User talk:Zoe/Final

Stop deleting my links

You keep going on the Road Rules pages and deleting links to the website The Real World/Road Rules Blog. I was the one who brought totally updated the Road Rules Wiki and all the information comes from that website. If you don't know what you're doing, since all you do is delete "spam" off the pages, please keep off! --- Thanks!

Please stop it!

You're really annoying! Research before you do!

Excuse YOU is right!

I don't care who you are. My deletion of those sections WAS absolutely brought up on the discussion board. YOU cleary chose to avoid the discussion. Furthermore, most of the claims made in that section were NOT sourced or cited - so perhaps you should take a look at them instead of badgering users like myself. Please do not respond on my wall anymore - I really don't think its appropriate given your attitude. (Flexpedition 14:33, 15 January 2007 (UTC))

about the notability requirement

A topic is notable if it has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial published works with sources independent of the subject itself and each other

The company or corporation has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the company or corporation itself.

* This criterion includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, books, television documentaries, and published reports by consumer watchdog organizations

I think I am confused on your objective view what notability means. From I could find there are more trivial articals with significantly less relevance to society and yet still gathers a spot in Wiki. Let me ask you, why are there artical with no publication in the Bibiliograph and yet still considered notable while Q's has filled colums after colums in Mid Missouri and yet still considered unnotable? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Master q (talk • contribs) 21:23, 31 December 2006 (UTC).

deleted items

I deleted Liquid Ghoul's talk comment because I found it very offensive and I thought you had a rule here on Wikipedia-no personal attacks. I will delete any other offensive materials I find. Just thought you might wanna know. BrandiniTheGreat 23:50, 9 January 2007 (UTC) Sorry. Could you tell me how to move my article to wiki how? Thanks. BrandiniTheGreat 00:21, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Persistent vandal issue

On December 26, you reverted this [1] conspiracy theory from Timothy McVeigh. Since then, Oklahoma City bombing has repeatedly had its wikilink to Timothy McVeigh changed to a hard link to the vandalized version of the article, and it is always done with a misleading edit summary. A variety of IP addresses are being used to make the exact same edits: 85.179.3.214 (talk · contribs), 72.36.239.30 (talk · contribs), and especially 81.233.185.213 (talk · contribs). Is there anything I can do other than leave vandalism warnings and request blocks once each address hits the magic threshold? I currently have 81.233.185.213 up to a {{test4}} warning. --Kralizec! (talk) 06:55, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Sookum1 legal meanderings

FYI: [2]. Cheers, and Happy New Year. Ben Aveling 10:53, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Zoe Tay

Hi Zoe - on 11 December 2006, the Zoe Tay page was semi-protected by Sarah Ewart after the discussion at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive153#Zoe_Tay. Today (1 Jan 2007), however, a sockpuppet by the name of Wenfangfan has come in to remove the three tags attached to it - the sprotected tag, the unreferenced tag and the inappropriate tone tag. Ryulong reverted to the original version. Wenfangfan came in to revert the article back to his/her preferred version, and added an image that was uploaded by banned user Walaha2006, confirming suspicions of sockpuppetry. I have reported this to Wikipedia:Administrator Intervention but hope that you would deem an indefinite ban fit for Wenfangfan. I feel that if sockpuppets are allowed to come in repeatedly and revert all edits to their preferred version, it makes a mockery out of Wikipedia. OngBS 16:04, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Spero Dedes

Hi Zoe - you removed the facts about Spero Dedes from his Wikipedia article, under rm attack. As noted, it's not an attack when the facts of the situation are presented - he didn't do his research and broadcasted misleading and simply wrong facts about Rutgers University.

Spam

I did not spam, I was simply leaving a message. cAN YOU EXPLAIN SPAM TO ME BECAUSE i DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND. --SHAERICELL!!!!! (is slightly crazy) Talker to! 20:56, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

hey a......., you remove what I wrote, I will put it on again, and for your health, leave it be if you know more about frozen seafood than us, fine but you do not I put this up, one to have a wiki link on this home page and to offer the consumer or anyone some correct information

you do NOT want visitors, take it as a promise, NOT a threat do not f... with my stuff SenorPescado

Spero Dedes

Zoe - great. Let me just reference that, and you can stop reverting the edits. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by MattyFridays (talk • contribs) 21:54, 1 January 2007 (UTC).

Zoe - I re-edited, and added a sourcing to NJ.com, which is a blog maintained by a writer for the Star Ledger, the biggest New Jersey newspaper. THanks. MattyFridays 22:00, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Try the second link added. From the Star Ledger, again. Search for "South Jersey" in the second link, under "Random Thoughts". It's sourced TWICE now. MattyFridays 22:05, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

No problem. BTW, there's some jerk that is actually attacking Spero now, looking through the reverts. Just sayin'. MattyFridays 22:08, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

thank you

Thank you for unblocking me. But please see my further reply concerning the debate which precipitated everything on my talk page.Skookum1 22:55, 1 January 2007 (UTC) Further query on my talk page.Skookum1 23:36, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

I didn't log out

Check my IP. I didn't log out and haven't been edit warring. Instead I left a protest on the Talk Page, as I was instructed to do. Thank you for your kind consideration. WerewolfSatanist 23:00, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

For the record, this is WerewolfSatanist logged out. 4.88.23.204 23:01, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps it is notable that in the conversation, Aren hadn't sought consensus himself and deleted the LaVeyan Satanism article that there had been, which had included a criticism section (which as far as I could tell had no objections). Of course I could be in the wrong here, but I don't see what this person did as exactly condoned by everybody. WerewolfSatanist 23:20, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

nonsense

Incomplete articles count as nonsense.

According to you. they made absolutely no sense to me. Hence the tag of "Non-sense". Dropal 23:58, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

You win

I wave the white flag. Dropal 00:01, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Original Barnstar
		For winning the argument with cold, unforgiving truth. Dropal 00:04, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

you are welcome.

You're welcome

see above Dropal 00:06, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Unwarrented block

You blocked User talk:216.129.135.4 for vandalizing a page that he was actually ALLOWED to vandalize. To quote from User:Hunt_4_Orange_November/draft2 "Note: This page is for editing or practicing HTML (or vandilisum if your wanting to let off some steam). This is not a real page and is a modification of Food . If there is any problem with this, see my talk page." Now I agree the user has been less helpful before, but this might not be a proper procedure. I suggest to undo the block and keep a close eye on him for his next violation of true policies :D TheDJ (talk • contribs • WikiProject Television) 21:45, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

oops!

ha ha, sorry about that. keep up teh good work and happy new year! best, tom 21:55, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Cheers

Thanks for your help in moving my page. Much appreciated •CHILLDOUBT• 22:03, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

removing the school motto translation

Is a translation necessary?

translation

does every latin motto have a translation?

This whole FSU page needs work. For instance, there is a summary list of departments, and then the WRONG departments underneath. Can I correct these glaring errors or not? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mike850 (talk • contribs) 22:10, 2 January 2007 (UTC).

Re: Worm Ouroboros entries. Thanks! Its one of my favorite books also. I first read it 30 years ago and I keep coming back to it. As to page numbers, well the edition online at Sacred-Texts includes page numbers so... I'm pretty much using that. Still, too much work to put in editions for me. Cglassey 22:20, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Itche Goldberg Page

Although I can not prove this, I can almost guarantee you that Mr. Berger did not base his post on the wikipedia article; he mostly likely based it on a post to the "mendele" yiddish e-mail list. If you would like, I will send you the e-mail; however, I would need your e-mail address first.

Please stop deleting articles because they don't meet your person tastes. You obviously know very little about Hip Hop. Soul Control is very reputable dance crew. Among many contributions to the Hip Hop dance scene, they have popularized the now common "Air Flare". In fact, the term itself was coined by this crew. You probably don't know what an "Air Flare" is, basically, its like a gymnastic flare "Thomas Flare" except the entire front half of the flare is skipped over.

You'll see the move in this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7cFB4Lzafdk

Soul Control includes many famous dancers. Kujo (Jacob Lyons), who at one time trained Cirque du Soleil in Canada, has pushed the push the envelope on Breakdancing/Bboy.

Granted, the article was a short stub, I am working on a detailed article.

Socrates/Plato argued that the right-action requires knowledge. For good intension can have bad consequence when we act without knowing. You are just trying to keep Wikipedia a source of good knowledge but you judgment should yield to knowing the difference between rubbish, something you know for sure is spam, and a stub or obscure entry.

Sincerely, Babak.

http://yiddish.forward.com/pages/radio/- about 22 minutes in there is an interview with Khaver Itche's longtime assistant- of course you have to understand yiddish. Like I said, I would also contact Mendele e-mail list. In addition, try the league for Yiddish (leagueforyiddish.org); if you email the director, she should back up the date of death.

Es kukt oys gut un gerekht- It looks great and correct (as far as I know)!--Engelmann15 01:47, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Wheel war

I see what you mean about the Wheel war :p FCYTravis reduced your ban of 65.0.104.154 to 24 hours. This anon user is back to vandalizing the artice with a new IP, as documented at [[3]] . He did this during his ban. I've left a note on FCYTravis' talk page as well. Could you have a look at this? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nardman1 (talk • contribs)

thanks a lot for telling me about the e-mail thing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chris gonzalez (talk • contribs)

How to delete things

Can somebody tell me how to delete an article you created? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chris gonzalez (talk • contribs)

Drop a {{db-author}} on it and an administrator (like Zoe or myself) will delete it. AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 17:43, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

User talk page warnings

Hey there Zoe, I see we both warned Poorleno at the same time. Heh. Stepping on eachother's toes? :P Anywho, I just though you might appreciate WP:UTM. It has a whole bunch of templates so that we don't have to type in messages each time. {{tpv0}} or {{tpv1}} were probably the best options this case. Cheers! --Brad Beattie (talk) 22:23, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Hilary Rhoda

Hi, with respect to supermodels.nl's profile- it was taken from img.com and is sourced, but furthermore, what if I ask supermodels.nl's approval to use the profile?

Hey

What's with the revert? --Far Beyond 23:24, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

SPAM #5

A deletion review in which you participated has been relisted: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rafed.net (2nd nomination).
brenneman 02:04, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello Zoe-

I see that you deleted and protected "Freaks of Laughter". I would like to request that you unprotected it as a stub so that I and others can create a useful article on the subject.

You should know that I am in no way affiliated with the film or in any way vested in it other than that I have enjoyed it at a screening here in Washington DC and assisted the films producer in posting it on Google Video for viewing on the web (a requirement of one of the festivals that is considering the film).

After reading the possible reasons why it was deleted I understand some of the possible problems with the original entry and will use those guidelines in writing the new entry.

Thank you for your work on Wikipedia I find it very useful and I am sure that much of the credit should go to people such as yourself.

Andrew Goldman Andy@Circus.Org

Thanks again

Yet again thank you for your help. You are helping me make my wikis the best they can be.

Chris Gonzalez

why did u call me dmb?

Re: this edit of yours

Even though I disagree with Zoe, and agree with you, on the Afd in question, I have to say she was right in her note. She might have been a bit brusque, but that's partly because she has less time. She fights a lot more fires than I do, so I'll take the liberty of explaining in more detail for her; I hope she doesn't mind. Your post did not shed more light on the issue of whether the Jewdar article should be kept. It did, however, raise the general level of heat and acrimony in the debate, unnecessarily. It encouraged turning a discussion about the article into a personal argument, unnecessarily. It ridiculed another participant, unnecessarily. It made people new to the debat want to vote against the article just because someone supporting it was behaving rudely. Whatever short pithy link you label that with, whether WP:CIVIL, WP:TIGER, WP:AGF, WP:NPA, or even WP:DICK, let's just say in words it was just a bad idea all around. Please, take a deep breath, realize that this is just one article (out of how many million?), realize that no one, not Recury, and certainly not Zoe, is out to get you personally, realize that we are all volunteers, trying to give the world a free encyclopedia, which seems to be a very worthwhile and rather selfless endeavor, and we should be nice to each other. We are all fools in certain ways and especially on certain days of the week, so we had darn well better suffer each other gladly if we want to get anything done. -- AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 15:27, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, Mouse, you said it a lot better than I could have. :) User:Zoe|(talk) 16:18, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Removal of username

Hi,

I saw your reply on the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents in regards to user going by the name user:ARYAN818. I strongly agree with you that the combination of the name is not coincidential. Furthermore, not only is his name offensive to some users, but his attitude of intolerance in regards to other people's cultures and ethnic background directly and indirectly shows. This user is taking advantage of the fact that the name Aryan is commonly used in Northern India and is making a fool out of a lot of us. This username is also disrespective to other users who may be of certain backgrounds who find this name offensive. I support you if you are planning on either removing the user, or getting the user to change his user name. Regards,

Wiki Raja 23:26, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

He will tell you that 818 stands for an area code, and that Aryan means "noble" in Northern India. Even if his name is accepted, his intolerant attitude will have to go. Wiki Raja 23:35, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Is it not possible to check his ISP, to see if it is indeed from California? Jeffpw 09:57, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello,

Here are some shocking articles I have found in regards to this topic. [[4]] [[5]] [[6]] [[7]]

Wiki Raja 19:52, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

It's amazing how some people can get away with offensive usernames at times. Similarly, there are those who get away with using a Nazi name and swastika for a restaurant in India. It is trully a shame, how some people will take advantage of the system under the guise of cultural heritage only to promote their culture and to undermine others.[[8]] [[9]] [[10]] Wiki Raja 02:35, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Removing content...

Altered it. Changed mind. Reversed it. Now explained it. Cheers RIANZ 00:41, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Indeed they do RIANZ 00:48, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

what a joke... who are u and why did you delete that page on fortune?

If you're trying to escalate the problem between us...

...you're doing an AWESOME job. I deleted my comment you had a problem with from your talk page, and I deleted your harassment from my talk page. I'm going to delete your comment AGAIN in a moment. I backed off as you asked, and then you decided that you would become aggressive. Fine. You're an administrator, I suppose that's your prerogative. I'll ask you not to revert your comment on my talk page again. In fact, don't ever comment on my talk page again. Should you continue to stalk me, appropriate measures will be taken. Please consider this your one and only warning. -- weirdoactor ^t|c 18:10, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Why??

it has come to my attention that you deleted the Lincolnshire Pallets article. I was fine with the article it was just the Phil Dukes article i was not. Could you please retrieve it or something? (Jamesbourne11 18:27, 8 January 2007 (UTC))

Why?

It has come to my attention that you deleted the Lincolnshire Pallets article. I am fine with the article and i only asked for Phil Dukes to be deleted. Could you recover it or something? (Jamesbourne11 18:28, 8 January 2007 (UTC))

I am sorry this was onkly a joke to my friend. I dont think anyone was using it that time.

What?

Why don't you think that others are interested?--Pierson's Puppeteer 20:03, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

CarRanger

Zoe, hi. Why did you revert my pagemove at Gekisou Sentai CarRanger? I was completing a request from WP:RM, and I checked the external sources, all of which spell it without CamelCaps. Do you have access to some other information, indicating that CamelCaps are correct? -GTBacchus^(talk) 21:49, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

No worries, I probably should have changed the text of the article when completing the rename. I'll do that now. -GTBacchus^(talk) 21:51, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

tell me how to correct this

zoe , all of this info is from my PR kit, all of the information from my PR kit is true a factual , all taken from articles written about me, while I was chef at google and since I have left google.

respectfully yours Charlie Ayers

List of smosh videos

That was deleted from the smosh page. I think the deletion made the article better. You should talk to the guy who made the change there; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Smosh because he doesn't have a user name. -CRouleau 22:23, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't think it needs its own list; Wikipedia is not a collection of external links, and most of those videos almost definitely won't have their own article. Veinor ^{(talk to me)} 22:33, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Whoops - you deleted a page in error

Dear Zoe:

I spent a lot of time creating the page Clear rolling papers. It was not written in ad format and I think maybe you misjudged it. Actually it was the opposite of an ad b/c I hate the product in question and I had a lot of trouble not letting my personal feelings get into the article. Could you PLEASE re-read it - then repost it. If you feel it needs cleanup then tag it appropriately. I have just spoken to other Admins who agree it was really not an ad.

I hope you will have a look at the article you deleted and then repost it. It's very important that the public knows that Clear rolling papers are just cellophane and the backgroud of the item and it's historic implications.

--Mrtobacco 23:12, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

MOTD discussion

I tend to agree with you - see Wikipedia:Motto of the day/Desk/veto, and note the author (if you read this and it hasn't yet been deleted, please do). Then you have the Esperanza attempt to revitalise, with him controlling it (from the little I read before it was deleted-and-salted), and I'm sure there's others. He just recreated the "co-ordinators" on Wikipedia:Motto of the day/Desk, who "are the only ones who can determine concensus", have a "special veto" (see above), etc. Although not the most applicable situation for it, a Request for Comment may not be such a bad idea. Daniel.Bryant ^{[ T · C ]} 23:35, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

I just found Wikipedia:Justice Court (and Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Justice Court). Worrying, to say the least. Daniel.Bryant ^{[ T · C ]} 23:39, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

See my response. Cheers, Daniel.Bryant ^{[ T · C ]} 23:52, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Could you possibly delete that Arbcab thing? Daniel.Bryant ^{[ T · C ]} 00:00, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Village Pump

People (or more likely person) have just been posting all sorts of nonsense there lately. You'd think they'd get bored. – Someguy0830 (T | C) 00:38, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

It rarely is. – Someguy0830 (T | C) 00:40, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Ben Longman & Superman Apcolypse

Hi this is Ben Longman, creator of the articles Ben Longman and Superman Apocolypse. Can you please stop deleting my articles? Every word I wrote is true and I am not breaching any copyrights, I have double checked in a lot of places. I'm just a young guy trying to promote his talents on the internet and who thought that you would be good enough to oblige, but obviously not. Please can you restore my articles, because they took a long time to get going and I have no other way to promote myself. If not, please give me the good reason why not and who I am harming. Thankyou.

Ben Longman

Please note

Please not that my profile was also in no way an advertisment for me, but merely an information page for someone wanting to use my services, if such a person ever does. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ben Longman (talk • contribs) 13:56, 9 January 2007 (UTC).

please do not edit my talk page

u edited my talk page cause i changed it when i wasnt signed on please do not edit it again —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Yells at soup (talk • contribs) 13:59, 9 January 2007 (UTC).

attack?

i wud like to no wot was an attack so i can delete it from the page khalid elqasabagli please —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jimathon (talk • contribs) 19:06, 9 January 2007 (UTC).

Sourced info

Dear user, thank you for your message! Wikipedia has become a place where nations wage intellectual wars against each other. Articles are nothing political pamphlets. Have you looked at the sources? They are often nothing but politics. Other users who come up with similar sources are sidelined because they are either less war-thirsty or numerically disadvantaged. I have noticed that Aremanians and Persian chauvinists are probably paid to misinform about Azerbaijani related articles. You have nothing to discuss. Wikipedia shall block these articles. They will soon create big scandals! These political articles are making this website a liability. 85.186.230.115 22:17, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Are you admin????

Look at the article about Azerbaijan, and any article whatsoever about Azerbaijan!!! Of course I also have political orientation and I feel obliged to enforce my political orientations arbitrarily. You know why? Because articles about my homeland are written by the enemies of my homeland. Sourced information have been deleted by other users and nothing happened. Azerbaijani users discussed the issues and received personal attacks. What do you call this? It's all dirty work and I think there is no other way to respond by dirty work. Do you see articles about Armenia mocked like this? No. Any article about Azerbaijani issues have been continuously mocked by Persian and Armenian chauvinists who portray themselves as Azerbaijani. Their sources are racist weblogs... as long as there are these problems there will be dirty work. I don't know how to solve these problems. I would personally put some Westerner write the articles according to Western sources then block the articles. 85.186.230.115 22:29, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

No Blogs

Thanks Zoey for telling me that we can't make blogs. I would have never Found that out.--Klaus 22:40, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

There is no possibility of having consensus

Look at the articles about Azerbijan, read them carefully and if you don't see simple political pamphlets correct me! Why are these articles up? You think Azerbaijanis did not try consensus???? They did. Look at the talk page! Believe me, this is campagin of misinformation. There are people paid to misinform! Who to discuss to? Look at the discussion! There are only personal attacks. Why is the article about Azerbaijan portraying Azerbijan in such a bad way? You think Azerbaijanis would have written those? Anyway, thanks for your comments! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.186.230.115 (talk) 22:41, 9 January 2007 (UTC).

I don't want to waste your time!!!

Let me tell you how the tactic works, as I have discovered. I previously tried to edit articles. I found sources, which were not blogs or political pamphlets. They were academic sources. I did some editing of an article about Azerbaijanis. I first tried to talk. I received many insults and was called names. Then I ignored and moved on to edit. I think there were tens of members each popping up every few seconds and editing back everything I had edited. Are you joking? Who can you resolve your conflicts with? One, two, three, or four members? They are so many. It's a waste of time. The only way is to play their own dirty game, though Azerbaijani or Turkish governments are not funding these strategies. The only way is to mock them, insult, intimidate, delete, edit back, intimidate, mock and insult until some of them give up. Many Azerbaijanis gave up like this. It's strange but Wikipedia policy has these tremendous flaws. The rules can be useful only if there was good faith. I explained about that. 85.186.230.115 22:48, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

I filed that too!!!

I filed it. After that dodgy parts were removed and the removal lasted for about 30 hours. Some of the members came back and changed everything back to where they were. No Aremnian will ever tell you these, I am telling you becasue I am not doing those things. I wouldn't mind being blocked anyway. Please look at this article: Azerbaijan (Iran) and you will see that there were changes made a few days ago by admins then the members who were mocking and distorting the article disappeared for a bit more than a day. They came back and turned the article back to where it was. please take a look. It was also a copy-right violation!!! That was why the admins deleted most of the article. The mockers came back soon, I think there are about 20-30 members at least and changed the article back to where it was, making it even worse. PLEASE take a look!!! 85.186.230.115 22:55, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

I know...

I know you don't know what to tell me. I told you about a very grave and serious problem at Wikipedia. It has become the war-zone of conflicting ideologies. There is no already-thought solution for it. Let me explain the strategy to you once again. I am not expecting solution from you but maybe if you are able to pass this on to someone with authority they can, at some point, think about a solution. So, the strategy goes like this: 1) You have somehwre between 50 to 100 IP adresses. You pay about 50 to 100 people and give them a single task: MOCK, INTIMIDATE, EDIT, DISTORT, MANIPULATE, INSULT, do whatever in your power so articles about the history and facts of the people that we consider threatening are not seen by Westerners the way we do not want to. A country like Armenia is doing this and the result is that, IT WORKS. Azerbaijan is not doing this. So, if you look at any possible article about Azerbaijan and Azerbaijanis you will see they are written by Armenians. It is quite funny, isn't it? A country can afford spending a lot of money for propaganda, especially when it is afraid of its future. Or maybe when it relies on certain factions' non-awareness of the opposing views, or facts. Believe me there is no way to oppose this strategy but to do the same, but I cannot do that. It is too costly. A governemnt can do it. Cheers! 85.186.230.115 23:05, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

...

Well... I doubt the US government is doing something like that. Small countries that feel threatened and fear for their future do such things. I told you how it works, right? You think it wouldn't work? It would, for sure. Paying 50 people is nothing for a government budget. And 50 people can do a hell lot of misinformation. So, you really really think this is paranoia?? No, seriously, you think this is paranoia? Governments are willing to pay tens and hundreds of millions to improve their image by ads on tv and the press. They also pay huge sums of money to researchers and writers to do favourable workd for them. You think those costs are greater than paying 50 people to watch all the articles about your country and your enemy's country on Wikipedia??? Well, at some point all this will get out of control when all the governments will start paying people write about them. It is true though that Iran's government would never be so stupid to pay 50 people to write disinformation about the US becasue it would put up with 300 million of English-speakers editing but how many Azerbaijanis speak English well enough, like me for example? How many of them search the net in English? How many of them have the time to waste to correct propaganda against their country. Very few :)) So, the method works for small to average countries misinforimg about other small to average countries or regions!

Please reconsider deletion

Dear Zoe,

Will you please reconsider your deletion of the "masturbatory thread" entry? I do not believe it qualified under the speedy deletion policy, and by any measure the article is useful or at least deserving of appropriate review and debate under the wikipedia deletion policy.

The only comments you made on the deletion record are "nonsense" and "still nonsense." As perWikipedia:Deletion guidelines for administrators, "nonsense" is a valid criterion for deleting articles without review under the Wikipedia:Speedy Deletion policy. Under Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion, "patent nonsense" (Wikipedia:Patent Nonsense) is a criterion. However, for it to be "patent nonsense" an article must be:

 1. Total nonsense - i.e. text or random characters that have no assignable meaning at all.... [or]
 2. Content that, while apparently meaningful after a fashion, is so completely and irredeemably confused that no intelligent person can be expected to make any sense of it whatsoever.

The article is obviously not a random string of characters. Nor is it so confused that no intelligent person can make no sense of it whatsoever. Several people contributed to writing and editing the article and I wrote a "talk" post describing why the article was relevant. In addition, the phrase "masturbatory thread" returns 377 google entries. Between the people working on the article and the wider universe, there are obviously people who see some meaning in the phrase.

Under the circumstances, I believe you may have inadvertently deleted the article "out of process" and that if you believe the article has no merit the proper "proposed for deletion" procedure should be followed. In the alternative, if the article was merely poorly or incompetently written, it should be flagged as requiring clean-up. I mentioned some of this in my talk post.

Underneath it all, "Masturbatory Threads" are a common, well known phenomenon unique to online forums, and that significantly affect the online experience and the success of the forums. The term fits properly alongside many dozens of other well-established Wikipedia articles in at least two categories: Category:Internet forum terminology and Category:Internet culture. These articles cover such terms as post counts, baiters, trolls, bumping, flaming, double posting, forum spam, on-topic versus off-topic posts, moderators, Godwin's Law, thread breaking, lurkers, leets, and kickbans. Many articles in these categories, similarly, have several hundred google hits as well.

Therefore, would you kindly re-post the article and, if it is deficient in any way, take the appropriate action so that the people who have been editing it today can continue their work to meet Wikipedia standards?

Thanks,

Cruelladevil 23:20, 9 January 2007 (UTC)cruelladevil

Your edit to User talk:72.40.44.97

Thanks for fixing my syntax :) I was just about to do it, but I guess you beat me to it! Gracenotes^T § 23:27, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Zarf

I wouldn't know; I only watch Days at the moment. Mike H. I did "That's hot" first! 04:59, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs WCWM Wauwatosa West High School Michael Hawkins (basketball) Targum Onkelos Saskatoon Public School Division Gus Mercurio Hammond High School (Columbia, Maryland) Amil Andy Caldecott Krum High School Konstanty Wasyl Ostrogski Miranda Kerr Arthur Treacher Elihu Harris Sámer Issa William Keble Martin Michael Cage EComStation Ma Rainey's Black Bottom

Cleanup Triple talaq Serge and Beate Klarsfeld Rashida Jones Merge Tennin Haileybury and Imperial Service College Conservation (genetics) Add Sources Eamonn McCann 1994 baseball strike Ross Tucker Wikify Ruby Ridge Kelston Boys' High School Ferris MC Expand Tom Weir Spectre Subminiature photography

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- ForteTuba 14:20, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Religious democracy

Please revert my article to its original version. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Farhoudk (talk • contribs) 19:14, 10 January 2007 (UTC).

Religious democracy

It has various sections like "Christian democracy", "Jewdasim and democracy" etc. already. There is no any ambiguity in the title or contents. Also it is under development. Farhoudk 19:22, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Religious democracy

Thanks. But I am not as skillfull as you in the wikipedia. Also other users may consider it offensive to see your edits were reverted by me. Would you mind doing it yourself. Best. Farhoudk 19:31, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Editing the Marehan page

Hi

I find it very unprofessionally that you keep deleting large verified junk from the Marehan page.

Please cease as I have provided citations for the evidence mentioned on the page.

Regards MarehanEmpire

That is because as you might know, the late president shifted and shared his power with his immediate clan. Hence why they are accountable for the many changes that they have brought to Somalia (education, higher literacy, etc).

Besides, why did you delete the reference the Marehan Sultanate or do you want me to present the actual page of the reference that I have included?

Zoe

I am appaled that you deny that the Ethiopians didn't had the Cubian and Soviet backing when Somalia when to war with them. It is common public knowledge.

Nevertheless I will provide the evidence for that.

Evidence 1: In 1970 Mr Barre proclaimed a socialist state, paving the way for close relations with the USSR. In 1977, with the help of Soviet arms, Somalia attempted to seize the Ogaden region of Ethiopia, but was defeated thanks to Soviet and Cuban backing for Ethiopia, which had turned Marxist.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/country_profiles/1072592.stm

Evidence two:

In December 1976, an Ethiopian delegation in Moscow signed a military assistance agreement with the Soviet Union. The following April, Ethiopia abrogated its military assistance agreement with the United States and expelled the American military missions. In July 1977, sensing the disarray in Ethiopia, Somalia attacked across the Ogaden Desert in pursuit of its irredentist claims to the ethnic Somali areas of Ethiopia. Ethiopian forces were driven back deep inside their own frontier but, with the assistance of a massive Soviet airlift of arms and Cuban combat forces, they stemmed the attack. The major Somali regular units were forced out of the Ogaden in March 1978. Twenty years later, development in the Somali region of Ethiopia lagged.

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2859.htm

Zoe,

I have already provided the sources, one from the BBC page and the other one from the US government page.

Evidence 1: In 1970 Mr Barre proclaimed a socialist state, paving the way for close relations with the USSR. In 1977, with the help of Soviet arms, Somalia attempted to seize the Ogaden region of Ethiopia, but was defeated thanks to Soviet and Cuban backing for Ethiopia, which had turned Marxist.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/country_profiles/1072592.stm

Evidence two:

In December 1976, an Ethiopian delegation in Moscow signed a military assistance agreement with the Soviet Union. The following April, Ethiopia abrogated its military assistance agreement with the United States and expelled the American military missions. In July 1977, sensing the disarray in Ethiopia, Somalia attacked across the Ogaden Desert in pursuit of its irredentist claims to the ethnic Somali areas of Ethiopia. Ethiopian forces were driven back deep inside their own frontier but, with the assistance of a massive Soviet airlift of arms and Cuban combat forces, they stemmed the attack. The major Somali regular units were forced out of the Ogaden in March 1978. Twenty years later, development in the Somali region of Ethiopia lagged.

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/2859.htm

RE: Deletion of my article

Well then —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ben Longman (talk • contribs) 21:13, 10 January 2007 (UTC).

RE: Deletion of my article

Well then what about Superman Apocolypse? That was in no way a promotion. That was merely information and there is nothing in there to try to promote it.

Ben Longman

RE:Superman Apocolypse

So you mean that it has to be noted somewhere else before it can be deemed properly existant? Because it hasnt actaully been released yet but it should debut on TheForce.net in about march

Ben Longman

Apocolypse is the name of the villan in the film

Ben Longman

Rutland etymology

Thanks for your question "What does "RatCE" mean?" on the etymology of Rutland. This was a direct quote from "Notes & Queries" of 1909 as referenced, but I think it was probably an error introduced by the journal in scanning & OCR of the original paper journal into electronic format. I can't explain it so I have removed that part of the sentance. I hope it stil makes sense & throws some light on the origin of the county name.— Rod ^talk 23:26, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

3RR

Thanks for your message, Zoe. Perhaps in this case I was too hasty, though I was motivated a little by the combination of 3RR and incivility. I will lift the block myself. Thanks for your input. Bucketsofg 23:47, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your intercession with Bucketsofg. Michaelsanders 01:44, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

A heads up for you: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR#User:Michaelsanders_reported_by_User:Milo_H_Minderbinder_.28Result:.29. Cheers. --Milo H Minderbinder 16:16, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

american dad eps

people have been asking for an expanded version as well...and thats what this is —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Grande13 (talk • contribs) 00:30, 11 January 2007 (UTC).

Your message

Hi Zoe, I think I saw on the email list that your request was done already. If not let me know. --FloNight 00:54, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia Policies

Mr Zoe

Please describe in complete detail what needs to be done about this article to meet Wikipedia's public standards.

Thank you —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mixlplix (talk • contribs) 02:54, 11 January 2007 (UTC).

Mike's talk page

[11] I DB'd it because he left and requested deletion of his user and talk pages. Someone, obviously thinking Mike was a new user, gave him the {{welcome}} template. He's obviously not new, so I thought it would be best to remove it. --69.144.234.146 04:06, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

That much I knew, it just seemed that a welcome message is probably the thing least needed there at this point. But it's not a big deal, anyway. --69.144.234.146 00:38, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Response

I do know that you favoured clemency towards me yesterday (there's a thank-you further up this page!) - I was very grateful (I spend too much time on here, and so got withdrawal yesterday...). I'm not going to bore you with this issue: if you want to find out, you can easily read the admin 3rr page and the article history in question, and if you don't, then I'll be wasting both our time by rambling here. But I do know that the 3RR is a borderline rather than a right (and said as much on the admin page). I did repeatedly ask the other editors to discuss their changes rather than partially/wholly revert - they didn't answer until my third revert, today. As it happens, the dispute already seems to be winding down: another editor has accepted most of my changes, and I have now suggested information which should be restored/added to the article on the talk page; I hope the others will be willing to talk this time.

And thank you, again, for the help yesterday - even if my zealousness has landed me in it again. Michaelsanders 17:10, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, I won't pretend that I don't bring some of these arguments with others on myself: sometimes through outright rudeness, more often through my baseline nature - I'm neither peaceful or quiet by nature, and that seems to cause a lot of problems for myself and others. Of course, one of the big unavoidable problems with wikipedia is the inevitable clash of timezones and schedules: it's often difficult to tell whether someone is refusing to talk because they're being truculent, or because they've just gone to bed...since I have a tendency to assume the former, it gets me really annoyed when people don't answer, and correspondingly less pleasant towards them when they do.

But ignore my maunderings. Thanks for the advice, and the help (which I so carelessly squandered). Michaelsanders 17:37, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

I don't know if I've squandered it or not - the decision still hasn't been made. Michaelsanders 17:41, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The New Way Forward

Zoe, what do you think about Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The New Way Forward in light of recent speech [12]? . change your vote? MPS 18:33, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

thanks. Please physically change your vote on the AFD. I can't do that for you. Also, feel free to participate in the name change discussion on Talk:The New Way Forward. Peace, MPS 19:48, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Church of Fonz

I didnt recreate the page, next time you should check the discussion page. I posted there to discuss why this shouldnt be deleted, I checked the rules and I see no reason why this couldnt be posted. What youre doing is very childish and disrespectful. Ill try and post what I can remember again: The article is not a joke or hoax, There are people who accept the idea and it is just as viable as christianity, Islam, rastafarianism, scientology and every other pagan religion. If they get their pages then The Church of Fonz can get its own. Just because it was created by Peter from Family Guy doesnt mean it cant be accepted. Next time try discussing it instead of copy pasting some bs response youd expect from aol/blizzard customer service. Peoplez1k 19:55 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Dashes

Copied from WP:Help desk:

At WP:MOSDASH is mentioned: Hyphens and dashes are generally rather avoided in page names (e.g., year of birth and death are generally not used in a page name to disambiguate two people with the same name). (...)If hyphens and dashes are needed to write a page name correctly (e.g., Piano-Rag-Music, Jack-in-the-box, Nineteen Eighty-Four), prefer simple hyphens, and avoid hair spaces, even in the odd case of a range forming part of the title, e.g., History of the Soviet Union (1985-1991). --213.155.224.232 20:54, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Comment

Hi Zoe, I noticed you're userpage says "I believe that Wikipedia:Wheel war is an important guideline, and should be policy". Are you aware that as of December 18, it now is? :-) Khoikhoi 03:01, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Zoe, fixed the query about the aslandad.jpg upload. It is a self-produced image, not copyrighted. please note.

Claros In Touch

Hi Zoe. The above aricle was recently speadied because it failed WP:SPAM, however, the author of it would like a copy of it so they could change it to a non spam article. Is there any chance you could sift it out for me an put it in User:Ryanpostlethwaite/Claros In Touch? It would be much appreciated RyanPostlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 00:29, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Cheers Zoe, I'll keep an eye on it so it doesn't get reposted without it meeting WP:SPAM RyanPostlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 00:40, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Yea

I got it by someone else How do I remove it?

I got a message to remove it. I don't know how to remove it, but I removed me redirecting to it.

No its ok I was just exploring and testing stuff out

I didn't know making a new page was vandalism

Ok I get it now. By the way, do you know how to enter one line down? Entering once doesn't work.

Ok thanks and
sorry for the violation Alex.petralia 02:16, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Shawn Hornbeck

You know what, I'm trying this again so as not to break your h-scroll. I don't agree that it was a personal attack, but I see how it could be regarded as such and I do apologize. It was more of an expression of frustration with what seems to me a subjective and spottily-enforced standard. Umlautbob 06:53, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

re: moodring (band) page

it wasn't false information, you didn't let me finish the article or write that they are a fictional band etc. I couldn't finish it cause the "database was catching up" etc apparently which was annoying.

i didn't write this....

"final warning? I didnt make it again dumbass and youre starting to get on my nerves"

The fiction is a zine called "fanscape"

Well fans don't write it, the writers do, I don't know if that counts as one

Yeah, its like the story of their rise to fame etc but they use characters people may know to make it more familiar

Oh ok, well I have seen loads of articles on similar subjects but fair enough.

Well I'm not sure what fanfic is but i've seen ones on characters in zines, one gave me the idea for this actually. I dunno, have a look round

Lasagna cell

Please see Talk:Lasagna cell, I've restored the page, whose deletion I think did not follow proper procedure. Femto 15:56, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Sticks

yeah, I was only putting it on pages that deserve to be vandalized. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Biggerdog (talk • contribs) 21:14, 15 January 2007 (UTC).

MattR658

MattR658 (talk · contribs) is requesting that he be unblocked. You blocked this account because, as near as I can see, every edit from the user was vandalism. However, the user is promising no more vandalism, so could you please let me know what you think? Thanks. --Yamla 22:15, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

poke He made the promise. :) --Yamla 17:02, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Dr. John H. Munro

He is the Senior Pastor of the most well known church in Charlotte NC. Newspapers such as the charlotte observer, and other media outlets request constantly information on him. This makes it easy for other people to gain information on him that is accurate. It will be recreated. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Clericm62 (talk • contribs) 23:13, 15 January 2007 (UTC).

Mark

Please justify your deletion more fully

I cited my source. Did you read it? How do you know it was original research?

I found when I went to amke another save that you had deleted it already

Geo Swan 23:18, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Everyone makes mistakes.

I suspected that your deletion of this article, skipping the intermediate steps, was a mistake. You say (User:Zoe#Philosophy) some nice things about trust, and collegiality. Well, in order for it to be fair to ask others to assume good faith, those who have been entrusted with a measure of authority have to exercise that authority in a manner that demonstrates a willingness to be accountable.

I am going to suggest that if administrators are interested in showing their willingness to be accountable they won't skip any of the steps -- not unless it was an emergency.

I think you are as aware as I am that it is recommended that nominators refrain from placing a tag for speedy deletion on articles that have recently been created. I don't have to quote WP:CSD to you do I?

Zoe, I recently re-read an official section that suggested we "forgive and forget" slights. You deeply offended me in our first interaction 16 months ago. I had created four articles about Guantanamo captives that day. All four of them were nominated for deletion. {{afd}} was a new procedure for me. I was totally unfamiliar with it. And none of you regular patrollers was showing the least bit of effort to explain it to me.

You justified deleting those articles, and, it seemed, ANY articles about Guantanamo, because you seemed to be saying that ANY article about Guantanamo could only be an opportunity for "America-bashing". I thought that sounded terrible. Bigoted, narrow-minded, parochial. I thought it sounded completely counter to the idea that the wikipedia is an international project, with a commitment to intellectual truth. But, I didn't assume you meant what you wrote the way it sounded to me. I asked you for clarification. I wasn't mocking you. It was a serious question. I believed then that it meritied a serious answer. I thought I phrased my question in civil terms. And I thought I deserved a civil answer.

You didn't answer this question. Instead you nominated the next Guantanamo article I created with a nomination that contained what I regarded as a completely uncalled for personal insult.

Most wikipedia conributors are fair-minded, and can be counted on to show collegiality. But, even before I met you, I had met a wikistalker, who felt their American patriotism meant that they could and should suppress information that they felt reflected poorly on the USA, without regard to how neutrally it was expressed, or how authoritative or verifiable the sources were. When you wouldn't clarify whether you really meant the surface meaning of your statements about suppressing all Guantanamo articles, I assumed you meant your statement just the way it sounded -- that your patriotism was so strong it could, potentially swing into POV pushing.

I had spent over a couple of dozen hours working on articles about the Guantanamo captives at that point. I didn't think they were POV America-bashing then. I have spent about 50 times as much time working on those articles now. And I don't think there is a POV America-bashing one among them.

I don't have a problem with you, or anyone, disagreeing about that. But, I would ask critics to be specific, and engage in civil dialogue.

Zoe, it doesn't matter if we disagree, so long as we both are collegial, remain civil, and comply with the wikipedia's policies and procedures.

Can you reassure me that you didn't jump the gun, and delete the article I had created, a few minutes after I had created it, without going through {{db-bio}}, {{prod}} or {{afd}} out of personal animosity? Can you reassure me that the articles I start will be safe from inappropriate deletions from you?

On September 28 2006 you cast an opinion on an {{afd}} discussion of a Guantanamo captive, that that particular captive didn't merit an article of his own. Well, since you seemed to have gone on record as stating that no Guantanamo captive merited an article an article, that didn't seem to be very trustworthy justification.

I would appreciate an answer to the question I asked you sixteen months ago. Did you really mean that you thought the wikipedia should not have any coverage of the Guantanamo captives, and issues and topics related to their detention? If so, do you still feel that way?

Candidly -- Geo Swan 20:35, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Zoe, you aren't addressing what I wrote. I am not arguing that you should re-instate the Mark article. On your User page you speak about collegiality. I am under the impression that you administrators are supposed to follow certain procedures. And unnecessarily skipping steps when deleting an article does not build trust. I am asking you to recommit yourself to following the rules. What would it have cost you to put a {{prod}} on that article, of a {{db-bio}}? -- Geo Swan 21:07, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Zoe, I did already check criteria for speedy deletion. And I checked it again, just now.

Can you please quote the passage where it says that original research is grounds for speedy deletion?

Can you plesae quote the passage that says administrators have the discretion to skip the step of one person placing a speedy tag or a {{prod}} tag, and a second person consummating the deletion? Can you please quote the passage that says you can delete an article, without placing any tags, or engaging in any discussion over what might turn out to be a relatively harmless problem?

How often do your ignore the recommendation in both WP:CSD and WP:CFD that we remember some wikipedians, (like me,) create articles in stages? You deleted this article within minutes of its creation.

I continue to believe your deletion was a breach of the recommended wikiprocedures.

Zoe, everyone makes mistakes. All wikipedia contributos should be willing to try to be humble enough to own up to them But it is particularly important for administrators to be able to acknowledge mistakes, because (1) they exercise more power than ordinary wikipedian, and (2), they should be setting an example. -- Geo Swan 21:31, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Zoe, everone makes mistakes. You aren't reading what I write. I haven't asked you to undelete that article. Not only haven't I requested you to undelete it. I already told you I am not asking you to reinstate the article.

I read WP:RFC. It recommends that wikipedians make a good faith effort to resolve problems with the person we have a problem with first. I am trying my best to phrase the concerns I have with your actions in the most tactful way I can, without being so tactful you don't understand what I am saying.. I am not getting the impression that you are trying very hard to show collegiality to me.

Zoe, go have a cup of tea, sleep on it. then re-read WP:CSD. If you can explain where it authorizes you to delete articles without going through the step of having one wikipedian place the tag, and wait for another wikipedian who is an administrator to consummate the deletion, I'll give you one cheerful apology. And if you can explain where it authorizes you to delete articles without waiting more than a few minutes after their creation, I'll give you another cheerful apology. Finally, if you can find where it says your perception that an article contains "original research" or "speculation" are grounds for speedy deletion, I'll give you yet another cheerful apology. But, if, after that cup of tea, and that's good night's sleep, you can't find these three things you claim are in that document, I suggest you consider simply saying you were wrong, and make a commitment to avoid committing that particular mistake again? -- Geo Swan 21:58, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

why

It is a matter of personal opinion for you. Look up his name and see numerous articles about him in the charlotte observor and many other newspapers

I salted John H. Munro.--Kchase T 11:49, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

sorry

this is regarding the Wykydtron post.

i'm not trying to vandalize the page. i'm the creator of it.

i just can't figure out where to go to add it for real, and to not have it be just a 'Test Page'

Could you provide assistance?

Thanks, Jason

818?

This isn't an appeal, I'm just genuinely curious what the Nazi connection is. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 04:08, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

OK, I see now on AN/I. I didn't know this. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 04:10, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

wykydtron

it's from a song that 3 Inches of Blood sings... but it's now added and modified from what i wrote previously.

did you clean it up? or did someone else add this record? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hamerj (talk • contribs) 18:23, 17 January 2007 (UTC).

Deletion of "Phil Doubet" article

Hello,

I started working on an article about author Phil Doubet and it was deleted within one minute of posting. How can you possibly justify deleting an article that I haven't even had time to complete? I literally got 1 sentence out and you deleted it! The spirit of Wikipedia cannot possibly be so fascist.

Explanation please,

2names

UPDATE: An explanation was provided and I apologize for the "fascist" remark.

Munro

I like your contributions to all things Munro mjgm84 18:09, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Damn!

Damn, Zoe, have I shat in your corn flakes? The day I put the ref desk on MFD is the day you can disagree with that. You are free to overturn any block I have made, or will make. Any editor, is of course free to edit- included putting back wrongly deleted content. If I do something specific you disagree with, you are welcome to express that disagreement. However, nonspecific, omnibus complaints are less helpful. Are you disagreeing with some comment I made a month ago, or are you disagreeing with something I've actually done? I've seen very little of you at the ref desk talk page, where these things are discussed. Friday (talk) 19:49, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Your removal of the talk page of WebAPP

Can you please explain your removal of the talk page of the above article ? It looks like vandalism to me. Pedro1999a |  Talk  22:09, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

See WP:NPA. User:Zoe|(talk) 22:10, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry Zoe, but please see the various articles on vandalism within Wikipedia. You blanked an entire talk page - that is unjustified. Also please see the edit history and note that I only came on this due to recent change patrol. I have no axe to grind either way on the article, but would kindly ask you to desist from page blanking. This still looks like vandalism on your part to me. Pedro1999a |  Talk  22:16, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

I suggest you stop claiming that content differences is vandalism. I think I know what vandalism is, as I have been here a lot longer than you. If you want to address this in a moderated tone, I will do so, but your screaming of "vandalism" will not lead me to being cooperative. User:Zoe|(talk) 22:18, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

And I sugest that you read some Wikipedia guidlines. Your derogatory tone "I've been here longer than you" is both offensive and dismissive. My "screaming" is entirely justified by your page blanking. An experienced (coverse to "being here a long time) user would know that is unacceptable. please check my 1000+ counter vandalism edits. The irony is we are both in agreement that the article needs removing. Pedro1999a |  Talk  22:24, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

This discussion is at an end. User:Zoe|(talk) 22:25, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Please do not back track from statements you have made. Be bold.Why not see Wikipedia guidleines on staying cool and edit wars. It will help your anger. Until then - Happy Editing !!! Pedro1999a |  Talk  22:33, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Apparently the reason that my article on "Fraquetball" was deleted was because it fell under the category "something made up in school one day". It says that these sorts of things can end up on Wikipedia if "someone first sits down and researches them, and publishes a book, an academic paper, or a magazine/journal article detailing that research. Such resources are reliable, and therefore the subject can become eligible for Wikipedia." One example apparently is the school craze "freak dancing" about which an article was published in Education week. The reason I felt that an article on Fraquetball now would be publishable on Wikipedia because it was indeed researched by a reporter from the Pioneer Press, and an article was written and published on Fraquetball in the St. Paul Pioneer Press. The article was on the front page of the local news section, and a link was provided to this article on the page I created. The Pioneer Press mind you, is no underground publication, it has many readers from all over Minnesota, Wisconsin, the Dakota's, and Iowa. I also would like to note that Fraquetball is more than a passing fad. While freak dancing has no doubt come and gone, Fraquetball perseveres. There have been dozens of teams to play in different seasons across the years, all kinds of students and teachers participate. Their are various statistics kept in a main computer, and coveted awards are handed out at the end of the season, and each year there is a playoff, and one team is crowned champion. So please reconsider not allowing an article on Fraquetball on this website, since it now clearly fulfills the criteria posed by Wikipedia.

Please respond to the reason you deleted the Fraquetball article.

I posted my argument in a preceding message, so please get back to me, I would appreciate it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Natedizzy (talk • contribs) 22:37, 18 January 2007 (UTC).

Is the Fraquetball website itself "trivial"?

The fraquetball website, while not on a very high quality server, contains a great deal of information on the sport, and was cited in the article in the pioneer press. And since it was cited as a source by such a major newspaper, I would think that it wouldn't qualify as "trivial. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Natedizzy (talk • contribs) 22:40, 18 January 2007 (UTC).

If it matters.....

The website was not started by me, nor a Fraquetball player, but by a fellow student who enjoyed watching. I'm not sure if this qualifies, just thought I'd throw it out there. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Natedizzy (talk • contribs) 22:45, 18 January 2007 (UTC).

New Fraquetball source!

This is a credible, second source that talks about Fraquetball.

http://open.spps.org/Fraquetball.html

But why not?

What is it about school websites that disqualify them as reliable sources. They are reviewed by the school board to make sure everything is accurate and proper, and this isn't run by the students, it's run by the school administration.

Edits of WebAPP

Hi, I'm sorry but this does not work here. You cite No Personal Attacks but I have been through the edit history of both the article and talk page and find no evidence. Obviously the fact that "I'm new Here" and "You've been around a lot longer" (you might want to check here about that by the way) means I'm thick, but I can see no history of personal attacks. Please can you point them out to this thick newbie. Pedro1999a |  Talk  22:55, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Zoe, I am sorry but I have fully reviewed the WebApp article history and see no personal attacks whatsoever. Some slight murmurings, but they were directed at ME. I admit accidently missing out my signature, and my apologies for that. Certainly there was nothing that could be viewed as an attack.

In addition I have reviewed your most recent edits and comments, in particular on this page. It is clear that you have a heated temper and are rather to happy too revert rather than discuss or modify. I am afraid I find you a poor quality administrator on Wikipedia. Respectfully, I would sugest you consider either a prolonged wikibreak or resignation from admin status. Please do not consider this an attack but informed comment. Pedro1999a |  Talk  08:33, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Ap.

Sorry. I just wanted to see the effects and learn from itSmall Text. I will never do it agian.

Reply to Benchtop freeze dryer.jpg

This photo is took by me and edited with photoshop to remove the background.

---

Original Message----------

Image:Benchtop freeze dryer.JPG Please explain how you created this image. User:Zoe|(talk) 19:49, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Millrock"

All the photos you delete is took and edited by me

Zoe,

All the photos you delete is took and edited by me. I have all the original pictures files as provement. You did not respect my work and delete them without verify with me is really rude! Please reply to explain what makes you consider them as false license. 19:51, 17 January 2007 Zoe (Talk | contribs) deleted "Image:Benchtop freeze dryer.JPG" (false license) 19:51, 17 January 2007 Zoe (Talk | contribs) deleted "Image:Max freeze dryer.jpg" (false license) 19:51, 17 January 2007 Zoe (Talk | contribs) deleted "Image:Lab Freeze Dryer.jpg" (false license) 19:50, 17 January 2007 Zoe (Talk | contribs) deleted "Image:Research Freeze Dryer.JPG" (false license) 19:50, 17 January 2007 Zoe (Talk | contribs) deleted "Image:Production Freeze Dryer.JPG" (false license) 19:50, 17 January 2007 Zoe (Talk | contribs) deleted "Image:Clean Room Freeze Dryer.JPG" (false license)

[13] Even if the user took the photo themselves, I doubt they own the copyright. Regards, Ben Aveling 10:57, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Millrock

Well in the 1930s people in Honduras said that he was from there and that hes family were from Cuba and they went back because of the bad situation in HN

Another thing they were announcing in the radio in the 1930s that Fidel was from there! but idk why people dont recognize that he if from HN maybe because HN did not want to be a comunist repuclic idk!

Its not a personal point of view when I say that these articles are blatantly ignoring the Turkish side of events and depicting the history of an Empire in a negative light, its the politics of the old influencing our perceptions of the past today. Bloody Sultaj???Its wrong.

WebApp AfD

Editors opposed to the deletion of WebApp and Web-APP have been engaging in contentious editing, including the removal of the AfD tags on the subject articles, massively interpolated comments within (rather than at the bottom of) the AfD discussion, and repeated removal of the AfD's "Not a ballot" tag. Given that it's not a case of simple remove-and-restore reversion, I'm not sure that what has taken place qualifies as 3RR violations, but I would appreciate your administratorial eye reviewing the AfD's edit history and seeing what if anything can be done to ensure a civil completion of the AfD. Many thanks! Robertissimo 19:24, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ill Mitch (2nd nomination)

Hi Zoe. Per your comments at DRV, you might be interested in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ill Mitch (2nd nomination)? Cheers. The JPS^{talk to me} 22:50, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

The problem is that the evidence past away 3 years ago, and idk if close friend that knew him have other evidence.

Removing the "Body Bag Game" Article

How exactly is this November 1990 NFL game between the Philadelphia Eagles and Washington Redskins too "silly" for wikipedia!? It's not like anybody actually died, it's just a piece of National Football League lore.TMC1982 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Some evidence is better than no evidence

I emailed him, actually. :( Should I post the contents of the email or how to contact him? It's not like he'd post it on his own website so I can't reference that, but the fact is anyone else could email him and get the same answer, so that should count. Ivyna J. Spyder 20:43, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Assistance is Needed, Please

Hi,

I posted 141.154.10.193 on the WP:AIV board, but the vandalism continues. It is sneaky at best. I am reverting all the vandalism made, but I need some help.

Thanks!....SVRTVDude 21:17, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

No problem (Hopefully it isn't snowing there:)). I have most of the pages on watch, so I will keep an eye on them too and let you know. Rock on....SVRTVDude 22:47, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

He's back....am correcting. - SVRTVDude 23:43, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

OK, he vandalised one page WFTS-TV, I corrected it, put a Warn3 Tag on his talk page, he stopped. Hopefully he is finally getting the message. SVRTVDude 23:43, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Ligat ha'Al 2006/07

Hey, I've changed a bit the introduction to the subject. Please tell me what do you think, if it's satisfactory or not. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Flags-Chaser (talk • contribs) 01:59, 22 January 2007 (UTC).

Mistake

Zoe, I think there must be some mistake. You warned me for vadalizing today's featured article (based on your post to my talk page) but in fact if you look at the history closely you will see that I corrected two instances of vandalism -- one in which the author inserted "HAHHAHAHHHAAH" into the opening section, and another in which the author replaced the entire article with the two-word phrase "tee-hee".

Could you please explain to me how it was that this mistake was made?

Parkerconrad 02:42, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Shmexy

To whom it may concern,

IT IS NOT NON-SENSE. It is a new word created by some high schoolers and it is sweeping the school. I just wanted to share it with the Wikipedia community. Many words are started on the Internet and is then added to the dictionary. Inventing words are a way of life. If no-one thought up words to share with one another we would still be talking to one another in grunts and groans. Also I am protected by the U.S. Bill of Rights to publish anything I wish on a piece of writing whether it be on paper or electronic. If you do take it down you are being Non-American,and if you aren't an American then you can't do anything due to the fact I have international protection.

  Sincerely,~alightintheabyss~

Shmexy (RE)

Thank you for representing the Wikipedia community by shooting down a word that in my mind that is as real as these that I am typing right now. Sure you might bring up that Wikipedia is not a dictionary. But I will tell you now, that if you type in a word in a search it most likely has the meaning and other info. I was going to add that later on as my ideas of what to share with this community. I understand that it's your job to take off what you think doesn't belong. But I don't see anything wrong with this article. It IS a word. It HAS a meaning,origin,creators,stem words,synonyms,proper uses. I just added this article today and I need to fix it up.

   Sincerely,~alightintheabyss~

Regarding Glukoza

It seems that you deleted the beginnings of my article within moments of me creating it, before I had a chance to expand it. If it violated Wikipedia's rules in any way, please explain. If this was a misunderstanding, please let me know as well.

-- Mik 03:30, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

It makes no sense

You deleted my link but then left the other link, which is both commercial and advertising things —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rwrrblog (talk • contribs) 04:47, 23 January 2007 (UTC).

Re GNAA article

Make constructive comments on how to improve or create a sourced article, but further attacks will be grounds for blocking.

Now I feel attacked. I only commented about the article in question on the talk page. I meant no attack to anyone in particular. I managed to find a copy of the page on the web as it was before it was deleted, and I found it worthy of being kept, or recreated at least. The talk page is explicitly the right place to express those views. Removing my comments amounts to censorship. You'll see I've changed nothing there, because I don't want to be involved in a revert war.

Anyways I'm done with that page. Found out more than I'd have actually liked to know about the topic elsewhere. Savant45 08:42, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Open dialogue

Hi Zoe. I note you didn't reply to my previous post, however your admin actions still seem to be of great concern. In particular I am very threatened by your speedy deletes and reversions without using the talk pages, and your comment to me "I've been here a lot longer than you".. That really did seem to have a lot of anger about it, and given how you seem to react to personal attacks of others perhaps you would review that comment and retract it. I do intend to report the full history of your actions to the administrators noticeboard unless your trigger happy style changes, but felt it to be only courtesy to give you the option of discussing this first on your talk page. Best Regards. Pedro1999a |  Talk  10:07, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Dear Zoe. As you have not reponded I have gone to WP:ANI. Please see here.Pedro1999a |  Talk  09:54, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Your deletion on my user page

Please point me to the appropriate policy and procedure that supports your deletion on my user page. Until you do, I invite you to keep your fingers off of the delete page when you are near my page. Cheers, Jeffpw 18:54, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Indeed, I was about to comment on this myself. WP:UP does not seem to prohibit a statement of support for a political candidate. In any event, editing another contributor's userpage is against convention- would a request for the material to be removed on Jeffpw's Talkpage have not been more diplomatic? WJBscribe 18:58, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

• The picture is from wiki commons, so there is no free use issue. Further, if you had taken the time to look before you deleted it again, you would see that there is just a photo, with no caption. I said it once politely, now I shall be blunt: Stay the hell away from my user page, or I shall take this to WP:ANI. Being an administrator does not give you the right to have it your way all the time. Jeffpw 19:06, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

• Here's the diff, in response to your snotty message of a few minutes ago. Jeffpw 19:14, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

I am going to have to back Zoe on this one....I could see a small picture (that would be OK), but the picture takes up the entire page. I respect your right to choose either side you want, any candidate you want, and to show everyone your support for that candidate, but don't make the picture that huge. Size it down, add a tag like "I support Hillary, who do you support", so it doesn't seem like you are pushing a candidate on everyone, so everyone is happy:) - SVRTVDude 19:56, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Deletion of Article: Bonny Jain

In the specified article, Jain was mentioned as having won the National Geographic Bee, which is notable as there are articles on other National Geographic Bee winners. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by BearsWinXLI (talk • contribs) 22:12, 23 January 2007 (UTC).

Jain

I agree, Bonny Jain should not have been deleted.

I Agree

I agree with BearsWinXLI, Bonny Jain should not have been deleted. Winning a geograghy bee is a notable experience. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Metalitis121 (talk • contribs) 22:16, 23 January 2007 (UTC).

thanks

Thanks for restoring "Bonny Jain". I will cite ie, but I am a novice and am not quite sure how. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by BearsWinXLI (talk • contribs) 22:21, 23 January 2007 (UTC).

Re: Bonny Jain Citation

yes that answered my question. BearsWinXLI 22:47, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Just wanted to clarify...

...that there's no malicious intent behind my new userpage; I generally think you're a good admin. This whole thing just seems like a good illustration of the thin line between being bold and accidentally steamrolling an innocent bystander. Take it as a comparatively painless reminder of the value of the sentiments you voice in the philosophy on your userpage, and we'll all move on and get back to editing the encyclopedia. -Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 19:07, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Reply to Benchtop freeze dryer.jpg 2

This is the first prototype Benchtop freeze dryer I got from the manufactory in 2005 I took photos as a records of the product developing history.

Original Message------------ [edit] Image:Benchtop freeze dryer.JPG Please explain how you created this image. User:Zoe|(talk) 19:49, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Then I apologize. But they look like they came from a website or a catalog, and you gave an URL that you said the image was taken from which equates to the URL of the manufacturer. User:Zoe|(talk) 18:52, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

According to the images: Date and time of data generation 11:25, July 10, 2005 . You have had these images for a year and a half? What purpose did they serve you prior? User:Zoe|(talk) 06:06, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Millrock"

Thank you, and by the way...

Thank you for restoring the featured article discussions, and by the way, if you are an admin, why aren't you in Category:Wikipedia administrators? Just wondering. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 22:12, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, you don't need the userbox to add the category. But whatever. :) ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 14:30, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Your comment

I respectfuly suggest you follow the sequence of the converstion. BenAveling is obiously attempting to relight a fire that has run it's course. My comment was in responce to the content of his comment.--Sand Squid 22:39, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Please explain how my comment to BenAveling is a personal attack. It is obvious given the sequence and the time of his comment that he is trying to reinstigate an unpleasant discussion which is over and did not involve him. Where is Smokey the Bear when we need him?--Sand Squid 23:01, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Gerard Montgomery

I suggest speedy deleting the article under BLP, and if necessary it can be built up again without the existing history accessible. I also suggest for the same reason speedy deleting Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gerard Montgomery as it contain blatant accusations and assumptions of murder which cannot be left accessible or on view. Tyrenius 23:05, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

• To be honest I think speedy deletion is unnecessary, and what you have already done is fine. (Of course, I'm assuming AFD is sensible enough to delete the article...) If you want the full text of the relevant articles (there are 8 or so), I'd be happy to email them to you. It would be inappropriate to post them on Wikipedia. Christopher Parham (talk) 23:16, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
  • In the meantime I've speedied them both. They can always be undeleted but I think best not to. Tyrenius 23:22, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Sent. Cheers, Christopher Parham (talk) 23:22, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Chris, Can you email me the articles also.--Vintagekits 00:07, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Hey Zoe, sorry for not getting back to you on the source for those articles, had to run out for a bit. I found 'em thru a subscription service (questia) you might be able to see a preview w/ these links: [14] [15]. In this particular case i understand completely the skepticism about the source: BLP, possibility article was retracted, articles from a single publisher, etc. On the other hand, if this had been a regular article i would expect you to take my word for it even if there were no online version which you could access. I've seen other editors make up citations out of thin air, but am not in the habit of doing so myself.—eric 01:39, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Why were the other articles deleted aswell? see here--Vintagekits 04:05, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Any update?--Vintagekits 00:29, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Any update?--Vintagekits 07:10, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

The Nutty Professor

I just wanted to voice my support for your actions regarding the vandalizing professor (who isn't really a professor after all). It's also likely a misuse of the university's network. Anyway, keep up the good work. | Mr. Darcy talk 02:36, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

I'd also like to lend my support to you. It seems some are criticising you for defending wikipedia, and making sure that an academic, who should know better, and an entire class of students don't continually vandalise. Good work, keep it up. Thε Halo ^Θ 11:50, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

I don’t entirely agree with what you wrote, but I appreciate that you acted in the matter. Regarding the ongoing debate, there is an old rule that ‘for every action there is an equal and opposite criticism’. —xyzzy_n 23:41, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Fourthed, Wikipedia needs more people like you around to protect us from individuals like this one. Moreschi ^Deletion! 11:36, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Zoe, I also support you. I don't agree with everything, however, I know you were always acting completely with WP's best interest at heart and I find Jimbo's ANI comment quite bizarre and unfair. I think your request that Pierce agree not to repeat his assignment was quite reasonable and Jimbo's comment makes me feel he is out-of-touch with the frontline of anti-vandalism work. I'm not sure how you were expected to know what he had done days ago...I guess admins are now expected to be mind readers as well. 8-| Sarah 13:14, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Image Benchtop Freeze Dryers

This is the one of my news release to Pharmaceutical Online which is a website of VertMarkets, Inc. You may find my pictures show up in differendt pharmaceutical maganize website. All these images are released by me to be use by anybody and they are not copy righted. The owner of pharmaceutical online.com is VertMarkets, Inc. their picture source is from me. It is not "their" images!

Well let me took a picture of an unfinished machine this morning by the same camera just for you to stop your worry about the copy right of all these photos.

Picture of unfinished machine for Zoe.

Original Message---------------------------------------------- Could you please explain how your image showed up here? What is the copyright status of that image and of the others you made? Who is the website owner of pharmaceuticalonline.com and do you have the copyright right to put their images in other locations? User:Zoe|(talk) 19:06, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Millrock"

Re: Image Benchtop Freeze Dryers

I took photos from Millrock for news release and factory accetpance test. I did read the WP:COI.

Hi

I saw your comment on ANI. Unfortunately, I don't take any consideration for cross-wiki contact/suggestions on either side. THe two sites are completely seperate in my book, save when MONGO or someone brings it up trying to get me banned. Additionally, I haven't edited ED in about 3 weeks, save to remove spam from a particularly heinous ED ripoff and archive my talk page there. Milto LOL pia 20:54, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello

Please, dont revert the page again. I am arranging it. Thanks Zamorafan 04:48, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

harsh words

Dear Zoe, I understand that I spoke quite harshly on the noticeboard earlier, perhaps too harshly. I'd like to make it clear that I have only respect for the vast majority of what I've seen you do. While I question your judgement in this matter, I have no doubt that you acted from principle in what you believed to be the best interests of the encyclopedia.Proabivouac 04:50, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

apology

So have you made an apology as Jimbo requested? or are you just going to delete my question let you did to the last person who questioned your actions and describe them as "trash" in an edit summary? --Fredrick day 00:12, 28 January 2007 (UTC) We can do without uncivil comments here. Yuser31415 (Editor review two!) 00:19, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

I would say if someone owes an apology to someone, it's Jimbo Wales to Zoe. Once again, secret, private telephone calls seem to supercede the mission of Wikipedia and the relevance of the Foundation Board. Is a 501(c)(3) organization allowed, by tax law, to have one man running the entire show from behind the scenes? This is really getting creepy. --MuscleJaw SobSki 03:40, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Your user page

I have no intention of revert warring over this with you but stating that Jimbo approves of vandalism is downright silly. I strongly urge you to replace the message with something more reasonable. Theresa Knott | Taste the Korn 00:57, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. See strawman fallacy. --Liface 03:24, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Thirded. Badgerpatrol 19:19, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

The Pierce thing

Zoe: I know how hard you work to keep the project presentable to the average reader and that Jimbo's approach seems to disrespect your efforts. But some factors that might have gone into his rational include the fact that NIU is a fully-acredited instition of higher learning which has a much better claim at a 501(c)(3) tax status than the Foundation does and that, throughout history, nations have sometimes sacraficed finished product for the sake of highter education (you know what I mean: supplies that go back into University laboratories and classrooms). Jimmy has to guard against the mere appearance of the project and the Foundation being for something other than for educational purposes. On the other hand, even pages at libraries eventually get bored of re-shelving books, so if you take a break from RC patrolling, I can understand. -- 64.9.239.102 05:56, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Spam?

My posts is spam?? I was just expanding the Wikipedia's free MMORPGs section. There are many games there that are missed. What I did was NOT SPAM. AWP Lizard

I gave the link to the main site of the games. I dont know how I can provide a more important link. Are you saying that the games do not deserve a article?

AWP Lizard

With a few games yes. But with less popular games like zanpo or decide, i really cannot cite a "reliable" source. I dont see the problem, the information i'm giving is not false and the sites i'm giving is the game's actual home site.

I'll give you an example. For Zanpo there's only ONE site that i can find that talks about it and that's the GAME'S MAIN SITE.

AWP Lizard

I did the same thing with Chaser why wasen't that deleted on the spot?

AWP Lizard

another vote of confidence

Hi, just adding another note that I think you were in the right in the recent altercation, and that Jimbo's public attack on you was utterly out of line. I'm a researcher who has done some work in online communities, and it would not be permitted here to ask a class of students to vandalize websites as part of an assignment. Social-science research at universities, as with all other human-subjects research and including research assigned to students in classes, must go through an Institutional Review Board for approval, and I would be very surprised if an IRB were to approve such an assignment. --Delirium 07:05, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

OK...

So, is that an international thing?--Meant:idontknow 08:13, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Look: I've been writing this article for twelve days. What do you do after you second something? ¿ﯓﯕﷲﯿﮭﮨ ﮚﮠﭿﭱ?--Meant:idontknow

Reply:Look:Four billion years ago, our world was created from fire. I understand new things that occur here. The hands of people we've never known. But it's all there. It's all there. It's all there. IT'S ALL THERE. IT'S ALL THERE.--Meant:idontknow 08:31, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Deletion and undeletion and deletion ...

Hi, although I don't want to become a player myself, could you explain to me the rules of the game you're playing? I think it's called Thaddeus Young. All the best, <KF> 11:06, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

Thank you for your support in my recent RfA. I think valid criticisms were raised in areas that I need to work on, so I've withdrawn my name. I intend to work on addressing the concerns that were raised, and think I need to work contributing without allowing myself to become as stressed as I have been at times, which did result in some inappropriate behavior. Perhaps I may re-explore adminship at some point in the future, but it's a little early to consider that. Again, thank you. Fan-1967 21:39, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Yet more on Pierce

Jimbo has explained the terms of his agreement with Pierce. In my opinion, he did negotiate to avert future vandalism from Pierce’s classes. Since he did not say so beforehand, your overreaction about his attitude towards vandalism remains understandable within context, but I wonder if you would reconsider your conclusions. —xyzzy_n 00:51, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Zoe, I would second that. I know that your intentions were to protect the integrity of the encyclopaedia, and I feel that the public rebuke you received from Jimbo was undeserved. I was surprised at his reaction — not so much the fact that he wanted the matter dropped as that he did not take into account that you were trying to protect the encyclopaedia, that you were simply looking for an assurance that the assignment would not be repeated, and that you had absolutely no way of knowing that the matter had been resolved. Looking at Jimbo's contributions, I see that he had not edited for nearly four days before he made that post on AN/I, and then, after that single post, he made no more edits for over 39 hours, so it's quite likely that he was caught up with real life commitments and just didn't manage to post that the matter had been resolved, and then, a few days later, made a hasty post without taking the time to word it more graciously, or to consider that you couldn't have known it was resolved. That said, it's obvious that he doesn't approve of vandalism. Musical Linguist 01:28, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but Jimbo should know better how people are going to take their queue from him, and if he is going to be making "hasty posts" basically backhanding Zoe for doing what she thought was right, then I don't see why people are upset at Zoe's understandably hurt response. She puts up with crap from vandals and idiots for months, reverts garbage , tries to do the right thing, deals with people calling her a bad admin, and then gets publically rebuked by the leader of Wikipedia on a horribly badly decided issue. --Elaragirl^Talk|Count 05:38, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Is there any point in asking that this be let drop? That everyone just go find something else to do? - brenneman 05:49, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

File:MahadevShiva.jpg

Zoe achieves inner peace while feasting on the souls on vandals.

Just one small comment here. Zoe made clear that if Mr Pierce apologised and made clear that he wouldn't do this again, she would drop the matter. Ignoring for the moment the issue of whether the matter was hers to take up or drop in the first place, couldn't the same be said about Zoe's conduct here? If she apologised on her part for the way she approached the matter (not for doing something about it, but for the manner in which she did something about it - compare her approach to that of Jimbo and Georgewilliamherbert), then similarly, the matter could be laid to rest. I've copied this comment here from Jimbo's talk page. Jimbo's comment may have upset Zoe, but Zoe quite clearly wasn't listening to the concerns people had raised at ANI about how she was handling the matter. Jimbo was good enough to later apologise to Zoe. It would be nice if Zoe could recognise that an apology from her for the way she handled this would put the matter to rest and allow everyone to move on. Carcharoth 11:21, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Speaking only for myself, I don't need an apology from Zoe. She wasn't attacking any of us, only defending herself against the growing controversy (which I note wasn't present in the initial thread - it must have taken her by surprise.) Jimbo asked her to apologize to Mr. Pierce, which in my opinion she should do and maybe has done, but it doesn't have to and shouldn't be public. No ritual humiliation, please. I prefer to quote Jimbo: "Zoe is good." No doubt we've learned our lesson, and should move on.Proabivouac 11:33, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I thought he said "Zoe is god"? - brenneman 11:55, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm not suggesting that Zoe apologise for any attitude towards us, just the way she handled things with Mr Pierce. Proabivouac, I disagree that it doesn't need to be public. I really think that a brief, genuine acknowledgement from Zoe that she was heavy-handed in her approach, and she would do things differently next time, would help. Jimbo apologised publically. Zoe published what Mr Pierce said in those e-mails (though she has now deleted that page). If Zoe doesn't feel that she should do things differently next time, then this will all just repeat itself next time. I wouldn't normally make an issue out of this, but she said "We got here because he won't pledge not to do it again" - do we really want to end up saying "We got here because she won't pledge not to do it again"? Part of the controversy was that Zoe did not acknowledge those who had concerns with how she handled this (the "I don't think that "community concern" is opposed to my actions" bit). If she publically acknowledged that there were valid concerns about how she handled this, then it would be easier to move on. If she doesn't, then we will all still move on, but there will be no reassurance that it won't happen again. Moving on cannot happen without acknowledgment and understanding, on both sides, of the other side's arguments. Many people have acknowledged that Zoe does great work, and that Jimbo was hasty (but right) to say what he did, and that what Mr Pierce did was not acceptable and that he could have done things differently, but I don't see any corresponding acknowledgement from Zoe that she could have done things differently. Carcharoth 12:47, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I suggest we get on with writing an encyclopedia and review the situation in a month to see what it looks like then. Tyrenius 14:13, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

OK. Let's do that. Carcharoth 14:33, 29 January 2007 (UTC)