Jump to content

User talk:Lar/Archive 5

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< User talk:Lar

This is the current revision of this page, as edited by MalnadachBot (talk | contribs) at 03:46, 10 March 2023 (Fixed Lint errors. (Task 12)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this version.

(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
← Archive 4 |
Archive 5
| Archive 6 →

I recognize that this user page belongs to the Wikipedia project and not to me personally. As such, I recognize that I am expected to respectfully abide by community standards as to the presentation and content of this page, and that if I do not like these guidelines, I am welcome either to engage in reasonable discussion about it, to publish my material elsewhere, or to leave the project.


This is an archive of User talk:Lar from about 15 Apr 2006 through about 1 May 2006. Please do not comment here, use my current talk page for that, thanks. It is part of a series of archives, see the box at right for the list and to navigate to others.

An index to all my talk page archives, automatically maintained by User:HBC Archive Indexerbot can be found at User:Lar/TalkArchiveIndex.

Talk Page Archives
My post 2012 archived talk
Archive 79 1 December 2012 through 1 December 2013
Archive 80 1 December 2013 through 1 December 2016
Archive 81 1 December 2016 through 1 December 2018
Archive 82 1 December 2018 through 1 January 2021
Archive 83 1 January 2021 through 1 January 2023
Archive 84 1 January 2023 through 1 January 2025 ??
RfA Thank Yous
RFA Archive Howcheng (27 Dec 2005) through present
All dates approximate, conversations organised by thread start date


VandalProof 1.1 is Now Available For Download

[edit]

Happy Easter to all of you, and I hope that this version may fix your current problems and perhaps provide you with a few useful new tools. You can download version 1.1 at User:AmiDaniel/VandalProof. Let me warn you, however, to please be extremely careful when using the new Rollback All Contributions feature, as, aside from the excessive server lag it would cause if everyone began using it at once, it could seriously aggitate several editors to have their contributions reverted. If you would like to experiment with it, though, I'd be more than happy to use my many sockpuppets to create some "vandalism" for you to revert. If you have any problems downloading, installing, or otherwise, please tell me about them at User:AmiDaniel/VP/Bugs and I will do my best to help you. Thanks. AmiDaniel (Talk) 06:47, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Jelly Beans

[edit]

(Just for the record, all, in case you were wondering why my heading was phrased the way it was. We don't celebrate the religious part of Easter in our house, just the crass/commercial/gift giving/mugging around with relatives/eating too much chocolate/fun part... Others do, which is cool, so I wanted to phrase it in a way that acknowledged both viewpoints) ++Lar: t/c 15:52, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Natalya says: Yum... chocolate. :)

Thanks! Enjoy your spring/Easter too! -- Natalya 15:01, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and happy Spring to you too!! FreplySpang (talk) 15:34, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well that's entirely fine, cause I celebrate Passover (more or less...) :P The part I like about Easter is the candy part :D — Ilyanep (Talk) 16:17, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, and my felicitations of the Season (as you see fit to commemorate it) to you. FYI - The Resurrection; ambivalent. Easter Bunny; no. Chocolate; YES! LessHeard vanU 19:59, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Blech! I hate Easter! -- Beland 23:05, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would concur with that "Blech!", but just can't remain belligerent when faced with a field of shiny, technicolor beans. Happy, er, April, everyone! Flowerparty☀ 23:56, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And thanks in turn for the reformat, this section was getting a little messy. well done. ++Lar: t/c 00:03, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

More Beans

[edit]
Thanks for the beans .... I'll try not to stuff them up my nose :-)--Cactus.man ✍ 15:18, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the beans! I am addicted to them...Happy Easter! -- Banez 15:41, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that, and right back at you :) — Ilyanep (Talk) 15:49, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, thanks for the Jelly beans! I'm glad they weren't WP:BEANS. ;) · Katefan0(scribble)/poll 02:21, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Donne

[edit]

Thanks for the jelly beans. I really shouldn't, but since you insist ... :) I really don't have a clue over the capitalization of catholic in Donne's case, sorry. User:Zoe|(talk) 20:38, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ugh, sorry, that'll teach me to check the edit history on my Talk page better. Thanks for the jelly beans, anyway.  :) User:Zoe|(talk) 15:23, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Happy easter

[edit]

Thank you for the tasty jelly beans and a very happy easter to you.--Dakota ~ 21:53, 16 April 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Happy Easter Lar and thanks for the beans! --a.n.o.n.y.m t 05:14, 17 April 2006 (UTC) [reply]

Thank you very much

[edit]

And a very happy "Spring Celebration" to you, though I hope you'll excuse my own personal celebration of the resurrection of my Lord and Savior. Now, as to what to do with my jelly beans... I can't exactly shove a picture up my nose... or can I? *presses Print* Hmm... interesting... Thanks again. Happy editing!

Oh, and by the way... why aren't you an admin yet? Are you interested? If so, I would so nominate you. So drop me a line, alright? Matt Yeager ♫ (Talk?) 02:09, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for your thanks... and as for adminship, see my entry at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Standards, I'm not where I want to be yet. All in due time, there's no rush. You are not the first person to suggest it (User:Phaedriel called dibs, in fact... wonder where she's gotten off to lately?) but I may end up deciding to have co-nominators, and if so, I would be honored to have you as one of them. ++Lar: t/c 02:20, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well, just in case you ever decide to accept it, it's already there for ya. Matt Yeager ♫ (Talk?) 02:47, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Matt Yeager would like to nominate you to be an administrator. Please visit Wikipedia:Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact Matt Yeager to accept or decline the nomination. A page has been created for your nomination at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Lar/Archive 5. If you accept the nomination, you must formally state your acceptance and answer the questions on that page. Once you have answered the questions, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so.

Thanks for that. I've put a "Please don't vote yet" flagging in there as well as a note about multiple noms, and a note that I have a lot of questions to answer first... Much appreciated also are the kind words in your writeup itself. One thing I think worthy of note is that while my articlespace edits aren't as high as I'd like (I'm m:metawikipedian after all, always have been, I've been cited in academic journals on communities and their formation) percentagewise I'd like to think they're GOOD edits... I'm 10 for 10 on DYK self noms so far... (User:Lar/DYK has the details) one of those good articles took me maybe 10 edits or so to mke on average, because I tend to write a lot at once, use offline editors, and preview it all rather than saving after every change. I could run AWB or CDVF or any of a number of vandal fighting tools to boost my mainspace count but that's not my style... See also Wikipedia:Discussions for adminship/Lar ++Lar: t/c 03:37, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DSP article

[edit]

Happy Easter Lar, I didn't know that you were not an admin. Oh, I'm pretty muchdone with Delta Sigma Phi, let me know what you think of it. Dspserpico 20:14, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's a great article now, I like the way it flows... I think it still needs more pics though. Perhaps the DSP foundation would GFDL license some of the early pics, or the HQ pic? A call to chapters to provide more GFDL chapter house pics, and pics of the men doing things, might be good... (I know one of those piccies got lost for licensing reasons.. no biggie). Also maybe the chapters should be put in a two column table, not sure. (I could take a crack at that if you want)... they tend to take up a lot of the tail end of the space. Pictures for a lot more of them would reduce that a bit. Does it make sense to say anything about particular chapters beyond college and founding date? Probably not??? ++Lar: t/c 22:26, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think leaving the chapter list as is but adding photos specific to each region. For example, we have a picture of a bunch of ZO brothers in the West Region Section and we have an image of the Gamma Kappa House. If you still live anywhere near your old chapter, perhaps you can help by snapping a photo of the Beta Pi house and add it to Great Lakes Region. I think those photos would make that section less boring. I think the Delta Sig Article is the best article about a fraternity or sorority on Wikipedia mainly due to depth of info and NPOV. I sure hope when December 10 rolls around the article will be included in the "On this day" on the main page.
I'll add some photos this week, I'm planning to take photos of the old Hilgard house and the Oakland Coliseum with the new reduced seating capacity for baseball. I'm also going to revive the Wikipedia:WikiProject Fraternities and Sororities to see if I can clean up the quality of greek organization articles. Dspserpico 00:39, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]


I live about 450 miles from Beta Pi and hardly ever get up there but I'll make myself a note to visit MSU's chapter or U of M's chapter if I can... ++Lar: t/c 01:36, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
What about ET Chapter at GVSU? I traded for a few of their shirts when I was at the 2003 convention because it said "Delt Sig." Just throwing out ideas. Dspserpico 01:53, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Definitely a good idea... I travel for business and already do a fair bit of "wikispying", so somewhere else is not "undoable"... but GVSU is close, living in GR as I do.... So ya, will try. Happy editing! ++Lar: t/c 02:12, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Who knows, they might even be able to sucker you into joining some alumni group ;), the ET bros are a great bunch of guys. Dspserpico 02:38, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

[edit]

Thanks for your Easter/spring wishes - I hope that you also enjoyed a good festive break. It's autumn celebration here, BTW :) Grutness...wha? 04:16, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the beans. Now I will go count them. pschemp | talk 04:22, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You know, I remembered to say that on Brenny's greets but forgot on yours. I knew you're Kiwi, no worries there. ++Lar: t/c 03:08, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ref converter 2.0

[edit]

You are receiving this message because you are on the Ref converter spamlist

With bated breath after much work I am proud to announce that Ref converter 2.0 has arrived. This new version properly deals with all ref labels and note labels, as well as multiple refs linking to the same note. There's also some miscellaneous bug fixes. I had to rewrite a good portion of the Ref converter from scratch, but it was worth it! The older version is no longer accessible online. Please give the new version a whirl, and of course, if you run into any bugs, leave a bug report! --Cyde Weys 04:26, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

[edit]

Do I get something for my birthday as well? :) --Mal 07:17, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Um, no? ++Lar: t/c 13:47, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My RFA

[edit]

Many thanks for your support of my recent RFA, which passed narrowly. I appreciate the compliment "more like this please," and I will try to be worthy of your support. I will also try to take your suggestion of becoming more involved with policy discussions. Regards, Kaisershatner 20:41, 17 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AfD Spam (4)

[edit]

Dear deluded egg-loving inclusionist -
Every time a minor political party with less than 1% of the votes gets another wikipedia page listing all their failed candidates for a year, god kills a chocolate bunny. However, since I know that your love of all pages great and small is tempered only by your desire to convert this project into Bridgeapedia, can I get you to give me some better reasons for keeping these than the pseudo-precedent currently given?

brenneman{L} 06:00, 18 April 2006 (UTC) PS - I'm still not back.[reply]

I'll see what I can do but it may not be till later today, I have a flight in 3 hours and I forgot to do some prepwork that I have to do before I leave (so why am I wasting time explaining it? hehe)... PS if you said god killed a real bunny I'd be out there making more articles, they terrorise our garden. PPS how are you coming on that domai article? Snicker. ++Lar: t/c 12:36, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I now feel particularly dirty. Thanks a lot. ++Lar: t/c 15:18, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ref converter update

[edit]

You are receiving this message because you are on the Ref converter spamlist

Ref converter has been updated once again. It now takes care of Harvard references (I didn't even realize they existed). I'm still looking for input on how best to handle {{ref num}}s. I've also added some additional sanity checks to the code that should catch more potential problems. As always, if you run into anything going wrong, leave a bug report! --Cyde Weys 09:05, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the Beans!

[edit]

Hi Lar, Hope you are well? I ate the beans when I got home (two hours ago) they were luvley - speshley the red ones! Thanks! Lion King 14:44, 18 April 2006 (UTC) P.S. A belated Easter Bunny [1][reply]

Yummy. Er, wait that wasn't politically correct was it? Oh, sod it. The lengths that game companies will go to in order to move product, eh?... Happy editing! (from the airport) ++Lar: t/c 15:06, 18 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies

[edit]

I formally apologise for slashing out your comment on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of shock sites. Also, I admit that I did not fully address the comment before slashing it out and will take the time to read users' comments more carefully in the future. - Conrad Devonshire 01:59, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your apology is accepted, with thanks and best wishes. ++Lar: t/c 02:00, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Naallic

[edit]

There's some consternation being expressed over your edit to Eads Bridge, particularly: The triple span, tubular naallic, arch construction...

  1. What on earth does "naallic" mean?
  2. Where did you get that history? A little red copyvio flag goes up whenever I see such a complete section appear out of nowhere. I hope that's not a copy-and-paste job.

Thanks. --Kbh3rdtalk 03:05, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That material is indeed cut and paste (of OCRed text) but with some light editing. However it's PD material... "From material recorded by Kevin Murphy, Historian HAER, April 1984 in the public domain.", it all came from the HAER site, I will follow up on the talk page for the article. Thanks for messaging me here so I became aware. ++Lar: t/c 03:18, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Adminship

[edit]

Hi Lar. I might or might not be on-wiki for the next couple of days. I'm also feeling a bit unwell. However, if possible I'd like to co-nominate you. I also plan to add a question or two which I presume is OK for a co-nom to do? Are you sure, though, that you want adminship? (It has plenty of downsides and I don't think you're the vain sort who simply wants the badge). If you do want the job, then of course you are just the kind of person needed for the role - in particular because you are a consensus builder, you always try to assume good faith, and you're mature and well balanced. If I'm not able to co-nom you will of course get my full support - even if you're a bit grumpy at times :P Anyway, if you go live and I happen to be away, good luck - not that you'll need it. --kingboyk 18:53, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just accept it now man and let's get this show on the road! What's all the dithering about?! :P --kingboyk 05:12, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Proof

[edit]

Cloaks? Cloaks? I don't need no stinkin' cloaks! --Durin 21:28, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Easter

[edit]

Thanks for the easter greetings. I hope you had a good one too. RENTAFOR LET? 01:05, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

You are receiving this message because you are on the Ref converter spamlist

Ref converter has been updated once again. This time I have created "WikiLinks", which automatically generates a fresh list of articles with old reference styles that need converting. Just run WikiLinks, open up a bunch of the resultant links it give in separate tabs, and go through each tab one-by-one and convert those references. --Cyde Weys 06:43, 21 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ref num converter

[edit]

You are receiving this message because you are on the Ref converter spamlist

I have just updated Ref converter to handle {{ref num}} links. I am not entirely sure of the correctness of the new code, though, so I have uploaded it as a testing version here. Please use it for now, especially on pages that use ref num, and contact me with any bug reports. If no bugs are detected by 2006-04-24 00:00 UTC then I will overwrite the old version of the ref converter with the new version and you can go back to using wikirefs.pl. --Cyde Weys 17:25, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Old Skool Esperanzial note

[edit]

Since this isn't the result of an AC meeting, I have decided to go Old Skool. This note is to remind you that the elections are taking place now and will end at 23:50 UTC on 2006-04-29. Please vote here. Thanks. --Celestianpower háblame 20:42, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

New Cabal

[edit]

If you currently live in Texas, regardless of place of birth, you have already been infected. If you just like Texas, you require assimilation, and need to request it on my talk page. Thanks for the interest. -JCarriker 21:35, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Overuse of refconverter

[edit]

Unreflective use of refconverter is causing many problems, and in many cases actively harming Wikipedia. The tool is nice to have—in fact, it's the impetus for me creating my own "Citation Tool" (still alpha). But it is nice to have to aid editors who are actually involved in editing a specific article, and who have reached consensus about making a given type of change to an existing article. Unfortunately, the semi-bot is largely being used to make "drive by 'improvements'" to articles where editors either have not considered the citation style, or where they have actively decided on something different from what the tool produces. This is extremely disrespectful to other Wikipedia editors, and a gross violation of process.

I have not looked at your specific changes made using the semi-bot, but I strongly recommend that you follow a guideline along the lines of: "Use this tool only after consensus for a change has been reached on the talk page of the article to which it is applied!"

You may also want to take a look at User:Evilphoenix/ref conversion. This is a sketch of an RfC that may be filed to try to resolve this problem (I see no reason you might not opine there, even while it lives in userspace). Ideally, Cyde will back off his insistence on changing all articles, even where against editor consensus. But unfortunately, his attitude has only become more belligerent when I have repeated requests in this regard. I think a positive involvment of well-meaning users of the semi-bot might help matters resolve amicably. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 02:34, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You can ignore his threats. He's been trying to pull this on me all day, and when he realized it wasn't working, he used my Ref conv spamlist to go out and directly threaten ref conv users. "This is extremely disrespectful to other Wikipedia editors, and a gross violation of process." - No, Lulu, what you are doing is extremely disrespectful to other editors. --Cyde Weys 02:46, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ref converter RFC

[edit]

You are receiving this message because you are on the Ref converter spamlist.

Hello there, I'd just like to make you aware that Lulu has filed an RfC against me and "other users of Ref converter". Since Lulu has previously contacted you regarding Ref converter I think it is safe to assume that you are one of the people named in the "other users of Ref converter" bit, so you may want to get involved. Just a heads-up, Cyde Weys 18:19, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Steveo2

[edit]

Hi! ++Lar: t/c 04:22, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(in response to "Do I know you?", refactored back here, as it says on the header of my talk page I prefer to keep conversations together)

You recently wrote on my talk page, making a (seemingly sarcastic) reference to an vote I made opposing Ezau's Rfa. I'm a little curious as to why that happened. Jared W!!! | Write to me, why don't you? 11:01, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No, you don't know me. As to why I wrote you... short answer: read your signature! What does it say? Longer answer: Did you notice I wasn't the only person to mysteriously write you out of the blue? ++Lar: t/c 11:10, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(in response to "Sorry about that...", refactored back here, as it says on the header of my talk page I prefer to keep conversations together. Second try to keep this threaded. I watch talk pages and WILL see replies)

Yeah, sorry I "snapped" about your message on my talk page. I kind of misinterpreted it. (And actually, someone else randomly wrote to me too...) Jared W!!! | Write to me, why don't you? 11:12, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It is no problem at all. As you surmised, I WAS trying to make a few points though. The points being
  1. I think your reason for opposing Ezau is ill considered.
  2. I think putting "write to me please" begging in your signature is ill considered as well.
  3. I think the two of them together really clash, and I'm not the only person that feels that way.
I don't know Ezau from Adam, so it's not like I'm sticking up for him because of prior history, but I think he's getting a raw deal for no good reason at all. I DO plan to allow an RfA on myself soon enough and I'm going to be terrifically disappointed if people use my balance of talk vs non talk, article vs wikipedia etc as a reason to oppose. I would ask you to reconsider your vote, and your statement, which has influenced others. ++Lar: t/c 11:22, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing that stuff out to me. I've changed my signature, and now I'm just about to change that vote to Nuetral. (I can never tell how what I write is going to be perceived. I'm a lot less rude in person than I am over the internet, and I don't know why.) Jared W!!! 18:48, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And here's another note: First, The reason my vote was originally one of Opposition was also a tremendous part of the reason my RfA failed. Secondly, who else agreed with your statements? Third, lighten up. That "write to me, why don't you" wasn't a command so much as a... I don't know. It was a pretty stupid thing to say in a signature. Fourth, I tried to keep the conversation together but I couldn't find where I had left my last message. (Is it possible that you have so much "community interaction" that you've archived it already?) Jared W!!! 18:57, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

(3)I hope I'm fairly light already... I dunno. Maybe not. (2)This came up on IRC so I'd prefer not to say who else for privacy reasons but it was more than just myself and Dmcdevit (who also left you a "hi" message) We just all found it funny. (1)Your point about low community interaction is valid if there aren't extenuating circumstances... for a candidate with just 1000 edits, if there were 40 total to talk pages of any sort I'd be worried too. But this candidate has a lot more than 1000 edits total, and also participates in other things that require community interaction. So I wasn't as worried. (4 (yes, I did these in random order!)) I had factored your last message to me back to your own talk page already and cleaned mine off so it wasn't there any more to see... ++Lar: t/c 19:18, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, we'll just keep all messages here. I don't think we need to write anymore, though. I've honestly come to agree with you. I'm placing this on my watchlist for the next few days, just in case. Jared W.

I slightly prefer keeping conversation threaded where it started. But either place is fine with me... As for watching, that's what I do too... ++Lar: t/c 19:18, 26 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Broadside

[edit]

Thank you for your sweet words (and the Easter treats)! I'm glad you liked the poem/broadside -- of course you may use it wherever you like; it belongs to the community now. Please just do me the favor of using the template syntax ({{User:CatherineMunro/Bright Places}}), as I will probably be continuing to tweak the formatting and such for the next few days. — Catherine\talk 00:42, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've done it, and done it that way (which is my preference anyway unless there's good reason for a subst:). Thanks again! ++Lar: t/c 02:18, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

[edit]

Thank you very much! That is actually my very first barnstar. up+land 05:25, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Legos

[edit]

On a totally unrelated subject (well, maybe not totally, since we've talked about it)... I've often wondered how to go about buying a number of individual Legos, as opposed to the sets that you get for your kids at Walmart, for the purpose of building models. I'm talking about the kind you'll see when, for example, some guy builds a big replica of the White House (or whatever). I remember reading about a guy who had done it at my undergrad university and thought it'd be kind of an entertaining thing to do as a part of youth ministry. It seems that you're the guy to ask about it. Know anything? Tijuana Brass¡Épa!-E@ 11:32, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe a little. :) See the KCCUSA project page We got our elements via BrickLink and from bulk tubs we bought when they come out from time to time. Tony the Tiger has about 30,000 elements in him. ++Lar: t/c 11:35, 27 April 2006 (UTC) PS, it's "LEGO Brand building elements" or "LEGO Sets" but never "legos" :)[reply]
I love it. Are you on this page personally? ...er, maybe you'd better not reveal any names online, actually. At any rate, that's exactly what I had in mind. So glad to have met someone else with a fascination with Lego sets. And you'll never hear just "Legos" out of my mouth again. Or keyboard. What blasphemy. Tijuana Brass¡Épa!-E@ 11:43, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm fine with my real name (Larry Pieniazek, 16100 Ghits, not that it means anything!) being known, it's on my user page already, although I realise others don't feel that way which is fine. See this page for a pic of all of us. I am standing behind Tony, and my head is the highest (except his) in the picture. "Milton Train Works" is my side business. ++Lar: t/c

Hello!

[edit]

Hi Lar! Just wanted to come by and say "hi"! I was away from Wikipedia for a little bit, catching up on a few odds and ends in real life. Here is a belated thanks for your Easter well wishes! --HappyCamper 21:20, 27 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, glad to see you around again, and you're welcome! ++Lar: t/c 15:06, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AfD research

[edit]

I've posted the following on the Village pump "let's get Redvers" thread, but I'm copying it to you regarding your words "...strongly recommend that Redvers do a bit more research in future before nominating academic articles...". ➨ ❝REDVERS❞ 11:31, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Without wanting to get into this - because I don't care - here are my 2 cents for those who are questioning my motivation, good faith and research on this AfD. Don't, because no one has asked me what my motivation was, so nobody knows. People have just jumped into a classic Wikipedia pile-on, where the words of the "vote" above are the only words read by the next "voter", leading to a spiral of assumptions and a suspension of good faith.
If people must know, it was largely a technical nomination. Many of the articles had been tagged for speedy deletion. When I came to clearing out the speedy category, I removed the speedy tags as the articles did not qualify (hardly the actions of someone bent on "removing all academics from Wikipedia" is it?). I put the articles on to PROD instead - this being a logical next move as they only had implied notability and it needed someone to either assert notability or bin the article. When the PROD tags were removed, without comment and without other edits to the article, I sent the articles to AfD - again, a logical thing to do with articles that don't assert notability.
I also followed the links on the main article, and the articles leading off, trying to see if there was a discussion attached to any of them and whether any of them had an assertion of notability that would be useful "up the tree". Instead, I found a largely circular walled-garden of articles, none of which asserted notability. Since it would have been ludicrous to either
  1. Nominate one article in isolation, or
  2. Flood AfD with a two dozen nominations all on the same subject and all with the same problem,
it seemed to make more sense to do one big AfD and let the community calmly and rationally discuss the issues and decide how to go forward on them.
So, there you go, you now have my motivation. Perhaps people would now like to stop writing to me and emailing me accusing me of having a vendetta against a person/people/subject, making a bad faith nomination because I'm power-crazed or being a vandal who has slipped through the RfA process because I'm part of "the deletionist cabal".
Thanks. ➨ ❝REDVERS❞ 10:17, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I was not aware of the history behind these noms and apparently spoke hastily. I will try to participate in the VP discussion. My apologies for any slight you may have felt. ++Lar: t/c 12:16, 28 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re the whole de-bureaucrating thing

[edit]

Hi, I never came to thank you for the message you left for me a month ago when I stepped down from being a bureaucrat. Thank you for the things you said, it's good to know there are still plenty of good people about in this project. I do not see myself standing for bureaucrat again anytime soon though who knows what the future may bring! Thank you once again. -- Francs2000 09:51, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are very welcome, sir. Our loss of your services is your gain in peace of mind it is to be hoped. All the best and happy editing! ++Lar: t/c 11:50, 29 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter, Issue 1

[edit]
WikiProject The Beatles Newsletter
Issue 1 - May 2006
Project news

Some project tips

  • Stick the following template {{Template:WPBeatles}} on relevant articles. We have 500+ already but may have missed some!
  • Use British/English grammar and spelling per Policy
  • A few moments checking other editors contributions is always appreciated.
  • Don't be shy on using the talk pages. It's where a lot of stuff gets decided.

From the Editors

Welcome to the inaugural issue of The Beatles WikiProject's newsletter! We hope that this newsletter will help members—especially those who may be unable to keep up with some of the rapid developments that tend to occur—find new things to do within the project that they may wish to participate in.

Please consider this inital issue to be a prototype; as always, any comments and suggestions are quite welcome. We would like to emphasise that this is a collaborative Project and all editors are equal - so next month the newsletter editor might be you!

kingboyk, LessHeard vanU and Lar

Signpost

The Project has got off to a great start but we really need your help to keep it going. Here's a few things you can do:


Want to help on next month's newsletter? Don't want to receive these in future? Don't want it subst'd next time? - It's all here

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Lar/Archive_5&oldid=1143824265"