User talk:Oren0/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Re: page moves

I am doing history merges to fix some very old cut and paste moves so that everyone can get credit for what they wrote in the article history. The way I do it gums up watchlists but minimises page deletions to keep the servers happy. I'm not going totally rogue, yet. :-) Graham87 07:58, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Hansen/BLP

Well - i'm going to disengage completely, i've had personal problems with User:Tillman which may influence my cool.

I just find it curious that you've taken a stand in an editwar with WP:BLP concerns that was started by a User:scibaby socket. And on top of that taken the stand that insertion of contentious information should stand - instead of being discussed first.

But oh well - such is life. --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 17:22, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Btw. i thought you were going to fight scibaby socks? [1] --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 18:50, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

I had no idea that he was a Scibaby sock. His editing pattern seemed completely different, using talk, etc. Oren0 (talk) 19:00, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

The newer scibaby socks have become smarter - he starts by editing small changes in wording on a few unrelated articles (i first noticed with this one[2]) - and then comes into the climate articles with the usual small wording changes. Its a moving target :-) --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 19:07, 29 July 2008 (UTC) [another example [3] - they are still spottable (fortunately)] --Kim D. Petersen (talk) 09:19, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Comments on my proposed short article

Hi there, thanks for your advice on page titles.

Please can you comment on my proposed short article on my user page?

Thank youBobman999 (talk) 12:54, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the article advice

I have made a proposal on the talk page for 'arab-israeli conflict' to insert my section into the article. Unfortunately, that article's neutrality is under dispute, and the talk page appears to have been subjected to trolling.

Thanks for your help.

Regards,

Bob

Bobman999 (talk) 09:52, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

WP:ANI#User:Sennen goroshi's stalking and disruption

Hello, Oren0, I notice that you had a hard time to communicate with the user in question. If you leave your input to WP:ANI, I would really appreciate your help. Thanks.--Caspian blue (talk) 17:20, 2 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thank you so much for the snarky reminder of the clearly obvious! It's pretty much what I'd expect from an anti-science POV pusher. Oddly enough, I see folks other than myself also reverting you - hmm indeed. --Badger Drink (talk) 17:29, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

Revert war - I-80 CA, etc

They're at it again... could you take a look at the situation? Thanks. --Rschen7754 (T C) 18:24, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

As one of my "cohorts" (per User:Badger Drink) ...

I thought you might be interested in this on WP:ANI:

Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Continued_baiting_and_harassment_by_User:GoRight.

I only mention it in case you haven't seen it and are interested. If you already noticed it then excuse the interruption. --GoRight (talk) 00:08, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Regarding your position that I should be banned from editing RealClimate, have I done anything on that page in the past that you would consider an attack on William M. Connolley? The only problem I have with your suggestion is that it prevents me from editing topics related to RealClimate which are wholly unrelated to William M. Connolley. The criticism that I have tried to include there is focused on RealClimate NOT WMC, agreed? You do agree that RealClimate does not equate to William M. Connolley, correct? --GoRight (talk) 16:50, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

My comment for GoRight RfC

I have finished revising my comment at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/GoRight#Ouside View by Abd. I promised that I would notify those who endorsed my comment so they would have an opportunity to revise their comments. Thanks. --Abd (talk) 03:26, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thank you for helping me get unblocked. :) Unknown the Hedgehog 20:05, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

User:Gears of War

Could you remove the whole "f*** you" bit? I can't since it's (obviously) a protected page. Ironholds 06:37, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Not sure why you think this should be removed. Wikipedia is not censored and it's his page. He can say "f*** you" to vandals as his goodbye if he so chooses. On the other hand, I do like to keep my page PG-13, no offense. Oren0 (talk) 06:40, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks (Re: Cheng Fei)

I better study coding and syntax before I touch another page again... I could not see such an obvious mess up...!!! Thanks again and Regds, Fredricfanthome (talk) 06:12, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Snark or Serious?

[4]?

I meant nothing by it. I was just responding on Kim's behalf. Oren0 (talk) 17:13, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

The question is, do you buy into the argument? --GoRight (talk) 19:33, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Re: Help

Thanks! If I come across a page like that again, what template do I tag the page with? Thanks Again :) Take Care and Have a Great Week Ahead...NeutralHomer • Talk 05:51, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Take Care....NeutralHomer • Talk 06:21, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for your help! I seem to understand what went wrong. I'm comencing the process of building up a unified account in order to solve all tweaks. Thanks again! The Ogre (talk) 17:22, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

3RR Help

It shouldn't, but I was blocked before for reverting vandalism, and have a feeling I would be reported again, and I just don't want the hassle. Thanks though. Arzel (talk) 04:39, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Sarah Palin

I noticed you wheel-warred the protecting admin. Did you read the discussion on the talk page, or discuss with the protecting admin? Kelly ^hi! 21:29, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm aware of what's going on there. Protecting a talk page because of BLP concerns is a big stretch, they can be removed as we editors deem necessary. Having potential BLP issues on a talk page doesn't bother me too much because it's much less visible than the article itself. Furthermore, when we semi-protect an article, anon editors can suggest changes on talk. Boxing them out because of a few disrupters is very wrong to me and it's something that should be quickly fixed. Oren0 (talk) 21:33, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

OK, probably should take to ANI, I've raised it there. Kelly ^hi! 21:34, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

RFAR alert

One of the arbitrators has asked that every admin who is arguably involved in the events at Sarah Palin be notified of an arbitration case covering it. I therefore draw your attention to Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#MZMcBride. GRBerry 18:57, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

I had already seen it, but thanks for the heads up. Oren0 (talk) 02:09, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Sarah Palin protection wheel war

The Sarah Palin wheel war arbitration case, on which you have commented, is now open.

• Evidence for the arbitrators may be submitted at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Sarah Palin protection wheel war/Evidence. Evidence should be submitted within one week, if possible.
• Your contributions are also welcome at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Sarah Palin protection wheel war/Workshop.

For the Arbitration Committee, Anthøny ✉ 21:12, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Palin

No, they are not relevant since those pages are structured in an entirely different way, especially Clinton. Did you even look at that before reverting? I sincerely hope you're not actually claiming they are relevant based only on Palin's, Bush's and Clinton's commonality of being involved in U.S. politics. user:Everyme 20:51, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

The purpose of a disambiguation page is to assist users in finding what they're looking for. Can you seriously argue that less than 98% of users who type that term are looking for Sarah or Michael? Don't want political examples? Look at some canonical dab pages: Mercury, Mars (disambiguation), or Joker. The most common things are listed separately. I also believe that Palin should redirect to Sarah Palin (Google the term, what percentage of results are her? How many orders of magnitude more traffic does her page get compared to his?) but that's another discussion. Oren0 (talk) 21:04, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Ah, so the reason you reverted is mostly that you share that deeply unencyclopedic view that the page should redirect to her. No further questions. user:Everyme 21:12, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

"Deeply unencyclopedic" is your opinion. I care about our readers: Sarah Palin has been viewed an average of 844,000 times per day since she was announced as the nominee. His average is 5,750 (and that has spiked since her nomination also, he was getting <1000 hits per day before that). So, among those two, 99.3% of users are viewing her page. Put another way, 147 users are viewing her page for every one that views his. Not only that, but I'd posit that someone who types just the last name is more likely looking for her than for him. So why wouldn't we redirect to the page that people are 99%+ likely to want. Oren0 (talk) 21:24, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

State of Fear

Hi there again. When you have some time, can you drop by the Talk page of the Michael Crichton's State of Fear article. May be you can give us a hand. Read the more recent discussions (last two weeks). See you around.--Mariordo (talk) 23:13, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to bother you again. This weekend I made an big edit with quotations in this article, similar to the ones in The Deniers, and made a proposal to try to stop the edit war that has been going on for the past two weeks and in order to try to move forward the article. I really think someone with your experience and NPOV could help resolve this stalemate, giving some advice and neutral judgment on the issues being discussed. I appreciate if you can drop by the Talk page when you have some time.--Mariordo (talk) 22:37, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

New article

Hi, this is just to let you know that today I created the new article An Appeal to Reason: A Cool Look at Global Warming. I though you might be interested in collaborating to improve it (the criticism section is still missing) or just to follow it up.--Mariordo (talk) 21:32, 27 September 2008 (UTC)