User talk:Sam Korn/Archive7

"Sandbox?"

"Thanks for experimenting with Wikipedia - your test worked, and has been removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you want to do. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. smoddy 17:10, 10 August 2005 (UTC)"

- Sorry, in regards to which page?

Thank you

Hi,

I just wanted to say thank you very much for kindly taking a look at our problem. I had a look at the vandalism templates, but could not see how to use them as the vandal had no talk page, just an IP address; the persistence of this individual felt very offensive and uncomfortable. Many thanks again. Professor S F Smith 18:18, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

No problem. IP addresses do also have talk pages, at "User talk:IP address". Cheers, Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 21:23, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Esperanza Newsletter, Issue #1

Reach out Reach out is a program aimed at allowing users to bring issues that they have had in Wikipedia to a listening, sympathetic and caring audience: "No one can know how we feel if we do not say. We cannot expect to get understanding if we do not ask for it. No one will dispute that sometimes life's issues are too much for one person. It is fair to say that sometimes Wikipedia's problems fall under the same heading. This is a place where you can bring the bruises that can sometimes be got on this project for attention." Stress Alerts The Stress alerts program aims at identifying users who are stressed, alerting the community of thier stress and works in tandem with the Stressbusters at trying to identify causes of stress and eliminating them. Note from the editor Welcome to this new format of the Esperanza Newsletter, which came about during the last Advisory Council meeting - we hope you like it! The major changes are that each month, right after the Council meeting, this will be sent out and will include two featured programs and a sum up of the meeting. Also, it will be signed by all of the Advisory Council members, not just Celestianpower. Have an Esperanzial end of March, everyone!

The last AC meeting (full log) Future meetings are to be held monthly, not fortnightly as before. Bans and Access level changes (apart from autovoice) in the IRC channel are to be reported at the new log. In the IRC channel, there is going to be only one bot at a time. The charter requires members to have 150 edits and 2 weeks editing. Why this is the case will be clarified. A new Code of Conduct will be drafted by JoanneB and proposed to the Esperanza community. The NPA reform idea is to be dropped officially. Charter ammendments are to be discussed in future, not voted on. The Advisory Council is not going to be proposed to be expanded by the Advisory Council themselves, if others want to propose it, they will listen. Signed... Celestianpower, JoanneB, Titoxd, KnowledgeOfSelf and FireFox 17:47, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Musical Artists

I was just wondering why you removed the (albeit incorrect) link to the [[Template:MUSART|Musical Artists]] WikiProject from {{Infobox musical artist}}. The project is just getting started, and I thought that was a pretty reasonable way of not only attracting more people to it, but also to indicate that there are some somewhat-standard guidelines in place for the article and infobox.

As it turns out, that infobox has come under question as late anyway, and it's currently up for discussion at WikiProject Musical Artists/Article guidelines. As I said, we're looking for people to help out with this project, so if you have any input, it'd be much appreciated. B.Mearns^*, KSC 19:43, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Great, thanks for the insight! B.Mearns^*, KSC 12:11, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Userbox issue.

If I can say this without sounding like a seven year old, I wasn't talking to you.

You could've said it another way, like maybe "Sorry for the confusion, but I was talking to the other user". Politeness and diplomacy are never bad things in Wikipedia. Please assume good faith, as I wasn't sure who you were talking to. People do make mistakes in Wikipedia. — natha(?)nrdotcom ^{(T • C • W)} 22:08, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

My apologies. My tone was intended to be light. I thought my indentation and threading made my point fairly clear. I am sorry if you were offended. The odious page has now been removed from my watchlist anyway. Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 22:12, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

Cricket Quiz

In your own time Sam! I'm sure you've just forgotten to post a new question, being busy with AS Level revision as you will be. Do try and come up with a non-stats question though. --Wisden17 16:02, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Thankyou

Damn, man, I feel like a fool. All that effort to fall at the last...

Many thanks! Steve block talk 21:49, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Devon Loch? Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 22:22, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Agapetos Arbitration

I'm sorry to spam your talk page, but this seemed serious enough to directly put on your talk page. I have evidence that AiG has actively had employees push their POV on the AiG page and possibly on related pages. I have added a new evidence section in the Agapetos arbitration to that effect, explaining the evidence. Due to the very serious nature of this accusation and its possible implications for Wikipedia, I decided to directly alert all of the ArbCom members. JoshuaZ 01:58, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

JoshuaZ retracted this in evidence because it was erroneous, but failed to mention it on your talk page. agapetos_angel 07:16, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

That's highly inaccurate. I qualified the evidence in question. The user wasn't an employee but was specifically asked by an employee. See my evidence section and Standon's for details, and Agapetos, please don't put words in my mouth. JoshuaZ JoshuaZ 13:53, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration : Terryeo

Why do you accept the arbitration when ChrisO is filing the RFAr without any proof that the previous mediation has failed. ChrisO has not even been into dispute with Terry since the RfC. --UNK 10:15, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Christos - Athlete rubbed in oil?

Hi, Sam. I've noticed the Greek babel box on your user page, and I wonder if you'd have time to take a look at this? I don't know Greek, unfortunately, but since I know that the English word athlete comes from a very similar Greek word, and since the English word chrism comes from a Greek word meaning something to do with oil or anointing, it seems unlikely that the relatively short word Christos could have the meanings "athlete" and " rubbed in oil" incorporated into it. Thanks. And by the way, last time I looked at your user page, you were sixteen, so Happy Birthday! Cheers. AnnH ♫ 16:12, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

The Greek root is the verb χριειν (chriein or khriein) meaning "to rub on" or "to anoint". χριστος (christos with a small c) means anointed, and Χριστος (Christos with a large C) is therefore taken as Christ. It is a precise translation of the Hebrew "Messiah". They both mean "anointed one". The comment on that diff stems from the fact that Greek athletes were rubbed with oil at games, and the verb here would also have been χριειν and χριστος in an athletics context would therefore have come to mean "athlete" by understanding. However, χριειν in itself was not specific to athletics, and neither was χριστος. I hope that helps, and thanks for the birthday wishes! Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 16:31, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your very helpful reply, Sam. I've posted it to the Christianity talk page. AnnH ♫ 11:51, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Lolicon

I understand and respect your decision. However, I am not interested in participating in an encyclopedia that is censored such that it is less informative. I have reverted my contributions where I could do so without also damaging the contributions of others on both this account, which I had stopped using some time ago (except to participate in discussions where using a sockpuppet would be disruptive) and on my successor account, which you can trivially find, and intend to stop editing this encyclopedia after this message.

In terms of actions that you can now assist with - I spent approximately 5 hours a week on new-page patrol. Since you have buttons, you will need to spend substantially less to make up for my output - I would expect approximately 2 hours.

Good luck and godbless. Hpuppet - «Talk» 19:28, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

I reverted back to your improvements. Thanks for your help. Ashibaka tock 19:32, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for exhibiting a clear presence of mind. I seemed to lose my way on the issue. Steve block talk 20:11, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

As a final note, persuant to your comments on Jimbo's talk page, I filed an RFC, which is a genuine attempt to gather community statements and to provide alternative solutions to problems in the case that, in the future, you decide to take actions which are both irreversable and have not yet acheived clear consensus. I ask that you waive the standard attempts to resolve the dispute because I don't care to help out here any more, and also the standard endorsers, as I don't care to endorse anything. Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Sam KornHpuppet - «Talk» 20:15, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Sam, as far as I'm concerned, I want to thank you for taking action on the clearly offensive and deliberately provocative image. It's restored my good feelings a bit towards the encyclopedia. Frankly, this is something that one of the site owners should have dealt with long ago. I worry about any site that allows the legality of an image be determined by voting. It's a ludicrous notion that the word "Utopian" wouldn't begin to describe. Cheers, Nhprman ^UserLists 21:29, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the notes. However, I must note that Jimbo in particular is in an unenviable position. Any statement or action he makes is twisted and tugged every which way. I don't blame him not wanting to get involved with disputes like this, especially when he has the media to deal with too. Cheers, Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 21:36, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

The confusion that always seems to result from his comments could be because he cloaks them in ambiguity in order to avoid making one side or another angry at him. Some clear statements about this or other issues dogging Wikipedia (i.e. "child porn is unacceptable" "Userboxes will be only allowed in userspace") would end a great deal of "drama" and endless debate. I do understand that some people just like to be loved and admired, rather than make hard decisions that could be criticized and earn enemies. But that's the lot of a leader. It ain't always easy. Nhprman ^UserLists 17:15, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Has Stranger been so uncivil?

I noticed your support of the sanctions proposed against me, and was hoping to know your reasoning. I have concerns that the proposals have bypassed the /Workshop page, and are very misleadingly worded.

Thanks in advance,

StrangerInParadise 20:23, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

It is not necessary for all proposals to go through the workshop. Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 21:25, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes, but because it has done so, its misleading wording has entered the /Proposed page without comment. I am more interested in why you voted the way you did, and whether you read either this or this, both fairly brief.

StrangerInParadise 05:06, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Specifically, I am interested in whether you have reviewed Concerning the finding of uncivil behavior, as well as the other evidence I have presented. I am concerned that the extent to which the finding and remedy is misworded has escaped notice by most voting on it. I have insisted that bad-faith deletion constitutes vandalism, and dmcdevit (who wrote the finding and remedy) has prevailed on me not to say so. I do not feel that to have said so is actionably uncivil, regardless of whether ArbCom ultimately disagrees. It is tantamount to asking ArbCom to order me not to have ever disagreed with him. StrangerInParadise 11:14, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Calling another user's actions vandalism is uncivil when they are not. Vandalism is tightly defined. MarkSweep's actions have not been vandalism. To continue to say that they are is uncivil. Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 11:33, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to press the point: did you read where I show that,

• The only user discussed specifically is MarkSweep in acts of bad-faith mass-blanking and mass-deletion (so why am I accused- wrongly- of referring to other users with whom he is in a dispute as vandals or as performing vandalism)
• Instances of bad-faith mass-blanking and mass-deletion fall well within WP:VAND (so how is to say so uncivil?)

Please let me know whether you have considered these points, and have read Concerning the finding of uncivil behavior.

Thanks in advance,

StrangerInParadise 12:37, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I have read it. Please stop interrogating me. Deleting pages, particularly in good faith, is not vandalism. It may be inadvisable and against policy, but it is not vandalism. Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 13:06, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

I apologize. I did ask the question several times without an answer, and it is a reasonable question: did you read this?

I have also said that MarkSweep's actions constitute prima facia bad faith, due to his misrepresentations and clear knowledge that what he was doing was out-of-policy (for example, abuse of CSD-C1). WP:VAND specifically cites blanking as vandalism, and what is deletion if not blanking only admins can do? To disagree on this point is one thing, to say it is unutterable is quite another, don't you think? Also, how did we get to referring to other users with whom he is in a dispute as vandals or as performing vandalism, as if it were a general habit: is that not misrepresentation? (hint: name one other specific person I have called a vandal). StrangerInParadise 13:28, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

No, MS's actions do not constitute prima facie bad faith. He is clearly acting in a way that he thinks furthers Wikipedia's goals. That is good faith editing, even if misguided good faith. And it's not unacceptable to say "MS has been acting in bad faith, IMO", but it is unacceptable to say "MS has been vandalising". Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 13:33, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

...and the other points I raised (misrepresentation of my "habit" of calling people vandals, my good-faith reading of WP:VAND, his deliberate misrepresentations, etc). StrangerInParadise 13:38, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Reading of VAND - good faith until you repeated it. To your "habit", as you call it: this is a debate over semantics, with the inevitable end result that you were uncivil. You are trying to justify your actions by saying that MS's were also unacceptable. This doesn't wash. Finally, a spot of advice: there are no remedies against you. This is our way of saying "go forth and sin no more". Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 13:47, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

To be honest, I believe most of those who have voted for it feel as you do: what harm is there, after all, in requiring one to be civil? The primary harm is that there are several who are trying to sanction me for my opinion, not my incivility. How is it that I have been here for over four years, and only now find myself faced a year-long parole solely for having declared MarkSweep's actions vandalism. The only abuse I have received- and I have received much abuse, being called stupid, moron, dickhead, divisive dick and worse- has come from admins. This parole only places them above any criticism, and put's a block me sign on my account. It is unjust and unnecessary, intended only to prevent me from playing a role in the userbox debates.

For the record, I am not trying to justify [my] actions by saying that MS's were also unacceptable. I justify my actions only by showing them to be a reasonable good-faith statement of fact which I had an right- even an obligation- to assert. Whether ArbCom agrees with the assertion is another matter- the assertion is both reasonable and civil to begin with. Why should I have not repeated it simply because userbox opponents told me not to? (Hint: no pro-userbox admin has ever disagreed with my assessment, and your assertion that this was not vandalism would not find concurrence in a general poll).

StrangerInParadise 14:12, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Why the AN/I revert?

Do you plan on fixing the problem or did I post incorrectly? I'm kinda new here so I dont know all the formatting procedures.Whilde Goose 23:09, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Those are two usernames that don't exist. I don't know what your game is, but you aren't being honest. Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 23:11, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

They certainly do exist and they are very offensive. I'm normally a patient man but those names went over the line. PS- I reposted the message without the religious reference, so as not to be interpreted as offensive myself.Whilde Goose 23:22, 3 April 2006 (UTC)

Message re Lolicon on my talk page

I've read your message, but at the moment I am tired and worked up about this issue. I am not going to comment further until I have had chance to get cool down and get some sleep. I really do not want to say something that I would later regret. This messages is basically just to say that I am not ignoring you! Thryduulf 00:09, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Re: IRC

You signed off while I was away; I had to handle an issue Robbie was bugging me about, and signed off in a hurry. If you pop back in, or on MSN, I'll be available the rest of the night. Essjay ^{Talk • Contact} 01:14, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Please blank and protect

Please blank and protect my user/usertalk page and that of my admitted sockpuppet, please, as I have left this project. Thank you. 64.95.38.193 02:34, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

My gratitude

Thank you for deleting the most vile image I have ever seen here. (i.e. the old "Lolicon" image.) You are my hero, and have earned my respect. --Shultz IV 05:53, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

PS: If anyone was wondering, I was the original poster for the alert to Jimbo Wales. Had I not have given Jim the alert that day, Sam here would not have found the image and deleted it. --Shultz IV 06:01, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

censorship policies

"I think that pretty much any close-up, sexualised image of children is blatantly and completely inappropriate for Wikipedia" - Sam Korn

What about a suggestive picture of a nude 11-year-old girl holding a toy that looks like a phallus or an image of a sprawling naked prepubescent girl? Kaldari 06:50, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

The reason I ask is not to be a bothersome troll, but because your words have now been written into policy: Wikipedia:Profanity. Do you support this change in policy (actually a guideline, technically)? Would you also support removing images such as the ones above? If not, why? I just want to know if you have any concrete suggestions for modifying Wikipedia policies. Clearly you feel like our policies have failed in this case. If you could change those policies, how would you change them? Kaldari 23:53, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Sorry for not replying earlier - I managed to overlook this on the page. I am afraid I really don't know about these images. The issue is most certainly not as clear-cut as the Lolicon one was. As for the changes to the policy... No, I haven't got any concrete suggestions. I actually think concrete policies, with every eventuality covered, are a positively bad thing, because, when the time comes again when radical action is needed (and it will, however policy is defined), an exhaustive, quantitative policy is harder to step outside of than a general, qualitative one. Cheers, Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 16:26, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you

Official Badge of a Rouge Administrator

Thank you! Your action will make it easier for us to justify removal of similar images, FloNight ^talk 10:14, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Please, I really don't want to be cited as a precedent! By all means reuse my arguments, but don't argue "this was the way we did it with Lolicon so this is the way we'll do it in the future". It's always best to argue on the merits of the case. Nevertheless, I didn't think I'd ever get one of those, so thanks! Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 10:22, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

I understand your point about precedent. WP:IAR can hardly be precedent for every image content dispute. I think your actions will give us momentum in arguments. Up to now, the no censorship folks won many of these arguments no matter how harmful the image could be to the overall project. The badge is deserved. I was surprised that I beat JzG to it! --FloNight ^talk 10:47, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

You have my full support. I applaud your decision in this case. FearÉIREANN\^(caint) 18:57, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Esperanza Newsletter, Issue #2

Barnstar Brigade The Barnstar Brigade is a new program aimed at giving more very deserving yet unappreciated users barnstars. It will officially start on 2006-04-09, but signing up is encouraged before this date: "Here in Wikipedia, there are hundreds of wikipedians whose work and efforts go un-appreciated. One occasionally comes across editors who have thousands of good edits, but because they may not get around as much as others, their contributions and hard work often go un-noticed. Sadly, these editors often leave the project. As Esperanzians, we can help to make people feel appreciated, be it by some kind words or the awarding of a Barnstar. A project the size of Wikipedia has thousands of editors, so there are plenty of people out there who deserve recognition, one just has to find them. The object of this program is not to flood editors with Barnstars, but to seek out people who deserve them, and make them feel appreciated." Stress Alerts The Stress alerts program aims at identifying users who are stressed, alerting the community of thier stress and works in tandem with the Stressbusters at trying to identify causes of stress and eliminating them. Information Welcome to the second issue of the new format Esperanza Newsletter - we hope you still like it! This week, it was delivered diligently by our new dogsbody. MiszaBot (run by Misza13): any execution complaints should go to him. Content comments should be directed at the Esperanza talkpage. Thanks!

The last AC meeting (full log) The next elections: Approval voting as before and, also as before, an previous leadership member can run. Please submit your name for voting in the relevant section of this page. Voting starts on 2006-04-23 and ends on 2006-04-30. There will be three places up for grabs as KnowledgeOfSelf is leaving Wikipedia. Please see the previously linked page for full details. The Code of Conduct is now ready for extensive discussion! Specific comments should go to the Code of Conduct talk page, discussion of having one at all should be directed to the main Esperanza talk page. The current process for accepting proposals for new programs has been deemed fine. All Advisory Council members and the Admin Gen are to endevour to be bold when viewing discussion. If they feel that consensus has been reached, they will act accordingly. A plea from the editor... The propsed programs page is terribly underused! Please leave any comments, good or bad, on the page, to help us determine the membership's thoughts on the ideas there. Signed... Celestianpower, JoanneB, Titoxd, KnowledgeOfSelf and FireFox 19:53, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket user notice

Sam,

Just to let you know that a page you created is being discussed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cricket#Wikipedia:WikiProject Cricket user notice.

Stephen Turner (Talk) 20:39, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Search box

Hi there, I've updated/clarified the wording of the proposal at Highlight search box, (and added 2 more examples), and i was hoping you could give it another look. Much thanks :-) --Quiddity 07:17, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Vizzy

Pilotguy did it on my request because I was hesitant either to copyedit or revert at the time. See my confession here Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Cricket#Copyediting_Vizzy about how I indirectly brought it about. The version that Pilotguy tagged had plenty of POV statments and many unverified statements, some of which still exist. The stuff at the end of the paragraph about Vizzy's family is his personal opinion. To the comment about Vizzy being a bad commentator, he added Cashman 's comment is typical of Britisher of that age who felt insulted by a person of darker skin being respected by Britishers. I would personaly disagree with this statement, among Indians of that age and genre and his colleagues, Vizzy was a memorable commentator even more than Talyer Khan.

There are still a lot of incorrect statements which I'll get around to soon.

• The prince was plebian enough to allow CK to captain even though Yuvaraj was on the field. This spelled doom for Vizzy's intentions but he presevered and finally the vote was 9 to 8 in his favor - Vizzy was voted to captaincy by 10 votes to four.
• Maharaja Porbandar and Maharaja Limbdi donated more than him and Limbdi was a much better player. - There is no record about Limbdi or Porbandar paying anything according to any of the sources listed at the end of the article.
• After becoming the secretary of board, he restored the test career of Lala Amarnath and brought him back as India 's captain redeeming himself for the incident 17 years ago. - Vizzy was the vice president, not secretary when Amarnath was brought back in 1952.
• He started commentating for Ranji matches with AF Talyerkhan and formed a memorable commentary team.  : This is very doubtful because A. F. S. Talyarkhan (sic) disliked commentating with others and anyway retired the same time that Vizzy started.

The original version of the article was referenced almost line by line and then I brought this upon myself. IMO, it deserves atleast a 'contains unverified claims' tag until I can get around to fixing it. Tintin (talk) 12:18, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

OK, no problems. I'll put a suitable tag on there. {{advert}} just didn't feel right, considering it's just biased, not actually an advert. Cheers, Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 12:56, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Regarding "New Development To "Requiring All Changes To Be Made With An Account""

When you sign up for an account to any project, & any language division, you must set up a username & password. That's what we sould be allowed to delete.

Please reply.

Thanks.

24.70.95.203 22:27, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Regarding "New Development To "Requiring All Changes To Be Made With An Account'"" # 2

Well no, I think that deleting your username, allows people who want your username to not go thru so much red tape. Also, I was I was given the choice, I wouldn't mind people taking credit for my work; here's an idea, you could make policy a page where you must click accept, in order to delete your account, so that it because legal or whatever, that the deleter abides by those rules, maybe namely to reliquinsh all rights to credit for any work done on any part or parts Wikimedia projects, Language Divisions, &/or Wikimedia itself.

Please reply.

Thanks

24.70.95.203 22:29, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Good luck in your exams

Best of luck in your exams, Sam. I'll be watching out for your return. Cheers from across the water. AnnH ♫ 22:10, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Wow, that was quick! Thanks very much. Best, Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 22:11, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Happy Spring celebration / Easter (as your preferences and beliefs dictate)

Here's hoping that if the bunny leaves you any beans they're this kind! ++Lar: t/c 15:36, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Old Skool Esperanzial note

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)

Arb Case Mistake

Hi, im confused about something said in a report on the Arbirition case against me.

In this report, it states that i had warred on Gothic Metal, and been placed on Probation. It also says i violated WPCITE. I want to know how this came about, when both myself and User:Parasti provided diffs to me citing sources. It also says this as a 'finding of fact'. In which case, here is the speficic sections which falsly accuse me of not providing sources, and the evidence that supported this, and the accompnying diffs:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Leyasu#Failure_to_cite_sources_and_original_research

Finding Of Fact Contrary To Provided Diffs

Diff from Evidence, Diff from Evidence, Diff from Evidence, taken from Parasti's Evidence. Diff from Evidence, taken from [Evidence] Diff from Evidence, taken from Leys Evidence. Diff from Evidence, Diff from Evidence taken from Leys Evidence Diff from Evidence, Diff from Evidence, taken from Leys Evidence

I even went as far as to quoting and explaining the sources on the talk page, [1].

I got all these diffs from the archive of the Arbirition case, Here.

I just want to know why all eight claimed i provided no sources, even though another involved party provided diffs of me providing sources, and i repeatedly gave diffs of me supplying sources. Im not having a go, im just confused how 8 Arbirrators managed to claim a 'finding of fact' despite over 10 diffs from two different users =\ Ley Shade 15:00, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Esperanza Newsletter, Issue #3

Administrator Coaching The Administrator Coaching program is a program aimed at preparing Wikipedians for Adminship or helping them understand the intricacies of Wikipedia better. Recently, changes have been made to the requirements of coachees. Please review them before requesting this service. This would be something like the Welcoming Committee, but for people who have figured out the basics of editing articles; they're not newcomers any more, but they might want some help in learning new roles. Some might like suggestions about how to learn vandal patrol, or mentoring on taking an article to featured status, or guidance with a proposal they plan to make at the Village Pump, for example. In this way, Esperanza would help keep hope alive for Wikipedia because we would always be grooming the next generation of admins. Stressbusters The Stressbusters are a subset of Esperanza aiming to investigate the causes of stress. New eyes on the situation are always welcome! Note from the editor As always, MiszaBot handled this delivery. Thank you! Also, congratulations go to Pschemp, Titoxd and Freakofnurture for being elected in the last elections! An Esperanzial May to all of the readership!

The last AC meeting (full log) Posting logs of the Esperanza IRC channel are explicitly banned anywhere. Violation of this rule results in deletion and a ban from the channel. A disclaimer is going to be added to the Esperanza main page. We are humans and, as such, are imperfect. Various revisions have been made to the Code of Conduct. Please see them, as the proposal is ready to be ratified by the community and enacted. All members will members to have to re-confirm their membership after accepting the Code of Conduct. Referendums are to be held on whether terms of AC members should be lengthened and whether we should abolish votes full stop. Admin Coaching reform is agreed upon. Signed... Celestianpower, JoanneB, Titoxd, Pschemp and Freakofnurture 20:29, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

GA spam on featured template

hi, i see that the "good article" spam has been put back in Template:featured despite objections from several users. this seems to be the way the GA project works: boldly putting something into a page that doesnt want it, then claiming consensus is required to *remove* it again (consensus is never required to put it there in the first place).

this is exactly the same behaviour as witnessed on the attempt to create an article space "good article" star, which i & raul654 finally managed to have deleted (a huge effort since they had already spammed a 1000 articles with it), and on the Community Portal where this non-policy wikiproject has pride of place - its apparently far more important than any of the other dozens of collaborations!

they even had the cheek to remove the "non-policy process" template from the top of their project pages claiming they now had "enough support to be policy" - this is despite clear consensus on the talk page that its NOT policy. an attempt to put it back was quickly removed.

as an admin, would you be so kind as to unlock the featured template and remove the GA spam? i'm really fed up with fighting these GA spam battles everywhere, its quite tiring. why do they have to constantly spread their GA spam everywhere? hope you can help! Zzzzz 09:45, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

While I'm not going to come out of my break to make a change like that, I will comment that I very, very strongly disapprove of this "officialisation" of GA, which in my mind is a hugely misguided process that will not result in an improvement in any area other than bureaucracy. Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 17:46, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

thx for the reply! any comments you have would be most welcome in the discussion at Template talk:featured, if you have time. regarding the "officialisation" of the GA process that was also being discussed at Wikipedia talk:Good articles#So is GA a policy already?. its bizarre. Zzzzz 17:55, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Hello from the Mediation Committee

Dear Mediators Emeriti: I'm writing to all former/inactive mediators (now called "Mediators Emeriti" to emphasize the ability of any mediator to return at will to active participation on the Committee), to encourage each of you to share your wisdom and experience on the Committee by commenting on requests by new individuals to join the Committee. There are five current requests to join the Mediation Committee: Wikipedia:Mediation_Committee#Master_of_Puppets Wikipedia:Mediation_Committee#Wisden17 Wikipedia:Mediation_Committee#Journalist Wikipedia:Mediation_Committee#Cadr Wikipedia:Mediation_Committee#.5Edemon The current Committee respects and appreciates the time you spent on the Committee, and the insight you can provide, and encourages you to take part in these discussions. Additionally, any mediator emeritus who has the time and would like to return to active mediation would be welcomed with great enthusiasm. Yours respectfully, Essjay (Talk • Connect) 02:26, 19 May 2006 (UTC) (I recognize that many of you left the Committee to go on to other responsibilities, particularly Arbitration and the Board, but we still welcome your input on new committee members and encourage your participation. Please don't feel guilty if you cannot participate; we just want to remind everyone that they are welcome to do so.)

Ancient Greek Wikisource

I understand from your userboxes you're interested in Ancient Greek. I've submitted a proposal to add an Ancient Greek Wikisource on Meta, and I'd be very grateful if you could assist me by either voting in Support of the proposal, or even adding your name as one of the contributors in the template. (NB: I'm posting this to a lot of people, so please reply to my talkpage or to Meta) --Nema Fakei 20:10, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

==Julien Cahn==

Brookie here - I have started the above article and would aprreciate some help from those with more knowledge. Thanks Brookie :) - a will o' the wisp ! ^(Whisper...) 12:57, 7 June 2006 (UTC)

WP:FAHD

Since you were listed as a Participant in the WP:FAHD, I thought I ought to send you a message announcing that I'm reviving and changing FAHD for the better, and if you are interested, please respond. - A Link to the Past (talk) 02:09, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Your vote on Topalov

This matter is a content issue (DanielPi wants to include the allegation, I don't), not an issue of edit warring or civility or conduct. I am fully capable of compromising, and I've never been blocked or banned. This case should be in mediation, not arbitration. Dionyseus 06:46, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

I would appreciate your not telling me how to do my job. It is my opinion that there have been conduct issues here. That's all that needs to be said. Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 11:28, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry for trying to defend myself against Daniel's attempt to make it seem as if I'm some kind of monster who is incapable of compromising and incapable of doing good for the Wikipedia project. Dionyseus 12:01, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Please have faith that we will do our best to ensure that the arbitration process is fair and in the best interests of Wikipedia as a whole. Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 14:00, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Proposed decision about Cesar Tort et al

Only one question. If the 6 April article I rewrote with Midgley [2] was a NPOV correction of the previous pov incarnation (in which Midgley, not I, removed the tag), how can this be considered "Tendentious editing by Cesar Tort [...]" in Proposed decision? [3]. —Cesar Tort 15:38, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

My RfA

Hello Sam Korn, and thanks for voting in my recent RfA, which passed with a tally of (68/19/3). I appreciated your comments, which I hope to take on board in order to gain your respect in my work as an administrator. Best of luck in your continued editing of the encyclopedia! Sam Vimes 17:53, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Probation

If I am to be included in any probationary measures, I request that you explain what, if any, evidence has been presented against me that influenced your decision to include me. Even after I made a specific request for evidence of any bad acts I've committed,[4] the only time I've even mentioned on the Evidence or Workshop pages is one instance in which I characterized SPUI's page moves as being akin to vandalism,[5] a characterization I subsequently retracted after reviewing the relevant policy.[6] Other than that, no one has presented any evidence against me at all.

My position is that I have responded to SPUI's page moves every time by seeking advice and assistance at WP:AN/I, rather than by reflexively warring with him; have only reverted SPUI's moves on a small number of occasions after being confronted with clear and convincing evidence of overwhelming administrator indifference to any such moves; and that I stopped moving pages entirely after an admin asked me to disengage from the move war as a unilateral gesture of conciliation. I can provide diffs to prove all of these things on request. —phh (^t/_c) 01:36, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

You admit with your own words to move-warring. Whatever your justification, it is unacceptable to move-war. Full stop. If you don't violate the probation, you won't be punished under it. Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 08:17, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

A short Esperanzial update

As you may have gathered, discussions have been raging for about a week on the Esperanza talk page as to the future direction of Esperanza. Some of these are still ongoing and warrant more input (such as the idea to scrap the members list altogether). However, some decisions have been made and the charter has hence been amended. See what happened. Basically, the whole leadership has had a reshuffle, so please review the new, improved charter.

As a result, we are electing 4 people this month. They will replace JoanneB and Pschemp and form a new tranche A, serving until December. Elections will begin on 2006-07-02 and last until 2006-07-09. If you wish to run for a Council position, add your name to the list before 2006-07-02. For more details, see Wikipedia:Esperanza/June 2006 elections.

Thanks and kind, Esperanzial regards, —Celestianpower ^háblame 16:00, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

The note allowing users to edit your page needs to be more prominent for User:Sebesta

I had changed '17 year old' to '17-year-old' since it was describing the Wikipedian and changed the edit count sentence to 'My edit count has passed 9300, as of 08:15, 25 June 2006 (UTC) (so I'm told). You can see my user awards in my gallery' ... but User:Sebesta thought you would like to do it yourself apparently.

I believe it depends exclusively on the user what they want to have on their user page, no matter whether the data is no longer up to date or even wrong. Daniel Šebesta (talk • contribs) 09:18, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

If the user wanted it to be up to them, they wouldn't have a note telling other users they can edit the page. But that's just my opinion. ;-)

Oh, that's what you meant. I hadn't seen that note on the user page before. Ok, then do as you like. Daniel Šebesta (talk • contribs) 10:33, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Be my guests! Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 12:32, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Discussion at Village pump

Please have a look at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#Resolving_content_disputes. Please help me to find the answer to my questions. Thanks.--AndriyK 14:03, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your comment at Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#Resolving_content_disputes. Could you please visit that page once more? The outcome of the discussion is still unclear. Thanks.--AndriyK 19:33, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Deletion review for Template:Good article

hi, i hope you can take part in the deletion review debate for the above metadata template that puts a star on the article's mainpage (you voted in the original deletion debate). the vote is here Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2006 July 8 (scroll down for Template:Good Article section). thanks. Zzzzz 00:32, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

Image:Unbalanced scales.png (Image:Unbalanced scales.svg)

Hmm.. Image had become quite, quite popular, thought you'd want to know. --Cat out 16:09, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

That's cool... cat... Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 17:32, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

a gentle greek translation from you...

Dear Sam, i' m an Italian user of Wikipedia i was looking for an image of delphi and getting arounf in foreigners wikiperidia i find your user page. Could you translate form me next phrase to put in my babel fish user page? "This user do not speak Greek, but he would like to leran it. At this tim he only could read it" Best Regards : άλβαρο

--82.184.61.186 13:32, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

RE: Johnny Lee Clary - Please help

Hey there, my name is Nick, my username is Potters house and I have encountered a problem with trying to provide any information about Johnny Lee Clary. I have posted this post off to other staff members also. I am not sure if this is the best route to resolve this, but can think of no other way.

The article Johnny Lee Clary has been deleted. I have known Johnny through telephone conversations and email for a short time now (about 3-4 months). He recently came and shared his life story in for our church group for the first time just two weeks ago. Before I met Johnny I became interested in his story i.e. his conversion from the head of the KKK in the US, to being a Christian Minister who now teaches against race hate groups. I found the article Johnny Lee Clary as it still is today, deleted, except for some small talk. If you read the talk you see what I have said at the time (notice I have gotten no reply, probable my fault as I don’t know heaps about WIKI policy). From my understanding Johnny Lee Clary was posting as The KingOfDixie and looks like he tried to change a few things on Wiki concerning the KKK. While this is a controversial subject, Johnny being the former leader of the KKK would probably know a thing or two and be able to contibute, but that’s another story. He eventually made an article about himself i.e. Johnny Lee Clary. Johnny being quite new to Wiki and ignorant of rules of conduct found himself at odds with some admins and had his site deleted.

Whilst observing Johnny over the last 3-4 months I have noticed that he is very outspoken against race hate groups such as the Neo Nazis, Skinheads, KKK etc. This, more often than not, lands Johnny in the hot seat. He has experienced persecution from racist groups for his departure from the KKK and voiced opinions against these racist organizations on his webpage, www.xkkk.org. Johnny has also received multiple death threats.

Because of his bold stance against these racist groups Johnny has become accustomed to hatred directed at him by those same groups. Johnny concluded that perhaps the guy who deleted the page Johnny Lee Clary was a white supremist. I am hoping to clear this up. Before he told me this, I started to create J L Clary, after hearing nothing from posting in user talk on Johnny Lee Clary's article. I wasn't 10 minutes into the J L Clary article when it was issued a deletion notice, and then before I had time to reply (about 5 minutes) it was deleted! I was amazed. I told this to Johnny and he said the main reason he was told that he couldn't have an article was because he was not prominent enough.

Johnny has a very famous testimony and has been on multiple TV shows like Oprah, Donahue, Jerry Springer, etc, and even recently when he preached in our town he made front page news, a double spread on his life, and the local ABC interviewed him live, which is not bad for our town (LISMORE NSW Australia) See http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_Kerry&dir=prev&offset=20050327125109&limit=500&action=history .

When David Wilkerson came to our town hardly anyone knew or cared, yet David Wilkerson is allowed an article (and rightfully so), but more people know of Johnny. As to whether he is famous or not, just Google search him and see all the TV interviews and radio interviews he does. He hangs with some of the most prominent Christian leaders in Australia. Besides this, just being the former KKK leader should be enough for an article (he doesn't even get a mention in the KKK one, and would be deleted). He was also a Pro Wrestler. So he is prominent in Christian circles, he is prominent amongst race hate groups, and he is also prominent in the WWE wrestling.

Johnny asked me to test the waters for him to see if he was being persecuted by someone from a race hate group. So I created some sites, John Clary Wade Watts and Operation Colorblind - the name of Johnny's Ministry. These have been fine until yesterday. I cannot understand why these sites are just issued a deletion notice? Just because they mention JLC? I was hoping to discuss these things but they are just deleted. The one on Wade Watts is about a black gospel preacher who was one of the leaders in the civil rights movement in the US and was good friends with Martin Luther King. He took Johnny Clary under his wing and even ordained Johnny as a minister (to this day Johnny is the only white man ordained in the All Black Baptist Church). But his article is up for deletion because I mentioned Clary and had a link.

That is why I am writing to you to see if you can help. It seems to me that the person(s) deleting all articles which even mention Johnny Lee Clary has an agenda. I thought that wikipedia admins had to keep a neutral stance on every article. It seems like this guy has a vendetta against JLC. Why delete the Wade Watts article. That is guilt by association and could be proof that all deletions are because of racial discrimination! I hope this is not the case and would think that it is politically motivated, as Johnny is a strong supporter of George Bush and Antaeus Feldspar of Kerry.

See:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_Kerry&dir=prev&offset=20050327125109&limit=500&action=history This shows how Antaeus Feldspar supports Kerry, which is fine, but Johnny is a strong supporter of Bush.

My hope is that Johnny will be able to have an article like any other famous person, minister, former KKK leader, or pro wrestler, and that Johnny and anyone connected with him and his ministry will in future have certain rules set in place that do not allow the wholesale deletion of the articles associated with him, but that they will be at least discussed.

I thank you for reading this long winded post. I have only been using WIKI for about a year myself so I need your help, I don't really know what else to do. I hope you can help. I personally think that Johnny's story is one that is beneficial to the cause of reconciliation between races and to the3 unity of society as a whole. It would be a shame if WIKI became known for having covert racists. Of course I hope that this is a misunderstanding and that all will be cleared up soon.

Here are some links that might help.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wade_Watts

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:TheKingOfDixie

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Colorblind

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Threeafterthree

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Potters_house

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Deletion_policy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Antaeus_Feldspar

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=John_Kerry&dir=prev&offset=20050327125109&limit=500&action=history This shows how Antaeus Feldspar supports Kerry, which is fine, but Johnny is a strong supporter of Bush. Perhaps the bias is political and not racial?

The link for page: John Clary has already been deleted!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Alabamaboy

Please notice that his link was taken from the KKK site the same day:

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ku_Klux_Klan&diff=prev&oldid=65690238

then

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ku_Klux_Klan&diff=next&oldid=65690238

Also note his contributions: Featured articles: · African American literature -- My first featured article. Thanks to everyone who gave feedback. While I didn't start the article, I obsessed on it for an entire month and wrote most of the copy. · Ku Klux Klan -- I began work on this article after it became a featured article. Since then I've mediated several editorial disputes on the article (including one of which kept the article from being delisted as a FA) and made a large number of edit. Potters house 00:27, 27 July 2006 (UTC) Nick.

My Arbcomm case

Fred's compilation of 'findings' seem mostly restricted to myself. If you look at my evidences pages, there is abundant evidence to show many editors found Pecher's work to be deliberately biased in that he intentionally misinterpreted texts. This accusation against him has been levied by Muslim editors and non-Muslim editors alike. All this is in addition to his hostility towards other editors and his utter unwillingness to compromise. I don't understand how such concrete evidence would go totally ignored by the arbitration, even insofar as excluding it from 'finding of facts'. His Excellency... 16:29, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

It is my intention to look over this case again presently. Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 16:33, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. That's all I'd ask for. His Excellency... 16:45, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Having looked over the case again (not solely on the basis of your request), I remain unconvinced that Pecher's actions are worthy of sanction. Sam Korn ^(smoddy) 17:01, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

The point would seem to be moot, as Pecher appears to have resigned.Timothy Usher 22:03, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

User subpage

Sam, I created this subpage to address the diffs which Dmcdevit had put forth as evidence for the finding of fact against me. User talk:Timothy Usher/re proposed finding. If there is anything else I can address, please let me know.

For a number of reasons, I can and will no longer be involved in any of the articles in which the referenced conflict occurred. I again petition the Arbitration Committee to accept my resignation from Wikipedia generally in lieu of the proposed finding and remedy.Timothy Usher 22:03, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Don't let the door hit you on the way out. I don't know what you're complaining about. Fred's not even considering what used to be my evidences. Probation is nothing. His Excellency... 01:04, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

August Esperanza Newsletter

Program Feature: To-Do List The Esperanza To-Do List is a place where you may list any request, big or small, for assistance. If you need help with archiving your usertalk, for example, all you need to do is list it here and somebody will help you out. Likewise, if you need help with some area of editing on Wikipedia, list it here! Again, any matter, trivial or not, can be placed on this page. However, all matters listed on this page must not be of an argumentative nature. You do not need to be a member of Esperanza (or this program) to place or fulfill requests on this page. If you don't have any requests, consider coming by and fulfilling a few! This program has not been very active, but has lots of potential! What's New? In order to help proposed programs become specific enough to make into full-fledged programs, the In development section of the proposals page has been created. Proposals that are promising, but need to be organized in more detail are listed here. Please take a look at what is there, and help the proposals turn into programs. To improve both the layout and text of the front page, in an attempt to clarify the image of Esperanza, the front page is going to have some redesigning take place. Please take your creative minds to Wikipedia:Esperanza/Front page redesign to brainstorm good ideas. Many thanks to MiszaBot, courtesy of Misza13, for delivering the newsletter.

The last AC meeting (full log) In order to make sure all users who join Esperanza are welcomed, a list of volunteers who are willing to welcome new Esperanzians is at Wikipedia:Esperanza/Members#Esperanza_welcomers. Please add yourself if you are interested; we want to make sure all new Esperanza members are welcomed! The In development section of the proposals page has been created. Proposals page: Some proposals have been moved to the aforementioned "In development" section, some have been left as a proposal, and others have been archived. For those proposals that were a good idea but didn't necessarily constitute a program, General Esperanzial Actions has been created. Two small pieces of charter reform will be decided on in a straw poll at Wikipedia talk:Esperanza/Governance. One involves filling the position of any councillors who may leave, the other involves reforming the charter. Until cooperation with the Kindness Campaign is better defined, it remains as a proposed program. There is a page for discussing the front page redesign. Signed... Natalya, Banes, Celestianpower, EWS23, FireFox, Freakofnurture, and Titoxd 05:03, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Although having the newsletter appear on everyone's userpage is desired, this may not be ideal for everyone. If, in the future, you wish to receive a link to the newsletter, rather than the newsletter itself, you may add yourself to Wikipedia:Esperanza/Newsletter/Opt Out List.