User talk:Horologium/August 2008

Would like your opinion on an issue with Everglades articles
Oh, look. I get to play in the new clean talk page. At any rate, I know you watch the page, but I'd like your opinions on this issue specifically, if you have time. Thanks. --Moni3 (talk) 14:45, 1 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I dropped a note at the discussion. Thanks for the heads up.  Horologium  (talk) 17:10, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Meetup
Meetup/Tampa -- You're invited! Hires an editor (talk) 15:00, 1 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Hmmm! I live a lot closer to you than I used to. Maybe we can arrange a meetup in Gainesville. -- Donald Albury 01:31, 2 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I am aware of a number of Wikipedians here in Gainesville (many of the WP:UoF project members, and User:Phil Sandifer) and Ocala; maybe a Gainesville meetup could be set up. I'm on vacation this week; let me get back to Gainesville. I'll ask around and see if there is interest in a local meet.  Horologium  (talk) 01:35, 2 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm in Gainesville. Let me know. --Moni3 (talk) 01:48, 2 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Maybe something will happen. I'll keep an eye out. -- Donald Albury 02:20, 2 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I've started Meetup/Gainesville, Florida. -- Donald Albury 15:22, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Miami article
Thanks! :) --Comayagua99 (talk) 03:23, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

Embry-Riddle in Orlando
The Embry-Riddle listed in Orlando is linked to this page, where there is no mention of any Orlando campus. Gamweb (talk) 19:27, 20 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Here is a link from the Embry-Riddle website: http://fusion.erau.edu/ec/wwc/centerinfo.cfm?CODE=02 This is an example of why Wikipedia is not supposed to be used as a citation for other articles in Wikipedia. Sometimes the articles are not always accurate.  Horologium  (talk) 19:37, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Hey...
Stay safe and dry during Fay. It's flooded here in Melbourne/Palm Bay...  - Jameson L. Tai   talk ♦  contribs  21:06, 20 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks. We're supposed to be getting about 12 in here in Gainesville, but little (or no) wind damage. I don't anticipate any flooding problems inside the house, but the neighborhood might be a bit wet for a while. :\  Horologium  (talk) 22:31, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Wondering
Soo...

Have you pretty much given up on UCFD? - jc37 21:17, 20 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, sorta, kinda. I've been on "reduced editing" since I took some summer college classes, and since I am starting up again next week (19 units this semester), I'll be remaining on reduced hours. UCFD had descended into an endless pit of the same arguments over and over again, which was why I stopped contributing there; I had limited time for editing, and was able to get more productive work from actually editing articles, rather than user cats. I may drop in again from time to time, and maybe even close a discussion or two, but I don't foresee returning to my former level of activity there until after this college term ends. (Once again, I expect to be the oldest person in most —or all— of my classes. Whee!)  Horologium  (talk) 22:24, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I can understand RL distraction. Quite well : ) - jc37 01:03, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

What do you think
As I greatly respect your opinion, (and since I've just now noticed you comment there) I'm curious what you think about my opposition to Moni3's RfA. (Response is, of course, optional : ) - jc37 00:08, 25 August 2008 (UTC)


 * If I was not familiar with Moni3, I would likely have opposed her candidacy because of the answers (which were, as I noted, rather weak). However, I am familiar with her, and consequently I am better able to assess her likely use of the tools, and I am quite confident that she will not use the tools in an inappropriate fashion. The discussion you reference as a serious concern dates back nine months, and was her very first FA nomination; she has made incredible progress since that time, as both a content contributor and as a reviewer for FACs. She can be quite direct (sometimes painfully so), but she's not reckless, and that is the primary reason that I trust her with the tools far more than many of the people who already have them.  Horologium  (talk) 00:23, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, thank you for that. (And if her nom succeeds, your comments, and others I've seen, will help reassure me.)
 * But that aside, that's not quite what I was asking. I was curious as to what you thought of my "vote", and subsequent comments (Noting that I've also commented on her talk page as well.) - jc37 00:49, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Hmmmm, OK. I thought I was being a bit oblique, but it appears that I was obtuse instead. (grin) Well, your !vote is well-thought out, and that alone would have influenced me if I was unfamiliar with the candidate. (However, I tend to avoid RFAs for candidates whom I have little knowledge, unless they are blatantly unqualified for the tools. You may have noticed that I am far from a regular at WP:RFA.) I do disagree with some of your conclusions, as I noted above, based on my personal interactions with her, but most of the objections are rather superficial. While I have not really followed the rather gigantic thread on the talk page that was created as a result of your !vote, I think that the comments by JayHenry and Keeper76 are important, because they address your most serious concern, that she is impetuous and does not consider her actions. (Revolving Bugbear's response is a strong rebuttal, but not enough to convince me to change my position.) Again, if this were a candidate with whom I had little interaction, your arguments would have been quite persuasive, but that is not the case here.  Horologium  (talk) 01:19, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok. Thank you for the thoughtful analysis.


 * To be honest, when seeing so many who's opinions I (at least moderately) respect, supporting, I had considered changing to nuetral, at least.


 * However, this edit (among others) concerns me enough to still oppose.


 * Anyway, thanks again for your thoughts. In situations of opposition such as this, it's usually nice to ask the thoughts/analysis of those whom you may respect : ) - jc37 01:47, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

User:Paige p3
Blocked by you, but you need to lock the talk page too, that's what they use for vandalism. De728631 (talk) 19:02, 26 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Ok, someone else just did that. De728631 (talk) 19:04, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Anonymous vandalism
Hi. Is there anything that can be done about the anonymous user that continues to revert edits on Miami-area articles (ie: Brickell, Brickell Avenue, South Florida metropolitan area, Miami, Florida, etc). As an administrator, I'm hoping there's something that can be done, because it's getting out of hand and is disruptive. Thanks! --Comayagua99 (talk) 14:16, 27 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm blocking each IP address as I see him editing. Unfortunately, there is little we can do except revert and block his latest IP address. We sometimes use IP address-range blocks for IP-hopping anonymous editors who are being disruptive, but we have to carefully consider what collateral damage would result (i.e., legitimate editors being blocked). My advice to you for now is to hang back and let us deal with him (there are now several admins who have reverted his edits). -- Donald Albury 14:27, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

Tagging of Armando Lloréns Sar
I recently removed a speedy delete tag that you had placed on Armando Lloréns Sar. I do not think that Armando Lloréns Sar fits any of the speedy deletion criteria because the subject of the article has been through AFD twice (now covered on talk page), and so, is not a candidate for CSD. I request that you consider not re-tagging Armando Lloréns Sar for speedy deletion without discussing the matter on the appropriate talk page. Dori (Talk • Contribs) 23:04, 30 August 2008 (UTC)


 * For some reason, there is no record of this article going through AfD in the article history, which is why I had tagged it in the first place. Considering the rather striking lack of notability, the apparent efforts of the subject to have it removed, and the consensus of the second AfD, I have redirected it back to Daily Kos, which was the result of that second AfD.  Horologium  (talk) 13:28, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you
Re protection of my userpage... Um... You don't think I might have upset someone over something, do you? ;~D LessHeard vanU (talk) 16:36, 31 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Naaah, that couldn't be it. Does protecting Talk:Sarah Palin make you a member of the Vast right-wing conspiracy? (evil grin)  Horologium  (talk) 16:39, 31 August 2008 (UTC)