User talk:Amarkov/Archive 14

Sorry for that undeclared Wikibreak
I was gone for a week and had no opportunity to get on and mention it. Sorry. -Amarkov moo! 02:44, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 2nd, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:22, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

censorship
if you disagree with my notion that the issue at hand is one of censorship, then simply say so. Do not presume to think your sole opinion on an issue makes it unworthy of listing. If consensus shouts me down, that's acceptable. But unilateral dismissal is not. VanTucky (talk) 05:37, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * But it is not a censorship issue. If anything, it's the other way around; people are reflexively saying "keep" BECAUSE it's a topic prone to censorship. The nomination cites lack of significant content and reliable sources, and you can not automatically assume that they really just want it censored. Assume good faith. -Amarkov moo! 05:40, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 9th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 07:23, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Progress in Physics
A template has been added to the article Progress in Physics, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but the article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice explains why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Danko Georgiev MD 04:58, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 16th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 19:47, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Insanity
People who are trolled are immediately cast as martyrs, and complaints against them are dismissed as trolling. They themselves inevitably come to believe that they are thus above the rules, and will do various things that would earn an instant block, except that they are martyrs of trolling so nobody will block them.

It appears that constant allegations of a hivemind actually do have the effect of creating one. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Amarkov (talk • contribs).
 * The situation is a bit more complicated than that, and the person I believe you are referring to has in fact been blocked several times at different points. Newyorkbrad 23:34, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * It's not really anyone in particular that I refer to, but there are two people who caused me to say this. One was only ever blocked for 3RR, and the other had their only block overturned. I'm aware that the actual situation is not this simple, I just wanted to get the frustration out. I may actually reason it out and post this somewhere other than my talkpage later. -Amarkov moo! 02:25, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
 * If you do, please let me have a link. Regards, Newyorkbrad 02:31, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Gah. Now someone vandalising another user's talk page, calling them a troll, is being supported. Never mind that the person does not have a single block. A martyr called him a trolling SPA, so it must be true! -Amarkov moo! 03:34, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

And now I'm insane
I'm pretty sure I won't end up blocked, at least. Kinda. Well, at least I'm pretty sure it won't be upheld. Why am I doing this? -Amarkov moo! 04:28, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
 * No one's going to block you, Amarkov; you've done nothing wrong.Proabivouac 09:25, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

WP:PS again
Please check out this MFD. Your opinion is welcome and requested since you particiated in the original MFD. /Blaxthos 22:11, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

WP:POKE is doing some housecleaning
This notice is to inform you that because many people have added their names to WikiProject Pokémon but do not seem to be active, all names are being deleted in an effort to find out who is still truly interested in the project. All you have to do is re-add your name if you'd still like to be considered a member of WP:POKE. Any questions, you can contact me on my talk page. -ΖαππερΝαππερ BabelAlexandria 17:32, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

ED
What's your grudge with ED? Also, the mention in the Guardian was mostly about ED, and with a couple exceptyions, most of the articles mentioning Uncyclopedia are only mentions. However, I don't want to violate WP:POINT, so let's forget about that. Ratherduarm 01:27, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 23rd, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 05:55, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/Jeffrey Vernon Merkey
Hello,

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: Requests for arbitration/Jeffrey Vernon Merkey. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Jeffrey Vernon Merkey/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Jeffrey Vernon Merkey/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Newyorkbrad 23:42, 24 July 2007 (UTC)


 * I have removed your addition of yourself as a party to this case. Generally, new parties are not added to a case once it has opened except with the approval of the arbitrators or where a clearly involved editor seeks to be added. Having participated in ANI or RfC discussions on the subject editor does not require that you be added as a party. Also, please note that any editor may present evidence or workshop proposals in any arbitration case and that this also does not require party status. Regards, Newyorkbrad 19:56, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Yeah, sorry, I'm not that familiar with arbitration. I'm just gonna go meep and hide now. *meep* -Amarkov moo! 23:52, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

*wham*
Yes, two random sections in a single archive, oh no. Anyway, a substantial group of our core contributors is INSANE.

Grammar at IAR
If any rule versus If a rule: Is "any rule" grammatically incorrect? I'm not going to insist on one versus the other, but if I've got my grammar wrong, I want to know for the future.--Father Goose 18:43, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Hmm. On second glance, I think it could be right either way. Sorry. -Amarkov moo! 18:45, 28 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Okay, I'll revert it for now, because I think "any" better captures the flavor of "ignore all rules". I changed "the rules" to "a/any rule" so I could use it instead of them at the end of the sentence, to avoid the possible ambiguity of "ignore them [the editors]".--Father Goose 19:49, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks
I wanted to say thanks for declining the ridiculas SPA on me. Thanks again. Watchdogb 22:52, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Deadminship proposal
This really needed feature has the best chances to be approved here if its working on another wikipedia. Do you know of a good existing system? --Matt57 (talk•contribs) 21:59, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for July 30th, 2007.
Apologies for the late delivery this week; my plans to handle this while on vacation went awry. Ral315

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 23:35, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Redirect
What exactly did you do here? I can still edit the redirect, and I don't see that it was move protected, either (see the protection log).  Mel sa  ran  (formerly Salaskаn) 00:12, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I made a random edit to the redirect. Doing that "locks in" a redirect, making it impossible to move another page over it. Such as the Wikicrime page. -02:50, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see. It's the annoying thing that happens when double redirects occur :) a bot fixes it and you can't move anything to it anymore.  Mel sa  ran  (formerly Salaskаn) 13:20, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
 * By the way, now I think of it, isn't it possible to move the redirect to a random target and then move the page you wanted to move to the redirect?  Mel sa  ran  21:49, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Nope. You can only move the target page over a redirect. -Amarkov moo! 23:39, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Err, yes, but what if someone moves Wikicrime on wheels! to azghjkfgfdkgjfd and then moves Wikicrime to Wikicrime on wheels!?  Mel sa  ran  11:11, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Cult
He he. I shouldn't but I found this pretty amusing. Actually, this could be a good question to add in the Wikipediholic test. "Did you understand what cult Amarkov is refering to? Yes, score 10 pts." Pascal.Tesson 06:49, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Lol. I still haven't gotten complaints, though, which means... something. -Amarkov moo! 01:18, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for August 6th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 08:22, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

ID Polls_.22sixty-four_percent_view_human_beings_were_created_directly_by_God..22
Come by Talk:Intelligent_design and feel free to state your reasons for reverting. --Yqbd 04:22, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Please take a look
at the reworked WP:RFC page and the bot that populates the subpages from RFCbio and related templates. Best of both worlds :)  &gt; R a d i a n t &lt;  08:45, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Please Take a look at this conduct
Lahiru has gone and crossed out your comments here. Sinhala freedom 14:01, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I reverted the edit that reopened a case that was closed. If you feel that I did something wrong, please feel free to revert my edits. Taprobanus 17:40, 9 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents-- ♪♫ ĽąĦĩŘǔ ♫♪  walkie-talkie |undefined

Signpost updated for August 13th, 2007.
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 19:52, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

And to finish it off...
I saw this horribly disruptive editor and wondered why he wasn't blocked. Turns out that he's another of those "People are trolling him so we can't sanction him for things we'd ban anyone else for!" Fun fun.

Harassment
Leave me alone..it is becoming more an more obvious that you are out to get me......I recommend now you cease getting embroiled in affairs that have nothing to do with you.--MONGO 06:15, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Like I said, I am annoyed that you are constantly incivil. If attempting to get you sanctioned for this means I am "out to get you", then yes I am. -Amarkov moo! 06:20, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Goping ater peope like you see to be trying to with me is unacceptable. You are getting involved in affairs that have nothing to do with you. I am politely asking you to stop this.--MONGO 06:40, 15 August 2007 (UTC)