User talk:Athaenara

Archives: 0 1 2 3 4 5               Signature Art Gallery                           WikiComedy  

Civilisation is High Maintenance. 

Monday  15 July 2024  06:08 UTC

VANDALISM THREAT

Guarded __ __ __ __ __

Words of Wisdom

  • Defend Each Other • Quotes from Wiser Editors • Soapbox • Wikiguides & useful shortcuts •

Why we are here

This project is here to  build an encyclopedia.  Please limit your actions here to things that help that goal.     • A Man In Black (talk · contribs)   21:46, March 1 2007 (UTC)

You know it ain't easy

Oh, good grief, it took me 5 months to find the undo button on edits, you expect me to see the obvious alert you posted right above your message?     • KP Botany (talk · contribs)   20:01, March 18 2007 (UTC)

Protect the encyclopedia

The volume of corporate vanity/vandalism which is showing up on Wikipedia is overwhelming.

If we are to  remain true to our encyclopedic mission,  this kind of nonsense cannot be tolerated. We are losing the battle for encyclopedic content in favor of people intent on hijacking Wikipedia for their own memes. This scourge is a serious waste of time and energy.

I am issuing a call to arms to the community to act in a much more draconian fashion in response to corporate self-editing and vanity page creation. This is simply out of hand, and we need your help.     • BradPatrick (talk · contribs)   09:53, September 29 2006 (UTC)

Assume no clue

Has anyone else noticed how spammers and other conflict of interest editors think the guidelines are for the other guy and what they are doing is "useful" and shouldn't be questioned? And they are completely sincere about that.

It's entirely plausible that an editor can plow blithely on, unaware of guidelines. Perhaps we need a corollary to Assume good faith called Assume No Clue.     • JonHarder (talk · contribs)   03:27, January 19 2007 (UTC)

Wonkish & Arbish

We have dialogues here in two languages. Let's for the purposes of discussion call them Wonkish and Arbish.

In Wonkish, discretion stands for certain vague and disreputable areas of policy where what should happen is not yet properly regulated.

In Arbish, you have always to look behind applications of policy to see intention and the application to  the mission of writing an encyclopedia.

In other words, discretion in Arbish is read as saying that proactive admins are the main lines of defence of the project. It is much better to have them out there doing their best, taking the mop and bucket away from a few, than to do up the constraints ever tighter to preempt misuse of admin powers.     • Charles Matthews (talk · contribs)   03:23, October 1 2006 (UTC)

Signature talk

→ See also: Signature talk section in Archive 1.

Apropos of nothing

Hi A, just wanted to say your curated signature collection inspired me to try being creative with my own. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 21:15, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Wonderful fish, love the bubbles! — Athaenara 09:35, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 11:06, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Miscellaneous

→ See also: Miscellaneous section in Archive 1.

You're a genius?

I hope this doesn't offend you, but you didn't seem like a genius. And you don't edit anything particularly brilliant, but rather, your edits seem to be just simple fixes here and there. How about completing the table of logic symbols? That's something I actually wrote on the article's talk page that I was going to do, but never did. Or how about "dumbing down," the articles on advanced mathematics and physics, so that, for example, the average reader can understand what the hell this means? At least maybe you can help me correct the article on Classical Liberalism. Robocracy 07:09, 17 November 2006 (UTC) aka HP_Owner in the IRC

No, I really cannot imagine why Mensa let me in. Given your low estimation of my intelligence, you won't be disappointed that I decline your offer of an assortment of ambitions in which you've lost interest. — Athaenara 14:00, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Wow

I don't think I've come across anyone on wiki that works as hard as you. You rock. Keep up the good work! I wish I could work the way you do, I'm serious. I've had a bad two days, suffered some personal attacks and stuff, and I've been thinking about quitting Wiki. I'm not going to do it. Looking at your edits was pretty inspiring. I've resolved not to let certain people get me down, and get back to fighting vandalism, something I'm pretty good at. Thanx for renewing my inspiration in Wiki.

Sue Rangell 21:11, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, thank you, it is very kind of you to say so, and I'm glad you're back on the job. — Athaenara 09:09, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

Biographies of living persons

Biographies of living persons policy & Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard

See also:

• Special:Recentchangeslinked/Category:Living people
• Unreferenced biographies of living people
• Category:BLP Check

Duggar family

→ (In re: Jim Bob Duggar article)

I agree. Way back I changed it to the Duggar Family, and the redirect was reverted within a few days. I never fought it, but I still think that should be the case. --Kickstart70-T-C 03:27, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

One editor seems to think I've been trying to do that. I have not, but you may have the right idea. There is far more news media exposure and notability for the family than for Mr. Duggar alone. Please see Talk:Jim Bob Duggar#Discuss encyclopedic edits. — Athaenara 08:04, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Postscript: I checked contribs: that user has been using TW for only a few days (a new toy) but this article issue needs discussion, not disruptive editing. — Athaenara 08:30, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

BLP Noticeboard Archiving

→ (In re sections added to BLP/N Archive 18)

Hi! In this edit you archived a discussion that had been active just five hours before. It's not a big deal, so don't bother moving it back, but now that I'm back from work I would have continued the discussion. Perhaps you could give things a couple of days in the future? Thanks, William Pietri 03:15, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Normally I don't archive any sections which have been active in the past week or more, but all three of these had been resolved (one had been redirected to another article, another had referenced information properly included, the third had been deleted).

If you tell me which discussion you want returned to the active noticeboard, I can easily do so. — Athaenara 03:28, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry about it. I just thought you'd want to know. Thanks, William Pietri 02:18, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Third opinions

Third opinion project

Loudness war

→ (In re: Talk:Loudness war#Popular Examples Refs)

I just provided a third opinion there, but it seemed you had picked it up while I was writing. Well, two third opinions can never hurt. --User:Krator (t c) 08:24, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Oy, isn't that the way it goes. I'll go ahead and post, and if it turns out my view isn't useful it can be reverted or ignored or laughed at or whatever. — Athaenara 08:28, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

;) --User:Krator (t c) 08:47, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Actually, do you think you could recheck what's going on at that page? It seems your comments were either misinterpreted by myself or User:Jrod2 because you never made a judgement. Thanks a lot, I appreciate it. Illuminatedwax 12:47, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

OK, I'll have a look later this morning tomorrow. — Athaenara 16:45, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

NM, it's all worked out! Illuminatedwax 04:47, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm glad to hear that. — Athaenara 04:49, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

I didn't notice my inadvertent pun until now ;-D   Athaenara 03:41, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

House swapping

→ (In re: Talk:House swapping)

I saw you removed it saying there was no indication of where discussion (if any) was. Did you look at the article history and compare diffs? I did, just to see if I might be able to determine what the dispute even was about and found a conversation at the bottom of the article using hidden comment tags. It seemed to be a fight over external links. I responded on the talk page. Just thought you might be interested in where I found it. ~ ONUnicorn^{(Talk|Contribs)}problem solving 18:13, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

I looked at 3O history, user contribs, talk page, article history and last two diffs. At that point, I lost patience, so I missed out on the secret messages! I'll go take a look to see what you gave them, thanks for the note. — Athaenara 18:53, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Above & beyond the call of duty, ONUnicorn, and a very nice job. Athaenara 22:49, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Conflicts of interest

Conflict of interest guideline & Conflict of interest/Noticeboard

See also:

• WT:BP: Blocks for COI-only accounts?
• WP:AN: Expand indef blocking for COI-only accounts?

Like minds

→ (In re: Raritan Computer section on COI/N)

I see you have set decreasing limits on Raritan too. I deleted some of the fluff, and then asked Seraphimblade to help out and he deleted a bit more. I just shook my head when all they wanted to do was decide which unsourced version to revert to. I figure that eventually when they see the article disappearing, they'll wake up. If I actually had time, I'd do some quick research and find some sources for them. Its an old enough company, something has to exist on them, somewhere. :) peace in God. Lsi john 20:16, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, Wikipedia really is an encyclopedia, not free content hosting for whatever commercial interests come down the pike. — Athaenara 20:26, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Motivating edits

Your modus operandi over at subtlety hasn't been ideal. If you really want to insist on restoring old version which was reworked for a good reason, then you should try a bit harder to actually motivate reverts. It's especially odd when you insist so adamantly on keeping content that was removed by its original author.

All the bureaucracy thrown into the discussion doesn't really strengthen arguments, btw. You should try to actually explain your views on the topic instead of just repeating your demands to keep certain material.

Peter ^Isotalo 12:29, 31 May 2007 (UTC)