User talk:KellyAna

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Credit goes to Pairadox for the big orange banner

Archives

1. Archive 1 August 2007 thru October 2007
2. Archive 2 November to December 31 2007
3. Archive 3 January 2008 to February 2008
4. Archive 4 March 2008 to

[edit] Nicole Walker

Listen, you. Stop altering the Nicole page with false information. I have asked you nicely. Now you are just being annoying.

[edit] Apology

I don't know how to reply on "my page." I am sorry for my comment and question on the EJ Wells talk page that were so inappropriate that they had to be immediately deleted. Your time is valuable and I should mind my own business and not bother you. NBK1122 (talk) 03:55, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Grant Chuggle now on LTA

To bring back a brief blast from what I hope will always remain the past, I have taken the trouble to create an entry at LTA for Grant, in case he returns. This way you can include the link with any AIV report to save the trouble of explaining him to another admin. Daniel Case (talk) 20:18, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Welcome back

Welcome back, hope all is well! — TAnthony^Talk 23:30, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

As well as can be expected. LOL. Good, or maybe bad, news is I went to the doctor today and found out why the mood swings and really really bad moods. I don't have allergies, I have a roaring sinus infection. Not making excuses, I did what I did, but at least I got an answer to why. How's life as an unemployed person in LA? KellyAna (talk) 23:35, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm glad that you're getting to the bottom of things. I have suffered from sinus infections myself and I know that they're no fun! Do you trust the doctor? I had to go through 3 or 4 doctors before I found one who I really felt was understanding things, and then once I found a good one, I've stuck with him for years.  :)

BTW, one other small piece of "course correction" advice. Please be very careful with what you put into edit summaries. Sometimes they can get you into even more trouble than actual comments, because they show up more quickly if someone is doing a quick scan of your contribs: KellyAna (talk · contribs). So I recommend that you be scrupulous about keeping the summaries limited to the content, and don't refer to other users at all. You're doing a good job reverting bona fide vandalism, but be careful to only use the word "vandalism" in an edit summary if you're reverting something really blatant (like the editor that changed "son" to "daughter"). That's definitely vandalism. However other edits, where people seem to be making good faith changes that are just wrong, it's not okay to refer to them as vandalism. A revert may still be appropriate, but it would be better to use some other edit summary such as "reverting unsourced material" or "fixing", or when in doubt, the nice neutral "copyediting" is always safe. :) Just giving you a heads-up, --Elonka 00:30, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

To be honest, it's too soon to tell about the doctor. Knowing that Claritan isn't going to help an infection did make sense and the "mood swing" comment didn't until I looked it up. He explained the combination of an infection with the wrong medicine and the proximity to the brain and pain effecting moods, yada yada yada.... I guess it makes sense in a way, I have been in a lot of pain but I thought it was because the world bloomed all at once without warning and then we had close to a week of rain. I don't know anymore, I just want the pain to stop and the moods to go back to normal because this isn't working.

Now, about "vandalism." I didn't think I had used that word tonight except for the guy who called Lorenzo Lamas a girl. But maybe I did.

I am sorry for what I said to you. The infection is no excuse, we should control our bodies, not our bodies control us. The head pain (my face hurts if I bite down with my front teeth), the wrong medicine, the lack of ability to breath are factors but they aren't an excuse for how I treated you. I make no excuses, I should have walked away rather than been such a bitch. I'm sorry. Please accept my apology. I can't guarantee I won't do it again, that would be a lie, but I can say I'll try not to. KellyAna (talk) 00:48, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Apology

I knew I'd misclicked and reverted your edits to the 3RR noticeboard, but I originally thought I must have accidentally hit the rollback button. I just noticed that it was actually twinkle's vandalism button, so I wanted to apologize for the edit summary even though I'd rolled myself back within a few seconds. --Onorem♠Dil 03:29, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

You're all good. Thanks for taking the time to apologize, that's really nice. A lot of people wouldn't do that. I appreciate that you did. Have a good night and thanks again. KellyAna (talk) 03:34, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Politeness

I said "polite and friendly." This doesn't cut it.[1] Please read WP:AGF. --Elonka 04:45, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

This is getting WAY TOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO MUCH. I was nice. I didn't snark. You are "holding me to too high a standard" and by your standards I'll never cut it. I'm going to go cry myself to sleep because I can't, I just can't live up to your new found standards. I was not impolite. I WASN'T. Why are you being mean? Going to cry now because YOU told me to warn him about the April Fools thing. Maybe you should have done it instead of telling me to do it.KellyAna (talk) 04:48, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

If I would have done it, I would have posted something like, "Hah, cute April Fools joke on your userpage. Too bad you can't keep it there for awhile, but it does kind of run afoul of WP:USER. Just thought I'd drop you a reminder about it. I look forward to reading more about you, the editor, when you update it!" (note: This doesn't mean I want you to copy/paste, I'm just suggesting a different kind of tone. But you gotta write whatever feels sincere to you) --Elonka 04:53, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I have no sense of humor, I hate April Fools and got a man fired for pulling an April Fools joke. I was nice to the best of my ability based on what you said to tell him, you need to stop holding me to some ridiculously impossible standard that I will never live up to. You should have done it yourself and not chastized me for not doing it your way. If it really is an April Fools joke, it's not funny. KellyAna (talk) 04:57, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I feel the same about 80% of the April Fools jokes I see.  ;) But you really have to work on your courtesy. --Elonka 05:03, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Gina Von Amberg

Thank you so much for that spelling correction! It has been bothering me for quite some time! Rm994 (talk) 18:42, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. KellyAna (talk) 19:07, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Walker Family

Why did you undo all my contributions? Paul, Fay, and Taylor need their own pages and now they are gone. RionDC (talk) 19:49, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Minor characters with little to no notability have no place in an encyclopedia. These pages were previously merged or deleted and do not belong on Wikipedia. This is not a fan site, it is an encyclopedia. When notability is not there, pages get removed. KellyAna (talk) 19:52, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Want me to block him now? Scarian^{Call me Pat!} 19:56, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Yes please. He's being uncivil and removing valid content along with creating unnecessary previously merged or deleted pages AND I am 99% sure he's a sock. Thank you. KellyAna (talk) 19:58, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Bah, I gave him a block for 24 hours. Maybe he'll calm down after that. Keep up the good work and happy editing! Scarian^{Call me Pat!} 19:59, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. I'm curious to see if NikoSwavae00 (talk · contribs) now shows up. They were editing the same brand new pages that I redirected back to the main Days page. Grant Chuggle (talk · contribs) used to delete any mention of retcons so it makes me really suspicious. I guess I'll just have to be vigilante tonight. KellyAna (talk) 20:03, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I have no idea. I didn't really pay so much attention to the content but to the fact that RionDC was doing things he shouldn't have been doing. I'll take a look and see if I can spot any similiarities. Scarian^{Call me Pat!} 16:07, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

[2] - Could be grounds in itself for an WP:SSP. But you'd need to find harder similiarities than just editing the same article. Sorry I couldn't be of any more help. Message me if you need anything else! Scarian^{Call me Pat!} 16:10, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Morgan Hollingsworth

Why was the page deleted? Reid Hochstedler 17:10, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

The page was deemed unnecessary as she is not notable by Wikipedia standards. She's a minor character and this is an encyclopedia, not a fan site. Minor characters don't warrant pages. KellyAna (talk) 17:13, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I disagree, I believe she is notable. The character has been involved in story lines which could be considered central to the show, e.g. Campus Rapist, Ford Decker death, ... I will reinstate the page and add a notability tag, if other people questions her notability I will delete the page. Reid Hochstedler 17:20, 4 April 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Reidhoch (talk • contribs)

Well, several others with more experience than you or I decided the page should be redirected to the main Days page. If you reinstate a deleted page, you will be flagged. Her page has already been deleted. Adding back a deleted page is a violation of Wikipedia policy. Consider this a warning. KellyAna (talk) 17:23, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I can agree with creating a list page for minor characters. Thank you for not being irrational. Reid Hochstedler 17:55, 4 April 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Reidhoch (talk • contribs)

[edit] Wiccan!

Uhhh, that's about all I had to say...sorry. Blizzard Beast ^$ODIN$ 19:42, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Okay. I'm confused. Am I needed to work a spell or something? KellyAna (talk) 19:52, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] April 2008

You have been temporarily blocked from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for repeated abuse of editing privileges. Please stop. You're welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Shell ^babelfish 22:18, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

You've been repeatedly asked to stop the personal attacks and maintain civility. Calling good faith edits vandalism and the dropping a vandalism warning on the editor's page isn't maintaining civility; you've been specifically asked before to stop referring to contributions you don't like as vandalism. I have blocked your account for 24 hours. When you return, please remember that you can always step away from Wikipedia for a bit if you don't feel you can respond in a calm and civil manner. Shell ^babelfish 22:25, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I support the block. KellyAna had been cautioned, by me, that it was uncivil to refer to good faith edits as vandalism.[3] Jason47a is an editor with whom she was involved in a prior dispute, and had issued personal attacks towards. She had also been blocked for those attacks.[4] Jason47a noted a page on Wikipedia, List of Days of our Lives producers and writers, which was unsourced. He added a source to the page, which was his own personal website.[5] KellyAna removed that source as unreliable.[6] Jason47a consulted me (Elonka) for advice,[7] and I counseled him that per WP:V, unsourced information could be removed by any editor.[8] He could have removed large portions of the page, but instead he simply modified some dates and removed some details.[9] Then KellyAna reverted him, called it "vandalism" in the edit summary,[10] and even worse, put a vandalism warning on his talkpage.[11] This was inappropriate on multiple levels, and KellyAna's actions violated multiple policies, from Wikipedia:Verifiability to Wikipedia:Civility and Wikipedia:Don't bite the newcomers. She has already been blocked multiple times just over the last week or so, and received cautions from numerous editors and administrators.[12] I actually think that a 24-hour block is quite lenient at this point. If KellyAna wants to continue participating on Wikipedia, she needs to abide by policies, and she needs to show that she can work in a cooperative and collegial manner with other editors. --Elonka 00:25, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Extension of block

I am extending the block to 48 hours. Jason47a informed me that someone matching KellyAna's communication style had sent him a harassing email.[13] I asked him to forward the email to me, and I can confirm that it is from the same Yahoo address which KellyAna previously used to write harassing emails to me, and that it has the same communication style. Along with extending the block, I am also disabling email for this account. If any reviewing admins would like to see the email, please contact me or Jason47a, thanks.

KellyAna, stop this, before the block is extended even further. --Elonka 00:49, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Page unprotection

I have unprotected the page since someone wanted to post an SSP report here. KellyAna, you are allowed to post here again, but please make sure all comments are in compliance with the civility policy. I may also be willing to lift the block, so that you can post at the SSP page, but I would need assurances from you that you would be able to moderate your behavior. --Elonka 02:30, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Listen, I'm okay with the 24 hour block. That's fine. I said it, I did it, I was the bitch that I am (although I didn't mean to violate policy, but it is how it is). What I'm really pissed about is I didn't "abuse the Wikipedia email system." Jason's email is available on his site and it has been since we first tussled nearly 2 years ago on NBC. Quite honestly, since I've seen the SSP, I don't think unblocking me is a good idea because I'll likely tell DJS, a one time confirmed sock puppeteer himself CarsGm5 (talk · contribs), where to "stick it." I know when I "need a time out" and with as pissed as I am, a time out until tomorrow morning is probably a good idea. Leave it for 24, I'm pissed and a bitch right now, leaving it is best. KellyAna (talk) 03:03, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Leave it for 48. I just read Daniel's comments and just cried. He is so sweet and always has been. He's right, I need the break and a block is just how it needs to be done. Or maybe unblock and see if I can control. Irregardless, I'm okay with it staying. I can piss off a lot of people but disappointing Daniel is too much. KellyAna (talk) 03:25, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Question

Is it allowable to link a video or upload pictures to prove identity? I took them, or was in the picture. It's visual proof of who I am and who Irish is and why we talk to each other off of Wiki through our other site. KellyAna (talk) 03:09, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

• Sure, you can upload a reasonable amount of fair use images. But better would be if you could come up with a plausible explanation for why you use a similar writing style, and you're never online at the same time. --Elonka 03:12, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

[14] That's Irish presenting Ali the pony. That's me next to her. KellyAna (talk) 03:16, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I don't think you're the same person. Irishlass updated the Gina Von Amberg article months ago...you made the spelling change a few days ago. If you were her, why didn't you make the change then? I may not agree with everything other editors say and do, but I will stick up for someone when they are wronged. Sorry you're having such a hard time. Rm994 (talk) 04:03, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

As I am not allowed to defend myself against DJS's accusations, why is a video of the two of us so offensive? No, Ali didn't call us by our names because until we met her here, [15] she didn't know our names. [16] Irish with Cameron. [17] Me with Cameron. It's easy to see this is taken the same day if you look at what people are wearing.

And thanks Rm994, that's really cool. KellyAna (talk) 04:07, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

KellyAna, you are allowed to defend yourself. If you are able to promise that you will present your comments in a civil way, I would be willing to unblock you, with the understanding that for the next 48 hours (or whatever remains of the block) that you will limit yourself to posting only at the SSP page and here on your talkpage. --Elonka 04:34, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you but I don't want that. I want to honestly serve my time. If I don't just because someone accused me of being a sock it's not right. It's killing me, I've already seen vandalism to the Billie Reed article so I know I can't stay to just the two pages. Okay, so removing that Billie raped Bo might not be vandalism to you, but it is to me and it shouldn't be removed because she did rape him. Besides, Daniel is right and I hate that I disappointed him. I mean, I really hate it. He's a really good guy and that just cuts that I disappointed him. I know DJS is just being vindictive and I'll prove him wrong but I'll do it when I'm allowed to edit, not under special circumstances. KellyAna (talk) 04:42, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Changed my mind

Oh, this comment is just wrong [18] when someone who I have had minimal contact with can't even offer a comment ON MY TALK PAGE without being attacked, he didn't even comment on the sock puppet stuff. That's not right and not fair. I'm used to Irish and I being accused but to accuse Rm just because he's got a random edit to a Days page and a school, that's not right. KellyAna (talk) 04:55, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

KellyAna, I think I took care of it. Not that it actually bothers me really. I sort of think its funny. Not sure what he's thinking, but as you are well aware, I am not a sock, nor are we the same person :). I would like to be involed with the Days of Our Lives cast page if at all possible. I remember lots of past stars that aren't on the list and would like to contribute. Yes, I have communicated with IrishLass, when I was new to editing. I was so mean to her. I felt like an idiot after she explained the rules. Feel better :) Rm994 (talk) 05:16, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I dont want you falsely accused, that's not right. What's so funny is DJS and Blackwatch are so socks but I've never reported them. I don't have the time to play that game but he apparently does. We've always edited the same pages, she watches my as because I'm a bitch but we were cleared before. Whatever, I can't do anything more than I've done because I'm blocked which I'm cool with. Thanks for having my back.KellyAna (talk) 05:21, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

No problem, and thank you as well. I hope we can work on these pages together to make them great. Rm994 (talk) 05:27, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

I guess it wasn't taken care of after all. Now I'm supposedly a sock. Oh well. Enjoy the rest of your weekend. Rm994 (talk) 03:01, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/KellyAna

As you may know, a request for checkuser has been filed to help clear things up in the suspected sockpuppetry case DJS24 filed against you. The checkuser found that you and IrishLass0128 are editing from the same area. An explanation about your off-site relationship with IrishLass0128 is needed in addition to why the two of you have never edited at the same time. AniMate 21:21, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re-blocked

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for Incivility, disruption, and posting private correspondence without permission. Please stop. You're welcome to make useful contributions after the block expires. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below. Elonka 02:55, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

KellyAna, it appears rather than taking advantage of your unblocked state to go back to editing articles, you instead used it to post uncivil comments at the SSP report,[19] the CheckUser page,[20] and here on your own talkpage. You also appear to have posted what may or may not be someone else's private correspondence. When you posted it at User talk:Daniel Case, I deleted it, and you then reacted by posting it again here at your own talkpage. Both versions have been deleted, and removed from page history. As Daniel Case is an administrator, he will be able to look into the history and still see it. I am also willing to forward any emails that I have received from you or any other accounts associated with yours, to any admins that wish to view them for themselves.

Your account is currently blocked for one week, though depending on how discussions go at the SSP page, this may be extended to indefinite. It appears that based on discussions at the SSP page, your block has now been extended to indefinite. Please find something else to do on the internet. We are trying to build an encyclopedia here, and your assistance is no longer desired. --Elonka 03:24, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sock puppetry block

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for repeated abuse of editing privileges. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below.

See Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/User:KellyAna(2nd),User:Irishlass0128(2nd) for evidence. Jehochman ^Talk 03:17, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:Sami and EJ.png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Sami and EJ.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:03, 24 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Car5ly85/Randy

She was actually telling the truth and the reason that i know this is because she's my cousin and she's doesn't lie to anyone. You probaruly had issues with her in the past but she doesn't like being called a lier. --Mkk08 (talk) 03:23, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Lucas From DAYS

So when somebody else change Lucas' last name to Horton, it's OK. But when I do it, something gets said to me. WTF IS UP WIT THAT?! The King Gemini (talk) 00:46, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:Stefano 190x143.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Stefano 190x143.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 05:02, 14 June 2008 (UTC)