User talk:Anyeverybody/Archives/2007/June

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search


A tag has been placed on Anynobody/3RR, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

G6, article mistakenly created in mainspace

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet very basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add {{hangon}} on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Metropolitan90 06:53, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I userfied it to User:Anynobody/3RR. Regards, MaxSem 08:29, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
Thank you :) Anynobody 08:34, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Use of WP:ANI

This is to remind you the uses of WP:ANI:

This page is for reporting and discussing incidents that require the intervention of administrators, such as blocked users evading blocks. Any user of Wikipedia may post here.

Please make your comments civil and please include diffs to help us find the problem you are reporting. As a courtesy, you should inform other users if they are mentioned in a posting. Please make your comments concise. Administrators are less likely to pay attention to long diatribes.

Dispute resolution: This page is not part of our Dispute Resolution process.

If you want to make an open informal complaint about misuse of administrative powers, you can do so here. But this is not the Wikipedia complaints department. If your problem concerns a content issue and does not need the attention of admins, please follow the steps in dispute resolution. These include mediation and requests for comment.

Any further postings to the board, that do not fit exactly withing the criteria, above will be refactored. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 01:23, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Jossi, given that I have previously tried WP:DP regarding the WP:ANI issue and it was unresolved where do you recommend taking such concerns? As I said there, it seems to span more than one policy. Going to the group who will be making decisions, administrators, seemed like a logical step. Anynobody 01:47, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
You can try WP:MEDCAB or WP:MEDCOM ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 02:57, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Jossi, closing the ANI post based on this message is a bit short sited. Remember I was asking about "Is it a personal attack to document an editor's uncivil behavior?", and I asked you to show me in the policies and guidelines where it says not to. Anynobody 07:37, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

I think the right advice here is to stop beating a dead horse.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 07:38, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Would explain why it's dead, and how it died? Anynobody 07:48, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Beating it too much?—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 07:49, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Seriously, Is it a personal attack to document an editor's uncivil behavior? Anynobody 07:51, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Changing username?

Changing username? See Wikipedia:Changing_usernames. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 03:31, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Not exactly. Anynobody 03:36, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
what is this, then? ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 03:56, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

For the future, consider Category:Wikipedians_with_committed_identities so that you can verify your identity and ask for a new password. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 04:05, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

≈ jossi ≈ (talk), I've sent an e-mail and am waiting for resolution of an issue. If I had felt like explaining it to you I would have given a more complete answer with my last post. (I also have to admit your question gave me a chuckle; If I was changing user names though, why would I transfer the pages and replace them with redirects? Either you must think I'm stupid or you weren't paying close attention.)

Also, I must say it strikes me as ironic that you would point out rules relating to usernames but above and on WP:ANI you say that the pages don't spell out everything. "This is a no no..." I'm not trying to be hostile, I'd simply like to know how you reconcile quoting rules some of the time and other times taking action not defined in them as if it were. Anynobody 04:19, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

An unusual situation as the one with this redirect, was picked up by me and another RC patroller. Changing usernames is spelled out at WP:USERNAME. In any case, as I can see that you do not appreciate any help from me, so be it. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 04:34, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

I appreciate all the help I can get, (to be blunt) you just aren't very helpful:

  1. As I said it isn't a name change.
  2. Your help includes an arbitrary quotation of policies and guidelines mixed with your opinion. I'm not interested in going around saying "Well ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) said:...".
  3. You also have a habit of simply disengaging when I don't agree with you without citing some kind of evidence to show why either I was incorrect or why you are more correct.
  4. I didn't ask for your help.

Again I mean no offense, I'm just being blunt in the interest of clarity. (So you understand it's nothing personal, I just choose who I ask for help more carefully than most. Anynobody 04:47, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Your changes to User:Anynobody

I have reverted the redirects you created at User:Anynobody and User_talk:Anynobody. If you are Anynobody, I simply reverted them to protect you from impersonation. Thanks, Kesac 03:36, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

I am indeed Anynobody, but I aod appreciate your vigilance in monitoring vandalism. Anynobody 03:41, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (Image:Jim Bakker.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Jim Bakker.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BetacommandBot 07:53, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

Destructive creativity AfD and new edits and updates

Dear Anynobody,

Thank you very much for your attention, edits and comments on one of my first Wikipedia articles, Destructive creativity.

Definition of destructive creativity in economic crime: The drive to create new profitable sources of income that are not beneficial to society can be denoted destructive creativity. [1] ( By: Halvor Mehlum, Karl Moene, Ragnar Torvik, "Destructive Creativity" Department of Economics, University of Oslo, 16th September 2003) This academic source is verified and needs to be read through to see that term economic parasitism is not related to parasitology, as one user mentioned to support his "Delete" decision.

Other sources give descriptions of destructive creativity in Terrorism and Organised crime, in Software engineering, where destructive creativity in internet crime is defined as trying to brake, trying to falsify, being nasty. One source is focused on "Destroyers vs Builders" struggle. Psychiatric underpinnings of behaviors causing crime, destruction of property, attacks on people, self-destruction, vandalism and other crime) are described in very carefully worded medical terms on three thousand pages of DSM-IV Sourcebooks on destructive behavior of diagnosed people with mental disorders, who, sadly, engage in destructive creativity by committing various crimes. Undiagnosed and untreated people may still have intermittent destructive behavior.

Any kind of Creativity is a mental process (see Wikipedia), so is destructive creativity, where mental process is in disorder (see mental illness, mental disorders and all five DSM-IV Sourcebooks). Professional terms, such as mentation, underdiagnosed, and many other are not even in Wikipedia yet. Criminology, forensic psychiatry, pathology sources on serial killer cases, as well as terrorism related sources and knowledge on current advancements in destructive creativity are classified for professional use only.

A conference of experts from eight countries stated on September 11, 2006: in crime and terrorism the possibility always exists for destructive creativity in terms of both weapons and operations. This may include a new generation of destructive devices, etc.. A global assessment of terrorism. White Paper. September 11, 2006. [2]

Real-life software engineers, economists, criminalists, lawyers, doctors and other people, mamas and papas, are still dealing with destructive creativity every day. The definition of destructive creativity for software engineers: braking, falsifying, and being nasty, is similar to professional instructions for law enforcement and forensic psychiatrists who are dealing with destructive behavior in society. Even if deleted from Wikipedia, it still exists in big real world, works in human minds, and causes destruction and losses. Thanks for all your help and tolerance to my funny English. This experience is highly interesting. Helping people see pieces of the elephant. Sincerely, Steveshelokhonov 20:58, 21 June 2007 (UTC)


I like the pic Image:AFwing.png that you created! Seems you have some account/username issues... =) Jumping cheese 07:35, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, I appreciate the compliment :)
Not really, the username/accounts are working perfectly I have a "failing to plan ahead issue". (In other words I take full responsibility for being a tool and not registering an e-mail address.) Anynobody 08:06, 24 June 2007 (UTC)


  • I am curious as to the username change? Smee 06:12, 22 June 2007 (UTC).

I lost my browser data, and the passwords therein. I had recently made the wikipedia password more "secure" than the others, and then my session timed out after I hadn't logged on within a certain time (I'm assuming that though). Hopefully it's just temporary, hence the redirects. Long story short, this is why listing e-mail is a good idea.

(P.S. why did you say "change", I'm still signing and redirecting from Anynobody? I expected a question like "What's with the redirect you pretentious bastard!?") Anynobody 06:19, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

P.P.S. The pretentious bastard part was a joke. Anynobody 00:41, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Got it. It's just a shame you didn't use email or that other thingy, so we could all be more sure about all this stuff. Yours, Smee 02:09, 23 June 2007 (UTC).
Other thingy? (I only changed my Wikipedia password, I'm still on commons, I messaged you, and the others. Anynobody 02:22, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
The secured password thing that Jossi had mentioned above. Smee 02:23, 23 June 2007 (UTC).

What he suggested would be a good idea, had I set up a string before being locked out. Since I hadn't done that under the Anynobody account, it's too late to be any help for this situation. It's no biggie, after being advised who can solve my problem I've e-mailed the situation to the correct people. Anynobody 02:32, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

Surely my new graphic must convince you, File:Lockedmyselfout.gif. (Again a joke) Anynobody 09:38, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Thank you. Please do me a favor and watch over my userpage and user talk page while I am on wikibreak, so that the userpage stays the way it is from my last edit, and the notice on the talk page stays the same as well. Thank you for your time. Yours, Smee 16:04, 24 June 2007 (UTC).

I'd be happy to do what I can, however it may be better to ask an admin to protect the pages. That's what I'd do in your situation. {{lu|Smee}} {{lut|Smee}} Anynobody 22:52, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Your potential report...

This is interesting. And if you do, it will also be interesting to see what comes out of it. Smee 20:08, 24 June 2007 (UTC).

Trying to answer a question

Not sure you're allowed to answer questions at the RfA. If you are you can move this there. Anyway the list was originally called "List of converts to Christianity." Notable was added at some point. Later it seemed apparent that the majority wanted former Christians to be on the list. I didn't agree, but I figured if that was to be done it should be renamed. So a rename proposal went in at Talk:List of notable people who converted to Christianity#Title Change?. There were three objections to the change with User:Sefringle's being the most serious. (One of the objectors seemed to prefer a different retitling, but I don't think either held a strong opposition to the proposed retitle) So I think it was more of a real consensus.

User:Bus stop did not state his position of the proposal at the time, but generally rejects anything that smacked of changing what he considers list's purpose. His view is the list should be a list of Christians, which logically means people who are Christian currently. I think he understands the other view, but rejects it as illogical and leading to slights to other religions. I think this is a fair reading of his view and hopefully he won't object to it if he sees it.--T. Anthony 12:48, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

I understand, and appreciate your explanation of the situation. The perception of the list's purpose changing is accurate though, the different names each describe different lists the page has been as you are aware. To your knowledge has anyone explained this to him/her? Using an example sentence about Dylan I'll illustrate why the title of the current list should include Dylan.
Bob Dylan's religious affiliation can best be currently described as Jewish, however he had previously converted to Christianity for a time.
  1. "List of converts to Christianity" implies a list of people who are Christian converts. The key word being are. Bob Dylan is not a current convert of Christianity and so wouldn't belong on that list.
  2. "List of notable converts to Christianity" implies the same current status as the previous name but excludes unknown/not notable people. Even though Dylan is notable, he still isn't a current convert, so also wouldn't belong on this list.
  3. "List of notable people who converted to Christianity" removes the current convert status requirement to be on the list by including people who have converted to Christianity at any time in the past. Bob Dylan belongs in this list because he is notable (per the current title) and converted at one point.
I was also wondering if anyone has suggested another list for current Christians, separate from this one, for Christians that are notable to other Christians? Anynobody 23:09, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
A difficulty is that Dylan was in it from the beginning, going back to when it was simply called "list of converts to Christianity." So the title change didn't change the purpose the way you might expect. The purpose apparently always was to just list anyone who ever converted, preferably in a notable way. This purpose is controversial for some editors. I'm not sure I agree with it myself. This might seem hypocritical as I added most former converts to List of Catholic converts, in that case I changed the name on my own, but the ones I added were mostly people who had been monks or nuns or who are most known for Catholic influenced literature. Also that was a long time back and I've since had time to reconsider. As for a more narrow list where the conversion is more clearly notable...well I suggested that, but it was decided that'd be too hard to determine.--T. Anthony 02:26, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry for the delay, I forgot I hadn't responded here yet. It is indeed a complicated situation, the current block seems to have settled things for now at least. Anynobody 02:35, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Arbitration notification

Per recommendation from the WP:CSN closure I have initiated Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration#COFS. You are a named party in the request so you may wish to submit a statement to the Committee. DurovaCharge! 02:28, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the notice, I'll put something together to say. I'm sorry this situation has gone so far and taken so much of your time. Anynobody 02:33, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

moon flag animation

Did you make the two frame animation from the two photos above it? They were both cropped by an editor. The original animation took the two original photos and lined the elements up. Bubba73 (talk), 13:06, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

I did indeed create the new animation. I agree the old one was lined up, but the colors didn't match and almost gave the impression of "waving". The difference in perspective is Armstrong's movement between the two pictures, but the flag's folds and shadows are clearly unchanged between the two.
I wasn't planning to edit war over it, if you or others prefer the old one I won't be offended. Anynobody 23:27, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
The change in color looks like it is because Armstrong changed the exposure between shots. I've changed it back to the original one because in that one, all of the stationary objects coincide. I left your other change in there. Bubba73 (talk), 00:33, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
It's possible but I doubt it, the cropped pictures were taken from each original image. The colors on the cropped images match, I suspect that whoever created the animation used a graphics editor that "corrected" the color of Aldrin's salute picture when it was formatted to line up. The creator probably did not modify the first image in the same program, thus it wasn't "corrected" as well and looks like the cropped images.
Still, I think the community should choose so I set up a WP:RFC to get an idea what people prefer. Anynobody 01:47, 28 June 2007 (UTC)


AN, I am uncomfortable with you covering up your current username with an image of your old username. I think that sets a bad precedent and borders on spoofing. I know that you are doing it in good faith but please remove the images and let your actual current username be seen. It is fair to tell you that I will post my concern on an appropriate noticeboard despite any agreement to the contrary. I am not looking to get you in trouble or gain you a sanction but to show you that what you have done is a matter of concern. Thanks. --Justanother 18:06, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Although I'm not sure this goes as far as spoofing, I agree with the gist of Justanother's comments. I listed you by your better-known username at the RFAR but you may wish to change both that and your signature. It does confuse people. DurovaCharge! 20:25, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
Though I must say it is very cleverly done - I especially like the Scotch tape. Maybe you can usurp your old name back or maybe someone will reset your password as any number of people will likely state that they are 99.99% certain as to your identity. --Justanother 21:53, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

I hereby petition the "powers that be" to reset the password of User:Anynobody so that he can have his old account back. I attest that I am reasonably certain that the editor now editing as User:Anyeverybody is indeed User:Anynobody.

  • Support Maybe this will help if you collect a bunch of sigs. --Justanother 22:36, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Support If you promise to stop trying to endlessly debate things with me. Besides, who could resist an open invitation to razz you for losing your password. (By the way I didn't want to gang up on you, and I had promised not to post here, so I didn't, but I, too, object to your 'taped' name overlay. I actually considered letting you know when you first did it). There are other ways to accomplish what you're trying to do, without 'pasting' a username over the real one. Peace.Lsi john 23:45, 27 June 2007 (UTC)
I had actually planned on taking this to the WP:BN if I don't hear back from today. If it's critical that the situation be resolved ASAP I can do that sooner.
Justanother I appreciate the idea and your compliments on my method here, I honestly don't want to trouble that many editors. Also I'm not even sure a petetion would do anything, so worse than asking for other editors time it could be wasting it. I'm going to rely on Durova's assistance from here on out though, simply because of the experience difference between you. (Incidentally since the petition is related to this discussion I integrated into the blockquote above.)
Durova I emailed on 06/19:

Hello, I edit under the username Anynobody and have forgotten my password. I recently added some numbers to make it stronger, but have since forgotten what they were or if I added them to the front or back of the main word which is video. I also hadn't gotten around to registering my e-mail address, so this precludes me from having it e-mailed to me by the system...

and received a response on 6/21 ([Ticket#2007062010003033]) suggesting be contacted by IRC (which I can't for a few reasons) or e-mail. Do you think I should go to the WP:BN sooner, as planned or not at all and do you have any suggestions? Anynobody 23:51, 27 June 2007 (UTC)