[edit] Posts

[edit] WP:ANI

Please stop disrupting the noticeboard. Nakon 01:26, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

With a trivial amount of compromise you can avoid a revert war. But you are running the show with an iron fist. Tells a lot about how ani discussions go. I will stop reverting the second you restore my comment and remove the discussion templates. -- Cat ^chi? 01:31, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

You don't seem to get it. Three editors have told you to either drop it or take it to DRV. Stop edit warring and do so. Nakon 01:32, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

I will not going to take it to Drv. And I will revert that page back. You could save me and everyone a lot of time if you just restored my comment. -- Cat ^chi? 01:33, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

So because three (four including myself) have asked you to drop it, you're going to continue just to violate WP:POINT? Nakon 01:37, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Point? What point am I illustrating? Do not throw random policies and guidelines at me. I am far to experienced for that. -- Cat ^chi? 01:44, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Don't throw account age into the ring. Your actions are clearly disruptive and need to stop. I'd advise you to listen to this edit by Daniel. Nakon 01:47, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

How ironic. You are accusing me of being elitist indirectly because I complain about arbcom eliteicism. -- Cat ^chi? 02:07, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

You're the one who mentioned account age. Nakon 02:08, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

I did not. I merely said I was experienced. You interpreted that on your own. -- Cat ^chi? 02:11, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The heck?

Who do you heck do you think you are characterizing my concerns and comments as trolling? Even actual legal court decisions can be criticized. Why can't arbocom? And this isn't even tied to any decisions by arbcom on a dispute. -- Cat ^chi? 01:34, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Because they've made their point clear and your comments are to effect of "well screw them, I deny they can control the way RfAr works". What you seem to forget is all the RfAr pages are designed for the community to interact with the Committee, not the other way around, and as such Committee have control over the format and composition of all pages in Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/* and Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/*. Daniel (talk) 01:39, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

WC/CC...you're being disruptive and three arb clerks have, in various words, told you to chill out. So do so. — Rlevse • Talk • 01:40, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

I have taken this issue with the foundation itself including Jimbo. I will drop this issue when I feel comfortable with the result. You can count on that. Arbitration clerks are not divine entities. I will not be patronized. -- Cat ^chi? 01:47, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Good. I eagerly await the Foundation's inaction on the issue due to them totally disagreeing with you. Daniel (talk) 01:48, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Is everything that scripted? My my... -- Cat ^chi? 02:08, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

No, you're just naive and ignorant. Daniel (talk) 02:15, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Naive in the sense I still believe foundation would listen to what I have to say? Ignorant as in I see a cultural problem others want to hide under the carpet? -- Cat ^chi? 02:28, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, and no. Daniel (talk) 02:34, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

What makes you so sure? -- Cat ^chi? 02:37, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

My gut. Daniel (talk) 02:59, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

How ironic. You are attempting to rebuff my attempt to criticize wikipedia by linking to external criticism of wikipedia by Stephan Colbert. -- Cat ^chi? 03:10, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Guys, calm down plz. —Dark ^talk 01:51, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Why should I be "uncalm"? I am the one merely proposing minor changes to arbcom. People are going out of their way to attack me for it. It is them who should be calm. -- Cat ^chi? 02:10, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Again, misrepresenting the facts. It was disagreed with by arbitrators and clerks, and you're going out of your way to threaten to make edits which will disrupt Wikipedia to make a point. You even link to the essay policy when doing so regarding the mediation restriction. Daniel (talk) 02:15, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

What essay is that? -- Cat ^chi? 02:20, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Policy, even. Daniel (talk) 02:21, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes I intend to disrupt wikipedia by successfully mediating a dispute. Your point? -- Cat ^chi? 02:28, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

That's not what Daniel said... —Dark ^talk 02:32, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Right, that is what the ridiculous arbcom remedy bans me from though. -- Cat ^chi? 02:35, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

(edit conflict) The respected members of the Arbitration Committee i) believe mediating "require[s] skill and the trust of the community", ii) believe you "[have] unsuccessfully attempted to mediate a number of contested articles" ... "where he had a strong POV", and iii) have therefore "prohibited [you] from holding [yourself] out as a mediator or attempting to serve as a mediator of any dispute". These respected and elected representatives of the community do not believe you have the necessary qualities or community support to be a mediator, and have banned you from doing so to prevent further disruption. You cannot ignore an arbitration decision just because you disagree with its ratio. Daniel (talk) 02:34, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Oh really? Will you block me for mediating? What makes you think I haven't mediated many disputes via a sockpuppet account? -- Cat ^chi? 02:37, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Seriously, stop digging yourself into a hole. Daniel (talk) 02:59, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

I am doing the exact opposite. Trying to pull arbcom out of a hole. -- Cat ^chi? 03:10, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Comment by FT2

There seem to be a couple of matters you are fighting on today at least - a RFAR redirect issue, and the removal of the prohibition on mediating for others. Unfortunately both of those seem to be problematic. The Arbitration Committee generally manages its own subpages, and there doesn't seem to be consensus either by Arbitrators, or arbcom clerks, or even by the community, to treat those differently than they are being treated. And the mediation issue, was considered by appeal very recently, and whilst questions were raised as to whether a lesser restriction might help, in the end, no arbitrator was willing to say the restriction should be removed as recently as March 2008. Wider communal consensus on both just says no interest in more discussion, best I can tell.

The communal concern in the mediation issue seems to be that you are still prone to arguement rather than discussion, and unfortunately that seems to be the case. On the other hand you are under considerable stress and are likely snapping at many things in part for that reason too. (Others have done so as well, not just you, I should add.) The concern I have is that these topics may be going nowhere in which case eventually your continuing pushing at them will just be seen as a problem by others.

I'm not sure what to suggest, but accepting what is, rather than consistently reacting to it, is probably going to be part of it. Easy for me to say, I know; I dont feel under pressure of the circumstances you've described. So I am wary of saying a lot because Im not sure I can be a help here, sadly. FT2 ^{(Talk | email)} 03:13, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

I dislike my activity to be classified as "fighting". I am not confronting - hardly arguing. I am not even being treated seriously... My efforts have been declared as trolling though. That sure surprised me. Please avoid such language.

Clarification. Issues I discussed today:

1. Possible restructuring of arbcom's main page WP:RFAR into two sub pages
   • This effort was declared as trolling
2. Recreation of Wikipedia:Requests for Arbitration/Davenbelle redirect
   • This discussion was closed, the admin deleting the page refuses to discuss this out of process deletion.
   • I am not binded by any rule arbitrators aren't.
3. FYI I relayed to arbcom over my intention to ignore their decision completely.
   • It doesn't qualify as an ultimatum as I am not proposing anything. Also an ultimatum to mediate would be an oxymoron.

• I do not believe arbitrators seriously discussed my appeal. If they have, I see no evidence of it. I think arbitrators do not have the slightest clue what those restrictions are doing to me - to a person who would rather die than mediate something on this project. Arbitrators have succeeded in disgusting me away from mediation. Let there be no mistake about it.
• It is simply offensive to every value I believe in such as honesty and fairness that arbcom and the community is willing to consider unblock/unban of trolls, vandals and other disruptive users (I am not even referencing to the Jack Merridew case) and yet go out of their way to ignore my appeal. How many edits does the indef blocked MARMOT get? MARMOT being a person who wrote vandalism bots, abused MediaWiki vulnerabilities to vandalize among other issues. He was unblocked and given a second chance, twice. Me being a good user (relative to MARMOT at least) have been given no such chances. What have I done to deserved to be treated so poorly?
• Then there is the matter of how would people punish me for successfully mediating... Seriously, would you block me? Even if the Mediation fails to resolve the dispute... Would you block me? Even if I were to be blocked for how long would it be? Based on what? Arbcom remedy doesn't even talk about blocking.
• Do you have any idea how much crap I need to deal with due to the expired remedies? Do you? Do you have any idea how useless arbcom has been so far? I have been bringing issues to arbcom since 2005. Not only do I need to hand feed arbitrators evidence and etc but I also have to deal with their poor judgment which only affects me. I am condemned to many things as a result.
  • Even a one week newbie knows I will never be granted admin tools.
    • Why? because I have been infront of arbcom at least four times now. In all cases Davenbelle was of course involved. A 5th case was avoided which is why the arbcom is still dealing with this.
  • I am completely banned from editing Kurdish or Armenian related articles even if the article isn't controversial.
    • I want to point out a good deal of these articles are hijacked by lobbyists. CAMERA people were merely careless, they aren't the only one. The Armenia-Azerbaijan arbitration case is a tool only useful to lobbyists. Regular inexperienced users can be sanctioned. Experienced paid/unpaid staff of lobbies can change accounts faster than you can change underwear.
  • No one has been taking be seriously since the first arbitration case. People always assume bad faith and mistreat me. They constantly accuse me of a hidden agenda. They call me paranoid even in the light of Christal clear evidence.
  • I am in a position where I cannot loose anything.
    • I am on a dynamic IP range. I know the inner workings of the community and MediaWiki to avoid any kind of block. I have obeyed any block to dat voluntarily even if I could easily avoid them. This isn't intended as a threat btw. It isn't like there is anything the community can take away from me.
      • I will not compromise from my personal values on honesty and fairness even if it incriminates me. So getting another account is out of the question for me. Dishonesty works better in the mechanics of our wiki-society. Under the guise of "privacy" you and I know how many sanctioned people returned editing. They become less disruptive so as to stay under the radar - but what was the point of the sanction?
• I already know from experience that the arbitration committee is anything but helpful. This isn't intended to be an insult. Just an observation from experience. So I know my expectations.

I am willing to listen others as much as they are willing to listen to me. You are obviously willing to listen to me which is why I am willing to listen to you as a person. I consider you different from rest of the arbitrators per your initiative to talk to me.

-- Cat ^chi? 04:11, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Difference in timesptamp is the amount of thought I put into this. -- Cat ^chi? 04:13, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Tell me what you need

You're under stressful times here, and you're getting nowhere fast. I think, however, the main problem is you're approaching things from the wrong angle, and with the wrong attitude. What is it that you need done? I will undertake my best attempts to help, so long as what you need is fair and warranted.

Anthøny 09:44, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

I made a few minor suggestions (creation of a redirect, minor restructuring of rfar) and I have been almost crucified for it. I do not know. I do need the redirect to more easily link to the case.

• As it stands, I probably will be forced to link to the Davenbelle for the next 47 years if my past 3 years is any indication. I wil hand feed the community more evidence and links to past cases (which are less than fun to type). I do not expect this dispute to be resolved for decades. If I turn out to be wrong... Well I suppose that is a good thing.
• I also need to be able to follow discussions on ArbCom. I spend a good deal of my time editing from a shared GPRS connection which has a speed close to a shared 56k (its slightly less). It's sluggish as is. As much as I find arbcom to be completely useless when dealing with disputes, the incompetent wikipedia will not move a yoctometer to help me and delegate the dispute to arbcom like it did the past 3 years.

I intend to file an rfar case on Jack Merridew. I know there is a clarification but the overly complex long term nature of the case that seems to be a better way to address the problem. You being a clerk can probably make the transition better than I. Please make this transition. A clarification has a very high chance of disappearing for inactivity per my past experience.

I seemingly need to demonstrate mediation (a field of science I have no interest to) in order to abolish an arbcom remedy. Since arbcom has shown complete apathy on the matter, I have to do this all by my self. Fun thing is I am only interested in the removal of this non-expiring remedy. Currently the remedy only serves to help trolls. I am open to suggestions on getting this remedy off my back.

-- Cat ^chi? 12:38, 18 May 2008 (UTC)

Are these realistic possibilities? -- Cat ^chi? 08:52, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Deferring a reply to this until I have time to do the thread justice. Anthøny 19:29, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

Deferring until tomorrow. Anthøny 20:58, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Well? [1] -- Cat ^chi? 12:48, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Ah! My Goddess (Quiz Game).png

Thanks for uploading Image:Ah! My Goddess (Quiz Game).png. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 17:18, 19 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Puzzling edit made by Computer

Your bot, Computer, made an edit to a redirect that I had created saying that it was "Fixing double redirect". However, I am unable to figure out what it actually changed! The diff is here. I would appreciate it if you could take a look at it. -- Imperator3733 (talk) 17:09, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

To an untrained eye that may be... but

• this and
• this

are different pages. The difference is "6%C2%A0" which are probably invisible control characters.

-- Cat ^chi? 21:52, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

Okay. It just seems strange. Shouldn't the article be the one without the control characters? -- Imperator3733 (talk) 17:10, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

Yes, it should be moved. -- Cat ^chi? 18:24, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

It's been moved now. -- Imperator3733 (talk) 18:40, 24 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your G22 map

In looking at your map here Image:G22countries.png, I noticed that China is not shaded as it should be. Could you fix that? Thanks. —OverMyHead 23:00, 26 May 2008 (UTC)

I altered it accrdingly: commons:Image:G22countries.png. Is that good enough? -- Cat ^chi? 10:45, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Botflag on vec

I think you should do the usual talk on the request page. From the three active voters 2 voted against because of the fact that in name computer there is no -bot part in. Carsrac (talk) 15:26, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

I have posted a remark there. -- Cat ^chi? 19:26, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mystified by bot with javanese articles

Sorry to do this - but what exactly is the bot doing with WP EN Indonesian articles and WP Jav articles? Apologies if my inability to see what it happening is blindingly obvious to you SatuSuro 04:28, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

OK I have just worked it out - is that really necessary ? SatuSuro 04:29, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

I am sorry, can you give me a link to the issue? You seem to be upset but I do not see what this is about. -- Cat ^chi? 12:40, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Nah not upset in the slightest - the bot is adding accents to javanese place name links on indonesian articles in english wikipedia and it seemed so odd i was gonna try to work out why - if it makes somebody happy - who cares ? - it just seemed quite odd for a while - so really in the end a false alalm - i think - its just when i was trying to learn javanese i cannot remember accents in the western alphabet for javanese words - thats all -cheers - if it fits thats ok - SatuSuro 13:06, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Hmm... Can you link me to one these changes. I think I may know why... -- Cat ^chi? 13:09, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

give me a minute or two if thats ok please SatuSuro 13:11, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Hell my watch list is well over the average and is causing me problems - not long now SatuSuro 13:15, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Banjar%2C_West_Java&diff=216811808&oldid=209669164 see that one makes sense - its replacing a name damned clever too - but a few days ago there was an accent part to what it was up to - maybe not a good example though SatuSuro 13:19, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Oh those... The bot scans every individual wikipedia (full list) it operates on. Let me explain what the bot did. Bot noticed the following

• jv:Banjar Patroman does not exist.
• jv:Kutha Banjar does exist.
• jv:Kutha Banjar links to en:Banjar, West Java

Based on above input the bot updates pages

• Links on en:Banjar, West Java is updated like you pointed out
• Links on jv:Kutha Banjar is updated. It used to lack links to en, ms, nl, sv wikis.

Of course that isn't all.The bot added or updated pages on the following wikis to link to the correct page

• id.wikipedia
• ms.wikipedia
• nl.wikipedia
• pl.wikipedia
• su.wikipedia

This procedure is called interwiki linking.

-- Cat ^chi? 13:50, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Ok thanks a lot for such a full explanation - it is good that you are able to give such an explanation

I realised long ago such a process occurred - it just seemed odd when i saw the bot putting accents in where i didnt think they were needed - as for offering to get the bot to do things - I dont trust mechanised processes on some areas of what i call cat tagging - where there are issues where I believe an actual looking at the category and or the derivative sub categories is useful.

So as much as some areas might benefit from the level of bot work - the one that I am currently doing has a three fold purpose - I am actually looking to see what cats the NZ project has - as a way of checking against what I have tagged in the Australian and Indonesian projects - and trying to see where there might be benefits to any of the projects in any direction - if mechanised, things can get missed and or misinterpreted :) - however I can see where a bot could do it more efficiently and thoroughly - a lot depends on my memory and capacity to make the correlations - in 1974 I remember meeting a man who used to sit in front of slides of cells from dead children to look for patterns - I realise now we have pattern recognition software that far out does the human capacity to work at that level of checking :) SatuSuro 01:24, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Categories are machine generated lists. Bots will be more effective in dealing with them. For example I can tag all talk pages of artiles in a spesific category with a "wikiproject" template. -- Cat ^chi? 18:57, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:Sora (Air TV).png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Sora (Air TV).png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 07:28, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:Misuzu Kamio (Air game).png)

Thanks for uploading Image:Misuzu Kamio (Air game).png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 08:14, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your bot...

made this edit which is not very good. --MrStalker ^(talk) 06:34, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I'll look into it. Thanks for notifying me. Your vigilance is commendable. :) -- Cat ^chi? 11:32, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Bot flag in Korean Wikipedia

Bot flag for ko:User:컴퓨터 is now granted. Please write down functions on the user page of the bot clearly. --Albamhandae (talk) 16:25, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] User Category for Discussion