User talk:Zoe/archive 8

Thanks for your help cleaning up the Jandek pages.

Much appreciated. Cadastral

Who said I was new here? Please keep your slander to yourself. Susan Mason


 * According to the database, you first contributed yesterday. That's new. Noting that someone is new does not constitute slander. Vicki Rosenzweig


 * Actually, "her" first new contribution appears to have been February 18. -- Zoe

Are you working on February 24 yet? If not I would like to add some events. --mav

--- Zoe, do you like to have first crack at day articles or second? It doesn't really matter to me because my focus is on updating all the linked year pages and many of the other articles. Also, adding events doesn't take me that long - even on days I add events before you do. You can answer here (I have your user page watched). --mav


 * (I have your user page watched). That sounds vaguely sinister. :)  DanKeshet

LOL, Dan. Mav, I don't care. I don't get a chance to do them every day, so if I can get in and do several at once, that's fine by me. I usually do them about 8 PM during weeknights and about 3 PM weekends, but that can vary. Just go ahead and do them whenever you want. -- Zoe

From: JWSchmidt

I'm new to Wikipedia. I tried to make a new Wikipedia page for Dan Dennett's book "Elbow Room" by modifing material I had previously posted at my GeoCities website. As the author of this material, I state that I do NOT mind if it is copied, edited, and freely distributed. What is the correct way to avoid this sort of problem in the future? I have been having trouble editing my preferences, so I will leave my email addy here just in case: johnwschmidt@excite.com JWSchmidt 14:07 Feb 27, 2003 (UTC)

&#35937 &#38530  '(y)zo (speaks to rulers) yin =  shade; yin - &#35918&#30505

Go to bed, Stevertigo, you're babbling. -- Zoe

Please could you indicate possible copyright violations by referring to them as "possible copyright violations", rather than "copyright violations". It's not good to accuse people. You might even get someone suing you for libel... ;) -- Oliver P. 13:27 Feb 28, 2003 (UTC)

Hey Zoe,

Would you break Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (dates and numbers) into more than one page? I can't edit there due to length of article. Be careful, though. There's a big ongoing controversy that makes this article touchy.

thank you,

Arthur 04:21 Mar 1, 2003 (UTC)

You brave brave person. Imaging 'tampering' with one of DW's edits. (Oh deerie me, did I write DW. Gosh, that should be Ron Davis. How could I possibly have made such a mistake. I mean, they are so unalike, Ron Davis and DW!)

I will say a prayer for your soul. JtdIrL 08:02 Mar 1, 2003 (UTC) PS: a word of advice. When The Nutter (DW/RD) comes to vomit abuse all over your page, don't say a word, put the garbage on the wiki-list, then just edit his stuff off your talk page. That's what I propose to do when he comes to my page to complain about something. Maybe declare it a DW-Free Zone in big red letters. Anyway, take care and don't let the DW monster give you too many bad dreams.


 * ) I have no interest in discussing things with him.  They'll get changed, whether he likes it or not.  -- Zoe

Zoe, I am Jcwf from nl.wikipedia and was trying to do some minor editing and then got a messgae that I was blocked by you for vandalism. What is going on? I am not logged in on this wiki because I usually avoid it, so currently my IP is 205.188.208.134 Please answer on my Dutch user page.

Thank you Zoe, I was able to change the page on standard enthalpy change of formation Jcwf 64.12.97.11 22:06 Mar 1, 2003 (UTC) P.S. Even though the names of the links on a foreign page look strange, they are still all in the same spot and I think if you keep your mouse on them a banner appears with the more familiar English.

allmusic.com has Lymon dying on the 28th -- they're no more authoritative than imdb, though. I did a search for "Frankie Lymon" died February on google and it looks like the 28th is more common, but not much so. Tuf-Kat

Hi Zoe, (sigh) what is it with this Cunctator? Does he normally do this crap? I've put a note on the Votes for Deletion page asking for his new Homophobic hate speech to be deleted immediately and for that other page (I don't even want to write its name) to be transferred back there. JtdIrL 03:37 Mar 3, 2003 (UTC)

Zoe, are you sure the article H.R. Pufnstuf": AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH! POOOP merited deleting? Perhaps it was an NPOV issue. - &#35918&#30505

-

Zoe,

Mary Queen of Scots is the title by which that monarch is best known by. Further, there was no Mary II of Scotland. (unless you count Mary II of United Kingdom, who can also be said to have been Mary II of Scotland. This is a circuitous argument, however.) It was on those grounds that I suggested the title change.

Arno

Dear Zoe,

Regarding your comment, "I don't know if you're intentionally trying to piss me off, but if you are, it's working," on my talk page... Is this a reference to what I said at Talk:Fear Factory? I admit that it was rather sarcastic in tone, and for that I unreservedly apologise. However, I was genuinely baffled by your statement that the "Dynamo Open Air Festival" sentence didn't make sense. I should have asked what you meant in a politer way, of course. Sorry for any offence caused. -- Oliver P. 02:56 Mar 4, 2003 (UTC)


 * That, on top of your comment above about copyright violations, and other things in the past few days. -- Zoe


 * I don't consider any of my comments to have been unfair, and I'm sorry if they've come across that way. The above comment about copyright violations seemed necessary: there is an established policy on how to announce possible copyright violations (see here and here), and you didn't follow it. I understand that no-one can be expected to get every detail of every policy right every time, but all I did above was point out what the policy was. Is that unfair? I consider the policy regarding possible copyright infringements to be an important one, because accusing people of actual copyright infringements when you can't be sure of this is itself unfair, and could offend potentially valuable new contributors, possibly even driving them away.


 * I've written a nice long reply to you at Talk:Fear Factory, by the way. I hope you don't find it offensive. -- Oliver P. 03:51 Mar 4, 2003 (UTC)

Hi Zoe, re- the issue of Mary, Queen of Scots. In fact she was not the only Mary. Mary II was. . . well. . . Mary II in both England and Scotland. Using Scottish ordinals only stopped with her sister Anne, who was the first Queen of Great Britain (though to confuse matters, James VI/I, MQofS's son, called himself King of Great Britain while using both ordinals to confuse everyone.) Mary II's father, James VII/II used both English and Scottish ordinals, and nothing in the constitutional arrangements between both kingdoms changed, so it seems logical that Mary II was,  Mary II/II. Hope this clarifies this. :) JtdIrL 03:26 Mar 4, 2003 (UTC)

Don't be sad Zoe, Allah loves you. Susan Mason
 * I admit, I've been smoking something other than tobacco, but this comment absolutely cracked me up and I don't know why. I'm still giggling and I first read it at least long enough for my computer to play all of a 4min26sec song (50 Cent's "Invasion of the Flat Booty Bitches", if anybody's interested).

Awesome. I remember being in ninth grade or so, and religiously watching Soap every day after school, when Comedy Central re-ran them -- I'd sell my soul for the whole series on DVD, VHS, beta or anything, for I would find a way to play it. Tuf-Kat

No, DW would want the Merovingians, but he'd be wrong. JHK


 * LOL. DW has been back lately as Ron Davis.  -- Zoe

Are you sure? DW et al are why I don't play anymore. Ugh.


 * Unfortunately. -- Zoe


 * Jimbo told me in an email that Ron Davis has left. --mav

Which picture on papal tiara? Maybe I am just too tired, but I didn't see any name. (Did you see, someone added in Susan Mason to the List of people with six toes. I nearly wet myself laughing when I saw it.!) JtdIrL 06:09 Mar 6, 2003 (UTC)

The first one, I think, JT, I'm not sure which one is causing the text to slide right. I didn't see the thing about six toes, that's funny. -- Zoe

Great work at Soap!! I had totally forgotten about some of that stuff. Wasn't Jessica's lover a revolutionary, not a dictator (at least, not yet)? Maybe I'm misremembering it... Tuf-Kat

You're right, I'll fix that. -- Zoe

The problem is that the wikipedia is not particularly useful for research because it can't be fact verfied as there are no references for any of the articles. For the ones I write I want them to be more than blowhard opinion. Grab a dead-tree encyclopedia, flip to the back. See all the references? Grab any biography or piece of non-fiction...same thing. Standards schmandards. Wikipedia should follow this 500 year old standard. -Reboot

This 'Susan Mason' character is getting stranger and stranger. Have you noticed how 'she' has begun going to the deletion log and putting down comments that are the exact opposite of whatever you or I say. I've looked at some of the articles 'she' has praised as superb, etc (after you had savaged them) just to see could 'she' possibly be genuine but misguided or something, but some of them are so pathetically bad it is almost funny. Yet Susan seems in awe of them. (And putting the names on that six toes list in {surname}, {firstname} order because, apparently that is how lists are done. Wha? What planet is she on? What is it about Wiki? For everyone like you, Deb, Mav, Cam, Oliver, etc you get DW, Elliot, Ron Davis (three divine persons in the one ego - if you are a catholic you'll get the joke!), Daeron, Lir, Susan, Vera . . . and Two16's weird poetry. Hell. Now I know how to make my millions. do a movie set on wiki and just use those characters. Would scare the bejaysus of the viewers. JtdIrL 06:02 Mar 7, 2003 (UTC)

Hi Zoe, I'm a little confused - please excuse me if I have misunderstood. You have removed from the votes for deletion page three images whose deletion I requested -
 * Image:Shanghai1.jpg
 * Image:Shanghai2.jpg
 * Image:Cabottwr.JPG

- but the files are still there. Are you planning to delete them? Thanks, Nevilley 07:41 Mar 7, 2003 (UTC)
 * Update - Mav kindly points out that you have already deleted them - thanks very much. The fact that I still seem to be able to see them is what is confusing me but I am sure I will grasp it sooner or later - caching or something I suppose. Thanks for your help. Nevilley

I think the problem is due to the very bad design of image description pages. There are two delete links on them; one for the image and one for the image description page. To properly delete an image and it's description page both delete links have to be used. A much better design would treat the actual image in the same way as text treated: When the page it is on is deleted the content (text or image) is deleted as well. I would classify the current behavior as a usability bug and will (again) notify the developers. --mav


 * Oy, sorry, I didn't know you had to delete both pages. -- Zoe

What is going on with Michael. His contributions seem to be getting more and more. . . well you know what I mean. Slán JtDiRl 07:50 Mar 8, 2003 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately, only a few can ban people who log in. -- Zoe

Heh heh. STÓD/ÉIRE is made up of the initials of my name as gaeilge (in Irish) ie, STOD, and the word Éire - Irish for Ireland in our constitution. I quite like the new nick. What do u think? STÓD/ÉÍRE 08:59 Mar 8, 2003 (UTC)


 * So, Siaghan T. O'D? 's cool.  -- Zoe

Pretty good guess. Well you know, St. Patrick's day is coming up, I'm wearing green pyjamas, I had dinner with the President, so I thought 'what the hell - lets get all nationalistic and pretend I can speak Irish. Too bad I can't change my username!!! STÓD/ÉÍRE 09:09 Mar 8, 2003 (UTC)


 * On a point of information, anybody outside Ireland who celebrates St. Patrick's day is not a good Catholic. Due to a surfeit of saints it's actually St. Joseph's day as well, and that takes priority - except, by a special dispensation, in Ireland. PML.

I didn't. The bloody system seems to have done. I have it open on my screen. Every time I try to preview it I get a blank page ????? I've even tried cutting and pasting it, but the page still stays blank. I don't know what the hell is going on. HELP! STÓD/ÉÍRE 06:44 Mar 9, 2003 (UTC)

Sounds like a browser problem. I'll see if I can revert it and archive it. -- Zoe

Hi Zoe, ermined to change all the lists around to her way. The debate has been moved to this page and votes are earnestly sought. STÓD/ÉÍRE 21:28 Mar 9, 2003 (UTC)

FYI - I'm working on March 10 right now but I'm already done with adding events to March 9. --mav

Thanks for the heads up, mav. Not a problem. -- Zoe

There's a great line in the Chamber of Commerce story about how the frozen grandfather was grandfathered into the new law against private ownership of bodies. Ortolan88


 * I saw that. :) -- Zoe

WHAT THE F@@@! Jeez, what happened there? It was perfect when I left. All I was saying anyway was that voting in now on about Susan's typically Susanish idea to change lists from {name} {surname} to {name}, {surname}. (Her latest idea, BTW, is to redo all pages that read 'US presidential election, {year}' to 'US presidential election for {year}. (AAAAAgh. S/he is doing my nut in!!!) Anyway, the vote is on at Wikipedia Talk:Manual of Style (lists) so I'm canvassing your vote. The more votes are cast against this nutty and unworkable idea the quicker it can be killed off. STÓD/ÉÍRE 02:26 Mar 10, 2003 (UTC)


 * Well, of course, Lir always wants things his way and to hell with anybody else. -- Zoe

AAAAGH! Susan is doing my head in. I promised myself I'd be nice to her but at this stage that would require extensive drugging. I have met some great people on wiki (including yourself) but also a fair shower of certifiable nutters. No amounting of painfully trying to explain in words of one syllable the situation seems to get through to whoever it is. Even though everyone kept telling me how Susan = Vera = Lir = Adam, I kept a deliberate degree of doubt, but there is the same fetish with causing chaos, with screwing up things with ludicrous unworkable ideas and a utterly paranoid inability to understand that you cannot jump in at the 21st of a linked series of articles and decide to change it simply because it suits him/her. Sometimes it seems as though Sue is really some 17 year old Fraser Craine wannabe in their bedroom who thinks they have borrowed papal infallibility and have exclusive use of it when on wiki. But given the number of complaints Baby Fraser is generating (that's what we'll call her/him/it from now on, BF!) they are well on the way to being banned, again. It cannot come too soon.

After dealing with BF, I'm off to take some valium! STÓD/ÉÍRE 04:14 Mar 10, 2003 (UTC)


 * I do think he's a college student. His first post to Wikipedia was at Iowa State University, and he tried to cause trouble even there.  -- Zoe

I've been rather sharp with BF on the Talk:US presidential election, 2000. Opps! STÓD/ÉÍRE 06:04 Mar 10, 2003 (UTC)

I know, Zoe. I'm just playing along for the fun of it. Usually one of the best ways of scaring the bejaysus out of such people is take them 'seriously' and ask for details, etc. 9 times out of 10, they think 'oh fuck. They'll find out I'm a fraud' and run a mile, afraid that someone is going to get onto the revenue service to check them out for their tax status, that they may have broken some legal rule, etc. Treating them like one of the big guys is often the quickest to have them crapping in their pants, disappearing into the woodwork and ensure they are never seen and heard off again. If nothing else, if it keeps him busy for a few minutes writing answers and justifying himself, that are a few minutes less he has to vandalise things while other people can work on banning him. STÓD/ÉÍRE 04:49 Mar 13, 2003 (UTC)

I might even add in a question about how, given the space of clerical sex abuse, before opening any article we have to check out whether a particular faith has ever had allegations made against its ordained ministry. By the time he's finished reading the sentence he'll be so freaked at the range of questions he is expected to answer he'll probably be knocking on his mammy's bedroom door asking can he stay there for the night!!!

Feel free to move the Saturday Night Fever soundtrack article. I did it like that because it was a natural disambiguator, but I don't have any strong feelings about it (I don't think it's ever been discussed). If you move that one, please move O Brother, Where Art Thou? soundtrack too, to keep them all together (as far as I know, that's all the soundtracks with articles). Tuf-Kat

Hi Zoe, If so HEEEELP! Not alone did Taku get away with renaming the Japanese emperors in a way that means they are unidentifiable to everyone other than experts in Japanese history, and made a balls of the directs (producing treble and quadruple redirects), he now has a sentence in Hirohito (if you can find it) and suggests (after all the row over naming Japanese emperors, that Japan actually a republic . . . with an emperor . . . who may not be a monarch . . . but a citizen! AAAAgh. Help. Come and give me support. It is bad enough screwing up readability, logic and naming conventions and redirects, now he was to screw up basic definitions of political science as well.

PS - did you see the correspondence with that divine vandal we had? heh heh heh. STÓD/ÉÍRE 06:11 Mar 13, 2003 (UTC)

I am inclined to agree. I think he has made a complete cock-up of all the Japanese emperors and other things. If you do it, you will have my full support. STÓD/ÉÍRE 20:15 Mar 13, 2003 (UTC)

Re: Irreversible (movie) - Have you seen the film and read the major and significant reviews? User:Black Widow

Zoe replied: ''Don't write on my talk page. I won't be responding to you. -- Zoe''. Why do you say such nasty things? That is not very polite. My question was honest, sincere and appropriate. I will pray for you and ask Jesus to show you the light so that there might be peace, love and understanding on earth. I apologize for asking another question, but I have thre right to know why you can go about changing my words when you know absolutely nothing about the film in question? Bless you, Sister Zoe, Jesus loves you and so do I. User:Black Widow

-

I'd like to include info on alternate versions, though I'm focusing on making brochure-style articles to encourage others and provide a base so information can be added en masse, so I know there are lots of holes. Some googling doesn't seem to reveal any alternate versions to the Arrested Development album, but I may have missed it.... Tuf-Kat 05:43 Mar 16, 2003 (UTC)

--

Please see Talk:Disinfopedia re non-NPOV. -- Jrv 19:50 Mar 19, 2003 (UTC)

--

Hello Zoe

I know. But, I had the feeling these were rather refered to in plural case in most biome articles and books. Let's say, it is the savanna biome type, but it refers to several savannas across the world. So I am not sure at all singular would be best. For example, Mediterranean forest might mean precisely what it seems, an article on the Mediterranean forest. However, Mediterranean Forests is a biome, that encompasses all the vegetation/animal/climate group of that type. I fear confusion here.

But, you are welcome to ask around. You might know better who the other biologists are and think. Just tell me what these others think, and I'll change them if there is general agreement.

However, I insist that the second classification in the biome article be left as it is, as it is the classification used in the wglobal 200.

User:anthere

Ok. Change savanna and grassland if it is your wish. In case, there is a "bump" of meaning between a biome and a physical locaton, we'll find a way to disambiguate. But please, keep the mediterranean forests plural. This would be very confusing otherwise.User:anthere

You're welcome! :) Nevilley 07:51 Mar 20, 2003 (UTC)

Heh heh. I was just about to change hæmophilia A (I was actually in the page!) when you made the change first. Great minds think alive, eh! STÓD/ÉÍRE 03:15 Mar 21, 2003 (UTC)


 * I got an edit conflict, so we must have both been trying at the same time. :-) -- Zoe

---

I seem to have missed out on something: What copyright issue has to be resolved concerning the image of Elisabeth of Austria? WHO is going to resolve it? --KF 20:26 Mar 21, 2003 (UTC)

---

hey, you linked in timeline of buddhism and deleted the source notice calling it an ad! i wasn't going to link the page in 'till i finished the transcription! not happy! -- prat
 * You are right that all wikis are works in progress, but 'pet projects' are often orphaned whilst under initial development (eg: Nation-building in Afghanistan). I will continue the transcription, and re-add the source. -- prat
 * As of tonight, Nation-building in Afghanistan is no longer orphaned, and it is now called Afghanistan timeline. Kingturtle 07:05 Mar 27, 2003 (UTC)

What does deleting duplicate into mean? Am curious. Thank the Lord for that nutty 'pope's website. It has acres of copyright-free religious images with the instruction 'feel free to use'! God Bless the Pope! STÓD/ÉÍRE 05:57 Mar 23, 2003 (UTC)


 * That was SUPPOSED to be "info". -- Zoe

Hi Zoe, I am looking for your observations re the Jesus Christ page. One of the things I used to work at was graphic design (I edited a college magazine as well as advertorials for parliamentary candidates) and articles like the JC one bugged the hell out of me; top heavy with detailed text which has little 'warmth' (as some graphic designers say), which means that most people on entering the page and faced with a lot of quite complex text would think 'oh fuck' and leave again. Giving a page 'warmth' can make it look less daunting to a first-time visitor.

So I added in a few images. 5 in total. 3 are of totally neutral universally agreed aspects of Christ's life, and the images chosen are deliberately NPOV in tone, content & caption and placed beside the article parapraph covering the topic. Two images were denominational, so NPOV captions were added to explain. But some people are not happy. (Everytime someone adds a picture to that article, the same people scream POV and demand it be dumped and the page be ritually clensed! I honestly am puzzled because I cannot see how three NPOV pages, deliberately chosen because they are used by many christian denominations, can cause offence. And the two POV pictures are captioned in such a way as to NPOV as well, simply stating who they are and who uses them.

I remain puzzled. As a historian I cannot understand the logic of the arguments. As a graphic designer concerned with 'warming' the page, the arguments strike me as loopy and amateurish. What do you think? STÓD/ÉÍRE 06:14 Mar 25, 2003 (UTC)

I don't know, there are people who claim that all of the pictures of Rachel Corrie are NPOV. Maybe you should take it to the mailing list. -- Zoe

Zoe, I just got thru looking up a bunch of details focusing on the play/movie "Chicago" and intend to do a bit of writing on them. We currently have an article Chicago (movie). I don't think I'll wind up creating an article for each "incarnation" of the story, but I thought just in case I'd get some disambiguation advice from you. Given the following: Do you have any suggestions for improving the (possible) article titles? For example, would it be better to distinguish the two films by "(silent movie)" and "(movie)", or "(1927 movie)" and "(2002 movie)" or what? Should "Roxie Hart" just be that (I don't think it needs to be Roxie Hart (movie) because the real murderer's name was Beulah Annan, Roxie Hart was the character's name only. Anyway, if you have any thoughts on the matter, I'd love to hear them... -- Someone else 07:08 Mar 25, 2003 (UTC)
 * Chicago (play) - 1926
 * Chicago (silent movie) - 1927
 * Roxie Hart (movie) - 1942
 * Chicago (musical) -1975
 * Chicago (musical revival) - 1996
 * Chicago (movie) - 2002


 * Zoe, Thanks, I probably won't make an article for each, but it's good to know a name to use if I wind up making one! -- Someone else 07:13 Mar 25, 2003 (UTC)


 * Zoe, I added four articles on the Chicago (movie) backstory. If you liked the film, you may want to have a look at them, and improve them if you see a way! Maurine Dallas Watkins, Beulah Annan, George Pierce Baker, and Belva Gaertner -- Someone else 12:07 Mar 25, 2003 (UTC)


 * Hiya. Have you looked at the links to various Japanese links that Taku has adapted lately? It is rapidly becoming a disaster zone. And he still refuses to take any responsibility for clearing up the mess. Maybe you could give him that famous Zoe charm and see if you could convince him to be a bit more careful. (I'm afraid if I have anything to do with him at this stage I'll have to take valium afterwards!!!) BTW I've had some people contact me via email to say that my original argument about naming conventions and Japanese emperors has been proved right and that Japanese entries after Taku has tackled them end up becoming the wiki version of the Bermuda triangle. Anyway, a couple of people at this stage are so fed up they are talking about renaming everything back to the way they were B.T. (before Taku). I'm steering well clear of the mess. I don't want to be involved in WWIII (Wiki War III). Slán STÓD/ÉÍRE 05:17 Mar 26, 2003 (UTC)


 * If you'll excuse me for saying so, both of you seem to be more the type to carp about things, rather than actually do anything about them. Hephaestos

Please make your views known at Wikipedia_talk:Naming_conventions_(slogans). --Uncle Ed 23:49 Mar 26, 2003 (UTC)

Thanks for the super-speedy collaboration on Liza Minnelli! I knew something was wrong, but I was wrong too. Now it's right. ;-) --SeanO 05:23 Mar 27, 2003 (UTC)

Thank you for adding the Daniel Patrick Moynihan article to the Main Page. -- NetEsq 05:43 Mar 27, 2003 (UTC)

Hi Zoe, could you please enlighten me :-) Honestly I don't understand you comment on Talk:Section_28 if this refers to my comment. Perhaps my English is just not good enough?! -- mkrohn 12:25 Mar 27, 2003 (UTC)


 * o.k., after reading Axon comments on the talk page now everything is clear for me. mkrohn 19:32 Mar 27, 2003 (UTC)

You made my evening with the link to the Crusader Rabbit pics! It's been so long since I've seen him ! I --don't-- remember the tune, sadly, but do remember the opening titles visually. Now, if you've ever heard of Colonel Bleep from Planet Zeeee-roe, I'll really believe you've seen everything! -- Someone else 04:17 Mar 28, 2003 (UTC)


 * Sorry, can't say I remember the Colonel. -- Zoe


 * Youngster!  -- Someone else 04:38 Mar 28, 2003 (UTC)

-- Hey Zoe - I was wondering what you thought about possibly working on the day pages a day before they are displayed on the Main Page. That way people who click on a link to the current day page link will be greeted with a de-stubified entry instead of the pitiful ones we see before working on them. --mav

- Hey, I'm doing fine, thanks. Busy with schoolwork, but in a good way. :-) How are you?  Koyaanis Qatsi

Zoe, those names were neither meaningless nor without context -- it's not a random list of names stuck in a "see also" block, but names of specific people the subject worked with, attached to specific periods of his career at specific locations. They're not very well filled out in terms of the relation or importance of these people, to be sure, but that's exactly the sort of fleshing out that a reader-edited encyclopedia is supposed to accumulate over time. They might well not be relevant or interesting enough to bother mentioning, but without being familiar with that context, you or I don't know that. --Brion 04:26 Mar 30, 2003 (UTC)


 * Then why is 172 so reluctant to create articles about them? -- Zoe


 * I don't know what you mean by 172, but the article on Kurt Wüthrich has existed for only four and a half hours. What's the rush? --Brion 04:36 Mar 30, 2003 (UTC)


 * Also, could you please not IP-ban longtime off-and-on contributors for responding grumpily to a concerted campaign of removing information they're trying to add to an article they've just written? That comes awfully close to abuse of sysop powers, particularly when done without notice. I've unbanned 209.234.79.205. --Brion 05:37 Mar 30, 2003 (UTC)