User talk:Socrates2008/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Question

Thanks for your work on SAS President Kruger and SAS Tafelberg. Could you double-check your sources for Kruger's displacement? It seems unlikely that a Leander class frigate of 2,800-3,000 tons displacement could be refitted to result in a vessel of 18,980 tons displacement. I would guess perhaps that you inadvertently copied your displacement figure from the former tanker Tafelberg? Appreciate clarification, if you could. Thanks. Maralia 16:27, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On 11 November, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Arniston (ship), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Cheers, Daniel 01:00, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

South Africa Section on SST Page

Hello, I don't see why you regard adding references to a section as being "controversial edits". While I appreciate that you are probably editing in good faith your removal of references that support the material is starting to get irritating. I suggest you read the FULL source before removing it in future. Regards, GiollaUidir (talk) 19:25, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

The reference did not support the statement - simple as that. Your citation was about an alleged assassination plot and attempt by SA to procure rocket technology and would therefore support a statement about SA buying, not supplying arms. You can't make a claim, then back it up with an contradictory citation. I raised this issue on the talk page specifically so that you could have the opportunity to resolve it. This is a controversial article, so reliable and verifiable references are required, even if you may find this "irritating". Socrates2008 (Talk) 22:01, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

COI

Your vague COI allegations will not wash, restore the autobio tag without providing the diffs asked for again and I will assume you are trolling. Thanks, SqueakBox 20:51, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

You're not assuming WP:good faith. You are also about to be in violation of the Wikipedia:Three-revert rule due to your unwillingness to discuss and reach consensus on that article's talk page.

Socrates2008 (Talk) 20:56, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

You mean you are. Sending an experienced user mike me unsigned templates isnt going to do your cause any good whatsoever, do not repeat. And as for your afg comment, that really takes the biscuit, you are accusing me of not having good faith with you in having bad faith with another user, such tactics are not covered in agf, as you well know. Thanks, SqueakBox 21:00, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

He's been banned - kindly see the COI page for more info, thank you. Socrates2008 (Talk) 21:15, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Who - specifically - has been banned?Phase4 (talk) 15:34, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

YOU have Socrates2008 (Talk) 09:35, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Your lying to me

Do not ever come to my user page again telling lies or it'll be you that is blocked. Your behaviour is out of order, desist if you wish to continue editing. Thanks, SqueakBox 19:23, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

That's a pretty strong statement that does not assume WP:GF. His IP was blocked by user:bearian. You have come out in support of him, despite conclusive info to back his POI and socket puppetry, which has made it significantly more difficult stop his actions. 19:31, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

You told me he had been blocked and you were lying. The case remains unresolved whereas you implied it was a shut case. This is editing, I am being merely neutral,. I suggest you edit more and complain less. Thanks, SqueakBox 19:36, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

So how else do you interpret a block of his IP that's a direct result of my COI complaint? If you call that "lying", then so be it, however your accusing intervention has not been helpful at all here - shooting the messenger is certainly not the way to get this issue resolved. You refused to disuss the reason for reverting my tagging of his article as autobiograhic. Yet you've now edited the very same article that I initially flagged, thereby indicating your acceptance of the evidence presented. When I've asked for clarification of this contradiction, you've accused me trolling.

I concede that with retrospect, I would handle some aspects of this case differently should it happen again. However, I do expect guidance and support, and not a personal attack from a "senior editor" in this situation.

To suggest that the articles in question should simply be edited while the subject is still adopting a militant ownership of them has already proven to be fruitless and frustrating activity. In fact, the very reason this issue has come to the surface is precisely because of other editor's inability to make any edits without the person in question reverting or changing them to his POV.

Please can we focus our efforts more constructively on the real problem at hand, and move on from this irrelevant sideshow? I'm not picking an argument with you, however I shall respond appropriately if you continue your personal attack. Socrates2008 (Talk) 07:48, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

PS: The ban on all his aliases, not only his current IP address, is now effective. Socrates2008 (Talk) 09:31, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Chilean navy ships

Hello. Earlier this month you moved several Chilean navy ships to names based off of the "CNS" prefix. Since CNS does not appear to be an official prefix used by the Chilean navy, as per WP:NC-SHIP I have returned the articles to the standardized name format used with the rest of our articles on Chilean ships. Please let me know if you have any questions or issues. --Kralizec! (talk) 16:44, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for this feedback - I guess I've seen a number of their ships refered to in this way, and therefore made an (incorrect) assumption in this regard that it's equivlant to HMS or USS. Socrates2008 (Talk) 20:41, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Haseldine

Thanks for uncovering the Haseldine sock puppetry, don't know why it wasn't spotted earlier! He has done wikipedia a great disservice. Of particular concern is a paragraph "advertising" his online petition that he cut and paste into almost all articles related to this topic! Deon Steyn (talk) 18:15, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Of particular concern "was" that paragraph, and you would have done wikipedia a better service by editing the article to make it neutral, though I hear you felt unable to do so. I hope you agree that my edits have done that, and that I have thus also responded to your question on my user talk page yesterday. Thanks, SqueakBox 18:18, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

I just saw your message on the Haseldine talk page re my edits. I'll be keeping an eye on the situation. Thanks, SqueakBox18:27, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Gilled Calamari

A tag has been placed on Gilled Calamari, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to have no meaningful content or history, and the text is unsalvageably incoherent. If the page you created was a test, please use the sandbox for any other experiments you would like to do. Feel free to leave a message on my talk page if you have any questions about this.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Potatoswatter (talk) 09:27, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Gluten in ice cream

Hello, Socrates- I'm trying to find a supporting reference for use of gluten as a stabilizer. Do you know one? I found a list of other uses at http://www.iwga.net/04_app.htm but no stabilizing.

Still looking, Wugo (talk) 01:10, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I found lots of references, but not a reliable one yet - will keep looking too. Socrates2008 (Talk) 07:46, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

The reference you supplied does not support the statement. It gives me an idea though: Let's look up lists of foods prohibited to celiac patients; they should include foods with gluten added. Wugo (talk) 14:55, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Bingo! Read the Beware List at http://www.celiacsyndrome.com/index.php?id=14 Wugo (talk) 18:00, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Discussion moved to talk:Gluten#Gluten in ice cream

Socrates- Are you not implying lack of gluten labeling occurs only in the USA? Wugo (talk) 14:51, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

No, however the current comment about the FDA is clearly USA-specific. It might be worthwhile getting a worldwide view on this labelling issue. Socrates2008 (Talk) 20:11, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Sounds good! Go for it. Meanwhile I may alter your edit slightly.Wugo (talk) 20:26, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Merge of Cuba in Angola

Hi, I have completed the merge as per the discussion, can you comment/vote on it so that we can wrap it up? — Deon Steyn (talk) 09:25, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

LocateMe

Hi. Can you please also add date within the LocateMe tags? It makes it easier to sort them. Add a pipe in the template and put date= the current date. i.e. {{LocateMe|date=January 2008}}. -- Magioladitis (talk) 12:31, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't usually add these tags, I remove them. Anyway, all done now. Socrates2008 (Talk) 13:12, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Signature

I noticed your signature is a transclusion {{User:Socrates2008/Sig}}. This is not a good idea (and indeed forbidden) according to and for the reasons laid out at Wikipedia:Signatures#Transclusion of templates. You may however use that page via substitution. Simply change your signature text in your preferences from {{User:Socrates2008/Sig}} to {{subst:User:Socrates2008/Sig}}.

I'm using such a signature subpage myself at User:Dorftrottel/s. When I sign any post, my signature {{subst:User:Dorftrottel/s}} is substituted with the non-transcluded content of that page (=my sig). This also affords extended tricks like the date link in my signature (see the code at my sig page). For your current signature, you don't even need a subpage, you can simply put the same code into the signature field in the preferences. User:Dorftrottel 16:31, January 17, 2008

Thanks for this top tip. Have you already changed it for me, as it's currently set to "{{SUBST:User:Socrates2008/SigX}}" Socrates2008 (Talk) 21:12, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

No. Only you yourself can access your preferences... or so I think. Your sig directly above still reads {{User:Socrates2008/Sig}} btw. Ah, found it: Change your signature in your preferences from {{SUBST:User:Socrates2008/SigX}} to {{SUBST:User:Socrates2008/Sig}} (minus the X). Your page User:Socrates2008/SigX contains a transclusion of User:Socrates2008/Sig, so your current signature {{SUBST:User:Socrates2008/SigX}} results in the (still unsubst'ed) {{User:Socrates2008/Sig}}. User:Dorftrottel 21:54, January 17, 2008

I don't actually understand why you created the page User:Socrates2008/SigX in the first place, was it a typo? I suggest deleting it by putting {{db-userreq}} on it. User:Dorftrottel 22:02, January 17, 2008

OK, done Socrates2008 (Talk) 08:48, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

, Yes that seems to have fixed it now - thanks very much for your help with this. Socrates2008 (Talk) 08:49, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. Looks fine now. User:Dorftrottel 22:24, January 18, 2008

Returning

After much thought and deliberation I have decided to return. Many wikians contacted me by various means and I truly appreciate the support from all of them. Man, did I need that wiki break! I have learned from it and will use the experience to improve. — Rlevse • Talk • 19:37, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

That wasn't a very long break! Anyway, take it easy and don't let them get you down. Socrates2008 (Talk) 20:52, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Fox Products Corporation

Did you see the discussion page? We already came to a consensus that there's no need to delete the article. Checking the talk page on an article that old would be appreciated before a CSD nom. Bassgoonist T C 14:11, 25 January 2008 (UTC)