Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by A ghost (talk | contribs) at 00:38, 19 January 2006 (→LSHTM: no worries). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Welcome to my talk page. Please sign and date your entries by inserting -- ~~~~ at the end.
Start a new talk topic.

• Archive 1 (to Jan 6, 2006)

Nomination for adminship

Thank you

Thanks KC. Are you accepting the above nomination, because you will be a great addition to the admin team. --a.n.o.n.y.m 22:57, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Thank you - I certainly hope I would be. I don't want to be hasty, it is a responsibility regardless of the "Admins are ordinary editors with an extra button" hype. Your note of encouragement is much appreciated. KillerChihuahua 23:04, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Go for it, it's not like you're busy or anything.  :) Jim62sch 14:22, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Heh, I promise we will get Guiding Light done, and I will finish writing Bob Roop, and I will finish writing Harry George Armstrong, and I will work harder with wikiproject Florida, and, and, and - but yes I accepted. KillerChihuahua 14:24, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Lighthouses

Hi, I've reverted your move of Wood Island Light. From the evidence it appears that both the USCG and the US Park Service refer to the lighthouses of the US by their full proper names including light as a capitalized part of their official proper noun name. (ex:Wood Island Light, Portland Head Light, etc) Gateman1997 01:49, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

replied on user talk page. KillerChihuahua 02:57, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

mediation comment

KC, I suppose you're correct, although I did not intend it as anything remotely similar to trolling; it was more a case of sarcasm in noting that Wade had requested mediation, did not like the answer, and went forward with his original plan. But, if it gives the impression of trolling, then it can and should be withdrawn. Also, I guess I'll remove the section (it could be archived, but that would just waste server space). Jim62sch 13:22, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

I realize you don't troll; I hope I made it clear that the comment bore the appearance or a similarity to borderline trolling. Minor point: Wade didn't request the mediation, Ignignot did.

I recommend you leave the comment as it is, struck out. Deleting comments from a talk page is generally not advisable, and striking out shows you have reconsidered your post. KillerChihuahua 13:30, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

OK, thanks for the advice, that's why I ran it by you first.  :) Jim62sch 14:13, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Washington sister cities

I put sources I found on the Washington talk page, to avoid an edit war with DL. -- Dalbury 13:50, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

I saw and replied on your talk page. Thanks for letting me know. KillerChihuahua 13:54, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

My apolgies for putting my comment on your user page. I need to slow down a little (and I need to leave for the gym in a few minutes). -- Dalbury 14:04, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

No worries, go work out. KillerChihuahua 14:07, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Many thanks for your support on my request for adminiship, I'm sure you'll be glad to know the final result was 92/1/0. I am now an administrator and (as always) if I do anything you have issue with, please talk about it with me. ps sorry, but my button is even faster now! ;) --Alf 11:35, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Hymn of creation

On this AFD discussion, you voted that Hymn of creation (AfD discussion) should be transwikied to Wikisource. However, a later comment by User:Uncle G brought to my notice that the entire Rig Veda already exists at Wikisource, including The Rig Veda, Hymn 10.129 and The Rig Veda, Hymn 10.130, since September 2005. Transwikification is, thus, not an option. Please change your vote to reflect this. Thank you.--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91($ |-| r 3 $ |-| t |-|) 12:46, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the information - I should have checked Wikisource, I thought the previous editor had. I have modified my vote appropriately. KillerChihuahua 12:54, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Zen

Bad puppy.  :) Actually, in this instance, I can't blame you -- I'm sure it's a dark and scary worl inside that mind. Jim62sch 01:43, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

RfA = Ultimate Evil

Responded on my talk page. - brenneman 01:10, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

List of Stalinists

I'd like you to take another look at this list. It has been shortened considerably (at least at this moment) and I have tried to make the criteria clearer. Sometimes good lists go bad but that doesn't mean we have to delete them. "Cruft" normally refers to articles that provide useless information, and I don't see how a political movement that defined international politics for several decades fits. Gazpacho 05:37, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

While I appreciate your position, I regret that I cannot agree with it. I appreciate also your efforts, and that the list is now cleaner and shorter, yet what possible purpose could this list serve? I concur that a political movement which spanned several decades and was highly influential is not listcruft - that's why we have the article Stalinism. KillerChihuahua 14:29, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Head of the Cabal

Looks like that bit is gone (for good I hope). Maybe, maybe... I could had have more patience, but seriously - my patience just seems to evaporate when it comes to her. (is prone to mental rambling)Lovecoconuts 06:09, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

I am really a slow coconut. Why in the world am I the brains in her list? I am slow. I didn't even get what KC meant for a considerable time.Lovecoconuts 08:49, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Dear me, this conversation is on three different talk pages now. Thanks for responding, I've responded on your talk page as well as FM's. Patience is a virtue, doesn't mean one should put up with personal attacks, trolling, and the like. KillerChihuahua 14:19, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm learning (slowly). Yah, you're right, the "brains" bit makes a lot more sense if she was being sarcastic about how slow I was in learning the ropes in Misplaced Pages. Well, at least I never posted between the paragraphs of another poster and make it look like I was arguing with myself.Lovecoconuts 10:16, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Old and new

Thanks, I'm glad you liked it!  :-) Sometimes these zealots try to run the debate in circles -- I thought I'd try to pin down his/her exact argument by stating the questions plainly... although I doubt we'll get a simple answer. --Quasipalm 20:06, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Re: Emergency at the Crisis centre!

Glad you like it - though I'm loathe to think that I'm feeding the trolls. -Kyd 23:56, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

GE is chasing his tail on a lot of subjects, isn't he? -Kyd 00:22, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

I dislike switching so I'm replying here, else we'll have the half-conversation on both our pages.

I thought cheesy canine puns and jokes were for me, and me alone? I'm hurt.... devastated even. (Loved tale -> tail pun). KillerChihuahua 00:26, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

This is Misplaced Pages. Everything must be shared. Even the puppy puns! (But, if it wasn't for you, I wouldn't have left it on your talk...ahem...bark page, would I? :) -Kyd 00:34, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

grrrr. Good point, tho. :D KillerChihuahua 00:36, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Abortion

Thanks for the help in reverting the edits made by 136.215.251.179. I was quite worried that he was going to use the fact that I was pro-choice (as stated on my user page against me. I do my best to handle vandalism, but I find it just as hard reverting back from views that I don't agree with as much as views that I do. It's always good to have some backup.

I've been wondering whether I should place his IP on Misplaced Pages:Vandalism in Progress because I have a feeling he'll be back, but I'm not really sure if it classifies as vandalism or just blatant POV. In any case, I'm not reverting any more because I'm sick of it and I try my best to hold to 3RR.

What do you think? Jamyskis Whisper, Contribs 16:52, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

136.215.251.179, aka as Goodandevil (I am 99.9% certain of that) has been making POV edits and generally being disruptive on both Abortion and Kwanzaa for some time now. I suggest you talk to Tznkai and get his input - you may wish to speak with Kyd also. I think you'd find support whatever you do, this user ignores NPOV, ignores WP:CON, has trouble with CITE, undue weight, OR, is borderline rude, and generally is not a positive contributor. We've all tried to work with this editor and failed, because this editor is not interested in working with others, but rather with pushing a POV. I will support you whatever you decide. You're not the first to think this requires some attention, but we've all stopped just short of actually doing anything (except for the one time that a different editor reported Goodandevil for 3RR on Kwanzaa.) Its gone on long enough. KillerChihuahua 18:57, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm not familiar with the procedures behind reporting someone for vandalism or RFC. I'm a relatively new user here (May 2005) and haven't strayed much outside of Abortion. I've been wary of reporting this, too, because I'm pro-choice (if the other regular editors hadn't discerned this already), and I don't want what is, ultimately, an alarm call against a disruptive user to become what seems to be an attack upon one whose ideology with which I don't agree. I rely upon other users to help keep any incidence of POV creep in check. GE, however, seems more intent upon working against us than in working with us. The last straw, for me, was the Free Republic incident -- although, it's just speculation, the pieces fit. See the thread "Free Republic user calls for war on Misplaced Pages" on the Talk:Abortion for more. Also, see my recent post on the thread "Edits by 136.215.251.179" there for information about this user's multiple IPs. -Kyd 19:24, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

3RR is clear and simple. GE has not crossed that line recently, having learned the rules about that, at least. This is not blatant vandalism, so WP:AN probably won't help. The next option is an Rfc, should we decide GE is too disruptive to countenence any longer. KillerChihuahua 19:40, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the input, guys. I've made a note of all the IPs that this guy/gal appears to use as well as the user name Goodandevil. I'll make a note of what I find and bring it to RfC to get some more feedback on it. I'll keep you guys up to speed. I'm going to find out what the hell Kwanzaa is now! :-p Jamyskis Whisper, Contribs 19:57, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Ick. This is going to be more complicated than I thought. For a user to be placed on RfC, it has to be two users who can lay testament to his or her misbehavior and then both have to have tried to contact him or her on their user page to ask them to behave themselves. Even then, the complaint has to be against the same user alias, which causes a problem because he or she doesn't seem to be using Goodandevil much now - probably in the knowledge that the user alias is likely to be blocked some time soon. Maybe we can log it under 136.215.251.179 and point out that Goodandevil and the other IPs are likely sockpuppets?

Another couple of things. I would agree that these IPs are one and the same person. There's a clear pattern - far-right POV edits, and hiding the nature of the summaries by falsifying edit summaries as well as accusing others of POV. The interesting thing is that while 136.215.251.179 is based in Texas, the other three are German - I recognise them by the 84 at the beginning. There was a third not listed that I noticed - 84.146.238.75. I have a suspicion that this guy knows he is going to be blocked at some point and is making sure that he has an IP that cannot be blocked - the three German IPs are probably open proxies.

Any idea where we take this from here? Jamyskis Whisper, Contribs 20:31, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Which is why I a) suggested you talk to Tznkai, and b) go to WP:RCU to confirm 136.215.251.179 is Goodandevil. Those are the next steps.

136.215.251.179 is an Army IP. It resolves as ce.hohenfels.army.mil (from http://remote.12dt.com/rns/) which I would presume is Hohenfels Combat Maneuver Training Center in Germany, not Texas. Hohenfels Or it resolves as the 5th Signal Command, also in Germany. Why did you think it was Texas?

The other IPs might be someone else, possibly several someones. 84.146.238.75 and the other IPs Kyd listed are registered to RIPE Network Coordination Centre, in Amsterdam. Website, http://www.ripe.net/. Info on the RIPE site: "The RIPE NCC service area covers Europe, the Middle East and parts of Asia." and you have to be in that area to obtain an IP, apparently. I do not know much how open proxy works, so it may be worth checking. KillerChihuahua 20:58, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

More on the RIPE accounts: 84.136.0.0 - 84.191.255.255, in other words the other IPs, are Deutsche Telekom AG, Internet service provider in Germany. In other words, your basic Internet provider with rotating IP addresses. KillerChihuahua 21:19, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

Real quick. If it wasn't already stated these edits are not vandalism, because pov pushing isn't vandalism, although it certainly isn't constructive. Should you feel it neccessary to pursue this to RFC (I'm witholding judgement for the time being) you need to focus on behavior, NOT content of edits. No matter what any editor thinks, its how they share that opinion and how much of that opinion they try to stuff into the article that matters the most. Give me some time to comb through the edits before I decide whether I'm willing to take this up on WP:AN--Tznkai 23:28, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

thanks Tzn, I had already stated it was not vandalism - it is good to have a second opinion concur with my judgment. KillerChihuahua 23:44, 12 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't think that GE's edits and posts qualify as vandalism either. However, the persistence to the point of edit wars and the discourteous attitude expressed in the course of discussion, particularly in dealings on his or her personal talk page, need to be addressed. -Kyd 01:22, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

My RfA

User:Sceptre/RfA

Thanks for the template

I don't mind at all that you did that, It's much appreciated. Thanks a lot :D Itamae 03:00, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

category for Noah's Ark story and the like

You have seemingly been fishing (and fencing) over a category for the Noah's Ark story or some parts of it. I suggest any of: fable, myth or children's literature Carrionluggage 18:15, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Feel free to weigh in on the discussion on the talk page about it. Currently last section, titled "Cats". KillerChihuahua 19:57, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Doesn't the puppy chase cats? — Dunc|☺ 23:03, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

My family once had a cat that chased the neighbor's chihuahua (when the chihuahua wasn't chasing it). -- Dalbury 00:15, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

LOL, thanks Dal. A laugh is always welcome. KillerChihuahua 00:21, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Most cats I know would probably crouch down, look at the Chihuahua puppy with bemusement, and then bat at it a couple times if it got too close Guettarda 02:05, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Story of my life, how the heck do you think I got this uName? Small, annoyingly persistant, think I can take on tigers but get beat up by housecats. KillerChihuahua 02:09, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, if it makes you feel better, you can hear a cat being strangled here. — Dunc|☺ 18:32, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

username; cats

How odd it is at cats again, rather than sixes and sevens. I made a cat contribution at

19:47, 24 December 2005 (hist) (diff) Irreducible complexity (→Criticism - cat and mouse and mousetrap game)

and I am concentrating on things like that, Ayn Rand and that objectionable pseudo-philosophy "Objectivism" occasionally returning to General Semantics, Parapsychology, General Relativity and the like. No time to change name - anyway if I really want to I could sock-puppet. I will leave the cats up to you - just suggesting that these bible-literalists are taking children's bedtime stories too seriously, hence one could classify the Ark and the Jonah-whale story somewhere between or with Aesop, Kipling, Grimm, Jules Verne, A. A. Milne, and Dr. Suess.... I am being generous not to include P. G. Wodehouse.

George V. Coyne, S.J., director of the Vatican Observatory recently gave a superb talk on "ID" and Creationism in Halifax, NS and other places. I have a copy if you'd like it. I could enter it in Misplaced Pages if I knew how to put in a Word document, or I can convert to PDF. It is not copyrighted and I have permission to circulate it anyway. But though I am a computer expert in FORTRAN and C, with a little UNIX and LINUX (see note 1), I am digitally challenged with Wiki-procedures like name changes, so if there is a way to post Prof. Coyne's work, I hope it is simple. I don't think he has it on line. Title: "Science Does Not Need God. Or Does It?"

Note 1: I can't wait until LINUX takes over - then as I say "it's curtains for Windows." Carrionluggage 22:58, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Sorry I wrote on my own user page: OK, ok - I will try to thread my way to the "Cats" link. Sorry for quailing - I grouse better than I quail anyway. How much time do I have to act? Carrionluggage 23:04, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Codex

If Codex does not like his English corrected, you can tell him the complaint department is in San Carlos de Bariloche and preferably buy him a ticket there. It's pretty, so he could relieve his seemingly interminable tensions and defensiveness, and it might not be so easy to hit the keyboard with his fulminations. Carrionluggage 23:43, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Oh, dang, can I come? I don't want to waste a ticket there on him! KillerChihuahua 23:51, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Apply for a grant from the National Endowment for the Arts (before "W" manages to reduce the budget to $0.0 or less). Carrionluggage 00:03, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

SysOp / Admin

Sheesh, everyone's a critic!  :) I did go back and sign my vote, but I didn't read your comment until afterwards, and I'm not changing it again, haha. And my vacation was very nice, thank you. Good to get away from the village and hit up the big city every once and a while. Good luck on the RFA. -Parallel or Together? 02:22, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Congrats on the RFA! I will never stop using "sysop", but I'm sure you'll do fine whatever it is people call you ;) -Parallel or Together? 04:26, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Look

--MONGO 03:41, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, I have a low pain threshold for that kind of behavior, but you're probably right, nothing will happen. I'm in favor of a month ban, but that's just probably a bit too long for most people.--MONGO 03:56, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

My last nominee had both of the sock accounts that voted support for him (User:Rogerd) counted in the final tally. The reason for my posting on the ANI was due to situations exactly like yours, not for the ones that are not going to matter one way or the other.--MONGO 04:10, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Congrats

Congratulations! Your mop and stun-gun are in the mail!

Regards, Ben Aveling 12:33, 14 January 2006 (UTC) (45 minutes early, but how else to be sure of first post? :-)

Me too. And I was sure I would be first (since none of the b'crats are out of bed yet, by the look of things). Congrats. Guettarda 15:59, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations!

Congratulations! It's my pleasure to let you know that, consensus being reached, you are now an administrator. You should read the relevant policies and other pages linked to from the administrators' reading list before carrying out tasks like deletion, protection, banning users, and editing protected pages such as the Main Page. Most of what you do is easily reversible by other sysops, apart from page history merges and image deletion, so please be especially careful with those. You might find the new administrators' how-to guide helpful. Cheers! -- Cecropia 16:51, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations, and you're very welcome! --King of All the Franks 17:25, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations! This is indeed a well-deserved honour. I know that you'll be excellent as an Administrator! Jim62sch 17:33, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations and good luck! --a.n.o.n.y.m 17:49, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations and good luck. --Mihai - 18:04, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations! Thanks for your nice note too. Best! Herostratus 18:48, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Congrats! arf!--MONGO 21:00, 14 January 2006 (UTC

Woof woof! A well earned mop and bucket. ....dave souza 23:34, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

You're most welcome - congrats! PJM 23:35, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations! -- Dalbury 00:41, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the brew!!

Thanks for the warm cuppa java. It is one of my pet theories that a lot of the world as we know it would come to an end if coffee were banned! Cheers, Cecropia 19:09, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Amen. Mine too! -- Cecropia 20:18, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

kwanzaa ref

the reference to kwanzaa is already in the sla article. i can't "take it there"

-Justforasecond 22:48, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Schlafly

Sorry, don't have any advice to give you. I eventually gave up out of frustration -- there's still accurate material absent from the article because Roger removed it. In the event that the situation gets bad enough that you're pursuing formal dispute resolution, please let me know -- I can certainly attest to his disregard for policies concerning personal attacks, NPOV etc. RadicalSubversiv E 00:30, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

replying on user talk page. KillerChihuahua 01:25, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Personal attacks

Hi KC. One of the first things I think you can do as administrator would be to warn Duncharris about calling creationists "cretinists." on Talk:Intelligent design. Thanks. --Ben 02:42, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

replying on user talk page. KillerChihuahua 02:49, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Funny

"If its the first sentence, we know the story is beginning... if the story isn't over, we know it continues". Grrrrrrr.  :) Jim62sch 03:35, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

I try to be accurate with my edit summaries! KillerChihuahua 03:55, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

re:Theodore7

Bad editor eh? I wasn't sure why I was notified but I guess I must have encounter him/her before and have forgotten. Oh well, I'll take a look at the Rfc anyway...happy editing!--MONGO 05:18, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Congrats

Congratualtions on your new role. --Bhadani 07:44, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Adminship

You're very welcome. Congrats on getting the role! Jamyskis Whisper, Contribs 08:02, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Congrats!

Congrats on your new mop, Pup! I trust you'll use it well, that's why I supported you after all ;). -- §Hurricane ERIC§ archive -- my dropsonde 18:03, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Your RfA

My pleasure. Congratulations, thanks for your offer, and I'm sure you will make good use of them. Jayjg 23:12, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Yip Yip Hooray

Congrats on your adminship! The pup's been promoted to top dog. If I'd known sooner, I would've given you my paw's up! -Kyd 05:14, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

BTW, what changes when one becomes an admin? I'm rather out of the loop. Sorry. X__X -Kyd 02:12, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Pointy sticks to drive back the barbarian hoards! Yay! :-) -Kyd 02:26, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Well, I'm just being a smart-alec, as usual. Of course, that's completely understandable -- you'd want to avoid a conflict of interest if there was a dispute between two users. It just must be nice to have the ability to put a forceful stop to vandalism. I always wonder how much impact tagging user pages actually has. -Kyd 02:40, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing that up. -Kyd 03:04, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Nope. I just tagged a whole bunch of anon IPs after monitoring "Recent Changes" and wondered how effective it was. Mostly because trying to deal with recurrent nuissances in Abortion of late seems to have proven quite ineffective. -Kyd 03:21, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

(reduce indent) Thanks for taking the time to explain the process. "Learning through experience" certainly has its limitations. -Kyd 04:01, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Will comment on notice posted on my userpage when I have time to give it due investigation. Currently devoting time to abortion incidence research (see User:Kyd/test). Also, have to run soon. Thanks for the heads-up. -Kyd

Inappropriate

Your admonisment to Duncharris for calling creationists "cretinists" is nowhere near stern enough, and is extremely inappropriate.

Dunc, please!

No calling creationists 'cretinists' - be civil. KillerChihuahua 02:57, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

I would hope you would take a less "pleading" tone towards someone who calls creationists "cretinists." Not only is this a personal attack against creationists on the talk page this is hate speech. As a participant in Duncharris' previous RFC you are well aware that this is a user that Mr. Jimbo Wales himself has recommended be desysopped for his previous attacks.

I trust that this is an error in judgement and you will consider your actions as administrator more responsibly in the future.--Ben 09:11, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Ben, I don't even have words for how inappropriate you're being. I would hope you would take a less lecturing tone to me in the future - you're not my mother, and you don't tell me what to do. I trust this was an error in judgment. As a participant in YOUR Rfc I believe you know a good deal better than to try to threaten me or tell me what to do. Watch your step, Ben.

KillerChihuahua 10:54, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Ben's simply trolling you; don't take his bait. With his history of personal attacks and abuse of others now well documented at his still open user conduct RFC, I'd hoped he'd get the message, but he's shown himself to be thoroughly refractory and utterly resistant to reform. FeloniousMonk 18:44, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

FM, I appreciate the heads-up, I am well aware he is trolling me and have already left a message on his talk page to that effect. KillerChihuahua 20:13, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

I've taken to ignoring him...it's just easier. Jim62sch 01:21, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Congratulations !

A super big congratulations are in order for your recent promotion to admin. With your dedication to the project and it's policies and conventions you certainly deserved it.

I see above the usual malcontents have wasted no time in critiquing your performance. You must be doing something right... FeloniousMonk 18:38, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

GRATS!--ghost 16:47, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Rollback button

While it's great to have and lots of fun to use, you should use it judiciously. Some people believe that it should only be used for vandalism, although there is no rule on it. Guettarda 18:42, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Blatantvandal

"For my part, I can't imagine a situation where I'd want to use such a scary horrible template..." Yeah, it took you long to come out in your true colors! :-D Bishonen | talk 20:39, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

I have a poor imagination, what can I say? KillerChihuahua 20:43, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

LOL

You don't care who put it there...that's why you asked!!!!!! Chooserr 01:43, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Oh sheesh, my apologies. It was a rhetorical question... I didn't realize you were answering my question, because it was rhetorical, if that makes *any* sense. Thanks for the info, apologies again for not making sense. KillerChihuahua 01:46, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Until

Freeze the Bigfoot article until the current dispute is resolved. I have told User:Beckjord about what will happen if there is another personal attack, another Edit War. Only Admins will be able to edit the article, and I don't think WAFE has any Admins in it. Martial Law 02:01, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

replied on article talk page. KillerChihuahua 02:50, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Adding a item

Hi KillerChihuahua, and thank you for the offer. I am curious of how I would insert some information about the organization I belong to? And where on the page? Thanks again MarcusTCicero 03:58, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

replying on user talk page. KillerChihuahua 03:59, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Bored

Thanks, I checked out the cleanup list. You were right: it's boring. Say, how do I return my talk link to its original lovely red colour? I like red. Fool 15:54, 17 January 2006 (UTC) <-- red!

Well that's fair, I suppose I am disruptive and anti-social, and possibly worse. Can I just delete the account entirely? I hardly use it. Fool 16:19, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

I've been generally very exopedian for a long time, and am becoming more so, is why. Doesn't matter. It has an unfinished feel to it, but I can just stop using the account. Sorry to take up your time. Fool 17:00, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Advice for KC???

LOL, my friend, I know nothing. Your best advisor is in the mirror. "(S)he who conquers a million men in battle wins a battle...(S)he who conquers (her)self wins all." - Buddha (I think) --ghost 17:01, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

Ayn Rand article and, generally, quality

The Ayn Rand article, I just saw, has been nominated as a "good article" and candidate for being a "featured article." This article is, in fact, a substandard one, being put up and edited mainly by her supporters. The claim that her "Objectivism" is a philosophy is arbitrary; she has not the reputation of Aristotle, Hume,or even (what must be almost her ideal) Nietzshe, and neither the perspicacity, incisiveness, nor, for sure, the sense of humor of Will Durant! Ayn Rand suffered the consequences of having lived under Communist oppression, namely to over-react, as did Edward Teller. Her books have appealed to many people who are "down and out" because in some ways they tell the story of "The Little Engine that Could," but the children's version is shorter and no more childish than hers. She appeals to people who do not like to pay taxes. So she collects a lot of supporters, the more literate of whom have gravitated to extolling her in Misplaced Pages. We can forgive her (with Teller) for over-reacting, but to lionize her is foolery.

Where do I vote against this nomination as a "good article"? I can't find a way to remove that tag or vote against it. Thanks.

There is a more general issue here: many articles attract supporters of various concepts that I would call "deviant" in the sense of departing from the main body of the beliefs of civilised people. Examples are parapsychology (OK, I know AAAS allowed a division on this - I'll bet they are sorry), General Semantics, and the Noah's Ark stuff. On the other hand, the article on astrology seems well-balanced, and the one on Cold fusion is pretty much OK. The question is how to identify articles that represent - shall we say - the contributions of monomaniacs - and then how do we rebalance them? Carrionluggage 03:10, 18 January 2006 (UTC) Thanks. I did not notice the little /{/{GA/}/} - that's why I contacted you. Your reference to GA (unfortunately not /{/{GA/}/}) sufficed. Thanks again. (Excuse backslashes - I am trying to use them to quote the little panel as in UNIX instead of having it appear on your page). Carrionluggage 05:40, 18 January 2006 (UTC) Thanks for explanation of quoting tags. Carrionluggage 15:50, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Still nothing...

Still got nothing on User:Goodandevil and the numerous IP addresses. Ah well, it's been quiet on that front for a while now so I think we can count ourselves lucky on this front. Hope your first few days with the mop have gone well! Jamyskis Whisper, Contribs 13:41, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Ahh read the thing wrong but now have filled in correctly i think ;)

Ok i read your comment and i think i noticed my misstake

LSHTM

You obviously do not realise that it is you that has lost the arguments. It just now your acting in a thugish way going around make threats because you cannot hold you own in an argument and do not understand what rules of refernce are all about. No I suggest that rather interpreting this as a personal attack. You should take it as constructive critisism. Much as I'm supposed to take your, what I consider, inchorent ramblings.--IanDavies 14:38, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Nonsense, I made no threats. I suggested you enter this at article Rfc or follow WP:DR procedures. Anyone can check my contributions log and see I have made no threats whatsoever. KillerChihuahua 14:40, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

It is not nonsense. Your reference to broken rules and RFC etc, is quite clearlly designed to intimidate. --IanDavies 14:49, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

I made no reference to broken rules. You did. I still suggest that if you have an issue with the article, put it on article Rfc. That requesting comments from the community at large about the article. How is giving you advice on how to obtain input intimidation? You must be confusing article Rfc, which I have now suggested three times, with user Rfc, which I have not mentioned. KillerChihuahua 14:53, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Yet more of you dishonesty you said "Please read WP:V and cease making personal attacks because you didn't get your way in an edit war." You acussed me of making personal attacks. WikiPedia records everything. --IanDavies 14:57, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

I'm flattered that you value my opinion. I understand we may differ from time to time, but it certainly has not impact on my overall respect for you. I hope you feel the same.--ghost 17:03, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Never a problem. I was flattered that anyone listened. ;-) --ghost 00:38, 19 January 2006 (UTC)

Sorry about posting on the admin board

I am sorry about that I didn't know there was a page refer items to when they needed protection, I'm still rather new :-) Grandwazir 17:35, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

recent IP block

KC, I think you removed the wrong vandalism alert from the Vandalism in Progress page when you blocked 168.9.35.14. Powers 20:31, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Ah, nevermind. I see you got them both anyway. Powers 20:34, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

re:Comfies

It's not your fault. Bit off more than I could chew. Thanks for the show of support. -Kyd 21:00, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

User:Piedras grandes

Hi, a huge number of questionable edits were added by this user over a short period, including adding welcome messages to article talk pages, and AfD discussions. What to do, start mopping them up? I saw that you had reverted at least one yourself. BillC 22:14, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

<Something I'm missing? I'm trying removing the template and message from Talk:Bedford, Ohio by just blanking the page, but it's not letting me do it. Can you advise? Thanks! BillC 23:21, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

Scratch that. It's preview that wasn't working. Regards, BillC 23:26, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

small

some the articles you're removing small tags from are indeed quite small--Piedras grandes 22:58, 18 January 2006 (UTC)