User talk:Indubitably

_{This page looks best in Mozilla Firefox.}

“

Women who seek to be equal with men lack ambition.

”

— Joseph Danek

					Subpages
User	Awards	BRC	Notebook	Contribs	Subpages	E-mail

LaraLove (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)

*READ THIS FIRST OR YOUR MESSAGE MAY BE IGNORED*
^{Probably not, but read it anyway.}

If you leave a message here, I'll reply here. If I've left you a message, you can reply there or here. If you chose to reply here, I will respond here.
If you are pissed off at something I've done, assume good faith. Most likely, whatever I did was with the best of intentions. If you decide to pitch a fit on my talk page anyway, note that I endorse WP:DGAF.

Archives

2007: [Mar] [Apr] [May] [Jun] [Jul] [Jul 2] [Aug] [Aug 2] [Sep] [Sep 2] [Oct] [Oct 2] [Nov] [My RfA] [Nov 2] [Dec] [Dec 2]
2008: [Jan] [Jan 2]

*Bathrobe Cabal Meetup*

This is how shit gets done. *the_undertow* ^talk 00:28, 14 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

User:Danaullman

Can you have a quick talk with him, as you're his mentor? He's been adding some stuff to Ludwig van Beethoven and other articles that's basically a coatrack for trying to advocate homeopathy. Thanks! Adam Cuerden ^talk 18:12, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Adam. Correct me if I'm wrong, but he made a single edit to the article a week and a half ago. It was reverted and he appropriately went to the talk page where he came to a resolution with the article custodians. The last talk page message was on the 11th. It's been moot for more than a week. Am I seeing this edit history inaccurately? His additions were also informative and, although they mentioned Homeopathy, it didn't read like advocacy to me. I think the resolution for a separate article is a good one. Perhaps some people should calm down at the mere sight of the word "Homeopathy", and stop stalking Dana's contributions. Lara❤Love 19:09, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, he did write an entire book claiming that because people used homeopathy in the past, it must be good. Adam Cuerden ^talk 21:04, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Did he really? Is that what the book is about? Really? He's written several books. He's the leading spokesman for Homeopathy in the United States. This is known. Obviously he holds a different position on the matter than you and some others here. However, this is an encyclopedia. We represent all views. So his position in his field doesn't mean that every edit he makes is against a policy. How about you work on your articles, stay off his Special:Contributions page and when he makes an edit to an article for which you are a custodian, actually read it before reverting it and consider rewriting rather than removing. Most of the additions I've seen him make to articles are informative. They're always backed by sources. Some, perhaps, could benefit from rewording, but they are instead always deleted. Consider, also, the fact that he remains cool in talk page discussions despite the fact that literally almost every edit he makes to the mainspace is reverted.

With that in mind, what exactly did you want me to talk to him about again? Lara❤Love 22:21, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Is it possible for you to provide some summarizing comment on the James Manby Gully discussion.[1] Also, the article on potassium dichromate is presently protected due to edit warring. Clearly, the study in the journal CHEST is notable, and yet, the same anti-homeopathic people delete reference to this study, asserting that it is not "notable" and then ignoring the evidence that it is notable.[2] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Danaullman (talk • contribs) 13:14, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'll look at them. Lara❤Love 16:14, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, Dana, I looked over the pages you linked. One of the reasons I was chosen to be your mentor is that I don't really know anything about Homeopathy and I'm not involved in anything remotely related to it. That said, I don't know enough to weigh in on discussions about what's relevant past asking for clarification about why some things are allowed and others not that don't fall into policy in my eyes. In these two instances above, consensus is against you. I have to put trust in the editors involved that they have a grasp on the topics and the policies that relate to their inclusion. While I see some POV pushing in few instances, I must ask that you stop throwing that claim out, as it's not helping advance your position in any of these discussions.

While I understand your desire to bring Homeopathic information to articles, considering your position in the field, it is, in many cases, undue weight. It seems apparent to me that there is little, if any, evidence of Homeopathic treatments improving the health of the historical figures for whom you have edited the articles of. In reading over these articles in their entirety and considering what other information is included in them, considering there is no proof that Homeopathic treatments improved their health, to include details of said treatment is undue weight. And to write the information in such a way as to imply that it even may have improved their health is synthesis, as it's not supported by the references cited. For that reason, it can be considered inappropriate to include Homeopathic information in these articles, with the possible exception of a mere sourced mention of it. Lara❤Love 16:54, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You got publicity!

...here in Britain! On a radio station in the Midlands here in the United Kingdom, your userpage was mentioned on a local radio station, described as "better than a MySpace one!"

What do you think of that?? --Solumeiras ^talk 19:16, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Holy shit! Hahaa... that's awesome! XD Thanks for telling me! Is there anyway I can get a clip of that? Lara❤Love 19:17, 17 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration

Hi. Please be aware of Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Ehud Lesar arbitration case. Thank you. Grandmaster (talk) 07:28, 18 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

people are gonna talk

[3] ;)... Anyhoo, off to sleep. Later. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 06:59, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yea. And I care >< that much. XD Lara❤Love 07:07, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

S Club peer review

Hi there! Your name is listed as a "peer reviewer" under the arts category (if that's what it's called!) I've recently nominated the S Club article for a peer review, and I was wondering if you'd be so kind as to check it out and leave your comments? Ha, this reads like a template.. but I'm just trying to make it sound like I'm not a demanding guy!! Thank yoou - ǀ Mikay ǀ 12:09, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Revision history of Wikipedia:Request an account

Hi LaraLove,

If you don't mind please clear the page history of Wikipedia:Request an account once in a while. Instructions on how to do this can be found here.

Thanks!

The Helpful One ^(Talk)^{(Contribs) (Review)} 13:09, 19 January 2008 (UTC) Done[reply]

Please restore move protection (sysops only). Thanks The Helpful One ^(Talk)^{(Contribs) (Review)} 18:39, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Tra did it a few hours ago. Thanks for the note, tho. I'll remember that in the future. Lara❤Love 03:08, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

what to do?

Hi Lara, I do not know if this is the right person/place but I've read the sockpuppet rules of wikipedia. Still it seems that the rules were broken inadverdently... so what do I do now? I still need to clear my name in this case against me. Thanks for your help.CompScientist (talk) 14:35, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What did you do? Where's your case? Lara❤Love 16:47, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Blocking of User:FA53764968566fgtu7757

I note that you have blocked FA53764968566fgtu7757 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log). This is one of the user accounts I have suspicions of being a sockpuppet of Fila3466757 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · page moves · block user · block log). I have filed a sockpuppet report at Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Fila3466757. Your thoughts and comments would be most welcome. --Stewart^(talk) 17:41, 19 January 2008 (UTC) [reply]

The name was posted at UAA. I don't know anything about their edits. Random string of letters and numbers. That's why I blocked. Lara❤Love 17:42, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your speedy response. I know understand what drew your attention to this user name. --Stewart^(talk) 17:44, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Mentorship would be wonderfull

Thank you. I will gladly accept any help, as I am at my wit's end. Following guidelines, I tried to work through the user talk page and had my comment deleted without response. I reposted. Another deletion. Each time when pointing out the falsity of the claim that the filmology had to be deleted as not belonging on Wiki, and pointing out examples of their inclusion in other actor's articles, the coment was deleted. To my limited understanding, the next step is to seek help and advice from more experienced users. Doing that was considered a "rampage"? Is my acceptance of your offer also part of this "rampage"? And as for my calling this person a liar and a fool, that was in response to earlier and even more blatant edits by this individual in violation of Wiki policy and guideline... and before I knew more about your processes. I have since apologized for that rashness and have done my very best to be moderate in my responses to what I can only now view as a continued and deliberate attack. Mentorship? Please. And thank you. MichaelQSchmidt (talk) 21:22, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've replied on your talk page and added you to my adoptee classroom. I also commented at ANI and I advise that you no longer comment on that thread or to or about Cumulus Cloud. Lara❤Love 21:50, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd love to corral you.

		The Barnstar for Best Edit Summary
		You're awesome. Thanks for being my best friend. the_undertow ^talk 22:47, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hahaha! I love being your best friend! Thanks for being mine, too. :) i<3 Lara❤Love 02:43, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You can see the very moment this kid turns gay. the_undertow ^talk 06:19, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

ROFL! Lara❤Love 06:21, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I LOL'd!! Trevor "Tinkleheimer" Haworth 06:22, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm thinking of using that as an avatar on a forum, but then people will think I am gay, or that I am the kid in the pic.Trevor "Tinkleheimer" Haworth 06:28, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, what? There's a kid in the video? Lara❤Love 15:19, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Classroom

I'd just like to say that despite not being an adoptee or anything, your classroom's quite helpful. I've been on wikipedia for a few months now, but I've never read over the articles about AfD, NC, IA etc except for AgF - namely because I've never created an article or nominated one for deletion, just spend my time here reverting vandalism. But yeah, helpful. Apologies if my thoughts are disorganized or this doesn't read well. Th 2005 (talk) 23:16, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thanks. I'm glad it's been helpful for you. That's great to know. Feel free to ask me any questions. I'm here to help. Lara❤Love 03:01, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Requesting comment again

This time for another page named So Far from the Bamboo Grove, a controversial book written by a Japanese American named Yoko Watkins for its portrayal of Koreans in the novel. A user named User:Amazonfire wants to add in this little factoid. [4] I ask for a source, and he gives me a Russian source. I ran it through a translator, which says the exact opposite of his claim. Yet he insists on adding it back in, accompanied by edit summaries that attack me and accuse me of being a vandal. [5]

I requested RfC quite a while ago, but it didn't bring any changes. Can you comment on the talk page please? Being Korean myself, I doubt that I'll be able to persuade him, if that's possible at all. Also, the controversy section may be too long and the "controversy" is an old one. Can you give a hand in condensing the section? Thanks. миражinred (speak, my child...) 06:43, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I also have questions about CheckUser. User:AmazonFire and multiple Japanese IPs have been making the same edits, which I think warrants a bit of background check. Can I use checkuser to check for an account and IPs? миражinred (speak, my child...) 06:45, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Report the user and the IPs to WP:SSP. I look over the rest today. Lara❤Love 13:36, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

User:KarenCarpenter

Yes, I would like it as a doppelganger, please. Thanks! Karen Carpenter (talk) 06:46, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Conspiracy or Joke?

I heard of the Bathrobe Cabal. I heard that the word "Cabal" means conspiracy but your cabals sounds funny. Because I don't want to accuse anyone. I'm just saying is it just funny or is it really a Cabal? But if it's a cabal

File:Bathrobe-cabal.jpg

Be Afraid, Be kind of Afraid.

--Angel David (talk) 16:42, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think actual Cabals can publicly state that they are, in fact, a Cabal. That would kind of defeat the purpose. However, I suppose they could put up a front as to appear to be a joke, while actually being a Cabal. That would probably be acceptable. As far as how all that relates to the Illustrious BRC, bathrobes are note evil, and we're really more of an organization. ;) --TRANSMISSION ENDS--

I just have to do this

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
Your continued joking is disruptive and considered vandalism. You will be blocked from editing Wikipedia if you continue.

Seriously, you're like the <insert comedian here> of Wikipedia. Especially with the BRC jokes (which makes me sad I can't join because I don't have a bathrobe) 17:16, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

Elvis Discography

Is there some reason why you deleted the entire Elvis discography template? I had fixed the broken bits, put the rest into reasonable shape, and it looks like you were offended by the Christian singles (not an insignificant number of them) and hammered the template promptly. Now it's just an empty shell - nothing left. Is this your way of working with others? We contributors put a lot of thought and energy into our content, and it would be only reasonable if you could resist blasting other people's contributions without even an "excuse me" just because you don't like it or you're feeling hormonally deranged. That's not what WP is about. Hoserjoe (talk) 21:03, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Grateful thanks...

Your classroom is just the spot on WIki I had hoped to find. Thank you for asking me to participate. I can see that I will be spending time simply trying to learn how to learn. I will try not to burden you with questions, and will limit those to only that which may have me totally baffled. With appreciation, MichaelQSchmidt (talk) 20:36, 20 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]