I just got a DYK for Are You There? (annoyingly, I ended up moving over the update it was in, so the DYK awarding is in my name.) User:Ssilvers also points out I helped with Maritana, another DYK, but realise that my contribution is somewhat limited - cast list and image, mainly, as Ssilvers got to most of it before I could. The GA and FA can be taken from my previous list, I guess. =) Adam Cuerden talk 10:44, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Sorry. Here ye go.
Orethrius (
talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{
subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
...but a WikiSmile was the best template I could find. You're going through a difficult time now, and I agree with Alex Bakharev: this is a time when you need our protection and support. I don't speak out often; and when I do, it's often in semi-serious outrage at some nitwit debating whether an article should have eighteen copyvio images in it, or just the usual five. This is not one of those times. This is a time where I honestly feel you need faith in your abilities and love more than anything in the world, and I hope a subtle WikiSmile can help you to get through this mess. Take care. :) Orethrius ( talk) 05:03, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Well done. The ability to laugh at oneself is a large part of my definition of a "classy" person. I loved the title of the thread, loved the way you've handled it. - Philippe | Talk 18:26, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
... are rather strong, but so is the strong whiff of "courteous" relationships going on in this community. My communications with all other members are aboveboard, for all to see. Any other arrangement is, by my definition, corruption of the principles of openness which Wikipedia once stood for. So no thank you, I do not care to "refactor" my comments, nor do I wish to hide them on a secret mailing list. Cleduc ( talk)
If it makes any difference to clarify, this nomination was an outgrowth of a discussion I've been having with a Harvard student who's writing a thesis on Wikipedia. For about six weeks we've been in periodic contact. This site's deletion dynamics play a role in her study and she recently mentioned the different outcomes of some similar biography nominations. I had nominated some of the other pages, but never this one. The timing was awkward, I agree, but the previous nominations set such a clear precedent for objectivity that I doubted anyone would contstrue mischief. I haven't nominated anything on that student's behalf, really, (this was my idea) and it's doubtful the result of this would even happen in time for the thesis deadline. I won't deny we were curious. Another nomination seemed justifiable after half a year and the other precedents. Angela Beesley agreed to try it. Durova Charge! 01:33, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I hope you agree this is a fair request? [1] Durova Charge! 23:58, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
I was reading the article on Joan of Arc and saw that the suggestion that Joan may have had a hormonal abnormality dismissed as "Old fringe theory" warmed over.
I am interested in learning more about Joan and would like to know (particularly if there are any online documentary resources that might help) why the theory was discredited, and possibly any related theories. Particularly I am intrigued by the suggestion that Joan may have been both schizophrenic and transsexual (i.e. female-to-male Harry Benjamin syndrome).
Thank you,
-- Lil Miss Picky ( talk) 14:01, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for clarifying, Durova. It wasn't my intention to suggest that you were calling schizophrenia a fringe theory. What has engaged my curiosity is the question of whether Joan had reasons other than the obvious ones in the historic record for adopting masculine dress. If you are able to shed any further light on the issue I would be very grateful. -- Lil Miss Picky ( talk) 16:14, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Everywhere I look right now you seem to be in the thick of controversy. Unfortunately it has the effect of making the debate about you and your reactions and not the issue. Can you please back off, even for a week or two. Someone else can make the points. Giano, for instance, rarely participated in AfD - your presence makes sure he is. But a week after your mistake you are nominating high profile articles for deletion - stirring the Daniel Brandt pot, and commenting on high-profile RfArbs - and I can't remember what else. Now some of the comments you make, I agree with. But it is beginning to look like you are seeking drama as some sort of vindication for what happened to you - and you are certainly not helping the issues. I'm not asking you to withdraw from the community - but perhaps do something non-controversial for a month or so. Thanks.-- Docg 16:13, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Um, could you address this kind of obvious disruption: throwaway IP insinuates misconduct. [2] Durova Charge! 21:35, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Hello. This is not a joke but my Block log is empty. So I want you to block my user account for a time of 30 min. Please do so as my request. D@rk talk 19:03, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
First of all, I've been meaning to tell you of my appreciation for your efforts in aiding that Harvard kid. I may be starting on my own thesis there before Spring (on a topic wholly unrelated to wikipedia, mind you), and the only reason I'm not thanking you on behalf of the University and all of academia is that's obviously far beyond my bailiwick. But, long story short, if you ever do reapply for adminship, you've earned my vote.
As for Ms. Beesley, I wouldn't have known her from a hole in the ground. Today I've learned "Ŝi estas kunfondinto kaj vicprezidanto por la komunejaj rilatoj de Wikia Inc." and even though my Esperanto is, to put it mildly, rusty, I am certainly perplexed that such a person would want to pull a "Daniel Brandt" to begin with; yet, of course, at the same time that's absolutely none of my business. There should be other avenues available for someone who probably has WP:OFFICE on speed dial; but maybe she'll sleep better a night believing she's gone about it the "right wey." However, I don't share that belief in this case.
What I ultimately reject here is the way "marginal notability" -- a rule invented for, if you'll pardon my French, "freeks and geeks" -- is now being used to delete a biography which actually meets notability in all respects: a sourced biography of a corporate officer of a powerful and well known corporation. Arguably, corporations in many ways run our lives in this modern world, and the number of board members in our world are a small and powerful subset of the general population (even smaller considering many sit on multiple boards). I don't particularly care for a precedent which enables them all to disappear from our knowledge base. Don't think others won't come forward with the argument that if Ms. Beesley was "marginally notable" then they must be too; that's where lawsuits come from. I guess I just believe that's a bad thing. -- Kendrick7 talk 04:09, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Ok then, hmmm. GAs my weakest link but:
FAs - 5 best (of lots)
DYKS - 5 of 37....
..umm which diffs? Page history counter a good bet? cheers, Casliber ( talk · contribs) 11:47, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Do you really think it's a good idea to have the article Guernica (painting) semi-protected indefinitely? You protected it nearly a year ago as an anti-vandalism measure. — Remember the dot ( talk) 19:24, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Your input is required here [4] Thank you. Giano ( talk) 23:19, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
So I'm contacting you. Thank you for your comment, by the way. Hiding T 23:44, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
I have to admit that, as irritating as Irpen can be, on the self-revert he was right. It strikes me that the community as a whole has finally come to the point where we're ready to start taking in the lessons of the mistake that was made. There are glimmers that more and more people are seeing what happened as symptomatic of a problem within the community, and not just one admin who went off the reservation so to speak. I don't know if you read wiki-en-l, but this evening we have been having a fairly constructive discussion about the problems of harassment and stalking. One point in particular that seems to be gaining greater acceptance is that victims of such abuse need to be supported by some formal structures within the community and with the support of the Foundation, and that an off-shoot mailing list just isn't enough. It's my own opinion that WP:PRIVATE isn't part of the solution; I cannot think of a way to write it that won't create a chill on the part of victims from coming forward and seeking support to address what is actually a real world problem. We need to get this problem into the light of day, and not allow it to fester under the carpets any longer. Risker ( talk) 05:18, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
We also need a whistleblowing protection system... DEVS EX MACINA pray 05:29, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
American copyright law is based on the U.S. Constitution which allows limitations to free speech for the promotion of "the Progress of Science and useful Arts" and not for purposes of privacy. The doctrine of fair use articulates an area where free speech is not allowed to be limited by copyright laws. Your e-mail
There is exactly zero copyright infringement in the publication of your private/secret email that was a work document related to the self-governance of the Wikipedia community. WAS 4.250 ( talk) 14:54, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
I added a few off-wiki links about you at Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)/Archive 45#Helpful Links that I think are fair.-- Laughitup2 ( talk) 23:57, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Setting new lows in thank-you spam:
Janitor's new tools
Spam must stop -- will
new mop act?
Ooops, .com
blocked
New admin, new tools
Earnest newbie furrows brow
Fare thee well
Main Page
New mess all about
Sorcerer's Apprentice mop
Not supporter's fault
A. B. so grateful
Wikipedia trembles
Watch out
DRV
A. B. wonders why
Copyright always confused
Fair use, farewell, bye
Dear RfA friend,
I will learn, chaos will fade
Thanks so much ...
A. B.
Durova, thank you so very much for your con-nomination. I look forward to (carefully) using these new tools you found me! -- A. B. (talk) 16:18, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
The Patience Barnstar | |
If for nothing else, that you haven't snapped and bitten off anyone's head given how absurd this has all been. I probably would have! Lawrence Cohen 16:46, 11 December 2007 (UTC) |
It galls me that people can think they can anonymously comment or discredit people and think they can get away with it- I guess they are relying on the fact that those who are worried about being too combative will say nothing and let it go. I hate it when people who work very hard could be ruined by such things. No need to thank me- I just felt it was necessary to speak up. Monsieurdl ( talk) 17:52, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
|
The Saints' Star
One of the things that is often credited to saints is having the "patience of a saint" and displaying a remarkably humble disposition. Anyone who would be willing to withdraw their adminship voluntarily in the first place and also civilly respond to the criticism you have received since then has I think demonstrated both of those characteristics. John Carter ( talk) 14:46, 12 December 2007 (UTC) |
And, trust me on this, several of the so-called "real" saints weren't what one would call perfect people throughout their entire lives, and made a mistake or two or more. That isn't held against them by the churches, and I don't think it would be fair for us to apply that standard either. John Carter ( talk) 21:59, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Please check your commons talk page... -- tomascastelazo ( talk) 03:35, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Hello, I've apparently qualified for this award.
Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ( Converse) 05:19, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
My apologies Durova. I did not see a similar request for the same user. I hope you don't mind, but I moved my comments into this subsection of the original request. Anyway, the user has now met the requirements for a "Imperial Triple Crown Jewels". ( Guyinblack25 talk 20:08, 17 December 2007 (UTC))
Original posting
Hello, I stumbled upon your Triple Crown award page and would like to say that this is a very cool and worthwhile idea to help encourage editors to create high quality editors. Anyway, to the point, I would like to put in a request for a fellow editor.
O.K. Durova, I have 4 FA's, 1 FL, 9 GA's and 28 DYK's. Do I make the grade (smile). Come on over my user page and check it out. Tony the Marine ( talk) 06:58, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
-- Cirt ( talk) 14:11, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Durova, I don't mean to be rude, but in light of your continued comments all over policy pages, Wikipedia: project space, ArbCom pages, AfD's, RfAdm, RfArbs, WP:AN, WP:ANI, Jimbo's talk, arbitrator's talk page, award-distribution, etc., etc., etc., that is your continued participation in attempts to be running the Wikipedia instead of writing it, please reflect more on the advises several people have given you, myself included. Please consider a long-term withdrawal fully into the article space, something you do very well when you do it. This withdrawal would be perfect if it also covered ceasing the invisible, but I assume still ample, email communication, google-chat with "connected" wikipedians, etc. I tried my best to help you by trying to defuse some of your questions, including, what I viewed as a big misunderstanding of the old incident. I am sorry that I am putting this in such a blunt form but you aren't a timid girl either, and besides, several similar messages from others seemed to have been insufficient.
If you intend to follow my advise, I will try to sweeten it a little :). You pick an article or a topic, related to Russia (which I know interests you) and I will put aside time to help if you want. Admittedly, I am not Ghirla, but I also have written a thing or two around here.
Thanks again for your consideration and I did not mean to have this soundi patronizing, demeaning or otherwise uncivilly. When I am pissed off I either write articles or take a wikibreak. Worked wonders for me. Cheers, -- Irpen 22:27, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
I did not mean to discount your article-space contribution. I did not even say there should be more of that (why would I?) I said that in view of what we all know there should be less of the rest and, preferably, none of the rest, including off-line, for a good and long period of time. I suggested more article work only because I know it helps to take a break from running wikipedia. Fishing or hiking helps just as much and is even better for health. But Wikipedia is an addiction, ask me how I know, and a complete withdrawal from running it to writing it manages to do the trick without overcoming the addiction itself, while going to the flight school, skiing, diving or windsurfing (I don't know what is your favorite dope), requires actually to take a break which is not always possible (or easy). -- Irpen 23:30, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Not sure what you mean. By "dope" I meant one of those activities ("flight school, skiing, diving or windsurfing") not knowing which one is your cup of tea. It was not meant to hint towards any of the illicit drugs, alcohol or that kind of thing. If this read differently, it was not meant like anything of that sort. -- Irpen 00:18, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
"There would be a different problem if I followed your advice to the letter, though, because that would embolden the people who harassed me to repeat the same tactics on other volunteers. I respect my fellow volunteers too much to turn my back on them." If you are saying you can't take a week off, then your hubris is showing. WAS 4.250 ( talk) 02:05, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Yes, you are correct, I worded that badly in that I was thinking more of the proposed block against Giano. I will refactor that. BLACKKITE 07:14, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
If "refactor" means "strike it out", I'll ask: why? I didn't gloat, kick, or use insulting names, and treated him far better than he treated me. Kww ( talk) 22:50, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
I should have done this a while ago. I was not thinking that there would be a possible COI issue with closing your AFD. I should have thought better and I apologize. Best, Mercury 02:42, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
Replied there. Cheers. LessHeard vanU ( talk) 13:27, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Wishing you and yours the very best of the holiday season. May the coming year bring you peace, joy, health and happiness. God bless us, every one! Jeffpw ( talk) 20:02, 14 December 2007 (UTC) |
Thank you! Durova Charge! 23:03, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
Durova, while I do mention you several times, I'd like to apologize if I make it sound as if I have a particular problem with you. I do think the block of !! was a bad call, but you relinquished the mop and all of these calls for more information from you are in extremely bad form and meant to continue drama, IMO. I mainly mentioned you, because of the reasons Mercury mentioned above. The COI should have been obvious to anyone in both cases where he used his tools in regards to you. I believe you (possibly at DRV) said that if he had approached you, you would have advised him not to close it. To me this shows a real lack of judgment on Mercury's part, and it's part of a pattern I've witnessed from him since before he became an admin. I opposed his RFA, because of his informal mediation of sensitive articles about children who had been abducted. He showed poor judgment there, and often attempted to prop up a now banned contributor who wanted to reveal as much personal information about these kids as possible. It continued with some things I witnessed at the now defunct CSN noticeboard in closing threads and other clerk related actions, as well as his block of Orangemarlin. These lapses of judgment are a pattern I've seen with him, and I mentioned your name only to show that the pattern continued. I'm sorry if you felt that I was calling you out in anyway, as I think that with your resignation as an administrator, you've given more than your pound of flesh, and you should be allowed to move on. Again, I apologize. AniMate 00:14, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Now that you made some sound judgments and brilliant insights in the Mercury affair. I was wondering if it is a good time to nominate you for adminship. Or is it a bit too early?-- Certified.Gangsta ( talk) 00:39, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
I often help out with DYK. I happened to see your name and hook while looking to help out DYK. The hook is scheduled to appear in a few hours. I last remember seeing your name involved in some controversy. It's wonderful to see that you are still a major contributing editor to WP after this. (Kids, don't click on this link! Prone to create nightmares!)
With WP so big, many people never meet each other except in fights in at ANI, AN, etc! Archtransit ( talk) 21:33, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 ( talk) 23:41, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Interesting! Viridae Talk 23:39, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Miranda 04:08, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Is there anything else that I need to do? Thanks. Rufous-crowned Sparrow ( talk) 21:17, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Almost surely not enough DYKs, I fear. Ah, weel! I shall work on that later =) Adam Cuerden talk 08:19, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Hallo, I see you removed the "textiles" cat from Salts Mill. I'd assigned it for want of anything more precise, to reflect its connection with the textile industry. Looking round again today, I would like to create a new category Category:History of the textile industry as a subcategory of Category:Industrial history and also of Category:Textiles. I'd assign it to various historic mill buildings (not all of which are currently Category:Industry museums or Category:Textile museums), and the people and inventions referred to in Timeline of clothing and textiles technology (from 18th century) and Textile manufacture during the Industrial Revolution. There is already a Category:History of the petroleum industry as a precedent. I've looked at WP:CAT and can't see a problem with this, but thought I'd run it past you as you've been working on the textiles category. What do you think of the idea? PamD ( talk) 08:40, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
I was moving hooks to the next update. Made a mistake and moved yours. Fixed it by putting it back (Dec 17). I noticed that you have a photo. Modify it by adding "pictured". Got to run now are I'd do it. If I do it in haste, I may make more errors like I just did. Archtransit ( talk) 20:41, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
We've submitted a revision, 3 people voted yes, one voted no. shouldn't that make the revision to the Adult Career Section good?
Matt Sanchez (
talk)
23:55, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi Durova,
look at this diff. He posts a babel with “This User likes Swastikas”. My problem is in first line: In Germany it is forbidden by Law to use the symbols of e. g. the NSDAP, the lawgiver doesn't ask who used this symbols decades before or if it is rotated, stretched or turned. The lawgiver says: A swatika is a swatika is a swastika and I banned them from public. Wikipedia isn't allowed to show it, because the Servers are located in Amsterdam oder St. Petersburg. We are allowed to do so, because of Wikipedias aim to change the world and spreading knowledge and so on. Quoting § 86 Strafgesetzbuch “der staatsbürgerlichen Aufklärung, der Abwehr verfassungswidriger Bestrebungen, der Kunst oder der Wissenschaft, der Forschung oder der Lehre, der Berichterstattung über Vorgänge des Zeitgeschehens oder der Geschichte oder ähnlichen Zwecken dient” are the only reasons to show a swastika. Posting a picture from the Nazi Party Rallye with lots of Swastikas in an article about the Nazi Party Rallye is ok, but messing around in a discussion with this Babel is no-go and just trolling, because this is not educational, no news coverage, no arts, no science and so on. A prosecutor won't ask, where wikipedias server are standing, he will ask who wrote it and where lives he. Mms is a “man on a mission” and didn't want to believe and got blocked for one year a few minutes ago, not because of the swastikas, because wasn't able to compromise. I won't make a report at my police post and if he is lucky, no one else will do. Perhaps my english is to rusted to go proper into the circumstances of this case, but I hope you can unterstand my Problem now. Best regards and a merry Christmas Achates ( talk) 13:37, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
With regard to your comment on the Cuerden case.
In the interest of keeping that page on topic, I'll reply here.
I don't believe that I supported any meaningful sanctions against you in the recent arbcom case in which you were involved. I believe that "admin recall" is a misguided policy, and recent events have borne that out in at least two cases. I think that it is unfortunate that you resigned your bit. The case never would have even been accepted had you not implied, by directing queries about your block to the arbcom, that we were somehow involved in the decision to make the block. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 17:15, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
I just got a DYK for Are You There? (annoyingly, I ended up moving over the update it was in, so the DYK awarding is in my name.) User:Ssilvers also points out I helped with Maritana, another DYK, but realise that my contribution is somewhat limited - cast list and image, mainly, as Ssilvers got to most of it before I could. The GA and FA can be taken from my previous list, I guess. =) Adam Cuerden talk 10:44, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Sorry. Here ye go.
Orethrius (
talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{
subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
...but a WikiSmile was the best template I could find. You're going through a difficult time now, and I agree with Alex Bakharev: this is a time when you need our protection and support. I don't speak out often; and when I do, it's often in semi-serious outrage at some nitwit debating whether an article should have eighteen copyvio images in it, or just the usual five. This is not one of those times. This is a time where I honestly feel you need faith in your abilities and love more than anything in the world, and I hope a subtle WikiSmile can help you to get through this mess. Take care. :) Orethrius ( talk) 05:03, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Well done. The ability to laugh at oneself is a large part of my definition of a "classy" person. I loved the title of the thread, loved the way you've handled it. - Philippe | Talk 18:26, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
... are rather strong, but so is the strong whiff of "courteous" relationships going on in this community. My communications with all other members are aboveboard, for all to see. Any other arrangement is, by my definition, corruption of the principles of openness which Wikipedia once stood for. So no thank you, I do not care to "refactor" my comments, nor do I wish to hide them on a secret mailing list. Cleduc ( talk)
If it makes any difference to clarify, this nomination was an outgrowth of a discussion I've been having with a Harvard student who's writing a thesis on Wikipedia. For about six weeks we've been in periodic contact. This site's deletion dynamics play a role in her study and she recently mentioned the different outcomes of some similar biography nominations. I had nominated some of the other pages, but never this one. The timing was awkward, I agree, but the previous nominations set such a clear precedent for objectivity that I doubted anyone would contstrue mischief. I haven't nominated anything on that student's behalf, really, (this was my idea) and it's doubtful the result of this would even happen in time for the thesis deadline. I won't deny we were curious. Another nomination seemed justifiable after half a year and the other precedents. Angela Beesley agreed to try it. Durova Charge! 01:33, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I hope you agree this is a fair request? [1] Durova Charge! 23:58, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
I was reading the article on Joan of Arc and saw that the suggestion that Joan may have had a hormonal abnormality dismissed as "Old fringe theory" warmed over.
I am interested in learning more about Joan and would like to know (particularly if there are any online documentary resources that might help) why the theory was discredited, and possibly any related theories. Particularly I am intrigued by the suggestion that Joan may have been both schizophrenic and transsexual (i.e. female-to-male Harry Benjamin syndrome).
Thank you,
-- Lil Miss Picky ( talk) 14:01, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for clarifying, Durova. It wasn't my intention to suggest that you were calling schizophrenia a fringe theory. What has engaged my curiosity is the question of whether Joan had reasons other than the obvious ones in the historic record for adopting masculine dress. If you are able to shed any further light on the issue I would be very grateful. -- Lil Miss Picky ( talk) 16:14, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Everywhere I look right now you seem to be in the thick of controversy. Unfortunately it has the effect of making the debate about you and your reactions and not the issue. Can you please back off, even for a week or two. Someone else can make the points. Giano, for instance, rarely participated in AfD - your presence makes sure he is. But a week after your mistake you are nominating high profile articles for deletion - stirring the Daniel Brandt pot, and commenting on high-profile RfArbs - and I can't remember what else. Now some of the comments you make, I agree with. But it is beginning to look like you are seeking drama as some sort of vindication for what happened to you - and you are certainly not helping the issues. I'm not asking you to withdraw from the community - but perhaps do something non-controversial for a month or so. Thanks.-- Docg 16:13, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Um, could you address this kind of obvious disruption: throwaway IP insinuates misconduct. [2] Durova Charge! 21:35, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Hello. This is not a joke but my Block log is empty. So I want you to block my user account for a time of 30 min. Please do so as my request. D@rk talk 19:03, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
First of all, I've been meaning to tell you of my appreciation for your efforts in aiding that Harvard kid. I may be starting on my own thesis there before Spring (on a topic wholly unrelated to wikipedia, mind you), and the only reason I'm not thanking you on behalf of the University and all of academia is that's obviously far beyond my bailiwick. But, long story short, if you ever do reapply for adminship, you've earned my vote.
As for Ms. Beesley, I wouldn't have known her from a hole in the ground. Today I've learned "Ŝi estas kunfondinto kaj vicprezidanto por la komunejaj rilatoj de Wikia Inc." and even though my Esperanto is, to put it mildly, rusty, I am certainly perplexed that such a person would want to pull a "Daniel Brandt" to begin with; yet, of course, at the same time that's absolutely none of my business. There should be other avenues available for someone who probably has WP:OFFICE on speed dial; but maybe she'll sleep better a night believing she's gone about it the "right wey." However, I don't share that belief in this case.
What I ultimately reject here is the way "marginal notability" -- a rule invented for, if you'll pardon my French, "freeks and geeks" -- is now being used to delete a biography which actually meets notability in all respects: a sourced biography of a corporate officer of a powerful and well known corporation. Arguably, corporations in many ways run our lives in this modern world, and the number of board members in our world are a small and powerful subset of the general population (even smaller considering many sit on multiple boards). I don't particularly care for a precedent which enables them all to disappear from our knowledge base. Don't think others won't come forward with the argument that if Ms. Beesley was "marginally notable" then they must be too; that's where lawsuits come from. I guess I just believe that's a bad thing. -- Kendrick7 talk 04:09, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Ok then, hmmm. GAs my weakest link but:
FAs - 5 best (of lots)
DYKS - 5 of 37....
..umm which diffs? Page history counter a good bet? cheers, Casliber ( talk · contribs) 11:47, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Do you really think it's a good idea to have the article Guernica (painting) semi-protected indefinitely? You protected it nearly a year ago as an anti-vandalism measure. — Remember the dot ( talk) 19:24, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
Your input is required here [4] Thank you. Giano ( talk) 23:19, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
So I'm contacting you. Thank you for your comment, by the way. Hiding T 23:44, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
I have to admit that, as irritating as Irpen can be, on the self-revert he was right. It strikes me that the community as a whole has finally come to the point where we're ready to start taking in the lessons of the mistake that was made. There are glimmers that more and more people are seeing what happened as symptomatic of a problem within the community, and not just one admin who went off the reservation so to speak. I don't know if you read wiki-en-l, but this evening we have been having a fairly constructive discussion about the problems of harassment and stalking. One point in particular that seems to be gaining greater acceptance is that victims of such abuse need to be supported by some formal structures within the community and with the support of the Foundation, and that an off-shoot mailing list just isn't enough. It's my own opinion that WP:PRIVATE isn't part of the solution; I cannot think of a way to write it that won't create a chill on the part of victims from coming forward and seeking support to address what is actually a real world problem. We need to get this problem into the light of day, and not allow it to fester under the carpets any longer. Risker ( talk) 05:18, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
We also need a whistleblowing protection system... DEVS EX MACINA pray 05:29, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
American copyright law is based on the U.S. Constitution which allows limitations to free speech for the promotion of "the Progress of Science and useful Arts" and not for purposes of privacy. The doctrine of fair use articulates an area where free speech is not allowed to be limited by copyright laws. Your e-mail
There is exactly zero copyright infringement in the publication of your private/secret email that was a work document related to the self-governance of the Wikipedia community. WAS 4.250 ( talk) 14:54, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
I added a few off-wiki links about you at Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)/Archive 45#Helpful Links that I think are fair.-- Laughitup2 ( talk) 23:57, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Setting new lows in thank-you spam:
Janitor's new tools
Spam must stop -- will
new mop act?
Ooops, .com
blocked
New admin, new tools
Earnest newbie furrows brow
Fare thee well
Main Page
New mess all about
Sorcerer's Apprentice mop
Not supporter's fault
A. B. so grateful
Wikipedia trembles
Watch out
DRV
A. B. wonders why
Copyright always confused
Fair use, farewell, bye
Dear RfA friend,
I will learn, chaos will fade
Thanks so much ...
A. B.
Durova, thank you so very much for your con-nomination. I look forward to (carefully) using these new tools you found me! -- A. B. (talk) 16:18, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
The Patience Barnstar | |
If for nothing else, that you haven't snapped and bitten off anyone's head given how absurd this has all been. I probably would have! Lawrence Cohen 16:46, 11 December 2007 (UTC) |
It galls me that people can think they can anonymously comment or discredit people and think they can get away with it- I guess they are relying on the fact that those who are worried about being too combative will say nothing and let it go. I hate it when people who work very hard could be ruined by such things. No need to thank me- I just felt it was necessary to speak up. Monsieurdl ( talk) 17:52, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
|
The Saints' Star
One of the things that is often credited to saints is having the "patience of a saint" and displaying a remarkably humble disposition. Anyone who would be willing to withdraw their adminship voluntarily in the first place and also civilly respond to the criticism you have received since then has I think demonstrated both of those characteristics. John Carter ( talk) 14:46, 12 December 2007 (UTC) |
And, trust me on this, several of the so-called "real" saints weren't what one would call perfect people throughout their entire lives, and made a mistake or two or more. That isn't held against them by the churches, and I don't think it would be fair for us to apply that standard either. John Carter ( talk) 21:59, 11 December 2007 (UTC)
Please check your commons talk page... -- tomascastelazo ( talk) 03:35, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Hello, I've apparently qualified for this award.
Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ( Converse) 05:19, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
My apologies Durova. I did not see a similar request for the same user. I hope you don't mind, but I moved my comments into this subsection of the original request. Anyway, the user has now met the requirements for a "Imperial Triple Crown Jewels". ( Guyinblack25 talk 20:08, 17 December 2007 (UTC))
Original posting
Hello, I stumbled upon your Triple Crown award page and would like to say that this is a very cool and worthwhile idea to help encourage editors to create high quality editors. Anyway, to the point, I would like to put in a request for a fellow editor.
O.K. Durova, I have 4 FA's, 1 FL, 9 GA's and 28 DYK's. Do I make the grade (smile). Come on over my user page and check it out. Tony the Marine ( talk) 06:58, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
-- Cirt ( talk) 14:11, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Durova, I don't mean to be rude, but in light of your continued comments all over policy pages, Wikipedia: project space, ArbCom pages, AfD's, RfAdm, RfArbs, WP:AN, WP:ANI, Jimbo's talk, arbitrator's talk page, award-distribution, etc., etc., etc., that is your continued participation in attempts to be running the Wikipedia instead of writing it, please reflect more on the advises several people have given you, myself included. Please consider a long-term withdrawal fully into the article space, something you do very well when you do it. This withdrawal would be perfect if it also covered ceasing the invisible, but I assume still ample, email communication, google-chat with "connected" wikipedians, etc. I tried my best to help you by trying to defuse some of your questions, including, what I viewed as a big misunderstanding of the old incident. I am sorry that I am putting this in such a blunt form but you aren't a timid girl either, and besides, several similar messages from others seemed to have been insufficient.
If you intend to follow my advise, I will try to sweeten it a little :). You pick an article or a topic, related to Russia (which I know interests you) and I will put aside time to help if you want. Admittedly, I am not Ghirla, but I also have written a thing or two around here.
Thanks again for your consideration and I did not mean to have this soundi patronizing, demeaning or otherwise uncivilly. When I am pissed off I either write articles or take a wikibreak. Worked wonders for me. Cheers, -- Irpen 22:27, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
I did not mean to discount your article-space contribution. I did not even say there should be more of that (why would I?) I said that in view of what we all know there should be less of the rest and, preferably, none of the rest, including off-line, for a good and long period of time. I suggested more article work only because I know it helps to take a break from running wikipedia. Fishing or hiking helps just as much and is even better for health. But Wikipedia is an addiction, ask me how I know, and a complete withdrawal from running it to writing it manages to do the trick without overcoming the addiction itself, while going to the flight school, skiing, diving or windsurfing (I don't know what is your favorite dope), requires actually to take a break which is not always possible (or easy). -- Irpen 23:30, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Not sure what you mean. By "dope" I meant one of those activities ("flight school, skiing, diving or windsurfing") not knowing which one is your cup of tea. It was not meant to hint towards any of the illicit drugs, alcohol or that kind of thing. If this read differently, it was not meant like anything of that sort. -- Irpen 00:18, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
"There would be a different problem if I followed your advice to the letter, though, because that would embolden the people who harassed me to repeat the same tactics on other volunteers. I respect my fellow volunteers too much to turn my back on them." If you are saying you can't take a week off, then your hubris is showing. WAS 4.250 ( talk) 02:05, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Yes, you are correct, I worded that badly in that I was thinking more of the proposed block against Giano. I will refactor that. BLACKKITE 07:14, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
If "refactor" means "strike it out", I'll ask: why? I didn't gloat, kick, or use insulting names, and treated him far better than he treated me. Kww ( talk) 22:50, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
I should have done this a while ago. I was not thinking that there would be a possible COI issue with closing your AFD. I should have thought better and I apologize. Best, Mercury 02:42, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
Replied there. Cheers. LessHeard vanU ( talk) 13:27, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Wishing you and yours the very best of the holiday season. May the coming year bring you peace, joy, health and happiness. God bless us, every one! Jeffpw ( talk) 20:02, 14 December 2007 (UTC) |
Thank you! Durova Charge! 23:03, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
Durova, while I do mention you several times, I'd like to apologize if I make it sound as if I have a particular problem with you. I do think the block of !! was a bad call, but you relinquished the mop and all of these calls for more information from you are in extremely bad form and meant to continue drama, IMO. I mainly mentioned you, because of the reasons Mercury mentioned above. The COI should have been obvious to anyone in both cases where he used his tools in regards to you. I believe you (possibly at DRV) said that if he had approached you, you would have advised him not to close it. To me this shows a real lack of judgment on Mercury's part, and it's part of a pattern I've witnessed from him since before he became an admin. I opposed his RFA, because of his informal mediation of sensitive articles about children who had been abducted. He showed poor judgment there, and often attempted to prop up a now banned contributor who wanted to reveal as much personal information about these kids as possible. It continued with some things I witnessed at the now defunct CSN noticeboard in closing threads and other clerk related actions, as well as his block of Orangemarlin. These lapses of judgment are a pattern I've seen with him, and I mentioned your name only to show that the pattern continued. I'm sorry if you felt that I was calling you out in anyway, as I think that with your resignation as an administrator, you've given more than your pound of flesh, and you should be allowed to move on. Again, I apologize. AniMate 00:14, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Now that you made some sound judgments and brilliant insights in the Mercury affair. I was wondering if it is a good time to nominate you for adminship. Or is it a bit too early?-- Certified.Gangsta ( talk) 00:39, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
I often help out with DYK. I happened to see your name and hook while looking to help out DYK. The hook is scheduled to appear in a few hours. I last remember seeing your name involved in some controversy. It's wonderful to see that you are still a major contributing editor to WP after this. (Kids, don't click on this link! Prone to create nightmares!)
With WP so big, many people never meet each other except in fights in at ANI, AN, etc! Archtransit ( talk) 21:33, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 ( talk) 23:41, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Interesting! Viridae Talk 23:39, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Miranda 04:08, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Is there anything else that I need to do? Thanks. Rufous-crowned Sparrow ( talk) 21:17, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Almost surely not enough DYKs, I fear. Ah, weel! I shall work on that later =) Adam Cuerden talk 08:19, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Hallo, I see you removed the "textiles" cat from Salts Mill. I'd assigned it for want of anything more precise, to reflect its connection with the textile industry. Looking round again today, I would like to create a new category Category:History of the textile industry as a subcategory of Category:Industrial history and also of Category:Textiles. I'd assign it to various historic mill buildings (not all of which are currently Category:Industry museums or Category:Textile museums), and the people and inventions referred to in Timeline of clothing and textiles technology (from 18th century) and Textile manufacture during the Industrial Revolution. There is already a Category:History of the petroleum industry as a precedent. I've looked at WP:CAT and can't see a problem with this, but thought I'd run it past you as you've been working on the textiles category. What do you think of the idea? PamD ( talk) 08:40, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
I was moving hooks to the next update. Made a mistake and moved yours. Fixed it by putting it back (Dec 17). I noticed that you have a photo. Modify it by adding "pictured". Got to run now are I'd do it. If I do it in haste, I may make more errors like I just did. Archtransit ( talk) 20:41, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
We've submitted a revision, 3 people voted yes, one voted no. shouldn't that make the revision to the Adult Career Section good?
Matt Sanchez (
talk)
23:55, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi Durova,
look at this diff. He posts a babel with “This User likes Swastikas”. My problem is in first line: In Germany it is forbidden by Law to use the symbols of e. g. the NSDAP, the lawgiver doesn't ask who used this symbols decades before or if it is rotated, stretched or turned. The lawgiver says: A swatika is a swatika is a swastika and I banned them from public. Wikipedia isn't allowed to show it, because the Servers are located in Amsterdam oder St. Petersburg. We are allowed to do so, because of Wikipedias aim to change the world and spreading knowledge and so on. Quoting § 86 Strafgesetzbuch “der staatsbürgerlichen Aufklärung, der Abwehr verfassungswidriger Bestrebungen, der Kunst oder der Wissenschaft, der Forschung oder der Lehre, der Berichterstattung über Vorgänge des Zeitgeschehens oder der Geschichte oder ähnlichen Zwecken dient” are the only reasons to show a swastika. Posting a picture from the Nazi Party Rallye with lots of Swastikas in an article about the Nazi Party Rallye is ok, but messing around in a discussion with this Babel is no-go and just trolling, because this is not educational, no news coverage, no arts, no science and so on. A prosecutor won't ask, where wikipedias server are standing, he will ask who wrote it and where lives he. Mms is a “man on a mission” and didn't want to believe and got blocked for one year a few minutes ago, not because of the swastikas, because wasn't able to compromise. I won't make a report at my police post and if he is lucky, no one else will do. Perhaps my english is to rusted to go proper into the circumstances of this case, but I hope you can unterstand my Problem now. Best regards and a merry Christmas Achates ( talk) 13:37, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
With regard to your comment on the Cuerden case.
In the interest of keeping that page on topic, I'll reply here.
I don't believe that I supported any meaningful sanctions against you in the recent arbcom case in which you were involved. I believe that "admin recall" is a misguided policy, and recent events have borne that out in at least two cases. I think that it is unfortunate that you resigned your bit. The case never would have even been accepted had you not implied, by directing queries about your block to the arbcom, that we were somehow involved in the decision to make the block. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 17:15, 20 December 2007 (UTC)