User talk:Angela/Archive12

>>User talk:Angela/Archive13

Protection of history of .ba
You wrote: unprotected since there has been no discussion for a week.


 * Well, yes. As I suspected, that troll (and his sockpuppets) wasn't in it for the discussion in the first place. After the page was protected, he went on to place a seemingly insulting comment on my user page :) I'm pretty sure that they'll also eventually return and try to do their damage again. --Joy &#91;shallot&#93;   19:51, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Gory picture
Gedday Angela. I'm doing a bit of a quick survey of Wiki-Women. Are you very squeemish? if not could you do me a favour and have a look at the photo I added to caesarian section. My other half says its too gory and will freak out women who may face need to have the operation. I guess I'm desensitised because I see so much surgery, so I'd appreciate your opinion about whether the picture should go or stay. Erich 07:43, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * Thanks! Erich 08:01, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Controversial Article: Prem Rawat
Hi Angela,

I'd like to ask for your help in a matter that has been causing some frustration.

Over the past few months, members and ex-members have been attempting to write an article about Prem Rawat aka Guru Maharaj Ji.

This group is recognized by scholars, cult psychologists, and the general media as a cult, in the same category with Scientology and Unification Church. see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_purported_cults#External_Links

Ed Poor and user Zappaz have been heavily involved in editing the article, and IMO, are extremely biazed toward the cult's POV. As you probably are aware, Poor is a practicing member of the Unification Church and Zappaz's edits speak for themselves.

Their involvement continues to frustrate ex-members who have sincerely attempted to make the article accurate.

Could you PLEASE get some people involved that don't have a pro-cult bias? Unless of course, Wikipedia is NOT a mainstream venture and is out to promote cults to the gullible and vulnerable.

I appreciate your efforts to provide an alternative source of information to the general public. I think if you take a look at the article and discussions you will see what I'm talking about.

Thanks, Mary Moore 14:46, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Message box
Hello, Angela. I noticed you gave a favorable comment to my proposal at Template talk:Message box. Would you please confirm your support by signing under Support? Thanks. --Cantus 16:53, Aug 18, 2004 (UTC)

Save the Hebrew Wikipedia
The Hebrew Wikipedia is ruled by dictator named David Shay!!! He and his "friends" (Ben Teva) use Wikipedia only to premote their political point or views and someone with a different opnion will be banned (e.g. They deleted articles that where translated word by word from the English Wikipedia because they "don't found it important" or without giving any reason!!!!). They are ignoring the decision of the majority.

I have 2 solution for this problem
 * 1) To open a new Hebrew Wiki
 * 2) To have a talk with the Hebrew Wiki sysops S0me0ne


 * There are 18 admins on the Hebrew Wikipedia, so if you feel one of them is abusing his sysop powers, perhaps it would be best to contact one of the others. I can't comment on the deleted articles since I'm not an admin there and can't view deleted pages. This needs to be addressed by the people on that wiki who can read Hebrew. Is there another user over there that you could trust to help you with this? Angela. 20:43, Aug 18, 2004 (UTC)

The problem is that on of them is above the all: He decided who will be an admin and he can remove any admin he wants to. So all the admins tring not to piss him off. Therefore I have no one to talk to him in the Hebrew Wikipedia. So I think about the idea to open a new Hebrew Wikipedia to make an alternative for the dictatorship.


 * Which user are you talking about? There doesn't seem to be a &. Also, what is your user name on the Hebrew Wikipedia? Angela. 22:04, Aug 18, 2004 (UTC)

I don't have a username in the Hebrew Wiki because I always blocked by the same user (&#1490;&#1497;&#1500;&#1490;&#1502;&#1513;). I want to open a alternative Wikipedia in Heberw: I've got 2 ideas. 1. I can use the Yidesh wikipedia (the is no articles in it - this is so old language that doesn't really spoken. The is no man under 70 that speaks that language. 2. I can open a new wikipedia... I can use the Hebrew interface


 * It would be a lot easier for people to communicate with you if you created a username. I don't think you should try forking the Hebrew Wikipedia. This dispute can be solved, and I suggest you talk with one of the admins there about it. Can you give me any examples of what this user has done and why you think he is being a dictator please? Angela. 15:48, Aug 19, 2004 (UTC)

One good example is the articles about politician or about the Israel army - if you worte something negative but true about this articles you will be blocked. Another exemple is article that articles that exist in the English wikipedia (and in more languages) deleted when they translated to Hebrew because one of them didn't find it important. This happaned with articles about Porn star (there was no "dirty words" or pornography in the pages - and I even didn't translated some part from the English Wikipedia that might be cosidered "dirty") that where translated as they are to Hebrew. They delete all the article without making a vote. Most of the Hebrew user wanted to keep the articles (the write about it) but some sysops decided to delete it. and everytime I tried to talk about it or to show my opnion they blocked me.

I think that I don't have another choice but tring open a New Hebrew Wikipedia.


 * Do you have a votes for deletion page on the Hebrew Wikipedia where this was discussed? Or have you tried bringing it up on &#1502;&#1494;&#1504;&#1493;&#1503;? Also, have you tried talking to &#1490;&#1497;&#1500;&#1490;&#1502;&#1513; and explaining to him what the problem is? I'm sure this can be worked out by discussion with users there rather than trying to start a new site for it. Angela. 16:37, Aug 19, 2004 (UTC)

I worte about it in the &#1502;&#1494;&#1504;&#1493;&#1503; but &#1490;&#1497;&#1500;&#1490;&#1502;&#1513; deleted the things that I worte (He kept only his point of view). He deleted it only because he don't like the subjects of the articles.


 * Ok, but there are 17 other admins there. I'm sure they can't all be as bad as you think &#1490;&#1497;&#1500;&#1490;&#1502;&#1513; is. Just approach people calmly without accusing them of being dictators or making other personal attacks, and I'm sure there are reasonable people there who will be able to explain to you why your pages were deleted, or help you to get them undeleted if &#1490;&#1497;&#1500;&#1490;&#1502;&#1513; really was abusing his position. People might take you more seriously if you create a username there too. Angela. 17:06, Aug 19, 2004 (UTC)

I have created some usenames but &#1490;&#1497;&#1500;&#1490;&#1502;&#1513; block me. My page were translated carefully from the English Wikipedia so there is no reason to delete them. Can you let me be a sysop in the Heberew Wikipedia for protecting those page form deletion?


 * Sorry, I can't make you a sysop. That is something the users of the Hebrew Wikipedia need to decide. What reason are they giving for blocking you? Is there some policy you are breaking? Angela. 21:03, Aug 19, 2004 (UTC)

They are blocking me because I put back my articles. All the sysops became sysop by one user in the Hebrew Wikipedia. I think you have the ability to set me as a sysop. (They delete everything I worte include talk pages and &#1502;&#1494;&#1504;&#1493;&#1503; - so I can't even tell the others my point of view). If you cannot I am asking you to let me open a new Wikipedia.


 * I think you need to respect the results of the vote at &. Have you tried to discuss it with the other users who voted to keep the articles? Angela. 21:50, Aug 19, 2004 (UTC)

The results are a complete bullshit (sorry for the language). The manipulated the results - They wrote that people who wants to keep as they want to delete it. I tried to make a new poll that will be honest (Every user will vote by himself - another users will not decide for him). Their respone was to delete it and to block me. They don't let me write there and show my point of view. (look at the page history). PS: They had deleted my articles many times before they made the "honest" poll.


 * How about you try to gain more trust over there by focusing on some different articles. You should consider stopping trying to recreate pages that were already deleted, as they will see this as vandalism. Instead, just find something else to write about, and then later on you can start a sensible discussion of this issue once the arguments have died down. Angela. 22:12, Aug 19, 2004 (UTC)

The reason I recreated the page was about pure ideology, freedom of speech, and the future of the Hebrew Wikipedia. It was about keeping Wikipedia FREE as it supposed to be. Today it is Porn stars. Tomorrow who knows?

How can I create other articles when I don't know if they would keep them?

Hi, I can prove that i m not a internet troll. list of my contributions that i was the one who write them: i worte about 15 articles:


 * . Subliminal Message - &#1502;&#1505;&#1512; &#1514;&#1514;-&#1505;&#1497;&#1508;&#1497;


 * . Homer Simpson - &#1492;&#1493;&#1502;&#1512; &#1505;&#1497;&#1502;&#1508;&#1505;&#1493;&#1503;


 * . Indymedia - &#1488;&#1497;&#1504;&#1491;&#1497;&#1502;&#1491;&#1497;&#1492;

i can prove that i worte them: if u look at the password of the user who wrote tham (in the begining) you see it's all the same.

if u don't want me delete my contributions.

i am leaving wikipedia.


 * Ok, well stick with one user name, and try to stick to articles that people have not already voted against. Since there were 10 people voting to delete your pages, it is clearly not an issue that one user is being a dictator over this. Sorry I can't help, but it is really up to you and the community on the Hebrew Wikipedia to work this out. I can't force them to keep your articles, and nor would I want to go against the consensus that has formed for getting rid of them. If these articles are important to you, you can always start your own wiki, but this can't be hosted as part of Wikimedia. Angela. 17:31, Aug 20, 2004 (UTC)

Hebrew (Gilgamesh)
hi, i am the administrator &#1490;&#1497;&#1500;&#1490;&#1502;&#1513; i banned the user since he was vandalising the hebrew wikipedia. he wanted to add some pornographical articals which we don't want to have in he.wiki. we voted against it in our village pump and the vote was 10 to 4 in favor of deleting those articles. David Shay is a very respectfull member of our wiki. there is no other administrator, who feels he is a dictator, furthermore we are delighted of his work.

this particular user opened at least 10 or 15 differnt usernames and rewrote his articles at least 100 times. this user is an Internet troll and we complained to his internet provider. if he will persist in his behavior we will involve the police. as for now, after the vote he is not alowed to write any article in whatever subject in he.wiki again.

his claims about nitionalistic point of view in issues of israely security and pokitics is wrong. you can translate the article to inglish via google and see for yourself. if it doesn't work, i hope u have some administrators who speek hebrew and can read the discussion in the village pump and in discussion pages of the requsted articles

any way any complaint of an internet troll should be regarded as disturbance to peace and shoud not be tolerated.

I have a username in en. wiki and u can reach me here.

best regards, Gilgamesh he 22:40, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

thank you for your answer i hope he will not return and we wont enjoy the questionable pleasure of his company Gilgamesh he 22:55, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Hebrew (Avihu)
Hi, Angela,

My name is Avihu and I am one of the 18 administrators of the Hebrew Wikipedia .I am very sorry to see our dirty laundry washed in public. I just want to add a few facts to those that were written by Gilgamesh: What we need is a way to block the user’s IP address even if he is a registered user, because some of us wasted lot of time and energy blocking the phony user names he created repeatedly, deleting his articles and discussing the merits of pornography on the village pump instead of writing articles.
 * Contrary to what the anonymous user wrote to you, David Shay who is the Hebrew Wikipedia’s bureaucrat is currently on vacation in London and was not involved with the conflict about Pornography that raged in the Hebrew Wikipedia for the last two days.
 * The anonymous user used foul language when he was questioned about the validity of the articles he created. I am not going to repeat what he said, but he insulted anyone, administrator or user which dared to ask for softening his Pornography articles.

Regards, My user talk page on the hebrew wikipedia Avihu 09:21, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * Hi Angela,


 * To your first question: as far as I know he only used user name during the last couple of days so I do not know his IP. Maybe there is a tool that can tell me what is the current IP address of a user, which is signed on.


 * Your response is very important and remaining question is where can I read about all the tools you mentioned (blocking range of addresses, preventing new users from creating articles).


 * Regards, My user talk page on the hebrew wikipedia Avihu 11:49, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * Hi Angela,


 * I understand.


 * Thanks
 * Avihu 12:26, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Sysop Accountability Policy
Good morning, Angela. On my Talk page, you asked about the archiving and closure of Wikipedia:Sysop Accountability Policy. For consistency of the thread, I answered there. The short version - I interpreted the consensus as "keep in BJAODN". Never having paid much attention to that page, I tried to find a queue where someone who does use BJAODN could take care of it. It was a temporary fix that I was hoping to improve on. If you have a better answer or want to overwrite my "closure", I would sure appreciate it. Rossami 11:22, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * Thank you. Rossami

Luzmila Carpio page
Hi Angela,

I'm quite new to Wikipedia. I wanted to add a page to Wikipedia for which I'm the copyrights holder.

However this page has been listed in the Copyright problems page, my fault, I copy-pasted my document without removing unrelated information which might have caused the trouble.

The talk related to that is here.

Thank you for your assistance!

Joel

London
hey - murray here - guess you found the ntk link :) hope that is all good.  I'm not sure how the evening talk will shape up - may just be a small crowd in a pub, may be bigger.  Should be all good tho.

The day stuff looks like the order may jiggle around a bit, but the topics are the same (if thats all cool?). Got 40 people + a waiting list for the main talk. If we can get a bigger room, there may be more. And somewhere we're hoping to get a few minutes with some of the higher ups.

Are you coming along too, or are you just helping with notes? Looking forward to this!


 * Replied by email. Angela. 21:32, Aug 20, 2004 (UTC)
 * ta. guess you emailed work : won't get that until monday. have a lovely weekend :)


 * Ah, it's Friday night already. Sorry, I lost track of my timezone a while ago. :) I've emailed you at gmail now. Angela. 21:51, Aug 20, 2004 (UTC)

Picture
Thanks for the kind comments on image:Korea_gyeongbokgung.jpg. Well, it is one of my favourites. You can now nominate it ;-) Kokiri 22:41, 20 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Thai Wikipedia
Thanx in a million for your help. I can handle vandalism on the Dutch wiki (I am a moderator there) but not on the Thai wiki. I do live in Thailand and can read a littlebit of Thai. I will try and restore everything in the correct versions later. Waerth 17:59, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * I just saw that 203.145.13.22 also vandalised your userpage. I will keep an eye on the Dutch wiki and all the other ones I have a userpage ... Waerth 18:08, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * Hmmm. I guess it would be helpful if blocks carried across wikis. Angela. 18:12, Aug 21, 2004 (UTC)


 * Not always. Just last week I have gotten an internetconnection at home. It took me 5 years to get one (do not ask me ... I just refuse to pay bribes). Before that I worked from an internetcafe around the corner. One day somebody else vandalized the English wikipedia from that cafe and I found the ip address blocked, I couldn't even login anymore. Luckily enough I could still edit on the Dutch wiki so I could tell Andre Engels. This IP address is not from that internetcafe, but is probably from Thailand. What would be usefull is having some kind of warning page at meta where the moderators could look for crosswiki vandalism. Waerth 18:29, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * Having a cross-wiki Special:Contributions page might be a better alternative then. Angela.

Help desk
(Barnstar moved to User:Angela/Barnstars) I award you this barnstar for all the help you give to people at the help desk. Theresa Knott 23:22, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Deleting User pages
I thot it was great the way you not only blocked the th: vandal, but also helped revert some of the damage. Anyway, I am curious why you put speedy tags on your obsolete User/User talk pages, instead of just deleting them yourself. Niteowlneils 17:19, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * I suspected something along those lines, and looked for it, but obviously not close enuf (I mostly looked at the cases on the 'candidates' page. Niteowlneils 18:33, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Trinity Buoy Wharf
I was trying to move Trinity *Bouy* Wharf to the correctly spelt page Trinity *Buoy* Wharf and mistakenly created a page with the new name before realising that I then couldn't move it to a page which already has a name - or can I? Saintswithin 18:24, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Deleted and moved. Niteowlneils 18:33, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Thanks Niteowlneils. Angela

TV naming conventions
Angela. I find myself in dispute with a number of users at the moment and I don't have the fight in me to spark off another RFC so I'm appealing to your good sense to sort something out without resorting to that. I would understand if you'd rather not get involved though.

I feel that User:Netoholic has acted with the upmost disgrace on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (television). A few days ago I and a number of other users noticed that pages related to TV programmes were being moved by him, so we questioned what was going on and he said that he was moving them under the guidelines at Naming conventions (television). When I looked at this page I discovered that the policy had been written by Netoholic a few hours earlier. So on the talk page I questioned what was going on. On that page there was a straw poll that had no indication of when it was due to finish. The so-called convention that Netoholic adopted had 5 votes and one of the other options had 2 votes. Several users argued with netoholic that this straw poll had not received enough publicity and no result had been declared, and questioned the so-called consensus policy that Netoholic was adopting. I ended up arguing with Netoholic on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions because in my opinion he was falsely claiming that some kind of consensus had been reached, when in actual fact more people had complained to him about the policy he was implementing than had actually voted for it. During this argument several more people cast their votes on the straw poll including you. I made a proposal that the straw poll be declared null and void; that the so called policy be declared a draft proposal; and that we restart a new poll with proper procedures and sufficient publicity. Several users agreed with this and User:Gtrmp drew up a poll and put it in his user space. At this point the policy that he had implemented was losing the straw poll. Netoholic decided to ignore the suggestions of starting with a clean sheet. He drew up his own poll which rather than list different options, is just to decide whether the policy he drew up should be endorsed or not. Furthermore he has put a time limit 20 days on it. So if we are to change his policy it would need 20 days before we even got to the stage of beginning the vote on an alternative, and then I guess another 20 odd days before any change in policy is implemented. Quite frankly I'm disgusted. Oh, he also moved the page to an archive thus losing the history. I have fixed this now though. You can see precisely what was going on if you look at the page before Netoholic expunged the content here. He has also moved around some other comments from one page to another so it might be difficult to follow exactly what's going on. Cheers. Mintguy (T) 00:49, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * On the converse, I feel like all the dissenters are not assuming good faith on my part. I wrote up a short convention on Aug 19, based on this Aug 17th edit on the Talk page, which shows both in the poll and previous discussion showing a wide preference in using "TV over television" and specifically "(TV series)" for most needs. The straw poll was very informal, there is no requirement that every poll be publicized all over the map. A post asking for input was placed by me on Village Pump for quite some time, starting on Aug 9.
 * The current poll is designed to simply determine what should happen to the currently written convention, and was done in response to all the criticism. Thanks for looking into this. -- Netoholic 03:07, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * Why not allow some more discussion, and changes to the proposed policy before trying to vote on it. I think you need to consider the alternatives rather than just saying yes or no to the current proposal. Since I already voted, I'm not the most neutral person to ask about this anyway. Angela 16:22, Aug 23, 2004 (UTC)

Sockpuppet quiz
I am slighted that I was not included within the sockpuppet quiz. I have worked very hard to establish my status; please remember me next time. Lirath Q. Pynnor


 * The question was about banned users, and you weren't banned at the time. Angela 16:22, Aug 23, 2004 (UTC)

Wikistress Four
There seems to be a recent epidemic of them. What's on your mind? Ilyanep


 * Ack, nothing. I'll remove it again. It's mostly RL stress, not Wikistress anyway. Angela 16:22, Aug 23, 2004 (UTC)

Vandalism?
Angela,

as an annonymous user I made some edits on some of the pages I was reading because I considered the grammar of the sentence I was reading to be wrong. I then was surprised to recieve a message from you stating that I should stop my vandalism or I would be banned.

Now, I realize that I can't do anything to stop you from banning me, but I would like to understand where I went wrong and hopefully prevent this from happening in the future.

Thanks for your time.

Miguel


 * Replied at User talk:MMart311. Angela

Welcoming
Hi, Angela. :) I noticed that you recently welcomed Funkyj. I was recently welcomed by Neutrality, my only problem being that I doubt he is as beautiful as you are. Any comments? ;-) AdmN 22:16, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * erm. No comment. Angela

Thai wikipedia moderator rights
Hello Angela, in the Thai wikipedia it has been suggested that me and user:Ahoerstemeier also get moderatorrights there and the steward there has given these rights to us. I do not know if you manually "revoke" the rights you gave me yesterday, if so please don't revoke them. For the discussion see: &#3614;&#3641;&#3604;&#3588;&#3640;&#3618;:&#3627;&#3609;&#3657;&#3634;&#3627;&#3621;&#3633;&#3585; The discussion reverse, partly in English were me and Ahoerstemeier are asked in English to agree and the other pediamembers also. Waerth 22:39, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * Ah, I had actually desysopped you about 20 minutes before Bact sysopped you. :) I assume you can still use your admin powers ok now? Angela 01:50, Aug 24, 2004 (UTC)

Template:Quotable
Maybe. SV 02:44, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)

What is the purpose of Wakipedia
Angela,

How does a private mail between Wakipedia and yourself become public item for everyones consuption. the trancript are listed below. I am not familiar with the confidentiality policy of Wakipedia. Please write and explain fully before i ponder on my next move.


 * I assume you mean Wikipedia, since Wakipedia seems to be some site which might well be violating our trademark that I'd never heard of before today. Private mail to me doesn't become public whereas everything you write on this talk page does. Angela 18:32, Aug 24, 2004 (UTC)

Of liars who do not know when to let go!

Long text that had something to do with User talk:217.35.96.217 removed]


 * I'm sorry. I don't understand what you're asking me or why you are putting this conversation on my talk page nearly a year after it took place. Angela 18:32, Aug 24, 2004 (UTC)

Requests for comment/Mintguy
Thanks for posting on the RFC page. I find your comments very fair. I am willing to capitulate on some of the older items (especially where no history is available). They were included in the hopes of showing that the admin has not performed particularly well in the recent past. My feeling is that consistent dis-use of admin functions, except during edit wars he is part of, reflects badly on the admin community. Since you did not specifically disagree with some of the comments (3RR, etc.), I am wondering if you actually agree with some points. If so, then I'd welcome your feedback in framing sections of the complaint as such. -- Netoholic (Talk) 23:11, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * The only connection, in my mind, with the TV series thing is that his rapid-fire revert of my efforts was the catalyst for me to review his history. I looked back and saw a pattern of settling his disputes by pulling out his admin privileges. By themselves, each incident warrants this sort of discussion. I am new here, so I only have the benefit of reading the most current policies. It seems to me though, from the beginning, that admin policy has shown that they should never use their privilege to settle their editorial disputes with others. Vandals, bots - sure, but not reasonable (if unpopular) edit work. I honestly feel, as a non-admin editor, I am at a great disadvantage. This goes against the dictum : "Sysops are not imbued with any special authority, and are equal to everybody else in terms of editorial responsibility."  If its bad timing on my part to post this now, I really don't know when it would be good. I am only asking for a fair re-evaluation of his status as an admin. -- Netoholic (Talk) 01:27, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * In response to some of the comments, I've updated the "Statement of the dispute" section to remove the much older deletion charges. I hope that satisfies most of your "So many of these charges are misleading or wrong" statement on the page. I hope you can now take a moment to revise it, and expand on why you think the others are valid speedy deletions, since they do not seem to fit any guidleline I've read. They may be very logical choices, but without posting for comment, I don't see as how he'd gather consensus. -- Netoholic (Talk) 06:18, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the information, and for providing me your input. I respect that you can do so calmly, even if you may disagree with my contentions. I think the point of the RFC process is just to present information back and forth and eventually pair down to the important issues. If it turns out that admins should be allowed to enjoy special editing privileges without having to contribute to the community by performing regular maintenance, then I'll withdraw the RFC myself. -- Netoholic (Talk) 22:49, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Redbone fix
Thank you very much for untangling the Redbone problem. From your comment on Talk:Redbone, I gather that Redbone (ethnicity)'s talk page failed to move with the page itself, which I hadn't noticed. (I could swear I had the "Move talk page" box checked. Oh, well.) I've updated all the links to point to "Redbone (ethnicity)" or Redbone (band). Jeff Q 23:42, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)

New icon discussion (for both recent change views)
Hi Angela, I have answered you and the others - the alignment of the enhanced view "columns" with the icon can be adjusted by modifying the code - pls. have a look to Mediawiki_talk:newpageletter, where I placed the relevant excerpt, at the moment unchanged. The original code already has some & nbsp; in it, nobody will likes them, that's for sure. But I like the NEW look and even made some experiments with replacing the MediaWiki:minoreditletter m, but this is another minor discussion, and I won't come up with this. The patch for the minoreditletter is a simple as for the newpageletter, of course. Nyxos (Talk) 00:14, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * Angela, I am note sure, if all WikiPedias runs the same software, but if this is so, we only need to define the (pixel) size for the small icons the same, which could be difficult -- or every language version get two icons, one being only a blank dummy picture of the same size (transparent !) acting as s spacer. This is perhaps not what all (insiders) will like, I admit. Nyxos (Talk) 06:53, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * If it's going to affect all Wikipedias, not just en, it might be better to raise this on the wikitech-l mailing list. Angela. 16:35, Aug 25, 2004 (UTC)

De-admin
Thanks! Maybe I will (hope to) return later. KRS 09:24, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Judgment call
You usually seem like one of the cooler heads around here, so I am seeking your advice. Feel free either to reply on my talk page or to email me. And if you don't want to make a substantive response, could you just drop me a one-sentence note saying so, so that I can try someone else?

Please take a look at the exchange between Wetman and myself at Talk:Mayonnaise. Going by his tone, he seems to think I was way out of line to ask for references in what struck me as a rather historically detailed article. He did ultimately provide a useful reference, which is great. Could you tell me if you think I was out of line, and if so, do you have suggestions to make as to what I should have done differently?

Thanks in advance. -- Jmabel 16:11, Aug 25, 2004 (UTC)


 * Thanks. I'm not complaining about his conduct, I was just trying to get an independent assessment of mine. -- Jmabel 16:28, Aug 25, 2004 (UTC)

Redirects are not candidates for speedy deletion
'Reusable software components.' is obviously a typo (there already exists the valid redirect 'Reusable software components'). Whether or not a candidate for speedy deletion, it should be deleted somehow anyway. Could you take care of that? &mdash; danakil 17:02, Aug 25, 2004 (UTC)


 * I've reverted my edit. I'll let someone else decide that one. Angela 17:11, Aug 25, 2004 (UTC)

Five-a-side
Angela you are entirely right about having to delete pages for page moves for those deletions stated on the RFC page. As for five-a-side; The previous content was - "I think Five-a-side football is what called Futsal, a Fotball/Soccer that play in a small field with six or five player and very populer nowdays. Five-a-side phrase is use to in football but in training mode". This was then redirected to futsal by User:Niteowlneils. Since neither the original description nor the redirect are in any way correct, I decided that deletion would allow someone to write an proper article. If this is abuse of powers then strike me down. Really this whole thing is beyond absurd. Mintguy (T)


 * Angela, I was also coming to write about this. Is there a way to confirm what the previous content of Five-a-side football (and the other pages I've commmented on) was? Even if what Mintguy says is true, I see that as going against the Deletion_policy, because the redirect had a useful history and did not qualify as a speedy delete. -- Netoholic (Talk) 22:29, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * Before the redirect, there was "I think Five-a-side football is what called Futsal, a Fotball/Soccer that play in a small field with six or five player and very populer nowdays. Five-a-side phrase is use to in football but in training mode", as Mintguy says. It was created in one edit by an anon. It was plainly a good faith edit by Mintguy. That you are quibbling over borderline stuff like this shows what a weak case you have against Mintguy, who's only ever done good things for Wikipedia. Why not just give it up before the more unforgiving folk around here start holding it against you? Pcb21| Pete 23:04, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * I've completely forgotten what I came to this talk page for. :(. Pcb21| Pete 23:04, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Untagged Images
Hi Angela,

I have put a list of the images without cp tags at User:Yann/Untagged Images.

Have a lot of fun with them, there is only 48655 such ones (at 22/08/2004) :-(
 * -- Looxix 23:56, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Categories for deletion
Hi. Can I ask you to visit Wikipedia talk:Categories for deletion, in particular the section headed Frustration - deletion without discussion - I still think there's a lot needing to be talked out and some kind of way forward found. At the moment category deletion seems to be controlled as a fiefdom. --Bodnotbod 02:22, Aug 26, 2004 (UTC)

Image:Crystalball.jpg
What do you think to adjust the color of Image:Crystalball.jpg like this ? Chmouel 17:03, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Adminship
Hi, Angela: Thanks for notifying me that I am now officially an admin, though so far I haven't heard any angelic chorus or received any magical powers! :( I will strive to be as judicious, evenhanded, and responsible in my duties as possible. -&#23665;&#36947;&#23376; (Sewing) - talk 17:16, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Vandalism
yo i aint vandalising im just deleting useless info 24.191.172.234
 * Yeah right. Angela. 01:11, Aug 27, 2004 (UTC)

Sorry
I fear I may have been the one that introduced 24.191.172.234 to Wikipedia. --Sgeo | Talk 01:11, Aug 27, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for being so fast
Hello Angela, thanks for being so fast to activate the "administrator buttons" :-), by the way... nice to meet you. --Javier Carro 11:52, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for comment
G'day Angela

User:Maveric149 is out of town until Monday, and there are now several sections added to the end of Requests for comment that are IMO completely out of order there. I've left a message for one of the authors (who asked for comments!) but no reply.

So even knowing you have all sorts of other things to do, you were the next one I thought of.

Suggestions? Andrewa 17:09, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the response, Michael has fixed it and in a significantly better way than I would have so I'm glad I asked. Andrewa 18:06, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I can't be reached via email right now
My computer has crashed due to a virus. I can't access my email until I get my computer back up again. It may be a few days. I'm accessing wiki through other people's computers. If you have recently sent me an email, or will send me an email in the near future, I have not or will not recieve it. If you need to contact me, you can still reach me on my talk page. Thanks. Kevin Baas 22:33, 2004 Aug 27 (UTC)

Ginger.jpg
Hi Angela. Image:Ginger.jpg seems to be being repeatedly vandalized by someone who can replace images without the fact showing up in the upload history. Do you suppose you could look at it? The original image was of ginger roots. Thanks. WormRunner | Talk 00:21, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)

On Cherokee translation
Hi Angela. I hadn't been on CHR for a while, and I THINK it was you who left the note on my talk page. If so, browse over to my talk page and see a reply. ;-) Etse


 * Thanks Angela. My, Angela, you seem to be a very cool person. Thank you for your evident and tireless dedication to Wikipedia. Etse

Meetings of the Board that are not board meetings
Based on this edit by Anthere, it appears that there was what is effectively an impromptu meeting of the Board of Trustees on IRC, acting in its capacity as a "court of appeal" for disciplinary measures against users. If such a meeting indeed took place (i.e. at least three members of the Board participated), I would like to request that a log of this chat, or at the very least, a summary of the discussion, be posted on the wiki.

I think this is critically important for the sake of transparency and due process. Furthermore, since apparently Guanaco also participated, it basically amounts to having ex parte communication with one of the parties to a dispute outside the presence of other parties. I can see that Anthere tried to contact RickK but he doesn't use IRC, and I can't tell if other potential parties, including Michael himself, were given an opportunity to participate.

I recognize that the bylaws do not require meetings of the Board to be open to the public, and in some situations it may be preferable for the Board to deliberate in private. I also realize that the exigencies of this situation might have prevented advance notice to the community and appropriate parties. Still, in the US judicial system at least, this kind of ex parte communication by a court would be considered a serious ethical breach jeopardizing the fairness of the proceedings. I know this does not necessarily apply to the board of a nonprofit organization, but because the matter involved is effectively judicial in nature, I think the analogy needs to be considered.

Given the emergency at hand, please know that I am not accusing the Board of impropriety in any way, but I believe the situation has created a problem that can only be remedied by full disclosure. This case is a matter of considerable interest to the community at large, and in order to maintain fairness to all parties, I think the only appropriate course is to publish the log. --Michael Snow 00:13, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * We are in the mediation channel (where you can join) and this is rather a mediation meeting than a board meeting Michael. SweetLittleFluffyThing


 * Danny "left" Wikipedia, and Jimbo wanted to know what happened. It was taken to a separate channel in order to better ignore certain trolls who were making the dissemination of information difficult. The channel was open to all for listening, and no decisions were made.  It wasn't a board meeting. anthony (see warning) 00:19, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * If it's three board members, it's a quorum under the bylaws, so effectively it is a board meeting. I'm glad that the focus is on mediating the dispute, but it's rather one-sided mediation if only Guanaco is participating. It's not just a question of me wanting to participate (and like RickK, I personally don't use IRC), it's a question of everyone being allowed to present their perspective on the situation, and not having things said about them in a forum where they can't defend themselves or even know what was said about them. --Michael Snow 00:23, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * It's only a board meeting if it's declared a board meeting. Merely having three people who are members of a board on the same IRC channel does not make it a board meeting.  Jimbo was asking questions, and two other board members happened to be answering them.  RickK was invited, you were invited.  You both declined.  I'm sure Jimbo is still willing to hear your perspective through some other channel, though. anthony (see warning) 00:29, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * The place is #mediation.wikipedia. Michael, if by 3 people we have a board meeting, I must say we rather frequently have "board meetings" because Angela and I are very often on irc and Jimbo comes nearly everyday as well. IRC makes it easier to discuss. Only certain people (parties, Jimbo and mediators) can talk, but you can join and listen. So, this is not really a forum either. Rick is more than welcome to come (we would really like that he be there), we regret that he do not. Note that any time, public discussion occur on irc and people not here just do not know what is said about them. SweetLittleFluffyThing


 * It's neither a board meeting, nor a court. No one is appealing anything. We are just discussing possible solutions and trying to understand the block/unblock war. Decisions are not made on IRC. If anything comes of it, those proposed solutions (not decisions) will be put on the wiki. I am strongly against the idea that policies can be decided on IRC. It was meant to be a quiet discussion between those involved, not something for the whole community to join in with, which is why very few people are voiced in that channel, and why it was not advertised (as well as the fact it was highly impromptu, not something planning in advance). The transparency was provided by allowing those not involved in the discussion to stay in the room. There are regularly three or four board members on #wikipedia. That doesn't make it a board meeting.


 * The channel is open to read at #mediation.wikipedia. I'll gladly provide a summary when it's over for the sake of those involved who could not be in the channel. Angela 00:30, Aug 29, 2004 (UTC)


 * You've really got the wrong idea completely about what we're doing. We're just chatting.  No actions are being decided, and of course RickK will have every opportunity to participate in the discussion.  It's not a board meeting everytime Angela, Anthere and I happen to be in the same chat room.  Otherwise, we might as well say that we have board meetings every day, off and on.


 * It's also important to keep conceptually separate my role *within the community* versus my role *on the board* or *as President* of the foundation. Jimbo Wales 00:35, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * May I also remind you that Angela and I are members of the MC. Sannse, also on the channel, is part of the MC. ant


 * Sorry for being imprecise; I wasn't trying to say that it's a board meeting anytime three board members are in the same (virtual) place. But given the situation and the limited information available, it looked very much like the Board acting in an official capacity, as provided for in the bylaws, particularly with respect to Michael's ban and/or the behavior of RickK and Guanaco, all of which is currently up for arbitration. That's definitely what I would call a board meeting. With the assurance that no decisions were made, I'll concede that there may be less reason for concern. The summary promised by Angela would still be appreciated. --Michael Snow 00:47, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * There is a summary at User:Michael/Proposal. Angela

Trouble with user
Hi! Total newbie here, reporting a problem.

A user designated "199.244.214.30" edited the following page yesterday:

Sunday Afternoon on the Island of La Grande Jatte

The picture is gone!

I checked the user's "Talk" page, and there is an admonition from you about suspending editing privileges. Maybe you want to check into this?

Thanks!

--David B.


 * Hi David. It looks like Grunt has already fixed this. If you see this sort of vandalism again, you can just revert the page. See How to revert a page to an earlier version for instructions. Angela. 15:13, Aug 29, 2004 (UTC)

IRC Banning
Angela, I've been banned from the #wikipedia IRC channel by Snowspinner, for what he considers "personal attacks" against him.

I don't feel I did make any personal attack, nor am I aware that banning from IRC for "personal attacks" is supported by policy (but with so many policies, perhaps it is and I've missed it). And in any case, I think it contravenes policy for Snowspinner to take action in a dispute to which he is a party to.

In what way do I contest the banning, and Snowspinner's banning for a dispute he is party to?

A log of the conversation leading up to the ban is given at User:Orthogonal/IRC ban by Snowspinner.

Thanks. -- orthogonal 04:55, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * I don't appreciate having my talk page spammed. You don't seem to be seriously asking for my advice on this, but rather taking a dispute that has nothing to do with Wikipedia (Wikipedia is not IRC) onto the site in an attempt to spread some sort of forest fire since you put this exact same message on at least half a dozen talk pages within the same minute. Angela 15:13, Aug 29, 2004 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry, I wasn't trying to spam. I was trying to get someone's advice as soon as possible, and yes, to make several people aware of it. As you're a bureaucrat, you immediately came to mind. But I suppose I do have your advice in any case: if Wikipedia and IRC are wholly separate, then anything happening in one should have no effect on another. -- orthogonal 15:43, 29 Aug 2004 (UTC)

You've seen a good chunk of the interactions between orthogonal and I in IRC, so this should be old news for you. The upshot of it is that he changed his username to "Sn0wsinner" and proceeded to "parody" my actions on Wikipedia. This was in the context of parodying other users such as Jimbo and Larry, but, as orthogonal has made his feelings about me quite clear, I failed to see the humor in this, and warned him against personal attacks as the IRC log he linked to shows. He pushed the issue and decided to keep trolling me. I removed him from the channel. As a further note, Fennec backed me on it shortly after I did it, noting that he'd wanted to do it himself. Just thought I'd save you a bit of trouble in trying to get the backstory on it if you were inclined to check into it. Snowspinner 06:12, Aug 29, 2004 (UTC)


 * You banned an abusive troll on IRC? I don't know whether you should get a barnstar or a reminder to not feed the trolls. Angela 15:13, Aug 29, 2004 (UTC)


 * Tough to tell, though for the quality of your response to this, you definitely deserve a barnstar. :) Snowspinner 15:30, Aug 29, 2004 (UTC)

I will note that there are two or three people I'd like to see banned on IRC :) earHertz, in particular, often seems to me excessively abrasive - in particular his long rants about how Wikipedia is overrun by furries. The sn0wsinner thing was insulting, demeaning, and rude: that alone ought to have gotten him banned. The snide remarks about his precious freedom of speech being so constrained by people asking him to show a little respect to someone are absurd. I commend Snowspinner for his extreme patience in even stopping to offer such a warning. -Fennec


 * That's nice. Completely irrelevant to this site though. Angela 15:13, Aug 29, 2004 (UTC)

Hi from Nick
Hi Angela,

i've given wiki a wide step the last few months and i'm really pleased to see loads of my additions edited but at least kept in slightly differing formats, that to me is the beauty of this place, anyway hope you are well.

Regards Nick Boulevard

A rant against the existence of IRC
First of all, my thanks for providing the summary of discussions regarding Michael. Because this incident touches on the issue, I wanted to share some of my perspective on IRC in general.

I think we agree that we operate by a consensus decisionmaking process wherever possible. As I see it, consensus develops primarily through discussion, and decisions grow organically from that discussion process. When the discussion ripens into general agreement, the decision has been made. In a significant sense, therefore, decisions are made wherever the discussion is taking place, whether that be on IRC, a mailing list, Meta, or the wiki pages of a specific project. Each of these fora has a purpose and each is also arguably flawed in some way, as you may remember from the poll at Wikipedia talk:Mailing lists. So while I generally support the idea that IRC is not the right place for making decisions, whenever a significant part of the process happens there I find it difficult to claim that decisions are never made on IRC.

Take for example the case of Mr. Treason. I don't know how familiar you are with it, but it seems generally accepted now that this user is banned. I have no objection to the ban, but couldn't really find a discussion that led to it. I have long suspected that this ban was effectively decided on IRC, and this seems confirmed by Snowspinner's explanation of it at Semi-policy.

I don't mean this to be a rant against the existence of IRC. That I don't use it is my own choice, just as some people choose not to follow the mailing lists. We can hardly prevent people from discussing Wikipedia issues, including policy matters, in outside channels that allow it. But I am concerned that IRC's influence on the wiki system itself is becoming too great, and I know that a number of other people feel this way as well. Because of it, I think, some people are less inclined to explain their reasoning or defend their actions on the wiki, feeling that the explanations have already been provided. This is detrimental to the atmosphere of the community, and actually works against consensus because it tends to polarize debate into the IRC crowd ("this has been discussed enough already!") and the non-IRC crowd ("what discussion?").

Unfortunately, I don't know how to solve this, and it's a cultural issue that can only change gradually over time. Part of what may be needed is for IRC users themselves to hold the line better against making decisions on IRC. No doubt you've heard some of this before and know other parts of it intuitively. Still, as our representative on the Board, I think it's important that you be aware of these concerns. --Michael Snow 01:43, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * Swap "IRC" for "mailing lists" and I'd fully agree, but I don't think decisions are being made on IRC. If a few people are giving that impression, it is more likely that they are doing so in order to try and win an argument than reflecting what was actually the case on IRC. I don't see what solution there is since you can hardly shut down the channel because you don't want people discussing Wikipedia off-site. Angela 01:57, Aug 30, 2004 (UTC)


 * I think IRC is a valuable tool for Wikipedia editors to "think fast" as it were. Rather than holding the line against decision making, then, I would, I think, prefer that users don't take an IRC consensus as Holy Writ, and allow that the non-IRC crowd may well muck up their nice little consensus. That is, IRC should be the start of discussion, and maybe even the place where enough consensus is gathered to feel justified in "being bold," but that we should not treat IRC decisions as immutable. Snowspinner 02:09, Aug 30, 2004 (UTC)


 * No decisions are immutable, except perhaps foundation issues. I find the suggestion that IRC "should be the start of discussion" extremely disturbing - certainly people aren't required to make their proposals on IRC - though probably Snowspinner didn't mean that as definitively as it comes across. Angela makes a good point that much of the same is true about the mailing lists, and I think a significant part of the problem is with people who move ahead impatiently and simply dismiss objections from people who missed the initial discussion, wherever it may have taken place. --Michael Snow 02:45, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * People on IRC can choose to start their discussion there if they want. Obviously people not on IRC can't be made to any more than people can be made to start all discussions at wiki-meetups. I don't see how IRC chat is any worse than people supposedly coming to some consensus on a non-advertised talk page on the wiki. If people who care about the topic don't know of it, the consensus amongst those who do would appear irrelevant. Angela 02:53, Aug 30, 2004 (UTC)


 * Well, the specific problem with IRC is the lack of a record, so that you don't even know what the basis for the supposed consensus was. And many people are not kindly disposed towards having to repeat their arguments for the benefit of those who didn't hear the first time. But the issue I wanted to raise initially had more to do with the overall balance of influence between wiki and IRC in the Wikipedia community. The problem is more a generalized cultural issue than a question of whether it's okay to discuss things on IRC. --Michael Snow 03:12, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * When has anyone ever refused to explain their arguments on the basis they already made them on IRC? Is this a hypothetical or real concern? Angela 03:19, Aug 30, 2004 (UTC)


 * I was getting at the very common resistance people have towards starting a debate over from the beginning anytime they think the issue has already been decided. This undercurrent runs through the attitudes of many people here whenever someone tries to reopen debate on any significant issue, wherever the issue may have been settled initially. It's human nature, and certainly not specific to IRC. That's entirely a real concern. I wasn't saying I have any examples of the hypothetical scenario you describe - most of the time, when someone dismisses objections by saying they've already made their case, part of the dismissive behavior is that they don't even bother to help you figure out where they might have made that case before. --Michael Snow 03:44, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Angela works in really quick ways!
Wow--I just posted a comment to the village pump, went to the MediaWiki:Monobook.css page and already saw that you moved the discussion. Imagine my surprise... &mdash; Il&gamma;&alpha;&eta;&epsilon;&rho;  (T&alpha;l&kappa;)''' 02:27, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)

New Belzieian pics
Iv'e added some new pics you might want to look at Plants and animals of Belize. Belizian 18:16, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Those who disagree with user:Angela must not sign their comments
Sorry! Theresa Knott (The token star) 19:48, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)


 * That's erm... interesting...
 * To do list
 * Add Theresa knott to List of users suspected of suffering worrying side effects of Wikistress


 * Nah it's not stress - it's red wine Theresa Knott (The token star) 21:48, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)

London
Well, I hope you have a good rest and a great day tomorrow :-) SweetLittleFluffyThing


 * Thanks ant. I don't hold much hope for the resting part, but I'm sure it'll be a great day. As soon as I stop stressing about it that is. :) Angela 22:17, Aug 30, 2004 (UTC)

Hebrew wikipedia
They deleted my article about feminazi that i translated from the english wiki without making a vote and just because they don't like it.


 * Please discuss this on the Hebrew Wikipedia. I don't know what their deletion policy is, so I can't comment on this. Angela. 00:11, Sep 1, 2004 (UTC)

Czech Wictionary Sysopship Status Application
Hello Angela, I would like to apply for sysopship in Czech (cs:) Wictionary. We do not (yet) have a bureaucrat, so I am asking you (with due apologies for inconvenience). My login is TMA, my user page is http://cs.wiktionary.org/wiki/Wikipedista:TMA and finally my user number is unknown to me, because our user preferences page is broken -- it just does not display the number. TMA


 * Thank you. TMA

Wikipedia:Popular articles
I've put a project page you created, Wikipedia:Popular articles, on VfD (Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Wikipedia:Popular articles). Please take a look and give your opinion.

cesarb 09:41, 1 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Wiki Conference in Rotterdam
hi angela, last week we spoke with Jimbo in utrecht about a conference we are planning for november 27th or 28th in rotterdam, with people from the nl.wikipedia, asking him if he would be available. alas, he is not, so he advised us to contact you, to ask you if you are available at that time and would be willing to come. we would be very happy if you (or any other board member) could join us! oscar 11:59, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC) also nl:Gebruiker:Oscar


 * great, Angela!! thanks for your very quick response! i'll keep you informed about the developments. oscar 13:00, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * sorry i forgot to put the link to the exact page on the dutch wiki, but you found the exact place to respond just perfectly. oscar 13:06, 2 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Wikisource
OK, for the first time ever I have done something quite radical and controversial here at Wikimedia. I hope it doesn't turn out to have been a poor decision. But regardless of whether it was right or wrong, I think you will quite fascinated when you take a look at Wikisource's Scriptorium. I'll understand fully if you decide not to get involved. Dovi 21:38, Sep 2, 2004 (UTC)

Happy birthday, Angela!
Happy birthday! :) Neutrality 01:16, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * I thought you just had a birthday, Angela. Guanaco 01:57, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Cool. Two birthdays. Thanks. erm... you're a month late but better late than never. ;) Angela 02:15, Sep 3, 2004 (UTC)


 * Oh, crap. I read the birthday table wrong. Sorry. ;) Neutrality 04:34, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Lol...suprwikigoddesses have birthdays? ;) Ilyanep 21:52, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Robbot on wiki-tr
Hi Angela, Could I ask you to mark Robbot as a bot on Turkish Wikipedia? I think one needs steward priviledges to do that.

Thanks in advance, and a late happy birthday from me too. -- ato 20:16, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * thanks a lot. -- ato

Hi Angela
How do you make it so that you can redesign the MediaWiki:Newpageletter in your MediaWiki:Monobook.css (the personal user one)? Ilyanep 21:50, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Alright, thanks. Ilyanep 22:23, 3 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Importance
I've purposefully separated Importance from Wikipedia talk:fame and importance because the latter created an "us and them" attitude from the start by being a poll rather than a policy proposal (see the policy creation guidelines). IMHO Importance actually has the possibility of creating consensus, rather than creating a divide. ··gracefool |&#9786; 04:01, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Must use the full URL?
Re: your comment from the wikitext of Stub (disambiguation):
 *  * A short, underdeveloped Wikipedia article.&lt;!-- You must use the full URL in the main namespace. Do not change this to an internal link or it will not work correctly for the mirrors]--> 

What? I'm afraid I don't see why this is different from any other (internal) link to the "Wikipedia:" namespace. - dcljr 06:39, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * It seems a good idea, I added a sentence about this in Avoid self-references.--Patrick 12:16, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Ages of Wikipdians
Angela, I see this discussion has now been archived, and it looks as though you did it in your latest clean-up. The entry in the summary section now has a link to the list of WP'ns by age, and the text mentions my final point about whether parents of youngsters should be involved, but there is no link to it. I can't assess if this is of importance and should be mentioned here, or if it appears elsewhere. I do feel there could be implications for WP, but don't know enough about child protection legislation to make a sensible comment. From my own experience in local church life, its application does cause problems in running churches (eg the proposal that all church bell ringers must be Police vetted to be allowed to continue!) Apwoolrich 11:49, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Hi Angela, Thanks for your prompt response. I will do as you suggest and try and kick something off. Kind regards Apwoolrich 15:51, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Hi Angela, its on the privacy policy page. Apwoolrich 18:56, 4 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the message :-)
Thanks a lot for your wishes, it is really nice that you are thinking of me! :-)

Btw, I was just thinking of going between christmas and newyear to Berlin to the 21C3 meeting, and I think a lot of other Wikipedians will also come. What are your plans for that period?

I look forward to see you again soon :-) Fantasy &#23481; 11:34, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * I replied on my page :-) Fantasy &#23481; 14:27, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)

User:Maio
This is not a speedy deletion candidate. anthony (see warning) 16:05, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)
 * Speedy deletions mentions it for subpages, not the user page itself. anthony 16:21, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Search string not passed to Google/Yahoo search boxes
I just noticed the search string is not being passed to the google/yahoo search boxes (see Village pump). The cause is probably, could you take a look? cesarb 18:36, 5 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Deleting user subpages
There's a vote in progress at Wikipedia talk:Deletion of user subpages. Please consider voting. I have also requested that the proposal be frozen for the period of the vote, but this has met with opposition. Your participation in the process would be greatly appreciated. Andrewa 10:25, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Robotito
Thank you. Gracias. ManuelGR 20:39, 6 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Opinion on a situation
As a respected authority, can you investigate this disagreement, and provide your opinion - [User talk:Geogre#Protection of diphallia]]? I merged some verifiable content from a VfD candidate (Votes for deletion/Duopenis) into this existing, but Geogre has taken what I think is an inappropriate action in protecting the page against policy. Thanks. -- Netoholic @ 01:55, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)

In reply to message to 220.244.244.10
Hi, just letting you know that 220.244.244.10 is actually a transparent proxy to an australian ISP, (TPG) and blocking it will actually result in several people being banned other than the vandal. Thanks, Lynxtor


 * I've never left a message for 220.244.244.10. Angela. 03:28, Sep 7, 2004 (UTC)

Unblocking Netoholic
I knew that somebody would go running as fast as possible to unblock Netoholic. What would you call repeated deletion of vfd headers from articles under discussion, and repeated deletion of the articles themselves from the VfD page, if not vandalism? What can we do about this guy? He's intentionally trying to destroy VfD. RickK 05:17, Sep 7, 2004 (UTC)


 * Misguided. Angela. 05:20, Sep 7, 2004 (UTC)


 * Him, or me? If you're talking about him, what can we do about it?  RickK 05:34, Sep 7, 2004 (UTC)


 * I meant him (as a reply to the "What would you call repeated deletion..."). I don't know what can be done to change someone's POV if they believe they are doing the right thing. A lot of people have trying talking him out of it on the IRC channel but he doesn't seem to get it. Angela. 05:42, Sep 7, 2004 (UTC)


 * I don't see what grounds that unblocking was on. The guy is doing vandalism, and has been repeatedly warned by several users. He's even been warned by User:orthogonal! If I, as a not new user, start vandalising pages, I would expect to be blocked. I can't see why the same should not apply in this case, and I can't see any grounds for unblocking. Ambi 07:17, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Even User:orthogonal? "And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light." Second Epistle to the Corinthians 11:14 -- orthogonal 20:25, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Logged in users can only be blocked for simple vandalism. In my opinion, the Netoholic issue is more complex than that. However, if you feel I was wrong, feel free to reblock him. I won't unblock again. However, since the block was only for 24 hours, I fail to see how it would make any difference. If he really thinks he is doing the right thing, he'll just continue that in 24 hours from now. Angela. 12:49, Sep 7, 2004 (UTC)

RickK - Your block of me (like so many of your blocks, so I hear) was completely trivial and directly against policy.

Ang - I'm not sure what I am supposed to do... everyone knows there is a problem with VfD, but noone respects that many entries are placed their in error. Good, improvable articles get VfD'd by a couple people who are pouncing on Special:Newpages. Removing articles which shouldn't be on VfD (and placing them on Cleanup or wherever) is a reasonable action. -- Netoholic @


 * I agree, but I think that kind of thing is the job of admins (at least at this stage, when it is so controversial). ••gracefool |&#9786; 12:24, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Just get consensus on what you are doing first. Stop unilaterally doing what you think is best even after people have objected. If you think VfD is broken, don't go to it. Angela. 12:49, Sep 7, 2004 (UTC)


 * According to our policies, admins have no more authority than any other users. They have additional powers, such as the power of deletion, but this kind of job does not require those powers and can be done by anyone working under the authority of the community consensus. anthony (see warning) 13:18, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * I agree with what Angela said. You have to respect the objections of other people.  This is especially true when you are in the minority, which you appear to be, and even more especially true when you are in the minority, are not an admin, and have a number of admins in opposition to you, which also appears to be true.  It may not be fair, it may not be the best way to run things, but it's a simple fact that this type of behavior in these situations simply won't work.  Your only hope, if you truly want to change these types of things, is to engage in discussion.


 * I'd like to make two other comments. First, I have problems with a number of RickK's blocks, but this particular one is not "directly against policy".  I don't think blocking was the right decision, but I have no reason to believe that RickK was doing anything other than acting in his good faith interpretation of Wikipedia policies against vandalism.  Second, I'm a big believer in being bold.  Had Angela told you to "stop unilaterally doing what you think best" without qualifying it with "even after people have objected" I would have disagreed.  But she added that important qualifier.  Don't be afraid to make changes that you think are OK and that people aren't going to object to.  But once people have objected, you have to try to form consensus before continuing any further.  Third (I lied), if you think VfD is broken please do go there and express your opinion in a way which conforms to the standards of that page.  If you feel a listing should be on cleanup rather than VfD, express that opinion. anthony (see warning) 13:18, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Request for mediation... (orthogonal)
Hi Angela -- Snowspinner has asked if you are willing to mediate a conflict at Requests for mediation. Would you mind letting them know if that is a possibility? Hope all is well, and great work on the newsletter, BTW.

Thanks, BCorr 14:21, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Another Request for Mediation (ACORN)
An article I made and have been helping to edit, ACORN, has been shreaded. About two thirds of the article was deleted, and a bogus criticisms section was added. A lot of the work done was good, helpful work, but too much was deleted for no reason. I think there should be a criticisms section, but the criticisms section has both spurious and wrong information. All changes are by one user, Wgfinley (who has made precious few other contributions to wiki recently).

Please take a look at the page and make your own judgement, or refer me to someone else I can ask for help. I no longer think I should act directly in this matter, as I have been doing so for too long. As I've said, some changes are good, some not so good, and I don't know how to sort it out when so much has been deleted.

Thank you for your consideration.

LegCircus 16:49, Sep 8, 2004 (UTC)

Vietnamese Constitutional Monarchist League
You have taken my contributions off from Vientamese Monarchist League, It is not copied, Can you show me the link of the statements are found ? that is a biography that I created myself, which is NOT ON A WEBSITE. Also I am expressing what the organization believes in, I can fix the grammer, that is not a problem, I am sorry that English was not first language but I will endure. Asian History is not given a fair chance here, not only Vietnamese, and I have mainly added topics to Southeast Asian and Important Southeast Asian Statesmen.

Furthermore, there is not any one point view or picking sides, if you look at the facts that is presented about Ngo Dinh Diem, rigging the election, press on Ngo Dinh Diem and you will see it stated there and is neutral fact.

Secondly speaking about the Republic of Vietnam it also states that the U.S. government supported them neutral fact.

Thirdly, Ho Chi Minh did take power in 1945 that is neutral fact

TranVanBa 16:49, Sep 12, 2004 (UTC)


 * Angela: Now that Mr. Tran has got your attention, could you please take a glance at Requests for comment/Tran Van Ba and in particular at the talk page for that RFC? There is a rather unusual story there and I'm not sure I've posted it in the right forum, but I wanted to make sure an admin took a look. Thanks.  &#8592;Hob 07:37, 2004 Sep 13 (UTC)

Hugh Hefner
Angela, I saw your wiki-beliefs. Therefore could you please help me out in the Hugh Hefner article where I am at my wits end with two users there over how appropriate the user of the word mistress is there?

De-adminship
Hi, Angela:

I've decided it's time to call it quits on Wikipedia. Please de-sysop me. (BTW, I am currently changing my username to Sando, but I don't want adminship for that username either.) -Sewing - talk 15:29, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Thanks. -Sewing - talk 15:35, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)

TV Naming conventions.
At some point in the past you expressed an opinion on Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (television). I have instigated a new poll on that page. I am hoping that this poll will properly allow all users who have an interest in the subject to express their views fairly before we come to a consensus. I have scrapped the poll that was previously in place on that page because I believe that it was part of an unfair procedure that was going against the majority view. I am appealing to all users who contribute to that page to approve my actions. I would appreciate it if you could take the time and trouble to read the page carefully and express an opinion and vote as you see fit. Mintguy (T) 16:47, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Angela - I believe Mintguy is upset that the current poll was extended (seen here in case he keeps reverting).  I followed normal survey guidelines, and it is valid. Please review the situation and acknowledge. -- Netoholic @ 16:54, 2004 Sep 13 (UTC)


 * Well, I'd love to help, but since the polling page currently makes no sense, I don't see how I can. It isn't even clear what the poll is about. Angela. 17:48, Sep 13, 2004 (UTC)


 * Hm... perhaps you caught the page at a stage when Netoholic re-instated his old poll. If the poll that I have implemented makes no sense, then please tell me how I can make it clearer. These are sections for users to add their own suggestions. Mintguy (T) 17:54, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * The poll seems to be trying to start before the discussion, which isn't really the case since it was discussed before, but all the "advantages" and "disadvantages" sections are empty, which makes it seem too early to be voting. How about setting a specific time period for those to be filled in, and then a specific period for the voting after that? Reducing the number of options to those most supported in the earlier poll might make the whole page a bit less confusing too. Moving the old poll out of the way helped, but now it's not clear quite what influence that one has on the new one. Angela. 18:09, Sep 13, 2004 (UTC)


 * I am hoping that contributors will add to the advantages/disadvantages. I can add what I think are the adv/dis but I don't want to impose myself too much. This is why I have not yet set a deadline. It is all up for discussion. The previous poll was set up by Netoholic to endorse his view and had no options other than to approve it ot not. 8 people voted against that but who knows what they voted for. Mintguy (T) 18:15, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * I am trying to police the page. I don't have an axe to grind about one policy over another I haven't even voted. I'm trying to offer choice, but Netholic first of all tried to restrict that choice, and when the vote went against him (for the second time BTW) he just extended the deadline. After he was blocked he changed tactics and is now moving the goal posts so that he can have his way one way or another. So many other users have spoken up requesting the chance to make another choice, but Netoholic is simply uncompromising. Mintguy (T) 22:59, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Have you considered requesting arbitration? Angela. 23:03, Sep 13, 2004 (UTC)


 * And what happens to the conventions page in the mean time. That is all I am interested in. Mintguy (T) 23:05, 13 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * I don't know. Sorry. I wish I did. Angela

Wikipedia talk:Remove personal attacks
Angela, you just now edited an exchange, largely between you and I, that is almost a year old, to contain a link to a page that is no more than a month or so old. I worry that this is likely to produce confusion in those who might happen to read the exchange (indeed, when Theresa created her page, I did not realize that the name was taken from our exchange, else I would likely have commented on it.) -- orthogonal 03:07, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * When you move a page, you fix the links to it. That was what I was doing. Angela. 12:59, Sep 14, 2004 (UTC)


 * But when you actually wrote it last year, wasn't the page a hypothetical only, a joke or an instructive hyperbole? Linking to the actual existing page distorts your meaning as meant when you wrote it. -- orthogonal 15:08, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Well, personally I don't think it really matters. I don't see what the difference is between it linking to that page when it was in the Wikipedia namespace and linking to the page which that Wikipedia namespace page moved to, but since you find it so problematic, I've reverted my edit. Angela. 15:37, Sep 14, 2004 (UTC)


 * Thanks for indulging my fetish about documents of record. If you want to see me being fully bizarre, check out my request to ambi on her page, in which I got all worried about her editing of her remarks after I'd begun responding. ;) -- orthogonal 15:33, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Mount Rainier
Hello Angela, something fishy seems to be going on. Mount Rainier is picture of the day today, but it is not on Featured_pictures_visible, or Featured_pictures. Actually it was not even promoted yet, the picture is still on Featured_pictures_candidates. I find it hard to track what happened, the image was clearly not ready for featuring as well. I thought maybe you had an idea what happened. Regards, Solitude 08:46, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Well I guess the definition of consensus is quite hazy, maybe we should formulate a decent formula to prevent discussions in the future. But anyways, I was mainly confused about what occurred, I see now that you were in a hurry to get a fresh POTD. -- Solitude 14:25, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Wikilove Picture
I noticed that you occasionally put up a troll picture to "warn" of trolls editing your talk page. Of course, I'm not one to worry about whether something is a "personal attack" or not, but I wonder if doing so makes you seem less approachable, or stifles free discussion, or even is perhaps seen as slightly petty. Especially to those correspondents who are writing on your talk page in all sincerity and may be hurt by such insinuations. By the way, do you have any idea where I could find a Wikilove picture; my Talk page seems a little bare and I'd like to spruce it up. -- orthogonal 16:21, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * I don't know what a "Wikilove picture" is but there's a wikithanks at Image:WikiThanks.png. Angela. 17:10, Sep 14, 2004 (UTC)

Re: Maps
Hi my maps are all made by me. I'm not sure what that means for liscensing. Earl Andrew 17:25, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

No more problems, Thanks for help with the Kurdish Wikis
Gelek spas ("Thanks a lot" in Kurdish). Erdal

WikiSpecies - launch of data
Hi Angela, I got a slice of a database of cacti by a bontanist in order to give us something like a "start-up package" for the wikispecies. As I said before, a village pump will be a valuable tool to evaluate the needs and expectations of wikispecies users; but this database will be very useful for hands-on experiments and to test the requirements for the wikispecies data presentation directly.

As I have never worked with databases before, I don't know how to implement the files into the wikispecies. But all files that I extracted from the original zip are online at: http://www.srcf.ucam.org/~bmm26/wikispecies/files/

(it's all files except the graphic file, which is the logo in print resolution). Could you please find a technologically advanced person who is able and willing to help?

Thanks a lot,

Benedikt

Help on Hebrew Wikipedia
Hi Angela. My name is Roy and I am one of the 18 administrators of the Hebrew Wikipedia. About a month ago, a user from the Hebrew wikipedia asked you to help him, after his pornogrphic articles were deleted, and after he was banned several times. After several administrators explained what happend, and after you didn't back him up any more, he left.

Now he is back, and worse than ever. Blocking doesn't help, since he registers with different user names. I know you don't agree with the suggestions made at Anonymous users should not be allowed to edit articles (neither do I, by the way), but a few a them could help us at the moment (especially those regarding registration and the editing ability of specific users only). Even if this would be only temporary, it would help a lot.

Anyway, we would be thankful for help you can offer us.--Roy 08:52, Sep 14, 2004 (UTC)


 * Replied at he:. &#1488;&#1504;&#1490;'&#1500;&#1492; 13:15, Sep 14, 2004 (UTC)


 * As for your questions - This isn't a normal vandal. He isn't like those anonymous users that write 'fahj' a few times and leave. He is here for more than a month, with only one thing in mind - driving us crazy. Therefore, blocking him doesn't help, because he registers with a different username, and deleting his so-called "articles" doesn't help either, since he creates them again.


 * Because of that, the problem isn't the amount of work we need to do in order to delete his articles - we can handle that. The thing is that we can't work on meanwhile. The main problem is the fact that he is so obsessive - he just won't stop.


 * The main reason we contacted you is because we need a way to find out his IP number even though he has a username. That is the only thing his Internet Provider needs in order to find him and worn him, and then block his acces to the site for good.


 * All the other things would be helpful in case we would desperately need to block him, because at the moment we can't. But this isn't that important at the moment.--Roy 06:55, Sep 15, 2004 (UTC)


 * Thanks a lot for your help. I hope things will be better now. In our case, the ISP usually does help - they will block him in the next few days, and this isn't the first time they cooperate with us.--Roy 13:18, Sep 16, 2004 (UTC)

Human, NPOV, and POV forking
Hi, Angela. At Human, we are merely beginning what will be another long, hard slog toward quality NPOV compliance (by the way, we finally came up with a pretty good solution at Mormonism and Christianity). But some of the proposals under early consideration involve ending up with separate articles for each POV. While this sounds somewhat reasonable, and certainly (I think) in harmony with NPOV policy, it stirs fears in me of eventual degradation of Wikipedia quality by forking it into parallel sets of articles written (admittedly) from various POVs. We are contemplating articles such as Human (biology), Human (traditional), etc. The question I have for you is, has the problem of internal content forking been dealt with somewhere already? Wikipedia already has the interesting feature of harboring back alleys and cul-de-sacs where specific POVs reign supreme, and this is all part of the grand scheme if kept under proper control. But what a different Wikipedia it would be if there were Christianity (apologetic) and Christianity (Hinduist criticism) articles, etc. Tom

Pic of the day Wednesday
Angela, I recycled an old picture because at that time the deadline for the candidates had not passed. I don't think we should try to rush out candidates to prevent ever having to recycle an old picture, that is OK. Anyways, I'll process the bottom 3 candidates now. By the way, I wondered why image you recycled a few days back was not the oldest POTD, was there a specific reason? Take care, Solitude 06:48, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Your "thermometer"
Here is how I would deal with Wikistress if I were you:


 * 1) Drink three (3) Bloody Marys.
 * 2) Post exactly what you feel like posting.

--Juuitchan

Just to tell you...
... that Serbian Wikipedia reached 5.000 articles :) --Millosh 13:42, 15 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Wikispecies: lil' stuff
Hi Angela, the village pump is installed and in use, thank you. There is the suggestion to establish "semi-internal" links for glossaries and definitions, which could be displayed in green and would link to a wikipedia article. That might also convince some people that wikispecies is actually no fork or competitor.

Also, the logo is not displayed on some computers. That's currently a minor issue, but just to let you know as I am already here. Best wishes,

Benedikt


 * The logo problem might have been temporary since it seems ok to me now but wasn't yesterday. Do you know if anyone is still having problems with it. The link color can probably be changed in MediaWiki:Monobook.css. Angela.


 * Nosy person nosing in, an' all, but is this interesting-sounding item available to the general peruser? --Phil | Talk 07:47, Sep 16, 2004 (UTC)


 * If you mean Wikispecies, then it's at species.wikipedia.org but it looks like you already found it. Angela


 * Yep. Now I just gotta figure out what to do with it :-) --Phil | Talk 14:47, Sep 16, 2004 (UTC)

Picture of the day
Hello Angela, could you take a look at Picture of the day. I've updated thursday with the latest promoted Featured picture candidate. It's my first non-recycled POTD, any comments on the text? I guess it should go live soon, it's been past thursday afternoon here for some time now :). -- Solitude 11:52, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * You are right, I used the 200px from the Star Thistle picture by mistake. But I think you make a good point there, the 300px seems quite large combined with the text, also considering the condensed POTD version which uses 300px as well. Using 200px on the text-version, which focuses more on the combination of text and image, will differentiate it more from the condensed picture-only version as well as creating a more compact POTD template. Good idea. -- Solitude 13:20, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Russian coordination
Hi Angela! I'm one of the administrators of Russian part of Wikipedia. I have feeling that at the moment our section is very isolated from other language section and the whole Wikipedia project. For example, your recent request for deletion of Black Sea image was caused that we did not provide interwiki link for WP:VFD. Another example - we use a bot (ru:User:HedgeBot) which is not registered so its work cannot be hidden in Special:RecentChanges page. The problem is that we do not know what we shall do for coordination of our section with other wikies and whom we can ask about this or that problem. May be there is a special place where all such a stuff is described, sorry I could not find by myself. May be you can help us? Please answer at ru:& Maximaximax 04:41, 17 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Essex Boy
Just found out about Wikipedia via the Computer Active Magazine. What an excellent site! I agree with your views. Keep up the good work.

From an elder Essex Boy (Colchester).

Developer help request
G'day Angela

According to the latest post to Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Error/Bug on the main page we need developer level help. How should we request this? Andrewa 02:45, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Fixed. Thanks for your attention to this. Andrewa 20:20, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Via foto
Saluton Angela ! eo : Kompreneble vi povas uzi la foton kiun mi faris. &#264;iuj miaj kontribua&#309;oj por la vikipedio estas sub GFDL. en : Of course you can use the picture I made of You. all my contributions to Wikipedia must be under GFDL. But I can't edit http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Image:Angela.jpg nether create an account for myself on wikimediafoundation.org. It doesn't work. Arno Lagrange &#9993; 09:54, 19 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Most Wanted Troll
Hi there. I was looking at the Wanted Pages for something to do, and found that the most wanted article was User:Angela(Troll). All of the links to that page appear to be the ones linking to your page, but I couldn't find a redirect on your page that might explain it. Anyhoo, the first 8 or 9 entries appear to be Redirect/LinkSpam of this type. Not sure if you were aware of it or not, but it sure messes up the Most Wanted pages. Also, a good portion of the wanted pages are User: pages, which seems wrong somehow... Take it easy, Thesteve


 * It's a bug caused by page moves. A vandal once moved my page to Angela(Troll), and the links to my page never updated properly when it was moved back. The problem is mentioned at 221. Angela. 14:06, Sep 19, 2004 (UTC)


 * Well, I actually thought of a couple of ways to fix those wanted pages. The first is to put a redirect there.  I wasn't sure you wanted User:Angela(Troll) to redirect to your page, so I left it alone.  The other way is to put some kind of placeholder on them, or even on all user pages, rather than leaving them blank.  However, I'm not sure how practical that would be, or if it might cause other problems somewhere along the way.  The Steve  08:21, Sep 20, 2004 (UTC)


 * A redirect would not be appropriate. By the way, your sig doesn't show up since it's a white font on a white background. Angela 15:23, Sep 20, 2004 (UTC)


 * Yes I know. That's an intentional effect.  [font colors removed] Select text to view :>  The Steve  07:40, Sep 21, 2004 (UTC)

Install Logo
Hi Angela, on How to start a new wikipedia in the section about getting your logo installed it is stated that i need a developer to help me install the logo. So i looked on the developer list and found you. It is on the faroese wikipedia i would like some help. The logo is on Wikipedia in other languages under "Faroese (fo)" and on. Quackor 07:55, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Translation of Fundraising page on ko wiki
Hi Angela, I've translated that message. I don't know if the Fundraising page needs also to be translated. -- &#50500;&#55124; 08:23, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Fundraising page
Angela,

I tried to leave a comment on the talk fundraising page at the foundation but it won't allow creation of a user account or allow me to leave an Anon edit.

The comment was:

How are you expecting traffic to come to that page? If you think any will come directly from google then I think you should move the page to "donations" or similar since I do not think a potential donor is likely to search on the term "fundraising". I know a lot of people do search on this term but I think they are people wanting to receive not wanting to give --BozMo|talk 14:15, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)


 * Got your reply, thanks--BozMo|talk 16:08, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)

E-mail on kladblok page
Hi Angela, I'm sorry for putting your email address on my kladblok-page, you're absolutely right that it doesn't belong there. When I copy-pasted the email message, I never thought about the privacy consequences, so thanks for the warning! I immedately removed the other addresses that were on my page as well. Fruggo 15:02, 20 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia Janitors
I have noticed that there are two functions carried out by administrators that could simply be allowed to other type of users: deletion and undeletion, and reverting. Reverting should be allowed globally, but deleting could be delegated to janitors. This could help in the recursive problem of granting administrator priviledges to users who only want the priviledges of deletion so that they can move articles to a certain location. Has anybody suggested something of this form? Thoughts? I would certainly would like to help with the deletion process (especially with Category:Candidates for speedy deletion) but not cope up with the other tasks for which the administrator status is given. (Hi, btw ;)   &mdash;Joseph | Talk 23:10, Sep 20, 2004 (UTC)


 * The one-click revert button should be available to everyone. The problem of having vandals quickly reverting can easily be fixed with a timer. But alas, who would sit down to code that... and would it be practical? (system overload) Regarding the janitors, it seems that the code is the only thing needed then. Is there any page recording this previous discussion(s) you refer to?   &mdash;Joseph | Talk 00:35, Sep 21, 2004 (UTC)


 * How do you allow people to revert vandalism faster than it can be created? I didn't explain well myself: to avoid that, we can have a timer that disallows simple users to use the revert button. Say that the timer is set for 5 minutes: if I revert a page, I can't use the revert button until 5 minutes have passed (as I'm not an admin, just a simple user). However, an admin is not constrained by this timer: he can use the revert button again and again and again without a time limit &mdash; just at it is now.   &mdash;Joseph | Talk 22:56, Sep 21, 2004 (UTC)


 * Hmm... I thought the place to discuss new feature request was on MediaWiki feature request and bug report discussion? Posted on both places anyways. As always, thanks for your time Angela. =)   &mdash;Joseph | Talk 23:35, Sep 21, 2004 (UTC)

Mistresses
Hi Angela, I have not been able to get back to you about the Hugh Hefner problem until now. I tried last night, but frustratingly, the message was not saved and 90 minutes of work went to waste. So I’ll start again.

I must maintain my complaint that there is still a dispute at that page over the use of the word mistress, and that it has been impossible to negotiate with Robert Merkel – and several follwers that he has now attratced to the page - on this matter. This has now been dragging out for nearly two months.

The following is my case as to why the word mistress should be used in the article.

1) Dictionary definitions. These favour virtually without exception that the word is acceptable in today’s English. Several are listed on that talk page. This was originally raised as an issue by Mr Merkel when he said that mistresses only apply to married men; he has since changed this to be that it is undesirable English period.  In response to this, a google search of “Monica Lewinsky’ and mistress has revealed more than 3000 entries. Similar entries for Camille Parker-Bowles and Wallace Simpson also revealed large numbers of  entries and was pointed out to Mr Merkel about two months ago.

(2) Use of mistress in other wikipedia articles. Numerous precedents exist in wikipedia for the use of this word., as a google search of wikipedia will show. Mistress is defined as an acceptable word in Wikipedia in Personal relationship, which is an article that Merkel himself has worked on. There is no reason why Hugh Hefner should be any different. Indeed, there is an implication that he is exempt or that what he's done is to be whispered about only. It also seems to violate the concepts of NPOV that Mr Merkel and his followers claim to be championing. It’s OK for, say, James IV of Scotland to have mistresses but not Hugh Hefner. This is nonsense! Also, how many of these articles have they ‘corrected’? The answer is none.

(3) Euphemisms are not necessary in this wikipedia. You yourself have agreed that it would be destructive for us to sugarcoat things, to use Floorsheim’s phrase for it. The use of words such as ‘attachments’ is therefore ridiculous.

(4) Merkel and his followers have claimed that this would offend cultural beliefs. However, if wikipedia can have words and indeed whole articles called "f**k" that can offend cultures, links to men’s magazines like one in the Playboy article that unquestionably would offend some cultures, then it can take a precise word like mistress. It goes back to calling a spade a spade. Or are they trying to cater for one particular “culture”? This does not sound NPOV to me.

Merkel and his followers have used a variety of tactics that I believe are designed to ‘wear me down’, and which has indeed now clawed away at my nerves.

The tactics include a personal attack claim that was at best pedantic and at worst vexatious when I attempted to summarise Merkel’s part in this. I retracted the analysis anyway, but this had no effect on the discussions.

They include constant reversals without discussion or warning ( Floorsheim is especially guilty of this) that are a clear violation of wikiquette, and which they in turn have yet to apologise for.

They include trying to fob me off with a POV “some people say” paragraph that has since (predictably enough) been removed by them. They include trying to divert attention onto me.

They do not include any objective rebuttal of any of the above points, just little more than a series of “we don’t like it” and cultural statements, and unfair comparisons with the word ‘slut’.

This word has been use in this article for about two years or so, without any damage done. I have now learnt that at one point it was illegally copied across to another website. Senior wikipedia staff who handled that matter did not have trouble with the word at that time. It was Mr Merkel who dived into this matter and has been making it into a huge and (for me) stressful saga since then.

It is perhaps worth mentioning one matter that I have found, in the September 11 2001 Attacks discussion page. There, a user called Platus Satire attempted to respell a series of words such as Osama bin laden based on his own flawed understanding of Arabic translations. Evidence was trotted out that countered this, his own sources were objectively shot down. He repeatedly ignored these and lodged an edit war on his own flawed beliefs, but was defeated.

The reverse seems to apply here. I am convinced that I am up against a gang of Plautus Satire-minded persons who revert without discussion or on mistaken grounds and who I have found just cannot be reasoned with. Allowing them to get away with it would be a triumph the concept of the spirit of discussion as outlined in wikiquette.

Any and all assistance from you would be very welcome.


 * It would be easier for people to reply to you if you had a user account. All of your arguments above really need to go on the talk page, not here. I'm not involved with the article and you need to discuss it with those who are. In this case, I see nothing wrong with statements like "some people say". This is standard text people use when trying to be NPOV. Have you read the NPOV tutorial? Perhaps that might explain more how these things work. If you can't work it out on the talk page, please consider making a request for mediation. Angela 13:17, Sep 21, 2004 (UTC)

William Watson
Now a disambiguation page; you posted an image on what is now William Watson (priest), but by the wig it looks like it would be William Watson (scientist), Copley Medal of 1745.

Charles Matthews 12:47, 21 Sep 2004 (UTC)