User talk:Nagle/Archive 2006-05-30

Welcome[edit]

Hello, Nagle/Archive 2006-05-30, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Wikipedia Boot Camp, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: ~~~. Four tildes (~~~~) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Kukini 07:16, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Solaris RPG[edit]

I fixed a misstatement in the Solaris RPG article. The game only has 25 to 50 characters at any one time, and only 10 to 15 of those people are playing their characters at the time. The game has had more than 672 previous characters and has received more than two and a half million unique hits since November of 2005. The game has recently celebrated it's 12th anniversary. For all these reasons and a few more, I believe the game is more than notable enough for Wikipedia. Thank you for your time.

Bladmaster article[edit]

Hello Nagle, I am sorry if you did not like my article because you thought I made the character. If you have any suggestions on how to improve this problem, suggestions are welcome. Comic master

SOSEMANUK[edit]

Aloha!

I saw that you placed the SOSEMANUK page in the cleanup bin. I have now tried to increase the contents of the page and do some clean-up of the page myself. If you could see if it is ok (or at least better) I would appreciate it. Thanks!

/Joachim

Re: Cooper Mountain Vineyards[edit]

It will likely be deleted, but I moved it to prod because advertising is not one of the criteria for speedy deletion. 05:38, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Speedy deletion[edit]

I noticed that you tagged the page Biographical study of Lawrence Kohlberg for speedy deletion with the reason "Subject covered at Lawrence Kohlberg. Unnecessarily long title". However, "Subject covered at Lawrence Kohlberg. Unnecessarily long title" is not currently one of our criteria for speedy deletion, so I have removed the speedy deletion tag. You can use one of our other deletion processes, proposed deletion or articles for deletion if you still want the article to be deleted. Thanks! Stifle 23:43, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Got your note about Biographical study of Lawrence Kohlberg being duplicative of Lawrence Kohlberg not being justification for deletion. I've since discovered via Google search that most of the text of the article was copied directly from Chapter 7, "KOHLBERG'S STAGES OF MORAL DEVELOPMENT", in W.C. Crain. (1985). "Theories of Development". Prentice-Hall. pp. 118-136.. It's not just a duplicate article and a badly formatted cut and paste job, it's a clear copyright violation and has been reported as such. --John Nagle 04:44, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent, thanks for your good work. Stifle 11:16, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

One piece-o-rama[edit]

I'm just planning on letting him create his articles, then I'll just move them to something more contextual and add an intro, the right tags and so on, he didn't seem to listen to me and the articles seem legit to me, albeit rather confusing... -O bli (Talk)^? 22:32, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. If the manga community will clean this up, that's great.--John Nagle 22:34, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, you seem to have left him a message on his user page, I moved it to his talk page for you

You'll also want to subst messages you leave on user_talk pages, like {{welcome}}, here's a little automated message about substing that could be useful:

{{subst:stubst}} -O bli (Talk)^? 22:36, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion[edit]

I noticed that you tagged the page Misclassification for speedy deletion with the reason "WP:NPOV Political statement". However, "WP:NPOV Political statement" is not currently one of our criteria for speedy deletion, so I have removed the speedy deletion tag. You can use Wikipedia:Articles for deletion if you still want the article to be deleted. Thanks! Stifle 22:04, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

General Atomics[edit]

I saw that you made an edit to this page, so I hope you know a little more about this company. I'm going through links to disambiguation pages ("Roman") and there is a link to Romans in this article, referring to a town in France. There are two options on the Roman disambig page, and I don't know which. Could you please take a look and link the article to the correct page? Thanks for your help. --Mmounties (Talk) 23:10, 1 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. Correct town in France is Romans-sur-Isère. --John Nagle 21:22, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

EXelement[edit]

Only admins can object to speedy deletion and force an AfD (and only if they think it doesn't mean WP:CSD). Just because it's been recreated doesn't mean it should be brought to AfD this time, that just clogs up the system. In the future, it should be tagged with {{db-repost}} or just the tag it was had the first time around. --Rory0 96 00:12, 2 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Arbiter[edit]

Thanks for your note. Last fall there was a bruhaha involving Carl Hewitt over a series of articles on things related to Arbiters, the actor model, denotational semantics its relation to physics, quantum indeterminacy, quantum mechanics and relativity among other things (all the way to Bruno Latour). It was unpleasant to say the least. If you're interested I can tell you about more of the details, although you can probably glean most of it from the talk pages. --CSTAR 20:37, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In all likelihood Anonymouser is Carl Hewitt, who though certainly not banned from WP, was asked to limit autobiographical editing in an Request for arbitration which was completed in late February. Though I was not a part of that process, I did have my share of run-ins with Hewitt. I got so fed-up with wasting time dealing with his style of editing that I stopped contributing to WP for a couple of months. The worst run-in one was quantum indeterminacy. After that process, he requested an admin to obliterate his page.

The Hewitt RfA makes very interesting reading. See [1], but if you decide to look at this, you should definitely first look at (in decreasing order of importance, in my view)

--CSTAR 21:36, 4 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion 2[edit]

I noticed that you tagged the page So i herd u like mudkips for speedy deletion with the reason "WP:NEO Neologism". However, "WP:NEO Neologism" is not currently one of our criteria for speedy deletion, so I have removed the speedy deletion tag. You can use Wikipedia:Articles for deletion if you still want the article to be deleted. Thanks! Stifle 20:33, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Changed to "prod", and it's now gone. --John Nagle 21:23, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

05:10, 6 April 2006 Blnguyen m (moved User NEWnavut to Template:User NEWnavut: should be a template)[edit]

I'm curious. What was the reason for your move "05:10, 6 April 2006 Blnguyen m (moved User NEWnavut to Template:User NEWnavut: should be a template)". It looks like an ordinary user page, not a template. --John Nagle 05:17, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's a userbox template so that people can quote its title, and the box will appear on the userpage, for example see Template: User WikiProject Eurovision.Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 05:20, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ah. Thanks. --John Nagle 05:24, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cool you found proof of Miniclip being insecure[edit]

I don't know how you found that, but it's correct because I visited Miniclip a lot and I got that trojan. Everyone told me I was a moron for believing the site installed bad stuff, but now I know for sure. Now there is one more thing I wanted to know. Many people say that playing Runescape via the Miniclip site makes it so you people's users could be hacked. Is this true too? Wikipeedio 17:29, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No idea. But two security firms say it's hostile code, and so we go with that in Wikipedia. --John Nagle 17:31, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tawkerbot2 there[edit]

Ok, I'm still not 100% sure of what the user is doing but it sounds like the bot is functioning properly, am I correct in this assumption? -- Tawker 07:02, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Right now, I think Tawkerbot2 is doing better than the user, who is busily creating a whole structure of pages to promote an indy filmmaker of marginal notability, all of which are going to have to be edited back to verifiable reality or deleted. See my note at Talk:Christopher_Saint, and of course User talk:Harlie8304. --John Nagle 07:09, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Three Kingdoms[edit]

Hello Nagle, I would just like to respond to the message you left me in my profile (even though it was in the wrong place, it's all ok). Yes, I indeed do read the novel of Romance of the Three Kingdoms, and I am currently on chapter 102. I'm sure you must read it as well, am I correct? Well if so I'd also recommend Journey to the West, which is quite a great novel. So thank you for leaving a message at my talk, and farewell.

-Darin Fidika

To Darin Fidika: Romance of the Three Kingdoms is not history, but historical fiction. I've already explained the proper procedure on your talk page when it comes to using fictional material. Please follow what I've written. Please also watch your style, as regardless of fact or fiction, a lot of what you've written is confusing and written in improper style. --Nlu (talk) 20:20, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:PROD for policy reminder[edit]

Quote: "This page is an official policy on the English Wikipedia. It has wide acceptance among editors and is considered a standard that all users should follow... If anyone, including the article's creator, removes Template:Prod from an article for any reason, do not put it back. If you still believe the article needs to be deleted, list it on AfD." 4.226.111.130 19:42, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I came here to deliver a similar message. Any editor is entitled to remove a {{PROD}} notice from an article if they disagree with its deletion: it's not vandalism to do so. With that in mind, you shouldn't re-instate the PROD notice afterwards, but take it to AfD (which you have now done). Regards, --BillC 21:24, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actuallly, I didn't send One Piece Attacks to AfD; I referred the problem to a manga expert, and he did. --John Nagle 03:58, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Digital Nitrate is up for deletion[edit]

Because you pointed out there are no results I have put it and its redirect page up for a deletion vote. Please weigh in here. Thanks! --Mboverload 06:31, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Christopher Saint[edit]

Hi John - sorry about that. The only reason I reverted it was it was redirecting to a redirect, which itself was pointing to a redlink. The article did look like vanity, but I didn't know that it had previously been deleted so thought it was better to have a closer look at it when I had more time to see if it needed afd'ing. I've certainly no objection to a {{db}} on it - in fact I'll go back and delete it now if no-one's already done it! Grutness...wha? 06:46, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Halo With Sprinkles[edit]

I'm trying to clean up Halo with sprinkles. Do you consider the entire article to be a promotion for the web site, or the article itself to be messy, or both? I admit the article may have been a bit biased, and I would like for it to conform to Wikipedia's standards. Any help or clarification would be appreciated.--TwoThumbsDown 03:54, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The problem isn't the article. The problem is that the web site just isn't notable enough. A college award and a note in the local paper just aren't enough. See WP:WEB (As a personal note, one of my own web sites has been reviewed favorably by Business Week, the New Yorker, CNN, and Fortune, but it's not in Wikipedia.) --John Nagle 03:58, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Band[edit]

Well, I'm not sure if Sara actually released her books in the UK (she told me to put that there, but i was thinking that was something she made up..) but i know that that band is real, becuase ...well, im in it?! I don't know what i need to verify in the band page... User:Starchaser65

OSF.8759[edit]

Hi John! It would have been better if we had a talk before that prod. Anyways viruses themselves are not that popular in Linux and among the viruses listed here, OSF.8759 is one that has been well researched on. It's not about creating a virus database here on Wikipedia but a person who goes here should have the option to get detailed information about the contents listed. There's no point in having the List of linux computer viruses page if a person has to "google" for getting details about the viruses! Do tell me what you think about that. bandan 08:35, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, the List of Linux computer viruses probably should be removed, or renamed to "List of notable Linux computer viruses". It lists only a tiny fraction of the viruses out there, and as an unmaintained list, it's just listcruft. Wikipedia is just the wrong tool for dynamic lists. --John Nagle 17:45, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Behave template[edit]

Thanks for the note - good isn't it? - I nicked from someone else - but it is quite handy! Brookie :) - a will o' the wisp ! ^(Whisper...)

Hollywood Undead[edit]

Hi John, thanks for pointing that out, I checked again, but I still feel they have enough mentions to justify an article. It's things like [2] and the number of mentions on forums etc. that make me feel that way. TH 07:46, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tribe spelling[edit]

Thankyou very much for cating and fixing the spelling of Meds.

Siddiqui 17:45, 22 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Guitar Programming[edit]

Yes, I did delete that because nothing is wrong with the article. I am not trying to be mean or anything I just saw that blog and thought it would make an interesting article. (by User:Nirelan).

It's not enough for an article to be interesting. It has to be notable. "Notable" has specific meaning on Wikipedia. See WP:WEB for what makes a web page notable, and WP:SOFT for what makes a piece of software notable. It's not just you; about a thousand articles a day are deleted from Wikipedia. Yes, you can add anything, but that doesn't mean it stays in. Also, since your user name is "NIreland" and the article is about "Nick Ireland", it's assumed that you are writing about yourself.

You can argue against deletion, by writing your argument on the article's Articles for Deletion page, but deleting the Articles for Deletion template won't stop the process. --John Nagle 08:30, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

John, I hear what you are saying about my name. I am a "Nick Irelan" ,obviously you didn't look at the name that closely, but just like many John Nagles exist there is more than one Nick Irelan. I typed my name in to Google and I found that Nirelan's website. I am definatly not a computer science student. I am not a student at all. I don't know how a completely new method of programming can not be considered interesting.

Battle of the forms[edit]

I saw your comments about creating forms for new users, and you've converted me --I want to help. As for the title of this talk subsection, it's a bit of legal in-jokery. I admit I'm relatively new to working on intra-Wikipedia policy and politics (most of it doesn't interest me), but this seems worth biting into. I've done a lot of new page patrol so I especially know where you're coming from on this. Let me know if you need my help in any way. Bobak 17:07, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Date reset on Maude cocktail[edit]

The previous backup system for prods because of the toolserver not replicating (namely PRODKEY) didn't work at ALL, and it was impossible to tell what should be deleted, so we're converting to a new system. Unfortunately, the conversion resets the dates. --Rory0 96_(block) 18:54, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

List of hardcore punk bands[edit]

Well, I'm not a fan, I just picked a particularly messy list to try and keep tidy. The best way to do this is to expunge all the red and myspace links, as if there's no article, they won't be notable (areas such as this now have pretty much 100% coverage now). Then the list can be dumped once the equivalent category is populated. I might start doing that in a week or two. Proto||type 19:36, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Zundis[edit]

G'day John,

Thanks for your message. The Zundis article originally said that Zundis was just another word for alcoholic beverages. Such an article is clearly useless, which left me with two choices (well, three, if you count "ignoring it"): redirect it somewhere useful, in case anyone looks for the word; or delete it. I usually take the view that redirecting is nearly always better than deleting, because if someone took the time to create an article under the name, someone else will probably search for it, too. Cheers, fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 03:46, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bug Report: Toolbar[edit]

Good to see you have submitted a bug report on this. It seems to be the right thing to do. I did look for an explanation of the change but couldn't find one (I could only find a note saying the buttons had been changed). Out of interest where do bug reports get filed? --MarkS 16:05, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

list of hardcore punk bands[edit]

Dont understand why you deleted list information? Its a perfectly valid list and should be added to not deleted surely. Jcuk 23:22, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I went through every band in that list, and if it had an article and wasn't already in Category:Hardcore punk groups, added it to that category. Once the list and category were in sync, I deleted the list. So the list is about what it was, but now it's always in sync with the articles.

There's some programming work going on to make it possible to generate a page from a category, and when that's working, the list can reappear, but it will be auto-generated from the category. The idea is to cut down on redundant updating work. "You should never have to tell the computer something it already knows". In time, I hope to have more lists converted to categories in this way. --John Nagle 03:29, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm... that would seem to make redlinks impossible, which is one of the reasons for having lists

(Advantages of lists Lists can include items for which there are no articles (red links); categories can only list things for which there are articles, unless stubs are created.)

Please correct me if I'm wrong in my understanding of what you're trying to do. Jcuk 17:10, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Someone else had already gone through and eliminated almost all the bands with redlinks. They'd also put in the message, as a comment visible when editing, "Please, only add bands for who articles or stubs have been created. Be aware that since bands often get their names from other things. Make sure that the link you add is actually to the band's article and not to the thing it is named after." Since the list had already been purged of no-article bands, a category could easily replace the list. The idea is that if you want to add a band, but don't have enough info, add a band stub with the category, and it goes into the list. --John Nagle 17:24, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I restored the Monnet Plan[edit]

You seem to be confused regarding what the article is about.

The article conscerns itself with the "original" plan, from just after the end of the war, when France tried to redirect German coal from the Ruhr away from German heavy industry and into the French economy instead.

It does not conscern itself with the alternative plan that developed years later, that involved merging the german mines in the Ruhr into a common system, whereby France could gains some control on German reindustrialisation and stop any rearmament, and which led to the European Union, sort of.

Please supply your motives for the NPOV tag in the article's talk page. Stor stark7 19:27, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The original article didn't have any citations, so it looked suspicious. But it matches the original documents now, so that's fine. --John Nagle 20:25, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok if I remove the NPOV tag then? Stor stark7 20:34, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. Thanks. --John Nagle 22:11, 6 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Clone template[edit]

Yeah, {{nonsense}} is supposed to be for utter gibberish, ideally -- though it often does and probably should get stretched well past that point. That article, though, could easily be about something described in detail in some Star Wars novel, so if it gets de-prodded, it probably needs to go to AfD. Let's cross our fingers that the PROD sticks. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 04:50, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

copyvios[edit]

Hey there, I thought copyvios from "commercial content providers" could get speedied (under CSD A8, and could get a {{db-copyvio}} instead of {{copyvio}}. Since these were unquestionably from a website designed to sell a "system," I thought they passed that test... Just wondering if you saw something I didn't. Thanks, --Nsevs • Talk 06:36, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's not from a "commercial content provider", that is, nobody pays CreateMyWealth.com for their valuable advertising content. It's spam, of course. --John Nagle 06:44, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I understand now. That definition is far too vague, but more problems, like you say... --Nsevs • Talk 06:51, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Horses[edit]

I missed that it was just edited. saw only the last edit, which was to correct a typo. Kim van der Linde ^{at venus} 21:43, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder[edit]

When using template tags on talk pages, don't forget to substitute with text by adding subst: to the template tag. For example, use {{subst:test}} instead of {{test}}. This reduces server load and prevents accidental blanking of the template.

— Ian Manka Talk to me‼ 03:37, 12 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment You Left On Village Pump[edit]

Seems that someone isn't happy about what you wrote: User talk:AmiDaniel#From McKenzie's IP Address. Nationalparks 05:25, 13 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

World of Kong animals[edit]

I don't really see a problem with the info supplied on the creatures from The World of Kong. They could still be expanded upon with the right imagination (though obviously people shouldn't simply make things up); I'll add stub-tags to them. Besides, (not to sound too arrogant) they're well-done pages if you ask me. I wouldn't mind the info being moved to the World of Kong page, but I think it would become way too big then. Jerkov 18:32, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

They're well-written articles, but see the discussion at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy). Not only is there a notability issue (per WP:FICT), copying much of the content of the "World of Kong" book into Wikipedia creates copyright problems. It's not just you; about a thousand articles a day are thrown out of Wikipedia. I noticed you've written some good articles about real dinosaurs; more of those would be appreciated. --John Nagle 05:36, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I think I'll start focusing on real dinosaurs. Also, the Tremors creatures make good articles, I already made a Graboid one. These are noteable and the info isn't paraphrased from a book but mainly based on what we see in the movies, much like the Xenomorph from Alien and the Yautja from Predator. Jerkov 16:28, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why is there a prod tag only only one of these articles? either delete them all or keep them all. Jon513 17:16, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I did a few of them, but I only have so much time. Want to help? I'm only proposing deletion on the ones that come strictly from "World of Kong". If the creature appeared in a movie as more than a background object, there's at least some minor level of notability. --John Nagle 17:21, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

put prod tags on all of them or regualar AFD with the same discussion page? Jon513 18:24, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Try "prod" first; AfD is only needed if there's disagreement. --John Nagle 18:47, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

it would be a strange situation if one of two of them are disputed. Would we delete the rest and AFD two of them. That is a bit strange. Jon513 20:59, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Listing jobs[edit]

Just wondering about your opinion of List of Homer Simpson's jobs. Cromulent Kwyjibo 22:31, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's probably OK. If there were an article for each job, though, that would violate WP:FICT. --John Nagle 04:18, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Excessive block by User:SlimVirgin[edit]

Today, SlimVirgin (talk · contribs) imposed the following IP range blocks.

06:20, 19 May 2006 SlimVirgin blocked "71.141.1.0/24 (contribs)" with an expiry time of 24 hours (Amorrow)
06:14, 19 May 2006 SlimVirgin blocked "71.139.176.0/24 (contribs)" with an expiry time of 24 hours (Amorrow)
04:27, 19 May 2006 SlimVirgin blocked "71.141.3.0/24 (contribs)" with an expiry time of 24 hours (Amorrow)
02:09, 19 May 2006 SlimVirgin blocked "71.141.17.0/24 (contribs)" with an expiry time of 24 hours (Amorrow)
02:02, 19 May 2006 SlimVirgin blocked "71.139.186.0/24 (contribs)" with an expiry time of 24 hours (Amorrow)

Those are AT&T DSL pool addresses, 1280 of them. This knocks out Wikipedia access for most AT&T DSL users in Silicon Valley. Unless there's a severe problem today, this is excessive. I'm being blocked at "71.141.1.150", even while logged in. --John Nagle 18:23, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

SlimVirgin (talk · contribs) suggests that I "reboot", to obtain a new dynamic IP address. Given the large range of IP addresses blocked, this is, of course, a futile exercise. --John Nagle 19:55, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bill Ham[edit]

Just wanted to let you know you made a mistake in nominating for speedy deletion the article on Bill Ham, who (as the article said) was the producer for ZZ Top, as containing no assertion of notability. Please be more careful in the future. -- SCZenz 04:12, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Failing to meet WP:BIO or WP:MUSIC is absolutely not a speedy criterion. The article had an assertion of notability the instant it said he worked for ZZ Top, and that's all it takes to avoid CSD A7. You can use the proposed deletion process if you're pretty sure something is non-notable but it doesn't meet the criteria for speedy deletion. -- SCZenz 04:21, 21 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Jimpartame[edit]

No danger of me or any other admins unblocking him, I'll bet. Just one Willy On Wheels-style pagemove uses up all three strikes, it turns out. -GTBacchus^(talk) 18:28, 22 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reminder about Hubbert[edit]

I just wanted to give you a heads up that not everything Hubbert says can be copied into Wikipedia as an NPOV statement of fact. That's all. MrVoluntarist 17:28, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Have you read Huber's "The Bottomless Well"? It really is faith-based economics. On charts of when oil will peak, Huber is all alone out there at infinity. Everybody else has dates from 2005 to 2050. Huber himself is kind of dated right now; from his prediction, oil would never hit $70/bbl. Actually, it's been striking how little supply increased when the price doubled. Elasticity on the supply side is painfully low. --John Nagle 17:38, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I thought "Huber" in your note was a shortening of "Hubbert". But it doesn't matter here, nor do the intricacies of the Peak Oil arguments. It is a violation of NPOV to to asymetrically call one view "faith" and another "prediction", when both are predictions their proponents can be said to have "faith" in. It doesn't matter what book the "faith" usage is a reference to. MrVoluntarist 17:42, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There really is such a thing as faith-based economics. Here in California, we remember the politician who said publicly "I believe in the free market as an article of faith" when the system for deregulatiing electricity, with auctions every half hour, was set up. This was before the blackouts, the huge runup in electricity prices, and Enron. Search Google for "article of faith" and "free market". Huber belongs to that faction. So "faith" is not inappropriate there. "Prediction" might be. Huber has no clue to get there; he just assumes the problem will be solved by market forces. It's kind of sad. --John Nagle 17:48, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I understand you believe a certain ideology is "faith-based economics", and your desire to send me off on a Google hunt to do your research, but I'm not going to let you bait me into arguing the merit of the various positions. As pertains to Wikipedia, it is a violation of NPOV to refer to one prediction about an eventuality as "faith", but another just a prediction. We can solicit the opinions of administrators if you like, but they will tell you the same thing. MrVoluntarist 17:54, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There are market enthusiasts who refer to their own position as "faith" based. Try that Google search. Huber is to some extent in that camp. If you're going to take that position, you really need to read his book. Writing useful material on this issue requires extensive homework. --John Nagle 18:30, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do your homework, sir. An anecdote about an unnamed politician who supports some philosophy "based on faith" does not suffice to allow you on Wikipedia to refer to all instances of that philosophy as mere faith. Again, I'm not going to let you bait me into debating the merits of the philosophies, so please stop trying. The phrasing of that passage was a clear violation of NPOV due to its asymmetry. I will continue to correct such bias. Ask an administrator's position if you like. MrVoluntarist 19:05, 23 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Horse[edit]

Yah, Horse gets a lot of juvenile vandalism. Lots of little girls love PONIES! and get excited I think. I understand why it doesn't get semi-protection, though. It's not really targeted vandalism. Try adding people's common names to your watch list, Sam, Dan, Dave. Same stuff. tata -g SchmuckyTheCat 03:17, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rob Assels[edit]

hi there John. I saw your comment to WP:AN/I and prodded him. Yet-to-be-candidates are nn, especailly when they are for a minor party in a regional election. Regards, Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 03:58, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks. --John Nagle 04:00, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Homeworlds Resistance PROD[edit]

I'm afraid I'm contesting your PROD, per the WP:FICT part that says "If the article on the work itself becomes long, then giving such characters an article of their own is good practice" - Exosquad is pretty long. AnonEMouse ^(squeak) 02:48, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi[edit]

Hi! Wow, I never would have thought of that suggestion. I cleaned up Global brain as per it though. I wonder how long the changes'll stick... :-) Cheers, --unforgettableid | talk to me 19:35, 25 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

QNX test[edit]

Testing MTU. --John Nagle 20:00, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]