User talk:Orangemarlin
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Warning
As of this post, you've made 11 posts to my talkpage, and the day is only have over. Using my superior math skills, my unsurpassed intelligence, my intuitive fashion sense, my tasteful sports loyalties, and my infinitely better physical appearance, I've extrapolated that at current pace, you'll have singlehandedly made more edits to my talkpage, today, than I have. Which, of course, is prima facie evidence that you need this warning. Keeper ǀ 76 17:55, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
- I'm now officially declaring myself a Vandalizing Keeper76's page account. However, I am going to have a secret meeting with myself, and declare some sanctions of Keeper76. This should only take 2 or 3 minutes. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 18:19, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
MedRevise.co.uk
Hey, I thought you might be interested in this, since you are medically active! With a colleague I have set up a Medical Revision website, called MedRevise.co.uk. It is not trying to compete with Wikipedia, but trying to be something else useful, different and fun. If you are interested, please read our philosophy and just have a little look at our site. I would appreciate your feedback, and some contributions if you have the time. Thanks a lot! MedRevise (talk) 18:19, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
Thanks ...
... for this -- the editor, who is almost certainly User:Firefly322, no more knows when to give up than (s)he knows how to write good prose. I therefore consciously err on the side of caution, rather than allow my frustration to inadvertently drag me into an edit-war. You may find Issues in Science and Religion an interesting example of this editor's unique editing style. HrafnTalkStalk 18:31, 5 September 2008 (UTC)
query
[2] Did you intend to revert me? 86.44.27.255 (talk) 00:43, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
- Absolutely. That was not a personal attack on any editor (It's like saying the "Yankees Suck"). It does not violate ANY guidelines outlined in WP:TALK. I have a singular policy about user or article talk. No censoring, unless it is very specifically a personal attack. Don't censor is my advice to you. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 00:47, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
- And please, don't take what I did as any type of criticism. The statement about Republicans was probably not necessary, but it did not have to be deleted. You may ask the editor who posted it to delete it (which is what I do, depending on the editor, in either or a nice or not so nice way.)OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 00:52, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
- (ec) Okay, that's your call. But three specific editors had already opposed, it seemed clear to me that therefore "It's pointless to propose anything as long as the Republicans have their little dwarves around here to vote in mass against" refers to them. Having this kind of talk is going to lead to flame wars, bad faith, acrimony, as well as influence others into thinking this kind of discourse is acceptable, with similar consequences. I don't see how that leads to editing an article well, and in this specific case, the talk page is almost impractically busy enough without it. 86.44.27.255 (talk) 00:56, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
- Well, I long ago learned if you talk like that, you convince no one of anything. You ignore it. And really, we don't vote around here. It's forming a consensus. Kind of different thing. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 01:06, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
- I'm well aware of what we do around here, no idea why you're telling me that. Also I made no point that the comment may convince anyone. I did make the point that it was obviously a personal attack on the three editors who already opposed - that's got nothing to do with the rights and wrongs of the formatting of the section - and the point that it and your reversion of it likely hurts editing of the article. *shrug* 86.44.27.255 (talk) 01:14, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
- Please don't take offense. I didn't check out your contributions, I just see you're an IP. You used the word "vote", and I wanted to disabuse you of that particular train of thought. I doubt my reversion does anything of the nature. We shouldn't censor. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 01:17, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
- Don't think I used the word vote anywhere, OM, except to quote our admin friend of anti-rightwingmidgetshill fame. 86.44.27.255 (talk) 01:49, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
- No offence was taken, btw, just some mild irritation that you had not been editing the page at a time when it was technically difficult to do so before dropping in, i think. I realize you were being friendly above.
- Don't think I used the word vote anywhere, OM, except to quote our admin friend of anti-rightwingmidgetshill fame. 86.44.27.255 (talk) 01:49, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
- Please don't take offense. I didn't check out your contributions, I just see you're an IP. You used the word "vote", and I wanted to disabuse you of that particular train of thought. I doubt my reversion does anything of the nature. We shouldn't censor. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 01:17, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
- I'm well aware of what we do around here, no idea why you're telling me that. Also I made no point that the comment may convince anyone. I did make the point that it was obviously a personal attack on the three editors who already opposed - that's got nothing to do with the rights and wrongs of the formatting of the section - and the point that it and your reversion of it likely hurts editing of the article. *shrug* 86.44.27.255 (talk) 01:14, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
- Well, I long ago learned if you talk like that, you convince no one of anything. You ignore it. And really, we don't vote around here. It's forming a consensus. Kind of different thing. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 01:06, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
- (ec) Okay, that's your call. But three specific editors had already opposed, it seemed clear to me that therefore "It's pointless to propose anything as long as the Republicans have their little dwarves around here to vote in mass against" refers to them. Having this kind of talk is going to lead to flame wars, bad faith, acrimony, as well as influence others into thinking this kind of discourse is acceptable, with similar consequences. I don't see how that leads to editing an article well, and in this specific case, the talk page is almost impractically busy enough without it. 86.44.27.255 (talk) 00:56, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
- On the wider point, having seen the Ossetia war talk page before this, i think there is a case for somewhat aggressive attempts to communicate an acceptable level of discourse on pages that a) are being read and edited by new users, and b) do not have the space for nonsense. I was not making it here, but the idea did inform my sole edit in this area, since i'm one of those guys who is not an enforcer or quoter of civility or personal attacks policies in any other context. But perhaps in contentious fast-moving contexts there is all the more danger of gaming and tactics and edit-warring being carried over into attempts to clerk, leading to even more fun! 86.44.22.206 (talk) 18:41, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
- I've been reading that page, just out of interest. The edit warring there is beyond belief. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 19:36, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
- On the wider point, having seen the Ossetia war talk page before this, i think there is a case for somewhat aggressive attempts to communicate an acceptable level of discourse on pages that a) are being read and edited by new users, and b) do not have the space for nonsense. I was not making it here, but the idea did inform my sole edit in this area, since i'm one of those guys who is not an enforcer or quoter of civility or personal attacks policies in any other context. But perhaps in contentious fast-moving contexts there is all the more danger of gaming and tactics and edit-warring being carried over into attempts to clerk, leading to even more fun! 86.44.22.206 (talk) 18:41, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
Mediation Cabal
You've been included in a case at the Mediation Cabal, Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2008-09-02 Relationship between religion and science. Feel free to put your two cents in. JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 20:44, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
- You misunderstood me there- the user who filed the MEDCAB accused some of the users of being on a "crusade" against them. I was trying to get them reassurance that the other editors were simply of like mind, not a roving gang. My apologies for the confusion. JeremyMcCracken (talk) (contribs) 22:16, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
- Ah. We've worked together on articles, and have each other's talk pages on our watchlists. Haven't sent armies to the Holy Land or murdered any of its inhabitants lately. . . dave souza, talk 22:21, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
- I've been vandalizing User:Keeper76's page with several other editors. But seriously, there are a very large number of related articles that several devoted editors watch. Is the assumption that we divvy up articles, each editor only editing a few? Or instead, isn't amazing that a lot of smart, devoted, articulate and rational editors find the time and energy to edit these articles? And if someone seriously looks at my contributions, you'd see my editing overlaps with medical editors, science editors, and, in some odd places here and there, history, warfare, baseball, hockey,.....and it goes on and on. Am I in a cabal or "roving gang" in any of those places? I don't think so. Maybe the point is that there are anti-science editors who lack any support for their POV, so without any intellectual backing, they attack a "cabal". We should ignore them. And in the case of this particular mediation, the editor who requested it ought to take an English writing course, instead of causing this dramafest.OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 01:25, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
- Speaking of drama, there's been a wee stushie at AN which, in my hopeful opinion, has led to reasonably wide agreement on the way forward.[3] .. dave souza, talk 17:46, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- I've been vandalizing User:Keeper76's page with several other editors. But seriously, there are a very large number of related articles that several devoted editors watch. Is the assumption that we divvy up articles, each editor only editing a few? Or instead, isn't amazing that a lot of smart, devoted, articulate and rational editors find the time and energy to edit these articles? And if someone seriously looks at my contributions, you'd see my editing overlaps with medical editors, science editors, and, in some odd places here and there, history, warfare, baseball, hockey,.....and it goes on and on. Am I in a cabal or "roving gang" in any of those places? I don't think so. Maybe the point is that there are anti-science editors who lack any support for their POV, so without any intellectual backing, they attack a "cabal". We should ignore them. And in the case of this particular mediation, the editor who requested it ought to take an English writing course, instead of causing this dramafest.OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 01:25, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
- Ah. We've worked together on articles, and have each other's talk pages on our watchlists. Haven't sent armies to the Holy Land or murdered any of its inhabitants lately. . . dave souza, talk 22:21, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
New vampire series on HBO in the US. I watched the first episode, and it's intriguing, though I'm not sure where the story is going quite yet. Anna Paquin stars in the show, and I believe she's from your part of the planet (meaning generally, not Oz itself). Anyways, I'm not sure when it hits TV in Oz, but you might find the story compelling. I'm not giving it 5/5 stars yet, but having vampires live in public amongst humans is really an interesting premise. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 15:59, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
- I read the book of this which was rather fun. Interesting. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:09, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
- Fungus. Vampires. Psychiatry. You're one strange dude. :) OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 21:22, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
- I watched 15 minutes of the show last night. Anna Paquin, is um, well. She's hot. No other way to say it on wiki, per BLP. As for the show, it sucked. (pun intended). Keeper ǀ 76 21:26, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
- Anna Paquin is hot???? Huh? What are you smoking up there in the Land of 10,000 Lakes? As vampire movies go, Kate Beckinsale in Underworld and Underworld: Evolution is hot. Anna Paquin was marginally interesting in Almost Famous and in The Piano, but hot isn't a word I'd use. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 21:30, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
- BTW Cas, I just watched Doomsday on video. Meh. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 21:34, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
- You mean this one? Hmm, Dog Soldiers (film) was fantastic but The Descent has to be one of the worst films I have ever seen. Well, that's a sample size of two so I will be 150% better informed after I see that one....Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:04, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
- I have to say that the pilot of True Blood was awful. I cannot stand bad fake Southern accents. MastCell Talk 17:54, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- Hear hear! It reminded me of Joey trying to sound I-talian. Keeper ǀ 76 17:57, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- Remember Anna Paquin is a New Zealander. She's doing the NZ version of a southern American. And also she needs some dental work. :) I didn't mind the pilot. I'll see if it develops. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 18:02, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- Dental work? Why might that be? I dunno - it's no Deadwood, and probably not even a Big Love. MastCell Talk 18:24, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- Oooh, now Big Love, there's a show I can sink my teeth into. (G-dam, I cannot stop the vampire lame jokes). Big Love has a fascinating premise, makes you think. If you are a manslut, and you impregnate lots of girls, you are the man. A stud even. And probably a deadbeat. (Think Maury quality). But if you marry each of the girls, provide them with food, shelter, morals, money, and stability, then you are a felon. Gotta love the double standard. BTW, Jean is my triple, nay, quadruple, horn (y). Keeper ǀ 76 18:32, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- I enjoy Big Love because I lived in Utah for way too long. The takeaway for me is that having one wife is annoying, having several is more annoying. I pretty much destroys any male fantasies I might have for having several gorgeous wives at the same time. I'm cynical. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 19:01, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- Oh, I understand, I'm married. I love my wife dearly, but I cannot even begin to fathom the lengthiness of the "Honeydew list" if I were to multiply the marriage licenses. That wasn't my point. Keeper ǀ 76 19:18, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- I understood. You were making a social commentary about essential hypocrisy of it all. I see that, I just watch him getting nagged by three women at once. That does it for me! And a thumbs up on Ms Tripplehorn too. I saw her in a Starbucks this summer when they were filming the show (I happen to live near where both Big Love and Weeds are filmed--I've yet to run into Mary-Louise Parker). OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 20:17, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- Weeds was good the first season, after that, how do you say, jumped the shark???. Jeanne is frickin hot. The other wives, not so much. Either too young (as in wife #3), or two skirty/braidy (wife #2). Barb Hendrickson rocks my world though... Keeper ǀ 76 20:31, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- Next you're going to tell me that she looks like Sarah Palin. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 20:37, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- This is a much better thread, for hobby-sake, than the one directly below. Jeanne does not look like Sarah Palin. Jeanne doesn't wear glasses. That's blasphemy for you to say, it's like saying Clark Kent looks like Superman, when, obviously, they look nothing alike. Keeper ǀ 76 20:40, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- OK, now that you guys are discussing which of Bill Henrickson's wives is the hottest, there is officially no difference between this and my day job. I saw Jeanne Tripplehorn on Broadway waaayy back in the day; she played one of the Three Sisters (I think it was Masha). Good stuff, but then I'm a pushover for Chekhov. MastCell Talk 21:10, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- Wait a minute. We went from talking about a marginal vampire TV show to Chekhov? I always preferred Sulu. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 22:06, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- You know, I used a quote from Ward No. 6 in a talk I gave awhile back, and I felt compelled to mention that I was quoting the Russian playwright and not the helmsman of the starship Enterprise. Isn't that sad? MastCell Talk 23:18, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- LOL. I wouldn't doubt it, except most individuals now think the helmsman of the Starship Enterprise is Data. Which makes me feel old. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 23:28, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- And Seven of Nine trumps everyone mentioned above. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 23:29, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- This thread hurts my brain. Too many colons. OM, you "claim" to be in the medical field. Any advice you're wiling to give to remove my colon(s)? Keeper ǀ 76 01:24, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
- And Seven of Nine trumps everyone mentioned above. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 23:29, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- LOL. I wouldn't doubt it, except most individuals now think the helmsman of the Starship Enterprise is Data. Which makes me feel old. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 23:28, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- You know, I used a quote from Ward No. 6 in a talk I gave awhile back, and I felt compelled to mention that I was quoting the Russian playwright and not the helmsman of the starship Enterprise. Isn't that sad? MastCell Talk 23:18, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- Wait a minute. We went from talking about a marginal vampire TV show to Chekhov? I always preferred Sulu. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 22:06, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- OK, now that you guys are discussing which of Bill Henrickson's wives is the hottest, there is officially no difference between this and my day job. I saw Jeanne Tripplehorn on Broadway waaayy back in the day; she played one of the Three Sisters (I think it was Masha). Good stuff, but then I'm a pushover for Chekhov. MastCell Talk 21:10, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- This is a much better thread, for hobby-sake, than the one directly below. Jeanne does not look like Sarah Palin. Jeanne doesn't wear glasses. That's blasphemy for you to say, it's like saying Clark Kent looks like Superman, when, obviously, they look nothing alike. Keeper ǀ 76 20:40, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- Next you're going to tell me that she looks like Sarah Palin. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 20:37, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- Weeds was good the first season, after that, how do you say, jumped the shark???. Jeanne is frickin hot. The other wives, not so much. Either too young (as in wife #3), or two skirty/braidy (wife #2). Barb Hendrickson rocks my world though... Keeper ǀ 76 20:31, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- I understood. You were making a social commentary about essential hypocrisy of it all. I see that, I just watch him getting nagged by three women at once. That does it for me! And a thumbs up on Ms Tripplehorn too. I saw her in a Starbucks this summer when they were filming the show (I happen to live near where both Big Love and Weeds are filmed--I've yet to run into Mary-Louise Parker). OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 20:17, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- Oh, I understand, I'm married. I love my wife dearly, but I cannot even begin to fathom the lengthiness of the "Honeydew list" if I were to multiply the marriage licenses. That wasn't my point. Keeper ǀ 76 19:18, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- I enjoy Big Love because I lived in Utah for way too long. The takeaway for me is that having one wife is annoying, having several is more annoying. I pretty much destroys any male fantasies I might have for having several gorgeous wives at the same time. I'm cynical. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 19:01, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- Oooh, now Big Love, there's a show I can sink my teeth into. (G-dam, I cannot stop the vampire lame jokes). Big Love has a fascinating premise, makes you think. If you are a manslut, and you impregnate lots of girls, you are the man. A stud even. And probably a deadbeat. (Think Maury quality). But if you marry each of the girls, provide them with food, shelter, morals, money, and stability, then you are a felon. Gotta love the double standard. BTW, Jean is my triple, nay, quadruple, horn (y). Keeper ǀ 76 18:32, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- Dental work? Why might that be? I dunno - it's no Deadwood, and probably not even a Big Love. MastCell Talk 18:24, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- Remember Anna Paquin is a New Zealander. She's doing the NZ version of a southern American. And also she needs some dental work. :) I didn't mind the pilot. I'll see if it develops. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 18:02, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- Hear hear! It reminded me of Joey trying to sound I-talian. Keeper ǀ 76 17:57, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- I have to say that the pilot of True Blood was awful. I cannot stand bad fake Southern accents. MastCell Talk 17:54, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- You mean this one? Hmm, Dog Soldiers (film) was fantastic but The Descent has to be one of the worst films I have ever seen. Well, that's a sample size of two so I will be 150% better informed after I see that one....Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:04, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
- BTW Cas, I just watched Doomsday on video. Meh. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 21:34, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
- Anna Paquin is hot???? Huh? What are you smoking up there in the Land of 10,000 Lakes? As vampire movies go, Kate Beckinsale in Underworld and Underworld: Evolution is hot. Anna Paquin was marginally interesting in Almost Famous and in The Piano, but hot isn't a word I'd use. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 21:30, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
- I watched 15 minutes of the show last night. Anna Paquin, is um, well. She's hot. No other way to say it on wiki, per BLP. As for the show, it sucked. (pun intended). Keeper ǀ 76 21:26, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
- Fungus. Vampires. Psychiatry. You're one strange dude. :) OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 21:22, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
←This should work. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 01:46, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
Dont' go overboard...
here. (aka - choose your battles) It's winding down. Both sides seem to be coming together amicably. Don't blow on the embers of the former flames please? Keeper ǀ 76 20:10, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- Hrafn is being attacked by a group of POV pushers. This place is out of hand. I'm still pissed about the other comment I dropped on your page. Since I've chosen to ignore the immature rantings, I need to stand up for others who are getting hosed (not sure if that's Minnesotan or Canadian) in this project. But I'll lay off.OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 20:21, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- I completely understand your frustration, and I personally think it is justified. However, don't give "the other side" anything to link back to (in, or out of, context). Let the WQA die out on its own. No need to stoke. Keeper ǀ 76 20:29, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- In the past I've argued vociferously for deletion of WP:WQA as actively harmful to the project. I have seen nothing to make me change that assessment. Commenting at WQA only justifies its unjustifiable existence. Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 20:31, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- Maybe you should give Hafrn the same advice? Both of you? I think he's really pissed about this whole situation. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 20:38, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- (e/c re to basil)I completely agree that WQA is completely useless as a form of "dispute resolution". It only provides a place to release steam against someone else, usually one-sided, and almost unanimously without results (aka a block, admonishment, etc). It's almost as useless as RFC. That said, it is a goldmine for finding diffs to "fight your enemies" in escalated arenas, whichever side of a dispute you happen to land yourself on. I've been the subject of a WQA myself. It's icky and embarassing. It worked itself out okay, but had it not, what were the repercussions? Nothing, dare I say. Nothing. Keeper ǀ 76 20:39, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- This was just stage 1.[4] WP:NAM springs to mind :) dave souza, talk 20:56, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- In the past I've argued vociferously for deletion of WP:WQA as actively harmful to the project. I have seen nothing to make me change that assessment. Commenting at WQA only justifies its unjustifiable existence. Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 20:31, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- I completely understand your frustration, and I personally think it is justified. However, don't give "the other side" anything to link back to (in, or out of, context). Let the WQA die out on its own. No need to stoke. Keeper ǀ 76 20:29, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
Literally and figuratively
In case you had any doubt, the Department of the Interior really has been in bed with the oil industry for the past 8 years. MastCell Talk 23:33, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
- Hell, I've been doing that for years. The Pharmaceutical Industry has been supplying me with money, wine, and sex, allowing me to retire with a villa in Tuscany. I get a new Ferrari for every 10 articles that I clean up removing all mention of Alternative Medicine. If I had known, I would be doing the same for the oil industry. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 23:46, 10 September 2008 (UTC)
Multiple sclerosis
I have rewritten the genetics section. I have simplified it a lot, first because it can be more easily read as it is right now but second because my genetics knowledge is not very good. However I believe that now covers in a NPOV most important facts about genetics in the disease without much overlapping with the epidemiology section. Would you take a look at it? If I have time I will attack the other parts of the section next week.--Garrondo (talk) 13:51, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
Guido
I've just put a comment here. I have tried to work with him, but it's just impossible. If the problem isn't sorted by tomorrow I think I'll start a thread on the administrators notice board about him. --Sciencewatcher (talk) 22:37, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
- Mango's response to my suggestion was less than helpful. But I agree that AN/I might be the next step. Many of these articles were peaceful until Guido's return. Also, I'm a bit confused. I thought he was blocked (before the NLT block) for edit-warring in these specific articles. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 00:39, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, have a look at Guido's block log and you'll see he's been blocked for edit warring 5 times, and for legal threats another few times. 3 of the blocks say he was edit warring on CFS, and I think one or two of the others were also on CFS. I'm going to make an attempt to work with him, but if it doesn't work I'll post a new section in the admin's page. --Sciencewatcher (talk) 14:31, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- I just don't understand this place. GdB can be helpful to the project, but his editing degenerates into edit-warring quickly. He files frivolous complaints when things don't go his way, or he makes legal threats. How many chances do we expect he gets? Another 8 or 9 blocks? He has used up AGF long ago. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 14:44, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- Yes, have a look at Guido's block log and you'll see he's been blocked for edit warring 5 times, and for legal threats another few times. 3 of the blocks say he was edit warring on CFS, and I think one or two of the others were also on CFS. I'm going to make an attempt to work with him, but if it doesn't work I'll post a new section in the admin's page. --Sciencewatcher (talk) 14:31, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
3RR assistance
Thank you! I'll try it out next time. Most wiki-stuff has been fairly straightforward, but the 3RR report template is a headbanger, heh! cheers, --guyzero | talk 09:05, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- I find some of the wiki-stuff to be so complicated. I have three screens going from my computer, cutting and pasting to get something done right. If you look on my user page, I have some helpful links to things I've discovered. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 14:28, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks to your info, I was able to easily file my first 3RR (actually, a 15RR(!) [5]) on an article that really needs it this morning, thank you! regards, --guyzero | talk 18:21, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- I'll send the bill to your email address. Please pay within 15 days. :) OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 18:22, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- I just looked up your report. That would have taken an hour without the tool. I'm doubling my bill. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 18:24, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- I'll send the bill to your email address. Please pay within 15 days. :) OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 18:22, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks to your info, I was able to easily file my first 3RR (actually, a 15RR(!) [5]) on an article that really needs it this morning, thank you! regards, --guyzero | talk 18:21, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
SO I went looking, and saw, and thought, "Oh I'll try the nth edit one." And lo, my 15k edit is me fixing a horrid grammatical error (of mine own, mind you.) [6] I don't think I'll forgive you anytime soon. KillerChihuahua?!? 18:30, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- What tool? Keeper ǀ 76 18:43, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- Well, you're a tool. But that's beside the point. It's the 3RR tool. See my user page. I have a collection of cool tools that help out editing. You know what editing is? Do you? OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 18:46, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- Oh and I think he was talking about the milestone tool, not the 3RR tool. Since I had a post about it and all. Maybe not though. KillerChihuahua?!? 18:49, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- You're right. Milestone tool.OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 18:51, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- (e/c)3rr tool is useless to me, I just block em. What's the milestone tool? That's the one I was talking about, as I thought was obvious by my colon-ized reply to killer chihuahua, who obviously was not talking about such non-adminny trivialities like 3rr reporting..Keeper ǀ 76 18:52, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- I keep forgetting that you're a lazy ass. Of course, you'd never use the 3RR tool. Just try the milestone tool. It's kind of useless, as things go around this project, but fun. You can find your nth edit on this project. Like my 1000th edit. I haven't a clue why I was editing that article. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 18:56, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- Following KC's lead, I checked my 15000th. (yes, I have that many...). It would have to be to my own talkpage. Dammit. The world is cruel and relentless....I'm wondering how many random nths I'd have to try before I found a mainspace diff.... Keeper ǀ 76 18:58, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- And it mentions the mysterious admin paycheck.OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 19:00, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- There is no admin paycheck. Actually there is. It's exactly a million times greater than your editor paycheck. Keeper ǀ 76 19:01, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- Wow. I've heard it said that you pay $5.00 for GA's and $10.00 for FA's, that means you make a lot. And underpay us editors. (BTW, you're not going to win, especially if I have to keep seeing that damn orange banner at the top.)OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 19:07, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- I'm just trying to make sure that your 20,000th edit is to your own talkpage, or perhaps more statistically feasible, mine. Be careful, you're getting close to Keeper zone, you only have 42 percent mainspace, along with 32% usertalk. Heh. Myspacer. (of course, my usertalk and my "Wikipedia:" edits are both higher than my mainspace....) Keeper ǀ 76 19:15, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- (It should also terrify you that, according to the above linked SQL report, you've made 102 edits to User talk:Keeper76. Keeper ǀ 76 19:17, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- It's interesting that the User talk list would indicate that whatever "cabal" I belong to, it's an odd one. And of course, my article edits indicate that I actually contribute useful articles to this project. You know what you have done? Pissed me off about this cabal bullshit again. Now I have to drink and take a few valium. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 19:20, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- You know, when the pill bottle says: "Alcohol may intensify the effect of this medication," it's meant as a warning, not a suggestion. MastCell Talk 19:42, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- L. O. L. Keeper ǀ 76 19:43, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- And the point is what? LOL. Kind of like ED medication with a black box warning that "if your erection lasts longer than 4 hours, please see your physician." Every guy is thinking, "give me 10." OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 19:47, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- L. O. L. Keeper ǀ 76 19:43, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- You know, when the pill bottle says: "Alcohol may intensify the effect of this medication," it's meant as a warning, not a suggestion. MastCell Talk 19:42, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- It's interesting that the User talk list would indicate that whatever "cabal" I belong to, it's an odd one. And of course, my article edits indicate that I actually contribute useful articles to this project. You know what you have done? Pissed me off about this cabal bullshit again. Now I have to drink and take a few valium. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 19:20, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- (It should also terrify you that, according to the above linked SQL report, you've made 102 edits to User talk:Keeper76. Keeper ǀ 76 19:17, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- I'm just trying to make sure that your 20,000th edit is to your own talkpage, or perhaps more statistically feasible, mine. Be careful, you're getting close to Keeper zone, you only have 42 percent mainspace, along with 32% usertalk. Heh. Myspacer. (of course, my usertalk and my "Wikipedia:" edits are both higher than my mainspace....) Keeper ǀ 76 19:15, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- Wow. I've heard it said that you pay $5.00 for GA's and $10.00 for FA's, that means you make a lot. And underpay us editors. (BTW, you're not going to win, especially if I have to keep seeing that damn orange banner at the top.)OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 19:07, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- There is no admin paycheck. Actually there is. It's exactly a million times greater than your editor paycheck. Keeper ǀ 76 19:01, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- And it mentions the mysterious admin paycheck.OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 19:00, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- Following KC's lead, I checked my 15000th. (yes, I have that many...). It would have to be to my own talkpage. Dammit. The world is cruel and relentless....I'm wondering how many random nths I'd have to try before I found a mainspace diff.... Keeper ǀ 76 18:58, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- I keep forgetting that you're a lazy ass. Of course, you'd never use the 3RR tool. Just try the milestone tool. It's kind of useless, as things go around this project, but fun. You can find your nth edit on this project. Like my 1000th edit. I haven't a clue why I was editing that article. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 18:56, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- Oh and I think he was talking about the milestone tool, not the 3RR tool. Since I had a post about it and all. Maybe not though. KillerChihuahua?!? 18:49, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- Well, you're a tool. But that's beside the point. It's the 3RR tool. See my user page. I have a collection of cool tools that help out editing. You know what editing is? Do you? OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 18:46, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
Some light reading
It's not very often that "Minnesota" and our "niceness" are the subjects of an article in the Jerusalem Post. Not very often at all. Yet, I have a hunch you still wouldn't vote for Mr. Coleman :-) Keeper ǀ 76 16:59, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- That is a great article. I never thought about the "Jewish" Senate seat until I read it. Actually, when I lived up there in the Land of 10 Trillion Mosquitoes for one winter, there were a couple of very good Jewish delis in Golden Valley (I believe, since it's been about 15 years). And yes, Al Franken is the man. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 18:31, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- Al Franken is single handedly losing the election, without coleman's help. Shame. Keeper ǀ 76 18:43, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- That is a shame. I won't go into my personal feelings about Norm Coleman, but his career arc is curious. The guy was a roadie for Ten Years After, which is badass, and opined in his college newspaper that "these conservative kids don't fuck or get high like we do." He was a committed DFL-er who idolized Bobby Kennedy, George McGovern, Warren Spannaus, Hubert Humphrey, Walter Mondale, and probably a bunch of other America-hating pinkos. And then Karl Rove whispers in his ear and he's suddenly a party-line, the-Senate's-job-is-to-make-end-of-life-decisions-about-Terri-Schiavo culture warrior who voted with Bush 98% of the time? I must be missing something. Are these the negative long-term consequences of marijuana use that we hear so much about? But really, the biggest problem I have with him is that his staff tried to whitewash his Wikipedia biography. MastCell Talk 19:36, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- Apparently grasshopper, you're too young to remember the The Manchurian Candidate (1962 film) (and not the crappy remake). It's the right-wing's plot to control our hearts and minds. And Ten Years After? I have to light a bong to think about that! OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 19:41, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- (re to mastcell ec with OM)Everything else aside, you do realize that the Wikinews article starts with the Joe Biden staffers, right? That's blockable on OMs page to slight Joe Biden indirectly or directly. And Boeheim is a genius. Keeper ǀ 76 19:42, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- Damn straight. And Biden/Boeheim. Tell me you've seen them in the same place at the same time. Hmmmmmmm. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 19:48, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- My biggest problem there is that Biden's staffers should have had the ironic sensibility to replace his Wikipedia article with plagiarized biographical material. MastCell Talk 19:49, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- Damn straight. And Biden/Boeheim. Tell me you've seen them in the same place at the same time. Hmmmmmmm. OrangeMarlin Talk• Contributions 19:48, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- That is a shame. I won't go into my personal feelings about Norm Coleman, but his career arc is curious. The guy was a roadie for Ten Years After, which is badass, and opined in his college newspaper that "these conservative kids don't fuck or get high like we do." He was a committed DFL-er who idolized Bobby Kennedy, George McGovern, Warren Spannaus, Hubert Humphrey, Walter Mondale, and probably a bunch of other America-hating pinkos. And then Karl Rove whispers in his ear and he's suddenly a party-line, the-Senate's-job-is-to-make-end-of-life-decisions-about-Terri-Schiavo culture warrior who voted with Bush 98% of the time? I must be missing something. Are these the negative long-term consequences of marijuana use that we hear so much about? But really, the biggest problem I have with him is that his staff tried to whitewash his Wikipedia biography. MastCell Talk 19:36, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
- Al Franken is single handedly losing the election, without coleman's help. Shame. Keeper ǀ 76 18:43, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
(Reverted good faith edits by Bnaur; This lead has been developed over a long period of time. I don't know what these edits add..using TW)
My comment was relevant, accurate and best introduces the article. How does its antiquity not add anything? Explain that please. Furthermore, the opening paragraph (as reverted) is a lie. It makes I.D. sound completely recent and totally theistic which is not correct. The two sentences allows the recent events but acknowledges I.D.'s history at the same time. - You are one of the "Nazi" reverters that protect this page from the type of needed collaboration. The motive POV is obvious on this page - it is an anti-Christian and anti- I.D. I am not a creationist, I am however an I.D.ist and an atheist and I assure you this opening paragragh very poorly represents the topic and how we believe. But you and your anti-Christian friends are too controlling to allow the real I.D. theories to be explained and considered in the opening paragarph so it will remain about hating those stupid Christians instead. This makes wikipedia a joke. I have a large group of non-Christian friends that point to this paragraph as evidence of that. It is a biased POV - not an accurate attempt at defining the view of many who are excluded from the collaboration by overly controlling reverters like you. I have personally attempted to fix this problem many times and so has many others I know. Not all I.D.ists are Christians or theists but that's not what this says. Revert my change back, it is documented and accurate:
The concept has been around, in one form or another, since the time of ancient Greece[4]. The most famous version of the design argument can be found in the work of theologian William Paley, who in 1802 proposed his "Watchmaker" thesis.
Do some reading while you are at it please so you may actually attempt to understand this topic (you get an F) as their is another atheistic POV on this topic - READ: