Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 15:05, 2 September 2006

Dear Wikipedians, if your signature has a talk-link, I may be more inclined to answer at your talk page. Otherwise I may be more inclined to answer here. I don't like to allways click 2 times to reply only because you do not provide a talk-back feature.

thanks to an idea by User:Ral315 I use raw signature now, because the other way of signing stopped working today. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 08:44, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Old talk until 2005-08-08 23:03 at

2006-07-03 emptied page until section Berlin which was started 2006-06-06.

Berlin

You alright, man? You never called.—Ëzhiki (ërinacëus amurënsis) • (yo?); 13:29, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

• you did not call me neither? Maybe we missed the once in a lifetime chance to see us. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 19:34, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Once in a lifetime? I much doubt it :) I liked Berlin, and hope to return one day. It's a pity, though, that things turned out the way they did. You are welcome to blank my userpage once as you promised—you now have every right to do so :)—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 19:36, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Vandal? First time I've been called that!

Tobias, I am appalled that you apparently did not even read my edit summary, nor did you take the time to realise that most of the changes to the Ubuntu article in the last few months have been done by me. Please see the talk page for further discussion, and please don't make me regret nominating the article for WP:AID, where I suspect you came across it! - Samsara (talk • contribs) 13:32, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

• 2006-06-27 20:18 replied at

2006 summer admin incidents

User:Tobias Conradi/2006 summer admin incidents

Hurlingham

Thanks for the tip-off - the changes have been made to Hurlingham. Mtiedemann 22:45, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi

One of your articles, List of tango singers is being nominated for deletion. Just thought I'd let you know. Regards, AdamBiswanger1 15:43, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Sometimes I get to these AfD's and I can't believe that so many people have written "Delete per nom". Alot of people assume that because it's being nominated it should be deleted. I also think that because they do not like tango music they are much more likely to assume it is insignificant. Oh well AdamBiswanger1 21:38, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Tango

Regarding your ad hominem attac here, please refrain from doing so. I have clearly mentioned that I have no relation whatsoever with any pro/anti tango group, and the article is afd'able on its own right. It popped up my screen when I was doing a random cleanup, and so I afd'd it. Thank you. --Ragib 21:08, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Regarding your ad hominem attac - maybe stop randomly cleaning up. BTW, why did you not notify the page creator? Tobias Conradi (Talk) 21:11, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

List of tango singers

Tobias, I just realized that you haven't voted yet! Please do!. Sebastian Kessel 21:15, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Otro pa'vos, pero no te olvides que si no votas, queda raro... la gente piensa "Si este no vota, porque voy a votar yo?". Suerte! Sebastian Kessel 21:20, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm currently giving this a going over - having found a very useful list of notable tango singers, I think this will ease previous concerns that they are being put in completely arbitrarily. I intend to put back information from the original list ASAP - the reason I made the drastic change is that the original list's references didn't seem to be working online anymore. Since making everything hyper-verifiable seems to be the way to do an AFD-save these days, I just ran with the first list I could find online. TheGrappler 21:41, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Re: Haukes

I don't know. I've fixed it. --Pilotguy 21:54, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Country subdivisions

move to Talk:Matrix of subnational entities Tobias Conradi (Talk) 14:41, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

eng.tango.info

It's working now! Yesterday I couldn't get the singers section to work either in Firefox or Internet Explorer. The weird thing is that all the other musician categories worked fine - singers were the ones that were the problem.TheGrappler 18:29, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Hi Tobias,

I was especially pleased at your positive comments at my RfA. Auf weiterhin gute Zusammenarbeit!

Samsara (talk • contribs) 22:31, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Tana River (Finland)

Interesting progression: Tana River → Tana River (Finnland) → Tana River (Finland)

Since it is called the Tana in Norwegian but the Tenojoki in Finnish I suspect that you mistook the county of Finnmark in Norway for the country of Finland. Not surprising; more than one person has made that misread.

Lacking any load outcry, I intend to change this to Tana River (Norway); the other logical revsiion would be Tenojoki River (Finland) and that is tautological, so I'd rather avoid it.

Williamborg 01:07, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

can't reply at your userpage, because I'm blocked (don't know why, my blocker number 1 seldomly provides diffs)

interesting tauto list. Since the Alaska and Kenya Tana River will not empty in the same body of water, a good dab could use the waterbody the river flows to. see Misplaced Pages:WikiProject Rivers#Naming , e.g. Tana River (Atlantic). best regards Tobias Conradi (Talk) 13:18, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

tango.info

One issue I am having with tango.info as a source, is I can't work out how the "singer-ness" of singers is shown. If I could work out that the database is telling me "this person released 34 CDs in which they sang" then I'd feel more comfortable updating the list of tango singers. At the moment, I am more comfortable with using todotango.com, for whom the biographies usually provide enough information to assert notability as a tango. And of course the other sources I have for tango outside Latin America (I was pleased with my Turkish finds... they seem to know how to sing a very good tango!) Could you explain to me how to work out from tango.info how many CDs (does that include LPs?) have been released by a tango musician purely as a singer? TheGrappler 12:32, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

I am not sure whether "Many tango musicians have been both instrumentalists and singers" is right. First lot's of musicians have not been singers. Second, those that are kown as singers, maybe were composers and lyricist, but are rarely known for being instrumatalists, except for guitar. Maybe I am just not aware of what they played else. I will look, how I can improve tango.info so that one can sort by number of tracks. Anyway, if you have a singer page and it says 20 tracks, he is likely notable. Currently the data is only CDs. But these are in most cases re-releases of 78rpm or vinyls Tobias Conradi (Talk) 13:31, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

http://eng.tango.info/singers?dsc=tracks , singers sorted by track descending Tobias Conradi (Talk) 13:59, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

Portal:Dance

Since you are making a tango portal, you might be interested in Portal:Dance. In particular, Portal:Dance/New article announcements. `'mikka (t) 18:52, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Unblock

unblock|no diff for allegation of perso attack provided by possibly stalking admin pschemp

first, its right here, please read your own talk page and second, nowhere in the blocking policy does it say I have to do spell out the diff. You know what you typed.pschemp | talk 19:25, 15 July 2006 (UTC)

move to Category_talk:Districts of Pakistan Tobias Conradi (Talk) 15:09, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

Hi

Hi Tobias,
Just to let you know I'm working on a table of /Subnational divisions by country for the sake of an overview if nothing else. Hope all well, David Kernow 04:20, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

...Hi Dave, thx for informing me. Good list, IMO mv to article space, so others can contribute. cu around Tobias Conradi (Talk) 11:14, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Will do, once I've been through it again a couple of times to tidy it up, maybe a add a paragraph or two about the most common terms and fill in any more of the missing data I can find. Am also intending to move /NUTS levels into article space, again after tidying up etc. Yours, David 01:31, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

Stadsdeel

The redirect of the stadsdeelpage to politics of the Netherlands (terminology)#Stadsdeel was discussed on the articles talk. Please do not revert that change, before discussing it on the talk page. --C mon 09:20, 29 July 2006 (UTC)

Atlantic/Faeroe on List of tz zones

As you pointed out, I made a mistake in changing Atlantic/Faeroe to Atlantic/Faroe on List of tz zones - I have changed it back, and have taken the liberty of inserting an html comment at that point in the page so that anyone else who is about to make the same mistake might read it first and stop. Thanks for spotting it and pointing it out. Euchiasmus 19:40, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

Australian naming issues

It might be worth reading the leadup and talk on the various pages to see why the issue is one in the first place :) SatuSuro 13:34, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Not inclined to read various talk. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 13:36, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

Hey be gentle, I'm just foll0wing it all - and suggesting that you see their reasoning, I make multiple mistakes on naming conventions across state lines :) - If you havent found it try -. . Misplaced Pages talk:WikiProject Australian places‎; thats where its all been happening :) - and if you want a good explanation - I'm not the one ! SatuSuro 13:48, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

And a big thanks, I do most editing on my imac, and for some stupid reason (shift) q does not work - so thanks for the King River correction! SatuSuro 13:52, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Argentina's motto issue

Hi, I noticed your comments on Template talk:User WikiProject Argentina, and I've started a new poll for all the people who want to change and/or remove the motto. As a member of WPAR, your opinion will be an useful contribution to our project. Cheers, —Aucun effort n'est trop grand 04:42, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Greg Garner

I talked with the creator here: User talk:TheBigOlBug. Basically this person is a NN teacher. This user also created a nonsense article ("Male stripping") which inclines me to believe s/he was just playing games anyway. --Fang Aili 16:25, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

Ah, A7 is one of the Criteria for speedy deletion, basically meaning "non-notable". --Fang Aili 16:31, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

place naming conventions

Hi. I have opened a discussion at Misplaced Pages talk:Naming conventions (city names)#New_.22General_rules.22 about your recent changes to Misplaced Pages:Naming conventions (city names), and reverted the change pending the outcome of the discussion. Please note I am trying to ensure that there is in fact consensus for the changes, so please join the discussion. Thanks. --Scott Davis 01:07, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

please revert

I'm sorry, I'm afraid I can't do that. Your article contained no more than one single sentence, which is rather short and making it fit for the criteria for speedy deletion. It states:

Very short articles providing little or no context (e.g., "He is a funny man that has created Factory and the Hacienda. And, by the way, his wife is great."). Limited content is not in itself a reason to delete if there is enough context to allow expansion.

If you can provide something which is longer than a few lines, it could stay...but one sentence is too short to merit an article.—♦♦ SʘʘTHING 19:37, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, I didn't know what you meant by me having violated WP:DP. I have thoroughly researched it and I still don't know what you mean, so please enlighten me...and do that without threats please, Misplaced Pages is not a battleground, you know.—♦♦ SʘʘTHING 19:48, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

With violations of speedy deletion criteria you make it a battle ground. Because CONTRIBUTORS can do nothing to easily undo you de-contributions.

Very short articles providing little or no context (e.g., "He is a funny man that has created Factory and the Hacienda. And, by the way, his wife is great.").

Did I write something like that??? Your comparison is kind of insulting. And furthermore, what about:

Limited content is not in itself a reason to delete if there is enough context to allow expansion.

You violated WP:DP/speedy deletion. The criteria are not matched. You are not allowed to speedy delete stuff only because it is "one sentence" as you said in the del log. I am really pissed of. You are not the first deleter of this kind. I would like every admin who does this to get de-admined for 1 month. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 20:50, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

I'll answer this one in five parts.

• Don't try to blame it on me now. I wasn't who erupted this battleground, and you know it. I'm just doing my duty; you were the one started making uncivil remarks, not me.
• You are aware that that comparison is directly taken from WP:CSD, right? I can't help it that you were "insulted".
• Well, no. There's no violation there. I say that there was not enough context either. That can't be expanded on, as it has only one location of which no more details can be given. Furthermore, if this is a valid stub...then tell me how that strokes with the definition of stub at WP:STUB: It must be long enough to at least define the article's title and its meaning in order to appear in Misplaced Pages.. It doesn't either of those, thus rendering the article 'below-stub'. Which is 'CSD A1'.
• What are you trying to do with these threats? Scaring me off? This debate is not gonna be more friendly with paragraphs citing stuff like that.—♦♦ SʘʘTHING 21:25, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Cool down chico. YOU VIOLATED, not me.

• You are aware that that comparison is directly taken from WP:CSD, right? I can't help it that you were "insulted".
  • I asked YOU wether I wrote soething like what you stated. I didn't. YOU are the insulter and disrupter.
• Well, no. There's no violation there. I say that there was not enough context either.
  • So I will go to ArbCom. Has nothing to do with threats. They shall decide whether there was enough content to expand this stub.

Tobias Conradi (Talk) 21:29, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

• I asked YOU wether I wrote soething like what you stated. I didn't. YOU are the insulter and disrupter.
  • Well some way, yes. Your article could be used as an example for what CSD A1 is meant to cover. Although the 'Factory and the Hacienda'-example appears to be of an overdone way, in order for WP:CSD to get the point across. So, don't jump the gun so quickly, I meant no harm with the quotation.
• So I will go to ArbCom. Has nothing to do with threats. They shall decide whether there was enough content to expand this stub.
  • You are aware that this RfC is futile, right? It states: 'at least two people need to show that they tried to resolve a dispute with this user and have failed'. To me it occurs that you are the only one who's having a problem with me.—♦♦ SʘʘTHING 21:46, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
• Yes, the ArbCom seems not possible right now. I don't know whether I am the only one that has problems with speedy deletions of something one just created, while this did not fit the "not expansible" criteria. Thanks for admitting the citation was overdone. please rv your deletion. There is real bad stuff out, so let valid things go. You may also consider to CONTRIBUTE to the stub :-), you already now there is a river with the same name. Maybe there is a relation??? Tobias Conradi (Talk) 22:11, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Civility warning

You are resuming your pattern of incivility. This edit (and the edit summary that goes with it) is incivil: . You have been warned before about being civil, I believe. Please explain why you should not get a block right away instead of a warning, or explain why you are not going to continue to be incivil in future? To be clear: removal of this warning from your talk page will get you a block as well. ++Lar: t/c 03:53, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

What do you want, you annoyer??? Please obstain from personal attacks here. Go away. 03:55, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

You (and others) are on my watch, because you have a pattern of bad behaviour here. So when I see things, I hand out warnings. It's what admins do. Calling me "you annoyer"??? That was incivil too. Blocked for 24h. Spend the time reviewing WP:CIVIL please. ++Lar: t/c 04:04, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

But you are annoying. You behave like someone with personal disabilities in real life. like a Napoleon. Maybe your use of the admin buttons is just an compensation for your problems elsewhere. So be it Tobias Conradi (Talk) 04:08, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Continuing to be rude after being blocked for incivility is an unwise move. Please, take a break and relax. There's no reason to get excited about what happens here. Friday (talk) 04:15, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

really, there is nothing to get exited about the admins here. They can violate policies, they can threaten. ...it's really annyoing. What do you want here? maybe go and CONTRIBUTE to WP or block policy violating admins. Or unblock legitimate users, users that are blocked for indefinite time by false accusatios. etc. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 04:21, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Tobias, this is a bit too incivil. As suggested by Friday above, perhaps you can take a break to cool down. Thanks. --Ragib 04:23, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Did you read civility? It's stupid that people like Lar are admins. I dont wanna cool down. You dont need to thank for nothing. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 04:32, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I've increased your block to 48 hours. Please stop being incivil and I'll stop increasing it. ++Lar: t/c 04:27, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

No, no, you cannot buy me. You or Pschemp did try so before. As opposed to you I am not corrupt. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 04:32, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Admins here are not trying to buy you. Rather, we are trying to change your behaviour, as you have made valuable contributions here and elsewhere. But if we cannot, if you persist in misbehaving, eventually you will exhaust the communities patience and be indef blocked. ++Lar: t/c 04:50, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Instead of trying ot change my behavior you should think about stopping abusive admins. Pilcomayo Department was a valid stub a speedy delete, directly by an admin was not right. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 10:41, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm all for stopping abusive admins. But that's not what this is about. This is about your incivility. Regardless of the merits of the deletion, this "you arrogant WP:CSD violation supporter" is incivil, and further, a personal attack. You need to internalise that no matter how upset you are, you must remain calm, make reasoned arguments, and avoid attacking others. Until you do that, you are going to continue to be blocked when admins notice that sort of behaviour. Regardless of how much you try to claim there is some vast (or small) conspiracy or that I personally am out to get you, or whatever, the fault lies with you for making comments like that. The sooner you stop making comments like that, the better. Really, this is not hard to understand. ++Lar: t/c 11:23, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Pilcomayo Department

A WP-email I wrote to User:Trialsanderrors Tobias Conradi (Talk) 10:55, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

IMO nice that you wrote something about Pilcomayo.

Nevertheless, I am really annoyed that admins can abuse their rights, and on DRV more admins support this. The only person who confirmed that is was not right to delete was Friday. It's still not fair that the original stub stays deleted.

Abusive admins have to be stopped and IMO abuses have to be orrected.

best regards

A WP-email to User:JzG Tobias Conradi (Talk) 18:45, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I am blocked

with respect to

http://en.wikipedia.org/Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2006_August_8#Pilcomayo_Department

you may like to read

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk:Tobias_Conradi&diff=68664490&oldid=68661659

that you take it for a department of a company does not justify speedy on sight delete. Errors as yours can happen.

You could have checked what links here to perfectly find more relations, or google, or use the category link.

best regards

Tobias, I am not the first to tell you this and I am sure I won't be the last: the article was not a valid stub. It was a single disconnected fact, barely a valid sentence, which contained insufficient information to establish the context. The solution was simply to creat a valid stub, which has already been done. If you can't be bothered to include enough information in an article that a busy admin can see what it's supposed ot be about, why should we care? You have put massively more effort into argufying about this perfectly legitimate speedy deletion than you did into the article. What the hell is the point? A proper stub has now been created, there is an article three times the size of the one you created which (unlike yours) actually establishes what the fuck it's about, and you are still arguing about it! You seriously need a nice cup of tea and a sit down. This has to be the most absurd dispute I can remember! As soon as you show evidence of climbing off the ceiling I'm sure someone will be along to unblock you, given your history of good contributions, but honestly the abuse and hysteria you have put out about this entirely routine deletion of a near-empty article, hundreds of not thousands of whihc get nuked every day, is baffling. I cannot remember another instance of a good faith contributor losing it to quite this degree over something so utterly trivial - which would have been fixed by simply re-creating the article with a bit more context. It's ludicrous. Go and have a beer or something. Just zis Guy you know? 21:51, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

it provided enough conteXt to be expanded. So it was not a candidate for speedy direct admin deletion. That you are not the only admin insisting in the opposite and thus defending a policy violation does make the thing even worse. At first I asked the deleting admin, then I asked at DRV. I don't know where to turn next, RfC? ArbCom? Tobias Conradi (Talk) 13:29, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

In your opinion as someone who already knew what it was about it provided enough context. In the opinion of the person who speedy tagged it, the admin who deleted it, and several (in fact almost all) the people who have reviewed it since, it did not. Where to turn next? That depends on what you want. If you want the existing stub reverted to your original sentence then edit away, but be prepared for it to be rapidly expanded or deleted again (either is valid from that strat point). If you want something else to happen you're going to have to tell us what it is, because as far as I can see we're all sitting here looking at the much better article which now exists and wondering why on earth you are still arguing. Just zis Guy you know? 14:12, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

It's is not a matter of opinion. Everybody could have find out what it was about. I don't want the stub to be reverted, I want mine undeleted and WP:CSD violations by admins stopped. BTW, bad try to intimidade with plural wording. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 14:19, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Tobias, come on, the current page is better than your stub, why would you want it undeleted and replace a good stub? Just let it go, it's a pointless argument. Move on... Sebastian Kessel 16:55, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Don't put stuff in wrong context. I think nobody argued the initial stub was better than the current. I want it undeleted so that everybody and not only admins can see what it was. If policy violations are pointless to you, fine, but maybe add this to your user page since you are an admin from whom at least some people would expect to work on stopping policy violations. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 17:05, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Why? What's the point? It contains no information which is not in the new article. Just zis Guy you know? 17:56, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

quote I want it undeleted so that everybody and not only admins can see what it was. AND the violation has to be undone. At best the initial violater would do this. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 18:00, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Tobias, please read WP:POINT. Don't be stubborn just for the sake of it. I have defended you in the past, but this time you're being paranoid. Sebastian Kessel 18:37, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

a violation does not vanish by calling the person who made this public stubborn. I don't know what is the connetion between "i have defended you in the past" and the repeated WP:CSD violations. I don't need you here to defend me, I would rather like you help making public policy violations and help stopping this violations. Undeleting would help in documenting. Not only admins should be able to see the original stub and to see what happened. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 18:48, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry for ever standing up for you and trying to tone down this argument. It won't happen again. You can pretty much count on me ignoring you from now on. Sebastian Kessel 19:03, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Why are you sorry? Why do you wanna ignore me? Is this a threat? Are you offended by the point that I didn't agree with you? I did not call for ignoring me, I'd rather like that you help to counter repeated policy violations by admins. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 23:41, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, Tobias, I understood the part where you said you wanted it undeleted so that non-admins could see the history and yada yada, but given that there is nothing in the single dleeted edit which is not in the current article, and given that the article exists so there is no "volation" to undo, what is actually the purpose of adding the single deleted edit to the edit history? What does that achieve? Why have you spent so much time and effort to in the pursuit of nothing except having your name first on the article history? There are many admins who will happily undelete content just because people ask nicely, if it will achieve something, but this will achieve nothing at all in terms of the project, so if you want it done you need to give a credible reason. Just zis Guy you know? 18:52, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Oh please, we're not still talking about this, are we? I had taken a few days off from Misplaced Pages to cool off and to think of what would be the best next move. Well, here's my proposal; Tobias, let's try to be mature about the whole thing and settle this. I have been at fault for not letting you know in the first place why I deleted this, and you were at fault for being uncivil. The both of us have made mistakes regarding this situation, and it seems pointless to argue any further. After looking at this talkpage, the deletion review page and the shortlived RfC, we both have to conclude that it's just a very longwinded repetition of the same arguments. Seriously, can't we just bury the hatchet? This whole debate (with many participants now) does seem way overdone for an article that didn't count more than 8 words at the time of deletion. I hereby apoligize to you and I hope you will do the same.

Yours sincerely, —♦♦ SʘʘTHING 10:08, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

(PS, good luck with the improvements on Pilcomayo Department!)

Thanks a lot for comming here again :-). I still think the original deletion was against policy. After having seen how many admins at DRV defend this violation I am not sure whether the admin selection process is good. IIRC only User:Friday was for undelete. You are right, a lot of repitition here. Whatever will happen next, could you, to relax the situation a little bit more, undelete the original stub and merge with what Trialsanderrors wrote? Maybe it needs moving to another page, then delete the redirect, then undelete and then merge. Maybe CSD has to be made more clear, stating how "enough context to be expanded" is to be interpreted. At least Trialsanderrors was able to somehow expand it. All the best regards and thanks again for having come back here. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 13:29, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, I have looked at your deleted stub again, and the only thing there which wasn't already in the current article was Category:Formosa Province, which I have edited in. The process you have suggested "moving to another page, then delete the redirect, then undelete and then merge" is really unnecessary, as it does nothing but triggering a pile of bureaucracy to erect. As for the comments regarding the CSD and the admin selection process, I suggest you take it up on these pages their respective talkpages and propose changes. Happy editing.—♦♦ SʘʘTHING 13:46, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

My point was, that the original stub is visible to everybody not only admins. That it is a lot of work to make this possible is so thanks to you and Trialsanderrors. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 14:11, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

For crying out loud, it only takes a minute to restore Tobias's original stub. He may be on the verge of WP:POINT, but so are other admins refusing to do this simple favor. Anyway, I've just deleted Pilcomayo Department with the intention to restore all revisions, but, unfortunately, I am now getting a database error preventing me from completing the undelete procedure. Most unfortunate. I will restore the article as soon as the database allows me to.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 19:36, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

...which, of course, it did immediately after I posted the comment above. Hopefully, we are not going to have another 100K-discussion about why or why not the original stub should or should not have been undeleted.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 19:39, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

You are my WP hero of the day. I don't know what you mean by your last sentence. But of course the thing is not settled yet. Now it's time for a straw poll and/or then RfC and ArbCom. So many abuse supporting admins this was really astonishing. Maybe also a project AdminAbuseWatch would be good. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 23:36, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

WPArgentina

Hi! I just wanted to inform you, as a member of WikiProject Argentina, that we are about to start using the {{WPArgentina}} for article categorization and qulification. Please, take a minute to read the project's talk page, as well as the taggin scheme and the Importance guidelines, and make the necesary comments. Thank you for your participation, Mariano(t/c) 08:40, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Abuse

They are a bureaucratic mess, but they are the only place where you can officially log a complaint against an admin. You can also make an informal complaint, by posting to either WP:AN/I or to WP:RFC (but not to both at the same time). If neither AN/I nor RFC appeal to you, I can help you with the technical side of the arbitration process. Please note, however, that arbitration cases tend to drag for quite a while. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 14:32, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

thank you for the info. Seems some admins live a different life in their admin pages. yesterday I found one who had around 3000 deletions and 4000 edits in the main space. If I guess the main edits are also tagging stuff for del or whatever than this looks like big imbalance. Taking into account that he maybe aquired adminship only after some main edits it looks more imbalanced. Special care must be taken if admins devote 70% of their time to deletions only. And if then they violate WP:DP or defend their violation - it's really a mess. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 17:27, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I would like a bigger review of the direct-delete-by-admin process. Where should I go? Seems like lots of admins apply the rules very lousy. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 17:30, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, I can imagine how one can have tons of deletions. If you patrol recent new articles, for example, you are bound to encounter loads of crap. Start doing it regularly, and your deletions can easily outnumber your contributions. Same goes for AfD closure—if an article is voted to be deleted, someone has to delete it, and some people regularly close AfDs, which, of course, throughs their contributions/deletions ratio off balance.

As for your other question, we have the following deletion procedures: WP:AfD (+WP:CfD & WP:TfD for cats and templates), WP:SPEEDY, and WP:PROD. I can't imagine how admins would be able to abuse AfD and Prod. Speedies, yes, those are not always as clear-cut. If an admin speedily deletes something, that something should very clearly fall under one or more of the speedy deletion criteria and should be specified in the deletion summary. If you feel that an article does not meet the speedy deletion criteria, you should bring this directly to the admin who deleted the page—the very least they can do is to restore it and put in on AfD instead. If for some reason they refuse to even hear you out, then WP:AN/I is the best place to bring it to everyone's attention. Or, you can always re-write the article, expanding it in such a way that no one would be tempted to nominate it for deletion again.

For now, I suggest you read through WP:SPEEDY—it's long, but it should answer most of your questions. If after reading it you still have any unanswered questions, feel free to ask me. If you disagree with some parts of that policy, you can always make a suggestion at Misplaced Pages talk:Criteria for speedy deletion; there are brief instructions there on how to best do it.

Hope this helps!—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 17:47, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

You are right, maybe he only closed tons of stuff. Pilcomayo Department was speedy deleted, it did not fullfill the criterion of no context to allow expansion. Still several admins insistent the speedy was right. This is policy violation and admin right abuse. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 17:58, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

A disagreement does not have to involve abuse. I'm as concerned about admin abuse as anybody, but we're all allowed to make simple mistakes. Quite often, asking someone politely to reconsider produces better results than crying "abuse" at any opportunity. Friday (talk) 18:01, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I wrote "please revert your deletion Pilcomayo Department" - but he didn't. I talked with him, he sticked to it. I went to DRV, the first reviewer endorsed the del. They produce the mess and I shall not address an abuse as an abuse? What do truth and free speech mean to you? I did not cry, I only named the thing. Admin right abuse is admin right abuse. And if 1000 admins defend the abuses, so be it. Abuse is abuse. And if 2000 admins come to the one who named the abuse and tell him how to behave and at the same time do not stop the abuser - so be it. Abuse is abuse is abuse. The initial stub is still deleted, the deleter did not say it was wrong, the defenders of the violation do not name the thing an abuse. So be it. But an abuse is an abuse is an abuse. Policy violation by admins is policy violation by admins. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 18:17, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I've just read the debates about the Pilcomayo Department; sorry I didn't notice this was going on before. In my opinion, the original stub, while quite marginal, did not meet CSD A1. If it only were one sentence, I'd probably agree with SoothingR's logic, but it was properly tagged and categorized as well, thus sufficiently defining the article's title and its meaning to facilitate further expansion. I also don't understand SoothingR's reluctance to undelete the article and, if he believed he was right, to list in on AfD instead—even if CSD A1 were technically met, it's quite obvious that the topic was valid. I'm all for deleting extremely short articles such as this one myself, but only under the condition that no one else is interested in expanding them or in incorporating them into an existing scheme (this one obviously belongs to Category:Departments of Argentina). I can see how this could piss Tobias off; after all, it's not the first time when his stubs are deleted per a CSD criterion, although, of course, I would recommend Tobias to create slightly longer stubs to avoid this from ever happening again. Friday also made a good point—just because you have a disagreement, it's not necessarily abuse, but I can't justify some of SoothingR's responses either.

Tobias, you mentioned that you brought it to some other admins to review, but I couldn't find where. Could you, please, provide me with the links? And please, please, please, don't get all wound up again—we are perfectly capable of solving this peacefully. Thanks.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 18:52, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

thanks for your comment. the DRV .... I am off for tango now :-) Tobias Conradi (Talk) 20:54, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Todo

media storage

audio

• phonograph cylinder
• gramophone record (also phonograph record, or simply record)
  • The terms LP record (LP or 33), 16 rpm record (16), 45 rpm record (45), and 78 rpm record (78) each refer to specific types of gramophone records. LPs, 45s, and the exceedingly rare, generally spoken word, 16s are usually made of polyvinyl chloride (PVC), and hence may be referred to as vinyl records or simply vinyl.
  • 78 rpm shellac records, A-sides and B-sides existed, but for the most part, radio stations would play either side of the record, and records often had more than one track per side. The "side" did not convey anything about the content of the record.
  • The terms came into popular use with the advent of 45 rpm vinyl records
• Compact Cassette
• Compact Disc
• DVD-Audio
• SACD
• vinyl

video+mixed

• VHS
• DVD-R
• DVD+R
• DVD+R DL
• DVD+RW
• Holographic Versatile Disc
• Blu-ray
• HD DVD
• DVD-Video

ISO 639:sip Sikkimese 28,600

Tanaro

Hi! I am not really clear why you felt the need to move Tanaro to Tanaro River, but would you mind fixing the double redirects you created? (I have made the appropriate change to the only link which was not pointing to the river article, the Tanaro in Départements of France) Thanks, —Ian Spackman 02:50, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Can I help you to become more clear? Feel free to ask me, as precise as possible. As a start you may also read Tanaro, if you have not done so already. I don't want to fix the links, I think this can be done tool-supported by other people better. I am not here to fix all bugs in WP. Why did you say "Thanks"?. best regards Tobias Conradi (Talk) 14:05, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I guess that English is not your first language. Thanks means ‘grazie’, ‘danke schön’…. But do not worry—I’ve fixed the problem. Cheers (‘Prost’,‘Salute’) —Ian Spackman 15:41, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Your guess was right as can be seen from User:Tobias_Conradi. Nevertheless I also ususally translate it this way ( more precise I translate as "danke" without schoen.). And this is the reason why I asked, I could not see what you thanked for. best regards and thanks for fixing. :-) Tobias Conradi (Talk) 17:58, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

I clicked on your contribs to see "what this helpfull editor" does else. By doing so I saw you did a cut and paste move in the Tanaro case and were not that helpful as your above text let think me. Cut and paste moves are not wanted in WP because of copyright issues. Furthermore it is a bad behavior of you to undo the dabbing I did and to delete the valley. You said you were not clear about why I dabbed and I offered you help. But you kind of arrogant told me how to translate "thanks". You should probably better leave WP or change your behavior. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 18:22, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Mails received

I received two mails from Tobias which I am answering here.

One I cannot quite determime what is being asked for and I reproduce it here in hopes it is of some help.

because of your block I cannot take measures to undo the following cut and paste move http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Tanaro_River&action=history additional would be nice if you inform http://en.wikipedia.org/User:Ian_Spackman of his possible pol violation. I did not find the pol, but think there must be one.

He also made a quite misleading statement at http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=User_talk:Tobias_Conradi&diff=68832292&oldid=68830829 which left the impression he fixed the wrong links. I just wanted to see what this helpful guy did else, clicked contribs and this way found out what he really did. I think this is really bad behavior of him.

best regards Tobias

The other is (in its entireity):

is this is personal attack: http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Misplaced Pages:Deletion_review/Log/2006_August_8&diff=68649656&oldid=68627594

In answer, if I understand the question, yes, it is. Trialsanderrors in his statement is highlighting something that he feels is a personal attack you made, and correct (in my view) in his assessment that it indeed is a personal attack. If you do not think it is, perhaps further reading will help. ++Lar: t/c 22:02, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

ad 1: Ian did a cut and past move as I wrote in the mail. I thought you may help to correct this and inform him of his policy violation, if he violated one. But seems you arrogant Esperanza member refuse to contribute in article space and to correct Ian. Maybe you have so much to do with me?

ad 2: I was referring to "No, that was a perfectly good call, you arrogant deletionist non-contributor." a statement made by Trialsanderrors in reply to Geogre. I wanted to know whether you would think this was a personal attack, because Trialsanderrors called Geogre arrogant. Maybe you answer this question just with yes or no and then explain why you regard it as attack or not. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 22:54, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

1... tsk tsk, personal attacks. Thought we'd talked about this already. Calling me arrogant is not going to score you any points I'm afraid.

2... No, it is not an attack. What people who already have a good relationship say to each other when bantering back and forth is not the same in meaning and intent with what people say when they are antagonistically interacting with someone that they do not have a good relationship with. You calling someone an arrogant non contributor when you have no positive relationship with them is an attack. Trials calling Geogre that is banter. Perhaps ill advised banter but banter nonetheless. ++Lar: t/c 06:24, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

1..I fixed the copy paste move

2..Thanks for the clarification of your view of the world. I can see the context depending differences between the Trialsanderrors words and mine. I don't think this kind of his talking is to the benefit of WP. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 13:09, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

With respect to #2, I think you may well be right about that, banter taken too far can be detrimental. Especially when it's very close to actual bad faith statements in time or place, as this was (and as were some of my comments). The problem is that staying completely 100% serious takes some of the fun out, so finding the right line is the challenge. ++Lar: t/c 13:23, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Did not knew you like fun ;-). But maybe some contacts I lately made would not expect this from me neither. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 20:07, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Move

move to Template_talk:Infobox City ES? Tobias Conradi (Talk) 18:11, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

move to Template_talk:Infobox_City_Lithuania Tobias Conradi (Talk) 20:02, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Links

Some pages: SPEEDY deletions for reasons of empty/no content/no context/and the like are generally without prejudice for recreation as a workable article. Any deletion can be contested by anoyone by listing it on WP:DRV, although frivolous listings are often closed. Articles up for deletion are discussed on WP:AFD generally before they are deleted. If you want to make an "informal complaint over the behaviour of an admin" you can start at WP:AN/I, or by opening an WP:RFC, but NOT both (please!). If you need more info, let me know. — xaosflux 15:51, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Bolshakovo

Thanks! I did what I could. There is no corresponding article in ru-wiki, by the way. Also, what is "Elch lowland"? I couldn't find any reference to it.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 22:00, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Broken links

move to Talk:Serua (disambiguation) Tobias Conradi (Talk) 23:10, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Fiji

Tobias, when I look at "Related changes" for a category and see nearly every recent entry is by you and has the edit comment '(rv to tobias)' it suggests that maybe you need to be using the talk pages more before trying to enforce what is obviously not the accepted naming scheme for Fiji. --Scott Davis 14:17, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

• David who reverted me before, has now accepted, see Talk:Ba Province. I am also cleaning other provinces now. Ra, Ba, Bua ... Bua even was primary topic. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 14:21, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Talk page of an admin candidate

what's this ... all about? That's a rather odd place to put an allegation, you may want to consider putting it somewhere else, perhaps? it might not get very noticed there. Hope that helps. ++Lar: t/c 19:44, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

agree. Thanks for telling. Yes, it may not be noticed. But maybe one day a discussion starts there about his adminship and then there is some fact. I now also start collecting stuff at User:Tobias Conradi/admin right abuse. In his case it's not ready for AN/I or RfC, but I have other cases I really would like to bring up somewhere. User:Hauke and User:Chrisjj2 still are blocked and some WP:CSD violations are still active. But AN/I seems not a very good place. Is there a special Request for De-adminship page? Or Admin-conduct? Tobias Conradi (Talk) 19:52, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

WP:RFC has a section to complain about admin conduct. --Golbez 19:54, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Iloilo, Cebu, Pangasinan

Please do not accuse me of abusing my admin privileges simply because you do not agree with my actions, please assume good faith. I have been trying to get all the provinces in a consistent naming pattern wherever possible. Please read Misplaced Pages:Manual of Style (Philippine-related articles)#Provinces. The names usually refer to the provinces, nothing else. I patterned this after the US States. Take a look at Hawaii (disambiguation) or other states. If you are not happy with this, then we can put this up for a vote to reach consensus. In the mean time, I will be reverting your reverts. Vielen Dank für Ihr Verständnis. --Chris S. 20:34, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I am sorry, I think you are out of line trying to accuse me of abusing my admin powers by blanking my RfA. If you are serious, then let's discuss the matter. I have already reinstated the provincial names back to their original namespaces. If you do revert my moves again, I will not intervene until there is input from other editors. --Chris S. 20:46, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't know how much you're familiar with the Philippines, but I think you are mistaken. When people refer to Cebu, they refer to the province AND island. They are the same. But since the province has official status, it takes precedence. Look at my Hawaiian example, there was an island named Hawai'i before the state was made but the state name takes precedence but yet, the state of Hawai'i gets its own namespace while the island is is Hawaii (island). So are you telling me that we have to change my grandfather's hometown of Oslob, Cebu to Oslob, Cebu (province)? I hope not. I really wish you would consider the guidelines that we are working on in the MoS. I have researched the variety of ways of bringing the most consistent namespaces for Philippine provinces, and other Filipino editors agree with the changes that have been made. Another administrator (Jondel) and I started it back in June. In any case, this dispute is not over yet. I am going to put up a poll in the talk pages of those articles. I will let you know when. --Chris S. 21:10, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

don't try to intimidade other editors by phrases like Another administrator (Jondel) and I started it back in June.. That you are an admin and Jondel is one, is of no say in content and naming disputes. That you started this in June, is not important at all. What matters is whether it is good or not.

You ask So are you telling me that we have to change my grandfather's hometown of Oslob, Cebu to Oslob, Cebu (province)? - No. This is against naming policies. IIRC have never seen such a naming for a municipality. BTW, you mention your grandpa, do you really think this matters for the naming scheme? Do you think you can make any special naming poliies because your grandpa was born there? I see no policy that allows this. Please respect policies and revert your abusive deletionsa and the corresponding moves. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 13:49, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

For what it's worth, I agree with Chris about keeping these three province articles where they were. Same as the situation we have with New York (referring to the state) and New York (disambiguation). In fact, 39 out of the 50 U.S. states have conflicting names, but all of them (except for Georgia (U.S. state)) are located at the base name, with links to corresponding disambig pages. Coffee 21:35, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Really now, please stop moving the province articles like this. Policy and consensus is clearly against this. Coffee 04:38, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

there is no consensus, since we disagree. There is no policy that decides what is main article and what not. Bad try of you to frame it as if I work against policies. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 16:31, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

There is consensus between other Filipino editors and myself at WP:TAMBAY. As far as I know, you are the only who opposes this. Now please don't go against consensus. --Chris S. 20:50, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Fine, and there is consensus between me and me and at least one other editor. But there is no general consensus. Was just a bad wrong claim of you. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 10:56, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

with respect to Tambayan, you can also have a consensus at your private talk page, but this does not stop general WP policies from being applied. WP:NC is a good starting point. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 11:05, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Mr. Conradi, I would like to point out that my consensus also comes in the form of the treatment of U.S. States, which are the equivalent of Philippine provinces. To wit, the state I live in, Washington, and the state of New York are given their own namespace in light of the fact that Washington, D.C. and New York City are more notable. When one mentions the word "Washington" one immediately thinks of the US capital. The same goes for New York; one thinks immediately of the Big Apple. Also, the state of Hawaii was created in 1959, which existed long after Hawaii (island). This is also mirrored in Canada. There's Vancouver and Vancouver Island, Quebec and Quebec City. There are oodles of other examples and there is no reason why the Philippine provinces cannot follow these examples. Thank you. --Chris S. 20:18, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Tobias, I would like to encourage you not to jump at conclusions and accusations. You know some people have been here quite a long time and naming schemes have been worked out. --Jondel 07:57, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

• I always _draw_ conclusions and _make_ accusations. Why do you tell me not to jump on some. Tell me where I did.
• You know some people have been here quite a long time and naming schemes have been worked out.
  • why do you write this? If I know it then why tell me? Tobias Conradi (Talk) 13:42, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

please stop moving comments

move to Misplaced Pages talk:Naming conventions (places). Tobias Conradi (Talk) 21:04, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages policy

First of all, please, again stop the accusations. And second, please reread Misplaced Pages policy concerning the moving of pages by admins. It is perfectly acceptable to delete pages in preparation of a movie. --Chris S. 16:23, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

It is not your thing to ask me to stop, if I think they are valid. Provide evidence that I am wrong. WP:CSD does not allow what you did. Stop the violations, say that you will not do it again and revert all your abuses. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 16:28, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Please try to be more collegial in working with others. Yes, that's an official warning. Reach consensus, then act. Consensus does not require unanimity. ++Lar: t/c 16:41, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Show the policy that allows you to "officially warn me" in a dispute were other admins abused their admin rights. And there is no consensus. Maybe ther is Lar-defined consensus, but no consensus. They just jumped in in June 2006 destroyed the dab work of others, deleted pages to get their way for dabbing and you warn me of collegiality? You are crazy. Yeah block me for this fight against abuses, hey come. Block me for getting angry of such an annoying statement from you. Yes, I said annoying. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 11:02, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Tobias, the reference is CSD G6. Furthermore, I urge you to read Misplaced Pages:How to move a page which mentions that deletion is appropriate and that users may ask an administrator to delete a page for a move; such is what I asked of User:Jondel before I became an Admin last month. I gauged consensus from other Filipino editors, who are in a better position to determine how these provinces' name space should read. Please respect the consensus. --Chris S. 20:55, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

G6 Housekeeping. Non-controversial maintenance tasks such as temporarily deleting a page in order to merge page histories, performing a non-controversial page move like reversing a redirect, or removing a disambiguation page that only points to a single article. - you see that this does not apply, since there is controversy about the moves. Please revert your violations. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 13:49, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi there!

Hi Tobias Conradi! I noticed that you had been recently blocked for what has been labelled as incivility. I hope that you don't become too jaded with Misplaced Pages and that your frustrations have waned. You are obviously passionate about Misplaced Pages and have shown quite a dedication to the project to rack up over twenty thousand edits! Misplaced Pages, while an amazing project, is just a website in the end, and I hope that you don't let your annoyances get the best of you. I would hate to see Misplaced Pages lose a tireless contributor such as yourself over a few isolated incidents and some bad experiences. If I can be of any help, please don't hesitate to contact me! Cheers! hoopydink 02:10, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Your 'admin rights abuse'

I'm going to be blunt, mainly because it's 7:30am and I haven't been to sleep yet - Please remove your 'admin abuses' page. If you are going to take action against an admin, then do so, either with an RfC or an RfArb. If not, then it simply reeks of a passive-agressive mentality that will only irk, rather than aid - that you'll complain about 'admin abuses', but won't actually do anything about it. If you are using the page to assemble evidence for an RfC or RfArb, then please let me know. --Golbez 11:35, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

I use it among other things the latter way. Why do you want me to remove these abuse facts? Tobias Conradi (Talk) 13:45, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Because having them hanging around, and not acting on them, is not collegial, and likely to give people a bad impression of you. Also note that they're not facts, they're your views, at least in a lot of cases. Having these around is not going to build your reputation as a person that's easy to work with. Golbez is spot on. ++Lar: t/c 16:27, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

In admin right abuses I don't want to have a reputation as being easy to work with, if easy to work with means spreadig admin right abuse culture and repeating admin right abuses. Which of the facts are not facts by your view? You may join the talk there. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 16:32, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Your reputation as not being easy to work with is far wider than just in "admin rights abuse cases" as you call it. What you need to internalise is that as long as you have a reputation for being difficult (which you do) you are going to have admins watching you a lot more closely. I'm not really interested in debating with you about "admin rights abuse" because in my view it's just trolling on your part. We have hundreds of thousands of users that happily edit a wide variety of articles without ever getting blocked. You need to think about why that is.... Perhaps the reason you have been blocked so many times has something to do with your approach to editing here and your approach to conflict resolution here, rather than some vast conspiracy to oppress you. Straighten up and fly right and you won't hvae me posting here any more but right now, you're cruising for a block again with your commentary and approach. ++Lar: t/c 16:43, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

• Perhaps the reason you have been blocked so many times has something to do with your approach to editing here - You mean when I got blocked for moving a page from "Name" to "Bad Name" and the blocking admin had no idea that 'Bad' was a german word here? Please stop making putting my edits in bad light. And stop allways threatening me with blocks. This is bad behavior of you and annoying. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 16:52, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
• I have absolutely no problem if admins watch my behavior. Don't let it look like that. Stop your defamation attempts. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 16:54, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Your reply just above proves my point. Please at least try to be more civil and take criticism on board instead of assuming that you are getting criticised because we all are bad people. And I'm not threatening you with a block, I am promising you that you will be getting blocked again sooner or later if you can't change your ways. ++Lar: t/c 20:58, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Where did I say you are all bad people? It's only that soe of the adins show bad behavior and threaten others. And don't try to fool me. Promising a block is pretty much the same as threatening. I can promise you that your body will not be able to let the fingers type threats in your keyboard. And I have also no problem if I get criticized. I only dislike unfair treatement and admin right abuses. Your civil stuff is really nonsense here. Remain civil, remain civil. Can you please stop these general statements? And can you stop your "official warnings" that you sent from time to time only because I said something you think was not civil? I don't need this. Give me exact diffs and policies and that's it. And you may also try to stop the abusive behavior among some admins. User:Hauke still is blocked with false allegations. But there you do NOTHING. Clear cut abuses you let go, because they are all worded so nice, in proper english. Oh yeah, this man, how could he have raped a woman, he allways was so nice nad had good manners. Yes, from this uncivil guy I would have expected it, but from him. No, I still do not believe it. Cannot have been him, he is soooo civil all the time. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 22:37, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Greek alphabet

I get errors when adding iso15924 at Greek alphabet. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 15:49, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi Tobias. What sort of errors are you seeing? It actually seems to display fine on my screen... with a link to ISO 15924 on the left and 'Grek' to the right. --CBD 16:12, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Country subdivisions

Hi. I would much appreciate participating in the WikiProject Country subdivisions (of which you are a participant), but unlike most WikiProjects, this one doesn't say that in order to participate I just need to add my name. I did not want to add my name there before being sure about any eventual participation restrictions. Please inform. Thank you. --Húsönd 20:17, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Disambiguation pages

See WP:MOSDAB, the normal style is to have "Blah may refer to:" at the top to hint the reader at what is going on, where some reasons could be confused, especially when the links aren't superficially obvious as being related. —Centrx→talk • 21:36, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Userboxes/Writing_systems

Huh, I followed the standard that ipa used, I didn't notice it was in the non-iso conform, thanks for the help. --2dMadness 21:59, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't understand "iso conform is Grek". It was apparently your reason for moving the Greek script template. If the move is a good idea, I think the template still has to be edited and the category renamed to match, otherwise it doesn't work properly. Can you do that? Thanks Andrew Dalby 13:16, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Contributions by User:Lar

Another civility warning

This edit was not very civil. Nor was this one Please assume good faith, thanks. ++Lar: t/c 02:15, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

The above comment was made by someone who very frequently comes to my page and posts civil warnings. Is mobbing different? Tobias Conradi (Talk) 03:28, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Who are you talking to? --Golbez 03:29, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

What do you think? To Jesus Christ? To God? To you? Tobias Conradi (Talk) 03:32, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

That's not an answer. I'm just wondering if you're making an actual complaint, or just being passive aggressive again. --Golbez 03:38, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

But I got what I wanted. A little longer statement from you. You can make an official complaint against Lar if you like. I don't think official complaints with the current admins will yield much good result. Look, there is strong cultural difference between me and some admins. I point out mistakes. I say: "WRONG", if I think something is wrong. And I also change my statements. So I changed the WRONG to "False conclusion". And then my stalker comes and gives me a civilty warning. He gives it to me, for standing up and saying WRONG. For me he is like from another planet. His contributions here have no value in my live. But he cannot accept this. He thinks everybody has to behave acording to what he thinks is right. It is censorship under the banner of civilty. Yes, the British and USians invaded Iraq and the banner was, that they will find WoMD. And admin pschemp blocks users with wrong allegations. And admins violate the policies. For me Lar is like a little Bush, trying to enforce in a very bad way his way of thinking to others. The AGF statement by Lar is absolut out of context. Why does he say "please assume good faith"? He is just posting mobbing-like statements. Yes, maybe he does so in good faith. But I will not make any assumptions here. It's irrelevant, I have no mind-reader at hand to check assumptions about other peoples faithes. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 03:51, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I'm having difficulty making sense of that. --Golbez 04:05, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Me too. AGF note was without any relation. And now I see pschemp engaging in a mayor deletion afford, near to something I worked on during the last days. Is this stalking? Tobias Conradi (Talk) 04:28, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

If it is, then file a complaint. I have no opinion. --Golbez 04:31, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Me neither. It is hard to prove. I think a complaint would not make much sense. To many bad admins here. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 04:43, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Then why are you complaining? --Golbez 04:46, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Did I? If I did, why not? What do you think is the reason why people complain? Could it be that they want things changed? Tobias Conradi (Talk) 05:06, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

You won't complain in a way that could get things changed, so what kind of complaint is this? --Golbez 05:17, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

I wrote an email to Jimmy Wales Tobias Conradi (Talk) 05:19, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

See User:Raul654/Raul's_laws "Laws by others", #3, #6, and #26... Hope that helps. (you may want to skip #49, it's a bit confusing). ++Lar: t/c 05:38, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

help in what? It seems that the stuff there is not realy helpful in getting things related to admin right abuses and as in your case mobbing changed. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 16:54, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Help in understanding that writing to Jimbo may or may not be useful. I see you haven't internalised that you need to be a productive civil contributor yet. ++Lar: t/c 05:10, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Help in understanding that writing to Jimbo may or may not be useful.

• this can be probably easier obtained from User:Jimbo Wales.

I see you haven't internalised that you need to be a productive civil contributor yet.

• your arrogant mobbing attitude persists. Tobias Conradi (Talk) 13:27, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Subdivisions query

Hi Tobias,
As you're probably already aware, I've posted my first query since (nearly) finishing my first foray through "country subdivisions" here. Best wishes, David Kernow 00:50, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Notability

I'm sorry, I'm not quite following you. What purpose would that serve?—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 15:56, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Template:User iso15924

Hi Tobias. Sorry, I overlooked your messages about this template until now... they were added further up on my talk page at about the same time as some new ones at the bottom so I missed it entirely until I happened to notice your name on the page history and didn't recall having read the note.

I undeleted the template for now. There wasn't any valid grounds for speedy deletion so it can go to TfD if someone really wants to get rid of it. In any case this looks to be the equivalent of a 'babel' template for writing systems... and almost everyone seems to agree that babel userboxes at least are 'safe' in the template namespace. --CBD 13:09, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for all your work on Template:User iso15924 which I am now using! Andrew Dalby 20:01, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Tobias, having looked at the comments made so far, I think the category structure for 'User writing systems' should be defended at all costs but there may be grounds for arguing that the number of skill levels should be reduced. I don't know if you would want to think about this. Level 1, confident with script order, being able to look words up in a dictionary. Level 2, confident with script-phonology relationship, being able to convert words to a different script. Level 3, fluent, being able to read in the script. What more is there, really? I can see no real difference between advanced, full and native-like. I leave that question for your consideration but I will register my vote to keep the system. Andrew Dalby 11:56, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Template:User jpan-N, Template:User jpan

This template has now been deleted. (aeropagitica) 10:27, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

admin right abuse

moved to Talk:Kayah Li Tobias Conradi (Talk) 15:05, 2 September 2006 (UTC)