User talk:Masssiveego/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hello, welcome to Wikipedia. Good work on the Kenpo article! I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian. You can learn more on the how to edit page. The naming conventions and style guide pages are also useful. There is a sandbox which you can use to experiment in.

If you have any questions, see the help pages or add a question to the village pump. Angela 05:58, 7 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] "Problems with Knoppix"

Could you point to some forum posts or articles or something that backs these problems up? I have run into many problems with Knoppix before (until I realized that all you have to do to get sound working is type "alsaconf" in the terminal), but for the sake of NPOV, please posts some sources, as it seems like these problems are your own. --Bash 03:48, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

You tried the new Knoppix "lite version"? That could help the sound issues. --Bash 21:02, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Your edit on Ashida Kim

I reverted your edit in this article because I believe it to be POV. Please read WP:POV. If you wish to make alterations to that article, I suggest you discuss them on the talk page first. Thanks. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 18:19, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

I am become concerned over your POV edits on this article. Your last two edits while provding some improvement to the $10,000 section, also removed two other sentences for no good reason at all. I urge you to first discuss your edits on the talk page to avoid an edit war. Thanks. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 18:37, 26 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Warning on edits to the article Wahine Volleyball

Please don't reinsert the religious bigotry into the Wahine Volleyball article again. User:Zoe|(talk) 19:10, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. User:Zoe|(talk) 04:08, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

- - No second warning? Atheist? Overzealous vandal fighter?

Masssiveego 06:46, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wahine Volleyball

If you got the impression that I felt that all the edits that I made were to correct falsehoods, I apologize. There's not much room for comments in the edit summary, and I may have been too terse.

However, it is false that Dave Shoji started Wahine Volleyball. Regarding Alan Kang:

  • [1] - See the next to last paragraph
  • [2] - Search for "previous head coach"
  • [3] - Says "Kang had been there from Day 1. As the Wahine's first head coach in 1974, he took an undermanned team from obscurity to national runner-up in one month."

Regarding your other statements, I didn't say that they were wrong. Most of what you said is still there. I just converted it into lists, to make it easier to read. The only thing that I removed completely was your comments about the games with international teams. To me, that seemed a bit out of place where it was. If you feel it is important, feel free to reinsert it. ManoaChild 05:24, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Your repeated insertion of religiously biased material is what I am referring to as vandalism. It has no place in Wikipedia nor in any other part of society. User:Zoe|(talk) 21:25, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Atheism.. --Masssiveego 06:47, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Would you mind if I moved your comments from my talk page to the article talk page? This sort of discussion really needs to be archived with the article. ManoaChild 10:38, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

5 players out of 18 is not "most". ManoaChild 06:37, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Despite your comments on ManoaChild's Talk page, I never said you couldn't edit the page, I said you couldn't reinsert your religious bias into the page. Zoe (216.234.130.130 19:39, 20 December 2005 (UTC))

All it refers to is a game face, which is a generic term, used in a lot of situations. It says nothing about "Much like the United States Marine Corps, war face. This poker face is often what is seen on the floor on the games. An emotionalless dull expressionless curl the upper lip, "game mode" that allows each player to rush into danger fearlessly". ManoaChild 12:05, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Hello Masssiveego,

I'm really not too sure how to improve this article. I added the clean-up tag to improve the overall quality of the article, particularly to correct incorrect grammar and remove unverifiable information.

As for creating a page that lists all Rainbow Wahine volleyball players, that probably wasn't appropriate and the admin was probably right in deleting the page. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, so perhaps a list of only the most notable Rainbow Wahine volleyball players (as the one that exists now) would be more appropriate. 青い(Aoi) 09:30, 28 January 2006 (UTC)


[edit] web colors

Hi mate - check out web colors for all the information and links you could ever need regarding the hexadecimal colour system. Image:Anglo-indian.jpg Deano (Talk) 20:13, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Nice job on the NRA userbox.

I added it to the list of Gun Control Userboxes at Wikipedia:Userboxes/Beliefs#Gun_Control so that I and many others can proudly display it on our userpages.  :-) Lawyer2b 04:59, 10 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Question on voting

Did you just go through and vote "oppose" on all Rfa's and Arbcom elections, and if so, why? I ask not only out of curiousity, but if that is not what you did, I wanted to ask why you voted "oppose" on my Rfa and if there were any misunderstanding I could clear up. thanks! KillerChihuahua?!? 03:04, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

No, you are not allowed to question possible RfA trolling, it is evil. Now you must burn in the eternal flames!:).Voice of AllT|@|ESP 03:30, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Care to explain

I'll assume bad faith here and state that I find your oppose votes as of late over in Arbcom elections and on the Rfa's to be borderline vandalism. Are you simply opposed to the election process, or just adolescent?--MONGO 09:11, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Adolescent? Sounds like a personal attack. --Masssiveego 06:48, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

I either disagree with their opinions, don't think they have the experience, haven't seen much of their writings at the village pump ,or don't really know them that well. It's my opinion none of this batch are qualified to be administrators. I have set very high standards, and I believe it's allowed for me to require such high expectations of our administrators if they want my vote. I did not believe I should had to explain my votes directly, as this will be seen as a personal attack on those wishing to get the job, which in itself is a violation of wikipedia policies.
Okay, then I retract my comment of trolling. Perhaps I am dealing with an etiquette issue here. If you don't know them, then why not bother to examine their edits and see if they may indeed fit your high standards? There is no requirement that you explain your vote, but generally, a vote of opposition, especially when a candidate has a lot of support votes and no other opposes aside from your own, it would be deemed by many to at least provide a few diffs that demonstrate why you feel the candidate is unworthy. If you provide a consise but accurate rationale for your opposition, no one would ever see that as a personal attack IMHO. I certainly won't demand that you do anything other than what you want as far as voting goes, but I question the manner in which you did so.--MONGO 11:05, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
And so instead of a troll, this is idealist, one of the two possibilities I mentioned. You do realize that opposing EVERY Arbcom nominee has a 0 net affect?Voice of AllT|@|ESP 17:01, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
Then why did you vote support for User:CrnaGora? He certainly doesn't have the experience. —BorgHunter alt
At least he was a nice guy, good character.--Masssiveego 04:14, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

(talk) 17:43, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

I don't know...Which reminds me: why do people troll?Voice of AllT|@|ESP 20:10, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Why ask why> --Masssiveego 06:48, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Why not answer the question instead of being defensive..? -ZeroTalk 15:45, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
So far I see no reason to answer the question. --Masssiveego 18:17, 26 January 2006 (UTC)
No doubt you don't. -ZeroTalk 18:32, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Charlie Wade

Okay, I'll deal with it. I'll wait until I see what the university has to say about it first. ManoaChild 09:56, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Style tips

Hi. I have some style tips.

  • First, you should use an edit summary when you contribute. And note that you should not use the minor button for edits which are not minor. That is misleading.
  • You should not use double brackets for external links. So, a link should be like this: [http:// .... ] rather than [[http:// .... ]]
  • When you add external links, you should put them in a section called ==External links== rather than inserting the word "sources" which is not even capitalized.

Hope that was helpful. :) Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 00:40, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Voting

Someone must have forgotten to tell you, voting oppose is no longer allowed. Now you have to vote either in support, extreme lesbian support, Strong support, or neutral. Keep in mind that voting neutral really means you vote in support. You see, this ingenious process allows everyone to become an admin regardless of aptitude or experience. Everyone is equal! This way we maintain the communist utopia that is The Cabal. The Cabal 19:03, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

Now that's a silly post. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 21:44, 15 January 2006 (UTC)
Google - Did you mean : BJAODN? ;) - Mailer Diablo 14:52, 16 January 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Thanks for the ArbCom Vote!

I wanted to thank my few "yes voters" in person...well, not in person, but at least contact you directly. Thank you for your vote. It is appreciated. I love you.

Rowlan 15:59, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sorry.

I apologize for going overboard in tagging your RfA votes, and for referring to you as "the new Boothy", which was an unnecessary snark. BD2412 T 16:23, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Just as a side note.. John Wilkes Booth is NOT one of my idols. I am NOT Boothy. --Masssiveego 04:13, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Template Tagging

In reference to the {{subst:spam}}, I realise that you feel it's not doing a good job of explaining to the spammer. I wondered if you had any suggestions to help improve it. If so could you reply at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam, where I've already left a comment. Thanks for your help. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 04:12, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RfA vote

Hi, Masssiveego. I was a bit perplexed by your vote on Wouterstomp's RfA. Of course, you are free to vote as you wish; as someone who is supporting WS, I want to be sure that there wasn't anything that should make me reconsider my vote. Are you opposing because he used the {{test2}} template to warn a vandal? That template is actually in widespread use—I'd guess that all or nearly all administrators have used it; most since before they became administrators (I know I did). — Knowledge Seeker দ 04:47, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

You commented on WS's vocabulary. It wasn't him, though, who used the word "vanadalism" but Bhadani (talk · contribs). WS did exactly the right thing by leaving {{test2}}. I urge you to revise your vote, as I completely fail to see why this should be a reason to oppose for adminship. Have you reviewed Wouterstomp's other contributions? JFW | T@lk 13:10, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
Please allow me to echo the sentiments and concerns voiced by others. If you have an objection to the grammatical structure of a specific test-warning message, please make a note of it on the talk page of that template, do not take it out on an RFA candidate. Thank you, Hall Monitor 18:55, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
Indeed. And may I ask what what "complex problem solving skills and thinking" have to do with adminship..? I'm extremely curious. -ZeroTalk 19:16, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
If you have to ask, I can't explain it to you. --Masssiveego 04:12, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Masssiveego, I'm not asking for you to defend your comment, I'm simply inquiring for your concensus; I'm going to ask you, once more, if you will comply with my request. Where, specifically, does complex problem solving skills and thinking have to do with the utilizing of admin capabilities? You refer to people's polite inquireies as "hounding", "harrassment", and "unfair". I'm asking for you to help me understand your concensus to this by establishing that, on the facts of the nominee, there is a side to this other than trolling. You state that you can't explain it if I have to ask. Try me. I assure you that I shall be very understanding to your logic indeed. -ZeroTalk 15:45, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
If you do not have the character, mental or emtional

facilites to understand the basics functions of grammer, communications, and tutoring, in my opinion you should not be an admin.

In my opinion, admin must be avaliable to help all users, and know the rules of Wikipedia. Complex problem solving skills is when you are dealing with complex situations where often times mental faciliites are needs to determine whiether a person is indeed a vandal, can be helped, or convinced not to be a vandal.

Some vandal fighters do not have the IQ, EQ, or the character to take the extra five seconds to add three lines after a template that explains the template they posted adequtely. IN my opinion, an admin that merely templates in my opinion is lazy, and is not taking the time to explain his template. Usually because the admin in question either lacked the communication or thinking skill to adquetely change the vandal in some cases.

So complex thinking skills in my opinion starts with being able to adqutely handle more then one detail, attention to detail, and resolving situations with other methods first with better conflict management, and agruement skills then going straight for the ban on the slightest drop of the hat. Admin should be clever enough to argue with boardline vandals, and convince them to be more productive. Yet know which vandals should automatically be banned as merely sockpuppets. As in don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. It would be prudent and responsible to take the baby out first.

In other cases where Admin go knee deep in revert wars, and multiple sockpuppets, the admin should have the IQ to determine, what is the vandalism, and resolve the situation to figure out what is the truth, and how to contain that mess.

I do not see voting against admin as disruptive, as anybody can try for the elections again, by merely meeting expectations, and be more skillful. While admin is a janitorial job with a mop and bucket, I think the severe damage a admin can do to the recording of truth by blocking the truth or distorting the truth must be taking into consideration. We have more then enough admin as it is, so there is no real need to press people into being admin, so we can be very picky as to what kind of person should be an admin. --Masssiveego 18:39, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

I see. However, there are different people, and different people excell at different tasks. For example, User:Sherool dabbles in copyvio infringements and deletion, User:Tony Sidaway seems to specilize in policy and AFD dicussion, and so on. Having high expectations is conmendable, but citing the explanation of "having too may admins" is vastly incorrect. Adminstrators are merely wikipedians given extra tools to carry on an increased workload in regard to their dedication to wikipedia. Simply citing oppositions without explanation, and having people go out of their way to inquire an explanation from you is not the best idea. Also note that wikipedia is an ever-expanding community, and taking on extra tasks only possible with those tools is necessary. I have also noticed in one of the proceeding posts, you cited "At least he was a nice guy", after being informed of the nominee's lack of experience. If you are siml\ply voting based on a person's personality, then there's a bit of a problem. Finally, if you want to establish concensus based on your voting, please post your "standards" here. Thanks for your response as well. -ZeroTalk 19:13, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] My RFA

Thank you for voting on my RFA. While you voted oppose, I feel that your comments will help me constructively to be a better Wikipedian. smurrayinchester(User), (Talk) 15:07, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Logos

I've noticed a couple of pages on which you've put knockoffs of logos, which you are passing off as the original. The problem is, you're telling us that they're PD and you made them, but not the reader. So effectively, you are still infringing the copyright of the people whose logo you're knocking off. As it happens, we probably could use their logos (not at the head of articles as in Airwolf, and not without captions) but I don't think our personal copies of them are acceptable, particularly when they have been done purposely to infringe the copyright holder's rights. If there are any more, please remove them from pages yourself, and please don't do it any more. James James 22:49, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

I've nominated both logos for deletion. You can find the entries on Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Feel free to discuss it there if you feel I've done the wrong thing, or drop me a message at my page. James James 23:00, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

While the logos were deleted, just for the record.. I can't find the Rainbow logo the way I made it on the net period, and I was unaware that I could simply upload a logo for the 2nd one from another website.--Masssiveego 04:11, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] NoSeptember's RfA

Thank you, Masssiveego, for your consideration of my RfA. I will do my best in my new role and welcome your feedback. NoSeptember talk 17:56, 22 January 2006 (UTC)


[edit] ArbCom

I want to thank everyone who took the time to vote on my ArbCom candidacy. I have placed some thoughts on this matter on my user page and would welcome your thoughts.--Edivorce 23:40, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] RfA thanks

Please accept my embarrassingly belated thank you for your input in my RfA, which much to my surprise passed 102/1/1, earning me minor notoriety and you a place in the sun as the one oppose ;-) I am grateful for all the comments, supportive or otherwise, and have already started doing the things people wanted me to be able to do. And hopefully nothing else... Just zis  Guy, you know? [T]/[C] AfD? 12:52, 24 January 2006 (UTC)

In case anybody wants to know why Jzg was not qualified in my opinion. A tad too smug and arrogant for my tastes to be admin. The link.. [[4]] ...

--Masssiveego 04:08, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

But acceptable to the hundred-odd who voted for me, including the user who wrote the linked document :-) I'd like to see how you deal with Pat, mind... - Just zis  Guy, you know? [T]/[C] AfD? 02:27, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Crappy Admin

Having problems with the Admin? I'd like to hear all about it. --Masssiveego 09:23, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

No, no problems. (I might respond in a little more detail if I knew what you meant and why you were asking). Drew (Snottygobble) | Talk 11:01, 27 January 2006 (UTC)
User:kmac1036 To anyone that stands up the abuses on Wikipedia.
User:kmac1036 To anyone that stands up the abuses on Wikipedia.
Thanks for your support and I will absolutely keep you updated via my talk page or this one. Anyone curious to see what this is all about, please check out my talkpage or edit history. Kmac1036 03:55, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

Howdy! Made it through the Arbitration! Back to work on articles more than arguing I guess. Kmac1036 03:24, 31 January 2006 (UTC) --

[edit] Re: Notable People standard

The requirements are listed on WP:BIO. =) Powers 03:19, 28 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Please don't use fair use images in userboxes

If you choose to put an image in a userbox, make sure the image license is free. Wikipedia policy does not allow templates or user pages to have copyrighted works on them. The use of copyrighted work as fair use is not allowed on templates. See Wikipedia's fair use policy guidelines for more details. Happy editing! 青い(Aoi) 10:10, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Three weeks of admin tools

Today three weeks have passed since I was granted access to the administrator toolbox. During this time I have made use of it in the following way:

  • Protections and unprotections: 1
  • Blocks and unblocks: 4
  • Deletions and restorations: 69
  • Rollbacks: 246

I've found that the rollback tool is much more useful than I'd thought for vandalism patrol. In fact it makes that task so easy that I've been doing it more than before. On the other hand I've been surprised by how little the blocking tool is needed. Having done a significant amount of vandalism patrol I have still only blocked one solitary vandal. The great majority of addresses which send out a vandal edit do so only once. Those who do it more often usually stop after a warning or two. Only rarely is a block actually needed and in those cases someone usually beats me to it.

As a side note I haven't retired from writing articles either. I'm still hoping to bring Freyr up to featured status but even though I've already performed more edits on it than on Hrafnkels saga back in the day, a lot of work remains to be done. Community expectations for featured articles have gone up and so have my own ambitions. I'm currently waiting for a couple of books I ordered to arrive and then I may be able to make the final push.

I'm trying my best to live up to the trust you showed in me by supporting my RFA. If ever you feel uncertain whether I'm using the admin tools in the best interests of the project, let me know. I am at any time willing to relinquish the mop and reapply for it to address concerns people have and ensure that I'm not using the admin tools without being trusted to do so. Haukur 22:40, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Semi-automated template substitution


[edit] Image Tagging Image:Leedonohue.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Leedonohue.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is therefore unclear. If you have not created this media yourself then you need to argue that we have the right to use the media on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you have not created the media yourself then you should also specify where you found it, i.e., in most cases link to the website where you got it, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the media also doesn't have a copyright tag then you must also add one. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then you can use {{GFDL}} to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media qualifies as fair use, please read fair use, and then use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other media, please check that you have specified their source and copyright tagged them, too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any unsourced and untagged images will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. feydey 01:49, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

You use fair use as the reason for uploading this picture: This is a copyrighted image that has been released by a company or organization to promote their work or product in the media, such as advertising material or a promotional photo in a press kit. After looking at the source page [5] it is nowhere said it is being released by the Honolulu Police to promote their work in the media. And as such is not a fair use picture and a violation of copyright by WP. Please have the picture deleted. Thank you. If not sure, gimme a notice. feydey 00:33, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
You write: I believe that the entire idea behind the website was to promote the police work done by Lee Donohue, and I feel your request to delete a public record photograph that has been released to both the media and the public by HPD is incorrect. Again You assume it to be a public record photograph maybe the Honolulu police/the photographer want money/credit/have copyright on all their pictures. If You are not really sure about the copyright of the picture, then don't upload, just put an external link to the appropriate article, so no copyrights are violated. feydey 01:13, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
Simply put {{db-author}} on the picture page. It says that the uploader wants the picture deleted. feydey 01:13, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
You say: If I were to take a digital camera and photograph Lee Donohue, would that count as fair use? See: Wikipedia:Image_copyright_tags#Tagging_options -- ideally, we would like you to license your own work under a "free" license -- with as few restrictions as possible. So if you take a picture yourself you don't use fair use -tags. Thanks for the queries. feydey 01:31, 15 February 2006 (UTC)