User talk:Xed/Archive6

Talk archives 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

Thank you

For your note of welcome! I hope I'm not back, at least that's what I tell myself :) - this place sucks a lot of time and energy over eventually minor results, because most of it is spent battling bigots and/or ignoramuses. Though sometimes you just have to do it :). -- 08:06, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

email

hi, i just got your email. pretty interesting, im glad to hear the DRC articles are fairly good from such a source as Gondola. Also saw Banyan's response (on the first congo war talk page), i'm in pretty much in the same boat as he is, pretty in the dark on opertation turquoise, j. kabila, and the transitional government in general. Also, the impression ive gotten from reading most of the articles related to recent DRC history (the war, as well as the 60s seccessionist movements) is that they have done a good job of illustrating the importance of the immense resources being squabbled over. although, i have not gone over the first/second congo war articles in a while, ill check to see where info on that can be added. i know banyan mentioned something about an entirely new article for 'role of resources in the congo wars'. i'm not sure how much we can really get out of that, however. also, it occurs to me that i dont really know what your interest in the DRC is. personally, i'm interested because ive read a number of books on it, and the country has been exposed to the worst possible circumstances over the past hundred+ years, the worst of new imperialism and the worst of the cold war fuck-over. you seem to be a lot more educated on the country than i am though...--Gozar 01:15, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

i have a similar reason for interest as you, I think. - Xed 04:29, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dershowitz

Yes, there is no reason to keep revisions that are vandalism. I just received a complaint from the principal of a school, where a student examined the images in the history of an article and came up with a particularly lewd image that was highly inappropriate. Similarly, I removed that edit from the history, as it should not be there. There is no reason for us to keep vandalism, and we should consider the impact this is already having on our reputation. Danny 21:51, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

What lewd images were in the Dershowitz article? So BRIANs explanation was just lies? - Xed 22:04, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

items to be added on Culture of DRC

spurred on by the articles newly acquired "good article" status, i came up with a few things we can add info on: sports and leisure, education, jobs and lifestyle,crime and corruption, and more info on regionalism (i.e. katanga and bakongo secessionists)

ill work on this at some point today, but i figured i would share with you. i think information on the widespread crime and corruption is something which cant be excluded.Also, have you checked out the Kongo Empire article lately, someone has been making ridiculously detailed updates to it (anon), it's absurdly long and in depth now. --Gozar 14:46, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That's great. Haven't got time to read the Kongo article. Will later though. - Xed 19:57, 15 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

congo war/uganda

just saw your post in the in the news current events (convenient that museveni is on the main page). i can only hope this damages his record enough to prevent his re-election in march (but im sure it will be rigged anyway). oh, nearly forgot to include obligatory nasty comment about how the US and the West in general always manage to avoid this shit, but Uganda MUST pay the price! keep on rockin' --Gozar 23:20, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The ruling is pretty toothless anyway. I don't see Uganda paying $10 billion. They haven't got it. - Xed 23:37, 19 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

return?

you back? what happened with arb. committee? i looked it over but it looked as though some other, more sane admins took care of it (the 'prosecutors' look like they've got their tails between their legs now).--Gozar 18:07, 10 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

nuts

sorry. i think that arbcom has completely taken leave of its collective senses, with the apparent exception of fred. you've done yourself no favors being so combative, but a one-year ban for petty offences is ridiculous. it's a just a web-site though; be well in life. Derex 04:00, 15 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections January 2006/Vote/James F.

Hello, Xed. You inadvertantly voted twice on the above candidate page, once in favor and once against the candidate. I've marked your most recent vote, but thought I'd let you know so that you can make sure to vote the way you want to. Thanks! Flcelloguy (A note?) 00:23, 18 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for voting!

Hello there! I wanted to thank you for taking the time to vote on my arbitration commitee nomination. Although it was not successful, I appreciate the time you spent to read my statement and questions and for then voting, either positively or negativly. Again, thank you! Páll ^{(Die pienk olifant)} 22:32, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia_talk:Arbitration_Committee/Clerks

Hi. I've seen your complaints on the clerks' talk page. You seem to be making a rather extreme accusation, based on the fact that Kelly Martin didn't yet close your case. None of the arbitrators have closed your case, either, have they? I appreciate that you want the case closed, but if you count up the votes to close there are only three, and four net votes to close are required. Kelly was only reformatting the list so that Fred Bauder's withdrawn (struck out) vote would not count in the tally. Your case is not yet closed. Please be patient. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 04:14, 27 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]