User talk:AndyL

Hi. When you add blocks of found text to articles, please take the time to integrate them into the existing article. The text you added to History of Costa Rica throws off the chronlogy-- the narrative now jumps from the 1840s back to 1502, than later from 2002 to 1949. Thanks, -- Infrogmation 00:21, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Unverified images

Thanks for uploading these images:

I notice they currently don't have an image copyright tag. Could you add one to let us know their copyright status? (You can use {{gfdl}} if you release them under the GFDL, or {{fairuse}} if you claim fair use, etc.) If you don't know what any of this means, just let me know (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Kbh3rd&action=edit) where you got the images and I'll tag them for you. Thanks, Kbh3rd 01:58, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Also:

Image:Jacobandrosepenner.jpg RedWolf 17:02, Dec 24, 2004 (UTC)
Image:Davidlewis.jpg RedWolf 04:01, Dec 27, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for protecting the Stalin page earlier. Could you unprotect it now? I think that we can make progress now, hopefully with the Trey Stone sockpuppets out of the way. 172 20:35, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/National Independents Movement

I'd like to know what you think. Samaritan 08:45, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC) (who bought a newspaper or two from you irl years ago)

KB MacDonald

It's a long discussion. What is Jacquerie trying to achieve? Ever since reading about MacDonald I have felt that he is a dangerous mind. It's actually made me aware how violently untenable evolutionary psychology is as a theory. JFW | T@lk 14:47, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Re: War template

Sure, I'll take care of it. It shouldn't be hard to make one. -- The KoG | Talk

OK, what do you think? -- The KoG | Talk 18:07, Dec 24, 2004 (UTC)

Glad I could be of use. -- The KoG | Talk 18:09, Dec 24, 2004 (UTC)

Military history of Australia Military history of New Zealand Military history of the Philippines Military history of South Korea Military history of the Soviet Union Military history of Thailand Military history of the United States Military history of Vietnam
Conflict	Vietnam War
Date	1957–1975
Place	Southeast Asia
Result	• Capitulation of South Vietnam • Reunification of Vietnam
Combatants
Republic of Vietnam and allies	Democratic Republic of Vietnam and allies Missing image Flag_of_North_Vietnam.gif Flag of North Vietnam
Strength
?	?
Casualties
KIA: ? Total dead: ? Wounded: ?	KIA: ? Total dead: ? Wounded: ?

Argentina flag

I see you removed the Image:FIAV_63.png from the Flag of Argentina entry, thinking of fixing a problem. The problem is actually with the new Wiki software, and the bug has been reported and is being worked on. Please leave the FIAV codes in place in the mean time.

Urhixidur 05:40, 2004 Dec 25 (UTC)

Free market

Randroid alert. Could you please protect this page? Thanks. 172 04:23, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

If you're looking for a better browser for OS 9

I suggest trying wamcom (http://wamcom.org/). As a plus, it's the only OS 9 browser I know of that supports Gmail without problems. Ground 20:06, 30 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Soviet Union

Hi. I saw your edits on Communist Party of the Soviet Union. [1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Communist_Party_of_the_Soviet_Union&diff=0&oldid=8946221) The same user who added POV to that article has been fighting to "overhaul" the Soviet Union with similar changes. I'm having little luck trying to reason with him. Please take a look at this article if you have the time. Thanks. 172 06:33, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

You're my hero [2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Communism&diff=8983639&oldid=8981972). I was trying to get rid of that "altruistic genes" b.s. but I couldn't at the time because of the 3RR. 172 16:22, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

I just got your message right after posting mine. Thanks for taking a look. I can understand not having the patience to discuss this on talk right now... Perhaps having the page unprotected will making things easier. That way the burden to defend the new edits is on the user making them, as opposed to allowing one user to have an open opinion forum on talk. 172 16:30, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)

AndyL, what do you think of UPI as a credible source on the Soviet Union? Yes, the UPI owned by Reverend Moon, self-proclaimed Messiah? Libertas

An anon beat me to Red Ensign. Should the page be protected? Let me know if this is necessary. Happy New Year. 172 08:02, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

3RR

hi, Andy. I don't want to go block crazy (I've been blocking destructive anons all night) and I only see 3 reverts at Red Ensign, not more than 3. Counting was never my strong point, though I think I'm right here. But I've dropped a message to Armchair letting him know about the rule. Perhaps Red Ensign would benefit from some mediation? - Nunh-huh 08:04, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Well, let's hope. Midnight is very confusing to me.....even without a month and year change<g> - Nunh-huh 08:11, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Ah, I actually see an easy way to calculate it now. Hopefully I won't need it! - Nunh-huh 08:16, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

CJN

I don't know very much about the paper's history, though I've discovered that Queen's apparently has copies on file dating back to 1960. I'll investigate once the library re-opens. CJCurrie

Collective security

I noticed you've listed the Collective security article as disputed under NPOV. May I ask why? There's been no discussion on it's talk page. Grunners 23:51, 1 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I have replyed at the talk page. Grunners 00:11, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Well edited. Grunners 00:36, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Image

I noticed you uploaded Image:Palaisgeneva.jpg claiming fairuse; however, for fairuse to be valid the source of the image needs to be cited. - SimonP 19:01, Jan 2, 2005 (UTC)

Totalitarian

I don't think it's even a debating point that either regime was totalitarian. In the interests of compromise, I'll accept your change however wrong it is. The BBC, hardly a font of right-wing opinion, agrees it was a totalitarian regime and doesn't feel the need to qualify it. The article would be improved if people left their political baggage at the door. Including me. Libertas

Capitalism co-existing with Police State

RE: FASCISM article "Actually, there are numerous examples of capitalism existing quite nicely with a police state. Chile under Pinochet was a lab for the "Chicago school", South Korea and Taiwan were both strongly capitalist while under police state regimes and, yes, Nazi Germany, fascist Italy, fascist Spain and fascist Portugal were all capitalist." AndyL 23:29, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)

A police state is force applied by the state. Capitalism is the freedom to own and dispose of your private property in any way you decide. Capitalism ends at the end of the gun (force). It is equivalant to saying you are free to dispose of your product in any way you want as long as you do it the way the state forces you. If you believe Nazi Germany, fascist Italy, fascist Spain and fascist Portugaland were all capitalist - edit the article within the parenthesis with these examples for the one-party capitalist states, so readers will have examples of what the writer is suggesting. I believe the author of the paragraph in question is asking the reader to swallow alot without any strong facts to support it. I believe the article would benefit from stating what the author believes are capitalist states.

copy and paste the following into the fascist article: ...and most other one-party states (including capitalist one-party states, e.g. South Korea, Taiwan, Nazi Germany, fascist Italy, fascist Spain, fascist Portugaland) have also been police states.

"I'm surprised you missed the rest of the passage. Examples are quite clearly listed:"

Furthermore, the fact that fascist states, on the one hand, and the USSR and the Soviet bloc, on the other, were police states does not mean that their commonality is a product of socialism. While many one-party states can be said to be police states, there is no correlation between socialism and police states, and most other one-party states (including some capitalist one-party states) have also been police states. A few examples:

   * Chile under General Augusto Pinochet
   * the Republic of China under Chiang Kai-shek's Kuomintang,
   * Afghanistan under the Taliban,
   * Iran under the Shah (a monarchist police state).
   * South Vietnam, South Korea, Singapore, etc. during certain periods of their recent history.  AndyL

The examples read as examples of one-party police states, not as "capitalist one-party police states". The article using capitalism to point out that a police state is not a result of socialism but then the author offers no examples of a police state under capitalism.

Ernst Zundel

It isn't factual, and is misleading. That is the justification.

Please don't remove factual information from the Ernst Zundel article. It is a fact that he go no votes when he ran for the Liberal leadership in 1968. What is your justification for removing that fact?AndyL 21:19, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Wow- you're quick! -W

Hi. I noticed your comments on the Madagascar Plan. I think the final sentence is very problematic, as to why it was abandoned and teh end results. Danny 03:30, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Madagascar

I don't know too much about the specific topic but I will look into it and watch the article. On a separate note, I have been working on the Franz Boas article. I have a variety of motives, but one of them is Jacquerie27's interest in Kevin MacDonald; J27 added to the Boas article a brief description of MacDonals's (anti-Semitic) critique of Boas. I decided that the best way to deal with this is to provide a more complete accoun of Boas and his work. Even if you don't know anything about Boas I'd appreciate it if you could read over it at least for coherence and readability. Thanks, Slrubenstein 17:50, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Arbitration

As ArmchairVexillologistDon has left Wikipedia, the arbitration case regarding him has been closed (Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/ArmchairVexillologistDon). This is subject to reactivation should he return. -- sannse (talk) 19:30, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Degenerate Art

Hi, I just did a huge input on this article after it was inactive for months. I listed literary citations, added links, followed the history of the exhibit through from its inception through what happened to the artwork after the exhibit. Need I say more? There are comments that I don't cite sources - I have about 100 - so...am I supposed to list both primary sources in German, and secondary sources in English? Asking you to keep on your watchlist? It was going so well.... --allie 23:19, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

LaRouche

See Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration#Lyndon LaRouche Part Deux. I had no advance warning that Snowspinner was going to do this, so I've quickly put together a request, otherwise the arbitrators might have temporarily blocked all the editors currently involved. I've tried to show why that should not happen. SlimVirgin 05:19, Jan 25, 2005 (UTC)

I've already made the request, in part because I know that Herschel will, but also in part because the old arbcom did issue temp bans on all participants. I'm not so much bothered about myself, but I wouldn't like to see Cberlet banned from editing them because he knows a lot about them and has access to a LaRouche archive. SlimVirgin 05:51, Jan 25, 2005 (UTC)

Andy, if you have a minute, would you mind taking a look at Template:LaRouche. Fred Bauder has added a sentence about the arbcom proposed decision, which has made it widen so that it's taking up most of the page of the LaRouche articles, but I don't know how to fix it. SlimVirgin 23:09, Jan 25, 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, Andy, I worked out how to fix it then forgot to leave you a note. SlimVirgin 04:12, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)

Re Template:LaRouche. Thanks for clarifying the semantic problem. There were organizations (now defunct, of course) that placed the AIDS initiatives on the ballot. PANIC was the acronym. It's almost too prejudicial to even use the name (not to mention impractical, as it then has to be spelled out and explained.) Anyway, nothing's simple with LaRouche. Cheers, -Willmcw 09:33, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Say what?

You sent me a message saying, "I find past claims that HK is in the US while Weed Harper is in Australia difficult to reconcile with your new claim above." Which past claims are you referring to? --HK 16:11, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I don't recall weed saying that he lives in Australia. I certainly didn't say it. I suspect that your POV is affecting your memory. --HK 21:05, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps it's your memory that's being affected, Herschel. One of the IP addresses that Herschel/Harper/Colden frequently uses has posted a few times using the name Peter_Abelard@ausi.com. Ausi.com is a webmail service for Australians, which might indeed give the impression the user was in Australia. Elsewhere you say you're in California, and the same IP address has been posted on the Web as being the source of SPAM emanating from LaRouche during the election for governor there. SlimVirgin 00:01, Jan 28, 2005 (UTC)

Help with an article

Hi, AndyL! I read that you have created the article about Slovak People's Party. Do you think that you could help me improve the Slovak National Party article I have created? I hope we could cooperate. Thanks! Liberal Nationalist 18:04, Jan 28, 2005 (UTC)

League of Nations

Why would you add something about the 1982 Falklands War to an article on the League of Nations which went defunct during World War II? AndyL 15:20, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Whoops, I misunderstood a phrase in collective security. -- Sy / ^(talk) 15:24, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Primitivism

Believe it or not, I'd really like your help on this page. I don't know how much you know about the subject, but from your comments in the talk, it would seem you know more on the subject than is average. I think that since you opposed the merge, your likely to recieve respect from the user who seems to want to revert me, rather than compromise. IMO the way Kev is insisting the page be presented, it isn't any appreciably different from primitive communism. The page doesn't focus on returning to this theorized state, but rather on emphasizing that it occured. I happen to think this is an important concept (I debate w communists / anarchists / socialists quite a bit, and it comes up pretty regularly), and would like to see it presented neutrally and accurately. Thank you for your time, [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]]) 17:41, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Sam's concept of neutrality is to pepper the article with plainly POV statements like, "The anthropological community has found no evidence of such egalitarianism or periods of leaderlessness," to insert endless qualifiers when the entire page was already qualified at the very begining, and of course to do nothing at all to list his complaints on the talk page for discussion even though the procedures he sets in motion requires this at the very least. All he does is change what he doesn't like and revert anything that comes in his way. One thing that I would tell Sam, were he willing to actually discuss this, is that many primitivists don't view thier claims as advocating a "return to this theorized state". Indeed, many of them don't view primitivism as a set ideology advocating anything in particular at all, but rather as a trend in critical approaches to modern civilization. This is already reflected in the language of the article, but not in the version Sam is pushing. However, I can't tell Sam this because he refuses to take his problems to the talk page and instead insists on diverting all discussion into vague claims about the unworthiness of the article. Kev 20:48, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

If you intend to be civil, I am willing to discuss these matters in Talk:Primitivism. [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]]) 21:21, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Jewish ethnocentrism VfD

In case you weren't aware, there is now a VfD on Jewish ethnocentrism. Given your participation in the page, I thought you'd want to know. You'll find it at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Jewish ethnocentrism. Jayjg ^(talk) 17:49, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Request for evidence in LaRouche case

On Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Lyndon LaRouche Part Deux/Proposed decision, you say: "Weed, you and Herschel have not only shared the same computers (home and office it seems) but have edited each others comments on talk pages which suggests the same person with different logins and perhaps being confused about who he has logged in as at what time." If you could present evidence of this (i.e., the actual edits), that would be useful to the arbcom. Thanks :-) - David Gerard 14:48, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Of talk pages, user pages, and the confusion thereof

I suspect you wanted to put this (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:David_Gerard&curid=419742&diff=0&oldid=0) here. --fvw * 04:58, 2005 Feb 5 (UTC)

Jewish ethnocentrism VfU

Don't know if you already know that Sam Spade has listed Jewish ethnocentrism on Wikipedia:Votes for undeletion. Speaking from experience, it's a bit stressful when your judgement as an admin gets questioned in a public forum, especially when you're being called names. Try to stay cool. -- Cyrius|✎ 18:09, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Vandalism of article on Canada

AndyL could you please look in at Canada. It needs an admin's hand on the tiller. Gbambino has repeatedly added nonsense to the article. Several people have reverted his gibberish. Stronger action may be necessary. Sunray 20:28, 2005 Feb 8 (UTC)

I was just going to post something on the Admin Notices page, but he seems to have stopped (or at least he hasn't made any more edits to the article for the last 30 minutes). Perhaps my pointed messages worked. You might just look in on the article though, as we will quickly run out of reverts if he continues. Sunray 20:52, 2005 Feb 8 (UTC)

Update: We now have a discussion going on the talk page. Hopefully he will desist from his former approach. Could be just a POV new user. Sunray 21:45, 2005 Feb 8 (UTC)

Conscious Evolution VfD

You may be interested to know that User:Dnagod, one of our Stormfront friends, has created an article on Conscious evolution, which has been proposed for deletion at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Conscious evolution. Best, SlimVirgin 04:48, Feb 9, 2005 (UTC)

Freedom Party of Ontario/Zundel Rally

Andy: I've done some google-searching on the 2003 Zundel rally in Toronto, looking for more information on the Freedom Party's involvement.

Loathe as I am to defend (or exonerate) the Freedom Party of Ontario, I'm not certain from existing web-coverage that they were even at the event.

Zundel's people claim that the event was attended by members of "the Canadian Heritage Alliance, the Northern Alliance, the Nationalist Party, HF Niagara and the Freedom Party". They don't specify *which* Freedom Party, however.

This could be significant, given that there's currently a "White Freedom Party" in the northern US. I don't know if this group existed in 2003 or if they ever had a Canadian branch, but they have supported Zundel in recent times. It isn't inconceivable that some ad hoc racist group with a similar name group could have briefly "emerged" in Ontario a few years ago.

Beyond this, I can't find anything specifically tying the FPO to the Zundel rally. Are you certain they were the ones involved? CJCurrie 02:51, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Robert Hunter (journalist)

Yay! Very good job on the piece. =) —Mar·ka·ci:2005-02-11 03:31 Z

B.J. Eversole

...What Mar ka ci said. :)

Meanwhile, I'm concerned about the VfD for Socialist Party of North Carolina leader B.J. Eversole. I hope I've expanded it into a credible treatment, I'm confident his role and party is notable enough on its own, and a deletion would set a threatening precedent for articles about other political figures and activists who are also encyclopedic but below certain restrictive notability bars. I hope you'll review the VfD and vote as you see best. Samaritan 14:30, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Jewish ethnocentrism

Andy, Mikkalai has re-created Jewish ethnocentrism again (second time) and has again redirected it to Culture of Critique. SlimVirgin 18:49, Feb 13, 2005 (UTC)

Would you mind explaining to me what has happened here? I'm the editor who proposed this article (title and contents) for deletion, and the two votes (VfD and VfU) were successful, yet now it's back. Because I proposed it, I feel obliged to see the process through to completion. I understood you deleted it once after the vote, then deleted it a second time after Mikkalai recreated it. But it still exists, and it still redirects to Culture of Critique, yet it's on the list of articles not to be recreated, so I'm totally confused. It's been protected, and Mikkalai has used his admin power to unprotect it, and apparently put a pretend notice up that it was up for another VfD. (Was that a pretend notice or a real one?) If any ordinary editor had behaved like this, I think they'd have been blocked by now for vandalism. I'm getting the horrible sinking feeling that this is being tolerated because Mikkalai is an admin. Am I jumping to conclusions, and can you help clarify what's going on? Best, SlimVirgin 20:52, Feb 13, 2005 (UTC)

Mikkalai did use his admin powers to unprotect the page. And it's still there, still redirecting to Culture of Critique. I've made a complaint here. [3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Complaint_about_abuse_of_admin_power) WP:AN says either make a complaint on the incidents page OR make an RfC but not both. I feel incredibly disheartened by this, to the point of not wanting to contribute any more, because if admins can behave like this, and other admins won't act against him, then there's a horrible problem in this community. SlimVirgin 21:50, Feb 13, 2005 (UTC)

CPC Executive

I've discovered (via a link on the party's main website) that the CPC held its 34th convention in early 2004, in Montreal. The Central Executive Committee is unchanged from 2001, except for George Gidora (who leads the BC provincial party) replacing Helen Kennedy. CJCurrie 23:09, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

CPC Photos

I'd actually noticed this page a while ago. Strange as it may sound, I've managed to go this long on Wikipedia without uploading any images (largely because I didn't want to read the requisite documentation on what qualifies as fair use ...). I suppose I could finally branch out in that direction now ... CJCurrie 23:38, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Conscious Evolution

I suggest you start over once the history of the very biased version you wiped is deleted per the votes for deletion vote. User:Trödel/sig 03:22, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Jewish ethnocentrism logs

It may interest you to view this: Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Jewish_ethnocentrism/Logs as your name appeared in the log. -- AllyUnion (talk) 16:09, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC) [4] (http://www.web.net/~ohc/040806.htm)

Prometheism

Hi Andy, I've nominated Prometheism for deletion, as it's promoting User:Dnagod's websites. See Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Prometheism. Best, SlimVirgin 08:47, Feb 18, 2005 (UTC)

Federal elections charts

I’d like to get some consensus on what to do about colours in the elections charts, but I don’t want to get into a revert war, so I’m asking people to express their opinions here before any changes are made. Since you have contributed to these pages, I’m inviting your comments. I am initiating this discussion because some of the colours that are currently being used are too dark for some monitors so that it is difficult to read the text. The point of adding colours to the charts is to make it easier for readers to derive information from the charts. This goal is foiled by using colours dark enough to obscure the text. The Wikipedia style guide is clear on the issue:

Use colour sparingly. Computers and browsers vary: you cannot know how much colour is presented on the recipient's machine if any. Wikipedia is international: colours have different meaning in different cultures. Too many colours on one page make them look cluttered and unencyclopedic. Use the colour red only for alerts and warnings.

So let’s choose some colours that are light enough that red Wilkilinked text and blue Wikilinked text are both easy to read through.

Please join the discussion at: Talk:Canadian federal election results since 1867. Thanks, Kevintoronto 17:23, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Wheeler's Republic

I see you've posted a no further edit notice - what was the ouctome on the vote? Brookie 19:56, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

What the Hell are you doing? Andy? You don't have a clue on what you are doing.WHEELER 20:44, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I know Andy. It is just that the proper title is "Classical Republic". Mendle uses this term all the time in his book to distinguish it from what the modern word republic has become. Sparta is a Republic. And now these people are deleting the external links to the page. Don't you find what is happening on Wikipedia what George Orwell talked about. There is a cabal running around deleting things they don't like. Wikipedia is supposed to be Free and Open Content. It's not happening. My external links to Wikinfo have been deleted twice now.WHEELER 14:23, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I notice your involvement in the debate over Wheeler's Republic classical republic article. Me and him have been arguing, and reverting each other, over whether it is suitable to have an external link to the article, now on Wikinfo, from the Republic page. The best solution might be to temporarily protect the page. - 15:26, Feb 21, 2005 (UTC)

What is this "mixed government" article all about? I am confused. Do I start putting all my stuff there or will it be deleted? Is this a game? How come the External Links on the Republic page keep on getting deleted and now they delete and then lock it. The External link was there first. Why don't they lock it with the external link and the argue why it should be taken off? Wikipedia is supposed to be "Free and Open Content". This is censorship. I have proof galore. WHEELER 00:08, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Or am I to take the hint that I am supposed to make another article and if it is, can it be "Classical Republic"? WHEELER 00:46, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)

William Z. Foster

A lot of sources on the Internet (a few google results) listed Foster's birthdate as 1881, not 1891. It makes more sense for him to join the socialist party when he's 20 than when he's 10. Can you verify the date? --Geoffrey 00:45, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Kibbutzim and Arab Labor

I haven't read very much about kibbutzim and Arab labor. Could you add some information about that to the kibbutz article? I got 2 more kibbutz books out today, but I don't know if they'll have the info. I am pretty sure that kibbutzim hire Arab labor (when it is available) today. Dinopup 20:28, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I see you've made a few edits to the kibbutz article. Thank you. I'm trying to get the thing up to FA status. Do you think you could provide some quotations/statistics as support for what you're claiming about kibbutzim not being profitable? If you could find the amount that Israel spends on kibbutz subsidies that would be invaluable.Dinopup 02:55, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

CJCurrie page

Thanks. CJCurrie 01:27, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Scripture

For it says in Scripture, "Wisdom is not manifest to many" and it says: "Thou shalt not join thyself with a multitude to turn aside with the majority so as to shut out judgement(righteousness)" Exodus 23.2.WHEELER 14:50, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Look who you are backing

As to the knowledge and expertise of our infamous Dr. SimonP of Republican theory. Let me quote Machiavelli's TRUE definition:

Thus the sagacious legislators, knowing the vices of each of these systems of government, (i.e. speaking of monarchy, aristocracy, and democracy) by themselves, have chosen one that should partake of all of them, judging that to be the most stable and solid. In fact, when there is combined under the same constitution a prince, a nobility, and the power of the people, then these three powers will watch and keep each other reciprocally in check." "Discourses on Titus Livius" end of Book I chapter II, The Prince, Niccolo Machiavelli, ed. by Robert M. Adams, pg 94.

"I think, then, that to found a republic which whould endure a long time it would be bewst to organize her internally like Sparta, or to locate her, like Venice, in some strong place". ibid, pg 97.WHEELER 16:05, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Does SimonP know what he is doing? I think the evidence shows otherwise. WHEELER 21:05, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Arbcom

Andy, you and The Epopt had an exchange a few weeks ago, which I'm trying to find, about arbcom procedure in connection with Ventriloquist Don. There's a discussion on the mailing list about whether the arbcom is too tied to the notion of equal treatment of editors who appear before them. I recall The Epopt telling you that the arbcom had adopted this as a policy in order to discourage editors from bringing cases. I have tried to find this exchange but don't have the dates and WP is so slow today, it's taking me an age to go through the histories. Do you happen to remember when this was, or do you have a copy of the posts somewhere handy? Best, SlimVirgin 20:37, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)

The exchange was between you (as I recall) and The Epopt on your or his talk page. I saw it on a talk page, not on e-mail. It took place just after you were prevented from editing articles related to Canadian politics (later overturned), and you were protesting; The Epopt replied that it was policy to treat people symmetrically in order to discourage them from bringing cases. This is being denied on the mailing list, so I'd really like to find the exchange. Can you remember even roughly what the dates would have been? Sorry for calling him Ventriloquist Don, LOL. Enjoy your party too. SlimVirgin 21:30, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)

Not to worry, Andy, I found the dates, so I'll now be able to find the discussion. Best, SlimVirgin 22:05, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)

Holocaust revisionism

You tell me that Holocaust revisionism is a euphemism for Holocaust denial, but its exactly the opposite. Many Holocaust revisionists do not "deny" that certain parts of what is referred to as the Holocaust occured. (such as the field shootings by the Einstatzgruppen) but that our understanding of other events were incorrect (i.e. gas chambers were used in very rare and isolated conditions for specific dissidents, not genocides). Of course, many revisionists "deny" the what some would consider "the whole thing" altogether. Regardless, the term revisionism is completely neutral while "denier" carries a strong anti-revisionist connotation. The fact that a user who searches for "revisionism" is automatically directed to "denial" is ridiculous. It's like someone who searched for "conservative" is directed to "reactionary" or "liberal" to "radical." You can't use the terms that critics use to describe their ideological enemies without sacrificing neutrality. We don't ridirect people who search for Holocaust to "The Jewish Myth," so too we shouldn't riderect those who search for revisionism to "denial," a term used exclusively by those who are against the idea. User:MeanMrMustard

Conscious evolution

We have another situation with a deleted page being created again. Conscious evolution, written by User:Dnagod, was deleted after a VfD, and my understanding was the vote was in favor of deletion, not redirection. User:4.250.138.88 has recreated it and redirected it to Transhumanism. I reverted that, but Sam Spade has redirected it again. (And even if Conscious Evolution were to be redirected to something, it shouldn't be to Transhumanism. Are you able to blank and protect the page, or whatever the correct procedure is? Also, there's something weird about it. Sam also deleted the page history of Conscious Evolution so that the anon IP's edit and my reversion don't show. They also don't show up in 4.250.138.88's edit history [5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=4.250.138.88) or in mine [6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=SlimVirgin), though I know they did a few minutes ago. SlimVirgin 03:10, Mar 6, 2005 (UTC)

Well, it's been deleted again, but I don't know who did it, or how long it will last. SlimVirgin 03:44, Mar 6, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. SlimVirgin 03:56, Mar 6, 2005 (UTC)

David Duke

I could do with some help, please, with a white-supremacist sockpuppet on this article. I'm in danger of violating the 3RR, otherwise. Thanks. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 12:07, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Recent articles

Andy: I haven't yet looked into the electoral interventions of Ontario's unregistered parties in the 1970s, but will contribute to the articles when and as information becomes available. (I suspect a more pressing concern might be to create an Ontario general election, 1977 article to begin with -- unless something has happened in the last few hours, I'm fairly certain this will appear as a red-link.)

And this is getting pretty deep into political minutiae, but do you know anything about Rosemary Ann Ray apparently being co-endorsed by the CPC-O and the CL in 1999? The Militant link that you provided indicates that she was the CL's (only?) candidate in the 1999 Ontario election; the official returns, however, show her as CPC-O. My suspicion is that there might have been a co-endorsement to get the CPC-O to the five candidate mark and official ballot status, but this is just an educated guess.

No major tragedy if you're not familiar with this situation, obviously. CJCurrie 21:14, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Post-Soviet States

A new article called "Post-Soviet States" is up for vote in "Collaboration of the Week." That means we Soviet Union buffs would, in Soviet Communist tradition, pool our resources to develop a new article detailing the contrasts and similarities the various republics faced on their respective roads to democracy. Anyway, we need 2 more votes by March 15, 2005 and your vote would be appreciated. Use this url:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Collaboration_of_the_week#Post-Soviet_states_.28March_15.29

Juppiter 04:05, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)

CPC/e-mail

Andy: I'm somewhat pressed for time at the moment, and might not be able to look over the CPC-related articles for a few days. Shortly, though ...

On another matter, did you receive my e-mail address? CJCurrie 17:19, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Black Book of Communism

Like Revisionist Zionism, this article is under attack by censors - except that there are three of them. User:Ultramarine and User:Boraczek in particular, but also User:Luis rib, are trying to systematically remove the arguments against the validity of the statistics presented in the book. I'd greatly appreciate it if you could take a look over the article and help defend it from censorship. -- Mihnea Tudoreanu 23:50, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I'm a doofus?

(this is a copy of a message placed on AndyL's page) ~~The score is now Three out of Four. Your crew~~ It seems that with the deletion of the Classical definition of republic in some certain respects made me a dummy and an idiot and an ignoramus. That seems to be the conclusion previous. So this made all my work suspect. And all the articles that I have started were going to be put up one after another for deletion. ~~I have now won three out of the four. Your Mel etits was not right in the Arete battle, and the rest of your crew lost out~~ In vanavsos and family as a model for the state, these articles have found merit, along with Arete (excellence). Now, Think here. ~~Three out of Four.~~ What does that tell you? That maybe I know what ~~the hell~~ I am talking about. If there is a "Modern Republic" don't you think that there ought to be a [Classical definition of republic] or [Classical republic]? ~~because from where it sits now, it looks like the British Wikipedian modern republican party is all washed up!~~WHEELER 14:34, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The above response was written because another Wikipedian wrote something like this:

Please see: Wikipedia:Village_pump_(miscellaneous)#Is_there_a_cabal_on_Wikipedia
- Specific example:

"There is no such hint. Creating another article under a different name for deleted material would be an attempt to cirumvent the VfD and would result in the new article being deleted and possibly in you being banned. Also, I'm certain that editors would start examining your other articles and start putting them up for deletion." AndyL 15:38, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I want to point out this sentence: Also, I'm certain that editors would start examining your other articles and start putting them up for deletion. Right after [Classical definition of republic] was voted off, they began: check out, Talk:Arete_(excellence) where the title was changed, and Deletion notices went up on Family as a model for the state and vanavsos. What was happening is that "once they proved" I was "erroneous" in one thing, they began to start voting and deleting my contributions to Wikipedia. They were impugning my scholarship and knowledge and my trustworthiness as a contributor. They used the voting off of the [Classical definition of republic] to impugn my character and have assaulted my honor and basically called me a liar and a no good scholar. That is the "inference" of their comments and actions. All these assaults on my contributions is a way of assaulting me and of calling into question my worth and my edits and my pages, therefore wrecking my reputation on Wikipedia.WHEELER 14:33, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I also want to point out that they deleted Classical definition of republic and now SimonP has created a page called Classical republic. What gives? They delete my article and then start their own? This is not right. No Academic in any college or university would stand for this. Yet, I am treated this way. If Classical definition of republic is "original research" then why is there now a page titled Classical republic?WHEELER 14:33, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)

User:Trey Stone

Hi. FYI, Trey Stone is still editing as User:Trey Stone. Your 2 week block doesn't seem to be working. WebLuis 21:30, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Maybe "2 weeks" isn't being interpreted right. I reblocked just now with an expiry time of "14 days".

22:22, 20 Mar 2005, Tony Sidaway blocked Trey Stone (talk · contributions) (expires 22:22, 3 Apr 2005) (AndyL's "2 weeks" block failed) --Tony Sidaway|Talk 22:24, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

BTW Trey, I can be contacted on the email address on my userpage. Please address all email for me concerning this block, which I assure you would be welcomed and read, to that address. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 22:32, 20 Mar 2005 (UTC)

PC senators

It seems clearer today, yeah...it wasn't so clear yesterday when I wrote that *g* Bearcat 23:34, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Kibbutz

Sam, I’ve noticed that you’ve made a few edits and additions to the kibbutz article. I was wondering if you would like to vote on the article becoming a Featured Article. For some reason, no one votes either way on kibbutz. I don’t know why. Perhaps if you became the first person to vote other people would follow you.

The nomination is right here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Kibbutz Dinopup 20:01, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Vandalism

Hi. Any chance you could have a quick look at this please. Wasting a lot of peoples' time.

Vandalism_in_progress#Pinnela.2C_64.12.116.13_and_R3d3

Maybe the page could be protected. TigerShark 23:47, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

It's OK. Has already been done. Sorry to bother you. TigerShark 23:49, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Radio Islam

I've made some major revisions to the Radio Islam page; I was hoping you might look them over. Jayjg ^(talk) 22:40, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Great job!

--Spinboy 05:49, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)

More CPC-ML

You're going to turn green with envy but I had the opportunity of attending the CPC-ML's 35th anniversary celebration in Toronto last weekend!

Would this indicate that a great historical rapprochement is in the works? ;)

Seriously, if you have any information on the party's recent developments (especially vis-a-vis the "Renewal" project), feel free to pass it along. CJCurrie 23:51, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

On another matter ...

Yesterday, Kevin and I had a disagreement (albeit a civil one) on whether or not to keep the redlinks for defeated and fringe candidates on the Ontario elections pages. My view is that the links are convenient in case these candidates do something notable in the future (or, alternately, should someone creates a list page). Kevin has raised some objections, and our discussion can be found at Talk:Ontario general election, 1990. (Note that I was writing my contributions on about three hours sleep, and might have added a few rhetorical flourishes that would have been snipped otherwise.)

If you have any thoughts on the matter, please contribute. CJCurrie 23:57, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Ontario politicians

Since I see you're now working on Ontario politicians may I direct your attention that there are a number of candidates at past leadership conventions who do not have articles and others who have only sketchy articles. I've done the best I can without regular access to a library. If your focus is now on Ontario politics it would be greatly appreciated if you could try to fill in those historical blanks when you have time. See Ontario Liberal leadership conventions, Ontario Progressive Conservative leadership conventions and Ontario CCF/NDP leadership conventions (the latter article has no red links but some of the earlier biographical articles in particular are sketchy.) AndyL 23:19, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)

This *is* on my to-do list, though I've been approaching the subject in a different manner. I'm trying to write articles on *all* Ontario MPPs -- working backwards, and going one parliament at a time. I'm currently in the early stages of the 1987-90 list, hence my recent contributions to the Bryden & Pope pages.

That said, I'm sure I make some time for the leadership contenders in the next week or so. (Unless there's an early election call, in which case much of my time will probably be spent reverting edits from anonymous contributors.) CJCurrie 02:32, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Removed featured candidates

Andy, next time please don't hurry with removal. The moment you did it the database clock was still in 11 April (see your own timestamp). So formally the article still had a weak chance to get the 4 missing votes during the remaining 4 hours. I understand that the article was sitting there more than 7x24 hours, but the notice says "needs 5 votes by April 11, 2005", rather than, like, "needs 5 votes by 13:27 April 11, 2005". Mikkalai 19:41, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

While I have nothing against this practice, I decided to raise the isuue at Wikipedia talk:Collaboration of the week, for future clarity. Mikkalai 20:01, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

?

It looks to me like you just listed John Baird as an incumbent Green Party MP running for re-election in the 39th federal election. Am I missing something? Ground Zero 13:17, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Okay, he seems to be a Tory again, which is good. As far as the incumbency question, I was going by the heading " incumbents running again are in italics ", which does not seem to be what is being done in this table. Ground Zero 13:25, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Jean Chrétien

Hello, I've noticed many of your recent additions regarding notable Canadian people. I wanted to make a brief request that when your articles link to Jean Chrétien, if you could please use the accented form of his name rather than just Chretien. Without the accent is slightly improper, and including it reinforces on Wikipedia the use of the French language in Canada. Thanks very much for your valuable additions, Kurieeto 21:42, Apr 12, 2005 (UTC)

Duchess of Cornwall

As the difference of views over the article Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall has been rather difficult to resolve, I have created a poll on the talk page. Perhaps you might consider voting. -- Emsworth 20:11, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Image:Droege.jpg

Could you please add source information to Image:Droege.jpg. ed g2s • talk 14:48, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Quebec

If you are interested in more Quebec-related collaboration, there is a Quebec wikipedians notice board and a Quebec collaboration of the week. Circeus 19:16, Apr 17, 2005 (UTC)

John Birch Society

There are two users who keep meddling with the John Birch Society page while refusing to discuss their changes. Is there a page that explains what steps to take such as asking the page be locked pending discussion? I am still a newbie on such matters. Thanks. --Cberlet 22:10, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Image:Benedictvi.jpg

Could you please protect this image until it's off the main page, to keep random trolls from uploading over it? —Korath (Talk) 17:46, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)

Henry Kissinger

Trey's back to his old effort to marginalize the war crimes charges as much as possible -- I noticed you reverted him a few weeks back, so you might want to look at the current situation. I'm on the verge of giving up, as he's shown no interest in compromising, and no one is responding to the RFC I posted. RadicalSubversiv E 23:11, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

User:Trey Stone

Just to let you know, I unblocked User:Trey Stone because as far as I could tell he was blocked for saying "the fucking page" on Talk:Henry Kissinger and for saying "bitchez" on his user page. We also have no potty-mouth policy, and this profanity wasn't directed at anyone in particular. silsor 03:13, Apr 23, 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, nice try Impartial Admin. J. Parker Stone 04:27, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Talk:National Socialist German Workers Party

Sam is at it again with the socialism...any help would be appreciated. john k 23:59, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

MIM reviews

Hi AndyL, this The Grza is giving me problems over adding links to MIM's reviews of movies. As you know, I do not agree with MIM on most things, but enjoy reading their reviews of movies because no one else on the left does it.. at least not the way they do. I think it is important to have alternatives linked to on WikiPedia. IMO this person is removing them based purely on POV. The reasoning they gave most times was "rv communist review". They have gone so far as to call it vandalism, which is bullshit and melodramatic even. Help? --Mista-X 00:50, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Check out the entry "Maoist Reviews" on my talk page for some more details. TIA! --Mista-X 03:23, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Your wikiholiday and The Matrix

Your user page says you are on wikiholiday until May 1. It's not appropriate to protect a page under those circumstances, so I have unprotected it.

My reasons for removing the external link are explained at User Talk:Mista-X, including specificially why it does not belong in the religion/philosophy section. IMDB lists 281 external reviews for the Matrix (of which MIM is not one, by the way), so clearly not every single reviewer who might wish to add an external to Wikipedia will be able to do so. Far better to just link to the IMDB page for this purpose and let people seek out reviews for themselves.

Based on Mista-X's additions of MIM links to other movie pages, it seems his motivation is primarily to publicize his organization rather than enhance Wikipedia content. Stormfront or fundamentalist religious organizations would likely have the same motivation if seeking to add links to webpages. Any page could have thousands of potential external links, it's entirely appropriate to be very selective.

You may have a different opinion, and if necessary consensus could be sought through a vote. At the moment, however, there is something of a consensus in that many people have reverted Mista-X's changes at the various movie pages he has edited (myself, Xezbeth, TheGrza, "LightofGlow", Boothy443, UtherSRG). Under these circumstances, you wading in to prematurely protect the page, reverting to Mista-X's version in the process, is inappropriate. A contributor like Mista-X who continually edit wars by singlehandedly reverting against multiple other users across multiple pages is engaging in disruption at the very least. Rewarding him by reverting to his version prior to applying premature page protection is somewhat questionable.

Given that the apparent consensus, Mista-X should back off for the moment and not try to force through his changes singlehandedly. That's just the way Wikipedia works, and as an experienced user you are well aware of this... trying to force through a change unilaterally against multiple other users is never appropriate on Wikipedia, by the very nature of Wikipedia.

It's entirely appropriate to call a vote and seek a wider consensus. You or Mista-X may wish to do so.

-- Curps 19:22, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I have now placed a comment at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#AndyL.27s_inappropriate_use_of_admin_power_at_The_Matrix. You may wish to respond. -- Curps 20:24, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I removed this now, see below. -- Curps 20:38, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

You protected the page at 16:59 UTC, and then applied your revert at 17:35 UTC. It was not appropriate to revert the page after you protected it, you should have refrained from editing the page after you yourself protected it. My initial action was to unprotect the page but leave your revert intact (in part because your user page advertised that you had gone on wikiholiday, and I thought you were protecting it and walking away). Since you insist on the page being protected, I have now reverted to your version of 17:01 UTC (just after you applied the "protected" template) and have left the page protected. -- Curps 20:33, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

You protected the page at 16:59 and added a "protected" message to it at 17:01. If you wish the page to be protected, this is the version you need to stick to. Either the page is protected or it isn't... you can't unilaterally make post-protection edits or reverts and claim that is the final word.

Let the discussion at Talk:The Matrix take its course... I think mediation over the content dispute is premature (not all the reverting parties have joined the newly centralized discussion at Talk:The Matrix), but if you want to call for mediation over the protection/reversion disagreement between the two of us I would accept that. -- Curps 23:25, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I think my actions were justified. You reverted a protected page (which you yourself know and state to be wrong), and undoing this was justified (either by unprotection, or by restoring the original unreverted protected version). -- Curps 23:44, 25 Apr 2005 (UTC)

If you think you have a 3RR, take it to /3RR. It's that simple. -- Curps 10:58, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

RfC

I invite you to respond to Wikipedia:Requests for comment/AndyL. — Phil Welch 18:34, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

You might want to look over the RfC again and change your response accordingly, I edited a lot of it to clarify a few things that weren't so clear earlier. — Phil Welch 08:03, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I did the editing before the RfC was certified. — Phil Welch 17:01, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I have made an extensive contribution to Wikipedia:Requests for comment/AndyL, and have invited Philwelch and TheGrza to take a look to see if they endorse it. In the meantime, I clearly indicate that this represents only my opinion and not theirs. I would have contributed to this RfC a lot sooner (and replied to the one you started against me), but real life intruded. -- Curps 18:31, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

I've already dealt with the certification issue--I decertified the original version and recertified the version with Curps' edits. If you wish not to respond, that is of course your prerogative. — Phil Welch 20:27, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

Please show me a precedent where it's been done on an RfC and rejected. The fact that it's a wiki implies that it should be editable. As for certification, users only have to certify the *basis* for the dispute, not the specific wording.

Furthermore, Curps' edits were a clearly marked addendum. You yourself made an addendum to your response, how can you deny Curps' right to make an addendum to the portion of the RfC that applies to him? — Phil Welch 20:34, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

3RR

Curps status as an admin doesn't really effect my desicission much (I have blocked admins under the 3RR in the past). The problem is that I see this as part of a much larger conflict that goes beyond the three revert rule. As such I am hesitant to apply the 3RR.Geni 15:48, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

not on this scale (frankly I think this is a matter for arbcom). I have inforced the 3RR against admins in the past. If you feel that my position is incorrect try appealing to another admin (User:Silsor might be one option on the basis that they have also blocked admins).Geni 16:32, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Then the case will end up at arbcom. The 3RR does not exist to provide a punishment for wider actions. User:Curps's excuse may be valid certianly it is an area the rule has never been tested in the past. As such I have no idea what comunity consensus is in this areaGeni 18:24, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Please don't disrupt Wikipedia:Requests for comment/AndyL

The "Other users who endorse this statement" section says (in HTML comments): If you agree with the summary's presentation of events but did not try and fail to resolve the dispute, please sign in this section.

I don't fit in that category... I did try and fail to resolve the dispute with you, and am part of the dispute. User:TheGrza is not active on Wikipedia at the moment; if he endorses what I wrote, then there should be no problem. In the meantime, Philwelch has endorsed what I wrote, and it is very clearly indicated that TheGrza has not currently endorsed it. There is no ambiguity here.

-- Curps 20:30, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

What is your recommended solution? Should I file a second RfC over the same dispute? Should I file an RfA? You tell me. I expect an answer. -- Curps 20:33, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

If original two certifiers endorse any addition, it should be acceptable to you. If TheGrza declines, then you might have a point. In the meantime, I think this is yet another case of you inventing a policy to suit yourself.

"There is no solution" is not really acceptable. What do you prefer... a new RfC (might as well just keep the old one as modified) or an RfA? Or do you have some other proposal? I have some points to make, surely you're not trying to deny me a forum.

Please think it over. I'm going for a walk, back in an hour or two. -- Curps 20:44, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

Andy, back on April 25 I suggested mediation between the two of us over the protect/revert dispute between us (see Talk:The Matrix). You simply ignored that suggestion. Now you're declaring the RfCs are resolved already, before I've even had my say? I've wasted far more time than I originally wished to on this, had to take time away from Wikipedia over the past few days as real life intruded, and now I'd like to see this through. If you really intend to boycott the RfC I think I'd need to go to RfA. I'm not calling for your head on a platter, but I do think your actions need some scrutiny and some... admonishing. Anyways, now I really am going to head out for a while. -- Curps 20:50, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

TheGrza has assented to the update (which was unnecessary, as only the *basis* for dispute needs to be certified, not the *wording* of it), so there are no longer "two versions to contend with. — Phil Welch 21:32, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

The dispute's been settled and I've backed off. Get over yourself. — Phil Welch 21:57, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

Sorry, I won't withdraw the RfC. I just have nothing further to add to it or say about it. But I believe the complaint still stands. — Phil Welch 22:00, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

I don't believe it's useful to continue this dispute. The matter has certainly not been resolved. However, I am no longer interested in *actively* pursuing the issue. My certification of the RfC remains, and even if I removed it, I wouldn't have the power to withdraw it because it's been certified by two other users. This is my last word on the issue: do not bother responding.— Phil Welch 22:09, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

AndyL,

You need to answer the things I wrote about in my RfC comments. I was a party to the dispute and I wish to have my say. If you boycott the RfC, I'll have no choice but to propose it to RfArb. That's really all there is to say. -- Curps 22:21, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

Please refrain from describing me or my comments as "specious" or suggest I don't understand RfC because you disagree with my endorsement of said RfC. I never made this issue personal and because of Curps level-headedness this situation has continued to be a cool one, instead of the dogfight you seem intent on starting.--The Grza 06:07, May 2, 2005 (UTC)

COTW Project

You voted for History of Quebec, this week's Collaboration of the week. Please come and help it become a featured-standard article.

Notice of request for arbitration

I regret that you decided to boycott the RfC. As discussed earlier, I have now filed an RfAr involving you at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration. -- Curps 00:52, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

Jesus

Care to check out the brewing revert war on Jesus concerning BC/AD -- and the stubborn comments by Arcturus and Rangerdude on Talk:Jesus? I think your input would be valuable. Slrubenstein | Talk 19:53, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

RfC Trey Stone

Hello, I've noticed that you have come into conflict with user Trey Stone upon occasion. I have just opened an RfC on him: Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Trey Stone: Care to add anything? -- Viajero 13:13, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

Freedom Party of Ontario

Please come to the Freedom Party of Ontario talk page as quickly as possible. CJCurrie 18:25, 12 May 2005 (UTC)

Trey Stone and Davenbelle

Hi! Trey Stone has Requested Arbitration with me:

I've also been updating the RfC re Trey Stone.

I see from my review of some of his activities that you have encountered Trey Stone in the past, so I'm bringing this to your attention. Comments and evidence of your own are welcome.

Sincerely, Davenbelle 10:23, May 14, 2005 (UTC)

Fascism and socialism subsection talk

Fascism like most isms developed to excuse a grab for power and not as something fuctionally different from socialism (of which it is ONE type). 4.250.198.126 14:34, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

"socialism considers" is NONSENSE. People consider. Socialism itself can include or exclude fascism based on how the term is defined. and the term is usefully defined differently in different contexts. 4.250.198.126 14:37, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

All talk of marxism belongs in THAT subsection. Confusing marxism and socialism is shameful. 4.250.198.126 14:39, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

Using the limited tool of left versus right to talk about fascism is like using west east to discuss the north pole. The tool is pointless for the task and proves nothing 4.250.198.126 14:41, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

Socialism does not require nationalization of anything. Control and power redistribution can be far more subtle. This subsection is hopelessly bad.4.250.198.126 14:45, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

Oh, one more thing. Sam sees fit to bring up "The road to serfdom". The road to serfdom for Today's Americans to to replace their civil rights with consumer rights, to believe the rich will act in their interest more than their elected representatives, that property=sovereignty, that "ownership society" is anything but an attempt to replace owner of USA=citizens with owner of USA=the rich. 4.250.198.126 14:58, 16 May 2005 (UTC)

Image:Baird.jpg

Image deletion warning

The image Image:Baird.jpg has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it will be deleted. If you have any information on the source or licensing of this image, please go there to provide the necessary information.

Burgundavia (✈ take a flight?) 00:19, May 26, 2005 (UTC)

User:Sam Spade/Report rogue admin

Hi, Andy. Please see this and comment if you like. Thanks. El_C 22:40, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

Look, I'd be lying if I said I wasn't angry about the way things transpired, but in hindsight you didn't do anything contrary to policy. That you ended up being in that position was hurtful, as you had earned my respect in the past, Despite our diferences. A warning to me personally would have been greatly appreciated. I would have explained my position, and reverted myself if that failed to convince you, believe it or not. Anyhow there is obviously no point in me attempting to persecute you over the matter. If your pissed off about it, feel free to do what you think needs doing, but the matter is dropped on my end. Sam Spade 17:09, 29 May 2005 (UTC)

Northern Alliance

Andy,

If you have a chance, could you look over Northern Alliance(White supremacist organization) and its discussion on vfd. The page title will be changed if the decision is to keep, obviously. CJCurrie 19:43, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Manitoba opposition leaders

I just realised there is no List of Leaders of the Opposition in Manitoba article. AndyL 04:23, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

This is because I don't have a complete list yet. The province's early years (before partisan politics was introduced) are pretty confusing on this front -- I have a few scattered names from the 1870s and 1880s, but nothing like a continuous list. (There are also a few points in the UFM/Lib-Prog/Coalition period that I'm not certain about -- there was an occasion when there was only *one* opposition member in the house, for instance.)

I could start the page tomorrow (I can't access the master file from my current location), but there would be a few gaps ... CJCurrie 04:49, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Naturally, the temptation overcame me and I created a list going as far back as the 1969 election. (The Liberal leader just before this election was Robert Bend, who didn't have a seat in the house -- I think Gildas Molgat was interim opposition leader, but I'll have to check the archives to be sure.)

Incidentally, the "one opposition member" was Lewis St. George Stubbs, in 1940-41. His life story was fairly interesting, from what I can tell ... CJCurrie 05:33, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Liberal Party of Canada leadership convention, 1968

I have recently been working on polishing Liberal Party of Canada leadership convention, 1968 with the hopes of bringing it up to featured article quality in the near future. I have just listed it on peer review for comment. I know you are one of the most active Wikipedians in these areas and I would much appreciate to hear any comments or criticisms you might have. - SimonP 14:00, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)

Privy Council

thanks for explaining that. It was really bugging me :) Dowew 02:34, 11 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice

Thanks for the advice. I did notice some other things similar to that, though.

NPOV

I did put up an RFC for them, a long time ago. No one has come to give comment. I'm still not satisfied, and my complaints are on the talk pages. -- Spinboy 03:55, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Just because no one commented doesn't mean they agreed with you. --

Spinboy 04:04, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Please take it to arbitration, because you also don't seem to be willing to even compromise. --

Spinboy 06:36, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Mediation

I am submitting to you a notice that I am appealing to the Mediation Committee in regards to your behavior, revert wars, and unresolved arguments on the Monarchist League of Canada and Monarchy in Canada pages.

Part of the process is that I recieve your consent.

As you are not a very cooperative person, I will pursue the mediation right now anyway, but I point out that it would probably be in your best interest to agree to it. --gbambino 19:52, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Reply from Maxwell C.

So you're a socialist eh? You should really switch to being a democratic socialist monarchist :P, it's so much more fun! Anyways, what you said is irrelevant. The Canadians want a page for the office of their Queen, LET THEM HAVE IT. If you are socialist enough to hate the monarchy, good for you, but wikipedia isn't a place for bias. The article still provides much useful information. Why don't you go and campaign for the pages similar to the Canadian one (those of New Zealand and Australia, IIRC) to be removed instead? It could be a more efficient use of your time? Maxwell C. 05:52, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

CPC/CPQ split

I've written an account of this situation on the CPC page, which I'll be posting to the CPQ page in a few moments. From what I can tell, the split appears to be in the CPQ itself. CJCurrie 19:00, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

UPEI

I was under the impession that they had totally left. That's fine with me. I'll see if I can't dig anything up later, but for now you can change it back. -- Spinboy 19:07, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

AH's associates

I was waiting for someone to notice Eichmann didn't belong on a list with that title (which as you indicated, wouldn't include any famous Nazi and so on). Wyss 03:20, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Stupid Microsoft quote character

How ever did you manage to move O’Donohue v. Canada, 2003 to O’Donohue v. Her Majesty the Queen, 2003 anyway? When I tried to move it to O'Donohue v. Her Majesty the Queen, 2003, so that the page title would not include Microsoft-specific characters, the Wikipedia move function blew up. I tried hand-construcing all sort of URL's, and they all blew out. (Although I actually think the v. Canada form is more correct - see Talk:O’Donohue v. Her Majesty the Queen, 2003.) Noel (talk) 06:15, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

User:Jnc/RMT

The back-quote (’) that's used in O'Donohue's name in the article title is a Microsoft-specific kludge (part of their "matching quotes" series).

In the article title, it's a one-byte character (hex 92), but whenever my browser runs across it in an edit box, it changes it to the Unicode equivalent two-byte character (hex 8217).

Anyway, since it doesn't work for lots of people, but apparently does for you, if you could change the article title to use the regular quote (') that would be great. Thanks! Noel (talk) 16:36, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Haboniem

do you go to a haboneim dror camp? I go to haboniem dror tavor in michigan

Haboniem

do you go to a haboneim dror camp? I go to haboniem dror tavor in michigan

Mary Kardash

I've expanded the page a bit. I'm not completely certain about Kardash's position on the Ukrainian famine, though the CPC's position (as I understand it) was that the famine occurred, but was not an act of genocide.

I don't have anything to add to the Smith page (yet). CJCurrie 23:30, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

haboniem

cool! i am going to haboniem camp tavor for my 3rd year tomorrow!

Elizabeth II of Canada

This is an issue of following proper procedure. Proper procedure includes:

at least a 2/3 majority - this discussion, being long and heated, deserves more than 5 days before we accept what is only just 2/3
being closed by a trusted user, not an anon IP (first time)
being closed by an impartial observer, not the nominator of the vfd (second time).

It does indeed look like the article will be redirected to Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom, and, personally, I think that would be the Right Thing to do. But what's important is that as many people as possible - even those that voted keep in the vfd - are happy that the Right Thing was done, and that their views were heard, and that proper procedure was followed. Do yourself a favour and leave it a couple more days. If you're right, then the result will be the same anyway. sjorford →•← 08:49, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

If an admin closes the discussion, certainly I'll respect that. That's exactly what I want, that a trusted, impartial observer makes the call. I humbly count myself as as trusted, impartial observer in this case, but I thought it was too close to call, hence I couldn't bring myself to condone what seemed to me to be an attempt to subvert process. But yes, if it's still open this time next week, give me a prod and I'll take responsibility for it. sjorford →•← 22:36, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://academickids.com:443/encyclopedia/index.php/User_talk:AndyL"