I recognize that this user page belongs to the Wikipedia project and not to me personally. As such, I recognize that I am expected to respectfully abide by community standards as to the presentation and content of this page, and that if I do not like these guidelines, I am welcome either to engage in reasonable discussion about it, to publish my material elsewhere, or to leave the project.
This is an archive of User talk:Lar from about 1 September 2006 through about 15 September 2006. Please do not comment here, use my current talk page for that, thanks. It is part of a series of archives, see the box at right for the list and to navigate to others. An index to all my talk page archives, automatically maintained by User:HBC Archive Indexerbot can be found at User:Lar/TalkArchiveIndex. |
|
Your vote is requested at the Wikipedia:State route naming conventions poll. As one of the admins, you have until 23:59 UTC on September 4, 2006 to cast your vote for one of the naming conventions for state highways. Thank you for your participation. --Willy No1lakersfan ( Talk - Contribs) 02:02, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
I would think that you would cast a vote as to which proposal you prefer to use for the naming convention for state routes. When you cast your vote, do so in the section that says Admin votes (it will say to be edited by ADMINS only). I do not know how much your vote counts toward the decision, but I know that it is an important part of it. --Willy No1lakersfan ( Talk - Contribs) 03:27, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
(this is copied from User talk:No1lakersfan}
when someone as old time as The Land says "I thought he was one" that's a pretty good giveaway to me.
That, or my busybody nature proactive editing of administration pages might lead someone to that conclusion.
In answer to your question -- I dunno. Part of it is that I can't think of a strong need for the admin tools -- nor can I think of what gaps I could fill if I were an admin -- that makes the extra responsibility (and it IS a great responsibility, I know) worth bearing.
Also, I can count on at least half-a-dozen people off the top of my head who'd oppose me either for personal reasons or on general principle -- and God-alone-knows how many others I don't know about -- so any RFA will be contentious.
Given the above, I'd probably have to draft a fairly detailed statement outlining what, exactly, I'd be doing with and/or expecting from the tools, along with the various pros and cons of giving me the tools (such as limited technical ability -- IRC? What's that? -- and limited e-mail access during certain times).
I will think about it, though. -- Calton | Talk 06:28, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
refactored to User_talk:SPUI#State_route_naming_conventions_poll please reply there. ++ Lar: t/ c 11:52, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
You have chosen Principle I based on the numbers. While it is clear that a majority prefers that style, perhaps one possible compromise that will be acceptable to a much wider group is to apply that principle only to the states where move wars and naming debates are occuring or have occurred in the past. Some states that do not conform to Principle I where absolutely no naming debates have gone on might be better left untouched. Would you at least consider this as a possible compromise solution? Thanks. -- Polaron | Talk 21:51, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Hey Lar - can you run the bot for me for a test? I'm not sure how it works or who has access to it, but .. well I set up the Northern Ireland project WPtemplate and relevant cats before the Mathbot set in, and I can't see Northern Ireland in the bot's contribs. -- Mal 16:38, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
That's perfectly acceptable old bean. :)
I'll just wait until tomorrow. Looks like the bot works in alphabetical order (surprise surprise). Belfast gets done around 4:30 am and NI *should* get done around 7am (UTC).. there or thereabouts anyway. -- Mal 22:14, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
The da Vinci Barnstar | ||
Thank you for your assistance at WP:ANI and at WT:SRNC. It takes a bold move for someone to finally put their foot down at a user like SPUI in an effort to reach a consensus, keep editors from bailing out of Wikipedia, and to bring more civility and peace to this whole naming mess. Kudos and thank you for your service! Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 19:35, 1 September 2006 (UTC) |
Hi Lar,
I noticed you wrote this comment on the poll page: "Principle I with recognition that it's not the consensus decision, it's the majority one, but that consensus is to accept the majority decision". I'm one that voted for principle II -- i'm not triyng to obstruct the process (hence i send this message just to you instead of posting it on the flame pag-- er, talk page. ^^). Since principle 1 passed with a majority, where does the "consensus is to accept the majority" that you speak of come from? Naturally, if it is because a majority of people feel they should accept the majority as consensus, one would logically assume that those who voted for principle I, the majority, would want to see that majority as consensus -- so if everyone that voted for principle I came and said to accept it as consensus, wouldn't it be the same thing as a vote? One could easily just remove that second statement and just say "majority is consensus", no?
Thanks, atanamir 00:46, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
PS - sorry if my wording is kind of confusing, I don't knwo how to articulate well. I'm trying to say -->
I'd like to thank you Lar for either supporting, opposing, commenting, nominating, reading, editing, promoting and/or anything else that you may have done for my successful request for adminship (I've broken the one thousand sysop barrier!); I'm thanking you for getting involved, and for this I am very grateful. I hope to be able to serve Wikipedia more effectively with my new tools and that we can continue to build our free encyclopedia, for knowledge is power, but only wisdom is liberty. Please do feel free to get in touch if you feel you can improve me in any way; I will be glad to listen to all comments. Again, thanks 8) — Xyra e l / 11:55, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Oops, I mean... misguided genuine hot 22-year-old Floridian alert. Sorry. Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Courtney Akins. — Bunchofgrapes ( talk) 04:34, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
I am on it. thanks for the heads up though guys ++ Lar: t/ c 05:01, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
Sorry to trouble you; I have a concern about this and this. Between one and the next, I spelled out my reason for reverting here. Together with SPUI's second action he posted a defense, which I find insubstantial. Before reverting, I looked at both pages concerned and SPUI's user and talk pages. Since, I've reviewed Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Highways/Proposed decision. I stand by my judgement that the new page is venue-shopping in direct contradiction to the purpose of centralized discussion.
My personal standard is 1RR so I'm done with this. Kindly consider appropriate action. Thank you. John Reid 05:00, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
I have sent you an email. -- Rschen7754 ( talk - contribs) 05:07, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
By the way I agree with John about the addition of this to {{ cent}}. wholly inappropriate. ++ Lar: t/ c 05:37, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi, How do i get this to show up on my talk page? Thanks DXRAW 12:59, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
Thank you! DXRAW 06:34, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Sorry about that last edit. Fred Bauder 16:20, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
I've clarified things at the bottom of the poll talk page. -- Rschen7754 ( talk - contribs) 18:08, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi Lar. Any chance you could deliver the newsletter? I think it's ready isn't it? -- kingboyk 18:50, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
It's done. ++ Lar: t/ c 06:31, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
In re the technical solution to TOCs on RfA, I'm wondering you can point me in its direction. I can't seem to spot it by myself and I'm genuinely interested in seeing it. Thanks, Splash - tk 01:03, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your support in my not-so-recent
RfA, which was successful with a an overwhelmingly flattering and deeply humbling total of 138/2/2 (putting me #10 on the RfA
WP:100). I guess
infinite monkey theorem has been officially proven. Chimps really can get somewhere on Wikipedia.
With new buttons come great responsibility, and I'll try my best to live up to your expectations. If you need assistance with something, don't hesitate to swing by my talk page or email me (trust me, I do respond :)). The same goes for any complaints or comments in regard to my administrative actions. Remember, I'm here for you. (Thanks go to Blnguyen for the incredible photo to the right.) alphaChimp laudare 01:29, 4 September 2006 (UTC) |
For being such a good admin and editor. Yay! :) (Why, no, I did not eat any odd fungi today) Charon X/ talk 01:41, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter
| ||
|
The featured article status of The Beatles was revoked.
A month of slow progress and some amazing efforts. Still need help getting comments shifted. Don't forget to log your accomplishments! If you've just joined, add your name to the Participants section of Wikipedia:WikiProject The Beatles. You'll get a mention in the next issue of the Newsletter and get it delivered as desired. Also, please include your own promotions and awards in future issues. Don't be shy! Lastly, this is your newsletter and you can be involved in the creation of the next issue (Issue 006 – October 2006). Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned, or just start editing!
| |
Complete To Do List
Make visible or invisible by clicking Show or Hide, respectively.
As the project is currently just starting, our more experienced editors are working on the project infrastructure, classifying articles, and listing/assessing red links. Your assistance is welcome. If you would prefer to just edit - and why wouldn't you? - we have a choice selection of red links to turn blue and articles to clean! Now let's get busy.
If you complete one of these tasks, please remove it from the list and add your achievement to the project log. |
Just thought I'd pop by and let you know that my admin coaching is awaiting your comments. Regards. MyNam e IsNotBob 08:57, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Mostly Rainy was just recently indef blocked for being a EddieSegoura sockpuppet. Well, there went one of Courtney Akins RFA supporters.. *rolls eyes* — The Future 00:32, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
A user has decided to be disruptive at Wikipedia talk:State route naming conventions poll. He was leaving nasty comments on my talk page and I finally told him to take it to that page or WP:ANI. However, he has persisted in his attacks on me, the poll, and does not recognize the consensus. What do you think? -- Rschen7754 ( talk - contribs) 02:28, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
I'd like to ask both of you to assume good faith, and work within the process, and leave the threatening to the admins, maybe? not that either of you were, but let's get through this somehow... ++ Lar: t/ c 03:32, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
What do you mean by that? -- Rschen7754 ( talk - contribs) 05:52, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
... in your contributions to the difficult debates over the past crazy week here. Your good sense and calm explanations of how you see issues don't go unnoticed, at least not by me. Metamagician3000 13:52, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
but did you notice I had a successful FAC close this week? It is as far as I can ascertain the first FA to feature the F-word in the title :) (censored name: ***K the Millennium). -- kingboyk 14:13, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
Sorry for what I wrote at WT:SRNC. My frustrations were boiling over when SPUI amassed a horde of NJ Road Wikiproject critics over that tried to disrupt the process. I'll just keep out of the mainstream discussion because frankly it's pissing me off that this is still going on (the discussions on how "wrong" it is or how certain states should be exempt). I'll put my vote in and thats it - it's taking up too much of my time that I could be using for constructive edits elsewhere.
Thanks Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 15:45, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
I've been following things at the State Route Naming Conventions for some time, if quietly (I only posted once, to vote for Principle II). Things have been heated recently, and I appreciate your playing the heavy is not comfortable, and quiet a tight rope to walk. You've mentioned on numerous occasions you're trying to promote what the ArbCom wants, and that you're working on the understanding that, at least in the begining, a consensus had formed to establish the poll and abide by it. Well, only the ArbCom knows what they think of the current situation, but personally, I felt they wanted to see a stable consensus form as much, or more, than just an end to the mess. That may be overly opptimistic. It's not why I'm posting here, though. It's about the beginings of the whole poll system. Your understanding is that it began out of common consensus, and certainly many of the editors moving things along agree. Myself, I'm not sure where this poll began, or the feeling that it must be binding, and so quick. Watching it all proceed, I'm very uncomfortable at how quick it's moving and how much that seems to be fueled by anger. Anger, primarly, at how long the overall fued has existed.
It's obvious that many parties have reached a point where they simply can't communicate directly, based on past conflicts. Which is sad, because some of the more heated arguments have had some decent discussions buried deep below the accusations and wiki-lawyering. You're working very hard to keep this stable, so I wanted to ask you if you're certain this polling procedure is built on firm foundations. Can we be certain of the consensus which started this? If I can help investigate this, I will. If I'm just too outside it, that's fair and I can back off. I'm just concerned if this keeps going with the momentum it's got, it might steamroll over some of the smaller projects like New Jersey and only generate more ill-will and cause more disruption down the road. I think you're working very hard here, and I'd hate to see it derailed...or worse, suceed only to crumble down the road. -- InkSplotch 17:10, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
Is it possible that she was telling the truth about her in the pictures? [1] This thread apparently was created back in February long before she joined Wikipedia. This thread also gives a picture of her, which looks, seemingly, identical to the pictures posted on Wikipedia. Any thoughts? — The Future 20:22, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
Oh, great one. I noted on the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council page that you said you would assist on project banners at request. I just wanted you to know that there are currently a lot that use the standard {WikiProjectNotice}} banner, if they use a banner at all. As soon as we accomplish categorization of all the projects, I anticipate contacting them for input on various things. I guess the question I have is how many banners requests you want to get. I've seen some of your work, and know that there is a lot for you to be proud of there. And, for those that don't have banners but indicate an interest in them, should they contact you directly or just tell me to relay to you or whoever? Lastly, my thanks for your level-headedness in the Council to date, and your contributions to wikipedia in general. We need contributers like you.
I was going to tell RadioKirk about this, but he apparently went on a short wikibreak. The results of a RFCU RadioKirk submitted confirmed that all the users involved were sockpuppets of eachother. But two of them are unblocked:
Could you indefblock these abusive sockpuppets? — The Future 01:28, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
If it's not too much trouble, could you look at User talk:Old TI-89 and either
It appears this user is a sockpuppet considering his IP is connected to a string of attacks on RadioKirk. His signature and monobook mimic RadioKirk's and he's telling me he just shares his IP, which is static, with this vandal. I'm going to rest, so please intervene if you could. Thanks. :) — The Future 03:54, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Well, of course its in my own words. Can you not comprehend how a piece on a rather academic topic might differ in tone from a piece about a youth-oriented radio staion that features such bits as "Drop a Duece in your Can, Brah"? For you to 1) assume that I am able only to write in a "breezy" style regardless of topic, and 2) that my latest piece was plagarism, is rather insulting indeed! I want an explanation... Courtney Akins 17:50, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm just getting ready to leave for work and will have to follow up from there. I can't access IRC from work as that would be pushing what we can do with the work computer. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 20:43, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
What is this deadline you speak of that ends in three hours? It's not Part II, so I'm confused here? Thanks Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 20:44, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Heya, I certainly didn't mean to disrupt the process. It's just that weeks of bickering back and forth gets old. People were obviously invited to participate prior to any voting and then nearly to the end of part 2 those same people are like, "whoa wait." I've made my position known on that page, so there's not much else for me to do. The first paragraph or two of what I wrote was a summation of what was going on and I hoped whoever read it would think, "gee, all this debate might not be worth dragging my feet." But I ended it on a humorous note to try and lighten the mood a bit, which I had appeared to be successful. (Viva principle IV :P)
On a more important note, I applaud your efforts in maintiaing your sanity while overseeing this whole thing and I hope you haven't aged significantly as a result. Hopefully, it's all over soon so we can get back to improving this little website. Cheers. Stratosphere ( U T) 20:52, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
My apologies for the impersonal nature of this message, but since you participated in the recent Sockpuppets of Outoftuneviolin discussion, I thought you might like to know that the categories are now at Deletion Review. This is not a solicitation of a specific response, as all participating users were notified, but your input would be appreciated. Thanks! - EurekaLott 00:21, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
You are both wrong but I have to go to class. pschemp | talk 12:15, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm not going to grovel, nor jump into a righteous rage. But if you want peace, and to move on, I'm up for that. -- Doc 12:37, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, that. Over on User talk:Zscout370, Courtney seems real sure it's not a copyvio. I'm concerned that's because the whole thing is made up out of whole cloth. I've searched the (admittedly abridged) version of Memoirs of the Duke of Saint Simon on the Reign of Louis XIV and the Regency on google books for phrases like "oxen" or "reeds" or "dream" or "dreame" -- no hits. The whole thing seems a little non-credible to me. — Bunchofgrapes ( talk) 02:39, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
The Library of Congress in Washington, D.C. has both books, if anyone is within range. Newyorkbrad 19:43, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
I read on the Ny times I think that Wikipedia has a vocal opponent in the US senate. Who is it? do you know anything about this hon? Courtney Akins 02:35, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
[3] — Bunchofgrapes ( talk) 03:06, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi, Lar. I've blocked Courtney Akins ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) for a week for this edit and posted the block on WP:ANI for review. Does that help, BoG? Bishonen | talk 03:46, 8 September 2006 (UTC).
Hi. I'm just sending out a message for a new study I will be undertaking soon. It will involve surveys & polls to gather information & trends of editors on Wikipedia & other subjects. The data gathering will involve yourself recieving a questionaire on your talk page for you to fill out. I will then collect your questionaire & combine it with data from other editors. If you would like to be a part of this experiment, or know of someone who does, place a "Yes" or "No" below this message. Remember, it's only for fun & you can choose not to fill out all or parts of your questionaire once they arrive. Have a nice day... -- Spawn Man 06:08, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi, Lar! Per your request, I posted the Hauke/Chrisjj2 unblocking issue for review at WP:AN/I#Indef blocking of meatpuppets. I will welcome your feedback.— Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • ( yo?); 16:05, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
thank you for notifying me Lar, i will do my utmost to refrain from incivility in the future. it's just that sometimes a very provocative editor can elicit provocative responses: and i find User:Mike18xx's behaviour extremely distasteful in some cases. nevertheless, i take your point and i will try to refrain from this, as i too believe that such may be counter-productive. thank you. ITAQALLAH 19:13, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
refactored to User_talk:Chris_Chittleborough#User:Mike18xx with thanks to Chris. ++ Lar: t/ c 01:41, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
Unfortunately, this is about Anarchism and Thewolfstar.
According to User:Lingeron's block log and User:KingWen's block log, both accounts have been indefinitely blocked as "obvious reincarnations" of "banned user Thewolfstar," most recently on August 9, one account by Geogre and Lar and the other by Bunchofgrapes.
Lingeron always signed his or her name as "Shannon" at Talk:Anarchism, starting at Talk:Anarchism/Archive39#anarchism_project and lasting until Talk:Anarchism/Archive40#Can_someone_answer_my_question?_(communist_or_socialist). KingWen's only discussion post appears later on the latter page at Talk:Anarchism/Archive40#removing_the_US_anarchists.
In the opinions of many observers, User:Whiskey_Rebellion is an "obvious reincarnation" of the indefinitely blocked user Lingeron. Whiskey Rebellion first appears in discussion August 17, initiating the section Talk:Anarchism/Archive41#Lopsided_article. He or she posts frequently in that archive and on the current Talk:Anarchism page.
On Sept. 6, with User_talk:Woohookitty#excessive_reverts_and_personal_attacks, Whiskey Rebellion recruited administrator Woohookitty to oversee the Anarchism pages. Woohookitty began policing Talk:Anarchism for "civility" and "NPA" on Sept. 7, at Talk:Anarchism#Settle_down, protecting Anarchism and notably issuing a civility warning at User_talk:69.164.74.68#Whiskey_Rebellion for little more than somebody mentioning that Whiskey Rebellion seems to be Thewolfstar. Just pointing out the obvious 07:15, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi everyone! This is the 1st ever poll to be sent out. Please read the Disclaimer below & enjoy! -- Spawn Man 05:29, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi everyone. If this is your first time filling out a survey, read this. To fill out a questionaire sheet, simply send me a post to my talk page, clearly stating your choice for each answer. For example: For Question 1, you might choose to place on the message, "Q1: A)" or "Question 1: Choice A." etc etc. It's up to you, as long as I get the general jist of what your choices are. You have around 1 week to return a survey sheet, but late entrie's will be accepted.
Remember however, your personal choices may be read whilst they are on my talk page. I will understand if you don't wish to answer some or all of the survey due to this. For this reason I have also placed an "Abstain" choice for each question. Try & answer truthfully, or don't answer at all if you can't.
However, your personal choices will not be expressed on the survey's outcome, instead it will be part of a larger finding, such as "60% of people eat chocolate, 25% never eat chocolate & 5% of people chose to abstain from answering..." I will never say, "90% of people eat chocolate, while only Fruityman said he didn't..." This would be an invasion of privacy. However, if a question has (Please explain) or (Please elaborate) as a choice, your specific answer may be used in the survey outcome, although your name will not be. If a question does not have (Please explain) as a question choice, but your intended choice is not represented on the choice list, then feel free to provide another choice which fits your description.
You're probably getting bored reading all of this so I'll wrap up. To see outcomes of the results, see my Polls subpage. Feel free to comment on anything! Feedback is always welcome. Most importantly, have fun. Topics will vary greatly & surveys may be resent out at later times to re-assess a consensus if survey numbers have grown significantly. If you know anyone who would be interested in these surveys, send them to my talk page or if you see this survey sheet, send your own answers in! Thanks. -- Spawn Man.
Due to high levels of demand, email is now available to survey subjects! Feel free to send your answers to my email. Thanks. Spawn Man 21:52, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
Hey Lar, thanks for amber courage! My favourite type! :) Thank you also for your support and encouragement. It means a lot coming from an editor as respected as yourself. Thanks Lar, Sarah Ewart ( Talk) 23:23, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
P.S. Thanks for all your help, mate!
hoopydink Conas tá tú? 23:44, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
Image:SpitfireAle.jpg is definitely an English, not an Irish beer. I drink it without prejudice though. :) Cheers, -- Guinnog 12:05, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
I've explained the situation on
Talk:USS Richard B. Anderson (DD-786). The ttu.edu page was also copied from the public domain
Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships.
—wwoods 18:49, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
Hello Lar. You had some input on the AfD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Surplus business, but it looks like it is not resolved. I have added a comment (in good faith) to delete the article as there is too much spam associated with it. What do you think should be done about the user Brian Radwell? An anon user was signing his name throughout the AfD which I gave a warning to stop. Would you look into this further? Spam is everywhere... Many Thanks. JungleCat talk/ contrib 03:44, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
Thank you, Lar, for voting on my RFA, which passed 95 to 1. Now that I have the mop, I hope I can live up to the standard, and be a good administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to ask me. —
this is messedrocker
(talk)
21:52, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
I recognize that this user page belongs to the Wikipedia project and not to me personally. As such, I recognize that I am expected to respectfully abide by community standards as to the presentation and content of this page, and that if I do not like these guidelines, I am welcome either to engage in reasonable discussion about it, to publish my material elsewhere, or to leave the project.
This is an archive of User talk:Lar from about 1 September 2006 through about 15 September 2006. Please do not comment here, use my current talk page for that, thanks. It is part of a series of archives, see the box at right for the list and to navigate to others. An index to all my talk page archives, automatically maintained by User:HBC Archive Indexerbot can be found at User:Lar/TalkArchiveIndex. |
|
Your vote is requested at the Wikipedia:State route naming conventions poll. As one of the admins, you have until 23:59 UTC on September 4, 2006 to cast your vote for one of the naming conventions for state highways. Thank you for your participation. --Willy No1lakersfan ( Talk - Contribs) 02:02, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
I would think that you would cast a vote as to which proposal you prefer to use for the naming convention for state routes. When you cast your vote, do so in the section that says Admin votes (it will say to be edited by ADMINS only). I do not know how much your vote counts toward the decision, but I know that it is an important part of it. --Willy No1lakersfan ( Talk - Contribs) 03:27, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
(this is copied from User talk:No1lakersfan}
when someone as old time as The Land says "I thought he was one" that's a pretty good giveaway to me.
That, or my busybody nature proactive editing of administration pages might lead someone to that conclusion.
In answer to your question -- I dunno. Part of it is that I can't think of a strong need for the admin tools -- nor can I think of what gaps I could fill if I were an admin -- that makes the extra responsibility (and it IS a great responsibility, I know) worth bearing.
Also, I can count on at least half-a-dozen people off the top of my head who'd oppose me either for personal reasons or on general principle -- and God-alone-knows how many others I don't know about -- so any RFA will be contentious.
Given the above, I'd probably have to draft a fairly detailed statement outlining what, exactly, I'd be doing with and/or expecting from the tools, along with the various pros and cons of giving me the tools (such as limited technical ability -- IRC? What's that? -- and limited e-mail access during certain times).
I will think about it, though. -- Calton | Talk 06:28, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
refactored to User_talk:SPUI#State_route_naming_conventions_poll please reply there. ++ Lar: t/ c 11:52, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
You have chosen Principle I based on the numbers. While it is clear that a majority prefers that style, perhaps one possible compromise that will be acceptable to a much wider group is to apply that principle only to the states where move wars and naming debates are occuring or have occurred in the past. Some states that do not conform to Principle I where absolutely no naming debates have gone on might be better left untouched. Would you at least consider this as a possible compromise solution? Thanks. -- Polaron | Talk 21:51, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
Hey Lar - can you run the bot for me for a test? I'm not sure how it works or who has access to it, but .. well I set up the Northern Ireland project WPtemplate and relevant cats before the Mathbot set in, and I can't see Northern Ireland in the bot's contribs. -- Mal 16:38, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
That's perfectly acceptable old bean. :)
I'll just wait until tomorrow. Looks like the bot works in alphabetical order (surprise surprise). Belfast gets done around 4:30 am and NI *should* get done around 7am (UTC).. there or thereabouts anyway. -- Mal 22:14, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
The da Vinci Barnstar | ||
Thank you for your assistance at WP:ANI and at WT:SRNC. It takes a bold move for someone to finally put their foot down at a user like SPUI in an effort to reach a consensus, keep editors from bailing out of Wikipedia, and to bring more civility and peace to this whole naming mess. Kudos and thank you for your service! Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 19:35, 1 September 2006 (UTC) |
Hi Lar,
I noticed you wrote this comment on the poll page: "Principle I with recognition that it's not the consensus decision, it's the majority one, but that consensus is to accept the majority decision". I'm one that voted for principle II -- i'm not triyng to obstruct the process (hence i send this message just to you instead of posting it on the flame pag-- er, talk page. ^^). Since principle 1 passed with a majority, where does the "consensus is to accept the majority" that you speak of come from? Naturally, if it is because a majority of people feel they should accept the majority as consensus, one would logically assume that those who voted for principle I, the majority, would want to see that majority as consensus -- so if everyone that voted for principle I came and said to accept it as consensus, wouldn't it be the same thing as a vote? One could easily just remove that second statement and just say "majority is consensus", no?
Thanks, atanamir 00:46, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
PS - sorry if my wording is kind of confusing, I don't knwo how to articulate well. I'm trying to say -->
I'd like to thank you Lar for either supporting, opposing, commenting, nominating, reading, editing, promoting and/or anything else that you may have done for my successful request for adminship (I've broken the one thousand sysop barrier!); I'm thanking you for getting involved, and for this I am very grateful. I hope to be able to serve Wikipedia more effectively with my new tools and that we can continue to build our free encyclopedia, for knowledge is power, but only wisdom is liberty. Please do feel free to get in touch if you feel you can improve me in any way; I will be glad to listen to all comments. Again, thanks 8) — Xyra e l / 11:55, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
Oops, I mean... misguided genuine hot 22-year-old Floridian alert. Sorry. Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Courtney Akins. — Bunchofgrapes ( talk) 04:34, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
I am on it. thanks for the heads up though guys ++ Lar: t/ c 05:01, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
Sorry to trouble you; I have a concern about this and this. Between one and the next, I spelled out my reason for reverting here. Together with SPUI's second action he posted a defense, which I find insubstantial. Before reverting, I looked at both pages concerned and SPUI's user and talk pages. Since, I've reviewed Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Highways/Proposed decision. I stand by my judgement that the new page is venue-shopping in direct contradiction to the purpose of centralized discussion.
My personal standard is 1RR so I'm done with this. Kindly consider appropriate action. Thank you. John Reid 05:00, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
I have sent you an email. -- Rschen7754 ( talk - contribs) 05:07, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
By the way I agree with John about the addition of this to {{ cent}}. wholly inappropriate. ++ Lar: t/ c 05:37, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi, How do i get this to show up on my talk page? Thanks DXRAW 12:59, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
Thank you! DXRAW 06:34, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Sorry about that last edit. Fred Bauder 16:20, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
I've clarified things at the bottom of the poll talk page. -- Rschen7754 ( talk - contribs) 18:08, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi Lar. Any chance you could deliver the newsletter? I think it's ready isn't it? -- kingboyk 18:50, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
It's done. ++ Lar: t/ c 06:31, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
In re the technical solution to TOCs on RfA, I'm wondering you can point me in its direction. I can't seem to spot it by myself and I'm genuinely interested in seeing it. Thanks, Splash - tk 01:03, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your support in my not-so-recent
RfA, which was successful with a an overwhelmingly flattering and deeply humbling total of 138/2/2 (putting me #10 on the RfA
WP:100). I guess
infinite monkey theorem has been officially proven. Chimps really can get somewhere on Wikipedia.
With new buttons come great responsibility, and I'll try my best to live up to your expectations. If you need assistance with something, don't hesitate to swing by my talk page or email me (trust me, I do respond :)). The same goes for any complaints or comments in regard to my administrative actions. Remember, I'm here for you. (Thanks go to Blnguyen for the incredible photo to the right.) alphaChimp laudare 01:29, 4 September 2006 (UTC) |
For being such a good admin and editor. Yay! :) (Why, no, I did not eat any odd fungi today) Charon X/ talk 01:41, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter
| ||
|
The featured article status of The Beatles was revoked.
A month of slow progress and some amazing efforts. Still need help getting comments shifted. Don't forget to log your accomplishments! If you've just joined, add your name to the Participants section of Wikipedia:WikiProject The Beatles. You'll get a mention in the next issue of the Newsletter and get it delivered as desired. Also, please include your own promotions and awards in future issues. Don't be shy! Lastly, this is your newsletter and you can be involved in the creation of the next issue (Issue 006 – October 2006). Any and all contributions are welcome. Simply let yourself be known to any of the undersigned, or just start editing!
| |
Complete To Do List
Make visible or invisible by clicking Show or Hide, respectively.
As the project is currently just starting, our more experienced editors are working on the project infrastructure, classifying articles, and listing/assessing red links. Your assistance is welcome. If you would prefer to just edit - and why wouldn't you? - we have a choice selection of red links to turn blue and articles to clean! Now let's get busy.
If you complete one of these tasks, please remove it from the list and add your achievement to the project log. |
Just thought I'd pop by and let you know that my admin coaching is awaiting your comments. Regards. MyNam e IsNotBob 08:57, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
Mostly Rainy was just recently indef blocked for being a EddieSegoura sockpuppet. Well, there went one of Courtney Akins RFA supporters.. *rolls eyes* — The Future 00:32, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
A user has decided to be disruptive at Wikipedia talk:State route naming conventions poll. He was leaving nasty comments on my talk page and I finally told him to take it to that page or WP:ANI. However, he has persisted in his attacks on me, the poll, and does not recognize the consensus. What do you think? -- Rschen7754 ( talk - contribs) 02:28, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
I'd like to ask both of you to assume good faith, and work within the process, and leave the threatening to the admins, maybe? not that either of you were, but let's get through this somehow... ++ Lar: t/ c 03:32, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
What do you mean by that? -- Rschen7754 ( talk - contribs) 05:52, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
... in your contributions to the difficult debates over the past crazy week here. Your good sense and calm explanations of how you see issues don't go unnoticed, at least not by me. Metamagician3000 13:52, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
but did you notice I had a successful FAC close this week? It is as far as I can ascertain the first FA to feature the F-word in the title :) (censored name: ***K the Millennium). -- kingboyk 14:13, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
Sorry for what I wrote at WT:SRNC. My frustrations were boiling over when SPUI amassed a horde of NJ Road Wikiproject critics over that tried to disrupt the process. I'll just keep out of the mainstream discussion because frankly it's pissing me off that this is still going on (the discussions on how "wrong" it is or how certain states should be exempt). I'll put my vote in and thats it - it's taking up too much of my time that I could be using for constructive edits elsewhere.
Thanks Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 15:45, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
I've been following things at the State Route Naming Conventions for some time, if quietly (I only posted once, to vote for Principle II). Things have been heated recently, and I appreciate your playing the heavy is not comfortable, and quiet a tight rope to walk. You've mentioned on numerous occasions you're trying to promote what the ArbCom wants, and that you're working on the understanding that, at least in the begining, a consensus had formed to establish the poll and abide by it. Well, only the ArbCom knows what they think of the current situation, but personally, I felt they wanted to see a stable consensus form as much, or more, than just an end to the mess. That may be overly opptimistic. It's not why I'm posting here, though. It's about the beginings of the whole poll system. Your understanding is that it began out of common consensus, and certainly many of the editors moving things along agree. Myself, I'm not sure where this poll began, or the feeling that it must be binding, and so quick. Watching it all proceed, I'm very uncomfortable at how quick it's moving and how much that seems to be fueled by anger. Anger, primarly, at how long the overall fued has existed.
It's obvious that many parties have reached a point where they simply can't communicate directly, based on past conflicts. Which is sad, because some of the more heated arguments have had some decent discussions buried deep below the accusations and wiki-lawyering. You're working very hard to keep this stable, so I wanted to ask you if you're certain this polling procedure is built on firm foundations. Can we be certain of the consensus which started this? If I can help investigate this, I will. If I'm just too outside it, that's fair and I can back off. I'm just concerned if this keeps going with the momentum it's got, it might steamroll over some of the smaller projects like New Jersey and only generate more ill-will and cause more disruption down the road. I think you're working very hard here, and I'd hate to see it derailed...or worse, suceed only to crumble down the road. -- InkSplotch 17:10, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
Is it possible that she was telling the truth about her in the pictures? [1] This thread apparently was created back in February long before she joined Wikipedia. This thread also gives a picture of her, which looks, seemingly, identical to the pictures posted on Wikipedia. Any thoughts? — The Future 20:22, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
Oh, great one. I noted on the Wikipedia:WikiProject Council page that you said you would assist on project banners at request. I just wanted you to know that there are currently a lot that use the standard {WikiProjectNotice}} banner, if they use a banner at all. As soon as we accomplish categorization of all the projects, I anticipate contacting them for input on various things. I guess the question I have is how many banners requests you want to get. I've seen some of your work, and know that there is a lot for you to be proud of there. And, for those that don't have banners but indicate an interest in them, should they contact you directly or just tell me to relay to you or whoever? Lastly, my thanks for your level-headedness in the Council to date, and your contributions to wikipedia in general. We need contributers like you.
I was going to tell RadioKirk about this, but he apparently went on a short wikibreak. The results of a RFCU RadioKirk submitted confirmed that all the users involved were sockpuppets of eachother. But two of them are unblocked:
Could you indefblock these abusive sockpuppets? — The Future 01:28, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
If it's not too much trouble, could you look at User talk:Old TI-89 and either
It appears this user is a sockpuppet considering his IP is connected to a string of attacks on RadioKirk. His signature and monobook mimic RadioKirk's and he's telling me he just shares his IP, which is static, with this vandal. I'm going to rest, so please intervene if you could. Thanks. :) — The Future 03:54, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Well, of course its in my own words. Can you not comprehend how a piece on a rather academic topic might differ in tone from a piece about a youth-oriented radio staion that features such bits as "Drop a Duece in your Can, Brah"? For you to 1) assume that I am able only to write in a "breezy" style regardless of topic, and 2) that my latest piece was plagarism, is rather insulting indeed! I want an explanation... Courtney Akins 17:50, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm just getting ready to leave for work and will have to follow up from there. I can't access IRC from work as that would be pushing what we can do with the work computer. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 20:43, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
What is this deadline you speak of that ends in three hours? It's not Part II, so I'm confused here? Thanks Seicer ( talk) ( contribs) 20:44, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
Heya, I certainly didn't mean to disrupt the process. It's just that weeks of bickering back and forth gets old. People were obviously invited to participate prior to any voting and then nearly to the end of part 2 those same people are like, "whoa wait." I've made my position known on that page, so there's not much else for me to do. The first paragraph or two of what I wrote was a summation of what was going on and I hoped whoever read it would think, "gee, all this debate might not be worth dragging my feet." But I ended it on a humorous note to try and lighten the mood a bit, which I had appeared to be successful. (Viva principle IV :P)
On a more important note, I applaud your efforts in maintiaing your sanity while overseeing this whole thing and I hope you haven't aged significantly as a result. Hopefully, it's all over soon so we can get back to improving this little website. Cheers. Stratosphere ( U T) 20:52, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
My apologies for the impersonal nature of this message, but since you participated in the recent Sockpuppets of Outoftuneviolin discussion, I thought you might like to know that the categories are now at Deletion Review. This is not a solicitation of a specific response, as all participating users were notified, but your input would be appreciated. Thanks! - EurekaLott 00:21, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
You are both wrong but I have to go to class. pschemp | talk 12:15, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
I'm not going to grovel, nor jump into a righteous rage. But if you want peace, and to move on, I'm up for that. -- Doc 12:37, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, that. Over on User talk:Zscout370, Courtney seems real sure it's not a copyvio. I'm concerned that's because the whole thing is made up out of whole cloth. I've searched the (admittedly abridged) version of Memoirs of the Duke of Saint Simon on the Reign of Louis XIV and the Regency on google books for phrases like "oxen" or "reeds" or "dream" or "dreame" -- no hits. The whole thing seems a little non-credible to me. — Bunchofgrapes ( talk) 02:39, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
The Library of Congress in Washington, D.C. has both books, if anyone is within range. Newyorkbrad 19:43, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
I read on the Ny times I think that Wikipedia has a vocal opponent in the US senate. Who is it? do you know anything about this hon? Courtney Akins 02:35, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
[3] — Bunchofgrapes ( talk) 03:06, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi, Lar. I've blocked Courtney Akins ( talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) for a week for this edit and posted the block on WP:ANI for review. Does that help, BoG? Bishonen | talk 03:46, 8 September 2006 (UTC).
Hi. I'm just sending out a message for a new study I will be undertaking soon. It will involve surveys & polls to gather information & trends of editors on Wikipedia & other subjects. The data gathering will involve yourself recieving a questionaire on your talk page for you to fill out. I will then collect your questionaire & combine it with data from other editors. If you would like to be a part of this experiment, or know of someone who does, place a "Yes" or "No" below this message. Remember, it's only for fun & you can choose not to fill out all or parts of your questionaire once they arrive. Have a nice day... -- Spawn Man 06:08, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi, Lar! Per your request, I posted the Hauke/Chrisjj2 unblocking issue for review at WP:AN/I#Indef blocking of meatpuppets. I will welcome your feedback.— Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • ( yo?); 16:05, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
thank you for notifying me Lar, i will do my utmost to refrain from incivility in the future. it's just that sometimes a very provocative editor can elicit provocative responses: and i find User:Mike18xx's behaviour extremely distasteful in some cases. nevertheless, i take your point and i will try to refrain from this, as i too believe that such may be counter-productive. thank you. ITAQALLAH 19:13, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
refactored to User_talk:Chris_Chittleborough#User:Mike18xx with thanks to Chris. ++ Lar: t/ c 01:41, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
Unfortunately, this is about Anarchism and Thewolfstar.
According to User:Lingeron's block log and User:KingWen's block log, both accounts have been indefinitely blocked as "obvious reincarnations" of "banned user Thewolfstar," most recently on August 9, one account by Geogre and Lar and the other by Bunchofgrapes.
Lingeron always signed his or her name as "Shannon" at Talk:Anarchism, starting at Talk:Anarchism/Archive39#anarchism_project and lasting until Talk:Anarchism/Archive40#Can_someone_answer_my_question?_(communist_or_socialist). KingWen's only discussion post appears later on the latter page at Talk:Anarchism/Archive40#removing_the_US_anarchists.
In the opinions of many observers, User:Whiskey_Rebellion is an "obvious reincarnation" of the indefinitely blocked user Lingeron. Whiskey Rebellion first appears in discussion August 17, initiating the section Talk:Anarchism/Archive41#Lopsided_article. He or she posts frequently in that archive and on the current Talk:Anarchism page.
On Sept. 6, with User_talk:Woohookitty#excessive_reverts_and_personal_attacks, Whiskey Rebellion recruited administrator Woohookitty to oversee the Anarchism pages. Woohookitty began policing Talk:Anarchism for "civility" and "NPA" on Sept. 7, at Talk:Anarchism#Settle_down, protecting Anarchism and notably issuing a civility warning at User_talk:69.164.74.68#Whiskey_Rebellion for little more than somebody mentioning that Whiskey Rebellion seems to be Thewolfstar. Just pointing out the obvious 07:15, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi everyone! This is the 1st ever poll to be sent out. Please read the Disclaimer below & enjoy! -- Spawn Man 05:29, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi everyone. If this is your first time filling out a survey, read this. To fill out a questionaire sheet, simply send me a post to my talk page, clearly stating your choice for each answer. For example: For Question 1, you might choose to place on the message, "Q1: A)" or "Question 1: Choice A." etc etc. It's up to you, as long as I get the general jist of what your choices are. You have around 1 week to return a survey sheet, but late entrie's will be accepted.
Remember however, your personal choices may be read whilst they are on my talk page. I will understand if you don't wish to answer some or all of the survey due to this. For this reason I have also placed an "Abstain" choice for each question. Try & answer truthfully, or don't answer at all if you can't.
However, your personal choices will not be expressed on the survey's outcome, instead it will be part of a larger finding, such as "60% of people eat chocolate, 25% never eat chocolate & 5% of people chose to abstain from answering..." I will never say, "90% of people eat chocolate, while only Fruityman said he didn't..." This would be an invasion of privacy. However, if a question has (Please explain) or (Please elaborate) as a choice, your specific answer may be used in the survey outcome, although your name will not be. If a question does not have (Please explain) as a question choice, but your intended choice is not represented on the choice list, then feel free to provide another choice which fits your description.
You're probably getting bored reading all of this so I'll wrap up. To see outcomes of the results, see my Polls subpage. Feel free to comment on anything! Feedback is always welcome. Most importantly, have fun. Topics will vary greatly & surveys may be resent out at later times to re-assess a consensus if survey numbers have grown significantly. If you know anyone who would be interested in these surveys, send them to my talk page or if you see this survey sheet, send your own answers in! Thanks. -- Spawn Man.
Due to high levels of demand, email is now available to survey subjects! Feel free to send your answers to my email. Thanks. Spawn Man 21:52, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
Hey Lar, thanks for amber courage! My favourite type! :) Thank you also for your support and encouragement. It means a lot coming from an editor as respected as yourself. Thanks Lar, Sarah Ewart ( Talk) 23:23, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
P.S. Thanks for all your help, mate!
hoopydink Conas tá tú? 23:44, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
Image:SpitfireAle.jpg is definitely an English, not an Irish beer. I drink it without prejudice though. :) Cheers, -- Guinnog 12:05, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
I've explained the situation on
Talk:USS Richard B. Anderson (DD-786). The ttu.edu page was also copied from the public domain
Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships.
—wwoods 18:49, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
Hello Lar. You had some input on the AfD Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Surplus business, but it looks like it is not resolved. I have added a comment (in good faith) to delete the article as there is too much spam associated with it. What do you think should be done about the user Brian Radwell? An anon user was signing his name throughout the AfD which I gave a warning to stop. Would you look into this further? Spam is everywhere... Many Thanks. JungleCat talk/ contrib 03:44, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
Thank you, Lar, for voting on my RFA, which passed 95 to 1. Now that I have the mop, I hope I can live up to the standard, and be a good administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to ask me. —
this is messedrocker
(talk)
21:52, 14 September 2006 (UTC)