User talk:TenOfAllTrades/archive09

This page is an archive of talk page comments for the months of June through August 2006.

'''Please add any new comments to my current talk page at User talk:TenOfAllTrades. Thanks!'''

Requests for arbitration/Blu_Aardvark
Hello,

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: Requests for arbitration/Blu_Aardvark. Please add evidence to the evidence sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Blu_Aardvark/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Blu_Aardvark/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, --Tony Sidaway 00:31, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Requests for arbitration/Francis Schuckardt
Hello,

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened: Requests for arbitration/Francis Schuckardt. Please add evidence to the evidence sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Francis Schuckardt/Evidence. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Requests for arbitration/Francis Schuckardt/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, --Tony Sidaway 02:49, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

Brilliance
Constantly finding myself chuckling at the brilliant way you express yourself, but "I mean, if an editor wanted to announce that he was a dick, there are better ways to go about it." was absolutely priceless. It belongs on a plaque, so I hereby award you one. :D Essjay  (  Talk  •  Connect  )  20:55, 4 June 2006 (UTC)

For your attention


A.J.A. 04:06, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Permit to copy from a Website
Thanks for your input on the Help desk. a follow up question:
 * If they agree to PD and waive not-for-profit, What about the requirements for citing them as a source, with a link? Also is specifying a category for articles using their material. OK? --Shafei 05:37, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Midgely
I am having a problem with Midgely making personal attacks in my Rfd on G. Patrick Maxwell. I have asked him repeatedly to stop. Other admins have asked him to be civil. Yet he continues to attack me by saying I am POV and citing another article I have been working on. We all have opinions. I am no more POV than he is. As an engineer and a lawyer, I am well accustomed to providing references and citations for any edits here or on formal papers. However, I really should not have to defend myself in this regard. The Rfd has nothing to do with my edits on a different article. Midgely has accused me of removing his vote/comments and then used that as an excuse to write a long diatribe on me. IN fact, another admin had inadvertantly moved his vote/comment, and explained that to him. Midgely never apologized or stopped his onslaught of vicious personal attack. All because he disagrees with me. This is unbelievable. He also has a section on his talkpage called "Molly Coddling". I doubt that this violates any particular WIki rule, but it is an example of his single-minded attack on me. I also know that he has a history of doing this. In m y case, he has been warned several times to be civil, but no admin does anything to stop this continued attack. Will you or someone please do something? MollyBloom 21:57, 5 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Frankly, in looking at the AfD, I'd say that both of you need to dial it back a notch. I really don't want to get involved where there has been bad behaviour on both sides.  Both of you have to cool off and step back.  TenOfAllTrades(talk) 22:44, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Kozlovesred block
You are a solid contributor, so I take your comments seriously. On that note, if you're interested, please review your comments on PMA's block of Kozlovesred. He was getting quoted out of context on WP:ANI. The quoted comments were meant only for me, and were posted on my talk page; they were not the stated reason for the block. PMA is experienced enough to know not to act as an involved admin. 172 | Talk 04:58, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Aldux
Hi TenOfAllTrades, as you seem to be a level headed administrator, could you keep an eye on user Aldux - who has reverted an article three times without any interaction at all. Of course the usual subject is the tedious Elections in Cuba, attempts to clean up the article - as it was an unreadable a mess (with a POV tag) - have been received with blank reverts. There has been a minimal/irrational-in-my-view response from Ultramarine - but I have grown used that over time. It is the former users editing pattern that concerns me.--Zleitzen 18:34, 9 June 2006 (UTC)


 * It looks like there's some editorial disagreement there, but nothing requiring admin intervention at this point.  Please don't call other editors irrational.  TenOfAllTrades(talk) 19:07, 9 June 2006 (UTC)


 * No problem, TenOfAllTrades. It's just repeated revertion without explanation raises the eyebrows and narrows the eyes. --Zleitzen 21:47, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

copyright tags
is there simply an image of the tags I can use instead of the tag itself? ...IMHO (Talk) 15:27, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

addressing comments individually is a common practice
Most users separate their comments into separate paragraphs because each paragraph makes a different point or asks a different question. It is therefore common and accepted practice among discussion or Cabal group participants (see: Usenet) to insert their response directly beneath each paragraph the user has created so as to help be more specific and to eliminate confusion. ...IMHO (Talk) 19:52, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

I suggest then that you not break up your comments into paragraphs if you do not want replies to follow each one independently. It is not just a matter of USENET versus Wikipedia protocol here. This is also the common method used in the paper publishing industry when editing or proofreading a document prior to giving permission for its publication. Ultimately the Wikipedia will have to join the real world and begin to acknowledge most of its traditions of which this is only one. Otherwise the Wikipedia needs to reconsider exposing itself to the public and subjecting itself to the rules the public expects and has learned to follow over many, many years long before computers or the Internet existed for identical situations in the real world. Hope this makes it clear. ...IMHO (Talk) 00:00, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Unique ideas, thoughts, commentary and concepts have, unfortunately, a tendency (and a right) to demarcate themselves regardless of the author's preferences. Although the Wikipedia may wish to overturn convention in the real world and replace it with a convention of its own the fact is that the hierarchy of reality will not permit this becasue the Wikipedia exists within the public realm and not the other way around. ...IMHO (Talk) 00:15, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

User:I.M._Rich
Hi TenOfAllTrades, that seems fair enough given his past productivity. Cheers -- Samir  धर्म 06:13, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

A short Esperanzial update
As you may have gathered, discussions have been raging for about a week on the Esperanza talk page as to the future direction of Esperanza. Some of these are still ongoing and warrant more input (such as the idea to scrap the members list altogether). However, some decisions have been made and the charter has hence been amended. See what happened. Basically, the whole leadership has had a reshuffle, so please review the new, improved charter.

As a result, we are electing 4 people this month. They will replace JoanneB and Pschemp and form a new tranche A, serving until December. Elections will begin on 2006-07-02 and last until 2006-07-09. If you wish to run for a Council position, add your name to the list before 2006-07-02. For more details, see Esperanza/June 2006 elections.

Thanks and kind, Esperanzial regards, &mdash;Cel es tianpower háblame 16:00, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Question for you
Hi, recently I posted a question about electricity on the Reference desk. There, you wrote: ''If you could increase your capacitance somehow, you could store more charge without the associated high potential. I can't think of a 'natural' process to do this, but there are mechanical ways.'' Below that, I asked you what are those mechanical ways, but as you probably will not look again at that question, since it is important to me, I decided to leave you a message here. Again, this is very importat to me, if you see this message, please answer me on my talk page(or yours). By the way, sorry to bother you like this.--Captain ginyu 14:44, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Another question for you from another user. I am posting links from Miller & Zois which, granted, is a commerical site. But it is also the leading site on the Internet for legal education for trial lawyers - 80% of the content is focused on this direction. Please actually check out the site. I fear that you see commerical website and a law firm and assume that it is garbage promotional links. But nothing could be further from the truth. All of our links that we are putting on here are specifically screened to make sure there is no "hey, let us be your lawyers" content on it. Please review the site and consider this before making futher deletions. In fact, much of what we put up is sample of the topic addressed, which are hard to find anywhere on the Interent. Thanks. - Mike Teflon

User:Hernando Cortez
The user User:Hernando Cortez, who was permanently blocked by you on 29 May 2006, made one of his usual edits today. Is he no longer blocked? No longer thought to be a sockpuppet of User:Lou franklin? Did he sneak in through an open window? Just curious.--KarlBunker 02:16, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

major revisions complete
The Half-life computation article has undergone substantial revision which has hopefully addressed everyone's concerns. If you have any further comments after looking at the article again, please list the items you do not like, make whatever comment you have and please be specific and allow time for further revision. If there is any reason I can not comply with your wishes then I will let you know the reason why. ...IMHO (Talk) 12:07, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

My sig
Done. Hope it's better. Regards. Orane (t) 19:32, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Hydnjo
I don't appreciate the accusation that what I did was "bordering on disrupting Wikipedia to make a POINT." That was never my intention, nor was it the outcome of my actions. I only had the best interests of the project in heart. --Jeffrey O. Gustafson - Shazaam! - &lt;*&gt; 13:32, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

Google Maps API and user overlays
You may wish to explore the idea of the Wikipedia incorporating the Google Maps API for use with user overlays. ...IMHO (Talk) 11:11, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

 * Thanks for the help on my talk page... if possible, can I get it semiprotected please? - pm_shef 01:29, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Alrighty then, I'll be the canary. Thanks for keepin your eye out :) - pm_shef 02:32, 17 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Didn't even notice ;-) - pm_shef 01:58, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Please Explain
Could you please explain your coments left on my talk page? I don't understand them, they seem be be unrelated. I wasn't rude I removed what I considered non-sense to mytalk page as you seem to be accusing me of some wrong doing with some user that I am not familier with.--JohnnyCanuck 02:23, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

You were referring to pm_shef? I never left any warnings on his talk page. I did provide some advice to him, he could take it or leave it. I was just pointing out to him why I think this started again. --JohnnyCanuck 02:29, 17 July 2006 (UTC)

Hydnjo's response to the blocking proposal
I thank one and all - Jarandal, Antandrus, Titoxd, Xaosflux, TenOfAllTrades, mboverload, PseudoSudo, Knowledge Seeker, Haukurth, Deathphoenix, Zzyzx11, Tyrenius, Zscout370, AnnH, Rick Block, Tyrenius (again), Zscout370 (again) and NoSeptember for your support.

To Jeffrey O. Gustafson who initiated this block request I ask why? We have had no interaction until now so how do you come to this requested action at WP:AN? Did you come across my account during your own research or are you acting as a proxy for another admin/user with whom I've caused to be angry with me? In reviewing your contributions I see no such "letter of the law" before now and so I feel singled out by you and I have no clue as to why - that to me is most disturbing. If you've come to this action on your own then should I be always wary of another admin challenging the legitimacy of my account?

For TenOfAllTrades who advised me not to worry and Rick who made me laugh I give special thanks, you've helped me to not take this so personally. And to Jeff, thanks for being courteous in informing me of your action and for letting me feel that your heart wasn't for blocking me. Except for my one explanation above, I haven't edited for a few days now so as to allow y'all to comment about this based on my history of contribution rather than my reaction to it.

I wanted to say all of this before it all goes to archive heaven. I still have a lingering concern that this may arise again and don't want to go through WP life looking over my shoulder or worrying that I might piss-off some admin and cause another inquiry about the legitimacy of my account. If any of you who have been so gracious as to take the time to support me here have any suggestions to prevent such an action, please drop your thoughts on my talk or by email.

Finally, on a personal note to all, I never ever expected so much supportive response from all of you. I know that I've been moody at times and have spoken in ways that I have regretted the next day. I hoped otherwise but it seemed that those unfortunate responses might end up being my legacy as they were the foremost in my mind. And so far as this being a "role account", I think that I'll let the descriptions of AnnH and NoSeptember (both above) stand as the most intuitive descriptions of this account. My (and our) warmest regards to all of you for your understanding and outward support for the continuation of hydnjo's user account and future contributions. Again, my delighted and humble thanks :-) --hydnjo talk 02:03, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

addendum: Jeff, I was confused at the outset in that I wasn't aware of the "role account" policy and then after becoming aware I was frustrated that I had made so many edits which could mislead someone to the conclusion that my account was a role account. I'm sorry that in my zeal to understand your actions that I posed the possibility that you were acting at someone else's behest. I have no evidence of that and it was improper of me to even mention that such a bizarre conspiracy was possible. I find myself guilty of "blaming the messenger" and posting an inappropriate comment about your motivation.

As for my account, I want to state that it is not a role account and I apologize for leaving the impression that it is one. "hydnjo" is the signature that I commonly use for much of my correspondence and thought it to be appropriate when I first started my WP account. The portmanteau is an acknowledgment of our shared existence and not an indication that Heidi and I share in editing at WP.

I thank you for your courtesy in informing me at the outset of the discussion at WP:AN and for your compliments about my contributions. The comments in my response were made in the shadow of my own frustration with my having left a trail of edits that could easily be construed as having come from either Heidi or myself. I sincerely apologize to you for making any suggestion as to your motivation in bringing up a legitimate policy question. You have a genuine concern for the orderly behavior of our editors and I thank you for initiating this discussion and providing me the opportunity to explain the nature of my account. --hydnjo talk 18:56, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Recusal in "real life"
I saw your query about how recusal issues are handled in "real life" on one of the RfAr pages. If this is still of interest, respond here and I'll send you the information I can find since I've dealt with some related issues. (I have no involvement whatsoever in any of the arbitrations here, though.) Newyorkbrad 22:23, 24 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks; no need for you to go to the trouble now, since it seems that the issue was addressed. Cheers! TenOfAllTrades(talk) 00:16, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

Richard Norton matter
I would welcome your input at Requests for comment/Block of Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ). The Uninvited Co., Inc. 20:20, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Request?
I'm sorry, but I couldn't find another way to do this.

I saw that you were an admin in the chemistry department here, and so I would like to request that you to start up a page that would function like a symbol dictionary for chemistry and math. Maybe there already is one, but I couldn't find it. I know I would find such a page useful, and so I assume others would also.


 * I'm not sure precisely what you're looking for; perhaps a few examples might help?  I know that many common abbreviations and short forms are already linked to their definitions via redirects or through disambiguation pages.  For example, putting the terms Pu or + into the 'search' box on the left side of the screen (and clicking 'Go') will take you directly to our articles on Plutonium or Plus and minus signs, respectively.  Na, meanwhile, links to a page giving a list of uses for the term, including (right on top) a link to sodium.


 * You might also find Table of mathematical symbols and the List of elements by symbol useful. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 18:38, 7 August 2006 (UTC)


 * Ahhhh  The mathematical symbols is a very good start! I think it would be nice if you could have something similar, linked to the front page of the chemistry portal. Just put in all the symbolic chemistry bits. I know most of them are greek letters, and their meaning is on the page with the elements and etc, but it would be nice to scroll through all the symbols to see what the one in the equation you're staring at means so you can remember how to solve it. I am coming to this from the position of a first year chem student who hasn't the easiest time remembering what all the new and odd things represent. If I know, for example, that I'm looking at an equation having to do with the probabale location of orbitals, it would be nice to have somewhere that I could look at the symbols to work backwards and see what means what. I hope that makes a bit more sense.


 * Well, Wikipedia is an entirely volunteer-driven project! If you'd like to start on a List of chemistry symbols, you can dive right in.  To create new articles, you need to register a username (click on the 'sign in' link up in the upper right corner of this, or any, Wikipedia page).  You'll also want to read our guide to creating your first article, to help you get an idea about Wikipedia's style conventions.  You might also enquire at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemistry, to see if you can find some like-minded individuals who would be interested in working on such an article.  Good luck! TenOfAllTrades(talk) 13:33, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Ste4k
You may wish to look at User talk:Ste4k now. I do not think Ste4k should be allowed to attack other users on their talk page. &mdash;  Who 123 12:49, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

Help
Hi Ten,

could you have a look at the Gerson Therapy talk page? I dont want to get blocked again, but the article is..well see for yourself..

Ta S

Miller and Zois links
REGARDING CONTRIBUTORY NEGLIGENCE How exactly is a statement of fact advertisting? While I agree polemic is a fancy word and that this is an appropriate forum for you to show off, no one disagrees the harshness of the contributory negligence rule creates challenges for injury lawyers seeking justice. When I say no one, and I mean no one, disagrees with this assesment, not the most ardent supports of the contributory negligence rule. Moreover, I'm a law professor. I get paid to teach. Does this destroy the value of the contribution I make? Of course not. And it does not on here, either. I appreciate that you try to addresss these issues in the ends on what you believe to be the merits. And while I disagree with your conclusion, I do not disrespect the analysis. Reasonable people can disagree on this, I concede. All of the "calling a spade a spade" junk before is simply not relevant but does meet its intended purpose: to be inflamatory. Mike Teflon 01:58, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

Contributory Negligence, Etc.
You have requested that I keep things civil. Agreed. Could you be kind enough in return to not respond to me in a way you would never consider if I was standing next to you? The Interent has a "road rage" aspect to it, you feel free to speak in a way you would not if we were face to face. Instead, you would afford me as a stranger at least a modicum of respect even though we have never met.

You say: "My point is simply that since there is no way to present the article without the surrounding material, we have to decide on a case by case basis whether or not the M&Z pages are likely to be of net benefit to Wikipedia. Does a given M&Z article provide enough new, supplementary information or source material likely to be of interest to a Wikipedia reader to be worth subjecting that same reader to the advertising all around the page?"

I agree with every word you write here. The truth is, TenofAllTrades, is that like most of us, our motives are mixed. We have a sincere desire to educate the public and lawyers. Miller & Zois spends hours and hours every month helping other lawyers (many through our web site) in a way that could never be characterized as anything other than altruistic. Still, do we use the Internet to promote our expertise? Of course we do.

We have hundreds of pages on our site. A small minority are focused on directing clients to us. Auto accident, medical malpractice, etc. Never have we tired to put one of those pages on Wikipedia. But we do have a vast education site - I think the most educational on the Interent for issues pertaining to personal injury. In particular, what we have the dovetails so well with Wikipedia is the samples. Read an explanation of what a deposition is, what an interrogatories are. Then, you get to see an actual sample. How many people do not learn better this way?

You are dead wrong about the MRI comment - I'll bet you MRI and lawyer come up together as a search pretty much never. What I'm trying to put up there are MRI reports. That is neat thing, actually seeing who the MRI are interpreted by a doctor. Try to find them elsewhere on the net. As to the herniated disc comment, I'll bet you there are a vanquishing low number of searches for this (but I have never checked). But these are nto the way people search for lawyers. Check for yourself on Overture or something like that.

Anyway, I'm going to end this post not because I don't have more to say but because I'm rambling at this point. Hopefully, you have a better idea of where I am coming from on this (whether you agree or not).

However
I apologize that you're under that assumption. I actually created this account when I was finding typos in various economics related articles. Stirling's POV on the Gold_Standard article was then noticed by me, so I decided to ensure that this article remain NPOV. Only then did the interaction with Stirling get ugly, as he made a gross and obscene false accusation against me, so I decided to research what was really going on.

I've made no attack on Stirling Newberry, nor will I apologize for my actions; he and I had a disagreement on an article. He took it to the next, "personal" level. When someone accuses you of harassing them offline, wouldn't you want to research the situation?

I do find it odd that there's pretty strong evidence that he's harassing himself, and yet, you target me with these claims. Why is that? T Turner 18:11, 31 August 2006 (UTC)

There is no such evidence, and in fact this is now in the realm of straight up defamation. T Turner has sent harrassing text messages to my personal phone, and quite probably got that phone number from Ray Lopez, who has left harrassing voice mails. The legal machinery has been invoked on the phone calls, though I rather suspect it will lead to some free VoIP service.

This material is both willfully false:



- and with the intent to defame. T Turner, or someone known to him, is part of the Ray Lopez harrassment, and this is an attempt to slander.

This goes beyond personal attacks and goes into the area of straight up illegality. Stirling Newberry 19:56, 31 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I must ask, though I doubt I will receive an answer, what evidence shows that I'm even related in the little games that you are invovled with Stirling? By the way, Wikipedia does have a policy against Legal Threats. Perhaps it's time I do seek intervention. T Turner 21:09, 31 August 2006 (UTC)


 * So wait, I get a "final warning" while Stirling Newberry goes to every single admin here in the attempt to smear me? Plus, I never said that I was a "new editor" I just have a newly registered username because I was sick of editing via my AOL account that was occasionally blocked. T Turner 22:34, 31 August 2006 (UTC)