This is an archive of past discussions with User:Keeper76. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Latest comment: 16 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
I notice you deleted the page on Hooper on the 17th September. Can you retrieve the text and put it on the talk page. I'd like to write it properly with notability, but would like to see what was written before to save time.BrissieGold (talk) 07:42, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
I restored the article, it is now at Daryl E. Hooper. Looking back now, I'm not sure exactly what I was drinking. It definitely asserts notability, and I was completely wrong to have deleted it via speedy deletion. My apologies, it was an honest mistake. However, the article does require some independent references to verify the information in the article. Again, apologies. Keeperǀ7615:11, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
This diff...
Latest comment: 16 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
Latest comment: 16 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Why'd you redirect[1]Amsterdam (Guster song)? I'm only asking since it orphaned a Fair Use image that hmwith uploaded (and I'm watching her talk page while she's away).
I don't recall where the "motivation" for that came from, was there an AFD or something? Either way, I just undid my vandalismz. :-) Keeperǀ7615:56, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
Latest comment: 16 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
Thank you for supporting me in my RfA, which passed with a count of (154/3/2). I appreciate the community's trust in me, and I will be sure it won't regret handing me the mop. I am honored by your trust and your support. Again, thank you. Happy editing! –JuliancoltonTropicalCyclone17:52, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
LOL! And congrats, well deserved (and overdue). I honestly assumed you were an admin. Do well with the tools, don't become a thread-title at ANI :-) Keeperǀ7617:53, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
Latest comment: 16 years ago32 comments7 people in discussion
Keeper, my friend, I was just going for some much needed jocularity : ) I didn't really subtract any points (you're topped out at maximum), although I was somewhat surprised by your label. That said, I see where you're coming from. If you're familiar with the candidate inside and out, or maybe even superficially, you become emboldened to defend them. If they're a stranger to you, well, you ease up. Wisdom89(T / C)18:03, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
I don't need to know the candidate personally to know it's a good candidate. Feel free to take whatever "points off" that you want, it's a good candidate that deserves better than "zOMG! he sucks at AFD!!!". Seriously. Keeperǀ7618:22, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
For what it's worth, I think that "stupid" rather undersells the inanity that RfA has become, and in particular the formulaic comments like "come back in three months when you've bored yourself rigid at AfD" nonsense that too many unthinkingly trot out. What could be more stupid that saying "I'll support you in three months"? Great editor, but I don't trust him/her with a few trivial buttons that ought to be as easily granted as taken away is so far into stupid territory that it's hyper-stupid. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 18:30, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
And to make it worse, this same candidate, in 3-6 months of going through the ridiculous things that are asked of him (namely, getting "more active" in admin areas, whatever the hell those are), will get opposed for gaming the system and trying to "level up". It makes me want to puke. Why the fuck are we so mean to each other? Keeperǀ7618:32, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
Too many children with no experience of life and nothing better to do than hang around RfA aping what they've seen other children say there in the past? --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 18:38, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
I wonder if throwing them some bananas woudl distract them. There are two RFAs running right now that are downright disgusting. Keeperǀ7618:39, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
Whats really sad, is that you guys aren't getting it. While others are pointing to the mainspace, I point to the project space. This is the area we should be looking at when deciding. If there is not enough there, you request more. And no thanks, I don't want any bananas. Synergy18:53, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
We disagree on almost everything synmag, including this. Meh, I still like you. This is a good editor, he isn't a vandal, he has clue, and he meets my criteria for adminship. So do you, so does malleus. It's only the defeated and defeatable that feel otherwise. Keeperǀ7618:58, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
My comments have nothing to do with my failed RfA's. In fact, this situation is reversed I believe. I just don't think banter on tossing bananas and children having nothing better to do accurately describes the situation. Synergy19:02, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
Since when has my talkpage been used for anything else other than idle banter??? Check the archives if you don't believe me. You (and others) have this candidate completely wrong, in my opinion. I'm allowed to talk about apes and bananas on my talkpage. Bring me to WQA if you feel so strongly about this. Again, I like you Synergy. You have this candidate completely wrong, and you would be well served to go back and look at his contributions that are making the encyclopedia better. Fuck Wiki-space, and usertalk, and whatever. Keeperǀ7619:04, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
Slow down Keeps. How did you get all of that from what I said? I knew watchlisting this talk page was the wrong move... Synergy19:07, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm not upset synmag. I never edit upset. I do, however, firmly believe I'm right about this candidate, and that you are wrong. But I'm not upset. I demand or ask nothing of you, other than to make your own decision, based on the candidates contributions. Keeperǀ7619:09, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
Right. I'm more neutral apparently. My only aim was to express a point of view, whether its right or wrong did not mean a thing to me at the time, and it still doesn't. Synergy19:17, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
See, this is exactly why I started this conversation off with you guys aren't getting it. Neutrality isn't localized to an RfA, and I never once mentioned it. I didn't label anyones opinion as right or wrong in this discussion, which was what I meant. Have fun being right. :) Synergy23:26, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
You may not think that comments about children have anything to do with the situation Synergy, but I do. And to be perfectly blunt, I don't much care whether you or anyone else agrees with me or not. ;-) --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 19:28, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
Mal, if I honestly cared, you'd be the first to know. I'm not interested if you agree with me. After many conversations with you, I've largely ignored many of your comments. Synergy23:26, 27 September 2008 (UTC)And yes, I should have ignored this one too.
Keeper, I guess you and I (and many others) are just going to have to agree to disagree. Lack of project space participation is something that should never be dismissed or overlooked. Sure, this is an encyclopedia, but it's not a lofty request to expect applicants to strut their stuff in adminy areas. It is a direct reflection of how they will ultimately work as an administrator. Performing admin chores before actually being granted the bit bolsters my confidence in an editor. Wisdom89(T / C)20:14, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
I never said you and I (and many others) were "required" to agree. I respect your opinion, and Synergy's, although I feel they are both dead wrong. Wikipedia exists because a select group of poor souls decided to make an encyclopedic website. After a while, it was decided, rather arbitrarily, that some of the editors should have the ability to view and delete non-encyclopedic articles, as well as block those editors that persistently tried to add them to Wikipedia. Everything beyond that simple "addition" is a bastardized version of the original intent of "administrators", as is self-evident by the earliest "requests for adminship". Bollocks I say. If any edit (You, Wisdom, and malleus included) have proven to be here for the good of the encyclopedia, you should be an admin. Same with Werespielchequers, same with Tadakuni. Which of those two are vandals? Which of those two are secretly "running for adminship" in order to destroy Wikipedia? Which of those two do you honestly feel will lead to drama, ANI reports, etc? Good grief, those RFAs are both for individuals that are quietly and consistently adding to the quality and accuracy of Wikipedia. Why, pray tell, would we deny them the tools to continue in that respct? That's a rhetorical question, but feel free to answer....Keeperǀ7620:23, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
Well, with Kurt (ahem) no longer with us,I guess it's down to me to defend the "Oppose" corner; I stand by my boilerplate oppose (I don't think editors who haven't had the experience of putting large amounts of work into an article, and/or defending their work against well-intentioned but wrong "improvements" or especially AFD, are in a position to empathise with quite why editors get so angry when their work's deleted and/or The Wrong Version gets protected, and I don't support users who don't add content to the mainspace being given powers to overrule those who do.) – I think the "tons of Wikipedia space but no mainspace" editors haven't demonstrated the common sense that's necessary in calming down situations. That's not to say they don't have common sense, but that I don't know – and in my experience, this type of editor tends to become the letter-of-the-law Defender Of The Wiki type ("well, technically, that's in breach of paragraph 4.2.7.b of WP:CIV"). AFD, GAN, FAR etc are stressful, and in my experience "I know what you're going through" really does help. – iridescent20:42, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
All fine and well, and I support article builders. Curious though, where you place me? Am I an exception to the rule? I have exactly 0 dyk, 0 GA, and 0 FA. I never will. Am I a horrible admin? Would you have oppose/neutralled my RFA? Honest question. Keeperǀ7620:46, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
You had the good luck to run for RFA while I was Otherwise Engaged for four months, so it never came up ☺. Seriously, looking at your RFA, it's one of those I wouldn't have commented on at all unless it were from someone I knew, as there was nothing there to send the "hang on, I'd better look closer at this one" signal. Part of the reason it looks like I oppose so much (although I oppose less than half the time) is that I don't join pile-ons either way, so if I already see 40 supports/opposes stacked up I don't see the point wasting my time reviewing contribs if it's obvious which way it's going to go. If someone had put a gun to my head and made me participate, I think Casliber's comments in Neutral probably sum up my attitude to it based on what's on the RFA, and without the benefit of nine months hindsight. – iridescent21:23, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
Malleus lives or dies by how I agree with him. I can tell... But answering why we're so fucking mean to each other - it's a bit of hazing and the zeal of the convert. Once an admin gets a brutal RfA (or several) and passes, it's only natural to turn around and treat the next guy as badly as you were treated, just to see if he can take it. It's for his own good, right? Or human nature. --Moni3 (talk) 00:23, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
I decided to talkpage-stalk this particular thread because Keeper's rant argument about any editor here to improve the 'pedia being an admin is fairly interesting. I really don't have much of a view on this, but one of the things I hate about RfA is the bashing of voters because of their standards; nearly any argument is very defensible. To people who think standards are too low, Keeper's points are a good wake-up call, but an argument can be made for high standards: There are many, many admins now; we can afford to be picky and choose only the ones which we think would be the best. Wikipedia won't suddenly implode if we don't promote one admin who could do the job fairly, or even a hundred. Not fair, you say, that those who come later, when we can afford to be picky, are less likely to pass? Fair has nothing to do with it. As long as what needs to be done gets done, which people have the tools to do it doesn't matter. Nousernamesleft (talk) 03:11, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
I somewhat agree with you. In fact, I think a case could be made for there being too many administrators on wikipedia. I forget the exact ratio of administrators to editors; something like one active admin per 20 active editors? Ridiculous. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 03:21, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
Standings
Latest comment: 16 years ago8 comments4 people in discussion
So the Mets are done. Shea is done. My thumb hurts from flipping back and forth between Yankees Game 1 and Mets -- both rain delayed and Yankees/Sox playing at their typical speed. Looks like Moose could win 20. So what happens if the WhiteSox win tomorrow? Then a playoff with the Twins? Two playoffs? I don't get this at all. Nor do I get why, other than $$$, the Yankees and Red Sox are trying to play 2 in a hurricaneTravellingCari21:47, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm waiting for Hurricane Dude! to come along. Baseball makes a distinction between "a playoff" and "the playoffs". Actually, baseball doesn't use "playoffs" to describe its post-season tournament (nor do they use the term "tournament"). It's the media that insist on calling it "the playoffs". The Sox have a makeup game against the last place Tigers tomorrow. If they win, they tie with the Twins, and then there has to be a 163rd game to decide matters. If they lose, they're out. Either way, the AL Central winner gets to play against Tampa Bay in one of the two ALDS's. Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?08:25, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
"a Moose could win 20" !?!??!!?!? Boy did you guys miss out when we let you win that little skirmish a couple of hundred years ago ......... :)Pedro : Chat 21:56, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
I don't know, Cobra. Apparently it replaced Klaus, which is equally odd. Pedro, see above. Rule number whatever :) Should have wikilinked for you uneducated foreigners :p Moose and Favre, the latter is actually football. He was retiring, then he wasn't, then he was. Then he wasn't. TravellingCari01:00, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Klaus? Geez, that just might be worse than Kyle. Why the hell do hurricanes need to have names, anyway? In the words of Lewis Black, "If they're gonna give a hurricane a name, why not give it a name that applies, like Hurricane 'JESUS CHRIST ON A CRUTCH!' followed by the next big one, Hurricane 'HOLY FUCKIN MOSES!'" GlassCobra08:54, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Bye bye?
Latest comment: 16 years ago15 comments8 people in discussion
I gather you're off - if it's just RL stuff, will you be back at some point? Not sure the wiki would be as fun without you or this place to congregate...but regardless, if you do go have a lot of fun out there, but don't do what I went through a phase of doing and correcting the grammar on chalkboard signs that say things like " Road work's " - I ended up getting chased when I did that Fritzpoll (talk) 07:58, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
It's just RL stuff. I'm weaning myself slowly from Wiki so that I actually go. This is a load of fun and when not having fun, we get to build an encyclopedia! ;-) You are definitely one of the good guys Fritzpoll. As I told Gazimoff, if I'm ever in the old country (it may be soon seeing as the US is about to collapse, lol), I'm going to look up some locals to show me where to find the real beer. :-) If someone would have told me that I would be chatting around with a bunch of Brits (I only came here as a reference for some local stuff), I'd have laughed. Fritz, Gaz, Rudge, Peds, Malleus, Rodhull, Baldy, Alex.m, dds, jza, etc. The good guys. Keeperǀ7613:45, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
Just a very quick note to add my best wishes for the future; our interaction may have been minimal, but your contribution to my overall well-being was (and still is) very much appreciated. Have fun! Tevildo (talk) 15:00, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
I know I'm not a "good guy" since well, I'm female and American. In addition to being one of <5 female TPSers (possibly <3), I'd really love to know the M:F ratio on Wiki. It's scary. PS: Nice football score in Boston last night. Was nice to play spoiler and keep the Sox from winning the East. For the rest of the weekend: Go Yankees, Phillies, Brewers and whoever is playing the White Sox :) Off to the shops now! TravellingCari16:00, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
A certain attack site performed the (actually genuinely useful) function of collating every WP admin who's posted a photo on their userpage, albeit with sarcastic running commentary on their looks or lack thereof. (I can't link to it, but if you Google "Wikipedia admin gallery" – in quotes – you'll see it). From that, the ratio is about 10-1 – albeit with the dual disclaimers that a) as we've recently learned the hard way, the photos people post "of themselves" are not necessarily genuine and b) female editors are often more reluctant to post their photo as they don't necessarily want either to be hit on by horny 13 year olds, or to see their photos "improved" on 4chan and ED. – iridescent16:10, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
I don't know where to categorize you two. First TCari, you're probably my favorite wikipedian, just sayin. And I hate the damn yankees (They were an awful band) :-). It was a good game last night, nice to see some formerTwins getting a champagne bath. Iridescent, I don't know where you belong either. I don't know if you are a brit or a newyorker, a guy or gal. But you're one hell of an administrator, and your picture catalog/catalogue (meaning your ability to quickly find the most obscure and randomly offensive photos in 2 clicks) is one of the most frightening I've ever seen. Keeperǀ7616:15, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
It's inevitable: real life will get us all someday. Thanks for being a great admin and a better Wikipedian. I'll miss you and your talk page, lurker that I am. --Moni3 (talk) 16:38, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
That means a ton coming from you Moni, you are one of the best we have. I'm not disappearing altogether, or retiring for that matter. Just going away for awhile. I don't surmise I'll be able to stay very gone very long, but my quantity of edits will definitely lower (you'd assume my quality might go up, but chances are slim :-) I'll always be lurking. Keeperǀ7616:48, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
OK fine if we're getting sentimental, you made me tear up. I still remember your first comment to me, the first place I remember "meeting" you and my first foray to the Keeperpedia. I'm glad you were around to show me the ropes -- I think you made the wiki a lot better for a lot of people, which is why your archives last days now rather than months and why I agree with DMN above, this page will stay alive. Oh and I'm finally User:Travellingcari/Funnies a copycat PS: I agree they were an awful band, but it was a great show. DOuble header tomorrow, few better ways to end the baseball season. Don't know why they're bothering though - Tampa clinched the AL East and BoSox have clinched the wild card. PPS: Who's going to make me a custom wikibreak when I go in December? Can you do it now? TCari is spending some quality time on the beach where her biggest decision of the week will be: beach or pool, tequila or rumTravellingCari00:24, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
Iri, will do. I think I've heard of that page. I figure I"m all over the web so finding me isn't that hard, even before I linked a photo of myself here. And if they come to the discovery that I'm not Heidi Klum, wow they're sherlock holmes :p
Well, goodbye, good luck, and try to pop by now and again. I'll have to get someone else to copyedit my next article, won't I? :) You've been bloody supportive the past couple of months, and I will be sorry to see you go. Fritzpoll (talk) 09:39, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Hey Keeper, in case you actually manage to leave WP I wish you all the best. And, like, if you don't, I also wish you the best. Everyme18:29, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Cool
Latest comment: 16 years ago8 comments5 people in discussion
Put in a user's name and it brings up a chart of which hours they're most active, how active they are on each day of the week, how fast they edit, which spaces they've been most active in per week etc – and if you scroll down and click "Analyse entire history" will, well, analyse your whole history. (NB; don't do it on me, it crashes at 30k edits). No possible use, but a great stalking tool. – iridescent20:35, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
The "cumulative edits" chart that comes up if you run the "Analyze the all edits of this user" [sic] function is fascinating. I once managed to make 1923 edits in a single day. – iridescent23:12, 27 September 2008 (UTC)
Ah, now I get it. OOpsie, that's a lotta blue. Of course, its for the week that I announced rather quietly that I was leaving, but I'm willing to bet it isn't that far off for any week in general. The joys of "running a noticeboard" in userspace.... :-) Keeperǀ7614:09, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Latest comment: 16 years ago14 comments6 people in discussion
You, in your entrenched "no-IRC, no-email, Wiki-is-Wiki-is-not-RL" stance, are one of my model 'pedians. And you hate that bald kid as much as I do, which says bunches. I almost wish I'd let you nom me for adminship back when you first mentioned it, but I didn't feel capable. I would gladly carry the torch, though, were I in a position to do so. You are quite teh awesum, and I hope RL gives you scads and scads of $$$$$$ so you and the Mrs and the Keeplings can wallow in material goods til the end of time. But WP will be poorer for your absence...even though you don't like my Sox, that is. I'll miss you, homes. Gladys J Cortez23:20, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
Thanks you two. Pedro, I swear a lot, both IRL, and once in a while, when I really feel strongly, on-wiki. My apologies if my fuckisms here and there have ever bothered you. And Gladys, you're ready. Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Gladys j cortez. Turn it to a bluelink, transclude it onto RFA (instructions are here) I'll add a strong support immediately. You are extremely clueful and passionate, you right articles, you know how to protect them, and you have wonderful communication skillz. And you use ALLCAPS appropriately :-). You should've run months ago. Keeperǀ7614:54, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
No no no no. Good try. That was created at 16:05, while I left my message at 15:47. LIAR! Not ahead of me! =D —the_ed17— 19:14, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Latest comment: 16 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Bwahahahaha! You thought this was going to be about baseball. Instead it is about Sarah Palin. Or at least, two priceless fictional depictions of the current governor of alaska.
The first one froze up my archaic PC, which is evidence enough for me not to click on the second. I assume they're funny though :-) Keeperǀ7615:52, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Latest comment: 16 years ago9 comments3 people in discussion
I guess you're a temporary fan. You just can't end your Wikipedia life until at least Tuesday. Definitely through the World Series, if the Twins make it that far. That's only fair. OrangeMarlinTalk•Contributions00:55, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Question I've been meaning to ask -- how was it decided that, pending Chicago defeating the tigers today, that the playoff betwix the twins/pales is to be hosted at Comiskey? I can't find a logical reason for that. #1 reason being we have a better record one-on-one (twins are 10-9 against the sox this year). What gives? Why aren't we doming it? Does anyone know why they get to play host? Keeperǀ7620:25, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Don't know for sure, probably coin toss. If they get rained out today, maybe they'll have a 3-team doubleheader tomorrow. Can't interfere with network TV schedules, you know. Baseball BugsWhat's up, Doc?20:34, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
You replied here to tell me that you "don't know". I already "don't know!" I want answers!!!! In every other "playoff" situation, the team with the better record and/or standing gets homefield. I want answers. Keeperǀ7620:36, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
'Fraid so. Not necessarily permanently. Tomorrow will be my last day with numerous edits. I'll still be lurking, but Real Life has changed very drastically in the last two weeks, a chapter is closing, and a new, very much more lucrative chapter is about to begin. Rough, I know. The only problem is that I won't have regular computer access. Keeperǀ7616:52, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
It's a very positive change. If the WMF was willing to pay my mortgage and other necessities, I'd gladly reconsider my options...:-) Keeperǀ7618:59, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Well... shit. Here's hoping you manage to swing around still, but if not, good luck in the real world. Drop me a line sometime (easiest email address in the world: my username, @, my username again, then a .com). EVula// talk // ☯ //19:43, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
So theshit@theshit.com? Really? It is memorable I suppose.....I'll be around here and there, just not everywhere anymore. Cheers, Keeperǀ7619:46, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
I have no idea where that started. At one point, EVula self-proclaimed himself to be "the shit" (which, if anyone reading this doesn't know, is American slang for being "f-ing awesome". I replied with, "are you sure you didn't mean "a shit?", which, by changing the article from "the" to "a", implied that he was the opposite of awesome. Just plain old shitty. The rest is history. Keeperǀ7620:57, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Oh no! Oh yay! But, oh no! Keeper, I'm happy that good things are happening in your life. I'm sad though that they mean you'll be away from WP. I'm glad you aren't going away totally though. Hugs, AletaSing22:06, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Thanks Aleta. You're one of the good ones, and I'm glad you're here. I very much appreciate your sentiments. Be well yourself :-) Keeperǀ7622:07, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Fixed numbering
Latest comment: 16 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion
Your recent edit to Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Tadakuni mentioned "fixed numbering" in the edit summary. The problem you fixed was something which bothered me, but I didn't know what to do about it or who to ask. I wonder if you could re-vist the page to look at another anomaly -- an initial opposition which was changed to neutral just before Oppose 9:
Oppose - A troubling lack of wikipedia mainspace edits and an edit summary usage that's worse than my own. Nice article writing though. — Realist2 14:12, 27 September 2008 (UTC) Removing oppose, consider this a neutral. — Realist217:54, 28 September 2008 (UTC)
I wouldn't worry to much about it, no need to move it if Realist didn't. The closing crat(s) will read it and "count" it where it belongs. And for your own reference, to "fix the numbering" usually means adding a pound sign (#) in front of the colons (:) of any comments in the support/oppose/neutral sections. If you ever see, in the edit window, someone's post that starts with a colon, without the pound sign, just add the pound sign :-) Cheers, Keeperǀ7616:58, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Latest comment: 16 years ago11 comments3 people in discussion
I can't even remember what we battled over, but I'm glad it was forgotten (well, I forgot, you keep bringing it up...I guess that's why you're the Keeper). I regret some of the things that I've done around here. I really have a low tolerance of some of the POV-pushing around these parts. The fringe cruft articles just upset me to no end. Even though FT2's methods were reprehensible (and let's not forget he has never apologized publicly for his little Machiavellian ploy for the POV-pushing side) and frankly unforgivable, I decided that maybe I should be nicer around here to get things done. I still suffer fools poorly. I understand your heartfelt comments about my being an admin. The funny thing is I would be an admin in your mold than in the mold of a lot of other admins I see around here who use the "power" to push their POV, whatever it is. There is an admin User:B, whose POV isn't even close to mine, but never abuses his tools (wow, did that sound wrong, or is it just my perverted mind?). Then there are admins who remain nameless, whose POV are just like mine, and I am shocked with what they do with the admin tools. Anyways, as we've discussed a million times, I wish I had some of the admin tools to semi-protect pages from IP vandals and clean-up some moves that are difficult for us powerless peasants. As for blocking, I've gotten blocks for every 3RR or Sock that I've found. If I'm in a battle with an editor, the one place where I'd love to use the blocking tools is the one place I'd never use it. Anyways, I'm rambling. You too are one of the good guys around here with an outstanding sense of humor, and an unhealthy obsession with Sarah Palin (I had to add her in here). Anyways, I hope that you don't leave forever. And that the reasons for your leaving isn't anything really bad (remember, I'm a physician, so I can be quite imaginative in your reasons). Let me conclude with Go Twins!!!!!! OrangeMarlinTalk•Contributions17:25, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Thanks OM. For someone that "suffers fools poorly", you've done an admirable job putting up with me :-). I'm not leaving forever, or permanently, I'll edit once and a while when I get the chance. $$$$$ is my motivator, and frankly is the primary reason why I'm "movin on up" (meaning I'm getting considerably more of it where I'm going). Anywho, I expect you to write a nicely worded letter to the Marlins players thanking them for getting rid of the mets two years in a row. I think the Shea wrecking ball should have a Marlins bumper sticker on it, but perhaps that's just me :-) Keeperǀ7618:15, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm curious where the other 3 came from. According to global warming "theories", we should be losing our glaciers, not gaining....and no, I'm not leaving. I wouldn't want to have to pay extra for the MLB package on directv to get out-of-market programming. A scenery change, definitely, but not a drastic one. And I put "theories" in scare quotes up there just to piss you off one last time :-) Keeperǀ7619:05, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Well, little does Keeper know, I'm kind of a skeptic about Global warming. My reasoning is that there is a bit too much reliance on very short periods of data, which can be misinterpreted. For example, the earth is still cooler than it was 2000 years ago, but is warmer than it was 10,000 years ago. Even that scale is misleading in a planet that's 4.5 billion years old. I don't know how to analyze 20 years or 100 years of data. Is the earth getting warmer? Yeah, I remember my first year in Syracuse, I saw over 200 inches of snow. It doesn't do that now. I remember when Lake Ontario froze over. I don't see that now. But I just can't bring myself to join the Bush POV that the oil companies are guiltless. So, I sit on the fence, and watch the edit-warring at Global warming. Oh, I used to love watching the local news up there when a car would try to drive across a lake, or one of the ice fishing houses sinks. Those made life in Minneapolis a bit more fun. OrangeMarlinTalk•Contributions19:53, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Don't tell Boris, err Ray Ray, or William Connelly what I wrote here. I'll be blocked for months. And all of my science street cred will be shot. All I remember is how effing cold Minneapolis was in March, and you all walk around in shorts and t-shirts like it was summer. OrangeMarlinTalk•Contributions20:19, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
No worries. No one takes anything said on my talkpage seriously anyway, it's all farce. As far as GW is concerned, and being old, I vividly remember the "global cooling" crisis of the 1970s. Makes for an uphill battle as far as "fighting skepticism". Al Gore isn't helping, other than making it politicized instead of scientific, he with his 3 or 4 mansions, private jets, and "carbon purchases". Sigh. Keeperǀ7620:23, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Latest comment: 16 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Hi Keeper76, I write you to talk. First of all, excuse me for my English, I'm not a native writer. I have seen that you deleted the articule about "Group for Spanish Football Statistics Compilation", and you considered it like a 'irrelevant matter', but this association work hardly, to compile a lot of Spanish football results. May be you thought wrong, this assciation is not a company, and it doesn't obtain any bussines benefits for its labour. This Group share the wikipedia principles, and one articule about it is a good idea for the football stadistic fans. This articule would be a way to know more football information. You can visit its web and provide your opinion (http://usuarios.lycos.es/arefe/). If the articule wording was not good, I'm sorry, surely I can do it better for next articules.
For future deletes, I advise you something; please, before talk first with the articule writer and then take your decision. To delete articules when you don't know its contain isn't good.
Thanks for reading my arguments, and my best regards.--Julián81 (talk) 18:24, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Ok, that was my mistake. The article Group for Spanish Football Statistics Compilation, had a proposed deletion template on it that was removed. After that, someone added a Speedy deletion template, which I obliged. If an article is contested, it should not have been deleted. It was my mistake, lo siento. For anyone else reading this, the article needs massive help with cleanup and general grammar, as well as some reliable third party sourcing. Failing that, it should be brought to WP:AFD. Cheers, J81. Keeperǀ7618:32, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Latest comment: 16 years ago10 comments3 people in discussion
Semi-serious question. Can someone eyeball this? I think it's non-notable spam (in a series of spam by the company) but it was restored via a request to Wikimedia UK. Does that mean it can't go to AfD? Thoughts? TravellingCari18:58, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Any article can go to AFD at anytime. The success or failure of the debate notwithstanding. A WMUK decree means, IMHO, that it probably shouldn't be speedied or prodded, but really the community decides, via consensus, what stays and what goes. It may not be worth the battle though, is it a really horrible article? It sounds spammy in name, its not a BLP, maybe not worth the trouble. Keeperǀ7619:48, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
The article is pure spam, restored as an "out of process" deletion by someone contacted. She asked for more info, I gave it, and didn't hear back. To be honest, I forgot about it until it popped up on my watchlist again today. TravellingCari20:32, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
I'd say AFD it, get community to trump. Just be sure to do a thorough googling/source search prior (not that you don't normally) :-) Keeperǀ7620:33, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Should anyone want to see what I assume is Sentry Parental Controls in action, here you go. Note the nice "leaving the S&M porn image in place while removing the word "bitch" from the caption" demonstration of their "intelligent filter". – iridescent20:55, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
The editor who did that had come to my talkpage to complain about my reverting his "improvement" of "Butch Cassidy"→"***** Cassidy" and "Dick Barbour"→"**** Barbour" on Paul Newman. – iridescent21:17, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
People's idea of improvements frighten me at times. Then again, I worked at a hospital (non-medical side) and was researching something through WebMD and it came up blocked for porn because, yep it was a search on breasts. TravellingCari22:16, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
That's very sweet Sam, thank you. I don't anticipate you'll get a lot of traffic there, I'm not "retiring" or anything. I'll be around, just drastically less frequency (which is probably good for me, and for Wikipedia :-) Keeperǀ7620:48, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
You're one of my faves Sam. It's so easy to pick on you sometimes, but I know you always mean well. Hope you had a nice time at fiddle camp, or whatever it was. :-) Keeperǀ7621:12, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Latest comment: 16 years ago6 comments4 people in discussion
I would like to become admin to further the protection of articals that i am intrested in such as nascar related articals and amusement park related articals. Many of the nascar articals are constantly vandalised and somtimes nothing is done about it. My main intrest is legitimitly protecting articals and i feel i would do a good job at this if given a chance.
Thanks,--Cmedinger (talk) 20:48, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
thanks for your advice but i dont see anyone nominating me anytime soon and will take no further action at nominating myself considering that you dont think it would be worth my time but thanks--Cmedinger (talk) 21:03, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
The real key is to recognise that adminship is potentially a poisoned chalice, one which only those immune to the poison of self-aggrandisement ought to drink from. That pretty much rules out all high-schoolers as far as I'm concerned, and an awful lot of adults as well as it happens. :-) --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 21:22, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Latest comment: 16 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion
If you are leaving, enable email why you are gone! You can even create a throwaway account with the name "Hans Danger Martinez-Arquebust" (unless I just guessed your real name). I promise not to ask you to swing the banhammer from the far reaches of email-dom. :) Protonk (talk) 21:52, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Ain't gonna happen most likely, on principle mostly. I'm not completely disappearing, I'll be checking in and lurking about when I can, and probably replying to talkpage messages here and there, just not nearly as regularly as I do now. And you got my real name wrong. It's Hans Danger Martinez-Arquedust. Common mistake though, switching the "d" for a "b" :-). If I ever decide to throw away an email account, I'll post it here. Cheers, Keeperǀ7621:55, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Well that's good. Besides, if you give us an inch we will take a mile. One minute you cede your email stance, the next you are on IRC doing whatever it is that people do there (Seriously, what do people do there? I figured talk pages were enough of a distraction from article-writing) 21:57, 29 September 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Protonk (talk • contribs)
Latest comment: 16 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion
Resolved
– I assume
I just posted on the WP:RFR page. I would like to use Huggle to revert vandalism and it doesn't seem that anyone has noticed my post. I am friends with Useight but I don't want him to assign rights because that would be a conflict of interests. I know this is the place that all the admins look at, so if someone could review my application that would be much appreciated. Thanks! Bassbonerocks (talk) 23:27, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I can't remember why I'm on this page (as always), but zomg, the above threads make me sad. Especially those about baseball. :-( Yeah. Snif. Giggy (talk) 00:38, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
~~Ronsax Needs Your Help, Keeper76!
Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
How are you, Keeper76? We haven't "talked" in a while. Please contact me and I'll explain.
Latest comment: 16 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Hi again Keeper76,
I wrote on your wall about a week ago regarding the page i was trying to create about Epidata Consulting. I have made quite a few changes, and nearly finished what I would like to put up. The only thing that remains for me to do is reference where I have got some of the information from. Does it suffice referencing from the website of the company or do I need more neutral sources? Obviously I would not like to post it if it does not suffice in any way shape or form therefore may I ask that you take a quick look at it, and give me anymore pointers that I may need, I have taken into consideration the last ones you gave me, though, and have checked the page: how to make your first wikipedia page: etc.
I couldn't find a way of writing on your page so I'll continue here. Thanks. I have researched a bit for that, and some of the stuff that i have written in the article that is on my user page I will reference the websites I got it from, tomorrow. It is notable in its sector, which is (in my opinion) very up and coming and relevant for large businesses. If I am unable to find articles written solely about Epidata then does that negate any chance of getting the page uploaded? Appreciate the help..
Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Have not read the article on Tom Valentine, which has apparently been deleted on your instructions, but I'd like to!
If this is the same person I think it is, he is not only a controversial "health quack" (not my words), but for several years hosted a nationally-syndicated talk program on the defunct Sun Radio Network. His show, Radio Free America, featured guests from the paranoid, far-right, including Holocaust deniers, and was linked to/funded by Willis Carto's Liberty Lobby. (Wikipedia has articles on Carto and LL). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.191.2.73 (talk) 02:14, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi Keeper76. I wish to question the existence of the article Tallangatta & District Football League. You closed the recent AfD on it. The article has no useful or verifiable information. The article was tagged for needing citations/verification in April 2008. No citations were offered. In the AfD discussion, some people claimed there were newspapers with articles about the subject, but once again, those editors were unable to provide any solid references. The information in the article is challenged and disputed, but it can't be deleted, because that would involve deleting the entire article! I've considered requesting a Deletion Review, but thought it best to consult you first. Regards, --Lester23:51, 2 October 2008 (UTC)
IP block exemption?
Latest comment: 16 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
I would be willing - no concerns about you as an editor - but I am not so familiar with all the conditions and procedures, listed here. It mentions verifications, and it's possible I might need to know the range you're in. Anyone else who can provide more details? I'm willing to learn. Frank | talk 03:19, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, but it looks like someone lifted the IP block. (I *can* edit from home, but I prefer to stay logged into my corporate VPN) Unfortunately, I'm not familiar with the process either, but it looks like non-open proxies aren't supposed to be blocked to begin with. Jclemens (talk) 03:30, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
Because I know this page is full of....
Latest comment: 16 years ago4 comments4 people in discussion
...
...baseball fans (HA! you thought I was gonna say something else...), I have come here (taking time out from my busy !campaign season--no, it's not a Sarah Palin link) to abase myself before you all.
I, as I believe I've mentioned more than once, am from Chicago.
Those of you whose teams have had a disappointing year may now throw tomatoes, rotten fruit, cabbages, et all. Because my Cubs and those Sox, about whom I've been bragging all season (off and on, anyway)...are tanking. TANKING, I tell you. Tanking like it's the middle of Tank Day at Tank Park in North Tankonia. Gawds, we suck.
Would someone please hand me my sword, please?? One more for the Cubs and it's over--our 100-year "Team of Destiny" flag-waving proven as hollow as it's been for the previous 99. (And yeah, the Sox are losing too. I can't feel quite as bad about that--after all, we'll always have 2005. And at least they're only ONE game down, at the moment; I shall come and bewail them tomorrow, should events warrant.)
My Cubs, my Cubs. You're giving me a GREAT BIG SAD.
Well, I don't really have a team after the Yankees kicked Torre out. It's not that I really like Torre, it's just it pisses me off that the guy leads them to what, 12 consecutive playoffs and they're boo-hooing because "he can't get them to the Series". WTF?
Anyways, that is neither here nor there. I was kind of rooting for the Twins because of Keeper, but now that they're gone IDK who I'm going for. Either way, I liked your post, Gladys. Your suicide overtones were funny, but what really got me was your *gasp* inclusion of a link on this page that does not involve Sarah Palin. And right after the vice-presidential debate, too. That has got to be a first. J.delanoygabsadds06:15, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
Latest comment: 16 years ago5 comments5 people in discussion
Man, I'm going to miss you. I'd airmail some snout but you probably don't want the scabby British stuff (heck you don't want them at all!!). Seriously - Keeps, take care, it's been an absolute pleasure. When you have five minutes and a PC drop me a note to let me know you're all good. Heck, we've had some fun times and some bloody lousy ones together on WP but through it all it's allways been worth it. And if you ever decide to visit our green and pleasant land you can at least count on a beer! Best wishes to you and yours. Don't stay away too long wihtout a note. Pedro : Chat 21:55, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Even though I am unaware of the circumstances that led to this decision, I hope all is well Keeper, my friend. I hope you return to major editing in the future. Wisdom89(T / C)19:46, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
Wait. You'd airmail him some WHAT now? Should I be alerting the relevant authorities that you are in possession of scabby British snouts--and if so, who would those authorities be? Who has jurisdiction over snout possession in the U.K.?? I've got to say, I'm disproportionately frightened by this thread--for Keeper, for you, for the airmail system--for EVERYONE. I'll be cowering under the bed if anyone asks for me.Gladys J Cortez05:48, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
Dear Keeper, our paths only crossed in a couple of brief interactions, and I think you forgot about the time I came to you for help when you came and argued my cause; but I am terribly sad to hear you are going, hope you come back when you can and enjoy Real Life when you can't. I'd offer to airmail some snout but its probably cheaper on your side of the pond. To answer GjC's question snout is the de facto internal currency of HMP, a well known if slightly downmarket UK leisure chain. According to a TV documentary, Mr Harry Grout is the relevant authority (though perhaps in deference to wp:bfp I should say was). ϢereSpielChequers09:23, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
We've never really talked directly, but on Pedro's talk you and I have broadcasted messages. I hope that Pedro sails through RFB as well, which he will we he feels the urge to throw himself at the mercy of those nasty opposers. Best of luck in RL. Or perhaps not, as one of my teachers says luck is inexistent. Anyway, have fun. You will be sorely missed. — Ceranthor [Formerly LordSunday] 13:15, 4 October 2008 (UTC)
Fare thee well!
Latest comment: 16 years ago7 comments6 people in discussion
Christ, I had no idea you were leaving until now. How have I managed to have had your page on my watchlist all this time and not noticed the farewells? Anyway, I didn't get to know you as well as I wanted to (it was on my list, I swear!) and it's a shame that I may never get to. I don't know what it is in the hideous RL that's taking you away but I hope it resolves eventually. Drop us a note sometime!
*great big squishy-squashy hug, and I'm (nearly) sorry for what my Sox did to your Twins...nearly. Thanks for EVERYTHING, and dammit, you better stop by now and again. Dammit. :)Gladys J Cortez10:04, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
Okay, so maybe I've had more name changes than a typical English fraud artist, but I think you still know me. :) Have a good time with whatever you continue to do. Hopefully, it will be as fulfilling as Wikipedia's relationship with yourself. Caulde19:05, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
Latest comment: 16 years ago51 comments20 people in discussion
Keeper, I thought I would whip out my guitar and offer you a farewell song. I was going perform "To Sir, With Love," which sort of seems appropriate given the circumstances –
("If you wanted the sky I would write across the sky in letters / That would soar a thousand feet high / To Sir, with Love") – except that I am definitely no one's idea of Lulu. So what can I serenade you with as a going away tune? Ecoleetage (talk) 17:59, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Unclear on Keeper's age, but I'm old enough to remember this: If You Leave Me Now, by Chicago. Only appropriate for people who are going to miss him, of course. Not me. I don't care. Sniff. (quickly wipes away small tear and puts on brave face, hoping no one saw) --barneca (talk) 18:15, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm definitely old enough for classy Chicago songs. Barneca, someday in the future, if you see me walking by, and the tears are in my eyes? Look away babe. Look away. Keeperǀ7618:19, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
To the tune of Bohemian Rhapsody...I'm kinda too lazy to make up more words right this second, but I will later to win the contest. XD
Keeeeper; oooooOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.....I know you're gonna make me cry, if you don't come back this time tommmmorrrrrow. But we must carry ON, carry on Even though you really matterrrr. (piano) —the_ed17— 18:21, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Keeper is a lion among men, so what better way to pay tribute than with an appropriately leonine tune? (With apologies to The Tokens): In the Wiki, the mighty Wiki, the Keeper sleeps tonight. In the Wiki, the quiet Wiki, the Keeper sleeps tonight. A-wimoweh, a-wimoweh a-wimoweh, a wimoweh, a-wimoweh, a-wimoweh a-wimoweh, a-wimoweh... Ecoleetage (talk) 18:39, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Thanks alot eco. Now that dam song is stuck in my head. My falsetto is rather impressive though, if I may say so myself....oooo WEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE, o weee oooo, oh weeee bo wum bo weeeehhhh.....Keeperǀ7619:18, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Got to be What A Bringdown, by Cream or Should I Stay or Should I Go, by Clash. Others: It Hurts Me Too, by Eric Clapton, or Wait Until Tomorrow by Jimi Hendrix, or (in an act of sycophany) In The Presence of the Lord by Blind Faith, or Just a Song Before I Go, by Crosby, Stills, and Nash, or in an act of assertiveness, You Ain't Goin' Nowhere, by Bob Dylan, maybe End of the Line, by the Traveling Wilburys, You're A Better Man than I, by the Yardbirds, My Friend by Jimi Hendrix, or Miss You, by the Rolling Stones. Give me the barnstar. Now. I win. Or, Eco, if we're doing Lions, I vote Lions, by Dire Straits. Erik the Red 2 ~~~~21:53, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Eric wins. Because he demanded it. And because I heart Bob Dylan. Local, and musical genius. When I started this, I said "first one that says anything Dylan gets a barn". Keeperǀ7621:56, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
I tip my hat to the The Keeper of the Stars, which despite your "this isn't what my screen name is about", is what I've always thought of because I'm a country music fan. Eco wins on the idea, I win on quantity :P I haven't asked for a star since Iri gave me the ninja one ;) :p TravellingCari21:54, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
I'm one of the very few midwesterners that despises country music, and apparently, you're one of the few new yorkers that likes it:-). You don't need a barnstar TCari, you are a barnstar....Keeperǀ7621:57, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
I don't consider Johnny Cash to be "country". He's too brilliant to be categorized, but if I were to call him anything, he'd be a mix of rock and gospel. No Country for that Old Man. Keeperǀ7622:02, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
Late to the party, but I know Keeps will see it eventually: How about "Without You"--no, not the hideous Mariah version, the ORIGINAL--by Nilsson, with the long mournful drawn-out melismatic wail that makes "LIIIIIIVE" into a six-syllable word...which (Warning: frightening Gladys tangent in 3..2..1..NOW) will forever be "the song to which I, at the age of ten, composed a spontaneous interpretive dance-on-roller-skates, in my parents' basement", but despite that, it's still a good, schmaltzy, going-away-type song. The place seems bare and quiet already, Keeper. Come back to us soon!Gladys J Cortez05:56, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
Latest comment: 16 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion
i read your review on christa,yes christa has done bit parts,bettie page was 10 yrs ago an her first appearance,her first movie was 2001 maniacs,but since then she has been the lead in day of the dead with ving rhames an muna suvari,,the star of hero wantedwith cuba gooding jr,the star of the upcoming lies an illusions with christian slater,and finding bliss with leelee sobieski ,all starring roles. she was last septembers celebrity pictorial in playboy,an in the horror genre made a huge name for herself.an its not nice to say that since you dont know of these films,doesnt mean they arnt "big" movies,just maybe not your type of films.christa did not write her own page,it was created by others.could you please put her page back up :) thank you Christacc (talk) 06:33, 3 October 2008 (UTC)
E-man or Christacc, you are more than welcome to bring this to WP:DRV. I won't be involved in the undeletion of the article, but also won't stand in the way (other than to say you definitely need some sources to independently verify your claims in your paragraph above Christacc). Cheers, Keeperǀ7600:57, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
Ok, I know it's an inactive board, but you TPS' are still out there....
Latest comment: 16 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion
I'm about to embark on a new page cleanup project over at a page for my favourite US sitcom, and wondered if anyone would like to help? Many of the sources I need (critical reception mostly) seem to be subscription, and whilst this isn't a problem for me thanks to my day job at a University, I'm guessing it'll be a problem for anyone trying to review them. Any thoughts on this? Fritzpoll (talk) 12:11, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
Malleus is right (as usual). You are allowed to use tossed salads, and scrambled eggs. :-) (Fritzpoll will get it, others won't). Keeperǀ7600:49, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Hi Keeper, I'm an editor who is attempting to assist User:Ronsax in editing the article there and removing all the blather that is POV and the inevitable items that come up with a new editor on his first page. I'm aware the author is editing the page that had been about himself. Any help you might be able to give is appreciated, especially in the Discography area. Thanks. --leahtwosaints (talk) 16:44, 5 October 2008 (UTC)
Minneapolis Meetup
Latest comment: 16 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Muddy Waters
maps.google.com
2401 Lyndale Ave S
Minneapolis, MN 55405
(612) 872-2232
Friday at 10:00 PM (at night)
Town Hall Brewery
maps.google.com
1430 Washington Ave S
Minneapolis, MN 55454
(612) 339-8696
October 11, 2008
Saturday at 12:00 noon (midday)
Meetup RSVP
Latest comment: 16 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
A Thank You Card!
Dear Keeper76, thank you so much for your words of support, kindness, and your trust in me. My request for Adminship has been closed, and the support the community has shown will be with me forever. I have no way to properly express how grateful I am, and all I can tell you is this: I shall try not to disappoint you nor anyone else with my use of the buttons... and if I mess up, please tell me! :) If you ever need my help, either for admin-related stuff or in any other way, you are welcome to ask, and I shall do my very best.
Latest comment: 16 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Keeper76, I'd like to thank you for voting in my RFA. Thanks also for expressing your trust in me, and I hope that I live up to your expectations. Don't forget, if you have any questions (or bits of advice), please leave a message on my talk page. Thanks again, SpencerT♦C02:16, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Is anyone else really bummed about baseball right now?
Latest comment: 16 years ago23 comments13 people in discussion
Or is it just me? Ok, so this last week in KeeperRL has been one of the most ridiculous and lovely weeks, with bonus points towards the surreal. But I still get time to watch baseball, and I have to say, it has been really really disappointing to watch the Angels crumble, and I was also quite sad for the cubs (even though I picked the dodgers to go fight against the american league hometeam, which now that it isn't the twins, had better be the feel-good rays.) I miss my twins, and I have no heart for the postseason, I don't care about any of these teams. I really miss this noticeboard, er, talkpage also. There have been several events, moments, etc., that have instantly made me want to post here, but I'm literally never near a computer. I'm going offline in about 10 minutes, just saying hi and hope all's well. :-) Keeperǀ7600:55, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
Well, hey, hopefully the Twins will make it next year, Keeper. :-) By the way, could you take a quick look at Randy Ruiz again? It's currently being reviewed to be promoted to WP:GA status. It's alright if you can't, or if you don't have the time. (Go Red Sox!) – RyanCross (talk) 00:58, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
Ryry! Didn't know you got a name change :-). I took a quick look at Ruiz, it needs a better picture, or three, to get through GA, in my opinion. The text itself looks terrific. I thought of you every time he was up to bat this season :-) Keeperǀ7601:03, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
Yep, I got a name change yesterday. Well, we're both bad add pictures, so that'll be a problem. We'll see, and I'll have to somehow get a better image. "A picture's worth a thousand words" comes to mind. :-) I'll see what I can do. Thanks for the advice! – RyanCross (talk) 01:19, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
Your baseball ended when Steinbrenner bought the team. What his family has done is not baseball, it's a money business. Zing! Keeperǀ7601:03, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
No the baseball ended when Mr. Hanky got involved. George at least knew what he was doing. I'm glad for Torre, I want him to have his fuck you moment. Thanks for the visit, Keeper. Football's good, my boys are 4-0. Plaxiwho? TravellingCari01:37, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
Very nice. I like what we saw from Carr and Hixon. User_talk:Endlessdan is Giantspedia, or at least what he and I have turned it into. I love how this team is playing like a team and achieving what they're capable of. Plus it's a young team (with the exception of his royal toe under a strong leader. I refuse to get my hopes up, but I'm certainly going to enjoy it. TravellingCari03:45, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
The Cubs organization should be happy... they are probably the only MLB team that will loose fans if they ever win the World Series... I mean how many fans are Cubbie fans because they haven't won in over 100 years! Just about everybody, unless you are a St Louis or White Sock fan, likes the Cubbies.---BalloonmanPoppaBalloon04:15, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
Cardinals win the World Series, then they can't even make the playoffs the next two years. What's up with that? Kurt Weber (GoColts!) 18:40, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
Hey, Keeper, I've been so busy being depressed about my Cubbies forgetting to even show up for the post season I didn't notice you were back. Great to have you around again!--Fabrictramp | talk to me16:41, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
Wikibreak?
Latest comment: 16 years ago10 comments6 people in discussion
Thats a great pic edan. I'm so glad that guy is on the sidelines. The Vikes have managed to stumble there way into a tie for the NFC north. Go figure. I should probably continue to cheer for the other team...Keeperǀ7601:00, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
Heh. I forgot you were a Lion Man. Good riddence to millen. If only your rookie quarterback knew to stay inbounds in the back of his own endzone, perhaps we wouldn't have won by two. Heh. Keeperǀ7601:11, 13 October 2008 (UTC)
Ick. BOOO Ohio State evil! =p I root for UConn, Purdue, UCLA and Tulane in that order. (I don't have a top-ten team. =/) Original home, Dad went there, don't really know, cool mascot —Ed 17for PresidentVote for Ed14:51, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
BAH! The only reason in the world for anyone to ever boo the great and all powerful Buckeyes is if they're a Wolverpeens fan (and even that's not a very good excuse)... yer not a Michigan fan are you? - Adolphus79 (talk) 23:02, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
Rawr. Needs more talk page stalkers
Latest comment: 16 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion
I had hopes this page would remain a watering whole, even with Keeper's absence. It seems that keeper was a big part of that, stirring up discontent about baseball and vice-presidential candidates. I would talk some smack about the "Rays" but I would probably mess up and call them the Devil Rays, or something. Come back, Keeper! Your TPS's need you! Protonk (talk) 22:24, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
Egads, I'm cheering for the rays too! Probably because I detest the Bloodsox (sorry, Sam). Yesterday's game (13-4) was a sweet treat. I giggled everytime the ball flew over the monster. Heh. Keeperǀ7601:33, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
For Protonk: A topic for conversation
Latest comment: 16 years ago10 comments4 people in discussion
Let's say you've got two groups of editors at an article talk page. 50% are in favor of adding a section to an article, and 50% think it violates WP:UNDUE. Each side has hardened their position enough so that compromise will never happen.
My take on this is that, in a situation with no consensus, and no hope of consensus, default goes to not inculding it. In other words, when all else has failed, consensus is required for inclusion, not required for removal. Can someone point me to policy or discussion that says that, precisely? Or alternately, that say the opposite? Or alternately (and, probably, more interestingly), what do you think? --barneca (talk) 22:35, 15 October 2008 (UTC) p.s. if that topic doesn't interest you, I'm curious who will give me what odds the Red Sox can still pull this off.
hmmm. this is actually similar to the Talk:Khan_Noonien_Singh#Enterprise_references dispute I looked at earlier. I would be inclined to agree with your assessment of that, but in some cases, the burden is reversed. Let's pretend that the section is a criticism of the subject--the argument to remove the section becomes different. Let's presume (for the moment) that the article is balanced with the section in, and too positive with the section out. Now I could construct an argument that consensus would be required for removal. Also, 30:1. Protonk (talk) 22:45, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
It's quite hard to answer Wikipedia questions in the theoretical abstract, because adding one more involved editor usually serves to break the deadlock. :-) My own answer depends on information not provided in the problem statement: Is the information covered in any other article that is, could be, or should be wikilinked from the article in question? If that were the case, I would tend to argue for exclusion on the basis that we don't need to cover everything everywhere. Further, I don't see this as incompatible with Protonk's answer, above. While criticism sections per se are deprecated, if a section under inclusion debate is really a criticism of or regarding the article's subject, there should be no other place on Wikipedia where it would be as appropriate, right? Jclemens (talk) 22:50, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, my point was just to say that the content lean can be argued convincingly from either direction. But keeper is right, mediation helps, sometimes. It also helps if the two sides are just WP:LAME rather than debating a significant issue. :) Protonk (talk) 01:37, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
Nice try there Protonk. Trying to sneak thru RFA without me noticing. Heh, I gave you what you had coming....Keeperǀ7601:46, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
I wanted a 10 page dossier, photos of me with barnyard animals, the works. I just wanted to have a nice quiet RfA like yours so that 12 months from now I can sit new users on my knee and tell them how things were different way back in 2008. Protonk (talk) 01:49, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
LOL - That's a hell of a lot to ask for in an election year. It seems to be going fine anyway, a testament to the quality of the candidate. For the love of Most Holy Things though, don't let this user vote. :-) That would be worse than "nobody" voting... (heh, word play...) Keeperǀ7601:52, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
I heard from a little bird that the user in question forgot his password one night and locked his account out. Now he's not sure which letter in the pass phrase was capitalized. Was the password McCainPalin08 or MCCainPalin08? He never could remember. Protonk (talk) 02:01, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
"For Protonk"? Wouldn't you get a better response, say, somewhere else?. :-) Hi boys. My quick answer is "in the event there is deadlock, get a mediator, get more people involved, RFC maybe". Outside opinions. Outside opinions, etc, may not break a deadlock, but the more the merrier, and sometimes a genius shows up and a solution (and stable article) can easily result. Keeperǀ7601:32, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
"For Protonk" doesn't mean the question was for Protonk alone; I posted it here because Protonk wanted some activity at AN/K. Thanks for input. It was intentionally vague because I'm kind of working something out in my own mind right now, wanted more of a theoretical big picture thing. Like, if ultimately a gigantic influx of outside opinions results in... a 50%-50% split with no hope of compromise. Since ArbCom ain't for content disputes, it seems there's no ultimate way to solve this kind of thing. Anyway, thanks. --barneca (talk) 14:10, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
Deviousness
Latest comment: 16 years ago9 comments7 people in discussion
Ok not really, but maybe. I'm in a confession mood tonight. Over the last week or so, I've been editing here and there while logged out. I hope I'm not guilty of sockpuppeting. I never posted anything on any Wikipedia pages or talkpages except WP:AFC, I never voted anywhere (and as an IP, it would be removed anyway). I've been improving articles, doing newpages patrol, and all the fun stuff that goes with it. I've been warned by a huggler and a twinkler (both of whom, IIRC, have posted here in the past about different things - at the very least, I recognized both usernames), about my "vandalisms", only to retract the warnings later after I questioned what exactly my referenced edits and general gnomish cleaning had to do with breaking Wikipedia. I have a very new outlook on IP editing. I've never disliked IP editors or IP editing persay, but it is very difficult not to have a "learned" opinion when adminning. The majority of vandalism comes from an IP, or a redlink user. It just does. So I can now empathize better with the newpage patrollers while simultaneously empathize with the IPs.
Anywho, I've kept track of my IP(s) (it changes about twice per week) and have record of my contribs, which I won't be sharing here. No vandalisms though, no interfering with anything. I've cleaned up some disambiguation pages, requested a new article (successfully) at WP:AFC, requested an edit or two on semi-protected pages with {{editsemiprotected}}, referenced and built up some new pages before they could get speedied, and CSD-nommed some others (all of which were deleted, and good Lord no, not by me).
There, I've confessed. I'm logging out now, it's a trip! (and I really shouldn't be online at all, per RL, but dammit, I like this place)....Keeperǀ7602:15, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
It is a whole 'nother world. I heard some good advice once about studying a new environment--take copious notes, because you will never do something for the "first" time twice. In this case you can skirt that a little--logging out to work as an IP editor gives you a view of what it is like to nudge your way in to a little world that revolves around social capital and where you are incapable of accumulating it. I like Wikipedia:Vandalism does not matter on the subject, as well as some cool off-wiki essays about social groups, cohesion and the building of barriers. Protonk (talk) 02:26, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
Interesting with IPs, when I first "met" 69.140 over a DRV or elsewhere and we started to work together on a number of articles, I realised how badly some IPs are regarded. It's almost as if the rule is IP=vandalism, which is unfair. Glad you've enjoyed the other side of the wiki. Next time you come back, I need a wikibreak template for Cancun. I tried but I broke it. I'm useless with it. Can you make it something like: TCari is enjoying a much-needed beach vacation where the only decisions she'll be making are beach vs. pool and the drink colour. She will not be checking in because she's taking neither Blackberry nor laptop. Thanks! TravellingCari03:45, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
Here ya go! Cut/paste this over yonder whence you need it. Aside, I personally don't like the beach. Too many pretty people make me look bad. However, I come off quite attractive in police lineups, nursing homes, bars after one am "last call", Kansas, morgues...Keeperǀ7605:47, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
{{vacation|in order to enjoy a beach where the only decisions she'll be making are beach vs. pool and the drink colour (and how many umbrellas in the drink are really ''too'' many umbrellas...) She will not be checking in because she's taking neither Blackberry nor laptop}}
Comedy is........ registering an account, leaving the userpage as a redlink, and declining speedy deletions that are clearly not acceptable. Wait for the influx of warnings and subsequent block. Then go back with the admin hat on and decline them all over again and ...... nothing. But of course admins are just regular editors with a few extra tools.... Pedro : Chat 07:15, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
I must try some of this sometime... as soon as I started editing Wikipedia I (a) created an account and (b) created a userpage. I suspect I missed out on all the prejudice. ~ mazcat|c07:43, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, Keeper. I've saved it for when I need it. Countdown to vacation is on. I'm no Heidi Klum but I love the beach for unwinding. Little beats it. TravellingCari20:43, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
Hi Keeper, apologies to reverting to the start topic, but sometimes I patrol new pages with registered users hidden and just look at edits by IPs with redlinked talkpages. Much good stuff, some good faith that needs tidying, a bunch of stuff that I can't categorise and a minority of vandalism. It does restore my confidence in IP edits which would otherwise be somewhat eroded by my experience from just checking my watchlist. I suspect we all have ways of saving time and targeting our attentions at vandals but when you do you risk skewing your perception of IPs ϢereSpielChequers14:47, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
HAPPY INTERNATIONAL CAPS-LOCK DAY
Latest comment: 16 years ago25 comments11 people in discussion
I FIGURED THIS WOULD BE A FUN THREAD:
HAPPY INTERNATIONAL CAPSLOCK DAY!
–JuliancoltonTropicalCyclone HAS GIVEN YOU A CAPSLOCK KEY. CAPSLOCK KEYS SPREAD EPIC LULZ, SO I HOPE YOU LOL'D!
SILLY PROTONK. ONCE YOU HAVE CAPSLOCK ON, yer not supposed to hold down the shift key....ANOTHER INCOMPETENT ADMIN!!!! ZOMG!!!!ELEVEN!1!11 Keeperǀ7613:15, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
It took you people that long to find this thread? I was able to go to sleep and wake back up before there was a reply! Slackers... - Adolphus79 (talk) 13:27, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
Woohoo! Go Red Sox! I was just amazed with that game. That's what baseball's all about. Pure baseball. Looks like my team will have another chance after all. :) I'll go back to article writing now... – RyanCross (talk) 06:20, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
I said yesterday, 2004 is too recent for me to count them out. Last night was one hell of a game. I saw them tie but fell asleep before the win. Let's hope this doesn't take the wind out of Tampa's sails, although I have to admit a Sox/Phillies series would be more interesting than Sox/Rays TravellingCari11:53, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
No, it's not very clear cut is it? Apron Maxim was certainly uncivil in that odd warning to you. It's unclear to me if Ousby's article was deleted the 3rd time solely because he wished it to be. That's not always enough to delete the article if the subject, regardless of being a BLP, is so notable that it warrants an article to address his/her notability, as per Matt Sanchez - an article that has an ArbCom warning. What does Apron Maxim want to add that trumps Ousby's own wishes? That's not immediately clear. --Moni3 (talk) 20:05, 18 October 2008 (UTC)
Help from Sysop TPS
Latest comment: 16 years ago9 comments4 people in discussion
Hi, can someone please take a look at these three articles and advise me on what action to take?
None of the other Thunderbirds episodes have articles and I don't see any reason why these three would be any more special than the others. All the articles are unsourced. I've tagged them, but it still doesn't feel like i've done everything I need to do here. Would a redirect or a AfD nomination be in order? Any help would be gratefully received! Thanks John Sloan (talk) 11:58, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
If they're old articles with low activity I'd go for the redirect. In this case, I'd probably look at WP:PROD as a first step. If the prod notice gets removed and the article doesn't improve, AfD them. Redirects are only useful if they are a likely search term. I'd argue that these aren't :) Hope this helps!
OMG, has Keeper really quit!? Just had a nosey at archive 16 (sad I know, but it came up in my watchlist and I had to have a butchers) and saw a load of goodbye messages :O - I thought Keeper was just taking a long rest!! I hope he comes back. Keeper if you read this, thanks for all your help and for your friendship over the last year! I wish you all the best :-) John Sloan (talk) 15:18, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
Looks reasonable to me, I know nothing of the subject but if a redirect has been reverted, it's clearly a case that needs discussion in the form of AfD. A cursory scan shows no pressing )i.e. copyvio) reason to delete. On another note, the blinky shit above is really slowing my laptop so I may de-watchlist until that archives. Poke me if you need more comments. TravellingCari02:35, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
Opinions please
Latest comment: 16 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
Hi all, i'm looking for some opinions on this article. It could probably be merged into this article without any protest. However, i'd like to see what other more expierenced users think! PS - If a merger is the correct thing to do, please feel free to go ahead and do it :-) Thanks in advance Sloan is back!! (talk) 22:08, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
LOL, I was considering asking about whether or not an Afd nom was in order! Looks like it could well be... Sloan is back!! (talk) 23:58, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
More opinions please....
Latest comment: 16 years ago6 comments4 people in discussion
Note: Before my edits, the article did not use the letter "e", which included hiding the [edit] tabs, hiding the category...(to keep with the book, which does not use an "e" either....) and moving the article from Gadsby (novel) to Gadsby (book)...
Any set of editors who went to that much effort to write a whole article without an "e" deserves some slack on the rules, IMHO. I think humor and a "cool hack" is among the best IAR reasons I've seen yet. Jclemens (talk) 04:20, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
I like that it is a lipogram. I would say that naming conventions are a pretty "low level" rule and it would seem justified to break them to keep the "e" out of the article. Not so for the hiding tabs and categories, but it is very, very clever. Protonk (talk) 04:32, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
Two flipping hours, and waste of time given that was all by district and I only flicked one lever. StarM21:09, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
I guess I'm heading off to vote now myself. although, I'm definitely not in a swing state, so my vote for President is even more drop-in-the-ocean-ish than it is for anyone else. Lines are gonna suck too, but I couldn't escape early, and I have this pathetic "civic duty" ethic that's forcing me to go, and anyway there are a few ludicrous Moronic Ballot Initiatives to try to defeat... --barneca (talk) 21:14, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
No line as usual for me. I just had to wait for one person to finish voting and then I was in the booth. I live in a good neighborhood to vote in. However, I'm committed enough that I would wait on line for hours if I had to. I would bring a good book. :) Enigmamessage21:16, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
My neighborhood was a zoo, but it was the district stuff. Moved, just there was a lot of volume. Theyare nominally closing our offices at 5p, which is meaningless for those of us who have voted. I get that it's important but yeah, bad and worse are never good choides. I'm not a swing state either, so until they fix the electoral process, the vote is meaningless. StarM21:21, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
(e/c, to Balloonman) LOL, well, I could say something to the effect of "Ah, the loveliness of being 17..." except that wouldn't be true—I kinda wanted to vote for Obama/Biden, but whatever, I guess... =( —Ed 17for PresidentVote for Ed21:25, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Damn edit conflicts. I haven't edited in two weeks, and I get twothree E/Cs trying to say: Yep. Voted. No one in line ahead of me. Went to Starbucks and got me a free coffee afterward. I ain't tellin who I voted for. Let the Palin jokes begin....Keeperǀ7621:29, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
I have no problem telling you I voted for Nader. Not hiding that one. No lines because there are no people in your state? ;P All left when the Twins' hopes died? come on, know I had to razz you there :p StarM21:44, 4 November 2008 (UTC)
Latest comment: 16 years ago3 comments3 people in discussion
"Due to high <a href="/wiki/Transaction_processing_system" title="Transaction processing system">database server lag</a>, changes newer than 97 seconds might not be shown in this list."
Ah dang! I was lurking about a bit this week, and forgot to check for recognizable names at rfa. I woulda been a +1 in the support column. Damn, what is with this place? Wisdom is not a vandal, he's got loads of clue, but people can't seem to get over themselves. How's the family Peds? Hope everyone is healthy, wealthy and wise! Keeperǀ7617:55, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, a loss IMHO but what can you do (actually I have some ideas about what to do but not tonight). Anyhow, yes family all good - healthy yes, wise maybe and wealthy - barely! Elisabeth is now sleeping though the night (has been for about 2 weeks) so User:WifeOfPedro is pretty happy! Trust all is well with you and yours and the new job is working out well. Pedro : Chat 18:06, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
Re: 3RR
Latest comment: 16 years ago5 comments4 people in discussion
Wow, that incident was quite funny! :D - I see your still enjoying your wiki-lite life at the moment Keeps. Hope your keeping well :-) Sloan ranger (talk) 18:03, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
Latest comment: 16 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
I've temporarily removed the absolute-positioned header from the top of your page – as with everyone else using absolute-positioning (including me), the fundraising header currently sitting at the top of every page pushes the header out of its normal place, making anything absolute-positioned near the top of the page appear to anyone who hasn't worked out how to disable the advertising (2nd checkbox under "Gadgets" in preferences) look like it's printed on a pizza. – iridescent16:59, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
I'm not asking for, and don't really think it's a good idea for, anyone else to gang up on the editor in question; it would likely back them into a corner, and I've asked at the WP:AUS Wikiproject for someone with more clue to take a look at the underlying content dispute. Just a further example of what IP editors have to deal with, tho. --barneca (talk) 17:24, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
"Nor will I entertain discussions with an anonymous editor"? "I will no longer respond to anonymous IPs. End of conversation."? As those who've heard my rants on the matter know, I'm no fan of IP editing and think account creation should be compulsory (if you want to be anonymous, create an SPA), and even less of a fan of the Wikipedia Civility Police, but it looks to me like a compulsory lesson in politeness would be in order if that sort of abusiveness continues. – iridescent17:34, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
(e/c with Sloan) I'm actually of roughly the same opinion; I think creating an account should be required (I never, never understand people who claim this is a loss of anonymity; it's a gain of anonymity, no one can do a WHOIS on you). But since this is a Foundation Issue and will never change, if IP editing is going to be allowed, no way do we treat them as second class citizens.
As the IP editor himself noted on my talk page, the other editor is otherwise contributing good stuff, and mentioningthe B word at this stage is likely counterproductive. I'm hoping that if someone shows up from WP:AWNB and helps out, that a similar comment to the other editor will be all that is needed to readjust clue level. --barneca (talk) 17:49, 9 November 2008 (UTC)
You know, I think this issue has some similarities to real world law enforcement. Cops tend to have notoriously racist attitudes, because they deal with the worst scum in every minority population. If their interactions go on for years without a corresponding balance of good interactions with people who have a particular trait (like they do subconsciously with their own ethnic group), they can get into a tunnel vision thinking that all (insert ethnicity) are crooks. I think vandal fighters--which is pretty much everyone on Wikipedia--can get into the same habit in their work with IP editors. I've been making it a habit recently to {{welcome-anon}} IPs without talk pages who make contributions. I have no idea if I've gotten you yet, Keeper, but I do it for myself as much as I do it for the IP editors--it's a concerted effort to remind myself that not all IP editors are vandals. Jclemens (talk) 02:01, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
Related: There's a black cop in my neighborhood who always thinks White people are cutting class if he sees them out on a weekday. Dragged like 6 of my buddies to the station just to double-check wether school was actually off. You'd think he'd ask for a scheduel or something by now.--Koji†02:56, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
Actually, Michelle, you don't get to say "end of conversation" (to an IP editor). It's not your encyclopedia, and you have neither a policy leg to stand on, nor a being-a-decent-human-being leg to stand on. One of the best sentences I've read on a talkpage yet. Good show, barnman. Keeperǀ7615:56, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
Cookie!
Latest comment: 16 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
RockManQ(talk) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!
Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Latest comment: 16 years ago7 comments3 people in discussion
I noticed this morning (when I was fiddling with that link in your rules list) that User:BigrTex had quite a few edits to my talk page. I didn't recall ever talking to that user, so I used Ctrl-F to search my archives: nadda. I searched their archives for my name: nothing. I checked my contributions, as far back as '06, still nothing. So I looked back at the edit count page and narrowed my search to June 2007 of my talk page history, where I found this.
Latest comment: 16 years ago8 comments3 people in discussion
Resolved
– Thanks Keeper!
can someone fix my sig? It's bold on my own talk, but not when I post on others. I think it gets lost. How do I make it always bold? '''? StarM
It's only bold on your talkpage because it's your talkpage. You'll notice also that it isn't a link there either. My sig (the 76 part) is only bold here, and you can't click on it (because you are already here). Helpful? Keeperǀ7603:17, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
I tried it, but I kept feeling lost with that too. Maybe with the now bold will fix it. Will try it. I miss _you_. Your boys did well yesterday! StarM03:50, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
My boys did horrible. However, my boy did well. I can't believe we're in freeking first place. Good grief. 5-4 right now, I predict we will be 7-8 when we meet up for the last game versus your 13-2 giants. We should, at that point, do well against your reserve players. :-) Keeperǀ7604:17, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
You have no idea how happy I am the Giants managed to beat the Eagles. If the Eagles are playing, I'd even root for the Cowboys... Yeah! I can actually make a somewhat positive comment before I go to bed for real! (for background on this, check out my last two comments (hell, just look at the edit summaries, forget the diffs) to the article talk namespace.) J.delanoygabsadds04:51, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
Keep, it can't be horrible if it was a W. That's my theory at least coming from a few close Giant wins this season. I don't think we'll be 13-2 at that point, but I'd love it if we are. This "bird stretch" aka Eagles, Ravens, Cardinals (exception in Redskins), Eagles is going to be a tough one and I think they mind find a way to lose to the Redskins since they barely beat them Opening Week. I watched a bit of last night's game to get an idea of the competition for next week. Last night's game was closer than it should have been for the Cards so we'll see. JD, love how you make it so easy in your sig to find those. Oy, that's why my head would explode if I did vandal patrol. I'm surprised neither of you heard me squeeing for the Giants Sunday, I was thrilled. Something to be happy about this season and enjoy the Yankee stupidity in the off season. StarM12:54, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
Userpage
Latest comment: 16 years ago6 comments3 people in discussion
Latest comment: 16 years ago4 comments2 people in discussion
Can you (or your IP) think of anything to say about this guy? I've just stumbled across it and to me he seems to fall into that "automatically notable so warrants an article, but there's absolutely nothing to say about him" dead zone. – iridescent14:38, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
"Stumbled" across, eh? Very funny. The DYK that I wrote as an IP is strikingly similar to that article in theme. My dirty little secret, heh, I was purposefully trying to stretch the boundaries. I chose to create an article about someone that was clearly not all that notable, except by our technical rules, he "met" our standards. I successfully campaigned with the W:AFC objector, then went and recruited someone else to write the "hook" for DYK and submit it. (someone with lots of DYK success). After the other editor fluffed up what should have been a one liner article at best, and after it was on the main page, I trimmed it back down to get rid of the overabundance of trivial repetitiveness required to scrape 1500 characters into the article for the dyk-police. Success? In one sense, sure. The article looks fine, has lots of reliable sourcing, and will likely be on Wikipedia for as long as Wikipedia is on Wikipedia. But like you say about Ratliff there, there really is nothing to say about him. Please don't link the article I wrote here, I'm pretty sure you know what I wrote. Cheers, Keeperǀ7621:36, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, I know the one you wrote – that's what made me think of you. At least the baseball ones there's the potential that there's something to say – and at least you can find out something, even if it's just a place of birth. During my (indefinitely on hold) attempt to rewrite William Beldham, I kept stumbling across characters like this – indisputably notable by WP standards, but even such basic facts as his name aren't known and never will be. (If you think that's an aberration, there's plenty more where he came from). – iridescent22:28, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
It's just wrong that I edit less than you. I will hereby block you if you do 27.23 more contributions in the next week. Sorry. Caulde17:47, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
very well said
Latest comment: 16 years ago43 comments13 people in discussion
I think so, I told him that going for it now would be a little bit of a gamble... but that I thought he should. I told him exactly why it would fail if it did, but IMHO he has the experience that proves he would make a capable admin, that taking a few months to build articles would be simply jumping through some hoops to prove something he's already proven. I'm also thankful that right now, the opposes haven't found anything subsinative to oppose on. "Lack of article building," while generally a valid concern (EG I will oppose on the same basis if there isn't proof otherwise) is definitely something that can be easily fixed. It would be a different thing if the criticisms were personal or one's of judgement/behavior. I think this RfA is a positive, even if it fails... and I'm hoping he does as well.---BalloonmanPoppaBalloon17:11, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
Funny funny sad, not funny ha-ha how the pendulum swings back and forth; It's absolutely vital the candidate have experience in: Content building; no wait, Wikipedia Space edits; no wait, Policy discussions; no wait, a Wikiproject; no wait, ANI participation; no wait, AFD votes; no wait, vandal fighting experience; no wait, Content building..... I doubt I'd pass another RFA right now, but that probably won't be true in a month or two. I guess the unpublished key to RFA is to wait for your strength to be in vogue, and time it right. --barneca (talk) 18:05, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
True in any election cycle/system. It's very vogue right now in America, for example, to not have any pictures of yourself standing next to George W Bush. Keeperǀ7618:11, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
In the recent New Hampshire U.S. Senate race, both candidates were running ads accusing the other of supporting Bush at the same time. Both ran ads with pictures of their opponent next to Bush, both ran ads with statistics showing how often the other voted with Bush (different definitions of "voted with" allowing them to each claim the high ground), both ran ads with soundbites of the other one claiming to back Bush on something. I ended up voting for Kodos. --barneca (talk) 18:44, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
Seeing as I'm prima facie under discussion… At least from my point of view my two criteria have always been "has the editor written anything substantial" and "have they been involved in a content dispute and behaved in a reasonable way (whether or not I agree with them)". That cut-&-paste text of mine is just the same thing worded in a slightly more flowery way. As I say in the support section (and in the thread currently top of my talk, come to that), despite the "serial opposer" reputation bestowed on me by Majorly and tendency to lump me in with Kurt, I'm generally pretty good at "embodying the consensus"; of my 70+ opposes, only three actually passed (and there's a similar pattern with my supports) – and those three I opposed that nonetheless passed (Elonka, Philosopher, and Penwhale) have not exactly proved uncontroversial appointments. – iridescent18:16, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
I respect your criteria (criterion, really), and don't intend to change it. I simply disagree with it. Mainly because it is so broad a criterion whilst simultaneously being so rigid to the point that it can't be anything else other than true/false, like turning huggle on or off, and therefore it is not a good indicator of nuance. Every RFA candidate is a person, and a formula doesn't work well on it. I don't doubt your "score" of 67-3; there are several good editors that are attempting to make people into formulas. Keeperǀ7618:21, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
Lurking comment to Iridescent* I gave you a reputation? Where the heck did you get that from? The only time I've ever questioned your opposes are when they're hypocritical (like demanding people do article work, when most of the time on here all you do is play on Huggle and AWB, and chat to your friends). When was the last time you significantly improved an article anyway? Al Tallytalk18:27, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
(ec to Al Tally) I always consider it to have been you (and to a lesser extent Shalom) who accused me of being a serial opposer. If it's not you I apologise, I really don't have time to dredge through diffs. The last significant article I wrote was Bruce Castle on 3 October, but I've barely edited at all anywhere since then, and aside from a single half-hour burst a couple of days ago when I was checking the new release for bugs I haven't used Huggle for months (it's easiest to spot Hugglers by sudden spikes on a Wikichecker timechart). Have you got me confused with someone else? – iridescent18:37, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
No there are people who oppose much more than you (and often you do have a point, albeit a hypocritical one). No, I haven't confused you with anyone. You were absent for about a month, right? Prior to 6 October, you were on Huggle regularly, as is seen in your mainspace edits. The next time you made a large number of mainspace edits was on 6th Nov. In between you made a few reverts (perhaps with Twinkle?) and nominated something for deletion. You're correct in saying you haven't used Huggle recently, apart from on the 6th and 7th, but incorrect in saying "months". More like "1 month". Three of the four edits you made after your latest Huggle spree were script based, and the other was removing a link. The point I'm trying to make here is that very, very, very few of your article edits are achieved without the help of Huggle, AWB, Twinkle, whatever. That's my issue with you opposing people for that reason. P.S. Adding images to an article that already had 5 isn't exactly "significantly improving" in my opinion. Al Tallytalk19:03, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
Well done you! I naturally only looked on the 3 October, since that's the date you gave me. A rare sight indeed though, seeing a manual edit from you in the mainspace. What about responding to your claim you haven't used Huggle for months, when you were using it regularly just over a month ago? Al Tallytalk19:13, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
I think this little spat has gone quite far enough. I first came across Iridescent when (s)he nominated Serpentine (lake) at GAN, when I was the reviewer. Since then I've helped on various articles that Iridescent has written. To suggest that (s)he isn't a content contributor is an absurd distortion of the facts. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 19:19, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
Agree with Malleus. Al tally, go away. Stop baiting. You've quite obviously overstepped your welcome, have completely misstated Iridescent's contributions (he/she started using Huggle to understand it better, as a critic of it. Iridescent is quickly closing in on 100,000 edits, mainly mainspace and other constructive activities), and most importantly, you have violated rule #3 of this talkpage. As someone that frequently agrees with you at RFA, and not Iridescent, I say Shoo. Take it outside. Keeperǀ7601:54, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
Lulz. The only person baiting is Iridescent. If she wants to discuss me, it's only natural for me to respond or say something, seeing as what she said about me was wrong. Anyhoo, you've said what you've had to say, so I'll be on my way... Al Tallytalk
Yeah, I just came here to say "I heart Keeper". Aervanath is an editor I consider quite similar (in terms of contribution pattern) to myself, and most of the opposes have amply reminded me why I still have no concrete plans to request adminship even though I'm personally confident I'd do well at it. Even though I'm a competent-enough writer, I really dislike writing sourced, FA-worthy prose with all the sourcing and MoS embuggerance that it entails: and that is (justifiably) the kind of writing Wikipedia needs. Given that, I could probably create an FA or GA, but it would in all likelihood be more along the lines of jumping through a large annoying hoop for the purposes of RfA. What I'd love to be able to do is expand the toolset I have available for supporting the encyclopedia rather than creating it; but in order to get the expanded toolset many people would have me jump through the aforementioned creative hoop. To sum up this waffling, Keeper's little tirade has reassured me that there are a lot of people that share, roughly, my own view. I will end up putting myself through the RfA mangle at some point, but I'm still a ways off it - the support for Aervanath at least reassures me that I might one day succeed at RfA without resorting to doing things I dislike. :D ~ mazcat|c18:56, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
← To return to theme, all I hope for Aevernath is that he she doesn't take this RfA too much to heart. It's very difficult to be entirely dispassionate in the face of rejection, but I hope that Aevernath will be able to take solace in the fact that RfA is a shit process designed by losers. Failure to attract 75% of the voters is nothing to be ashamed of, but too often the bruising opposition ends up in the loss or disillusionment of a good editor. Hopefully it won't in this case. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 18:56, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
Agreed. The reason I stay away from RFA is that I'm fed up with every single comment (for or against) acting as the blue touchpaper for another pointless drama that does no-one involved any credit. I think this thread proved my point. – iridescent18:58, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
Given the nature of the beast that's inevitable. Another human being is being subjected to critical scrutiny. Hard not to take that personally. It's very easy to shrug off comments like Tan's, but not quite so easy if you get a load of per Tan opposes piling up. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 19:05, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
He did. I was thinking of another recent comment of his.[4] I am not at all upset at being so vehemently disliked by Tan, in fact I find it quite comical for reasons that I won't go into, but the trouble with RfA is that a comment like that can trigger a critical mass event. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 19:23, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
I agree with 99% of what Tan wrote in that diff. The only difference is that I can "stand malleus". In fact, I can stand right on his throat sometimes. :-) Keeperǀ7601:56, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
I need to clear this up; I didn't realize it would be taken so seriously. I used to make fun of MF for being like Collie Parker, a character in Stephen King (Richard Bachman)'s book "The Long Walk". He's a total prick but very likeable to those who can take the heat. He mostly agreed that he was sorta like this character. This is how I feel - and I maybe didn't make that clear enough in that diff. I don't agree with all of MF's victim mentality or general hatred towards all things adminly, but as a whole, I enjoy MF's comments and agree with most of it. I also think he's invaluable to Wikipedia, and really would support in an RfA (I think I did once or twice, come to think of it). Sorry if I didn't come across the way I meant to. Tan | 3902:10, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
Agree. Malleus knows how to dish, and how to eat it too. He replied to your post on Wisdom's page (I seriously laughed my ass off at that diff tan), with an LOL. Gah-dblessem, gotta lovim. Malleus doesn't hate all things adminly either. He hates all things hypocritical that seem to manifest in admins. Am I right or am I right? Keeperǀ7602:13, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
You're right. I don't give a flying fuck what any administrator thinks about anything; they're just regular editors, or at least they ought to be. I hate hypocrisy, stupidity, dishonesty ... C'est la vie, I'll survive Tan's relentless stupidity. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 03:41, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
We're all faceless phantoms here anyway so there's nothing to take personally. I've slapped MF with a sarcastic comment once or twice : ) How about all administrators abdicate their buttons and return to "standard" editing. Oh, and an IAR admin could just delete the RfA page. I doubt a wheel war would ensue. Wisdom89(T / C)18:09, 12 November 2008 (UTC)
I've always maintained the way to go is automatic temporary desysopping every so often (perhaps, three months desysopping after every six months as an admin), with the bit automatically restored after that. That would end the us-and-them mentality – and probably put a large dent in the cabalism and "I'm an admin, I'm better than you"-ism – as it would be a lot less tempting to abuse a position if you know that a couple of months down the line you'll be on the other end of it. The odds of getting the majority of turkeys to vote for even a temporary Christmas seem pretty minimal, though. – iridescent03:30, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
The quickest way to get the RfA process reformed would be for administrators to have the job not for life, but for a fixed period, like one year, after which they have to undergo another RfA themselves. Ought to make some of them behave a little more honestly and with more consideration too. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 13:32, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
The argument against that is that even the most model admin will rack up a lot of "you deleted my article!" enemies who'll line up to oppose them next time, and it would put people off working on anything remotely controversial – while I don't generally agree with her, look at the amount of hassle Elonka gets, for example. I'm sure there are others, but off the top of my head the only person who's resigned adminship and run for reconfirmation (the closest equivalent we have in the current setup) and actually passed was Majorly – plenty of others who are obviously capable (Gurch, Walton…) got torpedoed by people with grudges of one kind or another. – iridescent15:23, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
That objection isn't unique to administrators. Try delisting someone's beloved GA, or initiating a GA reassessment on it, or even disagreeing with one of the wikifossils who clearly doesn't have a clue what (s)he's talking about, and you'll get just as many coming out of the woodwork with grudges. I agree with your assessment though, that many admins would get opposed in revenge, but many non-admins also get opposed for exactly the same reason and nobody complains about that. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 17:53, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
(←) There's not going to be any reform with RFA or the way that we deal with problematic admins until there is major change made within the community, but that change will not come for two reasons: 1/ Barack Obama has not been elected to replace Jimbo, and 2/ You can't fix stupid. As long the major demographics of Wikipedia are prepubescents and dumbasses, we're not going to be able to get any decent alternative for anything to replace what we currently have... and that goes for just about anything here. لennavecia17:44, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
I think that's about right. RfA is a basket case (not sure if that's an idiom that's uniquely British?), as is too much of the rest of wikipedia. Which wouldn't be so bad if there was any possibility of anything ever changing. But the dead hand of faux consensus is firmly on the tiller, making certain that the ship steers directly towards its ultimate doom: abandonment by all except prepubescents and dumbasses. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 17:59, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
I wouldn't say it was totally impossible to change RFA, actually I hope that the last little tweaks may already be bearing fruit, it is too early to have a statistically valid sample but I think the number of snows may have fallen. Next we just need to get crats to start striking out votes that breach wp:civil.... ϢereSpielChequers18:32, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
For the record, basket case isn't uniquely british. Though in America it's mostly only used to describe people, not things. :-/ --Koji†19:23, 13 November 2008 (UTC)
Wake up WP:LGBT! It's time to kick in gear and get some things done!
Project News
Wake up!
I say this to myself as much as I say it to all of us. I work a lot by myself or with individual editors who spend time at Featured Article Candidates. It seems on November 5 a fog was lifted off my brain that helped me realize that we have massive potential in this project to get things done. Take this allegory, for instance: On Wednesday, Nov. 5, 1980, my 10th-grade American history teacher started class by unfurling The New York Times. She pointed to its triple banner headline: “Reagan Easily Beats Carter; Republicans Gain in Congress; D’Amato and Dodd are Victors.” “Save this paper,” she told us. “This is the start of a whole new era.”Judith Warner from The New York Times
It definitely seems a start to a whole new era now. If planets align correctly to remind us that whatever advances we may have made in electing what appears to be an extraordinary president in the US, the moons that revolve around those planets also serve to illustrate it's not that simple. Florida, Arizona, and California all appear to have banned same sex marriage. As someone who was married in California and lives in Florida, this is particularly poignant. We seem to be at the juncture of two converging paths. If we maximize our efforts and take the right ones, we might just be able to affect some change for ourselves.
Though what we do is an interesting hobby for some, we have the power to make a difference. California's ballot initiative to ban gay marriage was a fierce fight. It's being challenged right now, but just look at how Wikipedia played a role in that: in October 2008, 360,238 people read its article. On November 5, an astounding 467,000 people read it. I commend the editors who work on that article—both those who support and oppose it. A look at the talk page shows a concerted effort to keep it civil and accurate.
What can we do?
How do you fight ignorance? With information. That's what Wikipedia is for. This project is overwhelming with 8,576 articles in its scope. We can continue to work piecemeal as we have in the past, or we can focus on goals. These are examples of areas we can concentrate on.
Current political events
LGBT Media and Literature
LGBT History
Sex and sexuality
Articles about political issues in the US and around the world that have been especially relevant within the past 5 years
Depictions of LGBT people and issues on television, film, newspapers, magazines
Topics about gay rights activism and the opposition to it
There are more than 8,000 articles to work on. Can we build a list of priorities? Can we build enough enthusiasm to work on these? What if we had editors who oversaw progress in these areas and reported to the talk page or in the newsletter? Surely someone here wants to report on the progress of sex articles.
Tony Perkins (irony) from the conservative Family Research Councilwas heartened by the recent passages of gay marriage bans. The Republican Party is without direction. What's going to take the place of a moderate voice will not be pleasant to our ears. Watching and improving articles of subjects that have opposed gay rights in the past will be of vital importance very soon, I predict.
But WP:LGBT is not a very active project
All we can do is start somewhere. The first step is answering this newsletter on the project talk page. Join in the discussion.
More things we can do
Give out more barnstars, and let each other know that what they're doing is valued.
Create a guide to stave off burnout, because editors in this project get burned out faster than others. There are many hills to climb.
Bring back the monthly collaboration project.
Participate in LGBT Peer reviews.
Get familiar with the characteristics of Good Articles and get our top priority articles to WP:GA.
Use the Newsletter, Moni3! You can suggest what to send out in the newsletter, too!
Offer research materials, copy editing, ideas, and support to your fellow editors.
Keep the project talk page informed of problems and discussions we should know about.
Proposal: Put Importance Levels on articles
If this was decided long before I was a member, maybe it's time to revisit it. Other WikiProjects, such as WP:Novels determine that some subjects have an importance category: Top, High, Mid, Low, or None (undetermined). If we decide that our most core articles, it might help to organize which articles to address first. Top importance, for example, would be Gay, Homosexual, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgender, Sappho, Oscar Wilde, Stonewall riots, for example. High importance would be Homosexuality and psychology, Harvey Milk, Mattachine Society, Harry Hay, or Daughters of Bilitis, and so on. This can be a matter of discussion, or perhaps we could have someone in charge of determining these levels for all the articles we have tagged.
These are the editors I've seen working (and I know I'm forgetting a few). There's more of you out there I haven't seen. Some of you are new. We need all of you. Please help.
Miami, January 18, 1977 after the gay rights ordinance was passed: While Bryant and the others were creating the beginnings of the repeal effort, (gay activists) Basker, Campbell, Kunst, and the other (gay rights) ordinance supporters congratulated themselves on their success and then quickly disbanded... There was no organized recognition or celebration of the victory. As one activist remembered, "We just went home." They had little idea of the battle that was before them. - Fred Fejes in Gay Rights and Moral Panic, 2008
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please let us know here. If you have any news or any announcements to be broadcast, do let Moni3 know.
"Somebody throw me a frickin bone. I'm the boss I need the info. Right."
Hello Mr.Doctor Blofeld! I have left Wikipedia, generally speaking. I'm not even here right now :-). Every once and a while (more frequently this week), I have a little free time and PC access, and I just can't resist this place (see Jennavecia's link above...). I've done some IP editing as well here and there creating new articles via WP:AFC. Be well! Keeperǀ7616:53, 14 November 2008 (UTC)
And still they keep posting! Ah I knew those kinky whippings were the reason LOL. I;ve missed our amusing converstations and discussions about Lemonheads and blocking. Lukcily our goodfriend Mr Fritz is now quite active with this in your place. Yes I;ve become that more evil by becoming a Doctor in Evil Medicine. I now have a new evil photograph on my talk page if you care to see it. Scar and eye patch and everything. Mmmmmmmwwwooooooooooooooaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhaaaa!
Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Keeper76, I just wanted to drop you a note to thank you for the well-thought-out and eloquent arguments you set forth in support of my successful Rfa. Hope to work with you again in the future!--Aervanathlivesinthe Orphanage18:16, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
Come back, oh Keeper! Your guidance is required!
Latest comment: 16 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
Hey Keeps...we're talking about Everyme's block in an AN/I thread, and Casliber mentioned that your input would be valuable...so if you stop by and it hasn't archived yet, could you please drop over to this thread and speak on the situation?? Gracias muchly... GJC14:03, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
Latest comment: 16 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion
Don't know if you've noticed, but this week's drama-fest seems to be an AfD (and the resulting DRV) over bow ties, and who wears them. Somehow I managed to get myself involved, but was able back out quickly (not without a few smartass comments here and there, of course). In a nutshell, Ryulong deleted the article after an intense AfD (well, intense by Wikipedia standards) and now has a shit-storm of bad faith being thrown his way at the DRV. One guy even suggested de-sysopping the poor dude. Amazing how heated people can get over bow ties, idn'it? :-) --Koji†16:27, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
Latest comment: 16 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion
You should wait for others to write an article about subjects in which you are personally involved, as you did at Aaron Nutting. This applies to articles about you, your achievements, your band, your business, your publications, your website, your relatives, and any other possible conflict of interest.
I had to log in just to see the deleted edits out of curiousity. Too funny. And dear God, no, I didn't write that article, and for the love, that is not me, no matter what Orangemarlin thinks....Keeperǀ7601:29, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
My Rfa
Latest comment: 16 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
Keeper76, thank you very much for participating in my Rfa, which was successful with 80 Support, 5 Oppose, 6 Neutral. The comments were overwhelming, and hopefully I can live up to the expectation of the community.
I would also like to thank my nominator Realist2 and my co-nom Orane(talk), and special mention to Acalamari and Lenticel(talk) for the kindness from the start. Regards, Efe
J, I can't speak for Keeper, but he stopped noming people for RfA a few months ago... he didn't like putting people through the crap that they often go through, so I would be surprised if he would do so. Of course, I've been wrong before.---BalloonmanPoppaBalloon07:13, 17 November 2008 (UTC)
(Just in case you didn't read on my tl;dr reply on my talk) – I deliberately suggested you (Balloonman) because you're familiar with with Jc and with the RFA process, and you (Keeper) because any RFA from Jc would be a Karanacs/Malleus style "I'm not 100% sure of policy, but have a great mainspace history" candidacy, and (as may have been mentioned occasionally) your opinions on this matter are – ahem – somewhat different from mine, so you're probably better placed than me to judge how the "familiarity with process is most important" crowd are likely to jump. If you don't think he's ready, then chances are he isn't, while a nom from you would probably assuage the group who opposed Moni3 whereas a nom from me, Lara, Giggy etc would probably polarize the crowd and spark a foul-tempered RFA (albeit one that would probably still pass). The "he'll take crap at RFA" hopefully won't be an issue, as (I hope) the thread on my talkpage has already prepared him for what to expect. – iridescent18:54, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Once more into the breach!!! Damn the torpoedos!! Fie on those who oppose! For your RfA, I suggest a bottle of valium and some Vicodin, just to dull the pain. --Moni3 (talk) 19:59, 19 November 2008 (UTC)
Well, if there's going to be an article, I'm going to make it the best article possible. :-) At my workplace, there's an expectation of "disagree and commit"--once a decision goes against you, you are expected to support it 100% as if you'd thought of it and advocated that outcome yourself. Reality is often different, but the mere expectation of full support keeps undermining and backbiting in check. That, and I partially nom'ed it out of my own defensive egotism--Eric/Tautologist accused me of wanting to destroy the article on numerous occasions, so getting it to GA would prove conclusively that my goal was exactly as I stated: that there was a BLP-compliant, non-coatrack article struggling to get out from under the current state of Wasilla Assembly of God. And yes, I still agree with you that the place isn't all that notable, but as I previously commented to Balloonman during that episode, it appears that WP:NOT#NEWS is no longer consensus of the Wikipedia community. So it goes. Jclemens (talk) 04:42, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
Getting it to GA would definitely help your cause, but I'm still worried that your involvement with Eric/Tautologist might bite you. And this isn't just about you, but I think most people who were involved in some of the more controversial articles during the election cycle are probably going to find it very difficult to pass an RfA at least until the smoke clears some. It would not surprise me if Eric/Tautologist or some of the other people you butted heads with still have your talk page watchlisted and are just waiting to sabotogue an RfA. I am pleased to see Keeper's comments above about Eric's early contributions... I felt the same way, but I think Keeper and I are on different sides of the political spectrum, so seeing him concur with my assessment, was heartening.---BalloonmanPoppaBalloon17:57, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
I highly doubt Eric is going to return at this point. He vanished without protest after being blocked for sockpuppetry and editwarring on those BLP articles. You may be right that I'll garner some opposes for my actions in that entire fiasco, but I'm OK with that. All of us could have used more patience in those discussions, but I displayed more patience and civility than many who stayed as engaged for as long as I did. I'm comfortable with my motivations, and the actions I've taken since he left to cleanuphismesses. You've probably got a better perspective than I do on how time will influence recollections of those events, of course. Jclemens (talk) 18:57, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
I've looked at your contribs jclemens (I was already familiar with them), and I would strongly support an RFA of yours. I don't do noms anymore, and your answer above is more than satisfactory to my only question I would've had for you at RFA. Go for it! Also, B-man, how do you know you are on opposite sides of the "political spectrum" as me? I've never announced my affiliations, at least not honestly. I'd be curious to know what you (or dear God, anyone I suppose) thinks I voted for on 11/4....Keeperǀ7601:32, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
If I told you whether my views were similar or different, wouldn't I therefore be revealing my views? Nice try B-man! Sneaky sneaky! I've never divulged anything about my actual identity. Well, that's not completely true. I have divulged some things, and I've also set up some purposeful smokescreens and their ilk for personal privacy reasons. Yes, it's true. My real name is not keeper. Now you know :-). I'm willing to bet we're not that different though. For example, do you breathe air or water? Do you have at least one opposable thumb? Do you wear clothing when in public? Do you ever fall asleep when you are tired and eat when hungry? See! Told ya! We got lots in common! (Oh, and happy balloonman day, just saw that). :-) Keeperǀ7602:47, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, that truly shocked me... there are so many others who I would have put before myself... heck... I'm not sure if I would have ever put myself on that list... so it was great that Rlevse thinks that much of me...---BalloonmanPoppaBalloon15:41, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Our little guideline gathering dust is being used....
Latest comment: 16 years ago23 comments6 people in discussion
Get a kick out of it all ye want, but it's causing the members of WP:LGBT some fits. Editors are highlighting Amanda Milan and other victims of LGBT violence only, then removing categories about victims of LGBT violence because the articles aren't about people. They tried this with Matthew Shepard, and I about lost my shit over it. See this discussion. --Moni3 (talk) 14:05, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
Well, that's not the fault of the guideline. The "Murder of..." guidelines are simply a way of avoiding a common deletion argument of WP:BLP1E when it comes to an article about someone notable only for their murder. Such articles can be place in categories relating to articles of victims of violence in any event since they are just as much about people as they can be. As for any suggested focus of LGBT issues, the same principle was applied to the Murder of Eve Carson, so if a few editors are picking on these articles for whatever reason, that isn't the fault of the guideline. Fritzpoll (talk) 14:13, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
Also, you could point them to the bit where it says that the renaming of articles that exist already should be decided on a case-by case basis, and not unilaterally by reference to WP:N/CA - it's only guidance for new articles. If people still stir up lots of shit about it, tell them to look at the tag at the top of the page. :) Fritzpoll (talk) 14:15, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
I'm not blaming you, btw. I just find it really frustrating that policy is being used to strip articles from what should logically be used to identify them. --Moni3 (talk) 16:44, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
As I hinted at above, you might want to point out that, pet of mine as it is, there's still only a {{proposed}} tag at the top of WP:N/CA so any arguments saying that the "Article title" section is valid must be on their own merits, and cannot be argued as having the weight of an official guideline behind them. As I also say, I'm irritated that some of these other folk misused the guideline, which explicitly promotes discussion when articles already exist. Glad I'm not on your hit list then, Moni :) Fritzpoll (talk) 17:50, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
As I am such a formidable Wikipedian, I understand your relief that you have not incurred my vengeful wrath. Rarrrr. Point taken on suggestion v. policy. --Moni3 (talk) 17:56, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
Lest you all not be aware of what you're getting yourself into, have a skim of this, this, and the fourth, fifth and sixth entries here; the "murder victims" arguments turned into a truly insane flamewar last time, and the soi-disant owner of every female murder-victim article, MurderWatcher1, is now back with us after a long hiatus. (I believe Keeper has already heard my opinions of MW1 and his unique interpretation of what Wikipedia is for; to anyone getting into any kind of conversation with him, read his userpage first so you know exactly what you're getting yourself into.) – iridescent18:09, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
My long-standing policy has been to keep as much space as possible between me and religious fanatics. I find the subject of religion interesting, but only for what it reveals about us as human beings. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 18:33, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
Oi, that is a singularly interesting userpage. I didn't even have to read past the table of contents. Wow. I know some people who go to church regularly, read their bibles, yadda yadda who are not insane "NOTHING ELSE MATTERS, I'M RIGHT YOUR [sic] WRONG!!!!", but they aren't exactly the type to get on the Net. It seems that those who are smart enough to figure out the internet are not smart enough to at least provide some basis for their claims. I have my doubts about evolution, but geez, the way most people present religion on the Internet, it's not that surprising that everyone hates them. J.delanoygabsadds18:41, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
Evolution is a theory, one which is no doubt imperfect and will be refined as we begin to understand the full implications of Lamarckism.</partial joke> The point about theories though is that they can be tested, unlike religious beliefs. If you or anyone else has doubts about some aspect of evolution, then it is quite easy to define an experiment to challenge that aspect of the theory and see who's right. How do you test for the presence or absence of some being called the Devil on the other hand? --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 18:59, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
Make an iron pentacle, and set your computer to work through every phonic combination Nine Billion Names of God style until it stumbles on the Word of Power? (The John Wyndham short story A Long Spoon in essence was about this.) – iridescent19:15, 20 November 2008 (UTC)
No argument at all there – I've probably read it at least once a year for at least 30 years. Although DOTT at points has a way with words nobody's reached since – "when xxx does yyy, something is seriously wrong somewhere" would certainly make my personal "most overused phrases" list. Fiction is hard to write decent articles on without either slipping in-universe or going into "review mode"; even pages like Harry Potter or Star Trek with thousands of eyes on them are a mess. (As a note to those who think standards here have fallen, this used to be a Featured Article.) – iridescent22:18, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
It's all rather crazy - as someone who is a practising religious chap, but also, in essence, a scientist (degree in Physics, PhD forthcoming in Engineering), I really don't understand why people like that guy won't just let the two areas of human experience remain separate - their domains should not intersect, as far as I can see: science is about the observable, and faith is about that which can't be (a very simplistic argument, not planning on a vast debate about this one). Pity that when people think about my religion, all they can see are the noisy ones who seem to deviate from all scientific endeavour.... anyway, enough religion for the internet, I guess. Fritzpoll (talk) 15:37, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
There are Christians (and Muslims, Jews et al) who believe in God's love, forgiveness, and that Jesus/Muhammad/Moses has given teachings on mutual respect and cooperation for the improvement of everyone's lives; there are also those who follow the "if you don't agree with my interpretation of every single word of (insert name of holy book) you're going to burn for all eternity". I think it is fairly clear which camp MW is in. (Although one does wonder why someone who appears to believe so devoutly that God's primary purpose is to punish anyone who disagrees with him, feels the need to post comments like this.) – iridescent18:04, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Nice to see the first half of your statement acknowledged by someone on the net - the internet can be a very black and white place opinion-wise. As to the latter half - would I be right in thinking that's one thing that led to his block? Fritzpoll (talk) 18:22, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
Amazingly, given his history, he's never actually been blocked (although had I noticed that particular comment at the time, he would have been). He's quit with the personal attacks, and his weird pulp-fiction style of writing doesn't actually break any policy that I'm aware of. – iridescent18:39, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
<outdent for Keeper's sake> I'm not touching this. I don't have the time unfortunately, but I do have strong opinions and wouldn't be able to commit to backing them up. Hope it works out, it looks that there are (relatively) sane and level people in the discussion(s), FWIW....Keeperǀ7601:34, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
-_Good_pic.jpg)
Resolved
–Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 02:22, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
Ha, milk! And a lovely amish lady! Sam Blab 16:17, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
![[3]](http://alternativeclassix.blogs.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/02/07/nm_shocked.jpg){kind=link}
You should wait for others to write an article about subjects in which you are personally involved, as you did at Aaron Nutting. This applies to articles about you, your achievements, your band, your business, your publications, your website, your relatives, and any other possible conflict of interest.
