This page is an archive of the twenty-first 20 topics on my talk page, lodged between the 2006-02-25 and the 2006-03-09. Please do not modify this page. If you wish to revive a discussion here, please don't hesitate to copy it back to my current talk page and add your comment per my policy.
Bulby and Furby
editWhy does the Furby information need to be in the Bulbasaur article at all? That's several degrees of separation away from Bulbasaur... that 6 years ago, in one country, a whole slew of toys that happened to include Bulbasaur was the most popular? I really don't think that that needs to be in there, and certainly not in the lead. If people need to see why Bulbasaur is connected to the real world, there's an excellent article, Pokémon, for that. Why do you feel that putting the Furby stuff in the Bulbasaur lead is so important? Matt Yeager ♫ (Talk?) 22:24, 25 February 2006 (UTC)
A note from the Admin Coaching coordinator
editHello, coaches. As you can see, there is a significant backlog at the Esperanza Admin Coaching program. Since we do not want users to have to wait forever to get assigned, I'm asking all of you for a status report. If you feel that you are done, that your coachee is not active enough, or that you could handle the extra load from another coachee, please tell me in my talk page as soon as possible. Thanks! Titoxd(?!? - help us) 06:48, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
FAC
editI'm not done having my say yet...but I got too tired to finish. I promise I'll get it done soon. pschemp | talk 10:01, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
I've arrived
editMy user space was vandalized three times this evening for the first time ever. :) [1] The vandal even updated his vandal count, wasn't that nice of him? Essjay says that now I have arrived. I'm so proud. pschemp | talk 08:05, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
ESP elections for AC
editthe elections are tied will 3 new members be added?
also i change the notice template thingy on the esp main page hope you don't mind
why do you ignore me? it says you are in did i do something wrong?
- He's probably just offline, his last edit was a few hours ago. Cheers, The Minister of War (Peace) 16:21, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
Hi - I thought I ought to try to pour some oil on troubled waters. I may be preaching to the choir, speaking to the Admin General of Esperanza, but please don't take the comments on WP:FAC personally. I understand your frustration in dealing with comments that seem driven by the subject matter of the article rather than its merits or demerits as an article, but you will be much better off in the long run (i) simply pointing out where objections are not actionable; (ii) dealing with any objections that are actionable; (iii) relying on Raul654 to notice that there is a lot of support - more so even than the previous couple of times - and not many actionable objections. Perhaps it will take another iteration of review and FAC to get there, but please try to stay calm - I know it is difficult, but you will only harm your own case if you lose your temper (or are seen to have done so). For what it is worth, based on other contributions, I think Tsavage is motivated by good intentions. -- ALoan (Talk) 17:46, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
- I considered coming here and saying almost the exact same thing as ALoan has written above, so I'll go ahead and say that I think his advice is very sound. :) -- Hinotori(talk)|(ctrb) 18:20, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
- Well, obviously, I disagree with the objections; the best way to counteract them is to explain why they are wrong. Please, please don't get stressed about this. It is not nice to have your work criticised, whether or not you agree with the criticism. Take a deep breath; go and do something else for a while. -- ALoan (Talk) 18:57, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
- I should add that the "mediocre, even crappy" was entirely uncalled for - I've seen mediocre articles, and this is not one of them - I note that it was carefully phrased in as "compelling, even brilliant" should NEVER equal "mediocre, even crappy" rather than actually saying that the article was crappy, although that implication was clear. -- ALoan (Talk) 21:03, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
- You may like to see the list of points that User:Tsavage has posted on my talk page. I have to say, some of them look quite good ideas. -- ALoan (Talk)
Esperanza Feb 06 elections
editI sent you an urgent e-mail regarding the elections. Please read it ASAP.
By the way, if you put 2 and 2 together regarding my username and e-mail address, you should work out my real name. That makes you and FireFox that know it. With great power, comes great responsibility... haz (user talk)e 20:26, 27 February 2006
- Big, big problem. User_talk:Mathwiz2020#Esperanza_elections haz (user talk)e 21:01, 27 February 2006
Sockpuppet
editHi. My name is Jared and I'd like to ask you a favor. I an not an admin, so I can't do it myself; User:Kalsermar and I have identified 3 people who seem to be sockpuppets of eachother. There is a lot of evidence for this, as noted on this page. Could you please step in and try to resolve this, (most likely by blocking the user names.) Thanks. --Jared [T]/[+] 21:50, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
My final good-byes
editHello Celestianpower. I came to tell all my friends, yes, that means you, that I am leaving Wikipedia. Thank you for being so kind to me during my stay on Wikipedia. I hope to speak with you again someday. Special thanks to you for being the first Wikipedian to list me as a user they held in high regards, that moment was special to me. Thank you. Moe ε 05:56, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
Hello! I nominated this page at Wikipedia:Esperanza/Programs#Esperanzian_Drive and I also found an image that you uploaded to use on the page, so I figured you might be interested in the subject. Hopefully we can expand this beyond a stub, and help relieve some stress of Wikipedians. :o) EWS23 | (Leave me a message!) 05:10, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
Please see here the message
editPlease take notice of Wikipedia:Esperanza/Charter Amendments At approx. 845 EST (one hour) I will place it before the entire Esperanza Community for debate. I am informing all Leadership members. --WikieZach| talk 00:45, 3 March 2006 (UTC) PS: Happy 1,000,000 DAYE!
Thank you!
edit |
Thank you! Hi Celestianpower/Archive21, thank you for your support in my Rfa! It passed with a final tally of 86/0/0. If you need help or just want to talk let me know! Again, thank you! – Dakota ~ ° 22:42, 3 March 2006 (UTC) |
My RfA
edit
Thank you for your support in my request for adminship. I'm delighted that the RfA succeeded with a final consensus of 52/17/7, and receiving comments including having 'excellent potential to become a great moderator', and I am now an administrator. It did however only just pass, and I shall do my very best to rectify any of my errors, including the general belief that I should do more article work. If you have any concerns, or if you ever feel that I may be able to help you, please feel free to leave a message on my talk page. Again, thank you!
Award
edit
—pschemp 23:18, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
Admin coaching
editHi, sorry I haven't responded sooner. I've been totally focussed on 2006 Winter Olympics items. I could use any advice as to what my potential limitations are regarding if I were to be considered for an adminship. I know that one of the things is that I don't spend a huge amount of time on talk pages or things like AfD or other things like that. Ever since I started editing Olympics pages, I realized how inadequate they are and tend to just plug away at those sorts of things. I'd love any advice of where I could get more involved in things. Sue Anne 08:16, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi!
editHey Celestianpower, I started to worry about your absence, but your wikibreak message says it all I guess! I hope they get it sorted out soon! Try not to get too frustrated by it, see it as a Wikiholiday in which you get to read some books or do some baking for a change ;-) (just kidding, I know it's frustrating nonetheless). Take care, --JoanneB 11:28, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
- I hope you get back on soon! P.S. I'm now an admin :P Ian13/talk 18:44, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
- I'm so very relieved now that you posted. :) btw we made up a new Esperanza holiday in your absence. Hope you don't mind. Wikipedia:Esperanza/Calendar/March pschemp | talk 19:21, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi Celestian! I hope your internets get working again soon. Cheers! --Fang Aili 20:22, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
I'm thinking that I'll need a new router and I can't afford one of those... :(. --Celestianpower háblame 10:56, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
- You could try ebay or freecycle. (And thanks for the tl-ising. :) --Fang Aili 17:23, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Requests for Adminship/Steveo2
editWhen you voted "neutral" in my RfA, you mentioned that you've heard my name somewhere. This is because you have left messages to users that I have also written to. And now you know. Thank you for leaving your opinions on the RfA.JaredW! 18:06, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
Trading card game
editHi, thanks for letting me know about this. You make two points, firstly that "Trading Card Game" is a proper noun. Certainly you could argue for "Pokemon Trading Card Game", "Neopets Trading Card Game" or "YU-GI-OH! Trading Card Game" needing capitals, I think it's harder to argue for the =term on it's own. Similarly I have a copy of "The Hobbit, the Book of the Film", I would not talk about it as the Book (that's reserved for THHGTTG or holy books :). To a lesser extent the same applies, for example, to Pepy's, one could say "in his Diaries" or equally reasonably "in his diaries"
Your second point, whether is this a job for a bot, is simpler. The bot isn't mindlessly replacing all section headings with slightly lower case variants, it's currently only changing about 200 specific headings - like "Selected Filmography" to "Selected filmography". Of course there's always the risk that someone's written book called Selected Filmography, but that is within the bounds of acceptable risk, IMHO. Rich Farmbrough 16:57 8 March 2006 (UTC).
- Yes, I would be happy to do that, probably tonight, maybe tomorrow. Rich Farmbrough 17:05 8 March 2006 (UTC).
illuminatus fac
edithi, you commented that the one-pgraph "numerology" section could be removed. is it an objection to its content, or the fact it is one pgraph? cheers. Zzzzz 17:13, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi - You may be losing the motivation to deal with this (I can understand it if you are) but I have tried to boil down the objections to the FAC as far as possible in a new summary section at the top. It seems that there are three:
- References thought to be inadequate (not sufficiently authoritative; not giving sufficiently verification)
- Elements thought to be missing (merchandise sales figures, design history and cultural impact)
- Context thought to be insufficient
Without getting into another point/counterpoint, it seems to me:
- You also can't produce "authoritative" references if they don't exist, and you can't do very much about the "authority" of the references that do exist: they are what they are, and either they do or they don't support what the article says.
- You can't add information that is not available in a verifiable form, and I would guess that these elements simply are not available in a published form, so how can you add them in a way that can be verified?
- The article can't explain each and every work, but I hope that a 90-year-old grandmother (who was motivated enough in the first place, and clicked through to the linked articles) would be able to work out what the article was saying. If not, a bit more explanation is required.
Just some thoughts... -- ALoan (Talk) 18:14, 9 March 2006 (UTC)