User talk:Narson

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


I'm trying to take a wikibreak and will be back on Wikipedia in a while. Most likely, however, I won't be able to keep away from Wikipedia for that long, and I'll probably be back a lot earlier, possibly even making some small edits every now and then anyway.

Contents

[edit] Dot-com bubble

Huh? What's improper about closing this RM? There is no support for it and it is clearly a frivolous proposal that doesn't stand a snowball's chance of succeeding. There is clearly no need to waste anyone's time keeping this one open. 199.125.109.102 (talk) 05:11, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Are you just running around undoing everything I have done???? Really now, only an admin can be so bold as that. I don't see any admins complaining about any of my edits. Do you? 199.125.109.102 (talk) 06:40, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

You closed debates a day after they started, that is not how it is normally done. As for needing to be an admin, no. You made inappropiate closures based on your misunderstanding of the protocol, I reverted that mistake. Please WP:AGF, I am a regular watcher of RM, it is an interesting place to get involved on the behind the scenes stuff and you notice when stuff you went 'Interesting' isn't there the day after it appears. After seeing that I did indeed check your contributions and saw the other one closed a day after its relisting. Generally it is best to leave the RM closures to the RM admin, otherwise it descends into verbal fist fights over the 'You arn't an admin, how can you make that call!' and the joys of edit wars. Narson (talk) 10:22, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
And just to prove everyone makes mistakes, I boo-boo'd on the Market Economy one. That was in the backlog not in the 3rd April section. Should have stayed closed, I apologise. Narson (talk) 11:06, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
No problem. It just seemed suspicious that you would be following me around and undoing all my hard work. And by the way it is ok to speedy close frivolous RMs. I see that you are discussing this with an admin. 199.125.109.102 (talk) 15:16, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] More request closed too soon

[edit] Administrators

Where can I contact Administrators? Some ultra-patriotic vandals keep vandalising the Battle of Harlem Heights and the Battle of White Plains to American victories, with the same reference present! Those people who are editing it should be banned from editing, and both pages locked. (Trip Johnson (talk) 10:56, 9 April 2008 (UTC))


[edit] References

I am one of the "Ultrapatriotic Vandals(I'm not even American)" Trip Johnson talks about. I have added two references that say Harlem Heights is an American Victroy, but he changed it anyway. Now tell me, how is that vandilisim? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Red4tribe (talkcontribs) 12:51, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Can you help me out with Trip? He has just gone out of his shell and you seem to be the only one that can control him. He is clearly never going to accept anything other than a draw for the battle of harlem heights, and I personally am I bit sick and tired of dealing with him. He doesn't listen to a word I say and I have glanced through previous versions of his disscussion page and i'm not the only one hes had a rather large disagreement with. Could you back me up with Harlem Heights? Thanks (Red4tribe (talk) 00:58, 13 April 2008 (UTC))

[edit] Re: your comment (and undo) at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (geographic names)#Widely accepted name changed by authoritative governing body

Hello. I was replying to your comment on Bangalore/Bengaluru when there was an edit conflict with your undo of your own comment/edit. I was wondering if there's any problem. Just a little curious, on the concerned side. aJCfreak yAk 20:40, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I know it's kinda confusing - we really can't look for an objective measure, here, and that seems to be the problem. Anyways, feel free to continue the discussion as you see fit. :) aJCfreak yAk 18:26, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sovereignty

Oops, I assumed it was related to the joke going around in 2003 of the French being "cheese eating surrender monkeys". It looked like a surrender flag. Justin talk 12:25, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] News! Tag & Assess 2008 is coming ...

Milhist's new drive – Tag & Assess 2008 – goes live on April 25 and you are cordially invited to participate. This time, the task is housekeeping. As ever, there are awards galore, plus there's a bit of friendly competition built-in, with a race for bronze, silver and gold wikis! You can sign up, in advance, here. I look forward to seeing you on the drive page! All the best, --ROGER DAVIES talk 13:03, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Falklands War taskforce

Hi there, I was considering setting up a Falklands War taskforce on wikipedia, hopefully a few interested people could make some head-way into improving articles, establishing uniformed lay-outs etc. Anyway, if it sounds like something you'd like to be a part of, please let me know. Thanks, --Tefalstar (talk) 21:20, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

It was quietly closed. There was some comment as how my version reflected my sources, whereas Alex's clearly didn't. I don't think the guy mediating spent much time on it. Alex tried to revive it in January but I haven't heard anything since. Possibly a co-incidence but as soon as I asked for an arbcom, Alex stopping agitating. I think he knew he was on to a loser. Justin talk 13:43, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
Well a combination of repeatedly using the same username on multiple dating sites, combined with IP editing, means I have a pretty good idea of who it was. He was too good at wikilawyering to be a noob. Justin talk 14:52, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
LOL. It wasn't difficult I only typed his username into Google and it picked up his profile on a net dating site. IP traced to the same campus. QED. All this was confirmed when I found he'd initially edited biographies of his relatives. Justin talk 15:12, 28 April 2008 (UTC)
That'll probably be the same people supporting bringing a certain editor back after a record level of blocks. I can defend my conduct. I don't mind giving this a go, give me a few days to sort a few things out and I'll start to put things together. I've a lot on my plate at the moment so it may be slow. Justin talk 11:24, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mozza

Seems like a sensible addition. I've tweaked a little bit. As I've observed elsewhere, the section devoted to this issue is really too long. However, I think it makes more sense to wait and see how it all pans out before trying to trim it. I'm starting to wonder if he'll get away with it now; by delaying the vote so the issue's not so hot, and by emphasising that he intends to step down anyway next year, he may just persuade enough people that they don't want to make an enemy of him in the meantime. Cheers. 4u1e (talk) 09:22, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Don't get me wrong, quite apart from recent events in F1, it's pretty clear reading between the lines of Max's earlier career that he's a fairly nasty piece of work. And that comment about BMW and Mercedes took some nerve to make and was probably an error tactically. In a way I think Jackie Stewart was right to observe that the FIA needs someone from outside motorsport to head things, because everyone of stature in motorsport is already entrenched. However, on those occasions I can think of when motorsport organisations have tried it (CART, March in its latter days) it's gone badly wrong. 4u1e (talk) 06:56, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVI (April 2008)

The April 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:45, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hello

You previously expressed an interest in an AN/I discussion involving Vintagekits, here. The discussion has now moved back to the main WP:AN/I board, where community input is being sought. Yours, --Major Bonkers (talk) 09:18, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for yours. In my own way, I think that you're right and I rather share your sentiments. I've taken an interest in this situation, having been crossing paths with him for the last two years. Since the end of 'the Troubles' arbitration, last October, he had largely kept himself out of trouble; there is a history of disruption, which no-one else seems to have had the gumption to point out, and the 'indefinite ban' lasted two days. As I say, I'm not against him returning, but I do think that some sort of policy should be maintained, and it's unfortunate that it falls to me, as one of his 'opponents', to point this out.
God Schama's boring - he takes a fascinating subject, like the French Revolution, and gets bogged down in such huge over-detail that you can't see the wood for the trees.
I had had a go at editing the Falklands War article; it attracts a large number of followers: some of my bits are still there:
Criticism was leveled at Ted Rowlands, a former junior foreign minister in the preceding government, who disclosed in Parliament in April 1982 that the British had broken the Argentine diplomatic codes. Because the same code machines were used by the Argentine military, this disclosure immediately served to deny British access to valuable intelligence. This, and other responses to parliamentary questions, and leaks of information to the BBC has been alleged by historian Hugh Bicheno to be a deliberate attempt to undermine the Thatcher government on the part of a variety of individuals who had a vested interest in its fall.[80]
and:
Ultimately, the successful conclusion of the war gave a noticeable fillip to British patriotic feeling, with the mobilisation of national identity encapsulated in the so-called "Falklands Factor." Since the failure of the 1956 Suez campaign, the end of Empire and the economic decline of the 1970s which culminated in the Winter of Discontent, Britain had been beset by uncertainty and anxiety about its international role, status and capability. With the war successfully concluded, Thatcher was returned to power with an increased Parliamentary majority and felt empowered to press ahead with the painful economic readjustments of Thatcherism. A second major effect was a reaffirmation of the special relationship between the US and UK. Both Reagan and Weinberger (his Secretary of Defence) received honorary knighthoods for their help in the campaign, but the more obvious result was the common alignment of Britain and the USA in a more confrontational foreign policy against the Soviet bloc, sometimes known as the Second Cold War.
but my 'spangle', a cited reference that an American naval analysis had considered the retaking of the Falklands to be 'a military impossibility', lasted about six hours! I gave up after that.
Best wishes, --Major Bonkers (talk) 10:09, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Major Bonkers

Ah, no problem. It was a relevant and properly sourced contribution, I couldn't see why it was removed. BTW you do realise Ryan is already all loved up? Justin talk 21:57, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

I'm too cantankerous to be a patriarch, I was going to have a stab at a project page but work is kinda getting in the way at the moment. A few volunteers and we should get some momentum going. Justin talk 22:33, 17 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RE: JCRB/MEGV

Thanks for informing me. Please keep me updated of any further issues with these users. --Gibmetal 77talk 21:31, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVII (May 2008)

The May 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:34, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Alex Returns?

I'm guessing so, the style is all his, you start to recognise that sort of thing after a while. I said we hadn't heard the last of him. I'm pretty sure that he has a regular username, the nom de plume is purely to kick up a fuss about the Argentine POV. Note he has gone to the edge of 3RR but hasn't gone over the boundary, he clearly knows how to play the game (though winding up admins isn't the smartest of moves). I'm guessing we'll hear from him as soon as the 24hr time period is over. Care to give me odds? Justin talk 22:09, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

If your Scottish poonds are useless you can give them all to me.  ;-) Justin talk 00:14, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

UNINDENT

Cheers, I knocked a couple up in my lunch hour. Justin talk 19:36, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

I don't know, mind in the gutter. You're not a student yet mate. Justin talk 21:11, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

BTW just a thought for you. I doubted that Alex would use the same name, because around the time he gave up, we'd all started to ignore him (editors, arbitrators etc). Did you see the question[1] on the arbitrators page?

[edit] fr:user:Narson

Account has been usurped.

On a side note, please keep in mind that until bugzilla:14330 is corrected and go "live", it is not advised to merge if any account to usurp is left.

DarkoNeko x 09:04, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Bearer of bad news

Seems to be the season for it, i woke up to find someone had created the category British occupations and put the Falklands War, BAOR and other articles into it. Looking at the guys talk page he seems to have a history of disruption. I've removed the category from many pages and recommended it for speedy deletion. Can you guys keep an eye on those pages for more disruption? Justin talk 09:55, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Cheers mate, that process is very confusing. Justin talk 16:18, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Having taken a peak at his contribution history, that is precisely what I was expecting him to do. Justin talk 19:34, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Its already on my watch list and thats what I've been doing. I did wonder if leaving it for a few days and allowing the purpose of it to become clear might help? Justin talk 16:38, 9 June 2008 (UTC)