User talk:Selmo/Archive 2

archive

Thanks
Thanks for the barnstar. :) -→ Buchanan-Hermit ™ / ?!  01:43, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Tax avoidance and tax evasion
Dear fellow editor: In the above-referenced article, on your recent edit the reference should be to "trusts" generally, and not to the article on "Trust companies" -- or at least that's how it is in the United States. A trust company is generally not a trust at all, but is usually a corporation or other entity that administers trusts. In the United States, the vehicle of a trust itself (whether legally valid as a trust or not) has often been used as a tax avoidance or even tax evasion device. The article is really talking about trusts -- not trust companies -- being used in this way.

It's not that a "trust company" has never been used for tax avoidance or tax evasion -- it's just that I believe the use of the term "trust company" here in this context would be incorrect.

Your thoughts? Yours, Famspear 21:04, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Screenshot
Its just newer and with a newer internet browser so it looks better. Also its a different featured article, the one in yours is not really screenshot material. Not much more than that. ~ Rangeley ( talk ) 04:56, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Anime page mediation
Hi, this is just to let you know your mediation case has been opened. Please feel free to discuss on the Anime talk page and/or the mediation page ; thanks! Jsw663 21:24, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Image:YourTransitAd.jpg
I think I may be able to get a better photo of this ad. If I'm able to do that, is it okay if I use it to replace this current one? I want to check with you first before doing anything. -→ Buchanan-Hermit ™ / ?!  03:46, 27 August 2006 (UTC)  Selmo (talk) 00:12, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

WP:AN
Hi Selmo, what's the problem? I didn't really understand it from your post. Do you have diffs? Thanks -- Samir  धर्म 00:26, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi - I too saw your post on AN but I do have a problem with swearing. Perhaps you need to take a break. By using "you", you are not commenting on content but contributers.--Arktos talk 00:29, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
 * I wrote about on Samir's talk page).

Anime
Sometimes the editing can get heavy, especially on contentious issues. Remember to keep your cool when it does. I'd let the mediation cabal finish their thing on the article, and consider taking the invitation to write a criticism section if you so desire. But, remember that, even if you feel provoked, you shouldn't do things like curse on a talk page. It's hard to take things back when everything is recorded on a wiki. Cheers -- Samir  धर्म 00:41, 29 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Selmo, I've replied on the Anime talk page, Criticism section. It is similar to Samir's reply above.  Please remember several things:


 * The WP:NPA rule applies to ALL editors. Whether you feel like you've been attacked or not, there is no excuse to attack someone else personally.
 * NEVER take things personally. If TheFarix criticizes you about something, then let him air his opinion.  You can always rebuke him in a civil manner.
 * ALWAYS control your language. I've edited your reply in that criticism section accordingly.  You must remember that Wikipedia is accessible by people of ALL ages and even if you don't control your language for TheFarix, please do so for other users.
 * I have read the archived discussion before about people deleting criticism sections, but since neither NedScott nor TheFarix are opposed to creating one, at least something has been agreed on principle. All of us can continue to hammer out the details, but only when you maintain your cool and civility.  Thanks.  Jsw663 04:32, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Rapid transit
I welcome your industry in creating a Rapid transit project. However, before you tag any more articles, it might be useful to take a step back and ponder the scope. WikiProject New York City Subway is already a subset of WikiProject Trains. That project already has a well developed template for tagging article talk pages, TrainsWikiProject. Some of the New York City Subway articles are already tagged with that template (e.g., see talk:New York City Subway nomenclature). I point this out before you embark on an effort that might involve duplicating a lot of work that has already been done by others. There are probably over 600 New York City Subway articles, so anything we do there involves a massive scale. Marc Shepherd 18:46, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

Btw, could you change "subway=yes" to "metro=yes" as this is more universal. For example, the Docklands Light Railway does not count as a subway type system but is more a metro type system. Even though it is closely related, it is not actually part of the London Underground system. Simply south 13:59, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

More on WikiProject Rapid transit
I also agree with the above. Once I'm allowed to use AWB, or write a bot by hand, I can help in correcting the problem. -- Selmo (talk) 22:31, 2 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I have some additional suggestions. The bot edits (some of which have now been reversed) have put the talk pages of every rapid transit article, anywhere in the world, into Category:WikiProject Rapid transit. This strategy, if taken to its conclusion, would create a humungous category containing many thousands of articles. Categories that large are seldom helpful. There should be a separate category for the talk pages of each major rapid transit system. Those categories could roll up to Category:WikiProject Rapid transit.


 * For similar reasons, in the template TrainsWikiProject, the flag "subway=yes" isn't very helpful. The WikiProject Rapid transit will not be maintaining all these articles. That template is already equipped with flags like "NYCS=yes", "WashingtonMetro=yes", and so forth. If those flags are set, then "subway=yes" should not be set. Marc Shepherd 13:56, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

VandalSniper
You've been approved to use VandalSniper. Please let me know if you have any problems getting it working. --Chris (talk) 22:12, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

JPD's RfA
Thanks, Selmo, for your support at my RfA, which finished with a tally of 94/1/0. I hope I live up to the confidence you have shown in me in my activities as an administrator. JPD (talk) 16:09, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

KarlBunker
Oh, boy. Has he ever once provided a reason why he reverted your changes? --Mr. L e fty Talk to me! 23:43, 11 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, then I guess you're going to have to explain to him why you edited the way you did. The best thing to do would be to discuss it on Talk:Telepathy, since he shouldn't remove messages from there, and other editors can voice their opinion as well, and notify him that you've opened a discussion.  If he continues to be unresponsive, you can continue that discussion we were having on ANI.  I hope this helps. --Mr. L e fty Talk to me! 23:49, 11 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I would only recommend ArbCom as a last resort. You should try either the mediation cabal or maybe requests for mediation.  One of those should probably help you guys work out your problem.  Good luck! --Mr. L e fty Talk to me! 22:00, 13 September 2006 (UTC)


 * People here sure have trouble getting along. :) My recommendation would be to just wait for the request for mediation to play out, and hopefully everyone can come to an agreement. --Mr. L e fty Talk to me! 02:28, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Selmo, an advocate would be at least the first step. I'm not sure KarlBunker is capable of being non-POV. -THB 02:31, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

I see
Back in August you made some changes to the Harley Earl article. Can you back up that bullshit about Earl hiring Women and "openly gay men"? Name them. who were these women and when did this take place? Its a fact that there were no womans rest rooms on G.M.s famed fourtheenth floor. If you realy believe the bullshit you substituted for fact, your a God-Damned idiot. randazzo56 00:32, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Although it seems that I was being a vandal, I was trying to combat vandalism that day. Again, I hope this clears things up. -- Selmo (talk) 00:41, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Fair enough
Sorry I was so harsh. Thanks for the response randazzo56 00:43, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

AMA request
Karl has been doing quite a bit of POV pushing. This all started with me simply deleting an unsourced claim that he reverted. I tried discussing it, but then Karl launched into a heated debate over the existence of the ability. Negotiation quickly turned into arguing as it became very hard to talk the issue over. Askolnick jumped in and made the bad faith assumption that I tried to POV push. My only action was a frank attempt to make the article more neutral. After this justification, I was told not to insult any one's intelligence. Before this I was questioned why I removed the POV-ish sentence stating that reproducibility is a hallmark of scientific findings. My belief is that anyone interested in the article has a basic understanding of the process of experimenting. However, Askolnick's apparent opinion is my justification was dishonest; that my edits are motivated by my beliefs. My last action in the debate was reminding Askolnick to assume good faith. Anyone's help in me and another editor who seems to agree with me more than the other two parties out would be greatly appreciated. Selmo (talk) 02:55, 16 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Selmo, your belief that anyone, who would be curious enough about telepathy to look it up in Wikipedia already understands that reproducibility is one of the main principles of the scientific method, is simply not credible. I had added this important point to the telepathy article to explain why the great majority of scientists do not accept the existance of telepathy or other paranormal phenomena: the failure of 100+ years of research to produce any reliably reproducible results. Without explantion, you reverted my change. When I objected, you stated a reason that simply defies logic. Most people interested in telepathy do NOT know or understand the principles of the scientific method and why they are important. Your protest of being mistreated rings hollow.


 * Assuming good faith does not mean one cannot question or criticize another editor's actions. Reverting another editor's work without offering an explanation - and then offering an explanation that makes no sense - are acts worthy of questioning and criticism.


 * Where have I assumed that you are not here to improve Wikipedia? I've done no such thing. And just because a person wants to improve Wikipedia does not mean his edits are beyond criticism. By the way, "guidelines" by definition do not "dictate." They "guide." Askolnick 12:03, 16 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Selmo, kindly tell me which Wiki rule makes you immune to the very same criticism you direct at others? You've been attacking Karl and me for putting in our POV. And you told Karl "I don't need my intelligence insulted" because he had asked you if you would accept including my point about reproducibility if it were cited. My reiteration of your bad faith comment was meant to show you that hypocritical comments like that are not helpful. You keep asking others not to assume bad faith. How about leading by example?Askolnick 14:10, 16 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Karl's asking you if you would accept my edit if a citation were provided implied nothing about your education. It was a simple request whether providing a citation would remove your objection. Wiki guidelines should not be used to justify your own uncivil statements. You did not say that you "disliked" Karl's comment. You accused him of "insulting" your "intelligence." That not only was a very uncivil thing for you to say, it was also wrong. He was doing no such thing. He simply asked you if you would withdraw you objection to the information you reverted if a citation were provided. Again, I suggest, if you want more civil conduct on this page, you should lead by example. Askolnick 16:24, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to Esperanza!
Welcome, Selmo, to Esperanza! As you might know, all the Esperanzians share one important goal: the success of this encyclopedia. Within that, we then attempt to strengthen the community bonds, and be the "approachable" side of the project. All of our ideals are held in the Charter, the governing document of the association.

Now that you are a member you should read the guide to what to do now or you may be interested in some of our programs. A quite important program is Stressbusters, which seeks to support editors who have encountered any stress from their Wikipedia events, and are seeking to leave the project. So far, Esperanza can be credited with the support and retention of several users. We will send you newsletters to keep you up to date. Also, we have a calendar of special events, member birthdays, and other holidays that you can add to and follow.

In addition to these projects, several more missions of Esperanza are in development, and are currently being created at Esperanza/Proposals.

If you have any other questions, concerns, comments, or general ideas, Esperanzian or otherwise, know that you can always contact Natalya by email or talk page. Consider introducing yourself at the Esperanza talk page! Alternatively, you could communicate with fellow users via our IRC channel, #wikipedia-esperanza (which is also good for a fun chat or two :). If you're new to IRC, you may find help at an IRC tutorial. I thank you for joining Esperanza, and look forward to working with you in making Wikipedia a better place to work!

Sasuk e  -kun  27  20:56, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

Re: Thanks
No problem. There's just something about welcoming new Esperanzians that I love! Anyway, good luck on future contributions and, once again, Welcome to Esperanza! Sasuk e  -kun  27  21:04, 17 September 2006 (UTC)