User talk:Raystorm/Archive 1

Welcome
Hello, Raystorm, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Wikipedia Boot Camp, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type   on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and vote pages using three tildes, like this: &#126;&#126;&#126;. Four tildes (&#126;&#126;&#126;&#126;) produces your name and the current date. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Kukini 14:43, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

Thanks!
Trying to find out how to put here those cool boxes I've seen on other user pages, such as 'this user has a livejournal' or 'this user likes chocolate'... Raystorm 21:18, 17 March 2006 (UTC)


 * I don't know that I'd call myself a master (I've only been active here for about six months), but thanks for the positive feedback! By the way, for userbox info, see Userboxes. Catamorphism 21:20, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Userboxes
Just putting together a collection. Is there some problem? I would be willing to remove any that are bothersome to you. Interestingstuffadder 00:12, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Case Closed Talk Page Move opinions needed
A flurry of page movings in the last few days has caused the Talk page of Case Closed to be located at Talk:Detective Conan (Case Closed). Please convey tyour opinion on the latter page if it should be moved back to Talk:Case Closed since this is required by the admins of Wikipedia.

Second Spanish Republic
Le agregue partes del manifiesto que tu posteaste en la "talk page", al articulo Second Spanish Republic. Espero que halla quedado bien, y suficientemente neutral, lo cual fue un poco difficil con un texto tan bonito. ¿Podrias pasarme el link o pagina web de donde conseguiste el manifiesto, para poder citarlo como fuente? Gracias. Saludos cordiales de otro simpatizante de la segunda república. =)

--Lobizón 22:18, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Article rating for Same-sex marriage in Spain
Hey Raystorm! I'm sorry that I caused some concern over the rating for the Same-sex marriage in Spain article. I didn't mean to do that. I was just cleaning up all the LGBT articles that didn't have a rating yet. After skimming the article, it looks to have the stuff it needs for GA rating. I gave it a B rating (which itself is pretty good) purely because it was waiting for GA review not because of any flaws. (If you look at the top of WikiProject_LGBT_studies/Assessment, you'll see that very few articles have a B rating or better -- only 16% of the 639 articles.) As soon as it gets GA status, please feel free to change the rating on the Talk page. --Tiger Marc ROAR! 00:06, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
 * P.S. I love your userboxes! --Tiger Marc ROAR! 00:06, 30 December 2006 (UTC)
 * P.P.S. Let me know if you need any help getting GA status. --Tiger Marc ROAR! 00:19, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

I'll take another look at the article over the next few days. --Tiger Marc ROAR! 20:47, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Removing material warning
It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from. Please be careful not to remove content from Wikipedia without a valid reason, which you should specify in the edit summary or on the article's talk page. Take a look at our welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Randroide 18:59, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Not redundant at all, Raystorm. The information is as relevant in the Barajas bombing article as it the Zapatero article, just as the chantings against Aznar arevas relevant in the article about him and in the article about the 2004 train bombings. Happy new year Randroide 19:09, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Uhmmm...could you please try the rewording yourself. The text as it is is good for me, but not good for you. Please, try to make it good for you and we´ll see... Thank you, Raystorm. Randroide 19:20, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Perfect. Thank you very much, Raystorm. Feliz año nuevo. Randroide 19:40, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

For the sake of equal treatment and of providing maximun information about relevant issues, I support the option of following the precedent established in Jose Maria Aznar: Full quoting of banners against the president in demonstrations.

Of course you are free to ask me whatever tou want, Raystorm. You are not a nuisance at all (and I hope neither I am for you).Randroide 19:58, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Hi again, Raystorm. I changed "M-11" for "3/11", which, I think, is the correct format for the english speaker. I am about to leaving my job and going home, so I wish you a happy 2007.Randroide 20:50, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Re: Minor Barnstar award
Thank you, thank you!! I appreciate the recognition. Happy New Year to you! Aleta 20:41, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Barnstar award
Thank you for the Barnstar award for the Wollstonecraft page! Live long and prosper. Awadewit 23:03, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Asociación de Víctimas del Terrorismo
Raystorm, al-Qaeda had nothing to do with the 11-M.


 * While the bombers may have been inspired by Bin Laden, a two-year investigation into the attacks has found 'no evidence that al-Qa'ida

helped plan, finance or carry out the bombings', or even knew about them in advance.here.

Could you please fix the erroneous claims you made in the AVT page?.

Thank you. CU. Randroide 18:02, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Raystorm.

FIRST

You wrote:


 * saying that Al-Qaeda didn't have anything to do with March 11 is just your POV, since the only people processed for the attack are islamists members from an Al-Qaeda cell


 * PS: Regarding your Independent ref, nowhere does it say that Al-Qaeda had nothing to do with the attacks

My response to both assertions, again from "The Independent":


 * a two-year investigation into the attacks has found  no evidence that al-Qa'ida helped plan, finance or carry out the bombings, or even knew about them in advance.

After the two year investigation, there´s no evidence. This reference is stronger than your "El Mundo" reference, which leads us to the second point...

SECOND

Your source for the al-Qaida claim. Look a the date, please. I could write that Ibarretxe aknowledged that ETA commited the attacks with this source.


 * The Basque regional president, Juan Jose Ibarretxe, stressed that Eta does not represent the Basque people. "When Eta attacks, the Basque heart breaks into a thousand pieces," he said.

I do not wrote that nonsense because I look at the date of the article and I have standards of intellectual decency.

Do the same as me and please correct the mess. If you want to write that al-Qaeda was blamed in the very first days, do it, but you can not say "it was al-Qaeda" because sources NOWADAYS show that that concept now is proved as false.Randroide 07:57, 13 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Randroide, please do bother to read the edit again. It does not say 'Al-Qaeda did it and ETA had nothing to do with it'. It says Al-Qaeda _claimed_ it and ETA did not. End of story. And I'll thank you not to mess my talk page by using fonts of different sizes, the equivalent of yelling trying to make a point. It is completely unnecessary. Cheers Raystorm 10:46, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Randroide"

Randroide 11:06, 13 January 2007 (UTC) I deleted the big font. I beg your pardon. I did not know you are bothered by bigger fonts. My sole intention was to make a point, not to "yell".

O.K., I´ll fix the text to make the text say just what the sources say. CU.

Randroide 11:35, 13 January 2007 (UTC) ...ehrr...I hope that, if we adhere strictly to what sources say, we´ll avoid futile discussions.

Read your own (and, I must add, pertinent) source, please:


 * "Un presunto portavoz "militar" de Al Qaeda en Europa...[]...La identidad facilitada por el protagonista del vídeo no ha podido ser acreditada por los servicios de inteligencia españoles, ni por otros extranjeros consultados."

On the other hand, if you think that the debate about the 11-M autorship does not belong in the AVT page, I suggest you to do not introduce the subject there.

The (so called) "al-Qaida connection" theory has been DISproved, as the source above states. It has the same status as the "ETA did it" assertions prevalent (even PSOE leader said it) in the day of the bombings.

al-Qaida first letter is lower case.

Please check my work on the AVT page to see if we can reach a consensus with no further nuisances.

Thank you for your emoticons : )

Randroide 15:38, 15 January 2007 (UTC) Your latest change is a very good improvement over my previous text. Excellent. I must confess that I was bored trying to find a declaration by Pilar Manjon against the AVT. Once I stumbled with the line about "the mental health" I stopped reading abd added a rather vague assertion. The reference about the closing down of the mosquees and all that stuff was at the bottom of the article, and I did not reach so far.

The AVT really asked for that?!. I would like to have more information about that issue.

Are you interested in LGBT issues?. I suggest you to look at this. CU.

Of course that AIDS is not a "LGBT illness", but it is a fact that the LGBT people is specially targeted by the "information" campaigns about AIDS.

Moreover, the film I linked above was showed in LGBT film festivals, gaining accolades.

My fauvorite LGBT link is this one: Pink Pistols. I am a pro-gun guy, and I think that the attitude of these "pinks" is fantastic: Stop whining and stop asking for more (dubious) "protection" from the government, and get a gun to exercise the right of defending yourself.

If this text is "too much" for you, I beg your pardon. The issue is that I am totally fed up of seeing the LGBT collective being presented as a bunch of "progressive" estatist clones. That´s not the case.

I agree with you in your perplexity about the strange absence of commentary about the (alleged) AVT claims.

Another perplexing issue: Barajas Airport was not evacuated (or, arguably, under evacuation) when the ETA van-bomb went off. I saw this video yesterday and my jaw dropped to the floor and stayed there for a long time. No media (AFAIK) is commenting this issue.

Sorry for the delay in my response to your reasonable arguments in the talk page of 2004 Madrid train bombings. The situation there, by now, is, uhm, problematic. CU. Randroide 14:46, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Ehrrr... a rather strange request, Raystorm. Could you please go to 2004_Madrid_train_bombings and fix the first link. The correct word to be linked is Tzezrzrzozrism (dismiss "z"s, please).

I have a "filtered access" that, on a random fashion, from time to time truncates "sensitive" words.

Thank you.Randroide 15:41, 16 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much for the correction, Raystorm. This random truncation is a nuisance. It never happened before in these circumstances. Randroide 16:51, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Invitation
Congratulations on getting GA! Would you be interested in joining WikiProject LGBT studies? Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 18:08, 13 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi Dev920! Thanks for your comments and invitation! They are much appreciated. I put _a lot_ of effort into that article, it's nice to see it worked out as a GA. :)


 * Regarding your invitation to join the LGBT project, I have to say I was a bit discouraged when a few weeks ago I asked for help with Same-sex marriage in Spain in the projects' talkpage and got no response. Seeking individual members of the project to review the article proved equally useless. It did dishearten me a little, and I didn't get a very good first impression about how the project worked.


 * If I join, what would it imply? Cheers Raystorm 18:44, 13 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry you had such a bad first impression. The WikiProject has been languishing for sometime, but since I joined in November I've been doing my best to get it going. However, the wall I keep hitting is that very few members are serious article writers. Most seem to be Wikifaeries, working behind the scenes. A number of them are also very inexperienced on Wikipedia, and probably don't feel confident enough to proffer criticism. I'm trying to rebalance that, because we need content writers as well as janitors, and since your message 24 more people have joined the project, some of whom do write good articles. The reason I want you to join the project is so that, when people such as yourself ask for feedback, they actually get it.


 * I'm not sure why you said approaching individual editors proved fruitless, your contributions show you only contacted Tiger Marc, who agreed to look at the article for you. However, this is an issue, and I will put something in the next newsletter about the importance of helping people who request it.


 * I don't really understand what you mean by imply. If you join, you will receive a welcome notice, and a newsletter every month. How involved you get is up to you. Obviously, it would be good if you participated in discussions (such as the ongoing one about categorisation) - likewise, when people ask for help with their articles, you might want to help them. The WikiProject's central aim is to bring together Wikipedians interested in improving LGBT-related articles, and and so it's mostly there to provide a series of options people can choose from in how they go about it and collate information and suggestions to allow them to do so. Collaboration is something we're lacking a bit, however. I'm working on it. :) I hope this has answered your question, please ask any more if you need to. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 19:12, 13 January 2007 (UTC)


 * By imply I meant the tasks involved with the project, which you have perfectly stated. I'm glad to hear new editors have joined since in order to keep the project going and improve it. You're right, I only contacted personally one member of the project (who did agree to review it but later did nothing). I thought I had contacted Aleta as well, but it seems it slipped my mind. My mistake. Anyway, thanks for the lenghty response, I have to run now but I'll definitely think about it. :) Cheers Raystorm 19:28, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

LGBT History
I noticed you added "LG History" when you joined WP:LGBT. I've been having some trouble keeping up with Timeline of LGBT history and would love some help watching the page and keeping it clean and up-to-date. In particular, there are often edits that add wikilinks to words and phrases that don't need them - for instance, homosexuality or civil unions. Since the words are already linked, wikilinking them again isn't needed, though new edits often do so anyway. If you have the time and energy, would you watchlist that page and help me patrol it? Also, Welcome to the WikiProject! -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 17:47, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Two articles and request for arbitration.
Hi Raystorm : I do not want to give lessons to you about Randroide but I want to tell what has been happening here to you having a perspective. Southofwatford follow the patth you are following many months ago and after intensive and extensive work, he found that what Randroide does is to twist things to his side relentlessly. The idea of Randroide is that the PSOE plus the former Gal components did the bombing. His strategy is very flexible. When he is cornered as now, he is very reasonable and accepts to include only doubts about official version. When he gains momentum he starts going beyond and beyond and one day you read the article and it is saying what he wants. In any case, we were going to do a RFA aimed to have two articles : one with the offcial version and another with Randroide ideas. The rational behind this is that the two narratives are incompatible and do not have enough in common to write only a single article. Randroide refuses this in spite of the fact that is a good deal since then he can work in one and the rest of us can work in the other. I suggest that you consider the posibility of helping to push for two separate articles as was done in 9/11 where also there are many alternative theories. I insist that is a question of sources. We have two groups of sources and what they say is incompatible for every single fact. As you have seen, even the first paragraph is controversial so I see no point in continue with something that after more than one talk page per week for five months has been imposible. It is better split and each one can contrbute in a comfortable way without quarreling all the time. This was Southofwatford idea and I like very much. Please consider to help us to push for an RFA that forces Randroide to accept that are two narratives (basically El Mundo and the rest) and both are legitimate but blended are imposible to read so the first article would be free of El Mundo quotes while the second can have as much El MUndo as Randroide wants. Then the reader can choose.--Igor21 18:19, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Copyedit before FAC
Hi Raystorm. I'll gladly take a look to that article, althought I'll warn you that I'm not even a native speaker or anything. So keep looking for copyeditors, and good luck! --SidiLemine 17:06, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Archivo de Talk:2004_Madrid_train_bombings
Hola, Raystorm.

¿Puedes por favor archivar el (digamos) 80% de la página de discusión?.

Yo no puedo, dado mi acceso "institucional" filtrado, que truncaría un par de palabras de los posts de Southofwatford (¡¡Y tienes que ver cómo se pone el tío cuando eso sucede!!).

La página ya es ilegible (por lo larga) por muchos navegadores, y está a punto de empezar a dar problemas en todos.

Te ruego que sigas las instrucciones que vienen clickando en el archivador que sale en la página arriba a la derecha.

Gracias, y un saludo. Randroide 11:25, 24 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Gracias por el archivado, Raystorm. Que tengas suerte con la candidatura.


 * Queda pendiente el tema de la notabilidad de la cita que retiraste del encabezamiento. Lo traté en Talk:2004_Madrid_train_bombings. Dejo el asunto "colgado" hasta que vuelvas con el "Óscar" debajo del brazo ;) . Un saludo. Randroide 17:28, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Copyedit equest for Same-sex marriage in Spain
Just letting you know I've proofed it and made copyedits; the only thing I am not sure about within the article is the paragraph that begins "Protesters against the measure claim to have rallied 1.5 million..." I think it would be helpful to give the date of this rally as well as preface the paragraph with mentioning a major rally, as it is not clear what the numbers are referring to until the second sentence. Otherwise give it a look and let me know what you think. --BrokenSphere 02:35, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

The Same-sex marriage in Spain FAC
Though I swore I would no longer edit in FA areas of Wiki, I dropped there to check something and saw your FAc. I have replied on the page regarding the refs, and will check the article and perhaps weigh in again. Keep the faith. Jeffpw 23:18, 24 January 2007 (UTC)


 * There's still one cite tag under residency Issues. Cite that and I will vote support. Jeffpw 23:46, 24 January 2007 (UTC)


 * FACsare always a bitch. They go for blood. Hoops of fire. Your intestines will be tied up into a Gordian knot by the end of it. :-) I decided to stay away from FAC and FAR yesterday, and seeing your nom has convinced me I made the right decision. I will see this one through with you, though. Jeffpw 00:09, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

FACs are dominated by people who seem to consider themselves above being polite. You just have to take it. Bitching comes after it passes. :) I've raised some issues that you need to take care of, but once you've dealt with them and perhaps got another copyeditor in, I'll be happy to support. What do you want to make FA next? Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 01:09, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Epa, Ray - I came over to give you an alternate take on the FAC process, that will hopefully help you get through FAC more quickly. (Not sure I agree with some of the negativity that creeps into some FACs.)  First, FACs are *not* always a bitch, by any means - well prepared FACs sail through.  (As I recall, I had about 20 supports in under a few days on my FAC, and only one testy post from a reviewer, who misread something.)  FAC can be quite hard when articles come unprepared, and then they can be made even harder when the nominator is impolite with reviewers, who have to put a lot of work into helping unprepared FAs attain FA status.  I noticed that you didn't start off very politely with that Explorer fellow, and I almost considered not reviewing your article :-)  De todas maneras, I'll be glad to read through the article and the Spanish-language sources thoroughly once you correct the referencing issues, but do take care with telling reviewers that issues are addressed if you haven't yet finished - it's time consuming to come back to an FAC over and over.  It looks like your article should be good to go with just a bit more work, Saludos, Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 04:32, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * By the way, since I *hate* the cite templates, I failed to point out to you that the reason your news sources are incorrectly formatted is that you used cite web rather than cite news. You can see the differences at WP:CITET, and easily convert them.  Leave cite web on websources, but switch to cite news on news sources like El Pais, El Mundo, BBC, etc.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 05:27, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi Raystorm, just a quick question/suggestion: have you alerted the folks at WikiProject Spain about the FAC? Keep plugging away at it and you'll get there! Aleta 08:10, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

So you'll know...
Same-sex marriage in Spain has been selected as this week's Featured article on Portal:LGBT. Jeffpw 16:46, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Hi
Heya. Thank you for your kind words! :D I'm having a lot of fun with the project, and I really like your contributions. If you do want to become more involved, you're definitely welcome to add yourself to the list of participants on WP:SM. There's also a big list of stuff to do on that same page, not to mention the miscellaneous stuff bouncing around in my brain. ^_^ Are you especially familiar with any particular story arc? Because if you're interested, I've got a good knowledge of the state of all our articles, so I can certainly point you toward an area where your help would make a difference. :) Either way, thank you again! I really hope to see you around some more. --Masamage 20:13, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Hmm, okay. What comes immediately to my head are the Sailor Moon R movie and Sailor Moon S movie articles. They were originally about Fiore and Princess Snow Kaguya, respectively, and although there's been some attempt to shift the focus, it hasn't really worked. I own the subbed SuperS movie, and have seen it recently enough that I was able to update its article quite a lot (though it was some months ago, and things can certainly continue to improve). I haven't seen the other two in years, though--so if you're interested, those do need a lot of help. ^^ The "Plot" sections are either too short or mostly centered on the characters I mentioned above. As well, the "new characters" sections contain mostly storyline, which isn't what they should contain. If you want to hit those articles, I found Hitoshi Doi's movie summary to be a big help, because it laid the story out in front of me so I didn't have to mess with my VCR as I wrote. X)
 * Other things...I'm hoping to start up the other arc summary pages sometime, in complement to the extant Sailor Stars article (which you could also probably help out with! We need people who have that manga). The anime series I'm second-most familiar with after that is S, so if you wanted to help me out in setting that up, that would be awesome. Not sure when I'll start it, but it'd be sooner if I had help. :)
 * Unfortunately, my biggest blank spots are in the R/Black Moon series too. :P My SuperS knowledge is also second-hand, but I do at least have one of the manga, so that helps a lot.
 * Anyway! Those are some of the things we could use help on. I'm around a lot, so if you have any questions at all give me a shout. You can also post specific questions to the talk pages of whatever articles you want, which will get both my attention and that of numerous other awesome editors. :) Really far-reaching issues (ie. multiple articles or groups of articles) are best dealt with at WT:SM.
 * Oh, and a good resource: WikiProject Sailor Moon/References was put together by our lovely User:Hitsuji Kinno. From it, you can copy-paste the full citation to any manga volume, including ISBN, and some other stuff too. Hitsuji is basically awesome.
 * Okay, that's enough. Thanks again for your interest! Writing about this stuff is way too much fun. It's kind of freaky. --Masamage 22:49, 26 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi! Looks like your FAC was successful--congratulations! :) I'm not quite ready to start up the new arc articles yet, especially since I'm kind of enjoying the cleanup-work, but I'll let you know. Meanwhile, of course, you're totally welcome to attack the movie articles (or anything else) as soon as you want. Just remember that the SuperS movie article is a template; try to keep the others to the same format, or if there's anything stupid about the format, discuss it at that page so we can stay organized while fixing it up. :) Thanks again! Let me know if you need anything! --Masamage 22:35, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

FAC
Hey Raystorm, I should have gotten back to you yesterday... sorry about that! I don't know anything about doing references properly; I've only ever messed with the "ref.../ref" usage. From what I read on the FAC page, they are really picky about how they're done (no surprise to you there). Anyway, I don't want to start messing with them at this point in it. Aleta 03:34, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar!
Thank you for the barnstars and you're welcome! :) Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 22:28, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Same-sex marriage in Spain
Raystorm, I've been putting off reading the article because I need to understand the basic laws before I try to digest it. En Venezuela, tenemos el matrimonio civil, y el matrimonio por la iglesia - the only one that matters legally is the civil - the church is only for religious purposes. I understand it's the same in most of Latin America, unlike the U.S., where you can be married civilly (that is, by a gov't official rather than by the church), but the church ceremony is also legally recognized if you get the license from the gov't. Is there any difference in Spain? I guess the reason I'm confused is ... considering the way the laws work in Venezuela, I don't understand the term civil union in the context of the law -- isn't a civil union the same as matrimonio civil? So, why would only some states in Spain recognize it and others not? Does that mean in some states in Spain you must be married by the church? And if that's the case, does the new law regulate the church as well? Or will this be clear to me after I read the article? I was trying to sort it out at Civil unions in Spain, but I'm still not clear. (Also, still unclear on caps of autonomous communities - they aren't capped in the Civil unions article - since I learned Spanish en la calle, I've never understood capitalization rules and such.) If you can educate me, I'll hopefully understand the issue better before I read the article. I was married in the USA, and don't fully understand the distinction of "civil union" in countries where you must legally be married by the gov't. Regards, Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 00:10, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I get it ! (We should fix the caps on autonomous comm. in Civil unions in Spain.)  Thanks - off to the bubble bath to read.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 00:43, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Raystorm, I have some basic copy edit stuff, as well as some questions. Rather than type it all up, is it OK with you if I do the basic ce edits myself, and type up only the ones I'm not sure about?  You can always revert what you disagree with, but I don't think it's any earth-shaking.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 01:15, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
 * OK, I'll do only those I feel fairly confident on (mostly redundancy that can be eliminated) and type up thost I'm not sure about on the FAC. Best, Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 01:20, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I went ahead and made all my changes, leaving some questions in the edit summaries about things you should check, so be sure to read the edit summaries. All I see lacking now is that the third paragraph of the lead could be expanded to better summarize the entire article - one or two sentences more.  By the way, I spent some time reworking the estimates of protestors to include exactly who said what - attribution is important in those cases.  I removed the word "claim" (which revealed which direction your bias leaned :-) ... best just to say who said what ... see the discussion of the word "claim" on WP:WTA.  Saludos, Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 02:30, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Prior to Support, I'm working my way through the Spanish wiki article (I'm also troubled that the LGBT Project doesn't seem to be up on Wiki guidelines - I started adjusting WP:LAYOUT issues throughout the articles, and grew tired - aesthetics are important, but they don't trump GTL - maybe you can get them to work on those issues? I created the See also template for your article.)

Anyway ... from the Spanish article (in order to meet 1b, comprehensive, it's best that anything significant from this list be covered, if it can be sourced): Yikes, that article needs work - everything else seems to be included, though. I didn't have time to check last night if all of Opabinia's concerns have been met - maybe you can get her to have a second look - she's a very good reviewer. Sandy Georgia (Talk) 16:06, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
 * (Apparently it is by Constitution so that should be mentioned): Sin embargo, la competencia exclusiva para regular las formas de matrimonio corresponde al Estado en virtud del artículo 149.1.8ª de la Constitución española. Por lo tanto, la mencionada legislación autonómica no podía otorgar a dichas parejas de hecho el estatus de matrimonio.
 * (Can't recall if this is included in History?) Por lo demás, el Tribunal Constitucional había declarado mediante el Auto 222/1994 que el no reconocimiento de los matrimonios entre personas del mismo sexo no era inconstitucional, puesto que, según el Tribunal Constitucional, la Constitución española únicamente contempla y protege el matrimonio entre personas de distinto sexo.
 * (I can't recall if you've said anywhere that it's the civil code that is modified?) La Ley 13/2005 reforma el Código civil en lo concerniente al derecho a contraer matrimonio.
 * (Or if you've mention the specific section that was modified, and the new wording?) En particular, esta reforma añade un segundo párrafo al vigente artículo 44 del Código civil, manteniendo el primer párrafo intacto:  El hombre y la mujer tienen derecho a contraer matrimonio conforme a las disposiciones de este Código.  El matrimonio tendrá los mismos requisitos y efectos cuando ambos contrayentes sean del mismo o de diferente sexo
 * (This may be redundant - not sure it needs to be mentioned:) Estos efectos se extienden a todas las materias en las que el matrimonio tenga relevancia: derecho de sucesiones, derecho de residencia, adopción de los hijos del cónyuge, efectos tributarios, derecho a no declarar contra el cónyuge, alimentos, separación, divorcio, etc.
 * (Do you think you should get into this?)También se ha señalado por ciertos juristas que la reforma producida por la Ley 13/2005 debe ponerse en relación con la casi simultánea Ley 15/2005, de 8 de julio, por la que se modifican el Código Civil y la Ley de Enjuiciamiento Civil en materia de separación y divorcio. Esta ley agiliza los trámites del divorcio, que pierde como requisito la previa separación de los cónyuges y reduce los plazos de tramitación. Se ha argumentado que estas dos leyes configuran una institución matrimonial basada en el afecto y convivencia de los cónyuges, por encima de otras consideraciones biológicas, procreativas o tendentes a impedir u obstaculizar la disolución voluntaria del matrimonio.
 * (This isn't covered entirely - maybe you can evaluate if you can expand that section a bit, depending on whether there are reliable sources to back everything up - I noticed the Spanish article isn't particularly well referenced:) El Consejo General del Poder Judicial negó, en un informe que preparó acerca del proyecto de ley que condujo a la Ley 13/2005, que la adopción sea un derecho y advirtió que la nueva legislación podría estar abriendo las puertas a todo tipo de relaciones, como la poligamia (que podría ser reclamada por asociaciones islámicas) o la zoofilia. Ante la polémica suscitada, el Consejo General del Poder Judicial retiró de la versión final de su informe la alusión a la zoofilia.
 * (I seem to recall you did cover this, but I don't remember there being a specific study cited?)  El día 4 de julio de 2002, la Facultad de Psicología de Sevilla y el Colegio de Psicólogos de Madrid presentaban las conclusiones ...

Raystorm, I checked with someone far more knowledgeable than I on Wiki guidelines, and there is no specific policy against using navigational templates at the top of the article. I still believe the way the article is currently structured is better (infobox at top, navigation of See also article links horizontally at bottom), but that is not the basis for an object, since there is no policy - just wanted to let you know so you could choose. Regards, Sandy Georgia (Talk) 01:52, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Peer review
Raystorm, now that you've been through the FAC process and know the expected standards, I'm wondering if you'd feel prepared to branch out and contribute to Peer review/El Hatillo Municipality, Miranda/archive3? I was mostly the only input on Enano's second peer review - and did most of the copyediting - so it really needs a new set of eyes, preferably one able to read the references. I also helped him seek out other references (from USA bookstores), and there's almost nothing in English. He's worked hard on it for a very long time; peer review is overworked, and unless you know someone to ask to help with the review, articles often get no feedback. He really wants to take it to FAC - if you're able to look it over, that would be splendid. Regards, Sandy Georgia (Talk) 17:33, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Red links are actually OK in FAs, and some argue a red link is preferable to a poorly-written stub, and will encourage someone else to fill it in. He only created that the other day at my urging, so I'm sure he'll get to it soon.  Thanks for looking !  I know El Hatillo well - baptized all my godchildren there - so I'm too close to it.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 22:22, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Congrats on FA!
Congrats to you on FA for Same sex marriage in Spain! Espana Viva  15:16, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Fair Use images on Talk page
Wikipedia policy is that Fair Use images can only be used on the articles which they illustrate so that we do not infringe on copyright. I have removed the image of the Enterprise from your talk page. Perhaps there is a Free image that you could use instead? ~ Bigr  Tex  23:50, 9 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Ahh jeez. Okay, thanks for the tip and sorry. I'll try to find a free image somewhere then. Cheers Raystorm 00:01, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

WONDERFUL!!!
Excellent! I have added the Wikiproyecto to our page. Would you like me to upload all our images to the Commons so you can use them (our barnstar, flag with pen, globe etc.)? Any plans for how to build the project? Is there anything you could use help with?

Can I ask that you start a translation section? We have 14 rather fabulous FAs I'd like to see in every language... Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 18:39, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Open up the userbox page and click on "What links here", which is on the toolbox to the left of your screen. Then you can see who has it on their userpage. :) When I first asked Kirill Lokshin how to go about building up WP:LGBT, he said the most important things were assessment, a navigational template, and if there are enough members, a peer review. Obviously, I would suggest slowly creating all of the departments we have at the moment, but I don't know how things work on the Spanish Wikipedia and you might not have the manpower or will to do it. However, I can try and create the assessment banner for you if you would like? It should be a matter of finding templates on eswiki and copying the Spanish into the english text, right? I can certainly give it a go if you want. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 19:20, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
 * K. Bear in mind though that you will probably need to create a new assessment scheme - Spanish standards are somewhat lower than our ones... Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 16:54, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Hmm, one small snag. Most of the infrastructure needed for assessment has been built by WP:10, but I didn't realise how much, and I'm not sure how they did it. No fear though, I'll get onto them and ask them to institute it on eswiki, and see they say. This could take a little while, but we'll get there. ;) Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 17:57, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
 * We are in luck. is developing a Spanish assessment system for esMILHIST (grr). I asked him if esLGBT can implement it too. You'll need to liase with him on eswiki if he agrees though, given my non-existent Spanish. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 20:42, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Excellent! Well done on all you work so far. When it's up and running, is there any equivalent of the Wikipedia Signpost or Community Portal announcements you can mention it on? Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 16:30, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Hehe, use me as a sounding board all you want. :) It's great to hear you've got some enthusiastic members, and it sounds like you're fast publicising the project, even if it was because of a faulty template. ;) Do you want to take a look at Burnley's version of the poster, given he has very kindly translated one? Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 23:36, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Election period
I'm certainly willing to make the election longer. How long do you think? RfAs are usually 7 days. Would that be enough here or do you think it should be longer? WjBscribe 18:19, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I'll ask Satyr if his bot can message everyone. WjBscribe 18:34, 11 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. --
 * }

You are too sweet!
Thank you so much for that purple Heart, Raystorm. It really means a lot to me, that my friends from the LGBT Project care about my well-being. Though I don't want to make a long story out of things, I will say I have fought the virus and lived with it in one form or another since 1983. I have been an AIDS buddy, have been arrested demonstrating against the USA policies regarding AIDS, and have been to more funerals than I can count, including my previous life-partner's. My husband also infected, and it's only through the grace of God that he's still with me. So those remarks were like a kick in the solar plexus. One nice thing, though, is that it demonstrated Wikipedia's commitment in general to civility that it was dealt with so forcefully and swiftly. Thanks again, and it's always nice collaborating with you, and seeing your name on my talk page! Jeffpw 14:37, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Commons image uploads
If you don't want to be bothered starting a commons account and dealing with the uploads, let me know and I'll handle them, looks like an good start to the Spanish project BTW Raystorm. WjBscribe 19:15, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I've uploaded the LGBT barnstar to Commons (same file name). I'll work through the same-sex marriage in Spain photos next. Can people let me know of any other copyright free photos the project uses that can be uploaded to Commons? WjBscribe 19:39, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Update:
 * Image:Samesex Map Europe.png is now on Commons as Image:Map Europe Samesex.png
 * Image:Family Forum march supporter.jpg doesn't meet Commons image requirements. It is a photo of an identifiable person and Commons acknowledges individual personality rights. As such this photo cannot be uploaded without the consent of the subject.
 * The other two photos seem fine, I'll upload them next. WjBscribe 20:29, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I've had a go at changing the focus of the photo. Can I email you the new version to see what you think? You can either email me at WJBscribe@gmail.com and I'll reply or enable emails in your preferences. Cheers, WjBscribe 21:20, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
 * A blurred version is now on Commons (same file name). WjBscribe 22:43, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the barnstar. The last two images are up as Image:Same-sex marriage celebration Spain.jpg and Image:Gay March celebrating 2005 Pride Day and Same-Sex Marriage Law in Spain.jpg respectively. Let me know if you need anything else uploaded to Commons in future. WjBscribe 21:43, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Template stuff
FYI, if you need any help with the programming of templates, just let me know. I may not understand the Spanish, but I'll be glad to help with the coding! -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 23:58, 13 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Boring!?!? I can't believe you think that!  Coding is my Life - and something I enjoy doing :) Bring it on!  -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs)  00:08, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Belated Congratulations
Raystorm, I slacked off my Wikipeding there for a while, so this is really belated, but congratulations on the FA promotion for SSM in Spain! I know you put a tremendous amount of work into getting the article up to that level. You should be very proud!! :) Aleta 06:38, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Poster
Presumably, as Burnley hasn't sent it to me. I'll give him a prod a bit later. How's it going, btw? Anything you need? (besides the poster...) Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 11:47, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Enthusiasm is better than experience, I would say. People who are enthusiastic learn fast - people who are simply experienced aren't helpful if they don't get off their arses and pile in! The barnstar has already been uploaded to the Commons, you can find it here ("Suggested by Dev920" - I always like seeing credit given to me. ;D). The eswiki doesn't seem to have much by way of Barnstars, so you might want to consider developing a template for it, like this one - though if you're thoroughly sick of coding you may want to ask Satyr. :) No pressure though, that's more an aesthetic suggestion! It's good to see the project's going so well! Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 18:01, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Rating the ToK
Hi. I'm trying to get members of the Psychology Project to get together and rate the both the quality and importance of the Tree of Knowledge System. Hope you're interested. Have a great day! EPM 22:04, 17 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the response, and the ToK rating seems fair. It was actually written by Gregg Henriques for The Psychology Wiki. (I've had some e-mail correspondence with him...maybe he'd like to get in on the discussion.) You should check out the papers in the references for the ToK article, starting with The Tree of Knowledge System...' paper followed by the Psychology Defined paper. You may find them quite interesting. Have a good one! EPM 00:20, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

History of Homosexuality
We have articles like that: Homosexuality in China, Homosexuality in Japan, Homosexuality in ancient Rome etc. If there's enough to be said about Homosexuality in Spain that isn't gay rights, I'd say go for it. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 21:58, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Hehe, trying browsing through the LGBT categories next time, it'll save you hassle. :) Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 22:06, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Save you hassle!? That category mess could take someone years to find anything :) -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs)  22:18, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Every time I've tried reforming the category system people just switch off. I've gave up a loooong time ago... Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 22:22, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Ditto, hon! I keep it on my back burner "some day..." list :) -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs)  22:30, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Hahaha! X-D Okay, here's the newbie question: where is the list of LGBT categories? Raystorm 22:54, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Here ya go... -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 23:01, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

Or just look up Category:LGBT and go from there. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 23:02, 18 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Nice! :-) Thanks, that was fast! Um, do you guys have my talk watched or something? *Looks furtively from left to right* X-D Raystorm 23:04, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I was under the impression that about the most active members all had each other's pages watchlisted - *goes to look at watchlist* - I have Coelacan, Jeff, you, WJB, and Satyr on mine. You're all the ones I talk to most and consider my friends, so I keep an eye on what you're up to. ;) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Dev920 (talk • contribs) 23:08, 18 February 2007 (UTC).
 * They really need to slow that bot down... Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 23:08, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Yep, those are the same pages I peek at daily :-) Consider yourself loved, Raystorm. Jeffpw 23:16, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I only have Dev watchlisted, and I think that happened during the 'which accents are sexy (formerly WP:Spoken, later 'let's do a convention!')' discussion at her talk, hehe. You pack of lovable gossipers..! ;-) How many pages do you have watched anyway?? I have 35 and barely manage, and it's all articles... Raystorm 23:24, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
 * 43 at the moment, but I prune daily. I have my preferences set to automatically watchlist when I edit a page. Jeffpw 23:33, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
 * I have 188 pages watched, but that includes all of my userpages and pretty much every WP:LGBT page. I regularly purge my watchlist to rid it of articles I don't need anymore. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 23:36, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
 * :-O You're just saying that to impress me...(and it's working). Raystorm 23:40, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
 * You've only been regularly editing since December, I've been since March, it's hardly surprising (though interestingly, you signed up three days before me). Believe me, your watchlist just gets inexorably bigger and bigger as time goes on... Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 23:45, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Heh. I finally got an account after the February exams, but had such a wild 2006 that I was unable to edit regularly (June was particulary busy I seem to remember). Until winter arrived I wasn't able to participate in earnest, and now I have the bug. :-) So, technically, you're the junior of the two of us? *Snicker* Raystorm 00:01, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * You're also six years older than me. On the hand, I am Coordinator of WP:LGBT and have written three FAs, so bow before me lesser mortal! ;) Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 00:03, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh yeah, and I have a higher edit count than all of you, so neh. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 00:06, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict, not changed to mention edit count, which anyway, only shows editonitis hehe) You're 18?? And here I had in my mind this picture of a 50-year old hardcore LGBT-rights fighter typing away...;-) And anyway, based on actual active time, I managed to get a FA in just a month and a half, so I have a better time invested/success rate than you do. *Big snicker* Nanananaaaa! And I am the founder of the Spanish project. Who should bow now? X-D Raystorm 00:12, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Excuse me? Who built WP:LGBT? Who got an FA a month from October onwards until distracted by the call of the gay in January? Moi. OK, so I'm 18 - just means I have more years with Wikipedia than you will. :) 50? Really? Some gay rights activist I am, technically not even out to my parents... Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 00:18, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Okay okay, you win. Geez, only a few hours as a coordinator, and already it has gone to her head. ;-) And you fight the good fight in your own way, like the rest of us, little slayer. What else can be done? *Grin* Btw, the call of the gay? That's how they call it now? ;-) And just so you know, you impudent kid, Spaniards live longer than Britons -we enjoy life more (we are the latin lovers by excellence, I may add) and have something called SUN. ;-) Raystorm 00:35, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * And with that resounding victory, I am going to bed. :) Night night. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 00:41, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Sleep well kiddo. ;-) I'll just have to resign myself to the aforementioned benefits of being a Spaniard... Raystorm 00:45, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

&lt;/me finally gets home from traveling and chimes in&gt; 565 watchlisted, which includes 22 WP:LGBT members, but also includes 222 cities and towns in NH that I did some extensive standardizing work on. And I don't trim that down very often. And no FAs (or even GAs) &lt;sigh&gt; Though my edit count (after updating it to be accurate) is the same as Devs, and I did join the WP before either of you, so that counts for something :) -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs)  03:00, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Just out of idle curiosity, would there be anything wrong with being 50ish????????? As I said, it's just idle curiosity, but I would like an answer! Jeffpw 15:51, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Funny, on reading this discussion I had the opposite question in mind i.e. is there something wrong with not being 50ish? :-) WjBscribe 16:09, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Well I'm certainly glad to hear that, WJB, after you seemed to be taunting me about my age on Sunday. :-) Jeffpw 20:03, 19 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Grin* Nothing wrong at all, my 45-year old friend. Nor with not being 50ish, my other age-unknown (but probably young) friend. ;-) It's just good to be 24, is all. Hehe. Raystorm 14:18, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

11-M
--Southofwatford 13:07, 19 February 2007 (UTC) Hi Raystorm, thanks for your list of issues. I think it was more than clear to everyone involved, including Randroide, that was being discussed here was a request for mediation. Anyway, he has blocked it when it was ready to go; it’s the second time I have tried to launch a mediation process and both attempts have failed because of his opposition, as also happened with my RFC proposal. Personally I think that arbitration is the way to go on this now after so many months of dispute and after 3 failed attempts to try and resolve it by other methods.

It’s interesting that the international press last week almost unanimously talked about conspiracy theories in relation to El Mundo and the PP’s positions. Some of the questions being asked in the trial are pure propaganda too, the AVT’s lawyers just try to introduce conspiracy theory ideas when they know that their questions are not going to be answered by the accused. The explosives issue is also not looking good for the conspiracy theorists, unless there is a major surprise in the remaining tests. Cheers.

I humbly apologize
I just saw from your edit summary that I hurt your feelings with my post, last night. Please accept my sincere apologies for that. It was definitely not my intention to hurt somebody I consider a good editor and a good wikifriend. I will certainly be more careful about that in the future, and I hope you will forgive my insensitivity. Jeffpw 19:01, 21 February 2007 (UTC)