User talk:Mel Etitis/Archive 44

Dear Mel Etitis, Thank you for the touching up.--BobClive 13:51, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikigogy

Hi Mel, I discovered you while looking up 'Tertiary education' on Wikipedia and note that you write lots on Wikipedia, have a fine garden lots of admin awards and that you have taught English as a foreign language. A full cup I'm sure. :-) But if you should have any interest and time to look at a new wiki I created for teachers of English as a second or foreign language I would love to know what you think of it -- http://wikigogy.org

It has only three contributors so far, me (the owner) and two teachers in China but hope it will grow to serve the TEFL and TESL community worldwide as their free professional support wiki -- to pick up the howtos and teaching materials of teaching English where Wikipedia as an encyclopedia will let go.

I have tried hard to set it up as a simple effective wiki where teachers of English as a second or foreign language can share and collectively develop free teaching materials and best practice ideas.

I would love to hear any comments or suggestions you might have about any aspect of my new Wikigogy.org project.

Thank you :-) Roger Chrisman in Palo Alto, California (roger at rogerchrisman dot com) --Roger Chrisman 05:15, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hope your end-terms better than mine!

I thought I was on wiki-break. Hah! Thank God for friends and email! Lend some vote help please!

re: Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_June_15#Fabartus_user_categories This is a bit of spiteful non-sense— at least on the admin cats, imho. Thanks. // FrankB 18:49, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Citing the bible

I started a discussion page re the approriateness of citing to an external link for the Bible rather than to wikisource - could you review the issue and edit - see Wikipedia:Citing sources/Bible - thx Trödel 23:17, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Star of Sophia

Mel, I just noticed that you have won a Star of Sophia, but it appears never to have been awarded - an appalling comeuppance!

So, it gives me great pleasure to belatedly award you the highest honour of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Philosophy:

I award the Star of Sophia Barnstar to Mel Etitis for ubiquitous and persistent improvement of the Wikipedia philosophy pages. Banno 12:43, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CFD renomination

For info: a cat you previously voted to delete has been recreated. Please see:

Wikipedia:Categories_for_deletion/Log/2006_June_26#Category:White_people

--Mais oui! 17:36, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NewUser needs input

Newbie User_talk:Rdengrove#2 contacted me[1] about a large rewrite he did on Mephistopheles, and I plead 'ignorance', save for superficial passing familiarity. If you've got some knowledge in the area (or perhaps, instead on or about 'Faust'), or just want to be 'welcoming', see if you can lend a hand. Thanks! // FrankB 16:04, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Circa 200" quandary

May I ask your counsel again? I'm having a problem with Eiorgiomugini over the Shiming that resembles the one you had over the Erya. Would you please review the edits and advise me what should be done? Keahapana 18:31, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Eternal Equinox

Hi, Mel. It looks like you might be on a bit of a wikiholiday, but I thought I'd just mention this RFAr. I don't know if you have been following the further adventures of DrippingInk/Winnermario/Hollow Wilerding/Eternal Equinox, and would have an interest in contributing. Or in putting in a few words about the old Winnermario days, as background to today's case. Please don't put yourself out, though—probably what happened in 2005 isn't going to make all that of a practical difference. Best wishes, Bishonen | talk 19:18, 1 July 2006 (UTC).[reply]

WP:ESP/UPA note

Greetings, Mel Etitis. The judges would like to announce that the winner for the Esperanza User Page Contest has been chosen. Congratulations to Fir0002 for winning the contest. The winning entry can be found here.

If you'd like to participate in the contest again, check by the contest page in a few days and sign up. See you around. fetofs ^Hello! 12:58, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I Ching article

Hi Mel,

Looks like you have been away, which is as it should be at this time of year in the northern hemisphere. If you're back and have time, it would be great if you could take a look at some recent additions to the I Ching article. I've removed some content for discussion here. So far there hasn't been any third party comment, which is needed. Sunray 15:10, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that the problem (?) is solved. Sunray 15:41, 9 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Link to www.roundtowerchurches.de in your article

Hi Mel Etitis,

why did you delete my link to the above metioned website, which fits perfectly to your article?

Regards,

B.

Kiel Canal image size

Why the postage size images? Care to defend? - Leonard G. 02:09, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It has been a week (and I notice you have not been active), so I redid the image layout, which I think is much improved. Please contact me before changing it (back) so we may discuss it. Thanks, Leonard G. 20:20, 17 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edits to Greek articles by RandyS0725

Hi Mel. New (8 July 2006) contributor User:RandyS0725 made a lot of changes to Greek classical Wikipedia articles: Special:Contributions/RandyS0725 The article on the Moirae especially doesn't seem to hang togther quite after the changes. I, myself, put the original quote by H.J. Rose from his work, Handbook of Greek Mythology into the article, book in hand, and know that what I put is what Rose wrote. "H.J. Rose writes that Nyx ("Night") was also the mother of the Moirae ¹ as she was of the Erinyes, in the Orphic tradition." RandyS0725 reworded it and it no longer, I feel, represents what H.J. Rose wrote. There are also other questions in what RandyS0725 wrote in that article. I will change at least that back to what it was. But RandyS0725 has modified lots of Greek mythology articles and I don't have enough internet access to check them. Could you check them when or if you have time? I have asked a couple of other classics Wikipedians, too. Bests as ever. --- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 21:01, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In Bed with Medinner (series 2)

I know you had some involvement with this list, which I came across as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Red Link Recovery. I wondered if you could confirm that the redlink to Gary Newman in Programme Three should actually be to Gary Numan? Many thanks, TheGrappler 22:07, 10 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect deletion

Dear Mel,

I would like to add a copy of the page for diarrhoea (of all things) which just happens to be of temporary importance to my family. I ended up being directed to diarrhea as if this is the more acceptable spelling.

I think it is good and proper for people in the US to have their own spellings. I also get really annoyed when that spelling is imposed on me. I prefer to assert my national identity and cultural affiliation with Australian spelling as recorded from common usage in the Macquarie Dictionary (which of course is often closer to the spellings used by many people in the UK).

I see no problems having two entries for the not particularly large number of articles where there are spelling differences. My article would use most of the present entry but could add some geographic specifics.

I would have placed that article but the redirection requires some process which I attempted to understand but I lost patience.

Did you read the article by Jarron Lanier in Edge? I found it very interesting and thank him for taking me to the debate. I even more liked the replies by the many, also in Edge.

My apologies for my mental block to the mechanics.

Regards

Roo

garrison 09:14, 15 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:MessageVista

Hi Mel,

I warned this user in a calm way some time ago about self-promotion - he originally created an article Messagevista which was deleted (not by me) and placed promotional links on Short message service, where there is a comment specifically to warn against such links, as well as elsewhere. Now he (I guess) is going through the same motions, but without logging in (User:67.70.97.59) i.e. without even the "courtesy" of creating a sockpuppet. I haven't been doing all of the reverting by any means, but maybe I am the first to see the pattern. What do you suggest should be done next? SMeeds 14:59, 16 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Question About Edits and Reverts

Could you e-mail me? I wanted to ask you a queston regarding edits and reverts privately. agentcooper9@gmail.com

Chadbryant

Chadbryant said you had helped him out earlier over harrassment from sockpuppets. He's now experiencing some problems and I wonder if you would be able to take a look? Otherwise, any information you might be able to provide me with would be helpful. Thanks. Tyrenius 23:16, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hinduism

Welcome to WikiProject Hinduism

WikiProject Hinduism — a collaborative effort to improve articles about Hinduism

Discussion board — a page for centralised Hinduism-related discussion

Notice board — contains the latest Hinduism-related announcements

Hindu Wikipedians — Wikipedians who have identified themselves as Hindus

Portal — a portal linking to key Hinduism-related articles, images, and categories

Workgroups — projects with a more specific scopes

For more links, go to the project's navigation template.

--D-Boy 06:01, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:Ambrose_(1927).jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Ambrose_(1927).jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 09:06, 25 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Request to see Adi Shankara

Going through the archived discussions of the article Adi Shankara, I found that you had contributed to the article in the past. The article is now in FAC. Could you please see the article and comment? Thanks. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 10:05, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:Ambrose_Orchestra,_Febrary_1933.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Ambrose_Orchestra,_Febrary_1933.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 08:04, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Advice on bad editor

Hi Mel,

Maybe I can get your input, or perhaps efforts, on a troublesome editor. User:Kmaguir1 has rather obnoxiously edited some bios of philosophers, and essentially exclusively such edits. His main target is Judith Butler, but he's also started doing disruptive nonsense on Michel Foucault. In both cases, a persistent thread is insertion of homophobic doggerel. But for Butler it also includes a 3RR violation in inserting badly written and personalistic "criticism". Since then, he's skirted 3RR, but has still inserted lots of bad content, that all the other editors dislike. He went into a foolish thread on Category:Philosophers to argue for Butler's exclusion (and added a number of borderline Calvinist theologians, mostly out of WP:POINT, i.e. not really centrally "philosophers"; but I don't really care about that). Of late, he's inserted outright gibberish into the Butler article; I guess he fancies himself as managing another Sokal Hoax or something (it vaguely uses relevant words, but not in any meaningful combination).

In general, it's pretty evident the editor only wants to degrade and disrupt the articles about philosophers he doesn't like... no single edit by him has ever actually improved any article. On the other hand, the stuff is nominally coherent enough that it's not quite vandalism. And mostly he's figured out to stay one edit shy of 3RR now.

I'm really not sure what to do about an editor of this nature. I'm afraid I really can't fancy enough good faith to pretend compromise or resolution will actually change his ill intent. But then, a user conduct RfC is a lot of work, and rarely brings about anything much. Overall it's very frustrating. Any ideas? LotLE×talk 05:33, 11 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blythburgh

Some edits from a prof. historian (UEA) and Blythburgh resident to clarify foundation date for church and relationship with priory. Some good sources.

Klinsie

Thank you for your kind welcome

Hello! In March 2005, you welcomed me to Wikipedia and I, being a newbie on the English Wikipedia (which still seems huuuuuge compared to the Slovene edition where I came from), replied on my talk page. I didn't really realize that you won't be able to see my edit through the 'Recent changes' (in my active Slovene wikipedian days, I browsed through *all* the edits made that day)... and now, when I'm the one welcoming newbies, I so seldom get a nice reply from them that I really think I should thank you. So here it is, a great THANKS for welcoming me. I really appreciate that. Regards from Slovenia, -Missmarple 20:45, 14 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blythburgh

PS I note, sadly, that the wrong information about the foundation of Blythburgh church is now spread over the web through the reuse of the Wikipedia entry. There was much good source material available when the original was drafted for this mistake to have been avoided. But, of course, source material must be viewed critically. That's what writers of history are supposed to do.

Klinsie

Theta Beta Potata PUNK HOUSE Deletion Review

Theta Beta Potata

This article was first started by me and was deleted back in May '06. I was reading the punk house article and saw that the link for the TBP article was no longer red so I clicked on it and there was an article back up, started by another user. I dont know who started it because, it was deleted soon after I saw it. The decision made in the "Article for Deletion" debate should be reconsidered. The article is about a punk house not a fratenal organization. It seems that the debate, run by User:ChrisB and results were reported by User:Mailer Diablo. I will post this on their talk pages. This is the first time I have requested a deletion review so please let me know what else I need to do. If there is anything. I am on wikipedia frequently and I want to learn. Thanks. Xsxex 16:28, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

dmwime posting dozens of photos with embedded URL

I know only a few admins, so please excuse my laying this at your doorstep; I'm doing so only because I don't know enough about Wikipedia policies regarding this. In the last week, user dmwime has made over 100 edits, almost all of which have been uploading photos from See Before You Die.Net (which have their URL embedded in the photo) and placing them on pages, normally one photo per page. Each edit summary on the upload sounds like an ad. I would like to assume good faith, but it really looks like an effort to promote the site. At the very least, it seems obvious - even if copyright is not an issue - that the URLs would need to be cropped out. Someone told him so a few days ago, and he proceeded to ignore the advice and placed almost 2 dozen more in the last two days. Would you mind looking into it? Thanks. -Do c t or W 21:38, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If they really are freely licensed (and we need to know that), then they allow for derivative use and we just remove the watermark. If they're not, then we don't want them and they should be tagged for speedy deletion. See if we can get some confirmation of the free license after explaining that it means the watermarks will be removed. Jkelly 22:29, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

$heyhowdoyoumakepagesforyourbands?$

Advice from User:Stirling Newberry

When I visited the Gold Standard article a couple of weeks ago apropos of a book on money I was editing, I discovered what struck me as an unseemly mess of which the bulk appeared to be extraneous material promoting a POV.

I made a few edits, mostly replacing, but deleting a single reference and discovered a day or two later that they had been all reverted by Stirling Newberry. I inquired of him as to his reasons for reverting to what struck me as even mechanically inferior previous versions, and with but one exception, received what I'll call ad hominem criticisms of my contributions (e.g., "unreflective of current scholarship").

In the ensuing discussion, said Newberry, having detected my relative newness to Wikipedia, took me in hand with Advice, a section he opened in my Talk page that contains recommendations as to how to get along productively with other Wikipedia editors (he talks on my page, and I on his). In the course of this instruction, he referred me to you as having experienced a "rough" launch in your Wikipedia editing career, which I see at this point is well along.

And so, if I may, I place myself at your knee and seek the benefit of whatever remarks you may have to offer. Thanks in advance for your response.

PS I find your focus on the Talk/Article ratio rather incisive. Depending on just how you calculate this statistic, I'm afraid my own ratio has been much degraded by the Gold Standard imbroglio. Much of my article product has fallen to Newberry's cleaver, not that I'm averse to changing or even discarding my writing in the course of attaining quality standards.--Joe 15:00, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fabricating User Messages

Fabricating user messages to make it appear that the user is slandering himself and praising you is a serious offense for a wikipedian who claims to be so dedicated to bettering this encyclopedia. You've been caught in the act, and I fully intend to follow it up to see some of your priveledges removed. Good day. --Badharlick 06:57, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Votes and your wiki philosophy

Mel... I came by your user page by chance and was reading your philosphy on wikipedia. I didn't get very far. This struck me as interesting:

"Voting in general. There's a disturbing tendency on the part of many editors to jump into a discussion, vote without reading any of the comments, ... and even seems to have been made in ignorance of the object of the discussion ... It can make the business of voting a farce."

I wonder if we can imagine a democractic election in which the situation you describe has arisen: voters, ignorant of the issues and motives of the candidates/parties, vote anyway - for the best-looking candidate, the candidate with the biggest flag, and so on. Probably describes most elections in the western world. Although I have heard it suggested in debates before that a general knowlesge or awareness test should be a requirement for voting, thankfully we haven't agreed to that yet. DDD DDD 12:19, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]