User talk:SwissCelt/archive5

Our Discussion on Essjay

Would you be okay with moving it to one of our talk pages? It's kind of derailed the post I originally made. In addition, I am genuinely confused about what point you're trying to make, although it could just be because I'm incredibly tired (I'm about to go to bed). If you'd like to continue the discussion, post a response and I'll respond accordingly tomorrow morning.

Regards, – Lantoka (talk) 09:07, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind. Two other people have jumped in now. I'll just leave off with saying I'm thoroughly confused. My original thread talks about Essjay and the community's reaction to what he did, causing his departure. Some replies are made. Then you take an opportunity to talk about how admins are censoring debate on the topic. I question the link, since it's kind of off-topic and I disagree with your point. You don't really give a response, but rather change the subject. So I don't really know what we're talking about. =P – Lantoka (talk) 09:12, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's difficult to form a coherent argument right now, as the ground rules for discussing this seem to be shifting by the hour. Nonetheless, I do wish you well, and I do apologize if I've offended you. We'll take this up at a later time, if you'd like. Thanks! -- SwissCelt 09:15, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not at all offended. I'm just trying to understand your views on the subject. Thanks for your courteous response, and I'd be happy to continue this discussion tomorrow morning.

Have a good night, – Lantoka (talk) 09:18, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree they censored us...this guy needs to be banned, not retired. You can discuss it at one of the many blogs listed here:

Blogs —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 65.94.112.104 (talk) 18:42, 4 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Continuing the Discussion

So what do you think of moving the conversation here? We can also continue it if you want. Mainly I want to get it off Essjay's talk page... in retrospect it seems kind of off-topic and disrespectful to leave it there in light of what has happened. Respectfully, – Lantoka (talk) 00:47, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd rather take it up on one of the blogs listed at the link above. Though I'm not sure what more I can add, or even want to add. I'm growing tired of the negative responses I'm getting on this, and especially the ad hominem attacks. I do want to thank you, though, for being a voice of reason on this issue, even if we disagree. -- SwissCelt 04:47, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be happy to continue the conversation wherever you'd like. A question, though, if I may. Are you okay with me moving our existing dialogue to this talk page? I don't feel it's really appropriate on Essjay's page, although I'll understand if you want to keep it there. Sorry to keep bugging you about this. =P – Lantoka (talk) 05:27, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh! Yes, feel free to move it here. Just be clear in the edit summary of User talk:Essjay that's what you're doing, so to avoid the appearance of censorship. -- SwissCelt 05:52, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion on Essjay

Moved from User talk:Essjay

Nor do I... especially as all his admin friends are censoring discussion about this. That's what's really sickening about all this. -- SwissCelt 08:19, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I honestly don't see the connection. And I don't know why you've fought so rabidly to have that troll's comment kept. It was trolling, plain and simple, and absolutely no productive discussion stemmed from it. – Lantoka (talk) 08:28, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You don't? Funny, you said yourself, in the resulting (and deleted) commentary, "That's disturbing news. Stuff like this can't really be swept under the carpet, and trying to do so before it's all out of our system is probably just going to make it worse." Anyway, and as I said before, this isn't about Essjay. Those who flounce off aren't supposed to be back reading what people say about them, and I'm not about to disguise the truth in an effort to get him back. That only furthers the dishonesty. -- SwissCelt 08:33, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Essjay has run off without saying much, not too startling and yeah, this isn't even about Essjay. Gwen Gale 08:40, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(triple edit conflict) You misquoted me. I crossed out that comment after I realized that you were the one who reverted an admin's removal of WAS's trolling. My opinion is that WAS's comment was unarguably trolling and was not productive, yet you chose to revert it anyway, which brings your comments about admin over-censorship into question because I don't believe that reverting trolling is over-censorship.

And also, the relationship between the two comments remains unclear. How is discussion on Essjay's return related to censorship, as you imply with the wording "Nor do I... especially as all his admin friends are censoring discussion about this"?

I think you're focusing a little too much on this whole issue of "censorship", dude. In retrospect, it seems excessive and out of place. Removing trolling isn't censorship, but rather an attempt to keep discussion productive. And in this specific case, to avoid alienating a much valued and respected editor any more than we already have. – Lantoka (talk) 08:51, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lantoka, we didn't all wake up this weekend and decide to be mean to Essjay. With all due respect to those who've collaborated with him on articles, there is a pretty serious issue of dishonesty that prompted his resignation. This issue is one that needs to be resolved by Wikipedia, and quickly before we appoint another mouthpiece to go before the news media. To me, that's of far greater importance than to try to avoid alienating an editor, no matter how valued and respected he might be. -- SwissCelt 09:02, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) That's the pith of it. Essjay made a big docking botch but this isn't about him. While there are many cool admins here, there are dozens of admins (and other editors with sway) on this wiki who daily pull the same codswallop and meanwhile Wikipedia's management referred a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist to an editor with a wholly fictional CV. That's worrisome and it's helpful to talk about it. Gwen Gale 09:07, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've lost you dude. You're constantly changing topics on me. – Lantoka (talk) 09:04, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't change the topic. That would be you, by setting this thread apart from its initial context. -- SwissCelt 09:06, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

[1], [2] are some of the edits we're talking about. While I agree that the initial remarks in these were somewhat over the top in their personal attacking style, I think it is worse to make this a site which leaves the impression that all Wikipedians are apologetic and think a great unjustice has been done to Essjay, while I think quick and firm action is the only way to restore credibility of our project. Also, I would like to know otherwise which one is the one place where the Essjay matter may be discussed, because in the places mentioned I am coming across a couple of "archived - do not edit any more" flags. -- Jungletiger 09:11, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Truth be told I think there are some editors lurking about here who are a bit on edge with the notion that Essjay got nicked for doing something they do themselves. My take on that would be... chill y'all! Don't lie to reporters from the New Yorker 'n don't puff up your academic background to other editors. Gwen Gale 09:16, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Like trying to hit a moving target

I give up. As my comments here are being continuously moved and deleted, it's clear to me that trying to form a coherent argument about this event is futile. I apparently have stumbled upon the Essjay Fan Club, and I'm sorry to have intruded. On the other hand, if anyone would like to discuss how this affair has hurt Wikipedia, I suppose I'll find you somewhere... though probably not WP:CN, as this same kind of revisionism is occurring there. Peace. -- SwissCelt 09:13, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image deletion proposal

I've proposed deletion of your Image:Map of Logan County townships.PNG because it has been superseded by Image:Map of Logan County Ohio With Municipal and Township Labels.PNG. Nyttend 03:15, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. I'll go voice my support for the deletion. -- SwissCelt 05:10, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Southern Cherokee Nation

SwissCelt,

Greetings Brother,

I am a member of the Southern Cherokee Nation and a Mason in good standing. I am the user that responded to the slandrous statements made about the Southern Cherokee Nation of Kentucky. I have noticed over the last week or so that we have been on and off the state recognized list a few different times. The last time I looked we were in a dubious status and now today, we are not listed at all. What made you finally take the Southern Cherokee Nation totally off the the list? You may respond to me at metisheart@comcast.net - Wado!

Polmer W. Burke Master Mason Harmony Lodge #18 Olympia, Washington

Greetings! First off, I should let you know that although my father and brother are both Masons in good standing, I (for various life reasons not worth discussing here) have not yet petitioned a Lodge. In any case, I must remain impartial where Wikipedia is concerned.

That said, I was not the one who removed the Southern Cherokee Nation from the list of state recognized tribes. I think there are issues with this Nation's inclusion on the list, but I think those issues should be resolved as completely as possible before a decision is made to delete. Actually, I anticipate that some solution will be reached whereby the Nation will be included with appropriate caveats from those who (for whatever reasons) don't believe the Nation should be included. But whatever the outcome, consensus is important. -- SwissCelt 13:43, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Osiyo Brother,

I never expected that you be anything but totally impartial. I wanted to communicate with you Masonically, but that will not be possible. I hope you will someday decide to follow in your father’s footsteps and petition a lodge. The fact that your father was a Mason is enough to open the door to you.

Now for the business at hand, I am not sure the Southern Cherokee Nation (SCN) would want to be included on the list at this juncture. Being added to a list with appropriate caveats from those that have issues with the SCN does not strike me as impartial. There are different factions of Cherokee that are purporting to be Southern Cherokee, and are the arch enemies of the SCN. They are giving the SCN a bad name. We are not affiliated with any other groups claiming to be Southern Cherokee. I hope the SCN is not somehow being confused with one of the shady clandestine splinter groups claiming to be Southern Cherokee. Additionally, there are quasi Native American groups within the State of Kentucky hoping to get recognition through powerful political ties and would love to see the SCN discredited. Before any decisions are made to add/delete us from the list with potentially damaging caveats, please contact Principle Chief Michael “Manfox” Buley via email manfox@henderson.net .

Walk in Peace and Beauty, Buffaloheart

Image:Map_of_Logan_County_townships.PNG listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Map_of_Logan_County_townships.PNG, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Selket ^Talk 00:23, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Confusion

Hi SwissCelt, there already is a page User talk:Appropriatusername, but I accidentally left the {{welcomeg}} template at Talk:Appropriatusername which is a talk page in article space (for a non-existent article named Appropriatusername, not a talk page in user space.

I then left the {{db-self}} template at the Talk:Appropriatusername page, which you have now reverted. I still want to speedy delete Talk:Appropriatusername and will leave the welcome template at User talk:Appropriatusername.

However, since I am frankly a bit confused about all this, please double check me and let me know if it is OK to delete the Talk:Appropriatusername page or not.

Thanks, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 18:08, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, I appear to have been snared in the same trap. It seems User:appropriatusername has been signing his or her posts as appropriatusername, leading me to believe that she or he has not yet established a user page (as seemingly indicated by the red link). I confess I did not check too carefully to ensure I was editing in user space rather than article main space. Go ahead and proceed with the speedy delete. And do it quick, as it's ensnared two of us thusfar. ;-) -- SwissCelt

Thanks for double checking - I am not 100% today and appreciate your confirmation that it is OK to delete this page. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 18:17, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It has been deleted. Thanks again, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 18:57, 22 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Bellefontaine

Hey there. I thought I should tip you off on why I nominated Bellefontaine, Ohio for Good Article status. User:Epbr123 assessed the article as "start class", which is the lowest possible assessment for an article that's not a stub. This editor also did so without leaving any comments, which essentially degrades the article-- how can we improve it if we don't know what to improve? I don't like assessments anyway, but assessments without comments just leave a black mark on the article and devalue the contributions of tireless editors.

So I tried removing the quality part of the assessment for now. He/she reverted my edits twice. Finally, I nominated the article for GA status in the hopes of bringing the quality scale up. It was a desperation move, as I could think of no other way to keep the article from forever being a start class article. This SAME editor failed the GAC, mere minutes after I nominated it. So now not only does the article have an ugly "start class" rating, it has an even uglier failed GA status on it. I'm fed up. I feel as though the article was vandalized by a drive-by editor, and I don't feel that I have any recourses to correct it. -- SwissCelt 13:10, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Aha, I see what you mean. I saw that bit and simply assumed that someone had nominated it for GA and quickly been turned down, with nothing else happening. Nyttend 13:13, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So what can we do about it? I'm in a cooling off period right now (self-imposed), so I won't do anything today, but I would very much appreciate your advice. -- SwissCelt 13:17, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not much of an idea. I usually don't do anything with this kind of ratings (too subjective for me), and my input was just a guess. I suppose the intro could be expanded, and the geography and economy as well. Do you get the Examiner's online edition? There's not that much of economy notes in the Examiner generally. Nyttend 13:20, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I know the article can be improved, certainly. Hmmm... Maybe I'm just worried too much about it. The whole process just upsets me, as it seems to be an easy way to snipe at other people's work without adding anything constructive. -- SwissCelt 13:32, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

One thing that could help the geography section is a picture and account of Campbell Hill (regardless of whether it comes with an ", Ohio" :-). I hope to go to get a picture sometime this summer.

At any rate, look at other cities. Articles as significant as Carson City, Nevada and Biloxi, Mississippi are rated start-class. Perhaps the cities Wikiproject is just really stringent. Nyttend 16:02, 25 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ohio State Flagship Status

Hi Swisscelt, I'll make the addtions that you suggested this weekend and will also see if I can find a more stable web link to Strickland/Fingerhut's recent descriptions of Ohio State.

As an aside, I wonder if the anonymous editor who feels a compulsion to constantly plaster the "Ohio A&M" term all over the article is a frustrated refugee from this discussion :) [3] --Sam Harmon 17:33, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]