User talk:TenOfAllTrades/archive07

This page is an archive of talk page comments for the months of December 2005 through February 2006.

Please add any new comments to my current talk page at User talk:TenOfAllTrades. Thanks!

BD2412's RFA[edit]

Although my RfA is not over yet, I figured that since so many people voted before it had been posted, I may as well start thanking people before it wraps up. It'll take me that long to thank everyone who voted anyway! Merry Christmas, Ten, and thank you for your support - I'll do my best as an admin to make the reality rise to the level of the dream. BD2412 T 17:07, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Reverting entries/User Zippity Doo Dah[edit]

User Chadbryant is vandalising articles and user pages on Wikipedia with baseless and unsubstantiated sockpuppet accusations. He has been warned on this by at least one Wikipedia admin, and there is an ongoing dispute between he and I regarding this immature and baseless behavior; as such, I will NOT allow him to do so, especially on user talk pages (user pages are bad enough). Before you go jumping the gun next time, please check to see who the weapon belongs to. For more information, see the user talk page of Curps. And yes, this IS a sockpuppet of Zippity Doo Dah, but only because you blocked me without giving me a chance to explain MY side of the story -- an action I have attempted to do multiple times, only to be stopped by idiots like yourself. ElevenOfAllTrades 01:07, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Stick a fork in it[edit]

I am sorry you don't appreciate how much the quality of the Supercentenarian article depends on undoing the work of often-ignorant editors.But the point in question is that a new World's Oldest has been recognized who retroactively obsoletes all claims to that title for the last year and a half.And you must know by now that I refuse to be complicit in any way in perpetuation of the other fork.--Louis E./le@put.com/12.144.5.2 16:34, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Please STOP supporting the "accepted version"!!--Louis Epstein/le@put.com/12.144.5.2 23:38, 13 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I would prefer if you not move my talk around again[edit]

Be nice my friend...this was uncalled for and you were not even engaged in the conversation.--MONGO 16:38, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I saw your displacement of my comment as being quite rude.--MONGO 16:55, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

While I understand your reasoning and am partially in agreement with it, I saw that you were not engaged in the conversation and I didn't like my comment being "displaced", no matter how inappropriate it may appear to you. If Ambi doesn't like my comment, then she can move it and that I would understand. A brief review of Mr. Newberry's edit history will provide ample support of my comments.--MONGO 17:30, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

SEWilco[edit]

He did make an edit as SEWilco after the bot was blocked, so far as I can see. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 15:55, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion here, TofT: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#SEWilco_and_footnotes_again. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 15:57, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; discussion carried on there. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 16:09, 12 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

== Thanks == ...for your useful tip on external links in signatures; the necessary modification has been made...--
Mark Bornfeld DDS
Brooklyn, NY 18:48, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Esperanza elections[edit]

File:Voting box clipart.gif

Hi TenOfAllTrades/archive07: This is a quick note just to let you know that there's an election under way at Esperanza. If you'd like to become a candidate for Administrator General or the Advisory Council, just add your name here by 15 December 2005.

Voting begins at 12:00UTC on 16 December and all Esperanza members are encouraged to join in.

This message was delivered to all Esperanza members. If you do not wish to receive further messages, please contact Flcelloguy. Thank you.

➨ ❝R E DVERS❞ 10:10, 14 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

News from Esperanza[edit]

Hello, fellow Esperanzians! This is just a friendly reminder that elections for Administrator General and two advisory council positions have just begun. Voting will last until Friday, December 30, so make sure you exercise your right to vote! Also, I'm pleased to announce the creation of the Esperanza mailing list. I urge all members to join; see Wikipedia:Esperanza/Contact for more information. All you need to do is email me and I will activate your account. This will be a great way to relax, stay in touch, and hear important announcements. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?)

This message was delivered to all Esperanza members by our acting messenger, Redvers. If you do not wish to receive further messages, please list yourself at WP:ESP/S. Thanks.

Thanks[edit]

Thanks for the quick revert on my User page. ERcheck 22:17, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

SCA blocked[edit]

Hello Ten,

The blocking message that comes up when I try to edit says my IP is 207.200.116.132. I frankly don't understand the technical aspects of this problem, but I'd like to be unblocked. Thanks for taking an interest. Sca 16:23, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, it's a block of an AOL IP. I've lifted the block, since it's obviously no longer blocking the correct account. TenOfAllTrades

Thanks! Dziekuje! Danke! Aciu! Sca 16:41, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Plagiarism[edit]

Hey Ten. Re: this, it seems clear to me that someone is at fault and the editors need to be informed. Have you alerted Jimbo, as this might be a big deal (or nothing at all). --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - <*> 00:00, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

On the theory that when someone gets caught for plagarism, it is never the first time, I went looking through other Tim Ryan stories and have added to your dupe page showing a story where he apparently lifted 5 paragraphs from the Sacremento Bee. Dragons flight 06:01, 23 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like the Star-Bulletin printed a correction. See User talk:TenOfAllTrades/Aloha Dupe for an update. --Calton | Talk 01:55, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas!![edit]

**MERRY CHRISTMAS**, TenOfAllTrades/archive07! A well deserved pressy!--Santa on Sleigh 22:22, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Emma Waston / Sex symbol[edit]

Talk:Emma Watson#Sex symbol. Thanks/wangi 23:23, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It's the thought that counts[edit]

Wiki alf seems to have beaten you to it, but your efforts in reverting vandalism on my talk page are appreciated by me anyways. :D Cookie?

-- Hinotori^{(talk)|(ctrb)} 00:42, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! :D TenOfAllTrades(talk) 00:43, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protection[edit]

Thanks for the semi-protect of my user page. I appreciate the protections from vandalism.

What does "semi-protect" mean (versus protect)? I take it I can still edit my user page, but no one else. —ERcheck @ 16:44, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A semi-protect is great. Would you please leave it in place unless I request otherwise? Thanks. —ERcheck @ 17:11, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry if I interrupted Wikipedia to make a point[edit]

Was in a bit of a bad mood earlier (long day!) when I added all of the See Also links to the National Vaccine Information Center. Sorry you had to intervene...InvictaHOG 02:02, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No harm done. It did make the point, but it probably would have been wise to revert yourself afterwards. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 02:03, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A great deal of harm in the form of vaccine injuries is being caused by the massive expansion of mass vaccination campaigns in recent decades. If you two are so adverse to the notion of informed debate that you must resort to deleting salient content, you should propose an RfC outlining the details of what evidently is an emerging strategy to ban see also links on vaccine articles. Ombudsman 03:01, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There's no reason for you to take offense to a qualified 'if, then' suggestion for an RfC. If you are not familiar with why a link has been added, do a little research and present your arguments for a particular deletion, rather than simply supporting a dubious campaign to wipe out all the see also links on vaccine articles, a campaign justified thus far only by vague blanket statements. If you don't like the balance of see also links, add or replace a few. But don't make the see also sections on the vaccine articles a vast desert just because they might not meet your personal standard for relevancy. The 2000 Simpsonwood CDC conference article is extremely relevant to an informed debate about many vaccine-related topics, especially in the case of the NVIC article. The see also links, by their very nature, are stepping stones designed to connect islands of knowledge. The events that went down in Georgia had a profound effect not only on participants, who clearly received the message that it would be dangerous to their careers if they spoke out against the travesty of the proceedings, but also to the public, which has suffered a great disservice by the suppression of VAERS data and related vaccine information that was reinforced by events there. There is no need to feel insulted if you don't intend to suppress informed debate, but strong relationships exist between a vaccine information center, Mark Geier, Safe Minds, et al. The articles linked in the see also section tell the story of their efforts to access suppressed data, and undoubtedly would help the Wiki's readers become better informed. Repeatedly removing the links has the appearance of suppression, regardless of whether it is intentional or not- a question that the 'if, then' phrasing left open for you to answer. Ombudsman 06:52, 31 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

HD DVD[edit]

It was originally added here by 201.29.32.87 (talk · contribs). I removed it, and it was added again the same day here by Dungeon Siege (talk · contribs). I left comments on both talk pages explaining copyright, but didn't receive any response. Then it seemed to be added again here, but it looks like whoever this was did rewrite a large chunk of it, but left the same leading sentence and link to FUD at the top (which up until now, I hadn't noticed anything had changed since the layout was all the same). So it looks like I screwed up... I'll stop reverting it, obviously. —Locke Cole • t • c 19:14, 2 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

86.131.79.168[edit]

Look at this user's user talk page; namely at the section I wrote "2nd time", "3rd time", etc. for the user blanking his user talk page. Study the number of words of each phrase. Do you think this is an interesting way to announce rather than just writing simply "2nd time", "3rd time", etc. each time?? Georgia guy 00:33, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aloha Flight 243[edit]

Good job on the investigative sleuthing on the Aloha Flight 243 story! I'd award you a barnstar if I believed that graphical complements were somehow more satisfactory than textual ones ;) Jacoplane 01:03, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I was just in the right–wrong?–place at the right time. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 01:59, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Thanks for the thanks and friendly welcome, hopefully soon I'll work out how to edit something all at once without making hundreds of little changes ;-) How do you get the User_Talk on your sig automaticall? Cheers Rescendent 23:36, 5 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A thanks and a poem for TenOfAllTrades[edit]

Mr. Trades, thank you so much for your support of my RfA. As is so often the case in such moments, poetry expresses it best:

Roses are red
Violents are blue
All my bases
Are belong to you

I will do my best to be a good and useful admin, and if you desire my help for anything at all, please just ask! Thanky thanky, Babajobu 00:41, 7 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks[edit]

Pgk's RFA

Thanks for your support on my request for adminship.

The final outcome was (80/3/0), so I am now an administrator. I was flattered by the level of support and the comments, so I'm under real pressure not to disappoint, thus if you have any queries, suggestions or problems with any of my actions as an admin then please leave me a note --pgk^(talk) 10:41, 8 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pomegranate seeds pic[edit]

Thanks for the suggestions, I'll definately use that in the future. I added more info to the pic and changed it to GFDL-self. Pschemp 00:46, 12 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not banning intellectuals and scientists (proposed language)[edit]

I would appreciate your comments and suggestions on the following:

Wikipedia talk:Autobiography#Not banning intellectuals and_scientists (proposed language)

Thanks, --Carl Hewitt 09:51, 16 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed remedies, indeed...[edit]

Tranquilizer darts? Hm. Might work better than probation. ;-) Mindspillage (spill yours?) 00:33, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and your name was conspicuously absent from the elections... your commentary that I've seen is usually quite helpful; I'm sorry to see you didn't run. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 00:35, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate the thought, and I'll congratulate you now on the runaway success of your candidacy. I considered running, but I have a number of commitments in my professional life over the next year and I expect that I just wouldn't be able to commit sufficient time to the ArbCom. I haven't been nearly as active in the article space as I would have liked in recent months, and I'd prefer to get back into that for a while. I'll have to limit my role in arbitration to useful gadfly this time around—maybe I'll see you next year. Cheers, TenOfAllTrades(talk) 01:35, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I made you say that :) R adiant _>|< 17:58, 17 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I deserved that. :D TenOfAllTrades(talk) 03:18, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aloha Flight 243[edit]

Well, I for one believe in barnstars: --Great work. ε γκυκλοπαίδεια*

Links[edit]

Hello, I Have Movesd THe Links That I Had On THe Article Page To THe Talk Page. Is That Ok. I Tryed To Put Lots Of Information For A Wikiproject. REply Please On My Talk Page. --CMonkey 00:43, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re:Links[edit]

Hi, THanks For The Idea, I Think That's a good idea. Thanks for all your help. --CMonkey 01:23, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Links[edit]

Hello, I Have Movesd THe Links That I Had On THe Article Page To THe Talk Page. Is That Ok. I Tryed To Put Lots Of Information For A Wikiproject. REply Please On My Talk Page. --CMonkey 00:45, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New page patrol - Derek McCormack[edit]

Sorry if db-bio was inappropriate, but I thought from what was in the article that the chap failed the professor test. No publications mentioned, etc. I'm still getting the feel for notability/importance, as the criteria seem a bit arbitrary between different professions (eg *all* professional sportspeople vs. professors test). I'll try not to be too trigger happy, though. Cheers, --Squiddy | (squirt ink?) 01:23, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Instantnood 3[edit]

Hello,

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Instantnood 3. Please add evidence to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Instantnood 3/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Instantnood 3/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee,

An Esperanzial note[edit]

As I remember, the last spam that was handed out was on the 20th of December last year, so I think it's time for another update. First and foremost, the new Advisory Council and Administrator General have been elected. They consist of myself as Admin General and FireFox, Titoxd, Flcelloguy and Karmafist as the Advisory Council. We as a group met formally for the first time on the 31st of Decembe. The minutes of this meeting can be found at WP:ESP/ACM. The next one is planned for tonight (Sunday 29 January) at 20:30 UTC and the agenda can be found at WP:ESP/ACM2.

In other news, Karmafist has set up a discussion about a new personal attack policy, which it can be found here. Other new pages include an introductory page on what to do when you sign up, So you've joined Esperanza... and a welcome template: {{EA-welcome}} (courtesy of Bratsche). Some of our old hands may like to make sure they do everything on the list as well ;) Additionally, the userpage award program proposal has become official is operational: see Wikipedia:Esperanza/User Page Award to nominate a userpage or volunteer as a judge. Also see the proposed programs page for many new proposals and old ones that need more discussion ;)

Other than that, I hope you all had a lovely Christmas and wish you an Esperanzially good new WikiYear :D Thank you! --Cel e stianpower ^háblame 16:57, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Message delivered by Rune.welsh using AWB. If you wish to recieve no further messages of this ilk, please sign your name here.

-Ril-[edit]

I replaced the {{sockpuppetProven}} tag with a {{Sockpuppet}} tag, per your comment on my talk page. --Phroziac _. o º^{O (♥♥♥♥ chocolate!)} 18:11, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Markups[edit]

Hi. In Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 January 24#Template:Markups, you suggested userfying this. However, per my comment there I don't think userfying to Xiong's space makes sense. So, since you thought it might be useful, I've moved it to User:TenOfAllTrades/Template:Markups. Feel free to delete it if you prefer. The redirect is already gone. -Splash^talk 03:01, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Allopath[edit]

Reply to your message to me, posted here and on my user page:-

Thank you. You are kind to take the trouble to explain this. I have also been looking at the definition of the term following the comments of others. The Invisible Anon 15:02, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your Revert Of The Edible_Salt Article[edit]

You Stated (rv: NaCl is not a poisonous food additive or industrial byproduct...) And here is some information to open up your eyes! Read the section 'Salt Consumption World Wide' http://198.66.49.238/salex.pdf (the human body has no problem with impurities in salt it's only for the chem industry) I would like You to re-revert the article.

Jan Girke jangirke@gmx.net

I forgot a link[edit]

http://scifun.chem.wisc.edu/chemweek/Cl2&NaOH/Cl2&NaOH.html

Jan Girke jangirke@gmx.net

Table salt isn't an industrial byproduct; it is major industrial product. One of your links indicates that some 30% of NaCl production goes to human consumption; it's not an industrial waste item, it's a commercially valuable food additive that is produced deliberately.

Salt–pure NaCl or iodized table salt–is not poisonous except in large quantities. Our bodies require a certain amount of sodium in order to function. (As is already noted in the article, consumption of excess sodium can lead to health problems like hypertension—everything in moderation, as they say.)

While processing rock or sea salt to remove impurities and improve colour and handling properties does remove or reduce a number of trace elements, this does not render the salt toxic. The addition of iodine to most table salt rectifies one of the major drawbacks of salt processing and restores an improtant trace element.

I'm not entirely sure what your links are meant to demonstrate; the fact that sodium chloride is also a major industrial chemical doesn't render it unsuitable as a food additive. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 17:51, 9 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:86.10.231.219[edit]

continuing attacks on "his" user page. You posted a warning on his talk page. What can be done now, please? Midgley 01:33, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Since I'm at least peripherally involved in the dispute, I'm not comfortable taking a direct hand in dealing further with this editor's behaviour. I will post a note note on the Administrators' Noticeboard asking for an outside opinion. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 01:41, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I don't think he has toned things down, rather moved from crude attacks to more sophisticated ones. . Midgley 12:35, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed: mainly based on filibustering, addressing criticism with pages of verbal fog while professing the utmost reasonability in doing so.

Like someone who spits in your soup in a restaurant, then when you complain says: "Thank you for your comment. What do we mean by spit? What do we mean by soup? The 473 differing recipes for soup in Larousse Gastronomique show that there is no agreed definition of soup. Your complaint fails to address specifically how the supposed soup might be improved. I welcome constructive discussion to reach an amicable solution" etc etc.

The discussions at Talk:Anecdotal evidence#Request for Comments are pretty representative of the problem. Tearlach 16:42, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In Response

These efforts to find something to pick holes in are really not helpful. There is nothing filibustery about my comments:-

of all the contributions on Talk:Anecdotal evidence#Request for Comments mine seem to be the only ones which are specific and to the point [[1]], [[2]], and if there is any difficulty in reading and understanding these specific references [[3]] which were asked for as evidence to deal with the one specific point that seems to have been raised (and answered) that is not something I can help you with - is that OK? You need to find a way of resolving it yourself rather than engaging in attacks of this kind.
for a vague filibustery comment of the "What do we mean by spit? What do we mean by soup?" kind see Tearlach's "When you open Encyclopedia Britannica, do you see something looking like that?". In fact, that is very short of "What do we mean by spit" because it has not got that far. "What do we mean by spit" is far more specific than that comment.
Having answered all there is, I have had to ask people in Talk:Anecdotal evidence#Request for Comments for them to say what their specific issues are. "No answer", comes the stern reply.
As noted, [[4]] I should be praised for tackling this issue well and head-on instead of these unspecific filibustery attacks

At least do me the good grace of finding something that approaches a good criticism and worthy of the attention of my highly attuned and intelligent mind than this attempt at allegations of filibustering. Is that clear enough and specific enough (like all the rest I write)? This is an online encyclopedia. It contains words. If you do not want to read words, there are plenty of other pastimes to choose from. The Invisible Anon 17:31, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oi! Please review the civility policy; it's not optional. I really don't want my user talk page to become another forum for repeating a rehashing the same arguments from Talk:Anecdotal evidence; that discussion belongs on that talk page. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 18:08, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your point taken 110%. More than happy for this to be moved there. I feel the same way and much more about the foregoing attacks on me as you do about having this on your page. It is not civil of Tearlach to accuse someone of something they plainly have not done. The Invisible Anon 19:33, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't use my talk page as a forum to make snide remarks, either. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 21:13, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about that. Provocation. Will try to avoid. The Invisible Anon 22:09, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Having read the above has anyone else seen the hilarity of a longwinded response to a complaint of filibustering? Kd4ttc 16:53, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Regrettably provocative, incorrect and soooo unnecessary. Apologies in advance that either the above or this comment appear on your talk page. Good example though of what I have to put up with. Plenty more available. The Invisible Anon 18:44, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

What part of 'don't continue this discussion here' are you having trouble with? You can have the last word on your own talk page; please move this dispute elsewhere. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 23:37, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/User_talk:86.10.231.219 Midgley 20:39, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In view of the dialogues taking place elsewhere regarding certain investigations, the lone link posted immediately above by Midgley at 20:39, 27 February 2006 (diff here[[5]]), taken together with its content and timing, might be seen as compromising the investigator's authority? The link is to Midgley's attempt to have my talk page deleted. That talk page contains the same text which User:Essjay was also keen to delete [[6]] but which was restored by a third party editor.

Might it be considered appropriate if those other dialogues and related matters were investigated by a party wholly unconnected with any of the players or the issues? Might you agree TenOfAllTrades?

The Original Invisible Anon at 86.10.231.219 22:52, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

mice[edit]

the mice on your user page are so cute, I almost cry when I so the pic... hey, one question...why are you so sure about Edgar Cayce's 'nonsense'? (not that I believe in him, but I always keep an open mind...but there's nothing to convince me of his ability yet).--Cosmic girl 02:31, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Call it a hunch, I guess. There just something about a guy channeling stories about the destruction of Atlantis that doesn't sound credible. Given that the more 'testable' predictions and readings have been contradicted, I'm inclined to give little weight to the Atlantis stuff. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 03:02, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

re: RfA -- I don't see why I should -- am I missing something?[edit]

I can't agree. It was probably not awarded by "another user", but IMO by RJII himself via a sockpuppet (alhought I didn't state that, not being able to prove it). In any case it was awarding editor's ninth edit (none of the previous eight in article space). If that sort of thing is allowed to stand then there is obviously no point in having barnstars (I will certainly remove mine and urge others to do so). Thus a small step away from an informal community of good faith.

RJII obviously has no intention of "cleaning it up", my request to do so being met with rudeness.

The abitrators are welcome to dismiss it. Its a very simple case that they can become fully read-up on in just a few minutes. Is there another reason that you suggest I withdraw the RfA? Is it likely to lead to some trouble either for me, RJII, or others, that I didn't consider? Herostratus 16:10, 11 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, after letting your comment percolate for about ten minutes, I figured, enh, you're probably right... I did go to remove it, but ppl were already commenting on it and stuff, so I figured, oh well, too late.... yes I do see your point about ArbCom being busy, but then, it would only take about one minute tops to look at the material and decide... but yeah, I do feel bad if I took up their time unneccessarily. Right, I see your point about one crummy pic, who cares... I dunno... I guess it was like, something like that goes to a core question of "why does a person edit Wikipedia anyway?"... its not for the money, that's for sure... not for pure altruism or we'd have about three editors... Like Napolean said, its just bits of tin, but people will do hella lot for those bits of tin. Enh, what I said in the case. Also, I was thinking too, because I got caught tangentially up in some nonsense about a userbox wheel war... and also what Jimbo said about userboxes, to nicely ask people to remove bad ones... also because, you know, just deleting stuff, at least in the recent case, ended up messing up a project I was working on (too complicated to explain)... so it would make sense to ask people to remove disruptive material, but sometimes you're gonna run into basically, NO, AND FUCK YOU, so if there's no way to back up a request, it'd be depressing to have to say OK Nevermind... and no, I didn't see any point in asking for comments because some users pretty much laugh at the community. Which I would think is not such a great thing, but who knows? It might not really matter. As the other party said, Dude you're taking Wikipedia way too seriously, which I guess a good point when you think of it. Whew, sorry to go on... anyway, thanks for your advice, which was probably good advice, appreciate it. Herostratus 07:33, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Another Esperanzial note...[edit]

Hi again Esperanzians! Well, since our last frolic in the realms of news, the Advisory Council has met twice more (see WP:ESP/ACM2 and WP:ESP/ACM3). As a result, the charter has been ammended twice (see here for details) and all of the shortcuts have been standardised (see the summary for more details). Also of note is the Valentines ball that will take place in the Esperanza IRC channel on the 14th of February (tomorrow). It will start at 6pm UTC and go on until everyone's had enough! I hope to see you all there! Also, the spamlist has been dissolved - all Esperanzians will now recieve this update "newsletter".

The other major notice I need to tell you about is the upcoming Esperanza Advisory Council Elections. These will take place from 12:00 UTC on February 20th to 11:59 UTC on February 27th. The official handing-over will take place the following day. Candidates are able to volunteer any time before the 20th, so long as they are already listed on the members list. Anyone currently listed on the memberlist can vote. In a change since last time, if you have already been a member of the leadership, you may run again. Due to the neutrality precident, I will not vote for anyone.

Yours, as ever, Esperanzially,
--Cel es tianpower ^háblame 09:00, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
(message delivered by FireFox using AWB on Celestianpower's behalf)

Thanks[edit]

Thanks for the info you left to me - when I get time I'll go back and make the change you recommended. I'm still learning the customs and protocols, so I'm grateful for your patient and measured advice :) Longshot14 16:27, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Midgley[edit]

Just to let you know, User:Midgley appears to have registered himself today as User:The Invisible Anon. He is now editing as User:The Invisible Anon and following me around and adding edits as "The Invisible Anon".

Here is his original IP address for the sock puppet he first started editing with on Wikipedia. This has to be him because only he would know where it is. The diffs clearly show him associated with his recently registed user IDs the User:Invisible Anon and User:The Invisible Anon:-

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:82.152.46.201&diff=next&oldid=14287194 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:82.152.46.201&diff=next&oldid=16799973 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:82.152.46.201&diff=next&oldid=41250577 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:82.152.46.201&diff=next&oldid=41457405

Here is the link to his history of contributions and if you follow them you will see what he is up to:- http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=The+Invisible+Anon

Here is some of his work on the MfD page:- http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia%3AMiscellany_for_deletion%2FUser_talk%3A86.10.231.219&diff=41466436&oldid=41447676

86.10.231.219 16:36, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've posted a Request for CheckUser, asking admins with sufficient database access to investigate. I'm not prepared to jump to any conclusions about the identity of the new user. It could just as easily be a random troll who saw a way to tweak you. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 20:05, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

So, let's see: Midgley engaged in sockpuppetry in bad faith, impersonated another user, and pre-empted an MfD. And he gets a warning? And this after he engages in personal attacks in virtually every talk comment. What Midgley did is not just trolling or tempting trolls, it's a gross violation. I don't want to censur the guy, but he needs and deserves a more serious slap than that. --Leifern 02:09, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Phenolphthalein Redux[edit]

Sorry to bug you again, Ten, but I'm trying to do the redirects from misspellings for phenolphthalein and found that someone had put in an entry for phenylthaline. It looks as though it was created as a stub from someone who thought it was the correct spelling for phenolphthalein but I can't be sure (I'm a liberal arts grad) - I've found a couple of Google links that indicate the terms are interchangeable (eg. an entry describing ingredients mentions phenylthaline with phenolphthalein listed right after it in parentheses). I want to change the entry for phenylthaline to be a redirect from phenolphthalein but I figured it would be best to first check with someone who has the authority of better knowledge of chemistry before doing so. Just let me know whether I should change it to be a redirect and I'll do so, or not and I won't :) - thanks! Longshot14 23:22, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, it's a misspelling. I've done the redirect; good catch! TenOfAllTrades(talk) 00:02, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]