User talk:Blnguyen/Archive39
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Special:Contributions/Sayeed212
Looks like Thugchildz's sock. What do you think? GizzaChat © 11:28, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
- Well, Thugchildz is blocked atm, so I'm just biding my time for a while. It's a pity, since he is a good user. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 03:43, 9 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Protection of Wikipedia talk:Esperanza
At first, I thought your protecting the page was kind of arbitrary given what I thought was simply one edit and a revert. However, when I examined the edit history, it became obvious that the edit warring had been going on for at least a day. I'm now a little bit sorry that I got involved in this since it's clear that emotions are running higher than I realized.
In the long run, however, your protecting the page comes down on the side of those who don't want any more discussion of Esperanza. I would argue that this runs counter to some of the basic spirit of Wikipedia. Thus, I would suggest that, after a reasonable "cooling off" period, you unprotect the page per Wikipedia policy discouraging the protection of pages.
Thanx.
--Richard 02:43, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- I certainly don't intend to protect it permanently at all, only to stop the reverting. I had not intended to protect it with the intention of enforcing a discussion shutdown of Esperanza. The MfD mandates what future the Esperanza pages have in their historical sense, so the talk page of the MfD would probably be the best place to interpret what the MfD means as to talking at WT:ESP. Thanks, Blnguyen (bananabucket) 03:23, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
- I think you're gonna need to protect the mainpage as well. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 03:09, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- It isn't a problem yet. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 03:23, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] user:Sarvabhaum
This users block has expired. He wishes to transfer the account to indef blocked vishu123. Is this acceptable.thanks.Dineshkannambadi 17:13, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
- He didn't appear to say that, but rather that Vishu123 is not Sarvabhaum but a meatpuppet who has transferred passwords. Either way, there is only one of them. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:05, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Nomination for Checkuser
How do I nominate somebody to be a checkuser? The WP:SSP backlog is daunting, and really, more checkusers are needed. Diez2 19:43, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
- I can just ask for it, but I don't think I fulfil the tech knowledge guidelines to be useful at this stage. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:05, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Count again
You'll find that it's three reverts. Please enter discussions here. violet/riga (t) 02:48, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
- What about undoing my update? Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:51, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
- My first edit was a change, not a revert. violet/riga (t) 02:52, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
- Well, it undid the selection of Dard Hunter four times. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:05, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
- My first edit was a change, not a revert. violet/riga (t) 02:52, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Sreesanth
Aha, I've worked out what's happened. This edit updated the number of tests, but not any of the other stats. When I opened his CricInfo profile I saw the test figures matched up and so presumed that had been updated. Will go and change those test figures now. HornetMike 00:02, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Categories
Category:Australian Buddhists and Category:Australian Hindus.Bakaman 00:17, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Ranji match
I didn't go for it. TN needed 80 odd with 9 wkts in hand. The ground is more than an hour's drive from here, so it didn't seem worth the effort to see less than two hours of cricket. The match had a good finish though, with TN winning by two wickets. Tintin (talk) 06:01, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
- Well, fair enough. I didn't expect that you would actually drive from Kerala, I thought you were already in TN on business or something. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:05, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
- I live and work in Chennai. Tintin (talk) 15:32, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Articles
Hey there. I'm posting this here since I feel that posting a response on the RFA would be improper. I agree with your concerns that I haven't really gotten "stuck in" with "meaty edits" as you would call them, the main reason for this is that my areas of interest, music and social work articles, tend to be highly contentious. I haven't really been able to find somewhere to get stuck in, though I have been working on a few stubs - Gap loss and some minor work on Guy Marchant for example. However, if you ever want a hand on an article, some copy editing, or just another pair of eyes to look over it, don't hesitate to ask. Cheers, ✎ Peter M Dodge ( Talk to Me • Neutrality Project ) 06:50, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
- I don't think posting a response is at all improper. The problem is that I simply don't think you have devoted enough time to it, as most of them were machine edits or semi-automatic stuff done in a quick time. I generally feel that being in a dispute makes you more qualified, as long as you weren't the problem, as there is a big problem on WP these days with interest groups, religious movements, ethnic POV-pushing and that is where it is like the wild west, so we need admins who are willing to probe sticky article situations. I especially liked RfA/Khoikhoi_2 and was not scared off by it and I would do the same for you. Having said that, doing tons and tons of gnome article edits is also OK, but doing what others will not do (I don't mean p[laying politics) in terms of fixing articles will get more weight than things where there is relatively more supply. I guess {{CWC Advert}} may find you helpful if you feel you can smooth out prose for Featured Articles. Thanks, Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:05, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
- I've been in a few, which mostly get aggrivated by the fact that people don't use talk pages when I ask them. One big problem I come across more often though is people will "discuss" the matter by stating the same thing over and over and over ... while avoiding acknowleding my point. I've kind of gotten tired of those kinds of fights, so I try to avoid it if I can help it, but I certainly don't mind copyediting, and as well Ive been trying to expand some stubs, as I noted. I find that expanding stubs tends to be a rather noncontentious way to really get ones hands dirty, so I've been trying that. In either event, my original offer still stands - if you have an article you want me to look over, just ask, and I'll take a hack at it. I can certainly look at the articles you're trying to promote to FA/GA status to see if I can help. Cheers, ✎ Peter M Dodge ( Talk to Me • Neutrality Project ) 07:11, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
- I feel complled to note, as far as Dispute Resolution type stuff goes, Ive been in it quite a bit, I just try to avoid being the cause of the dispute. I try to help out users in such untenable situations, and while it may have gained me some malign, I feel that ultimately the good edits these users make in the end is a net benefit to Wikipedia. Currently I'm trying to help Ilena - and this is proving to be one of the more difficult cases I've taken on, but I try to approach everyone involved with respect, cool, and kindness. That's the kind of approach that diffuses disputes in my opinion, and so I try to do so. I always welcome review and help, of course, should you want to take a look. I definetely don't shirk away from trying to fix bad situations, I just try my best to avoid being the cause. Cheers, ✎ Peter M Dodge ( Talk to Me • Neutrality Project ) 07:19, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Omura Arbitration
Pleas note that I have proposed other motions on the Workshop page re this case. I have also emailed ArbCom with further information that I am keeping private - which is being held up by the list Moderator. Richardmalter 10:16, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
- Noted and received. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:56, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Hi Blnguyen
You may be interested in the discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Template:Admin_100b_and_others, as it refers to two of your userboxes. Proto::► 14:11, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
- I don't mind it going at all. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:56, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Yay
For once, the Wrong Version wasn't protected on the Doosra page. Well done, this may be the first time ever that a sysop has protected the right version! GizzaChat © 01:52, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
- It's only sprotected. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:56, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] WikiProject India Newsletter: Volume II, Issue 1 - January 2007
|
|
|
[edit] For your efforts
 |
The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | |
| For your efforts in dealing with wiki vandalsDineshkannambadi 02:56, 15 January 2007 (UTC) |
[edit] DYK
Thanks for the DYK update. I see there's some warring over one entry, and the net result is that Dard Hunter doesn't currently appear. I hope the article will get a dedicated slot. :) –Outriggr § 03:24, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
- It was reverted on and off by another admin who was self-selecting against current consensus, but it was put back again. It actually got a 16 hour shift, which is quite long. Regards, Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:05, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Special:Ian Thorpe
I engaged in a conversation today, with an Australian Pro Athlete in the track, he represented us in the last commonwealth games. He told me that there is a 3months calendar that they have to fill with their whereabouts. They nominate a couple of places like home, pool etc as A B C D E and then they add that letter on every day at a specific time. Therefore, they nominate EVERY DAY where they will be for at least 1 hour. He said there are three ways of drug testing. 1) By appointment, they call the athlete and ask him to be at a location at a future date for the test. 2) During games 3) random with the use of the whereabouts calendar that every athlete submit. The day they tested Ian, they went at the pool, that was one of his nominated places and then they went at his home. He was not there. They waited for an hour. He did not appear. He failed his obligation as a pro athlete. It is a documented fact. It needs to be on the paragraph about his retirement.
Blnguyen, has the issue with Ian Thorpe been resolved? Can I post my two lines or will you erase them again. Please advice me of your decision, so i can post them or ask for mediation.Karacult
- Replied on the talk page. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:34, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
go to the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority and see what the law has to say. http://www.asada.gov.au/control/whereabouts/requirements.htm
“Athletes included in ASADA’s Registered Testing Pool (RTP) are required to provide quarterly Athlete Whereabouts Information directly to ASADA. The required information includes….” “Athletes are required to nominate one (1) location per day where they will be available for sample collection and provide the start time of the one (1) hour period that they will be at that location.”
It was Ian’s responsibility as an athlete to be there and he failed that. It is not up to the ASADA to look for Ian, it is Ian’s responsibility to be there, and he was not. The wiki entry for Ian has a detailed description about his achievements for anti doping. How can you justify to emitting his last professional act as an athlete, that of failing his drug testing obligations?
I think that I only bring facts, backed up by news articles and I see no reason for you erasing my entries. Please, don’t just erase them, talk this with me or I’ll call for a mediation
this is my entry:
On the eve of what was the biggest decision of his life, Ian Thorpe failed to comply with a drug test that was planned weeks ago and was part of a pre-championship testing blitz of Australia's top swimmers. [1] [2] No action was taken from the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority to that matter, as Ian Thorpe effectively deregistered himself from the ASADA register, by retiring the next day.[3]
- I replied on the talk page. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:05, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Evidence question
Hello, I had a question about the current Naming Conventions case. I was in the process of supplying evidence a couple weeks ago, when my wiki-time was interrupted by the holidays (and the fact that I got stuck in the New Mexico snowstorm for a few days). Upon my return to Wikipedia, I see that the voting phase on the case has already started, before I was able to finish supplying evidence, and before some of the other involved editors had returned from their own holiday break. :/ May I continue with supplying the rest of my evidence? Or would it be too late at this point? I'd posted alerts about my upcoming absence and return on the ArbCom talk pages, such as at Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Naming Conventions/Evidence#Christmas and Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Naming Conventions/Proposed decision#Additional evidence, but I'm not sure if anyone saw them. Thanks for your time, Elonka 19:50, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
- You can, I am willing to have a look at any extra material you provide. The case may linger for a few more days yet. Thanks, Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:05, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Again, please accept my apologies for the multiple delays. It's a been a really tough winter so far! I have finished presenting my evidence, as well as a few extra proposed principles and findings of fact on the Workshop page. If you have time, I would appreciate if you could review them. If not though, I understand. To be honest, I feel better just knowing that I was able to complete my section, since its half-finished status was on my mind during the last couple weeks.
For what it's worth, I have no intention of challenging the final ArbCom decision, whichever way it goes. I see ArbCom as a useful part of the Wikipedia Dispute Resolution process. And just as with an AfD or DRV discussion, I may not always agree with the decision of the closing admin, but I will respect it. :)
Despite some of the other comments that have been made about my behavior throughout this process, it is my hope that ultimately it will be clear that I am a longtime hardworking Wikipedian (I think I'm currently on the list as one of the 200 most active editors), that I believe strongly in the project, and that in general I'm not groundzero for various disputes. In this one particular case though, I felt strongly that I had an obligation to speak up. But I will be glad when the matter is finally resolved, as I am very much looking forward to getting back to writing articles! :) Elonka 03:43, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
- Please note that a significant part of Elonka's evidence is either misleading or downright false, as noted here. >Radiant< 14:37, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
- Noted. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:54, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
Could you please take a brief look at the talk page? There are several remarks by the involved parties regarding issues that haven't been addressed by the ArbCom. Thanks. >Radiant< 12:24, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
- Sure. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:34, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
I noticed the motion to close for this ArbCom case. I hope i'm not too late in asking the ArbCom members actively voting in this case to take a look at this request and consider it before closing the case? Thank you. --`/aksha 10:57, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] FA Campaign
Good idea, could you please take a look at Indian cricket team now and use your more neutral perspective to rejig whatever POV there may be in the history section. It's almost getting to a year from the day in which we began push for FA for this article. Nobleeagle [TALK] [C] 05:30, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
- Sure. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:05, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Eugene Guth
Greetings and Happy New year! Could you help me with this one? I have been trying to find an admin to remove a copyvio notice. The article was started by the subject's son. The subject died in 1990. The material was taken from the subject's Home Page, which it appears the son has the copyright of, and he is prepared to put it in the public domain. I have a long argument with him, during which he twice removed the copyvio notice, but I think he has calmed down. Of course I told him about COI. The discussion is on my talk page, on User talk:Mikeguth and on Talk:Eugene Guth. The article on the Temp page to be put in place is a stub that I wrote and there are no copyvio problems with it. I'll keep a tight watch on the article and the guy. I am, BTW, still thinking about a RfA as you suggested long ago. I'll be in touch on that. --Bduke 01:51, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- Done. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 06:34, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
- Many thanks. --Bduke 02:29, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Newsletter!
Hi Blnguyen, thanks a lot!! The edition looks great! I think I will distribute it tomorrow. Ok with you? — Lost(talk) 11:45, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
- Sure. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:54, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Indian cricketers
Good job on cleaning up the stubs for POV and whatnot. It's the sort of thing I've never been bored enough to do ;) Sam Vimes | Address me 17:36, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
- Yeah, I carved some of the Pakistani bios (about 60) last week. Maybe it simply means that I have transformed into an aggressive warrior with revert-happy tendencies or something :) Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:54, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] State Library of South Australia
Was there a point in deleting half the article? (Asking out of geniune wish to know; if there was I won't revert further.) Yodaat 01:43, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
- I think I should have trimmed a bit more selectively. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:54, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Yep
Already on FLC, though we cheated and worked on it in my sandbox for a month and a half first . . . ;) · j e r s y k o talk · 13:59, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Excellent User Page Award
 |
Excellent User Page Award | |
| I Hpfan9374, hereby award you with Excellent User Page Award, for content. Hpfan9374 06:24, 20 January 2007 (UTC) |
I'd have thought I was quite shabby actually. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:12, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Signature
Hello Blnguyen. I wanted to stop by and introduce myself. I am a newish user and I sorta stole your signature. I hope you don't mind! The banana theme suits my monkey username. Have a good day. - Tragic Baboon (banana receptacle) 02:24, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
- Greetings to you too my friend. Hee hee. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:12, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Barnstar
 |
The Working Man's Barnstar | |
| message Attilios 12:57, 21 January 2007 (UTC) |
- Many thanks, Attilios! Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:12, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Great job...
Well many congrats for pulling it off greatly, it was the most enjoyable wiki-newsletter I have ever read. Good luck on getting some Cricket related articles featured! Arjun 01:29, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Harby
Okay, I'll try to collect data for that. Tintin 05:59, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] RfA
(I hope you'll pardon my copying to you my reply to Renesis...)
- Many apologies for my failure to have replied sooner; I tend to undertake multiple editing tasks at once and then permit otherwise pressing issues to slip my mind. In any event, whilst I am quite appreciative of your suggesting that I might be a good candidate for adminship, I'm not particularly keen on pursuing an RfA at present principally because of the disorganization/flightiness by which my editing is sometimes plagued; I have had occasion to be irked by the failure of an admin to reply with any modicum of speed to a query apropos of his/her use of the tools (which failure leads some [especially new] users, I have found, to apprehend high-handedness and perceive an sysop-editor divide that ought not to exist), and so I should not be interested in using the tools until such time as I can be sure that I will be able to respond promptly to questions/concerns about such use. I expect that at least most of the projects on which I am working at present should be done in the next month, and I imagine that I might then nominate myself; if then you should continue to think me a competent editor, I'd be quite honored to have your support. In the meanwhile, cheers... Joe 08:11, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] My RfA
[edit] "Mathematically impossible to get 9/5"
Actually, with 14 active arbitrators, that is possible, if only just barely. -Amark moo! 01:51, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
- There are only 13 active. Dmcdevit is currently away. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:52, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
- I don't know if you aware but there is an active discussion of the vote threshold required to open a case at the RfAr talkpage. It may be irrelevant in this case since it wasn't going to get a majority anyway, but do you really believe that a case that had 8 votes to accept and 5 to reject should be rejected? There seems to be a consensus that the current wording of "4 net accept votes" should be modified, though it's not clear to just what. Regards, Newyorkbrad 01:53, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
- You can count me as the 6th one then, if you would want it restored....Then you can only have 7-6 at most, and until the change is officially enacted, the status quo would naturally apply, I would think. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:56, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
- I don't want it restored, I have no view on this case one way or the other. But people in the past have said that the exact voting requirement doesn't matter because no cases are that close. Yesterday, though, a case was rejected 4-3, and now this one and another you removed, so in general and apart from any particular case, the policy question should be thought through by the arbitrators. Regards, Newyorkbrad 02:07, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
- You can count me as the 6th one then, if you would want it restored....Then you can only have 7-6 at most, and until the change is officially enacted, the status quo would naturally apply, I would think. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 01:56, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
- Oh. I didn't actually know the number active, and I misinterpreted your comment to say there were 14. -Amark moo! 01:55, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
- I don't know if you aware but there is an active discussion of the vote threshold required to open a case at the RfAr talkpage. It may be irrelevant in this case since it wasn't going to get a majority anyway, but do you really believe that a case that had 8 votes to accept and 5 to reject should be rejected? There seems to be a consensus that the current wording of "4 net accept votes" should be modified, though it's not clear to just what. Regards, Newyorkbrad 01:53, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] As always
As always sir, many thanks for reverting userpage vandalism. It's appreciated! -- Samir धर्म 02:23, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
- Well, well, isn't that interesting!? -- Samir धर्म 02:25, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Deleted article recreated
I noticed that List of fictional battles, an article you deleted following its 2nd AfD (1st AfD; 2nd AfD) has been recreated. I only noticed because edits to it popped up on my watchlist. Not sure, but it looks like a genuine recreation. Not sure what to do, so I thought you might want to deal with it. Carcharoth 14:18, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks, NawlinWiki got there first. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 03:51, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks for your support
 |
As you set out for Ithaka, hope the voyage is long Don't expect Ithaka to make you rich. Ithaka gave you the marvelous journey |
[edit] Autoblocked user
A user, Linas (talk • contribs), has his IP autoblocked from the Jefferson Anderson block. It appears to belong to a fairly large router at IBM. Appreciate it if you could look into it and see if anything can be done. Thanks, —bbatsell ¿? 01:32, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
- Ok, thanks, I un-autoblocked him. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 03:51, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
