User talk:Evrik/Archive 6

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Messages

[edit] Chicano Stub

OK - I don't get it how to fix it. Will you be able to fix it given that you are bonked at the moment? BTW - The ignorance of others in that discussion was absolutely revolting. I'm glad that discussion is over. Chicaneo 15:04, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lebanon BoNM

Oh, awesome one. I just received a message from Ling.Nut regarding the new proposed Lebanon Barnstar of National Merit. He seems to think that based on the copyright information, there might be some difficulties with it. Based on what I saw, there shouldn't be, but I don't know as much about this as I probably should. I figure you probably know a great deal more about these things than I do, and I would welcome any input you might have regarding this matter. Thank you very much. Badbilltucker 14:07, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Interwiki bot request for it:Category:Santi

Hello Evrik.
Regarding this and this... I'm really sorry but I forgot to "retry next week" ^^ ... The script now works correctly, if it's not a problem, I'm doing it now (for "Santi" and its subcats). Sorry. --.anaconda 15:13, 26 December 2006 (UTC)


[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue X - December 2006

The December 2006 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 22:38, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Took out Barnstar Idea

Is there a reason you took out my comment in the barnstar proposal page? --Daniel()Folsom T|C|U 18:45, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[1]
Oh ok thanks! --Daniel()Folsom T|C|U 18:55, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Galleries and Cats

While I don't like this any more than you do, it is pretty clear from the language of the fair use license, that fair use images are limited in where they can be used to "illustrate the organization in question." More specifically, I think our interpretation on the Scouting WikiProject has been to only use them to illustrate the concept in question. For example, the Gold Award image should only be used to show what a Gold Award looks like. Any other use would constitute a copyright violation. Honestly, I wish that nobody had thought about how this applies to cats, because we had a nice thing going. But, it is pretty apparent to me (and I am typically fairly liberal in my interpretations) that it is not a good idea to create galleries of copyrighted images. I won't change the cat just yet, but would encourage you to research it more, and make your own decision. Nobody would be happier than me if we found out that fair use could be in cats, but I am not optimistic. Thanks. --NThurston 21:46, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Actually, it's not about them being cat'd. It's about them being displayed on cat pages. Everything with {{Scoutlogo}} gets cat'd somewhere, but we don't have an image gallery on that page. Your question got me wondering if this is official policy, and it turns out that it is: "9. Fair use images may be used only in the article namespace. Used outside article space, they are not covered under the fair use doctrine. They should never be used on templates (including stub templates and navigation boxes) or on user pages. They should be linked, not inlined, from talk pages when they are the topic of discussion. This is because it is the policy of the Wikimedia Foundation to allow an unfree image only if no free alternative exists and only if it significantly improves the article it is included on. All other uses, even if legal under the fair use clauses of copyright law, should be avoided to keep the use of unfree images to a minimum. Exceptions can be made on a case-by-case basis if there is a broad consensus that doing so is necessary to the goal of creating a free encyclopedia (like the templates used as part of the Main Page)." from Wikipedia:Fair Use#Images. I don't know when, what or who is driving the restricted use of fair use images, but it is pretty pronounced recently. --NThurston 22:05, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Award query

What happens to the awards once they get archived? Simply south 17:30, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Copyright problem with Historical Markers

Hi,

Unfortunately historical roadside markers in Pennsylvania are copyrighted. (I left a note explaining why in on a talk page here.) Images Image:Mikveh_Israel_Cemetery_sign.jpg and Image:Satterleesign.png will either need to be removed or kept under a 'fair use' justification: however, the PHMC owns the copyright and generates a profit from selling images of the markers making 'fair use' a stretch. Hope this helps, GChriss <always listening><c> 15:21, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
  • I am interested in knowing where this information is. When I called the PHMC I was told verbally the signs were in the Public Domain. --evrik (talk) 19:57, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Excellent User Page Award & The Lots of Barnstars Award

Excellent User Page Award
I Hpfan9374, hereby award you with the Excellent User Page Award, for a professional layout and design, as well as great content. Hpfan9374 06:59, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
Lots of Barnstars Award
I Hpfan9374, hereby award you with the Lots of Barnstars Award, to recognize a great wikipedian who has lots of barnstars. Hpfan9374 06:59, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jergen's getting paranoid

You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Evrik for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. --jergen 10:24, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Whatever .. --evrik (talk) 22:50, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scouting/Translations

Please look at the end of this section of the above article - Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Scouting/Translations#Project mediator offer and respond to the question I directed to you there about the involvement of others, in particular Chris, who you queried. Thanks. Hopefully we can get it moving very soon. --Bduke 20:38, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi Evrik, you said you would make your response "later in the week" (last week). I asked others to hold back until you commented. I hope you can find time to do so soon. We are looking forward to it. Thanks. --Bduke 00:45, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

OK. Do it as soon as you can. --Bduke 03:35, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XI - January 2007

The January 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 20:34, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Contributions

Can you tell me where I can go to learn about how to see someones contributions? Thanks, and here is a WikiCookie.

--al95521 00:33, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:MILHIST Coordinator Elections

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are looking to elect seven coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by February 11!

Delivered by grafikbot 10:30, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Maxfield Parrish artwork addition

I'm really new to Wikipedia and don't have a login or talk page yet. Hope it's still okay to ask this here.

I think you added "The Dream Garden" by Louis Comfort Tiffany to the Maxfield Parrish page, but I can't figure out why. Did Parrish paint it? If so, shouldn't the text say "by Louis Comfort Tiffany and Maxfield Parrish"? Could you clarify this?

Thanks very much, Sara —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.234.80.218 (talk) 07:58, 6 February 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Katholische Pfadfinderschaft Europas

What did you do to this article? You didn't even read my move comment, did you? Assuming doog faith I hope the chaos you started was not planned and the history and the article's title can be restored. --jergen 19:04, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I think you can understand my comments: I just came here and found a mess instead of an article I recently translated and rewrote. Actually, the English one is far better sourced then my earlier German version but I never came across Catholic Scouts of Europe. UIGSE, the umbrella organization, uses French as lingua franca so perhaps there is a French translation somewhere. --jergen 19:13, 6 February 2007 (UTC)


[edit] The Martial Arts Barnstar

Hi evrik, I added a barnstar which was later removed by you. Probably because I did something wrong, could you please explain..... And I would really appreciate it if you could point out how I should add barnstars.. thnx Kbarends 20:54, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Can you do any better?

Hello Evrik. My name is Zazzer. You have shot down three ideas for a barnstar I have created, and I was wondering then, if it isn't so great, can you do any better? If yes, then why don't you create one and post it under the topic heading. -- Cheers! :) Zazzer


I have three barnstars in the one topic headline. Sorry if that confused you! -- Cheers! :) Zazzer


I'm sorry for seeming angry. I had a bad day. And for future reference could you post your comments below instead of on top of your earlier comments. -- Cheers! :) Zazzer


I can try... How so though? -- Cheers! :) Zazzer


The three that are under the topic headline. -- Cheers! :) Zazzer


This topic headline. -- Cheers! :) Zazzer P.S.:In the Content box click on #6.

[edit] Meetup

Hey evrik- Thanks for starting organization of the next meetup. I've invited about 20 more philly area users that didn't get your notice. ike9898 17:39, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Re: When to pick a date, location? I dunno, but I say give it at least a week. ike9898 19:03, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping. I'm not sure when I'll be available yet but I'll certainly come if I am. Kat Walsh (spill your mind?) 21:42, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] False Barnstar?

Do you mean that there are genuine and fake barnstars in making [this_edit]? BuickCenturyDriver 23:45, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Done.

Done. Acalamari 20:37, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Katholische Pfadfinderschaft Europas

Sorry! I admit I did not merge the data bases, because I did not know I had to do it. Sorry for the delay to respond, but during the 3 previous days I had a lot of things pending in Wikipedia and in real life.--Yannismarou 11:10, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Amazing Race images

I know the policy (and implementation of the policy) can be extremely frustrating but it's just one of those things. Rather than continually tell you what I think should not be allowed, how about an example of something that I think would be considered fair use for use on the Kandice Pelletier article... an image of Dustin and her landing on the pit stop mat when they were eliminated. This would have to be used in the paragraph section and not in the infobox, and would be okay because the article itself specifically talks about the event depicted. In the meantime, I have asked an independent voice to have a look at the situation and possibly give some advice. -- PageantUpdater • talk | contribs | esperanza 18:39, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kandice Pelletier

The next time you go to edit/revert Kandice Pelletier, I urge you to consider improving the article rather than being disruptive to prove a point. -- PageantUpdater • talk | contribs | esperanza 21:57, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

I did this days ago (well, almost every one - just realised I missed Romber). Some were kept because they were in keeping with fair use rules, but moved to other parts of articles. Check my edits. PS, I love that you accuse me of stalking you but are also accusing me of singling out one particular article. PPS. I left some because the articles were pending deletion and I couldn't be bothered dealing with them. -- PageantUpdater • talk | contribs | esperanza 02:25, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
  • What a mess. --South Philly 13:45, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Catholic Scouts of Europe/Katholische Pfadfinderschaft Europas again

Can we list this as an uncontroversial move? If I interpret Talk:Catholic Scouts of Europe#Name change right you accept Katholische Pfadfinderschaft Europas as title because there is no commonly used and verifyable translation. But I can't make my mind if your last statement is "Yes" or only "Perhaps". --jergen 20:17, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

  • I'll comment on your page. --evrik (talk) 22:08, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
    Not happy about your proposal; "Catholic Scouts and Guides of Europe" is only a rough translation and not used outside Wikipedia. And further on I mistyped this; it should be "Catholic Guides and Scouts of Europe" - all member organizations of UIGSE name the Guides first when mentioning both. If you google for the latter you will get only hits for the Italian UIGS member.
But I can wait until the mediation is closed. --jergen 09:08, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Neuroscience

why did you remove my proposal? three supports and you decide it is not good enough? thuglastalk|edits 20:18, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Saints

Thanks for the box about saints. I am not much of a joiner but as you insist... Andycjp 18:40, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Phi Beta Kappa Society

Hi, Evrik. PBK is neither a fraternity nor a sorority but an honor society, and so it shoulod not be characterized as such. At one point, there actually was a comment somewhere reminding people NOT to categorize it with the other greek-letter societies, but with honor societies. Thanks. -- Avi 20:32, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but PBK is not within the scope of that project, if I am not mistaken. -- Avi 20:35, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
  • ummm ... as I said, I merely filled in the template. I don't care that much. --evrik (talk) 20:36, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

OK, no problem, I was just trying to be polite and let you know why I removed the template image:smile.gif, as per Wikipedia:WikiProject Fraternities and Sororities and Fraternities and sororities, Honor societies do not belong. -- Avi 20:37, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Coordinator

I just nominated you here. --South Philly 13:43, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Meetup/Philadelphia_3

Thanks for telling me there was a poll/discussion going on... not! :P And it's closed, but it says it's closed TODAY. What gives? Are we using the international date line as a reference or something? Grrr... - CobaltBlueTony 14:01, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I was home, sick from Tuesday 2/6, through the weekend. I know you didn't mean to offend, but I did note that you informed other people, so I was a little miffed. That's all. I'll go if I can at any rate. - CobaltBlueTony 16:15, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
D'oh! Melded into an older discussion of the topic, and not at the bottom of the page! ARGH! Curse you and your logical editing!!! 2/8... My wedding anniversary... I was beset by teh norovirus!!! - CobaltBlueTony 18:32, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed "Amazing Race X contestants" articles

I would advise against creating such articles. When most of the racers are inherently non-notable, grouping them together as a collective does not give them any greater significance. See Wikipedia:Listcruft and Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_an_indiscriminate_collection_of_information. --Madchester 20:29, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Again, I strongly advise you not to create articles like Amazing Race 1 contestants. It's a violation against WP:NOT, namely its provisions against indiscriminate information. Please don't create such articles simply to prove a point (WP:POINT) against another editor.--Madchester 05:13, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
Right now, you're creating articles that violate both WP:NOT (indiscriminate information and FAQ) and WP:BIO.) You're basically creating biographies on non-notable individuals, disguised as an Amazing Race subpage. That's simply not permitted under Wikipedia's official policies. --Madchester 21:35, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
  • I would argue on the notability. --evrik (talk) 21:36, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Military History elections

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting seven coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of sixteen candidates. Please vote here by February 25!

Delivered by grafikbot 14:00, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Commons Barnstar

I understand the suggestion to write a better definition for the Barnstar - I feel I provided one with my comment. However, I don't understand the need/desire to tie it to a WikiProject. I think it should be a barnstar given to people who make contributions of this type. I think it should be given by anyone who wants to give it. I don't understand an advantage to tying it to a project. Could you please elaborate? Johntex\talk 20:26, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply.
You have much more experience in the awards area than I. To me, it seems that 2 people (myself and the nominator) support the award and that no one has opposed it. So maybe it will pass. I don't think making it an award of Wikipedia:WikiProject Moving free images to Wikimedia Commons is the best approach in this case because I don't think the award should be limited just to moving images to commons. I guess we'll see if other supporters/opposers chime in.
If it does not get made a general barnstar, then perhaps it should be a PUA. I don't know of an ideally suited WikiProject. If there was a WikiProject tied to Wikipedia:Requested pictures then that might be the place. That leaves me to wonder why we don't have a WikiProject around adding images. Perhaps I should look into starting one. Johntex\talk 21:08, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I did find it, thank you. I will try to help out. Johntex\talk 23:50, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Amazing Race 5 contestants

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent contribution removed content from an article. Please be more careful when editing articles and do not remove content from Wikipedia without a good reason, which should be specified in the edit summary. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment again, please use the sandbox. Thank you. --Madchester 21:37, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

You are not allowed to procedural or maintenance messages/tags left by other editors. --Madchester 21:48, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

  • Umm yes you are. It said so on the template itself. --evrik (talk) 21:52, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Please do not delete content from articles on Wikipedia. It may be considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. You are not suppose to remove any maintenance tags by other users. Feel free to comment on the tag on the article's talk page, but to remove it without the permission of the user who placed the tag is against Wikipedia policy. --Madchester 22:07, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Actually Madchester, Evrik is right on this one. According to Wikipedia:Proposed deletion#Contesting a proposed deletion and the tag itself you are allowed to remove a prod tag. -- PageantUpdater • talk | contribs | esperanza 22:14, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
2nded. PROD tags can be removed by anyone -- that's the point of the policy. Please don't spread such misinformation, or misuse the {{uw-delete2}} tag this way. JesseW, the juggling janitor 22:42, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I think I had it right before your last rewrite

Thanks. But, I think it right as a California related article barnstar award. Could you please revert? Ronbo76 22:05, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

If you had bothered to read the re-write, you would see that my intent to give it to California related articles as a barnstar. The second proposed California Barnstar is for all California related articles and the text had been reworked to reflect that intent. Instead of opposing me, help me. Ronbo76 22:11, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
No, I think you should do the rewrite/revert. You are not being helpful and I mean that sincerely with no malice. Respectfully, Ronbo76 22:25, 16 February 2007 (UTC)


[edit] RFC

Please be alerted to Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Evrik. -- PageantUpdater • talk | contribs | esperanza 00:20, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RE: Another Street

I've left a reply to your question - CobaltBlueTony 21:46, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Amazing Race contestants

You might be interested in contributing to Amazing Race 1 contestants. See my message on the talk page for an explanation of why I have created the article at this stage. -- PageantUpdater • talk | contribs | esperanza 02:52, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

  • I'm waiting for the AfD to be complete. --evrik (talk) 04:13, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

If you're going to create all the articles, I would suggest you slow down and only do a section at a time, expanding and correctly referencing each (see Amazing Race 1 contestants and Amazing Race 5 contestants) with verifiable mainstream media sources rather than sources from blogs, fansites and sites like "realitytvrules" (etc... there are many variations on that site). It takes longer but is necessary. -- PageantUpdater • talk | contribs | esperanza 20:38, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm I kinda termed that wrong. They don't exactly have to be "mainstream media" sources (used that term because I couldn't think of the work I was looking for) but what I'm talking about is reliable sources. I suggest you read Wikipedia:Reliable sources and Wikipedia:Verifiability -- PageantUpdater • talk | contribs | esperanza 20:46, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image

Hi Evrik, I suggest you use the Template:Fair use in tag to explain a specific fair use justifiction for the use of the image in the particular article. Your justification needs to provide specifics about why the image should be OK for that particular article. Please see Image:WW2 Iwo Jima flag raising.jpg and Image:Apple-logo.png. If you provide a valid justificaiton, then the other tags should be removed. Best, Johntex\talk 15:16, 22 February 2007 (UTC)


[edit] The Amazing Race 4

Copyright problems with Image:Ar4amsterdam.jpg

An image that you uploaded, Image:Ar4amsterdam.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems because it is a suspected copyright violation. Please look there if you know that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), and then provide the necessary information there and on its page, if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Madchester 02:53, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Copyright problems with Image:Ar4australia.jpg

An image that you uploaded, Image:Ar4australia.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems because it is a suspected copyright violation. Please look there if you know that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), and then provide the necessary information there and on its page, if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Madchester 02:53, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Copyright problems with Image:Ar4kellyjon.jpg

An image that you uploaded, Image:Ar4kellyjon.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems because it is a suspected copyright violation. Please look there if you know that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), and then provide the necessary information there and on its page, if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Madchester 02:53, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Copyright problems with Image:Ar4jonal.jpg

An image that you uploaded, Image:Ar4jonal.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Copyright problems because it is a suspected copyright violation. Please look there if you know that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), and then provide the necessary information there and on its page, if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Madchester 02:53, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Please do not take copyrighted images from an official site, upload, and insert them in a Wikipedia article when there are fairuse or freeuse alternatives available. Labeling such copyrighted images as a TV-screenshot is not permitted; given your history of problematic image copyright tagging, any further violations may result in a block. --Madchester 02:53, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

  • Problematic image copyright tagging? What policy would you cite to justify a block? Which images are you referring to? --evrik (talk) 04:03, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
    • Evrik, I'd ask you to not simply remove "fair use disputed" tags placed by others, as you did on Image:TAR10Vietnam.jpg and others. I'll look into the arguments you provide, but at first sight I think I'll probably uphold my concern. I'd be within my rights to now simply go forward and delete the images all the same (bad fair use deletions are speedies, hence any admin is entitled to make the judgment call at any time), but I guess I'll leave the final decision to some other admin. I'll tag accordingly, please don't remove these again. Fut.Perf. ☼ 11:56, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
      • Somewhere in the last two days I apologized for removing the tag. I misread the text where it said the tag could be removed if a valid FU rationale was posted. I missed the part about being an admin. In any case, I would like to see some sort of global discussion about these images. --evrik (talk) 15:24, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
        • Okay, fair enough. The deletion guidelines are not very clear about process on this point. There are so many similar cases it might be preferable to tackle them all together to get a uniform solution. It's a tradeoff between wanting to allow proper discussion on a matter where judgment calls must be made, and the need to be efficient and expeditious. As I said on your RfC and in this essay of mine, the problem of questionable image uploads is simply overwhelming, in terms of sheer quantity. We have probably hundreds of thousands of images need to deal with in some form or another. Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:32, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
          • can you go back and restore image:AR10Finland.jpg until this all gets sorted out? --evrik (talk) 15:37, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
            • I'd rather not, after all, I agree with the deletion. I'd support some centralised discussion in order to save work; I'd hate to have to undo work that's already been done in this case. Sorry. Fut.Perf. ☼ 15:54, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
              • Just to save us both all the work of repeating this discussion for all later images. Let's take Image:TAR10Vietnam.jpg, as an example. What exactly is the information conveyed by that image that makes its presence mandatory for the critical discussion in the article? What is it showing that absolutely needs to be shown through the visual medium? That the candidate was wearing dark eyeglasses? That he was shown with his mouth gaping open and that was a reason everybody laughed about him? That the camera chose an angle that made the words "...ison Centrale" visible behind him in a particular artful way? Of course not. And of course the article doesn't mention any such thing. With none of these photos. You see, that's the standard we have to evaluate fair use on. That's what I mean when I say: Mere illustration or decoration. Fut.Perf. ☼ 16:08, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
                • My point on the FU: The text of the article can be edited to reflect the needs of the FU criteria. The text of the sunglass image reads Teams waiting outside the Hanoi Hilton, and it's next to the description of the leg through Vietnam. I'm going to give the sunglass image another look. --evrik (talk) 18:54, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
                  • Hmm, so whatcha gonna write? something like this:
"A notable event occurred during episode 10 when the teams were lining up in front of the "Hanoi Hotel", an historic prison building in Vietnam. As one participant turned around to face an interviewer, the camera caught him at an angle where the shape of his dark eyeglasses, together with that of his baseball cap and the form of a doorway in the background, coincidentally formed an occult Kabbalistic symbol. This coincidence was widely commented upon in the media[1], and the photograph soon made the round of the internet.[2] In a series of lectures and articles, Prof. A. Maze-Race, of the Institute of Modern Lifestyle at the University of Harvard, has analysed the event as "a potent symbol of the sudden and inexorable intrusion of the Absurd into human existence through the medium of popular culture."[3]"
Sure, if you have something like that to say, then it's fair use. Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:18, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstars

Sure, what's the question? Smurrayinchester 08:04, 23 February 2007

Sounds fine; it would be good to have a wider range of opinion on Barnstar Proposals. Laïka 21:15, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Churches

What can I help you with in regards to churches? Waarmstr 21:19, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

  • I'll get back to you anon. -evrik (talk) 23:42, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar

How many votes does the award need?thuglastalk|edits 20:51, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

  • It depends, but you still haven't crossed the threshold. --evrik (talk) 23:42, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Why are you voting against my barnstar twice? Im going to open a disute with you if you continue to mess around. If you want to comment, comment away. I have 6-7 votes and id imagine i will have 2-3 more very soon. When i get 9-10 i will be adding the barnstar. thuglastalk|edits 01:06, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] ABRSM

just to let you know that I removed the link to Malcolm Boyle you added to ABRSM. I didn't feel it was relevant. If you dissagree, feel free to express this on the talk page. MHDIV ɪŋglɪʃnɜː(r)d(Suggestion?|wanna chat?) 00:44, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstars

I think that we still need a major overhaul... The situation is getting worse with every new award. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  06:47, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

A very rough idea I have is that we should have only a few general barnstars but a lot of smaller add-ons to them: i.e. you could get a 'science barnstar with a neuroscience add-on', or a 'history barnstar with Poland's add-on'... something like a category for barnstars. They should be tied with categories, and be hierarchical like they are. Because currently one of the biggest problem is that there is little difference between a BS, a WPA and PUA, particulary in 'scale'.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  06:56, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar Notice

Hey thanks for those links - although I'm sad to say I only commented on the Editor's Barnstar - simply because I am not familiar with all of the debate behind hte neuroscience barnstar and I didn't know enough of the ... lingo(?) for hte LGBT barnstar (for example - I didn't know there were Project Barnstars (I think they called them PUA or something). Again very sorry, usually I'm always one to vote on even the most minor thing - but anyways - good luck on your Editor's barnstar award - as you can see by my vote I really do believe that should pass through! Good luck and I promise if you ever notify me of these things again I will vote on all of them.Daniel()Folsom |\T/|\C/|\U/ 15:31, 25 February 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Barnstar

Just because your vote was archived it does not mean it did not count. Why do you think i added the archived session? Users are only allowed to vote once as per voting policy. Yes, removing comments is vandalism but i did not move your other additions which were comments - i only removed your second vote. Also, you are ACTING coordintor. If i 'threaten' to post my barnstar at nine votes, you can not expect to be an official coordinator with two to three votes. thuglasT|C 08:27, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Difficult to work with

You're a difficult person. --Jagz 16:21, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Catholic Schools

Can I ask if it was you who removed all the catholic schools from "HS in Pennsylvania" and if so why? Thank you.Tstrobaugh 03:58, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Maybe I'm not clear enough. Roman Catholic HS's are a subset of All HS's in Pennsylvania, but they still are to be included in All HS's in Pennsylvania. Public and other Private schools can also have a subcategory under All HS's in Pennsylvania but they too are still HS's in Pennsylvania. You have removed catholic HS's from All HS's in Pennsylvania and they should not be removed because they still are HS in Pennsylvania. You have also miscategorized most of those HS as Catholic HS in Philadelphia. There are many that are not in Philadelphia, Lansdale Catholic High School for instance is located in Montgomery county. Maybe if you could state your objective I can help point out where it went wrong. How is it that you think catholic schools are different then public schools when it comes to being a HS in Pennsylvania would be a start. Tstrobaugh 16:48, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
I don't know if you are being coy or not. You do not seem to grasp that there is no difference between Catholic HS, Public HS and Private HS when it comes to the category of HS in Pennsylvania. They are all HS in Pennsylvania and should remain in that category. If you want to have a subset of catholic HS that's fine as long as they are still included in HS in Pennsylvania. Are you going to make a subset for the public schools? for the private schools? You don't get it so I'm just going to start undoing what you did. You had fair warning and didn't explain your reasoning. Category:Roman_Catholic_Archdiocese_of_Philadelphia is already in place, so is Category:Roman Catholic secondary schools. Why don't you start with the public schools? You haven't answered any of my questions so I take it you are being obstinate.Tstrobaugh 17:58, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
I didn't start it you did. If you have some edits to suggest go ahead and start a discussion about them, until then the pages will be put back the way they were.Tstrobaugh 18:39, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
Have you stopped yet? I'm the one who tried to have a discussion. Put everything back and then we can discuss future edits.Tstrobaugh 18:49, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
going to keep going then Huh? I will put everything back the way it was before you started editing without discussing changes first.Tstrobaugh 19:42, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar

I want to apologize for taking this argument personally. However, you cannot say that you have not taken it personal with some degree as well. I maintain that you should be a more considerate of others feelings when editing and removing content. If i had not maintained persistent my barn star would have went to waste. When you told me that you supported it as a WP award, i did not understand what this was and where it would go. I am not experienced with wikipedia so perhaps showing me where it went as Lakia did would have helped. Perhaps the best way to view this argument would be that if either of us had given up my barnstar would be either wasted or in the wrong place. thuglasT|C 20:34, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

  • I appreciate the apology. Thank you. --evrik (talk) 20:36, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

You're welcomethuglasT|C 20:53, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] salesians

Why you don't want to engage in a constructive discussion of the issue instead of mechanically reverting ? Bakersville 22:20, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Let's discuss it there then and see if we can reach a compromise Bakersville 22:27, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

  • Deal. --evrik (talk) 22:30, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Please note that you exceeded the 3RR in Salesians. Please self revert. Thanks. Bakersville 20:55, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Anon does not necessarily equate with vandal. Anyhow -imho- you are being unreasonable regarding the title issue. Bakersville 21:04, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

We can continue tomorrow. If you think that more cases are needed to substantiate the claim, I can take some time to do some research and add more. Bakersville 22:10, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

  • I try to reason with you many times. If you keep on adding a tag without explaining why I will report you for abuse. Explain what part of the POV policy the title is violating. Bakersville 14:55, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikihalo.

Stop, Evrik. There is no consensus whatsoever to delete or even delist the wikihalo. I was archived because the nimnation was SIX MONTHS overdue with no decision. Please stop acting unilaterally. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 18:06, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

  • There was consensus. It was just nnever done. --evrik (talk) 18:09, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
Really? Because I see two comments that could in any way be considered "votes". One for, and one against, with other vague comments both for and against. That does not create consensus. I archived it because it had gone neither way for over six months, why are you dragging this all up again? And why on Earth do you hate Barnstars so much? Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 18:12, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
  • I haven't delisted or deleted the award. I just got rid of the extraneous cruft that dealt with nominations and voting. --evrik (talk) 18:13, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
But that's the point os the Wikihalo! Look, here's a compromise. I agree that the idea of support and oppose voting is stupid for an award - so how about all nominations are subject to a simple approval vote? The Wikihalo is supposed to be a community award, so it is appropriate to let the community to express their support. And we'll cut down the candidacy time. Sound fair? Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 18:19, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
OK. Will let you know when I'm done. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 18:27, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
K. Why? Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 18:44, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
I have replied on the page you requested. I'm now going AFK for a few hours, but i will return tonight. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 19:00, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
I'm back. Can I get on with my proposed changes now? Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 20:50, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

If you really want Wikihalo deleted, speedy deletion is not the way to do it. I've declined all your speedy deletion nominations - use WP:MFD for this. --Coredesat 21:26, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

All right. Redirecting is a better idea. --Coredesat 21:35, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikiproject

Thank you for placing my award on the wikiproject awards section - i did not know it existed thuglasT|C 01:45, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

I was also wondering if there could be a vote on extending the archival time to 3 weeks or have some type of mathmatical mechanism where when something gets more support it stays longer. Its stupid for you to keep archiving things that just get unarchived after a day or lost because a user does not feel comfortable unarchiving it. As a semi-newcomer i believe this would be very beinificial to the project. Perhaps this would stop people from getting angry aswell thuglasT|C 05:04, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

i.e. - The wikipedia commons barnstar is already due for archival and the california wikiproject will be in two days.thuglasT|C 17:33, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

I dont plan on archiving them - but i believe that the rules should not be biased. You are probably the only person who archives awards, so if you approve of them - they stay around indefinitely, if you dont - two weeks and they are gone. Its quite discouraging for a newcomer to have an award archived, especially if they worked hard on a award as i did. I would suggest more time based on votes. Perhaps archived after two weeks if it does not have a conceptual support:opposition ratio of atleast 1:1. If not, 3 weeks. I'm going to be working alot on the awards with you, but ill try to keep to my domain which is graphics and let you worry about the concept. Im also willing to make any (within reason for the time i put into wikipedia and if i believe i am able to do it) image for an award conceptually supported. thuglasT|C 18:08, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Meetup

Stop by the meetup page. There's a lot to be done and not much time! ike9898 03:19, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] For you

For your valuable contributions in keeping WP:BS up, running and organized, I, Piotrus, award you the 'Barnstar Barnstar not-Barnstrar' :) --by User:Piotrus, 27 Feb 2007.
For your valuable contributions in keeping WP:BS up, running and organized, I, Piotrus, award you the 'Barnstar Barnstar not-Barnstrar' :) --by User:Piotrus, 27 Feb 2007.

[edit] Barnstar walkthrough

Hi there,

I'm Andrew. I don't understand the process to submit an WikiProject Award barnstar. Perhaps you can show me a walkthrough? FYI, I'm a member of Wikipedia:WikiProject Environment. The group has decided to come up with a barnstar. I submitted to the Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Environment talk page to see if other project members like it. But after giving 2 whole months, nobody aside from me voted. I don't know if they don't vote or simply don't care. So what should I do when I encounter this? Should I still go ahead and propose this barnstar?

OhanaUnited 05:10, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your suggestion. I have contacted all the members who were active (make at least 1 edit in February) and I'll let you know what happens afterwards. OhanaUnited 20:17, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Debate

Hey, I'd be glad to help - but first could you fill me in on everything. When I had voted for that barnstar - I had gone to it's voting page directly - so I did not see the alternative (or perhaps the alternative was added later). So why is one better than the other? (Filling me in on anything else you think neccesary would be great too). Thanks!Daniel()Folsom |\T/|\C/|\U/|(Can you help me with my signature?) 00:21, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

You're invited to the
Philadelphia-area Wikipedia Meetup

Sunday March 4, 2007
5pm
Independence Brew Pub

RSVP

[edit] Excuse me

Evrik, if you have a problem with me or my edits on Wikipedia, I would appreciate it if you could take them up with me and not cross-post a complaint to a number of editors behind my back [2], [3] etc. Thanks. Please get in touch on my talkpage if you have any issues you wish to raise. I would appreciate your explaining the basis for your cross-posting invitations to comment on barnstar proposals and how it complies with WP:CANVASS at the same time. Yours, WjBscribe 13:05, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

  • I'll respond to you later. --evrik (talk) 22:54, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Don't hide the truth

I saw you removed what I wrote. Don't hide the truth. --209.244.42.140 14:45, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

  • Yeah, right. --evrik (talk) 20:57, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XII - February 2007

The February 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 15:07, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Watch your back

Dev920 has called your actions pathological and mocked your actions. Check it out. --South Philly 15:39, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

I never mocked you. And I said your hatred of barnstars was pathological, not any of your actions. Your actions are perfectly rational given your viewpoint. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 17:25, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

This is like first grade i swear. Dev im not saying you are completely wrong - but if you say something bold admit you were wrong or stand by what you said. Pathological, by definition means abnormal and dysfunctional. Dysfunctional is not rational. thuglasT|C 18:01, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

  • yup. --evrik (talk) 22:53, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Not to mention perfectly rational seems pretty good - you should give him the E=mc2 barnstar because he must be doing quite a bit of math to remain perfectly rational. thuglasT|C 22:58, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re: WikiProject Doctor Who Award

Hi, I know you archived the request for this award, but from looking at its history I don't know if the support it had is enough to make it a full Barnstar. Is this the case, can we now add it to the awards page and use it as our official barnstar? Or did you just archive it because you felt like it? Smomo 18:06, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

  • The idea was approved and it was posted on the page. --evrik (talk) 20:56, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Salesians - Controversy

Are you satisfied with the state of the article as it is? I think there is a good arguement that the paragraph on sexual abuse is given undue weight, but if you are content with the state of the article, I won't push it. Mamalujo 18:33, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

  • I am okay with it. --evrik (talk) 20:56, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Campaigning

If you are referring to contacting multiple users, I am personally against the practice which I think it is disruptive and when similar minded editors are contacted may result in bias editing. Jeffpw brought to my attention that "campaigning" might be against the guidelines in some circunstances (when is characterized as "aggressive campaigning"). I am not planning to initiate any dispute in this case. In the future you may want to exercise restraint in the use of this practice.

As far as the Salesians article paragraph on sexual abuse, I am content with its current form after the edits. And I understand by reading the talk page that you are also. Bakersville 21:26, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Agree to disagree - Thanks

I guess with the contacting other users issue we can agree on disagreeing. Thanks for the editing to fix the user page. I've never got to do that yet. I guess is about time. Bakersville 21:40, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] That thing you asked about....

There was recently a vote on Wikimedia Commons for picture of the year [4]. Only established users (>100 edits) were allowed to vote. Unfortunately, you have to create separate user accounts on each wiki. What you saw there was one half a mechanism they set up to for voters prove they are established users on a wiki other than the Commons see this. Sort of convoluted... ike9898 21:37, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Copyeditor's Barnstar

I noticed you voiced an opinion in the first discussion on a Copyeditor's Barnstar/Award which was archived without decision. If you haven't already, would you please check in with the current discussion? The !votes/opinions from the first discussion, althought noted at the top, are not being counted in the current tally. It would be great if you would also weigh in on your preference of graphic design from among the choices (currently eight different images, the last being added at around 15:23, Thursday, 1 March 2007). If you !vote, please update the tally near the top of the discussion. Thanks. --PigmanTalk to me 22:13, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, sure, I know you are already participating in the current discussion but I sent the same message to everyone who participated in the first discussion. I included you because, I believe, you were the only really firm "oppose". I just wanted to be a stickler about inclusion. Otherwise, it could be seen as canvassing, though I made the message as neutral as possible. Sorry if you feel the message was redundant. --PigmanTalk to me 22:31, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Star

Thank you for the star. I'm glad we get along now. Has the california star been officially approved yet? If so, i believe you deserve one.thuglasT|C 23:10, 1 March 2007 (UTC) Sounds good. thuglasT|C 23:13, 1 March 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Re: Church of Saint George

Um, I'm in the UK; can't see how I would be much use for there...--Nilfanion (talk) 17:41, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

No problem, I know what that was about. I'm an admin over there and reuploaded a load of images in response to this thread (Image:Image:Checkpoint near Abu Dis.jpg was originally Image:Palestine occupation33.jpg for example) Thats why I have a lot of photos of that region in my contribs.--Nilfanion (talk) 17:50, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] re: Wikipedia:WikiProject Awards

Thanks for pointing me in that direction. I saw your reply to my comment in the discussion on the copyeditor star, and will comment on the project page.  :) Aleta 04:20, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

You consider me joining a WikiProject and actually working on it, "hijacking"? And, no, I'm not going to create a vote on whether you should be coordinator or not. The discussion which you seem to consider elected you made it very clear no-one was interested in a coordinator, and when you were put forward, everyone opposed. This seems a good enough consensus for me. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 10:57, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Hi Evrik, it looks like most of the discussion you sent me a while ago regarding awards that were approved with few actual numbers of votes has been resolved. Is that the case? If not, please point me to the current discussions and I'll try to lend my opinion. --Deathphoenix ʕ 21:04, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thank you for the welcome you sent me! Wpktsfs 19:20, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] re WP:SERVICE awards

You removed these from {{Template:Barnstarpages}} with the comment "Removing Service Awards - Never fully vetted by on the proposals page)". I'm not sure what proposals page you're referring to - the Wikipedia:Barnstar and award proposals/New Proposals page, or what? Herostratus 16:52, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Confused

What was the thanks for? IrishGuy talk 20:18, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Ah. No problem :) IrishGuy talk 20:21, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Commons Barnstar

Wow, thank you ! That is awesome. I am pleased to be one of the first recipients of the award, but I'm even more happy just to see it get promoted. It is probably something that we should have had some time ago given our desire to get free images were practical. Thanks for your work on pushing us to get the design/goal right. Best, Johntex\talk 23:27, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

On Wikipedia:Barnstars/General the link to the Commons Barnstar is a red-link. What is the process for fixing that? Johntex\talk 23:54, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hey!

Hey - I was just wandering around in the Kindness Campaign and I saw your name and decided to drop in and say hi. I really like your page...I'm jealous. ^_^ It looks wonderful.
Anyways, have a great day!
Saber girl08 02:17, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

I guess i wont be around haha i cant take the frustration of wikipedia. Im pretty sure i would have drop kicked Dev by this point - unfortunately the internet doesnt let me do that so i decided just to quit before i get any more mad. thuglasT|C 02:41, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar thanks

Thanks for the barnstar - it looks great. And thanks for all you do around here too. Cheers, -Will Beback · † · 02:54, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Scout gallery

Thank you for trying to help save this. There's got to be something we can do, this one isn't like a pile of Jambo patches or council strips, it's one of the things that ties all of us together. I appreciate your support. Chris 05:53, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] delete

hey i uploaded an image that i would like to delete, could you help me with that? the image is image:42nd_district_title.jpg

  • thanks Wpktsfs 17:11, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Thanks for the helpWpktsfs 19:20, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "Awards" argy-bargy

I would tend to agree: it looks to me like we're just seeing some residual sniping, which I'm attempting to assume will tail off fairly rapidly (hint, hint), and I don't see what further discussion at ANI will accomplish, until it gets to the point where multiple people get blocked for on-going pointless bickering in their messages to ANI in and of themselves. (Then again, I suppose ANI has a fairly high acquired resistance to pointless bickering, but still, it's tempting fate.) Alai 20:39, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I forgot

The California Star
Evrik has been awarded the California Star for the creation or improvement of California articles. --thuglasT

[edit] Phillyblog

I have added a "{{prod}}" template to the article Phillyblog, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. RJASE1 Talk 20:38, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

  • I've nominated Phillyblog, an article you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but in this particular case I do not feel that Phillyblog satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion; I have explained why in the nomination space (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and the Wikipedia deletion policy). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phillyblog and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Phillyblog during the discussion but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you.RJASE1 Talk 22:07, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Okey Dokey. --evrik (talk) 22:11, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] What do you think

Very nice, added it to my user page. ;) Yonatan (contribs/talk) 17:04, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

  • I like it also. I think it would be better if it said "free images" and not just "images". Even that is a bit of an over-simplification since not all free images are accepted on commons (for instance, we don't allow some types of candid public shots), but that would be a closer approximation of what we are looking for. Johntex\talk 17:20, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
    • I'm not sure what you mean by the template question. I do think it should auto-add users to a category though. That is a good feature. Johntex\talk 17:37, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
      • Oh yes, I think we should build a userbox template. I don't use very many userboxes myself, so I am not that familiar with how they are organized. I know there are userboxes for WikiProjects so it could go there, but this does seem like it is broader than that. I think there is a section of userboxes related to editting philosphy - maybe it could go there? Johntex\talk 17:53, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Possible renaming of Wikipedia:WikiProject Saints

It has been suggested that the above named project be renamed Wikipedia:WikiProject Christian saints. Please express your opinion on this proposed renaming, and the accompanying re-definition of the scope of the project, here. John Carter 17:08, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Content disputes and semiprotection

Attempting to have an article semiprotected based on a content dispute is an unfair practice, and could be considered a violation of civility. Please do not do so.

As a matter of course, I have reverted the article. This is not to be construed as me saying I agree with one version or the other, but I do not like seeing an edit war. I have created a section for the dispute in the article talk page [5], please use that and make your points rather than edit warring. One Elephant went out to play... 19:35, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

  • Yes, there is only one IP that is vandalizing. It is not a content dispute, it is an anonymous user that keeps using this text

The National Council of La Raza (NCLR) is a racial supremacist group in the United States, similar to the Ku Klux Klan. Its focus is on Reconquista (Mexico) and Hispanic supremacy.

to replace this text

The National Council of La Raza (NCLR) is a non-profit, and non-partisan political advocacy group in the United States. Its focus is on reducing poverty and discrimination, and improving opportunities for Hispanics. According to the organization's website, it is "the largest constituency-based national Hispanic organization, serving all Hispanic nationality groups in all regions". To this end, the NCLR does research, disseminates information through reports, press releases, and its website, provides expert testimony, and lobbies for causes important to Hispanics. To fund programs, the NCLR partners with philanthropic organizations, such as the Ford Foundation, and corporations, such as Citigroup and Wal-Mart. The NCLR serves its constituency by means of affiliations with almost 300 community organizations. The NCLR is headquartered in Washington, D.C. and maintains eight regional offices. The current president is Janet Murguia.

This is clearly vandalism by an anon user. One Elephant went out to play... just left me a message more or less accusing me of edit warring. Excuse me, but asking for semi-protection is a way to make whoever is forcing these changes to register so it can be discussed. --evrik (talk) 21:39, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re:NCLR

Hi, Evrik: If in fact that IP is vandalizing the page (I don't really know anything about the organization in question, so I can't really comment on the matter), just list on WP:AIV and have him/her blocked. Then we won't need to worry about protecting the page. Cheers, Heimstern Läufer 22:10, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, the protection policy allows for semiprotection for "Preventing vandalism when blocking users individually is not a feasible option, such as a high rate of vandalism from a wide range of anonymous IP addresses." So, I don't really think this situation would fall under that category. Sorry. Heimstern Läufer 22:14, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../e/v/r/User_talk%7EEvrik_Archive_6_c5ba.html"