User talk:Guettarda/Archive12

Oh gosh oh gee. Pleae assume good faith :-/ . I called you in when I actually thought there was a case. As to the comment, I deleted it, because it was somewhat out of line, and I wouldn't want to say that anyway. I did take that out, didn't I?

Even if not, "right honourable opponent" or "right honourable gentleman" is the way people often address the other party in the british house of commons, so no slight was intended (it was the part "have chosen to..." that was not very nice) Kim Bruning 11:01, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Even though I've been acting in good faith, I'd still like to apologise for leaving a bad impression. It was not intended. Kim Bruning 11:23, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Except that, being British, we can spell The Right Honourable William M. Connolley 11:36, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK! Fixed, fixed. Sorry :-) Kim Bruning 12:06, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting Kim. I'd have bought it a week ago when I was more naïve. Not dumb enough to buy your crap any more. You need to find a different audience to play to. Guettarda 18:28, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It saddens me that you feel this way. My apologies are sincere. In future, to prevent similar misunderstandings, I'd build up things like injunction requests in my own sandbox first, to prevent such misunderstandings (though I'd preferably not want to start arbitration cases at all, of course.) Kim Bruning 05:11, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kim, I mistook you for a friend and I judged your actions in that context. My mistake isn't your fault. On the other hand, your actions posting the RFAr without informing anyone was underhanded. It would do you good not to do this regardless of whether you were dealing with a friend or an enemy.

I find it incomprehensible that you should attack people in this manner, friend or foe, for trying to protect the integrity of articles. I assume that you are here because you have to best interests of the project at heart. I can't reconcile that with your actions, but I doubt you would still be here if you didn't. But, quite frankly, I'm no longer interested. I no longer see any reason to trust you. Guettarda 16:06, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But but but... I was still writing the darn RFAr thing. I wanted to keep the scope limited so that it wasn't an attack too. I was still checking with people whether it was sane to do this thing too, your jumping at me forced my hand even :-( *sigh* Talk about backfire. Well, the damage is done. There's not much I can do to prove my sincerity, other than to continue to do my best in future. I'm terribly sorry you feel dissapointed. :-( Kim Bruning 16:20, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have zero idea what's going on. How can I ~~make things worse~~ help mediate this dispute? Let me know. Love, El_C 05:13, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Elusive day for kitties

It may have been the frosty morning, but hard to find any cats basking in the winter sunshine. A black cat ran along the far side of the bowling green, but none of the snapshots really worked. Then after going out for some milk I walked back the same way and was just about to take a picture of the ferry when what looked like the same cat jumped up on the bowling green wall. By the way, in summer Caledonian MacBrayne run a twin hulled passenger ferry on this route, inevitably called Ali Cat. ....dave souza, talk 19:05, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Better communication

Hello Guettarda, I knew the situation with AA needed to be handled with great care. The second that she agreed to work with SlimVirgin I should have contacted you to make sure you were shifting your focus. I fear my oversight made the situation worse. For that, I am very sorry. : { Your user page and talk page are my favorite ones on WP. Please bring them back soon. FloNight ^talk 19:29, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vote on natural selection intro passage

As a contributing editor of the English wikipedia article on natural selection, you are being invited to vote on two different versions of a controversial passage of the introduction. Please see details on the talk page, Talk:Natural selection#Vote on intro passage.

Yours sincerely,

Samsara _contrib ^talk 01:40, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Apology

I apologize for my flippant response to your very legitimate challenge on Talk:Intelligent design. My remark was meant as a sarcastic riposte to the question you were responding to, but perhaps the sarcasm may have been lost. Sometimes these discussions are just too much for me and I just can only hold my head in disbelief. Cheers. Keep up the good work. --CSTAR 21:37, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RfA

Guettarda, I was emailed on your behalf, and upon reflection and review of the events, I think that your actions might be considered to be more along the lines of inappropriate action/reaction rather than true intent to harass. As such, I think that a RfA is not the best course of action. I am hoping that this will be seen as the extended hand of truce I intend it to be, where we can hopefully stay out of each other's way if/when we can't agree. I've already withdrawn your name from the RfA. agapetos_angel 13:57, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agueybana

I've given the article a temp. protection against the vandals. What happened to your User Page? Your friend, Tony the Marine 01:53, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your message. Don't quit, don't let those dumbnuts get you down. There are many times that I have felt that way but, with the unity of my friends I have been able to fight the injustices here. You know that you are one of my best friends here. If you ever need me to be by your side to fight, I'll be there! Your friend, Tony the Marine 04:56, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Natural Selection

Could you look at the latest round of edits to the first paragraph, and the latest discussion, and comment? Thanks, Slrubenstein | Talk 11:53, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Agapetos angel

Hello,

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

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Dmcdevit·t 06:42, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can't stress strongly enough how important it is that you say nothing. Don't even acknowledge this RfAr's existence (RfAr? what RfAr?). Don't even acknowledge my comment for you to ignore its existence as existing! (what RfAr? what what RfAr?) Uninicdentally, I still don't know what any of this is about as you have yet to email me! On behalf of myself and my cat, yours, El_C 07:14, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I hope it's not goodbye, but whether it is or not, thank you

Hi, Guettarda. I noticed you blanked your user page. I don't know what has happened, as we didn't often meet on the same pages, so I'm not familiar with disputes you may or may not have been involved in. I hope it doesn't mean you're leaving. But whether it does or not, I'd like to say thank you. You've always been friendly and helpful, and were to me when I was a newcomer. Cheers. AnnH ♫ 15:42, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to mediation

I see what you mean. I think I might have gone a bit overboard there. Anyhow I will like your input on the matter. Try to reason with him, it's sort of impossible but if you do try i'll apreciate it. I'm already tired of this discussion. I don't know what else to do I've brought the evidence I've explain to him, I tried reasoning with him and all and he still wishes to argue against fact and even the dictionary. If you have any ideas or advice on dealing with guys like that please let me know. Nnfolz 16:38, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Warm fuzzies

Maybe you should just take a nap and ignore all this stuff for a while, like this fat little white kitty I know pretty well. <yawn> I'm feeling tired myself. ;) Your Longhorn friend · Katefan0^(scribble)/poll 17:42, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Is Puerto Rico a Nation?

My friend, I want to post this on that debate and I want your permission to use your name.

First of all, when this debate started, the parties involved were "not" notified in their User pages. This clearly gave Algrs the advantage. Second the mediator has not responded to the opinions stated by the parties involved. His response came about before the others had an opportunity to express themselves. Third a consensus, which was the main objective of this page was not reached. Therefore, Guettarda and myself as administrators request that the article stay "as is" until a proper consensus is reached and that all those interested are properly notified of such action. Tony the Marine 02:26, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Let me know if you agree and then I'll post it. Your friend Tony the Marine 02:26, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You Tony the Marine 03:12, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

An apple for the teacher

Once upon a time you asked to use one of my figures in a class you were teaching. I don't know if you do a lot of that, but it is a noble endeavor. As is trying to write an encyclopedia, especially one where any idiot with an internet connection can come by and be annoying. I hope that your recent difficulties don't stop you from taking pleasure in contributing to the world's knowledge.

Dragons flight 02:44, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(Non-)Thanks

Well, actually really thanks, for the kind wishes, :-) even if you were coy. Yes, I think yu're allowed to wish me a happy birthday... and I hope becoming an arbitrator doesn't mean that no one wants to go near me anymore. :) Actually, more important than my own ego, I noticed your user page, and some of your recent frustrations, so I thought I'd tell you that I hope you stick around here for a long time to come. It is my firm belief that no matter what difficulties I face in the administrative side of things, and even in conflicts with other people and such, I, and anyone else, am still valuable to this project writing articles. Which is, after all, the whole point. There's a lot to be said for just taking a break from all the drama, and rediscovering what really drew you here in the first place (believe me, it wasn't POV pushers, AfD, userboxes, or thickheaded people). And your editing in that area is most appreciated. :) Dmcdevit·t 00:59, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Caribbean Manatee

It is actually the same species from Florida to Guyana. I have included it because it breeds in Puerto Rico waters and is shown in some lists as endemic to Puerto Rico. I should include a note regarding this. Joelito 19:22, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Uncyclopedic" Trivia

You anger me to the highest extent. I wish I could say what I felt right now at your exclusion of beneficial trivia from the Markos Moulitsas article. But you being a Liberal admin, an edit warrer, and a deletionist, I forgive your faults. Good day. Эйрон Кинни 06:34, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Questioning sanity

Guettarda, you write, When everyone else in the world seems crazy, it's time to question your own sanity. This was in some context that looked vaguely RfAr-ish. Occasionally, I gaze at these things. I do so disbelievingly. (The phrase "Get a life" comes to mind.) I then notice that a huge percentage of WP editors (though not quite everybody, I'm happy to say) appears to think that individual episodes of StarWarsTrek are more interesting (or even more important) than, say, entire cities (or perhaps even nations). These people seem crazy -- and I don't question my sanity. I do sometimes question what I find in articles, and more than occasionally discover that "facts" are wrong. If you have a capacity for WP-related worrying, direct it at content, not nitwits. Or of course turn off the computer for a few hours! -- Hoary 07:51, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]