User talk:Doc glasgow/Apr/2008

Heads up

I regret to advise you that I have mentioned you by name here. My apologies, I should have waited until someone pulled the logs. Risker (talk) 01:53, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Religion

Have you not looked at the date, or do you have no sense of humor? Noclip (talk) 21:28, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I must have grown out of that sense of humour (at about age 9). Knock it off.--Doc^g 21:30, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

AFD notice

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Organ Review of Arts -Pete (talk) 01:59, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Eh?--Doc^g 07:30, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Oi! :)

I was wondering what you were aiming for with your recent edit in 300. I have undone the incorrect usage of the indefinite article "an" in "an historical" for the previous version of a historical. In American grammar (as the film is American in origin), the 'h' sound is a breathy consonant, whereas the British language pronunciation renders the 'h' silent, using the vowel sound. I found some verification of this in both Nitty Gritty Grammar (1), "More Nitty Gritty Grammar" (2), "The Elements of Grammar" (3) and "Grammar for Smart People" (4). Additionally, I surprised myself in finding information right here in Wikipedia.
I actually have to thank you; I hadn't read through those books in a couple of years, but I respected you and your edits to make absolutely sure I was right about this before reverting your edits. Lastly, I think I may have reverted some of your external, foreign-language links, as I found them kinda baffling. could you explain what you were trying to do there? I have no problem with a partial revert to reinstate those choices. - Arcayne (^{cast a spell}) 14:53, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Not retired

Yes, I realised that after my edit. But somebody (preferably an admin, as this is AN/I) really needs to sign when archiving discussions. Geometry guy 10:31, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Hardly a good reason to revert him, nor is a retiral notice. You only revert if you believe it needs done on the merits, and then the onus is on YOU to give a reason why your revert is helpful/desirable. The only reason to reopen that thread was if you believed that the discussion should continue, in which case you should have indicated that in your summary.--Doc^g 10:51, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Fair comment. But (ideally :) all should take responsibility for explaining the decisions they make in their edits. Anyhow, I'm fine with the outcome, and I wasn't complaining, just explaining and I found your reply very helpful. Cheers, Geometry guy 21:08, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Important Notice

This I write to you is to inform you sir that I have put in a self-nomination for myself to become an administrator. And no this is no joke. I am serious about seeking the office. I write as a common courtesy out of respect for you being an administrator and fellow user. Feel free to write to my talk page any answer. ESCStudent774441 (talk) 03:08, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

FYI

One of the users of your BLP watch did not advise readers of the discussion as recommended by WP:CANVASS. I asked about that in WP:AN/I.

Can I ask why you don't just use the regular deletion sorting mechanism? Geo Swan (talk) 14:07, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Fusako Shigenobu article -- request undeletion

I feel that the article on ["Fusako Shigenobu"], deleted as a negative bio of a living person, was not in fact negative. Of course, it's difficult for me to check, but archived copies on other websites don't seem negative at all, presenting milestones in her long and storied career with a dispassionate tone. Assertions in the article seemed well-grounded in factual, published sources.

Articles for her also appear on the Arabic, French, Japanese, and Swedish Wikipedias.

68.125.110.120 (talk) 07:31, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Retirement

This message is just a courtesy notice for you that I have rendered a decision I am sure will make you happy. I have decided to retire from the Wikipedia project, retroactive to yesterday. This time my retirement will be permanent. Reasons for decision can be found at my talk page. ESCStudent774441 (talk) 00:09, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

What to do when you are away?

See User talk:Doc glasgow/BLP watch - suggestions. As you haven't contributed recently, I am going to post at the BLP noticeboard instead. But do you think you could post a notice there saying what to do when you seem not to be around? Carcharoth (talk) 02:46, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Changed my mind. BLP noticeboard didn't look appropriate, and was overloaded already by the looks of things, so leaving it alone. The DRV is getting a lot of attention anyway. Carcharoth (talk) 02:49, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:NotTheWikipediaWeekly

Hi, in our last Skypecast we discussed BLP issues that touched upon your user space proposal. There's a new chat proposed at a more Scotland-friendly time slot for Friday evening. It would be delightful if you could join us. Best wishes, Durova^Charge! 00:01, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, have been away for a bit. I'll listen to the archive when I've got a min.--Doc^g 16:56, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

G'day Doc....

I thought I'd drop you a line to let you know that various wikipedians discussed BLPs in general recently, and your recent posts, and work in defining the BLP problem, were mentioned and discussed in some depth. You can hear it in the fourth part of NotTheWikipediaWeekly for this week.

Further - it'd be cool if you were at all interested in maybe coming along to a conversation at some point, and sharing your views and ideas in this area - there's one currently being suggested for a Euro friendly time later this week, but should that be inconvenient, it'd be good to find a better time if you're interested in principle...

Any feeback on what was discussed is of course also most welcome - and thanks for your posts in this area too, I for one have found them both interesting and necessary. cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 00:18, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I've actually gone a step further also, and begun a proposal at Wikipedia:OptOut which I hope may be of interest too... best, Privatemusings (talk) 01:07, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I'll listen in when I've got time, I find your casts always worth the effort. I'm afraid I've never been convinced by the "opt out" idea. It's problematic because in many cases it is shutting the door after the libellous horse has bolted, and unworkable because it leaves us trying to define "marginal notability". You suggest: "A public official or any other person pervasively involved in public affairs". What's a public official? Does anyone who's every held any office count? And someone will want to argue that Dan B and Don M have both been "pervasively involved in public affairs". You see where I'm going... I'm also flattered by the invitation to participate in the cast, but at this point my own desire for privacy pushes me to "opt out" I'm afraid.--Doc^g 17:08, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Comics blp

Doc, I know there's a lot of proposals being put forwards regards BLP articles, but in the meantime I have put together Wikipedia:WikiProject Comics/BLP. This page lists every article which is tagged with both {{comicsproj}} and {{BLP}} on its talk page at the time of creation. I've left a note at the comicsproj so that all editors are aware, and I've added it to our to-do task template, so hopefully this is useful endeavour. If you can think of anything extra along these lines or issues with the idea, feel free to point them out, I'm just trying to think up ways of getting more eyeballs on the issue while the community works towards a consensus. Hiding T 21:40, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Movie trailer.

In a world... where BLP violations are rampant... two men must fight the hordes of POV warriors to save Wikipedia...

Doc Glasgow

Guy Chapman

In... Edit Wars Episode I: The Protection Menace. Coming to cinemas May 13th.

But seriously, keep up the good work :) Sceptre ^(talk) 01:00, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Speaking of, you guys need to look for Pablo Francisco, a US comedian. He does an amazing "In a world..." comedy skit, and I think there were videos of it on his site. If not there, Youtube probably. It's absurdly funny. Edit: here it was! This kills me. Lawrence § t/e 01:03, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Charlir91

I just had a looksee at the edit history for Charlir91 (talk · contribs) ... you think it may be time for an RFC or even ArbCom? I already warned him about his editing patterns at his talk page, as it seems he's primarily responsible for these poorly sourced articles on mob figures. Blueboy96 01:07, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

I suspect there's no need for action actually. We just need to remove all the BLP violating stuff and eventually he'll get the message or leave. Arbcom will simply tell you to enforce BLP, using blocks if necessary. An RfC won't tell us anything we don't know. Thanks for your interest though, all help with the clean-up is appreciated.--Doc^g 01:13, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

I guess I may have been a bit too jumpy. I would think we should restore the Lucchese crime family article at some point--like I said at ANI, everything after August 30 needs to go. Blueboy96 01:17, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Sheesh ... looks like it was more serious than I thought. Maybe we need a Wikiproject for this thing--in any case, I restarted it as a stub. Off to the library next week ... Blueboy96 03:19, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

I'm happy for you, or anyone else to restore any material that's directly sourced. But we can't list people as criminals on the strength of a vague "external links" section.--Doc^g 03:42, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I don't get how in the world this didn't have the number of sources that the other Five Families articles had. Go figure ... Blueboy96 03:47, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Bagel

I, for your comments at the Tel Aviv FAC's Flymeoutofhere (talk) 11:54, 13 April 2008 (UTC), award you this Bagel of Zion for improving the coverage of ציון. Remember not to edit on empty stomach.

Regarding This Edit

Perhaps next time before being so utterly rude, you could take some time to properly look into the situation. Until around an hour ago, the death of Speight was still unconfirmed, and even now sources (including the BBC) are contradicting themselves. _TalkIslander 00:30, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Ridiculous. You don't get more of a BLP hawk than me, but all major news outlets have been reporting him dead for hours. Yes, technically, there's been no legal declaration, but if it's good enough for the BBC then it's fine. We can record the nuance in the article text. It is BLP paranoia like this, when wikipedia is not saying anything controversial or damaging that brings real BLP stuff - when we might actually impact real people - into disrepute. If it turns out he's not dead, the fact that wikipedia got it wrong will be the least of his PR worries. I really don't get the silliness over this.--Doc^g 00:36, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

And, while I'm at it, whereas I unfairly accused Majorly of being uncivil, I can quite easily accuse you of it, thanks to that edit summary. Take a long hard look at WP:CIVIL. _TalkIslander 00:31, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

It is bullshit. Calling it such is not being incivil, I'm sure you meant well. I have absolutely no desire to take even the shortest look at WP:CIVIL.--Doc^g 00:36, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Shooting Example

Hi Doc:

Do you really think that shooting example is appropriate?

Seems to me an unnecessarily nasty example which offends in regard to civility. Also what would it do to Wikipedia liability if there was a shooting tomorrow?

I think the example might also be criticized as expressing personal opinion. It is unlikely that the subject was chosen purely at random.

Cheers, Wanderer57 (talk) 21:42, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

You are kidding me, right?--Doc^g 21:43, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Anyway, I said I might do it on a Monday, so if it were tomorrow, it wouldn't be me.--Doc^g 21:46, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

No I'm not kidding. I know you didn't choose the example initially, but what justification do you see for retaining an example that is nasty in nature, and unnecessary to the discussion? Wanderer57 (talk) 21:50, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Actually, I did choose the example. It's in my essay, the talk page discussion simply reflects that. Please don't change other people's posts. Shooting George Bush is just an example of a big event that would project an unknown to fame. Would it be better if I used Castro?--Doc^g 21:55, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

In the USA, it probably would be better. However I think a less negative but newsworthy "event" would work as an example. That is why I came up with the parachute idea.

Let's forget this. I'm pretty sure I'm not going to convince you, and it's over 30 years since anyone changed my mind. Cheers, Wanderer57 (talk) 22:06, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

OK, but I can change my mind.... I could do it on Tuesday.--Doc^g 22:09, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Bagels?

Personally, I go for the herb/cheddar ones, toasted, with dill cream cheese; however, if you don't mind too much I'd prefer tea instead of coffee. Something I read about flavinoids and anti-oxidants... Risker (talk) 15:39, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Damn you both, Doc and Giano. You made me open up Schmear from the long-standing redirect it was via the bagel talk at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents/Giano II. What do you Scots and Italians put on bagels, anyway? Capicola? Haggis? I'm baffled. Lawrence § t/e 15:49, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

I knew there was a reason I'd stopped doing the administrator thing. No bagels for me Doc, but I'll give you a cup of tea the next time you're around. Mackensen (talk) 10:59, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks. There is a long running disagreement over the sources. The Austin Chronicle story from 1997 is appearantly not good enought. What's up Doc? OddibeKerfeld (talk) 17:22, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

FYI - this source discussed on Talk:Keep Austin Weird Wanderer57 (talk) 02:56, 16 April 2008 (UTC)