User talk:Fred Bauder: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 09:14, 10 July 2012

Notes

Picture of the day

Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa (born 12 December 1948) is a Portuguese politician and academic. He has been the 20th and current president of Portugal since 9 March 2016. As a member of the Social Democratic Party, he previously served as a minister and parliamentarian in the Assembly of the Republic. This photograph of Rebelo de Sousa was taken in 2017 at Web Summit, an annual technology conference held in Lisbon.Photograph credit: João Pedro Correia

Archive – More featured pictures...

Please excuse my rudeness

Hi, Fred Bauder, you'll likely not be pleased about this but I have suppressed a number of edits to your userspace which reveal too much personally identifiable information about yourself. I've done this per policy and for your own protection and safety on-line as you are a self-declared minor. I'm really sorry about that and I know it's annoying, but it's for the best. Please don't re-add it. For some useful information on privacy and safety, take a look at Wikipedia:Guidance for younger editors. Thanks, and sorry for messing about with your pages - User:Fred Bauder Talk 10:13, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You'll note that your userpage has been modified somewhat. This is for your own good; to learn more about why this was done, you can read this page.

I apologize for the inconvenience. User:Fred Bauder Talk 17:20, 12 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Fred_Bauder (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA)

Barnstar

		The Minor Barnstar
		For of few words are made great men. It is the minor actions, the small subtleties, that can show the greatest valor, the deepest insight, the discerning thought. Thank you : ) Jc37 03:35, 15 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Defender of the Wiki

		The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		I award you this Defender of the Wiki barnstar in recognition of your three years of continuous meritorious service on the Arbitration Committee. (Sorry that it's a bit late) Eluchil404 11:48, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar of Peace

		The Barnstar of Peace
		For the integrity with which you provide peacemaking guidance. Law Lord (talk) 06:50, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

	The Working Man's Barnstar
	To the best arbitrator Wikipedia ever had. You spoiled us and we didn't know how good we had it. Durova^Charge! 16:21, 8 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sakotis!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Here's a Sakotis for you! This cake promotes WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving this cake to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Make your own message to spread WikiLove to others! Happy editing! Fernando Buceta (talk) 10:50, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dispute resolution survey

Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite

Hello Fred Bauder. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Wikipedia, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released.

Please click HERE to participate.
Many thanks in advance for your comments and thoughts.

You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang ^{DR goes to Wikimania!} 23:01, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ConfirmAccount extension

Hey :). You're being contacted because you are involved in the ACC process, or participated in the original discussion in '08 about the ConfirmAccount extension. This is a note to let you know that we are seeking opinions on switching this extension on, effectively making the ACC process via the Toolserver redundant. You can read all the details here; I would be very grateful if people would indicate how they feel about the idea :). Thanks! Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 13:20, 12 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for April 26

Hi. When you recently edited Volatilisation, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Sublimation (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:22, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Fred Bauder. You have new messages at Khvalamde's talk page.
Message added 12:47, 29 April 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Khvalamde : Holla at me 12:47, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Paid Advocacy FAQ

I undid your answer to my question about Paid Political Operatives. Realizing later that my act might be mis-construed I re-instated it...with a note. I hope you understand. ```Buster Seven Talk 13:55, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding MITx and Harvardx

MITx and Harvardx refers to the online learning initiatives of these institutions , there is no relevance between the initiative and the sentence " MITx and Harvardx university-level courses" . The content should be unambiguous what I mean. Gaurav Pruthi 14:03, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Fred Bauder. You have new messages at Gauravpruthi's talk page.
Message added Gaurav Pruthi 14:28, 24 May 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Mentioned in a ArbCom case

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Fæ/Evidence#Evidence_presented_by_Michaeldsuarez – I'm just letting you know that I've mentioned one of your Oversight actions in a ArbCom case. --Michaeldsuarez (talk) 18:20, 29 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Greeley, CO

Fred - the information that was listed under Crimes was incredibly outdated. If you would like to get your information correct, please contact Jerry Garner, Chief of Police here in Greeley. We have "never" had 6 murders here in Greeley in a year. In fact the stats that ARE correct and verifiable via our Chief are as follows: 2006 - 2 murders 2007 - 4 murders 2008 - 4 murders 2009 - 3 murders 2010 - 2 murders 2011 - 1 murder

Stats directly from our police department. I could go on. If Wikipedia is of ANY use for people who are looking to move into our area, the FACTS should be presented. The information and link I gave you were FACTUAL and VERIFIABLE, what is currently online is not even close.

We'll be sure to let everyone know that this is not a very useful tool in the future. Greeley Chamber (talk) 18:31, 30 May 2012 (UTC) Sharon[reply]

I'm not sure that having 2004 murder stats highlighted in the article is useful, but allow me to point out this Greeley Tribune article entitled "Each of Greeley's six murders in 2004 had gang connections". Delicious carbuncle (talk) 19:11, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That explains it. User:Fred Bauder Talk 19:15, 30 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it doesn't. That information is not in the article. Most likely the discrepancy originated in murders which occurred outside city limits. User:Fred Bauder Talk 13:00, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Revert for CPI-RUS

The user:CPI-RUS blocked by you have performed controversial and undiscussed move of 1991 Soviet coup d'état attempt. Please revert it. I also presume the need for move protect due to the said user's disruptive behavior. -- Sameboat - 同舟 (talk) 12:57, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Gang of Eight (Soviet Union)

Rename in State Committee on the State of Emergency. Violation. The distortion of facts, neutrality. With 2010, Talk nobody responds CPI-RUS (talk) 16:54, 31 Mai 2012 (UTC)

How did you get unblocked? Yes, we sometimes don't respond within a reasonable time. Let's have a discussion at Talk:Gang of Eight (Soviet Union). User:Fred Bauder Talk 13:09, 31 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

With 2010, Talk nobody responds CPI-RUS (talk) 17:15, 31 Mai 2012 (UTC)

Привет, я не буду туда лесть. Просто у Вас отсутствует нейтралитет и искажены факты. Hello, Ок. Just not have neutrality and distorted facts. No need to confuse Constitution USSR and United States. In the Soviet Union under the Constitution, article 6 ruled by one party. The KGB has authority to arrest any Government leader and the President USSR CPI-RUS (talk) 17:32, 31 Mai 2012 (UTC)

Clarify

"Legal workers of color, noting a history of laxity, have called for educational institutions to investigate and confirm all claims that a person is an Native American." Please clarify this statement; are there regulations as it pertains to scholarships, teacher-hiring, etc, already in use? I personally had to show proof of enrollment to qualify for some of my scholarships and this sentence makes it seem like anyone can claim anything and no one requires certifications. oncamera^(t) 01:06, 3 June 2012 (UTC) Nevermind, another editor clarified the issue. oncamera^(t) 01:22, 3 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looking for a second opinion

Hi Fred, I've seen you around China-related articles from time to time, so thought I would ask for your opinion on something. I've been working on the page Terrorism in the People's Republic of China, but am involved in a kind of slow-burning content dispute there. Would you be inclined to take a look? I can give more details, if it's not self-explanatory from the talk page and edit history. Regards, Homunculus (duihua) 15:38, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Hey, do you think you might be interested in developing the page further? I'd like to see if it can become a GA, but I haven't found many collaboratively-minded editors interested in helping. That might be a lot to ask, and may be outside your area of interest, but let me know. Homunculus (duihua) 17:35, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No worries

Sorry if I came off a bit brash. It wasn't my intention. I respect your work on these articles. --Xaliqen (talk) 19:56, 9 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Songbun

Damn, you beat me to it by a few hours! Egg Centri c 20:54, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Er, or indeed a few days. Doh! Egg Centri c 20:54, 11 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

JPM

got some notes from a good professor. Perhaps a quick / simple intro, toc, then "background" with your very good, detailed and probing paragraphs? See how the good prof leads in below. Rick (talk) 16:40, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Here are some useful links as well as some additional thoughts.

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2012/05/16/jpmorgans-trading-loss-is-said-to-rise-at-least-50/?ref=global-home

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/26/business/regulators-role-at-jpmorgan-scrutinized.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1338032555-bvE+LpVJ8uVKLx6qiBVI2w

You might indicated that JP Morgan entered into trades as part of its hedging strategy. They have gone on record calling these trades hedges that did not work. Also indicate the department where these losses occurred etc....

For example, trading losses occurred at JPM Chief Investment Office, located in London, England. This office was run by Ina Drew who has since left the firm. A series of derivative transactions involving credit default swaps were entered into as part of the bank's hedging strategy. Trader Bruno Iksil, nicknamed the London Whale had accumulated significant sized positions in the market.

In May, estimated trading loss of $2 billion were announced by JP Morgan and size of actual loss estimates continue to grow.

Regarding lax regulatory oversight. I would reference the above NY Times article that came out on Saturday, May 26th.

Fred - I like your edits, keep 'em coming. Also I believe you are absolute lead steer on the whole market manipulation facet of this. Last time I looked both SEC and CFTC were to survey markets on a near-real-time basis (both have large internal surveillance units costing the taxpayer plenty to do this) and spot manipulation. Free markets are not to be viciously manipulated for giggles and profits. How can you have a frikin' Whale floundering around and so many hedgies on the street knowing that market manipulation was going on and not have the dashboard lights light up at both SEC/CFTC surveillance units blinking red? From there is it that hard to find out who is doing it? Let's see, who exactly is keeping the markets "above board"? Oh in the SWAPS area no one??? Kinda has a bit of a "taint" smell that my auditor nose perks up to. Perhaps all O.K. but the more I read what you write the more I smell possible manipulation of markets. Are we talking RICO? FBI? When big whales at Global SIFIs BDs manipulate markets the average investor pays the vig. Even the larger hedge fund have to pay their proportionally larger share of this "slippage". banking.senate.org - overseers of SEC & CFTC re banking seem totally asleep to this, (or working the back field, also sec/cftc reports to banking.senate FBI (RICO) reports to justice). Also where are the investigative journalists? Would it be so hard for those guys to have a jr staffer call around some hedge funds operating in this "sliver market" of swaps, and ask some questions, ask for who might know? My guess is 20 dials of the telephone would probably break a story. Rick (talk) 18:57, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My guess is absoultely no one will talk on the record. Egg Centri c 19:02, 12 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

European sovereign-debt crisis

Hi,

I've been reading with interest your input there. I'm wondering if Iceland's experience in 2008 has any relevance. The Iceland government agreed to pay massive amounts of money to the UK and the Netherlands to compensate for money lost in the failure of that country's private banks. But this was overturned in a referendum by the Icelandic people, and as far as I know, Iceland never repaid and went their own way. And as I understand it, Iceland is doing ok now (although the article on Iceland isn't clear). I thought by defaulting, Iceland pretty much gave up the change to join the EU. Might not this be for the best? Best wishes, MathewTownsend (talk) 14:25, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Internationalism is always best, but significant advantage can be gained by being contrary, Switzerland being exhibit A. Attempts at cooperation are always clumsy with considerable maneuvering for advantage; however, they are best in the long run. User:Fred Bauder Talk 14:52, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Iceland, having greatly sinned, was basically offered life at hard labor; they declined. User:Fred Bauder Talk 14:55, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That was my impression. They were supposed to pay back something like 12,000 euros plus interest per person, as I understand it. (How are they doing now? They don't seem to be mentioned in these discussions.) MathewTownsend (talk) 16:11, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

They are not in the Eurozone, so play no role in the crisis. They seem to be doing quite well, but their name is mud in international banking; actually they were in consumer banking where public confidence is vital. I think they are probably out of that business for good; tourism and fishing from now on... This might be an option for Greece, in fact, quite a good option. User:Fred Bauder Talk 16:24, 14 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't the name of international banking mud? If these about-to-go-under countries don't greatly modify their practices (as Iceland apparently did), what ultimate good will bailouts do? And is all this bail outing even possible? Wasn't Ireland in a similar position as Iceland a few years ago and took a bailout? And aren't they in a worsening situation now? (Or am I wrong?) MathewTownsend (talk) 15:22, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

International trade requires international banking, difficult business even if everyone is cautious and honest, neither of which Iceland was. Iceland took deposits from the general public, a relatively simple business if the acquired money is loaned conservatively. I think it may have attracted loans by offering higher than usual interest which set them on the search for increased returns, a risky business best engaged in by experienced hedge fund managers rather than commercial banks. Iceland modified its practices because its banks were forced into bankruptcy, reforms came later. Unless something is done, all this bailing out is not possible because the bailouts are actually nothing but loans, although at lower interest; but which, being from other banks, must eventually be paid in some way; if only in greatly reduced ability to borrow internationally. Ireland is trying austerity. Bottom line, poor investments, of whatever nature, don't return enough to be viable. Combined with vested interests with bargaining power such as landlords, banks, and civil servants any country will eventually go broke. A fixed outgo and a diminishing income is a crisis. Lowering wages would work if most of the rest of the world did not offer the same thing at less. User:Fred Bauder Talk 15:42, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't banks in the US do the same thing—but were bailed out by the taxpayer? Then, recently a bailed out bank admitted losing $2 billion in risky business? I just heard on the radio that one third of the homes in my US metropolitan area (2.5 million people) are in one step or another of foreclosure and that most Americans lost 40% of their net worth in the last few years. Grandmothers having to work as waitresses etc. (This was all phony money - the "bubble" - but I read that in some countries such as Russia, Switzerland, Iran, China, Turkey, Austria(?), Venezuala(?), others, house prices are sky high.) Seems like some kind of massive readjustment is in order. The WHO just announced that diesel fumes are carcinogenic. And diesel fuel is one of the "alternative fuels" the US is betting the farm on. I think its all over now, Baby Blue. MathewTownsend (talk) 16:28, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning the report I've been target of at ANI....

Hi,

I was saddened to learn that I've been target of an ANI discussion which's been closed so fast that I didn't get to react to it at all (the last time before I've checked things on WP were before I went to watch an evening move, and when I came back the discussion was already WAY in progress). I'd like to reiterate on the fact that a banned Wikipedia editor's harassing me. For a while it was fun, but now it's starting to be much more annoying. And it's this editor who I've called a nationalist troll, because his only actions on WP consist of removing Hungarian place names from various articles (or replacing them with non-Hungarian names) AND harassing me. I've been harassed by him first via talk page posts ([3], [4] and [5]), then he went on to create a sock with the sole purpose of my harassment (User:CoolKoon jebe svoji matku=CoolKoon's fucking his mother).
Since you were so keen on suggesting a block for calling a harasser a "nationalist troll", tell me: have you ever been harassed by anyone? Online or offline? Have you had somebody stalk you on Wikipedia and report you for every single mistake you make? Also, have you seen your name in a harassment account (coupled with an expletive) that's been created for the sole purpose of your harassment? Have you managed to keep your cool after being reported to ANI/ArbCom/Jimbo/anywhere else the second time within a single week (or so)? Because I have a REALLY hard time keeping this user at bay. Perhaps you could suggest me something then. -- CoolKoon (talk) 22:37, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Well, yes, I have been a target of abuse, and have not always responded in an optimum way. User:Fred Bauder Talk 23:05, 30 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

I ask you and the others about the Article of Nemzade Hatice... There is no any Sources written on this Article

So what you told me? I only said: Who tolds you that she was a descendant of Seyh Bedreddin and where are the sources? Nothing else...But no any can give me a answer...always you must that you must so...strange.

Dilek2 (talk) 17:15, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

People have been trying to explain reliable sources to Dilek2 for a couple years now. Dilek2 typically deletes the comments and warnings [6][7] and always ignores them. Edward321 (talk) 23:51, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Xianrendong

Thanks for adding the latest archaeological results from Science on the pottery article. Archaeology is a surprising science indeed! Guss2 (talk) 09:14, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 276: / Line 276: @@
 :People have been trying to explain reliable sources to Dilek2 for a couple years now.  Dilek2 typically deletes the comments and warnings [http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ADilek2&diff=498421937&oldid=498188496][http://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ADilek2&diff=500658279&oldid=500648839] and always ignores them. [[User:Edward321|Edward321]] ([[User talk:Edward321|talk]]) 23:51, 4 July 2012 (UTC)
+== Xianrendong ==
+Thanks for adding the latest archaeological results from ''Science'' on the [[pottery]] article. Archaeology is a surprising science indeed! [[User:Guss2|Guss2]] ([[User talk:Guss2|talk]]) 09:14, 10 July 2012 (UTC)