Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 10:32, 13 January 2006

Archive 1
Archive 2
Archive 3
Archive of discussion with Anon
Archive of discussion on the 2004 Arbitration committee election
Archive 4
Archive 5

RfAr for Gabriel

Sannse, I have been trying to reason with GabrielSimon now for quite a while (as early as 6 Jul) and he appears to be stuck in his ways. I suggested that he live by a 1RR rule for a while to let things die down, he agreed on 23 July, and yesterday was subsquently blocked for 3RR. I asked him about it, and his answer is "pehaps i am too stubborn". A lot has happened since you voted on the RfAr, including a doubling of the number of editor endorsements and a doubling of the evidence for the RfC. I would like you to revisit the issue, as I don't know that Gabriel is voluntarily going to work with us. - grubber 18:02, 2005 August 2 (UTC)

The case has the needed four votes to open - it looks as though no one has had a chance to do so - I'll open it today -- sannse (talk) 09:46, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

What is sbst

What is sbst? ¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸ 23:42, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

Using {{subst:User:Sam Spade/Welcome}}, rather than {{User:Sam Spade/Welcome}} will paste the contents of your template rather than embedding them. This would mean that the last edit link on the talk page will no longer lead to your template page, and you won't have people editing your template by mistake any more. Like many people, I use the last edit link to add a section to a talk page, finding it taking me to a template page is annoying - especially when I don't notice until I've saved!

Using subst also means that changes you make to the template, will no longer change all previous uses of the text - something that saves on server resources and allows you to update the template without changing old talk page messages. -- sannse (talk) 09:46, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. ¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸ 19:08, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

deletion of rfc re: deletion of vfd

I explained a bit at RFA about my premature deletion of the RFC. It was a time-zone miscalculation. And I don't think Kim was justified in blocking me. Uncle Ed 02:14, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for your response -- sannse (talk) 20:47, 5 August 2005 (UTC)

Jämthund, or Jamthund Spelling.

I don't object, and I don't think that the Swedish object either... Michael 13:58, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

User:J. Jones

Hi Sannse! I see you removed that spurious RFAr, and I think rightly so. I was quite tempted to remove it myself, but I thought it best to report it to WP:AN/I, and wait for someone who is more involved in arbitration than I am. Do you think I would be justified in removing that request as an obvious vandalism/disruption and then blocking User:J. Jones for being a probable MARMOT sock? Sjakkalle (Check!) 13:02, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

It's best to leave the decision to arbitrators. We'll remove them if necessary - although it's more likely that we will leave them and vote, even if they appear to be disruption -- sannse (talk)

Thanks for your response, what about blocking/not blocking J. Jones? Sjakkalle (Check!) 13:09, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

As an arbitrator, I have no opinion on that. I'd see what other admins think on AN/I (but with only one edit, and that an offensive one, I doubt you would get much argument if you blocked) -- sannse (talk) 13:16, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

Developing conflict with Mel Etitis

Heya, sorry to bother you. I hope you're feeling ok. :-/

I've asked Mel Etitis to come talk with you, basically about my past um non-conflicts with FeloniousMonk. He's picked up some very strange ideas and I'd like him to understand what's really up. I don't mind if you tell him about my side of the situation. I don't know if feloniousmonk will let you tell Mel about his side of the conflict. Thanks if you do have time. :-/

Failing that, I'll ask the medcom for help. They're overworked as it is though, so I hope one of them has time ^^;;

Kim Bruning 15:25, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

KB has somewhat misrepresented the issue, perhaps because he hasn't understood my position. He has presented himself as a neutral mediator between SS and FeloniousMonk, as engaging in good-faith attempts to settle their conflict. His actions and comments, however, have indicated very strongly that he is no such thing, and that he favours SS (to put it mildly). Now, from what he says to you above, it looks as though he wants you to explain to me the reasons for his hostility to FM, or something of the sort — but as you'll realise, that's not the issue. It's not why he favours SS over FM, but that he does so — or, rather, that he does so while claiming to be neutral. If in fact there's something relevant to that issue which you can tell me, then fine; I'm certainly ready to listen. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 15:49, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

Yes, well, right. Like I said, could you maybe fill Mel Etitis in? (And I never claimed to be neutral in this, Mel: you only assumed I'd done so.) Kim Bruning 16:13, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

I'm not really sure what you want me to say here Kim. And I am very reluctant to talk about the details of mediation anyway - confidentiality is key to the process. I certainly will not discuss it in public, and don't think that there is anything relevant I can say in private. -- sannse (talk) 16:34, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

Good point. Sorry to bother. Let me think of something else then :-/ Kim Bruning 17:42, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

Admin overriding Arb-com

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-) 12:15, 18 August 2005 (UTC)

Hi Sannse

Just dropping you a little note to ask if its alright if I request arbitration. As you well know, my account was blocked by Linux last month, indefinitely, and I don't think it's very fair! Anyway, please allow me to present my case before arbcom to stop the bloodshed. Thanks. Marmot

Jimmy Boyd Picture

Sannse, please see Talk:Jimmy Boyd for my response to your removal of Jimmy Boyd's picture from his article.

Hello, I'm seeking guidance / support in re Fac for Terri Schiavo

Hello, Sannse,

I remember you briefly relaying some information regarding Dr. Hammesfahr's concern over some role he played (or didn't), and a recent post.

Now-days, the Schiavo article's nominated for a Fac. I'm trying to drum up support, and here's a reprint of my post to the big-guy --in that box below: -and, since you are familiar with Terri Schiavo, I seek your feedback (and support, if it is appropriate).

Thank you for your time.--GordonWattsDotCom 10:47, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

This template must be substituted. Replace {{Template for discussion ...}} with {{subst:Template for discussion ...}}.

Image:Nat-gall-lond-tr-sq dist1.jpg has been listed for deletion

Bull! (dogs)

Once upon a time, I'm thinking May of '04, there was a dog-project discussion on Bulldog vs Olde English Bulldogge naming, and I have spent half an hour searching and looking and can't find it. Do you have any idea where it might be/have a clever way of searching that discovers the text? It's come up again-- see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Dog_breeds#Bulldog_vs_English_Bulldog. Thanks. Elf | Talk 23:05, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

List of dog topics

FYI, you have a link to this article on your user page, but it's now becoming a redir to category:dogs. Elf | Talk 05:24, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

Your dog-breed excel table

... has now been put online in Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Dog breeds/Breed source list. Elf | Talk 22:00, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

Replies at User talk:Elf

Image:WikiMeet_London_2004-12-03_sann3_Angela.jpg

Do you want to add a license to the image, or a source, or do you wish for the image to be deleted? Zach (Sound Off) 02:13, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

Fixed -- sannse (talk) 09:56, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

I am the author of a new Misplaced Pages addition called "TDWG" that was 'held' due to possible copyright infringement.

The situation was this-

I am an Executive member of TDWG. I was using Misplaced Pages to search for some definition of terms that we use in our work on in TDWG on the Misplaced Pages site. I though that I would see if TDWG was listed and a group that TDWG relates "IETF". IETF was listd but not TDWG. I decided that I would use the basic defintion of the group on the www.tdwg.org site to ensure that it was listed on Misplaced Pages.

Lee

lee@netspace.net.au

Walton

Hope you are happy with my amendments to Walton-on-the-Naze. I know the area well, since my brother lived in Thorpe-le-Soken and then Walton. Nice images, how did you get the aerial shot?

(please note - not one Essex girl joke!)

jimfbleak 10:06, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Hi Jim, the changes look good, nice work. The aerial photo comes from a gift of a flight over the area (there is another photo on Clacton-on-sea). The trip was in a tiny plane flying from Clacton's small airfield. The visibility wasn't perfect, but the photos didn't come out too bad.

Essex girl jokes don't work for me anyway - I was born in Kent ;P

Sorry for the slow reply - I've been away

-- sannse (talk) 10:17, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

ArbCom elections

Hello, Sannse. In case you haven't noticed, I'm writing a special series on the upcoming 2005 ArbCom elections for The Misplaced Pages Signpost. In the October 17 issue, we will be profiling the current ArbCom members. Note that this should not be a platform for re-election; rather, it should serve as an insight into what you feel about the ArbCom, and your opinions of it are. Thus, I hope you don't mind answering a few questions. Many thanks!

1. Are up for re-election this year?
2. If so, do you plan to run for re-election?
3. How do you feel about serving on the ArbCom?
4. What do you think are the strengths of the ArbCom?
5. Weaknesses?
6. If you could change anything, what would you change? Why?
7. Do you regret accepting your position? Why or why not?
8. If you could say one thing to the current ArbCom candidates, what would you say, and why?
9. Do you think your job is easy? Hard? Explain.
10. Looking in retrospective, is there anything you would have done differently?
11. Do you feel that the ArbCom is appreciated by the community? If not, how do you think that could be changed?
12. What is the most frustrating thing about being on the ArbCom? Enjoyable?

I hope you didn't mind me bombarding with you with questions; by no means feel obligated to answer all (or any) of them. Thanks for serving Misplaced Pages, and for taking your time to help a Signpost reporter! Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk | W_S 14:11, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

Wikimedia chapter meeting

Hi Sannse, there will probably be a meeting for the specific purpose of discussing Wikimedia UK this sunday, which I was wondering if you'd be interested in attending. I'm also wondering myself... Cormaggio 23:18, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

Missed it. Maybe I will make the next -- sannse (talk) 10:25, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

I created Thai Ridgeback Dog (stub) to replace deleted Thai Ridgeback article

Hi Sannse,
I hope I haven't overstepped my bounds by editing a subpage of your User area, but I made a new page (just a stub) for the Thai Ridgeback Dog to replace a page that was deleted due to copyright violation, it would seem. Then, for completeness, I researched all the pages linking to the page that had been deleted, and I am systematically updating them. I hope that's OK.
--GraemeMcRae 19:36, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

That's just fine - it's a wiki after all :) -- sannse (talk) 10:27, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

WP:RFAR/SV

Re: Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_arbitration/Stevertigo/Proposed_decision#Ommision_of_fact

I understand that some are quite busy and may have missed recent discussion and questions regarding my Arbcom matter. Ive taken the liberty of posting here to remedy any inadvertent oversight regarding my case. Sinreg, St|eve 22:24, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

Help! I am being hassled by what appears to be a sockpuppet vandal

Please take a look at the edit history for Accountable 1135. Please help if you can. Rex071404 01:47, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

• Go away--anon editor 01:56, 21 October 2005 (UTC)

Pic of the day

Hi Sannse,

Just to let you know that your photo Image:Large White caterpillar 800.jpg is due to make a reappearance as Pic of the Day next Monday. I've reused the same caption as last time, but you can review and improve it at Misplaced Pages:Picture of the day/October 31, 2005. -- Solipsist 21:03, 24 October 2005 (UTC)

Hi, ...

... I just came across one of your older contributions in a page history and realize that you haven't contributed a word for more than two months. Are you okay? All the best, <KF> 00:34, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

I've been rather unwell and not logging on at all, but hopefully I'm back now - thanks for asking after me :) Best -- sannse (talk) 10:31, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Coventry Cathedral

I just converted a list of Coventry Cathedral photos (mostly yours from two years ago) into a gallery. 66.167.138.133 01:32, 31 October 2005 (UTC).

Looks fine -- sannse (talk) 10:32, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

General reply

I've been away for long enough that a lot of messages here are out of date. I've not replied to some that seem to be time-specific or are related to arbitration issues that I'm not currently involved in. I am working on catching up now, and hope to be back to arbitration shortly. If I've missed anything that I should have replied to, please leave me antoher note. I hope to be around a lot more again now. Thanks -- sannse (talk) 10:37, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

No problem, thanks for getting back to me, jimfbleak 13:56, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Your dog photographs at Misplaced Pages

Dear Sannse

I am currently writing an ebook about dogs and I have been viewing your beautiful photographs at Misplaced Pages. I was wondering if you would allow me to use some of them in my ebook. I would of course attribute them to you.

Kindest regards,

Alfie Harris

alfie.harris@web-malls.net

Reply sent via email (summary - help yourself, they are GFDL!) -- sannse (talk) 19:41, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

ArbCom Resignation

Hello, Sannse. I heard that you had resigned from the ArbCom, and as a reporter for the Misplaced Pages Signpost, could I ask you why you decided to resign when you indicated last week that you hoped to participate more in the Arbitration process? In addition, if you don't mind me asked, did you announce your resignation on the ArbCom mailing list? If you you made a statement, would you be willing to announce some of it to the public? Thanks a lot. Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk | W_S 22:53, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I told the other arbitrators via the arbitration mailing list. On the reason for the contradictory messages: I came back from an extended wikibreak last week, and hoped to get back to arbitration work as soon possible. Unfortunately, it became clear as I tried to catch up that I am just not well enough at the moment to put in the time and commitment that the job needs. I didn't feel it fair to my colleagues on the committee to continue with that being the case. I still fully support the arbitration committee and believe strongly in the job the committee does. In fact, I would very much like to rejoin the committee one day - if the opportunity arises and if my health improves. Sorry for the slow reply, I hope it's in time to be of use to you. sannse (talk) 19:41, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the response! Hope you get well soon. Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk | W_S 00:36, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

You are sick?

I'm very sorry to hear about it! :-( Sounds serious... hope that you get better soon. - Ta bu shi da yu 08:56, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

It's just the usual illness I've had for years, just a bad patch again. Thanks for the concern though :) -- sannse (talk) 12:30, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Bummer Sannse, I had no idea :( Hope you feel better! - Ta bu shi da yu 12:31, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Howard Smith's article

Cheers. You disambiguated "depression" into "clinical depression" in the Howard Smith (director) article (since he is a past board member and director of MDSG ), regarding the function of the Mood Disorders Support Group in New York City. MDSG not only helps people with clinical depression, but also people who are before that phase, perhaps just blue, light Seasonal Affective Disorder, reactional and situational depression, etc. I think I would like to broaden the category and change it back to something like depression (mood). MDSG is not a treatment center, so the panorama is larger. Unipolar, bipolar, and the mood disorders. Many people have a diagnosable disorder, so, I'm actually okay with having to word it as clinical depression but, again, I think might be too narrowing. Your thoughts ? Thanks ! -- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 17:56, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

Yep, I'm happy with using depression (mood). It's often a bit tricky to know which of those two to use, corrections are always welcome :) I've made the change -- sannse (talk) 13:29, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Hi sannse ! Thanks so very much for the clarification and making the change ! It's sometimes very hard to define a line. One trusts you're doing well. Cheers ! -- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 16:34, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

BBC articles internal links to non-existent articles

Hi sannse. An anonymous contributor made changes to many of the BBC sites but also just made internal article links where there were no supporting articles. He internally linked all names in the BBC 6 Music Past Presenter list. And other BBC radio articles where there are more names.

This is very hard, if there is a list of, say, ten or even thirty items, which ones are articles and which internal links are dead-ends. I had left them as plain text until I or someone had written a supporting article, then would change the plaintext name into an internal link to the new article. The anonymous contributor has done it to all names in all BBC radio articles. Lots of dead article links.

One can't distinguish which of a list of thirty presenters, have an article. One now has to try all thirty.

Is there some policy, or so you have a take on it ? Should internal pointers to non-existant articles be made when there's no obvious intention of the contributor's writing the supporting article ?

I think it disturbs the reader's flow to point to a number of contiguous dead articles.

Many thanks in advance. -- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 18:09, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

The usual policy is to link to any article that is likely to be written. The idea is that this encourages readers who come across a blank link to start the missing article. The different colours of the links should be enough to show whether the link leads to an active article or not. Of course, if no one is ever likely to write the article, there is no point in having a link - it's all a matter of judgement and, to some extent, of style. Hope this helps -- sannse (talk) 11:39, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, sannse. I would agree in general, although my browser doesn't show different colours for a non-existent article v. a live one ! I still have a lingering question in my mind that when someone takes a list of names, such as BBC radio presenters in a BBC radio article, and makes them all links to non-existent articles, it makes the intention a little unclear. Especially when none are written subsequently ! And the ip address anonymous user had some warnings posted on his discussion page: User_talk:217.33.74.20. I mean it winds up being more work for me, to remove the article links, or more likely to research and write a dozen articles which I hadn't quite presently intended to write ! Many thanks for your kind thoughts and response. -- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 19:59, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Wikimedia UK

You have expressed an interest in Wikimedia UK. Just to let you know I've posted a draft Memorandum of Association and Articles of Association of the proposed "Wikimedia UK" charitable company on Wikimedia UK/Memorandum of Association and Wikimedia UK/Articles of Association. It is proposed that these will receive initial approval by interested parties at a meeting on 27 November. I will put together a brief agenda for the more formal aspects of that meeting soon. Memo and Arts of Association are a company's constitution, and need to be agreed before the company is formed (though they can be changed at a later date). Please feel free to comment on the relevant talk pages (I'd rather the proposed drafts are left unedited so that it is easy to see what is going on) - particularly if there is something there that you would disagree with at the meeting, details of which can be found on the Wikimedia UK page on Wikimedia Meta-Wiki. Kind regards, jguk 19:04, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. I won't make the meeting, but will try to have a good read of the relevant pages. -- sannse (talk) 11:42, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

hi

Wanted to say hi :) How are you doing? Dysprosia 21:57, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Hi Dysprosia, good to see you! Have you got your home connection on yet? I'm looking forward to catching up with you on IRC as soon as you are back :) Thinking of you -- sannse (talk) 15:00, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

No :( I'm thinking of getting wireless internet, but the modem is a bit pricey, so I'm not so sure... But I'm looking forward to seeing you on IRC again too :) Dysprosia 00:29, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

Mach kernel

Looks like you had a "fun" time chasing down that vandalism in the Mach kernel article today! – Mipadi 16:34, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

Ah, such obvious stuff is no trouble - easy to spot, easy to revert ;) -- sannse (talk) 16:37, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

Arbitration re-opened

Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Climate change dispute 2 has been re-opened. Please place evidence at Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Climate change dispute 2/Evidence. Proposals and comments may be placed on Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Climate change dispute 2/Workshop. (SEWilco 03:42, 29 November 2005 (UTC))

French Directory

Could I ask you to weigh in at Talk:Directory (political) about the recent move of French Directory to Directory (political)? Thanks. Jmabel | Talk 03:09, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Sorry Jmabel, not really my area -- sannse (talk) 11:53, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Britney Spears article

The vandal who inserted those images is someone with access to a zillion IPs it seems, that one is blocked as well. I need to log out now I'm afraid. Is there something we can do with such people who enjoy playing the mole in whack-a-mole. Frankly, I have many other things I would rather be spending my time on. Sjakkalle (Check!) 16:09, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

There is not a lot we can do I'm afraid, just keep an eye out and revert as needed. The good thing is that there are more of us than there is of him, and he will get bored and go away eventually. Just take time away from the wack-a-mole game any time you get tired, and don't let it burn you out. Otherwise, it's just keep up the good work :) -- sannse (talk) 16:13, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Wolf Blitzer

Sannse, I'm not sure about the protection. It will just show that, when we're worried about vandalism, we protect in advance so that noone can edit, which is a long way from anyone. That won't look good broadcast live on CNN. -Splash 23:13, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Oh, no, it wasn't you. You just added the tag. -Splash 23:17, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Yep, it was Danny that protected - but I can see his point, we really don't want an article that is getting this much attention to be vandalised. And it will be vandalised -- sannse (talk) 23:26, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

CVU talk page template

The thing is this is in the talk page on articles that are already hammered by vandalism. The problem of being quiet is CNN reporters being unaware of our existance. Being brodcasted on national TV as an "uncredible source" and that "we aren't making an effort to prevent such incidents" is very very bad publicity for wikipedia. There is no reason to hide the fact that George W. Bush is getting hammered on a hourly (or much less) basis and that RC patrolers are watching, reviewing, reverting.

When someone is repetively accused/declared of assasinating JFK and are unaware of our existance they rightfully think we tollerate such nonsense on wikipedia as they are unaware of RC patrolers. Of course the template wont scare away the vandals but it will definately contain the apathy of CNN reporters whom (from what I understand from the CNN transcript) are also subject to random accusations. --Cool Cat 14:49, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Reply at Misplaced Pages talk:Counter Vandalism Unit -- sannse (talk) 19:30, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

A Rare RFA Thank You Note to clutter up your talk page...

Sannse:

Just wanted to drop you a note to say thanks for supporting me in my recent RFA. I know you don't vote in RFAs often, so I'm doubly flattered that you chose to support me in mine. I will hopefully continue to maintain the style and flair you commented on.

All the best.
→ Ξxtreme Unction {ł_blah} 23:30, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

You are most welcome, and congratuations! -- sannse (talk) 18:59, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Help from an admin requested

Hi Sannse

May I ask you to have an eye on what's going on below. My knowledge is fairly limited about what to do in stressful situations on wikipedia as I'm relatively new to wikipedia. Maybe you could help a little.

• It started at User talk:AzaToth#Misplaced Pages:Avoid using meta-templates.
• Moved on to Wikipedia_talk:Avoid_using_meta-templates#Logic_templates.
• Then I was blamed to be a spammer at User_talk:Adrian_Buehlmann#Spamming by Netoholic.
• On User_talk:David_Gerard#More_bad_templates I feel the folks interested in {{book reference}} were titled a "mob".

See also Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Netoholic 2

Thanks for your help! In good faith, – Adrian | Talk 01:07, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi Adrian. I would recommend listening to David Gerard on this. There are good reasons to avoid meta templates, they really do affect the performance of the wiki. However many people like using them, and I understand that they can be very useful in some ways, it doesn't change the underlying problem of server strain that they cause. Until that is fixed, then the advice is to avoid them. It doesn't matter that this has never been made an explicit policy - the guideline remains valid. I'm sorry if this is not the reply you hoped for, but I was an arbitrator for "Netoholic2", and so had to look into issues around meta templates. Other than that advice, I would just say to keep things calm and friendly and it is likely to all work out in the end. It is possible to come to an understanding in these disputes. Best -- sannse (talk) 18:59, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Many thanks for your help. I try my best. – Adrian | Talk 20:48, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Ramsey Lewis

I don't really know why I moved the Ramsey Lewis article, but I suspect it had something to do with my first hearing him back when he was billed as Ramsey Leis, Jr. However, as you point out, Ramsey Lewis is better. I've moved the article back to Ramsey Lewis. Thanks for catching that. John FitzGerald 16:05, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

That's great - thanks for the help -- sannse (talk) 16:25, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

IRC

Hi Sannse. Yes, it's me. Jayjg 21:53, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Great, thanks Jay -- sannse (talk) 22:03, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

hi again

Merry Christmas :) Hope to talk with you in the new year... Dysprosia 06:37, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Heya! Yeah, get that connection up and get back to us :) Have a great Christmas Dysprosia -- sannse (talk) 15:26, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!!

Excellent news

Good deal on the lithium. I was helped about 5 years ago by 6 months of welbutrin but haven't needed it since. Probably different causes & needs. Best wishes for continued success. Elf | Talk 21:47, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks Elf. It's early days, but I think this is a real change :) It's amazing what a difference the right help can make. I'm glad it worked out for you back then too. -- sannse (talk) 15:41, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

What the hell

what are you doin on wikipedia youre a uncyclopedia guy --Cao An Min 22:37, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

No, I'm a Misplaced Pages gal, but I also hang out at Wikicities sometimes. I don't have the sense of humour for Uncyclopedia -- sannse (talk) 15:41, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Image tagging Image:Lego-sannse.png

Unfortunately, fair use cannot be claimed for images solely on user pages. I've tagged the image Image:Lego-sannse.png that you uploaded as having unknown copyright status. You could try to contact the owners of the original site you retrieved it from to get permission, but without that it will be deleted. Thanks! ~MDD4696 02:37, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

I've deleted it. You might have seen from my comments there that I didn't expect it to stay for long - the "fair use" claim was a joke (see also above ;) -- sannse (talk) 15:41, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Happy Holidays

Happy Holidays Sannse! :) HolyRomanEmperor 13:49, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks :) and to you HolyRomanEmperor! And best wishes for the New Year - gonna be a good one, I can tell ;) -- sannse (talk) 15:41, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Everyking

Hi Sannse, thanks for your note. I would appreciate it if you would not undo that block. Everyking must not comment on any situation Snowspinner is involved in, and the onus is on him to check whether Snowspinner's involved in something, and if he is, to withdraw from it. However, he knows very well that the block that stands is Snowspinner's. The editor he's defending on Bishonen's talk page (to the point where Bish has had to approach the arbcom for an injunction asking him to stop) was a rotten editor and highly disruptive, so the chances are high that he's making this fuss only because of Snowspinner's involvement. He is asking Bishonen to unblock, and is therefore by definition asking that Snowspinner's block be undone. His not mentioning Phil by name is just an example of system gaming and boundary testing. Please see the warnings I've left for him prior to this, which I've listed on WP:RfAr. Everyking needs consistency in the way the ruling is enforced, because he will exploit every loophole and every disagreement between admins. He therefore needs to understand that there are no loopholes and that no admin will tolerate this kind of prolonged harassment of another editor. SlimVirgin 19:55, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Oh I certainly know that Everyking is the master at gaming rules, but I think that we occasionally think he is doing so when he isn't - simply because he has done so so many times in the past. In this case, I think he is being annoying, and I sympathise with Bishonen having to deal with him, but I think his issue is with the original block and not with Snowspinner. Snowspinner is (as far as I can see) a silent participant in this and I don't think a criticism of Bishonen's block is also a criticism of Snowspinner. I had already taken off the block but will not under any circumstances fight over this. Maybe the solution is to get another (non-involved) admin to look at the situation and to re-block if they feel that is appropriate? I am happy to stand by their decision -- sannse (talk) 20:02, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Hi again, it's hard for me to believe that he didn't know this was Snowspinner's block right from the start, but even if he didn't, once he'd been told it was, the onus was on him to back off at that point. But still he kept on, knowing he was arguably violating the ruling. Look, the ruling was very, very clear: "Everyking shall not interact with, or comment in any way (directly or indirectly) about, Snowspinner, on any page in Misplaced Pages." Even so, Everyking asked for clarification, which shows he was trying to determine exactly where the limits were so he could nudge right up against them. Raul654 reiterated the ruling in terms that made it clear no boundary testing would be tolerated: "Everyking is not to mention, gesture, indicate, or gesticulate in any way that implies Snowspinner or any action taken by Snowspinner (including, but not limited, to Snowspinner's edits)."

Despite this, he starts to question an indefinite block imposed by Snowspinner by questioning an earlier block of the same editor by another admin, and does so to the point where Bish is asking for an injunction against him. In my view, he knows exactly what he's doing, and now he's got admins arguing over him, and the blocking admin having to defend the block on various talk pages. It's playing right into his hands. SlimVirgin 20:14, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

In this case I disagree. Snowspinner being involved on the periphery does not, in my opinion, stop Everyking questioning Bishonen's reasons for blocking. I don't regard that as commenting on Snowspinner (even indirectly). Which is why I'm suggesting we ask an un-involved admin to look at the situation. I did discuss this with another admin before unblocking, and Bishonen herself feels the block should not stand, but I'm still happy for a non-involved admin to be consulted. We have different opinions, why not let someone else give input to help in this situation? -- sannse (talk) 20:21, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

I admit to being at a loss here. Everyking is asking that HW be unblocked. That means he is asking that Snowspinner's indefinite block be overturned. Your argument is that he was not aware of those facts from the start. I disagree with you, but fine, let's assume you're right. He was eventually told that the standing block was Snowspinner's. Learning this made no difference to his behavior. He therefore continued knowing he was hovering around the limits of the arbcom ruling. Let's stretch the assumption of good faith even further and assume he didn't realize this. I then posted to his talk page warning him that I saw his behavior as a violation. I had previously posted that I would enforce the ruling against him. Still, he continues. It would be incredibly naive to imagine he didn't know what he was doing by this stage at the latest. In fact, to assume he didn't realize is to assume he's remarkably unintelligent.

I'm willing to reduce the block to 24 hours in light of your concerns, but I think it should stand, and I'd really appreciate it in future if you'd approach me first with concerns about any of my blocks, rather than undoing them. We seem to have a situation at the moment where wheel wars break out over just about any block made by any admin for any reason. All that will happen now with Everyking is that he'll carry on pushing against the limits, thinking he can involve another admin and cause a fight, whereas had this stood, he might at last have understood it has to stop. If you want to ask another admin to review the block, you're very welcome to do so. SlimVirgin 20:36, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't consider this a wheel war, I have said clearly that I will not unblock if the block is reinstated. But I unblocked immediately as I felt that was the fairest thing to do having looked at the situation. I sorry you find this inappropriate, but I would do the same in a similar situation. I will post on AN/I to ask for the opinion of another admin in this. -- sannse (talk) 21:03, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

It's been a while since I've seen ,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸ — that brings me back! El_C 21:13, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

I could always make it my sig if it will help with your nostalgia ;) -- sannse (talk) 21:36, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

That would be pretty hysterical, actually! No pressure, though! El_C 21:49, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Ah the temptation... must... not... use... ugly ... sig... --sannse (talk) 21:50, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

OTRS

Go right ahead. Based on the history I could see, I unlocked it, but I don't think I can give it back to the root (as owner), can I? - Mgm| 05:57, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

It is possible to pass back to root ("zoom", and then "owner" - root is on the list). But don't worry in this case, I've got it in my queue. Thanks! -- sannse (talk) 16:47, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Fred's vote

Sure thing. It is rather different, and yet the bottom line is the same — Fred gave a supporting vote (implying that the target would be good aboard the ArbCom) and not an opposing one! Everyone should vote their consciousness, yet I was just trying to get some of the voters into more contemplative mode before jumping onto the Oppose bandwagon. --BACbKA 22:05, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Translation

First, I thought you meant from Portuguese, now I'm guessing you mean to Portuguese. I have a long weekend starting tomorrow, so I'll work on it then. Jim62sch 17:49, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Gmaxwell

Hi Sannse, thanks for your post. I have nothing personal against Gmaxwell at all, and in fact know nothing about him. All I can see from his contribs is that he's incredibly rude to people in a way that goes beyond being brusque (for example, "instructing" people to stop posting outside the main namespace because he didn't like the way they voted on an RfA, or threatening to block people although he's not an admin, over issues few admins would block them for anyway). It has caused some editors either to leave or to consider leaving the project, and that makes it a problem; my aim is only to persuade him to reconsider the way he interacts with people, and I hope that's an aim you'll support. SlimVirgin 22:56, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

I disagree with your interpretation of his interactions, and feel that your own opinion is colouring the way you are "hearing" his comments. I appreciate your good intent, but I a very worried that your conflict with him is likely to drive him off Misplaced Pages - something I really would hate to see. Perhaps you would consider taking a step back from this. If Gmaxwell is out of line, I'm sure others will be keen to let him know. At the moment, this is looking like a vendetta in retaliation for the image issue. Please understand that this is not an accusation in any way, just that this is the impression it is giving. I'm sure you'll agree it is often better to leave things to someone else rather than give the appearance of conflict of interest. -- sannse (talk) 23:35, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

I could equally say that your relationship with him is coloring your own opinion, but where would that get us? As I see it, my experience of him has informed my opinion, not colored it. As for him being driven away, he is the one doing the driving, I'm afraid, which is why I'm intervening, because I want to make sure it doesn't happen to anyone else. All he has to do is stop attacking people and stop pretending to be an admin i.e. edit within policy and as such I'm surprised you don't support that effort. These comments posted to several good users, for example, were described by others as "absurd and petulant," "out of line," and "shocking and inexcusable" and yet he continues to use the same tone, mostly against people who don't know how to stand up to it. It can't be allowed to continue, Sannse. I'm not trying to interfere with whatever work he does on fair-use images, because it's an issue I've never taken an interest in, but it has to be done in a way that doesn't completely alienate everyone he comes into contact with, and he has to stop threatening to block everyone who doesn't immediately kow-tow. Even his attempts to keep discussion of this off his talk page are the actions of a problem user, as I'm sure you know from your own experience. Perhaps instead of discussing it with me, you could use whatever influence you have with him to persuade him to modify the way he interacts with people. SlimVirgin 00:43, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

I do say, I'm beginning to feel inclined in investigating this dispute, with all the esoteric undercurrents which it entails. Regards, El_C 10:32, 13 January 2006 (UTC)