Revision as of 01:31, 25 December 2005 editJimWae (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers37,709 edits →linking dates← Previous edit | Revision as of 01:05, 27 December 2005 edit undoGTBacchus (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, File movers, Rollbackers60,420 edits Chooserr's blockNext edit → | ||
Line 345: | Line 345: | ||
Please either retore the date formatting or at least let me know that you will not revert me again if I do it --] 01:31, 25 December 2005 (UTC) | Please either retore the date formatting or at least let me know that you will not revert me again if I do it --] 01:31, 25 December 2005 (UTC) | ||
== Chooserr's block == | |||
Hi Nandesuka, thanks for the note. | |||
I'm pretty well aware of Chooserr's presence at Misplaced Pages. I've been watching him for some time, and was aware of... some of those blocks. Having watched him pretty closely, I can honestly say that he's been improving, and I think he has the potential to be a good Wikipedian. He doesn't quite understand the way Misplaced Pages works, but I wouldn't call his action trolling. I think he has good faith, but is rather naive in some ways. I believe him that he doesn't understand what was offensive about his comment, but I also agree that it was an unacceptable comment. I'm more interested in helping Chooserr figure out the ropes than in getting rid of him... | |||
I'll talk with him, and we'll see how it goes. (It won't be this evening - maybe tomorrow.) If he shows that he understands what he said wrong, and is willing to apologize for his comment, I'll consider reducing his block. Chooserr's been out of line, repeatedly, but he's also been at the receiving end of some pretty serious browbeating, and I would say the admins have come down more heavily on him than on those who've insulted him. I certainly welcome any further input you have on the matter. -]<sup>(])</sup> 01:05, 27 December 2005 (UTC) |
Revision as of 01:05, 27 December 2005
Archives: Archive 1
Welcome
Please leave me a message below, if you're so inclined. Nandesuka 20:23, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
Kaboom I was noticing your edited article on Kaboom cereal i was wondering in what state could i go about purchasing this cereal. I have not found it anywhere. Please Reply
Learning to walk before you start to run
Please consider who you are blocking and for what reason. You have now been an admin for two months? I hope that it hasn't gone to your head. In two months you have not only blocked me, but WMC as well! I strongly suggest you consider the appropriateness of such actions, and the Wikipolitics of who you are making enemies with. — Dunc|☺ 23:24, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
- I carefully considered the appropriateness of blocking you for telling another editor to "fuck off", and for removing your own block, and decided that it was, indeed, appropriate. Your amusing message on my talk page only reinforces the correctness of my decision. But thanks for expressing your concern for my wellbeing. Nandesuka 23:54, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
global cooling
Thanks for your recent edits there. William M. Connolley 16:23, 23 November 2005 (UTC).
- Thanks from me too :-) Your request for a poll has been advertized by SEW - see:
- I have followed him with a clarification on each. Thought you would be interested. Enjoy - Vsmith 02:42, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks for letting me know. He seems to be missing the point, though. Nandesuka 12:50, 25 November 2005 (UTC)
Thought I might visit
Thought I might visit. Congrats on the Admin.- ship position. I'm relatively new here myself, just helped another Wikipedian become a Admin.Martial Law 09:51, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
Webcomics
You're misreading. . Phil Sandifer 16:07, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
What citation format do you prefer?
Hi. I don't want to wade into the SEWilco battle over footnotes, but I personally do prefer the footnote style, so I was just wondering (because I couldn't find it in any of the discussions I have read) — what is the citation format you prefer? --P3d0 16:55, 30 November 2005 (UTC)
sources added
I went to the nearby university library and found some books in ENGLISH (yeah!) telling about the unsolved question why most men experience erections when waking up in the morning. The sources are now at the bottom of the page. Hope this will do. --Fromgermany 18:58, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
Madness and the Minotaur
Nice to find I'm not the only one who remembers this title, but all I have to say is -- where was its Misplaced Pages article when I was trying to produce an entry on it for Mobygames back in May? 8) Pseudo Intellectual
FYI
Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Circumcision advocacy Jakew 10:21, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
Regarding Bolo computer game
While the 1983 version of Bolo is indeed similar, the current Macintosh (and thus clones) are not in anyway based on any work from Synergistic Software per the author's response. http://groups.google.com/group/comp.sys.mac.games/browse_thread/thread/14a4680563b81134/9826ee67809edab5?lnk=st&q=bolo+apple+%5D%5B&rnum=1#9826ee67809edab5 I have discussed this with other "veteran" Boloers and they agree with my statement, however I felt the need to run this past you before editing anything myself given your edit responses.
Also various links around the Bolo community are rather outdated, yes, however they seem to come back online from time to time. (unsigned comment by 72.129.177.38)
- Reading that link, the author doesn't say anything at all about the Apple II Bolo, other than acknowledging its existence by quoting it. Certainly, he doesn't explicitly say "my version is not in anyway based on any work..." So I think you're inferring something that isn't there. Nandesuka 06:36, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
- True, but also he does not say "this *is* my work", nor can I find any documentation or otherwise stating that this is the case so your addition to the Bolo wiki is wrong and thus I would be interested in reading where you've found this information other than "it looks the same" which is infact "inferring something that isn't there". The 1983 version is indeed a tank game very similar but the Macintosh version wrote by Stuart Cheshire was not inspired by it.
- http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.bolo/browse_thread/thread/d4dd61913da0069a/a11a4f9f6e80547e?q=1983&rnum=1#a11a4f9f6e80547e
- On a lighter note I am not sure if this is the proper place to post such content and would kindly take to any suggestions you have as to where this post would fit in better.
- Thanks.
J hood 11:26, 4 December 2005 (UTC)J_hood
chabad
Regarding your comments to chabad. I have to admit I am not the best writer. However when speaking about reverting to a better written version you must take into account, whether this better written version is accurate and in a NPOV. I would like to ask for your help in improving the chabad article from a grammatical view. Thanks. --Eliezer | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 07:09, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
Eliezer's false accusations of using a sockpuppet
I am disappointed to see you believe Eliezer's shameless fictions. And that is what they are. I edit under my Username, RK , and have repeatedly signed my comments. I cannot imagine why would believe otherwise.
It is true that Misplaced Pages periodically signs people out without noting so, and this has happened to many people, many times. Sometimes the error lies in Misplaced Pages, sometimes in the contributor's personal computer, and sometimes because of the firewall/security wall that lies between the computer and the internet. A few years ago these problems, with their various sources and solutions, were discussed in the Wiki-En list.
But this cannot possibly apply to me. I re-sign into Misplaced Pages over and over to prevent this from happening, and I sign my contributions. The comments on the Discussion page clearly say RK , and I am looking at them right now in another window as I type. For Eliezer to try and mislead you and others into believing otherwise is just pathetic, and a violation of all civil norms that Misplaced Pages contributors are expected to follow.
Please read the comment page: see my quotes, fully signed, for yourself. Elizer's claims that I am doing this anonymously are false and misleading. RK 22:05, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
Jeremy Clarkson
Hi Nandesuka, I've put a query on the talk page and the article's on my watchlist now. Let me know whether you're requesting admin action or just that I look at it as an editor. If it's the former, I can't edit the article or express a view, except about what the policies say. Cheers, SlimVirgin 14:10, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
- Okay, sounds good. SlimVirgin 15:16, 5 December 2005 (UTC)
MagnaVox
Is this a personal attack? —Locke Cole 00:37, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
Humour
Sometimes, I must say, it's great to see that some of us Wikipedians have such a great capacity for subtle euphemistic humour. An extended vacation? :-) :-) :-) --HappyCamper 03:58, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
WikiFanatic
Is it just me, or is there a growing cult of personality around IRC? I've seen several RfAs recently where I felt it, and the TLA-anti-vandalism crew in particular appear to be going this direction. This isn't a commentary on the nominees per se simply that while the bar is rising all the time elsewhere (what? only 20,000 edits? too soon.) here it seems to be dropping.
Unrelated - There's a straw poll at WP:WEB talk regarding syndication. Feel like jumping in to something hot and seeing what you think?
brenneman 04:19, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
I'm reduced to spam and begging
(Pictue me on bended me, hands clasped) Please come and voice an opinon at Wikipedia_talk:Websites#Straw_poll regarding the facts of "syndication" indicating notability.
brenneman 03:29, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
Have a laugh point!
- Thank you — this is my very first award! I shall put it in a place of honor on my user page. Nandesuka 04:23, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
Copyvios
Hi Nandesuka. We don't restore copyvio's, period, unless we have permission from the copyright owner. The only solution is to write an original article. Rewriting in place is not acceptable without a total rewrite since it remains a derivative work which the original copyright holder retains partial rights to (and which we thus cannot release).
Please could you redelete any infringing versions of those articles and start from scratch? (Or blank the articles with {copyvio} and rewrite on the /Temp page,but that seems unnecessary.)-Splash 17:34, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
- Well, ok, but this is risky. We have no right to display the copyrighted text in the meantime. Also, if the work is derivative, as I said above, we still can't use it. This is because, in my approximate understanding, the original author retains copyright in the unrewritten parts thus we cannot redistribute them. So only a total rewrite is acceptable. Good faith doesn't extend to what is ultimately stealing others' work. -Splash 17:41, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
- In fact, I checked, and both articles are definitely copyvios. Storcloud with your intro is fine, but you really do need to redelete the history. There's no way we can justify retaining it. SCinet should not be restored, for the same reasons. It's unfortunate, but cheating isn't allowed under the law, and it's not good-faith (especially given the new message below the edit box). could be unprotected, however. A close eye would need to be kept on it. -Splash 17:48, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
Excellent, you did one, I did the other and now they're fixed! (PS I redirected the lowercase version of Scinet →SCinet)-Splash 18:05, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
Near anonymous RfA votes comment reply
Hey. I responded to your comment at my RfA page. Hope that helps! :-) WikiFanatic 23:03, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
Hmmm, so how can one be subtle?
I wonder if it were possible for you to muse... to yourself, you understand... on your own talk page? If so, anyone who on his or her own decided to come by and look would be doing so without any prompting. That way, no one ends up in the stocks, getting rotten vegetables with rocks hidden in them thrown at his head.
Also, on another matter, I've been concerned about the lensing effect of IRC for a while. It's not that a candidate is good or bad or that it is always right or wrong, but rather than a candidate's participation in IRC focuses reaction on RFA, and the airing of an issue by a dogged typist there can focus reaction on an AfD, poll, or discussion. This sort of rally point is actually not supposed to be happening. I can't see how anyone can spam talk pages half so effectively with two hours' effort as one can "spam" (meaning influence a vote or deliberation) by hitting IRC for two minutes. On a talk page, someone can say, "Vote for Bob!" On IRC, the person can answer the questions about Bob, can hear how Bob rescues kittens from rooftops, how Bob has vowed to support the good people and bash all the dirty people, etc., and all in far less time. Nor can that be changed so long as the IRC channel exists, as it would be absurd to say "#Wikipedians exists for discussing matters of interest to the Misplaced Pages community, unless those things are being decided currently." Geogre 10:46, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
- eatgray. Ownay Iay avehay nanay eadhay aicheay. Geogre 14:53, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
Clarkson
Hi Nandesuka, thanks for your note. I haven't finished with Clarkson yet. I'm just in the middle of something else at the moment, but I'll be back to it at some point today. It's kind of hard to know what to do with it because it's so full of Clarksoncruft. ;-) SlimVirgin 17:40, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
The Quitting Thing
Yeah, I just assumed that I had lost face and would have to do things that would make me have to leave in order to make things work out and blah, blah, blah. Thanks for the intervention, here's a barn star for your trouble, my friend. Please let me know if I can help out in the future. karmafist 04:54, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
Mistyped block
You blocked Pigsonthewing, or tried to: 17:14, 9 December 2005 Nandesuka blocked "User:User:Pigsonthewing" with an expiry time of 48 hours (Violating personal attack parole in edit summaries. ("he clealry hasn't "left", despite the lies to that effect on his user page)"). Notice the extra "User:"? You don't need to type "User:" into the box--it's filled in for you. You will probably want to block the correct username. Cheers! Demi /C 17:51, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
A Rare RFA Thank You Note to clutter up your talk page...
Nandesuka:
Just wanted to drop you a note to say thanks for supporting me in my recent RFA. I was surprised to see you there, and presume that you found your way to my RFA as a consequence of the comments I left Geogre on his talk page. However it transpired, I appreciate your comments and compliments, and will strive to live up to them.
All the best.
→ Ξxtreme Unction {łblah} 23:33, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
On the motion to remove Price Anderson
Dear Nandesuka, Clearly most people saw the piece for what it was. Hint: Katefan0's statement includes a foreshadowing of "breaching experiment". I used the art form of psuedo-realism (think War of the Worlds) to educate readers on the full force and effect of the Price Anderson Act. Benjamin Gatti 05:35, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
Template:Db-reason
Hi Nandesuka, I see that you're one of the admins who seems to be online right now. I was wondering if you can help me on this: I believe I can make Misplaced Pages:Template messages/All and Misplaced Pages:Template messages/Deletion disappear from Category:Candidates for speedy deletion. I just need Template:Db-reason to be unprotected for a moment. My comments are posted at Category talk:Candidates for speedy deletion. Would you consider giving this a try? Thanks. (I've already managed to prevent "Misplaced Pages:Template messages/Deletion" from showing up at Category:Attack pages for speedy deletion, evidently) Shawnc 07:00, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
- Thank you for the assistance, hopefully the changes are without errors. Shawnc 07:21, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
Please leave me alone
You know what Nandesuka. I don't need your two cents...the block was unreasonable, and if Curps took two seconds to read my contributions along with my messages as he should have none of it would happen. If someone answered the first two "spamms" it wouldn't have gone any farther. So please get out of my wikispace...Chooserr
Nandesuka is now one of the four admins who have
- abused Chooserr for welcoming people and reminding people with bad usernames of the rules, then
- blamed Chooserr for complaining about the punishment, and then
- punished Chooserr for complaining that he was being oppressed
And the discussion over at Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Chooserr_again now has enough links that everyone can see what happened and what a bunch of self-serving speed-trap deputies these admins are being. --24.221.8.253 07:55, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
- If you feel that I, or any other admin, has behaved inappropriately, then I encourage you to complain on the administrator's noticeboard, or to open a Request for Comments or a Request for Arbitration against me. Have a nice day, Nandesuka 07:57, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
- Could that not be an indication that you might not be on the side of consensus on this topic? User:Zoe| 08:03, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
Nandesuka, you asked for it, you can certify it:
Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_comment/User_conduct#Use_of_administrator_privileges
--24.221.8.253 08:24, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
- I won't certify it, obviously, because I believe you are terribly mistaken, and certifying it might give people the mistaken impression that I agree with, well, with nearly anything that you are saying. But I look forward to hearing the community's feedback once you find someone else to certify it. Best of luck, Nandesuka 17:23, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
User:Michigan Knight
Hi! The article at Freemasons Criticisms was created by User:Michigan Knight, who is most likely a sockpuppet of USer:Lightbringer. This identical article (verbatim) has been created before (twice now) at Freemasonry Criticism by User:SarekOfVulcan and User:Arb Admin, both considered sockpuppets of Lightbringer, who was banned by the ArbCom from editing Freemasonry-related articles. Look at the contibutions for User:Michigan Knight, his user page claims he is an admin, but it is clear that his user page and talk page are just cut-and-paste from somewhere else (look at their histories). Hope that helps! - orioneight (talk) 17:57, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
- No problem, thank you! - orioneight (talk) 18:01, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
- Umm... last time I checked, I wasn't a Lightbringer sock. However, it looks like Lightbringer has created User:MS Japan as a sock to spoof existing user User:MSJapan--SarekOfVulcan 19:56, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
Penelope Cruz
I tried to fix it. εγκυκλοπαίδεια* (talk) 16:53, 10 December 2005 (UTC) 18:21, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
Brian Walters
Why did that article get deleted? Admittedly it was very brief (I didn't have time to put in more detail) but I think it did mention why he is noteable, and I clarified this on the talk page. It was also linked to from elsewhere. It looks like the user who nominated it for speedy deletion has a bit of history of overuse of speedy deletion requests.
Totally Inappropriate 4 Day Block
Your actions in imposing a 4 day block is inappropriate for a number of reasons. Firstly you make a number of allegations which are simply not borne out by the facts. Secondly, you made absolutely no effort whatsoever to investigate the matter either properly or at all. And thirdly, you did not seek my comments at any point. You acted unilaterally and make allegations that no one has ever made and which are simply fallacious.
The main reason you give for imposing a 4 day block is wholly wrong. You claim I do not identify what it is that is POV. However, I have identified that material and made strenuous polite and civil efforts to make sure it is crystal clear.
You in fact admit you know absolutely nothing about the topic concerned so you are in no position to judge.
Further, in relation to the allegations you make, you provide no evidence whatsoever nor any examples.
I therefore ask you, as an administrator which is the appropriate mechanism for taking this matter to a resolution.
Further, as you impose a 4 day block that allows me no opportunity to make any representations as all effort at editing will be blocked. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.111.172.198 (talk • contribs)
- The above was left on your userpage. I've moved it here. JFW | T@lk 23:18, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
- I see you have put a long note on my User Talk page. However, still not a shred of fact is presented to support the allegations being made. That is because there is none. If there were any you could have provided them by now. You should have provided them before taking any action. So let's see the specifics.
- 81.111.172.198 23:29, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
Foreskin restoration
You might want to keep an eye on Foreskin restoration, you'll find the same issues there. Jayjg 03:34, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
SEWilco
FYI Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#SEWilco_and_footnotes_again. SlimVirgin 15:35, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
- The guy is trying to tidy up references, you two (you and slim) are reverting, and between you all there is now a right dogs-dinner of mixed styles on the page. Please go and sort out one style or the other, probably the first that was invoked as suggested in the guidelines. Have a nice day as you are fond of saying. --81.77.46.30 15:10, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
Esperanza elections
Hi Nandesuka: This is a quick note just to let you know that there's an election under way at Esperanza. If you'd like to become a candidate for Administrator General or the Advisory Council, just add your name here by 15 December 2005.Voting begins at 12:00UTC on 16 December and all Esperanza members are encouraged to join in.
This message was delivered to all Esperanza members. If you do not wish to receive further messages, please contact Flcelloguy. Thank you.
➨ ❝REDVERS❞ 10:01, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
News from Esperanza
Hello, fellow Esperanzians! This is just a friendly reminder that elections for Administrator General and two advisory council positions have just begun. Voting will last until Friday, December 30, so make sure you exercise your right to vote! Also, I'm pleased to announce the creation of the Esperanza mailing list. I urge all members to join; see Misplaced Pages:Esperanza/Contact for more information. All you need to do is email me and I will activate your account. This will be a great way to relax, stay in touch, and hear important announcements. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?)
This message was delivered to all Esperanza members by our acting messenger, Redvers. If you do not wish to receive further messages, please list yourself at WP:ESP/S. Thanks.
OCRT
Sorry about the brusque edit summary, jguk was mass deleting stuff from about 40 different pages and I was cleaning up after him. Why do you think OCRT is not a reasonable source? They cite sources, generally write fairly neutral articles (yes, the FGM article is an exception, but virtually every organization with a policy on it is against that) and they are a very popular website that ranks high in search engines and gets tons of hits. What is the problem here? Firebug 13:10, 17 December 2005 (UTC)
AD vs CE at the Village Pump
Hi. You recently edited the era formats in Sophocles, so I'm letting you know about a discussion I'm starting at the Village Pump, in case you're interested in helping to find an NPOV solution to this issue. -GTBacchus 01:24, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
IRC
If you're available, I'm on IRC right now on #wikipedia-en-vandalism. Cheers, Hermione1980 16:18, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
- And again. Hermione1980 23:01, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
Euripides
I'm not going to violate the 3rvt rule this time...and I won't let you trick me into it. But I do suggest that you revert it for it was consistent under BC/AD before BCE/CE. So please, please revert it. Thank you, Chooserr 18:26, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
p.s. you can view its history if you like
Your edits to chabad
Regarding your recent edit to chabad, As you are aware it is not just Feldman, Berger and Keller that condemm this belief, rather it is all of Orthodox Judaism including chabad. --Eliezer | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 00:20, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
There is no chabad organization that holds such beliefs, they are aginst what Judaism and what chabad stands for, and this belief is condemed by every orthodox person both whithin and outside chabad. --Eliezer | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 00:27, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
I agree the claims are notable and verifiable, however they are in regard to indviduals, and those indvidual's beliefs are not just condemened by the rabbis that RK brought down , but by all rabbis including chabad. To quote one rabbi implies that the rest may disagree with him which is not the case. This is like one Jew believing in Jesus, and having a rabbi saying that therefore you can't eat in his restauraunt, and to put that in the Judaism article. There is already a part in the article (the 4th category) which says that there are some individuals in chabad that hold this view, but it is obvious that everybody condems them. --Eliezer | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 00:34, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
Then I would agree to have the statement that "those beliefs are against Judaism and chabad beliefs and are condemed both within and outside chabad" inserted. But to quote all those people that RK brought, would mean quoting Shulchan aruch and basic sources in Judaism including from the Shulchan Aruch of the Alter Rebbe, which say the same thing. --Eliezer | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 00:42, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
POTW block
Nandesuka, POTW was apologizing (in the next edit summary) and reverting himself at the very moment you were blocking him, in case you want to reconsider this block. Best, Bishonen | talk 12:51, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
Bigfoot page
Sir: I am a very experienced curator of three bigfoot museums (brick and mortar) and I am trying to improve the Bigfoot page, based on state of the art info. Will you please work with me, Martial Law, DanielCD and Zagalejo to make this a serious page?
Please reply my page.
beckjordBeckjord 20:37, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
Nostradamus
I thought you might want to know User:Theodore7 changed the name of your message . 202.156.6.54 14:01, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
hey, bout that article
someone else on my account. thanks! Aeryka 04:52, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
chabad
Nandesuka, It is not personal interpretation, rather it is all sourced as I have shown by at least 2 books Pavzener, Avraham. Al HaTzadikim (Hebrew). Kfar Chabad. 1991 and Frumer, Assaf. Kol Hanikra Bishmi (Hebrew). Additionally the sources that RK is bringing is not relevant to what he is trying to prove as I explained in the talk page of chabad. --Eliezer | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 15:05, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
- Nandesuka, See my argument in the talk page of chabad in the section that says "Rabbis Feldman, Keller and Berger" based on the section in the talk page of chabad with name of "condemning the belief that the Rebbe is G-d from chabad". Also regarding the paragraph "Relationship between God, the Rebbe and his followers" See my coment in the section in the talk page of chabad with the name ""Eliezer's Version of "Relationship between God, the Rebbe and his followers"". --Eliezer | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 17:07, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
- Which section are you referring to? If you are referring to the paragraph of "Relationship between God, the Rebbe and his followers", how do you answer my objections to RK's version? And if you are referring to the "Rabbis Feldman, Keller and Berger", True, they are relevant, verifiable, validly sourced statements, HOWEVER this is in the controversy section of the chabad article, implying that there is this belief that chabad has and these people are against it. The truth is however that you have other Jews outside chabad that also hold heretical views, and these rabbis condemm those people as well, as does chabad. My point being, by leaving out the condemenations from chabad, you are implying that chabad endorses this view which they clearly do not. So we are left with 2 options to either quote every single well sourced, verifiable, and relevant condomenation of those that hold these views, which even according to Berger is just a few people, (I'm sure the percentage of Jews outside of chabad that hold heretical views is just as high if not higher), and quoting all those sources including the chabad sources and Shulchan Aruch which must be quoted because it is a greater source than the later Rabbis, would amount to most of the article condemming the beliefs of a few people that hold the belief. The second option is not to detail the sentences and details of each condemation, but rather to have a sentence that states that "However this view runs contrary to Judaism and has been condemed both within chabad (See Bistritzky and Ashkenazi) and outside chabad (See Feldman and Keller)." --Eliezer | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 16:00, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
Newbie at work
I have resubmitted the entry for Craik Sustainable Living Project as a temporary subpage. The original article was flagged for possible copyright violation for the section on "Community Action". I have corrected this, and hope things will be cleared up asap. I am new to this, so I hope I am following the correct protocols. Delzen 09:44, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
- Is there some reason you haven't responded to this? The user has asked for feedback at the Help desk. If you get a chance, can you leave a note on the user's talk page? Thanks. -- Rick Block (talk) 15:51, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
Fisheaters
The links are being reinserted, but on a more selective basis. I am reverting them and putting messages on the Talk pages. I don't discount the possibility of relevance, but there is nothing to persuade me that this site is an authority. - Just zis Guy, you know? / AfD? 13:08, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
Merry Christmas
I would like to wish you and your family a Merry Christmas and all the best for the New Year. Guettarda 18:48, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
Christmas
I think we could work out something - I see that it is ambiguous - I just didn't take it that way at first - which is odd, since I believe Christ was born in April. Anyway, if I am to assume good faith, I can't work on the FARC objections. I'm washing my hands (a little irony there) of the whole Christmas article. Trödel•talk 13:46, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
Re: "I'm around...."
Where? I don't see you signed in at #wikipedia-en-vandalism or #wikipedia-en. Or did you mean somewhere else and I'm just too asleep to know what you're talking about? Cheers, Hermione1980 00:01, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
- Oh. Well. I haven't learned how to do that kind of stuff yet. I'll remember that next time, promise! Hermione1980 02:08, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
Explain please
You've removed the addition to circumcision. What'd be the reason for this? Its not NPOV, the statement is in the right place and there's no "emotional language".Dabljuh 03:50, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
Veganism
Why did you unprotect Veganism? It's under severe attack. User:Zoe| 04:31, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
He's been hitting it with several different anon accounts. Check out the history of my Talk page. User:Zoe| 04:49, 24 December 2005 (UTC)
RefBot
The article's style already uses WP:FN. (SEWilco 15:02, 24 December 2005 (UTC))
linking dates
Dates are linked in most cases ONLY for preferences to work. The rule about only the first does NOT apply. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Christmas#Snipping_extraneous_links --JimWae 00:32, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
If you side with the style guide, you side with linking dates so that preferences will work. Having mixed date format in an article is every bit as ugly as having a date linked a few "extra" times. Did you read the discussion at http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Christmas#Snipping_extraneous_links - which is where this discussion should continue--JimWae 00:51, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
See reply at http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Christmas#Snipping_extraneous_links --JimWae 01:03, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
Please either retore the date formatting or at least let me know that you will not revert me again if I do it --JimWae 01:31, 25 December 2005 (UTC)
Chooserr's block
Hi Nandesuka, thanks for the note.
I'm pretty well aware of Chooserr's presence at Misplaced Pages. I've been watching him for some time, and was aware of... some of those blocks. Having watched him pretty closely, I can honestly say that he's been improving, and I think he has the potential to be a good Wikipedian. He doesn't quite understand the way Misplaced Pages works, but I wouldn't call his action trolling. I think he has good faith, but is rather naive in some ways. I believe him that he doesn't understand what was offensive about his comment, but I also agree that it was an unacceptable comment. I'm more interested in helping Chooserr figure out the ropes than in getting rid of him...
I'll talk with him, and we'll see how it goes. (It won't be this evening - maybe tomorrow.) If he shows that he understands what he said wrong, and is willing to apologize for his comment, I'll consider reducing his block. Chooserr's been out of line, repeatedly, but he's also been at the receiving end of some pretty serious browbeating, and I would say the admins have come down more heavily on him than on those who've insulted him. I certainly welcome any further input you have on the matter. -GTBacchus 01:05, 27 December 2005 (UTC)