User talk:The Transhumanist/Archive 10

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

RfA thanks

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which which passed nem. con. with 45 support, 0 oppose, and 0 neutral. Thank you for your support and all the kind words that were expressed. I will try to live up to the trust placed in me by the community. I now have my homework to do and then pass the Marigolds.

Hope you enjoyed your break. Cheers Kbthompson (talk) 16:41, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

User:The_Transhumanist/Virtual_classroom/Coaching/D.M.N.#Closing_AfDs

Please can you review my comments above? I am concerned that the advice DMN has been getting about AFD closes is not in his own best interest. I am going to hold off DRVing the two AFD closes that I am particularly concerned about to give you a chance to review them and offer DMN some advice. Being hauled over the coals at DRV isn't nice (I have been there before) and I feel that encouraging him to be overbold here will simply torpedo his next RFA. Spartaz ^Humbug! 20:40, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

He's not going for RfA again for several months, and he may have hundreds of AfD closings by then. A handful of mistakes at the beginning won't make any difference. The question is, how many more mistakes will he make before he gets the hang of it? Don't worry, he's a fast learner, and he's not making any of the same mistakes twice. The Transhumanist 10:19, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for letting me know about your list Glossary of philosophical isms. I bookmarked it. It's an interesting list and it is of interest to me. Thanks again! --Grrrlriot (talk) 23:25, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!

		Thanks for your support
		Thank you SO MUCH for your support in my unanimous RFA. Take this cookie as a small token of my appreciation.--Jayron32|talk|contribs 06:10, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Tutorial Series

Since you have done a go job with the Virtual Classroom, i was wondering if you could help someting similar. User:Enochlau/Signpost tutorial series. If yo could sign up to write a few or find other people to sign up to write articles, that would be great. The Placebo Effect (talk) 13:19, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Interesting project. Count me in. The Transhumanist (talk) 21:41, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the advice

Very subtle. Spartaz ^Humbug! 10:45, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Anytime.  :) The Transhumanist 12:04, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

virtual classroom

I´ve thought about it...and I decided to join you class! Please tell me when the lessons begin! I´m very happy to go to the virtual classroom! Dagadt (talk) 10:42, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

See you on your coaching page. The Transhumanist 12:05, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Re:Coaching

Oh, sorry about that; I nearly fogot about it. I have been busy with work on my normal editing, and I will get back to it as soon as I can (probobly before the weekend is over). I forgot, which assingment did I choose? Juliancolton (talk) 13:26, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Basic topic lists. The Transhumanist 23:08, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh, yea, sorry. Juliancolton (talk) 13:16, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

AfD closures of The Medic Droid (band) and Jake Weary

Your AfD closures of The Medic Droid (band) and Jake Weary have been reverted - please take more notice of consensus in future. Thanks, Addhoc (talk) 14:26, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Discussion reopened. Please refrain from closing controversial AfD discussions, especially if your opinions go against consensus. ~ trialsanderrors (talk) 14:28, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Rudget!

You are welcome. The Transhumanist 09:23, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Need help?

Hi! I'm a licensed attorney, basically looking for something to do in what spare time I have. I'm interested in joining your Law Wikiproject. I have an extensive criminal law background (I was a prosecutor for 6 years, and in private practice I did some criminal defense work). I also have some transactional and civil litigation work. I took a cursory look at some of the topics, but was wondering if you believe there is something I might get on immediately, where my background will be helpful. Thanks JimZDP (talk) 16:15, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi. Nice to meet you.

Thank you for offering to help. Yes, there is an area that needs the attention of someone familiar with the subject of law...

The organization of the overall subject of law on Wikipedia is incomplete.

One of Wikipedia's main contents navigation systems is made of topic lists. Some are designed like tables of contents, others are designed like indexes. The top of the topic list system is composed of two lists of lists: Lists of basic topics and Lists of topics. Law is included on both of those lists.

That's where you should start, at the top. Here is how the main navigation pages of Law are organized:

Law topics Alphabetical index: 0-9 A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z Lists  |  Basic topics  |  Portal  |  Category

That box is located at the top of all the main Law table of contents and index pages, and in turn leads to all of Law's main navigation pages (including the portal and category, which are not a part of the topic list system, but are included because all the systems are complementary/synergistic).

I recommend that you start with List of basic law topics and Lists of law topics. Both lists need to be completed and refined. On "Lists of law topics" add missing lists, and improve the ones that are already there.

The lists need to be completed to reflect both the law-related contents of Wikipedia, as well as the structure of the subject itself.

As the lists become more complete, they will provide a better and better means by which to survey Wikipedia's coverage of Law -- by showing what topics have articles (links), and by letting you click on the links to skim/read the articles.

As you begin to see the big picture (of Law's coverage) on Wikipedia, hopefully you will notice what topics are missing, and what articles need the most work. But right now, it's access itself (the contents navigation system) that needs work.

I hope you find my advice useful, and if you have any more questions, please feel free to ask.

The Transhumanist 08:49, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		I, Diligent Terrier, award you this "Tireless Contributor Barnstar" for your work in starting the List of basic American Civil War topics article from scratch. Great Job! DiligentTerrier • talk |sign here 22:17, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

US Preventive Services Task Force

I redirected US Preventive Services Task Force, per your awards center posting. --Sharkface217 04:19, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

That section is for awarding article creation. You found that an article already existed, and redirected to it. Though that doesn't merit a barnstar, it does display diligence and I thank you for that. Keep up the good work. The Transhumanist 06:21, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Phoenix-Wiki

Is he a coach or a student? Cuz the virtual classroom page says he's a student and not a coach. Lex ^T/_C Guest Book 19:34, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

He's your coach, and my student. The Transhumanist 19:43, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

I thought that the coaches were supposed to be admins (like LaraLove, Dweller, JodyB and AGK)? Lex ^T/_C Guest Book 19:52, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Some coached before they were admins. Like JodyB, LaraLove, and Dweller. And I'm not an admin. But I coached LaraLove, Dweller, AGK, The Rambling Man, and E; and as their coach I nominated and/or endorsed each of them for adminship. I'm one of your coaches too. Is that OK? The Transhumanist 21:32, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I have no problem, because you obviously know adminship and Wikipedia better than most, so why don't you go for RFA? Lex ^T/_C Guest Book 21:45, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

I have, three times. The Transhumanist 21:49, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

I can't believe you have been rejected, even while starting this magnificent project. Also, I don't need the template because the template is on the coaching page which I watch daily, so it's pointless to place it somewhere else. Lex ^T/_C Guest Book 21:52, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

I didn't understand this very well, can you clarify: Lex ^T/_C Guest Book 08:54, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Neutral: I am not quite sure why you need the adminship at the moment; you seem to be doing fine at the moment without the special tools so far. However, if there is a good reason, I would probably support. -- Casmith 789 08:25, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

It would provide more skins to peel off the onion. That is, explore! I try to improve Wikipedia wherever I go within it, and I would definitely do the same with any new areas I was provided access to. And it looks like it would be fun, which is the main reason I've been here the past year: I enjoy working on Wikipedia! Don't you? The Transhumanist 08:38, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, when an editor is liked and there isn't any reason to mistrust him, he may be voted in without "need" becoming an issue. However, if there is any questionable behavior in his past or present, or there are objections on the table, "need" often becomes a major issue. "Need" means that the candidate has been working on administrative-related chores. This provides a track record of reliability; also, if he's taking up the time of admins by sending lots of work their way (via requests for page protection, speedy tags, reports at AIV, etc.), giving him the mop would save existing admins time by allowing him to handle the work directly. Participants at RfA want to be sure a candidate is going to use the tools to actually help, rather than to gain an edge in pushing his own personal agenda or point of view. Ego gratification is another thing they must look out for - if a candidate is just going for status for status' sake, there's no way to predict how he'll use the tools. And WP:AGF doesn't apply where trust must be earned. So, when there's any doubt, if the candidate doesn't "need" the tools to improve performance on admin-related work he's already doing, then there's no need to give them to him. It all boils down to trust: in the candidate's motives, self-restraint, and competency. The Transhumanist 12:53, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Art Blastside

Hi there. I noticed you closed that page, and was wondering why you interpreted the result to be keep, when consensus so far was delete. Also, I mentioned that I didn't mean to propose a merge for it; I felt that if the author had any information there that wasn't on the main article they could move it. So, would you be alright with me relisting the debate? Cheers, Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP!☺} 04:09, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

I interpreted it as a "merge and redirect" proposal posted in the wrong place. After I closed the discussion, I posted a reference from a reliable source on the article's talk page for the editors there to make use of. If I can find one in 3 minutes, I'm sure they can find more. And there's probably a lot more in printed sources. BTW, I dipped in to Google again, just now, and found http://www.romantictimes.com/books_review.php?book=23668, so the character is notable. Cheers. The Transhumanist (talk) 05:28, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Uh, those two sources aren't exactly sturdy; the character only receives minor mentions (in fact, only about one sentence is written about her). I don't see what one could cite with those. I'm just concerned that your close was premature, that's all; no real consensus was given. So, relist? :P Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP!☺} 05:33, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Deletion discussions last for five days. The five days was up. You agreed yourself that there was no consensus. That makes it a default keep right there. Also, you proposed it as a merge. When somebody pointed that out, you replied with "What I mean is that this character shouldn't have it's own article; any information that the main article doesn't have can be included there. A separate article isn't needed." That is exactly what a merge would accomplish, and is exactly what merging is for. You proposed a merge in a deletion forum. The discussion should have been speedy closed as keep. By the way, the character's more popular name is "Piratica", for which there is an abundance of information floating around. The Transhumanist (talk) 11:18, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

And if no consensus is established, they're relisted... here, you could even say that consensus was to delete, since three editors were going for that. I know I proposed it as a merge, but what I meant was to suggest to the article creator to include any information they had in the main article. I was, at heart, going for either a delete or redirect of the article. I hope you understand.

And I don't think the character's name is Piratica... that's the series' name and a title in-universe. I'm guessing that the abundance of information floating around is for the series. Master of Puppets _{Call me MoP!☺} 13:38, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

I reverted The Transhumanist's closure and relisted the discussion. Again, please refrain from closing controversial discussions. As your record at RFA shows, you lack the community trust, and as the closures themselves show, you lack the understanding of our policies. If you have sources you think make a difference in the discussion, add them to the bottom of the discussion and allow other users to scrutinize them. ~ trialsanderrors (talk) 14:15, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to VandalProof!

Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, The Transhumanist! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. β^_command 14:01, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Orange Islands

An editor has nominated Orange Islands, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Orange Islands and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 14:59, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

User page hall of fame

A lot of the links on User:The_Transhumanist/User_page_design/Hall_of_Fame were dead, so I fixed the ones I could and deleted the ones I couldn't. I also worked on my userpage a little bit, so I updated the link for that as well. ☯  Zenwhat (talk) 00:34, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! The Transhumanist 07:29, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Rollback

Hello The Transhumanist, I have granted rollback rights to your account. The reason for this is that, after a review of some of your contributions, I believe you will use rollback correctly. Rollback is to be used for vandalism-reversion only, and since you know the difference between a good-faith edit and vandalism, I can trust you not to use rollback abusively by reverting good-faith edits or to revert-war. For information on rollback, see Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback. If you do not want rollback, let me know, and I'll remove it. Good luck. Acalamari 00:57, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. I'll use it for vandalism reversion only. The Transhumanist 09:32, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. Good luck. Acalamari 17:32, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your guidance!

Thank you for your guidance on my work on the City College of San Francisco Queer Resource Center. It was like a beacon to a lost ship on a stormy night sea. I look forward to making many future contributions to the world of Wikipeida. EdwardLINE1 (talk) 06:34, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

You are welcome. The Transhumanist 21:38, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

RfA Thanks

Hi The Transhumanist - thanks for your participation in my request for adminship. It passed 52/0/0, and I'm now in possession of a shiny new mop. If I can ever help you with anything, please don't hesitate to contact me. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 08:23, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

You are welcome. Good luck. The Transhumanist 09:16, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

huh?

You may want to check out your edit on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of LGBT couples. Benjiboi 00:18, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

What am I supposed to be looking for? What did you find confusing? The Transhumanist 00:25, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

At the top of the page you have closing remarks but did not close? Benjiboi 00:26, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

It also says "Practice closing statement for" Benjiboi 00:27, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

I'll make it clearer. Thank you for pointing it out. The Transhumanist 00:36, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

OK, I changed it. Take a look. What do you make of it now? The Transhumanist 00:46, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Makes more sense now. Benjiboi 02:09, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback. It helped a lot. The Transhumanist 05:06, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

This edit at AfD

Hello! I am not an admin, but I have been around since 2006 and have over 10,000 edits, so I just thought I would offer my opinion by saying that I totally think your reasoning is fair and valid. Good job! Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 04:59, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. I'm doing my best. The Transhumanist 05:03, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome!  :) Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 05:29, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

RFC on a policy proposal.

I put forth a policy proposal I'd like you to comment on.

Policy proposal: Don't give up hope

I made this largely because User:ScienceApologist was a great editor, but he told me that he felt a lack of belief in the Wikipedia project, mostly only editing it to remove violations of WP:FRINGE. Then, just today, I see that his talk page has been wiped, per the right to vanish, which makes me suspect he decided to quit. That kind of cynicism seriously hurts Wikipedia, because by leaving, now we have even less people to defend Wikipedia from pseudoscience.

I think it's inappropriate to phrase this as "keep the faith," because of the religious undertones, but it's definitely worth being a policy. ☯  Zenwhat (talk) 05:45, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the invitation. I've added my 2 cents to the discussion. The Transhumanist 06:39, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

"Wikipedia will hit critical mass relatively soon. I think we should be preparing for that," what did you mean by this? Do you see Wikipedia as being an integral part of Transhumanism? Do you believe that, once transhumanist technologies emerge, that Wikipedia will usher in a new age of information? It is an intriguing idea, one I find convincing myself, though I am skeptical because it seems presumptuous. It is entirely possible that transhumanism will lead to the human race being split in two species: The bourgeoisie neo sapien and the proletarian homo sapien. When such technologies are not distributed freely, but on the basis of wealth, mankind could split along the lines of social class.

I wasn't thinking about transhumanism when I made that statement. My guess is that Wikipedia will have hit "critical mass" when its readership has grown to a size (and to a level of reliance upon Wikipedia as their first stop for information) which will make it important in governmental decision making and corporate planning. Soon afterwards, control of Wikipedia (or a predominant fork) will be usurped by special interest groups (political or corporate), regulated and/or managed by their personnel. For starters, imagine the impact a group of 20 paid employees assigned to edit Wikipedia could have on Wikipedia's policies. They wouldn't even have to be coordinated, just have the same interests (for example, profit motive). Now multiply that by one hundred. Perhaps Wikipedia's user base isn't large enough to warrant such expenditures yet. But what will happen when it is large enough? Can we prevent it?

With respect to your question about Wikipedia and transhumanism, I believe that WAN- and Wireless networking technologies in general demonstrate that technological advance is accelerating. See technological singularity. Wikipedia's role in the future remains to be seen, but it is likely to be leapfrogged or dwarfed by something else that is more integrated and far more comprehensive, probably including organized original research and a much lower notability threshold.

Concerning social class, as general technology-based self-sufficiency increases, we'll be more and more preoccupied with what to do (or not do) with our technologies. For example, what do you need wealth for if shelter and cultivated food becomes obsolete? Someday, will someone swim across the Atlantic?

Also, what you said relates to the psychological theory called reactance. Based on your criticisms, how could we word it positively? ☯  Zenwhat (talk) 07:16, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia's mission. The right stuff. Hang in there. The ideal editor. Always say "live". Viva Wikipedia! Have a good cry and get it out of your system. Take a deep breath, then continue. Great accomplishments require great determination. Great deeds require great courage. To arms! To arms! Ándale! Ándale! If other editors are getting you down, you don't belong here. Grow a backbone! Goodbye, and thanks for all the fish!

Any of those will do.

Be sure to explain the right to vanish and to start over with a new account. (That's very stress-reducing).

 The Transhumanist    21:46, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

I created a page at WP:HOPE. ☯  Zenwhat (talk) 18:47, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

AN/I

Just informing you that I started a conversation at AN/I [1] about your AFD practice closures. I really have no clue if what you are doing is wrong but i felt it needed to be brought to the attention of others. Ridernyc (talk) 08:47, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

They aren't practice closures. I didn't actually close those discussions. I just posted practice closing remarks. Big difference. The Transhumanist 10:34, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

In future, use the sandbox for practicing, as everyone else does. You should know this already. Neıl ☎ 10:48, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

It was practice discussion, not practice editing. ;) But all the feedback has been helpful and has given me an idea. Thank you. The Transhumanist 10:56, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

It is the same thing. Copy discussions to the sandbox, please, or your own userspace, if you want to practice closing. As an aside, of your 3 practice closes, only one was how I closed them - List of LGBT couples was deleted as 2 of the 3 reasons for nomination were not addressed and the article was a gross BLP violation in its present form, and Hoffman (Saw) as the "keep" arguments were all WP:ILIKEIT. You got Drew Doughty right, although I just closed it as "keep", rather than "no consensus, default to keep", as there was a pretty good consensus for retention. I would suggest reading how admins close controversial AFDs (you can always identify these through browsing WP:AFD/O, WP:DRV or seeing which ones get complained about on WP:AN or WP:ANI. Neıl ☎ 11:14, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

There was a fourth, but it got endorsed rather than reverted.  :) So that's 50/50. I'll have to improve my batting average. Thanks for the critique on the closes. The Transhumanist 11:38, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

I came to my conclusion on Hoffman from an analysis of the article, and noticed that someone was actively trying to bring it up to standard, and had just added a referenced section of real-world significance. I thought it would be rather disruptive to dash the editor's on-going efforts and toss them in the trash. I felt that would be a waste, and an unnecessary snub of the editor who was trying to salvage the article. Above, you didn't mention the article itself or the new material added to it, so it seems like you read only the AfD discussion. Also, CyberGhostface posted external links to 5 interviews establishing real-world significance directly in the AfD discussion. For future reference (when I'm an admin), can admins reverse/revert their own deletions at AfD (without taking it to DRV)? The Transhumanist 12:27, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, of course they can revert their own closure (but not that of another admin - that is wheel-warring). Your argument, though, is an argument to keep the article, not a closing judgement - you have to be careful not to confuse the two. CyberGhostface perhaps made the only good argument to "keep", and I will amend the closing note accordingly. The role of the closing admin is to determine consensus based on Wikipedia policy, not simply impose their opinion upon the closure. The closing admin's role is not to analyse the article. I have closed hundreds of AFDs as "delete" when I would have personally voted to "keep", and vice-versa. I did read the article (I always do) - if nothing else, you need to check there are no fair use images on the article before you delete it (in this case, there was one). Neıl ☎ 12:41, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

By "analyze the article", I meant look to see what the editors did to it during the AfD discussion in response to the objections raised in the AfD discussion, and their relation to policy. That sourced section was new, and was in response to the WP:FICT concerns raised in the AfD, which were for the most part posted before the new section was added. The Transhumanist 12:59, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

The user who added was Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles (talk · contribs), who knows how userfying works. He can request it via Wikipedia:Deletion review. Note these five "references" he added were Photobucket, blog, blog, AOL's version of youtube, blog. Neıl ☎ 14:41, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

What about the 5 interviews linked to in the discussion? The Transhumanist 21:49, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Those would be considered primary sources, they could be used but they would not be very help full in establishing notability. I pointed that out in the AFD that none of the changes really addressed the issues presented by the nominator. In these case I normally find most of the information really belongs in article for the movie or an article for the franchise as a whole. Trying to establish notability and real world context for individual characters is very hard unless the character is exceptionally notable. You just can not add enough real world context or find enough to demonstrate notability outside the franchise. Ridernyc (talk) 23:20, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Just curious, would an interview published in the New York Times be considered a primary source? The Transhumanist 22:12, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

I disagree with your assessment of List of LGBT couples, and it appears others do too. I posted my reasoning at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2008 January 16#List of LGBT couples. The Transhumanist 23:26, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

My RfA

My request for adminship was successful at 64/1/2! Many thanks for your participation and I will endeavor to meet your expectations. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 09:20, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. The Transhumanist 13:44, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Interiot's back

Dweller, just thought you might be relieved. The Transhumanist 13:45, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

You could toast marshmallows on my cheeks right now, but thanks for the heads-up. --Dweller (talk) 13:55, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

ha!

You can't blame me for experimenting for the first time :)!
And why aren't you an admin? You qualify....don't tell me you misused the tool too :)-- penubag  11:19, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Worse. Major edit warring.  :) But that was almost 2 years ago. Been through 3 RfAs since then. It's not easy living down the past.  :) The Transhumanist 11:26, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Really? 2 years ago? and they still won't? At least you're not the only one. Seriously, they should lighten a little, if you want, later, I can RfA you? -- penubag  11:34, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm already spoken for.  :) But thank you for offering. The Transhumanist 12:12, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

looking over your shoulder

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zavorash There is enough discussion to make a decision. Gnangarra 12:56, 17 January 2008 (UTC)
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gary Lister good call Gnangarra 12:56, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the feedback. It's nice to have a guardian angel. The Transhumanist 13:00, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Natali Del Conte dont count its a discussion, base your decision on the strengths of the discussion (your edit summary gave the impression you just counted).

looking at the discussion in detail I would have deleted, only editors to propose keep were IP's they didnt offer any supporting referencing, I dont expect an IP to offer policy reasons(if they do its another story). the deletion suggestion based around BIO noting that there was nothing distinguishing about the subject to warrant an article. No reflection on you many admins would bypass(ignore), close as no consensus, or relist, some calls just require the admin to be bold. Gnangarra 13:48, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Old

Hello, you might be intersted to know that at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Old under the list of logs, there is link available to refresh the counts by mathbot.--Tikiwont (talk) 13:07, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

I was wondering if I was doing that the hard way.  :) Thank you for the heads up. The Transhumanist 13:10, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

My user page.

Hi,

I don't mind you doing this but can you explain to me why you did it? My userbox is accessible from User:Thehelpfulone/CurrentNavBox.

Thanks,

The Helpful One ^{(Talk) (Contributions) (Review Me!)} 19:08, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

To make a snapshot of your current userpage that is immune to NavBox changes.

See how the permanent link is used in the set of user page examples at User:The Transhumanist/User page design.

Enjoy.

The Transhumanist 22:05, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

What's the problem with using the article history like this? Are we all missing something? That's what I thought the permalink was doing. Do you think that something different is going on? The Rambling Man (talk) 22:13, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes. A permalink alone doesn't prevent this. The Transhumanist 04:23, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

(Hi TRM, long-time no-see). -TT

What about Panimalar ?

Hi, I'm A.K.Karthikeyan, the creator of Panimalar Engineering college page. Whats that you want to know about it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by A.K.Karthikeyan (talk • contribs) 03:58, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Reliable published sources for the information. It has to be covered from somewhere. The Transhumanist 09:28, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Duelist Pack - Jaden Yuki

Can you look at this one, I overturned your relist, whats your thoughts on why? Gnangarra 11:20, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

The standard reason: they didn't have any sources. Sources are needed to satisfy WP:VER, WP:NOR, and WP:N. In this case, WP:N was the chosen qualification to enforce (though WP:VER would have worked too). The problem is, the vast majority of Wikipedia lacks sources. So anything within the vast majority of Wikipedia could be targetted for deletion. Because of this, I think it should take more than 3 people (the nom and two others) to determine the fate of an article (and there were a whole slew of them listed on this deletion debate). I couldn't find a threshold of participation mentioned anywhere, above which relisting isn't allowed. Is there a threshold for relisting? The Transhumanist 12:00, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

there is no limit as its a discussion, remember there is nothing to count. My closure was based on the strength of the arguments also it was 7 articles listed all tagged correctly, plus listing on two notice boards that didnt draw any countering opinions. Gnangarra 12:07, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

If there is nothing to count, that is there's only a nom and no participants, I imagine it's a relist. The Transhumanist 13:32, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

you missed the point AfD is a discussion not a vote, closing is based on the reasonings not the number of votes. I delete a contested prod that only had the nominators comments. Gnangarra 13:54, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

The point of AfD is to have discussions to reach consensus. A monologue isn't a discussion. One person's opinion isn't a consensus. The Transhumanist 19:36, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SuG

This one Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SuG currently open, your thoughts. Gnangarra 12:11, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

The sources provided on the article, based on their Google hits, probably aren't well-established publishers, and therefor their reliability as sources is questionable. They're trivial and do not establish notability. Criteria #4 would be met, but not without sources. All the music criteria are based on sources being provided to verify them, and so the article fails. The Keep voter, appears to know nothing about policy, and doesn't seem to realize that sources are required when material is challenged (and to prevent it from getting challenged in the first place), so he isn't doing what is needed to save the article, thinking that more information is all that is needed. What's odd is that no one is informing him. So much for teamwork. An admin could delete, but I'd relist and then inform the person interested in improving the article how to do so. The Transhumanist 13:32, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

I'd close no consensus, same reasoning though given that the band just meets WP:BAND which says something about performing in another country, the ghit are weak but there no consensus gives a little extra time but leaves the door open for further discussion Gnangarra 13:46, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Not being an admin, my closing it no consensus would probably be overturned, but relisting it probably wouldn't. Relisting would be better than being deleted by an overzealous admin, which could easily happen. So I'd relist. The Transhumanist 21:01, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

My Userpage

Hi There First id like to thank you immensly for your pages about creating a decent userpage!! They are great and I would be lost without them!! Just one question, On my userpage i have a small welcome banner up the top. How do I make this text larger and change the font? Sorry if you have already covered this somewhere. Thanks in advanceCstubbies (talk) 12:40, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome, in advance.

Just kidding. Check your user page. The Transhumanist 05:51, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!Cstubbies (talk) 14:27, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

One more question while i'm at it. How do you get your fancy username when your signing a post? Im sure I have seen an article about this but now I cannot find it anywhere!Cstubbies (talk) 20:13, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Set your signature in "my preferences" in the menu at the top of the screen. The Transhumanist 20:20, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again! so simple!!CStubbies 20:49, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

AWC recruitment

Any chance we could work on an AWC recruitment drive sometime? I would love to get more editors active on there in order to tackle some major projects. --Sharkface217 05:26, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

It's just a matter of posting links and announcements in all the right places. Make sure a link is included in the see also section of all the awards pages (WP:AWARD, WP:BARN, WP:REWARD, etc.), and Wikipedia:Kindness Campaign. Also check WP:DIR, WP:QUICK, WP:CUTS, WP:FUN, WP:EIW, WP:RQ and make sure there's a link in the appropriate section of each page. And it can be included at Wikipedia:Community Portal#Things to do.

A notice can be placed on WP:CBB.

The Transhumanist 05:50, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

I posted in a few of those areas, although I have yet to hit WP:AWARD, WP:BARN, WP:REWARD and the Wikipedia:Kindness Campaign. I was wondering if we could also set up a bot of sorts that alerts users (who have signed up for such a service) to be notified about new challenges. If I wished to take the initiative and set up such a system, who would I need to consult regarding the technical requirements of such an audacious undertaking? --Sharkface217 01:50, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

It's very easy (and fun). Sign up for approval to use WP:AWB and install it. Then:

1. Create a sign-up page for subscribers (a subpage of the awards page)
2. Run AWB, and use its "make list" feature, set to "links on page", then specify the sign-up page
3. Click the "more..." tab, and enable "Append", then write your notice in the box provided
4. Start the operation (click the start tab, then the "start the process" button)
5. Check each page for proper placement, and press "save" after doing so for each one.

True, that's a manually-assisted method, but once you are up and running smoothly and your subscriber base grows, you can turn AWB into a full bot. That requires presenting a proposal and getting approval at WP:BOTS.

Once you are more familiar with AWB and have been running the subscription operation for awhile, then it'll be a good time to upgrade. You could contact others who oversee other subscription operations and compare notes. For example, User:Ral315 operates User:Ralbot (using AWB), the bot that delivers Signpost subscriptions. Another place to talk to others about bots is Wikipedia talk:Bots. And questions about AWB can be posed at Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser.

Have fun with AWB. The Transhumanist 10:10, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

admin coaching

Is it typical practice to remove people from the coaching list when they are no longer active? Both Rudget and Rlevse left yesterday. - Revolving Bugbear 13:49, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes. The Transhumanist 19:53, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

My RfA

Hey there, I'm writing to inform you that I have withdrawn my request for adminship, which was currently standing at 11 supports, 22 opposes and 6 neutrals. This count could have been so much better if I had understood policy, although I believe that 17 questions is a lot to ask of a user's first RfA. I will take on all comments given at the RfA and will endeavour to meet the high expectations of the RfA voters. _{WEBURIEDOURSECRETSINTHEGARDEN}^{play it cool.} 21:49, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

My RfA

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which closed unsuccessfully with 25 support, 18 oppose, and 6 neutral. Thanks for the support and I'll look forward working with you. --BritandBeyonce (talk) 06:30, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Contents and Megaportals Portal peer review

By the way, do you have any comments for the Contents and Megaportals Portal peer review? RichardF (talk) 13:38, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Admin Coaching...

I have left a comment on the page. D.M.N. (talk) 19:35, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

prod- hope you don't mind

I have placed a proposed deletion thing on List of basic hobby topics because List of hobbies is so much more comprehensive and has headings which give the basic topics, anyway. Hope you don't mind.Merkinsmum 23:52, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Deletion Discussions

I am sorry for the delay! I had not had any access to the net for the past three weeks. I've been able to access the net today and I'm sending you the details of the deletion discussions. Hope the internet problems get resolved sooner. :-)

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ghana national College
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of pigs over 1000 pounds
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Instant Flight
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Factions: Revenge of the Reich
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sometimes I

-Ravichandar 07:10, 23 January 2008 (

Replied :-) I've also voted in a couple of other deletion discussions.

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Makkal Manadu Katchi
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hindu-Muslim marriages

-Ravichandar 09:43, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Panchayat Feminism at the gram panchayath in kerala
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bhaskaryya baruah
• Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Access computer college

-Ravichandar 08:42, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

thx

I have the mop but can you search the RFA meeting shown to find the bucket?	Thanks for your support, my request for adminship passed 60/0/0 on Monday! I want to thank Mrs.EasterBunny and Royalbroil for nominating me, those who updated the RfA tally, and everyone for their support and many kind words. To paraphrase a president ... I wish my mum and dad could see the comments made. My dad would be so proud to see the comments ... and my mum would have believed them". I will do my best to use the new tools carefully and responsibly (and you may be surprised to find that I have not deleted all of the pages by accident..... yet). Thanks again, Victuallers (talk) 13:52, 23 January 2008 (UTC)	An early RFA meeting to decide if Victuallers can be included as a sysop - use cursor to identify.

RE: Admin Coaching

Yeah, I'm still up for it. I will follow the guidelines religiously and check the page regularly. You saw my last RfA and know my weaknesses (I hope!) _{WEBURIEDOURSECRETSINTHEGARDEN}^{play it cool.} 18:34, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

User:D.M.N.

How would you feel if I nominated D.M.N. for an Rfa? Zenlax ^{T C S} 20:40, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

He just went through RfA (December 10). I'll be nominating him eventually, but I'd be happy to co-nominate. Would you like me to contact you when it's time? The Transhumanist 21:36, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

You are welcome to participate on D.M.N.'s coaching page. Currently, we're focused on AfDs. We welcome your input. The Transhumanist 23:25, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

RE: Help desk volunteer instructions (eom)

Are you suggesting that that user needed the reference desk? - Rjd0060 (talk) 20:43, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

I provided a link you may find helpful. Be sure to read the section on "spirit of helpfulness". I hope you find it useful. The Transhumanist 20:53, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Tip of the day/March 24

Hi there, The Transhumanist. It's good to make contact with you after having watched you work for so long in so many areas of the project.

I do have a question regarding the link I have provided, and I don't wish to act until I know I'm either doing the right thing or entirely the wrong thing. March 24's Tip of the day implies in the header that transclusion and inclusion are two different things, but the tip itself implies that the opposite of transclusion is separate from substitution, and analogous to inclusion. I hope that with your say-so, the heading should be changed to read Transclusion vs. Substitution. Bobo. 22:15, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

That would be good. "Transclusion" and "inclusion" mean the same thing, so the tip title needs to be fixed. Thank you for spotting that. And nice to meet you! The Transhumanist 22:40, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Bathrobe

You have on your userpage (User:The Transhumanist#Are you in a cabal?) the Bathrobe Cabal listed as the Bathroom Cabal. I'm not sure whether this was done purposefully or not, but for some reason it's really been bugging me =D. Is it listed correctly or not? Malinaccier (talk) 23:25, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Oops. Thank you for pointing out that typo. The Transhumanist 23:46, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Anytime, just trying to help. Malinaccier (talk) 23:48, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

The virtual classroom

Excuse me, but I would like to request that you tag this page for deletion: User:The Transhumanist/Virtual classroom/Coaching/Someguy1221. Thank you. Someguy1221 (talk) 06:28, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

They won't delete it. Discussions are retained for the historical record. There are some exceptions, but they don't apply here. See: Wikipedia:User page#How do I delete my user talk pages? The Transhumanist 07:09, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't see why that should apply here. It was a conversation between all of two users, so if those two users agree, there's no reason not to fulfill the request. Unless you have qualms with it, of course. Someguy1221 (talk) 07:16, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

It applies because everyone's participation on Wikipedia needs to remain transparent. For example, my coaching was scrutinized at my last RfA, and so will likely be reviewed again at my next one, and I don't think they'd take too kindly if I tried to delete a coaching page. And since it's admin coaching, it would be considered relevant to any RfA of yours as well. The guideline clearly states "As a matter of practice, user talk pages are generally not deleted." After which the exceptions are explained. The reasons you gave do not match the exceptions for which talk pages are deleted. Plus, the discussion is linked to from an archive for the benefit of others. I believe we should abide by the guideline. The Transhumanist 09:22, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

By the way, my coaching style has changed a lot since our discussion ended, and we could try again if you want. Actually, I was trying out a different approach (and differenet assignments) on every student, and the approach/assignment I chose for you turned out to be a dud. I should have been more flexible. The other students seem to be enjoying the different approaches I've been using with them. Feel free to look over the other coaching pages, and choose the style of coaching you prefer. The Transhumanist 09:35, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

The actual reason I wanted it deleted is that it's possible to determine my IP from the meagre information I provided on it. Someguy1221 (talk) 10:19, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't see how. There's no way to deduce your IP from the text on the page. And your IP isn't in the page's edit history, and there are multiple anons on each of the pages you linked to, and none of them appear to be you. The Transhumanist 11:33, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

I've asked an admin to take a look. By the way, why don't you reset your IP? Also, don't you use a firewall? The Transhumanist 22:50, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

It's not a matter of security, but one of privacy (my IP has already changed at least twice). Someguy1221 (talk) 22:58, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Then problem solved. The Transhumanist 23:02, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

A valuable service

I think you need recognition for doing the job of ten other editors, and doing it out of altruism and genuine belief in Wikipedia. Not many editors here have the same good attitude and provide the same service as you - I don't have any specific point to put across, but I thought you should just be prodded and reminded that you do a lot of good around here, in the hope you'll keep it up. Kudos! Seegoon (talk) 17:43, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you.

The Transhumanist 19:46, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

My RfA

Thanks for your support at my request for adminship, which passed today with 42/0/0! I would like to thank Wizardman for nominating me, The Transhumanist/Archive 10 and everyone else for their support and comments. I'll continue with contributing to the encyclopedia's content (hopefully writing an FA here and there :) and will help out with admin-related tasks which you just entrusted me with. If you need any help, don't hesitate to ask! Thanks again, —dima/talk/ 01:51, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for participating in my RfA!

		Thanks for participating in my RfA!
		Although it failed 43/27/0, I'm happy because the outcome has been very helpful in many meaningful ways. Moreover you alerted me to your understandable concerns about the length of my track record. All the best, Gwen Gale (talk) 05:28, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Virtual classroom

Hi. I'd like to join the classroom. I've been on Wikipedia for a while, but only a year on this Username because I took an eighteen month break when I lost my computer and couldn't remember my username. How do I "enroll", I guess is the term? -- Matthew Edwards | talk | Contribs 05:38, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, for the first time ever, the coaching section is full. Another good place to find a coach is Wikipedia:Adopt-a-User. The Transhumanist 09:10, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I am BACK!!!!!!

Do you still remember me, Laleena? Hope so, because I am back! However, having been at Wikibooks for a long time, that's where I will be most of the time. Cheers, Laleena 12:55, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Nice to see you again. The Transhumanist 09:07, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I have a comment for you...

...on my coaching page! D.M.N. (talk) 18:12, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

ADCO

Say, I've been hearing a lot about you lately. If you don't already have enough pupils, wanna be my Admin coach? Two One Six Five Five ^{discuss my greatness} 20:16, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm full. But there are many places to get feedback and answers on Wikipedia:

• If you'd like other users to critique your participation on Wikipedia, sign up at Wikipedia:Editor review
• If you'd like an article you've written critiqued, sign it up at Wikipedia:Good article nominations or Wikipedia:Peer review
• If you'd like your questions answered about Wikipedia, post them at Wikipedia:Help desk
• If you'd like a mentor (a general coach, which I highly recommend), see Wikipedia:Adopt-a-User
• If you are a seasoned editor (3000+ edits in the main namespace), and are thinking about adminship, see Wikipedia:Admin coaching

I hope the above links help. Good luck. The Transhumanist 09:03, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

AUUGGH! 3000+ edits?! I better get crackin'! Two One Six Five Five ^{discuss my greatness} 12:41, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Admin coaching

>I noticed your name over at WP:ADCO. Have you been matched with a coach yet?

I haven't, but I've been out of circulation for the last month. Michaelbusch (talk) 04:34, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

OK, I'll leave your name on the active request list. Thank you for your response. The Transhumanist 09:05, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Rfa for D.M.N.

I'd be happy to be a co-nominator and I'd be glad to be contacted by you when he's ready for his Rfa. And I'd be happy to contribute to D.M.N.'s coaching class, but I wouldn't want to be a distraction towards his classes. Zenlax ^{T C S} 18:17, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

You wouldn't be a distraction. The more the merrier. He could use the feedback/assistance/company/group synergy/etc. Three heads are better than two. The Transhumanist 20:10, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Your truly right about that. I'll see what I can do. What would his progress be at the moment? Zenlax ^{T C S} 21:17, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Working on AfDs, etc. See his coaching page. The Transhumanist 21:26, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Invite to WP:ROBO

As a current or past contributor to a related article, I thought I'd let you know about WikiProject Robotics, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Robotics. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks and related articles. Thanks! - Jameson L. Tai talk ♦ contribs 23:39, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

EVIL!!! Humans United Against Robots ☯  Zenwhat (talk) 02:36, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

What about cyborgs? The Transhumanist 03:10, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Email Wikimedia about Back to the Future timeline

You're a very respected editor and we both agree that Back to the Future timeline is a copyvio. I sent an email to Wikimedia because I figured they probably care more about copyvio than the fanboy mobs. But then I received an email back, telling me that I couldn't cite the specific violation, that they don't resolve content disputes, and insultingly sent me a link to the dispute-resolution page. It's entirely possible that reply was made in good-faith, though it is possible that they might be more willing to listen to somebody like you.

Could you send them an email about it, maybe? It'd be best to contact Mike Godwin directly if you can. I don't want Wikipedia to get sued over something silly like this. Even though we have a policy against copyvio and we allow companies the ability to remove copyvio, that argument won't necessarily hold up in court. As noted in the discussion, it didn't work for GeoCities (back before they got bought out by Yahoo). ☯  Zenwhat (talk) 02:32, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

The specific violation would be the derivative nature of the page, per 17 U.S.C. § 101. The MediaWiki staff is overloaded, and Wikipedia has hundreds of admins who are responsible for this type of thing. There are hundreds of copyvios on Wikipedia at any given time, and there's no way the WikiMedia staff could handle them all. So they by necessity turned you away. In about a month, a new case for deletion can be posted. The Transhumanist 05:09, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Transhumanist, here's the problem: GeoCities made the same defense on court. They still lost. "But there were so many community members violating copyright!!!" is not a valid defense, because the burden of responsibility is on Wikimedia, not the community. ☯  Zenwhat (talk) 00:29, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: E-mail

Unfortunately, it seems to of not arrived. Are you sure you e-mailled it to me and no one else? Could you resend it to: neldav03 AT hotmail DOT com (note: substitute the at and dot for @ and .) Cheers, D.M.N. (talk) 17:27, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

I've also left a note on the coaching page about the propsal. D.M.N. (talk) 17:40, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, the email didn't bounce, so maybe it's in your spam folder. It's mostly moot now anyways. I've replied on your coaching page. The Transhumanist 18:06, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: Futurology / Futures Studies page

Hi Transhumanist, I'm not sure if you are the right person to talk to about this, but I left a comment in the discussion section of the "Futurology" page asking that it be renamed "futures studies" and giving the reasons. If you are not, could you let me know sometime on my talk page who I should talk to about initiating that process/discussion? Thanks very much. I'm an occasional WP user/editor who needs to get better at using and improving this wonderful resource. JohnMSmart (talk) 20:21, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

The article's talk page is the right place to post your proposal. The Transhumanist 21:19, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/VivioFateFan 2

My friend, I have replied at the RfA page to your comments but am now going to bed, so my appologies if you do not recieve an immediate answer. I will be back online at apx 0800 (Wikipedia time) tomorrow. Just wanted to let you know so you did not think I was being rudePedro :  Chat  00:34, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the heads up. I appreciate that. Have a good sleep. The Transhumanist 00:48, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/VivioFateFan 2

Why are you commenting on every single oppose !vote on this RFA? Sorry, that sounded kind of rude. I can't think of a better way to say it. It's just unusual for someone to comment so many times on a single RFA. I figured that maybe you were his admin coach or something, but I couldn't find anything that suggested that. Useight (talk) 00:38, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

As far as I know, he and I have never crossed paths.

I'm genuinely interested in the thought processes that were applied in that RfA. Also, it appeared the candidate was being summarily dismissed for very superficial reasons, and I felt it was important to point this out. The Transhumanist 01:18, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. P.S. - Why did you change your sig? Useight (talk) 03:31, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

A bug in the auto sig function causes it not to display right, so instead I have to cut and paste it in each time (which is why I have the code displayed above). Sometimes that gets tiring.  :( Thank you for asking. The Transhumanist 05:33, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Ultraexactzz is now an Administrator

My RfA was successful, and closed with 44 Supports, 6 Opposes, and 1 Neutral. For your support, you have my thanks - I fully intend to live up to the lofty yet not-a-big-deal responsibility you have granted me. For those who opposed my candidacy, I value your input and advice, and hope that I may prove worthy of your trust. Special thanks to both Rudget and bibliomaniac15 for their expert coaching and guidance. I look forward to serving the project, my fellow editors, the pursuit of higher knowledge, et cetera, et cetera. Again, you have my thanks. UltraExactZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 01:33, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

List of Republican Presidents of the United States

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article List of Republican Presidents of the United States, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add {{db-author}} to the top of List of Republican Presidents of the United States. KurtRaschke (talk) 02:07, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks from Happy-melon

I just wanted to say thanks for your support for my RfA, which closed (74/2/0) this morning. Your comment and support was very much appreciated. Happy‑melon 15:53, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Newsletter

Yeah, I've made plans to put the newsletter into place but currently I am held down by the shackles of real life, commonly known as "responsibilities". I do hope to soon be able to take on the newsletter challenge, but for the time being I am tied up. However, I will get on it for a few days. --Sharkface217 02:06, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you!

Hi, just dropping by to say thanks for supporting my RfA, I totally wasn't expecting to get so much support, it was a really pleasant surprise. Melesse (talk) 04:27, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Spam in Life Extension Foundation

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Life Extension Foundation, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Life Extension Foundation is blatant advertising for a company, product, group, service or person that would require a substantial rewrite in order to become an encyclopedia article.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Life Extension Foundation, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 06:00, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: Reverting Portal's TOC

(TT: FYI. Please weigh in on this so we can put an end to at least one little edit war. RichardF (talk) 13:10, 4 February 2008 (UTC))

Okay, I've weighed in on that issue at Wikipedia:Portal peer review/Contents#General comments. "Culture and the arts" matches the format of the other section headings (the arts is part of culture, not the other way around), and has been used for many months on all the other contents pages. Changing the portal page to match rather than change all the others to match the portal page makes the most sense. The Transhumanist 00:55, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Just keep in mind this conversations is about all contents pages, not just portal contents. The "edit wars" are taking place on the layout page, Portal:Contents/Types layout. In addition, the portal peer review is about all the contents pages, and then some. RichardF (talk) 01:25, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

I have reverted your edit from "Culture and Arts" back to "Arts and Culture" [2] because according to Wikipedia:Portal/Directory, the correct category is Arts and Culture. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 03:14, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but according to the actual location of the template, it's "Culture and the Arts". You will have to take it up with The Transhumanist – Gurch 12:50, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

How about both of you taking it up at Wikipedia:Portal peer review/Contents#General comments so we can work on getting some consensus about this? RichardF (talk)

The portal directory isn't part of the encyclopedia itself, and the portal list is part of a set and therefore should share the standard TOC structure of the set. The Transhumanist 04:03, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Life Extension Foundation

An editor has nominated Life Extension Foundation, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Life Extension Foundation and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 19:14, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

		My RfA
		Thank you very much, The Transhumanist, for your support in my RfA which I really appreciate. It closed at 83/0/0. I was surprised by the unanimity and will do my best to live up to the new role. All the best, --ROGER DAVIES talk 16:49, 5 February 2008 (UTC) The patio at the Partal Palace in the Alhambra, Andalucia.

"Each fact..."

...is a significant change. It's undiscussed, and it's plainly silly. Marskell (talk) 21:13, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

No, my friend, that's four. You changed the policy and reverted it thrice. What are you doing? You can't just decide to copyedit the lead to V and alter it's meaning! I'll go to sleep, but you'll be reverted soon enough anyway. Revert yourself, is my suggestion. And use talk, as you should have done before changing our most important page! Marskell (talk) 21:32, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

The initial edit is considered a reversion? When did that change? I'll reread 3RR to make sure I'm in accordance in future edits. And I'm not trying to alter tha page's meaning. The wording was/is convoluted, and needs to be simplified. I'm willing to work with whoever is interested, and have posted the passage for discussion on the talk page. The Transhumanist (talk) 21:41, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I've reread WP:3RR, and nowhere does it say an initial edit is a revert. Interpreting an initial edit as a revert is a bit of a stretch, especially since I didn't remove any passage, just changed the wording. The Transhumanist (talk) 21:56, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Neither of us should be quoting the page, because we've just used it like an entitlement, but the (long-standing) wording is: "A revert means undoing the actions of another editor, whether involving the same or different material each time." It's terribly (or, perhaps, appropriately) vague.

When you alter stable wording, you undo the work of other editors. You seem to want to undo very long-standing wording without discussing it, on V. 3RR can be viewed either way, to be sure, but interpreting it as not involving the initial edit is an invitation to disruption (e.g., the disruptive editor gets "plus one" with their initial edit). No, sorry. You can't significantly alter the most important policy page Wikipedia has, call it a "copyedit", and then claim I'm violating 3RR reverting you. Everybody gets reverted when they alter core policy. So it goes. Marskell (talk) 22:22, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I didn't quote the page, and I didn't make any claims about your editing or reversion practices. And I don't want to "undo" anything - adding or making improvements is not undoing. I was simply trying to improve the grammar, add a helpful section heading, and fix or add links to point to the most relevant material. There's nothing wrong with that. Cheers. The Transhumanist (talk) 22:51, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Basic topic lists

Thank you for the invitation, but I'm afraid my commitment to the Anarchist Task Force leaves me with little time to give earnest attention to unrelated projects. Best of luck with the collection of Basic Topics lists. If I ever happen to have some knowledge of a given subject, and a bit of time on my hand, I'll make minor additions, but nothing as substantiative as was my effort for the Basic list of Anarchism topics. --Cast (talk) 01:54, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

You did an excellent job on that one. I thought atheism might be close enough to entice you to do another.  :) The Transhumanist 01:58, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

I'll grant that a list of basic atheism topics, as a philosophy, may seem similar in structure to a list of basic Anarchism topics. However, atheism is not a topic I have any experience with; quite the opposite for anarchy, which is why I was able to produce that article so easily. Again, if I should happen to have information on hand for use in a basic topics list, I'll contribute to it. I can make no commitment beyond that. Again, best of luck.--Cast (talk) 05:25, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Interesting. Well, happy editing. The Transhumanist 05:28, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

How do you use AWB?

Aside from the obvious chores of placing WikiProject tags on talk pages, fixing spelling errors across Wikipedia, building link lists, and linkifying terms...

what else can you do with AWB?

The Transhumanist 05:14, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

I've used it to get some experience with regular expressions, strip useless spans out of my talk page archives when I changed bots, subst several thousand instances of {{unsigned}} and its variants (using the above-mentioned regular expressions to change to IP versions when appropriate), among other things. I find it very useful for doing exactly what its stated purpose is: I use it for making tedious, repetitive edits that I can easily automate. Whatever those may entail.

Other people use it for bots, as well; I provided help developing a regex for BotanyBot (minimal help, but still help), which uses AWB. Tuvok[^T@lk/_Improve] 06:15, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Its also got a semi-automated disambiguation feature... But the ability to be able to expand the functionality of AWB is great, but it all depends on your programming skills and such.. Plugins, custom modules.. —Reedy Boy 10:41, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't set out to find jobs for AWB to do, I let the jobs come to AWB. "Cleaning up" articles is pretty dull; the real power of AWB comes to light when you have a tedious task to do, particularly a task which can be made much easier by using regular expressions. Removing links to a deleted page, sending out a newsletter, converting template instances, things like that. --kingboyk (talk) 23:36, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. Gives me some ideas on what to ask next.  :) The Transhumanist 05:45, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Heading spaces

Hi. I'm sure there are better ways to employ your time usefully than making unnecessary changes to film articles. Adding spaces after and before the section equals signs just inflates my watchlist and maks absolutely no difference to how the page is rendered, and is also not policy. Or do you have some reason for this? TINYMARK 10:34, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

They're just clean up changes added on to my main search/replace list. I'll disable them. Thank you for the feedback. The Transhumanist 11:10, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

On a related note, would you mind explaining why section headers are being changed from "Plot summary" to the vague "Plot"? I don't believe there is a policy related to this change, either. Just64helpin (talk) 13:19, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

One-word headings are very common around Wikipedia. Like "History", "Criticism", "Etymology", "Growth", and in movie articles: "Plot". Most film articles have a section called "Plot". The meaning is obvious. Quitting for now. The Transhumanist 13:58, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Does seem to encourage verbose plots as opposed to the summaries they are supposed to be! ;-) TINYMARK 23:37, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I was merely improving consistency by following the default style, which is currently "Plot". "Plot summary" isn't much different, so I'll be happy to skip those. Thank you for your feedback. The Transhumanist 01:16, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Collaboration

Hullo how are u?? Just fixed my internet connection. By the way, I made a request for rollbacker rights and it was approved yesterday.

Well, most of the edits I have made in Wikipedia are in relation to articles concerning history or historical personalities or ethnic groups. Space exploration is not my cup of tea. Anyway, I've identified a couple of pages in the list whose link you provided me. I have some ideas and I shall introduce some content in the near future. -Ravichandar 04:01, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

List of space exploration topics

Hi, I've put in a couple of minor changes to your extensive recent work on this subject, which greatly interests me also. However, I am still rather new to Wiki, and don't want to disrupt what you are about, not knowing your concept, etc. Let me know (on the article talk page I guess, or my talk page) if I should lay off for a bit until you are done. Cheers, Bill Wwheaton (talk) 19:54, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Award Center Note

I have added a note to the award center that states that when a person who has sponsored a challenge has either left Wikipedia or is on Wikibreak, the person who has completed a challenge can contact either myself or you so that we may review their work and subsequently award them the Barnstar. Also, I will be adding a few more challenges tonight and will start recruiting for this project. --Sharkface217 02:50, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Sounds like you're having fun.  :) The Transhumanist 07:04, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I very much am. My only regret is that I can't devote more time to Wikipedia. --Sharkface217 20:45, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

 :)

		The Excellent Userpage Award
		Nice page. jaytur1 (talk · contribs) 12:13, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. The Transhumanist 19:45, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Sub Pages

I was wondering how to create Subpages. I saw that page you have on it but I was wondering how to make them. WeLsHy (talk) 06:32, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for pointing out my oversight. I've added instructions at User:The Transhumanist/User page design/Menus#Subpages. Have fun. The Transhumanist 19:08, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Retired quarterbacks AFD

I replied, I don't see the use for a category or a list, note the delete opinions are mostly by experts in the subject. Thanks Secretalt (talk) 03:21, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

List of environment topics

I had put in an uncompleted afd on List of environment topics‎ as you noted. I had previously put it up for deletion and I could not figure out the templates to have it put up a second time. That pages on the associated alphabetical list should be deleted or usified. Alternatively they should have the irrelevant links culled out. WP is not a collection of links and the links are wide ranging and many have no relevance to the word environment as used in the title. There is some discussion at User talk:Wavelength#List of environment topics. See also Template talk:TopicTOC-Environment. -- Alan Liefting-talk- 22:06, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

It clearly meets the exception for organizational lists specified in the policy on link collections, and it serves at least two of the three main purposes of lists per WP:LISTS (it only takes one to justify a list). Your concerns can be more effectively addressed without going to AfD, and based on the last AfD attempt going there again has a snowball's chance in Hell of gaining consensus to delete. I'm in the process of improving the lists, and I suggest that you, I, and User:Wavelength work together to fix the problems you see. The Transhumanist 22:24, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

List of environment topics

See also the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of environment topics. -- Alan Liefting-talk- 22:20, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

ER, please?

Since you're probably one of the most experienced and prolific editors I know of (and you reviewed me earlier, as I recall it), would you like to comment on my Editor Review?

Wikipedia:Editor_review/21655_(2nd) Thank'ee much, Two One Six Five Five ^τ _ʃ 03:31, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

RFA

Good luck this time. You deserve it. Malinaccier Public (talk) 13:00, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. The Transhumanist 13:03, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Erm... Hi TT. I'm puzzled. --Dweller (talk) 15:07, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Me too. You know that tone will result in a failure... The Rambling Man (talk) 16:23, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Please TTH, consider withdrawing. Leaving this to nosedive to its obvious conclusion is only going to ruin your chances of ever passing an RfA. And despite my oppose vote, I'd like the chance to vote support in the future and see you pass. Kim Dent-Brown ^(Talk) 17:43, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Any reason why you wouldn't share with us your strategy?! The Rambling Man (talk) 22:47, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Message on my coaching page

Here. D.M.N. (talk) 15:47, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

...and I've also opposed your RFA. Please do not take this against me - it is what I truthfully think, and I think it will help you in the future. Regards. D.M.N. (talk) 16:00, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

One of my favorite pictures

Thank you for participating in my RfA! It was closed as successful with 74 supporting, 3 opposing, and 1 neutral. I will do my best to live up to the trust that you have placed in me. —Remember the dot (talk) 18:49, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Your RfA was unsuccessful

I am sorry to inform you that I have closed your RfA early as realistically it was no longer capable of succeeding. I think its a shame you chose to run again at the time you did and in the manner you did, you seem to have eroded a lot of the goodwill you had built up amongst users (including those who you coached for adminship yourself). I don't think any RfA has succeeded where the candidate set out with hostility to their critics and I'd rather the system were not used to make points. That said, I hope your negative experiences in this area will not put you off continuing to contribute to the project. Best wishes, WjBscribe 19:01, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Slow

Heya. Please chill out for a few days before doing anything drastic (which is what your content shuffle appears to be a prelude to). The rfa was ill-considered, but it's not insurmoutable. Hell, I was hoping to support your next one. Wikibreaks are good for the soul; recharge and return when enthusiasm rises.

The RfA was carefully considered. ;) The Transhumanist (talk) 21:29, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Go out and enjoy the hints of spring, instead of cleaning :) Please! -- Quiddity (talk) 20:29, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Please answer your email. The Transhumanist (talk) 21:29, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

It's like quitting smoking, a good test of willpower, but it boils down to just not pulling a cigarette out of a pack. Simply don't log in. Edit anon for a few months; or don't edit at all, just read.

(Adminship is over-rated anyway. Can easily make the hobby into a chore. Why close afds when you could be climbing trees?!)

The tools wouldn't make sense in my space, plus a disassembled userpage is depressing for everyone else who comes across it.

Retreat to the live trees with some good dead trees. Ogle the scantily clan citizens of our confusing planet. If in doubt, think "what would Calvin and Hobbes do?" Easy! They would ......... -- Quiddity (talk) 21:32, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm not disassembling anything. Just delegating.  ;) The links will remain in place. Most of the pages are dynamic to some degree, and therefore need caretakers. The Transhumanist (talk) 22:42, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Enjoy the Wikibreak, dude. --Sharkface217 00:02, 14 February 2008 (UTC)