Hi Durova, and Happy New Year!
I was really touched by your and Filll's coronation, but I don't think that I deserve it. :( To be sure, I've helped out with a few Featured Articles and I earned one DYK very early in my Wiki-career (the funny story about Edwin Joseph Cohn's blood-protein purification demonstration). But I don't really have any Good Articles to my credit. I feel that I did help Harold Pinter become a Good Article, but my contributions were paltry and trivial compared to the amazing work of NYScholar, who deserves all the credit for that article. I hope to earn a Good Article someday, perhaps for Usher syndrome or Catullus 2 or Soddy's hexlet, but so far it's eluded me.
So I have to lay your three-fold crowns back at your feet until I do earn them. Much as I admire Freya, I can't wear a cloak of borrowed feathers. :)
If you have any tips for me, that'd be great! I've been a little despondent at how seldom my articles are awarded a DYK. :( I've started about 4000 referenced articles by now and only 1 has ever gotten a DYK; I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong. Admittedly, they're usually on pretty technical subjects that a general reader would probably find boring. :( Willow ( talk) 20:23, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for your speedy reply and offer of help! I'm a little embarrassed to admit that I didn't know that we're supposed to submit our own work for DYK; the Edwin Cohn DYK just happened without me doing anything. Unfortunately, I think I'm done creating new articles for the time being; I've already started too many articles that need improvement desperately.
I'm not sure what you mean by "line citations" — is that the same as "inline citations"? However, I just reviewed my work at Harold Pinter and I can safely say that I didn't contribute any references. My main contributions were minor re-wordings and re-arrangements of the prose to improve the flow and to make the article pithier and more easily intelligible to lay-people. The content of the article derives entirely from NYScholar. Willow ( talk) 21:00, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Yes, I really appreciate all your work there! :D I started the TA WikiProject, but after making its main page and article assessment system, I got pulled away by a bazillion people asking me to work on other things. :( I feel awful about abandoning PKM, Calliopejen1 and the others, and I get mad at myself for getting distracted every day by something new — blah. I'll try to make your crochet symbols tonight, though. :) Willow ( talk) 21:55, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Great and gracious lady, your symbols await your craft. :)
I used the following book as my reference
{{
cite book}}
: |pages=
has extra text (
help)but then I noticed that a slightly newer book in my library has more and slightly different symbols (the crossbars are at right angles, instead of beveled)
{{
cite book}}
: |pages=
has extra text (
help)Do you have a preference? It wouldn't take much more work to add the other symbols, although I'd have to do it tomorrow night, when I'm better rested. I'm a little under the weather at the moment. :P Willow ( talk) 07:00, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
PS. I really need to shed that Freya cloak, I'm feeling really uncomfortable; please forgive me.
What a fun letter! :) I can't tell you how wonderful it is to meet another crafter here; I was awfully lonesome when I first got here. :( My main love is knitting, which I'm pretty good at; but as I'm sure you know, knitting and crochet are as close as cousins, and I do crochet for fun and to make presents and vase-doilies. I love the way you can go in any direction with crochet, and also how its easy shaping and stiffness are wonderful for making little two- and three-dimensional figures like angels. I also use crochet doilies to illustrate the principles of curvature to my knitting students: too few increases = a cup, too many = a frill, just right = flat circle. I wonder that mathematicians don't do likewise! I'm pretty lame at embroidery, although I use it as duplicate stitch (Swiss darning) in knitting, to make flowers and leaves and to give the illusion that I can knit in a perfect circle, each stitch suspended from the next; it's wonderfully mystifying (and instructive) for some students. ;)
I'm pretty flexible about instructions vs. charts, but I usually use them only at the beginning; once I figure out the pattern by doing a swatch, I rarely look at them, because you can see from the stitches themselves where you are on the pattern. It's a lot safer than trying to follow written instructions exactly (which sometimes have mistakes in them!), and it lets you adjust the pattern to fit your gauge. I'm not like some people who can watch television and knit; I have to look, but my fingers do develop a pattern memory of their own, so that I'm usually not thinking about the knitting as I do it; my mind wanders off to happy, sunny fields populated by friends and kind words. :) Willow ( talk) 08:10, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
PS. I'm pretty sure that I used the American terminology throughout, but please correct me if I'm mistaken; two heads are better than one! :)
I'm not that good — I wouldn't want to excite your anticipation, only to disappoint. :( But I do love teaching and gabbing with fellow knitters in a circle. :) I used to go to a spinning circle every week, which was a lot of fun too, but I'm running out of time these days.
I'll be happy to make you a diagram for the scallop stitch, but I know it a little differently? I'm guessing you mean a solid shell stitch, which I would do as "* 5 dc's into previous sc, sk 2 dc's, sc into middle dc, sk 2 dc *" and half-stagger on the next row? Please let me know exactly what you'd like and I'll try to draw that.
As it turned out, I didn't get a camera for Christmas, but by good fortune, I have a friend visiting who loaned me hers. So I dashed off a series of pictures for knitting that I've been thinking about for some time, although they didn't turn out too well. :( But maybe they'll inspire someone to do them better? I'll crop them and upload them later tonight. I also took two crochet pictures that I thought you might enjoy for articles on filet and scallop stitch — well, really, fan stitch, but you know it's almost the same. Right now, though, I have to finish typing in some things for Awadewit, who's been far more patient with me than I deserve. :) Willow ( talk) 23:40, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi Durova, your reply to MartinPhi on the AC RfC page should probably go on talk, not underneath their view. R. Baley ( talk) 18:31, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Durova... On several pages, I have seemed to detect a plan for Z to forward you a quantity of private emails of mine to her (or to others) through-out a period of time --- which may or may not prelim any knowledge I had of her posting here at WP. I would like you to please clarify what it is that is expected to be delivered to you and what it will seek to prove. Do realize that emails taken out of context over nearly 10 years can present a distorted perspective, drawing only upon those that would support certain contentions.
Durova, if this is what is to be considered,I request a chance to forward private emails from her to several of my addresses, JUST since the time when I had publicly established, after her mentorship began, of full and consistent support and defense of her on WP... and, also found on WP, will be a consistent pattern of my withdrawing from each and every conflict that ever threatened to develop.
Durova, since this is something that is obviously going on off-Wiki, yet is being used by you to judge me, I think it important for this to be addressed publicly on the appropriate ArbCom topic and discussion pages of the evidence and workpage topics.
Thank you for your openness and clarification of what is going on so that all can understand what your judgments are being drawn upon. A_Kiwi, TRCourage Spotted Owl ( talk) 03:20, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Needed to add, Durova... The reason I did not reveal who -I- was prior to the blackmail attempt was that I knew she wanted her real identity to remain unknown, private, so I fully respected that and anyone can see that I have a continuous history of avoiding edit warring and if anything, once or twice tried to help her see that discussing things on the talk page, using it to teach rather than humiliate and demoralize new editors would be helpful and useful. However when she was writing me frequent sweet friendly emails during the Asperger/SG riot, I heard from wiki friends that she was working against my reputation on two fronts on WP, one of these being that she was going to get me banned for having two accounts by publicly linking the two. When faced with blackmail, the only recourse you have is to remove the secret. Unfortunately, her exposing me instantly exposed her, for tens of thousands of people on the web have witnessed her behaviors through the past 11 years on the internet, for my names and her identity are paired in web history via thousands of her posts on scores of forums, lists and discussion boards, depicting me (along with the occasional others) as one kind of person or another, being dangerous for one reason or another - the reasons changed as months and years passed. Why she wanted to lose her privacy on Wiki was beyond me, but she had made her choice and thus had left me no choice.
Spotted Owl (
talk)
07:40, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
That's a really nice tribute to the lady - good stuff! Hope you had a good Christmas. John Smith's ( talk) 10:37, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
I think I got a bit more of what you were saying. I responded there. —— Martinphi ☎ Ψ Φ—— 21:49, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
User:Durova we would like your input with regards to the creating of consesus of Wikipedia:Non-administrator_rollback. To me the way it is being presented now looks like a violation of WP:NPOV and Wikipedia:Polling_is_not_a_substitute_for_discussion. The way it is now it is now it is a candidate for WP:CSD. Thank you, Igor Berger ( talk) 23:53, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm passing this case over to ArbCom. I know you had a go at trying to sort things with the Matt Sanchez article, so you might want to comment on whether they should accept or reject the case. WjB scribe 04:05, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed that you recommended WikiMedia projects as a less intense atmosphere than this one. Would you explain what those might be? Or where they are? I know about Wiki Commons, the news and books projects. Are there others? Regards, Mattisse 21:17, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
I understand what you are doing, but I think that borderline notability articles should be deleted regardless of the subject's opinion on the matter. It is incumbent upon the proposer and supporter of the article to demonstrate notability; failure to do so ends the story and requires deletion. BLP or not. We are encyclopedia not people magazine or the gossip column of their favorite rag; once people who submit articles here understand it by having borderline or unsourced crap articles deleted as fast as they are submitted we will be a better encyclopedia. Does any other encyclopedia take the position that its articles' subjects can dictate whether they should get an article or not or what its contents should be? No. To do so makes a mockery of the NPOV guidelines under which we purport to operation. Because if someone, the subject's, POV is given preferential treatment then we'll only have articles on people who want them and they'll only say what those people want them to. When Ollie North calls up WP and says, he loves having an article but all that messy Iran-Contra stuff is a problem - just remove it; or OJ Simpson doesn't want the unpleseantness of his various court cases mentioned in his bio - after all there is enough football stuff to merit inclusion here, just drop the contraversial stuff... etc. You get the point. The best way to handle this in an NPOV manner is to raise the bar to bios here at WP so that everyone meets the definition of "public figure" per US libel law (that's where WP is headquartered). As public figures deserve little to no privacy and have limited rights to pursue libel claims we should seriously cut back these no-names who manage to get to get articles here - mostly self-seving ones and welcomed, but this class of low notability people are really the problem. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 21:33, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
I hope you dont mind that I approach you, but I see that you are active working with photos on WP, and I am totally clueless on that subject. I have a small problem: I use this beautiful picture in the Bayt Jibrin article, as the dress on the left, and the black/red shawl on the wall in the background are from Bayt Jibrin. However, the dress on the right is from BerSheba. Is it possible to "cut away" the Bersheba dress for this article? The picture is also used in the Palestinian costumes, and there we ofcourse would like to keep the whole picture. Is this possible? Regards, Huldra ( talk) 23:09, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
BTW I've added a category and put the Textile Arts project template onto the talk page. Looks quite good; are you shooting for GA? Durova Charge! 02:17, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Mind if I archive this? Durova Charge! 04:08, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
User:Durova please take a look at this. User_talk:Igorberger#Roughe_Criminal_Admin sysopsoc User:65.188.38.31. I am going out for a bit. All this security investigation forensics tired me out a bit. Maybe go have a beer or someting to relax. If you need anything let me know. Regards, Igor Berger ( talk) 16:33, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm a little disturbed by the way you're presenting the Cwiki unblock situation, especially at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Matthew Hoffman/Evidence. You fail to mention that Cwiki was blocked on the basis of evidence provided by yourself, a fact unknown by me at the time I reviewed the unblock request. Whilst I am disappointed with the way I handled it myself, I did withdraw my review since it became clear that I was in over my head. I'm not entirely sure how I was supposed to know I was supposed to contact you, which is a fundamental point in your evidencve. I reviewed the block based on Guy's request at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive176#Unblock request. There is no mention of you made in that request. I too am disappointed in the way the Cwiki block was handled, but I'm also disappointed in the way it is being presented. I withdrew my review. Hiding T 16:49, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Please check your email. Thank you. Sincerely, -- Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles Tally-ho! 17:02, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello Durova and thank you for contacting me. Hmm, I'm not so sure about a picture taken on an overcast day, it would likely fail to provide enough light and the picture would be too dark (I took pictures of other rooms in the palace that were not being hit by direct sunlight that day, and they didn't turn out that well). Anyway, I may try your suggestion some other time (not sure when though coz I'll be moving to another country soon and won't be returning to Portugal for quite a few months). Thank you for your feedback. Best regards, Hús ö nd 17:24, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
-- Carabinieri ( talk) 21:33, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Bluemarine/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Bluemarine/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, John Vandenberg ( talk) 22:10, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
I saw your hook on DYK, an area where I help out often. It's good to see your name again! Someday, I might ask for your advice on policy, blocking, or investigation. Happy New Year! Archtransit ( talk) 22:23, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
The length of prose on my check was 1559 characters, which is just enough for DYK. An expansion would be nice in case anyone calls you on it, but it does pass the requirement. Wizardman 22:54, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
The
Military history WikiProject Newsletter Issue XXII (December 2007) | ||
|
New featured articles:
New A-Class articles: | |
| ||
| ||
Tag & Assess 2007 is now officially over, with slightly under 68,000 articles processed. The top twenty scores are as follows:
Although the drive is officially closed, existing participants can continue tagging until January 31 if they wish, with the extra tags counting towards their tally for barnstar purposes. We'd like to see what lessons can be learned from this drive, so we've set up a feedback workshop. Comments and feedback from participants and non-participants alike are very welcome and appreciated. | ||
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. |
Note: This newsletter was automatically delivered. Regards from the automated,
Anibot (
talk)
23:17, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
I still await the day that I earn one of these. But I have a question that I want to ask you that I've wanted to for some time now. In order to qualify for a Triple Crown, do the DYK, GA, and FC articles all have to have something in common? Do they all have to be about a similar topic? Ksy92003 (talk) 23:54, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi Durova. Though we have interacted a tiny bit in the last year (I note that you gave me a 3 hour time out last March when I was having a bad day, and we worked together a bit on spam link deletion in November), I've never really stopped to say much to you. I just wanted to let you know how impressed I've been with your contribution to the Zeraeph arbitration, and how much I appreciated it. you have been very calming and the points you've made were quite apt. It really helped a lot.
If I can ever do anything to assist you in the future, please do not hesitate to call on me. I know how important this project is to you, and I feel the same way. Take care, Jeffpw ( talk) 00:26, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Your
Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for
featured picture status,
Image:Agarplate redbloodcells edit.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates.
MER-C
02:24, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
|
Thank you for the triple crown award. Its nice to know that work here is apreciated. TomStar81 ( Talk) 04:00, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
I read that you are
a past victim of harassment and attacks, and is also very keen on preventing abuse of the project. She knows (as most of us do) some of the signs of the returning user . . . Durova enjoys the whole business of tracking down such accounts. She calls it "sleuthing".
How would you track down a returning user who is unregistered and uses constantly changing WiFi connections to make his edits impossible to track down? Eschoir ( talk) 04:48, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
User:Durova, I do not know if you remember the Mood Ring, but it would be great if the WikiSphere would reflect the mood of our community. The colour would change from one spectrum of the gama to another and would return to neutrality for WP:NPOV! Igor Berger ( talk) 05:27, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Malware
Plasmid genetic engineering.
Igor Berger (
talk) 08:42, 8 January 2008 (UTC}
his move research
bioengineering
Igor Berger (
talk)
23:03, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Can you clarify the rules for "The great triple crown race of 2008". Do the GA & FA have to be nominated after 1st Jan as the rules say "Do qualifying editing work between 1 January and 14 February"? What about articles nominated before 1st Jan which then took (a lot) of editing to achieve promotion (eg Bath, Somerset & hopefully Somerset which were both nominated in Dec 07). If not I will have to wait & see what happens to Exmoor and Grand Western Canal which were both nominated on 1st Jan.— Rod talk 10:55, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
This sockpuppet is turning into a meatpuppet which will grow up to be a popuppetier! Looks like the indentity is being engineered unaturally! I could be wrong by the editing profile does not corespond logically. Just heads up, but I do recommend a name change for the user, same like other editor has done! With a name like User:DeadlyAssassin could become a very big problem if and when involved in an editor war! Igor Berger ( talk) 01:02, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
The are no Ninja Turtles at WikiPedia..:)
I think you mis-read his comment, what he said was that ideally, there woould be established BY the ArbCom a group (he calls it, humorously, i think is the intent) a mini-cabal, and he suggested that because of traits you posess which he admires, you should be a part of said 'cabal', which would then monitor the relevant articles and behaviors. It's like saying, I think Durova OUGHT to be the referee for our game of kick the article. He was most definitely NOT taking a swipe at you. ThuranX ( talk) 01:09, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Glad y'all patched things up. I read G-Dett's comment as straight forward at first, but second guessed when I saw your reply. She is known to be clever like that but always in good fun, and I know you've had quite the cabal experience lately -- too soon? Anyway, I hope we can avoid arbitration here. Jaak is pushy, if not tendentious, but I rather imagine certain other editors would metaphorically throw him under a bus if it meant an opportunity to, once again, poor over every nick and cranny of User:PalestineRemembered's edit history and try and take him off the project too, fairly or not. As PR's supposed mentor -- though Ryan I guess more or less muscled himself in to the job too -- I'm rather concerned at that prospect. We could certainly have an interesting play date though! -- Kendrick7 talk 07:55, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello Durova. I see you've taken on the mentorship of User:Jaakobou.
It's not very clear why you've taken this on now, somehow I'd have expected the time to arrange mentoring was after the proposed arbitration where he is a prime involved party, not before. Are you in favour of the community pressing on and detailing any alleged issues you might feel they've spotted in his participation?
I'd like to mention that mentors (and other "semi-impartial mediators") in similar cases have sometimes/often suffered harassment and time-wasting demands to explain themselves, with the apparent intention to drive them off (and I've repeatedly seen it succeed!). I can assure you this is not my purpose in speaking to you now (or ever). PR talk 11:03, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
has been turned on for you, now live for non-admins WP:ROLL. Cheers, NoSeptember 19:51, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Palestine-Israel articles/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Palestine-Israel articles/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, — Rlevse • Talk • 22:20, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi Durova,
Yeah I understand that and congratulate you on the work you're doing (great job!) but I think there needs to be a limit to the weight we place on historic images. I think, especially after looking through those gettyimages books, that we over estimate the limitations on photography 50, 60, 80 or even a hundred years ago. Especially since the photos we're getting are from trained professionals who are often using what was top of the line equipment in that day. Sure we can give a little leniency, but unless the photo was taken in exceptional historic circumstances where the photo captures a spontaneous and unrepeatable moment (circumstances which would allow similar allowances in modern photographs) I think we can demand composition, lighting and subject matter from historic photos.
As an example, I think Image:American military personnel gather in Paris to celebrate the Japanese surrender.jpg is great as in certainly captures a near unrepeatable moment, Image:Douglas Fairbanks at third Liberty Loan rally HD-SN-99-02174.JPEG would be just as spectacular taken today, whereas Image:Goyathlay.jpeg with it's forced backdrop is not so great. Would it fare much different to Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Luiz Inácio da Silva if it was a modern photo? I don't know. The first two examples also show that quality was attainable even in those days.
So I respect your work and hope you'll gone on with it, but I certainly feel that the "historical" line is overused as a reason for featuring. As you seem quite interested in history, I thought I might link to a few of my favourites from getty images 1920s: [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12]
Regards, -- Fir0002 07:25, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
I think my security work is coming to an end. Cleaned up a lot of stuff and taught the community about Black Hat SEO and how to deal with it. I will be going skiing to Austria next monht! Maybe will meet some Trolls on the slops..:)
Will try to contribute to WikiPedia how I can but do not know if I want to get political. Regards, Igor Berger ( talk) 08:10, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
You commented on this issue at User talk:Jimbo Wales/Archive 31#Wikipedia surrendering users' info without a fight. It was stated there that it was not an appropriate discussion forum for the topic of how hard the Foundation should and did fight to prevent revealing the IP addresses of registered users to parties who had been criticized in a Wikipedia article and who subpoenaed the user information. I have started a discussion at the Village Pump policy page at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)# Releasing IP addresses of registered users: the Video Professor incident. Your comments are welcome. Thanks. Edison ( talk) 15:18, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
I looked at that link you posted, but did not listen to any audio that may have been associated with that blog. I'm wondering how it is evidence in the Matthew Hoffman case, but I'm not sure if you think it is very much worth listening to first. — Whig ( talk) 05:10, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
The IP harassing you about Matt Sanchez, etc. sounds like banned User:Pwok. I don't know if a checkuser can confirm or deny that. Aleta (Sing) 05:52, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Your
Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for
featured picture status,
Image:Sfearthquake3b.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates.
jjron (
talk)
09:56, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
|
Hi Durova, you probably deserve one of these too. -- jjron ( talk) 09:56, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
---- Anonymous Dissident Talk 15:55, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Dear Durova, I now have over 10,000 edits!! Sincerely, -- Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles Tally-ho! 18:54, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
User:Durova I am not really good in creating an article but I am good in finding sources. So after getting an okay from User:Jehochman I created the article and it got CSD right a way. Can you please take a look what I am doing wrong. User:Igorberger/Andy_Beard Thank you, Igor Berger ( talk) 00:17, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
If you have better information, write it up in draft form in user space and open a deletion review request. Durova Charge! 03:22, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
You made this edit removing some material from the article on Dover, Virginia. Do you think that it should possibly be oversighted, as it not only identifies the editor and attaches an IP address but also identifies his employer? Avruch talk 03:29, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Your
Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for
featured picture status,
Image:Douglas MacArthur lands Leyte1.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates.
jjron (
talk)
09:17, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
|
Boy, another one! -- jjron ( talk) 09:17, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the note. I was the actually the editor who slapped the citations missing tag on the article. However, I do have several citations from other articles I've written that mentioned this, and I can do a little more work to pull them together for this. You might be interested in Racial tension in Omaha, Nebraska and Civil Rights Movement in Omaha, Nebraska. Keep your eye on Omaha Race Riot of 1919 and I'll work on it soon. Thanks for asking! • Freechild 'sup? 11:12, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi, finally got round to finding the other alternative tank shot I was on about. I still haven't had a chance to download the fullsize version again and I've not done a side-by-side comparison, so whatever you think is fine by me. FWIW I think the one you picked is easily the better composition; the other would need a crop.
Once I get some time (soon, I hope) I intend creating an article for Mr Palmer, which may help future FPC noms of his work. It seems to me that the real value of his large-format kodachrome work – certainly among the very best quality colour photography of WWII – is almost paradoxically difficult to translate into WP encyclopedic value, and hence FPC "plus points". I realise this is true of many historical images, some of which are individually pioneering or even unique in their own right & while this has a significant bearing on selection for cleanup, for FPC there seems to be growing need to major on notability outside of the history of photography itself. I've noticed some mild but growing hostility toward the historical noms which I can sympathise with (also ambivalence to images like the furnace nom, which was widley – rightly? – judged on enc merits alone) although I cringe at accusations of "just because it's old > FPC" etc. I wonder how you feel about all this? I'm of the opinion that emphasising the relative image quality of older photos via more specialised articles might help raise their photographic profile, but I don't want to create a load of unnecessary work. -- mikaul talk 19:43, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I've restored this article and added it to the California gold rush article. Perhaps you'd be able to identify: is that Telegraph Hill in the background? Regards, DurovaCharge! 06:38, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
... I've responded on my talk page. Thanks for the input! Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:34, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Saw your message on the MILHIST talk page. I've had this on my watchlist for a couple weeks but it might need cleanup. -- BrokenSphere Msg me 00:42, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Only one way to find out. If they like it on peer review, how about conominating? Durova Charge! 05:41, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
These things take a while to download because the good files are often 150-200mb. I have to downsample of course. Durova Charge! 06:45, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Finding it was half the task. Thanks for all the work in cleaning it up and putting it up for peer review. Wouldn't have come across the alternate version otherwise. BrokenSphere Msg me 04:48, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
Put in at Commons. Thanks for the notice. BrokenSphere Msg me 20:03, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
[13] Jehochman Talk 00:46, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Over the past months, TV episodes have been redirected by (to name a couple) TTN, Eusebeus and others. No centralized discussion has taken place, so I'm asking everyone who has been involved in this issue to voice their opinions here in this centralized spot, be they pro or anti. Discussion is here [14]. -- Maniwar ( talk) 00:52, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
It is never about one article for me. But I wanted to show our community where the new information is coming from. If Matt Cutts a Google search engineer references Andy Beard on his blog that alone makes Andy notable. When many bloggers SEOs like Rand Fishken, Danny, Vanessa reference Andy or some idea they are not just bloggers but industry professionals. I hope our community will grow to understand the diffference about a senator blog and some small individual blog. Cheers, Igor Berger ( talk) 07:01, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for moving folks along on Palestinian costumes. Perhaps I've added this (and you) in vain, but you might want to look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration, which is inspired by some of the ArbCom discussion of the Sri Lanka effort. Thanks. HG | Talk 13:31, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi Durova, and Happy New Year!
I was really touched by your and Filll's coronation, but I don't think that I deserve it. :( To be sure, I've helped out with a few Featured Articles and I earned one DYK very early in my Wiki-career (the funny story about Edwin Joseph Cohn's blood-protein purification demonstration). But I don't really have any Good Articles to my credit. I feel that I did help Harold Pinter become a Good Article, but my contributions were paltry and trivial compared to the amazing work of NYScholar, who deserves all the credit for that article. I hope to earn a Good Article someday, perhaps for Usher syndrome or Catullus 2 or Soddy's hexlet, but so far it's eluded me.
So I have to lay your three-fold crowns back at your feet until I do earn them. Much as I admire Freya, I can't wear a cloak of borrowed feathers. :)
If you have any tips for me, that'd be great! I've been a little despondent at how seldom my articles are awarded a DYK. :( I've started about 4000 referenced articles by now and only 1 has ever gotten a DYK; I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong. Admittedly, they're usually on pretty technical subjects that a general reader would probably find boring. :( Willow ( talk) 20:23, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for your speedy reply and offer of help! I'm a little embarrassed to admit that I didn't know that we're supposed to submit our own work for DYK; the Edwin Cohn DYK just happened without me doing anything. Unfortunately, I think I'm done creating new articles for the time being; I've already started too many articles that need improvement desperately.
I'm not sure what you mean by "line citations" — is that the same as "inline citations"? However, I just reviewed my work at Harold Pinter and I can safely say that I didn't contribute any references. My main contributions were minor re-wordings and re-arrangements of the prose to improve the flow and to make the article pithier and more easily intelligible to lay-people. The content of the article derives entirely from NYScholar. Willow ( talk) 21:00, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Yes, I really appreciate all your work there! :D I started the TA WikiProject, but after making its main page and article assessment system, I got pulled away by a bazillion people asking me to work on other things. :( I feel awful about abandoning PKM, Calliopejen1 and the others, and I get mad at myself for getting distracted every day by something new — blah. I'll try to make your crochet symbols tonight, though. :) Willow ( talk) 21:55, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Great and gracious lady, your symbols await your craft. :)
I used the following book as my reference
{{
cite book}}
: |pages=
has extra text (
help)but then I noticed that a slightly newer book in my library has more and slightly different symbols (the crossbars are at right angles, instead of beveled)
{{
cite book}}
: |pages=
has extra text (
help)Do you have a preference? It wouldn't take much more work to add the other symbols, although I'd have to do it tomorrow night, when I'm better rested. I'm a little under the weather at the moment. :P Willow ( talk) 07:00, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
PS. I really need to shed that Freya cloak, I'm feeling really uncomfortable; please forgive me.
What a fun letter! :) I can't tell you how wonderful it is to meet another crafter here; I was awfully lonesome when I first got here. :( My main love is knitting, which I'm pretty good at; but as I'm sure you know, knitting and crochet are as close as cousins, and I do crochet for fun and to make presents and vase-doilies. I love the way you can go in any direction with crochet, and also how its easy shaping and stiffness are wonderful for making little two- and three-dimensional figures like angels. I also use crochet doilies to illustrate the principles of curvature to my knitting students: too few increases = a cup, too many = a frill, just right = flat circle. I wonder that mathematicians don't do likewise! I'm pretty lame at embroidery, although I use it as duplicate stitch (Swiss darning) in knitting, to make flowers and leaves and to give the illusion that I can knit in a perfect circle, each stitch suspended from the next; it's wonderfully mystifying (and instructive) for some students. ;)
I'm pretty flexible about instructions vs. charts, but I usually use them only at the beginning; once I figure out the pattern by doing a swatch, I rarely look at them, because you can see from the stitches themselves where you are on the pattern. It's a lot safer than trying to follow written instructions exactly (which sometimes have mistakes in them!), and it lets you adjust the pattern to fit your gauge. I'm not like some people who can watch television and knit; I have to look, but my fingers do develop a pattern memory of their own, so that I'm usually not thinking about the knitting as I do it; my mind wanders off to happy, sunny fields populated by friends and kind words. :) Willow ( talk) 08:10, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
PS. I'm pretty sure that I used the American terminology throughout, but please correct me if I'm mistaken; two heads are better than one! :)
I'm not that good — I wouldn't want to excite your anticipation, only to disappoint. :( But I do love teaching and gabbing with fellow knitters in a circle. :) I used to go to a spinning circle every week, which was a lot of fun too, but I'm running out of time these days.
I'll be happy to make you a diagram for the scallop stitch, but I know it a little differently? I'm guessing you mean a solid shell stitch, which I would do as "* 5 dc's into previous sc, sk 2 dc's, sc into middle dc, sk 2 dc *" and half-stagger on the next row? Please let me know exactly what you'd like and I'll try to draw that.
As it turned out, I didn't get a camera for Christmas, but by good fortune, I have a friend visiting who loaned me hers. So I dashed off a series of pictures for knitting that I've been thinking about for some time, although they didn't turn out too well. :( But maybe they'll inspire someone to do them better? I'll crop them and upload them later tonight. I also took two crochet pictures that I thought you might enjoy for articles on filet and scallop stitch — well, really, fan stitch, but you know it's almost the same. Right now, though, I have to finish typing in some things for Awadewit, who's been far more patient with me than I deserve. :) Willow ( talk) 23:40, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi Durova, your reply to MartinPhi on the AC RfC page should probably go on talk, not underneath their view. R. Baley ( talk) 18:31, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Durova... On several pages, I have seemed to detect a plan for Z to forward you a quantity of private emails of mine to her (or to others) through-out a period of time --- which may or may not prelim any knowledge I had of her posting here at WP. I would like you to please clarify what it is that is expected to be delivered to you and what it will seek to prove. Do realize that emails taken out of context over nearly 10 years can present a distorted perspective, drawing only upon those that would support certain contentions.
Durova, if this is what is to be considered,I request a chance to forward private emails from her to several of my addresses, JUST since the time when I had publicly established, after her mentorship began, of full and consistent support and defense of her on WP... and, also found on WP, will be a consistent pattern of my withdrawing from each and every conflict that ever threatened to develop.
Durova, since this is something that is obviously going on off-Wiki, yet is being used by you to judge me, I think it important for this to be addressed publicly on the appropriate ArbCom topic and discussion pages of the evidence and workpage topics.
Thank you for your openness and clarification of what is going on so that all can understand what your judgments are being drawn upon. A_Kiwi, TRCourage Spotted Owl ( talk) 03:20, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Needed to add, Durova... The reason I did not reveal who -I- was prior to the blackmail attempt was that I knew she wanted her real identity to remain unknown, private, so I fully respected that and anyone can see that I have a continuous history of avoiding edit warring and if anything, once or twice tried to help her see that discussing things on the talk page, using it to teach rather than humiliate and demoralize new editors would be helpful and useful. However when she was writing me frequent sweet friendly emails during the Asperger/SG riot, I heard from wiki friends that she was working against my reputation on two fronts on WP, one of these being that she was going to get me banned for having two accounts by publicly linking the two. When faced with blackmail, the only recourse you have is to remove the secret. Unfortunately, her exposing me instantly exposed her, for tens of thousands of people on the web have witnessed her behaviors through the past 11 years on the internet, for my names and her identity are paired in web history via thousands of her posts on scores of forums, lists and discussion boards, depicting me (along with the occasional others) as one kind of person or another, being dangerous for one reason or another - the reasons changed as months and years passed. Why she wanted to lose her privacy on Wiki was beyond me, but she had made her choice and thus had left me no choice.
Spotted Owl (
talk)
07:40, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
That's a really nice tribute to the lady - good stuff! Hope you had a good Christmas. John Smith's ( talk) 10:37, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
I think I got a bit more of what you were saying. I responded there. —— Martinphi ☎ Ψ Φ—— 21:49, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
User:Durova we would like your input with regards to the creating of consesus of Wikipedia:Non-administrator_rollback. To me the way it is being presented now looks like a violation of WP:NPOV and Wikipedia:Polling_is_not_a_substitute_for_discussion. The way it is now it is now it is a candidate for WP:CSD. Thank you, Igor Berger ( talk) 23:53, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm passing this case over to ArbCom. I know you had a go at trying to sort things with the Matt Sanchez article, so you might want to comment on whether they should accept or reject the case. WjB scribe 04:05, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed that you recommended WikiMedia projects as a less intense atmosphere than this one. Would you explain what those might be? Or where they are? I know about Wiki Commons, the news and books projects. Are there others? Regards, Mattisse 21:17, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
I understand what you are doing, but I think that borderline notability articles should be deleted regardless of the subject's opinion on the matter. It is incumbent upon the proposer and supporter of the article to demonstrate notability; failure to do so ends the story and requires deletion. BLP or not. We are encyclopedia not people magazine or the gossip column of their favorite rag; once people who submit articles here understand it by having borderline or unsourced crap articles deleted as fast as they are submitted we will be a better encyclopedia. Does any other encyclopedia take the position that its articles' subjects can dictate whether they should get an article or not or what its contents should be? No. To do so makes a mockery of the NPOV guidelines under which we purport to operation. Because if someone, the subject's, POV is given preferential treatment then we'll only have articles on people who want them and they'll only say what those people want them to. When Ollie North calls up WP and says, he loves having an article but all that messy Iran-Contra stuff is a problem - just remove it; or OJ Simpson doesn't want the unpleseantness of his various court cases mentioned in his bio - after all there is enough football stuff to merit inclusion here, just drop the contraversial stuff... etc. You get the point. The best way to handle this in an NPOV manner is to raise the bar to bios here at WP so that everyone meets the definition of "public figure" per US libel law (that's where WP is headquartered). As public figures deserve little to no privacy and have limited rights to pursue libel claims we should seriously cut back these no-names who manage to get to get articles here - mostly self-seving ones and welcomed, but this class of low notability people are really the problem. Carlossuarez46 ( talk) 21:33, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
I hope you dont mind that I approach you, but I see that you are active working with photos on WP, and I am totally clueless on that subject. I have a small problem: I use this beautiful picture in the Bayt Jibrin article, as the dress on the left, and the black/red shawl on the wall in the background are from Bayt Jibrin. However, the dress on the right is from BerSheba. Is it possible to "cut away" the Bersheba dress for this article? The picture is also used in the Palestinian costumes, and there we ofcourse would like to keep the whole picture. Is this possible? Regards, Huldra ( talk) 23:09, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
BTW I've added a category and put the Textile Arts project template onto the talk page. Looks quite good; are you shooting for GA? Durova Charge! 02:17, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Mind if I archive this? Durova Charge! 04:08, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
User:Durova please take a look at this. User_talk:Igorberger#Roughe_Criminal_Admin sysopsoc User:65.188.38.31. I am going out for a bit. All this security investigation forensics tired me out a bit. Maybe go have a beer or someting to relax. If you need anything let me know. Regards, Igor Berger ( talk) 16:33, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm a little disturbed by the way you're presenting the Cwiki unblock situation, especially at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Matthew Hoffman/Evidence. You fail to mention that Cwiki was blocked on the basis of evidence provided by yourself, a fact unknown by me at the time I reviewed the unblock request. Whilst I am disappointed with the way I handled it myself, I did withdraw my review since it became clear that I was in over my head. I'm not entirely sure how I was supposed to know I was supposed to contact you, which is a fundamental point in your evidencve. I reviewed the block based on Guy's request at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive176#Unblock request. There is no mention of you made in that request. I too am disappointed in the way the Cwiki block was handled, but I'm also disappointed in the way it is being presented. I withdrew my review. Hiding T 16:49, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Please check your email. Thank you. Sincerely, -- Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles Tally-ho! 17:02, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello Durova and thank you for contacting me. Hmm, I'm not so sure about a picture taken on an overcast day, it would likely fail to provide enough light and the picture would be too dark (I took pictures of other rooms in the palace that were not being hit by direct sunlight that day, and they didn't turn out that well). Anyway, I may try your suggestion some other time (not sure when though coz I'll be moving to another country soon and won't be returning to Portugal for quite a few months). Thank you for your feedback. Best regards, Hús ö nd 17:24, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
-- Carabinieri ( talk) 21:33, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Bluemarine/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Bluemarine/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, John Vandenberg ( talk) 22:10, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
I saw your hook on DYK, an area where I help out often. It's good to see your name again! Someday, I might ask for your advice on policy, blocking, or investigation. Happy New Year! Archtransit ( talk) 22:23, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
The length of prose on my check was 1559 characters, which is just enough for DYK. An expansion would be nice in case anyone calls you on it, but it does pass the requirement. Wizardman 22:54, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
The
Military history WikiProject Newsletter Issue XXII (December 2007) | ||
|
New featured articles:
New A-Class articles: | |
| ||
| ||
Tag & Assess 2007 is now officially over, with slightly under 68,000 articles processed. The top twenty scores are as follows:
Although the drive is officially closed, existing participants can continue tagging until January 31 if they wish, with the extra tags counting towards their tally for barnstar purposes. We'd like to see what lessons can be learned from this drive, so we've set up a feedback workshop. Comments and feedback from participants and non-participants alike are very welcome and appreciated. | ||
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. |
Note: This newsletter was automatically delivered. Regards from the automated,
Anibot (
talk)
23:17, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
I still await the day that I earn one of these. But I have a question that I want to ask you that I've wanted to for some time now. In order to qualify for a Triple Crown, do the DYK, GA, and FC articles all have to have something in common? Do they all have to be about a similar topic? Ksy92003 (talk) 23:54, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi Durova. Though we have interacted a tiny bit in the last year (I note that you gave me a 3 hour time out last March when I was having a bad day, and we worked together a bit on spam link deletion in November), I've never really stopped to say much to you. I just wanted to let you know how impressed I've been with your contribution to the Zeraeph arbitration, and how much I appreciated it. you have been very calming and the points you've made were quite apt. It really helped a lot.
If I can ever do anything to assist you in the future, please do not hesitate to call on me. I know how important this project is to you, and I feel the same way. Take care, Jeffpw ( talk) 00:26, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Your
Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for
featured picture status,
Image:Agarplate redbloodcells edit.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates.
MER-C
02:24, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
|
Thank you for the triple crown award. Its nice to know that work here is apreciated. TomStar81 ( Talk) 04:00, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
I read that you are
a past victim of harassment and attacks, and is also very keen on preventing abuse of the project. She knows (as most of us do) some of the signs of the returning user . . . Durova enjoys the whole business of tracking down such accounts. She calls it "sleuthing".
How would you track down a returning user who is unregistered and uses constantly changing WiFi connections to make his edits impossible to track down? Eschoir ( talk) 04:48, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
User:Durova, I do not know if you remember the Mood Ring, but it would be great if the WikiSphere would reflect the mood of our community. The colour would change from one spectrum of the gama to another and would return to neutrality for WP:NPOV! Igor Berger ( talk) 05:27, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Malware
Plasmid genetic engineering.
Igor Berger (
talk) 08:42, 8 January 2008 (UTC}
his move research
bioengineering
Igor Berger (
talk)
23:03, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Can you clarify the rules for "The great triple crown race of 2008". Do the GA & FA have to be nominated after 1st Jan as the rules say "Do qualifying editing work between 1 January and 14 February"? What about articles nominated before 1st Jan which then took (a lot) of editing to achieve promotion (eg Bath, Somerset & hopefully Somerset which were both nominated in Dec 07). If not I will have to wait & see what happens to Exmoor and Grand Western Canal which were both nominated on 1st Jan.— Rod talk 10:55, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
This sockpuppet is turning into a meatpuppet which will grow up to be a popuppetier! Looks like the indentity is being engineered unaturally! I could be wrong by the editing profile does not corespond logically. Just heads up, but I do recommend a name change for the user, same like other editor has done! With a name like User:DeadlyAssassin could become a very big problem if and when involved in an editor war! Igor Berger ( talk) 01:02, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
The are no Ninja Turtles at WikiPedia..:)
I think you mis-read his comment, what he said was that ideally, there woould be established BY the ArbCom a group (he calls it, humorously, i think is the intent) a mini-cabal, and he suggested that because of traits you posess which he admires, you should be a part of said 'cabal', which would then monitor the relevant articles and behaviors. It's like saying, I think Durova OUGHT to be the referee for our game of kick the article. He was most definitely NOT taking a swipe at you. ThuranX ( talk) 01:09, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Glad y'all patched things up. I read G-Dett's comment as straight forward at first, but second guessed when I saw your reply. She is known to be clever like that but always in good fun, and I know you've had quite the cabal experience lately -- too soon? Anyway, I hope we can avoid arbitration here. Jaak is pushy, if not tendentious, but I rather imagine certain other editors would metaphorically throw him under a bus if it meant an opportunity to, once again, poor over every nick and cranny of User:PalestineRemembered's edit history and try and take him off the project too, fairly or not. As PR's supposed mentor -- though Ryan I guess more or less muscled himself in to the job too -- I'm rather concerned at that prospect. We could certainly have an interesting play date though! -- Kendrick7 talk 07:55, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello Durova. I see you've taken on the mentorship of User:Jaakobou.
It's not very clear why you've taken this on now, somehow I'd have expected the time to arrange mentoring was after the proposed arbitration where he is a prime involved party, not before. Are you in favour of the community pressing on and detailing any alleged issues you might feel they've spotted in his participation?
I'd like to mention that mentors (and other "semi-impartial mediators") in similar cases have sometimes/often suffered harassment and time-wasting demands to explain themselves, with the apparent intention to drive them off (and I've repeatedly seen it succeed!). I can assure you this is not my purpose in speaking to you now (or ever). PR talk 11:03, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
has been turned on for you, now live for non-admins WP:ROLL. Cheers, NoSeptember 19:51, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Palestine-Israel articles/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Palestine-Israel articles/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, — Rlevse • Talk • 22:20, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi Durova,
Yeah I understand that and congratulate you on the work you're doing (great job!) but I think there needs to be a limit to the weight we place on historic images. I think, especially after looking through those gettyimages books, that we over estimate the limitations on photography 50, 60, 80 or even a hundred years ago. Especially since the photos we're getting are from trained professionals who are often using what was top of the line equipment in that day. Sure we can give a little leniency, but unless the photo was taken in exceptional historic circumstances where the photo captures a spontaneous and unrepeatable moment (circumstances which would allow similar allowances in modern photographs) I think we can demand composition, lighting and subject matter from historic photos.
As an example, I think Image:American military personnel gather in Paris to celebrate the Japanese surrender.jpg is great as in certainly captures a near unrepeatable moment, Image:Douglas Fairbanks at third Liberty Loan rally HD-SN-99-02174.JPEG would be just as spectacular taken today, whereas Image:Goyathlay.jpeg with it's forced backdrop is not so great. Would it fare much different to Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Luiz Inácio da Silva if it was a modern photo? I don't know. The first two examples also show that quality was attainable even in those days.
So I respect your work and hope you'll gone on with it, but I certainly feel that the "historical" line is overused as a reason for featuring. As you seem quite interested in history, I thought I might link to a few of my favourites from getty images 1920s: [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12]
Regards, -- Fir0002 07:25, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
I think my security work is coming to an end. Cleaned up a lot of stuff and taught the community about Black Hat SEO and how to deal with it. I will be going skiing to Austria next monht! Maybe will meet some Trolls on the slops..:)
Will try to contribute to WikiPedia how I can but do not know if I want to get political. Regards, Igor Berger ( talk) 08:10, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
You commented on this issue at User talk:Jimbo Wales/Archive 31#Wikipedia surrendering users' info without a fight. It was stated there that it was not an appropriate discussion forum for the topic of how hard the Foundation should and did fight to prevent revealing the IP addresses of registered users to parties who had been criticized in a Wikipedia article and who subpoenaed the user information. I have started a discussion at the Village Pump policy page at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)# Releasing IP addresses of registered users: the Video Professor incident. Your comments are welcome. Thanks. Edison ( talk) 15:18, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
I looked at that link you posted, but did not listen to any audio that may have been associated with that blog. I'm wondering how it is evidence in the Matthew Hoffman case, but I'm not sure if you think it is very much worth listening to first. — Whig ( talk) 05:10, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
The IP harassing you about Matt Sanchez, etc. sounds like banned User:Pwok. I don't know if a checkuser can confirm or deny that. Aleta (Sing) 05:52, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Your
Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for
featured picture status,
Image:Sfearthquake3b.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates.
jjron (
talk)
09:56, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
|
Hi Durova, you probably deserve one of these too. -- jjron ( talk) 09:56, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
---- Anonymous Dissident Talk 15:55, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Dear Durova, I now have over 10,000 edits!! Sincerely, -- Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles Tally-ho! 18:54, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
User:Durova I am not really good in creating an article but I am good in finding sources. So after getting an okay from User:Jehochman I created the article and it got CSD right a way. Can you please take a look what I am doing wrong. User:Igorberger/Andy_Beard Thank you, Igor Berger ( talk) 00:17, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
If you have better information, write it up in draft form in user space and open a deletion review request. Durova Charge! 03:22, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
You made this edit removing some material from the article on Dover, Virginia. Do you think that it should possibly be oversighted, as it not only identifies the editor and attaches an IP address but also identifies his employer? Avruch talk 03:29, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Your
Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for
featured picture status,
Image:Douglas MacArthur lands Leyte1.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates.
jjron (
talk)
09:17, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
|
Boy, another one! -- jjron ( talk) 09:17, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the note. I was the actually the editor who slapped the citations missing tag on the article. However, I do have several citations from other articles I've written that mentioned this, and I can do a little more work to pull them together for this. You might be interested in Racial tension in Omaha, Nebraska and Civil Rights Movement in Omaha, Nebraska. Keep your eye on Omaha Race Riot of 1919 and I'll work on it soon. Thanks for asking! • Freechild 'sup? 11:12, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi, finally got round to finding the other alternative tank shot I was on about. I still haven't had a chance to download the fullsize version again and I've not done a side-by-side comparison, so whatever you think is fine by me. FWIW I think the one you picked is easily the better composition; the other would need a crop.
Once I get some time (soon, I hope) I intend creating an article for Mr Palmer, which may help future FPC noms of his work. It seems to me that the real value of his large-format kodachrome work – certainly among the very best quality colour photography of WWII – is almost paradoxically difficult to translate into WP encyclopedic value, and hence FPC "plus points". I realise this is true of many historical images, some of which are individually pioneering or even unique in their own right & while this has a significant bearing on selection for cleanup, for FPC there seems to be growing need to major on notability outside of the history of photography itself. I've noticed some mild but growing hostility toward the historical noms which I can sympathise with (also ambivalence to images like the furnace nom, which was widley – rightly? – judged on enc merits alone) although I cringe at accusations of "just because it's old > FPC" etc. I wonder how you feel about all this? I'm of the opinion that emphasising the relative image quality of older photos via more specialised articles might help raise their photographic profile, but I don't want to create a load of unnecessary work. -- mikaul talk 19:43, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I've restored this article and added it to the California gold rush article. Perhaps you'd be able to identify: is that Telegraph Hill in the background? Regards, DurovaCharge! 06:38, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
... I've responded on my talk page. Thanks for the input! Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:34, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Saw your message on the MILHIST talk page. I've had this on my watchlist for a couple weeks but it might need cleanup. -- BrokenSphere Msg me 00:42, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Only one way to find out. If they like it on peer review, how about conominating? Durova Charge! 05:41, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
These things take a while to download because the good files are often 150-200mb. I have to downsample of course. Durova Charge! 06:45, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Finding it was half the task. Thanks for all the work in cleaning it up and putting it up for peer review. Wouldn't have come across the alternate version otherwise. BrokenSphere Msg me 04:48, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
Put in at Commons. Thanks for the notice. BrokenSphere Msg me 20:03, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
[13] Jehochman Talk 00:46, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Over the past months, TV episodes have been redirected by (to name a couple) TTN, Eusebeus and others. No centralized discussion has taken place, so I'm asking everyone who has been involved in this issue to voice their opinions here in this centralized spot, be they pro or anti. Discussion is here [14]. -- Maniwar ( talk) 00:52, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
It is never about one article for me. But I wanted to show our community where the new information is coming from. If Matt Cutts a Google search engineer references Andy Beard on his blog that alone makes Andy notable. When many bloggers SEOs like Rand Fishken, Danny, Vanessa reference Andy or some idea they are not just bloggers but industry professionals. I hope our community will grow to understand the diffference about a senator blog and some small individual blog. Cheers, Igor Berger ( talk) 07:01, 16 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for moving folks along on Palestinian costumes. Perhaps I've added this (and you) in vain, but you might want to look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration, which is inspired by some of the ArbCom discussion of the Sri Lanka effort. Thanks. HG | Talk 13:31, 16 January 2008 (UTC)