![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Heyas!
You might've noticed the essay on privacy I linked to on the mail list...er, yesterday? I was hoping you'd give it a once-over, though I do understand you're quite busy.
Thanks. :) ~Kylu ( u| t) 04:50, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
Yo dog - do you know that NOR has been protected for several days and some people want it unprotected? I haven't been able to sort out the precise cause of the dispute but there is a lot of talk on the page about how stupid the policy is, claiming that it forbids all use of primary sources. I have commented that it allows the use of primary sources if they are verifiable and not used to forward an editors own POV, and some have responded that well that's a stupid policy too. I think it is serious and hope you can check it out. Current discussion is occuring in many different threads which makes it hard to pin down, but the fact that the page was protected tells me something serious is going on, and whatever the source of the dispute editors currently active on the talk page have not reached any consensus. Slrubenstein | Talk 18:34, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
Should this be the object of an RFC? I am going to poll other editors I really respect, but thought you should know. Slrubenstein | Talk 21:29, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
Okay. But it still concerns me. Slrubenstein | Talk 21:42, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
I'll step away from Jim62sch's talk page at your request. — Carl ( CBM · talk) 00:42, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
I disagree with your reasoning in removing the speedy tag. Of course he is notable. But the article as it stands is blatant advertising, not just an article that reads like an ad. Big difference. However, I will not revert you, just point out that you're thinking simplistically. Jeffpw 10:19, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
Since others are taking stabs at rewriting this policy, I have decided to try my own. Before I share it with a wider group, could you go over it and make such edits as you see fit? Thanks [2] Slrubenstein | Talk 14:44, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
Hello Huahua. I see that the top secret OTRS handshake or whatever it is has been divulged to you. What the (expleted) do you think " Temporary keep per OTRS Ticket # 2007072910013442" might be about? "Temporary" seems stretching it: actually I'd pretty much forgotten about this fellow until reminded by this. -- Hoary 14:04, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
Hey, KC. I posted a thread about that issue earlier on AN/I, but I was pointed →thataway→ to the COI Noticeboard and have posted the issue there. Your comments would be appreciated! Thanks :) Arky ¡Hablar! 21:09, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
Congrats,KC!;-) I didn't know that admin meant adminastrator. I thought it was and ad making company trying to win you over. My Bad. I hope there's no offense, KC or other admins. Sorry. So your the Man now! Well, one of the Men and Ladies. Here a nice bone for a new admin. -- Angel David ?!? Presents 21:14, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
Say, do you have a source for Gorham having designed the Davis Cup and the America's Cup? All evidence I can find points the other way... the America's Cup appears to have been made by Garrard & Co in the UK, and the Davis Cup by Shreve, Crump & Low... for the time being, I have removed this mention from the article. Lupo 16:39, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Enjoy your nice autumn wikibreak, or should I say Fall hol.? ;) ... dave souza, talk 22:21, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
In your opinion, is this (note the surname removal) enough to warrant oversight intervention? Cheers, Arky ¡Hablar! 14:28, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Sorry to disrupt your break, but after you modified Filll's view to be inside, Moulton made this edit deleting some of Filll's view and adding his own parody, with the edit summary "- Is this section really a kosher part of an RfC?" Not knowing the answer, I re-added Filll's comments under a note saying what I'd done, moved Moulton's comment under a comments heading and told Odd Nature that signing assent might be worth reviewing in light of the changes. [4] Should the whole lot be moved to the talk page? Puzzled, ... dave souza, talk 18:20, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
A request for arbitration involving you has been filed here. Please view the request, and add any statements you feel are necessary for the ArbCom to consider in deciding whether to hear the dispute. Videmus Omnia Talk 03:17, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
KC- I notice you've had prior dealings with this user, ao I thougt you'd be the admin to go to. LAEC runs a website that is opposed to the American Library Association, and over the past year since he joined wikipedia, he has devoted the bulk of his wikipedia activities to crusading against Libraries.
His first username was SafeLibraries.org (the url of his website), although at some point he was required to give up that username, since it was his site's url, and instead he chose his site's motto: "Legitimate And Even Compelling" (referring I believe to need to keep children from accessing american libraries).
Along the way, he's caused more than his share of disruption. In Oct '06, and RFC was filed against him. Glancing over his talk page, it seems like he's been causing plenty of stir in the intervening year. And now, he's been editwarring Another American Libraries Association article.
Because I filed the Oct 06 RFC, people contacted me to see if I had any suggestions for how to resolve his bad behavior. Regrettably, I'm swamped by real life lately, so I don't can't take lots of time to devote to the issue. Would you be willing to take charge of helping deal with LAEC-- or if not, could you please refer the matter to whomever should look at the situation?
Thanks so much! -- Alecmconroy 08:20, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
I have a reference here... http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/rational_response_squad_alerts/rational_response_squad_alerts/9978 However I am not familiar with how to add it to the article Could you please restore the content and reference it for me? —Preceding unsigned comment added by K Watson1984 ( talk • contribs) 10:18, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
I won't be on for a little while later, but I'm willing to help. Sxeptomaniac 22:50, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
What was it about Potter that we were discussing. KC? - Arcayne (cast a spell) 18:55, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Are you aware of [11] and [12]?
At some point I hope you will comment there. Slrubenstein | Talk 19:09, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
KC - yes, my edit to Rosalind Picard here was probably ill-timed, at the least. It was, I assure you, a joke, in keeping with the obvious reasons after the protection, and not intended as point-y at all. Thank you for playing. What do we have for him, Johnny-O? ;) -- profg 19:24, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
FT2 ( Talk | email) 16:17, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm glad I could help out. I see your page got protected. Do you know how you pissed off that guy who kept editing your page? Maybe reverted one of his other vandalism attempts? 66.189.137.113 04:29, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
I notice that you recently got involved in an edit war on the Abortion page. I would appreciate it if you would also contribute to the associated discussion on Talk:Abortion. Thank you. Sheffield Steel talk stalk 14:27, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Just a friendly note to apologize for my past snippetyness. I am starting to see and enjoy the method in your madness. I do think we are ideologically at loggerheads, and I do not think that will change. However, I do hope that we can be friends. Please let me know if you feel I need to make amends and how I might do so. Cheers. LCP 16:59, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Why did you say " Photo, just because there is a discussion about possible changes does NOT mean you get to make any changes you want while the discussion is underway.)"? Lion's Heart was the person who removed the image, not me. All I did was place the "no consensus template", is that some huge problem? Did you think I removed the image? Please explain. Thank you. Photouploaded 17:40, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
(outdent) Check any high-traffic page's history - try WP:ANI, for example. Summaries are frequently used to communicate brief messages rather than using the talk page. Errors are sometimes made; and sometimes apologies are made for the errors and sometimes (much more often) not. The world will not end tomorrow if there is an occasional edit summary which is erroneous, poorly phrased, or names the wrong party. Its an oops, not a personal attack. Accept apologies if offered, and if not, then usually its best to not make a big deal out of it - its almost certain nothing was meant by it. KillerChihuahua ?!? 18:55, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
Could you take a look at this discussion? I think we have a repeat of similar POV issues elsewhere and would appreciate your input. Thanks (By the way, my cousin Peewee, a chihuahua, bit me - well, nipped my thumb - when I was about 5, but I've forgiven him and don't hold it against you...) Tvoz | talk 19:20, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism#User-reported
Thanks. LCP 22:14, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
KC, would you please help me? The problem I am having is that LCP keeps editing a comment I made on their talk page. They inserted a link into my comment that I did not put there, it was not part of my original comment. This "substantially changes its meaning" and thus I see it as vandalism. Would you please help me? Photouploaded 22:21, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
(outdent) Not a problem, I'm here to help. KillerChihuahua ?!? 23:01, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
Hello,
KillerChihuahua, thank you for your support during my RfA, especially after the concerns that were brought up by other editors. I'll keep all of the comments in mind in the coming months, and will try again later. In the mean time, if you see me doing something stupid, please let me know. See you around. -- barneca ( talk) 13:02, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
At Talk:Abortion in this diff, a question; it would be hard to find if you weren't looking for it. Photouploaded 02:21, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, well, I don't like being accused by innuendo, and this is at least the 4th time that that particular editor misrepresented me - I've called him on it each time I've noticed it, and have yet to get anything remotely like an apology. I don't know, when I'm wrong I acknowledge it - apologize for it - explain it - something. This guy just flails around and doesn't respond or reverses the attack when he's called on his misrepresentations, without any evidence. Disagreement, even very vocal disagreement, is not harassment, and I'm not the type to be intimidated by false accusations. Feel free to email me if you have any suggestions. Tvoz | talk 00:11, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
Just saw you semi protect scientifc method. Cloning is in desperate need of a semi protect, again. The vandalism there is cronic. Any chance you could do the honors? David D. (Talk) 03:14, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
You have seen this before, but I just want everyone else to see it. Yes, I am trying to take a break. But...it...is...so...hard. *sniff* The Puppy Surfing. Have a good one. M. (er) 03:05, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
Zilla, remember puppy have tiny bones, make sharp pain in gums when eating. ⇒ SWATJester Denny Crane. 18:29, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
According to my sources, what I wrote is one among a couple of possible meanings. It should be added because there isn't one single definition for "Myth" and its uses. Miguelzinho 13:24, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Can you vote her, comment, and if you see any way to improve it, make any edits to the proposal as you see fit? Thanks, Slrubenstein | Talk 21:47, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
|
My RFA | |
Thanks for your support in my request for adminship, which ended with 58 supports, 1 opposes, and 1 neutral. I hope your confidence in me proves to be justified. Addhoc 19:07, 24 September 2007 (UTC) |
You appear to be perhaps the only obstacle to unblocking by account at memestream. You commented that you may have got the wrong end of the stick, and then you asked why I needed two accounts. I have given exceptionally good reasons (I made an undertaking with my former partner not to edit psychology topics in the name of lindosland becuase of close links with her business and the fact that we are both called P. Skirrow leading her colleagues (who edit those pages) to mistake my edits for her (she does not edit).
Many editors and admins have testified to a mistake being made. I did nothing outside the rules, I did not edit war, I was always civil and polite, I never edited the same page using both names, and I never deliberately stirred things up. I am currently editing in an intense but very successful fashion with Tim Vickers at neo-Darwinism, the very problematic page that started this, and you are welcome to look there. While that page, which I created, is up for deletion, it now has 15 votes to keep, and has become a good page. I have also listed many pages where I have made huge contributions, always without any problems.
There has been a big mistake (actually I was warned and set up by an anti-creationist group who mistook me for something I am not and will do anything to stop the page I created, but it's futile to go into that - you will see that allegation made by GettaGrippa without prompting from me.
Please take another look (I've summarised to make it easier) and unblock. Regards -- Lindosland 11:41, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
Please see the discussion here [14].
Thanks! LCP 18:47, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
I'd be inclined to block Profg for the stalking, given his previous history William M. Connolley 20:56, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
I've just made a new account at Meta, as it sounded pretty fun, and I figured it would be interesting to deal with project coordination. What kinds of things go on there? I know that there's RFA, which I can contrubute to with a good deal of comfort since Wikipedia also has it, and I saw some project proposals, but how else can I help there? Cheers, ARkY // ¡HaBLaR! 02:44, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi KC, I'd like your opinion on the topic of mental health at the bottom of the Abortion Talk page. Regards, --[User:IronAngelAlice|IronAngelAlice] 17:12, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Hey, KC! Just thought I'd remind you (sorry if I sound a bit like I'm nagging you ;D) but I answered your question here. Happy editing, ARkY // ¡HaBLaR! 02:02, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi, KC. Could you do me a favour? Could you restore my talk page and talk archives ( Archive 1 through Archive 7) if you've got time? Thanks! - Severa 21:29, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks Elinor, and again, Welcome Back, Severa! KillerChihuahua ?!? 10:02, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
KC something terrible has happened. After The no erz came back he saw me redo and edit that I made that he erased. He saw that I did it. But even worse. I was a sensitive person back then. Because another Wikipedian erased. And I called that user a harsh name and the no erz thinks that I was reffering him and went I sent him a message...he dissapeared again! I wish I contact him and tell him what really happened but I don't know his email address or if he works on another Wiki/pedia. What am I going to do!?-- Angel David 00:28, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for catching this... misuse of the word "theory" is one of my pet peeves. MastCell Talk 19:36, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
I have recently noticed two different editors making similar reversions on the same group of articles, including Abortion, [15] [16] Post-abortion syndrome, [17] [18] and Mexico City Policy [19] [20]. Both have also made similar edits to David Reardon. [21] [22] What do you make of this correlation in patterns of editing? - Severa ( !!!) 20:58, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
KC, can you have a look at a situation which developed overnight with the entries for Blackwater USA and Blackwater USA arms smuggling and User:Haizum a hostile and emotional guy with an extensive block log. In addition to his general uncivility, he keeps adding POV tags inappropriately. He has made no attempt to reach consensus with anyone about the articles. He's just very upset by them. -- Pleasantville 10:02, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
You recently commented on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Psychiatric abuse, which was closed as delete. The article has been nominated for a deletion review at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 October 5#Psychiatric abuse. Please feel free to comment on the decision there - as a contributor to the original AfD, your input would be welcomed. -- ChrisO 09:18, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Hey, KC. I've seen this come up in numerous RfAs, and so I figured I'd ask you :) What are your thoughts on Category:Wikipedia administrators open to recall? I'm personally divided on the issue; I think it's fair to be desysopped if someone misuses admin tools, but I don't think I'd like to have a potential recall hanging over my head...hmm. Oh well, just looking for your thoughts, and happy editing, ( ar ky ) 03:33, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
← And,as a side note, what do you think about this? Cheers, ( ar ky ) 01:27, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
In the Ferrylodge arbitration case, you state that "Also typical is his initial naming of "Ferrylodge v. FeloniousMonk", indicating his mindset of Me. v Them." This connection between the naming and his motives does not follow, because the use of "v." was once the standard for two-person disputes that didn't have any other reasonable name (see Category:Wikipedia Arbitration cases). Only recently was this changed, to make case names sound less adversarial. So what you are attributing to his state of mind may very well just be left-over knowledge of the old case naming conventions. I'd like to request you remove this claim unless you can back it up, because users shouldn't be blamed for shifts in procedure they were unaware of. Picaroon (t) 01:29, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Your input would be appreciated: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Martinphi ScienceApologist 21:41, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi KC. Today, an editor named Equidistant put on the Conservapedia entry some related articles he thought were appropiate. They were deleted by other users, so Equidistant opened a discussion on the talk page. Only user Hut 8.5 replied. I supported Edquidistant. Given that nobody said nothing else, I thought it was fine to make the edit again, but user Fredrick day reverted it. Anyway, an admin named Bbatsell intervened and deleted the "See also" section completely, arguing no relation to Conservapedia, as per WP:SEEALSO.
Please, help. Dukered 01:42, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
Hello,
An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ferrylodge. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ferrylodge/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ferrylodge/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Newyorkbrad 16:49, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi KC, hope you are well. Listen, I posted up a complete re-write and stub for chidiac, and did a big oopsy and put it back up into namespace. It got G4'd quicker than you could say G. I have the stub in my discussion page, can you help with it? Its notable, short, and not a train wreck anymore. all the best! T -- T3Smile 18:17, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure it's been ages since we've run into each other on Wikipedia or IRC. How are you? I'm stressed to the gills with law school, but I'm flying down to Florida tomorrow for the weekend, I can't wait to get a taste of home. ⇒ SWATJester Denny Crane. 02:51, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi KillerChihuahua, I have filed an arbitration request pertaining to the indefinite ban on me that you proposed. Here is the link. Ferrylodge 23:09, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
You'll recall that a few months ago you participated in Wikipedia talk:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-03-31 ChrisO, which involved User:Nikola Smolenski arguing in favour of using an unreliable source. Another issue has arisen with the same editor repeatedly disrupting an article currently under article probation. I can't take action myself, since I've edited the same article, but I'd be grateful if you could review the facts set out at WP:AE#Enforcement request re Kosovo. -- ChrisO 00:15, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
As you participated in the prior TfD, I thought you would be interested that it has been proposed for deletion once again. You can find the discussion here. SkierRMH 02:45, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
I would like to be adopted. Please adopt me. Pokemon Buffy Titan 01:39, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
⇒
SWATJester
Son of the Defender 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.
This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. The Committee has found that Ferrylodge ( talk · contribs) has a long history of disruptive editing on topics related to pregnancy and abortion, but has edited reasonably on unrelated topics, and that he was blocked after a discussion on the Community Sanction Noticeboard that did not have a clear consensus. Ferrylodge is unbanned, but is put on an indefinite editing restriction: "Any uninvolved administrator may ban Ferrylodge from any article which relates to pregnancy or abortion, interpreted broadly, which they disrupt by inappropriate editing." The Community is urged by the Committee to develop a coherent policy regarding the method by which community bans are to be imposed. On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Cbrown1023 talk 00:37, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
There is a current Request for Arbitration, to which you are a listed party, regarding Moulton ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). The Request can be found at this section of Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration.
Kind regards,
Anthøny
17:35, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
Puppy! You're back! Have some fishapod plushies! bishapod splash! 21:05, 13 December 2007 (UTC).
Cbrown1023
talk has given you a cookie! Cookies promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!
Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{ subst:Cookie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
I'm really, really glad to see you back around, and especially glad to learn that your absence was at least partially due to being busy with two marriages and a birthday. :-) -Severa ( !!!) 05:17, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
Good to see you back in action. JoshuaZ ( talk) 02:09, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks all! I'm still dreadfully busy but hopefully will be able to ease back into normal participation levels after the holidays.
KillerChihuahua
?!?
13:31, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Angel David hopes that you are joyful! Joy promotes
WikiLove and hopefully this little bit has helped make your day better. Spread the Wikilove by melting the clouds of sin and sadness that weigh down someone else. Try to brighten the day of as many people as you can! Keep up the great editing!
Smile at others by adding {{
subst:Joy message}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
-- User:Angel David ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
I am no good tracking these things down but I think that http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Centrum99 may be a sockpuppet for http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:MoritzB
When you have time can you look into it? Thanks and happy holidays, Slrubenstein | Talk 15:21, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
Check out this year article. We're trying to get it up to GA status and I noticed that in earlier discussions you had expressed interest in turning year articles into prose. Any help you could lend would be great. Wrad ( talk) 01:59, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Chihuahua undercover agent. :-P miranda 20:19, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Hiya lovely puppy, guess what? My prediction was correct; you are welcome to comment here. -- BorgQueen ( talk) 10:23, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Ghs bigred.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot ( talk) 23:52, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
I was very surprised when I saw that you changed the tag on that page from "historic" to "guideline" without announcing the change at all [25], months after it had been tagged "historic". I changed it back to proposed. If you think it has consensus, I encourage you to announce it more broadly. You can't expect people to continue to watch a page that is marked as historical for months on end; the point of the tag is to indicate that the proposal has been rejected. — Carl ( CBM · talk) 20:04, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Your rationale [27] was that it had been a guideline until 8 march 2007, when in fact on that day it was tagged as a guideline for the first time and removed that same day. Did you not analyze the history thoroughly enough? — Random832 04:55, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
I am wondering what you, as an experienced admin, think of the current RfArb system, in which "Findings of fact" are often indistinguishable from mere "accusations", which are allowed to stand as if they actually have been proven findings, when they sometimes are only poorly (or even undocumented) documented accusations. This situation seems to exist because the one raising the RfArb is always the accuser. While they often do raise legitimate concerns, in some cases they may actually be carrying out a vendetta against someone, and their accusations are then framed as findings of fact. What do you think about this situation and what can be done about it? -- Fyslee / talk 16:45, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
What the heck. I was just trying to make the first sentence of abortion easyer to read.
I am not stalking anyone. I would prefer you do not refer to me as such. If the source bothers you so much, I'll go remove it. Mahalo. -- Ali'i 20:50, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello KillerChihuahua. True I am new to editing on wkp. True I have made a few changes to the pregnancy page. I, too, am very busy in real life being a Consultant Obstetrician/Gynaecologist. The changes I made were all scientifically correct (w/o reference to sources as I noticed that most of what I was reading - and correcting - was also not referenced). Believe me changes were made with the best of intention and according to EBM.
I re-iterate that the correct medical terms are the ones I illustrated: term, preterm, postterm and postdate. Premature and postmature are error-inducing terms and best avoided in this context: Obstetricians and Gynaecologists certainly avoid this ambiguous use of these terms. (You will find that this is consistent with all recent medical literature on this subject). Premature in Obstetrics is best limited to another pregnancy related condition: PROM as in premature rupture of membranes. Definition of "term" = 37 W to 41 weeks + 6 days. This is universally accepted. (NO-ONE defines term as including the period from 42 weeks to 43 weeks). Consequently preterm = up to 36 weeks + 6 days and postterm = 42 weeks and beyond. Using premature and postmature in this context is an ERROR (that's probably why I felt it necessary to correct this). You will find that common sense suffices: mature, and consequently premature and postmature are biological terms whereas we are discussing temporal terms i.e. time-related - weeks and days.
My consideration on the mathematical/statistical vs biological/clinical importance of these terms was also to the point. You will find that this derives from a slightly skewed bell-shaped normal distribution of curve of term delivery dates.
The only point that could be open to discussion is the point I made about the term "postdate". Postdate is best left related to the period from 40 weeks + 1 day up to 41 weeks + 6 days. THIS, I grant, is not universally accepted but is a suggestion that I make put this term to better and preciser use.
Cervical ripening is a correct medical expression and believe I do not need to be chastised for my use of the term. I stated that seminal liquid contains certain chemical substances (prostaglandins) that can favour cervical ripening: this is a fact. I did not state that intercourse should be used to induce labour (which would be rubbish).
I feel the need to avoid reference to the Gregorian calendar as this adds nothing to knowledge of pregnancy dating.
Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Drrem ( talk • contribs) 21:23, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed that you declined speedy deletion for this. That's my fault in part; I was in too much of a hurry when I noticed it was still around. In fact there was a recent RfD on this ( Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2007_December_16#.27.27Kaiserlich_und_k.C3.B6niglich.27.27_.E2.86.92_Kaiserlich_und_k.C3.B6niglich); I assumed it was a recreation but it appears that it was just never deleted in the first place. I should have noted the RfD in my db tag, and would have if I wasn't hurrying. Would you mind carrying out the result of the existing deletion discussion? Thanks in advance. — Gavia immer ( talk) 15:14, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
Diff. · AndonicO Hail! 01:58, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
Friend I respectfully direct you to note #4 in the Simon Bolívar article. Nord1 ( talk) 00:21, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
You're reading too much into it. The fact is it that this was said and continues to be said about him and merits inclusion in the article, I also cited three other sources. Nord1 ( talk) 01:38, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi there. I didn't realise I was coming close to a three reverts warning - I thought I was acting in good faith, trying to take account of the people's objections each time. I'll be more careful in future! Cheers Fishiehelper2 ( talk) 19:21, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
and for the little bit of sunshine about getting users banned. Humour lures Victuallers ( talk) 08:04, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
I wish to thank you for being supportive of my effort to regain my adminship. Though it was not successful, your support was still very much appreciated. Let me know if there is anything I can do for you. Thank you!-- MONGO 06:13, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for notifying the matter. I almost forgot about it until the notice. However honestly to say, although I've set on the page on my watchlist for a long time, I'm very ignorant of the field and meditation procedure. I just restored JJL's reverting to the previous version one time after edit warring occurred between JJL and Manacpowers or melonbarnmonster. Once JJL put my name on the meditation page, I just simply agreed to engage in the matter without much consideration. I don't know I'm qualified to discuss its origin and how to write my comment on there. I must fully acknowledgy the whole content and relevant articles and sources. Do you think that writing my opinion on the page is urgent to proceed? If not, I still need a time to check all citation attached to the article. Thanks-- Appletrees ( talk) 18:07, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Regarding this change, can you show me the section where it explicitly states that a word can only be linked one time? Please respond on your talk page, I'm watching it. Lord Sesshomaru ( talk • edits) 02:48, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
I saw that you speedied this article as a copyvio. No quarrel with that - but the article had an open AfD at the time - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SELA - Semiconductor Engineering LAboratories, which you didn't close when you deleted the article. I went ahead and did it; but it's helpful if the deleting admin also closes the AfD. Verbum sapienti satis. - Smerdis of Tlön ( talk) 17:11, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
I have a comment and question in my talk page regarding your erasing my contributions to abortion. If you could read and comment. Thanks.
daviddaniel37 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Daviddaniel37 ( talk • contribs) 21:47, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
I regret to say that recent contact with two individuals, User:Latebird and User:GabrielVelasquez, have caused me to behave inappropriately. I wish review of this matter by an objective outside, eminently reliable source. I believe you clearly qualify. Please indicate any opinion at User:John Carter/Adminship. Thank you. John Carter ( talk) 23:20, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
K9KC,
Losar is currenting happening, how may I ensure that it is flagged as a current event? Is there a News Wiki article that this Wikipedia article can interwiki? How may I progress this? Is there anything else you recommend?
Blessings in the
mindstream
B9 hummingbird hovering (
talk •
contribs)
06:06, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Why was our page deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.179.4.146 ( talk) 14:22, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Why was our page deleted? This is a standard page of our company such as other companies that appear on the Wikipedia! The communication with admins whom decide what they want, without understanding what they are doing, is so bad, that I do not even have the possibility to explain. Yermi Herut (yermi@sela-semi.co.il) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.179.4.146 ( talk) 15:03, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Let's compromise. Leave the legit biography up and we'll leave your controversy part up as well. What say you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Junia3 ( talk • contribs) 14:17, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your answer.
Could you help on receiving the article backup, in order to analyse and restart?
I did not save a copy of the article.
Yermi —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yermih ( talk • contribs) 08:58, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Yermih, you are an WP:SPA with WP:COI]] and you haven't bothered to learn any of the rules here on Wikipedia. You created AIM - Adaptive Ion Milling, a recreation of the article you created called AIM Adaptive Ion Milling which was speedy deleted by Od Mishehu on 26 December 2007 under CSD G11. You uploaded an image over the current Image:AIM.jpg, which had been in place since 2005, and when you were either told or discovered that you'd overwritten the image, you didn't seek assistance to fix the problem, you removed the image from the article which had been using it [28]. You have created your SELA article under SELA - Semiconductor Engineering LAboratories and SELA - SEMICONDUCTOR ENGINEERING LABORATORIES both of which have been deleted - the one in all caps three times, by Marasmusine:
the one in mixed case has been deleted twice, as G11 and G12:
If you want either of these articles, go to WP:DRV. Stop recreating them. Do not, under any circumstances, overwrite an image with another image. Name your image something else. If you have any questions, put {{ helpme}} on your talk page, and someone will come and help you. KillerChihuahua ?!? 14:47, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Hello. I've filed a request at WP:RfArb for the expansion of remedies from Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ferrylodge. Briefly, I'm asking that the sanctions allowing Ferrylodge to be banned from specific articles for disruptive behavior be extended to apply to all pages (talkspace, projectspace, etc) where his conduct is disruptive, rather than applying solely to articlespace. I'm notifying you as an involved party in the original ArbCom case. MastCell Talk 21:56, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments. I'll verify again how to restart within Wikipedia rules. Yermih ( talk) 16:35, 22 February 2008 (UTC)YermiH
Hello, previously you expressed interest in participating in the Wikipedia:Admin coaching project. We are currently conducting a reconfirmation drive to give coaches the opportunity to update their information and capacity to participate in the project. Please visit Wikipedia:Admin coaching/Status to update your status. Also, please remember to update your capacity (5th table variable) in the form of a fraction (eg. 2/3 means you are currently coaching 2 students, and could accept 1 more student). Thank you. MBisanz talk 09:22, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Sorry to note the tag at the top, get well soon and don't worry about WP issues, we'll try to keep things under a semblance of control to the best of our ability ;) .. dave souza, talk 11:44, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
I have filed a new request at WP:RfArb for the Ferrylodge case sanctions to be amended or clarified to apply to Ferrylodge's editing in all namespaces, rather than solely in articlespace. This is a courtesy notification as you've been an involved party to the original decision; your statement or other input is welcome at the WP:RfArb page. MastCell Talk 18:57, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
:-P miranda 17:47, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
I have a question about why you moved this article from its correct name to its current name (in 2005; I know it's been a while). If you could respond to the discussion I initiated at Talk:Port of Miami-Dade, I'd greatly appreciate it. It looks like you are on a wiki-break due to health-related issues; I hope you recover soon. Horologium (talk) 16:17, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:BellsCrossed.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly hi! 21:46, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
An editor has nominated Human, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also " What Wikipedia is not").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Human and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot ( talk) 02:01, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
A request for arbitration has been made on a matter in which you were involved. You may add yourself as a party and comment if desired at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Appeal_of_commuity_ban_of_Iantresman. Thank you. Stifle ( talk) 10:13, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
What is going on? I just watched an excellent documentary tonight, just got back, and I wanted to insert some information that was presented in this film. But low and behold, the articles I want to edit are locked down. It's like the Berlin Wall. The documentary must be true. Please unlock this article and allow academic freedom. Yhvh777 ( talk) 03:46, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for putting Category:Propaganda back in Expelled. That movie is full of shit. Sincerely, Thegreyanomaly ( talk) 07:11, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Hello KillerChihuahua. I hope you will recover soon. Some users have added the views of Benedict XVI on the article agnosticism. That's rediciulous! Agnosticism is not a religious ideology. The view of Benedict XVI should be in his biography. I think you should take appropriate action against POV pushers. And, nice to know that you are a rationalist. Regards, Masterpiece2000 ( talk) 12:43, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
The this user is continuously complaining that because The God Who Wasn't There isn't listed as propaganda, that Expelled shouldn't be. Can you explain to this user that these two pages are completely independent of each other and that The God Who Wasn't There does not have any where as many neutral sources calling it propaganda as Expelled does. Sincerely, Thegreyanomaly ( talk) 23:20, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Hello KC. How are you? Some people are pushing their POV in the article agnosticism. I strongly oppose that. Please help me. Regards, Masterpiece2000 ( talk) 04:40, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
This was done per Alison at [this link]. Alison is traveling, otherwise she would have done it herself. Could you please unban the other editor who has been blocked because of this? Jayneofthejungle ( talk) 21:53, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
Well, they both said that this page should be blanked and they are pretty high on the totem pole. Take that as you will. Why wait, since Alison is going to do this when she gets back anyway? cheers, Jayneofthejungle ( talk) 22:02, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
If their "rank" precisely equals yours - and mine - why is a civil post from me worth less than one from one of them? And with I don't recall that either of them had much to do with Aubrey you imply that you do and therefore that your opinion matters somehow more than theirs, therefore you get to overrule anyone else on this. Well, to that I say - at least they can spell Awbrey. -- Random832 ( contribs) 22:28, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
Nonsense. I over-rode an IPs first ever edit, then a newbie who seems to be here to make nonsense articles and tell me I should do what two people, who I have no way of confirming are or are not who they claim to be (being on a completely different site - ANY different site, or IRC, or anywhere NOT Wikipedia) regardless of who they claim to be. If they claimed to be Jimbo I'd revert the IP and put a note on Jimbo's page, and/or email him. This is absurd. Other sites are NOT where to make decisions about Wikipedia, I've said that several times now, and you persist in painting me as irrationally opposed to one site in particular. Cease this bizarre accusation, nothing can come of it. I certainly "outrank" an IP and two unknowns who aren't even on Wikipedia. KillerChihuahua ?!? 22:55, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
NOTE please take any future comments on this subject to
WP:ANI#User:Jon Awbrey.
KillerChihuahua
?!?
22:59, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
No, but it doesn't make a difference what he believes. I'm not doing this for Awbrey or WR; WP:BLP is non-negotiable policy, and it weighs in favor of blanking. Do no harm. Cool Hand Luke 23:50, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
KC: I have commented at more length on the ANI thread but since I have a great deal of respect for you, I just want to say this to you directly for you to think about: BLP applies everywhere on the project, not just in article space. And we should do what's right, even if the subject of our doing right is the biggest weenie the project has ever seen. That makes us better than the weenies. Finally, as a CU, I can tell you I will not be hindered in any way by his page being blanked (not deleted, just blanked)... I know who he is already. So should ever other CU here. ++ Lar: t/ c 03:44, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi there, KC. As things have moved on over to ANI, I've commented over there regarding the blanking of JA's userpage. It is my opinion that it should be blanked in deference to the man's RL name. Luke put it rather well when he said "do no harm" and I concur. We're not here to punish people, nor bring their name into disrepute.
Re. the "rank" issue above; I have rather strong opinions on that matter myself. As far as I'm concerned, bits - be they sysop, checkuser or whatever - do not confer greater authority nor standing upon any person. We're all editors on here, IMO, and we all should have equal weight in these matters. Like Lar says, though we've not met much, I've also a great deal of respect for you however I think we're going to have to disagree on this one - Alison ❤ 07:30, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
KC, would you reading/mind commenting here. I think I've done a better job of framing my concerns. Thanks! Angry Christian ( talk) 14:59, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Regarding this. Maybe more on that page could be trimmed? I've tried mostly to skip over most of the bramble. Also, please let us know if you hear back from Myers one way or the other about a free picture. Mahalo. -- Ali'i 15:20, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
![]() | There is currently a backlog of 53 users at Category:Wikipedians seeking to be adopted in Adopt-a-user. Please consider offering adoption to one or more of these users. Don't forget to change their {{adoptme}} template to {{adoptoffer|KillerChihuahua/Archive 11}}. Thank you for your continued participation in Wikipedia:Adopt-a-User. xenocidic ( talk) 19:51, 1 May 2008 (UTC) |
⇒ SWATJester Son of the Defender 01:51, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for stepping in and sorting things out on my talk page. I still can't believe that two separate editors thought I was calling an admin a troll. Strange times. But thanks for helping out. Baegis ( talk) 07:13, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
Hi, the edit summary you used here seems to discourage any attempt to change the article without obtaining prior approval. This is not the way Wikipedia works, and I would like to encourage you to familiarize yourself with some of our policies and guidelines. The guideline at issue is that of WP:BOLD, which is explicitly mentioned in the five pillars of Wikipedia. You may also want to review the WP:CONSENSUS policy: I think you will find that, although it is important to gain consensus for edits, one way to do this is to make the edits by being bold. Discouraging all editing on the basis of prior discussion can have a chilling effect, and potentially terrible consequences. I appreciate your attention to this matter in the future. Thank you, silly rabbit ( talk) 13:27, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
There is no such thing as too much time spent on lol cats. However, in deference to your tastes, check out this. ⇒ SWATJester Son of the Defender 23:22, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia_talk:Consensus#WP:CON Gnevin ( talk) 14:10, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
How are you little homicidedoggie? Have a waspy fishapod plushy for comfort and cosiness! Yomangan sewn outstanding plushy collection for your friend Little Stupid. bishapod splash! 18:29, 9 May 2008 (UTC).
Thanks for the help with that user this morning. In my AIV report I mentioned that it was from the US House of Representatives. That makes it a "Sensitive IP address", so you are supposed to notify the Wikimedia Foundation Communications Committee here. I just saw that the IP added something that could be a threat on the IP's talk page and went to report that, but it doesn't look like you got to update the Communications committee. You probably should do that quickly. Toddst1 ( talk) 21:29, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
...for the puppy gratz, I'll keep them in mind :D weburiedoursecrets inthegarden 08:05, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
Heh, thanks for the warning, I'll try to keep those points in mind :) Gatoclass ( talk) 12:13, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Hello
May I ask why you did the above? Thanks. Police,Mad,Jack ( talk · contribs)☺ 14:54, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Ok fair enough, I understand. Thank you. Police,Mad,Jack ( talk · contribs)☺ 15:11, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Truer words were never said. Shame it was deleted, but I suppose the truth is the suck. •Jim62sch• dissera! 16:55, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
•Jim62sch• dissera! 18:55, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Well, apparently I'm a god, which explains how I can keep up. If only my acolytes would learn to spell my name correctly :-) Best, Gwernol 19:50, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Hello, i don't know how to post the MfD page for the category. Can you do that for me? Jek Tono Porkins ( talk) 12:57, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
A request for arbitration to look into your conduct has been made here. Please make a statement. Thanks, Sceptre ( talk) 02:25, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
I have apologized to both users. Best -- Eustress ( talk) 03:56, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
your editing of movies involving pedophilia and/or sexual abuse demonstrate ignorance of the topic and the movies. To delete L.I.E. for instance is very worrying. Tony ( talk) 21:16, 3 June 2008 (UTC)Tony
I am a bit confused by the message you left on my talk page. The IP's edit was vandalism, in that it was the deliberate introduction of false material. WP:VANDAL is explicit that warnings are not a necessary precondition for a block; in any case, the IP's talk page is full of warnings. In November, 64.58.187.23 was blocked for six months, and appears to have immediately resumed vandalism after the expiration of that block. If you feel that their behavior does not warrant a block, you may decline to issue one, but your ultimate judgment does not control the propriety of reporting sustained abuse to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. RJC Talk Contribs 21:58, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Hey K.C., I just wanted to thank you for your participation in my recent RFA. please note that I am taking steps to address the CSD issue that you raised as your main concern, further comments are welcome here. I've also left you some templated thank-spam below. ¡Yo quiero Mop & Bucket! xenocidic ( talk) 03:53, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
I would like to thank the community for placing their trust in me during
my recent request for adminship, which passed 72
13
2
. Rest assured, I have read each comment thoroughly and will be
addressing the various concerns raised as I step cautiously into my new role as janitor. In particular, I would like to thank
Balloonman for putting so much time into reviewing my contributions and writing such a thoughtful nomination statement after knowing me for only a brief period of time (and for convincing me that I was ready to take up the mop now, rather than go through
admin coaching).
To my fellow admins - please let me know right away if I ever take any mis-steps with my new tools. Should I make a mistake, and you reverse the action, I will not consider it to be wheel-warring (but please tell me so I can understand what I did wrong).
To everyone - please feel free to slap me around a bit if I ever lose sight of the core philosophy of Wikipedia as I understand it - the advancement of knowledge through the processes of mutual understanding and respect. As always, feel free to drop by my talk page if I can be of any assistance. =)
Sincerely,
~xenocidic, 01:04, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Hiya. Noticed you weren't feeling well. Best of wishes in getting better soon. :)
Btw, I thought I'd drop an Elizabethan collar your way for good measure. :P -- slakr\ talk / 19:00, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Sorry to hear you've not been well. Fingers crossed for a speedy recovery - Alison ❤ 22:12, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Ah, thanks much, Alison! That's so sweet of you. It looks homemade, too. Now, if they can just agree on what's wrong with me (no comments from the peanut gallery, please!) I'd feel better. Meanwhile, they test and frown at me. KillerChihuahua ?!? 22:32, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
From a sick clown, to a sick puppy, hope you feel better. ⇒ SWATJester Son of the Defender 22:54, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Aw, thanks muchly, Swat! I hope your treatment is going well, and that you are doing as well as possible. KillerChihuahua ?!? 22:59, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks Fozzie - much appreciated. KillerChihuahua ?!? 00:01, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
Template:Creationism2 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — Neelix ( talk) 20:45, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
You've been named as an involved party at this RfAR. As an outcome, User:Gnixon/Intelligent design RfC provides a Workspace, with discussion at User talk:Gnixon/Intelligent design RfC which I've started off with ideas for a basis to formulate the RfC. We also must try to resolve the dispute and as a first step my suggestion is developing guidelines or procedures aimed improving behaviour from now on, so that the desired outcomes can be achieved amicably. Your assistance and comments will be much appreciated. . . dave souza, talk 14:01, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
I have nominated William Norman Grigg, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William Norman Grigg. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? RJaguar3 | u | t 07:44, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
Just a note - I really don't appreciate being told I have "the brains of a brickbat", or that I am dense, or brainwashed, or malicious. I don't think I know anyone who does. Kelly hi! 20:37, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
KC: I've known you and respected you for a long time, you know that. But using phrasing like "Kelly, continuing to repeat that nonsense indicates to me that you have the brains of a brick-brat; or else you're congenitally dense; or else you've been brainwashed; or else you're happy maligning a group of people based on the actions of a few: which is it?" is just Not On. It reads exactly like a personal attack... regardless of any rhetorical escape clauses. Please don't repeat phrasing like that. Kelly, dial down a notch too "Not just a river in Egypt" is sarcasm. Stick to being unfailingly polite please. ++ Lar: t/ c 20:53, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Heyas!
You might've noticed the essay on privacy I linked to on the mail list...er, yesterday? I was hoping you'd give it a once-over, though I do understand you're quite busy.
Thanks. :) ~Kylu ( u| t) 04:50, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
Yo dog - do you know that NOR has been protected for several days and some people want it unprotected? I haven't been able to sort out the precise cause of the dispute but there is a lot of talk on the page about how stupid the policy is, claiming that it forbids all use of primary sources. I have commented that it allows the use of primary sources if they are verifiable and not used to forward an editors own POV, and some have responded that well that's a stupid policy too. I think it is serious and hope you can check it out. Current discussion is occuring in many different threads which makes it hard to pin down, but the fact that the page was protected tells me something serious is going on, and whatever the source of the dispute editors currently active on the talk page have not reached any consensus. Slrubenstein | Talk 18:34, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
Should this be the object of an RFC? I am going to poll other editors I really respect, but thought you should know. Slrubenstein | Talk 21:29, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
Okay. But it still concerns me. Slrubenstein | Talk 21:42, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
I'll step away from Jim62sch's talk page at your request. — Carl ( CBM · talk) 00:42, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
I disagree with your reasoning in removing the speedy tag. Of course he is notable. But the article as it stands is blatant advertising, not just an article that reads like an ad. Big difference. However, I will not revert you, just point out that you're thinking simplistically. Jeffpw 10:19, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
Since others are taking stabs at rewriting this policy, I have decided to try my own. Before I share it with a wider group, could you go over it and make such edits as you see fit? Thanks [2] Slrubenstein | Talk 14:44, 2 September 2007 (UTC)
Hello Huahua. I see that the top secret OTRS handshake or whatever it is has been divulged to you. What the (expleted) do you think " Temporary keep per OTRS Ticket # 2007072910013442" might be about? "Temporary" seems stretching it: actually I'd pretty much forgotten about this fellow until reminded by this. -- Hoary 14:04, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
Hey, KC. I posted a thread about that issue earlier on AN/I, but I was pointed →thataway→ to the COI Noticeboard and have posted the issue there. Your comments would be appreciated! Thanks :) Arky ¡Hablar! 21:09, 3 September 2007 (UTC)
Congrats,KC!;-) I didn't know that admin meant adminastrator. I thought it was and ad making company trying to win you over. My Bad. I hope there's no offense, KC or other admins. Sorry. So your the Man now! Well, one of the Men and Ladies. Here a nice bone for a new admin. -- Angel David ?!? Presents 21:14, 11 August 2007 (UTC)
Say, do you have a source for Gorham having designed the Davis Cup and the America's Cup? All evidence I can find points the other way... the America's Cup appears to have been made by Garrard & Co in the UK, and the Davis Cup by Shreve, Crump & Low... for the time being, I have removed this mention from the article. Lupo 16:39, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Enjoy your nice autumn wikibreak, or should I say Fall hol.? ;) ... dave souza, talk 22:21, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
In your opinion, is this (note the surname removal) enough to warrant oversight intervention? Cheers, Arky ¡Hablar! 14:28, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Sorry to disrupt your break, but after you modified Filll's view to be inside, Moulton made this edit deleting some of Filll's view and adding his own parody, with the edit summary "- Is this section really a kosher part of an RfC?" Not knowing the answer, I re-added Filll's comments under a note saying what I'd done, moved Moulton's comment under a comments heading and told Odd Nature that signing assent might be worth reviewing in light of the changes. [4] Should the whole lot be moved to the talk page? Puzzled, ... dave souza, talk 18:20, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
A request for arbitration involving you has been filed here. Please view the request, and add any statements you feel are necessary for the ArbCom to consider in deciding whether to hear the dispute. Videmus Omnia Talk 03:17, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
KC- I notice you've had prior dealings with this user, ao I thougt you'd be the admin to go to. LAEC runs a website that is opposed to the American Library Association, and over the past year since he joined wikipedia, he has devoted the bulk of his wikipedia activities to crusading against Libraries.
His first username was SafeLibraries.org (the url of his website), although at some point he was required to give up that username, since it was his site's url, and instead he chose his site's motto: "Legitimate And Even Compelling" (referring I believe to need to keep children from accessing american libraries).
Along the way, he's caused more than his share of disruption. In Oct '06, and RFC was filed against him. Glancing over his talk page, it seems like he's been causing plenty of stir in the intervening year. And now, he's been editwarring Another American Libraries Association article.
Because I filed the Oct 06 RFC, people contacted me to see if I had any suggestions for how to resolve his bad behavior. Regrettably, I'm swamped by real life lately, so I don't can't take lots of time to devote to the issue. Would you be willing to take charge of helping deal with LAEC-- or if not, could you please refer the matter to whomever should look at the situation?
Thanks so much! -- Alecmconroy 08:20, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
I have a reference here... http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/rational_response_squad_alerts/rational_response_squad_alerts/9978 However I am not familiar with how to add it to the article Could you please restore the content and reference it for me? —Preceding unsigned comment added by K Watson1984 ( talk • contribs) 10:18, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
I won't be on for a little while later, but I'm willing to help. Sxeptomaniac 22:50, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
What was it about Potter that we were discussing. KC? - Arcayne (cast a spell) 18:55, 13 September 2007 (UTC)
Are you aware of [11] and [12]?
At some point I hope you will comment there. Slrubenstein | Talk 19:09, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
KC - yes, my edit to Rosalind Picard here was probably ill-timed, at the least. It was, I assure you, a joke, in keeping with the obvious reasons after the protection, and not intended as point-y at all. Thank you for playing. What do we have for him, Johnny-O? ;) -- profg 19:24, 15 September 2007 (UTC)
FT2 ( Talk | email) 16:17, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm glad I could help out. I see your page got protected. Do you know how you pissed off that guy who kept editing your page? Maybe reverted one of his other vandalism attempts? 66.189.137.113 04:29, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
I notice that you recently got involved in an edit war on the Abortion page. I would appreciate it if you would also contribute to the associated discussion on Talk:Abortion. Thank you. Sheffield Steel talk stalk 14:27, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Just a friendly note to apologize for my past snippetyness. I am starting to see and enjoy the method in your madness. I do think we are ideologically at loggerheads, and I do not think that will change. However, I do hope that we can be friends. Please let me know if you feel I need to make amends and how I might do so. Cheers. LCP 16:59, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
Why did you say " Photo, just because there is a discussion about possible changes does NOT mean you get to make any changes you want while the discussion is underway.)"? Lion's Heart was the person who removed the image, not me. All I did was place the "no consensus template", is that some huge problem? Did you think I removed the image? Please explain. Thank you. Photouploaded 17:40, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
(outdent) Check any high-traffic page's history - try WP:ANI, for example. Summaries are frequently used to communicate brief messages rather than using the talk page. Errors are sometimes made; and sometimes apologies are made for the errors and sometimes (much more often) not. The world will not end tomorrow if there is an occasional edit summary which is erroneous, poorly phrased, or names the wrong party. Its an oops, not a personal attack. Accept apologies if offered, and if not, then usually its best to not make a big deal out of it - its almost certain nothing was meant by it. KillerChihuahua ?!? 18:55, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
Could you take a look at this discussion? I think we have a repeat of similar POV issues elsewhere and would appreciate your input. Thanks (By the way, my cousin Peewee, a chihuahua, bit me - well, nipped my thumb - when I was about 5, but I've forgiven him and don't hold it against you...) Tvoz | talk 19:20, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism#User-reported
Thanks. LCP 22:14, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
KC, would you please help me? The problem I am having is that LCP keeps editing a comment I made on their talk page. They inserted a link into my comment that I did not put there, it was not part of my original comment. This "substantially changes its meaning" and thus I see it as vandalism. Would you please help me? Photouploaded 22:21, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
(outdent) Not a problem, I'm here to help. KillerChihuahua ?!? 23:01, 19 September 2007 (UTC)
Hello,
KillerChihuahua, thank you for your support during my RfA, especially after the concerns that were brought up by other editors. I'll keep all of the comments in mind in the coming months, and will try again later. In the mean time, if you see me doing something stupid, please let me know. See you around. -- barneca ( talk) 13:02, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
At Talk:Abortion in this diff, a question; it would be hard to find if you weren't looking for it. Photouploaded 02:21, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, well, I don't like being accused by innuendo, and this is at least the 4th time that that particular editor misrepresented me - I've called him on it each time I've noticed it, and have yet to get anything remotely like an apology. I don't know, when I'm wrong I acknowledge it - apologize for it - explain it - something. This guy just flails around and doesn't respond or reverses the attack when he's called on his misrepresentations, without any evidence. Disagreement, even very vocal disagreement, is not harassment, and I'm not the type to be intimidated by false accusations. Feel free to email me if you have any suggestions. Tvoz | talk 00:11, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
Just saw you semi protect scientifc method. Cloning is in desperate need of a semi protect, again. The vandalism there is cronic. Any chance you could do the honors? David D. (Talk) 03:14, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
You have seen this before, but I just want everyone else to see it. Yes, I am trying to take a break. But...it...is...so...hard. *sniff* The Puppy Surfing. Have a good one. M. (er) 03:05, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
Zilla, remember puppy have tiny bones, make sharp pain in gums when eating. ⇒ SWATJester Denny Crane. 18:29, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
According to my sources, what I wrote is one among a couple of possible meanings. It should be added because there isn't one single definition for "Myth" and its uses. Miguelzinho 13:24, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Can you vote her, comment, and if you see any way to improve it, make any edits to the proposal as you see fit? Thanks, Slrubenstein | Talk 21:47, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
|
My RFA | |
Thanks for your support in my request for adminship, which ended with 58 supports, 1 opposes, and 1 neutral. I hope your confidence in me proves to be justified. Addhoc 19:07, 24 September 2007 (UTC) |
You appear to be perhaps the only obstacle to unblocking by account at memestream. You commented that you may have got the wrong end of the stick, and then you asked why I needed two accounts. I have given exceptionally good reasons (I made an undertaking with my former partner not to edit psychology topics in the name of lindosland becuase of close links with her business and the fact that we are both called P. Skirrow leading her colleagues (who edit those pages) to mistake my edits for her (she does not edit).
Many editors and admins have testified to a mistake being made. I did nothing outside the rules, I did not edit war, I was always civil and polite, I never edited the same page using both names, and I never deliberately stirred things up. I am currently editing in an intense but very successful fashion with Tim Vickers at neo-Darwinism, the very problematic page that started this, and you are welcome to look there. While that page, which I created, is up for deletion, it now has 15 votes to keep, and has become a good page. I have also listed many pages where I have made huge contributions, always without any problems.
There has been a big mistake (actually I was warned and set up by an anti-creationist group who mistook me for something I am not and will do anything to stop the page I created, but it's futile to go into that - you will see that allegation made by GettaGrippa without prompting from me.
Please take another look (I've summarised to make it easier) and unblock. Regards -- Lindosland 11:41, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
Please see the discussion here [14].
Thanks! LCP 18:47, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
I'd be inclined to block Profg for the stalking, given his previous history William M. Connolley 20:56, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
I've just made a new account at Meta, as it sounded pretty fun, and I figured it would be interesting to deal with project coordination. What kinds of things go on there? I know that there's RFA, which I can contrubute to with a good deal of comfort since Wikipedia also has it, and I saw some project proposals, but how else can I help there? Cheers, ARkY // ¡HaBLaR! 02:44, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi KC, I'd like your opinion on the topic of mental health at the bottom of the Abortion Talk page. Regards, --[User:IronAngelAlice|IronAngelAlice] 17:12, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
Hey, KC! Just thought I'd remind you (sorry if I sound a bit like I'm nagging you ;D) but I answered your question here. Happy editing, ARkY // ¡HaBLaR! 02:02, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Hi, KC. Could you do me a favour? Could you restore my talk page and talk archives ( Archive 1 through Archive 7) if you've got time? Thanks! - Severa 21:29, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks Elinor, and again, Welcome Back, Severa! KillerChihuahua ?!? 10:02, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
KC something terrible has happened. After The no erz came back he saw me redo and edit that I made that he erased. He saw that I did it. But even worse. I was a sensitive person back then. Because another Wikipedian erased. And I called that user a harsh name and the no erz thinks that I was reffering him and went I sent him a message...he dissapeared again! I wish I contact him and tell him what really happened but I don't know his email address or if he works on another Wiki/pedia. What am I going to do!?-- Angel David 00:28, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for catching this... misuse of the word "theory" is one of my pet peeves. MastCell Talk 19:36, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
I have recently noticed two different editors making similar reversions on the same group of articles, including Abortion, [15] [16] Post-abortion syndrome, [17] [18] and Mexico City Policy [19] [20]. Both have also made similar edits to David Reardon. [21] [22] What do you make of this correlation in patterns of editing? - Severa ( !!!) 20:58, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
KC, can you have a look at a situation which developed overnight with the entries for Blackwater USA and Blackwater USA arms smuggling and User:Haizum a hostile and emotional guy with an extensive block log. In addition to his general uncivility, he keeps adding POV tags inappropriately. He has made no attempt to reach consensus with anyone about the articles. He's just very upset by them. -- Pleasantville 10:02, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
You recently commented on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Psychiatric abuse, which was closed as delete. The article has been nominated for a deletion review at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 October 5#Psychiatric abuse. Please feel free to comment on the decision there - as a contributor to the original AfD, your input would be welcomed. -- ChrisO 09:18, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Hey, KC. I've seen this come up in numerous RfAs, and so I figured I'd ask you :) What are your thoughts on Category:Wikipedia administrators open to recall? I'm personally divided on the issue; I think it's fair to be desysopped if someone misuses admin tools, but I don't think I'd like to have a potential recall hanging over my head...hmm. Oh well, just looking for your thoughts, and happy editing, ( ar ky ) 03:33, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
← And,as a side note, what do you think about this? Cheers, ( ar ky ) 01:27, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
In the Ferrylodge arbitration case, you state that "Also typical is his initial naming of "Ferrylodge v. FeloniousMonk", indicating his mindset of Me. v Them." This connection between the naming and his motives does not follow, because the use of "v." was once the standard for two-person disputes that didn't have any other reasonable name (see Category:Wikipedia Arbitration cases). Only recently was this changed, to make case names sound less adversarial. So what you are attributing to his state of mind may very well just be left-over knowledge of the old case naming conventions. I'd like to request you remove this claim unless you can back it up, because users shouldn't be blamed for shifts in procedure they were unaware of. Picaroon (t) 01:29, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Your input would be appreciated: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Martinphi ScienceApologist 21:41, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi KC. Today, an editor named Equidistant put on the Conservapedia entry some related articles he thought were appropiate. They were deleted by other users, so Equidistant opened a discussion on the talk page. Only user Hut 8.5 replied. I supported Edquidistant. Given that nobody said nothing else, I thought it was fine to make the edit again, but user Fredrick day reverted it. Anyway, an admin named Bbatsell intervened and deleted the "See also" section completely, arguing no relation to Conservapedia, as per WP:SEEALSO.
Please, help. Dukered 01:42, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
Hello,
An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ferrylodge. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ferrylodge/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ferrylodge/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Newyorkbrad 16:49, 15 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi KC, hope you are well. Listen, I posted up a complete re-write and stub for chidiac, and did a big oopsy and put it back up into namespace. It got G4'd quicker than you could say G. I have the stub in my discussion page, can you help with it? Its notable, short, and not a train wreck anymore. all the best! T -- T3Smile 18:17, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure it's been ages since we've run into each other on Wikipedia or IRC. How are you? I'm stressed to the gills with law school, but I'm flying down to Florida tomorrow for the weekend, I can't wait to get a taste of home. ⇒ SWATJester Denny Crane. 02:51, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
Hi KillerChihuahua, I have filed an arbitration request pertaining to the indefinite ban on me that you proposed. Here is the link. Ferrylodge 23:09, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
You'll recall that a few months ago you participated in Wikipedia talk:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-03-31 ChrisO, which involved User:Nikola Smolenski arguing in favour of using an unreliable source. Another issue has arisen with the same editor repeatedly disrupting an article currently under article probation. I can't take action myself, since I've edited the same article, but I'd be grateful if you could review the facts set out at WP:AE#Enforcement request re Kosovo. -- ChrisO 00:15, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
As you participated in the prior TfD, I thought you would be interested that it has been proposed for deletion once again. You can find the discussion here. SkierRMH 02:45, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
I would like to be adopted. Please adopt me. Pokemon Buffy Titan 01:39, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
⇒
SWATJester
Son of the Defender 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.
This arbitration case has been closed and the final decision is available at the link above. The Committee has found that Ferrylodge ( talk · contribs) has a long history of disruptive editing on topics related to pregnancy and abortion, but has edited reasonably on unrelated topics, and that he was blocked after a discussion on the Community Sanction Noticeboard that did not have a clear consensus. Ferrylodge is unbanned, but is put on an indefinite editing restriction: "Any uninvolved administrator may ban Ferrylodge from any article which relates to pregnancy or abortion, interpreted broadly, which they disrupt by inappropriate editing." The Community is urged by the Committee to develop a coherent policy regarding the method by which community bans are to be imposed. On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Cbrown1023 talk 00:37, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
There is a current Request for Arbitration, to which you are a listed party, regarding Moulton ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). The Request can be found at this section of Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration.
Kind regards,
Anthøny
17:35, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
Puppy! You're back! Have some fishapod plushies! bishapod splash! 21:05, 13 December 2007 (UTC).
Cbrown1023
talk has given you a cookie! Cookies promote
WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!
Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{ subst:Cookie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
I'm really, really glad to see you back around, and especially glad to learn that your absence was at least partially due to being busy with two marriages and a birthday. :-) -Severa ( !!!) 05:17, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
Good to see you back in action. JoshuaZ ( talk) 02:09, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks all! I'm still dreadfully busy but hopefully will be able to ease back into normal participation levels after the holidays.
KillerChihuahua
?!?
13:31, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Angel David hopes that you are joyful! Joy promotes
WikiLove and hopefully this little bit has helped make your day better. Spread the Wikilove by melting the clouds of sin and sadness that weigh down someone else. Try to brighten the day of as many people as you can! Keep up the great editing!
Smile at others by adding {{
subst:Joy message}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
-- User:Angel David ( | talk | history | links | watch | logs)
I am no good tracking these things down but I think that http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Centrum99 may be a sockpuppet for http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:MoritzB
When you have time can you look into it? Thanks and happy holidays, Slrubenstein | Talk 15:21, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
Check out this year article. We're trying to get it up to GA status and I noticed that in earlier discussions you had expressed interest in turning year articles into prose. Any help you could lend would be great. Wrad ( talk) 01:59, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
Chihuahua undercover agent. :-P miranda 20:19, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
Hiya lovely puppy, guess what? My prediction was correct; you are welcome to comment here. -- BorgQueen ( talk) 10:23, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Ghs bigred.png. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. BetacommandBot ( talk) 23:52, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
I was very surprised when I saw that you changed the tag on that page from "historic" to "guideline" without announcing the change at all [25], months after it had been tagged "historic". I changed it back to proposed. If you think it has consensus, I encourage you to announce it more broadly. You can't expect people to continue to watch a page that is marked as historical for months on end; the point of the tag is to indicate that the proposal has been rejected. — Carl ( CBM · talk) 20:04, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
Your rationale [27] was that it had been a guideline until 8 march 2007, when in fact on that day it was tagged as a guideline for the first time and removed that same day. Did you not analyze the history thoroughly enough? — Random832 04:55, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
I am wondering what you, as an experienced admin, think of the current RfArb system, in which "Findings of fact" are often indistinguishable from mere "accusations", which are allowed to stand as if they actually have been proven findings, when they sometimes are only poorly (or even undocumented) documented accusations. This situation seems to exist because the one raising the RfArb is always the accuser. While they often do raise legitimate concerns, in some cases they may actually be carrying out a vendetta against someone, and their accusations are then framed as findings of fact. What do you think about this situation and what can be done about it? -- Fyslee / talk 16:45, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
What the heck. I was just trying to make the first sentence of abortion easyer to read.
I am not stalking anyone. I would prefer you do not refer to me as such. If the source bothers you so much, I'll go remove it. Mahalo. -- Ali'i 20:50, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Hello KillerChihuahua. True I am new to editing on wkp. True I have made a few changes to the pregnancy page. I, too, am very busy in real life being a Consultant Obstetrician/Gynaecologist. The changes I made were all scientifically correct (w/o reference to sources as I noticed that most of what I was reading - and correcting - was also not referenced). Believe me changes were made with the best of intention and according to EBM.
I re-iterate that the correct medical terms are the ones I illustrated: term, preterm, postterm and postdate. Premature and postmature are error-inducing terms and best avoided in this context: Obstetricians and Gynaecologists certainly avoid this ambiguous use of these terms. (You will find that this is consistent with all recent medical literature on this subject). Premature in Obstetrics is best limited to another pregnancy related condition: PROM as in premature rupture of membranes. Definition of "term" = 37 W to 41 weeks + 6 days. This is universally accepted. (NO-ONE defines term as including the period from 42 weeks to 43 weeks). Consequently preterm = up to 36 weeks + 6 days and postterm = 42 weeks and beyond. Using premature and postmature in this context is an ERROR (that's probably why I felt it necessary to correct this). You will find that common sense suffices: mature, and consequently premature and postmature are biological terms whereas we are discussing temporal terms i.e. time-related - weeks and days.
My consideration on the mathematical/statistical vs biological/clinical importance of these terms was also to the point. You will find that this derives from a slightly skewed bell-shaped normal distribution of curve of term delivery dates.
The only point that could be open to discussion is the point I made about the term "postdate". Postdate is best left related to the period from 40 weeks + 1 day up to 41 weeks + 6 days. THIS, I grant, is not universally accepted but is a suggestion that I make put this term to better and preciser use.
Cervical ripening is a correct medical expression and believe I do not need to be chastised for my use of the term. I stated that seminal liquid contains certain chemical substances (prostaglandins) that can favour cervical ripening: this is a fact. I did not state that intercourse should be used to induce labour (which would be rubbish).
I feel the need to avoid reference to the Gregorian calendar as this adds nothing to knowledge of pregnancy dating.
Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Drrem ( talk • contribs) 21:23, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed that you declined speedy deletion for this. That's my fault in part; I was in too much of a hurry when I noticed it was still around. In fact there was a recent RfD on this ( Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2007_December_16#.27.27Kaiserlich_und_k.C3.B6niglich.27.27_.E2.86.92_Kaiserlich_und_k.C3.B6niglich); I assumed it was a recreation but it appears that it was just never deleted in the first place. I should have noted the RfD in my db tag, and would have if I wasn't hurrying. Would you mind carrying out the result of the existing deletion discussion? Thanks in advance. — Gavia immer ( talk) 15:14, 18 January 2008 (UTC)
Diff. · AndonicO Hail! 01:58, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
Friend I respectfully direct you to note #4 in the Simon Bolívar article. Nord1 ( talk) 00:21, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
You're reading too much into it. The fact is it that this was said and continues to be said about him and merits inclusion in the article, I also cited three other sources. Nord1 ( talk) 01:38, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Hi there. I didn't realise I was coming close to a three reverts warning - I thought I was acting in good faith, trying to take account of the people's objections each time. I'll be more careful in future! Cheers Fishiehelper2 ( talk) 19:21, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
and for the little bit of sunshine about getting users banned. Humour lures Victuallers ( talk) 08:04, 25 January 2008 (UTC)
I wish to thank you for being supportive of my effort to regain my adminship. Though it was not successful, your support was still very much appreciated. Let me know if there is anything I can do for you. Thank you!-- MONGO 06:13, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for notifying the matter. I almost forgot about it until the notice. However honestly to say, although I've set on the page on my watchlist for a long time, I'm very ignorant of the field and meditation procedure. I just restored JJL's reverting to the previous version one time after edit warring occurred between JJL and Manacpowers or melonbarnmonster. Once JJL put my name on the meditation page, I just simply agreed to engage in the matter without much consideration. I don't know I'm qualified to discuss its origin and how to write my comment on there. I must fully acknowledgy the whole content and relevant articles and sources. Do you think that writing my opinion on the page is urgent to proceed? If not, I still need a time to check all citation attached to the article. Thanks-- Appletrees ( talk) 18:07, 31 January 2008 (UTC)
Regarding this change, can you show me the section where it explicitly states that a word can only be linked one time? Please respond on your talk page, I'm watching it. Lord Sesshomaru ( talk • edits) 02:48, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
I saw that you speedied this article as a copyvio. No quarrel with that - but the article had an open AfD at the time - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SELA - Semiconductor Engineering LAboratories, which you didn't close when you deleted the article. I went ahead and did it; but it's helpful if the deleting admin also closes the AfD. Verbum sapienti satis. - Smerdis of Tlön ( talk) 17:11, 1 February 2008 (UTC)
I have a comment and question in my talk page regarding your erasing my contributions to abortion. If you could read and comment. Thanks.
daviddaniel37 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Daviddaniel37 ( talk • contribs) 21:47, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
I regret to say that recent contact with two individuals, User:Latebird and User:GabrielVelasquez, have caused me to behave inappropriately. I wish review of this matter by an objective outside, eminently reliable source. I believe you clearly qualify. Please indicate any opinion at User:John Carter/Adminship. Thank you. John Carter ( talk) 23:20, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
K9KC,
Losar is currenting happening, how may I ensure that it is flagged as a current event? Is there a News Wiki article that this Wikipedia article can interwiki? How may I progress this? Is there anything else you recommend?
Blessings in the
mindstream
B9 hummingbird hovering (
talk •
contribs)
06:06, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Why was our page deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.179.4.146 ( talk) 14:22, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Why was our page deleted? This is a standard page of our company such as other companies that appear on the Wikipedia! The communication with admins whom decide what they want, without understanding what they are doing, is so bad, that I do not even have the possibility to explain. Yermi Herut (yermi@sela-semi.co.il) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.179.4.146 ( talk) 15:03, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
Let's compromise. Leave the legit biography up and we'll leave your controversy part up as well. What say you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Junia3 ( talk • contribs) 14:17, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your answer.
Could you help on receiving the article backup, in order to analyse and restart?
I did not save a copy of the article.
Yermi —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yermih ( talk • contribs) 08:58, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Yermih, you are an WP:SPA with WP:COI]] and you haven't bothered to learn any of the rules here on Wikipedia. You created AIM - Adaptive Ion Milling, a recreation of the article you created called AIM Adaptive Ion Milling which was speedy deleted by Od Mishehu on 26 December 2007 under CSD G11. You uploaded an image over the current Image:AIM.jpg, which had been in place since 2005, and when you were either told or discovered that you'd overwritten the image, you didn't seek assistance to fix the problem, you removed the image from the article which had been using it [28]. You have created your SELA article under SELA - Semiconductor Engineering LAboratories and SELA - SEMICONDUCTOR ENGINEERING LABORATORIES both of which have been deleted - the one in all caps three times, by Marasmusine:
the one in mixed case has been deleted twice, as G11 and G12:
If you want either of these articles, go to WP:DRV. Stop recreating them. Do not, under any circumstances, overwrite an image with another image. Name your image something else. If you have any questions, put {{ helpme}} on your talk page, and someone will come and help you. KillerChihuahua ?!? 14:47, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Hello. I've filed a request at WP:RfArb for the expansion of remedies from Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Ferrylodge. Briefly, I'm asking that the sanctions allowing Ferrylodge to be banned from specific articles for disruptive behavior be extended to apply to all pages (talkspace, projectspace, etc) where his conduct is disruptive, rather than applying solely to articlespace. I'm notifying you as an involved party in the original ArbCom case. MastCell Talk 21:56, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments. I'll verify again how to restart within Wikipedia rules. Yermih ( talk) 16:35, 22 February 2008 (UTC)YermiH
Hello, previously you expressed interest in participating in the Wikipedia:Admin coaching project. We are currently conducting a reconfirmation drive to give coaches the opportunity to update their information and capacity to participate in the project. Please visit Wikipedia:Admin coaching/Status to update your status. Also, please remember to update your capacity (5th table variable) in the form of a fraction (eg. 2/3 means you are currently coaching 2 students, and could accept 1 more student). Thank you. MBisanz talk 09:22, 24 February 2008 (UTC)
Sorry to note the tag at the top, get well soon and don't worry about WP issues, we'll try to keep things under a semblance of control to the best of our ability ;) .. dave souza, talk 11:44, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
I have filed a new request at WP:RfArb for the Ferrylodge case sanctions to be amended or clarified to apply to Ferrylodge's editing in all namespaces, rather than solely in articlespace. This is a courtesy notification as you've been an involved party to the original decision; your statement or other input is welcome at the WP:RfArb page. MastCell Talk 18:57, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
:-P miranda 17:47, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
I have a question about why you moved this article from its correct name to its current name (in 2005; I know it's been a while). If you could respond to the discussion I initiated at Talk:Port of Miami-Dade, I'd greatly appreciate it. It looks like you are on a wiki-break due to health-related issues; I hope you recover soon. Horologium (talk) 16:17, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:BellsCrossed.gif, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Kelly hi! 21:46, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
An editor has nominated Human, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also " What Wikipedia is not").
Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Human and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).
You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot ( talk) 02:01, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
A request for arbitration has been made on a matter in which you were involved. You may add yourself as a party and comment if desired at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Appeal_of_commuity_ban_of_Iantresman. Thank you. Stifle ( talk) 10:13, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
What is going on? I just watched an excellent documentary tonight, just got back, and I wanted to insert some information that was presented in this film. But low and behold, the articles I want to edit are locked down. It's like the Berlin Wall. The documentary must be true. Please unlock this article and allow academic freedom. Yhvh777 ( talk) 03:46, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for putting Category:Propaganda back in Expelled. That movie is full of shit. Sincerely, Thegreyanomaly ( talk) 07:11, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Hello KillerChihuahua. I hope you will recover soon. Some users have added the views of Benedict XVI on the article agnosticism. That's rediciulous! Agnosticism is not a religious ideology. The view of Benedict XVI should be in his biography. I think you should take appropriate action against POV pushers. And, nice to know that you are a rationalist. Regards, Masterpiece2000 ( talk) 12:43, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
The this user is continuously complaining that because The God Who Wasn't There isn't listed as propaganda, that Expelled shouldn't be. Can you explain to this user that these two pages are completely independent of each other and that The God Who Wasn't There does not have any where as many neutral sources calling it propaganda as Expelled does. Sincerely, Thegreyanomaly ( talk) 23:20, 19 April 2008 (UTC)
Hello KC. How are you? Some people are pushing their POV in the article agnosticism. I strongly oppose that. Please help me. Regards, Masterpiece2000 ( talk) 04:40, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
This was done per Alison at [this link]. Alison is traveling, otherwise she would have done it herself. Could you please unban the other editor who has been blocked because of this? Jayneofthejungle ( talk) 21:53, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
Well, they both said that this page should be blanked and they are pretty high on the totem pole. Take that as you will. Why wait, since Alison is going to do this when she gets back anyway? cheers, Jayneofthejungle ( talk) 22:02, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
If their "rank" precisely equals yours - and mine - why is a civil post from me worth less than one from one of them? And with I don't recall that either of them had much to do with Aubrey you imply that you do and therefore that your opinion matters somehow more than theirs, therefore you get to overrule anyone else on this. Well, to that I say - at least they can spell Awbrey. -- Random832 ( contribs) 22:28, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
Nonsense. I over-rode an IPs first ever edit, then a newbie who seems to be here to make nonsense articles and tell me I should do what two people, who I have no way of confirming are or are not who they claim to be (being on a completely different site - ANY different site, or IRC, or anywhere NOT Wikipedia) regardless of who they claim to be. If they claimed to be Jimbo I'd revert the IP and put a note on Jimbo's page, and/or email him. This is absurd. Other sites are NOT where to make decisions about Wikipedia, I've said that several times now, and you persist in painting me as irrationally opposed to one site in particular. Cease this bizarre accusation, nothing can come of it. I certainly "outrank" an IP and two unknowns who aren't even on Wikipedia. KillerChihuahua ?!? 22:55, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
NOTE please take any future comments on this subject to
WP:ANI#User:Jon Awbrey.
KillerChihuahua
?!?
22:59, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
No, but it doesn't make a difference what he believes. I'm not doing this for Awbrey or WR; WP:BLP is non-negotiable policy, and it weighs in favor of blanking. Do no harm. Cool Hand Luke 23:50, 20 April 2008 (UTC)
KC: I have commented at more length on the ANI thread but since I have a great deal of respect for you, I just want to say this to you directly for you to think about: BLP applies everywhere on the project, not just in article space. And we should do what's right, even if the subject of our doing right is the biggest weenie the project has ever seen. That makes us better than the weenies. Finally, as a CU, I can tell you I will not be hindered in any way by his page being blanked (not deleted, just blanked)... I know who he is already. So should ever other CU here. ++ Lar: t/ c 03:44, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
Hi there, KC. As things have moved on over to ANI, I've commented over there regarding the blanking of JA's userpage. It is my opinion that it should be blanked in deference to the man's RL name. Luke put it rather well when he said "do no harm" and I concur. We're not here to punish people, nor bring their name into disrepute.
Re. the "rank" issue above; I have rather strong opinions on that matter myself. As far as I'm concerned, bits - be they sysop, checkuser or whatever - do not confer greater authority nor standing upon any person. We're all editors on here, IMO, and we all should have equal weight in these matters. Like Lar says, though we've not met much, I've also a great deal of respect for you however I think we're going to have to disagree on this one - Alison ❤ 07:30, 21 April 2008 (UTC)
KC, would you reading/mind commenting here. I think I've done a better job of framing my concerns. Thanks! Angry Christian ( talk) 14:59, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
Regarding this. Maybe more on that page could be trimmed? I've tried mostly to skip over most of the bramble. Also, please let us know if you hear back from Myers one way or the other about a free picture. Mahalo. -- Ali'i 15:20, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
![]() | There is currently a backlog of 53 users at Category:Wikipedians seeking to be adopted in Adopt-a-user. Please consider offering adoption to one or more of these users. Don't forget to change their {{adoptme}} template to {{adoptoffer|KillerChihuahua/Archive 11}}. Thank you for your continued participation in Wikipedia:Adopt-a-User. xenocidic ( talk) 19:51, 1 May 2008 (UTC) |
⇒ SWATJester Son of the Defender 01:51, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for stepping in and sorting things out on my talk page. I still can't believe that two separate editors thought I was calling an admin a troll. Strange times. But thanks for helping out. Baegis ( talk) 07:13, 6 May 2008 (UTC)
Hi, the edit summary you used here seems to discourage any attempt to change the article without obtaining prior approval. This is not the way Wikipedia works, and I would like to encourage you to familiarize yourself with some of our policies and guidelines. The guideline at issue is that of WP:BOLD, which is explicitly mentioned in the five pillars of Wikipedia. You may also want to review the WP:CONSENSUS policy: I think you will find that, although it is important to gain consensus for edits, one way to do this is to make the edits by being bold. Discouraging all editing on the basis of prior discussion can have a chilling effect, and potentially terrible consequences. I appreciate your attention to this matter in the future. Thank you, silly rabbit ( talk) 13:27, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
There is no such thing as too much time spent on lol cats. However, in deference to your tastes, check out this. ⇒ SWATJester Son of the Defender 23:22, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
Wikipedia_talk:Consensus#WP:CON Gnevin ( talk) 14:10, 9 May 2008 (UTC)
How are you little homicidedoggie? Have a waspy fishapod plushy for comfort and cosiness! Yomangan sewn outstanding plushy collection for your friend Little Stupid. bishapod splash! 18:29, 9 May 2008 (UTC).
Thanks for the help with that user this morning. In my AIV report I mentioned that it was from the US House of Representatives. That makes it a "Sensitive IP address", so you are supposed to notify the Wikimedia Foundation Communications Committee here. I just saw that the IP added something that could be a threat on the IP's talk page and went to report that, but it doesn't look like you got to update the Communications committee. You probably should do that quickly. Toddst1 ( talk) 21:29, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
...for the puppy gratz, I'll keep them in mind :D weburiedoursecrets inthegarden 08:05, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
Heh, thanks for the warning, I'll try to keep those points in mind :) Gatoclass ( talk) 12:13, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Hello
May I ask why you did the above? Thanks. Police,Mad,Jack ( talk · contribs)☺ 14:54, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Ok fair enough, I understand. Thank you. Police,Mad,Jack ( talk · contribs)☺ 15:11, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Truer words were never said. Shame it was deleted, but I suppose the truth is the suck. •Jim62sch• dissera! 16:55, 17 May 2008 (UTC)
•Jim62sch• dissera! 18:55, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Well, apparently I'm a god, which explains how I can keep up. If only my acolytes would learn to spell my name correctly :-) Best, Gwernol 19:50, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
Hello, i don't know how to post the MfD page for the category. Can you do that for me? Jek Tono Porkins ( talk) 12:57, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
A request for arbitration to look into your conduct has been made here. Please make a statement. Thanks, Sceptre ( talk) 02:25, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
I have apologized to both users. Best -- Eustress ( talk) 03:56, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
your editing of movies involving pedophilia and/or sexual abuse demonstrate ignorance of the topic and the movies. To delete L.I.E. for instance is very worrying. Tony ( talk) 21:16, 3 June 2008 (UTC)Tony
I am a bit confused by the message you left on my talk page. The IP's edit was vandalism, in that it was the deliberate introduction of false material. WP:VANDAL is explicit that warnings are not a necessary precondition for a block; in any case, the IP's talk page is full of warnings. In November, 64.58.187.23 was blocked for six months, and appears to have immediately resumed vandalism after the expiration of that block. If you feel that their behavior does not warrant a block, you may decline to issue one, but your ultimate judgment does not control the propriety of reporting sustained abuse to Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. RJC Talk Contribs 21:58, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Hey K.C., I just wanted to thank you for your participation in my recent RFA. please note that I am taking steps to address the CSD issue that you raised as your main concern, further comments are welcome here. I've also left you some templated thank-spam below. ¡Yo quiero Mop & Bucket! xenocidic ( talk) 03:53, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
I would like to thank the community for placing their trust in me during
my recent request for adminship, which passed 72
13
2
. Rest assured, I have read each comment thoroughly and will be
addressing the various concerns raised as I step cautiously into my new role as janitor. In particular, I would like to thank
Balloonman for putting so much time into reviewing my contributions and writing such a thoughtful nomination statement after knowing me for only a brief period of time (and for convincing me that I was ready to take up the mop now, rather than go through
admin coaching).
To my fellow admins - please let me know right away if I ever take any mis-steps with my new tools. Should I make a mistake, and you reverse the action, I will not consider it to be wheel-warring (but please tell me so I can understand what I did wrong).
To everyone - please feel free to slap me around a bit if I ever lose sight of the core philosophy of Wikipedia as I understand it - the advancement of knowledge through the processes of mutual understanding and respect. As always, feel free to drop by my talk page if I can be of any assistance. =)
Sincerely,
~xenocidic, 01:04, 4 June 2008 (UTC)
Hiya. Noticed you weren't feeling well. Best of wishes in getting better soon. :)
Btw, I thought I'd drop an Elizabethan collar your way for good measure. :P -- slakr\ talk / 19:00, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Sorry to hear you've not been well. Fingers crossed for a speedy recovery - Alison ❤ 22:12, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Ah, thanks much, Alison! That's so sweet of you. It looks homemade, too. Now, if they can just agree on what's wrong with me (no comments from the peanut gallery, please!) I'd feel better. Meanwhile, they test and frown at me. KillerChihuahua ?!? 22:32, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
From a sick clown, to a sick puppy, hope you feel better. ⇒ SWATJester Son of the Defender 22:54, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Aw, thanks muchly, Swat! I hope your treatment is going well, and that you are doing as well as possible. KillerChihuahua ?!? 22:59, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Thanks Fozzie - much appreciated. KillerChihuahua ?!? 00:01, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
Template:Creationism2 has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — Neelix ( talk) 20:45, 6 June 2008 (UTC)
You've been named as an involved party at this RfAR. As an outcome, User:Gnixon/Intelligent design RfC provides a Workspace, with discussion at User talk:Gnixon/Intelligent design RfC which I've started off with ideas for a basis to formulate the RfC. We also must try to resolve the dispute and as a first step my suggestion is developing guidelines or procedures aimed improving behaviour from now on, so that the desired outcomes can be achieved amicably. Your assistance and comments will be much appreciated. . . dave souza, talk 14:01, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
I have nominated William Norman Grigg, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William Norman Grigg. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? RJaguar3 | u | t 07:44, 18 June 2008 (UTC)
Just a note - I really don't appreciate being told I have "the brains of a brickbat", or that I am dense, or brainwashed, or malicious. I don't think I know anyone who does. Kelly hi! 20:37, 27 June 2008 (UTC)
KC: I've known you and respected you for a long time, you know that. But using phrasing like "Kelly, continuing to repeat that nonsense indicates to me that you have the brains of a brick-brat; or else you're congenitally dense; or else you've been brainwashed; or else you're happy maligning a group of people based on the actions of a few: which is it?" is just Not On. It reads exactly like a personal attack... regardless of any rhetorical escape clauses. Please don't repeat phrasing like that. Kelly, dial down a notch too "Not just a river in Egypt" is sarcasm. Stick to being unfailingly polite please. ++ Lar: t/ c 20:53, 27 June 2008 (UTC)