User talk:Lar/Archive 51
|
I recognize that this user page belongs to the Wikipedia project and not to me personally. As such, I recognize that I am expected to respectfully abide by community standards as to the presentation and content of this page, and that if I do not like these guidelines, I am welcome either to engage in reasonable discussion about it, to publish my material elsewhere, or to leave the project.
This is an archive of User talk:Lar from about 1 February 2009 through about 1 March 2009. Please do not comment here, use my current talk page for that, thanks. It is part of a series of archives, see the box at right for the list and to navigate to others. An index to all my talk page archives, automatically maintained by User:HBC Archive Indexerbot can be found at User:Lar/TalkArchiveIndex. |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
My RFA
editLar, thank you again for having faith in me for so long, leading up to my RFA, and it's passing. Thank you, for the nom, and I will not let you down. rootology (C)(T) 07:34, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
- You're welcome and you'd better not! :) ++Lar: t/c 14:26, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
Your election page
editSee Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee/CheckUser and Oversight elections/February 2009 — Rlevse • Talk • 01:45, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- There's a small problem with the link to your reconfirmation page, it should be reconfirmation (no extra slash) :) -- lucasbfr talk 13:01, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks! I'm glad someone's reading my rantage. :) Good luck in the process. ++Lar: t/c 14:44, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Lar takes Manhattan?
edit[2] No doubt you could have done better. Kablammo (talk) 16:18, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- Hehe. Saw that on LUGNET earlier this AM. I don't know if I have the mad skillz for the sardonic newyorker attitude and bauhaus minimalism in that artwork... I'd no doubt try to make the representation as high fidelity as possible, and utterly miss the point. :) ++Lar: t/c 17:04, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
- While in Niemann's case this is due to his stark artisic sensibilities, in my case I duplicate the same effect because I've lost the relevant pieces.
*noise of box rattling* "Honey, have you seen those tiny orange fangs?"[1] *rattle* "Do you mean the ones clearly designed solely to pierce a baby's instestines? The ones that you left on the kitchen table?" *pause, silence* "Yes, those ones." "No, I haven't seen them since this morning. Remember, when I asked you to vaccuum, and you said you had to build a 1/60th MechaGodzilla instead. *pause, fearful silence* "Ok, thank you."
brenneman 13:48, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
- While in Niemann's case this is due to his stark artisic sensibilities, in my case I duplicate the same effect because I've lost the relevant pieces.
- Vacuum cleaners are not "forever". A TRUFAN will open up the bag and get the parts back. ++Lar: t/c 19:35, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Talk:Isarco
editHello. Could you move Talk:Isarco over to Talk:Eisack? Eisack has been repeatedly moved in the past by Supparluca and Icsunonove, despite a clear outcome of the discussion and vote on talk page (5.5-1 for Eisack; 2.5-1 against Isarco). Regards Gun Powder Ma (talk) 10:43, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
- I'm not seeing a recent discussion, can you provide a specific link? However, the thing to do here is take it to WP:RM and ask that a controversial move be undone pending further discussion, rather than asking a particular admin like me directly... that is more likely to get uninvolved admins to take a fresh look. ++Lar: t/c 13:33, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
- The discussion is at Talk:Isarco#Move request April 2007. However, since August 2007 till this January (history 1 and history 2), the page has been moved several times back to Isarco, as if the discussion did not take place. I follow your suggestion and take it to WP:RM, didn't know about that page. Thanks Gun Powder Ma (talk) 13:49, 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Check this out: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Statistics ++Lar: t/c 02:08, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- Ya. No WONDER arb article production goes down. ... (I feel sorry for MilHist, they're going to take a hit this year with two arbs!) Needs to be sortable though. ++Lar: t/c 02:41, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- What did Statistics do to deserve this?
--NE2 02:39, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- You mean that no one can ever start a case against him because the page is blocked? Dunno. Bribery? Mopery and Dopery of the spaceways? ++Lar: t/c 02:41, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
comments and questions
editMost of the comments are comments:) If you look at all the other candidates, the comments are first, then the questions have separate headings, such as, to give one of I think every other example,Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee/CheckUser_and_Oversight_elections/February_2009#Comments_and_questions_for_east718. It makes them stand out for people's consideration, rather than general chat which all merges into one and tends to be of quite a lighthearted nature sometimes. I think you have about two or three questions, like plenty of the other candidates. I will fix it (or you can) if you want, just wanted to get your ok before doing so, so people don't have an excuse to have a problem with my making it have the format which makes stuff clearer and which everyone else has.:) Sticky Parkin 20:17, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- Feel free to break out ALL the questions I received that way, if you want. (and make sure not to include any comments that are misthreaded) Or none, which is how it is now, and far simpler. But not just your own, as that's undue weight. I do have to say I think you're way off base with your line of questioning though. ++Lar: t/c 20:22, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- The fact that you didn't answer, says it all, you also are being, to WP:AGF, very, very forgetful about your innocent exploits, but then many people know that as it has contradicted what you and those close to you have said at other times. Anyway, I hope you will consider the security issues, if not, you are in violation of the caution you were given in the arbcom case where you were reminded of the privacy policy, not that I expect much to be done about that at WP:AE s you have friends in high places.:) My heading was just what every other candidate had for their questions, if people above in the comments did not feel they wanted one for theirs, maybe as they thought they were more lighthearted or less involving your individual candidacy that's up to them. Strange that you felt the need to hide somewhat a question...or maybe not so strange:) Sticky Parkin 15:23, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
- He's withdrawn. Go bug someone else. Avruch T 15:56, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
- Nobody asked me any questions so I stayed silent about the privacy issue, maybe that was a mistake. However, contrary to popular belief, I do not have access to Lar's email accounts. I do not know any of his passwords and he does not know mine. - Josette (talk) 17:12, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
- He's withdrawn. Go bug someone else. Avruch T 15:56, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
- He told me himself that you do. Anyway, I don't blame you for doing so. Sticky Parkin 22:59, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
- Anyway, I'll leave you to your fun now, Lar :) Sticky Parkin 23:01, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
- To clarify after your claims on the oversight elections page, I've not said anything about your wife's honesty, integrity etc, the fact is checkuser etc. is confidential information that no-one who hasn't been elected should be given, for the checkuser himself to let that info into others hands is the breach of trust of users that don't know their confidential mails are being read by anyone except the person entrusted with that position of power and others who need to know for wiki reasons to help the users of the site. Sticky Parkin 00:11, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
- Anyway, I'll leave you to your fun now, Lar :) Sticky Parkin 23:01, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
- The fact that you didn't answer, says it all, you also are being, to WP:AGF, very, very forgetful about your innocent exploits, but then many people know that as it has contradicted what you and those close to you have said at other times. Anyway, I hope you will consider the security issues, if not, you are in violation of the caution you were given in the arbcom case where you were reminded of the privacy policy, not that I expect much to be done about that at WP:AE s you have friends in high places.:) My heading was just what every other candidate had for their questions, if people above in the comments did not feel they wanted one for theirs, maybe as they thought they were more lighthearted or less involving your individual candidacy that's up to them. Strange that you felt the need to hide somewhat a question...or maybe not so strange:) Sticky Parkin 15:23, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
comments at Elections
editThank you for rethreading. I almost did the same myself; I'm glad you did. arimareiji (talk) 20:47, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
- No worries. Thanks for your kind words, here and in the Steward reconfirmation as well. ++Lar: t/c 01:03, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
Keep your head up
editI've just seen your election withdrawal - I've sent you an email, but I wanted to say here that I'm sorry that it came to this. You've got a lot of trust here and will maintain that, keep your head up and don't let this get you down. Regard, Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 18:00, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
- Gotta echo that; it would take a substantial amount of Bad Stuff for my trust in you to be eroded. EVula // talk // ☯ // 23:23, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
- Triple dittos. Sorry I didn't vote before you withdrew. Montanabw(talk) 02:54, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
- +1 to the above. MBisanz talk 04:07, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
- +1 and I am likewise sorry for not having found the opportunity to vote for you before you withdrew. --AFBorchert (talk) 06:38, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
- well I always knew you were unreliable ;-) Privatemusings (talk) 10:50, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
- +1 and I am likewise sorry for not having found the opportunity to vote for you before you withdrew. --AFBorchert (talk) 06:38, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
- +1 to the above. MBisanz talk 04:07, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
- I just saw this; fuck. Not really sure what happened, but ++Support. And I saw another Giano drama, which sure makes no sense from here. Drama will kill this project yet. Best wishes. Jack Merridew 11:27, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
- Why this election withdrawal if I may ask? Galoubet (talk) 17:11, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
- Someone's posting quite personal matters and insinuations about him, here and elsewhere. It'd be best to not ask more, I'd think. Kylu (talk) 20:26, 9 February 2009 (UTC).
- OK, thnks. Galoubet (talk) 01:50, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
- Someone's posting quite personal matters and insinuations about him, here and elsewhere. It'd be best to not ask more, I'd think. Kylu (talk) 20:26, 9 February 2009 (UTC).
- Why this election withdrawal if I may ask? Galoubet (talk) 17:11, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
- I've noticed your withdrawel, and was quite surprised. It is unfortunate news, as I would easily trust you enough for Oversight regardless of whatever happened. It was really honourable of you to withdraw in the circumstances, though. Props to you. Master&Expert (Talk) 02:43, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Thank you everyone for your kind words. It is gratifying to know that whatever aspersions might be cast by others who speak of good faith but apparently lack it, that I have your trust and support. ++Lar: t/c 12:32, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
- Lar is still cool. I didn't get around to voting for you, though if I had it'd have been support. Heimstern Läufer (talk) 02:06, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Have you stated anywhere why you withdrew? If not, that is fine too of course. --Apoc2400 (talk) 15:39, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
- He posted a withdrawal statement on the election page. Avruch T 19:12, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
- Hey, man, I have only just seen this/that. Sorry I was away (my first ever wikibreak!); perhaps you are doing what I was - taking a little while away so the teeth grinding doesn't make the jaw ache - but you know where to find me if you need an ear. LessHeard vanU (talk) 21:59, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
- +1 support Kralizec! (talk) 16:07, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXV (January 2009)
editThe January 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 04:28, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
User:Privatemusings
editHi, I came across this comment [3] by Privatemusings which I feel highly inappropriate. Not only was it clearly WP:POINTY it also was a clear cut BLP violation as Privatemusings must know well that there is no RS that he is Roy's son so it is not a genuine or valid question. While occuring on a user subpage talk page, so only a minor issue, I feel it is highly inappropriate for anyone who clearly knows it to be false and knows it is a violation of BLP policy. I have already informed Privatemusings of my feelings on this matter but noticed while there he had apparently been banned from editing BLPs by the arbcom and found out when I looked into it you were apparently one of the mentor appointed when the ban was lifted, so I feel your words may carry more weight if you agree with me. Nil Einne (talk) 10:10, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
- The mentorship is over and so is the BLP ban. If PM didn't listen to us when we were his mentors, he's not likely to now. If you really think this comment rises to the level of a serious BLP issue, you probably want to take it to a different place. ++Lar: t/c 12:34, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Meta issues: copyright on smaller projects
editHi Lar, can I ask you something in your function as Steward, since I'm not very familiar with Meta practices. What procedures could Meta or the Foundation use to bring projects in line when they refuse to comply with copyright/licensing policy? I'm talking of the Albanian Wikipedia here (sq:), whose image practices are truly abysmal. Virtually none of their images has as much as a source or copyright declaration, "PD" claims are strewn about at random, NFCCs, "exemption doctrines" or "fair use rationales" seem to be totally unheard-of, and what irritates me most, they have a whole category of images they claim are free to use on "Albanian-language websites" only, but "must not be copied to other Wikimedia projects". I tried to talk to two of their admins, but they were less than responsive. What can be done? Report also at Meta: here. Fut.Perf. ☼ 12:07, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
- This ultimately is a foundation issue. Stewards are not cops so don't have the authority to unilaterally go in and force wikis to do things in compliance with policy absent some process first to make a determination. But I agree it's a serious matter for a wiki to apparently abrogate foundation policy. Calling this admin a dick may not have been your best approach that early in the dialog though. Raising it on meta seems a good first step, but the next thing I'd do were I you is soften your wording on that admin's talk page. Point out that there are concerns, invite him/her to come to meta to discuss them and maybe even apologise. If you do that, please let me know, I'll put in a word also urging the same. I'd rather get the wiki to work to be in compliance with policy (if in fact they are not... we need to investigate matters to be sure, but at first blush it sounds like they are not) voluntarily than by forcing the issue. 'll also raise this on the stewards mailing list. Thanks for bringing this to my attention. ++Lar: t/c 12:39, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
- PS, you might want to refer to sq:Wikipedia:Ambasadat and talk to one of the 5 users listed under "with the english embassy" who by putting their name there have signified a willingness to assist people who speak English but not Albanian. I believe that is what Dan was telling you. Note also that maybe this is just a poorly worded template issue. We have templates here that request that images not be moved to Commons, for various reasons, which are legitimate requests. Maybe not, but it's possible. ++Lar: t/c 12:53, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
After this discussion with the second admin (the one who created the template), I'm not particularly optimistic. The template is clearly meant the way I understood it, as some kind of weird Albanian-only copyright status declaration. He was not able or not willing to explain why he thought the copyright situation was like that. He is now clearly stonewalling, claiming they have been "investigating" the issue elsewhere (but the thing has been sitting around since last April, and I see no discussion of it anywhere else), and asking me to go and mind my own business. He is completely unreceptive to the whole idea of why such a copyright status might be problematic. Judging from this admin's own image uploads, it seems clear there is only a vague awareness of copyright issues in the first place, and none at all of the non-free content problem. He is also saying, quite openly, that if they should get pressed for compliance they might just randomly put false copyright declarations on their images and challenge the world to prove them wrong. This is not looking good. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:05, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
- Unless Lar has already, it would be smart to alert Cary Bass (en user Bastique) to this as well. Avruch T 14:31, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
- I have engaged my fellow stewards on our mailing list. Cary is a steward but I'll make sure to make it clear that some input about this would help. As a note, it is not yet clear to me that this wiki is wilfully in violation of foundation policy... I again urge being gentle and not abrupt. ++Lar: t/c 16:17, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for your help. As I see it, it's mostly the same type of "no-time-to-deal-with-this and we-can-easily-get-away-with-it-anyway" attitude of sloppiness that I've seen on other small projects. The admins themselves upload blatant copyvios, and noone ever bothers to ask where an image is from. Perhaps someone should ask them what they did about the foundation's licensing resolution last year, and where their exemption doctrine is. Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:09, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
- Note: me is not copyright police :) Bastique demandez 18:15, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
- I do not think that's the question. The question is, suppose for the sake of argument that the XY project is way out of compliance with the Board resolution... what happens then, what's the process? Who does what? I don't think you're being asked to take action. I think you are being asked about process. I think it's early to say anything about any particular project being in or out, but what if they are? ++Lar: t/c 20:08, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
- Indeed, there's an issue about the whole structure of cross-project governance here, both with respect to policy standards in general and with the licensing resolution specifically. The whole structure seems to be set up under the assumption that every project will have enough self-cleaning impetus that every dispute can be solved adequately within the project alone. But what if not? – In the present case, both I and User:B have now been met with heaps of nationalist insults by one of the admins involved ([4], [5], [6].), and the discussion thread was deleted, so I think your hypothetical question mark in the paragraph above can be removed now. They definitely don't want to comply. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:44, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
- I do not think that's the question. The question is, suppose for the sake of argument that the XY project is way out of compliance with the Board resolution... what happens then, what's the process? Who does what? I don't think you're being asked to take action. I think you are being asked about process. I think it's early to say anything about any particular project being in or out, but what if they are? ++Lar: t/c 20:08, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
- Note: me is not copyright police :) Bastique demandez 18:15, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for your help. As I see it, it's mostly the same type of "no-time-to-deal-with-this and we-can-easily-get-away-with-it-anyway" attitude of sloppiness that I've seen on other small projects. The admins themselves upload blatant copyvios, and noone ever bothers to ask where an image is from. Perhaps someone should ask them what they did about the foundation's licensing resolution last year, and where their exemption doctrine is. Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:09, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
- I have engaged my fellow stewards on our mailing list. Cary is a steward but I'll make sure to make it clear that some input about this would help. As a note, it is not yet clear to me that this wiki is wilfully in violation of foundation policy... I again urge being gentle and not abrupt. ++Lar: t/c 16:17, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Albania finally signed the Berne Convention in 1994 -- and interpretations by some Albanians of copyright law have not caught up. AFAICT, it allows copyright for life+50 years, but may also use the system of using less where it had been published in Albania under the old system which ignored foreign copyrights. As such, the folks may fully believe they are in compliance with how copyright is actually handled there. Collect (talk) 17:29, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
- Nah, it's not that, it's just sloppiness. If they had such a theory and were carefully applying what they thought was right, they'd at least list their sources, wouldn't they? They can't be bothered. It's the same on other smaller east European projects. Fut.Perf. ☼ 17:36, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
Trentino-Alto Adige/South Tyrol
editHi Lar, thanks for the moral support regarding last week. I think that Administrator YellowMonkey banned me without even know why he was banning me. Anyway, I want to ask for your advice. I can see these editors Noclador and Gun Power Ma (especially) are going all over and editing things for a particular POV. I think Gun Power Ma is ignorant of the subject, has a particular POV set in his mind, and is out to establish it literally. He is going into the articles and using only the German POV of "South Tyrol". We've seen this before a couple years ago. Anyway, on to my question: We obviously don't want these utterly stupid and nonsensical edit wars to start again. How can we request that an Administrator come in and mediate for this topic? Of course you'd be the first choice, just to keep the children apart. I know how much you love that. :) Icsunonove (talk) 04:57, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
- Icsunonove is right. These days some editors, supported by Gryffindor, are making several POV edits. I'm not a supporter of the Italian faction or the German faction, I'm only interested in neutrality. We definitely need your help. --Checco (talk) 07:22, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
- Yeah, I'd really not like to see the return of all the bad feelings of a couple years ago. Sorry to make accusations, but Gryf started a lot of this torture circa 2005, and I see it starting all over again. This time around I think this needs to be nipped in the bud and have changes made more slowly and with some civilized discussion along the way (go figure). Having Lar et al. show up to keep things more cordial would be VERY nice as well. I've already been absolutely ripped twice already by those guys for adding citations to two articles. @_@ I explicitly trust Lar's judgement, even if it can be as harsh as he has described. :) Icsunonove (talk) 08:26, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
Lego stuff
editHey Lar. I saw this and thought "Y'know, that's something he'd find cool."
TTYL 207.145.133.34 (talk) 19:00, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you, IP that might be Kylu. At first I thought you were talking about the Tyco Superblocks phone, something I dearly wish to acquire (I have the calculator)... ++Lar: t/c 17:00, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
I have created a Neutral section for those who agree with the premise but not the method, or some other aspect, which may be altered following talkpage discussion. Perhaps you would wish to review your !vote under the changed circumstances? LessHeard vanU (talk) 23:02, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
talk page again....
editCan you please tell how to put a text box for creating a new section in my talk page like some users have\? Thanks, and can you please respond on my talk page? I may forget to come here. Regards, --Rsrikanth05 (talk) 13:12, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
- I'm not sure exactly how it is done, as I do not do it myself, but you could look at the source of the page (edit or view source tab) and see... then copy it. As for answering on your talk instead of mine, I prefer to keep conversations threaded together. You came here to ask me a question... if you forget to check back, not the end of the world. Good luck. ++Lar: t/c 23:40, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
[7] shows the remarkable pertinacity of User:Fugsawugsa on that article. I strongly suspect the person has a connection with Mr. Rousso. Collect (talk) 00:23, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
- Yyou may be right. You may want to bring this elsewhere. ++Lar: t/c 17:00, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
newby
editI understand you may be able to help me userfy a page I threw up (almost literally) last night, and got knocked down (ouch) almost as quickly for:
23:41, 17 February 2009 PMDrive1061 (Talk | contribs) deleted "Skycasters" (G12: Blatant copyright infringement: A7: Article about a company, corporation, organization, or group, which does not indicate the importance or significance of the subject)
This org has a unique concept, but drawing from marketing material without references just revealed my ignorance. Please help? Thanks! GHL (talk) 22:40, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
- Userified, discussed further at user's talk page. ++Lar: t/c 16:58, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
Watchlisting alert
editPer your past interest on the topic, kindly watchlist the conversation at [8] and consider if others need to be aware of this developing situation. A trainwreck on a kid's AP high school class project heading for FA would be a bad, bad thing. Montanabw(talk) 01:26, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for the heads up. Watchlisted. ++Lar: t/c 16:59, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
DC Meetup Events: You're invited!
edit|
Wikipedia Loves Art! (February 27) The Smithsonian American Art Museum will be holding a Wikipedia Loves Art! meetup on Friday, February 27 from 5-7 pm in the Kogod Courtyard. This is a photography event involving Wikipedians, along with Flickr users and others, to generate content for Wikipedia. Come share your experiences, meet the other teams, and take some photos! While RSVPing isn't necessary drop Jeff Gates an email if you're planning on attending so he can get a head count: gatesj (at) si.edu. There also is a signup list here, along with detailed information. The museum is conveniently located across from the Gallery Place-Chinatown metro station. DC 6th Meetup (March 7) The DC 6th meetup will take place on March 7th at Pizzeria Uno's at Union Station, one level up from the main floor. The meetup will start at 5pm, and people usually stick around there for several hours. You can RSVP at Wikipedia:Meetup/DC 6. |
This has been an automated because you your name was on the invite list. BrownBot (talk) 16:34, 21 February 2009 (UTC)