User talk:Franamax: Difference between revisions

To keep discussions coherent, I will usually answer in the talk page where the first message was placed.

If I left you a message in another talk page, please answer there: I will have it on my watch list.

Welcome!

Hello, Franamax, welcome Wikipedia! Hope little Franamax like. Here helpful pages:

• Hrair pillars Wikipedia
• Make article
• Help!
• Help, help!
• Make article bigger
• Er... what this for..? How write picky ?

Hope little user enjoy and edit smart like Bishzilla! Please sign talk pages using, er ... many tildes (~~~~) ('zilla can only count to three, regret!), clever automagic feature. If helpless, check out questions wikipedia, ask on 'zilla talk, or put {{helpme}} on own talk, get help soon. Again, welcome! 

Now that's a welcome page, had to steal it myself. Thanks Bishzilla! Franamax 02:00, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your thoughtful input at the PD page

I refer to your comments here. I found them quite insightful. I'm glad to see your participation at the general sanctions page as well. I think it's interesting that you have the perception that I don't see both factions as problematic. Based on recent statements by me that's certainly a supportable perception so I need to do better at articulating that. But I also think that ATren's response was pretty good. If you'd like to discuss further I'm open, here or on my talk... which as you know is a pretty visible page so would get input from others as well if we removed to there. Best. ++Lar: t/c 14:42, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

RfC and escalating alphabeticals

In the limited context established at Wikipedia:Escalating alphabeticals, please consider adding an outside view at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Teeninvestor. The correspondence between the essay and the RfC is not exact, but I recognize congruence in the tactics of (a) conflating issues and (b) sidetracking.

In my view, your essay presents an arguably useful tool in a process of highlighting the elephant in the room. If not, why not? --Tenmei (talk) 16:40, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

PIG

Actually the increase in flow of PIG is not intimately bound with global warming. Atmospheric warming almost certainly has absolutely nothing directly to do with flow increases on PIG seeing as the average annual temperature is -25 deg C and the surface never reaches freezing point, but nice attempt at trying to use this editing to prove I am a climate change fanatic. Polargeo (talk) 21:32, 5 August 2010 (UTC)

Polargeo, you are bringing a pretty high level of hostility to proceedings. I have never tried to prove you are a "climate change fanatic" in any way. And I was referring to warm ocean water having an effect on PIG, not slightly warmer freezing-cold air. Franamax (talk) 06:30, 6 August 2010 (UTC)

Uninvolved Party Needed

I remember you did a good job mediating a disagreement at Christian Metal. I will refrain from comment but I hope you have the time to take a look at the conflict at Concept Album which has now devolved into name calling. Ridernyc (talk) 17:51, 8 August 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism

IP 65.25.178.154 had been blocked for 3 months last April 28.[1] Their very first edit after the block was lifted was to begin repeating that same pattern of vandalism.[2]. My sense is that more than 3 months is merited, as the IP is an assigned Roadrunner static IP from Herndon, Virginia,[3] and being used only by someone who seems determined to continue that same patern of vandalism. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 21:00, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

As the IP began more vandalism after two "only warnings" and after I finished removing the 50-odd edits from July 29 til now,[4] and knowing you were away for a bit, I asked Cirt to block the static IP.[5] We'll see what happens 6 months from now.[6] Thanks for asking me to clean up. Best, Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 23:06, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Ping

I've opened a request for modification of the prior sanction at Wikipedia:General_sanctions/Climate_change_probation/Requests_for_enforcement#William_M._Connolley_comment_editing_restriction_modification. ++Lar: t/c 18:13, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Input please

I'd appreciate your input and feedback regarding my proposed proposed remedy/enforcement found here. Thanks. Minor4th 17:45, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:Castro-Trudeau 1976 - LAC PA136976.jpg

Thank you for uploading File:Castro-Trudeau 1976 - LAC PA136976.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Wikipedia:Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. J Milburn (talk) 01:38, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

Rude IP comments

Previously titled "Communist ass licker!" [also e/c during refactor] Franamax (talk) 22:32, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Seriously, that's what you are being accused of. Please see User talk:217.113.225.18 and its history. Thanks, and have a nice day! Drmies (talk) 22:14, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Well, yeah. Don't you know they conspire to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids? –MuZemike 22:18, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

More admin abuse, clearly, from an unrepentant POV warrior. Drmies (talk) 22:22, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the note Drmies. I changed the heading, just thinking about my talk archives. :) You can just remove that kind of stuff, or bring it to another admin's attention if it's persistent. MuZemike, what a great movie! Still, I'm glad to live in Vancouver where god delivers our water. Lots of water. Lots. :) Franamax (talk) 22:32, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

I know, but I thought that maybe you wanted to exercise your mop a bit more. You are much less vindictive than I might be; kudos. Drmies (talk) 22:34, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Regarding the issue you raised on my talk page

I think you raise some excellent points, however there are some salient issues you seem to have missed. Your feelings on the matter are important to me, and I would like to hear what you have to say in response to my further comments. --Jayron32 05:05, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Cowed by Elsie?

You're onto something. I could keep a quick postable link or two (on my PC where no one else can touch them) and post them whenever this comes up. That could save a lot of time. ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:05, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

An FYI

Since you've been dealing with this, an ANI thread has been started at WP:ANI#User:Ludwigs2 advocating other users commit rape.. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:45, 5 September 2010 (UTC)

Assist please?

Seems a few article being held at WP:Incubate's "Category:Article Incubator candidate for articlespace" are not being evaluated. Could you please review THESE as all 4 appear ready, though I can speak knowledgably only about 2... Wikipedia:Article Incubator/Demarco Morgan and Wikipedia:Article Incubator/A Marine Story.

1. the article on Demarco Morgan was sent to Incubator only because it did not have sources when at AFD in order for it to be improved.[7] Since incubation, the article has been cleaned-up, expanded, and properly sourced. It's ready.
2. the article on A Marine Story was sent because the film was not released at the time of AFD. [8] It was incubated to await release and coverage. The film was subsequently released, received many decent reviews, and the article has now been expanded and sourced to reflect its release and coverage. It's ready.

I'd do it myself, but would prefer a second set of eyes. Thanks. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 01:27, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

• A Marine Story looks OK to me and even notable based on my hazy understanding of film notability. I took out the sentence about the type of camera used - did it contribute something of note to artistic quality?

• Sometimes film equpment used for particular cinemagraphic effect does relate to an artistic quality of completed film. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 06:12, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

• Gave it a few more tweaks for style and tone. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 06:25, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

• Demarco Morgan also looks OK to me, though I have a style quibble: The sentence about the Ebony list is pretty tortured, I would word it as "was listed" and then "why listed", not the other way around. Now since I usually like to see the actual source, I checked Google Books, Ebony has a deal with Google to put their archives there. The article is here, page 120. So first of all, you should be using that as the source, right? And one more source to support your selection of quotes from the Ebony article.

• I have untwisted the sentence and added the cite. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 06:09, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

• Crash I'd say not ready yet, maybe never will be. There seems to be no discussion of viewership, critical reaction, significance, etc. and I don't really understand why I or anyone else would ever want to read it. All the links are to stubs, maybe these people are notable in Denmark but I see no "story" to read here. Also whatever arguments would be based on the notability guidelines I guess. :)

• Did not seem ready to me either, but the editor who had been working on it thought it was. Maybe drop him/her a line? Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 06:12, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

• MULTICUBE I would have thought would be notable of its own right, the EU Framework Programmes are a big deal in the science/technology community, at least in Europe. I see though that Thad declined a move and since then the changes add sources for the project results but not for any third-party discussion. And looking at it again, there still is no demonstration of notability. I spent a while looking and found nothing that wasn't in some way tied back to the project itself. I think my initial reaction was "it's taxpayer money, hell yeah there should be an article, was the money well spent?" but really, that's not good enough. :) Could it be merged somewhere? The FP7 article may be too high-level, I didn't read all that much of it. Maybe [[WP:COMPUTING] could help find a home for the material?

Have a thought to rewording the Morgan article. I'll have one more look at the film one. Franamax (talk) 20:55, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Been done. Busy day, but finally was able to get to it. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 06:12, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Inside and outside

Franamax, I will freely admit (here) that I find your point most compelling. I am, however, extremely wary toward too much WP:ANIsm in our little protected garden of reference dandelions. I think the deskians are basically a very tolerant group. More so, perhaps, than the WP:ANI crowd. Situations like this one, however, can turn us into an angry bunch (all sorts of dynamics are involved here, and it would be a lie to say that SteveBaker's status as a SciDesk luminary has nothing whatsoever to do with it). Being slapped and told that this won't do by someone who has zero history (or awareness of history) is (hopefully) proof, that the RefDesk folks, including our admins, are a lenient and laid back crowd. I want to keep it that way. In the interest of minimizing personalized conflicts, I guess I want WP:ANI to do the dirty work. I never wanted this to turn into a didactic exercise for anyone, but I'm relieved that C3 wasn't blocked by a refdesk regular. ---Sluzzelin talk 02:11, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

PS, if I had expected the restriction to work, I might not have oppsed (I still wouldn't have supported). I am convinced, WP:AGF notwithstanding, that C3 would have pushed it this far, restrictions or no restrictions. The only difference would have been that we have a precedent of handcuffing a volunteer at WT:RD. This is perhaps not a very persuasive rationale, but it might help you understand my position. ---Sluzzelin talk 02:22, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm certainly alive to the potential for abuse within a walled garden. I didn't see that potential in the discussion in question, since it was widely enough attended and had good views being expressed. Had it gone off into bashing territory, I would have joined you at the barricades. Of course I'm bound to be swayed by my own personal opinion on how to solve the problem, but it really didn't seem like a situation where two or three editors got together to plot an arbitrary course of action. I'll agree with you on having a feeling of relief that the "bad-ness" of the situation was so resoundingly confirmed in such a definitive manner, by a removed party.

I will though stick to my belief that matters should be settled first at as low a level as possible. I think there is a fundamental unfairness to channeling everything through ANI, in particular for editors who know ANI as a distant concept rather than the brutal reality. I'm more familiar with the environment and can handle myself there, that's not always true of each editor - so I feel it's a bit unfair for me to bring conflict to that arena and I'd prefer not to see others get dragged in if they're not up to speed. Nice to have as a safety valve, but wouldn't want to make a habit of it. :)

I really think everyone was participating from genuine motives, hopefully we can craft a welcoming environment when C3 returns too. Side note, I read your "On singling out editors" post at WT:RD with great interest and find it quite valid in large part. I'm still thinking on how to properly implement your ideas. I've certainly had success in the past with private communication (email) as a way of discussing things informally and effecting small changes (or not) in behaviour. It's a fine line though, between communicating transparently and communicating effectively. Thanks for the food for thought! Franamax (talk) 06:06, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Lol, I tried to type out my thoughts twice, but I can't capture what I want to say. Just letting you know that I appreciate your reply a lot, and that I'm thinking about it and also reconsidering my stance. I'll let you know when I have something relevant to say. ---Sluzzelin talk 21:42, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

misc

Speaking of Freudian slips... "busing" multiple accounts? :) ←Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} carrots→ 22:42, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

I had that fixed before you oranged me, I swears it! :) Are you not familiar with the technique of doubling your edit count using typos? Franamax (talk) 22:44, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

And it's one of the areas where I'd be fine if you fixed it with "presumed typo" in the summary. Even though that violates my policy of never ever encouraging Baseball Bugs. ;) Franamax (talk) 22:50, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

Can ya do me a favor....?

inre Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/$30 Film School: I was a major contributor to that article, and involved in it surviving an earlier AFD... but was never informed that it was sent to AFD a second time, not that I am blaming new editor User:Kindzmarauli. Could you please userfy it for me to the sandbox I have waiting at User:MichaelQSchmidt/sandbox/$30 Film School so that I might look improve it before sending it to incubation for evaluation? I had asked this of the deleting editor,[9] but it appears that User:Tone is on a Wiki-break.[10] Thank you. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 00:58, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Done, knock yourself out dude. I see no objectionable content in any of the now-restored article versions, and hopefully I've userfied it properly. I'm pretty confident you won't hang onto it too long if it turns out you can't whip it into shape, Franamax (talk) 05:22, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Sure enough, and thanks. All I'll need a several decent reviews of the book, and showing that it is spoken abut in independent reliable sources... and then I'll send it to incubation for evaluation. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 19:13, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

And while you're in the neighborhood...

Could you also userfy Michael W. Dean to me at User:MichaelQSchmidt/sandbox/Michael W. Dean? He's the author of $30 Film School. While working to improve THAT article,[11] I came across a lot about this guy in multiple reliable sourses. And in wondering why his article was gone, I found the AFD discussion... which led me to believe that the article was unfortunately SO poorly writen by its newb author, that she was unable to convince anyone, even with the sources she offered, that it was salvagable. Her talk page reflects her "warm welcome" to Wikipedia and its processes.[12] Sad. I dropped her a line... just in case... but she seems to have left the project after that. It may require complete rewrite, but I'm hoping the article and its "inline cites" might have enough with which to begin. Pity that she was chased off. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 06:04, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Uninvolved administrators

The section for uninvolved admins on the Climate Change RFE page is just that - for admins. When a non-admin posts there you don't get in a conversation with them, you remove the comment. Cheers. Weakopedia (talk) 07:13, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Eh, it's no big deal. I asked a question. WMC answered it with his own opinion, where I'd be sure to see it. I found his terminology confusing and noted that I would do my own research, in a place WMC would probably see it. Someone else clarified the terms, where I would see it. Then someone else moved it out of the admin section, where I could go find it. No biggie, job is done, information is provided, discussion continues, all is (possibly "un") well. Thanks for the note. Franamax (talk) 00:51, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Plagiarism?

Hi. A user has popped by my talk page to see if Central place theory plagiarizes from this pdf. I'm not sure. It does follow the structure of the original very closely,though I don't think we're in {{close paraphrase}} range. Can I trouble you for an opinion? Do you think it follows closely enough to require more specific attribution? --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:52, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

I'd say "unlikely". Commented at the article talk page. Franamax (talk) 20:09, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for slogging, and slogging so exellently at that! :D I wouldn't want to let down a class. :/ --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 20:24, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Yeah, well... I just found an older copy of the pdf, so I've had to change my opinion a little bit. :( I'm going to ask for advice over at WP:Economics. Franamax (talk) 20:27, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Mainland Mania

I've had to learn the hard way not to get my feelings all bent out of shape in disagreements like this, and to just walk away and not give a fuck. Which was very healthy, as the editor you mention will find out too if he really wants to be a postive contributor. Editors, like children, need to be free to skin their knees and learn therefrom. Nice to hear from another grown-up, though - appreciate ya buddy. Textorus (talk) 00:20, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Hence my note about not having your email set up. Private notes are sometimes very valuable in diffusing tension, you get to exchange swear words and things you would never say (or do) on the wiki and you get the one-to-one dynamic where you both have to find a way of continuing the conversation, or else decide to end it. When you use private methods to coordinate action on-wiki of course, that's double-plus-bad.

I'm rather mystified at how that debate turned into such a maelstrom. Unstoppable force meets immovable object I suppose. Send out for popcorn and enjoy the show.

Oh yes, you really shouldn't compare editors to children. If you really want to get someone to go ballistic, that's a vrey good way to get the job done. Even if your observation is absolutely true - we don't do truth here, just verifiability. ;) Franamax (talk) 00:42, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Ron's RfA questions

The unanswered ones are optional . -- Avi (talk) 03:40, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Point taken, but everything is optional here. If the option is to not bother to answer a Q at your own RFA, or at least provide your reasoning for why you are declining to answer, fine and well - but then I can draw conclusions about the level of diligence you are willing to devote to the role. Wacky admins are one thing, but unresponsive admins? Don't really need 'em. Just me own opinion of course. :) Franamax (talk) 04:16, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Umm... - warning

Thread moved from my Talk pageCuddlyable3 (talk) 08:20, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi Cuddlyable3, do you realize that almost immediately after a block returning to the behaviour [4] you were (more or less) blocked for is pretty much grounds for an immediate reblock of equal or longer length? Had you attempted serious resolution of whatever problem you see, maybe you could skate by - but you are just making a bald statement, which looks to me like resumption of your previous disruption. I'm ready to block you myself if you do it again. Franamax (talk) 23:17, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

If you wish me to explain the ambiguity in a sentence that was posted at the Ref. Desk, just ask and I shall do my best to provide it. Poster APL has acknowledged[13] the source of the error and so is equally able to explain it. It seems you have a choice between treating the messenger or the message. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 08:20, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Interwiki coordination

Greetings -- I was thinking about the question you posted at ANI and on Jpgordon's talk page -- I don't think we have a specific protocol. If someone is vandalizing multiple language wikis, a common occurrence, we can get them globally blocked at Meta, but in the case of a sockpuppeteer/POV-pusher active in only (?) two languages, usually we find someone who speaks both, and have that person post at the other wiki. Admin User:Future Perfect at Sunrise is reasonably active at de, and German is his native language, so that's one possibility. Do you know if there is a tool like this one for seeking out range contributions in other languages? Offhand I'd bet that particular user is even worse on de, as that's his native language (he's in, or near Vienna). Cheers, Antandrus (talk) 22:19, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

Good call

Here. Normally I'm not in favour of closing discussion that are still ongoing - I've un-hatted a few myself - but there's nothing new being said; all that can happen now is more drama and bad feelings. :-P Matt Deres (talk) 22:13, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Big Shiny Tunes

You know what's strange? The Big Shiny Tunes article has had several of those non-free images on the article for years and they had never been complained about. But now since I try to update the album covers to better fitting sizes all of a sudden there's a problem. I'll also add that these images are covers of multi-platinum albums. How many Wikipedia articles of successful multi-platinum albums do you see without a cover? Not many. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MatthewGoodfan101 (talk • contribs)

Hmm, maybe you would have been better to leave them alone then? We don't use non-free images as decoration, we use them for identification and education. An image is not necessary to teach the reader what a multi-platinum album cover looks like and it's not likely the reader will be left wondering whether the CD in the store is the "real" Big Shiny Tunes 5. I'm not the one you need to convince though, all I'm going to do is block you if you keep edit-warring. Get consensus from the community to include all the cover images - go to the article talk page, WP:MUSIC, one of the media noticeboards and present your case. If it makes sense others will agree and the images can go in. Just insisting on your version is not gonna get the job done. Franamax (talk) 16:59, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

@Franamax: he reinstated the images yet again. I've placed a uw-vandal4 warning on his talk page, and VernoWhitney has reverted the re-addition of the images. --Hammersoft (talk) 14:34, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you, Franamax, for your actions at ANI. Most appreciated. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 02:54, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Dog

Refactored to originating user talk page per my preference. [14] Weird technical problem with Skype toolbar in Firefox on the other users end. Franamax (talk) 03:01, 25 October 2010 (UTC)

Message moved from your user page. You might have never ever ever ever ever seen it otherwise.

Hello Franamax - I hope this gets to you, I saw your last helpful comments on my Hill (list) article as a "revision" note under a message when I logged in, but couldn't go the article discusssion page to respond because I presume it's been deleted already (can't search on it anymore anyway). I will recreate the article as you suggest in my "userspace", and am hopeful of collecting some historical and current third-party references for it. Great to hear your walking interests, I'm a RoW "monitor" for the Ramblers for 2 parishes near my home in liaison with the County Council, so that activity, plus leading and joining Ramblers group walks, plus other group and individual walking, keeps me fit and busy in retirement! Geocaching is an interesting idea, but I'd have to go to them all first to implement it!MVO Rambler (talk) 16:10, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Belated thanks to Sluzzelin. You are indeed correct that I might have never seen that. Usually when someone changes my upage it has to do with my ancestry or wearing of military footgear by the distaff side of my family. :) It's good to know someone's got my back for the useful changes as well as the useless ones! Franamax (talk) 22:08, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

FYI

Hi, I need your advice and it's private so I sent you another email. Would you mind taking a look when you get time? Thanks in advance, --CrohnieGal^Talk 17:43, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Received. Watching... Franamax (talk) 18:37, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)"...it doesn't seem as if it's going to stop short of you leaving the articles in question and allowing DocOfSoc to do whatever they want with the article(s)." This is what we call "a tell": way too much knowledge in way too short a time. There are other tells, and I'm about a heartbeat away from tagging, but not before a little querying. Cheers :> Doc talk 20:17, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Always welcome here. Yeah, I ticked a few items on the checklist. I've given specific advice, if they heed it and edit well, so much the better. Franamax (talk) 20:35, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll be nice to the user, I promise: this will only help foster good communication for them working with others on future edits here. I just want to be sure everything's "kosher", because there's been quite a flurry of activity recently. Thanks again :> Doc talk 20:50, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

• Note - Uhhhh, I think somebody made a mistake[15]: you might want to re-add your comment! I was about to respond to it and was like, "Where'd it go?" Cheers :> Doc talk 00:57, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! I put that down to an oopsie, possibly in trying to figure out the edit-conflict screen, which I always avoid by copying my text and starting all over, Looks like a fun conversation down there, maybe I should read it. :) Anyway, answer away! (If you still remember it :) Franamax (talk) 01:08, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Heehee yeah - when you get that group going crazy on a thread, it's usually an instant zoo :> Raul was trying to get his piece in, because someone will close that one down soon, I'd bet. 3...2...1... ;> Doc talk 01:12, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

I just sent another email out to you and to be honest I am quite agitated about the accusations being thrown around against editors like me and Doc9871. Now we have railroaded and set her up? Add that to your fist waving and we are now being called worse than the troll, is that the case going on here? We are accused of using Verizon to set her up with the edits too, what is going on? Would the project prefer her over us at this point? I'm sure that can be arranged if that is what everyone wants. I am upset and I think rightfully too. See the latest exchange then your email. I need cooling off, --CrohnieGal^Talk 11:17, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Got it and responded. Hopefully everyone will take a deep breath. That's why I try to stay far away from AN/I, or in immortal words from the past, the "crazy den of pigs" full of "ringworm snot". ;) Franamax (talk) 20:36, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for not clarifying the "e-mail" thing at AN/I initially: I'm still questioning what's going on, and am waiting for answers there and at talk pages. The questions have been posed, and the answers are being waited on. Doc talk 01:23, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Ah yes, the joys of indented threading. No apology necessary. :) Franamax (talk) 02:20, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Cool! Thanks for understanding... Snot! Cockrings! Pussywillow! Suuuuuck-nut?!? Ball-hair! BALL-HAIR!!! Heh! Sorry: I guess I should just now probably mention that I suffer from Tourette's syndrome, and that this, naturally, excuses me from selective bouts of incivility. What... you don't believe me? I'm still actually held responsible for my words and actions here? Why, that's just plain discrimination! Well, then I demand that Wikipedia revdelete my above admission of Tourette's syndrome, as this could actually damage me (actual legal name "Doc9871") in "real life". It's clearly WP:OUTING not to delete this information, and any editor that I'm edit-stalking that makes mere mention of it again when identifying my socks will receive off-wiki legal notices from me."

It wasn't Tourette's (and nothing has been revdeleted), but welcome to the party, pal! ;> Doc talk 02:41, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

You shouldn't joke about that, Bart Simpson had Tourette's for a few weeks. Anyway it wasn't me it was my cousin. He caught my Tourette's and somehow snuck in to my computer but I'm OK now and he went back to France or else he would tell you himself. :) But seriously, it's completely OK to have a mental (or physical) disability, so long as you also have an adaptation strategy. So I think in this case where you have a problem with blurting out inappropriate statements, I would suggest you set a rule for yourself that you always wait an hour before you save an edit on a talk page, use preview and keep going back to understand why each word you want to save is important. Where you said "pussywillow", what were you trying to tell me? If you don't remember, you should take it out before you hit save. If that works and people start complaining less about you, keep doing it. <-- That of course is not actual advice to you but is an example of my thinking on the approach. I do think it's important to maintain an environment that's welcoming to editors of all levels of ability, but at the same time they need to be willing to work with us to develop strategies that let them contribute here without being disruptive. There are no free passes. And of course it the whole thing is a play, be ready for the typical reaction from Wikipedians when they find their trust has been abused. Franamax (talk) 03:27, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Conduct

Thread moved from my Talk page in keeping with my policy stated at the top of that page. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 08:17, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
Hi CA3, I've been mulling this contribution of yours for a while now. I've resolved that your leading wording concerning a registered editor constitutes a personal attack and a continuation of the behaviour for which you were previously blocked. You may disagree with this assessment, however I intend to block you from editing if you repeat such. Please ask here if you need clarification on the terms, but at the same time please do not comment on other editors as you have done in the noted diff. Ideally we would conduct this entire conversation here on your own talk page, but I do recoognize your exploit of that fun dance where you insist that discussion of your own behaviour must happen anywhere other than on your own talk page. Of course I'll just copy everything back here to keep things coherent. Just for interest though, I (and many others) do keep an eye out for changes on others' talk pages and respond quickly, so it's not strictly necessary as I will be watching here. Franamax (talk) 23:51, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

As WP:BLP states: Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 08:17, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

CA3, what in the world does WP:BLP have to do with this? Certainly it's not relevant to material describing an anonymous Wikipedia editor. Sorry if I'm a little dense, but I don't follow. -- Scray (talk) 16:33, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

It possibly has to do with the editor being targeted using their real name to edit here, and maybe a suggestion that his comment should be removed as a BLP violation. I dunno, and no, BLP is really not the relevant policy here. I am talking about creating a negative environment for another editor (WP:HARASS) and continuing disruptive behaviour, both of which are reasons for blocking. Sure, I can try to fit BLP violations in there too, but there's only so much room on the form you fill out to block. So long as CA3 stops the behaviour, it doesn't matter what policy governs. Franamax (talk) 17:10, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

I thought Cuddlyable3 was referring to the cited characterization by Steve Baker on Steve's talk page of recent RD-talk-page contributors as a long list of disruptive types, without even providing a WP:RS for that characterization. But, if so, I mean if that was what Cuddlyable3 mentioned WP:BLP for, then quoting that characterization on the RD-talk-page was not doing what WP:BLP says to do about it (see above). Otherwise, I'm not sure what he meant. But I think he should probably try to be extra-special nice and accommodating while he is still coming off his still-recent blocks for being disruptive in the way it was agreed at the time he was. Hi Franamax, thanks for use of your talk page for this, have a nice day! :) WikiDao ☯ (talk) 17:24, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Blanket allusions to disruptive editors is not a BLP violation. It may be other things, but not a BLP problem. References to pseudonyms such as "WikiDao" and "Franamax" are not BLP violations. If you say "Franamax is a jerk" it will make me cry, but I'm a Wikipedia editor, not a living person. :) Franamax (talk) 01:24, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Account impossible

It still keeps asking my e-mail, when i put my real one in, it said log in error, missing confermation code, then i tried making it up, again, i deleted the e-mail address thing and again with the "missing confermation code." what's with that? -- Nissae Isen's Man 204.112.104.172 (talk) 15:23, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Hardy (hill)

Hello again - I have added some notability material and references to my draft article in my user space "User:MVO Rambler/Hardy (hill)". Is this enough yet for acceptance (I can provide scanned images of the various references or third party references to them if these are needed - but how! - temporarily add them to the photo gallery on my website www.thehardys.org?). The notes in square brackets are for further expected references, but nothing certain yet. By the way, had a scare just now - responded to the Founder's appeal for donations, paid through PayPal, got redirected back - and found me and all my stuff had disappeared, seems I'd got onto another separate admin area for UK Wiki - got worried for a while, then found the way back, and there I was again!MVO Rambler (talk) 18:57, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

List of banned users

Good morning, I've reverted your change to the language at the list of banned users. For an explanation of why, please see Wikipedia:BAN#Difference_between_bans_and_blocks and Wikipedia:BAN#Decision_to_ban. - Burpelson AFB ✈ 14:48, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

I just came here to tell you that what you thought was our safety net just got reverted again to the previous version. Now what are we supposed to do? Thanks, --CrohnieGal^Talk 15:00, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

That looks to me like a hole big enough to drive a truck through. I've asked about it here. It makes no sense to me that you risk a block for doing the right thing. Franamax (talk) 20:43, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

You have that right. It's unbelievable. I'll see you there and will let Doc 1 know about the discussion too. Please keep me advised though in case I miss anything. Thanks, --CrohnieGal^Talk 20:50, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi, in case you missed this, a comment was made here. I asked if he would comment since no one was responding and he was in the discussion above. I may also pop over to some of the other editors that have commented in the section above to see if I can get more editors active, feel free to do so too. I would really like to get the banning policy talked about with the questions you have asked. Hope you are well, --CrohnieGal^Talk 10:13, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Love Hurts Tour

Hey, seeing you are involved in articles regarding Cher, could you comment in the good article reassessment of the Love Hurts Tour? Thanks, Xwomanizerx (talk) 04:11, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Heh, you totally got the wrong music fan there. You don't want my comments on Cher, honest. :) Franamax (talk) 04:34, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Warning about edit war attempts

Replied at user talk page

Hi Franamax, I report you message here: Hello Amending, in your edit summary here you appear to indicate an intention to edit war at our Athens article. Please be aware that this sort of activity can and will result in temporary removal of your editing privilege. Also be aware that, while the three-revert rule is a "bright-line" offense, blocks for edit-warring can be made for fewer than four reverts. You need to discuss your concerns at the article talk page and attempt to reach consensus with other editors on the article content. Franamax (talk) 21:02, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

In the Athens article and some other ones, several assertions and reference have been entered by some users with different IP with one detail in common: to plead implicitly or explicitly heat, warm, being warmer than being the warmestetcecera. Some strong sentences with missing references (the source did not say that at all) were entered earlier. I detected and dropped those statements and reported the cases in Talk (and the fact that they were actually unsupported by the mentioned source) and short time later similar assertions were re-entered once again with references that, once checked, were found not to say that at all once again. Referencing is a awfully serious thing of course and missing references may not be tolerated at all as they undermine the trust in referenceing in essence and potentially slander authors by spoon-feeding them with things they have not said. I had reported those unpleasant cases in Talk, reporting the check process and its outcomes, and my report was dropped (a couple of days ago or yesterday maybe) and I had as response some personal attacks and offending niknames (but nobody detected the violation of rules in such case); maybe by hand of this same editor writing unproved sentences with wrong references in Athens article or maybe others. A relevant side of Athens urban climate and Athens climatological record (we talk about Athens climate in that section) is that of the urban heat island, which is a phenomenon impacting urban temperatures and measurment of temperatures in urban areas: urban climate and urban climatology) and I have entered a couple of sentences (similar to those asked by the user Athenean here http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AAthens&action=historysubmit&diff=397566366&oldid=397565548 ). Such sentences have been deleted, I guess because they may inspire the idea that Athens is so warm in summer also with the aid of its urban heat island. In front of the evidence that false sentences with wrong references had been entered by somebody and documented and referenced scientific findings I entered had been dropped, I re-entered them sometimes with small changes other times unchanged and they were again deleted; then an "academic" resistence has been tried by somebody, for instance by adding to them sentences of older articles reporting facts appearing to deny such urban heat island or its impact on temperature time-series of Athens that in fact at the time of the article where not fully discovered yet but today are overdocumented. The point here is that overwhelming evidence of contemporary research about UHI and impact in measures of temperature has been opposed by the use of a 25 years ago article with graphs drawn by hand and written when important parts of the phenomenon were yet to be discovered. So I progressively entered, as I wrote in Talk, strong, and stronger, and again stronger scientific evidende. Notice that my aim was defending the content of my two sentences. I am quite aware that 95% wikipedia readers can not understand much of that material and are not interested in, and the two sentences would be OK for them. But each time a scientific finding got opposed a fig leaf, I entered a finding that rejected it and depicted better the phenomenon. This is how and why the size of the paragraph (a couple of sencences initially) grew up. During this process I detected other case of missing reference (scientific works indicated for references, but without really saying that). When the block got really granitic in scientific content and accuracy and most of potential diversions had been discovered and rejected, it was deleted. Now, I have inserted in the Climate section of the Athens article a version of the Urban Heat Island subsection (without creating subsections) given by 3 sentences (I am going to collapse it into two sentences), and that is all what I claim must be said about Athens UHI and what I wanted till the first edit. Now I have to edit it adding "upwards" because I forgot to make explicit which is the effect of Athens UHI in Athens climatological record, and I expect another drop as an outcome of this because it seems that the fact that Athens has a UHI inflating its temperatures and strings of scientists have said that is not welcome for somebody. By the way you are informed. (Notice I do not mention users at all; you can identify them by yourself). Sequences of edits and entries have been made in the Athens article and others that clearly seem aimed to drive the public perception of Athens climatic features offered by the Athens article in Wikipedia, aimed to promote a representation of warm, extreme warm, being warmest ecetera etcetera with the use of missing references (references to authors and works that did not say that at all) and in some case missing references were replaced throu other missing reference (I guess, that was a mockery for readers or other editors). In other articles, sentences that appeared to put into question that propaganda about Athens have been attacked, and in other Athens-related articles the request of references has been deleted without providing any reference or quotation (see for instance Eleusina). Final, legitimate informations of climatic relevance for the Athens article have been dropped, in my opinion for the undesired evidence they provide that not all of Athens heat is naturally based. Well, now tell me: what shall I do? Do you prefer I leave rubbish and references to authors and works that do not say what imputed to them at all, manipulations and adulterations of well established scientific findings and, final, censorings of it? I suggest you to investigate about this. I do not believe ghosts; there are trackable human hands behind this. Can you suggest me the proper channel to denounce this via the institutional Wikipedia control mechanisms? Best regards. Amending (talk) 17:01, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi

Franamax my edit in Athens article stems from the fact that there is past personal history between me and the specific user in an Italian meteorological forum.His side claiming that Athens is not as warm as I have presented it officially with comparative WMO station data.This in my opinion have caused the specific user to revert to wikipedia and start a debate which is clearly academic!My references are well balanced ,albeit some in Greek and his probable difficulty to translate the documents do not mean that my references are rubish etc .The fact that I have consistently shown in various European meterological forums that Athens is by far the warmest area of Europe during the summer might cause reactions and objections but this does not mean that a whole debate using the UHI as a vehicle should be transfered here Please find the link of the Italian forum the topic of reference to get an idea.Most of it is in English.The user with the name Amending here is the user using the name Borat in this thread (he himself has mentioned in the Athens discussion) I am the user with the nick Mesogeiakos. http://forum.meteonetwork.it/meteorologia/56579-atene-forno-123.html

I am merely bringing this to your attention so you will understand that there is a strong past personal history between my self and the specific user and that in my opinion the UHI article is used as a vehicle to start a debate specifically for Athens all over again.Thanks!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Weatherextremes (talk • contribs) 04:21, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

I have also answered in the UHI an Athens discussion talk pages —Preceding unsigned comment added by Weatherextremes (talk • contribs) 05:07, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

You have no right to lecture me

Take heed. Others will see through your threats. Poor manners will not be tolerated. Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 19:33, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

An indef block a day, will keep imposters away. GoodDay (talk) 19:36, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Dang it! I already ordered up the popcorn for delivery. I wonder if I can still call and cancel... Franamax (talk) 19:55, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Don't worry, it got delivered to me but won't go to waste. ;) --CrohnieGal^Talk 19:59, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

If you wouldn't mind

Hi, I hate going to boards so if it wouldn't be a bother would you semi- protect Curt Cobain article? As you can see, the only edits for days are reverting vandalism. Thank you in advance, --CrohnieGal^Talk 13:42, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Just passing through

Hey there, I'm just passing through the desks and I notice what is almost certainly trolling by someone who knows the desks fairly well [16]. They've got two obvious medical advice questions on the desk at the moment, chosen (and removing answers) to cause maximum dispute among regulars, I'd guess. I'm not going to be here long enough to maintain and support any action I take, and I am, in any case, not empowered to do anything ultimately effective. I hope you're in right now... Skittle (talk) 15:13, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Nissae Isen's Man

Look at the editor's history before chastising me. And I'm not "hosting" a discussion. If editors wish to make comments to me, that's between me and them. That does not give Nissae Isen's Man the right to repeatedly message me with nonsense and threats that have nothing to do with previous "dire" (your word) warnings. No offense, I'm sure you are acting in good faith, but if you want to criticize someone, please look at the entire situation and criticize all involved. I think you jumped without thinking in this matter. Funny thing: I can't get an admin to consider a block for an editor who repeatedly adds unsourced and intentionally incorrect information even though I provide a long list of diffs. Now I get a hostile comment from an admin for warning an editor about repeated disruptive editing. Thank you. Cresix (talk) 18:08, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

(e/c from an hour ago, didn't notice when I hit save) I'll get to N-I-M too, I'm well aware of the situation. Keep in mind that this is a wiki. You do not own your talk page, although you have wide latitude in how you manage it. There is no "between me and them" here. You have chosen to leave a section title naming an editor on your page, again, don't be surprised if they comment therein. Relax, I will be adding more criticism of "all involved" later today. In the meantime, please moderate your tone. For instance, rather than terming addition of unsourced material as vandalism, you could be explaining why sources are required and how repeated addition of unsourced material can be considered disruptive. Franamax (talk) 19:52, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

(current) My comment was in response to your admonition on N-I-M's page alleging harrassment and threatening a block. It's never wise to predict the outcome of an AN/I complaint. Franamax (talk) 19:52, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

I'm relaxed, thanks. A few comments and corrections. I never said I own my talk page. My point is that if editors wish to communicate with me about NIM they do it on my talk page; that is not "hosting a discussion"; again, your action was in good faith, but your comment was over the line. Secondly, I have not predicted the outcome of an ANI; I'm simply letting NIM know what the possible consequences of repeated harrasssment can be. My admonition to NIM was perfectly appropriate IF you look at his edit history (both with username and as an anon) in articles, with me, and with others. Now, if you had gone to the trouble to "adding more criticism of "all involved" later today" before first jumping down my throat, my reaction might have been different. I was commenting to another admin who is equally disgusted with NIM's disruptive editing that I have seen some stellar admins on Wikipedia, but not in this NIM situation. You still have not convinced me otherwise. A few admins are first class; most are hard-working champions of the integrity of Wikipedia; a few encourage disruptive behavior by ignoring such behavior and going after the constructive editors. I haven't made up my mind about you yet. In any event, thanks the good faith part of your messages to me. Cresix (talk) 20:22, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

bless you franamax!

Bless you Frannamax, for helping me at least get my point across. Nissae Isen's Man (talk) 02:23, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

TorNodeBot

I left some additional comments at the discussion; I hope you take a look at them. I will make every effort to address your concerns, but I would appreciate it if you didn't bounce off the wall with some of your comments. For example, your comment that my bot was making wild port scans was, to be quite frank, a blatant lie (though I assume this was unintentional). If you have any questions on how it works, please feel free to ask, but making assumptions like those are not going to help the discussion at all. --Shirik (Questions or Comments?) 02:09, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Edits

Hi, haven't heard from you so am checking in. I am frankly surprised myself at what I am finding. I would like give you a further explanation, but not here, and I can't find your e-mail addy. I am really sorry, and upset with the errors I have found this far. Mea Culpa... Namaste...DocOfSoc (talk) 10:09, 29 November 2010 (UTC) I found it! Email to follow, manana. DocOfSoc (talk) 10:12, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

advice please

Hey Franamax, On List of WordGirl characters, people keep putting that Emily was seen without her clothes and that she was in Tampa Florida on June 6th with her supposed brother named Eli. This is completely unsourced, and i have reverted the edits again and again, only for people to keep putting them back. What can i do, see Here to answer. There are edits such as at this edit that say she was seen without clothes and that she was in Tampa with her brother Eli. Thanks, and please help asap, thanks. PS: how am i doing with my links? N.I.M. (talk) 04:04, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

It doesn't seem to be such a big deal that I would do anyting about it administratively, not yet at least. I would say just revert the edits with "rv unsourced, see talk page" in the edit summary. If it's the same IP adding the info, you can ask them on their talk page to supply a source. Remember that (unlike what you were told) adding unsourced material is not necessarily vandalism, although it is disruptive if done over and over. If it keeps happening several times a day, or for days on end, we can look at blocking editors or semi-protecting the article - but generally we tolerate low-level silliness, as long as someone is watching the article and reverting when needed. If it gets really bad though, ping me again. I've watchlisted the article but might miss things. Franamax (talk) 06:04, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Ok, thanks, i'll be watching the article, and how am i doing in the links? i learned yesterday. N.I.M. (talk) 13:41, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Edit war?

Holey creeps! Every time we undo the nonsense about the bathing suit and the tampa visit, someone comes along and undoes the revert, the nerv of some people! N.I.M. (talk) 22:56, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Assistance Please

Hello, to let you know I am a bit better But need assistance On Pasadena, California Article. As Kafziel suggested I wrote a very nice and polite letter to Grayshi on the talk page to hopefully jump start a real discussion. I hope it is proper to ask you for a 3rd opinion, I would rather not start a formal process, but will do whatever you say. Waiting with bated breath. Thanks for "Listening." Namaste...DocOfSoc (talk) 20:06, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Note: this dispute at Pasadena is currently listed at WP:3O. ॐ WikiDao ☯ (talk) 20:15, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Quick script request

I have a feeling that this is a trivial script for someone that knows how to write such things. I'm interested in getting a list of edits where User:Colonel Warden has undone a redirect, and seeing whether he ever mentions it in an edit summary. I suspect that it's a long list, and I further suspect that he never mentions it.—Kww(talk) 01:43, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

It would likely be fairly easy indeed to query the API for the article version immediately before each edit and just check the length, <50 chars or so would indicate a redirect. Unfortunately I'm not really set up for that kind of scripting, my stuff is much more ponderous. If I wanted that in a hurry I would go ask Betacommand, though I think he changed over to "triangle" (the delta symbol) as a username. I've looked at code of Steve Summit's in the past (User:Ummit) that I think could be used in a Cygwin shell script, if I get time tomorrow I'll take a look for it. But I would advise you to ask Beta for now. Franamax (talk) 06:06, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Would you please again block?

Hi, she is back with another account. Would you please block this one too? Thanks in advance, --CrohnieGal^Talk 17:13, 15 December 2010 (UTC) Please don't block. Everything is ok — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pairofzebralegs (talk • contribs) 17:15, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

No it's not, now leave me alone. --CrohnieGal^Talk 17:17, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Never mind another administrator saw what was going on and blocked this editor. Hopefully she'll give up now and just leave me alone. I struck her comment but feel free to delete or archive this if you wish to. Thanks though, --CrohnieGal^Talk 17:56, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Irregardless?

Thread moved from my Talk page. Cuddlyable3 (talk) 23:06, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Your understanding expressed here, "It is now a blockable offence...", is incorrect.

[17] [18] [19] Cuddlyable3 (talk) 23:06, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Consensus among the RD community is that your own particular input is not needed. I can provide the permalink for your review if you wish.

Your immediately previous post, yes, good one, too bad no-one has taken your bait (so far). You and I both know that you would never make that mistake.

Please try to play it straight. If you have a problem with my restrictions/threats on you, ask at the admin noticeboard. No-one else in the WT:RD thread raised grammospell issues, only you. I was fairly impressed with the way you stated your viewpoint in that thread, though I disagree with it - right up until your last 2 points. Franamax (talk) 03:26, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Merry (IP) Christmas

Wiki-IP-Santa says, Merry Christmas!

IP Santa-editor says Merry Christmas to Franamax! (And be kind to your 'clocks', free range or not!) - 220.101 talk^\Contribs 00:42, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Heh, thanks for the wishes and the memory of that particular laugh. :) I've since rediscovered my passion for geocaching, so my life is now actually ruled completely by batteries and the reliability and remaining life thereof. When you've hiked 10 km into the BC backcountry, you really want your GPS receiver to keep working. I still don't trust those hens not to rise up against me though, unlike some of my friends, I always bring a trusty 'ol compass too. Unless the appliances and the Earth's geodynamo form a conspiracy, I should be covered... Merry Xmas to you too! Franamax (talk) 06:17, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for all your help about Catherine Thompson, and rationale of posts about "Cathy"

Thanks for helping me about what to do about finding more on Catherine Thompson, as sune as my connection's security is fixed, i'll try some of that stuff. The reason i did all those posts on the ref desk and other places in the article, is because like i mention on the talk page for the ref desk, i have gotten messages that indirectly state that the author of the message doesn't think that i'm right, or at least that's part of what i understand. I understand she is not totaly notable, but she does deserve mention. Voice acting isn't exactly a piece of cake, i would know. You have to get your lines right, make your voice change to what the director wants, which is not always easy and takes some practice, etc. etc. Anyway, thanks for helping me, you are a good friend. I've coppied this message to the others who have helped me with Catherine Thompson and her work on Biz Kid$. N.I.M. (talk), the biz kid, 05:30, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia 10

The Interior cordially invites you to the Vancouver Wikipedia 10th Anniversary Meetup! It is being held at Benny's Bagels at 2505 W Broadway. Meetup will start at 6:30pm. Drop by for some Wikipedia-style conviviality and free gear! Feel free to forward this invitation to any Wikipedians who might be able to attend, and visit the discussion page to suggest activities. Hope to see you there and have a Happy 2011!

Thanks for your co-coordination on the discussion page. How many people came out for the 2008 meetup, BTW? The Interior(Talk) 16:13, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

see my talkpage

Her and I left a message on my talk page. She asked me to quote what she said, don't know why, but it's on my talk page. N.I.M. I miss you nissae! Elena Apostoleanu go behind the line. 06:59, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

R left a message, i didn't read it, so that's up to your judgement. thanks, N.I.M. I miss you nissae! Elena Apostoleanu go behind the line. 07:17, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

quick question

how come you let me say "..." yet you won't let me say her mrs. name? N.I.M. I miss you nissae! Elena Apostoleanu go behind the line. 02:12, 10 January 2011 (UTC) Corrected, thanks. Franamax (talk) 07:11, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

No problom, and please don't put 'redacted' in place of her name if i end up accidentally putting her full name, just delete the other letters so it is just Mrs. H, cool? pluss, i have never heard that word before, see below. Thanks. N.I.M. I miss you nissae! Go behind the line. 11:09, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

ANI notification

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. GiantSnowman 02:18, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Taken care of, alls that needs done is that block threat canceled. God Bless, N.I.M. I miss you nissae! Elena Apostoleanu go behind the line. 03:15, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

redacted?

I changed the word Redacted to Mrs. H on the talk pages. What does Redacted mean? I have never heard that word before, and it's not in the dictionary i have with me. N.I.M. I miss you nissae! Go behind the line. 11:07, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Gulbis

can you tell me the difference of this:

"In 2009, Gulbis was convicted and charged with the solicitation of a prostitute in Stockholm, Sweden, he plead guilty to the charge and was fined 2,500 SEK." Globe and Mail

"His other grandfather, Uldis Pūcītis, was a popular actor and film director." [no citation]

I don't understand your rationale. if something is embarrassing it should be deleted? why on the dennis rodman page does it list everything from drug problems to domestic abuse?74.14.35.98 (talk) 18:50, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

The issue is not if it is embarrassing, it's whether it is relevant, which generally is covered by our WP:UNDUE guideline. It was sourced to a blog section of the paper. A Telegraph article has a much more balanced account where he says it is no big deal. A few lesser blogs mention it. It doesn't affect a sponsorship agreement or break up a marriage or cast a team in a bad light, nor is it, say, a politician who is tough on prostitution who is getting caught. It didn't seem all that important so I felt it was better if left out unless better wording and sourcing can be done. Franamax (talk) 08:15, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Agree with concerns about N.I.M.'s username

Hi Franamax. I agree with the concern you expressed in your recent comment at AN/I[20] about NIM's username.
I thought your effort to address that concern at WP:UAA[21] (now at RFC/NAME) was more warranted than the responders there seemed to think at the time (that was recently closed[22] with the result Allow before I'd had a chance to comment about it there too).
If I were to want to raise the issue again, in light of recent developments with NIM, and with some expansion on what the issue is and why it may be problematic to refer to a living person in a WP username in this particular case, what would be the best way for me to go about that? Is there a formal process for petitioning to have a recently-closed thread re-opened? Would starting a new thread there under the same username-of-concern be inappropriate?

A google search on the name of the living person mentioned in NIM's username returns NIM's userpage as hit #8 at present. That connection may very likely be unwelcome to the person in question given the nature of NIM's activity at WP, which has included such insensitivity to BLP issues as to frequently declare (as part of NIM's signature, eg. [23])) sentiments such as "I miss you nissae!" and "Elena Apostoleanu go behind the line!". NIM comes across as an obsessed fan trying to insinuate a direct relationship to minor celebs (N.I.'s MAN!) that is very likely to be entirely imaginary and would in any case be inappropriate to mention in this context in that way. Given NIM's persistent and time-consuming problems with conduct and content and controversy at WP, NIM's use of that actress's name in his/her username amounts to just a lot of "bad press" for that actress, and I don't think WP should continue to permit that. WikiDao ☯ 22:42, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

And an equally high-ranking hit is to a mirror-site that preserves deleted Wikipedia content, an article created by - guess who?! (Though nothing we can do about that now) Unless something develops from the current AN/I thread, I think the best way ro go is to bring the issue up again at RFC/NAME, with more support beyond just the username itself, i.e. the sig and accumulated threads. I'd also been planning on contacting the named person's publicist as a courtesy heads-up, suggesting that if they have a problem with it to contact Wikipedia through WP:OTRS, in which case I'm pretty sure we would act quickly - and if not, I'd raise hell about it here myself. Seems like it can be hard to get editors here to focus on real-world impacts sometimes, though to be fair to the folks at RFC/NAME they were considering just the name at the time, not the behaviour since. Franamax (talk) 02:30, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes, that's what it looked like, though I think there were both "behavioral" and "content" causes for concern even then...

Anyway, I will probably start a "NIM revisited" thread at RFC/NAME in maybe a day or two (if that sort of persistence is tolerated there..;), unless you or someone else does so first, and depending on the course the ANI thread takes and any further developments there may be about this point there.

I think that would be a good idea, to contact N.I.'s people just to make them aware of the potential problem here, and giving them a chance to weigh in on it.

It's unfortunate that it's come to this, but, really, I think something ought to be done at this point. Regards, WikiDao ☯ 04:05, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Actually, reading over the policy a few times, I agree it's not being violated of itself, so they would likely tell you to take it to AN (not ANI) as the correct forum. Probably best to let it sit for a while though, to see if there's any improvement. Franamax (talk) 08:43, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Just a point to raise, you're talking about my girlfriend here, i don't like you doing that, it is making me feel uneasy. you're freaking me out now, please stop. By the way, I think that you guys need to think about the reason why i call myself Nissae Isen's Man. Not just an imaginary thing or something, i call myself that because i am, I just haven't seen her in a while, hence the I miss you Nissae part. When i do see her again, the I miss you Nissae will be replaced with "I come in peace", a line used by alien characters that come to earth, as i am a big space fan. I think you need to believe me when i say i do know her. N.I.M. I miss you nissae! Go behind the line. 10:33, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Are you saying that you have a close or imtimate relationship with N.I.? Franamax (talk) 10:52, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Yes, i do. She is my GF, which is why I named my account as such. P.S. If anyone asks about it I asked her to deny it, she recently e-mailed me to please change the signature to just "Miss you" instead of "I miss you Nissae." so done. N.I.M. miss you. Go behind the line. 11:56, 11 January 2011 (UTC)