User talk:Chacor/Archive 05

E@L support Barnstar

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		Though what you did is not so random, I, on behalf of E@L, award you this barnstar for your support. Randfan 18:46, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration case

Some created a RFAr against you and didn't bother informing you of it. So I guess I am officially notifying you of it. semper fi — Moe 04:27, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind. The user and the case was reverted. :) semper fi — Moe 04:30, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So, which one is it?

This is Konstable. According to your blatant personal attacks, I am a troll who should not be fed, yet you and others have invited me into an arbitration in which I will not take part. Hrm... So which one is it? Or was it your desire in the first place to have a one sided arbitration? And as to other admins that got de-sysoped for less that you were referring to, could it have been someone, say you, getting de-sysoped for being confirmed by checkuser to be following the will of the very banned user Daniel Brandt? Now you see, I am bringing this up because I remember you running for RfA and saying that it was a silly non-issue. Yet you think that I am an ultimate troll for lifing a mistaken block?--203.109.209.49 11:19, 13 November 2006 (UTC) Don't reply to the IP talk page, this IP is shared and is not really static - changes every now and then.[reply]

You said SIX DAYS AGO you were leaving. Your continued insistence on posting message like this very one using IP addresses is highly disruptive. If you want to go, just go, but don't disrupt how we work. Just leave, and no-one will bother you. – Ch acor 11:22, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh you see, I didn't think it was disruptive to ask people questions. I did leave, I came back for a quick message to Ryulong for which I was blocked as you very well know. And now people are making personal attacks against me. How am I disrupting the way things work here? What did I disrupt? Asking you questions? Posting goodbye messages to people? I will not be using User:Konstable again, and as people have a problem with me using socks I am using my IP, or would you rather I create User:AlternativeAccountK_2? In fact you personally posted a statement on the arbitration inviting me to comment and now I am a troll for doing so?--203.109.209.49 11:29, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me? As far as I can see, I never made any insinuation that you should comment at the RFAR. Seriously, just ignore all of this and leave. This is wasting everyone's time, including your own. For the sake of everybody, stop posting, and we'll leave you alone. I'm willing to retract my RFAR comment if you leave. Just stop treating us like idiots, because it'll only stir up more anger and controversy. – Ch acor 11:34, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WP:POST

I don't think covering WikipediaWeekly specifically would work; as you said, it'd just be an episode summary. Perhaps going in-depth into major stories, or basically adapting one or two major stories into a text article? Basically, writing stories like Michael Snow does on major wiki-related stories, with a link to the WikipediaWeekly site for the podcast report on it. I'd be happy to see some sort of positive collaboration. Ral315 (talk) 04:40, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

Thank you for your wellwishing on my first edit day :) —Cuivi é nen 01:14, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Konstable

Hello,

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Konstable. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Konstable/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Konstable/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, --Srik e it ^{(Talk | Email)} 05:49, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your talk on Tambayan

I saw that you were talking about me in Tambayan. First of all, I only have two vaild accounts (Deogene and Windows72106, Emir214 was abandoned) as of now. And second, I only plan to use this two accounts, the new user is not me. - Deogene 14:06, 15 November 2006 (UTC) And why are you so interested in posting topics to Tambayan anyway? You're not a Filipino, are you? - Deogene 14:11, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RFA Thanks

Thanks!
Thanks for your input on my (nearly recent) Request for adminship, which regretfully achived no consensus, with votes of 68/28/2. I am grateful for the input received, both positive and in opposition, and I'd like to thank you for your participation.
Georgewilliamherbert 06:08, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Let's vote for Mariano Trias

Hey there Chacor! I would like to ask for your vote for the article of Mariano Trias in Wikipedia's Article Creation and Improvement Drive.

I believe that this article still needs a bit of clean-up and expansion. I hope you would vote for the article in this link.

Thanks a lot!!! ---- Kevin Ray 08:39, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Storm path (Cimaron)

I hope this is sufficient for your sandbox. (on my user page) - Deogene 10:35, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

I appreciate the kind words :-) Ta bu shi da yu 09:00, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Impersonation of my Wiki profile

Hi Chacor, could you please help me out here in my report on the Impersonation of my Wiki profile. I noticed that you had removed it from WP:Pain and also WP:Admin. Could you please help me out with this? Thanks Sudharsansn (talk • contribs) 16:44, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I do understand. Just want to make sure that no mess is created by that vandal. Any suggestions? Sudharsansn (talk • contribs) 16:49, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot Chacor! Sudharsansn (talk • contribs) 16:53, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re Images

Sorry! Storm05 17:00, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Two questions

1) What was that last edit to your user page? (Mood: /Stress) Does that mean you are under stress? If so, I hope that the stress is not too great and that it passes quickly.

2) What is an "RSMC"? I assume that the "M" stands for "meterological" but that's as far as I can guess.

Never underestimate the power of search engines. "RSMC" = "Regional Specialized Meteorological Center", right? So, what is it? No real reason for me wanting to know. I'm just curious.

--Richard 16:12, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your support!

A week ago I nominated myself, hoping to be able to help Wikipedia as an administrator as much as a WikiGnome. I am very glad many others shared my thoughts, including you. Thank you for your trust! Be sure I will use these tools to protect and prevent and not to harass or punish. Should you feel I am overreacting, pat me so that I can correct myself. Thanks again! ReyBrujo 19:43, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion request

Since you expressed an opinion on Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Discuss and Vote, I would appreciate it if you could comment on WP:DDV, in particular as to whether it accurately represents the way Wikipedia works (and feel free to reword it if it doesn't) and as to whether it is correct that we generally discourage (but not forbid) voting. Thanks. (Radiant) 08:49, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Things that are really detrimental for Wikipedia

WP:3RR

Please re-read the policy, and in good faith please consider what you've said in IRC. The way you see 3RR is detrimental to Wikipedia, and we cannot have that in admins. You are advocating more than three reverts to a page as long as it's not to the same version, when it's clear that four reverts with the same intent is a 3RR vio. As pointed out on WP:3RR, "The policy states that an editor must not perform more than three reversions, in whole or in part, on a single Wikipedia page within a 24 hour period." In good faith, please reconsider your stand. We cannot afford to have admins allowing 3RR violations. – Ch acor 11:51, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This will speak for me – from User talk:William M. Connolley.

And could you please elaborate on your intent while revert-warring with the other user? — Nearly Headless Nick ^{L} 12:05, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Block of D.Prok. (talk · contribs)

Hello William. I read the report on the WP:AN/3RR page and saw that you blocked this user for 24 hours for WP:3RR on the Michael Shields page. From the look of it, the user in question made three edits and reverted to his version three times and not four which is a prerequisite warranting a block. I understand that WP:3RR does not give any user authority to take the system for a ride and blocks are warranted when they have been repeatedly disruptive, but this user was new and it would be preposterous to assume that he was aware of the policies and guidelines on Wikipedia. Prima facie it appears that User:Chacor did not care to discuss the issues properly, but only left edit summaries such as rv, stop reverting to POV version and failed to explain why he thinks that this revert is POV. I, in good faith believe that you should have warned the user against a 3RR breach instead of blocking him, and asked Chacor to discuss the matter with him. In my opinion this constitutes newbie biting. Take care. — Nearly Headless Nick ^{L} 10:48, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

D Prok made 4 reverts, not 3 edits. If he is a newbie, how come he knows about POV tags and reverting? William M. Connolley 11:05, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You'd be surprised to know how resourceful those newbies can be... ^_^ — Nearly Headless Nick ^{L} 11:18, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He's just sent me a rude email, so he can sit out his block as far as I'm concerned William M. Connolley 11:55, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'd endorse the block in such a case, but to speak for the defendant – reversion essentially means reverting to the same version, and three revert rule generally applies to reversion of the article to the same version more than three times. Here, this edit is slightly different from the other three edits. Now, I wouldn't really stand up for this. (removed inflammatory part that really could afford to be reworded.) Best regards, — Nearly Headless Nick ^{L} 05:52, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Hello Chacor, I would like you to reconsider removing a bunch of messages you considered to be attacks. Nearly Headless Nick means well, and is interested in seeing Wikipedia stay in peace. In any case, I removed the bits I felt to be quite a bit inflammatory and should be reworded. ★MESSED ROCKER★ 12:25, 20 November 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Townsville / Thuringowa

Hi Chacor, you seem to be a much more experienced editor, can you help me out with the Talk:Townsville, Queensland discusion. Thuringowacityrep|talk is getting increasingly personal in his remarks. Thanks Wiki Townsvillia n 09:56, 21 November 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Wikistressed?

SpLo T _{(*T* C+u+g+v)} has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!

- SpLo T _{(*T* C+u+g+v)} 13:38, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay!

I have no idea how to sign these things, so feel free to remove this after reading it. But, I'll be more careful with my 'edit summaries'. I'm used to copy editing a newspaper, in which our quips are only seen by other editors and are thus invisible. Then I realized that everyone can see these edits and why! I didn't realize they weren't classified information. I'll be cautious in the future :) and I read the WP:CIV notice as well, now that I've been linked. Also, I want to make sure I don't overstep my boundaries. I'm a tropical cyclone enthusiast and have been for over a decade, but I don't want to take over your project. I've made a few changes that weren't just "minor edits" for sure, because very little information was given when much more was available. I always cite that work, but I don't want to screw up the project. I love this project, by the way. I think it's great to have a directory available for access to all of this information available. But, I don't want to screw it up. Barrylius 02:13, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Userpage

Coming out of RfA for the moment, because it does not relate, what on Earth is wrong with my userpage?--Anthony.bradbury 02:23, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I like userboxes. My date of birth was not of my choosing. And I am currently a fully employed medical practitioner. Not everyone on wikipedia is a student, although sometimes it seems as if they are.--Anthony.bradbury 02:29, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks...

...for the welcome - I've always had a fascination with natural disasters, especially storms, and so I finally remembered to add my name to the list after the revert at 2006 Atlantic hurricane season :) Cheers, Daniel.Bryant ^{[ T · C ]} 02:59, 23 November 2006 (UTC) [reply]

WP:FA

Chacor, would you help me get an article to featured status?? I'm not sure what to get as featured yet, but I'd appreciate some help in deciding. --SunStar Net 20:32, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User talk:Deogene/Sandbox/Chebi 0620

You wrote:

"This is a violation of the GFDL, because page history has not been retained. – Ch acor 14:39, 23 November 2006 (UTC)"[reply]

Then, retain it. Why are you so against me? - Deogene 08:07, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[If nobody takes over responsibility]]

Perhaps you can help me It is too good damned easy to send me back to de wiki with an unsolved problem Thats no solution at all. I am asking for help not for beeing sent back to where nobody deals with that matter. Kind regars --Ekkenekepen 11:02, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Use de's dispute resolution process I already tried that several times but I was directly banned and blocked. They are working with page blocking to avoid further entrys from my side. I have enough people who are willing to evidence that. --Ekkenekepen 11:06, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Probably best left on ANI

This IP user is going around admin shopping... and causing other disruption (see WP:AIV). It might be better just to leave the section so that this latest IP will be blocked as well. I'm not going to revert however. (→Netscott) 14:10, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cimaron

Hey, Icelandic Hurricane wants to work on a Cimaron article. Do you mind if I re-userfy the information from your deleted sandbox article to his sandbox, or would you rather he start it from scratch? --Core desat 22:31, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Userpage

Thank you for reverting my userpage, which you picked up on so quickly that I had not yet spotted it. I was rather taken by the way he updated my vandal-counter, but am somewhat at a loss to figure out why he hit me. I may have {{speedy}} tagged him, but don't recall doing so.--Anthony.bradbury 11:58, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On delving a bit, it appears that this guy, User:Miiwote, vandalises incoming comments on his own talkpage, and then attacks the senders. My comment to him, which I have found and which seems to me to be both friendly and constructive, he has converted into a significant obscenity. Why would anyone do that?--Anthony.bradbury 12:04, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That seems to me to be a seriously good idea. Thank you.--Anthony.bradbury 12:08, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re : RfB/1ne

I didn't realize that, my apologies. I've reverted accordingly, thanks for notifying me. - Cheers, Mailer Diablo 13:04, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've restored it, since the RfB was restored. - Mailer Diablo 00:30, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK!

Did you know? was updated. On 25 November, 2006, a fact from the article Late November 2006 Nor'easter, which you recently nominated, has been 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.

--Aksi_great (talk) 18:41, 25 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed meetup: Singapore 3

Hi Chacor, it was regrettable that you couldn't attend our second meetup on Friday.

The third Singapore Wikipedians' meetup will be held either on 10 March 2007 or on 11 March 2007 in Chaerani's residence, a piece of landed property in Queenstown, Singapore. An estimated ten to fifteen users in the Singapore Wikipedian community are expected to turn up. Please visit the meetup page to indicate your interest for attending this meetup. —Goh wz 06:53, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

happy Turkey Day!!!!!

I wish you a very merry Thanksgiving! Hope you and your family have a magnificent day! So, what are you thankful for? Hooray and happy gormandizi^ŋ! --Randfan _{please talk talk to me!}

Have a great day! Please respond on my talk page (the red "fan" link in my signature). Cheers! :) —Rand fan !!

Cheers! :) —Rand fan !! has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile at others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Happy editing!

cyclone Tessi

can you tell me why you keep removing my edits when it is correct waiting for your reply.....

STOP inserting your POV-laden changes from a disagreement over Australian articles into the tropical cyclone articles. – Ch acor 02:07, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

i'm not....but this cyclone did cross the coast in Thuringowa north of Townsville and there was magor damage to Thuringowa Maggie island and Townsville and this info can be found on the BOM website all i am doing is correcting and updating the article this has nothing to do with that rubbish on the Townsville page so please don't think that it is. will you allow the very small and true fact to be added....

Fair enough, if you claim it's from the BOM, when doing your changes cite your sources for verifiability, then it won't be reverted. The unsourced changes to include the specific town involved in the other dispute stinks of an individual POV, but if a reputable source has included Thuringowa as separate it will be accepted. – Ch acor 02:25, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

thank you...im not sure how to cite i just read that page and i get a bit lost but i will work it out and them make the small changes if you see that i have made a mistake can you correct it for me please......thanks

The simplest way to cite is to include the source url in square brackets (like this: [http://url.url.com]) next to the sourced information. – Ch acor 02:58, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks mate..

Shanshan

I've done a history merge, so everything should be in order. Really nice job on the rewrite. --Core desat 06:00, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is there an issue?

'ello. I have been trying to get my head around what this arbitration is about for a long time. And now that Fred Bauder is proposing remedies, without saying what they are remedies against in the first place. As I am sure you know very well I was sick of this from day one. I just want to ask you if you still have any issues that you think should be arbitrated? I see you have proposed that I have violated WP:POINT but do not want to have any action taken. I of course have disputed this in my evidence, you haven't presented yours but in any case how does this warrant arbitrator intervention? (Is there any point in making a final decision full of: "X is reminded of Y" and nothing else, I have been reminded more than enough and what will it solve?)

Honestly, after this mess, there is no way in hell I would ever do something like that again, or that I will be back to editing within a month. And of course I have long given up my admin tools (with no intention of asking to have them ever returned even if I get back). I have written a (much much) longer and more general satement regarding the point of arbitration here, yet no one has commented to the first part in almost 2 days which leads me to think that there is really no pressing issue (and for all of the standing concerns I have already apologzed here)

I have wasted way too much time on this and I have only grown sourer over Wikipedia during this process. To make it even worse now there are inflamatory side-discussions (such as Dmcdevit being quite insulted by Fred Bauder's motion to have him recuse). This case is not benefiting anyone, I really think we should put an early end to this mess (there is no other word for it).--Konstable II 13:08, 27 November 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Single-party state Mediation dispute

Would you contact Regebro about moving this case further to Medcom? He has given me no response. Thanks Wiki eZach| talk 22:52, 27 November 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Freda

On the contrary, the Columbus Day Storm of 1962 is a mess and should be merged into the Typhoon Freda (1962) article. Storm05 15:20, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not quite, the sources clearly states that Freda hit the western United States as an extratropical storm, so the two are related. Storm05 15:23, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Again, not quite, read the sources, they clearly state that Freda struck the western united states as an extratropical storm and read the Tropical Storm Leslie (2000) article. Storm05 15:29, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, Tropical Storm Nicholas (2003) has an article, even though the storm itself didnt do any damage and the a low that absorbed this did. And plus, theres no way the 1962 Columbus Day Storm article can be cleaned up, much of it is unsourced and oringal research, any attempt to clean it up will be a waste of time because evenutally any additional source will clearly connect the 1962 columbus storm to freda. Storm05 15:32, 28 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment

Hello. I see you have voted against my candidacy as a steward. I respect your vote and I don't intend to make your change it. Though, it would really help me to know your reasons, so as to work on what you think I have done wrong (I don't remember meeting you before). It would be great if you could comment your opinion. Thanks a lot. guillom 07:37, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Erf, I don't see why a neutral vote is a sign of disruption (it must be because I don't know the en.wikipedia habits, maybe you could explain this one to me?). I don't consider 2 votes out of 14 are « many »... My point is: if I don't know the person, I am not the good person to say if (s)he will be a good steward. I prefer letting people who know him/her giving their opinion. Thus I vote neutral. Of course, a way would be to check their actions, but that would require a lot of time and that would never replace the opinion from people who have been working with the candidate for a long time. Letting people who know the candidate electing him/her is my way. And that's the reason why I have left comments on most of my votes, included supports, because I thought they could be useful for people who don't know the user. Anyway, I thank you for answering me. guillom 09:13, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your rv on User talk:Springeragh

Are you saying that a warning for "And leave it to Cyde to make a comment like that in your laft RfA…" is unjustified, and that the comment doesn't violate WP:CIVIL? --Rory096 15:16, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They're related. I could use {{civil}} instead, but he was specifically attacking Cyde, not just being generally incivil. And, to the contrary, it does say that: #'''Strong Support'''. Sorry to use the over-used clichè, but I thought he already was one. ;)  — [[User talk:Springeragh|<span style="background:#808;color:#fff;"> '''''$PЯING'''''rαgђ </span>]] <small>[[User:Springeragh/Loyalties|Always loyal!]]</small> 05:56, 28 November 2006 (UTC) --Rory096 15:22, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cabal

There is no Cabal! Please see my comment on Wikipedia:Mediation_Cabal/Cases/2006-11-18_Singapore_Changi_Airport#Discussion. I'd like to help out. The Duke of Chacor 02:01, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the siggy idea... the topic on my talk page before you said the same thing, but didn't say why or what it would do... :)

OK, so where do we go from here? The Duke of Chacor 04:24, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Transcript: Wikipedia Weekly Ep 7

Hi Chacor, this is just a message passed on from Daveydweeb to not work on the Ep 7 transcript, as he's away and is working on it right now. Thanks, and take care! riana_dzasta 14:25, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RE: {{hidden begin}}

Seemks to be a bug with the template, and not with the code in general. 11:14, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

Assessment needed

I need your opinion on my Isaac article. I think i got this right. Thanks.Mitch azenia(8200+edits) 01:23, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RFM

A request for mediation has been filed with the Mediation Committee that lists you as a party. The Mediation Committee requires that all parties listed in a mediation must be notified of the mediation. Please review the request here, and indicate whether you agree or refuse to mediate. If you are unfamiliar with mediation, please refer to Wikipedia:Mediation. There are only seven days for everyone to agree, so please check as soon as possible. Wiki eZach| talk 02:37, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Biased content in the page on Singapore

Hi, I have found some biased content under "Politics and Government" in the Singapore page. I have attempted to amend it but you have classified my amendments as vandalism and reverted to the existing text. Most of the sources cited are biased and put Singapore in a negative light. How are we going to set the record straight and present a more objective stance if our amendments are blocked? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Factually (talk • contribs) 04:53, 5 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Unverifiable content

Hi,the following paragraph under "Politics and Government" in "Singapore" page is not verifiable. They are allegations:

"It has also been alleged that the PAP employs censorship, gerrymandering by the Elections Department and the filing of civil suits against the opposition for libel or slander to impede their success. Several former and present members of the opposition, including Francis Seow, J.B. Jeyaretnam and Chee Soon Juan perceive the Singaporean courts as favourable towards the government and the PAP due to a lack of separation of powers."[15]

Suggest removing this paragraph as these are views and not facts. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Factually (talk • contribs) 07:53, 5 December 2006 (UTC).[reply]

OK! OK! if this is the policy of the site.

Hi, some of the changes are verifiable by the url links provided.

The 84% figure is to be in line with the figure quoted under Demographics: "Eighty-four percent of Singaporeans live in public housing provided by the Housing and Development Board (HDB).[40] ". So, which one is correct?

Singapore Infomap is an information portal and should not be under "Maps". Anything wrong to put it under "General Information"?

Thanks anyway for correcting my errors.

Your input is requested

Your input would be appreciated at this Request for Comments. Kelly Martin (talk) 17:08, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hurricane Danielle

I know we had a difference of opinion, I honestly thought the article was NN and nominated it because it is languishing in GA. It looks like you were not Assuming Good Faith on my part and I wanted to let you know there was honestly no bad faith on my part. What is and isn't encyclopedic varies depending on a persons viewpoint, thats why we go through these processes. The article wasn't harmed in any way by going through AFD, and in fact may be actually helped by protecting it from being AFDed if it makes FA. I plan on reviewing the article for GA status tonight. -Ravedave ^{(help name my baby)} 23:18, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Excessive moves

If you are an admin, can you pleaase block User talk:Yaksha ? it has come to my attention that that user has made excessive moving of pages without consensus, WP:ANI shows a member of the MedCom agreeing with this request, thank you,

See here as well [1]

Wiki eZach| talk 02:10, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

E-mail sent.

As above. Ral315 (talk) 21:10, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Help

I see you're online now (I got conflicted tagging a new article A7 but you deleted it). Portal:Current events/2006 December 8 - it's not nonsense and it seems to be notable enough, but there's POV and formatting issues. I'm up to 3 reverts, should I revert again? We definitely can't have "corrupt bastards" on Portal:Current events. – Ch acor 09:42, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. – Ch acor 09:48, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. This is just my opinion, but I think that it may be premature to add this to our daily Portal:Current events due to the limited amount of information available so far; the specific details of the charges have yet to be released, et cetera. Please feel free to replace this story if you disagree or if you are aware of additional media coverage I'm not seeing. Looks like we need an article for Tom Anderson (politician) in any case. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 09:54, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What do you know, we really do host an article on the Corrupt Bastards Caucus. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 09:56, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For your review. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 10:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Track maps

I've uploaded a new version. Let me know if anything else is needed. --Ajm⁸¹ 23:02, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Konstable

This case is now closed and the results have been published at the link above.

Konstable, now voluntarily desysopped, may not be resysopped without using the normal channels, including a request for adminship and community consensus.

For the Arbitration Committee --Srikeit 05:54, 10 December 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Your vote.

Please explain on Meta who is a troll and who have I threatened to block. Thank you. Bastiq▼e ^demandez 02:12, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've been trying very hard to mentor CC so he doesn't engage in the previous behaviors. Going so far as to getting him involved at Wikimedia Commons, where he has been, surprisingly enough, an asset to the community. SAJordan, on the other hand, had no other purpose it seemed than to engage the community in a lengthy, tenditious discussion. You've been involved with Commons, you know our needs are substantially different there. Please see User_talk:Moreschi#Meta regarding some of my comments about my patience with SAJordan, which had already been exhausted at Commons before this began, as well as Moreschi's response on my own page (right above yours). Note that my comments and tenor of language on AN/I are entirely directed at SAJordan. I'm tired of having to defend myself against innuendo and persistant character assassination because I've taken a chance on helping Cool Cat become a better user. Bastiq▼e ^demandez 02:35, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. It does make a difference and is greatly appreciated. Bastiq▼e ^demandez 03:25, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was pleased that you voted neutral earlier, could you let me know why you switched to Oppose? Thanks. ++Lar: t/c 04:18, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Being honest, when I first voted I considered opposing solely based on our past differences, but I don't believe I'm that kind of a person, so I voted neutral. I haven't actually checked the elections page again until today, and there's since been a considerable number of opposes with points made about your language limitations and lack of activity on meta. While I don't really care about meta activity, I can understand the concenrs regarding lack of language knowledge due to what being a steward entails. If you'd like, I'll clarify my oppose over on meta. I should also clarify that it's a weak oppose, something which I've not stated when changing my oppose. I hope you understand where I'm coming from. Cheers, – Ch acor 04:26, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, certainly if you wanted to clarify that it was a weak oppose and it was for those reasons that would be helpful. Of course I'd rather convince you that the language and meta issues really aren't issues. I think Pathoschild's support puts it best, we need stewards and those really aren't show stopper issues if you think about it. Thanks for your further consideration. ++Lar: t/c 04:40, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Admin coaching

I understand your concerns about admin coaching, and I agree that a program the sole purpose of which is to train users to get through the RfA processs is inappropriate, because then we may wind up with editors who were after the admin tools for their own personal agendas (which could be disruptive) or as a trophy (which means they weren't really that interested in helping in the first place). That of course was never my intention, but I see now that having a forum specifically for answering admin prep issues could easily devolve into a "gaming the system" forum, and that's why there was so much opposition to it. It was viewed as setting up a production line to mass produce admins using a "How to Crack the SAT" approach, and as such struck fear into the hearts of many admins. Such a help desk would weaken Wikipedia, not strengthen it, because it would inevitably help people get through RfAs whom lacked the right attitude, the appropriate intentions, and the essential skills.

Therefore, I designed a new project focusing primarily on attitude and skills. As an example of the venue, see Budgiekiller, on vandalism. I think you'll agree he has the right attitude, which is expressed in his presentation of his anti-vandalism efforts in this learning environment where others can learn by his fine example. Wikipedians with the welfare of Wikipedia at heart have been contacting me to contribute to the project. Grutness provided a course on stubbing, which inspired Elargirl to offer to prepare one on deletion. I hope you agree that this venue is one which we should expose as many developing editors to as we can. Your support would be most appreciated. The Transhumanist 13:17, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"One off"?

Chacor, I didn't want to comment until the voting period ended, lest this seem to be lobbying for votes, but now please compare discussions just over a month ago: [2], [3]. A line from the first, "Care should be taken with accusations", is ironic in view of the second. – SAJordan ^talk_contribs 14:17, 16 Dec 2006 (UTC).

Thanks for voting

I appreciate the feedback that I received during the RfA process. Unfortunately, I withdrew my candidacy. However, your participation is appreciated. I have made my New Years Resolution (effective immediately) to attempt to vote on at least 50 WP:XFD/week (on at least 5 different days), to spend 5 hours/week on WP:NPP, to be active in WikiProjects and to change the emphasis of my watchlist from editorial oversight to vandalism prevention. I have replaced several links that I had on my list to some that I think are more highly vandalized (Tiger Woods, Barry Bonds, my congressman Jesse Jackson, Jr., my senator Barrack Obama and Jesse Jackson). My first day under my newly turned leaf was about what I hope a typical day to be. I quickly found a vandal, made a few editorial changes to Donald Trump, voted at WP:CFD and WP:AFD, continued attempted revitalization of Wikipedia:WikiProject_Chicago and proposed a new stub type as a result of WP:NPP patrol. I hope this will broaden my wikipedia experience in a way that makes me a better administrator candidate. I hope to feel more ready to be an admin in another 3000 or so edits. TonyTheTiger 15:56, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

MedCab singapore airport

Yo. There are new developments on the MedCab case; specifically, on the talk page of the article itself... More news to follow :) The Duke of Chacor 12:39, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A Happy Birthday From Randfan

The Wikipedia Birthday Committee, myself, and B e a rly 541 wish you a very happy birthday! Enjoy your special day. Hooray! --Randfan _{please talk talk to me!}

Happy b-day! Hope it's a good one! Cheers! :)—Rand fan !! 00:50, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Birthday Chacor! · AndonicO ^Talk

I wish you a Happy Birthday! I hope you have a magnificent day! You are a year older now, enjoy it! · AndonicO ^Talk

.

Happy birthday!

File:Completed Versal Capital.gif Hurricanehink (talk) 17:28, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Birthday! Have a good one! Cheers. – Heave n's Wrath ^Talk 01:57, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Birthday, Chacor! Wishing you a very happy birthday and an awesome upcoming year! Don't forget to save us all a piece of cake!

Best regards from the Birthday Committee and myself! --lov e laughterlife♥^talk? 18:28, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: ArbCom elections bot

Chacor wrote:

Apparently Crazytales has withdrawn from the race, so could you adjust the bot to strike him out? – Ch acor 16:31, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done, thanks for pointing that out. I should have noticed sooner, given that people were trying to edit the page (perhaps next year I'll rewrite the bot so it actually notices this happening) – Gurch 17:36, 16 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Featured article

At the moment, I'm working on Toyota Corona - would you be able to help me get this to good article status?? I'm putting it up for peer review soon! --SunStar Net^talk 01:18, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm working on getting a few articles to GA status. Currently I'm working on:

I would also appreciate any advice for me at Wikipedia:Editor review/SunStar Net 2, I would not mind if you nominated me for RFA when you think it is appropriate to do so. --SunStar Net^talk 01:27, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

HAPPY BIRTH DAY

Happy birthday.--Sir james paul 04:27, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!

Thank you for reverting the vandalism to my user page. Best, Hagerman^(talk) 08:47, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Case closed

Happy birthday, too. The Duke of Chacor 10:21, 17 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thankyou for the supportive comments you made yesterday; I really appreciate it. Also, happy birthday. I hope you had a great day. :) Sarah Ewart 00:17, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I really don't know what to say, but good work!. — Nearly Headless Nick ^{L} 11:47, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

About your RfC comment.

Hi, thanks for contributing. You are basically correct, but there are two things you miss. First of all you insinuate that me or Huaiwei are intentionally reverting the otehr persons edits just because it is him. I can assure you that none of us do anything of the sort. Secondly, you seem to say that I should "step back". In the case of Single-party state, that stepping back would mean that I consciously allow an incorrect and POV article stand as is. I can not with a good conscience let Wikipedia contain lies. I hope you understand this.

Thanks --Regebro 15:39, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration

Greetings! You are being contacted to be notified that a Request for Arbitration has opened and you were listed as an involved party. You can find the discussion and make a statement at Wikipedia:Requests for Arbitration#Huaiwei and Singapore Changi Airport. Thank you for your cooperation. thadius856_{talk|airports|neutrality} 20:12, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

As a result of reverting systemic blanking of certain comments by a banned user, I've had to remove a few edits you made (due to edit conflicts) on ANI. I apologise, and ask if you could kindly reinstate them. Thanks and sorry. – Ch acor 02:36, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not to worry - will do. Sandy (Talk) 02:38, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll only re-instate my comment if Sandy re-instates her link to that site with images similar to the one that appeared on Today's Featured Article. Frankly, I'd prefer if she did not do that. -- tariqabjotu 02:40, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was considering not, but someone else already reinstated it. It would be best if someone would take note of all the images to blacklist, and then remove that from ANI. Sandy (Talk) 02:42, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

VOA's script has an undo edits button, which fixes only a single edit in the history. I did something with it here.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 02:56, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Husnock

Hello,

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Husnock. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Husnock/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Husnock/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee,—— Eagle 101 ^{(Need help?)} 04:26, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not trolling

The comments you removed here were not trolling. Please reinstate them. --Cyde Weys 11:55, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

YouTube

Hi, I think I saw you say somewhere that it's not okay to leave links to YouTube.com on Wiipedia. Is that true? I recently became a YouTube director and I promised people on my userpage that I would leave a link to my account. I just thought I'd check first. →Cyclone1→ 17:47, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, everything I post on YouTube is 100% my original work. Oh, and by the way, Happy Bithday (kinda late, sorry). →Cyclone1→ 01:29, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! →Cyclone1→ 01:32, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AfD Etiquette

Chacor, thank you for your participation in the AfD process. You may want to review Wp:afd#How_to_discuss_an_AfD.2FWikietiquette as it explains that an AfD is a debate, not a vote and editors are encouraged not to simply vote, but to make an argument as to their position on the AfD. Alan.ca 02:20, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bah

C'mon, you've been around for donkey's years... Please don't stir things up, take his talk of your watch list. (Longer to follow in two minutes.) - brenneman 03:05, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, where to begin:

I apologise without prevarication if I've offended you, or given the impression that I've taken a "side."
I'm happy to discuss at length on my talk the PROD issue if you disagree with anything I've said about that.
This is rapidly descending into chaos.

The real problem here is that everyone is pretty close to right in everything that they are saying, and *shakes finger all around* not enough niceness is being handed out.

(YOU) No one owns their own talk page.
Totally bloody correct.
(HIM) Quit with the repeated repeated hasseling on my talk.
Mostly correct too, you know. I've in my time fallen into the same, "I'll make it stick!" trap with regards to leaving someone a message, but really it does no good.

So, please, just for now at least, take the same advice I dished out on the other bloke's talk page and just step away, ok? Please?

brenneman 03:14, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tropical cyclones WikiProject Newsletter #7

After a long hiatus on my part, the December issue of the WikiProject Tropical cyclones newsletter is now available. If you wish to receive the full newsletter or no longer be informed of the release of future editions, please add your username to the appropriate section on the mailing list.--Nilf anion (talk) 22:33, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]