User talk:Durova

Welcome to my talk page. Please sign and date your entries by inserting ~~~~ at the end. I'll reply here if you post here.
Start a new talk topic.

San Francisco, 1851 daguerrotype.

Restoring this was a labor of love.

---

Interested in potentially featurable images? Help improve existing material from the Wikipedia/Commons archives at User:Durova/Landmark images. Durova^Charge! 18:53, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

---

Israeli-Palestinian conflict disclaimer Yes, I'm a member of Wikipedia:WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration and mentor to Jaakobou. That doesn't mean I'm an expert in the content dispute. Roughly I've got as much knowledge of those issues as a well-informed Jerusalem resident would have of U.S.-Mexico border relations. Well-informed by Jerusalem standards isn't the same thing as knowing this week's border crossing waits along la frontera, and vice versa. Durova^Charge! 18:59, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Archived talk 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44

Royal abdication

Hi Durova, and Happy New Year!

I was really touched by your and Filll's coronation, but I don't think that I deserve it. :( To be sure, I've helped out with a few Featured Articles and I earned one DYK very early in my Wiki-career (the funny story about Edwin Joseph Cohn's blood-protein purification demonstration). But I don't really have any Good Articles to my credit. I feel that I did help Harold Pinter become a Good Article, but my contributions were paltry and trivial compared to the amazing work of NYScholar, who deserves all the credit for that article. I hope to earn a Good Article someday, perhaps for Usher syndrome or Catullus 2 or Soddy's hexlet, but so far it's eluded me.

So I have to lay your three-fold crowns back at your feet until I do earn them. Much as I admire Freya, I can't wear a cloak of borrowed feathers. :)

If you have any tips for me, that'd be great! I've been a little despondent at how seldom my articles are awarded a DYK. :( I've started about 4000 referenced articles by now and only 1 has ever gotten a DYK; I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong. Admittedly, they're usually on pretty technical subjects that a general reader would probably find boring. :( Willow (talk) 20:23, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Before we start the interregnum, please remember that the standard threshold for qualification is 10 line citations. You don't have to be the principal contributor to achieve that. Would you double check and confirm before I downgrade the award?

And regarding DYKs, nearly all of my submissions have been accepted. You're welcome to show me your new work and I'll see what I can do about helping you draft a good hook. Best wishes, Durova^Charge! 20:28, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your speedy reply and offer of help! I'm a little embarrassed to admit that I didn't know that we're supposed to submit our own work for DYK; the Edwin Cohn DYK just happened without me doing anything. Unfortunately, I think I'm done creating new articles for the time being; I've already started too many articles that need improvement desperately.

I'm not sure what you mean by "line citations" — is that the same as "inline citations"? However, I just reviewed my work at Harold Pinter and I can safely say that I didn't contribute any references. My main contributions were minor re-wordings and re-arrangements of the prose to improve the flow and to make the article pithier and more easily intelligible to lay-people. The content of the article derives entirely from NYScholar. Willow (talk) 21:00, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, inline citations. All right; I'll see what I can do. I got pretty lucky with DYK: one of the first articles I ever started was a collaboration with Ghirlandajo who's an old hand at this. I was surprised to get a DYK nod for it, then looked around and figured out how it works. Probably I could have earned several other DYKs that I didn't try for. Lately I've been rebuilding Wikipedia:WikiProject Textile Arts so I've been writing more DYKs to bring attention to the project. Regards, Durova^Charge! 21:39, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I really appreciate all your work there! :D I started the TA WikiProject, but after making its main page and article assessment system, I got pulled away by a bazillion people asking me to work on other things. :( I feel awful about abandoning PKM, Calliopejen1 and the others, and I get mad at myself for getting distracted every day by something new — blah. I'll try to make your crochet symbols tonight, though. :) Willow (talk) 21:55, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I joined that last summer when the project was pretty healthy and did some low key work, not noticing how participation was dropping off. After I handed in my bit and had more time for mainspace work I realized how much attention was needed. Spam had even crept into the templates! Most of the work I've done since then is very unglamorous (stub sorting, despamification, template updates) so I threw in a few DYKs because nobody much notices a brilliant new stub category. ;) Durova^Charge! 23:00, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Great and gracious lady, your symbols await your craft. :)

I used the following book as my reference

• Pauline Turner (2001). How to crochet. London: Collins and Brown. pp. p. 150. ISBN 1-85585-827-4. {{cite book}}: |pages= has extra text (help)

but then I noticed that a slightly newer book in my library has more and slightly different symbols (the crossbars are at right angles, instead of beveled)

• Donna Kooler (2002). Donna Kooler's Encyclopedia of Crochet. Little Rock, AR: Leisure Arts. pp. p. 23. ISBN 1-57486-282-0. {{cite book}}: |pages= has extra text (help)

Do you have a preference? It wouldn't take much more work to add the other symbols, although I'd have to do it tomorrow night, when I'm better rested. I'm a little under the weather at the moment. :P Willow (talk) 07:00, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

PS. I really need to shed that Freya cloak, I'm feeling really uncomfortable; please forgive me.

I made these to illustrate thread weight for crochet thread. You're one of the few Wikipedians who can appreciate how much work was behind this photo.

Gorgeous, thank you! London and Little Rock, eh? I'll have to check this against Debbie Stoller to make sure whether you've chosen American or British terminology. I'm a southpaw myself, which means I look at the books just long enough to imagine geometric inversions and then create my own designs. I've just finished a Kleenex box cover in scallop stitching (four American double stitches into a single stitch, skip one, anchor with a flat stitch, repeat ad nauseam). Think you could do a schematic for that? I managed a DYK for granny square and maybe an article for scallop stitches could get there too.

The advantage of this habit is that I can upload photos of everything I crochet to Commons because I own all the underlying creative copyrights. The downside is that I don't read crochet patterns. I'm like the musician who creates songs without knowing how to read music. Someday some poor right hander is going to try to duplicate my illustrations and she'll be in for a nasty surprise. ;)

I'm a better embroiderer and can duplicate any stitch or schematic I see. And where stitch orientation is an issue I just rotate the piece and work upside down. But not much of that is uploadable because I tend to follow patterns. I keep eyeing a piece on my wall and wishing I could use it to illustrate the candlewicking article, but durnit the thing is someone else's copyrighted design. Durova^Charge! 07:40, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

What a fun letter! :) I can't tell you how wonderful it is to meet another crafter here; I was awfully lonesome when I first got here. :( My main love is knitting, which I'm pretty good at; but as I'm sure you know, knitting and crochet are as close as cousins, and I do crochet for fun and to make presents and vase-doilies. I love the way you can go in any direction with crochet, and also how its easy shaping and stiffness are wonderful for making little two- and three-dimensional figures like angels. I also use crochet doilies to illustrate the principles of curvature to my knitting students: too few increases = a cup, too many = a frill, just right = flat circle. I wonder that mathematicians don't do likewise! I'm pretty lame at embroidery, although I use it as duplicate stitch (Swiss darning) in knitting, to make flowers and leaves and to give the illusion that I can knit in a perfect circle, each stitch suspended from the next; it's wonderfully mystifying (and instructive) for some students. ;)

I'm pretty flexible about instructions vs. charts, but I usually use them only at the beginning; once I figure out the pattern by doing a swatch, I rarely look at them, because you can see from the stitches themselves where you are on the pattern. It's a lot safer than trying to follow written instructions exactly (which sometimes have mistakes in them!), and it lets you adjust the pattern to fit your gauge. I'm not like some people who can watch television and knit; I have to look, but my fingers do develop a pattern memory of their own, so that I'm usually not thinking about the knitting as I do it; my mind wanders off to happy, sunny fields populated by friends and kind words. :) Willow (talk) 08:10, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

PS. I'm pretty sure that I used the American terminology throughout, but please correct me if I'm mistaken; two heads are better than one! :)

So you teach knitting? That's far more advanced than me. I've made a few sweaters that way and occasionally even follow patterns. One of the tests I set for myself in the German language was to get a sweater pattern. The thing was actually wearable when I finished, so I passed the exam. :) But it's so much slower than crochet. Durova^Charge! 08:52, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm not that good — I wouldn't want to excite your anticipation, only to disappoint. :( But I do love teaching and gabbing with fellow knitters in a circle. :) I used to go to a spinning circle every week, which was a lot of fun too, but I'm running out of time these days.

I'll be happy to make you a diagram for the scallop stitch, but I know it a little differently? I'm guessing you mean a solid shell stitch, which I would do as "* 5 dc's into previous sc, sk 2 dc's, sc into middle dc, sk 2 dc *" and half-stagger on the next row? Please let me know exactly what you'd like and I'll try to draw that.

As it turned out, I didn't get a camera for Christmas, but by good fortune, I have a friend visiting who loaned me hers. So I dashed off a series of pictures for knitting that I've been thinking about for some time, although they didn't turn out too well. :( But maybe they'll inspire someone to do them better? I'll crop them and upload them later tonight. I also took two crochet pictures that I thought you might enjoy for articles on filet and scallop stitch — well, really, fan stitch, but you know it's almost the same. Right now, though, I have to finish typing in some things for Awadewit, who's been far more patient with me than I deserve. :) Willow (talk) 23:40, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll upload the pic later tonight. Right now I'm finishing up smocking for DYK before I head out to a party. I actually created a smocking sampler for that page. What an undertaking! Stitching the thing wasn't half as much work as marking it and stabilizing the pleats. For the crochet piece, what I did was almost the standard solid shell stitch. It was too lumpy at 5dc so I worked it in 4dc. And only skipped 1dc between them. I worked the half-stagger and everything else you wrote looks right. Your help with schematics would be so wonderful. The whole crochet area was hamstrung without it. Cheers! Durova^Charge! 23:46, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Reply to MartinPhi

Hi Durova, your reply to MartinPhi on the AC RfC page should probably go on talk, not underneath their view. R. Baley (talk) 18:31, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I had already posted a similar elaboration on talk before he directly challenged me in his opinion, which gives passersby a misleading impression. If he alters his statement accordingly I'll be glad to remove my reply. Durova^Charge! 01:39, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Query of Concern regarding the private forwarding of emails when an ArbCom is involved

Durova... On several pages, I have seemed to detect a plan for Z to forward you a quantity of private emails of mine to her (or to others) through-out a period of time --- which may or may not prelim any knowledge I had of her posting here at WP. I would like you to please clarify what it is that is expected to be delivered to you and what it will seek to prove. Do realize that emails taken out of context over nearly 10 years can present a distorted perspective, drawing only upon those that would support certain contentions.

Durova, if this is what is to be considered,I request a chance to forward private emails from her to several of my addresses, JUST since the time when I had publicly established, after her mentorship began, of full and consistent support and defense of her on WP... and, also found on WP, will be a consistent pattern of my withdrawing from each and every conflict that ever threatened to develop.

Durova, since this is something that is obviously going on off-Wiki, yet is being used by you to judge me, I think it important for this to be addressed publicly on the appropriate ArbCom topic and discussion pages of the evidence and workpage topics.

Thank you for your openness and clarification of what is going on so that all can understand what your judgments are being drawn upon. A_Kiwi, TRCourage Spotted Owl (talk) 03:20, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Could you link me to these assertions? I have made no offer to review any private correspondence between Z and anybody else. Your post comes as a complete surprise to me; I know nothing about such a thing. And I promise, if any e-mail of yours gets forwarded to my inbox by a third party, I will delete it without reading it as soon as I recognize it comes from you. Of course you may e-mail me directly if you wish. But please, don't forward me anything. I don't want to play monkey in the middle. Durova^Charge! 04:00, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

I had been puzzled by a question left on a talk page, asking for an AOL addy available only via a search by an admin (apparently was deleted). The question asked the party in question to send you a link to the relevant topic page. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Zeraeph#AOL_E-mail_address

And while I did not start searching for "AOL email", I later found on one of the ArbCom pages where a discussion was how I had once posted my private email address on a talk page (later deleted from history), and she suggested the article she thought it occurred in and she asked if you could track down the deleted post for her as she was ill.

The comment that struck me was that if the email address matched the letters Z had, you would readily accept them as they might be of importance.

These are, of course, scanty bits of scattered bits of conversation, but when one says that once wishes to receive emails, as long as they are sure they come from a particular person who has self revealed her online address, it puzzles me.

Don't worry. I did write Jeff of my concerns of course.

If the two identical TRCourage email searches in deleted material are not related, I am sure it will soon be seen as completely innocent.

Spotted Owl (talk) 04:57, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm watching my favorite TV show and uninterested in the swapping of out of context "interpreted for you" emails, but what was actually said was not that you wished to receive them, but that ArbCom would find them of considerable usefulness. Whatever. Fact and fiction are interesting things, are they not? Spotted Owl (talk) 05:14, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I see how the misunderstanding started. I wasn't suggesting Z send me anything; I was suggesting she ask an administrator to match an e-mail address from her own files against her recollection of a deleted post. If the addresses matched then she might forward those e-mails directly to ArbCom with the belief that they came from you. I've never seen the e-mails in question; are you confirming that you sent them? Durova^Charge! 05:34, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Durova, I apologize for not checking for a response, being busy going thru my own caches of emails. Yes, of COURSE, Durova. I fully admit that I, A_Kiwi, am the SAME PERSON as alleged stalker aka TR Courage, aka Cricket Courage, aka Cricket's Courage. When Z threatened on Wiki last year to reveal the association between my two screen names, I went public at that time. Spotted Owl (talk) 04:13, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Needed to add, Durova... The reason I did not reveal who -I- was prior to the blackmail attempt was that I knew she wanted her real identity to remain unknown, private, so I fully respected that and anyone can see that I have a continuous history of avoiding edit warring and if anything, once or twice tried to help her see that discussing things on the talk page, using it to teach rather than humiliate and demoralize new editors would be helpful and useful. However when she was writing me frequent sweet friendly emails during the Asperger/SG riot, I heard from wiki friends that she was working against my reputation on two fronts on WP, one of these being that she was going to get me banned for having two accounts by publicly linking the two. When faced with blackmail, the only recourse you have is to remove the secret. Unfortunately, her exposing me instantly exposed her, for tens of thousands of people on the web have witnessed her behaviors through the past 11 years on the internet, for my names and her identity are paired in web history via thousands of her posts on scores of forums, lists and discussion boards, depicting me (along with the occasional others) as one kind of person or another, being dangerous for one reason or another - the reasons changed as months and years passed. Why she wanted to lose her privacy on Wiki was beyond me, but she had made her choice and thus had left me no choice. Spotted Owl (talk) 07:40, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

BB

That's a really nice tribute to the lady - good stuff! Hope you had a good Christmas. John Smith's (talk) 10:37, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, same to you! I've been reviving the textile arts project. Have something in the works right now that I'll be uploading soon. :) Best regards, Durova^Charge! 10:48, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Cuerden

I think I got a bit more of what you were saying. I responded there. ——Martin^phi ☎ Ψ Φ—— 21:49, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll go catch up with you. I've been expanding an article for DYK and the biggest part of the work has been offline. Sometimes there's no adequate image on either Wikipedia or Commons and I make my own. For this one I actually created and labeled a sampler of ten different embroidery stitches. If that sounds like a lot of work, it is. So I'll head over and help clean things up at the RFC in a sec. Best regards, Durova^Charge! 21:58, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Non-administrator_rollback

User:Durova we would like your input with regards to the creating of consesus of Wikipedia:Non-administrator_rollback. To me the way it is being presented now looks like a violation of WP:NPOV and Wikipedia:Polling_is_not_a_substitute_for_discussion. The way it is now it is now it is a candidate for WP:CSD. Thank you, Igor Berger (talk) 23:53, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much for soliciting my opinion. I'm in a hurry but I'll run over there right away. Cheers, Durova^Charge! 23:59, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

I am being told by creater of the article to Wikipedia:IAR User_talk:Equazcion#Wikipedia:Non-administrator_rollback. Can sure use some advise. Thanx, Igor Berger (talk) 00:04, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Posted. Now I have to run and get ready for a party. Have a great weekend! Durova^Charge! 00:10, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Enjoy, we all need a break here! Igor Berger (talk) 00:50, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#Matt_Sanchez

I'm passing this case over to ArbCom. I know you had a go at trying to sort things with the Matt Sanchez article, so you might want to comment on whether they should accept or reject the case. WjBscribe 04:05, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Curiousity

Hi, I noticed that you recommended WikiMedia projects as a less intense atmosphere than this one. Would you explain what those might be? Or where they are? I know about Wiki Commons, the news and books projects. Are there others? Regards, Mattisse 21:17, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikiversity, Wikisource, Wikitionary, other language editions of Wikipedia, etc. WMF actually runs several hundred sites. Just about anyone who's fluent enough to contribute here could head over to the Simple English Wikipedia. I've done a little work for them and they were very welcoming. Durova^Charge! 22:25, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the info! Mattisse 17:41, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Seth Finkelstein

I understand what you are doing, but I think that borderline notability articles should be deleted regardless of the subject's opinion on the matter. It is incumbent upon the proposer and supporter of the article to demonstrate notability; failure to do so ends the story and requires deletion. BLP or not. We are encyclopedia not people magazine or the gossip column of their favorite rag; once people who submit articles here understand it by having borderline or unsourced crap articles deleted as fast as they are submitted we will be a better encyclopedia. Does any other encyclopedia take the position that its articles' subjects can dictate whether they should get an article or not or what its contents should be? No. To do so makes a mockery of the NPOV guidelines under which we purport to operation. Because if someone, the subject's, POV is given preferential treatment then we'll only have articles on people who want them and they'll only say what those people want them to. When Ollie North calls up WP and says, he loves having an article but all that messy Iran-Contra stuff is a problem - just remove it; or OJ Simpson doesn't want the unpleseantness of his various court cases mentioned in his bio - after all there is enough football stuff to merit inclusion here, just drop the contraversial stuff... etc. You get the point. The best way to handle this in an NPOV manner is to raise the bar to bios here at WP so that everyone meets the definition of "public figure" per US libel law (that's where WP is headquartered). As public figures deserve little to no privacy and have limited rights to pursue libel claims we should seriously cut back these no-names who manage to get to get articles here - mostly self-seving ones and welcomed, but this class of low notability people are really the problem. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 21:33, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

I respect that opinion. Borderline notability is an ambiguous term and I'm not particularly comfortable with it because there's no clearly defined boundary. I'm willing to keep the biographies on the lower end of the notability scale unless the subject actively requests deletion. Then, up to the point where the person is famous enough to appear in some paper-and-ink specialty encyclopedia, I'd honor that person's request.

Your concern about censorship resonates with me and I worked very hard to find a principle that doesn't open that door. Oliver North and O.J. Simpson are too famous for deletion; their absence would affect the encyclopedia's completeness. They certainly don't get a line item veto on properly documented information. Courtesy deletion is all-or-nothing: either the article stays online or it doesn't. You might like to glance at the Matt Sanchez biography and its talk page. The dispute is in RFAR now. Durova^Charge! 22:16, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Help with image

I hope you dont mind that I approach you, but I see that you are active working with photos on WP, and I am totally clueless on that subject. I have a small problem: I use this beautiful picture in the Bayt Jibrin article, as the dress on the left, and the black/red shawl on the wall in the background are from Bayt Jibrin. However, the dress on the right is from BerSheba. Is it possible to "cut away" the Bersheba dress for this article? The picture is also used in the Palestinian costumes, and there we ofcourse would like to keep the whole picture. Is this possible? Regards, Huldra (talk) 23:09, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

How's this? Durova^Charge! 01:06, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Wonderful! I have already put it into the Bayt Jibrin article; it looks sooo much better! Thanks again, it was very kind of you! Regards, Huldra (talk) 02:08, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. Really, this was a very simple edit. I'm glad it helps. Cheers, Durova^Charge! 02:13, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

ah, a small step for you, a giant leap for me! ;-) Huldra (talk) 05:05, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

BTW I've added a category and put the Textile Arts project template onto the talk page. Looks quite good; are you shooting for GA? Durova^Charge! 02:17, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, I have zero experience with the GA process..I just started the "costumes" articles because I really love some of those costumes..and there are quite a few books about the subject. (And it is very nice to work on a Palestinian subject without having to be edit-warring all the time!) Then Tiamut came along and expanded it...some added the fine pictures..and now we have been paid a great compliment; we have been plagiarised! See here :-) Do you think there is a lot needed for it to get to GA status? I have just got hold of Weir´s: "Palestinian Costume" book (one of the "Bibles" on the topic), so I thought I would be doing some updating in any case.

Btw; are you familiar with the Matson collection? I understand we can use them here on WP? There are lots and lots of interesting pictures there, I just have no clue about how to upload them. (I *am* clueless..) E.g. the Judah Magnes article has no picture, but search for: Magnes Hebrew....and you get two very, very nice pictures, which would have been great in the article. Likewise; if you search for: Jibrin...you get lots of pictures ..partly of daily life in Bayt Jibrin, partly of mosaics and other antiquties, now in Istanbul(!). I would love to have those in, say a gallery in the article. Regards, Huldra (talk) 05:05, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm no expert on Palestinian costumes and I very much doubt there's much to be found at my local libraries. Maybe I'll get lucky there, but for now I can only promise to help with images and copyediting and general advice. When I clicked on your link for the Matson collection all I got was a Library of Congress search form. Which keywords get me to the collection you mentioned? Durova^Charge! 19:08, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

It looks as if the Matson collection is part of the Library of Congress. In other words, if you go to the library of Congress search form (address given above), put in the keywords Magnes Hebrew you will get two pictures, both in the Matson collection, both without copy-rights (??????) and both perfect for the Judah Magnes article.

I have put the "search term" or keywords in bold, and then follows the article(s) where the pictures should go:

Magnes Hebrew to the Judah Magnes article

Jibrin olives a couple here would be fine for the Bayt Jibrin article

Jibrin gunpowder ...also for Bayt Jibrin article

Jibrin pictures depicting the mosaics and other antiquties, (as I said: now in Istanbul(!)) ..would be great in Eleutheropolis

Nebi Rubin ..one of the pictures of the camp should go into Tawfiq Canaan (he wrote about it), some should go into a new article. One of the historically most important pilgrimages in Palestine.

Hebrew university library Palestine one or more of those wonderful old pictures should really go under the "library" section in Hebrew University of Jerusalem

Ramleh ...into Ramleh

Lifta ..into Lifta

Well, I think that´s it for now, could you please also check under "Citations" on the talk-page of the Palestinan Costumes? Thanks. Huldra (talk) 22:18, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Roughe Criminal Admin sysopsoc 65.188.38.31

User:Durova please take a look at this. User_talk:Igorberger#Roughe_Criminal_Admin sysopsoc User:65.188.38.31. I am going out for a bit. All this security investigation forensics tired me out a bit. Maybe go have a beer or someting to relax. If you need anything let me know. Regards, Igor Berger (talk) 16:33, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

User:Cwiki

I'm a little disturbed by the way you're presenting the Cwiki unblock situation, especially at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Matthew Hoffman/Evidence. You fail to mention that Cwiki was blocked on the basis of evidence provided by yourself, a fact unknown by me at the time I reviewed the unblock request. Whilst I am disappointed with the way I handled it myself, I did withdraw my review since it became clear that I was in over my head. I'm not entirely sure how I was supposed to know I was supposed to contact you, which is a fundamental point in your evidencve. I reviewed the block based on Guy's request at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive176#Unblock request. There is no mention of you made in that request. I too am disappointed in the way the Cwiki block was handled, but I'm also disappointed in the way it is being presented. I withdrew my review. Hiding T 16:49, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

It was unknown to me also; I hadn't been informed of every block that had been made, nor was I notified of the unblock requests. If I'd gotten a heads up we could have resolved things much sooner. When the editor evaded his block to appeal to me on an IP a month later, I was really stunned to see that things had dragged out so far without anyone consulting the principal investigator. But I don't mean to be unfair; if you can suggest a way to amend that statement and make it better I'll be glad to update it. Durova^Charge! 19:57, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm confused. I really don't understand the process at all here. My understanding is that Cwiki was blocked on your say so. Is that correct or not? If that's correct, why were you not aware that Cwiki was blocked? My point is that yes, I made a mistake, but my mistake was based on the error of others. Guy should have come to you, and you should have been aware of what was happening to the information you were passing on. No? I just don't like seeing my name on an arbitration case I have nothing to do with and within a summary I do not agree with and which does not reflect the chain of events properly. If your intention is to show that admins make mistakes, then I think you have used the wrong piece of evidence, or used the evidence in the wrong way. That evidence to me demonstrates what happens when admins are misinformed. I was severely misinformed. Hiding T 14:17, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm pretty sure multiple people were checking the histories and I know there was some confusion about the borderline cases see here. The Joan of Arc vandal changed tactics enough times that he was very hard to track (19 registered socks plus tons of AOL IP shenanigans). I really wished I had been brought into the loop on that particular block appeal. Good faith miscommunication and unlikely to boomerang on anybody after this much time, but worth pointing out as an illustration of how standards were shifting in an IMHO untenable direction at the time the case opened. If there's a particular amendment you'd like me to make to my statement, please advise. Durova^Charge! 11:55, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

nah, never mind. I'm being overly sensitive. I've said my piece. I still don't get why Guy's post at WP:AN makes no mention of all of this, but I guess it's an IRC cabal thing. There's not much harm done, it just feels a little off to me. I can't think of a way of amending your statement which doesn't open a whole can of worms for someone if arb-com want to, so let it be. Hiding T 21:08, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

You have mail

Please check your email. Thank you. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 17:02, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Re. FPC

Another picture of the ballroom.

Hello Durova and thank you for contacting me. Hmm, I'm not so sure about a picture taken on an overcast day, it would likely fail to provide enough light and the picture would be too dark (I took pictures of other rooms in the palace that were not being hit by direct sunlight that day, and they didn't turn out that well). Anyway, I may try your suggestion some other time (not sure when though coz I'll be moving to another country soon and won't be returning to Portugal for quite a few months). Thank you for your feedback. Best regards, Húsönd 17:24, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

These are very difficult shots to nail. In order to avoid blowing out the windows completely, this photographer underexposed the ceiling. Darn palaces...

Tough call. I'd aim the camera away from those outdoor windows. The problem I anticipate is that there are probably mirrors on those opposite walls, which will still cause smaller blown whites unless you're careful about choosing your lighting conditions. You might get the right effect on a day with light cirrus or altocumulus cloud cover, or perhaps at a time of day when the sunlight doesn't strike that room quite so directly. Durova^Charge! 19:50, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

DYK

On 7 January, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article smocking, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Carabinieri (talk) 21:33, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! Durova^Charge! 21:59, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Bluemarine

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Bluemarine/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Bluemarine/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, John Vandenberg (talk) 22:10, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

another DYK!

I saw your hook on DYK, an area where I help out often. It's good to see your name again! Someday, I might ask for your advice on policy, blocking, or investigation. Happy New Year! Archtransit (talk) 22:23, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Ah, thank you. Yes for about the last month I've beeen writing DYKs to raise the profile of the textile arts project. Been getting very good feedback from the DYK folks: I can almost always provide an image that isn't a human head or a building. ;) Cheers, Durova^Charge! 22:29, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: Shell stitch

The length of prose on my check was 1559 characters, which is just enough for DYK. An expansion would be nice in case anyone calls you on it, but it does pass the requirement. Wizardman 22:54, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I'll see if I can add a little more in the next few days. Another project member may be creating a schematic diagram. Durova^Charge! 23:01, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter — Issue XXII (December 2007)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter Issue XXII (December 2007)
Project news The Intelligence task force has been created. The contest department has completed its ninth month of competition. The top scorer this month is Blnguyen, with 22 points, followed by Dreamafter, with 8 points, and Redmarkviolinist, with 6 points. Blnguyen also remains the overall leader, with 162 points in total. All project members are encouraged to submit the articles they're working on as entries. Help with converting deprecated infoboxes is needed; any assistance is welcome! {{WPMILHIST}} now supports an explicit tag (class=DAB) for marking disambiguation pages.	Articles of note New featured articles: Battle of Albuera Battle of Dyrrhachium (1081) Battle of the Gebora Constantine II of Scotland Francis Harvey Vasa (ship) Wulfhere of Mercia New A-Class articles: 1962 South Vietnamese Presidential Palace bombing Evacuation of East Prussia
Current proposals and discussions A discussion about minimizing terminological ambiguity has begun.
Awards and honors Blnguyen has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his efforts in improving the quality of articles related to Vietnamese military history, including the creation of numerous A-Class articles. Woodym555 has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his outstanding work on topics related to the Victoria Cross, notably including the creation of featured articles, featured lists, and a featured topic. For their outstanding efforts as part of Tag & Assess 2007, Bedford, TomStar81, and Parsival74 have been awarded the gold, silver, and bronze Wikis, respectively.
Tag & Assess 2007 Tag & Assess 2007 is now officially over, with slightly under 68,000 articles processed. The top twenty scores are as follows: 1. Bedford — 7,600 2. TomStar81 — 5,500 3. Parsival74 — 5,200 4. FayssalF — 3,500 5. Roger Davies — 3,000 6. Ouro — 2600 7. Kateshortforbob — 2250 8. Cromdog — 2,200 9. BrokenSphere — 2000 9. Jacksinterweb — 2,000 9. Maralia — 2,000 12. MBK004 — 1,340 13. JKBrooks85 — 1,250 14. Sniperz11 — 1100 15. Burzmali — 1000 15. Cplakidas — 1000 15. Gimme danger — 1000 15. Raoulduke471000 15. TicketMan — 1000 15. Welsh — 1000 15. Blnguyen — 1000 Although the drive is officially closed, existing participants can continue tagging until January 31 if they wish, with the extra tags counting towards their tally for barnstar purposes. We'd like to see what lessons can be learned from this drive, so we've set up a feedback workshop. Comments and feedback from participants and non-participants alike are very welcome and appreciated.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.

Note: This newsletter was automatically delivered. Regards from the automated, Anibot (talk) 23:17, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Triple Crown-related question

I still await the day that I earn one of these. But I have a question that I want to ask you that I've wanted to for some time now. In order to qualify for a Triple Crown, do the DYK, GA, and FC articles all have to have something in common? Do they all have to be about a similar topic? Ksy92003(talk) 23:54, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

The articles could be on any topic. If you'd like to get there on a team effort, you're welcome to join me on a couple of undertakings. At User:Durova/Landmark images I've got a workshop to raise historic photographs to FPs. I've also been busy with Wikipedia:WikiProject Textile Arts. So far I've expanded Navajo rug from a three paragraph stub to B-class and am aiming for GA. Plus I've sounded out the military history project about a joint effort to raise Bayeux Tapestry to FA. More hands are welcome. Best regards, Durova^Charge! 00:03, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Saying hi

Hi Durova. Though we have interacted a tiny bit in the last year (I note that you gave me a 3 hour time out last March when I was having a bad day, and we worked together a bit on spam link deletion in November), I've never really stopped to say much to you. I just wanted to let you know how impressed I've been with your contribution to the Zeraeph arbitration, and how much I appreciated it. you have been very calming and the points you've made were quite apt. It really helped a lot.

If I can ever do anything to assist you in the future, please do not hesitate to call on me. I know how important this project is to you, and I feel the same way. Take care, Jeffpw (talk) 00:26, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much. You can see from my contribution history where I've been active. If any of that interests you then feel free to join in. :) Best regards, Durova^Charge! 00:34, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Agarplate redbloodcells.jpg

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Agarplate redbloodcells edit.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 02:24, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! Durova^Charge! 02:30, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for the triple crown award. Its nice to know that work here is apreciated. TomStar81 (Talk) 04:00, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Very much appreciated. Keep up the good work! Durova^Charge! 04:07, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Is this a new thing?

I read that you are

a past victim of harassment and attacks, and is also very keen on preventing abuse of the project. She knows (as most of us do) some of the signs of the returning user . . . Durova enjoys the whole business of tracking down such accounts. She calls it "sleuthing".

How would you track down a returning user who is unregistered and uses constantly changing WiFi connections to make his edits impossible to track down?Eschoir (talk) 04:48, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Um, where does that blockquote come from? And how does that relate to the specific problem you're trying to solve? Less vague analogy and more facts would be helpful. Durova^Charge! 04:54, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

WikiSphere and WikiMood

User:Durova, I do not know if you remember the Mood Ring, but it would be great if the WikiSphere would reflect the mood of our community. The colour would change from one spectrum of the gama to another and would return to neutrality for WP:NPOV! Igor Berger (talk) 05:27, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Um, redlinks? Durova^Charge! 05:56, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Red blood, red cells! Blue republic, white peace! Red, white, and blue, for which we stand, under God, we the people of WikiPedia preserve naturality. Igor Berger (talk) 16:36, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Igor, I'm not really sure I follow you. Durova^Charge! 18:42, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Will expalin a bit later. Thank you, Igor Berger (talk) 18:49, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Hoooo

Malware Plasmid genetic engineering. Igor Berger (talk) 08:42, 8 January 2008 (UTC}
his move research bioengineering Igor Berger (talk) 23:03, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Um, can you fill me in on the background to this? Durova^Charge! 03:23, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Clarification on The great triple crown race of 2008

Can you clarify the rules for "The great triple crown race of 2008". Do the GA & FA have to be nominated after 1st Jan as the rules say "Do qualifying editing work between 1 January and 14 February"? What about articles nominated before 1st Jan which then took (a lot) of editing to achieve promotion (eg Bath, Somerset & hopefully Somerset which were both nominated in Dec 07). If not I will have to wait & see what happens to Exmoor and Grand Western Canal which were both nominated on 1st Jan.— Rod ^talk 10:55, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Show me specific diffs of "a lot" of editing during 2008. Normally that means 10 or more citations. Durova^Charge! 11:35, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Doing diffs for all the edits would take ages - can you look at the history of Bath, Somerset since 1st Jan as an example - it made GA last night. Examples (picking out the citations) since 1st Jan include: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5] but there have been loads of others not specifically adding citations.

Somerset hasn't made FA (?yet) but Lilstock is currently in the DYK section on the main page.— Rod ^talk 11:54, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, if you can find a simpler way to verify the work I'd accept that. Such as, if you were primary editor then a single combined diff would do. Does that sound fair? Durova^Charge! 18:42, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

User:DeadlyAssassin name change recommended

This sockpuppet is turning into a meatpuppet which will grow up to be a popuppetier! Looks like the indentity is being engineered unaturally! I could be wrong by the editing profile does not corespond logically. Just heads up, but I do recommend a name change for the user, same like other editor has done! With a name like User:DeadlyAssassin could become a very big problem if and when involved in an editor war! Igor Berger (talk) 01:02, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

The are no Ninja Turtles at WikiPedia..:)

Um, is this your sense of humor? Durova^Charge! 05:57, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Sort of tongue and chick! But you never know what is hiding under the mattress and in the closet. There is a lot to learn from video games and cartoon carachters! The subculture is very alert and children are very bright! You may want to look at this Igor Berger (talk) 07:10, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Kill the wabbit. Durova^Charge! 09:11, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Before the Fud? Igor Berger (talk) 23:10, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

RfArb comment by G-dett

I think you mis-read his comment, what he said was that ideally, there woould be established BY the ArbCom a group (he calls it, humorously, i think is the intent) a mini-cabal, and he suggested that because of traits you posess which he admires, you should be a part of said 'cabal', which would then monitor the relevant articles and behaviors. It's like saying, I think Durova OUGHT to be the referee for our game of kick the article. He was most definitely NOT taking a swipe at you. ThuranX (talk) 01:09, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks ThuranX. Durova, I just became aware of the misunderstanding through a note from HG, and have posted a clarification.--G-Dett (talk) 01:31, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Ah, thanks. You mean as in a mediation cabal? I doubt I know the underlying dispute in sufficient depth to be particularly useful. My role is limited to wiki policies and generally reducing the heat on a pretty hot dispute. I'll go ahead and strikethrough my response since I misunderstood the intent. Durova^Charge! 05:44, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Glad y'all patched things up. I read G-Dett's comment as straight forward at first, but second guessed when I saw your reply. She is known to be clever like that but always in good fun, and I know you've had quite the cabal experience lately -- too soon? Anyway, I hope we can avoid arbitration here. Jaak is pushy, if not tendentious, but I rather imagine certain other editors would metaphorically throw him under a bus if it meant an opportunity to, once again, poor over every nick and cranny of User:PalestineRemembered's edit history and try and take him off the project too, fairly or not. As PR's supposed mentor -- though Ryan I guess more or less muscled himself in to the job too -- I'm rather concerned at that prospect. We could certainly have an interesting play date though! -- Kendrick7^talk 07:55, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Have you seen the roast I played upon myself? User:Durova/Sockpuppets Durova^Charge! 08:16, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Lol, those are creative! Maybe you could auction them off to the highest bid donation to the Foundation? (Well, maybe we should scrounge around for other donated items...) Take care, HG | Talk 10:49, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Hm, I could actually make more sockpuppets if I really needed to. And then sell them on eBay? Dear heavens, the implications... Durova^Charge! 10:53, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I was thinking more like an internal Wikipedia charity auction. (Though I see that eBay is set up to host charity auctions.) Maybe Mr. Wales would donate a pair of autographed socks... Troll dolls with the WP logo... Could be fun. HG | Talk 12:25, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Jaakobou mentorship

Hello Durova. I see you've taken on the mentorship of User:Jaakobou.

It's not very clear why you've taken this on now, somehow I'd have expected the time to arrange mentoring was after the proposed arbitration where he is a prime involved party, not before. Are you in favour of the community pressing on and detailing any alleged issues you might feel they've spotted in his participation?

I'd like to mention that mentors (and other "semi-impartial mediators") in similar cases have sometimes/often suffered harassment and time-wasting demands to explain themselves, with the apparent intention to drive them off (and I've repeatedly seen it succeed!). I can assure you this is not my purpose in speaking to you now (or ever). PR^talk 11:03, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. Really my role is simple: to be a sounding board and a stabilizing influence on matters of conduct and site policy. And as much as is possible, to help turn down the heat on hot discussions and find areas of agreement and cooperation. Mentorship is a good thing for anyone who's part of a tough dispute and wants a little help being their best self. Best regards, Durova^Charge! 11:44, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm still not very sure about the parameters - for instance, I have three questions for Jaakobou which bear on the progress of the RfA we're increasingly expecting - do you think it is right and proper that I ask them now and that he respond?

I would like to avoid a position where these apparently puzzling discrepancies might appear in the Arbitration later and look very much like accusations. It would undoubtedly poison the atmosphere if it turns out that they're all silly misunderstandings. I think it's important that I not be seen to "harass him" by, for instance, going to his TalkPage and demanding answers, because I know he doesn't like that and, no matter how significant the question, will possibly refuse to answer and could even get quite upset.

Please note that Jaakobou himself considers it perfectly proper to approach other people's mentors, as here. (Actually, he considers it perfectly proper to make quite direct and personal accusations against them, but I can assure you that that is totally against my nature!).

I feel confident that many other people will want to know the answers to these questions, especially to the first one:

• Question 1 to Jaakobou: Have you ever operated any other Wikipedia (English version) editing-accounts, and, if so, have they been operated in ways that would attract censure?
• Question 2 to Jaakobou: In your statement at the RfA, you say "I also believe there is a serious need for formal mediation on Second Intifada and Israeli-Palestinian conflict". Now I (PR) have seen it suggested that you never agree to compromises. Please provide examples where you've compromised constructively. (I simply don't know the answer to this question, though I think I once noticed you refusing to join mediation at a favorite article of yours, the Battle of Jenin).
• Question 3 to Jaakobou: There was an RfC on the reliable source status of CAMERA. Eventually (after a great deal of uncalled for participation by involved editors, into which I allowed myself to be sucked in, sorry), I summarised the conclusions as being two to none against CAMERA (or likely three to one, if we included someone who'd been only slightly involved, offering to mediate). You don't appear to have exactly rejected that conclusion (I cannot understand what you're trying to say here), but just one day later, you were encouraging other people to ignore the conclusion, eg here. I'm sure you'll understand that this could look very much like both tendentious editing (concealing the reasonably clear nature of the result at the RfC) and disruptive editing, encouraging disrespect for WP:Policy. Would you care to explain yourself? PR^talk 15:15, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Next time I catch him online I'll ask him to look at your questions. Durova^Charge! 19:13, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Thankyou. Mentorship is not supposed to be a trial, least of all for the mentor. PR^talk 21:39, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Do you feel that these are questions I'm not entitled to have answers to? I should point out that (some?) of my mentors were subject to a barrage of demands, right up to seeing problems where there appeared to be none - if you feel I'm off track wanting some of these answers, please tell me. PR^talk 09:02, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, it's really up to Jaakobou to decide how to respond. My own suggestion is posted to RFAR talk: namely, I'd like to reduce tension by finding uncontroversial areas to collaborate. I'm willing to Photoshop images of Israeli or Palestinian culture and give a little bit of help improving Palestinian costumes. A 103-year-old image I worked on is at FPC right now. I doubt I can solve all of Wikipedia's disputes in this area (let alone the world's), but maybe I can help turn down the heat a little. Does that sound good to you? Durova^Charge! 10:01, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm afraid I find your response worrying (in fact, knowing one of your specialities, very worrying indeed). However, it was not my intention to "troll" you personally with behavior that might be worrying. Please accept my apology. PR^talk 09:49, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Why would my response worry you? I explained the scope of this mentorship and have been doing what I said I would do. At any rate, thank you for changing your evidence. Maybe we can work together on something. Over at Talk:Palestinian costumes I've posted an invitation for examples of Palestinian embroidery. If we get enough material I'll start an image category on Commons for it. In particular I'm looking for close-ups. The current article text discusses styles of work and motifs, but not much about actual stitches. I could identify some of that if we get some good images to work from. Best regards, Durova^Charge! 20:34, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

rollback

has been turned on for you, now live for non-admins WP:ROLL. Cheers, NoSeptember 19:51, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm uncomfortable about this: it's a controversial op, I haven't requested it, nobody asked me whether I wanted it toggled, and I don't really need it. What I do really need is to avoid any appearance of back door dealings and insider back scratching because people construe the weirdest things when they see my name. I appreciate the gesture because I suppose it's kindly meant, but please turn it off. Durova^Charge! 21:10, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Done. If you ever want it back, you know where to go. :) Acalamari 21:14, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

No problem, For the benefit of anyone interested, I have been looking at all users with previous rollback privileges enabled, and there is no back channel contact involved here, as Durova has indicated. Cheers, NoSeptember 21:46, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. Durova^Charge! 22:01, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Palestine-Israel articles

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Palestine-Israel articles/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Palestine-Israel articles/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, — Rlevse • Talk • 22:20, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

I have to admit PR has a bit of a paranoid bent, and the topic area he edits in doesn't exactly promote a person's sanity. I expect and hope that he'll calm down a little. -- Kendrick7^talk 05:41, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Re:FPC

Hi Durova,
Yeah I understand that and congratulate you on the work you're doing (great job!) but I think there needs to be a limit to the weight we place on historic images. I think, especially after looking through those gettyimages books, that we over estimate the limitations on photography 50, 60, 80 or even a hundred years ago. Especially since the photos we're getting are from trained professionals who are often using what was top of the line equipment in that day. Sure we can give a little leniency, but unless the photo was taken in exceptional historic circumstances where the photo captures a spontaneous and unrepeatable moment (circumstances which would allow similar allowances in modern photographs) I think we can demand composition, lighting and subject matter from historic photos.

As an example, I think Image:American military personnel gather in Paris to celebrate the Japanese surrender.jpg is great as in certainly captures a near unrepeatable moment, Image:Douglas Fairbanks at third Liberty Loan rally HD-SN-99-02174.JPEG would be just as spectacular taken today, whereas Image:Goyathlay.jpeg with it's forced backdrop is not so great. Would it fare much different to Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Luiz Inácio da Silva if it was a modern photo? I don't know. The first two examples also show that quality was attainable even in those days.

So I respect your work and hope you'll gone on with it, but I certainly feel that the "historical" line is overused as a reason for featuring. As you seem quite interested in history, I thought I might link to a few of my favourites from getty images 1920s: [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12]

Regards, --Fir0002 07:25, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Beautiful. If only they weren't copyrighted... Durova^Charge! 08:02, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

I need a vacation..:)

I think my security work is coming to an end. Cleaned up a lot of stuff and taught the community about Black Hat SEO and how to deal with it. I will be going skiing to Austria next monht! Maybe will meet some Trolls on the slops..:)

Will try to contribute to WikiPedia how I can but do not know if I want to get political. Regards, Igor Berger (talk) 08:10, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Wow, I even made it on the front page of WikiPropaganda news paper.
WikiPedia Famous Troll Wish I had more time to play..:) Igor Berger (talk) 08:28, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Don't take it personally. Enjoy your break. :) Durova^Charge! 08:31, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I never take it personaly. I have too much history for that! I even find it entertaining..:) Igor Berger (talk) 09:00, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Releasing IP addresses of registered users: the Video Professor incident

You commented on this issue at User talk:Jimbo Wales/Archive 31#Wikipedia surrendering users' info without a fight. It was stated there that it was not an appropriate discussion forum for the topic of how hard the Foundation should and did fight to prevent revealing the IP addresses of registered users to parties who had been criticized in a Wikipedia article and who subpoenaed the user information. I have started a discussion at the Village Pump policy page at Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)# Releasing IP addresses of registered users: the Video Professor incident. Your comments are welcome. Thanks.Edison (talk) 15:18, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Done. Durova^Charge! 21:15, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Podcast

I looked at that link you posted, but did not listen to any audio that may have been associated with that blog. I'm wondering how it is evidence in the Matthew Hoffman case, but I'm not sure if you think it is very much worth listening to first. —Whig (talk) 05:10, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Listen to the audio. Durova^Charge! 05:11, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry if I shouldn't have edited to make it clear that this was part of your evidence. I started to listen to it but it seemed to be a right wing talk show of some kind, I do not know if "Right March" or Bill Greene are notable however. —Whig (talk) 05:21, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

That's all right. You've seen the rest of my evidence? The Discovery Institute is notable, I'd wager. Durova^Charge! 05:23, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but perhaps not in depth. I have not gotten involved in the intelligent design issues, but I'm also not really understanding the point of bringing up non-notable podcasters' opinions. I understand we are all contending with partisans of all kinds in our lives, and I have my own blog for dealing with that kind of thing, but that's not how I see Wikipedia. I see this as being the place where we put aside our differences and work together to make an encyclopedia. My opinions have nothing to do with Matthew Hoffman of course but with the blocking of users based apparently on their POV. I expect to be added to the ArbCom case based on the RfC, if the ArbCom won't object. —Whig (talk) 05:27, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

My evidence sets this forth in greater breadth and depth. Yes, I agree we should put our differences aside and work together. That's not how some people view this site. Whether I agree with a POV or disagree with it, when I see a campaign to skew Wikipedia content to favor any given ideology I oppose that drive. Durova^Charge! 05:31, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, well I think you may have concealed biases of your own. I believe you are in absolutely good faith Durova and I have not had much opportunity to converse with you before, but I have read much of what you've said in various cases. I simply think you've decided that there is such a thing as an objective POV. I don't think that's what NPOV means. —Whig (talk) 05:33, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

I request you withdraw that insinuation. At Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Agapetos angel, for instance, I was the sole supporter of a young earth creationist. My evidence in the Matthew Cuerden case is about a long term partisan effort to recruit meatpuppets and skew site content. Debates about "objective POV" are beside the point when that happens. Durova^Charge! 05:37, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry for the insinuation. I really do not want to argue with you about Matthew Hoffman at all. I have no interest in the subject of ID/creationism, really. My concern is with abuse of admin powers, and you certainly have not done anything that I intended to complain about. Actually, I respect very much that you stand up for Adam Cuerden. I just happen to have my own experiences with him. —Whig (talk) 05:45, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

I think maybe it's best we discontinue discussion here, since it is a subject of arbitration. I hope to have more opportunity to talk later. I only brought it up here at all after you'd submitted the same link to the Adam Cuerden RfC discussion. —Whig (talk) 05:50, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the strikethrough, and all right. Durova^Charge! 05:53, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

IP harasser = Pwok???

The IP harassing you about Matt Sanchez, etc. sounds like banned User:Pwok. I don't know if a checkuser can confirm or deny that. Aleta (Sing) 05:52, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Would you put that up on a noticeboard and request semiprotection, please? Durova^Charge! 05:54, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Where should it go? Point me to the right place, and I'll be glad to do so. Aleta (Sing) 05:55, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

WP:ANI should do. Thanks again. Durova^Charge! 05:56, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Done: see WP:ANI#IP abuse at Arbcom workshop. And you're welcome! I don't know if you saw IP's comments at Talk:Matt Sanchez, but it's classic Pwok. Aleta (Sing) 06:07, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/San Francisco earthquake fire

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Sfearthquake3b.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. jjron (talk) 09:56, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi Durova, you probably deserve one of these too. --jjron (talk) 09:56, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 09:59, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

DYK

On 12 January, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Shell stitch, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

---- Anonymous Dissident^Talk 15:55, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 19:30, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Carpenter (nomination 2)

An image edited by you has been promoted to featured picture status Your edit, Image:PalmercarpenterA.jpg, was nominated on Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate an image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Thank you for your contribution! jjron (talk) 08:22, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Huh? I accidentally forgot to put a title in, so it just dumped it in with the previous comment. So I redid it here as a new comment, and deleted it from Triple crown!!! (how come you didn't see this one; it was in before the other one was out?). BTW, think yourself lucky - MER-C doesn't credit edits at all! ;-) --jjron (talk) 09:36, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Aw, thanks. :) Durova^Charge! 10:13, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

New milestone reached

Dear Durova, I now have over 10,000 edits!! Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 18:54, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Congratulations! Durova^Charge! 19:07, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 19:12, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Can you help me with Andy Beard

User:Durova I am not really good in creating an article but I am good in finding sources. So after getting an okay from User:Jehochman I created the article and it got CSD right a way. Can you please take a look what I am doing wrong. User:Igorberger/Andy_Beard Thank you, Igor Berger (talk) 00:17, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Jehochman is Wikipedia's resident expert in SEO. I suggest you rely on him for advice. Durova^Charge! 00:40, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

I asked him, but he seems to be busy with some other stuff. Igor Berger (talk) 00:53, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

I've left him a message on your behalf. Since he gave you the green light in the first place it's his responsibility to follow through. You put in a fair amount of effort on his word. Durova^Charge! 01:09, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! Igor Berger (talk) 01:18, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

User:Durova they are saying I have violated WP:COI Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Andy_Beard Soon they will say I got money from Andy. IMHO! I will be going to sleep soon, so you may want to head there and explain who is Andy Beard. Thank you, Igor Berger (talk) 14:15, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Jehochman is also an expert on COI. I've dropped him a line. Durova^Charge! 18:20, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. He came over and shed some sense on the discusion. Igor Berger (talk) 23:15, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

User:Durova User:VirtualSteve deleted Andy Beard before the end of 5 day period, only after 2 days, of WP:AFD. I have notified him on his talk page but he has not replied. Thank you, Igor Berger (talk) 02:44, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Sometimes there's an early closure if clear consensus emerges. Durova^Charge! 03:12, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Did a consensus emerge? Andy Beard provided a lot of information towards notability for WP:BLP I think it was premature to delete, but better to rewrite the article for BLP. I know I can rewrite it, but I wanted other editors to join in the task not have it look like WP:OWNERSHIP. I would like the article be undeleted and see if it can be rewritten. Thank you, Igor Berger (talk) 03:19, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Anyone interested in helping build Andy Beard article can do so here User:Igorberger/Andy_Beard Thank you, Igor Berger (talk) 04:01, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

If you have better information, write it up in draft form in user space and open a deletion review request. Durova^Charge! 03:22, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

I am not that good in writing articles so wanted help of other editors. I do not know if I want to waste my time when it can be more positive for other things. I may do DRV or just write a new version and try to publish again. Thanks, Igor Berger (talk) 03:27, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

I am also very busy with a lot of stuff. And try to help Steve from EmiSteve. He has bicycled the world for 20 years, and his Japanese wife got cancer and had a surgery and now back on a bike. You can watch a video I did with him http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNIso-vjl_8 and learn more about them from http://www.bicyclingworldtour.com/ Hey I just like helping people..:) Igor Berger (talk) 03:50, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Dover, Virginia

You made this edit removing some material from the article on Dover, Virginia. Do you think that it should possibly be oversighted, as it not only identifies the editor and attaches an IP address but also identifies his employer? ^Avruchtalk 03:29, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Douglas MacArthur lands at Leyte

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Douglas MacArthur lands Leyte1.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. jjron (talk) 09:17, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Boy, another one! --jjron (talk) 09:17, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 09:48, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Omaha Race Riot of 1919

Thanks for the note. I was the actually the editor who slapped the citations missing tag on the article. However, I do have several citations from other articles I've written that mentioned this, and I can do a little more work to pull them together for this. You might be interested in Racial tension in Omaha, Nebraska and Civil Rights Movement in Omaha, Nebraska. Keep your eye on Omaha Race Riot of 1919 and I'll work on it soon. Thanks for asking! • Freechild'sup? 11:12, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

What a gripping article! I've been trying to find an image that I could restore and put up for WP:FPC. As difficult as this subject matter is, it's also very important. What I find particularly chilling about this type of material is how often the murderers pose with smiles on their faces. Ping me when you get to it, because with citations and copyediting I think that ought to be at least GA and probably featured. I'd be glad to help (although I'm nowhere near Omaha). Best regards, Durova^Charge! 11:20, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Alfred Palmer's tanks

Hi, finally got round to finding the other alternative tank shot I was on about. I still haven't had a chance to download the fullsize version again and I've not done a side-by-side comparison, so whatever you think is fine by me. FWIW I think the one you picked is easily the better composition; the other would need a crop.

Once I get some time (soon, I hope) I intend creating an article for Mr Palmer, which may help future FPC noms of his work. It seems to me that the real value of his large-format kodachrome work – certainly among the very best quality colour photography of WWII – is almost paradoxically difficult to translate into WP encyclopedic value, and hence FPC "plus points". I realise this is true of many historical images, some of which are individually pioneering or even unique in their own right & while this has a significant bearing on selection for cleanup, for FPC there seems to be growing need to major on notability outside of the history of photography itself. I've noticed some mild but growing hostility toward the historical noms which I can sympathise with (also ambivalence to images like the furnace nom, which was widley – rightly? – judged on enc merits alone) although I cringe at accusations of "just because it's old > FPC" etc. I wonder how you feel about all this? I'm of the opinion that emphasising the relative image quality of older photos via more specialised articles might help raise their photographic profile, but I don't want to create a load of unnecessary work. --mikaul^talk 19:43, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

You might be right; that could be crisper. At any rate, the tank's position on the slope adds more tension to the scene: diagonal lines are inherently more exciting than horizontals and verticals. I think the tank may be closer to the camera also. Could you link me to the download? Palmer's color files are often 150-200megs so you might not want to load up your memory with this one. Cheers, Durova^Charge! 19:50, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Oops, missed your reply.. here you go. --mikaul^talk 22:25, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Portsmouth Square pic

Hi, I've restored this article and added it to the California gold rush article. Perhaps you'd be able to identify: is that Telegraph Hill in the background? Regards, DurovaCharge! 06:38, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Nice job on the restoration - Photoshop? Portsmouth Square still exists in its modern encarnation (that is, in reduced form) in SF's Chinatown. If this image is looking west (my initial guess), then that would be modern Nob Hill/Russian Hill behind it (the two are connected by a saddle). If this image is looking north, then that could be Telegraph Hill in the back (but Telegraph Hill is more pointed). I'll take a look around and let you my further thoughts!

Where did you find this wonderful image, and do you have a source? All the best, NorCalHistory (talk) 21:12, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Another restoration job that recently got featured on Commons and Wikipedia.

Photoshop CS. Not the latest version, but good enough for the job. I spent a lot of time at high magnification fixing small artifacts 2-5 pixels wide. Painstaking work, and worth it. This comes from the Library of Congress; the call number is listed in the image summary. I've spent three days working on another daguerrotype of San Francisco harbor. It seems to look out at Alcatraz Island (85 years before the prison was built). The harbor image had decomposed a lot worse than the Portsmouth Square image, so I doubt we'll ever get it into quite as good shape, but it's still intriguing to see an acutal photograph instead of an artist's impression. If you have other good sources for public domain images of California history, please give me the heads up. In order to be considered for featured status on Wikipedia they have to be at least 1000 pixels on the longest side; Commons minimums are a little larger.

Judging from the angle of the shadows my guess is that this is late afternoon, facing north. In which case that would be Nob Hill. Another editor who reviewed this with me suggests that the old semaphore tower is visible on the horizon, which would make this early morning shooting west toward Telegraph Hill. The slope of the hill on the square probably hasn't changed, so maybe the building profiles could settle the question. I also wonder whether any of these buildings still stand. I think I identified some of them in a different 1880s photo. Question is whether this block survived the 1906 fire. Cheers, Durova^Charge! 21:31, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

In terms of other collections, try the spectacular collection at UC Berkeley's Bancroft Library (http://bancroft.berkeley.edu/collections/bancroft.html) - I'm not sure exactly what the license is for these images, but the old ones must all be PD.

About Portsmouth Square, just to be clear ... Telegraph Hill is north of Portsmouth Square, and Nob Hill is west of the Square. I've taken a look at Google Earth, the silhouette of Nob Hill (to the west) is close to the silhouette of the hills in the photo. Telegraph Hill (to the north) is smaller, more-pointed and farther away. Try it yourself! I'm hesitant to post the Google Earth screen shots here, but if you like, I can send them to you via email. About the buildings, this is an area that was destroyed in '06, and I don't recognize any of the buildings. Finally, about the shadows on the ground, if the image is looking west (my guess), the shadows are consistent with a mid-morning photograph. NorCalHistory (talk) 22:28, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

I might have gotten my orientations wrong. Sure; e-mail me the images. This is intriguing. And thank you for the links! Durova^Charge! 22:32, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Glad to email you ... let me know what email address to use! NorCalHistory (talk) 23:24, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Ping me through my site e-mail and I'll respond. Cheers, Durova^Charge! 23:45, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

BTW regarding San Francisco geography, remember I'm that dreaded blight upon the state: the southern Californian. I'm certain I've wandered through Portsmouth Square, but my mind was on dim sum, and I was probably noshing on Ghirardelli whenever I passed through Telegraph Hill or Nob Hill. In otherwords, spank me within a kilometer of Mexico: I'm clueless. ;) Durova^Charge! 01:06, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

PS: Thanks for the Castle Lake (California) copy-edit ... much appreciated! NorCal (talk) 00:39, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

BTW: If you have Windows, as an alternative to Photoshop, for most restoration jobs, you might want to consider the free-ware open-source program Paint.NET, which you can download. I find that it's much easier to open and much easier to use, and has all the tools and gadgets I need 98% of the time! NorCal (talk) 00:46, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I'm comfortable with Photoshop. I've also started an essay on image restoration, so I've made a note to add that to the list of software. Thanks for the heads up - useful freeware is always good to know about. Durova^Charge! 05:05, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

That copyright issue...

... I've responded on my talk page. Thanks for the input! Fut.Perf. ☼ 21:34, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Possible FPC

Saw your message on the MILHIST talk page. I've had this on my watchlist for a couple weeks but it might need cleanup. --BrokenSphere^{Msg me} 00:42, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Interesting! Blown whites on the upper 12%, but I think we can get some slack for that. The image is definitely large enough and it looks like a good scan. Doesn't look like it needs much tweaking either. I'll see what I can do. Thank you for the heads up. Durova^Charge! 00:48, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

After restoration

I'm not really sure how this will be received. The composition and lingering smoke are exciting. At 300% I could tell there was lossy compression, especially in the darker zones. Not particularly sharp focus either. I've taken out the artifacts and fixed the scratches. If you like the result I'll put it up on peer review and see what the community thinks. Durova^Charge! 04:54, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

There's a black edge on the upper right corner. Otherwise I'll go with your judgment. BrokenSphere^{Msg me} 05:17, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Good catch. Reloaded with problem corrected. Durova^Charge! 05:28, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

OK. Let's see what the folks @ peer review think, if you feel it's ready for that. Who gets the FP credit if it goes all the way? BrokenSphere^{Msg me} 05:40, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Only one way to find out. If they like it on peer review, how about conominating? Durova^Charge! 05:41, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

That's fine. I like collaboration.  :) BrokenSphere^{Msg me} 05:43, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Cool. If you find others, go ahead and drop them into my workshop (linked from the top of this page). Sometimes other editors fish something out of there and restore it if they like the shot. And ping me if you'd like to discuss it. Cheers, Durova^Charge! 05:45, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

I've had my eye on this for a few days. Not a battle shot, but full color 1942.

I saw in there that you had a few of my Commons uploads in the gallery section (German troops on the march in 1914, German troops on the Belgian frontier, Douglas Fairbanks at a liberty bonds rally, and Italian mounted infantry in China). The color example you just put up looks good. I've hardly seen any colored battle shots. BrokenSphere^{Msg me} 05:53, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

During this war there really wasn't a lot of color photography. I've located one parade shot of the liberation of Paris where the color balance is goofy. The best I've located so far - at least among freely licensed material - is some Kodachrome sheet film shots by photographers of the U.S. Farm Security Administration. Sometimes they documented training exercises. I could upload some aviation shots from Parris Island. Would that be helpful? Durova^Charge! 06:06, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

OK. --BrokenSphere^{Msg me} 06:28, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Halftrack infantryman with Garand rifle, Ft. Knox, Ky. June 1942 - artificial lighting with slightly blown highlights; I don't know the soldier's name or whether he survived the war.

These things take a while to download because the good files are often 150-200mb. I have to downsample of course. Durova^Charge! 06:45, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

That's an odd place for a lightbulb, but what do I know?  ;) If it's easier for you, I can keep track of your u/ls on Commons, so you don't have to keep posting them here, unless you feel like it. Otherwise I think this is another good one. The soldier's expression is serious enough. BrokenSphere^{Msg me} 06:55, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Feel free to; you'll find that a lot of my recent uploads are much too small to be featured. For Alfred Palmer and the other wartime FSA photographers, the site loaded low resolution scans of their black and white work (over 90%) and really large files of anything in color. So while I sift for potential FAs I sometimes locate other encyclopedic material; a lot of it has nothing to do with military history. Durova^Charge! 07:02, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Funny that you mention that; 90% of the PD photos I've uploaded to Commons are easily military related in some way. Going back to topic, this is the first time I've had something go to picture peer review (just put up something else myself that I had bookmarked), so let me know either way when's the next step. I do have the page watchlisted. BrokenSphere^{Msg me} 07:06, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Sure thing. I'm not sure whether this one will get very far; we'll see how it goes. The Alfred Palmer files crashed for some weird reason so I've surfed elsewhere and have just located a 1913 panorama of the Panama Canal being built. Fascinating! Durova^Charge! 07:32, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Finding it was half the task. Thanks for all the work in cleaning it up and putting it up for peer review. Wouldn't have come across the alternate version otherwise. BrokenSphere^{Msg me} 04:48, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

That's what it's all about. :) Thanks for the help. Now I'm off to work on an M3 tank. Cheers, Durova^Charge! 04:50, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Does the co-nom mean an FPC already has 2 votes or do they still count as one? BrokenSphere^{Msg me} 04:54, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Two votes. Basically we're asking for shared credit if it passes. You searched, I edited and composed the nomination. FWIW the article where I placed it was a two sentence stub so I also translated some information from the German Wikipedia. Durova^Charge! 05:03, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Put in at Commons. Thanks for the notice. BrokenSphere^{Msg me} 20:03, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Nudge

[13] Jehochman ^Talk 00:46, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Cool. Thanks for the heads up. Durova^Charge! 00:49, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Centralized TV Episode Discussion

Over the past months, TV episodes have been redirected by (to name a couple) TTN, Eusebeus and others. No centralized discussion has taken place, so I'm asking everyone who has been involved in this issue to voice their opinions here in this centralized spot, be they pro or anti. Discussion is here [14]. --Maniwar (talk) 00:52, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. Durova^Charge! 01:11, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

How would one go about putting this on a community or a moderator watchlist notice? I have a feeling that this will become heated. I honestly think that community input is really needed and I feel that moderator input is truly needed. Lastly, would this be a good candidate for me to list on Jimbo's page? Thanks! --Maniwar (talk) 02:17, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Jimbo's page would be maybe a third recommendation after a request for comment and a post at the community bulletin board. If I knew how to keep site discussions from getting overheated...well...November would have been a much easier month. ;) I hope things work out better for you. Durova^Charge! 02:24, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm assuming that the village pump is a community bulletin board. I still am new on here and trying to learn things. I did place it in the village pump and there is already an RfC on the page...is there another place I could list it? Another community bulletin board? Thanks and those are my last questions for now :) --Maniwar (talk) 02:39, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

There's a diferent community bulletin board at the Community Portal.[15] Best wishes, Durova^Charge! 03:05, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your help and guidance

It is never about one article for me. But I wanted to show our community where the new information is coming from. If Matt Cutts a Google search engineer references Andy Beard on his blog that alone makes Andy notable. When many bloggers SEOs like Rand Fishken, Danny, Vanessa reference Andy or some idea they are not just bloggers but industry professionals. I hope our community will grow to understand the diffference about a senator blog and some small individual blog. Cheers, Igor Berger (talk) 07:01, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. It was mostly Jehochman's doing. Best wishes. Durova^Charge! 05:14, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

I-P collaboration

Thanks for moving folks along on Palestinian costumes. Perhaps I've added this (and you) in vain, but you might want to look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration, which is inspired by some of the ArbCom discussion of the Sri Lanka effort. Thanks. HG | Talk 13:31, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

What a beautiful idea! Yes, I'll join immediately. Durova^Charge! 19:03, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Good article candidates

Dear Durova, I made a large amount of improvements to this article as well. Maybe we can boost it up to good status as well. Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 03:12, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

The list of notable alumni is large enough to branch off as a separate page. GA reviewers aren't fond of long lists. Without that, it's a start-class article. Although it might be worth pursuing the list as a separate featured list candidate. It's well referenced and has a variety of images. Check into current standards (it's been a while for me) if you're interested and we'll see how this looks. Best regards, Durova^Charge! 08:22, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply. A couple of other articles I have focused on are the ones for the films Cloverfield and Alexander. Maybe one of these will pan out. Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 01:47, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

PR's evidence

After seeing PR's insinuations to Sam Blacketer about me, and then seeing PR refer to me again in his evidence statement, I felt compelled to respond. As I wrote at the evidence talk page, I'd be glad to strikethrough if PR withdraws those insinuations. And I'd still be glad to collaborate with him in uncontroversial areas. Best regards, Durova^Charge! 00:27, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, Durova, you're in a tight spot. Jaakobou defined the meaning of "mentorship", the mentors business is to make sure the mentee is squeaky clean. That means that he answers questions, you don't tell us he's denied sock-puppeting - he either confesses what he's been doing or he denies it. If the latter, I present my evidence. It's simple enough really. I'll be perfectly happy to collaborate with you in all areas - I'll not pull any stunts. PR^talk 10:04, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for that explanation. Would you modify your evidence to make it clear that I'm pursuing this in good faith? I think Jaakobou is also, but there's such a divide of perspective between the two of you that you might not agree. And by the way, the image of Palestinian cultural history just passed FPC on Commons. They haven't formally promoted it yet, but the voting period has ended and it's obviously passed. Durova^Charge! 10:11, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

(as Jaakobou's mentor Durova would tell us) - it's inappropriate to put words in my mouth. You never contacted me with any of these details and I've only just now started skimming your claims for the first time, now that you've made them available. You don't speak for me; please withdraw the attempt to. Durova^Charge! 00:13, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

PR, I see you've changed your evidence to the case. May I ask you to change your user page as well? If you'll shake cyberhands and move forward cooperatively I'd be glad to strikethrough my own evidence. Apparently you've had bad luck with previous mentorships and that's too bad. Please remember I'm a different person from them and from Jaakobou - just doing my small part to try and help make a bad situation better. Durova^Charge! 17:32, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Several fine people have stepped forwards and offered themselves as my mentor, and the whole collaborative process could work much better than it has done. But beware, despite any slight suspicion of POV you may have about me, I'm more or less rigidly straightforward. I want to see articles reflect either the truth or, at least, what the RSes say on the subject. I'll start making waves again if I think there's been funny business. PR^talk 20:43, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

What do you think of this model: build - criticize - build? The idea is that if you see a problem with an article, first demonstrate your good faith by helping to make the article better in an uncontroversial way. Then raise your criticism. Then continue to show good faith by helping in other uncontroversial ways. That's a working proposal I've made for the Israel-Palestine collaboration project, for everybody to follow. Durova^Charge! 20:52, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Over and over again, I've put good, non-controversial material into articles and had it thrown out. In May I did so and suffered an indef-block because my information might have come from the Holocaust Deniers (I'd neglected to explain that it came from a book in front of me). The action against me was taken by an admin and specialist on the topic, who must have known the truth of what I said (which is currently in the article). Under such circumstances, BCD leads me to show good faith and the next editor (rather often) show bad faith. I don't think the ArbCom has come to grips with this problem. PR^talk 09:29, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Free images lists

The Panama Canal being built, 1913. This qualifies for uploading to Wikipedia as pre-1923 public domain in the U.S., but I haven't uploaded to Commons yet because Panamanian law may have a claim on it also. Does Panama make a retroactive claim to the Canal Zone for copyright purposes now that the lease has expired? I really don't know. So I've actually attempted a translation of some passages of Panamanian copyright law, since commons:Commons:Licensing doesn't mention the country. Even though Commons already hosts some images of the Panama Canal being built, the ones I double checked listed license justification only according to U.S. law, so I won't be uploading this image there until I receive verification that my translation is correct.

See my additions here. I haven't had a chance to review them yet, but the lists don't seem that comprehensive or well-organised yet (well, the Wikipedia PD resources list is the best one and probably is fairly comprehensive), and there seems to be some overlap and failure of synchronisation between the Wikipedia and Commons lists, but it is a start. Carcharoth (talk) 13:07, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

And sometimes the best way to find new sources of images is to browse through Commons:Category:License tags, and to see what the sources are, and how many of the images have been uploaded (some, of course, are not encyclopedic). Carcharoth (talk) 13:12, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree. The Commons PD categories were a big part of how my survey search for FP-worthy material topped 100,000. It was much quicker searching there: Wikimedia categories display up to 200 images at a time. I can only get 20 at a time from the Library of Congress, then there are downloading and licensing issues. I've been putting my Spanish language skills to the test trying to translate relevant passages of Cuban and Panamanian copyright law.

What would you think of initiating a copyright translation drive on Commons? I'd call that a prerequisite to countering systemic bias on historical images. Durova^Charge! 18:49, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

That's an interesting question. The LoC page (I've linked it from the image) says "No known restrictions on publication." To be honest, for 1913 pictures, if you didn't know the photographer, that would tend to be enough. I tend to go by the rule of thumb that if no-one now knows the provenance of the pictures (photographer or initial publication), it is unlikely we will ever find out and it is unlikely that anyone living or dead cares any more. Things are more complicated here because the name of the photographer has survived [Thos. (Thomas) Marine], and a copyright date (1913) - though who wrote that is unclear. At the bottom it says "Gift; Mr. Harold L. Jenkins; 1976". Did Mr Jenkins write "Copyright Thos. Marine, 1913, Panama City" on the picture? The story there is probably that the photo somehow made its way into the collection of Mr Jenkins, and he then donated his collection to the Library of Congress. But to get back to the Panama question, I know nothing about whether Panama would be able to restrospectively apply copyright laws to photos taken in 1913. One thing to remember is that (I think) these laws apply to initial publication. If the photo has never been published in the USA, the US PD-laws may not apply. Something else applies - I'm sure you know the thing I'm talking about (don't have a link handy at the moment). But finding out when this photo was first published and where could be difficult, if not impossible. Why not ask at WT:NFCC. Some of the people there seem to know a bit about copyright stuff. Good luck with the translation drive - I'll have to just watch and encourage from the sidelines - I know nest to nothing about languages other than English. Carcharoth (talk) 20:55, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

I've posted a query to the Commons and Foundation e-mail lists. Maybe we'll get responses. More generally, these kinds of gaps are a serious obstacle to overcoming systemic bias. Durova^Charge! 21:08, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and if you weren't aware (I wasn't), most images at the LoC collections do have hi-res versions, even if clicking on the picture doesn't do anything. Have a look at Commons:User talk:Carcharoth (Commons) for more details. Carcharoth (talk) 21:16, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Pfft. You shouldn't have told me about the Commons mailing list! Now I have wikien-l, Wikback and commons-l to keep track of and eventually join... :-) Carcharoth (talk) 21:20, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Actually I'm all too aware of the hi-res versions at LoC. Some of the files I've downsampled and imported to Commons were 150-200 megs when they landed on my computer. Durova^Charge! 21:38, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Silence as consensus

I've responded to your comments on Silence as consensus with a question. I hope that the timeline I recall is correct. I'm also wondering if the wording at what ignore all rules means might need further elucidation. --Kim Bruning (talk) 15:02, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Oof, I was um, somewhat dissapointed, in your reply, as you will see when you read what I have to say about it. I'm sure you're acting in good faith, but perhaps we should use some real time communications system (like irc or skype) to do a bit more postmortem. That would be a good idea indeed, I think. --Kim Bruning (talk) 20:51, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Kim, I have never used IRC. Contrary to the rumors, I've always shunned communications methods that had overtones of cabalism. The cyberstalking list was an exception I made because I actually dealt with very serious problems and my previous response, which had been to be fully forthcoming on Wikipedia, had worsened the problem. It takes about five minutes on Google to spot the tip of that iceberg. I didn't enable e-mail until my RFA when another editor demanded it. My e-mail is still enabled and you're welcome to use it. Durova^Charge! 21:06, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

I would like to use a real-time system. Do you have any of irc, skype, or msn or aim? My preference is skype or phone , especially if you are not accustomed to text chat. --Kim Bruning (talk) 21:42, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

I have just sent you e-mail. Real time comms systems are a poor substitute for meeting face-to-face, but it will have to do as long as humanity hasn't invented macro-size teleporters yet. --Kim Bruning (talk) 21:46, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

I have temporarily removed the section of our conversation until we have had time to talk using a real time comms system. I reserve the right to place the text back, if necessary. --Kim Bruning (talk) 21:51, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

I have an admin competancy problem with User:VirtualSteve

Now I know it is my opinion and I WP:AGF but I feel the admin is too in the hurry to perform his admin duties. This is the second time it happned and the admin himself stated, "Sorry for the delay in responding Igor _ I have been busy at my real life working." User_talk:Igorberger#Andy_Beard_AfD Once with Social_Network_Aggregation related duplicate page and now with closing Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Andy_Beard and deleting Andy Beard. Now it is not about the article but what was the hurry to delete it and not give it the full 5 days? Please advise, Igor Berger (talk) 07:39, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Edit credits

Hi Durova,

I noticed you added an ‘Edited by Durova’ to some recent historical FP images on the Wikipedia:Featured pictures/History page. What some people do is add an 'Edited by...' to the Author section on the image description; see here for example. Without that it's not necessarily obvious it's been edited, especially when there's no note on the description page about what's been done or whatever. Often it's not mentioned during the FPC nom either. If I’m closing them and see that note I’ll put in the “Edited by” with the FP credit (and give you a credit on your talkpage as well, as for the Carpenter). I can’t speak for other closers though! --jjron (talk) 12:14, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. It just didn't make sense to randomly get credit for some restoration jobs but not others. I hope that wasn't out of line. I save all of my restorations under a new filename, and I'm careful to note what types of changes I've made (although I might not have been so detailed when I first started). Best regards, Durova^Charge! 15:55, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Jed

Doesnt this comment of yours about banned user Jed here belong below the bullet for Jed and not as a separate bullet?

Tennessee Jed 4415 has been blocked indefinitely for attempting to post private and possibly hacked personal information about Matt Sanchez

Since its related to his vote only, not the rest of the page. What do you think. --Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 19:17, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

That's a fair point. You're welcome to move that post as you deem appropriate. Thanks for bringing that to my attention. Durova^Charge! 19:19, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Ok thanks, moved it now. --Matt57 ^{(talk•contribs)} 19:23, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Palestinian costumes

Hi Durova. I noticed that you placed Palestinian costumes as a suggested article for collaboration for the new Wikipedia:WikiProject Israel Palestine Collaboration. I'm wondering how appropriate this is, considering that it is not an article related to the conflict, but rather a cultural article fundamentally related to Palestinians, and not Israelis. I don't really want to see the issue get needlessly politicized, especially with a GA review underway. Would you mind retracting the suggestion? Thanks. Tiamut^talk 20:20, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, it wasn't my suggestion. Durova^Charge! 20:29, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Did I muck this up? Durova suggested the collaboration idea back at the Talk:Rfar only, (well before the WikiProject was started). I added it to the WikiProject and am open to retracting it. But maybe we could discuss this in the context of Durova's basic idea of us working on low-tension articles, a thread here? Would it be plausible if the next collaboration moved to a low-tension article that's more Israel-related, e.g. Israeli culture? Thanks. HG | Talk 20:47, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

I'll take it up with you both there, if you don't mind. (If I sound stern, I don't mean to.:)Tiamut^talk 00:30, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Rachel Corrie

What do you make of this edit and this justification? (You may need to go to the previous edit to check what "improvements" I claim to be making). It seems to me that the NPOV version of the article is being undermined on POV grounds by legalese intended to mislead me, and mislead the reader of the article. Actual or potential racism has been incited by the wording and the time scale of another legal action has been pointlessly removed, thus tending to mislead the reader. (There are huge other POV problems, see this revert but let's just examine the legal parts above). PR^talk 09:57, 19 January 2008 (UTC) PS - I've responded to you above on Build - Criticise - Build, you may not spot it. I've also mentioned your name here but I'm not asking you to involve yourself immediately. PR^talk 11:07, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

PS - I fear that, however much you want to distance yourself, you will also become involved in the cordial exchange of opinion here. PR^talk

Hi, what did your mentors make of it? Durova^Charge! 18:00, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

I have a situation where, if my mentors show collegiality in the smallest way, they are liable to personal attack for so doing. That's why I came to you to ask for advice. The last entry concerns your mentee, over a concern that he is behaving exactly the same way now as he was before the ArbCom that has just closed. PR^talk 00:01, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, I don't pretend to know the content issues as well as the disputants. My mentorship is about conduct, dispute resolution, and site standards. Some of the editors from the Israel-Palestine collaboration project know these matters in more depth: how about asking the project for help? Durova^Charge! 00:28, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm glad you told us that your mentorship was about conduct - what about cases where he appears to have edit-warred 8 editors into silence over an entry everyone else considers UNDUE? 4 editors consider BLP? And careful examination might suggest were FRINGE - or indeed, simple falsehoods? PR^talk 17:51, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Information source

Durova, I made an interesting contact recently and he has a lot of interesting information about world events.

Please take a look http://www.mybloglog.com/buzz/members/EuroYank/

There are a few blogs with videos and other stuff. Regards, 02:42, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Blogs may be entertaining, but they're seldom acceptable for citations at Wikipedia. Durova^Charge! 02:51, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Image

Hello Durova. Thanks for you support on one of my images. Also, I do believe the halo's were added deliberately, to show a better conception of the Black Hole. - Ohmpandya ^{We need to talk... ♦ contribs} 04:11, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Regarding your vote from Cape St. Vincent image, that is not an image of earth, it's actually an image of Mars. - Ohmpandya ^{We need to talk... ♦ contribs} 17:49, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Show me? Durova^Charge! 19:41, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Dead trees criteria for BLP

What are your thoughts on having the Dead trees criteria for all BLP articles regardless of whether the subject wants them deleted or not? It seems to me that these articles are really more trouble that they are worth. Pocopocopocopoco (talk) 06:03, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

See what other people think. Durova^Charge! 06:11, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry to ask, but...

Once before, not too long ago, you sanctioned a misbehaving editor who threatened legal action against me for removing their edits. We now have a different but similar case, with a legal threat posted to my personal talk page (see this diff: [16]). All I had done was politely pointed out to them that original research was prohibited, and that constantly reverting the removal of their edits was violating 3RR rules - which provoked this amazingly hostile and belligerent response. They do say that I should go ahead and contact an admin, and I'm doing so now (since I know and trust you to do the right thing), to request if you would please have a nice chat with this individual. Obviously anything else I say is only going to agitate them more. Thanks, Dyanega (talk) 22:39, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, I'm not an administrator these days so I can't intervene directly. I've reviewed the post and I agree this is an explicit legal threat. So I've posted to WP:ANI. Best wishes, and try to remain calm and collected. Durova^Charge! 22:45, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Felbrigge Psalter

I was worried about the length, as DYK now requires 2,000 characters, but the long quotation from Davenport, which is out of copyright, gets it there! Xn4 01:09, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Ah, thank you for the heads up. I'll update my DYK page. There's a second article I'm planning to start about an embroidered book done by Elizabeth I as a child. Durova^Charge! 01:11, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Nice work, you two. - PKM (talk) 02:45, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, time to get to work on the Elizabeth embroidery. :) Durova^Charge! 02:46, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

The great triple crown race of 2008

Hi, I think I now qualify for this:

• DYK: article(s):

• Lilstock created - 1 Jan Front Page - 8 Jan
• Midford Castle created - 14 Jan Front page - 18 Jan
• Writhlington created - 13 Jan Front page - 16 Jan

• GA: article(s):

• Bath promoted to GA 8 Jan
• Roman Baths (Bath) promoted to GA 14 Jan
• South West Coast Path promoted to GA 9 Jan

• FA: articles:

• Exmoor promoted to FA 21 Jan

If you need more info let me know.— Rod ^talk 07:58, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

The more the merrier! I'll check this out, thanks. Durova^Charge! 08:00, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

WP:IPCOLL low tension article

Hi Durova. I got rid of the tongue in cheek intro as you suggested. Just posted a list of potential low tension articles. I can come up w/more candidates, well - maybe, if you tell me what you might be looking for. Thanks. HG | Talk 08:49, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Durova, greetings. It seems to me that the best chance of getting a low-tension article effort underway would be if you spearhead the effort. It seems unlikely that we'll get folks to put up candidates and make choice anytime soon, it would be much simpler and effective if, just as you did with Palestinian costumes, you choose an article and spearhead the effort. (I can keep suggesting options until you find one you like. I'll pitch in myself and make an effort to invite various involved parties.)

I hope you're willing to give this another try, especially since you helped get so much improvement on Costumes. Alternatively, perhaps we could go with one of the more tense situations, as Tiamut suggested. While you said that you wouldn't contribute as much content, just having you there for basic editing and work on images, etc., would be a good model and might loosen things up more than you might imagine. Thanks, I know you're busy, and I appreciate your giving this consideration.

PS. In terms of the restored pottery image (userbox/barnstar), will you be working on it? Not my forte, I'm afraid, but let me know if I can help out. Thanks again very much, HG | Talk 16:48, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

fyi sent you email about the pottery image contact info. Thanks. HG | Talk 17:21, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, we're here to work with both cultures. After getting a FP and a GA candidate for the Palestinian project it's time to do more for the Israelis. I've been working with Jaakobou toward an article about Biblical clothing laws. Our aim is to make it a DYK so it won't go live until it's nearly ready. Also I've had my eye on 613 Mitzvot, which could become a featured list if the introduction were better written and referenced. Durova^Charge! 19:57, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Greetings again. Haven't got much response on the polling for a low (or high) tension article. Still, there seems to be a budding interest in Israeli-Palestinian conflict. I wrote you a note on the IPCOLL Talk. Maybe we could set it up in some way, where a few of us try to resolve the live dispute -- yet encourage other project members to drop by and do low-tension improvements? Just an idea. Pls respond on the project Talk page when you have a chance. Be well, HG | Talk 23:16, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Let's move with this organically. Durova^Charge! 23:20, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Troubles

jc37 has requested some help on a recurrent issue, and with your previous involvement with the problem, I was hoping you might help him out. If you didn't have anything to do with this, then my apologies. Octane ^{[improve me]} 21.01.08 0854 (UTC)

Ah, I see. Sad case. He's welcome to e-mail me if he wants. But really, it seems like he's made his choices and decided not to adjust. I wish him well. Thanks for touching bases with me. Durova^Charge! 09:08, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: Image

Regarding your vote from Cape St. Vincent image, that is not an image of earth, it's actually an image of Mars. - Ohmpandya ^{We need to talk... ♦ contribs} 17:49, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Show me? Durova^Charge! 19:41, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Ok. Look at the alternative image # 1. I have never seen that on earth last time I checked! If you have, please take me there :). Also, please reconsider if you like on Alternative 1. - Ohmpandya ^{We need to talk... ♦ contribs} 15:23, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/San Francisco, 1851

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:SanFrancisco1851a.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. jjron (talk) 16:35, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Nice edit job too, but you only get one of these; I've credited your edits on the FP page though. --jjron (talk) 16:35, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 18:49, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Hey, just wanted to say thanks for all the work you've been doing on the WW2 FPCs. I really like what you have been submitting. Keep up the good work! Clegs (talk) 18:06, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I've got another possible nominee in the works right now, could I ask for your feedback on it before PPR? Durova^Charge! 18:50, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Triple Crown Race Entrant!

Oh wow...just remembered this. Here goes;

• FA: I Don't Remember (FAC)
• GA: Black Tears
• DYK: Nambour State High School (Jan 14)

Dihydrogen Monoxide (party) 03:16, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Felbrigge Psalter DYK

On 22 January, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Felbrigge Psalter, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 13:53, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 18:40, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Portal peer review/Textile Arts

I have given a peer review for Portal:Textile Arts. I laid out five key points, using examples from five currently Featured Portals. Hope that helps, Cirt (talk) 23:33, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

IRC

I think you have made a wise decision in respect of this. I also suspect that Jimbo's reaction was instinctual rather than reasoned; it's hard to fault anyone for being insulted when they've been called arsehole and worse - and I am quite sure that plenty worse has been said there. What I find saddest of all is that the problems seem to bubble up mostly in the admins channel, where one might expect a higher degree of decorum. Although heaven only knows why. Well, we can continue to avoid IRC together. Risker (talk) 07:32, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

It's the nature of the beast, I think: real time communications are more prone to see things that - on wiki - a reasonable person would leave on the screen, walk away from the computer for a glass of water, and then not send. Add to that a leakyish channel and a perception of power, and periodic to-dos are just about inevitable. A similar dynamic probably operates on other channels, but minus the perception of power nobody much cares. More often I've felt foolish by standing on principle about that, but in this particular arbitration it's been a huge relief. Durova^Charge! 07:46, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Triple Crown awards

Hey, just curious if you're not awarding triple crowns at the moment, as I've had a request present for about a week and a half. By all means, I'm not faulting you, I'm simply curious as to whether there's a reason or extenuating circumstances. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 07:49, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Sorry about the delay. I'll have it out shortly. Durova^Charge! 08:24, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

No problem at all. I was simply satiating my curiosity. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 08:29, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for caring

Dear Durova, I do greatly appreciate your sensitivity as well as courage regarding your recent suggestions about using the 613 Mitzvot article. IZAK (talk) 10:57, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

		The Special Barnstar
		You are a very brave and wise person. See Wikipedia:Barnstars: "The Special Barnstar may be awarded to a user as a gesture of appreciation..." With best wishes, IZAK (talk) 10:57, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much. What a pleasant surprise! Warmest regards, Durova^Charge! 11:18, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

You most certainly deserve it. I liked the way you did not drag things out. Hoping that we can have a meeting of the minds over some other articles. I will try to give some thought where we could possibly co-operate. IZAK (talk) 11:00, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Israel Defense Forces Women's Corps

OK, here goes, I thought of something we could work on. There is no article about the Israel Defense Forces Women's Corps known as "Chen" in Hebrew, an abbrevaition for "Cheil Nashim" ("Women's Corps"). In the main Israel Defense Forces article there is a sub-section for Women in the IDF, but there is no full-blooded in-depth analytical well-researched comprehensive article on this topic, and the time is ripe to write one because since the creation of Israel in 1948 the policy of its secular political leaders has always been to have young women conscripted like men (they serve two years instead of three) something that no other modern nation has ever done. Not a single Arab or Islamic nation requires any (certainly not a majority of) its females to do compulsory military training! There are many reasons for Israel's tradition of conscripting its young women. One is that Israel has few citizens compared to the Arabs so it needs every person's service. Another reason is that the state uses the army as a great integrator and socializer of a society that is made up of Jews who arrive/d from many different countries and cultures. It is also a continuation of the Socialist egalitarian mind-set of Israel's early pioneers where young men and women worked and defended the land together, as in the Kibbutz ethic. Israeli females' role in the IDF has expanded in recent years and wowmen have begun to serve in other roles outside of the Women's Corps, see this recent article in Haaretz for example IDF commission to recommend women soldiers serve in all units (17/09/2007) and this IDF to integrate more women in army (March 8, 2007) about the most recent trends. Another important issue is that service in the army by women, or the refusal to serve, reflects the various political and religious positions of Israeli society, its religious leaders and the political parties that reflect those views. Thus all those affiliated with Haredi Judaism absolutely forbid their daughters or women from their groups to go to the army upon pain of being excommunicated. This was also a great political debate and an arrangement was reached to relieve very religious girls from serving, see Religion in Israel#The secular-religious Status Quo. The ssue of conscription of women should have its own article actually called Giyus banot meaning "conscription or the drafting of women" (the word "banot" means "daughters" in Hebrew.) There are those who are part of Religious Zionism who allow and encourage their daughters to serve in a non-military National Service that the state offers (such as teaching or communal work in places where there are needs for this), but most secular Israeli female high school graduates have no choice but to submit to the rules of the state and fulfil their two years of compulsory army training with many doing so enthusiastically, see this 9 minute YouTube short about IDF Israel female soldiers or this shorter 4 minute version from MySpace Women Of The IDF. These young women, like the young men, will not go to college and will not be accepted for jobs unless they first serve, so that this means that the Israeli college population starts out at a later age than in Western countries and results in a student body that is more focused and more serious (as befits soldiers.) Take a look at this Women of the IDF on the Jewish Virtual Library, it's a reliable source and see the links there. See this Israel Women in the IDF (from CIA World Factbook 1988). There are many more articles online and it's a great topic. Feel free to start the article with the material and the comments I have made here. I have no doubt you will enjoy it, and I would help out as best I can. Thanks again. IZAK (talk) 11:00, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Ooh, very interesting. :) I'll put that idea on my list. Thank you for the suggestion. Durova^Charge! 01:04, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Ok, I was waiting to see your response. It is a great topic, and in terms of modern Israel it is a KEY topic, and essentially untouched on Wikipedia as a complex subject. I would post the stuff I wrote above as the start of it but I am letting you have the first shot at it. IZAK (talk) 04:15, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm starting a new article atm about the arts of the World War II Japanese-American internment camps. Have a few other things on my plate also, so not sure how long this will be. Thanks very much for the suggestion and for your patience. The subject is certainly well chosen, given my general interests. Cheers! Durova^Charge! 05:16, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

The Miroir or Glasse of the Synneful Soul

On 23 January, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article The Miroir or Glasse of the Synneful Soul, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 15:50, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 18:38, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

It's not always about you

As per your original answer to a question that wasn't posed to you. El_C 07:53, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Obviously there were parts of her complaint that I couldn't address. Phil Sandler had been responsive to my input before. It's possible to try to do some good without imagining oneself the center of attention. It's dismaying to see the way you phrase this title. Please adjust it to something in better faith. Durova^Charge! 08:30, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Face it, your record of interaction with Bishonen's friends is, infamously, bleak. El_C 08:31, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Various featured picture candidacies

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:AlfredPalmerM3tank1942b.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 03:41, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Waldenburg1945edit.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 03:41, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Congrats! I'll keep my eyes open for any other possible candidates. BrokenSphere^{Msg me} 06:31, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

You too; you found it. Please do keep your eyes open. :) Durova^Charge! 06:39, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Your Mentoree

Hi Durova,

Are you still mentoring User:Jaakobou? If so, you might want to to have a look at some of the recent discussions he's started (if not for WP:AGF, I'd assume he's picking fights) on Talk:Israeli-Palestinian conflict, namely here and here.

I was going to wait for one more discussion to take it to WP:AE for an opinion, but I thought maybe I should give you a heads-up first.

Cheers, pedro gonnet - talk - 25.01.2008 07:52

Hi, yes I'm mentoring him. I've made a comment at the second thread. Regarding the first one, please bear in mind that I don't claim expertise on content issues. May I suggest that the first discussion is a little bit "hot" and that turning the temperature down would be a good thing? Thanks, Durova^Charge! 08:02, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi Durova, thanks for your input! I was a bit upset about the casualty figures issue since the issue had been discussed on that same talk page over a period of weeks, namely here, here, here and again here. Considering User:Jaakobou's interest in the article, it is hard for me to believe that he could have missed them. In any case, I will try to tone-down the discussion.

Cheers and again, thanks pedro gonnet - talk - 25.01.2008 08:26

Well, it looks like you've made a fair effort to discuss this. Next time I talk to Jaakobou I'll show him those diffs. Thank you for your help. Durova^Charge! 08:34, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

User:Jaakobou's understanding of mentorship clearly includes demands that the mentee be challenged over particular edits he has made - eg these demands.

And it might appear to be time that you challenged Jaakobou, over some of his activities concerning WP:UNDUE, WP:BLP and WP:FRINGE, particularly with regards to Saeb Erekat. Or concerning his relationship to the edits of User:MouseWarrior and User:Paul_T._Evans. PR^talk 23:37, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

I offered to mentor Jaakobou on specific terms that I defined and he accepted. There might someday be an angle of Israeli-Palestinian issues where I do feel knowledgeable enough to step forward as you request, because I'm not entirely ignorant, but bear in mind that I live on the other side of the world. The big news over here this week is whether several respected museums were heavily involved in an art theft ring. We have perennial debates about people who die of exposure in the desert as they try to cross the border, or whether langostino can be sold as lobster. I don't ask you to weigh in on whether the economic interests of Maine fishermen should take precedence over a different imported Mexican species because, in all likelihood, you would be as much at sea as I would be if I attempted to fulfill your request. Previous opinions you believe Jaakobou to have held about other mentors whose talents and skills were different from mine really aren't binding upon my mentorship. I have never agreed to such terms, nor has anyone but you suggested them. Durova^Charge! 00:08, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

My attempt at assuming good faith

Being as perplexed as you, I'm having a hard time trying to imagine what sort of weird scenario would have to exist for this situation to arise as it has, assuming good faith of the arbcomm members involved. I started with a list of about a dozen scenarios. Upon carefully considering all of them, these are the situations where I believe I am assuming the greatest possible amount of good faith:

1. Arbcomm members cannot understand what has happened because they are too busy to read the RfC or they somehow had a problem understanding what the people responding to the RfC were saying.
2. There is dramatic evidence that arbcomm members are privvy to that they have not shared with the rest of us because of foundation issues.
3. The arbcomm members truly believe the community to be wrong in this instance and are trying to gently lead us away from the path to certain destruction.

This is me assuming the greatest amount of good faith that I can find with as much bending-over-backwards as I can muster. In each of these situations, I'm assuming that arbcomm members are acting with the best of intentions, but in each of these scenarios I'm still left with a poor evaluation of the arbcomm members in question. If 1 is the explanation then we probably should get rid of the arbcomm members in question since they are either too overworked to be able to make reasonable decisions or they simply don't understand what's going on. If 2 is the explanation then there should at least be some indication that this is going on. An appeal to WP:OFFICE could be made or an arbcomm member could mention e-mails or the like that indicate to the community that there are issues that could not have been addressed by the RfC. Assuming this is the case, then there has been a dramatic misstep on the part of arbcomm members and they owe the community an explanation at the very least. Having not provided one in a timely fashion seems almost inexcusable. If 3 is the explanation then arbcomm has inappropriately expanded its mandate and deserves censure. Is there any other explanation I'm missing here? Because I'm really trying very hard to assume good faith and this is all I can come up with.

ScienceApologist (talk) 09:35, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

For the Committee's sake, I hope option two; for Adam's, I hope anything else. There's a comment at the bottom of the proposed decision page, but it stops a long way short of explaining why they paused for a month for the community to give feedback, then acted this way. Durova^Charge! 09:52, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

If you're talking about User:FT2's comment, I can only say that this only really makes sense if option 3 is correct. If we assume that 2 is correct due to the cryptic mention that Adam wants to be desysopped for six months, then we're put in a very weird situation which requires me to assume an extreme amount of bad faith on Adam's part. It would entail Adam saying one thing on Wikipedia pages -- including, quixotically, asking for help from ANI -- but saying something else entirely when privately discussing the matter with the arbcomm members. If this is the case, then Adam should be banned for disrupting Wikipedia to make a point. Yikes! I have interacted with Adam enough to know that he doesn't do this kind of thing. So, in order to minimize the amount of bad faith in total (I'm being utilitarian here) I must assume that FT2 is really telling us that option 3 is what is going on. Is my analysis incorrect? ScienceApologist (talk) 10:11, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

For what it is worth, Adam has indicated that he has been e-mailing the committee about certain wider issues (ie. private issues similar to option 2). These issues were briefly raised before. I don't want to go into details (Adam has e-mailed me about this before), but that might be what has resulted in the ArbCom going in this direction. I would say a combination of 2 and 3. Option 1 is also possible if you look at the sheer volume of pages to read concerning arbitration cases. Go to all the open arbitration cases and try and read them all. Include the open requests, and the arbcom mailing list (which gets requests for unblocks as well), and they have a lot of work. Not an excuse, but just a reminder of the workload. I suggest e-mailing Adam to offer your support. It would probably help. Carcharoth (talk) 11:30, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Carcharoth, I'm well aware of their workload. Being an arbitrator may be the toughest assignment at this site. That's one reason why I wonder they increased their load by taking on this experimental case in lieu of normal dispute resolution, about an old block on an account that had hardly ever been active in two years. Nobody forced this upon them, and it would even reasonable for them to conclude that the experiment failed and to close the case without prejudice. A lot of people put a lot of time into that RFC at the Committee's invitation, believing that their opinions were valued. If the Committee has relevant information that the community doesn't have, then it would be a relief at least to get a signal that there's more to this case than there appears. I trust the Committee to weigh confidential evidence. But frankly, I don't like what this appears to be. Have you ever talked to someone who asked you a question, then interrupted your answer in order to contradict you? It's rude. Durova^Charge! 11:42, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

About the last bit, you mean ArbCom interrupting the "answer" of the RfC? Well, there was a deadline and that passed. No need for the RfC to drag on. As you are in contact with Adam, ask him what I mean by "other issues" here. It maybe that I am missing the point entirely, and the ArbCom aren't responding to that, but I can't expect them to confirm any of this. What they can do is confirm this to Adam privately, and indicate more clearly that private correspondence impacted on the decision. Carcharoth (talk) 11:47, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Actually what I mean is they interrupted the arbitration case in order to run the RFC that ought to have preceeded RFAR. Given the point things had reached by that time, I think they were right to put the case on hold for that purpose. What surprises me (and I suppose other people) is how little it seems to have mattered. Durova^Charge! 20:32, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

The blocking admin

I noticed no one had posted a follow-up to Alison's note at David's talk page. It's possible he hasn't logged on since the AN thread heated up. Probably we've all been surprised occasionally to see a flareup after we took a day off. Let's assume good faith. I've urged him to drop by the noticeboard as soon as he's back online. Durova^Charge! 07:01, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

I would be surprised if Gerard comments on the issue. The entire affair has been a huge black eye for him, Jimbo, the project, and a great many other editors, me and you included. I don't believe the entire truth of the matter has come out yet. Hopefully it will eventually for the sake of all concerned. Cla68 (talk) 14:30, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, I hope my good faith in David Gerard proves to be well founded and he addresses the concerns as soon as he comes online. Likewise, if you really want to help this editor, you might steer him in a more productive direction? There's another editor banned from en:Wikipedia I've been working with who's making positive contributions to another WMF project. None of us are perfect. Let's move forward as best we can. Durova^Charge! 20:27, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Triple crown assistant

Sure, what would I have to do? First off, instead of combing through your talk page, I think it would be easier if all of the requests were in one subpage somewhere. (Could be your own user space, or project space, but either way it'd be easier if they were in one location.) Cirt (talk) 15:08, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

A subpage would be fine. Durova^Charge! 20:21, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Okay, can I be WP:BOLD and start moving the nomination requests from your user talk page to User:Durova/Triple crown winner's circle/Nominations ? Cirt (talk) 21:54, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Sure. Thank you. Durova^Charge! 22:26, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

User:Durova/Triple crown winner's circle/Nominations

• Please see the subpage. I did not move the nominations on your talk page for "The Great Triple Crown Race of 2008", because I wasn't exactly sure on the formatting/process of exactly how that is working, so probably best for that to stay on your talk page. (It'll be over soon anyways, and won't be a regular part of the process at any rate, at least, not perhaps til next year.) I also may have missed some requests from your talk page that I didn't catch. Cheers, Cirt (talk) 02:31, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Another idea

• If you could create subpages in your userspace (perhaps User:Durova/Triple crown, User:Durova/Imperial triple crown, User:Durova/Imperial Napoleonic triple crown, etc.) of templates we could "subst" (with a spot for the username and perhaps a note as well) to actually award people the triple crowns, it would make the process much easier. Cirt (talk) 02:46, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Update, modifed instructions slightly

• I modified it so that you will still be responsible for The great triple crown race of 2008, the Valiant return triple crown, and the Special edition WikiProject triple crowns - as they are all A) Much rarer than the others, and thus easier for you to keep track of and less work than the constant stream of the others, and B) These special situations mentioned above should be looked over extra carefully. Cirt (talk) 12:37, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
  • I'll wait for you to respond here to each of my above points before doing anything further, I think this is a good start and goes a bit towards standardizing things and making the process a little bit easier. No rush, so long as the current nominees don't bug you - but I'd say a rule of thumb for patience for them should be the average length of time (from my estimation) that something sits at WP:FAC - one month. Cirt (talk) 12:40, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
    • Great work so far, thanks. You're right; it's best if I keep doing all the direct work on the special edition triple crowns. After the triple crown race wraps up I plan to implement the steeplechase on a special/trial basis because it's not actually a triple crown. I'll still do regular reviews also (but it's a relief to have help!) and in the very rare event where there's a dispute I'll make the final determination. Regarding the suggested subpages, bear in mind that there's already a transclusion to Wikipedia:Did you know/Hall of Fame. How would you resolve that across multiple pages? Durova^Charge! 19:15, 27 January 2008 (UTC)
      • Everything transcludes back into the main User:Durova/Triple crown winner's circle. But especially if you create templates for the 3 or so more common awards, the redlinks above, it would make things easier. For example, if you like I could start clearing the backlog now at the nominations page - but I don't quite know exactly what message to give with the presentation of the award - and how to format it in a new subsection on a user's talk page. I mean, I could try doing one or two, but I'd rather they they look uniform to the way you do it. Cirt (talk) 19:22, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Tell you what: for now let's keep the awards all on one page. You're welcome to write the award messages yourself or give me a report on reviews that pass and I'll write them - I plan to keep browsing the articles also, and to keep doing a share of the reviews. Let me know privately if some topic really isn't to your tastes and I'll do likewise, so we can both do justice to the nominees by concentrating on material we enjoy.

Nearly every message is unique in some way - I often throw in a compliment about the elements I enjoyed most. Triple crown winners are addressed "Your Majesty", "Your Imperial Majesty", or "Your Imperial Napoleonic Majesty" according to the award they've received. In the image caption I always include a link back to the awards page. Durova^Charge! 20:43, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

• Okay, we'll start doing it this way. I'll do my best to follow your lead, and clear a few entries when I get a chance. Cirt (talk) 22:46, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Update

Only four left to recognize at User:Durova/Triple crown winner's circle/Nominations - and I will leave those up to you. Cirt (talk) 20:22, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for all your work

		The Photographer's Barnstar
		For making many excellent cleanups and rescues of old pictures that would never have otherwise been considered for FP. Keep up the good work! Clegs (talk) 15:48, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! :) Durova^Charge! 19:32, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Your comment requested

Can you please provide comment here? - Talk:Project_Chanology#Current_events_tag. Thanks, Cirt (talk) 21:52, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Banned User" Paul Barresi - sock puppeting in with vulgarity and abuse

Dear Durova,

I see your comments on talk page for article Paul Barresi. A very abusive comment with vulgar words was put on my talk page from an IP who also put an abusive remark on the Paul Barresi article talk page in response to a remark I made about keeping the article within Wikipedia's guidelines. I also responded to this comment by putting a request/warning on the IP's talk page. A derogatory remark was made there as well by same IP.

If you look at the history of my talk page, Paul Barresi article talk page and the IP's talk page you may feel as I do that based on the word choice, abusive manner and bad spelling that this IP is indeed Paul Barresi!

Can you please take some action so myself and others will not have to put up with this vulgarity or be abused. Thank you!

Fuzzyred (talk) 05:15, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for coming to me. Unfortunately I can't address the problem directly because I'm not an administrator these days. Please post your request to WP:ANI and ping me when it's up. Best wishes, Durova^Charge! 05:24, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Franco-Mongol controversy

"The most serious assertion at this RFAR is misrepresentation of sources. I have seen no actual evidence to substanitate this. " I have now provided one example to demonstrate an issue worth investigating. Please see my statement, at the bottom. Jehochman ^Talk 16:28, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

I still have not seen any evidence; I am unable to read deleted articles. Durova^Charge! 18:43, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Priapus

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Priapus statuette I'm not active on Commons, so you're free to do so. Spikebrennan (talk) 22:25, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

grin Durova^Charge! 22:28, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

WP:NOT#FORUM

Re: ongoing disruption of talkpage and ongoing AfD - please see my 2 diffs per WP:NOT#FORUM DIFF, DIFF and let me know what you think of this disruptive behavior by JustaHulk (talk · contribs) on these 2 pages. Cirt (talk) 22:55, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Hm, deleting another editor's posts is problematic. If there's a problem try a noticeboard thread or a request for comment? Durova^Charge! 23:22, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh, my mistake, that was me that deleted those posts - I had seen this done by an Admin in the past, citing WP:NOT#FORUM. Perhaps you can better explain the spirit and the application of WP:NOT#FORUM to me? Cirt (talk) 23:27, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Seems fine up until the point where you tried to blank the thread. Better to just back off or call a halt to it, and wait for the page to archive. If the forum-style posting continues to be a problem you could seek assistance. Durova^Charge! 23:34, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Okay, thanks, I will not do that again. Strange, for I have seen an Admin do this in the past, maybe the Admin was wrong in doing so... Oh well. Cirt (talk) 23:35, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Borderline at best, and distinctly problematic at a dispute where you're an involved party. Durova^Charge! 23:36, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Most intriguing - for in the other case the Admin was definitely an "involved party" as well. That doesn't make it right, I understand your logic, and it's probably wrong in both situations. At any rate, thanks for the advice, it's definitely duly noted. Cirt (talk) 23:39, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

• Nevermind, I left a note to El C (talk · contribs), and the link itself that I had given to WP:NOT#FORUM is sufficient. Cirt (talk) 03:50, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Valley of death photographs

I am REALLY surprised by this issue. I did not bother to read the rest of the newspaper article (second half and second part) because the writer clearly lacked intelligence to count the cannon balls! It is clear that the cannon balls on the road in the FIRST photograph are simply gone. The balls in the ditch on the side of the road remain undisturbed. IF the balls were brought out onto the road, would not logic suggest they came from a location closes to the road? This is aside from the consideration that the suggestion is that Fenton and his assistant moved dozens of what look like at least 9 and 12 pound balls onto the road, not a task for the faint hearted (literally). It was common practice to harvest the balls since invention of artillery, and in any case, the dead and wounded could not be collected ( and the discarded equipment, saddles, etc.) until the road could be cleared. It is unlikely that pictures of this were taken because they were (until ACW) considered in bad taste, and because collection of cannon balls was so mundane a task for the time, it probably was not considered newsworthy. The landscape photograph was however considered an absolute necessity because it could be used to create lithographs for the printed publications. Consider for example the lithographic print of the Bay of Sebastapol (Vol.V, p.448) in Elisee Reclus's English printing of the Universal Geography (J.S.Virtue & Co.,London,1877?). Photographs existed of the Bay by this time, but the technique of including them in the printed books still did not exist. Much ado about nothing in my humble opinion :o)--mrg3105mrg3105 00:32, 28 January 2008 (UTC) PS. looking at the photographs again it is clear that some cannon balls were in fact either not fired on the day, or did not come from a cannon, but a howitzer because they are semi-embedded in the soil, even in the harder compacted road surface, suggesting this either happened earlier with the ball sinking in the soil softened by the rain, or that the trajectory was not the usual flat of the cannon (they bounced several times btw).--mrg3105mrg3105 00:44, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Actually the most interesting part of the series is the third article where he hires a forensics specialist. Cannonball counts and shadow analysis turn out to be not very useful because of specific conditions, but an analysis of the surrounding rocks yields compelling evidence. Durova^Charge! 02:42, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I seem to have missed the first part of this conversation (and can't find it anywhere). I found Wikipedia:Picture peer review/The Valley of the Shadow of Death and this (with the link to the newspaper article). From what I remember reading elsewhere about Fenton, he did 'set-up' pictures a lot (as our article says as well). See here for a picture of him posing as a Zouave. Carcharoth (talk) 02:58, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

The series won me over, reluctantly. I had been trying to study the shadows, but it turns out the films of his era weren't sensitive to blue so there's no way to tell the cloud cover by looking at the sky. From the highlights on the cannonballs themselves it's clear that one was shot while the sun was shining and the other was shot under a cloud, so the lengths of the shadows aren't telling. Too many cannonballs are in different positions to gain much information just by counting them. One thing is consistent, though: six separate rocks were in different positions and all six were further downhill in the "on" position. It's really unlikely that six random nudges would push rocks uphill. Durova^Charge! 03:05, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but what about their other photos! :-) That is one of the famous ones, but the pathos of the other ones is just as good. For example, this one shows his assistant, Marcus Sparling sitting on the van they used to carry their cumbersome photographic equipment around with them. Imagine them wandering around the Crimea like that! Sad end to Sparling's story, by the way. He died of hepatitis four years later. [17] and [18] (two very different sources!) Carcharoth (talk) 03:11, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Absolutely, there are other fine photos in that series. I particularly like the harbor. Go for it! Or if you'd rather bring attention to something that needs restoration, feel free to add material to the galleries at User:Durova/Landmark images. It's an open workshop. :) Durova^Charge! 03:15, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Heh, I just looked - you've already been busy there. :) Durova^Charge! 03:24, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I have? When? <looks confused> Carcharoth (talk) 03:31, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh, I will, at some point! I want a successful FPC to be part of, ahem, a certain award. I have a FAC on the boil (give it a month or so), but if that fails I'll go down the corridor to GAC and go for FPC instead. I'm saying that because I've only just realised that GAC is part of the award. I know next to nothing about GAC - I'm sadly (or maybe goodly) of the opinion that if I can get something to GAC, I might as well go the whole way to FAC. I have a few DYKs hanging around (there is no time limit, is there?) Are there any of the awards where the same article counted for DYK, GA and FA? Carcharoth (talk) 03:31, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Wow. I have 5 DYKs. That's several more than I had remembered. I'd better list them somewhere before I forget! If I line up a few FACs and FPC in one go, I could try and go straight for Emperor of France! :-) Carcharoth (talk) 03:42, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Teehee...say, if you'd like to team up on something, I've noticed that Wikipedia has only 17 featured sounds. If you have .ogg conversion software I've had my eye on a couple of public domain files. And you added some source links to the image workshop on Jan. 17. Durova^Charge! 10:41, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the invite, but sounds might be trying to do too much. I'll stick to pictures for now, but do try and get people interested. I know Raul does stuff to do with sounds - see the Signpost article recently on that classical music museum (or something). Carcharoth (talk) 16:07, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/United States Capitol, 1846

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Capitol1846.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 02:54, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 02:57, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

2008 Triple Crown Race

I left a nomination at your triple crown nomination page, but since you requested a note to be left on your talk page, here you go:

• Sephiroth BCR
  • DYK: List of True Tears episodes, List of FLCL episodes
  • GA: Sasuke Uchiha, Sakura Haruno
  • FC: List of characters in Castlevania: Sorrow series, List of Night Wizard episodes

Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 10:51, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Great effort! Durova^Charge! 11:35, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Potentially the first Valiant return triple crown winner?

See User:Qst. He seems like he qualifies for at least one Triple Crown, and that came after his community-ban got lifted and while he was on parole. His featured contribution is portal, Portal:England, the first DYK I found on a random search through his archives was Francis George Anstey, and a random GA would be Bill and Peter's Bogus Journey. He also has 12 more GAs and 6 more DYKs. Maxim_(talk) 13:55, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I've dropped him a line to see if he wants this. Thanks very much for the heads up. :) Durova^Charge! 19:35, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

I think I will start my own wiki

And I will call it wikitroll.org

I cannot believe how often that word is used to abuse people! Igor Berger (talk) 19:31, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

P.S. Through centuries what has changed? It is just a Rose as by other name.

You look really disappointed. Things haven't been working out? BTW if you do want to start your own wiki it's perfectly feasible. Wikipedia makes its software available at no charge and you could import as much content as you want from this site, since it's all GDFL licensed. There are actually quite a few forking and mirror projects. Durova^Charge! 19:34, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for consolation, but I am not the type to give up. Will contribute how and with what I can untill I am literaly kicked off the ship..:) There are a lot of good people on WikiPedia and that should give us hope and spirit to keep going even if we meet obstinate one's. If someone is so hard headed as to try to bully someone they must have a hidden agenda and not thinking of the project as a whole. So I will be that Igor for the time being. Thanks for the help, Igor Berger (talk) 04:16, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

• I have added an interesting caveat! It will be interesting to see if anyone chalanges this edit. If it is, I will move it to the article's talk page. Troll (Internet)#WikiPedia Troll Igor Berger (talk) 04:45, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: Valiant return triple crown?

Wow, I really don't know how to answer that question without coming over as a little arrogant :). But yes, I wouldn't mind, whichever is easiest for you :) Qst (talk) 20:24, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Your Valiant Majesty, it's going to be a delight to hand out this award. This is the piece that inspired all the rest of the triple crowns. More power to you! Durova^Charge! 20:40, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Psst... I think you forgot to deliver the award to His Valiant Majesty. ;-) Maxim_(talk) 17:57, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

email

sent--Filll (talk) 20:53, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Your Mentoree, again

Hello again,

While surfing some articles I stumbled over this, and, verifying your Mentoree's contribution history since the RfArb, also came up with this and this.

In the first two cases, he completely wipes any occurrence of the word "Palestine" from the article, even where completely justified (i.e. referring to the region before 1948, before Israel even existed), and in the first case with a very misleading summary. In the third, he gets a sourced statement and turns it completely on its head.

Tendentious editing is nothing new regarding your Mentoree, but it looks to me that since the closure of the RfArb, he hast only been looking for relatively quiet, low-profile articles in which to systematically push his POV.

As with the last time I contacted you regarding your Mentoree, I thought it might be wiser to give you a "heads up" before taking this to enforcement.

Cheers and thanks, pedro gonnet - talk - 29.01.2008 07:45

Have you spoken to him directly? Durova^Charge! 18:12, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

I've pinged him about this. He doesn't seem to be online right now. Durova^Charge! 19:13, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

He's gone ahead and made a post in response.[19] Apparently there's a historical issue about administrative divisions of the Ottoman Empire. I had to do some research myself when I nominated a historic image for FPC: the region was known as Palestine in English, informally, but there wasn't any official Ottoman district with a corresponding name. Has there been an RFC for pre-1948 NPOV terminology? Durova^Charge! 21:26, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi Durova, thanks for looking into this! I think the contextual dispute is kind of moot, since the main article on Palestine (specificaly Palestine#Ottoman rule (1516 - 1917 CE)) states that although the name was not in official use, it remained in "popular and semi-official use".

I didn't want to get involved directly since I have enough aggravation with User:Jaakobou already, which is why I called on you. It doesn't look like he's abiding to the word an spirit of the RfArb -- and he should know that -- and I was hoping if he was caught "red-handed", he'd back off without a block.

Cheers and many thanks, pedro gonnet - talk - 30.01.2008 07:27

Wikipedia Troll

User:Durova there is a very big problem when editors calling other editors Trolls. We need to educate ourselves as to what is an Internet Troll. When I tried to add the caveat to Troll (Internet) it was deleted pointing me to a link on the top of the page to Wikipedia essay on Wikipedia:What is a troll. In my opinion one small link is not enough and the issue needs to be made more prominent following Folksonomy. Can you chime in on it Talk:Troll_(Internet)#Wikipedia_Troll. Thank you, Igor Berger (talk) 08:00, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Okay, done. Durova^Charge! 21:21, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your input. I have incorporated it in the article. I have made it clear that it is not just how a few editors see the issue, but how the whole world sees the issue. Refer to talk page for additional notability references. Thank you, Igor Berger (talk) 03:26, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Okay, best wishes. Durova^Charge! 03:31, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

muchy

for this you deserve a cookie.

Martijn Hoekstra (talk) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Teehee, thanks. :) Once in a while I just can't resist a joke. Cheers, Durova^Charge! 21:16, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

The new parser seems to need more cookies to work though (at least, I think it is the new parser) Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 21:19, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

I lol'd. daveh4h 21:25, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I hope it doesn't offend anybody. The situation needed a little levity. Regards, Durova^Charge! 21:27, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

A perspective

Maybe it would help to explain my take on this by analogy. Someday an editor may come to Wikipedia who consistently writes good articles and featured articles about sex scandals connected to the Catholic Church. Is that POV-pushing? Not really, if the community approves each of the articles as neutral and balanced. Some Catholic editors might be unhappy, but the way to resolve that is to raise the quality of other material. There's a wikiproject whose whole purpose is to improve Wikipedia's coverage of saints' biographies. That's really not much different from my offer, except that one religion is older and more established than another. Durova^Charge! 00:00, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

If that's all they do, then they are a single-purpose account. People that do that are generally emotional nutcases who could never compromise on anything or follow policy when it leads to edits they don't like, and I can't think of any example otherwise. They may sometimes be forced to compromise out of the fear of being blocked, but their whole modus operandi is to skirt policy in any way that they can in order push a particular point-of-view.

For an idea of my perspective on Wikipedia, see M:Conflict-driven view of wiki, M:Factionalism, M:Wikindividualism, and WP:FAIL. Also, see my essays WP:WIARRM and WP:Zombies. If any of that makes you think I'm "anti-Wiki", there is a satirical essay at WP:Anti-Wikipedianism. ☯  Zenwhat (talk) 00:11, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

I noticed you cited WP:NAM at Jimbo's talk. Have a look at the history of that essay. ;) Durova^Charge! 01:15, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Two English gentlemen are sitting down, having a cup of tea.

"I say, old chap. What is that there in the distance?" one of them asks, squinting his eyes.

The other replies, "Well, I don't know, old bean. Hmm. It appears to be a tiger of some sort."

A saber-toothed tiger zips over to them in a blur, leaps on top of them, knocking their teacups to the ground, clobbering both of them, ripping both to pieces.

Destruction is what trolls, vandals, and bad-faith users do to our wiki. I agree with WP:No angry mastodons and in assuming good faith, but on the other hand, you don't invite a tiger to sit down with you and drink tea. In discussions about trolls, I've even had several folks ask the absurd question, "Troll -- according to whom?"

It is true that I have a tendency to idiotically assume bad faith and be irrationally paranoid, at times, but I generally acknowledge fault when I'm wrong (see here) On the other hand, I do see that Wikipedia, in general, is very complacent about dealing with POV-pushing trolls and mobs.

Also, an essay of mine you might like better is: User:Zenwhat/Zen guide ☯  Zenwhat (talk) 04:08, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Lovely. Re: this, in case you read German, Sieh, die Bäume sind. Die Häuser, die wir bewohnen, bestehen noch. Wir nur ziehen Allem vorbei vie ein luftiger Austausch. -Rainer Maria Rilke Durova^Charge! 04:18, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't read German, but I'm good with Google, including its translator and think I know what those words say. First, I did a search and the correct German, from what I see, should read:

"Siehe, die Bäume SIND, Die Häuser, die wir bewohnen, bestehen noch. Wir nur ziehen allem vorbei, wie ein luftiger Austausce." [20]

From what I gather, it's from his poem, "Elegies from the Castle of Duino," and it says:

"Behold, there are trees, the houses we inhabit, existing still. We just move over everything, like a dizzy exchange."

19th and 20th century philosophers, artists, and scientists in the west have largely re-discovered ancient eastern concepts. ☯  Zenwhat (talk) 04:59, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Stephen Mitchell has done some brilliant translations of Rilke's work. Mitchell has also studied Zen in some depth. :) Durova^Charge! 05:16, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you, Durova, for your fair-mindedness. I have made my final statement on the WikiNews thing over at WP:ANI and am finished tilting at that particular windmill. I will not be looking at WikiNews again if I can help it and certainly will no longer be surprised at what I see there. Thank you for you offer to create some articles. There are actually two very good articles that were AfD'ed by "another editor" about two months ago. They were quite good, represent considerable effort on the part of the author (User:Slightlyright, if I recall), and need very little work to get back up. They are in my user space as User:JustaHulk/Sandbox1 (KRC), User:JustaHulk/Sandbox2 (ARC). Please let me know what you think of them. Thanks again. --JustaHulk (talk) 03:02, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

They both have the makings of pretty good articles. Do you have other sources besides Hubbard's own writings? It would be interesting to note when Hubbard introduced these concepts and how other leading Scientologists have elaborated upon them. Other Scientologist publications such as magazine articles etc. would help verify assertions about their importance within Scientology. Perhaps most importantly, some analytical treatment from outside Scientology itself would round out the draft versions. How about academic studies in comparative religion? After I read your sandbox versions I looked over the trinity article to see how it approached its topic. That's a solid B-class article and you might find it useful for comparison. Best wishes, Durova^Charge! 03:22, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Durova, read over the AfDs please. Both articles were deleted because they lacked any secondary sources, and never had any since the articles were initially created. P.S. Full disclosure: I was the one who had nominated them for AfD initially, so I felt I needed to point that out. If no secondary sources can be given, we should not recreate deleted articles, we should not be in the habit of basing entire articles on Hubbard's writings or on Church of Scientology-affiliated publications, and the area in this user's userspace should be deleted if no secondary sources can be found. Cheers, Cirt (talk) 04:30, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Cirt, I have a big problem swallowing these two AfDs, especially the one on ARC. ARC is so incredibly central to Scientology that your desire to AfD it is indicative of an alarming lack of knowledge on a subject that you are broadly attempting to slice through with prods and AfDs. Did you even search the term? Cirt, you are famous for your ability to find sources. Did you not even run a simple Google book search on "ARC+Scientology"? There is plenty of material to affirm their importance and I will adjust the articles to reflect 3rd-party sources but the meat of the article will remain sourced to Hubbard material because that is what the article is about, understanding an important aspect of Scientology. --JustaHulk (talk) 05:27, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

I apologize at the time I did not do a search on Google Books. In the future (as is the case on an ongoing WP:SCN/AFD) I will do a search for secondary sources before nominating an article for AfD. But I disagree and do not think the bulk of the article should be sourced to Hubbard. That's like writing an entire article about the Qur'an, only using the Qur'an as a source. Cirt (talk) 05:30, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

We would get along a lot better if you specialized in what you knew, i.e. finding material critical of Scientology and working it into articles, and left others alone to do something else - explain Scientology so that the non-Scientologist can gain an understanding of it. That is the point of an encyclopedia, too. And some people might actually appreciate that understanding. Those two articles went a nice way along that line and only needed a bit of 3rd-party sourcing to be just fine. --JustaHulk (talk) 05:39, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Um, no. No article on this project should rely primarily on a primary source. That strays close to blatant POV interpretations of that source, and WP:OR violations. Cirt (talk) 05:43, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Right, this needs wider sourcing. And if they're as central to Scientology doctrine as they purport to be then secondary sources probably do exist. Durova^Charge! 04:38, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

For a moment, could we set aside the particulars about which religion this is? I don't see an inherent problem with having articles about the central tenets of any significant religion. The key thing is to establish and maintain some objective distance. Wikipedia's trinity article doesn't encourage readers to become trinitarians, nor does it offer a wholly internal triniatrian perspective. If JustaHulk's sandbox versions expand beyond Hubbard's formulation to set these concepts in the context of their history within Scientology and independent academic study, then it appears to me they could both become viable articles. Durova^Charge! 05:37, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Sure. If they are sourced mainly to secondary sources, and not to Hubbard's writings or Church of Scientology affiliated organizations' publications. Cirt (talk) 05:39, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Well, would it be fair to do a survey of other B-class articles of other religious creeds, and use a rough average of their internal/external sourcing ratio as a yardstick for acceptable sourcing here? Durova^Charge! 05:44, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Best to use a higher standard than "B" class articles. Shouldn't set the bar low from the get go. Cirt (talk) 05:48, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

B-class is "average article". There might not be many GAs and FAs to survey. Let's say B-class and above? Durova^Charge! 05:50, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

I dunno, WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS... What about comparing this to policy pages instead, which emphasize use of secondary third party sources over primary, self-referential sources? Cirt (talk) 05:53, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

There is a reason that WP:PSTS appears within the policy page WP:OR...... Cirt (talk) 05:57, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

When writing about any religion's internal teachings, internal sources are likely to play an important role. All I propose is that we set Scientology on the same footing as other religions for the purpose of article-writing. If you're unsure of how that will work out, then one alternative would be to improve these sandbox versions and then run a content RFC before moving them into article space. Durova^Charge! 06:15, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Sounds like a potential idea. I'll respectfully defer to your judgment. Cirt (talk) 06:24, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

A preliminary survey

• Predestination: B-class
• Prevenient grace: unrated
• Syādvāda: start-class
• Resurrection: start-class
• Afterlife: start/B-class

• GAs: Wikipedia:GA#Philosophy_and_religion
• FAs: Wikipedia:FA#Religion.2C_mysticism_and_mythology

From what I see here, it looks like there's a big gap between the level of sourcing that gets tolerated for a run-of-the-mill article and the actual quality of a GA or FA. For instance, Category:Sikh beliefs is really sketchy and basic. Ideally I'd like to see JustaHulk's sandbox pages at GA or FA level; I'd like to see all articles at that level. But I have to concede this point: with a bit of expansion and outside sourcing these would be at the same quality as comparable coverage for other religions. So first, let's get enough expansion and independent sourcing to move this into article space. Then let's see about continuing to improve them where more people can see the articles and contribute to them. Durova^Charge! 00:50, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Something that may interest you

Homeopathy has been placed on article probation via a discussion at the Administrators' noticeboard. As far as I know, this is the first time such a thing has been accomplished without arbitration. Jehochman ^Talk 22:18, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't know if that is good or bad. I just don't know. --Filll (talk) 23:05, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

What do you think of my Masterpiece

I think I hit a sore nerver with this one! Igor Berger (talk) 04:21, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Nobody likes to be on the wrong end of that. Good essay. Durova^Charge! 19:01, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you user Durova. I will ask someone to proofread it and will take it as an essay to main space. Igor Berger (talk) 19:34, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

We got it proofread, and I moved it to main space. Wikipedia:Social engineering (Internet) also created a shortcut WP:SEI. I am wondering if we need to have the parenthesis around Internet. So maybe better "Wikipedia:Social engineering Internet" What do you think? Thank you, Igor Berger (talk) 05:52, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Usually parentheses are only used to distinguish two pages that would otherwise occupy the same space. Durova^Charge! 06:00, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

I love the essay. It is perfect and we can use it when someone complains that WP:NOT#democracy. Thank you, Igor Berger (talk) 06:14, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

The essy is great. I am using it at WP:ANI and it works charms in preserving WP:COOL. Igor Berger (talk) 07:08, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm really glad it's working for you. :) Durova^Charge! 07:16, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

I am glad it is working for all of us. I could have never done it if I was thinking of myself. I always think of others first when I do something. Igor Berger (talk) 07:22, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by February 14! TomStar81 (Talk) 02:53, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. Durova^Charge! 03:00, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

From DYK to GA

Durova, just wanted you to know how helpful it's been for me to run into you. I had never paid attention to DYK before, and largely due to your positive energy I've now contributed to 4 DYKs, 3 nearly on my own. Now I'd like to work on a GA. Care to give me any guidance or mentoring on how to go about it? I realize you're already dealing with me on IPCOLL, plus you're quite busy, so it's fine if you'd that I see help elsewhere. (If so, any suggestions?) Anyway, thanks again, see you around, HG | Talk 03:52, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Absolutely, and congratulations! If the subject interests you, I've been working up Navajo rug from a three paragraph stub. It's solid B-class now and I'm intending to bring it to GA (kinda been distracted). Ping me if you like it, or if you find another subject that tickles your interest. Best regards, Durova^Charge! 03:57, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/First supersonic flight

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Yeager supersonic flight 1947.ogg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 07:22, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! :) Durova^Charge! 07:34, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Third strike, off to WP:AE

Hi Durova,

Just to let you know that User:Jaakobou just did it again. What makes it all the more ridiculous is that the coordinates in the top-right corner of the page are smack in the middle of the West Bank, just east of Bethlehem.

I'm preparing a post for WP:AE, I'll link you to it as soon as its done.

Cheers and thanks, pedro gonnet - talk - 01.02.2008 08:20

Thank you for touching bases. I'll ping him asap. Durova^Charge! 08:22, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

As promissed, here. Cheers, pedro gonnet - talk - 01.02.2008 09:26

Okay, I've e-mailed him. I do appreciate that you're touching bases. Best wishes, Durova^Charge! 09:28, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you also for your efforts! Mentorship is never an easy thing and I have great respect for people who take such a burden upon themselves. Cheers, pedro gonnet - talk - 01.02.2008 09:30

Barnstar

		The Photographer's Barnstar
		For your work on restoring historic images, I award you this barnstar.-- Muhammad(talk) 08:49, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Durova^Charge! 09:19, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

You deserve This

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		For recognizing a star in me while many other did not see it, and for your support for WP:SEI which already captured an abuser. Thank you, Igor Berger (talk) 09:13, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

You're too kind. That's your essay. Take pride in it. And keep up the good work. :) Durova^Charge! 09:20, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Sources

Hi, the discussion moved forward and I don't know where to answer you in this.
There is a misunderstanding. The idea I have is to go more into details to see how respect WP:RS in practice in writings :

• "bla bla bla" (ref)...(/ref) for reliable sources
• According to MrA, "bla bla bla" (ref)...(/ref) for contreversed material or analysis
• Commentators add that "bla bla bla" (ref)...(/ref) for minority allegedly biased analysis.

In all case, this is just a matter of WP:undue. Ceedjee (talk) 11:18, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Basically that makes sense. I've seen various disputes where people tried to game the idea of including or excluding sources. And - no joke - completely unrelated instances have tried to declare The New York Times an unreliable source. I'd just like to make people aware of that problem while we undertake this. Durova^Charge! 11:01, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Admiral Farragut

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Adm2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 05:41, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 06:25, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

WP:SEI maybe WP:MFD

User:VirtualSteve WP:canvassing for consensus of WP:MFD for WP:SEI. You know I am going on vacation for about 3 weeks in a few days, so try to defend the article how you can. I have life case of social engineering on Wikipedia that I will submit to WP:DRV if we ever have to go there. I do not want to devulge the case evidence untill need to be. Or I will bring it to WP:MFD if the guy can wait till I come back! Igor Berger (talk) 10:33, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure he's canvassing. Anyway I've gone ahead with a post to the essay talk. Best wishes, Durova^Charge! 10:44, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Please let's see some clarity in this discussion Durova - your an editor much worthy of respect (as I am). Standing back beyond any interest in Igor that you have previously posted - this fellow is trolling through page after page, admin after admin making out of context arguments about this page - which whilst he might be proud of it, is (being as kind as possible) completely nonsensical. And it is the silly threats and innuendo about 'life case' (?) that he spruiks whenever anyone asks him a legitimate question rather than providing a legitimate response, and the way that he proudly indicates that he is trolling the page, that is making others (not me initially) considering a placement at MfD.--VS ^talk 10:51, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Igor, would you agree to cut down on the links to this page? There's a fine line with a newly created essay between being enthusiastic and going too far. Just take your time, post a link once or twice a month when it really fits in best, and people will spread the word themselves if they agree it's valuable. Steve, I do think Igor means well. Best wishes to you both, Durova^Charge! 10:58, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

• Yes a well started compromise possibility at this stage - but I do not speak for other intentions. Certainly if Igor explains fully what the article is supposed to do on the talk page before he goes on holidays and only posts a maximum of two links per month I will leave it alone for now. My best in return to you Durova.--VS ^talk 11:01, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Wikipedia has a great number of essays. Very few are read widely. Occasionally a well-intentioned effort gets misunderstood and sparks a negative reaction. Yesterday I archived a thread early over someone else's misfired idea, which could have gone over well if the person had done one or two things differently, and instead had led to some bad blood. If the issue is excessive linking I trust Igor to be reasonable. Durova^Charge! 11:10, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
    • User Durova I already forgot about the article and will be working on WP:FLAME next as I told User:Jehochman. As far as explayining the article the article speak for itself. It is a double edge sword. When someone claims social engineering they need to uderstand what it is. The other side when someone canvassing for votes to indict an editor that is social engineering. The essay explains it all. Regards, Igor Berger (talk) 11:13, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

EC again - Well that is not the only issue - the issue from others relates to the question of what the page is and means. Put simply Igor is attempting to harass other editors with this (currently nonsensical) document and by linking it everywhere he is attempting to force its being read widely. Indeed he is also posting it in such a way as to make it look like a policy or guide, and at least one person has thought he is an administrator as a result of his posts. Put even more simply (and using your talk page because he started this thread here) - if Igor places an appropriate comment that explains the essay a little bit more and that he will only list it a couple of times a month as detailed above, on the talk page at WP:SEI before he goes on holidays I certainly will leave it alone - if not I can only assume that he is not being sincere with this essay and I will take it to MfD for wider consideration, this week after I have prepared the submission.--VS ^talk 11:20, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

• VirtualSteve you have not been sincere with me but literaly Stalking me from one editor to another, VirtualSteve calls SEI joke page VS just leave me alone! Igor Berger (talk) 11:24, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Please Igor just an answer to my legitimate question and to Durova's legitimate attempt at compromise. As for above it is a "joke" page - you are the one that put the joke alert label on the page. Please just an answer to my question so we can all get back to som serious wiki?--VS ^talk 11:27, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

I am not Spamming but wanted to see how the essay worked in real life. My test is finished so I have no reason to show it around as I did before. Igor Berger (talk) 11:31, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

We are concluded Igor - I have just posted this response to the "essay" talk page... Okay thank you Igor - I take it that you are not going to SPAM this essay again - and I thank you for not being mendacious any further with your finally answering my specific question. As I said before I do not speak for others but if you do not SPAM the article again I will certainly leave it alone. Now we can be friends again . . . best wishes to you - trust your skiing trip will go well.--VS ^talk 11:36, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Steve maybe I can come down to Australia and we can go skiing together. Never skied Down Under. Please try using WP:SEI when users complain about being picked on, it may save you time. Igor Berger (talk) 11:44, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

• Durova - thank you for the use of your pixels :) --VS ^talk 11:36, 2 February 2008 (UTC)
• Durova thank you, I will try to bring you some SNOW..:)

Scketches

Hi Durova. I've just seen your message. So you mean that scketched of photographs made my me are not my copyright? Thanks to confirm the info. PHG (talk) 11:30, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

In these instances, no you can't assert copyright. The photographs themselves are copyrighted and your sketches are derivative works of the photographs. Durova^Charge! 18:27, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Michael Lucas (porn star)

I am writing to you because you have had previous experience working with this article. The edits of David Shankbone on this article have been reported to COIN as seen here, [21].

--71.127.226.181 (talk) 15:14, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Okay, replied at the noticeboard. Short answer: I think you'd fare better raising this at the biographies of living persons noticeboard. Durova^Charge! 18:37, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Alternative medicine and John Gohde

I do not remember we having so much infighting with Homeopathy and alternative medicine. Maybe we should bring John back he knew what he was doing! Igor Berger (talk) 18:52, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Not my call. Durova^Charge! 18:53, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIII (January 2008)

The January 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:42, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

tendentious editing = WP:BOLD

If you look at ANI maybe 10 diffenret place they calling editors "tendentious editing". Is being WP:BOLD equal "tendentious editing" I am being blamed of this by VirtualSteve as well. here Igor Berger (talk) 04:04, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Bold is good, as long as no one has a problem with it. Continuing on the same boldness after other editors object is tendentious. Durova^Charge! 04:06, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

In each case I know when to draw a line, and I never over step it! But what they are not happy about that I always come to the line every time I do things. Should I just be silent when someone says no? That is not consensus! Igor Berger (talk) 04:11, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

That's when you talk to them. Durova^Charge! 04:12, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

• Well they need to talk to me not watch my actions partially and come up with some conclusions! Igor Berger (talk) 04:20, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Buffalo Soldiers

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Buffalo soldiers1.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 04:36, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 04:49, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

removal of links to lyrics

Hi, could you enlighten me as to why you have removed the links to lyrics have been removed from many articles on Strawbs songs? Is this contrary to wiki policy? Regards Witchwooder (talk) 08:33, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, some time ago Wikipedia consensus agreed to stop linking to outside sites that violate copright on song lyrics. It's a matter of legal exposure to the Foundation, if I understand correctly. Durova^Charge! 08:38, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for such a swift response - is there a wiki article about this or a link to the discussion? (The only article I can find is WP:SONGS#LYRICS. I don't believe that the strawbs website is in violation of copyright. Best Witchwooder (talk) 09:22, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Question for you.

I created a page in my userspace. User:Zenwhat/Hall of Shame

Now, I want to ask you a question. Let me first preface it by saying I don't know what happened and that's why I'm asking.

Basically, I'm just curious to hear your side about this. [22]

Keep in mind: I'm not like Cade Metz or Daniel Brandt. I'd just like to know what happened. Was it a mistake? If so, how did it happen?

Even if I list it there, that doesn't mean I don't respect you less. It's just an example of some of the theoretical problems that can emerge with the way "mop and bucket" is currently handed out.

Also, I'm sorry if bringing this up bothers you. ☯  Zenwhat (talk) 08:41, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I made a bad block, and reversed the action with apologies 75 minutes later as soon as I could confirm the error. It was a legitimate second account, and it came to my attention that the editor wished to avoid attention. So I added a statement to the noticeboard thread I had started and asked all further attention to focus on my own actions, rather than the individual I had blocked. The particular edit you cite was another editor's attempt to honor that. We were both acting in good faith.

As to how I made the mistake in the first place, I had attempted an experimental report that was quite out of the norm for my usual work. You'll get part of the background if you look at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Alkivar and Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Eyrian : two administrators involuntarily desysopped, one of them sitebanned indefinitely by the Committee, and two other accounts that had operated for over half a year banned for sock/meat activity. In the Alkivar case the banned vandal JB196 played a pivotal role. JB196 has created literally hundreds of sockpuppets and both Alkivar and Burntsauce were consistently proxy editing for him. I had been trying to root out serious long term problems like that, and had been quite successful at it - much to the chagrin of the people who had been trying to game our rules, and perhaps my own success buoyed my reputation enough that Wikipedians in good standing didn't look critically enough at my work afterward.

Also worth mentioning is that I was dealing with multiple problems of offsite harassment in the weeks immediately before I made the bad block. The harassment itself doesn't faze me much - I am nearly untrollable - but the cyberstalking list was filled with untrained amateurs who were making their newbie mistakes. By the luck of the draw, every single instance where I brought a problem of my own to the attention of that list, one or more people intervened against my wishes in ways that made the problem worse. In some of those instances the intervention went deeply against my principles because I believed it placed other women at risk of harassment. Trolling itself I can take, but not being able to trust the people who were near me - that was much harder. The particular editor I blocked was in no way to blame for that. Yet under those pressures my concentration and judgement slipped.

Normally a set of errors like the ones I made wouldn't be such a big deal, especially since I was self-correcting, accepted responsibility, and basically did all I could to atone for it and make changes so it wouldn't happen again. The stars must have been aligned; and I know some of the people who had been harassing me offsite did their utmost to fan the flames. The dispute resolution system broke. I had been attempting to take a short wikibreak on the advice of someone I respect very much, and expected RFC to last the usual term (three weeks or so) that would allow enough time for evidence, questions, and responses. Instead the RFC got certified on Thanksgiving Day and became obsolete within 12 hours when RFAR opened. Normally arbitration remains in the evidence phase for at least a week before progressing to voting. My case not only went to voting in under 24 hours, but when I saw that three arbitrators had already voted and I begged for time (my evidence was barely half prepared), my request went ignored and two more arbitrators voted within the next two hours. With one-third of the full Committee going on record that no defense was possible, and directing the outcome to an immediate RFA (I was open to recall), the only dignified option was to identify the irregularities and resign.

It didn't help that another editor violated my copyright and publish the report I had written onsite, two full days after I had reversed the block with apologies. When that person posted it his edit note was "for your entertainment". I have a stubborn streak that way. Talk to me, reason with me - that could change my mind. But I dig in my heels when someone tries to tread on my rights.

I did my best to reduce the drama. After the first day on the noticeboard, when it was clear that some incredibly off-target memes were gaining traction and most of what I posted was being ignored or misquoted, I withdrew from that discussion. I didn't lash out at anyone and I accepted more damage to my reputation than I actually deserved in order to let things cool down. Since then I've revived WikiProject Textile Arts from near-extinction, written a dozen new articles for "Did you know?", collected 11 featured picture credits, and founded an image restoration workshop for historic photographs. I've learned many lessons from the last couple of monts. I hope the community learns two lessons too. One of them I've worked toward actively: I don't want another editor to get railroaded through arbitration too quickly to present a defense. For that reason I've spoken up on behalf of both Adam Cuerden and Physchim62, even though Adam had been silent when my neck was on the block and Physchim had been one of my most active critics. The other part I've waited to express because the community didn't seem to be ready for it, but that would be a different conversation. Regards, Durova^Charge! 09:41, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Maybe a problem

User:Zenwhat brought this to User:MKoltnow. The problem is old but there was an andmin involved in an edit war and purged a bot revert. There was an edit blanked out in this here. So you better look at it carefully. Only sysop can blank out an edit. Igor Berger (talk) 08:43, 4 February 2008 (UTC)