Jump to content

User talk:Matilda/Archive08

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive This page is an archive of messages from October 2006 – November 2006. Do not edit the contents of this page. Please direct any comments to the current talk page.

Anon

Thought I let you know that the Anon returned but only stayed for a short time User:203.54.186.203‎. -- Bidgee 14:29, 3 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

...and posting to the Village Pump now - Wikipedia:Village pump (miscellaneous)#Editors Who Are Vandals, and Thugs and Ferals or this diff [1] if it's deleted. -- Longhair\talk 11:04, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
They're making a lot of noise tonight, which is a good thing. More eyes on the problem. Might be worthy to list at Wikipedia:Long term abuse seeing as your RfC hasn't gotten much of a response :( -- Longhair\talk 11:34, 4 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
...and welcome to the RfC, 203.54.x.x - they've finally replied [2] -- Longhair\talk 09:25, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Enjoy your holiday - it's high time I had one myself actually. Sorry for hitting your talk page whilst on break (from my dialup connection here in my new home). Enjoy life - don't let your Wikipedia experiences ruin it for you. Speak upon your return. I'll document the experience meanwhile for you ;) -- Longhair\talk 10:06, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm looking at quitting and having all my edits as well as images removed from Wikipedia since people are treating the anon as the victim. -- Bidgee 01:35, 7 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Good to see you back - I hope your trip away went well. Now onto the anon :) I've said it many times before, and I'll say it again. The anon is simply playing Wikipedia like a fiddle. They can't be forced to create an account, so in my view, they're using that to their ultimate advantage, and simply gaming the system to cause disruption. I've tried playing by the rules here, but the rules are powerless against liars and fools such as this anonymous editor. My stand now in regards to them is that they can edit, not sign their posts, and disrupt as many other well meaning editors as they like, then finally something may be done about them when others wake up to what we've been dealing with for many months now. As the old saying goes, give them enough rope, they may very well hang themselves with it. Any edits from them I notice, I'm pretending I simply don't see.
Some people get their kicks in weird ways - and quite frankly Wikipedia does little to reward good editors like yourself who tolerate crap like this for so long. The more disruption they cause for others, the quicker there may be a resolve. Sad, but true. Now back to some real editing, something we've both been distracted from for far too long. -- Longhair\talk 10:21, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it's a clear cut case of the community preferring one editor over another. It's the assume good faith dream at work here I think. Whilst I'm a believer of assuming good faith towards all editors, I can tell you now, any good faith I began to assume from that editor disappeared months ago. Go kick the side of the shed or something - it might help :) -- Longhair\talk 02:00, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, one more thing; here's how I'm coping - I dropped the relevant articles from my watchlist (for now), and don't intend to even take a peak at what's going on. The temptation is hard to resist, but try it. Perhaps choose a random topic of interest and plough into that effort on the other side of the encyclopedia. Who knows, when you come back to the articles you've dropped, the dust might have settled, and a few others might have lost their cool with the anon just like we have, forcing them to either disappear, or change. -- Longhair\talk 02:04, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The Waldorf fire is stil burning - I lost my cool there as well and sent them off to mediation :) One can only take so much. I'd advise you to steer clear of that mess if you're feeling down... -- Longhair\talk 02:10, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Longhair, I wrote this to you last August, when you first entered the Waldorf debate:

Thank you Longhair. You are definitely in for a challenge here as both sides of this issue have been at it for decades. I didn't assume you were singling me out in this. I appreciate how hard it will be to keep tempers on simmer instead of full boil. I appreciate the tip about diffs. Hopefully we won't have too many future problems as some of us are trying to iron out our differences (sometimes heatedly) on the discussion pages and not in the article. That has been a good first step. I'm hoping level heads will prevail here. --Pete K 16:56, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

So, don't say I didn't warn you <G>... Just know that you both are very appreciated - even by the people you have to occasionally spank with a newspaper. Have a good evening (or is it morning where you are?). --Pete K 01:54, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration

I have filed a formal request for arbitration regarding the anonymous Gundagai editor. Please make any statements you feel are appropriate. Thatcher131 01:30, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

More vandalism

Thanks GW, for your attention to the other vandalism. Here's a page that was created by a vandal so he could link from a legitimate page. We might want to consider deleting the entire article. Thanks!

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

--Pete K 21:25, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have written (three mails) to the ISP-provider of the IP from which a number of vandalizing edits have been made of articles related to anthroposophy the last week, asked them to trace the vandal/s, and take actions to prevent if from happening again. --Thebee 21:49, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'm not sure it will never happen again, but at least we might be able to slow these guys down. --Pete K 21:58, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here's this guy again: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Rudolf_Steiner&diff=81065554&oldid=80911593 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Rudolf_Steiner&diff=81068632&oldid=81066926 http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Rudolf_Steiner&diff=81068632&oldid=81066926

I think it's about time to cancel his account. Thanks! Pete K 19:52, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

award

A Barnstar!
The Optimistic's Star
I don't know what kind of abuse you have been suffering from, but this is for it and for your efforts at calming the steiner, waldorf, anthro edit warring trueblood 21:08, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Plurals

Hi Golden Wattle, I thought someone might. I still think it should be crabs, as it's not one crab but a Family of different species. Could you please reconsider - if you still think it should be singular, then fine, we'll leave it. Cheers GrahamBould 06:09, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:AustContinentShelf.jpg

Greetings. Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Unfortunately an image you uploaded, Image:AustContinentShelf.jpg, cannot be used on Wikipedia because it is not available under a free license and fails our first fair use criterion. Although we can't accept that image, we hope you will continue to contribute to Wikipedia. All the best, – Quadell (talk) (random) 18:06, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

My administratorship candidacy succeeded with a final tally of 81/0/1. I appreciate your early support, especially as the request for arbitration unfolded. Results of my candidacy are at Wikipedia:Recently_created_admins#Durova. Warmly, Durova 20:55, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Gundagai editors

Hello,

An Arbitration case involving you has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Gundagai editors. Please add any evidence you may wish the arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Gundagai editors/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Gundagai editors/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Arbitration Clerk, FloNight 22:08, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Help please?

I was hoping you could help me out a bit with a translation. I am a HUGE fan of Icelandic singer Bjork and was trying to translate the titles of her first solo album Gling Glo (prior to Debut) but am having a hard time doing so. You help would be much appreciated. Thanks in advance.

Obviously the last two titles are in English... Though, I find out that the word "Man" means cheater in Icelandic (at least according to this translator site http://www.translation-guide.com/free_online_translators.php?from=Icelandic&to=English 

IS that true?  Very interesting if so.  Anyway, here are the track names in Icelandic:

1. Gling Gló 2. Luktar-Gwendur 3. Kata Rokkar 4. Pabbi Minn 5. Brestir Og Brak 6. Astartöfrar 7. Bella Símamær 8. Litli Tónlistarmaðurinn 9. ÞAd Sést Ekki Sætari Mey 10. Bílavísur 11. Tondeleyo 12. Eg Veit Ei Hvað Skal Segja 13. Í Dansi Með ÞÉr 14. Börnin Við Tjörnina 15. Ruby Baby 16. I Can't Help Loving That Man

PS: If you are a fan, I could send you a copy of this album. I think it is a very rare find. I look forward to your comments.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.116.32.121 (talk • contribs) 17:05, 24 October 2006 (UTC+10 hours)

Infobox Upheval

Hey, Template:Infobox Australian Place is the official name of the new universal template, discussion is at Template talk:Infobox Australian Place. Just letting you know, TheJosh 09:35, 25 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fishing

Roman tram in Via Torre Argentina

Yes the trip went well and I finally worked out last night how to reduce the quality of photos (most important for taking photos of art book photos to put in National Gallery of Australia). My Rome tram photo still hasn't been deleted. The anonymous user is trying to get the RTA and the Wikipedia to prove something that can't be proved (and the RTA is not obliged to prove) and as you know I am no supporter of the white arm band theory of history (Goulburn, New South Wales). --Grahamec 00:16, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wooran, New South Wales

I moved this stub to Wooran, New South Wales recently but it appears to be connected with woorans blog. There is no evidence that Wooran exists or ever existed, except for the coordinates quoted in the article, which appear to be near a feature called Junee Reefs (presumably an old gold mine). I think it should be deleted --Grahamec 04:56, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can you look at this?

Hi Golden Wattle,

Can you look at the recent personal attacks by User PeteK, described and addressed here, and some of the personal attacks documented here, that he has made since you warned him last time, 1 Sept? (I have put not only the second, but also the first page at my personal site, as some comments have tended to get removed from the original Talks page, where they originally were made. The pages do not constitute a personal attack on PeteK, but in the main just list and document a number of personal attacks by User PeteK on the undersigned.) Thanks, --Thebee 08:23, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Now, TheBee has started posting my "attacks" (as he has perceived them) on his own website. That's a copyright violation, first and foremost, and harassment at the very least. He has started many topics within article discussion pages for the reason of harassing me. I will provide diffs if we really want to get into this. Pete K 13:55, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Sorrry - I cannot handle this at the present (see note at the top - busy in real life).
Republication is not a copyright violation as they were published under GFDL - that licence needs to be cited too - TheBee needs to refresh his memory about how that licence works to republish but that is a complaint at the margin. I think it would be better if he didn't republish but that is just my two cents. Can you both please use WP:PAIN to escalate issues?--Golden Wattle talk 23:52, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks GoldenWattle. Pete K 02:20, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A new wikipedian

I know, it's rather interesting, isn't it. I agree with your comments on the RfAr and I think it's rather transparent. At least she's signing her posts! Sarah Ewart (Talk) 01:55, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have a clue who Ken is? Sarah Ewart (Talk) 03:59, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have any clues on the identity of Ken, but I'm hinting at it being this new user's way of showing you (Sarah) zero respect. -- Longhair\talk 04:20, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, Longhair; it's rather pointed. Still, I'd like to meet my alter-ego. :) Sarah Ewart (Talk) 04:23, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gundagai anon editor

I had no idea all this was going on, or I would have given you whatever support I could have earlier. I stumbled across the arbcom case by chance because I have some interest in another case going on at the moment. As an Australian who often drives up and down the Hume Highway, I had my interest piqued ... so I reviewed what was happening. All I can say is that I have no idea why this person was handled with kid gloves for so long. If you ever need support from another Australian admin who can usually be trusted to look at things reasonably sensibly, feel free to sing out for me. Metamagician3000 12:00, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

---

Your comments were excellent. So I am thinking. Maybe your statement along with the statements of other should be recorded on Wikibooks somewhere. This might be something like tape recording what the elders said before there were written records. I am thinking about what you wrote. Thanks. --Rednblu 10:06, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure. I'm just sorry you guys have been left to cope with this for so long. Hopefully ArbCom will start moving soon. Sarah Ewart (Talk) 19:36, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the thanks must be handed back to yourself Wattle; for tolerating this nonsense for so long, for your concise compiling of evidence throughout this drama, for your excellent presenation before the ArbCom, and for seeing it through to the end. I'm only doing the job I offered to do in the first place. It's just like swatting flies over summer now. Still a pain but becomes automatic after a while. Don't take their abuse to heart. The truth has surfaced, and you can rest easy knowing more eyes are on the problem now. -- Longhair\talk 20:50, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Victorian election campaign

Hi Golden Wattle,

If you have some spare time, could you please cast an eye over the 2006 Victorian election campaign, which I split from the parent page Victorian legislative election, 2006. There is a dispute about how the article should be structured and whether it needs to be significantly altered at all. I think that the article is suffering from a lack of diversity of editorial opinion, which makes consensus appear impossible. There is of course a dialogue to follow on the talk page as well Talk:2006 Victorian election campaign. Thanks, Grumpyyoungman01 01:01, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Warragul

Hello,

In regards to the page for 'Warragul' the town loocated in Gippsland Victoria, i added that it is colloquially known as 'Waz Vegas' which is true. I am a resident of the town and myself, friends and aquaintances all refer to the town by this colloquialism thus i think it is appropriate that this be added to the page.

If you can explain why you think this is inapproriate than please tell me.

Have fun,

Steven Merriel —Preceding unsigned comment added by Steven.merriel (talk • contribs)

CheckUser for Gundagai Gretaw

Don't worry, it was easy enough to miss that instruction, and I certainly understand your exasperation with "process" by this point; that's why I posted my comment, so a CheckUser not familiar with the case wouldn't reject the request and make you start from scratch. If any more procedure issues come up, Thatcher131, who as it happens is both a CheckUser Clerk and an ArbCom Clerk, should have a pretty good idea how things are supposed to work. On its merits, the ArbCom case is a pretty clearcut situation and I had suggested moving to a community ban a couple of weeks ago, but a couple of other editors suggested finishing up the process, partly because of the novelty of banning an anon and partly so there wouldn't be any question about whether "involved" admins could help enforce the ban. Hopefully it shouldn't be too much longer till one of the arbitrators prepares a final decision now. Regards, Newyorkbrad 21:23, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

See question asked by a CheckUser/Arbitrator in response to your CheckUser request. I assume your point isn't that the Gretaw account would violate the injunction, but has been disruptive in some other fashion. You should respond on the RfCU page. Newyorkbrad 22:17, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think the issue here is identification. Whilst the ArbCom has not required the anon to inform them of any account the anon may have registered (which may very well be requested, but hasn't yet to my knowledge), it'd be handy for editors to know who they're dealing with so that any ArbCom sanctions or recommendations that may apply in future are enforceable. -- Longhair\talk 22:29, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've added my voice to the chorus in support of your request. Durova 03:58, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Question

I would like to know what your thoughts are of this article that was written by the same person. My neutral point of view is that it should be deleted but I'm unsure. -- Bidgee 12:01, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Gundagai editors

This case is now closed and the results have been published at the link above.

The anonymous Gundagai editor is banned from editing Wikipedia for one year. All blocks to be logged at Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Gundagai editors#Log_of_blocks_and_bans.

For the Arbitration Committee --Srikeit (Talk | Email) 18:08, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

Now that arbitration is over I'll hand out something I've been meaning to give. Wear it well. Durova 05:01, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Original Barnstar
I, Durova, give Golden Wattle this bulletproof Original Barnstar for displaying grace under fire during the Gundagai, New South Wales dispute. Durova 05:01, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations on the succesful arbitration and congratulations on your well deserved barnstar.--Grahamec 23:12, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Trollbait

I was talking about Longhair, not this new user. I've been following the Gundagai affair, and I agree that it's probably the same thing. As for Longhair copying copyright material though, if he indeed did it (and I've not had time to have a really good look at the accusations yet), then he should certainly be scolded. You don't need 5000+ efforts to know that copying stuff is bad. But that's about all that should be done, given his otherwise sterling service to this community and this project, and the fact that it was a single isolated incident years ago. Lankiveil 23:39, 8 November 2006 (UTC).[reply]

Dear Golden Wattle! thanks for your message. I just realised that autobiographical entries are frowned upon - I think the article is objective and factual, but you can delete the whole thing if you like! A slight problem with my image - I don't think it should be listed for deletion, as there is no copyright on it (it's on my website) - my fault, sorry, but I'm new here! best regards, Finghin 21:44, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. Hesperian 01:18, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox australian place

I have been using the versions of the template on the Template:Infobox Australian Place/Blank page. TheJosh 21:29, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about all the messups, but I was probably going too quick for myself last night, and had a period of about 15 mins when I kept making mistakes. I had a break and was going alright after that. TheJosh 21:42, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes the are. The unofficial complete list is at Category:Pages using obsolete templates TheJosh 22:04, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A speedy delete article....

Hi there Golden Wattle. This speedy delete article has been up for quite some time. Would you please take a look at it? Thank you.¤~Persian Poet Gal (talk) 23:24, 22 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion

On balance I would probably claim CSD G6.Geni 01:34, 23 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A question about a picture you've taken

Are you able to tell me where that Death Cap sign you've photographed is in the ACT? Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mutatedseabass (talk • contribs)

citation

No, you're throwing some sort of wiki-tantrum. The article's been there for a while, so it's clear no one else is freaking out about citation. Scenes in a film are inherently verifiable by simply watching the film, and that's what a wikipedia citation's meant to provide - a means for verifying information. Go look at every film article. there is never a need for external citation of scenes referred to. IF you think there ought to be, I invite you to start tagging every film article, and every reference to a film in OTHER articles with citation needed. You'll be at it a while, and incur the wrath of a great many wiki-editors. Give it a try. Your conduct is going to set you up to fail. No one needs external citations for a scene in a movie which can be rented to check the source. ThuranX 16:23, 24 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Matilda/Archive08&oldid=1145265505"