User talk:Angela/Archive6

>>User talk:Angela/Archive7

Quebec

I subdivided the ultra-long Timeline of Quebec history as inspired by Timeline of United States history. As this timeline will obviously only get longer as more events are added, I thought it made sense to do it now. On 3 occasions, User:Angelique has reverted to a previous version of hers to remove it. I am beginning to think that this "new" user is a hard banned one under a new name. She saw me get angry and insult another user on Quebecois so I think she is trying to push me to do the same to boot me out. User:Adam Bishop thinks the same. If she has objections, she can discuss them like User:Tremblay, User:Adam Bishop and I do. She has been giving hell to all of us for a while now. Is is possible for your to try to reason with her? Whatever happens, thank you. -- Mathieugp 14:35, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Angelique's user page

I posted your comments on my page not "out of context" but verbatim. I did so because Mathieugp deleted them so as to cover up his conduct. Angelique 15:14, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)

What are you talking about this time? I am really not following. Explain to me (and Angela I guess) in which way I am involved in your copying her comments? -- Mathieugp 16:24, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Two things: 1) If you read my page you would see that User:Mathieugp has continued his personal attacks, and 2) while I respect your objection, anything, anyone writes at Wikipedia is copyable. You do not have the right to restrict my page, particularly where an individuals conduct is a valid part of any ongoing matters. I am using your comments as a Wikipedia Administrator, to defend myself from attacks. That, is perfectly proper. Angelique 15:26, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Plan dalet

I guess I didn't then. Just that I had such a strange deja vu-feeling so I was almost sure.. Oh well thanks. BL 22:01, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Where is Stevertigo?

Hey, d'you know what happened to sv? Did I miss a "so long and thanks for all the fish" post to the mailing list or something? -- Cyan 23:35, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Thanks. -- Cyan 01:12, 12 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Angelique

I was starting to wonder about that user... how did you verify Angelique's IP? P.S. The "encyclopedic" comment on VfU was supposed to go on Cunc's talk page. I somehow posted it to the wrong page. $#!t. -- Cyan 04:00, 12 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Book of Mormon help request

Angela, you are a popular lady, but can I get a little help from you? I (with a few others) am having a very hard time understanding a point Eloquence User_talk:Eloquence is trying to make regarding the Book of Mormon page. You can skim the Book of Mormon Controversies topic on that page. I think she/he is trying to say that it is anti-NPOV to have a separate page for controversies. Others of us are saying that without a separate page, controversies were burying the topic, and that the controversies page is NPOV because both apologetics and critics are relegated back there, with "just the facts" reserved for the main page. Hawstom

Does Wikipedia fix links automatically?

Dear Angela,

Does wikipedia fix links automatically? and if so, how long will it take? Jack Zhang

Dear Angela,

Me again, I was talking about the links where it doesn't exist then it exists but it links you to the edit page. Do those get automatically fixed?

Jack Zhang

You protected 'The Wrong Version' of Lower Silesia

Lower Silesia The English Wikipedia use English names, that is, Oder, not Odra (see Talk:Oder River). 24.2.xxx is a vandal. He has also removed information about the German part of the region, and inserted a map of Lower Silesian Voivodship, when the article is dealing with the general entity, also the German parts. Please revert to the last edit by Daniel Quinlan. -- Nico 22:42, 12 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I object to reverting to the last edit by Daniel. It will show a bias. And the only thing Nico dosent like in that Page is that its not spreading his POV. 24.2.152.139 22:45, 12 Dec 2003 (UTC)

MediaWiki:opentask

Can I convince you to transclude Template:opentask in your welcome messages? I think it should be msg'd, so that users can always check their talk pages to see new stuff to do, and that we can update it quickly if the tasks get completed.—Eloquence 22:55, Dec 12, 2003 (UTC)

I guess that means yes? ;-)—Eloquence

BR

I can change it back. 640×480 is just the default on the school machines, and I was too lazy to change it when I logged in to check my messages. -- Pakaran 23:39, 12 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Superquiz

Thank you for taking care of the SUPERQUIZ thing. I didn't know what to do (I suspected copyright violation, but did not have the time to check) I did, however, have the time to enhance your stub image. Enjoy! Greenmountainboy 03:10, 13 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Thank you

Angela, thank you for your integrity and your energy. you help keep wikipedia together. Kingturtle 03:34, 13 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Hi

Hi I'm new at this so I don't know exactly what is going on, so please bear with me. :-) Barik

Where is your photo?? :-DDDD MAC

huh?

Jean Chrétien

Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chrétien's domestic and foreign policies - It appears that someone created this and didn't bother to put any text into it. But I believe that any text that might be added to this entry would really belong in the page for Jean Chrétien. The same applies to the blank entries of Domestic and Foreign Policies of Prime Minister Jean Chrétien and Domestic and Foreign Policies of Jean Chrétien. What do you think? - Denelson83 18:21, 13 Dec 2003 (UTC)

What's wrong with Meta

There is lively discussion of policy issues on the mailing list. There is lively discussion of policy issues on talk pages on en, and in places like the pump and vfd. With few exceptions, there has not been in recent times anything approaching lively discussion of policy issues on the meta. Few people follow the meta closely; that is, few follow recentchanges there or have watchlists that they check with any frequency. So, not a great place to move something when further discussion is the goal.

Louis Kyu Won Ryu 20:53, 13 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Blocking signed in users

Angela, I've looked all over the place and can't find the procedure for blocking a signed in user. Can you point me to the right place? RickK 21:42, 13 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Quitting Wikipedia for a whole 3 hours

What about a relaxing wiki-experience such as giving your opinion to the Brilliant prose refreshing? All the best, Muriel Victoria 17:07, 13 Dec 2003 (UTC)

---

Oops, well at least that means you won't ban me for reverting your page :-) (that was a joke) Greenmountainboy 19:50, 13 Dec 2003 (UTC)

---

I have seen your comments on irc :-)

I feel proud :-)
But for two tiny anon edits to help two people, I have quit fr for 2.5 days. I quit taking care of the french ml, I actually do not receive its mails any more, and have not looked at archives. I have looked at fr rcs only twice today :-)

2.5 days. Everything is possible :-)

Maybe I could even consider to quit drinking as well :-)

burned out...

look deeply for a good while with total lack of responsability. No one to ban, no one to block, no one to revert, no copyright hunting, no npov hunting, no Académie Française hunting. No scream, no complain, no one to tell me that I am supposed to be nice because I am a moderator. No, these days, I do not feel a moderator in the least.

Too tired. Look for quiet editing times with no responsabilities :-) Freedom. It is just too heavy. And frankly, the past 2 months personnal rewards did not compensate this. You understand what I mean ? :-)

Why should all dates be links?

Why do you think that all dates in an article should be links? Other people agree, but I have yet to see any reasoning. See also: Wikipedia talk:Make only links relevant to the context —Noldoaran (Talk) 23:19, Dec 13, 2003 (UTC)

I never thought about the "what links here" page. That makes sence, thanks. —Noldoaran (Talk) 23:32, Dec 13, 2003 (UTC)

One more thing. Should only the first occurance of a date be linked, or every occurence? —Noldoaran (Talk) 23:43, Dec 13, 2003 (UTC)

Canceling account

Thanks for the answer about my canceling account question. Xah P0lyglut 00:17, 2003 Dec 14 (UTC)

Holy Avenger

Angela, what do you think of Holy Avenger? Cheers. Doidimais Brasil 01:22, Dec 14, 2003 (UTC)

Reverting vandalism

Angela, are the anonymous vandal's edits on Tiny Toon Adventures something to be reverted or not? ugen64 02:14, Dec 14, 2003 (UTC)

Angela (and you) did the right thing reverting him there. We auto-revert signed-in users who've behaved much less badly than this. -- Finlay McWalter 02:26, 14 Dec 2003 (UTC)

=You protected 'The Wrong Version' of History of Greek and Roman Egypt

By freezing History of Greek and Roman Egypt in the form Jiang is trying to impose on it, you are effectively taking his side in this dispute. This I greatly resent. This is not a dispute about the content of the article (about which Jiang knows nothing), but about his opinion that it looks better a particular way rather than some other way. This is entitely a matter of judgement, and his opinion is no better or worse than mine (although I do have a degree in graphic design). The fact is that some designs look better on some browsers and some look better on others. I doubt the readers care very much. If Jiang ever actually contributed anything to this project I might not get so annoyed at his obsessive interference with articles I have contributed, but so far as I can see he is nothing but a professional pest. I request that you put the article back the way it was the way before Jiang started messing with it and then protect it. The same situation is obviously arising with Hippodrome of Constantinople. I think Jiang is now working his way through the articles at my homepage as a form of harassment. Adam 05:02, 14 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Adam, you're paranoid. No one here is out to molest you. Having your work edited what this encyclopedia is about. This is unacceptable formatting [1]. If you feel your view of my version is worse, then provide a screenshot and let a third party be a judge or let us come up with a compromise. No one knows what you're complaining about if you dont provide evidence. I've provided mine so mine should stay. --Jiang | Talk 05:06, 14 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Whatever the policy and whatever your intention, freezing the page at the "Jiang version" rewards his vexatious campaign against pages I have written and encourages him to continue. It is stuff like this that drives serious contributors away from this project. Adam 05:36, 14 Dec 2003 (UTC)

No it doesn't because it makes no difference as it isn't a permanent protection. It'll only be there until the two of you calm down enough to stop reverting. I can't believe the placement of a photograph would drive away serious contributors. Angela.

I have contributed something like 200 articles to this project. (How many has Jiang contributed, by the way?) Every day I look at my Watchlist and I see 10, 15, 20 edits other people have made. Maybe 25% of these are minor copyediting changes, most of which are needed, since I am far from a perfect typist. But most of the rest are frivolous, vexatious, pedantic, incorrect, illiterate, ungrammatical, polemical, tendentious and/or malicious, and have to be reverted. If articles are not watched over constantly, they always deteriorate over time through this kind of harmful editing. This is why serious contributors eventually drift away, and why WP will never be a real encyclopaedia until it allows articles to be declared finished and protected from further edits except through some sort of formal process. Adam 05:52, 14 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Holy Avenger

I think that the use of Image:Qholyavenger1.jpg in Holy Avenger and similar images are fair use in an article about the publication. We can't replace the publication and our articles are basically reviews of them. That's enough to swing the question in our favor, IMO. There's a potential issue because single cells of comic books have value as individual artwork pieces but for those things, our images are both thumbnails and increase the awareness of the unreduced frame, hence its likely market value. It's helpful to always have a link to the web site of the publication because that will also tend to help sales. As a useful side-effect, publications which check links to their site and want to object will find out about us and are likely to object before there's a print edition, while we're still protected by the CDA and OCILLA. I'll write to Doidimais Brasil about this and ask that he provides the information we need.

On the Disney images over in copyvio - I think the risk is too high and want them gone even though I think one or two of the non-wallpaper ones are fair use. Disney items are generally not worth using, just because of their baseless suits against fair use of their works. Jamesday 06:23, 14 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Please comment your reverts

You did the following in the Economics article: 04:52, 13 Dec 2003 . . Angela (Reverted to last edit by Galizia)

Unfortunately, I do not see why you made the revert. 142.177. seems to be making a valid attempt to improve the article and your comment gives no reason as to why it should be reverted. If you reverted it because it is a fairly substantial reorganization by a user that is not logged in you should say so. I have unreverted it because there was no reason and it does not appear to be a vandalism. I request that you please explain your reverts in the future if they are not obviously vandalism. Jrincayc 15:08, 14 Dec 2003 (UTC)

The reason no edit summary is given is because I used the rollback button, which automatically inserts the words reverted to last edit by ... and marks the revert as minor. The reason the revert was made is because User:142.177.etc is a hard banned user. If hard banned users attempt to circumvent their ban and continue editing, the general guideline is to auto-revert them. It's just a way of enforcing the ban when IP blocks don't work. Having said that, if you feel the content is useful, there is nothing stopping you reinserting it. In fact, some articles by this user, which would otherwise have been deleted, have been "kidnapped" by Cyan so that other users feeling the content is useful can repost it under their own name. There's a list of them at User:Cyan/kidnapped if you're interested. There are more details of the ban of this user under his other login names at User:Mediator/ban and User:EntmootsOfTrolls/ban. Angela. 15:44, 14 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I severely disagree with that. You did not comment on the User:142.177.92.201 comment page. You did not appear to examine the edits to determine their worth to wikipedia. You have no evidence that this is the banned user, other than the fact that they have the same isp as EntmootsOfTrolls. Both the edits to Economics and the edits to Ecosystem have been reverted back to 142.177.92.201's edit. If you have any evidence that this is EntmootsOfTrolls, and not someone else at the same ISP, you did not publicly put that up. If I see that you continue to rollback other's reasonable attempts at contributing with out any comment what so ever to them and no solid connection to a banned user, I will request that you have your Sysop status removed. Jrincayc 21:27, 14 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I apologize for getting out of hand. I should not have used BS as an edit summary. While you have not directly stated that "all edits from an ISP that has had a banned user are to be considered edits from the banned user", so far as I can tell, the only evidence that you have about 142.177.92.201 being EntmootsOfTrolls, is that they are from the same ISP. Therefore, from my point of view, it seems that you are operating under the assumtion "all edits from an ISP that has had a banned user are to be considered edits from the banned user." If I am mistaken, I would like to hear why I am mistaken on this point. Again, I apologize for getting out of hand and being uncivil. Jrincayc 23:56, 14 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Additional comments : in spite of what Angela says, User:Mediator is not hold by the banned user any more, so there is no sense in removing what has been written by that user. Besides, reverting good edits by banned users is controversial. Feel free to revert any edits you think are relevant. thanks PomPom

The Mediator and Ant

Hello Angela

I would rather appreciate that you do not list User:Mediator has being one of the user name held by 142, since that is untrue. This is a fact he is not that user any more, and that is also being unnice to me, because it reminds me that my attempts to discuss mediation brought me nothing be being blocked by Jimbo. ant

thanks. Plus the page in question does not bring the slightest information on the topic :-)

This archive does not include comments by Ec about Wikisource. Those should have been at Wikisource, and some have been moved to User_talk:Eclecticology, or attacks on Jiang by Adam Carr, as my talk page is not the place for a fight. See this revsision for the uncut version.

Strange goings on at VfD

195.56.187.125 is doing slightly strange things to VfD. I can mention these when I see them, but if he creates a user account I can no longer identify the IP address. I understand that sysops can see IP addresses - can I ask you to keep an eye out, assuming it doesn't take much time? Failing that, nominate someone else I can ask? Onebyone 18:05, 14 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Harvey Ball

thanks for writing such a grand article about harvey ball! Kingturtle 00:18, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)

• thanks for the help. I appreciate it. :-) Greenmountainboy 00:41, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)

APH photos

Re Kevin Rudd and the photo thereat: I now have an email from AUSPIC, the Australian Parliamentary photo agency, advising me that photos at the Australian Parliament website are not copyright and may be freely used for non-commercial purposes. I have therefore restored the photo. Adam 01:13, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Having too much fun

feel free to remove my Brenden Matthews page. I got a little carried away, what can i say.

- User:Bdiddy

On splitting

Where do you get the idea that splitting an article that is less than 20KB is bad? --The Cunctator 07:08, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)

URL linking convention

I was wondering if there are any specific rules in terms of providing links, because i like to provide links to data information i have. I've noticed on some pages the links are included into the article, and on others they are listed at the bottom. What would you say is appropriate? Thanks. --bdiddy 08:10, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)

UTF-8 at English pages and Description of Serbian Language

Hello,

It would be very useful if you (or someone who is responsable for that) move English pages move to UTF-8 encoding. In this moment I have to write non Latin-1 characters into some other editor, and then to submit it to Wikipedia.

Also, my intention with Description of Serbian Language was to invite other people to write this document with me. It is a long term work and I don't think that it would be done in the near future. But, I thought it is possible to develope it on Wikipedia openly.

I think that the best idea is to write several pages in my user space and then to publish and to keep on with developing. Is it OK? Millosh

Nico v. WolfgangPeters

about Nico. He posted few revisionists sentences on the different talk pages. Examples: Even the migrants must be considered expellees, since their homeland was under occupation and Germans generally was discriminated and threatened in these areas. Source User talk:Nico I thought it would be correct to name them expellees, as that is what they name themselves. When they emigrated, Germany had not recognised the current borders. But do as you want. And in any event, what is wrong with considering East Prussia rightfully German, in accordance with international law (the Geneva protocols states: "It is illegal to permanently keep land militarily taken over and to expell and to replace the inhabitants") -- Nico 01:43, 14 Dec 2003 (UTC) Source Talk:Landsmannschaft Ostpreussen He claims in Wikipedia, that some Polish or Russian areas, are rightfully German and are under occupation. Do we want to start again border disputes in Europe?? WolfgangPeters

I actually don't see what is "revisionistic" with these sentences. I just stated a fact: The (West-)German government actually considered these areas "occupied" when the people we are talking about emigrated. And it's not just "revionists" who thinks East Prussia should return to Germany. There are even Russians who thinks that. And after all, this is also just my private opinions, not what I write in any articles. Nico 13:14, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Based on, what you stated yourself, it seems to be irresponsible to give you the rights to edit articles in Wikipedia. Attempt to violate existing borders is a crime in every state. WolfgangPeters

Why have he moved these comments to you, Angela? Is it a campaign? Btw, User:Maximus Rex just told me that "WolfgangPeters" is the user GH/AM, or 145.254.xxx, a "Polish nationalist" [2] & [3], currently even listed on Vandalism in progress -- Nico 15:47, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Ghost of the Robot

I am sorry for putting that page on VfD. It was a mistake. I believed that the band was obscure, but now I realize that I have seen at least one of its members quite frequently on the television. Thank you for notifying about the VfD. Happy hunting, Greenmountainboy 21:12, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Book of Mormon Controversies Page

Good idea about renaming the page. Hmm. Maybe it could be called Book of Mormon Origin or Book of Mormon Studies. I don't know. Hawstom 21:38, 15 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Angela, maybe Eloquence is right. Book of Mormon Studies could use the NPOV forum of Wikipedia to mature. But maybe Wikipedia really isn't the place for a BofM Controversies page. Maybe both camps need to just stick to the agreed upon facts. If it is disputed too much to go on the main page, maybe it doesn't belong in an encyclopedia. Hawstom 16:02, 16 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Should anons be allowed to edit?

Angela, thanks for your comments on my reform proposals. Might I suggest we try and promote some sort of discussion forum on these problems among experienced users of WP, in a place where it will be seen? Such proposals will have more weight coming from you than from me, since some people here seem to find me antagonistic (I can't imagine why). Adam 11:16, 16 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Default Signature

Any chance of getting the WML (WikiMarkupLanguage) autosignature updated to include the "full stop" used by you and User:Dori. Could it not save a fair amount of pasting/extra clicks - as well as bandwidth? - unkamunka 11:30, 16 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Just Plain Thanks

Thanks for sorting out my problem the other day, I'm not sure that the topic in question (university libraries) is completely needing a page so I'll pass on making it one just for now. Thanks again ;-) - Al b 21:38, 16 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Moz Wiki stuff, Simple

Angela,

A couple of months ago, I created a Mozilla sidebar tab that enables a user to search Wikipedia. Is there a way I can upload the code here? I tried, but it uses JavaScript, and I don't think the Wiki software supports it.

As for the Simple Wiki, I hope to come back to it sometime, but I tied up im the main EN wiki right now.

Happy X-Mas! I hope Father Christmas is good to you!

iHoshie 01:53, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll contact the person you refered me to. iHoshie 07:02, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Incipient Vandalism

An IP user and User:Bobjoejill have each edited twice today on Mercury (element) (but never before or since, there or elsewhere), each pair within a minute or two. The earlier, logged-in pair, were adding one unsuitable word that could be honestly argued for, and adding some keyboard garbage; i reverted both. The later (IP) pair were adding "doodie" (a mild copralalia) and the other removing it; no revert needed.

I'm continuing to watch it for a couple hours, but at this point don't intend to put it on ViP. I'll leave another note if i see more of those users or on Mercury (element). I'm glad to see you stopped editing at a decent hour tonite, but if you could check in the AM, you should be up before me.

And please say so if i let them off easy, or if you look in detail & think i over-reacted.

Thanks. [smile] --Jerzy 02:24, 2003 Dec 17 (UTC)

Tsk, re yr hrs. Tnx, re yr reassuring answers. --Jerzy 03:31, 2003 Dec 17 (UTC)

Not removing stuff from talk pages

Oops, I deleted 2 pages that were edited only by EoT, and one was a fairly lengthy talk page. Pakaran 03:22, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC)

The Wolf

I think you'll want to take a look at this article. Blah..... UtherSRG 03:45, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Thanks. I seem to be finding a lot of junk today.... here's another: Edgar Ojeda. UtherSRG

msgs

Where are all those {{msgs}} coming from, and why don't I know about them? RickK 04:02, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Ann Kyslowski 142.177/EoT

How did you make that connection? Other than the use of the term 'little tin gods' I would have only been suspicious. --mav 04:09, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Adam Carr's Proposal

Angela. To me it wasn't anon users or new users who were the problem. My problem was the failure of most users to write for the enemy and to stand up for the integrity of articles that were not in their own "personal political space". I took pride in the fact that I, a conservative Republican, defended the integrity of the Wesley Clark article and was very vocal in confronting the conservative troll JoeM. Unfortunately, I did not see my philosophy working the same way on the other end. I, as a conservative Republican felt very UN-comfortable defending the George Bush article and Santorum article. I felt that a liberal Democrat should defend the NPOV on those but did not see it occur. Behavior that was seen as "trollish" on Hillary Clinton was seen as "informative" on George Bush. Thats why some started the "list war". Similarly, I felt uncomfortable trying to take anti-Bush material out of J. William Fulbright. I felt that a responsible liberal should have taken the lead on it. I asked for help and only got one person willing to assist me defend that article. So I don't think that Adam's proposal would help that. The only thing that would help that would be a change of heart by the political partisans or a change in NPOV philosophy. But I think very highly of the project and will keep watching in hopes of seeing it mature. -- Ark30inf

Alexander Fleming

On Sep 21, you removed the image link on Alexander Fleming. The image is still there, though. Any specific reason? Shouldn't that be restored? --Magnus Manske 11:40, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Re: On [4], it says that all information is in the public domain, except:

Specific NLM Web sites containing protected information provide additional notification of conditions associated with its use

If you search for Alexander Fleming on the site, it does indeed find such an image with a copyright notice, but many others without. THe deleted one did not contain any copyright information, so it should be PD by default. --Magnus Manske 12:46, 18 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Palestinian views of the peace process

That is a good question. I admit I didn't spend alot of time thinking before I made that vote. My best idea is to merge it into palestine, but... I would prefer if I wasn't the primary decision maker on this :). It really seems to be a section of an article, rather than an article itself. While it isn't good enough to stand on its own, or without editing, the article doesn't seem completely worthless, and I am generally really opposed to things which have any redeemable value being deleted. I am one of those Wiki is not paper people, or a medium-rare inclusionist, and whatever you want to call me, my instinct is to only delete complete garbage, and tinker/fix on the rest. Sam Spade

I was under the impression that merging was something only a sysop could do? I seem to remember some sort of problem on Wikipedia:Conflicts between users about something like that, between Jiang and pigsonthewing? Sam Spade 21:25, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC)

User:What most surprised me was the arrogance of the administration

Any way you can check to see if User:What most surprised me was the arrogance of the administration is a previous user returned from the grave? RickK 04:59, 18 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Reply on the Adam Carr thing/NPOV

I don't think its anarchy in regard to who edits and how soon, but anarchy in regard to NPOV policy.

You are correct about political partisans changing their beliefs, but I think they can change their behavior. IF that is what is expected by the majority and that expectation is insisted on. The problem is that the NPOV policy as stated and accepted in practice is not really NPOV, its dueling POV. You can't blame users for being good at dueling POV when dueling POV is the standard operating procedure and is accepted by the community.

The idea seems to be to "get as much of my point of view in there" and "grudgingly accept the minimum opposing POV after a long fight". In reality, Wikipedia's policy is very similar to Fred Bauder's policy only the sympathetic and critical views have to fight for the same article space here whereas they are physically separated on his site.

Dueling POV works in a way, but you better be ready for a head-butting contest in addition to being ready to write an encyclopedia article.

Jimbo said on the mailing list during the RK thing (paraphrased) that it is his view that the best articles come from such partisans engaging in mortal combat with other partisans. I respectfully don't see that and instead see the best articles occurring where partisans from both sides write for the enemy, police their own kind, and treat seriously any and every criticism of their work rather than circling the wagons and defending it in a kneejerk fashion.

I've always tried to avoid being a utopian. But I feel that most of the regulars here regardless of political stripe could deal with that concept if that were the standard accepted here and insisted on. I'm figuring that either Wikipedia will mature and move that direction or someone will fork and try that philosophy. I'll keep watching because the project (ignoring methodology) is intriguing and useful. --Ark30inf

Wikipedia:Wikipedia:

Angela, if my Wikipedia:Wikipedia: is redundant, feel free to get rid of it, but I urge that something be done to make whatever page it is redundant to (whether that is Wikipedia:Utilities or something else) more easily found. I've been working on Wikipedia for 6 weeks now and (as you can easily see if you track me) have been rather plunged in. This is the first I've heard of Wikipedia:Utilities. Is there some obvious way of finding it that I have missed? Also, now that you point me to that page, it seems rather painfully daunting and deserves a digest / overview somewhere (I don't really care where, as long as it is -- once again -- sane to find.) -- Jmabel 09:13, 18 Dec 2003 (UTC)

1. Apologies if I violated protocol in my first 2 days on the wikipedia. At the time, I had no idea what user talk pages were even for. I blanked your message after reading it. I did not understand that it was customary to retain content on one's talk page after reading it; I viewed it as more like email.
2. Nonetheless, the term "utilities" is nothing like self-explanatory in this context: mnemonic once you know it, but non-obvious if you don't. It is, indeed, linked from the Help page, but there is nothing to make it stand out, and it seems to be the only link-based (as against search-based) route into a vast array of pages. If nothing else, I think it deserves a more verbose entry on the Help page. If you have no objection to that, I'd like to write a sentence or so there. Jmabel 11:13, 18 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Oppositional philosophy

Angela, I think that's really a Jimbo thing. Jimbo believes that partisans fighting over articles produces the best articles. As long as that is true then many people who want to be collegial will be frustrated and leave. This place has gotten pretty far with the oppositional philosophy and I don't blame him for sticking with it. Its just not for me. -- Ark30inf

Articles to delete

Codabar, Vinod Scaria. UtherSRG 18:25, 18 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Linking to Images in Other Languages

Has this been addressed? Many images are not candidates, but a fairly large-scale rummage didn't reveal any WML to enable this. - unkamunka. 00:41, 19 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Please check [5]. Your judgments are occasionally more coloured than you might think. ~ stardust 12:41, 19 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Beekeeping

You added a link to simple English? that goes to "Beard." I'm puzzled. Not sure if it was an error, or are you referring to "bee beards," a stunt that is not mentioned in the article. Hmmmm...maybe that should be an item.... Pollinator 13:40, 19 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Newbie stuff...

Thanks for the touch-ups on the Martin Atkins entry, and the note. Is muchly appreciated.

Admin guidelines

Thanks for the feedback. When I was made an admin, I asked if there was a guideline, just in case, but never got a response (which is why I deleted one I was sure nobody wanted). I'll be more careful next time. --Raul654 06:51, 20 Dec 2003 (UTC)

New Age reversion

Angela, your reversion of New Age was smooth and timely. I appreciate your assistance. The slow way--the only way-- for me would b to edit the article's earlier content from the history, and then repost it. Thanks again... la di da ;-) Being from Britain, have you ever visited Somerset and Glastonbury? Our Avalon article here may get a rewrite(if I can maintain NPOV). BF

Stan v. 172

Stan was not attempting to reason with me. He has been harassing me and turning me into a staw man that is merely the product of his own fantasies. From my vantage point, his barage of attacks and acusations just came out of the blue, it seems, and I'm just brushing them off until he drops the straw man. I was thus disappointed by your comments on his talk page. Rather than addressing the matter as a dispute between two users, your comments insinuated that I was the sole source of the problem. It's not good to come to hasty conclusions without an adequate, balanced knowledge of what's going on. 172 12:44, 21 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Juglugs

Hi Angela, thanks for Juglugs :) Tualha 06:12, 22 Dec 2003 (UTC)

No problem. :) Angela.

Topsail

I was mostly irritated at myself about topsail, I'd seen the stub long ago and made a mental note to myself to make something worthwhile out of it. Too many things to describe, not enough hours in the day. But soon, very soon; sails are a much more interesting topic than the sleazebags of the world. :-) Stan 07:41, 22 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Mother Teresa

Hi Angela, and thanks for your comment on my talk page. I don't mind at all, thanks for asking. I appreciate the time you have taken dealing with this matter, and I think you have shown your normal wisdom and care in what you have done. Andrewa 10:30, 22 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Pearl

Cool user page. Greenmountainboy 14:06, 22 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Re: welcome

Hi Angela,

Thanks for welcoming me as a new member. I guess I'll pick up the Wikipedia style and formatting conventions in due course... the problem being that everywhere has its own rules and they're inevitably different from each other. (For instance: is direct current abbreviated as dc, DC, d.c. or D.C.? I've seen all versions in style guides.)

When in Rome, I try to do as the Romans do...

Dave Bass (can't work out how to make that a link!)

NPOV Issue at Transylvania

There appears to be a range war over at Transylvania. 171.75.71.215 has been attempting to update the page for the period since WWI. There are some important events here - including the start of the fall of Ceaucescu. The treatment has not been altogether NPOV, but Bogdangiusca has simply been deleting the material instead of attempting to NPOV it. Can we make this a "page under dispute". We are dealing with a cultural situation vaguely similar to Silesia. - unkamunka. 14:17, 24 Dec 2003 (UTC)

• Thanks for the support. Seems now that there was also a lurking copyvio issue. Have put an expansion/research on my projects lists. - unkamunka. 12:49, 27 Dec 2003 (UTC)

1911

In Ahmad Shah, you have replaced " Initial text from 1911 encyclopedia" with {{MSG:1911}} which expands to "This article incorporates text from the public domain 1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica. Please update as needed." I feel the "Please update as needed." is out of context here and should not be used for pages that have already been updated from a rough first draft. Jay 21:38, 24 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Merry christmas and best wishes for Peace Profound! Optim 06:41, 25 Dec 2003 (UTC)

:) Thanks Optim. Angela.

Our posthuman future

Angela,

I have reverted Our Posthuman Future from the redir back to the previous article, a serious stub. The redir created a self-link. Believe it or not, the name of the article is that of an actual book -- not the rant that was booted in VfD.

Davodd 01:07, Dec 27, 2003 (UTC)

Ok, I hadn't realised it had been edited since the votes on VfD were made. It wasn't a self link though. Angela. 14:36, 27 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Or maybe it was. I removed the link from transhumanism so it wasn't, but I've put that back now. Angela. 00:07, 28 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Mariavite church

Angela, could you check my new article about Mariavite Church. I'm afraid that there could be too much mistakes. But the topic is very interesting. I hope you will be able to reach the end of it ;) Thanks in advance Slawojarek 12:10, 31 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your corrections. Thanks to you my effort is more clear for others :) Here are the answers for your questions:

1. My mistake, I meant "at the turn of 19th centuries" (= around 1900) => now it's ok
2. yes - Capuchin monk => ok
3. I deleted it, I think "to spread the constant adoration of the Holy Sacrament" is enough => ok
4. changed for "First one with the Mariavite priest Skolimowski" => is it clear now? [Yes, Angela.]
5. I wasn't sure of this word, so I wanted to check it later; finally I forgot to do it :), it's "overbearing" => ok

Thanks one more time. I wish you great time in New Year! Slawojarek 20:34, 1 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Cleanup Process

Could you explain what the section headings in Wikipedia:Cleanup mean? If something is about a week old, does that make it "newish", or "oldish", or what? Is there a system? Thanks. Onebyone 05:08, 1 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Changing attribution for an edit

Thanks for the Intro! Okay, I have a question now: I started Russell, Ontario but I did it anonymously. I would do the thing where I go back to the computer with the IP and claim it as mine, but I did it on dial up with Dynamic IPs, meaning I probably won't ever get it again. Is there anything else I can do? Thanks! PS: You can probably tell that it's really short. I'm planning on longening-it up when I get a free minute (although I probably won't use made-up words. . . probably ;). canrocks

Hi, Yeah you said that you thought I did it from a University. . .very clever! The IP probably came from ncf.carleton.ca. My ISP is called NCF, or National Capital Freenet. It's a service (not really free) provided by Carleton University for the community. It is dial-up which uses Dynamic IPs, basically assigning an IP at random, first-come first-serve. It would be very tiring to dial up and dial up repeatedly to get the right one. Do I have any other courses of action in claiming my article? Thanks, canrocks 17:04, Jan 2, 2004 (UTC)

San Jose: Accent policy

Angela, I seem to be in an edit war with various Wikilunies regarding accents. I put them in (because they are part of a proper name) and people take them out. Is there an existing discussion on the pros and cons of accents? Is there a policy or recommendation regarding their use? Or do I just need to wear someone down in an edit war? Joelwest 19:23, 1 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification. It is about San José (and San José State), both of which under Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English) seem to qualify for accents -- since the official name on government stationery, website, etc. has the accents. But this is a general issue that comes up in California and a few other states with Spanish/Mexican influence, and before I write new content (or face other edit wars) I want to know the "right" answer.

As for talking about it, yes that's the right thing to do but that assumes my editing opponent is willing to talk rather than just go ahead and mash my accents. After the first round (with SJSU) I did just that at Talk:San Jose State University, but only got a discussion from someone who agreed with me not the person who backed out my changes. Joelwest 08:27, 2 Jan 2004 (UTC)

I've never seen San Jose spelled with an accent. The San Jose newspaper doesn't use an accent. http://www.sanjose.com/ doesn't use an accent. http://www.sanjosesharks.com/ doesn't use it. If they do it on their official websites, that's decidedly odd. Do we start putting accents on Los Angeles? RickK 16:36, 2 Jan 2004 (UTC)

To jump in on this, as both a San Jose resident and a SJSU alum, the city and the university are pretty much the only instutitions that use the accent, the rest of us ignore it. I believe the accent was adopted in the late 1980s or early 1990s to show off our "cultural heratige" as the oldest city in California. It is a symptom of SJ's inferiority complex. Gentgeen 22:46, 2 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Continued at Talk:San Jose State University. Last posting there by Joelwest 06:18, 11 Jan 2004 (UTC)

External links

Hi Angela. Thanks for the welcome. I've just discovered Wikipedia and I feel that I'm going to be spending a lot of time here.

Thanks for helping me be more specific in my link additions. Actually, I think you'll find myMicronesia to be one of the most comprehensive sites on the internet in the area of Micronesia, and is quite relevant to the islands of Kosrae, Chuuk, Yap, Northern Marianas and others.

Thanks again, and happy holidays.

NLucey

IRC

Are you still on #wikipedia? -- Tim Starling 16:49, Jan 2, 2004 (UTC)

It's a takeover bot. I think it was J-DoeAWAY. Basically it kicked everyone and stole their nicknames, now #wikipedia is inhabited by bots. I don't think I can do anything more about it, I'm going to bed. -- Tim Starling 17:40, Jan 2, 2004 (UTC)

Image question thanks

Thanks Angela! The offer still stands if there is any small Wiki job you think needs doing regularly which I might be able to handle anyway.Zestauferov 14:51, 3 Jan 2004 (UTC)

msg:disam vs msg:disambig

The ratio of the two is 647 for disambig vs. 2 for disam (PPD, River Dee which I am fixing now) according to the latest dump. I don't think it will be hard to decide between the two. disam is not even listed in the custom messages page.

Discussion at MediaWiki talk: Disam. Dori | Talk 18:14, Jan 3, 2004 (UTC)

You protected "The Wrong Version"

I hardly think you could fairly be described as "neutral" in respect of your protection of English unitary district and Unitary Authority. User:80.255

Once again, you are not only acting in a gratuitously non-neutral manner over Ross-shire, you are also protecting a version with is not in line with Wikipedia:naming conventions (places). 80.255

And had I protected the other version, I would no doubt have Morwen complaining that I protected "The Wrong Version". Please read the Wikipedia:Protection policy which clearly states that the protection of a page is in no way meant to imply support for that version. I haven't even read the pages so I have no idea whether they meet the policy or not. The aim of protecting them is just to stop an edit war not to display my biases one way or the other. As I haven't read them, how can you imply I am not neutral? For all I know it is Morwen's version going against whatever it is you think I believe in. Angela.

As the author of that text naming conventions, I can state confidently that the version that is protected is fine. The example that 80.255 quotes as justification for his assertion, only prohibits not mentioning continued geographical use, and does NOT prohibit use referring to them in the present tense. He has been told this before, and is persisting in wilfully misreading a policy he originally opposed to back up his claims. Thanks, Morwen 15:38, Jan 4, 2004 (UTC)

Great. :) Please take it to Wikipedia:Current disputes over articles. Angela. 15:46, Jan 4, 2004 (UTC)

Redirect Q

Howdy from Phoenix, Arizona. I have read some of the policy on deletions, but thought I would run this by a WikiGuru: Surfed over a redirect to Abdomen from AbdomeN. Seems petty. Is the AbdomeN page a good candidate for deletion?
Getting bolder azwaldo 21:49, 4 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Glad I asked. Thanks, I will review the links you gave. Just finished my second article, Biochemical oxygen demand. Another item: Seems that Fecal coliform bacteria could/should redirect to E. coli. As this would be the first redirect that I edit, I am throwing up a flag. Occurs to me that after a redirect, another more learned user can undo it, so it is alright to be bold here. azwaldo

Accidental deletion

Hi

I just inadvertently deleted Irish fiction, thinking I was deleting the draft version. I tried rolling back, but got this message: Cannot revert edit; last contributor is only author of this article. What can I do? Bmills 15:47, 5 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Thanks: you were confused, I was relieved. My first day back and I'm a sysop. I was bound to mess things up somewhere along the line. Bmills 16:02, 5 Jan 2004 (UTC)

I view the fact that I answered this request before you did as conclusive proof that you are not a perl script ;-). Cheers, Cyan 16:04, 5 Jan 2004 (UTC)

NPOV in IRT article

Angela, I think your npov-excising-edit, injecting perception, was not a good one. The article is about IRT. The section you edited was meant to explain a technical issue to a lay audience about IRT and tests. Your edit injecting percpetions is off-topic so I undid those changes. I appreciate the feedback; maybe there is a better way to phrase this issue. Amead 19:20, 5 Jan 2004 (UTC)

NOEDITSECTION on Main Page broken

The __NOEDITSECTION__ you added to the main page is showing up in the rendered page, which it shouldn't be. —Morven 00:36, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Spanish family names and accutes, middle name on articles?

Hullo Angela! :)

I have read Wikipedia's Spanish family names naming convention and find it kinda vague.

My concerns:

• should Spanish names be written with acutes?
• regarding the article titles of people, should they include the middle's name first letter? for example, the article title for Juan D. Pueblo Gonzalez should be Juan D. Pueblo or Juan Pueblo?

If you could reply on my talk page that would be great. ^_^

#pd: do you like Oreos?

- Maio 01:48, 7 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Re: Cyp's Sig

I already did stop :) As I got there from special:wanted pages, I think he's found the answer. Not much of an experiment really though was it? HappyDog

Thank you from Burnaby South!

Thank you for cooling Ed down enough to disable the block! But if you did it, well... I'll Thank you then.

-Jack Zhang 10:22, Jan 9 2004 (LST)

VfD headers and Internet trolling

Oops - re the headers - I don't particularly care, but when I saw someone putting headers, I made them in to subs for the non-days. Will stop. The Fellowship of the Troll 22:10, 9 Jan 2004 (UTC) PS Please could you help with an issue I am having with Maximus Rex? I keeps moving the article Internet trolling phenomena on Wikipedia to the Talk: namespace and will not discuss the reason. What can I do? I understand that articles and discussion on Wikipedia belong there, but this is an article about Internet trolling, that happens to tak place on Wik. Help! Thanks!The Fellowship of the Troll 22:10, 9 Jan 2004 (UTC)

I moved it to the "Wikipedia:" namespace, not the talk: namespace. Maximus Rex 22:12, 9 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Whichever, you keep on moving it around, without justifying it - it's antisocial and counterproductive - why do you want to move it?The Fellowship of the Troll 22:14, 9 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Oh come on, there are plenty of articles that comment on things that are not reporting of other people's publication - List of fictional cats for example, is primary research. We would gut half of the articles if we really did this. The Fellowship of the Troll 22:18, 9 Jan 2004 (UTC)

You support moving wikipedia as well?The Fellowship of the Troll 22:30, 9 Jan 2004 (UTC)

No, that's factual. Your views on what is trolling are not. Angela. 22:36, Jan 9, 2004 (UTC)

They are not my views, they are examples of trolling that exists. There is not (or need not be) any comentary on them.The Fellowship of the Troll 22:41, 9 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Cut and paste move

You're even more likely than usual to be busier than you wish, so let me start by suggesting that you might rather tell me who to ask, instead of whether i am over-finicky in contemplating rescuing the history of a particular article that got busted by a quite recent cut-and-paste "un-move" maneuver. Magneto was moved to Magneto_(engine component) make room for a disamb page. Then another editor, who rightly thot that the disamb belonged on the main article under the name Magneto, accomplished that by cutting and pasting Magneto_(engine component)'s content over the redir, and putting a redir back to Magneto over the text of Magneto_(engine component). Thanks in either case. --Jerzy 00:21, 2004 Jan 10 (UTC)

Prussia

Hey, since you've commented before on issues of where the article on Prussia should be, I thought I'd inform you that User:Zestauferov has made a complete mess of the article Prussia, and has moved all material on the Kingdom/Land (post-1918) of Prussia to the innacurate page Brandenburg-Prussia. Something needs to be done, surely. I've posted irritated messages on both pages already, but I wanted to get other opinions on this. john 05:19, 10 Jan 2004 (UTC)

I'm not sure why I ever was involved in that. I know nothing about the topic so there's not a lot I can do to help. Sorry! Angela. 12:47, Jan 10, 2004 (UTC)

Hi this is Zestauferov. John kenney came after the discussions at the end of December had finished and the work had been done and nasically let us know that he does not like it. Which is fine because it is not finished yet and anything he wants to add can be put in. Basically we agree that the Prussia page should cover all aspects and not be just about the Brandenburg Prussia state. Ultimately we want to phase out the disambiguation page. If you have any suggestions please post. The article is still in a bit of a mess. I am having a baby tomorrow and do not have a lot of time to focus on it now but wanted to get the ball rolling before that happens. All the bestZestauferov 08:11, 10 Jan 2004 (UTC)

See my comment above. I'm not the person to ask for help with this. Anyway, good luck tomorrow. Angela. 12:47, Jan 10, 2004 (UTC)

Protected pages

I removed some of the discussion concerning the administration page because it looked like a phantom edit - It still does. The dates for the comments I removed were April/May of 2003. The comments "I've unprotected this page" and "I unprotected it again" do not apply to the administrators page, which has stayed locked since I protected it. You can check for yourself in the protection log.

Almost all of the rest of the comments (Dershowitz-Finkelstein Affair, Silesia, extermination camp, et al) I removed were unchanged for almost three weeks. (Except, now that I look carefully, the last comment in Death camp was only 6 days old). When you say I removed text that was only a few hours old, I just don't see what you are talking about.

In the future, I'll archive them - I didn't know they were supposed to be.

Sorry for any confusion it might have caused. --Raul654 12:06, 10 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Think nothing of it, Angela. It was an honest misunderstanding between two well intentioned people, and nothing to hold a grudge over. --Raul654 12:48, 11 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for the star! --mav 05:45, 11 Jan 2004 (UTC)

:) no problem. Angela. 10:45, Jan 11, 2004 (UTC)

Danny's departure

Angela, could you look, first, at the comment RK has made at my talk page following my criticism of him relating to Danny's departure, and second, at the comment I have made at Jimbo Wales's talkpage relatikng to the structural issues which I think underlie this problem. I would welcome your opinion on both the RK/Danny situation and the structural issue. Adam 06:24, 11 Jan 2004 (UTC)

M.R.M. Parrott

Hello, Angela. Thanks for the message on my talk page. You're quite right, M.R.M. Parrott was a candidate for deletion after all. So I've deleted it. I've kept Talk:M.R.M. Parrott, because there was a lot of useful talk about policies and things there. You might also want to read my note at Wikipedia talk:Archived delete debates about it (basically, why I didn't make a separate /Delete page). Well done on all this maintenance stuff, by the way. I wouldn't have the stamina for it... -- Oliver P. 08:53, 11 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Thanks Oliver. I've replied there too. Angela. 10:45, Jan 11, 2004 (UTC)

Conflicts between users

Are you going to revert your edits to the protected page or not? --Wik 11:41, Jan 11, 2004 (UTC)

custom-messages breakdown

I noticed you had added one of these and had documented the fact, so i hoped you'd know what to do abt it. (If it should go to whoever added the other, let me know & i'll track it down myself & tell them -- or tell you if you prefer.)

One of the two tags for the third row of the table on Wikipedia:MediaWiki custom messages, and the tag of the next to the last row, differ only by capitalization. The version for factual dispute doesn't work (probably bcz the NPOV one trumps it). --Jerzy 01:19, 2004 Jan 12 (UTC)

Presumably i got it backwards. (I can't imagine that removing the row-3 use of it from the table made a difference!) It certainly is working (in preview, the only place i looked before) now, and there is no confusing info in the table anymore. Sorry for what was probably carelessness on my part, and thanks for making the table read accurately. --Jerzy 04:45, 2004 Jan 12 (UTC)

VFD - Foreign

Could you possibly look at my comments on the discussion for Key server? My Hungarian isn't fluent, but I could manage a translation. OTOH is this obscure enough to let die the death it would have had without the crash - and let an anglophone write it from scratch if ever needed? The content is valid enough and it is still probably one of the most effective methods of cryptography - just a rather obscure topic. The few bits of English on the page are mine - unkamunka. 04:19, 12 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Since we're keeping it, can it be retitled either "The MD5 Message-Digest Algorithm" or simply "Message-Digest Algorithm" - to convey the substance? "Key Server" I suspect is an anglicisation of the general topic in Hungarian - unkamunka. 05:42, 12 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Please delete both redirects - after all that:-) - Morwen found we have a shorter version in English already - unkamunka. 09:17, 12 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Very good idea to retain the Message Digest Algorithm redirect - unkamunka. 22:01, 12 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Walküre

My reading of Wikipedia:Special characters and Wikipedia:Naming conventions makes me believe the editors who created Die Walküre to replace Die Walkure were on the right track. But, alas, it was a cut and paste. If you would be so kind as to clobber it, i have saved the text, (just in case it was also a text-altering edit), i'll do the move and let them know about "Move this page". (This one is simpler & should go smoother than Magneto; thanks again for yr help on that.) --Jerzy 07:36, 2004 Jan 12 (UTC)

Moved talk.

This was posted on Use talk:Angela (the deletion of which should be seriously considered):

Just to say that I got unblocked! Seems it was a vandal using the same ISP and had gone through all the possible proxies and got them blocked. Anjouli 16:43, 12 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Re: ToU / Useful links

• Are you aware that .. has been working on something similar at Wikipedia:Submission Standards (proposal)? Perhaps you need to merge your efforts with him somehow.'
  • I will try to get in touch with him (if I can remember it). Thanks. :-)
• On a completely unrelated note, I came across some pages you have created like .. and .. which look amazingly useful but are so hidden. They need to be linked to places people are going to find them. As a minimum I would suggest you add them to the Wikipedia:Utilities page.
  • I'm glad you liked them! ^_^ Check also Wikipedia:HOWTOs Index -- it is a simple idea, used by many websites. With a page like that, Google can automatically link all "how to" searches to that page, instead of linking the page itself! That way Wikipedians will always find what they are looking for. The format is simple: list all possible combinations of "how to" do things regarding the Wikipedia Project.

#pd: DID YOU BUY THE OREOS?!?! REDEEM YRSELF la~ --Maio 23:02, Jan 12, 2004 (UTC)

The HOWTOs looks useful and no, I still haven't bought any Oreos! :) Angela.

TransWiki

Thanks for the tip. That'll make life so much easier for me. PMC 00:47, 13 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Factor analysis

I see you moved factor analysis (in marketing) to factor analysis. Let us recall some history. That was this article's original name. I complained that the article makes not the least attempt to say what factor analysis is (and please see the discussion page before disputing this). The page's first author rather belligerently and falsely accused me of wanting to write some sort of ivory-towerish account devoid of any mention of practical applications. What incited that attack I do not know. What happened was a sort of compromise. But my objection stands: the article still simply does not care what factor analysis is; it makes no attempt to even hint at that topic. Michael Hardy 02:05, 13 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Lizard King

Message for you on User talk:Tim Starling -- Tim Starling 05:46, Jan 13, 2004 (UTC)

IRC

Just a hi, for no reason whatsoever. Except that you are rarely on irc these days, so I miss you, and could not say hi :-) ant

On that note, I have to point out that it is now next Tuesday. Will we be seeing you back on IRC soon? -- Tim Starling 09:32, Jan 13, 2004 (UTC)

It certainly is strange hanging out on #wikipedia. I feels a bit like a cabal of people making decision about wikipedia in 'secret'. :) Good luck with your computer. --snoyes 08:48, 13 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Stubnote/IRC

Hi Angela. Thanks for the pointer. For some strange reason I don't especially expect talk on wikipedia to make sense, oh well. BTW, howcome you don't visit #wikipedia anymore? Do you find yourself wasting a lot of time when on IRC? (I know I do). --snoyes 08:39, 13 Jan 2004 (UTC)