Portal:Novels/Selected article/2

Holy Crap

What the hell did you and 88 do while I was away? I guess we don't have to worry about FoJ anymore.

Also, never noticed you were from Ottawa. Didn't know I had run across a fellow... Ottawean? Ottawite?

Anyway, good editing! --Thaddius (talk) 18:48, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Careful, someone will now think we're friends in person/sockpuppets of each other and file a complaint! BMW(drive) 18:59, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

I'll admit that one user (and I won't say who) probably needled her just a little too much, and those of us who were trying to help her got "lumped in". We all know she'll be back, and it will be obvious when it happens. While I usually admire passion, she needs some guidance to become a good editor. BMW(drive) 11:09, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you again. Do you know if I am the 'Mr. T' that Weisheit keeps referring to in comments like this one? Or was there someone actually named Mr. T that she dealt with? --Thaddius (talk) 15:41, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Short version of my reply on his talk page: No, it's someone else :P BMW(drive) 22:32, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Confused

You've just given a hearty welcome to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:ChubmasterFat

A user whose only contributions were vandalism and who has been blocked by another admin. Is there something the rest of us are missing perchance?The Thunderer (talk) 16:18, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Short version of my reply: even donkeychasms deserve a welcome every now and then :) BMW(drive) 22:33, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Keeping your coin

Hey, thanks for the Canadian coin in the Everyking RfA.  :-)

How is life (mis)treating you? Ecoleetage (talk) 03:00, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Hey, it is good to know that the Wiki culture of insults and false accusations is alive and well. I was just accused of sockpuppetry in an AfD debate because some new editor that I greeted as part of the Welcoming Committee voted in my favour. Incredible, eh? Keep in touch! Ecoleetage (talk) 12:32, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Hello, Thank you very much for welcoming me... :) Sicenrely, --RockandDiscoFanCZ (talk) 23:23, 28 August 2008 (UTC) .

You're quite welcome! BMW(drive) 23:32, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

and thank you for the answer ;) :D —Preceding unsigned comment added by RockandDiscoFanCZ (talk • contribs) 23:51, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

Help!!!!!

Hi, yesterday I wrote an article about "The Poetto" (The beach of Cagliari Sardinia) which is a perfect translation of the article "Poetto" in the italian wikipedia. The problem is that I didn't put any references or source cause I haven't found anything in English, an other user told me to link source/references in Italian would be ok due to the lacking of article in English and so I did but the template that say the article hasn't got any source or references is still there, I'm not English I'm Italian, and I spent an entire day to translate that article so I really don't want it to be removed, the italian version is ok, there are no template or any kind of advice so I suppose my English version is okay too..... please Help!!!!!!! Lawrencerock (talk) 07:16, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Ryerson University Page

I think you editors need to back off and not attempt to bully new wiki users. I have provided valid reasoning for my edits, provided edit summaries, only to have them undone without explanation repeatedly and then accused of starting an edit war when the other guy is undoing and not providing explanations. I take offense to being called a vandal and think that is not civil at all. Just because you are both editors does not give you the right to gang up on less established writers. How do I get someone blocked from editing? because undoing my edits and just crying VANDALISM without justification is NOT RIGHT.

Oh and my edits? I took out the section talking about Ryerson Publishing House, which has no affliating with the university besides its name, and the long history about egerton ryerson, because the history does not talk about how he started ryerson. He has his own article for everything non-university related. I really think you guys are just adding fluff to the article for no reason. It's ridiculous.

Musicmogul09 (talk) 15:16, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Whoa. First, see my reply on the Ryerson talk page. My role when I try mediate a dispute that has been filed in the Wikiquette forum is to help, not bully. If you're a new editor, it gives us a chance to start you off in the right direction. First, ALWAYS discuss major changes/deletions and gain consensus before single-handedly deleting large chunks of information from an article - or else it is, indeed, vandalism. Second, please be CIVIL ... edit summaries are PERMANENT, and referring to someone as a "dumbass" on a permanent record can usually get you banned. You will also be more likely to get your suggestions through if you're cooperative, rather than being combative. "Consensus", "Civility" and "Assume Good Faith" are the main keys. PS: I had no relationship with that article until this morning, even though I know a lot about the subject. BMW(drive) 16:27, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I can see that consensus, civility and assume good faith are important. BUT I think it's important NOT to automatically accuse somebody of vandalism and assume they are not acting in good faith. And to try to intimidate them because you (in your expect opinion, contrary to the whole wiki thing from what i hear) think they are vandals and you try to get them banned. Look at the summaries and note that I DID put comments in the history section. These were IGNORED. Also, no comments were put in reponse to any undo changes. Just because I don't know how to fill out a wiki: etiquette comment, and i don't know that editors assume vandalism over edits they don't agree with because they are biased, doesn't mean i should be intimidated. What you are doing is limited wiki to a SMALL NUMBER of people who likely are ALL HOMOGENOUS in thought.

Maybe I should edit more, and then GOAD new editors into getting themselves banned because I know the ins and outs of the system.

• If you don't want new editors to be combative, maybe you should communicate more rather than undoing without comment, and accuse them of vandalising and threaten to get them banned*. I'm not saying that was you, but it is what happened. Now it has escalated into a pointless edit war because an experienced editor CHOSE to NOT show consensus, civility and good faith. Musicmogul09 (talk) 20:49, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

:Thanks for the reply, and I understand that you're both pissed off and possibly (slightly) confused. First, whether or not you properly create an edit summary or not, any time you delete massive blocks of text, it will raise suspicions of vandalism ... in fact, there are some automated bots that will AUTOMATICALLY revert, and warn you for vandalism for exactly that infraction. Secondly, I personally believe that EVERYONE has something to add to Wikipedia (and have often been badly burned by defending this right). I personally may be chock full of useless information, but I am not an expert on every subject - as such, everyone has more to add than I do. The only complaint is how to do those edits. An article that has contained certain information for months/years/weeks has attained some degree of consensus, so massive edits run contrary to consensus - as such, I recommended to you that you discuss massive changes in advance. Whether you like the fact that your undiscussed edit was reverted never gives anyone the right to act uncivilly .. in fact, I think they were pretty tame with you, all things considered. Look, I think you have a lot of good things to do and say on Wikipedia, just please, for the sake of the entire project (and your own blood pressure) just do things the right way ... and yes, your suggestions may not be accepted, but at least they've been heard (like on any courtroom drama...and trust me, this place is full of drama) BMW(drive) 22:32, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Dinosaur Island (2002 film)

Got lucky. Its a keep... barely. I'll keep my eyes open for more sources. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 23:12, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry??

Hi regarding to that...

I had username Aradic-en before this unified login was enabled. On commons i was registered as "Aradic-es". (that was because I did not know that can use same name on different wikis. That is the reason not any sort of sockpuppetry. I ca no longer (since middle of July) contribute as "Aradic-en" but exclusively as "Aradic-es"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Aradic-en

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Aradic-es

--Añtó| Àntó (talk) 05:16, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Re: Thrindel-Zell disagreements

I'm not reporting him for anything, nor am I going to go around spreading any suspicions to anyone who will listen because it's just that, a suspicion. His actions make me question his motives, is all. I don't want to slander or defame any Wikipedians here. I just wish he would stop being so defensive on the CAD talk pages. It's getting hard to find a second opinion over there, because he seems to have scared off the newbies. Zell65 (talk) 00:00, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Are We There Yet?

Hi Bwilkins. I just joined Wikipedia on Saturday so I don't know how to do very much yet. Please tell me if I did this wrong! You asked on my talk page Does anyone have an episode list for Are We There Yet? I know where there is one, at http://tv.msn.com/tv/series-episodes/are-we-there-yet-world-adventure/?ipp=40. I'm sorry, I don't know how to write it so you can just click on it and go there. Teenly (talk) 13:31, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

I guess it was easier than I thought! Teenly (talk) 13:32, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Awesome! I'll work with that! BMW(drive) 13:58, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

I have not seen the ones after 49 so they must be new. I have not seen TJ and Tristan or Julia and Joanna either. They are not in the Wikipedia article yet. Their last names are at Internet Movie Database http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1170040/. Thank you for the welcome! I like to learn things myself but if I get really stuck I will ask you. Teenly (talk) 14:11, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

???

21 external links, prove it to yourself and read them. They are all right there. He's in all the magazines, he's on all the mixtapes, he was incremental in launching the careers of Bishop Lamont, The Game, Strong Arm Steady. He literally CREATED the mixtape game on the westcoast and has since been expanding, anyone in hip hop knows this information my friend, and the 21 links has all that information at your fingertips. Prove that he is actually someone? This man works with Dr. Dre, works with countless producers that I am sure YOU have never heard of, yet produce multi-platinum material that you most likely listen too. Why don't you do some research and edit yourself? I have put all the information as a fan would onto the entry as he more than deserves to be on wikipedia as the artists that he broke in the westcoast have there own full length page. Dont you think that it would make sense to have a legend on wikipedia so his fans can look him up on this site? I have barely used wikipedia, I personally don't have a week to sit there and edit and edit and edit a page until it is up to your standards. It is 100% accurate to the information provided, and you yourself should cite the links, cite the interviews, cite rolling stone, Urb, XXL, Vibe and the countless other magazines he has appeared in, and write the article. Thank you. --Journaldiction (talk) 20:07, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

AFD

I noticed your comments on WP:WQA and thought you might want to weigh in on this AFD. Dreadstar † 03:38, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

DJ Warrior

Hey, I have now included all the references on the entry, it is 100% official from the many many credible sources floating about on the internet. If you could please indicate that it stays on Wikipedia as the information is all referenced and 100% official from credible sites and sources, that would be great. Thanks so much, and have a good weekend! --Journaldiction (talk) 21:21, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

New Messages

Hello, DangerousPanda. You have new messages at ESanchez013's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

←Signed:→Mr. E. Sánchez ^{Get to know me!} / _{Talk to me!}←at≈:→ 10:16, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

RhoLyokoWarrior

Could I get your help with this user? I simply cannot reason with him. See his latest edit summary. Since it's fair use I could revert all day and night, but he's just going to become more and more belligerent each time. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 04:53, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Never mind, another user dealt with him. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 04:55, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Re: User_talk:Collectonian#page_blanking_.28almost.29.3F

is it gratifying for you to be nasty and belittle people who are still learning? if it was your intention to make me feel inferior, you failed.Coffee joe (talk) 10:06, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

How about re-read the post with a different tone. I was politely advising you of what happened so that you, a new user, can understand. I also left you a welcome on your Talk page, so "Welcome". BMW(drive) 11:12, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

i did re-read it, and as i see you're a professional wordsmith, i shouldn't need to explain to you why the tone of it was condescending. while it was on an other user's talk page, i don't understand your implication on my talk page that i should not have responded to it, because it was said to me. i didn't respond on that user's talk page because i didn't want to clutter up her page with a dialogue between you and me. as for my response to what you said, i may be guilty of responding in kind. but the bottom line is, i was having a civil dialogue with a user and got smaked by a third party. while i might have responded in a better way, i do feel that a responce was warrented. i'm willing to admit my mistakes and proverbially shake hands. are you? Coffee joe (talk) 00:24, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

I am not responsible for how you wrongly "interpreted" something. I think that what you SEEM to neglect is the big WELCOME at the top of your TALK page, and who put it there. If I was trying to blade you somewhere, would I have been friendly at the same time? I also, on that same person's talk page, defended your actions overall..where does that fit into your equation that I was being less than cordial? I am one of the FIRST people to welcome and help new users...and although we have a policy about "not biting the newbies", how about "not biting those that help the newbies from the start"? BMW(drive) 11:04, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi -- I wanted to thank you for helping me with my etiquette problem. I think I've spent too much in academia and have a lower tolerance for bad manners than many other editors do. I really appreciate your providing third-party perspective. Dealing with the alerts is a great service for the community. best, Aryder779 (talk) 16:32, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Template: Vague time

I once saw a guideline about this when browsing through the Manual of Style. I am currently reaserching where I saw that. If I cannot find it, I will remove the template. In the mean time it seems Wikipidia is behind me because the template has been semi-protected. So far I have found this and this. In addition, these words make a statement less clear, which is always bad. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ipatrol (talk • contribs)

FYI

I have already asked Arbitrator User:FayssalF to review that WQA thread.[1] Perhaps we can both wait for him to mediate this dispute, before taking further steps. I respect his opinion and will follow whatever guidance he provides. It is usually a good idea to avoid starting a drama when matters can be solved via direct discussions.

Additionally, to answer your question, Professor Dolores Umbridge was a character in Harry Potter OotP and DH. Jehochman ^Talk 19:35, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

WP:OUT or WP:OUTING

Hi, I tried to understand the context of 'outed' in you comments, and finally think I got it! Did you mean WP:OUTING instead of WP:OUT? 216.80.119.92 (talk) 20:40, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

I have set up a fresh discussion thread on my talk page regarding this matter. Feel free to comment or lurk. Jehochman ^Talk 04:28, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Fixed it to WP:OUTING ... my bad, sometimes I just should not type before coffee :) BMW(drive) 12:19, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

Your comment on my Talk page

Hi, I edit quite a few articles. What edit summary and article are you talking about? Longchenpa (talk) 01:34, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Okay, looked into it. This is user ZuluPapa. Yet again.

ZuluPapa doesn't like my edits to the Jetsunma Ahkon Lhamo page over the last year or so. There's a biography by Random House about JAL that ZuluPapa didn't want used in the article because it has some pretty negative information. JAL is a Buddhist Lama who was arrested 1996 for beating a monk and nun, has a swimming pool, three houses, and a salary of $100k a year. These facts are inconvenient.

ZuluPapa put in an RfC insisting that JAL is not a public figure, and thus this biography should not be included. Eventually Mike Godwin weighed in on the subject: The book is in. Then, ZP said Mike Godwin has a WP:COI on this issue.

ZuluPapa went to the Wikipedia talk:Biographies of living persons page to work to get this book removed there, as well as to the Biographies Noticeboard, pressing a for policy changes that could get this information removed. ZuluPapa asked Protonk to weigh in. Protonk did, and also found that JAL was a public figure.

ZuluPapa did sweeping edits on the article, removing anything negative that was from that book -- but kept everything that was positive from it.

Then, ZuluPapa preemptively cited me for a 3RR before I'd made a single change. My changes were normal edits.

ZuluPapa was informed by Blanchardb that "None of these edits can be even remotely regarded as reverts." But ZuluPapa accused me elsewhere of multiple reverts, even though this was not true.

When outside editor Ricky81682 stepped in, [2], ZuluPapa accused him of being uncivil.

ZuluPapa has complained about me in every possible forum. It's like a tour of sorts. I get to see every possible venue of complaint on WP. But it has nothing to do with me and everything to do with ZuluPapa wanting to control the editing of the Jetsunma Ahkon Lhamo article. My guess is, based on ZuluPapa's edits -- which Zenwhat calls a "whitewash," and I heartily agree -- ZuluPapa is a student of JAL's, with a vested interest in removing anything negative.

Is there a point where this becomes harassment? Because this has been going since, jeeze, the first veiled threat from ZuluPapa to me "I haven't investigated, however there are wiki procedure to exclude folks from contributing to articles" was December 16 of last year. Longchenpa (talk) 10:18, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

I probably should have created the Talk page on the Jetsun article, but it didn't seem necessary since ZuluPapa was already aware that Alyce Zeoli's title was given by her students and not the lineage. As soon the Talk page was created, yes, we confirmed what we both already knew. *shrugs* Longchenpa (talk) 21:08, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

A notice

Hi Bwilkins,

Please have a look at my opinion here. If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact me again. Thanks. fayssal - Wiki me up^® 02:04, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

I would say that you and I are on the exact same page on this fayssal, and that it helps when we all read the whole background. As an uninvolved, non-admin editor who only got involved through my patrolling of WP:WQA, I tend to do a lot of background reading, especially comparing what proof was provided, vice what was left out. My only (minor) disagreement with your conclusion: the user had been outed once. Editors then kept re-outing him by linking his IP address...therefore I do not blame the editor for continuing to desire anonymity by changing IP addresses. Heck, if I was being chased, I would keep trying to hide too. In addition, although cursing is never to be condoned, I sure don't blame him/her for getting a little bit p'd off and finally saying "leave me the $$$$ alone!" and filing in WQA as again, after being chased, I would do the same thing. Again, I'm glad we have a similar analysis (although mine was much less verbose :-P ) BMW(drive) 09:31, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Re outing. That's true and I hope I was clear enough... any further outing will be faced with an immediate block. Thanks for your help. -- fayssal - ^{Wiki me up®} 09:50, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

ORISSA VIOLENCE

The Page is under Mediation. However, several POV edits have been made during the past 72 hours.

Jobxavier (talk) 19:32, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Vague Time Template

I have created this essay and found this style guidline. I also created the inline template {{Template:Specific time}}. --Ipatrol (talk) 03:42, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Re: Wall of Shame

Thanks for the heads up. I'd still like to hear from an administrator, but I don't want the wall of shame to personally offend anyone. I figured that, since there's already a list of IP adresses that have been used for vandalism, that this wasn't really a big deal. I tried to be civil about it though, and stated exactly what I meant by it. I certainly wouldn't liken it to "hanging deer heads in my library" or "outing sex offenders upon release from prison." I try to make it clear that if someone is generally making constructive edits, and the vandalism that I will take their names off. Their name on the wall is not permanent, as outlined on my user page under "Policies."

You've even been advised that your WoS is the antecedent to the behaviour by at least one other editor, so I'm not sure why you raise a WQA with a tone of surprise.

I've actually never gotten any feedback about the WoS, (other than threats from Faethon Ghost) so I assumed it wasn't bothering anybody. Also, I don't really see how I mishandled the situation with User: Faethon Ghost. It would help to know what I did wrong, so I can avoid it in the future. I didn't add him to the wall of shame for personal reasons, and not to provoke him. Only because of the repeated vandalism of Paul Byrd, List of pigs and my user page. Faethon Ghost 1) did not seem to be too sorry about his vandalism 2)the vandalism was less than a month ago and 3)Faethon Ghost really hasn't done too much since then, so I don't have much to go by.

I would think that you should post an apology on the talk page of EVERY editor on your Wall once you have removed it. Feel free to say "although I will continue to monitor for continued possible vandalism, I do actually look forward to your positive edits in Wikipedia"

1) Most of the users are just sockpuppets that are banned indefinitely 2) I don't feel an apology is needed. I didn't say anything bad about them, didn't condemn them, didn't personally attack them, and didn't pass off any false information.

I don't see the Wall of Shame as anything important, but I promise as soon as I get a complaint from an admin I will tear down the wall. :) --Friginator 21:34, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Update: The comments you left on my talk page are disturbing. If you truly feel offended, then I think an admin is needed. If this is going to upset people, then I need someone with authority to step in and make a final descision. I don't want other users losing their respect for me over a little wall. I'm sorry. I'm not asking for an AN/I, just an outside opinion. The last thing I want is to log on and find that I've been blocked or banned. I'm unsure of which noticeboard this would fall under, but you seem to be more knowledgable in that area. Thanks. --Friginator 22:45, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I DON'T want to argue about it. At this point I just wanted to know if it was going to get me in trouble. I don't really think it's a big deal, but I'm not an admin. I don't like confrontation, I like knowing if I'm doing something wrong. I wasn't trying to confront you, I was just asking for help regarding an official descision. I'm taking the wall down if it's going to cause this much trouble. Sorry if I offended you. --Friginator 00:10, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

s and d

Yep, I noticed that just as I was hitting [Save]. Not the first time I wished I could edit an edit summary. As typos go, it was pretty funny. Guettarda (talk) 22:15, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I'd say a "Wall of Shame" is out of line. You did the correct thing in telling him to take it down. You wouldn't have been out of line to take it down yourself, but a gentler touch tends to be far more successful. Strange folks. But hey, if you're masochistic enough to hang around WQA... ;) Guettarda (talk) 00:39, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Hey!

I have a request for you, an admin deleted my entry on DJ Warrior, but restored it to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Journaldiction/DJ_Warrior so a proper decision can be reached, considering it is properly referenced and notable. Is it possible that you could leave a quick comment on the discussion saying that you approve of it being kept on wikipedia? Would greatly appreciate it, would be a big help. Thanks, --Journaldiction (talk) 23:08, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dj warrior

Please refrain from making sarcastic comments like "are weeks ever short in your part of the world". Requests for "hold (1 week)" are not entertained at AFD — all AFD discussions are open to debate at all times and for at least five days from listing. Thank you. Stifle (talk) 08:38, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

You're commenting on something from 11 days ago that has already been discussed? Wow. "Sarcasm" was not "incivility" in this case, but thanks I do understand AfD. Have a good one. BMW(drive) 11:34, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikiquette

Sorry about giving you a hard time. You were just an innocent bystander. In my view it was never more than an editing dispute that needs time to get worked out. Malcolm Schosha (talk) 11:10, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I have always acknowledged it was content-related, not civility-related (and I have a thick skin) BMW(drive) 13:12, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Civility template

Hey, you tried (albeit a little belatedly). As a Quaker, I always walk a peaceful path; but the Topgun fella doesn't seem to feel he's obliged to any such weenie rules; I guess "Mercy is for the weak!" --Orange Mike | Talk 17:47, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

User:Allknowingallseeing

I was just trying to keep the record thorough; I wasn't aware that follow-up of that sort was discouraged. What should I do when he continues to harass me? Just put up with it? - JasonAQuest (talk) 19:45, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Userbox needed

I don't use userboxes much but you really need one mentioning what model BMW you drive. After all, it's in your unofficial username/username signoff. At least, you should mention it briefly on your user page. Chergles (talk) 15:16, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh, you did mention it on your user page! The part that fooled me was the "BMW drive" (drive) part. Thanks for the catchy reply (wife)! Chergles (talk) 22:37, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

You discovered a loophole! Journalist writes something. Wikipedia uses it, calling it a reliable source! Chergles (talk) 22:38, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Question about recent comments

Just out of curiosity, why did you cross out "I have yet to find any real evidence that Frig is or has been one" on my talk page? Is there something I'm not aware of? --Friginator 20:22, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for telling me. I had no idea that it had happened so many times. --Friginator 20:17, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Editor Review

Regarding this comment, serialcomma was mad that a 3RR and ANI report that he opened, where I was involved, did not turn out the way he wanted to. I had the thought of just removing his comments because they were personal rather than objective, but I didn't. Grsz^talk 13:25, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

I understand, and could easily read the "personal POV" in the post, I merely wanted to clarify that an uncivil edit on any page (be it a Talk page, an AN/I, etc) is still an edit, and is still uncivil. That's all I was saying :) BMW(drive) 13:29, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Point taken, thanks. Grsz^talk 13:29, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Ok....

I had no idea that a blog wasn't a reliablr resource for somebody. Ok, thats fine, but I'm kinda new trying to learn all these policies, so thanks for the info and happy editing.

HairyPerry 15:54, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Miroj

Saying thanks for the very pleasant article on my page. FINALLY a person who is articulate and friendly. I was looking for that person in Wikipedia and starting to scratch my head quite a lot. I have a very "intellectual" styled humour. Things like "Turing Test", "SETI" and old school buzz words appear in my comments. Only the broad minded laugh their heads off.

There are some interesting people in this realm. Some of them failed to carry on a conversation with many questions. It seems that you take it or leave it, or as I like to say in the Leary manner "sit down, shut up and assimilate". I have been around and more than anything else I like a good old fashioned brain storm. Sometimes all I get is storm.

Your invitation to discuss things is most welcome.

I like the idea that people still like to stop and talk things over. Miroj (talk) 10:59, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the thoughtful reply. Sometimes, the "community" does call for "sit down and shut up" to all of us - there are days we're a "hippie commune" and some days we're the "Borg Collective". Funny how community has the two extremes. Even Wikipedia, in the midst of its rules, has the WP:IAR rule. We're told to be "bold in our edits". It's weird at times, but I would rather point out ways to improve, rather than put a "you're bad" template some days. I was surprised someone used the Turing Test analogy, and was humoured by it. Unfortunately, I do agree that the article in question probably did not belong on Wikipedia ... in fact, it's the kind of information I would build a website for, put ads that generated me some $$$, and maybe even a $5/year membership to access the information. BMW(drive) 11:33, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

I have a long long way to go but I have some very strong views on the cost of information. Richard Almeida in the UK literally created a global standard by giving away complete sets of information on a very specific task. There was an enormous flow-on effect. Some of it commercial and some of it social. I am very much aware of OLPC and MIT's free-uni. WP really needs to go more technical if it wants to retain the upper levels of usage. As a test case, the articles I created are on the thin edge of relevance. I wanted to know where the limit was. Is it in global volume or in social meaning. There is much to revisit. Some of the very first articles which were trashed for being sloppy, are now backed by many media (TV, newspaper) articles. But now I dont feel like it. Forgive me for thinking that people comment without knowing a topic or what it means. I take the broad view that if you can touch every corner of the globe with your excellence then you are special if not WP notable. Certainly I do not have a high bar on what is relevant - I have found over the years that nothing is junk and I live by that. Miroj (talk) 11:47, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Goodbye Earl

I'm not claiming ownership of the article at all. I simply removed the information because there is no source to back up the claim that it was similar to Thriller, and it's perfectly acceptable on Wikipedia to remove unsourced info. If you can find a reliable source that says that it looks like Thriller, then you can re-add the info. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 18:35, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Took 2 seconds, I added one ref. Remember, if it doesn't detract from quality/validity the article, there's no reason to remove. Have a great weekend BMW(drive) 19:19, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Redirect pages

Hi! I redirected it correctly. But User:PrinceOfCanada-HG reverted all my edits and said you're vandalisng the articles. But i only wanted to put it in alphabetical order. United States-Azerbaijan relations is not alphabetically ordered. Azerbaijan-United States relations is correct.. Please put that article's name in alphabetical order for me. Thanks! --Turkish Flame ^☎ 12:50, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

I would suggest that you cannot rename that article without consensus, as the MOS doesn't specify alphabetization of this. BMW(drive) 13:08, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi

I welcome constructive criticism, not rudeness. In the future, please either be polite on my talk page or don't post there at all. Thanks. Prince of Canada ^{t | c} 20:52, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Reply as copied from his Talk page; a cursory glace at which will speak volumes of his misuse of Huggle and misunderstanding of policy: "Nothing unpleasant/impolite in my above statement. An awful lot of us were really concerned about the huge amount of poorly-used warning templates, Biting the newbies, and a bunch of other things going on - and we were exasperated. There are at least a hundred bad warnings, etc. I certainly don't like your comment on my own talk page. Re-read the above. Look at the the comments that you ended up creating from other editors on the articles, and even here on your talk page. You went on a tool-based spree of (yes, I will say it) "vandalism", all as a very well-meaning attempt and being the anti-vandal. As you now know (I hope) there's a fine line between good and evil, and your first day was waaaaay on the wrong side of that line. Slow down a bit, and become a good vandal-fighter" BMW(drive) 14:16, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Can you please take a look at this?

Just gave the OK to the disambig page. Hey, take a look at this: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lost Hills Books -- my go-round for article saving. Thanks! Ecoleetage (talk) 21:32, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

D'oh! I was away, but happy to see it worked! BMW(drive) 14:17, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

The Rosetta Barnstar

		The Rosetta Barnstar
		I award you this barnstar for indeed making a silk purse out of a sow's ear. Amazing job at the AfD. You pushed back the snow and brought out the sun. Your thrashing through the article to find something worth saving is nothing if not remarkable. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 21:39, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Non Admin closure....

With the nom withdrawing his nomination, how does on close an AfD? See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Frederic Colier. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 21:47, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

A Few Issues

GabrielVelasquez, rather than use "templates" that can occasionally be construed as negative, I wanted to leave you a short note regarding a few issues I have noticed. First, please be civil to other editors. WP:CIVIL requires that we discuss EDITS and not EDITORS. Simply because another person disagrees with your view does not give anyone the ability/right to call others names, disparage their work, or be otherwise uncivil. Second sockpuppetry is one of the cardinal sins on Wikipedia. Tossing accusations around is not something to be done casually. If you honestly have a belief that someone is a sockpuppet, follow the process here or stop making accusations. We have people in Wikipedia who do a good job tracking socks, so blatant accusations of sockpuppetry can be construed as very uncivil as it is truly an insult. Please also note that just because 2 or 3 (or more) people disagree with you, does not mean they are all the same person - many people disagree with me all the time in real life :-) and I can guarantee they're not schizophrenic. Everyone has a right to edit Wikipedia and add valid, cited, referenced information whether "experts" or not. All articles have a right to a WP:NPOV. By working via consensus, article can obtain and keep Good Article status ... edit warring does not help. If you want to further discuss, please feel free to do so on my Talk page. BMW(drive) 12:21, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

you're right, I don't disagree on any particular point, but did you send this same message to the person on the other side of the incident (point one specifically: "you don't know any physics," "you're a POV pusher" [edits not editors, right?]) where I was attacked not my edits, or should I be asking how much he put in your paypal account to ignore his behavior but message me instead? GabrielVelasquez (talk) 19:00, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

also, do you happen to know someone with experience what would not mind checking where the edits of J. Langton (talk) end and the edits of Icalanise (talk) begin, and how much over lap there is (oh, of course) if any. GabrielVelasquez (talk) 19:38, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

I resent the suggestion that I'm being paid off in any way. I responded to a WP:WQA request to investigate into civility issues. Don't attack the people who are trying to help. To be advised that you were "pushing your POV" is not uncivil in my books, especially when it appeared that there was, indeed, a POV issue occurring. If you have a concern about someone being a sockpuppet, there is only one way to find out: file an ACTUAL sockpuppet case. See WP:SOCK for info. BMW(drive) 14:15, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Firstly, I was making an insinuation "I should ask" is what I actually wrote, which is not inequivocally an accusation. I would be amusing if it were not in practicality sad that so many people can brush things off and on their other hand what they don't wish to brush off they chose to call an attack. I hesitated a lot before a wrote that, and even thought of appologizing right after saving it, but my frustration got the better of my and left it as an exclamation point phrase. You are right to note that templates can be viewed as negative, it is easy enough to see someone as coming at you instead of them coming to you. But also the links you chose to cut and paste may seem to you to be competely relevant, and may be so, but I have always viewed them as someone throwing a book from across the room aimed at my head. I wish you so-called mediators could, if you are going to use those things ("WP:CIVIL"), would start from the beginning with the diffs of the behavior you think are not appropriate being that a users bad behavior may or may not be exactly describe there as though someones photo is there in the dictionary under the definition for stupid. No insintuation, just a pointed analogy. It is sheer laziness to use those links and not use very specific quotes of policy and the behavior. I have so limited an amount of time to use the internet that it is like getting away with distracting me from the studying and edits I want to do to have to do the investigation of sockpuppets and since you have pointed out that it is a grave offence to toss out the suspicion, good god an "attack" even, then I will make it a habit to collect evidence as I go along with my edits. I was not so angry that I could kill someone, but I was definately fuming, and my perception that you were being duplicitous only fueled that. Issues as otherwise, you could have acknowledged my indirect point that there is some provocation for my instances of laps in civility with out actually saying you condone the lapses. GabrielVelasquez (talk) 22:25, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Gabriel, I always look at more than the provided diff's because I like context. If you look at User:Bwilkins I discuss the A-B-C method I use in looking at WQA issues. Trust me, I read dozens of more diff's/pages than were provided. BMW(drive) 22:30, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

You seem to have misunderstood part of what I wrote (is that a temperment test you do with people, test their frustration limits). I said throwing policy links ("WP:CIVIL") at people can be pointless as well, if you don't provide a quote of thier specific behavior to them personally when you message them, about the problem, on their talkpage when you have been dealt them to deal with as a problem user, to the user himself, bring the issue to them, the offender themselves. and their offence, lol. GabrielVelasquez (talk) 22:39, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Look, my comments were a general attempt to say "ohhh, by the way ...", as opposed to discussing specific incidents. I really did not WANT to go into specifics. Mine was really a request to keep an eye on your "tone" overall. Do you want specifics? Personally, I would simply welcome the constructive criticism/advice and move forward, rather than focus on the past. Please note, that even with the uncivil statements you put in my direction, I am NOT commenting on the RfC against you. I try to SOLVE issues, not cause frustration. BMW(drive) 23:34, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

RFC on User:GabrielVelasquez

Hi. A request for comment regarding User:GabrielVelasquez has been filed here. You may be interested to join the discussion, since you have been one of the users affected by his behaviour. Thanks. --Cyclopia (talk) 22:54, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I have read a comment you leaved on User:GabrielVelasquez talk page and I couldn't but ask: Why helping us in the issue in the RFC should not be "solving" the issue? I think instead it will help a lot, no matter what is your opinion on the issue. A request for comment needs people to comment! Of course I respect your choice, but I wonder what is the rationale behind it. Thanks. --Cyclopia (talk) 08:53, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

To reply to your question: I think the RfC is a very heavy-handed process, and is premature in the process. To me, it looks like you didn't get what you wanted in WQA, so took the next step, rather than see if the behaviour changed. Bad idea, and I cannot support that kind of heavy-handedness. BMW(drive) 10:55, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

It seemed obvious to me that, given the answer he did to you in response to the WQA alert, the WQA failed and the RfC was the only step forward. However thanks for your opinion, I will think about it. I have little experience in this kind of things, so I have only to learn. --Cyclopia (talk) 11:02, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Did you look at the conversation that Gabriel and I have been having on each other's Talk page? I think you'd really get a better idea of their POV on this situation, and that they ALSO want it solved, if you did. BMW(drive) 11:19, 9 October 2008 (UTC) (copied from my talk page: --Cyclopia (talk) 13:06, 9 October 2008 (UTC))

Yes, I read it. Yes, he of course wants the situation solved: but frankly I was tempted to cite it as a further example of the episodes that led to the RFC, since he implicity continues to assume that he is surrounded by sockpuppets and sockpuppeteers, and tries to dismiss amusingly the fact he accused you of bribery. Not mentioning the fact that he decided to (try to) apologize only after RFC was filed: so RFC was not a bad idea, nor useless. I personally would expect from him a full apology and proof of assuming good faith. But maybe that's my bias. I am personally sure that the user has good interest in WP and is not trolling or what, but his behaviour has to change. --Cyclopia (talk) 13:06, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

HJensen, me and etc.

Hi

Sorry for late response but, however....

I really see no reasons that makes HJensen offended if he is beeing described as Norse. That is (or at least by my criteria :) synonim for Nordic, Scandinavian , North Germanic worldwide. Danish people belong to that group (that is the opinion of most foreigners-imcluding myself . I don't know how do they see themselves in that "package" )

--Añtó| Àntó (talk) 11:35, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Saw your reply on my Talk ... no issues about "lateness", I'm always trying to help everyone get along :) I would say that as a rule, calling a Nordic person "Nordic" is not offensive. However when placed in the context of the original text that caused the complaint, it appears more offensive...in fact, it sounds sarcastic. I know that tone does not always come across well in written word which is why we must always be careful.BMW(drive) 14:30, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

My intention was (to be honest!) to bring some sarcasm. But,it would not be appropriate only if Danish people don't like to be compared with other Scandinavians and to remember parts of the common history (whatever would be the reason :) ) AFAIK that is not the situation .Unlike the Dutch people don't like people do not like to talk about Nederduitsland and Nederduitsch language (see laso these things 1,2 )

bye! --Añtó| Àntó (talk) 17:04, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, I hope the bad blood between you is now gone. Happy editing! BMW(drive) 17:09, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Is Google Making Us Stupid?

Hi Bwilkins: In your capacity as a WikiElf could you help me with a new article "Is Google Making Us Stupid?" that I am hoping to bring up to snuff so that it can be a DYK in a few days.Manhattan Samurai (talk) 18:20, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Wallamoose

Hi. Doesn't Wallamoose's extreme rudeness merit some kind of action being taken? Thanks.RafaelRGarcia (talk) 22:19, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Can you ask Wallamoose to remove the inflammatory headings about me from his talk page? They are not conducive to positive discourse. RafaelRGarcia (talk) 23:36, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't seem Wallamoose is very happy. He called your treatment of his behavior "very one-sided" and said you are "grotesquely unfair." RafaelRGarcia (talk) 00:11, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Wallamoose has not removed the inflammatory section headings on his talk page, and he flouted your instructions by using talk pages on three different articles to attempt to cause conflict. He filed a Wikiquette alert against me in retaliation, but has no new information, so I think the dispute should be closed: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts#Stalking_behavior_by_RafaelRGarcia . Thanks.RafaelRGarcia (talk) 02:05, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

My concerns are legitimate and remain unresolved. So it's not fair to close my Wikialert. In fact RafaelRGarcia continues to stalk me as his edit history and posting make clear. I believe the headers on my page have been changed, but if there's something objectionable the best approach would be to let me know. I am awaiting your resopnse to my comments below. Thanks. (Wallamoose (talk) 03:34, 11 October 2008 (UTC))

Of course I am going to check your contribution history when you've filed an alert against me. I have pointed out the many actions which betray your bad faith, your disrespect for Wikipedia administrators and mediators, and your continued refusal to let things go. RafaelRGarcia (talk) 03:37, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Wallamoose continues to nettle me: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:RafaelRGarcia&diff=244508955&oldid=244508416 RafaelRGarcia (talk) 04:11, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

RafaelRGarcia

I received your message. It would be helpful to me if you could cite the specific instance to which you are referring. Also, it was my understanding that both of our actions would be considered. I have tried to be exceptionally patient throughout this process and I think it's clear that I am putting up with a lot. Do I need to file a WikiAlert on RafaelRGarcia? His stalking has continued and its been disruptive to other editors. Thank you for your time. I look forward to your response. (Wallamoose (talk) 23:32, 10 October 2008 (UTC))

If you have read my last entry on the Wikiquette complaint, you will note that the complainant has been warned about AGF. Your comments in the Wikiquette entry alone could have resulted in further action, so please, let's not push it. Be civil towards other editors which involves acceptance, and not insults. BMW(drive) 23:37, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

I responded to your request that I change some headers.

"My concern with your recommended rephrasing of my headings is that Rafael has pursued me around Wikipedia and sought to incite conflict. So I felt it was important for anyone who came to MY talk page to understand what I'm dealing with. I am willing to consider changing the way they are worded, but first his stalking needs to stop. You haven't addressed it, and as my comments on the WikiAlert page indicate, you've been grotesquely unfair.

You have also seemed to suggest that I have used inappropriate lanuage with other editors. And if this is the case I would ask that you cite examples. In fact, I've made an extraordinary effort to work collaboratively on some contentious articles and haven't had any major incidents of which I'm aware."

Yet I received no response. Then when I was busy working on another project you defaced my talk page and removed a record of my attempts to request suggestions and help in dealing with harassment. Please explain.(Wallamoose (talk) 01:48, 11 October 2008 (UTC))