User talk:Anonymous Dissident/October

2007

Bolding

Anonymous Dissident,

"I am doing this very clearly by the MOS. See WP:MOS#Article titles" you write. I have seen the section you refer me to. Indeed that is the very section which states that titles such as Trade and use of saffron not be boldfaced. See Talk:Trade and use of saffron#Bolding Jɪmp 00:03, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I reckon I can safely say that I'm pretty sure this would be considered "descriptive". Certainly "trade and use" is actually something but ... well, you've got to make your description out of something ... Trade is something, use is something, saffron is something and trade and use of saffron is something we can describe in five words. Perhaps this does constitute a loophole but ... I don't read it that way. Jɪmp 00:25, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

User:Saravask is the one who rewrote the lead. It reads much better in my view. Jɪmp 00:33, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Re: "My" Sep. 07 Edit

Hello. Thank you for the comment on my talk page; I've had friends staying at my place for the weekend and they must have had some drunk fun toying with Wikipedia a bit. I'll make sure to logout after use until they are gone. Also, it was very respectful of you to follow-up and view my contributions to ensure I wasn't a vandal. Keep up the good work.—oac old american century ^talk @ 03:08, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Frown!

~ Sebi _[talk] has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! 03:08, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Thanks Spebi. Much appreciated. Brightened my day. :) -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 03:43, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Omigosh

I just about fell out of my chair laughing when I saw this! ^Ariel♥Gold 04:14, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah. Why would you bother creating an article on that - it'd cost you your connection :P -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 04:15, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

That is just classic... something, I'm not sure what, but it is classic! lol. Perhaps your new nickname should be "Mr. Salt" lol. ^Ariel♥Gold 04:17, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Patrick Alexander (cartoonist) recreation attempts.

Apologies for the debate spilling over onto the Request for Protection page. This wasn't my intention in what was a open and shut case in eyes. I just hope the editor turning the redirect into a new article at least creates a new article rather than hi-jacking the redirect!219.112.189.202 04:16, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

No worries. I hope you can resolve the issue through polite discussion. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 04:17, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

I shall follow your excellent suggestion and create a new article rather than hi-jacking the redirect. I'm glad that we could resolve this issue. 203.221.239.119 06:17, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Apologies again for using your page Mr Anonymous Dissident, but a new article? If you want this article resurrected please follow the deltion review process. 219.112.189.202 06:27, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

My page keeps getting deleted.

Every time I create a page about this phpbb premod it gets deleted. I looked into it and I can see that its being deleted because it has a link with the same user name as the site. I then rewrote that article to look similar to the phpbb article and it was deleted again. I added the contest speedy deletion and no one responded. I added a Paragraph why I contested and still it was deleted. I just asked a friend to write the article in a neutral point of view. I also checked the deletion logs and 3 different admins deleted it at different times. Why won't anyone tell me how to fix it? I read the articles on how to make it NPOV and writing Wikipedia articles. How do I make it to where it can stay on Wikipedia??? Linkednet 21:11, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia has a new administrator!

Thanks, October! Thank you for voicing your opinion in my RfA, which passed today with a unanimous 79/0/0 tally. It feels great to be appreciated, and I will try my best to meet everyone's expectations. If you have any advice or tips, feel free to pass them along, as I am sure that I will need them! Cheers, hmwith talk 21:14, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Help please sir

Hey, could you move My Kind of Town (Sinatra song) to My Kind of Town, I moved My Kind of Town (TV show) to its present location because a four episode TV series shouldn't get the title that is obviously most associated with the Frank Sinatra song. I just need an admin to complete the move, stupid no admin tools. IvoShandor 22:56, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

All done. Regards, -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 23:17, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. IvoShandor 06:24, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Hrmm...

You around? Are you good at creating hooks for DYK? ^Ariel♥Gold 08:26, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Fairly. I've crafted quite a few during my time here :) -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 08:27, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I figured with all your DYKs, didn't know how many you self-nom'd though. Okay, here are my ideas, input appreciated:

• ...that a 14 year-old cartoon, On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog, is the most reproduced cartoon from The New Yorker magazine, as well as a phrase still used around the world?
  • By far and wide the best I think. Its the typical DYK nom, with good structure, an interesting fact, and concise.
• ...that one simple sentence, On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog, started out as nothing more than a "fill in the caption" cartoon, and turned into a 14 year phenomenon?
  • I dislike this the most from the three. It is too vague; "a fourteen year phenomenon". It lacks reader involvement, it sounds like it is going to give more; the bit about the "phenomenon" tells nothing, and DYK hooks should give something that doesnt make the reader at first beg for more information, but rather interests them with something quick and attention-grabbing.
• ...that a study on compulsive or Internet use cited a 14 year-old cartoon, On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog, to illustrate the lure of hiding one's identity behind the Internet?
  • Hmmm. It is merely a statement, rather than a true question. "Did you know that a study on compulsive or Internet use cited a 14 year-old cartoon, On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog, to illustrate the lure of hiding one's identity behind the Internet?" makes me feel like saying: "Yes, I did. It is obvious what the cartoon is most likely about, considering the title." Actually, no, its not a statement, it is a statement of an inference, if that makes sense. What the DYK hook is trying to convey, the information it is trying to convey, is already inferred upon the reading of the article's title.

I think it deserves something snazzy, but I'll be darned if I can come up with something that zings, of course, it is 4:30 am, so hey. ^Ariel♥Gold 08:31, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Ok. I have given my thoughts. Merely opinions, but, as you can see, I like the top one the best. I hope I have proved helpful in some way. Thanks, -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 08:42, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

• One of many pages I have watchlisted, but how about, DYK...that On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog? IvoShandor 08:34, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

• ~*Smacks head*~ Of course, it would be that simple! Doh, would that fly, you think? I mean, on the one hand, it is clever, but on the other, DYK sort of requires you give an idea of what the article is about, right? lol ^Ariel♥Gold 08:36, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Okay what do you think about Ivo's suggestion? And, if I did submit the first one, do you think it would be accepted? (Your unofficial opinion, that is.) ^Ariel♥Gold 08:45, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

• I would think it would be okay, it's kind of quirky, sure makes me want to click through. IvoShandor 08:47, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

• To be honest, I think that kind of hook smells unencyclopedic (sorry to kind of be a party pooper there, but we are talking main page material here). Still, Who stole the cookie from the cookie jar was allowed the similar hook of ...that [[you stole the cookie from the cookie jar]]? And yes, I think the first would be accepted easily. While the hook is important, and you do need at least something that is displayable on the front page, the article behind matters much more, and On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog is a fairly quality article. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 08:48, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I put them in the order that I liked them, so I liked the first one too. I'll submit that and we'll see. I like your suggestion Ivo, it has snazz, but I think this one would be good too, and explain that the phrase is a cartoon. I've been online since late 80s (yes, seriously) and I've never once heard this phrase, so not everyone would "get" the hook. ^Ariel♥Gold 08:51, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

No but they would be like "what the heck?" and click it. IvoShandor 08:58, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Maybe. Others might get offended on sight. Think about it. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 08:59, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

And you know this, but Wikipedia is not censored for the sensibilities of those who "might get offended." IvoShandor 10:03, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

And thinking more about it, I am hard pressed to believe that anyone reading that hook would think Wikipedia is calling them a "dog." If they did, one click would reveal their error and they would get a little chuckle, maybe. IvoShandor 10:10, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, maybe. I would just rather have Ariel's hook. It gives a better first portrayal of the site, and taking the hook offensively is one of only several possible, negative reactions to the hook. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 10:13, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Well they are both up there, we shall see in about a week, if it is even DYK worthy. Thank you both for your valuable input! And on that note, Ariel shall go lay her head down and sleep for a bit. Night night AD! ^Ariel♥Gold 10:17, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Sleep well. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 10:19, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Heheh

Gotta admit, the name was pretty creative, lmao. ^Ariel♥Gold 10:01, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah. I hope he doesnt shy away from the project. He appears to be of good intent. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 10:04, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, we know he has a great sense of humor! lol. ^Ariel♥Gold 10:04, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism

This is a shared Computer... I am unaware as to the "vandalism" as I am unable to find the link which will show me the edits. Please notify of the page vandalised so that the correct action can be taken.

Thankyou

124.188.210.166 10:28, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

The vandalism has already been removed, and the page restored to its usual state. The edit is: this -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 10:31, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for October 03, 2007

The Wikipedia Signpost

Volume 3, Issue 40	1 October 2007	About the Signpost

WikiWorld comic: "Buttered cat paradox"	News and notes: Commons uploaders, Wikimania 2008/2009, milestones
Wikimedia in the News	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Automatically delivered by COBot 01:49, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Protections

Protection conflict? Ha, ha! :) Acalamari 02:08, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Lol yeah; I always get that with DarkFalls. On a side note - I tihnk there is something weird with RFP.... when I click edit section, I seem to edit the section above: once today I declined a request that should have been accepted, and so did you, but perfectly by accident by both of us.... -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 02:10, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

I think we both declined that request by mistake because someone had posted a new request by the time we had clicked on the button. We were reviewing what became an old revision when we pressed the button, and as a result, we mistakenly declined that request. I think that's what happened anyway, I may be wrong. It's happened many times before. Acalamari 03:19, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes. It becomes really quite annoying when you are editing the source of one section, and then accidentally decline another perfectly acceptable and good request. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 03:27, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Help

AD, can you please delete User:Chris G Bot 3/enabled for me, I've stuffed up the bot and I need to crash it, thanks. --Chris  G  03:31, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

 Done :) -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 03:32, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! --Chris  G  03:33, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Frida Kahlo

Quite right! let's hope she (? surely) finds something else to do in the meantime. Congratulations on becoming an admin btw. Best, Johnbod 04:25, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

I live near you

Hey thats freaky, I live near you (Central Coast vacinity):). BTW, when do you think the iPod article can be lowered in protection? HarrisonB Speak! 05:14, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Introduction protection

Hi Anonymous Dissident. You appear to have indefinitely protected our "you can edit this page now" introduction [1]. Unless this is very temporary, it's a precedent [2] which should probably be mentioned on one of the admin boards. I think you should undo the semi. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 09:04, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh, my mistake. I was unaware. Next time I will consider more thoroughly when protecting Wikipedia:-namespace introductory pages. Thanks for the heads up. Unprotected. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 09:13, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Re: Tupac Shakur

Well, I'm pretty new at this and from my experience, a week's worth of protection is often enough, however, I've never dealt with this particular article before so if you feel that indef is necessary, I have no problems with that. nat^tang 09:24, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Halotus

It'll come soon. If you need any help, I'm just a peer review away... ;) ~ Sebi _[talk] 10:32, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

WP:DYK

Are you by any chance available to update the template? The next update has been ready to go for some hours. -- !! ?? 12:12, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, was writing an article, hence it had already been updated when I finished. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 13:13, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

No problem. -- !! ?? 13:53, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Appreciated

Thank you for taking action on Frida Kahlo and Diego Rivera, appreciated, good job. Modernist 12:14, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. No worries. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 13:13, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Did you know

On 4 October, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Halotus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Allen3 ^talk 01:23, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for your polite comment and civil advice on the talk about my username. It was much appreciated and very refreshing.Die4Dixie 09:23, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

I did think about what you said, but even if I were to change my name, my edits would still be my edits and if there were a COI, then my choice of username would not be the source: It would be the edit. I invite to to look at the Martin Luther King Talk and see the consensus that we reached while I was editing with my username. That was what I thought this was about, building consensuses.Die4Dixie 09:36, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

RE:Talk:Frida Kahlo

Hi. I really hope this doesn't seem patronising, but I never would have guessed you were 12 years old. You speak with such clarity and maturity. I think I'm a little envious that I wasn't as mature as you when I was that age. Hell, I'm 18 and I don't think I have the same composure...

Anyway, thank-you for sorting out the Frida Kahlo protection :)

Seraphim ^Whipp 11:20, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

No worries. And you don't seem at all patronising; I take such a comment as a compliment, and am not at all upset by remarks related to my age. Thanks again. Kind regards and best wishes, -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 11:27, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

DRV

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Hexayurt. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review.

Main page image protection

Hey. You put an unprotected image on the main page again. When you update DYK, you need to first upload the image from commons. Otherwise the commons version of the image can be vandalized and it will appear on the main page. --- RockMFR 12:47, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Someone told me that the cascading protection covered it. I guess they were wrong. Much apologies - again. I thought this other person was right. Is there something I am missing here? -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 12:49, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

DYK - factual error

Hi, there is a factual error in the DYK there is that Dombrau but its name is Doubrava and always was, there can be Polish spelling Dąbrowa also, but not Dombrau. ≈Tulkolahten≈^≈talk≈ 14:06, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

I wondered about this myself, but that is how the fact was written up. I merely took it from the suggestions directly. Please question User:Darwinek, as he is the creator. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 00:06, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

You misrepresented facts to justify your undue action

From Frida Kahlo: "Protecting" the article for 2 weeks - too much!!!:

"::::Enough. This article was semi-protected for 2 days from the 26th to the 28th because of vandalism. It simply spurred up again, with 5 or more accounts of vandalism in that many days. It was not someone merely saying "HELLO" and someone adding vandalism, it was more than half a dozen accounts of IP vandalism. No, I will not be unprotecting, or even lowering the time of protection. Please read WP:PROT and make sure you fully comprehend policy before making such harsh, and most likely uniformed, claims. Oh, and your skepticism and discrimination in regards to my age does not bother me in the slightest, but it shows that you are largely uniformed of the general age of the sysop on Wikipedia. I am merely on the lower end of that spectrum. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 05:29, 4 October 2007 (UTC)"

":::::From 70.18.5.219: ...not true!!!: The article was protected on the 26th due to "disagreement w/o discussion (IP violating 3RR" (my refusal to discuss and numerous edits on the 25th, as FisherQueen stated in his 1st warning on my page User talk:70.18.5.219), and NOT as a result of the preceding vandalism, which happened 3 times on the 25th, which did not bother much anyone. Between the 28th and 3rd there were only two (2) instances of very minor vandalism or rater little pranks (someone wrote "HELLO" and "he/she is also known as Victor") not deserving any attention, but FisherQueen posted another threat on my page User talk:70.18.5.219. So, the 2 wk "protection" seems to keep me out of editing rather then to prevent alleged (imaginary) vandalism, which DID NOT HAPPENED!!! In other words, Anonymous Dissident, you had no grounds to protect the article for 2 wks, and your above statement is just... false. In particular, it is not true, what you wrote, that: "This article was semi-protected for 2 days from the 26th to the 28th because of vandalism [it was 3RR]. It simply spurred up again, with 5 or more accounts of vandalism in that many days [only 2]." It proves my point about your limited moral judgment at the age 12!!! What were you thinking (or rather NOT) about my ability to check, count, or think, please? Do you reckon that I am stupid, and cannot put 2+2 together or verify your every word, please? And, you have the power to make such important decisions (affecting many editors and subsequently - readers) at the age of 12 used without due consideration (you possibly cannot make at 12), or rather it was a crude attempt to prevent me from editing for 2 wks under the pretext of alleged vandalism, which did not happened (and did not bothered anyone before, when it was more numerous), and you simply could not recognize at the age of 12, how shamefully crude the attempt was, please? But then, you lied twice to justify your action, and that is inexcusable, please!!!(70.18.5.219 18:50, 4 October 2007 (UTC))"

As an outside, uninvolved administrator, I endorse the protection level set by AnonymousDissident. Further, I regret anon 70.18.5.219's tone in dealing with AnonymousDissident. There is no excuse for the tone, and it will not be tolerated. Wikipedia places a very high premium on civility, and if you can not operate in a civil way, you will not last long here. If you want to edit this article, the answer is simple: set up an account. In a few days, the anonymous protection will not affect you. - Philippe | Talk 19:44, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Sshhhh! Johnbod 22:21, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh, there's no chance they'll actually DO it - it's far easier to sit on the outside and harass the people who are working hard on the article. Plus, it adds a horrible sense of accountability to what you do, doesn't it? - Philippe | Talk 22:37, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Having seen this, I'll offer another uninvolved admin's opinion for what it is worth. First, references to Anonymous Dissident's age or any related matter are irrelevant, uncivil, and should not be made again. Second, the amount of IP vandalism on this article made semiprotecting a legitimate exercise of administrator discretion. The community trusts our judgment to make decisions like these; that's why we are administrators. Third, in my personal opinion, two weeks might indeed on the longish side for protection in this incident, at least based on what we have seen so far. You are not going to convince anyone that the vandalism problem on the article has abated by shrieking insults, but polite request that Anonymous Dissident try unprotecting after a few days might receive his careful attention. Newyorkbrad 22:47, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

From 70.18.5.219: Thanks Newyorkbrad (and Johnbod)! I agree with you 100 %, and I regret my tone considered necessary at the time. A sysop's behavior, considered excessive or abusive, is not a right way to enhance a desire to register at Wikipedia. Isn't it? Please, do not forget that I had also been working hard on this article until it was interrupted, and more than half of that work was deleted without a cause, which has started that whole affair. Sincerely, (70.18.5.219 23:45, 4 October 2007 (UTC))

Now that we have calmed down, I have carefully considered the history of the page, and while I feel that protection is still necessary, I would be willing to lower the time of protection to a week, therefore ending on the 12th of October, rather than the 17th. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 00:15, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

I must still note that it was not, indeed, only (2) instances of vandalism, but rather what I counted to be (4) in that many days, and at least a couple more in the days preceding. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 00:25, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

From 70.18.5.219: It does not matter, I will not edit Wikipedia ever again under such conditions. To appreciate my capacity to contribute, see my combined work as 70.18.5.219, 141.157.253.112, and 151.202.72.24, or, please, compare the amount (number) of contributions for Frida Kahlo on the 24th and 25th of September, when I was editing, to other days... to see almost nothing going on, because people were not inspired to do anything. So, the effectiveness of the "protections" can be summed up as throwing out the baby with the bath water. Congratulations, you won..., but what, please? It is not Wikipedia, who does a favor to the editors, but vice versa. Sincerely, -70.18.5.219 03:03, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Well then that is your choice. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 03:04, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

I have blocked this guy. 24 hours for disruption. - Philippe | Talk 04:02, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Much appreciated. Good decision. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 04:04, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

I was reading this thread gradually and navigating my way to Special:Blockip at the same time. If he/she starts off again, leave me a note and similar action will be taken. Cheers, and keep up the good work AD, Daniel 11:31, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for that Daniel. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 11:33, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Re: Bulldog

Thanks muchly for the prot on the page...hopefully it'll calm things down there while I'm trying to rewrite :o) Cheers Drivenapart 11:43, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

No worries. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 12:06, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Meta

Left you a message that will make notes like this very one unnecessary. ;) EVula // talk // ☯ // 14:52, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Smile

Cheers, Lights (♣ • ♦) 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.

Thanks a lot! :) -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 23:55, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Re: Dwight D. Eisenhower

Thanks for setting the semi-protection. I'm starting to wonder if all the U.S. Presidents could benefit from this level of protection, especially in the first few weeks of the school year. - Dravecky 02:10, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah. No worries. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 02:17, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Cheerleading

Thanks for semiprotecting cheerleading.

How long have you ben an admin? I didn't know you were. Maddie ^talk 02:38, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

1 month and three days. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 02:40, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Not that he keeps track... lol. ^Ariel♥Gold 02:42, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Nah, just know weird stuff... -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 09:24, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism?

On 29 September 2007 at 01:32, Modernist changed the opening Diego Rivera sentence:

Diego Rivera ([...]) was a world-famous Mexican painter influenced by Cézanne - and also a communist born in Guanajuato City - whose large wall works in fresco co-established the Mexican Mural Renaissance with those by Orozco, Siqueiros, etc.

to those still opening the article:

Diego Rivera ([...] was a world-famous Mexican painter influenced by Cézanne - and also a communist. Born in Guanajuato City - and whose large wall works in fresco co-established the Mexican Mural Renaissance with those by Orozco, and Siqueiros.

The errors include: missing parenthesis, incorrect division into two (2) sentences, completely wrong structure of the second sentence, factual error that the Mexican Mural Renaissance was established by works of only 3 mentioned painters (there were more of them). Can such damage to article be considered as vandalism, please? -70.18.5.219 08:43, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Errors like this are not considered vandalism. Please review what vandalism is on Wikipedia, including what vandalism is not. Unintentional incorrect information, bad grammar, poor spelling, manual of style errors, and other common mistakes are not the same as vandalism. Additionally, editors should assume good faith with regards to edits that are not obvious, intentional, malicious destruction. Instead, just fix the errors, explaining in the edit summary why you're making those specific changes. (i.e. in edit summary box, type "fixing typographical errors, adding closing parentheses, adding info that multiple founders of MMR." etc,) Cheers, ^Ariel♥Gold 09:23, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

What Ariel said is correct. Also - why are you taking this up with me, may I ask? I think that you would be better advised to ask Modernist about what has transpired. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 09:25, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Probably because you did the protection level on the article, and 70.18.5.219 was previously quite active editing it, so figured you would be the one to speak with regarding changes? (Just a guess, of course). (Morning m'dear AD!) ^Ariel♥Gold 09:36, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh. I forgot. I do quite a few protects most days... I just forget. Still, I advise that Modernist would be the person to contact. Good morning to you too Ariel, or rather, if you were where I am, good evening. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 09:47, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, and the Ariel's "guess" was 100 % correct. Additionally, after reediting that intro single-handedly, I could not even fix it, because the article has been protected for 9 days - effectively against... myself - as a result of someone's vandalism. B.t.w., how such protection works against vandalism, which acts seem to be singular and unrelated to each other, so one occurrence does not allow to predict the next one? In other words, if acts of vandalism are random and unpredictable, how the length of duration of protection against random occurrences can be calculated? Wouldn't be better just to block the vandals instead of disallowing editing for all anons, please? -70.18.5.219 10:44, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, there are several reasonings behind protection. WP:PROT would be the best place to read the full information on the action, but basically it allows a cool off period for the article, so that people dont have to constantly watch for vandalism and revert, and to perhaps turn the vandals away. blocks are applied as necessary; the blocking of every one-time vandal would turn the project into a warfield, and many are grossly unaware of what is and what isn't appropriate on Wikipedia. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 10:49, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

I have edited the intro sentence per the manual of style, but that frankly, is the least of the article's issues. The article uses geocities and personal websites as references, and one would think that someone of this caliber would certainly have reliable, third-party sources that could be used. I added a note to the talk page to explain this issue. ^Ariel♥Gold 11:18, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh, well... I have not finished, those references were temporary (seeking good references is time consuming, tedious, usually requires reediting, and I did not have time to find all at once); in the meantime I switched to fix the poor Frida Kahlo intro, but Modernist was deleting without explanation half of, what I wrote, which caused the row to erupt (as you know), and the articles got locked (protected against vandalism) preventing my contribution. I do not recall anyone else adding Diego Rivera references.-70.18.5.219 14:01, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Bioshock semi-protect

Can you give a justification on on your semi-protect of article Bioshock, as I see nothing that meets the policy? Parjay ► Talk 22:24, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi there, Parjay—sorry to stick my nose in, Anonymous :)—the article was actually protected by Can't sleep, clown will eat me (talk · contribs), as may be seen in the logs. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 22:49, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Nope, I made that mistake also (check my contribs), Anonymous "sprotected"-ed the article earlier today. Parjay ► Talk 23:11, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Actually, while Anonymous Dissident did indeed add a protection notice today, that was just to note the fact that it was already protected. As Fvasconcellos says, the actual protection was by Can't sleep, clown will eat me on September 16th. Regards. Will (aka Wimt) 23:17, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Ahh, I see. Sorry about that, bit confusing really(!) Parjay ► Talk 23:35, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah. Basically, Cant Sleep actually made the move, and I was just noting it. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 23:36, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

User:Goshikuu

The above user has been constantly copying the content at Naruto: Clash of Ninja (series) and creating duplicate articles. In addition, he has uploaded numerous images for his new pages, and attempted to replace the ones on the primary page with them. Despite constant attempts to open discussion, he has ignored any such entreaties. I've redirected his duplicates, but I can't see most of them ever being a search option. Deletion of the redirects and the images (consensus has decided against using more than one cover image out of fair use issues) would be greatly appreciated. Thanks in advance. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 01:38, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

No problem. Thanks for the response. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 05:01, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XIX (September 2007)

The September 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 08:53, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for protecting Nerd. I'm called a nerd every single day (although I don't wear glasses), and it hurts when they attack people like that. Anyways, thanks! --Hirohisat ^紅葉 06:02, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

P.S. Can you protect Nigeria as well? Thanks.

 Done. Called a nerd, eh? Ahhh, don't worry about it. I don't get it as much...everyone at my school is a "nerd" I suppose.... -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 06:07, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Interesting. Thanks for Nigeria too. --Hirohisat ^紅葉 06:09, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

No problems. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 06:09, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

DYK

What do you think of my newest DYK nom?

• ...that in the future, space tourists may use the Quasi Universal Intergalactic Denomination (Quid) as currency when traveling? - New article by Gnosi and expanded by ArielGold. Nom by ArielGold 07:19, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

I tried to come up with a few other hooks, but this was the one I ended up going with. The others were:

• ...that space tourists in the future will need a unique form of currency, and National Space Centre helped come up with the Quasi Universal Intergalactic Denomination to fill the need?

• ...that the Quasi Universal Intergalactic Denomination is a new form of currency designed for future space tourists?

But it seems those just give the article's info in condensed form, and didn't really have a "grab" aspect. Can you think of anything better? Ariel♥Gold 07:40, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

I think that teh last one is simple and good. It gets my attention :) Ariel - can I ask you for some help? DYK needs updating, and there are many good noms on the 3rd. Many. This is going to be one of the last updates they can be used, if not the last, Could you help me pick some? If not, I understand, but I feel overwhelemed. Also - I feel the need to perhaps stretch the rules a bit and perhaps use a few more noms that usual in DYK - lets see if we can possibly condense the hooks and fit a few more articles into the template than usual. Thanks in advance, and if you can't, I understand. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 07:49, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

I'd be more than happy to help, of course! Give me a few minutes to look through them, check the articles, and I'll post my favorites! And I'll add the alt hook to the quid thing too. Ariel♥Gold 07:52, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. Much appreciated. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 07:54, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Okay here are my favorites: (Not sure how many you want)

• ...that Dutch 19th century scientist Cornelis Rudolphus Theodorus Krayenhoff was his country's Minister of War for 10 months? - article by User:Neddyseagoon, nom by -- !! ?? 17:47, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

• ...that British farmer Sir Nigel Strutt, great-nephew of Nobel Prize-winning physicist Lord Rayleigh, was offered a peerage, but, like his great-great-grandfather, Joseph Holden Strutt, declined? -- !! ?? 11:41, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

• ...that it remains a point of debate whether Gaius Stertinius Xenophon a Roman physician, had anything to do with the murder of Claudius (pictured), fourth emperor of the Julio-Claudian dynasty? (self-nom) -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 12:53, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

(Reworded this one a bit to be more succinct and intriguing so readers will want to read more.)

A lot of the rest have issues, or aren't that interesting, to me at least. Meaning if I saw them on the main page, I would not bother to click on them to learn more. Ariel♥Gold 08:13, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, thanks for taking the time to read through them. That makes ten on the main page, which I really think is quite enough. Also - no worries on the rewording on the last one. It is better. I'll just take one more quick scan to see if there is maybe one other we could have. If you could, please just copy those to the Next update page. Thanks Ariel. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 08:15, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

 Done I removed them from the TT:DYK page, placed the hooks in the T:DYK, and credited creators and nominators in the credits section. Did I miss anything? Ariel♥Gold 08:38, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

All done right... -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 08:41, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Really? Cool, I'd never done that before, lol. Also, I went and cleaned up the Nigel Strutt article, as it wasn't really formatted that well. Put refs into cite templates, footnoted them, added sections, etc. Anything else you need help with? (This is a true shock, you asking me for help for once, LOL) Ariel♥Gold 08:53, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh, do you want me to add the DYK boxes to the nom/creators' pages? Ariel♥Gold 08:55, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

No, I'll get to it. Thanks for your help. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 08:59, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Hee hee, well let me add the one to your page so you don't seem to be giving yourself an award! lmao. Hey, I just want to thank you, for putting your faith and trust in me, and for allowing me to help out in this area, you know I love learning new stuff, and it really means a lot that you'd ask me to pitch in, so thank you. Seriously Ariel♥Gold 09:02, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Ariel - what is not to trust in someone who I think could have been an admin quite a while ago? I don't know why you are thanking me; you offered to help me when I needed it, and I'd trust you and your discretion in pretty much any area. :) -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 09:05, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

You're truly such a wonderful wiki-friend, I'm very lucky. But I still thank you, because I want you to know how much you're appreciated! (Lots!) ~*Hugs*~ Ariel♥Gold 09:14, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, thanks for that. It means a lot from a contributor who I hold in such high esteem. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 09:15, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

DYK

Can anybody change next update (I know they can, but is it the done thing?). The Florida State Hospital is currently described as originally...the first...Andplus 07:57, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, we are getting to it. Currently, DYK is not stuffed to the gills, and thats what I'm aiming for, because the 3rd is about to really go past its expiry date, even though there are many good noms there. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 07:59, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I didn't notice that there might have been COI, the template just seemed a bit packed. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 08:44, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I noticed too. Its just that I wanted to pack as many in as possible as the 3rd was expiring, and there were a lot of valid noms. I think it is ok, because the hooks are short... -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 08:45, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

There's still stuff left over from the 2nd. It won't hurt to put a couple of those either. Hmm, I've been a bit neglectful of DYK updating recently...trying to clean up my FAC. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 08:50, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

I've been slack writing lately too. I really do think that the DYK expiry should perhaps be six or seven days. Good things are missed with the current limit. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 08:52, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Lol I meant the other way round. I've been trying to get away from doing the actual updating so I can do my article stuff. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 08:54, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry too much - I see a mention of wiki-stress in the section above. Most of the writers of the articles I have been nominating recently won't realise that they are up for DYK, so it will be a nice surprise if they get it, and little disappointment if they don't. -- !! ?? 09:45, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Hopefully there will be enough time for another update wherein the last from the 3rd can be scraped up. There were just so many on the third... it was busier than I have ever seen, really.... -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 09:48, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On 9 October, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Gaius Stertinius Xenophon, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

:P ---- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 09:42, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Halotus

If you would like me to check the copy when you have finished, I'd be happy to do so. I'd still urge you to produce an article on the Death of the Emperor Claudius. It could be very interesting and would be a lot easier to construct in a balanced manner than any of the articles on the suspects (most of whom we know very little about outside their possible involvement). The suspects's articles (Locusta's is particularly dire) could be reduced to the known details and the discussion centred on this new article. Andplus 10:02, 9 October 2007 (UTC) 't

Can you tell talk from Butter?

Fine job..... but. I think there was an error on the last DYK. Nathanial BuTTer was chosen, but the thanks went to Nathanial ButLer. I can fix mine but dont like to interfere with the templates on the articles. Do carry on the good work. Victuallers 14:48, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Poisoning of Claudius

Hey, Anonymous, I was reading the articles you wrote about the events of Claudius' poisoning. Do you think we should create a main, central article about the incident? bibliomaniac15 22:35, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it was suggested above. I was going to get into that sometime soon. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 00:00, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Tony Homo

I've put a template on this page because it is made only to attack someone. I wanted to let an administrator know so that this page goes Byebye

Savie Kumara 04:08, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Deleted. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 04:22, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Agathodaimon

He is little known. I believe the only surviving record of him is a medieval copy of a Greek text in which he is mentioned. I'm pretty sure that Agathodaimon is the standard way of rendering his name in English. A quick search on Google scholar or Google books for "Agathodaimon alchemist" turns up a few results whereas the alternate spelling gives only your source, which suggests it is an error on the part of the author of the book. I wasn't suggesting there was another article on him; there was another article blocking my move and I can't see any way of moving it over the top without first moving the existing article somewhere and I'm sure there will be some policy about not doing that. Andplus 08:47, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

All done. I have deleted the redirect and moved Agathodaimon over it.

DYK

Thanks for the message. Do you know if the following DYK got used?

• ...that Gibraltar's national dish is calentita, a baked bread-like dish of Genoese origin made with chickpea flour, water, olive oil, salt and pepper?

Also, how can I tell when the DYK will appear on the mainspace?

Thanks for your help! Gibmetal 77^talk 13:17, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

I am afraid that I don't think that one got used. This is probably because the 3rd was just flooded with good noms, so some didn't make it. Apologies. What do you mean by "mainspace"? The main page? You will just see it there, or you can look in the DYK archive. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 00:23, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. That's ok I was just wondering. Can you submit more than one DYK from the same article then?

What I meant to ask last time was if I can know on which day it will feature on the main page? Gibmetal 77^talk 00:30, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

While you can suggest more than one hook for the article, ultimately, only one fact will be picked, and the article can only be featured on the main page once. Usually, an article will feature on the main page 4 or 5 days after the day it was created, if it is chosen. Regards, -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 00:36, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks again for your help! Gibmetal 77^talk 00:54, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

template

A template you have created or significantly contributed to, {{user16}}, is the subject of a discussion I have started on the village pump. —Random832 18:07, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Response

I've made a reply to your statement on the Usurpation page, here. Regards, Onnaghar talk.review 15:47, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

DYK help

I saw a red urgent warning at the Did You Know page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Did_you_know/Next_update . The page is 2.5 hours past due since the pages are supposed to be changed every 8 hours. Archtransit 20:55, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

My recent RfA

Thank you for supporting my RfA, which unfortunately didn't succeed. The majority of the opposes stated that I needed more experience in the main namespace and Wikipedia namespace, so that is what I will do. I will go for another RfA in two month's time and I hope you will be able to support me then as well. If you have any other comments for me or wish to be notified when I go for another RfA, please leave them on my talk page. If you wish to nominate me for my next RfA, please wait until it has been two months. Thanks again for participating in my RfA! -- Cobi^(t|c|b|cn) 00:30, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

DYK

No sure about your extra entry. Seems that (1) it means that there's more on the DYK side of the mainpage that the other so it looks an little unbalanced and (2) that makes two entries about writtings connected to Africa. Could that hook not wait for the next update? WjBscribe 09:09, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Its just that 5 is a little on the lesser end of the spectrum in terms of number of hooks on the main page, so I added another. Two Africa related hooks on the main page wouldn't be so bad; they'd go hand in hand. However, if you feel strongly abotu removing it, I won't protectest, I was just trying to fill up the temp., as there are so many candidates that keep getting missed out each day. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 09:12, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Well as I see it the goal in selecting number of hooks is balancing the page rather than getting as many on as possible. Someone suggested that there were already too many hooks on my version. I do think it would be better to hold off til the next update (I will include it at Template:Did you know/Next update to make sure it gets on next time). WjBscribe 09:17, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Ok, then. I'll put it on the NU. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 09:20, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

DYK update

Given the DYK backlog, we should probably update as often as possible. It is due now.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 15:21, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Taken care of. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 16:48, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Cornelis Rudolphus Theodorus Krayenhoff

It seems to me we are back in the 18th century, when there was no copyright, and composers as Handel and nl:Antonio Lotti were confronted with copies of their work published by others. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Taksen (talk • contribs) 07:31, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

As you can see in the Dutch Wikipedia most of the article is mine. My name there is Taks or T. Tichelaar. User:Neddyseagoon translated my work after I asked him to do so, see the discussion on his page.

Therefor I would like to have an award also.

I knew something like this one day would happen, because there is nowhere written in the English version that it was copied and translated from the Dutch Wikipedia or it will disappear after a while.

I think I have to have the possibility to add a sjablon, that it is a exact translation of my work. Neddy did not add anything. Besides it was all translated with a machine. Usually I check what he did, but he is working so fast I have not had to possiblity to check.

Besides he does not warn me, that the article is awarded, may be he is a rat.

Please pay attention when someone is copying completely, including the Dutch references. Taksen 00:23, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

The article has not been checked by me. I dont believe the translation is reliable. I will ask User:BesselDekker to check. He is a much better translater. Taksen 00:38, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Several things. Firstly, the article is not a direct copy at all, and the english version is much longer and is independently sourced.

What do you mean with longer? The Dutch version is (7.876 bytes) before two small edits. The English version is (7,505 bytes) before my edits of today! Please explain. Taksen 19:11, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

I dont know about your understanding of Dutch, but the sentences are the same, as the sources! I think you have to look again or ask Neddy. He did not create it or expand it, he only translated it! Taksen 19:11, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Second, no award was dispensed to User:Neddyseagoon, he was merely recognised.

I also would like to be recognized with a DYK as being the one who wrote most of the lemma. I was adding for one year on that article. The Dutch author, who started it, just copied an old encyclopaedia from 1888-1891. I told Neddy to add at least one English reference or external link, as he did not, the article is my work. Taksen 19:11, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Plus- why should you be recognised when you created that article on another project?

I did research. I also know where the references belong, for which I had no time. References dont seem to be appreciated in the Dutch Wikipedia. They dont like to inform the reader with sources. Taksen 19:11, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia is linked multilingually, but not that way.

It looks to me Wikipedia does not seem to be interested in the real author. Do you like to be treated unfair? Taksen 19:11, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

I got in the past two weeks a DYK for Samuel Iperusz. Wiselius, The Conspiracy of Claudius Civilis and I like to have more. May be in the future, when I am used to it, I will not put attention to it anymore. Taksen 19:11, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

-- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 07:40, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Help request

Hello, I need some admin assistance, Brigham Field at Huskie Stadium needs to be moved back to the redirect at Huskie Stadium, per WP:NC. It was recently the moved as a result of good faith, though ill-judged, unilateral action. The common name for the venue is, and has been Huskie Stadium. It appears the user who moved it was under the erroneous impression that the venue name had been recently changed, not the case, the field itself is known as "Brigham Field," but the venue is not referred to in this way. If you could fix this it would be great, as the exceedingly long title isn't needed for disambiguation or any other reason. IvoShandor 00:50, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Also Ronald Reagan Boyhood Home National Historic Site needs to be moved to Ronald Reagan Boyhood Home (also a redirect) per the discussion on the talk page. IvoShandor 00:58, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Forget the first request about the stadium, just going to disambiguate it, there appears to be other stadiums of the same name. IvoShandor 01:18, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Looks like the change has been already reverted, but here is what I said on my talkpage where I was notified of the disagreement:

I disagree. My rationale is that for stadiums/arenas/etc the article name should be the official name (which I think "BF at HS" is what it is -- if it isn't, then by all means, revert the move. It is the name used at the 50 yard line on the field though). Many stadiums have "nicknames" that are used, but the official name is the name of the WP article. I also think that since there exists Huskie Stadium and Husky Stadium, the longer name reduces confusion between the two. I do think you were reading too much into my edit summary; "new" was relative. But I can see your point too, so either way is fine with me. I think there currently exist WP articles that follow both conventions. X96lee15 01:14, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

X96lee15 01:20, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Igonre me, your move is fine as is, I may create a dab page and move it later but I don't know if it needs it, more searchig is required. IvoShandor 01:20, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Sydney is new ACOTF

Hi. You voted for Sydney as WP:ACOTF. It recently lost WP:GA status. It has been selected, so please help to improve it in any way you can. Thanks. --Scott Davis ^Talk 14:02, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Smile

Hello Anonymous Dissident, NHRHS2010 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. Go on, smile! Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

NHRHS2010 ^Talk 01:41, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Hey! Thanks. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 22:09, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Agathodaimon

On 15 October, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Agathodaimon, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 18:21, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion of Drink the Beer - cross ref to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Drink the Beer

Thanks for speedying the Drink the Beer article. Could you please close the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Drink the Beer debate or alert an administrator who works on the afd section to do so to save other editors having to express their view on a settled matter? Many Thanks. B1atv 08:41, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Closed by non-admin Bongwarrior. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 09:27, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I didn't know non-admins could carry out straightforward closures such as this else I wouldn't have bothered you. Thanks again. B1atv 11:30, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

RfA Thanks

Dear Anonymous Dissident, ______ __ __ __ /\__ _\/\ \ /\ \ /\ \ \/_/\ \/\ \ \___ __ ___\ \ \/'\ __ __ ___ __ __\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ _ `\ /'__`\ /' _ `\ \ , < /\ \/\ \ / __`\/\ \/\ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \/\ \_\.\_/\ \/\ \ \ \\`\\ \ \_\ \/\ \_\ \ \ \_\ \\ \_\ \ \_\ \ \_\ \_\ \__/.\_\ \_\ \_\ \_\ \_\/`____ \ \____/\ \____/ \/\_\ \/_/ \/_/\/_/\/__/\/_/\/_/\/_/\/_/\/_/`/___/> \/___/ \/___/ \/_/ /\___/ \/__/ For your contribution to My RfA, which passed with 8000 Supports, 2 Neutrals and no opposes. The standards and dedication of the English Wikipeidan Administrators is excellent and I am privileged to stand among them. Thankyou for putting you trust in me, I'll not see it abused. And now, I will dance naked around a fire. Party at my place! Cheers! Dfrg.msc 09:03, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for October 15th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 42	15 October 2007	About the Signpost

From the editor: Brion Vibber interview
Wikimania 2008 awarded to Alexandria	Board meeting held, budget approved
Wikimedia Commons reaches two million media files	San Francisco job openings published
Community sanction noticeboard closed	Bot is approved to delete redirects
License edits under consideration to accommodate Wikipedia	WikiWorld comic: "Soramimi Kashi"
News and notes: Historian dies, Wiki Wednesdays, milestones	Wikimedia in the News
WikiProject Report: Military history	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 09:11, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Conyers' School

What is actually required for semi protection. Not complaining, just wondering what it takes, so I do not make inapropriate requests again. Dolive21 10:20, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

well, see, sure, there was a bit of vandalism today, but look further back - it has barely been edited over the last few months. A bit of "freak" vandalism doesn't usually require protection. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 10:21, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

An editor has asked for a deletion review of REALTORS Association of Hamilton-Burlington. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. -- Robocoder (t|c) 14:31, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

DYK

Apologies for disturbing, but an update of the DYK tempalte is quite overdue. The next update is ready to go. -- !! ?? 12:02, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

RfA

Thanks for your comment in my RfA. Although I would have preferred if it were on the support section, I fully understand your reasoning, and appreciate your comment. I look forward to coming back to RfA sometime down the road. Thanks again - Rjd0060 13:47, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs Cool (aesthetic) Krum High School Frédéric Chopin WCWM My Lai Massacre Andrew Peters Julie Wagner Amphibian Pork Alex Rodriguez Kirk Douglas Samantha Ronson Maternal bond Kings of Chaos Technology during World War II Ear Egg magazine York Community High School La Salle College

Cleanup Sumptuary law Clatskanie, Oregon Closed list Merge Bragg diffraction Tsunami warning system Sompur Bihara Add Sources King Henry VIII Grammar School Urecco Racket (crime) Wikify Hubble's law History of Colombia Aprepitant Expand A1 (band) Me Against the World Eugene R. Black

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- ForteTuba 20:51, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

The War article

Yep, 100% sure... [3] ;) Prime minister is the article in general about Prime ministers, but in the article's context, it's the M in Prime Minister of Australia is capitalised. ~ Sebi _[talk] 09:38, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Lol I reverted like 5 secs afterward, after realising. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 09:39, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

K/d ratio

Hi, I notice that you deleted this article with the summary of "non-notable neo-logism (CSD)". I was unaware that neo-logisms had been added to CSD A7, r any other of the speedy criteria. Dsmdgold 04:36, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

The article showed no notability whatsoever. Obviously, a neologism is too abstracter topic to be included in the A7 criteria, but an article solely on a ratio that is merely an element of post-match statistics in FPS video games is not notable enough to be in Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a dictionary. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 04:42, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but only those topics listed in A7 are subject to A7. Dsmdgold 04:49, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but there is a reason for {{db-because}}. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 04:56, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

To quote that template, "If no reason for speedy deletion exists, consider nominating this material through one of the other deletion processes." As far as this being a merely an element of post-match statistics, have you seen Run batted in? I doubt that K/d ratio is notable enough for inclusion. I, after all, did tag it for PROD. However, there is the faint possibility that I (and you) could be wrong. If I were wrong, the PROD period might have allowed someone with more experience with FPS to notice and bring the article up to snuff. Dsmdgold 10:37, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

The K/d ratio is simply not notable enough. There is no chance. I know exactly what it is. It is like making an article on a specific "class" in a video game, or an article on the ammo bar in any FPS. It is simply not notable enough. It is non-notable, and just because the scope of A7 does not specifically encompass "neo-logisms" (a very left-field topic, I am sure we can both agree) does not mean that it should not be speedily deleted without discussion. I think that in certain cases, sysop discretion is not disallowed. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 10:49, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

We disagree. Dsmdgold 01:28, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

DYK

It's been 11 hours since the last DYK update. I'm not sure if the next batch is ready to go or not. --293.xx.xxx.xx 05:33, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Your Face

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Your Face. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Esn 06:58, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

-snipped-. Anyway, no reason to assume bad faith right off the bat. Let's have a more civil discussion on the deletion review, ok? Esn 07:56, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

As it happens, I had already discovered what had gone on as you wrote this, but I have already explained myself at the DRV. Regards, -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 07:57, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick fix. I still can't seem to edit the page, unfortunately: "This page is currently protected from editing because it is transcluded in the following pages, which are protected with the "cascading" option: Wikipedia:Protected titles/Twinkle"

I'm more interested in creating articles than in moderating the system, so I wouldn't be a very effective administrator. ;) Esn 08:08, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Hi, I just restored all the back links that were deleted when this article was deleted. Maybe you were planning to already, but just a reminder to please try to remember next time you restore something that was deleted to go back and clean up! Thanks! Katr67 17:37, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I was going to get around to it, but I just didn't get there, after messing around with DYK. Thanks for doing it for me. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 23:19, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

DYK

DYK was updated way too early; very unfair to editors who were successful with their nominations. Can you revert this for a little while? --Camptown 11:13, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Actually, it wasn't. The last update was so old, the DYK refresh clock somehow messed up. That last batch of noms was on there for 18 hours. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 11:26, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for updating and all, but look at the edit history of {{Did you know}} - [4] -

(cur) (last) 10:23, 19 October 2007 Anonymous Dissident (Talk | contribs) (4,900 bytes) (→Current hooks - add) (undo) (cur) (last) 06:00, 19 October 2007 Blnguyen (Talk | contribs) (5,487 bytes) (→Current hooks - update) (undo) (cur) (last) 17:47, 18 October 2007 Howcheng (Talk | contribs) (5,081 bytes) (update DYKs) (undo) (cur) (last) 09:46, 18 October 2007 Allen3 (Talk | contribs) (4,860 bytes) (Updated) (undo)

and of {{Did you know/Next update/Time}} - [5]

(cur) (last) 10:26, 19 October 2007 Anonymous Dissident (Talk | contribs) (204 bytes) (→Next update - upd) (undo) (cur) (last) 9:40, 19 October 2007 Camptown (Talk | contribs) m (203 bytes) (→Next update - update) (undo) (cur) (last) 17:52, 18 October 2007 Howcheng (Talk | contribs) (203 bytes) (→Next update - update timestamp) (undo) (cur) (last) 09:47, 18 October 2007 Allen3 (Talk | contribs) (203 bytes) (→Next update - update clock) (undo)

Howcheng updated {{Did you know}} after 8 hours, then Blnguyen after over 12 hours, then you after just over 4 hours.

Blnguyen just forgot / omitted to reset {{Did you know/Next update/Time}}, but Camptown got there before your recent update of the Main Page template. -- !! ?? 11:57, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

I too think Anonymous Dissident is doing a great job. But, the only decent thing now is again to include items from the session which lasted for only some 4 hours. DYK means so much for many "productive" editors who get some reward out of seeing that their hard work is observed for some hours on the front page. --Camptown 16:20, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

I agree - it is an easy mistake to make. If the update had been reversed for a couple of hours and then reinstated, I would have been happier, but, after all this time, I would suggest just putting it down to experience and moving on.

We have been lucky if the template has been updated anywhere near the appropriate time in the last few weeks. I think User:Allen3 has been doing most of the updates recently, but it shouldn't really be left to one admin. -- !! ?? 16:47, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh, many apologies. See, I didn't realise that Blnguyen had updated only a little while ago, but he forgot to update the time template, so there I ws thinking that it was 18 hours overdue. I am very sorry. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 23:07, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of edits/latest

User:Mike Halterman is the same person as User:TheCustomOfLife. It only makes sense to combine the counts. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 12:27, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, not really. We are counting users. I am sure that there are quite a few people on the list who have two accounts on the list who have not revealed themselves. But, all the same, I won't revert you, I just think that it doesn't make sense. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 23:12, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Not that big of a deal in the grand scheme of things. Quite an argument going on at the moment, eh? —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 23:24, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Nice userpage, by the way. :) —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 23:25, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. :) I really do pity the closing admin of that MFD... -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 23:26, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Francis Drake

Thank you for protecting this article. Cheers, JNW 00:07, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Rouge deletion bot

Okay, I've created the basics for a speedy deletion bot. You'll have to (or I will) bug Reedy Boy to get the AskConfirm part to work, but the script I'm going to give you will delete everything without question.

Source

using System;
using System.IO;
using System.Text;
using System.Text.RegularExpressions;
using System.Collections;
using System.Xml;
using System.Diagnostics;
using System.Threading;
using DotNetWikiBot;

class MyBot : Bot
{
    public static void Main()
    {
        Site enWP = new Site("http://en.wikipedia.org", "YOURUSERNAMEGOESHERE", "YOURPASSWORDGOESHERE");
        PageList pl = new PageList(enWP);
        PageList plSave = new PageList(enWP);
        // Pages to delete
        pl.FillFromCategory("CATEGORYNAME(DO NOT INCLUDE THE CATEGORY: PREFIX");
        pl.LoadEx();
        foreach (Page i in pl)
            if (i.text.Contains(""))
            {
                Console.Write("Would you like to delete " + i.title + " (Y/N)? ");
                if (Console.ReadLine().ToUpper() == "Y")
                {
                    i.Delete("REASON FOR DELETION");
                }
            }
    }
}

That's the very basic. Of course, you'll want to add more precise information in. Let's say you wanna deleted all pages in the category Category:Importance or significance not asserted pages for speedy deletion , your username is Foobar and your password is 12345 . You'd be deleting the pages per [[WP:CSD#A7|]] and you need to make sure {{db-bio}} is contained in the page. Now, it's a simple matter of plugging it all into your source.

Modified Source

using System;
using System.IO;
using System.Text;
using System.Text.RegularExpressions;
using System.Collections;
using System.Xml;
using System.Diagnostics;
using System.Threading;
using DotNetWikiBot;

class MyBot : Bot
{
    public static void Main()
    {
        Site enWP = new Site("http://en.wikipedia.org", "Foobar", "12345");
        PageList pl = new PageList(enWP);
        PageList plSave = new PageList(enWP);
        // Pages to delete
        pl.FillFromCategory("Importance or significance not asserted pages for speedy deletion");
        pl.LoadEx();
        foreach (Page i in pl)
            if ((i.text.Contains("{{db-bio}}")) || (i.text.Contains("{{db-web}}")) || (i.text.Contains("{{db-band}}")))
            {
                i.Delete("Deleting per [[WP:CSD#A7|CSD#A7]]");
            }
    }
}

Open up notepad and save the file as delete.cs in the same file you put the dotnetwikibot framework (I'm hoping it's in C:\CBot ). Now, open up cmd.exe and enter cd\CBot . Copy and paste C:\WINDOWS\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v2.0.50727\csc delete.cs /debug:full /o- /reference:DotNetWikiBot.dll into cmd.exe and hit the enter key. The .cs file should compile into a .exe file in C:\CBot . All you have to do now is type delete.exe in cmd, and the pages should be deleted. I should mention that I have never tested this code, so I don't know what will happen. It should work, but again, I don't know. I plan to test it on test wiki though :). Carbon Monoxide 01:21, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Mwhahahahah! It works [6]. Carbon Monoxide 01:25, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Okay, you put the source in any text editor (use notepad), then go to save as and save it as delete.cs in the folder c:\CBot . Then after you compile it, you type delete.exe into cmd and hit enter. Carbon Monoxide 01:49, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Hmmmm, I did as you say, but when I typed delete.exe into the cmd this came up: 'delete.exe is not recognised as an internal or external command, operable program or hatch file. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 01:55, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

What is the path file to the folder you've placed dotnetwikibot and delete.cs in? Carbon Monoxide 01:59, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

My Computer>C:\>C:\CBot -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 02:10, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Anyway you could hop on IRC? Carbon Monoxide 02:14, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Ok, just give me five minutes. Thanks. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 02:15, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

ZOMG ROUGE ADMIN! Carbon Monoxide 15:52, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

You know, if you're going to run an adminbot, it's probably best that you don't talk about it in public... --uǝʌǝsʎʇɹnoɟʇs 19:19, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

No, we are trying to find a way to make a confirm button, so its not completely automated, but rather a lot faster. Speaking of which, can you program in C# ST47? -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 22:07, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Added the "confirm" to the simple code. Its not the robust - if you dont enter y/n, it will take it as no, and move on. I can help improve it later Reedy Boy 07:46, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

DE-SYSOP HIM!, not becouse your running an unaproved adminbot, but becouse it uses a propritary programing langage and is therefor EVIL :) --Chris  G  12:04, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Bah, C# > perl! CO 20:17, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Its not a bot, not when the confirm button works :) -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 15:18, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

You did recopy the source to the text file and rebuilt it, didnt you? Reedy Boy 18:11, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

I'd presume not. See [7] Reedy Boy 18:28, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Nope. I just added a space to make it look better when formatted. You need to copy it to the text file, and recompile it... Chances are i suspect CO talked you through that on IRC? Reedy Boy 10:10, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

No probs :) Give me a shout if you need/want help expanding it further! Reedy Boy 10:28, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Another Script

Find and replace...

Source

using System;
using System.IO;
using System.Text;
using System.Text.RegularExpressions;
using System.Collections;
using System.Xml;
using System.Diagnostics;
using System.Threading;
using DotNetWikiBot;

class MyBot : Bot
{
    public static void Main()
    {
        Site enWP = new Site("http://en.wikipedia.org", "YOURUSERNAME", "YOURPASSWORD");
        // Make empty PageList object, representing collection of pages
        PageList pl = new PageList(enWP);
        // Fill it with pages from Special:AllPages
        pl.FillFromAllPages("!", 0, false, 1000);
        // Load texts and metadata of all found pages from live wiki
        pl.LoadEx();
        // Now suppose, that we must correct some typical mistake in all our pages
        foreach (Page i in pl)
        {
            // In each page we will replace one phrase with another
            i.text.Replace("teh", "the");
            i.text.Replace("word", "replacementword");
        }
        // Finally we'll save all changed pages to wiki with 1 seconds interval			
        pl.SaveSmoothly(1, "General [[WP:MOS|MOS]] fixes", true);
    }
}

I'll break it down. You know your username & password go in their respected places. Now, pl.FillFromAllPages("!", 0, false, 1000); means a few things. The "!" means you are starting from !. 0 is the namespace (this is the mainspace). False means you don't include redirects, and 1000 means you are going to get 1000 pages to check.

i.text.Replace("teh", "the") || i.text.Replace("word", "replacementword"); means a few things, again. You are replacing "teh" with "the" (the quotes aren't including, their to make a string. If you want to add more, you'd just add another || i.text.Replace("word1", "replacementword1") so it'd look like i.text.Replace("teh", "the") || i.text.Replace("word", "replacementword") || i.text.Replace("word1", "replacementword1"); . Finally you have pl.SaveSmoothly(1, "General MOS fixes", true); This is your save function. The one means you will wait one second between edits to save the page (this is fine, because not every page will have a replacement to make). The "General...." is your edit summary, and the true means it's a minor edit. Carbon Monoxide 02:54, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Blain Johnson

I was just wondering why you deleted the article about blain Johnson. Was there any harm in it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by BlainTrain (talk • contribs) 06:41, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

He was non-notable. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 06:48, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Maybe to you he was Non-notable. I don't know half the people in this site, but im not going to go delete them just because i don't know them. You should really think about reinstating this article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by BlainTrain (talk • contribs) 07:04, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

No, atcually, I won't, because he blatantly flunks the criteria; he is a school teacher. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 07:23, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

I find it funny that u are 12 yet u think you have the right to delete peoples pages. You live in Australia. How would you know if Blain is notable or not? I am 17 and I'm not gonna stand for a 12 year old deleting my site. I notice you have sites of your own. Did they get deleted. Well let me tell you it doesnt feel very good when u spend $ours on a web page that gets deleted in 2 minutes. So please re-install my web page or I will bring this to a higher level of authority. P.s. If your 12, go outside and live a little. You have your whole life to work and be on the computer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by BlainTrain (talk • contribs) 07:28, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, actually, I do have the right to delete pages that I think fail policies such as this one. I can tell if "Blain" is notable enough because I can read; the article said he was a senior in a school, and persons such as these are certainly not notable enough to be included in Wikipedia, and it alos obvious that you are Blain Johnson, and so therefore have an extremely close COI. Actually, my articles did not get deleted because they met Wikipedia policy. So no, I won't be reinstating the article. Regards, -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 09:56, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

RfA Thanks

Thanks, October! Thank you for your support in my RfA. It was a success, and I look forward to getting started! Hiberniantears 17:43, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Blain Johnson

I'm not completely sure it fails any of the wikipedia criteria. I am the leader of 700 people in one of the most well-known schools in the State. Don't try to Immasculate me. I understand you don't agree. Ill have to try again. I hope you continue to have fun deleting peoples pages. It must make you feel good because apparently you don't have much of a life because you sit on your computer and interfere with other peoples lives. Good luck accomplshing what i have. I have worked hard in my life and sorry if i seem a little upset.My best wishes to you. P.S. Shut off your computer and join basketball or something. Have fun and live a little. Your only 12 once. Enjoy it while you can. Sincerely Blain JOhnson —Preceding unsigned comment added by BlainTrain (talk • contribs) 19:41, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

I am completely sure that it fails every criteria relating to notability within Wikipedia. I grow tired of this discussion; if you recreate the page, I will delete it. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 21:53, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Quick question

Would a username like User:Spartan be off limits because it was a "sock puppet"? I noticed that and it seems that when you look up the contributions it says there isn't any. What is the policy on that? Thanks, Kevin 21:46, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't think so, considering that it has not made any (d)contributions. Although - I may be wrong. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 21:54, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Alright, thank you! Kevin 22:25, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Deletion

Hi. You may want to add a comment Here, since you deleted it. - Rjd0060 00:25, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, commented. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 09:29, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Hi AD,

Thanks for your note and the attached barnstar. What a nice thing to say; thank you for taking time out to message me. I have seen your name pop up around WP as well, and look forward to working with you in the future. Best wishes and happy editing, Firsfron of Ronchester 10:30, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, you deserved it. Keep up the good work. Cheers, -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 10:42, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, you too. Best, Firsfron of Ronchester 10:53, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

AD meet Firs, Firs meet AD....aaawww you've already met...cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:55, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I first noticed his (great) contribs to lion. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 10:57, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

LOL, Cas! AD, my contribs to Lion were quite minimal, but I was glad to help out a bit. I did notice some other folks putting in huge amounts of labor on the article, though... Firsfron of Ronchester 11:00, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

*cough*Cas*cough* ;) -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 11:08, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Hahaha...what happened to tiger then? I was doing a bit but the extinction stuff kinda bums me out I find rather depressing (gotta stop american slang). Now Jayhenry is doing Javan Rhinoceros...more nearly-extinct critters. Doesn't seem so bad when theyre 100 million years old. cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs)

Its kind of coming along.... over the past few days, I have kind of burned out when it comes to tiger... but I plan to get back soon. Cheers, -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 11:16, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

DYK: George Raff

On 21 October, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article George Raff, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--PFHLai 03:23, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Caribbean Medical University & 3RR

Dear Anon, it seems that Leuko is still reverting other editor's contributions to Caribbean Medical University. He has made many reverts and "restores" in the past several hours. Might you be able to intervene and direct him to discuss the issues on the talk page before continuing with edits? Bstone 04:40, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Fronter site deleted

Dear Anonymous Dissident

Hi, I recently created an information site for the compay Fronter (similar to Webct, Moodle etc). Noticed that you deleted it and wondered excatly why? Have looked around a bit and think it might be because it was seen as marketing? If this is the case please could you advise me as to how to put it up without violating this as I see that other company's information is posted up successfully. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Adtlau001 (talk • contribs) 06:57, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

It was deleted under the rationale displayed in {{Db-inc}}; "Fronter" was deemed not notable enough for inclusion in Wikipedia. This is common for a great portion of companies and websites featured on the internet: it must be remembered that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 07:06, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for noticing so quickly.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 12:03, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, and possibly needing help.

Hello, first let me thank you for helping with the Only Built 4 Cuban Linx II page. I was also wodering, seeing as that you are an admin, would it be possible to protect the page? I understand that this may be outrageous, but I just figured I would ask. Thank you. JpGrB 22:49, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Considering that it was one, very persistent vandaliser who was causing the trouble, I have instead made a block. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 03:35, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

RfA thank-spam

Thank you! Thank you for your help in my RfA. It hammered home a few things I need to keep in mind while admining and passed with a final tally of 40/0/4; two people forgot to vote in time, leaving me short of that exquisite number :-(, but I'll just have to fudge the next vote about me. Adminship feels slightly august but not particularily exalted, so I shall endeavour to consider it a toolkit and make sincere efforts to know what I'm doing before using it. If you later on have something to say or want to ask for -- MESSAGE EATEN BY BEARS --Kizor 23:10, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Rudget RfA

Dearest Opposer,

Thank you for your participation in my RFA, which closed unsuccessfully with 39 supports, 15 oppose, and 1 neutral. I would have liked to gain some experience of being an admin, but it wasn't to be. At least I gained some valuable time there and will use my knowledge picked up to my next candidacy. I would like to say once again, thank you for voting and I hope to see you at my next request be it a nomination or self-induced, I hope I don't get as many questions! Rudget _{Contributions} 09:40, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia has a second Carlos admin

Click there to open your card! → → →

My dear Wikipedian Anonymous Dissident,
Thank you for your participation in my RFA, which closed successfully with 29 supports, 1 opposed, and 3 neutral. No matter if you !voted support, oppose, neutral, or even if you just stopped by to make a comment, I thank you for taking the time to drop by. Since I am a new admin, if you have any suggestions or concerns, feel free to inform me of them. Special thanks to Carlossuarez46 for encourage me and nomination. Thank you and good day.

Carlosguitar

Credits

This RFA thanks was inspired by The Random Editor, who in turn was inspired by Phaedriel's RFA thanks. So unfortunately this is not entirely my own design.

This end the usual RFA thanks spam. You may return to your regular editing now.

Favor?

If you're around, would you please weigh in on this? I don't think Flyguy is awake, and I saw you just edit, so I'm hoping you're still up :) Ariel♥Gold 06:48, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

I have blocked indefinitely; this is most definitely a breach. Thanks for contacting me. No idea why UAA declined... -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 06:59, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

(I removed the word "not" as I'm sure you didn't mean it wasn't a breach). Thank you my dear AD, I honestly cannot figure out why this was kicked from UAA, it is nasty. Finally, I have to ask, could I please edit your talk page header so that it isn't causing a horizontal scroll bar no matter how wide the browser is? lol. Pretty please? :) Ariel♥Gold 07:01, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Lol you'd be doing me a favour; I can't figure how to fix it myself. :) -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 07:04, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

There we go. I moved the clock to your /header page, adjusted the width of your customized header (the colored name at top left), and removed the pre formatted tables that were here, which were what caused one of the issues. Testing now. Ariel♥Gold 07:19, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Okay we nuked the clock, but I think we could maybe put it back, AD do you see the horizontal scroll bar now? Ariel♥Gold 07:28, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Your vandalism warning

Hey AD, in lieu of the general vandalism warning you gave to 168.105.118.40, I would probably have opted for {{uw-test1}}, which to me seems more a appropriate to an edit which just added "haha" to a page. YMMV, of course, and feel free to ignore my suggestion. Phaunt 08:27, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Personally I disagree. I don't consider any non-constructive editing to be tests unless it involves an actual test of wiki-markup. Nonsensical additions to pages, such as what has occurred here, constitutes vandalism in my mind, because, as far as I am concerned, the person willingly and knowingly added rubbish to encyclopedic content. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 10:48, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

I believe the thinking behind the "test" wording is that brand-new editors are "testing" the whole idea of a wiki, as in "can I really type something and have it show up instantly as part of the article?" The hope is that by wording the first warning positively in accordance with WP:AGF, we communicate to at least some small fraction of editors who do that, not "go away," but "yes, you really can edit it, see? Now why don't you start." It would be interesting if we could measure how often it works. Regards, Newyorkbrad 11:29, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

I do agree in that regard, but it should be noted that the first caution is by no means chastising, but rather a notice informing of error. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 13:14, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

I still prefer test-1 for this situation, but will neither declare you in error nor chastise you for disagreeing. Regards, Newyorkbrad 14:48, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

The rumour goes that many active contributors started out by testing the water, adding a single word to see if it really works. I choose for the test templates because as Brad said, they have a positive tone. But everybody's choice is their own and I agree with what Brad just wrote. I just wanted to make sure you were aware of the existence of the test templates. Thanks for your attention, and happy editing, Phaunt 14:53, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

You both do make some good points. I will certainly consider the usage of the test templates from now on. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 22:32, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

What do you think?

Hey AD what do you think of this, should I go now or wait a bit longer? --Chris  G  08:37, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Infobox tv

I just noticed your change here. I like where you're going with this, but the trouble with the edit is that it uses "ifexist" and that means if the page doesn't exist, it doesn't give the link, which is a commonly used parameter right now, and it's likely to become broken for many because many TV shows are disambiguated, whereas their episode articles are not. I'd suggest removing the edit, but simply as a viewer of the template, I thought I'd just throw it out there for you up front, instead of just doing it myself. --lincalinca 06:44, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Of course. I didn't consider that. I will undo. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 06:48, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Take a peek?

At my newest DYK: [8] and let me know what you think, or if you think the hook could be improved? (If you have time, and are bored, that is, lol) Ariel♥Gold 07:36, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

I'd say that that hook is sound. It interested me. In fact, I have submitted quite a few successful noms with hooks telling of someone's interesting and diverse achievements. Good job! :) -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 07:38, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Ariel♥Gold 07:49, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Lol, no problem. :) -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 07:53, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

2003 invasion of Iraq (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Hey AD; we appear to have protected over one another at 2003 invasion of Iraq (my bad, you got there first). But, you've protected with a reason of "dispute"...? Where is the dispute? Are you sure it's not just vandalism? Anthøny 07:38, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

No, check the diffs. The IP is adding content that can be said to be not vandalism, but a controversial piece of content, hence the war that is going on. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 07:42, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

It's not vandalism if the changes are made to make the entry less POV, to remove uncited commentary, and to remove items irrelevant to the subject. As the entry stands now it reads like propaganda from the DNC.70.107.177.15 —Preceding comment was added at 14:30, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Australia Day is new ACOTF

Hi. You supported Australia Day for Australian Collaboration. It has been selected, please help to improve it in any way you can. Thanks. --Scott Davis ^Talk 13:06, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

New York City

Thank you for sprotecting New York City. I've been active in anti-vandalism for months as an IP, and that's an article that consistantly gets vandalized. Mr. Carbunkle 21:41, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Successful RfA - Thank you!

Thank you for supporting my recent RfA. It was successful, and I was promoted to Administrator today. I appreciate the support! — KieferSkunk (talk) — 23:10, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Reverting

Revert, then warn! :P --wj32 ^{talk | contribs} 06:05, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Lol, I thought I did, but it turned out you slipped in front. See, Lupin's tool doesn't conflict... -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 06:08, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Göttingen Seven GA on hold

Hey cap'n. Göttingen Seven is on hold, see my comments at the talk page. Interesting piece btw. IvoShandor 11:29, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

I am on a long wikibreak, just drop me an email when the article is ready, and I will come by again. IvoShandor 17:44, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Passenger on DYK

Did you know? was updated. On 29 October, 2007, a fact from the article Passenger, which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--chaser - t 11:56, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for October 22nd, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 3, Issue 43	22 October 2007	About the Signpost

Fundraiser opens, budget released	Biographies of living people grow into "status symbol"
WikiWorld comic: "George Stroumboulopoulos"	News and notes: Wikipedian Robert Braunwart dies
WikiProject Report: League of Copyeditors	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Sorry for the tardiness in sending the Signpost this week. --Ral315

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 13:49, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Usurp

Hey Anonymous, thanks for replying to my USURP. I noticed you left a note saying the user has no email adress, will the 7 days still stand? Or will the usurp not be able to take place? Thanks. — jacĸrм (talk) 10:25, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

The fact that the usser has no email is just something to be noted. You can be usurped still. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 19:33, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Happy Tim Starling Day!

Secure and split! Here's hoping a nice day for you and the wonderful parsing algorithm. bibliomaniac15 A straw poll on straw polls 02:24, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

I hope you had a good day too Biblio :) -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 19:32, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

New Userbox

This user is respected by Tinkleheimer and has done great work in Tinkleheimer's eyes.

I made my very first userbox and am passing it out. I won't be terribly offended if don't put it on your page. And if you want to make one for yourself, just create a subpage under your user page and just copy/paste the code from User:Tinkleheimer/RespectedByTinkleheimer. Thanks!!Trevor "Tinkleheimer" Haworth 03:07, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! :) -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 19:32, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Transfusion (EP)

I hadn't noticed that you passed this GA. Thanks heaps for that! I was somewhat preoccupied with other things, but really appreciate this (to be honest, I didn't think it'd get reviewed for abot another week). --lincalinca 04:10, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

No worries. -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 19:33, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar

		The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
		I'm awarding you this RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar for your great contributions to protecting and reverting attacks of vandalism on Wikipedia. Wikidudeman (talk) 18:36, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks a lot! :) -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 19:32, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Hehe

I have stolen your userpage design :) Qst 22:09, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Without asking permission?! ;) -- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 05:14, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks for your opposing comments on my recent RfA. I understand your concerns related to my low Wikipedia namespace participation and will do my best not to behave like a bull in a china shop as I learn the ropes. :) Dppowell 23:40, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

2008

Name change

Thanks for your help. Hi--Triquetra.bis (talk) 09:45, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

redirect

I don't think this redirect is necessary, it is the second part of the (original) full title: ... or Flower Garden Displayed. It's not an alternate title AFAIK. cygnis insignis 17:47, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Ah, right you are. Sorry, I'll fix it. —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 23:48, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

From what you've said, this redirect would be okay, no? [9] —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 23:52, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for telling you. I've instead made a redirect of the fll original title, which should not be a problem. There was something else: why did you remove the Wikisource link? Completion has never been the criterion for interlinking; hardly anything on Wikimedia is "complete". I think the link should be restored, because the Wikisource text does have some useful content (having spent my recent time there compiling Vol. II), but I won't do it before you've weighed in. —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 23:57, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

The links to Gutenberg and biodiversitylibrary.org and more useful to the reader, when our work exceeds those I would not object. The name of a roughly completed volume could be linked. I would be happy to proof read Vol. II against online scans, as I have done with the cover page. I have linked a number of pages to the species articles here - and back again - sometimes adding the botanical illustration and, surprisingly, using it as a reference. The work at WS is experimental and unstable, the selection of pages I've done at Curtis's Botanical Magazine (the later volumes) made me realise that problems need resolving with it's structure. Glad to see someone take an interest, let me know your thoughts on its development. cygnis insignis 07:06, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, I'm gradually uploading the text and images from Vol. II, and I plan to eventually complete the entire work. I think I agree about simply linking to Guetnberg for now. Your proofreading of Vol. II would be appreciated, as soon as I am finished. Thanks a lot for your input. —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 07:36, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

I glad you volunteered to transcribe 150 years of the magazine, I will try and help a bit ;-)

I will post the lastest version of my model for sources, page titles, etc., at your talk over there. You may be able to improve on it, there should be ways of making it easy for people to contribute to the volume's improvement. I'm looking into djvu and ocr before going too much further. Cheers, cygnis insignis 07:52, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

FAC

This is a personal note: I was thinking in bed last night, and I believe my reserves of WP:AGF, as well as my usual good nature, were tapped almost completely bone dry by recent events (unrelated to you or quark). The WP:AGF reservoir was not only tapped dry, it was almost capped for good measure. I'm in a negative space with respect to FAC noms at the moment.

I may end up supporting quark; I may end up opposing, but I hope I can retract any unneccesarily sharp tone I may have drawn, and discuss things collegially.

Yes, the the lead needs to be dumbed down (read:clarified) a tiny bit, IMO. perhaps rearranged a bit as well. I'll put something on the FAC later but my Better Half is making salient harrumphing noises at the moment, so I may not be able to do it now. We'll see... Ling.Nut ^{(talk—WP:3IAR)} 01:52, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

That's not a problem at all. I thank you for your note, as well as your input on the FAC. Best wishes, —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 01:56, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Cratship

Have you ever considered running? bibliomaniac15 03:55, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

I have considered the matter, but don't really have any intention of running at this point in time. On that note, and while we're talking about it, I'd just like to say that you've been doing a particularly fine job as a bureaucrat since your election, especially at WP:CHU and its daughter pages. Best, —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 03:58, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. I think the arduousness of the RFB is amazingly unproportional to the difficulty of the crat tasks. CHU is really simple enough for any admin to do, bot flagging really up to the BAG, and closing RFA/B's are, at their worst, the level of a contentious AFD or block. It's my belief that any admin worth his or her salt is capable of performing crat tasks with little trouble. As for RFB, I have two RFBs on my watchlist for the future, yours and Alison's. If you ever feel like jumping into the croc-infested waters for a wrench, I'd like to be there to give you a push and a lifejacket. :) bibliomaniac15 21:08, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Aww, I was just considering asking if you would accept an RfB. Xclamation point 21:35, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, AnonDiss said not at this point, but that may imply he intends to run later on at some point. -- how do you turn this on 12:15, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks all for your support; it is certainly something I'd consider trying sometime in the future, but not right now. I still appreciate your kind words. —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 12:33, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Adminship

Thanks for the offer. I am inclined to accept it. I need several days to think about answers to questions, so I think the nomination can start sometime next week. Ruslik (talk) 09:10, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

quark

Hi AD, I considered telling you that I was asking Tony1 for an opinion, but then I thought that notifying one person that I had asked someone else for an opinion might seem goofy. But now I'm going ahead & telling you; I hope you don't feel I was doing an end-around... Ling.Nut ^{(talk—WP:3IAR)} 05:12, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

PS: well the nom may be nearing its termination point! I am undecided; would defer to Tony, but he has not declared. It currently has no Opposes, and so would pass if it hits the fan. Ling.Nut ^{(talk—WP:3IAR)} 05:20, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, you have opposed now on what you refer to as "philosophical" basis. I don't see any philosophy in the FA criteria, and I struggle to understand your concern. —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 06:15, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I came here to ask AD not to give up on the article, please see my latest comments and save me from having to repeat myself here. Quark is very close to FA standard in my opinion; it just needs a little more work. As it is Sunday, I have some time to make a few edits, but I am a biologist not a physicist so I need someone to look over my shoulder and correct any errors that might creep in. Graham. Graham Colm ^Talk 08:19, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for The Independent Journal

On 5 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article The Independent Journal, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Keep up the good work! ~ User:Ameliorate! ^{(with the !) (talk)} 16:40, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXI (September 2008)

The September 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:50, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Falkes de Breauté

I thought only the line required for the hook needed an inline? Thanks for the research, i'll get right on to including that :).Ironholds 06:57, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, yes, but the article still needs adequate referencing to be featured on the main page, and 2 refs for an 11KB page isn't quite there. Keep going, though. :) —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 07:37, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Fair does, thanks :). I'm working on another article right now that will (hopefully) turn out as a GA, so I'll be off DYK for a week or so, but I'll remember that point.Ironholds

Apparently not a week; this is the one I was talking about.... Properly referenced? :P. Ironholds 00:42, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

That's very well referenced. You could even have a FA on your hands if you flesh out the lead. :) —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 02:32, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Really?! I was aiming for GA at best, I'm crap with prose. Do you know anyone who might be willing to look at it and make sense of my meandering text? Ironholds 11:37, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Mark Speight

Hi, you commented on the (failed) FAC; please can you help me out by leaving some feedback at peer review? Thanks, and best wishes, -- how do you turn this on 12:04, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

RFA Thanks

Anonymous Dissident, I'd like to thank you for voting in my RFA. Thanks also for expressing your trust in me, and I hope that I live up to your expectations. Don't forget, if you have any questions (or bits of advice), please leave a message on my talk page. Thanks again, Spencer^T♦C 02:28, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Lausus Palace

No problem, I understand what you mean, and appreciate you bothering to explain it fully. Cheers, and take care! Constantine ✍ 23:02, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Template:Did you know

Is this really a good idea considering there is already too many DYK nominations and not enough time? Gary King (talk) 20:08, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

In any case, I think it should say Nominate for Did you know, not DYK. I have always wondered why there wasn't an easy link to nominate an article. -- how do you turn this on 20:32, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

A Sydney Meetup

G'day all - I'm dropping this note in to let you know that there's to be a Wiki Meetup the week after next, on Tuesday, 21st at 18:00 at The Paragon in Circular Quay. If you've ever thought about popping along to one of these, but haven't had the chance - now's the time! If you love the idea, but the time and / or place don't quite work for you, please do feel free to wiki edit away at the meetup page and I'm sure we can sort something out :-) Meetups are a great way to share wiki-thoughts, meet wiki-friends, and generally learn how to prefix all areas of your life with wiki- :-)

It's a very friendly bunch, and we're hoping to be able to formally collect membership fees and details for the Australian Chapter (did you know that we're the only current english speaking chapter? Join now for kudos and future bragging rights!) - as well as just generally have a good 'ol time. I look forward to seeing you there :-) best, Privatemusings (talk) 07:48, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

March

What do you think about a move to "The March of the Guards to Finchley". It's almost universally referred to as "The" with some variation on the following wording. I know WP doesn't use "The" as standard but when it is part of the title an exception can be made and the missing article grates with me a little. Yomangani^talk 17:09, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

First off - great to see you around, Yomangan. Yes, you're right. I didn't realise what I had titled it, and I think a move would be best; I am seeing "the" everywhere. I'll get to that now. —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 23:47, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Birds October newsletter

The October 2008 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:15, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

dyk

Update overdue. Thanks. Chergles (talk) 22:21, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for Palace of Lausus

On 13 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Palace of Lausus, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 06:10, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

		The 100 DYK Medal
		Well done on a well-deserved century of DYK contributions. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:24, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much, Cas. I appreciate it greatly. This is going straight to the pool room. ;) —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 08:42, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Xymmax RfA

I'd like to take a minute to let you know that I appreciate your support in my recently-closed RfA, which passed with a count of 56 in support, 7 in opposition, and 2 neutrals. I'll certainly try to justify your faith by using the tools wisely. Happy editing, and thanks again! Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 21:51, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Happy Anonymous Dissident/October's Day!

User:Anonymous Dissident/October has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, and therefore, I've officially declared today as Anonymous Dissident/October's day! For being such a beautiful person and great Wikipedian, enjoy being the Star of the day, dear Anonymous Dissident/October! Peace, Rlevse ~ A record of your Day will always be kept here.

For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:EVula/Userboxes/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:05, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a lot Rlevse. I appreciate it. Keep up the excellent work you've been doing lately too. :) —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 04:14, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

2009

Name Change

Hello, I have a question. Is there a reason that my name change request has been ignored by all the bureaucrats? I put it there, and there is no answer, but all the ones before and after have been answered. Dr. Clutch (talk) 00:40, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Not that I can tell. I've filled the request. Regards, and sorry for the delay, —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 11:15, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Dr. Clutch (talk) 23:09, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Meetup Time in Sydney :-)

Hi all,

It's meetup time again in Sydney - hopefully you'll be able to come along for friendly chat and drinks about all things wiki - topics will no doubt include the Chapter - perhaps with planning for the upcoming AGM, the general state of wiki-play, and the traditional candle lighting to encourage the mythical flagged-revisions extension to make its way on to the wiki. At this point, I usually mention that sitting wiki arbitrators are compelled to buy everyone a drink, but one of our number has taken a rather extreme route in avoiding this duty - if you have no idea what I'm talking about then you're probably busy writing and maintaining articles - but come along anyways on the 21st October, from 18.30 til late, to find out :-) cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 21:31, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Beautiful

• 03:03, 5 June 2008 Anonymous Dissident protected Beautiful ‎ (whilst it isn't *constantly* bombarded, almost every IP and new user edit is vandalism. It can be uprotected at a later date if deemed necessary. [edit=autoconfirmed:move=autoconfirmed])

That was sixteen months ago. I'd like to review this to see if semiprotection is still considered necessary. This is part of my large scale review of all longstanding indefinite semiprotections. Please see the discussion I have started at talk:Beautiful. TS 09:55, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

I think an unprotection for the article seems reasonable at this time. I would still want to wait for Anonymous Dissident to comment in case I or others may have missed something. Best regards, --Kanonkas :  Talk  10:00, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

comment copied to talk:Beautiful. --TS 10:17, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

• Worth seeing how it goes, but I fear this is an inevitable target. Done. —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 10:20, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIII (September 2009)

The September 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:14, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 5 October 2009

• New talk pages: LiquidThreads in Beta
• Sockpuppet scandal: The Law affair
• News and notes: Article Incubator, Wikipedians take Manhattan, new features in testing, and much more
• Wikipedia in the news: Wikipedia used by UN, strange AFDs, iPhone reality
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
• WikiProject report: New developments at the Military history WikiProject
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 04:41, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Edit counters on the footer of Special:Contributions

See this thread on the technical village pump. I'd try to deal with it, but I have to be out of here in like fifteen minutes. Graham87 05:47, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 08:02, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Username changes

Hi there. I see that you're a bureaucrat. Well, you're just the person to help me. My original username was Declan Davis. I desided to sign my posts as Dr Dec. I registered the user name Dr Dec, and then set up redirects from the user page and the user talk page to my user page and user talk page. I've decided that I'd rather edit under the name of Dr Dec from now on. As you've seen, I've been involved in some heated discussions recently, and I'm worried that this might spill out into the real world. For example, I'm apllying for jobs at the moment. If a prospective employer were to Google me and were to read all of the discussions on the RD then I wouldn't be in with much of a chance. I've been signing my posts as Dr Dec for several months now, so there wouldn't be a problem of me being misidentified by the community. Is there a way of you moving all of my edit histories, stats, etc, from my username to Dr Dec? If you're willing to do this then let me know and I'll start moving userpage templates. ~~ Dr Dec (Talk) ~~ 23:32, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Your request sounds reasonable. For archival purposes, it's probably best that you file a request at WP:CHU; I (or, depending on timezones, someone else) will be able to fill it out there. The pages in your userspace are automatically renamed when your account is, so there's no need for you to do that. Best, —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 00:48, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

I've just filed the request. Thanks for your help. ~~ Dr Dec (Talk) ~~ 09:10, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for making the change. But If I type user:Declan_Davis then I get redirected to user:Dr_Dec. I would like to cut all ties with my real world identity, and remain anonymous whilst editing; for the reasons given above. Could you delete and salt all of the page is the user space Declan Davis? Declan Davis (talk) 09:40, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm willing to delete these redirects when it's a privacy matter, so yes I can. Salting is usually reserved for cases of serial recreation of undesirable pages. —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 09:43, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Sorry to be a pain. I see that you've deleted user:Declan Davis, and thanks. But could you delete the other eight, or so, pages in the Declan Davis userspace too? Like user talk:Declan Davis, etc? ~~ Dr Dec (Talk) ~~ 09:55, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

All done. —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 10:02, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for all your help. I appreciate it. ~~ Dr Dec (Talk) ~~ 10:09, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

It's no trouble. Everyone has a right to privacy. —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 10:11, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for changing my user name. The President of Chicago sounded cool when I created it but now sounds like I'm a psycho or an idiot trying to pretend that I'm great. PresChicago (talk) 04:27, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 04:28, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Westminster Pit

On October 12, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Westminster Pit, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

≈ Chamal ^talk ¤ 15:29, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 12 October 2009

• From the editor: Perspectives from other projects
• Special story: Memorial and Collaboration
• Bing search: Bing launches Wikipedia search
• News and notes: New WMF hire, new stats, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: IOC sues over Creative Commons license, Wikipedia at Yale, and more
• Dispatches: Sounds
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
• WikiProject report: WikiProject Tropical cyclones
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 03:36, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Kww 3 - Bureaucrat discussion

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Kww 3/Bureaucrat discussion

I've opened a bureaucrat chat in relation to this RfA as I don't think the outcome is particularly clear cut. If you have a moment, I'd appreciate your input. WJBscribe (talk) 20:09, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

Just waking up

I just noticed the close and the after-discussion myself. I have no problem with the discussion extending, and would not see undoing the close as "messy". Your choice.—Kww(talk) 12:56, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi. I appreciate the angst of the situation and I extend my sympathies for the toing-and-froing to which you've been subjected over the past days. However, when I said "messy", I was more referring to procedural mess. I'm of the opinion that when an RfA is closed and archived, and the candidate informed of the outcome, the action should only be undone when there is strong reason to do so. In your circumstance, I don't believe there is the possibility of determining any other outcome than no consensus; the bureaucrat cohort is firmly split over the matter, and I can't see why the present lay of the land would change. Therefore, the only real reason to prolong the discussion would be to allow certain bureaucrats to offer judgement. This would more be for the sake of form than anything else, given that – as aforementioned – further input is unlikely to bear fruit. I hope you understand, and I do encourage you to consider a future request. As a final note, it's entirely possible the discussion will be re-opened; my voice is not the only one, and others have said they think we should wait for commentary from WJBscribe and Rlevse. Best, —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 13:17, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 19 October 2009

• News and notes: WikiReader, Meetup in Pakistan, Audit committee elections, and more
• In the news: Sanger controversy reignited, Limbaugh libelled, and more
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 02:40, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Super-root

As you have contributed to the article and seem to have enough knowledge on the subject to make a fair judgement on whether it's notable or not, you may have an opinion of its suggested merge with tetration. If you do please discuss it here, as the consensus currently seems to be in deadlock, and this is causing a large edit war across both articles. Robo37 (talk) 18:31, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the semi-PP

Re on the article of Singapore, it has always baffled me why I have to keep requesting for Semi-PP for this page whenever the time expires and it becomes the subject of vandalism edits by vandals. Is there any way to make it off limit to those IP vandals and newly registered users? Thanks and cheers~! --Dave1185 ^talk 13:21, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

It's been semi-protected now, so IP users and newly registered users will not be able to edit it for 2 months. After that, depending on the situation, it may be necessary to semi-protected for longer. —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 14:45, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Old name & new name

Hello, I recently requested a name change from User:Ti-30X to User:Steve Quinn. At first it appeared that this was accomplished almost immediately. My User page (and User talk page) have been transferred to tne new name. No problem. Then after a few hours, as I was editing somehow I got switched back to Ti-30X, but I still have my new user name on my User page and user talk page.

Also when editing and adding references, which include DOI links, the Wikipedia software treats me as though I am an anonymous IP asking me to enter a word before I can add my edit. This has happened several times already.

Furthermore, when I started editing under my new name my contributions list disappeared. I understand that this is to be expected sometimes, because it will be restored later. However, now that my current edits are being attributed to Ti-30X - I seem to be in a kind of limbo, and my contributions list still has not been restored. Anyway, maybe you can see if there is something wrong. Please let me know either way on my talk page. In case you are wondering, yes, go ahead and proceed with the name change. Thanks. Steve Quinn (formerly Ti-30X) (talk) 22:21, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

Terribly sorry for the delayed reply – your message was lost in the Signpost (below). This is an unfortunately frequent side-effect of renames of users with high edit counts. It appears to happen when a user edits around the time of the rename; the old account seems to re-register and the rename doesn't carry over properly. System administrator intervention is typically required here. I'd advise you ask in #wikimedia-tech on Internet Relay Chat. If you don't have access to IRC, I'm perfectly happy to ask for you. Once again, sorry for the delayed reply. —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 13:22, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 26 October 2009

• Interview: Interview with John Blossom
• News and notes: New hires, German Wikipedian dies, new book tool, and more
• In the news: Editor profiled in Washington Post, Wikia magazines, and more
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:49, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Bureaucrat question your reasoning for bot flag

I would like to know your reasoning for granting a flag to Cobra Bot.[10] I have posted my question here. Thanks. --69.226.106.109 (talk) 22:08, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the straight-forward answer to what seemed like a simple and direct question. --IP69.226.103.13 (talk) 00:36, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Just wanted to say thank you for changing the username. --TheMandarin (talk) 13:15, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

You're welcome. —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 13:16, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

2010

The Signpost: 4 October 2010

• News and notes: German chapter remodeled to meet Foundation requirements, and more

• In the news: Spanish police pursues BLP vandals, Jimbo interviewed, advice for experts and spammers

• Book review: Good Faith Collaboration: The Culture of Wikipedia, by Joseph Reagle

• WikiProject report: Hot topics with WikiProject Volcanoes

• Features and admins: Milestone: 2,500th featured picture

• Arbitration report: Tricky and Lengthy Dispute Resolution

• Technology report: Code reviewers, October Engineering update, brief news

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 23:31, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs Polynomial expression Littlewood polynomial Dustin Brown (tennis) Reciprocal polynomial Pontus (mythology) Radical polynomial Horizontal line test Height of a polynomial Miodrag Bulatović Australian realism No. 2 Court (Wimbledon) Term (mathematics) Alejandro Falla Integer matrix Classical mathematics Polynomial matrix Functional square root Constant (mathematics) Quasi-polynomial

Cleanup Pumping lemma for context-free languages Gaël Monfils List of career achievements by Roger Federer Merge Sex-negativity Inverse functions and differentiation Numerical polynomial Add Sources Root of a function List of social nudity places in North America Jack Lockett Wikify Gate operator Vibrating structure gyroscope Orders of magnitude (frequency) Expand Carl Friedrich Gauss Algorithm Greatest common divisor of two polynomials

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 20:57, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 October 2010

• News and notes: Board resolutions, fundraiser challenge, traffic report, ten thousand good articles, and more

• In the news: Free culture conference, "The Register" retracts accusations, students blog about Wikipedia, and more

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Smithsonian Institution

• Features and admins: Big week for ships and music

• Dispatches: Tools, part 3: Style tools and wikEd

• Arbitration report: Tricky and Lengthy Dispute Resolution

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 06:22, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 October 2010

• News and notes: Wikipedia fundraiser event, Frankfurt book fair, news in brief

• WikiProject report: Show Me the Money: WikiProject Numismatics

• Features and admins: A week for marine creatures

• Dispatches: Common issues seen in Peer review

• Arbitration report: Climate change case closes after 4 months

• Technology report: Video subtitling tool, staff vs. volunteer developers, brief news

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:07, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LV (September 2010)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue LV (September 2010) Front page Project news Articles Members Editorial

Project news The results of September's coordinator elections, plus ongoing project discussions and proposals	Articles A recap of the month's new Featured and A-Class articles
Members Our newest A-class medal recipients, this September's top contestants, plus the reviewers' Roll of Honour (Apr-Sep 2010)	Editorial In the final part of our series on copyright, Moonriddengirl describes how to deal with copyright infringements on Wikipedia
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 21:01, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 October 2010

• News and notes: Mike Godwin leaves the Foundation, ArbCom election announced

• In the news: Good faith vs. bad faith, climate change, court citations, weirdest medieval fact, brief news

• WikiProject report: Nightmare on Wiki Street: WikiProject Horror

• Features and admins: The best of the week

• ArbCom interview: So what is being an arbitrator actually like?

• Arbitration report: Case closes within 1 month

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:25, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Are you open to recall?

Hi Anonymous Dissident,

I note that you are a bureaucrat here, so I wanted to ask whether you are open to recall, and if you are, what you would consider to be a fair process to reaffirm community support for your respected and much valued role? Many thanks in advance for your response, Geometry guy 22:59, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

I'm not open for recall in the sense that I haven't drafted a personal page for the process, but if it were felt by a concerning number of users that community support for my position had been lost, then of course I would step aside. Why do you ask? —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 00:22, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. I ask because I would like to understand better how WP:NPA (no personal attacts) should be interpreted in the context of a request for adminship. Even editors who are critical of Wikipedia's civility guidelines uphold the principle that criticism should focus on the behaviour or the contribution, not the editor. At RfA, I believe we seek admins who are good role models in this regard, and hence expect them to conduct themselves according to a higher standard. If so, are bureaucrats not expected to be even more careful in their comments, to avoid even the slightest suggestion of a personal attack? Does this not apply especially to a context, such as a request for adminship, where a bureaucrat might have or be perceived to have additional influence?

I would like to know whether you agree with this. For example, do you believe that a comment such as "his attitude is often one of condescension and arrogance, and... he holds the project and its editors in contempt" is appropriate comment for a bureaucrat to make at a request for adminship? Geometry guy 01:46, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

I agree with the premise of your comment, but not with the suggestion that my remark was excessive. It was candid and critical, sure, but I don't think it could rationally be labelled a personal attack. This is especially true given that the 27 opposes before me broadly reflect the same sentiment. As a bureaucrat, I do have a responsibility to be thorough and fair in my evaluation of candidates, whether that be in the capacity of a participant or in closing a request; however, I am aware of no responsibility to refrain from stating strong opinions. At any rate, I think that the record will show that such assertiveness at RfA is rare from this bureaucrat's mouth (I rarely participate in any fashion other than closure). —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 02:13, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

• Sorry, but it's a violation of NPA. Not that I actually plan to raise trouble or even complain at all – I haven't really cared about others' calumny for quite a while. But you ranted on my essays (which is wholly irrelevant in an RfA!), questioned my intelligence, said I was self-important, etc etc. those aren't "thorough and fair"; they are simply insults. Let's just be clear about past events without dodging the truth... A better course of action would have been to contact me by email and tell me exactly what you find so offensive about my essays, me, etc. give the real events that offended you (starting at the beginning). I think you would be shocked to find that I would discuss it quite dispassionately. I do not consider myself above reproach. • Ling.Nut (talk) 10:56, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

You are distorting the truth. I did not question your intelligence, nor say anything of an ad hominem nature. My statement was entirely concerned with your behaviour and your attitudes, which are clearly relevant at RfA. The tone and content of some of your essays reflect these traits, in my opinion, and that is why they were mentioned. —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 11:08, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

"each as self-important and falsely erudite as the last". Insult: yes or no? Irrelevant, yes or no? • Ling.Nut (talk) 11:09, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

I suspect the real issue here is that I made claims without providing solid evidence (diffs, quotes, and so on) to support my views. At the time, I felt it was unnecessary, since others in opposition had stated similar views and linked diffs. While I maintain that the wording of my remarks was not excessive, I am willing to clarify my position by introducing meaningful evidence, since I think it's a fair call. How does that sound? —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 11:23, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

• It sounds dodgy. The issue you raised is my essays; they are there for everyone to see. As for diffs, you and I both know you can find diffs of me ranting against various issues; that was the first thing I noted in my self-nom. I am quite happy for you to link all day and all night, if you wish: it is certainly your right. I repeat: link all day and all night if you wish. I will not say a word. But you are not examining yourself honestly, nor are you accepting the door I opened for private dialog. That seems... what shall I say?... like you have a grudge. The offer stands: I am open to email dialog. Pour your heart out. Start from the first time you decided that I hold the project in contempt, and go from there... I will listen.• Ling.Nut (talk) 11:30, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply again, which surprised me somewhat, so I want to be sure I have understood.

1. You agree with my basic premise that admins and bureaucrats have a responsibility to act as good role models, particularly in situations where their status may add weight to their comments and behaviour, such as RfA.
2. You agree that there should be no personal attacks on Wikipedia, and comments should focus on contributions, not editors.
3. You believe that it is not excessive, nor a personal attack, to describe an editor's attitude as "often one of condescension and arrogance" (without reference to a context) and to state that he "holds the project and its editors in contempt" (basing your view on your judgment of the tone of his essays that they are "self-important and falsely erudite": do you honestly believe you can understand the minds of contributors by reading their texts?).
4. You believe that the previous 27 opposes (or at least a significant proportion of them) raised broadly the same issue that the candidate is condescending, arrogant, and holds the project and its editors in contempt.
5. You believe that the presence of prior opposes lowers the standard required for presentation of criticism.
6. You believe that in all this you have been a good role model as a bureaucrat, encouraging good conduct at RfA, so that the process provides a thorough and fair evaluation of candidates (rather than a pile on or a popularity contest).

I would have been able to understand "I agree with above opposes that xxxx has demonstrated neither the temperament nor the experience to be an administrator. <your sig>"; it is your further remarks, and subsequent defense of them that leave me baffled about your judgment. Geometry guy 19:25, 31 October 2010 (UTC)

I stand by everything I've said here. —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 05:19, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

• I've already extended an open hand and an offer for dialog. I'm gonna exit this forum, but not in a huff or sulking. I have exhausted my options at reconciliation; done everything I can do. My offer for dialog still stands, but I won't say anything else here. Good luck in all you do. • Ling.Nut (talk) 05:24, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Good judgment is a very important quality in a bureaucrat and I am disappointed by the judgment shown here. Particularly alarming is your belief that your comments were in line with the prior opposes. Apart from comments about admin-like experience (and need for the tools, answers to questions etc.), these editors do raise concerns about temperament, but they base their opposes (where they elaborate) on examples of colorful language and behavior which they found insulting, rude, abrasive or condescending. Many of these opposes are also polite, some expressing regret.

Only one oppose ("prolific drama monger") comes close to the level of presumption and character assassination implied by your remark that "he holds the project and its editors in contempt". So, if you believe your personal attack was summarizing (or even consonant with) the thread thus far, I am very concerned about your ability to read the mood of the community in other circumstances. When reading through opposes at an RfA, I expect those made by bureaucrats to be exemplars, not the most excessive or offensive.

And on this talk page, whereas Ling.Nut has made offers of reconciliation, you have dug your feet in ("I stand by everything..."). I hope this is not a case of the Dunning-Kruger effect in which poor judgment is compounded by a failure to recognize it (and hence apologize, correct and move on). If it is, how will you recognize when "a concerning number of users" feel "that community support for [your] position had been lost"?

Criticism of other editors is like throwing stones. It can gentle or fatal with a whole spectrum in between. In a forum like RfA, each stronger throw "ups the ante" as to what is acceptable, and you upped the ante. This RfA is an isolated incident, but you have failed to provide a good example to the community, and you have not helped to encourage good conduct and thorough and fair evaluations at RfA's in the future.

Geometry guy 22:05, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

(Talk page stalker comment) Interesting that you suggested Dunning-Kruger effect to describe Anonymous Dissident's (AD's) attitude here, rather than noticing that your own entrance on this page smacks pretty strongly of When did you stop beating your wife? You've come here asserting that the comment was a personal attack (it wasn't) and that in expressing an opinion, some level of community trust has been breached. I don't think it's a stretch to say that the community as a whole is pretty comfortable with AD's judgment. Please don't take that to mean that I am asserting AD is infallible, and that by virtue of community trust there can be no argument with what AD has to say; that's not my intent and I believe neither of those. But I do think you've failed by a wide margin to present anything that remotely resembles something for which someone ought to consider recall (bureaucrat or otherwise). Indeed, I think the problem you are suggesting here is actually non-existent. An editor went to RfA, another editor expressed an opinion with a specific reference to the candidate's user page. Happens every day. I did not express an opinion in that RfA, and I am neither endorsing nor refuting the candidate's user page contents. I will, however, endorse ADs right (responsibility even) to express an opinion on the candidate, especially when strongly felt. It's one among many. That's what a discussion is. Even if I might wish for a little more by way of example, the comment itself was well-written and certainly avoided personal attack. It's one thing to say someone is "short-tempered", for example (I've expressly chosen a description that was not part of the comment). It is quite another to say "my personal interactions with XXXX have convinced me that XXXX is short-tempered." Some might claim that is subtle, but I think it makes all the difference. In the first case, a claim is being made that goes to the core of an editor's personality, which is of course very hard to do, especially online. In the latter case - far more like what AD wrote - the claim is "look, this is how my interactions have gone, and because of them, I do not support this editor for this role". I think, in retrospect, the comment is the very model of civility considering it is an oppose that raises a serious and significant misgiving about the candidate.  Frank  |  talk  00:55, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for commenting: let me try to resolve any misunderstandings. First, I have not and am not asking for recall over an isolated incident. Second, you seem to be saying that while it is not okay to say "he holds the project and its editors in contempt", it is okay to say "My interactions have led me to the conclusion that he holds the project and its editors in contempt". I disagree. This is a pretty borderline remark from any editor, but from a bureaucrat at an RfA it is unacceptable: indeed the word "conclusion" makes the comment even less appropriate (see my above remarks).

If I were seeking recall over an isolated incident, then you might be justified in your "when did stop beating your wife" criticism. I am instead drawing attention to a serious lapse of judgment by a bureaucrat. What I am looking for is recognition of this lapse of judgment, which has so far been lacking, and some assurance that such complaints will not fall on deaf ears in future. A clear recall process would certainly be a step in the right direction. Geometry guy 01:56, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm reminded of Valentine Michael Smith, of Stranger in a Strange Land fame. In the course of his...upbringing...he spends time living with Jubal Harshaw, a mentor figure, and a woman whose job is as a fair witness. In watching her live and work, Smith learns to differentiate between observation and opinion. At one point, Harshaw asks him what is before him, to which he replies (paraphrasing here) "two hands" and then quickly corrects himself to say "I see two hands". The subtlety is not lost on Harshaw, who comments that Smith might make a great fair witness at some point. Well, the idea is similar here. Smith corrected himself so that the assembled group would understand he was making no judgment but rather reporting his experience of the scene before him: he saw two hands. There may have been any number of hands, but what he was able to report was what he saw. I think the situation you are describing is essentially the same. AD has expressed an opinion based on personal interaction with the candidate; nothing more...and, equally, nothing less. Other members of the community are free to draw any (or no) conclusion as they see fit. I see no lapse of judgment by AD here; I see a measured response in an open forum that invites such. Whether or not such complaints fall on deaf ears - regardless of whether I (or anyone) think they are applicable - is of course something I can't say with certainty...but I think it's a fair bet that something which takes up over 10KB of text on one's talk page is rarely ignored.  Frank  |  talk  02:15, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

"I can only conclude from your self-important and falsely erudite ramblings that you are a sycophantic moron who disguises his prejudices and biases in verbose and irrelevant homilies". 'Kay? Geometry guy 23:04, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Geometry guy's last comment is a clear indication that this discussion is unlikely to bear more fruit. I have no intention of responding further unless there is a compelling reason to do so. Geometry guy, I have received your concerns and given them the consideration they deserve. Thanks to the both of you for expressing your views on this matter. —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 12:46, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

It has been clear that this discussion would not bear more fruit since you dug in your heels and refused to comment further except in a guarded manner. I have done my best to explain and illustrate why administrators and bureaucrats should steer well clear of the borderline area between acceptable discourse and personal attacks, rather than push the envelope. Set a good example and we improve the environment; set a bad example and it deteriorates.

(As an aside, quite obviously, I do not actually believe Frank is self-important, a sycophantic moron, or any of the above insults: I was simply pushing the envelope in the context of the "rules" you and he find acceptable. I do not find such comments acceptable, especially not from an administrator, which is why I placed them in quotes, with an edit summary to explain this.)

I thank you likewise for giving my views consideration. I have the good faith to believe that your phrase "the consideration they deserve" does not mean you have dismissed them as undeserving of consideration, and that you will think twice in future before employing rhetoric that many would interpret as character assassination. Nevertheless, I remain underwhelmed by your response.

Since you and I both contribute to mathematics articles occasionally, I hope we will next meet under happier circumstances. Geometry guy 00:06, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 November 2010

• News and notes: Foundation's finances, geodata milestone, interim counsel, museum conference

• In the news: Airplane construction with Wikipedia, lessons from the strategy project, logic over rhetoric

• WikiProject report: Scoring with WikiProject Ice Hockey

• Features and admins: Good-lookin' slugs and snails

• Arbitration report: Arb resignation during plagiarism discussion; election RfC closing in 2 days

• Technology report: Foundation office switches to closed source, secure browsing, brief news

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 03:11, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

It's raining thanks spam!

• Please pardon the intrusion. This tin of thanks spam is offered to everyone who commented or !voted (Support, Oppose or Neutral) on my recent RfA. I appreciate the fact that you care enough about the encyclopedia and its community to participate in this forum.
• There are a host of processes that further need community support, including content review (WP:GAN, WP:PR, WP:FAC, and WP:FAR). You can also consider becoming a Wikipedia Ambassador. If you have the requisite experience and knowledge, consider running for admin yourself!
• If you have any further comments, input or questions, please do feel free to drop a line to me on my talk page. I am open to all discussion. Thanks • Ling.Nut (talk) 02:15, 3 November 2010 (UTC)