This is an archive of my talk page from November 2005. Please add new messages to my current page.
In the MAC address article we're seeing repeated insertion of a spam link to www.sdadapters.com (and historically, www.sd330.com). Blocking the user won't affect the spammer, because they're coming in from a different IP address each time. Can you either add the two addresses to the spam blocklist or protect the article? I think I'd prefer to see the first; protecting a page to protect against spam seems like overkill. Josh Parris # 23:30, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
You have ostrich! ; - ) -- Essjay · Talk 00:45, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
You think it is valid to delete an Association outpacing exclusion? Why not delete the Deletionist Association then?
User:Canadianism 05:28, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
Hello Mindspillage, are you still at Stetson? Just wondering, because I'll be travelling up there next week — I'll be too busy to meet anyone, but just wanted to let you know... (P.S. I like your music excerpt of Bach Suite, but that should be played on a cello!) :-) Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk | W S 22:17, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
- (replying via email) Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk | W S 22:58, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
That was unexpected! What did I do wrong?! Normally I'm very low profile; I've never gotten a barnstar before. This is very disconcerting. :-) Hm, a cryptic message... I'm not exactly sure what edits of mine you've found in page histories, but I'm happy you found them sensible. Although I don't do much article writing, so, um... I'm a Wikignome with an inferiority complex. Wait, what was I going to say? Oh yeah: Thank you! That was nice. I also want to tell you that I have a lot of respect for you, thank you for all your hard work (and I wasn't surprised when you became an arbitrator :). Dmcdevit· t 00:45, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
PS: You spilled something over at my talk page. I always wanted to say that!
PPS: Did I say thanks?
Not a problem, so long as he behaves himself, but if he starts doing it again, he needs to be blocked indefinitely. User:Zoe| (talk) 07:53, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
Rafterman sent me this email:
- Please unblock me, Zoe, I'll never vandalise again. If I vandalise again, I'll let you hunt me down and kill me. I was just being a dick because I could, I'll never do it again. Please assume good faith in me, I'll become an admin if you unblock me, I will work hard, and then after months and months I will be an admin, just give me another chance. But if you don't, you will face hell, wikipedia, will face hell. So either you unblock me, or prepare to bring it.
Hello,
You recently wrote "Would like to see more evidence of ability to handle disputes without losing his temper". I had been under the impression that, with the obvious exception, I wasn't too bad at that. However, the truly incompetent are usually blissfully unaware. With this in mind I'd like to ask the eponymous favour.
I've been trying to help move things forward over at
WP:WEB. I haven't had much luck. I'm trying not to be cranky, but don't know how else to progress this. So, if you'd indulge me, I'd like to ask that you review the discussions and my contributions to talk pages. There is also some history on
WP:DRV and some AfDs, but those would require looking at diffs and I know that you're pretty busy.
If you're not keen, I'll understand.
brenneman
(t)
(c) 23:52, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks for looking at that, I only mentioned the RfA as an aside. There was only one opinion expressed that I took even the slightest umbrage at, and it certainly wasn't yours! - brenneman (t) (c) 05:39, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
Can you help me here? Im looking for a place to park three things:
- A conical list of Musician Jokes
- Q:What is the diffrecne between a Viola and a Violin?
- A:A Viola burns longer
- An archived usenet post on the Atmospheric Effects of Avation.
- Is there still an all-you-can-eat resturant across the street from Stetsion?
- Is there a picture of it?
- Artoftransformation 04:46, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
Kat - you're right, there isn't a lot on the web about his passing. I did find this site: http://www.wasbe.org/en/news/reed.html after searching for 'Alfred Reed obituary' on Google. Sorry I didn't get back to you sooner! Cheers, Kate (aka anonymous user with an IP Address)
I know I've been slow in saying this, but thanks for supporting my request for adminship. It was an honor to be both nominated and approved as an admin. If there is ever any adminish (is that a word :-) things you need help with, please let me know. -- Alabamaboy 16:25, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
Thank you very much for another chance. I swear to the good lord above, I will not let you down. Rafterman 20:13, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
More from User:TheDoctor10
Hey, 'spillage. I just wanted to draw your attention to a (still pissy) response from User:TheDoctor10 on his talk page. He seems not to understand that he did, in fact, violate the terms and conditions set forth by Wikipedia for editing the website. I'm not sure whether it's willful blindness or unwillingness to step down from a fight, or what. I tried to give him some friendly advice, but it seems to have fallen on barren soil.
I wasn't sure if you had his talk page on your watchlist or not, but he's demanding a response — I think from you, even though it's after the comment from me. Not my problem really, but wanted to let you know. — Josiah Rowe ( talk • contribs) 21:27, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks for the heads-up on that; I don't really have anything to add beyond what you'd said. By the way, I noticed you said you weren't an admin: would you like to be? Mindspillage (spill yours?) 05:04, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
- That's very kind of you to ask. I think at the moment I'm content being a lowly editor, and trying to keep things on an even keel with my peers. I may change my mind later, but I don't feel like standing (running?) for adminship at the moment. Thanks, though!
- As for TheDoctor10, do you think that there's anything more we can do? It looks like he's on a lower boil at the moment, despite his vague threat to "take it to the Foundation". — Josiah Rowe ( talk • contribs) 05:11, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
- I can understand wanting to stay a user; if you change your mind you have a willing nominator. As for TheDoctor10, yeah, it looks like he's calmed down a bit—or at least not reverting at the moment! I'm not terribly worried about the consequences of him taking it to either the Foundation or the criminal justice system. :-) I suppose if he persisted a user RfC would be in order, since it looks like this isn't a new issue; hopefully not, of course. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 05:31, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
- Yeah, he's been an on-and-off nuisance on various Doctor Who-related pages for a little while. I filed the RfC on his behaviour at List of minor Doctor Who villains, after discussion with other editors, and at the time I wasn't sure whether it was better to file it about the page or about the user. Khaosworks, who's the driving force behind WikiProject Doctor Who, recommended that we start with the page. I suppose we'll see whether, despite his bluster, he's capable of taking a hint. (In this case, a hint dropped with a ten-ton weight attached...)
- And again, thanks for your kind remarks about adminship. If I do change my mind, I'll let you know! — Josiah Rowe ( talk • contribs) 05:40, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
I just wanted to thank you so much for your support of my RfA which finally passed! That was some debate. I greatly appreciate it! Ramallite (talk) 04:28, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
It's regrettable that it ever has to happen on any Wikipedia article, but thank you for protecting the Elvis Presley page. I note you say you aren't sure as to seeking another term on the Arbitration Committee. In this regard, I plan to make a proposal in the next day or so that might be of interest. -
Ted Wilkes 19:35, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
I admire those who have dedicated themselves to Arbitration Committee work. It requires a special personality and from what I see, is mostly a thankless job. My suggestion will (hopefully) be a way to reduce the workload of the Arbitration Committee in a way that gives a simple resolve to certain issues regarding basic fundamental Wikipedia principles that currently trigger long edit wars and endless Talk page parlance that then wind up at Arbitration. - Ted Wilkes 20:35, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
Please do not keep this article protected too long as it is currently mentioned in Template:Did You Know on the main page and I am hoping for it to bring some more editing. Thanks. Harro5 04:35, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
The rule for unlisting and deleting uncertified RFCs exists, in my experience, to get rid of "attack" RFCs that aren't really based on anything. If an RFC has received substantial feedback from the community, it is proper to keep it as a record of an earlier dispute, even if the one who originally filed it would prefer it not to (the possibility of RFC backlash is warned against on the RFC page, after all). For that matter I personally wouldn't even unlist an RFC if the last comment made was less than a week ago. There are a number of third parties who have given their view, and they should at least be consulted before deleting the entire page. R adiant _>|< 16:57, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
Regarding User:Rafterman
I believe you blocked this user indefintely recently and when he appealed you reduced that block to 48 hours on 8th November suggesting future misbehaviour might cause the block to be reinstated. You might then be interested in this complete with false edit summary from 11th November. Subtle it is not. -- pgk( talk) 21:22, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for the action, you might also like to consider his update to his talk page including the rather vile edit summary: [1]. Thanks again -- pgk( talk) 22:01, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
Something looks a bit awkward here: User talk:LoveandPeace. What is the best thing to do here? -- HappyCamper 01:55, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
- Ah hah! Now we know what is going on... [2] - were you able to contact someone who can read the material? -- HappyCamper 18:46, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
- Okay, that's comforting to hear. Oooh, I should mention in passing that Antandrus started an artile on Hora staccato - Is there a viola adaptation of this piece you could...record for the article? :-) :-) :-) -- HappyCamper 21:36, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
OK, I am not compromising your reputation. See how good I am? Promise, I was not coming just to *- - -* you, but for a real question. People sending permissions don't link to the article, don't give their user names etc. Which makes it very difficult to use those permissions at all. Is there a page here that advertizes the email address permissions? If yes could you point me to it so that I try and make it comprehensive? If not, can we think of making one (or a section in any other page you'll deem appropriate)? Thank you friend. And here are your daily *- - - -*. notafish }<';> 09:36, 14 November 2005 (UTC)
Hi mindspillage, I'm very concerned that Hobbes000 did not give you a full set of facts about Judi McLeod. Hobbes000 removed verifiable information from those pages including mention of a documented lawsuit, a politically inconvenient endorsement and the paper's original name.
I also find it suspicious that Hobbes000 claims not to know Judi McLeod but dismissed disputed - and in some cases verifiable - facts with complete authority.
I'm also concerned that Wiki staff didn't pick up on this.
I find it too suspicious that in the same time frame - August 23 to August 25 - that Hobbes000 was reverting pages and removing verifiable information, "somebody" was reverting and vandalizing the Rachel Marsden page, removing any mention of Marsden's stalking conviction.
I strongly believe that this is a pretext to stop factual information from appearing.
Judi McLeod's old publication Our Toronto published a short 100-word letter to the editor from Paul Fromm. I re-read it last year when going through older issues. I will look into this again.
I appreciate the situation Wiki is in, and I do realize that Wiki administrators must go out of their way to avoid any appearance of bias, but much of what Judi McLeod says needs to be taken with a grain of salt.
For that reason I seriously doubt that there has been a "smear campaign" on the internet ... especially since I can't find any trace of it!
- they have been the target of a smear campaign recently and are concerned that those responsible are attempting to defame them on Wikipedia as well.
Or tell the truth.
I would have also preferred you said "They CLAIM to have been the target of a smear campaign," and not stated it as fact.
I would like to know more about this recent smear campaign and where it occurred. What proof did they offer? On one Wiki page you claim "one person" is behind a smear campaign, but elsewhere you claim it's a group of people. Which is it?
This is probably what she meant and I hardly consider it a smear campaign. "World O'Crap" link
Judi McLeod has a very bizarre idea of what constitutes libel. She claims that calling her employee Rachel Marsden a convicted stalker is defamatory, even though Marsden was convicted of stalking.
I hope I don't sound too harsh. I worry McLeod has misled you and other Wikipedia administrators. I want to bring this to your attention before it becomes a problem.
Thanks! -- Cyberboomer 00:30, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks for your thoughtful comments on my page. Yes, it is a heated topic. I had suspected that you knew "nothing about Canadian politics." That's okay. I understand the position you have to take in this. -- Cyberboomer 01:02, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
Hi, umm i've altared the Lockdown page and added a separate disambig page to encapsulate other examples. Not sure what you meant at the talk page however. Pydos 15:58, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
Oh right. The only other lockdown related page i've found is ' TNA Lockdown'. Possibly whoever was responsible for the copyright violation just scarpered and deleted the page to which you are refering. I'll let you know what, if anything, i find. Pydos 11:19, 16 November 2005 (UTC)
Re:The result of the debate was delete, and this coming from another DeLand resident... ...and coming from another extropian transhumanist, agnostic atheist, and geek. Yeltensic42.618 16:49, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
Another weirdo around these parts...I know, the number of atheists in West Volusia is probably in the single digits. As for the Hitchhiker's Guide, for a while around the time the movie came out I claimed "Adamism" as my religion. As for the show, if you go to Sands Theater I can still be found on the lobby wall in three places (though in two of them I might be pretty much unrecognizable). When exactly did you go to Stetson, by the way? I live only several blocks from Stetson. Do you know Eric Hoffman by any chance? Yeltensic42.618 22:47, 15 November 2005 (UTC)
Ah, so you graduated at more or less the same time that I wrote the Chris bensko article. Coincidence? I think...probably so. It would be rather difficult not to cross paths, especially considering that when you started there I lived even closer to Stetson than I do now, virtually on the edge of the campus in fact; then for another two and a half years, I lived about the same distance away as I do now, but in a location relative to the campus such that I passed through the vicinity more often (I still do regularly, but more often by car than foot, other than walking to Sands Theater, which doesn't involve venturing into the campus itself (I live west of Woodland, so going to the theater means only going to the near periphery of Stetsonland)). It has occured to me that the title of Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead is somewhat of a misnomer; they are not dead yet as the play is going on, so it should be Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are to be Dead in the Very Near Future, by the End of This Play in Fact. Yeltensic42.618 07:08, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
Just wanted to drop by and thank you for taking the time to comment on my RfA. I really appreciate the feedback. .:. Jareth.:. babelfish 14:36, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
Hi Mindspillage,
Thank you very much for your support on my RfA. I was both surprised and delighted about the amount of support votes and all the kind words! If I can ever help with anything or if you have any comments about my actions as an admin, please let me know! Regards, Joann e B 15:45, 21 November 2005 (UTC)I'm very glad to see you've decided to run for the arbcom. I'd have actively urged you to, but I've rather lost track as to whether we're even having an election this year. You're probably right about having to be somewhat crazy to do it, but you strike me as about the sanest of the bunch, both current and available replacements. (Though don't get me started again on preference vs. approval voting.) I'll stop now, before you end up needing a different hat size. Alai 19:30, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
Hi, Mindspillage. I just want to thank you very much for supporting my RfA, and to say also that I hope I'll make a good job of it. I'm supposed to be working on an assignment at the moment, and had been reducing my Wikipedia activity, so delayed thanking people, but I'm finding the new rollback button so easy to use that I'm just keeping Wikipedia open on my browser while working on other things, and I thought I'd like to thank at least a few of those who supported me while I'm here. Glad to see from your userpage that you like semicolons as well as music. That's another thing we have in common! Cheers. AnnH (talk) 23:07, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
...to write and edit I see! nice job! ( Come Out (Reich)) Antandrus (talk) 03:41, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
I noticed you have listed yourself in Category:Atheist Wikipedians. That said, you will probably be interested in my suggested featured article for December 25th: Omnipotence paradox. The other suggestion being supported by others for that date is Christmas, although Raul654 has historically been against featuring articles on the same day as their anniversary/holiday. — BRIAN 0918 • 2005-11-28 08:27
Hey, no problem; I've been meaning to do that for a while, actually. Everybody has a different way of understanding modes, and they all wanted to put them in there. :) Now, cleaning up the new page, that will take some work.... / blahedo ( t) 09:26, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
|
Did you know? has been updated. A fact from the article Come Out (Reich), which you recently created, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page. |
I have not yet seen your reply as required by Wikipedia:Arbitration policy#Requests to my request here as of 15:39, November 24, 2005 re with respect to this process. Please provide a rationale for your vote that was rendered while I was prevented from responding on the Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Wilkes, Wyss and Onefortyone in accordance with Wikipedia:Arbitration policy for Requests which states "Individual Arbitrators will provide a rationale for their vote if so moved, or if specifically requested." Thank you. - Ted Wilkes 23:04, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
Thank you, but the question I asked was: On what authority did you base your decision to deny me
due process and render an opinion? Thank you. - Ted Wilkes 23:24, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Arbitration Policy guarantees me due process and I want to know on what authority did you base your decision to deny me that most fundamental right. Also, you stated "Wikipedia is not a court of law". This contradicts what Jimmy Wales has stated on the Wiki mailing list. - Ted Wilkes 23:48, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
Re your statement at
User talk:Ted Wilkes "Re: due process: Wikipedia is not a court of law, thank the deities. You were not denied anything and your case will be heard fairly. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 23:42, 28 November 2005 (UTC)"
- Wikipedia is a court of law. I quote Jimmy Wales: "The arbcom is a judicial sort of body." And in fact, your denying me the right to be heard violated the most absolute and fundamental right under the administration of any judicial body. What's worse, is while deliberately and recklessly denying me the right to be heard, you accepted the diatribe of a person you unanimously voted to place on Wikipedia:probation because of his repeated serious violations of Wikipedia:policy and conduct. - Ted Wilkes 16:44, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
Why did you accept this RfAr when no efforts, nor evidence of any efforts, to remedy the alleged issue by other means have been made or presented? I ask because this seems to be contrary to both the template instructions and WP policy. Could you please cite the documented section of Wikipedia's written policy which you used to make this extraordinary exception? Thanks. Wyss 23:59, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
Hello, unless User:Hogbrend is your sockpuppet, he's stealing your identity. -- Angr ( t· c) 16:25, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for your question regarding my opinions concerning consensus. I am almost certain that any opinion I have given regarding consensus has been restricted to AfD vote closures. I suppose my view hasn't changed (as pertains to AfD closures) that 66% or a clear two-thirds majority is adequite to close most AfD candidates. In more contentious cases, I would not hestitate to ask for some trustworthy, impartial advice. Regarding any of the straw polls or other polls that take place, I would not have any administrative role in closing them, until I have gained more experience and credibility within administrative circles. So as it pertains to AfD, after discounting votes that come from sockpuppets, brand new user accounts and other spurious sources, a clear two thirds majority would suffice. Since I was nominated several days ago, I have been making a dent in the administrators required reading pages. I might not become an admin (at least during this run at it) but I will be prepared for subsequent attempts. As Samuel Johnson once said, "Knowledge is Power". If you have any other questions, or if you feel I have forgotten to mention some comment I made in the past regarding consensus, or anything else, please feel free to respond to this memo. Hamster Sandwich 20:15, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
You may have already seen it, but I found this page a rather interesting read. Yeltensic42.618 06:37, 30 November 2005 (UTC)