User talk:AlexiusHoratius: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 21:16, 20 April 2009

Welcome to my talk page. Please adhere to the talk page guidelines and particularly the following:

Please post your new topic at the bottom of this page.
Please sign and date your entry by inserting "~~~~" at the end.
Please specify a descriptive "Subject/headline" for a new topic and separate subtopics by ===heading=== lines, if needed.
Please indent your posts with one more ":" than what you are replying to, i.e. begin with ":" if replying to an existing topic and "::" if replying to a reply.

I will generally respond here to comments that are posted here, rather than replying via your Talk page (or the article Talk page, if you are writing to me here about an article), so you may want to watch this page until you are responded to, or specifically let me know where you'd prefer the reply.

⇒ Start a new Talk topic.

Archives

Archive 1 (October 2006 - July 2008)

Archive 2 (August 2008 - February 2009)

Iowa Barnstar

		The Iowa Barnstar
		For your protection of the main Iowa article, I hereby award you the Iowa Barnstar. Bill Whittaker (talk) 15:32, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! AlexiusHoratius 15:51, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RfA followup

Hello AlexiusHoratius! I'm sorry that we haven't spoken in so long, turns out that RL has been quite demanding these past few months. However, I wanted to ask you if you were still interested in running the RfA gauntlet; I've been digging through your contribs and writing up a potential nomination statement. If you'd like, I could also ask User:Qaddosh, who wanted to nominate you back in May, if he'd be interested in a co-nomination. Hope to hear back from you! GlassCobra 16:06, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it looks like Qaddosh isn't active much anymore. If you'd like another user to do a co-nom though, let me know and I'll go ahead and ask them. GlassCobra 16:10, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again - yeah, I'm still open to running, let me know if you have any questions on the nom or if not, I guess just let me know when you've finished writing it and I'll transclude the RfA the next day or so. No rush, whatever suits your schedule. I'll let Qaddosh know about it in case he sees it and wants to put a co-nom in pre-transclusion, but like you said, it doesn't look like he's hugely active (as in every day); if we don't hear from him then I suppose one nom is plenty. Thanks, btw, for offering to do this, I really do appreciate it - I understand about the RL stuff - after we spoke last summer, I didn't really want to pester you with a bunch of "Where's my nom?!?" messages, and I had seen that you were studying in Greece...I figured if you wanted to nom, great, if not, thats OK too. Again, let me know if you have any questions or if you've finished the nom. AlexiusHoratius 21:45, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What's the quickest way to contact you (AIM, IRC, etc)? I've got a few final questions I'd like to ask you before we get the ball officially rolling. GlassCobra 22:11, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've actually never used IRC, I guess my talk page would probably work best for me, I've also enabled email if you would rather do that, although I would prefer to keep things on-wiki for transparency and ease of communication and so on. AlexiusHoratius 22:18, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, just shot you an email. :) GlassCobra 22:21, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Replied. AlexiusHoratius 23:03, 30 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GlassCobra would like to nominate you to become an administrator. Please visit Wikipedia:Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact GlassCobra to accept or decline the nomination. A page has been created for your nomination at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/AlexiusHoratius . If you accept the nomination, you must state and sign your acceptance. You may also choose to make a statement and/or answer the optional questions to supplement the information your nominator has given. Once you are satisfied with the page, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so.

Cool - I'll probably transclude it in the early afternoon tomorrow. AlexiusHoratius 00:17, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, great! Make sure to fix the timestamp once you've transcluded it, instructions are at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/nominate#What to do if you are nominated by someone else. Good luck! GlassCobra 01:33, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

RE: One last thing

Hey there, I replied on my talk and made a couple tweaks to the nom statement. That look okay? GlassCobra 16:03, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looks great now, I left a fuller response on your talk. AlexiusHoratius 16:13, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sioux Quartzite

Hi - I saw you just changed Sioux Quartzite to "mid" for its cultural importance in Eastern SD. I started the article with the geology only - would you mind helping me, or pointing to references, for its cultural importance? Thanks, Awickert (talk) 04:05, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I actually have a book that I've been using to slowly expand History of South Dakota with (the one by Schell) that I'm sure discusses the stone in various places, I'd be happy to add a paragraph or so over the weekend, if you like. The book is SD-specific, but should help nonethess, I'm thinking. I haven't read page-to-page that far in it yet, but I seem to remember it discussing various quarrying methods, immigrant workers, etc. when I was first paging through it. AlexiusHoratius 04:16, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

All I know is that the natives carved ceremonial pipes from certain layers, and that much of Sioux Falls was built from it. I think the stone is most significant in South Dakota - but I'll check some info on Pipestone National Monument in MN as well. The article as it is right now was a one-day pet project by me, so I'd love if you'd like to expand. Awickert (talk) 04:27, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm proposing a re-organization scheme on the talk page. Feel free to add material whenever you want, and I'll pitch in. Awickert (talk) 04:39, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good! AlexiusHoratius 04:45, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) Hmmm... I'm not seeing it in the book initially, but it's got to be in there somewhere... You're right about the historical significance of it to SF. It was a fairly major early industry in the city- a bit like milling's importance to Minneapolis, maybe not quite that important, but important - in fact, there is still a large quarry in operation in the city right beside I-29. Most of the larger public buildings were built using the stone, courthouses and early mansions and so on. This probably isn't sourced, just my OR, but it is sort of used in a "symbolic" way now in the city, like with sculptures and monument pedestals. The pink color is pretty distinctive, I suppose, so it's kind of cool in that way. I also saw/read somewhere, and again, this is my OR unless I can find a source, that the rock that was quarried was used as a paving stone in many larger cities to the east, like St. Louis or Chicago. Again, I'll look at this over the weekend and try to do a sourced expansion, if I'm able. AlexiusHoratius 04:44, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK - thanks - sorry about the edit conflict. I'll look around too, for what I've been thinking of and for what you say, and list any good sources I find on the article's talk page. I'll start the section if I find enough info, or I'll start a smaller section (i.e., spiritual importance to Native Americans) that you can feel free to incorporate as a subsection to a larger "Uses/Importance to humans" section. Awickert (talk) 04:49, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good. (Don't worry about the e/c by the way, I actually think that may have been a first for my talk page!) AlexiusHoratius 04:58, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your RfA

Dear AlexiusHoratius,

I have closed your recent RfA as successful per the consensus of the community. Congratulations, you are now a sysop! Please make sure you're aware of the Administrators' how-to guide and are aware of the items on the Administrators' reading list. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to let me know. Best of luck in your new position! —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 21:10, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats! :D --Dylan (chat, work, ping, sign) 21:51, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wield it with pride, Alexius. **Dylan** (chat, work, ping, sign) 21:51, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! 'Twas actually a good experience, overall, even though I'm glad it's over... Just like to say thanks to everyone who participated- especially GlassCobra, my nominator. It was a bit surreal seeing all of those people showing up and reading the comments... Thanks again! AlexiusHoratius 22:44, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats!!!America69 (talk) 00:58, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! (and thanks for your support, BTW!) AlexiusHoratius 01:01, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

George Laraque

Dear Alexius Horatius,

I believe you edited out some well-sourced and referenced history of the rivalry between the boston bruins (specifically milan lucic) and george laraque on the wikipedia "geiorge laraque" page.

I noticed one of my footnotes remains but the message has been changed. Sadly, it does not tell the complete story. The question becomes, if the Boston Bruins "outplayed" the Canadiens in the first round of the playoffs in 2007-8, how would they have lost? Thus I think that that is not a neutral stance.

Second, why the fuss about all the referenced items. I even took one from the Boston Globe as well as the Winnipeg Sun! Is there a way we can cover this rivalry in a way that you will think is fair, or do I have to report your entry to Wikipedia for lack of neutrality?

Please respond so we can work this out.

Thanks, dr —Preceding unsigned comment added by Deranged Ranger (talk • contribs) 06:05, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I actually never removed or added any content to the article itself, I only semi-protected the article as a request had been made at WP:Requests for page protection; it looked as though the article was receiving a large amount of vandalism in addition to some of the content disputes that you're speaking of. I see that you've started a thread on the subject at the article's talk page, which was the right thing to do in this situation. I would suggest continuing the discussion either there or on the talk pages of some of the editors who had been reverting your additions. (I don't personally have an opinion on the validity of the various argument being made, as I don't really know that much about the subject of the article.) AlexiusHoratius 14:40, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Removing my posts?

I have professionally edited and added several times a segment for Janeane Garofalo, and have had it removed. I would like to inquire on it being protected. This is what I have added:

The argument that some have stated about this interview in 2009 dealt with her previous comments given on Keith Olberman in August 2003 where she stated, "I am in favor of any citizen talking" and "...the most appropriate response is dissent which is the most patriotic thing you can do and the First Amendment guarantees everyone's right to speak out."[14]

I posted a youtube link to the video showing this, and edited it for nonbias. I posted it in the appropriate area as well. Thanks in advance for your response and aid towards this matter :)