This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 10 | ← | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | Archive 18 |
Thanks again for your remark. See Talk:Trial_of_Geert_Wilders. -- JanDeFietser ( talk) 15:56, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
Oh and I think I may have removed a characterization of Wilders views as "anti-Islam"? I wasn't sure if it was an accurate paraphrase of his views, but after looking at a couple sources I see that it is definitely accurate and appropriate. So I think it should be included. ChildofMidnight ( talk) 18:26, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
I have nominated H. Neill Wilson, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/H. Neill Wilson. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. -- Alan Liefting ( talk) - 03:04, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Here's one for you that I did a bit of work on: Jacob Wrey Mould. Perhaps you care to find some appropriate images; I haven't found any yet. Thanks! Drmies ( talk) 18:57, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
I'm not sure about the one in Virginia or the Museum. Could be a different Mould. The Trinity building has a photo. ChildofMidnight ( talk) 19:14, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
Good luck with that. I am amazed it was up for deletion at all. Short lived account ( talk) 14:17, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
This edit summary is out of line. What "massive removal" of mine? I cleaned up after after someone's edit. If you can't be civil, is it too much to expect you to get your facts straight? Please retract your smears. Guettarda ( talk) 18:01, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Would you care to explain why we should disregard Wikipedia:Summary style in this article? It would be nice of you to explain why you believe we should disregard the MOS. Thanks. Guettarda ( talk) 18:13, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
And seriously, is it too much to ask that you participate in the discussion of your edit on the article's talk page? Guettarda ( talk) 19:37, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
My edit was made in response to what was the third-to-last section on the talk page at the time you reverted it. If you had bothered to read the talk page, you'd have seen it. You talk about civility and respect, but can't be bothered to be civil to your fellow edits, or to treat their efforts with the slightest hint of respect. Guettarda ( talk) 20:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
If you had seen the discussion and believed there was consensus why would you say "And if he wants to take issue with someone's actions, it would be with Dave's decision to spin off the section" and wait so long to provide a link? Listen, I'm sorry you're unhappy with me. I've explained my actions and have responded to your repeated accusations. As you've noted, it's being discussed now on the talk page, so you're concerns are best communicated there. I'm just one of many editors and I'm happy to abide by whatever consensus is determined going forward. I'm optimistic that the title and the article can be fixed and the content be made compliant with our policies. ChildofMidnight ( talk) 20:50, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Really. Don't invite trouble. -- JohnWBarber ( talk) 18:44, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
CoM, (hi there, incidentally, hope you've been well and such...) ...CoM, every time I come to your talk page I learn something new. Often it's the sort of "something new" that leaves me wacketing through Wikipedia playing follow-the-linky for hours, postponing my bedtime and aggravating my cats with my constant listener-free monologue (the sad habit of the only child who now lives alone). I'm girlcotting your page for the next two weeks, therefore; my ex-husband-but-no-longer-ex-boyfriend is coming into town for our eighth non-aversary next week, and would not take kindly to hours of my time being used for learning about--of all things--Sinatra-related killings. My goodness--the things people get in a dither about!!! GJC 03:10, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Am I the only one who doesn't know what wacketing and girlcotting are? Where are the Wikipedia articles when I need them? I'm very consfused about it all. Gladys, am I to understand the we've been engaging in a non-platonic relationship? Or is the otherwise highly reliable Urban dictionary misleading me? This is all making me very hungry for brick oven pizza and all I've got is Tony's is the freezer!!! Connecticut? So I have to make lame spelling jokes about the state's name, comments about the big homes and elitists in Greenwich, and the communist leanings of Yaleys? This isn't much to work with. And where's the picture I need for Yale's Street Hall designed by Augustus Russell Street (supposedly the first art school building at any U.S. college)? ChildofMidnight ( talk) 20:16, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps, you can improve the article up to DYK standard from the doomed status given your love for sweeties. -- Caspian blue 18:42, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
If someone is willing to move Feed Notifier to my userspace, I'm curious what the article looked like. ChildofMidnight ( talk) 22:47, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
I believe that User:William M. Connolley has already requested that you refrain from using some modes of address. Please simply use "WMC" when the context is clear, or his full username when it might not be. Thank you, - 2/0 ( cont.) 07:53, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
The DYK project ( nominate) 18:00, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Just FYI: There was a banned user using a sock to evade their ban, that's why I reverted the edits as vandalism. Beeblebrox ( talk) 00:12, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
I have some questions on grammers (sic). Maybe one of my stalkers is a high school English teacher?
When responding please indicate if you are a colonialist oppressor of Britian (cob) or freedom loving American (fla).
1) Is one of these incorrect? Do they have different meanings?:
2) If an article discusses The Nautical Exploration Committee and a writer doesn't always want to write out Nautical Exploration Committee each time the group is mentioned, can the group be written as "the Committee..."? Or would it have to be "the committee..."? I know committee is not a proper noun, but does it have to be lower-case even when it's standing in for a prior proper noun, or can it be made capital to indicate its standing in for a proper known? Is it ever a judgment call or is there a hard and fast rule?
If you literatti don't know the answers to these important questions, perhaps someone can point me to where I can get answers?
Also, when is the draft, who will be the top pick, and who will be the top three quarterbacks selected? ChildofMidnight ( talk) 04:47, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
I think both examples of what Bobby discovered are what the article on the pluperfect calls pluperfect of state. To my Midwestern-American ear, both are correct and idiomatic. There may be a shade of difference between the examples, depending on context. Jonathunder ( talk) 18:36, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Here it is WP:ANI#Tarc's ongoing abuse. -- JohnWBarber ( talk) 19:27, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for your reverts to the Scotus article. There is still a problem with the Greyfriars article [5] which has the birth date as 1264. No one really knows the exact date (it is an inference from the fact he was ordained in 1291) but the dates should at least be consistent, and the scholarly consensus is around1265/66 (see the SEP entry e.g. [6]).
Note the revert by Beeblebrox has destroyed the link to John Pecham which is now showing red again.
On Illuminationism, there is not really such a thing as illuminationism (European). The version discussed in Illuminationist philosophy is simply the Islamic version which comes from pretty much the same neo-Platonist sources as Augustine's. Again, see the relevant SEP entries [7], [8], [9]. There really should be a single article which discusses all the different varieties, and indeed Damian made a start on this but it has been deleted. [10]. An admin needs to restore it. It seems absurd it was deleted at all. Best John Watkins LLD ( talk)
Sorry, never heard of them before. I can't give you any information on them at all. Nyttend ( talk) 20:46, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
Can someone tell me what this source say: [12]? I've hit my limit on reading it apparently. Or is it unavailable to everyone? ChildofMidnight ( talk) 21:52, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
<meant to be posted to another user's talk page but it got locked down. :(> What about my question regarding whether you use the term fuddy-duddy in Britain? That was a serious question related to a new article I'm working up. This archiving is an outrage! Who made you King of this talk page? I would ask Iridescent, but I don't think she cares for my brand of humor. Ah well. I suppose I best shower off. Chlorine is no good for my skin. Do we get to eat ice cream soon? ChildofMidnight ( talk) 03:02, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
The article Fuddy-duddy has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{
dated prod}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{
dated prod}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. The
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Ridernyc (
talk)
22:06, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
(Said S-man, "Up up and away. :-) Proofreader77 ( interact) 17:37, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
Take this as a friendly warning - I've noticed that you are frequently reverting climate articles, only to later find out that you are reverting items that were specifically discussed and agreed on on the talk page. Please be certain to carefully read the talk pages of contentious articles before editing them, especially before reverting them. Thanks. Hipocrite ( talk) 13:55, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
What's a DBH [ [16]]? I assume you're not a 1800 yr old king or enzyme? Gerardw ( talk) 20:07, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
And I thought TCB was commonly understood to mean "Takin' Care of Business (or 'Bidness')" from a number of sources, particularly Elvis. Geoff Who, me? 21:36, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for your sensible and calming comments Re Mattisse. I just wanted to advise you that she is on conduct probation, and may be subject to discretionary sanctions at any time. See Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Mattisse#Clarification_motions, in particular motion 7.1. Geometry guy 22:40, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
(User:2over0 coming to my talkpage to make absurd and ironic comments)
The discussions at Wikipedia:General sanctions/Climate change probation/Requests for enforcement are not meant to be general fora for discussion of other issues. Narrowly targeted productive comment at any thread is welcome, but please confine your comments to the substance of the request and closely related issues. For instance, if a request is made detailing edit warring by one party, it could be appropriate to provide context in the form of links to talkpage discussion or diffs of other parties engaged in the same edit war. It would not be appropriate, however, to bring unrelated issues to an already open request, discuss content issues, or engage in incivility or personal attacks. If someone else makes that you feel merits a reply but your reply would not itself be closely related to the original request, please raise make your reply at usertalk, open a new enforcement request, or start a thread at Wikipedia talk:General sanctions/Climate change probation/Requests for enforcement. Thank you for your cooperation. A few diffs of posts that venture partially or wholly off topic, or would be better suited to other venues: [17], [18], [19]. - 2/0 ( cont.) 03:57, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
I had not meant to refactor the thread header. I had added my own, and then changed my mind, but apparently deleted the wrong one. It's late here and I'm trying to work on Lake Onota and a new article I've been researching on Wirt Dexter Walker. Maybe the problem has gotten enough attention now that something will be done about the nastiness? Or is 2over0 going to be allowed to continue blocking editors he disagrees with in favor of the AGW crowd, no matter how abusive and disruptive their behaviors and uncivil their comments? ChildofMidnight ( talk) 04:45, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
CoM, I am collecting evidence of 2/0's uneven enforcement, with the intent to take it to arbcom. I suggest you disengage from those pages, and from 2/0, and use the time to collect evidence. I've already downloaded the entire enforcement page history and I am currently pouring through it, starting
here with the 7 WMC enforcement requests that 2/0 largely dismissed. You are welcome to participate by contributing evidence there. Note, I want to keep this professional, so if you do decide to participate on my page, I reserve the right to refactor anything that is overly inflammatory.
ATren (
talk)
06:18, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
Add Damnatio memoriae as a see also to social amnesia and politics of memory? Add politics of memory to Book of Laughter and forgetting? ChildofMidnight ( talk) 21:09, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
[22] [23] (last part in particular) ChildofMidnight ( talk) 02:10, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
Hi ChildofMidnight,
you are receiving this message as you voted in VOTE 2 at the recent Community de-Adminship 'Proposal Finalization' Poll. Unfortunately, there is a hitch regarding the "none" vote that can theoretically affect all votes.
1) Background of VOTE 2:
In a working example of CDA; ater the 'discussion and polling phase' is over, if the "rule of thumb" baseline percentage for Support votes has been reached, the bureaucrats can start to decide whether to desysop an admin, based in part on the evidence of the prior debate. This 'baseline' has now been slightly-adjusted to 65% (from 70%) per VOTE 1. VOTE 2 was asking if there is a ballpark area where the community consensus is so strong, that the bureaucrats should consider desysopping 'automatically'. This 'threshold' was set at 80%, and could change pending agreement on the VOTE 2 results.
This was VOTE 2;
This is the VOTE 2 question without any ambiguity;
2) What was wrong with VOTE 2?
Since the poll, it has been suggested that ambiguity in the term "none at all" could have affected some of the votes. Consequently there has been no consensus over what percentage to settle on, or how to create a new compromise percentage. The poll results are summarised here.
3) How to help:
Directly below this querying message, please can you;
I realise that many of you clarified your meaning after your initial vote, but the only realistic way to move forward is to be as inclusive as possible in this vote query. Sorry for the inconvenience,
Matt Lewis ( talk) 14:36, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
WP:AN#Good faith (towards Peter Damian) was an impressive piece. Well done. 8-) Andy Dingley ( talk) 17:30, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
;-) Proofreader77 ( interact) 19:20, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
I'm sure CoM will appreciate rhetorical assistance from Rachel, the Rhodes scholar, and lathering liberal lesbian. :-)
P.S. God thinks CoM is a drama loving troll, too ... and that is why CoM is going to heaven, says God, with a big smile on Her lathering liberal lesbian divine face of universal proportions. :-) That concludes Proofreader77's comments on the CoM Civility debate. LoL (Fat chance.) -- Proofreader77 ( interact) 04:18, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
{{
unblock|As established in all the quotes below from recent activity on the noticeboard, all kinds of insinuations of bad faith and personal attacks have been made but not objected to, even though they should have been. Plese contrast these with my statements. I've reproduced my quotes in their entirety, and while they are unnecessarily antagonistic (that comes with abuse and frustration after a while, I'm not perfect) they are not in violation of any policies and were on a talk page. I'm happy to refactor anything that is objected to, but it's certainly my privilege to object to admin actions that are abusive. This block is also problematic because it came without warning, without discussion, didn't use the appropriate noticeboard, and was engaged in by an involved administrator who has made clear his disdain for me and his support for William Connolley who was FINALLY blocked after 7 filings at the noticeboard and dozens of diffs and warnings over weeks.}}
.
Sorry but [24] and following edits [25] is completely unacceptable both in terms of style of addressing 2/0 ("grotesquely biased and damaging", "abusive enforcement actions and your disruptive activity"), failing to assume good faith, repeated use of other provocative language e.g. in characterising other editors as "disruptive propagandists" etc. I am blocking your account for a week. If you show signs of genuine apology I would be happy for any other admin to shorten this to 48 hours. But they should look at your block log and breathe deeply first. -- BozMo talk 18:33, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
and
It should also be noted that this improper act of retribution by BozMo is because he is upset that William Connolley was finally blocked for his relentless incivility and personal attacks (after a mere 7 filings and dozens of diffs produced by at least a dozen editors). BozMo's history is also telling as far as poor judgment and improper action. BozMo, I trust you reported your concerns to the appropriate noticeboard as you've told other editors to do? You wouldn't engage in a unilateral and controversial block without any warning or discussion would you? You know it's not right to apply your tools against someone you don't like and who you took the time to point out to another editor "has a long block log". Sounds like you were looking to find any excuse to block me after your buddy William was finally blocked. Have you looked at my block log? Most were undone as improper. So you join an elite club of abusive admins who act improperly using misrepresentations and abuse the community's trust based on their personal whims about who they like and don't like. Shame on you. And "old fruit" is insulting and should never be used. Please don't defend your buddy William's abusive behavior and come after those trying to rein him in ever again. Comprende? ChildofMidnight ( talk) 19:10, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
I am puzzed by BozMo's block. He solely blocks this editor [26] and then goes right on to comment [27] to another that blocks (for another editor) should be taken up by a community. There seems to be a double standard here in BozMo's action and the comment diffs (maybe I missed something, but that's what it looks like to me.) Hey, but then that was the issue COM was addressing in the first place, so then it seems like he get's blocked by it for bringing it up. Zulu Papa 5 ☆ ( talk) 22:05, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
What all these comments have in common is that they are from AGW acolytes. So of course they weren't objected to. But pointing out 2over0s highly abusive activities results in a week block without any noticeboard posting, without any discussion, without any warning, from an admin who is buddies with an editor who was finally blocked for relentlessly attacking and baiting me and others. Welcome to the jungle folks. Wikipedia at its best.
ChildofMidnight (
talk)
19:29, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
Hi, you seem to have overlooked the guideline on editing others' comments by correcting another editor's spelling, perhaps inadvertantly. [28] You may wish to reconsider that part of your edits. . . dave souza, talk 20:21, 12 February 2010 (UTC) Ah, looking above I see you may not be able to attend to this for a few days, but something to think about in future. . . dave souza, talk 20:24, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
Hey, sorry to see you are blocked. I didn't know if you were still following the Peter Damian unban discussion, but he has indicated he does not want to be unbanned as he has no interest in editing here anymore. I find that somewhat hard to comprehend since he has been creating new accounts and making edits all along, but those are his stated wishes at this time, so the unban discussion has been rendered moot. Beeblebrox ( talk) 20:57, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
I'm starting a new !CABAL, the Benevolent Order of Old Fruits (BOOF) and hereby issue you an invitation for a charter membership. I'm working on a logo - something in the rotten apple motif seems apropos [29].
Good luck with your appeal. JPatterson ( talk) 00:08, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
Looks like you were prescient in your choice of images on your user page. Those bananas definitely look past their prime. JPatterson ( talk) 02:04, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
Where did all these peeps come from. Here I am waiting longer than at the Post Office or DMV, and as soon as I post for a review people from all over the world are popping in. Namaste. ChildofMidnight ( talk) 00:35, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
I have requested an enforcement action against you at Wikipedia:General sanctions/Climate change probation/Requests for enforcement#ChildofMidnight. Requesting that you be temporarily unblocked so that you may respond there. ChyranandChloe ( talk) 00:48, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
God bless Ryan for wonderful comments like "I'm sadly of the opinion that CoM is nothing but a drama loving troll".
It's a good thing he's a well respected admin. That kind of incivility is strongly discouraged from us mere peon editors... err trolls, if you will. ChildofMidnight ( talk) 01:15, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
Speaking of trolls... I wonder is it fun to launch all sorts of smears and broadsides on editors when they have no opportunity to defend themselves? Thank goodness Tarc checked in with his usual helpful commentary. I'm a troll but a third of his edits relate to me in some way. Go figure!
The message of this block is very clear. Don't mess with William Connolley, he has admin friends, and don't mess with admins that are his bullying friends. Message received.
Perhaps I should be banned like all the other editors who have dared to enter the forbidden zone and question whether our Climate Change content should consist of something more than biased propaganda from climate change activists who operate hate sites off-wiki where they make hateful attacks on global warming skeptics? Heaven forbid we actually upheld core policies like NPOV or actually expected our policies on civility and appropriate tool use to mean something.
It's a funny thing this "civility" as defined by the powers that be at Wikipedia. A funny thing. ChildofMidnight ( talk) 01:23, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
Maybe you'd be able to find some peace and quiet if you tried to concentrate on architecture more for a bit? Don't take me as trying to tell you what to do; it's simply that I appreciate articles such as DeCurtins, and I wonder if you might be able to avoid getting attacked if you worked on topics that aren't as controversial. Nyttend ( talk) 06:27, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
Hey CoM, I just prodded your can of whoop ass for deletion. Feel free to open one up on me assuming you disagree. Ladyof Shalott 23:49, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Can of whoop ass. Oh my. What a concept. What a useful link that could be in so many situations on Wikipedia. Where do you get these article ideas, CoM? Hmmmmm. Maybe one of these days I'll consider the possibility of opening up one of those cans myself. And how's your day been? -- JohnWBarber ( talk) 02:13, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
I am very interested in purchasing a can or two of whoopass, do you know of any reliable retailers in the area that can assist me with my intended purchases? 163.1.147.64 ( talk) 15:54, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
Would a kind sole soul be so kind as to post a request for review of this disgustingly outrageous block on
WP:AN. I'm sure our admin elite will sort this mess out in no time once they're made aware of it and have a chance to review the evidence of BozMo's foul play. Unfortunately the block review template seems to be malfunctioning. Thanks!
ChildofMidnight (
talk)
23:48, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
:
Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Unblock_review_request
Gerard
PFAW
00:00, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
Maybe I can get review by a German admin who is familiar with "Randy from Boise"? And someone from the Hebrew Wikipedia? I would very much like Rabbinical review. They're very thoughtful I think, and I know the findings would be insightful. As long as it's no one from France. We're all allowed our biases and I'm not fond of the frogs and their surrender monkeying. :) If it's a Canadian I'll need more information. What province are they from? Do they play hockey? When is the last time they ate poutine. have they had pizzaghetti? Russian also is very acceptable. Unfortunately my friend Dimitree is not yet an admin. But soon, I'm hoping! I would like a jury of my peers. That means the reviewers must be international, handsome, lenient, loving, fond of food and bad architecture, and of the sign of Aquarius (or at least some sort of water sign). ChildofMidnight ( talk) 00:25, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
Caspian blue, please do not be so inhospitable to my international guests! Also, could clarify where I'm allowed to refer to editors as "Chummers"? It seems... well... I'm not sure.
Spiff, once I'm back on my feet we can set about fixing up the mess over at circular reference. :) Do you know anything about immediacy (philosophy)? ChildofMidnight ( talk) 00:51, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for the kind words on the new article I created, The BLT Cookbook. Also, thanks very much for the helpful copyediting. Much appreciated, Cirt ( talk) 14:34, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
Materialscientist ( talk) 18:00, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
Materialscientist ( talk) 12:01, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
Hello,
I am writing you this message because you have participated in the RfC regarding the name of the Climatic Research Unit hacking incident article. As the previous discussion didn't actually propose a name, it was unfocused and didn't result in any measurable consensus. I have opened a new discussion on the same page, between the existing name and the proposed name Climatic Research Unit documents controversy. I have asked that no alternate names are proposed at this time. Please make your opinion known here. Thanks, Oren0 ( talk) 05:45, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
Do you happen to know or meet AtlanticDeep ( talk · contribs)? Since the sockpuppeter unrelated to you bothered himself to badger you, it is too obvious that you're a unofficial Wiki-celebrity!! :-) The photos of fish dishes look yummy.-- Caspian blue 16:56, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
I'm going to see if I can manage a short break. The hunting season is getting to be a little too much for this wabbit. ChildofMidnight ( talk) 19:06, 13 February 2010 (UTC) Oh, and happy VD day to everyone. ChildofMidnight ( talk) 19:09, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
User talk:Mandarax#(Replace DEFAULTSORT template with the magic word using AWB) Aymatth2 ( talk) 05:10, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
Yes, this blog post about the Bacon Chocolate Crunch Bar probably can't be used as a reliable source, but it does link to several viable reliable sources. You're welcome. - Dravecky ( talk) 18:53, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
Hello ChildofMidnight. I've filed a request for arbitration against you because I believe your conduct requires the intervention of the committee. It would be in your interests to read the above link and offer your comments. Regards, Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 20:34, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
I have reverted this edit [38]. Use of list-defined references is encouraged by the ArbCom. Ottre 05:26, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
Thank you to everyone for the warm wishes, kind thoughts and expressions of love and support. ChildofMidnight ( talk) 00:54, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
Would an admin be so kind as to tell me what was in the Frederick H. Wallis article in its two previous incarnations? I'm planning to recreate. Gracias. ChildofMidnight ( talk) 02:33, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
Hi, ChildofMidnight. Because you participated in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steve Titus in September 2009, you may be interested in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steve Titus (2nd nomination). Cunard ( talk) 07:44, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
Oy frickin' vey, says I (agnosto-atheistish surreptitiously-recovering Catholic--hey, can't be TOO obvious about it; don't wanna break my mom's heart, after all). And as an easy-to-revile, leans-so-left-that-I'm-actually-parallel-to-the-floor commie socialist pinko tree-hugging granola-scarfing fuzzy-headed squishy-hearted blue-statin' Limbaugh-hatin' feminazi libtard of the highest order (yes, we have orders--it gives us something to scribble on those cards we apparently carry)--as one o' them folks up there, I have two words for that block (in fact, for the whole thread, top to bottom), and the first one is "cluster". (But just as a small, hopefully-not-TOO-relevant point: asking ppl not to ascribe a POV to you just looks a wee bit hinky when a few lines up, you're defining other people's "leanings" for them. I'm not sayin', I'm only sayin'.) Okay, though: seriously. Whoever the guy was---it wasn't Yogi Berra, was it?--who said "you can't win 'em all" has probably NOT been reincarnated as a WP editor, but whoever he was, he had a point. Right now, I gotta tell you, things are NOT looking good re: your long-term survival here. You've dug in your heels at some of the most contentious articles we've got; no crime in that, of course, but the people who manage to keep a long-term tenure at those articles--the ones who do it RIGHT, anyway, not the ones with powerful friends or cadres of defenders--are the ones who speak quietly and calmly, in measured tones, but with the force of every possible policy behind them. They often don't say much--it takes a lot of time and energy to marshal evidence and pre-address all the objections they know they'll get from the other side. But when those objections come, those editors know it's best to turn off whatever part of their brain demands that all sentences end with the phrase "...and the horse you rode in on, as well." They go into Spock mode (Mister, not Doctor) and put emotion--and that includes right, wrong, left, right, POV, admin abuse, who's on what side--put all those things aside and quietly repeat: Here is a fact. Here is where it says this is a fact. Here is where it clarifies that the guy who says this is a fact is not a crank. This is the dog that chased the cat that worried the rat that ate the corn that lay in the house that Fact built. You do see what I mean, I trust. As you know, the sharks are circling. What you don't _seem_ to be processing, however, is that every word you say on a noticeboard, on an admin's talk page, on any page which could even remotely be defined as "contentious", is the Wikipedian equivalent of splashing around in the water at the center of a circling ring of Great Whites, singing "Look At Me I'm Sandra Dee" while stapling raw meat to your body. I don't want to see you banned from here. I would suspect that there are a lot of ppl here who feel the same. As meat-staple-y as you've been, I think your heart is in a good place and you honestly want articles to express a truly neutral POV. But you're never gonna make it happen if you're sitebanned.
Please. I'm asking nicely. I'm not saying you're right and they're wrong, nor the other way around; I'm not even saying anything lefty, righty, nor in-betweeny. I'm just asking you to put down the stapler and the cold-cuts, and let the sharks find something else to do for a change. (You can, however, hold onto the bacon, if only to make "disgusting bacon confections"; that is an activity of which I approve highly, especially if you share them.) Take care--please??? GJC 21:58, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
As I approach the state of pure euphoria I find I need a large size typewriter case to carry my underwear in. Aymatth2 ( talk) 02:15, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
I find that remark insulting and will report it immediately to ... glad to see you are back. But I am too full of good food and wine to be coherent right now. Aymatth2 ( talk) 02:35, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
Most people up in the Great White North are hoping the "road kill" moose in the freezer is going to last until June when the ice starts to melt. Meanwhile we keep going as best we can with pea soup and Chateau le Box. Aymatth2 ( talk) 03:01, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
It may be more common than you think. Just after moving out from T.O. we were driving along Stoney Lake road and saw a deer in the ditch being hounded by a dog. It had been shot in the leg and was wounded but very much alive. We called 911 and within a few minutes two local guys showed up in a pick-up truck with a rifle, quickly and efficiently finished the job, tossed the deer in the truck and drove off looking very happy. They told us not to worry about the dog. They knew it and it only lived a few miles away. We had a hole in the car blanket we had thrown over the deer, and they had the deer. That was a few years ago. We know more now. Aymatth2 ( talk) 01:24, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Can you lend a hand at Crest Glide? I think given the origin and 30-year development cycle, there's a good hook in there if it's sufficiently expanded. Bongo matic 14:43, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
link Grundle2600 ( talk) 20:30, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
Commons user NorskPower found it. Geoff Who, me? 23:33, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
Cool Whip is disgusting. What's wrong with using real whipped cream? Grundle2600 ( talk) 01:27, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
Materialscientist ( talk) 00:15, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
I only have two pictures for buildings listed in James' article — the one in the infobox for First Congregational-Unitarian Church, and one of the Sir Alfred T. Goshorn House that's inferior to the one currently on the article. I hope to get to Lima before too many more months pass — it's less than an hour away, and there are plenty of sites — but I'm having enough trouble getting to a few sites just one county away (instead of two, as Lima is) that it might be even longer before I can get Lima. Nyttend ( talk) 22:57, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
An Arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/ChildofMidnight/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/ChildofMidnight/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, ~ Amory ( u • t • c) 04:29, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
TURNING and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
Surely some revelation is at hand;
Surely the Second Coming is at hand.
The Second Coming! Hardly are those words out
When a vast image out of Spiritus Mundi
Troubles my sight: somewhere in sands of the desert
A shape with lion body and the head of a man,
A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun,
Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it
Reel shadows of the indignant desert birds.
The darkness drops again; but now I know
That twenty centuries of stony sleep
Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,
And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?
In Flanders fields the poppies blow
Between the crosses, row on row,
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.We are the Dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved, and were loved, and now we lie
In Flanders fields.Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields.
— Lt.-Col. John McCrae (1872 - 1918)
Hmmm ArbCom again? that's exciting. Hey, I am a swine eater (Mandarax, if you're reading along, skip this part): tonight I bought three pounds of bacon, two pounds of hog jowl bacon, a pound of ham, and a chunk of salt pork. I'm making ham-meatloaf and bacon and brown sugar ice cream (from Seduced by bacon--but augmented with maple syrup). Yumm-o! Good luck in your case. Drmies ( talk) 00:48, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
Hello, I note that you have commented on the first phase of Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people
As this RFC closes, there are two proposals being considered:
Your opinion on this is welcome. Okip 02:04, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
I uploaded you a little snack. Drmies ( talk) 06:05, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
Did you kick someone's cat?
What a cute puppy! | ||
This cute puppy has been given to you for your recent amazing performance. Don't forget to train it. Fiddle Faddle ( talk) 18:52, 24 February 2010 (UTC) |
Is this an article about one person, or about a "team" made up of the Sr. and Jr. Nomlands? Shadowjams ( talk) 21:19, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
I wondered why you were asking me about something with Oregon, since I've almost never edited matters related to that state :-) Nyttend ( talk) 01:19, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
I have created the new article Climate change exaggeration. Please feel free to contribute to it. Grundle2600 ( talk) 01:58, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Please, CoM, do not change other people's comments. I reverted the changes you made in the ArbCom workshop page. You know you are begging for more trouble when you do stuff like that. Really, please, please don't. Ladyof Shalott 03:33, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
Hey, CoM. In case you weren't aware, users are asked to post only in their own section on Arbitration Evidence pages. I notice you've made several comments in response in other's sections - if you could please remove these, you're welcome to post responses in your own section or on the talk page. Thanks. Hersfold ( t/ a/ c) 04:26, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
I need the help of an Arb clerk. Another editor is lying about me in Arb evidence. This is a clear civility violations and the statements need to be fixed. Slander is unacceptable. ChildofMidnight ( talk) 03:39, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
I will not be slandered. We have clear policies about civility and a BLP policy. Even if I am somewhat anonymous, I may not be forever and I am entitled to be protected from false disparagements. Is there an Arb clerk around that can address this VERY serious issue before it gets out of hand? I would just like the blatant lies to be removed or corrected. Thank you. ChildofMidnight ( talk) 04:49, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
This is absolutely not resolved. The civility policy and the BLP policy are very clear. It is not acceptable to misrepresent what other editors have said in order to disparage them. I will have to take this issue back up when I have more time but I am OUTRAGED that the discussion has been moved and closed improperly in this way. Demonstrably and obviously false statements cannot be allowed to stand. If this is not fixed by tomorrow we are going to have a MAJOR problem. Lying about what I have said to attack me is slanderous. Period. ChildofMidnight ( talk) 05:42, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
The Surreal Barnstar | ||
For effectively having a one-way conversation with yourself here, then actually coming out with productive additions to the article whilst replying to your own comments without the insight of others. Bravo! ~ Super Hamster Talk Contribs 01:25, 26 February 2010 (UTC) |
I give up. Just a bunch of peaceniks. Time to get back to the Governors. Nobody could accuse them of being that. Aymatth2 ( talk) 19:22, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
Please visit my pages here. Lucy Skywalker ( talk) 22:49, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
Materialscientist ( talk) 12:11, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
Ucucha 18:03, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
Ucucha 00:09, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Thank you, and to you as well! :) Cirt ( talk) 00:41, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Congratulations, CoM! In the words of Samuel F. B. Morse: " What hath God wrought?" Geoff Who, me? 02:30, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Bacon Academy and its founder Pierpont Bacon? — Ed (talk • majestic titan) 04:29, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 10 | ← | Archive 14 | Archive 15 | Archive 16 | Archive 17 | Archive 18 |
Thanks again for your remark. See Talk:Trial_of_Geert_Wilders. -- JanDeFietser ( talk) 15:56, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
Oh and I think I may have removed a characterization of Wilders views as "anti-Islam"? I wasn't sure if it was an accurate paraphrase of his views, but after looking at a couple sources I see that it is definitely accurate and appropriate. So I think it should be included. ChildofMidnight ( talk) 18:26, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
I have nominated H. Neill Wilson, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/H. Neill Wilson. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.
Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. -- Alan Liefting ( talk) - 03:04, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Here's one for you that I did a bit of work on: Jacob Wrey Mould. Perhaps you care to find some appropriate images; I haven't found any yet. Thanks! Drmies ( talk) 18:57, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
I'm not sure about the one in Virginia or the Museum. Could be a different Mould. The Trinity building has a photo. ChildofMidnight ( talk) 19:14, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
Good luck with that. I am amazed it was up for deletion at all. Short lived account ( talk) 14:17, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
This edit summary is out of line. What "massive removal" of mine? I cleaned up after after someone's edit. If you can't be civil, is it too much to expect you to get your facts straight? Please retract your smears. Guettarda ( talk) 18:01, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Would you care to explain why we should disregard Wikipedia:Summary style in this article? It would be nice of you to explain why you believe we should disregard the MOS. Thanks. Guettarda ( talk) 18:13, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
And seriously, is it too much to ask that you participate in the discussion of your edit on the article's talk page? Guettarda ( talk) 19:37, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
My edit was made in response to what was the third-to-last section on the talk page at the time you reverted it. If you had bothered to read the talk page, you'd have seen it. You talk about civility and respect, but can't be bothered to be civil to your fellow edits, or to treat their efforts with the slightest hint of respect. Guettarda ( talk) 20:41, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
If you had seen the discussion and believed there was consensus why would you say "And if he wants to take issue with someone's actions, it would be with Dave's decision to spin off the section" and wait so long to provide a link? Listen, I'm sorry you're unhappy with me. I've explained my actions and have responded to your repeated accusations. As you've noted, it's being discussed now on the talk page, so you're concerns are best communicated there. I'm just one of many editors and I'm happy to abide by whatever consensus is determined going forward. I'm optimistic that the title and the article can be fixed and the content be made compliant with our policies. ChildofMidnight ( talk) 20:50, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
Really. Don't invite trouble. -- JohnWBarber ( talk) 18:44, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
CoM, (hi there, incidentally, hope you've been well and such...) ...CoM, every time I come to your talk page I learn something new. Often it's the sort of "something new" that leaves me wacketing through Wikipedia playing follow-the-linky for hours, postponing my bedtime and aggravating my cats with my constant listener-free monologue (the sad habit of the only child who now lives alone). I'm girlcotting your page for the next two weeks, therefore; my ex-husband-but-no-longer-ex-boyfriend is coming into town for our eighth non-aversary next week, and would not take kindly to hours of my time being used for learning about--of all things--Sinatra-related killings. My goodness--the things people get in a dither about!!! GJC 03:10, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Am I the only one who doesn't know what wacketing and girlcotting are? Where are the Wikipedia articles when I need them? I'm very consfused about it all. Gladys, am I to understand the we've been engaging in a non-platonic relationship? Or is the otherwise highly reliable Urban dictionary misleading me? This is all making me very hungry for brick oven pizza and all I've got is Tony's is the freezer!!! Connecticut? So I have to make lame spelling jokes about the state's name, comments about the big homes and elitists in Greenwich, and the communist leanings of Yaleys? This isn't much to work with. And where's the picture I need for Yale's Street Hall designed by Augustus Russell Street (supposedly the first art school building at any U.S. college)? ChildofMidnight ( talk) 20:16, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Perhaps, you can improve the article up to DYK standard from the doomed status given your love for sweeties. -- Caspian blue 18:42, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
If someone is willing to move Feed Notifier to my userspace, I'm curious what the article looked like. ChildofMidnight ( talk) 22:47, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
I believe that User:William M. Connolley has already requested that you refrain from using some modes of address. Please simply use "WMC" when the context is clear, or his full username when it might not be. Thank you, - 2/0 ( cont.) 07:53, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
The DYK project ( nominate) 18:00, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
Just FYI: There was a banned user using a sock to evade their ban, that's why I reverted the edits as vandalism. Beeblebrox ( talk) 00:12, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
I have some questions on grammers (sic). Maybe one of my stalkers is a high school English teacher?
When responding please indicate if you are a colonialist oppressor of Britian (cob) or freedom loving American (fla).
1) Is one of these incorrect? Do they have different meanings?:
2) If an article discusses The Nautical Exploration Committee and a writer doesn't always want to write out Nautical Exploration Committee each time the group is mentioned, can the group be written as "the Committee..."? Or would it have to be "the committee..."? I know committee is not a proper noun, but does it have to be lower-case even when it's standing in for a prior proper noun, or can it be made capital to indicate its standing in for a proper known? Is it ever a judgment call or is there a hard and fast rule?
If you literatti don't know the answers to these important questions, perhaps someone can point me to where I can get answers?
Also, when is the draft, who will be the top pick, and who will be the top three quarterbacks selected? ChildofMidnight ( talk) 04:47, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
I think both examples of what Bobby discovered are what the article on the pluperfect calls pluperfect of state. To my Midwestern-American ear, both are correct and idiomatic. There may be a shade of difference between the examples, depending on context. Jonathunder ( talk) 18:36, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Here it is WP:ANI#Tarc's ongoing abuse. -- JohnWBarber ( talk) 19:27, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for your reverts to the Scotus article. There is still a problem with the Greyfriars article [5] which has the birth date as 1264. No one really knows the exact date (it is an inference from the fact he was ordained in 1291) but the dates should at least be consistent, and the scholarly consensus is around1265/66 (see the SEP entry e.g. [6]).
Note the revert by Beeblebrox has destroyed the link to John Pecham which is now showing red again.
On Illuminationism, there is not really such a thing as illuminationism (European). The version discussed in Illuminationist philosophy is simply the Islamic version which comes from pretty much the same neo-Platonist sources as Augustine's. Again, see the relevant SEP entries [7], [8], [9]. There really should be a single article which discusses all the different varieties, and indeed Damian made a start on this but it has been deleted. [10]. An admin needs to restore it. It seems absurd it was deleted at all. Best John Watkins LLD ( talk)
Sorry, never heard of them before. I can't give you any information on them at all. Nyttend ( talk) 20:46, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
Can someone tell me what this source say: [12]? I've hit my limit on reading it apparently. Or is it unavailable to everyone? ChildofMidnight ( talk) 21:52, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
<meant to be posted to another user's talk page but it got locked down. :(> What about my question regarding whether you use the term fuddy-duddy in Britain? That was a serious question related to a new article I'm working up. This archiving is an outrage! Who made you King of this talk page? I would ask Iridescent, but I don't think she cares for my brand of humor. Ah well. I suppose I best shower off. Chlorine is no good for my skin. Do we get to eat ice cream soon? ChildofMidnight ( talk) 03:02, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
The article Fuddy-duddy has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{
dated prod}}
notice, but please explain why in your
edit summary or on
the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{
dated prod}}
will stop the
proposed deletion process, but other
deletion processes exist. The
speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and
articles for deletion allows discussion to reach
consensus for deletion.
Ridernyc (
talk)
22:06, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
(Said S-man, "Up up and away. :-) Proofreader77 ( interact) 17:37, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
Take this as a friendly warning - I've noticed that you are frequently reverting climate articles, only to later find out that you are reverting items that were specifically discussed and agreed on on the talk page. Please be certain to carefully read the talk pages of contentious articles before editing them, especially before reverting them. Thanks. Hipocrite ( talk) 13:55, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
What's a DBH [ [16]]? I assume you're not a 1800 yr old king or enzyme? Gerardw ( talk) 20:07, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
And I thought TCB was commonly understood to mean "Takin' Care of Business (or 'Bidness')" from a number of sources, particularly Elvis. Geoff Who, me? 21:36, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for your sensible and calming comments Re Mattisse. I just wanted to advise you that she is on conduct probation, and may be subject to discretionary sanctions at any time. See Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Mattisse#Clarification_motions, in particular motion 7.1. Geometry guy 22:40, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
(User:2over0 coming to my talkpage to make absurd and ironic comments)
The discussions at Wikipedia:General sanctions/Climate change probation/Requests for enforcement are not meant to be general fora for discussion of other issues. Narrowly targeted productive comment at any thread is welcome, but please confine your comments to the substance of the request and closely related issues. For instance, if a request is made detailing edit warring by one party, it could be appropriate to provide context in the form of links to talkpage discussion or diffs of other parties engaged in the same edit war. It would not be appropriate, however, to bring unrelated issues to an already open request, discuss content issues, or engage in incivility or personal attacks. If someone else makes that you feel merits a reply but your reply would not itself be closely related to the original request, please raise make your reply at usertalk, open a new enforcement request, or start a thread at Wikipedia talk:General sanctions/Climate change probation/Requests for enforcement. Thank you for your cooperation. A few diffs of posts that venture partially or wholly off topic, or would be better suited to other venues: [17], [18], [19]. - 2/0 ( cont.) 03:57, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
I had not meant to refactor the thread header. I had added my own, and then changed my mind, but apparently deleted the wrong one. It's late here and I'm trying to work on Lake Onota and a new article I've been researching on Wirt Dexter Walker. Maybe the problem has gotten enough attention now that something will be done about the nastiness? Or is 2over0 going to be allowed to continue blocking editors he disagrees with in favor of the AGW crowd, no matter how abusive and disruptive their behaviors and uncivil their comments? ChildofMidnight ( talk) 04:45, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
CoM, I am collecting evidence of 2/0's uneven enforcement, with the intent to take it to arbcom. I suggest you disengage from those pages, and from 2/0, and use the time to collect evidence. I've already downloaded the entire enforcement page history and I am currently pouring through it, starting
here with the 7 WMC enforcement requests that 2/0 largely dismissed. You are welcome to participate by contributing evidence there. Note, I want to keep this professional, so if you do decide to participate on my page, I reserve the right to refactor anything that is overly inflammatory.
ATren (
talk)
06:18, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
Add Damnatio memoriae as a see also to social amnesia and politics of memory? Add politics of memory to Book of Laughter and forgetting? ChildofMidnight ( talk) 21:09, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
[22] [23] (last part in particular) ChildofMidnight ( talk) 02:10, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
Hi ChildofMidnight,
you are receiving this message as you voted in VOTE 2 at the recent Community de-Adminship 'Proposal Finalization' Poll. Unfortunately, there is a hitch regarding the "none" vote that can theoretically affect all votes.
1) Background of VOTE 2:
In a working example of CDA; ater the 'discussion and polling phase' is over, if the "rule of thumb" baseline percentage for Support votes has been reached, the bureaucrats can start to decide whether to desysop an admin, based in part on the evidence of the prior debate. This 'baseline' has now been slightly-adjusted to 65% (from 70%) per VOTE 1. VOTE 2 was asking if there is a ballpark area where the community consensus is so strong, that the bureaucrats should consider desysopping 'automatically'. This 'threshold' was set at 80%, and could change pending agreement on the VOTE 2 results.
This was VOTE 2;
This is the VOTE 2 question without any ambiguity;
2) What was wrong with VOTE 2?
Since the poll, it has been suggested that ambiguity in the term "none at all" could have affected some of the votes. Consequently there has been no consensus over what percentage to settle on, or how to create a new compromise percentage. The poll results are summarised here.
3) How to help:
Directly below this querying message, please can you;
I realise that many of you clarified your meaning after your initial vote, but the only realistic way to move forward is to be as inclusive as possible in this vote query. Sorry for the inconvenience,
Matt Lewis ( talk) 14:36, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
WP:AN#Good faith (towards Peter Damian) was an impressive piece. Well done. 8-) Andy Dingley ( talk) 17:30, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
;-) Proofreader77 ( interact) 19:20, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
I'm sure CoM will appreciate rhetorical assistance from Rachel, the Rhodes scholar, and lathering liberal lesbian. :-)
P.S. God thinks CoM is a drama loving troll, too ... and that is why CoM is going to heaven, says God, with a big smile on Her lathering liberal lesbian divine face of universal proportions. :-) That concludes Proofreader77's comments on the CoM Civility debate. LoL (Fat chance.) -- Proofreader77 ( interact) 04:18, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
{{
unblock|As established in all the quotes below from recent activity on the noticeboard, all kinds of insinuations of bad faith and personal attacks have been made but not objected to, even though they should have been. Plese contrast these with my statements. I've reproduced my quotes in their entirety, and while they are unnecessarily antagonistic (that comes with abuse and frustration after a while, I'm not perfect) they are not in violation of any policies and were on a talk page. I'm happy to refactor anything that is objected to, but it's certainly my privilege to object to admin actions that are abusive. This block is also problematic because it came without warning, without discussion, didn't use the appropriate noticeboard, and was engaged in by an involved administrator who has made clear his disdain for me and his support for William Connolley who was FINALLY blocked after 7 filings at the noticeboard and dozens of diffs and warnings over weeks.}}
.
Sorry but [24] and following edits [25] is completely unacceptable both in terms of style of addressing 2/0 ("grotesquely biased and damaging", "abusive enforcement actions and your disruptive activity"), failing to assume good faith, repeated use of other provocative language e.g. in characterising other editors as "disruptive propagandists" etc. I am blocking your account for a week. If you show signs of genuine apology I would be happy for any other admin to shorten this to 48 hours. But they should look at your block log and breathe deeply first. -- BozMo talk 18:33, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
and
It should also be noted that this improper act of retribution by BozMo is because he is upset that William Connolley was finally blocked for his relentless incivility and personal attacks (after a mere 7 filings and dozens of diffs produced by at least a dozen editors). BozMo's history is also telling as far as poor judgment and improper action. BozMo, I trust you reported your concerns to the appropriate noticeboard as you've told other editors to do? You wouldn't engage in a unilateral and controversial block without any warning or discussion would you? You know it's not right to apply your tools against someone you don't like and who you took the time to point out to another editor "has a long block log". Sounds like you were looking to find any excuse to block me after your buddy William was finally blocked. Have you looked at my block log? Most were undone as improper. So you join an elite club of abusive admins who act improperly using misrepresentations and abuse the community's trust based on their personal whims about who they like and don't like. Shame on you. And "old fruit" is insulting and should never be used. Please don't defend your buddy William's abusive behavior and come after those trying to rein him in ever again. Comprende? ChildofMidnight ( talk) 19:10, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
I am puzzed by BozMo's block. He solely blocks this editor [26] and then goes right on to comment [27] to another that blocks (for another editor) should be taken up by a community. There seems to be a double standard here in BozMo's action and the comment diffs (maybe I missed something, but that's what it looks like to me.) Hey, but then that was the issue COM was addressing in the first place, so then it seems like he get's blocked by it for bringing it up. Zulu Papa 5 ☆ ( talk) 22:05, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
What all these comments have in common is that they are from AGW acolytes. So of course they weren't objected to. But pointing out 2over0s highly abusive activities results in a week block without any noticeboard posting, without any discussion, without any warning, from an admin who is buddies with an editor who was finally blocked for relentlessly attacking and baiting me and others. Welcome to the jungle folks. Wikipedia at its best.
ChildofMidnight (
talk)
19:29, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
Hi, you seem to have overlooked the guideline on editing others' comments by correcting another editor's spelling, perhaps inadvertantly. [28] You may wish to reconsider that part of your edits. . . dave souza, talk 20:21, 12 February 2010 (UTC) Ah, looking above I see you may not be able to attend to this for a few days, but something to think about in future. . . dave souza, talk 20:24, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
Hey, sorry to see you are blocked. I didn't know if you were still following the Peter Damian unban discussion, but he has indicated he does not want to be unbanned as he has no interest in editing here anymore. I find that somewhat hard to comprehend since he has been creating new accounts and making edits all along, but those are his stated wishes at this time, so the unban discussion has been rendered moot. Beeblebrox ( talk) 20:57, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
I'm starting a new !CABAL, the Benevolent Order of Old Fruits (BOOF) and hereby issue you an invitation for a charter membership. I'm working on a logo - something in the rotten apple motif seems apropos [29].
Good luck with your appeal. JPatterson ( talk) 00:08, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
Looks like you were prescient in your choice of images on your user page. Those bananas definitely look past their prime. JPatterson ( talk) 02:04, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
Where did all these peeps come from. Here I am waiting longer than at the Post Office or DMV, and as soon as I post for a review people from all over the world are popping in. Namaste. ChildofMidnight ( talk) 00:35, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
I have requested an enforcement action against you at Wikipedia:General sanctions/Climate change probation/Requests for enforcement#ChildofMidnight. Requesting that you be temporarily unblocked so that you may respond there. ChyranandChloe ( talk) 00:48, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
God bless Ryan for wonderful comments like "I'm sadly of the opinion that CoM is nothing but a drama loving troll".
It's a good thing he's a well respected admin. That kind of incivility is strongly discouraged from us mere peon editors... err trolls, if you will. ChildofMidnight ( talk) 01:15, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
Speaking of trolls... I wonder is it fun to launch all sorts of smears and broadsides on editors when they have no opportunity to defend themselves? Thank goodness Tarc checked in with his usual helpful commentary. I'm a troll but a third of his edits relate to me in some way. Go figure!
The message of this block is very clear. Don't mess with William Connolley, he has admin friends, and don't mess with admins that are his bullying friends. Message received.
Perhaps I should be banned like all the other editors who have dared to enter the forbidden zone and question whether our Climate Change content should consist of something more than biased propaganda from climate change activists who operate hate sites off-wiki where they make hateful attacks on global warming skeptics? Heaven forbid we actually upheld core policies like NPOV or actually expected our policies on civility and appropriate tool use to mean something.
It's a funny thing this "civility" as defined by the powers that be at Wikipedia. A funny thing. ChildofMidnight ( talk) 01:23, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
Maybe you'd be able to find some peace and quiet if you tried to concentrate on architecture more for a bit? Don't take me as trying to tell you what to do; it's simply that I appreciate articles such as DeCurtins, and I wonder if you might be able to avoid getting attacked if you worked on topics that aren't as controversial. Nyttend ( talk) 06:27, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
Hey CoM, I just prodded your can of whoop ass for deletion. Feel free to open one up on me assuming you disagree. Ladyof Shalott 23:49, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
Can of whoop ass. Oh my. What a concept. What a useful link that could be in so many situations on Wikipedia. Where do you get these article ideas, CoM? Hmmmmm. Maybe one of these days I'll consider the possibility of opening up one of those cans myself. And how's your day been? -- JohnWBarber ( talk) 02:13, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
I am very interested in purchasing a can or two of whoopass, do you know of any reliable retailers in the area that can assist me with my intended purchases? 163.1.147.64 ( talk) 15:54, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
Would a kind sole soul be so kind as to post a request for review of this disgustingly outrageous block on
WP:AN. I'm sure our admin elite will sort this mess out in no time once they're made aware of it and have a chance to review the evidence of BozMo's foul play. Unfortunately the block review template seems to be malfunctioning. Thanks!
ChildofMidnight (
talk)
23:48, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
:
Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Unblock_review_request
Gerard
PFAW
00:00, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
Maybe I can get review by a German admin who is familiar with "Randy from Boise"? And someone from the Hebrew Wikipedia? I would very much like Rabbinical review. They're very thoughtful I think, and I know the findings would be insightful. As long as it's no one from France. We're all allowed our biases and I'm not fond of the frogs and their surrender monkeying. :) If it's a Canadian I'll need more information. What province are they from? Do they play hockey? When is the last time they ate poutine. have they had pizzaghetti? Russian also is very acceptable. Unfortunately my friend Dimitree is not yet an admin. But soon, I'm hoping! I would like a jury of my peers. That means the reviewers must be international, handsome, lenient, loving, fond of food and bad architecture, and of the sign of Aquarius (or at least some sort of water sign). ChildofMidnight ( talk) 00:25, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
Caspian blue, please do not be so inhospitable to my international guests! Also, could clarify where I'm allowed to refer to editors as "Chummers"? It seems... well... I'm not sure.
Spiff, once I'm back on my feet we can set about fixing up the mess over at circular reference. :) Do you know anything about immediacy (philosophy)? ChildofMidnight ( talk) 00:51, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for the kind words on the new article I created, The BLT Cookbook. Also, thanks very much for the helpful copyediting. Much appreciated, Cirt ( talk) 14:34, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
Materialscientist ( talk) 18:00, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
Materialscientist ( talk) 12:01, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
Hello,
I am writing you this message because you have participated in the RfC regarding the name of the Climatic Research Unit hacking incident article. As the previous discussion didn't actually propose a name, it was unfocused and didn't result in any measurable consensus. I have opened a new discussion on the same page, between the existing name and the proposed name Climatic Research Unit documents controversy. I have asked that no alternate names are proposed at this time. Please make your opinion known here. Thanks, Oren0 ( talk) 05:45, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
Do you happen to know or meet AtlanticDeep ( talk · contribs)? Since the sockpuppeter unrelated to you bothered himself to badger you, it is too obvious that you're a unofficial Wiki-celebrity!! :-) The photos of fish dishes look yummy.-- Caspian blue 16:56, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
I'm going to see if I can manage a short break. The hunting season is getting to be a little too much for this wabbit. ChildofMidnight ( talk) 19:06, 13 February 2010 (UTC) Oh, and happy VD day to everyone. ChildofMidnight ( talk) 19:09, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
User talk:Mandarax#(Replace DEFAULTSORT template with the magic word using AWB) Aymatth2 ( talk) 05:10, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
Yes, this blog post about the Bacon Chocolate Crunch Bar probably can't be used as a reliable source, but it does link to several viable reliable sources. You're welcome. - Dravecky ( talk) 18:53, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
Hello ChildofMidnight. I've filed a request for arbitration against you because I believe your conduct requires the intervention of the committee. It would be in your interests to read the above link and offer your comments. Regards, Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 20:34, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
I have reverted this edit [38]. Use of list-defined references is encouraged by the ArbCom. Ottre 05:26, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
Thank you to everyone for the warm wishes, kind thoughts and expressions of love and support. ChildofMidnight ( talk) 00:54, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
Would an admin be so kind as to tell me what was in the Frederick H. Wallis article in its two previous incarnations? I'm planning to recreate. Gracias. ChildofMidnight ( talk) 02:33, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
Hi, ChildofMidnight. Because you participated in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steve Titus in September 2009, you may be interested in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steve Titus (2nd nomination). Cunard ( talk) 07:44, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
Oy frickin' vey, says I (agnosto-atheistish surreptitiously-recovering Catholic--hey, can't be TOO obvious about it; don't wanna break my mom's heart, after all). And as an easy-to-revile, leans-so-left-that-I'm-actually-parallel-to-the-floor commie socialist pinko tree-hugging granola-scarfing fuzzy-headed squishy-hearted blue-statin' Limbaugh-hatin' feminazi libtard of the highest order (yes, we have orders--it gives us something to scribble on those cards we apparently carry)--as one o' them folks up there, I have two words for that block (in fact, for the whole thread, top to bottom), and the first one is "cluster". (But just as a small, hopefully-not-TOO-relevant point: asking ppl not to ascribe a POV to you just looks a wee bit hinky when a few lines up, you're defining other people's "leanings" for them. I'm not sayin', I'm only sayin'.) Okay, though: seriously. Whoever the guy was---it wasn't Yogi Berra, was it?--who said "you can't win 'em all" has probably NOT been reincarnated as a WP editor, but whoever he was, he had a point. Right now, I gotta tell you, things are NOT looking good re: your long-term survival here. You've dug in your heels at some of the most contentious articles we've got; no crime in that, of course, but the people who manage to keep a long-term tenure at those articles--the ones who do it RIGHT, anyway, not the ones with powerful friends or cadres of defenders--are the ones who speak quietly and calmly, in measured tones, but with the force of every possible policy behind them. They often don't say much--it takes a lot of time and energy to marshal evidence and pre-address all the objections they know they'll get from the other side. But when those objections come, those editors know it's best to turn off whatever part of their brain demands that all sentences end with the phrase "...and the horse you rode in on, as well." They go into Spock mode (Mister, not Doctor) and put emotion--and that includes right, wrong, left, right, POV, admin abuse, who's on what side--put all those things aside and quietly repeat: Here is a fact. Here is where it says this is a fact. Here is where it clarifies that the guy who says this is a fact is not a crank. This is the dog that chased the cat that worried the rat that ate the corn that lay in the house that Fact built. You do see what I mean, I trust. As you know, the sharks are circling. What you don't _seem_ to be processing, however, is that every word you say on a noticeboard, on an admin's talk page, on any page which could even remotely be defined as "contentious", is the Wikipedian equivalent of splashing around in the water at the center of a circling ring of Great Whites, singing "Look At Me I'm Sandra Dee" while stapling raw meat to your body. I don't want to see you banned from here. I would suspect that there are a lot of ppl here who feel the same. As meat-staple-y as you've been, I think your heart is in a good place and you honestly want articles to express a truly neutral POV. But you're never gonna make it happen if you're sitebanned.
Please. I'm asking nicely. I'm not saying you're right and they're wrong, nor the other way around; I'm not even saying anything lefty, righty, nor in-betweeny. I'm just asking you to put down the stapler and the cold-cuts, and let the sharks find something else to do for a change. (You can, however, hold onto the bacon, if only to make "disgusting bacon confections"; that is an activity of which I approve highly, especially if you share them.) Take care--please??? GJC 21:58, 13 February 2010 (UTC)
As I approach the state of pure euphoria I find I need a large size typewriter case to carry my underwear in. Aymatth2 ( talk) 02:15, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
I find that remark insulting and will report it immediately to ... glad to see you are back. But I am too full of good food and wine to be coherent right now. Aymatth2 ( talk) 02:35, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
Most people up in the Great White North are hoping the "road kill" moose in the freezer is going to last until June when the ice starts to melt. Meanwhile we keep going as best we can with pea soup and Chateau le Box. Aymatth2 ( talk) 03:01, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
It may be more common than you think. Just after moving out from T.O. we were driving along Stoney Lake road and saw a deer in the ditch being hounded by a dog. It had been shot in the leg and was wounded but very much alive. We called 911 and within a few minutes two local guys showed up in a pick-up truck with a rifle, quickly and efficiently finished the job, tossed the deer in the truck and drove off looking very happy. They told us not to worry about the dog. They knew it and it only lived a few miles away. We had a hole in the car blanket we had thrown over the deer, and they had the deer. That was a few years ago. We know more now. Aymatth2 ( talk) 01:24, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
Can you lend a hand at Crest Glide? I think given the origin and 30-year development cycle, there's a good hook in there if it's sufficiently expanded. Bongo matic 14:43, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
link Grundle2600 ( talk) 20:30, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
Commons user NorskPower found it. Geoff Who, me? 23:33, 17 February 2010 (UTC)
Cool Whip is disgusting. What's wrong with using real whipped cream? Grundle2600 ( talk) 01:27, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
Materialscientist ( talk) 00:15, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
I only have two pictures for buildings listed in James' article — the one in the infobox for First Congregational-Unitarian Church, and one of the Sir Alfred T. Goshorn House that's inferior to the one currently on the article. I hope to get to Lima before too many more months pass — it's less than an hour away, and there are plenty of sites — but I'm having enough trouble getting to a few sites just one county away (instead of two, as Lima is) that it might be even longer before I can get Lima. Nyttend ( talk) 22:57, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
An Arbitration case involving you has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/ChildofMidnight/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/ChildofMidnight/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, ~ Amory ( u • t • c) 04:29, 21 February 2010 (UTC)
TURNING and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
Surely some revelation is at hand;
Surely the Second Coming is at hand.
The Second Coming! Hardly are those words out
When a vast image out of Spiritus Mundi
Troubles my sight: somewhere in sands of the desert
A shape with lion body and the head of a man,
A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun,
Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it
Reel shadows of the indignant desert birds.
The darkness drops again; but now I know
That twenty centuries of stony sleep
Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,
And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?
In Flanders fields the poppies blow
Between the crosses, row on row,
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.We are the Dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved, and were loved, and now we lie
In Flanders fields.Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields.
— Lt.-Col. John McCrae (1872 - 1918)
Hmmm ArbCom again? that's exciting. Hey, I am a swine eater (Mandarax, if you're reading along, skip this part): tonight I bought three pounds of bacon, two pounds of hog jowl bacon, a pound of ham, and a chunk of salt pork. I'm making ham-meatloaf and bacon and brown sugar ice cream (from Seduced by bacon--but augmented with maple syrup). Yumm-o! Good luck in your case. Drmies ( talk) 00:48, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
Hello, I note that you have commented on the first phase of Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people
As this RFC closes, there are two proposals being considered:
Your opinion on this is welcome. Okip 02:04, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
I uploaded you a little snack. Drmies ( talk) 06:05, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
Did you kick someone's cat?
What a cute puppy! | ||
This cute puppy has been given to you for your recent amazing performance. Don't forget to train it. Fiddle Faddle ( talk) 18:52, 24 February 2010 (UTC) |
Is this an article about one person, or about a "team" made up of the Sr. and Jr. Nomlands? Shadowjams ( talk) 21:19, 24 February 2010 (UTC)
I wondered why you were asking me about something with Oregon, since I've almost never edited matters related to that state :-) Nyttend ( talk) 01:19, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
I have created the new article Climate change exaggeration. Please feel free to contribute to it. Grundle2600 ( talk) 01:58, 25 February 2010 (UTC)
Please, CoM, do not change other people's comments. I reverted the changes you made in the ArbCom workshop page. You know you are begging for more trouble when you do stuff like that. Really, please, please don't. Ladyof Shalott 03:33, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
Hey, CoM. In case you weren't aware, users are asked to post only in their own section on Arbitration Evidence pages. I notice you've made several comments in response in other's sections - if you could please remove these, you're welcome to post responses in your own section or on the talk page. Thanks. Hersfold ( t/ a/ c) 04:26, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
I need the help of an Arb clerk. Another editor is lying about me in Arb evidence. This is a clear civility violations and the statements need to be fixed. Slander is unacceptable. ChildofMidnight ( talk) 03:39, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
I will not be slandered. We have clear policies about civility and a BLP policy. Even if I am somewhat anonymous, I may not be forever and I am entitled to be protected from false disparagements. Is there an Arb clerk around that can address this VERY serious issue before it gets out of hand? I would just like the blatant lies to be removed or corrected. Thank you. ChildofMidnight ( talk) 04:49, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
This is absolutely not resolved. The civility policy and the BLP policy are very clear. It is not acceptable to misrepresent what other editors have said in order to disparage them. I will have to take this issue back up when I have more time but I am OUTRAGED that the discussion has been moved and closed improperly in this way. Demonstrably and obviously false statements cannot be allowed to stand. If this is not fixed by tomorrow we are going to have a MAJOR problem. Lying about what I have said to attack me is slanderous. Period. ChildofMidnight ( talk) 05:42, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
The Surreal Barnstar | ||
For effectively having a one-way conversation with yourself here, then actually coming out with productive additions to the article whilst replying to your own comments without the insight of others. Bravo! ~ Super Hamster Talk Contribs 01:25, 26 February 2010 (UTC) |
I give up. Just a bunch of peaceniks. Time to get back to the Governors. Nobody could accuse them of being that. Aymatth2 ( talk) 19:22, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
Please visit my pages here. Lucy Skywalker ( talk) 22:49, 26 February 2010 (UTC)
Materialscientist ( talk) 12:11, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
Ucucha 18:03, 1 March 2010 (UTC)
Ucucha 00:09, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Thank you, and to you as well! :) Cirt ( talk) 00:41, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Congratulations, CoM! In the words of Samuel F. B. Morse: " What hath God wrought?" Geoff Who, me? 02:30, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
Bacon Academy and its founder Pierpont Bacon? — Ed (talk • majestic titan) 04:29, 2 March 2010 (UTC)