is there a way to "protect" it, limiting the link to Artistic Language or Constructed Language articles? I appreciate your response. en:User:BoLingua 00:48, 16 February 2007 (UTC) Reply

Yeah, for the time being I've listed it on the WP:WHITELIST, it should be fine for now. There is discussion going on at WT:WPSPAM about this. Feel free to hop in.

Thanks for the heads-up, and apologies for the delay in responding. I've replied on that page. Thanks again! Flcelloguy (A note?) 02:24, 19 February 2007 (UTC) Reply

Really bad :-) Many bots and many users spamming their site. IIRC a user is waiting for a toolserver account to set up an antispam-bot. I don't think anybody will watch a counter spam channel :-/ (also, I definitely left the project).
I proposed the activation of the ConfirmEdit extension for anonymous users adding new URLs a month ago, but nobody replied... Thank you anyway! --.anaconda 17:48, 19 February 2007 (UTC) Reply

Hello, I wrote this on[[1]] As you can see I have had a few run ins with A.B. For some reason we have had some arguments. I have written comments and was warned not to attack for these comments on [[2]] They keep vanishing. I have been warned and it has been documented. I just want all editors to have all the facts. I just have a problem with someone with knowledge or power in wiki to abuse the system. A well respected editor 3 months ago cleaned up the articles and warned of blacklisting these sites if they spammed us (wiki) again. Since that warning the links was not put back on wiki. I have watched how A.B. handled the situation and like I said earlier he wouldn't or these sites wouldn't be blacklisted if A.B. didn't have something against the user. Here is what was written on the page above. That is the problem with wiki nobody will take the time to review the information before commenting and writing. Look at you. You said Jan. 7th hasn't been 3 months. The last time this website had posted an external link was Sep. 13th which is well over 3 months. I am not going to sit an argue. I simply know that this user has a history of trying to get sites blacklisted and A.B. had pulled up everything he could find and had them blacklisted. All I am saying is the webmaster has not made any spam attempts for these 2 sites since Sep. 13th or longer. Please help uphold standards. Please look at all the information before commenting. We don't need you making choices without actually reviewing content. P.S. Editors will continue not to like me. I am and will continue holding the highest standards for wiki. I am sorry if you oppose the way I work. But if you follow guidelines and read the material properly we can get along ok. If editors fail or lack research I will need to challange them. My goal is to make wiki a better place and I hope yours and other editors hold the same standards.