User talk:HighInBC/Archive 29

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is HighInBC/Archive 29's talk page, where you can send messages and comments to HighInBC/Archive 29.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming

Contents 1 Dr. David Allen White 2 Hey High 3 Wikibreak 4 Opinions, and hopes 5 re:Fat Buddha 6 AIV Helperbot 7 Too simple 8 Excuse me, but you are out of line 9 "go ahead and list it" 10 E-mail 11 Smile! 12 Wiki-civility 13 RFCN to ANI humorous thought 14 username 15 User:Renegade cash@hotmail.com 16 Note 17 Ghostbusters 18 Mr. Barnstar? 19 thanks

[edit] Dr. David Allen White

In reference to you removal of this article. Please restore it and I will make the necessary adjustments . Thanks --Jag7720 04:27, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

I didn't remove it. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 05:04, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hey High

I'd agree with your logic in RFCN mostly, if I didn't notice that the examples like "RL violent acts" etc are sub-listed under "potentially offensive/inflammatory etc", which IMO serves as a precondition to further examine the bullets, and not vice-versa. Maybe your id's made a mental forking of these sentences out on their own... What do you think? NikoSilver 22:46, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

I see two sections, confusing, and offensive. The potentially precedes the offensive to indicate that a name does not need to be offensive to you, only potentially offensive. Please note both sections are under the heading "Wikipedia does not allow certain types of usernames". The section on potentially offensive says the the following are included in what is considered potentially offensive, " Wikipedia does not allow potentially inflammatory or offensive usernames...This includes, but is not limited to". ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 22:51, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Well then, obviously the policy is wrong if it can be interpreted that way and it needs to be amended accordingly. For example, I see that "bodily excretions" are banned. So we should ban names like "NoTears", "NoSweat" etc (which are technically "excretions" -but not remotely "potentially offensive"). How would you feel if we reworded the specific part to indicate that? I propose we change "are included" to "may include". I think it all comes down to the common sense bit we were talking about in earlier discussions... NikoSilver 10:52, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

I am all for making changes to the policy after a consensus based discussion on the policy talk page. But this common sense you keep referring to would not be an issue, if the sense was really common to all of us. The ignoring of policy when it is contrary to common sense can only happen when the sense is really common. In other words, if people are disagreeing then it is not common sense. A discussion about excretions is already happening at WT:U, as for references to violence, I think that rule has a very important purpose. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 13:34, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikibreak

So how was your 43-minute Wikibreak? Do you feel refreshed? :0 RJASE1 ^Talk 16:27, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

I apparently am incapable at taking a wikibreak, every time I try I fail. I need help. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 16:48, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Its called wiki-addiction. I have it too. Maybe we should seriously consider counseling. Or...must...edit...encyclopedia! Gah! --Iamunknown 16:59, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

I took a very sudden one-month wikibreak. I found it most relaxing... well, at least I'm sure I would have, if it wasn't for the fact that I was busy during that month. Still... EVula // talk // ☯ // 17:34, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Try not browsing your watchlist for a day or two. After that, you will have lost follow-up, and will be very difficult to regain it, which will discourage you. Then, you can always give it a quick glance every now and then, and filter out the most important issues. It worked for me, but it requires an amount of trust for the rest of the Wikipedians. NikoSilver 10:56, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Oh ya, then I come back and Wikipedia's has fallen apart, and I have to fix everything(chuckle). ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 14:08, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Opinions, and hopes

Regarding:

I will try to enforce policy, but sometimes there are simply to many people resisting it and I give up.

Try to take the "long view". They are resisting now, for whatever reasons. If policy is trending in a good direction, and ignoring it is producing increasingly bad results, the good policy will eventually win. Or nothing will matter much at all. In either case, the understated simple arguments for policy will be useful background to the history. Don't stress - just pipe up with the "good reasons" every so often. (Oh, but you must fix the 'too' (sorry, the wikignome won out over the philosopher :( )) Shenme 00:14, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

I will speak reason, if people do not take it then... I will just bang my head against the wall. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 14:08, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] re:Fat Buddha

(sigh) What would Wikipedia do without you??? You're amazing!--Ed ^{¿Cómo estás?} 02:11, 4 April 2007 (UTC) Image moved to subpage[1]

Since our edit conflict over "Heavybuddha" left me nowhere to post this, I give it to you:

• Exact wording of WP:U#Religion for reference: "The names of religions or religious figures; in addition, usernames that invoke the name of a religious figure or religion are prohibited should they be distasteful, provoke or promote intolerance, are disrespectful of the religion, or promote the ideology that one religion is superior to others. Usernames that are clearly expressions of faith are discouraged, however considered allowed unless disruptive. Should a username not be clear as to the motive, it may be reviewed." Claiming to be (a) Christian or (a) Buddhist would merely be discouraged; claiming to be (a) Christ or (a) Buddha is prohibited... even if it's jolly old Hotei... and if this chap really is a Buddha, then he'd be Maitreya the World-Ruler, since that's the next expected Buddha, but he's well ahead of schedule. Disallow, obviously. -- Ben ^TALK/_HIST 05:51, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

As came up in the discussion, there are many meanings to the word Buddha, including references to a religious state. I personally have no opinion on this, but I do feel the discussion was in line with policy. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 13:18, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AIV Helperbot

FYI, your bot hasn't been running for several days. I wasn't sure if you were aware. Could this be the issue I emailed you about? Regards, alphachimp 04:53, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Very strange. Thanks for pointing this out. It is running, and listing off things it is doing, but it has not done anything since April fools day. I wonder if it is playing a joke on me.

When your bot was acting up, did it stop running? Or did it pretend like it was still going? I am wondering if it is a login issue, I should use a packet sniffer to see what is actually happening.

But first, sleep. In the morning I will examine this. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 05:12, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I am awake, and the bot is sending the changes, but it is getting a "loss of session data" error. I am going to shut down the bot and run it again and see if that helps. I saved the packet logs to future analysis. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 13:38, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

And now it works. Hmmm it looks like it got logged out. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 14:01, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I need to add a routine to check if it is logged out and log back in again. This was most likely the problem you encountered too. Thankfully, because the script sends the login session on every edit, it will not make an edit anonymously even if the server expires that session. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 14:03, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

In response to your comment above, this is exactly the issue I was experiencing with my version of the bot. alphachimp 18:02, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Excellent, that means that when I fix my problem yours goes away too. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 18:05, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Heh, it looks like my bot is running into the issue right now, so yeah, the sooner the better. alphachimp 18:07, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Too simple

Quite possibly, yes, but the present board may be too complex. Please see WP:AN for related discussion. >Radiant< 13:52, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

I saw that discussion, see WT:RFCN#New_way_of_running_RFCN for a larger discussion about how we have it now, that was made by the people involved in the process itself. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 13:53, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

• I have no objection to the revert, and was unaware of the earlier debate, but it appears that the people on the admin board do not necessarily agree with the earlier decision. We'll see if it stands up to broader inspection. >Radiant< 14:15, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

The people at the admin board can participate in the discussion on the relevant talk page, I don't see how this is an admin issue. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 14:17, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

E kala mai, jumping in here, but you're right... it's not an admin issue, I was only discussing there because that was where the current discussion was. Maybe that discussion should be moved to WT:RFCN with a note... Again, sorry for interrupting. --Ali'i 14:41, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

No worries for interrupting, I have already put a note at WP:AN mentioning the existing discussion. People will go post there if they want. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 14:42, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

• It's indeed not an admin issue. It just so happened that I spotted the thread on the admin board. It should probably be moved to the RFCN talk page. >Radiant< 14:43, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

I am not sure moving it is the best idea, I hate it when I comment somewhere then I am getting responses on a page I don't even have on my watchlist. I have already left a note there though. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 14:45, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

I'm having a problem adding user:Pothead12345 to the RFCN page. Thanks. Wǐkǐɧérṃǐť(Talk) (Contributions) 14:45, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Read the instructions, you need to make a sub page. May I ask which part of the username policy that name violates? ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 14:45, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Excuse me, but you are out of line

Arcayne's bad faith "warning" on my talk was about comments I made on Talk:300 (film) which were not personal attacks. Thus my comments on the edit summary on Persian people had nothing to do with any warnings from Arcayne, so please do not make false comments. Thirdly, User:Heja helweda has constantly made partisan edits towards Persians in a similar manner to User:Patchouli (who has since been permabanned). This is just for your own edification. No need to respond again on my talk page again, because frankly, I am tiring of this harassment of editors like Arcayne "warning" others in bad faith. Why don't admins go after problem users instead of going after people like me who are actually trying to build a neutral encyclopedia? Look at the talk of Talk:300 (film) and Heja's contributions. You've got to be kidding me if that kind of thing should be tolerated. Khorshid 18:25, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Calling someone a "anti-persian kurdish supremacist" is a personal attack. Don't use name calling, it is a violation of policy. The circumstances surrounding the insult do not justify it, you are warned not to violate this policy. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 18:28, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] "go ahead and list it"

In the Fenian Swine RFCN, you said: "First off, no I don't disallow everything, check your facts. Secondly, if you think there is a problem with my name then go ahead and list it. HighInBC(Need help? Ask me) 19:56, 1 April 2007 (UTC)" - the problem with that is if anyone actually took you up on that offer, they'd immediately be accused of violating WP:POINT (despite that a single RFCN listing is not disruptive, no-one cares about that when they cite POINT) and blocked. In light of this, can you please refrain from baiting people like that? --Random832 18:47, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

No, such a nomination would not be a point violation unless it was disruptive in some way. My offer for anyone to bring it up my name is sincere. It was not baiting. I think you have misinterpreted the situation. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 18:51, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

I guess the word "baiting" was a bit loaded, and I'm sorry for that. But, honestly - WP:POINT is often misused, and my very first thought on seeing that statement was "well, wouldn't that be a good way to get slapped for a supposed POINT violation?" I don't agree with the way it's misused, but it's out there, "the elephant in the room" so to speak, and needs to be considered. --Random832 19:44, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Well, I am not sure how bringing up my name in a discussion would be disrupting Wikipedia, even if it was done to prove a point, especially considering I have invited such a discussion. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 19:47, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] E-mail

You've got an e-mail :) --TeckWiz ^ParlateContribs_@(Lets go Yankees!) 19:57, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

You've go a response. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 20:00, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

And you've got a reply to the reply. --TeckWiz ^ParlateContribs_@(Lets go Yankees!) 20:02, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Smile!

Wooyi 20:28, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Wheeee! ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 20:34, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wiki-civility

I am the one who placed the initial civility warning on User:Khorshid's page, for his lack of civility with another editor in the 300 article here, here and here. It seems to be kind of a pattern, but hey - make your own determination. I think it certainly warrants a level two warning, as he did this right after getting the first one. That he removes them suggests he's aware that they can hurt them if they accumulate. He might remove your warning as well, but it will remain in his edit history. They really don't like that sort of behavior.
He's certainly passionate about his unique point of view. Cheers. -Arcayne 21:30, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

I warned him that there would be a block if the violation of policy continues, I was sincere in that statement. He removed my warning, so I assume that means he read and understood it. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 21:36, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RFCN to ANI humorous thought

Humorous/silly thought based on part of the MfD discussion:

• Regarding your misconception about WP:ANI: It is simply a board for issues that require administrative attention; non-admins frequently comment there. The rest of your comment, the slippery slope argument, is thoroughly vapid. —Centrx→talk • 02:54, 5 April 2007 (UTC)
  • ANI is overcrowded, you cannot even load the page if you don't have enough RAM. HighInBC(Need help? Ask me) 02:55, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps we need an AN/I subpage... Call it AN/I/Usernames. Joking, of course. Flyguy649^talk_contribs 03:00, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Lol, now that is funny. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 03:18, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

(sotto voce) ha...ha... WP:AIV/U? "Since only admins can block anyway" (paraphrased) Shenme 08:30, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

• Please request new subpages on Wikipedia:Requests for subpages. In triplicate. :) >Radiant< 09:05, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Would that be User:Page1, User:Page2, User:Page3 ? (Believe or not, the first two exist) Shenme 09:11, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] username

I thought the "Bloody" was considered inappropriete. I guess I need to remember Wikipedia is not censored.--U.S.A.U.S.A.U.S.A. (talk • contribs) 04:50, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

It is not a blatant violation of the username policy, not that I can see. You can make a posting at WP:RFCN which is the better place for borderline violations. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 04:54, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User:Renegade cash@hotmail.com

Hey -- this user created their account back long before email addresses were forbidden. Care to reconsider? That grandfather clause was recently removed from WP:U but that may have been unintentional. Mangojuice^talk 04:40, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

It does seem like I may have made a mistake, but it is late here, I will look at it in the morning. Thank you for bringing this up. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 04:44, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Renegade cash is a commercial website, so it is a promotional name anyways, I am going to leave it blocked. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 13:34, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Note

It seems that your advice is not respected, and the issue continues: [2][3][4]. It is unfortunate that he doesn't appreciate advice. The Behnam 10:38, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, see #Wiki-civility for my plan. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 13:34, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Well that fact that he removed one of them as "rvv" is yet another violation, and that is after he removed yours. So it is a post-warning incivility. The Behnam 18:29, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't think that justifies a block at this point. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 18:38, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

I didn't mention block. I was just pointing it out for the record. The Behnam 18:42, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

On that matter, what exactly are your "temporary page indexes"? What do they do? The Behnam 18:43, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

It is an index of items that have been removed from a particular page. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 18:51, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Oh, so then it was pointless for me to notify you. I see now. The Behnam 19:08, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ghostbusters

I'm just praying the trolls don't turn out in force due to using this RFCN discussion as an example. RJASE1 ^Talk 02:58, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

lol, I should hope we as a community can recognize trolling, but then again, when we as a community get carried away you never know what will happen. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 03:10, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

"Disallow It has an obvious sexual reference in it - 'bust'!" Shenme 03:12, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

• Disallow Bust is also a drug reference! RJASE1 ^Talk 03:21, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
• Disallow Bust is a reference to female anatomy! RJASE1 ^Talk 03:21, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
• Disallow Reference to trouble, they might want to "bust" (i.e. break) Wikipedia! RJASE1 ^Talk 03:21, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
• Disallow Clear impersonation of Busta Rhymes! RJASE1 ^Talk 03:21, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

• "Disallow The reference to a ghost is of clear and blatant offense to too numerous religions to count here." HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 03:19, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
• "Disallow Ghosts should not be subjected to threats of violence, this name is threatening in nature." HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 03:27, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

• Allow! You guys are all policy wonks, busting can be a reference to musical stylings! And ghosts can be a positive reference to one's ancestors! Assume good faith people!!. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 03:30, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

• "Disallow per WP:U#Illness Death (the ghost-causing condition) is a physical malady or illness and should not be referred to." RJASE1 ^Talk 03:31, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

• Super-dooper-mega-strong-allow because I said so. Listen to me! RJASE1 ^Talk 03:33, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

• Is this High's talk-page or an episode of Whose Wikipedia Is It Anyway? Must... control... laughter... Cascadia ^{TALK| HISTORY} 03:33, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mr. Barnstar?

What do you think of [this user]? RJASE1 ^Talk 18:19, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Not sure, looks harmless so far. ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 19:45, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I probably just don't like it because I'm military. Someone making their own barnstars seems like like someone making themselves a Purple Heart. RJASE1 ^Talk 20:26, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] thanks

thanks for the unblock highinbc. nice login btw ;) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.112.7.212 (talk) 04:31, 8 April 2007 (UTC).

No problem, try not to make me look foolish for doing it ehh? ^High_InBC^{(Need help? Ask me)} 04:32, 8 April 2007 (UTC)