Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 05:29, 29 December 2005

Speak up and be heard! (last blanked 7/26/05)

Manuel Lujan

• Thanks for helping to clean up some NPOV. But are you going to try to make it neutral all by yourself? Are are you just doing some initial work on it? Thanks. 207.195.255.228

Civitavecchia

Thanks for the minor correction made to my additions to the Civitavecchia article. Normally I don't make that mistake, but I seem to have slipped up.

Preservation of Fecalcore

Hi! I am very glad you found my article funny, that is the main point, a serious, encyclopedic funny. I see you were talking of preserving it on BJAODN, which I would greatly appreciate, as I have put considerable time in making it what it is. Would you mind discussing the BJAODN w/ me and how I could put it on there? Or should I just go RAMBO and put it on there myself? Thanks!

Sango's RfA

Hi, Everyking. Thank you for supporting my RfA! I am honored to have your endoresment and hope to make good use of the mop. Sango123 01:40, July 27, 2005 (UTC)

AN/I

I think some of your recent comments on AN/I have really been over the line. I hope you'll moderate yourself as discussed in our mediation and other times. Snowspinner 17:37, July 27, 2005 (UTC)

/sigh. Arbitration will be requested against you shortly. Snowspinner 18:11, July 27, 2005 (UTC)

Everyking, I noticed the request for arbitration regarding you and User:Snowspinner where you mention User:David Gerard. David Gerard was involved in a dispute with me and a few others wherein they attempted to discredit me and my attributions. David correctly recused the arbitration, but mentioned he was going to be submitting evidence. David has still not provided any evidence in the case. However, I have evidence of him arbitrarily claiming an organizations affiliations with Scientology. He initially ignoring my questions about it and then he came back and corrected his claim of affiliation which turned out to not be Scientology. He is a critic of Scientology, yet he is a member of the Scientology project which claims to have the goal of NPOV'ing Scientology articles. I don't know if this mention helps you in anyway, but I thought it wouldn't hurt your case or mine to mention it. If you want the evidence, let me know. Also, Snowspinner blocked me for 24 hours last weekend as a result of a erroneous 3RR report by User:Jdforrester. I explained this to them, but they ignored me and this was right at the time of dispute I mentioned above. TINC is no longer true, IMHO there IS somewhat of a cabal. --AI 21:30, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

McDonald's fun facts

I rarely snort when I laugh, but "you can't call the massacre a "fun fact"" in your edit summary did it. Joyous (talk) 00:44, July 28, 2005 (UTC)

Barnstar

Hi, EK. What was this for? My faith in your vandal-fighting is still as strong as ever! Cheers, ] 11:55, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

Oh dear me. I should not have said that. I did not read my comment through, as I was in a bit of a rush. I should know better by now... Comment removed. Would you accept my apology, and my continued faith in you? If it makes a difference, I think the RfAr against you is completely spurious, and borders on a personal attack... Cheers, and best wishes, ] 12:00, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

I'm glad to hear it. Cheers, ] 12:41, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

Tom Brinkman

You were kind enough to support my nomination of Jean Schmidt as a featured article and I wonder if you would look at my newest FAC, Tom Brinkman. The voting page is at Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Tom Brinkman. PedanticallySpeaking 15:04, July 29, 2005 (UTC)

Arbitration Problems

I saw your troubles on the requests for arbitration pages, with respect to Raul654 and those other clowns. Don't let them get you down.

Block them?

69.118.219.88 has had all the warnings they need... -Splash 01:56, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

for the userpage revert; quick to catch vandalism as usual. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 05:37, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

Canderson7's RFA

Thanks for supporting my RFA. I'm honored! --Canderson7 16:57, July 30, 2005 (UTC)

Important VFD

Please see the VFD for commons:List of victims of the 1913 Great Lakes storm. This is of vital importance. This list and others like it are being pushed off of the entire Wikimedia project. It started at Misplaced Pages, where they were VFDd in favor of moving to Wikisource/Commons. Now they are being VFDd off Wikisource (they don't really belong there, since they are not original source texts), with people there saying they should be on WP/Commons, and it is also being VFDd on Commons, where people don't realize that Commons accepts texts (says so right on the Main Page). This will set a precedent for any user-created lists. -- BRIAN0918  22:22, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

IRC

Hey EK - Why don't you come onto IRC tomorrow night (Wednesday night, US Eastern Time) so we can discuss your case. →Raul654 08:25, August 3, 2005 (UTC)

Well, several of us (myself, Fred, David Gerard, and Jimbo) waited up for you, but you never showed. →Raul654 00:15, August 4, 2005 (UTC)

Yes discuss the case outside of Misplaced Pages, in *IRC* of all places. The idea of TINC is propaganda. I have a new term IRCCE (IRC CABAL EXISTS). :) Anyway, congratulations Everking, I am glad they did not impose any extreme restrictions upon you. If you have time, take a look at Misplaced Pages talk:Requests for arbitration/AI/Proposed decision. Aloha --AI 00:23, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Admin nomination

Jim, of all the support votes I've gotten, yours is the first I've directly responded to since it really means a lot. I know that you're very particular about who you support for adminship. I truly cannot thank you enough. - Lucky 6.9 17:46, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

WP:AN and arbitration talkback

My fellow James...it's odd, but I can't recall the last time I posted on your talk page. We've both been around for so long, I feel certain I have before....but perhaps I haven't? If so....allow me to belatedly welcome you to Misplaced Pages! (Forgive my bizarre sense of humor this evening.)

Now, with my perhaps foolish attempt at humor aside, I hope you'll extend me the courtesy of hearing me out -- I'm tired of seeing you try to take on the AC on WP:AN. I said something about it before, apparently to no avail. Now you're talking back to them on AN about the agreement you made in EK3 or whatever the heck they called it. I almost unloaded on you right there, but I decided I should take this to you privately on talk first. You've been a fantastic contributor (better than I, by far) and a good admin (more active and probably more effective than I, again by far), and you deserve that courtesy. That said, I truly implore you, if you have any respect for my opinion whatsoever, stop doing this on AN. It only makes people like myself weary of your comments and frustrated at your desire to publically challenge and defy a group of people you clearly don't respect. And I like and value you as an editor (please don't misunderstand me on that point -- I'm very sincere about this).

I've served on the AC....longest 5 months of my wikicareer. I loathed every minute of it. Bearing responsibility for those decisions was agonizing -- no punishment seemed fair to anybody, no explanation was sufficient, no case moved quickly enough (or else we were over-hasty). That's not to say that there isn't legitimate room for criticizing arbitration here, or specific AC decisions. I know you feel shabbily treated by the AC. All I can say is, your public criticism of them is not being taken seriously, and only serves to further marginalize your opinion in the eyes of many (judging from the response of most editors to your comments). I think you have a valuable perspective -- you're an undeniably talented editor who has experienced the sanctions of the AC and has remained here as a contributor. I think that gives you an insight into arbitration that can be very helpful as we continue to explore how that process will be used by Misplaced Pages in the coming years. But I am continually frustrated by the fact that, as far as I can tell, you want to limit most of your criticism of arbitration to potshots and nit-picking, usually posted in a forum (AN) which is not traveled often enough by arbitrators (especially the arbitrators with whom you do not seem to have a "past"). I feel that, if you didn't do these things, you would be in a far better position to make some serious and well-thought-out suggestions for how arbitration can be improved here.

Yes, this is far too long -- if you've read it all, I thank you for that courtesy, and I hope I made it remotely worthwhile. If you want to discuss this with me, please drop me a note. Whether you do or not, please be fairly warned -- I respect you, I value your contributions, I hope to see some positive and constructive suggestions about arbitration from you in the future. But if I see you using the AN as a forum from which to criticize the AC (either explicitly, as you did in the Zivinbudas case a few weeks ago, or else implicitly, by challenging the lack of a time limit in an agreement that you voluntarily accepted and by then implying that you were coerced into that agreement), I'm not going to just leave a note here explaining my perspective. I'm going to be very clear about my objection on AN in response. I know you may take this as a threat, and I apologize if it reads as one. I just feel that my politeness in replying to you in the past was not taken seriously, and I want to be taken seriously by you -- I assure you, when you make serious criticisms of Misplaced Pages practice and policy, whether I agree with you or not, I always take you seriously. I wish you the best of luck in the future here, and I hope that my comments here did not offend you in any way -- I mean to be clear about how displeased I am, but not offensive or rude, and if you think I crossed the line, please know that I will fully apologize for doing so if I am informed. Best regards, Jwrosenzweig 09:40, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your response, James. I hope you know that I don't mean to silence you, and I can't imagine that you think I have a personal grudge against you (I certainly don't). All I mean to say is that I personally feel that any quibbles or challenges you mean to address to the AC should go directly to them, not onto AN. And that I think you will find more support and more people seriously attending to your perspective if, instead of challenging the AC on specific issues on AN, you instead put together some more general thoughts on arbitration and what could be done to improve it, then invite others to comment and discuss. If I'm tempting you to violate your new agreement, please forgive me -- I'm not intending that. I just feel frustrated, because (though this is probably not a fully accurate perception) it appears to me that everytime the AC announces a decision on AN, you want to turn it into an opportunity to start an argument. And I'm saying that I feel that's not productive. I really appreciate your talking about this with me in a calm and reasonable manner (heck, I didn't expect any less :-) and I hope you don't feel attacked by me. I'm headed for bed, but thanks once again for your reply, and I hope this somewhat briefer note helps clarify my position. Best regards, Jwrosenzweig 10:10, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

Please understand my position

Why do you people want to block me? I'm trying to spread the message of Democracy to Cuban people (and also i'm active within Cuba), this is hardly extreme POV pushing--Comandante Gomez 09:37, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Heya...

I am currently in discussions with Ozemail regarding persistent vandalism that has been occuring from the following IP addresses in their network:

• 203.166.96.234 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 203.166.96.235 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 203.166.96.236 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 203.166.96.237 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 203.166.96.238 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 203.166.96.239 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 203.166.96.240 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 203.166.99.246 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 203.166.99.247 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)
• 203.166.99.252 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

Calton told me that you were hip-deep in fighting these vandals. I need assistance with all the specific items of vandalism. I have setup a page to gather this evidence at User:Ta bu shi da yu/Ozemail.

Are you able to help? If so, please use the format:

• 13:30, 5 August 2005
  • Added abusive text to Ta bu shi da yu user page

We'll see just how good their service is at responding to this sort of thing - we should be supporting any company that assists us. Therefore, I'm hoping that the Misplaced Pages spirit of cooperation and immense amount of volunteers will help with tracking down vandal edits.

If Ozemail gives a good response, we can use them as an example of a good ISP, and maybe even shame AOL into assisting us (we get lots of vandalism from them).

If nothing happens, I'll be taking the whole subnet to ArbCom as I can't think of any other way of dealing with the problem.

Ta bu shi da yu 02:34, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

Rollback

And once again I ask you why. To which policy or guideline are you referring? Why do you think that the information automatically created by rollback is inferior ro to the information I'd have placed in the edit summary anyway? When editors don't explain their edits, or engage in large numbers of vandalistic reversions, why do you think that rollback is inappropriate? Don't just issue commands to we lesser beings; have the courtesy to explain yourself. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 10:57, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

Do you think it is OK to use rollback on a self-revert? Sjakkalle (Check!) 11:14, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

vandalism to RCP page

An anon user has been adding zip file links to the Revolutionary Communist Party (USA) page repeatedly in the last 24 hours. This seems a pretty obvious violation of wiki protocol. The zip files could consist of anything and the relevance seems tenuous at best. The contributor is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Special:Contributions&target=24.19.62.186 And to a lesser extent from here: http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Special:Contributions&target=69.145.21.94 Any help you could give to monitor the situation or block the user, if necessary, would be appreciated. DJ Silverfish 07:50, 13 August 2005 (UTC)

Schmidt and Hackett

You worked on articles on the special election in Ohio on August 2. I have posted my articles on the nominees in that race, Jean Schmidt and Paul Hackett, at Misplaced Pages:Peer review and would appreciate your comments. The individual pages are at Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Jean Schmidt and Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Paul Hackett. PedanticallySpeaking 19:29, August 17, 2005 (UTC)

Admin out of control

Under exactly what authority does UninvitedCompany think he can unilaterally permanently ban users, and destroy their user pages, and protect their talk pages so that they can't respond? -

It should be noted that the alleged images were listed at User:Evil Monkey/Nudity as well as being considered entirely appropriate for articles, having, as far as I can tell, already survived IFD, and have been on Misplaced Pages for over a month.

Note that an arbcom case has only just opened and has by no means come down with even remotely any penalty such as a ban. UninvitedCompany seems to think he has greater authority than ArbCom, and can completely act outside it.

Does UninvitedCompany has infinite power and permission to unilaterally with impunity?

Particularly when the user/victim in question has challanged a prior abuse of adminship by UninvitedCompany in an RfC, and has diametrically opposed political opinions?

This seems to be a case of right wing evangelical Christian admins thinking they have the right to dictate to everyone else.

It also seems in contempt of the arbitration committee's right to make the decision.

SomeAccountThatIWillListOn-Ril-'sUserPageWhenOrIfIEverGetItBack (-Ril-) 11:50, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

Move Roxelana

Hi, Everyking, You expressed your preliminary support to the move at Talk:Aleksandra Lisowska. Could you consider casting a vote there now regarding the official move proposal? Thanks! --Irpen 20:42, August 18, 2005 (UTC) Talk:Aleksandra Lisowska

On "polls are evil", and what it means and doesn't mean

While I'm generally loathe to spam people with requests for attention, "polls are evil" (in the sense I mean it) is something dear to me, and I want to make sure we understand were each of us is coming from. Just in case it slips off your radar: Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard#Misplaced Pages:Votes for deletion/WikiProject Wikipedians for Decency. I'm not asking for a response there, mind you; a private discussion is fine as well. JRM · Talk 00:38, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

Wikiproject

The WikiProject for decency is a mess. I appreciate your understanding that at least some of those involved in it's protection never desired to commence a witch hunt for whatever was deemed obscene. I'm for renaming and considering something that deals more with encyclopedic merit...this would greatly transcend the original direction the project seemed to be headed, one I would ultimately not been a part of, which was to go around tagging certain things. The project could discuss the possible legal ramifications of hosting images of individuals without also ensuring that there are appropriate legal disclaimers proving age of consent of persons displayed in such images...something Jimbo has stated he is not interested in doing. The project could also address the need for encyclopedic merit or worth of questionable sourcing, article content, and related issues. Perhaps such a similar enterprise already exists that you may be more aware of. Your thoughts, if you feel so inclined, would be appreciated.--MONGO 08:43, August 19, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks!

Just to drop a line to thank you for reverting the vandalism in my user page. ;) --Huaiwei 10:57, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

Same here, such cleanup is always appreciated. -- (☺drini♫|☎) 19:09, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

what are extant cliques?

Is there possibly an established clique between Jtdirl and Slimvirgin? or how? Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR and Misplaced Pages:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (recent items) show how there seems to emerge excuses etc. 217.140.193.123 10:19, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

Is anything being done?

Hi,

I notice you've reverted several edits by 203.144.21.77. I just reverted one more of the same sort of edits and started to trace back to his other edits, which you seem to be following up on. Is there anything else that needs to be done? P0M 07:14, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Jean Schmidt

Thanks for your support for my previous effort to get this featured. I've submitted the article as a FAC again and would appreciate your vote at Misplaced Pages:Featured_article_candidates/Jean_Schmidt. PedanticallySpeaking 17:08, August 23, 2005 (UTC)

History of South Carolina

Hello. History of South Carolina is on Featured Article Candidates for a third time due to recent controversy. Because you commented on one of its past nominations, you may be interested in commenting this time at Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/History of South Carolina. Toothpaste 19:33, 23 August 2005 (UTC)

Userpage and Trollderella

Hi Everyking!

I have unblocked Trollderella, but left another warning that such a username might be asking for trouble. Anyway, I have also restored your userpage. I think it got hit by Willy on Wheels (we can block him on sight can't we?), and two admins tried moving it back at the same time, thus deleting it by accident. I liked your userpage with links to your subpages better though... Sjakkalle (Check!) 07:44, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing up my userpage and talkpage, I seem to have gotten at least one enemy on Misplaced Pages. This guy's been after my user and talkpage about a zillion times. Userpage protected again. Sjakkalle (Check!) 08:16, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Vandal

Hi. Can you please block User talk:202.74.164.3 who is vandalising Jew and Jews in the Middle Ages. Has been warned several times. Cheers TigerShark 07:20, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Yes please block him if i had admin powers i would have done so a while ago. Jobe6 07:21, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

OK, if I see any more vandalism from that IP, I'll block it. Everyking 07:23, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Motorola i930--Vandalism Lock Request

The recent Vandalism incident at the article Motorola i930 has really redflagged the integrity of the article. I keep watch on that article, and realized that there has been some vandalism attempts lately. If you are an Administrator and/or a Sysop, can you lock the Motorola i930 article for me to deal with Vandalism by Vandals? Those who want to discuss about changes should direct all the feedback to me. I appreciate it if you temporarily lock the Motorola i930 article to deal with vandalism. Thanks. — Vesther 12:55, 25 August 2005 (UTC)

Head's up

In case you hadn't already seen it, here's a heads up - Misplaced Pages:Today's featured article/August 29, 2005 →Raul654 03:39, August 28, 2005 (UTC)

Deletion

Ah, burning midnight oil as well, I see.  :) That "Jessica Stover" thing was little more than a single sentence and an external link. No notability established and I wiped it out as link spam. Sorry about brain fading on the summary. - Lucky 6.9 07:11, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

• I get it right every so often, I guess.  :)) Thanks for following up. - Lucky 6.9 07:15, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

Penda of Mercia

I'm at a loss - what do you call the British in the 6th Century? -- BDAbramson 02:59, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

Please don't censor me, Thank You.--Comandante Gomez 04:15, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

I've been doing better if you look the Castro's page, I stopped calling him a "Dictator" (even though I REALLY think he is)...and agreed with the editor known as Speak Box, who has been editing the page recently.--Comandante Gomez 04:21, 30 August 2005 (UTC)

We Belong Together

James, I just noticed that you unprotected We Belong Together shortly after I'd protected it. Please don't do that again to articles I protect, and particularly not if you intend to edit them yourself. I protected because of the reverting between Omega and Mel, which both have discussed with me and which needs to be sorted out. In future, if you feel I've protected something inappropriately, I'd appreciate it if you'd leave a note on my talk page and give me time to respond. SlimVirgin 23:26, August 30, 2005 (UTC)

As my request is denied, I'm therefore re-submitting it. If one admin protects a page, another admin shouldn't unprotect it just hours later, except in exceptional circumstances, where a mistake has been made or similar. This is a basic matter of courtesy, and so perhaps I should rephrase my request in those terms.

As for the revert war, I agree that it's low level, but it's been going on for a long time and involves several articles, this one being the main bone of contention, it seems, and it needs to be sorted out, which is what I'm making an effort to do. SlimVirgin 03:45, August 31, 2005 (UTC)

In that case, I owe you an apology. When I looked at the history, I misread it that the page was protected and unprotected on August 25, but now that I look properly, I see there were three days in between, which sheds a different light on it. I would still have appreciated a note in advance of unprotection, but three days is less of a deal than a few hours. I'm sorry for jumping the gun. SlimVirgin 03:59, August 31, 2005 (UTC)

Vasco da Gama

An article that you've edited before (Vasco da Gama) is nominated for Article Improvement Drive. If you want go there and vote. Thanks. Gameiro 02:58, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

thank you -Jimbo's post is covered

saw your post --and deletion --in re my post on Jimbo's page --yes, I got it wrong, but copied it to the "Real" page.

thanks again for your concern -- ps: we could use a few "affirmative" votes to encourage Terri Schiavo to kick butt. Thx in advance.--GordonWattsDotCom 10:59, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

JonBenét Ramsey

Hi, I'm playing around with wiki tonight, mostly just vandal hunting (for the first time), and I saw a recent entry for JonBenét, and decided that it was just...um...wrong...if you know what I mean. So I reverted it. In between I noticed that you saw it and didn't revert it, but instead just corrected the spelling (which I do find quite humorous). So should I have left it alone? Hagie 08:19, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

Ashlee Simpson FAC

Hey Everyking :). The article is already on peer review now... any ideas on how to improve it before we send it to Featured Article Candidates? Ryan Norton 09:17, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

Belarusian Republican Youth Union

Thanks a bunch for doing the minor grammar check there. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 08:08, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

...

I don't know how you do it... even with all the RfArs and whatnot you still tirelessly edit. Try to remember that words do matter though, and I think if you keep that in mind maybe it'll improve with some of the other admins, no? Take care! --RN

SuperShadow VfD

Greetings: pawing through the SuperShadow edit history, I noticed you've edited the page in question before. I thought you'd want to know it is now the subject of a Vote for Deletion, at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/SuperShadow. If you want, you could stop in there and cast a vote. --Maru 22:07, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

Please could you comment on a peer review?

I was reading the Autobiography article, and was very impressed by it. I actually think it's one of the best Misplaced Pages articles on recent albums that I've seen. Anyway, after perusing the edit history, I noticed that you were responsible for most of the content of the article. This did not surprise me (due to your great contributions to Ashlee Simpson), but since the style of the Autobiography article influenced my expansion and rewrite of the article for Extraordinary Machine (which is a forthcoming album by Fiona Apple), I would be extremely grateful if you were to visit its peer review request here, and comment and add suggestions on how the article could be improved. You don't have to, of course, but I want this article to be the best it can be, and I believe that your guidance may help me and the other editors of the article to achieve that goal. I even hope to submit it at WP:FAC some day after the album is released. Thanks in advance. Extraordinary Machine 23:34, 4 September 2005 (UTC)

Winter War

Re. "give me a break..how do you define "moral victory"?" You're right, of course. But I put that in there as an attempt to give some ground to the "Finland won" POV revisionism, rather than just have a revert war with those guys.--67.101.67.73 14:43, 5 September 2005 (UTC)

Autobiography on FAC again

I put Autobiography (Ashlee Simpson album) on FAC again... I think its pretty much ready. Maybe you might want to take one last pass at it when you get a chance :). Go to FAC and comment there if you'd like also :). Ryan Norton 00:30, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Museveni on peer review

Hey EK, just thought I'd let you know that Yoweri Museveni is now on peer review as you have contributed to it previously. I thought now was about the right time, as it would be good to get a feel for the kind of things people will say in WP:FAC now, rather than pressing ahead with expansion and then having to change a whole load of stuff later. TreveX 11:09, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Zoey 101

Regarding this edit. First of all, you made it look like January 9]]. Second, why even change it form January 9 to January 9? Howabout1 23:43, September 6, 2005 (UTC)

Huh? Are you sure? I'm looking and it now and it appears the other way around with EK fixing it after you reverted... Ryan Norton 23:46, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Stupid me! Sorry Everyking. :) Howabout1 23:48, September 6, 2005 (UTC)

Another question, what is the policy regarding a father and son with the same name and both should have wikipedia articles. Is it Paul Butcher (Actor) and Paul Butcher (NBL Palyer) or Paul Butcher Jr. and Paul Butcher Sr.? Howabout1 23:58, September 6, 2005 (UTC)

ashlee simpson article reworked

Hi Everyking,

as you know we've been facing some steep opposition on the FAC for the article so I reworked the structure of it to read better, and expanded the intros of both this article and the autobiography article. Let me know what you think :) Ryan Norton 06:41, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

By all means keep editing the article :) - I feel like we're getting somewhere, which is a good thing :) Ryan Norton 07:05, 7 September 2005 (UTC)

Minor Barnstar for major contributor

I, Willmcw, pin this Minor Barnstar on the chest of you, Everyking. No edit is too minor that improves Misplaced Pages, and your 'minor edits' are more important than many an editor's 'major contributions'. Thanks for what you do, -10:54, September 7, 2005 (UTC)

Autobiography (Ashlee Simpson album) intro

Hi Everyking, when have a chance, could you give me your opinion on the 3 intro paragraphs to Autobiography (Ashlee Simpson album)? I reworked them a bit and I want to make sure they are good :). Thanks for help :). Ryan Norton 06:27, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

User:SlimVirgin

On both SlimVirgin's Talk and User page, you might want to revert with "hidden on the history" page, because those comments are sticking there. Sorry, *if* that's possible. --None-of-the-Above 09:45, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

Request

This is actually considerably more moderate than what was done a few days later...the key point of it all is that none of these radical revisions, removal of huge amounts of content, was ever done with any attempt at compromise or consensus beforehand (compared with my emphasis on meeting halfway, which fell on deaf ears literally for months before something began to be achieved). Everyking 18:43, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

I'd appreciate it if you stop making unsubstantiated claims and flagrant untruths which are apparently intended to try to discredit those who hold opinions you disagree with. Provide diffs to back any claims you wish to make about people's behaviour. Thanks. Worldtraveller 19:16, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

What he means is that didn't include him in the consensus decision (or enough of what he wanted, anyway), which is more or less true. In my e-mail I sent to you I explained some similar situations... Ryan Norton 22:59, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

I can't figure out if this is addressed to me or Worldtraveller...I know I didn't get any e-mail. Everyking 23:05, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

I meant an e-mail I sent to wordtraveller... sorry :) Ryan Norton 23:07, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

rewrote Ashlee Simpson

Yep - there still a bit to be done (see the todo) but I think we pull it off without too much work. BTW on the todo, World mentions a few things that are not sourced directly such as the original album name for the second album (which I removed but we should put back if we find a source)... any idea which sources those are? Ryan Norton 04:30, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

BTW, do you know what the source is for the "although there have been rumors that Simpson stole Valderrama from Lohan" claim? (Its the last one, thankfully) Ryan Norton 05:45, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Great, thank you! Ryan Norton 06:14, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing up the snl thing :) Ryan Norton 06:03, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

Thank you

James, thank you for reverting that horrible vandalism from my user page. SlimVirgin 20:41, September 9, 2005 (UTC)

Kanye West

Everyking, is it possible you could unprotect Kanye West? He made some statements, which have caused an edit war of sorts on his page, but it needs to be updated especially since he has now has the #1 single and album in the country. OmegaWikipedia 03:44, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

Hello!

I know that you are American, but do you perhaps know where it is possible to retrieve Canadian album sales on the internet? Winnermario 20:36, September 10, 2005 (UTC)

Autobiography

OK, I'm taking your suggestion and working on this.... you might want to keep an eye on this as I'm replacing/reworking descriptions of songs with something that has a reference. Ryan Norton 05:17, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

OK, two things left - let me know if you know references for them or not :). If not I'll try something alternate :) Ryan Norton 08:02, 11 September 2005 (UTC)

George W. Bush

I saw your edit, unlinking the word Bush. Could you do us a favor and leave an edit summary? A lot of us have that page on watchlist and it would just be convenient. Redwolf24 (talk) 02:40, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

Here's my 2 cents worth in re Jimbo

I saw your post on Jimbo's page, and I put in my 2 cents worth: Here's a copy-n-paste of the entire conversation -where I replied on that page, but here you go for a copy in your talk.--GordonWattsDotCom 12:14, 12 September 2005 (UTC) (PS: See below.)

Quote

Recently User:PigSwill (an Irate sock?) posted on your article an IRC conversation with User:Irate which led to Irate's ban. Of course I've complained vociferously about that ban before, since it was done 100% outside of process, but in the actual text I found this concluding exchange which I found extremely troubling:

Irate says, "I'll stick to the riles but I won;t like them is not enough for you?" To this you reply: "not at all", "not even close". This was a devastating thing for me to read because it is extremely important to me that a project I invest so much time in be founded on basically just principles, and what Irate was saying seems so obviously to be the just argument that I am astonished that any reasonable person would disagree. Irate, and presumably by extension all contributors, are required to like all of our rules, as opposed to simply following them? And for the founder of the project to say that? I'm hoping I misinterpreted or got something out of context, or maybe the text as given isn't even accurate, so I request clarification. Everyking 11:35, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

Everyking, I took a look at the diff in question (which was quickly reverted by SlimVirgin.) It is here. While I agree that this may be a little harsh, remember that intentions eventually lead to actions, and Jimbo probably thought that his attitude was bad. "Insubordination" can get a person fired -even from a "nonpaying" volunteer job, such as wiki-editor. Now, if you don't agree with the Bible, then my following arguments won't be valid, but even still, let me just share with you some things I have found on the web (and I'm guessing they are correct quotes, because I don't feel like looking in my Bible for ALL these quotes).

• Proverbs 5:12 And say, How have I hated instruction, and my heart despised reproof;
• Leviticus 19:17 ‘You shall not hate your brother in your heart. You shall surely rebuke your neighbor, and not bear sin because of him.
• Mark 7:21 For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders,
• Matthew 15:19 For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies:
• 1st John 3:15 Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him.
• Zechariah 8:17 And let none of you imagine evil in your hearts against his neighbour; and love no false oath: for all these are things that I hate, saith the LORD.

Remember, also, Everyking: Jimbo does have the all-powerful authority -at least for a time. (I hear there are plans to reduce his authority, but that is out of my hands.)

If you read all that I wrote -both my thoughts and those of the various Biblical writers, and combine that with your studied analysis of how you might act if someone starts tinckering with, say, your homepage -or home -or car, or whatever you own --then you might see a bigger picture. --Again, I am not saying Jimbo is right (assuming he was quoted correctly from some private chat or something) --I am just saying there are several sides to a story.--GordonWattsDotCom 12:09, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

Ashlee Simpson, and is this legit??

Hi Everyking! While googling I found this.... it appears at first glance to be a journal entry by ashlee simpson.... although it reeks of fakeness, so I'm not sure. Interesting note - has some info we could use, that's for sure :).

Also, did you get a change to read the latest (DMC's) objection to the ashlee simpson article? It's pretty good. Any idea on what her influences are, vocal singing type/registers etc.. I'm researching it right now but if you know that's good too :).

Take care :). (Love your posts to AN/I, LOL!).

Ryan Norton 07:26, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

Zalmay Khalilzad

Hi James, please see my entry on Khalilzad's discussion page. Would appreciate advice from an admin. --Derek 18:16, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

comments

I hope my comments on the FAC didn't sound like I was ganging up on you. I do agree that if we cut out much more it's not going to be much more than a stub... so don't worry I won't do much of that :). I was just trying to point out how, in my opinion, we should try to resolve objections.

Also, maybe someday we should try to resolve some of these old conflicts on IRC or something. Heck, I could mediate :). Anyway... thanks and take care :).

Ryan Norton 22:20, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks...

...for reverting the oh-so-very-amusing vandalism on my talk page. OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 11:45, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Peasant revolt

Since you're convinced that it can be made into more than a dictionarty definition, why don't you you actually go ahead and do so? That's the point of the {{Move to Wiktionary}} template, to get people motivated to have make an article that might be more than that into more than that. I normally wait a while before taking articles that I stick that template over to the Atricles for Deletion page. (In fact, I have been placing that tag on articles only within the last two weeks so I haven't actually taken the next step on any such article.) However, if you insist on removing the template again, I'll see no option but to submit the article to an AfD immediately so as to resolve the issue one way or another. Caerwine 11:58, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for your advice, but this is hardly my first AfD nomination. I was slowed down a bit by a combination of lag, discovering during preview that the tl and cl templates don't work inside the afd2 template, and making sure my first entry in the Wiktionary followed their expected format. Caerwine 14:17, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Request

I am asking past editors of the Karl Rove page to weigh in on a survey. If you can spare a couple of minutes, please visit this page: Talk:Karl Rove/September Survey, read the introduction, and answer the three questions that have been posed. Thank you. paul klenk 09:15, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

If you got some spare time...

would you mind taking a look at an article I've (mostly) written, Sverre of Norway? I'd planned to get it up to FA soon, I'd liked to have an experienced editor take a look first. Probably needs some general copyedit from a fluent speaker too Fornadan (t) 23:56, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

Columbine High School massacre vandalism

There's these idiots (looks like 2 of them) who keep vandalising the page. If you could block them/protect the page, that would be awesome. (If you don't feel like doing either, could you please delete the source pictures they're linking from, at the least?) Thank you very much. --Matt Yeager 05:49, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

Expansion theory

I can't work out why you first reverted this article to restore the version with the AfD notice that had been removed, and then reverted yourself. I've restored to the version with the AfD notice, which also happens to have content that in my opinion reads less like a publisher's blurb for the book. --Tony Sidaway 12:01, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

Oh I see. Yes, that was the safe thing to do. Thanks. I couldn't imagine that you'd deliberately remove a AfD so I was puzzled. --Tony Sidaway 12:10, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

Mel Etitis

I am quite angry with user Mel Etitis. Whenever I speak with him, he always replies with "I didn't follow all of your message" or something related to that. I was just curious to know if you know why he must act the way he is? Especially with the song titles, which has vexed me to the point of self-destruction. I cannot stand his attitude anymore, and he appears to like it when rules are followed his way—is there a possible way to end his ongoing stiffness and if this has ever occurred with any other users? Winnermario 20:19, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

I've asked you to supply a source for your odd claim that normal English rules don't apply to songwriters, and you've consistently refused. What more can I do? And am I supposed to pretend that I follow your (sometimes rather odd) English when I don't? --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 22:16, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

Luther Page Rewrite Discussion on

See the Luther page talk. --CTSWyneken 01:26, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

Proposed merger of effects.

Given their closeness in time and location, it strikes me that it will soon become difficult to separate the respective economic, political, and social effects of Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Rita. What do you think of the idea of moving the articles covering these aspects to Economic effects of the 2005 Atlantic hurricane season, Political effects of the 2005 Atlantic hurricane season, and Social effects of the 2005 Atlantic hurricane season? -- BDAbramson 00:13, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

• Note: I've opened a centralized discussion on this question: Misplaced Pages:Centralized discussion/2005 Atlantic hurricane season effects. -- BDAbramson 00:25, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

Sigh

199.178.207.10 (talk · contribs). Do you think I'm being to harsh on him? Sjakkalle (Check!) 12:16, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

• Don't think this one has any agenda. Probably some kid testing out his powers. Sjakkalle (Check!) 12:20, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

Husein Gradascevic

Hi, I see you cast your vote in support of the Husein Gradascevic article on featured article candidates. Currently there are two objections to it. The first I don't think is legitimate, because it merely says that the article is "too bland" and doesn't offer any suggestions to improve it. The other objection is more serious and has to do with the grammar and style of the writing article. The user who objected and me have done extensive copyedit work since then. I feel that the article is now fine, but he has suggested that perhaps a third copyedit by another user would be beneficial. I think it'd be a shame if this article failed to make featured status at this point, and I was wondering if you could give it a quick read and fix anything you'd consider a problem as far as grammar/sentence structure/flow is concerned. Live Forever 05:54, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

Flag of Belarus

Since I saw you comment on the first FAC attempt of this article, I am letting you know this is at FAC again. Please come by to see if the article is good to your liking. Zach (Sound Off) 05:33, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

Barnstar

Don't worry, we'll try again next month :). Ryan Norton 06:00, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

213.18.248.23

Looking at the rampant behaviour and trail of offences shouldn't this be a much more severe block?--Rjstott 10:06, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

Albanian troll

Hello Everyking! I hope that You can help me! User:Albanau is currently involved in an edit war, see the article history for Francesco Crispi. He is assisted by User:L'Houngan, who is identical with Swedish user sv:Användare:L'Houngan. Today, L'Houngan was blocked on Swedish Misplaced Pages, see sv:Block log. L'Houngan is widely considered to be a sock puppet of User:Albanau/sv:Användare:Albanau, who has been banned indefinitely on Swedish Misplaced Pages, see Swedish RfC. I hope You or someone else may do something about this user. He has been truly annoying and the cause for severe conflicts on Swedish Misplaced Pages! Best regards, Probert 20:26, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

Njyoder

He raised a spurious and abusive arbcom case, and began altering arbitrator votes. This was straight-up vandalism, and of a very serious and extra-bad flavor. Snowspinner 03:49, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Mariah Carey articles on AFD

Hi, Everyking. Some Mariah Carey articles have been put up for deletion, and I was wondering if you would consider voting on them.

If the articles are merged, it would look very messy, so I hope we can keep them the way ther are. Incidentally, this is actually the 2nd AfD for "O Holy Night", so they really shouldn't have nominated it again (even though I guess technically they can). Thank you OmegaWikipedia 01:47, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

Another pop group article gone bad

Hello, I know we havent always seen eye to eye, but I think even you would agree this could use some serious work. Dont suppose you'd be willing to tackle it would you?  ALKIVAR™ 08:07, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Grumble

Oops. - brenneman 08:49, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

User:Sortan

Everyking, I'd be grateful if you'd look at Sortan's user contributions - which will probably show you more of a picture of what has been going on than anything else. You'll also remember that the ArbCom result on BCE/BC was a wash (with no-one being held out to be particularly at fault - just all participants together!). What did arise was it being clear that we have a de facto "no change" policy that I have both adhered to and reverted in accordance with. I know you've been hounded by those who have deliberately tried to wind you up in the past, so I hope, when you look at what Sortan's done, you'll see that he has been doing the same with me. All the best, jguk 07:00, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Stuff

Although not, to my recollection, a part of our agreement, it is not something I intend to make a habit of - in fact, I have in general refrained from joining discussions where you're unfairly criticizing other admins on AN/I (Such as the jguk discussion) so as not to put you in a position where you would feel as though I'm taking shots at you that you can't respond to. Snowspinner 13:27, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

You should probably have brought that up during the discussion of the agreement, instead of trying to append it after the fact. I'm certainly not going to accept that as a formal and binding part of the agreement. That said, I really don't intend to mention you again. Do what you will with that.Snowspinner 22:32, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

I have notified the arbcom of your decision, and asked that the case be re-opened. Snowspinner 22:51, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

First off, he's not "unfairly" criticizing other admins - its just his opinion. Also, I checked the lists and Jguk is not an admin (although he is a year-old editor). Please leave Everyking alone Snowspinner, it does unfair that you can criticize him but he can't critize you. Ryan Norton 22:57, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

User:Jguk

I too would be grateful if you would look into User:Jguk's edits in provoking more revert wars over date styles. I feel that I have not done anything wrong or against policy while Jguk has made several date style changes directly against policy (of which I've named several examples, and there are more if you would like). It seems that just because he's been around longer, most people are content to overlook what he does, but unfairly chastise me. Sortan 14:42, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting vandalism on my page

Thanks! Molotov (talk) 19:20, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for nominating me to be an adm, even though I did not attain it. Molotov (talk) 19:20, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Maduro

I am wondering why you reverted this good edit, SqueakBox 02:25, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Uh - for one the garbage line at the end of the article :). Trust Everyking :). Ryan Norton 09:02, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

I didn't realize there were other potentially good edits behind that one. Normally one vandal edit to an article by an IP means all that IP's edits to that article are vandalism. Apologies for not being thorough. Everyking 16:30, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Whoops from me too. I hadn't spotted the garbage at the end. The anon edit was a funny mixture of good and bad, and I was certainly at least as inefficient as you, but I think it is totally sorted now. Cheers, SqueakBox 16:48, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Snowspinner etc.

Hi Everyking! I'm discussing something with Snowspinner at the moment, and maybe he'll agree :). I was wondering that if we can get an informal agreement going where you two agree to not "criticize" each other would that be OK with you (thus avoiding the needless arbcom case)? I hope so :). Ryan Norton 09:05, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Hi again :). Well, I know you'd like the same agreement, and personally I'd like to see the same too. I guess though unfortunately as Raul says they don't much like the criticism on AN/I for some reason, so I have a feeling that if they open a new case like that things could get drastic. I imagine its quite a frustrating thing and both you and I think its a tad unfair, but I don't have any say in the issue :-(. Maybe, if I can't work out anything with Snowspinner it would be best just to stick to the (however unfair) agreement? I know it sounds like a rather morbid thing to do, especially after the sideswipe Snowspinner took at you on the RfC. As for the AN/I stuff maybe just research a bit more before criticizing... I admit that its not the best solution but maybe over time it'll die down? You can always talk to me if you want too :). Ryan Norton 23:42, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Some Afds

Hi, Everyking. Some more Mariah Carey articles have been put up for deletion, and I was wondering if you'd consider voting on them.

If the articles are merged, it would look very messy, so I hope we can keep them. Thanks again. OmegaWikipedia 05:50, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

OW again

Ahh, I was hoping you would have voted to keep those articles. LOL Oh well, it's all good. Life will go on. Anyway two things...

Gwen Stefani's "Luxurious" is up for deletion. This really shouldnt be up there because its a major single and some people voting on it think its a Crystal Ball type article when its not and the music video is being filmed and edited right now. It's even getting radio airplay too.

Second thing. There is an RFC on Mel right now. Not trying to cause any drama or anything, but I know you and him have had some drama in the past too, and I'd appreciate your views on the matter. Later... OmegaWikipedia 05:18, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your support on my RfA!

Thanks for your support of my adminship!! I was surprised at the turnout and support I got! If you ever have any issues with any of my actions, please notify me on my talk page! Thanks again! Hopefully the arbcom case will blow over/get resolved soon :). I see you're running for arbcom too - good luck with that Everyking :). Ryan Norton 03:12, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

Request for admin interference

Recent nationalist editors have moved by force the article from Macedonian Slavs to Macedonians (nation) (a nationality that hasn't been recognised by neither EU nor UN). You can see at the history page that the vandal editors break 3RR almost every day. Most administrators have stopped wasting their time on this page because vandalism never stops. However this time it's not just about a content dispute but about an entire unjustified renaming. For some reason the page can't be restored to its original name, hence the need of an admin support. Miskin 15:00, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting and blocking that vandal who spent so much time vandalizing my user psage. Also, thanks for all your great work on Misplaced Pages. I've noticed you adding content, reverting vandalism and participating in discussions for over a year, and you are really a great contributor. Academic Challenger 06:49, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Arbitration reopened

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Everyking 3 has been reopened. Fred Bauder 20:26, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Oppose this proposal!

Misplaced Pages:Quick and dirty Checkuser policy proposal Erwin

Celestianpower is an admin

I haven't worked much with you but thank you very much for your support - my bid (as you probably know) went swimmingly. I couldn't have asked for a better one. Thank you very much and I just hope I don't mess up! --Celestianpower 13:06, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

Economy of Ghana

James, thanks for your vandalism reverts - most recently on Economy of Ghana but I see you all the time rvv'ing Africa pages. Wizzy…☎ 07:13, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

Candidate statement

Your statement is about double the 250 word recommendation at the top of the Candidate statements page. Please use your Questions page for the lengthy version, but confine yourself to that rather fair guideline. -- Netoholic @ 14:50, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

Hey

What's going on? Yeah, I agree on the CB tour article, but for now I guess it should stay that way. Glad to see you pleasntly suprised with the Sessions@ AOL article. Btw, it looks like theres another song article on AFD again.. Madonnas version of the song is definitely notable and the proposed merging doesnt seem to work well. OmegaWikipedia 11:57, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Delete this please

Fillon law, 2005/temp has now been moved to Fillon law, 2005, rendering the first one unnecessary. You were the first user i recognized on RC as an admin. --Wonderfool 08:45, 21 October 2005 (UTC) Thanks in advance

Thanks

Thanks you for correcting some of my spelling mistakes on Britney Spears Hair Zone Mall Tour. -L.a.m.b

Ashlee Simpson

I understand your reasons for deleting my edit on Ashlee Simpson. Please let me know how I can change the edit so that it will be allowable.

vandal

Keep on a lookout for this one.202.81.174.115 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) Just given her a test1, and she created a nonsense articel babaeng seems to be infatuated with a guy called Cecil.Borisblue 03:56, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

See this can we oblidge him please?

Felice Beato

Hi, regarding my FAC on Felice Beato, I've rewritten the lead and other sections and I've added some images. How does it look to you now? Pinkville 11:18, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Template/Workshop

You, or any Misplaced Pages user, can contribute your suggestions and comments to the /Workshop page of any active arbitration case. Comments on evidence or proposals can help in understanding the import of evidence and in refining proposals. Proposed principles, findings of fact, or remedies may be listed on /Proposed decision and form part of the final decision. Fred Bauder 14:35, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

Do me a favor

Mykola Bogolyubov <-- Delete this article; the guy is already listed under another name.

A redirect is fine. Everyking 16:12, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Mentoship

It's been repealed! Congrats are in order I think. Keep up the good work. Theresa Knott (a tenth stroke) 16:32, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Amalekite affair brought up again

Hi, James! Since you're one of Misplaced Pages's most experienced editors I would greatly appreciate your opinion on my RFA and, in particular, whether you think my participation in the discussion of User:Amalekite's ban should be a factor weighing heavily against me. - Haukur Þorgeirsson 21:39, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

user:194.83.198.13

that is quite strange that he/she vandalised two pages that i have just edited when we have never even interacted. Xtra 11:53, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Hey EK

Could you take a look at this? This shouldnt be deleted and helps people see what directed each video quickly and what source it came from. Thanks OmegaWikipedia 12:06, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Cytoplasm vandalized

The Cytoplasm article has been vandalized I'm affraid, and I do not know how to revert it...

Thanks. Fixed. Everyking 20:32, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Everyking 3

Do you have any intention of ever presenting any evidence on the evidence page? You've had plenty of time and still nothing. If we see no progress soon we will assume that you do not intend presenting a defence. Theresa Knott (a tenth stroke) 22:21, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

I'm sorry but "a while" is not good enough. You need to start adding evidence now or we will assume you are simply stalling. Do you need any help? How is the advocacy thing going? You do know how to search for your contributions in a particular namespace? I'm happy to help you with anything you need in that respect, but you have to make a start. Theresa Knott (a tenth stroke) 23:00, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

I've replied on my talk page Theresa Knott (a tenth stroke) 23:15, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

If you intend to present evidence related to your pending arbitration case, I suggest you do it in the very, very near future -- otherwise, you can expect a motion to close shortly. →Raul654 00:53, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Everyking we have decided to reject your offer. We will however give you one week to present a defence if you wish to do so. If you do not add evidence to the evidence page by friday the 11th November. We will assume you no intention of ever presenting any evidence and close the case when we see fit.Theresa Knott (a tenth stroke) 06:38, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Bacon's Rebellion

Thanks for picking up my oversight in reverting Bacon's Rebellion. I was trying to do two things at once-- a secondary effect of slow page loads. -- Mwanner | Talk 23:24, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

IRC discussion

I read your commentary on Misplaced Pages talk:Requests for arbitration/Everyking 3/Proposed decision. Would you like to come on IRC and discuss the case? →Raul654 05:59, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I am on there right now. →Raul654 06:03, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Thank you, James

Thank you for your eloquent support during me difficult RFA. It meant a lot to me at a time when people were opposing me "for reasons of ethical integrity". I hope your RFAr goes well and that you keep up the good work here. It seems that whenever I open my watchlist you've just reverted a vandal. - Haukur Þorgeirsson 15:42, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Polish-Muscovite War (1605-1618)

If you could spare the time for this, I would like to encourage you to further correct the English in Polish-Muscovite War (1605-1618) FAC. I'm sure the changes there are being closely monitored, so there's not much chance of significantly breaking the meaning without it being noticed. I'm sure most of your corrections would be improving tha article, and if soemthing questionable happens by accident, it can always be discsussed and repaired. I'll of course understand if you don't have the time to do it. --Wojsyl 16:48, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

Coyote-37 user page vandalism

Just a quick note to say thanks for fixing the vandalism on my user page before I even spotted it! I doff my wiki cap to you Coyote-37 10:08, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

CfD

If you got a minute can you take a look at Misplaced Pages:Categories for deletion/Log/2005 November 7#Category:Soviet spies to Category:Aed Soviet spies. This is a challenge to the sourcing of Venona project materials & direct related article series. Thank you. nobs 21:48, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Bullying

Having read the Everyking 3 thing, I offer my sympathies. It's like a latter-day Milgram experiment. If the wider Misplaced Pages community knew that prominent admins spend a lot of their time actually trying to stop valuable contributors criticizing incompetent admins, they would be outraged. It makes you wonder if some of those admins want to build an encyclopedia at all... or if they just have a peculiar attachment to bullying. User:Andrevan has said "I hope Snowspinner realizes how much the community finds his actions distasteful." I'm sure the community would find the kneejerk support of his bullying amongst admins even more distasteful. I see that limits on your rights to criticize admins have been (or will soon be) imposed, so I will understand if you don't respond. - Xed 18:40, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Final decision

The arbitration committee has reached a final decision in the Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Everyking 3 case. →Raul654 03:04, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

ArbCom ruling

My sympathies, James. I hope you don't let this drive you away. - Haukur Þorgeirsson 09:24, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for rving my userpage

And within a minute, too! Proof that Misplaced Pages does have fast revert times. Thanks a lot, Ingoolemo  18:24, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

WP:AFD/Surviving WWI veterans

See, that's the problem I was thinking of. In my mind, an article should never be temporary, awaiting deletion at some future time: if we're going to have it, we need to either plan on keeping it forever or have some idea for redirecting or moving it. Everyking 10:12, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

I don't see anything wrong with an article that is, by design, of only temporary encyclopedic value. That's part of what separates a dynamic encyclopedia from a static (paper) one. In about 25 years we will probably have the same discussion for surviving WWII veterans. Or even today, a List of countries not using the metric system would be encyclopedic, but may or may not, someday, become an empty list. — FREAK OF NUR_xTURE (TALK) 12:39, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Deletion review

You'd want to take that to deletion review and contest the validity of the close. Alternatively, if the consensus was a merge and the information was not merged, you could just add it into the main Autobiography article. Phil Sandifer 16:21, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Can you link me to the previous AfD? Phil Sandifer 06:36, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

It looks to me like it's not a deletion issue one way or another, and now that you're free to revert again you can restore the article without violating any rules. Phil Sandifer 06:51, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

A point worth making that I have never particularly focused on is that I was silent on your first RFAr - it was only your behavior in response to that and the subsequent ones that I ever found to be a problem. Either way, you're free of editing restrictions on Ashlee Simpson articles now - if you think the article ought exist, I see nothing in the rules that prevents you from putting it in, so why not do it. Phil Sandifer 08:19, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

I find asking for or demanding gestures of good will really tacky. If you really find one so important, rest assured that I will not be the one filing EK4 over this, and that if you're reverted I'll even revert the article back to existence for you. Phil Sandifer 16:31, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Everyking for Arbcom

You've got my 100% backing for arbcom elections this year. Time to spread the word. MARMOT 22:05, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Autobiography sales and chart positions

Thanks for restoring the text at Autobiography sales and chart positions. Everyking 19:22, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

No problem. I happened to note your conversation with Snowspinner on the subject and went and looked at the deletion debate and the article itself. The information is clearly verifiable (and sourced!) and it seems completely natural to split this subject off from the main album article in this way. Call me an inclusionist if you like but I just can't see how blanking that article made Misplaced Pages a better encyclopedia. Since the VfD did not produce a consensus for deleting I just went ahead and restored it.

I think you were wise in not wanting to do this yourself - it could easily have been used against you. Let me know if there are other edits which you'd like to see done but feel it's not prudent for you to do yourself. I'm not your puppet, of course, but if my judgment agrees with yours I'll happily go ahead. - Haukur Þorgeirsson 20:23, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Hello

I am currently upset at the situation being held at Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Hollaback Girl. Some users in particular insulted Cool (song) and Hollaback Girl for being too "chart"-influenced to be featured articles. It is bothering me and I don't believe that I'll be contributing to song articles anymore. Apparently Layla is the true work of Misplaced Pages. I don't know what to say or do. --Hollow Wilerding 00:20, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Did you see the coments made about Cool and Layla? --Hollow Wilerding 00:46, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Well they have no idea what they're talking about: the Beatles aren't going to be around forever. Anyway, are there any edits that you think I should make for Hollaback Girl? --Hollow Wilerding 01:04, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Ashlee tour

I don't see what convincing grounds I could give deletion review for reviewing a ten month old deletion debate that was 40/7 in favor of deletion. Phil Sandifer 12:08, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Sorry for barging in again. If I were to argue the point I would suggest three main reasons that this could be taken up again in the way James suggests:

1. The original vote took place in a somewhat hot atmosphere which might have clouded some people's judgment (either way). The Simpson issue has since greatly calmed down.
2. In their votes some people objected on the grounds that the tour was not over. Presumably it is over now so presumably more verifiable information is available and the potential article will be much less speculative.
3. If Phil were the one raising the issue it's likely that many people would take a fresh look, seeing your disagreements in the past.

I don't really have a material opinion on the subject at present - for one thing I can't see the deleted article. I'd guess more people will probably care about this tour than will ever care about some of the obscure Norse mythology issues I write about and no-one is trying to delete those. I'm probably something of an inclusionist, though. - Haukur Þorgeirsson 12:35, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

You're absolutely right - undeletion would be the best solution, recovering the edit history. But if undeletion is something that can only be achieved with enormous difficulty under the current system then maybe creating a new article will have to do. And if she's started a new tour already then maybe both tours could be covered in one article - this would be consistent with some of the delete votes on that vitriolic VfD debate. There was one like this, for example:

Delete. It might be acceptable to have one article with a list of all of her tours.

On the other hand you did explicitly say this:

I would be fine with a general article on her touring. At first it would by necessity focus on this tour, but with time it would presumably grow to cover more. But if this is deleted, then I can't recreate it in any form, because it'd be too similar, like recreating a deleted article.

Sadly, you were probably right back then. Someone might well speedy it, whatever it's called. But I just don't see this getting anywhere on the process-obsessed deletion-review. And yet it is clear to me that your wanting to recreate the article is completely reasonable. I don't know what the best method would be. If you create the thing in your user space I'd be willing to take the responsibility for moving it into the article space. I could then immediately bring it up for discussion on AfD, explaining why I thought that was a more appropriate forum than deletion review and why it deserved a new debate/vote and why it should be kept - I think there's a very decent case for it. Or, I don't know, maybe that's just being silly and/or not worth the bother. But I'd be willing to do something like that if you think it would help. It seems to me that Snowspinner probably isn't very interested. - Haukur Þorgeirsson 08:27, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

You're right, this probably isn't such a big issue anymore. We have a whole "Category:Madonna tours" now so surely a single article with Ashlee's tour stuff is reasonable. We probably still want to avoid the impression that we're trying to slip anything under the radar so it would probably be nice to post a notice somewhere, we'll see. Just let me know when you start the article and I'll put it on my watchlist. - Haukur Þorgeirsson 11:00, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

Actually - scratch that "single article" sentence. Having a separate article for each Ashlee tour is completely reasonable. We have separate articles not for individual Simpsons seasons but for individual Simpsons episodes (and that's fine). And while we're at it let's resuscitate the Ashlee Simpson category too. There's not only a Simpsons category with more than a hundred entries - there are six sub-categories too. The vote to delete this Ashlee tour article must have been some sort of "last stand of the deletionists" - the facts on the ground clearly favor detailed multi-article coverage of contemporary pop culture phenomena as long as the facts are verifiable and someone wants to write the articles.

And where do people get these "test of time" crystal balls anyhow? Ashlee Simpson is big in 2005. Will she be big in 2010? No-one knows. Heck, she could still be hitting the charts with number one records in 2030 and eventually be considered one of the most important artists of the 21st century. Does that seem likely to me? No. But stranger things have happened and in the meantime all we can do is report on the present and the past.

Sorry for the rant :) - Haukur Þorgeirsson 19:07, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

I think that my proposing undeletion would go badly for the article - there would be enough backlash against my percieved radical inclusionism that, combined with the general backlash against you, I think what would result is that being bold and recreating would become difficult or impossible. I can undelete and move to your userspace so you can access the history and then recreate the article. Phil Sandifer 15:05, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/Halibutt

Since you have supported me during my RfA, I wonder if you could review and comment on the RfA for Halibutt, the first person I have nominated myself. There seem to be a heated debate and votes of experienced, unbiased editors would be appreciated. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 17:03, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Thank you!

Hi Everyking,

Reply

I have read your message on my talk page. Phil Sandifer 18:56, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

I agree heartily with your comments at User:Snowspinner; unfortunately, how can you reason with someone whose user page says, "All we are saying is give jack-booted fascism a chance."? He might think he is joking, but we know he isn't! Ah well, yer a good guy Everyking; maybe you should think of a way to start your own wiki, one free of the trolls. Raul will probably delete this; he likes to think he has the right to remove criticism. 134.161.67.125

Comment removal

The comment was made by Lir - banned users are to be reverted on sight. I didn't even look to see what talk pages he was editing. I just went down the rollback links. Phil Sandifer 05:35, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

The particular insult he used on my talk page (calling me a lapdog) is trademark Lir, and he repeatedly linked to kapitalism.net, which is Lir's site. Phil Sandifer 06:16, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Comment removal

See User talk:Simon Chartres#Endorsements and disendorsements.

Wonderfool

I think that having an opinion on abortion is a mistake, in that it is an issue on which nobody will ever change their mind, and which at this point exists almost purely to cause divisiveness. Debates in which no progress can possibly be made are ones that I tend to avoid. Phil Sandifer 04:57, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

If it helps, I did laugh. Phil Sandifer 05:03, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

I think you'll find I actually have been . Phil Sandifer 05:11, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

I find this criticism somewhat offensive, since criticisms that I made no article edits - particularly from you and Netoholic - were what motivated me to play with the random article button a lot more of late. And yet apparently a massive increase in my article efforts does not actually silence the criticism. This does not seem to speak well either to the criticism or the merits of the editing. Phil Sandifer 05:18, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

It's born largely of a conception of the project as a whole, rather than as a series of disconnected articles. I think that major work does need to be done on the overall administration of the project. Phil Sandifer 05:36, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

I find it difficult to take seriously the possibility that a belief of mine is wrong while simultaneously holding the belief. I mean, I can concieve of being shown that I'm wrong about something, but I can't really take seriously the possibility "what if I'm wrong," because if I were really worried about it, I couldn't believe the proposition in the first place. The things I'm concerned about being wrong about (Say, abortion) are the things I don't do anything with my opinions on. Phil Sandifer 05:46, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

vandal

67.167.124.211 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) is an obvious vandal, vandalized Alexander the Great 20 minutes ago as well. I think blocking would be a good idea, or do you think test4? Borisblue 05:57, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

well, I've already given him a test4... it's definitely vandalism IMHO- he's targetting the same article, and waiting between strikes. Your call- you the admin. I'm logging off now g'night Borisblue 06:24, 27 November 2005 (UTC)

Führer Stalin

Hey James, I added the image of Stalin as Leader (Führer) and Teacher of Mankind.

Why did you delete the word Führer? That's what it says on the poster...

And where did you get the info that it was to mark his 70th birthday?

CPMcE 17:42, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Fair do's James.

The point was that this was an example of the "Personality Cult" - Stalin was now the Führer - I thought it was remarkable that they would

use this word - granted that it's literally "leader", but you'd think that the association of the word with Hitler would make them choose another word.

On the other hand, perhaps that was precisely the idea - Stalin supplants Hitler...

Yeah - I looked at the picture again - don't know how I didn't see "zum 70 geburtstag" - on his 70th birthday - duh!

I do read German, so you may be interested to know that the full thing is "J.V. Stalin - the Leader and Teacher of Mankind in the struggle for Peace, Democracy and Socialism".

CPMcE 21:01, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Important AfD

Hello again! I am contacting editors applies NPOV and NOR standards rigidly for their input on Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/List of modern day dictators, where a consensus has yet to be established. I think this AfD is particularly important because it has been bringing to light some fundamental differences in interpretations of content policies among editors. If you have time, please take a look at the page and add your input. Best regards. 172 08:01, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Spelling

Thanks! Not my strong suit. 08:42, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

Help

Hi admiin,

Can u help me about the Jessica Simpson article. Extraordinary machine just rearraange the article which I highly fixed and made it very organized and he just rearrange like that with no any style at all, he deleted almost 4 out 5 pics that put before and he would not let me revert the section in it's organized form.' please help I want article to be back on it'ss organized arrangement.

this is my version of the article: http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Jessica_Simpson&diff=30116520&oldid=30115925 His versioon: http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Jessica_Simpson&oldid=30116628

thanks--Hotwiki 15:30, 4 December 2005 (UTC) reply pls

Semi-protection

I saw you just reverted vandalism on George W. Bush, and wondered what you thought about the proposals to curb what's going on there. If you have time, check out Misplaced Pages:Semi-protection policy, and weigh in (there's a bit of a large discussion page, so be prepared.) Hope to see you there. -Mysekurity 01:39, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

Worldtraveller and the Early life of Hugo Chávez FAC

Worldtraveller's objection is not actionable because it would require deletion of the article. He should remember that his stance of radical deletionism is a very lonely one. I agree with your assessment above of Worldtraveller's voting habits at the Early life of Joseph Smith, Jr. FAC. I do not have the experience to counter his claims as you have. I just wanted to notify you that he has offered exactly the same deletionist rationale for his objection to the Early life of Hugo Chávez FAC. I hope you do not consider this spamming; I just would be glad if you would independently evaluate the article as you did for the Early life of Joseph Smith, Jr. FAC. If you end up voting oppose, that is fine. Apologies, and thank you. Saravask 02:12, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

If you have a problem with what I am saying, I would suggest it would be far, far more productive to talk to me personally about it. Deletionist? Clearly, you have not bothered to look at my contributions before slandering me, and you haven't really understood what I've said on the FAC nominations you refer to. Worldtraveller 02:20, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Hollaback Girl

In response to your message, I am fed up with attempting to upgrade the Hollaback Girl article and will be taking a break from its improval. You can most certainly contribute to the article and edit it as you wish, of course (since that is what Misplaced Pages is here for), however I'm going to be invading other articles for now. Just wanted you to know. —Hollow Wilerding 01:02, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Both of us will have the articles achieve the status that they are nibbling on sooner or later. I believe that there will always be a few users, unfortunately, of which will be against our beliefs. But time is of the essence; time will tell. I suppose we'll have to find out and see what really happens. —Hollow Wilerding 20:51, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

This discussion is extremely hilarious. You might want to see some of the comments that were left on the page; they're comments offered me the assumption that they were—oh, the heck with it, are—kindergarteners! Someone even threatened to block me from editing because I relisted Hollaback Girl at Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates. Funny, considering he never responded to one of my questions made at Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Hollaback Girl; I questioned him curiously regarding removing Hollaback Girl. It was relisted as a candidate four days following its original removal, yet Céline Dion was relisted the following day, and no actions have been taken into account. It seems as though some controversy has been stirred. —Hollow Wilerding 21:45, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

DRUB

Theres a danger of this non-notable band being accepted. Would you mind voting to delete at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/DRUB. Many thanks!--File Éireann 18:49, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting the vandalism on my page. --Nlu (talk) 23:15, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Luigi30

I stand by my decision. Feel free to post on WP:BN if you would like the other bureaucrats to review it. — Dan | talk 00:38, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Christina's album

I'm seeing your point. Verified info on the album should be covered, but not neccesarily in its own article (especially when the album isn't named yet. Why not consider merging it somewhere else until you can put it in an article on the album once it's named? - Mgm| 12:42, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

BDAbramson's RfA

Everyking, thank you for supporting my RfA - it was indeed overdue, and I'm glad to now be able to contribute more to this project! BDAbramson T 18:00, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Question

In regard to all of the deletion tags on the Gwen Stefani singles, I was wondering if you'd like to edit a single article to advance to featured status? You see, some Wikipedians will discontinue their actions of placing deletion tags on the articles if we edit them; Cool (song) can no longer be placed up for deletion, and and during a recent nomination for the article, a speedy keep was resulted (within ten minutes). The user who nominated it was, as I see it, a sockpuppet for another user. Do you care to work on any music-single article on Misplaced Pages? Perhaps people will begin to see the light of the importance of these articles. —Hollow Wilerding 14:37, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Cognition

I would point out that when the definition of bullying and harassment has been extended to cover ensuring Misplaced Pages's image use policy actually falls within the domain of copyright law, it has almost certainly extended too far. Phil Sandifer 16:28, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

I encourage you to, in the future, spare yourself the time of writing criticisms of me that depend on your psychic insight into my motivations - I will not be responding to them. Phil Sandifer 01:02, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

You're not really going to accuse me of wikistalking, are you? Phil Sandifer 02:26, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

So essentially you assume bad faith in everything I do, and accuse me of wikistalking when you yourself have a mysterious skill at turning up to complain about everything I do? Phil Sandifer 07:52, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Reversion of GWB and USA page

Hey man I see that you have been keeping an eye on a couple of the same pages as me. Right on. -Reid A. 04:08, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Be really mellow

Everyking, your edits to User talk:Snowspinner#Cognition seem to be sniping at his activities. Being "more mellow" is good, but it's as good as being "mellow enough". Also, you've generously added a section to your page for users to list examples of your sniping, but you've ungenerously removed legitimate entries from two different users. That's not helpful either. Be cool. -Willmcw 09:14, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Ann's RfA

Hi, Everyking! I want to thank you for voting to support me in my RfA. I know I'm very late thanking you, but I've been a bit caught up with college work. I hope I'll live up to the expectations of those who voted for me. I look forward to working with you as a fellow admin. Thanks again. Cheers. AnnH 17:43, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

EffK is forced to Abandon a Corrupted Misplaced Pages

I refer you to my response of a few moments ago at 15 December ],http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/EffK/Evidence#3_December_2005 EffK 02:01, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Snowspinner vs. Cognition

I just wanted you to know that I appreciate your challenging Snowspinner on Cognition's talk page. That took some guts. --HK 12:59, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Marsden

I have reviewed Marsden's contributions, and feel that my original claim that he is a pernicious troll is borne out by them. Phil Sandifer 19:53, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

so that's all sorted then! Unbehagen 21:10, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Everyking, Marsden has been causing a lot of trouble for months, insulting a large number of editors, including Jimbo. He's been blocked for serious personal attacks eight times by seven editors, and complaints have been made to Jimbo. Snowspinner blocked the account indefinitely because Marsden has shown no willingness to behave differently toward his fellow editors, and I believe another editor has blocked the IP address. If you were to unblock, I think it would be a very unpopular move, which people would rightly or wrongly attribute to your campaign against Snowspinner. I can only guess that Marsden has contacted you to do his dirty work for him, as he has done before with others. I hope you won't fall for it. SlimVirgin 07:23, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

I hope you won't do that. If Marsden is in touch with you, he is using you, as he has done before with others. It will end up causing you a problem, because it will look as though you're out to get Snowspinner, and someone will reblock Marsden anyway, so nothing will have been achieved. I don't think there is any condition Marsden would adhere to. He has attacked Jimbo and Fred Bauder, has supported any troll who he feels opposes the editors he doesn't like, and it has been going on for months. All he seems to want to do is cause trouble. I appreciate that you're trying to be fair, but please take into account that you've had no contact with Marsden before, and you're perhaps not aware of how much trouble he has caused, and that he has almost caused some good editors to leave. I hope you'll let sleeping dogs lie. SlimVirgin 07:35, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

He has spent virtually of his time here trolling, and the blocking policy allows for these blocks by the community without the arbcom getting involved. Also, it may be a violation of your arbcom injunction to be commenting on Snowspinner's actions like this, though I'm not familiar with the details of that, so I should check more carefully first. My point is: don't get yourself into more trouble over Marsden. He is definitely not worth it. SlimVirgin 07:42, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Phil and Slim are right about this, Everyking. He's not worth it. Even if I agreed with your choice of fights to fight in general, I'd urge you off this one. You spend a ton of time fighting vandals. Marsden is a meta-vandal; his attacks aren't against articles, but rather against the Misplaced Pages polity. It's perfectly legitimate for you to ask if action against Marsden was fair and justified. It was. What would it take to convince you of that? --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 08:54, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Marsden has never done anything other than toxic trolling - review the edits. Have a word with Jayjg about this. Did you see the crap he was spewing on Jay's AC nomination? As far as I can see, he's someone from an opposing POV who's out to deal with someone he sees as a POV opponent - David Gerard 10:46, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

What people don't seem to grasp is that I am not trying to defend Marsden per se, or say he's not problematic—I'm opposing a unilateral indefinite ban that seems to me outside of policy. A case like this should go to arbitration, if necessary, although I think with the right approach something reasonable could be worked out. If someone is going to be banned "by the community", fine—but it's not enough to just say that. You need to be able to show clear community support for the action. All that said, however, I appreciate the reasonable points made here and I'll try not to pursue this any further. Everyking 12:59, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Thank you. I support the indefinite ban because Marsden was just trying to hurt people. I know we all seem to go too far sometimes but that was Marsden's game. Fred Bauder 15:42, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

The message is clear enough. Disagree with Jay or any other arbitrator often enough, get banned. You won't find that in the policies, James, but it's the way it is. "Marsden has never done anything other than toxic trolling." That's a plain lie. It seems to be perfectly okay for arbcom members simply to lie about any editor they have pointed the "troll" bone at, while editors like Jay, considered "in", can do and say more or less what they please. When they are sanctioned, as Jay clearly was for editwarring, the sanction is "reinterpreted" by friendly arbitrators. I agree that Marsden has often been over the line, but it's frustrating to be opposed by empowered editors who push their POV without any opposition, which is very much the case on Jewish issue pages. It seems that a pro-Likudist tone is considered "neutral" and of course editors who don't share the pro-Likudist line want that changed. It's easy to become frustrated when you play by the rules and find that the "other side" a/ doesn't have to and b/ changes the rules to suit. Some of the "other side" have argued, preposterously, that the "occupied territories" should not be called that because Israel doesn't call them that, and they're a party to the dispute, but the "Yom Kippur War" should be called that even though one side in the actual conflict never calls it that. The same editors source part of another article to a journalist's blog but on other pages argue that blogs are not "reputable sources". The hypocrisy and cant are all too easy to expose, and for editors such as Marsden, who are quickly astonished by the lack of shame the editors in question show, the frustration can become too much to bear. The idea that a rampant POV pusher such as Jay should be allowed to arbitrate cases in which he has an interest sticks in the craw. -- Grace Note

Felix Navidad

O.K. Everyking, so you don't believe in Santa, but I still want to wish you and your loved ones all the happiness in the world and the best new year ever. Your friend, Tony the Marine 04:35, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Cheers!

Hi James, thanks for your support on my recent RFA. The request was successful, with a final tally of 33/0/0. I'm delighted that you decided to support it and I hope that I can live up to your expectations. Leithp (talk) 10:27, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

Marsden

James, can you unprotect Marsden's talkpage? It's totally out of order that he's been banned on the say-so of Snowspinner, and doubly so that the means of communicating with him has been removed. Where's the policy that suggests that user talkpages get protected if Snowspinner doesn't want them to read messages to them? It seems to me that if you get adminned, there is absolutely no control over your behaviour except that exercised by other editors who belong to your faction! Is that how a wiki is meant to work? -- Grace Note

To be honest, I'm afraid to do that. I think they will put me through arbitration again and get me de-admined if I take any further steps pertaining to that issue. Everyking 04:52, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Go ahead and unban Marsden. You are perfectly well in your right as it was a violation of Misplaced Pages:Blocking policy to ban him in the first place. If you worry about the consequences on your part, your might want to try listing Snowspinner on Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/User conduct#Use of administrator privileges first. -- Dissident (Talk) 17:34, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Ianbrown's RfA

Thanks for voting in my recent RfA. I was overwhelmed at the turnout and comments received.

Ian ≡ talk 07:40, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

AfD policy

Thought you might like to take a look at this given your comments on WP:DRV recently: Misplaced Pages:GNAA deletion policy. —Locke Cole 03:46, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Vandalism

You are an anti-vandalism superstar. I see you already have a recent (and well-deserved) barnstarn. Congrats! -Parallel or Together? 06:24, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Kanye West

i noticed that you reverted on Kanye West earlier. am I within my rights to block 69.143.146.214 for continuing to add a certain bit of POV, or is this a content dispute? I can't figure out if blocking would be an abuse of admin powers. thanks, --Alhutch 07:45, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

thanks for the advice, i didn't want to overreact. see you around--Alhutch 07:49, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

The arbcom question

Because I've been driving up the east coast for the past two days, and haven't been doing any Misplaced Pages work that requires thought since early Sunday evening. I'll get to your question on Thursday, most likely. Phil Sandifer 23:23, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

3D Monster Maze

Thank you for your comments on the FAC. I've incorporated your review suggestion, squeezed a bit more around to augment the other parts, and am generally out of further ideas that would change the article substantially. I've also posted a reply to your comment. Thanks again! BACbKA 23:57, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Felbeast

JAranda and another guy feel that i am a troll of Ashida Kim

The Movement

What do you think of the movement? Reply here. Thanks. --Kin Khan 03:05, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Help

Hi, I uploaded an image of Ari Meyers within the the accordance established by Misplaced Pages (source and licence) and someone put it up for deletion because "it is unencyclopedic". The image is of good taste and just because it is a wallpaper image I don't think it should be deleted. Please view and if you can, express your opinion. Images and media for deletion/2005 December 24 Thank you, Tony the Marine 04:20, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!!

I second that. Welcome back. Nice to see your work again! - Lucky 6.9 06:38, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Thought you'd left. I hadn't seen you in awhile. No matter; glad you're here. - Lucky 6.9 06:42, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

You've been blocked for 12 hours

I'm just letting you know right away, and ask your indulgence while I compose a rather longish note outlining my rationale... Tomer 06:06, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I'm sure there is a good reason why you blocked me for debating something regarding my ArbCom ruling with the other participant in the case on the ArbCom talk page. Everyking 06:08, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

James, I'd have blocked both of you, except that technically, his reaction was not a violation of the ArbCom and related mediation agreements. What follows is my prepared statement to you regarding my rationale for the block. Regards, Tomer 06:44, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

James...I've blocked you not because Phil Sandifer requested it, but because you rejected (by not agreeing to or even responding to it) a perfectly reasonable offer by TenOfAllTrades] over 2 days ago already, indicating the accuracy of Snowspinner's reaction. Given that you haven't seen fit to abide by the agreement you signed onto less than a week ago, clearly there's a pattern of ongoing abuse here, by you, of Snowspinner. I realize that you have your problems with Raul654 as well, but the fact remains that you have given him reason to watch you, and none of his conclusions or discussion regarding you are/is even remotely far-fetched. ...and that's just in one section of discussion on a single talk page...) Raul makes a legitimate point, that not only is there no publicly visible agreement by Jimbo to review your appeal, but that your setting up a harassment page is a violation of the agreement you made to not attack Snowspinner. What I see here is not an agreement to hear your appeal, but a statement that he'll get around to responding to your request to hear your appeal. There is a big difference. Now...on to the matter at hand...

After off-wiki discussion with several other admins, all of whom thought you should be blocked for 24 hours for what seems to be regarded as "a rather minor infraction", I've decided to instead only block you for 12 hours at present, and when the block expires, to give you 12 hours in which to offer an olive branch to Snowspinner to return to the ceasefire you agreed to previously (i.e., the agreement to ignore each other...or an offer to, as TenOfAllTrades suggested, not mention Snowspinner for 2 months, with similar consequences for infractions), on his talk page. If I don't see such an offer made there during those 12 hours, I'll go ahead and block for an additional 12 hours per everyone else' recommendation. I don't want to get dragged into a mutually abusive relationship like the one you seem to have with Phil, which is why I'm giving you a clear chance to demonstrate that you're willing to be civil to him for at least 12 hours. Understand that this leniency is not contingent upon Phil's acceptance of your olive branch, but it is contingent upon my acceptance that the olive branch was offered in the spirit of a genuine desire on your part to get along with each other, or to return to the ignoring-each-other ceasefire agreement. The timer is running.  :-) Tomer 06:44, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

He did accept the appeal. Plain and clear. Ask him, or dig through the page history, it's there.

The agreement to undo the previous block ended on Christmas and is no longer applicable.

And I'm definitely not going to be agreeing to any kind of "cease-fire" with Snowspinner at this point, so you can go ahead and extend the block to 24 hours. Everyking 06:52, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Tomer, in Everyking's defense, he is right about Jimbo considering his appeal - see this diff. On the other hand, just because he is considering it doesn't mean he'll actually grant it (quite the opposite). Raul654 07:15, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

I actually made that very point in my statement of rationale. It's unfortunate if it was misinterpreted or overlooked. Tomer 07:31, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

D'oh! You are correct, sir. </wipes the egg of my face> Raul654 07:34, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

The terms and duration of the block are not up for negotiation. I'm going to IRC, look for me there as Tomer__ if you wish to discuss the matter further. Tomer 07:02, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

I never said they were up for negotiation, sir. I said I'm not going to agree to anything like you're asking me to, so if you want to extend the block on account of that, then you might as well go ahead. Everyking 07:01, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but are you saying you're refusing to comply with a mediation agreement or to even pretend to be civil to Snowspinner for 12 hours? In any case, like I said, the terms of the block are not open to negotiation, you'll have those 12 hours to do with what you please. If you use them to do something that's going to get someone else to block you before they're over, that's up to you. I'll just go ahead and tack the 12 hours onto the end of that block if necessary. What I'm doing here is giving you a chance to demonstrate a willingness to at least say you'll agree to abide by the ArbCom decision and to say you agree to be civil. I honestly don't think that's a ridiculous expectation. I could be wrong...that's up to you to prove tho. Tomer 07:05, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

No thank you. The block is completely unjust and I won't make any concessions because this has gone so far that I have to stay firm out of sheer principle. I am not going to deal with anybody who would do something so wrong to me just over 12 hours of my life. The gain is so small that it isn't worth compromising my principles over. Everyking 07:14, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Well, James, all I can say at this point then, is that you'll hopefully use these 12 hours to get some sleep or whatever will help you interact in a more acceptable manner with the community as a whole. Like I said during my RfA, I was initially unaware of the full extent of your contributions to the project. I would hate to lose such a valuable RC patrol member just because of a personality conflict. Tomer 07:16, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Nah, if I was gonna leave the project over dickheads I would have done it a long time ago. Everyking 07:20, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm going to stop discussing the matter at this point. I don't know whether you're calling Snowspinner a dick or me for having blocked you, but I suggest that neither case speaks well of your willingness to abide by WP:NPA. Gnite. Tomer 07:25, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

I was calling both of you that. And yes, that was a violation of NPA, but as Snowspinner would say, there are times when you just have to ignore policy and use common sense. Everyking 07:27, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

As a matter of re-iterating, I do not and never have made a practice of following your contributions, and have never, to my knowledge, wandered onto a page that you were editing already and begun editing, except in the now rather ancient Ashlee Simpson dispute. Thus I forsee no rason why I should run into you and create a situation in which commenting on my actions would be necessary for you. If you wish to have no further contact with me, then, it ought be easy for you to achieve - I'm certainly not going to stand in the way of that desire. It is, frankly, what I want too. Phil Sandifer 06:50, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Isn't my autoblock still on? I'm afraid to check because it will just reset it if it is on. If you count the autoblock, then I've really been blocked for 36 hours, not 24 and certainly not 12. And I still don't know what exactly I'm accused of doing. I was arguing with Snowspinner, but I'm allowed to do that. Everyking 20:58, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

The initial 12-hour period of the block expired at 12:03PM CST (18:03UTC) Wednesday 28 December, 2005. I assumed by your contribs that you were aware of this. There appears to have been a problem with the block, however, which I'll go over to address at WP:ANI. Tomer 03:42, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

nm...I wasn't aware still worked during a block (which is fortunate). Tomer 03:55, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

2nd 12 hour block period

When I originally blocked you, I said I would be blocking you for an additional 12 hours beginning tonight at 12:03AM CST if certain conditions were not met. Those conditions have not been met. That said, given that ArbCom has altered its ruling in your 3rd RfAr, it would be ridiculous for me to expect you to abide by my conditions, even if you had expressed a willingness to do so. Therefore, since I don't want to suborn snubbing of ArbCom, and in recognition of the fact that ArbCom has put you in the position of choosing whether to concede to my conditions and be blocked for 24 hours, or to follow the ArbCom decision and be blocked by me for 12 hours, I'm rescinding my promised block. If someone else (like you, perhaps) decides to block you for calling me a "dickhead", I'll leave that up to them. Cheers, Tomer 05:28, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Quick Help

Could I get a little administrator help with User:68.225.54.146 He's my first vandal. I have been chasing him all night. I feel a bit honored but could use some help. THanks--Looper5920 11:30, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Issue regarding User:Toosmart215

The above user, who I'd assume is a new Wikipedian, is persisting in vandalising Misplaced Pages. Judging by the history at the Shakira article, User:Toosmart215 has failed to respond to the message I posted at the Shakira talk page. They have also vandalised my profile and posted uncivilised messages on my talk page. Their current profile page, as I believe, is aimed at me. Can something be done about the user's behaviour? I'd definitely appreciate it, Everyking, thanks. —Hollow Wilerding . . . (talk) 23:20, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Enforcement

Hi Everyking, following the posting of this, this is just to let you know that I plan to help enforce it. I was harassed myself by a user for five months, so I know what it feels like and I don't want to stand back and watch it happen to anyone else. Having said that, I very much hope action won't be necessary. SlimVirgin 02:08, 29 December 2005 (UTC)