User talk:Tvoz/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

October 2006- May 2007 archive 1

_

Phil Ochs

Howdy Tvoz,

So far am pleased with the edits on the Phil Ochs Wiki entry. I'll be sure to stay tuned and see how it evolves over time.

Peace,

Geneisner 06:26, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Thanks - I think it's shaping up now too, and things are in better proportion. (The prominence of hat AFTRA note was bothering me!) Tvoz 06:36, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

	Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia! You recently added an external link to a fansite in an article. It has been removed because the link pointed to a non-encyclopedic source. Please refer to Wikipedia's policy on external links for more information. --Veinor (ヴエノル^(talk)) 04:33, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

my response: Whoa, wait a second - I didn't add that item, I reverted an arbitrary edit made by an anonymous editor, who then went in and posted an inane reason for deleting it. Why are you coming in 2 seconds after I reinstated it with this? Did you even look at that source? Also, how about discussion on the talk page before coming in with a hammer? I'm reinstating it. Tvoz 04:47, 16 November 2006 (UTC

It's a myspace fansite, two things that WP:EL forbids. Veinor (ヴエノル^(talk)) 04:54, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

I removed a level 3 warning template here per [[User:Birgitte|Birgitte§β]]'s suggestions on my talkpage that I had previously inserted. Veinor (ヴエノル^(talk)) 06:20, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Hey, cool it - I'd like an admin to come in here please - I'm asking for this to be discussed, and this editor is just ripping off an item (not a very important one, by the way) that has been standing on the page for a while. Tvoz 05:04, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

If you want an admin opinion, you should probably post at the Aministrator's noticeboard. {{helpme}} doesn't bring in an admin. Other options you could explore are filing an WP:RFC and further steps in Dispute resolution. Honestly however that external link does not belong, and I don't think any admin or RFC will give you a more favorable opinion. --Birgitte§β ʈ Talk 05:17, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

You are welcome. Feel free to ask me if you need any other dorections around here. It can be very confusing about where is the right place for answers. Alot of the people doing cleanup work, like removing improper links, work off long lists and tend to get impersonal as they continully leave the same messages again and again. It is really hard to stay fresh and not get short with people when continually getting negative reactions for doing unexciting but very necessary grunt work. I am sorry that you had a bad experience today. I've personally been on both ends of these things in my time here so I am a little more philosophical about it now. It is generally best to assume the cleanup person knows something you don't and ask about the policy backing up what they did, which in this case is WP:EL. I understand that the warning about blocking you while answering your question doesn't really help things, but I always try cut people doing that kind of work extra slack. --Birgitte§β ʈ Talk 05:59, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

OK, let me see how clearly I can explain this. At Wikipedia, fansites and links to Myspace sites are generally not allowed. There are exceptions to the fansite rule that this could possibly fall under, given its popularity, but the MySpace rule still covers it. It states that links to social networking sites (which MySpace is) are not allowed unless "mandated by the article itself." Basically, they're only allowed if they need to be mentioned specifically (e.g., for criticism). Therefore, the link was viewed as inappropriate. I apologize if i came off as impersonal; after a while, you just start to run on autopilot when you're cleaning up articles. Veinor (ヴエノル^(talk)) 06:20, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome!

Sometimes I think there's too many help pages to be helpful. There's just so much to learn here!

Where do you live that you don't observe DST? I live in Indiana, and we just switched over this year. I hate it. -- Merope 02:28, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

Murray the K

Great job on the Murray the K article! I didn't know his son but we went to the same high school, McBurney School, and I did get to meet Murry the K once when he visited the lunchroom. That would have been pre-Beatles, say 1962, but he was already a big name in New York, and I especially remember the collecctions of oldies - meaning 1950's hits - he had on LP records - great at dances. Revmoran 19:07, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

I believe his name was Neil Kaufman - he was several years younger and I only really knew he was a student because of the time his father came to school - which was quite an event. Revmoran 17:18, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Cat Stevens

Good work : ) Mrtea (talk) 03:38, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Hi man, thanks for trying to help, anyway, i took the picture from the official Rolling Stone website:

http://www.rollingstone.com/artists/catstevens/photos/collection/photo/17/large

it says down that the picture was taken by "Annie Leibovitz"

Good luck Q8-falcon 20:09, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Bronx Zoo

Hello Tvoz,

Regarding Bronx Zoo and the Yankees; For non-Yankee fans/anybody whose unfamiliar with NY Yankees, "for the book about the Yankees, see Sparky Lyle", it's seems not in a right place/unclear, since Bronx Zoo and Yankees has no relation beside both in Bronx, New York. You cleared the problem, by adding the book's name in last edit. I thought it was a joke, my apology.--Stavenn 11:46, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

re:Email

From what I can remember you had put {{subst:promophoto}} instead of {{promophoto}} which had the effect of copying the entire template including the bits that should be included (wrapped in <noinclude> </noinclude>) in the image page. The upshot of all this was that the images were included in a number of categories that they don't belong in i.e. "Unfree image templates". If you have a question about a specific image, please drop a note at my User talk page. Megapixie 11:54, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

No problem - I've been here over a year and I still come across things that are confusing... Megapixie 22:27, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Clockers book.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Clockers book.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 05:04, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Science Nobel Ranking

Tvoz,

I figured that I'd respond to your question on the Bx Sci talk page so any of the curious could see the answer, but here's what I posted there:

According to the table on the Nobel Laureates by country page, 7 laureates is the number shared by India and Spain, which are tied for 21st. I'm assuming that 10th was inaccurate in 2003, but I don't know what source. I figured that there would be at least some curiosity about this, which is why I included the reference when I made the change.

Feel free to drop a line if there's any questions, or just post them there, I'll keep watching.

--Prainog 02:04, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

Unspecified source for images

archived: Image:Reggiejackson.jpg, Image:Lou Gehrig.jpg, Image:Yogi larsen.jpg, Image:Mickeymantle.jpg, Image:Rogermaris.jpg, Image:Thurman Munson.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:MurrayWINS.jpg. I notice the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you have not created this file yourself, then there needs to be a justification explaining why we have the right to use it on Wikipedia (see copyright tagging below). If you did not create the file yourself, then you need to specify where it was found, i.e., in most cases link to the website where it was taken from, and the terms of use for content from that page.

If the file also doesn't have a copyright tag, then one should be added. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{Non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair_use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. cholmes75 ^{(chit chat)} 14:42, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

Edit

Hi TVOZ, I edited your comment header (In BX Science). I know that's not the nicest thing, but something seemed very uncool/unfair about you using the name of a discussee in a heading. I don't want an edit war, but you are coming across as the self-ordained "keeper of". I realize you are just trying to maintain order - I've done it myself - but I also want to mention how it looks from my side. 65.57.106.28 02:41, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, I responded to this on User talk:65.57.106.28. It's not "not the nicest thing" - editing someone else's comment on a Talk page is out of line. Tvoz 06:40, 4 November 2006 (UTC)

Nomination for candidacy

Hi Tvoz,

The Science article is probably not ready, not yet developed to the level, to be nominated for featured article candidate. See Bronx Sience discussion.Bxsstudent 19:11, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

yes, I agree totally - I was not the one who nominated it, and I don't think it's ready to be a featured article either. Tvoz 19:18, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Cat name piping

_ _ Two errors! In two months? You're going exhaust your quota in, um, ... uh, .... How many years does 10,000 months make? [Smile]
_ _ The Cat pipes are a bit obscure, as wiki markup goes, and bios are where it most often pinches. If you run out of interesting places to screw things up [wink], you might consider patrolling Col... names and/or Joy... ones for uninverted or unpiped names ... now that you're one of the initiates! But on the other hand, don't let suggestions like mine interfere with the instructions of your assignment editor. Keep up the good work!
--Jerzy•t 03:27, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
That technique (or, in tricky cases that someone else has already dealt with thoroly, checking the hdgs on the bio's talk page) is sometimes necessary, tho common sense is often sufficient, and in fact see Talk:Hu Ge for a pathological case! However, IMO the single most important factor (should have mentioned earlier; i think you're the first to whom i've offered the thot that has led us to this discussion) is described in something i wrote; finding it yourself may amuse and edify you, but feel free to say "cut the bullshit", and i will take a very short break to provide you the lk (which i should save somewhere anyway, for use until i can rewrite the contrib as part of the non-talk pg i was commenting about).

Click to my user page (but open a new window, so you have the rest of the directions in front of you.
Click on "User contributions" from the built-in "toolbox" on that page.
(If you're using the WP Pop-up Tools, as i eventually realized i should, you know how to achieve the effect of those two steps without displaying my user page.)
In the "Namespace:" selector, choose "Wikipedia talk", and click "Go".
Use your browser's Find function to locate my last (i'm almost certain) contribution to any page in that namespace that has "Categ" in its title.
Altho that now removed contrib also exists in an Archive of that page (where it is addressable by section via wiki-lk that i'll place here if you ask), at the moment the quickest way to find it is to
1. note the date of my contrib,
2. click on "history" for the page i edited,
3. find the entry for my edit by time-stamp sequence, and
4. click on that time-stamp to see the page exactly as i left it.
Click on the first entry of the ToC on that old version (to get just past the end of the probably long ToC).
Scroll up slightly to see the end of the ToC.
Click on the last entry, which should be the hdg of my contrib.
Sit in Full Lotus position for five minutes to achieve a state of alert calm.
Dig into some experimental observations i recorded, which will save you some confusion re various editors' treatments and mistreatments of CJK names, and maybe be more specifically helpful.

As i say, don't hesitate to ask for the shortcut (which, on reflection, probably would have been quicker to find and pass you than to write these instructions [Shrug]).
--Jerzy•t 17:51, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
OK, here: Wikipedia talk:Categorization#Alphabetization of articles within a Category. (Actually, i wasted time trying to find the Archive page in question; maybe i was thinking of something else, or maybe it got removed from the Archive in order to revive it on the talk page: it got a comment i had not seen, which also means it's probably premature (rather than overdue) for going onto Wikipedia:Categorization.) I'm going to comment further in that section (probably irrelevantly to the purposes i raised it with you for), but (hopefully) i'll restrain myself for the next 36 hours.
--Jerzy•t 18:24, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
Responses to two of yours:

Yeah, i was wrong about "my last contrib".
Be scared. Be very scared.

--Jerzy•t 18:38, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Answer to your question.

Not easily. You can request a checkuser, but you have to have a pretty good justification for doing so. Sorry I'm not more helpful! -- Merope 20:02, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

Support for Bronx Science GA collaboration

The Bronx Science article had been nominated for Good Article Collaboration of the Week by another editor. This should a significant step toward its collaborative development as asserted by Ross. Please add your suppport at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Good_Article_Collaboration_of_the_week.Bxsstudent 00:12, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Bronx Science

Hi, thank you for notifying me. The article was delisted from WP:GA page. However, what is strange for me is User:Qazws11 nominated the article for the collaboration of the week after (s)he passed the article for GA. The GA COTW is used to drive an article to get a GA status. So it's useless if an article is nominated for GA COTW after it gets GA status. Furthermore, since I re-listed the article at WP:GAC, I raised question at WP:GACo#Bronx_High_School_of_Science. Do you want to nominate at WP:GAC or as GA COTW? Cheers. — Indon (reply) — 09:49, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Yes, you are right, I was wrong. Another GA reviewer has explained in the GA COTW page. Let's see if the article passes GA, then the nomination can continue. Sorry. — Indon (reply) — 18:16, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Ah, ok - the reason I raised it is I saw no point in pursuing GACo of the week if it was going to be shot down because the GA status was removed. So I think where we stand now is that the article is nominated for Good Article status, awaiting reviews, and we'll take it from there. ThanksTvoz 18:21, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Tvoz for removing the dentist yet again. BTW, my alumni yearbook tells me that the most prevalent occupation for my class (late 1950s) was ob/gyn. Useful, but not up to the Nobel-ish pretensions of BHSS. Bellagio99 15:03, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

So why not put in a short note about the informal practice of singing "Oh Baby" after the song lyrics. It was the practice, 1955-1959 when I went there. I forebear to do it myself, as I don't know if it has continued, or until when it continued. Bellagio99 13:37, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Tvoz, Are you sure that Bobby Strom was the 2nd biggest winner on $64K Question. I wasn't so, so I put in the vague "early winner". Unless you are Bobby (or Steven), how do you know? Too lazy or hard pressed (pick one) to do research on it. Here it is midnite....

Bellagio99 03:50, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

From Tvoz (I hope I haven't violated a Wikinorm here, but it seems silly to have conversations split between 2 Talk sites)

No, I am not "sure" of anything, but will do a 5 minute Google stalk. And I didn't even know that Pearl Strom existed (I assume mother of the 2 Strom boys). So let's let your's stand unless I come up otherwise. I was class of '59 along with Steven, btw.

Bellagio99 04:01, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

[1] and [2] I think shows it, if I'm reading it correctly. As for Pearl - you know, after all these years I'm not completely sure if she was their mother - I think so, but again, I wouldn't swear to it. Bobby was a year ahead of my sister and I was a few years later. Tvoz |talk

From Bellagio99:

I just checked the 2 URLs, and Bobby seems to be the highest 64K winner. I went back to the millionaires, etc. Anyway, it's late, I may have missed something, so highest or 2nd highest, it's your call. Good nite. Bellagio99 04:23, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Look at p 2 - Teddy Nagler or Nadler (don't have it open) seems to have been #1, with Bobby #2 - I think. Tvoz |talk 04:27, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Yup, you're right. I even remember Nadler. Musta missed it. Another signal that it it is time to shut down NOW. Bellagio99 04:36, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Tvoz, Listening to an oldies station last nite, I heard Danny and the Juniors' "At the Hope" (1958) which is the obvious source for the irreverent addition of "Oh Baby" to the Bronx Science "anthem". So I added a note to the anthem section of the BxHSS article saying that -- please check and edit. My 1959 class certainly sung it I don't know about 1958. Bellagio99 14:39, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

ISBN formats

I'm not sure about this - I've seen them on Wikipedia with and without the hyphens. John Lennon is the one you changed tonight. Tvoz 05:06, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

Don't worry, this is the ISBN standard way of displaying them. Rich Farmbrough 07:22 23 November 2006 (UTC).

Ochs again

Answered at Talk:Phil Ochs. - Jmabel | Talk 00:18, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

"…grew up on the same music you did…": I grew up on such a variety of music! My father was the one into folk—I'm a second-generation red diaper baby, he had the Almanac Singers & Paul Robeson 78s from his teen years, for example, which I heard as a child—but he was also into outside jazz (one of the few people of Coltrane's own generation who thought Trane got better and better as he got more avant garde) and was one of the older Beatles' fans (he traveled a lot, and brought Beatles & Stones records back from the UK when they were still a bit of a novelty). He and my mom both liked Broadway show tunes, and she liked mainstream jazz-influenced pop (Sinatra, Andrews Sisters) but also listened to WBAI and might have been one of the few people who thought early synthesizer music ("of the computers, by the computers, and for the computers") was listenable. And starting in about 1964 I discovered WMCA, which was mostly Top 40 at the time, but also went way deeper into garage rock than most stations of the time: when Lenny Kaye brought out Nuggets, I already knew half of what was on it. And then I went to college and wanted to work at the radio station, and the only opening was the classical show. - Jmabel | Talk 00:46, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

"…So come all you good travelers / And fellow travelers, too…"

So, I take that we are not only the same age and similar backgrounds but also grew up near one another & listened to the same radio stations? I don't remember B. Mitchell Reed (before my time?), but I was certainly listening to WMCA before Alex Bennett got there (and well into his tenure, and even when they first went talk radio). Actually, I probably remember their one talk show from the mid-60s—Barry Gray—better than any of the DJs. Gray had an amazing selection of guests, everyone from the editors of Screw to Herman Badillo. Bennett was certainly the best WMCA DJ I remember but I'm thinking before his time, "Home of the Good Guys", playing the Count Five next to Staff Sgt. Barry Sadler and Johnny Cash next to the Stones, where a "Golden Oldie" often meant six months ago. Top 25 radio—not even Top 40. Other DJs I remember were Harry Harrison and Gary Stevens. Does that date it pretty precisely? - Jmabel | Talk 07:54, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Alex Bennett: Anyone who played Terry Riley's "Rainbow in Curved Air" on a rock station is alright by me, poser politics notwithstanding. - Jmabel | Talk 20:10, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Century: Several have the year only in the title. Two leap to mind: the Bee Gees "New York Mining Disaster, 1941" and "Aladdin Sane (1913-1938-197?)", which I used for 1938. And there are some instrumentals. - Jmabel | Talk 20:13, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Cat Stephens

The Cat Stephens quote consists of him just talking while he's thinking about what to say, annd he finally finds it and says it: Christians have all this stuff in their religious books too. By including the whole quote, it make it less likely that people actually read what he finally got around to saying. I think the rest of the section makes it clear that his opinion is mixed and flexible (yes to killing Rushdie, no to vigilantism, maybe to non-leathal vigilantism, etc). This quote clearly does not contain a retraction, but it does ask christians to think about his position in their own terms. So that what I thought was the important part. I'm not sure why I even left those first two sentences there the first time. JeffBurdges 04:11, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Okay, I'll just be happy with the fact that the sentence I are about is the last line in the quote. JeffBurdges 04:55, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Gibb brothers

Thank you - the "he was 53 years old" had to go, and I feel honoured. Of all the edits I've seen recently, it is one of my favourites. On the bright side it didn't say "unfortunately he was only 53 years old". I've never seen the "unfortunately" and the "only" used in one sentence and my head will surely explode if ever I do. I thought I'd take a peek at the Andy Gibb article, and sure enough, my worst fears were confirmed, so I decided to match your edit with this one. Very satisfying! :-) Rossrs 07:29, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Blame me, that's fine. I've been told by a few editors that we should remember not everyone is good at math, to which I asked, "does that mean we should be intentionally aiming Wikipedia at people who are not good at math?", and the answer I got was "yes, we should." I was a little surprised. Then I said "a lot of people can't read but we keep writing articles", and nobody replied to that one. I suspect that by then only the people who can't read were still hanging around, probably hoping that I would upload a picture, and the people who aren't good at math had gone, which was unlucky because apparently they can read, and they could have commented. It would have been nice. I get the impression that you can read, plus you're good at math. That's an unusual combination. Let's see how quickly you get reverted. I commend your fortitude, even if you are planning on offering me up to the angry mob! Cheers! Rossrs 11:23, 30 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, however a day is made is not important. I'm pleased you like it. :-) Cheers Rossrs 07:10, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Re: Amish vandal

I decided not to block that IP. This is a difficult case, but I decided it was pointless to block an IP several hours after it last vandalizes. I am sure that it will be blocked for an even longer period if it vandalizes again. Academic Challenger 04:25, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar

For good humour and excellence in editing, I present this barnstar to the multitalented and admirably coherent Tvoz. Rossrs 06:26, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

Images

Hi Tvoz, well I don't agree entirely with all of Wikipedia's uberrestrictive policies either, despite my recent spats with some other editors, but I think that the way to change a policy is to discuss it, not simply disregard it - I understand our policy errs on the side of caution rather than applying fair use doctrine to the letter. Anyhow I think the big question with promo photos is this - can the image be replaced with a free alternative that would provide the same information? Often the answer is yes, especially with a living celebrity because it is theoretically possible to get a free image (not necessarily easy, but possible). The difference with a dead celebrity is that the number of photos in existence is finite and if a free image doesn't exist already it's too late to create it. Lately a school of thought has emerged here that contends images of dead celebrities are more allowable and less likely to be challenged than images of living celebrities. I think the image you've found is therefore as acceptable as many other images that are regarded as acceptable. I would upload it, ensure you link to source, but most importantly provide a fair use rationale. Then .... double check that a "replaceable tag" has not automatically been applied to the image. Something has been changed recently in the upload process that automatically adds the tag, but I don't know under what circumstances it's added. I think if you choose a licence it doesn't like, it automatically tags it. If the tag is added, you should remove it because it wouldn't apply. I've been adding generic fair use rationales to previously existing images of dead celebrities. A couple of examples are Image:Fredginger.jpg (Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers - I got a bit specific with this image because I wanted it to cover use in both articles), and Image:Gloria3.jpg (Gloria Swanson - this is more generic and I've applied this to numerous similar images of various people.) Let me know if there's anything you need a hand with. As for Commons - I've uploaded some screenshots from public domain films on there. I haven't spent much time there and I'm not as familiar with how it all works - I find it a little scary to tell the truth! Happy uploading. You could really be mischievous and choose the Witch Hazell image instead. It's very .... ummmm.... nice? No? Cheers Rossrs 05:17, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

PS. I've also seen some discussions that suggest we should extend this idea to include living celebrities if we're looking for an image that represents a person at their period of fame. The example given was Bettie Page an 80+ year old woman who was a popular pinup 50 years ago. The question there is - do we want a picture of 80+ year Bettie (preferably with her clothes on) to show what she looks like, or do we want 25 year old Bettie in a bikini to show what she looked like when she was famous? No decision on that one, but it's interesting isn't it? Rossrs 05:23, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

ryan d.---senior at Bronx Science

I added some clarification in the 'collaborations section' like you asked. Thanks for the words of advice! I'm waiting for the Early Decision word back from a 'large name' school. I am nervous and excited, and most of the stress comes from not knowing where I will be going for the next four years of my life. I rest in the fact that I'm going somewhere, and I will make the best of wherever I am. I will certainly miss Science, though. I've been involved in so many amazing things, and have met so many amazing people------for me, I will never forget the opportunity that Bronx Science gave me. I'm sure you feel the same.

--ryan

PS. i'm still crossing my fingers that the edleville murders "surface". ha!

User:WeinsteinWarWolf

Regarding your request at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism User:WeinsteinWarWolf was blocked (see: [3]). However blocked users can continue to edit their talkpage, which is what he or she has been doing since. Rockpocket 09:04, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

You're welcome. He or she has been blocked indefinitely, but will probably return under another account. They usually do. Rockpocket 09:09, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Warning template - specification

Glad to help - put the usual {{subst:test4}} for example, but after the test4 put a vertical line - | - and the page name without a Wiki link (it does that itself). Giving you, {{subst:test4|John Lennon}} which will include in the warning, ...as you did to John Lennon.... or similar. Kev Liverpool Scouse 15:09, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes I saw the suggestion on Talk:John Lennon, and see that it's been given protection, which is welcome news - God knows how much reverting would be getting done otherwise! Liverpool Scouse 20:57, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
- Yep, I did have a check earlier today and expected to see loads of reverts on the history so I was pleasantly suprised! I think it hasn't really attracted as much media attention this year as last year, with it being the 25th anniversary last year and all. But indeed - a toast John, 26 years on and still as influential as ever. Liverpool Scouse 20:08, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
  - It's sad that he got killed over there when he loved it so much due to the freedom he had to wander the streets without being harrassed by fans too much. Having said that, Chapman was so obsessed he more than likely would have travelled to any other city had Lennon chosen to live there. New York has done him proud though - The Strawberry Fields park and Imagine memorial are perfect ways to remember him. Liverpool Scouse 20:40, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Re: WP:AIV

On closer review, I've decided to block the IP. Thanks for your time. :) Luna Santin 20:27, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

TNG

Thanks. Shooting self not needed. All stuff added to that article was from the Companion and the Gene Roddenberry authorised biography, which I cited. Plan to add an awful lot more stuff in future : the problem is where to start! Morwen - Talk 21:25, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

warning: Systematic repeated violation of Wiki rules WP: Living

One more violation of Wiki rules and you will be reported as a repeat violator. 23:38, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

The user who added the above threat, User:Rjensen, has been blocked by User:Khoikhoi for 31 hours for WP:3RR. ProhibitOnions ^(T) 10:53, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

I'm attempting mediation -- Talk:Nelson Rockefeller -- Merope 15:08, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

This threat is unfounded. Tvoz 19:01, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Megan Marshak

Hey, Tvoz, you might also be interested to learn that Rjensen has censored the Megan Marshak article as well. Granted, the revious text needed a lot of work, but we've got 31 hours... Regards, ProhibitOnions ^(T) 11:32, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Be that as it may, the model here is bold, revert, discuss. Take it to Talk, please, and achieve consensus. Your wording, if nothing else, needs work. Guy (Help!) 18:40, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
Since you seem unclear, Nelson Rockefeller. Guy (Help!) 19:25, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Barack Obama

I don't get it either to be honest with you, alot of things about how Wiki is run makes no sense to me, but i'll just leave it be. I don't want to argue with anybody on here, i'd prefer to be constructive. Just H 15:53, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Lennon

Absolutley NO problem about edit wars with me :) A lot of us have been working on the McCartney page, and over the last few weeks we have been trimming things on it (have a look and see what you think...) It's scary how finite a page has to be to get an FA. After the McCartney page gets an FA (which a few of us think it will) there have been suggestions that Lennon may be the next. This does not mean that hordes of us will descend on Lennon, but only a group of Beatles fans that can improve it - with the aim of getting an FA. We all get along really well, and we have had a good time working on 'Macca' together. You should join us (BTW, I'm not a scout leader, lol). --andreasegde 21:23, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

References? Uhh... we've got lots (and lots) of them on 'Macca' - even the "hard-edged", and "baby-faced" ones. Copy the book page references over, but don't forget to copy the book 'References' as well, or it won't make sense. Good work on protecting the Lennon page, BTW... --andreasegde 21:39, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Freddie

I didn't write that bit, but it is true. I only put the first paragraph in, as I didn't have time to do more. Re: The links - Spitz is a respected author, and there is also a web link there to the 'Liverpool Lennons'. Other sources are also available on the Web. Wait until the bit where Freddie takes John to Blackpool, because he wanted to emigrate (with John) to New Zealand, and John had to choose between Freddie and Julia... heavy stuff for a young child. --andreasegde 12:14, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, the story about Julia and Freddie (who was always known as Alf by the family BTW) being musical is true. Julia played Banjo, and Freddie did some other musical stuff. I was too lazy to go back and read through the pages, but I will... --andreasegde 16:34, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

Nice to hear from you

I've commented on the Bee Gees page. I strongly feel that the song was never released as a single, and in terms of their careers it's a bit "so what?" But it could be someone's favourite song.... I sense that you are weary of some of the attitudes here, and I know how you feel. I've been struck with a barrage of criticism and rudeness here recently that I find difficult to comprehend because it seems to have come from out of the blue, and from people I never expected it from. Actually, I shouldn't find it too difficult - I deal with "the public" on a daily basis. :-) With the leadup to Christmas I've been finding that I've had less time available to spend here. I think I may sign off for now, get myself a nice Thai takeaway and watch a movie or two. Thank you for the very nice acknowledgement on your user page. I was incredibly pleased; it made my day! Cheers. Rossrs 07:30, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

your words

thanks, Tvoz. Your words mean a lot to me. Unfortunately, I was deferred from Princeton. It was early decision, and I cannot fully describe my emotions. I would have liked the process to be over today, but, unfortunately, it will not be. I am putting the finishing touches on my other applications, and will have them out by the end of the week. I wasnt flat out rejected, so I feel a little bit better that I will be considered in the regular application pool. Overall, I hope you are right----that it doesnt matter where I go. Whats important is what i Do wherever I am. (At least thats what I tell myself). Now, the waiting game until March.--Rocketrye12 04:26, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

McCartney

Good comment about the Linda section (what a difference a fresh pair of eyes can make). I rearranged the sentence and it makes sense now. --andreasegde 14:51, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Well spotted! I have moved it under the 'Family life' header, which seems to make more sense (as that section is an overview). It's great to have you on board with us. --andreasegde 18:34, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

I have just read your comments on the Lennon talk page, and I instantly felt like giving you a Barnstar. (I think I will, at some point... :) You are a 'breath of fresh air', and I am really looking forward to us all working together. --andreasegde 21:38, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

This is funny, but true: If you win something (and you are English) you are 'English'. If you are Scottish, Welsh, or Northern Irish, you are 'British'. It's a bugger, but such is the mentality of the Brits/English (of which I am one, BTW) although I disagree with the idea, having a tiny little bit of Scottish ancestry myself... --andreasegde 01:04, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Check out Wikipedia talk:WikiProject The Beatles. --andreasegde 01:11, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Painful

I truly, and deeply, apologise. I am absolutely not sexist, but one encounters so many on these pages. I normally write she/he when talking about editors. I will now take the hair shirt out of the closet and wear it for 24 hours. Do I feel like a moron? Doh! --andreasegde 01:26, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

No, I'm not that sensitive (scratch, scratch) and it's good to have you working with us (scratch, scratch... :) What makes me laugh is that I should have known you were not a bloke, because you were too intelligent and reasonable on the Lennon pages (I'm not joking about this) and then you spotted stuff that none of us have ever noticed on Macca's. (Whack - ouch!... :) --andreasegde 12:16, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Botbrains

No problem. Rich Farmbrough, 09:51 18 December 2006 (GMT).

Spooky!

Whoooo! Your'e not gonna believe this, but I've just been looking at all of Phil's stuff on You Tube! I log in an the message bar goes up, an I think It's Sir Sean on the wind up from Spain, but no a Phil Ochs fan!! I suppose you spotted my edit to "Talking Birmingham Jam", an thought, "how did a limey know that one?" Yeah, I Love Phil Ochs - Genius! I once met an English singer songwriter in a club who was a good friend of his, and he wrote a wonderful song about him, but I can't remember his name if my life depended on it.

Well, I never did, it really is very nice to meet you! Very best wishes, Vera, Chuck & Dave 20:54, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

You can go on for as long as you like Queen! Wow, you used to go to his concerts? Oh WOW! No it wasn't Bragg, he had a really great voice Like Phil's I'll get it one of these days! I'm so pleased that your children know him, there really is hope for this world after all! Sorry this has taken so long, but I'm recovering from an accident an can't type very fast at the moment, but it's getting better! Yes, we do need him now - Tony Blair, find yourself an another country to be part of! Best wishes, Vera, Chuck & Dave 21:37, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

He would have made mincemeat (hamburger) out of the pair of em! I was just eating dinner and our "prince" was just on the news, and is bangin on about IRAN now!!!!. Yes I'd love the link, can't seem to find it. Take care, Vera, Chuck & Dave 22:51, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Got Him! Harvey Andrews. Vera, Chuck & Dave 01:04, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi Tvoz, thanks very much for tying, no wonder I had no luck, lets hope that your husband will be able to talk him round, I'd love to see that, I've never heard him interviewed. I'm not sure, but I don't think he ever played over here, perhaps you may know? I looked for "Hey Sandy" on youtube, but the only Andrew's song they have is "Soldier", which for some strange reason will not link, it also seems to be running to fast, making his voice sound higher and by the comments left, seems sadly to have been hijacked (or misunderstood) by the Right-they never "get" irony, do they? You went to Kent State? I am not worthy!! Take care, Vera, Chuck & Dave 13:52, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Please see this

Here [[4]] Simbirskin 09:33, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Reverting text on other people's talk pages

The account that goes by the name of "Sir Nicholas de Mimsy Porpington" came onto my user talk page and removed this message ("Please see this: Here [[5]] User:Simbirskin|Simbirskin 09:33, 22 December 2006 (UTC)") that was meant for me. He did this without even bothering to explain himself or send me an email, as if I just wouldn't notice it. This is unacceptable behavior and I am reporting him. I do not care who the sender of the above note is - it is up to me whether I read it or take it seriously or act on it, not someone else. Stay away from my talk page. Tvoz 19:56, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

And apparently he also reverted the text that this was pointing to, on yet another person's talk page, but it is retrievable. I'm not commenting right now on the content of the material - I am strenuously objecting to his coming onto my talk page and removing text without even attempting to contact me. Tvoz 19:57, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

LOL!

No, just: "Stupid Scouse Get, GM"! He's correct a GM is conferred, but an MBE is an award you can't appoint an appointment. "MBE award" gets one million, one hundred & ten thousand Google hits! Cheers, Vera, Chuck & Dave 23:29, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

I like your edit, I've just asked B Z Bod to have a look at it! The problem is, that an MBE is Awarded but by the token it is an appointment. Him 12? I doubt it, me 10 year old baby girls are more grown up than him! One of em was putting in page numbers for Sir Sean when me shoulder was really hurting and I could hardly move. Cheers! Vera, Chuck & Dave 01:02, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

I also like the edit. Mind you, if this article is going to go for FA then it will need to be resolved - enjoy Christmas, have a break, and then hunt the blessed thing down and get a definitive answer - or it will be failed.LessHeard vanU 01:08, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Re; Vera, Chuck & Dave GM

If you want to know why he got a GM I suggest you look at item 6 on his talk page...B Z Body

OH NO!

Stop it! You've started me off again, me shoulder's killin me! What a Country eh? Nowhere like it in the world - I loved it when Joe ( Crestville) came in- 3,"Disagreeing with a Fireman" and P.S. "Some Yanks are cool"! I think he was refering to you, you are dead cool, and very funny! I wish you and all your Family a very Merry Christmas and a Happy and Peaceful New Year. Very best wishes, Vera, Chuck & Dave 11:40, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Pint

I tried it before, they always spill in transit. And me a barman, eh? Merry Chrizzmuzz.--Crestville 12:36, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Sorry, didn't realise you was a girl. Too easy to assume everyone on wikipedia is a lad. Is that your minority status then?--Crestville 12:45, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Season's Greetings

Thank you for your message, and a very Merry Christmas and happy holidays to you too. I've had one "White Christmas" in my life and the rest I've spent in sunny, tropical Brisbane. To me, a "White Christmas" seems kind of odd, but luckily I've grown up on an unhealthy diet of American TV and cinema, so I can buy into the whole Bing Crosby thing without stretching my imagination too far. As a matter of fact, I have my airconditioner turned to "Arctic blizzard" right now, so it's kind of chilly. I have to ask - where are you? Wherever it is, I hope it's fun and you have a fine time. Best wishes. Rossrs 13:51, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

New York! I would never have guessed! I must admit I was surprised to see Col Joye mentioned on your user page. An Australian icon (more or less) but I wonder how many people in New York have heard of him! I dare say a lot of people in Brisbane have never heard of him either ;-) Rossrs 13:57, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

And you started his page too, I notice, and that's great. Rossrs 14:02, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

The Col Joye article looks fine to me. It is a bit sketchy, but it's more than a stub. It looks accurate to me, but I'm no expert. The only major event I know of that could be added, concerns an accident he had a few years ago when he fell off his roof and landed on his head. Fortunately he didn't live in a 10th floor apartment ;-) The media in Australia started writing what can only be described as obituaries, but he failed to oblige. He's fully recovered and he acted as both the headline act and MC for a major rock tour a couple of years ago. (That's an interesting article in itself and one I'll definitely do) I've seen his performance on DVD and it was very good, I must say, though I'm not a "fan". I'll see what I can find and maybe add to the article. Rossrs 12:05, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

After a bit of research - he fell, not off his roof, but out of a tree and it wasn't "a few years ago", it was 1990. I think the only bit I got right was the "I'm no expert" part. Rossrs 13:18, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Kidnapped

I agree with you 100%. Kidnapped was a great show and it is a shame it didn't last long enough on NBC. I hope it gets picked up by another station as well. Happy Holidays Sox23 02:45, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

mello yello, socialities, etc

Some anonymous IP had deleted that entry, and I was not sure if it belonged there. Is it a joke? Anyway, I figured that, without justification, something should not be deleted by anonymous'es. i didn't look deeply into the history, nor did I investigate the situation further. is the joke on me? Is it vandalism? If it is, I put it Back in by accident! oops!--Rocketrye12 14:50, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Happy Gregorian New Year to you, too!

Thanks for the note! As for blocking policy, it is true that a user can edit his or her own userpage and talk page during the block. The reason for this is to allow the user to request that another admin review the block by placing a {{unblock}} template on the talk page. The language on the blocked page (which you can read here) says only that "abuse of this template" can result in the page being protected. However, users who use their talk/user pages for disruption while blocked (personal attacks, nonsense edits along the lines of "You can't stop me!", etc.) will end up with protected pages and possibly a longer block. Basic policies about blocking can be found at WP:BLOCK. If you've noticed a user under a block who is using his or her talk page in a disruptive manner, you can report it at WP:AIV and an admin will evaluate the situation. It's one of the areas of WP policy that's kinda vague and falls under the "I know it when I see it" category. (Unless I'm mistaken, and there's a page all about this that I have yet to discover.) I hope that helps; let me know if you want more information or links. Cheers. -- Merope 02:51, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi!

Please check your mail. – SAJordan ^talk_contribs 22:03, 29 Dec 2006 (UTC).

Obama

You're welcome to try listing at WP:RFP if you like. Frankly, I'm not sure if there's been enough recent activity (even with today's vandalism) for an admin assessing it to semi-protect. Maybe I'm wrong. A longer semi-protect would be my first choice, obviously. For that to happen, the article should probably remain unprotected until after Obama announces for '08 one way or another (January, hopefully) while the vandalism edits pile up. But a short term request for now might not be a bad idea. · j e r s y k o talk · 05:11, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Tvoz, I expect we are both looking for the same thing, perhaps we just have (only slightly) different philosophies about how to get there. I believe semi-protection status weakens the article's credibility and undermines Wikipedia's unique voice as the "free encyclopedia that anyone can edit". It's the main reason I consciously choose to make my contributions here, and not elsewhere. And when Wikipedia becomes a burden, I take a break from editing and trust others to do what's needed. Even with the increased activity, the Barack Obama article has been a supportive community, with plenty of good people who also value being given a chance to help out.

But let's not divert our energies in debating this. Let's just consider Robdurbar's suggestions and let things cool for now, OK? I can promise you that User:HailFire is one and my name is one, and I have never made an intentional IP edit. Perhaps I have done it once or twice, by mistake when not logged in, but never that I can recall to the Obama article. I hope this explains enough about me to reassure you that my motives are in good faith. Peace? --HailFire 19:28, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Your remark, questioned

You say that there are more of you with me than against me. And maybe you are right. But a third person just dropped by my user talk page to bitch me out, and it was Cberlet, with whom I have worked extensively, and always cooperatively, and have supported in several disputes, etc., and apparently he assumes that something I did in an effort to clean up before I cut back was a "horrifying" attack on him. Go figure. Sorry, but it's just gotten ugly here lately. There are a lot of good people, but even some of the good people seem to have lost the ability to assume that the other good people are acting in good faith. It's sad. I'm sad. And I'm still hoping I can stick around as a casual contributor. But if it turns out to mean being repeatedly kicked in the teeth, why would I want to do that? - Jmabel | Talk 05:46, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Macca

Hi, Tvoz. What's all this about the MBE? Bugger it, and fiddely-sticks... Great to see you're active on the pages BTW. Your humour, logic, and intelligence are very much appreciated. We have a great saying in northern England: "Don't let the bastards grind you down..." Have a really happy New Year's Eve. andreasegde 15:08, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

mystery user 208.120.27.201

i am reverting most of his changes. --Rocketrye12 18:44, 31 December 2006 (UTC) there was some misc. information that I think doesn't belong, but whatever. Josepher's changes are all good (I actually have gym with him, i just realized).

Okay, great, the BOE needs to be changed BACK to Dept. of Ed. This irritated me because when I first got to this page, I had changed it FROM BOE to Dept. of ED because i knew BOE was wrong. this 208. person changed it to BOE (check the logs). I'm not grumpy, I swear.--Rocketrye12 21:20, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

EDIT: we have a vandal, 70.23.151.198 . Are these incidente related? the antivandalbot was able to stop some of it, but I had to put the entier dress code section back. the fu***r deleted it!--Rocketrye12 21:25, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Kent State

Hey boss...I'm gonna call it a night (morning). Good debating you and I'm glad is hasn't gotten out of hand. Equinox137 10:59, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

I've made some more edits to KS after removing the NPOV tag. They're pretty minor to me, but please check them over and let me know if you disagree with any of them. Equinox137 09:34, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Vandalism on User:Specter01010

Hey Tvoz, thanks for reverting the vandalism on my page. Appreciate the help. --Specter01010 00:11, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I did WHOIS on 81.233.34.245, and by default, the varying IPs all came from Stockholm, Sweden. In this case, if 81.233.34.245 was blocked, users whom have/will use the IP address won't be able to contribute to Wikipedia. If the user does continue to vandalize, would it constitute a "softblock?" --Specter01010 01:28, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

a NON-WIKI question about 60s NYC radio

Promise - this has nothing whatsoever to do with anything on Wikipedia - just something I can't remember and thought an old Alex Bennett fan might recall .... do you remember which NYC radio dj/talk show guy used to say "Namaste" at the end of his show? This is driving me nuts - was it Leon Lewis? Thanks, if you recall. Best wishes Tvoz | talk 01:14, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

It was definitely a WMCA jock, and it was late 1960s, but I'd hesitate to say which. I thought Leon Lewis was the one who finished his show with a longish rap the tail end of which was "…and you don't eat chicken on Sundays." - Jmabel | Talk 04:53, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Obama

Sure, sounds good. Thanks, Khoi khoi 05:09, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

See my message on the RfC

|See Kundan After Sundown 05:50, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Response

Absolutely...I'm not pretending I tilt otherwise. With that tilt, I probably would never be a college student protesting any war (in fact, I've already have fought one and my youngers sister did a tour in Fallujah). Given that, along with my current occupation, the sentiment "that could have been me" comes almost daily.

I fully understand that some of the wounded and killed had notthing to do with the protests. It's also undisputed that the Ohio National Guard was extremely poorly trained to respond to such an incident. However, you pointed to the feelings that permeated the student movement of the 60s/70s such as "that could have been me" or "they're tyring to kill us/they can't kill all of us" - I look at it from their perspective being from that world (military and LE) and knowing first hand what feelings/mentality permeated among the troops and cops. They were reports of snipers. Although the were later apparently false, the responders on the ground didn't know that at that time. In any situation such as what happened there, there is no way of knowing if someone or people have weapons in that crowd, regardless of what the political flavor of the day is, whether it's flower children singing "Give Peace a Chance" or a Ku Klux Klan rally. There will always be people, regardless of what political flavor, willing to be violent to force what they want.

Anyway, If I'm in that situation and I even think I see a weapon pointed at me or my fellow officer/soldier - that subject's going down. All other questions can be asked later. It's better to be tried by 6 than carried by 12, when it boils down to it. In other words, I'm going home alive - and I'm sure those guardsmen had the same mentality.

As far as evidence being supressed - absolutely I think it's possible. However, I'm looking at it from the perspective of the officer/soldier on the ground at the time. Equinox137 06:41, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

By the way, I've always wanted to ask a Vietnam War-era protestor... What was unconstitutional, illegal, or immoral about the Vietnam War? Not to argue...I just want to understand. Equinox137 06:44, 4 January 2007 (UTC) PS... This is on the bottom of the page. HAHAHA! (KS isn't organized either way, but no biggie)

The Constitution quite clearly, and with great wisdom, states that 'Congress shall have the power to declare war'. War should not be entered into through a back door, or an executive order, or resolution - if we are going to put our soldiers in harm's way, and if we are going to invade, attack, or otherwise engage in war against another nation, the Constitution requires that a declaration of war come first. Why is this important? Because of checks and balances, because it is the most serious thing we can do as a nation. The current president often remarks that sending soldiers to war is the most awesome (in its negative sense) thing that a president does - and I don't think any of them do it lightly - but the bar is far too low and was in Vietnam. Congress never declared war then (and has not now). These are unconstitutional wars, and therefore also illegal. If they feel so strongly that a war is needed - and soldiers are likely to be sent to their deaths - then they owe it to us all to go through the process of real Congressional approval. There should be an overwhelming consensus that war is the only choice - I don't recall now (it's 3AM!) if the Constitution requires 2/3 or simple majority, but war is too serious a step to take without having Congress solidly behind it. As for immoral - there are so many reasons it was immmoral. We had not been attacked; it was essentially another country's civil war that we were intruding into, on the side of a propped-up government; the use of napalm; that we were not fighting against an army (not our fault, of course) so were indiscriminately killing civilians and destroying entire villages and the countryside in our desperate and impossible hope of defeating a guerilla enemy; our soldiers were largely drafted (which ties into why a declaration of war was so necessary) - they did not choose to fight in a cause they believed in, they were forced to by a government who allowed over 57,000 of them to be killed in, again, an illegal war that a large majority of Americans opposed; and the immorality of the draft was the way in which it targeted the poor and minorities who didn't have the knowledge or wherewithal to use the loopholes that existed and allowed some to get out of being drafted; the atrocities that occurred, My Lai being only one; and finally - although there are more reasons - it was immoral because it was unwinnable, and that was painfully apparent for many years, yet we continued on, killing more and more American soldiers - that is immoral. I'm afraid there are many parallels to today. but I am tired - it's late - and I also don't want to argue about this at all. Good "talking" with you. Tvoz | talk 08:34, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

You were tired, and you wrote that? Wonderful stuff. I doff my cap to you. andreasegde 19:25, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

POV Obama

Hey - I noticed that you'd reverted my additions to the Obama article referring to his supposed decision to run for president for the reason that they could be construed as POV. In reading the article, I was initially hesitant to post it on Wikipedia because of the nature of the topic and the fact that no major news networks had picked up the story nearly twenty-four hours after its release. Nevertheless, I think that the Sun Times is a fairly reputable source and was wondering what about the article was POV - besides of course, the columnists opinions. I think the wording I quoted in the article was particularly "fact-laden". However, I'm still open to hearing your reasoning and I'll leave the article as it is for now. Thanks :), Mrmaroon25 22:12, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, as you said, the link does not work, which I assure you was not the case when I posted the reference. So anyway, even if the article was NPOV, it doesn't matter anymore because it's not there. Thanks for the clarification! Mrmaroon25 22:30, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

Just found this - would it qualify? Obama looks ready to run Mrmaroon25 07:02, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Absolutely. Mrmaroon25 07:30, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Lennon

I know you would like the 'mourned' phrase in, but it would need a strong citation to support it. Not everybody is a Lennon fan, and the top brass upstairs frown upon it.

I will tell you a true story though... Lennon was murdered on my birthday (Dec 8 1980) and I had a small party at my house. I went to bed about midnight, and heard about his death from the alarm clock/radio in the morning. I got up, went downstairs and looked at the record player. (Goose-bumps now...) Last record still on the turntable? The 'Imagine' album.. andreasegde 11:53, 5 January 2007 (UTC).

Good points, and spot on. I'm trying to make it look like the Macca page, but I'm having trouble. Kingboyk (admin) likes to have a paragraph as a short lead/overview to an article like 'Family life', and I have to agree.

I'll get out Cynthia's/Spitz's book tonight and start to add stuff about their (fairly miserable at times) marriage. andreasegde 17:26, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Look at the Macca history talk pages, and you will see that me and my pal Vera, Chuck and Dave seriously fell out with Kingboyk about how the Macca page is now, with us both wanting it to be chronological. We finally came around to realise that subjects are dealt with in sections (Kingboyk is an admin, after all, and has worked on a lot of FA articles). Anyway, we got up, dusted ourselves off and shook hands like the gentlemen we are. I now doff my cap to the bosses upstairs, and work on the articles as requested, which shows my working class roots, and my previous job as a percussionist... :) andreasegde 20:34, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

I've got it! Slip it in the 'Memorials and tributes' section (said the bishop to the actress :). It deserves to be in there, at least. andreasegde 21:15, 5 January 2007 (UTC) I did it... andreasegde 21:22, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

The Beatles and forking articles

I have a problem that I would like to impart to all you good 'Beatles project' editors, and it is this:

Should anything directly Beatles-related be in the main Beatles' article, and only 'personal' stuff put into the Lennon, McCartney, Harrison, and Starr articles? I have the disturbing feeling that I'm repeating stuff in both Lennon and McCartney articles that should only be in the main article.
But... if only personal stuff is included in the individual Beatles' articles, would it make them too confusing/random, to read?

Please answer (on a stamped and self-addressed postcard please) on our talk page. (This might be more interesting than talking about MBEs... :) andreasegde, Mr Hornby, and Sir Sean de Garde 15:21, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes I was confused, but never mind. :) (BTW, don't answer this on my page, because I'm waiting for the gals and guys to answer, if they can get out of bed :)).

Q - Should I descend on The Beatles' page and add everything Beatle-ish with citations, and then only put really good, personal stuff in Lennon's, etc.? For example: Mimi threw a chicken and a hand-mirror at John because he bought a leather coat for Cynthia". "McCartney saw Lennon as the Emperor of his house whilst they were both on LSD." This is stuff that could never go on The Beatles page. Time to get the hair shirt out again... (Ouch...) andreasegde 22:14, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

well, yeah there's no point in having everything duplicated, for sure, and there;s no point in bogging down the Beatles article with little details about personal stuff, or bogging down the Lennon article with an exegesis (my $2 word of the day) on how high they all were when they met the Queen, but you can't have an article about Lennon without a decent section on the Beatles that is like a summary of the longer page, and you can't have a Beatles page without talking about Lennon when he was a Beatle. I think that the problem is that of course there's great overlap and forked off articles about a lot of Beatles stuff because there's a lot of ground to cover. But you still want someone to go to The Beatles and get more than a collection of "See main article" links to other pages. Tvoz | talk 22:38, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

It's about how much is duplicated that's 'niggling' me. There's a lot of really funny, and very interesting personal stuff about Lennon, but one feels that one has to (oh, very British) put the usual "went to Hamburg - Epstein worked at NEMS - Decca turned them down," etc. in the articles, which takes up valuable space (and starts to get a bit boring/irritating after the third read).

I suppose I'm toying with the idea that we should do all the factual stuff concerning all four of the Fabs on the main page, and then dig deeper on their 'personal' pages. I spotted some urban legends on the Aunt Mimi page, BTW. Shortly before she died she confessed that she, "had led a wicked life", and had been "a very cruel woman", which is fascinating stuff. (Do you know she rented out one room in her house to John and Cynthia?) If this all sounds like the ravings of a lunatic, please contact your local fish and chip shop and complain... andreasegde 05:59, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, personally I like that idea, and I totally agree with you that by the third time, even 2nd time, of reading the same thing you want to take a nap. And I agree that you don't need to go into the Epstein-Decca level details on the individual pages. I don;t know, maybe just referring people to the main Beatles article would work - it just seems a little odd to me to have a page about Lennon or Macca and just a little about the Beatles. Problem, to me, are the GA/FA expectations - if you want to know what I really think, I don't give a rat's ass about GA and FA, insofar as the length requirements restrict the quality of articles. I mean it's cool to get GA and FA, and it would be very cool (except for the vandals) to see these articles on the main page, but I think sometimes there's too much emphasis on trying to meet that goal and forcing cuts to some arbitrary length and a toning down of the kinds of things you might like to add, and maybe too much "sameness" between the articles in the interests of uniformity. But I'm willing to work on them with the GA/FA goal if that's what the group wants, so this is just what I really think. I haven't really looked at the recent stuff you've done - I will now - I've been busy arguing on the Cat Stevens page with a rather unpleasant guy who's accusing me of all sorts of untrue nonsense and is actually the one who is totally ignoring a hidden-text note asking editors to discuss before changing how the name should be rendered - classic POV pushing, and nasty too. So I welcome the opportunity to return to the beatles pages with sane people who don't view it as their mission in life to rid wikipedia of anything out of the ordinary and slime people on the way there.Tvoz | talk 06:31, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Good points, as always. Mr Fish-and-chip shop man 13:54, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Cat Stevens

Sorry you had to go through all that incivility. I've been completely disconnected from Wikipedia recently and I was overwhelmed when I got to the Cat Stevens talk page. Looks like things have settled down by the time I got here though. I mentioned that I support the current wording, looks like that's all the help that I can really offer right now. I didn't read through everything but it looks like I got the gist of it.

The actual article looks great though! I'm upset I can't be more apart of it as I used to be.

Keep up the good work, Tvoz,

Mrtea (talk) 16:10, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Survey concerning Cat Stevens/Yusuf Islam lead sentence.

Talk:Cat_Stevens#Survey: Ordering_of_names_within_lead_sentence

As an active editor at Cat Stevens, your input is requested for the purpose of establishing consensus. Italiavivi 00:44, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

RE:Obama

Ah yes, thanks for pitching in! Sorry for forgetting to notify you. Anyway, I don't agree with the "pitiful" assessment, but it could definitely be improved. What do you think of the new lead? Gzkn 03:42, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Huh...the signature thing is rather interesting, but I don't think it adds any real value to the article. Maybe someone is just going through and adding it to all the politician articles? I, too, feel that some of the information on his sponsored legislation and the like can be condensed, and some of the less important stuff eliminated. Otherwise, this is going to be one long article two or three years from now! Some of the long quotations could probably be trimmed as well. Gzkn 05:38, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, that was a rather amusing. Especially the long rant on the talk page. :) Gzkn 05:54, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

I think we may need to let that one cool for a while. I added a source that I thought covered the factual part of it without much bias (or at least that's how it read to me, I could be wrong about this). I'll try to do more to address imbalance concerns, I have some ideas. Keep up the great work. --HailFire 13:38, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

3 pence

"I inhaled", "Muslim school", and Iran sources now appear in article Notes with text intros. It's all in there, without punishing the article. You holding up OK with the big crowd? Hope so. --HailFire 01:18, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

14:11, 23 January 2007 Italiavivi (Talk | contribs) (Section is not restricted to what was in one book. Quote is notable, taped, and sourced; cease your edit-warring and take it to Talk, HailFire.) {sigh}... I thought I had taken it to Talk. Won't revert it myself as I don't want to risk feeding him. --HailFire 15:30, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

no-more-songs

would I know you from no-more-songs? Tvoz | talk 00:53, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Almost certainly. I'm a member of n-m-s. Malik Shabazz 01:33, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Lennon

Thanks (as always) for your comments, dearest Tvoz. I started work on it, and threw a load of stuff in, but I didn't really go through everything. I had an overload of pages (I was working on The Beatles, Macca and Lennon at the same time) and my brain crashed, so I went to the stubs to rebuild my original enthusiasm. (I'm really enjoying it, BTW.) Anyway, if there's anything you want to change, then you are the person to do it. Go for it... andreasegde 20:04, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

P.S. "Aunt Mater" is confusing, because 'Mater' means mother. She was Lennon's Aunt Elizabeth, but (like Mimi and Julia) she was known by another name - from Elizabeth to Betty, and then to Mater. Funnily enough, this never occured to me before, but your eagle-eyes spotted it (again) :) andreasegde 20:09, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the user talk cleanup. I don't like being harassed on my user talk page about something completely unrelated to Wikipedia, so it was nice to see you had re-deleted the text from that unregistered user. --Chris Griswold (☎☓) 19:56, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Mimi Smith

I reviewed it as a B article, then I thought I'd 'jump in the deep end'. (I have nominated it for GA). To Hell with the doubters - let rip, unfurl the pennants, and 'strike while the iron's hot', as the boys and girls from the 'East Leeds Labour Club Pensioners International Line-dancing Formation Team' say (when they put their dentures in). Sir Sean de Garde and the other mob 02:01, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks Tvoz! Better late than never ;) · j e r s y k o talk · 14:11, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I know . . . I admit, though, that things feel a little different for me now that I have the tools. Before, there wasn't an admin watching the Obama page as far as I knew, so we had to beg for protection. Now, all I'll have to do is click the little protect tab. Anyway, we're still in agreement, I think, on the prospects of increasing vandalism on the page. But HailFire et al have a point. Cheers. · j e r s y k o talk · 22:50, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Troz

Pinky what exactly is Troz? H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 23:57, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Ha, nevermind, I read your name wrong. It's a quote from a TV show. Just ignore this, delete it if you want. I'm in a very boring class now and took the first distraction I could see. H2P ^{(Yell at me for what I've done)} 00:07, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

May Pang

Have a look at my talk page, because some vandal has added comments to yours that make you look bad. (Ba*ta*d!) I will delete them soon (you can delete them yourself if you want) but I will also post a note on the May Pang page, which is also being attacked. (Thanks for the work on Mimi, BTW.) andreasegde 19:51, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

I have tried to protect May Pang, but it doesn't seem to work. Can you help? andreasegde 20:04, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Warning users

Please do not apply {{blatantvandal}} tags to users which just made typos. That completely defeats the purpose of the tag. It inflames (or in the best case scenario, inflames them) unnecessarily, and scares off good users. Even if the purpose of that edit had been to test editing privileges, it does not warrant a {{bv}} by any means. Titoxd^(?!?) 06:43, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Barack Obama FAR

FYI. --HailFire 18:47, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: going crazy

If you edit two political articles, that's one more than I can bear! But music article editing drove me into an attempt at retiring from Wikipedia, one that I currently seem to be failing at ... Wasted Time R 04:49, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

I have no problem with using HRC's interpretation of VRWC. I wasn't aware that Cat Stevens had edit battles ... I did substantial work on Father and Son (song) and The First Cut is the Deepest, those were fun articles, especially finding the P.P. Arnold original of the latter, which I'd never heard before. Song and tour articles often avoid the stresses of the higher-profile album and main articles. Use to work on the solo Beatles articles but back then the churn and vandalism was too much. Would like to do something on the Beatles tour articles, it's a neglected area. Wasted Time R 05:16, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the "enjoying your edit summaries" note. If nothing else WP gives endless chances for one to develop an edit summary style ... Wasted Time R 01:44, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Bill Clinton protection

Okay, semi-protected. I don't know why VoA declined at the time, but it currently looks like it needs to protection. Nishkid 64 22:55, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Since I'm not particularly sure how long we'll need this, I did not specify an expiry date for the protection. Nishkid 64 19:59, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Dealing with unsigned messages

There's a useful template for these: Template:unsigned. Just add {{unsigned|USERNAME}}. :) Gzkn 05:03, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Andy Kaufman Edit

I was asking for a cite that Kaufman didn't self-identify as a comedian. From what I understood, that wasn't particularly true. While some called him a performance artist, he certainly didn't take that title, and I would be surprised if he didn't prefer comedian.WoodenTaco 16:02, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Regarding Warnings on the IP vandalizer of Bill Clinton's page

Hi there Tvoz, I actually did not use a template, but a script from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Voice_of_All/UsefulJS#Non-admin_RC_Patrol_JS_.28Stand-alone.29 .

Glad to be of any help. Sir Vicious 21:31, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Paul McCartney

I have nominated it for FA. andreasegde 22:09, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

I think that is called "bad form" by one seriously English editor, but I have never seen a rule about it. I believe the 'unwritten rule' is to stop overly-interested editors from "stuffing ballot boxes" by making comments like, "I think it's Fab, 'cos my dad said so." The editor/editors of an article are asked to leave their own opinions on the FA Nom pages, BTW.

As we are all reasonably adult (apart from the insane humour, of which I approve) I see no reason why we can not be level-headed decent human beings, and allowed to leave our well-considered comments on the FA page. andreasegde 08:30, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

re Wikipedia:Smokers

I came across this page and felt inclined to comment on the talkpage. I then read back and noticed your comments. Are you still unhappy about this page? If you are then I will unwatch it (it isn't as if I am looking for more exchanges of opinion). LessHeard vanU 20:20, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Cool. I was entering into the debate, citing Harrison as someone whose smoking habit directly effected his health/demise and which is included in his article, as an exception to the 'no comment' suggestion. I can't think of a way to divert that into an attack on the pages (quasi)originator...

...for the moment. LessHeard vanU 20:48, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Songs

You're going to kick yourself for this, but look at Northern Songs... andreasegde 22:44, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Ah-hah! Now I see what you're getting at. Well-spotted, Oh venerable eagle-eyed one. Give me 10 minutes or so, and I will check it out. andreasegde, your on-line citation inspector. (That sounds like 'sanitation' inspector :) Give me a tick, as they say... (sound of pages rustling.) andreasegde 23:24, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Get ready...

James suggested a long-term contract to Epstein for Len and Mac, instead of the usual song-by-song contract. Spitz 365. (The usual song-by-song contract gave James 100% of publishing and 50% of royalties, but only for one song at a time.)

James suggested 50% for him for publishing and 50% for royalties, meaning 25% each for Len and Mac for publishing, and 25% each for royalties. Epstein’s 25% would come off both Len and Mac’s income. Spitz 365.

The deal meant that James had to buy out ‘Lenmac’ which was a holding company formed by Epstein that held 59 Fabs songs. Spitz 365

Len and Mac were obliged to write only 6 songs a year for the next four years. They did more, of course. Spitz 365 (Epstein nearly "jumped in James' arms" because he thought it was a great deal.)

George Martin said that anybody who signed a contract like that today would be “an idiot”. (He forgot the shit deal when he signed them to Parlophone/EMI, didn’t he?) Spitz 365

It later went on the stock market and Goerge and Ringo were given some small percentage, but I haven’t got to that bit yet. Martin was also offered a share when it went public, but turned it down, as it conflicted with his EMI interests. What a dope, or a gentleman…

andreasegde 23:50, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, he could have been a gazillionaire too. (But he probably is, isnt he?) I don't think we need to go into too much detail, at least not on Beatles or McCartney pages, just have the right names attached. Northern, I guess, could have some detail. Tvoz | talk

If the deal was with L&M why did Harrison publish with them? Was there a separate deal? The main article mentions that Harrison and Starr created their own publishing companies when the Northern Songs contract expired... In any event, please remember that the Beatles had 3.1/2 songwriters within the group. LessHeard vanU 00:04, 28 January 2007 (UTC) (I am repeating bits of what I have written at Aunty Drears page; except the Ringo slander.)

Aunty Drears? You cheeky monkey....

Anyway: The contract was only for 4 years, after which Starr and Harrison set up their own companies. They didn't write much before then so it was good for them. Len and Mac went for the whole hook, line and sinker routine, and signed for more years. So:

For every 100 Dollars income (for publishing income or royalties income:

James got 50 Dollars

Lennon got 18.75 Dollars

McCartney got 18.75 Dollars

Epstein got 12.50 Dollars (Which was his management percentage from any income the Fabs earned.)

Result? 100 Dollars.

andreasegde gets fu#k all 00:10, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

I forgot: Group decisions were the norm, but not when it came to BIG money... Not a pot to p#ss in 00:10, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

I need to have dinner - my brain isn't working. Didn't you mean 50% to James for publishing, 50% to lenmac, then the Lenmac further divided btwn Epstein Lennon and Mac? Dinner. definitely. Tvoz | talk 00:19, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Publishing contracts:

A normal contract is 60-40, 70-30, or 80-20 (depending on the level of exertion a publisher is committed to, like getting out of bed in the morning.) Royalties are the big thing (radio plays) because publishing is just music books/sheets, which nobody wants anymore. (Me again).

Timothy Hutton

Hi Tvoz, nice to hear from you. Your addition to Timothy Hutton looks spot-on to me. Hope you're doing well. Cheers Rossrs 08:28, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

sorry, tvoz

where should i fit in that gangs article? i'm collaborating with Bellagio. feel free to join in. --rocketrye12^{talk/contribs} 05:25, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Done

I redirected Sr.'s article to Jr's. I don't know much about Sr.'s work as an economist, though, and if that work is encyclopedic, of course an article could be written. But the article wasn't worth keeping as it was. · j e r s y k o talk · 00:25, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Obama semi-protection

I would love to reach a consensus with you about this. During the recently concluded FAR, I felt it was helpful to "close the room" for some time so we could collectively get safely past that editorial challenge. This, and my respect for your view, was the reason I stayed silent about lifting sprot through the first weeks of January. Now with the closure of the FAR and a lapse of over one week since the last sprot was applied, I just wanted to make my preferences known to Jersyko. Of course, it is an Admin decision to lift the sprot, I was just letting him know I favored the idea.

Regarding February, I didn't intend to be secretive about my motivations. As you suggested, we can expect more visitors to the Obama page if/once the candidacy is formalized, with the likelihood that some of these people will be newcomers to Wikipedia. I'd prefer that the Obama article has a low incidence of vandalism then, as first impressions can count for a lot, and promoting Wikipedia is something I care about. I can appreciate the view that we may need sprot from time to time to discourage vandalism (though I am not convinced that applying sprot actually works over the longer term, as those intent on making trouble will always come up with new ideas). But I also consider it likely (for reasons of prevailing Wikipedia policy against applying sustained and preemptive protection) that sprot will never be permanently applied to the Obama article. I also remain hopeful that maximum openness might inspire maximum good faith among all editors.

I think you know it is unusual for me to continue at length about my views in any talk page posting (I don't aim to frustrate anyone, it is just my introverted nature to be that way). I am making an exception here because of the respect I have for your commitment, contributions, and continuing collaboration. Can we find middle ground? --HailFire 12:31, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

I've added a note on the talk page which I hope explains my reasoning and my preference for the more informative sprot template. --HailFire 01:07, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

Obama vandalism

Hi, I'm not sure if it's appropriate to post it here, but I'm a bit of a n00b and I had a question...I reverted some Obama vandalism to your previous edit, but the history just shows the vandalism and my edit. How can I restore the history? Thanks. Rmj12345 09:09, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

"Unwatch"

Hello... I saw your request at the Village Pump. There is some code you can add to your monobook.js file to add an "unwatch" link to your watchlist. You can find it here. I installed it a few weeks back, and haven't encountered any problems to date. Cheers. --Ckatz^chat _spy 03:04, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

It's pretty much a cut-and-paste edit. You copy the text in the box at Ilmari Karonen's page into your monobook.js file at User:Tvoz/monobook.js, making sure not to delete anything that's already in there. You then save that edit, and flush out your Internat browser's cache to see the changes. (For Firefox/Mozilla/Safari: hold down "shift" while clicking RELOAD (or press Ctrl-Shift-R); for Internet Explorer: press Ctrl-F5; for Opera/Konqueror: press F5.) The "un" tag will show up on your watchlist next to items; clicking it removes the article. If you decide you want to remove the code, the easiest way is to revert yourself or undo the specific edit where you added this code. Good luck~ --Ckatz^chat _spy 03:15, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

I wondered why you had not been berating me at my talkpage

...and now I know why; You do not get the Beatles newsletter. I am sure that the editors meant it in the most affectionate way possible (in truth, I know I did!) LessHeard vanU 23:34, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

I am sure that nobody at the Beatles considers you Scary, or indeed as any of the Spice Girls. I was just looking to include you in the general silliness... To get future Newsletters click this link and put your name down.

It seems that you are going to be busy with the Obama article for a while! I will pass on your thoughts to Sir Sean, Fireman VCD, and TykeMaster. LessHeard vanU 14:49, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

ROHA

My guess is that "ROHA" is actually his handle -- he doesn't want to or can't create a username, but he wants people to know it's him so he adds it to the beginning of each edit summary. -- Antaeus Feldspar 08:22, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome!

I'm so confused I spent three minutes trying to figure out how to return a message before I realized I just leave things on your talkpage. Is there a n00b userbox available? Mykll42 06:49, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I haven't used the term but since eight grade Latin American social studies. I saw it was in discussion though so I thought it best to be consistent.

Bloody Sunday and Kent State

Hey, I'm glad your still watching. I was hesitant weigh into this mess, but I just had to pick at it. I think the Bloody Sunday entry should be shortened also. In fact the whole list could use some trimming. Let's let the main WP article give all the details.
Shouldn't all these entries be sourced? Especially the red-link ones like Homestead lockout/strike that don't even have a WP entry?
As far as Kent State, I almost resisted the urge to make this edit, to keep the conversation about the image name pure. I don't see that it matters what the students were protesting. I think that the "permanant paralysis" is an unnecessary dig for sympathy. And the students were not "unarmed" but had been throwing rocks and tear gas canisters at the Guard. Okay..I will admit, that hardly counts as armed, but they were not being passive, nor complacent. The main Kent State Shootings article covers all these nuances, so why try to spin the information over here?
If you'd like, I think it would be good to mirror or move this conversation over to the List of Massares talk page. Thanks for the interest. --Knulclunk 01:51, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

commons:User:Tvoz

I am most definitely me - the same user as commons:User:Tvoz. Guaranteed. Tvoz | talk 22:44, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Cat Stevens

Its a good idea so for the most part the go ahead and do it aproach appears to be working.Geni 13:01, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

FYI, I've posted a comment/question at Wikipedia talk:Fair use#No free image available. —Wknight94 (talk) 13:25, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

List of massacres

I guess I was too late. Khoi khoi 04:12, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

I reverted the anon (hence making me involved), so I wouldn't have been able to have intervened. However, if I was uninvolved, I would probably have blocked both, or at least fully protected the page (see Wikipedia:Protection policy#Semi-protection). It's not a big deal anyways. Thanks for your kind words. :-) Khoi khoi 04:49, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Cat Stevens & the 3RR

I'd just noticed that and was off to block him when I got your message. Gone for 24 hours now. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 05:46, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Re:Josh Wolf

We could move the info there by cut and paste but that dosen't bring the history page along (though Admins could move the history page later) usually its better to use the move tab instead of cutting and pasting the article page and the talk page to its new location. Still if an edit war continues, cutting and pasting would be preferable than that.

--Wowaconia 07:24, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

User page

Thanks for the reversion. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 04:06, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Cat Stevens

I still think that there needs to be some dicussion to obtain a consensus on the infobox naming system. All I see is the discussion on the name to be used in the first sentence. If I missed it then please let me know. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 10:17, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Obama

Hope this helps. I've been a bit distracted by the 2007 NCAA tournament and will be starting a new job this week, so I haven't been paying as close attention as usual lately. Anyway, if it keeps up and I don't notice, let me know. · j e r s y k o talk · 23:06, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Fat Thom

Good old, reliable sarcasm. Nothin' beats that.--Crestville 10:28, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Re

Hi Tvoz. Blocked users are not automatically given a notice on their talk page, but will always see a special message when they try to edit. I do try to post a block message on their user talk for the convenience of other users, but blocks are recorded in a user's block log whether a template is place on their talk page. I've added one in this case. Hope that clarifies. Xiner (talk, email) 14:05, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Btw, the AIV bot works by examining the block log of the users or IPs reported on AIV. If someone has been blocked, the bot removes the entry from the AIV page. This way admins don't have to manually edit the AIV page when they enact a block. Hope that clarifies. Xiner (talk, email) 15:27, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Maybe that's a bot or feature that you can request. I can't see a reason why that isn't done. Xiner (talk, email) 18:52, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Username policy violations ←

Obvious username policy violations such as this one should go to WP:AN, WP:AIAV, or to the talk page of any friendly admin who is online at the moment. Where a violation is debatable, a discussion could be held at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User names - NYC JD (interrogatories) 03:00, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

This is a state secret and you're unworthy... Oh fine... When in trouble, click here - NYC JD (interrogatories) 03:55, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Oohh Yiddish... Did you learn it in Bronx Science? Too bad it wasn't offered at Stuy when I went there (blows raspberry) - NYC JD (interrogatories) 04:02, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Obama's legal career

Please do not keep reverting changes about Obama's law firm. The old version had a blanket and potentially misleading statement that he was a civil rights lawyer. His cases were mostly employment cases. The new language has been developed as a compromise by several editors but you, Tvoz, all of sudden changed it back to the old wording. The compromise language had been there for a few days. Even wiki's policy is to revise, not blanket revert it back. What do you have against a neutral and verified description of obama's legal career? Please stop this! Dereks1x 20:12, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

I've revised it even more to add some of your ideas about civil rights law! Be happy!Dereks1x 20:13, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

go to article talk page please Tvoz | talk 17:46, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Reported to 3RR

Just so you know HumanThing (talk · contribs) reported you to WP:AN/3RR. Fortunately the reviewing admin said there was no violation. Is it just me, or does it seem like HumanThing and Dereks1x (talk · contribs) are either sockpuppets or meatpuppets. Aside from an edit to Fort Lauderdale, Florida and Talk:Sarah Pallin, HumanThing has edited the same pages as Dereks1x.--Bobblehead 14:53, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

SSP

Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Dereks1x. Any comments would be appreciated. · j e r s y k o talk · 20:24, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Nice work. I included a diff to your edit in the RFCU. On a different note, now we have this, which is obviously going to be summarily declined. · j e r s y k o talk · 15:12, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

KS

Hey Tvoz. I just wanted to be sure that you knew I wasn't taking anything personally on the KS page and I hope you're not either. Thanks Equinox137 06:16, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Since the debate in there has turned into a debate over how I view the event, I'm thinking about just outlining what I think about it then shutting up. It seems that my views are being misunderstood or taken out of context. What do you think? Equinox137 07:29, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Obama's mother

I have no reason to not believe you, but I do wonder what makes you believe one source over the other when there's multiple sources for both names. Do any of the sources that quote her as being named Stanley come directly from her or Obama themselves? - Mgm|^(talk) 10:11, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Andrew/Andrea and others

I'm sorry to say that it is likely to have been the T/t debate, and the consequences thereof. I'm not sure as I bowed out of the Beatles Project a couple of weeks back and only caught up as I watch Crestville's talkpage. Looking over A's and V, C & D's talkpages and the Beatles Policy talkpage renders a few clues. I'm not sure what precisely happened, but I think the consequences are bad for the Project and Wikipedia. The Project lost more than these two, as a few more other editors pulled out too. It's a shame. I'm still editing Beatles articles, but as an independent. Thank the deity of your choice for Crestville... LessHeard vanU 11:51, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

I wasn't really paying attention because I'm working on other things, but Andrea just deleted all his stuff one day. I asked him what he was doing but go no reply, and then a vague, anonymous responce later. Shame really.--Crestville 12:11, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Seems to be resolving itself now, which is good. Andrea just needs a little push. Go tell him you love him or something.--Crestville 23:09, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Kent State

I see that we share a point of view on the Kent State Murder. You may want to post a comment on my user page. --Defender 911 18:29, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Tvoz, I just want to bring to your attention that there is a vote on my user talk page over the Kent State issue. Please try to participate or inform other users please. Thank you. Defender 911 11:11, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Talk page archival

Hi Tvoz. Have you met MiszaBot? Xiner (talk, a promise) 16:14, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Fine, be like that. XinerBot 16:14, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

John edwards cancer issue

Tvox, I made some comments in the John Edwards entry discussion about the breast cancer topic. I think you were indeed spot on re. to the appropriateness of not getting into a discussion of breast cancer in the context of an indivual biography entry. The whole discussion on that is comical and shows the lack of understanding about what in fact an encylopedia functions as. Cheers! Droliver 23:38, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Atlas87

Jersyko beat me to it. :-( Khoi khoi 06:59, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

No problem! Khoi khoi 07:02, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Sure, if an admin has already blocked him/her, then it seems fine. Khoi khoi 07:22, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Equinox137 Adminship

Hey, Tvoz - I've been nominated for an adminship by Defender911. Feel free to visit Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Equinox 137 to give your input. Thanks. Equinox137 08:27, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

dylan-Kurtis Blow

can I ask you why you are deleting this all over the place

Sure. I'm not questioning whether or not Bob Dylan appears on the Kingdom Blow album; that is certainly true. It's the Debra Byrd/Wayne Garfield part that is the problem.

the Bob Dylan Encyclopedia is not a bogus reference

I'm not questioning the validity of the book. A quick check on Amazon (where you can read the index) shows that Kurtis Blow is not mentioned on the pages cited. I think that faking your sources is a far greater sin than simply adding unverified material—it indicates intent to deceive rather than simply being misinformed. If you check every other edit by that same user, it's all unverified information inserting this Wayne Garfield into the lives of notable musicians. I could see leaving in the fact that Dylan appears on the album, but I feel strongly that the Byrd/Garfield references should be struck (stricken?). I have no interest in starting a revert war of any kind so, if you would be so kind, could you please reword that part of the article? Wikipedia is not the place for self-aggrandizing back-up singers to exaggerate their role in the lives of those more famous than they are. Closenplay 18:53, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

EDIT, added:

The songwriting credit on the Kurtis Blow track that Garfield claims that he co-wrote is ONLY Kurtis Blow. (Another "blow" to the user's (Garfield himself?) credibility. Closenplay 19:02, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I can live with asking for citations, as long as it's removed promptly if no reliable sources are cited. I did comment out the part of the Kurtis Blow entry claiming a songwriting credit; that song is credited on the album to Blow alone. Cheers! Closenplay 19:22, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Dear TVOZ, Sorry For Inconvenience...But

The songwriting credits for "Reasons For Wanting You" referencing the Blow/Garfield collaboration indeed appeared on the original 1986 Polygram release of "Kingdom Blow". Perhaps the complaining blogger, Closenplay, has referenced another product (perhaps a U.K. release) containing the song that verifies only Blow's credit which is an apparently inadvertant mistake. Both Garfield and Blow are co-writers of the song and both are ASCAP members. User: waynegarfield@yahoo.com. 2:30 am, 8 April 07

With regard to the Byrd/Garfield connection to the Dylan/Blow duet "Street Rock" on the album, "Kingdom Blow", the affiliated credit on the original 1986 Polygram release reads as follows: "Bob Dylan's appearance was furnished through the special efforts of Wayne Garfield and Debra Byrd". User: waynegarfield@yahoo.com 2:30 am, 8 April 07

I give up. While I will admit my source for the songwriting information was incorrect (damn internet!) I still say that Garfield is abusing Wikipedia. His latest attention-getter is to include his Janet Jackson songwriting credit next to his name in articles he has inserted himself into. This is taking up way too much of my time and effort so I'm going to unwatch all those pages and just step away. Wayne, go nuts and include as much unsourced information about yourself as you like, undo edits, remove requests for citations, and then, as I'm sure you will, create your own Wikipedia article so you can validate your long career in the music biz.Closenplay 11:23, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Barack Obama

Tvoz,

I did not find a single mention of the Born Alive criticisms aside from what I put in and this ONE sentence is hardly a thorough explanation of his abortion views. Maybe we can be a little more balanced given the entire article is sorely lacking in any opposing viewpoints?

"In his write-in response to a 1998 survey, Obama stated his abortion position as: "Abortions should be legally available in accordance with Roe v. Wade."[1]" pic82101 11:42, 7 April 2007 (EST)

Bar-B Q'd Firebobby

LOL! I rarely wear it, it gets tiresome being called Mutley all the time! Luv, Vera, Chuck & Dave 16:03, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

redundant cat

Thanks for the heads up - I deleted the category and removed it from the articles. It didn't really fall into a speedy deletion criteria, but I think WP:SNOW or similar applies here. Hopefully everything will make sense to him. Natalie 17:00, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

No problem. It's a good thing he hadn't actually added all the US Democrats to the cat yet. Natalie 17:02, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Robin Gibb

In your edit summary of Robin Gibb, I noticed that you have a problem regarding the inclusion of information about descriptions of Dwina Gibb in the tabloid newspapers. The information given in the article is merely that there were reports in the tabloid newspapers, which is factually correct, and a summary of what was said. This is confirmed by a citation from two reputable sources (the BBC and the Times) and there is no opinion given as to whether the tabloid comments are true or not.

This is not the same thing as using a report in the tabloid press as a primary information source, and presenting it as fact, which could indeed be construed as being unreliable and possibly libelous. I can therefore see no reason to delete this information. I have inserted the word 'tabloid' in the article to make it clear to the reader that this comment was not made in a quality newspaper. Jud 18:09, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Ladies man

Hello girl. Given that I know so much about girls, I happen to know that girls love complments, so I thought I'd let you know that you, a girl, are being complemented on another page. I'll give you a link, because I know girls are delightful, delicate, silly creatures and need boys to hold their hands. Anyway, it's here, dear heart. Girl... does this mean we're getting married?--Mr Darcy 00:49, 11 April 2007 (UTC) (by the way, that was post-modern irony, I'm not really a prat. Well, I am, but I'm the same loveable prat as always)

Hello

I'm not vandalizing. I don't like Imus but that story makes me sick, it's just jokes. I'm sick of this white and black nonsense. I want to become purple. K69 06:37, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

dealing with talk page chatter

Regarding Talk:Don Imus: just go ahead and remove all talk page chatter on sight, treat it as vandalism, warn the editors with the {{uw-chat}} series of warning templates, and report repeat offenders at WP:AIV. And thanks for what you've been doing so far. The above comment suggests you may already be warning them, that's good. Go ahead and remove their comments as well. — coel acan — 09:57, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I don't even want to touch Talk:Kurt Vonnegut. I just scanned over it and saw people arguing over whether to include the words "so it goes". Is it really as silly as the first impression I got? — coel acan — 05:22, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

It's good to meet you too. =) I just replaced the image on Kurt Vonnegut, see my comment on the talk page. Somebody is going to complain, because the image isn't as visually appealing. It's legal, though, and the other one wasn't. I'm trying to avoid that talk page, to be honest, but if someone is making a fuss and nobody's sure how to answer about WP:FUC, give me an orange bar and I'll swoop in to disappoint everyone. =P ... Bad image but it was the best I could pull off on short notice. — coel acan — 06:16, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Mimi Smith

Thanks for your comment at Talk:Mimi Smith. I've moved the comment to Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Mimi Smith and posted some possible solutions; your further feedback would be most welcome. --kingboyk 10:57, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Don Imus

Thank you for clarifying the "nappy-headed" thing. Mine was a genuine question. I understand the desire to keep the talk page on point. However I think that where a significant portion of the world might completely fail to understand Imus' comment the comment itself needs to be explained. Avalon 22:41, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

CAPSLOCK and others

You have my apologies. I didn't check which cite you referred to I must admit, so I apologise again for the mistake. The Capslock thing I couldn't resist however :D--Koncorde 21:55, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

I've got used to so many silly revisions of sensible amendments (I was "there" when Mel Gibson gobbed off; the silly moo) and the bile with which people seem determined to fill up otherwise sensible biographies that I reacted without my usual attention to detail. When a 40 year career is summed up by someone placing tomorrows chip paper next to yester-years Grammy award and plaudits you get to thinking 'perception' is a dirty word on Wikipedia. As for Kurt - utter, unabridged, legend.--Koncorde 00:00, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

household name

It's a dictionary definition, not any candidate for speedy deletion, so I gave it a prod. If the prod is removed, it should be taken to WP:AFD. The incoming links have probably been sitting around for a long time, linking to a redlink, bcause it is a commonly used phrase, but it's much more appropriate to wiktionary, where in fact there already is a dictionary definition. If you feel up to it, you could go replace those links with links to wikt:household name. Or don't; it's a pain you don't have to undertake. =) Thanks foe the congrats, btw. Keep me updated on whatever's going down. I haven't taken a look in on Imus lately and it's hard for me to compare all the goings-on there... remember WP:RFC and WP:3O if you need them... — coel acan — 07:37, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but

I am just sick and tired of all the goddamn "promotional" editors on Wikipedia. Sometimes I think we need to scrap this whole project and start over, banning certain ISPs related to ZIP codes that are known to be gathering places of politicians, businessmen, and journalists.

BTW, like everyone else, I will tell you to stop trying to get me to read some kind of "welcome, here is how to do this" blah blah blah page. I've read them before, I CONTRIBUTED to some of them even, and Ive been editing Wikipedia for 3 years now. I just do not stick to any one inparticular subject, and I change names every now and then. Scryer_360 is perhaps the longest running name I have had, the other ones I delete when I change email addresses. Which is something I have to do frequently, it seems even when you use fake emails, if you piss the right people off they will find your real one eventually.Scryer_360 19:55, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

BTW

I am also going to fault you with lack of sense when you say I made personal attacks on anyone with my comments. Review that comment carefully: you will see I named no one and any specific group, rather my comments were made towards a general collection of people, and even that is without a name.

Hence, I will be watching your edits and contributions carefully, as I now think I struck a personal chord with you. After all, when only "Democratic promoters" and those of "self-righteous" motives were alluded to, still without names, I somehow think you constructed yourself as a person who fit that description.

Maybe you need to review that policy yourself. I will be discussing your comments on my talk page with some friends. OF course I will leave them up though. Scryer_360 20:02, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Making assumptions are we?

Who said I thought people with motives were lurking around every corner? Not even I alluded to that, I simply made the statement that Wikipedia has been besieged by people of questionable motives both in the past and present.

I happen to contribute from Manhattan now and then by the way.

Also, who really uses templates here? How long have you been contributing? The few templates I have worked with seem to never be meant to be used more than once a person if at all. And only then if the user is REALLY out of line, aka actually making named personal attacks (which, logically, is all a personal attack can be) on multiple persons in multiple instances. Read the attacks policy yourself: its recommends no or little reprimand unless certain criteria are met. In most instances, its usually by consensus of several editors that reprimands are given, and Ive never used one for comments against large, unspecified bodies before.Scryer_360 20:16, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Differences in wikipedia Editors

I guess this is where editors differ in their approach to Wikipedia then. You seem a more "light" editor in your approach to this: as in to you its something that needs done, this getting the facts, but its nothing to rail and bitch about (which is what I did).

My approach to Wikipedia is far more serious: whenever I see an historical inaccuracy or any bullshit (which is a large and hard to define term in Wikipedia), I tend to enter a state of fervor.

To me, Wikipedia is one of the greatest endeavors humans have ever undertaken: its up there with building the pryamids, democracy and creating the Internet. Wikipedia is a source where the victors DO NOT write the history books. Whenever someone has won at something in the past, they tend to be the ones that tell the stories. Wikipedia does is not supposed to be written in such a way that these people are the only wons writing the books.

Example: if Hitler has won WWII and conquered the world, the idea behind wikipedia is that even here it would not be JUST FACISM that wrote the Wiki article. Real truth would be recorded here. And if someone found something that evokes the words "hey, thats not the whole truth," then it can be taken into consideration and eventually written down, if it is indeed the truth.

In example: on the Don Imus page someone wrote (in the talk section) that when a riot broke out in New York in 1979 in which many African Americans died, Imus had played "Another one bites the Dust" by Queen upon learning that. An attempt to include this in the Don Imus article was started, and research was being gathered. OF course, it obviously has not been included: that song was not out until 1980, so how could Imus of played it?

So I take everything written here very, very seriously. Even my own personal political views I try and keep out of my contributions, and I if I think I am adding something significant I have friends and enemies alike review it (both in person and on forums) to make sure something is not going across the line. I have even edited and/or removed sections from pages dedicated to views I hold for either not being true or being shedding way to generous of light on the issue (especially if its considered a "positve" thing that a party said or did)(over-exagerations about something tend to backfire eventually, Ive learned).Scryer_360 20:46, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Central Park?

What needs editing there? As far as I can see its a finished page....

Also, just to let you know, I am as far from my 20s as you can possibly imagine (within reasonable bounds, no I am not hundreds of years old, no I did not know Jesus). I am no child.

But I guess since you are a parent and all that wonderful excuse, you do know that there are other concerns in life than just editing this encyclopedia, however a serious endeavor it may be.Scryer_360 21:23, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Tony Snow - Cancer near liver

I moved a comment to Talk: Tony Snow and replied there. Tvoz |talk 03:32, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

List of songs containing covert references to real musicians

You may want to weigh in at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2007 April 15#List of songs containing covert references to real musicians, since you were involved in a previous discussion of this article. - Jmabel | Talk 05:24, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

The wording on the nomination was clear. I just never saw it. More of a response on my user talk page. - Jmabel | Talk 16:10, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Imus in the Morning

Hi, I've done some more work to better elaborate on the outrage sparked by Imus's slur, by adding more cited sources. Please look it over to see if you agree the POV tag could come off JGHowes ^talk - 12:50, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Tvoz, have you had a chance to review this article since it was edited for NPOV after your POV tag? I think the POV tag should now be removed. If you don't agree, please advise your reasoning. Thanks JGHowes ^talk - 13:59, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Kent State

See me on the Kent State shooting talk page. By the way, DST is great, as it gives us extra time in the latter hours of the day during the summer months. I don't see how anyone can dislike this. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Wasted Sapience (talk • contribs) 22:43, 16 April 2007 (UTC).

But you see mornings are lousy anyway when you have to wake up. Nothing beats sunlight at 8pm, and nothing stinks more than total darkness at 5pm. See me on Kent State. I discuss "in popular culture" trivia, however I should have included that the IPC on Kent State is better referenced that most other IPC on Wikipedia. --Wasted Sapience 00:42, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Heya

Thanks for the question! I responded to it on my talk page. :) Rockstar (^T/_C) 05:51, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Dates with months and year

WP:DATE#Dates_containing_a_month_and_a_day says they should be linked that way. Gdo01 20:00, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Reply

Hello. It's always fun "meeting" people on WP. I agree with you. I too became a "keeper" when seeing all the lists that were being deleted where some of that information would have been useful, collected in one place, but "listcruft" is to WP in 2007 what "commie" was to the US in the 1950's. Periodically I rant on the issue, but until some admins who feel as we do (or people who feel as we do become admins) put some effort in, WP will be the worse for the deletions. Carlossuarez46 21:23, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Barack_Obama_portrait_2005.jpg

No problem... The other one actually wasn't public domain like we thought. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 18:31, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Barbara Walters

Hello Tvoz! At this article I wanted to undo the edit by 69.2.145.95 after that by Gwernol and somehow managed to miss the edits by you and Paul210. Guess time to log out. I do agree with your changes to the article. I'm sorry for this waste of your time. Best regards. --VirtualDelight 21:41, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Block

Hi there; that has got to be a really impressively tactful way of saying "you did it wrong, mate"! You are right, of course. I can only assume that after hitting the show preview button I failed to hit save. Nobody's perfect, me most of all.--Anthony.bradbury 00:45, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Print size

Thank you. I have always admitted freely that, while I may well have reasonable skills in some fields, at basic IT I am an idiot. I had obviously noticed that the type face in the latter part of my talk-page had shrunk, but could not see why and had as yet not got around to calling for help. May I ask what had actually happened, and how you corrected it - for which I thank you?--Anthony.bradbury 00:55, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I had in fact read through the page line-by-line, but missed that apparently vital omission.--Anthony.bradbury 09:52, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Medium is the Massage/Message

Massage NE Message. Marshall really enjoyed the pun. Perhaps the note to keep it as Massage should be in Red, with a RTFM next to it;-) Bellagio99 19:58, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Kent Shootings vandal

It was weird, wasn't it? Those edits now show up (at least, to me) on the user's contribs page. I figure what happened (complete guess, btw) was that the server that dispatches user contributions requests was out of synch temporarily. Mango juice^talk 19:42, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Reported latest Dereks1x sock to AN/I

The subject says it all. :) [6] Hopefully they'll boot the latest shortly. --Bobblehead 21:26, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Phil Ochs

Hi. I wanted to let you know that I created an article for Camp Favorites, the long-lost Ochs album.

I've also started a Phil Ochs template. I'd appreciate any suggestions you have before I move it out of my "sandbox."

Thanks. — Malik Shabazz | Talk 05:26, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

I was born at Bronx-Lebanon Hospital in 1963. We lived in Pelham Parkway until 1969 or 1970, when we moved to Co-op City. In 1973 we moved to Lon Guyland (boo hiss).

Funny you should mention the Amalgamated. My grandmother was a life-long member of the ILG, and I have a friend who works for UNITE HERE. But I never knew anybody who lived there. :-) — Malik Shabazz | Talk 15:12, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

PS - I have a copy of Camp Favorites, but my home PC is currently out of commission. When it's back in service I'll burn you a copy. But be warned — it's not Phil's finest work. LOL

Barack Obama image

Hi Tvoz,
I received an email from the photographer and he wanted the image removed. I called Obama's people and they confirmed that he was the owner of the image and that it wasn't owned by either the US government or the Obama campaign. Reference WP:OTRS ticket 2007041810014021 for confirmation. Since the gentleman was under Obama's employ at the time I think they could make the case that the image belongs to them or the government. However, if Obama's people are not going to claim ownership then we can't fight that battle. In any case we have free images to use in it's place so it's not worth the risk. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 15:43, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, it's odd that there wasn't any kind of attribution... but thats between the photographer and Obama. ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 22:16, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Jail

Hi! Sorry for the confusion. Indeed you have caught me in the middle. The reason for moving Jail (American) to Jail is that the usage of "Jail" as a place for detention is not US specific, and is used in many other places (such as Mongolia). Initially I was of the opinion of merging Jail (American) to Prison, because as of now, there are more than a 100 redirects to Jail most of which are referring to the usage of Prison, or a place for detention before going to Prison. Other usages are negligible. Here is my current plan:

Create Jail as a place for detention
Add a disambig, which lists the usage of Prison etc.

I have done the point 2, but point 1 is still left. You can help me :)--Scheibenzahl 21:00, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

A minor suggestion :) Please archive your page, it really kills my browser :D--Scheibenzahl 21:22, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Please look at the article now. Regarding page history etc., I will request an administrator to do the job cleanly (by deleting/moving instead of copy/pasting). I am sorry for creating the mess, since I am not an administrator, I should have asked some one to do the job. Right now I have posted the talk page at Talk:Jail.--Scheibenzahl 21:58, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Vielen vielen dank!--Scheibenzahl 22:21, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Dylan

I think the following ref is pretty explicit about Dylan's conversion to Christianity and his baptism. I've put it in the article. [[7]] Of course Dylan does NOT talk about his Christian conversion in his autobiography Chronicles. Have you read it? it's most interesting. Mick gold 21:43, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

I have read nothing authoritative about Dylan's so-called "return to Judaism" except what is claimed (but not substantiated) by some Wiki editors. Mick gold 21:54, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Flickety

Is my presence at this occasion not enough? I can provide my credentials but maybe not authentic enough? The Concordia website has the date wrong but if you would rather use it, it is: http://mediarelations.concordia.ca/mediaroom/mediafax/2007/03/009064.shtml. But their date is most definitely wrong as I was there on 22nd March in his presence and it is my diary and notes so I know I am not mistaken! Cheers, F

Another source: http://cjournal.concordia.ca/journalarchives/2006-07/mar_22/009006.shtml (Concordia Journal) - gets the date right. :)

Infobox changes

My changes lasted barely an hour, Orangemarlin caught me (see Bill Clinton). GoodDay 21:42, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your support, Tvoz. As for Orangemarlin's revert, to put it in American Political terms (in keeping with the subject), my edit has been 'vetoed'. GoodDay 21:56, 24 April 2007 (UTC)

US/SA relations

No, I think removing the speedy tag was reasonable, but I think an AfD nomination may be in order...Thanks. --Finngall ^talk 23:08, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

It works like this... --Finngall ^talk 23:16, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that one out. I've gone ahead and redirected it. The original submitter can still pull stuff from old revisions and add it to the other article if desired. --Finngall ^talk 23:28, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Gerald Ford

The Gerald Ford article is so huge that it definitely needs some splitting. Georgia guy 23:18, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

Rosie O'Donnell

Thank you for your efforts in trying to keep some balance and perspective on the Catholicism subject. Near as I can tell, there are various pro-Catholic users who insist on posting Donohue's diatribe, unchallenged and with no background on his own biases, and won't discuss the matter. Any attempt at providing balance, they turn around and call it "POV-pushing". I think it's fair to cite to some extent the accusations of bias, but the source of those accusations has to be considered. Which I think is a point you're also trying to make. What a hassle. Wahkeenah 23:39, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

What to do? Well, semi-protection won't do it, as these are presumably established users. And, by the way, I am willing to admit that a number of the things she's said have been just plain stupid or like she was mentally ill or something. That point was being made on O'Reilly tonight, discussing today's face-saving decision on her part that she will be leaving The View in June, at the end of her one-year deal. There is no question she's gone off the deep end several times. But many of her most vociferous critics are fairly close to that deep end themselves. One solution here may be taking it to arbitration. However, it occurs to me that with the end of her View tenure in sight, maybe the interest (i.e. the Rosie-bashing) will die down. Wahkeenah 00:20, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

You're probably right. It's a wait-and-see at this point. However, if someone refuses to discuss a POV issue, there's still the possibility of a Request for Comment. At the very least, if this nonsense continues, an admin should be consulted. I've found that endless edit wars are just that - endless - until an admin can be brought in, which is what we "pay" them to do. :) Wahkeenah 00:26, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter Issue 012 – April 2007

Wikipedia:WikiProject The Beatles/Outreach/Newsletter/Issue 012 --kingboyk 13:09, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

comment from another obvious sockpuppet

As explained in the talk page, previous Obama language is deceptive and POV because it may make the reader falsely believe that Obama has widespread police support when the reference states otherwise. You seem to be fixated on this KCtoday thing, not the reasoning behind my logic. Rather than try to achieve a NPOV, you just revert. Why not compromise? Bottlehead banned KCtoday, are you going to ask for the same thing? If so, this isn't compromise, it is attack. Let's work together.Lawman8 19:06, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

It's not going to work with me, Derek. Or whatever your real name is.Tvoz |talk 19:09, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Didn't mean you

Hello Tvoz |talk, I'm sorry if there was some confusion but i wasn't referring to you. I noticed you were doing it correctly, however if you look at some other edits in the history I think you'll see what I mean. The attempts to help seem to be genuine, but the result is not very good (again I am being vague to avoid offending anyone who is trying to help. I didn't want to hold you up as an example and have the other editors see us both as know it all jerks. Sorry for the confusion, Anynobody 23:04, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

diff this type of edit is more what I was referring to. Anynobody 23:34, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

User:Lawman8

OK, I'll handle it.--Anthony.bradbury 01:00, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Bob Dylan

I have been laboring to get Dylan removed from List of converts to Christianity.

The current debate is going on here.

This is an example of my argument, my most recent post:

C.Logan -- The list as presently configured is in violation of WP:NOT#SOAPBOX. You have been asked to change it. Many people on the Bob Dylan Talk page have asked that Bob Dylan's name be removed from this list. Why hasn't that change been made? Why hasn't Bob Dylan been removed from the list? Your assertion that the list should contain any person who has ever converted, even if they are no longer Christian, is an illogical contrivance that does not serve normal encyclopedic purposes and is advocacy for Christianity. Christianity and Judaism happen to be two different religions. Christianity is a religion which asserts that Jesus Christ is the Messiah. Judaism asserts that Jesus Christ is not the Messiah. Bob Dylan happens to be a Jew. Bob Dylan's identity implies that Jesus Christ is not the Messiah. You are conflating mutually exclusive assertions in the definition that you have contrived for this list, making it into a grotesquery. It is not as if you are unaware that Bob Dylan's status has changed. One can accept that a change in religious status that you are unaware of can mistakenly creep into a list or remain on a list because you are unaware of it. But it is incumbent on an editor to remove a name if they are clearly aware that the person is not in fact a Christian, but in fact in this case is a Jew. This list should logically be a list not only of those who have ever converted but of those who are still Christians. It is promotion of Christianity to include the prominent Jew, Dylan on this list. Any other names that come to light as no longer being Christian should also be removed. The list is not a billboard for advertising Christianity. Please understand that I mean Christians no harm. But the twisting of logic is destructive to an encyclopedia, and the promotion of religion is totally out of place in Wikipedia. Bus stop 09:50, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Any comment? Thanks. Bus stop 14:52, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Edwards

Sorry about that... the picture seems very out of place, why would a (low quality) image of him at a NYT panel discussion be in the section about his early life? I just don't see the need for it. Bbsrock 03:39, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Question

Do you have any qualms with me removing your talk comments involving conversations with banned users (as incidental to removing the banned user's comments)? Just curious for future reference. · jersyko talk 16:57, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Tucker Max

Thanks for that, I'm borderline retarded when it comes to formating things on Wikipedia. Bluefield 19:50, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Afd concerning Bob Dylan

Never mind. It's come to my attention that I'm not supposed to contact other editors about these sorts of things. Bus stop 01:14, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Imagine

Well, the real reason I reverted was because in the IP address's edit, there was no "e" at the top of the page, and then someone edited it and the was an "e" at the top, seemed like vandalism, but I missed the other part of the edit, I guess, so change it so it looks like it should, without the "e" :).
Blind man shady 04:53, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Re: thanks

Hey - you're very welcome. Happy to help. Will (aka Wimt) 22:20, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Will (aka Wimt) 22:23, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Cheng's Guy

The guy who playes Zhou is Ian Anthony Dale.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_Anthony_Dale

Hillary Clinton

I'm never sure how to do it, but I'm a technolog trainer at a high school and often make comments on wiki pages like I did with Hillary to demonstrate to teachers how quickly other people will fix mistakes.

Not sure of the wiki etiquette, but thanks for helping with my demo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.125.30.157 (talk • contribs)

I agree, thanks!

Hello Tvos,

Remember I am still a little green. Your point's are well taken and I agree with you.

Thanks for your help!

Anappealtoheaven 05:57, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Maurice Gibb / Clive Anderson

JoeBrennan 02:45, 13 May 2007 (UTC) I don't see how it shows Maurice as peacekeeper either. Barry mentioned on radio in 4/07 that he was still sore about Robin leaving the group in 1969, and I think that was the problem here. Clive mentioned Robin's hit, and asked about it. Watch Barry defensively mention the Robin-less Bee Gees hit of the same time, Don't Forget the Remember, and Clive's lame joke that he forgot it. This appears to be what ticked off Barry. Robin then leaves because Barry did, and Maurice follows.

stalking?

I hope you aren't stalking me because of the Barack Obama comment that I made as you seem to inhabit there! Out of the blue, you appeared at the Astronaut Hall of Fame, an obscure article which was recently created by me. Your comment of "true but not relevant to his election to the HoF" is appreciated but is not necessarily true. See the talk page of that article.

Senator Glenn was senator at the time of his induction. Conceivably, it's possible that that influenced the decision. It's possible that the museum wanted to gain favor of a powerful senator. It's also possible that they did not consider the fact. Note that Glenn was inducted before Neil Armstrong, even though Armstrong was the first man on the moon. Feddhicks 16:36, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

P.S. I'm not trying to fight with you, if any comments, just leave them on the Astronaut Hall of Fame page unless you want to keep it the way it is.Feddhicks 16:38, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

James Dean

Just between you and me, I was intrigued that James Dean Bradfield's father was so huge it was necessary to mention it in an article about James Dean, and for all we know he was merely big-boned. It was a little insensitive, don't you think? :-) Nice to hear from you. I agree with your comment re The Bee Gees : sometimes it's best to just shrug one's shoulders and move on. Rossrs 08:49, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Davidwr

If you aren't following me, why are you following Davidwr? You don't have to answer, just tell Davidwr why! Inhabit? Look at your talk page, a large chunk of it is Barack Obama or Cat Stephens. What does logical disjunction have to do with Astronaut Hall of Fame? Don't bother to explain!Feddhicks 19:17, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Dude, seriously. Wah. At least try to assume some good faith. Your comment on the Barack Obama talk page[8] was made six days before Tvoz ever made an edit on the AHOF page.[9] If Tvoz was wikistalking you, why would she take 6 days to make an edit on the AHOF article? And since you seem to be pushing an agenda in regards to John Glenn.. Take a look at the names in the first class AHoF inductees, they are the seven Project Mercury astronauts. All of which (except Gus Grissom who died in the Apollo 1 accident) were instrumental in the creation of the AHoF museum. Go figure. The astronauts that pioneered the US's entry into manned spaceflight were the first class admitted into the AHoF. Shocking.. Scandalous. --Bobblehead ^(rants) 19:58, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Tvoz made the comment soon after I edited about John Glenn. That explains his delay.Feddhicks 20:06, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Feddhicks, here's a news flash: people are interested in more than one thing. My user page talks about a few of the things I'm interested in (and also mentions that I'm female, so "she" works better for me), but is hardly a comprehensive list of my interests, and this talk page is far less than that - talk is mostly what other people post here. (Oh, and try "contributions" if you want an idea of where people edit.) As for the astronauts, you see I'm old enough to remember quite clearly when Shepard, and the others in the Mercury seven, launched into space - I held my breath with my classmates in 5th grade when Glenn orbited the Earth - and so I have a lifelong interest in the space program,, especially Project Mercury, but Armstrong wasn't bad. And my husband knows Rusty Schweickart, Edgar Mitchell and Storey Musgrave personally, so those guys are of interest to me too. I was on the page for another reason (but I don't know who Davidwr is - I'll have to check him out now, thanks) and when I saw what to me was an odd inclusion about Glenn, I posted. You are either not who you claim to be and so have reason to think I'd be stalking you, or you are reacting to an edit in a really odd and inappropriate way. I'll figure out which one it is soon enough. Thanks Bobblehead - you of course have it right. Tvoz |talk 23:26, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for reverting the blanking of my userpage. At that time of day it would've remained in that state for at least another 30 minutes before I could possibly have noticed it. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:44, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

john edwards

I saw your change of my change. I don't quibble over the details. That's fine with me. Summary, yes...ad, no.Pipermantolisopa 04:12, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Ron Paul? It's locked out for newer users so I didn't bother. Some of the way it's written can be improved. I have seen wikipedia before and shook my head at some of the stuff so I finally decided to do something about it. Some stuff is good, other stuff is childish, and some in between. The political candidates' articles are generally ok except some have too much advertising. --- When is a new user locked out? If you don't know, it's ok. I taken a peek at wikipedia occasionally for 2 years but never did anything so I'm considered a newbie.Pipermantolisopa 03:32, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Marshall McLuhan and "hot and cool media"

Hi Tvov. I left a message re. the merger of "hot and cool media" (with the McLuhan article) on Talk:Marshall McLuhan -- the "hot and cool media" content has disappeared. --Smobri 14:17, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I appreciate your comments

Hello Tvoz,

I really do appreciate your comments and keeping me in check. I need that oversight from an experience user like yourself.

With that said, under normal circumstances I would agree with your position regarding the John Birch Society.

On the other hand, I think we could now call into question the validity of the so called mainstream news organizations.

One example: Here in Houston (Ron Paul's own backyard) I have only seen one article in the Houston Chronicle that even mentions Ron Paul's name in the last week. Further, the Chronicle is censoring/deleting blogs that ask for Ron Paul coverage.

I thank God for a neutral service, Wikipedia, to summarize and quote what has been reported nationwide.

Further, Ron Paul is not a polarizing figure himself, garnering support from across the political spectrum (right and left). My goal is to report what is being said from both the right (JBS) and the left (911 groups); as well as anyone else who would make factual statments regarding this candidate in an appropriate sorce/forum.

Again, thanks for your oversight and I wanted to respond with my thinking on this particular issue.

AnAppealToHeaven

BaBa WaWa

Yes, the link in the article is dead, but I looked it up at ancestry.com just before I edited the article - so I added the citation. - Nunh-huh 18:41, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't think a link to Ancestry would do much good, as it's by subscription. I'd upload an image, but of course that's forbidden by Ancestry's TOS. - Nunh-huh 18:47, 17 May 2007 (UTC) (Thanks for the font fix, btw.)

Just as a heads up, User:Cantwaitforit/User:Zackfins54 is continuing to insert misinformation at the page. - Nunh-huh 19:17, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, I imagined it was, and I see that he was blocked on the 18th because others held similar suspicions :) - Nunh-huh 19:19, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I would like you to know that I'm not the same person as Cantwaitforit. That is my sister's username and she went on a spree of fake edits last week, so our IP Address was blocked because we use the same computers. I do apologize for her vandalism, however, I stand behind all edits made under this username. I don't believe that Barbara Walters was born in 1929. There are just as many, actually more sources that cite her birth as 1931 rather than 1929. Also, I don't appreciate the way that you speak to me. I am not a five year old. I notice that a lot of your postings have a certain condescending "I'm better than you" tone to them. Zackfins54 19:30, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

You have repeatedly changed the article, despite the extensive discussion on the Talk page - exactly the same way as "Cantwaitforit" did. And your comment here is rather odd, since I haven't had any interactions with you before if you are not the same person - so I don't know what comments of mine you think are condescending or where you came upon them. I'm well aware that there is a discrepancy on the web regarding her birthdate - this was handled in a footnote long ago - and you have been told about ancestry.com and the availability of records offline. Your change is not correct, and edit warring is not the way to go about convincing anyone. Get some real evidence and there will be something to talk about. I'm not convinced about your identity - others will have to decide for themselves. Tvoz |talk 20:04, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

When I said that I don't appreciate the way you speak to me, I was referring to the note you made the last time you undid my edit, as well as the other postings you have made in the discussion section of the Walters article. And why is it that I am accused of edit warring simply because you don't agree with what I have changed? It takes two to make an edit war. I have provided a link to support my change so I don't see how you find it outside of reason. Zackfins54 20:06, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Because you are wrong. I reverted you one time with an explanation. Nunh-huh reverted you with explanation. You ignored hidden text, you ignored talk discussions, you just reverted. Add in the repeated identical changes that were done under the name Cantwaitforit and you'll understand why I say you are edit warring.. If you have anything more to say, please say it on the article talk page, not here. I do not wish to continue this conversation. Tvoz |talk 20:24, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Giuliani article

Spitting accusations and assuming bad faith will not get you far either. I was unaware of these but was in the process of fixing this (see my edit "tidying", and later "more") as you came in. Things don't happen instantly. Str1977 ^{(smile back)} 21:34, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Tvoz, again you are not AGF

I first reinstated my changes (the edit with the long edit summary) by reverting to the previous version.
Then I spotted the Ron Paul additions and set out to remove them - or rather reinstate the removals. I called this "tidying". I worked on the version created by my first edit and when I saved it, after an edit conflict, this of course produced the previous version minus Ron Paul.
And then I spotted to more paragraphs of Ron Paul and removed them under "more".

So there was dishonesty involved. I worked on the version I had created and hence the previous changes were part of that too. I could not know that you would come in immediately. Had I worked all by myself you would have had three edits in a row, with my changes and the tidying all together.

As for Giuliani making this into an attack on "religion" - that is possible and if we have a Giuliani soundbite about this we can quote him. Then it is his inaccurate wording and not ours anymore.

Str1977 ^{(smile back)} 21:54, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

One more thing about the accident: you removed it a while before. I didn't know that. I saw that you reverted other edits as well and was under the impression that your current version and mine only differed in regard to "my changes". After saving, I found out my mistake and set out to tidying. It was bad timing that you happened to come along. (I am not blaming you, as you couldn't know that I was working on this already.) Str1977 ^{(smile back)} 21:57, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Regarding the artistic credentials: I still think this irrelevant but I can live with it. In contrast to the "catholic" thing there might be legitimate reasons for this information.

I also agree about the 3rd behind Ron Paul thing. There are a couple of Paul-omaniacs around.

Finally, do you have any opinion/suggestion about the "occupation" issue? Str1977 ^{(smile back)} 22:01, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

John Birch Society agenda

The long standing "agenda" of The John Birch Society has been from day one: "Less government - more responsibility" -- which of course has often been translated (even by ourselves) as ridding the country of communism and other totalitarian forms of rule.

The point in the JBS article referenced in the Paul entry comes down to this: BEFORE the debate 73,000 plus MSNBC "voters" gave more than a 40% favorable rating to Giuliani, while Paul got only 9%. AFTER the debate the results where essentially the opposite with over 80,000 votes cast. The before-debate on-line polling was considered something worthy of attention because the major-media produced darling was winning. When the favorite was crushed...after his debate performance...the on-line polling significance was immediately called into question by those who set up the poll. ABC chimed in by suggesting that Internet savvy Paul supporters had found a way to hijack the result by somehow overwhelming the system...as if the 73,000 pre-debate voters had mysteriously disappeared. Of course a more plausible explanation is that MSNBC fans who found Giuliani's pro-abortion and gun control positions most to their taste, opted for Paul when they discovered to their delight that there is an anti-war candidate running for President...something that can't even be said for the front running options in the Democratic Party.

Since Ron Paul is also one of the three US Congressmen running for President who have become co-sponsors of HCR 40 that calls on the President to stop work on the North American Union and NAFTA superhighway, I may have to go put an edit on the Giuliani page noting that his law firm Bracewell & Giuliani, is the exclusive legal council for Cintra, the Spanish firm chosen to operate the I-35 toll road in the Texas Trans Corridor leg of the very same NAFTA superhighway. No agenda there for Mr. Giuliani and friends, I am sure. But alas, I might be taken for one of those conspiracy theorists at the Washington Post who wrote last Sunday that Giuliani Capital Advisors "was sold for an undisclosed amount as Giuliani was preparing his run for president."

The Post article also discloses that Giuliani's secretive lobbying firm, Giuliani Partners, has made more than $100 million over the last five years and that its clients "are required to sign confidentiality agreements, so they do not comment about the work they receive or how much they are paying for it. Though now running for president, Giuliani refuses to identify his clients, disclose his compensation or reveal any details about Giuliani Partners. He also declined to be interviewed about the firm."

Note: I do not know the person who referenced my article in the Paul entry but, I thank him for being objective.--Capousa 02:11, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

If only Phil Ochs were alive to see this on my talk page. Tvoz |talk 20:48, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Definitions

Miltie's on the cross-dressing page with a photo none-the-less. Again, there is in an established section of the Rudy article on the Rudia facet of his personality. Please be respectful. Each of your messages to me carries a threat of banning. How can you claim to have a sense of humor when you're such a bully? That is not dialogue or proper wikipedia behavior. :( Be NICE :) Arbol25 06:07, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Giuliani 2

Thanks Tvoz for your reply. Apologies wholly accepted. I can very much understand how you were feeling. I have encountered the Paulomaniacs myself too, though not yet on WP. And I am not blameless, I could have made my edits clearer.

Indeed, we have an understanding on the issues and if there is a reference giving Giuliani's stance back in the day that would be fine.

As for "occupation" - this is the name I gave to the section on the talk page. It is about Ron Paul denouncing US foreign policy as the cause of 9/11, referring to "our occupation of Saudi-Arabia" ... I don't think occupation is an accurate and neutral term in this context. If he said it, we should word it in a better way. Str1977 ^{(smile back)} 06:39, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply again. I have seen what you have done and agree. I have tweaked it a bit more (explained on the talk page). I agree about the cross-dressing thing and if I come across this, I will take care to revert it too. Str1977 ^{(smile back)} 06:57, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

24 headings

Sorry. At first, I thought those are your heading . But I realize that I was wrong. So I undo it again after I find out the user who did it. Chris 04:38, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Ron Paul et al

If the current level of protection isn't high enough, you could always try WP:RFPP. The noticeboard is really (unfortunately?) the only other place I can think of to request admin involvement for something like this, unless it qualifies as vandalism, then WP:AIAV would be the place to go. I realize you already are aware of all of these options, but I just can't really think of anything else to point you to other than perhaps trying the viliage pump or community portal. I'll be happy to take a look to see if there's any immediate action I could take as well. Then again, you could always endure RfA for yourself . . . :) · jersyko talk 13:44, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

(about the neutrality tag) Is it the same person taking it out or many people?--Gloriamarie 16:15, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Perhaps we can watch who is taking it out and ban them? I think it's OK the way it is now.--Gloriamarie 16:49, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

OK, sounds good.--Gloriamarie 17:13, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

(family section) Good idea.. I'm going through adding information in order as it appears in the article, but I'll do that when I'm done.--Gloriamarie 17:20, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I'll take another look. I'm not done yet. :)--Gloriamarie 18:22, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

(ref name) Sorry about that, I guess I was working too fast! I'll pay more attention.--Gloriamarie 19:09, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

(family)I tried to look up more things on his family, but there's surprisingly little other than about his wife. There is some info on various Myspaces of his kids and grandkids (apparently he has another great-grandchild on the way) but those aren't good sources, so I don't think I have much to add on that front for now. I found some info on one daughter who is a doctor, but it would be odd to only have information on one child so I won't add any of that. Should the family part be at the end or the beginning?--Gloriamarie 19:24, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

John Edwards and Ron Paul

I don't want to quibble over little details in the wording but we can make the article good and 100% accurate, instead of 99.9% (my changes of your changes of his legal work). As far as Ron Paul, it's still locked out to me. That article needs much more than changing a word or two for 100% and not 99.9% accuracy.Pipermantolisopa 04:32, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

User:VK35

Just so you know, VK35 is not a sock of a banned user. Jimbo Wales determined this. I am telling you because of your concern about clerk volunteers. Funpika 20:35, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Songs with Names AfD

Check the discussion, I answered your question. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps)))} 21:41, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Dereks1x

Hi Tvoz. As someone familiar with the Dereks1x situation, I think your input would be useful here. Thanks. · jersyko talk 01:23, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

John Edwards

Have you been watching the John Edwards article for a while? I would have sworn that the article included a pretty extensive Controversies section a few months ago, and now that information is completely removed. I put this on the talk page there, too.---Gloriamarie 17:20, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Answered - in a way-too-long comment on Talk:John Edwards. Tvoz |talk 18:29, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

I think adding smear type controversies isn't right for an encyclopia. What do you think about the person who put back in the health care ad in the John Edwards article. How do we correct it? If I change it, they'll change it right back. Is there any way to bring some objectivity into that section instead of just making it an ad? Your putting the top paragraph seems like a nice balance.

I saw on yahoo news that Edwards wants a draft, what he calls national service. Hear that? I think it's too early to include that because it might have been a one time statement, not a change that changes his bio.

Any suggestions on Ron Paul? How do you re-write something that needs to be rebuilt? Pipermantolisopa 03:17, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

John Edwards

No problem. It's an editor who's being rather disruptive on the Bobby Sands talk page, in addition to his talk page as an IP and his current talk page. Basically he doesn't realise that categorising people as Catholic isn't helpful for navigation unless they are notable because of their religion, and has incorrectly assumed that all categories therefore follow the same rules. Thanks. One Night In Hackney₃₀₃ 21:36, 23 May 2007 (UTC)