User talk:Tijuana Brass: Difference between revisions
Cicero Dog (talk | contribs) |
→Community Justice: response |
||
Line 350: | Line 350: | ||
== Community Justice == |
== Community Justice == |
||
It looks like all upheaval is over if u wish to rejoin [[User:Cicero Dog|Cicero Dog]] 19:44, 23 May 2006 (UTC) |
It looks like all upheaval is over if u wish to rejoin [[User:Cicero Dog|Cicero Dog]] 19:44, 23 May 2006 (UTC) |
||
:Thanks for your note and invite, but my concern is not limited to the recent discussion over the "government" of CJ. Rather, it's about the tendency of the group to focus its time organizing, then reorganizing, then reorganizing again instead of doing much of anything meaningful. Newsletters and elections are nice, and sometimes necessary, but I have yet to see anything truly productive come out of CJ since the the creation of a couple of templates (and even that was a minor thing). |
|||
:Now, don't get me wrong. I believe there could be potential for the project, I really do. And I believe those involved have good intentions, and appreciate that. But for the past few weeks, there's been repeated statements of "Hey, let's do a project"... yet nothing materializes. I waited to see if the editors who were selected to lead the group would take the proper initiative to create some meaningful goals, and when that didn't pan out, I [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Community_Justice&diff=54619822&oldid=54604714 proposed] both a means to help plan and a goal of my own (which had some intentional vagueness to it, intended to spark discussion). But the conversation once again turned towards organizational issues — or, rather, never turned away from them — which is a sign to me that this group isn't on the right track. |
|||
:To give an example from my personal life, I spent two years as a missionary in Venezuela when I was a Mormon. It was a tremendous place to work; at the time, it was one of the highest-baptizing areas for the LDS Church. Tons of people wanted to hear what the missionaries had to say, and we all had our hands full trying to figure out how to use our time best to reach as many potential members as possible. I learned quickly that the most effective missionaries were the ones who spent a short time planning, using techniques that they knew worked, and then focused the rest of their time on putting it to use instead of tweaking it endlessly to find the "perfect way" to reach the unchurched. There were flashier ways to present the gospel, more elaborate methods than those used by the ones who really grinded away, but they ended up using so much time to plan and organize that it lost its effectiveness. Of course, the techniques were still refined from time to time, but it was secondary to hard, dedicated work. |
|||
:That's the ethic which has carried successful groups here at Wikipedia, like [[WP:EA|Esperanza]]. I'm still not decided if Community Justice is wholly necessary as a unique group, or if it would do better merged into another one, but I know that the same ethic would make that clear, and serve the intentions of the editors who have joined CJ. In any case, until I see a shift from endless planning to actual work, I'm staying out — but my name is only crossed out, as opposed to being removed altogether, because I believe that it may eventually happen. <b>[[User:Tijuana Brass|<span style="color: #FF4500; font-family: Times New Roman; font-variant: small-caps;">Tijuana Brass</span>]]<sup>[[WP:EA|<span style="color: #228B22;">E@</span>]]</sup></b> 22:42, 23 May 2006 (UTC) |
Revision as of 22:42, 23 May 2006
Current discussion | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminshipHi... I've been watching you in action, and I think you'd make a fine administrator if you were interested. Your edit count is a bit light for what people seem to want nowadays but it's growing. I'd be happy to nominate you either now, or later, if you were interested. What do you think? I'll watch here for your reply. (you gotta fix that album cover thingie though!) ++Lar: t/c 15:02, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
So then... let's get the process started. It can go live "whenever"... I'm working on creating the RfA page as we speak. It can percolate for a month or more, there's nothing wrong with that. ++Lar: t/c 11:28, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
hey back from thewolfstarTijuana, Thanks. I understand what you mean about not posting the Kapersky Trust unblock request on Jimbo's page and I won't do it again. Kapersky has been told to send an email to his block guard and is obviously extermely uncomfortable about that. He is aking that his comments be seen by all and is obviously scared. He knows what living in a Communist regime is like. He came here looking for freedom and instead has found more of the same oppression here. You and I have talked before, remember? We've had some good talks, too. At least, I enjoyed them a lot. I believe there was a level of honesty achieved there thanks, initially, to your kindness and consideration when I was stressed up. Can you help me help this guy now, the way you helped me? He needs our help. Thanks Tijuanna. peace Maggiethewolfstar 09:15, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
Tijuana Brass, you there? thewolfstar 10:11, 1 May 2006 (UTC) Hi I'm newHello I'm new to wikipedia. I like your user page. The League of Crazy Men 16:25, 1 May 2006 (UTC) User page redesignThe initial redesign is now up. :) Please let me know if you want anything tweaked or changed (I couldn't manage to work in the light maroon :P). And as for the status icon, do you want the same images that Jude uses, or would you like something different? Thanks! Sango123 (e) 19:15, 1 May 2006 (UTC) Hey, I noticed you tagged this article for cleanup. Could you specify what problems you think need resolving, so that they can be addressed? Thanks! --Hetar 07:22, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
time to voteCongrats on TIME 100Congratulations Jimbo on being named one of TIME's 100 Most Influential People.user:Felisberto2May2006(UTC) heyYeah, I hear what you are saying. The only thing is this. I believe many people have it sort of the wrong way around.
It didn't take me long to learn the Wiki rules, or at least the ones that I have been accused of breaking so many times. I broke them most of the time, at least, because of the irony of the situation as I've explained above. Sometimes I broke the rules and yelled defensively and was rude. I've already aplogized to the people I was aware of. And they apologized to me. I have a hunch that the exact same situation happens to many newcomers. And you know what? I have seen for sure that this is what happens on a regular basis, not only to newcomers, but to anyone who comes up against the powers here. The cabal, the oligarchy whatever you want to call it. I hope you don't take offense at what I say to you, Tijuanna. I like you and would like to remain friendly with you. peace, Maggiethewolfstar 06:48, 3 May 2006 (UTC) discrimination at wikipedia???why you told me to look at portuguese(you didnt expell well on my talk page) wikipedia?.is the english version only reserved for americans our english folks?.i dont think so as wikipedia is under GFDL amean anyone can edit or read.are you mad because i sent the link of times to vote on jimbo?if yes i dont think this is the way to react with racism and discrimination.my apologies if you dont like jimbo wales.may peace be with youuser:felisberto3May2006(UTC)
okyou know?now i fell ashamed. user:Felisberto22:22,3 May2006
Changes madeI've completed all your requested changes (you have May the Force be with you.![]() Dear Tijuana Brass,
![]() Hello Tijuana Brass¡Épa!-E@ Of all the editors I see on Wikipedia, you deserve this award the most. You are a true bringer of peace, a voice of reason at Wikipedia, and a wonderful friendly person. Thanks for being a friend. Yours in peace and freedom Maggiethewolfstar 03:34, 4 May 2006 (UTC)
heyHey, Tijuanna, glad you like the award. You know I mean it sincerely. One thing people should know by now about me is I am honest. You are also honest, but seem to have acquired a gentler way of expressing stuff than I have. Uh, by the way, I didn't think you meant that kind of warm and tingly feeling..? hah. Anyway I know that due to your and Merecat's efforts that I would be Wikipedian history by now. At least..well maybe or maybe not..(be history). But I still appreciate some one who has the courage and integrity to go up against strong oppositon. I sure do know hard that can be. Did it my whole life and it's a hard road to trudge. Thanks for being who you are. peace Maggiethewolfstar 05:49, 4 May 2006 (UTC) Go Heels!I figured you were at Wake. I did my *h.* at UNC Chapel Hill and left the Southern Part of Heaven in 1999. Winston-Salem is a neat place. (Yeah, my profession is what you'd expect.) (Do you really count the anti-trinitarians as part of the flock? It seems to me that most of them would revel in being called heterodox by the established churches. In particular, the neo-Albigensians up there (yes, I mean in Durham) were delighted in calling all members of all churches "false Christian scum" and the like and hoping for nothing so much as another crusade of St. Louis against them, as they were also collecting guns.) Geogre 01:38, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
I like to think that I'm as liberal as the next person (unless I'm in Cuba), but I don't think that a spirit of intolerance and an ability to define one's religion are synonymous. It's possible, I think, to say, "We are this" without saying "We will eliminate people who believe that." What has bothered me about liberal theology (or so-called liberal theology) is that it has mistaken a fuzziness of identity for tolerance at the same time that it has advocated wording changes without any adaptation of the concepts behind the words. Liberation Theology is frankly Marxisant, and yet it is definite, clear, and exclusive, so social justice and freedom can go hand in hand with powerfully identified theological principles; on the other hand, a lot of contemporary theology at, say Candler School of Theology, is based on the idea that God is a social construct that can be dispensed with or reshaped according to community (and then individual) need, and this leads to no way to say what it is that you believe. Once you can't say what you believe in, you cannot say that anything is outside of it. (Grumble.) I think 'liberal' theology is often not liberal, not liberating, and not left wing. Geogre 09:25, 5 May 2006 (UTC)
Thank you!
Thanks for your message on possible speedy deletion of this article. Not asserting notability is grounds for deleting articles about people not products. Vanity is discouraged but not grounds for deletion. It is worthy of deletion and should be deleted in five days time when the Proposed Deletion process finishes. Subsequently, it can be speedy deleted as recreation of a previously deleted article. Regards Capitalistroadster 09:01, 7 May 2006 (UTC) HelloI'm back. Anonymous_anonymous Have a Nice Day 10:37, 7 May 2006 (UTC)
would you give me an idearecently i published an article about notable survivors of abuse but was rejected due to copyrights issues then i asked the owner of the article about an authorization she gave me the authorization to publish.now i dont know what to do? yet i receive an email of the owner saying i can publish the article with a condition of stating wich website the article came from and a disclamer.i think her conditions are met. if i have a problem like this in the future which person to contact? since im new here not having many friends i remenber to contact you first i thank you whatever the outcome.21:25Felisberto7May2006
Esperanza Newsletter, Issue #3
Criticism of MormonismI'll try to take a look, but won't be much use until tomorrow, as I'm trying to sort out the past few weeks of edits. Incidentally, your help could be used at Exmormonism. -Visorstuff 23:53, 8 May 2006 (UTC) Indefinite block proposal on WP:ANIHi, TB. I was wondering if you might wish to share an opinion here. Bishonen | talk 11:53, 9 May 2006 (UTC). Re: EsperanzaThanks for your comments on my talk page. As far as my involvement in Esperanza goes, I'm not sure. EWS23 had a lot of good things to say at WT:ESP, but it still seems to me in this addition that I was being asked to leave under the words, "I am getting pretty damn sick of all of you." Also, my leaving Esperanza was apparently the first in a wave of people leaving, and I can't help but wonder if I was the catalyst of some of that. I suppose I took Richardshusr's message too personally. Regardless, I'll give some consideration to returning, but that depends on whether I think I can add something to Esperanza. --Elkman - (talk) 19:34, 9 May 2006 (UTC) Talk:Exmormonism FlamesThanks TB! I was trying to find the right way to say that, I'm glad you did. - Reaverdrop 09:17, 10 May 2006 (UTC) TTDSorry I didn't get a chance today, but I had been terribly optimistic about how quickly I'd get done with my RL (for profit) tasks, so I hadn't time for anything more than a cursory glance. One way or another, I will be done with my end of term assessments tomorrow, while the sun is shining, so I'll take a look then and the LSD page. Geogre 03:18, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
Re:User_talk:Reaverdrop#ExmormonismLikewise. Glad you liked it. I look forward to collaborating too. - Reaverdrop 04:31, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
Carbines RFAall wikipedians i am nominating for admin very soon and i would like your support. i have been a member of the anti vandilsm unit and community justice and i have done alot in my time to help keep wikipedia going at the best it can be. Your support would be much appreciated Carbine (soon to be adimin) i have helped stop many vandels in my time of great service i am also a memeber os esperanza which i have worked with to create a better place carbine (soon to be admin) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship#carbines_RFA this is my nomination page check it out user carbine (RFA) You will never stop me you evil @#%$#%$& EpsiloonDid you use Wikipedia for a while before creating an account? I'm impressed by your understanding and editing ability. Also, would you be interested in joining the LDS Wikiproject? Could always use another editor. Tijuana Brass¡Épa!-E@ 09:03, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
Template FixNo - problem - we may want to consider making the Welcome to Wikipedia not be indicated by the == since that makes it so if you click the section edits it takes you to edit the template being transcluded. Instead use a <h2> type marking which will make it large and bold but not have the section edit capability. Trödel 12:42, 11 May 2006 (UTC) BarnstarTY, I'll display it proudly. Computerjoe's talk 15:13, 11 May 2006 (UTC) RfA noteThanks for letting me know about this. Unfortunately, I think Zpb52 has just dug himself a bit deeper into the hole. I can't support an admin nom, when I (as a non-admin) have to point out the correct action to him. Tyrenius 04:28, 13 May 2006 (UTC) Important NoteI would just like to point out that I hate you and I hope you die. Best regards, 60.227.174.236 06:52, 13 May 2006 (UTC) ThanksThank you, I hope I can improve myself and then re-apply. While I'm here, have a smile. ; ) Highway Rainbow Sneakers 08:18, 13 May 2006 (UTC) ![]() I don't think this is just a matter of different priorities, but "well roundedness" or editing "diversity" are not valid criteria for RfAs. I fail to see how either of these qualities could help separate good admins from bad ones. If you trust me with the tools, then I should have them. Why? Because an administrator is just a user that can be trusted with tools that originally everyone' had.
My history proves my good intentions and good practice in Wikipedia. If I suddenly can rollback, ban, etc., I'm not going to completely change and become "harmful". I'll still do everything I have been doing, but with increased ease. For the tools would be useful to me. There have been many times in the past where I couldn't move a page, or couldn't fix typos on the Main Page, but had to request them and wait.-- Rmrfstar 12:45, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
Hi![]() Anonymous_anonymous_Have a Nice Day has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Smile to others by adding {{subst:smile}} or {{subst:smile2}} to their talk pages. Happy editing! Community Justice Newsletter
|
|
Too bad
It's too bad that you changed your mind on my RfA. I mean, honest mistakes happen (especially with VandalProof and one of its known bugs), and I reverted all of those immediately. --Zpb52 06:15, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
Sukh's RFA - Thanks!
Thank you for your vote on my RfA. Unfortunately there was no consensus reached at 43 support, 18 oppose and 8 neutral. I've just found out that there is a feature in "my preferences" that forces me to use edit summaries. I've now got it enabled :) Thanks again. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 15:44, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
Re: Renovation
No problem, Tijuana; your page was pleasure to redesign. :) I like the improvements you've made to it as well! Enjoy your wikihiatus, and I'll be here to answer any questions you may have. Take care, Sango123 (e) 21:55, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
*poke*
Hey there. I don't really have any particular reason for bothering you, just wanted to check up on my old friends. >_< Master of Puppets That's hot. 01:11, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
- I'm fine, thanks. Coming back for a while to do some editing while I wait to start a new job, and finally getting around to accepting a month old RfA nom. Thanks for the note, let me know how you are and if there's any article help you need from me... always glad to peer review, cleanup, or whatever. Tijuana Brass¡Épa!-E@ 01:14, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
- Awesome, and I know the new job will go well for you! I mysefl am fine... just lounging around helping out with RfA and such. Cheers, Master of Puppets That's hot. 01:15, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
Your RfA
I've added two questions to your RfA. When you have a minute, I'd appreciate if you would take a look. Thanks. JoshuaZ 02:39, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
- Will do, thanks for the notice. Tijuana Brass¡Épa!-E@ 02:42, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments on my page. I have only had a chance to look at about half a dozen of your pages so far. I suspect I'll be able to change my vote when I find the time to look at more. Good luck with your vote! Ted 05:05, 22 May 2006 (UTC)
- Are you sure about your vote here? I think the authors rather bold intention is to actually create a list of characters who die in films, not actors who accidentally get killed on set. Nice one, Deizio talk 01:53, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
- You're right, thanks for the correction. Tijuana Brass¡Épa!-E@ 01:54, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
Criticism of Mormonism Article
Brass, I know you were active on this article in the past; however, I would ask you to take a look again. There is a need for nonMormons to assist in making sure that we Mormons are meeting NPOV standards and to further facilitate some of nonmormon editors.
Also, I think I have come to the point where I think it impossible to keep this article substantially different from Mormonism and Christianity or what is covered in Anti-Mormonism. I find that it is more of a redundant article. I have asked whether it should be deleted; I know we talked about that in the past. I can't remember where you were on the vote. Regardless, if you have some time, please visit the article again. Thanks. (btw, I am actually trying to not tweak any noses...ok at least today I am not.) Storm Rider (talk) 07:10, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
- Will be glad to return to the discussion within a day or so. We'll see if I get accused of being a closet Mormon again as I was at Anti-Mormonism. I also tend to agree with you on the duplicated efforts in the Criticism article; I proposed a merge around a month ago, but didn't find much support for it and subsequently withdrew the proposal.
- And you have yet to tweak my nose. Given that I have a head cold at the moment, you probably wouldn't want to, either. Tijuana BrassE@ 07:20, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
Community Justice
It looks like all upheaval is over if u wish to rejoin Cicero Dog 19:44, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for your note and invite, but my concern is not limited to the recent discussion over the "government" of CJ. Rather, it's about the tendency of the group to focus its time organizing, then reorganizing, then reorganizing again instead of doing much of anything meaningful. Newsletters and elections are nice, and sometimes necessary, but I have yet to see anything truly productive come out of CJ since the the creation of a couple of templates (and even that was a minor thing).
- Now, don't get me wrong. I believe there could be potential for the project, I really do. And I believe those involved have good intentions, and appreciate that. But for the past few weeks, there's been repeated statements of "Hey, let's do a project"... yet nothing materializes. I waited to see if the editors who were selected to lead the group would take the proper initiative to create some meaningful goals, and when that didn't pan out, I proposed both a means to help plan and a goal of my own (which had some intentional vagueness to it, intended to spark discussion). But the conversation once again turned towards organizational issues — or, rather, never turned away from them — which is a sign to me that this group isn't on the right track.
- To give an example from my personal life, I spent two years as a missionary in Venezuela when I was a Mormon. It was a tremendous place to work; at the time, it was one of the highest-baptizing areas for the LDS Church. Tons of people wanted to hear what the missionaries had to say, and we all had our hands full trying to figure out how to use our time best to reach as many potential members as possible. I learned quickly that the most effective missionaries were the ones who spent a short time planning, using techniques that they knew worked, and then focused the rest of their time on putting it to use instead of tweaking it endlessly to find the "perfect way" to reach the unchurched. There were flashier ways to present the gospel, more elaborate methods than those used by the ones who really grinded away, but they ended up using so much time to plan and organize that it lost its effectiveness. Of course, the techniques were still refined from time to time, but it was secondary to hard, dedicated work.
- That's the ethic which has carried successful groups here at Wikipedia, like Esperanza. I'm still not decided if Community Justice is wholly necessary as a unique group, or if it would do better merged into another one, but I know that the same ethic would make that clear, and serve the intentions of the editors who have joined CJ. In any case, until I see a shift from endless planning to actual work, I'm staying out — but my name is only crossed out, as opposed to being removed altogether, because I believe that it may eventually happen. Tijuana BrassE@ 22:42, 23 May 2006 (UTC)