User talk:Karmafist/Archive5

New Hampshire articles

Do you think possibly in each Title or Chapters of the RSAs could have a link over to Wikisource to the actutal laws themselves? Since Wikisource is more suited to Primary Source documents.

Also, I wanted to let you know that I have already created a page for the New Hampshire Constitution. Maybe you would like to take the pertinant info from the page you created New Hampshire State Constitution, and put it on the New Hampshire Constitution page, then redirect the one you created to New Hampshire Constitution? I dont know which one has the better title name, I only put it the way I did because the one I created had more information on it.

Its nice to be aquainted with another Granite Stater who attended a school in the University System of New Hampshire. I look forward to working with you. Assawyer 05:27, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I do not have a preference either way, but I believe the official name to be New Hampshire Constitution. I'll send off an e-mail to the NH Secretary of State to see what the "offfical word" is. The references on the state's page are kind of amiguous. I have not had the pleasure of dealing in Wiki law, but then again I don't get blow away by consensus-type law; while it is interesting, I much prefer that of the Common Law and Civil Law legal traditions. I tried looking for your arbatration case, but was unable to find a reference on the pages. I hope things go well for you, let me know how they turn out. Assawyer 06:31, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I took the info from your Constitution page and merged it with the info on mine. I did it this way to make it easier for editing. Depending on which page we finally choose to use, we can either leave it the way it is or move the info on mine to yours. Also, I e-mailed the NH Sec. of State to see if they can give us the official word. Assawyer 18:39, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Table

Umm... the link to Wikipedia:Barnstars on Wikipedia is up there, so you're fine on that... ;) Hey, thanks, don't worry about it. I'm going to have to put the bear in the Loony Barn so he scares the vandals inside... Tito xd^(?!?) 06:36, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your kittens & sunshine page

Hello! I decided to check my talk page this morning and found a message letting me know that I was the creator of a "hate page" and that I was listed on your (originally users to watch page) kittens & sunshine page. I would really like to know why it is a "hate page". Jesus Christ is all about loving everybody and wanting them to get saved so they will have eternal life. What is "hateful" about that? I have several things on my page right now that show what The Bible teaches. God says that I am supposed to let people know what His Word (The Bible) teaches, so I am doing that. Please explain what is "hateful" about that. If you look at my Myths Debunked section, you will see that I do not advocate hate crimes against gays. I explain what true Christianity is all about in that we are to hate the sin of homosexuality but love the sinners. There is nothing "hateful" about that. Please back up your claims of a "hate page" or remove me from that page. If you don't, you will have to answer to God someday for it...not me. By the way, what does kittens and sunshine mean if you are listing so-called problem users on that page? It seems like a happy name to me. Thanks in advance for your input on this! phatcat68 13:02, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Anti-editcountitis craze

Lol, I guess you're right- the anti-editcountitis thing went a bit too far, and I was very much a part of that, I know. I'm glad to say I've mellowed a bit since then, and I'm just glad that this is all cleared up. Borisblue 15:00, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/MONGO

My Rfa is not going to pass. It is a shame that so few can assume good faith while asking others to do so. I appreciate your nomination and your confindence in my abilities and, of course your maturity in by overcoming our past disagreements. However, if things continue the way they are, I may soon ask that the nomination be withdrawn.--MONGO 08:40, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm about ready to have you withdraw the nomination. I would like to see at least a 90 percent pro vote. I don't want to just skim by or have it fail outright. Interestingly, recent edits indicate that three months ago, I was disruptive and that is a longer period of time in the past than some nominess total editing history and whose applications for adminship pass. I also get the feeling that the opposers merely spent time reading the other votes and not my responses to the questions raised by Hipocrite. Regardless, all this seems like a waste of time now as I could be doing something more productive.--MONGO 14:49, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Neil Cicierega and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Neil Cicierega

I don't know what exactly to do about this situation, but I suspect you might have a better idea than I would. It seems the subject of this AfD decided to blog about his Wikipedia entry being up for deletion two days after I nominated it. [1] Anyhow, if you have any ideas, be my guest, but IMO the results are hopelessly tainted now. --Locke Cole 09:20, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

As a minor note, that blog entry is also the most recent entry when you go to his blog index. [2] --Locke Cole 09:39, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

MARMOT

I've blocked MARMOT for two weeks, at his request on IRC. Apparently he had written a new and improved vandalbot and was sorely tempted to set in into operation. --Maru (talk) Contribs 20:33, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Rfar

Go ahead and move it to the talk page; that's fine with me. Thanks for understanding, and I again apologize if I may have offended you. Ral315 (talk) 21:35, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

I'm afraid you don't know what you are talking about.

You chose to update the template with an article that you are involved with by way of a Wikiproject above all the other suggestions on the dyk suggestion page.
The article you choose is about 3 months old page, rather than the required 5 days, and had already appeared in dyk in September! You selected an article from the archive section of the page and put it on the current template.
When the template gets updated it's best to do the whole thing so other admins can tell what is going on.
New suggestions are in the date section of the page, suggestions that have recently appeared in the template are kept in the archive section on the same page and later moved to archive pages - but the bot that does the job has been down since Mediawiki 1.5.
Please actually attempt to work out how things function before being bold.--nixie 22:28, 17 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Johnny Cash song

Here you go it's off his 1996 album Unchained. - Akamad 22:52, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Alternate table layout

Yo. ΞU here. Was bathing my son and had an idea for an alternate table layout. Basically just doubles up the table, giving two columns instead of one. Dunno how wide you planned on making the single table, but you can see the alternate layout in your sandbox. → Ξxtreme Unction {^yakł_blah} 00:11, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Went ahead and finished the tables, in both styles. Hope you find 'em useful. → Ξxtreme Unction {^yakł_blah} 14:51, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy promotion for admins

In Demi's RfA you said "if we should have a WP:CSD-esque speedying for noms". Interesting thought. You might want to have a look at Image:RfAsPerWeek.png. Observe that the average # of admin nominations per week tripled in three months from July to October. If that sort of an increase is not an aberration, but what we can expect in the future, then six months from now we will be seeing ~180 nominations per week. Wow. I mean really wow. I did a linear progression using similar data some weeks ago. I don't remember the results, but I do recall something along the lines of ~200 nomination per week within two years. Reality probably lies somewhere between those two figures of six months from now or two years from now. Either way, I think we're looking at near 200 nominations per week in the not too distant future. RfA's current process is, I don't think, scalable to handle that. Change will happen I think, and I think "speedy promotions" just might become reality. Just some food for thought. --Durin 00:30, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Due to the rancor currently surrounding RfA, it's unlikely any such proposal would gain consensus at this time. I think the probable best course of action at this point is to let it get so bad that it's blatantly obvious we need a change to the system. Besides, the tripling of admin noms just might be an aberration. Who knows? --Durin 00:38, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

User:Karmafist/users to watch

I have restored this page, as you link to a diff on it from POTW's RfAr. Furthermore, you may not have been aware, but it's generally encouraged for administrator's not to delete their own sub-pages, but to ask another administrator to do so. I'd like to request that you not to either, however, while the RfAr is active, as you linked to a diff as evidence there. Best regards, Ëvilphoenix ^Burn! 06:31, 21 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion of tronic and supertronic

Hi, since you just deletec the tronic article, you may be interested in having a look at Supatronic, which is in the exact same vein. Schutz 01:12, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Andy Mabbett

Things are not resolved between Andy Mabbett and myself. I thanked him for reverting some vandalism on my user page, because he had done so. This does not mean that I agree with everything that he is doing. For example, he is insisting on treating The Merry Widow (ballet) on an equal footing, within The Merry Widow operetta article, as the various versions and productions of the operetta. In spite of the fact that the operetta and the ballet are completely distinct pieces, separate from each other, Andy Mabbett insists on acting as though the ballet is just another version of the operetta. It is becoming tiresome and frustrating trying to correct his mistakes. Figaro 16:49, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I would add that the bits you quoted, when you said that things had been resolved between Andy Mabbett and myself, were actually very strong indications that things were certainly not resolved between us. One of them included his accusation that I was making a personal attack on him (which is, of course, his way of dealing with someone who disagrees with him). Figaro 17:01, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

MONGO RfA

Well, I was hesitant for good reasons it appears, but it worked out okay in the end. It wouldn't have happened if you hadn't nominated me, and for that I am deeply appreciative. Been a rather long week for me as you might imagine. Your strong support and continued endorsement of me is a really fine thing and I am very much looking forward to our continued and combined efforts to make this a better encyclopedia. Thanks Karmafist, you are a class act!--MONGO 03:06, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Small Towns

I replied to your peer review concerning the small towns. You may be interested in this Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Dawson Creek, British Columbia that I posted. It is a rural town of 11,000 people in western Canada. I would like to know what you think, especially in terms of a structure for a small town article. --maclean25 09:19, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Jason's socks

Alright, but I've known "Dr" Gastrich for quite a while from Usenet, so when he turned up here I was ready for him more than most. He isn't very clever and is easy to contain. He's even more blunt than me when it comes to politics. I smelt his socks as soon as he arrived about a week ago. It was me who identified all of them, after which everyone caught a whiff.

Socks are against policy but not so much as disruption or personal attacks (um yeah, them). But on the other hand, why encourage him to try to hide them better? Why block his socks, which will only wind him up (I've been there recently, remember) when he's not being disruptive? — Dunc|☺ 21:06, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

Sorry to be such a bureaucratic snot nose, but I unblocked Pigsonthewing. I don't think it's fair to block someone that you are having a dispute with (also 24hrs might be a bit long). I'd reblock him myself if I knew exactly what the dispute is about. I recomend you use WP:AIV or WP:AN/I to try and get him reblocked. I also fixed your userfication (there is no User Template namesapce), I made it a subpage of your userpace -User:Karmafist/Potw. Broken S 19:38, 24 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Can I talk to you?

Please come back to IRC, I'd like to speak with you. Bishonen | talk 20:05, 24 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Blocking of Pigsonthewing

As a major disputant with Pigsonthewing, it is not your place to block him. If you feel he is engaging in behavior that warrants a block, you should endeavour to contact other administrators to enact a block, but you should not place a block yourself, regardless of whether or not a block is deserved. You should also not have engaged in block warring by re-blocking after another admin unblocked him. Please do not block Pigsonthewings again for any reason whatsoever, if he is engaging in block worthy action another administrator will enact a block. Best regards, Ëvilphoenix ^Burn! 02:45, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Tell you what, i'll ask for you from now on then. After asking on IRC for blocks about a billion times in the past few weeks and waiting for the Arbcom to do something after weeks of his constant disruption, bad faith and edit warring, something had to be done about him once and for all. Karmafist 02:58, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to contact me at any time. It may take a few hours for me to respond at any given time, but I check my e-mail and my watchlist with frequency. Your best bet at this point, however, is if you continue to have problems with Pigsonthewing is to simply add information to the Evidence page of the RfAr, but not engage in uncivil or inflammatory action yourself. If he attacks another user, find the diff and put it on the evidence page. The case is before the ArbCom, and that's where your efforts should focus for now. I know you're looking for a "once and for all" solution, but that is not going to happen anytime soon. This one is just going to take time. There's no way around it, but please to try to keep a cool head about it. You can't control what other users say or do, but you can control what you say or do, so I encourage you to keep control, keep calm, and keep working to make Wikipedia a better place. Ëvilphoenix ^Burn! 03:18, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt he's scared away thousands of editors. That doesn't excuse his actions or his intimidation tactics, but I don't think the amount of users he's affected number that highly. That being said, scaring away other contributors is not good, and needs to be dealt with, and will be dealt with. PS have you tried e-mailing Leonard to try to get him back? Ëvilphoenix ^Burn! 03:40, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Anons

Don't block anons indefinitely, unless you're sure its an open proxy. Whether the effect is collateral damage or a lifetime ban, each is a Bad Thing, so try to avoid it. A couple of days will suffice. R e dwolf24 (talk) Attention Washingtonians! 06:17, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Jason Gastrich

I've commented on your block of User:Jason Gastrich over on WP:AN/I. Kelly Martin (talk) 06:39, 25 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Response

FYI - There may be something wrong with your signature. The one on my talk page was broken. I added in your username. As to the arbitration... I'm pretty sure that's not the way it works, but do what you think you need to. As to the rest, this isn't about an edit summary. I urge you to take a good look at your behaviour and the number of different people who have suggested that there is a problem with it. --CBD ^T _C ^@ 00:57, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

CBDunkerson and Pigsonthewing

CBDunkerson and Pigsonthewing are different users. CBDunkerson edits from very wide range of dynamic ips, Pigsonthewing edits from a small number of different ips. Fred Bauder 01:24, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I should have known better since they act differently, but I was wondering since CBDunkerson's the only person who has stuck up for POTW on that rfar so far, so I had to be sure. karmafist 01:44, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

List under Karmafist

I hope you don't think I'm cheeky, being a relative newby, but if you add |Karmafist after your user categories, you'll come up on lists under K (for Karmafist, duh!) rather than U for User.