Jump to content

User talk:Everyking

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Ryan Norton (talk | contribs) at 22:57, 4 October 2005 (→Stuff: comment). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Speak up and be heard! (last blanked 7/26/05)

Manuel Lujan

  • Thanks for helping to clean up some NPOV. But are you going to try to make it neutral all by yourself? Are are you just doing some initial work on it? Thanks. 207.195.255.228


Civitavecchia

Thanks for the minor correction made to my additions to the Civitavecchia article. Normally I don't make that mistake, but I seem to have slipped up.

Preservation of Fecalcore

Hi! I am very glad you found my article funny, that is the main point, a serious, encyclopedic funny. I see you were talking of preserving it on BJAODN, which I would greatly appreciate, as I have put considerable time in making it what it is. Would you mind discussing the BJAODN w/ me and how I could put it on there? Or should I just go RAMBO and put it on there myself? Thanks!

Sango's RfA

Thanks!
Thanks!

Hi, Everyking. Thank you for supporting my RfA! I am honored to have your endoresment and hope to make good use of the mop. Sango123 01:40, July 27, 2005 (UTC)

AN/I

I think some of your recent comments on AN/I have really been over the line. I hope you'll moderate yourself as discussed in our mediation and other times. Snowspinner 17:37, July 27, 2005 (UTC)

/sigh. Arbitration will be requested against you shortly. Snowspinner 18:11, July 27, 2005 (UTC)

Everyking, I noticed the request for arbitration regarding you and User:Snowspinner where you mention User:David Gerard. David Gerard was involved in a dispute with me and a few others wherein they attempted to discredit me and my attributions. David correctly recused the arbitration, but mentioned he was going to be submitting evidence. David has still not provided any evidence in the case. However, I have evidence of him arbitrarily claiming an organizations affiliations with Scientology. He initially ignoring my questions about it and then he came back and corrected his claim of affiliation which turned out to not be Scientology. He is a critic of Scientology, yet he is a member of the Scientology project which claims to have the goal of NPOV'ing Scientology articles. I don't know if this mention helps you in anyway, but I thought it wouldn't hurt your case or mine to mention it. If you want the evidence, let me know. Also, Snowspinner blocked me for 24 hours last weekend as a result of a erroneous 3RR report by User:Jdforrester. I explained this to them, but they ignored me and this was right at the time of dispute I mentioned above. TINC is no longer true, IMHO there IS somewhat of a cabal. --AI 21:30, 27 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

McDonald's fun facts

I rarely snort when I laugh, but "you can't call the massacre a "fun fact"" in your edit summary did it. Joyous (talk) 00:44, July 28, 2005 (UTC)

Barnstar

Hi, EK. What was this for? My faith in your vandal-fighting is still as strong as ever! Cheers, [[smoddy]] 11:55, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oh dear me. I should not have said that. I did not read my comment through, as I was in a bit of a rush. I should know better by now... Comment removed. Would you accept my apology, and my continued faith in you? If it makes a difference, I think the RfAr against you is completely spurious, and borders on a personal attack... Cheers, and best wishes, [[smoddy]] 12:00, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]
I'm glad to hear it. Cheers, [[smoddy]] 12:41, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Tom Brinkman

You were kind enough to support my nomination of Jean Schmidt as a featured article and I wonder if you would look at my newest FAC, Tom Brinkman. The voting page is at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Tom Brinkman. PedanticallySpeaking 15:04, July 29, 2005 (UTC)

Arbitration Problems

I saw your troubles on the requests for arbitration pages, with respect to Raul654 and those other clowns. Don't let them get you down.

Block them?

69.118.219.88 has had all the warnings they need... -Splash 01:56, 30 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

for the userpage revert; quick to catch vandalism as usual. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 05:37, 30 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Canderson7's RFA

Thanks for supporting my RFA. I'm honored! --Canderson7 16:57, July 30, 2005 (UTC)

Important VFD

Please see the VFD for commons:List of victims of the 1913 Great Lakes storm. This is of vital importance. This list and others like it are being pushed off of the entire Wikimedia project. It started at Wikipedia, where they were VFDd in favor of moving to Wikisource/Commons. Now they are being VFDd off Wikisource (they don't really belong there, since they are not original source texts), with people there saying they should be on WP/Commons, and it is also being VFDd on Commons, where people don't realize that Commons accepts texts (says so right on the Main Page). This will set a precedent for any user-created lists. -- BRIAN0918  22:22, 30 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

IRC

Hey EK - Why don't you come onto IRC tomorrow night (Wednesday night, US Eastern Time) so we can discuss your case. →Raul654 08:25, August 3, 2005 (UTC)

Well, several of us (myself, Fred, David Gerard, and Jimbo) waited up for you, but you never showed. →Raul654 00:15, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
Yes discuss the case outside of Wikipedia, in *IRC* of all places. The idea of TINC is propaganda. I have a new term IRCCE (IRC CABAL EXISTS). :) Anyway, congratulations Everking, I am glad they did not impose any extreme restrictions upon you. If you have time, take a look at Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/AI/Proposed decision. Aloha --AI 00:23, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Admin nomination

Jim, of all the support votes I've gotten, yours is the first I've directly responded to since it really means a lot. I know that you're very particular about who you support for adminship. I truly cannot thank you enough. - Lucky 6.9 17:46, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AN and arbitration talkback

My fellow James...it's odd, but I can't recall the last time I posted on your talk page. We've both been around for so long, I feel certain I have before....but perhaps I haven't? If so....allow me to belatedly welcome you to Wikipedia! (Forgive my bizarre sense of humor this evening.)

Now, with my perhaps foolish attempt at humor aside, I hope you'll extend me the courtesy of hearing me out -- I'm tired of seeing you try to take on the AC on WP:AN. I said something about it before, apparently to no avail. Now you're talking back to them on AN about the agreement you made in EK3 or whatever the heck they called it. I almost unloaded on you right there, but I decided I should take this to you privately on talk first. You've been a fantastic contributor (better than I, by far) and a good admin (more active and probably more effective than I, again by far), and you deserve that courtesy. That said, I truly implore you, if you have any respect for my opinion whatsoever, stop doing this on AN. It only makes people like myself weary of your comments and frustrated at your desire to publically challenge and defy a group of people you clearly don't respect. And I like and value you as an editor (please don't misunderstand me on that point -- I'm very sincere about this).

I've served on the AC....longest 5 months of my wikicareer. I loathed every minute of it. Bearing responsibility for those decisions was agonizing -- no punishment seemed fair to anybody, no explanation was sufficient, no case moved quickly enough (or else we were over-hasty). That's not to say that there isn't legitimate room for criticizing arbitration here, or specific AC decisions. I know you feel shabbily treated by the AC. All I can say is, your public criticism of them is not being taken seriously, and only serves to further marginalize your opinion in the eyes of many (judging from the response of most editors to your comments). I think you have a valuable perspective -- you're an undeniably talented editor who has experienced the sanctions of the AC and has remained here as a contributor. I think that gives you an insight into arbitration that can be very helpful as we continue to explore how that process will be used by Wikipedia in the coming years. But I am continually frustrated by the fact that, as far as I can tell, you want to limit most of your criticism of arbitration to potshots and nit-picking, usually posted in a forum (AN) which is not traveled often enough by arbitrators (especially the arbitrators with whom you do not seem to have a "past"). I feel that, if you didn't do these things, you would be in a far better position to make some serious and well-thought-out suggestions for how arbitration can be improved here.

Yes, this is far too long -- if you've read it all, I thank you for that courtesy, and I hope I made it remotely worthwhile. If you want to discuss this with me, please drop me a note. Whether you do or not, please be fairly warned -- I respect you, I value your contributions, I hope to see some positive and constructive suggestions about arbitration from you in the future. But if I see you using the AN as a forum from which to criticize the AC (either explicitly, as you did in the Zivinbudas case a few weeks ago, or else implicitly, by challenging the lack of a time limit in an agreement that you voluntarily accepted and by then implying that you were coerced into that agreement), I'm not going to just leave a note here explaining my perspective. I'm going to be very clear about my objection on AN in response. I know you may take this as a threat, and I apologize if it reads as one. I just feel that my politeness in replying to you in the past was not taken seriously, and I want to be taken seriously by you -- I assure you, when you make serious criticisms of Wikipedia practice and policy, whether I agree with you or not, I always take you seriously. I wish you the best of luck in the future here, and I hope that my comments here did not offend you in any way -- I mean to be clear about how displeased I am, but not offensive or rude, and if you think I crossed the line, please know that I will fully apologize for doing so if I am informed. Best regards, Jwrosenzweig 09:40, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response, James. I hope you know that I don't mean to silence you, and I can't imagine that you think I have a personal grudge against you (I certainly don't). All I mean to say is that I personally feel that any quibbles or challenges you mean to address to the AC should go directly to them, not onto AN. And that I think you will find more support and more people seriously attending to your perspective if, instead of challenging the AC on specific issues on AN, you instead put together some more general thoughts on arbitration and what could be done to improve it, then invite others to comment and discuss. If I'm tempting you to violate your new agreement, please forgive me -- I'm not intending that. I just feel frustrated, because (though this is probably not a fully accurate perception) it appears to me that everytime the AC announces a decision on AN, you want to turn it into an opportunity to start an argument. And I'm saying that I feel that's not productive. I really appreciate your talking about this with me in a calm and reasonable manner (heck, I didn't expect any less :-) and I hope you don't feel attacked by me. I'm headed for bed, but thanks once again for your reply, and I hope this somewhat briefer note helps clarify my position. Best regards, Jwrosenzweig 10:10, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Please understand my position

Why do you people want to block me? I'm trying to spread the message of Democracy to Cuban people (and also i'm active within Cuba), this is hardly extreme POV pushing--Comandante Gomez 09:37, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Heya...

I am currently in discussions with Ozemail regarding persistent vandalism that has been occuring from the following IP addresses in their network:


Calton told me that you were hip-deep in fighting these vandals. I need assistance with all the specific items of vandalism. I have setup a page to gather this evidence at User:Ta bu shi da yu/Ozemail.

Are you able to help? If so, please use the format:

We'll see just how good their service is at responding to this sort of thing - we should be supporting any company that assists us. Therefore, I'm hoping that the Wikipedia spirit of cooperation and immense amount of volunteers will help with tracking down vandal edits.

If Ozemail gives a good response, we can use them as an example of a good ISP, and maybe even shame AOL into assisting us (we get lots of vandalism from them).

If nothing happens, I'll be taking the whole subnet to ArbCom as I can't think of any other way of dealing with the problem.

Ta bu shi da yu 02:34, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback

And once again I ask you why. To which policy or guideline are you referring? Why do you think that the information automatically created by rollback is inferior ro to the information I'd have placed in the edit summary anyway? When editors don't explain their edits, or engage in large numbers of vandalistic reversions, why do you think that rollback is inappropriate? Don't just issue commands to we lesser beings; have the courtesy to explain yourself. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 10:57, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think it is OK to use rollback on a self-revert? Sjakkalle (Check!) 11:14, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

vandalism to RCP page

An anon user has been adding zip file links to the Revolutionary Communist Party (USA) page repeatedly in the last 24 hours. This seems a pretty obvious violation of wiki protocol. The zip files could consist of anything and the relevance seems tenuous at best. The contributor is here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=24.19.62.186 And to a lesser extent from here: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=69.145.21.94 Any help you could give to monitor the situation or block the user, if necessary, would be appreciated. DJ Silverfish 07:50, 13 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Schmidt and Hackett

You worked on articles on the special election in Ohio on August 2. I have posted my articles on the nominees in that race, Jean Schmidt and Paul Hackett, at Wikipedia:Peer review and would appreciate your comments. The individual pages are at Wikipedia:Peer review/Jean Schmidt and Wikipedia:Peer review/Paul Hackett. PedanticallySpeaking 19:29, August 17, 2005 (UTC)

Admin out of control

Under exactly what authority does UninvitedCompany think he can unilaterally permanently ban users, and destroy their user pages, and protect their talk pages so that they can't respond? - [1]

It should be noted that the alleged images were listed at User:Evil Monkey/Nudity as well as being considered entirely appropriate for articles, having, as far as I can tell, already survived IFD, and have been on Wikipedia for over a month.

Note that an arbcom case has only just opened and has by no means come down with even remotely any penalty such as a ban. UninvitedCompany seems to think he has greater authority than ArbCom, and can completely act outside it.

Does UninvitedCompany has infinite power and permission to unilaterally with impunity?

Particularly when the user/victim in question has challanged a prior abuse of adminship by UninvitedCompany in an RfC, and has diametrically opposed political opinions?

This seems to be a case of right wing evangelical Christian admins thinking they have the right to dictate to everyone else.

It also seems in contempt of the arbitration committee's right to make the decision.

SomeAccountThatIWillListOn-Ril-'sUserPageWhenOrIfIEverGetItBack (-Ril-) 11:50, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Move Roxelana

Hi, Everyking, You expressed your preliminary support to the move at Talk:Aleksandra Lisowska. Could you consider casting a vote there now regarding the official move proposal? Thanks! --Irpen 20:42, August 18, 2005 (UTC) Talk:Aleksandra Lisowska

On "polls are evil", and what it means and doesn't mean

While I'm generally loathe to spam people with requests for attention, "polls are evil" (in the sense I mean it) is something dear to me, and I want to make sure we understand were each of us is coming from. Just in case it slips off your radar: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/WikiProject Wikipedians for Decency. I'm not asking for a response there, mind you; a private discussion is fine as well. JRM · Talk 00:38, 19 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject

The WikiProject for decency is a mess. I appreciate your understanding that at least some of those involved in it's protection never desired to commence a witch hunt for whatever was deemed obscene. I'm for renaming and considering something that deals more with encyclopedic merit...this would greatly transcend the original direction the project seemed to be headed, one I would ultimately not been a part of, which was to go around tagging certain things. The project could discuss the possible legal ramifications of hosting images of individuals without also ensuring that there are appropriate legal disclaimers proving age of consent of persons displayed in such images...something Jimbo has stated he is not interested in doing. The project could also address the need for encyclopedic merit or worth of questionable sourcing, article content, and related issues. Perhaps such a similar enterprise already exists that you may be more aware of. Your thoughts, if you feel so inclined, would be appreciated.--MONGO 08:43, August 19, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks!

Just to drop a line to thank you for reverting the vandalism in my user page. ;) --Huaiwei 10:57, 21 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Same here, such cleanup is always appreciated. -- (☺drini♫|☎) 19:09, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

what are extant cliques?

Is there possibly an established clique between Jtdirl and Slimvirgin? or how? Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR and Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents (recent items) show how there seems to emerge excuses etc. 217.140.193.123 10:19, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Is anything being done?

Hi,

I notice you've reverted several edits by 203.144.21.77. I just reverted one more of the same sort of edits and started to trace back to his other edits, which you seem to be following up on. Is there anything else that needs to be done? P0M 07:14, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Jean Schmidt

Thanks for your support for my previous effort to get this featured. I've submitted the article as a FAC again and would appreciate your vote at Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Jean_Schmidt. PedanticallySpeaking 17:08, August 23, 2005 (UTC)

History of South Carolina

Hello. History of South Carolina is on Featured Article Candidates for a third time due to recent controversy. Because you commented on one of its past nominations, you may be interested in commenting this time at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/History of South Carolina. Toothpaste 19:33, 23 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Userpage and Trollderella

Hi Everyking!

I have unblocked Trollderella, but left another warning that such a username might be asking for trouble. Anyway, I have also restored your userpage. I think it got hit by Willy on Wheels (we can block him on sight can't we?), and two admins tried moving it back at the same time, thus deleting it by accident. I liked your userpage with links to your subpages better though... Sjakkalle (Check!) 07:44, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for fixing up my userpage and talkpage, I seem to have gotten at least one enemy on Wikipedia. This guy's been after my user and talkpage about a zillion times. Userpage protected again. Sjakkalle (Check!) 08:16, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Vandal

Hi. Can you please block User talk:202.74.164.3 who is vandalising Jew and Jews in the Middle Ages. Has been warned several times. Cheers TigerShark 07:20, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes please block him if i had admin powers i would have done so a while ago. Jobe6 07:21, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

OK, if I see any more vandalism from that IP, I'll block it. Everyking 07:23, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Motorola i930--Vandalism Lock Request

The recent Vandalism incident at the article Motorola i930 has really redflagged the integrity of the article. I keep watch on that article, and realized that there has been some vandalism attempts lately. If you are an Administrator and/or a Sysop, can you lock the Motorola i930 article for me to deal with Vandalism by Vandals? Those who want to discuss about changes should direct all the feedback to me. I appreciate it if you temporarily lock the Motorola i930 article to deal with vandalism. Thanks. — Vesther 12:55, 25 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Head's up

In case you hadn't already seen it, here's a heads up - Wikipedia:Today's featured article/August 29, 2005 →Raul654 03:39, August 28, 2005 (UTC)

Deletion

Ah, burning midnight oil as well, I see.  :) That "Jessica Stover" thing was little more than a single sentence and an external link. No notability established and I wiped it out as link spam. Sorry about brain fading on the summary. - Lucky 6.9 07:11, 28 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Penda of Mercia

I'm at a loss - what do you call the British in the 6th Century? -- BDAbramson talk 02:59, 29 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't censor me, Thank You.--Comandante Gomez 04:15, 30 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've been doing better if you look the Castro's page, I stopped calling him a "Dictator" (even though I REALLY think he is)...and agreed with the editor known as Speak Box, who has been editing the page recently.--Comandante Gomez 04:21, 30 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

We Belong Together

James, I just noticed that you unprotected We Belong Together shortly after I'd protected it. Please don't do that again to articles I protect, and particularly not if you intend to edit them yourself. I protected because of the reverting between Omega and Mel, which both have discussed with me and which needs to be sorted out. In future, if you feel I've protected something inappropriately, I'd appreciate it if you'd leave a note on my talk page and give me time to respond. SlimVirgin (talk) 23:26, August 30, 2005 (UTC)

As my request is denied, I'm therefore re-submitting it. If one admin protects a page, another admin shouldn't unprotect it just hours later, except in exceptional circumstances, where a mistake has been made or similar. This is a basic matter of courtesy, and so perhaps I should rephrase my request in those terms.
As for the revert war, I agree that it's low level, but it's been going on for a long time and involves several articles, this one being the main bone of contention, it seems, and it needs to be sorted out, which is what I'm making an effort to do. SlimVirgin (talk) 03:45, August 31, 2005 (UTC)
In that case, I owe you an apology. When I looked at the history, I misread it that the page was protected and unprotected on August 25, but now that I look properly, I see there were three days in between, which sheds a different light on it. I would still have appreciated a note in advance of unprotection, but three days is less of a deal than a few hours. I'm sorry for jumping the gun. SlimVirgin (talk) 03:59, August 31, 2005 (UTC)

Vasco da Gama

An article that you've edited before (Vasco da Gama) is nominated for Article Improvement Drive. If you want go there and vote. Thanks. Gameiro 02:58, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

thank you -Jimbo's post is covered

saw your post --and deletion --in re my post on Jimbo's page --yes, I got it wrong, but copied it to the "Real" page.

thanks again for your concern -- ps: we could use a few "affirmative" votes to encourage Terri Schiavo to kick butt. Thx in advance.--GordonWattsDotCom 10:59, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]


JonBenét Ramsey

Hi, I'm playing around with wiki tonight, mostly just vandal hunting (for the first time), and I saw a recent entry for JonBenét, and decided that it was just...um...wrong...if you know what I mean. So I reverted it. In between I noticed that you saw it and didn't revert it, but instead just corrected the spelling (which I do find quite humorous). So should I have left it alone? Hagie 08:19, 2 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ashlee Simpson FAC

Hey Everyking :). The article is already on peer review now... any ideas on how to improve it before we send it to Featured Article Candidates? Ryan Norton T | @ | C 09:17, 2 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Belarusian Republican Youth Union

Thanks a bunch for doing the minor grammar check there. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 08:08, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

...

I don't know how you do it... even with all the RfArs and whatnot you still tirelessly edit. Try to remember that words do matter though, and I think if you keep that in mind maybe it'll improve with some of the other admins, no? Take care! --RN


SuperShadow VfD

Greetings: pawing through the SuperShadow edit history, I noticed you've edited the page in question before. I thought you'd want to know it is now the subject of a Vote for Deletion, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/SuperShadow. If you want, you could stop in there and cast a vote. --Maru 22:07, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Please could you comment on a peer review?

I was reading the Autobiography article, and was very impressed by it. I actually think it's one of the best Wikipedia articles on recent albums that I've seen. Anyway, after perusing the edit history, I noticed that you were responsible for most of the content of the article. This did not surprise me (due to your great contributions to Ashlee Simpson), but since the style of the Autobiography article influenced my expansion and rewrite of the article for Extraordinary Machine (which is a forthcoming album by Fiona Apple), I would be extremely grateful if you were to visit its peer review request here, and comment and add suggestions on how the article could be improved. You don't have to, of course, but I want this article to be the best it can be, and I believe that your guidance may help me and the other editors of the article to achieve that goal. I even hope to submit it at WP:FAC some day after the album is released. Thanks in advance. Extraordinary Machine 23:34, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Winter War

Re. "give me a break..how do you define "moral victory"?" You're right, of course. But I put that in there as an attempt to give some ground to the "Finland won" POV revisionism, rather than just have a revert war with those guys.--67.101.67.73 14:43, 5 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Autobiography on FAC again

I put Autobiography (Ashlee Simpson album) on FAC again... I think its pretty much ready. Maybe you might want to take one last pass at it when you get a chance :). Go to FAC and comment there if you'd like also :). Ryan Norton T | @ | C 00:30, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Museveni on peer review

Hey EK, just thought I'd let you know that Yoweri Museveni is now on peer review as you have contributed to it previously. I thought now was about the right time, as it would be good to get a feel for the kind of things people will say in WP:FAC now, rather than pressing ahead with expansion and then having to change a whole load of stuff later. TreveXtalk 11:09, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Zoey 101

Regarding this edit. First of all, you made it look like January 9]]. Second, why even change it form January 9 to January 9? Howabout1 Talk to me! 23:43, September 6, 2005 (UTC)

Huh? Are you sure? I'm looking and it now and it appears the other way around with EK fixing it after you reverted... Ryan Norton T | @ | C 23:46, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Stupid me! Sorry Everyking. :) Howabout1 Talk to me! 23:48, September 6, 2005 (UTC)

Another question, what is the policy regarding a father and son with the same name and both should have wikipedia articles. Is it Paul Butcher (Actor) and Paul Butcher (NBL Palyer) or Paul Butcher Jr. and Paul Butcher Sr.? Howabout1 Talk to me! 23:58, September 6, 2005 (UTC)

ashlee simpson article reworked

Hi Everyking,

as you know we've been facing some steep opposition on the FAC for the article so I reworked the structure of it to read better, and expanded the intros of both this article and the autobiography article. Let me know what you think :) Ryan Norton T | @ | C 06:41, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

By all means keep editing the article :) - I feel like we're getting somewhere, which is a good thing :) Ryan Norton T | @ | C 07:05, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Minor Barnstar for major contributor

I, Willmcw, pin this Minor Barnstar on the chest of you, Everyking. No edit is too minor that improves Wikipedia, and your 'minor edits' are more important than many an editor's 'major contributions'. Thanks for what you do, -10:54, September 7, 2005 (UTC)

Autobiography (Ashlee Simpson album) intro

Hi Everyking, when have a chance, could you give me your opinion on the 3 intro paragraphs to Autobiography (Ashlee Simpson album)? I reworked them a bit and I want to make sure they are good :). Thanks for help :). Ryan Norton T | @ | C 06:27, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

User:SlimVirgin

On both SlimVirgin's Talk and User page, you might want to revert with "hidden on the history" page, because those comments are sticking there. Sorry, *if* that's possible. --None-of-the-Above 09:45, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Request

This is actually considerably more moderate than what was done a few days later...the key point of it all is that none of these radical revisions, removal of huge amounts of content, was ever done with any attempt at compromise or consensus beforehand (compared with my emphasis on meeting halfway, which fell on deaf ears literally for months before something began to be achieved). Everyking 18:43, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'd appreciate it if you stop making unsubstantiated claims and flagrant untruths which are apparently intended to try to discredit those who hold opinions you disagree with. Provide diffs to back any claims you wish to make about people's behaviour. Thanks. Worldtraveller 19:16, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

What he means is that didn't include him in the consensus decision (or enough of what he wanted, anyway), which is more or less true. In my e-mail I sent to you I explained some similar situations... Ryan Norton T | @ | C 22:59, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I can't figure out if this is addressed to me or Worldtraveller...I know I didn't get any e-mail. Everyking 23:05, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I meant an e-mail I sent to wordtraveller... sorry :) Ryan Norton T | @ | C 23:07, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

rewrote Ashlee Simpson

Yep - there still a bit to be done (see the todo) but I think we pull it off without too much work. BTW on the todo, World mentions a few things that are not sourced directly such as the original album name for the second album (which I removed but we should put back if we find a source)... any idea which sources those are? Ryan Norton T | @ | C 04:30, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

BTW, do you know what the source is for the "although there have been rumors that Simpson stole Valderrama from Lohan" claim? (Its the last one, thankfully) Ryan Norton T | @ | C 05:45, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thank you! Ryan Norton T | @ | C 06:14, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for fixing up the snl thing :) Ryan Norton T | @ | C 06:03, 10 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

James, thank you for reverting that horrible vandalism from my user page. SlimVirgin (talk) 20:41, September 9, 2005 (UTC)

Kanye West

Everyking, is it possible you could unprotect Kanye West? He made some statements, which have caused an edit war of sorts on his page, but it needs to be updated especially since he has now has the #1 single and album in the country. OmegaWikipedia 03:44, 10 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

I know that you are American, but do you perhaps know where it is possible to retrieve Canadian album sales on the internet? Winnermario 20:36, September 10, 2005 (UTC)

Autobiography

OK, I'm taking your suggestion and working on this.... you might want to keep an eye on this as I'm replacing/reworking descriptions of songs with something that has a reference. Ryan Norton T | @ | C 05:17, 11 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

OK, two things left - let me know if you know references for them or not :). If not I'll try something alternate :) Ryan Norton T | @ | C 08:02, 11 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

George W. Bush

I saw your edit, unlinking the word Bush. Could you do us a favor and leave an edit summary? A lot of us have that page on watchlist and it would just be convenient. Redwolf24 (talk) 02:40, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Here's my 2 cents worth in re Jimbo

I saw your post on Jimbo's page, and I put in my 2 cents worth: Here's a copy-n-paste of the entire conversation -where I replied on that page, but here you go for a copy in your talk.--GordonWattsDotCom 12:14, 12 September 2005 (UTC) (PS: See below.)[reply]

Quote

Recently User:PigSwill (an Irate sock?) posted on your article an IRC conversation with User:Irate which led to Irate's ban. Of course I've complained vociferously about that ban before, since it was done 100% outside of process, but in the actual text I found this concluding exchange which I found extremely troubling:

Irate says, "I'll stick to the riles but I won;t like them is not enough for you?" To this you reply: "not at all", "not even close". This was a devastating thing for me to read because it is extremely important to me that a project I invest so much time in be founded on basically just principles, and what Irate was saying seems so obviously to be the just argument that I am astonished that any reasonable person would disagree. Irate, and presumably by extension all contributors, are required to like all of our rules, as opposed to simply following them? And for the founder of the project to say that? I'm hoping I misinterpreted or got something out of context, or maybe the text as given isn't even accurate, so I request clarification. Everyking 11:35, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Everyking, I took a look at the diff in question (which was quickly reverted by SlimVirgin.) It is here. While I agree that this may be a little harsh, remember that intentions eventually lead to actions, and Jimbo probably thought that his attitude was bad. "Insubordination" can get a person fired -even from a "nonpaying" volunteer job, such as wiki-editor. Now, if you don't agree with the Bible, then my following arguments won't be valid, but even still, let me just share with you some things I have found on the web (and I'm guessing they are correct quotes, because I don't feel like looking in my Bible for ALL these quotes).
  • Proverbs 5:12 And say, How have I hated instruction, and my heart despised reproof;
  • Leviticus 19:17 ‘You shall not hate your brother in your heart. You shall surely rebuke your neighbor, and not bear sin because of him.
  • Mark 7:21 For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders,
  • Matthew 15:19 For out of the heart proceed evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, blasphemies:
  • 1st John 3:15 Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him.
  • Zechariah 8:17 And let none of you imagine evil in your hearts against his neighbour; and love no false oath: for all these are things that I hate, saith the LORD.
Remember, also, Everyking: Jimbo does have the all-powerful authority -at least for a time. (I hear there are plans to reduce his authority, but that is out of my hands.)
If you read all that I wrote -both my thoughts and those of the various Biblical writers, and combine that with your studied analysis of how you might act if someone starts tinckering with, say, your homepage -or home -or car, or whatever you own --then you might see a bigger picture. --Again, I am not saying Jimbo is right (assuming he was quoted correctly from some private chat or something) --I am just saying there are several sides to a story.--GordonWattsDotCom 12:09, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ashlee Simpson, and is this legit??

Hi Everyking! While googling I found this.... it appears at first glance to be a journal entry by ashlee simpson.... although it reeks of fakeness, so I'm not sure. Interesting note - has some info we could use, that's for sure :).

Also, did you get a change to read the latest (DMC's) objection to the ashlee simpson article? It's pretty good. Any idea on what her influences are, vocal singing type/registers etc.. I'm researching it right now but if you know that's good too :).

Take care :). (Love your posts to AN/I, LOL!).

Ryan Norton T | @ | C 07:26, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Zalmay Khalilzad

Hi James, please see my entry on Khalilzad's discussion page. Would appreciate advice from an admin. --Derek 18:16, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

comments

I hope my comments on the FAC didn't sound like I was ganging up on you. I do agree that if we cut out much more it's not going to be much more than a stub... so don't worry I won't do much of that :). I was just trying to point out how, in my opinion, we should try to resolve objections.

Also, maybe someday we should try to resolve some of these old conflicts on IRC or something. Heck, I could mediate :). Anyway... thanks and take care :).

Ryan Norton T | @ | C 22:20, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks...

...for reverting the oh-so-very-amusing vandalism on my talk page. OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 11:45, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Peasant revolt

Since you're convinced that it can be made into more than a dictionarty definition, why don't you you actually go ahead and do so? That's the point of the {{Move to Wiktionary}} template, to get people motivated to have make an article that might be more than that into more than that. I normally wait a while before taking articles that I stick that template over to the Atricles for Deletion page. (In fact, I have been placing that tag on articles only within the last two weeks so I haven't actually taken the next step on any such article.) However, if you insist on removing the template again, I'll see no option but to submit the article to an AfD immediately so as to resolve the issue one way or another. Caerwine 11:58, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your advice, but this is hardly my first AfD nomination. I was slowed down a bit by a combination of lag, discovering during preview that the tl and cl templates don't work inside the afd2 template, and making sure my first entry in the Wiktionary followed their expected format. Caerwine 14:17, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Request

I am asking past editors of the Karl Rove page to weigh in on a survey. If you can spare a couple of minutes, please visit this page: Talk:Karl Rove/September Survey, read the introduction, and answer the three questions that have been posed. Thank you. paul klenk 09:15, 16 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

If you got some spare time...

would you mind taking a look at an article I've (mostly) written, Sverre of Norway? I'd planned to get it up to FA soon, I'd liked to have an experienced editor take a look first. Probably needs some general copyedit from a fluent speaker too Fornadan (t) 23:56, 16 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Columbine High School massacre vandalism

There's these idiots (looks like 2 of them) who keep vandalising the page. If you could block them/protect the page, that would be awesome. (If you don't feel like doing either, could you please delete the source pictures they're linking from, at the least?) Thank you very much. --Matt Yeager 05:49, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Expansion theory

I can't work out why you first reverted this article to restore the version with the AfD notice that had been removed, and then reverted yourself. I've restored to the version with the AfD notice, which also happens to have content that in my opinion reads less like a publisher's blurb for the book. --Tony SidawayTalk 12:01, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I see. Yes, that was the safe thing to do. Thanks. I couldn't imagine that you'd deliberately remove a AfD so I was puzzled. --Tony SidawayTalk 12:10, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Mel Etitis

I am quite angry with user Mel Etitis. Whenever I speak with him, he always replies with "I didn't follow all of your message" or something related to that. I was just curious to know if you know why he must act the way he is? Especially with the song titles, which has vexed me to the point of self-destruction. I cannot stand his attitude anymore, and he appears to like it when rules are followed his way—is there a possible way to end his ongoing stiffness and if this has ever occurred with any other users? Winnermario 20:19, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've asked you to supply a source for your odd claim that normal English rules don't apply to songwriters, and you've consistently refused. What more can I do? And am I supposed to pretend that I follow your (sometimes rather odd) English when I don't? --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 22:16, 19 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]


Luther Page Rewrite Discussion on

See the Luther page talk. --CTSWyneken 01:26, 20 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merger of effects.

Given their closeness in time and location, it strikes me that it will soon become difficult to separate the respective economic, political, and social effects of Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Rita. What do you think of the idea of moving the articles covering these aspects to Economic effects of the 2005 Atlantic hurricane season, Political effects of the 2005 Atlantic hurricane season, and Social effects of the 2005 Atlantic hurricane season? -- BDAbramson talk 00:13, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh

199.178.207.10 (talk · contribs). Do you think I'm being to harsh on him? Sjakkalle (Check!) 12:16, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Husein Gradascevic

Hi, I see you cast your vote in support of the Husein Gradascevic article on featured article candidates. Currently there are two objections to it. The first I don't think is legitimate, because it merely says that the article is "too bland" and doesn't offer any suggestions to improve it. The other objection is more serious and has to do with the grammar and style of the writing article. The user who objected and me have done extensive copyedit work since then. I feel that the article is now fine, but he has suggested that perhaps a third copyedit by another user would be beneficial. I think it'd be a shame if this article failed to make featured status at this point, and I was wondering if you could give it a quick read and fix anything you'd consider a problem as far as grammar/sentence structure/flow is concerned. Live Forever 05:54, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Flag of Belarus

Since I saw you comment on the first FAC attempt of this article, I am letting you know this is at FAC again. Please come by [2] to see if the article is good to your liking. Zach (Sound Off) 05:33, 24 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Barnstar

I, RN, hereby give Everyking a barnstar for his help and patience on the Ashlee Simpson-related FACs (even though they failed :().

Don't worry, we'll try again next month :). Ryan Norton T | @ | C 06:00, 24 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

213.18.248.23

Looking at the rampant behaviour and trail of offences shouldn't this be a much more severe block?--Rjstott 10:06, 26 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Albanian troll

Hello Everyking! I hope that You can help me! User:Albanau is currently involved in an edit war, see the article history for Francesco Crispi. He is assisted by User:L'Houngan, who is identical with Swedish user sv:Användare:L'Houngan. Today, L'Houngan was blocked on Swedish Wikipedia, see sv:Block log. L'Houngan is widely considered to be a sock puppet of User:Albanau/sv:Användare:Albanau, who has been banned indefinitely on Swedish Wikipedia, see Swedish RfC. I hope You or someone else may do something about this user. He has been truly annoying and the cause for severe conflicts on Swedish Wikipedia! Best regards, Probert 20:26, 28 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Njyoder

He raised a spurious and abusive arbcom case, and began altering arbitrator votes. This was straight-up vandalism, and of a very serious and extra-bad flavor. Snowspinner 03:49, 29 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Mariah Carey articles on AFD

Hi, Everyking. Some Mariah Carey articles have been put up for deletion, and I was wondering if you would consider voting on them.

[3] [4] [5]

If the articles are merged, it would look very messy, so I hope we can keep them the way ther are. Incidentally, this is actually the 2nd AfD for "O Holy Night", so they really shouldn't have nominated it again (even though I guess technically they can). Thank you OmegaWikipedia 01:47, 1 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Another pop group article gone bad

Hello, I know we havent always seen eye to eye, but I think even you would agree this could use some serious work. Dont suppose you'd be willing to tackle it would you?  ALKIVAR™ 08:07, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Grumble

Oops. - brenneman(t)(c) 08:49, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

User:Sortan

Everyking, I'd be grateful if you'd look at Sortan's user contributions - which will probably show you more of a picture of what has been going on than anything else. You'll also remember that the ArbCom result on BCE/BC was a wash (with no-one being held out to be particularly at fault - just all participants together!). What did arise was it being clear that we have a de facto "no change" policy that I have both adhered to and reverted in accordance with. I know you've been hounded by those who have deliberately tried to wind you up in the past, so I hope, when you look at what Sortan's done, you'll see that he has been doing the same with me. All the best, jguk 07:00, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Stuff

Although not, to my recollection, a part of our agreement, it is not something I intend to make a habit of - in fact, I have in general refrained from joining discussions where you're unfairly criticizing other admins on AN/I (Such as the jguk discussion) so as not to put you in a position where you would feel as though I'm taking shots at you that you can't respond to. Snowspinner 13:27, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You should probably have brought that up during the discussion of the agreement, instead of trying to append it after the fact. I'm certainly not going to accept that as a formal and binding part of the agreement. That said, I really don't intend to mention you again. Do what you will with that.Snowspinner 22:32, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have notified the arbcom of your decision, and asked that the case be re-opened. Snowspinner 22:51, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

First off, he's not "unfairly" criticizing other admins - its just his opinion. Also, I checked the lists and Jguk is not an admin (although he is a year-old editor). Please leave Everyking alone Snowspinner, it does unfair that you can criticize him but he can't critize you. Ryan Norton T | @ | C 22:57, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

User:Jguk

I too would be grateful if you would look into User:Jguk's edits in provoking more revert wars over date styles. I feel that I have not done anything wrong or against policy while Jguk has made several date style changes directly against policy (of which I've named several examples, and there are more if you would like). It seems that just because he's been around longer, most people are content to overlook what he does, but unfairly chastise me. Sortan 14:42, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reverting vandalism on my page

Thanks! Molotov (talk) 19:20, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for nominating me to be an adm, even though I did not attain it. Molotov (talk) 19:20, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Everyking&oldid=24765361"