From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Short message/Long message 2 Helpful links 3 NOTICE 4 Archived Talk 5 Tools 5.1 Category tool 5.2 Juxtaposition of user boxes 6 Messages: 6.1 hmmmmm 6.2 No worries 6.3 Message 6.4 Hi 6.5 Storm over? 6.6 Keane 6.7 Working Man's Barnstar and Barnstar of Diligence 6.8 Yes!..yes!...yes! Just in...ya gotta see this. 6.9 Copped out 6.10 Regarding Association of Members' Advocates 6.11 OBL worldwide perception article AFD 6.12 Image:Bleep pic11.jpg 6.13 Image:Bleep pic11.jpg listed for deletion 6.14 November Esperanza Newsletter 6.15 Image query 6.16 WikiProject Former Countries 6.17 Barnstar 6.18 WikiProject Awards News 6.19 Hwacha's discussion moving to an advanced level 6.19.1 Post 2 6.20 OrbitOne/Hwacha 6.21 Microsoft Virtual PC 6.22 Afro latin american 6.23 Chowbok RfC 6.24 Millard Fillmore 6.25 HappyApple's comprmise offer 6.26 Just for your Information 6.27 Umm hi 6.28 Hello 6.29 Request for Mediation 6.30 Message 6.31 Article in need of cleanup - please assist if you can 6.32 Need help with wordless reverts and bullying behavior 6.33 WP:ADOPT 6.34 Robert Genn 6.35 WikiProject Awards 6.36 Questions about edits 6.37 Wikipedia:WikiProject Awards Coordinator referendum 6.38 User:Scumbag AMA case 6.39 Mattisse's Case

[edit] Short message/Long message

Leave short messages here or if you have a really long message please post it here and sign here.

[edit] Helpful links

A synopsis of Wikipedia policies can be useful. If you have a problem, it helps to know what the relevant policy is. A gentle introduction to 'why we have rules when even the rules can be edited by anybody' can be found at Pillars of the Community.

Don't let 'problems' with other editors become disputes. Other editors are working on the same article you are for a reason... you have something in common! Instead of an edit war, try collaboration and maybe you will find some valuable help in improving the article. Those other editors are your colleagues, they deserve the same respect and assistance as you do.

[edit] NOTICE

I try to handle adovocacy cases very informally (I have never needed to go beyond a brief advocacy process in any of my cases) in an effort to reach a resolution as quickly as possible without undue stress for those concerned. If you see me making comments on discussion pages, for articles which I have not edited, I may be doing so as part of the advocacy process. I might express opinions which are not necessarily my personal opinions sometimes because of this. User:Pedant

[edit] Archived Talk

Archive 1 2004-11-19/Archive 2 2004-11-24/Archive 3 2005-01-14/Archive 4 2005-02-27/Archive 5 2006-03-22/Archive 6 2006-08-19/Archive 7 2006-08-19

[edit] Tools

[edit] Category tool

Using: <categorytree>TheNameOfACategory</categorytree> you can place a Category Tree, rooted in any category, on a page:

[edit] Juxtaposition of user boxes

---

[edit] Messages:

[edit] hmmmmm

Pendant, your recent edit summaries have crossed into Personal Attacks on Viritas, please refrain for doing this. If it countiues I will have no choice but to report you. I have cautioned Viritas as well for his behavor. Æon ^{Insanity Now!}_EA! 22:54, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] No worries

I accept your apology as I hope you will accept mine. I think we can work everything out. I feel terrible about Founders4's departure, but I hope he returns. We have all made mistakes, and as long as we can admit them, we can move on to the next level. I'm looking forward to your contributions. —Viriditas | Talk 22:06, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Message

Thanks, I'll think about it. I like what you have done so far. --Guinnog 18:09, 2 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hi

First, sorry again if my English is too bad 'cause your Spanish isn't at all :) I followed your suggestions on posting what did I think should remain on Keane article but Richyard doesn't agree with my reasons so I don't know how are we supposed to collaborate. His advocates on saying that information is irrelevant and we cannot take information from fansites, only from official sites. The thing is the "irrelevant" information was removed a long time ago by Painbearer and FlyingNelly so what's left and he insists on deleting is actually interesting and well referenced information. I don't see a reason for delete it. About the fansites, if you visit Keane.at or Keaneshaped, you'll find out there's even more information than the found on the official page, well sourced since the owners (Markus Unger, Girid Obertleiner and Karin Englheart for the Austrian and Chris Flynn for the British) have near contact with Keane through interviews (some important media like Teletext has even took keane.at as a reference for their news) And now, the thing has gone out of Keane-related articles. Last week, he deleted an article about an important Mexican politician (Gustavo Baz) saying this:

“

Nominated for deletion. Article doesn't qualify subjects notability, or give any real details of his life

”

You can't see how the article was but certainly was better than the current revision. Being a stub and brand new article, it was quite reasonable why it was short. Now I think is not about contributing to the Wikipedia but more like bothering me. Gustavo Baz to Keane is like Apple to Cell Phone. The only way he could found the article is by checking my user contributions isn't it? Hope all this trouble can be solved soon--Fluence 00:57, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Storm over?

So Pedant, do you reckon the storm is over? Or is this a temporary lull, the eye, so to speak?Founders4 08:14, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm pretty much waiting as well. I've done a couple of minor things, but I have no taste for confrontation, particularly with non-collaborative personalities. I'll probably wade in slowly and see what happens, starting with some non-controversial stuff.

The article looks quite forlorn the way it is! Some of what was done was useful, and I have always felt that sourcing is important, but the basic tenor has changed so much (especially the lead) that the article no longer works very well. I suspect that only former (or present) hippies have a true feel for the topic.

It seems that almost any statement can be sourced given the volumne of literature and commentary on the subject. Sourcing offers no protection against distortion, and therein lies the problem.

BTW do you suppose the Reagan quote is just an annoying joke? Certainly there can be no pretense that this adds anything to a reader's understanding of the topic. Founders4 08:12, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi Pedant. A bit of your time if possible. Two issues. My Escape from Samsara bit needs an escape from samsara alias. Do I modify the original entry or create a new one and forward it. Also, I created an entry for Worthy Farm and put in a pic, which then got deleted cos I didn't do the copyright thing properly. Trouble is, someone has forwarded the page to Glastonbury Festival and I can no longer edit it to remove the broken link, which looks sloppy. Any help gratefully received. User:Wizardprank

[edit] Keane

I think I am really digusted of Wikipedia ability to restrain offenders and illwishers. I think that the complete disregard of Fluence to my edits and my persona is punishable. But you just came like Gandalf and you just said that: "Oh, my dear little hobbits, what do we have here? You should work like team!" Well, I don't think it's useful. I think it's useless. Where I tried with all my kindness and tactfulness to be reasonable to assume good faith (gosh, how I hate that word) that dude Fluence disregarded my work, reverted it, acted derisively and disrespectfully. I am really, really disappointed of that. First in my work here, I am extremely dissatisfied of the way control works here.

I don't know. I think I will fuck off and get a rest. We'll see.

Regards: Painbearer 16:16, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi Pedant. See? That's exactly my point. I'm not really guilty for this. We'd agreed previously with a version of the article (with Mr. Scare) and I thought he was satisfied with that version. However, after adding just a paragraph (hidden due to a format failure) and two music samples, I finally let the article to be. Soon, Painbearer reverted again the edits and therefore, I reverted his. Somehow, Mr. Scare wrote this:

“

I don't recall "reaching a concensus". I did my best to make this article make sense but you've continued to try to drag it back to the miserable state it used to be in. Endlessly reverting and comparing the utterly insignificant Keane to the greatest band ever just serves to make you look like an idiot. Shut up, Fluence. Mr. Scare 16:17, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

”

I'm fed up with this users. I tried to show my point of keeping some information as you saw on the talk page, just like you told me to but they're just uncapable to understand. I really need help. Take a look at the current version of the article and you'll se is not the "bad article" Painbearer thinks it is--Fluence 21:59, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

It was me who requested advocacy if you remember. It is understandable to take his side. I didn't expect it to work. Yet, again, I must say that I am disappointed in the way it all turned to be. Simply because there is no justice here. Simply because User Fluence is acting like innocent, instead when he is to blame for the situation. This is frustrating I assure you. Think whatever you want, I really don't care at this point. User Fluence repeatedly claimed ownership on this article. If you see the history of Keane you will notice that wherever and whenever it was necessary I always have put a reason behind my edits, which were reverted by Fluence. Such a petty behavior from your side "asking permission for every edit" is highly insulting for me and my abilities as a capable editor.

Calling me uncivilized is a passable insult. I have always tried with reason before. We have always tried with reason. But you see, whether or not I do say fuck of shit matters not, because it is really frusrtating to try to reason with someone who blames you, frames you and is overall insulting and disrespectfull towards you and your work. This is what Fluence is. I don't demand an apology, I don't hope for one. You can see, there are always to sides of coin. I told you back then that things will get ugly. Surely, they did get. I don't like it, but it happened. Take Fluence side if you want, I really don't care, but I am making a statement regarding Fluence on this issue. I won't work on Keane anymore, because I am heavily disgusted, but I certainly hope for not crossing his path ever again. It is a disgrace and insult for me as a person and editor to have him around me.

Call me uncivilized if you want. It is a conscious choice for me to preserve my personal dignity and not get involved anymore into this issue. I don't want to speak with Fluence ever and I don't want to work on Keane anymore. Simply because I don't see any kind of meaning in this. I cannot collaborate with User Fluence. I don't want to work with him anymore so I am backing off.

Regards: Painbearer 14:19, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

In my opinion in his current state the Keane article sucks. In my opinion this is a testament to the other editors unwillingness to contribute to the article while Fluence is conducting "work". I don't see User:Richyard, User:Flyingnelly and other people, who refused to work anymore while Fluence is working on the article. I refuse to work on the article, too and I regard it as a "stillborn"-article. And I am striving for full-fledged works.

About the other thing, I don't know really. My personal advice is to browse the history of Keane and it talk page and see for yourself what is the truth. If you want to have an in-depth knowledge about the situation: you can do it. I am heavily disappointed, however. I don't want to brag about it, but I just want to see some kind of... justice, you might call it. True, meaningful and good justice. Because giving a shoulder to Fluence just wasn't the right thing IMO. I respect your opinion, mate, but I think you made a mistake. I think that Fluence is not a very good editor, nor he is very good person. Perhaps this is from age, but his behavior wasn't the best thing around, you know. However, I hope that things are gonna change, sooner or later. Preferably sooner, though later works for me too.

Regards: Painbearer 16:51, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Working Man's Barnstar and Barnstar of Diligence

Hi! evrik suggested I contact you since you're associated with WikiProject Awards. After some discussion about changing the name of the "Working Man's Barnstar" to something gender inclusive, we realized that there is not much distinction between "Working Man's Barnstar" and the "Barnstar of Diligence". In order to avoid an overly-PC rename of "Working Man's", and given that there's not much difference between the two anyway, I thought it'd be best to conflate the two awards and have only "The Barnstar of Diligence." Your opinion on the matter would be much appreciated! The discussion can be found here. Cheers! -- Merope ^Talk 17:44, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Yes!..yes!...yes! Just in...ya gotta see this.

Main article: Haight-Ashbury

Many of the earliest San Francisco hippies were former students at San Francisco State College (later renamed San Francisco State University) who had "dropped out" after they started taking psychedelic drugs and began living communally in the large, inexpensive Victorian apartments in San Francisco's Haight-Ashbury neighborhood. Young Americans around the country began moving to San Francisco, and by June, 1966, around 15,000 hippies had moved into the Haight. This constituted the original core of the hippie movement, comprised of people with historical roots and the beginnings of a political and social analysis. A second wave, larger, younger and without an analysis and commitment that could sustain their rebellion, but nevertheless affixed with the same appellation - hippie - flooded major cities around the world in response to the publicity that followed the world's first "Human Be-in" or "Gathering of the Tribes". Knowing this basic distinction between these two sociological demographics is essential for understanding the further history of the movement. For example, it is likely that it was mostly the second wave that "copped out" and became yuppies. Many or most of the originators are probably still among us, scattered across the country and the world, having had and continuing to have a profound influence in a thousand different ways on mainstream society and culture. ^[1]

that was from User:Founders4

[edit] Copped out

Hi Pedant. I understand totally re: not engaging with Viriditas. I've done it a little, but even at this remove any interaction causes a feeling in my gut that is a little sickening--overexcitation of the spleen chakra, in particular, and an emotional tone that I am not used to fielding. Very hostile, ego-centered vibe.

Actually "copped out" means to avoid a commitment or responsibility. "To cop a plea" has to do with plea bargaining.

Hope you're doing well, my friend. Founders4 05:35, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding Association of Members' Advocates

Hi, you are receiving this message because you have listed yourself as an active member of WP:AMA. If you aren't currently accepting inquiries for AMA, or if you have resigned, please de-list yourself from Wikipedia:AMA Members. If you are still active, please consider tending to any new requests that may appear on Category:AMA Requests for Assistance. We're going to put AMA on wheels. :) Sorry for the template spamming - we're just trying to update our records, after we had a huge backlog earlier in the week (if you've been taking cases, then sorry, and please ignore this :)). Again, sorry, and thanks! Martinp23 21:08, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] OBL worldwide perception article AFD

You might be interested in this Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Worldwide perception of Osama bin Laden

Regards, -- That Guy, From That Show! 07:33, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Bleep pic11.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Bleep pic11.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Chowbok 16:18, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

If you dispute this, then follow the dispute procedure outlined above. The tag says, in English, "do not remove this tag". That means you should not remove that tag, especially when accusing others of not being able to read English. —Chowbok ☠ 18:54, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Image:Bleep pic11.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Bleep pic11.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in its not being deleted. Thank you. -- Chowbok ☠ 19:24, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] November Esperanza Newsletter

Program Feature: Admin Coaching (needs coaches!) Admin Coaching needs coaches!!! If you are an administrator, or even a generally experienced user, do consider signing up to be a coach. Admin Coaching, now being coordinated by HighwayCello, is a program for people who want help learning some of the more subtle aspects of Wikipedia policy and culture. People are matched with experienced users who are willing to offer coaching. The program is designed for people who have figured out the basics of editing articles; they're not newcomers any more, but they might want some help in learning new roles. In this way, Esperanza would help keep hope alive for Wikipedia because we would always be grooming the next generation of admins. What's New? The Tutorial Drive is a new Esperanza program! In an effort to make complicated processes on Wikipedia easier for everyone, Esperanza working to create and compile a list of tutorials about processes here on Wikipedia. Consider writing one! A discussion on how Esperanza relates to the encyclopedia has been started; please add your thoughts. Many thanks to MiszaBot, courtesy of Misza13, for delivering the newsletter.

The last AC meeting (full log) The list of proposed programs has been updated, with some proposals being archived. There is now a new program: the Tutorial Drive! Consider writing a tutorial on something you are good at doing on Wikipedia. The suggestion of adding a cohesive look to all the Esperanza pages is being considered; join the discussion if you are interested! In order to make a useful interlanguage welcome template, those involved in translation projects will be asked what English Wikipedia policies are most important and confusing to editors coming from other language Wikipedias. A discussion of Esperanza's role in Wikipedia is being held, with all thoughts of all Esperanzians wanted! Shreshth91 informed everyone that he will be leaving the Esperanza council as life is rather busy; his spot will be filled by the runner up from the last election, HighwayCello. Signed... Natalya, Banes, Celestianpower, EWS23, FireFox, The Halo, Shreshth91 and HighwayCello 20:33, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Although having the newsletter appear on everyone's userpage is desired, this may not be ideal for everyone. If, in the future, you wish to receive a link to the newsletter, rather than the newsletter itself, you may add yourself to Wikipedia:Esperanza/Newsletter/Opt Out List.

[edit] Image query

Hi Pedant. "Free for non-commercial use" is no longer a valid image status. The image must be free for all use, and released accordingly. Proto::type 17:55, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a commercial site. Images, as with all wikipedia content, must have no restrictions on use, commercial or otherwise. The GFDL does not forbid subsequent commercial use of GFDL content, providing that such content is correctly and sufficiently attributed, and remains free of copyright. Hence specifying an image as for non-commercial use only is no longer allowed. HTH. Proto::type 19:02, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Former Countries

I would like to invite you back to WikiProject Former countries. You were previously a member of its former incarnation WP Historical States. The objective of this project is still to improve the content and accessibility of articles on former countries. A taskforce for the states of the Holy Roman Empire has also been started and the child project on Prussia has also been revived. This restart is still in its early days but it would be great to have you back. - 52 Pickup 18:54, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar

You may be interested in this discussion Talk:Barnstar#Straw_poll. --evrik ^(talk) 15:25, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Awards News

There are several issues that the WikiProject needs to address.

1. Do we need a coordinator (or more than one) to coordinate our efforts and act as an arbiter? Please place your thoughts here.
2. Could someone work on archiving the talk page Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject Awards?
3. Do we need to develop better guidelines for the Wikipedia:WikiProject awards?
4. Finally, could you please weigh in on the following discussions so we can move them to conclusion:
   1. LGBT Barnstar
   2. Islamic Award
   3. Working Man’s Barnstar.

Sincerely, --evrik ^(talk) 02:08, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hwacha's discussion moving to an advanced level

Hi, Pedant, its me HappyApple again. I haven't been active these months on Wikipedia due to my classes at university, but now as the tests were finished i can see there is recent and suspiciously negative activity on Hwacha's article, to be brief i can say: User:Wikimachine is deliberately deleting paragraphs and subsections i created months ago (totally cited) regarding Hwacha's characteristics, on the other hand user:OrbitOne's had already deleted the paragraph of Popular culture based on this Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history#Popular_culture, I dont know where does this rule or sugggestion came out, but i believe the short paragraph which was already written filled the requirements stated on that Wikiproject page. In the aims of WP:IAR i appreciate you can assist me on this.

User:Wikimachine already asked to move Hwacha's discussion to an advanced level as i can see right here: Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-11-13 Hwacha popular culture , it seems he had asked for a Medication Cabal ( i am not sure what it is) but i believe i would seriously require your help in order my voice can be heard. I hope you can give me a quick response as soon as you had finished to read my message, Cheers, a wikipedian in need, --HappyApple 00:35, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

ok, the mediation cabal is another informal step, they will attempt to mediate the conflict, and attempt an informal resolution. I'm busy this weekend, but I'll check in with the discussion... in the meantime, you can make a statement about the problem at Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-11-13 Hwacha popular culture in the Discussion section. User:Pedant 07:24, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Post 2

Hi Pedant, thanks for sending me a note on my discussion page about what's a Mediation Cabal. As far as i can see, it seems this step (the mediation cabal thing) is not going anywhere and i am really confused on what i should to to settle down this issue.

These days i have been away from wikipedia due to my tests on university (still ongoing), and i am afraid i can't be answering all the questions or defending my point of view accurately in time (as they may appear) so i would appreciate you can represent me while the discussion is on.

Today i had a little bit of time to look up, what happened this week and it seems User:OrbitOne and User:Wikimachine already deleted the pop culture section. Its a pitty they have done that but at least they are not deleting the earlier referenced material which i posted.

I can't understand well what's the legal (or if does it have a legal status) of a guideline (User:OrbitOne & Wikimachine's arguments are based on this guideline which i can't figure out if it is a rule written on stone or something like this-Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history#Popular_culture). What is a guideline anyway?. Is it a formal rule that we editors should obbey?. I am not familiar with it, i would deeply appreciate you can explain this better to me. Thanks again for reading my queries, cheers & happy holidays :)--HappyApple 03:04, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] OrbitOne/Hwacha

As HappyApples advocat, I would like to have your input on Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history#Popular_culture. HappyApple seems content on ignoring this style guideline, which is a problem if other users agree the guideline should be followed. --OrbitOne ^[Talk|Babel] 17:09, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

I was asking your opinion about the style guideline, thats all. You could have given your objective opinion about the guildline and how it affects this case. You did not need to be rude about it though. If you wish I did not talk with you about it, then I got the message and will leave you alone about it in the future. --OrbitOne ^[Talk|Babel] 06:57, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Then can we please work together to find a productive solution to this conflict? --OrbitOne ^[Talk|Babel] 22:52, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

I do not have an oversized problem with pop culture sections, but I do have a problem with game articles being linked to from artlces that otherwise have nothing to do with the games. I am willing to accept a highly generic section that says turn based strategy games often feature, have featured or do feature this weapon. But I do strongly object to the naming of any games. In this compromise, a pop-culture section can exist, with a link to Turn-based_strategy. This way, no games need to be named in Hwacha, since any and all games of the genre that are notable will be mentioned there (Turn-based_strategy). --OrbitOne ^[Talk|Babel] 09:08, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

If you object to it, I suggest you voice your concerns on the mediation page. --OrbitOne ^[Talk|Babel] 19:54, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Microsoft Virtual PC

Are you really wanting a cite, or are you just not sure if it's correct or not? It's impossible for an emulation to be perfect, especially if it is connected to the real world. --Scott McNay 06:33, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, you're right, the "excellent" needs a cite. I have one (and it seems typical), but it doesn't agree with the article, so I'll change it. The rest, no. --Scott McNay 00:07, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Afro latin american

I hope you, or someone you can refer this to can help.

I have become involved and intrigued by the challenge of putting a NPOV to Afro-Latin American. As you can see by the page history and the talk page, I've been quite involved.

My reason for coming here is another contributor (mostly to the talk page) User:Chriscarlos who posts lengthly diatribes to the talk page, often without signing his posts or putting any time stamp on them. I've requested that he do so, but he doesn't seem to care, or perhaps he doesn't read his own talk page. I think he could make some worthwhile contributions, but he seems more inclined to add to the talk page.

I don´t know what to do and wonder if someone could at least give me some guidance, and possibly lend a hand in getting over any hurdles which my have to be crossed.

Thanks in advance --JAXHERE | Talk 03:28, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

---

Hi Pedant, Thanks for getting back to me. I guess what I'm after is:

1. some idea as to how to get User:Chriscarlos to be an active editor on the page rather than filling up the talk page with long dissertations on what should be done.
2. how to get this user to sign and date his additions to the discussion
3. how to get him/her? to follow accepted procedure and place his comments following those of others in time/date sequence. (His failure to do so makes it very difficult to pick up on any thread of conversation and follow it through ... one has to virtually scan almost everything from day one on the talk page to see if he's added anything and, if it isn't dated one can't even be sure it's new or whatever.

I've tried to point this out to him on his talk page but, if he reads these suggestions, he simply ignores them. Also, he seems to be inconsistent in signing in and making un-logged incontributions ... there seem to be a lot of entrys from the same IP which might be him (evidenced by similar material, time proximity, corrections to earlier posts, etc) In short, I find myself wondering if this guy is serious, or if his is some kind of a squeeky wheel that is simply looking for some kind of attention, except for the fact that he seems to provide some valuable resources on the talk page. So, I'm just wondering if anyone (you or your group) might have some ideas of what to do in this kind of situation. --JAXHERE | Talk 14:41, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

---

Thanks Pedant for your comments. After giving you the details above I started thinking that maybe I had assumed too much ownership of the page in question because I'd taken it on as a challenge and just wanted to see it through. Obviously no one owns any page here and so, as much as I'd like to see a good or excellent article result, that is completely beyond my control ... I can add what I can, but it is always subject to modification and even the whims of others so I've decided to relax a bit on this and try a bit of your gentle nudging as it becomes appropriate. --JAXHERE | Talk 13:18, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Chowbok RfC

I have begun RfC procedures for User:Chowbok. Since you've had previous disputes with him about image uploads, maybe you'd like to add your commentary? [1] TheQuandry 02:52, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Millard Fillmore

Is Talk:Inherently_funny_word#sock that it? 68.39.174.238 22:45, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] HappyApple's comprmise offer

Could you find this for me and put it in the appropriate section on the mediation page. You will see where it should go. Thanks! →Bobby← 22:08, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Just for your Information

I know you are not overly happy about the change of venue for the Hwacha debate. I just wanted to let you know why I did this. There are three reasons:

1. Organization - I think you could understand how the Talk:Hwacha page might be intimidating for a new editor to the issue. By creating a blank page (and moving relevant sections of the old debate to the new location) I can do my best to ensure that discussion flows in a clear way so that anyone can pop in and see waht's happening.
2. Freedom - The mediation page created when a request is submitted is good for small disputes. However, it's preordained headers can be constricting when mediating a more complex issue.
3. Clean Slate - By the time I begin mediating, debates have usually been raging for quite some time. By forcing users to recompose their positions, I hope to get a more refined understanding of the issues at play.

I just wanted to let you know why I did this. It is not out of laziness or apathy, but simply because I truly believe it allows for a smoother mediation. Also, please drop by the mediation page at some point. I've added many comments and questions. →Bobby← 15:14, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Umm hi

I got the thing about the adoption could you adopt me? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Newbee1222 (talk • contribs) 04:56, 3 December 2006 (UTC).

[edit] Hello

Hey thanks for the adoptation... hey if i think that there is a suspected sockpuppet what do i do?--Newbee1222 05:13, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

RE to your question i do games (or will try)--Newbee1222 05:15, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Request for Mediation

A Request for Mediation to which you are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/September 11, 2001 Attacks. For the Mediation Committee, Essjay (Talk) This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

this is a mediation about what seems to me to be horrible POV in the 911 attacks article. Yes, aircraft hit the buildings, yes the buildings fell but I believe the article in general follows the logical fallacy of post hoc ergo propter hoc, "If ya know what I mean" User:Pedant 08:56, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Message

Hello, just saw you message from 6 June. Thanks for offering to help however shortly after leaving wikipedia I noticed further examples of the treatment dished out to me on wikitruth.info. After some reading there it became clear that abuse, and harassment are all part of the wider (unadvertised) wikipedia experience, so it doesnt bother me now :) Fluffy999 17:43, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Article in need of cleanup - please assist if you can

Because I think you inserted the famous Martha Graham quotation, and I'm a newer user, I wanted to encourage you to look at my edit. I agree that your version "read" better, but I think that the precise sourcing and content I managed to find are preferable. Please also advise me if this message is appropriate, and whether I should eventually remove your reply (if any) to my talk page. Thank you. Stagehand 22:26, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Need help with wordless reverts and bullying behavior

I'd be delighted if you could help me with this. At the Quran Desecration Controversy article, I have been trying to add a cross-reference to the Piss Christ article, which speaks about a similar incident where a Crucifix was desecrated with urine.

The change is additive, small, and relevant, yet it's been met with bullying behavior from a couple of editors, including repeated wordles reverts.

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Qur%27an_desecration_controversy_of_2005&diff=97518851&oldid=97512050

Any help you can impart would be greatly appreciated.

67.175.216.90 20:21, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

67.175.216.90 (talk • contribs) is disrupting this article with an unrelated reference. He was asked to stop months ago, and the dispute over the alleged relevance of the reference was settled at that time. He is now revert-warring to get his way. csloat 22:41, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] WP:ADOPT

Hi there,

As a current Adopter with the Adopt-a-User program there has been some ongoing developments that we would like to bring to your attention.

A new Adopter's Area has been created where you can find useful resources and other Adopter's experiences. Please feel free to add any resources you may have found useful as an Adopter, as well as recount any experiences that you think may help others. If you know of any useful resources for new users / Adoptees then you can add them here.

Also the way the adoption process works has changed slightly. To decrease workload at Category:Wikipedians seeking to be adopted in Adopt-a-user, on offering adoption please change the {{Adoptme}} template to {{Adoptoffer}} on the user's user page, and this will add the user to Category:Wikipedians having been offered adoption. Users that have already been offered adoption can always have a second or third offer, but by separating out those users that have not had an adoption offer yet, it is hoped that no one will go lacking.

Furthermore numerous Adopters have been adding their details to a list of users available for adopting, to offer a more personalised service and allow new users to browse through and pick their own Adopter. The quickest way to adopt though, is still to contact users at the Category:Wikipedians seeking to be adopted in Adopt-a-user.

Finally - thanks for all your hard work, keep it up - and if you have any general questions or suggestions about the further development of Wikipedia:Adopt-a-User please bring them to our talk page. Cheers Lethaniol 13:58, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Robert Genn

Thanks. If you've got any more, do add it. I'm sure there are more refs out there.... Tyrenius 07:05, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

And you, without whom Robert Genn would have been a very different story, I think. Tyrenius 23:11, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Awards

There are three proposals which need some comments. Please weigh in:

• Moving the LGBT Barnstar
• Changes to The Editor's Barnstar
• New_Proposals - Neuroscience_Barnstar

Two of the three are sensitive, and thuglas is taking the whole process personally. Finally, there has never been a standard for how much support is needed for the creation of a barnstar. The LGBT star went up with seven votes, and thuglas is threatening to post his star when he gets ten supportive votes. Thoughts? --evrik ^(talk) Barnstar]]

• Changes to The Editor's Barnstar
• New_Proposals - Neuroscience_Barnstar

Two of the three are sensitive, and thuglas is taking the whole process personally. Finally, there has never been a standard for how much support is needed for the creation of a barnstar. The LGBT star went up with seven votes, and thuglas is threatening to post his star when he gets ten supportive votes. Thoughts? --evrik ^(talk)

• Once again, someone disagrees with my interpretation of our very loose guidelines. Now I don't mind when two users like WJBscribe and Kathryn_NicDh%C3%A0na, but they've taken the disagreement and posted negative comments over at that RFC.

So ... could you please weigh in one last time ... new barnstar or a wikiproject award Wikipedia:Barnstar_and_award_proposals/New_Proposals#The_Copyeditor.27s_Award. Thanks. --evrik ^(talk) 23:00, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Questions about edits

Hello Pedant, I'm just wondering about some recent edits to the page I put up on Bob Arno. I read the Help:Diff page, but on comparing the new and previous versions of the Bob Arno page, I don't see that all the red colored items were changed at all. Also, I'm wondering why the external links were removed. I see that some other pages list and link to articles, profiles, interviews, etc. Remember: you invited me, long ago, to bug you with questions! Thanks for your help. Mercurie 19:47, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

I have thrown my hat into the ring for Medcom. Would you be kind enough to give an opinion of me. Sorry to bother. Geo. Talk to me 06:17, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:WikiProject Awards Coordinator referendum

There has been some conflict at Wikipedia:WikiProject Awards. Please vote on the Coordinator referendum. --South Philly 20:23, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User:Scumbag AMA case

I had thought User:Hbdragon88 was interested in this one, but I can do it. I will be on Wikibreak for close to a week soon, so I can't address it other than a brief message or two until then. Best, --Shirahadasha 15:39, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mattisse's Case

Hey Pedant. I'm currently looking for an Advocate who would be willing to take back up Mattisse's Case as I do not have the capacity to deal with it anymore. Would you be up for it? אמר Steve Caruso _(desk/AMA) • Give Back Our Membership! 15:22, 8 April 2007 (UTC)