User talk:Moink/archive291105
Old talk archives:
- Aug 11, 2004: User talk:Moink/archive110704
- May 10, 2004: User talk:Moink/archive100504
- Mar 16, 2004: User talk:Moink/archive160304
Kenneth Alan
[edit]- Kenneth Alan's case it now in arbitration. See Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Kenneth Alan. You may wish to add comment to Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Kenneth Alan/Evidence Mintguy (T) 14:16, 22 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Hey, where'd you go?
[edit]You're missed, friend. :-) I hope you're vacationing or taking some time to focus on grad school, and not leaving us? If anything is going on that I can help out with, please let me know. It would be good to see you around again. Best wishes, Jwrosenzweig 15:19, 8 Sep 2004 (UTC)
- Very nice to see you dropped in. I hope everything is all right? Given that you're a friend (as we've noted before) and my occasional alter ego (or am I yours?), I hope you know you could count on me to help out if anything around here was causing you enough stress to be absent? Best wishes and have a great autumn -- hope to see you here again soon, Jwrosenzweig 22:33, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Mediation Committee application
[edit]Hi, just a note to say that Grunt has applied to join the mediation committee. There is a vote at Wikipedia:Mediation_Committee#Grunt if you want to participate. (if you are still around - and I hope you are!) Regards -- sannse (talk) 22:16, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)
It could just be me, but recent edits to this article seem to me to say way too much about how great MIT is, and seem to be moving it in the direction of being a bland PR puff job. I'd appreciate it if previous contributors would keep an eye on this article and make sure it reflects a reasonable consensus about what "neutrality" means. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 19:44, 2 Oct 2004 (UTC)
Yay!
[edit]Glad to see you're back :) -- I thought you had quit. →Raul654 17:46, Oct 6, 2004 (UTC)
"Terrorism" straw poll
[edit]Moink, there is a straw poll going on at Straw poll on use of the term "terrorist" on whether or not to use the term "terrorist" to describe the 9/11 attacks. I'd be interested in hearing your view on the subject. – Quadell (talk) (help)[[]] 23:11, Oct 24, 2004 (UTC)
Boston gathering
[edit]Hi moink, there's another Boston meetup being planned this month; I hope you can make it. (see Wikipedia:Meetup/Boston). +sj+ 21:20, 3 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Hate Groups and NRMs
[edit]Care to comment on the dispute about Hate_group#Hate_groups_and_new_religious_movements?. That section is now in RfC. Thanks. --Zappaz 01:19, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Article Licensing
[edit]Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:
- Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
- Multi-Licensing Guide
- Free the Rambot Articles Project
To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:
- Option 1
- I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:
- {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}
OR
- Option 2
- I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:
- {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}
Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)
Could someone please start mediating? - Andre Engels 16:02, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
No need to deactivate your admin status
[edit]but it's generally good to slide back in slowly and make sure the rules didn't change out from under you, IMO. —Morven 00:34, Jan 25, 2005 (UTC)
Welcome back pt 2
[edit]Theresa - welcome back (again) - we missed you :) →Raul654 00:32, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC)
Good to see you around again. --Michael Snow 04:06, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Welcome back once again! I feared we'd lost you -- it is good to know your absence wasn't directly caused by us here (though it sounds like the semester was quite rough! You have my sympathies). In case you hadn't seen, I've fled the ArbCom and am now serving as your colleague on the MC. If you get any time and feel inclined, any advice about how to mediate, what works, what doesn't is more than welcome. Best wishes, Jwrosenzweig 21:04, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Hey there! A belated welcome back from me, too. I was just thinking that I hadn't seen you around in a while, and then saw your question on the Reference Desk. I wouldn't worry about the inactive admin thing. The only thing I can think of that's changed recently is some additions to Wikipedia:Candidates for speedy deletion. Isomorphic 23:25, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Template:Mediation-meeting Please edit the side box here (be brief) to update when you might be able to attend. Thanks. -==SV 22:05, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Local beans
[edit]Planning some Boston meetups over the coming weeks: tomorrow (Sunday) at Asmara, and two weeks later in (place tbd)... would love to see you. unifiedly, +sj + 20:27, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
about your (great) artical on lift
[edit]you said u wanted to make it easy for anyone to understand u so let me congratulate u on doing just that
the problem is u failed diddent mention some of the mesuaring units i just asumed that since u mesured preasure in kg per m2 that u where using the metric system but my calculations leads me to suspect otherwise
i assumed that vingsurfus where in m2 and velosity in km per hour and lift in kilos
im not really sure how u can get back in touch with me so if u could update the lift-page with the correct units i would be one happy wannabenerd!
thanks a lot Jesper
I'm a new voter
[edit]- moink 16:47, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Didnt see it, sorry
[edit]self-castration while interesting in its own right, unless its historically significant in relation to larger events, shouldnt be in the lead. You know, if this event caused his downfall as Pope it would be notable. Stbalbach 03:27, 10 May 2005 (UTC)
disrupting wikipedia policy vote
[edit]You voted once for the policy at Wikipedia:Don't disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point. Despite a 75% support that vote was rejected by the minority. A new vote has been called with a two week limit at Wikipedia talk:Don't disrupt Wikipedia to illustrate a point. Please take a moment to participate. Thanks. - Tεxτurε 16:55, 13 May 2005 (UTC)
Oh where, oh where has my Moink gone?
[edit]Moink - where have you wandered off to? →Raul654 01:37, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
Busking
[edit]I don't know any famous buskers, but here's a tidbit for MrMoink: Buskers in the London Underground have to get a licence from Transport for London (who run it). This entails their having to audition (the standard is very high), and after that they get a designated slot. I think they're not allowed to play anywhere or anywhen else. Some more info at [1]. I guess you could ask the London photo dweebs (User:CGP, User:ChrisO, User:Ed g2s, User:Jdforrester, User:MykReeve, User:Secretlondon, and User:Worldtraveller) to take you a busker-in-the-underground image (maybe even the digeridoo guy). -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 18:55, July 19, 2005 (UTC)
Testing a link
[edit]Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Booger (2nd nomination) Ok, that worked... why can't I get it to work elsewhere!!! AHHHHHH! moink 06:54, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
Harry Potter Trolling
[edit]Lets see, the votes were 16 delete, 4 merge, and 3 keep. One keep vote was an anon, another an unsigned vote. Thus, you get 16D to 5Non Delete votes. That's a definite consensus to me... Redwolf24 (talk) 00:43, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Votes for undeletion#Harry potter trolling. Please vote eh? ;) Redwolf24 (talk) 23:25, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
Hey, I wasn't thinking. I kinda feel like a dick for doing that man. I'm sorry. What do you think of the deletion review idea though? --Phroziac (talk) 21:16, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
- You're welcome. As for that proposal,
Extreme lesbian support! :) --Phroziac (talk) 21:32, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
Hey
[edit]Just popped in to say I love your "how I became a Wikipedian..." story on your userpage. Best · Katefan0(scribble) 21:41, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
Boston shenanigans
[edit]Hello Moink, long time... what are you up to? There's a meetup in Cambridge two mondays from now, with a special guest visit from the Museum of Science, and a proposal to have Wikimania in Boston next year... let me know if you're interested in either. +sj + 07:52, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
Sycophancy
[edit]Hello, person with whom I've never interacted.
Simply saying that I've appreciated your input in discussions regarding admin behavior on VfU and the like.
brenneman(t)(c) 12:27, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
Thanks
[edit]Hey, Moink. Thanks for the cucumber! You guessed my gender right. I'm still quite fresh to this whole admin thing, so I suppose I have learnt that I must tread extra-extra-carefully when I decide to delete close-cut AfDs. (Though, honestly, I didn't expect any inflammation over that one; I'd have written out my reasoning if I had.) That was my first proper 'encounter' on AN/I — I usually quietly watch from the sidelines — I think that looking for community opinion one way or the other is far the better thing to do. Anyway, thanks again. -Splashtalk 15:13, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
Mike Kinkella
[edit]Moink, you recently closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mike Kinkella, and I don't disagree with this conclusion, but I would like to ask that you temporarily undelete this as it is being referenced during the RFA for DESiegel in a discussion of whether DES overstepped his bounds in nominating articles for speedy.
If you don't object to undeleting it for that purpose, I'll make sure it is deleted at the end of the RFA. Dragons flight 00:30, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
- Since you seem to be unavailable right now, I am going to go ahead and temporarily undelete this. If you have a problem with my doing so, feel free to leave me a message. Dragons flight 01:43, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
Amsterdam...
[edit]I posted a comment on your user page to keep the discussion together. Hope you don't mind. - Mgm|(talk) 15:53, 25 September 2005 (UTC)
AFD
[edit]I'll be responding to this thread on my talk page. --Phroziac(talk)
16:32, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
Blocking
[edit]Greetings! Noticed you chiming in on the Brian0918 blocking discussion, and thought I would tell you that my own approach to blocking was very much shaped by a post you made a while ago -- I don't even remember where it was, but I'm pretty sure it was you -- on why you use multiple warnings before blocking. Just thought I might say hello and let you know you're not writing into a vacuum. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 22:57, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
Deletion Review
[edit]Hi. You were involved in the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Votes for undeletion#The scope of VfU which looked to establish a Deletion Review process in place of VfU. There is now a discussion about how we might construct the mechanics of such a process. The current proposal suggests that debates be relisted on AfD if there is a majority of editors wanting to overturn the debate (usually on procedural grounds) and that the alternative result be implemented if it is supported by three-quarters of editors. Please call by Wikipedia talk:Votes for undeletion/Deletion review proposal when you can to discuss. Thanks. Titoxd(?!?) 02:01, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
Comment
[edit]Would you like to rephrase what you wrote?. No. --Calton | Talk 07:56, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
- Let me clarify my answer: "'Hell no, I will not rephrase my answer because everything in it was perfectly true and appropriate." Is that clear enough?
And in response to your comment on my Talk Page, I would like to point out that my mother is not dead yet and I am not accepting applications for her replacement. And it might be considered a less-than-brilliant management technique to candidly ask for advice (while, you know, insulting the target) on a public, highly trafficked page: you didn't think I'd notice, or was it merely a passive-aggressive stunt get in your digs? If the former, I'm thinking that you're not very good at card games ("Hey guys, is having four of the aces a good thing?"), but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt because the latter is just too horrible to contemplate. Certainly I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt in my reply until I read that.
As for your comment itself, I'm not sure what I find most annoying about it: the cheap middle-management technique of praise followed by criticism (you followed that advice, I see), the chirpy yet condescending tone, the eye-rollingly obvious communication lessons, or the outright inaccuracies/misrepresentations at the heart of your finger-wagging.
Let's deal with the last one, shall we? What newbies, exactly, have I been biting and frightening off? Can you name one? I seriously doubt it.
But let's stretch the definition to include some recent "targets", starting with that gasbag GordonWatts. Do you have the faintest inkling of what a blot on Wikipedia this guy is? When I said he was dishonest, incompetent, and fanatical, I wasn't employing any hyperbole: skim the Talk pages of the Terri Schiavo article (including the archives), Jimbo Wales's talk pages, GordonWatts's own page and talk page, and, especially, his abortive attempt at becoming an admin (go here first, it'll include links to examples of the others) to see his single-issue fanaticism; his disrespect for consensus, NPOV, and basic policy; his persistent argumentation and wikilawyering; and his intellectual dishonesty and reinterpretations of reality (the "incompetence" part admittedly takes some digging: buried in one of the Terri Schiavo archives is User:FuelWagon's research into how Gordon bobbled a perfectly simple legal motion in pursuit of his obsession and how Gordon was trumpeting this as if it were a great legal victory). This guy doesn't deserve civility; he deserves to be shown the door.
Or maybe you were worried about RoyBoy, who nominated an article for deletion and then immediately deleted the AfD listing. Of course, he came to ME about it, not vice versa, so if he didn't want my opinion he shouldn't have asked for it. I would think you would consider that a bad idea -- oh, wait you do.
Let's cut to the chase: if you've got a problem with me, file an RFC, document your charges directly instead of hiding behind vague, passive-aggressive generalities, and stand behind them. But save the lectures for someone who thinks your opinion has value. Clear? --Calton | Talk 05:27, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
Wikipedia Story
[edit]Liked the story a great deal, partially because it involves a bridge behaving badly; and because I forget how I was introduced to Wikipedia... so I guess I can adopt that story as my own for the time being. I took the liberty of fixing the Tacoma Narrows Bridge redirect, hope to be seeing more of ya... out there. - RoyBoy 800 06:12, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
Hi. You closed this afd as delete, but don't seem to have pushed the button on the article itself. —Cryptic (talk) 08:40, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
Please see Category:Wikipedians in Massachusetts for info on the continuing project of user categorisation --Vidkun 21:08, 2 November 2005 (UTC)