Can you please look over my translation of this article? There's a lot left that I didn't have time for. Obrigado. Muito obrigado. Cbdorsett 16:55, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
CobraGeek has repeatedly violated Wiki's NPOV and three revert rule policies in an obvious attempt to put a biased spin on the Carolina-Clemson Rivalry article. He and other anonymous users (probably just him editing anonymously) have also removed relevant material from the article to maintain their slanted POV. Here was his excuse:
"We are trying to get this right. If you have constructive input, provide, don't just vandalize the content, it will just be restored to its original state. I can see how some would say that newspaper style content might sound editorial, but if it is factual it is going to stay if it has relevence. There is significant relevence in the most recent game in the series, including its short term implications (coaching records and bowl implications included)."
No one was vandalizing anything, it's pretty clear this user has a very obvious POV interest in this article and would not tolerate changes that attempted to neutralize this bias. Current coaching records and season results have zero bearing on the subject of the rivalry as a whole. In fact, neither the 2006 nor 2007 games are of any particular historical relevance in the series. It's fairly clear we are dealing with a user who is using Wiki as a way to gloat. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.188.38.31 ( talk) 02:49, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
This user is demonstrating what appears to be genuine remorse on their talk page, and claims to no know about the 3RR. Given that I don't immediately see any evidence to the contrary, I'm going to unblock and let them know this is their last chance. Wanted you to know, since you were the blocking admin. - Philippe | Talk 03:39, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Ay, sorry about that. :( I haven't been very active lately, so I'm out of practice (I even forgot to check what edit I was rolling back earlier >_<). Give me a while and I'll get back to normal. ;) Thank you very much for pointing that out. · AndonicO Talk 19:51, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
This user has abused his admin privileges in the past. He has been blocking users and protecting their talk pages because that user was editing his own talk page. Shiggity ( talk) 20:27, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the stamp, curious why you thought of me though? Cirt ( talk) 13:29, 6 December 2007 (UTC). Hrm, weird, it didn't come from you, it came from this user giving them out with your sig: Vatomanocu ( talk · contribs). Now I'm really confused! Cirt ( talk) 13:30, 6 December 2007 (UTC).
This (and all the other contributions this editor is making) are all in your name. Know anything about it? Thought you ought to know.... The Rambling Man ( talk) 13:39, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Here's a
stamp from the Faroe Islands for you! Stamps from the Faroe Islands somehow promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving something friendly to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Make your own message to spread WikiLove to others! Happy editing!
Vatomanocu (
talk)
13:53, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Husond, I'm curious what the Chinese characters on your block template translate to. Cheers, Caknuck ( talk) 16:15, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
As the header says. – Steel 20:54, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi Húsönd, thanks for the stamp! I've never been to the Faroe Islands, but I once met a couple from there, and it sounds like a nice place. Thanks again! Love, Kyok o 02:59, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Getting pretty sick of this CobraGeek character. They have identified themselves as a Clemson University fan in the WikiProject College Football list and if you check their contribs I think it's quite clear there is an anti-USC agenda at work here. Clearly a user who regularly violates NPOV policy and no longer deserves the benefit of the good faith rule. I will be watching this users edits at all USC-related articles and will remove material that has obvious POV problems. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.188.37.65 ( talk) 03:37, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I commented on my talk page when you awarded it to me, but I just have to tell you incase you didn't see it. That is my all time favorite award I've ever received for anything on Wikipedia. I really want to offer my thank you for it. Happy editing. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 06:04, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
PeaceNT (
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.
Smile at others by adding {{
subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Cheers and happy editing!
Thanks for the barnstar. It was good to find an interesting subject to work with. Giano ( talk) 00:23, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the birthday wishes :) Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»= 07:09, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Could you please write an article about Kurów on Mirandese language here ( http://kurow-wiki.openhosting.pl/wiki/mwl:Kurow ) – just a few sentences based on http://kurow-wiki.openhosting.pl/wiki/pt:Kurów ? Please.
PS. Article about Kurów is already on 246 languages and dialects. If your village/town/city isn't yet on PL Wikipedia, I can do article about it. Only you on PT and EN wiki, speak on Mirandese. Pietras1988 ( talk) 21:53, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
OK. Yes, in this wiki were vandalisms so I semi-protected Wiki and everybody must register :/. Pietras1988 ( talk) 07:28, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
E aí, tudo bom? Só por curiosidade: por que você 'boicota a Wikipédia em português'? (Bom, pelo menos é o que diz lá entre as suas userboxes...). Não que eu tenha lá muita simpatia pela Wikipédia em português, só curiosidade mesmo. Eumedemito ( talk) 16:20, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
É... Seus argumentos têm sentido. Acho que é por esses mesmos motivos que quase nunca uso a Wikipédia em português. Estava tentando começar minha participação por lá, e a minha primeira reação foi exatamente a de querer proteger uma enciclopédia única para br/pt, logo depois de ver o embrião da nova "Wikipédia brasileira", o que, na minha opinião, era puro bairrismo. Aparentemente os participantes da discussão sobre esse assunto, como pode se imaginar, não são lá muito moderados, o que acaba deixando pouca margem para argumentação construtiva, não ajudando muito a definir minha opinião (especilmente considerando que a maior parte das reclamações era sobre detalhes ortográficos e sinônimos). Mas dois argumentos seus me convenceram: a dominância do pt-br e a falta geral de organização. Provavelmente tive a impressão de que quase não havia problemas em uma wp unificada justamente pelo fato da variante dominante ser a brasileira. Na verdade ainda acredito ser tecnicamente possível essa wp-pt unificada. O problema é que entra aí o fator da organização. Não sei como é em Portugal, mas o povo daqui é, no geral, notavelmente mal-organizado, não só na Wikipédia. E junta-se a isso a costumeira arrogância dos usuários mais ativos de computadores, o que só piora a situação. No fim das contas, acho que você está certo, e que a minha visão de um esforço coletivo de padronização é que é pouco realista. Mesmo assim ainda não tenho muita certeza se a minha idéia técnica não poderia ser de alguma utilidade, mesmo que em um contexto mais restrito. Eumedemito ( talk) 22:28, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
---|
| ||
Volume 3, Issue 50 | 10 December 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot ( talk) 07:30, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi, Husond. I am aspiring to take part in the admin coaching program. I was wondering if you are willing to take me up for coaching. Martijn Hoekstra ( talk) 15:19, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi, could you reinstate the protection of Chronic fatigue syndrome, same version as before? Users Orangemarlin and Sciencewatcher keep mutulating the article, despite a number of warnings. Guido den Broeder ( talk) 21:58, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
I was, of course, referring to the edits made by Orangemarlin and Sciencewatcher. JFW | T@lk 20:38, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Just wondering, because I like to talk about it and discuss it, how come you're supporting Kosovo independence? Being a Belgrader for most of my life and a lifelong Yugoslav, it's hard for me to imagine discussing other countries' matters, especially when it comes to issues of national importance, but am always curious to see what drives people to get interested in matters of other countries, who then support ideologies of their own countries that give themselves the right to decide on the future of others. Are there any specific reasons you want independence for Kosovo? If you don't want to talk about it, that's fine too, as I said, I was just wondering... :) -- GOD OF JUSTICE 03:29, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
1 Bogdanovic, Dimitrije. The Book on Kosovo. 1990. Belgrade: Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts, 1985. page 2428.
2 Genfer, Der Kosovo-Konflikt, Munich: Wieser, 2000. page 158.
3 Krizman, Serge. Massacre of the innocent Serbian population, committed in Yugoslavia by the Axis and its Satellite from April 1941 to August 1941. Map. Maps of Yugoslavia at War, Washington, 1943
4 Howe, Marvine. "Exodus of Serbians stirs province in Yugoslavia." The New York Times. July 12th 1982: A8.
I didnt think anyone would notice ok il stop trolling —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.142.236.124 ( talk) 00:04, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
I replied on my talk, but just wanted to say I think they are the best interior fotos on the encyclopedia, interiors are so rare here, even the one's at Versailles are very grainy and not as good as these and most similar pages don't have them at all. I've added them all - This will be the best illustrated page I have done. Far more exiting than being on the Arbcom! Giano ( talk) 00:15, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
---|
| ||
Volume 3, Issue 51 | 17 December 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot ( talk) 18:59, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Great images, just trying to incorporate as many as possible, with some difficulty. Appears it is not a church I can't find out much else about it though! Giano ( talk) 13:14, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Congratulations on bringing Queluz National Palace to Featured Article status. Your photographs really brought the article to life. I'll look forward to seeing what comes next! Risker ( talk) 05:00, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
The Cecil Beaton Barnstar | |
For the most amazing photographs at Queluz National Palace which are amongst the best on a Wikipedia architectural page Giano ( talk) 17:54, 20 December 2007 (UTC)|} |
Thank you for your support in my RfA. It was definitely a dramatic debate! I paid close attention to everything that was said, and, where possible, I will try to incorporate the (constructive) criticism towards being a better administrator. I'm taking things slowly for now, partially because it's the holiday season and there are plenty of off-wiki distractions. :) I'm also working my way through the Wikipedia:New admin school and double-checking the relevant policies, and will gradually phase into the use of the new tools. My main goals are to help out with various backlogs, but I also fully intend to keep on writing articles, as there are several more that I definitely want to get to WP:FA status! Thanks again, -- El on ka 10:51, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Dear Húsönd, I don't even know what to say, to such a lovely note you left for me. Although I don't think we've ever officially "Wiki met" each other, I am quite familiar with you, as I've often seen you around the areas I frequent, and perhaps I've even bumped into you without knowing it. I have replied on my talk page, but I wanted to drop by here as well, and thank you for your confidence in me, as it truly means so very much. If you would like to discuss anything in more detail, feel free to email me, and I'd be more than willing to talk about things so not to bulk up your talk page. Thank you again, it means a lot to me. Ariel ♥ Gold 20:07, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Hello Gscshoyru. I've been witnessing your superb work here on Wikipedia and wonder if you would be interested in becoming an administrator. If you are, and if you need a nominator, I hereby offer myself for the task. Best regards, Hús ö nd 17:57, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
The Barnstar of Good Humor | |
For your brilliance at ArielGold's talk page. Top notch that is. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 00:48, 21 December 2007 (UTC) |
Marlith T/ C 04:22, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
Hello! I wish you a Merry Christmas and all the best in the new year. - Darwinek ( talk) 12:05, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
You are right; I should have informed you. That is the extent to which you are right:
User talk:I love entei tagged my article on Lazarraga for deletion because it failed to indicate the importance of the subject, but it was all in there. I asked him why he did it, and he said it had to do with lack of categorization, broken, links, and being a "poor article" (no arguments there, but hasn't the guy ever heard of stubs?!?) I asked about the "no indication of importance thing," and he just dodged the question a couple of times. (Check out my talk page for the other half of the back-and-forth.) I told him I'd report the tagging as malicious if he couldn't explain his actions, and he couldn't, so I'd like to know how to report him. I looked around, but couldn't find anything. Also, it might be interesting to you to note that a page he created at 13:11 today (Dec 22) on a vacuum cleaner has been tagged for deletion. Perfection Vacuum Cleaner. It looks to me like he was looking to get back at the world. I don't know how someone who could write an article like that could call the Lazarraga article "poor." (I'm cross-posting this to a couple of people on the Basque Project.) Madler 05:04, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
---|
| ||
Volume 3, Issue 52 | 26 December 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot ( talk) 13:19, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedia administrators open to recall category member! |
---|
I am leaving you this message because recent events have given me concern. When Aaron Brenneman and I, and others, first developed this category well over a year ago, we visualized it as a simple idea. A low hassle, low bureaucracy process. We also visualized it as a process that people would come to trust, in fact as a way of increasing trust in those admins who chose to subscribe to the notion of recall. The very informal approach to who is qualified to recall, what happens during it, and the process in general were all part of that approach. But recent events have suggested that this low structure approach may not be entirely effective. More than one of the recent recalls we have seen have been marred by controversy around what was going to happen, and when. Worse, they were marred by some folk having the perception, rightly or wrongly, that the admin being recalled was trying to change the rules, avoid the process, or in other ways somehow go back on their word. This is bad. It's bad for you the admin, bad for the trust in the process, and bad for the community as a whole. I think a way to address this issue is to increase the predictability of the process in advance. I have tried to do that for myself. In my User:Lar/Accountability page, I have given pretty concrete definitions of the criteria for recall, and of the choices I can make, and of the process for the petition, and of the process for other choices I might make (the modified RfC or the RfAr). I think it would be very helpful if other admins who have voluntarily made themselves subject to recall went to similar detail. It is not necessary to adopt the exact same conditions, steps, criteria, etc. It's just helpful to have SOME. Those are mine, fashion yours as you see fit, I would not be so presumptuous as to say mine are right for you. In fact I urge you not to just adopt mine, as I do change them from time to time without notice, but instead develop your own. You are very welcome to start with mine if you so wish, though. But do something. If you have not already, I urge you to make your process more concrete, now, while there is no pressure and you can think clearly about what you want. Do it now rather than later, during a recall when folk may not react well to perceived changes in process or commitment. Further, I suggest that after you document your process, that you give a reference to it for the benefit of other admins who may want to see what others have done. List it in this table as a resource for the benefit of all. If you use someone else's by reference rather than copy, I suggest you might want to do as Cacharoth did, and give a link to a specific version. Do you have to do these things? Not at all. These are suggestions from me, and me alone, and are entirely up to you to embrace or ignore. I just think that doing this now, thinking now, documenting now, will save you trouble later, if you should for whatever reason happen to be recalled. I apologise if this message seems impersonal, but with over 130 members in the category, leaving a personal message for each of you might not have been feasible, and I feel this is important enough to violate social norms a bit. I hope that's OK. Thanks for your time and consideration, and best wishes. Larry Pieniazek NOTE: You are receiving this message because you are listed in the Wikipedia administrators open to recall category. This is a voluntary category, and you should not be in it if you do not want to be. If you did not list yourself, you may want to review the change records to determine who added you, and ask them why they added you. |
...My guinea pigs and the "A"s through "F"s having felt this message was OK to go forward with (or at least not complained bitterly to me about it :) ), today it's the turn of the "G"s, and "H"s! I'm hoping that more of you chaps/chapettes will point to their own criteria instead of mine :)... it's flattering but a bit scary! :) Also, you may want to check back to the table periodically, someone later than you in the alphabet may have come up with a nifty new idea. ++ Lar: t/ c 20:55, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
...and all the best in the new one!!!
May you write tons of articles. ;) -- PaxEquilibrium ( talk) 00:36, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
This article, to which you contributed (magnificently), will be featured on the Main Page on January 5, 2008. [3] Risker ( talk) 17:50, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Husond, I have a bit of an issue. A fellow user has asked me for input (I suspect he mistakes me for an administrator) on a dispute he is having with another user, whom he apparantly tried to help. He has been accused of Wikistalking, and the basis for it is that one of the disputants mentioned the other disputant's name on the talk page of a fellow editor, which he states is in violation of WP:TALK. However, I didn't recall reading that it was uncivil to do this, and when I checked, I didn't see anything about the mentioning of others that his edits had violated. Is there anything on Wikipedia that states that another user's username should not be mentioned on another talk page? Maser ( Talk!) 00:31, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
My apologies for not responding to the message you left me. I was thinking about a reply, but had to leave for a New Years party before I could finish a decent response. I didn't edit again until January 2, and forgot about the message. Thanks for your patience throughout the mess I made and Happy New Year. James086 Talk | Email 07:47, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Here are a load of
apples for you! Apples somehow promote
WikiLove and hopefully these have made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving something friendly to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Make your own message to spread WikiLove to others! Happy editing!
Acalamari
00:20, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Not sure if you noticed this under the whole wall of text, but isn't the fact that googling "
Iaşi-Chişinău Offensive" returns only references to Wikipedia is reason enough to reject that name as original research? True, "
Jassy-Kishinev Operation" and "
Iassy-Kishinev Operation" are not particularly popular in Google searches either (this operation isn't quite as popular as Barbarossa), but at least they do point outside of Wikipedia and include book names and topical sites.
post-edit conflict: Aww, sorry, hope I didn't spoil the message above... :o] --
Illythr (
talk)
01:27, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Simply pick the most popular one of the J(41)/Y(19)/I(1) bunch, which would be "Jassy". "Iassy-Kishinev Op" brings up just the one book by Glantz, whereas "Yassy" is merely a more direct derivative from Russian. --
Illythr (
talk)
04:10, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
May I ask you to take another look at the discussion, particularly this section? mrg3105 is being quite incivil and failing to AGF -- my arguments are based on Wikipedia policy, not "Romanian PRIDE". For all I know, his comments may even fall afoul of the Digwuren restriction. Thank you. Biruitorul ( talk) 17:48, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello there
I see you are interested in the Life On Mars Television Series, as I am.
At the moment I have A Life On Mars Wikiproject currently up for approval by the Wikiproject Approval Council. As you are interested in Life On Mars I was wondering if you would be interested in adding your name and joining. If you are interested you can find it on Wikipedia: WikiProject Council/Proposals its right at the very bottom you cant miss it as its titled ‘Wikipedia: Wikiproject Life on Mars (Television Series)’. And after your name is added to Wikiproject propsals please add it to the main page Wikipedia:Wikiproject Life On Mars
If you are interested by all means feel free to join
Regards
Police,Mad,Jack —Preceding comment was added at 20:44, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello Husond,
I'm sorry about the confusion with Samba (old), but I didn't imagine that such a move was irreversible. I beg to differ with you with regard to wikipedia policies. Many articles in this situation do not have words in parens, I could cite numerous examples. That happens when they are obviously the senior article regarding that name. I think this is the situation here. There's nothing in the disambiguation page that comes close in relevance or claim to the name Samba as Samba (music). The second most relevant IMO is Samba (software), something which was created in the 90s and borrowed the name from the music. Thus it is my opinion that Samba (music) has the right to the title Samba alone. -- Mahriolobo ( talk) 22:14, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Hopefully I'm not bothering you, but I replied to your comments there. Thanks, Keilana talk (recall) 01:40, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Hey. My internet is relatively slow, and my comments couldn't get through there (edit conflicts), so it's copy pasted below, if you're interested.
(ec x 3, + a possible death threat from my ISP) The original banner was not aimed at anyone in particular (notice how many other people have asked for a speedy close and completely ignored Deskana etc. in the process - obviously WP:READWELLWITHOUTBANNERS wasn't working). The second banner was hypocritical - getting angry about a banner using another banner is just that. I'm sorry if you found that claim offensive. I have no problem with Black Kite's removal of the banners. pours a cup of tea — Dihydrogen Monoxide 02:56, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm really sorry to have offended you, but yeah... — Dihydrogen Monoxide 02:56, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
I appreciate your comments at my RfA and request that you reconsider your vote as I have expanded upon question 1 (per your request). If there is anything further I can explain, please don't hesitate to ask. — BQZip01 — talk 04:59, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
I took another look at that Queluz National Palace ballroom. Would it be possible for you to return there and shoot again on an overcast day? That should eliminate most of those blown whites. Cameras don't adjust for differences in light intensity as well as the human eye. If I were shooting this I'd stand near the right wall instead of the left, use a slightly longer lens, and tilt the camera upward slightly. That should get you better levels and more of that spectacular ceiling; the floor isn't really that interesting. There's a featured picture in there - you just haven't quite shot it yet. Durova Charge! 09:20, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Can you please look over my translation of this article? There's a lot left that I didn't have time for. Obrigado. Muito obrigado. Cbdorsett 16:55, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
CobraGeek has repeatedly violated Wiki's NPOV and three revert rule policies in an obvious attempt to put a biased spin on the Carolina-Clemson Rivalry article. He and other anonymous users (probably just him editing anonymously) have also removed relevant material from the article to maintain their slanted POV. Here was his excuse:
"We are trying to get this right. If you have constructive input, provide, don't just vandalize the content, it will just be restored to its original state. I can see how some would say that newspaper style content might sound editorial, but if it is factual it is going to stay if it has relevence. There is significant relevence in the most recent game in the series, including its short term implications (coaching records and bowl implications included)."
No one was vandalizing anything, it's pretty clear this user has a very obvious POV interest in this article and would not tolerate changes that attempted to neutralize this bias. Current coaching records and season results have zero bearing on the subject of the rivalry as a whole. In fact, neither the 2006 nor 2007 games are of any particular historical relevance in the series. It's fairly clear we are dealing with a user who is using Wiki as a way to gloat. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.188.38.31 ( talk) 02:49, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
This user is demonstrating what appears to be genuine remorse on their talk page, and claims to no know about the 3RR. Given that I don't immediately see any evidence to the contrary, I'm going to unblock and let them know this is their last chance. Wanted you to know, since you were the blocking admin. - Philippe | Talk 03:39, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Ay, sorry about that. :( I haven't been very active lately, so I'm out of practice (I even forgot to check what edit I was rolling back earlier >_<). Give me a while and I'll get back to normal. ;) Thank you very much for pointing that out. · AndonicO Talk 19:51, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
This user has abused his admin privileges in the past. He has been blocking users and protecting their talk pages because that user was editing his own talk page. Shiggity ( talk) 20:27, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the stamp, curious why you thought of me though? Cirt ( talk) 13:29, 6 December 2007 (UTC). Hrm, weird, it didn't come from you, it came from this user giving them out with your sig: Vatomanocu ( talk · contribs). Now I'm really confused! Cirt ( talk) 13:30, 6 December 2007 (UTC).
This (and all the other contributions this editor is making) are all in your name. Know anything about it? Thought you ought to know.... The Rambling Man ( talk) 13:39, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Here's a
stamp from the Faroe Islands for you! Stamps from the Faroe Islands somehow promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving something friendly to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Make your own message to spread WikiLove to others! Happy editing!
Vatomanocu (
talk)
13:53, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Husond, I'm curious what the Chinese characters on your block template translate to. Cheers, Caknuck ( talk) 16:15, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
As the header says. – Steel 20:54, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi Húsönd, thanks for the stamp! I've never been to the Faroe Islands, but I once met a couple from there, and it sounds like a nice place. Thanks again! Love, Kyok o 02:59, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Getting pretty sick of this CobraGeek character. They have identified themselves as a Clemson University fan in the WikiProject College Football list and if you check their contribs I think it's quite clear there is an anti-USC agenda at work here. Clearly a user who regularly violates NPOV policy and no longer deserves the benefit of the good faith rule. I will be watching this users edits at all USC-related articles and will remove material that has obvious POV problems. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.188.37.65 ( talk) 03:37, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I commented on my talk page when you awarded it to me, but I just have to tell you incase you didn't see it. That is my all time favorite award I've ever received for anything on Wikipedia. I really want to offer my thank you for it. Happy editing. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 06:04, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
PeaceNT (
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.
Smile at others by adding {{
subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Cheers and happy editing!
Thanks for the barnstar. It was good to find an interesting subject to work with. Giano ( talk) 00:23, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the birthday wishes :) Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»= 07:09, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
Could you please write an article about Kurów on Mirandese language here ( http://kurow-wiki.openhosting.pl/wiki/mwl:Kurow ) – just a few sentences based on http://kurow-wiki.openhosting.pl/wiki/pt:Kurów ? Please.
PS. Article about Kurów is already on 246 languages and dialects. If your village/town/city isn't yet on PL Wikipedia, I can do article about it. Only you on PT and EN wiki, speak on Mirandese. Pietras1988 ( talk) 21:53, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
OK. Yes, in this wiki were vandalisms so I semi-protected Wiki and everybody must register :/. Pietras1988 ( talk) 07:28, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
E aí, tudo bom? Só por curiosidade: por que você 'boicota a Wikipédia em português'? (Bom, pelo menos é o que diz lá entre as suas userboxes...). Não que eu tenha lá muita simpatia pela Wikipédia em português, só curiosidade mesmo. Eumedemito ( talk) 16:20, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
É... Seus argumentos têm sentido. Acho que é por esses mesmos motivos que quase nunca uso a Wikipédia em português. Estava tentando começar minha participação por lá, e a minha primeira reação foi exatamente a de querer proteger uma enciclopédia única para br/pt, logo depois de ver o embrião da nova "Wikipédia brasileira", o que, na minha opinião, era puro bairrismo. Aparentemente os participantes da discussão sobre esse assunto, como pode se imaginar, não são lá muito moderados, o que acaba deixando pouca margem para argumentação construtiva, não ajudando muito a definir minha opinião (especilmente considerando que a maior parte das reclamações era sobre detalhes ortográficos e sinônimos). Mas dois argumentos seus me convenceram: a dominância do pt-br e a falta geral de organização. Provavelmente tive a impressão de que quase não havia problemas em uma wp unificada justamente pelo fato da variante dominante ser a brasileira. Na verdade ainda acredito ser tecnicamente possível essa wp-pt unificada. O problema é que entra aí o fator da organização. Não sei como é em Portugal, mas o povo daqui é, no geral, notavelmente mal-organizado, não só na Wikipédia. E junta-se a isso a costumeira arrogância dos usuários mais ativos de computadores, o que só piora a situação. No fim das contas, acho que você está certo, e que a minha visão de um esforço coletivo de padronização é que é pouco realista. Mesmo assim ainda não tenho muita certeza se a minha idéia técnica não poderia ser de alguma utilidade, mesmo que em um contexto mais restrito. Eumedemito ( talk) 22:28, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
---|
| ||
Volume 3, Issue 50 | 10 December 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot ( talk) 07:30, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi, Husond. I am aspiring to take part in the admin coaching program. I was wondering if you are willing to take me up for coaching. Martijn Hoekstra ( talk) 15:19, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Hi, could you reinstate the protection of Chronic fatigue syndrome, same version as before? Users Orangemarlin and Sciencewatcher keep mutulating the article, despite a number of warnings. Guido den Broeder ( talk) 21:58, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
I was, of course, referring to the edits made by Orangemarlin and Sciencewatcher. JFW | T@lk 20:38, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
Just wondering, because I like to talk about it and discuss it, how come you're supporting Kosovo independence? Being a Belgrader for most of my life and a lifelong Yugoslav, it's hard for me to imagine discussing other countries' matters, especially when it comes to issues of national importance, but am always curious to see what drives people to get interested in matters of other countries, who then support ideologies of their own countries that give themselves the right to decide on the future of others. Are there any specific reasons you want independence for Kosovo? If you don't want to talk about it, that's fine too, as I said, I was just wondering... :) -- GOD OF JUSTICE 03:29, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
1 Bogdanovic, Dimitrije. The Book on Kosovo. 1990. Belgrade: Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts, 1985. page 2428.
2 Genfer, Der Kosovo-Konflikt, Munich: Wieser, 2000. page 158.
3 Krizman, Serge. Massacre of the innocent Serbian population, committed in Yugoslavia by the Axis and its Satellite from April 1941 to August 1941. Map. Maps of Yugoslavia at War, Washington, 1943
4 Howe, Marvine. "Exodus of Serbians stirs province in Yugoslavia." The New York Times. July 12th 1982: A8.
I didnt think anyone would notice ok il stop trolling —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.142.236.124 ( talk) 00:04, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
I replied on my talk, but just wanted to say I think they are the best interior fotos on the encyclopedia, interiors are so rare here, even the one's at Versailles are very grainy and not as good as these and most similar pages don't have them at all. I've added them all - This will be the best illustrated page I have done. Far more exiting than being on the Arbcom! Giano ( talk) 00:15, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
---|
| ||
Volume 3, Issue 51 | 17 December 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot ( talk) 18:59, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Great images, just trying to incorporate as many as possible, with some difficulty. Appears it is not a church I can't find out much else about it though! Giano ( talk) 13:14, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Congratulations on bringing Queluz National Palace to Featured Article status. Your photographs really brought the article to life. I'll look forward to seeing what comes next! Risker ( talk) 05:00, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
The Cecil Beaton Barnstar | |
For the most amazing photographs at Queluz National Palace which are amongst the best on a Wikipedia architectural page Giano ( talk) 17:54, 20 December 2007 (UTC)|} |
Thank you for your support in my RfA. It was definitely a dramatic debate! I paid close attention to everything that was said, and, where possible, I will try to incorporate the (constructive) criticism towards being a better administrator. I'm taking things slowly for now, partially because it's the holiday season and there are plenty of off-wiki distractions. :) I'm also working my way through the Wikipedia:New admin school and double-checking the relevant policies, and will gradually phase into the use of the new tools. My main goals are to help out with various backlogs, but I also fully intend to keep on writing articles, as there are several more that I definitely want to get to WP:FA status! Thanks again, -- El on ka 10:51, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Dear Húsönd, I don't even know what to say, to such a lovely note you left for me. Although I don't think we've ever officially "Wiki met" each other, I am quite familiar with you, as I've often seen you around the areas I frequent, and perhaps I've even bumped into you without knowing it. I have replied on my talk page, but I wanted to drop by here as well, and thank you for your confidence in me, as it truly means so very much. If you would like to discuss anything in more detail, feel free to email me, and I'd be more than willing to talk about things so not to bulk up your talk page. Thank you again, it means a lot to me. Ariel ♥ Gold 20:07, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Hello Gscshoyru. I've been witnessing your superb work here on Wikipedia and wonder if you would be interested in becoming an administrator. If you are, and if you need a nominator, I hereby offer myself for the task. Best regards, Hús ö nd 17:57, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
The Barnstar of Good Humor | |
For your brilliance at ArielGold's talk page. Top notch that is. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 00:48, 21 December 2007 (UTC) |
Marlith T/ C 04:22, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
Hello! I wish you a Merry Christmas and all the best in the new year. - Darwinek ( talk) 12:05, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
You are right; I should have informed you. That is the extent to which you are right:
User talk:I love entei tagged my article on Lazarraga for deletion because it failed to indicate the importance of the subject, but it was all in there. I asked him why he did it, and he said it had to do with lack of categorization, broken, links, and being a "poor article" (no arguments there, but hasn't the guy ever heard of stubs?!?) I asked about the "no indication of importance thing," and he just dodged the question a couple of times. (Check out my talk page for the other half of the back-and-forth.) I told him I'd report the tagging as malicious if he couldn't explain his actions, and he couldn't, so I'd like to know how to report him. I looked around, but couldn't find anything. Also, it might be interesting to you to note that a page he created at 13:11 today (Dec 22) on a vacuum cleaner has been tagged for deletion. Perfection Vacuum Cleaner. It looks to me like he was looking to get back at the world. I don't know how someone who could write an article like that could call the Lazarraga article "poor." (I'm cross-posting this to a couple of people on the Basque Project.) Madler 05:04, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
---|
| ||
Volume 3, Issue 52 | 26 December 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| |
Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot ( talk) 13:19, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedia administrators open to recall category member! |
---|
I am leaving you this message because recent events have given me concern. When Aaron Brenneman and I, and others, first developed this category well over a year ago, we visualized it as a simple idea. A low hassle, low bureaucracy process. We also visualized it as a process that people would come to trust, in fact as a way of increasing trust in those admins who chose to subscribe to the notion of recall. The very informal approach to who is qualified to recall, what happens during it, and the process in general were all part of that approach. But recent events have suggested that this low structure approach may not be entirely effective. More than one of the recent recalls we have seen have been marred by controversy around what was going to happen, and when. Worse, they were marred by some folk having the perception, rightly or wrongly, that the admin being recalled was trying to change the rules, avoid the process, or in other ways somehow go back on their word. This is bad. It's bad for you the admin, bad for the trust in the process, and bad for the community as a whole. I think a way to address this issue is to increase the predictability of the process in advance. I have tried to do that for myself. In my User:Lar/Accountability page, I have given pretty concrete definitions of the criteria for recall, and of the choices I can make, and of the process for the petition, and of the process for other choices I might make (the modified RfC or the RfAr). I think it would be very helpful if other admins who have voluntarily made themselves subject to recall went to similar detail. It is not necessary to adopt the exact same conditions, steps, criteria, etc. It's just helpful to have SOME. Those are mine, fashion yours as you see fit, I would not be so presumptuous as to say mine are right for you. In fact I urge you not to just adopt mine, as I do change them from time to time without notice, but instead develop your own. You are very welcome to start with mine if you so wish, though. But do something. If you have not already, I urge you to make your process more concrete, now, while there is no pressure and you can think clearly about what you want. Do it now rather than later, during a recall when folk may not react well to perceived changes in process or commitment. Further, I suggest that after you document your process, that you give a reference to it for the benefit of other admins who may want to see what others have done. List it in this table as a resource for the benefit of all. If you use someone else's by reference rather than copy, I suggest you might want to do as Cacharoth did, and give a link to a specific version. Do you have to do these things? Not at all. These are suggestions from me, and me alone, and are entirely up to you to embrace or ignore. I just think that doing this now, thinking now, documenting now, will save you trouble later, if you should for whatever reason happen to be recalled. I apologise if this message seems impersonal, but with over 130 members in the category, leaving a personal message for each of you might not have been feasible, and I feel this is important enough to violate social norms a bit. I hope that's OK. Thanks for your time and consideration, and best wishes. Larry Pieniazek NOTE: You are receiving this message because you are listed in the Wikipedia administrators open to recall category. This is a voluntary category, and you should not be in it if you do not want to be. If you did not list yourself, you may want to review the change records to determine who added you, and ask them why they added you. |
...My guinea pigs and the "A"s through "F"s having felt this message was OK to go forward with (or at least not complained bitterly to me about it :) ), today it's the turn of the "G"s, and "H"s! I'm hoping that more of you chaps/chapettes will point to their own criteria instead of mine :)... it's flattering but a bit scary! :) Also, you may want to check back to the table periodically, someone later than you in the alphabet may have come up with a nifty new idea. ++ Lar: t/ c 20:55, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
...and all the best in the new one!!!
May you write tons of articles. ;) -- PaxEquilibrium ( talk) 00:36, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
This article, to which you contributed (magnificently), will be featured on the Main Page on January 5, 2008. [3] Risker ( talk) 17:50, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Husond, I have a bit of an issue. A fellow user has asked me for input (I suspect he mistakes me for an administrator) on a dispute he is having with another user, whom he apparantly tried to help. He has been accused of Wikistalking, and the basis for it is that one of the disputants mentioned the other disputant's name on the talk page of a fellow editor, which he states is in violation of WP:TALK. However, I didn't recall reading that it was uncivil to do this, and when I checked, I didn't see anything about the mentioning of others that his edits had violated. Is there anything on Wikipedia that states that another user's username should not be mentioned on another talk page? Maser ( Talk!) 00:31, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
My apologies for not responding to the message you left me. I was thinking about a reply, but had to leave for a New Years party before I could finish a decent response. I didn't edit again until January 2, and forgot about the message. Thanks for your patience throughout the mess I made and Happy New Year. James086 Talk | Email 07:47, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Here are a load of
apples for you! Apples somehow promote
WikiLove and hopefully these have made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving something friendly to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Make your own message to spread WikiLove to others! Happy editing!
Acalamari
00:20, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Not sure if you noticed this under the whole wall of text, but isn't the fact that googling "
Iaşi-Chişinău Offensive" returns only references to Wikipedia is reason enough to reject that name as original research? True, "
Jassy-Kishinev Operation" and "
Iassy-Kishinev Operation" are not particularly popular in Google searches either (this operation isn't quite as popular as Barbarossa), but at least they do point outside of Wikipedia and include book names and topical sites.
post-edit conflict: Aww, sorry, hope I didn't spoil the message above... :o] --
Illythr (
talk)
01:27, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Simply pick the most popular one of the J(41)/Y(19)/I(1) bunch, which would be "Jassy". "Iassy-Kishinev Op" brings up just the one book by Glantz, whereas "Yassy" is merely a more direct derivative from Russian. --
Illythr (
talk)
04:10, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
May I ask you to take another look at the discussion, particularly this section? mrg3105 is being quite incivil and failing to AGF -- my arguments are based on Wikipedia policy, not "Romanian PRIDE". For all I know, his comments may even fall afoul of the Digwuren restriction. Thank you. Biruitorul ( talk) 17:48, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello there
I see you are interested in the Life On Mars Television Series, as I am.
At the moment I have A Life On Mars Wikiproject currently up for approval by the Wikiproject Approval Council. As you are interested in Life On Mars I was wondering if you would be interested in adding your name and joining. If you are interested you can find it on Wikipedia: WikiProject Council/Proposals its right at the very bottom you cant miss it as its titled ‘Wikipedia: Wikiproject Life on Mars (Television Series)’. And after your name is added to Wikiproject propsals please add it to the main page Wikipedia:Wikiproject Life On Mars
If you are interested by all means feel free to join
Regards
Police,Mad,Jack —Preceding comment was added at 20:44, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello Husond,
I'm sorry about the confusion with Samba (old), but I didn't imagine that such a move was irreversible. I beg to differ with you with regard to wikipedia policies. Many articles in this situation do not have words in parens, I could cite numerous examples. That happens when they are obviously the senior article regarding that name. I think this is the situation here. There's nothing in the disambiguation page that comes close in relevance or claim to the name Samba as Samba (music). The second most relevant IMO is Samba (software), something which was created in the 90s and borrowed the name from the music. Thus it is my opinion that Samba (music) has the right to the title Samba alone. -- Mahriolobo ( talk) 22:14, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
Hopefully I'm not bothering you, but I replied to your comments there. Thanks, Keilana talk (recall) 01:40, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Hey. My internet is relatively slow, and my comments couldn't get through there (edit conflicts), so it's copy pasted below, if you're interested.
(ec x 3, + a possible death threat from my ISP) The original banner was not aimed at anyone in particular (notice how many other people have asked for a speedy close and completely ignored Deskana etc. in the process - obviously WP:READWELLWITHOUTBANNERS wasn't working). The second banner was hypocritical - getting angry about a banner using another banner is just that. I'm sorry if you found that claim offensive. I have no problem with Black Kite's removal of the banners. pours a cup of tea — Dihydrogen Monoxide 02:56, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
I'm really sorry to have offended you, but yeah... — Dihydrogen Monoxide 02:56, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
I appreciate your comments at my RfA and request that you reconsider your vote as I have expanded upon question 1 (per your request). If there is anything further I can explain, please don't hesitate to ask. — BQZip01 — talk 04:59, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
I took another look at that Queluz National Palace ballroom. Would it be possible for you to return there and shoot again on an overcast day? That should eliminate most of those blown whites. Cameras don't adjust for differences in light intensity as well as the human eye. If I were shooting this I'd stand near the right wall instead of the left, use a slightly longer lens, and tilt the camera upward slightly. That should get you better levels and more of that spectacular ceiling; the floor isn't really that interesting. There's a featured picture in there - you just haven't quite shot it yet. Durova Charge! 09:20, 7 January 2008 (UTC)