User talk:El C

If you have the capacity to tremble with indignation everytime that an injustice is committed in the world, then we are comrades. – Che.

---

Southern Rhodesia draft:

---

File:Herooflabor.jpg

Archived Discussions

Archive

---

*sigh*

Gene Nygaard replied to a comment by Guettarda [1],

Did you notice that when Slrubenstein talks about years like 5765, he never identifies the calendar with "A.M." or in any other way? Perhaps he figures that since he is using the "real" calendar, it doesn't need to be identified; but I think that mostly he is hoping that people will not notice that this calendar also expresses one of those evil, culture-centric points of view.

As you know, I feel like I am at a serious disadvantage whenever Nygaard disses me because I announced I would not participate in discussion. But I thought it was obvious that when I said I think the year is 5765 because I am Jewish and this is my point of view, and repeatedly said it is my "POV" that everyone would understand that it is a POV. It pisses me off that he says "evil" since I do not think my people's calendar is "evil" and I certainly never said that the Christian calendar is "evil." Or, do you think he believes that to call something POV is to call it "evil?" I am pretty confused by his comment. Slrubenstein | Talk 15:25, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

---

I think there is a clear tendency and direction among these editors to stifle –any– discussion per se., which I strongly disagree with. I don't, however, think s/he meant 'evil' outright (though the choice of words is poor), but rather as a purely argumentative paralel to how s/he percieve you view AD/BC (i.e. as culturally-centred and undesirable, hence, 'evil.'). Of course, it is a gross misrepresntation of your position wrt to dating systems on Wikipedia and your policy proposal (a debate which, despite my involvement, as you know, I consider as relatively unimportant), so I understand and sympathize with your confusion and discouragment. El_C 23:59, 21 May 2005 (UTC)

Could you have a look at the article about Subhash Chandra Bose ?

Got suggested your name from admin -Bishonen, as there is some disagreements regarding the article about Subhash Chandra Bose. I am an amateur in this, but as far as I can see the article is not NPOV and should be more critical to Bose. I tried to enter passages regarding his collaboration with the Axis powers but these has mostly been deleted. As I dont have any special knowledge about Bose, and just saw the article by chance, I dont think theres more I can do. Ulflarsen 18:20, 20 May 2005 (UTC)

Endorsed very much, if you can find the time, El! It looks to me (speaking from unassailable ignorance) like Ulflarsen has done good work, but the problem may be getting a bit out of hand. Ulf has entered it on WP:RFC, but you know how it is, sometimes nobody bites. Bishonen | talk 18:47, 20 May 2005 (UTC)

Sorry I've taken so long to get back to you, Ulflarsen, and thank you for the kind words, Bishonen! :) I'm afraid that my scheduale has become unusually busy, so I doubt I can find the time to attend to this (or any article) for at least another few days. I also dont have any special knowledge about Bose, still, I'll see what I can do to help when I have more time. Perhaps, in the interim, you can find out whether John Kenney is willing to have a look at it. Regards, El_C 23:59, 21 May 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, El, I've dropped a note on John. Now he can be as grateful to you as you are to me. ;-)--Bishonen | talk 02:26, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

Who's the boss?

File:Catincharge.jpg

The president of OiHA with an attentive assistant. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 18:51, May 20, 2005 (UTC)

---

That's right, folks, our beloved President is so important and so...beloved, even dogs volunteer to be his body guards, and preform their duty with honour and vigilance! El_C 23:59, 21 May 2005 (UTC)

Sam

Hi, have a look at "SS" section. I understand your feelings. I wasn't aware of all the history when I first posted that message to Mel. Sam has told me not to defend him as I'll just get into trouble as so many people dislike him here. I don't need to be convinced he's been bad. I've been hoping to patch things up, but that's not likely. oh well. I don't let my feelings for one person affect my feelings for another, and no-one's going to convince me to not like someone else because they don't. I don't even dislike the people Chameleon dislikes (such as Sam). Nevermind, this isn't RL. I just wish we could all get along, but that isn't going to happen. What did you mean about refuse editing by the way? Yours, --Silversmith 00:57, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

---

Nothing, I misphrased that, I meant editing as in collaboratively with him (it has nothing to do with my current absence right now, entirely a product of being busy elsewhere). I actually don't wish to convince you of anything regarding Sam Spade, because I place enough faith in your powers of observation (that is, when you put your mind to it) and ability for introspection, that I am more than content to say nothing. Which is what I wanted to say, nothing. But I felt it necessary to correct your misreading of my comment on SlR's page (note how both yourself and Mel cite it is as evidence against/towards), as an endorsement of any change on his part. I appreciate what you're trying to do here, I tried to have him and AndyL see eye to eye when my relationship with him was still collegial (even cordial), and it was well into our own dispute when I learned of Jack Lynch. I don't really wish to discuss it any further at this point, but thank you for your comment. **** Just one final correction: my own dispute with Sam Spade is totally unrelated to that of FM (until the bastards comment it was, at least) —it predates it— it seems to be in dispute resolution limbo at the moment (for further info., my advocate's page is here). All the best, El_C 01:37, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

Oh no! (oh yes!)

Darn that Blankfaze... *curses* :P Ta bu shi da yu 07:44, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

---

Sad thing is that I was (exactly) the 420th active admin to be added to the list. And yet he mocks me! :D El_C 07:54, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

Vote on policy positions at Government of Australia

I note that Skyring has said that he doesn't intend submitting a proposal for the position this article should adopt on the matters in dispute between him and other uses. I think we can all draw the appropriate conclusions from this. At the expiry of the 24-hour period I gave Skyring yesterday to submit a proposal (10.10am AEST), I will announce a vote at Wikipedia:Australian Wikipedians' notice board and at Wikipedia:Village pump. Since Skyring has wimped the chance to have his views voted on, the vote will be a straight yes/no on my policy position, which appears below. Amendments or alternative suggestions are of course welcome. I have an open mind on how long the voting period should be and how many votes should be seen as an acceptable participation. I will be posting this notice to the Talk pages of various Users who have participated in this debate. Adam 23:03, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

My proposed policy position is this: Talk:Government_of_Australia#Vote_on_contents_of_Government_of_Australia

---

I find it unfortunate (and slightly absurd) that there is even a need to draft such a policy. Yes, of course, you can count on my support, Adam. El_C 23:19, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

---

El C, I think a better course of action in the case of Skyring would be to take it to the ArbCom, I have made a page in my userspace to prepare the case, please feel free to contribute.--nixie 05:29, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

---

I'm not sure it would be better, I am definitely leaning towards Adam's position as stated on your talk page, but like him, I have no objections. El_C 06:12, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your response. Although Adams idea has its merits, I don't think that it is a good idea to overturn 3RR on pages where there is a content dispute, that is the primary reason I suggested arbitration. If you have any comments to make on the case please do so. --nixie 06:26, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

I think it is a good idea if the Arbitration Committee approves it. I also think Skyring should be afforded a chance to appeal this — which should include drafting something along the lines of the proposal he was requested to submit, but all that while the policy/ injunction/ remedy is ongoing. What I'm getting at, is cutting down on the procedural without compromising on fair due process. I'll have to return to this later. El_C 06:58, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

---

I compeletly agree that the process is too long for a dispute like this, there needs to be another mechanism for this kind of dispute--nixie 11:01, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

Thank you, nixie! That's all I wanted to hear. :) El_C 11:29, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

gvt of aus

what is this delayed votes thing? Xtra 13:22, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

---

What? El_C 13:30, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

you just voted for it. Xtra 13:35, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

That is incorrect. El_C 14:11, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

Adminship

Thanks for supporting my adminship, El C. It was much appreciated.--Wiglaf 21:04, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

---

My pleasure, Wiglaf. Congrats! El_C 22:11, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

I Drink Your Blood? No!

It wasn't aimed at a particular person, in fact — but if you do want my blood, I should say that I don't know what my blood type is (strange but true). Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 22:54, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

That's okay, I'm not very picky! :) El_C 23:00, 25 May 2005 (UTC)

Proxies

Nope, just some guy running around on open proxies. See my talk page for more info. Better to just protect then let him run around vandalizing. CryptoDerk 23:18, May 26, 2005 (UTC)

---

Ah, makes sense. A (seemingly) wide-range of ip adresses though. El_C 23:22, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

Yep, a lot of open proxies. Que sera sera. CryptoDerk 23:26, May 26, 2005 (UTC)

♪ Whatever will be, will be blocked! ♪ El_C 23:35, 26 May 2005 (UTC)

Edit to Yom Kippur War

Can you please explain why you re-added this after I took it out with a fairly clear explination? →Raul654 09:57, May 27, 2005 (UTC)

Yes, by mistake. I meant to add with an edit summary, I guess I must have hit the button accidentally. My apologies. I saw it start to load, and pressed stop on FF, but apperently not fast enough. The thing is, Raul, is that I am eating grapes at the moment, and I wasn't careful enough at the time. Anyway, please read my edit summary. Also, I'm interested to learn Danny's thoughts of this. I am willing to follow his opinion on whether it should be in the lead; or elsewhwere; or both in the lead with elsewhere being an expansion and elboration of that. I realize it isn't widely known outside of Israel, but it was shocking news in Israel, & is very well-known now. El_C 10:06, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

Danny concurs

Hi! I have to say that I agree with your lead on the Yom Kippur War. I will tell Raul as well. Danny 01:02, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

---

Thanks, Danny! I appreciate you taking the time. I wish I would have kept the print series of it (I may still have the odd issue though somewhere), there's a great article waiting to be written about the whole event, how it got exposed, the sensation it caused and so on. Perhaps there's already an article resembling that on .he (it makes sense that they'd create it before .en). All the best, El_C 01:44, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

That which

The simplest distinction is that "that" introduces a defining and "which" a non-defining relative clause. So it's: "I want the house that I saw yesterday", but: "I saw a new house yesterday, which really impressed me." In the first case, the "that"-clause defines the house in question, while in the second case, the "which"-clause adds information about a house that has already been adequately defined. A rule of thumb is: if the sentence makes sense without the clause, use "which" (e.g., "I saw a new house yesterday"); if it doesn't, use "that" (e.g., "I want the house" — which house?). Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 10:38, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

Thanks! I think I actually understand (which isn't to say that I'll be able to apply it practically; it would slow me down). For me, it's like playing the piano/b3, I can figure anything I want without formal theory (just need to know the chords and it will come to me by ear after a little while); and when presented with the formal theory, it all makes sense, but invariably I think: wow, it would have taken me such a long time to master that tune this way (which tune? Exactly). I really spared no expense with the italics! El_C 11:06, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

Canada

I'm sorry, El C, you are quite mistaken about "Canadian Federation" being the official name of the country. It is not even a commonly used term, except in constitutional discussions, but then it is used to refer to the relationship of the provinces to the federal government: it is not used to refer to the country as a whole. I have provided references from the Constitution Act, 1867 at Talk:Canada. These I lifted from previous discussions further up on the talk page, but I have also confirmed them myself with on-line versions of that act. The name of Canada is not a new discussion, it has been going on on Wikipedia for quite a while, so don't be surprised if people who are a little weary of the discussion revert without explanation. Regards, Ground Zero 14:24, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

---

Oh, I stand corrected. Thank you for taking the time to explain this to me, Ground Zero. All the best, El_C 14:40, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

---

Quite alright. We're all here to learn and to teach. I have an explanation at the bottom of my user page about "that" and "which", by the way. It may help. Regards, Ground Zero 14:57, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

---

• Use that when the information is essential to the meaning of the sentence.
• Use which when it is not essential.

I think I actually understand that. It certainly is formulated in simpler terms than Mel's non-defining relative clause philologism — which isn't, though, to say that I'll be able to apply it practically! :p Must.stop.italicizing Thanks again for all your help. Best, El_C 15:30, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

Other changes to Canada

I do not have time for extensive debate on this. Below are some points re your edits

territorially, the second largest country on the planet

- "the second largest in area" is simpler & sufficient JimWae

---

See for example Russia ...is the largest country in the world – less vague, no simplicity is lost, on the contrary. El_C

---

Bordering the United States on the south,

- borders usa on south & west - but that's too much detail for intro JimWae

---

Right Alaska. No, you're incrorrect: most country leads in Wikipedia, and indeed, in other enecylopedia I encountered provide such an who-does-it-border-on-the overview. Again, I urge to look at some random examples of country leads to see this phenomenon. El_C

---

its territorial claims extend north into the Arctic Ocean and as far as the North Pole.

- repeats "territory" and "and" is unneeded - someday I'll wikify North Pole - for those who do not know what it is JimWae

---

(above bold is my emphasis) We wikify North Pole (and all wikifiable geographic designations) because this is a wiki. El_C

---

Geographically sizable but sparsely populated portions of Canada are administered through three "territories".

- this is just confusing - lots of "portions" of Canada qualify as such but are parts of provinces. Territories have well-defined boundaries JimWae

---

Their size (large country-sized) vs. population (city-sized) is notable – unlike the provinces who also have a relatively sizable population (though, obviously concentrated southwards). So how it is just confusing, and what about territories having well-defined boundaries? El_C

---

It is governed as a parliamentary representative democracy.

- "It" becomes ambiguous, having talked about so much else in meantime JimWae

---

I changed it from Canada, because, at the time, there was a Canada in the sentence prior, so it was for grammatical flow. Minor though. El_C

---

Initially constituted through the British North America Act of 1867 as a confederation,

- confederation was a process, not a result JimWae

---

Sure, that's fine, I didn't author that sentence, nor to my knowledge did I modify it. El_C

---

it was granted Dominion status as the "Dominion of Canada". Since Dominion status was relinquished (and the Dominion Office abolished), this designation is no longer used.

- could we use the word "dominion" one more time please? Too much detail for intro JimWae

---

Not too much, it can be slightly expanded at least. Yes, I was also bothered with the overuse of dominion. I was going to change it to somethign else, but I left it there for now at least to curtail the 'Dominion of Canada' edit war (which I was uninvolved with), it having explictly outlined the inappropriatness for using Dominion in the formal name contemporarily. Which I trust you agree with. El_C

---

Canada's official languages are English and French (predominantly in the province of Québec).

- French is official language throughout Canada

--JimWae 17:16, 2005 May 27 (UTC)

---

I am well aware of that, obviously I meant (& should have added) predominatly spoken in Québec. El_C 23:13, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

---

AND, I did keep 2 of your points:

1. with three territories administered by the federal government.(which necessitated the ongoing reconstruction of sentences & paragraphs, but is an important & worthy point)
2. a designation no longer used officially

--JimWae 17:33, 2005 May 27 (UTC)

---

I do not believe I authored either of these, though I'm not 100% sure. And one more thing, as per soviergn or independent nation: again, I urge you to review other country lead to see this is stylistically unorthodox viz. simply country or nation. It is common knowledge Canada is an independent country, and such designation need to be extended to newly-independent nations. El_C 23:13, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

Spadism

Just skimming the recent flurry of activity on the ML and WP:AN3. Typical troll behaviour on his part; how much time we waste on these matters. Actually, I would categorize it as sub-troll; flying just low enough to escape the normal troll radars, but nonethess attracting enough attention and sufficiently disrupting business to make it all worthwhile.

Everytime I encounter your use page I am blown away by that incredible photo. -- Viajero | Talk 16:33, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

---

Thanks, I really appreciate that, Viajero, It was a rough one, and it seems too many people are willing to excuse anything he says or does without bothering to look closely at the evidence (and it is truly overwhelming and extends far beyond this case). File:Meh.gif Yours sincerely, El_C

3RR Sam

Please don't respond in that section for a sec, there are a number of comments that have been reverted due to a bug. Am trying to fix now. I'll let you know when it's sorted. Thanks, --Silversmith Hewwo 16:42, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

Ok, it's fixed, but I didn't add your edit back in as it was based on something that had been added before you edit, but then reverted due to the bug (Chameleon had already retracted the "immidately" comment). Feel free to copy and paste it in as I've done with the others if you want. --Silversmith Hewwo 16:59, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

That's okay, I can't be bothered. El_C 23:13, 27 May 2005 (UTC)

Government of Australia

Many thanks for your comment. It was much appreciated. I thought it important to pull together all the evidence. Skyring's supposed rebuttal shows just how little he actually knows about the topic, about law, about constitutions, etc. It is astonishing how one person can stick so rigidly to ideas that fall foul of some many fundamental aspects of constitutional law. If he produced what he writes in a law exam he'd barely pass (and indeed a lot of what he writes is so fundamentally wrong it might produce an automatic fail). Few academics, as you know, would allow his batty claims to stand unchallenged. He is lucky he isn't a law student or he could expect his ideas to receive a severe savaging from a law professor. One colleague of mine, an international expert on constitution, read some of Skyring's analysis, and responded by saying "oh dear God. This man don't know what he is talking about." A second colleague stopped reading after 2 minutes, saying "it is so bad I'm not going to waste my time reading any more." Many thanks again. FearÉIREANNFile:Ireland flag large.png\^(talk) 00:20, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

I hear that! You are very welcome, it is always a pleasure to compliment brilliant work, and we really needed an actual expert on constitutional law —someone who could rebuttal Skyring's original research with the depth and intensity as you have— so it was a very welcome sight to read your poignant and so inexorably logical comments. I, of course, agree with everything you say. Your description of how your colleagues viewed Skyring's, shall we say, thoughts (which I got a chuckle from), does not surprise me one bit. If you have'nt already, please have a look at the brief comments Adam Carr and myself have issued on Skyring's RFAr case. Keep up all the great work! All the best, El_C 00:46, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

Rougue admin? No.

Periodization: [2] ], [3], [4],[5], [6], [7], [8]

On the list: WP:POINT, WP:NPA, WP:Civility, Good_faith, Wikilove, et cetera, etc.

RickK is my new hero!

You're welcome. Thank you for the thank you.  :) RickK 23:58, May 27, 2005 (UTC)

Section self-titled! El_C 00:15, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

The only thing I can think of to do is to report it on WP:ANI and get other people's comments, or file an RfC on him. He's a troll, and has been from day one. I find it hilarious that he gets upset whenever anybody calls him Jack on Wikipedia, yet that's how he signs his mailings to the mail list. RickK 22:14, May 28, 2005 (UTC)

I placed a notice here. Please speak out against is harrasment of myself, Rick. Thank you. El_C 22:20, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

Spadomasochism

I'll contemplate a repsonse on the WP: page shortly, but for now, let me observe that I simply do not understand why Wikipedia tolerates disruptive behaviour of this kind. I have no wish to alter the fundamental character of openness and inclusivity, but soon as a user demonstates they can't conform to agreed upon principles of behaviour, they should be banned. Why is that so controversial? Is this an encyclopedia project or some kind of sheltered workplace for disturbed individuals? -- Viajero | Talk 23:22, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

I certainly will comment! As soon as I'm awake. (It's 3:50 AM on Sunday morning here right now. :-( ) Kim Bruning is my hero for this edit. Bishonen | talk 01:50, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

A picture that is, unfortunately, too apt

I am livid with rage. That Sam would attempt to do such a thing is not only a mockery of everything Wikipedia stands for — it is an open-faced attack on the democracy of the project. If you are such a terrible user, why were you just made an admin by an overwhelming majority? This is absurd. I'm thinking the mere presence of that list demands action. Wally 03:04, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

I am, by the way, prepared to immediately report him to the AMA Coordinator for bad conduct, if you'll allow. Wally 03:05, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

Changed my mind

Yeah, I changed my mind about sleeping first and commenting at WP:AN/I afterwards, I got too mad at the people writing in to say we need to forget the whole thing now that Sam has been nice enough to change his sig back. I've commented now. Please don't leave the project, El, we need people like you. It's OK, you don't have to marry me! Bishonen | talk 03:39, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

Don't worry about it

It's more evidence against him than against you. It won't have any impact on your ability to work here, it's just an intimidation tactic. Jayjg ^(talk) 05:14, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

Some light in the darkness

Please see: this. I've only just finished it, and I need help adding some people to get the ball rolling. Your most competent and good-spirited help would be appreciated. Cheers, --Silversmith Hewwo 13:42, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

Well, I'm back–sooner than I expected, but I couldn't ignore being mentioned in an arbcom case (of all things). This business with Spade is shameful, and you have my full support. Best, and thanks for the kind note earlier (with kitty!). Mackensen (talk) 17:13, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

Not allowed to block yourself

Blocking yourself is not allowed according to policy. CryptoDerk 03:31, May 30, 2005 (UTC)

my apologies

I see that you have left. I admit that almost made me happy for a moment. However, after some reflection (and admittedly conversation with persons whom I respect), I have realised this is a bad thing. While we havn't gotten along well for a long time, and I assume you have a rather ugly opinion of me from how we have interacted, you have a number of friends here. Overall, your interactions with other wikipedians were overwhelmingly positive (I should know, I have your talkpage on my watchlist). Me chasing you off, particularly in a circumstance such as this one, is not a positive occurance, neither for me personally, nor for the community as a whole.

I apologise, formally and without reservation, for having placed you on that list. It was inaccurate, and done due to anger, rather than rational contemplation. Due to how things have played out since then, I feel that list is unhelpful, and have asked for it to be deleted. We may disagree about alot of things, but I am going to try to avoid confronting you. I will still consent to mediation if you prefer, but I will certainly not insist on it. I ask you to return, you were a good editor, and a benefit to the project.

Sam Spade 23:46, 30 May 2005 (UTC)

Alright, I accept your apology and I hereby return. I don't want to sound ungraceful, so I will not expend words beyond that at this point (esp. wrt some of the criticisms levied against you), but for the record, my protest had as much to do with some editors focusing exclusively on the signature, while ignoring the personal injustice committed against myself. And that was very hurtful to me. I want to thank all those who stood up for me, and who appealed to my better judgment throughout this stressful time, your support was invaluable and I will not forget it. Finally, the film I watched was Red Beard, which I highly recommend as one of the masterpieces of modern cinema. El_C 02:21, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

YAY! Welcome back! Welcome back! Kim Bruning 07:22, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

Thank you, Kim. It has been an exciting three days! El_C 07:28, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

Hi. You probably have no idea who I am, but I just wanted to pop by to say that I'm glad that you haven't let SS drive you out of here. We need editors like you, while I'm in the minority who believe that we could live happily without him. At the very least, having a Grateful Dead lyric on your user page makes you one of the good people, in my books. Filiocht | Blarneyman 08:29, May 31, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, Filiocht! No, our love won't fade away! I'm seeing the Allman Bros. this month, and Warren Haynes is back on lead guitar! (yet Gvt. Mule is on tour right now, I'm sure there's a perfectly scientific explantion) :) El_C 08:52, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

[insert jealous noises] Enjoy. In my rural Irish backwater, I rarely get to see any good gigs. Filiocht | Blarneyman 08:55, May 31, 2005 (UTC)

If I didn't like them, there's a reasonable joke to be had about your missing the "e" out of the "Allman Bors", but I suppose I'll have to wait for someone else to make it... Doh! Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:11, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

Emberassing typo! The Allman Brothers Band are anything but that! El_C 11:37, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

Two things: Hurrah for the brevity of your exit; Hurrah for SS's apology; Hurrah for your courteous acceptance; Oops! That's three things. [Note to Mel: NPOV requires that only an Allman fan can make that joke]. --Theo (Talk) 10:13, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for the hurrahs (plural) ! El_C 11:37, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

hullo El C -- I may have missed a thing or two, but you didn't actually consider leaving the project because Sam featured you on that stupid list, now, did you? In any case, cheers for showing the format of accepting an apology, and keep up the good work. cheers, dab (ᛏ) 10:19, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

As a form of protest, absolutely I was prepared to. Thanks! El_C 11:37, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

YAY! Che's back! El, you had every right to be angry, and upset by the lack of support. We are a community here, and we should support each other. "You have my bow". --Elven ally Hewwo 10:48, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

Thank you, yes, that was exactly the point behind my protest. To change things for the better, sacrifices need to be made, there is no other way. But had it not been to my loyal supporters and friends, it would have amounted to nothing. El_C 11:37, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

I also am glad to see you back and reverting vandalism. Thanks!!! Trödel|talk 12:47, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Chip on Chip

Hi, thanks for adding links to my page. I think my bio from the Center for Milennial Studies is redundant, and these links under References are just an ad for Brandt since they are already in the text, so they don't belong: Googlewatch, Namebase.

Otherwise, my energetic critics tend to scream when any criticism of me is deleted. Any links in particular that seem odd to you? I have agreed to not edit my page after a rather nasty battle over the insertions of false claims by my legion of critics.  :-) --Cberlet 13:21, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

Got it. They can scream at me all they want. :) I'll have to take another look. So I trust so my elected papers linkage were all applicable...(?) Let me know if you have any ideas of how to better restructure any of those sections. I'll take a closer look at the body soon. El_C 13:42, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

All but one of the new links look fine. The one just has an earlier title that was published differently than originally expected: "{1996) with Matthew N. Lyons, The Buchanan campaign incorporates themes of right Wing Populism, Scapegoating, Reactionary Politics and Fascism" (http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/45/083.html), from Too Close for Comfort: Right Wing Populism, Scapegoating, and Fascist Potentials in US Politics, Boston: South End Press." Actually: "(2000), Right-Wing Populism in America: Too Close for Comfort, New York: Guiford Press. Cberlet 11:11, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

Heh, the one and only reference (as opposed to linking of existing ones) I added myself. That figures. :) Right, I'll remove it. I've yet to get a chance to look at the article closely, and I'm writing in haste, but I am hopeful I'll be able to attend to it soon. El_C 02:05, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Re: message. The issue is how to avoid the "no original research" mandate. I need to focus on some family stuff for a week, but then I will try to locate the responses. Note that the American Friends Serive Committee was, at the outset, "related" to the Quakers, but is independent.--Cberlet 13:24, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Well, these are, after all, your responses, so NOR isn't a huge factor, though of course, you'd want it to be empirically-grounded and to be convincing (I would if I was you). But you could, if you suddenly went insane, say that Daniel whatever the hell his last name is is actually an alien — it's your replies. But, clearly, if you have hitherto responses that are already out there and you find are representative of your position, that sounds like a sensible approach to follow. I leave that at your discretion; this way, you'll be doing research about yourself, for me! By all means, take all the time you need. And best wishes to your family, I hope everything is well. El_C 13:46, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

upon being picked up and held

"Dah-dah-dah-dah-DAH-dah-dah-dah-dah-dah-dah-dah-dah ... Catman!" :p

File:P1010953.jpg

Hey, El C. :) What do you know about ragdolls? I'm curious about an answer to my question Talk:Ragdoll about why they go limp. Any info? Thanks. :D deeceevoice 14:04, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

I did not know they went limp upon being picked up and held to be thoroughly and mercilessly petted. I must study this fascinating phenomenon further. Thank you for bringing it to my attention, DC! El_C 15:21, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

Secretlondon

El, I don't know if you've heard of this legendary user—like me, you arrived after Secretlondon left. She's been too long gone, for reasons similar to yours, if I've understood the old campfire stories and wikisongs right. But she's baaaack! Better still, you're back without being long gone. It's so cool to see you doing normal stuff round the place again—right there ahead of me, voting at all the RFA's! :-) Bishonen | talk 22:20, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

I've heard of her, I think from 172. Always good to have another knowledgable editor and a progressive voice. El_C 02:02, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

---

RfA Skyring

Hi El C, I've put up a page of evidence realting mostly to edits in the main namspace of Government of Australia, if you have anything to add or know about similar behaviour by him on another page please add it. --nixie 02:17, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, nixie, I'll have a look at it soon.I'm sure I have some thinga to say on his conduct in Govt. of Australia, but that pretty much sums up my experience with him (a little bit on Republic, but that's about it). I am committed to see it succeed. El_C 03:10, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

To update you on the Skyring case, we're up to evidence now.--nixie 06:58, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Right, I did notice actually. Sorry for being behind scheduale. I will attend to it soon Thanks, nixie. El_C 07:07, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

---

Thank You

What a year! My first year in Wiki, a featured article and now administrator. Thank you for your support. Tony the Marine

My pleasure, congrats! El_C 06:20, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your vote in support of my admin nomination. Paul August ☎ 13:30, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC) P.S. I love the cat picture above.

Not at all, good to have you on board. El_C 13:33, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Welcome back

File:Kittenradiator.jpg

Good to have you back, El C. But don't fall asleep on the job. ;-) SlimVirgin ^(talk) 07:48, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC)

What a wonderful dream I ... wasn't sleeping. And that looks so incredibly comfortable! El_C 09:28, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hewwo. Did you see the email? I need help man!:p --Silversmith Hewwo 09:52, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

This has what to do with felines!? El_C 10:04, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Hewp! Hewp! I'm a poor little puddytat, stuck behind a radiator! --Silversmith Hewwo 10:27, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

An incredibly comfortable sleep! Such wondrous dreams, I'm sure. El_C 10:51, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Which is more than can be said for me. I'm barely able to breathe again. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 11:19, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC)

Well, don't overexert yourself. Try to take it easy. :( El_C 11:31, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Image issue

Hi, if you have a moment, could you take a look at Ward Churchill? As you may know, he is a highly controversial figure in the US at the moment and the article gets a lot of attention. At the moment, Klonimus is insisting on including a photo of Adolf Eichmann to the article, because of Churchill's reference to him in his "infamous" 9/11 essay, with a long caption and an additional paragraph on Eichmann in the article. Yesterday, I removed the photo and trimmed down the digression on Eichmann to one line, but it was quicky reverted by Klonimus.

First of all, this article is about Ward Churchill and images should pertain to him. Second, the image sets up a strong subliminal association of Churchill with Nazism, which I think is inappropriate and vastly unfair. Thanks, -- Viajero | Talk 10:24, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Agreed, it's a form of POV propaganda meant to produce a negative emotionalist response, despite the obvious connotation with the (in)famous passage, it is untopical. I echo your objections which I noted on the article's talk page. El_C 11:06, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

LaRouche

Hi El C, I'm back, though not yet up-to-speed and still unwell. Will e-mail with more details. In the meantime, we have another LaRouche editor The Power of Reason (talk · contribs), possibly a sockpuppet of the old one(s). Your views would be appreciated at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/LaRouche-Riemann Method and Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Triple Curve, two articles s/he created today. There's also an incident report at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Lyndon LaRouche and User:The Power of Reason. Sniff, sneeze, cough. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 00:49, Jun 7, 2005 (UTC)

Welcome back! Yes, I had already noticed & watchlisted — I got your back. Looking forward to your email. El_C 01:14, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

My RFA: Thanks

Thank you for your support on my RFA. Now that I have been promoted, I promise to be as hardworking and fair with the admin tools as I have been with the other areas here on Wikipedia. See you around and happy editing. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 00:51, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

My pleasure, congrats! El_C 01:15, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

My RFA

El C, Thanks for your vote of confidence on my recent successful RFA, it was much appreciated. I will work to demonstrate that your trust was well-placed. Fawcett5 19:16, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Not at all, well done! El_C 04:00, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

IRC

El, if you put messages at the bottom of my page there's a chance I'll actually see them. Bishonen | talk 22:02, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

So long as there's a chance...YASE! :) El_C 04:00, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your support

Thank you for voting on my RFA. Have some pie! I was pleasantly surprised by the sheer number of supporters (including several people that usually disagree with my opinion). I shall do my best with the proverbial mop. Yours, Radiant_>|< 07:57, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC)

My pleasure, thanks for the pie! (mmm) El_C 05:15, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/List of tyrants

Please read what I have written on the page because I hope that on reflection you will change your vote . Philip Baird Shearer 17:37, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Okay, I'll look into it soon. El_C 05:15, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

tyrants

Can you help? Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/List of tyrants user:Philip Baird Shearer is asking what category of deletion under Wikipedia:Deletion policy I am arguing under. The list is, of course, inherently POV, but he's pointing out (correctly it seems) that this isn't a deletion category in itself, and that POV should be argued in the talk page. If he wins this argument - then 'list of horrible people' and 'list of great holiday destinations' would also be legit (and that's just moronic). But I don't know how to answer him... --Doc (?) 12:15, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I think the argument is that tyrants can be seen as a subjective term; I'm uncertain where that falls as per the deletion policy (if at all). I'll look further into this whole issue soon. El_C 05:15, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Image copyright

{{Image copyright|Image:Raul hilberg-large.jpg}} User:Nv8200p

That data has been lost, I'm afraid. I'll see what I can do though. El_C 05:15, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for your support

Thank you for supporting my candidacy for administrator. Kelly Martin 15:09, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)

OKAY! :) El_C 21:48, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)

---

---

I lift the shroud and make the masses proud
Crush our enemies,
Are you gonna ride with me?
Or sit in your materialistic moyogi

Race to our grave
how much more could I have gave
to the insatiable assassins that are forever laughing
like an atom cracking,
will we ever be saved?
With landmines not gold my future is paved,
love in my heart but not racist-ly raised
You want back but you never gave,
you think you're prince but you're really nave – sissy,
I bet you think you're brave
playing broke, stack your loot
the cream you save,
body boarding on light's way
The rich taunt me
specter of bill collectors haunt me
The fates of the greats leaves me undaunted
socialist dazzle mother****er and I flaunt it
Class equality and abolish poverty – I want it 

Preach knowledge with no answer, 
you speak in tongues
climb life's ladder and it has no wrongs 
My old-school compadres are spun

The rich steal my labour and my health
to bag their wealth
They got us ass backwards 
fight for the self
and not the masses,
they got us right in Congress
Anything but abolish the classes
Anything but rocking the vote of our masters
Mother****ers telling me that my vote is the answer
You simple fools
I duel your revisionism tools
You leer,
indegenous people fuc**n with cheap beer
sniffing glue,
redestroyed their world – what would you do?

My African comrades
Killed by disease and nationalism
our motherland raped and beaten by this giant mob
capitalism
Spewing fumes of death-smoke, we choke 
on consumer goods
like gunpowder-fed pits,
we kill each other in our own hoods
More and more are forced to settle in the ghetto
we whore and horde to pay the rent and fill the kettle
The rich test our mettle 
I'm an avalanche started by a pebble
I throw a rock at the devil
I rebel
In politics I meddle 
past lives several 

Esoterics,
yes, I dabble 
control the rabble 
false prophets praddle 
the lumpen cut down like cattle
In the street we battle
the bourgeois we rattle
Lift the curse
check em down from their perch  
For the truth we search at birth,
living together in harmony
I never understand why you just can't see
We'll kill you just like we did the Nazi

Let's clean the names 
of the heroes the rich besmirched
Spiritualism is valid
just make it an equal portion of the salad

Life is callous 
mass confusion
cats living in delusion
stalled evolution
each breath I taste pollution
no respect for women, 
just a cushion for the pushin'  
Lions laid and wait
and ambushes from the bushes
Watch how hard this player pushes through
in and out a pussy like a douche
he rush your tw*t like swat
he makes more than your pussy pop
leave you broken 
All to say is bambaclat

I mark 
rats, rapists, police agents and snitches
Subject deep lyrics vicious
pockets broke
mental riches
rathead bitches
capitalistic wishes
personal issues
You've never heard words like these
they're free so don’t say please
you're the host of degree disease 
Stay clam
smoke balm 
you better sound the alarm
Revolution's cold so dress warm
like millions of locus we swarm
the children of corn
destroy child porn
Heed to seed our plant
feel the impression of my stamp

--Comrade Zearle.

---

---

Baruch Goldstein

Sorry. My apologies. Followed a contrib and didn't realise there was more afterwards. No insult to you, your Cness. Grace Note 04:05, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)