User talk:Swarm

This user replies where s/he likes, and is inconsistent in that respect.

Barnstar

		The Newyorkbrad Dispute Resolution Barnstar
		I agree that you deserve it, as you resolve many WQA disputes perfectly! Jasper Deng (talk) 01:10, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Awesome, thanks a lot for the barnstar! I try to be thorough and helpful and work against the perception that WQA is a worthless dramafest. I appreciate this. Swarm ^X 07:58, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

You're doing an excellent job and you're very welcome.Jasper Deng (talk) 01:24, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

RfA reform

See this. Would you eventually be interested in being part of the team? It would need a high degree of availability.Kudpung (talk) 01:05, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

See also User:Kudpung/RfA reform. You may not agree with it all - that's what it's for: to get comment, but hopefully at task force level. --Kudpung (talk) 12:01, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

WQA incident

Hi Swarm. I didn't know this at the time, but I happened to learn today that about six months ago you became User:GoetheFromm's adoptive parent. I wonder if that couldn't be considered a possible conflict of interests in relation to your handling of GoetheFromm's WQA alert against me.[1] You are being asked this as a genuine question for its own sake, not as a challenge of your competence as an Admin or an implication of any wrongdoing on your part. Thanks.—Biosketch (talk) 17:39, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

collapsed for navigational purposes

Hey, Biosketch. I hope you can accept my assurance that I'm not 'on' GoetheFromm's side necessarily, and I would have handled the situation the exact same way had it been anyone else. As for it being a COI, I don't know...adoption is a really loose, flexible association. I've really only communicated with them once since adopting them, and that was back in December. However, it's a legitimate concern, so I'll refrain from involving myself in any future disputes between you two. I hope that's a satisfactory solution. Regards, Swarm X 20:23, 29 March 2011 (UTC) Swarm, please accept my apologies on behalf of Biosketch's behavior. My opinion of this matter is that he is attempting to approach his perceived grievances in as many ways possible (i.e., three separate noticeboards, not including the one on the issue of his civility). Your past help has been very useful and I look forward to corresponding/working with you whenever appropriate. Again, really sorry about this. Sometimes things escalate... Take care, GoetheFromm (talk) 22:18, 29 March 2011 (UTC) User:GoetheFromm, you are of course free to contribute to any discussion at Wikipedia. I would kindly ask, however, that you respect the personal nature of my correspondence with User:Swarm and allow our communication to proceed uninterrupted. And please in the future do not make apologies to other users on my behalf without my having authorized it. Swarm, I appreciate your offer to refrain from involving yourself in any future disputes between GoetheFromme and myself. Understand that I have nothing against you as a contributor to Wikipedia in general, as I've observed your input in many areas to be admirably intelligent and constructive. It is only in your capacity as an Admin, and only in this particular case, given its circumstances, that certain questions are raised. I am also glad that you acknowledge the legitimacy of my concern. Even the most esteemed judges, after all, will excuse themselves from a trial if they had prior contact with an involved party. It seems to me that the proper course of action at this point, as a natural extension of our understanding, would be to erase the warning issued against me on my Talk page. These are my personal cogitations, submitted in the best of faith for your consideration.—Biosketch (talk) 23:48, 29 March 2011 (UTC) You're right. Glad we agree. That message wasn't some type of serious warning or anything, it's more like a simple reminder (though we do have more serious warnings) and you're free to remove it if you feel strongly about that. Let me just urge both of you to try to keep a cool head in your future dealings. Regards, Swarm X 00:06, 30 March 2011 (UTC) Thanks Swarm for your contributions on this matter relating to myself and Biosketch. I gotta admit that I'm a little surprised at manner in which you've retracted the legitimacy of your actions . But I do understand what it is that you are addressing. As for Biosketch's comment about the "personal nature" of his correspondence...if there a single mention of me, directly or indirectly, then that means that I am involved and privy to whatever is being said and I will each and every time address what is necessary. My apologies about your behavior, Biosketch, is something that I should clarify. I wasn't apologizing in lieu of you, but rather my apologies were towards behaviors that I am sorry are occurring. GoetheFromm (talk) 08:43, 30 March 2011 (UTC) I don't necessarily retract the legitimacy of my actions, I just feel that if a user thinks my involvement in something is not appropriate, it's most reasonable not to become involved. I think I could give unbiased dispute resolution, but how helpful can I possibly be when one of the parties feels I have a conflict of interest? On another note, how are you doing? You haven't needed any assistance from me in over four months, have accumulated nearly 700 edits and have already been awarded a barnstar. Seems like pretty good progress to me. Swarm X 11:30, 30 March 2011 (UTC) @Swarm, while this may seem a trivial request, I would be sincerely grateful if you would be the one to edit my Talk page and remove the warning, and we can all at last move on and put the whole affair behind us.—Biosketch (talk) 13:00, 30 March 2011 (UTC) Thanks Swarm, again I want to say I appreciate your help and appreciate your clarification on your position and rationale on the matter. LOL, I was just thinking when I was on your talk page that you are a "classic" admin (which is a compliment) in that you have a good way of diffusing and containing controversy and contention. I've been doing well on wikipedia, thank you, with exception of getting mired with an editor from time-to-time. Yeah, I'm proud of the quantity and quality of my edits (and my barnstar). I try to do a little bit everyday, that's my motto. As for help, thanks for asking, really. I'd like to eventually learn the process of adding and removing photos to article. Not quite sure how that works? Is there a cache or storage in which pictures are stored and then retrieved to add on an article? i really have no idea. There are articles that I have been observing that are simply atrocious and are similar to a Frankenstein monster where the individual writing styles, conflicting facts, verbose and fallacious description can be likened to the separate body parts acquired from different corpses to create the monster. i've been tempted to be bold and address the larger issues of those article but I haven't out of fear of offending. Thus, I've made moderate grammatical and style changes and fixed egregious issues. Still, the articles that I am thinking about need a entire rewrite (and I'm one of the many editor who thinks so) but I'm not quite sure how to go about it. Best, GoetheFromm (talk) 17:26, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

How are you Swarm. Perhaps you did not notice but I left you a comment here last week and you still haven't replied to it. Is it because (a) you didn't see it? or (b) you've been deliberately ignoring it? or (c) you've been busy and haven't had time to direct your attention to it? Again, I understand the message on my Talk page was "a simple reminder" and that I'm "free to remove it"; but, for the reasons we discussed above, it would still be grateful if you would be the one to remove the message.—Biosketch (talk) 10:46, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

RfA reform

I'm beginning to find Epipelagic's comments and manner of expressing him/herself less than helpful. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 04:39, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

I must say I agree. I'm curious as to what brought this user to the page in the first place, as they don't seem to be remotely involved in anything similar to the project. Perhaps their viewpoint stems from this and this drama; not really important I guess. Swarm ^X 06:31, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

It was Jimbo's comment on Strat's popularity poll, and the thread I started on Jimbo's page that set the whole RfA reform in motion. Clearly a user with a combative nature and an aversion to all things administrative. If he comes on my page again with anything unconstructive, I might make a polite suggestion. After I've moved that page to WP space, there is probably little I can do. Experience shows that probably the best thing to do with such comments is to ignore them. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:52, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

You're right, it seems they're doing little more than unconstructively soapboxing their anti-administrator opinions. I think it would be reasonable, WP space or not, to politely request that they either keep their comments focused on the matters at hand or refrain from commenting. I'm sure they'll be reasonable enough to oblige such a request. Swarm ^X 07:12, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

I just hope that now I've got the mop I can keep my cool ;) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 07:32, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, I was gonna remind you not to go crazy and block him in a mop-fueled rage :P Swarm ^X 07:46, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Can you review

Rabbi Pinto Information seems to be getting ignored. 2 major recent features are longest stories ever written on Rabbi Pinto.

Rabbi's right hand man who owns property with the rabbis wife and has power of attorney for Pinto - rabbi’s translator, gatekeeper and conduit to the outside world in America is a longtime pornographer. The Rabbi is revered in the United States and Israel for his financial advice, especially in real estate, Suky’s own real estate business has faced a string of lawsuits, foreclosures and legal judgments. And while Pinto is an ultra-Orthodox rabbi, his adviser’s involvement in the pornography industry would seem to run counter to the tenets of modesty espoused by traditional Judaism. http://forward.com/articles/136819/#ixzz1J47HjPxA

Additionally no mention of $60 Million organization and 3 employees. Is noteable. Pls assist, http://www.forward.com/articles/136250/ 65.112.21.194 (talk) 21:55, 9 April 2011 (UTC)