User talk:Mnyakko

Global Warming Skeptic category up for deletion

Category:Wikipedians who are skeptical of anthropogenic global warming is up for deletion. If you would like to comment on this, feel free to do so here. Oren0 20:26, 30 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Understanding warm bias in the temperature record

I know you have an interest in global warming. As you may know, there are serious problems with the temperature record being biased by UHI or similar warming biases related to land use changes, etc. ClimateAudit.org is organizing an effort to photograph sites. Understanding the issue will help you be a better editor and improve the quality of Wikipedia articles on AGW. If you are interested, you could be a part of the effort. Please take a look here. [1] RonCram 05:25, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the heads up.

On a different note, did you see the latest abuse of power from Raul654?

So, Raul654 blocks Zeeboid. The crime? Making "this luidcrious edit" [sic]. The edit was removing the word "controversial", which was placed in the article by RaymondArritt. The edit summary was "Undid revision 136172818 by talk) RV, No Current concensus" [sic].

What was the blockable offense?

Is a "ridiculous" edit (and by what referable standard) enough for a block?

How about when considering the blocker, Raul654 ‎(Bureaucrat, checkuser, oversight, Administrator) made this edit just 2 weeks earlier? That edit (to the same article) was changing a Heading from the non-POV "Points" to the weasel word "Claims". The edit summary was "point implies that it might actually hold water. Claim is more accurate description of their propaganda".

Clearly an abuse of power in that noone in Wikipedia will do anything to Raul654 for such blatant hypocrisy, article ownership, and POV enforcing admin actions. I guess, this is the type of "neutrality" Wikipedia's founders want.

Oh, and about that word, "controversy", being in the opening of a documentary about Global Warming...Jersyko was brought in via a RfC. That person's objective determination on the matter was given on May 29, 2007 and said the following:

"The controversy, if discussed in the article, should be discussed in the introduction by way of "brief description" (perhaps a sentence or two; the introduction to this article actually needs to be expanded a bit on the whole). The descriptor "controversial", used in the first sentence of the intro, however, is problematic. It provides no context in favor of making the absolute (if referenced) determination that the film is, in fact, controversial. Whether the film is controversial is a matter of opinion; whether it has been described as controversial by specific sources is not."

None of the Global Warming article owners were blocked for removing "controversy" from the the other article, yet somehow the rules change now.

Pathetic display by all of the Admins involved in this one. -- Tony G 21:14, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your user and user talk pages

Your user and user talk pages seem to be dedicated to attacking specific editors and admins with whom you disagree. The user page policy forbids using your user page for "polemical statements", and Jimbo Wales has said that "using userpages to attack people... is a bad idea". In light of that, I'm wondering if you'd consider removing the attacks in question. MastCell ^Talk 05:25, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please be specific...what "attacks" are you referring to? I am using my user page as a journal of my Wikipedia experiences and lessons.-- Tony G 14:23, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A journal of your experiences is one thing. The first two sections of your user talk page, as well as your entire user page, seem devoted to attacking specific admins and editors with whom you've come into conflict. You make a number of accusations toward (among others) William Connolley, Raul654, Raymond Arritt, etc. There are mechanisms for addressing disputes on Wikipedia; rehashing them on your user and user talk pages is unlikely to be productive, though. MastCell ^Talk 16:38, 9 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"There are mechanisms..."--yeah, sure, mechanisms I am sure have as much consistency and fairness as all of the others throughout the project. I have been following and making note of much of the "mechanisms"...how they work, rationales and justification as well as the pattern of absent explanations. There is nothing to suggest that any mechanism offers a fair process to resolve such issues. Especially when the issues involve admins, their friends, checkusers, etc. So, thanks for the offer, but no thanks. I think I will continue to chronicle my wiki-experiences on my user page where the governing "rules" are not as biased and rigged. -- Tony G 01:18, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. I've asked for outside input as to whether this is an appropriate use of your userspace on WP:AN/I. MastCell ^Talk 04:32, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As an uninvolved admin, I concur that it resembles an attack page, and as such, I removed it. Which isn't to say that you're not permitted to chronicle your grievances of specific editors, only that such an account be geared to active attempt to resolve the dispute. Thanks in advance. El_C 05:10, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting...truth is "attack". Exactly what I'm talking about...the system is fixed. Not surprised in the least that an admin removed unflattering truth about another admin. -- Tony G 04:35, 3 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Invite

I notice you have expressed an interest in logic. Have you considered joining the Wikipedia:WikiProject Logic? It is an effort to coordinate the work of Wikipedians who are knowledgeable about logic in an effort to improve the general quality and range of Wikipedia articles on logic topics. We at the project invite your participation and correspondence. Be well.

Gregbard 21:51, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Operation COOKIE MONSTER

Wikipedia:WikiProject National Basketball Association/Los Angeles Lakers task force invite

Please accept this invitation to join the Lakers task force, a WikiProject dedicated to improving all articles associated with the Los Angeles Lakers. Simply click here to accept!

Orphaned non-free media (Image:KNSI radio.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:KNSI radio.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 09:34, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You maybe interested in the Article Rescue Squadron

Hello, Mnyakko. Based on the templates on your talk page, please consider joining the Article Rescue Squadron. Rescue Squadron members are focused on rescuing articles for deletion, that might otherwise be lost forever. I think you will find our project matches your vision of Wikipedia. You can join >> here <<.

Ikip (talk) 18:52, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Progressive Animal Welfare Society

Are you sure you meant to create a mainspace article with a userbox? If it was meant to be in userspace you might want to slap a {{db-author}} on there. —Switchercat ^talk_cont 16:03, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry...been a while since I used my Spaces. -- Tony G 16:04, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, yeah, just make sure to add the {{db-author}} so it goes in the "Pages for speedy deletion" category and the admins can deal with it quick. :) —Switchercat ^talk_cont 16:07, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to the Article Rescue Squadron!

WELCOME

from a Article Rescue Squad member

Welcome to Article Rescue Squadron Mnyakko, a dynamic list of articles needing to be rescued, which changes with new updates, can be found here:

Articles tagged for deletion and rescue
Category Articles tagged for deletion and rescue not found

I look forward to working with you in the future. Ikip (talk) 16:17, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome Tony, looking forward to seeing you rescue articles when you find time! Ikip (talk) 16:17, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to ARS!

Hi, Mnyakko, welcome to the Article Rescue Squadron WikiProject! We are a growing community of Wikipedia editors dedicated to identifying and rescuing articles and content that have been nominated for deletion. Every day hundreds of articles are deleted, many rightfully so. But many concern notable subjects and are poorly written, ergo fixable, and should not be deleted. We try to help these articles and content to quickly improve and address the concerns of why they are proposed for deletion. This covers a lot of ground and your help is appreciated!

If you have any questions, feel free to ask on the talk page, and we will be happy to help you.

And once again — Welcome! Addbot (talk) 00:01, 7 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Spite?

"Let's see how long before the content polizei delete this out of spite", you said.

Although that's exceptionally rude of you, there is no reason for your userpage to be deleted, and so it will be left up unless you specifically request its removal. DS (talk) 22:34, 25 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I usually do not like to say "I told you so", but I think this will suffice: Wikipedia:Miscellany_for_deletion/User_talk:Mnyakko/aboutme. -- Tony G 18:35, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing as how that is not your userpage, I fail to see how it has any relevance. You were referring to specifically, your userpage, as was he. Not a sub-talk-page in your userspace.— Dæ dαlus^Contribs 22:43, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have found that when people have to argue semantics or minutia to claim differences they are simply rationalizing a position that cannot be equitably applied. "userspace" and "sub-talk-page" within a "userspace" seem to fall within that...no offense intended. And for the record, my "faith" in the fairness of most actions by admins applies to 'userspaces', 'talk-pages', 'sub-talk-pages', 'main pages', 'main page talk pages', and the wide assortment of "dispute resolution". My comment refers to ALL text that does not fall in line with the POV of admins. -- Tony G 03:27, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A study on how to cover scientific uncertainties/controversies

Hi. I have emailed you to ask whether you would agree to participate in a short survey on how to cover scientific uncertainties/controversies in articles pertaining to global warming and climate change (survey described here). If interested, please email me Encyclopaedia21 (talk) 19:35, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Hornbook -- a new WP:Law task force for the J.D. curriculum

Hi Mnyakko,

I'm asking Wikipedians who are interested in United States legal articles to take a look at WP:Hornbook, the new "JD curriculum task force".

Our mission is to assimilate into Wikipedia all the insights of an American law school education, by reducing hornbooks to footnotes.

Each casebook will have a subpage.

Over the course of a semester, each subpage will shift its focus to track the unfolding curriculum(s) for classes using that casebook around the country.
It will also feature an extensive, hyperlinked "index" or "outline" to that casebook, pointing to pages, headers, or {{anchors}} in Wikipedia (example).
Individual law schools can freely adapt our casebook outlines to the idiosyncratic curriculum devised by each individual professor.

I'm encouraging law students around the country to create local chapters of the club I'm starting at my own law school, "Student WP:Hornbook Editors". Using WP:Hornbook as our headquarters, we're hoping to create a study group so inclusive that nobody will dare not join.

What you can do now:

1. Add WP:Hornbook to your watchlist, {{User Hornbook}} to your userpage, and ~~~~ to Wikipedia:Hornbook/participants.

2. If you're a law student,

Email http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/WP:Hornbook to your classmates, and tell them to do the same.
Contact me directly via talk page or email about coordinating a chapter of "Student WP:Hornbook Editors" at your own school.

(You don't have to start the club, or even be involved in it; just help direct me to someone who might.)

3. Introduce yourself to me. Law editors on Wikipedia are a scarce commodity. Do knock on my talk page if there's an article you'd like help on.

Regards, Andrew Gradman ^talk/_WP:Hornbook 21:26, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Article Rescue Squadron Newsletter (September 2009)

MfD nomination of User talk:Mnyakko/aboutme

User talk:Mnyakko/aboutme, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User talk:Mnyakko/aboutme and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User talk:Mnyakko/aboutme during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. --KillerChihuahua^?!?Advice 12:45, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Article Rescue Squadron Newsletter

	The Article Rescue Squadron Newsletter
	Issue 2 (January 2010) Previous issue \| Next issue

Content

The community is currently

deciding whether

60,000

articles should be deleted.

background