Catalpa please leave messages below
Catalpa, hi! I'm trying to achieve consensus on the renaming of Libertas (lobby group) to Libertas (political movement). I know that you object to this because "...It is a party in name and with offices and has 600 odd facebook members..." and feel that addressing it as such would give it undue weight. I want to reassure you of the following:
I appreciate that you have reservations: I hope I have addressed them above. I also need to point out that given the workload involved (so far I've had to read thru sources in Polish and Estonian, and that's not easy), this structural change will enable me to write articles without having to worry about the structure I'm trying to fit them into, and given the soap-opera level of complexity (Igor Grazin was a VP of Bonde's EUDemocrats before signing up to Libertas: yikes?!), that's a lot of worry.
Thank you for your time, regards, Anameofmyveryown ( talk) 01:45, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
sorry for the delay in getting back , you have done amazing work. It is all clear and has the best layout of any political Wiki pages I have seen.
I note your questions and will read the pages again and get back to you. Catapla ( talk) 02:50, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
if a user is under a topic ban should they be editing on any of the pages talk or main that he is banned from?
I ask this because a topic banned user was subsequently banned from attempting to frame a user also on a topic ban. he was let back on Wiki to participate in resolution but is now violating the topic ban with unsigned post Re can you please please please crack the whip here. There is a process in operation. No one involved is supposed to be editing talk or main pages as per the Topic ban, [1]
A re ban is now in order User:BKLisenbee I refrain from bringing this up at ANI just yet awaiting your opinion. thanks Catapla ( talk) 23:52, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
thanks I moved the post up to Catalpa concerns (just to park it there for the moment)
I think you should absolutely make the topic ban include all the talk pages as I was under the impression it did. Let's try and keep all this where it can be somewhat followed by us all. I for one am not following a lot of the edits there as there have been so many changes, additions and redactions of original points and info by BKL. It is a bit like jumping on quicksand. I think it is only fair to restrict comment by either user on talk pages until this process has concluded Catapla ( talk)
Actually you do, you have let lots of material of a personal nature about living people sit there and it is there still. I for one must insist if that is permissible that all this is confined to one page. It is impossible to follow BKlisenee's continuous edits on one page without spliilage .
You have also allowed anon edits to stand on pages under discussion. I have not bothered to track down the IPs or ask for check users but enough is enough. if this is ever going to reach a conclusion . One page , One discussion no side bars. That is only fair. It was you who unblocked BKL so please take responsibility for his editing and his behaviour Catapla ( talk) 01:27, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
Sorry had not read your note thanks Catapla ( talk) 02:00, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
I can't see the article: every time I click on the link I get "Internet Explorer cannot open the Internet site....operation aborted". Are they lifting my copy again <grin>? Regards, Anameofmyveryown ( talk) 02:50, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
Ah, can see it now. OK "...Libertas is proving more successful in fielding candidates in the Czech Republic, where it is expected to announce today it is fielding 25 candidates in the elections...". Madam's got it wrong again: it's Zelezny's Libertas that's doing the fielding, not Ganley's Libertas. Shall I email them and tell them to just read the Libertas Czechia article? Also, have you seen the Libertas.eu press release in which Ganley lauds the two Czech MEPs but conspicuously fails to do likewise for Zelezny?
Oh, one of the two Libertas Lithuania candidates hasn't read the Lisbon Treaty.
Regards, Anameofmyveryown ( talk) 02:58, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
I have wondered whether Ganley the leader has read it , if I was a journalist I would ask him some spot questions.
Germany must have redesigned its laws after 1945.
You have done an amazing job organising all that info. Is there an EU barnstar? Catapla ( talk) 11:15, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
Regards, Anameofmyveryown ( talk) 02:07, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for the barnstar. As for your question re far-right Libertas folk, you may consider Philippe de Villiers or League of Polish Families, who have been labeled far-right by the international press. Mintcho Hristov Kouminev is former Ataka. Piotr Farfał, the Polish television head accused of bigging up Ganley, is a former skinhead. As for the far-left, didn't Igor Gräzin and Vaclav Klaus hold governmental posts before the fall of the Soviet Union? Working up bios for all the Libertas candidates is probably beyond my capabilities - I can barely keep up with the parties (and if Ganley's current running estimate of over a hundred candidates is even half-right, we're missing some fairly big chunks: has he got lots of Spanish/Italian/Greek/Bulgarian/Romanian candidates that he's not letting on? Romania has a pop'n of over 20million people) - but I will keep my eye out.
As for your observations concerning Junilistan's illogic: political parties of all stripes use language as a tool to appeal to and reinforce their target constituent's prejudices: logic has precisely nothing to do with it...:-) Oddly enough, Junilistan is one of the more rational Eurosceptic parties.
As for your observations regarding Junilistan/EUDemocrats' surprising offer to sit in a group with Libertas: the convention that Eurosceptic parties flock together around the themes of EU democratisation and accountability has been observed in IND/DEM, where UKIP and EUDemocrats do exactly the same thing despite the fact that they cannot stand each other. It is a rule of European politics that deadly enemies will sit together in the EP, because they are entirely powerless if they sit on their own. Identity, Tradition, Sovereignty stayed together for seven months even though each national party thought the other parties in the group should be killed.
I will get Libertas Slovakia up over the next couple of days. Once again, thanks for the barnstar. Regards, Anameofmyveryown ( talk) 02:36, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
Catalpa, hi!
Thank you for your message on my talk page here. Your observation that an IP registered in Tuam is editing the Declan Ganley article has an obvious corollary: since Libertas is based in Tuam, it implies that it is Libertas personnel doing the editing: a rather obvious Wikipedia:Conflict of interest violation. I'm not sure how to combat it: I'm so deep in the Libertas articles I can't devote any time to help. You can ask an admin to semi-protect the article: that won't prevent interested vandalism, but will require them to register first.
Sorry I can't be of more help. Give me a few weeks to get the Libertas articles sorted out.
Regards, Anameofmyveryown ( talk) 23:07, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for your message on my talk page here. You state that "The ANI seems to have disappeared, can you sandbox a version I can replace the current on ewith that would bring the page back to before the NPOV edits?". Please note the following:
You will also wish to note the following:
Hope that helps, kind regards, Anameofmyveryown ( talk) 20:37, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
Factual evidence being clearly referenced from reputable sources is constantly being removed by what are probably Ganley supports. Any ideas what we could do against this? Truthinirishpolitics ( talk) 16:29, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Regarding your 7 April 2009 request that I inform you should a link from Libertas to the far-right be discovered. The Bulgarian "Freedom" party (Партия СВОБОДА) are claiming involvement with Libertas on their website. Their website is here and they have several articles concerning Libertas (Либертас). They placed a photograph of Freedom personnel with Jens-Peter Bonde on one of their articles. That article is called Affair "Libertas" (Аферата "Либертас") and can be found here. The English translation is here. The photograph is here. In fairness, it has to be emphasised that the article states that JPB eventually repudiated them.
You have User:QuotationMan to thank for this. S/he removed the details of "Libertas Bulgaria" from the Libertas Bulgaria article, stating that it had nothing to do with the movement (correctly, btw: "Libertas Bulgaria" is a faux-Libertas: yes, another one - I didn't know). Since I figured s/he had knowledge I did not, I looked further to find out what the personnel of Libertas in Bulgaria actually were. I sought. And I found.
Regards, Anameofmyveryown ( talk) 00:53, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
Don't worry, all the sources I've been using are from the Irish Times and other broadsheets. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Truthinirishpolitics ( talk • contribs) 07:42, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
Catalpa, hi!
So that's it: Libertas articles completed on Wikipedia. Libertas in-real-life is effectively over now: although it may continue as a rump, it'll never be as it was. During the past year, I alluded to several points which you didn't pick up on: I couldn't elaborate because of WP:OR, but here we go:
I'm off now: groups to write articles about, more Polish sources to wade through. If you ever feel like joining Wikiproject European Union, please feel free: God knows we're short-staffed. Regards, Anameofmyveryown ( talk) 23:01, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
Catapla ( talk) 22:13, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
[4] Regards, Anameofmyveryown ( talk) 23:09, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.
Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.
See also:
I've blocked the IP address and posted comments at WP:ANI ( [5]). Thanks, -- Gyrofrog (talk) 23:50, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:The stars are underground cover image Cat fr007 VHS olkrum records.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 12:59, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
I reverted that section to an earlier version (before the edits in question). I also left a note for the anonymous IP address, but it's probably for the sake of documentation at this point – I doubt that editor is using the same IP address at this point. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 22:06, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
13:40, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
Catalpa please leave messages below
Catalpa, hi! I'm trying to achieve consensus on the renaming of Libertas (lobby group) to Libertas (political movement). I know that you object to this because "...It is a party in name and with offices and has 600 odd facebook members..." and feel that addressing it as such would give it undue weight. I want to reassure you of the following:
I appreciate that you have reservations: I hope I have addressed them above. I also need to point out that given the workload involved (so far I've had to read thru sources in Polish and Estonian, and that's not easy), this structural change will enable me to write articles without having to worry about the structure I'm trying to fit them into, and given the soap-opera level of complexity (Igor Grazin was a VP of Bonde's EUDemocrats before signing up to Libertas: yikes?!), that's a lot of worry.
Thank you for your time, regards, Anameofmyveryown ( talk) 01:45, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
sorry for the delay in getting back , you have done amazing work. It is all clear and has the best layout of any political Wiki pages I have seen.
I note your questions and will read the pages again and get back to you. Catapla ( talk) 02:50, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
if a user is under a topic ban should they be editing on any of the pages talk or main that he is banned from?
I ask this because a topic banned user was subsequently banned from attempting to frame a user also on a topic ban. he was let back on Wiki to participate in resolution but is now violating the topic ban with unsigned post Re can you please please please crack the whip here. There is a process in operation. No one involved is supposed to be editing talk or main pages as per the Topic ban, [1]
A re ban is now in order User:BKLisenbee I refrain from bringing this up at ANI just yet awaiting your opinion. thanks Catapla ( talk) 23:52, 1 April 2009 (UTC)
thanks I moved the post up to Catalpa concerns (just to park it there for the moment)
I think you should absolutely make the topic ban include all the talk pages as I was under the impression it did. Let's try and keep all this where it can be somewhat followed by us all. I for one am not following a lot of the edits there as there have been so many changes, additions and redactions of original points and info by BKL. It is a bit like jumping on quicksand. I think it is only fair to restrict comment by either user on talk pages until this process has concluded Catapla ( talk)
Actually you do, you have let lots of material of a personal nature about living people sit there and it is there still. I for one must insist if that is permissible that all this is confined to one page. It is impossible to follow BKlisenee's continuous edits on one page without spliilage .
You have also allowed anon edits to stand on pages under discussion. I have not bothered to track down the IPs or ask for check users but enough is enough. if this is ever going to reach a conclusion . One page , One discussion no side bars. That is only fair. It was you who unblocked BKL so please take responsibility for his editing and his behaviour Catapla ( talk) 01:27, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
Sorry had not read your note thanks Catapla ( talk) 02:00, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
I can't see the article: every time I click on the link I get "Internet Explorer cannot open the Internet site....operation aborted". Are they lifting my copy again <grin>? Regards, Anameofmyveryown ( talk) 02:50, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
Ah, can see it now. OK "...Libertas is proving more successful in fielding candidates in the Czech Republic, where it is expected to announce today it is fielding 25 candidates in the elections...". Madam's got it wrong again: it's Zelezny's Libertas that's doing the fielding, not Ganley's Libertas. Shall I email them and tell them to just read the Libertas Czechia article? Also, have you seen the Libertas.eu press release in which Ganley lauds the two Czech MEPs but conspicuously fails to do likewise for Zelezny?
Oh, one of the two Libertas Lithuania candidates hasn't read the Lisbon Treaty.
Regards, Anameofmyveryown ( talk) 02:58, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
I have wondered whether Ganley the leader has read it , if I was a journalist I would ask him some spot questions.
Germany must have redesigned its laws after 1945.
You have done an amazing job organising all that info. Is there an EU barnstar? Catapla ( talk) 11:15, 2 April 2009 (UTC)
Regards, Anameofmyveryown ( talk) 02:07, 7 April 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for the barnstar. As for your question re far-right Libertas folk, you may consider Philippe de Villiers or League of Polish Families, who have been labeled far-right by the international press. Mintcho Hristov Kouminev is former Ataka. Piotr Farfał, the Polish television head accused of bigging up Ganley, is a former skinhead. As for the far-left, didn't Igor Gräzin and Vaclav Klaus hold governmental posts before the fall of the Soviet Union? Working up bios for all the Libertas candidates is probably beyond my capabilities - I can barely keep up with the parties (and if Ganley's current running estimate of over a hundred candidates is even half-right, we're missing some fairly big chunks: has he got lots of Spanish/Italian/Greek/Bulgarian/Romanian candidates that he's not letting on? Romania has a pop'n of over 20million people) - but I will keep my eye out.
As for your observations concerning Junilistan's illogic: political parties of all stripes use language as a tool to appeal to and reinforce their target constituent's prejudices: logic has precisely nothing to do with it...:-) Oddly enough, Junilistan is one of the more rational Eurosceptic parties.
As for your observations regarding Junilistan/EUDemocrats' surprising offer to sit in a group with Libertas: the convention that Eurosceptic parties flock together around the themes of EU democratisation and accountability has been observed in IND/DEM, where UKIP and EUDemocrats do exactly the same thing despite the fact that they cannot stand each other. It is a rule of European politics that deadly enemies will sit together in the EP, because they are entirely powerless if they sit on their own. Identity, Tradition, Sovereignty stayed together for seven months even though each national party thought the other parties in the group should be killed.
I will get Libertas Slovakia up over the next couple of days. Once again, thanks for the barnstar. Regards, Anameofmyveryown ( talk) 02:36, 8 April 2009 (UTC)
Catalpa, hi!
Thank you for your message on my talk page here. Your observation that an IP registered in Tuam is editing the Declan Ganley article has an obvious corollary: since Libertas is based in Tuam, it implies that it is Libertas personnel doing the editing: a rather obvious Wikipedia:Conflict of interest violation. I'm not sure how to combat it: I'm so deep in the Libertas articles I can't devote any time to help. You can ask an admin to semi-protect the article: that won't prevent interested vandalism, but will require them to register first.
Sorry I can't be of more help. Give me a few weeks to get the Libertas articles sorted out.
Regards, Anameofmyveryown ( talk) 23:07, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for your message on my talk page here. You state that "The ANI seems to have disappeared, can you sandbox a version I can replace the current on ewith that would bring the page back to before the NPOV edits?". Please note the following:
You will also wish to note the following:
Hope that helps, kind regards, Anameofmyveryown ( talk) 20:37, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
Factual evidence being clearly referenced from reputable sources is constantly being removed by what are probably Ganley supports. Any ideas what we could do against this? Truthinirishpolitics ( talk) 16:29, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
Regarding your 7 April 2009 request that I inform you should a link from Libertas to the far-right be discovered. The Bulgarian "Freedom" party (Партия СВОБОДА) are claiming involvement with Libertas on their website. Their website is here and they have several articles concerning Libertas (Либертас). They placed a photograph of Freedom personnel with Jens-Peter Bonde on one of their articles. That article is called Affair "Libertas" (Аферата "Либертас") and can be found here. The English translation is here. The photograph is here. In fairness, it has to be emphasised that the article states that JPB eventually repudiated them.
You have User:QuotationMan to thank for this. S/he removed the details of "Libertas Bulgaria" from the Libertas Bulgaria article, stating that it had nothing to do with the movement (correctly, btw: "Libertas Bulgaria" is a faux-Libertas: yes, another one - I didn't know). Since I figured s/he had knowledge I did not, I looked further to find out what the personnel of Libertas in Bulgaria actually were. I sought. And I found.
Regards, Anameofmyveryown ( talk) 00:53, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
Don't worry, all the sources I've been using are from the Irish Times and other broadsheets. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Truthinirishpolitics ( talk • contribs) 07:42, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
Catalpa, hi!
So that's it: Libertas articles completed on Wikipedia. Libertas in-real-life is effectively over now: although it may continue as a rump, it'll never be as it was. During the past year, I alluded to several points which you didn't pick up on: I couldn't elaborate because of WP:OR, but here we go:
I'm off now: groups to write articles about, more Polish sources to wade through. If you ever feel like joining Wikiproject European Union, please feel free: God knows we're short-staffed. Regards, Anameofmyveryown ( talk) 23:01, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
Catapla ( talk) 22:13, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
[4] Regards, Anameofmyveryown ( talk) 23:09, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.
Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.
See also:
I've blocked the IP address and posted comments at WP:ANI ( [5]). Thanks, -- Gyrofrog (talk) 23:50, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:The stars are underground cover image Cat fr007 VHS olkrum records.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under non-free content criteria, but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia is acceptable. Please go to the file description page, and edit it to include a non-free rationale.
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified the non-free rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 12:59, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
I reverted that section to an earlier version (before the edits in question). I also left a note for the anonymous IP address, but it's probably for the sake of documentation at this point – I doubt that editor is using the same IP address at this point. -- Gyrofrog (talk) 22:06, 8 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability 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, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk)
13:40, 23 November 2015 (UTC)