Revision as of 13:59, 15 June 2006 editJzG (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers155,070 edits Archiving some stuff← Previous edit | Revision as of 14:31, 15 June 2006 edit undoJzG (talk | contribs)Edit filter managers, Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers155,070 edits →Troublesome fellow: replyNext edit → | ||
Line 294: | Line 294: | ||
::Erk, I'm sorry if I'm annoying you. Could you make a comment on the 3RR ]? With due diligence, no one should block me (I was essentially responding to vandalism) but you confirming the sense he was a troll would set my mind at ease. What's your sign BTW ;) ] 23:55, 14 June 2006 (UTC) | ::Erk, I'm sorry if I'm annoying you. Could you make a comment on the 3RR ]? With due diligence, no one should block me (I was essentially responding to vandalism) but you confirming the sense he was a troll would set my mind at ease. What's your sign BTW ;) ] 23:55, 14 June 2006 (UTC) | ||
:::Nothing to see there, I reckon. ] 14:31, 15 June 2006 (UTC) |
Revision as of 14:31, 15 June 2006
Guy Chapman? He's just zis Guy, you know? More about me
I am on indefinite wikibreak due to a bereavement. I will not be checking Talk or email. I do not know how long this will last. Just zis Guy you know? 21:41, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
If you need urgent admin help please go to the incident noticeboard. To stop a vandal, try the vandal intervention page. For general help why not try the help desk? If you need me personally and it's urgent you may email me, I read all messages even if I do not reply. If next time I log on is soon enough, click this link to start a new conversation.
- Misplaced Pages:WikiProject History of Science
- JzG (talk • contribs • blocks • protects • deletions • moves)
I will be dealing with some of JzG's stuff on Wiki
I will be trying to deal with requests and issues that go to JzG for the indefinite future. I may not be able to deal with all of them, since I am not nearly as experienced or prolific an editor as JzG. I'll try to check his talk page a few times a day, but if something needs urgent attention, an email to me and/or a message on my talk page will probably work better. JoshuaZ 01:38, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
Count me in too of course, with the same caveats. My sincere condolences to Guy at this time - sigh. --kingboyk 02:34, 21 May 2006 (UTC) Guy just received a templated newsletter, which I have moved to User talk:JzG/Temp 1. I suggest moving all low-importance content to that subpage to keep this one clear. He can move/delete/archive it as he sees fit upon his return. --kingboyk 02:54, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
Anything I can do to help? JzG is "good people"... condolences, and hope all works out well in the end for you Guy... ++Lar: t/c 03:26, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
My condolences to JzG. Stephen B Streater 07:58, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
JzG, you are in my thoughts and prayers during this difficult time. A Transportation Enthusiast 12:30, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
Guy: I'm praying for you and yours. "May your God be with you." - Arie. AvB ÷ talk 12:46, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
JoshuaZ et al., if I can help (as a non-admin) I'll gladly make time for it. AvB ÷ talk 12:46, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
Condolences Guy. All the best.Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 03:38, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
Take care, mate. Condolences. NSLE (T+C) at 03:50 UTC (2006-05-23)
My condolences to you. All the best. --Terence Ong 12:08, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
Condolences from me and mine as well, JzG. I'll be glad to help out with anything. RasputinAXP c 20:02, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
I'm sorry to see that. Waiting is. Midgley 03:05, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
Content undeletion requests
Hi JzG,
I hope your wikibreak is going well. I will be very grateful if a kind administrator posted the contents of the deleted userboxes Drug-free, atheist, evolution2, evol-N and antiuserboxdeletion at a subpage of my userpage for userification. Thanks.Loom91 06:49, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
Antonella Gambotto-Burke
Hi, I've added and deleted some material with a view to giving the article more balance - unsurprisingly, that's being disputed. I feel input from a neutral and level-headed editor is needed at this stage. If you could take a look at the recent history and make some suggestions I'd appreciate it. Thanks, Dlyons493 Talk 19:53, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
- P.S Sorry about the bereavement Guy - I only noticed the top of your page on exit. Dlyons493 Talk
- To any editor who is interested in looking into this - User:Sarahgeorge is the
publicistpublisher for Broken Ankle Books who published Antonella Gambotto-Burke most recent book. She (and what looks like her IP Address) are the main editors of the article (with some apparent vandalism from an Australian school). She's had some email correspondence with Guy. Suggest you look at the history of her talk page (some relevant edits have been blanked) and the first version of the Antonella Gambotto-Burke article which I've been trying to NPOV. All help appreciated. Dlyons493 Talk 20:33, 25 May 2006 (UTC)
- To any editor who is interested in looking into this - User:Sarahgeorge is the
Tuatafa Hori (again)
Tuatafa Hori was not a fake, and was not proved as such. She was deleted simply because she was suspected, and is now under protection so that she cannot be created again. The book was a proper source. They found some Myspace things that mentioned her so they assumed that she was a hoax, however, that is no basis for that type of assumption. I have a friend whos screen name is that of a historical queen, but does that mean that she made up that particular queen? I just don't think this particular issue was given enough credit-- they just wanted to get rid of it. 72.144.223.101 14:01, 30 May 2006 (UTC) (reposted by me from archive page - RasputinAXP c 15:06, 30 May 2006 (UTC))
- Hoax or not, a single source which is not available nion more than ahandful of libraries amounts to functionally unverifiable, or at best of so little objectively measurable significance as to be unencyclopaedic. Just zis Guy you know? 20:16, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
Why Rummel is always Right (again)
This article has been recreated in a different format. You discussed the deletion of a previous version; please comment at Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Possible wars between liberal democracies; it may be that this version is less POV. Septentrionalis 21:02, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
Umm, justa question, you know?
What does the British Flag have to do with Admin-ship? And how is that Quality Vandalism? Livin' Large 12:24, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
- Nothing: that's why it's vandalism :-) And it's "quality" because of the flag. I have low entertainment threshold. Just zis Guy you know? 07:59, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
Sidaway RFC
It sounds like you're complaining about RFCs in general, rather than commenting on this one in particular. No RFC has ever helped build an encyclopedia- I thought this was obvious. RFCs are used in those unfortunate circumstances when there's a problem. So far, a good number of people have found Tony Sidaway's behavior to be disruptive to building that great encyclopedia- hence the RFC. Hope this helps. Friday (talk) 17:41, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
- You need to look much harder at why he does what he does. Tony is fantastically aggravating a lot of the time, but almost invariably right. Just zis Guy you know? 17:49, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
- As I commented on the RFC, I find him to be right about 75% of the time, but that's not he issue. The issue is, right or wrong he's so hamfistedly disruptive that many of us think it's important that he change his behavior. Sadly, he becomes selectively deaf when he hears criticism- a terrible, terrible trait for an editor. Anyway, I also responded to this a little bit at Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_comment/Tony_Sidaway_3#JzG.27s_view if you care to read. I understand if you don't- RFCs are certainly an unfortunate distraction from useful work, as I attemped to explain on the talk page. Friday (talk) 17:53, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
- Have you seen the sigs he's objecting to? ]]]]] 02:03, 1 June 2006 (UTC) for example? Just zis Guy you know? 20:14, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
- That takes 15 lines on my mobile edit window (the whole screen). PS Welcome back. Most of the action has been on the T1/T2 debates summarised (incredibly) here - the sigs are a mild diversion. If you want something completely different to look at, I've started getting my FORscene article ready for DRV here. This has a week or two more work on it, I expect. Stephen B Streater 21:53, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
- I can't even edit it on my Blackberry 8700, too long. Just zis Guy you know? 21:58, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
- I can't read that particular debate on my phone ;-) Stephen B Streater 22:39, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
- Good editors are hard to find. Ones that are invariably right are like diamonds. It's the ones that are ameniable, but often misguided, ignorant, or worse, widely admired by others and often wrong that lead good publications down the drain. Keep Tony. Dr1819 21:46, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
- And it's the ones who flatly refuse to acknowledge even the theoretical possibility that they might be wrong who get the bum's rush from Misplaced Pages :-) Just zis Guy you know? 08:18, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
- Good editors are hard to find. Ones that are invariably right are like diamonds. It's the ones that are ameniable, but often misguided, ignorant, or worse, widely admired by others and often wrong that lead good publications down the drain. Keep Tony. Dr1819 21:46, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
- I can't read that particular debate on my phone ;-) Stephen B Streater 22:39, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
- I can't even edit it on my Blackberry 8700, too long. Just zis Guy you know? 21:58, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
- That takes 15 lines on my mobile edit window (the whole screen). PS Welcome back. Most of the action has been on the T1/T2 debates summarised (incredibly) here - the sigs are a mild diversion. If you want something completely different to look at, I've started getting my FORscene article ready for DRV here. This has a week or two more work on it, I expect. Stephen B Streater 21:53, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
- Have you seen the sigs he's objecting to? ]]]]] 02:03, 1 June 2006 (UTC) for example? Just zis Guy you know? 20:14, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
- As I commented on the RFC, I find him to be right about 75% of the time, but that's not he issue. The issue is, right or wrong he's so hamfistedly disruptive that many of us think it's important that he change his behavior. Sadly, he becomes selectively deaf when he hears criticism- a terrible, terrible trait for an editor. Anyway, I also responded to this a little bit at Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_comment/Tony_Sidaway_3#JzG.27s_view if you care to read. I understand if you don't- RFCs are certainly an unfortunate distraction from useful work, as I attemped to explain on the talk page. Friday (talk) 17:53, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
Passing through...
Hello friends. I have just been catching up on a couple of things, I will be back at least to some degree but not as active as before, or at least not for a while. There has been a life-changing event.
My sister, 21 months younger than me, died on 20 May. The cause is not a state secret but I'm not really ready to talk about it here right now. I was there when she died, and I can safely say that was the worst moment of my life (and presumably hers, though fortunately she was well out of it by the end). What with helping to organise the funeral, actually managing to get the kids on holiday, driving back from Baie du Somme to Hertfordshire for the day to see her off, and the complete emotional exhaustion the whole thing has caused - to say nothing of having to find the money to buy my other sister a car with brakes - things are feeling pretty stragnge right now.
My sincere thanks to all who have sent supportive messages, and to those who have picked up the many loose ends I left dangling. I'll be back to work next week, and will be looking to make some contributions to the project soon. Just zis Guy you know? 17:58, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
- How terrible. I can't really say any more than that. Real life comes first, so take your time Guy, and in the meantime your friends here will be thinking of you, I'm sure. I certainly will.
- I've watchlisted a couple of the articles you usually keep an eye on (unaccredited universities and Guildford (?); several whitewashing edits have been reverted and culprits blocked... I look forward to having you back to over :) --kingboyk 18:26, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
- It has been strange and intense. Unreal, at times. Just zis Guy you know? 20:06, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
- I'm so sorry Guy. My prayers to you and your family during this difficult time. -- Samir धर्म 20:08, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
- Oh Guy, I'm so sorry. I hope you and your family can find some consolation somehow. Please take it easy and don't rush things. In my experience all the... reverberations can take some time to die down.
- Thanks for letting us know what's going on. I'm sure I'm not the only one who was concerned. My thoughts are with you. · rodii · 21:16, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
- It's starting to feel numb now. I was there when she died, and I really hope I never have to do that again. I'll make a user page to explain the ins and outs some time - people here have been good to me and I am a WYSIWYG kind of person - but right now I don't have the words. Just zis Guy you know? 22:44, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
- My condolences. Hang in there, man. --badlydrawnjeff talk 12:28, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
- My condolences as well... focus on real life and view WP as a thing to use for stress relief, a way to escape and work on something you enjoy, rather than viewing it as an obligation. Real life comes first. Hang in there, you have a large circle of well wishers if that's any consolation. ++Lar: t/c 15:56, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
- I'll add my belated condolences here as well. (I didn't read about what happened until I was checking up on Samir's RFA.) I can't claim to understand everything you're going through, and I hope I never have to deal with something like that. I'm sure it's a stressful time, though, so if Misplaced Pages adds to that stress in any way, feel free to step back for a time. I hope the memories of your time with your sister will comfort you, as well. --Elkman 15:44, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
- I just saw this. My condolences. If there's anything I can assist with, let me know. FeloniousMonk 15:50, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
- My deepest sympathies, Guy, I just saw this. Know that you are in our thoughts. KillerChihuahua 16:05, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
- Guy, I just saw your comment on WP:AN and realized I hadn't seen you around AfD and elsewhere for a while, and came to your user page and saw the news. Please accept my sincere (and belated) condolences. --MCB 00:45, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
- I am truly sorry to read of the death of your sister. May she always shine in your memory.
- Davidkevin 08:04, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
Your ID.
I'm just interesting about your ID. Is your ID JzG just for abbreviation? Please, Reply on my talk-page. Thanks. Just ask you for about your ID. '''*Daniel*''' 03:35, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
Image copyright problem with Image:Giant Lafree Twist Comfort Gts.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Giant Lafree Twist Comfort Gts.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Misplaced Pages because of copyright law (see Misplaced Pages's Copyright policy).
The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Misplaced Pages are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Misplaced Pages:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}
.
Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me, or ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sherool (talk) 13:55, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
DRV
On DRV, you said that List of tongue-twisters should be restored because it was deleted at Wikibooks. It has however, also been transwiki'd to Wikiquote, where it has not (yet) been deleted. -Splash - tk 20:33, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
Deletion review of List of tongue-twisters
I'm notifying you because you voted recently at Misplaced Pages:Deletion review#List of tongue-twisters. Since your vote, additional information (merely, the fact that the content was transwikied to Wikiquote) has emerged. I'd therefore like to ask you to revise (or confirm) your vote in light of this additional information. Thank you, and sorry for bothering you about his. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 21:27, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
Northandsouth
Yeah, I think you're right. Next steps? Someday you need to share your method with me of getting confirmation. FeloniousMonk 15:49, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
- I usually ask at WP:RFCU. It's unlikely to be possible to confirm at this stage, since Gastrich has not been active for months. I'll watch the edits, though, and we can go by them I think. Just zis Guy you know? 15:55, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
Complaint
First, I am not a sock puppet (I assume you mean Jason). Second, I have to figure out how to file a complaint with Misplaced Pages. I am amazed that I am providing factual information and you call it a "white wash". The article says LBU makes false accreditation claims. They do not. It says degrees by Life experience, they do not. I have made the challenge to show me several times and NO ONE has done so. When I edited I left the good and bad in there. LBU is at least honest. This article is dishonest and you have an obvious bias that means deleting material that does not serve your interest. I provided facts, you nothing. In arbitration your assertions will not stand up. LBU catalogue clearly says...we are not accredited, you are unlikely to become a certified teacher...you will not be able to obtain counselor certifcation, etc. What you and the folks who dislike LBU and refuse to at least present factual unbiased information are doing is essentially bullying. It is also dishonest.
Nordundsud 18:46, 7 June 2006 (UTC)Nordundsud
- Feel free to raise an RFC, in fact please do as I am likely to be kicked out of the rouge admin cabal any day due to the fact that there is as yet not one RfC or RFAr against me, whereas Tony Sidaway who is not even a member is never off the lists. Sadly the assurance that you are not a sockpuppet does not cut too much ice, good faith notwithstanding, as several of Gastrich's proven puppets (verified by CheckUser) said the same. I don't care one way or the other about LBU, I do care about edit warring. It is not the way to achieve anything. Just zis Guy you know? 18:58, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
Sock Puppet
The fact that you think I am a sock puppet is amusing and to me (unprovable) demonstrates a shocking lack of intuition. I know who Jason is because about 95% of anything negative I ever saw about LBU was due to his interactions with others. Don't know what to make of him (strange run for Governor of Calfornia and even stranger concession speech). Not to mention the fact that although I am going to a fundamentalist school I am not a fundamentalist (enjoy reading Spong & Borg). As an FYI, I have three accredited degree (BA thru doctorate).
My editing, was in order to get factual information in. I don't mind having in there that some have accused LBU of being a mill. I do mind wierd assertions like LBU is a mill because they claim false accreditation or offer Life Credit Degrees. Utter unsupportable nonsense. That is why no one could support those assertions with references. To leave that in the article is wrong.
LBU is among the most honest unaccredited schools in terms of saying so several times and noting that because they do not have accreditation you will not likely become a certified teacher and will not qualify for mental health licensure.
As a side note, not all unaccredited schools are mills. They do have some large limitations in terms of their use as you note in your latest edit. You may want to read Bear's Guide. Dr. Bear has worked with the FBI to sting diploma mills and is the foremost expert in distance education. I think he is currently on Gov. Schwarzenegger's Board that deals with education.
Your last edits that I read were fine and honest. Thank you!
Nordundsud 19:10, 7 June 2006 (UTC)Nordundsud
- My edits usually are fine and honest - in my view. And what I said was that you risk being identified as a sockpuppet - with over 100 Gastrich puppets blocked, it is a strong possibility whenever anyone starts writing apologetic material about any Southern Baptist institution. The main thing is to ensure that the reader understands that these institutions have no real significance outside the American Baptist church, and then we can all get on with life. The use of {{unaccredited}}, which I substed in the lead, is good because it means we use a consistent form of words every time, one which is neutral in tone. Which is (of course) why I created it in the first place. I certainly agree with you that Gastgrich is a rum 'un, though... Just zis Guy you know? 19:29, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
Gastrich posted briefly on a distance education forum board that I frequent and it was a strange experience. He did not hold up well and left. That was my first encounter. Searched his page and could not believe he was serious about himself. His concession speech was quite bizarre and written as if he were a major contender for Governor of California. At any rate, education and accreditation issues are hobbies of mine and subjects that I am very...very familiar with. We have people on these education boards pursuing degrees from the University of London to the University of Zululand. I certainly always recommend accredited institutions due to versality (etc.). With Australian and South African degrees (accredited) being so affordable there is little point in pursuing unaccredited degrees. Unaccredited schools do serve a certain constituency. In the US there are some fundamentalist schools like Pensacola Christian that will not have anything to do with the government. The BBFI is a fundamentalist Baptist group (some of whom see the Southern Baptist Convention as too liberal). You are correct that terminology is interesting because you use the term "American Baptist", they are actually a variety of Baptist (rather liberal) that would probably not have anything to do with the BBFI. The openly homosexual preacher and chair holder at Princeton, Peter Gomes, is an American Baptist. He probably won't be appearing at any of the BBFI college commencement ceremonies any time soon. The very conservative BBFI theological stand espoused by LBU is probably one reason that Attorney General Ashcroft was a commencemnt speaker there. Ashcroft was a very conservative Christian (Bush's first Attorney General).
At any rate, I see you are Anglican. I grew up as an Anglican (wonderful English grandmother). One of my degrees is from a Commonwealth country and the other two accredited degrees are American. Miss my grandmother's Roast beef & Yorkshire pudding, bubble and squeak, sheperd's pie, plum pudding, etc. Still drink black indian tea with milk though.
Nordundsud 03:28, 8 June 2006 (UTC)Nordundsud
Removing fisheaters.com from Spam blacklist
A request has been made to remove the domain fisheaters.com from the spam blacklist . As you are the one that requested it be listed, I'd appreciate it if you could provide a reason why I should or should not remove it. Thanks Naconkantari 22:18, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
- They have asked Jimbo, too, and I gave him pretty much the same reply as I've posted on the meta talk page. To save clicking the link: see User:JzG/Fisheaters. I have no confidence that the (anonymous) operator of this site will do anything other than what she did before: add the site (in preference to either content or links to the same content at more authoritative sites) to large numbers of articles. Oh, and edit-war over its removal. Prior to its addition to the blacklist I was scanning the project monthly for new links and finding anything up to ten new links each time, on various language versions, many with misleading desriptions (Catholic view of foo or traditional Catholic view of foo - this is a Traditionalist - i.e. dissenting from the mainstream Vatican II - site). I also found several additions with misleading edit summaries, and at least one to the full text of a particular rite which was also available from the (demonstrably more authoritative) Vatican site. I don't recall any of these additions being by logged-in users. So: what we lose by having the site on the blacklist is one link to a monograph of unproven authority in one article; what we gain is a saving in time for me, scanning the project for the anonymous addition almost certainly by the site operator of linkspam. You can see why that looks like an easy call to me, but I'm not the meta sysop. Just zis Guy you know? 23:12, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks, I've denied the request. Naconkantari 23:17, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
Objective validity of astrology
Your comments on the nature of the page spurred me to start an AfD nom. Comment here if you like. Marskell 16:13, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
- Hard to disagree. Just zis Guy you know? 16:15, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Raphael1
Hello,
An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Raphael1. Please add evidence to the evidence sub-page, Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Raphael1/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Raphael1/Workshop.
On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Johnleemk | Talk 11:35, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
m:MPOV and WP:TIGERS
Sandstein has requested that his page not be cluttered with whatever dispute you may have with me.
By the way, I read both the MPOV and Tigers pages with keen interest. Both of these are rather insightful articles. I found it rather amazing how closely the criteria for inclusion into either category resembles just four of the more than twenty posters who've provided well-stated, clear, concise, and most importantly, qualified comments, both positive and negative, to my articles. It's nice to know that so few Wiki editors fall into these categories. Sadly, the four who did fall into one or more categories are apparently unaware that that they do, or that disagreement is healthy, provided the discussion remains civil, threats or invitations to leave (very uncivil) remain absent, and the focus centers around the details and quality of the article, rather than degenerating childishly into who's right or wrong. These simple rules of debate can be learned in any high school.
Of particular note were the very polite and well-crafted suggestions at the bottom of the Tiger's article. Unfortunately, I've seen very few suggestions resembling those in the comments, most disturbingly, including among a few admins. I also loved the the following statement on the MPOV article: "Upon reading this list, you are convinced that most of the people you deal with are suffering from MPOV." Sadly, I cannot lay claim to this thought, as I've only found about four of more than twenty posters to whom this applies, and then only on topics which are highly controversial in more conservative circles. The other topics I've created, or edited, to which I apply the same care, thankfull remain free of uncivility, personal attacks, etc. Who was it who said, "The best example you can provide is the one you put forth yourself?" On second thought, I could use a good polishing, too. Always room for improvement! Dr1819 19:25, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
- Once again you are measurting everything according to how closely it matches your own preconceived notions. You really need to try to be more objective. And you need to realise that the criticisms of the two contended articles are valid (they come from long-term, experienced and respected contributors). Instead of simply re-stating your view that the criticisms are baseless, you need to engage and find out what needs to be done to fix them. I've already given you my view on that. Just zis Guy you know? 10:06, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
New sig
I've been following the discussions on sigs and I remember you saying something about shortening your name to JzG to make editing talk pages simpler. I'm thinking of having a new signature and am looking at requirements:
- Shorter than my current one - several people have recognised me from my name, but my ego does not require this ;-)
- Have a link to my talk page as well as my user page.
- Three characters maximum.
To keep the signature short in edit mode, I'll need a new login name as this would be referred to twice - once each for the user page and the talk page. SS is gone, as is St, but as both my names start with St, I was thinking about: St
The "S" represents me and links to my user page, the "t" links to my talk page. The "t" is a bit short to click on, and "St" could be confused with the (inactive) user of that name. As both my names start with St, the solves both problems.
I'm planning to wait until after my RfA, but wondered if there were any logistical issues in transferring everything over to a new id. Would I need a bureaucrat to help, for example? And of course, if it's a bad idea, the next few weeks would be a good time to mention it ;-) Stephen B Streater 21:22, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
- Excuse me for butting in on someone elses talk page... But are you serious? People get pissed off with the fancy crap that you're proposing to use. What's wrong with the standard sig? As it is just now? Your current sig is quite simple when it's seen within an edit:
- ]
- and the "improvement":
- ]]
- is a much longer string of gibberish! Thanks for reading/wangi 21:33, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
- But if I add my talk page it comes out as ]] and the new one is shorter. Stephen B Streater 21:40, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
- Simple reply to that is... well don't add it — the majority seem to manage just fine :) /wangi 22:08, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
- When you get to know me, you'll understand that I am not the majority. Also new technology may soon allow sigs to be minimised in edit mode and re-expanded in view mode. Stephen B Streater 06:35, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
- Simple reply to that is... well don't add it — the majority seem to manage just fine :) /wangi 22:08, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
- Stephen, I don't think your sig is a problem at all, and there is every reason to post with your real name (although no reason not to). My original one was "Just zis Guy, you know?" whihc was foolishly long. Yours is not much longer than Tony Sidaway; I don't see a problem. But a beuraucrat can arrange to move your histry to a new account if you like. Just zis Guy you know? 10:03, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks. I forgot to mention the other pun "t" for talk and for to ie talk to (me). I think I'll just keep it in reserve, as people have been able to find my talk page. Stephen B Streater 12:39, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
- But if I add my talk page it comes out as ]] and the new one is shorter. Stephen B Streater 21:40, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_comment/Dr1819
An RfC has been opened concerning Dr1819s behavior surrounding men's fashion articles. Since you have been involved in discussing his behavior on these articles, you may wish to certify the dispute or add your thoughts on the issue. Thanks. Shell 01:27, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
New FORscene article
I've got a meeting right now and will be back later. . Stephen B Streater 11:29, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
- OK, not unexpected (even though I put an HTML comment in there that it is not eligible for Db-repost). I have left a note for Sleepyhead. His experience was much like yours (he works for 24SevenOffice which was originally deleted as WP:VSCA). He polices a number of list articles and does a great job of defending against the spammers. Just zis Guy you know? 11:57, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
The Objective validity of astrology AfD
The AfD looks like it could be headed to majority delete but not consensus delete and thus kept (say 65% del). This is in some ways the worst outcome. Disinterested editors have rightly said get it out of here, while a handful of people into astrology will veto deletion. Is there anywhere it can be brought up, say with editors who work on a lot of science articles? The RfC pages generate little and it doesn't seem right to bring up an AfD at the sci Help Desk.
I realize I'm sort of asking "how can we game the system" but at the same time it strikes me as a good example of an article that if seen by long-term editors would certainly get shot down for violating all three content policies in ample measure. Marskell 12:58, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
- You could take it to WikiEN-l I guess, or you could take a scythe to the article and reduce it to its verifiable core. Just zis Guy you know? 13:02, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
- I think I'll spam a couple of talk pages. Is it considered bad form to "campaign" over AfDs? I've never really felt the need to do so until now. Marskell 15:19, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
- It's bad form unless the people have been involved in prior debate on the issue, or unless you take steps to inform others you believe will support inclusion. It would be permissible to bring it to the attention of all users with a contribution to the article or the relevant section in the parent, pro or anti. Just zis Guy you know? 15:27, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
- I think I'll spam a couple of talk pages. Is it considered bad form to "campaign" over AfDs? I've never really felt the need to do so until now. Marskell 15:19, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
RfA/Gurch
Thanks for the support – Gurch 17:30, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
Hey
Meh, it's not really just problems as much as stress that would hinder Misplaced Pages, so I'm taking a brief side-step for the benefit of the project. And don't worry about BB Sinha, I acted rash and that was not approate (I think I spelt that wrong). I have just followed that article and had been urging the creator to bring sources, and well he said he had a photocopy, but I think he gave up. To be honest, I don't know the true extent of his humanitarian efforts, I saw Paul Farmer speak and it was fascinating, but I learned that 97% of humanitarians don't get recognized, because...well, of the field they work in. Thank you, again for all you concerns and you are an awesome admin! Yanksox 18:31, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
Thank you
Hi JzG/Archive 24, thank you for voting in my RFA which failed eventually at a result of (91/51/8). I do not plan to run for adminship until a later date. Once again, I would like to thank you for voting. --Terence Ong (talk | contribs) 14:41, 13 June 2006 (UTC)How do you mean re the Robert Steadman comment at DRV?
I replied on Robertsteadman's talk page. He is Robsteadman, and has been unblocked per a discussion on AN a month or so ago per conditions held in my userspace linked from Robertsteadman's talk page. Syrthiss 15:17, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- See what you miss when you go on Wikibreak? Thanks. Just zis Guy you know? 16:19, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- heheh thats what Essjay said. :) Syrthiss 16:34, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Notice anything suspicious?
. Some of the legal points looks quite interesting, but I don't think he's come across WP:NPOV. Stephen B Streater 17:46, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- Ah, the classic hatchet job. Pruned the Royal Dutch article, well done on sucks.com Just zis Guy you know? 22:37, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Need your help
Guy, one of my favorite editors Herostratus is being eaten alive on his Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/Herostratus. Please see my comment and support if you think it is wise. I think that you are familar with Sam's the out of process deletion of the image on Lolicon article and likely understand the complexity of the decision. I think Herostratus is being unfairly portrayed by some oppose voters on that topic. FloNight talk 19:02, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
Troublesome fellow
Do you mind having a look at User:Stanfordandson? He started an account today, made his first main space edit to Gay Nigger Association of America, and then decided to troll (in my very honest opinion) the Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Objective validity of astrology page. I've actually been reported at 3RR for the first time! Though I seem to only have made three... Marskell 22:04, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- To be clear on name Stanfordandson not Stanfordansdon is the user in question. Thx for quick response. Marskell 22:17, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- Erk, I'm sorry if I'm annoying you. Could you make a comment on the 3RR Misplaced Pages:Administrators'_noticeboard/3RR#User:Marskell_reported_by_User:Stanfordandson? With due diligence, no one should block me (I was essentially responding to vandalism) but you confirming the sense he was a troll would set my mind at ease. What's your sign BTW ;) Marskell 23:55, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- Nothing to see there, I reckon. Just zis Guy you know? 14:31, 15 June 2006 (UTC)