User talk:Secretlondon/Archive 2

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


Communist Parties[edit]

Hi there, good work re: all the various Communist Party articles you have written. I started the article List of Communist Parties (before I set up an account) and thanks to you the list is looking pretty good now.

Where did you get your info on all of them from?

Also, if you can get info on the parties without articles on the list, maybe you could start their articles.

Anyway, good work.

Big Jim Fae Scotland

Hi again Secretlondon. Cheers for the message. Will take a look at what you have done to the Comintern article (I actually started that one too). Delighted to contribute to the articles on political parties (I also did some stuff on the CPGB and the Communist Party of Scotland (very basic though)).

Will take a look at the history of socialism in UK article. There certainly should be a mention of Scotland given the historical strength of leftist parties up here. Will attempt a Tommy Sheridan article maybe, did a wee bit on the SSP article already, as well as Scottish Militant Labour, so there is enough to at least do a stub article about him.

Keep up the good work.  :o) Big Jim

Hi again Secretlondon, have added a comment to the Talk section of the List of Communist Parties article re: your suggestion if you want to take a look. Do my suggestions make any sense? Big Jim Fae Scotland

Hi Secretlondon, I've not really heard of a snappy term like entryism to describe the activities of any other groups. Although from my knowledge, it's quite widespread, e.g. pro-hunting groups joining the National Trust to gain influence, I can't imagine they'd call it entryism and don't know what other term they might use. Warofdreams 14:20, 7 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Indeed, they are unlikely to use leftist jargon. I think infiltration would be the term used in the real world for it. ;) Morwen 14:58, 7 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Hi again Secretlondon - thanks for the kind words. I've added some thoughts to the talk page, but I'm not really sure what the answer is. Good work on your contributions on towns in the UK - the number with no article is coming down, and some of the stubs are filling out, too. Warofdreams 18:02, 25 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Hi - Hope you like the extra Trotskyist internationals. I've also added some non-Trotskyist internationals to the talk page; do what you like with them. That must be pretty well all the current internationals, but there are plenty of defunct ones, too. And I don't know if you found the section of the broadleft site I've linked to, but it's a useful resource. Warofdreams 22:07, 16 Dec 2003 (UTC)

OK, I've moved the list of non-Trotskyist internationals to List of left communist internationals, which describes them all. It does mean we now need an article on Left communism. Warofdreams 22:21, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Nice article on the Trotskyist Internationals: there are several more, and I'll be adding extra info to some of them, but you've produced a great start. Warofdreams 20:13, 2 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Mother Theresa[edit]

Why did you protect Mother Teresa? User:2toise and I were in the middle of discussing and changing the article. Could you please unprotect it so we can finish editing? Alexandros 14:50, 10 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Sorry Alexandros, it wasn't really much of a discussion - I appreciate Secretlondon's doing this - we can discuss changes before we make them on the talk page.2toise 14:53, 10 Nov 2003 (UTC)
Thank you for protecting this article again after I unprotected this morning. User:Alexandros stated both on the article Talk page and on my Talk page his intention to withdrawl from the article for a time and I took him at his word. Obviously that was a mistake. -- Viajero 15:58, 10 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Sorry about the redirect hiccup at MT just now. I got lost in a kind of redirect hell, and at a given moment I thought I was looking at Adam's original, but it turned out to be the real thing. Fortunately, it is pretty hard to do any permanent damage here -- only make a fool of one's self. Good luck with mediating, it will probably be a long haul. -- Viajero 19:25, 12 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I am sure you must be dying to unprotect Mother T ;-) but let's wait until we have some kind of agreement with/over Alexandros. IMO, it won't hurt if the page stays as is another day or two. -- Viajero 18:46, 13 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Are you satisfied with the recent turn of events at MT? -- Viajero 21:47, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)

To be honest, I don't have a tremendous amount invested in the article. I got rather swept up in it without really wanting to. But, once in the thick of things, I tried to push a mediated solution forward. I thought we were making slow but steady progress and just about got to the point where Adam was coming back on board, when ** barges in and starts rearranging things, ignoring the protocols we were trying to put in place. Grrr... Sysops are not supposed to be more equal than everyone else... -- Viajero 22:31, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Municipal government[edit]

Hi Secretlondon, we seem to be working at cross purposes here. I've been trying to rewrite the opening para so it isn't purely about the US (the concepts are general, after all), and you've just put the US back in right at the front. Any objections if we try to make this more general? I'm trying to get it to interface with the local government page. seglea 09:33, 20 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Hi-- yes, I'm a Brit too, and I know we don't use the word as a technical term, but it still crops up as a general one. I'll have another go at generalising the introduction and you can see if you like it. seglea 09:47, 20 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Hate Speech[edit]

I see you expressed an opinion on Talk:AKFD/redirect, but you didn't vote. The vote is hidden away further down the page. If you want your vote to count, you should be sure to cast it! You will have to cast it several times, as each individual page is being voted on individually. -- Someone else 19:44, 22 Nov 2003 (UTC)

You're welcome, especially as I agree with you<G>. Vote early, vote often, bring a friend<G> -- Someone else 19:54, 22 Nov 2003 (UTC)


You have protected the wrong version of the Gdansk article. vandalized the formatting of Danzig, and have changed Danzig to Gdansk when the city was known as Danzig, which is clearly unacceptable. This has been discussed ad nauseum before. I think he is the same as the vandal Kommiec, which "seems dedicated to make sure that any place with a German name must be known only by it's Polish name", to quote RickK. Nico 16:29, 1 Dec 2003 (UTC)


You should of checked the statment nico made and wether its true or not. I did not delete any Prussian Flag off that page all I did was added refrences to Polish cites and gave the Polish name to the region in Bold. Nico dosent seem to like that :) 22:16, 12 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Check the page history. He vandalized the page, deleted the civil flag and interwiki links. By the way, there are no reason to mention Polish names in an article about a German province when Lower Silesian Voivodship not mention German names. Nico 22:18, 12 Dec 2003 (UTC)


To be fair please revert to a version that is not edited by me or Nico. 17:40, 4 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Irrelevant, since I just reverted to the previous version after vandalized the page. Nico 17:46, 4 Dec 2003 (UTC)


Hi Secretlondon, I see you've contributed in the past to the Zviad Gamsakhurdia article - I've greatly expanded this. Unfortunately it seems to have been vandalised overnight by (addition of lots of POV material, unexplained deletion of two thirds of the article), so I've reverted it back to the previous version with a few amendments. I've also asked (on the related Talk page) the user responsible to acquaint himself with the Wikipedia rules. I hope this was the right thing to do? Grateful for advice! -- ChrisO 10:26, 6 Dec 2003 (UTC)

North Korea[edit]

Thanks to You! I try to make also like You suggested, I know that it will be as the standard is, but this material is very big and complicated for me -korean language- that need to be put here /About Administrative Divisions/.-- Egon


Hi, do you know whether there is any procedure with anons claiming to be copyright owners of material on other web sites? See Talk:James Horner, and contribs. --snoyes 15:57, 10 Dec 2003 (UTC)

It seems the person has now created a user account (user:Mmuk64). Is it sufficient to take his/her word on the matter? --snoyes 16:04, 10 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Hmm, I'll send a quick email to the legal mailing list. --snoyes 16:08, 10 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I goofed on one of them and reverted: the anon has made a few productive edits, sadly, which means I have to check every one. Look at Klaus von Klitzing for an example of a violation. Jwrosenzweig 23:56, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Gerd Binnig is another...the anon seems to like bartleby. The additions so far have been from text marked as copyrighted by Columbia Encyclopedia in 2001 or 2003. Jwrosenzweig 23:59, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Can you help me? I'm supremely confused...after a couple of edits I noticed the anon had switched sites, and the site he was copying from now was under the GNUFDL and the anon was fine, so now I'm confused and I think I may have screwed up. If you can follow my edits and make sure I didn't botch some of these, I would really appreciate it. I got panicked when the first couple were from bartleby and the anon had added 20+ pages...thanks for your help! Jwrosenzweig 00:13, 12 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Thanks for your note....but guess what, it gets even more confusing. From a little spot checking, it appears to me that the site the anon got some of the stuff from ( claims to release under the GNUFDL, but its content there is in fact often plagiarized directly from brittanica or bartleby! Argh. So even when the anon thought he/she was getting copylefted material, the site he/she got it from was either very confused or not telling the truth. Jwrosenzweig 00:18, 12 Dec 2003 (UTC)
I'm confused enough by the whole thing that I'm not sure whether to boilerplate half the articles the anon wrote...after all, if the nobel site is telling the truth, we should be able to use its words. I don't share your confidence that EB has nicked the stuff from them, though...the nobel-winners site offers no means of contacting them, no original text of the GNUFDL, no identification for who operates the site, and confusingly posts a "Copyright 2003, All Rights Reserved" right beneath the "All text released under GNUFDL". But I'm muddled, so I've left two notes at Village Pump and am hoping someone else has a bright idea about this. I have no internet at home, and my time here is almost up, so perhaps we both will have to leave this for the morning. Thanks again! Jwrosenzweig 00:31, 12 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Politics of Iceland[edit]

The five Icelandic parties on the List of Political Parties are the ones that have representation at the Icelandic Parliament currently. The smallest are the Liberal Party and Left-Green with 7-8% of the votes in last elections. The others are larger and the Independence Party and Social Democratic Alliance are the largest with about 30% each. Biekko

I'm loath to correct your English... no wait, I'm not[edit]

I think you're loath to intervene, not loathed -- no one I know loaths you. [1] Cheers, Cyan 14:59, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)

"I'm loathed to intervene in the political edit war that angelique is one of the main actors in." -- Your comment is inappropriate at Wikipedia. Please refrain from such conduct. Thank you. Angelique 15:35, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)

"I'm loathed to intervene in the political edit war that angelique is one of the main actors in." -- Ending a sentence with a preposition is inappropriate at Wikipedia. Please refrain from such conduct. Thank you. Cyan 16:25, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Vinca alphabet[edit]

I see that you put "Factual accuracy disputed" boilerplate on Vinca alphabet. Could you tell me which facts do you find disputed, so that I could correct that? Nikola 07:40, 5 Dec 2003 (UTC)

As you haven't answered in eight days while being active on wikipedia, I assume that you don't know. So, I'll remove the notice if you don't answer in several more days. Nikola 08:32, 13 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I don't know what facts Secretlondon is disputing, but I've certainly got some to dispute - see the comments on the Vinca alphabet talk page. -- ChrisO 15:06, 13 Dec 2003 (UTC)
I've rewritten Vinca alphabet - see what you think. There are a couple of actions which will need to be done (i.e. renaming/moving the page) if everyone's happy with it. -- ChrisO 01:30, 14 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Albanian Politics[edit]

Thanks for the articles on Albanian political parties. By the way, there is a page called List of Albania-related articles that I use to keep track of articles on Albania. I would be great if you could link any additions there (or just leave me a note and I'll do it; I also left Morwen a note). Dori | Talk 18:54, Dec 14, 2003 (UTC)

Spirtituality Portal[edit]

Thank you for your coments about the Spirituality Portal I am preparing. Your contributions, especially the political entries about various communist parties and the listing of left-wing newspapers of UK are very useful and attracted my attention. Wishing you to be wikihappy forever:) Peace Profound, Optim 23:36, 17 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Indian political parties[edit]


You can't rename the BJP as Indian People's Party- it is never ever referred to like that. One can't translate every non- English name reference. If it were a common noun its OK, but translating a name is absurd. Could you please move it back to its original page? KRS 14:46, 19 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Hi SL. Although I agree with you on about 99.99% of what you do, I think KRS is right on this one. BJP is th most common usage. (Google says 383 vs 407,000) Anjouli 14:50, 19 Dec 2003 (UTC)

I am not so well informed:-), I just know what the general public knows. Maybe you could try User:Chancemill and User:Arvindn, they seem to be better informed in politics KRS 15:15, 19 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Hi SL, Thanx for inviting me. Will be happy to help in anyway I can. (though, like User:KRS I should also say, nobody can be a master of Indian politics. If you know what I mean ;-). It is huge and DIRRRRRRTY. :)) chance 15:34, Dec 19, 2003 (UTC)

political parties of Croatia[edit]

Please pause mass-adding random little parties while I restore the full list. Thank you. --Shallot 13:07, 20 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Thanks for your help re :) Dysprosia 15:15, 21 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Cathedral Basilicas of St Louis, MO[edit]

Thanks for the copyedits on my newly added stub articles on the two Cathedral Basilicas of St Louis, Missouri. :)

Insert Reminder Here[edit]

Morwen 23:47, Dec 24, 2003 (UTC)

Merry Christmas![edit]

Merry christmas and best wishes for Peace Profound! Optim 06:39, 25 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Insert reminder here[edit]

And happy new year. ;) Morwen 00:59, Jan 1, 2004 (UTC)

User pages[edit]

Just an accident on my part, meant to put the greeting in her talk page. Thanks for catching it. Isomorphic 17:29, 1 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Local authority[edit]

Go on, I'm curious, which local authority do you work for? -- MykReeve 00:21, 05 Jan 2004 (GMT)

Cool. I work for Westminster, in the Licensing department, trying to make some sort of sense out of the upcoming licensing reform. Do you know if there are many London Wikipedians?

(raises hand) I work just a few hundred yards down the road in Whitehall and as a Southwark resident Secretlondon is spending my council tax. Hope she's doing so wisely... ;-) -- ChrisO 10:57, 11 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Also, out of curiosity, do you know what the Wiki policy is on replacing existing images? I'd say that some of my photographs are better than current ones on some articles, but don't want to step on any toes. It seems a more self-indulgent act than amending text, somehow. -- MykReeve 12:46, 5 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Just FYI, the upload file feature is operating again. I've already uploaded an exciting image of Arequipa cathedral today! -- MykReeve 15:06, 5 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Excellent. I have a stockpile of London photographs, owing to an excessive amount of snap-happy activity with my digital camera last year. I'll have to get going on uploading some of them when I get home. It'll give me something more worthwhile to do, other than further discussion of what consistutes NPOV with Mr-Natural-Health. I think I'll just leave the Alternative medicine to decline under his control - there's so much goodwill elsewhere on the site, it seems a shame to get involved in petty disputes. -- MykReeve 17:54, 5 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Well, I've updated some of my pictures now to Westminster Hall, No 1 Poultry, Cuzco and done a new article for the Royal Exchange. They're all 300 pixels wide, as the Image Use Policy info suggested this was the optimum, but some of them look a bit big... Do you think they're OK as is? -- MykReeve 01:28, 6 Jan 2004 (UTC)

go to bed[edit]

Hi, sl, it's me. I congratulate you on Anarchist Pogo Party of Germany. I didn't think it could be done NPOV. --Merovingian 23:09, Jan 8, 2004 (UTC)

This going to bed pact thing isn't working anymore, is it? (Unless I was just going to bed unilaterally and haven't) Morwen 23:57, Jan 8, 2004 (UTC)

Well, that lasted all of ten minutes. :( Morwen 23:53, Jan 9, 2004 (UTC)

Did you know your landline isn't working atm? Fine - but if you don't want to keep the curfew, please don't agree to it. I give up. Morwen 00:04, Jan 10, 2004 (UTC)

Secretlondon, is there the slightest hope that I could convince you to change your votes on Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Peerage? -- Lord Emsworth 13:05, Jan 11, 2004 (UTC)

Secretlondon, I thought that this applied:

"If there is no commonly-used English name, use an accepted transliteration of the name in the original language"

for instance, I have never heard the French or German groups called by the English translations of their names (and I have never heard most of the other groups called anything at all). The original names are at least as well-known in English as the translated ones, and there is definitely no commonly-used English name. But I will not translate any more until you get back to me. Warofdreams 18:46, 12 Jan 2004 (UTC)

I can see you have applied your policy in many places, but I still feel that generally using the original names for these parties would be more accurate, (especially in the case of Socialisme par en bas and Linksruck which I know something about). I see Indian People's Party has been translated, and just about all the French parties are named in the original. Warofdreams 19:08, 12 Jan 2004 (UTC)
Its not just our policy - it is _the_ policy. And accuracy doesn't enter into it, as long as the original names are mentioned in the article - it is usefulness. Which would be more useful to you? a link to Magyar Igazság és Elet Pártja or Hungarian Justice and Life Party? I will bet the latter. Btw, where should the articles about parties from multi-lingual states go, in your system? Morwen 19:16, Jan 12, 2004 (UTC)
Well, I'd find it far more useful to have a link to the name I've heard used, and is used, rather than to a translation which in many cases could be one of several possiblities (e.g. Pardido Obrero Revolucionario - Revolutionary Workers Party, Workers Revolutionary Party or Party for Workers Revolution?) Articles from multi-lingual states should go under their most commonly used name, with redirects, as I believe is applied to places. And I should point out that where a translated name is in any way official (e.g. Worker-Communist Party of Iraq or Internationalist Communist Union} I have used that version, as per the policy. Warofdreams
Well its not for you, but for the reader. Of course every page should have a redirect from the name in the original language. Deciding which language should be used in a multi-lingual country such as Switzerland is highly political. I think if you want to change the policy then you do it officially - try the talk page of the Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English) article to start off. Your amendement would have to be agreed by everyone else, of course. Secretlondon 19:48, Jan 12, 2004 (UTC)
"Name your pages in English and place the native transliteration on the first line of the article unless the native form is more commonly used in English than the anglicized form."
The more I read it, the more convinced I am that at least for the two parties I mentioned above (Socialisme par en bas and Linksruck, the native form is in accordance with Wikipedia policy. I'll move them over, unless you object. I'll leave the others unless I find that their native form is more commonly used in English than the anglicised form. Warofdreams 20:05, 12 Jan 2004 (UTC)
It would probably be best to have a proper discussion on this, involving many more people, before we do anything else. If you are just going to move two things in the meantime, I'm not going to complain (but I will if you do any more). Now is a lousy time to debate, though, mainly due to server slowness. Morwen 20:11, Jan 12, 2004 (UTC)
We have a consistant policy for the world. You seem to want to change it for languages you understand. The policy is meant for cases like BJP where they are commonly known by that. As changing this to your interpretation would involve a lot of work (if you look how many political party articles we've written between us) please hold off for the moment. I think if this is a debate on interpretation of the policy then we should move this discussion there. Secretlondon 20:12, Jan 12, 2004 (UTC)
I agree, we need a proper debate with more people. There have been some contributions on the subject at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (use English) and Talk:Socialist Party, but neither has had many contributions. I'll not move anything for the time being. Warofdreams 20:22, 12 Jan 2004 (UTC)


I can't figure out how to reply to your message.

Thanks Secret (re US/U.S./UK/U.K.) I didn't know the Brits made a distinction. I'm a copy editor so I'm incredibly crabby about periods and such. :) Anyway, thanks muchly. :) jengod

Thanks for the Oh! Heavenly dog deletion- I'm too new to feel comfy wiping pages yet. :) - Puffy jacket 09:05, 27 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Secretlondon, thanks for the edit and message. Wayland Saturday 27-12-03 19:48

You changed committee to committeee. I've reverted. Secretlondon 14:16, Jan 4, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks. Mouth stick bounce! Was busy correcting, but you got there first. Think I'll knock it off for today. Getting tired and likely to make mistakes.SpellBott 14:19, 4 Jan 2004 (UTC)

I do not know if you are watching Brianism Talk, but it is fair that you should see this: An Open Letter from Rex Mundi, co-founder of Brianism. In view of this, I have changed my vote to Delete. Link has apparently been "e-mailed to participants in the discussion", but not posted on WP by the writer - which is why I am doing it. I also do not see how the writer would have all the e-mail addresses involved. Kind regards, Anjouli 13:56, 16 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Okay thank you for help in the Turkish Communist party question! At the Turkis Wikipedia it is even worse. I wish I could be Sysop to prevent such thingsArnout Steenhoek 14:55, 16 Jan 2004 (UTC) The only thing I know that somebody called Murat is workıng on the mainframe. But here are so many dead links, which should definetely be deleted.Arnout Steenhoek 15:24, 16 Jan 2004 (UTC)


In response to your questions about whether ANSWER is controlled by the Workers World Party, here is some evidence supporting that claim:


Republican communism[edit]

I've not personally come across this as a term before. The Republican Communist Network might describe their politics as republican communist, although there's no evidence of it, but they were a tiny group who are now defunct in England and probably defunct in Scotland and they didn't agree on what their position was on Scottish independence (the CPGB(PCC) and RDG proposing they should campaign for a republican Britain, while various tiny member groups wanted a seperate republican England and Scotland.

The Russian link appears to be the official communist parties in the smaller republics being described occasionally as the Republican Communist Party.

The only real references to Republican Communism I've found are a couple referring to Irish Republican and Communist Party working together in joint organisations in the 1920s and 30s, but this amounts to only two hits, so I'd find it hard to justify an article.

But good luck with finding more, if you manage to find something I haven't, or even just write a decent article on this, I'll vote to keep it. Warofdreams 19:09, 16 Jan 2004 (UTC)


* I welcome you to the WikiBank and wish you to win lots of WikiMoney! :) Optim 23:29, 16 Jan 2004 (UTC)


I cite as often as possible, and I strive for a NPOV article where all sides are heard. Some wish to present the numbers of atheists as larger than they are. It is a fact that at some times, in some places, the numbers have been altered by communist totalitarian influence on the people being counted. I am making it NPOV, by providing information, with citations. If you have differing information lets see it. I am not trying to keep your POV out of this, I am asking for respect of sources. Jack 08:15, 20 Jan 2004 (UTC)


You might be able to answer this one.  ;)

Bradford, along with lots and lots of articles is currently an article about a settlement called Bradford, and a borough called Bradford. I am wondering whether we should split them, as, say, Lambeth and London Borough of Lambeth are. Maybe to Bradford (district) and have Bradford be about the town, or Bradford, Bradford for the town and Bradford about the borough. Does this at all make sense to you? Morwen 16:35, Jan 21, 2004 (UTC)

I'd be reasonably happy calling Shipley unconditionally part of Bradford. I'm more concerned about places in the countryside. Saying that Ilkley is a village in Bradford, would give the wrong impression entirely... I am tending towards treating it as if there are two things called Bradford - the borough/city, and the urban area centred around the city centre. This would include Shipley, Bingley, and Baildon. The annoying thing is I'm not sure what to call the smaller entity. It's not a city or district or borough, because the larger area are those. Is it a town? There are similar issues at most of the metropolitan boroughs. Sunderland for example. ;) But logic suggests that if Bradford is an article about a borough, so should Southwark ;) Morwen 18:30, Jan 21, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for vigilantly pouncing on my gothic faux-pas on To do and correcting the link. Before I knew it, it was all gone ;-). I feel so stupid. Should I explicitly request deletion of that page ? Chancemill 16:38, Jan 21, 2004 (UTC)

That's taxobox (taxonomy), not tacobox (taco). Your spelling (in Wikipedia:Cleanup) sounds rather funny, at least to those of us across the big water. --Smack 05:05, 22 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Hi secretlondon, In Edward's Syndrome you asked how to link a URL with an apostrophe in the title. You can do this by replacing the apostrophe with %27, since 27 is the decimal ASCII code for the apostrophe and the %## format is used to encode harmful ASCII characters in URLs. silsor 05:08, Jan 23, 2004 (UTC)

Deletion policy[edit]


on Wikipedi talk:Deletion policy I noticed that you voted for creating a Wikipedia:Deletion requests page, but against a second stage page for voting. Would you mind explaining your reasons for that? I believe this two stage model represents a good compromise between the pro-voting and anti-voting factions in Wikipedia, and I would like to find the broadest possible consensus before implementing it.—Eloquence 18:28, Jan 24, 2004 (UTC)


Feel free to take those wikis :). Thanks a lot for helping! Ilyanep 20:54, 25 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Rabin's Tomb[edit]

Yes, I noticed that the image was way too big as soon as I opened the page. It's a picture I took myself in Israel - how do I downsize it? I'm not a big technology person. If you could help me out, that would be great, since I have a lot of other pictures like it that I want to upload onto Wikipedia. --Alex S 23:21, 25 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Nejmeh images[edit]

Hi, first i've put sme copyrighted pictures about the club, then i noticed that this is not permitted. So i search for non-copyrighted and free-to-use pictures, and i found them at nejmeh fan club website. They are free to use without any condition.(they are nejmeh.jpg, nejmeh69.jpg, hojeij.jpg)... Europeen

Auto-creation of thumbnails[edit]

Ugh, the function is cool but the way it is right now is kinda annoying. Do you know by chance where is this function defined in the code source? --Maio 01:52, Jan 31, 2004 (UTC)

Oliver Tambo[edit]

Hi Secretlondon - may be a short article, but at this rate I'm never going to spend any Wikipedia:Wikimoney, so ψ1 is yours! Greenman 31 Jan 2004

Copyvio help, please[edit]

Hello Secretlondon, I have reported today the page University of Puerto Rico - Mayagüez Campus as a possible copyvio and replaced the page's content with the copyvio notice. I now see that people have continued to edit the page despite the notice and have thus overwritten the notice. What to do now? If I move the page to Talk:University of Puerto Rico - Mayagüez Campus/temp, the temp page will have the possible copyvio version in its history after all. If I copy-paste the current version, the history will be lost. I'm somewhat reluctant to do that, because I might after all be mistaken about the copyvio suspicion... Could you give me some advice on how to proceed? Lupo 22:39, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the fast answer. Morwen just did it. Lupo 22:48, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)

More UK political parties[edit]

Hi Secretlondon - your vote is much appreciated. I just thought you might be interested in writing articles on some of the political parties I have listed at User:Warofdreams/To do (most are small, and some may not have been actual parties, so I haven't formally requested any of them). Warofdreams 19:19, 5 Feb 2004 (UTC)


go to bed ;) Morwen 23:43, Feb 8, 2004 (UTC)

Your OMA membership[edit]

Hello Secretlondon, and welcome to the Office of Members' Advocates. As the de-facto interim coordinator I've added a link to your talk page on the talk page of the association; if you want to add any more contact information that you feel comfortable with please do so. I've started writing a few other pages and if you want to contribute to any of those pages or do some editing that would be great. Once we have a few more members we might try to have a membership meeting to discuss how we might act as a group or help each other with our new-found volunteer role. — Alex756 [ talk] 04:14, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Conflicts between users/Wik[edit]

I responded to your remark on the above page. Try not to take my comments personally, I have a problem with your choice of language, not with you as an individual. --Dante Alighieri | Talk 23:15, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)

RESPECT Unity Coalition[edit]

I've had a go at NPOVing it, but I suspect that it'll prove controversial. Warofdreams 18:31, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Poll notification[edit]

Jack (now known as Sam Spade) created a poll at Talk:Atheism/Godvrs.god poll on the capital G issue in atheism, so I figured I should drop a note about it to all the major participants in the editing on that article since Jan 11. I just went through the edit history clicking names that looked prominent, so if you aren't interested in the issue feel free to ignore it. Bryan 05:27, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Edit War[edit]

I didn't block Wik because of a political disagreement, but because his incessant edit war just got under my skin. He reverts things far too often. And the latest time he said he would just re-revert it an hour later. He was daring anyone to put a stop to his childishness.

But I would never fight with you, my dear sysop sister, so I guess I'll have to let it drop... --Uncle Ed 20:40, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I agree with both of you, in some respects. :) Makes it hard for me to know what to do. I trust you realize, though, that some of us Americans (most of us, I think and hope) are doing our best to learn from others where the biases are in our culture's view of the world...and I trust that others are willing to learn from us now and then. :) If you need help holding back the tide of "WHOOP! Brand that non-American EVIL!" I am more than happy to oblige in thanks for a great deal of late-night work you put in to sort out a copyvio mess I stumbled upon, in addition to all your other good work. I fear that defending Wik may not be a good move for you to make in the long-term...he seems to be at the heart of every major controversy here, and he is frequently unwilling to discuss his reversions, which I think may get hm a reprimand if not more, eventually. But we all have our own consciences to bear. Good for you to stand your ground. :) Take care, Jwrosenzweig 22:12, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Too much? No, certainly not. We need 12 more like you (and more Eds and Angelas also), in my humble opinion. Jwrosenzweig 22:18, 12 Feb 2004 (UTC)

The image you added to Gautama Buddha is not showing up. Could you fix it please. mahābāla 10:42, 2 Feb 2004 (UTC)

What is Wikipedia policy on a user with multiple accounts? OneVoice 21:38, 3 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments on Hutton. Glad to see someone is reading. Washington irving 23:01, 4 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Hope you don't mind my fixing what looked like a result of fast typing at Talk:Montana Management. :) You are being excellently patient with this anonymous user, for which I commend you. Jwrosenzweig 21:52, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Commodore PET 8032 photo[edit]

Hi there, I wonder if we should remove the 8032 photo from the Commodore PET article for the time being, for reasons of worsening the layout and not giving much more info. Perhaps three PET photos is enough after all, and the 8032 pic doesn't really give any more visual info as it stands now. Agree? --Wernher 16:19, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)


I am very sorry for my deceptions and childish actions in the past. I never intended to hurt you or anyone else. Please accept this apology as it is from my heart. Once again, I am very sorry. Thanks, Alexandros 04:48, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Thanks Secret. What would I do without you? --Wik 18:46, Feb 16, 2004 (UTC)

Secretlondon, I trust you know I have great respect for you as an admin. I just thought that, should you have missed it thus far, it would be good to point out to you what Wik is accomplishing with your gracious unblocking--a brief look at his user contributions should be enough. The word "rv" has returned, and where it is not present, its spirit lives on. If I may be bold, I think that your desire to have contributors here who are not coming from a US-POV may have blinded you to some real faults on Wik's part. I admit all of Anthony's known faults, and hope that he will not continue long here, as I think he is frequently detrimental to the project--the rest of us, though, have found less bizarrely disastrous means of dealing with him than Wik has. I cannot see that Wik is deserving of too many more reprieves from you. You are, of course, the keeper of your own conscience in this, and I hope I don't overstep any bounds by offering my perspective. Hope your editing is going well, Jwrosenzweig 19:21, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Secretlondon, thanks for your note. I understand your frustration, and cannot figure out why we can't get an actual process to consider these two editors and their obvious dispute. I hope I didn't come across as too confrontational--I agree with your general sentiment in not wanting an editor unilaterally banned, but it looks to me as though Wik may need more than a few hours off. I may be wrong. And if Wik is desperate to get Anthony banned, I wish that, rather than pursue reversion wars, he would escalate the dispute on Wikipedia:Conflict resolution so that it can be decided by the AC? Perhaps you can persuade him, as he knows you have no bias against him. Jwrosenzweig 19:34, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)
Given that you admit Anthony's faults, wouldn't it be "less bizarrely disastrous" simply to ban Anthony? --Wik 19:27, Feb 16, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for telling me about the List of islands of the United Kingdom. I've now incorporated it into my work at List of the British Isles and related pages. Warofdreams 19:25, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)

While we're being contrite, I'd like to add my apologies for dealing with situations poorly in the past. I hope you can accept this and stop attacking me on the user pages of others. Anthony DiPierro 19:29, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Wik once again[edit]

I have blocked Wik again. See his edit at One thousand seven hundred twenty-nine, which he masked as a Minor edit. He said he was going to be reverting Anthony every chance he could get, and he did it once again. RickK 03:33, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Bureaucrat status[edit]

There's a new class of users who can turn other users into sysops. This could previously only be done by developers (such as myself). These users are called "bureaucrats". I've picked a few users from Wikipedia:Administrators who I think would make good bureaucrats, and you're one of them. Please don't take that as an insult. ;-)

Do you want to be a bureaucrat? If you say yes, I expect you to keep an eye on Wikipedia:Requests for adminship and turn users into sysops in accordance with community consensus.—Eloquence 04:23, Feb 17, 2004 (UTC)

Not sure whether I'm supposed to be reading that page, but Hipólito Mejía is OAS. The word "image" was repeated ([[Image:Image:...]] on the article page, so you couldn't see the OAS credit boilerplate. Fixed now. HTH, as they say. – Hajor 22:39, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Secret, I don't know if you've tangled with Irismeister before. If not, would you mind fulfilling my request to have Iridology protected? Much appreciated! Jwrosenzweig 20:30, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Never mind, it's done. Sorry for bothering you -- you were the first admin whose name I saw in recent changes. :-) Have a good day, Jwrosenzweig 21:49, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Invitation to "Wikipedia is not national" discussion[edit]

Hi. You may be interested to participate in the discussion regarding "Wikipedia is not a national encyclopedia" at Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not. If not, feel free to ignore this invitation. Optim 07:57, 20 Feb 2004 (UTC)

--- Thank's so much for your message. I've been beleaguered lately, coming under merciless attack from the Fox News crowd. So it's such a relief to find out that I'm not the only one who dislikes crude moral platitudes and sweeping generalizations in history. 172 09:23, 20 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Hi. I've been having problems with User: User talk: contributions, at The Turner Diaries and elsewhere. As I stated in Wikipedia:Conflicts between users I think he's reached the point where blocking would be appropriate, but as I've been an editor of some of the problem pages I recuse myself as an admin from doing so. Could you please take a look, and if you think approriate take action or add feedback? Thank you, -- Infrogmation 21:21, 20 Feb 2004 (UTC)

PD message not understood[edit]

Male (top picture) and female Smew at Slimbridge Wildfowl and Wetlands Centre, Gloucestershire, England. Taken by Adrian Pingstone in January 2004 and released to the public domain.
This image is in the public domain in the United States and possibly other jurisdictions. See Copyright.
I don't understand the message you've added. How can the pic be PD in possibly other jurisdictions if I have expressly made it public domain worldwide. I didn't give any country exclusions, I just said released to the public domain. Can you explain? Best Wishes,
Adrian Pingstone 12:17, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Please see the message of thanks on my talk page at User talk:Arpingstone
Adrian Pingstone 18:26, 21 Feb 2004 (UTC)

msg:GFDL instead of msg:gfdl[edit]

I saw you added


Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation; with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts.
Subject to disclaimers.

Image:Atari_2600_2.jpeg, but the proper msg would be

GNU logo (similar in appearance to a gnu)

The GNU Free Documentation License (GNU FDL or simply GFDL) is a copyleft license for free content, designed by the Free Software Foundation (FSF) for the GNU project. It is the counterpart to the GNU GPL that gives readers the same rights to copy, redistribute and modify a work and requires all copies and derivatives to be available under the same license. Copies can also be sold commercially, but if produced in larger quantities (greater than 100) then the original document or source code must be made available to the work's recipient.

The license was designed for manuals, textbooks, other reference and instructional materials, and documentation which often accompanies GPL software. However, it can be used for any text-based work, regardless of subject matter. The largest project using the license is Wikipedia, a general-purpose encyclopedia.

Secondary sections[edit]

The license explicitly separates any kind of "Document" from "Secondary Sections", which may not be integrated with the Document, but exist as front-matter materials or appendices. Secondary sections can contain information regarding the author's or publisher's relationship to the subject matter, but not any subject matter itself. While the Document itself is wholly editable, and is essentially covered by a license equivalent to (but both-ways incompatible with) the GNU General Public License, some of the secondary sections have various restrictions designed primarily to deal with proper attribution to previous authors.

Specifically, the authors of prior versions have to be acknowledged and certain "invariant sections" specified by the original author and dealing with his or her relationship to the subject matter may not be changed. If the material is modified, its title has to be changed (unless the prior authors give permission to retain the title). The license also has provisions for the handling of front-cover and back-cover texts of books, as well as for "History", "Acknowledgements", "Dedications" and "Endorsements" sections.

Commercial redistribution[edit]

The GFDL requires the ability to "copy and distribute the Document in any medium, either commercially or noncommercially" and therefore is incompatible with material that excludes commercial re-use. Material that restricts commercial re-use is incompatible with the license and cannot be incorporated into the work. However, incorporating such restricted material may be fair use under United States copyright law and does not need to be licensed to fall within the GFDL if such fair use is covered by all potential subsequent uses. One good example of such liberal and commercial fair use is parody.

Criticism of the GFDL[edit]

Many people and groups consider the GFDL a non-free license. The reasons for this are that the GFDL allows "invariant" text which cannot be modified or removed, and that its prohibition against digital rights management (DRM) systems affects valid usages as well. Some members of the Debian project (based on their Debian Free Software Guidelines) agree. The project eventually voted [2] to consider works licensed under the GFDL to be free provided the invariant section clauses are not used.

A number of objections have been made to the GNU FDL, with some critics recommending the use of alternate licenses (such as the share-alike Creative Commons licenses or even the GNU GPL). The Debian project has a detailed draft of objections and Nathanael Nerode has also [3] summarized his objections. Often mentioned arguments against the GFDL include:

Overly broad DRM clause[edit]

The GNU FDL contains the statement:

"You may not use technical measures to obstruct or control the reading or further copying of the copies you make or distribute."

A criticism of this language is that it is too broad, because it applies to private copies made but not distributed. This means that a licensée is not allowed to save document copies "made" in a proprietary file format or using encryption.

In 2003, Richard Stallman said about the above sentence on the debian-legal mailinglist:

"This means that you cannot publish them under DRM systems to restrict the possessors of the copies. It isn't supposed to refer to use of encryption or file access control on your own copy. I will talk with our lawyer and see if that sentence needs to be clarified."

As of 2006, the sentence has not yet been clarified.

Invariant sections[edit]

A GNU FDL work can quickly be encumbered because a new, different, title must be given and a list of previous titles must be kept. This could lead to the situation where there are a whole series of title pages, and dedications, in each and every copy of the book if it has a long lineage. These pages cannot ever be removed, at least not until the work enters the public domain after copyright expires.

Richard Stallman said about invariant sections on the debian-legal mailing list:

"The goal of invariant sections, ever since the 80s when we first made the GNU Manifesto an invariant section in the Emacs Manual, was to make sure they could not be removed. Specifically, to make sure that distributors of Emacs that also distribute non-free software could not remove the statements of our philosophy, which they might think of doing because those statements criticize their actions."

Ironically, this problem is reminiscent of GNU's problem with the 4 clause BSD license.

GPL incompatible in both directions[edit]

The GNU FDL is incompatible in both directions with the GPL: that is GNU FDL material cannot be put into GPL code and GPL code cannot be put into a GNU FDL manual. Because of this, code samples are often dual-licensed so that they may appear in documentation and can be incorporated into a free software program.

At the June 22nd and 23rd international GPLv3 conference in Barcelona, Moglen hinted that a future version of the GPL could be made suitable for documentation: "By expressing LGPL as just an additional permission on top of GPL we simplify our licensing landscape drastically. It's like for physics getting rid of a force, right? We just unified electro-weak, ok? The grand unified field theory still escapes us until the document licences too are just additional permissions on top of GPL. I don't know how we'll ever get there, that's gravity, it's really hard." [4]

Burdens when printing[edit]

The GNU FDL requires that licensées, when printing a document covered by the license, must also include "this License, the copyright notices, and the license notice saying this License applies to the Document". This means that if a licensee prints out a copy of an article whose text is covered under the GNU FDL, he or she must also include a copyright notice and a physical printout of the GNU FDL, which is a significantly large document in itself.

Ideological tone[edit]

The license has a preamble, which some critics dislike because of its ideological tone. Because the preamble is part of the license, it must be included (along with the rest of the license's text) with every copy of a licensed document.

Transparent formats[edit]

The definition of a "transparent" format is complicated, and may be difficult to apply. For example, drawings are required to be in a format that allows them to be revised straightforwardly with "some widely available drawing editor." The definition of "widely available" may be difficult to interpret, and may change over time, since, e.g., the open-source Inkscape editor is rapidly maturing, but is still in a prerelease stage. This section, which was rewritten somewhat between versions 1.1 and 1.2 of the license, uses the terms "widely available" and "proprietary" inconsistently and without defining them. According to a strict interpretation of the license, the references to "generic text editors" could be interpreted as ruling out a format used by an open-source word-processor such as Abiword; according to a loose interpretation, however, Microsoft Word .doc format could qualify as transparent, since a subset of .doc files can be edited perfectly using, and the format therefore is not one "that can be read and edited only by proprietary word processors."


The FDL was released in draft form for feedback in late 1999. After revisions, version 1.1 was issued in March 2000, and version 1.2 in November 2002. The current state of the license is version 1.2.

Other free content licenses[edit]

Some of these were developed independently of the GNU FDL, while others were developed in response to perceived flaws in the GNU FDL.

See also[edit]

External links[edit]

af:GNU/FDL-lisensie als:GNU-Lizenz für freie Dokumentation ar:رخصة الوثائق الحرة (جنو) zh-min-nan:GNU Chū-iû Bûn-kiāⁿ Hí-khó-su be:GNU Free Documentation License bg:Лиценз за свободна документация на ГНУ ca:Llicència de documentació lliure de GNU cs:GNU Free Documentation License cy:Wicipedia:GNU FDL da:GNU Free Documentation License de:GNU-Lizenz für freie Dokumentation et:GNU FDL el:Άδεια Ελεύθερης Τεκμηρίωσης GNU es:Licencia de documentación libre GNU eo:GFDL eu:GNU Free Documentation License fa:GNU FDL fo:GNU Free Documentation License fr:Licence de documentation libre GNU fy:GNU/FDL ga:GNU FDL gl:Licenza de Documentación Libre GNU gu:GFDL ko:GNU 자유 문서 사용 허가서 id:GFDL ia:Licentia GNU pro Documentation Libere is:Frjálsa GNU handbókarleyfið it:GNU Free Documentation License he:GNU FDL ka:GNU Free Documentation License ku:Lîsansa Belgekirina Azada GNU lv:GNU Free Documentation License lb:GNU Free Documentation License lt:GNU FDL li:GNU Free Documentation License hu:GNU Free Documentation License ms:Lesen Dokumentasi Bebas GNU nl:GNU Vrije Documentatie Licentie nds-nl:GNU-FDL ja:GNU Free Documentation License no:GNU fri dokumentasjonslisens nn:GNU Free Documentation License oc:Licéncia de documentacion liura GNU nds:GNU-FDL pl:GNU Free Documentation License pt:GNU Free Documentation License ro:GNU FDL ru:GNU Free Documentation License sc:GNU Free Documentation License simple:GNU Free Documentation License sl:Dovoljenje GNU za rabo proste dokumentacije sr:ГНУ-ова ЛСД su:Lisénsi Dokumén Bébas GNU fi:GNU Free Documentation License sv:GFDL tl:GNU Free Documentation License tt:GNU/İrekle İstälek Röxsätnämäse th:GNU Free Documentation License vi:Giấy phép Văn bản Tự do GNU tr:GNU Özgür Belgeleme Lisansı wa:Licince di documintåcion libe di GNU zh-yue:GNU Free Documentation License zh:GNU自由文档许可证 (uppercase vs. lowercase matters, it seems). Will change to that; seeing as how you tagged the other ones correctly, it may just have been a typo, but one that matters ;) Eike 20:46, Feb 21, 2004 (UTC)


Please add your evidence to Wikipedia:Matter of Wik evidence and/or Wikipedia:Matter of Anthony DiPierro evidence. Specifically please track down specific diffs and add them to that page and explain what the problems are. You may want to work together with other users in order to create a summary of the evidence. The arbitration committee cannot decide an issue based on statements (statements are only a starting point) - we need evidence. --mav 04:30, 22 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Southwark council[edit]

-> Wikipedia talk:Pictures from details

Image Tag Team[edit]

Thank you for the link to Wikipedia:Image Tag Team. I was wondering where to find a list of all the image copyright status messages that i've seen. Perl 21:35, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Please add your support to User:BL at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship. It would be a step toward correcting the disproportionately high number of US-oriented users among the adminship and be a step toward a more international perspective on Wiki. 172 01:37, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Message source unverified?[edit]

I'm still learning, so let me know: You added a comment to an image I uploaded (Jacques Villeneuve), saying that its source is unverified. My description says, "Jacques Villeneuve, Indianapolis, 2002, by Rick Dikeman". To me that means, "Rick Dikeman took this picture of Jacques Villeneuve in Indianapolis in 2002." Is there a more official (Wiki) way to say this?


Rdikeman 03:39, Feb 24, 2004 (UTC)

Southwark link orgy[edit]

I've added what looks like a zillion links from London Borough of Southwarkto other related Wikipedia articles. See if you can think of any more. ;-) -- ChrisO 13:15, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)


What are we doing where we find an image that is clearly uploaded by the person who holds copyright on it, but there was no explicit statement putting it under the GFDL? We might want a msg:presumedGFDL? Morwen 13:50, Feb 24, 2004 (UTC)

Press Release Help[edit]

Since you're the only person in the logbook, can you tell me how we're sending out the press release? I'd like to send it to local papers, but I don't know if I send a link to the current page? Cut and paste the text into an email? (If so, do the links survive?) Any advice is appreciated. :-) Thanks! Jwrosenzweig 19:24, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I think we can target the more national and international media first. -- Kaihsu 20:04, 2004 Feb 24 (UTC)

Good job in sending the press releases to the papers! Cheers. -- Kaihsu 20:04, 2004 Feb 24 (UTC)

For the Associated Press, you might want to consider faxing it to AP Business News, New York, fax: 212-621-1587, for attention of Anick Jesdanun, their Internet reporter. See -- 22:42, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)


Never uploaded an image before....thanks so much for the help! Jwrosenzweig 21:49, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)

The community information backlinks are deprecated because the new community main page makes the community information directory obsolete. See Wikipedia talk:Main Page. --Michael Snow 21:59, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC)


Yes, you have the template correct for 'years in gay rights'. Thanks for the additions to this project. Davodd 22:53, Feb 27, 2004 (UTC)

Transliteration issues[edit]

Hi Secretlondon,

I want to invite you to weigh in at the new discussion of related matters that have come up in the last few days at Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions_(places)#Transliteration_of_Russian_place_names. Please see the intro paragraph of Boris Yeltsin to see an example of what's been going on with articles on Russians and places in Russia....

Also, if you haven't already do so, you might want to take a look through Cantus's contributions.

Right now, the main participants in the discussion are the two people who've been changing the formats of intro paragraphs of articles -- both of whom have been here for less than a month and seem rather uninterested in other people's points of view. Many thanks, BCorr ¤ Брайен 13:55, Feb 29, 2004 (UTC)

Nia Künzer pictures[edit]

Hi Secretlondon, your question about the uploaded pictures - well, I called the promotional agency, showed them the appropriate link of the article, pointed out that this stuff is going to be freely distributed, and to that they agreed. I'm new to all that, what else should I have asked...? --Palapala 22:45, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Got an EMail which had attached two photographs and some promotional material... --Palapala 22:52, 1 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Why do you block the picture in question, instead of telling me whether the above information is sufficient or not, or what kind of details you think should be given and where...? --Palapala 21:43, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Will try sorting this out tomorrow as suggested, will let you know. Thanks. --Palapala 21:58, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)
Done. Would you mind having a look, whether this now meets the requirements? --Palapala 16:29, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)

i've connected to 1982 ;) Morwen 19:51, Mar 2, 2004 (UTC)


Hi. What is keen eddie - we don't have it here. Secretlondon 21:49, Mar 2, 2004 (UTC)

Response at Talk:List of television shows set in London --Charles A. L. 04:16, Mar 3, 2004 (UTC)

your Wikicookies[edit]

Wikicookies - do I get one for discovering Ralph Maxwell Lewis on village pump/agora? I'm not sure how this works. Secretlondon 22:33, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiMoney/WikiCookies - you get two WikiCookies! One requested by you and one more as a gift because you are the tenth Wikipedian who won a WikiCookie! Optim·.· 22:38, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

here are your WikiCookies:

Wikicookie.jpg Wikicookie.jpg

Note: you get Wikicookies for reading articles found from "secret links", not for just finding the links. Read the relevant page Wikipedia:WikiMoney/WikiCookies. Optim·.· 22:41, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I read the page but I couldn't find a way of demonstrating that - were there more links in there that I missed?

Wikicookies work like this:

  1. You notice a link to an article and you click it.
  2. You read the whole article word-by-word and carefully.
  3. You request a Wikicookie for the article you just read.
  4. spelling fixes etc grant additional wikicookies.
  5. you can have many wikicookies if you are able to find more of my secret links.

Of course I am not going to say where and how I put the "secret links" - they wouldn't be secret if I was doing that! :) - but actually it's easy to find them. very easy Optim·.· 22:53, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Re: Shell Oil pic

Is that grafitti on the Shell sign?

Read Vegan and edited it (moved the list of references to the end) Secretlondon 23:05, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Great, 3 wikicookies. But now I decided to give you the "new" wikicookie (which is actually a wikiroll) - both have the same "value" :) Optim 23:18, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Elected Leader of the Free World[edit]

Caroline, I thought you might enjoy reading this news story about Kerry being elected US President in a landslide if everyone in the world could vote. --Uncle Ed 14:44, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Deformed workers state[edit]

Thanks for the link. It was in a pretty confused state, but I've tried to help it along. Warofdreams 19:03, 4 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Here's a question an anon left on your userpage[edit]

Hi! Could you check the Vegan talk page please? Got a little dispute for you. --noname

Reversions of (Paul Vogel)[edit]

Hi Secretlondon. There's quite a history with this user. See Wikipedia:Conflicts between users/Paul Vogel. Thanks -- BCorr ¤ Брайен 13:57, Mar 6, 2004 (UTC)

Regarding national leaders entry[edit]

I found that the "head of government" doesn't equate with "vice president", I removed Dick Cheney as soon as I put him on. The thing I did do was change the translit. of the emir of Dubai. WhisperToMe 23:14, 6 Mar 2004 (UTC)

remember to go to bed (and so should I) Morwen 23:21, Mar 8, 2004 (UTC)

Picture Import[edit]

Have been offered to " this picture on Wikipedia for one calendar year...". Could you tell me whether this is worth the effort, and how to enforce that it's not used by any third party, and not used past the time limit. --Palapala 11:45, 2004 Mar 9 (UTC)

you too... ;)

Thanks for catching Ingush. I warned the user, and then got side-tracked on a game. Pakaran. 23:51, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Hi - you ok?

Request for an advocate[edit]

Since you are one of the people who signed up as an advocate to assist in the arbitration process, I wanted to let you know of a request for assistance. User:Anthere (currently signing as FirmLittleFluffyThing) posted a request on Wikipedia:Association of Members' Advocates regarding the recent dispute that has led to User:168... apparently leaving Wikipedia. Ideally the advocate would be someone who has not gotten into disputes with 168 before (this disqualifies me, unfortunately). Anthere suggested that you would be a good candidate, and I agree. I don't know whether you have followed these events very much, but I'm sure Anthere would be happy to bring you up to speed. Please let Anthere or myself know whether you would consider filling this request. --Michael Snow 16:31, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Mermaids at Brighton[edit]

I scanned it in from a postcard. Mintguy (T) 23:14, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)

No I don't think that's right. I have produced the image by the process of scanning. this is an original representation of a past work. Just like if I photographed the postcard. The copyright is mine. Mintguy (T) 23:18, 10 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Re: USS HMAS Perth (DDG-25), you are quite right. It is not a speedy deletion candidate. It's an instant deletion cadidate, under the patent nonsense rule. Tannin 11:38, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Oh, the ship is real, but the article title is 100% stupid. Whoever heard of a United States Ship (USS) that is at the same time Her Majesty's Australian Ship (HMAS)? We might have an arselicker for a Prime Minister, but there are limits. There is a bot making these articles and it's lost the plot. I'll fix it shortly. Best Tannin 11:45, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I think it must be a habit thing. You see "USS" in front of all or nearly all ship names for long enough and after a while you stop seeing it, if you know what I mean. Or something. No-one from the other side of the pond seemed to notice these bizarro ship names. But I'm used to seeing HMAS in front of ships, so when I see one that doesn't fit the mould, it sticks out like dogs ... er ... thingies. Whatever. There were only 3 Australian missile ships of this class, and I've deleted all three today, so maybe that will be the end of it. Best -- Tony

Descending spiral of incivility[edit]

I've noticed that relations between established contributors and mavericks (either political or alternative science) have really disintegrated recently. It seems to be a negative spiral - first they write something, people respond fiercely to them (a lot of newbie biting), they then feel victimised and lash out, and this is seen to justify them being seen as a problem user.

I first noticed this pattern when people wanted user:RK banned. It seemed to me they were over-reacting, so I stepped in and mediated several times. I think he and Martin (MyRedDice) finally came to some sort of understanding, although the Mediation Committee hasn't said much about it.

We ought to be kinder to newbies, and we always should assume good faith with old bees. If someone writes something that stings you, assume it was a mistake -- at first. Or better yet, try to understand why they wrote it. Be reluctant to conclude that malice is the motive. And anyway, don't return malice for malice -- it's a waste of time that could be better spent researching an article!

If we need rules, then by gosh let's make some. But complaining and yelling are tactics which cause just about as much disturbance as the ills they are meant to cure.

When I taught young children, I could maintain order without even raising my voice. Calm, friendly, reasonable -- yes, these are good characteristics to have -- but when you see your teacher write a note about your behavior and ask you to deliver it to your parents . . . (!)

Mostly I focus on the project: writing and editing articles. I strive for accuracy and neutrality, but like everyone else I make occasional mistakes. We're all in this together. Let's help one another.

I don't want to convert you to my politics; I want the articles to provide a clear exposition of the major political points of view (POV) and why people hold them. The most common propaganda strategy is "I'm right, and here's why; so you better just shut up!" combined with "See? No one can say any different, so I must be right!!" That's not allowed here.

But people keep trying to propagandize. In some cases, they might not even realize they're doing it; for them, it's an unconscious strategy -- so I always assume Good Faith. But some troublemakers take advantage of Uncle Ed's trust: these are the difficult cases.

It's best not to spend too much energy fighting. Far more profitable is to go ahead and do good work. But I hope Jimbo's "throttling" idea or Erik's "temp ban" idea will work out. --Uncle Ed 14:23, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC) Venceremos 10:06, 12 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Hi! Thanks for noticing the XTC thing. I redirected the one i created to the original, which was much better. Cheers, Muriel 11:42, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Adam Jacob Muller[edit]

Hi. The page was blanked by its original author after being added on vfd, which I would normally accept was grounds for speedy deletion. Only one anon ip added any of the content to the article. -- Graham :) | Talk 12:28, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Okey dokey. -- Graham :) | Talk 12:40, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)

picture #2[edit]

Hi. I am not willing to stick my neck out and say that is what it is, but #2 might be a Solanum, possibly a white eggplant? I would use that as a starting point anyway. WormRunner | Talk 19:30, 14 Mar 2004 (UTC)

no prob. glad I could help. WormRunner | Talk 22:12, 14 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Hi. Raining there too? Morwen 14:40, Mar 18, 2004 (UTC)

Forecasts I've seen say it will be worse tomorrow... [and not get better at the weekend] Morwen 14:42, Mar 18, 2004 (UTC)

Tok Pisin Wikipedia[edit]

Hi, Thank you for your comment and for your help. The Tok Pisin page, currently occupying space in the Bislama domain, is growing little by little, though I prefer to wait for the opening of the proper tpi domain before giving it a real start and before promoting it among certified Tok Pisin users who already exist on the net.
I noticed that many newly created wikipedias are not really active; nevertheless I will do my best for the Tok Pisin wikipedia to become rapidely active and living.
--Milaiklainim 05:40, 19 Mar 2004 (UTC)

UK Government Departments[edit]

I've made a rather large update to the Government Departments section of the Crown copyright MediaWiki section. I'd appreciate it if you could check the additions I've made for any howlers. David Newton 22:37, 20 Mar 2004 (UTC)

AMA Election[edit]

Dear Secret (if I can call you that), I've taken the liberty of adding links at Wikipedia:Announcements and Wikipedia:Goings-on that the Wikipedia:Association of Members' Advocates is searching for a Coordinator and I have started a new page dealing with the election. See: Wikipedia:AMA Coordinator Election. You editing, comments and participation as an AMA member would be appreciated. Cheers. — Alex756 [ talk] 20:33, 21 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Missing picture[edit]

The image you uploaded of Paddington Station has gone AWOL (presumably when pliny's hard disc went down); you said it was from - is it this one? Also, what licence would it have been and will it be under?
James F. (talk) 16:00, 22 Mar 2004 (UTC)

History of British socialism[edit]

As someone who raised objections as to bias in an earlier version of the article, do you agree that the NPOV dispute tag can now be removed from the reworked page? Warofdreams 22:06, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Other than Alun Ephraim, who always objected to the NPOV tag, the other social democrat to comment was G-Man, who proposed removing the tag (see Talk:History of British socialism. Would you mind removing it? Probably best if its not me, as I've done a lot of work on the article. Warofdreams 22:12, 23 Mar 2004 (UTC)

msg delimiters[edit]

Thanks for catching my missing double {{ }}. Don't know how you managed to spot that. I've typed dozens & dozens of these things & I think my brain just rebelled this morning. In fact, I remember noticing that I had typed {{msg...} and going back and *removing* the first double brace, so somewhere between the opening and the closing brace, the nonwiki part of my brain kicked in. :-) ... Elf | Talk 20:17, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)


Secretlondon, once upon a time you corrected some improper headings I had added. Since then I have become aware that the headings don't seem to work properly for me. Hve you noticed that there is no discernible difference between 2nd and third level headings, or evern further down into the level. This really mkaes articles read poorly. What do you think I can do about this? (see Energy development)Hawstom 21:17, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)

re: grazingship[edit]

Hcheney has come clean with some truths regarding GrazingshipIV. You may want to reconsider your Quickpoll vote. Kingturtle 23:59, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for comment/VeryVerily[edit]

Please take a moment to express your thoughts on this page, if you have the time. 172 00:46, 27 Mar 2004 (UTC)

header level[edit]

Tip: please start your headers at the "==" level, and work down from there (MoS). Thanks! Dysprosia 12:54, 27 Mar 2004 (UTC)


A user known as thebam is attempting to discredit and smear me on wikipedia this user was created after my exchange with rickk which MAY be a coincidence eitherway I do beleive he is a sockpuppet created by someone who wants to discredit me as he has no other contributions other than trying to pretend I "struck" a deal to get aat rickk to make myself an admin. Please intervene in this matter. For some reason kingturtle is spaming messages about me (possibly a rickk link) GrazingshipIV 17:28, Mar 28, 2004 (UTC)

hi. you ok? Morwen 13:05, Mar 29, 2004 (UTC) ? Morwen 13:25, Mar 29, 2004 (UTC)


Is it worth me bothering looking at the contents of the camera or shall I just leave yesterday all to you? Morwen 17:11, Mar 29, 2004 (UTC)

I wasn't sure, since you seemed to be just uploading yours. Probably me taking my camera along yesterday was a mistake. Morwen 17:17, Mar 29, 2004 (UTC)

Ok. Have you quit with IRC by the way? Morwen 17:29, Mar 29, 2004 (UTC)

Miguelangelb.gif is mine, because he was my grandfather, and its a family picture although you may find it in several websites. My mother´s lastname is Burelli. The other picture cerroavila.gif i found it in, which is a public website were people post their pictures and you can express yourself in forums. Their are no copyrights due to its sharing principle. If in any case the picture has copyrights it was not expressed when posted in User:Obarraiz

Being new to Wikipedia, I don't know what exactly you meant in my talk page. Isn't it enought to put "public domain: copyright disclaimed" in the Image description page? I took the photos personally. Unfortunately, I don't have a photo of the new tram. I didn't even know there's one. I was there for 8 months in 99-00. Which is the preferred way to communicate between wikis? Like I'm doing now? User:Alexblainelayder

A peace cube for you![edit]

Thanks for your comments re the images from the cube - here is one I have uploaded for you - based on a digital photo of the original Peace Cube created for its 1997 dedication as a Peace Cube - it wasn't until later that I realized the significance of the existence of twin virtual light & colour cubes - particularly since I am a twin - my fraternal twin brother still lives in Croydon. I have put information - and some links in the description of the Peace cube image at the top of your page, and have adopted the practice of including credits & copy rights for images that I post.

I was interested to see that you are at UCL, as I have been a [virtual] Visiting Scholar at DPU, through Babar Mumtaz - who I had met in conjunction with follow up to Habitat II, and made a small presentation on the Peace cubes back in December 1998, on my way to Thailand. My work with respect to DPU has been independent of any oversight, and have involved developing resources for a curriculum in information ecology; I had made use of the excellent email access to files stored on the dpu-pip list on what used to be mailbase, now migrated to jiscmail - see Mailbase Online Micro-Library Service.

Recwntly I have focused on development of curriculum resources and methodology using DataPerfect Digital Engines that I have been developing - see, e.g. Gandhi-King Season. I haven't been in touch with Babar for a while - this encounter may prompt me to remedy that very soon; please give him my warmest regards if you by any chance know or run into him.

I was also interested that you are in London, as I grew up in Croydon, having lived in the U.S. - except for about a year - since leaving Cambridge in 1966; I have been living in New York, NY since early 1994.

PS. I love what I have seen of wikipedia, and would appreciate your comments on how to follow up with an idea for an alternative construction for red links - Wikipedia talk:Red link -- that would involve converting them into search links. I have been been fascinated with the nature of the red links, and with possible parallels to the red pill in the Matrix.

In peace, Robert, User:Information-Ecologist

Levzur and the anon IPs[edit]

Hi Secretlondon,

I've added some more info on Levzur and the anon IPs on Wikipedia:Quickpolls. The evidence is circumstantial but a reasonable inference IMO. Happy to discuss further if you wish. -- ChrisO 13:23, 27 Mar 2004 (UTC)


A user known as thebam is attempting to discredit and smear me on wikipedia this user was created after my exchange with rickk which MAY be a coincidence eitherway I do beleive he is a sockpuppet created by someone who wants to discredit me as he has no other contributions other than trying to pretend I "struck" a deal to get aat rickk to make myself an admin. Please intervene in this matter. GrazingshipIV 17:27, Mar 28, 2004 (UTC)