Jump to content

User talk:Jimbo Wales: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
MiszaBot III (talk | contribs)
m Archiving 3 thread(s) (older than 1d) to User talk:Jimbo Wales/Archive 50.
Line 50: Line 50:


I am sorry if you feel this as a waste of time but what is your religion? I have not found any information on your Wikipedia biography or anywhere. You have stated that you are an objectivist. Does that make you an atheist? [[User:EvilFlyingMonkey|EvilFlyingMonkey]] ([[User talk:EvilFlyingMonkey|talk]]) 14:19, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
I am sorry if you feel this as a waste of time but what is your religion? I have not found any information on your Wikipedia biography or anywhere. You have stated that you are an objectivist. Does that make you an atheist? [[User:EvilFlyingMonkey|EvilFlyingMonkey]] ([[User talk:EvilFlyingMonkey|talk]]) 14:19, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

That's not something I feel comfortable answering here.--[[User:Jimbo Wales|Jimbo Wales]] ([[User talk:Jimbo Wales#top|talk]]) 22:53, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Revision as of 22:53, 26 September 2009

(Manual archive list)

I mention you in an arbitration

I make it a practice to notify editors if I mention them in any proceedings. Please see my statement/evidence at Case/Eastern European mailing list. VЄСRUМВА  ♪  22:05, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notification. It doesn't look like any of that has anything to do with me at all though. :)--Jimbo Wales (talk) 23:41, 24 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, this case may strongly discourage people of participation in the project. I made a comment here. I believe arbitrators should not even read any stolen private emails, but make their judgement only on the basis of on-wiki evidence. What do you think? My personal view of this incident can be found here. Biophys (talk) 15:49, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Please also note where I question why we tolerate incivility and open threats (this involves a reference to you specifically). You may also be interested in my comments on consensus. VЄСRUМВА  ♪  22:00, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

{{bio-notability}} tag

Hi Jimbo,

I would appreciate your input on the appropriateness of the {{bio-notability}} tag for living people. When applied to a page, a message appears: "This article may not meet the notability guideline for biographies. ... If notability cannot be established, the article is likely to be merged or deleted." Depending on how it is used, it seems to me that it can be used to assert any editor's opinion that a person is "a non-notable" whilst leaving the burden of proof on others to prove him wrong and without having to worry about the verifiability of his opinion. This seems contrary to the spirit of the BLP policy where the burden of proof otherwise lies with the editor who adds or restores negative material. I raised this at BLP/N and the consensus was against me, although I believe that opinion was swayed by the editors involved in the dispute. What are your thoughts on this -- do we really need this tag at all? Best, Alex Harvey (talk) 14:10, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the link to the BLP noticeboard discussion. Alex, you may wish to clarify what you mean by "opinion was swayed by the editors involved in the dispute"; to me it sounds completely tautological. Baccyak4H (Yak!) 15:35, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Baccyak4H, you're quite right; badly worded and not relevant anyway. I have struck it. Alex Harvey (talk) 03:22, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The letter from Jimmy Wales and Michael Snow

Hi there! I was just thinking about this thing. I am always open to help here in wikimedia in any form I can, I always want, but watching at that letter (specially the task force section) makes me think that it´s only for expert/qualified people in some special aspects (I don´t understand it very well, maybe I´m wrong). The fact is that I am only a humble physics student in real life, I can contribute to the regular editing in wikipedia (formatting, researching for the creation of articles, helping other users, etc...), but I´m not involved with political issues, software development or governace models. So I just wrote to you to clarify this. Is there something in which I can help to this or you would say that it´s preferred for me to stay in normal edits within the community? - Damërung . -- 19:28, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello...

If you are busy, feel free to disregard this, but if you have a minute or two, please peek and let me know what to do, as I'm not sure where to turn at this point. In summary, I met the qualifications for a name change, but it seems to have stalled due to my being polite, following protocol, and unknown activities taking place by another user of which I am not aware.
I put in for a simple usurp on one wiki (the en wiki), and within a few days someone else had taken my home wiki (fr), changing it to (jp), and without any direct communication to me, seems to be seeking to stall my name claim even though I met the requirements. You can view the goings on here..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Changing_username/Usurpations#OiseauTemp_.E2.86.92_Oiseau ..
The primary puzzlement is that no one is giving me any specifics or link records about how this other user is achieving these takeovers, without contacting me, after I've filed and qualified, and continue to be expected to follow the rules, even as it's unclear which rules this other user is following, if any.
Thanks for your time if you can, and no problem if you can't... OiseauTemp (talk) 08:24, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think there has been a big misunderstanding Oiseau... Its not that the jp user flew in and subverted your efforts to get the name: he(or she, you never know) already had it. When a user registers for any wiki, they are automatically registered on en wiki, commons, etc. etc. So when the jp user registered, he(again, or she) created an account on en wiki. Now you want the unused name, the jp user won't give it up, and there's not much left anyone can do.
It's like me buying four hamburgers even though I only intend to eat one. You can't just take one because you're hungry, you have to ask for one (e.g. WP:CHUU). I say no, I'm saving them for later. You get no hamburger.
Trust me, I know how you feel. I'm in the middle of getting a name change as well, and I can't have the name I want because someone registered and made one edit from it. But thats the way things work in this wikid world. - Drew Smith What I've done 08:53, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

hello

I am sorry if you feel this as a waste of time but what is your religion? I have not found any information on your Wikipedia biography or anywhere. You have stated that you are an objectivist. Does that make you an atheist? EvilFlyingMonkey (talk) 14:19, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's not something I feel comfortable answering here.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 22:53, 26 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]