User talk:LaraLove/Archive 22

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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.

← Archive 21

Archive 22

Archive 23 →

Contents 1 GA Sweeps update 2 Dana 3 your bathrobe cabal 4 The undertow 5 WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter 6 THANK YOU! :O 7 DRV common sense 8 And here's a little FYI for you 9 User page 10 Signpost updated for March 3rd, 2008. 11 Thankies 12 Twonkle 13 marketing guerillas deletion 14 To archive or not to archive 15 Pseudoscience discretionary sanctions 16 Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#BetacommandBot 17 Hi there 18 Userpage design 19 My request for bureaucratship 20 Hi (it's or its please tell me since you know so much about grammar) me again under a different user name 21 User talk:Oh wiki your so fine your so fine you blow my mind 22 User:Twaz 23 User talk:Twaz 24 Help please 25 User:LaraLove/Userbox/Bearcat 26 bc - bot - bag - blah 27 March 2008

GA Sweeps update

This is a form message being sent out to all of the GA sweeps reviewers. Thank you for all of your dedicated work in the difficult and time-consuming task of ensuring the quality of articles within the GA project. Many reviewers have taken time out of reviewing articles at WP:GAN (this may be one factor in the expansion of the backlog), writing articles, and probably getting some sleep! I have sent this message out to update you on our current progress and to remind you to please keep up with completing your reviews and updating GARs/holds. As of March 1, 2008, we have swept 20% of the 2,808 GAs we started with. At our current progress, all of the articles will be assessed in just under three years (based on when we started). If we want to complete the sweeps sooner, we need to continue reviewing at a higher rate (consider doing one or two more reviews a week or whatever you feel comfortable with) and inviting new, experienced reviewers. If you are taking a break, focusing on GAN, writing your own GAs, or are already reviewing articles like crazy, I still want to thank you for all of your hard work and hope you are pleased about our current progress. Keep up the good work and happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 09:03, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Dana

Hi Lara, I've made a comment on Dana's talk page about some recent editing practice. Addhoc (talk) 17:46, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

And I have responded to them. DanaUllman^Talk 19:24, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

your bathrobe cabal

I noticed you had a website for your bathrobe cabal and was wondering what company hosted it, I 've been looking to make a website for a while now so any help would be great.--Pewwer42  Talk  22:14, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

ZZ Hosting, I think. It was given to me as a gift, so I'm not entirely sure. I don't have access to my BRC email on this computer, because I haven't felt like setting up the POP server thing, but I'm pretty sure that's it. Lara❤Love 06:35, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

ah well part of that was because I decided to make a cabal and based the html scrip almost entirely on yours(your more then welcome to change mine, I'm not really good at html), It's just about done now and is called the 42^nd Cabal have a look and tell me what you think--Pewwer42  Talk  07:46, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

You might want to wait until the member base picks up before investing in webspace. Ya know... get a foundation going and some interest built up. Lara❤Love 08:07, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

good Idea, your answers were acceptable(42 is preferred for all of them) your in if you want to be(I believe you cabal says loyalty to only yours but it also says rouge admins which it think has the rule break all rules so... just tell me if you indeed want in)--Pewwer42  Talk  08:40, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Ya, I can hold allegiance to no other cabal. Just being funny. Lara❤Love 17:12, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

The undertow

What happened to him?

The Transhumanist    05:18, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

He's retired. Combination of wiki-stress and real life stress. I don't want to talk about it. Lara_Love^Talk 05:43, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter

The March 2008 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter is ready! Dr. Cash (talk) 06:03, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

The Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles Newsletter

The WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter Volume I, No. 5 - March 2008 February issue | April issue Project News There are currently 3,647 Good Articles listed at WP:GA. The backlog at Good Article Nominations is 185 unreviewed articles. Out of 237 total nominations, 42 are on hold, and 10 are under review. Please go to WP:GAN and review an article or three as soon as you have a chance! The oldest unreviewed articles are: Ian Browne (cyclist), Tony Marchant, Reginald fitz Jocelin, Annie Russell, Brodie Croyle, and Jimmy Moore. The top five categories with the largest backlogs are: Sports and recreation (39 articles), Theatre, film, and drama (34 articles), Transport (23 articles), Music (21 articles), Politics and government (18 articles), Culture and society (13 articles), Places (13 articles), and World history (12 articles). The backlog at Good Article Reassessment currently stands at 13 articles up for re-review. If every participant of WikiProject Good Articles could review just one article in the next week, the backlog would be almost eliminated! GA Sweeps Update Two members joined the sweeps team this month. They are Jwanders and jackyd101. Jwanders swept Physics sub-category quickly and is now sweeping "Astronomy and astrophysics". Meanwhile, jackyd101 is sweeping "Armies, military units and legal issues". During February, 66 Good Articles were reviewed. Including those articles that were under GAR or on hold, 33 were kept as GA, 21 delisted, 17 currently on hold or at GAR, and 1 was exempted as they are now Featured Articles. Reviewer of the Month Blnguyen is the GAN Reviewer of the Month for February, based on the assessments made by Epbr123 on the number and thoroughness of the reviews made by individual reviewers each week. Blnguyen is from South Australia and has been editing Wikipedia since 2005. He was also the reviewer for the month of December 2007, so this marks the second time that he has been GAN's Top Reviewer for the Month. Congratulations to our GAN Reviewer of the Month for February! Other outstanding reviewers recognized during the month of January include: Blnguyen (talk · contribs) David Fuchs (talk · contribs) Derek.cashman (talk · contribs) Dihydrogen Monoxide (talk · contribs) Calbear22 (talk · contribs) Ealdgyth (talk · contribs) Jackturner3 (talk · contribs) TimVickers (talk · contribs) VanTucky (talk · contribs) Wrad (talk · contribs) Member News There are now 185 members of WikiProject Good Articles! Welcome to the 9 new members that joined during the month of February: Bibliomaniac15 (talk · contribs) Canyouhearmenow (talk · contribs) Chrisisinchrist (talk · contribs) Ed! (talk · contribs) Juliancolton (talk · contribs) Kakofonous (talk · contribs) LOTRrules (talk · contribs) Matthewedwards (talk · contribs) Nousernamesleft (talk · contribs) Did You Know... ...that the shortest timespan for a GA to be listed and subsequently delisted is 8 minutes? (The article is Project Chanology and currently listed on WP:GAR) ...that the current nominations system started on March 10, 2006? ...that in May 2006, number of GA surpassed number of FA? This WikiProject, and the Good Article program as a whole, would not be where it is today without each and every one of its members! Thank you to all! One GA Requirement - The Lead Section By Geometry guy In this issue, we will focus on one of the requirements for good articles: a good article article should follow Wikipedia's guideline on lead sections. So what does this guideline say, why does it say what it does, and how can good article reviewers help? The lead section is particularly important, because for many readers, it is the only part of the article which they will read. For instance, they may have come to the article by following a wikilink in another article simply to obtain a quick overview before they continue reading the original article. They may only read the first paragraph, or even the first sentence. On the other hand, one of the joys of Wikipedia is the way that embodies the endlessly branching tree of knowledge; if a lead is well written, it may encourage even such a reader to read on and learn something new. This is reflected in the terminology: "lead" is a word taken from journalism, where it recognized that many readers will only read the beginning of a newspaper article, and so it is important to convey the key points first, before going into detail. Note that "lead", in this sense, is pronounced as in "leading question" and is sometimes spelled as "lede" by journalists to distinguish it from lead, the metal, which was once very important in typesetting. Wikipedia supports both spellings. Wikipedia:Lead section is written with all this in mind, and describes two different roles for the lead: first, it should introduce the topic; second it should summarize the article. This is not always as easy as it seems; indeed, it is almost impossible to write a good lead if the article itself does not cover the topic well. It has a side benefit that an article which satisfies this guideline is probably also broad: if the lead is both a good introduction and a summary, then the article probably covers the main points. The good article process is often the first place in which an article is judged against this criterion, yet many current good articles may not meet it. A common fault is that the lead is purely an introduction, while the rest of the article contains other information, which should be summarized in the lead, but isn't. So, how can reviewers help to improve this? One approach is to read the rest of the article, and not the lead, first. Make a note of the significant points discussed in the article. There is usually at least one important issue in each section. Then, go back to the lead and ask the following questions: Does the first sentence of the lead define the topic, as described in the article? Is the most important information mentioned in the first paragraph? Is the lead a suitable length for the article? The lead guideline recommends 2–4 paragraphs depending on the article length, but judgment is more important than counting. Are each of the significant topics that you noted mentioned in the lead? If the answer to each of these questions is "yes", then the article probably meets the guideline. If not, you may be able to fix it yourself by summarizing the article. If you can't, then it suggests that there are not only problems with the lead, but also the rest of the article. That is the beauty of Wikipedia:Lead section. Finally, there isn't universal agreement on whether the lead should contain inline citations. As long as the material in the lead is developed and cited elsewhere in the article, then inline citation is not required. There are exceptions, the most significant being quotations and controversial material about living persons. Good luck helping more articles meet this important criterion! From the Editors Well, this is somewhat GA-related but at the same time not totally GA-related. However, I think this is important. Thanks to everyone who supported me at my 2nd RfA. It passed unanimously at 79 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral. As many are impressed by my work in Good Articles processes, I want to take this opportunity to thank everyone giving me a very enjoyable time at GA. There are 2 people that I want to explicitly say thank you to. They are Nehrams2020 and Epbr123. They patiently taught me how to do GA reviews properly in summer 2007. I couldn't achieve better without them. Now that I have the mop and the bucket, some of my time will be working on reducing Commons image backlog. Nevertheless, you will still see me once in a while in matters related to GA. OhanaUnited Please leave any comments or feedback regarding this issue here. Dr. Cash Contributors to this Issue Dr. Cash (Lead Editor, Distributor) OhanaUnited (GA Sweeps and Did You Know correspondent) Geometry guy (News Correspondent) Improving Wikipedia one article at a time since 2005! WikiProject Good Articles: Open Tasks This project identifies, organizes and improves good articles on Wikipedia. Nominations: Choctaw • One Night Stand (2007) • Justin Tuck • Impalement arts • Backlash (2007) Reassessment: Madonna (entertainer) • Sweeps / List: references (All Categories), image tags (All Categories), article quality (All Categories) Possible GAs Needing References: Clarinet • Carleton University • Appalachian Mountains Task forces: Project quality • Unreferenced GA Good article criteria | Statistics | GAN Report | Changes log Nominations queue: 215 articles (44 of them are on hold) as of 08:00, 8 June 2008 | edit

THANK YOU! :O

O-M-G! Thank you lara! The userpage will get my lots of street cred on wiki! :P But srsly! srs! lol Cheers! Drizzt Jamo 08:46, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. Bill is in the mail. Lara_Love^Talk 14:15, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh Noz! Drizzt Jamo 23:57, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

DRV common sense

Thank you. Ten quid says that the DRV will get closed with an overturn despite a majority to keep :P Will ^(talk) 14:05, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

We should hope. Otherwise I may have to create WP:DRVRV. Lara_Love^Talk 14:10, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Or keep bringing it up at DRV - hey, they did it for that article about that Australian kid. Will ^(talk) 15:09, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

I have added the source to the image page. As this was your major concern with the image, I would appreciate it if you changed your position on the drv page. If you have other concerns, please explain them there so that they may be remedied. Thanks. Z00r (talk) 14:15, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

And here's a little FYI for you

You're free to contest my placement of a speedy tag on OMG. You might have noticed that someone else had already troubled themselves to put much the same message on my talk page, making your input entirely redundant.

But here's the thing: I distinctly remember reading the following in the speedy tag: "If this page does not meet the criteria for speedy deletion, or you intend to fix it, please remove this notice, but do not remove this notice from pages that you have created yourself. If you created this page and you disagree with its proposed speedy deletion, please add:{{hangon}}". The emboldening is per the original.

At what point does it become acceptable for a wikipedian to ignore that fairly firm injunction? You rabbit on about "a long-term contributor who has gained the trust of the community to be an administrator and thus can be trusted blah blah blah" whilst entirely not comprehending that the RTFM complain was about a clear violation of the procedure for dealing with disputed speedys. It matters not that the speedy should not in a month of sundays have been added in the first place: it matters that admins abide by the rules. Those - like you - who fail to do so or just entirely miss the point should perhaps consider whether they're fitted to such a role. --Tagishsimon (talk) 12:12, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

You also told him to PROD his own article... who does that?. Answer: anyone who follows instructions. Is that a problem for admins? --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:58, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

AHEM. sniff. cough. Pardon me. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 17:04, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Wow, I just heard about this... Anyways...

Hope your day gets better. - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ contribs} 18:23, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

User page

oOoOo I like the new user page layout for User:Drizzt Jamo. Do you do that for other people too? I'm looking to give my user page a make over. I think I've got way too much useless crap on mine, but playing around with the divs has not served me well... Anyways, could you help me with this? I'm looking for a simple bright orange and blue Sharpie color with a dark gray/"carbon fiber" color background or something like that. (If you're confused, Wikipedia Ad #116 is what I designed for WP:ROBO and has a similar color scheme) Thank you! - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ contribs} 18:31, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

I'll see what I can come up with in the next few days. Lara❤Love 14:12, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 3rd, 2008.

Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 10	3 March 2008	About the Signpost

Wales' relationship, breakup with journalist Rachel Marsden raises questions about possible improprieties	Eleven users apply for bureaucratship
Signpost interview: Domas Mituzas	Role of hidden categories under discussion
Book review: Wikipedia: The Missing Manual	Military history WikiProject elections conclude, nine elected
Best of WikiWorld: "Extreme ironing"	News and notes: Encyclopedia of Life, Wikipedian dies, milestones
Dispatches: April Fools mainpage featured article	WikiProject Report: Football
Tutorial: How to use an ImageMap	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View	Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:00, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Thankies

Thanks for the help with the Bleed image :) Jamesbuc —Preceding comment was added at 10:19, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. :) Lara❤Love 21:01, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Twonkle

Good to see you back. I guessed it was Teh-winkle that screwed up, realising that YOU would never do that! Cheers. --Rodhullandemu (Talk) 20:37, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. It's good to be back. :) Lara❤Love 21:03, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Very good to see you back Lara. I read your banner. Best wishes and kindest regards. Pedro :  Chat  21:05, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Pedro. Lara❤Love 21:22, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

marketing guerillas deletion

I have done this project in good faith and i need to do some major edits do u think u could warn me if ur planning on deleting my article thanks im trying to learn howto use wikipedia and i seem to only be pissing people off not to many helpfull people here Henslee57 (talk) 05:00, 6 March 2008 (UTC) can i talk with u Henslee57 (talk) 05:12, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

The speedy tag on the page was the warning. I moved the contents to your user space. If you have questions, feel free to ask me. Look over WP:COI, WP:MOS and WP:RS. Those are good starting points. Also, you may be interested in looking at out adoption program. Regards, Lara❤Love 05:41, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

LaraLove Thank U so much ive been at this all day and got nothing but deleted. I will take all of ur advise! When I saw ur pic I had a good feeling about u!! Truly thanking u Henslee57 (talk) 05:51, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

To archive or not to archive

May I discuss this with you? Carcharoth (talk) 14:42, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, if I refuse, I risk an AN/I thread about me over it, so please, discuss. Lara❤Love 14:47, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Shall I start it? WP:ANI#User:LaraLove made me feel bad. Banx0r her! --Jayron32.talk.contribs 14:51, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm still trying to calm down after reading Hammersoft's contribution there. Carcharoth (talk) 15:01, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Hammersoft makes a good point. One that is basically the same as mine. The unending threads are utterly pointless and annoying. It's just totally ridiculous. I can't even believe it really, but I can. It's become such a standard at this point that one can't really be surprised by the new threads on AN/I about Beta or the FU policy. Nothing is going to change because no one is interested in keeping up the the Bible's worth of pages to get anything done. Lara❤Love 15:10, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

You are both aware that that thread is about WP:BAG and the bot approval process and the possible misuse of ST47's tools during that process, not about Betacommand or BetacommandBot? You are reading the comments by others such as BrownHairedGirl and WJBscribe? Carcharoth (talk) 15:17, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Of course. The point is that you went there with a question. You got a response, you didn't like it, and then it became, as per usual, an advertisement to your current on-going discussion. Lara❤Love 15:20, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Pseudoscience discretionary sanctions

Hi! As somebody who commented on a January proposal to place all articles related to homeopathy on article probation, I would greatly appreciate your input on a new proposal to help combat disruption that would scrap the probation and implement discretionary sanctions. I apologize for any intrusion, but this is to my knowledge the first time sanctions of this nature have been attempted to be enforced by the community, so I feel that a wide range of opinions is necessary. Thank you in advance for any comments you may make. east718 (talk) 18:59, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#BetacommandBot

I've listed an arbitration case under this tentative name to resolve the longstanding conflict basically surrounding this issue. This is a message to inform you that you're listed a party there. Maxim_(talk) 00:00, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

\o/ YAY! ArbCom! Wonderful welcome after a shitty night at work. Love it. XD Lara❤Love 06:28, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Just a brief comment. "much of the drama surrounding this bot will fall silent once there are only new uploads being tagged". In fact, that stage has already been reached. Betacommand finished that about a week ago now, I think, and if you look at User:MiszaBot/Trackers/CAT:DFUI, the backlog of thousands and thousands of tagged images has been cleared. You could say the ongoing discussions resulted from the large tagging runs in the first few months of this year, but I agree, once the drama subsides, things will be better. I am concerned though that there will be a big push from certain quarters, after the WMF deadline passes on 23 March 2008, to change the deletion criteria and get rid of a lot of non-free images that they don't think should be on Wikipedia. They are perfectly entitled to do that, but I don't want to see such changes strong-armed through under the banner of "enforcing the WMF resolution", at least not without proper community discussion. And that means a long, careful discussion over several weeks, with a clear way to end the discussion and move forward. Even though people say this is no longer possible give the size of Wikipedia, I don't think people or bots should be forcing the pace on anything as sensitive as this, especially given the lessons of what happened over the past year. Carcharoth (talk) 08:18, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

That has absolutely nothing to do with the arbitration case. If there is such a push, which I'm not so sure there will be, I don't think Betacommand will go tagging images before the community has reached a consensus for him to do so. Lara❤Love 18:00, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi there

Hey Lara Love (what a sweet username) thank you for teaching me how to properly spell "you're" this act of kindness will not be forgotten. By the way I was hoping that you would unblock my alterego "Oh wiki your so fine your so fine you blow my mind" so I can change my name, since I have already established a page under that name. Since your username contains the word "love" I'm sure you will unblock me and then we can be friends and chat about punctuation, grammar and how to spell "you're".Adrian Fletcher (talk) 07:40, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

You were unblocked so that you could change your name, yet you continued to edit without requesting a name change. And, I see, you've created another account now. What need do you have for two accounts? Oh, and the reblock reason was mostly in jest... point 2 anyway. Lara❤Love 17:32, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Userpage design

Thanks for looking into it. Don't worry, it's not a rush or anything so take your time. We're all very busy people!  :D Thanks again! - Jameson L. Tai ^{talk ♦ contribs} 17:23, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

My request for bureaucratship

I've always been very... 'impressed'... by you too. xD ~ Riana ⁂ 04:56, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Oh, ya... I'll "impress" you, baby! ;) Lara❤Love 05:16, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi (it's or its please tell me since you know so much about grammar) me again under a different user name

Thanks for blocking me (note that my voice as i say this is dripping in sarcasm)

I'd be glad to help you with this. :) It's is a contraction of it is. Its is the possessive form of it. It's an easy mistake that many people make, and it's understandable, as pretty much every other word in the English language uses 's in its possessive form. Hope that helps. In related news, I, when used as a personal pronoun, should be capitalized, and sentences should end in full stops (aka periods). And you are, by the way, quite welcome. Good to see you getting such good use out of that account I recommended you create. Lara❤Love 12:43, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Oh wiki your so fine your so fine you blow my mind

"You were unblocked so that you could request a name change, but you are continuing to edit." - I'm not aware of any rule that says the user is required to wait for the name change request to be processed before continuing to edit, so long as they actually make the request (and request an appropriate name). —Random832 15:30, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

User:Twaz

You just unblocked Twaz (talk · contribs) per new name, and now [1], [2]. Um was that part of the unblock ground rules? MBisanz ^talk 05:48, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

He wasn't to use an inappropriate name in his sig. Diplomat is appropriate. It conveys what he was trying to get across using Bureaucrat without breaking policy. His posts are unnecessary, but keep in mind he's obviously new. Let ArbCom handle the notification that it's not a case-worthy situation. Lara❤Love 06:16, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Yea I figured the sig was ok now, and given that he's said he emailed arbcom (he didn't say that before, so I thought it was more disruptive posturing), they'll deal with it. MBisanz ^talk 06:26, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

If by "deal with it" you mean laugh uncontrollably to themselves and push "delete", then yes, I am sure they will "deal with it". --Jayron32.talk.contribs 21:23, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

User talk:Twaz

Is still using old signature, here. I was going to say something on his talk page and noticed your recent block release. Do you want me to report it or do you want to handle it? Gtstricky^{Talk or C} 16:39, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Again, Diplomat is fine. It was the use of Bureaucrat which was inappropriate. Lara❤Love 16:41, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

<edit conflict>

Never mind. I see the above discussion. Gtstricky^{Talk or C} 16:42, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Help please

I tried looking through the speedy delete reasons, and didn't see one for something that belongs in a user name space but was created in a template namespace. See {{Thisisborin9}}; I notified the user here, and they removed my notice but left the template untouched. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 23:19, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

I moved it to User:Thisisborin9/HiddenBarnstar. Hopefully there's no further issue. Lara❤Love 01:43, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

User:LaraLove/Userbox/Bearcat

That is the most hilarious userbox I've ever seen! bibliomaniac15 21:14, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Haha, thanks, but it's not my creation. Someone posted it to Riana's talk page with "This user" instead of "This cabal". Astral Enigma picked it up and put it on a subpage for transclusion, and I just tweaked it for cabal use. XD Lara❤Love 23:04, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

bc - bot - bag - blah

Hi Lara, I notice you're pretty solidly on Beta's side in this whole mess. That's OK, there's lots of reasons I would be on Beta's side too, it seems that events and actions keep pushing me just one way. I was wondering if you had any ideas on ways to move forward to resolve this and avoid future messiness. It seems a little sterile to just line up in opposing camps and blast away. If you feel that this is all not Beta's fault, no problem with me; if you have some ideas on how to reach a resolution, you're familiar with the situation, you're probably one of the best positioned to help settle things. Any ideas? Franamax (talk) 08:18, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

I think if everyone would back up off of him for a couple weeks, give him some air and let him relax, things would be better. He's been taking fire, so to speak, for quite a few weeks now. And if people would then approach him in a more respectful manner than is normally the case, I think everyone would see better results. That's not to say that no one has approached him in a constructive manner in the past couple weeks or so, but at this point, he's already on the defensive from everything going on. The valid concerns are being addressed, we just need everyone to give it some time to see results. Lara❤Love 14:49, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm actually beginning to lose track of which concerns have been addressed and which haven't. I agree it is not reasonable to expect them all to be addressed at once, but I do know one thing that would improve the situation immensely is Betacommand himself communicating more and saying (for example) some of the things that you are saying above. I was looking through his Wikipedia namespace and talk page contributions for the past week, and noting the constructive contributions, but I got distracted by the opt-out template MfD. Carcharoth (talk) 16:02, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, there are so many complaints, I'm not sure anyone has a good grasp on what's been addressed and what hasn't, especially considering all the crap that surrounds those few valid concerns. As far as the MFD goes, I agree, it is distracting. Especially considering the MFD itself is based on no policy and, thus, is out of process. It's a case of WP:IDONTLIKEIT made by an admin who shows a lack of knowledge for the policies he's been entrusted to uphold and a lack of judgment in his rogue deletion of a page as a template. Ignoring All Rules because he has no policy to stand on. Then accusing BC of vandalism after he's just abused his admin tools. It's all very distracting, indeed. Lara❤Love 16:08, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Lol, was it five shots or six? To tell you the truth, in all the excitement, I kinda lost track myself.(Dirty Harry) The massive confusion of issues and threads has pretty much completely obscured the progress or lack thereof on any single point.

Agree that a little cool-down period for everyone would have been good. Having been AFK for a day, I see now that this looks headed to Arb just when everyone is all heated up.

It's probably immaterial now, what my comment a day ago would be: One thing that could help would be for Beta's supporters to be a little more proactive on Beta's civility issues. So when Beta gets frustrated and says something rude, instead of saying "well he was provoked", instead say "well, he was provoked, but he shouldn't have said that". Then go on to deal with the substantive issue (if any) raised by the provocateur. And if Beta comes back again with another incivility, say "Beta settle down, take a break, let us deal with it just for now". The "he's right, you're wrong" approach is rarely fruitful, even when that formulation is completely correct, there's often a better way to say it.

Probably doesn't matter now. Things seem to be happening so fast, seems like it's spinning out of anyone's control, even though no-one really wants that to happen. Thanks for your response anyway. Cheers! Franamax (talk) 07:51, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

There are instances of me telling Beta on wiki to calm down. Typically my discussions with him are off wiki, however. Regardless, it's hard for me to condemn him for his actions considering I don't agree with all the shit he takes, nor do I find it appropriate that he be taken to ArbCom in the midst of a few weeks of unrelenting bullshit. It was recommended by both me and Carcharoth that such a case be postponed until some time after the deadline to allow all to cool down and to see how everything flows after the deadline. Instead, on the same weekend that the Beta supporters agree to dewatchlist all the pages, the case gets accepted in a stunning turn of events. I'm really getting tired of all the bullshit this place has to offer. Lara❤Love 05:07, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

March 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we must insist that you assume good faith while interacting with other editors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.. I don't see any way that any rational person could edit the encyclopedia if had signed the quasi-contract. In fact, signing the contract as written would be grounds for de-sysopping and possible blockage as an agreement to perform actions clearly not in the best interest of the encyclopedia in the opinion of the signatory. I'm trying to AGF, but that clause, is, as I've said, unconsionable, and it would be morally questionable to allow it to be signed. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 18:55, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

What are you talking about? A contract? De-sysopping and blockage for putting 4 tildes on that page? I'm not trying to be rude, but, what are you talking about? If you think that it's blockable to put 4 tildes on that page, I think we may seriously need to discuss your access to the block buttons, as a community. SQL^{Query me!} 19:06, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

I've got to get ready for work and I'll be heading out in about 40 minutes, but I'll be building a case at AN/I. Arthur, I think it's time for the community to reevaluate your access to admin tools. Lara❤Love 19:08, 15 March 2008 (UTC)