User talk:Natalya/Archive10
| Archives | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 |
| Last archive: 20 April 2011 | |||||||||||||
A Resilient Barnstar from Hildanknight
[edit]
|
The Resilient Barnstar | |
| I admire your ability to stay cool and civil, despite all the stress Esperanza must be causing you. I hereby award you this Resilient Barnstar. J.L.W.S. The Special One 14:59, 1 January 2007 (UTC) |
This is my last chance to spread some Esperanzal love before Esperanza gets deleted.
P.S. I wanted to include the following sentence in the barnstar message. For some reason, it broke the template, so here it is: I'll never forget the support you provided me when my Wikilife was in crisis.
P.P.S. At the MFD, there is consensus that Esperanza should be deleted, but there does not seem to be consensus on how Esperanza should be deleted. Some prefer the MessedRocker solution while others think outright deletion is better. Some (such as myself) voted Keep, while others suggested Esperanza be converted into something else, such as an essay. That's why I started the thread "Aftermath".
P.P.P.S. I saw your post announcing that you'd resign as Administrator General of Esperanza. Do you intend to leave Wikipedia as well? If Esperanza's deletion results in a fork, will you participate - even lead - in the fork?
--J.L.W.S. The Special One 14:59, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
Recovery, etc.
[edit]Hey Natalya, great to hear from you, as always :)
Thanks for your recovery wishes, and I hope you've been having a great time over this holiday period.
It looks like the Esperanza debate is over, and Esperanza itself, which is sad to see, when you think of what Esperanza set out to do. However, Mailer Diablo seems to have made the right decision in regard to closing it, and keeping the history there.
Anyway, I'll talk to you again sometime soon, I'm sure. Once again, you really have been great over this period.
Thε Halo Θ 17:11, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
RE: Illness
[edit]Hi, I've recovered since last Wednesday, did not update anything as I'm lazy to do that in fact. Oh, I must say that you've done a good job for the now defunct Esperanza as an admin general since July. I do hope to see you often here on Wikipedia and IRC. I'm logging out now as its very late already. Bye. Terence Ong 18:17, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
- I will be making small edits time to time, uploading pics mainly. May write a bit of articles sometimes, but I think I will be inactive. Wikipediholism stops me from taking a Wikibreak, unless I'm on a vacation. Terence Ong 05:23, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Your opinion
[edit]Hi Natalya, and Happy New Year. I suppose you are well aware of the immense uproar that Esperanza has created lately and of its deletion. Just curious about your opinion. Frankly the whole discussion looked so ridiculous to me that I was proposing that we "deleted ourselves" as long as all the people discussing there promised to do something useful rather than writing tons of letters with no sense. —Gennaro Prota•Talk 19:28, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
- on my talk page you replied:
- Hey Gennaro Prota. I think it's unfortunate that Esperanza had to come to be deleted, but it did feel like it was a different organization than it used to be. The values of Esperanza still hold, however, and many of its programs will hopefully continue. It seems that the organization as a whole just wasn't a good fit for Wikipedia anymore.
- I don't understand why there was so much anger. In any case I couldn't resist writing this, sorry. —Gennaro Prota•Talk 19:48, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
Esperanza essay
[edit]Hi Natalya, I understand what you mean, and I've just tried to reword things. It may not be obvious, but there are times when I have a lot of difficulty trying to find the right words to say or type. As for the games subpages, I couldn't remember when those were deleted. Thanks for pointing out my mistakes, and let me add that I hope you aren't upset about how Esperanza turned out. I fully understand if you are, and I would even understand if you feel a bit upset at me for what I've said in the past. --Kyoko 20:28, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for the compliments! ★MESSEDROCKER★ 20:34, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
- I guess being a Wikipedian for over 2 years shows... ★MESSEDROCKER★ 20:37, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks, Natalya! And thanks for understanding my opinion as well. I'm a bit sad that it came to an end, but in the long run, I think this result will be better for Wikipedia. Oh, and Happy New Year! --Kyoko 20:41, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
- I guess being a Wikipedian for over 2 years shows... ★MESSEDROCKER★ 20:37, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
Thank you
[edit]Natalya, words fail me at the moment, but I just wanted to leave a brief thank you message for you. Actually, I'd really like to thank everyone at Esperanza for all the work that everyone put in, but seeing as how WT:ESP is shut down, I figured this was the next best thing.
You're stronger than I am, being able to contribute at this time and clean up the last bits of Esperanza. Granted, I have a lot of stuff going on IRL that's occupying my time as well, but that will merely be a welcome distraction during the wikibreak I really need for on-wiki reasons. Don't worry- I will be back, in time. And when that time comes, I look forward to working with you on the encyclopedia and continuing to build the community here through civility, friendliness, respect, recognition, and support. Best of luck to you as we start 2007.
Your friend,
Eric (EWS23) 21:49, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks, I'm glad you like the exercise. I also encourage you to contribute to this page I recently established, which I hope one day will be greatly developed with ideas from many people, and will be a great resource for new coaches. Cheers, Eric (EWS23) 09:14, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
- P.S.- How do you like the tweak I made to my Esperanza userbox?
A little request (deletion in my user space)
[edit]Hi Natalya,
if you are online, could you please delete this page for me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gennaro Prota (talk • contribs)
- Thank you so much! I'll re-add contents now. Please don't delete it anymore :-) —Gennaro Prota•Talk 22:38, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
- Since you said so on my talk page I'll dare to ask another favor: could you also delete User:Gennaro Prota/styles (it has one subpage, which is empty, so everything is fine). I'll promise to not bother you for a while, really! —Gennaro Prota•Talk 23:00, 1 January 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks :-) (I didn't know the expression you are all set; it's nice :-)) —Gennaro Prota•Talk 01:06, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
Esperanza wrap-up, and "Reach out"
[edit]The end result of the ESP MfD wasn't all that bad. ESP basically just got reabsorbed into the Wikipedia mainstream, with its programs either spun-off as standalones or redirected to the closest match.
There is one loose-end, however...
The way the MfD was closed was pretty subjective, leaving its various programs open to become standalone pages. The "Reach out" program is currently redirected, but I see no reason why it couldn't be moved and resumed as an active program - even the MfD nominator wasn't opposed to re-creation of ESP's programs, and based on the way the MfD was closed, there isn't any good reason why Reach out should be restarted from scratch (which would disrupt the page's history). You seemed pretty active in it, and I'd be glad to help if you wanted to run it again. The Transhumanist 03:44, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
- I agree with your general idea of how things were going. Esperanza had changed from what it used to be, so at what it's current status was, the outcome hopefully saved the good parts and lost the not-as-good parts. As for Reach Out, hmm... at the moment, I'm just going to be happy to see the programs that have already been moved to separate projects stay, before trying to resurrect other Esperanza programs. At the same time, feel free to take the initiaitive, though I imagine discussing at the MfD talk page or elsewhere would be appropriate, so no one thinks circumvention of the MfD is going on. -- Natalya 03:54, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
It would be in context with the MfD closing, and therefore appropriate. I don't see why anyone would object, because it has its own merits and community-building purposes which are distinct from what ESP was. The page would be eligible for deletion nomination just like every other page, so if there is good reason for it not to exist, this would certainly come to light in a deletion debate. But since it would be doing nobody any harm, there would be no reason to nominate it for deletion in the first place. The Transhumanist 04:10, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
Done - the page can be found at WP:RO. The Transhumanist 05:14, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
Esperanza member bot
[edit]Hey Natalya, thank you for your message. It's sad to see Esperanza go, but I'm glad I was able to make bots for it over the months I was active on it. And also, thank you for your leadership. Cheers, and see you around, Tangotango (talk) 10:09, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
Re: User:ColScott
[edit]This user is using other IPs to attack my talk page[1]. This has continued since you reduced that users block from indef to 1 month. Since this user is continuing the same behavior that got him indef blocked to begin with perhaps you would reconsider the reduction of the block. HighInBC (Need help? Ask me) 18:09, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
Regarding #wikipedia-esperanza
[edit]Hi there. This channel had been set to inactive by someone in a little unclean manner, and I'm pretty sure it wasn't you. I decided to re-organise things over there as a group contact, as I didn't want to leave it hanging. However, you are still the channel contact and can therefore use /cs identify #wikipedia-esperanza to continue to work with it as you wish - it's your channel :) Please let me know if you need anything else. Thanks. —Xyrael / 20:43, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, that shouldn't be a problem; I've given it a pretty permenant solution. Thanks for going down with the ship, so to speak. —Xyrael / 17:31, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
Resiliancy barnstar
[edit]Thank you for the barnstar. It certainly put a smile on my face. --Fang Aili talk 00:30, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
Esperanza
[edit]Would you like to see Esperanza return. Please contact me with an answer. Geo. 05:51, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
- What like to see Esperanza return if it was as it used to be , but without the bureaucracy Geo. 23:42, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for January 2nd, 2007.
[edit] |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 1 | 2 January 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:32, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
Hi
[edit]I looked at your page. Very interesting. Very nice name too. See you soon. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Male Renamon (talk • contribs) -- Natalya 13:20, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Mother!
[edit]Go on Natalya, you tell 'em! Seriously, but I have to start laughing. Over the grave of a defunct organisation? I mean, really. Save it for ArbCom or whatever. Or just write some articles. I hope all the fuss starts dying out soon, otherwise I'll begin to feel that I should never have written up my co-nom in the first place. Yawn. Anyway, kudos on keeping a cool head throughout all the unpleasantness and for being such an exemplary Wikipedian. Cheers, Moreschi Deletion! 13:35, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- Natalya, I have to applaud you on your kindness and coolheadedness even in the toughest situations. Over the whole MfD of Esperanza, there wasn't a single negative thing that you said. (or it seemed, as I was reading over the MfD) You're a true example for Wikipedians. Even though Esperanza is gone, I'm sure that you will demonstrate your leadership through another Wikipedia project. Best wishes, lovelaughterlife♥talk? 08:11, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for January 8th, 2007.
[edit] |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 2 | 8 January 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:56, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
My Request for Adminship
[edit]
|
Thank you for your support in my my RfA, which passed with a tally of 117/0/1. I hope that my conduct as an admin lives up to the somewhat flattering confidence the community has shown in me. Please don't hesitate to leave a message on my talk page should you need anything or want to discuss something with me. I'm already starting to use the en mop for good effect on both wikis. Whilst I haven't had a serious go at an en backlog yet, I will soon and give it similar treatment to the ones on Commons (where I can delete ~100 unsourced images in half an hour).--Nilfanion (talk) 16:13, 9 January 2007 (UTC) |
Bye
[edit]It was very nice knowing you. --Sir James Paul, La gloria è a dio 01:14, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks
[edit]Thanks for your support. Have a nice week and god bless. --Sir James Paul, La gloria è a dio 03:04, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
And Thanks for the un-block! Robovski 03:12, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
Civility
[edit]
Thanks for your message. Yes, I know, I know! (smile). But I am only human and finally reached my point of exasperation with a certain user who just doesn't "get" Wikiepdia standards. My plan (expressed too impolitely to the person in question) is still to walk away from this one and do damage control later. Have a good one. House of Scandal 14:05, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
About that unblock request
[edit]Hi Natalya! That user was a vandal account created here: [2]. If you look at the contributions of the spawning account, [3], you can see it is a sockpuppet of the original vandal account [4] trying to evade block. This one forgot to log out before making the new accounts, allowing us to see the connection. I'll leave something on the unblock page. Thanks for the note, and take care, Antandrus (talk) 05:40, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
- Hi again Natalya! I've never created another myself while logged in (I have an "Antandrus sockpuppet" account I've never used, but I think it predates us being able to see the user creation log). I'm pretty sure all you have to do is go here: Special:Userlogin. A lot of our "favorite" trolls don't realize that we can see the accounts they create while logged in. You can tell that one was created that way when you click on logs and it comes up empty (e.g. [5] -- all accounts should have at least one entry: the original account creation time and date in the user creation log -- if it does not, then it was spawned from an existing account, and you'll have to hunt it down in the log itself). I periodically like to look at the user creation log for accounts spawning other accounts, especially when there are multiples, for they're almost always signs of trouble. Have fun! Antandrus (talk) 16:15, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for January 15th, 2007.
[edit] |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 3 | 15 January 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:59, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
A Cookie!
[edit]
Hi there Natalya :) I haven't seen you around awhile, and thought I'd catch up with you, wish you well, and remind you how valued you are here. That's when I thought of this WikiCookie here! Now all you need is some milk ;) Keep up being you. Thε Halo Θ 19:31, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
Page seems vandalised
[edit]page seems vandalised http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norah_Jones — Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.22.41.64 (talk • contribs)
Your support
[edit]I would like to thank you for supporting me when I was about to leave. It is the editors like you who made me decide to stay. Again thanks. Have a nice week and god bless. --James, La gloria è a dio 20:22, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
James, La gloria è a dio 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!
Newyorkbrad's RfA
[edit]Thank you for your support on my RfA, which closed favorably this morning, and for your very kind words accompanying your !vote. I appreciate the confidence the community has placed in me and am looking forward to my new responsibilities. Please let me know if ever you have any comments or suggestions, especially as I am learning how to use the tools. Best regards, Newyorkbrad 18:18, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for unblocking me
[edit]I don't know what that was all about, but thanks. Spute 22:59, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Edit number
[edit]Hi Natalya,long time no see! How are you? I can wait for the reply, as I am not really that free to make frequent visits to Wikipedia anymore. Anyway, is there a way for me to know the total number of edits that I have made? I would greatly appreciate your help. Thanks! Zacharycrimsonwolf 13:14, 14 November 2006 (UTC) 08:34, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
ColScott / Spawnopedia
[edit]Hi, Natalya, Based on conversations on Talk:Jane Hamsher, User talk:Kynn and User talk:Spawnopedia, as well as the talk page for Bobby Beausoleil, I suspect that Spawnopedia is the same person as User:ColScott, who you banned recently. Can you look into this? --Kynn 21:44, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
Hi Natalya- This "user" took offense to my objecting to his editing a page when he is friends with this person and now he is calling me names and making up lies. I have not vandalized a page nor called him names both of which he has done. Thank you. Spawnopedia 21:56, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
- Factual correction: I am most definitely not friends with Jane Hamsher. Spawnopedia claims I am, but that's simply untrue. He's been insulting from the get-go, and has made false claims of "vandalism" against me (but, curiously, has not reported this vandalism anywhere). --Kynn 22:05, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
- I am no tattletale. I simply asked you to stop the Vandalism. Why don't you just stop crying and follow the rules? Spawnopedia 22:35, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
- Name one rule I've broken. (Hint: there aren't any.) As for "stopping the vandalism," I didn't commit any, so it's hard to stop doing that, isn't it? --Kynn 23:01, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
long articles
[edit]What's the tag for articles becoming very long? --NEMT 22:45, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for January 22nd, 2007.
[edit] |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 4 | 22 January 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
| Wikipedia modifies handling of "nofollow" tag | WikiWorld comic: "Truthiness" |
| News and notes: Talk page template, milestones | Wikipedia in the News |
| Features and admins | The Report on Lengthy Litigation |
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 06:38, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
Re:Editcountitis
[edit]Hi Natalya. I guess you know what's coming...QUESTIONS!!!! Umm...anyway, you said something about editcountitis. May I know what that is? Is it a bad thing? Thanks for answering my previous question, and thanks for this too!! Zacharycrimsonwolf 13:14, 14 November 2006 (UTC) 12:25, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
Well, for me, apologising to someone for bugging them with questions is just a habit of mine. It seems dreadfully rude not to. Anyway, someone told me that to become an admin, you need at LEAST a 1,000 edits. So, isn't your edit count important? And, can you teach me on how to archive my talk pages? Pretty please, with sugar tops? My talk page is gonna overflow like, soon. Thanks, thanks, and...thanks :) Cheers!! Zacharycrimsonwolf 13:14, 14 November 2006 (UTC) 13:35, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
Heheh, I will. Thanks anyway, again, for ALL the help you have given me. It really helped me. A lot. Zacharycrimsonwolf 13:14, 14 November 2006 (UTC) 13:44, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
Barnstar
[edit]Thanks, Natalya! Good thing VoABot just started working again; now I don't have to manually clear requests lol. =) Nishkid64 01:15, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
Favor
[edit]Will you do me a favor and comment at my desk about the case Wikipedia:AMA Requests for Assistance/Requests/January 2007/Grandmaster? It would be a big help. Thanks. --James, La gloria è a dio 02:29, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
Disambiguation Help
[edit]It seems that you have answerd this question once, about the word escort, but could you take a look at my Disambiguation question? Thanks! --Knulclunk 16:52, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
Cool
[edit]Way to stay cool as a cucumber during your discussion as WP:AN/I! That was impressive, I hope many people learn from your attitude. -- Natalya 14:23, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you! That means a lot! I felt it was an important point to bring to the community, and I hope I conducted myself well. The subject has been discussed and my comments were found to be unsupported - and that's fine too. That is the point of open and honest discussion, and review by one's peers.Thanks again! :)Pedro1999a | Talk 14:56, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Vandalismus
[edit]I can't speak english well, so I wrote first in (my) english and then in german. I hope you understand what I want. So: The article Poles is permanently vandalism by IP's-Users. Can you please change the page that nobody can do changes in this article who is not sign in? Jetzt auf deutsch: Die Seite Poles wird von Benutzern, die sich nicht anmelden andauernd vandalisiert. Kannst Du den Seitenschutz ändern, damit User ohne Anmeldung keine Änderungen vornehmen können? Thanks in advance!--Plk 19:42, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you. I understand very much but I can't speak. The vandalism is since 19. Jan. 2007 and this user (allways with an other IP) change it again and again. If there is again a vandalism like that I will tell you. Thank you again for your help.--Plk 20:22, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
- I want to let you know that an IP vandalize this article again. I don't think that this person will stop with it.--Plk 23:03, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
- this user don't want to talk. He vandalize in wikis other language, too. This IP's that change this article vandalize at the polish wiki, too. The changes of this user were reverting in the PL-Wiki.--Plk 14:13, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
- I want to let you know that an IP vandalize this article again. I don't think that this person will stop with it.--Plk 23:03, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
Re:Picture of the day, etc., etc.
[edit]Hello, Natalya. I would be very grateful if you were to tell me how to uh...how do you put it? Its about the picture of the day thing in your user page, and I would really like to know how you do it. Also, if it doesn't bother you, can you please explain the term 'fair use' to me? I tried to upload pictures, but they keep sending me pictures regarding fair use to me. I read about it at Wikipedia:Fair use, but it wasn't very clear. And, if it REALLY doesn't bother you, can you please tell me the way on how to upload pictures? As I said, every time I tried, they warned me off about 'fair use images'. Thanks in advance! May good fortune rule over you, peace live in your heart, and the stars watch over you. Cheers! Zacharycrimsonwolf 13:14, 14 November 2006 (UTC) 12:09, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
re:Wikistress
[edit]Thanks for your support. The thing is, it's not coming from anonymous IPs . . . the major user who keeps adding the information is User:Zagozagozago. I also received a personal attack by him. I'm really fed up and I do not know what to do. WereWolf 02:10, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Vandalism at "Infamous" disambig page
[edit]Hey, this is ProfessorPaul and I wish to report vandalism at the disambiguation page of Infamous. The user responsible is Antenna1111; I have reverted the vandalism back to your most recent version. Just wanted to inform you; thank you. ProfessorPaul 05:47, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
Signpost updated for January 29th, 2007.
[edit] |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 3, Issue 5 | 29 January 2007 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 18:11, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for whacking me twice. :-)
[edit]Apparently we're clearing the WP:RPP backlog at the same time, and picking requests in the same order. You already edit conflicted me to decline one request, and even edit conflicted me while I was protecting a page! :-)
|
The Original Barnstar | |
| For beating me to the punch twice while clearing the backlog on WP:RPP. Argh! :-) Regards, Húsönd 15:17, 31 January 2007 (UTC) |
Aw, thank you so much! :-) Meanwhile, you edit conflicted me when I was going to report that I had speedy deleted The Jim. Too funny. Best regards, Húsönd 15:26, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
LaRouche page *sigh*
[edit]Just thought i'd explain what's going on and ask for your reaction. I think LaRouche falls into the category of pages that are most problematic for Wikipedia (political fringe group/borderline cult). For a mainstream media primer, I would recommend this http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A46883-2004Oct20?language=printer.
One of the editors of the Larouche article is DKing, a journalist and author of a book titled "Lyndon Larouche and the New American Fascism." The title pretty much sums up DKing's view on LaRouche. Also working on the article are a number of LaRouche followers: TsunamiButler, NathanDW, HonourableSchoolboy, and MaplePorter. Sometimes they have good edits, but their general modus operandi is to puff LaRouche up and to eliminate as much unfavorable material as possible. Numerous times I've had to remove stuff they've done that is just false. Anyway, this is essentially a recipe for edit war. DKing puts in a quote of LaRouche saying that only 1.5 million Jews died in the Holocaust, and LaRouche followers take it out citing WP:X where X is practically everything.
The main problem is that either a number of LaRouche followers are not engaging in an honest process and/or their view of reality is so skewed that an honest edit process is essentially impossible. Removing vandalism is simple, but fixing/removing half true, half false, semi-misleading material inserted by a dedicated band of editors is an absurd amount of work. If they insert something misleading, you can either revert it (in which case they revert u back and tell u to follow WP:Z/discuss on talk) or you are forced to spend hours of research finding out wtf actually is precisely right and then spend additional hours arguing it out on talk. The alternative is to surrender and let them remove/rewrite the article bit by bit.
What are you supposed to do in this situation? It's not clear that mediation will do anything. If the current edit dispute is resolved, the same level of intensity will merely arise on a different topic. Is there grounds for a ban against some pro-LaRouche editors? I don't know. They are pretty good about avoiding blatant violations of WP rules. Their edits feel more like erosion by the sea. Each wave isn't terribly damaging, but the net effecet over time is to knock the land into the sea, unless the sea is checked. In some ways, I'm almost for keeping this article protected for forever because it would save me so much time. Mgunn 07:29, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Thank you!
[edit]Thanks for your response on Menino. I realize it didn't seem like as much of a problem when I asked for sprotect, but having looked at previous vandalism to that page, I expected more, and I was right. Thanks!--Vidkun 21:22, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Thank you
[edit]Thanks for deleting the Jordan M. Lewis article -- I was trying to put a db-bio tag on it, but I'm slow, and I managed to recreate it by saving after it was deleted. Anyway, sorry about that, and thanks for deletimg my error. -- ArglebargleIV 22:17, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks...again
[edit]Once again, thank you ofr helping me out. Hope I;m not flooding your talk pages with these gratitude messages.... :). Zacharycrimsonwolf 13:14, 14 November 2006 (UTC) 06:33, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the Barnstar!
[edit]It's really nice to feel appreciated. Some people might argue that the most important job of Wikipedians is writing/improving articles, but I think that supporting those who do so is just as important. And then there's supporting those who support, like you just did... :) Thanks! —PurpleRAIN 19:42, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
Re: Bi-polar
[edit]Thank you for your words on my talk page. :) I never really thought it was a bad thing to be manic-depressive, but sometimes people would look at me really weird when they found out—it's good to know that doesn't happen here. :) — $PЯINGrαgђ 21:13, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
Re:Admin coach
[edit]Hi, Natalya. Do you still remember the Esperanza program Admin Coaching? From what I know, you were a coach before Esperanza was deleted. I just want to ask, are you still one? Its just a matter of curiosity. Goodbye and, cheers! Zacharycrimsonwolf 13:14, 14 November 2006 (UTC) 13:52, 4 February 2007 (UTC)