User talk:ElinorD/Archive05
I sent you one.--MONGO 13:38, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
I sent you another one...--MONGO 08:00, 8 July 2007 (UTC) Yum[edit]Thanks! Those look so good I almost reached into the monitor... of course it also might be approaching dinnertime. :) Antandrus (talk) 22:56, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
Re: An overdue thank you[edit]Elinor, I'm sorry I haven't replied to your note; I probably won't give a longer reply—I've caught the wiki-blues—but I wanted to let you know that I appreciated your note and the Viennese biscuits and that someone else did too. :) Again, thanks, Iamunknown 00:49, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
thanks[edit]Hello ElinorD, thanks for reverting the vandalism to Riana's talk page. I was going to do that myself, but sometimes the javascript I use runs slowly. I wonder if semi-protecting her page might not be a bad idea. Thanks again. --Kyoko 10:58, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
Hello[edit]I was wondering how that got removed from the history link and who removed it? It also got removed from my contributions. I thought I was experiencing deja vu. But I could of sworn I left that on there. I am sorry but that was wrong. Just hope she didn't see that. Have a nice day:) King Lopez Contribs 09:21, 8 July 2007 (UTC) What?[edit]You say I vandalized the christian page on April 8. How? A tag says I discriminated against christians. How? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Criticalbill21 (talk • contribs) 03:47, 9 July 2007. Here are the edits you made:
I have no idea what you are referring to when you say that "a tag says [you] discriminated against" Christians. The standard warning I sent you did not mention discrimination; it mentioned vandalism. I believe most Wikipedians would regard your edits, quoted above, as vandalism, or as extremely clueless. I hope that answers your question. ElinorD (talk) 15:34, 12 July 2007 (UTC) Abusive use of anon IP[edit]Hi ElinorD, I'd be curious to hear your opinion on this thread.[3] It would seem we are being asked to accept this kind of edit as a normal and acceptable event on Wikipedia.Proabivouac 07:40, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
Your block of Nleobold[edit]Thanks for the block of User:Nleobold. I've been trying to curb my impatience with his style and direct him to the policies and guidelines he needs to understand, but he appears to have no interest in doing so. The one-day block also failed to get his attention. Perhaps your block will convince him that he can't grind us down. JamesMLane t c 02:20, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
I did respond, and followed the insturctions you gave me, when you said I could remove any un-sourced material. You didn't even care enough to check for my reply. You give Wikipedia a bad name. I have tried to contribute with quality material, and all of you are complete losers, liars, and trolls. Nleobold 08:23, 14 July 2007 (UTC)Nicolas Leobold Thanks from this quarter for your good work on curbing this editor's uncivic discourse and actions. We have been patient with him and he is not engaging in a productive dialogue. Dogru144 14:28, 14 July 2007 (UTC) Interesting...I identify myself for the community, yet Dogru144 declines to. I guess he *IS* a vandal. Nleobold 20:11, 16 July 2007 (UTC)Nicolas Leobold, nleobold@msn.com
userboxes[edit]I have no idea where to start or anything on making userboxes. I was hoping that maybe you could offer some help? Savie Kumara 23:49, 11 July 2007 (UTC) PS. By the way, could you reply on my user talk page? That way, it will tell me when I get the reply.
Never mind, I figured it out =) Savie Kumara 04:32, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
Check your e-mail. Miranda 00:02, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
My dear friend[edit]My sweet friend, all I can say is, thank you from my heart for your support, and your wise and kind words, in this moment of need. In your own words, I know you'll patiently wait for me to get back to you,s omething I'd love to right now; but even if days pass, and you know why - know that you'll be with me at all times, holding my hand and helping me with a fond smile. You're special, important beyond words. I just can't find the proper way to say it - but I know I don't need to. You've seen inside of me, and you know exactly what I mean, my friend. Love you, Phaedriel - 00:06, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
TREYWiki[edit]Hi. I was curious why you reverted your blanking of User talk:TREYWiki. Given the user's stated intention to leave and all the circumstances, unless there is a serious reason not to I intend to delete both his userpage and talkpage, by request. The arbitrators are of course all administrators and would still have access to the deleted material. Please let me know if you see any serious problem with this. Thanks, Newyorkbrad 00:14, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
Hello[edit]![]() Vassyana has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing! I haven't talked to you much since your RfA. Just sending well-wishes and a smile. Vassyana 07:24, 12 July 2007 (UTC) Thanks for the smile, Vassyana. Good to see you around. I've been meaning to email you, but I have a whole list of people that I still have to email, so I hope you won't mind waiting. However, since we're talking to each other anyway, let me say again how much I appreciate the RfA nomination. I hope not to let you down. :-) ElinorD (talk) 15:34, 12 July 2007 (UTC) A star for you[edit]![]() ![]()
Thank you![edit]Thank you for your message, and your support! Cheers, Kat Walsh (spill your mind?) 01:45, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Hey Elinor, about the picture - The original URL was http://www.wyd.ie/images/Pope%20Benedict%202.jpg It's the site of a Catholic Youth Care center in Dublin. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lord Yaksha (talk • contribs) 00:50, 14 July 2007.
Nadler/Glick[edit]What is your problem? I followed your instructions. So, you didn't even read my response to your message on my page. So much for responsible administrators. Wikipedia is a complete joke because of you and fellow losers you defend. No doubt you are another Wikipedia Democrat. Haven't you realized yet that the Democrats are just as evil as the Republicans? (except for Ron Paul: www.RonPaul2008.com) Nleobold 08:24, 14 July 2007 (UTC)Nicolas Leobold
70[edit]I think you were too soft on the ED reader myself - Sharon's got enough on her plate as it is. Will (talk) 00:44, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
Unblock[edit]Thanks for being so quick - he seems ok and I found his "facts" fascinating - once I had checked them! I always hate to see a new contributor jumped on as it could encourage them to say "whatever" and vandalise instead of contribute. I will keep an eye on him and get back asap if there are real problems. Sophia 11:29, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
Sparkzilla block[edit]A previous RfC on the Nick Baker article had accepted the text and sources that are at the core of this dispute that have resulted in Sparkzilla's block. Sparkzilla may have a close relationship with the source journal, but there are other editors (including me), that commented in the RfC and that have commented on that article's talk page recently that knew this but still felt that the information was credible and appropriate for the article. Also, Sparkzilla was allowed to participate in the discussion on the article's talk page in the past and now suddenly wasn't allowed to. Therefore, I'm not sure that there was a clear case for a block here. Cla68 11:39, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
Unblock[edit]It's no problem, and yeah, I have no intention of reblocking. Thanks for your note. --Golbez 20:37, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks[edit]For reverting the userpage vandalism. :) — Moe ε 21:37, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
I'll tail onto this thank-you. I appreciate your apt choice of words, and your patience, which I will try to cultivate myself. Tom Harrison Talk 22:53, 17 July 2007 (UTC) Image copyright policy[edit]Actually, I think you'll find I was merely bringing the image into the infobox's proper formatting. I am full aware of copyright policy, thanks. DBD 22:40, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
Since Jack Shea died because of that car accident, BLP no longer is in play. The source is a good one ... a news digest, linked from various local news organizations (did you visit the link?). Please revert your edit. Duke53 | Talk 23:09, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
Defending MONGO[edit]Why do you keep protecting him? And for the record, While you were archiving it, I was busy replying and removing some of my vandalism.Because of the Edit Conflict, I went in after and readded, only to edit conflict with Tom Harrison, and then add it again. I am however, disappointed that once again, MONGO got off free. ThuranX 23:22, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
ThuranX, we don't use punitive blocks here, and your post immediately about mine is only bound to increase sympathy for MONGO. ElinorD (talk) 00:18, 29 July 2007 (UTC) notice[edit]Good day Admin , i guess both users Faisal Saddiq and Unites uploading Tons of non-free images , they could be a Sock puppetry accounts , along with User Jiddah_Saudi , they often vandalise the article Jeddah by the same way. Ammar (Talk - Don't Talk) 17:16, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks[edit]Hi ElinorD, Didn't notice your comment on ANI until just now; very kind of you to say. And, while I'm here, thanks for deleting the draft page last night. Still not sure what the best way to formulate such a thing is, but that wasn't it. --barneca (talk) 21:28, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
Thankee! :)[edit]Thank you so much for your kind words, and the heads up, Eli! :) And don't worry about the "tone", silly - now go to bed, and with a little luck, something will be sitting at your mail when you wake up ;) Sweet dreams, dearie! Love you, Phaedriel - 00:24, 22 July 2007 (UTC) Thank you![edit]It's very useful that I am on your watch list! Sophia 21:49, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
His excellency[edit]He's at it again, on talk pages this time. See [6], which preceeded [7]. I thought it was BS who has usually used IP's to circumvent his block, but the talk page post had the bitterness of HE's posts. It would be best if someone were to block these socks and protect the talk page of Muhammad so this banned editor cannot attempt to influence the project. Arrow740 07:56, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
Crystal Oscillators[edit]Hi ElinorD I note that you recently deleted the bode diagram plot of a crystal oscillator gain (placed by Snlevasseur) from the "Crystal Oscillator" page. For some reason, I can no longer see this plot when working back through the history (maybe I've missed dome of the tools - if so, I apologise). The plot looked essentially accurate to me, although I would have to check that it corresponded to its title. I would like to be able to check. Assuming that it is accurate, I would regard it as clarification of the text (once the title is corrected), rather than adding new material. It should, incidentally, provide much the same information as John Vig's figure 4 (which is referenced), except that the information relates to oscillator loop gain rather than to crystal unit impedance. (Re copyright: I would imagine that the author generated the plot (either using Matlab or public-domain SPICE) rather than copying it from an unreferenced article. If the issue is that you do not know who owns the copyright, I would be happy to provide a "virgin" version. Measured versions may be found at http://www.omicron-lab.com/customer_examples/pdf/Measuring_equivalent_circuit_of_Quartz_crystal.pdf http://www.k8iqy.com/testequipment/pvxo/Atlanticon2002V1R5.pdf , others at I wonder if you would consider replacing it - albeit with a corrected caption if necessary. If not, I believe the section entitled "Bode magnitude diagram" should be deleted in its entirety. Regards PhysicistQuery 10:40, 23 July 2007 (UTC) (Fyz)
Hi Elinor, Thanks. Also for your courtesy in messaging my talk page. Would it be practical to post the plot to my talk page, because my availability is patchy? What I would propose to do is check it out, and if I can't establish its provenance I will create (easy) and try to post (I will need to learn about tagging and how to post graphics) an equivalent new one. That would be based on a real oscillator, so there could be no copyright issues. Regards Fyz PhysicistQuery 21:15, 23 July 2007 (UTC) Hi Elinor, I've looked at the plot. Although it looks plausible, once you look at the numbers it becomes apparent that the "crystal" would need to be of a material not known to man, and that the circuit would be completely non-standard. I will create something a bit more realistic when I have time. Regards Fyz PhysicistQuery 08:40, 24 July 2007 (UTC) Hey there :)[edit]Hey Elinor, Just a quick note that the IP who was editing User talk:Newspaper guy 999 was me as commented on the checkuser, however he was unblocked as lack of evidence of a Molag Bal sockpuppet but doesn't this prove that he is a Molag Bal sockpuppet, he was autoblocked because the IP address who was originally blocked (217.43.214.178) is a blocked Molag Bal sockpuppet so its obviously him, he then removed it obviously realising he had given himself away. I will email you within the next few mins with a more detailed explanation. Regards, — Rlest 14:02, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
Cheese Bacon[edit]I saw you blocked Cheese Bacon and gave him an invite to try to plead his case with you. I speedied a few of his articles, and just wanted to give you some background. He isn't, so far as I can tell, a malicious vandal (except for those last couple edits, where he was pretty torqued). He's a kid that doesn't seem to understand the difference between Wikipedia and MySpace. He posts vanity articles about unpublished comic strips that he has created, and garage rock bands that he is in, and doesn't seem to grasp the meaning of "notability". Kww 20:55, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
Can you instruct Giovanni to stop changing the header of the message I posted. It is confusing because I posted the first message underneath - it looks as if I'm asking for arbitration and mediation at the same time. John Smith's 23:45, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
Amy Mihaljevic[edit]I have updated the photo to include the URL and Fair Use argument. Since this case is still unsolved, it is EXTREMELY important we include this picture along with the article. Police, FBI, and family hope that it will either spark a memory for someone or compel the killer to come forward. Thank you. -James Renner —The preceding unsigned comment was added by JamesRenner (talk • contribs) 03:25, 24 July 2007. Images of caves[edit]Hello, The images as well as the content used by me in my contribution are absolutely mine, so no question arise about copyright violation. Further an image of Borracave has been taken by wikipedia.org itself, if there will be any problem, I'll also replace the same. However I'm the admin of the site www.cave-biology.org. -Regards —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Biospeleologist (talk • contribs) 06:40, 24 July 2007.
George W. Bush[edit]It's not vandalism, it's the truth. Save your threats. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jtpwright11 (talk • contribs)
Abortion[edit]Abortion is murder, why did you remove my edit? -- Footballexpert 11:21, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
Image tags[edit]Seems I'm not the only one tagging :) Much appreciated however if you could follow the compressed format I've adopted in future, I've already amended the existing entries you made. The compressed format should be evident from the page concerned. :) Sfan00 IMG 17:57, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
Hello[edit]Please stop sending me threatening messages. If you continue I will be forced to stop reading your messages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.104.199.138 (talk • contribs)
Christina McKinney[edit]I left a notice on the talk page asking that if they plan to put a photo on the article that it be done under wikipedia guidelines. Robert Moore 01:13 July 27, 2007 (UTC)
Why was this image deleted from the server?[edit]It was a very appropriate picture for an article on the history of the home and personal computers. Is this image from a museum with the permission of the museum's owner acceptable? Alatari 20:04, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
There are hundreds of pictures taken by the owner of computers at the OldComputerMuseum. He has given me freedom to use any of those images. Using these images should clear up the matter. Why you say that is is nearly impossible to get your hands on a freely-licensed image is confusing to me. They seem readily available. Alatari 23:27, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
Do I need to go through the same procedure if the picture is one I personally took? Alatari 23:39, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
How do I verify that any image is free to use? How do I verfy this image? [Image:IBM PC 5150 Image.jpg|thumb|right|250px|A release photo of the original IBM PC (ca. 1981).] Alatari 23:46, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
Ack! Editing this one article has taken 18 to 26 hours so far and now I have another layer of verification. *sighs* Thanks for your help. Alatari 00:59, 31 July 2007 (UTC) Your note[edit]Thanks, Elinor, I'll take a look. Nice talk page color, by the way. :-) SlimVirgin (talk)(contribs) 19:54, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
SlimVirgin[edit]I'd start it off by saying there is a difference between concerned editor and harassment. What Ludwig Braeckeleer said is a very serious accusation that need to be looked into. Note that I am not siding with anyone, and have never met her (correct me if I am wrong) before. SYSS Mouse 00:33, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
Right to disappear[edit]I was looking for the process on "right to disappear" but could not find it. I will leave this case be, and in your capable hands Elinor...thanks for noticing and stepping in. Oh...and could you send me the link for the process I mentioned. It is not readily found under policies, it seems. --Kukini hablame aqui 13:41, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
You're right[edit]You're right. I didn't really think that one through. Sometimes I assume too much good faith. Andre (talk) 16:23, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
Your note[edit]Actually, I believe I prefer Wikipedia:Template the regulars. Even a regulars can be edit warring. DreamGuy appears to have a serious problem with both assuming good faith and being civil. I don't believe his reaction would have been any different if I'd customized my message. In fact, I did attempt to discuss his removal of the example See also section from WP:LAYOUT. You will note that it was actually removed. His first response was to deny that he had removed it and to immediately accuse me of bad faith. After somebody responds like that, I use templates. I'm not going to waste my time talking to somebody who is always right, even when he's wrong, and whose second response to most people is to whip out his WP:DICK. If somebody treats my first good faith effort to communicate as an attack, they get templates. Personally, I think that DreamGuy needs an enforced Wikibreak to adjust his whole attitude. He snaps at other editor's first attempts to communicate with him, then wonders why thy would rather template him than talk to him. Sheesh. IPSOS (talk) 14:14, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
Removal of comment[edit]Regarding this. Elinor, I had time to think and sleep on this issue. I understand your motivation. But please listen. You are going too far. You can justify the removal of a link to an attack site, you may be able to justify removal of gossip around a Wikipedia editor being attacked off site, but you can't justify removing discussion of people getting together to complain that their comments are being censored. Please pause for a little and think. How far should one go to "protect" the feelings of an editor? Don't your actions remind you of good old censorship, where the government controls information to "protect" its citizens? I don't believe your actions bode well for the future of the encyclopedia. You can reply here. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 14:50, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
I replied on my talk, under the "Support" heading. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 00:27, 30 July 2007 (UTC) Templating the regulars[edit][8] Bishonen | talk 14:59, 29 July 2007 (UTC).
Things have got a little heated here and I know I'm not being much help. If you have time could you take a peak as I know you are a calming influence! Thanks Sophia 15:17, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
|