User talk:Jossi/archive4

Wasn't me

Hey, I'm not the only one using this computer and as much as I might think Joe Lieberman is an ankle-grabbing DINO hobag, I don't vandalize wikipedia. I know the guy who did it though and have given him a good stern talking to.

Sorry

Sorry about this edit screwing up your user page, I'm not quite sure what happened there. I use a script to revert vandalism, and something must have gone wrong somewhere along the line. the wub "?!" 23:10, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

No problems... I think it was the rollback script and te fact that the table used HTML markup instead of wiki markup. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 23:58, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Blocking

What particular vandal are you complaining for? Sometimes they don't warrant warnings. --Golbez 02:38, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

I did not save his IP address, but I noticed that you blocked after one instance of vandalism. Please see: Wikipedia:Vandalism#Dealing_with_vandalism ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 04:35, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Deletion of State transition diagram

You just deleted State transition diagram as I was trying to turn it into a redirect to Unified modeling language. I think this would have made more sense. chowells 15:22, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

You can recreate the page. I deleted it because it had no content and was marked for Speedy deletion. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 15:25, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, that was me. It was created by an anonymous IP and contained the text "blaat", so I though speedy deletion was appropriate. -- Gurch 15:28, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for removing that extra October 2005 from the potental vandals page, I'll keep an eye on that user for a while.

Prodego ^talk 20:39, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

Talk:Coercive monopoly

I am out of ideas on how to proceed on Talk:Coercive monopoly. I have tried everything I can think of, but we aren't making any progress at all. The editors are arguing in circles and attacking each other and getting nowhere. I am open to suggestions. -- BBlackmoor ^(talk) 18:27, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

In these circumstances you can escalate and ask for assistance using Wikipedia's dispupte resolution process. This includes:

1. Conducting a survey
2. Mediation
3. Requesting an advocate

≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @

I was really hoping we wouldn't have to go that route. But I guess that's where we are. -- BBlackmoor ^(talk) 18:45, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

FYI, RJII appears to be intentionally disrupting discussion of the survey. Any assistance you can provide would be appreciated. -- BBlackmoor ^(talk) 18:48, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

Tomf688 RFA vote

I'm trying to make sure that I take the time to thank everyone who voted in my RfA, and verify that they don't have any concerns over my experience, neutrality, etc. If you have a problem, please drop a line on my talk page and I will answer it as best as I can. Again, thank you. --tomf688^{talk} 14:37, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

No concerns. Just make sure you spend some time engaging other editors on shaping WP policies and other aspects of the community. My view that a good admin should be not only involved in janitorial stuff or editing articles, but involved in policy as well. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 16:02, 23 October 2005 (UTC)

the wub's RfA

Thanks a lot for your support on my RfA, I really appreciate it. the wub "?!" 13:14, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Titoxd's RfA

Thank you!

Thank you for supporting me twice in my RfA. I never thought I would get so much support! Thanks to your help, my nomination was the 10th most supported RfA in Wikipedia history. Now, please keep an eye out on me while I learn the new tools, ok? Thanks again! Titoxd^(?!?) 17:27, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Gongrats....! If you need any help, just ask. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 17:29, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Talk:Rajput

Hey Jossi, Would you like to look at Talk:Rajput and see if you have any recommendations? [1] [2] I've been removing personal attacks and inflammatory off-topic chitchat from the talk page, in an effort to make wikipedia a less welcome place for a continuing Muslim-Hindu hatefest. There's no progress being made on the talk page. If unprotected, the article will be vandalized. 203 ("Shivraj") has previously been blocked for 3RR violations. — goethean ॐ 18:52, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Jossi, Gothean has been selectively removing hindu responses from the wiki talkpage on rajputs. He is calling himself a moderator but I let the post from raja(who happens to be a muslim), where he talks about insecurity of faith, sit there on the talk page for more then 24 hours. Goethean was nowhere to be found. Then someone called me a moron and Goethean was still on snooze. Finally I responded to raja and then Gothean woke up instantaneously and started deleting stuff. When I sk him to explain this duplicity in behavior he remains silent.

More fundamentally muslims and Goethen have been reverting my edits and I had to ask for page protecction which was done by a wiki admin. For last 4 days or so I have repeatedly asked these muslims and goethean to provide evidnece for there edits. Not one has been provided till date. On my side I have given a bibliography from where I built the article. It is missing some info and I am gathering that. It is taking some time because I am travelling and am not close to my library but I hope to get it done by COB Friday.

-Shivraj

Thank you

Thank you very much for your support, Jossi. :) I look forward to working with you in the future. By the way, your artwork is magnificent. --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 00:02, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the compliment. Don't get stressed out on the RfA. Hang on tight... ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 00:09, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

User 24.155.128.4

FYI, He vandalized four articles today. I've noticed you blocked this user 9 days ago as well. --Vizcarra 20:25, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Counter Vandalism Unit Elections!

Just a reminder: If you haven't already done so, you have until November 1st (00:00 UTC) to vote in the Counter Vandalism Unit Elections! FireFox 18:52, 28 October 2005 (UTC)

Tomf688's RfA

Well, it seems I'm now an administrator. I wanted to thank you for your vote of confidence, and, as always, feel free to drop me a line at any time. --tomf688^{talk} 01:05, 29 October 2005 (UTC)

My RFA

Thanks for supporting my nomination till the end. Now happening across your user page for the first time I have to say that your artwork is stunning. - Haukur Þorgeirsson 22:38, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

Congrats and thanks for the compliment... ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 07:07, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

DmSetup

Can you look into it and see if the tags I threw on it (which Mitka repeatedly delete) are appropriate? Further, is the article itself properly speedy-deletable or AfD-deletable? It seems to be way too much propaganda. --Nlu 12:12, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

I have simply deleted all the self-serving stuff from the article leaving just facts. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @

Thanks. --Nlu 12:37, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

A "Spirituality" portal

Hi Jossi,

Goethean and I have been discussing the possibility of creating a “Spirituality” portal. I’ll be asking some other editors to weigh in on the subject as well. What do you think? — Richard_RDF^talk 12:07, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Now the conversation has expanded to Creating a "Spirituality" WikiProject and portal. I hope you're interested! ;-) — Richard_RDF^talk 05:17, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

I entered some basics to get the ball rolling. I look forward to your participation in the Spirituality WikiProject and reading your contributions to the Spirituality portal. :-) — Richard_RDF^talk 00:38, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

Swarupanand

Now that I've cleared out a few cobwebs and read up a little on the lineage "controversy" (what a surprise! ;-), how would you like to proceed with developing the article? — Richard_RDF^talk 19:09, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

I would start by sourcing some biographical material. I have tried by failed sofar to find such source. I hope you can help with this. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 04:24, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

I've seen comments on the "detractors" web site, but I haven't followed links from there. I also haven't been able to "cross-reference" the "Sant Mat" lineages they mention there with the one's I'm aware of and have cited in Wikipedia. Can you match up any lineages with common historical masters? — Richard_RDF^talk 05:13, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

I would not touch that website with a 10 ft long pole... We need solid information and that website is simply not a solid resource for anything but animosity, anti-guru bias and intolerance. I am also not so much interested in the parampara, but more on the life work of Swarupanand. I have failed so far to find good info on the subject. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 06:23, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

I understand your concern. That's why I didn't add anything from that particular site. However, I'll still try to track some info down, even if I get my leads on where to go next from there. — Richard_RDF^talk 14:33, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Yoga in Sanskrit

Hi Jossi,

I like how you added "(Sanskrit सदगुरू sat=true)" to the Satguru article! Can you do something similar for the Yoga article, e.g., "Yoga (Sanskrit ???? union) is a family of spiritual practices..."? Thanks. :-) — Richard_RDF^talk 20:28, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Will do Done. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 04:25, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Cool, thanks! :-) — Richard_RDF^talk 05:07, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Plasma cosmology

Can you unprotect Plasma cosmology? Thank you. Joshuaschroeder 15:45, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Make a request at WP:RPP, not here. Thanks. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 16:23, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Request was already made. Can you respond to it? Joshuaschroeder 17:49, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Johann Wolfgang's RfA

Thank you for voting on my RfA. I realize that I have not been here long, however other users said I would do just fine as an administrator, so I followed their advice. I realize I do not particpate in the Wikipedia namespace very much, I however have recently been doing more in that namespace (i.e. copyright violations). I do not have much to do with afd's, I generally try to improve an article instead of nominating it for deletion, I realize now it is an important part of being an administrator. Thank you again for voting. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me.

Johann Wolfgang [ T ...C ] 16:58, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Just keep up the good work and in due time you will be a great admin. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 17:26, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

FireFox RFA

Jossi/archive4

---

Thanks for your support on my request for adminship.

The final outcome was (96/2/0), so I am now an administrator. If you ever have any queries about my actions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Again, thanks!

FireFox 18:54, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Thank you

Very much for your kind support of my adminship. I'll do my best to live up to your and my other supporters' expectations. If you have any comments or concerns on my actions as an administrator, please let me know. Thank you! — MC MasterChef :: Leave a tip — 14:42, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Spirituality

Template:Spirituality has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at Wikipedia:Templates for deletion#Template:Spirituality. Thank you. — Richard_RDF^talk 17:48, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Merci beaucoup

Thanks, jossi, for your vote of support on my nomination to become an administrator. I passed, and my floor rag has since been bestowed upon me. Please let me know if you need me to help with anything in particular! —BrianSmithson 16:20, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Plasma cosmology again

I have not much experience with Wikipedia conflicts. I'd like to ask you what we should do next with JoshuaSchroeder's edits, as they verge on vandalism. While I don't necessarily disagree with much of his position, the bulldozer-like fashion with which he edits is driving many others up the wall, including a leading figure in the topic. He is also not reading or researching the material on the topic and generally getting in the way. What is the next best course of action? I'm not sure if the usual RfC and article protection is appropriate, as this seems to be specific to one user. On my part, I'm trying to avoid any further unfortunate burst-vein episodes of infuriation and exasperation. What does one do with what is essentially trolling? Jon 06:49, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

I think it fair that you consider the difference that is considered "trolling" by User:Jonathanischoice: [3]. Please explain to me how this is either "vandalism", a "bulldozer-like fashion", or evidence of not "reading or researching the material", or "getting in the way". While I'm trying my best to edit, I get the distinct impression that a few editors are not taking WP:FAITH seriously. Please respond on my talkpage if you will. Thanks, Joshuaschroeder 06:57, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Please discuss this on the Talk page and not in here. My only suggestion is that you find a way to address these concerns by asking other editors to participate in the discussion. If you get too stressed out, take a wikivacation. You may be surprised to see what happens when you(both of you, I mean) stop editing for a while. Life is beautiful. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 16:03, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Identities

There is a concern that you are also editing under an IP address, 64.81.88.140 (talk · contribs). Do you know anything about this? Is this a TPRF IP? Sorry for bothering you about this, but and editor is bothering me about it. -Willmcw 10:05, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

No. Not me. In regards to your second question, I am not in a position to disclose TPRF's IP addresses. (PS: Thanks for factoring out these personal attacks.)≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 11:59, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your prompt reply. Would I be correct to say that you do not know or use the IP address, and you have no connection or knowledge of the editor who uses that IP. Is that right? -Willmcw 12:10, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Note that I do not appreciate being interrogated in this manner, after I answered your questions in good faith. Furthermore, I would argue that asking about the IP addresses of editors, or their identities, is innapropriate as anybody responding to it will certainly be in violation of Wikipedia's privacy policy. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 17:15, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

No offense intended. The IP address has the appearance of possibly being a sock or meat puppet. You say it's not you, but you won't say you don't know who it is, which doesn't resolve the matter. If you do know the person who edits under that IP address, you might tell them to get an account. Thanks, -Willmcw 21:41, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Plasma cosmology

Jossi, thank you for your help on the plasma cosmology page. I am concerned about User:Elerner's behavior on that page. While he has improved the article immesurably with his rewrite, he seems unwilling to attempt to build a consensus with me and the other users, choosing instead to belittle or attack us. He is in clear violation of the three-revert rule on that page, is insisting that proponents of the big bang make edits in a specific form "Critics of the theory..." and has stated that he will just continue reverting attempts at constructive change. He will not discuss my edits, except, irrationally stating that "Once again Joke137’s version attempts to describe the composition of the universe—plasma—as something other than settled fact," when, in fact, I do believe what the composition of the universe is and clearly stated that astrophysicists agree on this in my edits. The rest of his comments were a tirade against other editors, and the sort of thing that shouldn't be encouraged on Wikipedia.

I'm sorry to say I don't believe your comments have been helping much. The issues I and Joshuaschroeder have been bringing up do fall under the rubric of the NPOV guidelines, in particular: "The task before us is not to describe disputes as though, for example, pseudoscience were on a par with science; rather, the task is to represent the majority (scientific) view as the majority view and the minority (sometimes pseudoscientific) view as the minority view." I'm not claiming that the article is pseudoscience, but I do claim that Lerner is preventing a reasonable comparison to the dominant scientific views from being in the introduction, where it belongs. The point of NPOV is not to give all subjects equal weight, but rather to give them weight according to their importance and make clear statements of facts.

Finally, I think I have a history on Wikipedia of trying to deal with these subjects sensitively, as per my work on the non-standard cosmology page. I have established a consensus with other users, especially Iantresman in the past, and he in particular seemed happy with my proposed introduction. The problem is that Lerner is one of the leading proponents of the plasma cosmology theory, and seems unwilling to compromise. He is writing an article largely about his own work, and attacking those who see differently. –Joke137 10:54, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

I am glad to see that you and other editors are making process and arriving to consensus, at least on the intro. If you need another intervention, please let me know. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 16:44, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

I do not think that any progress is being made. –Joke137 17:15, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Leon v. United States

Any particular reason why you would nominate Leon v. United States for deletion? Descendall 11:02, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

My mistake. I understand now that it is an important Supreme Court case. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 16:36, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Mistaken PUI?

There is no indication that User:Tprf.org has any right to put a creative commons license on Image:Prem Rawat.ogg so I don't plan to try and restore the file.

I missed the fact there was no notification on the User talk page, but the user must have been aware of the PUI somehow or they would not have changed the license. -Regards Nv8200p [[User_talk:Nv8200p|(talk)]] 16:16, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Once deleted, image files cannot be restored and I cannot find the file on the usual mirrors I check. You (or User:Tprf.org) can re-upload the file and link in the article if you desire. -Nv8200p talk 20:29, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Thank you!

Hi Jossifresco,

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, JoanneB 14:49, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

GraemeL's RFA

Hi Jossifresco,

I am now an administrator and would like to thank you for your support and kind words on my RfA. I was very surprised at the number of votes and amount of and kind comments that I gathered. Please don't hesitate to contact me if I mess up, or decide to stop paying attention to detail in the use of my new powers. --GraemeL ^(talk) 15:32, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Are you sure you blocked it?

Apparently you blocked the IP address 203.10.121.81 for 1 month. However, just recently (as the 23rd of Nov at 5:20 PST) that IP address was able to add more vandalism, despite the fact that the block you imposed doesn't expire until the 16th of December. Can you explain why your "1 month" block has failed to work as it is supposed to? Just wondering is all. Maybe I could use the mop. Please reply here. Thanks --Master Jay 01:34, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

I did block for a month ... but User:AlistairMcMillan blocked it a few seconds later to 24 hrs, overriding the 1 month block. See [4]. Probably Alistair did not check that the user was already blocked. I have restored the one month block. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 01:39, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Guru page

looks like we have some disagreements about how the opening paragraph of the guru would be most effective.

Would you be willing to discuss your revert of my deletion as well as your raction to my new delete on the guru talk page? Sethie 18:56, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Of course! Let's discuss on Talk:Guru. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 18:59, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

W:Aiav

Thanks for taking care of Jake vandal, note I had also lisetd him on Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism and you may want to remove. Xaosflux 03:50, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

User:Joshuaschroeder

He requested that his page be deleted because he was resigning, and as far as I'm aware, a user can do so. (Please reply on my Talk.) I mean, if there's been a serious oversight, I can restore it easily, but as far as I know, users may request the deletion of their User page. (Talk, naturally, stays, which is why I left the note atop his Talk page.) ♠PMC♠ 06:03, 25 November 2005 (UTC)

• No problem. If the page needs to be restored, you can ask me or any administrator and we'll be happy to do so. ♠PMC♠ 19:42, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Jihad

Hi there! I've unprotected that page. I think the anonymous editwar was a bit odd; the page might need some intervention in the style of this page (see Archive 1 if you are interested, to see how things unfolded to a good close) - I think I might give that a shot if that's okay with you. --HappyCamper 13:01, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

No problems. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t •

@ 15:38, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

New user question

how do i know i can trust wikipedia if anyone can change it. --qwerty

Yes, anyone can change it and that is the strength of Wikipedia. As you may have obeserved, vandalims gets deleted very quikly, usually in a couple of minutes. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 03:46, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Apologies and a question

Sorry for the deletion, I'd just been working on that planet page (from various IP addresses) for a long time and realised those debates had all been settled. What is the proper procedure and how do I "archive"? TJM

Very simple:

• Open the talk page for editing
• Cut the text you want to archive to the clipboard
• Add a a link at the top page such as Talk:articlename/archive 1 (replace articlename with the full title of the article)
• Save the talk page
• Now you will have a "red" link at the top of the page. Click on it
• Edit the empty page and paste the text

≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 03:53, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Sorry about that. Got a little carried away there. Pacific Coast Highway 04:31, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Vandalizing articles is not an option. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 04:34, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

I really didn't understand the above, but I'll pretend it says Don't do it again. Pacific Coast Highway|^{Spam me!}

You got it... ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 17:10, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Swarupanand and Co

great work that you have started there. Congrats. Concerning the 2 Dayals, David Lane commented that the founder of Advait Mat might have had an early Sant Mat/Radhasoami teacher, but that remains speculation, the two dayals are probably to different persons, their time table is also bit different. The common thing is the revitalisation of Surat Shabd and the chapter "The Philosophy of Sant Mat" in the Advait Mat book. Thomas h 20:49, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

plus the Initiation by Sawan Singh! Thomas h 20:56, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

The two Dayals are very different persons as well as Swarupanand and Anand Swarup being also different persons. The fact that they all lived in northern India makes it more likely to be confused with each other. Are there any references of Sawan Singh initiation of Swarupanand? That seems very unlikely... ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 23:15, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

No, a certein Gyan Ji at Sawan Ashram told Lane that Hans has had an Initiaton by Sawan Singh before he met Swarupanand. Anand Swarup and Swarupanand are most probably different in lineage Thomas h 05:40, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Anand Swarup and Swarupanand are most certainly different people. I have not found any references in Lane's books about something that he may have heard at the Sawan Anshram. Nevertheless, it is known that Hans Ji Maharaj met with numerous gurus and renunciates during before he met Swarupanand, but that does not changes anything... ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 15:52, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Why should it change anything? Yet meeting other people and taking one's initiation may be a different thing. Nonetheless by searching that field it becomes more an more obvious to me that surat shabd origines with the persian mystics, highly interesting, i wouldn't wonder if i'd find links into the 7th century to the impulse that was blocked by the islamic invasion. But that is my private research Thomas h 19:08, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Yes, my research is showing a similar linkage. Hopefully the sources I am reading will enable me to add material without being tagged as original research. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 19:25, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Depends on the conclusions you will have/make. Isn't it, that if we pursue an aim or only have a certain standpoint, things that we discover appear for us in a light of selfevidence, that might not be given that exact way in reality. A personal word. I have once read how you described your experience when Michael Dettmers left and how it touched you. Though i don't share your conclusion about that matter, i am still touched by the honesty of what you have expressed there. Thomas h 21:57, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Re: Block template?

Hi Jossi, I use {{vblock}} for any block over 12 hours. It takes the duration as parameter. For shorter blocks, I use {{test5-n}}. For permanent bans I use {{vpblock}}. Owen× ☎ 04:03, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Thank you!

➨ ❝ReDVERS❞ awards this Random Act Of Kindness Barnstar to Jossifresco for reverting a vandal's blanking of my userpage.

About 24.155.128.3 & the Holocaust

Don't you think it was a bit excessive to put a level 3 warning on this guy when his only real act of vandalism according to his history was the holocaust article? I was only going to give him a level 1. Please respond on my talk page. --LifeStar 18:10, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Nevermind, yeah the guy is an idiot. The history updated! Good job. --LifeStar 18:14, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Ramakrishna

OK I'll take a look. — goethean ॐ 23:01, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

World War II

I was informed that my change of adding Western Imperialsim as a cause of World War II was removed as it was a test. But it wasn't a test this cause is missing.

I also looked at the causes of World War II page and noticed that all of the references listed are for histories of the European War. The causes of the war in the Pacific are only being addressed from a European perspective. One of the stated goals of the Greater East-Asian Co-prosperity Sphere was to end European colonialism in Asia. While this may have been cynical manipulation by the Japanese it certainly shows that Western imperialism was a great concern and was one of the underlying causes of tension in the Pacific region. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.31.109.107 (talk • contribs)

You are welcome to edit the article, but you will need to provide sources for your assertions. I would suggest that you read the Wikipedia guidelines. I have placed some links on your talk page. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 06:22, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Thank you I understand and will check those links out. I think though that until the Causes of War page has some sources that are not just about the European Theater all the causes listed under the Pacific Theater should be deleted too. Sorry for editorializing here I will take it to the discussion page where it belongs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.31.109.107 (talk • contribs)

Welcome to Wikipedia and good luck with these edits. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 06:31, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Michael Bauwens

Jossi, I carelessly moved a page to a wrong spelling, and it won't let me move it back. It should be at Michael Bauwens. Could you help? — goethean ॐ 20:21, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

It happens... Now it is fixed. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 21:13, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Arbitration accepted

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Reddi 2 has been accepted. Please place evidence at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Reddi 2/Evidence. Proposals and comments may be placed at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Reddi 2/Workshop. Fred Bauder 22:13, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Page protection

Hi Jossifresco! A while ago, you protected the page jihad - I have subsequently unprotected and protected the page a number of times, and engaged in some discussion on the talk page. The edit war that is occuring there does not seem to be approaching any resolution any time soon for a number of reasons. Would it be possible for you to keep an eye on it? I think all that is needed is just someone to unprotect the page when the time is right - and very likely so only after some positive dialogue has occured on the talk page. I think my intervention there is directed the focus away from the article, so I may step back and keep a distance from the article for a while and only come back when necessary. Please let me know your thoughts on this, and whether you think you can help me out in any capacity at your leisure. Thanks very much! --HappyCamper 05:10, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

Unfortunately when we protect pages due to editwarring, we usually protect the wrong version :) I'll keep an eye. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 05:52, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

I know what you mean...I wish there was a better alternative. No matter which version is protected, 50% of the contributors will find it less than desirable. Thanks so much! I will keep an eye on it too :-) --HappyCamper 14:14, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

'Last Warning'!?

This is an insult to me. I'm simply blanking my old user pages. I just changed username. - G^t 06:34, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

If that is the case you should ask an admin to delete your user ID. Otherwise your page blanking will continue to be reverted and you may be blocked for vandalism. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 06:36, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Semi-protection

I havn't talked to you since your RfA, and was hoping to do so; this gives me a perfect reason ;). 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. Check out Wikipedia:Semi-protection policy, and weigh in (there's a bit of a large discussion page, so be prepared. Hope to see you there, Mysekurity ^{(have you seen this?)} 06:41, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Table talk

Jossi, nice formatting on Template:Cult mind control links. Uncle Ed 22:10, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Vandal

24.255.189.148 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) This is always faster than the WP:AIAV :-D KnowledgeOfSelf | talk. 01:56, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

• P.S. Sorry to be so rude! I didn't even say hi or request that you do anything I just assumed you would know what I wanted. You probally already knew but, I was rushing. Anyway could you please block thanks!Cheers KnowledgeOfSelf | talk. 01:59, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Barnstar

I, xaosflux award you this Barnstar for welcoming newbies even when they start as vandals!.

xaosflux ^T/_C 05:01, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

:) ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 05:02, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Been there done that :)

I have and my opinion is unchanged. A vandal who is repeatedly warned (including a supposedly final warning) and yet continues to vandalise again TODAY and did it again just 4 or 5 days ago, needs a short block. Nothing Draconian about that.Gator (talk) 17:37, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

I agree. I use my admin discretion to do so when it is evident that the user in question is a recurrent vandal with no history of useful contribution to Wikipedia. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 17:41, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Well that was the scenario I dealing with and Nlu seemed to think yet another wanring was necessary because the last clear Vandalism (not counting the several today) was on 11/30 adn that the vandals eesm to come back to vandalise once every 2 weeks. He said it wasn't "numerous" enough. I thought that if you put a test4 and they do it again fairly soon after (4 or 5 days) that that should merit a block. Am I wrong?Gator (talk) 17:46, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

The policy speaks of admin's discretion on this matter. I have no patience for users that their only contributions is vandalism. In these cases, in which their vandalism is recurrent I block straight after one warning, increasing the period each time, 24h, 48 hrs, 72 hrs, one week, one month. If the user continues after one month, another month block is issued. On the other hand, users that vandalize pages unknowingly or as a test, I not only warn them two, three and four times sometimes, I welcome them. Some of them grow to become useful contributors later on. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 18:05, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the lesson. I will take it to heart. I understnad that admins have discretion. I just think that some exercise it better than others and I will sometimes express that opinion. That's OK right?Gator (talk) 18:09, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Of course! Feel free to give feedback to admins. We all need it... :) ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 18:12, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Benedict XVI

You deleted the comments I added on the page about Benedict XVI. I'm sorry but were those fighting in the German army and other units fighting under the orders of Adolf Hitler - whether they agreed with them or not? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.88.7.202 (talk • contribs)

If you add material to an article, and specifically if your material is of a controversial nature, you need to provide sources. Please read: Wikipedia:Cite your sources. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 03:04, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Sorry

Was trying to add, I didn't mean to erase the page. Please don't block me. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.35.208.21 (talk • contribs)

No problems... Good luck with your edits. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 16:35, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you very much for your vote at WP:RfA. By the way, could you sign it as otherwise it might not be counted. Again, thank you for your vote of confidence.--File Éireann 01:30, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

AIV Fix

looks like we were bumping heads to fix that (I forgot the vandal part of the template) Thanks for fixing it! --негіднийлють ^{(Reply|Spam Me!*|RfS)} 05:45, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Any time... :) ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 05:46, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Thank you

12.210.1.200 appears to be a persistent vandal. Thank you for blocking him. Unfortunately, I think he will need blocking again in 48 hours. It appears that he decided to blank my talk page because I had been one of various people to warn him about vandalizing other pages. Robert McClenon 12:16, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

We will follow policy. If he decides to vandalize again, we will block for a week, then forr a month and so on. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 15:13, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm an admin now!!

Thanks a ton for your support on my rfa, the final tally was 50-0-0; I'll try and live up to the expectations of others and do my best in maintaining the integrity of Wikipedia. I have Guru on my watchlist and it has been a pleasure seeing you clear out controversies effortlessly. --Gurubrahma 14:23, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Congrats and welcome to the ranks of the mop and the bucket. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 15:15, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Blocked IP

Hi you recently blocked an IP - the same user is back making the same edits as 81.182.144.238 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log). What do we do? Izehar (talk) 17:17, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Blocked for WP:3RR. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 17:21, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

That one from above is the same as this one:

anon=

Please look at this: [[5]], there is a anon, can you help please? -- Bonaparte talk & contribs 18:57, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

He changed until now 5-6 IPs: user:81.182.194.197 user:81.182.104.136 user:81.182.195.63 user:81.182.20.159 user:81.182.108.116 user:81.182.194.197.... He also posted a propaganda film for fascism movement and under the rule of Wiki: What WIKI IS NOT - "Wiki is not a propaganda machine" please do something. Either you block him or protect the page. -- Bonaparte talk 17:40, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

As user:Izehar also said: The articles in question are:

• Second Vienna Award (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Greater Hungary (political concept) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Vienna Awards (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
• Treaty of Trianon (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

-- Bonaparte talk 17:42, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Blocked by breaking the WP:3RR under multiple IP addresses. Try and work with this person and see if you can convince him/her to make constructive edits. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 17:54, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Oh, we've tried. user:Izehar, user:Juro, user:Orioane, User:Jbetak, user:algos and others have failed so far. Thank you for protecting, but also the other 3 pages we need.-- Bonaparte talk 18:13, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

I have protected these three pages, but it is not forever ... so you have to engage this anon editor and find a way to describe his/her POV, supported by sources as required. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 18:22, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Sorry but at Treaty of Trianon you kept the vandal's edit! 195.228.240.74 is also another suckpoppet of HunTomy aka anon IPs...Please revert the edits of 195.228.240.74 and then save protect. Forgive me to ask you. -- Bonaparte talk 18:24, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

The page protection does not endorse one specific version ... that is why sometimes, admins protect the wrong version. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 18:47, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

I understand, but there you forgot to revert! Is like you let the revert war vandal's version, please check one more you'll see. -- Bonaparte talk 19:35, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

No. You do not understand ... I did not forget to revert. I protected the page, period. Read the wrong version. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 19:36, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

It is so easy for you to correct now. You want to keep another 2-3 weeks until it will be changed? It's easier now when the situation is not that inflamatory, if you know what I mean. Is more important now to solve it not in 2-3 weeks. It is easy for you. -- Bonaparte talk 19:44, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

---

I understand that the "protection is not an endorsement of the current page version", but you just protected the version of the person which refused to discuss further about this issue, as you can see here:

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Treaty_of_Trianon#User_HunTomy
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Treaty_of_Trianon#Answer_to_PANONIAN_.22User_HunTomy.22

You can see that he answered to my first post, but after I showed to him that his edits are not correct, he just stopped to discuss and started to revert page with no further explanation. Protecting his version of the page would only encourage him to behave like this in the future and this revert war will move to many other articles. I tried again to start discussion with him here:

• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Treaty_of_Trianon#Solution.3F

If he do not start serious discussion about this, some other steps should be made. What is the procedure of dealing with people who revert pages and refuse to discuss that? PANONIAN (talk) 19:57, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

---

Yes! What PANONIAN (talk) just said is right! Please repair the page. -- Bonaparte talk 20:40, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Beckjord

Hi. Beckjord came to me and I have been trying to coach him on his user page. (However, I kind of feel like I've met The Tar Baby.) Do you think you are the "Jon-Jon (something)" he has referred to? --DanielCD 21:55, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

I you don't know what I'm talking about, just ignore this question. --DanielCD 22:07, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

No idea.., in any case, the Erik Beckjord deserves an AFD. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 22:36, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Ramakrishna

Hi, I'd have a look at this after a week or so. Thanks for the heads up. --Gurubrahma 07:00, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Re: MA

I did not add the "enormous schlong" comment... Please see here for the changes I made. I'd appreciate a comment reflecting this on my talk page, as I did not notice the vandalism had been added or I would have removed it. Thanks. Narco 00:59, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

That was an honest mistake. I have refactored the message on your talk page. Apologies. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 01:13, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Redshift

We're "bickering" again. I placed a NPOV tag on the Redshift page for reasons described in my Request for Comments. The tag has now been removed as described here, but I feel it is somewhat premature as discussion is still progressing (many posts per day).

1. Is there any guidance you can give as to when (a) A "Request for Comments" ends (b) a NPOV tag may be removed. And if there is, can you place it on the Redshift talk page.
2. At the end of one of the Redshift Talk sections, one of the other editors has alledged that a peer-reviewed scientist and his work amounts to "pathological skepticism"; Is this not a personal attack?

--Iantresman 11:17, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

It gets worse. Now ScienceApologist (was JoshuaShroeder) has unilaterially removed an entire section of an alternative view (which one of the other editors has distanced himself from). This it the EXACT OPPOSITE of Neutral Point of View, and still during a "Request for Comments". --Iantresman 21:09, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Please make requests for page protection at WP:RPP. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 21:21, 9 December 2005 (UTC)