I'm unsure if we've ever spoken before, and it seems to me that we contribute to rather orthogonal parts of the encyclopedia. It does, however, look like you might be stressed at the moment. Don't take it too hard, and remember that not everyone's against you. Hope you have a nice day. -- Eyrian 18:35, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
Uhm... His. My name is Zero-Drug, and Madore99 is my brother. He asked me to do this favour by posting this. He thinks that your block was unfair, especially because he received no warning and because the block he can't state his case, apparently. He would like to ask you, El_C, to email him to sort this out, or lift the block. He said there is a reasonable explanation behind his case, and was just wondering if you could contact him or "try to see how unfair it is". Well, thanks I guess. If you can't get in touch with him, please contact me. - Zero-Drug
Policy seems to indicate that I can do so if I desire, from the
WP:BAN "..Users that nonetheless reinstate such edits take complete responsibility for that content by so doing." Please considering restoring my edits". Respectfully,
Navou
banter
20:24, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
You are being recruited by the Money and Politics Task Force, a collaborative project committed to ensuring that links between government officials and private-sector resources are accurately displayed in relevant entries. Join us! |
Cyrusc 16:26, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Please look into the battle that is going on regards my sourced info on menudo and gay sex and drugs that come from real sourced newspapers and letters by menudo kids and parents to the department of justice and the legal threats made by the Christopher R username. The article is accurate and please look into this Menudo I have placed a call to Jimbo wales cell and hope he calls saturday,-- Blue5864 ( talk) 04:57, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
El_C don't leave yet help me with the Menudo article so that is complies with Wiki policy. The stories are sourced and I am in communication with serveral admin via email who have offered to help if you cant but truly the links and Menudo info while scandal are accurate original PDF newspaper stories that reflect history not fiction. People should know what was printed when this international scandal broke. I did not wright this stuff respected reporters did and major publishers printed it. And do not forget the signed letter by MENUDO PARENTS THAT INLCUDED THE SIGNATURES OF MENUDO BOYS claiming Gay sex in Menudo and drugs. PDF original sourced info. Just guide me on this to make sure we do it right. Wiki nor I created these facts history did. Thanks in advance---- Blue5864 ( talk) 16:27, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
"Just as an aside, I also took issues with Neutralhomer placing resolve tags on notices involving himself, but I'm pretty certain (though not positive) I'm not confusing him with Sceptre in this extension."
I am pretty sure you are confusing us, while I did comment on the ANI post about Sceptre, I didn't tag it as resolved and I don't have an opinion on the whole Fasach Nua/Sceptre/Doctor Who image discussion. My whole opinion was the diffs that Fasach Nua presented as Sceptre being disruptive. But I didn't tag it as resolved.
I hope that clears everything up. Take Care and Enjoy Your Weekend..... NeutralHomer T: C 07:46, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Oh, it was definitely you, just another time. El_C 10:17, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Please stop the vendetta against me. You had a point several months ago, but trying to disrupt an RfAr and reopening a thread that two neutral admins long term users (Neutralhomer and Jéské Couriano) agreed was resolved isn't on. I closed it as resolved because I thought the matter was actually resolved because I genuinely thought Fascha Nua was being disruptive, especially with the edits to the image page. Fascha's following post just looks like someone who's not getting their own way.
Will (
talk)
12:54, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Hey there,
I've lifted the protection on User talk:Alexia Death to allow them to post an {{ unblock}}. I'm going to be keeping a close eye on the page, and will reprotect if they step beyond that. — Coren (talk) 16:46, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I'm aware you and I have a history. I hold no grudge, however, as you were once nice enough to revert some vandalism to my userpage. The greater issue, however, is that we really need a clearer policy as to what sort of edits and reverts are permitted on user talk pages (a couple of other recent incidents have made this clear to me), otherwise we're going to have more of this. Daniel Case ( talk) 18:07, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
At times this place can seem like a cross between an insane asylum and something out of a Kafka novel. Hang in there, but please don't take things seriously enough to cause you stress. It's not real life. Raymond Arritt ( talk) 19:33, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi EL_C, I am sorry I made that comment on the incedent board. I seriously don't know all the details about the recent article about a mailing list and I probably don't want to since its so involved. It just goes to show how feelings can be hurt when an editor doesn't know all the details involved in a dispute and then chimes in. Again, it was written at an attempt at humor but I did see an editor after me took it seriously and even used a "ya, thats right" comment to follow up mine which was uncalled for since I was just being tongue in cheek. I actually thought about using a ";)" or a "j/k" (just kidding) but couldn't see how anybody could take me seriously, but I was WRONG. Again, please accept my apology and if anybody wants me to restate that for the record, they can visit me. The last thing I want to do is upset a regular editor to this project. Cheers! -- Tom 22:17, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi El C, I have now moved all the extra material from the History of Jammu and Kashmir to Kashmir region. I guess we can now move the history page to the Kashmir region page. The only problem is: what does one do with the talk page? It would be great if you could move it. Thanks. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 22:57, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Do you have any input for this discussion on WP:AN? You were involved back in March 2007. -- Versa geek 01:15, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
But then there's her being disruptive and you responding with a (valid) threat to block, and then the editor in question is responding with an uncivil statement, which makes you in sort of a dispute with that editor. The prior dispute is unrelated to you, I know. As an administrator, you are ensuring that his disruption ends. For this I think you're trying to do the right thing. :) Maser ( Talk!) 01:32, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Take a look at this diff on my talk page Alex fusco 5 01:38, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Im a she, a female. Thank you.-- Alexia Death the Grey ( talk) 01:56, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Most of the people who are editing here do not know the difference between the different usage of the term Kathmandu. So, I think it is better to have Kathmandu as a disam. page rather than any of the four entities for which it is used. It was a terrible idea to redirect Kathmandu Metropolitan city to kathmandu as most of the people edit kathmandu without knowing that they are editing about the metropolitan city only. Please do not redirect the article again.-- Eukesh ( talk) 18:23, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
enjoy KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 00:14, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
[1] [2] bishapod splash! 07:46, 12 December 2007 (UTC).
I don't agree with your 2 latest block reasons like "Overexcited" and "unfriendly", regardless of what the editor did, it'd probably be a better idea to be more specific and use a reason more relevant to policy. Others like myself might see that and get the wrong idea. Cheers -- Charitwo talk 17:33, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading
Image:The Prince.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a
claim of fair use. However, it is currently
orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed.
You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see
our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot ( talk) 20:41, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading
Image:The Prince.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a
claim of fair use. However, it is currently
orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed.
You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see
our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot ( talk) 00:55, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading
Image:The Prince.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a
claim of fair use. However, it is currently
orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed.
You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see
our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot ( talk) 03:37, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading
Image:The Prince.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a
claim of fair use. However, it is currently
orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed.
You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see
our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot ( talk) 15:01, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading
Image:The Prince.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a
claim of fair use. However, it is currently
orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed.
You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see
our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot ( talk) 15:32, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
Hey El_C, judging by the history of Sapere aude you don't think it's just a lexical definition, either - your input on the talk page would be handy. Neıl ☎ 15:21, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
When you have time, please drop by Karl Marx and review recent edits by TelAviv (and Vision Quest to a much lesser extent). I have added content to restore NPOV but more work is needed. Thanks, Slrubenstein | Talk 16:07, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
A different editor. Same reckless violations of NOR and V. Telaviv1 seems to be on break but I fear when he returns he will resume the revert war ... I am feeling a little beleagured. I added a couple of comments on the talk page, and content to the section, but what I wrote is pretty weak (even after I went through the old archives for ideas). Slrubenstein | Talk 22:33, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
As the mentor of the user (per block log) I think you may want to see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Arbitration enforcement#List of attacks by the Armenian Secret Army for the Liberation of Armenia. -- Cat chi? 20:07, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Jehochman Talk 22:49, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Hello, why did you rease the following link?
I mean, what is it about? How is it helping our readership? El_C 23:29, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
It is about the Uyghur language. It is for Uyghur or Chinese speaking readers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.165.240.69 ( talk) 23:30, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
It takes a long time to explain and sorry to tell you that I don't have time to explain. It is a petition signed by 1000 Uyghurs. I've added it to the Chinese wikipedia as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.165.240.69 ( talk) 23:37, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Hmmmmm, I thought it is helpful for Uyghur or Chinese speaking foreigners... Ok, you can delete it if you want. take care and good-bye. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.165.240.69 ( talk) 23:44, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
... looking for me? I'm here!! :) BTW - the fractals on the bottom of your talk page completely freaked me out. I was mystified as to how they got there after my edit!! - Alison ❤ 05:17, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:So-you-tell-me!.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We requires this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.
To add this information, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
Thank you for your cooperation. -- ImageTaggingBot ( talk) 08:10, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
I'm not even going count on how many articles. "there is no such thing as Artsakh except armenian name of Azerbaijani region. It is clear attempt to legitimaze illegal entity" See here VartanM ( talk) 20:47, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
If you are " still here", why are you allowing the user to say things like "go to hell" ? An unblock request was declined, and the user continues to be uncivil, where's the line? - Rjd0060 ( talk) 05:59, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
"Admin hopefuls". Good use of the WP lingo, for such an inexperienced user. This is just a friendly note of caution: This user seems to be very experienced with Wikipedia despite the facade. Please don't be taken in by the sobby story. You were right to issue the block. As the reviewer noted, this isn't a new user user in distress. This is someone who wants to disrupt and will play on people's sympathies in order to do it. Thanks for your consideration -- Equazcion •✗/ C • 06:06, 2 Jan 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I used the fair use rational on the image for the Patria disaster because a message was left on the talk page here, stating that it would be deleted if one were not provided. Hopefully it won't be deleted without one. Not sure how that works though. It seems like it was a bot making the posting, though. Is that bot able to distinguish that it is indeed fair use? Hope so. :-) Thanks. GeeAlice ( talk) 22:37, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thanks, mate. this is really, really crazy. -- Soman ( talk) 23:41, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
I know you mean well, but if people weren't confused, why would this occur? Perhaps disambiguating to an article that doesn't exist yet is probably justifiable to be remove, but I feel very strongly that the distinguishing needs to be here. It's not a subtle poke at Serb nationalists, before you start. — MapsMan [ talk | cont ] — 19:10, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Just wondering, is The Black Book of Communism a reliable source on the Che Guevara article, particularly this? [4]?-- 60.242.159.224 ( talk) 15:59, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
For your consideration: WP:TODAY. Lawrence Cohen 17:48, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Locking D. James Kennedy after the liberal POV has been restored seems a bit underhanded. Did somebody ask you to lock the article out of band? Thanks. Ra2007 ( talk) 18:59, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
I appreciate doing this, from a Jewish Socialist to a Jewish Communist. :) OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 07:36, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi El C. Sorry for all the confusion there. I must admit to doing the deletion to make a point but then other editors ran away with something constructive instead of just reverting me as I expected. Of course there was no reason not to restore the history and you edits were very welcome. I ran away too far with the idea of giving fut perf time to finish their work on the rewrite. I'm sorry for any offense caused. Best Spartaz Humbug! 19:17, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
So, after coming over to your page and thanking you, I noticed that there was a brief discussion on Marx's supposed anti-semitism. Which led me to the article on Marx, and, as Wikipedia enables so well, I started clicking from link to link to link. I then noticed how many of the 19th century Marxists and Communists were Jewish, raised in Jewish families or were ethnically Jewish. When I was younger, all of the Jewish families in the Los Angeles area where I grew up were lefties, and their kids were genuinely left-wing. Of course, when I was younger, Andrew Goodman was my hero; and I knew a lot of college-aged Jewish kids went to the south to help out.
Why is that? Are we educated in a way that makes us economically and socially liberal? Or after a few thousand years of mistreatment by Romans, Christians, Germans, Russians, Greeks, Arabs, Spanish (never mind, too many to list), we're just tired of it all? I remember hearing racist comments amongst officers when I was in the Navy, and I nearly blew out a cerebral artery or two. Time for me to learn more. Any ideas? OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 03:58, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Weren't the Weatherman and Students for a Democratic Society (almost universally) lead by radical Jewish leftwingers too? TableManners U· T· C 06:56, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Our cat Ruby just turned up an hour ago out of the blue after 3 months, to be welcomed by her daughter, Blue. Cheers for everything. Thanks, SqueakBox 22:55, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
You don't know the history of this page. An editor who calls himself alternately Rawicz, or Turtus, or any number of things is constantly vandalizing the page with bogus info. Check into the discussion page. Gobbschmacht ( talk) 22:45, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your level-headed decision regarding the proposed deletion of my user page. Although not overjoyed by the decision, I can objectively see it as a compromise. I still feel that the situation was dealt with heavy handedly considering Stan Shebs and I had both agreed that I would keep the image, and that anonymous editors had since vandalised my user page. The parties proposing the deletion seemed to have absolutely nothing to do with the debate (which had already been resolved with both me and Stan happy with the outcome). Still, I appreciate your looking at the whole argument and not jumping the gun. Thank you. Yeanold Viskersenn ( talk) 23:15, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
In spite of an RfC at Talk:Waterboarding/Definition some folks are pushing weasel words and newspeak edits at Talk:Waterboarding. I view this as an attempt to spin the article for political reasons. One of the participants, User:Shibumi2 was recently blocked and unblocked for checkuser established sock puppetry. Now, single purpose accounts have appeared to dispute the RfC consensus. The RfC also remains open. Could you look at this? Jehochman Talk 20:04, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
ok.. i tried to make the topic on Tamil nadu's independence neutral. :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.63.226.79 ( talk) 21:50, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Sorry about that. Obviously I have no idea what I am doing here but I am trying not to make too much of a mess of it.-- Filll ( talk) 22:13, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Am I missing something here? Is there some sort of a problem with my nomination of a seemingly pointless redirect from Wikipedia:GURCH to Wikipedia:Requests for oversight? - Rjd0060 ( talk) 23:17, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
FYI, your name was mentioned in passing at an extension request that I filed at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Request for extension of restrictions at DreamGuy 2, specifically, my extended report at User:Elonka/DreamGuy report. No action is required on your part, I just wanted to let you know. -- El on ka 03:21, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Hey El C there are moderators on here who seem to think its okay to add extra stuff on Pakistani Kashmir articles but paint a softer image of Indian administered Kashmir can you help and make these articles balanced and less pro Indian I understand if you don’t. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.156.208.195 ( talk) 11:09, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Your mentioned in this MfD Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User talk:Neutralhomer/TopDeely and I was wondering if you could give your prior reason for deleting it, as it would help me both frame my comments ( WP:OWN, etc) and opinion. MBisanz talk 22:16, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Just wondering why the stamp picture was moved back to the section about theater? Doesn't it make more sense to have it in the section about stamps produced in East Germany?
Re: The change from 15 to 60 min. here. There has been some discussion on it, probably hard to find amidst all the clamoring. Link is on the talk page here. Just thought you might want to know. R. Baley ( talk) 08:17, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Pretty spiffy, I like what you've done with the place since I was last here. You might remember, way back in November when I asked you for assistance on how to satisfy your DG ArbCom Enforcement complaint requests? Maybe I posted on Dmcdevit's page because - strangely enough - neither of you chose to respond. Forgive me for ending up feeling that 'something odd was afoot' then.
As i said before, you chose to nix it, Calling it stale (then again, maybe it was Dmd - they all ran together after a while) seemed rather unintuitive, as someone who is specifically trying to conceal their identity is counting on people not uncovering that identity in a timely manner. Why fault the person who discovers the falsehood and not the person who committed the falsehood? It semed less than logical, and I've noted your logic in the past. ergo, as it wasn't logic driving the decision, I had to consider the possibility that logic was not a guiding force in the discussion, and simply walk away, frustrated. -
Arcayne
(cast a spell)
08:34, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
(←dent) Like I said, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. If he falls into the pattern that others have noticed, I will come directly to you, and expect you to act on it. Does that seem fair enough to you? - Arcayne (cast a spell) 10:24, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
The 3-tier diff and link series |
---|
Thanks! BTW - love the fractals. Sophia 23:20, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
can you protect Page Marshal of the Soviet Union? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Staygyro ( talk • contribs) 17:54, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Can you clarify this comment:
In what way/s do you feel any conduct I have undertaken on this editor was unusual in comparison to normal best practice?
Thank you.
FT2 ( Talk | email) 02:54, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Not that it matters now, but at first glance, looking at his contribs, it seemed as though he was wikistalking that editor and reverting his edits. I guess it's fine. J-ſtan Contribs User page 04:35, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the comment. Tkn20 ( talk) 16:11, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi there! Happy New Year! I am still on vacation, with very little access time to Wikipedia. Could you please keep an eye on user Magicalsaumy who is adding, what can be euphemistically only be called, "nut-job" edits to the page. These included citations that consist of Indian embassy websites(?) and the like. Thanks. Regards, Fowler&fowler «Talk» 02:51, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
Regarding your reply to this user, and your deletion of her text on the Sam Blacketer userpage: This user is currently involved in an arbitration, has been blocked multiple times for making personal attacks and baseless allegations, and has left or vanished Wikipedia multiple times in an effort to game dispute resolution. Have a look at the arbcom case and her block logs before you involve yourself further. She is currently blocked under her IP, but the blocking admin forgot to block the account name, too (I believe that was Krill who blocked her IP today). Just a head's up so you don't get sucked into this drama too. Jeffpw ( talk) 21:50, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm enjoying
my new tool and just wanted to say thanks! : ) --
MPerel
00:46, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Nice to see you! My pleasure, glad it's proving useful. El_C 01:04, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
One thing I admire about you is you have balls (I meant that metaphorically, since it appears you are a male of the species). I constantly get attacked by religious nutjobs, and I guess I have taken the approach that since the anti-science religious nutjobs can lie, whine and scream, I can at least scream back (I refrain from the lying and whining crap). Now, another creationist POV-warrior, User:Gnixon who has a long-standing feud with me, has begun an attack on my person. Everytime I stand up to him, he goes and moans to whomever will listen, I have to put up with reprimands and admonitions on my user page and I'm getting tired of it. Why do users like him, who has an anti-science agenda, get away with it? And how do you put up with it? Maybe you have admin powers, so the right is scared of you. Nothing worst than a communist with guns I suppose. Or a Jew. :) OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 06:17, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Nengscoz416 (
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.
Hey EL C han you help me with the indophobia article a indian cannot seem to grasp the fact that indophobia exsists becuase of the kashmir human rights abuses by indians. Also the indian parliament article is being reverting by the same Ghanadar galpa even when sources are given hes trying desperately to make india look good and gives a biased veiw.
Hopefully, you won't be insulted, but this image would be perfect for your Wiki-fights!!! LOL. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 22:10, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm having an "edit war" with User:DAGwyn on the Ayn Rand article. He/she insists there is no consensus, but there is plenty. I am new to the article and I've stood up to the reverts, yet he/she continues to revert over and over again. I've left messages to the user's talk page, especially here, and on the article's talk page. I've provided links to the talk page where there is indeed consensus for my edit, yet the user uses misleading edit summaries stating the opposite. I guess I'm just as guilty with the 3RR policy, but if one looks at the talk page, and the links I provide on the user's talk page shows there is consensus for "my" version and not "his/hers". (I know that you are an admin and probably know more on how to handle this). Yes, I'm being hardheaded, but that user is more so, and more importantly... wrong. lol. TIA. ← Gee♥ Alice 06:12, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
Any Chance you can make me an admin? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Staygyro ( talk • contribs) 23:23, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
I have tagged Image:I'm_RickJames_Bitch!.jpg as a disputed use of non-free media, because there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please clarify your fair use rationale on the image description page. Thank you. Rockfang ( talk) 07:34, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
Is he allowed to add that?-- Alisyn talk 02:58, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Hey, nature bwoi. :) There's an anonymous user at Talk: Race of Ancient Egyptians who's been engaging in attack trolling. I've repeatedly deleted his comments on the talk page, and he keeps it up. He's likely a sock puppet of a registered user. What's the best way to deal with this guy [7]? Temporarily block his IP addy? Run a user check? What do you suggest? Thanks. deeceevoice ( talk) 03:20, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. :) Another admin, User: Addhoc, visited his talk page and warned him. That seems to have chilled him out. deeceevoice ( talk) 03:44, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
"... "mentally inbread propoganders that have only the sole intention of furthering their leacherous, parasitical affinty." LOL Is that what he wrote? (I wasn't kidding when I said I hadn't read most his posts. I mean it only took the first few words to know he was just being disruptive.) That what he's saying violates Wiki policy is quite clear. Exactly what he's trying to say, however, is another thing entirely. Jeeze. The man is belligerent and incoherent! In my book, that's a Wiki capital offense. Off with his head, dammit! deeceevoice ( talk) 04:00, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Sorry to say it, but he's still at it. I think he needs something stronger than a warning. deeceevoice ( talk) 04:50, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. Again. :) deeceevoice ( talk) 08:47, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your kind suggestion, at least the first half. It appears threatening in the second half. Your concern for the unblock worries me a bit because you haven't mentioned that Jersey Devil violated an ArbCom directive that admin are not to wheel war, which they defined as the 3rd action of block-unblock-block. The particular ArbCom directive did not define wheel warring as block-unblock.
Furthermore, the decision to unblock was made after notification to Jersey Devil. Prior permission is not a requirement. The decision to unblock was made with consideration of the following comments made by others at ANI such as:
I want to stress that I do not agree or disagree with the block - I just think it needs to be discussed to ensure that there is community support for an action: B
…and may be a tad too controversial about how edits are made, but he/she isn't totally wrong.: Anynobody (referring to the blocked user)
Has CltFn been a party to any form of DR at all?: Anynobody (I think there’s been no DR)
I think an indef. block is a bit harsh, considering what he did. CltFn has, after all, been good for over a year since the last block…I am very confused as to why this disserves an indef. block.: Yahel Guhan
All I am proposing is that we give him one last chance to change before an indef. block after a month. Heck, we give repeat vandals that opportunity all the time, with 1 month, 3 month, 1 year blocks, but almost never indef. Besides, at least he remained on the talk page for the most part this time, rather than in the article, where he is less disruptive, which may mean he might be trying to improve himself: Yahel Guhan
Not that I am trying to sanction what he did, but I do think an indef. time period is excessive, at least at this point: Yahel Guhan
A suggestion for formal WP:DR has been made onthe user's page. Perhaps, given his long-term contributor status, it may be to our advantage to let him try that process?: ThuranX
I am however also happy to endorse Thuran's proposed course of action and comments above also.: Orderinchaos struck by
Orderinchaos
17:18, 21 January 2008 (UTC) as it mischaracterises my contribution to the debate
also note:
based on looking through his contributions, if an admin is willing to keep a close eye on a problem user, that's a low risk proposition: B
I don't have a problem with Archtransit's action providing tha the follows through on it. I do have a problem with the same admin who originally made the block reimplementing it.: B (being critical of JerseyDevil’s wheel warring)
but it is merely a longer explanation made necessary because of your ArbCom mention. Also please note that ArbCom is a busy panel and that they require prior attempts such as mediation before submitting the case. I am willing to have formal or informal mediation with you or others. I am also in the process of making a new and novel suggestion on ANI to resolve the concerns raised above by others (the quotes above). Please remember that I have never advocated for the blocked user but have merely considered comments that others made. I have never supported the user with comments like "the user is not that bad" or even "the user deserves a chance". I am merely trying to bridge the gap between opinions that others have expressed. The reaching of compromise has been my primary goal in this entire episode. Consensus is not one side shouting loudly enough and ignoring the stated concerns of a few. Archtransit ( talk) 16:31, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
This is not an emergency. In the days since the original ANI post, nothing has happened except discussion.
Let's move on to more productive things. If your question was if I would have done things differently in retrospect, the answer is clearly yes. Archtransit ( talk) 16:41, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for highlighting the question from the previous message. The tone of your message seems angry and confrontational. I don't know if this is true or the intention. If it is true, consider stepping back for a while.
Question 1: Are you prepared, from now on, to commit to discussing unblocks prior to implementing these.
Answer: I plan to discuss unblocks as a general rule.
However, some unblocks by others have been done without discussion. Some of these unblocks done without discussion have not resulted in further discussion. I will be more cautious if this path is taken. Some blocks are clearly a mistake and discussion for the sake of discussion only creates delays. For example, I recently unblocked someone and changed the conditions of unblock. I notified the blocking admin but did not have prior discussion. The blocking admin later agreed with my change. Discussion would have only tormented the editor with a delay.
Question 2: At least in the next few months, consult a more experience admin before blocking a fellow sysop?
Answer: Yes.
Comment: The asking of question 2 plays into the hands of those who accuse Wikipedia of cabalism. I would not have phrased the question like that.
Archtransit ( talk) 18:02, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
You write: John Nagle, you need to write more concisely. This is unreasonable. El_C 22:50, 22 January 2008 (UTC) [8].
Please note that I was requested by Thatcher ( talk · contribs) to provide diffs. I provided diffs. -- John Nagle ( talk) 00:11, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
This should not be marked as resolved - first of all, NE2 was doing the reverting, not Imzadi1979. Imzadi1979 was acting in good faith, and at this point the articles were not disputed. However, NE2 reverted the articles, which was furthering the dispute - thus, it was NE2 who was breaking the injunction and not Imzadi1979. (Furthermore, NE2 is a party to the arbitration, while Imzadi is not.) -- Rschen7754 ( T C) 01:27, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you; I sort of missed that too; funny how when you're involved with the crafting of a policy you don't bother to check the final version! -- NE2 02:19, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
I thought of your kitty when I read this. [9] What a cutie. deeceevoice ( talk) 00:13, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Sammo Hung white eyebrows.jpg. BetacommandBot ( talk) 04:54, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:TIH.jpg. BetacommandBot ( talk) 06:19, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
El C, I noticed that you closed and tagged as "resolved" a complaint that I had posted at the Arbitration Enforcement page. [10] For the record, I do not think that this was entirely an ethical behavior on your part, since you are definitely not an "uninvolved admin." You and I were in a dispute recently about the DreamGuy_2 case, [11] and you have been maintaining a subpage where you have obviously been searching through my contribs and twisting statements of mine, [12] as well as threatening to start a new case. [13] If you want to do that, fine, I can't stop you, but I don't think it's appropriate for you to be blocking other actions of mine in the meantime. In the future, I would ask you to please avoid making "rulings" on decisions involving me, as I do not feel that you have the necessary impartiality to make those decisions. -- El on ka 17:26, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Cant see the cause of the revert, it adds information. I'm reverting back. Khutuck ( talk) 20:18, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Your comment about the bureaucracy of deletion reviews was awesome!
I wasn't around for the multiple deletion reviews on this article, but I read threw part of them and it was ridiculous!
I agree, if hundreds of thousands of people have seen it, it's almost impossible for it not to be notable.
Thanks so much!
VegKilla ( talk) 09:36, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Franco-Mongol alliance now exists. Jehochman Talk 17:09, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
No good deed goes unpunished. Wjhonson ( talk) 00:54, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
If you want to have a monopoly over article about Kathmandu without even contributing to it (just because you are a sysop), its fine with me. I will stop editing there. However, please see that you control all the other users who confuse Kathmandu Metropolitan city with Kathmandu valley or Kathmandu district and revert edits meant for other meanings of Kathmandu. Kathmandu to denote metropolitan might be fine in britannica as there are no other editors there. However, there are many editors here and they WILL have difficulty choosing between the three or four meanings of kathmandu. I have much better things to do than waste my time discussing with you here for nothing. Please improve the quality of article about Kathmandu. Its up to you Mr/Ms./Mrs sysop. Good luck.-- Eukesh ( talk) 17:24, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
El C, as far as I know CE and BCE are standard in Wikipedia Jewish template articles, instead of BC and AD. I don't want to change your revert without agreement because I have found that can lead to hurt feelings and, eventually to various editing problems. Let me know. Malcolm Schosha ( talk) 22:50, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Noted, thanks, I won't copy that passage any more - a simple link to WP:NOT#FORUM itself, without actually quoting the passage, is sufficient. Cirt ( talk) 00:30, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
The most important thing is to discuss and to try to minimize reverts. Further revert wars may result in revert restrictions being imposed. Thx. El_C 21:35, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
I don't know what you mean and didn't see any addition from your edits aside from fixing the links. The purpose of my edit was to remove those links, since they are all to partisan sites and don't support anything other than that position exists, which isn't what they are being used to prove (that is already in the article). I can't understand why you would revert me then when I explained my reasoning.
The other editor went ahead and warned other people about reverting and then reverted four times away from the preexisting edition while I reverted only twice, nothing was done to stop him, and he's gone around continuing to make these disputed changes on related pages. I understood from the directives that if your change is reverted once you should go into discussion, but as he believes that his new version is right he keeps on reverting. If might makes right then something is broken here. --Robert —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.177.100.134 ( talk) 22:52, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Damn I'm glad you are still about. :-) - Tbsdy lives ( talk) 11:18, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
It has no sources, and the uncited tag's been on it since October last year. I'm also not sure there's much in it that's not in Holocaust or couldn't be -- though that page is so long we almost daren't add anything more. However, if you think it was wrong-headed BOLDness, by all means revert. :-) SlimVirgin (talk) (contribs) 20:41, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Good day, El C. I'm worried about the edits made by 71.163.213.244 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). Editor still doesn't seem to acknowledge messages on his talk page. Perhaps he didn't see them? Some of the edits look alright, but the number changes seem far too systematically coincidental, and no sources forthcoming. --- Sluzzelin talk 07:29, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Apologies for my procedural error in editing Sierra Leone, and thanks for correcting it. I have no connection with Sierra Leone, but just became involved when I noticed a strange sequence of edits. How do we find out what is going on here? I have left messages on discussion pages, but none of the "strange" editors respond. Am I in order to keep restoring the 2004 census data? By the way, I think the "strange" editors are moving to changing the percentages in the 2007 Sierra Leone election article. They do add useful articles (though sometimes just copied from elsewhere on the web). I'm not going to become involved in an edit war over this! dbfirs 11:21, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
what are you trying to say Igor Berger ( talk) 12:02, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
At the top of the Kabbalah article there is this statement:
Is there a way to keep the statement, "This article is about traditional Jewish Kabbalah", and move the links to the bottom of the article, without being unfair to people who may be looking for the other articles? The way it is right now the top of the page is rather cluttered, making a difficult subject even more difficult to comprehend.
Thanks. Malcolm Schosha ( talk) 18:00, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Why did you do this change?-- Rockfang ( talk) 05:18, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
M-95 editing, plz stop changing the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:M95_interior_shot.jpg - it is M84A4 Sniper interior, but it is used to show what is possible to achieve with the M95 tank if same DBMS is in use. Right now M-95 supports French Thales DMBS, Israelis have provided some assistance with the M95 design, but Thales fire control seems to be best solution for now, Unfortunately we have no Thales DMBS photo to use, for that we'll need to contact Thales and see if they are willing to release the image for Wiki. Mic of Orion.
OK, nw, I didn't get any of your questions, anyways, article is done, also you asked about reference list if I can translate this in to English, article is in English, you only need to disseminates the article, which is kind of hard as it is a technical paper full of test results and not something average user would understand. I tried to summarize the article in Reference list, but layout came wrong and I deleted my work to preserve the cohesion of the article and layout. Poslovni Vjesnik is a story which speculates whether Kuwait will order additional 66 M84D tanks on top of current order, citing close sources at the Croatian MOD.
Also I have deleted repetitive chapters as they are saying same thing I mentioned in modernization paragraph.
PS, I'd love to put M-95 images in to Wiki Commons, but don't know how, I've never done it before, so if you want to o it for me would be best. No need to create new gallery about M-95 on Wiki commons, just add the images to Wiki Croatian Armed Forces. Mic of orion ( talk) 14:17, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Yes, football is U.S. centric, but most who read English know what it is. So long as we're editing the English site, I think the mention of football is both entirely pertinent and perhaps even an important note. Don't forget, I also mentioned office and political jobs, which retain pertinence to those unfamiliar with American pastimes. Regardless of all, I thank you for alerting me of any potential mistake. User:Two-face Jackie 2 February 2008. —Preceding comment was added at 18:37, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
I'm unsure if we've ever spoken before, and it seems to me that we contribute to rather orthogonal parts of the encyclopedia. It does, however, look like you might be stressed at the moment. Don't take it too hard, and remember that not everyone's against you. Hope you have a nice day. -- Eyrian 18:35, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
Uhm... His. My name is Zero-Drug, and Madore99 is my brother. He asked me to do this favour by posting this. He thinks that your block was unfair, especially because he received no warning and because the block he can't state his case, apparently. He would like to ask you, El_C, to email him to sort this out, or lift the block. He said there is a reasonable explanation behind his case, and was just wondering if you could contact him or "try to see how unfair it is". Well, thanks I guess. If you can't get in touch with him, please contact me. - Zero-Drug
Policy seems to indicate that I can do so if I desire, from the
WP:BAN "..Users that nonetheless reinstate such edits take complete responsibility for that content by so doing." Please considering restoring my edits". Respectfully,
Navou
banter
20:24, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
You are being recruited by the Money and Politics Task Force, a collaborative project committed to ensuring that links between government officials and private-sector resources are accurately displayed in relevant entries. Join us! |
Cyrusc 16:26, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Please look into the battle that is going on regards my sourced info on menudo and gay sex and drugs that come from real sourced newspapers and letters by menudo kids and parents to the department of justice and the legal threats made by the Christopher R username. The article is accurate and please look into this Menudo I have placed a call to Jimbo wales cell and hope he calls saturday,-- Blue5864 ( talk) 04:57, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
El_C don't leave yet help me with the Menudo article so that is complies with Wiki policy. The stories are sourced and I am in communication with serveral admin via email who have offered to help if you cant but truly the links and Menudo info while scandal are accurate original PDF newspaper stories that reflect history not fiction. People should know what was printed when this international scandal broke. I did not wright this stuff respected reporters did and major publishers printed it. And do not forget the signed letter by MENUDO PARENTS THAT INLCUDED THE SIGNATURES OF MENUDO BOYS claiming Gay sex in Menudo and drugs. PDF original sourced info. Just guide me on this to make sure we do it right. Wiki nor I created these facts history did. Thanks in advance---- Blue5864 ( talk) 16:27, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
"Just as an aside, I also took issues with Neutralhomer placing resolve tags on notices involving himself, but I'm pretty certain (though not positive) I'm not confusing him with Sceptre in this extension."
I am pretty sure you are confusing us, while I did comment on the ANI post about Sceptre, I didn't tag it as resolved and I don't have an opinion on the whole Fasach Nua/Sceptre/Doctor Who image discussion. My whole opinion was the diffs that Fasach Nua presented as Sceptre being disruptive. But I didn't tag it as resolved.
I hope that clears everything up. Take Care and Enjoy Your Weekend..... NeutralHomer T: C 07:46, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Oh, it was definitely you, just another time. El_C 10:17, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Please stop the vendetta against me. You had a point several months ago, but trying to disrupt an RfAr and reopening a thread that two neutral admins long term users (Neutralhomer and Jéské Couriano) agreed was resolved isn't on. I closed it as resolved because I thought the matter was actually resolved because I genuinely thought Fascha Nua was being disruptive, especially with the edits to the image page. Fascha's following post just looks like someone who's not getting their own way.
Will (
talk)
12:54, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Hey there,
I've lifted the protection on User talk:Alexia Death to allow them to post an {{ unblock}}. I'm going to be keeping a close eye on the page, and will reprotect if they step beyond that. — Coren (talk) 16:46, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I'm aware you and I have a history. I hold no grudge, however, as you were once nice enough to revert some vandalism to my userpage. The greater issue, however, is that we really need a clearer policy as to what sort of edits and reverts are permitted on user talk pages (a couple of other recent incidents have made this clear to me), otherwise we're going to have more of this. Daniel Case ( talk) 18:07, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
At times this place can seem like a cross between an insane asylum and something out of a Kafka novel. Hang in there, but please don't take things seriously enough to cause you stress. It's not real life. Raymond Arritt ( talk) 19:33, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi EL_C, I am sorry I made that comment on the incedent board. I seriously don't know all the details about the recent article about a mailing list and I probably don't want to since its so involved. It just goes to show how feelings can be hurt when an editor doesn't know all the details involved in a dispute and then chimes in. Again, it was written at an attempt at humor but I did see an editor after me took it seriously and even used a "ya, thats right" comment to follow up mine which was uncalled for since I was just being tongue in cheek. I actually thought about using a ";)" or a "j/k" (just kidding) but couldn't see how anybody could take me seriously, but I was WRONG. Again, please accept my apology and if anybody wants me to restate that for the record, they can visit me. The last thing I want to do is upset a regular editor to this project. Cheers! -- Tom 22:17, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi El C, I have now moved all the extra material from the History of Jammu and Kashmir to Kashmir region. I guess we can now move the history page to the Kashmir region page. The only problem is: what does one do with the talk page? It would be great if you could move it. Thanks. Fowler&fowler «Talk» 22:57, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Do you have any input for this discussion on WP:AN? You were involved back in March 2007. -- Versa geek 01:15, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
But then there's her being disruptive and you responding with a (valid) threat to block, and then the editor in question is responding with an uncivil statement, which makes you in sort of a dispute with that editor. The prior dispute is unrelated to you, I know. As an administrator, you are ensuring that his disruption ends. For this I think you're trying to do the right thing. :) Maser ( Talk!) 01:32, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Take a look at this diff on my talk page Alex fusco 5 01:38, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Im a she, a female. Thank you.-- Alexia Death the Grey ( talk) 01:56, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Most of the people who are editing here do not know the difference between the different usage of the term Kathmandu. So, I think it is better to have Kathmandu as a disam. page rather than any of the four entities for which it is used. It was a terrible idea to redirect Kathmandu Metropolitan city to kathmandu as most of the people edit kathmandu without knowing that they are editing about the metropolitan city only. Please do not redirect the article again.-- Eukesh ( talk) 18:23, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
enjoy KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 00:14, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
[1] [2] bishapod splash! 07:46, 12 December 2007 (UTC).
I don't agree with your 2 latest block reasons like "Overexcited" and "unfriendly", regardless of what the editor did, it'd probably be a better idea to be more specific and use a reason more relevant to policy. Others like myself might see that and get the wrong idea. Cheers -- Charitwo talk 17:33, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading
Image:The Prince.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a
claim of fair use. However, it is currently
orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed.
You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see
our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot ( talk) 20:41, 15 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading
Image:The Prince.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a
claim of fair use. However, it is currently
orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed.
You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see
our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot ( talk) 00:55, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading
Image:The Prince.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a
claim of fair use. However, it is currently
orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed.
You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see
our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot ( talk) 03:37, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading
Image:The Prince.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a
claim of fair use. However, it is currently
orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed.
You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see
our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot ( talk) 15:01, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading
Image:The Prince.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a
claim of fair use. However, it is currently
orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed.
You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see
our policy for non-free media).
If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the " my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot ( talk) 15:32, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
Hey El_C, judging by the history of Sapere aude you don't think it's just a lexical definition, either - your input on the talk page would be handy. Neıl ☎ 15:21, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
When you have time, please drop by Karl Marx and review recent edits by TelAviv (and Vision Quest to a much lesser extent). I have added content to restore NPOV but more work is needed. Thanks, Slrubenstein | Talk 16:07, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
A different editor. Same reckless violations of NOR and V. Telaviv1 seems to be on break but I fear when he returns he will resume the revert war ... I am feeling a little beleagured. I added a couple of comments on the talk page, and content to the section, but what I wrote is pretty weak (even after I went through the old archives for ideas). Slrubenstein | Talk 22:33, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
As the mentor of the user (per block log) I think you may want to see Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Arbitration enforcement#List of attacks by the Armenian Secret Army for the Liberation of Armenia. -- Cat chi? 20:07, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Jehochman Talk 22:49, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Hello, why did you rease the following link?
I mean, what is it about? How is it helping our readership? El_C 23:29, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
It is about the Uyghur language. It is for Uyghur or Chinese speaking readers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.165.240.69 ( talk) 23:30, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
It takes a long time to explain and sorry to tell you that I don't have time to explain. It is a petition signed by 1000 Uyghurs. I've added it to the Chinese wikipedia as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.165.240.69 ( talk) 23:37, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Hmmmmm, I thought it is helpful for Uyghur or Chinese speaking foreigners... Ok, you can delete it if you want. take care and good-bye. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.165.240.69 ( talk) 23:44, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
... looking for me? I'm here!! :) BTW - the fractals on the bottom of your talk page completely freaked me out. I was mystified as to how they got there after my edit!! - Alison ❤ 05:17, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:So-you-tell-me!.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We requires this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.
To add this information, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
Thank you for your cooperation. -- ImageTaggingBot ( talk) 08:10, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
I'm not even going count on how many articles. "there is no such thing as Artsakh except armenian name of Azerbaijani region. It is clear attempt to legitimaze illegal entity" See here VartanM ( talk) 20:47, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
If you are " still here", why are you allowing the user to say things like "go to hell" ? An unblock request was declined, and the user continues to be uncivil, where's the line? - Rjd0060 ( talk) 05:59, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
"Admin hopefuls". Good use of the WP lingo, for such an inexperienced user. This is just a friendly note of caution: This user seems to be very experienced with Wikipedia despite the facade. Please don't be taken in by the sobby story. You were right to issue the block. As the reviewer noted, this isn't a new user user in distress. This is someone who wants to disrupt and will play on people's sympathies in order to do it. Thanks for your consideration -- Equazcion •✗/ C • 06:06, 2 Jan 2008 (UTC)
Hello, I used the fair use rational on the image for the Patria disaster because a message was left on the talk page here, stating that it would be deleted if one were not provided. Hopefully it won't be deleted without one. Not sure how that works though. It seems like it was a bot making the posting, though. Is that bot able to distinguish that it is indeed fair use? Hope so. :-) Thanks. GeeAlice ( talk) 22:37, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
thanks, mate. this is really, really crazy. -- Soman ( talk) 23:41, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
I know you mean well, but if people weren't confused, why would this occur? Perhaps disambiguating to an article that doesn't exist yet is probably justifiable to be remove, but I feel very strongly that the distinguishing needs to be here. It's not a subtle poke at Serb nationalists, before you start. — MapsMan [ talk | cont ] — 19:10, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
Just wondering, is The Black Book of Communism a reliable source on the Che Guevara article, particularly this? [4]?-- 60.242.159.224 ( talk) 15:59, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
For your consideration: WP:TODAY. Lawrence Cohen 17:48, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Locking D. James Kennedy after the liberal POV has been restored seems a bit underhanded. Did somebody ask you to lock the article out of band? Thanks. Ra2007 ( talk) 18:59, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
I appreciate doing this, from a Jewish Socialist to a Jewish Communist. :) OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 07:36, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi El C. Sorry for all the confusion there. I must admit to doing the deletion to make a point but then other editors ran away with something constructive instead of just reverting me as I expected. Of course there was no reason not to restore the history and you edits were very welcome. I ran away too far with the idea of giving fut perf time to finish their work on the rewrite. I'm sorry for any offense caused. Best Spartaz Humbug! 19:17, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
So, after coming over to your page and thanking you, I noticed that there was a brief discussion on Marx's supposed anti-semitism. Which led me to the article on Marx, and, as Wikipedia enables so well, I started clicking from link to link to link. I then noticed how many of the 19th century Marxists and Communists were Jewish, raised in Jewish families or were ethnically Jewish. When I was younger, all of the Jewish families in the Los Angeles area where I grew up were lefties, and their kids were genuinely left-wing. Of course, when I was younger, Andrew Goodman was my hero; and I knew a lot of college-aged Jewish kids went to the south to help out.
Why is that? Are we educated in a way that makes us economically and socially liberal? Or after a few thousand years of mistreatment by Romans, Christians, Germans, Russians, Greeks, Arabs, Spanish (never mind, too many to list), we're just tired of it all? I remember hearing racist comments amongst officers when I was in the Navy, and I nearly blew out a cerebral artery or two. Time for me to learn more. Any ideas? OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 03:58, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Weren't the Weatherman and Students for a Democratic Society (almost universally) lead by radical Jewish leftwingers too? TableManners U· T· C 06:56, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Our cat Ruby just turned up an hour ago out of the blue after 3 months, to be welcomed by her daughter, Blue. Cheers for everything. Thanks, SqueakBox 22:55, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
You don't know the history of this page. An editor who calls himself alternately Rawicz, or Turtus, or any number of things is constantly vandalizing the page with bogus info. Check into the discussion page. Gobbschmacht ( talk) 22:45, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your level-headed decision regarding the proposed deletion of my user page. Although not overjoyed by the decision, I can objectively see it as a compromise. I still feel that the situation was dealt with heavy handedly considering Stan Shebs and I had both agreed that I would keep the image, and that anonymous editors had since vandalised my user page. The parties proposing the deletion seemed to have absolutely nothing to do with the debate (which had already been resolved with both me and Stan happy with the outcome). Still, I appreciate your looking at the whole argument and not jumping the gun. Thank you. Yeanold Viskersenn ( talk) 23:15, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
In spite of an RfC at Talk:Waterboarding/Definition some folks are pushing weasel words and newspeak edits at Talk:Waterboarding. I view this as an attempt to spin the article for political reasons. One of the participants, User:Shibumi2 was recently blocked and unblocked for checkuser established sock puppetry. Now, single purpose accounts have appeared to dispute the RfC consensus. The RfC also remains open. Could you look at this? Jehochman Talk 20:04, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
ok.. i tried to make the topic on Tamil nadu's independence neutral. :) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.63.226.79 ( talk) 21:50, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Sorry about that. Obviously I have no idea what I am doing here but I am trying not to make too much of a mess of it.-- Filll ( talk) 22:13, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
Am I missing something here? Is there some sort of a problem with my nomination of a seemingly pointless redirect from Wikipedia:GURCH to Wikipedia:Requests for oversight? - Rjd0060 ( talk) 23:17, 8 January 2008 (UTC)
FYI, your name was mentioned in passing at an extension request that I filed at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Request for extension of restrictions at DreamGuy 2, specifically, my extended report at User:Elonka/DreamGuy report. No action is required on your part, I just wanted to let you know. -- El on ka 03:21, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Hey El C there are moderators on here who seem to think its okay to add extra stuff on Pakistani Kashmir articles but paint a softer image of Indian administered Kashmir can you help and make these articles balanced and less pro Indian I understand if you don’t. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.156.208.195 ( talk) 11:09, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Your mentioned in this MfD Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User talk:Neutralhomer/TopDeely and I was wondering if you could give your prior reason for deleting it, as it would help me both frame my comments ( WP:OWN, etc) and opinion. MBisanz talk 22:16, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
Just wondering why the stamp picture was moved back to the section about theater? Doesn't it make more sense to have it in the section about stamps produced in East Germany?
Re: The change from 15 to 60 min. here. There has been some discussion on it, probably hard to find amidst all the clamoring. Link is on the talk page here. Just thought you might want to know. R. Baley ( talk) 08:17, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
Pretty spiffy, I like what you've done with the place since I was last here. You might remember, way back in November when I asked you for assistance on how to satisfy your DG ArbCom Enforcement complaint requests? Maybe I posted on Dmcdevit's page because - strangely enough - neither of you chose to respond. Forgive me for ending up feeling that 'something odd was afoot' then.
As i said before, you chose to nix it, Calling it stale (then again, maybe it was Dmd - they all ran together after a while) seemed rather unintuitive, as someone who is specifically trying to conceal their identity is counting on people not uncovering that identity in a timely manner. Why fault the person who discovers the falsehood and not the person who committed the falsehood? It semed less than logical, and I've noted your logic in the past. ergo, as it wasn't logic driving the decision, I had to consider the possibility that logic was not a guiding force in the discussion, and simply walk away, frustrated. -
Arcayne
(cast a spell)
08:34, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
(←dent) Like I said, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. If he falls into the pattern that others have noticed, I will come directly to you, and expect you to act on it. Does that seem fair enough to you? - Arcayne (cast a spell) 10:24, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
The 3-tier diff and link series |
---|
Thanks! BTW - love the fractals. Sophia 23:20, 10 January 2008 (UTC)
can you protect Page Marshal of the Soviet Union? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Staygyro ( talk • contribs) 17:54, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
Can you clarify this comment:
In what way/s do you feel any conduct I have undertaken on this editor was unusual in comparison to normal best practice?
Thank you.
FT2 ( Talk | email) 02:54, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Not that it matters now, but at first glance, looking at his contribs, it seemed as though he was wikistalking that editor and reverting his edits. I guess it's fine. J-ſtan Contribs User page 04:35, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the comment. Tkn20 ( talk) 16:11, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi there! Happy New Year! I am still on vacation, with very little access time to Wikipedia. Could you please keep an eye on user Magicalsaumy who is adding, what can be euphemistically only be called, "nut-job" edits to the page. These included citations that consist of Indian embassy websites(?) and the like. Thanks. Regards, Fowler&fowler «Talk» 02:51, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
Regarding your reply to this user, and your deletion of her text on the Sam Blacketer userpage: This user is currently involved in an arbitration, has been blocked multiple times for making personal attacks and baseless allegations, and has left or vanished Wikipedia multiple times in an effort to game dispute resolution. Have a look at the arbcom case and her block logs before you involve yourself further. She is currently blocked under her IP, but the blocking admin forgot to block the account name, too (I believe that was Krill who blocked her IP today). Just a head's up so you don't get sucked into this drama too. Jeffpw ( talk) 21:50, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm enjoying
my new tool and just wanted to say thanks! : ) --
MPerel
00:46, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Nice to see you! My pleasure, glad it's proving useful. El_C 01:04, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
One thing I admire about you is you have balls (I meant that metaphorically, since it appears you are a male of the species). I constantly get attacked by religious nutjobs, and I guess I have taken the approach that since the anti-science religious nutjobs can lie, whine and scream, I can at least scream back (I refrain from the lying and whining crap). Now, another creationist POV-warrior, User:Gnixon who has a long-standing feud with me, has begun an attack on my person. Everytime I stand up to him, he goes and moans to whomever will listen, I have to put up with reprimands and admonitions on my user page and I'm getting tired of it. Why do users like him, who has an anti-science agenda, get away with it? And how do you put up with it? Maybe you have admin powers, so the right is scared of you. Nothing worst than a communist with guns I suppose. Or a Jew. :) OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 06:17, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Nengscoz416 (
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.
Hey EL C han you help me with the indophobia article a indian cannot seem to grasp the fact that indophobia exsists becuase of the kashmir human rights abuses by indians. Also the indian parliament article is being reverting by the same Ghanadar galpa even when sources are given hes trying desperately to make india look good and gives a biased veiw.
Hopefully, you won't be insulted, but this image would be perfect for your Wiki-fights!!! LOL. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 22:10, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm having an "edit war" with User:DAGwyn on the Ayn Rand article. He/she insists there is no consensus, but there is plenty. I am new to the article and I've stood up to the reverts, yet he/she continues to revert over and over again. I've left messages to the user's talk page, especially here, and on the article's talk page. I've provided links to the talk page where there is indeed consensus for my edit, yet the user uses misleading edit summaries stating the opposite. I guess I'm just as guilty with the 3RR policy, but if one looks at the talk page, and the links I provide on the user's talk page shows there is consensus for "my" version and not "his/hers". (I know that you are an admin and probably know more on how to handle this). Yes, I'm being hardheaded, but that user is more so, and more importantly... wrong. lol. TIA. ← Gee♥ Alice 06:12, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
Any Chance you can make me an admin? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Staygyro ( talk • contribs) 23:23, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
I have tagged Image:I'm_RickJames_Bitch!.jpg as a disputed use of non-free media, because there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please clarify your fair use rationale on the image description page. Thank you. Rockfang ( talk) 07:34, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
Is he allowed to add that?-- Alisyn talk 02:58, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Hey, nature bwoi. :) There's an anonymous user at Talk: Race of Ancient Egyptians who's been engaging in attack trolling. I've repeatedly deleted his comments on the talk page, and he keeps it up. He's likely a sock puppet of a registered user. What's the best way to deal with this guy [7]? Temporarily block his IP addy? Run a user check? What do you suggest? Thanks. deeceevoice ( talk) 03:20, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. :) Another admin, User: Addhoc, visited his talk page and warned him. That seems to have chilled him out. deeceevoice ( talk) 03:44, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
"... "mentally inbread propoganders that have only the sole intention of furthering their leacherous, parasitical affinty." LOL Is that what he wrote? (I wasn't kidding when I said I hadn't read most his posts. I mean it only took the first few words to know he was just being disruptive.) That what he's saying violates Wiki policy is quite clear. Exactly what he's trying to say, however, is another thing entirely. Jeeze. The man is belligerent and incoherent! In my book, that's a Wiki capital offense. Off with his head, dammit! deeceevoice ( talk) 04:00, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Sorry to say it, but he's still at it. I think he needs something stronger than a warning. deeceevoice ( talk) 04:50, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. Again. :) deeceevoice ( talk) 08:47, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your kind suggestion, at least the first half. It appears threatening in the second half. Your concern for the unblock worries me a bit because you haven't mentioned that Jersey Devil violated an ArbCom directive that admin are not to wheel war, which they defined as the 3rd action of block-unblock-block. The particular ArbCom directive did not define wheel warring as block-unblock.
Furthermore, the decision to unblock was made after notification to Jersey Devil. Prior permission is not a requirement. The decision to unblock was made with consideration of the following comments made by others at ANI such as:
I want to stress that I do not agree or disagree with the block - I just think it needs to be discussed to ensure that there is community support for an action: B
…and may be a tad too controversial about how edits are made, but he/she isn't totally wrong.: Anynobody (referring to the blocked user)
Has CltFn been a party to any form of DR at all?: Anynobody (I think there’s been no DR)
I think an indef. block is a bit harsh, considering what he did. CltFn has, after all, been good for over a year since the last block…I am very confused as to why this disserves an indef. block.: Yahel Guhan
All I am proposing is that we give him one last chance to change before an indef. block after a month. Heck, we give repeat vandals that opportunity all the time, with 1 month, 3 month, 1 year blocks, but almost never indef. Besides, at least he remained on the talk page for the most part this time, rather than in the article, where he is less disruptive, which may mean he might be trying to improve himself: Yahel Guhan
Not that I am trying to sanction what he did, but I do think an indef. time period is excessive, at least at this point: Yahel Guhan
A suggestion for formal WP:DR has been made onthe user's page. Perhaps, given his long-term contributor status, it may be to our advantage to let him try that process?: ThuranX
I am however also happy to endorse Thuran's proposed course of action and comments above also.: Orderinchaos struck by
Orderinchaos
17:18, 21 January 2008 (UTC) as it mischaracterises my contribution to the debate
also note:
based on looking through his contributions, if an admin is willing to keep a close eye on a problem user, that's a low risk proposition: B
I don't have a problem with Archtransit's action providing tha the follows through on it. I do have a problem with the same admin who originally made the block reimplementing it.: B (being critical of JerseyDevil’s wheel warring)
but it is merely a longer explanation made necessary because of your ArbCom mention. Also please note that ArbCom is a busy panel and that they require prior attempts such as mediation before submitting the case. I am willing to have formal or informal mediation with you or others. I am also in the process of making a new and novel suggestion on ANI to resolve the concerns raised above by others (the quotes above). Please remember that I have never advocated for the blocked user but have merely considered comments that others made. I have never supported the user with comments like "the user is not that bad" or even "the user deserves a chance". I am merely trying to bridge the gap between opinions that others have expressed. The reaching of compromise has been my primary goal in this entire episode. Consensus is not one side shouting loudly enough and ignoring the stated concerns of a few. Archtransit ( talk) 16:31, 21 January 2008 (UTC)
This is not an emergency. In the days since the original ANI post, nothing has happened except discussion.
Let's move on to more productive things. If your question was if I would have done things differently in retrospect, the answer is clearly yes. Archtransit ( talk) 16:41, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for highlighting the question from the previous message. The tone of your message seems angry and confrontational. I don't know if this is true or the intention. If it is true, consider stepping back for a while.
Question 1: Are you prepared, from now on, to commit to discussing unblocks prior to implementing these.
Answer: I plan to discuss unblocks as a general rule.
However, some unblocks by others have been done without discussion. Some of these unblocks done without discussion have not resulted in further discussion. I will be more cautious if this path is taken. Some blocks are clearly a mistake and discussion for the sake of discussion only creates delays. For example, I recently unblocked someone and changed the conditions of unblock. I notified the blocking admin but did not have prior discussion. The blocking admin later agreed with my change. Discussion would have only tormented the editor with a delay.
Question 2: At least in the next few months, consult a more experience admin before blocking a fellow sysop?
Answer: Yes.
Comment: The asking of question 2 plays into the hands of those who accuse Wikipedia of cabalism. I would not have phrased the question like that.
Archtransit ( talk) 18:02, 22 January 2008 (UTC)
You write: John Nagle, you need to write more concisely. This is unreasonable. El_C 22:50, 22 January 2008 (UTC) [8].
Please note that I was requested by Thatcher ( talk · contribs) to provide diffs. I provided diffs. -- John Nagle ( talk) 00:11, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
This should not be marked as resolved - first of all, NE2 was doing the reverting, not Imzadi1979. Imzadi1979 was acting in good faith, and at this point the articles were not disputed. However, NE2 reverted the articles, which was furthering the dispute - thus, it was NE2 who was breaking the injunction and not Imzadi1979. (Furthermore, NE2 is a party to the arbitration, while Imzadi is not.) -- Rschen7754 ( T C) 01:27, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you; I sort of missed that too; funny how when you're involved with the crafting of a policy you don't bother to check the final version! -- NE2 02:19, 23 January 2008 (UTC)
I thought of your kitty when I read this. [9] What a cutie. deeceevoice ( talk) 00:13, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Sammo Hung white eyebrows.jpg. BetacommandBot ( talk) 04:54, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:TIH.jpg. BetacommandBot ( talk) 06:19, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
El C, I noticed that you closed and tagged as "resolved" a complaint that I had posted at the Arbitration Enforcement page. [10] For the record, I do not think that this was entirely an ethical behavior on your part, since you are definitely not an "uninvolved admin." You and I were in a dispute recently about the DreamGuy_2 case, [11] and you have been maintaining a subpage where you have obviously been searching through my contribs and twisting statements of mine, [12] as well as threatening to start a new case. [13] If you want to do that, fine, I can't stop you, but I don't think it's appropriate for you to be blocking other actions of mine in the meantime. In the future, I would ask you to please avoid making "rulings" on decisions involving me, as I do not feel that you have the necessary impartiality to make those decisions. -- El on ka 17:26, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Cant see the cause of the revert, it adds information. I'm reverting back. Khutuck ( talk) 20:18, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Your comment about the bureaucracy of deletion reviews was awesome!
I wasn't around for the multiple deletion reviews on this article, but I read threw part of them and it was ridiculous!
I agree, if hundreds of thousands of people have seen it, it's almost impossible for it not to be notable.
Thanks so much!
VegKilla ( talk) 09:36, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Franco-Mongol alliance now exists. Jehochman Talk 17:09, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
No good deed goes unpunished. Wjhonson ( talk) 00:54, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
If you want to have a monopoly over article about Kathmandu without even contributing to it (just because you are a sysop), its fine with me. I will stop editing there. However, please see that you control all the other users who confuse Kathmandu Metropolitan city with Kathmandu valley or Kathmandu district and revert edits meant for other meanings of Kathmandu. Kathmandu to denote metropolitan might be fine in britannica as there are no other editors there. However, there are many editors here and they WILL have difficulty choosing between the three or four meanings of kathmandu. I have much better things to do than waste my time discussing with you here for nothing. Please improve the quality of article about Kathmandu. Its up to you Mr/Ms./Mrs sysop. Good luck.-- Eukesh ( talk) 17:24, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
El C, as far as I know CE and BCE are standard in Wikipedia Jewish template articles, instead of BC and AD. I don't want to change your revert without agreement because I have found that can lead to hurt feelings and, eventually to various editing problems. Let me know. Malcolm Schosha ( talk) 22:50, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Noted, thanks, I won't copy that passage any more - a simple link to WP:NOT#FORUM itself, without actually quoting the passage, is sufficient. Cirt ( talk) 00:30, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
The most important thing is to discuss and to try to minimize reverts. Further revert wars may result in revert restrictions being imposed. Thx. El_C 21:35, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
I don't know what you mean and didn't see any addition from your edits aside from fixing the links. The purpose of my edit was to remove those links, since they are all to partisan sites and don't support anything other than that position exists, which isn't what they are being used to prove (that is already in the article). I can't understand why you would revert me then when I explained my reasoning.
The other editor went ahead and warned other people about reverting and then reverted four times away from the preexisting edition while I reverted only twice, nothing was done to stop him, and he's gone around continuing to make these disputed changes on related pages. I understood from the directives that if your change is reverted once you should go into discussion, but as he believes that his new version is right he keeps on reverting. If might makes right then something is broken here. --Robert —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.177.100.134 ( talk) 22:52, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
Damn I'm glad you are still about. :-) - Tbsdy lives ( talk) 11:18, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
It has no sources, and the uncited tag's been on it since October last year. I'm also not sure there's much in it that's not in Holocaust or couldn't be -- though that page is so long we almost daren't add anything more. However, if you think it was wrong-headed BOLDness, by all means revert. :-) SlimVirgin (talk) (contribs) 20:41, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
Good day, El C. I'm worried about the edits made by 71.163.213.244 ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). Editor still doesn't seem to acknowledge messages on his talk page. Perhaps he didn't see them? Some of the edits look alright, but the number changes seem far too systematically coincidental, and no sources forthcoming. --- Sluzzelin talk 07:29, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Apologies for my procedural error in editing Sierra Leone, and thanks for correcting it. I have no connection with Sierra Leone, but just became involved when I noticed a strange sequence of edits. How do we find out what is going on here? I have left messages on discussion pages, but none of the "strange" editors respond. Am I in order to keep restoring the 2004 census data? By the way, I think the "strange" editors are moving to changing the percentages in the 2007 Sierra Leone election article. They do add useful articles (though sometimes just copied from elsewhere on the web). I'm not going to become involved in an edit war over this! dbfirs 11:21, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
what are you trying to say Igor Berger ( talk) 12:02, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
At the top of the Kabbalah article there is this statement:
Is there a way to keep the statement, "This article is about traditional Jewish Kabbalah", and move the links to the bottom of the article, without being unfair to people who may be looking for the other articles? The way it is right now the top of the page is rather cluttered, making a difficult subject even more difficult to comprehend.
Thanks. Malcolm Schosha ( talk) 18:00, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
Why did you do this change?-- Rockfang ( talk) 05:18, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
M-95 editing, plz stop changing the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:M95_interior_shot.jpg - it is M84A4 Sniper interior, but it is used to show what is possible to achieve with the M95 tank if same DBMS is in use. Right now M-95 supports French Thales DMBS, Israelis have provided some assistance with the M95 design, but Thales fire control seems to be best solution for now, Unfortunately we have no Thales DMBS photo to use, for that we'll need to contact Thales and see if they are willing to release the image for Wiki. Mic of Orion.
OK, nw, I didn't get any of your questions, anyways, article is done, also you asked about reference list if I can translate this in to English, article is in English, you only need to disseminates the article, which is kind of hard as it is a technical paper full of test results and not something average user would understand. I tried to summarize the article in Reference list, but layout came wrong and I deleted my work to preserve the cohesion of the article and layout. Poslovni Vjesnik is a story which speculates whether Kuwait will order additional 66 M84D tanks on top of current order, citing close sources at the Croatian MOD.
Also I have deleted repetitive chapters as they are saying same thing I mentioned in modernization paragraph.
PS, I'd love to put M-95 images in to Wiki Commons, but don't know how, I've never done it before, so if you want to o it for me would be best. No need to create new gallery about M-95 on Wiki commons, just add the images to Wiki Croatian Armed Forces. Mic of orion ( talk) 14:17, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
Yes, football is U.S. centric, but most who read English know what it is. So long as we're editing the English site, I think the mention of football is both entirely pertinent and perhaps even an important note. Don't forget, I also mentioned office and political jobs, which retain pertinence to those unfamiliar with American pastimes. Regardless of all, I thank you for alerting me of any potential mistake. User:Two-face Jackie 2 February 2008. —Preceding comment was added at 18:37, 2 February 2008 (UTC)