|
buttonlabel=Leave me a note!
</inputbox>
== Women's rights ==
I'm not on a shared IP, just a lowly comcast inet connection and I certainly did not vandalize the Women's Rights page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women%27s_rights) page. Feel free to contact me at victor at fourstones dot net but don't ban my IP since I use wp as an important resource in my work. (this is me: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Fourstones-framed_bg.jpg ) -- 24.5.196.208, 22:18, March 8, 2007
== Fair use disputed tag ==
I put a [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Image%3AScwartzbarbaratribune.jpg&diff=115439643&oldid=115436530 fair use disputed] tag on the image you put on the article [[Barbara Schwarz]]. Don't get me wrong - I think an image would add nicely to the article, but that particular image doesn't have enough of a fair use reasoning behind it. There are a coupla things that could be done - You could add a "Fair Use Rationale" subsection to the image description page, with about 4 or more "points" as to your fair use reasoning, or even better, attempt to contact ''The Salt Lake Tribune'', and see if they will give permission for the image to be used on a non-profit encyclopedia with attribution given - for education non-commercial purposes only ... Let me know what you think. Yours, [[User:Smee|Smee]] 00:04, 16 March 2007 (UTC).
:hi, I'll reply on the Schwarz talk page to everyone. I didn't realize we weren't linking to the mirror SLT article so will DB self the image for now, and mail SLT for an OK. if they give it, I'll reupload the image then with an email authorization from them. thanks! - [[User_talk:DennyColt|Denny]] 01:46, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
::Hi Denny, thank you for your efforts with seeking permission from the SLT to use their image. Sorry it didn't work out. Best wishes, [[User:Orsini|Orsini]] 23:14, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
:::Yes, thanks again! There are probably more public domain documents somewhere... [[User:Smee|Smee]] 15:17, 25 March 2007 (UTC).
== [[Bates College]] ==
Denny,
We currently attend Bates College. The Bates College Rough Crew is a crucial aspect of the Bates College student life. There is no joke here. The Rough Crew is as much a part of student life as the pub crawl, Newman Day, etc. {{unsigned|Pstrumol}} 05:36, March 22, 2007
== Img ==
Hi. Any word on [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Barbara_Schwarz&diff=115460869&oldid=115451993 this] ? Thanks for your time. Yours, [[User:Smee|Smee]] 21:25, 22 March 2007 (UTC).
== Thanks for reinstantiating [[Template:Buddhism]]! ==
You reverted the vandal within a minute. Amazing! Well-done! I applaud your diligent, righteous, safe-guarding efforts! [[User:Larry_Rosenfeld|Larry Rosenfeld]] ([[User_talk:Larry_Rosenfeld|talk]]) 11:37, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
== [[William Bradford (professor)]] ==
Thanks,Denny. I appreciate your fairness and decency. I imagine that the enemies I made 2 years ago won't be happy with the edits and will want to revert everything, and if you would be kind enough to be on guard for that I'd be very grateful. I've written to the administrator asking for relief in the form of either removing the page, freezing it in a fair format, or else "salting" it I believe is the proper phrase. It's difficult work being a whistleblower, and to have to bear the burden is hard, especially since my wife is disabled from what happened to her in 2001 and the smear campaign has dampened my job prospects. I'm hoping the sun will shine again, and I pray every day in Christ's name. So I know God is watching.
Warm regards, and thank you.
Bill {{unsigned|24.250.202.104}} 06:44, March 24, 2007
== Cheers ==
Have a nice w/end, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 15:19, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
== Talk page houskeeping upon closing a "move" debate. ==
I would like to invite you, when moving an article, as a consequence of a discussion or debate to also do some talk-page and debate-housekeeping. <BR>
One model is here at [[Talk:Hillary_Rodham_Clinton/Archive_5#Requested_move]]. <br>
I can't find a policy guideline for this kind of thing, but if you do, please point it out to me.<br>
What is helpful about doing this housekeeping is that it affirmatively closes a debate, and gives notice that the move has been accomplished, which...might not be clearly closed without the housekeeping.<br>
(The move at [[Talk:Political positions of Mitt Romney#Requested move]] is what brings me to make this suggestion, which I marked concluded, after your move.)
:: -- Best regards, -- [[User:Yellowdesk|Yellowdesk]] 16:25, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
:Thanks. A follow-up and another caution.<br>
: For your information, the moved page has a reason for being moved in your edit summary remarks (as related to similar pages, titled '''Political views of .....''' listed at [[Talk:Political positions of Mitt Romney#Requested move]]) that is erroneous. I had initiated the discussion because of the exceptional character of the move, and so we would not have future "move wars" on the page because this page doesn't follow similar article titles. Perhaps the proposal's intent to not follow other pages of the same name is something that should have been said on the project page, and that the move was exceptional...and now (for the moment), intentionally unique. For an outsider, I can see it might be a challenge to see why the discussion was created. -- [[User:Yellowdesk|Yellowdesk]] 22:59, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
== RegisterFly ==
Hi there, got your message. Haven't been online very consistently so far today, but I will gladly take a look at that article sometime within the next 24 hours and make minor cleanups/tag, and leave a note on the talk page at minimum. You seem to be having an interesting evening ;). [[User:Risker|Risker]] 02:45, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
:Hello Denny, give me a few days to go over the article. I get back to you then. :-) {{User:Netscott/s1.js}} 20:16, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
I've gone through the article over the course of the day (you can probably see a few of my edits), but failed to get back to you until now. I did put a couple of cite tags in where there are quotes that are not specifically attributed, down near the end of the article; I know I may be a bit cite-happy given recent editing experience ;-). I am of the overall impression that the introduction could use some further discipline in its structure, in particular bringing to the surface why the failure of RegisterFly is significant in a world-wide sense, and not just to those domain holders. It will probably be difficult to really flesh this out before the expected announcements from the ICANN meeting later this week; and of course when the deregistration occurs later this week, there will also be yet-to-be-seen impacts on the customers that will be reported. What you have here is a good base for moving forward in the next couple of weeks as the situation continues to evolve. While I think it will be a while before this will be eligible for GA status (simply because it is a current event), you might want to see if there is a really good sentence or two that might be suitable for Did You Know; perhaps talk with one of the editors there? [[User:Risker|Risker]] 02:25, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
== RFA Thanks ==
I would like to thank you for your support in my recent RFA. As you may or may not be aware, it passed with approximately 99% support. I ensure you that I will use the tools well, and if I ever disappoint you, I am [[:Category:Administrators open to recall|open to recall]]. If you ever need anything, don't hesitate to leave me a note on my talkpage. Thanks again, <span style="color:red;font-weight:bold">^</span>[[User:^demon|<span style="color:black;font-weight:bold;">demon</span>]]<sup>[[User_talk:^demon|<span style="color:red">[omg plz]</span>]]</sup> <em style="font-size:10px;">20:42, 25 March 2007 (UTC)</em>
== Incoherent sentence on Registerfly ==
About [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=RegisterFly&curid=9660405&diff=117885528&oldid=117763965 this edit], the sentence is a direct quotation; the source itself is good. Did you mean that the quotation itself--that's literally what the person said--is incoherent, or the way I referred to the quotation? - [[User_talk:DennyColt|Denny]] 01:34, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
:The quotation itself (on [[Registerfly]] is incoherent, and lacks a subject to relate to the verb "understand". If maintained as a quotation, it needs a <nowiki> [sic], </nowiki>; even better is a different quotation that makes sense in English, or better yet, paraphrasing in a non-quotation context, or editorial insertion of the subject of the sentence with <nowiki> [I] </nowiki>; or something like that. -- [[User:Yellowdesk|Yellowdesk]] 01:45, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
== Fair use rationale for Image:Navdeepbains.parl.gc.ca.jpg ==
[[Image:Nuvola apps important.svg|70px|left]]
Thanks for uploading '''[[:Image:Navdeepbains.parl.gc.ca.jpg]]'''. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under [[Wikipedia:Fair use|fair use]] but there is no [[Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline|explanation or rationale]] as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the [[Wikipedia:Image copyright tags/Fair use|boilerplate fair use template]], you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to [[:Image:Navdeepbains.parl.gc.ca.jpg|the image description page]] and edit it to include a [[Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline |fair use rationale]].
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "[[Special:Contributions/{{PAGENAME}}|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 fair use images lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#Images.2FMedia|criteria for speedy deletion]]. If you have any questions please ask them at the [[Wikipedia:Media copyright questions|Media copyright questions page]]. Thank you. [[User:Jesse Viviano|Jesse Viviano]] 15:34, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
:Thanks Jesse, updated (sorry, I forgot!). - [[User_talk:DennyColt|Denny]] 15:42, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
== This image should be replaced with a free photo. ==
=== Image:Navdeepbains.parl.gc.ca.jpg ===
Thanks for uploading '''[[:Image:Navdeepbains.parl.gc.ca.jpg]]'''. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under [[Wikipedia:Fair use|fair use]], but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our [[Wikipedia:Fair use criteria|first fair use criterion]] in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:
# Go to [[:Image:Navdeepbains.parl.gc.ca.jpg|the image description page]] and edit it to add <code><nowiki>{{Replaceable fair use disputed}}</nowiki></code>, '''without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template'''.
# On [[Image talk:Navdeepbains.parl.gc.ca.jpg|the image discussion page]], write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.
Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, [[Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission|requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license]], or by taking a picture of it yourself.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on <span class="plainlinks">[{{fullurl:Special:Contributions|target={{PAGENAMEE}}&namespace=6}} this link]</span>. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#Images.2FMedia|criteria for speedy deletion]]. If you have any questions please ask them at the [[Wikipedia:Media copyright questions|Media copyright questions page]]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Replaceable -->
This image is a repost of an image that has been deleted as a replaceable fair use image.
Since this person is not a recluse, fugitive, nor prisoner, it is possible that this person could get a free image created which does not restrict the usage to non-commercial entities, so this image fails the requirement that a fair use image be unrepeatable. He could grant permission to use this photo under a free license like the GFDL or Creative Commons licenses (which are not version 3.0 (which has a clause that prohibit derivitives that infringe on the moral rights of the licensor) nor have the noncommercial attribute attached). [[User:Jesse Viviano|Jesse Viviano]] 19:18, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
== Your opinion might help here ==
You might like to comment at [[WP:AN3]] under "User:Marskell reported by User:Coppertwig (Result:)". Note that the words "in principle" are contentious; people have been inserting and deleting these words from question 1. Two of Marskell's five (alleged) reverts in my allegation that the user violated 3RR were restoring the words "in principle" (among other words) which you had deleted. The user claims those were not reverts because you are now in agreement about the wording. What do you think -- were they reverts? Do you now support having the words "agree in principle" etc. in the question? --[[User:Coppertwig|Coppertwig]] 21:22, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
: Hi, [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard%2F3RR&diff=118111999&oldid=118109765 I replied] as requested. - [[User_talk:DennyColt|Denny]] 22:17, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
::Thanks. :-) --[[User:Coppertwig|Coppertwig]] 22:22, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
== [[MyWikiBiz]] ==
Denny, thanks for your enthusiasm in defending the article. [[User:Aaronbrick|Aaronbrick]] 02:20, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
two days later... interested in RFC or arbitration for this? apparently some people still think they can unilaterally delete the article. [[User:Aaronbrick|Aaronbrick]] 00:43, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
== Your comment ==
Just wanted to tell you that the message you left at my talk could be deemed rather far out of place. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dragan_Nacevski&diff=118253867&oldid=118253036 Inappropriate speedy nominations with wrong template use] is something I can live with, but I will thank you not to welcome (!) me to Wikipedia and direct me to the sandbox. Regards, [[User:Punkmorten|Punkmorten]] 13:54, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
: Sorry, that was a complete mistake (I had just woken up). :( - [[User_talk:DennyColt|Denny]] 15:11, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
:: Yeah, but on the other hand I apologize for not keeping a sufficiently [[WP:COOL|cool head]] about the issue. [[User:Punkmorten|Punkmorten]] 20:09, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
:::No worries... if it makes you feel better, you'll always remember this as the time someone accused a footballer of being a no-name musical act. - [[User_talk:DennyColt|Denny]] 20:11, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
== [[Perry Tong]] ==
I just wanted to let you know that I removed your speedy deletion tag from this page. The article does indeed assert notability, it does so in the first sentence. I replaced it with a prod. You shouldn't just throw on a7 speedy notices on articles you don't think are notable, it doesn't work that way. Please be more careful in the future.
Other than that, have a nice day :) [[User:Oskar Sigvardsson|Oskar]] 20:11, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
== RFA Thanks ==
{| style="border: 2px solid {{{border|green}}}; background-color: {{{color|#ddeedd}}};"
!colspan="2" align="center" | Thanks for your '''support''' on my [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Casliber|Request for adminship]], which was successful, with votes of 49/0/0.
Lemme know if you need help on something I might know a little something about....([[User:Casliber|check my userpage]]).
|-
!colspan="2" align="right" | cheers, [[User:Casliber|Casliber]] | [[User talk:Casliber|talk]] | [[Special:Contributions/Casliber|contribs]] 14:03, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
|}
== Brandt block ==
Thanks for bringing that to my notice. I've tweaked the block to 1 week. Cheers! --<span class="user-sig user-Shreshth91">May the Force be with you! [[User:Shreshth91|Shr]]e[[User talk:Shreshth91|shth91]]</span> 16:59, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
== [[Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/DennyColt]] ==
Dear Denny, please see above page where I requested a checkuser. If it wasn't you, please don't be offended. The sheer sensitivity of this article outweights personal issues in my opinion. For the record, as long as there is a diff on the talk page linking to your removal (which I added), I have no objections to the removal of the comment by Brandt itself. Regards, --[[User:Reinoutr|Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr)]] 19:20, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
:As confirmed it indeed wasn't you. Thanks for understanding my request though. Regards, --[[User:Reinoutr|Cpt. Morgan (Reinoutr)]] 21:23, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
== Extraneous shared IP templates ==
Your concerned is covered by {{tl|SharedIP}} which covers for everything. -- [[User:Avraham|Avi]] 00:58, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
: I replied on the template deletion page. :) - [[User_talk:DennyColt|Denny]] 01:01, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Hello Denny,
Thank you for the warm welcome. I am new and could read up more on how I can contribute. I am concerned about contribution's to bio's from sources that use "self hypnosis". Which if you know much about the vast anti-mormon community you will find a plethora of opportunists who would prefer to distract or redirect the readers attention from the fascinating scholarship and faith of Hugh Nibley, to his estranged daughter's disingenuous "so called memory" of her father.
Is Martha Beck his only child? Where are the comments by his wife or all of his other children? (I noticed there is no mention of his wife Phyllis or their marriage, or their children and their names.) Can you see the potential snowball effect of allowing such defaming comments. I hope there is concern here for defamation of character. Obviously Martha has distanced herself from the LDS church. I hope she is not given a platform here to blemish her fathers memory because of her distance from his faith.
I point this out to show the motivation force behind this. It is driven by a hatred for Mormons (Latter-Day Saints) & gains momentum from sites that propagate its so called contributions cloaked in honest or fair rhetoric. Well I don't know what outcome will prevail, all I can do is attempt to remind the powers that be, that responsibility precedes credibility. I can only hope that authenticity prevails over objectivity.
Sincerely,
Derek Harris User:SentinelLion
== Reasons for my actions ==
Hey, since I'm doing things that affect you so much, I feel I need to explain why I'm asking you to slow down so much. One reason is due to scaling issues, our software will not easily allow such a large number people to use a single page, as you may by now be aware.
The other reason I wanted you to slow down is to slow the rate of people coming to the page for a while. You can still try and reach the entire 3 000 000 registered userbase, but please give us some space and time to handle the new people and stay organised?
If everyone hears about this at once at the rate you've been advertising, it's like mopping while the tap is still running. It just can't be done. We'll all end up with a big mess, rather than a well organized process, which is probably what you're looking for.
So could you maybe give us all some time to figure out how to deal with this rather novel approach? Else the new groupings will spawn faster than I can handle them. --[[User:Kim Bruning|Kim Bruning]] 14:28, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
Oh oh, before it sounds like I'm harping on you or anything, did I mention I admire your energy and can-do attitude, and that it's that attitude in people that really makes wikipedia great?
But at the same time, you do have to be a bit careful to not bite off more than you can chew all at once. Especially when you're not the one having to do the chewing :-P We have plenty of time. Right now I'd really appreciate it if you could direct your energy towards talking with the people already present. Preferably about ATT itself. (Since I'm already ''swamped''.) Later on we can then try and advertise and pull in more people. But there's some issues with that we may need to look at.
--[[User:Kim Bruning|Kim Bruning]] 14:39, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
== What got into you? ==
Wow, I was shocked to see you add that screenshot in so fast! Thank you for self-reverting, I didn't want to have to have an edit war about it. If that article doesn't stay diligently neutral, it will be back on AfD. Keep the focus on the controversy itself, and its outcome. Remember the mantra of this article...talk for at least 24 hours about anything...I know it's not exciting, but I can tell you there are plenty of people watching this article all the time who won't hesitate to nominate it again. [[User:Risker|Risker]] 18:32, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
:A picture has nothing to do with an AFD. These comments are branded. :) - <b><font color="669966">[[User:QuackGuru|Mr.Guru]]</font></b> (<font size="1"><sup>[[User talk:QuackGuru|talk]]</sup>/<sub>[[Special:Contributions/QuackGuru|contribs]]</sub></font>) 06:15, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
== Stop that ==
Kindly stop attacking me on the admin board. You don't own that poll, and people who think it is a bad idea have the freedom to state so. [[User_talk:Radiant!|<b><font color="#0000DD">><font color="#0066FF">R<font color="#0099FF">a<font color="#00CCFF">d<font color="#00EEFF">i</font>a</font>n</font>t</font><</font></b>]] 07:53, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
:You certainly do have that right. I mentioned you by name, yes, but that was hardly an attack, please AGF. If you guys don't think there should be a Poll MfD the whole thing and stand up to Jimbo. I also have the right to stand up to El_C's abusive misrepresenation that I did something wrong. Up to when I posted, only an extreme minority complained in the way that people are now. I was only trying to help. If people were unhappy, why didn't they SAY so? Also, his assertation that I was keeping things out of the pre-poll was a flagrant lie meant to disparage me. I don't care if someone has 300 edits or 30,000. I have every right to defend myself if made to look bad with false statements... I never once remove a single thing that anyone added, and in fact INTEGRATED two other suggestions (Q4, Q5) that I said I didn't care for. Look at my history of editing--I go out of my way to not try to own stuff, and to add in suggestions that people give me since I've been here... if you took it as an attack on you, sorry, it certainly was't meant to be. El_C was 100% out of line in singleing me out and I wasn't going to let him make me a patsy for the problems some obviously have with Jimbo over this. - [[User_talk:DennyColt|Denny]] 13:15, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
::Okay, okay. I had the impression you were grouping me with El C. I'm glad to hear that's not the case. I wish you best of luck with sorting out [[WP:ATT/P]], but it doesn't seem very stable yet. [[User_talk:Radiant!|<b><font color="#0000DD">><font color="#0066FF">R<font color="#0099FF">a<font color="#00CCFF">d<font color="#00EEFF">i</font>a</font>n</font>t</font><</font></b>]] 13:18, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
:::I honestly have less hope now. I know polling is evil, and I do agree, but to be honest, like I said on the talk page, we'd be at it till christmas jus to figure out Q1 without some forced structure. I figured, let me see what'll happen if I try to ram ''some'' structure down their throats for how to at least approach the problem, just for that one thing. I thought if it works, great, if not, nothing ventured, nothing gained. Worst case I get laughed at and it goes back to what it was, right? I was more surprised than anything that people not only ran with it, but liked it, and actually got people to focus more. Do I think the policy itself should be decided by poll? Probably not... but do you agree it would be interesting for finality to see what a tremendous number of people have to say about this? I think no harm from that exercise itself could come... - [[User_talk:DennyColt|Denny]] 13:23, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
::Denny Colt, [[Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/3RR#User:Radiant.21_reported_by_User:Netscott_.28Result:_No_action.29|this]] is somewhat related to what is happening between you and Radiant! here. You may want to comment there. {{User:Netscott/s1.js}} 13:21, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
::*Huh? No it isn't. [[User_talk:Radiant!|<b><font color="#0000DD">><font color="#0066FF">R<font color="#0099FF">a<font color="#00CCFF">d<font color="#00EEFF">i</font>a</font>n</font>t</font><</font></b>]] 13:47, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
*Yes. I think the problem is that we already had a tremendous amount of people speaking about this (check the several megabyte archive of [[WP:ATT]]), and a secondary problem is that people seem now to be arguing about the poll about the poll. It's positively herculanean. I'm honestly not sure how to untangle this mess except by giving it a few days to calm down first and stopping any further forest fires. I'm afraid that not everybody in the discussion understands the underlying issues (and that would be worse in a poll). This has the potential to be closed as a lack of consensus either way, and we'd end up with ''four'' att-related policies (3 - 2 = 4 ? ). Which I don't think anybody really wants. [[User_talk:Radiant!|<b><font color="#0000DD">><font color="#0066FF">R<font color="#0099FF">a<font color="#00CCFF">d<font color="#00EEFF">i</font>a</font>n</font>t</font><</font></b>]] 13:47, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
== MfD close ==
David, I like you a ''lot'', but I rv'd your closure. you and I are not neutral parties and shouldn't be closing that (no one really involved on that poll page should, and the nonsense about the poll being dead needs settling/attention). Another neutral party can close later. Please don't take it the wrong way. - [[User_talk:DennyColt|Denny]] 16:58, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
:We aren't going to delete the poll pages. That isn't how things work. I know that you mean well, but you're creating a needless distraction from the real matter at hand.
:I'm biased '''''against''''' the poll, so there's nothing wrong with me applying common sense in deciding to keep it. —[[User:David Levy|David Levy]] 17:01, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
::David... the matter at hand is that there is overwhelming desire from the most people (including our founder) to run the poll. The same admins saying over and over again "NO POLL NO POLL NO POLL" is meaningless--please don't take this the wrong way. Admins have no more value/voice in policy than every one else on this one. If there is support to kill Jimbo's idea, lets be done with it. Letting the MfD run a day at least won't hurt anything. - [[User_talk:DennyColt|Denny]] 17:06, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
:::You don't understand. We certainly should discuss whether or not to kill the poll. MfD is ''not'' the correct venue. No matter what happens, '''we are not going to delete the pages'''. The question asked at MfD is ''not'' the one that needs answering. —[[User:David Levy|David Levy]] 17:10, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
== Help fixing up edit conflict? ==
I'm sorry to have caused this mess, but apparently I accidentally deleted a comment by user Avraham during an edit conflict [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Attribution/Poll&diff=next&oldid=118775443 here]. also a comment by Radiant!, but apparently the latter user added that comment back in. The comment by Avraham is still not in, I believe: "# First version; at least there is a representative range of choices. -- [[User:Avraham|Avi]] 13:51, 29 March 2007 (UTC)" in section "Option 3 - Verbose version" subsection "Endorse". Apparently the page is being archived so I don't know how to restore this comment to its proper place. I would appreciate help or advice. Thanks. --[[User:Coppertwig|Coppertwig]] 23:44, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
:Er, that section/date would be twice over archived by now, dunno how to get it back cleanly. Post on the Poll talk page. A veteran can probably get it easily. - [[User_talk:DennyColt|Denny]] 23:46, 30 March 2007 (UTC)
== My RfA ==
Thank you for your support in my recent successful RfA.--[[User:Anthony.bradbury|Anthony.bradbury]] 10:50, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
== My RfA ==
*Thanks for the support position. However, I've decided to withdraw my acceptance because of real [[WP:CIVIL]] concerns. I will try again later when I've proven to myself and others that my anger will no longer interfere with my abilities as a Wikipedia editor. Thanks again, and I'll see you around here shortly. :) [[User:JuJube|JuJube]] 04:23, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
== Huh? ==
Please don't get personal in edit summaries. If you check the talk page you will note several people agreeing with me. It is simply improper to remove a {{tl|guideline}} tag while a {{tl|disputedtag}} dispute is ongoing. [[User_talk:Radiant!|<b><font color="#0000DD">><font color="#0066FF">R<font color="#0099FF">a<font color="#00CCFF">d<font color="#00EEFF">i</font>a</font>n</font>t</font><</font></b>]] 15:26, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
:Hi Radiant, sorry -- it was based just on the edit warring that is going on over the tags. Others should step up if they agree to edit the tags--from an outsider's perspective it ends up looking like (based on edit history) that you are exerting authority over policy to a degree that gives you some special rank/authoritative position when none exists. :( - [[User_talk:DennyColt|Denny]] 15:30, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
::Please look a bit deeper. This page has been an accepted guideline for awhile. Some people don't like that, so they added {{tl|disputedtag}}. I have no real objection to that, we can always discuss such disputes on the talk page. However, two of these people think that a dispute is grounds for immediately revoking the guideline, which is obviously false (per [[WP:POL]]; if a simple dispute was grounds for revocation, we would simply delete [[CAT:G]]). The general wiki principle for disputes is to retain the present version, add a dispute tag if wanted, and discuss. [[User_talk:Radiant!|<b><font color="#0000DD">><font color="#0066FF">R<font color="#0099FF">a<font color="#00CCFF">d<font color="#00EEFF">i</font>a</font>n</font>t</font><</font></b>]] 15:34, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
::*Well, here's the thing: we can have discussion with polling and discussion without polling, but we should never have polling without discussion. That is why the page is called "polling is not a substitute for discussion". That title does not mean "polling is forbidden", indeed the page explicitly states that it's not. If you were to say "polling is a supplement" that would seem to imply that discussion should always, or generally, be supplemented by polling, which isn't really the case. [[User_talk:Radiant!|<b><font color="#0000DD">><font color="#0066FF">R<font color="#0099FF">a<font color="#00CCFF">d<font color="#00EEFF">i</font>a</font>n</font>t</font><</font></b>]] 15:48, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
:::*[[Wikipedia:Polling can be a supplement to discussion]]? Current wording makes it sound like a dirty thing to be avoided, which can give just the loudest/most frequent voices on an issue authority, which is very bad, right? Just thinking aloud, I guess, based on my experience. Dropping that silly pre-poll poll on the ATT thing was the only thing that broke the deadlock to make any forward motion and cut out half the crap. - [[User_talk:DennyColt|Denny]] 15:52, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
:::**I don't quite see how "is not a substitute" is a dirty thing? The old wording was "Voting is evil", which does sound dirty (which is why we changed it). If you're saying "X can be Y", you're in essence not saying much (X can still be Not-Y, or Y can be Not-X). Note that ATT is the exception rather than the rule, and by now has hit 3.5 megabytes of discussion and counting. We usually don't do things that way. The issue there is that controversial issues are messy regardless of whether or not there is a poll. [[User_talk:Radiant!|<b><font color="#0000DD">><font color="#0066FF">R<font color="#0099FF">a<font color="#00CCFF">d<font color="#00EEFF">i</font>a</font>n</font>t</font><</font></b>]] 15:58, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
== Christadelphians ==
Just wondering why you returned the neutrality tag to this page. The tag was originally added a long time ago and much work has been done to make the page more neutral. Please can you comment? --[[User:Samtheboy|Samtheboy]] <sup><small>([[User talk:Samtheboy|t]]/[[Special:Contributions/Samtheboy|c]])</small></sup> 15:33, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
:The page very much reads like it advocates their positions and views, which is not a NPOV state, and will be removed (by me, when I have time soon)... we can talk about their positions of views, but NOT ever advocate them even slightly. Especially not bigotry and hate speech towards homosexuals which that Europeon gang of trolls keeps adding (also why I requested semi-protection). - [[User_talk:DennyColt|Denny]] 15:35, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
::Thanks for the clarification. How long do protections last for as I would like to trawl through the article and remove as much NPOV as I can. --[[User:Samtheboy|Samtheboy]] <sup><small>([[User talk:Samtheboy|t]]/[[Special:Contributions/Samtheboy|c]])</small></sup> 15:42, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
:::I think just a day or three(ish) or until concensus is sorted a bit on the talk page. That article definitely needs to stay under semi-protection for a long while however to keep those related trolls/vandals out. - [[User_talk:DennyColt|Denny]] 15:44, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
::I agree with you. I'll make the edits in word and paste them in later on! Thanks for your time. --[[User:Samtheboy|Samtheboy]] <sup><small>([[User talk:Samtheboy|t]]/[[Special:Contributions/Samtheboy|c]])</small></sup> 15:47, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
== [[WP:AIV]] ==
Thank you for making a report {{#if:{{{1|}}}|about {{userblock|{{{1}}}}}}} on [[Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism]]. Reporting and removing vandalism is vital to the functioning of Wikipedia and [[Wikipedia:Cleaning up vandalism|all users are encouraged]] to revert, warn, and report vandalism. However, administrators are generally only able to [[WP:BLOCK|block]] users if they have received a recent final [[Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace|warning]] (one that mentions that the user may be blocked) ''and'' they have recently vandalized after that warning was given. The reported user has not yet been blocked because it appears this has not occurred yet. If this user continues to vandalize even after their final warning, please report them to the AIV noticeboard again. {{{2|Thank you!}}} <!--Template:Uw-AIV--> [[User:Feydey|feydey]] 16:53, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
: Which was this about? - [[User_talk:DennyColt|Denny]] 16:55, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
:[[User:67.107.166.135]]. [[User:Feydey|feydey]] 16:58, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
::Editors: Before listing a vandal here [WP:AIV] make sure that:
::1. The vandal is active '''now''', has received a proper set of warnings, and has vandalized after '''a recent last warning''', except in unusual circumstances.
:::The above from [[WP:AIV]].
::[[User:67.107.166.135]] last warning on 13 March 2007 <-- not very recent huh? And it's also a shared IP. [[User:Feydey|feydey]] 17:05, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
:::Shared IP, yes, but still blockable for long-term abuse like any school IP. I added warnings based on the current vandalism of today, including a last based on the abusive and ongoing nature. - [[User_talk:DennyColt|Denny]] 17:18, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
::::Let's hope he stopped. [[User:Feydey|feydey]] 17:25, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
== double vote ==
You inadvertently voted twice on [[Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Akhilleus]]. —[[user:Kncyu38|KNcyu38]] ([[user talk:Kncyu38|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Kncyu38|contribs]]) 07:20, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
: I removed the double, sorry! - [[User_talk:DennyColt|Denny]] 13:07, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
::No prob. —[[user:Kncyu38|KNcyu38]] ([[user talk:Kncyu38|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Kncyu38|contribs]]) 14:01, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
== [[Wikipedia:Straw polls]] ==
Denny, sorry I haven't gotten a chance to give a good look at [[Registerfly]] but in the meantime considering the "hotness" of the whole polling issue I've decided to make an effort to reestablish this above page to guideline status as such a thing is greatly needed. I would like to invite you to join in editing and discussing this. Thanks. {{User:Netscott/s1.js}} 14:00, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
== Daniel Brandt ==
Hi, [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Daniel_Brandt&diff=120170825&oldid=119521609 this edit] wasn't appropriate, as it is unsourced, inflammatory, and self-referential. Thanks, - [[User_talk:DennyColt|Denny]] 06:34, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
: I think it is important that the article reflects this nature of the Wikipedia-Watch website. I understand that the fact could be inflammatory, but there is at least one page in the Wiki-Watch site that lists editors who have committed some sort of offense. I suppose that the line I added could have been worded better, but I think that the article should at least mention that Wikipedia-Watch displays information about wikipedia editors, as well as criticizing them for their individual conduct. Do you think it would be appropriate to add the note back in with better wording and a source, or are you opposed to even mentioning it? <span style="background-color:black">[[User:TrogdorPolitiks|<font color="red">Heavy Metal Cellist</font>]]<sup>[[User talk:TrogdorPolitiks|<font color="red">talk</font>]]</sup><sub>[[Special:Contributions/TrogdorPolitiks|<font color="red">contribs</font>]]</sub></span>
:: Not completely, no, but given how heated it is, I would guess that a concensus on language like that should be reached. Besides his endless legal threats, my understanding from what I've learned... is he was blocked also for stalking/harassment tied into that stuff. Thats why I was thinking to slow down and see what the group concensus is for that. Check out the new thread on the talk page of his article about this. :) - [[User_talk:DennyColt|Denny]] 13:16, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
:::I think you'd struggle to find evidence that Brandt has stalked or harassed anyone on the wiki. It seems to be a theme with you, Denny. [[User:Grace Note|Grace Note]] 23:15, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
::::I don't know what you are talking about. Could you explain? Could you show me where I said Brandt stalked people on-wiki? - <font color="#0000C0">[[User:DennyColt|Denny]]</font> <sup><i>(<font color="#7A1616">[[User_talk:DennyColt|talk]]</font>)</i></sup> 23:22, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
:::::He was blocked, so far as I know, for entirely onwiki behaviour. I have no problem with his being blocked for the offwiki bullshit. So far as I'm concerned, apart from his article, Danny isn't welcome here and never should be again. Nor should anyone who makes it their business to harass and "out" editors. [[User:Grace Note|Grace Note]] 23:30, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
== Issue ==
Grace, do you have any sort of a problem with me, or are you following and reviewing my edits? You seem to follow in the wake of much of what I do since I commented on the Brandt matter with scorn and hostile or excessively questioning tone, and I am concerned about it. Please let me know. - [[User_talk:DennyColt|Denny]] 05:22, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
:It's interesting that you think I might have an issue with you. Why do you think I might? I've previously worked on WP:Attribution (check my contribs if you like) and WP:BLP (ditto), and I occasionally look at editor review (again, this is clearly visible in my contribs). If you are active on particular pages, as you seem to be, you have to expect to run into the same editors.
:There's nothing hostile in asking you whether you have previously edited. You asked to be reviewed. That's what has struck me about you. You can email me if you want to discuss it further. There is also nothing hostile in suggesting that an editor with only a few weeks' experience does not invent new policy or new instructions/templates/bullshit to clutter up pages with.
:Now I will tell you something. Posting passive-aggressive whining to my talkpage ''does'' aggravate me, particularly when it is manifestly not assuming good faith of me. Try not to do it again and I'm sure we'll be best of friends. [[User:Grace Note|Grace Note]] 23:14, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
::You had (rather out of the blue) vigorously countered me--which is fine--on my edits on the Brandt issue, my addition of [[WP:FORTHEPEOPLE]] on the deletion arguments to avoid page, on the ATT polling, and then with negative comments on the BLP category idea. All of which is quite fine, but I was concerned that after never having seen/interacted with you before I disagreed with you re Brandt, that you were perhaps seeing what I was up to. For example, you had never once edited [[Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions]] before [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Arguments_to_avoid_in_deletion_discussions&diff=prev&oldid=117156675 03/22/2007 23:25], a full ten days after I had first touched the page. No worries, however. Happy editing. - <font color="#0000C0">[[User:DennyColt|Denny]]</font> <sup><i>(<font color="#7A1616">[[User_talk:DennyColt|talk]]</font>)</i></sup> 23:21, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
:::I think you'll find I edited the Danny Brandt article long, long before you turned up, and have vigorously supported its deletion on several occasions. Your appointing yourself saviour of the Brandt article does not give you licence not to be disagreed with. As for the deletion thing, I'd forgotten that was you. I'd suggest that unilaterally deciding what arguments people can use in deletion debates is not seemly in a "new" editor. And I followed the link to the deletion page. Someone had used it as though it was policy and I checked it out to see what someone had invented this time. You'll find my edits all over deletion pages, policy on deletion etc. I'd suggest once more that if a "new" editor turns up and starts rewriting policy as soon as his feet are under the table, he's going to meet some opposition from editors who have previously been involved. That's just natural, particularly if you are going to make a beeline for controversial articles and policy areas. [[User:Grace Note|Grace Note]] 23:26, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
::::Thanks for clearing that up; I understand now. - <font color="#0000C0">[[User:DennyColt|Denny]]</font> <sup><i>(<font color="#7A1616">[[User_talk:DennyColt|talk]]</font>)</i></sup> 23:30, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
== Straw polls ==
I saw it on your talkpage and thought it looked interesting. Whenever someone comes and whines about nothing much on my talkpage, I have a look and see who else they've been talking to. I think you'll find that's quite normal. So I followed the link. Now, I have to ask you to stop wasting my time. I have better things to do than read your conspiracy theory about me, and I'm sure you do too. Isn't there a policy that needs your input somewhere? [[User:Grace Note|Grace Note]] 23:29, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
:I'm sure I'll find one sooner or later I want to learn more about. :) - <font color="#0000C0">[[User:DennyColt|Denny]]</font> <sup><i>(<font color="#7A1616">[[User_talk:DennyColt|talk]]</font>)</i></sup> 23:31, 4 April 2007 (UTC)
== Image:Navdeepbains.parl.gc.ca.jpg ==
Thanks for uploading '''[[:Image:Navdeepbains.parl.gc.ca.jpg]]'''. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under [[Wikipedia:Fair use|fair use]], but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our [[Wikipedia:Fair use criteria|first fair use criterion]] in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:
# Go to [[:Image:Navdeepbains.parl.gc.ca.jpg|the image description page]] and edit it to add <code><nowiki>{{Replaceable fair use disputed}}</nowiki></code>, '''without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template'''.
# On [[Image talk:Navdeepbains.parl.gc.ca.jpg|the image discussion page]], write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.
Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, [[Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission|requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license]], or by taking a picture of it yourself.
If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on <span class="plainlinks">[{{fullurl:Special:Contributions|target={{PAGENAMEE}}&namespace=6}} this link]</span>. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on [[Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion#Images.2FMedia|criteria for speedy deletion]]. If you have any questions please ask them at the [[Wikipedia:Media copyright questions|Media copyright questions page]]. Thank you.<!-- Template:Replaceable -->
For an image of a living person to be allowed on Wikipedia just to show what he or she looks like, the image must be under a license or other condition that allows anybody to reuse the photo in any way, including commercial works. The only restrictions that Wikipedia allows on photos are that the photo may require attribution, and that the photo may require that any derivatives be relicensed under the same license. Since official photos of Canadian politicians disallow commercial reuse, the image is permissible if and only if a similar work that achieves the same purpose is impossible (e.g. the person is a fugitive like [[Osama bin Laden]], looks very different compared to what the photo looks like (e.g. had his face disfigured or is much older than when he or she had that photo taken), or is a prisoner like [[Dennis Rader]] a.k.a. the BTK killer, where prisons probably do not want people taking photos of their prisoners because some of them, like Rader, are media hounds who get their jollies by getting their images taken by either still image or television cameras). For us to keep the photo, we must receive explicit permission to use the photo under one of the licenses listed [[Wikipedia:Image copyright tags/Free licenses|here]]. Permission for use on Wikipedia is not enough, and photos used with permission where a free alternative could be created are disallowed. [[User:Jesse Viviano|Jesse Viviano]] 15:44, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
: I retagged for speedy myself, and will find a better free one. - <font color="#0000C0">[[User:DennyColt|Denny]]</font> <sup><i>(<font color="#7A1616">[[User_talk:DennyColt|talk]]</font>)</i></sup> 16:04, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
::I am very grateful that you understood instead of reacting negatively when he or she is shown that he or she inadvertently violated policy. It is a refreshing breath that you understand and comply with policy unlike others who violate polciy like [[User:{{ucfirst:R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine)}}|<tt class="userlinks" style="1.3em">{{ucfirst:R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine)}}</tt>]] (<span class="plainlinks">[[User talk:{{ucfirst:R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine)}}|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/{{ucfirst:R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine)}}|contribs]] '''·''' [{{fullurl:Special:Log|user={{urlencode:{{ucfirst:R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine)}}}}}} logs] '''·''' [[Special:Blockip/{{ucfirst:R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine)}}|block user]] '''·''' [{{fullurl:Special:Log|type=block&page=User:{{urlencode:{{ucfirst:R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine)}}}}}} block log]</span>) (this user failed to meet the burden of proof that the images he uploaded are permissible reacted negatively to anyone who called him for this failure) and [[User:{{ucfirst:Primetime}}|<tt class="userlinks" style="1.3em">{{ucfirst:Primetime}}</tt>]] (<span class="plainlinks">[[User talk:{{ucfirst:Primetime}}|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/{{ucfirst:Primetime}}|contribs]] '''·''' [{{fullurl:Special:Log|user={{urlencode:{{ucfirst:Primetime}}}}}} logs] '''·''' [[Special:Blockip/{{ucfirst:Primetime}}|block user]] '''·''' [{{fullurl:Special:Log|type=block&page=User:{{urlencode:{{ucfirst:Primetime}}}}}} block log]</span>) (this user committed unrepetant mass plagiarism and copyright violations). [[User:Jesse Viviano|Jesse Viviano]] 16:16, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
:::No, no problem at all, I didn't realize I had asked for the wrong permissions. I rewrote them and the PMs office as well to ask for a better one under GFDL. :) - <font color="#0000C0">[[User:DennyColt|Denny]]</font> <sup><i>(<font color="#7A1616">[[User_talk:DennyColt|talk]]</font>)</i></sup> 16:20, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
{| style="border: 1px solid {{{border|gray}}}; background-color: {{{color|#fdffe7}}};"
|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | [[Image:Barnstar2.png|100px]]
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Editor's Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | This is for understanding and taking action to correct your addition of works disallowed under Wikipedia policy, and for reacting positively when notified. [[User:Jesse Viviano|Jesse Viviano]] 16:21, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
|}
==thanks==
Thanks for the kind words Denny :) [[User:Gwen Gale|Gwen Gale]] 20:05, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
== You're a human, think like one... ==
Hey now, if we were going to have all vandalism patroling done by mindless bots, ... we'd cut out the middle men. :) I'm blathering about [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ask_a_Ninja&diff=120676362&oldid=120675869 this revert]. You managed to revert the covering edit but not the initial suspect edit. Watch out for stuff like that.--[[User:Gmaxwell|Gmaxwell]] 06:35, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
:I am a man! Oh, wait. Sorry! That was amateur hour by me, good eye. :) - <font color="#0000C0">[[User:DennyColt|Denny]]</font> <sup><i>(<font color="#7A1616">[[User_talk:DennyColt|talk]]</font>)</i></sup> 06:37, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
== [[Casey Serin]] ==
Please see [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Casey Serin]]. The whole article is just a glorified attack page, as far as I'm concerned. ˉˉ<sup>[[User:Anetode|'''anetode''']]</sup>[[User_talk:Anetode|╦╩]] 09:47, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
== Your recent edit to my user page. ==
Thank you for helping to make sure my userpages follow wikipolicy. :-) [[User:Lawyer2b|Lawyer2b]] 22:13, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
== Your enforcement of a non-policy ==
Your essay [[WP:BADSITES]], by its own admission, is not a Wikipedia policy. Thus, you have no business "enforcing" it by altering other people's comments on talk and project pages. [[User:Dtobias|*Dan T.*]] 13:55, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
: I not the page made any "admission" of its merit. New pages start as Essays, move to guidelines, then policy, I believe? The essay/guideline/policy 'status' is fluid, and the true status is what reflects actual practice and precedent. Anyone can enforce anything that is applicable and 'right'. We do not support hate, or attack sites. Do ''you'' support in ''any'' fashion websites that can cause personal harm to editors here? - <font color="#0000C0">[[User:DennyColt|Denny]]</font> <sup><i>(<font color="#7A1616">[[User_talk:DennyColt|talk]]</font>)</i></sup> 14:40, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
::That last question has a vaguely [[McCarthyism|McCarthyist]] sound to it, like "Are you now, or have you ever been a communist?" And it seems like your campaign to suppress links to such sites is a witch-hunt. Personally, I think we ought to "know our enemy", meaning that it is sometimes necessary to read and discuss the things they write on anti-Wikipedia boards. It does us no good to suppress such discussion by banning such links. [[User:Dtobias|*Dan T.*]] 14:50, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
:::Events can be discussed, but can you think of a single, solitary good reason to link people BACK to revealed personal info of editors here? NONE. - <font color="#0000C0">[[User:DennyColt|Denny]]</font> <sup><i>(<font color="#7A1616">[[User_talk:DennyColt|talk]]</font>)</i></sup> 14:52, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
I feel like editing userpages to conform to your essay is poor form. Consider simply dispensing advice about links you find offensive on the users' talk pages and soliciting feedback. [[User:Vees|Vees]] 15:30, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
== RfA thanks from [[User:Akhilleus|Akhilleus]] ==
{| style="border:2px solid gray; background:#FADDA8; padding:5px;" align=center
|[[Image:Hydria Achilles weapons Louvre E869.jpg|left|none|300px|Akhilleus gets new weapons.]]
|style="text-align:center;"| Denny, thanks for your support in my successful [[Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Akhilleus|RfA]].<br />
As the picture shows, the goddesses have already bestowed my new weapons, <br />
which I hope to use to good effect. If you ever need assistance,<br />
or want to give me feedback on my use of the admin tools, <br />
please leave me a message on my talkpage. <br />
[[User:Akhilleus|--Akhilleus]] ([[User talk:Akhilleus|talk]]) 17:11, 7 April 2007 (UTC)
|}
== Cla68's question ==
Cla68 raised an important issue [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AAdministrators%27_noticeboard%2FIncidents&diff=121065812&oldid=121065717 here], and I would like to hear your response. Assuming a reliable news source like the NY Times publishes a story in which it links a user to a real name, exposing him (or her) and/or mentions the name of an attack site: May that article be linked to? —[[user:Kncyu38|KNcyu38]] ([[user talk:Kncyu38|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Kncyu38|contribs]]) 02:32, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
:You've got me there. Yes, it's purely hypothetical as of yet, but it's not too farfetched and may happen any minute now, considering the media attention the Essjay story received. Wikipedia has become prominent, and prominent users may gain sufficient mainstream attention. I'm asking this question because if and when such an article appears, the information published in that article would be suitable for citation, effectively circumventing any attack site policy. Then we'd have a whole new conflict at our hands: We could not censor a reliable source, but the article would still pose a threat to the mentioned user/s - either through linking to an attack site or by publishing real names (or talking about agendas and whatnot). Again: Yes, it's still hypothetical, but it could happen [[Real soon now|real soon now]] and I believe we should be prepared for the impact - and hope it never comes to this. —[[user:Kncyu38|KNcyu38]] ([[user talk:Kncyu38|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Kncyu38|contribs]]) 11:41, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
==AGF==
Please do not confuse AGF with criticising your lack of experience. Seeing you lack experience is not the same at all as assuming you are not coming from a good faith space. I suggest you wait till you have 6 months experience before starting to write policy as you inevitably still have a very poor understanding of wikipedia due to not even 3 months here and even coming from aa good faith space you have a tremendous capacity to unintentionally damage the project, IMO, not due to bad faith but due to inexperience and hence a poor grasp of how wikipedia actually works, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 16:02, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
==attack site==
Look, in my opinion, you're right. The mentioned sites ''are'' indeed attack sites. I just want to lay emphasis on the ambivalence I'm having, because I believe those sites offer at least ''some'' valid criticism. Dang. Someone should make a site that collects the better bits and pieces from those attack sites and leaves out the attack crap. —[[user:Kncyu38|KNcyu38]] ([[user talk:Kncyu38|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Kncyu38|contribs]]) 22:17, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
:Thanks for your understanding, and you're right: a straight criticism community that scrubbed abusive nonsense, and outing, could be an asset. - <font color="#0000C0">[[User:DennyColt|Denny]]</font> <sup><i>(<font color="#7A1616">[[User_talk:DennyColt|talk]]</font>)</i></sup> 22:21, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
== Apology requested ==
:''Moved to [[Talk:William_Oefelein#Apology_requested]]'' - <font color="#0000C0">[[User:DennyColt|Denny]]</font> <sup><i>(<font color="#7A1616">[[User_talk:DennyColt|talk]]</font>)</i></sup> 17:45, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
== arbitration requested ==
Thanks for the note. —[[user:Kncyu38|KNcyu38]] ([[user talk:Kncyu38|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Kncyu38|contribs]]) 21:40, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
: Anytime. - <font color="#0000C0">[[User:DennyColt|Denny]]</font> <sup><i>(<font color="#7A1616">[[User_talk:DennyColt|talk]]</font>)</i></sup> 21:41, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
==WP:BLP==
I suggest you either look at the diffs I posted on WP:AN/I or not get involved in this. There is no point in complicating the matter and your suggestion of banning me from the article reflects poorly on you. [[User:KazakhPol|KazakhPol]] 00:40, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
== ArbCom rulings ==
As demonstrated by the ArbCom case [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3ARequests_for_arbitration&diff=122198097&oldid=122192311 linked to by arbitrator] [[user:Kirill Lokshin|Kirill Lokshin]] in the [[Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Requests_for_clarification_with_regard_to_Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration.2FMONGO|Mongo request for carification]] and as transcluded to [[Wikipedia_talk:Attack_sites]] in response to the request for clarification, there seems to be no binding ArbCom ruling pertaining to links to attack sites. I reverted your revision of WP:BP. And besides: Calling a good-faithed edit vandalism as in "rvv" [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Blocking_policy&diff=prev&oldid=122217180]/[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Blocking_policy&diff=prev&oldid=122236711], is not the preferred way. —'''[[user:AldeBaer|Alde]][[user talk:AldeBaer|Baer]]''' <s>[[user:Kncyu38]]</s> 15:25, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
==Personal attack==
Claiming another law-abiding user supports personal borderline terrorism is way out of line. Please stay calm and dont attack other users as you are making for an unsafe wikipedia environment in doing so, something I thought you were trying to prevent? [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 15:31, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
== Surely ==
{| style="border: 1px solid {{{border|gray}}}; background-color: {{{color|#fdffe7}}};"
|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | [[Image:WikiDefender_Barnstar.png|100px]]
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" | '''The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar'''
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid gray;" | Regardless of the outcome, your efforts to help defend Wikipedians from links to websites that attack them, is appreciated. [[User:MONGO|MONGO]] 16:25, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
|}
Thank you, MONGO! - <font color="#0000C0">[[User:DennyColt|Denny]]</font> <sup><i>(<font color="#7A1616">[[User_talk:DennyColt|talk]]</font>)</i></sup> 18:18, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
==Mediation==
Wil you agree to mediation, given [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration&diff=prev&oldid=122270658 this] completely out of order accusation it is, IMO, entirely necessary, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 17:49, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
:The only mediation needed is that you stop challenging everything I write all over Wikipedia endlessly. Re: my harassment statement -- I posted a [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk%3ABiographies_of_living_persons&diff=122014378&oldid=121996147 question] on the BLP page. You per the edit logs had ''never'' touched that page before you [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Biographies_of_living_persons&diff=next&oldid=122014378 replied] to me minutes later, your first edit ever there. I don't care if you're following my contributions to contest me at every step of everything I do--your right, I suppose. But be honest about. :) And don't be surprised if it goes on for weeks or months if you find yourself on the other end of arbitration/ANI for harassment. Your jousting against anything I do lately is amusing but if you keep this up much longer it will not be. - <font color="#0000C0">[[User:DennyColt|Denny]]</font> <sup><i>(<font color="#7A1616">[[User_talk:DennyColt|talk]]</font>)</i></sup> 17:59, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
::Is that a yes or a no? You suddenly start attacking me with serious accusations and I have not been attacking you. Please calm down and answer the question. I've had BLP on my watchlist for longer than you have been editing here and you have no right to claim I cannot edit there. Your aggressive thrreat in your response and your failure to answer my question are not shoiwiung any good faith towards me, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:04, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
:::I am concerned that every single time I write a single sentence related to the Brandt or attack site issues, you swiftly come after what I wrote. For the BLP page. You've had it a long time watchlisted, ok. Why did you NEVER touch the BLP talk page until I posted THAT question? Please answer that question. And please, please, please start doing indents like everyone else on WP does. You don't need to outdent every four seconds. - <font color="#0000C0">[[User:DennyColt|Denny]]</font> <sup><i>(<font color="#7A1616">[[User_talk:DennyColt|talk]]</font>)</i></sup> 18:09, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
::::Denny, if you're concerned others might read and/or comment on what you write, you're most definitely in the wrong place. —'''[[user:AldeBaer|Alde]][[user talk:AldeBaer|Baer]]''' <s>[[user:Kncyu38]]</s> 18:12, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
:::::I know that. Squeak's apparent tracking of my activities, however, makes me pause and consider why he is doing that. - <font color="#0000C0">[[User:DennyColt|Denny]]</font> <sup><i>(<font color="#7A1616">[[User_talk:DennyColt|talk]]</font>)</i></sup> 18:15, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
::::::There's a phrase for that and it's different from "assumption of good faith". Look, you two are heavily engaged in the same debate, it's very understandable that anyone in that situation makes use of the most basic Wikipedia tools to keep up with the debate. Please consider that nobody did accuse you of "secretly obtaining ammunition for the discussion on Attack sites". Whether or not Squeakbox ever edited the page before today doesn't matter, and if you cannot accept that, mediation may indeed be a good idea. —'''[[user:AldeBaer|Alde]][[user talk:AldeBaer|Baer]]''' <s>[[user:Kncyu38]]</s> 18:32, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
I take it you are refusing mediation then? [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:06, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
:I will address any mediation questions after you answer my question about the BLP page, based on your answer. Why did you NEVER touch the BLP talk page until I posted THAT question? - <font color="#0000C0">[[User:DennyColt|Denny]]</font> <sup><i>(<font color="#7A1616">[[User_talk:DennyColt|talk]]</font>)</i></sup> 18:09, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
:::You what? I can make no sense of your question. I watch BNP because of Brandt, and I only post when I have something to say, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:10, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
::::Stop outdenting. Yes or no question: did you ever post on the BLP talk page BEFORE I posted my question there? - <font color="#0000C0">[[User:DennyColt|Denny]]</font> <sup><i>(<font color="#7A1616">[[User_talk:DennyColt|talk]]</font>)</i></sup> 18:15, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
:::::Err that information is publicly available so you can answer the question for yourself though I fail to see why your question has any relevance to my request for mediation, or indeed to anyhting But here is a handy tip. You can access the whole history of the talk by adding an extra 0 to the 500 page and you get [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Biographies_of_living_persons&limit=5000&action=history this] which gives 5000 of the last edits (all in this case. Then with Ctrl F just check the [[Regular expression|irregular expression]] '''kbo''' and you'll get your answwer without too much effort. The mediation, I should add, is entirely about your personal attacks against myself and other users and not about your attemptints to write policy or your POV's, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 18:44, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
::::::Thanks, I know how to search history, and confirm your reply to my question was your first ever edit to the BLP talk page, even if you do not wish to simply say so for some reason. :) Were you following my edits? If so, what were/are you looking for? I am not trying to entrap you but understand your point of view and also the point of view of anyone who defends that hate site. Thanks. - <font color="#0000C0">[[User:DennyColt|Denny]]</font> <sup><i>(<font color="#7A1616">[[User_talk:DennyColt|talk]]</font>)</i></sup> 18:49, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
:::::::Well I am happy to talk. I certainly do not defend any hate sites, and if by that one you refer to WR I dont defend that site either. I have my own page there (Mr Squeaky) which isnt complementary and I am very unhappy at having my name and city location on the HM page at WW so to accuse me of supporting these sites or Brandt is plain wrong. I am one of those being outed! I've clearly antagonised Brandt etc (as has Tobias) and now we appear to have antagonised you too. So perhaps I am following a middle path. I was linking to HM until someone asked me if I would remove the link and I was happy to so its not about me wanting to link to these alleged attack sites either. If I remember correctly you had mentioned BLP at the attack sites page and so when the page cam up with your name on as editor on my watchlist I naturally went and had a look. I should add that my response [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk%3ABiographies_of_living_persons&diff=122020286&oldid=122014378 here] doesnt look like harrassment to me inder even the most liberal interpretation of that word let alone cyberstalking. I would have thought my intererst in BLP would be self evident due to my long standing interest in the Brandt case, I have quoted it many times etc, so my having posted there or not before April 11 is completely irrelevant, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:12, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
== Don't know ==
Sorry, I've no idea. [[User:SlimVirgin|SlimVirgin]] <sup><font color="Purple">[[User_talk:SlimVirgin|(talk)]]</font></sup> 18:34, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
:It might be [[WP:SUBPAGE#Listing_subpages|here]]. [[User:SlimVirgin|SlimVirgin]] <sup><font color="Purple">[[User_talk:SlimVirgin|(talk)]]</font></sup> 18:38, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
Maybe this: <nowiki>{{subpages}}</nowiki>? Returns like this: {{subpages}}. —'''[[user:AldeBaer|Alde]][[user talk:AldeBaer|Baer]]''' <s>[[user:Kncyu38]]</s> 18:42, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
::Ding ding! Thanks guys. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Prefixindex/User:DennyColt This was the actual syntax I remembered vaguely]. - <font color="#0000C0">[[User:DennyColt|Denny]]</font> <sup><i>(<font color="#7A1616">[[User_talk:DennyColt|talk]]</font>)</i></sup> 18:50, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
==Squeakbox RfC?==
Maybe a [[WP:MEDCAB|mediation request]] or a [[WP:3|third opinion]] is a better idea for starters. —'''[[user:AldeBaer|Alde]][[user talk:AldeBaer|Baer]]''' <s>[[user:Kncyu38]]</s> 19:11, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
:Well I am awaiting a mediation response, certainly refusing mediation and going to Rfc isnt a good idea. And am filing a mediation request, will let you have the link, [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:25, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
::See [[Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Wikipedia:Attack Sites|here]], [[User:SqueakBox|SqueakBox]] 19:29, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
| 