User talk:Magister Mathematicae/2006-02

Thanks for your help

I hadn't heard from you, so I also tried to sneak onto #wikipedia.... Just FYI, the address really formally IS registered to the Illinois Century Network (which I guess now is the Illinois Department of Central Management Services; homepage is http://www.illinois.net/). They in turn assign static IP addresses to school districts and buildings who pay the Network for their Internet connectivity. But thanks again for posting the notice! --JohnDBuell 20:27, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I should have read the comment you left first :) According the the reverse whois, all numbers in 66.99.0.0 - 66.99.255.255 belong to the ICN, and thus COULD be assigned to schools throughout Illinois, along with the other clients that the ICN serves.... I don't have more specific information, unless I could get into other schools and find out what IPs they're hiding behind. ;) --JohnDBuell 20:30, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about this, your message notifier must be going nuts :) But another thing that may want to be brought up to administrators is that any address under the ICN is subject to their Acceptable Usage Policy, which may be read here: http://www.illinois.net/AUP.pdf (and I confirmed that you can find all 9 ICN ranges by entering ICN1 through ICN9 on the lookup service at ws.arin.net). --JohnDBuell 20:37, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, it's good information. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 20:53, 1 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Eswarappa

Drini, you deleted Eswarappa but lef the afd open.. I'd close it but wasnt sure how [1] —This user has left wikipedia 01:19 2006-02-02

there was no afd notice, thus I missed that. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 01:20, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandal

User:210.14.23.6 (talk • contribs • page moves • block user • block log) has been vandalizing Wikipedia on a non-stop basis. Today he did it again. Could you please take a look? Thanks. Lesfer 03:19, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I took a look. He seems to have stopped today, but I'll be watching him. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 03:27, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PgkbotWin

I have moved WP:CVU/PgkbotWin to Wikipedia:Counter Vandalism Unit/PgkbotWin. Do you propose to leave this article as a total orphan? -- RHaworth 18:56, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:212.138.64.178

You've dealt with this user before (15 November 2005 tempoary block). I am requesting that you review some of his latest edits that include changing Jaques Charaq's succesor to a dog and removing all the text on the December 2005 page. Please take whatever action you feel is necessary. --mitrebox 19:28, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

On your actions.

Please don't edit my user page. Feel free to leave comments at User Talk:The Cunctator. The Cunctator 20:01, 5 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your actions -- editing my userpage without warning; after I had asked you not to; doing so without discussion; editing my protected page -- were rather uncivil as well. By the way, I called you a sanctimonious prick, but I meant it in the nicest possible way. Sorry about that. Please don't take it personally. I don't usually get this annoyed, but people editing my userpage actually does tick me off, I guess. The Cunctator 15:17, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Recreate of deleted article

Rocabu, which you deleted per AfD, has been re-created. I don't know what to do in this case. Someone else has already put a speedy up for nonsense. Same user has also recreated Image:Rocabu.png which was deleted on Images for Deletion -Halidecyphon 19:25, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: external editor

No; you have it installed correctly. However, you need to configure your computer to edit pages with an external editor with ee.pl. See Help:External editors for information on how to do this. Let me know how it goes! Wh e re ^(talk) 22:02, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User:Joey Wheeler

Hi Drini. I see you blocked this user as a WoW account. It's a pretty normal name, and might well be for real, so I was thinking about unblocking and watching him. What do you think? FreplySpang (talk) 04:24, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

sure, it was jsut that at that precise moment there were many WoW accounts being created, so it was an unfortunate coincidence. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 04:25, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I figured something like that. Thanks, FreplySpang (talk) 04:30, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

Thank you for your support on my request for adminship. It ultimately succeeded with votes of 52/1/2, so I am now an administrator. Should you have any questions, comments, complaints, or requests at any point in the future, please do not hesitate to let me know on my talk page or via e-mail.

—bbatsell ¿? 05:13, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CSD on my user page

Hi. Doesn't the Wikipedia article user pages say that "ehere there is no significant abuse, and no administrative need to retain the personal information, you can request that your own user page or talk page be deleted. Most frequently, this occurs when a longterm contributor decides to leave." ? I thought that this meant that my page could be deleted upon my request, though you said that it's not a criteria for SD. My unmentioned fuller reason for wanting the page deleted is that over the past few months I've become increasingly paranoid about sharing any personal information, of any kind, with anybody. It's become a sort of Obsessive-Compulsive thing. Anyway, at one time, my user page did have some personal info on it, and now I'm concerned about the prospect of it always lurking there in the page history. You no doubt know more about Wikipedia than I do, so I'll trust what you say, though I'd like to request that you reconsider. Thank you, and take care --Whimemsz 19:29, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Huh? I recall you said to me you had everything under control so I stopped payed attention to the issue. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 22:16, 12 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, I don't think I said something like that..... Um, so, anyway...? --Whimemsz 22:49, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Another Esperanzial note...

Hi again Esperanzians! Well, since our last frolic in the realms of news, the Advisory Council has met twice more (see WP:ESP/ACM2 and WP:ESP/ACM3). As a result, the charter has been ammended twice (see here for details) and all of the shortcuts have been standardised (see the summary for more details). Also of note is the Valentines ball that will take place in the Esperanza IRC channel on the 14th of February (tomorrow). It will start at 6pm UTC and go on until everyone's had enough! I hope to see you all there! Also, the spamlist has been dissolved - all Esperanzians will now recieve this update "newsletter".

The other major notice I need to tell you about is the upcoming Esperanza Advisory Council Elections. These will take place from 12:00 UTC on February 20th to 11:59 UTC on February 27th. The official handing-over will take place the following day. Candidates are able to volunteer any time before the 20th, so long as they are already listed on the members list. Anyone currently listed on the memberlist can vote. In a change since last time, if you have already been a member of the leadership, you may run again. Due to the neutrality precident, I will not vote for anyone.

Yours, as ever, Esperanzially,
--Cel es tianpower ^háblame 09:00, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
(message delivered by FireFox using AWB on Celestianpower's behalf)

192.87.165.xxx

I'm not sure why you removed exactly half my post at Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism regarding this IP range, but I would really appreciate if you could re-visit that problem and spend a bit more time reading the problem description. It's an ongoing vandal (I reverted the whole set just this morning from one in that range) for all the pages I listed originally in my complete post. Thanks. --bmills 21:46, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was doing it but couldn't finish due to WP problems. SOme of those were old (like 5 days old) we can't block ips for more than a day or 2 anyway, specially if they haven't been used on several days.-- ( drini's page ☎ ) 21:48, 13 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Civility

I saw on your ESP candidate statement you were interested about civility. Just pointing you to WP:CJ Compu te r Jo e 15:45, 14 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wondering

you add Reverted edits by 165.138.97.251 (talk) to last version by Betacommand) to your edit comments is there a js script for that? Betacommand 15:42, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, go WP:JS and look for "godmode-light" its a scritp for autmating reversions. However, given I?m an administrator, I geta "rollback" button when I look at diffs, I just click on that and get the same effect. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 19:51, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

User 166.102.99.165

On 14:25, 15 February 2006 (UTC) you claimed that "You may be blocked from editing without further warning if you continue doing so." if 166.102.99.165 continued to vandalize pages, well I provided two further examples of vandalism. I have confidence this should be sufficient for a temp block. Thanks --droptone 16:20, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

already blocked that ip. ;) --Syrthiss 16:24, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Had to go take an exam, but I see it's blocked already . -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 19:52, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies

I was pranking my friend who was mentioned in a Wiki article (much to his amusement) and got caught up in the process. I didn't mean to vandalize or cause trouble to anyone. Sorry for being a goofus. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.248.128.222 (talk • contribs) . -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 19:52, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's ok, go on and sin no more. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 19:53, 15 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Admin coaching quiz page

Hey, it's me, the guy you share with Celestianpower as an admin coach. I set up a little page at User:Snurks/coaching for Celestianpower to ask me hypothetical questions and have quizzes on so on. Since you're a coach too, I thought I'd let you know about it, in case you want to do some coaching there yourself or maybe start a new page for the same purpose.

I hope to speak to you a little more often, since you're closer to my time zone and it's probably easier to communicate with you than with Celestianpower. Thanks for coaching!

Snurks ^{T C} 02:40, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

question

Got a message saying:

User talk:168.156.102.42 From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to our encyclopaedia. Take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing. However, unconstructive edits, such as those you made to Vaporware, are considered vandalism. If you continue in this manner you may be blocked from editing without further warning. Please stop, and consider improving rather than damaging the hard work of others. Thanks. -- ( drini's vandalproof page ☎ ) 23:38, 2 November 2005 (UTC) This is the discussion page for an anonymous user, identified by the user's numerical IP address. Some IP addresses change periodically, and may be shared by several users. If you are an anonymous user and feel that irrelevant comments have been directed at you, please create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other anonymous users. If you're concerned with privacy, registering also hides your IP address.

Don't know how it was linked to my IP, but I haven't left any comments/changes on Wikipedia. I signed up for an account. Hopefully this won't happen again.

Thanks,

Sophia

replied on your talk page. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 21:36, 16 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RFA Thanks

Thank you!
Hello Magister Mathematicae/2006-02, and thank you for your support in my request for adminship! It passed with a final count of 98/2/0. If there is anything I can do to help you, please leave me a message on my talk page! -- xaosflux ^Talk

Monobook out of control!

ok I addeda working version, it's up to you now, if you mess it, revert to it. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 04:07, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My AfD closer seems to be working. Copy mono monobook from:

//AFD Closer----------------

All the way to:

//end AfD closing script

mine is working now as well -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 05:22, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sweet! I was able to get some of your monobook tabs to work on mine without conflict.Voice_of_All^T|@|ESP 05:33, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm STILL working on it, I'll let you know when I'm done. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 05:34, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please Stop Deleting Userboxes Without Discussion

What is really divisive in this community is rampant deletion of userboxes, not the userboxes themselves. I don't see how suggesting apes be treated with respect is considered divisive or inflamatory--it's not as inflamatory as your anti-userbox-userbox, and it is not as divisive as single-handedly deleting userboxes. Please consider what I have to say and stop deleting them without discussions. I would also be very thankful if you undeleted the ape-equality userbox. The Ungovernable Force 06:04, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you feel so strong about it that you need to mention it on your userpage, then write it so. You can WRITE it on your page. Alternatively: you could have substed the template so it wouldnot be affected by its deletion. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 06:11, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I was doing, but several of them got deleted before they could. And I did have it on my user page, but

This user believes that only articles need reflect a NPOV, and that displaying political, religious, or other beliefs using userboxes and user categories should not be banned.

got deleted too. And

This user supports userboxes .

is really close, but it is subsetted already. Anyways why is it ok to subset it but not to have it in a template. At least give people a few days warning about the upcoming deletions of userbox templates before deleting them, so they can subset them. As far as I know, there has not yet been a decision as to whether or not userboxes have to be subsetted or not, isn't it just a proposal? The Ungovernable Force 06:36, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Consider an "I like chocolate strawberry" userbox. Having it adds no value regarding to the encyclopedia building. THere's nothign wrong with you writing such thing on your page, however, it does pollute the Template namespace when thousands of such boxes are created. That's why having it on your userpage would be fine, but not as template.

Note however that userpages should ideally follow the guidelines at WP:UP: Userpages are NOT a personal homepage, they are to be related to your wikipedia work. And also, Wikipedia is not a webhost provider but people could get a geocities page if all they want is to express their political affiliations and food tastes. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 07:37, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And about the substing.. it's been long agreed that templates that do not NEED to be updated often (like current events, or the signpost one, whose value depends on the template showing dynamic text) should be substed, and this comes from much much before than the userbox mess. After all, if you agree with an instance of the wording of the userbox, it's because you are stating your belief in that particular sentence. If somebody else changes the text, then somebody else is putting new words "in your mouth". Substing avoids this. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 07:42, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have another issue, namely, you are severely misapplying CSD T1. I've been reviewing the templates you speedied, and very few could be called polemical or inflammatory by a reasonable person. Rogue 9 13:43, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are entitled to your opinion. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 02:39, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I'd like Template:User Yes Animal Testing restored - unless it went through proper TfD. Same with Template:User EFF.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 18:19, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

agreed. Look how divisive userboxes are--an animal liberation advocate and vegetarian is supporting a Yes animal testing userbox. The claim that these are divisive is just plain wrong as far as I am concerned. The Ungovernable Force 18:25, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's because you agree with its content. But my points stil lremain. You can write in your own words that you like animals on your userpage. Don't pollute the template namespace. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 02:53, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Karmafist's Fair Election Request

I have a request of my fellow candidates, and of the voters -- that all candidates give a vote to every other candidate.

It may seem that this request goes against the idea that leadership and potential leadership of our group should be neutral, a precedent that has been followed since the beginning of Esperanza by JCarriker, but I beg to disagree.

For one, mathematically all votes would be cancelled out, but unlike if we stayed silent, we are showing an affirmation of our support for each other.

No, MATHEMATICALLY votes wouldn't cancel out except on very special arrangements of voting. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 03:09, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

To me, that's what Esperanza's about. I've had disagreements with many people in Esperanza, but i'll always support them in some form or another as long as I believe as they'll do the same for me -- as long as we're unified in a belief that kindness can cure the ills of Wikipedia as a whole.

Karm a fist 04:08, 17 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikizach supports this request
Dakota Kahn supports this request and did this in the last election for maintaining neutrality.
I reject this notion. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 03:09, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cool Monobook

My monobook is pretty awesome right now...when my vandal revert (the one with the cool edit summary, takes my to vandals contribs and his talk page in edit mode) combines with the stuff in your script (which I modified by removing the annoying prompt, I can warn vandals with lightning speed. Less time wasted on trolls/vandals :). I also added "p" and "sp" tabs for quick protection templates.Voice_of_All^T|@|ESP 22:54, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My userboxes!

Why did you delete my userboxes? I don't go around deleting things from your user page. I find your behavior extremely rude.--M @r ē ino 02:05, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here you can have this one {{User_vomit}} --mitrebox 02:07, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Because your userboxes pollute the template namespace without providing value to the encyclopedia. However you can write the text in your own words on your userpage. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 02:40, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just would have appreciated notificiation before you decided that I was "polluting" the internet. My userpage qualifies as a "what links here". I have been scouring the TFD, and I simply cannot find a record of these templates being lawfully deleted.--M @r ē ino 03:56, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not "the internet". "this user thinks vomiting is the right way to diet" has no encyclopedc value anyway. But if you feel strongly about it, write an essay on your userpage. You're not being censored. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 03:58, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

1. I did not create "User Vomit", nor was I the one who added that to your user page. Mitrebox added it, and I don't know who created it b/c I see that you've gone and deleted it. 2. I am not worried about censorship. I am worried about revert wars and WP:NPOV, which I consider one of the most important policies on Wikipedia, if not THE most important. When people refuse to declare their points of view, the only conclusion that I can draw is that they must have some point of view that they are trying to sneak into Wikipedia articles. When you delete these userboxes, you are muddying the waters, and if I may say so, enforcing your anti-userbox POV on everyone else.--M @r ē ino 05:43, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Who said that people cannot express their point of views? I'm all for it, and I've been suggesting that all along. If you feel so strongly about a subject that you feel you mst talk about it, well then DO SO. Write on your own words, explain, don't just stick a bumperstick. It's the template that's unneeded. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 05:45, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AND.... I think you understanding of policy is a bit weak. From WP:NPOV:

Neutral Point Of View) is a fundamental Wikipedia principle which states that all articles must be written from a neutral point of view, representing views fairly and without bias..

In short: NPOV applies to articles (and all elements related to articles: the templates, categories and portals). Now , userboxes are not used on articles, and userpages are not articles. So I see no point in invoking NPOV here unless you want to setup some sort of straw man. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 05:50, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Darn right! NPOV applies to articles. So why are you deleting polemical userboxes? They're not articles!--M @r ē ino 17:20, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've already explained my reasons. I was only pointing your "defense" didn't apply here and you've just agreed. It seems to me that you (and a few others) are just trying differents approaches to see "which one sticks", and that makes clear to me that you don't really ahve a strong argument, you just "want the userboxes to stay" no matter how or why. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 21:59, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's partly because the pro-userbox group is very diverse. If you want a single reason, though, how about M:Metapedianism?--M @r ē ino 22:25, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Again, you an write the content of the userboxes ony our page. You can use the same format or write an essay in yoru own words. This is about keeping it on template form. I will stop responding here to this thread since there's no point on conducting a separate debate here. There are plenty of other sites (like TFD in question or the talk pages of associated projects). Please conduct the discussion on the proper places. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 22:28, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Votes

No problem, I was wondering what you were saying there for a sec. It's not a demand or anything, it's just an idea to continue JCarriker's request of neutrality among the leadership of the group in elections, only while showing all others in the group support, which is the cornerstone of what our group is about.

Unfortunately, if we don't all do it, I don't think it's going to happen. Oh well, worth a shot. Karm a fist 03:20, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes we should support us among themselves, but other than "don't vote for yourself" (which makes sense to me), I also have preferences on who I'd like to lead esperanza, and your proposal denies me that right. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 03:33, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Userbox Deletions

I noticed you have been deleting a large number of userboxes as T1. However, some of these have already survived a deletion review and are now up at TFD. [2] These can not be speedied. Please undelete these.--God of War 03:42, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed.--M @r ē ino 03:49, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

no. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 03:59, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As an administrator you have a responsiblity to follow consensus and uphold wikipedia policy. DRV is wikipedia policy and it has ruled that the templates are not divisive. Therefore T1 does not apply.--God of War 04:14, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DRV is NOT policy. And on wikipedia, policy is descriptive, not prescriptive. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 04:16, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please respect the Wikipedia community and undelete these until a decision is reached on TFD. —Guan aco 04:33, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Until TFD settles, there's no actual decision to uphold. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 05:01, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, we'll wait until after the seven-day period to undelete the pages without a consensus to delete. —Guan aco 05:10, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

but for which there was a deleting criterio anyway. The point is that I believe the criteria applied, you disagree. That's fine. Just don't portray it as you opinion is the ultimate truth and I acted out of process. I claim I did acted on process with CSD. TFD will just uphold or undo my decision. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 05:11, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ALTER: Okay, we'll wait until after the seven-day period to keep the pages deleted. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 05:15, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

But don't reviews of speedies go to DRV, not TFD? It's hard to have a debate about the template on TfD without knowing what's being debated, so one has to note the out-of-process deletion on DRV first in order to re-open the TFD. But if review of the speedy sends it back to TFD but then it's speedied again for the same reason... Do you see what I mean? In such a situation, I think one should probably leave the templates until the end of the TFD. --AySz88 ^-^ 05:22, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair. Can you point me exactly which templates are we talking anyway? -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 05:25, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think you've found them already, but just in case, the ones listed at Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2006_February_19/Userboxes. --AySz88 ^-^ 05:49, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Medcom nomination

Glad to see you're applying to be a mediator. The application process can be unclear, so I've simplified it. Please change your request using the new template:

{{subst:medcom-nom|username=MediatorWannabe|comment=I want to be a mediator because... ~~~~}}

Let me know if you have any questions. Ral315 (talk) 05:30, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First Edit Day

Happy first edit day from Esperanza!

Happy first edit anniversary. Many happy returns. haz _(user talk)^e 10:55, 20 February 2006
Happy First Edit Day! -- Tvaughn05 _e ^(Talk)_(Contribs) 12:46, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Congratulations! —Kirill Lokshin 14:29, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

thank you my friends! -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 22:39, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wayne Gretzky

If the page isn't sprotected, can we get one? I requested full protectiong on the 18th, Snowspinner said he was sprotecting it, but clearly that's not the case. RasputinAXP c 15:12, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

*shrug* I'm not doing it, I don't think semiprotection policy covers it, as the vandalism level is not overwhelming. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 22:41, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Mario Marin to Mario Marín

Hello Drini, Could you move article Mario Marin to Mario Marín. His name has an accent. After you made that move i will check for double redirects, create new redirects etc.. Saludos, --Abögarp 17:14, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I've also done the cleanup (fixed double redirects etc). -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 22:07, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

T1 Speedy Deletion

I see that you've speedy deleted {{User pro concealed carry}} and consequently broken part of my user page. You speedy deleted that under the criterion T1 which has, shall we say, proven to be somewhat controversial. Your POV is obvious: you do not like userboxes. I would suggest that it is highly inappropriate for you to be speedy deleting things when you are so obviously anti-userbox. We have a general rule about those involved in a dispute not deleting/blanking things. That is rather difficult to enforce here given how much of Wikipedia is involved, but if you are going to delete user boxes which are expressing a perfectly valid political point of view which does not violate any laws then you are treading on thin ice. All political issues are divisive, and merely saying that you use Linux to post to Wikipedia could be got under T1. T1 is a fundamentally flawed policy. The intention was seemingly good, but the result, due to sloppy drafting, has been bad.

It may be flawed or not, but it was an order from the owner of the site. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 00:29, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The drafting of T1 leaves it open to wide personal interpretation and it can be applied differently by different people. For the moment please at least stop speedy deleting userbox templates, unless they are clearly in violation of another Wikipedia policy on speedy deletion than T1, and send them through the normal TFD process. That way you will not be short-circuiting things and causing tension. David Newton 00:22, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, I won't stop. violating a single policy is enough, if the policy is set, why ignore it? isn't that what most people complain? But it also breaks WP:NOT and a few other policies. This is an encyclopedia, and userpages are not personal homepages. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 00:29, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Violating a single policy is normally enough. This policy is not established and it is certainly controversial. There are no compelling legal requirements to require it. It is poorly drafted and its collateral damage has been enormous. If you find userboxes that violate estalished laws in the United States such as, for example, making threats against the President of the United States, then by all means speedy delete them.

Would you like me to speedy delete the userbox on your user page under T1? I could quite legitimately do so as I am an administrator of long standing and I consider it "inflammatory", "divisive" and "polemical" which fulfils the three criteria of T1 for speedy deletion. I am not going to do that because it would be petty and would not help the situation. The fact that I could do it quite legitimately under this "policy" shows that there are serious problems with the policy that you support. Until and unless it is redrafted into something much less controversial and much less subjective those problems will remain. David Newton 00:52, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The T1 policy is already established by the owner of the site. And no, the reason for you not being able to delete my userboxes is very simply: they aren't userboxes they're hard coded. And that's what we're suggesting everyone, toeither write the statements by themselves, or to subst: them so they won't get removed even if the template is deleted.

That's the fine difference: substed or hardcoded on your page = good, unsubsted template form = bad.

The criteria applies to deleting templates not to deleting the userpages content-- ( drini's page ☎ ) 01:21, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Now if you refer to the large green one at top, that wasn't on template namespace, It's from somebody else's userspace, so T1 wouldn't apply either. But it wasn't worthy, so I took it away myself -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 01:43, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The T1 policy as currently written is not what Jimbo said. It is a distortion of the intent of what he said that is far wider in its application. Until and unless the policy is redefined tightly and without room for subjective interpretation it is not valid. You also seem to imply that creating categories of like-minded users (which is something that people like Tony Sidaway objected to when it comes to some subjects of those categories) and having the code on a page are not a problem. In essence you are applying Jimbo's statement too broadly when it comes to deleting templates and too narrowly when it comes to objectionable content on user pages. That's an interesting dichotomy! BTW the userbox I am referring to was on your page when I originally wrote the comment above, and merely putting the userbox in the user namespace does not alter the fact that it is a userbox. Do I detect a guilty conscience? David Newton 01:52, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, it wasn't my box anyway, it was on physichm62 userspace. I don't see the contradction. And as I said, there was no point on having it if all it will do is give basis to weak arguments like that. If you have problems with the policy, take it to the policy page, not mine. That's the place of discussion. Meanwhile THAT is the policy and I'll continue applying it. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 02:11, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Happy First Edit Day

I noticed on the Esperanza calendar that today is the anniversary of your first edit so I just thought I'd wish you happy first edit day :) Jtkiefer^{T | C | @} ---- 03:46, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Noob Sailboat

Hi there! I still believe that Noob Sailboat should be speedily deleted. A google search for that name ONLY returns instances of a gamertag called 'Noob Sailboat', which was an intentional parody of Noob Saibot. In fact, the Noob Sailboat article was created as a copy of Noob Saibot, with the author progressively making search/replace edits. In short, Noob Sailboat is not a notable article, and there are no current misspellings in the wild. I ask that the Speedily Delete tag be replaced -- Ch'marr 05:56, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No it shouldn't. Let me explain. Suppose some clueless person that in good fait hbelieves the name is "Noob sailboat" wants to read about it. Since he's mistaken, he will type that on the search. Now, since it's a redirect when he types Noob Sailboat, he will be sent to Noob ailbot and he will learn that he's mistaken. It doens't hurt having it since, if you read carefully, when you go to Noob Sailboat the TEXT and TITLE on that page will be Noob Saibot. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 06:04, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Also, read Wikipedia:Redirect, misspellings is one of the good reasons for creating redirects -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 06:06, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that a redirect should be inserted where there's a common misspelling. However, this is not only not common, it's totally non-existant. Leaving this in sets a poor precedent. -- Ch'marr 06:10, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

it doens't hurt either, does it? -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 06:10, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, yes and no :) On the 'it doesn't hurt' side, it doesn't take up that much space, so who cares? On the 'it does hurt' side, do we put in a spelling redirect for every possible misspelling for every article, or just the common misspellings? (Eg, Jubilex). I also argue that the Noob Sailboat article was created specifically as a 'wank page' for the gamer that uses that handle, so leaving it in place just encourages that behaviour. -- Ch'marr 06:18, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We do them as we go, usually the more common we try to do when we create the articles. Others as we see. For instance I did Spanish flea today after typing that and getting a blank page (the right title was Spanish Flea) so, people like me could be searchign at the wrong title and thus a little redirect is of help. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 06:30, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that putting redirects for common, or even rare misspellings is worthwhile. I disagree that this is one of those cases. I don't think I can successfully argue my case, here, so I'm conceding the point... for now ;) -- Ch'marr 06:36, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, I don't mind if that actuall ygets deleted, it's just that I'm not doing it ;) -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 06:37, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for reverting the vandalism to my page. --Nlu (talk) 07:17, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Title: Robert Stasiak

Dear Drini,

I myself wrote the page for Australian actor, Robert Stasiak. I would like to you tell me exactly why you have suggested that the page be deleted and please inform of the proof to show you that this page is not a fake, and is as real as any other actor or actress from Australia or anywhere else in the world.

Sincerely, Red

huh? I cannot speak for the current version asI'm not the one who sent it to AFD, but I can speak ofthis version: Robert Stasiak is an Australian actor and musician and born on 12 August, 1989 in Perth, Western Australia, Australia. That has no asserion of notability and therefore fallswithin criteria A8 for speedying deletin.

Now don't get me wrong, I?m not saying Stasiak is not notable. I'm claiming the entry didn't claim he was notable (there's a difference) and when I was cleaning out the backlog of deletions, I checked, it fit and thus deleted. Feel free to read [3] for the explanation and I encourage you to fix and improve the entry so it won't get deleted again.

And I stress, I'm not stating that Stasiak is not notable, I?m stating the entry didn't claim he was and therefore it was deletable by the criterion. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 17:04, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Esperanza Elections

Hello Drini: Thank you very much for your support in the Esperanza elections. I appreciate your vote greatly. Also, good job in trying to quell the flames in the userboxen fiasco currently erupting through the project. Hopefully, it will die down soon. Cheers, Bratsch e^talk 23:23, 21 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why Delete Fabricari and not other webcomics?

Why was "Fabricari" deleted and not other webcomics entries in Wikipedia? Fabricari is updated more than once weekly, it is a live site and comic with over 5,000 unique visitors a month. The Comic book, Fabricari, an indy comic, ran for 6 issues and is being bound into a graphic novel. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.198.195.158 (talk • contribs) 22 February 2006. The artist is active and is continuing the project.

I didn't take the decision by myself. It was the outcome of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fabricari -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 22:06, 22 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

3RR violation

User:-Inanna- has violated the 3RR on Turkmen people. Since you blocked her for 2 days awhile back, I just wanted to let you know. --Khoikhoi 00:10, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've been blocked.

I am Billy Joe Koepsel. My account is billyjoekoepsel to my email at billyjoekoepsel at aol dot com. I am not anyone else and would appreciate the Administrators to stop blocking me every few hours. You are blocking an AOL IP address that hundreds of people could be using. Billyjoekoepsel 18:19, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

alas thats one of the problems of using dialup. --mitrebox 21:10, 24 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

have you considered signing up for an username s oyou don't get hit by the ip blocks? -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 01:34, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I thought billyjoekoepsel was my user name. I have a user page. At the end of this I will sign off with Billyjoekoepsel 03:09, 25 February 2006 (UTC). Or I might not as I just did it in the middle. I am a madman that way. If a username is something else I would sign up for it in a minute.[reply]

Sorry I was on a hurry when I reply. Well, the problem is.. AOL ips are one of the main sources of vandalism and attacks to wikipedia, and while we try not to block them precisely because good editors also use aol, there are sometimes when there's no other choice and we need to put a brief temporary block. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 15:03, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I guess I will have to live with it till I get a Cable modem. Billyjoekoepsel 01:59, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CSD on my user page...continued

"Huh? I recall you said to me you had everything under control so I stopped payed attention to the issue."

I don't think I did...maybe you have me confused with someone else? Anyway, do you have any thoughts about what I've said? Sorry if I come off as pushy; I don't mean to. Take care, --Whimemsz 22:41, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

yeah right :P ;) -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 00:31, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deleted template

Hi,

Can you please tell me why did you delete the template "user fidesz"? It was for supporters of a political party, and lots of parties have their own templates. Was there some discussion about it getting deleted?

regards,

Alensha 23:11, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the discussions are being done on the respective pages, not here. In particular, policital statements userboxes are being deleted according with the criteria T1 from WP:CSD which was a ruling that came from the owner of the site. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 23:15, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the answer. Alensha 23:26, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

File Upload

Hi, are you the same Drini who uploaded this torrent file? http://www.torrentspy.com/directory.asp?mode=torrentdetails&id=169748&torrent=Mathematica_5_ISO_windows_and_linux Robust Physique 04:57, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No, I'm not. -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 05:56, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Heh heh, Really? I'm just curious ;9 Robust Physique 20:15, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Heh no heh -- ( drini's page ☎ ) 20:58, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A note from the Admin Coaching coordinator

Hello, coaches. As you can see, there is a significant backlog at the Esperanza Admin Coaching program. Since we do not want users to have to wait forever to get assigned, I'm asking all of you for a status report. If you feel that you are done, that your coachee is not active enough, or that you could handle the extra load from another coachee, please tell me in my talk page as soon as possible. Thanks! Tito xd^{(?!? - help us)} 06:49, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Admin Coaching

Hi Drini (and NSLE)! Cross-posted!

Thanks for agreeing to coach me for mop-holding status. I've started a subpage of my talk at User talk:Redvers/Admin Coaching for us to co-ordinate at. I hope you find this helpful! I've started by asking a tough question, but it's one I think I could learn a lot from (if it isn't impossible to answer!).

Thanks again for agreeing to help me - your kindness is noted and won't be forgotten. ➨ ❝R E DVERS❞ 10:55, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Best and Worst

The best has been people congratulating me on helping them and of course learning new things, and feeling like I make a difference (by including my school for example). The worst is people attacking me for following the rules, for being too young or deleting vanity/nonsense pages. I have recently started doing RC patrolling and a lot of people get very upest when their articles are slated for deltion. I try to ameliorate this, but am not always able to. For a particularly egregious cae, take a look at my archive and User:Farfartwo (who was subsequently banned). (A rundhati Bakshi (talk • contribs)) 00:27, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

templates substituted by a bot as per Wikipedia:Template substitution Pegasusbot 08:09, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]