User talk:Eclecticology

You left me a message about the hacker's manifesto, AFAIK it was released under the public domain thats i felt comfortable adding it to wikipedia Lightning 19:47, Mar 20, 2004 (UTC)

Welcome to the 'pedia! Good work on the Library of Congress articles. maveric149

Hey Eclecticology -- I hope you don't mind me moving some of the Latin articles to their Anglicized equivalents (and in some cases their common names) -- I mean nothing by it. However, when ITIS lists an English equivalent (or a widely known common name that means essentially the same thing), could we use that and redirect the Latin to it? It just sounds overly pedantic to use the Latin all the time -- I don't know any biologists that talk or even write like that outside the most academic of the scientific literature (and wikipedia ain't that at all). When I do see the Latin, it is almost always in parenthesis after the Anglicized if not common name or within a cladogram/taxonomic tree. I'm not at all saying that you in any way have an academic writing style --- I'm just concerned that creating articles titled with the Latin names encourages that type of writing in others (with everyone else using pipes to hide the Latin). --maveric149

Thank you for your comment on my talk page, I'm always happy to read feedback and suggestions. In reply to point number 1, I can think of many examples where using sub-pages with a / is a bad idea, but I think that The Twilight Zone isn't one of the examples. These are Twilight Zone episodes, and that is all (ok, with the exception with An Occurrence at Owl Creek). So they are not going to be referenced in any other context. But, I may still be convinced otherwise on this.

You are right about point 2, and it will happen. It should be reorganized, so that it has a page for each season giving information on the season, and that can include the list of episodes for that season, and then there can be a master list all on one page. Also, the stuff I'm adding is only 'first-round'. I'm going through adding stubs on every episode, and then I shall build up information gradually. But you weren't complaing about the content, I know. Anyway, maybe I can be convinced on the subpage issue but one main problem is the amount of work it would take to move every page, it would be pretty tedious, and in my eyes for little gain. Thanks again, Smelialichu 21:07 Nov 28, 2002 (UTC)

Thanks for your note about Arabic names at Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions. My state of knowledge of Arabic is quite appalling! -- Oliver Pereira 02:19 Nov 29, 2002 (UTC)

I'm glad I can be of help. I'll have to take a break for a couple of days now though. By the way, I don't know any other Franz Grubers, so again I hope he's the right one. --KF 23:49 Dec 2, 2002 (UTC)

User:Two16 looking for your input on astrological topic. I've read Your coments in horoscope you seem NPOV. It could be fun because Bcrowell has left the community : see his comments on the village pump. It took a lot of dogged and committed posting to hold his rabid scientific reducftionist funsdamentalism in check.please see my posts for astrologer ephemeris table of houses talk:horoscopeand what horoscope looks like now

Two16 There is probably more going on with bcrowell than he let on at the village pump. The posts in Talk:horoscope did not go well for him. His ossified world view was shown up as he clumsily grasped at straws and ignored basic logic. Ultimately he made embarrassing mistakes in physics and silly completeness statements about science (his strongly held views and his profesion) which I showed him were demostrably false. His ego is massively hurt : he cleared out all incriminating material from the history.

I don't believe that bcrowell will come back even if he is sweet talked bcrowell biggest problems were advocasy, never understanding NPOV, mistaking snide and dismissive for balance, and mistaking fanaticism and prejudgement for science.

Scientists always lose arguements about science, with philosophers of science.

I 'm new here. And I've been bad. I was bold too boldand it put me on the vandalism page (216.129.198.41) and thrown off. Later I put some satire in a completely meaningless paragraph. It made it through several edits. Somebody finally noticed it and edited it out and added a dismissive summary. So I demolished each remaining sentence with ridicule.

sex was a wild snake pit. Now it will be stable for awhile. Most of the credit belongs talk:sex. I marshalled reason, external links, internal links to wikipedia to get NPOV in the article. Even the stuff casually dismissed as utter nonsence by the fundamentalist. By definition you can't convince a fundamentalist of your position you can only shows them the unreasonableness of theirs (if that)

Open source community is in my soul. I aspire to the ideals that the community needs me to have.

Moved a discussion about a discussion, from my user talk page back to the discussion page itself: Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions (calendar dates). Please add that page to your watchlist if you want to continue it. -- Bignose

When it was not checked I was told to check it as I was marking too many edits as major. I believe the solution to the problem is to introduce a new notation G which can be used to indicate truly minor grammatical edits. Vera Cruz

Why have you moved First Past the Post AGAIN? It is ALWAYS ALWAYS called First Past then Post - a proper noun, a formal title. It is NEVER described formally as first past the post, any more that you would write about queen elizabeth or pope john paul. Wiki policy is to follow the rules of grammar. Why don't you want to do it here? Students have been failed in exams for mis-naming it. It appears that a lot of people on Wiki don't know a lot about electoral systems; from the fact that their names are proper names to the mixing up of PR.STV with STV, two different systems. I am changing FPtP back to its grammatically correct name. (again) JTD 01:38 Feb 14, 2003 (UTC)~

I lurv your new usernic symbol. STÓD/ÉÍRE 01:08 Apr 9, 2003 (UTC)

It’s not unrealistic to suspect that the timing of the latest crackdown against dissidents in Cuba was linked to the timing of the war in Iraq, with the US media not paying that much attention to anything else. Castro has reasons to fear the Bush administration and its desires to topple all regimes that don’t share US values, geo-strategic interests, and economic interests. After Iraq, what’s next? Cuba, North Korea, Libya, Syria, or Iran?

I’m afraid of the hard right turn of US foreign policy, and I’m sure Castro is too.

172

Aaaagh! What have you done on Communist state? :-) Well, okay, you've just mucked up something already mucked up so much I have all but given up fixing it. Communist state (capital C) is a specific term for a system of governance and so is capitalised to denote that it is a specific and defined term that is treated as a proper noun. communist state (small c) is a state run by a communist government. Not all states with communist governments run a state along the Communist state model, which involves among other things a single party regime in which state and party are blurred, with the political elite controlling the system of government via the party in a manner unheard of in liberal democracies (eg. Gorbachev initially held no governmental post and was merely General Secretary of the communist party but still ran the state), where a governing elite, though they may come to power via the party, govern exclusively through state institutions (parliament, prime minister, presidency, etc). Similarly some states that use the Communist state model aren't necessarily governed according to the principles of communism; some have moved away from pure communism but still use a Communist state governmental model. The capital denotes whether one is talking about the specific definition or generally about communism. They are two different things. The former is a political science definition of a type of government, the latter is about communism. Only the former should be capitalised. The latter should not be. The capitalisation is used in english to distinguish formal proper nouns such a name (in this case the system Communist state) from a generalised set of terms. However every time people try to use capitals to do just that, someone comes along and either decapitalises everything or capitalises everything. (One person has been constantly doing this to 'screw up' the article deliberately!) Given his handywork, I am not surprised you were confused but you have only confused it now even more because no-one can tell at a glance what is the formal term and what isn't. FearÉÍREANN 03:27 17 May 2003 (UTC)

Communist state is a formal title of a system of government and is as a result capitalised, not least to distinguish from references to communism which of course are not capitalised. As was covered extensively in the talk page, it is not communism and does not refer to communism. It is a political science definition which as a formal definition and formal name, and is as a result capitalised. Why is that people on wikipedia seem so incapable of understanding that the word 'communist' can and is used on occasion in a manner that neither refers to automatically communISM nor to communist parties? It refers simply to a system of government in marxist-leninist states. If it referred to communism then you would be right. But it doesn't and you are not. Sorry if I sound narky but I have weeks of people constantly mis-understanding the term, at best (as in your case) accidentially. At worst deliberately, they then changing the content of the page and plonking in analyses of communISM even though political scientist after political scientist keeps telling them it is not about communism. It it like the farce over the capitalisation of birds all over again, with people who don't know the meaning of the term and how it is used (and what capitalisation rules are followed in its case) applying rules that don't apply to it, to it. Is it too much to ask that people ask the author of a page if they have queries about it, why it is in the format it is in before unilaterally changing it? FearÉÍREANN 18:44 17 May 2003 (UTC)

Regarding the rubbish you put on the Communist state talk page. It is complete garbage. Try understanding terms before you being lecturing people about them. Your comments on that page simply show you don't know what Communist state means; it is not the equivalent of republican, democratic, socialist, and bares no similarity with them. But then as your comments show, you haven't bothered to check out the topic. You have your fixation and why let facts interfere with it. FearÉÍREANN 21:19 17 May 2003 (UTC)

You and Tannin should both cut it out with the capitalization war. Why don't you go somewhere and discuss it, and try to work out some sort of arrangement? john 04:26 2 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Why do you keep on doing this? You're not getting anywhere. What do you hope to accomplish? Unless you stop this silliness and try to actually discuss a new arrangement with people (specifically, with Tannin), you're not going to get anywhere. john 05:55 2 Jun 2003 (UTC)

The arguments you've presented on my talk page are fairly convincing. But don't you think it would have been a good idea to bring them up on some discussion forum and tried to argue it out, rather than just try to muscle the changes through? As for me, I tend to think that the article title should be capitalized, simply because, well, I generally think that titles ought to be capitalized (although that's obviously not wikipedia policy), and because it looks sort of odd if we don't. But I'd agree with you that there's no need to capitalize use of the species name in sentences. As far as lists go, I think it just looks better to have terms in lists be capitalized, when possible, but who knows. In any event, I think bringing up the topic again on the mailing list or the appropriate meta-page would be the best way to go about it. Although it was amusing that we got into that whole edit war over bears at just the time that I was avoiding translating my stupid German passage about bears. (In German, of course, Bear is always capitalized, as are all Nouns.) john 08:36 2 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Bonjour Ec,

Nous avons un problème sur la fr. Relatif à User:Faré, au liberalism, libertarianism, minarchism et touti quanti. Une des accusations portées contre lui est qu'il aurait volontairement essayé de nous tromper en mélangeant les terminologies

Faré, un ardent liberal, aurait mis dans fr:libéralisme grosso-modo, le contenu de en:libertarianism puis "truque" les liens interwiki pour, depuis fr:libéralisme, arriver sur en:libertarianism plutôt que sur en:liberalism.

Bon, il lui est aussi reproché d'écrire de façon biaisée (autrement dit dans ce cas, de parler assez lourdement de ce qui le passionne - je pense etre donc parfaitement biaisée aussi :-))). Passons.

Ma question n°1 : la traduction de liberalism est elle liberalisme, ou les deux idéologies sont elles en réalité des faux amis ?

Idem pour libertarianism ? Le mot libertarianisme existe t il en français et recouvre t il la meme signification qu en anglais ?

Enfin, sais tu si qn sur en, connais suffisemment le sujet pour jeter un coup d oeil sur toutes les modifs apportées par Faré sur ces thématiques (ainsi que sur l anarchisme qu il a très lourdement retouché sur en) ?

Merci pour toutes infos.

Notre pb, au dela de l'expression très partisane de Faré, est que visiblement aucun des détracteurs de Faré ne semble connaitre le libéralisme, et qu'ils ont une méchante tendance à confondre la "neutralité" avec un plat de nouilles à l'eau. Rien de nouveau.

(note : je ne connais rien au sujet du libéralisme, et assez peu des idéologies politiques en général)

Le second, est que Faré est un coutumier de en, donc utilise des liens en: dans les discussions. Or, il n'y a pas de différences d'affichage entre un lien vide et un lien plein. Il est donc accusé de pratiquer l'entourloupe.

Le 3ème est qu'il s'obstine à appeler ces détracteurs des "cocos" :-)))). Mais il est vrai que s'exprime contre lui une véritable chasse aux sorcières. Bon, c'était en passant. Curieusement, en regardant l'historique de certains articles anglais, je vois un utilisateur User:Fare (sans accent). Je me demande si c'est le meme, et je me demande si notre utilisateur actuel est vraiment le même que le votre actuel.

Bon week end.

User:Anthere

Merci pour ta réponse Ec. Je n'avais jamais entendu parler du mot libertarianisme (fr) avant d arriver sur wiki, mais en venait a me demander si ce n etait pas un mot typiquement canadian (Faré ayant écrit sur une revue québécoise, je suppose qu'il est canadien francophone...). Apparemment, ce n est donc pas si clair. Maintenant, meme si le mot n existe pas en français, le concept existe (ailleurs), donc il faut en parler. Comment parle t on d un concept pour lequel on a pas de mot ? :-)

Pour les choses essentielles, oui. Les trois choses importantes que je vois dans cette affaire, sont l intolérance majeure de la part de 3/4 contributeurs face au biais de Faré (considérée contre de la tromperie et du vandalisme), refus de discuter le désaccord (ie, on supprime la page et le problème est résolu), le comportement peu agréable de Faré face à cela (moquerie, usage de termes peu sympathiques, tels que "mon coco") et usage hier de "protection de la page" par un sysop impliqué dans une guerre d'édition avec Faré sur "communisme". En bref, manque de coopération et abus d'administrateur. Burk. Bon, affaire à suivre. Merci en tous cas. User:Anthere

PS : tu n'as pas tort pour "clique", mais d'un autre coté, le terme "type" ne recèle qu'à peine l'aspect péjoratif. Nous n'avons probablement pas d'expression équivalente, meme si "type" ou "genre" est apparemment la meilleure. Je comprend l'aspect "association".

The Steve Martin/Chevy Chase days were great, of course, and Eddie Murphy had some classic skits, too. Some inspired lunacy during the Churchlady/Wayne's World days, but the Adam Sandler stretch leaves me cold--that's what I'm referring to with the 30/1500 comment. :-) Best, Koyaanis Qatsi 21:12 12 Jun 2003 (UTC)

If who votes doesn't matter; then, neither does the vote. Pizza Puzzle

You might be interested in some current activity at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Battles --mav 21:08, 31 Jul 2003 (UTC)

You asked this question:

Does anyone know if there is a way to refer to Japanese ships that parallels the use of "USS" for American ships?

over on Talk:Attack_on_Pearl_Harbor a while back The answer is " "HIJMS", for "His Imperial Japanese Majeesty's Ship" - Noel.

Hi. I actually consider the XXX links a feature. Hehehe. Sort of an incentive to researching the missing information. Then again, it might put off serious researchers. :) --seav 02:19, Aug 19, 2003 (UTC)

Hi Ec.

How would you translate in french, "board" and "board manual" as in m:Board. We can't settle on the right word. Thanks Anthère

oui, cela me semble être bien. It is a sort of advisory board, right ? Perhaps "comité consultatif" pourrait etre pas mal aussi finalement. Je ne vois toujours pas ce que peut etre une traduction pour board manual :-( Bon, on va tourner la phrase autrement pour ne pas dire le mot dans l immédiat :-) Merci :-)

I like what you did with the PB subclass. It looked a little open previously. The important thing is, is it easy to read, and I think it is. -- sugarfish 13:49, 25 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Logo contest

Did you vote in the logo contest? There is no link to a user page on the respective page on Meta.—Eloquence 22:52, Sep 25, 2003 (UTC)

I hope you checked my edit summaries for both scientific method and interpretations of the scientific method

Greek names

Hi Ec. Sorry, I didn't understand your reply about the Greek names of states in Wiktionary. Did you mean there is no point putting it there or that it should be moved there? Thanks. Angela 21:47, Nov 5, 2003 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. Angela

gg==Battles==

Hi there! Just wanted to know, why you changed name of batlle Grotniki to Grotnik? This makes no sense. Village is called Grotniki, not Grotnik.

Another one, i returned to wikipedia and i am happy that someone is continuing the efforts with uniforming battles. I wonder only why you abandoned standard links i suggested earlier? I can't find any discussion about it. szopen

As for Grotniki, I assume the case is solved. Battle of Grotniki, not Grotnik (the village was called Grotniki).

As for links: see e.g. Battle of Tannenberg (1410)

Hi Eclecticology

I've reformatted your President of India page so that you don't need to create redirects for [[01-26]] etc. I suggest leaving the ones already created, but not creating any more. DJ Clayworth 22:47, 10 Nov 2003 (UTC)

You may want to look at the Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates and numbers). One of the things that is said there, and its important, is that you should not use numbers to represent months. It's not too bad if you are always going to write YYYY-MM-DD, but as soon as you omit the year then the day becomes confusing. '05-03' means different things in Europe and America. As for creating 366 redirects, that seems rather a lot of work when you could just write the link names in the six or seven places you currently have links already. You might also want to ask some other people what they think. Remember that styles like this are about making things understandable for everybody. The current styles are widely used in thousands of articles, and your style in not so many. DJ Clayworth 14:29, 11 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I also want to add that your date formats are not being picked up by the automatic date formatting feature, which will annoy many people. You should really keep all dates in a format that Wikipedia understands and can convert. No offence intended, but I'm going to edit President of India to show you what I mean (check out the date format in Special:Preferences). DJ Clayworth 15:39, 11 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Hi, Ec. First can I say that we all like the President of India article. There is some good stuff there. However many Wikipedians have discussed the question of date formats, and we would prefer to keep them in a standard format that Wiki can understand. Plus the redirects that have to be created to make your dating work are ambiguous: 05-03 means 5th March in Europe and 3rd May in the US. We had to put a disambiguation in to make it clear, which means that if you click on some of your date links you go to a page asking you which date you mean.

I've written more stuff on Talk:President of India. If you need to discuss this further feel free to talk about it there.

Once again, thanks for your contribution and keep up the good work. DJ Clayworth 23:29, 13 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Hi Ec -- I know you haven't been a major contributor to 2002 Gujarat violence, but I just wanted to let you know that Angela asked me to mediate, and I am in the process of reviewing (I would not characterize it as "investigating") the article, the edit history of the article (http://en2.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Talk:2002_Gujarat_violence&action=history) and its talk page (http://en2.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=2002_Gujarat_violence&action=history), the various comments linked to this page (http://en2.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Special:Whatlinkshere&target=2002_Gujarat_violence), and the email traffic here (http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2003-November/008097.html), here (http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2003-November/008257.html), here (http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2003-November/008258.html), here (http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2003-November/008259.html), and here (http://mail.wikipedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2003-November/008284.html) (and a few other threads) on the mailing list related to it. Even though the page is unprotected, I would ask all parties involved to hold off editing this article voluntarily until I can offer a few suggestions, which I will do within a few hours. Thanks for your forbearance, BCorr ¤ Брайен 14:36, 11 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I have posted a comment on the talk page of Politics of Canada. This page features by far the most accurate and neutral summary of the Canada/Quebec constitutional issue I have ever read in English. Whoever wrote it, congratulations. Who is responsible for this article? Mathieugp

NOTE: See bottom of page for mediation proposal

Hi again -- only one person has made any edits whatsoever to 2002 Gujarat violence/revision, and it was tiny. You are "officially" invited to take a stab at it. Thanks, BCorr ¤ Брайен 02:36, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Hello, before you make any more date redirects like 09-22, please see Wikipedia:Votes for deletion#November 12. -- Minesweeper 07:44, Nov 14, 2003 (UTC)

Ec, please stop undoing the dismbiguation of [01-11]] etc. DJ Clayworth 22:32, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Can I second David's request please? I'm not going to get in an edit war over a bunch of numerical redirects but you need to discuss this before reverting Martin's disambiguation of the articles. Thanks. Angela 22:49, 14 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Dates...

It was decided at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion that the date-redirects you were making are not necessary. They were deleted because they serve no purpose. Please stop re-creating them. thanks! Kingturtle 06:21, 17 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Please explain why you continue to create these redirects? We want to understand. Kingturtle 06:35, 17 Nov 2003 (UTC)

~~Ec, this isn't looking good. You're going to have to stop and discuss, or else I'm going to have to do something. -- Tim Starling 06:49, Nov 17, 2003 (UTC)~~

You're not going to be blocked anyway, in the short term. Brion said no. -- Tim Starling 07:04, Nov 17, 2003 (UTC)

How are my deletions "a breach of truce". The outcome of VfD was completely clear, and I'm hardly the only one deleting them. Have you seen the Deletion log? You behaviour is completely unacceptable. Angela 07:06, 17 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Ec, do you realise the dynamic date software automatically creates piped links to whatever date format is the site standard? [[2003]]-[[03-11]] will automatically be converted to [[2003]]-[[March 11|03-11]] , as soon as that feature is implemented. -- Tim Starling 07:25, Nov 17, 2003 (UTC) [clarification added following Brion's comment below, TS]

That doesn't appear to be the case. Would be a nice feature and save a lot of useless anger, though. Is that supposed to work? --Brion 07:23, 17 Nov 2003 (UTC)

A truce in January? I wasn't even here in January and I can find no such discussion. The only way these can stay is if they are in a disambiguation format, but it seems you are willing to allow those. Have you looked at how much work you are causing everyone? Can you please please just stop and discuss this? Angela 07:21, 17 Nov 2003 (UTC)

There was no such truce. Have you no respect for the views of people who are quite clearly against this? If it wasn't for the fact that Brion thinks the sky might fall in if a redirect is ever deleted, you may have actually been blocked over this. That ought to tell you something about how wrong this is. Angela 07:31, 17 Nov 2003 (UTC)

So you were doing it to prove a point about VfD? (What is the smiley icon for raised eye-brows?). Anyway, Tim is going to code something which will supposedly solve your date issues and will hopefully stop your desire to create any more. That doesn't solve your VfD issues though whatever they might be. Angela 08:11, 17 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Ec, I am sorry for taking this so seriously earlier. I should never have wasted so much time arguing about the existence of such pages.

I agree that co-operating on matters such as transfers to Wiktionary would be far more a productive use of our time.

With apologies,
Angela

Transwiki

I really like that idea, and it doesn't necessarily have to involve any developer time either, as it could just be a fake namespace, certainly until something more permanent could be coded. This solves the problem of Wikipedians not wanting to move stuff to Wiktionary because they don't know how to format the entries correctly. If they could just leave it in the transwiki namespace without worrying about formatting, it would make things a lot easier, and as this namespace would reside at Wiktionary, there is more chance of Wiktionarians knowing about it and working on it. Eventually, when the search feature is turned back on, it would be better to have this as a real namespace, because then you could search for just for the transwiki articles, but until then, a database query could be used to find them all every couple of weeks, for example, to ensure people knew they existed. Do you think the idea has to go to the mailing list or can it just be implemented? Angela 20:25, 17 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Votes for Deletion

Votes for Deletion" is not a tyranny of the majority, as you have called it.

VfD exists to prevent any single administrator from going hog-wild with deletion power. VfD keeps that power of the individual in check by entailing a process of time and community input. The deletion process, therefore, is not an individual act, but an act of many. It is not a tyranny, but a process that involves all users.

You seem to see VfD as a conspiracy of "deletionists," but in fact, plenty of users make arguments to keep articles; moreover, a good number of users edit articles to save them. Conflicting points of view are often discussed regarding nominated articles. A good number of articles survive the process. What I am describing is not tyranny, it is in the vicinity of fairness.

Sincerely,

Kingturtle 23:42, 17 Nov 2003 (UTC)

In re The Best Years of Our Lives: You should say at the beginning that it's a movie. After reading the first sentence I thought it was a book. Also, could you follow the highlighting convention? Michael Hardy 20:51, 19 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Hi Ec, I drafted a page about m:Transwiki on Meta. Angela 06:53, 20 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I hope you don't mind me running off with your idea, but I added some details about how the process would work at m:Transwiki. Can you give it a quick check to see if it's going in the direction you had planned it to. Thanks. Angela 23:01, 20 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Abuse of power??

Protecting a page to stop an edit war is not an abuse of sysop powers unless you have been personally involved with the page, which I had not. If you are so concerned about the fact I protected that page that you feel the need to tell the entire mailing list that I am abusing my sysop privileges, I would appreciate it if you could discuss the issue with me first. Angela 20:37, 27 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Yes I was referring to Sunset High School. You said on the list that anyone who had blocked the page was abusing powers, which clearly refers to me as I was one of the three people who did this.

What is "your admission of guilt" supposed to mean? I am not guilty of anything, nor have I admitted such.

I reverted the article to its protected state because it should not have been unprotected. I do this when any sysop edits a protected page they shouldn't. [1] (http://en2.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Maveric149&diff=1753049&oldid=1753022). It has nothing to do with my POV. I don't happen to have one on this, which is why I was able to protect the page in the first place. I would not protect a page in which I had expressed a POV, or a page I had ever edited. Angela 00:14, 28 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Re Peggy Fleming. What is the point of an "article" where all the information is on other pages? If you think the article is worth keeping, you could revert the deletion, or probably more quickly retype the substub. jimfbleak 06:06, 4 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Hello Ec.

I wanted to know how much influence the French Academia still has on Canada ? Does it have any juridiction ? I suppose no, but I just want to check. Is there a sort of similar organ for french Canada ? That is to work against french pov. Thanks PomPom

Thanks Ec :-)

Okay, that is a good day :-) I took the decision to do what I have been willing to do since beginning of november. I just hesitated too long :-) I had hoped the press release would be my last email to the ml talking about the french wikipedia, at least to have a good laugh, but well...no one is perfect :-)

Shall take care of more rewarding matters now.

my best

PomPom 20:32, 11 Dec 2003 (UTC)

All I've wanted since last April with regard to that article was a good place to put it. I can't thank you enough. - Hephaestos 04:34, 12 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Good point about the space at the end, I'll probably make that change (probably to (born 1987) as pointed out on the talk page) when I get back from work (can't imagine anyone objecting to that if they didn't object to the other). Good point also about how this might not be the end of it for some, but it's a nice respite anyway. :) - Hephaestos 15:25, 12 Dec 2003 (UTC)

And yes, it has started again. - Hephaestos 15:58, 12 Dec 2003 (UTC)

It wasn't my idea. I was just following the suggestions made about the page when it was listed on VfD:

source text referring to Australian court case. Secretlondon
Delete, source document is entirely inappropriate, could be moved to Wikisource.... Daniel Quinlan
Delete, source document. Maximus Rex

However, surely all the parts starting "At paragraph xxx" are source text even if the beginning isn't? I certainly don't think that the text in the form in which it is now at Wikisource is appropriate for Wikipedia, but I don't think we have enough guidelines yet to determine whether it is suitable for Wikisource. Angela, desperately awaiting a What Wikisource is not page. :)

Israel independance

Your orphan contribution at Wikisource Israel's declaration of statehood duplicates what was already there at Declaration of the Establishment of the State of Israel. Please remove it and avoid creating these orphan entries. ☮ Eclecticology 08:43, 2003 Dec 13 (UTC)

I am sorry I am not aware of every page that exists at Wikisource. There are over 1000 pages now, so the lack of redirects is going to lead to duplicated entries. I don't think criticising people for making such errors is a good way to encourage participation in the project. Orphan entries can be sorted out by anyone interested in doing that by using the lonely pages function. It's a wiki, so the point is someone else will come along and make improvements and solve these issues. It's not finished. These things will sort themselves out in time. Don't stress about it! Angela . 14:39, 13 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Help wanted: Spirituality Portal

Hi. Just saw that you are familiar with astrology and parapsychology. I am looking for ppl to help me finish User:Optim/Spirituality Portal. You are welcome to have a look at the page and the talk page and tell me your opinion. If you like we can cooperate and find more ppl knowledgeable in these areas so that we will create something great. if you like to help, write your message in the talk page of the Spirituality Portal. if you know other ppl who could help, tell me their usernames so that I can comunicate with them. Also Check User talk:Optim/Spirituality Portal. Thank you! Peace Profound Optim 21:10, 20 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Declaration of Independence of Lower Canada

I understand. I simply was not aware of Wikisource at all when I decided to put a translation and orignal copy of it on wikipedia. When I did learn of Wikisource, I just dumped it there. I will put more relevant details on the subject so people can understand what the historical context is. -- Mathieugp 21:13, 21 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Hi Eclecticology. Just added some responses on Talk:Mars_effect. Not changed the actual page else we're going to get into a silly edit war about a few odd words. Spellbinder 09:02, 2 Jan 2004 (UTC)

You may disagree with my edit to Academie Francaise, but I'll thank you not to describe it as "vandalism." The article was a mess and is still a mess.Adam 00:58, 12 Jan 2004 (UTC)

The incomplete list was very confusing and unattractive. My view is that the complete list should be worked on off-site and not included in the article until it is finished. In the meantime there should be a list of current members, which is what the majority of visitors to the article will be looking for. However since you are working on the article and I am not I will wait and see how things develop. Adam 02:25, 12 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Hi! Have now found your other communications on my user page at wikipedia. Yes writing about esoteric matters such as the Quaternity invariably draws a blank at the 'pedia . It is a rather specialised Jungian psychological term. Shall post the full Latin titles to the three pieces at wikisource when i have time.Norwikian 04:16, 13 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Hi. On the List of painters are you using American as a synonym for United States? If so would you object to using something like "U.S." in the listings? Cheers, -- Infrogmation 23:29, 31 Jan 2004 (UTC)

Initials

You removed the phrase

Modern typographical practice in book and newspaper publishing leans towards the latter.

from Wikipedia talk:Naming conventions declaring it "unsubstantiated". I don't know where you live but where I live I don't see any books or newspapers using the periods-with-spaces style. As far as I can tell, it went out of fashion in the ~1960s. Fine, you can adhere to the in this case outmoded prescript of the style guides, but that is called pedantry. Also, I would be reluctant to submit every issue on wikipedia to a vote, but it seems that for essentially aesthetical issues, which is what this is, it is not at all inappropriate. -- Viajero 09:35, 18 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I read again the democide article, and it should be stated, that Germans weren't victims of democide after WW2. There were few massacres committed by Red Army, there were bombing and torpedoing evacuation ships and trains, accidental revange. Probably also hunger deaths. The fantastic number 2 100 000 is out of the question for total number of victims. But democide requires the active government to organise the crime. Seaman 10:15, 3 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Apocatastasis

I put this the vfd notice on Apocatastasis because it had originally been deleted after a vote in December 2003 and was also listed on the wiktionary except for the opening paragraph. It was a toss-up whether it belonged in vfd or village pump but because it had been previously on vfd and deleted, I thought vfd seemed more appropriate. RedWolf 06:06, Mar 4, 2004 (UTC)

If you could, please adopt this article (my knowledge of the area is practically nil) as it's currently orphaned and thus why I originally came across it. RedWolf 02:14, Mar 5, 2004 (UTC)

Revisionism

Your using the therm "Revisionism" is unappropriate. Revisionism is used to name the alternative history findings that denies crticly proved historical events. There is no consensus, that there occured democide of Germans caused by their expulsion after WW2. The population transfer was agreed on Potsdam conference to avoid ethnic clashes and was ordered be performed in ordered and humanitarian way. There were no intention of general slaughter of Germans nor there were ever signals that transfer fails the criteria set by the victorius powers. The whole issue belongs to alternative history and was created by number play and factual forgery. Germans were set in motion by advancing Red Army. During winter evacuation happenned frequent tragedies, like Gustlof torpedoing with some 5 000 victims. However, the organized population transfer, that happenned after the war didn't caused a lot of such a tragedies. Cautious 10:03, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)

About Democide. I put new interesting material in the talk page. Please put your comments and try to reply my arguments. Cautious 22:43, 7 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I see that you're now in the crossfire of Adam Carr (the Joe McCarthy of Wiki) at Talk:Kim Jong Il. If he continues to spew his mindless ad hominems and slogans, don't even dignify him with a response. BTW, sorry about how the admin issue turned out. I was shocked that anyone would oppose your nomination. I respect Angela, but I regretted the bandwagon effect of her opposition. 172 13:00, 6 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Postal Codes

I like how you assumed the worst by assuming I was making trouble. The US zip code pages got listed on VfD, by wikipedia admins. I agreed, so I followed their lead by undoing the changes on wikisource that would leave the information nowhere when the pages were deleted. Secondly, my count of the votes on that page gives different results from what you and JamesDay claim.

Further comments on the subject should be directed at votes for deletion, where the pages are listed. -- Cyrius | Talk 01:58, Mar 29, 2004 (UTC)

Alright then, have it your way. If/when the pages get deleted, they'll just go away. -- Cyrius | Talk 04:09, Mar 29, 2004 (UTC)

Hey Eclecticology

Just wondering, what aspect of Welteislehre disqualifies it from being a pseudo science. I looked over the article and it looks to fit right in. Everything I read on it referred to it as pseudo science as well. Yardcock 20:34, 14 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Hi. Since you've done so much POV work on Fidel Castro, I'd appreciate it if you could take a look at this new article called Allegations of human rights abuses in Castro's Cuba. I'm not personally familiar with Cuban history and if I removed everything that sounds POV, there would be nothing left.

Diderot 17:20, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Hah! You two think that you can "wear me down" on the Castro page? Good luck, you will need it. TDC 15:11, 19 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Paul Smith

Thank you for your message. I mistakenly thought he had blanked your user page and replaced it with his text, as he has done so in the past with the article. I made the assumption that that you would see on your watchlist that your user page had been changed, and would investigate the reason. I will continue to do the same for other users besides you when I feel their page has been vandalized, as others have done so for me. As for your page, and the article itself, you can rest assured that I will lift no finger to correct anything he adds. -- Decumanus | Talk 12:24, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for replying. I appreciate it. I too am distrurbed that Paul seems to have Jimbo on his side somehow. -- Decumanus | Talk 16:23, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Astrology & Newton

With regard to Newton on the Astrology page, why did you put the reference to alchemy in, when the books listed on the talk page have nothing to do with alchemy? Mintguy (T) 15:22, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)

You said - Although there is no serious claim to Newton's being involved in astrology, the same cannot be said about alchemy. The astrological and astronomical concepts of the time did tend to be commonly imported in the study of alchemy. Eclecticology 18:29, 2004 Apr 23 (UTC)

No doubt. But the four books that Newton possessed, that are listed on the Astrology talk page, that mentioned Astrology were not more concerned with Alchemy. Mintguy (T) 20:01, 23 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Do you want to make some comments at Talk:Augusto Pinochet#Another poll? 172 15:19, 19 May 2004 (UTC)

In need of community support

I'm in need of community support.

Right now, I am on the verge of being driven away from Wikipedia through the relentless efforts of a single problem user on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/172, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration, and Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/172 vs VeryVerily.

The same user who refuses to accept the results of the Augusto Pinochet poll (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Augusto_Pinochet/Archive_3#Another_poll) (see also [2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Talk:Augusto_Pinochet&diff=3762238&oldid=3762178)) goes through my user history every time he logs on and then starts reverting things that I've written arbitrary. He manages to divert attention away from the articles onto ad hominem attacks, thus poisoning the well against me. [3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/172&diff=3684325&oldid=3684302)

He has been doing nothing else for the past couple of months, other than making some minor changes to pages that he finds through the random page feature. Meanwhile, I've been working on articles such as Empire of Brazil, Dollar Diplomacy, and Franco-U.S. relations. I'm tired of letting a problem user define my contributions to the encyclopedia, as opposed to my work.

I may have said some regrettable things in the past, but my editing practices are scholarly and methodical. When I make an edit, my choice is based on a consideration of the quality of the encyclopedia. Unlike the user who avowedly admits to trying to escalate a personal feud (see, e.g., [4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Michael_Snow&diff=3758167&oldid=3758053)), I do not decide which pages to edit and what changes to make on the basis of personality feuds, emotional POV whims, or a desire to get attention.

Although this user shows little evidence that he understands the content of the articles, I have shown considerable restraint, given my professional expertise. [5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/172#Outside_view). Only through community support (i.e. lobbying the arbitration committee)will this user be stopped. Otherwise, Wikipedia will die unless we stop vandals and clueless POV-pushers from running rampant and driving away valued contributors.

Please feel free to direct questions and comments to my talk page or e-mail at sokolov47@yahoo.com.

Sincerely,

172 01:51, 30 May 2004 (UTC)

I can't find "Eclecticology" in either Webster's or the OED. What does it mean and where does it come from? – Clarknova 16:01, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Hi Eclecticology, I've made a request for mediation regarding the astrology page. Are you willing to go to mediation? --Bcrowell 15:00, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Korn shell

Someone has proposed that three Korn shell items of yours be deleted from Wikisource. Could you please comment at Wikisource:Wikisource:Proposed deletions on your current feelings about these three. Eclecticology 05:40, 2004 Aug 21 (UTC)

looks like a troll run imo. Checked all code, runs like clockwork on the 5 implementations of Korn at my disposal, and I know for a fact is useful information because I have pointed a few people at it already, and ahve heard nothing untowards or negative in return. Sjc 12:54, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Meetup in Seattle

Ec, Michael Snow and I are planning a meetup of Wikipedians in Seattle, probably at the downtown library on the 6th of November. I am trying to contact any Wikipedian I know in the general area so they can start looking at calendars -- I know you listed yourself in B.C., but I don't know if that's the lower mainland or Kamloops. On the off chance that it's the former, I thought you'd want to know about it, even if the drive might be too daunting. If you want to know more, right now details are being hashed out on my talk page and Michael's. We'll have a page up at Wikipedia:Meetup in the next few days. Have a good autumn, and I'll hope to see you on the 6th. Jwrosenzweig 22:32, 30 Sep 2004 (UTC)

TUCIHHGTG

Hi, thanks for your comment. First,I don't know much about licences or copyright law. I have contacted Mathias Maul about both issues. I think that if he releases the index under GFDL after that he has released the original disclaimer it overrides it, so I have clearly stated in my email that the GFDL makes it possible for others to edit his work and asked if he was ok with this. For now, I'm going to change the page on 'Source so that no edits are made until I get an email back. --Dyss 14:00, 9 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Eric Bogle

I didn't know you were a fan! *grin* Ambi 10:57, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

"If I can be of help" offer

My offer was more in general, than a request for an assignment... I always offer help when I ask for help, just as I always attend to one or two pages on 'pages needing attention' when I list a page there. I also don't like to generate tasks for others to do, but I am always eager to repay assistance in kind. It is simply a custom I have adopted. Thanks for your quick response. I imagine I will eventually be very active in wiktionary, as I am on wikipedia, but for now, I just dropped in to request an entry for the phrase cat and mouse, cat-and-mouse game or whatever would be appropriate as I have seen the expression redlinked on wikipedia and do not think an encyclopedia entry is warranted for it, Nice to meet you.Pedant 01:54, 2004 Oct 25 (UTC)

Meetup

Ray--do I have your name right?--I think I heard someone call you that. It was great to meet you today. I put up some pictures at Wikipedia:Meetup/Seattle including a couple of you, by the way. Best wishes. --Matt Decumanus 09:09, 2004 Nov 7 (UTC)

RFA

Do you consider my request for adminship worthy of support? --[[User:Eequor|ηυωρ (https://academickids.com:443/encyclopedia/index.php/User_talk:Eequor)]] 08:13, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Project Genealogy

Dear E, remember discussions on Wikipedia:WikiProject Genealogy abt a year or two ago? Reading through the discussion page, it appears to me, the project was false related, under hoobies, when the topic for my suggestions was in fact History/noble or royal ancestry or similair, which fits the data more into history rather than hobbies. maybe more people would now be interested to loominto this if it was placed ona proprite place? Ideas? Can u move it? here is an example how it is implemented on the swedish wikipedia: http://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_XII:s_antavla (ancestry of Charles XII of Sweden) Dan Koehl 11:13, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Article Licensing

Hi, I've started the Free the Rambot Articles Project which has the goals of getting users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to...

...all U.S. state, county, and city articles...
...all articles...

using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) version 1.0 and 2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to the GFDL (which every contribution made to Wikipedia is licensed under), but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles (See the Multi-licensing Guide for more information). Since you are among the top 1000 most active Wikipedians, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles.

Nutshell: Wikipedia articles can be shared with any other GFDL project but open/free projects using the incompatible Creative Commons Licenses (e.g. WikiTravel) can't use our stuff and we can't use theirs. It is important to us that other free projects can use our stuff. So we use their licenses too.

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}} template (or {{MultiLicensePD}} for public domain) into their user page, but there are other templates for other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

Option 2

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}} with {{MultiLicensePD}}. If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know at my talk page what you think. -- Ram-Man 18:06, Nov 30, 2004 (UTC)

Red Ensign

Why do you say the usage of the red ensign by neo-nazi groups is "irrelevent"? AndyL 14:37, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

So then the fact that the confederate flag was revived in the 1960s by various white supremacist groups in the south shouldn't be mentioned in an article on the confederate flag? The usage of flags is certainly germane to articles about a flag.. Should it necessarily be the main point of the article? No. But to avoid any mention at all would be negligent. The point is the Candian red ensign fell into disuse in the 1960s and has been rarely seen until then. Very few people fly it today. By far the largest group that does use the flag is neo-nazis who have adopted it as their Canadian symbol in oppoisition to the "multiculturalist" maple leaf. There is no reason not to mention that in passing in an article on the red ensign. It is certainly relevent. The fact that this is embarassing to the few other red ensign supporters in the country, those who are not neo-nazis, is not a good reason for non-inclusion. Our point in writing articles is not to "protect" the reputation of the topic (in this case the red ensign), to exclude material for that reason is POV. AndyL 15:43, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

January 15 Seattle meetup

Just wanted to let you know we are planning another Seattle meetup on January 15, 2005. We're trying to get a sense of who will attend, so please drop by that page & leave a note. -- Jmabel | Talk 23:40, Dec 22, 2004 (UTC)

About the meetup...thanks for your concern. I really would love to come, but honestly, I can't see my parents driving me three, four hours to Seattle to do it. Maybe if it were in Vancouver. Ah well, what can you do, right? P M C 01:14, 24 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Whole Earth Catalog

We will have images of every page of the first four Whole Earth Catalogs on wikisource; I hope that makes it appropriate for the project. I have a copyright release from the original publishers, Stewart Brand and Kevin Kelly. The source images should go on wikisource and the OCR'ed text + images on wikibooks, for updating with more recent information... talk to me more about this later in the week, once I've fully processed the new year. :-)

Cheers, +sj + 07:48, 4 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Mysteries of the Korean language

Hi: Okay, let me shake the cobwebs off as I temporarily step out of wikiretirement. Sorry for the late reply. Anyhow, I've added the requested article. The "Hun-eum reading" line was added by a bot (not mine), whose operator I asked to later correct to "Eumhun reading." I redirected the article Hun-eum (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Hun-eum) to Eumhun (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Eumhun), and added an explanation of the concept. (If it's too encyclopedic for Wiktionary, someone can cut it down to size!) While I was at it, I updated the section Meaning and Sound on the Wikipedia Hanja page as well. -Sewing - talk 13:37, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:No original research

One of your contributions last December to Wikipedia:No original research ("it purports to refute another idea") is now being challenged; you might want to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:No original research. Jayjg ^(talk) 03:11, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Poll: Inclusion of Biblical figures at List of occultists

I have put up a poll concerning the inclusion of Solomon, Jesus, and the Three Wise Men at Talk:List of occultists. As someone who has contributed to the page in the past, your input is invited. -- Smerdis of Tlön 04:54, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

List of Godfathers

Hello Eclecticology. I hope you don't mind but I did some minor editing on the List of godfathers. I would have alphabetized them or list them by era although I wasn't sure which order should they be in ? 209.213.71.78 21:18, 10 May 2005 (UTC)

lots of edits, not an admin

Hi - I made a list of users who've been around long enough to have made lots of edits but aren't admins. If you're at all interested in becoming an admin, can you please add an '*' immediately before your name in this list? I've suggested folks nominating someone might want to puruse this list. Thanks. -- Rick Block (talk) 22:59, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)

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