User talk:Revolving Bugbear/Archive 9

ANI thread (blocks by JzG)
You commented on this earlier. Please see Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. Carcharoth (talk) 00:35, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

RFA thanks
 .: RFA thanks :.

User talk:Frogsprog
User:Frogsprog says he has complete his requirements and would like to to see it.--Sunny910910 (talk 20:16, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Me!
Hi. I requested that my user page be deleted to try and force me to quit wiki. It seems to have failed. Could you restore my old page? Dapi89 (talk) 13:01, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Animation Userbox
WOO HOO! Took a bit of work but I got it! Thanks! Captain Infinity (talk) 22:36, 11 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Ah-ha, yes! It worked! Thank you! :-) Cinemaniac (talk •  contribs) 01:29, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

signature
I'd appreciate you looking over this conversation for two reasons. You seem to be familiar with the user name policy, and none of the other admins there seem to know what to do about a controversial user name, and also because I think there is a problem with the procedure if there is a debate over whether or not a signature is acceptable when the policy states that controversial user names can't be used, equally applying to signatures, but my initial attempt to post it at WP:Usernames for administrator attention was declined because I raised the issue over a sig and not the actual user name. Did that make sense? So the debate that would usually go on at WP:UAA is now going on at WP:ANI only because it's a signature, but the policy applies equally to both. Cuñado ☼ -  Talk  06:08, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

BRC photo
zOMG!!! thumb|right|150px|RB lookalike :) Rudget . 16:20, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Just joking of course. :) Rudget . 16:29, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

User:Robin48gx‎
I've unblocked, per your note on my talk page earlier today. I'll keep an eye out, but I think the squall is over. --barneca (talk) 21:09, 15 February 2008 (UTC)



Robin48gx (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.


 * hi bugbear,
 * I was just replying to the comments. I did nor realise I was 'voting'.
 * some of the arguments are circular though, like them saying
 * there are no articles for the rigs, but articles on the rigs are being deleted.

hi bugbear, I am trying to defend the List_of_free_party_sound_systems page. I know what I did before that was a bit stupid, I was angry about having work removed so quickly. But I would like to put that incident behind me. User:Corvus cornix has linked to a difference with the unforunate comments I made. These really have no relevance to the defence of the List_of_free_party_sound_systems page. I wonder if you could help me by removing that particular reference.

Doczilla's RfA


'''I've commented out this thanks because the archive bot broke the code, and I didn't feel like finding the fix. If you'd like to see it, copy out and render the code.'''

coordinator election
The Wikiproject History is going to elect 3 coordinators. As a member you are invited to participate. Wandalstouring (talk) 10:52, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

User:Tasc0
Thanks for reviewing my earlier block. He escalated from there and I indef'ed him for this little gem. I salted his talk page and prevented email. I just wanted another pair of admin eyes before I washed an editor with this type of history down the memory hole. Ronnotel (talk) 01:15, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Administrators
I notice three of the fours users writing to me is an administrator. Do you pay a certain amount of money for these tools or do you need a certain amount of edits? Are part of official staff or something? Jason (talk, contributions) 19:30, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

You've unblocked User:Powerarts
Be aware that the account has been used to create very spammy articles for recording artists whose label is "Power Arts"! -- Orange Mike  |  Talk  22:23, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Great work at WP:European history
Thanks for all the work organizing the collaboration of the month! Looks like a fair amount of sweat was involved.--Doug.(talk • contribs) 04:03, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Hammerandclaw
Hi RB,

Just a quick note that I appreciate you, and several other admins, stepping in on this. It kind of resolved itself more messily than perhaps necessary, and might have been a little less so if I had known exactly what I was doing from the very beginning. But I did learn alot about how this kind of thing works, and feel much more confident in being able to handle the next one more smoothly. --barneca (talk) 22:39, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Hello
Hi, I was just perusing my talk page recollecting the exchange we had a long time ago when I remembered you were keen on becoming an Administrator. It's been a while, but may I just say well done with your successful RfA. Regards, WilliamH (talk) 15:20, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

User:Robin48gx
It appears my faith was misplaced. I've reverted back to your indefblock. Thanks for letting me try. --barneca (talk) 15:38, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Question About Block - ADZNet
Recently my username was blocked, and you said that it was promoting. ADZNet is the name of my site (http://adznet.info) which holds my homework and photo album, which is by the way, open source. And it is not at all a company or organization. The only reason I chose this name is that ADZ is taken already, so this is the next most related thing... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.80.251.42 (talk) 23:03, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: User talk:UliEkMuDkiPz?
"So I herd u liek mudkipz" is a pornographic troll meme from 4chan. east. 718 at 20:18, February 15, 2008

Admin Coaching Re-confirmation
Hello, previously you expressed interest in participating in the Admin coaching project. We are currently conducting a reconfirmation drive to give coaches the opportunity to update their information and capacity to participate in the project. Please visit Admin coaching/Status to update your status. Also, please remember to update your capacity (5th table variable) in the form of a fraction (eg. 2/3 means you are currently coaching 2 students, and could accept 1 more student). Thank you.  MBisanz  talk 09:09, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Introducing myself
Hello sensei. I've been asked to introduce myself and explain why I want to be an Admin.

It's not a life dream of mine, and I won't cry if it never happens. I consider Wikipedia a valuable resource, and I edit errors or add content when I'm able to. I am apparently trustworthy enough to have Rollback, which I find very helpful. I have, on a few occasions, participated in discussions about policy. The response to my comments has generally been positive, and it's been suggested on more than one occasion that I should strive to become an Admin. I have the time, and perhaps the ability, to contribute more than I have so far. I would like to learn what is expected of an Admin, and acquire whatever knowledge I would need to be qualified for that post. It's supposedly not a big deal, so I'm not sure why any mature, trustworthy regular contributor with knowledge of Wikipedia's core policies wouldn't be qualified, but I have observed that an awful lot is expected of candidates for Adminship, and the vast majority of applications fail. I, therefor, submit myself to your tutelage to learn the ways of the Admin. DOSGuy (talk) 09:45, 25 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I have followed your instructions and created a lengthy list of my strengths, weaknesses, and Wikipedia paradigm at User_talk:DOSGuy/Coaching. DOSGuy (talk) 07:40, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

I am satisfied with my responses to Episode 1. DOSGuy (talk) 07:09, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps I'll be accused of laziness for not finding a better "disagree", but disagreeing with that particular CSD has gotten an interesting response, so I'm satisfied that Episode 2 is ready for review. DOSGuy (talk) 21:59, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

I love you
Friendly enough, haha! -UWMSports (talk) 21:19, 27 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Saw you in there, then saw how you like to receive friendly messages, haha. -UWMSports (talk) 21:23, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia policy question
What is the Wikipedia policy on comments like this by User:GoHuskies9904 --Josh (talk) 02:51, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * It is also worth noting that the above comment was made after said warning for this . --Josh (talk) 04:57, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Already recieved my well deserved punishment for that. I've been trying to reform myself since my 2 week ban. -GoHuskies9904 (talk) 03:05, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Upon further digging I found these as well., , , , and . --Josh (talk) 02:57, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

SportsMasterESPN
You unblocked this guy so he could get a new username. Instead, he's been editing again under the inappropriate username. I've blocked him again. -- Orange Mike  |  Talk  17:45, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
 * It should be noted that a request for him to usurp the unused name SportsMaster is in process (I was mistaken about that); but in the meantime, he's been editing anyway under the forbidden username. -- Orange Mike  |  Talk  17:54, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

User:Adznet
Hi, just a friendly note about the unblock request you declined (sorry, I forgot to ping you earlier): the block is now discussed at Requests_for_comment/User_names. -- lucasbfr  talk 17:46, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Turning in my work
I submit my latest answers for your review. DOSGuy (talk) 16:32, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Part 4 is done. DOSGuy (talk) 20:04, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

I declared one example 4-1 instead of 5-3 because I thought I had come to the end of the page. My re-response has been posted. DOSGuy (talk) 03:25, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Another reincarnation of Fox53/Kay Körner?
Hello Revolving Bugbear,

sorry to bother you, but I recently stumbled over the Sportvereinigung (SV) Dynamo article and upon reading it found, that it didn't met wikipedias quality standards in language and, especially, neutrality. I tagged the article and left an explanation for my action on the talk page under "This article needs a cleanup!". The reply I received from the main contributor, anonymus user 194.95.142.179, the fact that I was accused of vandalism for it, and the fact that the tag was just deleted without truly anserwing or addressing the questions I raised make me think, the editor is just another sockpuppet of Kay Körner/Fox53 or whatever other id's he has used in the past. He is barred from both the German and English version of the wikipedia and I noticed you took care of one of the sockpuppets. Drop me a line if you think there is anything else I can do, have fun,EA210269 (talk) 06:23, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your reply, I guess its very hard to stop somebody who is so determind, even when his goal is so narrow minded. I think, the user Captain Future might be an incarnation of Kay too, he has been inactive for some weeks but come to live again now. If so, he keeps a very low profile under that name. I don't see to much of a point trying to edit the Dynamo article, he will just call any contrary opinion "vandalism", as he has with my POV tag and delete it. I think, the goal at this stage is to contain the damage to just one article, the Dynamo one is obscure enough not to cause to much misinformation.EA210269 (talk) 00:51, 8 March 2008 (UTC)
 * His IP address actually leads to a public computer at the Saxon State Library, not much point blocking that, he would just move to the next. I think a letter of complaint with our friends name and the issue of spreading hate propaganda to the library would do a much better job but I don't want to be that harsh to him, I have to say. He may still grow up one day and be a useful contributor, his talent is definatly amazing, in many ways! I have to go back out to the mines for eight days so I won't have much time but I might do some research on the Dynamo doping history. I left a bit of information with a BBC-source at the Doping (sport) article. Kay deletet the link to "his" Dynamo article but let the text stand. It may be possible to counterbalance things through that article and create a neutral view. Anyway, enough from here, EA210269 (talk) 08:44, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I have created a section in the article titled "Controversies surrounding the Sport Club Dynamo", lets see wether he will let it stand! I wonder if he is tolerant enough to accept a well referenced section contrary to his world believe. I've researched a lot of sources, the amount of information regarding DDR-doping is overwhelming! Only used the most reliable sources, like BBC, The Guardian, etc. I also added a Dynamo section to the Doping (Sport).EA210269 (talk) 03:42, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

I know the subject is getting a bit old but our friend is still roaming freely, creating yet more Dynamo articles and even setting up its own Category now! I've made an attempt to engage in discussion with him and addressed every point he made patiently (not always easy!), in the end I created an article, upon his sugestion, called Controversies surrounding the Sport Club Dynamo which he then procceded to delete all references to his pet from. He is operating under yet another IP address, IP 212.201.54.112, needles to say, from the same place as always. I think, however that your assumption him being a student there is wrong, I think he is an employee. It fits with his job describtion, librarian, on one of his old user pages. Sorry to bother you once more with this unpleasant subject,EA210269 (talk) 23:41, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Peace and harmony again on wikipedia! Many thanks, maybe I can write now again about stuff I'm really interestet in, not Dynamo.EA210269 (talk) 23:25, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Monobook troubles
Thanks. You've saved the day! (for me at least :D) Regards, GK . 14:35, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

adminship
Would you like to be nominated? - Revolving Bugbear  17:10, 8 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Maybe, I've thought about it a little. For a while I thought I didn't really need the tools, but recently I've been involved in trying to salvage CSD's and copyright problems and it sure would be handy to be able to actually delete the unsalvable stuff as well as to accomplish full history merges and fix copy&paste moves.  As you probably noticed, I've closed at least one fairly controversial MfD (WQA), and it would be nice to think that I'm not going to be speedy overturned at DRV when I do that sort of thing.  Also, someday I'd like to be a member of MEDCOM and several members of that are against approving non-admins, per se (though I don't see why).  I know I'd get flak though for having created very few articles.  Never had a GA or even a DYK, yet, and you can see from my userpage that I'm fairly new to many of the anti-vandalism tools.--Doug.(talk • contribs) 18:10, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Doug, I was impressed by your very diplomatic and well-reasoned non-admin closure of Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Wikiquette_alerts (2nd nomination) and urge you to consider applying for admin. It appears that mediation skills are valued, and it is assumed that someone who mediates well won't become an idiot as an administrator. EdJohnston (talk) 18:24, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Aye, the article-writing thing can be a stickler. It's sort of a skewed metric, in my opinion -- yes, we want people to build the encyclopedia, but there is so much more that one can do to prove that he "appreciates what goes into an article" or any of that other jazz.
 * For what it's worth, my RfA passed (with no opposes) without any FAs/GAs, and with only a couple of DYKs.
 * In any case, if you would like a nomination, now or in the future, just let me know, and I will be happy to set you up. - Revolving Bugbear  19:36, 9 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Ditto here. I still don't have any GAs or FAs, for what it's worth. And, regardless of those statistics, you've been an active mediator and are probably one of our best copyvio people out there. And we could probably use another admin to close the occasional MfD, as well. John Carter (talk) 17:59, 10 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, I appreciate all the confidence! Thank you.--Doug.(talk • contribs) 03:25, 11 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I did some more thinking. I expected someone would eventually mention adminship since I spend so much time in Project space particularly MFD, but I didn't expect three people in two days, two of them apparently completely independent of each other (Ed was responding here, but John brought this up separately on my talk page before he commented here).  Considering this and my interest in being more involved in copyright issues - such as copyright problems, possibly unfree images, and suspected copyright violations (all of which have large backlogs), and other deletion procedures - I will change my answer above from "maybe" to "yes"; let's move forward on this.  Would it make sense for you to co-nominate me?  What do you need from me to advance this?--Doug.(talk • contribs) 07:43, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

(undent) I would be happy to co-nom with John and/or Ed. If they want to go ahead and ack this here, one of us will go ahead and create the page. I don't think there's anything in particular I need you to do/say, but if they'd like to see something, by all means. - Revolving Bugbear  17:59, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Only thing I would add is that he's a very level headed editor, and by all accounts a good mediator, though I haven't dealt with him in that regard. So, who creates the nomination page? I'd say Bugbear gets first choice, as he preceded me, but I'll do it if he would prefer not to. John Carter (talk) 18:05, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Since my first acquaintance with Doug came by seeing his close of the WQA MfD, I'm probably not a good choice as a co-nominator. But I intend to support once the AfD is opened. I've watchlisted Requests for adminship/Doug even though it doesn't exist yet. My only advice would be to carefully prepare your answers to the typical RfA questions. This can be done in a sandbox if necessary. Take a few extra days if needed. EdJohnston (talk) 18:18, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree that the answers to the questions should be careful and thoughtful; my experience with Doug indicates that they most likely will be. I will go ahead and create the nomination page soon, or, if Doug would prefer, whenever he lets me know. - Revolving Bugbear  18:21, 12 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Right, good point. I had thought them out but not written them down.  I have now written down my answers to the standard questions offline and can place them in a sandbox if any of you wants a preview.  Otherwise, I'd say, "ready".--Doug.(talk • contribs) 00:50, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Hope I did OK. I've never nominated anyone before. John Carter (talk) 19:47, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Doug, once you officially make your application, people may expect to see that you have enabled an email address. Administrators are expected to be available by email since occasionally people will have problems they don't want to reveal to the world. Consider going into 'Preferences' to allow people to send you Wikipedia email. If you have answers to the questions prepared, you are welcome to send them via Special:EmailUser/EdJohnston. EdJohnston (talk) 20:56, 13 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much, I've accepted and posted my answers. Is it important to "make a brief statement" there's a place for it after the acceptance that's commented out?  I haven't noticed anyone doing that lately and between my answers and my userpage, I don't know that I have much to add.--Doug.(talk • contribs) 20:58, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * The nomination's been transcluded. The first !vote is by rights yours, I think. John Carter (talk) 21:05, 13 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Thanks for taking care of that John, I went back and read the instructions and noted I was supposed to do that as well as advance the time of expiration when I accepted, I did the latter - but now it's a few minutes off from the time of acceptance - hope no one is going to care?--Doug.(talk • contribs) 21:13, 13 March 2008 (UTC)


 * A few minutes in either direction is not a big deal. Screws fall out all the time; the world is an imperfect place. - Revolving Bugbear  21:19, 13 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I just logged on and noticed I had extra tabs! Wow!  I was surprised with the unopposed promotion!  I just want to say "thank you" to both of you. (BTW, do you consider it necessary to personally thank everyone?  Seems a post on my talk page thanking everyone would be a bit less clutter but would it be huge faux pas?)--Doug.(talk • contribs) 20:04, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

AfD Excercises
Thanks for the heads up on the questions... what did you think of the test? Did you notice that 2 of the 3 dealing with Command and Conquer had more votes one way an the third a different way? And that 3 of the questions dealt with one case---it was speedy kept, sent back to AfD by DVR, and then deleted as a hoax?Balloonman (talk) 23:48, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Why was my Cory Bold talk page deleted?
I stated factual proof of this guy as a producer? What is going on? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiuser12348 (talk • contribs) 18:38, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

This is really making no sense, and I've even seen others ty to convince these guys that Cory Bold is "notable" Do I need to provide links or even scan's of magazine arcticles pertaining to Cory Bold?

Wikiuser12348 (talk) 18:47, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok. I was refering to the "others" as someone tried to tell someone else who deleted the page, that they would be glad to fax over book stub withs Cory Bold appering on the credits.

Anyway, here is Cory Bold even listed here on WIKIPEDIA under an upcoming album : In a Perfect World. Look at the "producers" on that album. What makes Cory Bold different from other producers listed on there with "pages" such as Polow da Don, or Danja? If this is the case, you need to delete their pages as well.

Also, download this issue of FADER Magazine, a "real" magazine. It can be downloaded via their website here. There is a section there about music producer, Cory Bold

Thank You

Wikiuser12348 (talk) 19:00, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Postponement
I will need to postpone responding to Exercise 5 until next week to allow for birthdays and baby visits. DOSGuy (talk) 17:03, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Back on the job, but I'll need further instructions. Details are in my talk page. DOSGuy (talk) 18:38, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

I have completed my assignment in a somewhat unconventional way. I look forward to your feedback. DOSGuy (talk) 23:41, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

March 2008 edition of the WikiProject Germany newsletter
This newsletter is delivered by a bot to all members of WikiProject Germany. If you do not want to receive this newsletter in the future, please leave a note at the talk page of the Outreach department so we can come up with a better spamlist solution. Thank you, - Newsletter Bot 'Talk  15:37, 23 March 2008 (UTC)''

Coaching
Yeah, actually I am still interested. Sorry I kind-of disregarded you a bit quickly. :) &mdash; scetoaux (T/C) 20:12, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Johnnie Ray
Hi. Do you happen to remember this situation? Well, a "new" user is back requesting to add information that Wildhartlivie and I object to for various reasons, one being the fact that the user is basing some of the information on unreliable sources (tv.com) and their interpretation of body language between two people on a game show they saw (original research at best). Since we both basically put our foot down about it, they want to go to mediation. How exactly do we go about re-opening that case or do we have to start a new one? Many thanks and sorry to drag you back into this dead end situation again. Pinkadelica (talk) 03:53, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Do I get to defend myself? If you read the Discussion page for Johnnie Ray, you will notice that I said that a book is one of the sources. The book, authored by Gil Fates and listed as a source in the Wiki article for What's My Line?, lists August 22, 1954 as the date of Johnnie Ray's first appearance on the show. I never said "the interpretation of body language" was a source. What I said was that August 22, 1954 is very different from "the early part of 1956." Pinkadelica and Wildhartlivie insist on using "the early part of 1956" in the article to explain where and when Ray met Dorothy Kilgallen, who was a regular panelist on the show. But there is no evidence he appeared on the show in the early part of 1956 or the early part of any year. August is not the early part of the year, and neither is June 9, 1957. That's the date of his second appearance. Episodes of TV shows that are broadcast on GSN are acceptable sources. Three of them are listed as sources for Dorothy Kilgallen's article along with the air dates, and nobody has expressed doubt about those air dates. Ray and Kilgallen can be seen shaking hands on both episodes. They met on or before August 22, 1954, not the early part of 1956.

Also, Pinkadelica added to the Discussion page earlier today that she has reported me for being "uncivil" to Wildhartlivie. How do I defend myself against that charge? Where is the page for the mediator who handles these reports? Read the Johnnie Ray "Discussion" page and you see will that Wildhartlivie said, "Do not talk down to me" and I replied, "Do not accuse me of anything. This is not the House Un-American Activities Committee." Thanking you in advance for your time and attention. Nyannrunning (talk) 15:44, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Re:
No problem. I hope you don't mind that I went ahead and found a different person to coach me. Thanks for your well wishes. :) &mdash; scetoaux (T|C)  19:01, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks
Didn,t want to bother you again with him, no reason why one admin exclusevly should have to deal with him all the time, thats why I left the notice on AN/I. He is a bit to painful for that! Actually getting worse, I think. Thanks for your help,EA210269 (talk) 02:02, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

RFA
I have answered your request, I hope it helps.  STORMTRACKER   94  Go Irish! 23:05, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

An idea worth trying?
Hi, here's a thought that might do some good. Today I was chatting with an editor from Serbia. Mentioned the Serbian-Croatian ethnic disputes on en:Wiki and he surprised me by telling me the Serbian and Croatian Wikipedias actually get along pretty well. Basically what happened was some guys packed into a car, drove to Zagreb, and shook some hands. Then some other guys packed into another car, drove to Belgrade, and shook some hands. Once they saw that they were all pretty normal people, things calmed down a lot.

Maybe there's a way we can replicate that. Would you be willing to try a voice chat on Skype? I've noticed that when Wikipedia editors get into a conference call, with voices instead of just text, it's easier to find common ground. Wishing you well, Durova Charge! 06:28, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

WP:AE .. patronising?
Hi, thought I'd put a quick response here rather than adding yet more material to that page, plus our discussion veered somewhat off-topic and into more general areas anyway. I think we somewhat fell foul of the problems of written communication - I did just feel that possibly, you were suggesting with your "step in the right direction" comment, that there were many more steps I personally needed to take. When coupled with your comment that I should "take time to study policy" (especially as I had, I thought, made clear that I did understand the principles at stake), I kind of felt as if I was back at school being chastised by a teacher. Thanks for making clear that that isn't what you meant. More generally I also felt from the outset as if I was being taken to task by two successive admins (Jayjg and then yourself), when all I had done was left a short comment offering my perspective on a dispute between two other editors. --Nickhh (talk) 16:53, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

Being bold is one of the core values of Wikipedia
Hi Bugbear. I took a while to consider what you said, and I've responded on my coaching page. The short version is that I believe that Wikipedians are called upon to be bold -- not only in editing, but in their proposals and suggested solutions. Being bold may be a risky tactic for someone who wants to be an Administrator, but it shouldn't be. At any rate, I would rather be bold. I will have the courage of my convictions, and I will continue to make good faith efforts to improve Wikipedia. I believe that my good faith will be self-evident, even if my proposals are ultimately rejected. I am ready to boldly continue my training. DOSGuy (talk) 05:14, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Wikistalk
I have had a problem with GoHuskies990 before see. Once again I am having problems again. Not only is he leaving comments on my talk page with the heading "don't be a baby" he is also leaving edit summaries of "THIS ARTICLE SUCKS!!!". He also is nominating the same articles once again for deletion that I have created, in my belief to create grief for myself. --Josh (talk) 20:54, 2 May 2008 (UTC)


 * This article sucks wasn't my edit summary. It was the previous editor and I happened to be editing under the same section. It was the default summary. Check it out! -GoHuskies9904 (talk) 21:07, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

No one is stalking you. I just have a problem with some of your work. You seem intent on just maximizing your page created count and not upgrading current pages. Pages like Yahoo! Fantasy Sports need significant work. Why don't you make your pages wiki worthy before adding more pages. You are spamming the site! -GoHuskies9904 (talk) 21:05, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Skype invite
Hi, you mentioned you'd be free this weekend? E-mail me for my Skype ID please. :) Durova Charge! 04:46, 3 May 2008 (UTC)

Proposal to remove claims of alleged controversy about Raritan Valley
Thanks for your past contributions to the article Central Jersey. I've placed a proposal on the article's talk page to remove the claims that there is controversy over whether the Raritan Valley in New Jersey exists. Please visit the page and register your support or opposition for the proposal. Thanks. --Bryan H Bell (talk) 04:47, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

SV Dynamo
Hi, I nominated Template:Kinds of sport and sport associations of the SV Dynamo for deletion. You can probably guess who created this template. Your input on the deletion discussion would be appreciated. Novidmarana (talk) 20:06, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Possibly unfree Image:CheNuevara navbar.jpg
An image that you uploaded or altered, Image:CheNuevara navbar.jpg, has been listed at Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. as<FONT COLOR="#72b5d9">e</FONT><FONT COLOR="#87ceeb">nine</FONT> <FONT COLOR="#72b5d9">say what?</FONT>  23:10, 7 May 2008 (UTC) --<font face="Trebuchet MS"><FONT COLOR="#4682b4">a</FONT><FONT COLOR="#5c9cc7">s</FONT><FONT COLOR="#72b5d9">e</FONT><FONT COLOR="#87ceeb">nine</FONT> <FONT COLOR="#72b5d9">say what?</FONT>  23:10, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
 * There is actually a license for the Wikipedia logo, although I cannot remember what the template code is. <font face="Trebuchet MS"><FONT COLOR="#4682b4">a</FONT><FONT COLOR="#5c9cc7">s</FONT><FONT COLOR="#72b5d9">e</FONT><FONT COLOR="#87ceeb">nine</FONT> <FONT COLOR="#72b5d9">say what?</FONT>  16:29, 8 May 2008 (UTC)

Spare me your euphemisms!
Oh spare me your euphemisms! You would have to eliminate the unsourced statements from all articles in North and Central Jersey if that were true. Just acknowledge the fact that the standard is different for Central Jersey. And that it is based on personal interests.

By the way, the development of industry is common fact. It's also very hard to source because the source itself is often making a value judgment not supported by empirical analysis (profits of companies in Raritan Valley, resident totals, etc...). Jps57 (talk) 19:10, 8 May 2008 (UTC)jps57

Your selective paraphrasing is primae facie example of exactly what I'm talking about. Here's the whole statement ""White flight" from Newark to the suburbs, which started in the '40s and accelerated in the '60s, meant that an increasing number of people who worked in the city no longer lived there." Notice the area that says "accelerated in the '60s."

As for your reference to historical text, any student of history will tell you that history books are inherently subjective. Why is the Vietnam War ignored in most American textbooks but covered extensively in other textbooks? There is no such thing as "objective" analysis. I don't want to get into that with you. Only empirical evidence (raw numbers), count as objective sources. And even then, there are gray areas like statistics where you can manipulate the stats by asking leading questions. Historical text base their claims on sources that have a subjective component to them. For example, primary sources such as newspaper articles have a subjective bent to them because the newspaper articles are written by certain people in a certain period of time. There is a historical movement stressing non-sources because official archival records and primary sources kept by the wealthy and elites often overshadow the life of common people in all civilizations. In the financial services sector, numbers are often used in a selective way (like what you just did) to further agendas. There is no such thing as a "statistically sound" buy or sell. So even numerical information is misleading if used the wrong way. Your naive attitude regarding sources and failure to recognize the inherent contradictions in the Central Jersey article is beyond me. Furthermore, you might want to work on edits to entire towns in the United States. There is unsourced information everywhere on wikipedia in every region of the United States. Jps57 (talk) 19:32, 8 May 2008 (UTC)jps57

Revolving Bugbear, when I made that statement about not challenging the historical analysis, I wasn't necessarily referring to you. I was referring to the people who randomly came onto the Central Jersey site to make bald statements that suited their personal agendas. I have sourced the section. But your insistence on them for every conceivable statement belies both academic standards and common sense. Your excuse about not going onto other sites (try California) to change their unsourced statements is simply an example of your SELECTIVE preference for sourcing in certain articles over others. You also misinterpret the word "start." If a farming community has some development, it doesn't mean that it's changed. "Start," then, means when the character of the community has undergone FUNDAMENTAL change. Again, your failure to even mention the 1960s acceleration is just an example of your bias. The point I'm trying to make here is that no one should pretend they're objective, even with sources. Everyone has an agenda. I have an agenda. I am trying to inform, to add as much as possible (even cultural references), to an article about a nebulous topic. A tactic used to defeat portions of the article not liked by certain users has been to insist on sourcing. That is a fair statement. Your failure to realize your own apprehensions about the article is baffling. Your assumption about the nature of sourcing just reinforces your unfamiliarly with the concept of research (though I can only say what's true for the financial and maybe the legal industries). Jps57 (talk) 19:59, 8 May 2008 (UTC)jps57