User talk:Horologium/January 2008

Re: List of high schools in Florida
Hello, I've replied to your message on the talk page. The discussion can continue there, as it should be seen by other editors involved with the article. --Dan Leveille TALK 04:24, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I see you didn't reply to my message. I was just interested to hear your response since you seemed so die-hard about it. --Dan Leveille TALK 23:50, 2 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I hadn't responded because I was busy most of the day. I only briefly participated in a single discussion before I left the house for the day. It appears that Donald Albury reiterated what I had already stated in reference to redlinks on this article; I wasn't even actively editing on Wikipedia when the consensus was hammered out on that page. Horologium  (talk) 01:52, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Coral Springs
A-Class.I am not part of the Wikiprojects FL/Miami, but I guess you can update them...--Legionarius (talk) 17:16, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Done for both. I also did a really big rework of the Demographics section of the article. Unfortunately, I had to jettison an image in the section after adding that big table, so I nuked the 2000 population density map, which is eight years out of date. Horologium  (talk) 21:06, 5 January 2008 (UTC)
 * It wasn't exactly high art, anyway. Good job!--Legionarius (talk) 01:41, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Requests_for_arbitration
I'm refering the Sanchez matter over to the Arbitration Committee. Given your past involvement with the Matt Sanchez article, so you might want to comment on whether they should accept or reject the case. WjBscribe 04:16, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

admin
Hello. I've seen you around, and your demeanor and edits suggest that you would be a good administrator. If you're interested, I'll nom you over at WP:RFA. Let me know of your decision. Wizardman 04:17, 6 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I may be involved in an arbitration case as a somewhat-involved participant (see the above post regarding Matt Sanchez), and it has been my perception that running for adminship during an open arbitration case is a very bad idea, as the case becomes a convenient grazing area for all sorts of spurious opposition. If the case is accepted, I'd rather wait until it is over before accepting your nomination. I'm sure you can understand my concern. Horologium  (talk) 05:05, 6 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Ah, didn't realize you were part of that. In that case, yeah, it would be better to wait. Wizardman  05:20, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Tenses
I saw you switched some tenses on the Henegar Center. You reasoning was definitely logical, but generally speaking I stick to either past or present tense in a section as suggested in the Chicago manual of style (as Wikipedia recomended using). Not a big deal, just pointing out why I used that format in my articles. Thanks & I appreciated your edits on other articles I have done in the past! FieldMarine (talk) 00:40, 7 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Tense can be a tricky issue, but I try to apply logic: if the condition is ongoing (in this case, the building is still standing, and it is still being used), then use of present tense is appropriate. Otherwise, past tense should be used (such as the renaming of the building, or noting that a school occupied the building in the past). Horologium  (talk) 00:44, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Deleting pages in your userspace
To make it a little clearer for us admins, you might want to use db-userreq when requesting the deletion of pages in your userspace. Thanks! Ioeth (talk contribs friendly) 16:08, 7 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Oops. Sorry about that; I've not done this before. I'll file that away for future reference. :\ Horologium  (talk) 16:10, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Bluemarine
Even I am a little surprised by his exceedingly bad move. Aatombomb (talk) 15:01, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
 * It only further proves that he has no regard for rules of Wikipedia. Even after the Arbcom case is closed, I have no doubt that he won't abide by anything implemented there unless forced to by system status, ie: account/editing blocks. -- ALLSTAR  echo 17:04, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I have no objection to blocking him indefinitely at this point. This goes far beyond the bounds of the RFAr, and has nothing to do with incivility or self-promotion. I've been played. Horologium  (talk) 17:11, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
 * And now he has asked to be unblocked again, to participate in the ArbCom case, stating he's confused why he was blocked again for editing in other places. -- ALLSTAR  echo 23:04, 9 January 2008 (UTC)
 * I noticed. I'm going to neither support nor oppose. I understand the other editors' expressed desire to allow him to participate in the case, but I disagree that he will do anything productive. He didn't participate in the RFC, as you have probably noticed. I didn't expect him to contribute much (if anything) to the RFAr, but I didn't expect him to go to one of the most contentious topics on Wikipedia as his new target of opportunity. If he wants to participate, he can use his talk page with a request to transfer the information to the RFAr pages. Horologium  (talk) 23:11, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for this note. John Vandenberg (talk) 09:04, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

I put some of my evidence on the Evidence page of the ArbCom, hopefully you will read it. I *think* I was careful not to directly attack any particular person, and I certainly am not attacking you. If there is anything in my comments on the Evidence page which you feel is a personal attack against any specific person, as opposed to an attack against their arguments, please let me know. Thanks. Wjhonson (talk) 22:47, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Apologies
I've given you a hard time in the past. Please accept my apologies. Having looked through my edit history in depth and reflecting on my words, I realize I made some judgment errors and often misinterpreted the situation. Aatombomb (talk) 17:13, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/R. fiend
An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Requests for arbitration/R. fiend/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Requests for arbitration/R. fiend/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Daniel (talk) 23:59, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you
For removing personal attacks. <font face="Verdana"> Durova Charge! 02:12, 18 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I would also like to thank you for removing this. I was also more than a bit surprised at his response to Durova who was offering him a way to lodge evidence regarding his allegation of defamation (i.e. via OTRS).  I mean my mouth actually dropped, and it takes a lot to do that. Wjhonson (talk) 02:18, 18 January 2008 (UTC)


 * You are both welcome. I will be happy to see this case end, and fully expect to see more indef-blocks and bans before it is all through. Although I still believe that my proposal to delete and start over is the best way to proceed, the rest of the community feels differently. <font color="DarkSlateGray">Horologium  (talk) 02:36, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Everglades National Park
Hi there. I submitted ENP for FAC a couple weeks ago, and I have a few comments, but would love more. No one from WP:Florida has commented. I was wondering if you might be able to comment on the process. You can find it here. I appreciate your time, and if you have ideas of anyone else who may be interested, please let me know. Thanks. --Moni3 (talk) 02:07, 23 January 2008 (UTC)


 * One of the reasons I have not commented on the nomination is the simple fact that I am an active participant in WP:FLA. Somewhere, sometime, I remember reading that participating in a WikiProject that related to a particular article presented a possible CoI in GA/FA discussions, so I have avoided participating in such discussions. (I cannot recall where I read this, and I really have no desire to go on a search for it, but it stuck with me, so I am pretty sure that I read it somewhere, and not as an off-hand comment.) I think the article is fantastic, and you appear to have addressed the problems raised by the three or four reviewers who have participated so far. Hopefully, the single oppose will reconsider now that you have addressed some of his concerns. Raul654 is the final arbiter of all things FAC, so he makes the final decision, but I am not too familiar with the timeline for FACs; I was only (inadvertantly) involved in one (Fort Lauderdale, Florida), and that article was not ready to be promoted, as the FAC nomination revealed. <font color="DarkSlateGray">Horologium  (talk) 02:32, 23 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Ay. Well, it will probably be re-nominated since it has so far no supports, and one oppose. I read another FAC where the nominator labeled those who passed it up as lazy farts. I may have to resort to petty name-calling. Thank you. --Moni3 (talk) 04:08, 23 January 2008 (UTC)


 * (Hoping you are joking) Incivility is seldom a good idea, especially when you are asking others to do something for you. Sneering at the people who make the decision to promote an article is probably counterproductive. <font color="DarkSlateGray">Horologium  (talk) 15:27, 23 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I don't know how he did it, but it was almost charming. It made me read his article and comment on the FAC process. A couple of others have commented now on ENP, so I guess I won't have to use the "assclown" card... (I was joking, btw) --Moni3 (talk) 02:09, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

You might want to consider
--Filll (talk) 17:02, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

My Rfa
Well, not this time anyway it seems...my effort to regain my adminship was unsuccessful, but your support was still very much appreciated. Let me know if there is anything I can do for you. Thank you!--MONGO 07:11, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Admin?
Are you a admin? If you are can you please address the issue, and make it clear to STOP disputing the issue. Several admins have attempted to stop it, but it keeps going on. Thanks DJS --DJS24 (talk) 15:46, 27 January 2008 (UTC)


 * No, I am not an admin, just another user. However, my edit was intended as a wake-up call to both of you (I'm leaving your brother out of this, since he's only posted once to the AN/I thread) that AN/I is not the appropriate forum for what boils down to the two of you disliking each other. Stop interacting (stay off each other's talk pages, don't respond to each other in talk pages, don't refer to each other in posts, and don't revert each other's edits unless there is a CLEAR consensus to do so). Your brother could be considered a meat puppet of you, so ensure that you don't both contribute to discussions where consensus is an issue. <font color="DarkSlateGray">Horologium  (talk) 15:53, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Florida Parks
Ok; thanks. I wasn't aware of the demonstration project. I've just been going through the lists of nhls and nnhps and ensuring that they are all in the proper categories, and then ensuring that no other articles are in those categories. When I came across the article with six parks in it, I just figured that it was created before the individual articles existed. I wanted to delete the categories since the category list should eventually match the number of properties. Then I linked the three in case the editors of that article didn't know they existed. Thanks for the heads up.--Appraiser (talk) 20:44, 29 January 2008 (UTC)