User talk:Durova/Archive 55

Triple Crown

I would like to request the creation of a new triple crown for WP:FA, WP:FL and WP:FP creators such as myself.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 17:18, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

I see your steeplechase section. I can tell you I am almost surely never going to get a sound. I do not know code well enough to do much for the Chicago Portal. I could only see myself possibly getting a topic. You may want to reduce the hurdle to three or four. or come up with something new. 4 could be the 400m hurdles and 3 could be the 110m hurdles.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 07:30, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

TonyTheTiger (talk · contribs), if I could interject here, portals aren't that hard to work on to get to WP:FPORT once you get the hang of it - if you need some help with a featured portal drive for Portal:Chicago, let me know. Cirt (talk) 13:56, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Tony, your triple crown will be ready soon. Cirt's a great collaborator with portals; he's been invaluable to the textile arts project. We supply content, he supplies code. He demands more content, we strain to provide it, he does more coding. And actually if you can convert to .ogg files there are lots of important historic recordings you could upload. Pre-1923 and U.S. Gov't public domain would be among the easiest places to start. Best wishes! Durova^Charge! 08:55, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Cirt and I are working on Portal:Chicago. I have to figure out all my recent additions for the DYK verification. Then we have to figure out a few more wrinkles and I think it will have a good shot. I just think that with all the triple crowns you could make the standards similar for steeplechases and let some less extraordinary efforts get some type of merit with three or four. I am not so sure about .oggs because I have never used them.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 22:40, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

P.S. I may get distracted from steeplechase efforts because I expect a contentious battle with my next few in the WP:FAC pipeline (Jack Kemp, Bob Chappuis, Rush Street, More Demi Moore). In addition, I have lots of work to do to clean up Barry Bonds for WP:GAC.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTD) 22:47, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Don Murphy (3rd nomination)

There is some discussion of the moratorium there. You may wish to comment (and possibly correct me if I misinterpreted your earlier statements). JoshuaZ (talk) 20:51, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. I'll go have a look. Durova^Charge! 20:53, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Bluemarine socks

Please add 72.83.207.187 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log) to Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Bluemarine#Log_of_blocks_and_bans. Benjiboi 01:14, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi, actually I'm just about certain that wasn't Matt Sanchez who trolled you. It's an AOL account and Matt isn't in North America right now. He did an interview in France the other day. I fully support the block on that IP, though. That was completely out of line. Durova^Charge! 01:31, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I'll add that if your topic ban isn't lifted (see my post to AE) you're welcome to post concerns about the article to my user talk page. All I want is a well-sourced neutral article that complies with site policies. In the interests of full disclosure, I'll also mention that I do mentor Sanchez on Commons, mostly about unrelated image upload issues. He's expressed his concerns about the biography to me, but I do not proxy for him. And if there's anything I can do to reduce that trolling problem, please let me know how I can help. Durova^Charge! 01:37, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I feel that topic-ban is in error so will hopefully be a non-issue but appreciate your willingness to filter my contributions. As for that IP, please add as a possible WP:MEAT if nothing else and add your assessment that it likely wasn't Sanchez himself. Sadly this may be a new trend since his other socking was dealt with. Benjiboi 03:36, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:NotTheWikipediaWeekly

Thanks for your interest in coming and being a part of a conversation! - I'm going to host a chit chat at 00.00 UTC March 26th (which is probably tomorrow for most - it's 8.00pm east coast US) - it'd be great if you can come along, and I've created a new 'confirmed' participants section at the wiki page, which it would be great if you could pop over and sign, if you are indeed available! - I hope so, and I look forward to chatting tomorrow! best, Privatemusings (talk) 02:12, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Justanother et al

I am removing myself from this situation, including my restrictions, as they were not the core issue. If you wish to seek my input on this in the future, as with what I attempted recently, do not bother.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 08:08, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Just think....

...about all the sockpuppets you could conjure with this little contraption: http://www.dancingtoasters.com/html/knitmagic.html Why you'd be just like the Queen! :) Flowanda | Talk 22:54, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Gorgeous! Durova^Charge! 04:19, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:NotTheWikipediaWeekly

Thanks for expressing an interest in coming along to the next conversation - if you click above you'll see that we've confirmed a new date and time, and have also created a new 'confirmed participants' section (sorry about the extra hoops to jump through - but hopefully it'll help us figure out if 'everyone's here'!) - if you do happen to be free at the suggested time, that's great! - I'll create the 'room' about 30mins early, as usual, and please do pop in as soon as possible so we can iron out the inevitable technical problems in time for a prompt-ish start! thanks, and I look forward to chatting tomorrow! best, Privatemusings (talk) 22:29, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

JD Estes

I uploaded this fine US-OWI photo Image:JD Estes fsac 1a34896.jpg some time ago but could never find a good article for it. I thought it would make a good FP, but without encyclopedic value, it'll never make it (didn't pass at Commons because people were too put off by the propaganda value). If you have any ideas, that would be great. Thanks. howcheng {chat} 05:39, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I've added it to watchstanding. He's standing pier sentry. Durova^Charge! 15:16, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Excellent. Thanks. howcheng {chat} 23:08, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Note the timestamp. Jehochman ^Talk 19:51, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

(rolls eyes) Durova^Charge! 20:11, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

(mimics you) Jehochman^Retreat!

The Wikipedia Trolls

http://www.fanboys-online.com/index.php?comic=134#60

I hope they do not CSD Main page..:) Maybe we should nominate Google articles for deletion! See if they like it? Igor Berger (talk) 17:53, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Images

Dear both, here's one of the original shots (before retouching), if you have any doubts :) Cheers. PHG (talk) 21:37, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Just FYI, your expertise might be helpful in this thread: User talk:FayssalF#User Page. --Elonka 18:46, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I've commented. Durova^Charge! 21:20, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Just curious, if he were scanning in photographs from postcards or museum brochures, as opposed to taking them himself, would this kind of thing show up at all in the metadata? For example, Image:AndhraPradeshRoyalHearings1stCenturyBCE.jpg struck my eye. I searched on "earrings" instead of "Hearings" and found this.[1] It seems a different image based on the flash pattern, but the level of detail and arrangement and everything else seems identical. What are your thoughts? --Elonka 04:03, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

This element is legitimate. The metadata resolves to the same camera he used for the rest of the shots. He did some cutting and pasting in Paint Shop Pro afterward, probably to get a cleaner background than the one in the display case. I suspect the original shot had glare problems. These earrings are probably permanently mounted so you'd get the same arrangement in any photograph. Durova^Charge! 04:16, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Following up on the museum permissions issue, I've confirmed at both the Commons level and the Foundation level that PHG's uploads are a contractual issue between him and the museum that doesn't place WMF or any of its daughter projects at risk. Durova^Charge! 02:36, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXV (March 2008)

The March 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:05, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Images issue

SlimVirgin pointed out this site Icons that seems to be the origin of some images on Commons. Specifically This one, but I suspect there are others also. Any ideas on what to do? Ealdgyth - Talk 02:32, 3 April 2008 (UTC) See this page also, where it is claimed it is free for use. Image:StWilfrid.jpg. The main page of the artist though, says no commercial use. Ealdgyth - Talk 02:37, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Ah, you're right. That's a living artist who works in historic styles. I'll delete it as copyvio right away. Please let me know if you find any others. Props to SlimVirgin on an excellent catch! Durova^Charge! 02:43, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

The second one is hosted on en:Wikipedia, not Commons, so I can't delete it. The copyright rationale is false; I can't see any reproduction permission on the owner's website. I doubt there's a site-compliant fair use rationale for using a copyrighted image of this saint - surely some public domain icon survives from the 1300 years since he lived? I'd recommend deletion. Durova^Charge! 04:27, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, the RCC doesn't use icons like the Orthodox church does, so there may not be a contemporary image of him surviving. If there isn't one for the article, it'll survive the loss. Lots of medieval articles go without images, it's part of the territory. Do I need to do something about the rationale being off? Ealdgyth - Talk 21:55, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Oops, RCC. Still, there ought to be plenty of later images that have gone into public domain? Durova^Charge! 23:27, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

NOt that I can easily find. (i'm in the States, most of the windows and statues of him are in Britain) Like I said, it's not a biggie. I didn't even add the image, honestly. Somehow I think my accountant would strangle me if I said the bills for the trip to England were because I needed a picture of a statue! Ealdgyth - Talk 23:29, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Heh, well then I wouldn't oppose fixing the licence to a fair use claim and seeing whether that flies. Durova^Charge! 00:07, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

I suspect we can find other images, if folks would just go take pictures in cathedrals, or mark down the names of the statues/windows/etc. that they take. So, while I like the image, I'd rather not step on someone's living that way. Ealdgyth - Talk 00:16, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

A request about an image

Hi Durova, I have been bold this evening and uploaded my first image. I *think* I did everything right, even added the "local" tag, but I wonder if you would be so kind as to check my work. The image is here. Thanks in advance. Risker (talk) 04:15, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

What a flattering thing to be asked. Yes, it's lovely. A good start! The best thing would be to go ahead and port this over to Commons. Wikipedia's hosting requirements require images to be used in article space, but it'd be compliant with Commons project scope. Best regards, Durova^Charge! 04:21, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

You've got mail

No rush, thanks for your time, and sorry I can't increase the hours in a day to bring that backlog down... :P -Dureo (talk) 06:45, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Already answered. It's an honor. :) Durova^Charge! 06:49, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Triple Crown Backlog

Although I have a vested self-interest in speeding the process, the following offer is genuine – and of course would not extend to my own application. Is there anything I can do to help with the backlog of Triple Crown Noms? Just lemme know. – Scartol • Tok 14:12, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

SMX Long Beach

Hi,

My name is Jon Rognerud (New SEO Book Author: "Ultimate Guide to SEO" coming out April McGrawHill/Ent Press).

I was thinking of attending your session in Long Beach. I'm excited about it.

I was wondering if it would help me to position messages and updates for Wikipedia for my clients? I know the basics, but what are the guidelines? What are rules that would exclude some, and not others - while very similar? I get these questions a lot.

Hopefully I get a chance to speak with you!?

Best, Jon Rognerud http://www.jonrognerud.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.54.15.64 (talk) 21:38, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Hi, not sure what angle you have in mind, but I'd be glad to explain our site standards and policies. Durova^Charge! 21:45, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

A proposal

Hi Durova,

Could you please take a look at my proposal here [2].

I think this is important given the current waves of secular attacks on all religions. Thanks in advance.--Be happy!! (talk) 07:50, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Re: Featured sounds

The problem with most sound files, is that the uploader did not add enough information about the source of the file to meet criterion 5. Zginder ^{(talk) (Contrib)} 12:46, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Sigh... I guess you're right. Too bad, there. Thanks for the answer. Durova^Charge! 18:02, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

I'd like your opinion on some medical pictures

Hi if you don't mind I have some medical pictures that I think might be appropriate for Wikipedia and the Pyoderma gangrenosum. Would it be possible to send the pictures to you via email? Just a warning, these pictures are graffic and maybe too graffic for use, but to be honest, I really don't know. I just know this article could use a good picture of how nasty this can be. If you wouldn't mind, would you respond on my talk page about this so that I don't miss it? Thanks Durova, I appreciate you listening, --CrohnieGal^Talk 12:49, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

I'd be honored. Heading over to your talk page now to repeat the same. Durova^Charge! 16:04, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Wonderful, thanks, I'll get them together as attachments and send them to you. Please expect an email from me, Crohnie, which will contain attachments. I like to fore warn people that emails will have attachments so they are aware and expect it. If you feel like playing with them to make them more Wiki usuable please do not hesitate. I don't mind at all if you find you think they are acceptable to go ahead and put them up where they are needed. I don't know how to plus I just want to help so I don't care who gets the credit or anything. Thanks Durova, I hope you like them. --CrohnieGal^Talk 12:06, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Email sent! --CrohnieGal^Talk 12:19, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Commons ping

Not sure of the etiquette here, but you have a message from me at Commons. Carcharoth (talk) 15:36, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Replied. :) Durova^Charge! 18:01, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

a NotTheWikipediaWeekly message

Hi folks,

I've confirmed a time for the next conversation on Tuesday night, US time, (Wednesday, 02.30 UTC). Huge apologies that this isn't going to be good for Euro folk, and I know Anthony and Peter will likely be unable to attend therefore. It's possible we need a bit of a wiki effort at the project page to better organise and plan conversations - and I'd also like to encourage all interested folks to watchlist that page for updates / changes etc. which will probably be a smoother way of staying in touch than many talk page messages (though it's great that more people are expressing interest in participating...). With that in mind, if you'd like to reply to this message, please do so at my talk page, and I'll respond as soon as I can.

If you are able to attend at the given time, please do head over to Wikipedia:NotTheWikipediaWeekly#Confirmed_Participants and sign up - this is a great help in making sure everyone is around. We generally chat for about 10 minutes before 'going live' and the whole process takes about an hour, and I very much look forward to chatting to all!

best, Privatemusings (talk) 00:56, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Correct count

Right now:

• you=28694
• Me=28114

So you still have a slight lead.--Filll (talk) 00:31, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Eek! (edit, edit) ;) Durova^Charge! 01:04, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Do you guys edit in your sleep too..:) Igor Berger (talk) 01:06, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

We dream in text. Durova^Charge! 01:07, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

We need to integrate Wikipedia with Twitter, than we can really rack up! Igor Berger (talk) 01:43, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Boatswain's mate

Hello, I'm a member of the Milhist Project and I mostly copyedit, but I've noticed that this article seems to belong as a sub-article to the US Coastguard rather than as a stand-alone. The title has been around for centuries and this article coopts it to one time/place. I think the content should be copied to a new article for "Coast Guard ranks" or something like that and the title deleted until someone wants to write about the concept more generally.LuckyThracian (Talk) 08:08, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Why so? It's as much a Navy occupation as a Coast Guard occupation and BM isn't a rank per se; it's what they call a rate. Other rates get their own articles (List of United States Navy ratings) and boatswain's mate is one of the oldest ones. What this particular article needs is expansion and balance. Durova^Charge! 17:25, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I forgot that Bosun and Bosun's mate are the derived forms. When I remembered and searched them I found the article Boatswain. Now it makes sense. LuckyThracian (Talk) 04:10, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Triple Crown request.

Hello Durova, you awarded me a triple crown last year, and I've since met the requirements for the Imperial triple crown, I believe. FAs: Rise and Fall: Civilizations at War, Age of Mythology, BioShock, Cannon; GAs: Risk (game), Age of Empires III, Eugenio Espejo; DYKs: Close Combat: A Bridge Too Far, History of timekeeping devices in Egypt. I've still not been able to figure out how long it will take to get the Genghis Khan edition conquest of the wiki world triple crown... · AndonicO ^Hail! 18:17, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Ooh, I'll need to go do some updating. When I started the Alexander the Great edition I thought it'd take longer than it did to get any recipients. So now...who knows? Once somebody gets Genghis Khan I'll dangle just one more carrot: the only way to go bigger is to resort to mythology. So the last triple crown ever will be for 100/100/100. At that point, in some sort of parody of Greek legend, the editor eats Jimbo Wales for dinner and takes over Wikipedia. We've had editors get well over 100 DYKs and one editor has over 100 FPs, so it might actually be feasible. Durova^Charge! 18:40, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

FPs and DYKs are much easier to get than FAs (unfortunately), so it'll take a while, don't worry. In the meantime, I'll try to find an appropriate Greek myth. ;) · AndonicO ^Hail! 20:09, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Any type of featured content counts toward a triple crown. Durova^Charge! 20:43, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I see. Maybe I should take more pictures then (only have one FP... not nearly as impressive as Fir). · AndonicO ^Hail! 01:39, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

File:Goya-Saturnus.png

I'm thinking of Photoshopping Goya's Saturn Devouring His Son so it looks like a submarine sandwich with Jimbo's head on a bed of lettuce.

(outdent) That'd work. And if you have the stuff for it Wikipedia could really use more featured sounds. You've got my mental gears turning about the 100/100/100 award. Durova^Charge! 02:20, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

I'll try to find free use classical music, I'm sure there's quite a bit of it. I think you've nailed the 100/100/100 award; my photoshopping skills are abysmal, else I'd offer to help. How about "Greek mythology/Cronus edition eat Jimbo for breakfast and take over wikipedia triple crown," as the name (though perhaps that's too long)? · AndonicO ^Hail! 14:44, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Looks good. Finally someone realized that manipulating images is not encyclopedic. Nikkul (talk) 07:06, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

User:Jaakobou and WP:BRD

Hi Durova!

Is User:Jaakobou still your mentoree? After making a number of somewhat WP:BOLD edits to the article Avigdor Lieberman, two other editors and I reverted and engaged him on the article talk page. The discussion is still underway, yet User:Jaakobou insists on repeatedly injecting his contested version into the article, accusing the other editors and myself of tag-team edit-warring.

This is obviously not the way WP:BRD works, and I have tried many times to explain this to User:Jaakobou. The last attempt ended here, in rather bad form.

Could you have a word with him, i.e. explaining to him how WP:BRD works, before I take this to WP:AE?

Cheers and many thanks, pedro gonnet - talk - 11.04.2008 13:19

I've inserted a completely different version, a huge compromise which included addition for the English translations from the Hebrew sourfce. Please apply the "discussion" part of BRD, rather than repeatedly try to cite it against me. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 13:50, 11 April 2008 (UTC) more context, 13:53, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and did I mention he has stalking issues? Anyway, I would be very glad if you could have a word with him. Cheers and thanks, pedro gonnet - talk - 11.04.2008 13:57

Whew, how about a cold glass of water and a walk around the block on both sides? I'm pouring my morning coffee here and I'll be glad to talk. Durova^Charge! 16:13, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Image issue

[I quoted PageantUpdater with a message she left on User:HowCheng's page:]
I know you're busy but could you please take a look at something quickly? There is a dispute about the lead (infobox) image at Susie Castillo. The alternatives are a low-res headshot that is face on, and a hi-quality hi-res version that is a long photo and not such a good photo of her face. My argument is that the smaller image should be in the infobox, because regardless of quality issues, the proportions of image itself and the angle of the face are more suitable. I argue that "I disagree with your reasoning, and highest quality needs to be the lead. Also, for someone who is a beauty pageant contestant, full body works better anyway". We're not going to get anywhere with this and I would appreciate another opinion, perhaps at the article talk page? Thanks. --David Shankbone 14:44, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Done. I hope it helps. Durova^Charge! 19:19, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

NTWW

Do you know whether it's possible to listen live? Dorftrottel (harass) 18:28, April 11, 2008

Yes; if you prefer to listen you could join the chat and remain at listening status. You'd need Skype for that. Durova^Charge! 19:11, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Great! I have Skype, but how do I join? Or would someone invite me? Dorftrottel (canvass) 19:39, April 11, 2008

We'll post a link at the NTWW page. Suggest you e-mail me as a backup; due to the Skype traffic at this hour we may need to go to a backup plan. Durova^Charge! 19:53, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Y Sent. Dorftrottel (criticise) 20:14, April 11, 2008

Wikiproject you may be interested in

Dear Durova, you may want to join this project. Considering your work on the cultural depictions of Joan of Arc article, I think you would be an asset to this project. Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 18:33, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

I'd articulate that support for different reasons from the ones given, but sure. Not certain how much time I'll have to work on it. Basically agreed, though. Maybe sometime I'll write an essay about why. Durova^Charge! 16:26, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Great! I'd be happy to see such an essay and possibly add it to my list. Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 19:41, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Adam JWC and camera lenses and metadata

Re the ANI thread on same, whilst generally agreeing that there is cause for concern, I was also concerned at misinformation (not intentional) - it is fairly simple to point out any number of possibilities for metadata inconsistencies or absence, from "What Lightroom export options are used", to "Where data is embedded, be it EXIF or IPTC", to "What format is used for export or import into Photoshop, be it TIF, RAW, JPG, and status of import filters in ACR (Adobe Camera Raw)" through "What options are used for Export from Photoshop, be it Save As, Save For Web, format used, Web Save metadata options" - not at all conclusive, and quite possibly inconsistent, given the ad hoc and inconsistencies of human nature.

Further, a quick check on Google revealed several after market lens adapters and extenders for the Fuji S5700, including a wide angle fisheye lens (which you had said did not exist for his camera). Further, though I will apply a due grain of salt here, as history review has not turned it up again, I had found (not necessarily for his model) an aftermarket adapter that claimed to allow use of all Canon EF lenses (though even if it does exist, I have my doubts as to its effectiveness).

I added these points to the ANI thread, and wanted to flag them with you, not as criticism, but in the spirit of informing. Achromatic (talk) 18:57, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Why are you raising this days after I accepted Adam's explanation about the metadata? Under the circumstances it was perfectly reasonable to question that - he had actually threatened to perpetrate wholesale copyright violations of another photographer's work. I raised several points, asked for an explanation there, and accepted this portion as soon as he provided a reasonable answer. Most of the remaining questions are still unresolved, and it's a little bit frustrating to see the others languish while people return to the part that's already wrapped up. How about the Bin Laden issue? Durova^Charge! 19:10, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Because the points I made are still valid, and I don't want to see possibly incorrect conclusions being drawn in other cases on the basis of flawed hypotheses. As I specifically qualified re this case, "agreeing that there is cause for concern". It doesn't make my points any less valid - I didn't realize there was a temporal limitation on responses, or issues raised thereon. Achromatic (talk) 04:23, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Well, I've posted twice to that thread that discussed it. So that shouldn't be a problem in the future, and if it becomes one please ping me. I think Adam might turn out all right after all. Durova^Charge! 05:32, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Your mentoree, again

Do you think you could discourage him from posting notes on talk pages warning other editors, even those he has disagreements with, against editing in places where he doesn't want them. Especially when he does it in response to an initial offer to collaborate on improving and expanding an article. Accusations of "not being neutral" are also a bit wide of the mark, which has long been Jaakobou-speak for "disagrees with me".

And while you're there, you might want to encourage him to respond a bit more positively when another editor - ie me - very politely (at first) points out to him that he has introduced a couple of minor errors into an article, and also says that he will leave it up to Jaakobou to put right rather than reverting his input. He spent most of the next twenty four hours fighting over content on other articles, rather than spending two minutes to correct those basic and uncontroversial errors. Thanks --Nickhh (talk) 15:04, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

And since I started, can something also be done about constant accusations (this wasn't the first) of tag-team editing against three independent editors who just happen, of course, to broadly disagree with a lot of his edits. As well as his behaviour in removing third party comments from a MedCab page. --Nickhh (talk) 15:21, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Dear Nickhh,

1. I apologize if my suggestion that us involved editors leave the decision on keeping/merging the article to less involved editors seemed to you as a warning, I assure you that was not my intention. I do however still believe (see reason (1), (2)) that you might not be the most neutral person to approach this descision of how to pursue a possible merge (or keep).
2. As I've noted you before, if I've missed some gross error, you can correct it.

With respect, Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 15:35, 12 April 2008 (UTC) added diff. 15:51, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

1) Then why didn't you write "We should probably let someone more neutral handle this ..", instead of "You should .."?

2) I'd have thought my professed interest in preventing Wikipedia from being used as a forum for bashing a particular ethnic or national group was evidence of my neutrality, not the opposite. Unless they deserve bashing?

--Nickhh (talk) 15:45, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Dear Nickhh,

I apologized for my error-ed phrasing, though I think it was fairly clear when reading the entire thread.

Content-wise, I think that the events should be written as they were reported, without over-emphasis or minimizing.

With respect, Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 15:57, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Looks like this played out while I was sleeping (GMT-7). Is this worked out now? Durova^Charge! 16:23, 12 April 2008 (UTC)

Well these specific issues are more or less done with now, but these things seem to keep happening. --Nickhh (talk) 09:13, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

I really wish I had a magic bullet for that. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. I guess we'll have to take this one day at a time. Durova^Charge! 18:08, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Sorry but instead of merely being "not neutral", editors who disagree with Jaakobou now have a "conflict of interest", apparently, and are being warned off participating in debates about merging or deleting one of Jaakobou's favourite pages here, because they have a view different from him as to what to do with it and as to whether the subject matter needs a whole separate wiki-page devoted to it. Because I have a view, I am apparently not allowed to express it - especially because it does not accord with his. I'm all for content disagreement and even robust debate, but this is something else, and is a direct repetition of the behaviour referred to above. I'm only coming here again in order to hold off going to WP:AE. --Nickhh (talk) 20:03, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Nick, some editors have a different definition of COI than mine. I do not agree that a strong opinion constitutes a conflict of interest. As a separate matter, I think it's often a good idea to recognize areas where one cannot be neutral and recuse oneself from them. My choices are stated at User:Durova/Recusal. You, Jaakobou, and others each make your own choices there. Durova^Charge! 20:20, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Well the COI guideline here relies on pretty much the standard definition in the wider world - that is, someone having a personal, professional or financial etc interest. As the article is related to the I-P conflict, arguably Jaakobou is far nearer to COI than I am, given our respective nationalities. Plus the views at issue here are not about taking "sides" over the fundamentals of the conflict (even if Jaakobou has me down as a fanatical pro-Palestinian, whatever that means anyway), but about what I think of the notability of specific material and the value of one specific page. It would be an odd conclusion which says that I shouldn't make my opinion known when that issue is being discussed. And beyond that rather academic point, the reason I bought it here is because of Jaakobou's behaviour in trying to order me off a discussion page - for the second time in three days. --Nickhh (talk) 20:34, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Nickhh,

I've never once pegged you down as a "fanatical pro-Palestinian" and now would be a good time to present a diff if you have one. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 21:02, 15 April 2008 (UTC)

Apologies, I was using a bit of dramatic licence there. However as the diffs above show, you frequently claim I am "not neutral" or even have "conflict of interest", and I am assuming you don't have me down as a fanatical "pro-Israeli" editor. Actually the reality of course is more subtle than that - I am a partisan of neither "side" and have no stake whatsoever in the underlying conflict. However, as an outside observer, when I see blatant attempts to push a point of view into articles and use Wikipedia as some kind of advocacy site, I react against it. And given that English wikipedia is mostly edited by Westerners, the greater amount of any bias here often tends to favour a broadly Israeli perspective, even if you don't see that from where you're sitting. --Nickhh (talk) 08:05, 16 April 2008 (UTC)