Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 00:55, 23 August 2005

Please click here to leave me a new message.

Comments left here will be responded to here as well.. *In the interests of not fragmenting conversations, if you leave me a message, I will respond here on my talk page. *Generally speaking, I will leave you a note on your talk page saying as much, but I may not always remember to do so. Take no offense; I am both busy and tremendously absent-minded. *If I leave you a note on your talk page, feel free to respond to it there as I ought to come by eventually and look for a reply.

Archived talk sections

Archive I (Feb-July 2005) • Archive II (1 August 2005 - 8 August 2005) • Archive III (9 August 2005 - 21 August 2005)

Current talk

Celebration!

Please join me in celebrating my 1000th edit at Wikipedia, the most important online information resource! Hamster Sandwich 21:46, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Vfd

I think I'd re-list a vfd with virtually no votes. Mention that it was listed on whatever day, but didn't receive enough votes to determine consensus. There may be a formal procedure, but I'd probably just copy/paste the vfd discussion link to today's log. Joyous (talk) 21:49, August 21, 2005 (UTC)

I already closed it out as no consensus. But what you said makes good sense, and that's what I'll do from here on out. Fernando Rizo T/C 21:52, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you!

For you kind wishes! And can you help me in a revert war at London, Ontario? Hamster Sandwich 22:17, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Checking it out right now. Fernando Rizo T/C 22:23, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I was going to leave this on the talk page...

Bill Brady Bandit All pretense of assuming good faith in this vandals actions aside, I would like to suggest that the cowardly anon vandal who keeps removing the Bill Brady inclusion under notable Londoners is blocked from editing after his first revert to that section. He obviously comes in bad faith for the simple purpose of doing so, contrevening the both the spirit and letter of Wikipedia policy. He adds no value to the discussion and disregards the concensus view that Brady deserves mention in this article. If the chicken in question reads this, I would suggest getting over whatever personal bias you have with Brady, and perhaps do something useful in WP,like make a contribution to other articles, get involved with the community in a positive way. Maybe you will eventually mature into an adult type person who dosen't sulk when you don't get you own (misguided way). Or maybe just find somewhere else to push your personal bias with Brady. Go bother your parents or something.

Ham, say something like that, but cut out the bitter stuff. Don't tell him to go bother his parents for God's sake. :) Rememeber, WP:Civility above all else, bro. Don't call him a chicken either. Go chill out for a few minutes and write it again. Just cause the guy's a vandal, do go down to his level and make an ad hominem. Fernando Rizo T/C 23:06, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Ya see..thats why I bounce this stuff off of you first! :-P Did you read his "I am prepared to eat rat meat" quote? I offer instead, a lovely hamster sandwich, with all the trimmings!. I just left a comment at admins noticeboard under, Bill Brady Bandit. Thanks my brother in electrons! Hamster Sandwich 23:13, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm takin the high road brother. I plan on getting an interview with Brady this week and have some of these ambiguities laid to rest. The Robarts Institute is 5 minutes away from me right on the other side of campus. I go to school here BTW [www.UWO.ca]. I'm the world's oldest sophomore. Hamster Sandwich 04:21, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

- Hell no; I'm a 26-year-old sophomore by virtue of my 5 years in the Marine Corps, I may have you beat. As for the Brady thing; my only caveat is that other editors will call shenanigans with the original research. I say bounce that off of a few more editors before you commit the time. Fernando Rizo T/C 04:37, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Good plan. Didn't think of the original research prohibition. The concensus seems to have solidified as to his notability. The anon just told me he would "permit" the continued editing of Bill Brady at the talk page. I was so grateful, well, tears welled up, I'm not afraid to admit it either.

I was going to ask Brady about his Transplant International connection and get some information concerning that body (so to speak)and ask him about his talk show to see if he was indeed the first radio call in show in Canada. If I have some time this week that is. Peace! Hamster Sandwich 04:46, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed

See my comment on the notice board. Sorry for causing trouble, I'd like to say I didn't mean too, but I'm so sick and tired of trolls that it is tough to do so. While I definitely didn't mean to cause trouble for you and other decent Wikipedians, I sure as hell don't care whether I caused it for trolls like Gorgonzilla. I'm sick and tired of sitting back and watching while mods let personal attacks like theirs slip while nothing happens. As such, I feel no remorse for taking matters into my own hands and letting him know what I think of him. I'm getting off this sinking ship while I still can. Shouldn't have come back to see the state of affairs, all I see is Wikipedia declining more and more. Agriculture 23:00, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

User:Hipocrite has created the following page: [1]. Originally he created it in my user space: [2], and then moved it to his page when it was clear it would be deleted. I consider this harassment and would like to request you deal with this. I will leave as soon as it is dealt with. Agriculture 23:50, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm looking into it right now, Agriculture. Fernando Rizo T/C 23:53, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Many thanks. Again I'm sorry if I made things difficult for you, I consider you a shiny example of what Wikipedia should be. Agriculture 23:55, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  - Ag, I looked all over the place for a policy and procedure for ascertaining whether or not a user is a sockpuppet, and I came up with nothing. I'm going to have to punt this one to another admin. Fernando Rizo T/C 00:30, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The digimon VFD

Honestly, I'm not sure if it even is bogus. I was a fan some years back but I don't know anything that happened in the show after the second season. I mean, "ChaosGallantmon Crimson Mode" seems a little bit of an outlandish name to me, but apparently it is a common sort of name. (As I search, I find "Imperialdramon Fighter Mode") However, there seems to be confusion even on forums as to whether or not he exists - I see various examples of merchandise sold in his name that people are saying isn't real.

I think essentially what it is is not a separate monster, but another form of the existing ChaosGallantmon. In that case, I wouldn't suggest another round of VFD but a merge into ChaosGallantmon. (Anything to reduce the number of loose Digimon articles...) [[User:Premeditated Chaos|User:Premeditated Chaos/Sig]] 23:48, 21 August 2005 (UTC)

I'll merge it then. Thanks for lending me your brain. Fernando Rizo T/C 23:55, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

User:Hipocrite

Hi, I saw your posting on Joy's user talk page, hope you don't mind my nosing in. Not many people can do the technical IP check to see if someone is a sockpuppet - only DavidGerard and TimStarling that I know of, and they don't use it lightly. I'm pretty sure that User:Hipocrite isn't a sockpuppet created just to harass User:Agriculture, though. For one thing, User:Gavin the Chosen has accused User:Hipocrite of being a sockpuppet created just to spite him! So at least we are dealing with a multipurpose sockpuppet here. No, really, I think Hipocrite is a regular person doing his/her best to contribute to Wikipedia in good faith. FreplySpang (talk) 00:31, August 22, 2005 (UTC)

JINX!!! :-D FreplySpang (talk) 00:32, August 22, 2005 (UTC)
- Also, User:Hipocrite requested the deletion of his AgriTalk subpage, and I deleted it. FreplySpang (talk) 00:33, August 22, 2005 (UTC)
  - Hilarious. FS, you and I must be soulmates, or the same person in alternate dimensions, or twins seperated at birth. And by 9 years. :) As I alluded to, my investigation into Hipocrite was quite cursory, so I'm totally prepared to take you at your word on this. I'll just keep trying to referee as best I can, then. Thanks, FS! Fernando Rizo T/C 00:35, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    - Thanks for the help, as a note, I wasn't claiming Hipocrite was a sockpuppet, merely a user harassing me and generally doing some bad faith edits. Once again thanks. I'm off now. Agriculture 06:36, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The Point

The point is that this is how one of the principle proponents of this 'decency' league behaves. The behavior is entirely on point to the topic of discussion. If this is how they start it is probably going to be how they continue. If you look at Agriculture's history you will find that he has posted this type of material for quite some time. --Gorgonzilla 01:12, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not arguing that you're wrong and that Agriculture is right, or vice versa. The point is that you're both being disruptive. If you believe that his behavior is inappropriate, take the high road and show everyone how a good editor should behave. Don't stoop to taking cheap shots like this and this. Fernando Rizo T/C 01:18, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hey I look at my user page and I see that the guy who wants to discuss decency has written a headline 'Screw You', he then delves into some not very subtle personal attacks. You don't think that sort of behavior isn't relevant to a debate on policing decency? I do, I think it demonstrates exactly the sort of level the 'debate' will start and end at. He decides to make an 'appology' and removes the 'screw you' but leaves the personal attacks in place. Responding in kind was a bit uncalled for though. --Gorgonzilla 01:39, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

"Responding in kind was a bit uncalled for though." Bingo. Take the high road, and people will flock to your defense. Fernando Rizo T/C 01:41, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No problem

I did think that was directed at me, but I later realized what you meant and at any rate I never thought you were talking down to me at any stage. Cheers, CanadianCaesar 03:58, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Illuminati X

In the world of Online Gaming, Illuminati X is an organization that has chronicled the online gaming sites history. Earth 2025 is the online game in question. While this may not be considered as normal history, I should know, it is an online chronicle. A Chronicle of which will be viewed daily by a customer base of around 50,000 people. Thankyou for your consideration and please do not delete this. <unsigned comment by User:24.151.22.156 at 08:26, 22 August 2005>

Blinging

How else can one convey the fact that someone considers themselves Blinging without using that word? Also the Michele Raven stuff is true, that woman is nasty and insane! -Wiffle0rz 09:40, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wiffle0rz, I completely believe you that Michele Raven is nasty and insane. The larger issue, however, is that it's not encyclopedic to say that "she thinks she's blinging" or that she has "amazing deepthroating ability". Try to make things neutral and academic when you right about them, and cite references. Seriously, read some other articles on Wikipedia. Try Wikipedia:Featured articles. Then come back and tell me that you honestly think what you wrote at Michele Raven sounds professional. Fernando Rizo T/C 09:46, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry, I did it fast and hoped others would clean up for me, lol. I understand about the blinging, but the deepthroat thing is totally on-key, its one of her main selling points, one of the reasons shes famous (shes considered a Deepthroat Queen) and the theme of many of her films! What hobbies are you into? -Wiffle0rz 09:51, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  - Wiffle, check out WP:NPOV, and you'll understand why "amazing" anything doesn't work for Wikipedia. It's got to be neutral. How about, Many of her films are marketed on the strength of her noted skill at "deepthroating" instead? You see how that's neutral? On another note, I reverted your addition of Gag Factor to Slut's See also section, because it has nothing to do with it. Think about these edits before you make them, OK? Fernando Rizo T/C 09:57, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

VfDs from today

Erwin, I don't disagree with any of your VfD nominations. Those were all good catches on your part and I'll back you up 100% for tagging them. My advice, however, is this: use a more descriptive (and less snide) nomination. Invest a calorie or two into writing a complete sentence. You've got an RfC over you head right now, and the last thing you want to do is piss off some other random people who see your VfD noms and run over to RfC to certify your dispute.

You're an odd mix of smart contributions and unprofessional conduct, but I think you can be brought around. I say plenty of snide things to people on Wikipedia in my head, and give myself a good laugh. I recommmend you start doing the same. Drop me a line if you want to talk about it some more. Fernando Rizo T/C 17:34, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The RFC was compiled by several well known problem users. You only have to do a brief scroll through the contributions of 'Gorgonzilla', 'Mirror Vax' and 'Acetic Acid' to find they are all involved in a number of editing disputes, personal attacks, etc. It's a poor reflection on wikipedia that people like that even have a voice. Oh, congratulations on your adminship. I would have supported it but I don't vote on RFAs. Erwin Walsh

Walsh, I complained about you because you were VfD tagging with an insufficient amount of thought. In the process you VfD tagged a lot of important pages, the ones that you don't list in your Vfd log. What people have been asking you to do is to exercise just a little bit of care. Stopped clocks are right twice a day. Instead you spend time attacking anyone who complains about your behavior. Recently the subject of your VfD nominations have not been a problem. But you have been engaging in a lot of pretty disruptive and unpleasant attacks in the process. Your latest attack on me is utterly untrue and says more about you than me. I am not a homophobic biggot, in fact I rent out my basement in Massachusetts to gay couples for a nominal fee so they can establish residency and get married. So I don't use homosexual as an epithet. --Gorgonzilla 13:34, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wild Animal Park

The Wild Animal Park is in the City of San Diego (yes you drive through Escondido to get to it but it is in the community of San Pasqual. It is not in Escondido. It has a Escondido ZIP code much like areas of Del Mar Heights have a Del Mar ZIP code but they are not in Del Mar but San Diego or areas of Lake Murray have La Mesa ZIP code but are in San Diego not La Mesa. There are numerous examples of this throughout the "City of San Diego" <unsigned comment by User:Marcpschaefer>

Marc, we're going to have to agree to disagree on this one. Did you see my post in on Talk:San Diego, California? If there's substantial disagreement, let's do a request for comment and I'll go wherever the consensus goes. Fernando Rizo T/C 22:33, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ron Davies

You are American and thus not fammiliar with the topic. I know that Wikipedia has a very American-centric slant to the world, but please, if you are not fammiliar with a topic, please let it be.

Ron Davies resigned for the second time as a result of a further homosexual indiscretion in woodland near his home constituency in Wales. He claimed at the time that he was a keen Badger Watcher, and that was why he was poking around in the bushes (sic).

check the BBC if you want for the story.

<unsigned comment by User:82.35.34.24 - I replied at their talk page>

Maxwell

Are you saying Robert Maxwell was not a thief? Are you fammiliar with the story of how he STOLE, not 'mis-used', millions of pounds from his company's pension funds, to support his failing business?

<unsigned comment by User:82.35.34.24 - I replied at their talk page>

Ignorance

Ok, if I MUST proove you to be out of your depth here.

Link 1: Davies admits he is partial to badger spotting: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/2828421.stm

Link 2: Davies again admits to badger watching: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/2828421.stm

On the Maxwell story, I can only conclude that you are showing your ignorance in a much larger way. I don't know how fammilar you are with the Robert Maxwell story, but here you are - go educate yourself, and next time, stick to edits that you are fammiliar with. Thankyou.

Link: Check the Caption below the thief's photograph. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3681364.stm

Now can you stick to your areas of interest/experience please. As you well know, not every sentence on Wikipedia has to be accounted for. Especially not claims of Robert Maxwell of all people, being a thief, a liar, a fraud, and a cad. In the UK, that would be laughable.

Now, I have a dissertation to get on with. Buh-Bye!

So please in the name of God tell me WHY we cannot describe Maxwell as having thieved from the Trinity Group's pension fund? How is this NPOV? The man was a thief, therefore he thieves correct? Don't they teach you anything in the colonys? (light humour/jest/mil ribbing intended).

Maxwell

So please in the name of God tell me WHY we cannot describe Maxwell as having thieved from the Trinity Group's pension fund? How is this NPOV? The man was a thief, therefore he thieves correct? Don't they teach you anything in the colonys? (light humour/jest/mil ribbing intended).

Compromise

Ok, you seem like a decent sort of chap.

How about stole. That is the most common verb used for the act of stealing no? And the BBC used it too - hardly tabloid. I do not want to give the impression that white collar criminals are somehow less culpable than their working class counterparts, simply because their crimes are conducted via Offshore Financial Centres and electronic trading networks.

That is something you in America should know all about with your Corporate Governance issues ;)