Thank you for your support during my RfA! It has decided to postpone making me an administrator based upon recent consensus (or lack thereof). Thanks for the kind remarks and I hope to continue to see you arount the project. Cheers, ZsinjTalk08:32, 4 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The following code in your talk page is broken and should be fixed:
<div class="usermessage" style="text-align: center;">I post replies here, unless I don't.<br><small>[[User:Adrian]] welcomes reader replies, but reserves the right to edit submissions for libel and length.</small></div>
The problem is that you're using the class "usermessage", which many user interface modifications rely on to change the text of the "You have new messages" display. To me, rather than reading your spiel on libel and length, it just displays to me as "You have User:Adrian". -- 18:44, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
The code is fine. Your script is broken >:o
That's my story, and I'm sticking to it until I've had coffee :/
Thank you for your support in my request for adminship. I'm delighted that the RfA succeeded with a final consensus of 52/17/7, and receiving comments including having 'excellent potential to become a great moderator', and I am now an administrator. It did however only just pass, and I shall do my very best to rectify any of my errors, including the general belief that I should do more article work. If you have any concerns, or if you ever feel that I may be able to help you, please feel free to leave a message on my talk page. Again, thank you!
Hello! I am glad you raised this question on my e-mail. But first, I have to let you know that I have been editing on Wikipedia for only about 2 months. My first edit was on 6 January 2006. Based on the results of other users on their request for adminship, 2 months of experience is just not enough to pass into a successful nomination (although there are a few exceptional cases).
I am definitely interested in becoming an admin in the future. But I feel I need a minimum of 3 months of edit experience to be successful in my nomination. In fact, since I started editing on Wikipedia, I was thinking of self-nominating myself around April 2006. If you were to nominate me now and I accept the nomination, it will likely end up to be a failure. However, there is also a possibility of a failure if I were to apply for adminship around next month. But at least, I would have fulfilled the basic requirements of having at least 3 months of experience in editing Wikipedia and I would be able to improve my edits based on the comments of users opposing my nomination. It would be wise to wait for at least one more month before embarking on the next step of becoming an administrator.
I also wish to thank you for giving me encouragement on the future role I might play in editing Wikipedia.
Hi. I absolutely agree, the timing you mention is the timing I had in mind. I didn't plan to haul you before WP:RFA the very next day :)
I'll raise this with you again in April. I have every confidence that by then, your contributions to the project will be beyond questioning for even the most skeptical Wikipedians.
Congratulations, Adrian! Your user page has been nominated for the Esperanza User Page Award! Five judges will look over your user page and award it 1-10 points in four categories:
Attractiveness: general layout, considering colour scheme and/or use of tables if applicable
Usefulness: links to subpages or editing aids, helpful information
Interesting-ness: quirky, unique, captivating, or funny content
General niceness: at the judges' discretion
But first, you must be chosen as a finalist. If your user page is chosen as one of the five finalists, you'll have the chance to win an award created just for having a great user page!
I could pull it out. It is true, and I just sent off a 60-odd page proposal to NASA (for The NASA Commercial Orbital Transportation Services project). Mostly I don't; sometimes I do it as a joke, sometimes it's appropriate, for space-related stuff, but most of the rest of the time you come across as an intellectual prick if you do that sort of thing. It does help end arguments about space subjects sometimes, though. 8-) Georgewilliamherbert01:09, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! Thank you for your support in my recent RFA. It passed 53/1/2 and I am now an administrator. I appreciate that some of you made exceptions to your usual requirements re length of service and so on because we've interracted positively in the past, or because of my credentials, so I will endeavour to use my new mop cautiously. I'm always open to feedback and gently constructive criticism. If you're not an admin and need some assistance do of course please let me know. Thanks again --kingboyk00:23, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. If you are interested in The Beatles, User:Lar has asked me to tag on a little note advertising the creation of a new Beatles WikiProject that we are currently setting up. Please sign up and help.
I think G4 is a bit dodgy when the previous deletions were speedy. These articles are usually the work of newbies who won't know about [{WP:DRV]]. As far as I know this was not (yet) deleted by any process, and the speedy cat under which it was deleted is actually false. The article is original research, unencyclopaedic and cruft, but it is not patent nonsense, which was one grounds for speedy deletion, and it does provide sufficient context which was the other. That said, it doesn't stand a snowball's chance so I'm not going to argue :-) Just zis Guy you know?11:44, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This article wasn't as clearcut as some. WP:AFD isn't a perfect process -- I sometimes see deletion votes pile onto good articles because readers don't have the time to research them, and articles that absolutely won't be kept have days of attention lavished on them. When there's a plausible reason to speedy -- either speedy keep or speedy delete -- I like to think it helps the remaining articles get a closer look.
Of course, I guess I should also hit people over the head to use WP:PROD more :)
What was the username of the author of Pottsville radio? I should at least leave them a note on their talk page, and see if there are other ways they'd like to contribute. I'd hate to be the jerk that leaves a well-meaning contributor disenchanted.
That's a nice user page you've got there! How've you managed to change the colour of the TOC on the talk page? smurrayinchester(User), (Talk)21:08, 6 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hello! Thank you for taking the time to vote for me in my recent request for adminship It ended successfully with a final score of (40/10/5). I value all of the contributions made during the process and I will take a special note of the constructive criticism regarding interacting with users in the user talk space. If you have questions or requests, please leave a message. (aeropagitica) 17:21, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your support in my RFA. The final vote count was (66/2/3), so I am now an administrator. Please let me know if at any stage you need help, or if you have comments on how I am doing as an admin. Have a nice day! Stifle17:02, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm getting tired of this guy, maybe you can help explain Wikipedia policy and "logic" to him better than I can, especially since you agreed with him (at least at first.) He could be a useful editor. We seem to agree most of the time on AfDs, perhaps you could revisit this one. Thanks! Regards, Grandmasterka22:36, 7 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
*instant headache* Is it too early to start drinking? I'd considered telling him that my keep vote was not an invitation to write a couple thousand words on the topic, but bit my tongue in the interest of WP:CIV :x
I try to defer to plausible expertise on WP:AFD and matters of content, but it looks increasingly like this editor has a dog in this particular fight. I'll leave them a note, but I suspect my skills of diplomacy may be outmatched on this one.
A lot of users participate in the fight against vandalism, not just administrators. It's important to bear in mind that the function of administrators is to help, not to police. When users are blocked, the goal should be to give them time to cool off, or consider their actions. Unrepentant vandals are the exception, not the rule. You might be better served by considering the role to be more closely akin to that of a tour guide than that of a cop -- holding hands, showing people around, keeping the path clear, helping the lost find their way, and gently nudging the public away from activities best kept roped-off :)
I was raised in a military family who also had personnel in the Alphabet Agencies and in law enforcement, thus is why I had assumed that the Admins are like police officers. Martial Law21:39, 12 March 2006 (UTC):)[reply]
For removing the personal attack on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Spanjo. Had I known anyone felt strongly enough about the spanjo to respond angrily, I might have picked my own words differently :)
Hello Adrian. Can you explain what you mean by a point-making nomination. I have nominated a variety of nn stuff in the past User:Blnguyen/AfD, and this article was the first time I have edited anything related to that done by the author. I simply clicked on the user in the history list and saw the stuff on his userpage. I would like feedback on how I can improve my standard of contribution here at WP. Regards, Blnguyen | Have your say!!!07:50, 8 March 2006 (UTC).[reply]
Lots and lots of articles end up at WP:AFD. Many of them are nominated with rationales like "nn bio blah". Your extensively researched nomination came across as the work product of someone with a personal interest in the topic.
To wit, the words "he appears to clearly be a minor radical left-wing political hack who has come to wikipedia to put up articles about his non-notable fellow left-wing hacks and glorify the activities of his organization (MUSU)" aren't really NPOV. Maybe I misread them somehow, but they gave me serious reason for pause in actioning your nomination.
I'd have the same reservations if the political spectrum reversed; It's been less than a week since an AfD voter called me a "right wing creep", so this isn't my socialist tendencies speaking here :)
If I did, in fact, misread your intentions -- and at first blush, it didn't seem that way, or I woulda voted to delete -- please let me know. I'm open to being corrected. This is a learning experience for everyone involved.
FWIW, I stopped short of citing WP:POINT, since WP:POINT implies disruption, and your nomination obviously wasn't disruptive. If you want my personal advice -- try to keep a neutral tone when judging the value of political articles. They're trouble :)
Thankyou, I'm sorry. I was somewhat taken aback when I looked at DarrenRay's history when I first looked at the article. In hindsight, I should have probably taken a breath, and not even bothered to state what I see as a conflict of interest, and left that to everyone else to read.Blnguyen | Have your say!!!08:14, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Your comment on the logline with it's "Different". if that is a little West Coast irony please check Gerald Bull entry and then see if his science has been developed much since his death or taken up in fiction. A more cost effective launcher for unmanned spacecraft might take away a few bucks away from some California areospace concerns but consider the science for a moment. Re. the notion of "vanity publishing": Beck may not be Balzac, who you'll remember owned his own printing press, but his readers seem to endorse if their comments at various on-line booksellers are to be believed. American Library Association interview appears to me more impartial source than much consumer media publicity generated by commercial interest groups. National Union of Journalists' award supports credentials for a book with journalist protagonists. As for the editor's comment "Malundi also keeps removing tags requesting cleanup", sorry, but that I believe that was only once, and only after I supplied the request for a citation. By all means clean up, but let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater. Please have another look and see if the evidence suggests support for nomination. Malundi 8 March 2006
I'm leaving this macrophage, a particularly hungry white blood cell on your talk page, I just finished a rewrite of its article and realized they're not so different from administrators, as they keep their surroundings clean, doing away with anything that's not supposed to be there... Anyway, with that short lecture on cell biology done with, I'd like to thank you for your vote on my RfA, which passed with (49/2/0), I'll do my best to not let you down, and if you see me heading towards a common newbie mistake, please nudge me in the right direction :)
G'day Adrian, and thanks for your message. My answer's twofold: firstly, I don't have a clue why Impastato's redirects to McDonald's, and no real reason for preferring that article as a redirect (sorry). However, a while back I came across an anon making nonsense posts on talkpages, tagging stubs and redirects as {{fac}} candidates, undoing merge-based redirects related to Maccas and the McDonald's massacre, and just generally being a damn nuisance. See for instance, [1], which was from a different IP but follows the same pattern (including the spurious accusation of "vandalism"). I believe the various IPs I've seen doing this stuff have been the same person, so when I saw him tackling yet another Maccas-related redirect, with edit summary "(Licciardi's Mound)" (one of his nonsense posts reads "President's Mound"), well ... you can imagine why I reverted, I hope. Cheers, fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 00:46, 10 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Speaking of pig dogs, I have been meaning to ask you about the ordained minister comment on your userpage. So, what group are you ordained with (is it one of those over the internet things)? Just kidding about the pig dog part (kind of). The Ungovernable Force08:36, 11 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
WikiThanksThanks for supporting my RFA. I really appreciated the show of support and all the kind words from so many great Wikipedians. I hope I live up to them! -- Vary | Talk17:34, 12 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for participating in my RfA. It passed with a final tally of 98/13/10, just two short of making WP:100. If you need my help with anything, don't hesitate to ask.
Ok, I think that the registered user who defended the anon on the This Bike Is A Pipe Bomb article is the anon (which would mean they have violated 3RR) because User:Tombride hadn't made any edits since July 2005 before today, so I am pretty sure the two users are one in the same (too big of a coincidence). I requested a usercheck, but nothing has happened yet. I have provided two sources that say they are folk-punk, whereas Tombride only provided one (and really it didn't count for anything, see my comments on the talk page). Anyways, Tombride has now started engaging in personal attacks on his/her talk page [3] and editing my own comments (blanking my original warning [4], taking out part of my comment [5], and making a personal attack in the form of an edited comment [6]). I went to the Admin Noticeboard and Incidents board, but I didn't have the necessary prerequisites to post something. I need someone else to try to resolve the dispute, and that is where you (hopefully) come in. What can I do? Thanks. The Ungovernable Force07:52, 13 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding my article on Fries BBQ. Looks like I'm in over my head. I'm not sure I see the logic of what goes on around here, but as the old saying goes, "50 million Elvis fans can't be wrong." -JG
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways, from comparing articles that need work to other articles you've edited, to choosing articles randomly (ensuring that all articles with cleanup tags get a chance to be cleaned up). It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
Thank you for supporting my RFA. I appreciated the show of support and all the kind words. If there's ever anything I can do to help with my new administrator status, please don't hesitate to contact me. --Myles Long14:19, 15 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your support and kind words on my recent RfA, which I am pleased to say passed with a final tally of 80/1/1. If you ever need any help, or if I mess something up as an admin, please let me know.
How exactly can this problem be addressed in the best way? Putting aside Striver's partisans who disingenuously recommend things like "keep nothing wrong with this article" on articles that quite obviously are severely flawed (if not obviously in violation of WP policies), I think there is a consensus that Striver's articles are: badly written, lack citations, do not provide context, and do not assert the notability of their subject (beyond peacock terms like "famous"). And, it is a fact that he adds a large number of new articles. It has been claimed that he revisits the articles he creates and expands them up to par, but from what I have seen the majority of them remain less than stubs. What can be done to at least get Striver to slow down and improve the articles he has created, and to create better new articles (at least proper stubs) in the future?
How can AfDs on Striver's articles be better handled? I can't imagine (and I would not advocate) that all of Striver's articles are going to be proposed for deletion. However, there are nonetheless a great many which can reasonably be proposed for deletion, far more than have been so far, I fear. If legitimate policy reasons can be identified for proposing them, why should one refrain from doing so? Esquizombi22:40, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'm at a public terminal with a time cap, so please forgive me for being terse. My assertion is not that Striver's articles are perfect, or that they should be kept. I proffer that action taken on them en masse disrupts the day-to-day operations of the WP:AFD process. AfD is not a substitute for a cleanup tag, and nominating articles for deletion in great clusters creates disruption. Surely they can be actioned at a more reasonable rate, or through other Wikipedia process, such as cleanup?
Thanks for your thoughts. I'll check back again later :)
Hey. I'm trying to get the RFC back online (it's currently userfied as everyone forgot to certify it); if you certify it at User:Jersey Devil/RFC#Users certifying the basis for this dispute we can move it back to the RFC page. I would rather try and reconcentrate the discussion at the RFC than all over AFD.... I suspect you agree with this approach, but if not, then feel free to do nothing. Have a good day. Georgewilliamherbert03:58, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The fact that the RfC was not certified by anyone was not "forgotten," and had been noted on both the Project and Discussion pages of the RfC in some detail. I'd recommend a new RfC; relisting the old one would seem to be saying that more than 48 hours can be given to people to meet the minimum requirements. I think the complaint should also indicate attempts to resolve the conflict that were made after the uncertified RfC. Esquizombi04:14, 17 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've re-tagged this as {{db-repost}}, due to ongoing consensus to delete among registered Wikipedians, and a complete failure by supporters to produce evidence or arguments favoring notability. Unfounded dissent shouldn't automatically extend the life of an unambiguously non-notable article :)
Striver's statement of the dispute is "User:Jersey Devil needs to be admonished for not heeding the advices he received after he afd'd a bunch of my articles, and instead proceded to afd a new bunch of articles." As far as I can tell, the advice you (Adrian) gave came after the second batch. I believe Striver needs someone who "contacted the user on their talk page, or the talk pages involved in the dispute, and tried but failed to resolve the problem" prior to the second batch Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment.
Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Jersey Devil states "In order to remain listed at Wikipedia:Requests for comment, at least two people need to show that they tried to resolve a dispute with this user and have failed. This must involve the same dispute with a single user, not different disputes or multiple users" (emphasis added). Your post on Jersey Devil's talk page seems to relate to the second batch of AfDs, not the first one. In order to certify Striver's dispute, it would seem to me that you would have to believe that Jersey Devil did not heed your advice and proceeded to AfD a "new bunch of articles" after you gave your advice, and that your therefore had failed to resolve the dispute. Maybe this is overly technical, but that's what the rules seem to state. Esquizombi06:16, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
User:Striver's wording is sufficiently ambiguous with respect to the precise timespan implicated in the alleged course of conduct that I feel comfortable endorsing this WP:RFC. It's clear what *kind* of conduct User:Striver is offended by, it's clear from the existence of this RFC that my efforts to mediate failed, and by that basis, I do certify this dispute.
Thank you though, for your attention to detail and process. It's quite commendable, and I'm glad you're out there keeping an eye on the areas between "process is important" and WP:IAR.
I think I got it. Though giving multiple last warnings to an obvious vandal and then not delivering on the promise to block is rather ineffective. Esquizombi19:39, 21 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Reach out is a program aimed at allowing users to bring issues that they have had in Wikipedia to a listening, sympathetic and caring audience:
"No one can know how we feel if we do not say. We cannot expect to get understanding if we do not ask for it. No one will dispute that sometimes life's issues are too much for one person. It is fair to say that sometimes Wikipedia's problems fall under the same heading. This is a place where you can bring the bruises that can sometimes be got on this project for attention."
The Stress alertsprogram aims at identifying users who are stressed, alerting the community of thier stress and works in tandem with the Stressbusters at trying to identify causes of stress and eliminating them.
Note from the editor
Welcome to this new format of the Esperanza Newsletter, which came about during the last Advisory Council meeting - we hope you like it! The major changes are that each month, right after the Council meeting, this will be sent out and will include two featured programs and a sum up of the meeting. Also, it will be signed by all of the Advisory Council members, not just Celestianpower. Have an Esperanzial end of March, everyone!
I was wondering would you please help me as i'm not 100% sure on what to do. This user User:Unixer keeps adding my username on his userpage. Now i do not know this person and i do not want it on there. They asked me a stupid question thats how i noticed it. I have asked several times for them to remove it but they refuse to. I have deleted it off his page but he keeps adding it back there and said he will not remove it. Now this person doesnt know me and i dont know them and i dont want it there. Could you please help. Thank you (Lil crazy thing11:37, 28 March 2006 (UTC))[reply]
The Barnstar Brigade is a new program aimed at giving more very deserving yet unappreciated users barnstars. It will officially start on 2006-04-09, but signing up is encouraged before this date:
"Here in Wikipedia, there are hundreds of wikipedians whose work and efforts go un-appreciated. One occasionally comes across editors who have thousands of good edits, but because they may not get around as much as others, their contributions and hard work often go un-noticed. Sadly, these editors often leave the project. As Esperanzians, we can help to make people feel appreciated, be it by some kind words or the awarding of a Barnstar. A project the size of Wikipedia has thousands of editors, so there are plenty of people out there who deserve recognition, one just has to find them. The object of this program is not to flood editors with Barnstars, but to seek out people who deserve them, and make them feel appreciated."
The Stress alertsprogram aims at identifying users who are stressed, alerting the community of thier stress and works in tandem with the Stressbusters at trying to identify causes of stress and eliminating them.
Information
Welcome to the second issue of the new format Esperanza Newsletter - we hope you still like it! This week, it was delivered diligently by our new dogsbody. MiszaBot (run by Misza13): any execution complaints should go to him. Content comments should be directed at the Esperanza talkpage. Thanks!
The current process for accepting proposals for new programs has been deemed fine. All Advisory Council members and the Admin Gen are to endevour to be bold when viewing discussion. If they feel that consensus has been reached, they will act accordingly.
A plea from the editor...
The propsed programs page is terribly underused! Please leave any comments, good or bad, on the page, to help us determine the membership's thoughts on the ideas there.
I know this user in the real world and can also attest--this is theAdrian Lamo. Just look at the pic on the userpage (which is his real picture) and look at the pic on the Adrian Lamo article. Notice a resemblance? The Ungovernable Force08:14, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I've seen him interviewed on the late, lamented Screen Savers. I'm glad to see he walks the streets a free man! Tex22:55, 16 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Adrian, just thought I would let you know that I was leaving Wikipedia, but before I left, I finally got a picture of thyself of onto Wikipedia. (I know great timing for me to post a picture of myself, right?) This is my final gift to my friends. Later! PS. Try not to laugh to hard at my ugly mug ok? Moeε14:55, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The Administrator Coaching program is a program aimed at preparing Wikipedians for Adminship or helping them understand the intricacies of Wikipedia better. Recently, changes have been made to the requirements of coachees. Please review them before requesting this service.
This would be something like the Welcoming Committee, but for people who have figured out the basics of editing articles; they're not newcomers any more, but they might want some help in learning new roles. Some might like suggestions about how to learn vandal patrol, or mentoring on taking an article to featured status, or guidance with a proposal they plan to make at the Village Pump, for example. In this way, Esperanza would help keep hope alive for Wikipedia because we would always be grooming the next generation of admins.
The Stressbusters are a subset of Esperanza aiming to investigate the causes of stress. New eyes on the situation are always welcome!
Note from the editor
As always, MiszaBot handled this delivery. Thank you! Also, congratulations go to Pschemp, Titoxd and Freakofnurture for being elected in the last elections! An Esperanzial May to all of the readership!
Posting logs of the Esperanza IRC channel are explicitly banned anywhere. Violation of this rule results in deletion and a ban from the channel.
A disclaimer is going to be added to the Esperanza main page. We are humans and, as such, are imperfect.
Various revisions have been made to the Code of Conduct. Please see them, as the proposal is ready to be ratified by the community and enacted. All members will members to have to re-confirm their membership after accepting the Code of Conduct.
Referendums are to be held on whether terms of AC members should be lengthened and whether we should abolish votes full stop.
Please could you add on the infamous hacks page specifics regarding your proposed merge to Timeline_of_hacker_history and how you best feel such a merge should occur. I am slowly cleaning up the timeline and getting rid of the filth, and am not too sure what to do about your nomination for merger.
The information on infamous hacks is a droll index to other articles, mainly about hackers who have been caught, and most of this is already in the timeline, albeit in varied and often wrong places *sigh*. Also besides arrests, I don't see much connection between these people, expect for infamy, which probably is due to the arrests. If I were to document many aspects of these peoples lives it would certainly clog up the timeline. I could add most notable features of their career, like demoing vulnerabiities to news agencies or realing major exploits and/or whistles, but this is all covered in their personal articles.
If you could provide any insight into a merger it would be much appreciated, because I am feeling conflicted about merging anything at all, and might just nominate the infamous hacks page for deletion and let the users start again on the timeline page.
Hi, you contributed to discussions at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Israel News Agency. It was deleted by User:Danny, but not done as an Office Action. As you contributed to the original AFD, I was wondering if you would take the opportunity to make comment at DRV. Please note that if it remains deleted then I'm not terribly fussed. However, because the community found that it was notable and should be kept and it was not slanderous (that I can see) I relisted it. - Ta bu shi da yu12:11, 15 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
…seems to consist of a transclusion from here.
Since I am assured by the devs that if you put an actual template in your signature preference, it will be automagically SUBSTituted, I assume that you are using some clever cloaking trick to preserve the transclusion, something like {{User:Adrian/zap2}}.
Since the guidelines on signatures now strongly recommend against this technique, can I make a plea that you alter your usage to directly transclude the text?
I can also offer my help to fix up the 966 instances that are currently still live if you like…
HTH HAND —Phil | Talk16:35, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A close reading of the concerns listed on the page you cite will show that neither of the problems -- vandalism or frequent re-caching -- are an issue here, as my signature is static, and not editable by regular users.
Thank you for your concern, and for working to keep Wikipedia tidy and stable :)
Hi Adrian, just letting you know I came back to Wikipedia. Just wondering were have you been, you've dropped to less than semi-active lately, so I stopped in to say Hi. I know we don't know eachother much, but your edit [7] still and does mean a lot to me when you made that comment. ;) Cheers! -- from The Kingof Kings02:51, 9 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well if you don't want it to happen you could always write up the article in a text editor first then transfer it over to Wikipedia when you have it complete that way it won't get the speedy tag. Whispering04:35, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I like my idea of "not nuking things the second they're posted" better, but your way has a kind of colloquial charm too.
I'm a relatively new user reopening this issue: The following comments are a reply to Morton devonshire, who questioned my notability tag (and I suspect, removed the tag without either addressing the issue, or knowing the background. Sorry to clog your page quoting my comments in full but I see that Vfd, notability tags and other stuff mysteriously disappear from the Farivar page. Perhaps delete all this later? I think it's important for WKP that this issue be decided and the legitimate majority view be carried:
Hi, thanks for your prompt feedback. I don't feel you addressed my reasons for tagging the page, and these reasons are not affected by what happened last year (I have read up a lot of the past discussion, but I'm not at all convinced). On consideration, I feel the Cyrus Farivar page will eventually go as it is clearly:
decidedly not notable - the subject is not notable in himself, andn greenlighting was not a notable hoax
the count of the last deletion vote (Aug '05)came down firmly on the side of 'delete' - how does this come to mean 'keep'?
mainly based on a trivial subject - a non-event, in fact
a page intended as a self-promotional tool, rather than to be informational
refers almost entirely to itself - no importance in the wider world
a bad precedent
The issue of CF 'criticising' WKP is simply begging the question, I wasn't aware that he did so. I note that my notability tag has been removed without any notability being added. I am determined to have a debate about this page on principle, and if notability is not discussed, will take it further. I'm also confident that if I take the discussion wider, I will find reasonable support for my stance.
IMHO the majority of the 'keep' votes are based on weak arguments, and/or a lack of perception of the issues: the hoax, notability etc.
Further, I am aware from my background reading that past raisings of this issue have disappeared. See Mrtourne's comments during the Aug '05 deletion discussion.
I should add that I am also going to push for the related 'Greenlighting hoax' page to be merged to 'hoaxes'. Again, it is extremely trivial, and almost entirely self-referential.
I would draw your attention also to the following comment by user Snowspinner (during Aug '05 deletion discussion).
Quote: Keep. I don't care if it was vanity created, it is a notable subject. In fact, I will go a step further. This article is being kept. I do not care what the outcome of the usual VfD suspects straw poll is. The article is being kept, and I will undelete it until the arbcom or Jimbo tells me to stop. Snowspinner 21:34, August 1, 2005 (UTC) End quote
I note also that the announcement of the result of the Aug '05 deletion vote being a 'keep' was made by the same user Snowspinner. As a new user, I respectfully suggest that he made a bad counting error.
My suggestion is that the page be deleted, and perhaps userfy-ed.
Centrepull 15:59, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
You don't know what you're talking about. I've been following the Farivar page, and the accompanying debate, for months. It's the reason I came to Wikipedia -- without Farivar's Slate article, I would never have heard about it. Farivar is a God. A Golden God. And don't you forget it Boyo. Dear Adrian, just now noticed your comment re me on the Feb 26 Afd on Counter-Misinformation -- what's up with that? Not offended, just curious. Morton DevonshireYo
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 Wikipedia:Esperanza/June 2006 elections.
i missed the PENIS PENIS PENIS vandalisms and i was actually awake at the time. i know, i know - i am a terrible person. Ytcracker18:17, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Whoever that was should seriously ask their doctor about Prozac.
This is a great idea, lets change 'Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.' to 'Your life is worthless, your mother does not love you, no one loves you'. —Mineralè2006-07-15 15:26Z
Ok Doctor! Hey, I just printed my first zine off of zinelibrary.net. Yay! I wasted a bunch of trees trying to get it right though, but I finally did just a minute ago. Well, time to find some other nice zines. So is it at the Sacramento courthouse? And what is it for? TheUngovernableForce02:53, 2 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If an airplane stands on a treadmill runway that track's the plane's speed and moves at that same speed backwards, will the plane fly? —Mineralè2006-07-14 07:14Z
The Esperanza To-Do List is a place where you may list any request, big or small, for assistance. If you need help with archiving your usertalk, for example, all you need to do is list it here and somebody will help you out. Likewise, if you need help with some area of editing on Wikipedia, list it here! Again, any matter, trivial or not, can be placed on this page. However, all matters listed on this page must not be of an argumentative nature. You do not need to be a member of Esperanza (or this program) to place or fulfill requests on this page. If you don't have any requests, consider coming by and fulfilling a few! This program has not been very active, but has lots of potential!
What's New?
In order to help proposed programs become specific enough to make into full-fledged programs, the In development section of the proposals page has been created. Proposals that are promising, but need to be organized in more detail are listed here. Please take a look at what is there, and help the proposals turn into programs.
To improve both the layout and text of the front page, in an attempt to clarify the image of Esperanza, the front page is going to have some redesigning take place. Please take your creative minds to Wikipedia:Esperanza/Front page redesign to brainstorm good ideas.
Many thanks to MiszaBot, courtesy of Misza13, for delivering the newsletter.
In order to make sure all users who join Esperanza are welcomed, a list of volunteers who are willing to welcome new Esperanzians is at Wikipedia:Esperanza/Members#Esperanza_welcomers. Please add yourself if you are interested; we want to make sure all new Esperanza members are welcomed!
The In development section of the proposals page has been created.
Proposals page: Some proposals have been moved to the aforementioned "In development" section, some have been left as a proposal, and others have been archived. For those proposals that were a good idea but didn't necessarily constitute a program, General Esperanzial Actions has been created.
Two small pieces of charter reform will be decided on in a straw poll at Wikipedia talk:Esperanza/Governance. One involves filling the position of any councillors who may leave, the other involves reforming the charter.
Until cooperation with the Kindness Campaign is better defined, it remains as a proposed program.
Although having the newsletter appear on everyone's userpage is desired, this may not be ideal for everyone. If, in the future, you wish to receive a link to the newsletter, rather than the newsletter itself, you may add yourself to Wikipedia:Esperanza/Newsletter/Opt Out List.
Here in Wikipedia there are hundreds of wikipedians whose work and efforts go unappreciated. One occasionally comes across editors who have thousands of good edits, but because they may not get around as much as others, their contributions and hard work often go unnoticed. As Esperanzians we can help to make people feel appreciated, be it by some kind words or the awarding of a Barnstar. This is where the Barnstar Brigade comes in. The object of this program is to seek out the people which deserve a Barnstar, and help them feel appreciated. With your help, we can recognize more dedicated editors!
What's New?
September elections are upon us! Anyone wishing to be a part of the Advisory Council may list themselves as a candidate from 18 September until 24 September, with the voting taking place from 25 September to 30 September. Those who wish to help with the election staff should also list themselves!
Appreciation Week, a program currently in development, now has its own subpage! Share your good ideas on how to make it awesome there!
The Esperanza front page has been redesigned! Many thanks to all who worked hard on it.
Many thanks to MiszaBot, courtesy of Misza13, for delivering the newsletter.
The September 2006 Council elections will open for nominations on 18 September 2006. The voting will run from 25 September 2006 until 30 September 2006. If you wish to be a candidate or a member of the elections staff, please list yourself!
The new Esperanza front page design has but put up - many thanks to all who worked on it!
TangoTango has written a script for a bot that will list new members of Esperanza, which will help those who welcome new Esperanzains greatly!
Although having the newsletter appear on everyone's userpage is desired, this may not be ideal for everyone. If, in the future, you wish to receive a link to the newsletter, rather than the newsletter itself, you may add yourself to Wikipedia:Esperanza/Newsletter/Opt Out List.
Admin Coaching needs coaches!!! If you are an administrator, or even a generally experienced user, do consider signing up to be a coach.
Admin Coaching, now being coordinated by HighwayCello, is a program for people who want help learning some of the more subtle aspects of Wikipedia policy and culture. People are matched with experienced users who are willing to offer coaching. The program is designed for people who have figured out the basics of editing articles; they're not newcomers any more, but they might want some help in learning new roles. In this way, Esperanza would help keep hope alive for Wikipedia because we would always be grooming the next generation of admins.
What's New?
The Tutorial Drive is a new Esperanza program! In an effort to make complicated processes on Wikipedia easier for everyone, Esperanza working to create and compile a list of tutorials about processes here on Wikipedia. Consider writing one!
A discussion on how Esperanza relates to the encyclopedia has been started; please add your thoughts.
Many thanks to MiszaBot, courtesy of Misza13, for delivering the newsletter.
The list of proposed programs has been updated, with some proposals being archived.
There is now a new program: the Tutorial Drive! Consider writing a tutorial on something you are good at doing on Wikipedia.
The suggestion of adding a cohesive look to all the Esperanza pages is being considered; join the discussion if you are interested!
In order to make a useful interlanguage welcome template, those involved in translation projects will be asked what English Wikipedia policies are most important and confusing to editors coming from other language Wikipedias.
Shreshth91 informed everyone that he will be leaving the Esperanza council as life is rather busy; his spot will be filled by the runner up from the last election, HighwayCello.
Although having the newsletter appear on everyone's userpage is desired, this may not be ideal for everyone. If, in the future, you wish to receive a link to the newsletter, rather than the newsletter itself, you may add yourself to Wikipedia:Esperanza/Newsletter/Opt Out List.
Hi, in the talk page on Adrian Lamo, I saw people wondering about whether "Lamo" is your real name. I also thought if this is true, it would be a fun coincidence. So tell me, is it really your real name? And if so, is it indeed pronounced "Lame-o"?
Hi. My last name is, from birth, Lamo. In the old country, "a" is pronounced like the "a" in the word "father," more or less. Here, you can pronounce it pretty much however you want; it's all the same to me.
Hope this helps. Adrian the anti-hacking dog says be cool, stay in school.
I feel a little embarrassed about that sorry. Just seemed important to get the unreferenced people of that page until I (or someone else) found sources. Can I ask how for the web address of your NNDB entry so I can cite it (or feel free to do so yourself).
I notice that NNDB entries are used to support a number of entries both on that list and in List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people for celebrities that one would not expect to see on such lists. How accurate is it if you don't have the subject of the entry to confirm its truthfulness? WJBscribe
Out of an abundance of caution, I wouldn't use NNDB as a sole source for any controversial information not confirmed in multiple independent venues. It's more corroborative than informative, since some of the material comes from independent unverified original research by the site admins.
Of course, that guideline applies to any other source as well -- Wikipedia is not "You saw it here first!" material, so there's no need to rush if something can't be corroborated. The truth finds its own way, and patience will see it through.
(outdent) Not a problem. I'm not as active on Wikipedia as I'd used to be, but I check stuff regularly and make periodic corrections to articles that interest me, so I get messages in a fairly zippy fashion. Please consider me at your disposal should you need assistance in the future :)
Actually I thought that was a good suggestion. I find it a lot easier when sigs link to talk pages. I've only had an account for less than a month though so hadn't got round to working out how to change my sig. Right, here goes. Shall test it out here... -WJBscribe(WJB talk)03:57, 7 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, with regards to this image, it's still consdiered orphaned despite your putting it on a subpage in your user space (especially since your subpage consists of nothing but that image AND it's an orphan page). If you really want to keep it, put it on your main user page or expand your subpage into something more meaningful and link it from somewhere. I'll look into deleting it tomorrow. Regards, howcheng {chat}01:13, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I saw your vote at the AfD for the homoflexibles page and thought I would clarify. I don't think the bisexuals list is in danger of losing subtle distinctions. Rather I think those editing the page are trying as best as possible to come to a criteria for inclusion. At the moment the list includes everyone from those who have once in their life deviated form their stated preference to those who have publically declared themselves bisexual. In many cases references have been weak. What I for one would like to work towards is having the central focus of the list those who have self-described as bisexual. Those whom it has been confirmed have had cross-gender relationships should perhaps be listed as well but under an appropriate heading- ensuring that everyone is 'labeled' as fairly is possible. Categorising bisexuaility is inherently complicated- if we accept the Kinsey scale most people are to some extent bisexual, but for encyclopedic purposes I think a criteria for inclusion is needed. TerriNunn's fork is an attempt to promote her own POV that anyone who has ever been rumoured to be involved with someone outside their usual sexual preference is a closet (my word) bisexual- if there is such a thing. Your input on the List of bisexuals would be appreciated as we try to work out a sensible framework for working out who to include on the page.
I hope that you have a wonderful New Year and will party all night long. If you don't celebrate New year at this time well then happy early or late New Year and I still advise that you have a good time tonight!!!¿Why1991ESP. | Sign Here22:44, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Are you going to be back at ARC for spring? Hope everything's going well. Anything interesting? I'm getting plastic surgery on Tuesday. Skateboarding is fun, except for when you faceplant after your biology final while on a concrete incline and need 17 stiches above your eye and surgery to fix a deviated septum. I know from experience. At least I got an A in the biology class. Ungovernable ForceGot something to say?07:18, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. I was aiming to drop by tomorrow, in fact. —— Adrian~enwiki (talk) 2007-01-08 12:13Z
.jpg)
#c-Howcheng-2006-12-12T01:13:00.000Z-Image:Lamoascii.png){kind=link}
