User talk:Causa sui/Archive 6

RfAr

I don't know where you get the idea that you set policy for the RfAr page. Hackwrench 14:40, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ryan Delaney was enforcing existing policy previously set by the Arbitration Committee. (I routinely go through the RfAr page and refactor out excessive threaded commentary, under my authority as an Arbitrator; Ryan is merely acting based on this precedent and his actions are consonant with the wishes of the Committee.) I thank him for his efforts, wasted though they were in this case. Kelly Martin (talk) 17:20, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

IP Address 66.213.45.18 is a Public Library

Hello,

I just wanted to inform you that this is the IP of a public library. I do not know how this effects the policy of blocking but I wanted to let you know.

Thanks --66.213.45.18 15:06, 14 November 2005 (UTC)Nate nnguyen@ghpl.org Grandview Heights Public Library[reply]

good luck

Good luck stopping my "vandalism." I find a computer lab open at a uniersity and go in and do this. It's a hobby. I go to local cafes, the library--only places that have open access. If you block from this address, you will only be blocking one of scores of places I "contribute." My philosophy is that I don't believe in such sites because they invite misinformation. I have messages in your site that have been posted for over a half a year and have not been taken off. Real, scholarly books are what I push, and that this this is not. It is fun, it is unusual and it is a hobby. Goodby and goodluck. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.163.164.193 (talk • contribs)

Thanks

Thanks for supporting me for adminship. The RfA passed today. I look forward to working with you to make Wikipedia a better place. --Nlu 03:39, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of banning

Please make a note, as required, at Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Zen-master#Impositions_of_a_ban_under_the_probation_remedy of your ban of Zen-Master. Fred Bauder 01:13, 20 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, each banning should be explained, setting forth the reason it was imposed. Fred Bauder 14:20, 21 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

Hi Ryan Delaney,

Thank you very much for your support on my RfA. I was both surprised and delighted about the amount of support votes and all the kind words! If I can ever help with anything or if you have any comments about my actions as an admin, please let me know! Regards, Joann e B 14:44, 21 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Outside view

Hi Ryan, thanks for your input on the RfC. NPOV issues can be subtle, especially when trying to neutrally decide what to include and exclude in a long article about a vast subject, such as the big bang. In this case, it is clear that the major editors (myself included) all have strong feelings about this. I earlier wrote a content RfC, at Talk:Big Bang#RfC. If you haven't read it already, I would encourage you to look at it before concluding that Elerner's edits are unambiguously NPOV. There has been substantial discussion of this on talk. Thanks. –Joke137 18:41, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Democratic peace theory

I was orphaning a template used in this article, and noticed that you protected it on 7 November: a substantial length of time ago. I wonder are we done with the protection for now? I've left it since I know nothing of the article's history. -Splash^talk 23:55, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I thought there was probably a good reason. Good luck! -Splash^talk 22:57, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Uni Hall

Hi Ryan. Seems someone has been inspired to start an article on the Flinders University Hall. Being a former resident, I thought you might like to know. Happy editing, --cj | talk 09:09, 24 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Featured article for December 25th

I noticed that you have listed yourself as an atheist Wikipedian. You will probably be interested to know that Brian0918 has nominated Omnipotence paradox as the front page article for December 25th. You can vote on this matter here. The other suggestion being supported by others for that date is Christmas, although Raul654 has historically been against featuring articles on the same day as their anniversary/holiday. AngryParsley ^{(talk) (contribs)} 08:24, 28 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Removed comment

I'm very sorry — I had no idea that had happened. I did have numerous time-outs at one point earlier on, perhaps my impatient save-save-save-save approach was what did it. -Splash^talk 01:39, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

FAC/Marilyn Manson

Thanks for your input last month at Wikipedia:Peer review/Marilyn Manson/archive1. The article benefited greatly from all of those comments, and it's now a Featured Article candidate. I would definitely appreciate your vote! --keepsleeping say what 20:05, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

pls unblock me

User:Haham hanuka - i have more than 3000 edits...

pps: can u tell alf from snobby cambridge to fuck off too! i know you probably bum him but ' bothered'

Edit Summaries

Thanks, I knew that...sometimes I just forget. Sorry about that. Was there a place in particular you noticed me forgetting? --Violin Girl^♪ 13:50, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, fine...I'll be glad to post edit summaries. I was thinking that might be where I was messing up! Thanks for getting back to me.--Violin Girl^♪ 13:56, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the revert

Thanks much for reverting the vandalism my user page. –Abe Dashiell ^(t/c) 14:22, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Adminship

I would be honoured if you, great editor that you are, would nominate me. However, I do not believe that I am ready for adminship yet. I desire more experience, and self-assurance, that I would make a good admin. Also, MONGO has stated that he would like to nominate me at a later date. So, a good reason is, I simply dont think I have enough experience. But thank very much for the consideration. All the best Ban e s 14:43, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

(Pauses cryptoderk). I have thought about the joys of having the rollback, and have often fumed over people like you perpetually beating me to the reversion:-). But, I would like to be well clear of 2000 edits as I dont think I would be well supported right now. Again, it means alot to me that my contributions are being noticed...Cheers Ban e s 14:52, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oh yeah, but your rfa had an oppose vote, I dont want one of those :-)! Seriously, I thought that one had to have over 2000 to have a good chance, yours was very well supported. All the same, I dont think I am quite ready for it yet. Expect to see my name on the RFA page sometime in January, btw. Thanks again for everything Ban e s 15:10, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sam Ryder

Got a bit troubled by the warning you added to my draft on Sam Ryder. Not sure of the basis: is there something in particular that you query? do you have a POV that clashes? is this just a generalised thing that you (and others) add to new articles (not seen it before)? or are my eyes too close together??

I live in the area and the sources I checked confirmed what I had been told locally. Regards Folks at 137 13:07, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It's been a while since I posted the above query. Not found any answer, did you post one? Or just overlook it? Assuming I found loads of references, how would I get the warning removed? Folks at 137 12:47, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The "Exameter Road"

Back in September, someone actually made an article of the Exameter Road? It happens to be a sci-fi concept of mine, and just thought I'd look to see if anyone attempted an article.

Yes, publishing it into a novel is a number of years off, so I understand it's not article-worthy right now, but I'm curious: What did the text of the Exameter Road say before deletion? I look forward to hearing from you. --Shultz 17:53, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Zen-master

are there any specific edits i should watch out for? Because most of it just seems like normal talk page stuff (though he is very repetitive). Perhaps I'm a bit too leniant? Sasquatcht|c 04:35, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Not very... I just watch for personal attacks and what not... are there any other mentors on that know more about him than me? I'm a confused soul with too much work and too much stress right now... =( Sasquatcht|c 04:42, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection

I saw you just reverted vandalism on George W. Bush, and wondered what you thought about the proposals to curb what's going on there. If you have time, check out Wikipedia:Semi-protection policy, and weigh in (there's something of a large discussion page, so be prepared. For a quick run-through of what's been said and done, see #rehashing) Hope to see you there. -Mys e kurity^{(have you seen this?)} 02:48, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, No Problem!

The block logs are filled with blocks occuring on the same person over a few minutes. I wonder if those high speed vandals ever get sick of being blocked 3 to 4 minutes after they create names. Guess not, oh well.

Hey, have you ever dealt with stubs before? I've been having some issues with the stub sorting people lately, and i'd like to clear that up, so if you have any advice, that'd be great. karmafist 03:53, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sturmgrenadier AfD

Ryan, I'm dropping you this note, as I've seen you vote on some gaming articles that were up for deletion and you probably have an interest. Recently, the article for Sturmgrenadier met with Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sturmgrenadier (2nd nomination). I would appreciate your input on the article and comments on the AfD page, whether you see fit to retain it or delete it. --Habap 15:36, 21 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Céline Dion

Just to let you know that a PD/free photo has been added to the article (you opposed on that ground. I don't know if you might want to change your vote). Thanks. Oran e (t) (c) (e-mail) 01:08, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Aolanonwaswronglyaccused

He has re-added his message to the admin/incidents and I am unable to respond due to some weird block that says the wikimedia foundation needs my donations. I'm really scared that some admin will block me just on his word. Can you please, please remove this section? Chooserr 06:03, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Contributions & Block Log--Aolanonawanabe 06:14, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Flamewar

I do thank you for removing the flamewar. You will notice I didn't start either, told you it was happening, and only replied to his false allegations so no one would mistake them as truths. Chooserr 06:54, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I listed a vandal, the vandal decided to flame his own edit history, vandal gets ignored, vandalism get's written off--Aolanonawanabe 06:56, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

zenny

Oh, I was unaware of that. Fixed, thanks. R adiant _>|< 18:07, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas!!

MERRY CHRISTMAS, Causa sui/Archive 6! Hope it's a wonderful one! (happy New Year, too!)--ViolinGirl^♪ 15:09, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps you misinterpret

Cleaning up an extremely biased and biasing article should not be a crime as you seem to imply. Please list a specific case for how my two recent edits to race and intelligence were "disruptive"? I think your characterization of them as "bald reversions" is inaccurate. The WP:0RR encourages editors to not think in terms of "reverting" and to preserve information and viewpoints, which in this case is the fundamentally critical viewpoint which has been completely mischaracterized and obfuscated. No one has yet to give an explanation for why my changes were reverted, I must assume they aren't following the WP:0RR. Any no one has responded to my challenge to explain the article's presumption inducing dichotomy and extreme bias. I've made a list of some of the problems with the intro of the article on its discussion page, please comment there. zen master T 00:58, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not tell people what to do without a policy justification and rationale. What made you consider my 2 most recent edits to race and intelligence to be "bald reversions"? I understand you claim you are not involved in the "content dispute" but tacitly supporting censorship and obfuscation makes you involved. I've seen this "disruptive" label used quite frequently on wikipedia, but I've never seen an actual justification nor even a rationale offered to explain its use, in each and every case. And note the WP:NPOV policy is the most important on wikipedia, the race and intelligence article currently has an obscene degree of bias. zen master T 01:49, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

BD2412's RFA

Thanks, Ryan, for piling your support onto my RfA - I'll do my best as an admin to help make the dream of Wikipedia into a reality! BD2412 T 22:04, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Breakcore

what you deleted (breakcore diy resource) wasn't nonsense, it's a vital addition to the breakcore wiki, as it appears collected at all other breakcore hubs. if the formatting was your complaint, i was in the middle of editing that.

Notsleeping 10:26, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Happy New Year

For last year's words belong to last year's language

And next year's words await another voice.

And to make an end is to make a beginning.

T.S. Eliot, "Little Gidding"

Happy New Year! ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 20:24, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hospitality

Thanks for that suggestion. Usually a cleanup can avoid the AfD but waiting means a fresh start without the problems of the current article. Vegaswikian 22:34, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Repeatedly blanking anon

This user continues to blank pages about conservative US political figures, and got the "last warning" (after being blocked before). I imagine only admins can block IPs. Massysett 16:52, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image Tagging Image:Magnus Carlsen.jpg

This image may be deleted.

Thanks for uploading Image:Magnus Carlsen.jpg. I notice the image page currently doesn't specify who created the image, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created the image yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the image on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the image yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the image also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the image qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other images, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of image pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stan 04:38, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bat-embargo

Hi I noticed you seem open minded about keeping good information and interested in the Bat Embargo. Please help me keep and improve the bat-embargo page.--T for Trouble-maker 22:19, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!--T for Trouble-maker 04:30, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Clerking

You are always welcome to make suggestions and analyze evidence on the /Workshop page of any open case. I have forwarded you suggestion to the committee also. Fred Bauder 14:00, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We appreciate your help very much Fred Bauder 22:11, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:EffK

I more or less agree that that makes your case. However, since he is the defendant in an arbitration proceeding, I would prefer to let the arbitrators deal with his posts, since that post is a typical example of what he posts to article talk pages and why I am requesting to ban him. Robert McClenon 20:37, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, since you are assisting the ArbCom, do you know why they still have the evidence record open and have not taken that case into voting? If there is a reason why they want to keep the evidence record open, could they respond to the request for a temporary injunction? Robert McClenon 13:25, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Steve Sailer

Hey Ryan, can you help out? An anon seems to be behaving disruptively at Talk:Steve Sailer, repeatedly removing comments, arguing (without ground) that they qualify as personal attacks on the article subject. Thanks if you stop by, Nectar 16:59, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Benpagar

Give me a shot to reform him by unblocking him? I promise that if he acts up I'll come running to you for a reblock. Hipocrite - «Talk» 23:28, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Request retracted. Hipocrite - «Talk» 22:52, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

politics

You say you like politic. I am sure you are a liberal it would not surprise me.

Clerk application approved

Your application to become a clerk for the Arbitration Committee has been approved. Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/Clerks/Administration is for recording organizational work and communication between clerks. Raul654 18:12, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

United States Congress contributions

I see you were involved in interactions with several editors from the United States Congress and had personal experience in dealing with them. Their behavior is now up for comment by the rest of the community. Can you please certify this RFC at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/United States Congress? Thanks. Elle _{vécut heureuse} ^{à jamais} (Be eudaimonic!) 11:14, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]