User talk:CaveatLector/Archive 2

Project Gender Studies
Hi CaveatLector, I'm asking some Project Gender Studies members for their opinions on a few changes to the project templates. The discussion is here. If you're interested please have a look. I'd also like to have the project page unprotected so it could be editted to give due balance to the Gender Theory activities of the project as well as the removal of systemic bias activities - what would be your opinions on this (discussed here)?--Cailil 01:53, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Atlantis
Caveat, thanks for your supportive comments. I expect some crackpottery at Atlantis, given the article's subject, but that guy is just off the charts. --Akhilleus (talk) 02:15, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Proposing to merge List of basic classics topics to Classics
Seeking concensus on proposed merger at Talk:Classics. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast 01:32, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Finished clean-up after merge with Classics
Hi

Please do what you will with Classics. I'm not trying to step on anyone's toes. Obviously, every WP editor acts as an individual with all the short-comings that entails. According to your userpage, you are a genuine expert on the subject and as far as I'm concerned Wikipedia needs a lot more people like you. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast 17:43, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you for your friendly comment regarding Classics and the addition of tables. Your subsequent work has made my mash up read better. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast 22:51, 10 February 2007 (UTC) {| width=100% cellpadding=10px 10px 5px 5px;
 * style='border: 2px solid #9B75AD; background-color: #EED8EE;' |

WP:LGBT Coordinator Election Notice
This is just a quick, automated note to let you know that there is an election being conducted over the next 7 days for the position of &quot;Coordinator&quot; for the LGBT WikiProject. Your participation is requested. –
 * }

Cupid
I began an article about Cupid as a holliday character. It has been edited a bit. Anyway, you mentioned something about starting it somewhere and then moving it, I don't know how to do that but would like to. (you can see that I had to revise it several times, I wish I would have read you messege first) Thank you for your help. amyanda 19:21, 28 February 2007 (UTC)amanda

awsome thanks.:) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Amyanda2000 (talk • contribs).

thank you for raising this matter
You directed me to the NPOV section and the NOR section. I would like to make my own counterpoints. Those articles raised some core issues about heroes. WHAT ARE THEY? I agree they were not fully neutral, but I am putting them on the talk pages to find out what other people think. I also would like for some people to look at what research HAS been done on it. The issues of masked Heroes, the difference between superheroes and normal heroes, finding out WHAT is a hero and the other things all need to be raised. Only after they have they been raised, and research put forwards, can we advance the page. At the moment it is ignoring a lot about the hero genre, and these articles were raised in the hopes of fixing that. Would you please pouint out EXACTLY I have not followed the NOR and NPOV rules? i would appreciate it for the next bunch of articled I post on talk pages. Corrupt one 03:45, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Anna Nicole Smith
Hi, You changed my "born to a U.S. citizen" to "since her biological mother was a U.S. citizen" (I may be paraphrasing without looking). I am pretty sure that if the father was a U.S. citizen, that would be OK also. Do you have any evidence otherwise? By the way, at some early adult age, the person has to elect to continue her/his U.S. citizenship. Bellagio99 20:30, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Please Explain
Why did you remove what someone had re-added? i can understand removing sections you deemed to be off topic and like that, but some of the things you removed WERE on topic. that is what i am restoring it how it was just before you removed it. As I mentioned to you before when you sent me a message on my talk page (which is STILL up there), that it is to get people to think about the matter, and hopefully change things. Also, there weer some other things that had been added since then that you removed, and I consider it fair to have them still up there.

If you want to remove a section, just remove that section, not everything that had been added since that section was added, and please notify the person of what you are doing and why. It is exreamly impolite not to! Corrupt one 05:33, 27 March 2007 (UTC)


 * (This is in regards to the discussion forum type topics that were Corrupt one keeeps adding to the Hero talk page.) CaveatLectorTalk 14:07, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

You said that it ws not a page to discuse matters? If not there, then where? I was not using any originial research. I asked you before how you considered not to be relevant, and you did not reply. If you can't tell me how my posts are not relevant, then what right do you have to remove them.

Not just that, but were were removing NOT just those posts, but all the other posts that had been put up since the time you reset it to. Why not just remove the posts deemed not to be releveant?

I have put those posts back up, but gone over them and made sure that they ARE relevant, and they all use referancable material, which I should not have to!

Do not remove them, until you can tell me WHY they should be taken down, and let me reply. You may have a good reason to take them down, but how can I know unless you TELL me!

I even removed one post that would piss off a lot of people, and part of another. Not because they were not relevant, rather, I think they WERE extramly relevant, but because I think there is more chance of the rest of the work staying up if I took them down.

Corrupt one 06:58, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Odd revert
Did you intend to revert me here? It's not at all clear to me why that translation should be there. Jkelly 03:09, 2 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Oops. Reverted back. CaveatLectorTalk 03:11, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

The Jesus and John thing
I think you cut a little too much this last time. It seems to me only the second part of that paragraph (after the note) was POV. Haiduc 03:32, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

LGBT WikiProject newsletter
SatyrBot 05:00, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Homophobe on Talk:Homophobia
I've removed the offending comment and warned. Your instinct was right that it was a violation of WP:NPA: note that "Racial, sexual, homophobic, ageist, religious, political, or ethnic epithets directed against another contributor" are included in that page's list of the type of comments that are never acceptable. Aubyte's comments easily fall into that category, in my judgment.

That said, it was a good idea to contact an uninvolved third party rather than respond in anger (even righteous, justified anger). I've been busy in real life lately, and may not be able to keep a close eye on the user's contribs, as I normally would in a situation like this, but please let me know if he continues to make personal attacks and incivil remarks. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 16:46, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

MedCab case
Hi. I'm currently mediating a case into which you're involved.

Please take a look of the case here.

For a successful mediation, I need to hear every position and its arguments, including yours, of course ;-).

So, please voice your opinion on the case's page.

I'm at your disposal for every question.

Happy editing,

 Snowolf (talk)CONCOI  -  18:45, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

LGBT WikiProject newsletter
This month's project newsletter (hand delivered as SatyrTN and Dev920 are away). Best wishes, WjBscribe 03:07, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter
Delivered on 16:00, 6 June 2007 (UTC). SatyrBot 16:00, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter
Delivered on 16:00, 6 July 2007 (UTC).

Replacing coin images
The reason I believe the coin images are replaceable is that someone could go to a museum or collection where the coins are located and photograph them. If you have information showing this is impossible, please present it on the image talk page. &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 02:28, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Humor
Thanks for injecting a bit of it into frequently acrimonious deletion debates. Nice job. --Eyrian 22:54, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Category:Christian mythology in art and literature, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. User:Ceyockey ( talk to me ) 18:34, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I think the problem here is that it's not precisely clear where this category fits in amongst others, such as Category:Christian art. --Eyrian 18:49, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I was unaware that those Categories actually existed, and I suppose I should have checked before creating this category (had my mind on many other things at the time). This makes articles like Spear of Destiny in popular culture even more useless.  I'll let it be known that I assent to and recommend the deletion to proceed.  CaveatLectorTalk 03:25, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Cussing at a member is uncivil
No matter what your intention was you were clearly being uncivil. I had thought that you were a respectable member, but will have to reexamine my opinion.--Amadscientist 06:07, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
 * This refers to Wikipedia talk:Wikiproject LGBT studies. The user had previously accused me of being uncivil because I told him/her that it was inappropriate to attempt to garner support for one side of an editing dispute in a WikiProject.  The discussion there will clearly show that my 'cussing' was hardly an act of incivility, for those interested. CaveatLectorTalk 06:41, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I am going to apologise for my negative reaction. I was obviously already mad with the situation and became overly offended by a perceived accusation of my participation in an edit war. The war was against me and I was following wikipedia policy and the advice of admin on how to handle the situation.


 * I cuss far worse than you did, which is why I believe it should remain off the written page. As it is defined at wiki as uncivil. I looked up "in-civil" and wiki simply doesn't use that term. Any way I extend an olive branch.--Amadscientist 22:40, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

Archiving
How often do you suggest archiving. I really don't have that much activity on my talk page but I copied this code directly from another page that archives every day. Today was actually the first day it archived as I just added it yesterday.--Amadscientist 05:19, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I am going to experiment with 7 days. I'll see how that works for me.--Amadscientist 05:25, 29 July 2007 (UTC)