User talk:Dev920/Archive3

Please, leave me a message. I am happy to be help or be helped.

Thank you for experimenting with the page Latter Days on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you may want to do. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Ginkgo100 ^{talk · e@} 22:20, 16 November 2006 (UTC) Hi... As I was investigating this I had a feeling you'd ask about this... In this edit you appeared to be intentionally adding misspellings. Looking through the diffs, it looks like you reverted to a previous version with misspellings. Sorry for the confusion! --Ginkgo100 ^{talk · e@} 22:25, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Made me laugh

Your long titled subpage that discusses not putting adjectives into your vote is incredibly hilarious, yet entirely true. You might consider expanding that into an essay...it could be worth something. Funny, nonetheless. DoomsDay349 00:33, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Forgive me if I'm being overly forward/serious/neurotic but I'd be glad to help out in writing an essay on it...that would be a great idea. DoomsDay349 00:37, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

I would want to start it on my sandbox, if you don't mind me stealing it :). You'd receive full credit for inspiration, though. DoomsDay349 00:41, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Hey Dev. Forgive me for being so amazingly mindless/stupid/forgetful, but might you happen to recall the name of that page about not adding adjectives to your vote? I want to copy it to my sandbox and start writing something. Sorry I had to ask, but it's long and I can't remember it. DoomsDay349 22:37, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Hey, thanks! It's a great concept to write about. If we happen to use my Forum idea for a new Lounge, then that'll be a great place to discuss this. Still can't get over how good an idea this is... thanks again! DoomsDay349 22:41, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Hey! I wrote it; it's here. Tell me what you think! DoomsDay349 01:06, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Vote solicitation in signature

It's really not ok to have vote-soliciation in your signature; see Wikipedia:Spam#Canvassing. Can you please remove it? -- SCZenz 23:15, 17 November 2006 (UTC)

Thank you! :) -- SCZenz 00:39, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Maggie

I was looking for something to do, and I found this User:Dev920/Userproject:Jake Gyllenhaal so I thought waht the hell.Stevenscollege 01:04, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Sorry about that

Sorry if I came across as biting your head off, I don't think you or FishUtah intended to come across as uncivil, I've just seen a lot of unnecessary hostility recently, so I was quick to jump in and try to stop it. --Lethargy 02:08, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Qiyamah

Hi Dev,

Thanks very much for your contributions. I have an article on Qiyama but am personally busy and can't summarize it. I would be thankful if you could help me. I can send it through email. If you could help me, please send me an email and I'll reply you back (I can not attach it from wikipedia email.) Thanks --Aminz 03:10, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Here is the article [1]. I had to remove it because of copyvio but you can see the link :) And the most accurate section on Islamic belief should be Ma'ad(returning to God), not Qiyama, though these are related. Cheers, --Aminz 03:36, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Scarlet

Oh, whatever you think best. I just ran across it and wanted to make sure it had a category of some kind on it; generally a stub is the fastest way to do that. -- SCZenz 08:55, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

More LGBT talk

I just noticed that evrik proposed (and had passed) a Human Rights Barnstar. When I looked at that category, I noticed that there were far less categories under human rights than LGBT, whiuch I've pointed out on the discussion page of proposed Barnstars. I also asked why there seems to be a double standard. At a certain point, I think I am going to have to start openly discussing what I think is going on. I hope you will support me if it comes to that. By the way, have you ever felt that there was homophobia on Wiki? It was mentioned to me once and I would like to discuss that with somebody who has been here longer than me.Jeffpw 14:32, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

• I have no intention of accusing anybody of anything. I will discuss what I see as a marginalizing of the LGBT community's contributions to wiki, however. one interesting thing I just noticed, though: The Scouting Barnstar, which evrik was passionate about keeping, was demoted to a project award....but kept its name of Scouting Barnstar. I do think that is worthy of mention if the decision is taken to make the LGBT Barnstar a project award--to say "put it on the award page but keep it with a Barnstar name. And digressing for a moment, I have an article I wrote on a LGBT topic up for FAC right now, James Robert Baker. Have you read it?Jeffpw 17:54, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
• I have no idea why the LGBT project page is so dead. There seem to be only a few active users there. It's a shame, really, since there is so much to do there. When looking at the LGBT project userboxes, there are a lot of people who are listed as members, but I guess there's a difference between listing yourself as member and actually working on a project. Do you think it might be useful to leave a few messages about the Barnstar on some of the more active user's talk pages?

Thanks for your support on the Baker article. I was rather surprised that several people on the Wiki biography project supported it as a FA, but *nobody* from the LGBT project did, though a LGBT Project sticker did get slapped on its talk page :-)Jeffpw 18:17, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

• I'm not sure I know what you mean about the "notice board". Do you mean the discussion page of the Project page? Or the Project page itself? And I will message a few members after dinnerJeffpw 18:24, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Don't Worry I Won't "Have-a-go-at-Dev"

Hello Dev, my apologies if the criticism of the LGBT barnstar seems a bit rough. Honestly any barnstar that has been proposed always is likely to be contested in order to see how much the community is certain in the desire to add it. The barnstar I have proposed for Wildlife faces similar challenge, some argue that the Bio star is enough, or that the design can be different, or similar. I view their statements as valid arguments. Give the barnstar some time to mature on the page and maybe there will be enough supporters to come and have their say. I honestly feel evrik is not trying to push an agenda, he just has a slightly overly blunt way of saying his opinion but I see for what reason he feels that he needs to do that. All in all I feel barnstars representing any community should be given at least a fair and just chance. I hope you have not had a stressful week either! Anyways I'm off to cruise Recent Changes, feel free to leave a message on my talk page any time.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 20:22, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

• Check my talk page.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 20:38, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

As per your request:

You are very very close, if not in fact crossing the line, of WP:CIVIL by your actions on the proposed barnstar page. Please stop hounding those who disagree with you. I have noticed that on your talk page you indicated that you had to take a break from wikipedia because you became sick. I submit to you that it may be because you (1) believe that somehow you can call into question the judgement of others when they have honest disagreements with you, (2) question them when they call into question how this conduct of yours is very likely itself a violation of the rules of civility, (3) choose not to respond to their arguments directly when they do make them, and (4) overreact emotionally when they remind you of this. You are the one who saw fit to interrogate anyone else whenever they disagree, and now, after I have supplied reasons as per your apparent demand for my justification of my opinion, you continue to act as if somehow you are the party being wronged. I have never to my knowledge had any contact with you before, nor do I have any reason to actually want any further contact with you beyond the minimum required to do that which I am trying to do to enhance wikipedia. I sincerely hope that you will refrain from continuing to cross-examine those who have honest disagreements with you on the proposed award. I sincerely hope that you will try to distance yourself from the issue and cease your attempts to interrogate and otherwise call into question the fair judgements of those that honestly disagree with you, because I personally believe that it may have been your own reactions to wikipedia, not wikipedia itself, which made you sick. Please refrain from continuing to harrass those who disagree with you regarding the award. In fact, given your health complications, I think it might be a good idea if you stop watching the page completely, and simply wait out the two weeks Evrik, who has over the months given me the impression that he may be the only editor actively involved in all of the proposals made on that page, noted is the standard time for discussion to see if it is approved or not. Certainly, questioning others and attacking them for disagreeing with you will not help you or your health. I anticipate, and honestly hope, that I will receive no response on my talk page to this, just like I hope that you will allow the current nomination to continue without your further questioning of the judgement of others. Badbilltucker 20:51, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

This, that, and the other thing :-)

First, don't let the bastards get you down, Dev. You were unfairly attacked on a personal level, and I will give you my complete support if Badbill does, in fact, seek arbitration. After what I saw on the Barnstar page, I think now that there is, indeed, an agenda behind it all. If you go to Talk:John Bosco you'll see that evrik has reacted negatively about LGBT issues in the past (I found that page when I was looking over the LGBT notice board you feel needs to be deleted). We'll have to wait and see what happens, but hopefully others will chime in with support.

About the notice board: I agree it doesn't do much to add to the project, but wonder if it really distracts, since there has been almost no activity on it for months. If you have any ideas about how to jumpstart the project, I'm all ears and will be happy to help. Take care, and I am sending electronic happy thoughts your way! Jeffpw 21:40, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

• If you need any help with the mediation (I don't know how the process works) feel free to call on me. I do feel he unfairly provoked and attacked you.

If you want to make some lists of things to do on the LGBT project, I'd be happy to start cleaning things up there--that could be fun... after the Esperanza situation gets resolved, of course. I'm sure you are busy with that right now. I was just reading about it today.

Anyway, I am off to bed now. It's getting on midnight here, and I've worked 6 days in a row. Jeffpw 22:38, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

I just happened to see this because I was watching User:Evrik's page. If anyone thinks that Evrik's posts to Talk:John Bosco are somehow anti-LGBT, they need to read a little closer. Evrik's arguments are against introducing a non-neutral point of view into the article without any reliable sources. To think otherwise is to find conspiracy where this is none. Mike Dillon 02:26, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. Mike Dillon 02:34, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Request for Mediation

A Request for Mediation to which you are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the mediation subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Wikipedia:Barnstar and award proposals/New Proposals. For the Mediation Committee, Essjay (Talk) This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management. If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

This message delivered: 04:15, 19 November 2006 (UTC).

Concordia MfD

I made a comment on the Concordia MfD before noticing your request for closure. Sorry about that; I closed it now, so feel free to open whatever discussion you think might be useful. Opabinia regalis 05:22, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Admin Coaching

Hi Dev,

Thanks for your contributions to the recent discussions on Esperanza. I think a reformation of the organization is in order, and I appreciate your efforts.

However, I would like to discuss with you some comments you made on the page:

If the purpose of admin coaching is to educate users on how to edit, but everyone else is accusing you of gaming the system...

There are a few users who believe it is "gaming the system", but it is certainly not everyone. Also, those people who have stated it is "gaming the system" apparently have not looked in on actual admin coaching sessions. Could you provide links to where users have been taught how to game the system while under admin coaching?

(which I think happens and will continue to happen, simply because Esperanzans who see someone who has gone through AC and is up at RfA will immediately vote for them)

This does not assume the good faith of those Esperanzans who participate in RFA. As I am an Esperanzan who has participated regularly in RFA, I do not believe the comment that an Esperanzan will immediately "vote" for another Esperanzan. In fact, my strongest support comments were those for users not involved in Esperanza, and many Esperanzans have failed RFA, even multiple times.

Best wishes, Firsfron of Ronchester 23:52, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Merging Muslim Guild

Yes, if you're not busy, I would appreciate it. If you are busy, please wait a few more days until I am done with the arbitration and I'll do it myself. Thanks. :) BhaiSaab ^talk 17:07, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

RE: Esperanza Governance

I think it needs a strong governance to help make our goal a clear one, and make sure that things are properly organised and overseen. Its not crucial, but I think it would help a lot - as it does at the moment - • The Giant Puffin • 19:56, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Depending on the length of suspension, I suppose it would be OK. But I like the current system - • The Giant Puffin • 20:47, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar

‎

		The LGBT Barnstar
		The LGBT Barnstar is hereby awarded to Dev920 for her support of the article James Robert Baker, part of the LGBT project on Wikipedia, during its successful FA candidacy. Thank you! Jeffpw 10:15, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Updating your Barnstar, so you now have the proper award and not just the "temporary" Barnstar while it was still a proposal. Boldness is good, Dev! Jeffpw 10:15, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Reply

1) You got an LGBT Barnstar? Rock on. 2) Esperzana has a bit of a rift, as best as I can see it. The original organization was founded by some very strong contributors to Esperanza, many of whom were longstanding community members with tens of thousands of edits. It started as an excellent idea. Over time, though, the group reached out to people, and too many of the ones who took up their cause were what I like to call "social editors". They aren't bad people, but they see editing/writing/maintaining as secondary to their ideal of what it should be like. Most of Esperanza is inclusionist, eventualist, with a focus on softer, more social issues and a penchant for trying to do things their way. The problem is that these tendencies, when combined with the certainty that Esperanza does good things for everyone since it helped them, is groupthink.

I don't "hate" Esperanza, and I've been villified, rudely emailed, rudely insulted, and had my motives and even my good faith questioned too many times to take much of that organization at face value. Natalya is an excellent contributor. Editor-At-Large and Kyoko have personal issues that are so horrific that quite frankly I can excuse their defenses of Esperanza and are both reasonable people. The Halo is at least openminded to change, and Moreschi is one of my best friends. That being said, I'm afraid that if I take something to MfD I will be accused once again of agendaism. And with my feelings toward the org as a whole right now, they might be right. I will not be nominating anything for deletion until I've seen them operate under a completely revamped plan for a bit. There's no hurry. Their dog-barking Coffee Lounge, ridiculous games, and userpage award programs are gone, and their plan to ejaculate barnstars and smilies randomly without thought to actual achievement is also gone. What remains (stress alerts, tutorials, etc) has the potential to be of use.

I'm sorry to write so much, but all too often people try to condense shit into a phrase and the issue is very nuanced. --Elaragirl^Talk|Count 14:08, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Then again...check this out. Wow. --Elaragirl^Talk|Count 15:40, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

You helped choose Rosetta Stone as this week's WP:AID winner

AzaBot 16:22, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

How dare you steal my proposal

You devil!! I'll...nah, no problem. Just to say I appreciate your contributions to the EA debate - always a little fiery, but in good faith and for what you think is best - which is usually right. Keep going! Cheers, Moreschi 16:48, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Hey, the whole thing has come to resemble one big crash site, though not as bad as I thought it would turn out to be. Anyway, masterworks are usually formed out of the fires of adversity, and it would be good to see Esperanza fixed and made more productive: The crooked straight, and the rough places plain, right? Thanks again for devoting your time and helping out. Cheers, Moreschi 18:20, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

My Esperanza Charter Proposal

• Section 1: Natalya as Supreme Esperanzan Happiness Dicator.
• Section 2: Purpose. Esperzana is there to generate editor productivity through stress reduction and having a place for editors to talk and relax. This don't include dog barking noises or games, but alerts and noticeboards of stressed people and Civility Patrolling is fine
• Section 3: FFS, there is no council. Natalya may execute whoever generates dog barking noises.
• Section 4: Each program (outreach , alerts, campaign for kittens and snuggles, etc) will have ONE person overseeing it. These people will answer directly to Natalya. Once a year, Natalya picks new ones.
• Section 5: Anyone being a dick or unproductive gets the boot and their green E taken.
• Section 6: Any placement of kittens by an Esperanzan on Elaragirl's userpage will result in immediate MfD for all Esperanzan pages, user pages, and userboxes. Repeat offenders will be subjected to Extreme Deletion. Serial offenders will be required to source the article Cleveland Steamer.

Warning:The above statement is intended as sarcasm and is for the purpose of humor. Humor impaired inDUHviduals should find a clue if they take offence to this post. --Elaragirl^Talk|Count 17:15, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Esperanza Charter Debates

ATTENTION: A Poll will be conducted for all proposals starting at 12:01 December 1, 2006; please remember to debate the ideas beforehand [2] WikieZach| talk 17:55, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Smiley Award

Feel free to place this award on your user page, as a token of appreciation for your contributions. If you're willing to help spread the good cheer to others, please see the project page for the Random Smiley Award at: User:Pedia-I/SmileyAward

about your comment on Elaragirl's talk page

Hello Dev920, I couldn't help but notice your comments on Elaragirl's talk page under the heading "Esperanza", so I'm sorry if you feel this was an intrusion of your privacy (or Elaragirl's). I wanted to remind you that there is a spectrum of individual editors who claim affiliation with Esperanza, and some editors, how shall I say this? contribute less towards the mainspace than others. As for the governance issue, I personally don't understand the current structure and I don't feel as if they exert any influence on me at any rate.

I still think that an off-Wikipedia coffee lounge that has an obvious link on Esperanza's page is the best way to satisfy those users who like to spend their time in the lounge, and still address the concerns of those who are opposed to its presence on Wikipedia. What's one more click of the mouse? Just so you know, I had participated a little in the coffee lounge, but I got turned off of it because of the random dog barking and a series of dirty jokes which I felt were sexist, offensive, and not at all belonging on Wikipedia. Because I had participated only to a limited extent, my overall edit count (2971 as of 20:38, 22 November 2006 (UTC)) wasn't seriously affected when the coffee lounge was deleted.

I had proposed a hypothetical merger between Esperanza, the Kindness Campaign, and Concordia, and while I still think that many of their stated goals overlap, I also feel that Esperanza needs to better define itself before even considering such a merger, and feedback must be solicited from members of all three groups. I was unaware that Esperanza had a prior history of attempting mergers in the past. If you feel that my suggestion was naive and arrogant, chalk it up to my own shortsightedness, not to Esperanza as a whole.

I know that we may differ in our views of what to do with Esperanza, but at least the MfD and in particular comments by you, Elaragirl, and others, have given the impetus for Esperanza to examine itself. Thank you for that.

Since I've typed this much, I might as well invite you to review me at editor review. Thanks again for your participation in all of this. --Kyoko 20:38, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

re: your message, Esperanza, etc.

Hi Dev920, thanks for your message and especially for your well wishes about my depression. I'm currently taking both medication and receiving therapy for that, and it helps. It's not an instant fix, but it helps.

I'm not sure what to say regarding the suggestion that people ignore regular Wikipedia norms when they enter Esperanza. I'm still not sure what the advisory council actually does, so I can't answer that question either. As has been pointed out to me several times, participation in Wikipedia process is a weak point for me, and evidently this includes Esperanza process as well. For what it's worth, I don't recall having voted anyway. I don't feel stifled by the governance structure, but my participation in Esperanza is mostly limited to participating with Stress Alerts (both asking help and offering it) as well as trying to be nice in general. Rather ironically, the current MfD-related matters are probably the most I've ever gotten involved with Esperanza in terms of the amount of thought and effort I've put in.

I'm sorry that you were the target of name-calling. Behaviour like that goes against what Esperanza is supposed to be, and resorting to such actions only weakens the arguments of whoever is saying them.

I think I had mentally combined your comments about the "arrogance and determination of (Esperanzans) to set themselves apart" and the merger content, so I'm sorry for confusing the two and insinuating something that you didn't intend. By the same token, I never meant that programs of general moral support should be brought under the control of Esperanza. I should also mention that I am a member of all three projects mentioned — Esperanza, the Kindness Campaign, and Concordia — so I am an interested party from the non-Esperanza side as well. I once asked Kylu what exactly the Kindness Campaign did. She said something to the effect that members try to act with kindness, with the hope that the spirit of goodwill rubs off on others and encourages those others to act with kindness as well. A very freeform, decentralised project, as opposed to the structured project that is Esperanza.

If you're wondering what my position is, I personally would have no objections to Esperanza having no governance at all. In that sense, my proposal of a merger between the Kindness Campaign and Esperanza was meant in the sense that people would sign up as a pledge to try to live up to certain standards, that's all. I do think that programs like the Stress Alerts page play an important role, though.

I hope this clarfies how I feel about all of this. --Kyoko 22:32, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Let me also add that your compassion proves that you aren't "robotic", "cold-hearted", "heartless" or any of the other epithets that were given to you. --Kyoko 23:05, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Your Proposal on Arbitration

Your proposal on the arbitration page sufficiently answers that question, does it not? Have a nice day. BhaiSaab ^talk 17:45, 23 November 2006 (UTC)

ArbCom

My response to your ArbCom post. Thank you and straight strength. [3].Hkelkar 11:49, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

Your very high edit count

May I ask how you have acquired an edit count of over 150,000? What do you do on Wikipedia? You must feel utterly exhuasted! Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 21:05, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

I read WP, and fix errors I find. When I fix an error I like to fix all instances of it, sometimes this can be done by hand, sometimes it has to be. Where possible I get my bot (SmackBot) to do it, but even then I will run a few hundred edits testing the process. For example almost every album article has been modified by SmackBot , but there are other changes that can't be fully automated. Rich Farmbrough, 21:54 25 November 2006 (GMT).

Comment regarding your closing of the barnstar

Please don't take this the wrong way. However, you will note on the various other barnstars that have been on the list longer than the LGBT barnstar that they have been in discussion for a long time now. I believe the full description of the requirements for the award being finalized are at least two weeks of consideration and a "groundswell" of support. I personally question whether this award achieved the required groundswell with only about a dozen votes. I will not personally challenge the possible premature closing of the discussion, but think that at some point down the line someone else might. I don't know, but I can't rule it out. Also, I personally think it's best if we allow those who are more generally involved in such discussions to close them, as they tend to be more fully informed of the existing guidelines than those who are, shall we say, rather pronouncedly partisan in the affair. Just for your information. Badbilltucker 01:50, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject LGBT studies

Hello! Thanks to ask me if I want to join the WikiProject LGBT studies, and yes I have interests in it. Only, I need to know what I have to do to be in the group, I have never be a part of a group/project here and my english can make me shy sometimes lol... I just hope I can be "ok", you know. Just answer me to this and if it's alright for you, I would like to join! DaliJim, 3 December 2006

OK :-) I want to join! Can you just tell me... how please? Thanks! DaliJim, 7 December 2006

Response to Your Comment on My Talk Page

Coming in on Elara's sockpuppetry point, I will be watching your contributions from now on. Please consider editing more in the main article namespace if you are not a sockpuppet, as your current history looks deeply suspect.

Dev920, I am sending a link to this response to Elaragirl and to Doug Bell, who are both administrators [edit: it turns out Elaragirl is not an admin], and who can take appropriate action as they see fit. I have come across, in my travels on Wikipedia, the word "wikistalking." Plugging it into Google while limiting the search to Wikipedia pages yielded the following quote [4] from an Arbitration Committee decision, which may be of special note to you:

It is not acceptable to stalk another editor who is editing in good faith. (Note that everyone is expected to assume good faith in the absence of definite evidence to the contrary.) Once an editor has given reason to suspect bad faith, monitoring is appropriate, but constantly nit-picking is always a violation of required courtesy.

There are hundreds of administrators available to monitor problem users. [1]

Davenbelle (talk • contribs), Stereotek (talk • contribs), and Fadix (talk • contribs) monitored Cool Cat (talk • contribs) with the view to bringing problems he caused to the attention of the community. However, this has tipped over into effectively "wikistalking" or "hounding" Cool Cat, and so disrupting Wikipedia and discouraging his positive contributions. [2]

So, I suggest this to you. You obviously think I'm some sort of troll, villainess, or sockmuppet. Fine. I accept your opinion, or, rather, I accept the fact that I cannot change a stranger's opinion of me. I'm also not going to live in fear of you.

I also think that the sort of commentary that you offered above offers much room for doing yourself harm. You see, you and I had several differences of opinion on the MfD page for the poem, one of which centered around my belief that your initial 'keep' vote spoke of vagarities that weren't backed up. Your reply, which began with "Why don't you back off and chill out? Where the hell were you when Esperanza was being MfDed?", obviously shows that you do not feel warmly towards me, and I think it offers a very substantial case for bias on your part were I ever to perform something that was cause for disciplinary action. You do not seem to be very predisposed towards remaining calm when interacting with me, and I think it blemishes your ability to monitor me objectively.

Or, to be much more succinct, if a cop has a personal grudge against a perp, he may not be the best one to keep an eye on that perp in the future. Entirely apart from the issue of whether the perp needs monitoring or not — I don't feel, as the "perp" in question, that I do, but whatever — the cop staking out the perp needs to be free from possible charges of bias or taint, or else the case against the perp is significantly weakened.

So my suggestion is this: if you feel I'm a threat, hand off the monitoring to one of the hundreds of administrators referred to above who can carry on the monitoring task equally as well as you can ... or better, given their access to the admin tools. I guarantee them it will be a boring stakeout, but if you honestly feel I need observation, bring it to their attention. You see, I'm sick of the fighting — thus the reason why I left the MfD — and I don't want you following me around, breathing down my neck, and picking fights with me whenever I do something you personally don't feel is right.

This helps me by knowing that if there is someone breathing down my neck, it's someone with no personal history with me and someone with the sole intention of keeping Wikipedia free of "perps." This helps you by knowing that if I ever do do something that is quite thoroughly out of line, the charge will stick and there is no chance nor opportunity for anything backlashing upon you.

If you don't agree to this and instead plan to follow me around to "watch my contributions from now on," then let me know, and we'll escalate this thing as appropriate in whatever channels are appropriate here on Wikipedia. — Whedonette (ping) 06:03, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Size of projects

Please be advised, as per your comment on the proposed project awards page, that the Wikipedia:WikiProject Pennsylvania State University has been in existence since February, 2005. Given the number of people who have graduated from the school, the size and prominence of its college football program over the decades, and the number of professors who qualify for articles on them over the years of the school, its scope would seem to be enough to merit the existence of a project. Also, the fact that the project has existed for almost two years and is still active is evidence that the project, however limited the scope, is sufficiently real to qualify as a legitimate WikiProject and thus qualify for an award. There are certainly other editors who question the need for projects such as these single-college projects, myself among them. However, given the unqualified success of another "micro-project", Wikipedia:WikiProject The KLF, it is hard to question the development of other smaller projects at this point, and certainly perhaps more than a little out of line to question the creation of an award on the basis of questioning the existence of the project. Badbilltucker 16:33, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Comments

1) I am not fool enough to name the names of angsty admins insecure in their sexual nature who are overprotective of some LGBT articles. If you look , you will find. Since Whedonette doesn't identify with the Movement, it was a warning in good faith.

2) No, what I see is one editor getting too involved in the affairs of another editor. Being an edgy, sarcastic, hateful bitch myself and not inclined to call a spade an entrenching tool for earthworking, I see what you're doing as a bitchy little jab. You're more mature than that. You should stop. IF Whedonette is a sockpuppet and it's proven THEN I will drop the hammer on her. I might point out that people accused you of bad faith in the Esperanza trashburning removal of shitcrud MfD, yet you weren't acting in bad faith. I try not to accuse or assume anything about anyone cuz I don't give a damn, but that's me. I'm not ordering you or warning you or anything else except saying you could do better things with your time instead of pulling a Calton. And you know it. --Elaragirl^Talk|Count 21:52, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Hey! I'm rude and unpleasant too. I demand to be treated as such. :p --Elaragirl^Talk|Count 22:35, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Re: Your advice would be appreciated

The WikiProject guide will probably be of general use, even though it's incomplete. As far as your specific questions:

• By far the best way to get more members is by efficient placement of talk-page banners. (Before WPMILHIST developed its banner, it had only gathered about a dozen members in two years of existence.)
• For a small project, trying to emulate all the complicated structure of a large one is overkill. I would initially limit your efforts to two main areas:
  • Getting together an effective to-do list/announcement board.
  • Starting up article assessments.
• Once you're comfortable with those, and have gathered some more members, you can go for the more time-intensive things like project peer reviews and such.
• On a final note: having a good navigation template will do wonders for drawing editors to various parts of the project.

Hope that helps! Kirill Lokshin 02:21, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

You need to add the code to the template; see WP:PROJGUIDE#Advanced project banners. ;-) Kirill Lokshin 17:31, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

At this point, you need to create the categories yourself. There was some discussion of automating the process, but I don't think that's gone anywhere yet. Kirill Lokshin 18:17, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

LGBT WikiProject Newsletter

The LGBT studies WikiProject Newsletter! Issue I - December 4, 2006

Project News This is the first newsletter of the LGBT studies Wikiproject! Come and discuss your thoughts on it at the Wikiproject talk page. An LGBT Barnstar has been created for editors who have contributed significantly to LGBT-related articles. The LGBT Portal has been revamped and tidied. It's various sections could do with updating on a weekly basis. Please pitch in if you have the time. The main page of the Wikiproject has also undergone a bit of a rewrite. Your participation is welcome. James Robert Baker became the first known LGBT biography to become a Featured Article on November 22. It was written and nominated by Jeffpw. Well done Jeff! A discussion has been started on the WikiProject talk page about how to get the WikiProject going. Your thoughts would be welcome. Finally, five new users have joined the Wikiproject: Jeffpw, Ikasawak, Dev920, AliceJMarkham, and WereWolf. Please make them feel welcome!

To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please drop me a line. If you have any news or any announcements to be broadcast, do let Dev920 know.

Comments on the LGBT newsletter

Being my usual, picky self, could you wikify the date in future newsletters, please? ;o) — OwenBlacker 13:29, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

It means that users' preferences control the date format. Edit this section and see: 6 December 2006; December 6 2006 and 2006-12-06 all look like whichever is your preference to you, but they're all specified differently in the code. It just means people always get the date the way they prefer.

But bloody good work on the newsletter :o) — OwenBlacker 21:39, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, and no worries :o) — OwenBlacker 10:20, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

By the way...

You Rock! :) -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 07:19, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

• Allow me to second SatyrTN's comment! you do rock, Dev, and are my favorite Wiki contributor. Keep up the good fight! Jeffpw 10:10, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Speaking of tweaking the banner, I changed the image on it. Let me know if you think we should stay with the plain flag. -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 08:05, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Re: WikiProject LGBT studies

Thank you for the offer about joining the project, but I'd say I'd have to decline. :) I haven't been very active on Wikipedia lately. --AshyRaccoon ^{Talk | Contribs} 15:22, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

New Template

I like the Bi template, but do you think you can make one of Transgendered, too? Just so we don't give the appearance of exclusionism.....and by the way, can you believe anyone could get worked up over a pretty little flag????????????? Jeffpw 20:59, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

• Your point is valid, and well taken, Dev. However, perhaps similarly to Elaragirl, I have no patience for fools and bigots. I will try to exercise more tolerance and restraint, though I should say Wiki is not the be all and end all of my existence, so if I ruffle a few feathers I won't lose any sleep over it. And for the sake of clarity, I think if somebody says "I don't want to come across as a WP:Dick, BUT.....", generally speaking they know they are acting like a WP:Dick. Jeffpw 21:14, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Barnstar_and_award_proposals/New_Proposals#Hinduism_WikiProject_Award

Since you commented on the Hinduism barnstar proposal I recommend you looking at the new designs introduced by User:Priyanath. Thank you. Gizza^{Chat ©} 22:24, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

{{LGBTProject}} tagging

Hey, Dev, I noticed on some of the pages you've tagged with the LGBT Project that you're doing it with {{Template:LGBTProject|class=?}}. I'm sure it's just a copy/paste job, but you don't need the "Template:" in there, right? And it looks like we're making progress on tagging! -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 22:47, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Not a big deal - I've been rating as I go, anyway, so not a problem. Only one new member, eh? And we've really only been tagging for a day or three, so I guess that's pretty good! -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 22:54, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people

Just wanted to congratulate you on how great the A-E section of this list looks- both in terms of layout and thorough referencing. I've been trying to sort out the lack of references in the other pages and am starting to understand what a mammoth task it is to track everything down. -WJBscribe ^{(WJB talk)} 23:20, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Well I've started so should finish (as they say). Yeah, I'll join the project :). Do you have a view as to the standard of source needed for a reference? A lot of people (especially on the bisexual only list) are referenced to NNDB articles, which seem rather flimsy evidence. I don't see that as a source in the A-E section. Is there agreement that sites like NNDB are not a good enough source for listing someone by sexual orientation?

On a separate point, I'm amazed at how resistant editors are to providing references. Why argue so hard to list people without them when you could spend the time actually tracking down a proper source? -WJBscribe ^{(WJB talk)} 23:40, 7 December 2006 (UTC)