User talk:Tristessa de St Ange/Archive 1

Welcome!

Hi NicholasTurnbull, and a warm welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you have enjoyed editing as much as I did so far and decide to stay. Unfamiliar with the features and workings of Wikipedia? Don't fret! Be Bold! Here's some good links for your reference and that'll get you started in no time!

Editing tutorial, learn to have fun with Wikipedia.

Picture tutorial, instructions on uploading images.

How to write a great article, to make it an featured article status.

Manual of Style, how articles should be written.

Most Wikipedians would prefer to just work on articles of their own interest. But if you have some free time to spare, here are some open tasks that you may want to help out :

RC Patrol - Keeping a lookout for vandalism.

Cleanup - Help make unreadable articles readable.

Requests - Wanted on WP, but hasn't been created.

Merge - Combining duplicate articles into one.

Wikiprojects - So many to join, so many to choose from...Take your pick!

Oh yes, don't forget to sign when you write on talk pages, simply type four tildes, like this: ~~~~. This will automatically add your name and the time after your comments. And finally, if you have any questions or doubts, don't hesitate to contact me on my talk page. Once again, welcome! =)

- Mailer Diablo 19:26, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Turnbull

Hi. I've made Turnbull a disambig. Cheers! -- BD2412 ^talk July 7, 2005 01:39 (UTC)

thanks for the tips

thanks for the tips. those are things that i've been trying to figure out lately. i really appreciate it.

peace, --jonasaurus 23:11, 17 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Harry Potter

It's okay. I was just pissed off at having spoilers distributed in such an unexpected venue. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 17:01, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

My reply to your comments on Talk:David S. Touretzky

AI, speaking as a Computer Science student, a supercomputer that documented every single piece of data across the Internet would be a near impossibility considering the huge volume of data transfer on the Internet compared with the finite amounts of available data storage.

"Religious Freedom Watch" fails to substantiate its claims with adequate referencing to the appropriate documentation or any other form of evidentiary support and is consequently of doubtful veracity. As such, Religious Freedom Watch cannot be considered to be an adequate reference source for claims made on Wikipedia. Please see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view and Wikipedia:Cite sources for more information on this.

IRC logs are not acceptable as a quotable source and you have not provided third-party evidentiary support that the IRC conversation you describe took place; also, even if the IRC logs could be authenticated as being stated by Prof. Touretzky's username or originating from his computer system, it is trivial to masquerade as another user on IRC and even a verifiable log of such an exchange would prove nothing. Consequently, there is no doubt in my mind that your attribution of comments is spurious and are nothing but groundless attacks on Prof. Touretzky's name; please see Wikipedia:No personal attacks for the official Wikipedia policy on the matter.

Can I please ask you to try to maintain a neutral point of view in future when writing articles, and not to use spurious reference sources when writing articles about individuals? (This reply is also posted on Talk:David S. Touretzky) --NicholasTurnbull 19:53, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the tips, but I will not abide by your suggestions. I am entitled to my POV and it is up to opposing POV's and outside views to ensure NPOV. If you are going to bite other newcomers, don't bother trying to hide your POV stained false teeth or pretend to flash shiny, false gold and false jewel encrusted POV teeth. My current understanding of policy based on my recent education by civil admins is that your scrutiny of me in an article's talk page is a violation of Wikipedia policy. --AI 01:12, 19 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dear AI,

Thank you for responding to my comments. I am sorry, but NPOV applies to everyone, and it is up to you to make sure your edits conform to this policy - not other contributors. You can validate this for yourself by reading Wikipedia:Neutral point of view for more information on this matter; you can see for yourself that it is clearly stated on that page. You may also be interested in reading Wikipedia:NPOV tutorial, which provides an informative guide to implementing NPOV in your articles.

Secondly, would you please be so kind as to tell me which policy you are referring to regarding my comments to you on an articles talk page? I am unable to find it on Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines, and I have discussed the matter with a number of senior admins who are not aware of such a policy.

Also, I don't understand what POV of mine you are referring to - I have absolutely no point of view as goes Prof. Touretzky's personality, and I was making my judgements on the basis of sources that you cited, not the matter of judging Prof. Touretzky's character. I also invite you to go through Special:Contributions/NicholasTurnbull to find evidence of POV in any of my edits.

In addition, I am sorry if what I said to you could be construed as "biting" you; that was most certainly not my intention. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.

Best regards,

--NicholasTurnbull 18:57, 19 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with your presentation. If you disagree with my actions, then file an RfC. Further messages from you about this will be ignored. --AI 10:34, 20 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

This will teach you!

Never offer to do me a favour again :) Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Suburbs of Johannesburg. Páll 09:04, 19 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Personal comments

I removed your personal comments[1] from the David S. Touretzky talk page according to Wikipedia policy. Reverting my change restores the personal remarks[2] and count as another violation of Wikipedia policy on personal attacks. Your edit summary states ..."and word-clear". This is another personal attack, telling me to word clear implies that I have misunderstood the words in the policy you mention. Personal comments and remarks have no place on article talk pages and technically qualify as personal attacks. --AI 21:05, 20 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dear AI,

Firstly, I wanted to apologise for any entheta comm that I have written; I understand that my comments to you have clearly caused you some degree of enturbulation, and I also wanted to apologise to you for any offense I have caused you through my comments on article talk pages or through suggesting that you had MUs on Wikipedia policy. I am of the opinion that we must both get along with each other here on Wikipedia, so I hope that we might be able to call an amnesty on this matter, on condition of us both being more moderate with our actions. I shall personally see to it that the existing Request for Arbitration and Request for Mediation currently pending are cancelled if you are prepared to do so, on condition that you are willing to follow the advice given by User:Talrias in the message above.

I don't think that low toned behaviour from either of us is going to remedy the situation, and I hope that since we are both experienced Scientologists, we can be at cause over this; after all, comm is one of the key points that LRH emphasises in Scientology as "the universal solvent", and it seems silly for us to be ARC broken with each other. I also hope that we can together correct any POV present in Scientology articles on Wikipedia; I noticed your comment on the Wikipedia:WikiProject Scientology page that you did not feel that our project could achieve NPOV, and so I would like to invite you to join our project to help us set the record straight.

Thank you for being a Wikipedia contributor, and I hope that you will be so kind as to consider this a possibility.

Best regards and ARC,

NicholasTurnbull 04:21, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your kindness and accept your apologies. However I am sorry to say that I consider your offer premature and therefore not currently acceptable. Please understand that more important issues need to be resolved first. Aloha --AI 20:43, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Statement by User:AI

AI, please tell us what you consider in the statement above to be lies so that we can do something about it; we cannot correct lies that we are unaware of. Please give us further information. --NicholasTurnbull 21:36, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I will only provide information at the request of an arbitrator. Currently, the only arbitrator I will respond to is James F.. David Gerard is not neutral and therefore I will not submit information to him. He should be part of party 2, not an arbitrator. --AI 22:01, 22 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That's what "recused" means - it means I'm taking myself off the case in question and, for purposes of this case, am not an arbitrator but an editor like any other - David Gerard 00:14, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

RfA - User:AI

I'm not sure what the best means to comment on this is, but I discovered this on the RfA page today, and thought it should be commented on:

In summary about a possible campaign against me:

Repeated personal attacks directed towards me by Modemac, Antaeus Feldspar and a few others in Talk:David S. Touretzky.

As a look at the history of the page shows, I've never edited it even once. I think this says a great deal about AI's claim of a "campaign" against him. -- Antaeus Feldspar 05:36, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration Committee case opening

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/AI has been accepted and is now open. Please bring evidence to Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/AI/Evidence. Thank you. -- sannse (talk) 15:08, 24 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sasquatch's RfA

Thanks for supporting me on my RfA! I promise I will use all my new buttons for good. Happy Editting! Sasquatch′↔T↔C 04:42, July 28, 2005 (UTC)

Uploaded Images

Dear user NicholasTurnbull, thank you for bringing this to my attention, I can only appologise for the time I have wasted, originally though, these images did link to relevant articles however, these have since been removed for reasons which I now understand.

(preceding unsigned comment by 7121989 15:14, 28 July 2005)

My RfA

Thank you for supporting me in my RfA. Also, thanks for the nice comments! Thunderbrand 15:13, July 31, 2005 (UTC)

Nice Language

Please refrain from abusive language in your posts, it is neither helpful nor mature. You must learn to humour (clue to location) hitshead danvals like me. --Zippydeedoodah 21:59, 31 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Zippydedoodah: I have never used abusive language in my posts either on Wikipedia or elsewhere, and make it a particular point never to do so. I never use abusive language either when writing or in conversation. Here are the diffs of the two edits I made to your user page: [3] and [4]; you can verify for yourself that neither of these edits contained abusive language. Please substantiate your statement by providing a link to the diffs of my edits that contained such language, as I do not take such suggestions lightly. Please look through my edit history; I can assure you that you shall find no abusive language in my edits. Perhaps you may have mistaken someone else's edits for mine? Best regards, NicholasTurnbull 22:25, 31 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Nicholas I apologise for my mistake. The additional material was added by User:68.196.255.51 see- [5] I accept that you didn't call me a shithead vandal, although my actions so far may justify such a tag. This is largely due to the inherent clique-ridden nature of WP editing. If one is not a 'member' of the club, posts are summarily rejected, it seems to me. Objectivity seems to have been lost in the comradeship of member status of 'approved' fellow posters. This is something to be resisted.

I will endeavour to tone down my hitshead activities. --Zippydeedoodah 22:50, 31 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Book Club

The first book selected for the Book Club is Chekhov's play The Cherry Orchard. --Oldak Quill 14:04, 1 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration Case

Ed Poor has responded. Rob Church 13:21, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have signed the RfAr myself and made some very minor changes to wording. Since the changes were to the section you signed, I am bringing them to your attention so that you may remove them if you feel they change the meaning of the statement in such a way that it no longer reflects your views. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 18:56, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Fred Bauder has accepted the arbitration case. Rob Church 19:11, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've emailed you my AIM and ICQ addresses. I'm more familiar with AIM, and I suggest we chat at some time earlier than 11:00 P.M. New York time. Uncle Ed 02:21, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

IRC Conference

Previous meeting was at Monday, August 8th at 11:30 PM BST. That is, 10:30 PM GMT and 6:30 EDT. ~~Please sign below if you plan on attending or need a time change:~~

Nicholas Turnbull: NicholasTurnbull 16:19, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Phroziac: Phroziac (talk) 22:05, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
~~Phroziac has a quickie oral surgeon appointment 2 hours and 30 minutes before the meeting, and MAY miss it or be late, though it is unlikely..~~
That's tomorrow. duh. --Phroziac (talk) 16:32, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Rob Church: Rob Church 14:59, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Uncle Ed: Uncle Ed 13:11, August 6, 2005 (UTC)
Uninvited Company:

kmccoy's RFA

Hey, Nicholas!

Thanks for your support on my RFA. I look forward to further disagreements on IRC -- they certainly help me clarify my position for myself, and I appreciate that they always remain civil with you. :) kmccoy (talk) 22:57, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Erection

Hello. I have reverted your removal of the picture on the Erection article. This issue was discussed in detail on the talk page. Wikipedia is not censored for the protection of minors. Thank you for participating in Wikipedia, and I look forward to your future work. Nandesuka 21:34, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Vandal Whacker & Barnstar

I, {{{1}}}, hereby award you this vandal whacking stick to help you in fighting the hordes of vandals.

Awarded for working to darn up the moral fabric of the Wiki.

Above two awards from Rob Church 01:28, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Defender of the Wiki

**Awarded for working to protect contributions from improper observance of the GFDL** by Rob Church 18:08, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Awarded by Rob Church 18:08, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

IRC Mediation

I've refactored the page, as you will notice, and I've also moved the related public logs to a more appropriate place, cutting out all the stuff before and after the official time of the conferences, as noted on the wiki page. Full logs made by the bot of the days' happenings are still available, from a slightly different location. Also, I've given you FTP access to the Ed Poor logs folder to make it easier for the both of us to update the information - feel free to bung more than just logs there, if it's related to the case. I'll give you the details via IRC.

Rob Church 18:12, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, then schedule something. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 20:07, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Motion to withdraw Ed Poor ArbCom case

As I understand it, we now have a majority. Congratulations to us all. Rob Church ^Talk 21:11, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I am very dismayed by Ed's removal of Lucky6.9's RFA and also by his unwillingness to carry on a reasoned discussion of his actions in so doing. I see these actions as a continuation of his unwillingness to listen to the community and his misuse of status and tenure as a source of authority. While I am not entirely sure that an RFAr is the best way to proceed, I am hardly ready to declare that mediation was a success. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 21:45, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

IRC Mediation Conference 3

With regard to the third (and hopefully final) mediation conference relating to the Ed Poor case, would you please visit http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User:NicholasTurnbull/Mediation_IRC#Scheduling and indicate when you will not be available at the usual time for the forthcoming week. I am hoping to propose a time within the next few days.

I will also draw up an agenda for this meeting as soon as possible, which will be on the same page, and as for the previous meeting's agenda, I encourage editing in true wiki-style.

If you have any concerns, please don't hesiate to drop me a note. Rob Church ^Talk

Uninvited's Note

[6] The Uninvited Co., Inc. 17:18, 11 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Featured Article Drive

Take a look at WikiProject:Featured Article Drive. Rob Church ^{Talk | Desk} 15:49, 13 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Alert! CoS page sorely in need of attention.

Check discussion page for details.

Scott P. 03:14, August 17, 2005 (UTC)

Cleanup Taskforce FYI

Whenever you have a chance to get back to work, a new task has been added to your desk. -- Beland 23:11, 17 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Suburbs of Johannesburg

Hey there, sorry to bother you, but it seems Suburbs of Johannesburg FAC's nomination has stalled. Is there any way you could go to the FAC page and vote? Thanks! 66.108.82.80 04:21, 19 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Fernando Rizo's RfA

Nicholas, your support of my RfA was practically a second nomination. Thanks, brother. It made feel good to know that what I contribute is appreciated. I was promoted last night, and I will only use my new powers for awesome, never for evil. I'll see you on IRC, my friend. Fernando Rizo T/C 18:11, 20 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Adminship

Nicholas: Thank you for supporting my nomination for adminship. I received many votes from editors that I encounter frequently, which is re-assuring, but I am honoured that you and others that I don't know through Wikipedia saw fit to support the nomination. The admin powers will enable me to patrol for vandals more effectively, amongst other things. I promise to use my new powers for good, and not to inflict the retribution on my enemies that they so richly deserve, as tempting as that may be. ;-) Thanks again, Kevin. Ground Zero 12:56, 22 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

IRC

Meh, you weren't that bad. :) I assumed it was the time, since it was after midnight over here. --Phroziac ^(talk) 13:18, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Featured Article Drive

I noticed you have left the Featured Article Drive team. On behalf of the Founders and other participants, I would like to thank you for your time and support, and of course, your contributions. We would like you to accept this small barnstar as a token of thanks for helping us to improve articles on the wiki. Rob Church ^{Talk | Desk} 00:43, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The RfA We Discussed

Just spotted he's also got a bot. Recipe for disaster... Rob Church ^{Talk | Desk} 19:26, 27 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

And, according to the bottom of this, [7], bit of abusing his admin powers for GNAA purposes. Rob Church ^{Talk | Desk} 21:19, 28 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your Edit

I have undeniable evidence that you've been editing. This is obviously a prohibited action and will be met with only the most damning sanctions. Incidentally, Phroziac has advised me that the Ed Poor RfAr has started. Rob Church ^{Talk | Desk} 16:11, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

POV

"rv POV edit - AI, the motion by Brinkman was overturned, IMO; by all means include the motion but don't selectively use parts favouring the "against" POV" - NicholasTurnbull[8]

Hi Nicholas. Requirements by NPOV policy should results in articles that representing all majority- and significant-minority views. Don't forget the already long-established copyright law POV of ALL those who create their own works and want ownership of their own works. Currently the lawsuit story mostly represents Lerma's apparently anarchistic liberal anti-copyright law viewpoint. The unpublished Scientology works were copied/published by Arnie Lerma. Since the article represents Lerma's viewpoint so much, the article should also fairly represent the Scientology viewpoint because it's their rights he violated within the recent atmosphere of sensationalized copyright controversy. Both POVs regarding this particular copyright controversy should be there in the article. --AI 04:25, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Cabals!

Inter didn't give you a briefing? :-/ Oh my!

You see, the mediation cabal is a ragtag band of people that has been recruited from the "irc cabal" and environs, and there's actually historically been a fork to it as well, with some members wanting to reform official mediation as well/instead.

The WP:TINMC page is just someplace we tell people to put on their watchlists.

Soooo, I like the fact that you're tidying up, and I'd like to give you a briefing on What The TINMC REALLY Is^TM and how it works. This might help prevent things from blowing up, and such and soforth :-) 80.126.238.189 06:35, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well, now you know. And I sincerely apologize for not getting this information to you earlier. I'm *still* leaving things in your capable hands, you know. Act as you see fit, and don't you dare agree with me so easily! :-P Kim Bruning 22:56, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sociopathic smilies, Nick. Better do what he says...;-) Rob Church ^{Talk | Desk} 08:55, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nick, can I join the Cabal? Fernando Rizo T/C 17:57, 10 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, of course you can! We'd be delighted to have you! :-) Just add your name to the list on Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal, put the page on your watchlists, and help out on anything that interests you. It's as simple as that! Thanks for helping out, Fernando! :-) Best, --NicholasTurnbull 23:21, 10 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration case

The Arbitration case against Ed Poor has been closed without action after Ed resigned his bureaucrat status.

Yours,

James F. (talk) 01:45, 14 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikistress and the Bogdanoff Affair

Take care not to get too burned out on this one. This thing appears to be burning out everyone who comes near it. Don't get too bogged down with it, it isn't going to be healthy. Rob Church ^{Talk | Desk} 08:53, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Mediation?

Kim asked me to talk to you about a mediation. Shoot me a talk page message or an e-mail--Tznkai 17:58, 15 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Bogdanov spelling

The Bogdanov brothers have used both spellings for the last name, but most the way their names are spelled in the journals that they published in is "Bogdanoff". I am not sure, but we may revert this.

I must agree that you don't want to get burned out on this and neither do I, but I have seen this affair develop on sci.phyics.research (and have recently learned of much more reprehensible behavior) and I know for certain that the intention of the Bogdanoff's is to turn a stinkhorn into a rose. They do PR rather than physics. r b-j 06:37, 22 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Would you please have a look at the possibly-now-dreaded Bogdanov page and advise on that new edit war regarding the CQG quote. I don't think rbj is right and provided what I think is a reasonable compromise/edit, which he has already reverted several times. However, I would rather have someone neutral decide than go on arguing. Thank you. CatherineV 15:57, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Bogdanov affair

Hey- over at Talk:Bogdanov, XAL said this:

And I would very much like to know who you think you are and who appointed you on that talk page? For your knowledge Maru was officially placed here to watch this talk page by mediator Nicholas Turnbull, and this talking is in the process on entering the arbitration comity, so your interventions here are so outplaced as they can be! I talked with Nicholas Turnbull tonight who disagree with your actions. You are not appointed here and do not have to make decisions above the heads of the members of the arbitration comity, so you will be very kind to step aside and anihilate your previous doing. This is not your playground. I do not know what are your motives to act as you own the place, as nobody has ever seen you here, but you do seems to go at it with a revenge. Any reasons who would be worth mentioning now, to us poor mortals?"

Did I miss where I was officially empowerd by you to oversee Bogdanov? --Maru (talk) 03:01, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, interesting. No, I never officially placed you whatsoever - I asked you to assist via IRC, if I remember correctly, but I certainly didn't elect you as the final ruler of the page dispute! I fear User:XAL possibly misunderstood the scenario somewhat. Thanks for helping out, by the way. --NicholasTurnbull 18:43, 30 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

AI Arbitration case

The Arbitration case against AI has closed. Given that you brought it, I thought you might be interested. The results include AI being banned until the legal dispute is resolved.

Yours,

James F. (talk) 01:03, 29 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Admin nomination

Since I see you're posting to wikien-l. I said I would, and I have! - David Gerard 14:49, 30 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

My RFA

Thank you very much for your vote on my RFA, it is now the 8th most supported RFA ever, and it couldnt have happened without your vote. I look forward to serving wikipedia. Again, thanks. →Journalist >>talk<< 23:36, 30 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Jaxl's RfA

Hi Nicholas, thank you for your support and your comment on my RfA! Rob e rt 16:17, 1 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

Apparently I get sloppy thirds in thanking people for making my RfA a success. :( Ah well, I still thank you for the vote! --Maru (talk) 00:22, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Monty Sarhan

I am now seeing that subjects that were part of this article are now getting based left and right. This is one revert I had to do: http://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Monty_Sarhan&diff=prev&oldid=24826948. I think we should not only keep an eye on the article, but also keep an eye out on the IP, since he/she only edits that article. Zach (Sound Off) 17:53, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]