User talk:Athaenara: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 20:51, 1 July 2007

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

Civilisation is High Maintenance.

Thursday

14 November 2024

19:47 UTC

VANDALISM THREAT

Moderate

__

Words of Wisdom

• A few opinions • Defend each other • Soapbox • Wikiguides • Wiser Editors •

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)[reply]

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

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

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[reply]

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)[reply]

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^{[citation needed]} 21:11, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

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)[reply]

Biographies of living persons

BLP/N - the Wikipedia Biographies of living persons Noticeboard

See also:

Closing

On the BLPN board, should I stop using the {{Resolved}} template in favor of {{subst:Blpt}}/{{subst:Blpb}} or does my use of the {{Resolved}} template help you use {{subst:Blpt}}/{{subst:Blpb}}? -- Jreferee ^(Talk) 05:42, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The discussions on BLP/N and COI/N are not often as simple and straightforward as, for example, they frequently are on AN/3RR.

In any case, I read through the discussions themselves to see whether or not they have actually been resolved. There are times (e.g. here and here) when closing is disputed.

I find the {{resolved}} template a sometimes misleading distraction. When it is used at all, it's more to the point at the end of a section than at the top. — Athaenara 18:08, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I think the resolve tag is a good way to let the person who posted the request know that at least one person thinks the matter is resolved. I usually post the resolve tag if it appears to me from the discussions themselves that the matter is resolved as far as the BLPN board is concerned. Before posting the tag, I may give the article a read and check the article history. If the discussion isn't clear on whether the matter is resolved, I may revise the article and/or add more to the discussion. I think posting the resolved template at the end of a section is a good idea since if the person disagrees, they can continue the discussion below the tag.

Oh, I mentioned your signature gallery to Tλε Rαnδom Eδιτor (ταlκ), who enjoys creating signatures (he did mine). He enjoyed your collection. -- Jreferee ^(Talk) 23:39, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

→ (In re: response to heads-up elsewhere.)

I hope he will sign the Gallery Guest Book. — Athaenara 00:11, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Postscript: Resolved tags are pretty toys. I find them unsuitable for BLP/ and COI/N. — Athaenara 08:23, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're sort of begging us to leave these all over your talk page (huge, wicked grin!). Seriously, the resolved tag is a way to say "I motion that we close this thread." If somebody else agrees, they can archive it. If somebody disagrees, they can pull the tag. These are my own feelings, of course, but if they bother you, I won't use them anymore on the boards you frequent.

Resolved

– Jehochman ^Talk 05:06, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know you can sign inside those templates? (Don't let me tempt you.) — Athaenara 05:16, 24 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Third opinions

WP:3O - the Wikipedia Third opinion Project

MedCab

Hi, Athaenara! I'm mediating a MedCab case at Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-06-14 H. Although your participation is not compulsory for the mediation to go forward, it would be really helpful if you'd provide a statement, because you've been noted as involved. I saw the "third-opinion" tag on your userpage, and that's what I'm trying to get at right now. Thank you!, Cool Blue^{talk to me} 01:39, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I also would like it if you gave your account there. Specifically any comment on my behavior would be very helpful to me. ^(H) 02:40, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(1.) I've found H very reasonable, with a good understanding of policies and guidelines. Isotalo, on the other hand, has been disruptive (see page histories on Subtlety and Entremet), deliberately and repeatedly discourteous to other editors (see posts on Talk:Subtlety - even blanked active discussion there - and posts to User talk:H), and has flung the epithet "bureaucratic" at other users' policy concerns; he seems to see no distinction between basic policies and bureaucracy. — Athaenara 06:31, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(2.) Pursuant to understanding Isotalo's position, I began reading the diffs he provided. I'm baffled by his unawareness of his own habitual and even aggressive discourtesy, which violates both the spirit and the letter of No personal attacks and Civility policies, and by his apparent expectation that his distortions and deliberate defiance of other encyclopedic policies will be accepted as substitutes for the real thing. Isotalo should be called on that carpet he's trying to roll out for H. — Athaenara 20:50, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Postscript: Feel free to quote what I have posted here as well as what I have posted on Talk:Subtlety and on Talk:Entremet. — Athaenara 20:54, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Question for mediator Cool Blue:

In which section on the case page should my comments be posted? — Athaenara 22:50, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just create a subsection called "Discussion" and post your comments. Cool Blue^{talk to me} 19:57, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You asked me to provide a statement. I've provided two, which you're welcome to copy to the project page where you see fit. — Athaenara 20:03, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

→ To H: This applies to you as well. If you want my statements there, they're yours to copy to the project page. — Athaenara 20:11, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Conflicts of interest

COI/N - the Wikipedia Conflict of interest Noticeboard

See also:

Peter Nehr

Thanks for reverting the tags on this article. It really needs a clean-up, but I may be too biased to do a good job myself. Bearian 17:27, 15 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:COIN needs more administrators

If I nominate you, will you accept? Jehochman ^Talk 22:50, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

MER-C suggested this in April: see discussion in User talk:Athaenara/Archive 1#Adminship? section. I don't mind a bit when administrators find me reliable and respect what I say, but I'm not at all sure I want to be one myself. — Athaenara 22:58, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, but you could always accept the nomination and just speak your heart. There's no need to change your agenda just to please some narrow minded people. I completely understand your position if you don't want to do this. We do need more admins on COIN, and you are certainly trusted well enough to have access to the tools for use when needed. Jehochman ^Talk 23:42, 16 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hi, I'm pretty new to COIN. I notice you closed some entries, including Overton Loyd. Is this something that any editor can do? If so, do you think I would have been justified in closing that one myself (since another editor had already reported that the situation was resolved?) And what exactly is the process for doing so? Thanks for any tips… -Pete 05:15, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I'm on my way out the door, but the first step is to read the instructions at the top of the Conflict of interest/Noticeboard page. — Athaenara 05:33, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I had looked through and missed that bit about closing. I think I understand it, but may be back with questions if/when I find one worthy of closing…appreciate the reply! -Pete 06:22, 21 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

COI/N archiving so far

A discussion which has concluded may be boxed with top {{coit}} and bottom {{coib}} markup:

==Section heading==

* {{article | articlename }}

* {{userlinks | username }}

Report and subsequent comments.

The article and result fields are filled in for each section. An example from COI/N Archive 14:

==[[Kossar's Bialys]]==

( Report and subsequent comments. )

"Resolved" "Inactive" and "Article deleted" are typical but not universal results. The templates are {{subst}}ed (see template substitution) and will expand after a page save.

The {{coit}} and {{coib}} markup may be added either before or after a section is lifted and transplanted as a single block of text from the noticeboard to the archive selected from the COI/N archive toc.

But it could be changed

Volunteers?

My mouse will no longer do massive copying and pasting. Fortunately, there are other editors with tougher ones. Maybe you're one of them? — Athaenara 22:26, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Most excellent, thank you for the detailed instructions! I will try to jump into these on occasion. I am a bit wary of potentially-contentious debates these days though - I've found they can reduce my wikifun a bit. But I'm definitely up for the challenge, just might be a little slow to take it on. My first COI/N experience was very positive, with an editor I chastised going out of his way to thank me for my input…so I'm definitely interested in sticking with it. Thanks! -Pete 22:35, 29 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Great, I'm very glad you're interested. I don't expect much if any disagreement about changes because relatively few editors take on tasks such as noticeboard archiving. It comes down to a willingness to do the work. Note: when I first happened upon BLP/N in February, more than 140 of its 185 sections needed to be archived and had not been. — Athaenara 01:39, 30 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Slavery-related Articles & External Links

Athaenara -- I shall pass on any further immediate address to deleted links in the slavery-related articles. The past several days have been interesting but diversionary, and attention needs to be paid elsewhere. Late this month I shall return to this matter via talk pages on the individual articles. When we get around to that, I shall notify you and look forward to working with you on review of these links. Cheers, --Jlockard 20:51, 1 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 256: / Line 256: @@
 :: Great, I'm very glad you're interested.  I don't expect much if any disagreement about changes because relatively few editors take on tasks such as noticeboard archiving.  It comes down to a willingness to do the work.  Note: when I first happened upon [[Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard|BLP/N]] in February, more than 140 of its [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard&oldid=111301733 185 sections] needed to be archived and had not been.  — [[User:Athaenara|Athaenara]] 01:39, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
+===Slavery-related Articles & External Links===
+Athaenara -- I shall pass on any further immediate address to deleted links in the slavery-related articles.  The past several days have been interesting but diversionary, and attention needs to be paid elsewhere.  Late this month I shall return to this matter via talk pages on the individual articles.  When we get around to that, I shall notify you and look forward to working with you on review of these links.  Cheers, --[[User:Jlockard|Jlockard]] 20:51, 1 July 2007 (UTC)