User talk:Jmabel/Archive 37

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Meetups, events, local chapters

Hi Jmabel,

There's currently some renewed discussion about whether and how to set up [a] US wikimedia chapter[s]. Among other things this could help better organize meetups, gatherings at large events and cons, and local outreach. I'm notifying people who have been actively involved in local meetups; if you are interested, see the mailing-list and meta-page on the topic... both of which could use activity and ideas. +sj + 17:21, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

links

You are making Wikipedia links to dates, months, etc. I wanted to check if you were aware of [1] Precis 06:17, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick reply. Yes, I'm familiar with the reference you gave, but I find the numerous linked dates in the McCloskey article to be quite a distraction. I'm asking you to weigh that against the advantages you perceive in linking dates. In short, consider the spirit of the guideline, which is to avoid cluttering the page with irrelevant links.Precis 07:15, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Truth to tell, I don't have strong feelings on this. I found, however, that when I went the other way on this, someone inevitably came in behind me and marked up the dates (even dates of access to a cited web page), citing the MoS, and I figured I'd save them the effort. - Jmabel | Talk 18:06, 20 June 2006 (UTC)...If I start to undo the markings, would you remove the rest to save me the trouble? (Just kidding, I won't undo, as my feelings aren't that strong either.) Precis 22:08, 20 June 2006 (UTC) P.S. I edited [2] to be consistent with the MoS--let me know if you disagree. Precis 23:05, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Yup. Good edit. - Jmabel | Talk 00:09, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. By the way, when I see a date like 13/11/2006, I'm so glad when one of the first two numbers exceeds 12, so I can tell which is the month :) Precis 01:38, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

VfD: Category:Jews and Judaism

Hi Joe: Please see Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 June 19#Category:Jews and Judaism. Thanks, IZAK 10:25, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

A possible Wikimeetup in Portland

Hi Joe -- While I see by your schedule you'll be tied down for the rest of the year, I hope you can make some time available in the first week of November: Jimbo will be in Portland about then, & I've verified that he is very interested in a Wikimeetup then. -- llywrch 19:01, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Great! -- llywrch 21:09, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Collaboration of the Week

Hey, we've set up at collaboration project at Wikipedia:WikiProject Alternative Music/COTW. Feel free to suggest or vote on articles to work on. WesleyDodds 23:59, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Gibraltar

Hi Jmabel!

Could you please have a look at the talk page and history of the article on Gibraltar. Over the past few months a number of users, including myself, have been in conflict with user:Gibnews. We feel he has taken over the page as his pet project and has imposed a NPOV pro-Gibraltarian point of view. I feel his attitude and utter refusal to acheive any form of consensus is contrary to the rules of wikipedia. He accuses everyone of Spanish propaganda even on issues which are not directly related to the Anglo-Spanish dispute over Gibraltar and reverts pretty much everything which is not written by himself. Although I am not Spanish, I sometimes wonder if I may be slightly biased towards the Spanish perspective. I do not however believe that Gibraltar should be Spanish and I try to remain as neutral as possible. I do not have a problem with Gibnew's views. I simply do not approve of his way of discarding other people's sources, opinions etc... You should perhaps consult other users for their opinions such as user:ecemaml and user:asterion.

That is why I ask you, as an uninterested party, to mediate or atleast give your perspective on this issue.

Please look at the talk page over the past few months. Conflict with user Gibnews seems to go a long way back.

Thankyou very much for your help. We would really appreciate it. There is nothing worse that when articles are hijacked by individuals with political agendas. --Burgas00 15:39, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

I doubt I'll have time to really look into this in the near future, though I'll try. If you feel that there are problems with his conduct, and at least two people have tried and failed to resolve the issue, you could start an RFC and then, if that doesn't resolve the matter, request mediation. Otherwise, given your description, if I wade in I'll just be one more person for him to revert. - Jmabel | Talk 16:00, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Cfd

Hi Jmabel, please see:

With hope that you won't need a "heads-up" from IZAK this time :), many thanks, Nesher 22:48, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

Deleted Cyrillic / Southern Bessarabia vs Budjak

Re: Why were the Cyrillic spellings removed? - Jmabel 18:37, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

The lists like that are prone to mission creep and the Budjak cities already have 3 forms, adding two Cyrillic forms is straying toward them being more like entries in "Names of European cities in different languages." My thinking was that the list links to articles on the cities and these articles contain the Cyrillic forms. AjaxSmack 02:26, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Re: "'[Budjak] is rarely used, replaced normally with Southern Bessarabia.' ... does someone have evidence that Southern Bessarabia is more common? And if it is more common, then why is the article at Budjak rather than Southern Bessarabia?" -- Jmabel 06:43, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

When researching the various spellings of Budjak for Talk:Budjak#Rename_this_page, I found that in English-language sources, especially those dealing with wider subject areas (e.g., Romania, Ukraine), the term Southern Bessarabia was used when the area was mentioned in passing, particularly when referring to WWII territorial changes. However, the nature of these mentions was descriptive and does not reflect on studies more focused on the subject. (A crude comaprison would be the encyclodedic "flatulence" vs. the more common "fart.") The article should retain the title of Budjak because that name properly situates the topic in both time and space (cf. Gaul/France, Mesopotamia/Iraq). AjaxSmack 02:26, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. - Jmabel | Talk 02:32, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for explaining how to edit category pages.Pliny 23:09, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Reply to Please be careful

Hi Jmabel,

Thanks for alerting me that several paragraphs of Talk:Romania/Archive 1 were deleted. That was an inadvertent error, of course. There seems to be a problem with some browsers not being able to load the very long wiki articles in the edit box. I try always to check that the article is still all there, but obviously missed this one.

Regarding the addition of a cleanup tag, that seemed to me not to require comment, but I can see how you could view that otherwise. I'll try to note it in the future. --Iggle 00:34, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

To your second note: Point taken! Thanks--Iggle 07:08, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Seattle Times

[3] SchmuckyTheCat 04:55, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Category up for deletion

Hi Jmabel, you may want to express your opinion on this, you are more than welcome: Category:Organizations accused of terrorism is up for deletion. Regards, --E Asterion u talking to me? 19:22, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

THP Arb

  • After looking through the Arbitration policies, it appears that you can simply add yourself to the Arbitration Request as another "involved party", at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration. In this manner, you can then make a Statement, and participate in the evidence sections of the arbitration.Smeelgova 18:17, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

RFAR

I have added you to the THP arbitration, at [4], as per your request to discuss the content of the article.Smeelgova 20:58, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Portal:Communism

Hi there! Take a look at the newly-created Portal:Communism and make the contributions and suggestions you want. Thanks! Afonso Silva 20:04, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Trust

Thank you for your contribution at WP:TRUST. Given how well-used the system is at de: I was a little surprised so few people believed that it could be useful to them. You seem to have something of a trust list on your user page any way, perhaps you should put an equivalent list at User:Jmabel/Trust? Whether it's part of the "web of trust" or not, I've always found people's "these are some users who I really respect/admire/want to thank" lists fascinating reading, if only because they serve as a great reminder that there are loads of good editors out there, often doing great work on topics that I don't look at so often. Having said that, looking at the spread of your contributions, I suspect that there are few areas of Wikipedia you've never at least ventured into! TheGrappler 22:44, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for that, I appreciate your support. For what it's worth, you've just ramped up User:Angela to be the most trusted Wikipedian apparently! :-) TheGrappler 00:00, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
If being trusted by three people makes you most trusted, then all it shows is the immaturity of the system. - Jmabel | Talk 00:05, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
Yes, I thought it more than a little ironic myself. Although it does tell an interested editor who has somehow never heard of Angela four distinct things: the "trust" system is immature (I just hope it is immature rather than stillborn), I trust Angela, you trust Angela and Thue trusts Angela. If they trust any of our three judgements, for whatever reason, then they won't need to spend the 15-20 seconds it would take looking at her userpage to work out that Angela is, indeed, an "on the level" contributor ;-) TheGrappler 00:15, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Category:Memorable photographs

I recently added Category:Memorable photographs to Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/Log/2006 June 28. Since you contributed to Category talk:Memorable photographs in regard to the category's suitability, I thought you might like to know. —D-Rock 09:45, 28 June 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Hunger

Hello,

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Hunger. Please add evidence to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Hunger/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Hunger/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, --Tony Sidaway 20:33, 30 June 2006 (UTC)


Moldavia

Hi, thanks, and sorry for the delayed reply. I personally dislike carrying out long debates on e-mail, especilly since they lack transparency. I certainly do care about Anittas' views, but I think the best way is if you post them on my talk page (though, I'm hoping they do not refer to my removal of unchecked and bombastic fragments in Moldavia). Dahn 19:19, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

OK, will do. - Jmabel | Talk 22:03, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Thank you. Please tell Anittas I have replied on my talk page, in case he is not aware of that. Dahn 23:04, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Re: Iron Guard

What I was trying to do was put tags on articles that need them. I looked on the Articles for Cleanup page and looked for articles that didn't have the little tags. If you need more, check that page. Political Mind 21:03, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

I have no idea what page you mean. There is no Wikipedia:Articles for Cleanup or Wikipedia:Articles for cleanup. - Jmabel | Talk 21:05, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

Moldovan Wikipedia

Hi,

You might be interested to drop your 2c here (a vote/discussion on whether to keep or close the Cyrillic Moldovan Wikipedia.) I don't know which way you'd vote, but I know you have somewhat of an interest in the area, so I thought you may have wanted to know about this. --Gutza T T+ 07:44, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Noucentisme

Thanks a lot for your corrections, I'm not a native English speaker but I hope I can count on your help some other time :)

It's always nice to see people interested in Catalan culture, I'm always afraid this annoying ever-present nationalism scares everyone off lol I, personally, try to ignore chauvinism from either side as well ;) And well, there are still lots of biased articles to (gently) fix in the Catalan wiki. --Kitten86 21:32, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

User talk pages

I realize that this was entirely well-intentioned, but I prefer not to have people's comments edited by other people on my user talk pages (archived or otherwise). It's fine if you are fixing a bad cross-space link, but for something like this I'd really prefer that it be left alone. - Jmabel | Talk 21:57, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

If you'd read my talk page, you would have realised that this issue was already brought up with me twice and responded to. It was clarified why it was wrong and since then I have only edited main articles in this way. Harryboyles

Talk:Ashkenazi Jews

Hi Joe: Your input would be welcome at Talk:Ashkenazi Jews#"Related Ethnic Groups". Thanks. Be well. IZAK 09:43, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Re: Hubris, indeed

Hi Jmabel,

I recommend ignoring it. I've supported "Hubris's" right to disappear for a while now. He's disassociated himself from his own user name and, as far as I know, is only involved with articles relating to economics and game theory. Then every-so-often he goes and does something completely dumb like edit archives that include his name. I didn't like that he changed the archives (even less so the first two times he did it), but spoke to him over email back in April and convinced him that he was being dumb. As far as I can tell, it worked. He gave up his Hubris identity (which is his right to do) and doesn't seem to have been messing with archives with whatever identity he has now.

I vote to just forget it. If he thinks he's so important that future employers will spend hours Googling different combinations of his name and nicknames, let him get rid of traces of his old identity. I don't think it's hurting me, you or the project in any way. It looks like he's just separating himself from his ugly, trollish side and has started just contributing like everyone else. — Asbestos | Talk (RFC) 18:43, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

I suppose you are right. If he is genuinely putting that behind him, all to the good. - Jmabel | Talk 19:39, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Re: Bibliography of Jorge Luis Borges

Hi JMabel,

Thanks for your note. Unfortunately I'm at work now and can't check my source for the bibliography (Collected Fictions translated by Hurley, which I believe is considered authoritative). I may have misread Hurley or made a typo somewhere, its possible that I meant to list the stories by the collection in which they first appeared in Spanish. I will check later tonight. Either way, I chose to list them by collection because that's where most readers will encounter them, but now that I think about it that might not have been the best choice. Also, I'm curious if you think the table format is appropriate and if not, if you have any ideas to improve it.

Thanks, GabrielF 18:11, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Political Correctness

I know it is a lot to ask, but could you eyeball Political Correctness when you have a chance. It now reads like a Michael Lind - Pat Buchanan essay. Sigh... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cberlet (talk • contribs) 7 July 2006.

Imperium Europa and Viva Malta

They claim to be libertarian, and a lot of their views are libertarian in nature. Gun rights, civil rights, drug legalization etc. How exactly are they wacko and how exactly aren't they libertarian? Drew88 10:07, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

Desperately Seeking Name: Classical mediators of ancient Egypt

Denial of historic facts. Please check vote. A suggested Name is needed.

This note came to you because you have showed a related background in an earlier comment. Regards.--Connection 18:37, 8 July 2006 (UTC)

DYK

Updated DYK query On July 9, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Lou Graham (Seattle madame), which you created. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

GeeJo (t)⁄(c) • 10:28, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Forgery

Yes, I know it's serious. I posted it on wikipedia-l, becauses it's an interwiki issue, not a simple en.wiki problem. I am also trying to ceritificate technically the fact that the message is forged. I will give details here as soon as I have them. You see, it's not a simple wikipedia issue, because Node_ue claims I'm the liar. I will post all info I have on the issue on the noticeboard and on wikipedia-l. Dpotop 20:34, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Magyar

OK, I was joking, this is why I used the :-) sign. :-) --KIDB 06:51, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Imperium Europa/Viva Malta

"You go to their web site and the splash screen looks more like a bad video game than a political party. "

Obviously, you haven't seen websites of other Maltese political parties, such as: Alpha Party Website. Seriously, check that out. And by the way, the real website of the political party is Viva Malta, which also includes a forum. The Imperium Europa website is basically Norman Lowell's website and not really the party's, as you probably noticed, since there is even a section with his own paintings for sale.

"Imagining that Malta will transform Europe is pretty wacko. " That was never said. The party is Maltese so obviously they are concentrating primarily on how to change Malta first.

""It is at this point that European-Americans, besieged in their redoubts in the North, will perforce ask to join Canada and form a new nation including Alaska. The new state will form part of Greater Europe."

I don't know what so wacko about this.

"For starters, they are explicitly racialist, definitely not a libertarian position."

The idea is to unite all native Europeans, yes. But in Malta, the political ideology would be primarily libertarian:

How are the above not libertarian positions? You can't just take one aspect (the Pan-europeanism aspect, and say they're not libertarian simply because they're racialist.

Drew88 09:18, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Sure you can. One of the premises of Libertarianism is that all people have equal rights. A racialist party is inherently not libertarian. I am by no means a libertarian, but I do share a common tradition with them in the principles of the Enlightenment. It is very obvious that this party does not.
The Alpha Liberal Party site looks perfectly normal except for some slightly unusual wallpaper.
As for Malta transforming Europe: the following is verbatim from their site: "Our aim is that Malta, this Sacred Island of Melita, this land of honey, will be the first liberated nation in the whole, White World - liberated from the enemy within and the enemy without. Malta, at the southernmost tip of Europe, could ignite a flame that would set Europe ablaze."
Since Norman Lowell's name is all over the Viva Malta site, the other's being his personally would still reflect heavily on the party. And there is nothing on their site that is inconsistent with the Imperium Europa site: just toned down.
It is obvious that I am not going to convince you, and you are not going to convince me, so I have no interest in discussing this further. - Jmabel | Talk 16:23, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Classical mediators

Hey, friend. :D Long time no talk.

Thanks for the note on my talk page, but I wasn't aware of the apparent dispute, haven't been involved and probably won't get involved. I'm hunkering down on a long, crazy work jag in preparation to get out of town and won't be editing much for a while, except as a momentary relief/distraction.

Thanks for thinking of me, though.

I hope you're well and enjoying your summer. Regards deeceevoice 17:19, 10 July 2006 (UTC)