User talk:とある白い猫/Archive/2005/04
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Unfortunately I don't have the time or skills to effectively mediate this disagreement. I posted on the talk page in an attempt to steer the discussion in a productive direction. There was far too much discussion about users and not enough about the article itself. I see that Fadix has listed some points that he disagrees with. I'd recommend responding to these points with evidence of why you believe they are valid or invalid points. The first step is to identify precisely what the disagreement is about. Until that is done, I doubt that consensus can be reached. Just keep your cool ;) and take a break if you start to get frustrated. Carbonite | Talk 00:35, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC) Talk[edit]It is okay for other users to make comments to each other on my talk page. Please don't tick them off for doing so. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 07:21, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Your templates[edit]Your templates are nothing but an attempt to subvert the consensus. You wanted to redirect Abdullah Ocalan to Kurdistan Workers Party, and got NO support. Trying to accomplish the same thing through your templates is not acceptable. -- Curps 11:47, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC) It's not a sensible way to organize the two articles. There are many similar cases to this throughout Wikipedia (related but distinct topics), and templates are not used to duplicate large portions of text between two articles. -- Curps 12:10, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC) I agree that they're a little unorthodox. Coolcat, if you want to do things this way you have to obtain a consensus. You can't just ride roughshod over other editors and then complain when they express a dislike for your unorthodox use of template transclusion. I think it's the point about consensus that you're neglecting most of all. Consensus means reaching an agreement as a group. You're full of innovative bold idea, and this is good, but you can't just keep throwing a sulk every time your ideas are rejected. If you learn to listen to what people say, they will listen to you and they will, I promise you, be willing to cooperate with the best of your ideas. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 12:15, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC) Stressed[edit]I know your pretty stressed. But I still can't see how misspelling your name is insultive. Try to calm down and talk things over with Tony Sidaway. I think he's trying to get this whole thing sorted. Mgm|(talk) 12:26, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC)
What I'm saying is: be less quick to return attacks in kind. If you really, really want to dumbfound and impress people with your skills, start to listen to and respond to their criticisms. Believe me this will build up an incredible store of goodwill and make them more likely, in turn, to listen to you. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 13:59, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC) I'm not about to block editors over a series of content disputes. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 14:16, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC) I will somewhere in the future, but I'm currently working on Ancient Egypt articles. To be more specific, I'm trying to get Mummy complete enough to be a FAC. Sorry. Mgm|(talk) 12:44, Apr 1, 2005 (UTC) Hi, since you are active in the article, I believe we can work together for a second time to merge lost of articles cluttering wikipedia. Us working together is very productive in my opinion. Since I know the wiki way I dont think we will have the "newbie friction". -- Cat chi? 11:16, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Nagorno Karabakh[edit]The following resource describes this subject in full details:
talking: Listen[edit]In order to talk effectively, first you need to listen. Listen to what people are saying, show them that you are listening. Everybody knows what your opinion is now, but you need to show that you are listening to criticism. You've not done anything bad, but you've still managed to annoy a lot of people. People are upset at you. You have to take that into account, and show that you're willing to change the way you work so as not to annoy them. When you've got used to listening to people, then you'll have a better idea of what to say and how to say it effectively. I mean this. Listen. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 01:45, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Read Davenbelle's answer. I second that. Stereotek 08:04, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC) Templates[edit]Hello, They don't have to be in the template namespace to be transcluded, so you can still do that from here. Be advised, you should give other users permission to edit those pages, so they don't think you are keeping the pages for yourself or trying to own them. Good luck! Mgm|(talk) 07:39, Apr 2, 2005 (UTC)
Mummy[edit]I'm currently looking for info about purpoted (sp?) medicinal and magical powers of mummies in China and other countries. I'm purposely saving Egyptian burial rituals for a seperate article as I think they warrant their own article, so please don't include them in Mummy. I'd be happy if you started Egyptian burial rituals, though. Mgm|(talk) 07:58, Apr 2, 2005 (UTC)
Adam Carr[edit]- As someone said to me a while back, he's like that to everybody. Dunno what his problem is, but he's a bit of a drama queen. Seems to take things personally and isn't keen on providing sources. Just stick to stuff you can prove and ask him for checkable sources and you should be right. Pete 05:06, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I am sorry what happened in 1997 is not history. The S-300 crisis bothered a lot of people. Not Just the Turks. You dont buy AA missles from russia if you are a NATO member, you dont try to smuggle it either. Everything I suggested is vaild. Some are just format siggestions, I have a rewording request and one clarification request on what happen to a trety. Thank you for your kind welcome on Armenian Genocide. I don't think I will stay long, though. I appreciate your being extremely constructive and patient on those debates. I honestly admire your maturity to avoid all agression and provocation of Fadix and others. I noticed that Fadix was overly assertive and aggressive, so I decided to interrupt agressively to show theyself and the moderators that Fadix is not behaving appropriately. I am not sure how much it helped and honestly it is not doing good for my own health to face that kind of shamelessness and agression. So I don't think I will continue discussion, unless Fadix can achieve provocating me again. I hope my conclusions will be useful for you to clean the from Fadix's professional propaganda. It is a good thing being constructive and not being trapped into provocation, I also believe that you can do better for everybody if you go slowly. Cezveci 08:11, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Dispute rsolution[edit]I am afraid I'm going to decline your offer at this point. I already have a skilled Mediator, Danny, and to my knowledge, neither my advocate, Wally nor myself, nor Danny, nor Sam Spade have been issued with a request for a change. I am hopeful that Danny could attend to mediating the dispute soon. Also, you do not seem to be a member of the Mediation Committee, which is indicative a standard as per mediation skills – since I have never met you before and have no way to gauge on your abilities on that front (without expending time that, I, at the moment, do not have). Finally, who is Kevehs? I am not inclined to have him/her participate in the mediation since I have never heard of that individual until your brief announcement on my talk page. Best, El_C 05:41, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Not comeete material but,[edit]
I would prefer if you removed it as I don't wish for you to be the mediator in our dispute. Thanks. Hope you understand. Best, El_C 06:41, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Hi Coolcat, I'm Wally, El C's advocate in the Sam Spade dispute. Sorry it has taken me a bit to speak to you. I really appreciate your offer to mediate for us on this dispute — it shows the stuff that good Wikipedians are made of. At the moment we have to pass, as we've set up with the (notoriously-slow) MedCom a mediator to help us through it, who is unfortunately having personal problems at the moment that make him unable to take care of the issue. Until then we're trying just to let the thing simmer until we can get started again. As the mediator is one we've all already agreed upon, it's just easier to let that lie than to make a switch. However, should that for any reason change, chances are you'll be my first message. Yours, Wally 23:40, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC) Your mesage[edit]I'm sorry not to have replied to (and thanked you for) your message and compliments; I've overstretched myself, and become badly behind keeping up with all my commitments (as well as occasionally casting an eye on the adminship process, which seems to take months when you're involved, and to fly by when you're not). Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:09, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC) Hello[edit]Thanks for your interest, any special reason why you've decided to focus on cases involving myself? Unlike El_C I have no objection, and progress is good progress and all of that, so thanks. I like your idea for a ranking system BTW, but why should admins deserve special status? I've been here over a year and am ranked #42 in overall edits, w over 20,000 to all namespaces. I am also an AMA advocate with 3 successful arbitrations
along w countless instances of helping new users (have a look @ my Archives sometime). Anyways, the idea interests me even if it does seem unbalanced in favor of admins. Cheers, (Sam Spade | talk | contributions) 10:51, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC) templates (your message of April 2)[edit]
Anon User on Star Trek[edit]We have an anon user who is changing info on the Starfleet rank article. I have asked for a source and so far all the user has done is change back to his/her previous edits. Could be a problem. We should both watch it. -Husnock 01:26, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC) Dispute Resolution[edit]The link you have provided on my discussion page does not post to a page that has anything to do with me. After doing some research I have found that you seemed to think this was somehow a three way dispute, but I do not know EL C and my dispute with Sam has nothing to do with him. While I very much appreciate your offer, the request for mediation is a request that, according to the policy of the mediation page, is made of those on the mediation committee. Given that you are not on that committee, and that you are currently involved in what appears to be a very hostile arbitration with another user, I would have to assume this is more of an informal attempt to mediate this dispute. I appreciate the effort, but my hopes for a positive outcome in this case are slim as is, and I believe that a formal process has a better chance of success given the proven records of the mediators in question. I also appreciate your attempt to be bold and help others work through their disputes, and I wish you luck in that endeavor. Kev 01:52, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC) Maybe you forgot, but you still haven't told me why you renamed the article. Could you please do so? Mgm|(talk) 08:53, Apr 5, 2005 (UTC)
Flag templates[edit]Discussion moved from Wikipedia:Village_pump_(news)#Flag_templates to Template talk:Flag. Merging[edit]Merging isn't just putting the text in the article. It needs to be placed and rephrased so it fits the text already there. Also, it could simply be no one came by to merge it yet. I'll see if I can do something. (BTW, this would be one of those jobs that's perfect for the new Wikipedia:Cleanup Taskforce.) Mgm|(talk) 08:57, Apr 7, 2005 (UTC) Ranking[edit]I'm not too thrilled with Barnstars, either, but at least they are entirely positive. I would have no objection to creating certain levels of privilege where needed for process-oriented purposes (i.e. a level above admins that can do certain tasks now relegated to developers, or defining a level of newbie that cannot yet move articles), but I am entirely sincere in saying that if Wikipedia starts ranking its editors for the sake of ranking, I will resign on principle. What do you do with someone like Everyking, who is a generally great editor but drives everyone batty with his Ashlee Simpson obsession? Or with Nanahuatzin, who contributes generally useful material written in non-native English that always needs major editing? Or any of several, who will remain nameless, who are knowledgable, but POV warriors. Etc. I don't us to have to think about how to rank these sorts of things, or decide how they compare. And I don't want anyone judging me on these matters, except insofar as there is a need to judge whether I am capable of discharging a particular responsibility. I feel strongly enough about this that I will not want to be part of this organization if it starts creating a hierarchy that so inherently judges people. - Jmabel | Talk 20:37, Apr 7, 2005 (UTC) The rating system looks a bit funny in Firefox, although that could just be because you put it in tables --Munchkinguy 00:55, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Head template[edit]I don't want to have the news included; I don't do anything in that field much, but I'd be happy to use some of the borders you made. :) Mgm|(talk) 07:22, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC) Deletion and boxes[edit]I can delete that page for you. I haven't read that red box yet, so I can't really comment on it. Mgm|(talk) 07:38, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC) Cool page[edit]I like your changes. In case your not aware, were accepting new positions @ Spade & Archer. Just thought you might like to know. Cheers, Sam Spade Apply now, exciting opportunities available at Spade & Archer! 23:43, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC) I have replied. Cheers, Sam Spade Apply now, exciting opportunities available at Spade & Archer! 12:12, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC) Hostility[edit]You haven't been removed as far as I'm aware. Moreover, there isn't any good reason to remove you. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 02:01, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC) Faces and places[edit]Looks great - I may have to steal your idea ;) - Guettarda 02:16, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC) Jefferson Smith, leader of the Boy Rangers[edit]Mr. Smith Goes to Washington — In case you didn't get this. — Davenbelle 05:28, Apr 9, 2005 (UTC) FOTD[edit]I probably should've made it an Fact of the Week. It's too much of a pain to update manually, maybe another bot is in order, but I certainly think it's useful, it can draw attention to all those articles that aren't allowed in DYK. Feel free to update it :) Mgm|(talk) 08:01, Apr 9, 2005 (UTC) Stars[edit]Thanks, and sorry not to have got back to you sooner; things have been amazingly hectic recently, on and off Wikipedia. I thought it more modest to put the small versions on my page; they look rather sweet, though. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 10:22, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC) Kurdistan[edit]We agreed to a lot of things which we no longer, may I ask why? Why was "Kurdish seperatists" removed? It isnt exactly controversial as you suggested. Hello. Sorry, I'm not sure what you mean here. What do we no longer agree about? I don't remember removing a reference to Kurdish separatists. Which edit do you have in mind? Iota 16:54, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC) You wrote:
That seems like a good suggestion. I'll take a look at some of those articles when I get the chance but they're not my primary interest on Wikipedia so it may take a while. Iota 18:13, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC) My talkpage[edit]Do not edit other people's comments on my talkpage. If you want something removed because you think it is a personal attack ask me and if it's a reasonable request I'll do it for you. You are not entitled to edit another person's talkpage in this way. Iota 02:11, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC) I've never addressed you as "Mr Coolcat" nor would I. You'll notice that I've struck through the word Mr, like this
Have you actually looked at the few small edits I've made to the article today? I don't think any of them could be characterised as an "attack" on the article. And please don't make accusations against people just because you disagree with their edits. I'm not interested in getting into bickering or creating a bad atmosphere because I think we've communicated constructively in the past. But interfering with my talkpage and comments like "I do not know what they are trying to prove" are not constructive. Iota 02:33, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC) Oh right. Stupid of me to misunderstand. Iota 02:38, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC) Your message[edit]I don't know about User:Davenbelle, but I've generally found that User:Stereotek is reasonable if one stay calm and engages with the issues fairly. I'll have another look at the edits, but I'm afraid this is all part of the Wikipedia experience. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:04, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Hostility[edit]You said "Stereotek and Davenbelle, are still reverting my edits". Well I looked at what you're doing on Kurdistan Workers Party and I'm not surprised. If I were editing that page I'd do the same myself, because you're removing external links for bogus reasons, saying for instance "I cannot allow PKK's main web page on this article, that is like putting Al-Qaeda's main web page, which likely is no longer there after CIA is done with it". We are supposed to describe all significant points of view, and an external link to the PKK website is an excellent reference for our description of their point of view. I don't think you yet fully understand NPOV. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 14:04, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
As you can see this needs to stop, I recommend locking that page. How many edits are vandal, anti vandal? [1]
Sorry about that. I re-deleted this template after reading that it had been previously deleted. However, it does not look like this went through the proper Wikipedia:Templates for deletion process. I have notified the original tagger, who will most likely list it there; you will be able to debate its eligibility on that page when it is listed. Cheers. DropDeadGorgias (talk) 17:22, Apr 11, 2005 (UTC)
In short, I'm not really sure why you put them in that location. Can you clarify? Mgm|(talk) 19:21, Apr 11, 2005 (UTC) see: Wikipedia:Templates for deletion#Template:Kurdistan/Pictures. — Sgt. Davenbelle 23:24, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC) You have been blocked for 24 hours under the three revert rule. If you wish to appeal please contact another administrator or the mailing list. Carbonite | Talk 23:43, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC) WikiProject Ranking[edit]To let you know, someone has placed the project page under a VFD. The VfD vote page is at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/WikiProject Rankings. Zscout370 01:09, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Cheers, Slac speak up! 12:18, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
My two cents. --TenOfAllTrades | Talk 12:34, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Hi, Coolcat. :) I can see this is a very contentious issue, so I would rather stay out of it. As I state on my user page, I consider all edits that I personally make to Wikipedia to be in the public domain, so you may place the Tote the Ranks thing anywhere you would like. Best regards, func(talk) 16:42, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC) Copy from my talk page:
I urge you to reconsider your vote based on this clarification. Thanks -- Cat chi? 08:41, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC) One by one:
My opinion stands. —Charles P. (Mirv) 17:10, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC) Hi Cool Cat. I've looked over the points you make on my talk page. I apologize, but I can't change my vote. I do see your point. You want a better way to recognize the great heroes of wikipedia, and I can surely appreciate that. Call me alarmist, though, but I just worry about the potential abuses of the system, that it'll make wikipedia into a pissing contest. Sorry. --InShaneee 18:48, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC) Like the others, I have nothing against you, and harbor no personal resentments against you regarding the Rankings project. However, I object to the project because it certainly does suggest hierarchy, which I feel goes against the Wikipedia communal spirit. --Andy M. 19:04, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC) Same here. Rankings are inherently and inescapably hierarchical. Insignia or other indicators of rank are likely to be intimidating to newbies. Thanks for your efforts to improve Wikipedia, but this is not the way. FreplySpang (talk) 00:48, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC) I've looked over your message, but decided not to change my vote. Essentially, it seems like it would at least introduce a risk of hierarchy (not that it would necessarily lead to one), and I think the benefits would be very small, indeed largely intangible. Please don't take it personally, but I just don't feel this is in WP's best interest. Yours, Meelar (talk) 18:31, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC) Don't let rude people get you down. They don't mean it personally, it's just that sometimes it's very easy to forget that there's a real person with real feelings on the other side of the computer. As far as I'm concerned, you've been showing a great deal of dignity by your stoic perseverance in the face of their words. – ClockworkSoul 03:47, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC) Hi Coolcat. It seems that there is a substantial consensus now that your first Rankings proposal isn't something the Wikipedia community is comfortable with. Perhaps you might be better off to start fresh—propose something new that doesn't have the baggage of the first proposal associated with it. You might also consider presenting new ideas through Wikipedia:Barnstar and award proposals; it strikes me as a sensible forum for that type of discussion. Don't get disheartened. Happy editing, --TenOfAllTrades | Talk 15:12, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Hi - I'm trying to help chase down how various articles end up with wholesale duplication (see Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#duplicate_content_in_articles) and there was an instance of this a few minutes ago from a diff attributed to you. Do you happen to remember exactly what happened? Did you encounter an edit conflict window? If so, do you remember exactly what you did? Thanks. -- Rick Block 14:40, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I be damned[edit]You are actualy thinking Fadix does not use personal attacks against me? I try to stay civil, I can only handle a level of insults. I cannot mediate this crap, Fadix will stop his insistance on HIS/Someone elses pov regarding Armenian Genocde and deal with me in a civil tone. Cool Cat My Talk 15:10, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC) I am the one declared pulic enemy no 1, its perfectly fine to have material that makes Kurds or Armenians look good, their propoganda and POV are fine, no one has to show sources for their beefed up statistics, or information they add unless they are Coolcat, which I do, still is POV. Dont, tell me to chill. I am perfectly calm. I think its unjust what I am living through. -- Cat chi? 15:10, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC) They intercept my communications to other users, they comment on their talk page about my "bad conduct" they go great lenghts to find my "POV". I feel like a POW rather than POV-pusher. I should not be the person seeking mediation, they are. I backed donw from a lot of facts of mine. I constantly back down they constantly engage. Them agreeing with me on anything is un heard of. I have to revert something a dozen times for them to accept it. They are wasiting my time. -- Cat chi? 15:15, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I'd like to call your attention to this. — Davenbelle 23:20, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)
Cat, David Gerard asked if all parties, including you, could agree on a brief description of what the allegations being made are--not whether they're true, but whether they're being alleged. This will help them to make sense of all the babble and decide whether there is a case that needs their involvement. I'm openly pushing for them to recommend earlier stages in dispute resolution and I'm fairly sure that will be the outcome of this application. The others think it's gone too far but they probably don't have my experience with arbcom cases. As you're all communicating and aren't being deliberately abusive (though you're all being uncivil to one another) it seems likely to me that a good honest go at mediation will help you all to see eye to eye. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 23:54, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC) They declare my edits as POV and never bother to read talk, do not expect me to be nice to them. They are being silly rude and I have been patient with them long enough. Ill work on arbitration. -- Cat chi? 00:08, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC) Wetman[edit]What are your experiences with Wetman? He seems to be a troll, and is causing some problems for me. I want to know if others are sharing this experience. RK 01:11, Apr 14, 2005 (UTC) See, for example, Talk:Book of Ezekiel Vandalism[edit]Yes I checked it first; it does not meet the definition of vandalism. Please move the dispute to a more appropriate page. Jayjg (talk) 03:05, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
real people[edit]what? These are real people? I just thought they were some kind of Turing automata. unigned User Talk:151.207.240.3 11:59, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
red green color blind[edit]These 3 File:Tng red ADM L pipbg.PNG File:Tng gold ADM pip.png File:Tng red ADM R pipbg.PNG
look almost exactly like these 3
I'm red green color blind and your method of identifying (officers from nonofficers ?} doesn't work for me. Just thought you'd like to know. At night green traffic lights are white to me, while in the sunlight the red traffic light looks broken (I see diminished red, among other things) 4.250.27.129 18:53, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC) Colours[edit]I can work on improving that. Can you see gold pips with black background like:
Red is the command uniform in the serries. Engineering is Gold background. Science is greenish. Etc.. I can pu them with those backgorunds. Whould that help? Big blue box at top of this page[edit]Perhaps it might be nicer to write that in positives, rather than negatives. Hmmm, in fact, check out Wikipedia:Simplified Ruleset (shameless plug ;-), Perhaps you might want to use that instead! :-) Kim Bruning 21:53, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC) Nato ranks[edit]Haven't been working on it. Kind of stuck with that regard, as I don't really know where to go. I have also been working on the airport template. Burgundavia 05:50, Apr 18, 2005 (UTC) FYI[edit]I noticed that your 'Masterpeice 3' Diagnosis Murder, has been removed as a copyvio. In the future, please, do not submit copyrighted work without permission. Stereotek 19:52, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)
...[edit]I have been constantly harrased, pursuied, annoyed by Stereotek, Davenbelle, and Fadix. Since no one will end this I hereby leave wikipedia. This is not a friednly community for me currently. Depending on the desicion of arbitration comitee I may return. -- Cat chi? 00:06, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC) Hi Coolcat, I'm sorry to see that you're leaving. Drop me a line if you decide to visit or come back. silsor 01:39, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)
I just noticed that a large part of the article that you call 'Masterpeice 2', GAP Project, is a copy-paste/possible copyvio from [2]. I just removed the offending content. Stereotek 08:06, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC) The content it obviously copy/pasted from the webpage that I provided. If you want it to remain here on Wikipedia, you must provide evidence that we can legally publish it under the GNU Free Documentation License. Stereotek 08:39, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC) I provided the website where you copy/pasted it from. Did you ever notice this?: "By submitting your work you promise you wrote it yourself, or copied it from public domain resources — this does not include most web pages." Anyway, in what way has I "threatened" you? Stereotek 08:47, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC) fyi, I listed it as a possible copyvio. — Davenbelle 09:01, Apr 22, 2005 (UTC) Yes work together, find ways to remove all my content. I own rights for those. -- Cat chi? 09:08, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC) fyi, I listed Image:AtaturkDam.jpg, too. — Davenbelle 22:31, Apr 22, 2005 (UTC) Personal Attacks[edit]Personal Attacks are Unnaceptable.WP:No personal attacks -- Cat chi? 11:49, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
fyi, I've also listed Image:DiagMurder.jpg as a possible copyvio. — Davenbelle 23:00, Apr 22, 2005 (UTC) now this is a personal attack[edit]
Not quite[edit]I dont see that as a personal attack, you are welcome to fill a complaint though. Please stop reverting a topic which you are not a part of the discussion. There are things we agreed in the disucssion(s) and agreements long before I arrived at the article. Ignoring concensius is not good practice and waistes my and your time. -- Cat chi? 06:49, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I archive it whenever I wish, I dont have to archive either. -- Cat chi? 07:06, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)
fyi, Davenbelle[edit]http://www.princeton.edu/~nanking/html/nanking_gallery.html Japanese war crimes[edit]OK. no one has altered the page for a week, so I think there is a concensus of words now. Can w eget rid of the disputed sticker now ? Lincolnshire Poacher 07:56, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC) I've deleted copivio versions of this article. Please don't add copyvio material without getting permission first. (I didn't see any permission granted in the talk page emails, correct me if I'm wrong). Also, don't remove copyvio notices from pages that include copyright violations. Thanks --Duk 16:27, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Hmm, seems like some images disturb some parties. I think we can sove this by something like this project. -- Cat chi? 04:38, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Well you say this is about caring about people, but the examples you give are absurd: people who faint at the sight of blood and whatnot. We can't go around censoring an encyclopedia just because some people are of what used to be described as a "nervous disposition." The important thing is that the articles should be well written and well illustrated. People who don't like looking at pictures don't have to download them, let alone look at them. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 12:01, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC) You write Any web site you go where pictures of dead people are present you see warnings. Well you can certainly argue that this should be the case. What you cannot say is that this is the case: Don't use falsehoods and invalid generalizations to argue your case. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 14:12, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Hi CoolCat. I would urge you to not take these things personally. You've made many constructive and helpful edits to Wikipedia, and I see by the barnstar on your User page that they've been gratefully acknowledged by the community. People on Wikipedia propose policies all the time. Sometimes they're rejected by the community; occasionally that rejection is a bit...terse. In this case, the issue of restricting access to images on Wikipedia has come up many times before, so some of the more senior editors are perhaps a bit tired of addressing the same questions over and over. (For example, the question of graphic violence came up on Templates for Deletion a couple of weeks ago.) Don't be discouraged because a few of your ideas haven't been enthusiastically accepted. Listen to what other people are saying; learn from their suggestions. If you want to create new policy, the best place to start may be the Village Pump; you can sound out the community before creating a full-blown Wikiproject. Cheers, TenOfAllTrades (talk/contrib) 14:48, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC) Flags[edit]So you been to the Vatican but not to Italy, strange? --Boothy443 | comhrÚ 08:00, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Nagorno Karabakh (by Alberto Laija)[edit]I read the article on Nagorno Karabakh, and personally found it very objective, neutral and accurate. I understand that this is a very controversial topic (maybe only the Israel-Palestinian conflict can be more controversial) I think the article should remain as it is, and only updated when relevant events occur. Given present the facts on that region, and as it was accurately stated (Intransigence on both parts)it's to be forecasted that Status Quo will prevail for a considerable time. Deletewhy[edit]If it's a redirect then redirect it insted of just copying it over. Also you might want to use Template:db if you are frustrated by a lot of typing. Cheers! BrokenSegue 01:54, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC) Hi there. I noticed you listed Peggy Kerry as a candidate for speedy deletion, but that's really reserved for nonsense articles. The article was already on VfD, and that's where it belongs. Thanks, Mackensen (talk) 05:14, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC) Speedy templates and VfD[edit]Hi there! It's not so cool to slap speedy templates on articles already on VfD. Just let the VfD discussion run its due course, there ain't no hurry. Lupo 07:26, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC) changing Sikth member articles to redirects[edit]I noticed you changed these pages to redirects. Please do not do so at this time. The Vfd notice clearly says to not blank the page or remove the notice while the Vfd is in progress, and you did both of these things. Also the consensus of the Vfd is right now to speedy delete without any redirect, so if you were going to be bold you would ideally have carried through the speedy nominations. I have now done this myself. Please be aware of the dangers of your actions, you could well be seen as subverting or even defying the Vfd process. Thank you for your time. Master Thief Garrett 23:26, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC) Solana[edit]Thank you for your help at Javier Solana. The disputants have been referred to advocacy for resolution, and we no longer require an outside mediator. Thanks! KC9CQJ 04:08, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC) British Ranks[edit]Hey, you should check out your page edit on the enlisted british ranks, there's a problem with the formatting =p Melsith 05:46, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC) |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
