User talk:Bielle/Archives/2010/April

A late "thank you!"
Thank you! for your answer to my question: Reference_desk/Archives/Science/2010_February_22.The link you gave me is very helpful. :-) I have not looked at your answer before today, but a late ‘thank you’ is much better than none at all, so again: Thank you! --Seren-dipper (talk) 17:46, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
 * You are most welcome. It is nice to know when an answer has been useful, even if long after it was given. Bielle (talk) 17:56, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Bach Prelude in C: triple coincidence
Hello, Bielle. What do you reckon about this? --  Jack of Oz    ... speak! ...   12:28, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
 * That's right up there with me finding the Piet Hein wall plaque at auction the very day on which you in Australia and I in Canada were discussing him here on WP. It is also clear that your partner picked a very good night to be watching TV. May I add a bit to the Bach story? Last fall, my partner bought a brand-new complete works of Bach, a 155-cd boxed set packaged by Brilliant Classics at a charity silent auction for the princely sum of $CA80. (We thought the production quality might not be up to much, but have been most pleasantly surprised.) We started working our way through the box about 3 weeks ago and are now in the middle of the "Kanatas" with the Boys' Choir of Holland and many Dutch soloists. So, you are writing of the Bach synchronicity to a household currently immersed in his music. (I would loved to have said that the Prelude No. 1 in C Major is one of the current batch on the player, but that would not be truthful.) Of course, the skeptics would say that, having just been playing the piece, your ear would be particularly attuned to hearing it even in the distant background. (Is it a piece commonly heard on TV? I watch almost no TV, so couldn't comment on my own account.) About such things, I am only skeptical on the third Saturday of months with an "n". What fun!:_) Bielle  (talk) 00:06, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Ahnan harassing another user
Hi there, sorry if this is a bit abrupt but I need your assistance on a particular matter as a senior on wikipedia. I understand that you tried to mediate between [User:Tanlipkee|Tanlipkee]] and Ahnan in the past [] when their conflict escalated to outside the confines of wikipedia. There was no resolution to that case (unless one counts [User:Tanlipkee|Tanlipkee]] quiting Wikipedia), but Ahnan is similarly harassing another editor now off-wiki again. I reported this to the Admin notice board, but as this is the 1st time I'm attempting something like this I'd like your advice if I'm going about this right.

The following is the link to the notice made [].

Is there someway I can improve on this? I know I'm actually putting myself in for my turn at being harassed for outing Ahnan but I think this really requires some special attention. Hope you can help me out in controlling this unnecessary harassment on Wiki editors. Zhanzhao (talk) 03:28, 13 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Mr ZhanZhao, have I harassed you in anyway? Pls show proof. Do not simply just cry wolf. As for Tan Lip Kee case, the NCC entry is settled. Why are you bringing old wounds out? What is your intention here, Mr ZhanZhao? Bielle, I've worked with you in the past. You should know that I'm a fair guy when comes to editing. I go by logic and references. We have resolved issues in NCC before. If you recalled, NCC zealots were trying to delete away controversies from their site. The same is happening now in CHC, starting from Kimberry, a known CHC member. CHC and NCC deals with prosperity gospel. If you check thru wiki yourself, many org or televangelists inevitably will have some controversies when involving themselves with prosperity gospel. Ahnan (talk) 17:01, 13 April 2010 (UTC)


 * I apologize for failing to notice that Tanlipkee had left the project. I have kept away from the article in which we were both involved because I don't need the grief in my life that Ahnan spreads. What he does outside WP is impossible to control from inside WP. SlimVirgin made some attempts to approach Ahnan, but I don't think she was successful in changing anything. You might ask her about her conclusions. I have just read some of the current Kimberry352- Ahnan exchanges and I am tired with only that limited exposure. Ahnan clearly has an agenda, and, as an essentially argumentative  SPA account whose only truth is the one he supports, might be tackled for his on-WP behaviours. Just as an aside,  Kimberry352's suggestion that he/she meet Ahnan to solve their differences face to face worries me. I will keep an eye on the  noticeboard and comment as might seem helpful there. Bielle  (talk) 05:19, 13 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Bielle, my agenda is simple - to reveal the truth. And yes, the truth has to be supported by facts before it can be accepted. It's the same thing in the court of law. I have no trouble with you. I only have problems with parties who want to hide the truth. Ahnan (talk) 17:06, 13 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the info! I'm trying to get this over and done with (slim chance but I can always hope) so I can continue my work on other articles. I totally understand~ your apprehension in dealing with this editor.Zhanzhao (talk)


 * Sorry to butt in but it seems like Ahnan has taken a very big interest in wikipedia. Do also take a look at talk with reference to the article Lim Biow Chuan. My talk page has been graced by Ahnan, if you like to see what he had commented. 14:09, 13 April 2010 (UTC)  Xaiver0510 (Signature added by Bielle  (talk) 16:14, 13 April 2010 (UTC))

Ref desk humanities
I see Vanilla rubbed it out. What you were missing is that it was Vanilla himself who broached the issue (on that page) of the worship of dogs and snakes, so it's rather odd for him to be commenting on someone else about it. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 15:17, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the explanation, Baseball Bugs. I had looked at the "Snakes-and-dog- worship" question but not noted the names of the participants. I am glad he exchanges all had at least a tenuous link to some recognizable reality. I appreciate you bringing it to my attention. Bielle (talk) 15:33, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
 * He rubbed out not just his comment, but the other editors' comment, which in my opinion is not appropriate, but whatever. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 15:35, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
 * It would have been better, I agree, for Rhinoracer to have been permitted to remove his own comment. Bielle (talk) 15:39, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually he didn't rub them out, he just commented them. The more conventional approach would be to collapse it, but maybe commenting them out is better? ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 15:41, 30 April 2010 (UTC)