Jump to content

User talk:SarekOfVulcan

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by JakeInJoisey (talk | contribs) at 06:00, 26 February 2013 (→‎Courtesy Notification: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Please add new comments in new sections, e.g., by clicking here. Thanks. SarekOfVulcan

Because of their length, the previous discussions on this page have been archived. If further archiving is needed, see Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page.

TharkunColl block

TharkunColl is asking to be unblocked. I don't think he understands the gravity of the external link in question. Could you explain to him the problem with the link? I suspect he will probably agree not to use that EL again.  little green rosetta(talk)
central scrutinizer
 
05:13, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

TharkunColl has agreed not to use the EL and appears to be waiting on a response. Whatever you decide to do, could you at least give him a response? Thanks.  little green rosetta(talk)
central scrutinizer
 
17:59, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'd prefer to leave that discussion to others at the moment. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:02, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Sarek. Since you've decided (perfectly legitimately!) to take a step back from this situation, I've taken that as tacit approval for a considered unblock, and have thus implemented one. Cheers, Yunshui  11:42, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thoroughly-considered unblocks are always welcome on my indef blocks. :-) --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 11:48, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, SarekOfVulcan. You have new messages at MisterShiney's talk page.
Message added 00:29, 10 February 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

MisterShiney 00:29, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Martin911

Oh, I wasn't suggesting you had been too hasty (although I think we both know there are some admins for whom it's not too much of an exaggeration to say that they really do think every new account is a sock of someone), just trying to explain why I'm not taking his word for it that it was a bad block even though it can arguably be made to look like one.

For the record, after that last post of mine, I looked into things a bit more than I had and I, too, believe he's a sock of the Hackneyhound family. Daniel Case (talk) 17:58, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. That clarifies things. I didn't have an opinion on who Martin was socking for, but it seemed clear to me that it was _someone_ who had been around the block a few times. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:00, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notable works on Freemasonry

When I complete one of my current transcription projects at Wikisource, I was considering if I should add a suitable work on Freemasonry to English Wikisource.

As you are a member of a relevant Wikiproject, it would be appreciated if you could advise as to appropriate works for a general audience. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:26, 10 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As an update to your response on my talk page -

which appears to be a 1921 revision of one of the works you mention. However I'm already finding some 'clipped' page scans, and so a review of the transcription attempt or reconstruction of the clipped portions by those more familiar with the material would be appreciated.

I am also all too willing to admit my failings in another area, as I could not be confident in transcribing specfic non-english words from the scans,and have so far omitted those, rendering the transcription incomplete. Perhaps you know of better qualified scholars and scribes that would be able to re-insert them?

I will try and transcribe as much as I can, but appropriate input from others would be greatly appreciated. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:12, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I took a look at it, but was a bit confused by the statuses. I'll read up later and see what I can do to help. Note that there are other transcriptions around on the web, which might help you with your cross-checking.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 21:20, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Thanks - I am sadly having to note some missing pages in the Volume 1 Scans, pages 445-456 appear to be missing from the scans, and as noted in the Index page, a number of pages towards the end of the work appear to contain clipped portions(marked as !bad! or !Bad!) , :( , I'll try and transcribe the 'good' pages, but unless someone can get new scans for the missing pages, I'm a bit stuck as the original source (Google Books) doesn't seem to list it for the UK.

At least I tried :(. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 00:58, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your comment at AN3

Now that the ArbCom-case evidence phase is closing, can you please review User talk:SarekOfVulcan/Archive 19#Follow up to your recent comment at AN3?  I know from your involvement in the WP:V RfC that you are willing to take on tough problems.  Asserting that an outcome is "sweet" is an opinion without a foundation, so if you are still of that viewpoint, then I request that you lay the foundation.  Thank you, Unscintillating (talk) 00:53, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

RfA: thank you for your support

Sarek, thank you for your support and counsel during my RfA. I appreciate your efforts to keep it on the straight and narrow, but I have no one to blame but myself for the ultimate outcome. I hope I did not disappoint you too badly as a candidate. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 03:53, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hide Away (2011 film), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Variety (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:09, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cite needed (GG approves, but it IS in jest)

citeGreenwald approves of the edit Bamage02 (talk) 22:27, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I see, but I think it's much better left out. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 22:31, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, SarekOfVulcan. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.Orlady (talk) 00:17, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

1RR

You don't get me on that one. If editors demonstrated juuuuust a little more WP:AGF and obeyed their own 'instructions', then we wouldn't need your quasi-impartiality; but obviously both me and your friends appreciate your input Cheers! Slán leat mó chara. Basket Feudalist 18:14, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(stalking) As someone who grew up watching the Brighton hotel bombing, the 1996 Docklands bombing and the Omagh bombing on the news, not to mention many more regular reports involving conflict in Northern Ireland, I would heed Sarek's warning very carefully, as you have just skirted WP:1RR with this and this. I would suggest you are in a hole and strongly advise you that you stop digging. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 18:28, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Good one. But, unfortunately, what you 'used to watch on the TV' is as about as relevant here as Airey Neaves legs. I am not likely to be bullied over ignorance. Mhaith thú! Basket Feudalist 11:15, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hi ... quick question. If I have an editor edit warring with me over a range of articles, most recently repeatedly deleting RS-sourced information, and I don't want to edit war, and discussion is unavailing -- if I don't want to escalate the matter to a board, what is the best way to address it? Thanks.--Epeefleche (talk) 10:17, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Crystal Reports history

You reverted some changes I made to the History section of the article on Crystal Reports. As I said in the comment to the change, I was there in 1991 - in fact, I was one of the 3 developers of Quik Reports for Windows. I've searched for an independent web page that corroborates what I wrote, but haven't been able to find one.

So how does wikipedia deal with a situation like this? The page has errors, I was there, I know what happened, but I can't supply references.

Rbc tn (talk) 07:00, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

When I reviewed the reference that had supported Mark Cunnigham's involvement, I saw that the original editor who added it had elided a bit too much, so I removed his name. Generally, removing references in favor of personal knowledge is a Bad Thing around here, so try to avoid it where possible.--SarekOfVulcan (talk) 07:05, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In fact, the indicee web site used to claim that Mark Cunningham was a co-creator of Crystal Reports; they removed that claim as a result of a request from SAP, which now owns CR. This shows that the indicee website is not a reliable source of info on the history of CR. Sadly, I cannot prove that I am a more reliable source. Rbc tn (talk) 07:14, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I would be tempted to remove it outright, as you're correct -- it's not a very WP:reliable source for our purposes. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 07:23, 23 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy Notification

I have made reference to your participation in the recent ANI you initiated against me in an inquiry to De728631. JakeInJoisey (talk) 06:00, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]