Jump to content

User talk:Raul654: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
rvv
m lol!
Line 1: Line 1:
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
<!--
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
As you may already know, Raul654 is among the most famous Wikipedians around. Vandalism edits of this page remain for an average of just 18 seconds, and the average time it takes for a diligent user to revert it is a mere 5 seconds. It only takes an admin two mouse clicks to remove indecent edits. On average, a vandal here spends 56 seconds creating his edit, and will likely be blocked before he even gets the chance to start a revert war.
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Consider it. If you are here trying to vandalize this page, you obviously are on the Internet and are most likely (though not definitely) on a computer. I can think of about 30,000 better uses of your internet time than doing this absolutely pointless act. You can update or create blogs, play games, check the news, download new programs, and so much more!
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Bottom line: The vandal wastes the most time. Do not vandalize this page. You heard what happened to Brian Chase.
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
-->
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
<div style="float:right;width:150px;margin:2em;padding:1em;">
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
<center>
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
[[Image:Barnstar.png|frame|For your tireless work in making Wikipedia better, for keeping [[Template:Feature]] up-to-date, for doing the grunt work of cleaning up [[Wikipedia:Featured article candidates]], for mediating in disputes, for adding lots of really nice pictures, and for still finding the time to work on articles! In a few months you've already become a highly valued member of the community. Stay with us and don't burn out, please. --Eloquence Apr 10, 2004]]
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
<br/>
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
[[Image:Purple heart.jpg|120px|thumb|right|For wounds suffered in the battles of [[Wikipedia]], I hereby award you this [[Purple Heart]]. May you continue to be a valued contributor to Wikipedia for many years to come. [[User:Neutrality|Neutrality]] 05:22, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)]]
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
</center>
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
</div>
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
* [[User:Raul654/archive|Archive 1: August 2003 - July 2004]]
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
* [[User:Raul654/archive2|Archive 2: August 2004 - July 2005]]
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
* [[User:Raul654/archive3|Archive 3: August 2005 - ]]
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
==Good article==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
The user [[User:Zzzzz|Zzzzz]] has directed me to you to help with the problem I’m having. I’ve recently finished an article on the [[Photosynthetic reaction centre]]. After a peer review, a featured article request and a lot of effort from many other users, the article has been labelled as ‘good’. The good label still remains on the discussion page, but the star in the top right hand corner of the article has gone. Apparently it’s a violation of Wikipedia rules. Please can you tell me how I can get this star back on? Thanks.
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
p.s. I’m also applying for a MEng in computer science and electronics at Edinburgh University. --[[User:Simpsons contributor|Miller]] 17:08, 6 April 2006 (UTC)[[Image:Signature george.PNG]]
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
== Lothal FAC ==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Hi Raul654 - I'm concerned that [[Lothal]] not been promoted to FA despite six days of FAC and having 10 support votes and none opposed, with all concerns addressed. If there is a problem, please lemme know so I can fix it. Thanks. [[User:Rama's Arrow|Rama&#39;s Arrow]] 02:52, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:It's been promoted - sometimes these things take time. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 05:33, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
== Checkuser backlog ==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Since Diva took ill, it looks like the Checkuser backlog is growing without bound. Is it time to grant that priv to more admins? &mdash; [[User_talk:Ciphergoth/Please don't use this|ciphergoth]] 09:42, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:You addressed the backlog [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_CheckUser&diff=43415059&oldid=43414730 in a most unexpected way]. I'm not sure that's the right solution; I'd be interested to know more about your ideas for how RFCU should best be maintained. &mdash; [[User_talk:Ciphergoth/Please don't use this|ciphergoth]] 22:45, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
::Well, for one thing, after a certain period of time, IP addresses leave the database. So removing the old ones was the right thing to do. As far as maintaing it, well, it's a time-consuming thing to do, and there aren't enough people with checkuser access. I'm *REALLY* busy, and I don't have time to maintain it. Kelly Martin did a good job, but quit in frustration at the overall harassment she was experiencing. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 05:32, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
== Featured shorts ==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
[[Image:Pumas3hbdbk.jpg|right|thumb|Featured shorts? &mdash;[[User:Bunchofgrapes|Bunchofgrapes]] ([[User talk:Bunchofgrapes|talk]]) 17:43, 16 March 2006 (UTC)]]
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Another queury for you. I don't know if you follow the [[Wikipedia:Good articles]] process or what your opinion on it is. I personally don't like it because I think it's a backdoor way to get a good content tag without having to go through the tussle of an FA nom. The one argument for its existence that makes sense is that it allows for an acknowledgement of good content on articles that are too short, and will likely always be too short, to become an FA.
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
A thought I have had previously to address this is a '''Featured shorts''' or '''Featured short articles''' category. Like Featured lists and images, it would provide an outlet for stuff that can't go to FAC, in this case articles round about 10 to 20K. A Featured short could of course graduate to a Featured article if it achieved sufficient length but would have to be re-nommed. With this in place GA could be scrapped. If you're at all interested, [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Good_articles#Thoughts this] is the discussion that got me thinking about it on the Good article talk page. Cheers, [[User:Marskell|Marskell]] 12:06, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:I do not care for the good articles. I see no point in it. I've seen some good articles tagged as "good", and I've seen some truely awful articles tagged as "good" (if [[George W. Bush]] can be tagged as a good article, which it was until a couple weeks ago, then what exactly constitutes a bad article?) [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 05:42, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
::Well, if you're in agreement that GA is pointless what do you think of the Featured Short Article idea? I'm in a minority of one or two criticizing GA on its talk page (naturally partisans of the project are those who stop by to comment) and it would be nice to have an alternative idea to point to. Note, the way things are going Good Articles is becoming a parallel FA process (right down to copying the colour scheme). [[User:Marskell|Marskell]] 17:17, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:::Well, quite frankly, I'd like to see GA abolished and nothing replace it. I consider it a needless expenditure of contributor effort that could be better spent doing other things (like working to get articles up to actual FA status). [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 17:20, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
::::If you have any ideas on how to go about abolishing it (or at least altering it and marrying to some other process where it might be useful) do let me know. Your voice might have a bit of weight there. [[User:Marskell|Marskell]] 20:02, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:::::Raul, you consider wrongly. You must realise that not every article can become an FA, not by a long shot, right? GA encourages ''virtually the same standards'' to apply to all those thousands which are not FA material. Marskell, here's an idea on how to abolish it - put it on Miscellany for Deletion. Quite simple really, then we can all see what the consensus is on whether it's useful or not. Continually sniping from the sidelines helps absolutely no-one. [[User:Worldtraveller|Worldtraveller]] 20:56, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
== Barbara McClintock ==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
I've semiprotected this article due to very severe vandalism. I'm letting you know in case you disagree and want to unprotect.--Fil[[WP:EA|<font color="green">e</font>]] [[User talk:Brendanconway|Éireann]] 21:35, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
==Appeal==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Feel free to comment at [[Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_arbitration#Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration.2FCoolcat.2C_Davenbelle_and_Stereotek_.28appeal.29|my appeal]]. --<small>[[User:Cool Cat|Cool Cat]]<sup>[[User talk:Cool Cat|Talk]]|[[Special:Emailuser/Cool Cat|@]]</sup></small> 16:12, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
== Quick note on the Main Page article ==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Regarding [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Battle_of_Badr&diff=prev&oldid=42696946], the article seems to still be semi-protected; figured to just drop a note. ~ [[User:PseudoSudo|PseudoSudo]] 23:50, 7 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:Yes, I removed the sprotection label without removing the protection itself. There's a reason for this, which I'd rather not get into here - contact me in private if you want the long explination. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 03:04, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
::Yeah, don't worry, easily trust your judgement; though perhaps consider dropping an edit summary like 'rm <nowiki>{{sprotect}}</nowiki> template (intentional)' for a potentially ambiguous edit. Awesome, ~ [[User:PseudoSudo|PseudoSudo]] 11:45, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
== James D. St. Clair ==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Thanks for the [[James D. St. Clair]] article. I noticed you also created [[Jim St. Clair]] as a rdr. If you'll forgive my selfish curiosity, did [[Wikipedia:Title pairs for future redirects]] suggest that to you? If so, i'd be grateful for any comments, suggestions, etc. that you'd care to make at [[Wikipedia talk:Title pairs for future redirects]] (or for that matter on my talk page). Thanks, <br>--[[User:Jerzy|Jerzy]]•[[User talk:Jerzy|t]] 03:38, 8 March 2006 (UTC)<br>
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:Yes, the title and redirects page influenced me. I checked to see what pages linked to 'James D. St. Clair', saw it was a requested redirect, and created it. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 03:39, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
== Roman Vishniac ==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Excuse me: has the [[Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Roman Vishniac|Roman Vishniac FAC]] failed? It hasn't been promoted, but neither has the talk page tag been changed. -- [[User:Rmrfstar|Rmrfstar]] 04:27, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Archived_nominations&diff=42916829&oldid=41994583 Yes] (Violetriga usually handles the failed tagging.) [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 04:28, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
::Well, I guess I disagree with the decision not to promote the article. At the time of demotion, the candidate page listed only two "opposes", both by [[User:Petaholmes|Petaholmes]], the latter of which included the first one within it and was posted only an hour before judgement, (so no time was allowed for the simple (and possibly invalid) concerns to be dealth with). -- [[User:Rmrfstar|Rmrfstar]] 04:40, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:::Hrm (handn't noticed how recent Petaholmes' comment was). OK, I'll restore the nom for the time being. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 04:43, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
::::Thank you kindly. It's late here, so I'll be turning in for the night, but I'll get right to work on the nom in the morning. -- [[User:Rmrfstar|Rmrfstar]] 04:46, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
== United States Bill of Rights ==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Hi, I'm soliciting [[Wikipedia:Peer review#United States Bill of Rights]] comments from people who contributed to the FA on the [[First Amendment to the United States Constitution|1st Amendment]], since there doesn't seem to be any response at PR. Many thanks, [[User:Kaisershatner|Kaisershatner]] 21:25, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Oh, and I'm also the Fieldmarshal (ENTJ). So get on it. :) [[User:Kaisershatner|Kaisershatner]] 21:26, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
==Rationale behind FA promotions==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Hi. Just wondering if you could explain the rationale behind promoting [[Chetwynd, British Columbia]] and [[Hurricane Floyd]] to featured status recently? There were some quite serious objections on Chetwynd's FAC which for the most part had not been resolved; on Floyd's FAC my points in opposition were minor points but nonetheless I'd have liked to have seen them dealt with and discussed before the article was promoted. And actually the same thing happened with my nomination of [[Sun]] not long ago, we didn't get a chance to fully resolve an objection before the article was promoted. Shouldn't it always be the case that any actionable objection is enough to prevent an article getting promoted? [[User:Worldtraveller|Worldtraveller]] 00:32, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:Still interested in hearing why these were promoted if possible. I see actionable objections being apparently ignored more and more often these days, and it really knocks my motivation to spend any time reviewing nominations. [[User:Worldtraveller|Worldtraveller]] 21:00, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
==Dien Bien Phu==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Hallo Mark- I'm well aware that there were a large number of Legionnaires at Dien Bien Phu; my point is that there is no substantive difference between French soldiers (sensu your definition) and those of the FL- they are all 'soldiers of France'- French ''troops'', if not actually French citizens (although I believe the majority of them are both). A reasonable analogy would be Gurkhas serving in the British army; very few people (in fact, in my experience, no-one) would refer to a battle fought by British and Gurkha troops as e.g. 'British and Nepalese troops'; there is no conceptual distinction. Would you be amenable to a rewording, ie something like 'French forces (including those serving with the Foreign Legion)...'? I have to say, the second phrase ('..many of them not even French...') is a bit more problematic. Frankly, to me it has a vaguely racist undertone, and I'm really not sure what it is supposed to be saying, or why it is relevant. If you can clarify this, I'll happily accept the phrase. All the best (and sorry for the pedantry!), [[User:Badgerpatrol|Badgerpatrol]] 19:12, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:I am open to a rewording, but it really does need to mention the fact that the foreign legion troops at the battle was composed heavily (primarily?) of ex-SS/Wermacht soldiers. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 19:26, 10 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
==Akeakamai==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Hi Mark,
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
just noticed your recent additions to [[Akeakamai]], thank you. Reading your user page looks like you're an admin, so it was nice to see your interest in this article. If I may ask was this a random fix, or do you have an interest in dolphins issues or wikipedia articles? (I've been pondering a detailed fix to the [[cetacean intelligence]] and [[animal language]] articles for a long time but I'd want to do these right, with both science and npov intact).[[User:Santaduck|Santaduck]] 10:59, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:I ended up there because I'm a [[David Brin]]/[[Uplift Universe]] fan. 'Nuff said :) [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 06:22, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
==Taste!==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Bet that would have been a support vote if it had been [[:Category:Dead babies who were cryogenically frozen]] ;P -- [[User:Sannse|sannse]] [[User talk:Sannse|(talk)]] 18:40, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:What's the sense in freezing them? There's a hungry world out there. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 06:21, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
== Community News ==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Have you seen that article about you? I didn't read it yet but I read the one about Stilltim. Interesting stuff. [[User:Grenavitar|gren]] [[User talk:Grenavitar|グレン]] 18:47, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:Yes, I saw it :) [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 18:48, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:They're both online if you want to access them that way. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 18:48, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
== Request for clarification on Bulbasaur promotion ==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Given the long and contentious review, the many hours put into it by several editors on both "sides", and the unresolved objections from eight editors, would it be possible to share your reasoning in favor of "consensus" on this promotion? --[[User:Tsavage|Tsavage]] 02:37, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Yes I'm quite surprised to see this article promoted. Little to none of the objections were addressed. [[User:BlueShirts|<font color="mediumblue">''Blue''</font>]][[User_talk:BlueShirts|<font color="mediumblue">''Shirts''</font>]] 03:13, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Hi Raul, I am quite surprised about the promotion. Given that none of the objections are addressd and that the article is just a plot summary with fan pages as references, I really like to know your rationale for promoting this article. Thank you. [[User:Temporary account|Temporary account]] 03:43, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Although I think some of the opposition could be ignored, a few of the objections are easily fixable, and should be prior to FA promotion. However, perhaps a deal could be struck where a list of fixable items could be created. These items could be fixed by a certain time; if they are not, then the article becomes a format candidate. [[User:Deckiller|Deckiller]] 03:55, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:I sensed this would be a controversial choice, so I took extra care with this one. Despite their great length, all the objections fell into one of three areas - that it "read like a fan page", that the sources didn't match the text of the article, and that it used too much jargon without properly defining them. I read the article top to bottom. This is the second time I have done so - I read it top-to-bottom the first time it was on the FAC, and that time I agreed with the objections and failed the nomination. This time, I did not feel it read like a fan page; Pschemp took care of the referencing problem (along with Aloan's comments wrt one specific reference problem), and although I didn't check point by point, when I read it I didn't feel swamped by words I didn't understand (and I know nothing about Pokemon) [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 06:20, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
::*Does that mean any page about a minor character that contains ONLY PLOT SUMMARY and PRODUCT INFORMATION, as long as it has fan pages as sources, can be FA? Also, it is true that this article doesn't read like a fan page, because it reads professionally (grammar...etc), but it is still a fan page essentially. Please reconsider you decision. [[User:Temporary account|Temporary account]] 07:04, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
::Raul654: Respectfully, you are simply wrong in your assessment that the references were "taken care of". They were not. The References still consist of mostly personal fan pages, as clearly noted in the review. Simply '''[http://www.pojo.com/cardgame/CotW/pokemon%20cotw%207.txt click this]''' for an example of what "the best" now offers as verifiable sources. The "lead critters" quote attributed to Time Asia IS NOT IN THAT PUBLICATION, but it is in the first para of the lead, and that was pointed out. It goes on...as in the review.
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
::Also, I think it's really odd that, when it's apparent from the review that more than one editor has dissected this article and engaged in debated it daily over a period of weeks, you can read it once and see all. Why is your assessment more accurate than anyone else's? It took me at least an hour just to check the references... --[[User:Tsavage|Tsavage]] 07:33, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
::: The phrase "hard cheese" comes to mind. Oh, did I really say that? --[[user:Celestianpower|Cel]]<font color="green">[[User:Celestianpower/Esperanza|es]]</font>[[User:celestianpower|tianpower]] <sup>[[user talk:Celestianpower|háblame]]</sup> 12:48, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:::Regarding that pojo.com link you are referring to above, that is being used to reference the fact that the Bulbasaur card is of common frequency, correct? I believe someone mentioned in the FAC that the rarity of cards is indicated by a symbol in the corner (circle for common), so I think that you should remove the reference altogether and consider this supported by primary source material if you take issue with it. '''<font color="8855DD">[[User:Pagrashtak|Pagra]]</font><font color="#6666AA">[[User talk:Pagrashtak|shtak]]</font>''' 13:42, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
::Still waiting reply from Raul about plot summary question. [[User:Temporary account|Temporary account]] 19:34, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:::(Replying to Temporary accounts claim that the article contains only 'plot summary and product information) - this is flatly wrong. During the first nom, people objected that it contained too little informaiton about the franchise, and that was rectified (hence the Carmen Miranda-et-al comments in the introduction now). This is why '''not one single person''' in the second nomination registered an objection along these lines. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 22:28, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
::::I wasn't there during first nom, thus I can't say anything about that. But if I were there, I would have voiced the same objections. But you'll have to agree that the current form of article is ALL plot summary and product information. And I don't understand how you or anybody else cannot see that. As for Carmen Miranda stuff, did you actually read the Time/CNN article or Tsavage's comments? Did you check ALL the references for consistency and that the quotations are not taken out of context? For a fictional character, plot summmary is clearly not good enough for FA. Even though this character has no rich history, at least we are expecting development history and cultural influence...etc. Further, Goomba (sp) is currently under FARC for the same objections that I and many other have brought up. At the end, again, are you sure that an article with only insubstantial plot summary and product information is suitable for FA? I still don't know your point. [[User:Temporary account|Temporary account]] 22:42, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
::::Take a look: [[Wikipedia:Featured article removal candidates/Bulbasaur]]. I think it's too early to go this far, especially since we're just getting our feet wet with this discussion. [[User:Deckiller|Deckiller]] 22:39, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
::::*re '''Raul654: "that was rectified (hence the Carmen Miranda-et-al comments in the introduction now)"''' As I've already pointed out elsewhere, the Carmen Miranda addition is one of the worst bits in the article. There is absolutely ''no reasoned comparison between Bulbasaur and Carmen Miranda'' in the source, it is the most trivial, passing bit of editorial color, in a passing description of a couple of sample Pokemon, in an article about Pokemon cards being banned in school yards. It was just a "colorful costume" reference, and is barely even trivial, the ONLY possible value to the comment being it was a few words "on a CNN web site". And if that's not poor enough, in the article, which should be developing the lead, "“increasingly exotic foliage" is NOT EXPLAINED, the only rather subdued and obscure further mention is "grows into a large floral bulb". How much explanation is necessary in a FAC review to convey really obvious points, and for what purpose, if it's just overlooked or ignored? --[[User:Tsavage|Tsavage]] 01:10, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Raul: Well, the FARC's de-listed, and I just need some clarifications. First, do you think that none of our objections are reasonable? Here's my input, I believe the failure to address the objection does not mean that the objectino is unactionable, it may simply mean that there's a fundamental shortcoming that the article has that can't be repaired easily. Second, is Bulbasaur one of the best articles Wikipedia has to offer, with only plot summary and product information? Third, what counts as a consensus, because the objections we have were not simple grammar fixes, but important features of FA such as referencing...etc, so what makes you think that there's a consensus? I'd really like to know your answers. Thx [[User:Temporary account|Temporary account]] 02:22, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:I'd like to suggest that you (the continual objectors) respect the consensus of the community, [[User:Jeffrey O. Gustafson]]'s and [[User:Raul654]]'s decisions and kindly move on. The endless continuation of the debate is unnecessary and a waste of our intellectual resources. I think your considerable talents could be put to good use improving wikipedia elsewhere. <small>[[User:Pschemp|<font color="green">psch</font>]][[WP:ESP|<font color="green">e</font>]][[User:Pschemp|<font color="green">mp</font>]] | [[User talk:Pschemp|<font color="green">talk</font>]]</small> 05:02, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:1. There's respect here, the objectors never made personal attacks, even under attack from supporters. 2. There's no consensus with substantially unresolved objections (where did you get the idea there's consensus). 3. You don't need to tell us how to spend our time and energy (it's OUR time and energy). [[User:Temporary account|Temporary account]] 18:54, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Anytime now... [[User:Temporary account|Temporary account]] 07:14, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
I to cant understand why when the editors didnt act in good faith when looking at fixes. All oppose votes where dealt with along the same lines of attacking the person who oppose instead of investigating the suggestion. Like you I dont know much about pokemon but was able to find information regarding the suggested fixes from one of the site referrenced(after FAC). It turned out that some of the information is also available on Wikipedia..
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
*That point aside I checked the copyright status of the bulbasaur image as posted in the article believe it breachs copyright laws. the image owner states ''No material from this or any other Internet site owned, operated, licensed, or controlled by us or our affiliates may be copied, reproduced, republished, uploaded, posted, transmitted, or distributed in any way, except that you may download one copy of the materials on any single computer for your personal'' The image is listed as fair use here acknowledging the the copyright holder and links directly back to this statement. Under each use it must clearly state detailed reasonings for fair use. There is no reasoning attached, can you require the editors fix immediately. [[User:Gnangarra|Gnangarra]] 01:19, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
==Addition to laws==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Hi, I saw your userpage about WP laws and I thought of one myself:
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
*As time passes, the probability of an article becoming an ''average'' article approches 1.
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
That is true for both stubs and FA's (just look how many were de-featured). [[User:Renata3|Renata]] 07:25, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:It's a wiki - you can edit it :) [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 14:35, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
==[[Cheers]] quest for the main page==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Hi Raul! I was just wondering what your though process is when choosing what appears on the main page, and if ''Cheers'' is lacking something I can add/fix such an issue? I ask only because articles such as [[Bath School disaster]], which was only featured March 9th, is already slated to be on the front page (on a day that isn't related to the article, so that would not seem to be the reason for the sudden front page appearance). ''Cheers'', on the other hand, has been featured and with a request up since January 30th. Is the process merely random and Cheers number hasn't come up yet, or is something missing? [[User:Staxringold|Staxringold]] 21:47, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:Yes, I am curious about this myself. It isn't clear to me the degree to which the front-page nominations influence Raul's decisions. I don't think he regards them as relevant. A little more insight into how he chooses FAs for the main page would be helpful. [[User:Andrew Levine|Andrew Levine]] 05:07, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
::I try to service requests in the order they're made (or for the particular date specified), but certain genres tend to be over-requested (anything geeky, for example). TV shows are also heavily requested - West Wing had been on the queue for a while. As far as cheers, I was tenatively planning on featuring it sometime in April.
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
::As far as how much they "influce my decisions" (I assume you mean my decision to promote from the FAC) - it doesn't. Main page featurability is pointedly *not* a consideration at all. There are a very few articles I have promoted to featured status, with the caveat that they will never appear as the main page featured article (specifically, [[Wikipedia]] and [[Caufield Grammar School]]). [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 05:40, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:::By "influence Raul's decisions" I was referring to the same decision as Stax was talking about, i.e. the decision regarding what to feature on the main-page (and whether you take [[Wikipedia_talk:Tomorrow's featured article]] into consideration or not). [[User:Andrew Levine|Andrew Levine]] 06:46, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
::::Clearly I do, as (I would estimate) something like three-quarters of the articles featured on the main page are there specifically by request. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 07:09, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
::::UPdate - I just did a quick count over the last two week's worth of featured articles appearing on the main page. Ten were specifically requested on TFA, and four were chosen by me (71.4% - so my guess of 75% wasn't too bad). [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 07:14, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:::::I ask only because looking at [[WP:FA]] there actually ''are not'' that many FAs on American TV shows, weird as that is. As for the "influence", I purely meant what facets of an article you like to see (and does that include a TFA), thanks for the answer! As for Caulfield, I know you've said you don't want to throw gas onto the fire of whether or not high schools meet Wikipedia's notability requirements, but its a shame to see such a great article never Main Page'd. Does this mean that if, god willing, the community supports my baby [[Hopkins School]] it wouldn't be Main Page'd either, or is this something specific to Caulfield? [[User:Staxringold|Staxringold]] 12:21, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
== Bulbasaur woes ==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
[[Image:WikiThanks.png]] I'd just like to give you a little appreciation for all the work you do at FAC. I honestly don't have a strong opinion on whether [[Bulbasaur]] should have been promoted (which is why I didn't support or object), but we all know you were going to get flak either way. Congratulations on completing your own personal [[Kobayashi Maru]]. '''<font color="8855DD">[[User:Pagrashtak|Pagra]]</font><font color="#6666AA">[[User talk:Pagrashtak|shtak]]</font>''' 22:51, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:[[Image:WikiThanks.png]] Well said, Pagrashtak, and I completely agree. [[User:Deckiller|Deckiller]] 22:52, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:Hear, hear. &mdash;[[User:Bunchofgrapes|Bunchofgrapes]] ([[User talk:Bunchofgrapes|talk]]) 02:44, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
[[Image:WikiThanks.png]] I agree you are doing a fantastic job with FAC. I'm just trying to understand a process that I've only recently decided to be a participant rather than just a spectator. [[User:Gnangarra|Gnangarra]] 14:33, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
== Ted Wilkes ==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
I'd appreciate your advice about {{vandal|Ted_Wilkes}}. As I posted at [[WP:AN/I#Ted Wilkes seems to be identical with multiple hardbanned user DW|AN/I]], I'm pretty sure this is [[User:DW]] ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=43345948&oldid=43345384 here's] my comment). I posted a message about it at [[User:Angela|Angela]]'s talk page, but she seems to be away. Now I'm not sure what to do. I'm not sure on what basis checkusers are decided, but would you be willing to look through the contributions? Thanks. [[User:Chick Bowen|Chick Bowen]] 14:20, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
== Frog ==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Hey, could it be possible to move Frog to March 27th, see, it's my girlfriend's birthday and, ironically, she's obsessed with Frogs. When I saw that the article was featured so close to that day, I thought it'd be a cool birthday surprise (sort of) to have actually it featured on her birthday. She's really obsessed with them, she once almost got her eBay account revoked because she kept telling the people bidding against her for a frog shaped clock to stop bidding. Thanks. -- [[User:SmthManly|<font color="black">SmthManly</font>]] / <sup><font color="blue">[[User_talk:SmthManly|ManlyTalk]]</font></sup> / <sup><font color="blue">[[Special:Contributions/SmthManly|ManlyContribs]]</font></sup> 23:28, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:Easily done. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 23:30, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:: Awesome! Thanks a lot! -- [[User:SmthManly|<font color="black">SmthManly</font>]] / <sup><font color="blue">[[User_talk:SmthManly|ManlyTalk]]</font></sup> / <sup><font color="blue">[[Special:Contributions/SmthManly|ManlyContribs]]</font></sup> 23:38, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
== Slobodan Milošević ==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Sorry! <font color="green">[[WP:EA|A]]</font>[[User:Admrboltz|dmrb♉ltz]] <small>([[User talk:Admrboltz|T]] | [[Special:Contributions/Admrboltz|C]])</small> 02:58, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
== Wikimedia templates ==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Mark, I noticed that you're on the communications committee, so I'll throw this your direction. Do we have any Powerpoint templates for use when giving talks on Wikipedia and/or Wikimedia? If not, any ideas who could put something together? I'm thinking something based on the look and feel of Wikipedia itself (for a Wikipedia template), or Meta (for a Foundation template) would be good.
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
My immediate reason for asking is that I'm giving a guest lecture on Wikipedia, for a college class my friend is teaching. If I can find a nice template or con someone else into making one, it'll save me the trouble of trying to throw something together myself. On the flip side, if nothing is available and I do make a template myself, I'll gladly donate it for others to use (and improve.) [[User:Isomorphic|Isomorphic]] 05:56, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:That's a good point. I gave one of these talks before - I didn't use a powerpoint, I just used Firefox. I'll ask the others and see if any of them happen to have one. If not, I'll be happy to take whatever you provide :) [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 14:10, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
::Angela pointed me to [[m:Presentations]] [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 14:30, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
==[[Bruce Johnson]]==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
I am trying once more to make this article featured ([[Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Bruce_Johnson]]). By my count the vote is 6 to 2 in favor of the nomination. Is this a sufficient ratio for it to be approved? [[User:PedanticallySpeaking|PedanticallySpeaking]] 16:24, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
== Checking user ==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Raul, I had the following conversation with Tim Starling, I was wondering if you could check these two users instead as Tim is unnable to: [[User:Xtra|Xtra]] 02:40, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
"
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
''Tim. [[User:Lefty on campus]] has been making personal attacks against me. [[User:Lefty on campus]] and [[User:PSYCH]] have both been active today. Can you check if they are the same person please. Thanx [[User:Xtra|Xtra]] 00:22, 12 March 2006 (UTC)''
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:''I take this as a personal attack. Please do not spread lies about me to other people, and have the nerve to accuse me of an attack. [[User:Lefty on campus|Lefty on campus]] 00:29, 12 March 2006 (UTC).''
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
::''Lefty, if these two people are not you, then why are you being so defensive about it? if Tim can find out that you are in fact different people, then everything will be fine. --[[User:Bishamonster|Bishamonster]] 23:35, 13 March 2006 (UTC)''
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
''See above under [[#Checkuser backlog]] -- [[User:Tim Starling|Tim Starling]] 23:39, 15 March 2006 (UTC)''
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
"
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
== Spam blacklist... ==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Spam_blacklist.3F] Here's a new addition. &middot; [[User:Katefan0|'''Katefan0''']]<sup>[[User talk:Katefan0|(scribble)]]</sup>/<small>[[User:Katefan0/Poll|poll]]</small> 22:38, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
== FA of the Day ==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Raul, in light of the fact that the [[University of Michigan]] entry has now graced the Main Page, is there any chance [[Caulfield Grammar School]] could now be considered as well? There seems to be hundreds waiting in line at [[Wikipedia talk:Tomorrow's featured article]], but in the foreseeable future is this possible? Please reply on my talk. Thanks. [[User:Harro5|Harr]][[WP:EA|<font color="green">o</font>]]<b>[[User talk:Harro5|5]]</b> 23:42, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:replied on your talk page. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 23:47, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
::Thanks for that quality response. How disappointing that my school is just [[KaDee Strickland]] in disguise :p [[User:Harro5|Harr]][[WP:EA|<font color="green">o</font>]]<b>[[User talk:Harro5|5]]</b> 23:50, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
== fitting tribute ==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
[[Image:Goldenwiki.png|thumb|165px|Thank you Raul654, for three great years of amazing work and dedication to Wikipedia and its community. [[User:Rama's Arrow|Rama&#39;s Arrow]] 19:58, 17 March 2006 (UTC)]]
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
== Frank Zappa ==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Raul, I just attempted to resubmit this article for FA, and in doing so might have fudged the process. The directions are not easy to follow, and I couldn't find any "leave comment" button, anywhere. If I screwed anything up, allow me to apologise. Until I get some clear direction on how to do this (Nom for FA) I will refrain from doing so. Once again, sorry if I did anything horrible. [[User:Hamster Sandwich|Hamster Sandwich]] 21:18, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:Zscout took care of you already [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Frank_Zappa&diff=44264359&oldid=44263819] [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 02:17, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
== Cross-linking of images and other media between different language sites ==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Hi, Raul! You seem to have written the better part of the image tutorial, but this question is unanswered. How do I use image already uploaded to, say, en.wikipedia.org on another language's project? The usual answer is to '''reupload''' them to Commons. I don't like that way personally for the following reasons:
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
#No easy linking to appears to exist for Commons either (Commons:... ?)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
#A large group of images are already uploaded to language-specific projects and re-uploading them all will create useless duplication and waste diskspace and bandwidth
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Hence the question to you (or someone you know): how can an article on [http://uk.wikipedia.org Ukrainian WikiPedia] use an image already uploaded to the English project? I'd expect it to look like Image:en:....jpg, but that does not work &mdash; perhaps, WikiPedia can request MediaWiki to add this feature in the next release?
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
If such direct cross-linking is not going to be possible any time soon and Commons is the only answer, how does one link to Commons?
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
And, finally, why can not '''all''' images with sufficiently persmissive licenses, which are currently spread out in all language-specific WikiPedias, be transfered to Commons in one sweep? A large set of duplicates can be eliminated and from that point on any projects will be able to refer to any image directly.
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Thanks for your time reading this. Yours, [[User:PanBK|пан Бостон-Київський]] 23:34, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
To answer your questions:
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
# It is (literally) impossible for another language wiki to use files uploaded to english. Files uploaded to the english wikipedia exist '''only''' on the english wikipedia and nowhere else. So the ''only'' thing you can do is uploaded it to commons or to the ukranian wikipedia (and, for files moved to commons, it is suggested that you ask an admin to delete the original to save space)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
# Files that exist automatically exist on all wikis. So (for example) look at [[Joyce Kilmer]] (and the wikitext for it). The picture exists on commons here -> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Joyce_Kilmer.jpg However, it also has a mirror image page on the english wikipedia here -> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Joyce_Kilmer.jpg (which says: ''This is a file from the Wikimedia Commons. The description on its description page there is shown below.''). To use the picture, you don't have to do anything special - just pretend it was uploaded to the ukranian (or english) wikipedia like any other file.
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
# As to your last question, there is no reason they cannot be so transferred in one large sweep, although people are probably a bit hesitant about using a bot to do it because there's no way to undo image deletion.
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
I hope that answers your questions. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 02:16, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Not so fast :-) Here are some follow-up questions:
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
#Is not this feature worth developing? The physical servers are all the same. In my case the English-language wikiPedia has already processed the images, created thumbnails of various sizes, pushed the images to caching proxies. Why does all of this have to be redone for each other language's project?
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
#Ok, so, for files in the commons, using Image:... will work for all languages? That may be fine, except I already have uploaded so much to the en.wikipedia.org :-( But is the file on '''en''' a ''copy'' or an ''alias'' of the file on '''commons'''? I sure hope for the latter... Ideally, the HTML-rendered articles would all link to the commons directly. Less ideally, but also acceptable, the language-specific images would use HTTP redirect to commons, so that various proxies will only cache one copy of each image, regardless of the number of its aliases.
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
#Why not? The images will not be deleted, they will be moved to commons, no? At least, there ought to be a button on each media file's page, allowing it to be transfered to commons automatically...
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Thanks! [[User:PanBK|пан Бостон-Київський]] 05:40, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
#Keeping the languages (mostly) independent of each others is a good idea. Overlap should be addressed by using commons as a shared repository. For files that don't meet commons' licensing terms, yes, there will be replication and wasted space, and the developers are aware of this.
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
#Every wiki has a word that refers to media files. On english (and french, among others), it's "image". All links to pictures, music, and movies must use this word. On german, it's "bild". You have to use the local-language keyword. However, you are correct in that the commons image is not copied, but simply aliased. If there's a local language file with the same name as the one on commons, the local language file takes precedence.
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
#I'm not the best person to ask. Ask the developers; perhaps file a report on bugzilla - http://bugzilla.wikipedia.org/ --- [http://bugzilla.wikipedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=709 Bug709] is for a similiar feature (the ability to rename media files within a wiki). [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 05:53, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Alright:
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
#I agree, that keeping the uploaded media separate is a good idea. What I don't understand, is why can't one language use images of another. Different language projects can cross-reference each other's articles by prefixing the link with something like en: &mdash; why can not media be cross-linked similarly: Image:en: or some such?
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
#I know, but using '''Image''' works fine in Ukrainian wiki as well -- it translates automatically.
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
#I read, you have written a bot or two :-) Anyway, thanks for the idea -- I created [http://bugzilla.wikipedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=5283 Bug 5283]
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
[[User:PanBK|пан Бостон-Київський]] 07:23, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
== Site-wide spam blacklist ==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
(Cross-posting from your meta talk page).
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Hi Raul/Mark, I noticed that you are quite active in updating the site-wide spam blacklist. A few days ago I have added a request to put some frequently spammed Nigerian sites on the list; the details can be found [[:m:Talk:Spam_blacklist#nigeria.tz4.com_.2F_nigeriaplanet.proboards43.com|here]] and [[:m:Talk:Spam_blacklist#muturzikin_.2F_nigeria.tz4|here]]. In the last few weeks, there have been some nasty personal attacks (see [[User_talk:Mark_Dingemanse#Dont_not_delete_my_contirbution|this discussion]] and also [[Talk:Lagos#How_can_you_have_a_Place_without_Picture|en:Talk:Lagos]]); they even followed me at Meta to mess with the request. I think it would be a good thing if those urls could be added to the blacklist as soon as possible. May I ask you to look into it? Thanks in advance, &mdash; [[User:Mark Dingemanse|mark]] [[User Talk:Mark Dingemanse|&#9998;]] 07:39, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:I absolutely don't like to bug persons more than once in a few days, but I feel I'm being harassed now by one of the spammers, [[:m:User:Peter2 Henry]], over at Meta. There are some more nasty personal attacks now at [[:m:Talk:Spam blacklist#Racism have to stop]], and I would be very grateful if you could remove those in your function as admin over there. I would do it myself, but I'm afraid of pouring more oil on the flames. Thanks very much, &mdash; [[User:Mark Dingemanse|mark]] [[User Talk:Mark Dingemanse|&#9998;]] 13:24, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
== [[User:Tim Starling]] ==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Yesterday, I made the following request of several people [[Special:Listusers/checkuser|listed]] as CheckUser-privileged:
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
*''Is anyone currently working [[WP:RCU]]? As I type this, the backlog is at 88 requests.''
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
[[User:Tim Starling]] made this reply on his talk page:
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
*''Maybe because whoever it is who invented that page is too shy about telling people to get lost when they make frivolous requests. I don't know what it has to do with me though.''
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
and this reply on mine:
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
*''Don't spam my user talk page please.''
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
This sort of response&mdash;particularly from someone listed [[Special:Listusers/checkuser|here]] as a "[[Wikipedia:Administrators|bureaucrat]]"&mdash;is intolerable. Because I happen to have a request at [[WP:RCU]], the intimation that my request is "frivolous" is clear; that and his assertion that I would "spam" anyone or anything are both in direct violation of [[WP:AGF]].
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
With CheckUser privileges come two attendant responsibilities: active participation thereon, and the presumption that each request is treated as equally valid until clearly demonstrated otherwise. If [[User:Tim Starling]] no longer wishes to be part of this process, then his dismissal from this list might prevent [[WP:BITE|teeth marks]] on newcomers (to [[User talk:Tim Starling|his talk page]], anyway) in the future.
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
[[User:RadioKirk|<span style="font-size: 13px; font-weight: normal; color: #161;">Radio</span>]][[Special:Contributions/RadioKirk|<span style="font-size: 13px; font-weight: normal; color: #161;">Kirk</span>]] [[User talk:RadioKirk|<span style="font-size: 10px; color: #161;">talk to me</span>]] 21:10, 18 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
==Main Page Redesign needs a Bureaucrat to interpret the election results==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
The poll on whether to replace the current Main Page with the Redesign Draft is over. We need a Bureaucrat to look over the votes and render an official decision as to the result. And then to either install the draft as the new Main Page, or assign an admin the task of doing it, preferrably one involved with the project, such as [[User:David Levy]]. The poll results are here: [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Usability/Main Page]]. I look forward to your reply. --[[User:Go for it!|Go for it!]] 01:30, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:Oh dear - I see someone has to make the big decision (sigh). Ok, I'll take a look. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 04:27, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
== A brick of common sense ==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
[[Image:Legobrick.jpg|100px|left]] In honor of this [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk%3AMain_Page&diff=44470746&oldid=44470628 diff] I hereby award you a brick of common sense. <font color="green">[[User:Lar/Esperanza|+]]</font>+[[User:Lar|Lar]]: [[User_talk:Lar|t]]/[[Special:Contributions/Lar|c]] 07:28, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
==Sockpuppets violated Ted Wilkes's probation==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
[[User:Ted Wilkes]] has again violated his probation. Although he is "banned from making any edit related to a person's alleged homosexuality or bisexuality" (see [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Wilkes%2C_Wyss_and_Onefortyone/Proposed_decision#Ted_Wilkes_and_Wyss_banned_from_making_homosexuality.2Fbisexuality_edits]), he edited the [[Boze Hadleigh]] article heavily dealing with the homosexuality or bisexuality of celebrity stars, thereby denigrating the author and reverting the edits of another user. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Boze_Hadleigh&diff=prev&oldid=44384373].
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Based on recent checkuser evidence, Ted Wilkes, [[User:Danny B.|Danny B.]] and [[User:Karl Schalike|Karl Schalike]] appear to be the same. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_CheckUser/Archive/March_2006#Ted_Wilkes_.28talk_.E2.80.A2_contribs.29_and_related_accounts]. As both Danny B. and Karl Schalike have contributed to articles related to the alleged homosexuality or bisexuality of famous personalities (see [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nick_Adams&diff=prev&oldid=41770924], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Adolf_Hitler&diff=prev&oldid=39486929], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Adolf_Hitler&diff=prev&oldid=39601278], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Adolf_Hitler&diff=prev&oldid=39603001], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Adolf_Hitler&diff=prev&oldid=39605213], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=August_Kubizek&diff=prev&oldid=40042710], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hidden_Fuhrer:_Debating_the_Enigma_of_Hitler%27s_Sexuality&diff=prev&oldid=39482159], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Hidden_Hitler&diff=prev&oldid=39483320], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_gay%2C_lesbian_or_bisexual_people/F-J&diff=prev&oldid=39603828], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ernst_R%C3%B6hm&diff=prev&oldid=40044415], etc. etc.) thereby violating the probation of Ted Wilkes (see [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Wilkes%2C_Wyss_and_Onefortyone/Proposed_decision#Ted_Wilkes_and_Wyss_banned_from_making_homosexuality.2Fbisexuality_edits]) more than five times, Ted Wilkes, who has wasted the time of many users, administrators and arbcom members, should now be blocked for one year or hardbanned indefinitely, especially in view of the fact that he also seems to be identical with multiple hardbanned [[User:DW]] alias [[User:JillandJack]]. See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Ted_Wilkes_seems_to_be_identical_with_multiple_hardbanned_user_DW]. The arbcom ruling says, "Should Ted Wilkes ... edit any article from which (he is) banned (he) may be blocked for a short period, up to a week in the case of repeat offenses. After 5 blocks the maximum block shall increase to one year." See [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Wilkes%2C_Wyss_and_Onefortyone/Proposed_decision#Enforcement_by_block]. On 28 February 2006, administrator [[User:Jtdirl|Jtdirl]] admonished Ted Wilkes not to breach arbcom rulings again: "You have now made 3 breaches of the arbcom ruling, the two that caused this weeklong ban and the one that caused the earlier ban. If you make '''''2''''' more at '''any''' stage before the expiry of the arbcom ruling, or its amendment, '''''you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia for one YEAR.''' " See [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ted_Wilkes&diff=prev&oldid=41652156]. [[User:Onefortyone|Onefortyone]] 16:35, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
==[[Katelyn Faber]]==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Could you weigh in at the bottom of the [[Talk: Katelyn Faber|Talk Page for Katelyn Faber]] regarding the inclusion of an image of her? [[User:Tufflaw]], who unsuccessfully tried to have the entire article deleted back in December 2005 insists on censoring/deleting it for extremely specious reasons, and I've been asked to gather a consensus. Please read the bottom two sections of that page. Thanks. [[User:Nightscream|Nightscream]] 18:41, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
== News ==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
[http://www.citizen-times.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060303/LIVING05/60301081/1030/LIVING This article] has a picture by the non-community news person... hmm, interesting... in case you hadn't seen it. (although I have no idea why my picture is there). [[User:Grenavitar|gren]] [[User talk:Grenavitar|グレン]] 00:03, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:Yes, I saw that picture. It's, um, awful. And the picture was taken by the News Journal photographer who was at the meetup. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 00:04, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
== Thanks ==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Thanks for the unblock Raul, I appreciate it greatly. --[[User:GorillazFanAdam|GorillazFanAdam]] 00:28, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
==misconduct by Eternal Equinox, re [[We Belong Together]]==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Hi -- Sorry to bother you with this unpleasantness, but I wanted to call your attention to misconduct by user Eternal Equinox re [[Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/We_Belong_Together]]. The edit history shows both me (Bcrowell/Bcrowell2) and Tsavage complaining about Eternal Equinox deleting our comments. This version of the page
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/We_Belong_Together&oldid=44594640]
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
shows my attempts to call attention to the situation (see comments signed Bcrowell near the top of the page, and one signed Bcrowell2 near the bottom). I'm posting here on your user page because my previous attempts to call attention to Eternal Equinox's misconduct have been deleted by Eternal Equinox.--[[User:Bcrowell2|Bcrowell2]] 02:50, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
::* Ah! I see some people have beaten me here. For how much longer is [[User: Eternal Equinox|Hollow Willerding]] going to be allowed to continue these antics on the FAC page. While I can see the obvious advantages of keeping her where she can be observed, I do think a slap on the wrist (hard) is necessary, and a brief ban from the page (for say 48 hours) would not come amiss. Some leopards never change their spots! Tedious, tiresome woman. [[User:Giano|Giano]] | [[User talk:Giano|talk]] 14:05, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
::::Raul, please page me if you come to IRC, I'd like a word. [[User:Bishonen|Bishonen]] | [[User talk:Bishonen|ノート]] 15:45, 20 March 2006 (UTC).
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:IMO, the principle's the same in both instances, using a tactic thinly cloaked in WP guidelines (anti-vandalism) to mess with FAC reviews. Just to be clear, my case was slightly different than Bcrowell's, where I had been logged out, didn't notice, and amended an existing comment of mine under my IP# rather than username, and had the addition removed. I saw the History right afterwards, assumed it was just an overzealous error, replaced my comment (and even posted a polite note to that effect on EE's page). The Bcrowell deletions were entirely more blatant, wholesale and unhelpful. Ultimately, though, "punishing" such behavior is one issue, however, the overall climate of battling in FAC is a larger issue that goes beyond one indictable act, or one person. I point to recent promotions like [[Celine Dion]] and...[[Bulbasaur]], after marathon sessions and standing objections, as examples where it can seem that protracted arguing and wearing down of objectors is rewarded, therfore, part of a successful FAC approach. --[[User:Tsavage|Tsavage]] 16:15, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Per [[Wikipedia:Vandalism]], I reverted all of the edits left by anonymous editors because I felt as though they were vandals who were attempting to distort the discussion, and both edits were ''not'' to avoid the controversy surrounding the article. Both users Bcrowell and Tsavage should have edited while accessing their accounts because other registered contributers may or may not know, such as in this case, where I did not know that the actual editors had written the comments. I feel as though my edits were in good faith, and I do not feel that [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Eternal_Equinox&diff=44717365&oldid=44669041 this message] is definitely based on previous accusations of being [[User:Hollow Wilerding|Hollow Wilerding]] (which [[User:Journalist|Journalist]] is able to back me up on). I would also appreciate it if [[User:Bishonen|Bishonen]] did not analyze my every move, which she has obviously been doing. &mdash;[[User:Eternal Equinox|Eternal Equinox]] | [[User talk:Eternal Equinox|talk]] 22:55, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:By the way, I would like a response from [[User:Raul654|Raul 654]]. Simply supporting [[User:Bishonen|Bishonen]] because she "says" that I am a specific person is not persuading enough, and apart from that, the primary basis for this post is that I had been attempting to compromise edits submitted by anonymous contributers. The actual users should have edited from their accounts, and I only reverted based on [[Wikipedia:Vandalism]]. Therefore, I feel as though my edits were not trying to remove the additional objections from the FAC. I would like a response as per my comment about Bishonen above. &mdash;[[User:Eternal Equinox|Eternal Equinox]] | [[User talk:Eternal Equinox|talk]] 23:44, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
::Judging by Raul's contributions, I am being ignored and would like a response. &mdash;[[User:Eternal Equinox|Eternal Equinox]] | [[User talk:Eternal Equinox|talk]] 03:09, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:::In regards to the above, I'll defer to Bishonen's comment [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia_talk:Featured_article_candidates&diff=prev&oldid=44738993] [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 03:13, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
::::That is nonsense. I would care for you to point out exactly where I have "misconducted" myself and what kind of "culture" has been distorted. I don't believe any of this and am very convinced that this has to do with my residence being in Toronto and accusations of HW, which is also nonsense. Unless specific points of "misconduct" is pointed out (so that I can "correct" my mistakes for future reference), there is no reason why I should oblige to the "ban". &mdash;[[User:Eternal Equinox|Eternal Equinox]] | [[User talk:Eternal Equinox|talk]] 20:58, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
==CheckUser Assistance==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Hello, I feel I need some assistance. A user placed my userid in for a CheckUser here [[Wikipedia:Requests_for_CheckUser#PoolGuy_.28talk_.E2.80.A2_contribs.29_and_GoldToeMarionette_.28talk_.E2.80.A2_contribs.29]]. I am not a very advanced user of Wikipedia, however after reading the green box at the top of [[Wikipedia:Requests_for_CheckUser]] there appears to be no reason for [[User:Jayjg]] to complete the investigation.
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
I am not sure if I have any Wikipedia Rights, however I feel as if they have been violated. I could understand if I had been acting to violate Wikipedia Policy, however I have not been, contrary to whatever the user who filed for the CheckUser wrote.
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
I would appreciate it if you would review this and comment back to me. Thank you. [[User:GoldToeMarionette|GoldToeMarionette]] 04:39, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:I'll defer to [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Essjay&curid=4245834&diff=44611859&oldid=44611194 Essjay's comment] on the matter [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 04:40, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
We also could use checkuser on the three registered sockpuppets currently suspected at [[Wikipedia:Long term abuse/Roitr]]. Thank you! -[[User:Husnock|Husnock]] 16:15, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
==Please add link to Main Page alternates==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
We didn't place it on the Redesign draft because it would have caused confusion and division during the poll to replace the main page. But now that the election is over, and many users still want to use the old version of the Main Page, here's the code to insert the link (it's at the top of the header, below - and you'll need to test it in preview to make sure the margin settings work with the Main Page before you save). --[[User:Go for it!|Go for it!]] 15:24, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
<p style="margin-bottom:-.9em; padding-right:.5em;text-align: right; font-size:95%">''[[Wikipedia:Main Page alternates|Main page alternates]]</p>
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
{|style="width:100%; margin-top:+.7em; background-color:#fcfcfc; border: 1px solid #ccc"
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
|style="width:56%;color:#000"|
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
{| width="280px" style="border:solid 0px;background:none"
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
|-
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
| style="width:280px;text-align:center; white-space: nowrap; color:#000" |
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
<h1 style="font-size: 162%; border: none; margin: 0; padding:.1em; color:#000">
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Welcome to <span class="nounderlines">'''[[Wikipedia]]''',</span></h1>
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
<div style="top: +0.2em; font-size: 95%">the '''free encyclopedia''' that '''[[Wikipedia:Introduction|anyone can edit]]'''.</div>
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
<div id="articlecount" style="width:100%;text-align:center:padding:1em;font-size:85%;">[[Special:Statistics|{{NUMBEROFARTICLES}}]] articles in English</div>
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
|-
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
|}
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
<!-- ----------Portals Follow----------------------------- -->
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
|style="width:11%;font-size:95%;color:#000"|
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
*[[Portal:Arts|Arts]]
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
*[[Portal:Biography|Biography]]
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
*[[Portal:Geography|Geography]]
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
|style="width:11%;font-size:95%"|
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
*[[Portal:History|History]]
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
*[[Portal:Mathematics|Mathematics]]
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
*[[Portal:Science|Science]]
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
|style="width:11%;font-size:95%"|
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
*[[Portal:Society|Society]]
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
*[[Portal:Technology|Technology]]
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
*'''[[Portal:Browse|All&nbsp;portals]]'''
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
|}
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
<!-- -------End Portals----- -->
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
{|style="width:100%; background-color: transparent; margin-top:-.8em; margin-bottom:-.7em"
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
|style="font-size:95%; text-align:left; white-space: nowrap;color:#000"|
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
[[Wikipedia:About|Overview]] '''&middot;''' [[Wikipedia:Searching|Searching]] '''&middot;''' [[Wikipedia:Tutorial|Editing]] '''&middot;''' [[Wikipedia:Questions|Questions]] '''&middot;''' [[Help:Contents|Help]]
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
|style="font-size:95%; padding-top:10px; padding-bottom:10px; margin:0px; text-align:right; white-space: nowrap;color:#000"|
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
[[Wikipedia:Browse|Categories]] '''&middot;''' [[Wikipedia:Featured content|Featured content]] '''&middot;''' [[Wikipedia:Quick index|A&ndash;Z index]]
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
|}
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
== Herzog ==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Impossible! I couldn't have misspelled "Heowever" :)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Seriously, I think the Herzog's quote in 6-Day War was added by me. To verify the page number I'll need to check in the library. I don't think that the sloppy anon edit in YKW is mine, but it is possible. Thanks for doing the dirty & unappreciated job. ←[[User:Humus sapiens|Humus sapiens]] <sup>[[User talk:Humus sapiens|ну?]]</sup> 01:22, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
==Crusading Composer Change of username==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Hello, I requested a change of username but the name was taken. I made 2 further suggestions on the same request, but they didn't seem to being actioned. I didn't know if each suggestion needed a separate request so I made a new request at the bottom. You removed both requests - I don't know why? I have reinstated the request, if that's OK.[[User:Crusading composer|Crusading composer]] 08:30, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Thank you very much. That was quick. Sorry for not making myself clearer on the request page. Cheers.[[User:Count Of The Saxon Shore|Count Of The Saxon Shore]] 12:36, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
==Re:Sorry==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
No problem, actually. I got my doubts cleared by [[User:Robchurch|Robchurch]] and others. Thanks for your concern. :) --'''<font color="#E32636">[[User:Anirudhsbh|Andy123]]</font>'''<small><font color="green">[[User talk:Anirudhsbh|(talk)]]</font></small> 19:16, 21 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
==Thanks==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
I am astonished that you decided to help me, but I won't question it. Thank you. Beyond that I will try to avoid making comment as much as possible. [[User:Everyking|Everyking]] 13:42, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
== Everyking ==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Raul, I strongly disagree with your unblock of Everyking, and I'm minded to reblock him. The situation with Bishonen was the second day in a row he'd commented on admins' actions. On Monday, he left criticism on [[User talk:IAMthatIAM]], a new LaRouche supporter whose account was blocked indefinitely by [[User:Karada|Karada]] because of the user name. Everyking turned up with criticism of Karada on [[User talk:IAMthatIAM]], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AIAMthatIAM&diff=44769159&oldid=44725888] which was a violation of the arbcom ruling that comments from him about admins may only be posted to the admin's talk page, RfC or RfAr. When I explained this to him and said I was going to revert his edit, he got into a revert war over it, calling my intervention "abusiveness." [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AIAMthatIAM&diff=44775309&oldid=44775061]
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
There's no point in the arbcom giving admins the tools to deal with disruptive behavior and violation of rulings, if arbcom members (or those on the arbcom list) are the ones to undo the blocks. The last time I blocked Everyking for a violation, Sannse unblocked him 24 minutes later, [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ALog&type=block&user=&page=User%3AEveryking] and now you've undone a week-long block after less than 12 hours. So for two violations back-to-back over two days, he hasn't even served the customary 24-hour block.
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
When Everyking violates the ruling, he's engaged in deliberate boundary violations in order to test how far he can push, how many loopholes he can find, and how many people he can get involved arguing over him. The only way to deal with this is to issue clear rulings, tell him what the consequence of any violation will be, and then stick to that consequence no matter what his excuse is. In this way, he'll know that ''he'' is in full control over whether or not he's allowed to edit Wikipedia. Any other approach is doomed to fail, in my view.
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
I'm therefore asking you to reconsider your unblock. I have no opinion on whether he should be given a week, but it should definitely be more than 24 hours. [[User:SlimVirgin|SlimVirgin]] <sup><font color="Purple">[[User_talk:SlimVirgin|(talk)]]</font></sup> 18:43, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:I have agreed to stay out of all this business from now on. What more do you want? Quit calling for my head and let me edit in peace. [[User:Everyking|Everyking]] 19:59, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
::Then quit behaving like someone who's going through the [http://nvnv.essortment.com/terribletwosto_rhat.htm terrible twos] and needs to be put in the time-out chair. [[User:SlimVirgin|SlimVirgin]] <sup><font color="Purple">[[User_talk:SlimVirgin|(talk)]]</font></sup> 20:29, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:::I unblocked Everyking because I'm taking him at his word that he'll start abiding by the decision. This would would let him continue doing RC patrol and other useful edits -- everybody wins. If EK fails to live up to his word and again violates the arbcom's prohibitions, then not only can he expect to be blocked for any more violations, but I will be tacking on the 6+ days I unblocked him for to whatever new blocks he accumulates. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 20:59, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Why does this idea of blocking me for a year seem to appeal to you? I'm serious, that's not sarcasm. [[User:Everyking|Everyking]] 22:58, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:Three minuts after agreeing to "stay out of all this business from now on" [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Raul654&diff=prev&oldid=44988884] Everyking was writing about the "misuse of admin powers" by [[user:Carnildo]].[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Carnildo_2&diff=prev&oldid=44989207] Does everyone agree about what types of comments are prohibited? I told Everyking that if he went 24 hours without commenting on Admin decisions I'd unblock him. He didn't make it that long, in my opinion. -[[User:Will Beback|Will Beback]] 23:19, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:The fault, dear James, lies not in the stars, but in ourselves. To wit, you have repeatedly violated the arbitration committee's decision. (The question about whether or not this is willfull obstinance has come up. To be frank, some people have suggested you are simply too clueless to know that what you are doing is wrong; I remain undecided. If this be the case, no one has yet devised a remedy, nor is one likely to be forthcoming) And you have not given us any reason to hope you will reform. And, except for trivial and convoluted statements that you regret being somewhat incivil, you have not even acknowledged that you did anything wrong prior to the (third) arbcom case. (Let's not forget the first two cases either, when you drove away [[user:Reene|at least one]] other user, if not more) And you have repeatedly made appeals that waste the committee's already-limited time (hundreds of kilobytes worth) - appeals that have so little substance that it beggars the imagination. And when you didn't get an answer you liked, you simply waited a while and asked again (5 times, in fact). And when we rightfully began ignoring these vapid, time-consuming queries, you began complaining that you were being ignored. Not to mention your constant [[Let's make a deal]] attitude during those appeals, offering to be more civil in your carping at other admins if we let you edit the administrator's noticeboard again. (1) I'm am '''not''' [[Monty Hall]], and (2) only a fool would agree to that.
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:So, that leads us to the ultimate pragmatic question - what do we do with you. At this point, I think it's fair to say that you've burned most (if not all) of your bridges -- even people who previously argued on your behalf are now rather irritated (like Bish, who previously, critizied someone for "kicking EK when he's down", is now calling for your head [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration&diff=prev&oldid=44874559]). I also don't think it's an exagerration to say that you are really, really on your last chance here, and that the next time you do something you shouldn't, you're going to get a long ban, and no one will be coming to your aid then. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 23:34, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
::When people boundary-test, they're engaging in attention-seeking behavior. All this discussion, the unblocks, his begging on IRC, it's all oxygen to him, and it's harming him as well as Wikipedia. His promise to "stay out of all this business from now on," means he will define and redefine "this business" so that he's never quite in violation of the promise, just as he's never quite in violation of the arbcom rulings. I feel the block needs to be reinstated, and we need to agree not to undo each other's blocks in relation to him in the future, no matter what excuses he comes up with. [[User:SlimVirgin|SlimVirgin]] <sup><font color="Purple">[[User_talk:SlimVirgin|(talk)]]</font></sup> 23:36, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:::As my above statement says, if EK again violates the decision, I will not be unblocking him (except to reblock him for the duration of the block +6 days) [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 23:46, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
::::Isn't this comment about Carnildo [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship/Carnildo_2&diff=prev&oldid=44989207] a violation? The ruling says comments about admins may be posted only on their talk pages, RfC, and RfAr. [[User:SlimVirgin|SlimVirgin]] <sup><font color="Purple">[[User_talk:SlimVirgin|(talk)]]</font></sup> 23:55, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:::::Strictly speaking, I suppose it is (and, by that logic, I suppose he could now be blocked for up to and including a year). On the other hand, I would ask that admins refrain from blocking him for too long, but I won't unblock regardless. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 00:00, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
::::::I don't see how that is a violation. He cannot vote on RFA by merely posting "Oppose" since it may be overlooked. &mdash;[[User:Eternal Equinox|Eternal Equinox]] | [[User talk:Eternal Equinox|talk]] 00:01, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
=== Kudos ===
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
I tip my hat to you for [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Will_Beback&curid=3567479&diff=45025425&oldid=44968181 this] statement, and fervently hope that it catches on. People make mistakes, and graceful acknowledgment of them is where most of us go wrong. - [[User:Aaron Brenneman|<font color="#000000">brenneman</font>]]<span class="plainlinks">[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&user=Aaron+Brenneman<font color="000000" title="Admin actions"><sup>'''{L}''' </sup></font>]</span> 01:25, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:Seconded. Very decent of you. :-) [[User:SlimVirgin|SlimVirgin]] <sup><font color="Purple">[[User_talk:SlimVirgin|(talk)]]</font></sup> 01:52, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Raul, I feel like I should get some kind of "take back" options for my statements because I know that, with over seven months to go until my sentence expires, at some point I might slip up and accidentally violate the ruling, and then I would be banned for ''an entire year''. I have been worrying about this a lot. I have invested an enormous amount of myself in the project for over two years, and the idea that I could be banned from it for a year for some momentary oversight is frankly rather horrifying. Is it reasonable to expect that I might have the option to retract any objectionable statements I might accidentally make and therefore not be penalized for them? [[User:Everyking|Everyking]] 10:16, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:It's not like you haven't had 233 chances before this to not be in the situation you're in. If you hadn't had so many chances and willfully disregarded them, a lot of people would be more lenient. Just don't comment about anything that any admin does and you'll be fine. - [[User:Taxman|Taxman]] <sup><small>[[User talk:Taxman|Talk]]</small></sup> 14:48, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:OK, well, you aren't responding...I'm afraid if I take this to the ArbCom in general you'll say that I'm being a vexatious litigant, like you threatened, so I had hoped you could just give me a kind of informal OK about this. [[User:Everyking|Everyking]] 07:19, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
::I suppose if it's a subjective case, you could tell the blocking admin that you didn't really think it was criticism of another admin's action, and politely ask him to reconsider and maybe shorten or withdraw the block. However, do you have the right to retract your comment and automatically get yourself unblocked? Absolutely not. So if the prospect of being blocked for a long period of time does horrify you, then as Taxman says, you should make it a point to err on the side of caution. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 07:24, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:::The problem is, even if you assume that no one would block me for something that isn't really in violation of the ruling (also a point of concern), that I may forget about the restrictions and say something contrary to the ruling. This tends to happen to me fairly frequently. Now, since that last disturbing episode, I am more wary than before, and finding myself clinching my teeth in nervous anticipation when I try to load an edit screen after I've been away for a while, but still, with over seven months to go, I have little faith in myself to keep the ruling so consistently in mind that I never slip up even a single time. So I think I should have the option to say: "I forgot. I'm sorry." and delete my offending statement. This would certainly help me breathe a little easier. It is not very pleasant contributing to something when you know that even the most minor slip-up, regarding something you consider injust in the first place, will result in being ground up into hamburger meat. [[User:Everyking|Everyking]] 07:54, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
::::"Oops, I forgot I'm not allowed to do that" is not an excuse for bad behavior. You may ask the blocking admin for leniency and use that as your reason, but it will not be the get-out-of-jail-free card you want it to be. As far as you not being fond of the last chance situation you are in, I really am sorry it has come to this. I'm not fond of using heavy sanctions on users who make good edits, but you really have not left us any other choice. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 08:12, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:::::That won't work when appealing to the blocking admin, most likely. I have experience in dealing with how they think. It won't necessarily fail because they think I'm ''wrong'', but rather because they have this kind of "by the books" mentality about ArbCom decisions. So you are telling me to deal with the blocking admin, but I know good and well the only effective thing to do is to get some words on the subject out of an arbitrator&mdash;that is what a blocking admin might listen to, not my pleas for mercy. I also feel I should use this opportunity to try to get across to you the concept of how the boldest and most severe admins tend to prevail, because of the way we delegate so much practical authority to individuals (this goes along with one of the key things I've argued against all along, of course, which is the diffusion of power among individuals, instead of concentrating it in collective deliberation); therefore whichever admin blocks me will likely be the one of the ''least'' sympathetic and reasonable out of the entire admin population. And this "you really have not left us any choice" business needs to be dropped. That's bait for me to get outraged and start pointing out how the whole case is insane, but I have been trying to get away from that sort of thing, the "I was right, you were wrong" logic. Why can't you drop it, too? Two opposing closed minds generally come away from discussions angrier than when they started. [[User:Everyking|Everyking]] 09:32, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
==Copy of Message at [[User talk:Mushroom]]==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
I am the wife of [[User:Danny B.]], as he advised the [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Wiki_alf&diff=prev&oldid=34643372 Wikipedia Welcomer] [[User:Wiki alf]] and we log in from the same office computer. We don’t contribute all that often and so it came as quite a surprise to Danny to find himself blocked by you and this message on his user page:
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
: This user is a sock puppet of Ted Wilkes, as established by Wikipedia:Requests for CheckUser/Archive/March 2006#Ted Wilkes (talk • contribs) and related accounts,
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Because you provided no explantion for your actions on his talk page, it took me some time to track it down. At the [[Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard]] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=44469574&oldid=44465830] you wrote:
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
: "See this request for CheckUser: Ted Wilkes, Danny B. and Karl Schalike are the same person." Mushroom (Talk) 06:40, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
I note that this statement by you was posted immediately after Danny complained on the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents&diff=prev&oldid=43616123] about vandalism by Onefortyone which you did nothing about.
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
However, at [[Wikipedia:Requests for CheckUser/Archive/March 2006]] [[User:Sam Korn]] who did the checking said only:
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
: "Ted Wilkes, [[User:Danny B.|Danny B.]] and Karl Schalike appear likely to be the same."
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Your action appears to have been based on a message left on your talk page by [[User:Onefortyone]] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Mushroom&diff=44515756&oldid=44360276], someone on probation who I see has been banned by [[User:Stifle]] from editing certain articles for a time as result of his repeated violations of his probation and someone that numerous others have complained about. ([[User:MrDarcy]], [[User:Arniep]], [[User talk:Lochdale|User:Lochdale]], [[User:Func]], [[User:DropDeadGorgias]] and if I looked a little further, I'm swure I would find plenty more).
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Mushroom, I think it is right to assume that a [[Wikipedia:Administrator]] has the responsibility for stating facts, not making quick guesses to spin there own version of what [[User:Sam Korn]] who did the checking said. Your rush to judgment has forced me to do a lot of searching all over Wikipedia for no reason. I will unblock my husband and place copies of this message on the talk page of each member of the Arbitration Committee.
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Just for the record, because my husband has an interest, I am the one who pointed him to the non-encyclopedic material being pushed by [[User:Onefortyone]] after I came across a nonsensical contradiction in on of the articles he edited. I also come from a small city with one of the highest number of writers per capita in Canada and where Wikipedia has a high profile and where I know from the local newspaper(s) and business/social associations that there are a number of Wikipedia editors. - [[User:Cynthia B.|Cynthia B.]] 19:58, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:In my opinion, Cynthia B. is identical with [[User:Ted Wilkes]] alias [[User:DW]] alias [[User:JillandJack]]. Both Cynthia B. and DW/JillandJack or Ted Wilkes contributed to the following articles: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nina_Hamnett&action=history], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Montparnasse&limit=500&action=history], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vincent_Price&limit=500&action=history], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Kay_Boyle&action=history], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Alan_Dershowitz&action=history], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Henri-Pierre_Roch%C3%A9&action=history], [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_Quebec_television_series&action=history],etc. This suggests that DW alias Ted Wilkes has created many more sockpuppets, as DW did in the past. [[User:Onefortyone|Onefortyone]] 23:24, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
== Change Username ==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
I would like to have my username changed from Steveo2 to JaredW. I have already created the account, and I have added myself to the "Request to Usurp" list, but I've been #16 on the waiting list for a while. If it's too much trouble, then I can wait. [[User:Steveo2|JaredW!]] 17:48, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
== [[Mango]] ==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
You removed this from the FAC page a couple of days ago but the article talk still displays it as an active candidate. I'm not sure if it's still open or not: could you iron that out please? Cheers, [[User:Durova|Durova]] 18:03, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:Durova, I've changed the template. The process has lag, but you can always put on the appropriate template yourself if you get tired of waiting. Best, [[User:Bishonen|Bishonen]] | [[User talk:Bishonen|ノート]] 18:34, 23 March 2006 (UTC).
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
::Bish stole my thunder - I usually rely on VioletRiga to do the fac-failed tagging, but there's a lag in the process. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 18:19, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
== Societal Attitudes Towards Homosexuality ==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Mark,
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
My name is Lou Franklin. We have talked before [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Raul654/archive3#Clue_me_in].
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
The article "Societal attitudes towards homosexuality" is being used, not for the benefit of the reader, but to promote the agenda of a well-organized group of gay advocates. I can provide you with ''many'' examples if you would like. I know that you have seen first-hand what can happen with the homosexuality-related articles, but this particular article is a disgrace. I have gone through all of the proper channels to raise a red flag about this.
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
The first item on the "workshop" page is a request to "remove the article" [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Lou_franklin/Workshop#Remove_the_article]. But, so far, that option has not been added to the "proposed remedies" section of the "requests for arbitration" page [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Lou_franklin/Proposed_decision#Proposed_remedies].
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
I hope that you will seriously consider adding this remedy to "proposed remedies" section, as that is the only remedy that will actually correct the problem.
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Best Regards, [[User:Lou franklin|Lou franklin]] 04:06, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:I just skimmed the article. IMO, it's not stellar, but it's not terrible either. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 08:20, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
::It is '''atrocious'''. Wikipedia is not supposed to be a soapbox, or a vehicle for propaganda and advertising [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_soapbox]. This article falls way short of that standard, and attempts to balance the article are quickly reverted. They actually compared ingesting semen to taking vitamins ''in the introduction!'' [[User:Lou franklin|Lou franklin]] 10:12, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
== KKK ==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Hey. I am sure you would probably notice, but I posted the current [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ku_Klux_Klan&diff=45365239&oldid=44130335 difference] from the same time frame to the current version of the article. It looks a little more volatile. I do not know what the best solution is, but I think it is obvious that a good bulk of the article has changed. By no means am I saying change is bad... but in this case, the issue of POV has been brought up. I have been trying to keep an eye for blatent vandalism, but hopefully there can be some consensus on how to deal with some of the more specific content issues. As long as we meet our end goal of a neutral, factual article, then I am sure most everyone will be happy with the end result. - [[User:Dozenist|Dozenist]] <font color="darkgreen" size="1">[[User talk:Dozenist|talk]]</font> 04:28, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
=="good article" star on main article page==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
hi, i wonder if you could comment on the debate at [[Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 March 25]] about a new template to be slapped on the *main article page* when an article is deemed "good". it would be directly equivalent to the featured article star on an article mainpage, and suddenly appeared, without prior discussion, on hundreds of articles marked as "good articles". i read your arguments about a similar featured article star with interest.
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
note the GA process is not currently policy, and was formerly restricted to talk pages only, putting an icon on the main article page itself is the new development). would you consider "good article" differently from "featured article" in this case, and allow the meta-data on the main ARTICLE page? [[User:Zzzzz|Zzzzz]] 10:57, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:There is no "star" for the good article icon and it is not directly equivalent to the featured article icon! The <nowiki>{{good article}}</nowiki> template places a small Good Article symbol ([[Image:Symbol support vote.svg|14px|Plus icon]]) in the top right corner of an article to indicate that it is a [[Wikipedia:Good articles|good article on Wikipedia]]. &mdash;[[User:RJN|RJN]] 11:07, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
::Raul, you may also be interested in commenting at [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Good articles#Icon]], where some discussion pertinent to this issue is taking place. Thanks! [[User:Flcelloguy|Flcelloguy]] <small>([[User talk:Flcelloguy|A <font color="brown">note?</font>]])</small> 14:45, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
First that "Good Article" monstrosity, now [[Template:CoorHeader|this]], which explcitly admits that it does not work for any skin apart from monobook (including my default skin, as it happens)! -- [[User:ALoan|ALoan]] [[User talk:ALoan|(Talk)]] 21:49, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
==Law proposal==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Law: Ignoring all rules is permissable as long as you are right
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Corollary: The first time you are not right, you will face disciplinary sanction
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Second Corollary: When you finally face disciplinary sanction for being wrong, all previous cases where you were right will still be evidence against you. [[User:Phil Sandifer|Phil Sandifer]] 18:48, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
== Damaging edit ==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
I don't know what happened. All I did was to readd paragraph about NetBSD logo removed earlier by someone. Maybe I was editing an old version instead of the current one? I'll be more careful in the future, for sure! [[User:Grue|<font style="background: black" face="Courier" color="#FFFFFF">'''&nbsp;Grue&nbsp;'''</font>]] 12:46, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
== about template PakQL1 ==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
hi, you changed the template layout to standart talk and the template is on only 2 talk pages, if the templates on talk pages must have a the standard layout then I think the template should be removed the pages and another template should be added the template you changed is for pakistan related project pages. thankyou<center><tt><font color="red">[[Taqi Haider|Wol<strike>ver</strike>ine]]<font color="green"><sup>[[User talk:Taqi Haider|talk]]</font></sup></font> 21:24, 6 March 2006 (UTC)</tt></center>
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
== RE: IBA thingy ==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
It'll probably only make a difference of a few minutes versus (most of the) the mainstream English media, but it'll will be neat for Wikipedia to beat em, live. Let me try to find out where I stand scheduale-wise before bothering with too many contingencies &mdash; since it looks likely I will be around for it. As of now, we have a little less than 12 hours (though, it being delayed by 30 minutes or so is a very real possibility). Regards, [[User:El C|El_C]] 08:18, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:Thanks again for the kind words. I'm told that ITN isn't election central, which is fair enough in a sense. But for about 25 minutes it was, and it looks like I even beat the (non-IBA) Hebrew newsources by a minute or two (I write fast). /bows [[User:El C|El_C]] 00:12, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
==Scarf==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
It's a ''khata'', a Tibetan scarf given to guests on ceremonial occasions. Everyone at the dinner was given one. [[User:Adam Carr|Adam]] 06:13, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
==Mexican anthem article==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Raul, you promoted [[Mexicanos, al grito de guerra]] to FA status even though it was only at a 75% support level, and furthermore there were only three support votes (with one oppose). I don't believe this is adequate by our conventional standards. Could you please remove it from the list and put it back up for nomination again? The combination of the low turn out and the relatively low percentage of support should invalidate such a promotion, in my opinion. [[User:Everyking|Everyking]] 11:18, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:Could I get a response to this? [[User:Everyking|Everyking]] 05:49, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
::Sure. The nom was on the FAC for the rather-long period of 11 days, which as you mentioned, produced only 4 combined supports/oppositions. The last 4 of the nomination produced only a single comment (which I will address in a moment). So, say what you will about the decision to promote, it was clearly not premature -- the article clearly was not getting any more comments no matter how long I left it there.
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
::As to the decision to promote - the single objection (yours) was that it was not comprehensive. This objection gets thrown around quite a bit, I have repeatedly stated that it's inherently vague. (Yes, hypothetically if someone were to nominate a 5 sentence stub, I would give an objection like this considerable weight, even if it didn't list all the things that could be described. However, that is not the case here). It's impossible to respond to this objection when you have no idea what the objector thinks is missing. At any rate, within 10 minutes of registering your objection, Zscout asked what you thought was missing, and 2 days later Ta Bu reiterated Zscout's question. 2 days after that, (with still nary a response from you), I promoted , for the reasons I believe I hope I have made clear (although, because of the unusually low number of supports, I did check the article myself). [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 06:15, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:::Comprehensiveness: the article as a whole is shorter than what we generally expect of an FA, and this is especially so when you consider that so much of the article is the lyrical text and another large portion just recounts various constitutional regulations. I have cautiously expressed my concern to Zscout previously that, while it is certainly good to approach these kinds of topics for "systemic bias" purposes, that doesn't mean they should have the bar lowered for quality. This article makes me feel that way with more certainty. I understand the limitations of an English speaker without access to a lot of the sources that would be useful (I know this as well as anybody, having worked on a good many articles where the best sources either aren't in the Internet or aren't in my language, or both), but to me that means that he should do the best he can do and then either try to conduct more extensive research or (more likely) wait until someone better able to research the subject comes along to work on it. I frown on the notion of producing an article that is only the maximum quality possible within the context of the linguistic or geographical background of a particular author, and then calling that featured quality. I'm not sure we'd accept this level of comprehensiveness on a Pokemon character, and this is a national anthem. [[User:Everyking|Everyking]] 07:59, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
::::Can you please respond to this? I would take it to FA removal, but with this being so recent and the number of voters so low I would expect you could just reverse yourself without any big stir. [[User:Everyking|Everyking]] 05:24, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:::::Well, I wrote that long explanation of my position and I got no response. Wonderful. Well, I'm just going to have to take it to FARC if you're not going to address my concerns. [[User:Everyking|Everyking]] 05:38, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
== Agapetos Arbitration ==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
I'm sorry to spam your talk page, but this seemed serious enough to directly put on your talk page. I have evidence that AiG has actively had employees push their POV on the AiG page and possibly on related pages. I have added a new evidence section in the Agapetos arbitration to that effect, explaining the evidence. Due to the very serious nature of this accusation and its possible implications for Wikipedia, I decided to directly alert all of the ArbCom members. [[User:JoshuaZ|JoshuaZ]] 01:58, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:'Notified. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 06:35, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
== [[Yom Kippur War]] ==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
[[Yom Kippur War]], that article that you worked so hard on, is featured on the main page today! Congratulations. It's an awesome article. [[User:deeptrivia|deeptrivia]] ([[User talk:deeptrivia|talk]]) 04:25, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:Thanks - I think of all the articles I've written, that's the one I'm most proud of. The only downside is [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Yom_Kippur_War&diff=prev&oldid=46118584 this "typo"] that everyone seems to fix. I'm getting a tad flustered at having to undo everyone who "fixes" it. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 04:28, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
::Maybe you should [[materiel|link it]]? &mdash;[[User:Bunchofgrapes|Bunchofgrapes]] ([[User talk:Bunchofgrapes|talk]]) 04:31, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:::Alphax has done it. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 04:32, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:::: I also added an internal remark to the effect that it wasn't a typo. [[User:JoshuaZ|JoshuaZ]] 04:33, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:::::I noticed - thank you. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 04:33, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
::: Wow, I didn't know of the word either. I'd have thought it's a mistake by a French guy trying to write English :) [[User:deeptrivia|deeptrivia]] ([[User talk:deeptrivia|talk]]) 04:36, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Anyway, getting a bit more on topic, the reason I like it is because it's one of the few non-controversial articles on the Arab-Israeli conflict (/me knocks on wood). [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 04:35, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:Apart from the FARC person? -- [[User:ALoan|ALoan]] [[User talk:ALoan|(Talk)]] 22:17, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
::What can I say? A village somewhere is missing its idiot. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 22:43, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
== James Tuohy ==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
I know you are a bit jumpy right now because you have a featured article to sheperd, but I wanted to point out that his last modification (modifying your block) was itself vandalism and so should probably be noted on his page for future reference. It appears that you protected his page, so I can't make the addition myself. [[User:JoshuaZ|JoshuaZ]] 05:26, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
==POV Warriors==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
Raul's Laws uses the term "POV Warrior". I just wondered what you meant by that: people who are heavily pushing their POV, or people who are oversensitive to POV and want to weasel everything down?
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
[[User:Bathrobe|Bathrobe]] 06:31, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:It's generic, it can mean both, I suppose. However, when writing it, I believe I was thinking primarily of the former. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 06:33, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
== [[Neo-Mitochondrial Creatures]] ==
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
I'd like you to critique this article, if possible. I think it constructive to recieve an outside opinion on the subject and summerize if its worthy featured article material. -[[User:Megaman Zero|Zero]]<sup>[[User talk:Megaman Zero|Talk]]</sup> 07:12, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:Well, it's lacking on two very big FA-related fronts - it lacks a suitable introduction (one sentence is insuffecient) and it has no inline references (although, oddly, the references section uses the list format reservred for inline citation) [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 07:19, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
::Could I inquire your assistance in developing a more sufficent opening and reference format then..? -[[User:Megaman Zero|Zero]]<sup>[[User talk:Megaman Zero|Talk]]</sup> 07:21, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]
:::I've taken your advice and editted the article accordingly. I'd like it if you could take a look. -[[User:Megaman Zero|Zero]]<sup>[[User talk:Megaman Zero|Talk]]</sup> 16:32, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
[http://kapital<!---->ism.net Look Raul!]

== [[Wikipedia:Today's featured article/April 1, 2006]] ==

Sorry to interrupt whatever (grin), but "extraterrestrial" is misspelled. I'd fix it, but the [[WP:TOFA]] summaries are edit-protected. [[User:RadioKirk|<span style="font-size: 13px; font-weight: normal; color: #161;">Radio</span>]][[Special:Contributions/RadioKirk|<span style="font-size: 13px; font-weight: normal; color: #161;">Kirk</span>]] [[User talk:RadioKirk|<span style="font-size: 10px; color: #161;">talk to me</span>]] 21:25, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
:Fixed. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 22:45, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
::Er... apologies, but I still see a hyphen in "extra-terrestrial" on that page. Is there a server lag? [[User:RadioKirk|<span style="font-size: 13px; font-weight: normal; color: #161;">Radio</span>]][[Special:Contributions/RadioKirk|<span style="font-size: 13px; font-weight: normal; color: #161;">Kirk</span>]] [[User talk:RadioKirk|<span style="font-size: 10px; color: #161;">talk to me</span>]] 01:25, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

== Smith Chart ==

What was the copyright problem with the former smith chart? The one you placed is hardly useful. [[User:Afonso Silva|Afonso Silva]] 15:24, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
:The image you uploaded that I replaced is the exact same one I found on google images and uploaded back in my naieve days. Unless you created it yourself, you can safely assume it's copyrighted and someone will get mad if we use it. So while yes, the current ones isn't as useful, it's a lot less likely to get anyone into legal trouble either. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 16:01, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

:It was marked with this: <nowiki>{{PD-ineligible}} </nowiki>

It can be used for images that are inherently ineligible for copyright protection because they are based exclusively on common knowledge with no element of creativity. An example would be [[:Image:F Major key signature.png]] or things like multiplication tables. If you have any doubts, please ask.

It's trivial work, if it isn't, let's sue all the telecommunications engineers, because there isn't a single one that hasn't used a Smith chart. [[User:Afonso Silva|Afonso Silva]] 16:15, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

== Copyright problems ==

Over a month ago, I posted you a queation on the copyright of the photos of statues. [[User:Raul654/archive3#Photos of statues]]. Finally, I have posted a bunch of copyright questions on the talk page of the uploader [[User talk:Brastite#Images with copyright problems]]. This user has recieved lots on notes on copyright stuff. Xe has labelled El Greco paintings from 16th century "copyrightedfreeuse" - see [[User talk:Brastite#Image stuff]] - and frankly, I don't this user just has uploaded zillions of pics from the net without caring for copyright. Probably we should have everything xe has uploaded deleted, except for those images that are obviously old enough to be PD.

How should one go about to handle this? Report pretty much every image this user has uploaded - no, that is not true because xe also uploaded lots of pics of old paintings which are PD-old, but maybe half of them - on [[Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images]]? If so, they probably should be brought up all at the same time so people can see the big picture. I am assuming I won't recieve much of an answer on my question, either than the user re-labelling the images "GFDL-self" and such without further explanation. Checking the history of the images that others have brought to the user's attention, this is pretty much what has happened. // [[User:Habj|Habj]] 02:21, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
:List them en-masse at [[Wikipedia:Copyright problems]] [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 02:22, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
:: The whole lot - those who have a source and a license (probably false) and those who don't have a source? Or, should the non-sourced stuff first go through the procedure of <nowiki>{{subst:nsd}}</nowiki> + contacting the uploader? // [[User:Habj|Habj]] 02:53, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
:::You've already contacted the uploader [[User_talk:Brastite#Images_with_copyright_problems]]. Give him some time to respond, but if something doesn't get fixed in the near future, bring 'em to CP. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 02:55, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
:::: OK. I was thinking more along the lines of all non-obvious-PD-stuff that the user has uploaded... but I guess we can start with this chunk. // [[User:Habj|Habj]] 03:08, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

== [[Dietrich v The Queen]] ==

I noticed you chose this for tomorrow's main page article, but then you took it down again. Were there any problems with it? I got all excited there for a minute. --[[User:Thebainer|bainer]] ([[User_talk:Thebainer|talk]]) 05:00, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
:Yes - [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Tomorrow%27s_featured_article&diff=prev&oldid=46410018] (I wouldn't toy with someone like that otherwise; that's not cool) [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 05:03, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
::Ah, I see, I hadn't noticed that objection. The same editor tagged the page with {citationneeded} ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dietrich_v_The_Queen&diff=46410343&oldid=45659667]). The source was in the references section at the bottom, and linked to from the infobox at the side, but there was no footnote, so I added the reference in footnote form a short while later ([http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Dietrich_v_The_Queen&diff=46413278&oldid=46410910]). I hope the article is back in consideration for the main page now. --[[User:Thebainer|bainer]] ([[User_talk:Thebainer|talk]]) 03:55, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

== Can I add a new law? ==

The law is this: The speed of Wikipedia's expansion is proportional to the messiness and hostility of it.
Corollary: The speed of Wikipedia's change in policy, structure, users, etc. is also proportional to the messiness and hostility of it.--[[User:Exir Kamalabadi|<font color="steelblue">Exir</font>]] [[User talk:Exir Kamalabadi|<font color="royalblue">Kamalabadi</font>]][[Wikipedia:Esperanza|<sup><font color="mediumseagreen">Join Esperanza!</font></sup>]] 07:53, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

==[[S. A. Andrée's Arctic balloon expedition of 1897|Flight of the Turkey]]==
Raul, if and when you should feel like mainpaging [[S. A. Andrée's Arctic balloon expedition of 1897]], please let me know and I'll give you a couple of images to choose from that'll look good at 100px, because the lead image is absolutely impossible for the purpose. [[User:Bishonen|Bishonen]] | [[User talk:Bishonen|talk]] 08:04, 1 April 2006 (UTC).
:Acknowledged. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 20:02, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

== Deletion of Good article template ==

Mark, isn't it customary to go to [[Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2006 March 25]] and put a box around the discussion to close it out? Not that I am taking sides, but until 5 days ago the vote seemed nose-to-nose. I thought that there had to be a serious majority to delete an article or template. Be careful how you word the verdict, this one is touchy. [[User:Chris the speller|Chris the speller]] 17:31, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
:Done. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 20:01, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

::A couple of us fixed your box (you forgot the tfd bottom, and put the top in the wrong place). Could you also delete the [[Template talk:Good article]], too? Gosh, with the haste, one might think you had an opinion on the nomination.... ;-)
:::--[[User:William Allen Simpson|William Allen Simpson]] 20:58, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
::::I suppose you could say that :) [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 20:59, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

== Help at RfA and RfB ==

Given [[User:Cecropia]]'s resignation as a bureaucrat, some huge shoes have been left behind to fill. He's been responsible for 50% (234 of 467) of the admin promotions over the last year. You are the fifth most active bureaucrat in that time frame with 6%. I hope you can step up your activity level at RfA to help cover his departure. All the best, --[[User:Durin|Durin]] 19:47, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
:Um, not bloody likely. I'm already stretched too thin here. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 20:02, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

== removal of {{tl|world}} from [[abortion]] ==

I was the one who added the template. There is too much US-centrism on that topic as there has been constant debate in East Asia as well, and there is barely any description of the issue there (where it is not merely divided into pro-life and pro-choice factions). [[User:Natalinasmpf|Elle <small><sub><font color="#CC9920">vécut heureuse</font></sub></small> <small><font color="blue"><sup>à jamais</sup></font></small>]] ([[User talk:Natalinasmpf|Be eudaimonic!]]) 21:22, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

== [[Three Whom God Should Not Have Created: Persians, Jews, and Flies]] ==

Hmmm, interesting. I'd never heard of it. If I see anything I'll add to it... it'd be good to find the Arabic title... so, I'll try to do that. [[User:Grenavitar|gren]] [[User talk:Grenavitar|グレン]] 01:20, 2 April 2006 (UTC)


== Has Stranger been so uncivil? ==
I saw your vote in support of this resolution and was hoping you could let me know why you chose to do so. In part, I am concerned that its wording may be misleading.

Thanks in advance,

[[User:StrangerInParadise|StrangerInParadise]] 01:35, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
:I'll defer to the previous messages you have been sent in this regard - [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:StrangerInParadise&diff=41889985&oldid=prev][http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AStrangerInParadise&diff=42265249&oldid=42262030] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:StrangerInParadise&diff=42266508&oldid=42265249]. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 01:41, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

So, I should conclude then that,
* you agree that my UN Wikipedian messages constituted an uncivil attack?
* the characterization of MarkSweep's out-of-process mass-blanking and mass-deletion as ''vandalism'' is uncivil?

The reason I ask is that this is the only issue (and MarkSweep the only specific person) in connection with which (whom) I have ever used the word ''vandal'', whereas the resolution implies that I make it a regular habit of labelling my opponents with it. (This excludes, of course, uses of ''rv vand'' in summaries of very uncontroversial reverts). I'll point out that [[WP:VAND]] excludes from the definition ''Any '''good-faith''' effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered'', and that I am alleging, specifically, that the CSD-C1 subterfuge and recurrent out-of-process deletions are ''prima facia'' acts of '''bad faith''', that is ''their bad-faith nature [was] inarguably explicit''.

WP:VAND goes on: ''Committing vandalism is a violation of the Wikipedia policy; it needs to be spotted, and then dealt with — if you cannot deal with it yourself, you can seek help from others.'' I clearly could not deal with- or even keep up with- an admin using admin tools in a mass blanking/deletion session, so I sought help from others, which begs the question: how could I do so and not call it what it was? Very much to my surprise, finding an admin to deal with this proved difficult, so the argument wasn't simply gratuitous, it was, ''Hey, this is vandalism, you are obliged to stop him!'' Even if one disagrees with the conclusion, one should not see it as uncivil to raise the issue, even in the face of resistance.

Thanks again in advance,

[[User:StrangerInParadise|StrangerInParadise]] 02:04, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

:While I don't necessarily agree with Mark Sweep's actions (in point of fact I haven't decided where I stand on the issue), they are by no means vandalism. Labelling them vandalism was a bad idea; repeatedly labelling them vandalism despite being told not to is not only a bad idea, but is uncivil and worthy of reprobation. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 03:50, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Despite being told ''by whom?'' Every person who has said so (perhaps excepting yourself?) also happened to be a strong userbox opponent. Even if you disagree with my thesis (that this constitutes vandalism), don't you think that ''to bar utterance of it'' is to go too far, and why should userbox opponents be allowed to do so? BTW, the ''good faith/bad faith'' arguments, or that the resolution is overstated, do either of these things make sense?

Thank you for your continued indulgence,

[[User:StrangerInParadise|StrangerInParadise]] 04:18, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

:''Every person who has said so (perhaps excepting yourself?) also happened to be a strong userbox opponent.'' - their opinions are irrelavant; the fact of the matter is that they gave you good advice, which you promptly ignored. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=George_IV_of_the_United_Kingdom&diff=46530093&oldid=46528591 This] is vandalism. The edits you labelled as vandalism were not. To say "Hey, Mark Sweep is removing a bunch of userboxes" is one thing; to say "Hey, Mark Sweep is vandalizing Wikipedia" is something entirely different, and (in point of fact) it is simply untrue, as the edits were not vandalism. You were told 'don't do this (label his edits as vandalism), this is bad', and you continued to do it anyway. So it's a little late to complain that you are being cited for uncivil behavior [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 04:31, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=George_IV_of_the_United_Kingdom&diff=46530093&oldid=46528591 That] is a cry for help (in addition to being clearly vandalism). Hmmm. Why are you so certain that this is not vandalism that one should be censured for even saying that it is? Bear in mind that I've not had a single pro-userbox admin disagree with me. I will be very interested in your answer.

[[User:StrangerInParadise|StrangerInParadise]] 04:40, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

:Because you happen disagree with an edit doesn't make it vandalism; conversly, labelling an edit vandalism when it's done by a legit user whom you happen to disagree with is an insult, a slap in the face to the person who made the edit. It's one thing to do it without knowing better; it's something very different to do it despite being told (three times) not to -- that's obstinancy. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 04:46, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

I like to think of it as ''consistency''. The "edit" in question was out-of-process mass-blanking and mass-deletion, with subterfuge (misuse of C1, falsification of edit summaries). Has this no impact on your view? Have you considered that my view, in the context of Wikipedian politics, constitutes a ''political view'' which perhaps should not be abandoned simply because opponents say, ''don't say that?''

[[User:StrangerInParadise|StrangerInParadise]] 04:56, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

:No, sorry - just because you happen to hold one set of beliefs does not mean you can insult other wikipedians when you want to, '''especially''' after being told not to. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 05:02, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Told not to by userbox opponents ''only'' (and far more than three, BTW, ''all'' userbox opponents). How can you characterize ''out-of-process mass-blanking and mass-deletion, with subterfuge (misuse of CSD-C1, falsification of edit summaries)'' as simply ''an edit I happen to disagree with'' by ''a legit user?'' How, in light of WP:VAND (which I quoted above), can my view only be seen as ''an insult'' and not at least a reasonable reading of the policy?

[[User:StrangerInParadise|StrangerInParadise]] 05:14, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

== Java featured? ==

Hi - I'm updating the mainpage appearance date of the articles in [[Wikipedia:Featured articles nominated in 2005]] and ran across the Java article. It seems to have been "promoted" to featured by [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Java_programming_language&diff=2950727&oldid=2950590 this edit], which (as far as I can tell) doesn't actually correspond to a [[WP:FAC]] discussion. Thoughts? -- [[user:Rick Block|Rick Block]] <small>([[user talk:Rick Block|talk]])</small> 00:02, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
:Hehe, you're "new" here, I can tell ;)
:Long story short - prior to December 2003, we had 'Brilliant Prose' articles (a self-promoted list of the best articles; roughly equivalent to today's "good articles"). Through November 2003, they were voted on and most were weeded out. The remainder became (in December 2003) the first set of featured articles. When we started tagging articles as <nowiki>{{featured}}</nowiki> in February and March 2004, none of the articles had any corrosponding FAC page; hence, the reason why Java has no FAC page.
:For future reference, [[Wikipedia:Featured articles]] is the definitive list of what is and is not a featured article. If something is listed there, it is definitely a featured article. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 09:56, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
::I understand all that, but can't find any evidence that Java was ever a Brilliant Prose article, or voted on (I'd expect to see it in [[Wikipedia:Archive/Refreshing brilliant prose - Science]]). Poking around some more, it was listed at [[WP:FAC]] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates&diff=prev&oldid=2854468 here], added to [[WP:FA]] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_articles&diff=next&oldid=2950610 here], and the FAC discussion removed [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates&diff=prev&oldid=2954320 here]. It looks to me like [[user:Sasha Slutsker]] simply boldly promoted this article on their own initiative. If you have no objections, I'll copy the FAC discussion to the appropriate subpage and transclude it in the proper month's archive. -- [[user:Rick Block|Rick Block]] <small>([[user talk:Rick Block|talk]])</small> 13:21, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

== Old edit ==

I removed the link because external links go only in the "External links" section, not in the article body. Of course, this was before the introduction of the References section. [[User:Crculver|CRCulver]] 00:09, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
:Ah, ok. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 09:51, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

==Featured article not chosen yet==
Hello, Raul - just a heads up that [[Wikipedia:Today's featured article/April 4, 2006|tomorrow's featured article]] hasn't been chosen yet. If you get a chance to do so before tomorrow, that would be great. Thanks![[User:Flcelloguy|Flcelloguy]] <small>([[User talk:Flcelloguy|A <font color="brown">note?</font>]])</small> 00:18, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

:Thanks a lot! [[User:Flcelloguy|Flcelloguy]] <small>([[User talk:Flcelloguy|A <font color="brown">note?</font>]])</small> 00:43, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

==WBT FAC==
Raul, if now is too soon, when would be an acceptable time for renomination of [[We Belong Together]] on FAC? [[User:Everyking|Everyking]] 00:39, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
:Personally, I'd say it would be a good idea to wait least 4 to 6 weeks before making another nom. Nor should this be idle waiting either; the time would be best spent responding to (read: fixing) objections made in previous FAC noms and asking previous objectors if they consider the problems fixed. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 00:42, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
::Do you think there are any objections left to address? I think the nom could succeed this time. [[User:Everyking|Everyking]] 00:53, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
:::I haven't been following the objections, so I'm not in a position to say whether or not they've been fixed (nor am I comptent to say -- I know very, very little about pop music). The best people to ask would be the people who made the objections. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 00:55, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

== TFA April 15 ==

Not sure if you're aware or not, so just letting you know, but you skipped April 15 in choosing tomorrow's featured article. -- [[User:SmthManly|<font color="black">SmthManly</font>]] / <sup><font color="blue">[[User_talk:SmthManly|ManlyTalk]]</font></sup> / <sup><font color="blue">[[Special:Contributions/SmthManly|ManlyContribs]]</font></sup> 04:36, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
:Doh. Ok, give me a few. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 04:38, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
::Fixed. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 04:44, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
:::Great! -- [[User:SmthManly|<font color="black">SmthManly</font>]] / <sup><font color="blue">[[User_talk:SmthManly|ManlyTalk]]</font></sup> / <sup><font color="blue">[[Special:Contributions/SmthManly|ManlyContribs]]</font></sup> 04:48, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

== [[Retreat of glaciers since 1850]] ==

Thanks for promoting the article. If you don't mind, can I add it instead to the section under Geology and Geophysics and change that heading to "Geology, Geophysics and Glaciology"...reason is, and not to be presumptuous, but there are a couple more glacier related articles such as [[Glacier]] that I feel can be brought up to a FA level in the near future. If you disagree with me, I certainly understand.--[[User:MONGO|MONGO]] 06:18, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
:Actually, I was thinking about creating a new meteorology section (or something along those lines), so I have somewhere to put all these hurricane articles too. What do you think? [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 09:48, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
::Yes, Raul...that would be a good idea...I did think that there was at least one recent promotion of a hurricane article. Maybe the heading of ''Weather and climate'' as I see a number of articles related to climate that may be brought to FA level if some relatively minor work is performed...whatever works is fine.--[[User:MONGO|MONGO]] 01:11, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

==[http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Echidna_ST_03.jpg Echidna]==

Hi Mark, Is that enough, or do you need anything else? ST [[User:128.139.226.37|128.139.226.37]] 08:55, 3 April 2006 (UTC) [http://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%A2%D7%9E%D7%95%D7%93_%D7%A8%D7%90%D7%A9%D7%99 (Hebrew Wikipedia userpage)]
:Excellent - that will suffice. Thank you. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 08:56, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

== Semi-protection ==

Hi Mark. After a stream of vandalism here and on your userpage, I semi-protected the userpage and Bishonen semi-protected this page. Just letting you know... [[User:Sam Korn|Sam Korn]] <sup>[[User talk:Sam Korn|(smoddy)]]</sup> 23:16, 3 April 2006 (UTC)
:About 5 months ago, I was listening to an interview on NPR. They were talking with one of the cops in New York City whose job is specifically to find and arrest graffiti artists. Apparently the graffiti artists hated him so much, they took a picture of him off the official NYC police website, made a stencil of it, and started painting nasty graffiti with his picture and name on it. At first, he was upset by this, but his boss took him aside and told him 'once they stopped spray-painting their own names and started spray-painting yours, that's the sign you're doing your job well'. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 01:12, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

== Thanks ==

Hi! Thanks for your suggestion about how to get more respondants. So far, I have around 60, and the survey has been out there only for one day. I am afraid that contacting editors in masse will also mean contact vandals in masse. But I will think about it. Thanks again! --[[User:Mermes|Mermes]] 02:47, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

== Thanks ==

Hey Raul, thanks for clearing up that IP address incident last night. I guess I should have taken a better look at that IP's talk page before blocking. Anyway, I appreciate your cleaning up after me.

Also, I've been meaning to tell you that you're doing a great job with the featured articles. I've seen how FACs can get contentious and how closing them can be a tough decision to make, but you've shown that you have good judgment when it comes to figuring out which ones to promote. I imagine that that takes alot of time, and causes a fair amount of stress when people start complaining that the list hasn't been cleared lately or that you're unfairly giving extra time to a certain candidate or that you promoted something that you shouldn't have (or vice versa). I'm amazed that you keep up with everything. Don't burn out, and don't forget that there are alot of people that appreciate what you're doing and think you're doing a great job, even though it seems like most of your interaction with people is dealing with their FAC complaints. —[[User:Spangineer|Spangineer]]<sup>[[:es:Usuario:Spangineer|[es]]]</sup>&nbsp;<small><font color="brown">[[User talk:Spangineer|(háblame)]]</font></small> 03:36, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
:(1) There's no way you could have known it was a shared IP address -- no sense in beating yourself up for being fallible.
:(2) Thanks for the compliment. Yes, it does take a fair bit of time, some days more than others. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 05:18, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

== [[Template:Good article]] deletion review ==

An editor has nominated the closure or deletion of the article [[Template:Good article]] for [[Wikipedia:Deletion review#Template:Good article|deletion review]]. Since you closed the deletion discussion for, or speedy-deleted this article, your opinions on this will be greatly appreciated. -- [[User:King of Hearts|King of Hearts]] <sup>''[[User talk:King of Hearts|talk]]''</sup> 03:46, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

== Thanks. Where can I request a bug fix? ==

Thanks, Raul. Autoblock may be bugged. It ought to unblock as soon as someone unblocks early. Where can I request a bug fix for the MediaWiki software? --[[User:Shultz IV|Shultz IV]] 04:32, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
:Well, technically, [http://bugzilla.wikipedia.org/ here], but what you are asking for is unlikely to be implimented, to say the least. (Mapping usernames-to-IPs is *slow* typically requiring 3-4 minutes per query). [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 04:34, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

== URL Rewrite ==

Why would making the base URL / be bad? [[User:Willshepherdson|Willshepherdson]] 04:39, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Because it negates other possible solutions, such as (for example) my suggested naming scheme:
:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_name (to get the Wiki article)
:http://en.wikipedia.org/stable/Article_name (to get the stable article)

The Wiki and stable versions are explicitely identified, and that's a very good thing. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 04:41, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

:Though couldn't the 'stable' version be located somewhere else. Such as:
::http://stable.en.wikipedia.org/Article_name for the stable version
::http://en.wikipedia.org/Article_Name for the normal Wiki version.

This way it is obvious that the "stable" archived version is different from the normal wiki url.
[[User:Willshepherdson|Willshepherdson]] 04:46, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

== BBSpot ==

Must not read BBSpot at work, must not read BBSpot at work ... --[[User:Bth|Bth]] 09:14, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

== Misuse of administrator powers by you on [[Wikipedia]] ==

*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia?diff=next&oldid=46947486
*http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Log/protect?page=Wikipedia

Please can you unprotect this page. Just because you do not agree with their views or are offended because they have talked about you and your Wikipedia actions on the forum is not a reason to remove the page then stop anyone from re-adding it.

Please do not let your personal views interfere with your role here on Wikipedia, you are damaging it with this kind of obvious POV-pushing.

I also note you failed to list the protection (and supply a reason) on [[Wikipedia:List of protected pages]]. As per the [[Template:Protected]] you put on the [[Wikipedia]] page in your edit, this should have been done. [[User:Bob, just Bob|Bob, just Bob]] 18:00, 4 April 2006 (UTC)
:Hello [[user:Mistress Selina Kyle|Mistress Selina Kyle]] - Your spamming of Wikipediareview is not acceptable. I see your latest incarnation has been blocked, and the remaining 26 days of your 30-day ban have been restored. I suggest you use the time for introspection. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 00:10, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

== April 17 FA ==

Hi. I notice that Today's FA for April 17 is the next to be chosen. I thought I'd draw your attention to [[User:Rodw]]'s suggestion of [[Chew Valley Lake]], as that date is the 50th anniversary of the lake's "official opening" [[User:SP-KP|SP-KP]] 20:56, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

== Rush (band) ==
Hey there. I think [[Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Rush (band)]] might be ready to be promoted; I believe all objections have been crossed out/reduced. What do you think? &mdash; '''[[User:Deckiller|Deckill]][[User:Deckiller/EA|<font color="green">e</font>]][[User talk:Deckiller|r]]''' 23:24, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

==Oops, I was a bit vague. I've clarified what I had in mind...==

[[Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#By what process was "Featured articles" added to the navigation menu?]] --[[User:Go for it!|Go for it!]] 18:04, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

==Request: please restore the Community Portal==

I called for a vote to oppose a reversion that was made on the Community Portal, to request that the version that was there before (actually a slightly modified version thereof) be immediately restored to the Community Portal page. I think enough feedback has been garnered to support that request. [[Wikipedia:Community Portal/Redesign#The design drafts|Here is the link to the feedback page]], and [[Wikipedia:Community Portal/Redesign/Draft1a|here is the link to the draft itself]]. The Community Portal is locked in a version that hasn't been on there for months, which almost nobody likes, and this upgrade was already there (having been designed in place). I humbly ask that you place the draft back on the Community Portal. --[[User:Go for it!|Go for it!]] 03:36, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Once this is done, I'll start working on presenting a proposal to have the Community Bulletin Board placed on the nav menu and simultaneously removed from the Community Portal. It'll just confuse things if I present that proposal while the reversion proposal is still unresolved. So please, help me wrap up the reversion issue. Thank you. Sincerely, --[[User:Go for it!|Go for it!]] 03:36, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

== [[:Image:Raul654.jpg]] ==

I hate to be so anal, but please clarify the source by tagging this GFDL-self if you took it yourself. Thanks! -[[User:SCEhardt|<font color="blue">SCEhard</font>]][[User talk:SCEhardt|<font color="#3D9140"><b>T</b></font>]] 04:25, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

[[Raul654]], you need to read [[Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_free_host.2C_blog.2C_or_webspace_provider]]:

"Please upload only files that are used (or will be used) in encyclopedia articles; anything else will be deleted. If you have extra relevant images, consider uploading them to the Wikimedia Commons, where they can be linked from Wikipedia."

"If you are looking to make a personal webpage or blog, please make use of one of the many free providers on the Internet." [[User:86.132.47.38|86.132.47.38]] 14:44, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
:Erm, sorry, but it is a long accepted practice for people to upload pictures of themselves, and is not, in-and-of-itself, considered to be problem vis-a-vis the no-webhosting rules. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 21:30, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

== [[James Aubrey]] photo ==

Greetings, Raul!<br>Hope this message finds you well. I observed today that the photo of Aubrey, a featured article, had been removed from his article and that the image ([[Image:JamesTAubrey.jpg]]) was missing (deleted?). Would you be able to tell me anything about what happened to this image since clicking on its title is a dead-end. [[User:PedanticallySpeaking|PedanticallySpeaking]] 16:32, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

:Here's the page history for the deleted image page:
* 19:06, March 10, 2006 Howcheng deleted "Image:JamesTAubrey.jpg" (orphaned fair use image tagged more than 7 days (I5))
* 18:01, March 2, 2006 . . PedanticallySpeaking (remove orphan)
* 03:12, March 1, 2006 . . Roomba (WARNING: This fair use image has been tagged as orphaned because it is not used inline. If it is not used in the article namespace within 7 days, it will be speedy deleted.)
:Direct complaints to [[user talk:Howcheng]] [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 21:32, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

== Featured articles ==

Christ, you do that all by ''yourself''? Do you want an assistant or something? That's a lot of work. —[[User:BorgHunter|BorgHunter]] <sup><s>[[User:BorgHunter/AntiUBX|ubx]]</s></sup> ([[User_talk:BorgHunter|talk]]) 22:24, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

== Deckiller has blocked AOL ISP and me in the process ==

[[User:Deckiller|Deckiller]] has blocked the AOL ISP 207.200.116.134. I know this because I use AOL, and his block has effected me. Can you please remove the block promptly, I am in the middle of remodeling the [[Marshall, Texas]] article which currently has an inuse notice on it. If not can you remove the inuse notice from the page. Thanks. -[[User:JCarriker|JCarriker]] 22:44, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
:I have unblocked you. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 22:46, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
::Also, I checked the log and I didn't see a block by deckkiller on 207.200.116.134, which suggestly strongly that he blocked some pain-in-the-ass logged in user and that user caused the autoblocker to whack the 207.200.116.134 proxy. [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 22:48, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
:::Yeah, it was an autoblock. &mdash; '''[[User:Deckiller|Deckill]][[User:Deckiller/EA|<font color="green">e</font>]][[User talk:Deckiller|r]]''' 23:43, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

== [[Abortion]] ==

Why is this article protected? -[[User:GTBacchus|GTBacchus]]<sup>([[User talk:GTBacchus|talk]])</sup> 00:26, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
:[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Abortion&diff=47264070&oldid=47042018 Because] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Abortion&diff=47293086&oldid=47264070 of] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Abortion&diff=47314442&oldid=47293086 today's] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Abortion&diff=47315543&oldid=47314442 constant] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Abortion&diff=47317577&oldid=47315543 edit] [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Abortion&diff=47322434&oldid=47317577 warring] [[User:Raul654|Raul654]] 01:00, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps a warning to the edit-warriors would serve the same purpose without locking the article. At least one of them has just come back from a ban and would probably take a warning seriously. [[User:Alienus|Alienus]] 01:29, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Revision as of 07:41, 7 April 2006

Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul! Look Raul!

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Raul654&oldid=47374474"