User talk:Jaxl/Archive03

Thanks for your support on my RfA!

Thanks for your support of my adminship!! I was surprised at the turnout and support I got! If you ever have any issues with any of my actions, please notify me on my talk page! Thanks again! Ryan Norton ^{T | @ | C} 03:17, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

Advisory Committee

Hola Roberto! I just wanted to pop in to thank you for supporting me in the Advisory Committee Election. I don't know exactly what I'm supposed to do yet, but I trust that Essjay will be a good leader and let us know. And if he doesn't, I'll impeach him! ;o See ya around! Acetic'^Acid 20:57, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for your vote of confidence in the Esperanza elections. I look forward to helping Esperanza and Wikipedia progress. Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk | W_S 21:52, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Hey, Robert, thanks for your vote in Esperanza's Advisory Committee Elections. While I didn't get enough votes to be part of it, I know that the four who are can do the job much better than I could have. But I don't take your show of trust in me lightly, I really appreciate it, and tell me whenever you think I can be useful for something. Titoxd^(?!?) 22:58, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

More RFA thanks...

Thank you for supporting me. I'll try to only do a little bit of evil.  :) Wikibofh 00:15, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for your support on my RfA. It is sincerely appreciated. ≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 15:13, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

Esperanza Spam

Hello Esperanzians! A few announcements.

The Advisory Committee election results are in. In tranch A are Acetic Acid and Flcelloguy. In tranch B are Ryan Norton and Bratsche.

My other annoouncement is that our founder, JCarriker, has founded Esperanza's sister project, Wikipediology. I have written two essays here (my name is Matt Binder). My essays are under Teenage Wikipedians and Anon Editors.

On behalf of myself and Jay Carriker and the other wikipediologists, I would appreciate it if you were to join.

Cheers Esperanza! Redwolf24 (talk—How's my driving?) 23:34, 15 October 2005 (UTC)

My message wasn't forged

In regards to my vote to Keep the page Tom Freda, the signature wasn't forged. My roommate, who uses my computer, forgot to log out and I had assumed I still was loged in. My apologies - MC Rufus

Okay, I'll fix it. Thanks. Robert 03:15, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

Celestianpower is an admin

My fellow Esperanzan, thank you very much for your support - my bid (as you probably know) went swimmingly. I couldn't have asked for a better one. Thank you very much and I just hope I don't mess up! See you on the Esperanza IRC soon, yeah? --Celestianpower ^hablamé 13:03, 16 October 2005 (UTC)

Bentley's proton electron mass equation

Dear Robert,

I do not claim to have the intellectual powers of Einstein, but the manner in which my page ("Bentley's proton electron mass equation") was deleted was equivalent to the manner in which Einstein failed his exit exams at his University, i.e. no discussion possible between "creator" and "community".

Perhaps this is entirely my fault, for it has been difficult for me to find a venue for my opinions concerning the "votes" that were made to delete my page. However I will assume that my input was never intended, on wikipedia's part, to be submitted, and therefore, I hope you will allow me to voice my defense here.

1) Contrary to Johntex, SCZenz and Andrew pmk this result is 98% accurate, which, obviously unknown to these individuals, is highly esteemed in the particle physics community.

I do not know how they could not have come to this conclusion, I can only assume that they either interpreted my formula incorrectly or do not know how to use a calculator, either circumstance disqualifies them as competent reviewers of any mathematical physical theories.

2) The fact that I did not use constants significant to the 9th decimal place, as idiotically noted by Johntex, is inconsequential for two reasons; first of all, any college student can look up (ko) in the Handbook of Physics and Chemistry and find its' current value accurate to 9 digits, so obviously that is not the reason I did not include the values to that level of precision, and second, if Johntex had any semblence of Physics experience, he would have realized that changing any or all of the constants I used, to their present day experimental accuracy, it would have changed my result by less than 1%.

So naturally you may ask, why did I so calously ignore that less than 1% error? Perhaps I wanted to minimize the effort it would take for the Wikipedia reviewers to validate my result. Apparently I was correct in my presumption that the reviewers would be challenged by so easy a task, even with such simple numbers.

3) Finally I come to the only reason that is valid for removing my equation and that is, that it is original work. Wikipedia is an immense encyclopedia, but it will remain a second rate information source unless it scrutinizes original work as vigorously as it does established work, especially when that original work is presented in such a brief and easy to understand manner as I have submitted. The fact that wikipedia did not recognize the accuracy and relevance of my result lends one to question the articles wikipedia has accepted.

You might reply that "original work" is too tenuous and abundant to accept as well as attracts "wackos", but you will always have vandals and nuts, the number of times your own page has been vandalized is evidence for that.

But as aggravating as those vandals can become, they are inconsequential when compared to the loss of information from individuals such as myself, when we are considered "vandals" for striving to advance knowledge beyond where it is now.

For if we accept our current knowledge as adequate, then surely we should accept our current problems as unsolvable and therefore acceptable.

4) Finally I must make a remark concerning one comment which assumed I was threatening not revealing my proof until my page was accepted, this statement is so filled with paranoia that it overwhelmingly qualifies this individual for a position in George Bush's cabinet. Keeping unfounded paranoia out of science would be a valuable first step for wikipedia to improve itself. I was simply displaying sincere humbleness in assuming my work might not be considered relevant to this particular "physics" community, how right I was, to wikipedia's embarassment.

My intentions in composing this defense of my work is not to hopefully see it restored within wikipedia, for following the monumentally incompetent performance wikipedia's reviewers have subjected my, as well as other's I'm sure, work to, I would never wish any of my work to sullied by being in any way associated with wikipedia. My intentions are to ring some bells in the ego-centric reviewers which are bringing such ignorance to what should be an intellectual haven.

I leave my email address in order to offer you the same courtesy you have currently offered me, i.e. so that you might mount a counter-defense to my onslaught of logical analysis on the dysfunctionality of wikipedia's current review process.

When I first considered including my equation in wikipedia, my colleages told me not to involve my work with the "wiki-idiots at witless-pedia", but I kept an open mind in the interest of making a valuable contribution to the world community, you have a chance to prove my peers wrong by redeeming wikipedia with a proper response, good luck.

Sincerely, Vince Bentley jlbalb@msn.com

Replied on your talk page. Robert 02:15, 18 October 2005 (UTC)

part 2: Bentley's proton electron mass equation

Dear Robert,

Thank you for your timely response.

Physics and Mathematics, not bureaucracies or vandalism, are my forte, i.e.;

1) I will not be contacting any one at wikipedia in order to restore my equation for reasons I mentioned in my first response, my initial selfless act of trying to provide wikipedia with some of my, albeit, "original" research has already left a bad taste in my mouth, I will leave it up to obscure publications, such as Physical Review Letters, to disseminate my work, of course these publications are not as readily available to the general public as wikipedia, but that is the wikipedia community's loss, not mine. The lack of intelligence exhibited by your subordinates makes me more than happy to terminate my right to submit any material, original or not.

2) As far as any act of vandalism is concerned, my first question is "why would I vandalize a page in which I am voicing my opinion on?". I'm afraid coincidence has easily generated paranoia once again at wikipedia, surprise, surprise. My second question is "If your vandals write as eloquently and coherently as I do, can you please put them in contact with me?", I would love to get a hold of them and give them a job doing something more productive and intellectual stimulating than the simple task of editing a wikipedia page. It also sounds like I would be doing you a favor at the same time, then again, heavens forfend, I wouldn't want to offer an "original" idea to wikipedia.

Sincerely, Vince Bentley jlbalb@msn.com

Replied on talk page. Robert 21:47, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

part 3: Bentley's proton electron mass equation

Dear Robert,

Thank you for expending so much effort in search of my intentions with all this correspondence. I only wish you had picked up a calculator and spent a tenth of that effort to type in the numbers I provided into the equation I had submitted, so that you would not have blindly "rubber-stamped" a valid equation out of wikipedia's existence. That would have saved us all a lot of frustration.

So instead of discussing Physics, here we are debating who is smarter than who and who might be a vandal and who might be paranoid. If you think this was my intention when I first came to wikipedia, you are sorely mistaken.

You're apology for unjustly accusing me of vandalizing your page is about the only positive thing I have come out of this situation with.

The reason I singled you out initially is not because I had the most disdain for you out of all the individuals listed on my deletion page, quite the contrary, you were the only person who did not have an ignorant comment to make about my result and therefore, you were my greatest hope of finding someone whom I might have a chance to intelligibly reason with.

As far as my intentions are concerned, in pursuing this as far as I have, I must confess that I am an educator, and as such, when a student of mine is incorrect, I always afford him many chances to prove me wrong. On rare occasions, I am wrong, and in those circumstances I pass adulation after adulation to the student, for I know he/she has made me stronger by pointing out something I was unaware of.

However when the student cannot prove his/her point of view yet remains defiant. That student is "conditioned" to behave in a manner that will be productive to society. This was my intention with wikipedia, not you. You simply are my only conduit towards that undoubtedly, unattainable goal.

Sincerely, Vince Bentley P.S. I apologize for the "big SAT words"

Still replied on talk page. I hope this discussion is closed. Robert 21:47, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

part 4: Bentley's proton electron mass equation

sounds good

thanks

My RfA

Thanks, Robert, for your very kind comments and support of my RfA! I promise to do a good job using the keys to the janitor's closet. >: Roby Wayne ^{Talk • Hist • E@} 01:50, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

my talk page

Just wanted to tip my hat to you for reverting User:Ugabogaimasuuuukpoopit@!'s vandalism of my talk page. Much appreciated! :) --InShaneee 21:38, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Me too for mine! Uncle Ed 21:40, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

Sure, no problem! Robert 21:47, 19 October 2005 (UTC)

David C Harrison

Thanks for deleting the hoax David C Harrison page, but it's baaaack.

I don't think this one is a hoax exactly, but it has several strikes against it:

1. This is the third time this page has appeared, each prior one was a hoax.
2. Checking the creating user's contributing history shows a clear record of hoax pages.
3. The article is a pure copyvio of a paragraph in a document we found that showed the prior article was a hoax: [1].
4. Even if true, it's non-notable.

However, Clicking the deletion page brings us to the original AfD vote page.

What is the procedure for such a situation? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Corvus (talk • contribs) 19:21, 20 October 2005

I took care of it. Thanks for letting me know. If you see it come up again, put a speedy tag on it. It will be deleted under WP:CSD G4. Robert 23:26, 20 October 2005 (UTC)

Titoxd's RfA

Thank you!

Thank you for supporting me in my RfA. I never thought I would get so much support! Thanks to your help, my nomination was the 10th most supported RfA in Wikipedia history. Now, please keep an eye out on me while I learn the new tools, ok? Thanks again! Titoxd^(?!?) 18:07, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

Take good care!

We'll miss you :( Hurry back! Hugs, Shauri smile! 02:05, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

David Even Pedley

Hello Jaxl, Thank you for closing out this voting with no consensus. Can you help me with getting a RfC or RfA on the Dominion of Melchizedek article? All I've tried to do is take from credible sources using parts that have some consensus and balancing some areas with the other side of the story. I gave up on that, and just started posting POV check at the top. That POV check is even considered vandalism by some that claim I have sock-puppets. As you can see I need help. I'll give you an example of something that needs balancing as I see it. An employee of the US OCC has been quoted as saying that DOM is illegal, whereas the offical web site of the US OCC only refers to DOM as an "unrecognized soverignty" that licensed a bank that may be operating without permission in the USA, so I and another wikiuser tried to get consensus (even boldly editing) to add this fact, as a "however" following the employee's quoted statement. Am I way off base here? Cordially,Johnski 06:27, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page. Robert ^{T | @ | C} 22:34, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

SF series page cleanup

Currently I am making over the Star Fox series article here: User:Thunderbrand/Sandbox. Looking at the article, all it is is basically a list and nothing else, and needs more substance to it, you could say. I kind of want it to look like the Lunar series page. When you have the time, I would like you to maybe expand some of it a bit, especially the summaries for Star Fox, Star Fox 2, and Star Fox 64. You don't have to do it immediately, but whenever. Also, maybe you could help find the logos for Star Fox and SF2, since the boxes there look kind of out of place. Thunderbrand 17:42, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page. Robert ^{T | @ | C} 22:17, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

Actually I only started using the sandbox today, so no biggie. I guess all I really need are the two logos, a white background preferable, but if it needs anything else added or fixed go ahead. Anyway, I think those two pages could be merged, after looking at them now. Thunderbrand 22:19, 30 October 2005 (UTC)

I went and put it up. It was pretty much done, and looks a lot better than the old page. Thanks for the SF logo. It's no big deal if you can't find the SF2 logo. I reckon the only place to get it would be to take if off the box art or the start menu. Thunderbrand 01:03, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Dunno about the SF2 logo. If you want, you could upload it and see how it looks. Also, I came across this article while looking at the "what links here" for the recently merged page I did: The Adventures of Star Fox. It sounds like some TV show, but Google brings up nothing. It lists Krystal, but she wasn't even "created" until like 1999. And Dan Akroyd as Fox? Give it an AfD, perhaps? Thunderbrand 04:51, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

William Crawford Sherrod?

I noticed that you removed the bio-stub from this entry. I was just curious as to your rationale -- I had originally put up the stub in the first place since the bio seemed to be incomplete and could probably have stood to be expanded upon. Thanks! --Martin Osterman 12:50, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page. Robert ^{T | @ | C} 15:14, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks! I wasn't aware that the Politician stub also acted as a bio stub of sorts, so I apologize for my lack of knowledge in the matter of stubs! I hope I didn't come off as seeming too stupid. LOL --Martin Osterman 19:34, 31 October 2005 (UTC)

Vandal help

Thanks for the vandalism help. --badlydrawnjeff 21:11, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

No problem. Robert ^{T | @ | C} 21:13, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks again. That was...interesting. --badlydrawnjeff 21:31, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, I was all ready to protect your user page and everything... Robert ^{T | @ | C} 21:32, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

RFA for Johntex

Hello, I want to thank you for your support of my RfA. I hope I see you around Wikipedia soon. Best, Johntex\^talk 00:20, 2 November 2005 (UTC)

Metroid Prime 2

Oh yeah, Quadraxis was harsh, but sooo good. So much so that i just had to make that my nickname! Happy editing to you too! --Quadraxis 15:51, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thank you so much for voting in my RfA, and especially thank you for supporting me. I really appreciate it, and will wield the mop and bucket the best way I know how.

Your support vote means especially much to me, as you are a user whom I aspire to be like. You are civil and awesome to work with. Thanks for electing me, and I hope to see you around on all the favorite adminly haunts. Happy editing, [[User:Mysekurity|Mysekurity]] ^{[[additions | e-mail]]} _{00:40, 7 November 2005 (UTC)}

Johann Wolfgang's RfA

Thank you for your support on my RfA. I will use my new abilities with the common interest in mind. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me.

Johann Wolfgang [ T ...C ] 03:08, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

My RFA

Thank you very much for supporting my rather contentious request for adminship, but now that I've been promoted, I'd like to do a little dance here *DANCES*. If you have any specific issues/problems with me, please feel free to state them on my talk page so that I can work to prevent them in the future, and thanks once again!  ALKIVAR™ 07:56, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

FireFox RFA

Jaxl/Archive03

---

Thanks for your support on my request for adminship.

The final outcome was (96/2/0), so I am now an administrator. If you ever have any queries about my actions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Again, thanks!

FireFox 18:14, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

Shauri

Dear Jaxl. I saw your message on Shauri's talkpage. She will soon be back on Wikipedia :).--Wiglaf 07:55, 9 November 2005 (UTC)

Katrina: The Wrath of Bush

Hello! You closed this AfD debate with a consensus to delete, and I just noticed that the original title was Wrath of Bush (a redirect that also requires deletion). Thanks! —Lifeisunfair 02:35, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Taken care of. Thanks! Robert ^{T | @ | C} 02:36, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Re: Barnstar!

Thank you very much for the barnstar. I appreciate it. Thunderbrand 15:36, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

No problem. You were long overdue for one. Robert ^{T | @ | C} 15:39, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Aww thank you Rob!

My dear Robert, thank you so much! Your warm wishes and your concern when I was down, and your beautiful welcoming message have been very dear to me. I'm back now and better than ever, so get used to being hugged by me again ;) Starting now: hugzzzzz! It's great to see you again! :) Shauri smile! 21:55, 13 November 2005 (UTC)

WikiStress

Hi Robert,

You are real active sysop! But your WikiStress seems to be bursting. :P

I hope things are still going okay for ya here? Don't worry about your userpage vandalism, we'll all keep a lookout for them. If you need anything, just let me know. :)

- Cheers, Mailer Diablo 07:03, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Hang in there, buddy. Taken an aspirin and call me in the morning. :) encephalon 09:50, 14 November 2005 (UTC)

Thank you very much

Thank you Robert for your kind words on my user talk. Although we havnt really met, as you say, I will admit that your bolded sig was an inspiration for me:-)! For what its worth. Anyway I'm back again. Thanks again for taking the time. Banes 10:07, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trollaxor

Hey, I don't know if it would make a difference in your closing or not, but some of the editors (possibly including Timecop (talk · contribs), Skrewler (talk · contribs), Adamn (talk · contribs), and Femmina (talk · contribs)) who said "keep" have been acting in a coordinated manner on Afd, claiming to be connected to Gay Nigger Association of America. IMO, it's worth considering giving their input less weight that than of established editors. Friday (talk) 02:14, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Replied on your talk page. Robert ^{T | @ | C} 02:29, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Not sure how I blundered into this one, but I wouldn't RFC you if you closed that as a delete. It's basically only sock-supported, and AFD isn't a vote anyway. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 23:21, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Well, in any case, it was redirected to Slashdot, so it looks like the AFD didn't really matter anyway. Robert ^{T | @ | C} 23:28, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for supporting me for adminship. The RfA passed today. I look forward to working with you to make Wikipedia a better place. --Nlu 03:41, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Thedon

Keeps vandalizing my pages... indefinite block in order? -- PRueda29 ^Ptalk29

Already blocked him for 48 hours. We'll see after the block is up. Robert ^{T | @ | C} 18:25, 19 November 2005 (UTC)

Greetings from the United Federation of Planets

You may find the folowing template of interest :) --Cool Cat^Talk|@ 02:46, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

This user scored 656.3 on the Wikipediholic test.

Surviving Veterans of the First World War

Robert,

I'm glad to see that the "Surviving Veterans of the First World War" survived, although I would describe the result as "keep," not "no consensus." The vote was large, but there was a sizeable majority in favor of keeping. That's not to say that other ideas, such as rename or merge, were not also discussed.Ryoung122 07:50, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

The decision was amended to keep. Robert ^{T | @ | C} 15:32, 20 November 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Jaxl, I just noticed that you reverted vandalism to my User page yesterday. Thanks. ERcheck 15:54, 20 November 2005 (UTC)