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 August 2007 through about 1 September 2007. 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. |
|
Today is a special day, so I wanted to share this with you...
forever... Epousesquecido 04:44, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Just to let you know. Thanks. BrokenSphere Msg me 01:16, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
Your Checkuser flag is now active, you're already listed on meta:CheckUser, would you please subscribe to checkuser-l, email checkuser-l-owner@wikipedia.org so that the listadmins know you're allowed on the mailing list (the list may contain confidential information), and also contact an op for access to #wikimedia-checkuser. Thank you, -- M/ 13:25, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
-- Allen3 talk 12:35, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
The 25 DYK Medal | |
For over 25 DYK-worthy contributions. Great job Lar! You are getting close to the 50! -- Anonymous Dissident Talk 22:25, 17 August 2007 (UTC) |
Way to go!! I see you are busily working on your 26TH, so I'll lean over and give you a smooch. - Epousesquecido 00:05, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
... is of no concen to you. Please, avoid posting anything on my page - due to the demonstrated lack of civilty.-- Guivon 23:01, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
The pictures you added to Thomas Wilson (shipwreck) are quite informative. I also am interested in your knowledge about copyrights and old pictures. I've added a few photos of Civil War soldiers, using the justification that the photographers have been dead 100 years. I can't imagine that that's not true, although I suppose it's possible. Historic photos without a known photographer around 1900 seem more dicey. Tell me what rules of thumb you use to determine when usage is acceptable. Thanks.-- Appraiser 17:11, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
Hello, Lar. A new edition of the USRD newsletter is at Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Newsletter/Issues/Issue011/Delivery. -- Rschen7754 ( talk - contribs) 22:28, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
I'm trying to keep out of this mess as any comment I make has become a magnet for disparaging remarks by Proabivouac But I had to respond to your comment on the CU page. Please don't put too much trust in his judgment as his methods are self fulfilling [1]and under close questioning he avoids the issue and shoots the messenger - see this exchange [2]. All this from an account that was wiki aware enough to immediately use the jargon and blank accusations of sockpuppetry with his 23rd and 24th edits [3]. Something really doesn't add up and this sudden rush of sockpuppet cases all over the place is odd. Sophia 13:13, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
Sent you one. Cheers. Miranda 23:07, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi,
See User talk:Guivon and its history.
Copmare with this removing of warnings. Same here.
I suggest using checkuser for this guy and blocking the IP's he is using since it is the only way to get rid of this proven vandal.
Except denial of CU results and accusations of You being croatian nationalist or brainwashed by someone or smt like that. Don't take it personal, he does that every time ;). -- Ante Perkovic 12:45, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi,
User:Guivon keeps deleting the note You left on User talk:Guivon, along with the perfectly legitimate text I left. I believe it is against the rules, not "harrasment" like he calls it.
Please, act accordingly.
-- Ante Perkovic 13:32, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi Lar, was wondering if you could help me. A friend of mine has expanded Chrome Division recently, though I was wondering if its eligible for a DYK nomination? LuciferMorgan 21:27, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
-- Peta 06:28, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi. Im sorry if this is not a good time but I have noticed that you are listed as an admin coach and currently do not have a student since you returned from your period of inactivity. I have added a request for admin coaching but Wikipedia:Admin coaching states that I should make my own effort to try and contact a coach and so I would like to ask if you are available for admin coaching at all. Thanks Tbo 157 talk 11:43, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
I would like to know why my request was denied (Single User login means nothing much to me!).
Thanks,
Auroranorth 13:35, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Hey there, Lar. It's your favorite CU clerk, GrooveDog!
Anyways, to get to the point. I know you're already coaching someone else, but I was wondering if you would be willing to coach me. I've contacted John on his talk page to ask him as well, as I noticed that you two have coached together before. If you could do this that'd be great, if not, that's okay too. Thanks, GrooveDog ( talk) ( Review) 17:50, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
I tried to assess the importance of the Imagine article, I put high on the table but for some reason nothing happened, I don't know what I could have been doing (of course that's irregardless of the fact that the article needs alot of improving). Please either tell me how to do it (as I'm not good with HTML, or wikitext or whatever), or do it for me; thanks. Lighthead þ 22:37, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi Lar, I could use the help of an independent admin. I was asked to intervene in the case of some disruptive editing by an editor at Amelia Earhart. The article has been protected, and a staw poll was set up to establish consensus. Another admin, Ck lostsword was also involved as the independent arbiter...as I got involved with sorting the mess out, I became too involved to be able to neutrally render a closing verdict. The poll was to close today (ck originally was going to do it earlier, but extended it at my request so that an editor who had a 48 hour block levied against him could have plenty of time after the block expired to participate). Anyway, the problem at the moment is that it's time to close the poll, and ck lostword hasn't been on wiki for the last couple of days, so we could use someone to step in. The intent of the straw poll was to seek consensus for reverting the article after lifting of protection to the last edit by Gwen Gale. Thanks! AKRadecki Speaketh 23:51, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Hey Lar, I requested a checkuser a couple of days ago at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Lester2. You ruled that before anything was to proceed a "suspected:sock" discussion had to be filed and the vote in question had to be over. The resultant discussion over at Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Lester2 seems to have run its course with all involved parties commenting and agreeing to a checkuser. The two active socks (about which I and another user am 100% sure), are demanding apologies and the right to clear the "slander" from their name/s. The vote in question is also over and the results of the sock allegations need to resolved before anything proceeds in what is a very contentious article. ( John Howard). I urge you, please, to look over the discussion at Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Lester2 so a conclusion from an admin can be made. Cheers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Prester John ( talk • contribs) 00:22, August 29, 2007 (UTC)
I am not sure what made you go all sock hunting on Col Scott tonight, but if you are gonna keep a good record, you need to combine the list you made with his names with those of AZJUSTICE who has a bunch of socks. AZ Justice was also ColScott. As I understand it, thanks to a popular message board out there he has dozens of socks. Hedgehog01 06:29, 30 August 2007 (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 August 2007 through about 1 September 2007. 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. |
|
Today is a special day, so I wanted to share this with you...
forever... Epousesquecido 04:44, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Just to let you know. Thanks. BrokenSphere Msg me 01:16, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
Your Checkuser flag is now active, you're already listed on meta:CheckUser, would you please subscribe to checkuser-l, email checkuser-l-owner@wikipedia.org so that the listadmins know you're allowed on the mailing list (the list may contain confidential information), and also contact an op for access to #wikimedia-checkuser. Thank you, -- M/ 13:25, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
-- Allen3 talk 12:35, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
![]() |
The 25 DYK Medal | |
For over 25 DYK-worthy contributions. Great job Lar! You are getting close to the 50! -- Anonymous Dissident Talk 22:25, 17 August 2007 (UTC) |
Way to go!! I see you are busily working on your 26TH, so I'll lean over and give you a smooch. - Epousesquecido 00:05, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
... is of no concen to you. Please, avoid posting anything on my page - due to the demonstrated lack of civilty.-- Guivon 23:01, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
The pictures you added to Thomas Wilson (shipwreck) are quite informative. I also am interested in your knowledge about copyrights and old pictures. I've added a few photos of Civil War soldiers, using the justification that the photographers have been dead 100 years. I can't imagine that that's not true, although I suppose it's possible. Historic photos without a known photographer around 1900 seem more dicey. Tell me what rules of thumb you use to determine when usage is acceptable. Thanks.-- Appraiser 17:11, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
Hello, Lar. A new edition of the USRD newsletter is at Wikipedia:WikiProject U.S. Roads/Newsletter/Issues/Issue011/Delivery. -- Rschen7754 ( talk - contribs) 22:28, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
I'm trying to keep out of this mess as any comment I make has become a magnet for disparaging remarks by Proabivouac But I had to respond to your comment on the CU page. Please don't put too much trust in his judgment as his methods are self fulfilling [1]and under close questioning he avoids the issue and shoots the messenger - see this exchange [2]. All this from an account that was wiki aware enough to immediately use the jargon and blank accusations of sockpuppetry with his 23rd and 24th edits [3]. Something really doesn't add up and this sudden rush of sockpuppet cases all over the place is odd. Sophia 13:13, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
Sent you one. Cheers. Miranda 23:07, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi,
See User talk:Guivon and its history.
Copmare with this removing of warnings. Same here.
I suggest using checkuser for this guy and blocking the IP's he is using since it is the only way to get rid of this proven vandal.
Except denial of CU results and accusations of You being croatian nationalist or brainwashed by someone or smt like that. Don't take it personal, he does that every time ;). -- Ante Perkovic 12:45, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi,
User:Guivon keeps deleting the note You left on User talk:Guivon, along with the perfectly legitimate text I left. I believe it is against the rules, not "harrasment" like he calls it.
Please, act accordingly.
-- Ante Perkovic 13:32, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi Lar, was wondering if you could help me. A friend of mine has expanded Chrome Division recently, though I was wondering if its eligible for a DYK nomination? LuciferMorgan 21:27, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
-- Peta 06:28, 24 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi. Im sorry if this is not a good time but I have noticed that you are listed as an admin coach and currently do not have a student since you returned from your period of inactivity. I have added a request for admin coaching but Wikipedia:Admin coaching states that I should make my own effort to try and contact a coach and so I would like to ask if you are available for admin coaching at all. Thanks Tbo 157 talk 11:43, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
I would like to know why my request was denied (Single User login means nothing much to me!).
Thanks,
Auroranorth 13:35, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Hey there, Lar. It's your favorite CU clerk, GrooveDog!
Anyways, to get to the point. I know you're already coaching someone else, but I was wondering if you would be willing to coach me. I've contacted John on his talk page to ask him as well, as I noticed that you two have coached together before. If you could do this that'd be great, if not, that's okay too. Thanks, GrooveDog ( talk) ( Review) 17:50, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
I tried to assess the importance of the Imagine article, I put high on the table but for some reason nothing happened, I don't know what I could have been doing (of course that's irregardless of the fact that the article needs alot of improving). Please either tell me how to do it (as I'm not good with HTML, or wikitext or whatever), or do it for me; thanks. Lighthead þ 22:37, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Hi Lar, I could use the help of an independent admin. I was asked to intervene in the case of some disruptive editing by an editor at Amelia Earhart. The article has been protected, and a staw poll was set up to establish consensus. Another admin, Ck lostsword was also involved as the independent arbiter...as I got involved with sorting the mess out, I became too involved to be able to neutrally render a closing verdict. The poll was to close today (ck originally was going to do it earlier, but extended it at my request so that an editor who had a 48 hour block levied against him could have plenty of time after the block expired to participate). Anyway, the problem at the moment is that it's time to close the poll, and ck lostword hasn't been on wiki for the last couple of days, so we could use someone to step in. The intent of the straw poll was to seek consensus for reverting the article after lifting of protection to the last edit by Gwen Gale. Thanks! AKRadecki Speaketh 23:51, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
Hey Lar, I requested a checkuser a couple of days ago at Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Lester2. You ruled that before anything was to proceed a "suspected:sock" discussion had to be filed and the vote in question had to be over. The resultant discussion over at Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Lester2 seems to have run its course with all involved parties commenting and agreeing to a checkuser. The two active socks (about which I and another user am 100% sure), are demanding apologies and the right to clear the "slander" from their name/s. The vote in question is also over and the results of the sock allegations need to resolved before anything proceeds in what is a very contentious article. ( John Howard). I urge you, please, to look over the discussion at Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Lester2 so a conclusion from an admin can be made. Cheers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Prester John ( talk • contribs) 00:22, August 29, 2007 (UTC)
I am not sure what made you go all sock hunting on Col Scott tonight, but if you are gonna keep a good record, you need to combine the list you made with his names with those of AZJUSTICE who has a bunch of socks. AZ Justice was also ColScott. As I understand it, thanks to a popular message board out there he has dozens of socks. Hedgehog01 06:29, 30 August 2007 (UTC)