User talk:Isomorphic/archive2

'''My activity level this summer will be somewhat reduced from earlier levels, but it seems my addiction will keep me around. Still, it's possible that I'll be gone for a while now and again, so if you need to get in touch with me and I haven't been on in a while, use email.'''

why did you delete epedia?
 * Well, two reasons. First of all, redirects to external links don't work.  Second, we aren't an advertising site.  This site is for encyclopedia articles, and what you submitted was clearly not an encyclopedia article.  Isomorphic 20:11, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for tidying up after me on John Robinson

BozMo

Archived discussion is at User_talk:Isomorphic/archive1

Force Recon
Thanks for the heads up. I found out about the other page too. I've taken his photo and his links and merged them up under "Force Reconnaissance" and placed the redirect at USMC Force Recon.

Glad I could contribute.

~tin

message
In response, I do plan to follow up on every stub I have created. Yes indeed many are not very lengthy-particularly the ones created in relation to banking-but they are necessary to understand larger articles. My philosophy is that its better to have something rather than nothing. I do though, once again, plan to go into detail when possible. Thanks for your concern. GrazingshipIV 23:58, Apr 15, 2004 (UTC)

Yeah, I think your technically right about that page not really being a stub. I tend to overuse the stub message due to the motivation I believe it creates in others to contribute. Also many articles though they contain more than one paragraph are very incomplete and in need of expansion. In the future I will follow the expressed guidelines. Thanks. GrazingshipIV 19:50, Apr 16, 2004 (UTC)

203.10.59.63
I assume that blocking that person would involve going to http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Special:Blockip&ip=203.10.59.63 and putting "infinite" in the Expiry: box. I haven't tried it before though. I thought that IP might be a persistent vandal, but I didn't know if they'd been blocked before. Evil saltine 06:32, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Roman Catholic Church
Why did you delete this? It seemed like a good potential article to me, or a redirect if not. But more important, it was listed on VfD and the vote hadn't yet completed. Or have I missed something? Andrewa 22:25, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Agreed, we've got a lot of upset Wikipedians on the Vfd page complaining about this. Did you salvage any, so we can reinstate it or is it gone for good? Please, next time wait the required 7 days, or at least some consensus. Catholicism as a religious doctrine and Roman Catholic Church as institution must remain separate articles... When done properly they would turn out vastly different. Pteron 01:18, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

On top of that, when you deleted it, it was a redirect to Catholicism, but you didn't clean up any of the links when you took out that redirect, leaving a bunch of articles linking into the void. Snowspinner 01:24, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * Yeah, sounds like a messed up situation - mind you, you could go ahead and undelete it (yes, I've been reading up about that), especially since Criticism of the Roman Catholic Church has also been merged with Catholicism. It wasn't perfect - but there were cool things like a list of dioceses. I think we're in agreement - I agree wholeheartedly with your arguments on Catholicism - but my even more fundamental concern is that an intellectual/theological/doctrinaire movement and an institution practicing this should be kept apart. Pteron 03:09, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * Hm, that poses a general question though. Even if the doctrine of a church/state proposes an equivalence of the that it is the church/state, does that mean that we have to follow that train of thought? The state says 'we own culture', but culture doesn't say 'I belong exclusively to the state'. That's exclusionary because other voices cannot be heard. If Louis XIV says: "L'État, c'est moi!", do we write "Louis XIV embodied the state"? Should French politics during absolute monarchy be merged into the biographies of the Kings? I don't want to be polemic about this, but there is a difference that is profound enough that we should make a general distinction. Textuality and materiality of such a broad subject shouldn't be discussed in a single article. Wikipedia is a strange hybrid in this respect - it uses very interesting models of knowledge production, but relies on Enlightenment distinctions concerning article classification. However, if we didn't do so the system would collapse onto itself. There is also a more practical component worrying me though. With one article people are forced to see these as connected and it will take a while till someone is audacious enough to split them again. That way growth will be stifled, as people will be more cautious to add themes like bureaucracy of the RCC etc. Also other movements (new age Catholics, people rejecting Vatican II, all the others you mentioned...) will suffer if we restrict Catholicism to the Catholic Church. We're limiting what people write if we consolidate too much. Oh no, now I've gone off on a rant... sorry but I just got engrossed... Pteron 05:49, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * Having said that, it is a nicely organized article - if it got some pictures (of the Vatican? etc.) it could possibly even be considered as a featured article. The contentions surrounding it need to be resolved first though. Pteron 06:06, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Barnstar


Mark - for your good work in making newcomers to Wikipedia feel welcome, I hereby award you this barnstar &rarr;Raul654 02:39, Apr 20, 2004 (UTC)
 * Agree wholeheartedly - made me feel very welcome. Pteron 05:49, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

New user welcome
I love your new user welcome, do you mind if I use and recommend it? I have a hunch you will keep it current. Have a look at my user page, and if you don't like the plug there just tell me and I'll change it (or just change it yourself, this is permission). Andrewa 07:14, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

vote result
Iso,

It seems that things went well with your nomination of me. Apparently I'm sufficiently non-offensive (or work only on obscure topics) that not even a sock-puppet decided to throw in a monkey wrench.

I even managed to shanghai a few non crypto types who are willing to review articles for obscurity to the non specialist, so I think things have gone swimmingly.

Thanks. It doesn't always go like this does it?

ww 16:52, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

RE: Alain Robert- your query
 * We haven't put any info on the photo yet (as we always do) because I'm still waiting for a reply to my e-mail. (And he is away for several weeks.) The photo comes from his website where there is an e-mail address to contact for use of photos. I (Jack) placed the photo in my article in advance because I'm certain Monsieur Robert will be most pleased with a complimentary and factual article on his exploits. If not, we can always remove it. JillandJack 15:28, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Link Attack
Please don't link-attack me. It's childish and vindictive. Besides, you seem to want to cast me into obscurity, and edit-wars will only draw attention to me and my contributions. So you're working against yourself. However, I don't like edit-wars, and, though I might benefit from the attention, they make Wikipedia worse. Please don't start them. Mike Church 07:43, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I already said I don't appreciate this link attack regarding my card game. I bet you've never played Ambition. Why must you hate it so? Mike Church 08:50, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * Well, I'm glad I'm not the only sysop who finds Mike Church's promotion of his game here tedious and inappropriate. Charles Matthews 19:40, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Satin Bowerbird
Yes, the current line of research on them comes from the University of Maryland, College Park - it's good stuff. There's a reference in the article, though there are many others that could have been given. seglea 16:05, 25 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Anna spessard
Did you mean to that? Because it looked like speedy-delete to me... :) - Fennec 05:54, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Anne-Lise Tessier
Not-Done. Looked like it was deleted but the article remains. I can't find anything odd about it to explain why it won't delete. - T&#949;x &#964; ur&#949; 16:01, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * Hmm... I moved the article to Tessier and deleted Tessier successfully. Ann-Lise Tessier is now a redirect that still can't be deleted.  Any thoughts one what to redirect it to if we just plain can't delete it? - T&#949;x &#964; ur&#949; 16:52, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)


 * (If I can find out how it was done maybe I can make "Texture's Law" a permanent, undeleteable article ... ;)

What's the unicode value for a dash? - T&#949;x &#964; ur&#949; 16:55, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)

User: Mike Church
I just wanted to say thanks for your work against Mike Church's ridiculous self-promotion. It's often a thankless job to correct those kind of edits, and it shouldn't be. --Lowellian 23:26, Apr 26, 2004 (UTC)

Main Page:SandBox
Noticed you had it down in the deletion log. Looks like it doesn't want to die. EddEdmondson 00:38, 28 Apr 2004 (UTC)

More on the tutorial
I took a stab at shortening the namespace article: User talk:Niteowlneils/Tutorial (namespaces). It is written assuming it's preceded by my proposed Registration info page (or something like it--I'm not wedded to it's wording): User talk:Niteowlneils/tutorial (registration). If the reg page doesn't go in, obviously the User/UT section would have to be tweaked a bit, since non-regs won't see the links unless they happen to click on a user name in a page history or something. Anyway, did I cut too much? Too little? Cut the wrong stuff? Oh, as to why I think the reg page is worth putting in, even though it doesn't qualify as something a newbie would need to know: I think many people that made it that far into the tutorial would be curious, also, I think selling the idea of registration is good for the community, and might even help with RC patrol, by encouraging newbies sincere enuf to be reading the tutorial to register. Niteowlneils 02:23, 28 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * OK, the pages are in. I've already been thinking about the 'advanced tutorial', at least big picture-wise (IE I haven't thot much about what topics it might cover yet). I think it should have similar goals: just 5-10 fairly short pages, not comprehensive, but with links to additional info, and focused on getting editors to the next level. There are two things I think might make sense to tweak: Depending on what topics are included, it might make sense to have described links to the topic pages on the front page, so, if someone is looking for something specific, they can go straight to it. The other thing is to shy away from the word "tutorial". Ive been thinking something like "Editing tips and tricks" (possibly with the word "guide" at the end) or maybe more like "Brief editing guide". PS I added a link to the tutorial on the tutorial page, and a redir to it from wikipedia tutorial. PPS I'm glad you linked watchlist. Niteowlneils 23:21, 28 Apr 2004 (UTC)
 * There are probably a variety of ways to follow-up the tutorial, but where I see the most need, and thus am most interested in contributing to, is to give people that have mastered the basics covered in the tutorial, guidance in writing good, consistent Wikipedia-style articles, some info on key backend processes/areas, any shortcuts and resources they can use, and ideas about various ways they can contribute. I've written a start at a draft outline that should give some idea of what I'm thinking of, and a draft of one page Invalid content. I'd start by linking to it from both the first and last page of the tutorial, and ideally, everywhere the tutorial is mentioned, as a 'for further reading' type reference. Niteowlneils 00:22, 1 May 2004 (UTC)
 * User:TheCustomOfLife(User talk:TheCustomOfLife) (originally an IP) is a good example of the type (or at least one of the types) of users the guide should target--he has enthusiasm, knowledge in areas our coverage had gaps, and has responded very well to a little guidance--going from new pages like this, to Love of Life. The tutorial does a great job on giving people the tools to be good editors, but after some hours on WP, people will want to start creating new pages, so the guide should address that audience, focusing on style standards (intro before any section heads, repeat subject in bold in the intro, image placement, etc.), naming conventions, checking the article doesn't already appear at an alternative title, and that sort of thing. Niteowlneils 02:37, 10 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Re: Welcome
Hello, thanks for your welcome message, that was nice to see.

I think Wikipedia is a truly, truly amazing monument to what the web can do.

I've seen a couple of mini-debates about scalability and so on, and I've also seen how things like Votes for Deletion are becoming very difficult to manage due to the growth of the project. I just hope and pray that people are equal to the task.

I would be interested to know what you think of my idea for increasing funding, which you can see here: village pump Fundraising through Increased Book Linking.

Incidentally I would have liked to have linked directly to that section. I tried a number of link attempts using the # but to no avail. The link FAQ doesn't seem to help either. Any answers?

--bodnotbod 14:58, May 1, 2004 (UTC)

Blues-rock
Is blues-rock fixed for you? Tuf-Kat 22:09, May 3, 2004 (UTC)

Ambition
I would appreciate any help you can give in keeping the gaming topics NPOV. See these edits. Thanks. UninvitedCompany 21:22, 10 May 2004 (UTC)

I sorry, 'wikipedia' is new to me as matter of fact so is english and computer!--Jimbo The troll Slayer 05:43, 13 May 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome!
I'm flabbergasted that someone wrote something on my Talkpage. I'd create a link but I think my brain is overloaded by the tutorial, which was, indeed, helpful. Thanks for the tip about topics I could work on. I'll check it out. divadiane 15:00, 13 May 2004 (UTC)

Re: Welcome
I was writing about a friend. Why? Becouse some people would maybe want to contact him. But ofcourse if you do not want me to write it, I'll delete it right away. --Underground 18:43, 13 May 2004 (UTC)

Hahaha, thank you. That made my day. He had been really getting under my skin. Meelar 22:03, 14 May 2004 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks for the award. It is good to know that my work is helping the project. Academic Challenger 04:29, 15 May 2004 (UTC)

Rishartha
Hi; while I know it's usually standard practice to warn people before a block, I don't think such a courtesy is necessary in this case. See Vandalism_in_progress for but a brief sampling of this vandal's previous incarnations. Cheers, -- Hadal 06:06, 15 May 2004 (UTC)

My nomination
I did not see that I deleted the two votes in the edit conflict. I didn't do it on purpose. Thanks for telling me that. --Lst27 21:44, 16 May 2004 (UTC)

Hi. I am not the same person as User:AlexPlank. --Lst27 00:36, 17 May 2004 (UTC)


 * A general note to people who may be wondering whether Lst27 is in fact Alex Plank. You may observe that Lst27's decision to remove his self-nomination for adminship, after it had received considerable opposition, is entirely consistent with Alex Plank's behavior when nominating himself in the past. --Michael Snow 21:05, 17 May 2004 (UTC)

Xena Articles
User:Snowspinner/Mess of Xena articles is the full list. The top list are ones that are made-up characters - the bottom list are ones that I should list on pages needing help, which I'll do some time today. Snowspinner 14:18, 17 May 2004 (UTC)

Alex 
Yes, I could see from your discussion with him that you didn't really need to be convinced. Posting the message above was partly just to let people know what had happened, though I admit that may be redundant since I expect many people would have checked back at RfA to monitor that particular nomination. But also, in your case, since Lst27 flatly denies being Alex  on this page, I thought that denial should be accompanied by a little evidence that tends to refute the statement.

I'll take your word for it on the common interests. I didn't investigate that far, because like you, I didn't need proof that Alex is Lst27 in order to oppose the nomination. And even at this point, it doesn't matter that much whether we can say the point is proven, since we're not talking about a banned user. --Michael Snow 21:31, 17 May 2004 (UTC)


 * I wouldn't accuse anybody of witch-hunting on this one. Even Wik didn't pull out his usual asylum verbiage that Alex finds so offensive (presumably Wik has learned that the vitriol is counterproductive in this case, because it just generates sympathy for Alex when the community would otherwise agree with Wik anyway).


 * Unfortunately, I think the cycle has already killed any hope of ever getting a consensus in favor of making Alex an admin. He has potential to be a valuable contributor, certainly, and would be even more valuable if he didn't spend so much effort on the adminship obsession. I mostly wish he would just recognize that being an admin is nothing special, and he can be just as respected without being an admin, though that's difficult because there are many people who do treat it as a status symbol.


 * As you say, sleuthing can be fun, and Wikipedia provides a great place to entertain yourself that way. --Michael Snow 21:59, 17 May 2004 (UTC)

Welcoming Committee
Good point about msg:opentasks - I'll have to think what to do about it. If I don't take it out, I'll make a point of saying, "don't feel pressured to do these", in the same way that I link to policies but qualify it by saying that you don't have to read them before contributing.

I'll definitely include the link to Tutorial. Thanks for your input.--ALargeElk 08:49, 20 May 2004 (UTC)

spellying/spelling
Iso, I noted your amusement at the existence of Hoople and wish to suggest another possibly bemusing issue before you vanish for the summer (if you haven't already). The cypher vs cipher issue now has its own discussion page (see WikiProject Cryptography) and has produced quite a few comments, even some at the Pump (under spelling question: cypher vs cipher). It's become a Teapot Tornado. You might want to chime in or at least watch.

Best wishes this summer. ww 18:02, 28 May 2004 (UTC)

re: Unifying conjecture VfD request
Hi, if you're around sometime in the next few days and get a chance, could you look over Unifying conjecture and see if there's anything worthwhile there? It's listed on VfD and we're trying to get a couple extra expert opinions, just in case. Thanks, Isomorphic 22:07, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)
 * I just saw your message and took a look. Seem that it has made a lot of progress since your request. I think it could use some cleaning up, but there does seem to be some content there. Sorry for the delay, I need to check my talk pages when I come back from a break and they fall off the bottom of my watchlist. ;-> Jake 20:44, 2 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Thank you very much
for your support of me these last few weeks, both on my talk page and elsewhere at WP. Comments like yours help me stay focused on what I love about this project, rather than getting caught up in the pain of dealing with those who would see it crumble. I hope your summer is a pleasant one, and that you don't stray too far from us...I fear the trouble with trolls will require your brand of cheerful encouragement to keep us all calm. :-) I see from perusing your user page that I have miraculously claimed a place in your Hall of Fame, first position no less, and that you would seek to imitate my conduct to some extent. I am humbled by such praise, and though I fear that, in heated moments, I have not always conducted myself in a manner that deserves to be emulated, as Edgar said in Lear, "Sir, I shall study deserving" (and I will hope to do much better than he did).  Perhaps your kindness will inspire me in the future to act even more in accord with Wikiquette and Jimbo's vision for this place.  Thank you once again for all your generous and much-needed words, Jwrosenzweig 20:06, 4 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Tokipona
For why are you delete my page of Tokipona Wiki. I was try to make page so my friends can read Wiki, and add there knowledge, which is plentiful as good harvest in all the areas knowledge. You should change your mind. MAybe it was not perfect, but I was in process of making it a good page to read and look at. I will work harder next time to make everything look nice and all "links" be serviceable. Is copy still there of my page? I would like not to type all over again everything again. Thankyou -Gamra Tangtiphai

--I should add that this is not my language one. (nor Toki Pona nor English). Toki Pona is a new fashioned language, so it does not surprise me that what you say "bizarre nonsense". I am not expecting you to had seen this language before, but it is real language.

Sharon Case
I just saw your edits to Sharon Case. I've tried getting in touch with the anonymous user twice, but the new profiles are still very bare-bones and, IMO, insufficient. I'm willing to suspend doubt, though, because I'm fairly new myself. The discouraging thing is that I've tried contact twice and nothing has come of it. How can we get this to stop? TheCustomOfLife 21:51, 11 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * I know I can expand on it, and I have. However, I would like to write these things at my own leisure, and when I see those short things, I get all obsessive because I have to fix them up. It shouldn't have to be like that. TheCustomOfLife 22:07, 11 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * I wasn't asking you to ban the person or anything. I was just...venting. Complaining. Whining. I do that a lot. Nice to meet you, too! :D TheCustomOfLife 22:19, 11 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Another World
You would know a lot more about this since you've been here longer, but I've built up a sizable (and pretty good, if I do say so myself) Another World page. Since you know nothing about soaps, this would be good since I wrote the page with the uninitiated in mind. Take a read and tell me what you think. TheCustomOfLife 22:35, 11 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the support! I'll be on pins and needles waiting for the feedback. TheCustomOfLife 00:48, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * Hey, is it normal for it to go on this long without any feedback? TheCustomOfLife 22:08, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)


 * Hey, could you email me? haltermannews@yahoo.com TheCustomOfLife 01:00, 13 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I've edited the article again. Now review and see if it's fine. TheCustomOfLife 04:50, 22 Jun 2004 (UTC)

opinion sought
Just wanted your opinion on an article I saw... I have my doubts about POV, but wanted to get a more experienced opinion before doing anything... John Hagelin. -FZ

Yet an other "thanks for welcome" message
I never really looked at my talk page before, I didn't expect to find something there. So I was delightfully surprised to see your message.

Some time ago I've written an article on the International Biology Olympiad, though of course it can always be improved (hey, it's a wiki). Besides that I haven't contributed much yet. I think I'll blame time. Eef (A) 11:45, 24 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Henry Hunt
No, I'm not stalking you- I didn't even realize it was one of yours until just now. I'd been working my way through Civil War generals for list of military commanders. FZ 13:09, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Essays
I read through your essays the other day and found them insightful. Thanks. UninvitedCompany 15:31, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Sobaka
Thanks a bunch for pointing this site out. I've bookmarked it - it makes for fascinating reading, and it's exactly the sort of stuff I'm interested in. Ambivalenthysteria 12:18, 11 Jul 2004 (UTC)

William Patrick Hitler
The source for the assumed last name is AndyL 06:25, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)


 * That seems to make it clear they don't want to be bothered, and arn't politically or otherwise signifigant. Sam [Spade] 06:30, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)

If you're suggesting there shouldn't be an article at all then you should probably also complain about the book and the documentary. AndyL 06:47, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)

The thing is both the book and the documentary hint strongly as to the name by saying that it's a "double barrelled" English name and an "ironic choice" given William Patrick's statements that he rejects his uncle's ideology. It's fairly clear that the name is based on that of Houston Stewart Chamberlain from the published material. Also, given the publication of pictures in the book and on CNN etc, publication of the business two of the brothers are in and their location I think any attempt at privacy was pretty much blown away by the book, the article in the New Yorker and in other media that accompanied it. I think, at least, the Houston Stewart Chamberlain connection should be kept in the article since that has been widely published and since it reveals something about William Patrick's thinking even if the precise assumed name is removed. AndyL 07:03, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)

My comment about there not being an article was directed at Sam, not you. Anyway, I've modified the article somewhat. AndyL 07:23, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)

in any case this BBC article] suggests that the last name is Stewart-Chamberlain rather than Houston-Stewart so it's probably best to just say the name is based on Houston Stewart Chamberlain's than to actually state what the name is. AndyL 07:28, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Energybone
Mark - I ran into energybone and banned him once already. The emails he sent... invective, to say the least. What evidence do you have that it's the same user as Plautus? If it is, the ban on him is reset. &rarr;Raul654 03:14, Jul 22, 2004 (UTC)

Alice Liddell
Hi. I know you're busy, but I'm not sure who besides you has been following the pedophile thing. Just wanted to let you know that a certain user has been busy at Alice Liddell, adding innuendo about her relationship with Dodgson. I don't know enough to judge mysel, but at some point it'll need reviewing for factuality and NPOV. Thanks, Isomorphic 05:09, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)
 * I think this whole issue cannot be resolved without banning a couple of obviously abusive users like Moon_light_shadow, Zanthalon, Madeline, Marlais and so on. Sorry, it is too time consuming to delete all their crap. Get-back-world-respect 11:57, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Church Times
I hadn't looked for Mike for a wee while; I drop in on Ambition (card game) every now and again - though not for some time. Good to know he still stalks the boards. I'd be quite happy if you hacked one of my Mike tweaks on my page to add new sock-puppets. Church Army would seem to be the place. Catch my blatant lies might indeed just catch on. best wishes, Tagishsimon

Plautus banning
I talked it over with some people - it is left up to admins' discretion to decide whether or not someone is a sockpuppet. We both agree that Energybone is a Plautus reincarnation. Using sockpupets to evade an arbcom ban resets it. Therefore, I have banned Plautus for a year, to expire in July 2005. Just thought I'd let you know. &rarr;Raul654 06:05, Jul 27, 2004 (UTC)

Question about equations
Why have all the equations on wikipedia been removed?

I couldnt find them on the intro editing page, or the sandbox, nor in any of the articles that uesd to have them, or google cached pages...

Do equations have no place in wikipedia?

--DrXenocide

Mike Church
I am taking up matters regarding Mike Church; see his talk page for details. While it is unclear whether he is still a student at Carleton, at least some of the problem edits have originated from Carleton IPs. We'll see. I'll visit the administration there in person if it looks like that will help, since it's but a short drive away for me. UninvitedCompany 16:23, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)

If he were a student at, say, Yale, I'd let it drop. However, his actions reflect poorly on Carleton and do not respect community standards for either Carleton or Northfield. I have fairly deep ties to both places. At this point I am approaching this not as a Wikipedia problem per se but rather as a problem these other communities face; Wikipedia is merely the venue. UninvitedCompany 15:50, 29 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Thank you
Thanks for replying to my voting question on the help desk. Since putting it, I seem to have seen something somewhere--just caught a glimpse, in looking for something else--about how you need to be a registered user of three months' standing to get to vote on, uh ... perhaps on anything. Any poll. Do you think there is such a rule? It sounds like it might be a reasonable precaution against coups, actually, though three months also sounds a bit long.--Bishonen 17:25, 1 Aug 2004 (UTC)

cleanup assist
Do you have any suggestions for Language of set theory? It's on Cleanup (because, frankly, it sucks), but I'm not sure where to start.... -FZ 22:54, 3 Aug 2004 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I'm still not sure if I want to undertake a project of the size this thing could turn into, but it's good to have some ideas. -FZ 16:31, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Exile
I just saw your comment on the Jeff Vogel VFD. You play that too? Best game series ever made. Ambi 01:44, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)

use of awesome power
Isomorphic, Since you're partly responsible for all this (well sort of, if you hadn't mentioned it...), I'm asking for some anti-fractional assistance. You will observe (at Talk:Jerzy RóÅ¼ycki) that a problem has arisen. Matt thinks he can't, and I'm not sure I understand what's going on well enough to risk use of my awesome powers to, fix this. Even Superman shows proper restraint at times! Presumably, you know what's going on sufficiently to not break the Wikipedia by intervening. Or know who would know. Either (or both) would be appreciated.

You may have been watching the progress at WikiProject Cryptography, and the more recent WikiReader Cryptography. Matt certainly has the organizational touch, far more than my misanthropic self, and much has been accomplished. Even some humor (see Project at discussions/cypher v cipher). So much that I have for some time been contemplating nomination for him. If you would, I'd like a comment from you on the conventions. Matt has been editing and contributing since his (dramatic) debut in March this year (see Talk:Cryptography for the intial examples) and has clearly demonstrated enough good will and ability and willingness re WP to qualify as I understand things. How long does one have to be aboard before becoming eligible? Is there a rule? If so, I haven't found it in my poking around under the furniture. ww 17:02, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Hope your period of reduced activity is proving rewarding. ww 17:02, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)

what do you mean?
Hello. What did you mean by what I am doing? I had the same question, because they are related to poetry. Why did you delete my question? Are people not allowed to ask questions in discussion pages?

block of User:Avenger
Just thought you might want to know User:Avenger, who you blocked, edited your userpage and added a picture of the Kurdish National Flag. -Frazzydee 15:33, 15 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Being able to parse sentences is better
My bad. I didn;t see the word "asked" in the sentence ... without it, Lst27 was saying he was Mike. With it, well, I erred. --Tagishsimon

Truce
I am offering a truce. If you remove your hate page, "Minions of the Church", I will hereby cease all vandalism and exit Wikipedia. If you do not, the vandalism will continue indefinitely, and will become more vicious as time progresses. Keep in mind that if you keep your hate page in existence, you will be upholding a page that has proven, over the past few days, to attract vandalism. By doing so, you will be engaging in behavior that is utterly inappropriate for a sysop, and it will be reported to Requests for de-adminship that you have encouaged vandalism. Offering Truce 04:43, 16 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Anon vs. your user page
Some anon removed your Minions of the Church thing from your user page. I've restored it. Please be aware. -- Grunt (talk) 22:49, 2004 Aug 16 (UTC)
 * By the way: I view it as a _good_ thing that one's userpage is being vandalised; it's a sign of importance. Don't give in to vandals, as there's more than enough of us grunt workers out here to deal with them. -- Grunt (talk) 22:51, 2004 Aug 16 (UTC)

Statement on your hate page
Guano removed this bit, so I'll just post it here. This is addressed to all the filthy swine who supported your hate page, not just you, Isomorphic:

Glad to see that your shrine ("Minions") dedicated to the time-honored tradition of resenting one's intellectual and moral superiors, is getting so much activity.

I've given a formal statement about your hate page, at my User page. I know you won't read it, but I thought I'd mention that it's there.

Fact is, I'm bloody sick of fighting you. When you write a card game that hundreds, if not thousands, of people are playing, maybe you'll have something to say to me. When you're stalked for two years, develop post-traumatic issues from it, and still manage to gather yourself back together against all odds, maybe you'll be able to talk to me as an equal. Until then, get out of my fucking face, all of you. None of you are worthy to mention my name. Mike Church 18:54, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Quake in your boots, laddie
Or, come to that, ladette. Who am I to say? You've been RfC'd. Oddly, I'm sure being RfC'd will just stoke the huge ego problem that Mike complains of in the RfC. So I'd opine that it's all getting somewhere between circular and pear shaped. Yawn. --Tagishsimon 20:25, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)