User talk:Wikiwoohoo/Archive 2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is an archive. Do not edit the contents of this page. Direct any additional comments to the current talk page.

Listing images for deletion

Hello, Wikiwoohoo. I noticed that you recently listed Image:Bbc.gif and Image:BBCNews06c-1-.jpeg for deletion. I have just two quick comments I would like to make. First, it is important that you notify the uploader when you nominate an image for deletion; you can accomplish this by simply pasting {{subst:idw|Image:ImageName.ext}} at the end of the user's talk page. Also, I noticed that both of these images were being used under a claim of fair use. In the future, if you run across orphaned fair-use images, you can tag the images with {{subst:orfud}} and notify the uploader with {{subst:orphaned|Image:ImageName.ext}} ~~~~ (you can copy this line from the box that is created by {{subst:orfud}}). There is no problem with listing these images for deletion, but it is quicker to use {{subst:orfud}}. Please let me know if you have any questions. —Bkell (talk) 15:34, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggestions, I will do as you suggest from now on. :) With regards to Image:BBCNews06c-1-.jpeg, this was not uploaded by C.byron and so I have deleted your message regarding said image from their user talk page. I hope you do not mind. I will send a message to the actual uploader of the image now. Thank you for your help again. Wikiwoohoo 17:13, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Oops, I didn't notice that the two images were uploaded by different users. Thank you for cleaning up my mess… —Bkell (talk) 17:14, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Seamus215

Do you know anything about the new idents, or a BBC WOrld revamp for the set?Seamus215 17:26, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Edit count

Username        Wikiwoohoo
Total edits     1978
Distinct pages edited   806
Average edits/page      2.454
First edit      22:13, 7 August 2005
        
(main)          988
Talk            58
User            127
User talk       135
Image           463
Image talk      1
Template        17
Template talk   2
Category        8
Wikipedia       151
Wikipedia talk  28

Any further questions, don't hesitate to ask me on my talk page. Viridae^Talk 13:18, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

Here are the instructions. Viridae^Talk 22:49, 30 July 2006 (UTC)

You may also try this one —Minun ^{Spiderman • Review Me} 10:20, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

My RfA

Thankyou for your participation in my RfA. Due to an almost even spread of votes between Oppose and Support (Final (16/13/6)) I have decided to withdraw for now and re-apply in a couple of months as suggested. I thank everyone for their kind support of my editorial skills; it meant a lot to me to get such strong recommendations from my fellow editors. If you ever have any hints as to how I can improve further, I would love to hear from you. Viridae^Talk 15:24, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Languages

Hi There! Can you translate my name in what language you know please, and then post it Here. I would be very grateful if you do (if you know another language apart from English and the ones on my userpage please feel free to post it on) P.S. all th translations are in alpahbetical order so when you add one please put it in alpahbetical order according to the language. Thanks!!! Abdullah Geelah 13:59, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Please stop sending me the same message again and again, I've already archived the original message, I found the image somewhere on the internet to be honest with you Abdullah Geelah 18:20, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

AMA Coordinator

You should probably consult with User:The Thadman, who has apparently been working as acting coordinator in the absence of a process for choosing one. I haven't been involved in the AMA for some time, but efforts to make it a more useful part of resolving disputes are certainly welcome. --Michael Snow 23:21, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

re:AMA availability

Hi Steve. This is just to confirm that I am available to take AMA cases, and if the position is still vacant, am interested in the position of AMA Coordinator. I have left a message regarding this at Wikipedia:AMA Coordinator. I had previously contacted Michael Snow and he passed me onto you. Wikiwoohoo 23:23, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

I have just seen your note at Wikipedia:AMA Coordinator. Thank you, I will add myself to the nomination list. Wikiwoohoo 23:26, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Excellent :-) You kinda sneaked onto the membership list without my noticing; I usually try and welcome all new members and see how far along they are with the Advocacy process. :-) Please do add your name to the nominations list, and I believe that have a case that may be appropriate for you so check back on your talkpage soon. :-) אמר Steve Caruso _{(desk/AMA/vote for me)} 23:29, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Advocacy request

Heyo, Steve Caruso here. There is a Request for assistance by Zephyrad (talk) on Second-class citizen. Would you be willing to take their case? If you will, please leave a note and sign under the entry on WP:AMARQ and change "(pending)" in the heading to "(open)." When you're finished with the case, set it to "(closed)". If you're not able to take the case, please leave me a message on my talk page so I can continue searching for a willing Advocate. Many thanks! אמר Steve Caruso _{(desk/AMA/vote for me)} 23:33, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

If it is possible, it would be best to wait one more day since I will be able to give it my full attention then. Would that be a problem? Wikiwoohoo 23:35, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

It shouldn't be a problem. Just drop the user a quick message saying the same and it should be fine. :-) אמר Steve Caruso _{(desk/AMA/vote for me)} 23:41, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi! I apologise for the delay; I didn't want to take time for this until I really had some. A user named Mike18xx has effectively hijacked the "Second-class citizen" article. It appears any change made to it by another person is promptly (and repeatedly) reverted by him, with needless POV commentary and personal attacks on the posters, both in summaries and on the talk page. I felt bad enough when he started in on me; once he saw I would no longer play his game, he started it with others.

I wrote the original article together with Marskell. I understand that once posted, an article is fair game for editing, but Mike18xx's ungroomed writing style, his wholly unprofessional attitude, his multiple reverts, and his consistently nasty, insulting comments are each a detriment to this article, and to Wikipedia as a whole, as far as I can see. (Not to mention his advocation of flaming IP addresses, on the article's talk page.)

I would like to attempt to clean things up once more, and possibly have the article edit-protected; the list of historical examples (note: HISTORICAL examples, as stipulated earlier on) has become something of a flashpoint, and a magnet for unnecessary POV, finger-pointing, and attempts to post weak or unfounded current-events "examples". I didn't write this piece (or continue to work on it) for these kinds of purposes, and it's very disturbing to me to see it so mishandled.

I would be satisfied, I believe, to have another party (possibly Marskell; we haven't spoken recently) overhaul the article. My main concern is to stop persons like Mike18xx from using Wikipedia as a soapbox, and an excuse to try to hurt other people with words... which appears to be his rationale, from reading his own user and talk pages. – Thanks for your time. Zephyrad 05:34, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

I see Pablo D. Flores has also picked up on this matter, and gotten less than positive results with the same user, while Lar has previously warned the user about his tactics. I have written each, and asked them to read the above, also. Zephyrad 06:16, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

I acknowledge that this has been brought to my attention and I am monitoring contributions by this user. ++Lar: t/c 07:22, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Followup:

Thanks for your reply. I would appreciate it if you could keep an eye on this situation. I'm not in a personal dispute with Mike18xx so much as I notice he doesn't seem to take anything but himself and his own narrow opinions seriously, and thinks causing grief by the kilobyte is his mission in life, or something. I can't improve on my own (co-)creation without watching it get instantly reversed to something less, and told what I "don't understand" about the subject, and that I'm "anti-American" – all because I merely wish to change some weak phrasing. This is ridiculous on more levels than is worth discussion.

I have read this person's talk page, and the talk pages on other entries he has "contributed" to, and watched him smart off to one and all (even Wikipedia staff), abuse the setup, and filibuster meaningless and questionable points, while he detracts from the work of others and nearly assumes credit for it. At the same time, he equates any attempt to streamline (or wikify, as I understand it) his prose, or critique any point, as "suppression of the Truth", and the same with everyone's attempts to reason with him, or take disciplinary action. In his view, those who aren't pawns and stooges are actively trying to hide facts (not present them objectively), and punish him and others for "knowing better". This is equally ridiculous.

If this person showed half as much writing talent (as needed here, not in POV pieces) or objectivity as he does sheer arrogance, he might actually make a positive contribution. As it is, from what I've seen and read, his writing is substandard, his facts are slanted, his regard for peers is practically nonexistent, he's unable to take criticism, and his ignorance is only outpaced by his paranoia, and his determination to impose his (lack of) ideas wherever possible. I appreciate Pablo D. Flores taking some action, but if 24-hour blocks haven't worked, I think a 48-hour one will be like putting a bigger Band-Aid on the same bullet wound. People like this crave attention; more than is worth giving him, and I do hope something more effective, or more permanent, is in the works if he comes back expressing the same outlook.

I have not returned to the Second-class citizen page as yet, because I'd prefer to do so when I have adequate time to go over the whole thing (including contributions that may have been overlooked or mangled by recent events). I would still be interested in seeking edit-protection for a revised article, particularly for the list of examples, which I do believe should be limited to noted historical items, not arguable or POV ones from recent memory or interpretation. (There are persons of every race, belief, and economic level, who believe they are unheeded, exploited, or oppressed by the people around them. A page such as this is not the place for blame-gaming.) – Thanks for your help. Zephyrad 12:04, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your messages, and my apologies for not responding sooner; real life has beckoned the last few weeks. So far it appears that Mike18xx has backed off, or found something else to do, which pleases me greatly. I do intend to go back and clean up the Second-class citizen page, when I have time to devote to a proper cleanup (and the mood is right); I still find its present status unsatisfying, but don't want to do half a job. Zephyrad 00:44, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

On an unrelated note... you may want to peruse (or refer to someone to peruse) the contributions of CyberSongs, who apparently claims to have invented, predicted, or precipitated every other technological development and trend since rippled toilet paper, offering "proof" in the form of links to his own blog or Web pages, or message boards where he has posted essentially the same unverified/unverifiable claims. (I believe this falls under "circular arguments"; correct me if I'm wrong.) Meanwhile anyone who disagrees, or asks for hard evidence or outside substantiation, is merely "censoring" him, and/or spelling out their own doom. (He and I tangled awhile back, when he inserted a number of POV comments, non-sequitors and unrelated matter into another of my articles [ Songshark ], which I promptly reverted or moved to its talk page. He replied sometime later with a number of further POV remarks and personal attacks, which I answered point-by-point... and never received a response.)

There is a difference between "inventing" or "discovering" something, and merely observing "I'll bet this is going to be big someday!" He doesn't appear to know the difference, and I don't see validation or proof of anything, except possibly his own humbug, naiveté, or delusions of grandeur. (Anyone with as much education and experience as he boasts on his user and talk pages alone ought to be either too busy to make contributions to Wikipedia, too rich to care, or at least be able to have a better writer working on his behalf, IMO.) – Thanks for your time. Zephyrad 00:44, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

That other matter

Yeah, the warnings and dialogue you're referring to came overnight, after I noticed this guy had posted even more self-serving fluff, and it kinda got my goat. I referred one page (discussing his "company") for speedy deletion as advertising, and proposed another (claiming to have developed or "proven" the Unified Field Equation – again through his "company") for deletion as original research (and a possible hoax, since he took primary credit for "completing Einstein's work" in this area, and how it would affect the price of tea in China).

A MONGO took action (deleting both pages), prompting the guy to flip out, claim everyone was trying to suppress or "screw with" him, and asking who made the proposal so he could sue them (me) for defamation. Konstable then intervened, and also dropped me a note about using the word "hoax", despite the qualifier. I gave a largely rhetorical reply, explained where/how I found that as grounds (in Wikipedia's own guidelines, no less), and he seemed satisfied.

So yes, there are indeed admins onto this person now, and it'll be interesting to see what develops. I have nothing personal against him, but I do hate to see anyone's time and energies wasted, or anyone misled, by this sort of garbazhe. Meanwhile, I see no reason to stop editing on Wikipedia (despite one person's grumpiness, and I'm glad someone else mentioned that in the help pages); it's an outlet, a chance to share what I know and keep my writing skills in shape... and if I want to toot my own horn, I have my own, off-Wiki pages for that. ;-) – Thanks. Zephyrad 05:38, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

WIkipedia:Esperanza/User Page Award

Hi Wikiwoohoo! You've signed up to be a judge for the Esperanza User Page Award! You'll have three user pages to examine. The user pages you get coincide with your signup number. So if you signed up to be a judge in spot 1 than you will get nominations 1-3. Pick your favorite one, and list it in the finalist section. After all 5 judges have chosen a finalist it's time to award them 1-10 points in the four categories:

• Attractiveness: general layout, considering colour scheme and/or use of tables if applicable
• Usefulness: links to subpages or editing aids, helpful information
• Interesting-ness: quirky, unique, captivating, or funny content
• General niceness: at the judges' discretion

Please see the Scores section on this page for additional information on your job as a judge.

Keep in mind that your scores are confidential! Email Shreshth91 with your scores and final picks. As soon as all the scores have been tallied, a winner will be announced! Thanks.

May the Force be with you! Shreshth91($ |-| ŗ 3 $ |-| ţ |-|) 08:19, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

August Esperanza Newsletter

WIkipedia:Esperanza/User Page Award

Greetings, Wikiwoohoo. The judges would like to announce that the winner for the Esperanza User Page Contest has been chosen. Congratulations to Buchanan-Hermit for winning the contest. The winning entry can be found here.

If you'd like to participate in the contest again, check by the contest page in a few days and sign up. See you around. May the Force be with you! Shreshth91($ |-| ŗ 3 $ |-| ţ |-|) 16:41, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Re: userpage

Thanks for the congratulations message. Yeah, it did take a lot of planning but once I started making it, thing went quite smoothly. A bit time-consuming but it was worth it. :) -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 17:06, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:BBC Edward Stourton.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:BBC Edward Stourton.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 20:01, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Advocacy request

Heyo, Steve Caruso here. There is a Request for assistance by Thankyoubaby (talk) on Deja Vu (Beyoncé song). Would you be willing to take their case? If you will, please leave a note and sign under the entry on WP:AMARQ and change "(pending)" in the heading to "(open)." When you're finished with the case, set it to "(closed)". If you're not able to take the case, please leave me a message on my talk page so I can continue searching for a willing Advocate. Many thanks! אמר Steve Caruso _(desk/AMA) 13:16, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

AMA Request

Hi, thanks for contacting me. My problem is with User:Tigermichal over the article Deja Vu (Beyoncé song).

Basically, I haven't added anything to the page, I was just watching it. There was some paragraphs on the page about how Beyonce's fans had a petition for a reshoot for the video, and one about the song "underperforing" at radio compared to her last singles, and Tigermichal kept removing them, while I kept putting them back because it's Point of View to not have them, and I think it's encyclopedic to keep them. The petition was mentioned on the TV show Extra, and the other one (which has been readded now) is just explaining the charts. So after I did a few reverts and told Tigermichal of the problem, he went after me, so I went for help.

It's not that big of a deal, and I've just ignored that page now anyways, I just think this user is a bit problematic, especially if you look at his talk page...

Thanks,
Thankyoubaby 19:53, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Sure, I can wait... :)
Thankyoubaby 22:22, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

BBC news

Yes, I remember reviewing the BBC news article. However, I don't get much time these days to participate in WP, so I won't be able to review it. I'm really sorry about that. Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»= 15:13, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Milla Jovovich

The user in question edits from 213.240.3.* IP (see [1]). The problems are that he wants to portray Milla's origin as being Montenegrin. While this is partly true, he abuses the fallacy of equivocation, as the word "Montenegrin" could have two meanings:

• from Montenegro
• of Montenegrin nation

While Milla's family does come from Montenegro, it is not a part of Montenegrin nation (which I could elaborate, if you want to know more). To that end, for example in [2], he removes references about her knowledge of Serbian language and misinterprets reference about her Serbian origin.

A compromise is possible, for example by saying that she is Montenegrin Serb by origin, but I don't believe that the user would listen to it. Nikola 20:14, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Montenegro is a country. Various nations live in it. In the widest sense of the word, Montenegrins are all inhabitants of Montenegro, regardless of their nation (you may think of it as, say, Corsicans being all inhabitants of Corse, regardless of their nation). In a narrower sense, the meaning is somewhat ambiguous.

Prior to 1945, utmost majority of inhabitants of Montenegro were considered and have considered themselves as Serbs, and it is undisputed (see Demographic history of Montenegro). In the narrower sense of the word, Montenegrins are these Serbs who live in Montenegro (and who have different culture than f.e. Albanians who live in Montenegro). After 1945, communist government in Yugoslavia created Montenegrins as a new nation, and maintained that they are not Serbs. For decades, people could not freely declare on the issue. Now when they can, most of them declare as Montenegrins and a large minority declare as Serbs. In the narrowest sense of the word, Montenegrins are those who don't declare as Serbs. See Montenegrins for more details.

Related to Milla, her family either lived in Montenegro prior to 1945 or (her father) consider themselves Serb after 1945, so there is no reason to call her Montenegrin. Nikola 20:34, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

First, thank you for taking the time to deal with this. How Milla considers her background is not the issue at the moment: none of the references mention that.

However, even if there is an official website with this info, it may not be definitive. If I may take some more of your time, the root of the problem is that in this issue the anon is using the fallacy of equivocation. For example, when he says that she is of Montenegrin origin, it could mean either:

• from Montenegro
• of Montenegrins

The first meaning is true, but the second isn't. The anon gave a couple of references which say that she is of Montenegrin origin; this tells us nothing, as it could refer to either of the meanings. Nikola 20:33, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

Just occured to me that I never thanked you for your participation in all of this. Well, thank you :) Nikola 17:48, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

WP:ESP/UPA template to judges

Just letting you know I fixed the error in the template you gave to the five judges - the current overseer is Celestianpower, and that's who we'll be sending our scores to. However, thanks for filling in and distributing the templates - as I'm going to be doing it next time, I was wondering what the {{????}} link is to add them to pages, or if it's manual submission by copy-and-paste. Cheers, Daniel.Bryant 02:37, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Vandal

Sorry, I'm afraid I missed your original message... still, good to see it's been worked out! smurrayinchester^{(User), (Talk)} 16:00, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

BBC News

In response to your question, yes definitely it should be summarized. The details should be placed in the sub-articles if they exist. You may also want to look at the article I worked on, The Philadelphia Inquirer, which is also a news medium, for ideas on how you might want to format the BBC News article. Medvedenko 02:15, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

September Esperanza Newsletter

Mediation Cabal case: advocate review requested

Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2006-10-05 Pravknight/FeloniousMonk has been reviewed by two mediators and in their opinion the case seems more an advocacy request than a mediation request. I'd appreciate it if you'd take a peek and determine if this is the case or not? Thanks! ~Kylu (u|t) 22:21, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

BBC News

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits, such as those you made to BBC News, are considered vandalism. If you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the hard work of others. Thanks. - RoyBoy ⁸⁰⁰ 20:20, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Yeah sorry about that, I had already reverted myself back to your version, but forgotten I had sent this warning. My bad. - RoyBoy ⁸⁰⁰ 20:40, 11 October 2006 (UTC)

Archives

Generally it's best to keep archives; you never know when you might need them again. Still, if you still want them deleted, drop a line. Laïka 21:14, 11 October 2006 (UTC)