User talk:Shalom Yechiel/Archives/June 2007

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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


Contents

i know you!

Yechiel, i know you, you leigned at adams street and came over to my house alot--we go way back!Rubidubi 01:17, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Your RfA

There's a question on your RfA which you need to answer quickly to avoid a snowball, I fear. Good luck --Steve (Stephen) talk 01:37, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Wow, thanks for the heads-up. YechielMan 01:49, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi. ... I see that you withdrew your RfA. ... I am surprised at how many people opposed you for the googlebombing issue, which took place 17 months ago, and also that two joke edits could outweight 6000 positive contributions. I truly hope this will not discourage you too much and will not make editing Wikipedia any less enjoyable for you. As for "what will convince [people] of [your] integrity", I'll leave that to the opposers, as I am already convinced. Best, Black Falcon (Talk) 22:53, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

P.S. Though I share your frustration, my opinion is that you should disclose everything the next time you run. At the very least, if you don't disclose the information, someone else surely will. -- Black Falcon (Talk) 22:53, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention

I'm a bit confused about this. I thought the purpose of the report page was to solicit admin attention, not general discussion. So when you responded there, I assumed you'd passed an RfA while I was on wikibreak, and were declining to block Mr. "Blow Me". Because of this, I wound up going through other channels, which took a lot of time. I may well have needed to do that, anyway, as the admin who later responded didn't think the name was offensive enough. At the same time, I feel your commenting there was a bit misleading. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 02:01, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

I did not intend to mislead you; it was a misunderstanding. The WP:UAA system is new, so confusion will last a while until everyone figures out how it really works in practice. My comment was to clarify the basis for blocking or not blocking the user, rather than to issue a final ruling. Perhaps I should have made my intention clear by introducing the word "Comment" as is common in other discussions.
As I understand it, the reason UAA replaced WP:RFCN is that the discussions were becoming excessive, and deciding that a username violates policy is a simple matter in most cases. (If you read the relevant MFD discussions, it's more complicated.) Although I'm not an admin, I find the issue curious, and I happened to stop by when your case was active. I think it's helpful to provide administrators with additional information they might need, since you didn't clarify what about the username was offensive. In the future, if you see an unclear post on a noticeboard, you are free to clarify its intent - and again, I should have used the word "comment" in order not to confuse you. The word "administrators" in the page title is not meant to scare you away. :)
Best regards. YechielMan 02:56, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. I assure you, I am neither confused nor "scared" by the process at WP:UAA. Non-admins posting their opinions there is really not the point of that page. The page is not a discussion page, it is only to post usernames believed to be in violation of policy and then have them blocked, or not, much as the process works at AIV. Only an admin can enact the block, so it is only proper, imho, for an admin to reply there. When dialogue clutters up the page, it winds up being moved elsewhere. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 03:29, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

  • That's a reasonable point, and does reflect the original intent of Ryan Postlethwaite and others who started UAA. I'll keep a little more restraint in my future visits there. YechielMan 03:34, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
As an admin with UAA on my watchlist, I appreciate all comments and opinion about a name! --Steve (Stephen) talk 06:01, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

RfC

Just wanted to let you know that I opened an RfC on myself in response to the concerns raised during my RfA over my actions in the Gary Weiss dispute. The RfC is located here and I welcome any comments or questions you may have. CLA 09:37, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

adobeacrobatreader

Hey there YechielMan, just thought I'd come here to offer you this advice as I saw what you wrote about that "adobeacrobatreader" article on your RfA, and your views are reflected by process. The process for speedying such articles goes like this: 1) Identified as duplicate, redirect to existing article. 2) Identified as unlikely redirect, speedy under CSD R3. Just thought you might find this helpful! Have a nice day, - Zeibura S. Kathau (Info | Talk) 16:52, 3 June 2007 (UTC)


RapidWeaver

1. My changes to RapidWeaver contain useful content. 2. This article was in the process of being created in multiple saves, and was deleted way to soon after the initial creation. 3. IT IS NOT ADVERTISING FOR ANY COMPANY. ESPECIALLY NOT BLATANT ADVERTISING. I am not promoting any company, product, group, service, or person. I am unaffiliated. It is intended to be all inclusive resource. 4. IT IS NOT SPAM. Taylorluker 16:53, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

RapidWeaver discussion

No, there is no misunderstanding on my part. The work I was doing was originally intended to be on the RapidWeaver page. When that work was deleted in its entirety, I took the exact same work and posted it on my user page. I made some additions to that work, on my user page. Then someone deleted my entire user page. Right, I would of been happy to remove the price list, no one even mentioned that before either deletion. Actually, two people, on separate occasions decided to remove the whole project that I had been working on. I am not advertising in any way. I am simply listing the prices as a reference.

If one looks at the list, without the prices, there is no remote way it can be construed as being an advertisement. The current RapidWeaver lists the third party developers with less thoroughness, clarity and detail.

The bottom line is this: Where can I put the work that I have done? Preferably with the prices, worse case without the prices. Ideally, the invaluable links and information will be accessed by everyone. THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IS THAT SOMEONE CAN NOT JUST COME, RANDOMLY ON A WHIM, WITH GIVING WARNING, WITH DEFINING, DISCUSSING OR DEFENDING THEIR ARGUMENT, WITHOUT ASKING ME TO CHANGE THE ARTICLE, AND DELETE THE ENTIRE ARTICLE (WITHIN SECONDS).

our comments

G'day Yechiel,

thanks for your message. Regarding your "harsh tone", don't sweat it. I've heard (and said!) worse. You're a long way from being uncivil, so no worries. The article Edward Behr (food writer) was clearly not a speedy candidate; whether it should be deleted by AfD or not is debatable (which is why it's being debated, ahem). If a user wants to point to an article you incorrectly tagged for speedy deletion and say, "That's why I don't trust him with the ability to delete stuff", that's his business, but it doesn't strike me as an entirely unreasonable thing to say.

As far as good faith goes, you may find it useful to re-read your nomination at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Edward Behr (food writer); I am not the only one to jump to the conclusion that you nominated the article for more reasons than a genuine belief it doesn't belong on Wikipedia. Something like, "I nominated this for speedy deletion, but it was rejected. However, I do not believe the article is appropriate for Wikipedia, so I am bringing it to AfD." would have done wonders for your reputation, as opposed to, "I have an axe to grind. I tagged this page for speedy A7 deletion, it was declined, and someone used it as a reason to oppose my RFA."

I also commented on your RfA, and you responded. Walton has already pointed out an approach you may not have considered re: speedying duplicates. You've already answered your own question about blocking. Look, at the end of the day, you did something (in my own view, which may not accord with anyone else's) rather petty. I don't believe the article should be deleted, and I don't support your RfA. However, I have nothing against you, and may support a bid for adminship, given time and a demonstration that you can let things slide. No worries. Cheers, fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 10:50, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Your request for adminship.

The best advice I can give you is this: remain positive, and treat your RfA as a large-scale editor review (I did these with mine). You are a person able to learn from your mistakes, and that's an excellent sign. Everyone has made mistakes both here on Wikipedia and in real life, YechielMan (I certainly have). My other suggestion is that you avoid another self-nomination; it may not be wise to self-nominate again. However, these are only my suggestions so you are free to ignore them. :) Good luck. Acalamari 22:19, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the comment about not self-nominating again. I came to that conclusion independently, so it's good to see it confirmed. YechielMan 18:12, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

My advice

Next time, don't mention the I vandalized thing. You might want to edit a 1000 thousand more times, so your disruptive edits are well hidden. It's what I would do. RuneWiki777 22:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

You should make a fancy signature for yourself. Some people rate others according to their sigs. People like others that have fancy ones. Makes yours flashy, then apply again!

These two strike me as Incredibly Bad Advice. People actually wander around Wikipedia spouting stuff like that? Good grief. fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 13:42, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Your recent vandalism: May 28

Since you have admitted to editing as 69.201.182.76 (talk · contribs) I have found some more "joke" edits and vandalism, for which you were warned on your IP page.[1] I don't want to beat a dead horse here, but this reinforces my feelings that you are not really a "reformed" vandal. Further, it seems you are not averse to using alternate identities to vandalise in secret. In particular, the Devil's Advocate vandalism is quite harmful, as it disrupted links to 10 pages. The placing of speedy deletes on pages for a joke, one of them a featured article, did not result in deletions,[2] [3], and arguably one of them, Vandalism (band) is nn, but your reason really wasn't funny, and one really worries what would have happened to some of those pages were you granted the admin tools. *shakes head in dismay* - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 23:01, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh my god!! You did this much vandalism?! RuneWiki777 18:45, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Guilty as charged. I encourage you to monitor the editing patterns of my IP address if you are concerned that any of this is likely to continue. I certainly don't intend to resume my wayward activity under any account or IP. YechielMan 18:21, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

You claimed during your RfA that you had stopped vandalizing months ago. By your own admission above, that was a lie. Why on earth should we believe you now? You are not a new user; the above was not a newbie mistake; it was deliberate vandalism that caused disruption to 10 wikis. It should not be the job of other editors to "monitor" you. While blocks are supposed to be preventative, not punitive, I still think you deserve a block for this. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 21:03, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

I think that would require an WP:RFC on user conduct. I am willing to submit to such an investigation if you think it is better than just letting the past remain in the past. If you do decide to start an RFC, please leave me a note, and I will cooperate. YechielMan 01:10, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

User:YechielMan/Other stuff/RFA review

As you probably know, I supported you strongly in your RfA. And I stick by that now, despite your (honest, which I applaud) showing off all of your vandalism etc. Personally (and this opinion obviously isn't echoed by the majority) I think that your honesty, combined with the fact that you haven't done anything "bad" in a very long time, means that opposing you is madness. Sheer madness.

My only comments are concerning the being a dick section. I know you don't have to withdraw, but it does look good to see someone mature enough to "quit whilst they're ahead." Concerning the AfD, I still personally think that you just shouldn't mention RfA outside the RfA page (except on your user page with the RfA banner)...it just annoys people.

Anyway, I really don't know how to help you. But if you need to talk etc., I'm always happy to. Good luck next time. G1ggy! Review me! 23:18, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Second most of that. Man, I'm really sorry about what happened. I'm not sure though whether there is much you can do right now besides not doing fun edits. Seems to be rough times at RfA. Just stick around and continue business as usual. Please keep in mind that this comes from someone so unpopular that even if I pushed some 10 or 20 articles to FA status (which I intend to do real soon now), any attempt at RfA would get snowballed before I could even type in w-i-t-h-d-r... However, this is just a quick first note. I'll read your subpage closely and may comment more in-depth there. —AldeBaer 01:32, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Parallels

I understand your frustration very well. If you glance over at my RfA, you'll see many of the oppose reasons on your RfA are similar to mine. It is, unfortunately, all too easy to dig up the past and new users simply don't know better. It is extremely difficult to get people to see us as we are now, and not as those who made some immature edits so long ago.

I changed my vote from Neutral to Support. This has got to be one of the most major mistakes I'll ever make. It was supposed to be that you wouldn't abuse them ! Wouldn't! And now, your RfA is closed and I can't fix it. At least it made a few laugh. Cheers! Dfrg.msc 06:00, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

DYK

Updated DYK query Did you know? was updated. On June 5, 2007, a fact from the article Ribbon diagram, which you recently nominated, has been featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:00, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

My RfA ...

Hi. My RfA was closed as "successful" not long ago and I have been sysopped. I want to once more say thanks for nominating me. As for your RfA, I'll just reiterate my hope that you'll not let this bring you down. If you remember, please let me know when you're ready to run again and I will support you in whatever way you think best. Best, Black Falcon (Talk) 05:23, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Hello

I've made a comment here like the old windbag I am. Please take the advice in the spirit with which it's intended. --Dweller 13:42, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

bullocks

I noticed your comment about the history of Camp Ramah in Glen Spey. Sad to say, it is the honest to God truth. I added a reference to the fire department that carried out the deed and describes it as a great learning experience.--Gilabrand 06:31, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Xaverian High School edit war

Take a look at latest additions to User talk:Xaverianhs for more information on this topic.
—  Jim Dunning  talk  :  18:53, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

AfD - Lunds ASK

Since you commented on the first AfD you may wish to comment on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lunds ASK (2nd nomination). Please note: I am alerting all editors on both sides of the argument last time per Wikipedia policy. BlueValour 23:01, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Rfa

Just dropping by to say "thank you" for supporting me in my recent my RfA. I passed the vote, and am now an admin. It will take me some getting used to with the new tools, but I thank you again for the trust. Have a good one, and, as always, happy editing! Jmlk17 04:59, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

That's me...

Dear Shalom Yechiel/Archives, thanks for your support in my recent RfA, it was, however, unsuccessful. I am not the type of editor to be disheartened by such a result, and have gained much experience. If you have anything to contribute by way of improvements or comments, please don’t hesitate to tell me.

I will run again. Until then, Cheers, Dfrg.msc 07:12, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

User talk:YechielMan/Other stuff/RFA review

Hi YechielMan. You messaged numerous editors' talk pages asking for thoughts on your recent unsuccesful RFA. I noticed a number of editors have done so. It would be a courtesy if you would respond to the comments and questions they were kind enough to give you. Neil ╦ 08:23, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Editor Review

Many thanks to you for the recent editor review that you've posted about my contributions to Wikipedia. Lwalt (talk ☯ contribs) 12:09, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hicks Building

Hi. Thanks for your comment on the above page regarding Hicks Building. It is truely lovely for another editor to describe my work as "beautifully written"!! I was beaming! L.J.Skinnerwot|I did 00:44, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Jenn Hanna afd

Thanks for withdrawing the article. I admit, it needs some sources, and it's one of my plans to do so. I assure you that all the articles I create in relation to curling are notable, although I admit some articles created by others are border line. I should probably spend some time sourcing some of the Jenn Hanna article when I get a chance. -- Earl Andrew - talk 06:16, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Culture in Omaha

Thanks for the Barnstar - its my first, and I'm excited! I knew there was a reason I've sharpened my citation skills! Seriously, thanks. I added fact to DYK, so we'll see where that goes - thanks for the advice there, too. Appreciations for all of it. – Freechild (Hey ya. | edits) 10:07, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting vandalism to my user page!--Diniz (talk) 12:06, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Re: Editor review

Thanks a lot! Daniil Maslyuk 18:45, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Possible mistake

Assuming your comment here was directed at me, I'm neither Irish nor live in Ireland. One Night In Hackney303 06:24, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't mind, it's a popular misconception. Hackney refers to the London Borough of Hackney, but I don't live there either... One Night In Hackney303 06:36, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

My RFA

 Hello Shalom Yechiel/Archives/June 2007, I just wanted to thank you for giving your comments at my recent RFA. While it didnt pass (I withdrew after it became apparent that the RFA was "sinking like the titanic" =]), I will try to focus on and build upon your comments, and the comments of all the other Wikipedians who participated. Thanks again for voicing your opinion, and I wish you very happy editing! Anonymous Dissident Utter 06:23, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Thanks a lot for the message. I think the key is to not take your losses harshly, and I've tried to stick to that. The failing of my RFA has merely served to spur me forward, encouragement for me to push myself forever forward. I look forward to my next RFA, however far that be down the track, with high hopes and steadfast conviction. Kind reagrds, Anonymous Dissident Utter 06:36, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Hooray!

The Barnstar of Good Humor
I award you the Barnstar Of Good Humor for your efforts to save BJAODN, and helping to keep Wikipedia a little bit fun IvanKnight69 09:25, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

BLP

Why would you advise me to drop it?--Lucy-marie 16:26, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

so I'm willing to assume, or at least hope, that One Night in Hackney had the best interests of Wikipedia in mind - before I take that the wrong way, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt here. These are some of the articles I stubbed yesterday
All egregious violations of WP:BLP wouldn't you agree? I left a message withe the relevant WikiProject here about each article I'd stubbed. I wasn't even looking for BLP problems, I was fixing the incorrect use of categories such as this, this and this. I also found articles which are in dire need of merging such as the merge I've proposed for New Year Murders. My honest opinion is that it would be helpful if certain editors spent as much time sourcing unsourced biographies of living people as they do complaining at the helpdesk Wikipedia would be a much better place. One Night In Hackney303 14:01, 12 June 2007 (UTC)
Well the problem is policy doesn't allow for that, it clearly states Unsourced or poorly sourced contentious material — whether negative, positive, or just highly questionable — about living persons should be removed immediately and without discussion from Wikipedia articles. So there was no viable alternative to stubbing, other than WP:CSD#G10 which allows for the speedy deletion of an unsourced negative biography if there is no sourced version that can be reverted to. Had I wanted to, I could have easily tagged them all for speedy deletion, but I stubbed them and left a message at the relevant WikiProject so they could hopefully be improved. Therefore my intention wasn't some sort of deletion via the back door. One Night In Hackney303 14:19, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Smile


Dfrg.msc has smiled at you, revealing rows, upon rows of gleaming pointed teeth. Wait a minute, that's not Dfrg.msc, it's a dragon! Run! Run for your life! Aaaahhhggg!!! Ahhhhhhaaaa!!!! AAAAGGHHGH!!!!!
This confusing and rather contradictory message is probably supposed to promote WikiLove and hopefully has made your day better, or just weirder. Cheers, Dfrg.msc 06:41, 21 February 2007 (UTC).


Review

Thanks for the review. I really appreciate it. I will take you advice and be the best that I can be. Thanks so much. -- Mattl2001 talk | contribs 10:18, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

SUSPSOCK

Thanks, YechielMan for noticing that. For whatever reason, I missed that, and wasn't paying close attention to the dates. My apologies, and thanks, Cool Bluetalk to me 22:31, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

I would love help on the ethiopian article...

I am trying to translate all the articles in the Hebrew Wikipedia about the Aliyah in Israel (it is well explained there) to the English Wikipeida. I'll be happy if you could help me translate to English other paragraphs in this article while I continue translating the first ones..

If you'd like to I'd be happy if you could translate the paragaphs "הפלאשמורה" and "אתגרי הקליטה בישראל" of this page and send them over to my disscusion page. thanks for the help.. Acidburn24m 15:24, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I am only missing those two paragraphs now.. (The Aliyah of the Jewish Ethiopians) ... should I continue and them them alone or did you already do parts of them or do you plan on doing them ? Acidburn24m 16:52, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

RfA

Thank you visiting and commenting at my RfA, I have tried to expand on my philosophy and answers, and quite a lot has happened since you last commented. I do hope that the new comments address your concerns. Even if they don't, thanks for stopping by! DrKiernan 15:25, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I'd like to join my voice to DrKiernan's: I think his expanded answers and the arguments made in his favour by a number of editors might lead you to change your mind. So if you have a minute, please take a look (not that I'll hold it against you if you don't change your mind of course). Cheers, Pascal.Tesson 21:38, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

UBX's for deletion

I've found several dozen userboxes I would like to propose for deletion because they are ill-humored, divisive, offensive, and unhelpful. One I would like to get rid of immediately is this Boston Red Sox fan UBX, which seems to have made its way around. I fear that Yankees fans will be highly offended by it, and think it might be a good candidate for speedy deletion because it is a such a divisive topic. Also, there are several others I'd like to get rid of. You seem to know a lot about the deletion process and procedures, perhaps you can help me file these UBX's for deletion? Thank you. SqlPac 18:27, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing my AfD

Thanks also for the tip about WP:PROD - I didn't know about that. I guess I should register, but all the good names are gone, and I sometimes get dis- ooh! Shiny! 82.25.185.35 20:12, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Ck lostsword's RfA - Thanks

Image:Admin_mop.PNG Thanks very much for your comment on my recent RfA, which passed successfully at 40/2/1, making me Wikipedia's 1,250th administrator. Your comments were much appreciated, and I will endeavour to fulfil your expectations as an admin, as well as following your suggestions from the discussion.


ck lostsword • T • C

ck lostsword • T • C 18:34, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Re: Userboxes

This is a response to your comments on my talk page. You state that you overreacted to my "no bureaucrats" userbox, in fact you frivolously nominated every single one of my userboxes for deletion because they offended your sense of humor. After your nomination I simply went around looking for userboxes that actually meet the criteria for deletion, in an effort to help you improve Wikipedia. I found about 50 userboxes that actually meet the criteria for deletion policy in about 15 minutes (divisive, offensive, unhelpful, etc.) If it makes you feel any better, only about 4 or 5 of them were actually displayed on your userpage. Nothing is more divisive and offensive to a Yankees fan than the Boston Red Sox. I highly recommend that you review your own user page content and get your own house in order before you go screwing with other people. And leave me alone—I hate bureaucratic types who try to enforce the letter of the law just to screw with people. SqlPac 19:22, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

Raymond Apple (rabbi)

I have rewritten this article adding sources. I would be grateful if you could take a look. Capitalistroadster 06:24, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for the hello and the helpful links- I'll be sure to read them  : )

Kalyna malyna 17:50, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

Contested PROD (moved from top of page)

I am new to Wikipedia and put up 2 articles that I thought were serving a general purpose in increasing knowledge, yet you have flagged them for deletion. I have no idea how this works or why you did it. Can you please let me know what you object to about the articles and what you think would make them acceptable? (Articles were a description of "Passage Meditation", a method of meditation I found out about by attending a retreat and which didn't have an entry on wikipedia even though it seems that thousands of people use it; and on the "Blue Mountain Center of Meditation" where that meditation method is taught)

thanks!

Note: Reply on user talk. YechielMan 16:41, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Latin Alternative

Hello, i'm new on Wiki and i see my article about the list "Thw 250 most important albums of latin alternative" is gonna be removed but i think it could be informative for people who doesn't know about comtemporary latin american music as any rolling stone magazine talks about popular culture; i would like to show us is important as any of those lists are published on Wikipedia, but i don't know what to do. :( Insert non-formatted text here --JICAMARCA 21:29, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

FYI

I've sent you an email. JoshuaZ 01:45, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Hey hey hey!!!

Hey buddy, just checking in to see how it's all going. I've been a tad out of the loop recently, and just wanted to drop by and say hello. Happy editing! Jmlk17 03:47, 20 June 2007 (UTC)


blanking page

Aha, I did not know that! how odd..if it's a rule, which I seriously doubt it is, then I will not blank it. However, you might want to mention the rule that obliges me not to. Thanks.

Mind if I join this discussion?

As a television news junkie, I am required to to ask some very tough questions. Feel free to contact me.

(Aeverine Frathleen Nieves 05:20, 20 June 2007 (UTC))

Thanks re looking at Anti-Zionism

Thanks you for looking impartially into the arguments about the lede even though you didn't feel able to come to a definite decision. --Peter cohen 08:55, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion

Next time get your facts straight before you delete someone elses pages!

Odd One Out 12:27, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Why was my page deleted? I stand by my recommendation to delete, and I will have no further comment on this. YechielMan 12:30, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome!

Hey YechielMan! Thanks for the welcome, I really appreciate it! The table/drop-down menu thingy looks really useful so thanks!

Btw how do you display those labels like "I'm a native English speaker" or "I'm a near native Hebrew speaker" etc...just out of interest because I'd like some similar ones on my user page!

Thanks again! Salamander01234 13:32, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

do we talk like this?

Hi YechielMan. I'm not sure if I'm meant to talk to you on your talkpage or on mine? I'm DuncanCraig1949 who put up the page on Passage Meditation. If you have time to check out Passage Meditation itself then as a jew (like myself) you may find it interesting - it's a way of meditating on sacred texts of all traditions, and there are some superb Jewish texts that I would never have known about if it hadn't been for trying this practice.

Note: I responded at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Passage Meditation. YechielMan 17:52, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Theatre Under The Stars (Houston)

The creator is at it again, I think violating some other rules on 3 reverts, etc. Do I need to make a request for intervention? What is the correct procedure for this? Bearian 16:49, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

comment on deletion monkeys

Thank you; I totally missed (in all the heat and little light flying around WP lately) that your comment was intended as a joke, but I appreciate the willingness to revise your statement. Cheers. 64.126.24.12 21:07, 20 June 2007 (UTC) (-- nae'blis, not logged in)

I was referring to the infinite monkey theorem. The idea of the joke was that more time on Wikipedia doesn't necessarily make you a wiser person. YechielMan 22:42, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the encouragement

Hey YechielMan, really appreciate the encouragement on the editing. Thanks for the suggestions of places to look for help! The Someday 21:37, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Musicals AfD

My apologies for the sheer number of nominations; I definitely don't want to burden anyone. I think I'm done (for now), save for a couple things that, I think, I will be able to do as a group nom. It'll be a couple days before I have it all together, anyway. —  MusicMaker 02:18, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
This barnstar is for all the great work you have done to fight vandalism here. Please keep it up. Cheers! †Sir James Paul† 05:14, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Inappropriate response at Reference desk

I have removed some serious insults you managed to include in your response here. That was totally uncalled for. Please read our official policies No personal attacks and Civility carefully. Then also read Please do not bite the newcomers and the Reference desk guidelines.  --LambiamTalk 09:18, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

You are correct. I will leave an apology note on the IP's talk page in the hope that he might read it. YechielMan 14:13, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User:Selfworm/Userboxes/NotCatholic_(2nd_nomination)

As you are an editor involved with the the previous discussion, I am notifying you that I have relisted it for mfd. Thank you. --Flamgirlant 11:59, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi

My comprehensive reply: [4]. Cheers, RCS 20:37, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Question regarding my Incident report on User:FatherTree

I appreciate your comment. Will he be sanctioned? I see my incident report is no longer listed. Should I relist it? I'd appreciate your advice here. Thanks. DPetersontalk 23:54, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

OK, thank you. DPetersontalk 11:36, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Linking; User: Mind Swapper

Hi there, Thanks for warning me. I understood the implications clearly. Mind Swapper 06:29, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

improving the general level of civility?

I noticed your comment on User:YechielMan/Other stuff/RFA review about the level of incivilty you experienced during your RfA.

I found it a bit ironic, because I didn't find your comment on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brahim Yadel to be entirely civil.

Unfortunately, the corps of administrators includes some administrators who seem to think their eelvation to administratorship means they no long have to comply with WP:CIV. I only want wikipedians who can WP:AGF, refrain from inappropriate sarcasm, and have the patience to reply to civil comments, to become administratrators.

FWIW Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Guantanamo Bay detainment camp was created by Crzrussian. As you can see Crzrussion had nominated Ibrahim Daif Allah Neman Al Sehli and Kako Kandahari for deletion. About a dozen other articles had been nominated for deletion at that point. Half a dozen people had asked me to give them a heads-up if other articles were nominated for deletion. I had complied, and he complained that I was "vote-soliciting", which he said was highly frowned upon by regular patrollers of {{afd}}. Well, I am not a regular patroller of {{afd}}, so I didn't know any better. I left this comment after his admonishment. And he created Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Guantanamo Bay detainment camp. It kind of pissed me off at the time. I'd spent several hours working on my file. And he didn't make any effort to explain how deletion sorting worked. IMO Crzrussion is basically an OK guy. But I don't think his nomination, and his participation in this fora, represented his best efforts. Whatever. Forgive and forget.

I don't think your participation in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brahim Yadel show you in your best light. I think patrollers of {{afd}} shouldn't state an opinion on an article's future unless they are prepared to put both the article and its deletion fora on their watchlist. I don't think they should state an opinion unless they are prepared to monitor the replies to their comment. I don't think they should state an opinion unless they are prepared to actually monitor the changes to article under consideration.

Are you thinking of nominating yourself for administrator in future? I have only participated in a couple of RfAs. The only person who wasn't civil in the first one I participated in was the nominee. He turned out to be a disgusting, deceitful sockpuppet -- User:KI. Anyhow, the question I ask of candidates for administrator is whether they think administrators have a greater responsibility to comply with WP:CIV than regular wikipedians.

I'll look in on your comments on a few more {{afd}} fora. Do you want to know whether I think your future comments on {{afd}} fora are compliant with WP:CIV? I am going to try to keep an eye open for your future nominations.

In answer to whether acts of vandalism should be forgiven, if they were your very first edits, yes, I think they should be forgiveable, provided your conduct has been basically unblemished since then.

Candidly Geo Swan 08:58, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you X 100

Thank you very much for supporting my RfA, which closed successfully yesterday... W00t! I hope to be a great admin (and editor) and I'm sure you can tell that my use of a large, boldfaced, capital "T" and a big checkmark image in this generic "thank you" template that I swiped from some other user's Talk Page that I totally mean business! If you need anything in the future or if you see that I've done something incorrectly, please come to my Talk Page and let me know. So now I've got a bunch of reading to do.... see you around! - eo 13:27, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Fatty as a username

Ok then, your reasonibng seems sound, so I'm williing to support your decision. -- Anonymous DissidentTalk

Tour de force

WP:NOT is not a valid reason for speedy deletion. Therefore, I have prodded this article instead, using the same reasoning you did. J Milburn 11:36, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Upasana Vaduthala

I tried to improve the article by adding links and renaming it to Upasana Vaduthala, because as you see both terms exist. The article was written in very bad English so I don't claim I did something awesome. I added tag for orphan too and fiannly i removed the prod. I don't claim that the article should remain but at least now is in better shape and I haven't decided yet if it can get better from someone who know the subject or it's just loss of time. Maybe for could AfD it so we can chekc other users' opinions. I would like your opinion. -- Magioladitis 14:50, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Shane Hagdorn, and others

If there are any of these articles which you wish to keep then you can indicate so on the AfD. It should be noted that they were all PROD-ed for the same reason and they are all up for AfD for the same reason, otherwise this means running 13 AfDs at once, when they will all finish with pretty much the same conclusion, unless they are all sustantially imporved, of course, but I can see no reason for seperate AfDs at the moment. Darrenhusted 16:36, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough. I'm going to remove my comment and sit this one out on the sidelines. No harm, no foul. :) YechielMan 16:37, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
Now unbundled, you may wish to take part again, and use my contribs to track down the others. Darrenhusted 00:23, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Baseball player naming conventions

Thanks for your input into the proposed naming convention for baseball players (made either here or here... or both). Hopefully, the final tweak has been made to the proposed guidelines. If you get a chance, please review them here and add any comments/suggestions/feedback on the talk page. If there are no major issues, we'll put this thing to a straw poll in a few days, and if successful will then submit for inclusion on WP:NC. Thanks again, Caknuck 04:26, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Alegations of state terrorism by the United States

You spelled allegations incorrectly while moving the page. Please move it to the correct spelling and change the redirects. Pablo Talk | Contributions 07:33, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Whoops! Sorry about that! I thinks someone else already fixed it. Shalom Hello 13:21, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the informartion.

The info you gave me is quite helpful. My experience and my paranoia has left me a little overly cautious when it cones to dealing with the empowered. lol. Thanks again Albion moonlight 08:57, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Review

Hi yechiel! I saw your review. thanks for the helpful feedback. i will definitely think about that. Shalom to you! I am also a proud member of the tribe! :-) See you. Steve, --Sm8900 13:07, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Tecmobowl

He is bound and determined to assume ownership of all baseball articles, the inevitable result being that I will be unable to edit ANY baseball articles. You need to review his history of contentiousness and sockpuppetry before taking his side fully. Baseball Bugs 15:25, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

He has said, several times, that he is unwilling to talk to me. So the only solution is to avoid any pages he's editing. Which I have done for the most part, but not totally. His complaint about my "following" him (even when I agree with him) echoes that of his sockpuppet User:El redactor. Baseball Bugs 17:07, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
Um, you realize that Checkuser found that Tecmobowl and El redactor are unrelated. Shalom Hello 17:21, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
I'll let you and User:Irishguy slug this one out. There are ways around checkusers, and I know sockpuppet behavior when I see it. El redactor was no longer needed by Tecmobowl once his own block expired. Baseball Bugs 17:39, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

He has made numerous complaints about me and others. What it comes down to is that he wants to become the owner of all the baseball biography pages, and won't stand for anyone questioning his tactics. Baseball Bugs 17:43, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Here's an example of his viewpoint on things: User:Tecmobowl/links#users harassing me. He was angry that I saw him post that. That's part of the reason he's filed this latest complaint. His complaints have generally been ignored because they can see what he's about. Baseball Bugs 17:45, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Here's the sockpuppet discussion, for your possible amusement. Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Tecmobowl Tecmo got caught, and he's still angry about it. Baseball Bugs 18:31, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

He was, in fact, determined to be a sockpuppet.--Epeefleche 20:47, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
And this involves you how? What is going on with you people. I was not determined to be a sockpuppet. I was banned by an admin who abused his power and prevented me from defending myself. I am not a sock puppet and just don't care anymore, please stop following me around wikipedia. As this is a user's talk page, this is the LAST thing i will say on this topic here. I do not want to clutter his/her page any more than you and baseball bugs already has. One last time: LEAVE ME ALONE!!!!//Tecmobowl 20:52, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

PLEASE NOTE: I am no longer interested in this matter. I will remove any further messages that anyone sends me regarding this matter. Please leave me alone. Thank you. Shalom Hello 20:54, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Ayn baayah. L'hitraot. Call tov.--Epeefleche 21:02, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

FYI, today it was proven that El redactor was Tecmo's sockpuppet, and Tecmo is now under a 1-week suspension due to disruptive behavior. Baseball Bugs 00:18, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Mediation

While I would be happy to participate in a mediation case, there are already two that are going on that involve me and this user: 1 and 2. I have been falsely accused of being a sock and User:Irishguy,an admin, totally abused his powers with regards to his behavior and how he dealt with my opinions. I just want to be left alone. I don't know that you really want to get too involved in this thing, it's a mess. I just want to be left alone. //Tecmobowl 15:42, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

  • Thanks for the note. Hopefully, he'll just leave me alone. //Tecmobowl 19:30, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

My Review

Thanks for your review, do you really believe I have a chance of adminship with my current edit count/contributions?

I have been debating the topic with myself a lot lately, but I am worried about the editcounters, do you think I have a chance of passing?

I'll have a look at the uncat categories, however my first attempt at proper categorization was on iRed Lite and I am still learning the category names etc.

I will go for a RFA iif you beleive I am ready, and if you believe that I would pass - from what I can see, there are a lot of edit counters out there who probably wouldn't like me.

Anyway, thanks, and if you have any more comments please say - I am always looking for things to improve on. Matt/TheFearow (Talk) (Contribs) (Bot) 21:10, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Could you please tell me which issues exactly? I believe I answered most of them sufficiently, as I would at an RFA, however I would like to check which ones I most need to improve on. Thanks! Matt/TheFearow (Talk) (Contribs) (Bot) 22:33, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
I am considering going for an RFA soon, now I have got more into specific articles (still not a huge amount, but i'm not that kind of person), and I aam a sysop on mediawiki.org, so I believe that shows I am trustworthy (I only deleted CAT:CSD and Main_Page once, and I hope blocking jimbo doesn't count), and I have been doing a lot of cleanup work with that. I am also getting more active in AFD's, and I comment on every RFA/B. What I was going to ask, is does your offer to nominate still stand, or should I self-nom? If you are willing, but want me to improve on something first, I definately will. Thanks! Matt/TheFearow (Talk) (Contribs) (Bot) 01:53, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Category renaming

Apologies if i have the wrong person. However User:Kbdank71 has indicated that you are the user responsible for suggesting the name change to the Australian Football (soccer) players category. Unfortunately, it seems you neglected to advertise the discussion on the talk pages of affected articles and most importantly, that of Wikipedia:WikiProject Football (soccer) in Australia, from which a better discussion and understanding of the situation would have taken place and perhaps led to a different outcome. In particular, the 'debate' is utterly ignorant on the efforts at achieving a compromise between editors working on the different football codes in Australia. It in this spirit that i wish to have the debate reopened, so that editors who have been working on the affected articles can have their say. Blackmissionary 05:32, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

RE: Italiavivi's falsified charge of sock puppetry

Yesterday to my surprise I saw that there is a whole controversy about me. I was not informed about this at all. I would wish to have the sock puppet page removed. Below is what I posted at the sock puppet page about me:

The two accounts were in full and independent operation since before the Miriam Shear conflict even started. Thus the accusation based as it is on Yisraeldov being a replacement for Yisraelasper is groundless. Yisraelasper

The Mehadrin bus line was not my cause. You are making canards. The Miriam Shear story I contributed to but it also was not my only one on Wikipedia. Also you continually censored out what I added on the Miriam Shear story. I have no account other one. Worry about your own cases of being blocked and condemned by people rather than starting up again with me. I am not identical with any other user other than myselfself. It so happens my full name includes the name Dov as my second name but I have no other Wikipedia account other than Yisraelasper. If you continue to make trouble I will urge you be banned again as you hinder rather than help. Yisraelasper

Italiavivi I contributed to more than just one article. You claim above that I was a one agenda user and yet you fail to say that my last post on May 2 was on something else a topic I returned to yet. I posted on

May 2 "Talk:Extrasolar moon (The Petition no longer exists)."

I am not identical to Yisraeldov. I also don't live in Israel. I don't have an agenda for separate bus seating. I don't feel there is a need for separate bus seating. The Miriam Shear dispute has been over for months. You kept on though reposting warnings on my user page including on June 12 the date of your posting above after not posting on my site for at least over a month if not longer. No one asked you to. I am going to complain about this attack on me to Wikipedia to have this page removed or otherwise have you banned. What kind of a system is this where the evidence is not reviewed? Anyone with an agenda like Italiavivi can defame someone and that someone is not informed of the charges to be able to make a defense?User:Yisraelasper

Italiavivi I didn't know until now that there was an Egged article. You just make accusations and this you submit as evidence! Yisraelasper

Italiavivi you say that Yisraeldov started contributing in 2007? He was around in June 2006* and I've seen now that the first of his many contributions as far back as I was able to see started in July 2006**. All this was before even the Miriam Shear controversy. How could he be sock puppet for what wasn't yet?


"*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:YisraeldovUser talk:Yisraeldov From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation, search Welcome!

Hello, Yisraeldov, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Help pages Tutorial How to write a great article Manual of Style I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Mak (talk) 05:43, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Your view of RZ is verry limited. Yes there is a MO comunity in Israel, and yes most of them tend to be RZ, but those are not the only or even the majority of Religious Zionists here. --yisraeldov 19:23, 21 June 2006 (UTC)" Yisraelasper

You were supposed to notify me of the charge "Notify the suspected puppetmaster." Instead you just reposted on June 12th 2007 old Miriam Shear article warnings though no one asked you too. Yisraelasper

Jerdon13

Thank you for the advice. --- Efil4tselaer: Resurrected 14:58, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

FilmAid International

You marked FilmAid International for proposed deletion and I deleted it. But because the deletion was contested on my talk page, I have now undeleted it. Just thought you should know. --Ed (Edgar181) 19:16, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

Re: Sock puppet case update

Thanks, but you didn't really need to alert me, since the page was on my watchlist. :P --AAA! (AAAA) 00:10, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

heads up and barnstar

Just a heads up, but I removed the prod from Israel Cultural Excellence Foundation since I'm fairly convinced the organization is notable. I'll rewrite the article at some point for NPOVness.

Also, I want to take this chance to give you a barnstar, since I've been repeatedly impressed every time I've run into your comments:

The Original Barnstar
For your prolific and thoughtful contributions to the workings of Wikipedia nadav (talk) 07:44, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm sure your next RfA will be a breeze. Best, nadav (talk) 07:44, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Re: FYI

Yep, I noticed - had nothing to do with someone finding out your identity either, I'm sure... lol.--DLandTALK 16:45, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

nah...

I don't want to be an admin...for now. I'll wait until I've been here a while, get a few pages up, and such. Cheers, JetLover 20:57, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

But if you wanna nominate someone, there's two guys who I can reccomend. Oysterguitarist and Spartan-James. Cheers, JetLover 21:51, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

re: WP:-( & WP:(

I have reverted your speedy close of the subject RFD. That is not a valid speedy keep reason as links can be fixed. Consensus must be demonstrated for a keep. You cannot unilaterally disregard someone else's opinion. Thanks. -- JLaTondre 22:44, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Socks

Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/222.153.66.204 I noticed you removed the links for the sock puppet case and stated that they were already listed. I first put those links in then I realised that there was another way of doing it and added to the list above, the proper way. It was my first time. Thanks. (Mindys12345(Wonder-Contributor)(<S>))

No problem. Thank you. Shalom Hello 02:51, 28 June 2007 (UTC)


ANI

I noted your edit on ANI. You are not an admin, nor were you involved in the issue in any way. You have no knowledge of the incident other than what you read on the page, and I do not believe it valid to throw away established wikipedia policy just because one of your friends was involved in a dispute. Also please note I have not been in breach of 3RR, which is three reverts over a 24 hour period, not three reverts of a timespan of say a week. Blahman1985 06:29, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't have time to deal with this anymore. I hope you can work it out, and I apologize if I acted out of line. Shalom Hello 21:14, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Sock report

Thank you very much for the investigation. Very nice work. I added what little I could to the report. IrishGuy talk 08:35, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Re: 3RR on ACN Inc.

You made a request to block an editor for 3RR violations on ACN Inc.. At the time of your request, the editor had already been blocked for violating Wikipedia's policy on WP:NPOV, after multiple warnings.

Please note that the editor should be made aware of 3RR prior to blocking the user. If at the expiration of the block, the editor again starts reverting > 3x in 24 hours, you make a report on the Administrator' noticeboard for 3RR violations — which will bring it to the attention of editors who are logged in.

— ERcheck (talk) 23:41, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Image:Water drop animation enhanced small.gif

Hi Shalom Yechiel/Archives. Thank you for your support and kind words in my RfA, which passed with 95 support, 1 oppose, and 1 neutral !votes. It means a lot to me to have your individual support and the collective support of so many others. I truly will strive to carry myself at a level representing the trust bestowed in me as I use the mop to address the never-ending drips of discontent in need of caretaker assistance.

Jreferee (Talk) 07:57, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
 Image:Admin mop.PNG

Just a funny note...

A recent MFD
*Delete per SJP. MSJapan 15:02, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete per SJP and MSJ. MAJ5 15:04, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per SJP, MSJ and MAJ. (Anyone else want to play this game?) Shalom Hello 16:07, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

I thought that was kind of funny! Nice comment! :) MAJ5 (talk) (contribs) 21:39, 30 June 2007 (UTC)