User talk:R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine)/Archive02

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.

PLEASE DO NOT EDIT OR POST REPLIES TO THIS PAGE. THIS PAGE IS AN ARCHIVE.

This archive page covers approximately the dates between November 3 2005 and January 9 2006.

Post replies to the main talk page, copying or summarizing the section you are replying to if necessary.

• Archive 1 The Saga Begins (July 18 to November 3 2005):

Welcome to my Talk page. "Discourtesy is unspeakably ugly to me." --Dr. Hannibal Lecter, So please use rubber bullets, ok? ;> READY...AIM...FIRE AWAY!

WHEW! My first archive is now done...JOY..and it wasn't as complex or painful as I'd thought:> For convenience sake, I moved some of the more recent and ongoing discussions to this (now) new page. --R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 18:26, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Contents 1 WACKY CAPTIONS! 2 RFA process 3 More O'Connor trivia 4 Thanks: 5 Reply 5.1 Grazie! 6 WP:NPA 7 Thank you 8 Award 9 Thanks for supporting my RfA 10 Byzantine infantry tactics 11 Byzantine Cavalry 12 FireFox RFA 13 Shauri 14 DID I MISS SOMETHING??? 15 I want my Ghost! 16 Sealand infobox 17 Front page 18 Joke edits, funny photos 19 Barnstar 20 Cheers 21 Molobo 22 Convo with Molobo 23 The time has come 24 Reply 25 Thank you! 26 Vodka 27 YAY For Dino's!! 28 A thank you from Ann 29 Lets talk Monster 30 Template:Warbox Cimbrian War 31 Project completed 32 We're all doomed! 33 Byzantine battle tactics 34 Vote? 35 Info 36 Alhutch's RfA 37 SoLando's RFA 38 Esperanza elections 39 Image 40 Thanks 41 Image source (Image:FloddenBattlefield1.jpg) 42 News from Esperanza 43 Cheers! 44 Thanks!!! 45 Bloody heck! 46 Boxing Day 47 battle of vaslui 48 Funny Pic 49 A modest proposal 50 Wikipedia:WikiProject Florida. 51 malo's RfA 52 Battle of Aquae Sextiae 53 Sturmgrenadier AfD 54 BD2412's RfA 55 Offer to co-review. 56 Congratulations! 57 Merry christmas 58 Mottos 59 Reversion of Edits to Richard O'Connor 59.1 Post Nominal Migration To Manual of Style 60 Main page shenanigans 61 Meat Grinder 62 same ghost in the machine as on usenet? 63 Esperanza elections 64 Thanks 65 Thanks 66 Happy new year 67 Question 68 TFC 69 HELLO! C3PO! 70 Requesting backup 71 My RFC

[edit] WACKY CAPTIONS!

Here's a place to post unusual or interesting pics you find on the 'pedia or commons, and give them funny captions. Your favorite ones you can then take and post on your user:page should you wish.

]]

---

[edit] RFA process

I've just had an idea regarding the RFA process - I bet however, that it's either been proposed already or that it will be deemed an unnecessary new tier. Basically my idea would be for the RFA to have its own optional "peer review", in much the same way as articles. At the review, issues could be raised and resolved with the prospective admin - one obvious reason why some RFAs have been descending into an unpleasant shambles - and perhaps an indication of their chances (or whether they are ready) could be given. I know this idea probably seems unnecessary, what with there being RFCs and the like, but it's a thought. :-) Take care (please be gentle when you demolish my suggestion ;-)). SoLando (Talk) 09:09, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

Demolish?! The hell I will!:> How could I demolish such a GREAT suggestion?! RFCs usually involve edit wars, personal pissing contests and such, what you propose would exclusively deal with admin candidate issues. If nominators and nominees use your "peer review", then they are far less likely to get ambushed or piled on...the two worst aspects of Rfa. Please bring it up HERE or I will if you wish, but I'd much rather you do it since it is your idea afterall, plus you don't yet have as much political baggage as I've managed to accumulate:>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 18:38, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

I'm really surprised you never knocked down the idea. Thanks! I suppose it's inevitable that Wikipedians become entangled in the political machinations that go on in the background (I've consciously avoided it for most of my time with Wikipedia, but I still have sympathy for you :-)). I've placed it under the Tony1 section, since your (excellent) ideas inspired me. It's probably going to be lambasted as redundant, but ah well. Feel free to expand on the proposal :-) I probably won't have time to devote my time to defending the idea right now, as I have to replace every template made for British Army regiments with a new infobox i've just made, then list the templates for deletion *sigh*. Take care. SoLando (Talk) 19:30, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

You should'nt be surprised, it is a fine idea. And I will defend it, though I'm growing weary of this whole Rfa reform mess. No one seems to recognize the the system is breaking down and the time to fix it is NOW before it breaks completely. It may have worked fine in the past, when Wikipedia was small, but now that it has grown so and is fast growing things will only get worse. That's the trouble with trying to reform ANYTHING...the powers-that-be refuse to recognize the problem until it is too late and peaceful, incremental reform is no longer a viable option. LE SIGH...I'd be a much happier frood if I stayed the hell away from politics. If I'm to be a Wikipedian for the long haul, I'm afraid that's what it is gonna come down to. Cheers M8 --R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 16:49, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Hi dude, sorry about the later reply. I've been trying (failing) to figure out how to make one of my templates modular, but it should be resolved with the (hopefully soon-to-be) welcome assistance of Kirill. Thank you so much for showing your support for the proposal - I really appreciate it. I don't think there will ever be a time when change isn't resisted, no matter how imperative it is to embrace it. It's like coca cola and new coca.......hang on.....that change wasn't for the better :-D. Ok, better example (at least it's the only thing I can come up with right now, which leads me to believe I'm spending an excessive amount of my time on here writing about history ;-)). In some way it's like the reforms of the British Army in the late-19th Century: the Colonel Blimps were so resentful at the thought of not being able to purchase their commissions, give someone the lash ("the damed scoundrels deserve it, I say!" :-D) and the rest of the changes (improvements) that took place. The reforms were successful and many of those officers probably shaved their moustaches off before hiding in some random cave, embarrassment etched permanently across their faces (I can't substantiate that, but meh). I've got to stop digressing like this. By the way, if it keeps you a Wikipedian for years to come, stay the hell away from Wikipedian politics! :-D Take care, dude. Also, if you ever have any Wikistress, just listen to some Nightwish when editing. Though I'm not a big of the band, their music is just so soothing, helping to keep Wikistress at a very minimal (almost non-existent) level. SoLando (Talk) 21:28, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

LOL! Good point about the Colonel Blimps! Such gasbags eventually do get swept away by history's winds if not blown up by their own conbustable gasses :> Agreed on Kirill, he is the GRAND MEASTRO of Templates. I may spare him such mean chores as helping me do an archive, or fixing a simple campaign box, but for actually creating templates, you have to call on the PRO:> Oh and thanks for Reverting the vandalism on my userpage. It was my first case (Does this mean I'm a "real" Wikipedian now?) and I'm glad you got to do the honors:>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 21:09, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] More O'Connor trivia

Just found out that Monty suggested that O'Connor succeed him as 8th Army commander, they apparently got on well until Monty sacked him in '44. "Not ruthless enough with his American subordinates", apparently (something Monty could never be accused of). BTW, I took some of your comments about Horrocks a while back to heart. Since he was in the top ten generals of the war (IMHO obviously), it can only be the fault of my Wiki page about him that you didn't think he was a "blitzer". Just reading his autobiography at the moment, having read a biography last week, so I'll be improving the page over the next week or two (or three, or four). Leithp 22:40, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

BTW, I second the calls for you to archive your talk page, it takes ages to load sometimes. Leithp 22:47, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

Monty was a strange little man. Underneath the flamboyance, pomposity and abrasiveness was a very complex and troubled soul. I've given up trying to understand him. He is just not interesting enough to intrigue me. I'm glad and greatful you found and added that, though. It says more for O'Connor that he and Monty got along despite him being passed over, pushed aside and eventually sacked by him, than it does for the Victor of El Alamein. As for Horrocks, I really did'nt mean to demean him and I apologize again to you both. But if I inspired you, in some way, to give him a much more extensive biography here (Which he deserves) then my unintended slight was well worth it ;> If you want, I'll post more of my thoughts on him over on your talk page...after I archive this here mutha of mine:> Cheers bro,--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 17:09, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Funnily enough I was reading a dictionary of British WWII generals (I read the most exciting books) and its appraisal of Monty was similar. I think the consensus view of Monty in Britain has gone from hero during the war and post-war period to villain during the sixties-nineties and is now balancing somewhere in the middle. This seems to be a recurring theme for British "heroes", Robert Falcon Scott being the prime example. We tend to put people on a pedestal in order to knock them off later. Personally I tend to agree with you, but with the proviso that I've never read a biography of him that wasn't blatantly partisan or violently opposed to him. I find many writers on WWII to be rather frustrating reading because of their agenda, Corelli Barnett springs to mind here, and Monty's reputation is one of the most frequent battlegrounds for the revisionists. Wikipedia also tends to be a magnifying glass for these kinds of disputes. Leithp ^(talk) 16:47, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

BTW, no news on O'Connor over at WP:TFA, it's a mystery to me how they get chosen. Ah well, it's on there waiting anyway. Leithp ^(talk) 16:59, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

"We tend to put people on a pedestal in order to knock them off later." Thank you bro, I've always wondered where we Americans got this tendancy from! :> Another thing to keep in mind is: O'Connor, Horrocks and Monty all had the misfortune to live long after the war. Sadly, old soldiers really do seem to fade away, unless they are "lucky" enough to meet their deaths in some fashion during a war or shortly afterwards. There is a tendency for personality cults and fan clubs to spring up around dead heroes much more than long lived ones. Just look at the ones which have grown up around the "Magnificant Bastard" Patton and the Wonderful Madman Wingate. And I need not mention our old friend the Desert Fox:>. This is not confined to the military realm either. Look at Rockstars...how many dead legends are there as opposed to living ones? The very term "living legend", itself, is a virtual contradiction. Prime example: Marshall Georgy Zhukov...argueably the greatest commander of WWII as well as one of the greats all around. I think he is, yet his fame and acclaim today is FAR less than he truly deserves. If a single man could be credited with breaking the Third Reich (not to mention defeating the Japanese so soundly they thought twice about invading Siberia), it is him. Yet Stalin's paranoia and jealousy, post Stalin Kremlin politics, the Cold War(where a nonsense view of the Eastern Front as just a giant holding action by an ill-equipped peasant army became popular in the West) all conspired to diminish his reputation. Of course dying nearly 30 years after his great triumph did not help him either. Humans are fickle creatures. Cats have nothing on us in that regard (Max seems to be winking and nodding in agreement :)

Whatever machinations take place on WP:TFA, Raul is somehow involved, for he is Wiki-mighty in all things FA, I have learned. There also seems to be a backlog of articles which have been waiting over a year to get to the front page. At this rate we'll be lucky to have Sir Richard up there sometime early next year. So we might as well celebrate now and again later. Cheers M8--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 02:52, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks:

Thanks for your stylish comment on my talk page during that guy's & my argument. Helped a bit, I hope. Spawn Man 02:01, 3 November 2005 (UTC) P.S. You should really ask Kirill Lokshin to archive your talk page, it's out of control!! It's Alive I Tell You, Alive!!!!!!

No problemo, stranger ;> Glad to help out. If he continues to harass you I've got more ready...and if that does'nt work I'll bring in the Grande Battierie:> Yes, my lively talk page seems to have taken on a life of its own. I'll have to put it "down" soon..let me try and figure out how to do the deed first, before bothering Kirill. --R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 17:19, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Reply

I have responded to your observations here [1]. Giano | talk 22:39, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

And you shall have my reply to your response to my observations there, once I deal with more important matters. Good day, sir.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 02:39, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Yes, more important matters like voting on my Dinosaur submission on the Article Improvement Drive page, (please, please please, pretty pleeeeease???). It has 10 votes already, (yay!). Please R.D.H.... My bestest buddy in the whole wikiworld, well at least until I say that to someone else.... :)--Spawn Man 03:42, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Ok...but there is the small matter of all that BEER you promised me...:>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 04:28, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Damn, was hoping you wouldn't notice... um... some beer fungi? Yep that's it, beer fungi ruined the hops crop. Sorry, they say next brew will be ready sometime next decade.... :) -- Spawn Man 05:02, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

So the Fungus is amungus eh...sigh always something...send me a link pointing the way to the Dino droppings :>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 18:10, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Here it is, Dino DooDoos. Bye & thanks... Spawn Man 22:39, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Grazie!

hey friend thanks a lot for all you've done to help me in writing that article. Wow what living user's page, it seems like a chat! P.S could you give another of your wisdom in that article? If you ever find the time, it seems that all people there owes to you something. Farewell Philx 11:15, 4 November 2005 (UTC) Philx Philx 11:15, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Hey Phil! I'm sorry I've been neglecting our work on the Roman tactics article of late. As you can see, I'm being pulled in many different directions here, but it keeps me busy:> Yes, the article is coming along quite fine. I'll be glad to check it out and see what I can do. Good to hear from you, my friend! Ciao for now--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 18:10, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Hey friend, i wish to thank you for the help you gave me in the project, i think it is almost finished! If i could, i would give you a barnstar for all yoa have done. F. S. S. D. (Filippus suum salutem dat) Philx 21:31, 6 November 2005 (UTC) Philx Philx 21:31, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

Grazie for your kind words! But you started this project, and over 80% of the work is based on your keen knowledge and reasearch which spans four different languages. My major contribution was helping you out with only one of them, which I'm glad to do. Point is, if anyone deserve a barnstar it is YOU, my friend! I only wish I knew the Latin for BE BOLD :> I look forward to working with you some more...now on to those Legio Mottos! Ciao for now--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 22:30, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for the barnstar! Thank you for all the help you infused in "our" project!I think rather that you've done the 80% of the work, you made it encyclopedical, you made it, in english! Be bold in latin sound like audere aude! F.S.S.D Philx 12:21, 7 November 2005 (UTC) Philx Philx 12:21, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

You earned the Aquila, mio amico! I trust you will defend it and not allow it to fall into the hands of the Barbarians ;>Sapere aude!--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 22:37, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] WP:NPA

I've reverted your reinsertion of your personal attacks. Please reread WP:NPA and don't do this. Thanks - David Gerard 21:50, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

This isnt personal, it is POLITICAL. It is a clique of admins trying to silence a user who dares to speak out when one of their friends personally slanders one of his. If this petty bias, thinly disguised as bureaucratic policy continues, I'm willing to go all the way to ARBCOM. If you are truly being FAIR, then STRIKE GIANO'S COMMENTS as well as my own. Otherwise DROP this and I will do the same. Good day sir. --R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 22:00, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

Thank you very much for the award, and for your help with getting the article to FA. Now, for the other (hopefully somewhat simpler) parts of the Italian Wars ;-) Kirill Lokshin 22:55, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

Doh! And speaking of COMPLEX I misspelled that on your award. Allow me to fix it...there!:>

I'd also to like to thank you for the Wikithanks :-). If you'd like your user page vandalised some more, go on a few days of RC patrol ;-) Take care, dude. SoLando (Talk) 14:08, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

Ugggh RC Patrol...not until I'm unlucky enough to get elected an admin ;>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 22:51, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

What's RC patrol?? Spawn Man 03:49, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:RC patrol An ungreatful and neverending chore.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 03:52, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Award

Thank you dear Ghost. If you refer to me fighting trolls, it is my pleasure :-).--Wiglaf 07:49, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

You are most welcome and worthy, my friend. In the case of Molobo that's not a mere troll you are fighting, it's a fricking Balrog!!! Say along with me now: YOU>>>>SHALL NOT>>>PASS!!!! ;>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 23:00, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for supporting my RfA

I know I've been slow in saying this, but thanks for supporting my request for adminship. It was an honor to be both nominated and approved as an admin. If there is ever any adminish (is that a word :-) things you need help with, please let me know. --Alabamaboy 16:32, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

I'm glad to have supported you, congrads and welcome to the Cabal :> I will most certainly let you know if I should need any help of an Adminish nature;> Your Wiki Neighbor and Floridaboy,--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 00:19, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Byzantine infantry tactics

Hey friend, i have a proposal, what about creating an article based on maurice's and nikephoro's tactika , that tells about the byzantine infantry? What you say? F.S.S.D Philx Philx 19:25, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Sure Phil! I like your proposal and will be glad to help! But we must keep two things in mind: First, let's make this article Byzantine Tactics or Byzantine Battle Tactics? Since their military system was built around their heavy cavalry Cataphracts and not their infantry. The Byzantines had evolved a much more Combined arms approach to warfare, from the practices of the Late Roman system Vegitus describes. In fact their armies were usually divided almost evenly between infantry and cavalry. Second, I can manage Latin, but Greek is all Greek to me. So we might run into a lot more translation problem. My knowledge of Byzantine military history is pretty much limited to the campaigns of Belisarius and Heraclius, the disaster at Manzikert and 3 of the big sieges of Constantinople. I need to read more of the works by the great Byzantine Soldier-Emperors such as Maurice and Leo The Wise. Ciao amico!--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 00:19, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

well making an article on byzantine battle tactics it is very challenging, i have read from greek nikephoro's taktika and you don't even image what kuind of sophistication they reached in warware! It is amazing their organization and their tactics, but i think that will bring us more soddisfation creating a such article! Don't worry about the translation, we can manage this. an appointment, their heavy cavalry was not Καταφρακτοι but Klibanarii. And their byzantine infantry, not the mercenaries that were usually recruited ,were the elite of the elite of infantry, Nikephoros says: οι σκυτατοι του ταγματος, εστωτες βαρβαρων ιππευτες ταξει ΧιΛιας εινικησαν, literally, one tagmata in formation defeated 1000 barbarian(or in this case bulgarian) knights. F.S.S.D Philx Philx 12:26, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Err sorry, but I think that i've not understood your decision on the project of creatin the previously talked about article. Shall we begin creating some, or there are some problems that you ,my friend, can't help me with? F.S.S.D PhilxPhilx 11:25, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

I say SI! With your knowledge and enthusiasim how can I not? :>. But I do think we should make it a more general article, covering both infantry and cavalry and how the two worked together to win big and win often. They did, indeed, have the most sophisticated military system in the world...and would for centuries to come. Many of their organizational and tactical concepts are still very useful today. For example, they were the earliest to use combined arms task forces as part of their official doctrine. Over a thousand years before the Kampfgruppen of the self-proclaimed "thousand year reich". But I digress. Basically, yes I'm in. Ciao for now--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 12:01, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

I'm glad that you will help! I'm begining to write something, when I post something acceptable, (my damn english, should i take a private teacher?) I'll tell you imediately, and to coordinate the efforts, what kind of byzantine aroument are you better aknowledged with? Because one of the two can for example start something about the infantry, the othere somethin bout the cavalry to speed up the project, what you say? F.S.S.D Philx Philx 12:48, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Sounds good to me, amico. We may also want to mention briefly about how the Byzantine tactical system evolved from that of the late Roman Empire. For instance, The Scutati from the scholae, to put it in historical context. Or, if you want, I can add that after you get the main article started. Let me know when you are ready. (Why hire a private teacher? Unless she is really pretty and talented, you are probably learning more here actually practicing English :>) Ciao--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 02:43, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

OK friend i'll advise you when i post the main article, it will take time , because the argoument is very big. F.S.S.D

My dear friend im ready i' ve posted something accetable on byzantine infantry, but there's a lot of work that must be done, the erticles is byzantine battle tactics, i have to post someting on byz inf tactics and i've to post all about the cavalry, please help me. F.S.S.D Philx Philx 18:59, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Eccellente! I'm ready to go into battle with you once more! If you want, you can handle the infantry and I'll take the cavalry. Oh, could you please post a link? I'm not able to find the article.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 06:35, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Thank you my friend ok i'll handle the infantry while you the cavalry, the article is Byzantine battle tactics F.S.S.D Philx Philx 12:57, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

thanks for the corrections! I'm pleased that you will support me once again amico, well about F.S.S.D you wrote on byz battle tactics talk pages, let me explain that is F Because it is Filippus that's me,in fact it means phils give his respects, i think you should write R.D.H.S.S.D :) Philx Philx 13:01, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Ah ,eh, uh, yes well, you mentioned that you know someone that can help us in the greek, weel can you do me a little help? Can you redirecth you greek acknowledge friend to anceint greek aritcle adn ask him to help me to correct ancient greek subordination rules and verbs meaning (stuff i wrote and im not sure that what i wrote is english! :( ) F.S.S.D Philx Philx 13:24, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, Filippus, I was VERY tired when I wrote that. I'm having another bout with insomnia recently. The good thing is, I can get a lot more done :) Panairjdde MIGHT be able to help us, but I'm not sure how much Greek he knows, plus he's a very busy editor and has already been kind enough to help us with the Roman article. The one I'm thinking of seems to know A LOT about Byzantine history and is highly proficent in Greek. Problem is, I don't really know him..I have'nt work with him yet. I only know OF him, but I'll see if he can help. Mean while I'll try to get our article a bit more up to speed. I like the sections you've started! So far so good! R.D.H.S.S.D ;>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 02:58, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

Hi friend, unfortunately in the weeks to came i'll have to limit my visit and edit here on wikipedia, this because of my job, i'll return back soon as possible F.S.S.D Philx 18:11, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

I fully understand, my friend. You go and do what you must. I'll edit the paragraph you just added and maybe start on the next section discussing, briefly, other types of Byz Cav. Mainly light and foriegn mercenaries. We, or some other knowlegable collaborator, can expand on it later if need be. Oh I made the first section, on History, into the introduction. We needed an intro anyway and it would be redundant to bring up subjects which will just be addressed again in detail in the next paragraph. besides, it is less work :> And it leads nicely into our discussion of the Infantry. Take care and best to you Amico, R.D.S.S.D--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 20:11, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Byzantine Cavalry

hey friend how's going? I see you are pretty under stress this time, well I understand it, and if you want I can handle the cav part too , vso you will be more free. What you say should i proceed? F.S.S.D Philx Philx 17:12, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Hey again Phil! yes, my sincere apologies, I keep meaning to start that section. But as you say, I'm busy, busy. I'll be taking a small Wikibreak soon for the holiday and to spend some time with the Three F's...Family, Friends and Food ;> I'm glad you understand and appreciate your kind offer to handle the Cav. Sure, you can start it now and I'll get back to it when I come back from break. Or we can just wait till I get back. If you REALLY don't want to handle the horses, then leave it to me. I can at least get us started, then you can come in and edit or add anything I left out. Sort of the reverse of our usual tactics huh Amico?:> Let me know what you decide, Ciao for now, R.D.S.S.S.D --R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 09:05, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Nemo problema for me amico! Relax during your holiday and enjoy it! I will start cav thing. F.S.S.D Philx Philx 13:00, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

Grazzie amico! I shall try to ;>S.S.S.D--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 12:08, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

Er my friend, well i think that i'll be late in posting in our article byzante cav, not too much however cause as you can se from my talk page i entered in an endless conflict in talk: Ancient Greek Phonology. Best regard amico mio, F.S.S.D Philx Philx 16:18, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

Back from break. I'll start up the Cav section now, my friend. I understand about the whole conflict thing...seems I have a talent for getting into those...maybe that's one reason why I'm so interested in military history:> But it's good to be back and ready to continue work on our article. S.S.S.D.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 18:45, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Thank you my friend! I owe you a beer ! F.S.S.D Philx 10:43, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Prego amico, it's a deal! Knowledge, friendship and beer...damn I love Wikipedia! --R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 17:07, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Hey friend, you wrote numeri, but here nikephoros it says that cav was organized into turmae (10 men ) and arithmos. While numeri is used for late empire heavy cav. At least i can think numeri as early byz cav. I'm messin all around again or when nikes say : αριθμος is thinking about maths ?:) And last but not least we should include the byz proniai allagion or we focuses only on 8 century 10 century byz cav? thanks for a your reply . Cheers F.S.S.D Philx 21:48, 30 November 2005 (UTC) ar ,uh ,well, yes, 'bout the beer, you weren't asthemious ? :)

Byz organization was complex and confusing. And deliberately so, they kept it that way so their enemies would not be able to figure out the size and composition of their armies (Which were usually small). A Byzantine Turmae, for example, could have anywhere from 10 to 50 men. Nikephoros as a general understood this and would'nt divulge too much detail. I chose Numeri, or Banda as they were also sometimes called, because this was used more consistantly throughout both early and late Byz history. It is still a bit confusing because they also called these units Artimos, as you point out, and a Numeri or Numerous is also a term for an auxillary unit of about 1000, originally used in Roman times. Charles Oman in his translations chose to use it and so did Dupuy and Dupuy for their encycleopedia. We could, if you want, mention the Turmae. I don't see any harm in providing a bit more organizational detail, plus it further illustrates our point about the Roman origins of the Byz army. And sure, let's include the Allagion! I figure we need one more section on other types of cavalry, and that would be the perfect place to bring them into the battle:> Ciao for now --R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 22:37, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for your wise words, i think that your description as numeri is better than mine because it's used almost in any period during empire's life. But we should say also that numeri were sometimes called as arithmos. F.S.S.D Philx 12:59, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Sure! Let's do that! In fact I think Arithmos specifically meant a Numerus of cavalry, whereas Banda usually referred to an infantry Numerus. So good idea amico! S.S.S.D--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 16:26, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] FireFox RFA

FireFox 18:54, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

What a neat Thank You Template! T'was a slam-dunk, Congrads and welcome to the Cabal!--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 00:22, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Shauri

Dear Ghost. Fear not for Shauri, she will be back one day soon :).--Wiglaf 08:06, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Dear Wiglaf, thanks for the reassurance bro! I got a wonderful letter from her today, which really warmed my black little heart. Our lady and Muse is a true treasure. --R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 10:16, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Yes, she truly is precious. As for Ansbachdragoner, I am no expert on how to handle individual IP-addresses, but I have posted his case on the admins' notice board. Hopefully, someone with more experience and knowledge can have a look into it.--Wiglaf 11:25, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, my friend. With luck we'll have this mess cleared up soon. Ansbach is a very valuable contributor, whom I met thanks to our Shauri, interestingly enough :>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 11:44, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

Pssst. Word on the street is Shauri's getting married.... I don kno whatta believe any more... Spawn Man 04:18, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] DID I MISS SOMETHING???

Did I miss something? Since when is your Richard O'Neil article a FA? I haven't seen it on the main page. This thus lefteth me wonderingeth if Ieth had missedeth somethign outeth? Well have I? Flabble yop.... Spawn Man 04:17, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

Since 9 October 2005 I thinkee. It is a Featured Article, it just has'nt been featured on the main page yet:>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 05:32, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

FA? What is a Fa article? And how can became a Fa? Philx Philx 12:50, 12 November 2005 (UTC)

FA is a Featured Article that is, an article which is worthy of being Featured on the Main page. Articles have to be very well written, throughly researched and completely cover their topics, in order to qualify. Then they have to be approved after going through a gauntlet of critical reviews here: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates. I found the process challenging, but highly rewarding, and even if you don't get FA the first time, you usually end up with a better article.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 06:30, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] I want my Ghost!

Guess what, Mr. Ghost? Your worst nightmare is ba-ack! Smooochs and huugggzzz till you cough! Shauri smile!00:00, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

(P.S. check your mailbox tomorrow - I really wanna talk to you and make up for the lost time, Ghosty :)

(COUGH!:) ahhhh you just MADE my weekend babe! With "nightmares" like this I dont wanna wake up ;> Thank you so much my darling, I will ALWAYS be YOUR Ghost, Extra Warm Inviso *HUGS*--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 05:53, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

I'm back too! Yay! Spawn Man 03:36, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Yay! Was starting to wonder and worry, Welcome back!--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 09:07, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Sealand infobox

Hi. I'm reverting your change to the above. Please review my reasons for doing so here. Basically I think that compromising the standard infobox format is the thin edge of the wedge. Micronations should be no different from schools, universities or companies when it comes to infoboxes - they all provide tabulated information on a unique entity. By caving in to the demands of 1 or 2 anti-micronation POV-warriors by changing the standard format just for micronations we are effectively supporting an agenda which is just plain wrong. --Gene_poole 02:17, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Hi Gene! (Hygiene?!:) I understand, agree fully and am on your side in this. I was only trying to work out a compromise solution so as to end the edit war and the wasteful debate surrounding it. In the true Wiki spirit, though, someone (ironically a sock puppet of a hard banned user) edited my edits, so now PRINCIPALITY OF SEALAND is once again at the top where, in our opinion, it belongs. So far no one has bitched or complained. So let's just leave it as is for a while, until we are sure they have gone away to find something else to bitch about. My strategy is to offer reasonable compromises, and if they refuse they will been seen as the unreasonable POV warriors they are. Then we will have the advantage in the defence of Sealand from these invaders! Cheers M8, --R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 06:20, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Front page

I've no idea what's happening with Richard's listing over at WP:TFA. Pages that were listed after it are now being put on the front page next week. Some people are now voting (I didn't even think it was a vote!). I think that it's all supposed to be organised by Raul654, but other people appear to be handling some stuff. Looks fairly shambolic from my perspective. Leithp (talk) 16:51, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

So tell me how does the light shine in the halls of Sham-bol-ic? :> Sorry, I can never resist the opportunity for a bad joke. No wonder it's a bloody shambles...it's a democracy! So I went ahead and voted. Voted for some other artys I strongly supported there too, such as the Texas Ranger Division, Mark Felt and the US Navy Marine Mammal Program. Damn fine reading all. Amazing how much talent we have here. So we will just have to ROCK THE VOTE...only wish we'd know sooner though. Doh! "To those who say 'What did the president know and when did he know it?', let me say this; If I knew then what I know now."--Richard M. Nixon--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 02:44, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Apparently voting ist verboten, by decree of Raul654. Bugger knows what's going on at that page. Leithp (talk) 15:30, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

Apparently, a pissing contest developed over when to feature the Roy Orbison arty, and it caught Raul in a foul humor so the experiment with democracy is ended for now. Bit much of him to delete all the comments, though. So the wait continues. "And you better hope and pray there's intelligent life up in space, 'cause it's bugger all down here on Earth!"--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 18:32, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

I think it had more to do with the voting over whether to feature Christmas day or Omnipotence paradox on 25th December. It got a bit out of hand. Personally I think it's quite.... odd, that Raul654 is in sole charge of whether to promote articles to featured status and whether to put them on the front page. I think it's a hangover from when Wikipedia was a lot smaller. Leithp (talk) 20:09, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps it is a bit of a hangover. But after my experience with RfA reform, I'm not about to cry out for a return to democracy. I don't agree with everything Raul does, but overall I think he does a good job, which is all any of us can really do. I say we wait till the 8th, then start, politely, bugging him about Sir Richard.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 23:04, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Well now I'm confused. What on earth was that about? Leithp (talk) 22:42, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

No worries. Just someone I had a run in with earlier who obviously can't find anything better to do than butt-in where it really is none of their concern.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 23:04, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Bad news, I'm afraid. Leithp (talk) 23:13, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

So let the gentle bugging begin I suppose. But not now, Raul seems to have a high level of Wiki Stress at the moment. On a personal note, I hate December...it has never really been one of my "Power months" anyways.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 23:31, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Hope you guys don't mind me barging in, but just wanted to say that i'm sorry to hear O'Connor didn't get his 8 December main page appearance. I have to say that December is a great month - if you happen to be Bill Gates, that is ;-) Take care, guys. SoLando (Talk) 23:58, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Not at all dude! Unlike some, you are welcome here. Thanks for the condolances;>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 00:06, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Joke edits, funny photos

Incidentally, I noticed that your Monopoly joke lasted an impressive (or worrying) six days. Quite interesting as a breaching experiment (if that's the right term). Obviously, I only noticed this after it had been reverted, because jokes like that should be corrected on sight. Ahem.... Leithp (talk) 12:02, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Only 6 days?! Damn...I was hoping it would beat the record of 7, set by my Ostrich experiment. Since it is the more clever, and hence to me funnier, of the two. Now if it had been up 9 days I'd prolly have taken it down myself. You have a real talent for finding cool and unusual pics, wanna help me with the next one? Remember- naughty schoolboys get the girls;>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 17:03, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

I'd love to say that I'd scoured Wikipedia, searching for only the choicest weird pictures, but I've got most of them from here. So, were someone to theoretically want to try another experiment, they might want to use one of them. Crushing by elephant is a classic, I think. Leithp (talk) 18:12, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

Oh SUPER SWEET! A whole new GOLDMINE! I could spend DAYS just purusing that page! Thanks bro! The Wikipedia continues to be an unending source of amusement if not enlightenment for me. Yes, Crushed by elephant tis a classic indeed. I've actually SEEN it you know...several times...in movies ;>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 21:24, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar

Hey, the talk page is fixed! I was going to award this earlier, but my eyes nearly popped out with the strain of looking at odd, tiny blue text!! Take care. SoLando (Talk) 06:12, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

MUCHO GRAZZIE BRO! It will look great in my Wiki-Trophy room;> I wonder what that green stuff is, though...Wasabi? Pickle parts?...hmmm--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 10:16, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

No probs, dude. By the way, I was going to say the green stuff is probably mould - after all, so few are deserving of such a barnstar - but that may take the shine off it ;-) I'll go for, um, um.......something that isn't....mould :-p SoLando (Talk) 10:37, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

LOL..oh I see now- Mould for a Mouldie Oldie;> I shall try to continue to be worthy of it! (And I needed the laugh too...thx :)--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 06:30, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Cheers

Cheers for the ironmongery, I shall wear it with pride. Although, given my recent shirking over expanding the Horrocks article I'm not sure I deserve it right now. But, since I saw him being interviewed on TV a couple of nights ago on The World at War, I'll take that and the MC as a sign to get my arse in gear and back to work.

Incidentally, sorry if my sig caused problems yesterday. There was apparently a software "upgrade" that removed a section allowing for the correction of bad HTML code (the only kind I know). This has caused some havoc across talk pages. Leithp 09:50, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

Not your fault M8. Anyone, who had any kind of HTML in their sigs was affected. Seems they turned off HTML correction in order to free up bottlenecks on the increasingly clogged pipeline. Or so this droog says.

Damn, I need to buy The World At War for my DvD library. BEST WWII DOCU...EVAH! You have the MC for now, the VC will come later once you finish and we get Bernie FA status ;>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 10:16, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Molobo

This case and the RfA on Molobo that will inevitably follow sooner or later needs opinions of admins not involved with either side of the dispute (i.e. neither pro-Polish, like me, or pro-German, like Wilgaf), so I am happy that you have become interested in it. I the last event I acted on the basis of incorrect information and already apologised to Wiglaf, but I am pretty convinced he abused his powers during the German_4th_Panzer_Division dispute. All things considered, Molobo has broken the 3RR rule several times, and I don't support many of his actions, but he has also done many good edits and helped to reduce the anti-Polish POV of some articles. Unfortunately, he often pushes them to pro-Polish, thus igniting the reverts. I honestly don't know what to do - I asked Molobo several times to be more careful, but to little avail. The fact is that he is often is fighting with similar nationality pov-pushers from Germany or Russia, and so if we ban him, shouldn't we ban them as well? I am afraid my Polish nationality doesn't help me to form a truly neutral opinion here (but by the same token you should carefuly approach any opinions of editors involved with edit wars with Molobo, or even editors sympathising with their friends...). --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 17:14, 16 November 2005 (UTC)

I'm glad we can agree Molobo is the real problem and provacateur here. As for what should be done, you make (as usual:) some good points. Bans should be decided on a case by case basis, depending on the circumstances of each one. In this case, the only fair and reasonable course of action I can think to recommend, would be to LOCK the 4th Panzer Division article, after reverting it to its last, stable revision. We can then at least try and work out a concensus on what needs to be done in his case. Beyond that, I'm unsure too. Banning him would be easily justified, but like most fanatics and trolls he would probably wear it, like a barnstar, with pride instead of shame. Yet we cannot allow him to continue to disrupt Wikipedia to make his point. The only other course of action I can think of would be to extend the LOCK strategy to other articles where and when he provokes an edit war. Then if he complains on the talkpages, ignore him (deny the troll his food:). Once he moves on, the article can be safely unlocked. It worked for the Erwin Rommel article, it might work for the 4th Panzer and others too. Of course we all have biases, my friend...so long as we recognize and admit to them, they can be controlled for. Reasonable people can discuss and work through them. The Molobos of the world do not acknowledge their biases nor can they be reasoned with. Thank you for your reply, I'll be glad to help in any way I can. --R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 08:32, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Through I don't approve all of Molobo's actions, I don't think he is a 'troll'. His POV is too nationalistic, and he tends to turn to revert wars or pointless talk arguments too often instead of just editing the articles - but nonetheless I think there is a clear gap between him and the 'real' troll. For example, I feel that Molobo's actions on the 4th Division page were completly justified. Through I admit this may well be 'an exception to prove the rule' - I am not prepared to take clear sides at the moment. I don't know about most of other cases he is involved in - I simply don't have interest (and will) to tackle most of those nationalistic disputes (giant waste of time, if you ask me) - however when I do get involved in such cases, I very often find out that both involved parties are equally guilty of allowing the situation to deterorate. I have recommended an RfA involving him as a prudent action to Wilgaf some time ago (much better then simply blocking at will), but when it comes to pass, I think it will show that Molobo is not the only guilty party. In the end, the world is not black and white as some hope it will be. On related note, I wonder if you could comment on this: am I constructing a 'network of admins pushing a nationalist POV, with the power of unblocking each other and Molobo' :) You seem to have earned respect of Wilgaf - and mine - so perhaps you could mediate between us before this gets any worse. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 15:56, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Indeed, my friend, so much of our world is in shades of gray. But there does come a point where gray starts to resemble black more than white. Molobo has reached this point in the eyes of A LOT of people. Let's deal with him first, as you recommended to Wiglaf earlier (that was a missed opportunity, but hey water under the bridge:), then deal with the other national PoV pushers. Just because they did it too, does'nt put Molobo in the right. As I said, let's consider each case by its own merits and circumstances separately. If they are equally guilty (and from what you say and the example of Zivinbudas, you provide, it seems they are) then by all means they should share the same punishment. Even if it comes down to, as you say, banning the whole bloody lot of them. If they are as guilty as they seem, you should have no problem getting Wiglaf and the other admins on your side just as you did with Zivin. But we really need to deal with this mess so we can get on with our Wiki work and lives. I could'nt agree with you more about nationalistic edit wars. Wastes of time...and they turn up in the strangest places, I even got recently pulled into one involving SEALAND. As I mentioned there, nationalism, and perhaps even the nation-state itself, are becoming dangerous anachronisms. But I digress (again:).

You and Wiglaf need to put this behind you. You have both done the right thing, admitted your wrongs and apologized for them, like the true, honourable gentlemen you both are. Rex is making much too much of a fuss about this. I'll tell him so. As for the "Network" issue. No, I don't think you are. Unfortunately, I can see where it could be seen this way. The "Black Book" especially (though Molobo doesnt help either). It is probably best to delete the "Black book" entirely, especially since it has become such a big black cloud hanging over Halibutt's election. I hate to see such a worthy candidate, whom I wholeheartedly SUPPORT BTW, denied because of it. Just is'nt worth it. Besides, this whole situation reminds me of a joke an old friend of mine from Poznan, Marik, once told me, you've probably heard it but it goes-"Poland is being attacked by the Germans and the Russians...quick! Who should we fight first!?...The Germans, business before pleasure:>Sapere aude!--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 10:26, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Convo with Molobo

Why do you say such things-I was right about the 4th German Panzer division. If you believe information I provide is wrong, why don't you address it on talk page ? If you are concerned with any information then I will be glad to provide you source or information that will confirm it. --Molobo 13:15, 17 November 2005 (UTC) Then if he complains on the talkpages, ignore him (deny the troll his food:) Why do you insult me in such way ? After all I did enter correct information on several articles.What is the reason for your reaction ? --Molobo 15:04, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Why Molobo, I'm honored you grace my humble talkpage. Iam curious about you. I would like to know how you come upon your "facts", and I don't mean by Google either. I think that none of us are born with a hard-set group of beliefs...we come by them through our life experiences. So what is it in your life, which makes you think the way you do? Did your family suffer loss due to the war and occupation? Most every family in Poland did. I'm being quite sincere here. Please help me understand where you are coming from, besides just Poland. I would like to think, somehow, you could be "rehabilitated" and your energy and enthusiasm made into asset to the English Wikipipedia instead of a liability. But if your beliefs and values are hard-wired in your head, I'd only be wasting our time. Sadly this seems to be the case. Several of my friends have tried in vain to reach out to you before. But in every case you shunned their efforts. I really would enjoy having a civil, productive discussion with you, Molobo. But all you've shown me so far is a combative, arguementative, uncompromising side. And unless you show me there is more to you, I cannot help but side with those who want you banned. By the way, I do not hate you and I certainly do not hate the beautiful land or gallant, brillant people of Poland. So please consider this, my attempt to "Reach out" to you, Molobo. Accept it or reject it as you see fit. Thanks for stopping by. Regards,--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 10:26, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

I would like to know how you come upon your "facts", and I don't mean by Google either. Mostly history books, documentaries, as well as research by Instytut_Pamieci_Narodowej. If you want to know about particular entry I will be glad to provide you with specific source, as to recent entries about atrocities made by Wehrmacht troops in Poland, they came from IPN research, Szymon Datners book and work by German institute in Poland.If you wish so, then I see no problem with providing you with pages, names, links or even translation of various texts-however I already included many of them in discussion on 4th German Panzer Division. Several of my friends have tried in vain to reach out to you before. But in every case you shunned their efforts. Can I ask you for providing links to these efforts ? I will gladly enter any dialog that may ease this situation. So what is it in your life, which makes you think the way you do? Did your family suffer loss due to the war and occupation? Most every family in Poland did. I'm being quite sincere here. Please help me understand where you are coming from, besides just Poland. I feel always uncomfortable about personal questions, and believe that the articles and edits should be discussed not private life, as it is not the subject of debate. I assure you that I didn't engage in providing personal experience as proof-I think its a very bad concept(and my family didn't suffer in WW2 anyway according to my knowledge If you want to know, besides I am of German heritage).However I don't know what you mean by my personal beliefs ? I would like you to point at some edit that you believe was just my belief, and I shall gladly provide the source I was using for you to settle that issue. I would also like to know what edits of mine are disturbing for you. --Molobo 00:16, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your response, Molobo. ITN seems like a credible source. But I can't vouch for the rest of your sources. I understand about documentaries...I'm a bit of a history Docu junkie. However, historical documentaries are not historical documents. Besides that, they usually have a political and/or economic agenda. There are very few (The World At War for instance) which offer as much depth of research and coverage as a good book or even article. This seems especially true of some of the newer Docus, which are mainly about "Info-Tainment" and so are designed to appeal to the interests and biases of their target audiences. Thus, I'm loathe to cite documentaries as sources.

Now in the case of the 4th Panzer, which is such a small article to cause such a large controversy, I think its main focus should be on the division's COMBAT HISTORY. As it stands, about 1/3 of it now talks about war crimes commited in Poland in 1939. If it were a larger article, with more info about its combat actions, then this would not be such a big deal. This is not the case, unfortunately. Furthermore, if you are going to talk about its war attrocities in detail, then you should mention ALL of them, including those commited against Russians, French or British. Of course, this would make the problem even worse. Warfare is slaughter...NO UNIT involved is free from some act which can be percieved as a warcrime. This is why I think unless a unit is particularlly infamous, such as Kampfgruppe Peiper or 12th SS Panzer Division Hitlerjugend or SS Division Totenkopf, then the focus of an article about a combat unit needs to be mainly about its combat roles. Otherwise it is a slippery slope to try and mention every potential attrocity a unit commited. Now, if you or anyone wants to start a separate, related article focusing solely on the 4th Panzer's or Hitlerjugend's war crimes in Poland, then I see no problems with it. I might even contribute if I can. But otherwise, they just bog down an article with details and it looses its focus. Sometimes all it takes to throw it off is just a few strategically placed words of a sentence. Such as "Throughout its existence, the division was responsible for a number of war crimes." with which you started the section. Even that can cause problems. Not the best way to start a section, especially since you don't discuss its entire history of war crimes, only Poland 1939. Moreover, most of the crimes, you attribute to it are minor. 13 prisioners being executed...while terrible is nothing compared to the Katilyn Forrest or even the Malmédy Massacre. So why give it such large mention? Its all about RELEVENCE and PERSPECTIVE.

"Several of my friends have tried in vain to reach out to you before. But in every case you shunned their efforts.

Can I ask you for providing links to these efforts ? I will gladly enter any dialog that may ease this situation."

WHY SURE! Leithp for one for 1, Patton for 2, Shauri for 3 (Who seems to have gone OUT of her sweet way to try and be kind and reasonable with you!) And does so again here for 4. Wiglaf for 5 and Ansbachdragoner for 6, who makes many of the same points I do above only in a much more concise manner. ALL from your own talkpage, Molobo. Would you like more? I'll look them up too. I'm not mocking you, if you are being sincere here then I like your attitude. Some sincere apologies to the fine Wikipedians above would be a good start, and show your GOOD FAITH.

"I feel always uncomfortable about personal questions, and believe that the articles and edits should be discussed not private life, as it is not the subject of debate. I assure you that I didn't engage in providing personal experience as proof-I think its a very bad concept(and my family didn't suffer in WW2 anyway according to my knowledge If you want to know, besides I am of German heritage).However I don't know what you mean by my personal beliefs ?"

I mean Poloncentricism and Anti-German, Anti-Russian biases. But Thank you for a bit on your background, I never imagined you might be of German heritage. I know many Germans who suffer from "War guilt" and self-loathing due to some of the things their nation did during the war. Where we are coming from helps us to understand where we are and who we are. I come from a military family. One of my cousins was killed in the Battle of The Bulge. My great uncle Cleve was nearly blinded by a German gas attack in WWI (I was 6 years old, sitting on his knee when he told me the story). I see it this way, Germany paid for it. Paid for it in many ways: By having their nation almost completely destroyed and overrun, by being occupied and divided for over 44 years, by their millions of deaths and by loss of territory, much of it to Poland BTW. Not to mention the Gulags, rapes and tons of other examples of "Victor's justice" inflicted upon them by the Soviets. So there is no need to "Rub their noses" in it. Doing so only makes things worse..turns shame and guilt into resentment and new hatred which only breeds and strengthens neo-nazis, skinheads and other ilk. Just because your opponents are bigots doesnt mean you have to be one as well. I'm glad you responded in a positive way, there may be (an NPOV:) hope for you yet. Best regards,--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 12:04, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] The time has come

Dear friend. I and Dbachmann are discussing opening that inevitable RfAr against you know who. It is time to gather the forces and to collect the evidence. Let's deal with this liability to Wikipedia once and for all.--Wiglaf 11:45, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Lead the way. "Lay on MacDuff, And damn'd be him that first cries, 'Hold, enough!'":>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 06:40, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Reply

Hi, would you please read the edit summary, if you had you would see that my bot was performing a necessary task; removing excess templates from pages, which does not alter the look of the page. It is a bit disturbing that you labelled it a "vandel bot", next time, think then act. I see you just rolled back my edit, now that is verging on vandism. Martin 10:50, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

It is no more than what your bot did to a page my freinds and I have put a LOT of work into. And I see from THIS, I'm not the only one to compain about your bot. One admin even thought it necessary to put a BLOCK on it. And this was only a few days ago. Should this hostile and uncooperative attitude of yours contine, I shall file another complaint against your bot AND YOU.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 11:06, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

No-one else agreed that that complaint was justified, my bot was changing pages to match the consensus format. I would like you to explain why {{Prettytable}} is necessary. I don't think you can, because there is no reason. Your attitude is hostile and uncooperative and totally unjustified, I can't see what you would file in this complaint against me, as I have clearly done nothing wrong, I have explained clearly why my bot was right, you have offered no reasoning at all, just silly threats. Martin 11:20, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

No, I asked you POLITELY but FIRMLY to please put a leash on your bot and restrain it from altering TEMPLATES. Instead you responded by doing the exact same thing to the same page, Without even DICUSSING it first. And this is'nt the only time your bot has made unwelcome and unneeded edits. Nor will it be my only complaint if I file one. For instance, HERE, your bot effectively created TWO "See also" sections. The reason I had that link listed separately is because it is a DAUGHTER article created by PhilX, hence a RELATED article, not a see also, as the article's discussion page will show. That's the problem with bots-they edit without discussion (or THINKING) first. Moreover, the "Manual of Style", which seems to be your Koran, is not a bunch of written in stone rules, but GUIDELINES. Having a bot running around mindlessly enforcing your ridgid interpretations of them, goes against the spirit, if not the letter, of Wikipedia. If you find me hostile, sir, then it is not without reason. Unlike your bot, which is unable to reason and its creator who seems incapable of being reasonable.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 11:50, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

An article should not have a "related articles" section and a "see also" section, if you think you are above the manual of style then you are simply wrong. When you say I didnt discuss it first, perhaps you haven't actaully read this which clearly shows that templates should be replaced, sorry for not asking you first, but, quite frankly, I don't need to ask you everytime I edit an article you have editted.

"mindlessly enforcing your ridgid interpretations of them" No, I was correcting articles to match the MoS, if you think the MoS is wrong, or that you don't need to follow guidlines, then you are really really wrong.

You still haven't justified your revertion of my bots edit.

p.s. I posibly won't be able to respond for a while. Martin 12:07, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

you are way out of line, I'll deal with this later. Martin 12:10, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Please, both of you calm down. Now I have myself been replacing prettytable with {| class="wikitable" - anything that will help Wikipedia to not be so painfully slow can be a great thing :-) The table doesn't seem to be noticeably different, in my opinion at least. So please, both of you just shake hands and forget about this incident. Both of you are great editors, so don't let a minor disagreement get in the way of cordial relations. By the way, I have to say that Bluemoose appears to have taken the decision of his own accord to replace prettytable after seeing significant (but not unanimous opposition) to the prettytable in TFD. Is that true, Bluemoose? SoLando (Talk) 12:39, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

No, I am doing per Wikipedia:Template substitution, it isn't to do with the tfd, I don't think it should be deleted. thanks Martin 12:49, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Yes, Thanks Solando for your calming influence. Martin, we obviously have polar differences in outlook on the MoS. To me, guidelines are suggestions and examples...not orders. They are subject to interpretation and change. The very term STYLE (as in Fashion) connotes this. Moreover, so what if they ARE rules? Even then they would get trumped by Wikipedia:Ignore all rules. I apologize for using the V word with regards to your bot. I reverted its edits because I wanted to discuss them first. But this- "quite frankly, I don't need to ask you everytime I edit an article you have editted." is exactly the attitude I'm talking about..and it is how editwars get started. For someone who is "a firm believer in common sense, much more so than rules and guidlines. " You seem pretty bloody devoted to the letter of some of them moreso than the spirit. Which goes flat out against what Wikipedia:Ignore all rules when it states "The spirit of the rules is more important than the letter." I also do not see how I'm "Out of line" to talk with MY friend on HIS page about an article WE have put a lot of work into. Frankly, I don't have to ask your permission. I called SoLando in to intercede. He has done so. (Thank you bro). And as promised, I now drop my objections and will allow YOUR edits to stand. At least until the fickle finger of fashion changes again and the new template format becomes "out of style". Please take all the time you want in responding. Till then, sir --R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 13:32, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Your message to your friend was a personal attack on me. This is nothing to do with the MoS (it makes no mential afaik to subst:'ing templates), I referred to that in regard to the previous dispute I had with a user (which, no one has agreed with his point of view, everybody involved agreed with me). You do realise that my edit made no difference to the look of your article, and that over use of templates slows down the servers unneseccarily. Martin 14:49, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Hi R.D.H, I just want to quickly point out that 1) Wikipedia:Ignore all rules is definately not an excuse to literally ignore all rules, this is a frequent misuse of it and 2) the MoS is a consesus driven guideline that is very rarely subject to any change, we really should try and stick to it as much as possible.

Anyway, the issue is resolved now, and I really hope we can get on in the future and work positively together on something, consider this an attempt to "shake hands and make up" as recommended by SoLando. thanks Martin 21:58, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Martin, consider the hands shaken. The issue is indeed resolved. And please accept my apologies for any personal offence. Let's put it all down to yet another case of misunderstanding. My main concern was your edits would somehow undermine the look and/or stability of the article. But this does not seem to be the case. I still, however, agree to disagree with you on the nature of the MoS. This is a philosophical difference, though, which cannot be as easily reconciled. Also, bots are perhaps better for performing certain kinds of tasks than others. While Bluebot did not seem to cause a problem here, it may not always be the case for every template. Misunderstandings such as this are bound to occur in the future, and may not be resolved as quickly or (relatively) amicably. Best regards, --R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 05:20, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

Nice one. thanks Martin 11:18, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you!

You're VERY welcome and congrads! I can see from your pleasant manner, along with all the outpouring of support you will make a fine admin who will wield the mop wisely and well. Best regards,--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 09:12, 22 November 2005 (UTC)

You're welcome, I'm proud to have supported you and will do so again. I'm very glad you are staying on Wikipedia, it sorely needs good and good natured editors such as yourself. At some point in the not too distant future, I strongly urge you to reconsider running for admin again. With the strong outpouring of support you received, plus the fact the infamous "black book" is now gone, you will almost certainly make it next time around. Cheers and best regards,--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 18:55, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Vodka

Well, I'm already smiling. I was even laughing hysterically, laughing my jaws off today. Though I'm not that merry now and I'm afraid shaking hands with certain people is beyond my abilities now. I though I could smile endlessly and repeat the same things in a calm tone several times in a row, but there apparently is a certain ammount of offense I can bear and this has gone far enough. That's why I'm withdrawing from all discussions with Ghirlandajo until the RfC is ready. I'm currently gathering diffs and links and trying to calm down a bit before I do something too serious. Hope it sounds reasonable enough. Halibutt 21:19, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

Sounds quite reasonable. I know how difficult it can be for reasonable people with a good sense of humor to deal with unreasonable ones who have none. BTW I find it particularlly funny how he accuses you of sicking Molobo on him, as if Molobo were some sockpuppet. No one controls Molobo...not even Molobo...right Molobo? The Vodka must make him paranoid too:> Cheers M'friend, --R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 22:00, 1 December 2005 (UTC)

I thought you might be interested in Wikipedia talk:Requests for comment/Ghirlandajo. Just search for your username. If you would like a 'honorable Pole' badge or something, I think you have just qualified ;p --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 17:40, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

After reading Ghirly's comments, it is my pleasure and honor to accept. Thank you! Umm now does this mean I have to stop telling "Polack" jokes? ;>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 23:43, 6 December 2005 (UTC)

Infamy! Infamy! They've all got it in for me! Leithp (talk) 08:20, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

(LAUGHS) Well put, bro:>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 23:05, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

Well, now you should start telling Pole-Russian-German jokes, they are a tad more brilliant in some cases. :) Halibutt 00:42, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

True, I know a few of those. My favorite is Lenin In Poland ;>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 06:13, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

You mean the one with an artist painting the Lenin in Poronin with Nadezhda Krupska and Dzerzhinsky in one bed? When asked "Right, but where is Lenin?" he replied "How come, Lenin is in Poronin" :) Halibutt 08:29, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

Yep, that's the one:>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 08:42, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] YAY For Dino's!!

Thanks for voting. Spawn Man 01:56, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

HI 5 ;>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 02:04, 5 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] A thank you from Ann

Hi, Ghost. I just want to thank you for voting to support me in my RfA. I know I'm very late thanking you, but I've been a bit caught up with college work. I hope I'll live up to the expectations of those who voted for me. Please let me know if you ever have a problem with any admin action that I carry out. Thanks again. Cheers. AnnH ^(talk) 01:23, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

You are more than welcome, Ann, and congrads. I fully understand, I was a college student once myself...in the last century;> Besides, you have LOTS of supporters to thank. Such is the cursed blessing of popular candidates. I don't see where I would have a problem with any action you will take and I'm sure you will make a fine addition to the "Cabal". Congrads and welcome! --R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 06:26, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Lets talk Monster

Seen what you had referred to about a creature in Scotland's Highlands. This may sound like a Demon due to its negative effects on people who are in its area, but I do'nt think it is a demon at all. Any more data on this creature ? For a short while we had reports of Flying Humanoids that were seen in Mexico and here in the States. These things look like some kind of humanoid creature that appeared to be a yeti flying about. Can you add the link to the creature you had referred to in the Mysteries Megasite website ? The homepage is Mysteries Megasite Homepage This has several sections that you may find interesting, incl. The Loc Ness Monster, Bigfoot(What is it called over there in the UK ?), the Chupacabra, a monster that first appeared in our territiorry of Puerto Rico, now seen all over Latin America and here in the States.Martial Law 04:04, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Interested as Iam in mythology and urban legends, let's talk about CRIPTIDS, which are simply "hidden" or presumed extinct or as yet undiscovered animal species. On such creatures I try to be skeptical yet open-minded. The possible Highlands Bigfoot candidate is the Fear liath or Am Fear Liath Mòr. Credable reports of which go back to the late 1800's. I posted quite a few links on the article, some of which detail them. Interesting the paralells between these stories and those of Yeti/Bigfoot encounters...in many cases, witnesses report "sensing" the creatures' presence before seeing/hearing/smelling them or later finding physical evidence (footprints, hair samples in some cases even droppings which might help explain the loud "howls" :). You are familar with the Bigfoot Field Research Organization ? If not and you are any kind of serious student of the subject you should be. They do outstanding Cryptozoological work, on par with the Loch Ness Society. So yes, Iam inclinded to believe there may be some large member of the primate family roaming the world's remote, wild places. Or even more likely, some Criptid sea creature in the depths. Only a few months ago pictures were finally taken of the Giant squid. As for "La Chupa", that seems to me like much more of a case of misidentification, combined with urban legend and media hype. This started to become clear, when the Chupas made the mistake of crossing over into Texas, where they have lots of guns and really enjoy using them. There were then reports of "Chupacabra" shootings which later turned out to be foxes, coyotes or other small canids with severe cases of Mange. So apart from further evidence of the old adage "Don't Mess With Texas", this seems to show that Chupacabras= poor visability + a superstitious populous + small feral canids + mange. And that their most likely living relative is the Taco Bell Chihuahua :> I'm even more skeptical of "Flying Yetis" or "Aliens" and UFO conspiracies. Those subjects have become magnets for the paranoid, insane and outright fools, rather than serious researchers and scientists. --R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 03:11, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

While I was a kid, my family had to deal with UFOs,aliens AND the trigger happy idiots. While playing in a UFO landing site,I may have nuked myself, NOT knowing @ the time that a UFO landing site is RADIOACTIVE. Nick Pope, a former MI-6 or MI-5(Your equivalent to our CIA and/or our NSA)agent, stated that these things are for real in two books, which are Open Skies,Closed Minds, and The Uninvited. He was assigned to "the UFO desk" in either MI-5 or MI-6.Martial Law 03:59, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Someone found out about a CIA campaign to make people who see/encounter UFOs/Aliens look like idiots and fools. This is the Robertson Panel and/or the Brookings Report. Your nation's intelligence services may have had a similar campaign in effect. Does your nation have a FOIA, a means to obtain info. of this nature ? I am not trying to be offensive, if so, I do apologise. Just after the truth.Martial Law 04:06, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Been examining the Fouke,Arkansas Monster. This thing is some sort of Bigfoot that periodically scares this geographical area, inducing the men to grab some "heat" and go looking for this thing, much to the displeasure of law enforcement, who believe that someone could end up hurt or dead, especially if some idiot is wearing a gorrilla suit to masquerade as the monster.Martial Law 04:12, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

There are two videotapes of these flying humanoids. Seen them myself. They're on Jeff Rense's homepage and/or Jeff Rense's Archives.Martial Law 04:17, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

We do have some cryptids over here besides Bigfoot, such as The Jersey Devil, the Thunderbird, the Mothman, the Lizard Man(NOT the He-Man character) , a cryptid that may be a alien, since a GIANT UFO was seen where this thing first appeared. It has a really nasty disposition towards humans and is known to damage property.Martial Law 05:05, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Other cryptids we are known to have are Champ(Similar to the Loch Ness monster),Momo, Little Foot, a creature similar to bigfoot, only a LOT smaller.Martial Law 05:12, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Any other cryptids out there we can look at ?Martial Law 05:18, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Template:Warbox Cimbrian War

This appears to be an unused test template. Please mark it for speedy deletion if it's no longer needed. -- Netoholic @ 17:35, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

Done, feel free to scrag it. But please take care not to delete my campaign box for that war ;>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 00:34, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Project completed

Wow, the byz aricle seems to be finished! It is impressive what you've done alone in this week! Congrads it seems to be perfect. Sorry 4 my limited edit this week but was overstressed byu work. F.S.S.D Philx 12:32, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks! But we still must add our references. Need to do the same for our earlier Roman article too. Your edits were appreciated, my friend...you caught and corrected some of MY english spelling mistakes and type-o's (Odd since it is usually my Latin and Greek mistakes you catch ;). But yes, it looks good overall. We have built the Pedia a fine lil article on a complex subject. Hopefully begginers won't have too much trouble understanding our terminology. Wish there was a way I could drawn some diagrams to illustrate it and demonstrate the formations and tactics. But maybe I'm getting a bit too ambitous and bold now huh?:> Here's hoping you have an easier week, Amico. Ciao for now--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 20:18, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] We're all doomed!

Did you see the "experiment" at Alan Dershowitz? Apparently Jimbo locked the page, and only allowed admins to edit it. I'm quite disturbed by this recent trend on Wikipedia, there seems to be a seige mentality taking hold. I've thrown in my lot with the cabal in any case. Leithp (talk) 17:16, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

I don't know if we're ALL doomed yet, bro. But the days where random, unregistered IPs can roll-in from the "Information Autobahn" and edit to their anonymous-hearts' content, seem to be numbered. The fallout resulting from the Seigenthaler incident continues. What a lovely old gentleman...I was watching an interview of his on C-SPAN the other day. For someone who is a self-appointed champion of the 1st Amendment, he seems unable to grasp the concept that free speech is a double-edged sword...which should not be protected any less merely because it may cut you on occasion. On the contrary, that means it must be protected MORE. He clearly has a chip lodged somewhere and an agenda. He also does not seem to grasp or Grok what the Wikipedia is all about. This is not simply the democratization of information, but the democratization of KNOWLEDGE itself!! Several of the viewers called-in and pointed out that when someone makes a errouneous, mallicious, untrue or crap edit on our Wiki (happens all the time) it CAN be caught and corrected in minutes and it is the mistake, not the correction, which is no longer circulating but buried deep in the bowels of the article's edit history. But once his paper, USA Today prints erroneous garbage, which is also all the time, it is out there and all they can do is print a correction/retraction, days after the fact at the earliest if at all, and even then usually in small print and buried away deep in the paper's bowels. Someone else pointed out that what his biography went through is nothing compared with what happens to that of G.W. Bush all the time. Only because Prez Dubya is a more highly visable figure does it get caught sooner. Another asked what so many of us have- why did'nt he just BE BOLD and edit it himself? His cop-out response: because "Jimmy Wales has an explicit policy against anyone editing their own biographies". I've never heard of this "policy", which if it exists at all is ill-considered nonesense. Why should'nt someone be allowed to edit their own biographical information, if they do so in a factual and NPOV manner?! But the former editorial Poobah of the mullet wrapper once called, "Mc Paper" and a "Glorified Tabloid" by the old guard media, cannot see beyond his own personal slight. He concludes that if something is not "Done" to correct Wikipedia, then Congress will do something. Which sounds a lot like the mentality of the Kennedy-Johnson administration regarding Vietnam: "We must destroy it in order to save it". Sad that a 78 year old man of obvious wealth and influence has nothing better to do with his time and money than try and track down and sue some shithead vandal. So in his honour, I'm going to add a new pic to the WACKY CAPTIONS Gallery soon. Stay tuned! Oh, and of course my support of your Rfa is a Fait Accompli;>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 22:09, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

I think the policy is against people creating their own pages. If I remember right Jimbo has edited his own page a number of times, so it's not verboten. I'll give the guy the benefit of the doubt though, you'd be hard pressed to find a 78 year old who wasn't reactionary. Or one who could edit Wikipedia. Leithp (talk) 22:26, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Good points. Unfortunately, this is a 78 year old, reactionary, technologically illiterate crank with some money and influence.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 10:02, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

It was all a joke apparently. Oh, how Seigenthaler must have laughed when he found out. Leithp (talk) 14:56, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes Mr. Burns..errr Seigenthaler must have just laughed and laughed. I sure did...Presidential assassination conspiracies are an endless fount of comedy here in the states. Maybe he will help him now to find a new job writing network sit-coms.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 10:02, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words. I didn't mention Richard O'Connor, despite the fact that I consider my involvement in his FA nomination as one of the high points of my time in Wikipedia, as I thought that I would be stealing some of the glory. The article was almost entirely your work, so it's not fair of me to cite it during my nomination. And it is a featured article! Just not on the main page, yet...... Leithp (talk) 21:14, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

You would'nt be stealing the glory M8, but sharing in it and rightly so! If anyone has justification in being co-author of that FEATURED arty it is you. I've never disputed this, never will and you can't change my mind :> But it did give me a chance to sing your praises along with my support...which was already a given :> Self-Nom too...you are BOLD, my friend! Or is it because you want to work on the Dershowitz "experiment"? Cherche les avocats :>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 22:09, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Self-noms don't bother me, it's an honest way of going about it. If people are going to vote against me for that... meh. Leithp (talk) 22:26, 10 December 2005 (UTC)

Well honesty is one of the qualities I value most in you as a friend and collaborator, bro. It is also something else you will bring to the admin cabal. Another thing I value is your ability to find things which somehow elude me. I've been using MEH for a couple years now in casual conversations, and never till now realized it came from The Simpsons...even though I've been watching that show religiously since 91.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 10:02, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, meh is now considered a perfectly cromulent word. I often use it, as it helps to embiggen the point that I'm making. Leithp (talk) 13:20, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Indeed, you Introubulate me with your Groin-Grabbingly transcendent command of neologisms.:>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 03:29, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Raises a glass of Skittlebrau in salute to R.D.H. Cheers! Leithp (talk) 09:00, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Byzantine battle tactics

I've seen the article already, but I don't think I have anything to add. (And I'm certainly not an expert on Byzantine history!) Adam Bishop 16:36, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

You are being modest, sir. Your contributions on Byzantine history and politics say otherwise. Regardless, as a highly learned and respected Wikipedian, what do you think of the article?--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 10:07, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

It looks good...I don't know what else to add. Adam Bishop 17:08, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Well thank you sir, Iam truly Embiggened that it meets with your approval! --R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 03:34, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Vote?

Could you please please please vote heeeeerrrreee? I've put so much work into the Dinosaur article, I don't want to see it fail..... Thanks, Spawn Man 01:20, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Sure! Of course I will have to read it first. I'm not really up on all the latest dino lit. But I'm sure you are, and the hard work will show it worthy ;>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 03:38, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Info

This may interest you. Alx-pl D 20:12, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Molobo again...sigh. Can't take that lad anywhere. Thanks Alx.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 04:17, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Alhutch's RfA

Dear R.D.H.(Ghost In The Machine),

I'm an administrator, and I've got you to thank for it! Thanks to your support, my RfA passed 25/0. Please don't hesitate to contact me if I can help you with anything. See you around the wiki, :-) Alhutch 06:07, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

You're welcome, congrats and welcome to the Cabal!:>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 03:44, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] SoLando's RFA

Hi R.D.H., thank you for the MEGA, ULTRA, Leithp and 10 others beat me to it, SUPPORT support in my RFA; the result was (28-0-0 ). I hope that I am able to fulfil the expectations of an admin. If you see me mess up anywhere, have any concerns (be it for my musical taste or edits), please don't hesitate to tell me! If you need the help of other wordly powers......I'm probably not going to be a great help, but Wikipedia's another matter ;-) SoLando (Talk) 10:05, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

I, for one, welcome our new SoLando overlord. Leithp (talk) 10:30, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

Muahahahahaha.......cackle......cough.......cough.....splutter. Can I just say, rollback is awesome :-) The protect tab happens to be next to history, so I have to be exxxxtrrrraaaa careful ;-) SoLando (Talk) 11:10, 14 December 2005 (UTC)

WOOHOO! Führerific! But Shhh Sol! Don't spoil the surprise for Leithp...in a few hours your nominator is going to be finding all this out himself when he joins you in the Cabal. Looks like I'll be handing out another Golden mop. Hey, Tis the season ;>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 03:41, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Esperanza elections

Thank you, I will look into it fellow Esperansian:>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 03:45, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Image

In the increasingly unlikely looking event that O'Connor ever does make it to the main page, I was thinking we should maybe try and find a better picture of him. Not necessarily for the top of the article, where a portrait seems appropriate, but for the image on the Main Page. Images I've dug up include: [2], [3] and [4]. None of them are terribly good I'm afraid. What are your thoughts? Leithp (talk) 09:11, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

I like the last two. Those are good ACTION shots of him, similar to the one you found of Horrocks. So either of them would be fine. I agree, the photo I dug up looks a bit like a school yearbook or passport pic. A better shot might help convince the mighty Raul to bless our noble Arty.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 05:51, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for the barn star. I hope the issues will be clarified. Alx-pl D 15:46, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

As do I, my friend. Thanks to your actions I believe it shall be. Cheers :>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 05:57, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Image source (Image:FloddenBattlefield1.jpg)

The image Image:FloddenBattlefield1.jpg, that you uploaded has been marked as without source by 62.214.228.193. Please, add the source asap, and best regards!--Panairjdde 18:03, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, will do. I uploaded it back when I was relatively new, had just discovered how to upload images but not yet the Wiki Copyright Militia. The author of the image came forward, so I gave him due credit in the caption and left a message on his talkpage in the meantime. --R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 02:30, 17 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] News from Esperanza

Hello, fellow Esperanzians! This is just a friendly reminder that elections for Administrator General and two advisory council positions have just begun. Voting will last until Friday, December 30, so make sure you exercise your right to vote! Also, I'm pleased to announce the creation of the Esperanza mailing list. I urge all members to join; see Wikipedia:Esperanza/Contact for more information. All you need to do is email me and I will activate your account. This will be a great way to relax, stay in touch, and hear important announcements. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?)

This message was delivered to all Esperanza members by our acting messenger, Redvers. If you do not wish to receive further messages, please list yourself at WP:ESP/S. Thanks.

[edit] Cheers!

Image:Imp pint thmb.jpg Meh, souls are cheaper by the dozen these days...I just picked up a new one at Wallyworld last week, on sale. Hope you like Stout...if not I'll gladly finish that pint for you;>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 07:50, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

---

[edit] Thanks!!!

Hello Ghost, lol I've been reading the wikipedia for a while and perhaps I've been folish around for almost 2 year , but just a couple of days ago and mostly 'cause I was so bored I decided to getting involved with the project.

and once more Thanks for ur comments!!!

Jfreyre 14:58, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

You are most welcome! Always pleasant to find another good contributor (and fellow Bonapartista ;). 2 years?!...wow...you have probably seen a lot more of Wiki's workings than I have. I just jumped right in, and keep finding cool things and metting cool people. It's a blast. --R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 07:58, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Bloody heck!

Can you believe I got Dinosaur up to FA?! I'm so happy! It only took me a week of rocking back & forth on my computer chair, sucking my thumb, crying & losing sleep! But I still did it! Thanks for voting. I still can't believe it! Spawn Man 01:04, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Believe it M8, YOU DID IT! I always knew you could, you have the ability it was just a matter of putting the work in to apply it. Which you did...with authoritah. See what I mean about FAC? It is a tough, but rewarding teacher, and in the end you come away with a better article. Of course now begins the REALLY tricky part..Getting it on the Main Page: Wikipedia:Tomorrow's featured article. Wish I could help you there too, but unfortunately Sir Richard O'Connor is in the same boat, but at least now he has some Dino buddies for company;> Congrats and WELL DONE!--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 08:23, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

I think I need a holiday now........ The argument with monicasdude, (Is he really Bill Clinton? Get it? Monica Lewinsky, Bill Clinton? Ahh never mind...) is so totally boring. The argument started under extreme stress for me, (wiki world & real life). It's gotten stupid. Plus I don't know where he got I'm 14 from! I just want it to be over with him. He's like me, never lets an argument go! Ahhh well. Thanks for your comments, but it wasn't all my doing getting Dinosaur to the FA status. I'll try & figure what I have to do to get it to the main page. Bye, Spawn Man 01:04, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

BTW, I only just noticed the barn star you gave me! So thank you for that too... Spawn Man 01:06, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Well earned my friend! Especially after all you went through to get it there (battling with the likes of MOANica..etc). You've also earned yourself a Wikibreak. Then we will work to get the mainpage infested with Dinos for a day ;>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 11:36, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Boxing Day

Woo-hoo! Richard O'Connor's day in the sun will be 26th December! Leithp (talk) 21:10, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Oh yes and while I'm at it:

WOO-HOO! Plus might I add Banzai And Boo-Yaaah! We did it bro! Those prayers to the Mighty Raul seem to have paid off. I must thank him now for smiling upon our efforts....and you for the kind words and cool, rotating ironmongery (It's...kinda hypnotic...is..nt...it...)Cheers bro!--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 12:10, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] battle of vaslui

Hey, what are your suggestions to improve the article? What so-called "tweaks" do I need to make? Thx. --Anittas 01:14, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Just some minor wording changes and move some of the pictures around a bit. I'll make some edit/suggestions and see if you approve. Oh and about those pics, you have them all properly credited right? There seem to be a few who live for shooting very good articles merely because some of the images in them are not attributed to their satisfaction. Otherwise, you've done a great job so far! --R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 12:24, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Funny Pic

I hope this is what you were looking for when you opened up your funny pictures section on this page.... (After I added the last picture, I was amased to find that infact I had been unaware that my "dog mine" was actually real! See here: Anti-tank dog.).

That is EXACTLY the sort of thing I'm looking for WACKY CAPTIONS! Thanks! I moved your pics up there. Knew dogs were used in WWII to help find mines, but not that they had been rigged up as a means for delivery of them. It was good to see the dogs had more sense than to run up against a charging tank. So that experiment in inhumanity failed. I'll have to show this to my Nephew (who is an almost complete hippie pacifist BTW). One time we were playing Command & Conquer: Red Alert 2 as the Russians, of course...because hey, they just have cooler stuff in that game! We had our Crazy Ivans rig detpacks to our attack dogs, then we were gonna send them crashing into the Allied bases (Canine-Kazies we named them), but instead the game crashed after about 30 of them exploded. Too bad...it would've been glorious! ;>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 12:55, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] A modest proposal

Hey friend i came back from work and ready to act! Well i was wondering if our article Roman infantry tactis and whatever could be a F.A , what do you think friend? Should we put it in a contest in order to transform it in a F.A or what? F.S.S.D Philx 19:40, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

A modest proposal...heheh I like that. You know it won't be quite so easy. First we are going to have to include our references, the more the merrier. Then, the article's title will have to be changed or shortened to maybe Roman Military Tactics, or some such. We are also going to need a few more images and maybe expand it a bit. Maybe have a section at the beggining which discusses the early Republic, then one at the end for the later Empire (Vegitus' era). Then we will need to get it looked at in Peer review, or better yet, by the gang at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history. Which of course will mean a lot more work to do. It will be a challenge, sure, but I think we are up to it and our friends can help ;> Ciao for now Amico, Sapere Aude! --R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 12:40, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

yeah ready to fight comrade! wll i personally don't know how to upload images, if you will be so kind to expand that i'll take the the early republican times and the end of the empire! Err but i did not understand a thing , how the "gang" will look at it? I have to contact them? F.S.S.D Philx 12:51, 21 December 2005 (UTC) P.S (a modest proposal, the satyre written by Swift, when he claims that the only way to feed the irish people is that to sell the irish children as meat to the nobles! hope the article won't be meat fo nobles! ) Philx 12:51, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm expanding the history section, analyzing the three major ages of the roman infantry : King's time , early republic, late republic-empire, late empire. If you can my friend clean up and insert some references i would pareciate a lot . F.S.S.D Philx 13:11, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

thanks for your clean up Friend! I will be doomed without you, now it looks... English you saved me from the dobious that fall upon all my ex english techers when they see my writings, they say: Huumm is proto indoeuropean or maybe osthrogothic? F.S.S.D --Philx 17:31, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Hey I speak fluent Ostogoth, should you need any help there too;> Don't worry about contacting the Military History Project gang...I will, I'm ONE of them you see:> I figure they will be much more knowlegable and helpful than some random bunch on Peer review. This is once we are ready, though, and we are not ready yet. Only begun this FA battle has. I got and enjoyed the Swift reference BTW :> Onward we go! S.S.S.D.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 12:55, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

What? You be one of the big evil guys? WoW im talking to v.i.p or some kinda of! I'm glad to hear, i called for some photos panarjdde he gave me the links of some good photos on his user pages but don't know how to upload them ! :(. To summarize we need one section about late empire rigth ? F.S.S.D --Philx 13:12, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Heheheh well big and evil guy yes, amico, but VIP no, not yet...though I do know a few VIPs there :> But ANYONE with an interest in and knowledge of Military History can join. You certainly have both, so why don't you join us Phil? I saw Pan's photos and added a few to it. He did find some good ones. Let me know if you see anymore you think would help and I'll add them. You dont have to upload them, just place the photo's name inside a [[]] tag. All photo names start with "Image:" so be sure to include that. It is easy once you get the hang of it. Yes we do need a late Empire section. You know the drill- Crisis of the Third Century, the frontiers collapsed along with very nearly the empire itself. Diocletian steps in to restore stability and reforms the military system. Limitanei, Comitatenses etc. Then maybe something, I was thinking of adding to the Legio article, about the "deline and fall of the Roman Legions" which would lead in nicely to our newly finished Byzantine article. You write the "guts" of the section going into the details of organiztion, equipment and formations, then I'll do the nice narrative stuff at the start of the section and at the end. Sound like a battle plan to you comrade? S.S.S.D--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 12:41, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Me be ok comrade , i'll flank the enemy with katas while the infantry charge the at the centre dividing the enemy the the cavalry would charge into the gaps opened and.... Ah was digressing, you know barbarian invasion is a nice expansion of rome total war and ... ok no nedd to tell about this. BTW i did some history changes, what do you think? F.S.S.D --Philx 12:58, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Ahh Rome:TW...another weakness of mine, Comrade! Adore that game! I need to play it some more, it's been a few weeks. I hope the next game they do will be Napoleon:Total War. another one of my favorite historical periods. I saw your new section and worked on it some yesterday. I'll do a bit more today. Ciao for now --R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 16:48, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

---

Hey friend, sorry for the lte for posting the late section of the empire, but vegetious is surprisng confusing about this period for example have you ever heard of auxila paltinae? I, honestly, never, and is confusing about the role of the palatinae itself, he says that is a kinda of pretorian guard woth the role of protecting mount palatinus at rome, but fought with cometanense il small deatachment, could you bring light to this my friend because i'm unsure of what to post... Thanks --Philx 12:27, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

No problem, Phil, take your time. We have no deadlines here :> "auxila paltinae"? Never heard of them either. Best I can figure they were some sort of "Lower" order of paltinae, perhaps comprised of recently promoted comitatenses, or perhaps non-citizen "Barbarian" members. As such they would have been to the Paltinae what the pseudocomitatenses, were to the comitats. Vegi also mentions "Vexillationes Palatinae" and "Legiones Palatinae" formed by Constantine after he disbanded the Praetorian guard. If we are not sure what they were it is probably best to just not mention them. If it confuses us, it is bound to do the same for most readers. Yes, Paltinae were a sort of evolution of the Praetorian Guard, but they were used as field troops far more than bodyguards. When they were used as guards, it was for high ranking generals and junior royalty (the Augusti in the tetrarchy for instance) and not for the Caesars themselves, that's what the Scholae were for. From what I've read they were also largely mixed units of Infantry and Cavalry, like the earlier Cohors Equitata, who were the precursors of the Vexillatios. So they were basically the elite heavy (infantry and cav) hitters of the late empire, who could be used as both guards and field forces. This is really all we need to say about them in the article. The later empire is a very confusing time. Hope this helps Amico, let me know if you need anything more--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 16:13, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:WikiProject Florida.

I noticed from Category:Wikipedians in Florida that you are a floridian and I have created a state wikiproject, Wikipedia:WikiProject Florida. So far is it very small but it could be expanded later. Join it if you want and help make it grow, set tasks etc. Thanks. --Jaranda ^{wat's sup} 04:32, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

Hello Aranda! Why yes, I'm a 2nd generation native. Not many of us around. Nothing is wrong with small..from small stuff can come great things...so sure I'm in! Though my main contrib to Florida history so far is rather scant and parochial, namely the Battle of Gainesville. But there are plenty of areas where I think I can contribute a bit more on our home state. St. Augustine, for instance, could use a lot more enhancing. Thanks for the invite fellow Wiki-Flordian!--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 12:53, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] malo's RfA

You're welcome! I have full confidence that my confidence in you is well-placed and you will meet, or exceed, expectations. Congrats and welcome to the Cabal.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 12:57, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Battle of Aquae Sextiae

Hello R.D.H. (Ghost in the Machine) - first sorry - but english is not my native language. - I have read some very good history books about the Cimbri and Teutones. And the number of these people is very controversial. I think the english wikipedia is mostly the best but I think it's not so good that it makes always lists, for example about the "strength" of the combatants -especially in such uncertain things. One example: Plutarch says: at the beginning the Cimbri had 300,000 warriors. But this would mean that the whole moving nation had much more then 1 million persons (and all had to survive a very long time) (there have been always more women and children then men). On the other hand it is relative sure that in this time between Elbe and Rhine lived only 3-4 million humans. So many modern historians think that the roman sources exaggerate. Some even think that the whole moving nation had been only 100,000 - 150,000. Thatswhy I think that at least in the articels of the battle of Aquae Sextiae and Battle of Vercellae should be mentioned that the numbers are very uncertain. It makes a big different if the Cimbri had 160,000 warriors or the number 160,000 means men, women and children (this is for example said in the german wikipedia). I have read many Battle pages in the english wikipedia and very often the numbers are very different from my sources. I don't want to say that my sources are more correct - for example there could maybe be some old pro-Germanic-propaganda, which unfortunately survived in the newer sources - on the other hand many historians think the romans made also propaganda - it sounds realy good that 50,000 romans killed 160,000 barbarian men and lost only >1000 - I don't know for sure the correct answers, but I know for sure that the correct numbers of the Cimbri are very uncertain. And because I have read many different sources (and the most seems very neutral) I believe that 160,000 humens seem more true then 160,000 men. At least should be said that the number is very controversial. If you want you can discuss it on my user-page. Greetings Knarf-bz

Hello Knarf! I have no problems at all with your English! It is certainly better than my German. You raise some very valid points regarding numbers in ancient history. It is basically one giant guessing game. Figures and estimates are all over the place. This is why battle figures from this period are best presented as an ESTIMATED RANGE. It is my practice to do this as shown with the Battle of Lugdunum. So I take the best figures I can find and make a reasonable guess from there. That being said, I think a strength of 100-160,000 warriors out of a population of some 300,000 is not unreasonable. I'm also assuming that most of the battle dead were men, while most of the captives were women and children. This does not take into account any extracurricular slaughter the legionaries might have engaged in. Keep in mind too, this was a LARGE migration, and included not only the Cimbri but the Teutones, Boii and other associated or allied tribes. So their total population on the move could well have approached 1 million. This would help explain why they had a tendancy to "spread out" and not concentrate in one area for too long. Their numerical advantages in battle were also great logistical and organizational disadvantages. I don't know what your sources are, mine are Mommsen, Dupuy & Dupuy and Plutarch. If one of your sources is Hans Delbrück, then I do not put much trust in him. He is interesting reading, but he was a German nationalist and a revisionist. As such I give him no more credence than I do David Irving. A lot of German sources have been tainted by his slant on numbers, particularly when it comes to Roman warfare. We have good estimates for the sizes of their armies because they kept records and very meticulous ones at that. We know, for instance, that a Cohort had 480-1000 men. But a Barbarian warband could have been anything from a platoon to brigade size. Yet Delbrück has many believing that the Romans usually outnumbered their barbarian opponents, when this was clearly not the case. This is somewhat like the misinformed and biased estimates Medieval European gave of the Mongol "Hordes" which so decisively defeated them in the 1240's. It turns out these vast, disorganized "Hordes" were actually small, highly mobile, very well trained, disiplined and well organized forces. Yet partly out of their own ignorance and partly to excuse their defeats, European sources greatly exaggerated their numbers. Of course you are quite right to point out the Romans were not beyond propaganda either. For instance, I've noticed that while they went to great lengths to record how many barbarians they had slain or enslaved, but when it comes to their own civil wars and the spilling of Roman blood by Roman hands, they are a lot more quiet. It would seem they did not regard it as good propaganda to boast about such things as much. This is also why you don't see very many Roman momuments commemorating some usurper-general's triumphant coup over another. With the possible exception of Constantine's arch, but of course his coup was "divinely inspired" at least according to his propagandists:>. The Romans were also prone to brag about "annihaliating" their enemies. In most cases there were almost always a significant number of survivors. Caesar, himself, seemed rather surprised to find such large numbers of the Boii living in Gaul, after his Uncle Marius supposedly annihalilated them decades earlier. So their notion of annihaliation really meant eliminating them as an effective military force and threat. In this sense, then they were being truthful. Thank you for your interest, thoughts and comments. Why don't you get an account here on the English Wiki? It seems you have the language skills, I find your command of English commendable. Sapere Aude!!--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 15:19, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Sturmgrenadier AfD

I'm dropping you this note, hoping you might have an interest. Recently, the article for Sturmgrenadier met with Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sturmgrenadier. I would appreciate your input on the article and comments on the AfD page, whether you see fit to retain it or delete it. Would especially love to see some of the humour you inject into the talk pages I've been glancing at.... --Habap 16:29, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

NP, Done. Thanks for dropping by:)--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 11:45, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] BD2412's RfA

Thanks for supporting my RfA (even though, thanks to folks like you, it's taking me forever to get through the thank-you's) - I'll do my best as an admin to help make the dream of Wikipedia into a reality! BD2412 T 23:05, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

NP, You're welcome and congrats! I'm sure you will make a fine addition to the Cabal. Our best is all any of us can really do :> Cheers--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 11:49, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Offer to co-review.

Hey.

I'd love to have a co writer for my new reviews page; User:Spawn_Man/Reviews. I'm just reviewing recent stuff I've seen, heard or read of late & would love for you to write your own reviews for any of the movies I've already reviewed. For example, If I've reviewed the game, Age of Empires, & if you've played it recently, I'd love if you left your rating out of five (eg: 4.5/5) & a basic review of what you liked or didn't like, what was good, what was bad & who you think might like it on the review talk page; User talk:Spawn Man/Reviews. If it's worthy of my glorious review page, I'll slam it on as a sub review for the whole world to see. If not, then I'll hate you forever & ever & ever.... (just kidding... or am I?). You could also put a link to it on your user page so other people can submit their reviews. Thanks, Spawn Man 01:22, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Hey thanks for the invitee bro! But I'm already reviewer on Daily Pulp and I havent done a review for them in months (looks guilty). I blame Wikipedia...before I got bitten by the giant, radioactive Wikipede I was averaging 2 reviews per month on there. But I will contribute what I can when I can. AOE is kinda old news...yes I played it, Civilization too back in the day. Verily they are classics. But the NEW HOTNESS is Rise of Nations which combines the finest aspects of both. Right now I'm playing as the Iroquois (the bestest nation in the Rise of Nations: Thrones and Patriots X-pack IMHO:). Much fun, especially when I got to wipe out the Americans;>/. I've been meaning to write a review for The Pulp. But I guess I will make it for you page too huh?--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 12:46, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

There's no rush, I'm fine writing on my own right now, just thought I'd bring it to your attention so you don't get angry at me for not telling you. Bye then, Spawn Man 08:15, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

What me angry...well maybe mad ;> Yeah it's not as if we are being PAID for this...oh if only. But if we were then maybe it would'nt be as much fun. BTW, if you ever do play RON as the Iroquois, avoid naval battles if you can. They don't make very good sailors. You know its bad when the Fremch, Spanish and Dutch can take down your navies. If possible, ally with the British, give them plenty of wood and let them fight your naval battles! MUUUHAHAHAHA!--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 12:50, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Congratulations!

I know I'm like a decade late with this but I only just realised that Richard O'Connor had reached FA status. Congratulations and good job! Loopy 00:02, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Why thanks Loopy! Your support and suggestions, such as adding the biobox at the beggining, certainly helped it get there. Cheers! --R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 12:56, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Merry christmas

Merry christmas friend, i don't know ,but here in italy is nearly christmas, at least 8 hours.--Philx 13:24, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks amico! Same to you and yours! It is surprisingly cold here in Florida. No snow though, of course. My Sister is up and we're having a nice visit. And I just got a call from my Uncle thanking me for the gift I sent him and ordering me to have a Merry Christmas and fun...Aye Aye Sir! :> He wishes he could be here, so do I. Maybe next year I will ask Santa for Transporters So we all can all be together. Here's to peace on earth and confining war to the history books and cool videogames!--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 16:59, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Mottos

Hey friend think we gotta some problem, in fact the mottos i wrote aren't said by vegetious to be official mottos but words of encoraugement said by some genrals i think we should remove some except S.P.Q.R and pugnamus pro roma --Philx 15:51, 25 December 2005 (UTC)

Yes, I'm afraid that whole section might have to be deleted, since there will be only 2 mottos left. In a regular arty we could get away with it, but in not a FEATURED ARTICLE. Pity, I rather liked it, especially Dextra gladius, laeva scutum, corpore honor. Oh well, such is war. Would you like to do the honors and put the motto section to the sword or should I?--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 17:01, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Please , do you first, i ahven't got enough courage to delete them. sigh :( --Philx 12:30, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

Sigh, I shall go do the deed then...Vis et Honor, friend--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 23:50, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Reversion of Edits to Richard O'Connor

IMNSHO, I do not think there is any way that the prior version of Richard O'Connor which you reverted can be considered superior to my changes. If you were reverting for fear that information was deleted, note that every piece of information is still there—merely delegated to the body. I believe these choices were quite judicious, serve readability, and keep the focus on the subject (O'Connor) instead of going into some arbitrary details in the lead.

Also, please refer to the principles of Wikipedia etiquette, in particular: Avoid reverts and deletions whenever possible, and stay within the three-revert rule except in cases of clear vandalism. Explain reversions in the edit summary box. Metaeducation 17:38, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

I apologize if I caused you any offense. Unfortunately, what you did I considered a major edit to a long standing section, without prior discussion. Which is also a violation Wiki-etiquette. I reverted the discussion of "Srinigar or Srinagar" as General O'Connor's birthplace for the same reason. I refer you to that discussion Talk:Richard O'Connor#Birth place?. What I said there applies here equally, For now, to avoid further confusion and edit wars, PLEASE let us let the older version stand until the frenzy dies down and we can discuss and make changes at a more thoughtful pace. This is difficult to do when every 10 minutes some IP Freely anon vandal blanks the entire article or adds in some witless vulgarity or sexually retarded remark. Thank you --R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 17:56, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

1. I appreciate your response. But note: "what you did I considered a major edit to a long standing section, without prior discussion" is rather subjective (and not in the Wikiquette list as far as I can tell). The current tide is not to gather consensus and then make edits—we'd be waiting forever—but to be bold whenever you feel you have the time to help, and assume good faith. I might feel differently if I was introducing loads of new material or changing the content, but rephrasing for clarity and style is something that can be done any day and absorbed and massaged back into shape relatively easily by other editors.

2. It does not seem appropriate to address increased traffic and vandalism caused by being a featured article by implementing your own virtual "lock". If you are an administrator or have successfully lobbied for an article to be thus protected, that is different. While I recognize that doing a lot of work on an article leads one to feel naturally protective, they aren't featured only so everyone can bask in their glory—but so that an existing quality article may get a chance to be wiki'ed by many. Bear in mind that for many (such as me), today is the only we'll pay attention to Mr. O'Connor. So rather than fear how bad it might temporarily look to people who don't fathom wikipedia's *cough* dynamism, fear the potential loss from all those frustrated "minor" contributors! The major contributors have a stake and will ultimately win out in the long haul.

3. Despite my arguments here, I try to look ahead in the featured article calendar but sometimes I forget to. Which is okay because I think interactions like this are useful on the day-of, because it stresses the system and helps us think of how to evolve ourselves and the software to deal with lots of edits at once. So at the very least, if I convince you to put an edit summary of "reverting interesting changes to longstanding section pending discussion—adding notes on changes to talk page for discussion"...then it de-escalates at least a bit. I would encourage you to encourage others to do this as well, because many diligent and well-meaning watchdogs go into a panic and just revert pretty darn good edits. This causes me irritation because improving the article ends up taking a lot longer than it should.

Note also that you may generate a notice of adding to this thread on my page by using a link instead of copying your full responses

Tx. --Metaeducation 18:48, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Well yes what I did was rather subjective, but our notions of style are also. There is a reason why I placed that section at the end. And if you had checked the discussion Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Richard O'Connor Which took place to get it to FA status you would see why. I had to make extensive edits to it and still had to fight to keep from deleting it entirely. As you can see it was accused of being Hagiographic, too POV and "sounding like the 1911 Britannica". So perhaps after seeing this you will understand why I fought to keep it and why I put it where I did. It was, ironically, for the same stylisic reasons you seem to champion. And stylistically I like most of what you wrote, though of course I would make a few wording changes here and there. And you are quite right about the "Major Contributors" winning out in the end. Those who truly care and have something to give will add Sir Richard to their watchlists and revisit him. Those who don't will move on and as my very southern Granny used to say "Let the doorknob hit em where the good lord split em!":> Of course, the opposite of the casual editors are the Hyper-Critics, who like to tear things apart and argue for arguement's sake. I'm not at all accusing you of being one of those. But they are out there and I'm weary of them and their destructive potential. You, I'm sure, have the best of motives and want to make the article better. So I welcome your participation in its improvement. Especially once the edit/vandal orgy dies down, which should be in the next 48 or so hours. You are right I SHOULD have given a bigger edit summary. Unfortunately, that is another casualty of the frenzy. Regards,--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 22:02, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, and thanks for bringing the changes back, I hand it back over to you from here out. I'm just particular about lead sections... Metaeducation 22:57, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

No problem:> Particular is the polite word, sir...there are some less polite ones but for the sake of our newly formed good faith and good will I shall refrain from mentioning them:> Cheers, --R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 03:39, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Post Nominal Migration To Manual of Style

Please note that I've not edited the article since my one initial attempt at changing it. Thus I would appreciate more "good faith" assumption on your part and fewer derogatory statements, such as calling me "arrogant and culturally illiterate" (both in general, and then subsequently for an earnest refactoring). In the large, I'd encourage you to think about what belongs where and how to get it there faster. This includes properly identifying when something is a question of general policy, as well as hashing out personality issues on user talk pages (not article talk pages). My attempt to refactor was an attempt to bring all the material closer to these goals. Metaeducation 22:21, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Then please explain how the following statement:FWIW, my American friends and I feel that leaving them out of the lead makes it seem like the authors of the article took the time to write in "English"! can come off as anything EXCEPT arrogant and culturally illiterate? Maybe it was not your intention, but to most and me, EFFECTS are what matter more. I've taken your well meant "advice" on nearly every issue you have brought up. I even sided, initially, with you in the "Alphabet Soup" debate. I've invited you to make any other edits you see fit in the article. You have declined. Then you "migrate" the entire discussion from the talkpage to the MOS, AFTER Dabbler made it clear he would be unable to participate further in it until after New Years. I do not mind at all you starting a debate. What does bother me is the fact you started it without asking if any wished to join and worse- DELETED the discussion also! So aside from "Ugly American" issues, I might add, PUSHY, ARGUMENTATIVE and OVERLY OPINIONATED to the mix. I'm sorry if I've gotten the wrong impression of you or given you a less than flattering one of myself. We obviously have stylistic and philosophical differneces, which cannot, and perhaps should not, be easily resolved. Good day, sir --R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 20:26, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Nothing is wrong with moving a discussion if you do not delete anything relevant and leave a link in the old location. In fact, if you put it in the right place, it's actively beneficial. Was I trying to hide the argument from Dabbler, or from readers of the O'Connor page? Or was I making it visible to a larger audience, refining it, and making it possible for us to establish a policy to save others from this time-wasting debate? Did I delete something important, and if so, what was it?

This conversation is worthwhile because I like to solve problems when I trip across them, so they do not occur again. That includes process problems. To the extent that we have a dispute (which I have a tough time figuring out if we actually do)—it's my opinion that you are the major violator of process—I've cited specifics and given links to policy pages to support my arguments. Meanwhile you prefer to call me names, instead of specifying one way in which moving the discussion actually was a detriment to the work of developing an encyclopedia. Please stop.

(As for the writing in "English" remark—that was a joke. Someone might say that "&$9 48$*& 9983" does not look like English, so I could say that post-nominals do not look like English...but it's funny to say that in the context of discussing an "English" person. Jokes probably just confuse the issue—as obviously you were confused—so it was one of the few things I took out when trying to clarify the policy question. When I can make myself more clear, I do.)

Perhaps it would benefit you to have someone peer-review your responses to me before you write them. (I have found this to be helpful, personally.) If you would like to edit this section so that it has the conversation we *should* have had in the first place, then that's fine too. Metaeducation 21:34, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

I was originally not going to respond. I have more productive, constructive and frankly PLEASANT things to do with my time here. But some of your accusations I felt needed to be addressed, if for no other reason than to deny you the smug satisfaction of thinking them correct merely because I did not bother to respond. First up, I did not call you arrogant or culturally illiterate, I stated, I thought your "Joke", made us (Americans in general) APPEAR thusly. A subtle, but important difference. I DID state I found your arbitrary move of the discussion to be arrogant. But not culturally illiterate. So if I called you anything it was arrogant and arbitrary. Though your comparasion of centuries old British nominal conventions to years old American LeetSpeak seems to indicate a certain level of, if not cultural illiteracy, then certainly cultural insensitivity. Had you made similar disparaging remarks about..oh say Ebonics, then you would mostly likely be argueing against an Rfc now. As for my need of a "peer review", I strongly suggest you have one as well for your attempts at "humor". In my experience, it is better to refrain from humor entirely than to make feeble attempts which can be easily misunderstood. Of course, to be a true PEER review it would mean having to find those with the same level of humor as yourself...Which in this case would kind of defeat the purpose. But good luck on that all the same.

Now you proclaim yourself a "problem solver", who "like(s) to solve problems when I trip across them, so they do not occur again." And myself as a "major violator of process". This is in fact, the complete opposite of reality as I shall demonstrate. There were two problems in the O'Connor article I addressed, one involved confusion over O'Connor's birthplace, Srinigar or Srinagar?. I was as confused as everyone else at first. But I did some digging and determined the two places were in fact the same, and recommended a merger between the two articles. Problem solved. The second problem, of course, was the "Alphabet Soup" (as you labelled it), which I simply moved to the Biobox. It was the much more easily resolved of the two, since it required no further research and even you acknowledged it was an acceptable compromise, yet ironically this is what our main arguement remains about. In this case your made the problem worse, with your refactoring attempt. It may not have been your intention to exclude Dabbler from the discussion, but it has that effect all the same. Dabbler was clearly interested in the issue and took a valid, firm stance upon it, and one which by some strange coincidence was at odds with your own. Clearly, if this did not create a problem, it needlessly aggrevated an existing one. Furthermore, you've now taken this as a Casus belli to launch a jihad against WP:Ignore all rules, which you've now also "advertised" on the LiveJournal Wikicommunity. Which is all well and good, you are entitled to your opinion, of course, long as you don't try and impose it upon others who may disagree. But it is still making a mountain where there was merely a molehill.

You seem to think the solution to most problems is to create some new rule, guideline or standard, which is the road to INSTRUCTION CREEP, RED TAPE and effectively violates the spirit, if not the letter of WP:Wikipedia is not a bureaucracy. Afterall, rules and standards must be ENFORCED if they are to have any kind of meaning, right? Otherwise, they don't really matter much. So who will do the enforcing? I know your type, I've encountered them many times before in many places besides Wikipedia. Those who value the letter of the law more than its spirit. Those who place PROCESS above PRODUCT. So I really don't think, on a fundemental level, you Grok what this project is truly about. Process must never be allowed to overshadow product. And it is not a "violation" to overlook process when it serves as a hindrance more than a help to the goal of obtaining better product. I'm willing to BE BOLD and do this, whereas you are not.

Want further proof? Well I provided some qualitative, anecdotal evidence above, so how about some quantitative. Normally I'm not one who places much store in Edit Counts and hardly an Editcountitis sufferer, but have a look at mine vs yours in the old counter sometime when it is up. I did earlier. To date I have, if memory serves, over 2440 edits, 1500+ of which are articles. You have under 300, barely HALF of which are in the "mainspace". And this despite the fact of having a two months "headstart" on me (May—July05). So in less time I have contributed FAR MORE to the project than thou. This is not subjective, nominal opinion, but OBJECTIVE, MEASURABLE FACT. Beyond these numbers, and to me more important, I've won barnstars, friends and the respect if not always the affection of many here, played an active role in projects. Together with Leithp, I even helped get an article to featured status and onto the mainpage if you recall. What have you done beyond creating confusion and criticism? By clinging to process and "sacred procedure", you are actually hampering the creation of product and thus more of an obstructionist than a facilitator. I will say this for my sometime nemesis Molobo, at least he cares about things that matter more, even though he is completely oblivious to WP:NPOV and WP:POINT. I have a grudging respect for that, whereas I find you, sir, to be hardly more than a waste of time, space and bandwidth. Good night and Happy New Year.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 03:09, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

P.S. Please when you have time, articulate your personal stance on refactoring talk pages on your user page...or modify the document / engage in discussion there. I do not accept "don't do it ever", or the idea that keeping a copy of discussions "where they originated" is sufficient justification in and of itself. You seem to think this is intrinsically obvious, but I feel like nipping things in the bud and moving things to where they belong before a conversation gets too long is the way to go. Metaeducation 21:49, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

I looked at it. I'm not impressed. It is neither a policy nor a rule and just barely a guideline. And a galaxy away from being one of the foundations of Wikipedia, like IAR, to which you are so opposed. So I guess what separates them in your mind is whether you like/agree with them. I also noticed you havent contributed anything to that page nor even its discussion. How double-plus unbold of you. Especially since it is clearly something you believe in so strongly...although WHY I have no idea. You really need to get this "refactoring" fetish of yours looked into. I'm sure in L.A. you will have no problem finding professional help if you have the cash. BTW, please feel free to file an Rfc against me. Rest assured, I will do the same to you if you continue to harass and belittle me on my talkpage and in the editspace. But be warned, my Wiki-Fu is stronger, you WILL NOT WIN.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 03:09, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

One of the benefits of Wikipedia is that people who are interested in all kinds of different aspects can get involved. Some just fix spelling mistakes. Some start articles. I often often try and rewrite introductions, because I think that's the most important part of an article (see some here, and I think you'd have to admit they're improvements.) Another aspect of my interest is process and diplomacy. You have yet to explain how anyone was excluded from any discussion by moving it and leaving a link, and you continue to use that as a big reason for attacking me. I'm still puzzled by all this. I don't know about an "Rfc", but because we seem to be further diverging rather than converging, I've asked Nicholas Turnbull to take a look at this see what he thinks. He's head of the more informal mediation cabal—not about banning people or anything, just mediation. Perhaps he'll have thoughts on how we can have a better discussion. (He's also a supporter of IAR, so I'm not seeking biased help.) I'm sorry if you see this as a waste of time. Yet if you intend to continue using your wiki-fu to edit thousands more articles than anyone else, it's productive to work on your discussion style with "more minor contributors". If anything, being a longtime editor gives one increased responsibility in a discussion, not less. Metaeducation 10:10, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for keeping me in the loop re. the discussion moves. I am afraid that I find Metaeducation's philosophies and beliefs are rather insulting and arrogant. Its all very well trying to make rules to force your opinions on the community but I think he has no idea just how many pages are out there with post-nominal initials in the first sentence. Virtually every British military figure plus a lot of others, from Winston Churchill to Paul McCartney and Elton John. Changing all those will keep him very busy and start a lot of edit wars! Dabbler 04:51, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

RE:notification of moves, you're welcome.

Clearly I have no interest in edit wars, or I wouldn't be trying to build policy consensus. I've emphasized that the key is seeing some kind of guidance given—even if it's just a canonization of current practices, or a formal statement that the choices are left to the discretion of the article stakeholders. I am entitled to my opinion, and y'all are entitled to yours, so just say what they are and let the personal comments drop out of the equation.

I respect the hard work you and the other people on the military projects do. But bringing outside perspective on style is a good thing for creating articles for a general audience. The nominals issue is interesting to at least a few people other than myself, and there is learning for everyone as we go along about what works and doesn't work in the wiki process. If I get to experience the wonder of an RfC along the way, I guess that's kind of a mixed blessing...though I would hate to waste the broader community's time with a personality issue. (And I'd sure feel lame to not be able to see this worked out to a pleasant resolution in "private"). Metaeducation 11:17, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Just to clarify, my thanks to our host here was for a separate note directly on my Talk page. Dabbler 16:39, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Just to clarify, I left you a note first [5], and I would appreciate receiving a thanks.

As an aside, this morning I woke up with a further thought on how on earth this discussion ever happened, and I realized perhaps you two fundamentally misread "FWIW, my American friends and I feel...". What I meant was—literally—I and my friends that I chat with, who happen to be Americans—and who I have showed the issue to—feel the letters compromise readability. It's not "All Americans, whom I will rhetorically call my 'friends', feel..." That's not what I wrote. If I had written the latter it would have been uncool (though again, I feel the treatment here would be unjustified even then). Metaeducation 19:12, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

Given that you were the one who moved the discussion in the first place, I am not sure that the simple related act informing me justifies me of thanking you, especially after the personal attacks on me and your opinion of my "culture" "lack of style" and other "attitudes", supposedly by your "friend". I don't fight with people or do the RfC thing, I withdraw if people are unreasonable. I prefer to keep on doing what I think is correct. You may make any rule you want and try and enforce it, but I feel secure in the knowledge that there are hundreds of articles out there with post-nominal initials in the first line, probably most of the prominent British people of the last couple of centuries. You will be hard put to enforce a rule like that without a lot of work and major edit fights. You may win in one or two places briefly but in the end a nonsense rule will be ignored by the working community. Dabbler 00:03, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

So Gentlemen, it would seem the best we can hope for on this issue is to agree to disagree. Since there is no clear consensus, not only between us three but in general. For now, then, the matter is left, perhaps as it should be, to individual authors/editors/contributors to deal with as they see fit. Although this is bound to lead to further edit conflicts (Hey, C'est la Wiki:) Better that than to have some formal, controversial rule foisted upon the community, which as Dabbler points out will be hard to enforce and generally ignored if not rightly defied. My own opinion: PNIs should be included where appropriate. Not only out of respect for their subjects and tradition, but for the sake of relevency and comprehensiveness. And as long as the most important titles are included, in the propoer order, then it really does not matter if they appear in the introductory line or a biobox (Though listing them in both is argueably a bit much). What is strange in Sir Richard's case is, this issue was not raised before, during or after his arti's FAC, only after it reached the mainpage. Despite the fact it was co-authored by Leithp and carefully looked at by SoLando and Loopy, all Her Majesty's loyal subjects. While I have no intention of reporting my friends to QEII or the Privy Council, the Point here is, even among those who should abide by PNI conventions, they are not always followed. Cheers--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 04:56, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Main page shenanigans

It all seems to have died down now, do you have any regrets about letting O'Connor go up for the main page? You seem to have done a good job reverting the vandalism. Sorry I couldn't be more help, I was away from computers for most of the day watching rugby. I blocked a couple of vandals and talked to that time-waster on my talk page, but that was about it. I blocked him for personal attacks, as I should have done some time ago. Anyway, hope you had a good christmas. Leithp (talk) 23:28, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

You did your fair share of vandal slapping. And banning those IP Freelys helped too. But the regular patrol did more than both of us together. It was rather heartening to see strangers so readily come to the defense of our work. The RC Patrol and CV Unit Rock! Except for some minor editing conflicts (C above) it wasn't too bad. I would'nt mind doing it again. Though I must admit, next time I won't be in such a hurry to beg Raul to put it up there. Spawn Man, PhilX are you reading this bros? This shall be your "Reward" for getting an article on the main page (Evil laughs). X-mas was quiet, peaceful...unstressed...the best kind really. Visited with my Sister, talked with my uncle. Ate lots of assorted, delicious Key lime pastries, washed em down with Guinness and consequently slept a lot. Typing of unstress, Good move banning that abusive boron. He calls us Fascists then Communists, completely oblivious to the contradiction there, Comrade. Then he lectures us about the "enormous creditability problem, which WIKI has been recently exposed to have." Not realizing the entire Seigenthaler incident he's alluding to was caused by exactly the same sort of anon idiot as himself getting his yayas off by injecting the same sorts of libellous crap. "Beam me up Scotty, there is life here...but no sign of intelligence":> --R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 04:27, 27 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Meat Grinder

A RFC has been filed for questionable user conduct.

Regarding User:Monicasdude. Please join in at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Monicasdude 2.

- Cheers, Mailer Diablo 15:13, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, I will see you (and many others as well:) there--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 16:22, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

• You'll have to write up the Dinosaur case yourself though, I spent too much time on the original RfC to write for you. Sorry. :P Man, this RfC looks more like an ArbCom format. :P - Mailer Diablo 16:29, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

No problemo, Fait accompli. Besides, the Dino case is really just more supporting evidence for yours. Oh this is only a "Hearing", ArbCom (the true Meat Grinder) is the "Trial".:> Cheers--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 16:56, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Hehehe...Reminds me of a fellow sysop's userpage, it reads "If this link is blue, then I'm really in trouble". - Mailer Diablo 22:01, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

I signed my name on one of the voting thingys, don't know what I should do next. But anyway, I'm going to be involved at home with New Years etc etc, so I wont be too involved. Merry Christmas by the way! Anyway, if they need it, put that I found Monicasdude's conduct questionable, but that I was probably partly responsible as well. I don't really have a huge beef with him, it was rather just a hinderence at the time. See ya buddy...... Spawn Man 05:47, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

See, you admit your fair share of the blame and take responsibility for it. That shows charachter and reasonableness. Plus it puts you up in the game. You went out of your way to address Moni's criticisms...I would have told him to edit it himself or shove off:> Hope you agree with my statement...it was'nt too off the mark was it? I only wanted to summerize how this mess got started, then maybe let you elaborate if you wished...which you did, to good effect. Check you on the wildside bro,--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 19:49, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Plus! Did you notice dinosaur is set to be featured on the 1st of January? Awesome aye? Spawn Man 06:00, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

Why no, HYAH! Good news! And fast too. Awesome ineedy Ayyye! Maybe we should share the news with Moni-nucleosis, so he/she/it can share in the joy and maybe DINO-SIZE IT. Prepare yourself, though...Not just for vandals but for a lot of well-meaning but misguided neophyte editors who want to make various "improvements" to it.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 19:49, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] same ghost in the machine as on usenet?

Hi, Are you the same ghost in the machine who used to post on usenet on math/computer/science related topics? BostonMA 16:53, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Hi, no, but thanks for stopping by :>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 16:57, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

• Oh no! Clones! :P - Mailer Diablo 21:58, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Esperanza elections

Thanks for voting for me in the Esperanza elections. I've been appointed to the Advisory Committee, thanks to your show of confidence in me. I'll do my best to make you proud, but please feel free to ask me for help at any time or to give me tips as to what you would like to do. Thanks for being an active member of Esperanza! I'll see you around. Titoxd^{(?!? - help us)} 00:48, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

You are most AAAAAACHOOO Welcome! (Sorry my pollen allergies are acting up:). I've seen you in action and know our confidence is well placed. Congrats and Happy new year fellow Esperanzian!--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 03:14, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

59 is that all?! Sorry, but the new, minimal, agreed upon criteria is now 60 votes. Sorry, but you will have to turn in your mop and reapply:> Seriously, CONGRATS and I know you'll make a fine addition to the Cabal,--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 05:56, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for supporting me in my rough vote to become an admin guy. I hope you enjoyed the newest Terry Gilliam film. I also have a love for dystopic vision of the future and love the movie Brazil and 12 Monkeys. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 21:41, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

Glad to have helped, sorry you didn't make it this time. Should you decide to run again, which I hope you will, rest assured you shall have my support again. We "geezers" must stick together afterall:). Yes dystopian films and literature are far more fun than the increasingly dystopian present we seem stuck in. Cheers, --R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 02:51, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Happy new year

Happy new year friend , thanls for all the support you are givng me and sorry for my late on postin about the late empire, I'm trying to uses different source from vegetiou like Ammianus Marcellinus and now i can understand better a couple of things, i'll post the the section in a few time . F.S.S.D --Philx 16:54, 1 January 2006 (UTC)

Why thanks Phil! Felice Nuovo Anno Amico! Yes it is always nice to have good, multiple sources when you can find them. This is often difficult when dealing with arcane historical matters such as the late empire. About our friends, the Auxilia Paltinae, I'm guessing they were originally members of some form of Germanic Guard unit like the Germani Corporis Custodes. When Constantine disbanded the Praetorians, he sent some, the Legiones Palatinae to the Limitanei legions on the frontiers (I'm assuming these were the ones he thought least loyal or most discontent), others, the Vexillationes Palatinae to the Comitatenses, and the Auxilia, of course went to various Cohors Auxilia. But these "Palace units" proved their worth, so they became part of the regular army establishment under Constan's successors. Mind you, this is only MY interpretation as rereading Vegi. I dislike putting guesses, even educated ones, in articles unless it screams out for something rather than nothing. I don't see where we have this problem...yet. Again, take your time, there is no rushing perfection:> Our only deadlines are the ones we set for ourselves. Ciao and here's to a happier 06!--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 03:54, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

You are right my friend, but , peraphs you have an english translation that is always not complete as the latin original, I'm taking my time because i don't want make any mistake, and due to overstress of my work. but no pronlem mate, i'll postt the section in a few time . --Philx 12:13, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

You're right also friend, it is an English translation. Unlike yours, my Latin is not up to the task. Sapere Aude!--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 02:16, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

hey man wasn't saying that your latin isn't good enough! Was saying that "probably" translation miss something, no need to argue with you my friend ! --Philx 15:13, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

I know my friend, what I meant was, translations can be problematic. Especially when you don't know enough of the language to double check, which is true in my case. I wanted to take Latin in H. School, but it was'nt offered so I ended up taking French instead. Which is useful for the Napoleonic Wars, but not the late Imperium of Vegi :> Spiritus.S.S.D --R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 03:13, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Question

I've uploaded an image onto wikipedia. It is on my user page, but isn't showing. Is it just me or can neither of us see it? Plus is the licence I put on it suitable? I want to reserve the right to claim it at any point & want to be able to have my name attributed ot it, so like no one can go "This is my photo". Can you please help? I desperately need help... Spawn Man 03:33, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

It's showing now.... but I still need advice on the licencing part. I don't want my cat being misused... Spawn Man 04:57, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

No need to PANIC, one of the image servers appeared to be down for a while..a prelude to the whole shebang temporarily going boom. Twas only a Glitch in the System. Now about the photo, can I see it? Link me bro... As for your cat being misused, I keep mine indoors at all times. But should that fail, there's always ducttape (Evil grin)--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 05:26, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Oh you mean the pic of Smokey? (What a cutie! I love pink kitty noses). You have it tagged under GNU. Think there is an attribution where you can claim authorship, use it on WIKI but still reserve some rights. You might prefer that one. SIGH It's getting to the point where we are going to have to memorize and understand all possible image license tags. Bloody Instruction creep. "First thing we do, kill all the lawyers."--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 05:38, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] TFC

The old game? I've only been playing for a couple years.. but you do seem familiar. - Evil saltine 19:41, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

I've been playing for only 6 years..well 6 as of 08/05;> So we prolly have met on a field of Gibs somewhere at some point. Do you go Demo a lot? --R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 04:07, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] HELLO! C3PO!

This bot, as it currently operates, is a menace. It not simply alters content, but removes and marks it for deletion. The entire point of policing images for copyright vios is so Jimbo won't get sued. This means being able to DISCRIMINATE between Orphan images which pose a high risk of this from those which donot. So please explain how a map of The Tetrarchy of Diocletian or a photo of an ancient bas relief potraying members of the Praetorian Guard or of the British army's Military Cross fits this criteria? At the very LEAST your bot should INFORM the uploader of the problem. This should be a small task for an expert programmer such as yourself. There are certain jobs for which bots are unsuitable. Deciding which content should be removed or deleted is certainly among them. Please turn it off and keep it off until it is improved. Thanks--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 09:47, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Before ranting, please familiarize yourself with exactly what the bot does. All it does is search for images that some editor has already tagged with {{nosource}}, {{unknown}}, or equivalent, and removes those images from articles. It does not tag images for deletion, and it does not delete content. Oh yes, and the bot hasn't been running since early New Years' Day. --Carnildo 19:44, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

OrphanBot does more than simply remove tagged articles. It also patrols for images it deems "unsourced" and captions it deems "too long". You completely ignored the points and issues I raised. How do those three images I listed, pose a grave danger of a copy-vio lawsuit? In many cases, these images had been on the 'Pedia long before the Jihad against unsourced images was launched. They are clearly being used in a FAIR manner, and even if on some remote planet a lawsuit were filled, it would be laughed out of court or ignored. As would the map Image:Map Gaul.gif, which your bot removed from NINE pages!!! In some cases it has even removed long standing images from long ago FEATURED ARTICLES. Please explain this- Found unsourced image Image:Blackadder.jpg in Wikipedia:Today's featured article/April 2005. It did'nt remove it, but it did see it as unsourced. Clearly this image SHOULD NOT BE REMOVED but your bot for some reason deemed it should. It therefore should not be removing ANYTHING. There is a term for mindlessly removing or altering information without regard to context, content or discussion...VANDALISM. Strong term I know, but apt in this case...and one I would not use if you had bothered to program it to inform the uploader of an image's status and place a note or tag on the article's discussion page. Much as I love technology and the idea of it making our lives easier, we must admit there are many tasks bots cannot nor SHOULD not be doing. Making what are effectively EDITORIAL DECISIONS are certainly among them. I see from the number of objections, complaints and suggestions on your talkpage, I'm not alone. Good thing for you, you ran it over the holidays when far fewer people were around, or you would have gotten a lot more complaints. By all means, use it to locate images which you think may be problematic, then REPORT what it finds to you and other interested parties. But the actual decision on what needs to be removed or deleted is best left in the hands of us frail, "meatbot" humans:> Please consider these points and suggestions before you run it again. Thanks--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 06:53, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

What you see on my talkpage is a number of editors who don't understand what OrphanBot is doing. "Caption too long" is a warning to me, the operator of the bot, that the bot might have made a mistake and removed a paragraph, instead of an image. "Found unsourced image" is a warning to me, the operator of the bot, that OrphanBot found a tagged image in an unusual location, such as the "today's featured article" image you mentioned. As I said before, please try to understand what OrphanBot is doing before you complain. --09:16, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

I know what your bot does, sir. I've spent a good deal of the last two evenings trying to track down and revert some of the damage it has done. These are not frivillous or questionable images either, but helpful, informative and interesting maps, paintings and photos which are CLEARLY being used in a FAIR manner in historical articles. On the plus side, I'm glad it keeps open logs and you've programmed some safeguards into it. But it needs to STOP removing content without regard to context. Your bot has serious technical and philosophical issues which need to be delt with before you unleash it again. Perferably at a point in time which is not a major holiday.--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 14:26, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Take it up with Jimbo, then. He declared that images with unknown source or unknown copyright information need to be deleted. I've just been assisting in the cleanup. --Carnildo 18:08, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Nice Nuremberg Defense. So by the same logic, if Jimbo suddenly decided one day that INLINE citations are to be required for every article, then it would be justified in your mind to create a bot which would delete all text passages which lack sources. You may call removing content without regard to context clean-up, sir, but to me it is effectively vandalism. Very well, since you refuse to be reasonable and your bot incapable of it, I will, reluctantly, contact Jimbo himself on the matter. It raises some larger issues which need to be addressed--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 02:55, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Requesting backup

I've replied here to try and keep the discussion in one place; suffice it to say the general mood is pretty ugly right now. —Kirill Lokshin 14:22, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Roger that bro. Plus User:Shauri and User:Wiglaf are gone, I been involved with two Rfcs and just had an angry spat over Post Nominals and discussion page refactoring. Not much Wiki-love at the moment. Leithp has helped by filling my userpage with naked chicks though.:>--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 14:46, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Wiglaf as well? Shit..... Leithp (talk) 15:13, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

I still cannot bring myself to post goodbyes on their talkpages. Have neither the will nor the words :<<--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 02:57, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] My RFC

Hi, RDH, I was trying not to comment on my own request for comments until it seemed that everyone involved had given an opinion, but I have to thank you for saying "Talrias is one of the most thoughtful, fair-minded admins I know of." That's very kind of you to say. Maybe you just don't know any other admins. :) Talrias (t | e | c) 12:24, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

Hi Talrias! Yes, admins I know a few :> But I've seen enough of your actions to justify my conclusion and oppose your Rfc...Sorry;> The way you handled the earlier spat between between Giano, Bishonen and myself, your well considered proposals for Rfa reform. Granted, I'm not familar first hand with the incident involving Marsden, but the very fact you are willing to file an Rfc against yourself in order to admit any wrongs and learn from them shows true charachter. You have my repect, Sir, and this is something I don't hand out casually. Cheers--R.D.H. (Ghost In The Machine) 02:16, 8 January 2006 (UTC)(Or simply Ghost to his friends:)