User talk:Crzrussian

Please click here to leave me a new message and I will respond on your talk page.

Archives of Old Comments:

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 (incl. recall)

The Future of Recall

I would like to propose adding a fourth quesiton to the RFA template, as follows: "If promoted, do you plan to join Category:Administrators open to recall and why? If yes, what course of action will you take if recalled?" I think this will make people give a lot more thought to this new process, encourage the setting of expectations for recall, and will force more accountability of the new sysops. I would love to get preliminary feedback from those who may be watching my talk page as a result of my recent recall before I initiate a wider discussion. Thanks. - CrazyRussian talk/email 04:56, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I really don't like the idea since the concept of being open to recall is supposed to be something voluntary and the choice of the candidate. By making it a mandatory question (instead of an added optional question), you would be almost stuffing the choice down the candidates throat, and any candidate that didn't feel comfortable adding themselves could face some kind of castigation for not doing so. I'm not too keen on forcing people to, esentially sign up (really to garner supports, for something voluntary. Yank sox 05:01, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And yet it will allow marginal candidates to pass more easily, which would 1. really help the backlogs, and 2. make adminship truly NO BIG DEAL. - CrazyRussian talk/email 05:03, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Marginal candidates are marginal candidates for a good reason due to the fact that there are serious concerns about them. I don't want candidates that I would never endorse, due to serious issues, fly by through supports that rile people up. There are some admins that I would like to see them have their privilege reviewed, and there are others that have lost their privileges when I believe they were extremly effective. Yank sox 05:06, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No no, not marginal candidates - candidates who would otherwise be on the verge of passing - 74-percenters. Many "questionable trust" voters would be allayed is recall was easy. - CrazyRussian talk/email 05:09, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Would it be better if it were hard-coded as optional? - CrazyRussian talk/email 05:10, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I guess the thing is, that it's something that should be entirely intiated by oneself. Maybe a good option would be to add it to the suggested reading. Yank sox 05:14, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here's my suggestion.[1]. Tyrenius 18:58, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

D'oh!

Could you please move my userboxes on the side coloumn down to my new catagory Userboxes, I'm having so much trouble with this! -- Lego@lost 06:08, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That is so confusing!? I did not do that! Ohh... it must have been Kevin Breitenstien, I asked him before to do it, Wow!? I feel dizzy *faints* ;) -- Lego@lost 06:16, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:ValentinIvanov.jpg

FYI - I undeleted it and provided it with a fair use rationale. Please review if you wish. Thanks. - CrazyRussian talk/email 19:07, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You missed an important point in the rationale: why it's not possible to find or create a free-license replacement for the image. --Carnildo 06:37, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"My spreading slander"

Please see Wikipedia's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on the contributor; personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks may lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. - CrazyRussian talk/email 00:14, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I see. I am not allowed to say you are spreading potentially libelous material, but your are allowed to call people "idiots" and "heretics"? Great system this wikipedia. --Historian2 07:33, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lostpedia Talk Page

Hello Crzrussian,

I am wondering if you can provide more information on why Talk:Lostpedia was Deleted and Protected? I'm surprised that SysOps would lock the talk page of a deleted article. In fact, the deleted page itself instructs users to discuss the issue on the article's talk page.

"Please discuss possible changes on the talk page of this article. You can use {{Editprotected}} to request changes."

Thanks in Advance, --Kevincroy 09:19, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strictness!

Well, I'll admit I did start typing a weak support then changed my mind. Feel free to check over my other votes though.--Andeh 16:37, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ORBCW

Man, my buddy just asked me the same thing last night!!!

I really don't have the patience and geduld to do it. The very little I have done consumed a lot of time. I'm sure the same happens to others.... and I really appreciate al that time that you (and others) put into this.

For the time being I'll continue being a lurker, rather than active participant -- which is why I respect the 'vote' and only wrote that I was 'tempted' to do it. Of course I did not feel that it was my place to vote on the issue being that I haven't even added the minutest detail about Lakewood Yeshiva/BMG.

See you around :)

Phetter 17:11, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

frwiki notes

The list I made for missing biography articles on fr: was based on a list of requests made by others that used to exist at the French Wikipedia. I don't know where it's been archived. It wasn't I, I swear, who lumped Martha Stewart in with Oliver Wendell Holmes! Andrew Levine 17:24, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: צבי הירש אשכנזי

If Wikipedia is going to work for Orthodox Rabbis, we're going to have to draw on everyone's resources. For R' Tzvi Hirsch there hasen't been any addition by our counterparts over seas, but when it comes to other luminareis I'm sure, and I hope that there are.

In the past when I was doing a little of my own research, I tried to read the hebrew and yiddish as well. There is no way that I cold type up an article in those langueages, but I know how to link them up. So I decided that every week, I'll try to link up the OCBRW (or whatever it's called ) to the hebrew and yiddish pages so that we could draw on them, and that our counterparts could draw on the english....

So I know that it's an empty link, but a bi-lingual hebrew speaker that chances upon it, might find it usefull to have the link to the english page. And then maybe that user will actually create an article using, in part, the info from the english page.

In general it is a good thing to link all the different variations of a the spelling of the name, so that random users will find the article no matter what spelling they use (Tzvi v. Zvi; Tzvi Ashkenazi vs Tzvi HIRSCH Ashkenazi; and Even the variants of Chacham Tzvi).

Take Care Phetter 17:55, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vyomesh

Protected. Let me know if you need any jobs in future. Tyrenius 18:51, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Pic of Chacham Tzvi

OK I think I found the right one:

This image is in the public domain because under the Copyright law of the United States, originality of expression is necessary for copyright protection, and a mere photograph of an out-of-copyright two-dimensional work may not be protected under American copyright law. The official position of the Wikimedia Foundation is that all reproductions of public domain works should be considered to be in the public domain regardless of their country of origin (even in countries where mere labor is enough to make a reproduction eligible for protection).

This image is in the public domain in the United States. In most cases, this means that it was first published prior to January 1, 1929 (see the template documentation for more cases). Other jurisdictions may have other rules, and this image might not be in the public domain outside the United States. See Wikipedia:Public domain and Wikipedia:Copyrights for more details.

.

Please le tme know if that is applicable.

Also what do you think of the Tzvi vs. Zvi issues? Phetter 19:12, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]