User talk:GRBerry/Archive 1

At this point I became an admin. Subsequent archives are by bots, so in the order conversations became stale rather than the order they were created.

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Welcome, my brother. I am a fellow Alpha Phi Omega Alumnus (Kappa @ Carnegie-Mellon, Pledged Fall '86). You may want to add yourself to the aphio_wikipedians. Go to http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Category:APhiO_Wikipedians and add as it says.

YiLFS Randolph Finder - Naraht 02:00, 20 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot #1

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs: ~~Reny's - improved, left stub tag as someone wants an image~~; Western Maine Mountains - declined, but was a possible; Thirumoolar - Not interested; ~~Roman Catholicism in the United States - Done~~; Maine State House - Not interested; Thirumandhiram - Not interested; North Rock - didn't google anything to add; ~~Maine Highlands - destubbed via google book~~; Andover Elementary School - Not interested; Siddha - Not interested; Israel Washburn, Jr. - Not interested; Oak Hill High School (Maine) - Not interested; Israeli judicial system - Not interested; University of Maine at Farmington - already non-stub; Territory of Sagadahock - didn't google anthing to add; Sambation - Not interested; ~~Oyster Shell Heaps - Done with rename~~; ~~Sebago Lake - Done~~; ~~Aroostook River - Done~~

Cleanup: Kappa Delta Phi - Not interested; North Woods - Not interested; Political status of the West Bank and Gaza Strip
Merge: Tsourtougousous - Not interested; Lists of Jews by country - Not interested; ~~Jude Thomas - Decided not to, removed merge tags~~
Add Sources: Bruce Metzger - Not interested; Skull (symbolism) - Not interested; Earnings per share - Not interested
Wikify: Silvanus of the Seventy - Not interested; Anu - Not interested; Madshus - Not interested
Expand: Vezins, Maine-et-Loire - Not interested; Telecommunications rating - Not interested; Coming of age - Not interested

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 13:52, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just finished that post. FrankB 20:45, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I may have been off a bit - contrast with Appalachia -- which is where I started a chain of edit stops through that article. If nothing else, we both know it's both too short and needs a map. Have to run... taxi Dad time! FrankB 20:50, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Corporate fascism

Hi, the article in question in no longer a Redirect, the info is back up, so if you are still in interested in sharing your thoughts at the AfD discussion page, you now can! Editors are attempting to blank the article with a redirect, so apologies if the information has disappeared by the time you get back there (its all in the history at any rate). Jdcooper 10:46, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

done earlier today, thanks GRBerry 01:09, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pseudohistory

i have rewritten entirely. I think the neutrality tag could be removed? ElectricRay 18:34, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

done GRBerry 01:09, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AfD: Struck jury

I withdrew my nomination ... I'm still not sure if I can technically do that or not. I also moved it to Struck jury to be in line with WP:NC#Lowercase_second_and_subsequent_words.

Thanks for expanding it! Jesuschex 16:47, 10 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rona Ambrose

Can you please explain why you deleted half of this article? Mattpope 00:16, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for responding so late. I can't remember why. My edit summary shows that I thought I was reverting some edit that was invalid, but even I don't understand in retrospect. GRBerry 19:29, 24 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Userboxes: A New Proposal

Hey, I've noticed that you've been active on the Userbox deletion page, either strongly FOR or AGAINST the use of the new T2 for deleting userboxes. I have noticed that most of the community is strong in their opinions on this issue; for that reason, I created my own proposal which attempts to create a middle ground for the two groups, and finally get this debate settled once and for all. I welcome your input into the proposal, as well as your (non-binding) vote on the straw poll. Thanks! // ^The True _Sora 01:31, 20 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

T1, etc

I'll have a look. -GTBacchus^(talk) 03:20, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Userbox Compromise

What are you looking for in a compromise? —David618 ^t 21:23, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Guantanamo detainee

Thanks for the heads-up Geo Swan 02:06, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ping; firefox images

See; [1] -- ∞Wirelain 03:39, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank You

Your comments are great. PoolGuy 04:32, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The German solution

I think the war's over. It's been a pleasure working with you. -GTBacchus^(talk) 01:54, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the credit primarily goes to Jimbo, that is for sure. I found it a pleasure to work with you also - nuanced responses are better than the alternative. I know the preservationists are still worried about whether the deletionists will come after userboxes in user space, but since I never gave up on assuming good faith, I'm not too worried. (Slightly longer answer to follow on your page.) GRBerry 02:00, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just can't believe this didn't find its way onto WP:JOU until Ashley Y found it two days ago, and I only just now saw it. I see we pushed the "if it walks like a template" clause off the boat a full fortnight ago. This will be an interesting experiment, see Tony's reply to me on his page. -GTBacchus^(talk) 02:25, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I believe that is a legitimate but vastly overstated risk given the examples found for the T1/T2 debate page. I'm going to go modify the WP:TGS page to suggest getting rid of user categories that are tied to boxes, because most of the problem examples seem to have been primarily user caregories. My view of AFD is that most of the stacking concern comes from off-Wikipedia stacking, not on-Wikipedia. However I tend to review each day's nominations early the next day, so I don't see the full amount seen by closing time. If Tony has bought into this even that much, we are indeed on the way to resolving the war. GRBerry 02:35, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It was impossible to find a test case proving that boxes are the problem, because it would have to be a box with no category attached, or any sane vote-stacker would use the category, as more efficient (one click from home, as opposed to two). Since there were no such boxes of relevance, there was no distinguishing example. We'll have to address vote-stacking as a behavior problem, and be sure to boldly close AfD's against a flood when appropriate, without being daunted by the numbers. It's true about Wikipedia not being a democracy, but flooding being nonetheless effective because it's a rare admin who'll close as delete without the numbers behind her. Convincing people that those discussions aren't votes is the hardest thing, for some reason. -GTBacchus^(talk) 03:41, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ABF talk

Sorry, where's the link? :-) Rfrisbie^talk 14:29, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reminder

Thanks for the reminder re Lakambini Sitoy. I will just delete the quotation to play it safe. The rest of the article were originally written based on sources available and not just "cut and paste" from the original sources. - 7258 16:29, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Goldfish Dieseses

I think it would be better off as just a list. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Abyab (talk • contribs) .

Redir and Article creation

Hi to a fellow MIT alum and thanks for the advice! I'll be sure to do this in the future. By the way, the article in question, Wilkerson Pass, has now been created (about 5 minutes after I made the redirect). But I understand why it's a bad idea to create the redirect first. Nationalparks 17:10, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, Wikipedia:Special pages says: "redirects to a random page from the main namespace which is not a redirect". Nationalparks 03:10, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Forgot to sign

You forgot to sign your welcome to User talk:Charles Cassidy - might be a good idea to go back and do that. Λυδ α cιτγ^{(TheJabberwock)} 01:30, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And thanks for the welcome! --Charles Cassidy 10:17, 6 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DYK

Contents moved to User:GRBerry/DYK. GRBerry 13:15, 6 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking a fair look...

Thanks for taking a fair look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shaker Aamer.

Two more articles about Guantanamo detainees have been nominated for deletion:

Would you feel up to taking a look at them?

Shall I let you know if other articles about Guantanamo detainees come up for deletion?

Thanks. -- Geo Swan 01:55, 10 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You are welcome to let me know. I ususally skip proper names when reviewing AFD. I see too much evidence of advocacy on some of these AFD discussions, and would like to help offset that. GRBerry 14:47, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

DRV comment

No, I think I meant that. Since Wikipedia is not a democracy, what's the justification in complaining about XfD not returning the correct results? If XfD is wrong, bring it to review. Even better, close XfD in the right way to begin with, by paying attention to the policy arguments brought up, and not slavishly to the numbers. -GTBacchus^(talk) 04:16, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Precursor of Democratic Party

Your comments may also be applicable to the Talk on Democratic-Republican Party. Griot has included the same statement in the first sentence of this article. Another editor also removed it but he has added it back so we're discussing it in that talk as well. I believe it should be included in the article but it is discussed much better in the context of history presented in the article itself. I think adding it to the first sentence gives the wrong impression. Thought you may want to add your thoughts as you presented it well on the Jefferson page. Morphh 15:51, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh.. on the FairTax question. I've asked one of the Americans for Fair Taxation guys. The South East director for AFFT is a CPA and is very familiar with this question. I know there would be a large boom in the area of investing which tends to generate a lot of year round business for this field of work. Morphh 15:58, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

3RR and Islam

I know. I can't revert any more. But this is all getting very frustrating. I've listed Islam at Wikiquette and RfC to get consensus, with the net result that you said that it should be on there; the talk page is full of my attempts to get discussion on the topic, which meant I debated a single user for five hours cos we didn't udnerstand each other, and to get any kind of a response out of bhai saab as to why he keeps reverting - and I'm getting no response beyond "it does not belong here". All I want is a h3 section to allow greater accessiblity under WP:SS. What can I do now? Dev920 19:13, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Answered at User talk:Dev920. GRBerry 19:29, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can't go for WP:3O, because I had the same revert debate witha different user. Page protection only lasts for 15 minutes, and bhaisaab has already reverted it, so it doesn't need to be proetected. Have I missed a dispute method? Dev920 19:38, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Me and tony

Two comments:

The "whack his peepee" is a reference to a Cheech and Chong skit. I thought it would be readily recognized as humor; obviously, I was wrong.
The rest of my comments are on Tony's actions, not Tony himself, and I believe are within the bounds of fairness, given Tony's history.

To which were you referring? Jay Maynard 01:18, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh. Simply put, I've got no use for the guy. I haven't seen a thing he's done that hasn't been in direct opposition to the idea that userpsace is for users, and whatever happens there is harmless (as long as it doesn't violate NPA, etc). As far as I can tell, he's of the opinion that anyone who doesn't exclusively edit encyclopedia articles is worthless and should be driven off with extreme prejudice. His actions in the userbox wars, and now the latest deletions, do nothing but reinforce that. I can't help but believe Wikipedia would be better off without him.

Further, he slings similar accusations, and nobody threatens to block him for NPA. He occasionally gets a light reminder, but nothing more, and in particular, his disruptions of other folks' attempts to reach compromise and consensus are actively harmful to that process.

I get frustrated by the appearance that the rest fo the community - especially those with power - coddle him while holding the rest of us much more strictly to the rules. How many other folks have been to RFC and RFAr as many time as he has?

Someone has to point out that the emperor is naked. If not me, who? Jay Maynard 01:32, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ainsley Waugh

Hey -- I deprodded this. I'm a little confused by your prodding here. I think CSD A7 definitely applies, but I think what you were saying is that with expansion, the article would be keepable. So you were saying that you added Prod to highlight it? I think that's a bad decision, so I removed the prod; and yes, I think the guy is likely notable. Prod is a lousy way to highlight articles, because hardly anyone checks prods. I'm going to leave it up to you to tag the article as speedy or to AfD it or whatever. IMO, the stub tag is there, specifically, to encourage expansion... but on the other hand, if it became a redlink it would encourage expansion even more actively. Mango juice^talk 03:51, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: User:67.9.135.185

Just to let you know, this user actually reverted vandalism, though the missing section was not restored until your edit. I have fixed the user's talk page. :) RadioKirk (u|t|c) 13:40, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

NP. I just restored your sig to the welcome, since you did it first. :) RadioKirk (u|t|c) 13:43, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads-up

Thanks for the heads-up on Qari Esmhatulla. Good eye. He is one of the detainees whose name was spelled differently on the DoD's April 20th and May 15th official lists. I have merged the two articles I created under each name. Thanks again. -- Geo Swan 14:48, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ICCEC page

Hey, thanks for the message. I really haven't done much to the ICCEC page other than fixing grammar and style errors and adding a picture, so I'm not really responsible for its present content :)

BUT.. I actually think I could do some good for the page, and I'll try to flesh it out. I do have some worries because I am a member of the denomination and would obviously have POV issues, so I would REALLY appreciate revisions of anything I might add, to bring it up to speed and make it more NPOV and generally wikipedia-like.

Kennethmyers 19:32, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Examples of Blindekuh replication

I saw your edit in Blindekuh (restaurant). Do you have any specific examples that we could add? Rl 15:10, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fascinating, I didn't know that. Thank you for the links. Rl 16:12, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Psst. R-e-s-t-a-u-r-a-n-t. :-) Rl 19:00, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Subsequent archive at User talk:GRBerry/Archive 2