Salutations, Cool Cat. I've returned from my (cough) mediocre (cough) trip with my girlfriend from the states and I've returned to Wikipedia. Happy New Year, and I'll return to work; feel free to ask for any assistance on the articles as always, my friend.
Ahoy! Welcome back to the WFSWikipedia. I am currently working on redoing the Oh My Goddess! character pages. As most being subs, its a rather demanding task, but hey thats ok. I am having difficulty finding good manga images of various characters, including Hijiri etc. Or even Belldandy.
If you are up for the task, please convert images to .png format and use the Image:Character name (Oh My Goddess manga).png format :) -- Catchi? 16:17, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Concerning your recent edits to the OMG articles, may I inquire why you have transmogrified the templates again..? I thought they were fine the way they were; as the different corresponding colors gave each respective character page a distinct personality. I am not complaining, however, the new templates look very nice; I just found the new choice a tad odd. -MegamanZero|Talk16:19, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh the colours were confusing. And often made the text unreadable (such as on skulds page). New template is more generic. The complete list of avalible commands you can use on the template is avalible at templates own page: Template:Oh My Goddess Infobox-Generic, fields left blank will not appear on the page (this takes care of tens of redudent unkowns and N/As. -- Catchi? 16:29, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Meh he hasnt made edits since dec 6 :P I doubt he'll ever read. I really dont care about him much ^-^' Thanks for the heads up though. -- Catchi? 20:23, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Ever since the TheOrgy's arrivial, I has noticed that his username means very rude description in regard to the english language, and I find that somewhat offensive. Perhaps a "Usernameblock" template is in order. -MegamanZero|Talk21:28, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm... I can try to arrange that. -- Catchi? 21:30, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
Ok I moved it to template:User firefox I am terribly sorry for my mistake its just that I am tired of the moveing of this template, the changing image on display and all the copyright paranoia with it. -- Catchi? 21:47, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
I really cannot comment on your views regarding RfCs. Given I support Kellys actions (just not her speed). I think people are spending too much time on such a minor issue. It's a "show an arbitrator with mud" case... -- Catchi? 21:05, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
I was referring to how I set it up like your vandalism section. What's your opinion on that..? Don't you think they're similiar..? Also see this for my view on the subject- I also agree with Ms. Kelly's actions, but she handled them in a very wrong manner. -MegamanZero|Talk21:24, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
OH it looks fine, tho often opinions of other users on userpages can be disasterious. -- Catchi? 22:26, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
Indeed. Firstly, that userbox is exactly what started this shit with Ms. Kelly and the rfc's. Second, its appalling and can be considered clear violation of WP:NPA. Finally, its ridiculous, because simply put, Cool Cat is a cat, and he has paws that lack opposable thumbs for this sick joke of yours anyway. He has enough problems typing as it is. However, the point is that userbox is unacceptable, I'd remove it without delay. -MegamanZero|Talk23:19, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Handling it isn't the problem. Its just its hard to get sleep with stuff like this in your head. Better get some coffee and pull an all-nighter then...tomorrow's the beginning of the weekend anyway. -MegamanZero|Talk23:46, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I did this as a very minor troll but you two are feasting on it. I suggest you both get lives. Especially you MegamanZero, activity on your friend's talk page is not an excuse to "pull an all-nighter" although it's probably too late to tell you that, as I imagine you've wheeled the chair closer to the screen and settled down with a mug of cocoa, cock in hand, slowly masturbating to discussion on your friend's Wikipedia talk page. Kevin23:58, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I do have a life, and you have provided quite an entertainment. -- Catchi? 00:01, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
No thanks. Try filing an RFC regarding my username instead. -- Catchi? 00:03, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
"Minor trolling"..? Ridiculous. Trolling is trolling, no ifs, buts, NO CONDITIONS. And you started this, if I'm correct..? I don't start or "feast" on anything (except batteries), but I damn well do finish them. And you, are finished. -MegamanZero|Talk00:07, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I can't help noticing the user MegamanZero's username is an infringement of copyright - not to mention confusing for new users, who might genuinely believe Megaman is editing pages. Could you have a chat with some of your mates and see if you can get a {{Usernameblock}} put on him? Cheers.
I am sorry I have no idea what you are talking about. However I do know you are violating WP:NPA as well as WP:AGF by directing insults and accusations at me. Cease it at once! One more thing apperantly someone aside myself wants the image there. There was no consensus established. Consensus is a dynamic thing and can change at any given second depends on recent data. -- Catchi? 13:45, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
You were the only one who supported it according to the talk page. Last night, two blatant sockpuppets began revert warring to keep the image in place. To quote the official policy concerning sockpuppets, "The Arbitration Committee has ruled that, for the purpose of dispute resolution, when there is uncertainty whether a party is one user with sockpuppets or several users with similar editing habits they may be treated as one user with sockpuppets." There is no other logical explanation for this. Hexagonal02:30, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think they are your sockpuppets in an attempt to get me blocked. There is no logical explanation!</sarcasm> Useless accusations such as this one will only lead to your block. Please stop it. -- Catchi? 02:35, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
They are not my sockpuppets. I don't know you, let alone have anything against you that would make me resort to sockpuppetry. I reverted those consensus-violating changes to the AGF article, and request that they stay that way. The community decided that the image is of zero value, and wants it left off of that page. Hexagonal04:05, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Do not talk in the name of the comunity, not even Jimbo Wales does that. Also you have the option of either ceasing your pointless acusations or seek checkusers to check me. Try User:Kelly Martin or User:David Gerard. If you do not cease to bother me with this I will ask for adin asistance. Please stop waisting my time. -- Catchi? 04:39, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
I'm speaking of the consensus that was reached on the talk page. You were the only one who wants it to stay, and many others want it removed. The image simply cannot stay - you aren't Jimbo Wales, and can't override a decision by a group like this. Hexagonal04:50, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Excuse me can you please leave me alone? I do not know what your problem is and I frankly do not care. GO AWAY! -- Catchi? 04:59, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
Do you have any idea who you are accusing of sockpuppetary and vandalism? -- Catchi? 04:41, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Counter Un-civility Unit is a new wiki-project I have thought up. I was wondering if you thought it was a good idea and if you wanted to join up. I need some users backing me before I construct a wikiproject, and you seem to share my views on subjects such as consensus, civilty, etc. Reply on my talkpage if you're interested. Thanks, -MegamanZero|Talk16:31, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You are really getting carried away with this. Uncivility is treated with apathy wehenever an issue. No need to form an organisation against it. -- Catchi? 16:48, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
Actually, I am running for mediator right now, and I believe this project is a good way to introduce working together in wikipedia, mediating issues, discussing how to go about consensus, etc. I do not plan to hunt down anyone or anything such as that, no. :) -MegamanZero|Talk17:04, 6 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Too much of a good thing is bad, dont forget that :). Take it a bit slow as people tend to get wrong ideas otherwise. -- Catchi? 17:12, 6 January 2006 (UTC)
No, lets compete. In one month thime who will have the oddest edits. Its not the quantity, its the oddness that counts. Its a first come first serve one so as t evade dupes. -- Catchi? 05:41, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
Competetion, you say..? Seems you are serious about this... Okay, I'll accept. Let's get it done! :) One condition, however: the winner recieves a barnstar of some sort. -MegamanZero|Talk06:21, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Cool Cat -
If you feel so strongly about boycotting the Babel project, TfD is most certainly not the place for this. The usual way is to suggest a policy that can be discussed for a reasonable amount of time. We are all really curious about why you think the rest of the world which uses five or six-scale evaluation systems is wrong. Express your concerns on Babel in a policy statement (Wikipedia: Policy proposal - Stop Babel now) and withdraw your nomination on TfD. You are not even giving a reason on why you personally want to stop this successful project at this level and you never consulted with other users on the talk-page of Babel. Since you are trying to prove your point a policy proposal corresponds to your needs much better since it will be on longer and people can much more efficiently block the advancement of Babel. --Fenice08:29, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh I want to express but the link you have doesn't seems to be working. -- Catchi? 10:40, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
Gray was ugly and I was being bold, I'll post there but I really felt a discusseion is wasn't necesary. Tonikaku, I'll be more careful in the future. -- Catchi? 10:37, 7 January 2006 (UTC)
An image created for wikipedia by wikipeedia violates copyrights? One of the copy was 20px. No one can tell what it is. I am kinda confused. -- Catchi? 21:17, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
You removed images from my userpage telling me "I should know better". I am sure you know about it. -- Catchi? 21:29, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
OH! It was many hours ago and many edits ago, I'd completely forgotten! There were two copies of a copyrighted animation from the zero wing video game. My "you should know better" comment was because we'd talked about fair use on user pages ... and you'd already switched out a fair use image for a free one in advance of me asking. I removed the same animation from a half dozen other users who had it. Yes, it's funny, but it shouldn't be on your user page, you know this. As for one being 20px, ... if you say that no one knows what it is.. thats okay, so why not replace it with a nice dark blurry square which is equally meaningingless and doesn't require us to maintain a high resolution copyrighted image on the servers? :) Sorry for the initial confusion. --Gmaxwell21:38, 9 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That clears things up, when I started using the image it was tagged as a {{parody}}. parody shows can air on national TV so I wasn't worrying about copyrights much (as the copyright holders do not care THAT much). After all its a derived work and the new version has little to do with the orriginal. Heavly edited parodies of shows come with their own copyrights right?.
You marked the image as a likely copyright violation. And before that discussion concluded you removed it from many peoples userpages, this is something I do not particularly like (the removal of images from peoples userpages w/o asking them). But the "damage" is done and I dont care about it. Just as a future referance. :)
You seem to know me but I cant recall. Who were you? I do recall discussing fair use images on my userpage with someone (I think NullC). I do not recall your nick :(
What the hell?! You just said let it go! liar! :) Nice try, trying to sneak some odd eits behind my back for your comeback victory. However, I'm not quite fooled so easily. :) Sneaky Cool Cat. :P -MegamanZero|Talk18:57, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I ment let it go on. :P -- Catchi? 19:17, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Cool cat, i am keeping a eye on this user too, he looks suspicous and could try to bend the rules of Wikipedia for his gain. -Dynamo_aceTalk
Username :The great grape ape is straight out of the know
Total edits :11
Image uploads :1 (1 cur, 0 old)
Distinct pages edited :10
Edits/page (avg) :1.10
Deleted edits :0 (browse)
First edit :2006-01-10 02:40:10
Edits by namespace Namespace Edits
Articles 8
User 1
User talk 1
Image 1
I gave no award to any person before they started making edits. December 18, 2005 he perhaps wasn't even registered. -- Catchi? 18:33, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Server chance needs time to be flushed. Generally templates dont change, thats the definition of a template. Static text. -- Catchi? 18:47, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Did not realise that - i thought the template on other pages altered automatically when it was edited...that's why i noticed it on my user page. Anyway many thanks. Pydos11:47, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there Cool Cat, Im Moe Epsilon. I would like for you to join in of the conversation about the above user at Wikipedia talk:Are You a Wikipediholic Test about his possible fake score on the test. I contacted you because you were one of the top scorers on the test, so you could probably tell if the score is fake or not. We would appriciate your input. — Moeε21:09, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, that test thrives on honesty. One is not a Wikipediholic if they arent honest. Wikipedia thrives on honesty. There is little that can be done directly, if the user is disruptive by other means he can be treated for such. I'll check. -- Catchi? 21:27, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Do you mind if I, or you if you prefer, cross-post this to this to the discussion at the test's talk page? — Moeε22:30, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
NO I dont mind. Make it happen. -- Catchi? 13:15, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
Indeed, Cool Cat, you are a formidable foe. This edit is truly proof of your odd editism. But don't get cocky... The war still wages on, and I am in the lead! :) -MegamanZero|Talk18:32, 11 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Going through the broken redirects page, I noticed there are several created by you. Last I checked, they were numbers 275 - 282 on the page; you may want to take a look. Deadsalmon22:09, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the heads up, the numbers seem toi be actual articles, can you link me to the broken redirect pages? I have over 18,000 edits hence have lost track of all :) -- Catchi? 22:13, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
All fixed... :) Thank you again for the headsup... -- Catchi? 22:23, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
No problem. On a different note, if you've got a minute, mind explaining to me if you've got a bot or some other easy way to copy text between talk pages as you've done? Do you just cut and paste? Thanks. Deadsalmon22:28, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The text files (now much more complex) are the language files on the bot. I paste it in english and people transalate it to their native langage. The IRC vandal fighting bot covers many wikis (9 languages) and 13+ projects I actually lost count and am too lazy to check. -- Catchi? 22:31, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
I responded to your comments. Sorry for the month-long delay, got carried away with work etc. -- Catchi? 08:43, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
I responded to your comments. Sorry for the month-long delay, got carried away with work etc. -- Catchi? 08:43, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
Don't worry, Wikipedia is a volunteer effort and you have no obligation to respond to all comments you get on your bot. :) Thanks for replying though. Btw, if NullC's bot can process the text of pages, why isn't it running on the IRC channels then? --Unforgettableid | talk to me00:55, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Nullcs bot gets data directly from wikimedia servers. I do not have such access. :) -- Catchi? 13:09, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Hi, I can't help noticing the user MegamanZero's username is an infringement of copyright - not to mention confusing for new users, who might genuinely believe Megaman is editing pages. Could you have a chat with some of your mates and see if you can get a {{Usernameblock}} put on him? Cheers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.252.152.45 (talk • contribs)
Please do not edit archive pages, instead use the respective talk pages. I nearly missed your post. -- Catchi? 16:16, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
That, and he's disappointed that we found out his little charade with trolling the other night. This is clearly a petty way to attempt to get back at me. Its humorous though - "who might genuinely believe Megaman is editing pages" Get real. -MegamanZero|Talk16:23, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I can imagine that, although I may not apear like one I am a megaman fan, it was the second game I got. Ah Megaman IV on NES. :) -- Catchi? 17:01, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Because I make an effort to limit/halt his vandal campaign. Even though I can't even block him as the comunity does not trusts me enough to hand me such power. -- Catchi? 17:00, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
We have a problem... certain articles (like Cardcaptor Sakura and World War 2) have continuly faced vandilism and POV. What we need is a template that warns the user that the article is senstive to vandilsm and POV and should be read with caution. Perhaps with varations that include advising potential contribaters to consolte the talk pages for advice before contribuating to the article. -Dynamo_aceTalk
I designed a template like that, its on the talk page of CVU, I dont know how aproporate it is tho. -- Catchi? 10:13, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Incredible. it looks like it isn't his first time to screw around with fancruft Mega Man articles. Look at this! What the hell is the author up to? Does he actually think tampering with Mega Man canon is acceptable behaviour? I'm flabbergasted at his antics. -MegamanZero|Talk20:45, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Because you are breaking my and many other poeples userpage. You should fix all userpages prior to doing that. -- Catchi? 22:51, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
There should be no difference, they are only extracted, there were only four that was missplaced that I forgot to put back. Perhaps it's one of them you are referring to. and please be more civil. →AzaToth23:18, 13 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for fixing my userpages. I was being perfectly civil. -- Catchi? 18:13, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
I figured you wouldn't mind my fixing the spelling error, but I erred on the side of the holy jihad against people editing other's userspaces. cheers ("denies"). Unless of course it's some Cabal thing I'm not privy to. Avriette01:06, 14 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Any productive edit, or any edit with a productive inted is welcome such as spelling/grammer corrections, npovisation (when applicable), translations to Turkish/Japanese, or anything you can think of. If I like it, Ill keep it. I generally like it. :) -- Catchi? 10:39, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
When you leave the edit summary blank, some of your edits could be mistaken for vandalism and may be reverted, so please always briefly summarize your edits, especially when you are making subtle but important changes, like changing dates or numbers. Thank you.
Thx for your check on Kurdish people
You should know that these Yezidi Kurds are faking facts, because they claim that Yezidism is the only true Kurdish faith.
Many historicals know that Kurds were once Zoroastrian, at least when only 1% of the Kurds were Zoroastrian why we shouldn't add this information?
There are still many Zoroastrians in northern Iraq.
--ShapurAriani12:24, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I am no expert in the matter (aka kurdish religious beliefs), however if you can WP:CITE sources no reason why it shouldn't be in the article. It is generally preferable to have a reputible source. Bear in mind religion is generally a controversial issue by nature as there are more than one religion on earth. -- Catchi? 13:05, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
We have a problem... certain articles (like Cardcaptor Sakura and World War 2) have continuly faced vandilism and POV. What we need is a template that warns the user that the article is senstive to vandilsm and POV and should be read with caution. Perhaps with varations that include advising potential contribaters to consolte the talk pages for advice before contribuating to the article. -Dynamo_aceTalk
I designed a template like that, its on the talk page of CVU, I dont know how aproporate it is tho. -- Catchi? 10:13, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Yes, but it is stuck in the archive and the template is telling users that the CVU is monitoring this page. Would it be appropate or a more non-baised version is in order? -Dynamo_aceTalk
I was never too happy with the wording on the template, I am out of ideas :) What kind of a wording would you use? -- Catchi? 13:01, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Hmm... i think this might work:
"WARNING: This article has become prone to vandlism and POV and therefore has been known as a senstive article. Potental contributors are advised to consolt the talk page before making additions."
How about {{Talkheader}}? elling something is prone to vandalism and POV has gained little support :/ -- Catchi? 13:11, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
That won't work, i need something that can be stuck on to the main article to warn anon users (amongst others) to be wary with the article. -Dynamo_aceTalk
Cool Cat...please reconsider. I really believe this is excellent time to accept this nomination (Davenbelle is gone) and I really know you have changed. I know all about the "old Cool Cat" (Your rfar is in my sandbox; I look at it everyday). I really would like you to give it a chance. -ZeroTalk22:59, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I am really flaterred but parts of wikipedia community isnt ready for my adminship. I am more than ready and qualified, but since RFA is broken and several people wouldnt miss this opertunity to be m:dicks on my RFA. Before anyone asks, that comment was NOT directed at Oleg Alexandrov as he opposed my 3rd rfa with a VALID reason. My comment was directed at people who would rather have SPUI adminised than me or would rather leave wikipedia all toghether. Such people have not even apologised for such ridiclous comments and some are admins (you'd think they would have a basic understaing of WP:CIVIL). -- Catchi? 23:08, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Cool Cat, I think this is really an excellent opurtunity. As you know, the Bcrats vote on consensus as well as vote percentage, and its obvious anyone who opposes for reasons that violate civilty will be ignored. Also consider the fact that you have improved immensely in your field of behavior; and countless people agree with that fact. I greatly implore you to accept. -ZeroTalk23:11, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You havent seen the panic on IRC right after you post the nom. I know at least 10 people ready to oppose, I wont give them the pleasure. :) -- Catchi? 16:55, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
Who cares for their buffonery...? For every person who opposes, I know 3 that will support. Let them have their "pleasure"; I'm certain you will still win the election in the end. -ZeroTalk16:59, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
To set the record straight Davenbelle had only been a mild irritation as far as I care. Karl Meier got me blocked more than anyone else and should not be trusted (as per a userbox on his own userpage. See: User:Karl Meier). As far as I and many others care he tricked the system by reverting me 3 times then teamng up with davenbelle and revert more, giving me the option of either agreeing with their version (which was any version but my own at a point). Karl Meier opposing and fadix opposing my votes on the recent arbcom hearing is also interesting. It isn't exactly stalking but it is still annoying. I have however more serious issues with vandals.
With my limited user power I can only do so much. But people fear that I would cause havoc all over wikipedia. People are even hesitant to hand me power on IRC as "I might abuse it". Given I have op power on a number of IRC networks, one among the big 5. People think I will start deleting random articles based on my pov and mass block people for no real reason. They have no basis for this but its the gossip and people vote based on gossip (or the lack of it) on RfAs. Hence why I have declined. People still see me as a pov pusher on kurdish articles. Even though I have no to little contribution on such. My only contribution on PKK for ages was tweaking of tables and other minor stuff, but some people make baseless comments as if I have been declaring ownership on those articles. Some people would oppose the RfA because of the "militaristc" "defacto-arbcom": Counter Vandalism Unit "cabal". These comments come from more notable people such as arbotrators which pains me more than anything. Firsthy the defacto arbcom is a definitely not the case, otherwise I would be an admin. The paranoia is ridiclous.
Do not get me wrong I am flattered by your nom and your insistance. However Davenbelle and Karl Meier as well as Fadix (partly if anyone takes his pages of comments on arbcom case's (filed for Davenbelle and Karl Meier and not fadix) talk page any seriously) achieved in polarising a notable comunity against me with the RfAr. -- Catchi? 17:35, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
Firstly, I want to apologise for our spat on IRC earlier today. I accept my share of the blame for being intransigent and perhaps a little arrogant. I should not have got as annoyed as I did. On a separate matter (and please trust me that it is separate; I have been considering this for some time), please see this post of mine to the Foundation-l mailing list. Cheers, [[Sam Korn]]18:15, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, its all right some good came out of it. CVU is undergoing a reform. I was not aware of the problems originated from the group. Although I have to admit there were better ways to tell that to me :). Ne ways, forget that.
As for the images, the deletion of them will mean the end of my wikipedia contributions. Let me explain.
I have been mistreated since my early career, I have been stalked all over the place for months and even with their limmited power admins and users assisted me in the hard times. Arbcom did little to halt it and even one of them suggested a year-long-ban on me for getting stalked. If it werent for a single arbcomer (Raul) the arbcommers may have looked the otherway regarding the level of stalking I recieved. Davenbelles entier contribution was stalking me which even annoyed users aside from myself such as FrencisTylers (whom has oposite POV as I do regarding PKK), DavidGerard, Phroziac, and many others. Davenbelle opsed my second RfA before the nominator could support it. He also objected at me reciving a barnstar (which changed the minds of some arbcomers I think)
Pests like MARMOT and WoW as well as super-troll also gave me a serious hard time, my userpage is among the most vandalised pages on wikipedia, it is one of the RARE pages that suffered multiple vandal bot attacks. I have over 50 imposteration cases. I wrote an IRC bot that people started using whom got promoted to adminship. No objections to their adminship and I did not code the bot to get easy adminship but you'd think I wouldn't be treated like a useless troll by people simply because of that. I dont expect people to like me or hand me adminships. All I wish is to be treated with dignity. Now unblocked MARMOT, SPUI and other refurbished vandals/trolls are treated better than myself and I dont like it. I should be treated with the dignity at least marmot has.
Marmot is also suspected of getting my IP from IRC, and spoofing my ip to vandalise wikipedia using a wikipedia vunrability to get me blocked. While I have no evidence if it was marmot or not, I have every suspicion.
I had to put up with peoples insults, threats, and accusations on both of my rfas, and for the amout of time and effort I spend on wikipedia all the parts commutiy told me is that theyd rather leave wikipedia or promote SPUI to adminship than promote me to adminship.
Then snowspinner deleted the CVU images with suspicion of copyright infirgment without even bothering to list it for 7 days. He speddied the images and many templates images were on such as Template:MARMOT, also rfared me for this. I on the otherhand looked the otherway rather than rfc him to death etc. (and yes he did oppose my RfA)
Then now someone wants to get the images deleted again.
While I was typing this my bot announced that there is a 3rd RfA filed by MegamanZero. As flatered I am I have to reject it. If I accept it, many people would only use it as a means to be dicks and get away with it.
I sometimes ask myself why do I bother contributing to wikipedia... I recieve this overwhelming level of hostility. These comments are not directed at you spesificaly. I am just... just... tired of dealing with stuff like this. I havent vandalised wikipedia once, sure I had a rough start regarding POV but that was about a year ago. -- Catchi? 22:39, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
I haven't got time to respond to this in length right now, but I want to assure you that I fully value your contributions against vandalism. It has only ever been the format of the CVU to which I have been in opposition. I know that I didn't express myself well earlier (I rarely do on IRC), but I am a great fan of the tools that you have developed. I also think you should know that I don't necessarily think the images should be deleted. I just think they should be reappraised in light of the new guidelines. Whether they should be deleted is a Foundation matter, on which I am not qualified to comment. [[Sam Korn]]22:46, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh I see, sorry I am a timered bomb these days... ready to explode any second. I honestly dont understand why people oppose CVU. It exists to guide people into being RC patrolers. It was successfull in this to some extent, people are lured by the nice/cool logo and they read about RC patrol and start RC patroling.
We need more RC patrolers, although its not easy/possible to "replace" RC patrolers such as RickK, this is better than nothing. CVU "Elite" are people who know about RC patroling and are among the more notable ones. I do not RC patrol myself tho, my bot limits my edit ability as I have very limmited and slow net connection.
If images go the luring from them vanishes. And hence CVU looses its main purpose. CVU colects/summerises wikipedia policies and tools into a single page making it easier for newbies. People can jump in bot aided RC patroling by just clicking ONE button without downloading software or anything (java chat). Thats something rather nice IMHO.
The importance of images kicks in here. Why the wikipedia/wikimedia logo? Well its wikipedia! :D
I commend you for your honesty in letting me know about that mail (which I understand you sent) and hope (although do not expect) you read my long rant from earlier on if you care at all. :) -- Catchi? 23:00, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
I hadn't heard of it before; It does sound interesting though, especially their incorporation of Norse mythology. Anime, Manga, and graphic novels generally are not something I know much about. What I've seen and read I've usually liked. The page isn't on my watch list; I run Lupin's anti-vandal tool and sometimes hit 'Rollback' by mistake. Tom HarrisonTalk22:06, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi CoolCat, I don't know if you've been monitoring Aegean dispute at all since our discussion the other day. I've done a pretty large rewrite now, basically from scratch, which is now almost finished in its general outlines. Needs some filling in still. Would you mind having a look? Your {{POV}} tag is still standing; I think it's time we either removed it or started to talk what else should change. Lukas20:40, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Heya CC, I don't think we've spoken before. After speaking up today regarding the membership issue at the CVU page, it has belatedly occurred to me that one or two of the things I've said in my discussions there could possibly be seen by you as a criticism of the work you've done at CVU. If so, please know that isn't true, that's not what I've meant and not what I was trying to convey. You've obviously put in a great deal of work, and as I've said many times today, I found the information gathered there to be a great resource as I was learning to fight vandalism properly. I do certainly have an opinion about how the group could be improved, but that's just an opinion, and in no way reflects on you or the work you have done. I appreciate that work, and I hope you will jump into some of the conversation going on on the talk page there today. Your input would be especially welcome, I'm sure. Thanks --Krich(talk)21:28, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I dont mind criticism, actually I have to thank you for actually proving I am not in charge contrary to gossip, :) -- Catchi? 21:37, 16 January 2006 (UTC)
Bizim için bizden fazla savaşıyorsun. Seni yürekten tebrik ediyorum. Çok teşekkürler. I love you Cool Cat, please keep your good work! --Alperen11:12, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I set up a possible replacement for this template at User:CBDunkerson/Sandbox. It essentially adds an extra parameter to the template call (|if=) to copy the 'if defined call2' template logic out to the Oh My Goddess template itself. In the examples below the top line is the current version and the bottom how it would be called in the replacement (blank spaces are inserted just to line up common elements):
{{if defined call2|{{{Image1| }}}| Oh My Goddess Infobox-Generic/Image|{{{Image1}}}| {{{Caption1}}} }}
{{{if {{{Image1| }}}|{{Oh My Goddess Infobox-Generic/Image|{{{Image1}}}| {{{Caption1}}} }} }}}
Please take a look at my sandbox link above and consider whether this is a viable option. I think that once you look at it the 'if' parameter is just as understandable as 'if defined call2', indeed the two formats are very similar. However, making this change would help to retire Template:If defined call2, and the Template:If defined call and Template:Void templates which it depends on. Primary reason for doing that is to discourage further use of these conditional templates, which could lead to server load problems. If this change is ok with you let me know and I will help convert the articles over... can add the |if= parameter to all existing articles and then switch the template itself to make the change seamless. --CBD☎✉16:50, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not blank sections. Thank you. -- Catchi? 20:28, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
I don't see why I shouldn't have. All it is is a link to a comic strip with Belldandy in it. Were there something more there, I would not have blanked it.--Veemonkamiya11:28, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The section explains how inportant Oh My Goddess! is on cultures outside japan. A clear example is belldandys apearance on a non-japanese comic strip (just like how she appears on various comercials as a camo from time to time). That section needs to be expanded. After all it answers the FAC requests "Why is it notable, what makes oh my goddess! so special?" -- Catchi? 12:38, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
I have to agree with Veemonkamiya, the section wasn't needed unless more information (unbaised of course) comes up.
Oh and the templates to the charathers appears to be bust. Can you take a look? -Dynamo_aceTalk
Dynamo Ace brings up my concern as well. The new template made by CDB is overy saturated with useless sections. I suggest reverting to the last version by Cool Cat. -ZeroTalk11:48, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There was a problem with the header (the one part of the template which doesn't rely on the new format), but I don't see what you mean about 'saturated with useless sections'. Can you give an example? --CBD☎✉12:19, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
False alarm- I was looking at your template, and it had nearly twice as many sections for data as the last- but it turns out you coded it to not depict the sections being utilized. Never mind, my mistake. -ZeroTalk12:41, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, I found a bunch of articles that I had missed updating before. They weren't showing up in 'What links here' from the template (probably because of all the moving around it went through). My bad. I think I've found them all now - I went through the various 'Oh My Goddess' categories to check each article. --CBD☎✉12:43, 20 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please notice that the Kurdistan term is officially recognized in Iraq/Iran. However, I do understand your view on the Kurdish inhabited areas of Turkey, since the term Kurdistan isnot recognized there. Please kindly leave the Kurdistan category in the Kurdish areas inside Iraq/Iran unchanged. Thanks.Heja Helweda07:36, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You will have to cite sources for exact boundaries including those provinces to a kurdistan. Do not ask me or anyone to leave any subject alone. No one owns articles. If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly or redistributed by others, do not submit it. Content you provide MUST be verifiable or it will be removed. -- Catchi? 11:47, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
Why are precise boundaries required in this context? Still, presumably there is fairly strong precision on Iraqi Kurdistan, and there may be similar areas in neighboring Iran but I'm not an expert on the region. --Tony Sidaway|Talk16:19, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I wont accept any random tagging of region or provinces with kurdistan as its borders are loosly defined. However:
Iraqi Kurdistan as you put it is just borders of KAR. you are welcome to suggest it being the borders of KAR or however Iraqis put it, do not mark it as a part of the great kurdistan.
Kurdistan is any region where kurds happen to live, its borders cannot be drawn artificialy. This really is inaproporate. The tagging as you are doing means the province is a territory of a kurdish state. Do not use categories to jigsaw a country out of the blue. I cannot compromise in that area I am sorry.
We just dont mark pages like that with categories even if borders are defined this is like saying california is a blue state for voting democrat majority. I however dont mind a Categoy:Kurdish inhabited regions or something along the line. I still would need citation on its borders.
Why not write about kurdish culture etc rather than competeing over this? I am sure there is more about kurds than their nationalism/seperatism etc... I am beeing blunt but I think I have to.
The issue is currently under consideration whether to delete or keep it and people are voting on it. With all due respect, one person can not decide on the content of Wikipedia. Until a democratic decision is declared on this matter, it cannot be deleted. Again, the name Kurdistan does not imply a country or independence or anything like that. About Kurdish inhabited Regions, that's again something to be voted upon. Majority of Kurds don not like such a term the same way that you do not like the term Kurdistan. The borders of the three provinces(Arbil, Dohuk and Sulaimaniya) in Iraqi Kurdistan are well defined and they are governed by a state (KRG), its official name isnot Kurdish Government but Kurdistan Regional Government. The name of the province in Iran is not Kurdish province but Kurdistan Province. I amnot pushing any POV, these are the simple facts on the ground. Heja Helweda19:53, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is not a democracy. The categry will eventually go away I can assure you that. Pov categories such as that one eventually get deleted or get renamed. Name kurdistan is a declaration of a country as far as I care, usage of an alternative naming for whatever you are trying to convey will not have any resistance from me. KRG is not the legitemate successor of the historic Kurdish nations mentioned on wikipedia. I dont care what the province is called. I wont swallow the establishment of a kurdistan on wikipedia. If you strictly want to talk about areas where kurds are living do so and dont call it kurdistan (aka land of the kurds). I am not alone in this. Use alternative naming please. -- Catchi? 20:31, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
With little effort you can get me banned from editing articles related to kurds and kurdistan. I am under mentorship and my mentor can block me if you think my edits are disruptive. If your intention is to simply to get me banned form the articles pelase mention this to user:Tony Sideaway. If you are however interested in creating wikipedia articles that are not intended to infuriate people such as myself I am more than willing to offer my cooperation. -- Catchi? 20:50, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
First of all, take it easy. It is not a matter of life and death to me. I did not say KRG is legitimate or not, as many Assyrians agree with you on this matter, I just said it does exist, take a flight to Arbil to see it for yourself. Kurdish inhabited areas are called Kurdistan and that's not my POV, it is KRG's POV. Contact them to change their name. About the province, if you don't care, why do you care about the word Kurdistan? I told you, I'll keep Turkey out of the matter and I agree with you on this. But for other areas, there is concrete evidence on the use of the name. We are not here on Wikipedia to decide or change the realities on the ground, just to report them. Heja Helweda20:46, 21 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I am not willing to discuss this. Category kurdistan is unacceptable. -- Catchi? 20:50, 21 January 2006 (UTC)
I decided to cut my vacation a bit short. Due to heavy snowing I am stranded so I will be bored. Dont get me wrong I am still a bit nuts... -- Catchi? 22:49, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
I noticed your rant section, you may want to take a look at mine and we can chear each other up. Or at the very least start a support group: "Annoyed wikipedians" :P -- Catchi? 22:53, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
I see that you are on a break, but thought to mention the matter anyway since you deserve to know about it sooner rather than later. I have nothing invested in the argument- I just happened to see it at the Admins' Noticeboard. Slainté, P.MacUidhir(t)(c)08:17, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you I have commented there too. -- Catchi? 22:53, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
I just noticed your comments there, I am not going to bother responding there. I find your overal ownership of the hole thing annoying. In anycase I have no strength left to offer any resistance to anyone as I am pounded by a large number of users now. Sockpuppets and trolls are given a higher respect than myself. this post here has no reason. Since I dont even know why I am telling all this to you. -- Catchi? 22:12, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Hmm.. Id like that. Its not you offending me, its a number of people giving me a hard time. I am likely to explode anyone talking to me because of that. -- Catchi? 22:25, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Hi Cool Cat, I left a lengthy reply to your comments on the talk page for Aegean dispute, but I now see you seem to be under a lot of Wikistress about other issues, so I guess you might not have much energy left for that one right now. We can let that discussion wait, of course. Or do you know of somebody else who might be interested in joining that page and monitor POV from a Turkish perspective? Take care, Lukas23:04, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I have responded to your response on the talk page of the article. Unlike what you may think that article has been one of the most pleasant ones I have ever touched/discussed. I thank you for your civil, and polite attitude for that you should be commended as this is not a wikipedia standard (even though it should be).
Unlike what some people may suggest I am not Turkish while I may be biased as I lived in Turkey for a while.
Thanks for your kind words. Yes, I think this has been a pretty good cooperative enterprise, which is rare for a politically laden topic such as this. And I feel the article is getting pretty good :-) I've now filled in most of the sources I had and removed the underconstruction notice. Lukas(T.|@)23:02, 23 January 2006 (UTC) (I followed your hint about this one too, as you see. Is it working?)[reply]
Man. I am telling you it aint gona work. People ban me off of IRC channels when I prompt them to ban MARMOT. RfA is really broken. -- Catchi? 16:19, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
And I was banned on IRC for requesting a ban on MARMOT (from the IRC channel) by a person I used to look up to. Geez I pick lousy role models... it is so hard to admire a person who doesn't even like you. My RFA will definitely fail. Last RFA failed because I told snowspinner off for inquiring about copyright status of CVU images in the middle of a vandal bot attack. He simply deleted every template CVU images appeared on and deleted the CVU images and not just that but also Rfared me. God knows how many people would oppose me for talking down on MARMOT and requesting his ban from the IRC channel. People generally choose idiotic reasons to oppose RfAs anyways (such as candidate having too many userboxes).
Some exiting admins are too arrogant for me to work with. The consider themselves to be the best thing since slice bread they can violate every policy and dictate how articles or templates should be. This isn't uneque to admins but mostly I deal with such people who are admins. Such as the incident on Skuld or on template:user wikipedia
I don’t care about wikipedia enough to care about adminship. I do not like this community that doesn’t like me. Don’t get me wrong there are lots of users who like me. There are just more whom hate me for reasons I am not made aware of.
People make lots of ridiculous statements about me. Until I am treated like I should be I have no reason to have admin powers to serve this community. I don’t mop after people not appreciating my mop work without a mop.
No need to waiste wikipedias bandwidth over something as useless as my RfA. I'd rather use that bandwidth for articles. People are stuck with the means too much on wikipedia and they call CVU militarsitic... those idiots. All of them have forgotten about the ends. The point of wikipedia, aka encyclopedia. All some of those care is about me violating NPOV about a "YEAR" ago. Man I wonder if they were flawles wikipedians when they were newbies. -- Catchi? 21:50, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
You're right. However, if I didn't truly believe you had a chance of passing this election (no matter how slim), I would not have filled out the rfa. Please accept, I'd like to survey the progress - and besides, its very possible people might vote out of good faith and provide some constructive criticism. -ZeroTalk16:23, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I dont want to be with it same category as admins. I am not admin material. I am not arrogant enough. -- Catchi? 16:27, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
But Cool Cat... I don't think I'm arrogant, and I wish to be administrator soon, our good friend Tony is administrator and he is not arrogant (though this can be argued in some cases.. :)) as well as many others. Administrator is not to please the people nor is it an award. Its for the good of the encyclopedia and I honestly believe in the conjecture that you would benefit from gaining the possition. Please accept. -ZeroTalk16:36, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Tony is no longer my firend, however I am not going to forget him standing up for me. I am not sure what to think of him. His arrogant attitude on IRC a day or two ago regarding Category:Kurdistan is something I wont forget... Siding with a sockpuppet that is. Lecturing me how apporporate that damn category is... What kind of a nerve does he have?!!? -- Catchi? 16:53, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
I am sorry, but due to my technical difficulties I have no access to IRC as of late, therefore I have no idea of what traspired on IRC peviously. However, what I do know is that Kurdistan is an area/country with very indistigiusable boundaries and divisions, meaning grouping such areas in one category is (arguably) one's own POV. And while I trust you and believe that the truth is spoken when you believe that person is a sockpuppet, I think that you should not let bad-faith editors impede your decision to accept the rfar. I know it might not turn out out well, but I still believe you should accept. I am curious to see what ridiculous reasons people have to oppose you; as I am positive they won't be worth anything. -ZeroTalk17:08, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I told you, I do not want to be held in the same category as those arrogants... Not all admins are bad many are and last thing I want is to be on the same category as them. -- Catchi? 17:11, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
Coolcat, I have been away from my Computer for nearly a month because I was on my summer vacation and now I can only view images when I click on the high res. link on the images. When viewing pages there is just a blank box. Did some wikipedian policy change or something? Thanks Hamedog04:38, 24 January 2006 (UTC). Could you please reply on my talk too?[reply]
No such thing has happened (as far as I know). We did have problems with image servers from time to time tho. which images can you not see? -- Catchi? 11:55, 24 January 2006 (UTC)
I cannot see any images on articles. I cannot see the images when I click on the blank box where the image should be. I can only see then when I click high res. It been happening the whole time and I can see images on other websites. I can also see images on wikipedia using the desktop at home (I am using a notebook}. I used to be able to see images on wikipedia last year, but this year it hasn't worked. Maybe I should ask dave taylor?Hamedog21:39, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry about the lateness of this reply too.
I am not sure what the problem is. It works fine over here. What os and browser do you use and ae you sure you havent turned off images? -- Catchi? 22:38, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
I am using XP, Firefox. I don't think I have turned images off as I can see images on every other site and can see the wikipedia globe in the top left corner. It is only in articles. I can see colours though. Is there something I can change in preferences? Also, it doesn't change when I sign in or out. I was wondering if you could tell me how you do that signature of yours too. Hamedog06:27, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
For signature: Click prefernaces and add <small>[[User:Hamedog|Hamedog]]<sup>[[User talk:Hamedog|Talk]]|[[Special:Emailuser/Hamedog|@]] to "Nickname:" box and also check "Raw signature (no auto link; don't use templates or external links in this)" box. -- Catchi? 18:23, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
For images: I have no idea what could be wrong. Since you being logged of must fix it. I am as convused as you are. You may want to talk to the devs. -- Catchi? 18:23, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
The Devs are who?--HamedogTalk|@ 21:40, 27 January 2006 (UTC
Don't worry about replying, images appeared all of a sudden litereally a minute ago viewing this very page (the wikimood and no barnstar on the side etc). Thanks for your help Cool Cat. --HamedogTalk|@21:44, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You seem to be rather upset, and I think that as your mentor I need to think for you and act in your best interests. I've removed your RFA because you clearly don't seriously expect to be made an administrator on this occasion. Could we talk online? --Tony Sidaway|Talk23:03, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Rather upset you say... That is an understatement. -- Catchi? 14:56, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Why don't you leave me alone. I only cause you problems. -- Catchi? 15:19, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
You never caused me any problems--at least none that I didn't gladly accept as your friend. As your latest RFA self-nomination appears to be in order I'll not intervene again. --Tony Sidaway|Talk16:53, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! You have this paragraph on your user page: "Do realise that vandalising Wikipedia is a very bad idea. Brian Chase was forced to resign from his job because of the mounting pressure all because of vandalising a wikipedia page. He was also mocked on the New York Times as well as CNN." The CNN word links to: http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/12/11/wikipedia.ap/index.html, link which is dead. HTH. --Vlad02:02, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I see. Them let's get to the root of the problem. What do you think is MARMOT's fasination (ie. Obsessision) with harrasssing you...? I find it odd that this user contributes such a unhealthy amount of time and energy tormenting you. -ZeroTalk15:21, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
My interactions with you in the past have always been quite good. Please take this in the spirit it is intended, which is friendly, and to help you. I think you should consider withdrawing your RfA. I am personally concerned that you are treating the RfA as an affirmation of a job well done on Wikipedia. This is not what it is for. I am mostly concerned that the RfA is not going to go well, and that it will cause you to leave Wikipedia. Yet, the reasons it will not go well have nothing to do with your value as an editor. Please see my latest comment on the RfA and decide if letting the RfA run is really in your best interests. What is it about being an admin that you really, really want to be able to do but can not due right now as a non-admin? --Durin16:17, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
As a non admin I cannot block a vandal vandalising my userpage. As a non admin I cannot block vandals. As a non admin I am useless. -- Catchi? 16:20, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
You are in no respect useless. You've gotten yourself into a serious funk. Were I there, we'd hit a pub and get ridiculously drunk and hash it out. Knock off the self-defeatism, ok? :) --Durin17:56, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Your RfA is becoming "give me adminship or I'll leave". The outcome under this guise is pre-determined. RfA isn't going to grant you admin tools under such a demand. This is tantamount to finding a reason other than yourself to leave Wikipedia. This is wiki-suicide. Please, don't do this. --Durin20:26, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You are bright. Please understand there is nothing I want to do on wikipedia left. At least for a serious amount of time. However, if I am given proper RC patrol tools I will stick around for another year. -- Catchi? 20:32, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Such powers won't give you the respect and knowlage needed to help protect Wikipedia, listen to a good friend, power isn't everything.By trying to seek such powers such as adminship on a case of that you are not fit to have such powers, you are essently causing Anakin Skywalker syndrome! Stick to what you do best and leave such powers in the most responsable hands.
I leave that as my opion, it is up to you to decide. -Dynamo_aceTalk
I have stick to my best and my best only got me harassment from User:MARMOT for which I was awarded with a ban from #wikipedia. If marmot is that decent of a guy then I won't interfere his wiki experience. -- Catchi? 20:35, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
I dont bluff hence no one can call my bluff (regarding the rfa) -- Catchi? 20:36, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
My RfAr limits me greatly on topics I care to write about. When I make useful edits on those topics I am still yelled at.
Apperantly everything related to kurds are controversial. I do not however see anything about kurds aside from "atrocities" committed against them such as the "cultural genocide" from hydroelectric dams as well as other stuff. Almost all articles related to Kurds are one sided. Pro/Anti-Kurd is a poor definition as there are no uniformal POV on either side. I do not deny I have my own pov regarding the topic. I make an effort to not push that. But when I revert random tagging of provinces with Category:Kurdistan, my action causes me trobble. So since I am not welcome to make edits there, I am left with only one option: RC patrol.
There shouldn't be any reason why people are voting oppose. People are being paranoid on stuff what might happen.
You said "There shouldn't be any reason why people are voting oppose". Yet, you also say "I will no longer honor any rules or policies on wikipedia so long as there are double standards". Surely you can see why someone would vote against you when you are carrying that sort of opinion at this time? You are very angry right now, and very upset with Wikipedia. This is not an attitude that is going to encourage people to vote for you. I said it before, and I'll repeat it here; if the consequence of a failed RfA is you leaving Wikipedia, then you're committing wiki-suicide. Your RfA is failing, and will fail. Given your current mindset, it's hard for people to be sympathetic to your situation. --Durin13:21, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I cannot take my words back... -- Catchi? 15:03, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
I am not the one pulling the triger, gun is in the hands of voters. I'll maybe stay if there are about 50/50 votes as after all thats a no consensus rather than oppose and I was going to leave on oppose. Still I do not think thats going to happen. This is strictly because of your comments. I am however not sure. -- Catchi? 15:44, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
I honestly feel like I am negotiating with someone who has a gun to their head. The choice to stay or not is entirely yours. Nobody else is pulling the trigger. You are. I can't imagine you actually thought that submitting an RfA at this time would result in you becoming an admin. There wasn't anything to be gained from it but an excuse to wiki-kill yourself. Nobody has the responsibility for what you are doing but yourself. You are better than this, and you know what the outcome of this is; it's pre-determined. You're leaving people little choice but to vote oppose to you. If it was a fair RfA, it might pass...but it isn't. You tilted it from the beginning to make it a referendum against you, noting the ultimatum that pass or I leave. What did you expect? People to jump up and down and suddenly declare you to be great and grant you the admin buttons? RfA has never gone like that. You knew that. You put the trigger to your head. Please, stop this behavior. You're so much better than this. --Durin15:53, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
meh RfA is broken... -- Catchi? 15:56, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
I Can bend my words slightly. Can you RfC me for me? I do not know the procedure as the procedure changed greatly since my last one. -- Catchi? 15:58, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Disruptive behaviour? -- Catchi? 17:30, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
I guess this is a [7] case... :o -- Catchi? 16:03, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Given your comments here on your talk page in response to me and others, would you be willing to withdraw your RfA? I ask this because it won't achieve any end you'd really want to achieve at this point. --Durin17:00, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for withdrawing it. That's a step in the right direction. Now, can we work together on getting you back to editing the main namespace? --Durin18:26, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You are starting to lose it again! Just because you can't get your way doesn't mean you can't throw your toys out of the pram! Look at me, i would like to impose restrictions on numorous anon vandals who have been either vandalism for the sake of it or just want to unbalance some of the most senstive articles know on Wikipedia, but i can't and nor do i want too, because that could make me an unbalanced wikipedian, so i follow procedure and hope that justice is dealt.
You don't have to deal in senstive areas, just deal in areas which you know you can accomplish without problem. -Dynamo_aceTalk
The thing is I get yelled at for following the procedure. -- Catchi? 15:00, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
How exactly then do you follow the procdure, i put all vandels on a 3 strike system, with each vandal attack i detect scoring that user a strike. Strike 1, they get an general anon warning, strike 2, they get a general signed warning, and then strike 3, and then they get reported.
Maybe it is how you are warning users that may be the problem -Dynamo_aceTalk
Then maybe the category is too senstive for your liking and you might not have all the facts needed to enforce it properly. I'm not trying to insult you or anything, but you must know when functions end. Combating vandlism is one of them. -Dynamo_aceTalk
Precisely why I do not touch articles related to kurds. So I try to get peoples attention. Either on IRC or not no one cares. Hence I have to do it myself. -- Catchi? 15:35, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
I intend to devote my time perfecting my bot (I do not leave unfinished work behind) and then send it to people and vanish from the project similar to User:RickK. -- Catchi?15:37, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Then maybe you have to wait until a sutible soultion can be achieved by the community. We are all in this togther, and our enemy is the vandals who try to destroy the only fresh resource that is reachable by nearly everyone on the world. You still have a place here, i mean we are still waiting for an up to date audio version of Ah!My goddess! and its respective articles.So don't let people get you down or they will think they have won and drive you out, believe me, i have had this on me before. -Dynamo_aceTalk
Hmm... You know... you are manuplating me... :) -- Catchi? 20:21, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
Hi Cool Cat. I'm sorry for the slow reply, I've been off-wiki. I've read all you wrote on my talk page, and I can certainly see why you are feeling fed-up with Wikipedia at the moment. I wish I could help, I really do. Certainly, from what you say about the ban from #wikipedia, I would have protested and probably removed that - but that's not very helpful to say now. As far as I am concerned, you are a welcome member of the channel, and MARMOT is not.
On the categories, I won't second guess your mentor - but I will say this: it's sometimes very, very difficult for us to edit in areas of Wikipedia that we really care about. I know you don't want to hear any suggestion that you should stay away from that subject, but I think it's important to acknowledge that it will always be difficult for you to edit there. There will always be people who feel you are pushing a POV, and you will always have to fight your own preconceptions and firm ideas to find the neutrality needed.
I couldn't find the problem with the CVU and RFA, but I think that this is a wider problem anyway. RfA is certainly not an ideal process - none of our processes are really. How we change that, or even if we can change that, I just don't know. As I was saying on IRC before we got cut off - you have built up your reputation from your troubled early days. You haven't totally overcome them, because Wikipedian have horribly long memories, but you have come a long way. Whether it's possible to totally overcome those initial problems is impossible to say, I don't think I've ever seen it done I'm sad to say.
But that doesn't mean you are not a valued and valuable member of this project. So I really hope that thinks improve for you on Wikipedia and that you get back to enjoying it. And please don't burn your bridges, it's better to take time off and recover your breath than to get angry and make it impossible to return. You do some good work, and are someone I want to see stick around. -- sannse(talk)22:23, 26 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You nominated your self and apperently what you said for that RFA caused it to fail.... If you had not of done that you would of become an admin. Make some edits appologising about it and change how you express your self on it (still put forward your ideas but say it differntly...)
Why all the concern about "rc patrolling"? Haven't you got more interesting things to do? THere are plenty of people running around doing that already. This is an encyclopedia. You don't need to be an administrator to edit. Furthermore, if you watch a few hundred pages, even a thousand or more, you can revert instances of vandalism or errant users simply enough with administrative tools. It's easy enough for somebody else to block if it needs to happen, but I think once you remove yourself from the politics that you won't find it to be as much of an issue. Regardless. Good luck, and try to destress a little. Avriette04:42, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Umm no I am more hardcore than that. I watch over every edit on wikipedia. I filter the ones that are suspicious and people revert pased on that. AKA my bot. People who use the bot are trustable users some became admins just by using my bot. Which is fine. But when it comes to trust people cant trust me. People dont like me. People wont accept me. That what hurts me most. However on this rfa no one made "utterly stupid" remarks. Some remarks were not ok as they had nothing to do with adminship but was exponentialy better. -- Catchi? 18:26, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
Don't revert again. There is a SPECIFIC REASON why that template is the way it is, so that we can convert Template:Main articles over to it. If a specific page looks incorrect, then fix it... someone is probably just mistaken about how to use it. -- Netoholic@19:42, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Template main have always been passed a string (article name) not a link. That's how it was always used prior to your edits. I am not willing to fix hundereds of links for you.
If you want to make an edit to a template you must be willing to fix any page you break. You have broken hundereds of pages. -- Catchi? 20:46, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
I see lots of articles with broken links, from what understand you are willing to break a large number of pages (thousands) without hestiation for no good reason. -- Catchi? 21:52, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
I can see you have spent a lot of effort gathering the texts on Wikiholism to Meta. I can see no point in doing that, as most articles in the Wikipedia projects do have wikilinks to cover the need to find an article in another language. Why should Wikiholism be treated otherwise? (It's not like the election documents, which in some way were official documents from the board of trustees.) RaSten08:47, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Wikiholism has nothing to do with the "Wikipedia Encyclopedia", it is rather an illness among wikipedia editors. The pages explaining Wikiholism do not help article namespace to improve hence the Wikiholism concept is strictly a part of "wikipedia culture". Also true Wikiholics perefer meta. :) -- Catchi? 11:38, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Yes and that namespace is primarily for wikipedia policies or proposed policies or guidlines or other stuff intended to assist editors on writing an encyclopedia. Wikiholism is not intended to that end. I am not saying its something useless, its just that for such stuff we have meta. -- Catchi? 15:54, 28 January 2006 (UTC)
Most Wikipedias including the Dutch one don't like it when an unknown user wipes out a page whithout discussing it first on the talk page, so it will be reverted. When you want to make such a page on Meta, ok, but when you wipe out and move the page, also the history of edits isn't longer available on the page. Also the user has to click once more because redirection between Mediawiki projects does not function. JePe17:30, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well in a good faith environment such a move should not cause anyone any stress. Its a simple move.
The history is avalible on the nl page and a new history will develop on meta.
Yes the meta page redirect is not possible, just like all pages on meta. The user can click on the link. All links going to the nl:Wikipedia:Wikiaholic can be changed to go to m:Wikiaholic and problem will not be that bad. -- Catchi? 29 jan 2006 01:04 (CET)
What do you want to discuss further. It isnt easy to move a page to meta and had taken me several hours. I did the bulk of the work, all there is now is the blanking of the nl page :) -- Catchi? 29 jan 2006 01:06 (CET)
In a good faith environment, changes are made because the Wikipedians on a Wikipedia want them, not because a single Wikipedian from another Wikipedia wants them. - Andre Engels19:08, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What are you trying to say? I do not like your attitude. -- Catchi? 19:38, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
What I am trying to say, is that the Dutch Wikipedians are used to be the ones who decide what is and what is not on the Dutch Wikipedia. And that if you go make such changes on other Wikipedias (or even on the English one), that you can expect to be reverted. - Andre Engels19:43, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If you oppose such a move to meta w/o any reason please ask your self this "Will it change anything". The main reason this is moved to meta is that us Wikiholics will get together interwiki. Or at least that was my original idea. If you want to downright oppose, I cannot prevent you. I wont pursuit this any longer. Several languages have acknowleged the move some are resisting. I really dont care, your loss. -- Catchi? 20:38, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Next time you try to force the french wikipedia to move such pages to meta against their will, you'll be blocked. Each project is free to decide what to do with such pages. Please do not mix with other projects habits. Make the move to meta if you wish, but do NOT impose english habits on other languages (in short, do not impose moving the pages over there). Thanks in advance. Anthere22:11, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I dare you to block me for that, I merely tried to unite interwiki communities on a bold attempt. For that I only get yelled at. -- Catchi? 22:18, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
Hi Cool Cat.
I just now saw that you have put thet POV tag on the article: Kurds of Syria.
It is quite possible that the page still be one sided as you have mentioned there. But please say which parts in the article is so. I will be glad if you do so. I want the article to be a neutral one.
Sure, we have an article improvement drive going on for articles related to kurds going on (planned) at the moment. That article is on top of my list to be processed. -- Catchi? 16:01, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
So you're leaving us officially now? Shame. You'll be missed! --D-Day 22:35, 29 January 2006 (UTC)
If it is about that anon vandal who likes to leave unproven personal attacks, then i have ignored him.
Your just not trying to cool down, instead you are going back into "fights" that you can not win in any case. You need to focus on areas which can make a difference without disruption. And there is still lots of work to do.
But if you just want to fade away, fair enougth, i won't comment nor weep... but i will miss you. -Dynamo_aceTalk
This is not about battle variness or anon vandal (I have no idea of this anon vandal)
The only one responsible of my departure is myself. Since several disturbed people are holding me responsible of RickK's departure, I do not want anything like that over me.
People have contributed in the general level of annoyance I recieve:
Kelly Martin banning me from #wikipedia on IRC for me requesting a ban on a MARMOT sockpuppet.
I used to admire/worship her... Your role model turning against you is rather hard to swalow.
Tony Sidaway threatening to ban me from articles related to kurds for me reverting a sockpuppet
User in questions only contribution was tagging random articles with category Kurdistan, also opposed my rfa 3 and is an obvious pov pusher acusing random people of being "turkish/mongol nationalistic" (what ever that means).
Sorry Tony but threats are the worst way to comunicate with me you should have known by now. Tony I don't hate you tho.
kim_ on irc complaining and presuring me about the IRC channel restrictions forcing me to lift the restrictions
Did not even joined the channel after restrictions lifted.
Anthre threatening to block me if I dared "force" fr.wiki on to accepting something.
A Nl wikipedian (could be Karl Meier or davenbelle who knows) had been revert waring with me interwiki on languages he/she did not had any other contribution but reverting me. All I sugested was the move of a page to meta.wikimedia.
I only had two edits on fr wikipedia promting such a threat. Even if this was an idle threat it still served to its purpose. I have not ever been intimidated by threats and I do not intend to start now.
None above should be held accountable of anything. I just want them to know how I feel about it.
I should have left with dignity after my first rfa... Incident after incident, edit after edit its the same story. Comunity simply put is too hostile to work with. Instead of talking, people monopolise and declare ownerships. Such people are not regular users or anons but admins (one being a board member).
Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia was a dream for me. The longer it lasts, the more painful it is to awaken from it. I wish there was a pleasant enviorment free from hostilites here.
I enjoyed working with you, your departure saddens me but I understand. Thank you for the help, advice and support you gave me. --Alfmelmac10:11, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
As you have said that you want to be alone, so be it! But if you need someone, i am here.
I have posted a message on the Oh! My goddess! talk page about the postion for a spoken word version of the respective articles become vacant again. If anyone is intrested please go to Talk:Oh My Goddess!.
And i will perseve these pages so that vandels won't gloat about your departure from wikipedia.
Hmm... the infomation on ANN is not in chronical order but there is a bit i can use to enchance the article. As for all the roles she has been in, some of the roles she have done are only minor, adding them or a nearly every single apperarance may not go down well with other users because they are only minor and not significant apperances or the page could get overloaded if all her apperances are listed.
Therefore, i have included a IMDB link for now, and await your suggestions for improvement. -Dynamo_aceTalk
Do a section for major roles and a subsection (maybe) for minor roles. "Major" role is POV anyways :P. The ANN is ordered alphabeticaly, wikipedia is chronologicaly. i do not see why we shouldnt list her every appearance. We do that for movie stars no? See: Jackie Chan -- Catchi? 15:32, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Big and Little Wong Tin Bar jakie was only 8 years old on this movie. I seriously doubt he had a major role :P -- Catchi? 15:35, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading Image:Star of life.gif. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.
If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.
If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you.--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91($ |-| r 3 $ |-| t |-|)11:50, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This image is exempt from copyrights. The image has a source and I believe that websie created. That image is in the public domain as it is avalible on many ambulances, ER uniforms, and even on ER rooms.
Tell me you were kidding with that warning. -- Catchi? 11:59, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
I haven't seen that sort of ambulance star before, cause I'm in India and here we have a different type of cross. Anyways, the img was tagged as no copyright information, and so I thought I'd asked you. I'm sorry to here you're leaving. So many users are leaving nowadays (freestylefrappe, SWD316 and now you).--May the Force be with you! Shreshth91($ |-| r 3 $ |-| t |-|)12:14, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I highly recomend checking history of an image to see if the tag was modified, which was the case for this image. -- Catchi? 12:17, 31 January 2006 (UTC)
I did check the history, and since I'm no great shakes at copyrights, I wasn't sure what was correct since User:Simetrical had commented that The stated reason for the image being public-domain is impossible. Please see Wikipedia:Copyright and determine the legal status of the image. I was just checking. --May the Force be with you! Shreshth91($ |-| r 3 $ |-| t |-|)12:24, 31 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Some people intentionaly give me hard time strictly to annoy me. At least I hope that's it. Otherwise why else would they complain about restrictions imposed on an IRC channel and never use it once restrictions were removed.
People dont even trust me to hand over admin power after a full year here. People who threatened to leave wikipedia on my forst rfa if I were to be adminise still vote oppose on the 3rd rfa complaining about civility and AGF. Granted adminship is a broken process and my rfa 3 wasnt remotely as bad as rfa 3 but still there are reapearing people voting oppose.
People I trust/should trust such as mentors, arbitrators, and board members are giving me a hard time. An arbotrator banned me from #wikipedia for requesting the ban of User:MARMOT who was taunting me in PMs. While the ban from #wikipedia does not slience pms it at least symbolicaly removes marmot from my presence. Youd think people would not ban good users. I got a oard member threating to ban me if I force fr wiki (I dont know how can I do that since I dont know french and had only 2 real edits on fr.wiki). I am not going to slander these individuals any further.
I am tired of contributing to a comunity whom the people in charge does not appriciate my prsence and efforts to the point of threatening me with blocks on even the slightest dispute. I would not put up with this even if I were payed, not that I care about money all that much.
Even in my last days here I get "the image you uploaded is for deletion" warning for an image designed for PD. But I can't blame the person posting that to my talk page as image history is quite silly.
If I stay people will annoy me knowing I wont leave. If I leave they wont annoy me. Also people use me as an excuse to oppose rfas. It is almost at the point of "'''Oppose''' User is a friend of Cool Cat ~~~~"
