User talk:AniMate/Archive 5

WikiProject Croatia/Participants
You are added on this list. If this is mistake you can delete your name from this list.--Rjecina (talk) 00:39, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Point taken. Sorry for mistake--Rjecina (talk) 04:15, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Glutton
The major problem I see is the complete and utter disregard for finding sources for information. Every article I see (take Serbs of Croatia) attempts to throw in the same historical information without sources and everyone wastes time figuring out ways to get their spin in different places. For examples, the history section in Serbs of Croatia should be a history of the movements of Serbian people into the Croatian land, not the same history that's repeated everywhere, each one with a different set of people trying to spin it their own ways. The only solution I see if some admin just goes in and strip every single article of everything without a source (like I tried here as people sat around saying "I think he's Serbian, no he's not") lock the pages and block people for screwing around. If everyone had to prove a source for their arguments, the whole thing would be a lot better off. Then, everyone is on the same page. Right now, it's just a game of who can bring in the most sock and meat puppets for their random spin until they drive the other side off. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 02:59, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

My draft of Freemasonry in NA article
Thanks for your comments AniMate... I know my draft does not include sources yet... that's why it is in my user space as a draft and not yet posted as an article. :>)

More importantly, thanks for spending a bit of time to look at the articles in question and give a neutral, third party view of their flaws and how to correct them. Blueboar (talk) 12:24, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

The Political Cesspool
My user talk page isn't the place for you two to hash out your political disagreements. A ni  Mate  21:54, 19 September 2008 (UTC) {| class="navbox collapsible collapsed" style="text-align: left; border: 0px; margin-top: 0.2em;" ! style="background-color: #f2dfce;" | Discussion closed. I don't know how to use Wikipedia too well so I apologize in advance if I'm using this feature the wrong way.
 * style="border: solid 1px silver; padding: 8px; background-color: white;" |
 * style="border: solid 1px silver; padding: 8px; background-color: white;" |

With that said, feel free to keep an eye on The Political Cesspool page. The same person (probably one of their own staff members) keeps vandalizing the page into his version of it with no sources as opposed to the version that we want to keep it as. Rock8591 03:04, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

- - - - -

True, I got your recent message. I think Winston's recent attempts to drastically change the content of the page would be considered vandalism, which is why I reverted the page back to its original state give the way the page is and has been for a while. Rock8591 07:59, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Except for possibly one instance, there is nothing in what I wrote that could be considered offensive or incorrect, and I am willing to modify that one instance. My article offers a benign and matter-of-fact definition as to The Political Cesspool’s content, hosts, and history, whereas the truly offensive article relies on sources that are mere opinions and knee-jerk declarations of extremist and hateful organizations (the SPLC and Media Matters). The only proof offered to support the assertion that I am Harold Covington is from the SPLC (which later re-hashed their original article sans the false assertion that I am Covington). Anyone who has researched the issue knows that Covington lives somewhere in the northwestern U.S., whereas my live presence on the show clearly proves that I live in the Millington, TN area. Since Wikipedia is supposedly so "big" on citing sources, Wikipedia should demand that the SPLC article provide proof and sources for my "real identity" before allowing it to be cited as an authoritative source. The SPLC provides neither proof nor sources; they simply declare it, falsely. And Wikipedia gladly perpetuates the falsehood. As long as Wikipedia continues to perpetuate the false association between myself and Covington, Wikipedia perpetuates its de facto association with the SPLC - an association that seriously undermines Wikipedia's credibility and benefits only the nefarious SPLC. The basis for the SPLC falsely claiming and Wikipedia ignorantly perpetuating the lie that I am Covington is the fallacious notion that Smith families ceased to name their sons “Winston” after 1948. There is no reason whatsoever for men to not be named Winston Smith, and there are many of us so-named. Here are just a few:

http://www.outreach.olemiss.edu/events/compass_group/speakers.html

http://umasshoops.com/history/alumni/smith_winston/

http://www.drexeldragons.com/News/mbball/2008/7/16/WSmith-COBO.asp?path=mbball

http://www.presbyweb.com/2002/Letters/011803.htm

http://www.dep.state.fl.us/secretary/news/2004/tal/epa_letter.pdf

http://www.auburn.edu/~lakwean/johnnyray_history_smitht.html

http://www.rwu.edu/depository/publicaffairs/ishmael_beah_092507.pdf

http://www.themq.com/index.php?articles_id=260&issue=114

http://www.sctrucking.org/index.php?option=com_alphacontent&Itemid=305&section=15&sort=1&limit=25&limitstart=75

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/oarpg/t3/memoranda/orgsolve.pdf

http://www.hofstra.edu/Athletics/WBasketball/ath_wbb_gameresult.cfm?gameID=A655BB7C-9B1C-4CB7-9D769B204023B634

http://gvcwinstar.net/about_executive.htm

http://www.jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/20000221/business/b1.html

So much for Rock8591’s recommendation, “In that case, I advise you to Google this up and you'll find plenty of agreement that "Winston Smith" is Harold Covington.” Such shoddy “research method” proves that Rock8591 is also an unreliable source, especially when you remember that all the allegations that I am Covington are merely repetitions of the unproven and un-sourced SPLC declaration. Following his “logic” that a Google search constitutes proof, I could just as legitimately Google “Jews” and conclude that Jews are the most odious creatures on Earth (something that I absolutely do not believe). After all, a Google search of the word results in lots and lots of articles disparaging Jews; apparently, there's plenty of agreement.

Regarding our guest list, having a guest on the show for an interview does not necessarily mean or imply that we agree with that guest’s opinions. I have interviewed many guests with whom I strongly disagree. CNN’s Wolf Blitzer interviewed David Duke; in fact, CNN has an huge guest list of people with whom it disagrees in varying levels of disparity. And just as it is unfair to assume CNN’s agreement with its guest, it is equally unfair to assume our agreement with our guests.

I do not wish to be associated with Harold Covington, and I doubt he wants to be associated with me. One person on the discussion page wisely and fairly suggests, “The host Winston Smith is not Harold Covington. The Southern Poverty Law Center reprint [sic] the article that made that claim later without the claim. It is speculation that Winst [sic] Smith is not this individual's real name. Until someone can confirm, which the SPLC has not and cannot, what this individual [sic] name is, it is best to omit attempting to identify him. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.104.83.3 (talk) 21:34, 19 August 2008 (UTC)” I demand that Wikipedia correct the lie it is perpetuating. And I object to Wikipedia allowing only the opinions and unproven declarations of political hacks and race-baiting hate-mongers to define us, just as Wikipedia, the SPLC, Media Matters, and Rock8591 would object to me defining them without their participation.


 * "And just as it is unfair to assume CNN’s agreement with its guest, it is equally unfair to assume our agreement with our guests." Winston, that is patently false and you are well aware of it. I've listened to a few episodes of your show before and you have shown tremendous agreement with your guests, oftentimes throwing insults to a greater degree than your guests do. e.g. when you interviewed Randy Gray back in January. Rock8591 02:49, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

(Ah, the old red herring. . .proof of defeat. . .)

I prefer red herring with dill sauce, if you don't mind, but I'll deal with yours nonetheless. "Oftentimes" hardly means "every time". The Randy Gray interview was about the kidnapping, torture, rape, and murder of Channon Christian and Chris Newsome, not about Randy Gray’s other activities or beliefs. Regardless of what you think of Mr. Gray, what he said about Channon, Chris, and the murderers was true, and I agreed with him because I agree with the truth. And the truth is there is no description too shocking to depict the horror of what Channon and Chris endured, and there is no imprecation too severe to call down upon the perpetrators who so heinously violated them. (Maybe you would care to revise the Wikipedia entry on Channon and Chris to read, "What they went through really wasn't that bad, and the murderers they insulted are actually fine, upstanding, and misunderstood model citizens.") Agreeing with Randy Gray is by far better than agreeing with Morris Dees, which you obviously do, despite Dees being almost universally recognized as a charlatan, not to mention what we know about him from his divorce proceedings. But, he's obviously "your guy."

In the future, skip the red herring and stick to the topic, if you can. In case you need a reminder, the topic is the lies in your Wikipedia article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.66.253.96 (talk) 13:29, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

It was stuff that I myself added. I prefer discussion in the Talk page of that article though, as opposed to our user talk sections for more details. Rock8591 23:18, 25 September 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rock8591 (talk • contribs)

In appreciation of a job well done
I would be seriously remiss in not paying tribute to very fine work that you accomplished in saving this article. Thanks and be well. Ecoleetage (talk) 16:27, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * My pleasure. I look forward to seeing more of your work. If your schedule permits, perhaps you can look at this item that I just began as a stub: . If you have any suggestions expanding it, I would be appreciative. Be well. Ecoleetage (talk) 20:37, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Hmmm...something weirder than a museum in a nursing home? Okay, I will tighten my thinking cap and report back with appropriately eccentric material.  Many thanks! Ecoleetage (talk) 10:22, 29 September 2008 (UTC)
 * P.S. I don't know if you observe this, but if you do...Happy Rosh Hashanah. Ecoleetage (talk) 10:30, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

reply
It was constructive. Every time it is mentioned in the news that issue is brought up, so the article should mention it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.153.182.241 (talk) 18:26, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Secret Invasion
Thanks for backing me up on this edit. It's much appreciated.Shin-Goji —Preceding undated comment was added at 00:00, 28 September 2008 (UTC).

Sarah's marathon
I agree completely with your removal of the marathon - I was struggling to find a place for it while removing some utter nonsense from the section. Thanks Tvoz / talk 07:06, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
 * There's always the Weekly Reader. Tvoz / talk 07:26, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I try. Especially at 3AM. Tvoz / talk 08:35, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

User:Presumptive
I thought you would like to know, it was User:Dereks1x all along! Sticky Parkin 13:00, 5 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Not surprised in the least. Hope his account burns in Wikihell. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 02:32, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

User:Onelifefreak2007
Oops. Sorry. I DID step over the line. His reactions were amusing to me, which is why I kept goading him. I'm done with him, I promise. BassPlyr23 (talk) 11:52, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Sarah
Yo Dude

I haven't found anything else on Justis leaving the role of Sarah Roberts on the show except that one article, I don't know if that is true unless I hear it from Soaps.com. It might be true and it might not. I don't think it is true but who knows. How do you get your name like to do two different links. P.J. (talk) 02:14, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Miroslav Filipović
I am having 1 interesting source about this monster and his children killings. In my thinking there is no point in adding similar sources because my arguments will always be defeated without clear reasons.--Rjecina (talk) 11:17, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Forgive any old vandalism?
Should we forgive any vandalism if it is old?

At first, I thought the vandalism was just an honest mistake. If it were, the user would say so. He nasty to me and denies making the edit even though the diff is clear, he did.

That's why I think the person needs to be blocked so we can check his work. He might be hiding sneaky vandalism with hundreds of grammatical corrections. Fossett&amp;Elvis (talk) 20:34, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

This revert...
...deleted all contributions from that we discussed in the Request for comment about Jasenovac extermination camp. You seemed to have been of the opinion that they should stay. SWik78 (talk • contribs) 23:18, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you so much!
You made my evening wonderful with your award! Thank you! -- Enzuru 00:22, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

RfA
Hi AniMate! Thank you very much for your support and insight in my RfA, which passed yesterday. I hope not to let you and the others down and use the tools for the benefit of the project. Cheers, Ynhockey (Talk) 19:34, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Anaheim Hills, Anaheim, California
I noticed you made an edit to Anaheim Hills, Anaheim, California earlier today removing a substantial amount of text. The information you removed was important and relevant to the article. I noticed your edit summary was "removing copyvio", can you tell me where you found this text elsewhere or how you know it's copied? Thanks! Grant (talk) 05:19, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the info. I just started watching the Anaheim Hills article and I wanted to make sure your edit was legitimate. I'm going to try and clean up this article a bit over time. Right now, the language it uses doesn't fit in Wikipedia at all. It reads like it's a marketing brochure for the area. Grant (talk) 06:07, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

I really wish I hadn't just read the archives of that talk page. ;-) Sounds like a boat-load of no fun trying to improve that article.  Oh well, I've already started editing it, and I can't stop now! Grant (talk) 06:37, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Ancient Persian problems
You recently contributed to an AfD discussion on an article about ancient Persian history. I have been reviewing the contributions of the editors who have been involved in these and other related articles, and have found a considerable number of issues - bad writing, original research, lack of sourcing or citations, and POV problems. I have posted the results of my review at User:ChrisO/Ancient Persian problems (it's a work in progress, as I'm still going through the contributions). Please feel free to add to it as you see fit and leave any comments at User talk:ChrisO/Ancient Persian problems. I would be interested in any feedback that you might have. Thanks in advance.


 * Thanks for suggesting that to me AniMate, thats actually a good point, so thanks.--Ariobarza (talk) 04:04, 7 November 2008 (UTC)Ariobarza talk

Appreciate what you are doing...
I appreciate that you have decided to mentor Ariobarza, and that you are assuming her to be a good-faith editor. I just wanted to know that I respect you for that decision. I do hope it works out well for both of you and if I can be of any help please let me know. For the record I am a fairly new user myself (6 mos) and still learning my way around, but I also believe her to be a good-faith editor and hope you can help her be a good one as well. :) Tundrabuggy (talk) 04:21, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

I thank you from the bottom up, for you have decided to be my mentor. I read every sentence you wrote me on my talk page, and I consider it correct and from now one I pledge to consult you before any notable edits and follow the policy rules and guidelines of Wikipedia from now on. Finally I consider and hope you promise me that if we are ever going to make a page called, "Campaigns of Cyrus the Great," it should be made as a last resort if none of Cyrus's battles deserve their own articles. Second, if their are certain articles that are too vague, then we should only include the vague battles, and not try to jam it with well sourced articles, which would make "Campaigns" article gigantic. So do you agree, and promise? With best thanks.--Ariobarza (talk) 09:24, 8 November 2008 (UTC)Ariobarza

--Animate, thanks for your note on my talk page. I agree in principle with everything you said. I do have a question for you. Do you have any expertise, knowledge or interest in the era of Cyrus the Great and the available archeological evidence of those times? I would appreciate some objective eyes on a couple of articles mentioned on Chris' subpage, not the battles except maybe Opis, but the ones bemoaned as "POV-pushing", ie Cyrus the Great & Cyrus Cylinder. If you have some spare time...and the interest. Tundrabuggy (talk) 02:38, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

AniMate I just remembered... I have a request, could you please recover Siege of Kapisa, and paste (with all the sources and links, like  stuff ext...) the article here User:Ariobarza/Siege of Kapisa (so I can complete it with sources before I ask you if I can recreate the article), I do not care about the talkpage, I'll make talkpage with new information. Thank you soo much!--Ariobarza (talk) 04:50, 9 November 2008 (UTC)Ariobarza talk


 * AniMate, I thank you for your request, but just a reminder. I have a hectic month ahead, that is why I made so many battles in my user space, just in case the real life articles are to be deleted. I suggest if you do not have to work on other articles and have some free time to spare on Wikipedia, you can keep adding cited sentences from the books already there and more, whether in my user space or in the real article, but I suggest the user space is the best place to make changes to articles that are about to be deleted soon. So I put them in my user space so no one can delete it for a long time, I hope, as they should ask me first politely. So my appearance on Wikipedia for the next month will be on a 'on' and 'off' basis. But for now I agree to only expand Battle of the Marsyas, as doing this one step at a time is the right thing to do, as you suggested. So whenever I come on Wikipedia we can work together to expand the article, and like I said before, if you have free time, your welcomed to contribute to it. Many thanks.--Ariobarza (talk) 23:34, 9 November 2008 (UTC)Ariobarza talk

Siege of Kapisa
I've userified this. dougweller (talk) 10:39, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Fan fiction vandal
I am so damn tired of that fan fiction vandal, and I have not ran into/reverted him or her that much either, but I see this vandal has done this to way more soap opera character articles than I thought. One of the main problems in stopping this person is the drastically different IP addresses in which this person is using to add this fan fiction stuff to these fictional character articles. Therefore, we cannot easily block this vandal (even though the block would be temporary, anyway), and the changing IP address of this vandal makes it difficult to keep up with the articles he or she is vandalizing, unless it is a specific article we have on our watchlists or come across. In fact, these drastically different IP addresses makes me think it is at least two people from the same fanfiction site or some kind of collaboration that has now become annyoing for Wikipedia due to this vandal or vandals. Flyer22 (talk) 12:24, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, I take back this vandal being difficult to block. He or she seems to use the 24.97.214.237 IP address consistently enough. But the 168.169.134.43 IP address was also used for fan fiction to the Todd Manning article, and probably more, which is why I figured it is the same vandal with changing IP addresses. If this guy or girl strikes again, which will most likely be under the 24.97.214.237 IP address, we definitely need to block. Flyer22 (talk) 12:33, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

LOL, Reese Williams and Bianca Montgomery
You don't feel that they are referred to by their couple nicknames that much yet? What, you want to wait until they are a better known couple first? Flyer22 (talk) 17:19, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

re: Elekstra Bladet

 * OI understand were you're coming from re: Elekstra Bladet. maybe it was a little too hast yo in removing the tgag but i have been noticsing a disturbing trend in which poeple put tags on articles and then dont even mak ea token atmept t at resolving the issues that claimed to have notice. For in this exmaple, there was a POV tag pissed on an articfle re: a moderately-well known (within Danemark) newspaper Ekstra Bladet. My view is that it is valid to remov a tag as long as i am wiling to devote the time to reserach and revise the aritcle to in my view eliminate the issues depicted in this tag. It was m yintension to do so immediately before removing the tag, but conectivity issues re: my Internet connection disabled my acess until just now. I respect your poitn in that removing the tag was probably a istake and I should have obtained conesnus but I hope you can understnad why I Am coming from and why I feel that substantial revision is more valid an aproach to criticsm of wikiepdia than simply hurrying in, throwing up a bunch of tags, and then leaving iwtiout even making a stab at revising the issues brought to be abear the by the presence of the tag. Smith Jones (talk) 03:27, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to the LGBT WikiProject!
-- SatyrTN (talk / contribs) 05:28, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

BLP
The Arbitration Committee decided a while ago that the BLP policy also applies to dead people, despite the name. I was a bit cynical at first, but I think it was a good call; dead people have living relatives, and there's still a problem with including dubious and offensive material in articles even if the subject themselves have died. Rebecca (talk) 04:36, 16 November 2008 (UTC)


 * I can't remember the exact case - it was either earlier this year or late last year, and trying to use Google to filter through them isn't working very well. I'm sure one of the arbs who was actually sitting at the time would be able to tell you. But yes, though I was a bit cynical at first about extending a policy specifically about living persons to the dead, I do think it was a smart decision in hindsight. Rebecca (talk) 04:50, 16 November 2008 (UTC)

um
You really thinking of taking me to a topic ban. Open your eyes! If you knew what was going on, you wouldn't believe the lies on that page, they just keep exxagerading things. READ all my comments, specially the new, I do care what you do to that article anymore, bye! I added it was a LOW KEY SEIGE, AND IT WAS IN PYHRYGIA, everything else was put there by others, and Siege of Gordium, was made by the actual creator, and now I HAve kept an open mind, while everyone was going to delete, now people are finding sources for it! If you want to help, then help me.--Ariobarza (talk) 23:47, 17 November 2008 (UTC)Ariobarza talk

Did you hear the one about the rabbi in Uganda?
Hey, Happy Thanksgiving! Here is an offbeat new stub that I came upon that I thought would be of interest: Gershom Sizomu, a rabbi in Uganda. I didn't know they could get a minyan in Uganda, let alone a rabbi, but the story behind this is quite interesting. The stub is pretty bare -- is this something you'd be interested in helping to flesh out? Hope all is well. Ecoleetage (talk) 04:24, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

User:I am Mario followup
Following User:I am Mario's threats to Jimbo last month, he seemed to have continued so I've finished indefinitely blocked him here. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 05:03, 5 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Actually at this point, I don't think anyone other than the new IPs aren't blocked at Template_talk:The_Holocaust. We've had 3 or 4 people blocked within a few days last month.  Of course, Rjecina as usual is just ignoring them (Washington IPs so just another blanket assumption of being a sock) which means that they will edit war, someone will eventually create a login, the warring will continue, someone will block, and the cycle begins anew. -- Ricky81682 (talk) 05:53, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Let say that I have taken job of user:Spylab which has been edit warring with IP in question until July 2007.
 * I have not noticed this user until he has started to write how Croatia has never been kingdom ?!--Rjecina (talk) 08:35, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Adminship
I can see no reason not to accept Ecoleetage's explanation that his comments were misinterpreted. As this is generating more heat than light, I'm just going to close this discussion so everyone can get back to editing. A ni  Mate  21:44, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi Animate, for some while I have considered you a very good candidate for adminship. I think the time has come to put your name forward. Before I nominate you, I would just like to ask whether you would accept what they call "the mop". Thanks, AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 22:57, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Great. Sounds fine. I'll put your nom up in a couple of weeks. I'll check back with you first beforehand. Cheers, AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 08:40, 6 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't want to bring around a cloud to rain on your parade (apologies to Barbra), but you do realize that some of your actions involving li'l ol' me will be raised at any possible RfA? It will not help your candidacy if I call to attention your over-the-top comments in my RfA -- false accusations of aiding a sockpuppet account, the "begging for barnstars" libel -- or your accusatory comments on my Talk Page following the blocking of the Gp75motorsports puppet account, or even your own berating of that 16-year-old kid on his talk page when Metros blocked him for a month (taunting a blocked editor is not the stuff admins are made of). You have some problems that need to be addressed before you get in the spotlight.  I don't take pleasure in seeing anyone bloodied in RfA, so I am giving you the fair chance that no one gave me: you will need to get everything in order ahead of any RfA.  Please let me know how you plan to proceed. Ecoleetage (talk) 03:42, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * There is no need to assume good faith here. You're backpedaling now, but this was clearly not a message intended to declare that you "plan to support" AM's future RfA, as you're now claiming. You should probably just apologize for the threats and step back now, Eco. S. D. D.J.Jameson 14:50, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Further evidence, Ecoleetage, of why you would have been less than ideal as an admin. Erm, and something cannot be a libel if it is true. AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 07:37, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Just want you to know that should you go up for Adminship I would certainly support it; in my many interactions with you I have found you to be calm, civil, evenhanded and always going out of your way to deescalate conflicts between others, encourage more collaborative behavior and help/guide/teach new editors both technically and regarding policy and behavior. I don't know the details of your interactions with Ecoleetage, but I can't say I'm comfortable with the tone of his/her comments above, which are presented as advice about the ugly nature of RfA's and yet (intentional or not) have an unpleasant retaliatory aftertaste and a hardly subtle "I will drop a bomb on your RfA" message squeezed between the lines. I imagine, however, that you will consider the validity of Ecoleetage's accusations above (and the perception to other editors of these past situations) when deciding how to proceed, but I'm not sure why you are expected to consult with him/her about it.

This is exactly why I'll probably never have the desire to seek Adminship; the use of the tools is not worth the potential bloodbath, and the parade of every editor I've ever contradicted coming out of the woodwork to give a little back. As necessary as formal RfAs may be, they often seem to be vehicles to give editors free reign to eviscerate each other. That said, I'd like to see you as an Admin and hope this "controversy" is just a blip.&mdash; TAnthonyTalk 09:18, 10 December 2008 (UTC)


 * I am not threatening to derail anything, nor do I have the power to do such a thing. Your friends seem to miss the point entirely -- I am tipping you off about what could be an unforeseen reef in the path of your RfA journey.  I am giving you a heads up because I feel that some of your previous actions are problematic and may not stand up to RfA scrutiny.  This is not the first time that I've warned people in advance of an RfA of what might be a weak link in their chain.  I've seen a lot of worthy RfA candidates get kneecap-whacked with gotcha-style surprises. If anything, I am extending a courtesy of previewing what you may encounter if this goes live. Thank you and be well. Ecoleetage (talk) 12:02, 10 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Just want you to know, AniMate, that I think you would make a good candidate for adminship, and would have very few opposes at RfA. S. D. D.J.Jameson 13:21, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * For the record, I plan to support the AniMate RfA when it goes live. I only wanted to call attention to a possible problem before the RfA takes place. I am genuinely sorry to see that a genuine act of good faith is being seen as something it is not. Ecoleetage (talk) 13:44, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Seriously it is very hard to interpret your initial comment as good faith, you are saying quote some of your actions involving li'l ol' me WILL be raised at any possible RfA. It sounds like an attack. It is not making you look good trying to go back on your word now.-- intraining  Jack In  13:51, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * As any RfA veteran knows, it is astonishing what can get dug up. I was trying to point out that some thorny issues would probably come out. I am genuinely sorry if my comments were seen as threats, which they were not -- I was speaking in a hypothetical manner, and I can see now that this could be seen as something less than academic. Not only am I supportive of having AniMate as an admin, I am willing to step forward with this effort to show it:

 Ecoleetage would like to nominate you to become an administrator. Please visit Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact Ecoleetage to accept or decline the nomination. A page for your nomination at Requests for adminship/ . If you accept the nomination, you must state and sign your acceptance. You may also choose to make a statement and/or answer the optional questions to supplement the information your nominator has given. Once you are satisfied with the page, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so.


 * I hope this puts this matter to rest and puts the spotlight where it properly belongs, on someone who would be a fine admin. Ecoleetage (talk) 14:04, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * It's getting a bit ridiculous now.-- intraining  Jack In  14:09, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Please assume good faith. My initial comments were meant to be hypothetical and to point out a potential weak link, and I am sorry if they came across as something else. Ecoleetage (talk) 14:16, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * This is not a time to be hiding behind AGF, Basically by being a co-nom under these circumstances is not a smart thing do for the sake of the process and Animates chances of succeeding(and your reputation). Weather you co-nom or not you are only adding a single vote to the tally regardless. Animate will not benefit any more than if you were to just Support-- intraining  Jack In  14:22, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

As a message to AniMate: I am truly sorry this got out of hand. I should've clarified at the beginning that I was supportive of any potential RfA. That was a stupid omission on my part. Whether you want me as nominator, co-nominator or passive observer, you will be a fine admin. Ecoleetage (talk) 15:26, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Um, if I may, why do you guys not believe Eco when he says he is sorry? Am I missing something? I know about Animate and Eco's past, but I see no reason to believe Eco is lying now. Can someone supply the missing pieces of the puzzle? J.delanoy gabs adds  18:18, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * He hasn't simply said he was "sorry", he's claiming his initial post was misunderstood. Reread the post below, with bolded parts by me, and tell me what we "misunderstood":
 * I don't want to bring around a cloud to rain on your parade (apologies to Barbra), but you do realize that some of your actions involving li'l ol' me will be raised at any possible RfA? It will not help your candidacy if I call to attention your over-the-top comments in my RfA -- false accusations of aiding a sockpuppet account, the "begging for barnstars" libel -- or your accusatory comments on my Talk Page following the blocking of the Gp75motorsports puppet account, or even your own berating of that 16-year-old kid on his talk page when Metros blocked him for a month (taunting a blocked editor is not the stuff admins are made of). You have some problems that need to be addressed before you get in the spotlight.  I don't take pleasure in seeing anyone bloodied in RfA, so I am giving you the fair chance that no one gave me: you will need to get everything in order ahead of any RfA.  Please let me know how you plan to proceed. Ecoleetage (talk) 03:42, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * What part of that is misunderstood by our subsequent posts? Eco clearly was still harboring a lot of resentmet toward AM, and it came out there. He's backtracking now, but has yet to just admit what he did and apologize. He's even taken to offering to NOMINATE AniMate, when clearly in his first post, he was attempting to raise "issues" that would disqualify someone who actually believed that stuff from nominating AM. S. D. D.J.Jameson 18:45, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Hey, didn't necessarily mean to stir the pot here; as I've said, I am unaware of previous situations and can only comment on what I see written here. And I think it only speaks to Animate's character that he/she hasn't gotten involved as yet LOL. &mdash; TAnthonyTalk 18:48, 10 December 2008 (UTC)


 * To borrow a line from Charlie Brown: AAAAAAAAARGH! I am not angry at AniMate. If I was angry, where would this come from ? If I was angry, would I highlight something that would hurt his RfA? I wanted to get any problem out of the way NOW, rather than have it pop up later.  My RfA was months ago...get over it, because I have. I should've stated clearly that I was speaking hypothetically and supported AniMate's candidacy. How many times do I have to apologize for that? Ecoleetage (talk) 18:59, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The words you typed initially speak for themselves. And with that, I'm quite done with this whole mess. AniMate, please notify me when your RfA pops, so I can support. S. D. D.J.Jameson 19:11, 10 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Jameson, give it a rest already. There is no point in creating an overblown issue, User:Ecoleetage has apologized and I'm sure that AniMate will make admin. on his own merits. Tony the Marine (talk) 20:12, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Replied at Tony's page. I said I was done here, and I am. S. D. D.J.Jameson 20:15, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Kamar de los Reyes leaving
Ok

About Kamar leaving I highly doubt that that's true, since it wasn't on his website which I just checked, plus rumors like this go around contract time, and it doesn't matter if a website has an actor say it, they could be making it up to make it look like the truth, and websites and magazines do do that, so if he was really exiting it would be on his website just like Nathaniel and Justis's websites, so until it is actually confirmed, just leave it off, just because one website says it that don't make it true. P.J. (talk) 22:27, 10 December 2008 (UTC)


 * P.J. my friend, if something like this is added to an article and cites a reputable source, we need to just relax and in good faith assume it is accurate until proven otherwise. It is not the end of the world if this Kamar info is posted on Wikipedia for a few days and turns out to be somehow incorrect, but for now it has been sourced back to an ABC-produced magazine, which is pretty reputable to me. The fact that he has not reported this on his website means nothing; his webmaster could be out of town, he could be avoiding such self-announcement until his contract expires, who knows, there are many possibilities. You say "just leave it off, just because one website says it that don't make it true," and yet I have a feeling that if your bible Soaps.com published it, you'd be fighting for it to stay. You have an ongoing issue where you seem to let your personal opinions and interpretations color what you think is appropriate content, and it has to stop. I'm not saying the Kamar thing is true or not, but your removal/doubt of adequately sourced content is inappropriate on the grounds you assert.&mdash; TAnthonyTalk 22:53, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Thank you!
And thank you for being such a class act! I have been upset all day that this got so out of hand -- it must have been a real "WTF?" moment when you clicked on the site today! I will get in touch with Alasdair to arrange this. Be well. Ecoleetage (talk) 04:45, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Hey there
So I actually wanted to thank you for having a link to the Michael Turner article; I'm an on-again, off-again comics fan who has admired his work, and I had no idea the poor guy had died. And at nearly my exact age too! What a terrible shame.

Thanks also for your continued intervention and calm under pressure where our friend P.J. is concerned. I try not to get sucked in, but ... ah well. In any case, you may have noticed he's been blocked for a month, and his IP autoblocked as well. Still, I think it'll be much of the same when he returns; I've tried my usual preachy, wordy reasoning with him here because I can't help myself, but I'm not holding my breath for some miraculous change.

And by the way, is it too personal to ask if you're male or female? It's obviously OK if you'd prefer not to answer, I just like to use the proper pronoun when I can. Everybody always seems to assume Flyer22 is a "dude" and I know it makes her nuts ;) &mdash; TAnthonyTalk 06:41, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

sorry for my bad redirect
i apologize for the bad redirect. whiel wikipedias serch function is aboslutely worhtless (sometimes simply failing to capitlaize a word properly can throw of the serach and make it iompossible to find the real articel). I also thank you for claiming that I ignore warnings/comments on my talkpages. i was unaware that i had to leave every comment or temple everyone has ever left on my talkpage up in odrer to prove that i take them into consideraiton. I have already begun to leave up comments so that others would not believe that i am just deleting them in ord erot o concelal other editors' valid criticisms of my actions. thank youf or bringing this to my atnetinton again Smith Jones (talk) 21:32, 16 December 2008 (UTC)


 * again i agree with your and i aprociate your ime and helpful advice. However i wory that people might not take me in a decent maner if I go on WP:AN or elsehwere sinc eeverytime I have been involved with administrative noticebarods i have oversteped myself and gotten on the nerves/bad sides of other users and i want to ajust abvoid that and go about my busienss. Smith Jones (talk) 22:09, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Proposed ban of User:Ariobarza
Hello, AniMate. I have filed a proposal to ban Ariobarza at the administrators' noticeboard. As someone who volunteered to be her unofficial mentor, you may want to comment there. - Best regards, Ev (talk) 14:53, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Your RfA is now open
AniMate, it is definitely for the benefit of the community that you should be an admin, and therefore it is with pleasure that I have opened your formal nom at Requests for adminship/AniMate. You will of course have to accept the nom. Judging your contributions to Wikipedia in the round thus far, I am certain this process will be entirely uncontroversial, and I look forward to seeing your expert panache-rich finesse-full mopwielding. Best, as always, AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 21:05, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads up. I don't understand why Alasdair went ahead without me, but I will put my two cents in. Ecoleetage (talk) 01:10, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * It doesn't matter who nominates you...this is your hour. You are a great editor and you are clearly deserving of adminship. I already put in my support and I genuinely hope your RfA is a smooth, stress-free experience.  Trust me, you'll be swell...you'll be great...gonna have the whole world on a plate.  Starting here, starting...uh oh, I'm channeling Roz Russell .  Seriously, I am looking forward to seeing your success in a week's time.  Be well, my friend. Ecoleetage (talk) 01:53, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi, AniMate. Regarding question 6, you will find General sanctions helpful. Congratulations for the clearly successful RfA, and merry Christmas ! :-) - Best, Ev (talk) 19:59, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Rfa
Good luck in it!

Happy Hanukkah
Pity that Judah Maccabee isn't around today -- if he could get the oil in the temple lamp to burn for eight days, I wonder what he could do with my home heating fuel supply. Happy holiday to you and yours! Ecoleetage (talk) 03:30, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Manuel Bonnet
You're right about the tilde above the 'n' in Manuel - it shouldn't be there. In all references to him, that I've followed, the n is normal. But how to change the redirect? I'll happily add translations from the fr:wiki to improve the article, some time this year! Best wishes. Dickie (talk) 09:39, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

re: Barnstar, Dickey & Bonnet

 * thanks for the headsup re: the barnstar. it totally didn't even see that 'message section on their. And thanks for working wtith me on the Manuel Bonnet article. i had been trying to see about that itlde for a while since i created the article by clicking on a link (i dont know how to use the symbols on Microsoft Word XP in order to create the proper lettering, regretifiably enough). Good luck on your Rquest for Adminship! Smith Jones (talk) 13:43, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Withdrawing AfDs
Hi there. When withdrawing AfDs, please remember to close them with the templates. Thanks! :) &mdash; neuro(talk) 16:44, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Smiles on your RFA


DocDeel516 discuss has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend, Go on smile! Cheers, and Happy editing!=) Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message. Good luck with your RfA; I voted "support" for you!--DocDeel516 discuss 20:35, 24 December 2008 (UTC)
 * In advance of the successful conclusion of your RfA, please accept this token of my appreciation for your contributions to Wikipedia:

Your RFA was successful
Congratulations, I have closed your Request for Adminship as successful and you are now a sysop! If you have any questions about adminship, feel free to ask me. Please consider messaging me on IRC for access to the #wikipedia-en-admins channel. Good luck! --Deskana (talk) 00:13, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Congratulations! I didn't even see it but I'm not surprised your nomination succeeded. You'll be a fine admin, I'm sure. Feel free to ask for help anytime. ·:· Will Beback  ·:· 00:21, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Congrats ... while I'm not surprised, that has to have been the biggest landslide I've seen ;) &mdash; TAnthonyTalk 03:17, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks to both of you. I'm currently debating whether or not to do the post-RfA spam, but I'm thinking not. Glad at least one of us was confident it would go well, but I felt oddly reconciled with the possibility of the Wiki-smackdown that so often accompanies RfAs. I've even taken part in one or two. I guess it really didn't bother me 'cause I really don't think this is a big deal, which is also my rationale behind not doing the spam thing. Sure it's nice, but I'm fairly certain it goes against some sort of code for a Generation X slacker to thank people for added responsibilities. A  ni  Mate  04:00, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Congrats! No go over the block log, and see if you can find out what sparked my interest in those New Admin School blocks. There is something you did there, that is rather unusual. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 23:06, 26 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Allow me to add my personal congrats. I am not at all surprised by the overwhelming thumbs-up you have received. AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 23:36, 26 December 2008 (UTC)

I know it's a bit late but,
Congrats on your adminship!—  Dæ dαlus Contribs  08:24, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * It's never too late to send someone a nice message. Thanks! -- AniMate talk 17:53, 31 December 2008 (UTC)