User talk:Hcheney/Archive 2

I just wanted to say that I really respect the polite and non-confrontational way you withdrew your nomination acceptance. I'm sure you'll be renominated soon, after things die down a bit, and once again you will have my support. Your mature way of handling this has reflected well on you. moink 04:18, 26 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Welcome back! Hadn't realized you were gone such a short time. moink is entirely right of course, as I'm sure I said to you before. I would like to nominate you for adminship -- in fact, I went to do so just now, but I realized that you would probably rather I discussed it with you first. I will write you an absolutely glowing nomination, of course, but if you'd rather wait a bit longer, you are free to let me know, and I will of course respect your wishes. You handled yourself with great skill and integrity in a difficult situation, and I admire you tremendously for it -- such worth is well deserving of adminship. Let me know, either here or on my talk page, if you would be willing to accept a nomination, if offered. Thanks for your work and generally excellent attitude, Jwrosenzweig 23:11, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Thank you. Having your permission, I will look for an opportune time to nominate you -- given some bizarre recent nominations of controversial users (which have brought out the firing spirit in a few), I'll bide time a bit longer, but I assure you I won't forget. I'm honored to be thought of highly by you, and appreciate your comments on my talk page: keep up the excellent work, and watch your talk page for a note from me in the next few weeks saying "I've nominated you". :-) Jwrosenzweig 23:09, 13 Apr 2004 (UTC)

thanks

Thanks for your vote in re my admin nomination. Since you've not been editing in the crypto corner, you're one of those I was surprised would have even known about anything I've done. Except for a single edit of a cat article (and a few other such) nearly everything I've done has been in crypto.

Anyway, since you're not a crypto specialist, I have a slight proposal to make... and an offer. There is need for a non specialized eye to look over some of the general crypto articles (not the technical ones with math and algorithms innards) for lack of clarity and other such that's hard to see from close up. Comments on narrative arc (or lack), over use of terms too technical for the general reader, opacity, missing concepts, unclear concepts, ... A writing thing really, not anything actually cryptographic (except possibly the writing here or there).

The offer, of course, is to provide a similar eye for articles you feel need an overview from a stranger.

Maybe we can improve a few crypto articles and some <your choice> with a little mutual eyeballing?

Thanks again.

ww 20:55, 15 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Quickpolls

"If due process and attempts at de-escalation are skipped, Quickpolls will be nothing more than a lynch-mob under the democratic veil, becoming a tyranny of the majority."

You summed up quite nicely what I perceive Quickpolls to already be. In their current form they are quite useless. Nevertheless I stand behind calling 172 and VV's latest revert war to attention. — Jor (Talk) 03:13, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Cantus is a very active user. Why are you removing his vote? RickK 05:28, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Oh. I didn't understand your comment. I thought you meant it had been more than three months since he last edited. RickK 05:37, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)

You've been making a pretty good case on the Quickpolls page. It got me to vote against banning VV. You'd be really good on the WP conflict resolution committees. 172 06:04, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I'm not sure about your interpretation of the rules. It says for the first violation don't use a quickpoll. So the lack of even a quickpoll is not inconsistent with a violation, much less the lack of a vote going a certain way (possibly for reasons of first violation, as I noted). Of course, it would be a perverse outcome if I were banned (which may be in the cards about now) but the other party (who incidentally was the aggressor) is not. -- V V 06:48, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Thanks "Dick" for your comment, there's still a lot of work to be done on the 24 hours of Le Mans but the 1968 race seems nearly complete now to me if you can fix typos and fox up my English it would be great. BTW do feel writing something on the Jaguar era ? Ericd 14:43, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I'm not sure I agree with the edit you made to Land Rover. The Oldsmobile/Buick 215 cubic inch V8 picked up by Rover was discontinued in the US more because it was simply too small as for any other reason. Sometimes head gasket problems are experienced once miles get over 90,000 or so, but to experience them at lower mileage is rare. The bigger problem is simply that this is a 40+ year old engine design that is now rather antiquated and the retrofitting of modern ECUs etc has not changed anything fundamental inside the engine. In fact, reliability is decreased by making it pass today's stringent emissions legislation - lean mixtures can cause overheating and wear, for one thing. —Morven 19:14, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Maybe they've got worse in recent years, even. I wouldn't be surprised. Guys I used to hang out with who worked on a lot of Rover V8s used to tell me 90k miles was about when it was needed, but it might depend on engine date and how it's treated even. It's possible the new, bored-out over 4 litre versions fail easier than the 3.5 litre variety, too. Anyway, the important thing is that it's an antique engine ready for retirement and quite possibly the oldest engine design still sold by a major manufacturer in production vehicles. —Morven 19:34, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)

55k to 70k miles in any case would have been way beyond warranty in the late 50s/early 60s, when 2-year 24,000 mile warranties were considered good. I'm not sure GM would have cared if the head gaskets died when the cars were on their second/third owners ... —Morven 19:37, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I have nominated you

Let us hope that sanity and right prevail. Regardless of your previous remarks, you are of course free to refuse the nomination or accept it, as your discretion thinks is right. I hope both that the community supports you wholeheartedly and that you will accept cheerfully. :-) Best of luck, Jwrosenzweig 22:57, 22 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Sysop

Congratulations! You are now an administrator. You should read the relevant policies and other pages linked to from the administrators' reading list before carrying out tasks like deletion, protection, banning users, and editing protected pages such as the Main Page. Most of what you do is easily reversible by other sysops, apart from page history merges and image deletion, so please be especially careful with those. Good luck. Angela . 03:08, Apr 30, 2004 (UTC)

Great. That was a quite interesting piece--I'm thinking of putting it up for featured status; hopefully, I'll be able to find more images. Meelar 16:16, 2 May 2004 (UTC)

Wik's list

I see you too are listed, with the charge "trickery/lies", and that you have complained to Wik. I wouldn't worry much about it. Indeed, I now find it fun to be part of this little club; I'm "FOX POV pusher" myself. Especially after this, almost no one takes Wik and his charges seriously (except of course 172 [1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Wik&dummy=1&diff=3385385&oldid=3385173)). -- V V 06:44, 3 May 2004 (UTC)

This is a misrepresentation. Notice that I wasn't commenting on his list of unsuitable admins. After all, I voted for your nomination for admin status in the first place. 172 10:45, 3 May 2004 (UTC)

Sep 11 Wiki

Thanks for the nomination, but I never go to the Sep 11 Wiki, so I'll decline. Besides, I would probably not get a consensus. RickK 14:56, 4 May 2004 (UTC)

mediation

I suggest we end this foolishness over your baseless accusation. I request we go to mediation to work out our differences...do you accept? GrazingshipIV 01:27, May 10, 2004 (UTC)

Please go here and agree to mediation. I suggest Bcorr be used as a mediator. GrazingshipIV 01:50, May 10, 2004 (UTC)

Mediation with GrazingshipIV: Update

I have created the topic (thread) on the mediation bulletin board here (http://boards.wikimedia.org/viewtopic.php?t=81). Thanks, BCorr|Брайен 23:51, May 10, 2004 (UTC)

Sorry to be a noodge, but GS4 has posted to the mediation bulletin board. You can set up an account on the message board here (http://boards.wikimedia.org/profile.php?mode=register) if you don't already have one. I'm leaving for California tomorrow, and although it's not vital, it would be great if you could post something to the topic within the day. Thanks, BCorr|Брайен 02:04, May 13, 2004 (UTC)

Your question

I'm not sure of the proper form in which to address you, Mr. Vice President, but in any case, I have posted a response to your inquiry at User:Michael Snow/Candidate statement and discussion. --Michael Snow 01:12, 11 May 2004 (UTC)

And now, my answer to your follow-up question. --Michael Snow 06:10, 11 May 2004 (UTC)

Excuse me, sir. Sorry to be so rude in the summary of my recent change to you but you deleted my data that was indeed valid. Please explain yourself. --65.73.0.137

P.S.: Oh!, and I'm deeply sorry I was extremely rude in my edit summaries. Please accept my apologies. (--User:65.73.0.137)

hello, you pulled the link to www.ohiotrespassers.com on the 'urban exploration' page because it's a 'commercial' site? there are no advertisments, products, or anything for sale on the website. NO profit is being gained. - 64.65.236.153

sep11 wiki

Thanks. I'm deliberately taking things slowly, since quiet places need more time for people to notice things. Please take a look at the proposed admin policy and do whatever you think best with it. Jamesday 04:08, 16 May 2004 (UTC)

Austria

Re: I doubt most citizens of the Austro-Hungarian Empire would appreciate being called Austrian. --"DICK" CHENEY 00:46, 17 May 2004 (UTC)

If they were German-speaking, like Kafka, and actually lived in Austria (the Hungarians lived in the Kingdom of Hungary, not in Austria, while Bohemia was simply an Austrian province) they would.

Admin nominations

Hi. Just a quick suggestion: Kingturtle isn't likely to change his mind about his policies. He's a respected editor and entitled to his opinion. He already knows that most Wikipedians don't agree with him. There's not much point in continuously bringing up the "country club" thing. You don't need to refute what he says, as people will be promoted anyway unless there are other objections. Isomorphic 12:58, 17 May 2004 (UTC)

Background check

I appreciate your mentioning it to me, although actually I had already seen it. The existence of the page is fine with me, I consider it a legitimate use of the user namespace, and I have no objections to the present content. However, I don't plan to link to it either, unless someone wants to know whether my credentials have been verified. Basically, I prefer to leave this as your independent project, rather than incorporating it into my campaign. That would feel too much like vouching for myself. It may not matter much, but I feel more comfortable that way. You may of course use it yourself as you see fit.

I can mention one minor quibble about the page - you say that you have never communicated with me "outside of Wikipedia or the Wikipedia IRC chatroom on freenode." Since I have never used IRC, the last part of the disclaimer is unnecessary, in my opinion. Though of course you would have to take my word for it that I don't use IRC, and that I don't use some IRC nickname other than my username. But I assume that nobody is using the IRC nickname of "Michael Snow", since I haven't been. --Michael Snow 17:49, 17 May 2004 (UTC)

Liberia

I just saw your comment to the anonymous user regarding Liberia... I'm not sure which of his edits were personal opinion, though. Am I missing something? Snowspinner 20:01, 18 May 2004 (UTC)

Ah. I totally didn't even think about the factual inaccuracy of that. I was just looking for POV - not total inaccuracy. Thanks for clearing it up. Snowspinner 20:11, 18 May 2004 (UTC)

Empire of Atlantium Talk Page

I removed comments from the above page that were self-promotional and wildly off-topic - ie pointing to an article on the subject of horse racing in Australia (!) Wik - as usual - has repeatedly reverted that deletion for no reason other than that he/she can. I do not intend to waste my time arguing with a (ab)user who is commonly acknowledged as a certifiable crackpot POV-pushing content-perverting vandal.--Gene_poole 23:30, 19 May 2004 (UTC)

While I think that what Gene_poole did was wrong and i am certainly less than enthralled about his edits, pov pushing of pure bullshit, and insulting comments, the fact is that when I asked him to stop, he did. If he acts up again with the same behavior, I would ensorse a request for comment, but until he does so, I can't. Danny 01:50, 21 May 2004 (UTC)

Hey Dick

I see you lived in New Jersey... I hope that we can work together to get some more articles up pertaning to the state. Keep up the great work! Mike 06:05, May 21, 2004 (UTC)

Salsa and learning project (http://amor.rz.hu-berlin.de/~h0444e1w/vokeng.htm)

Hello from Berlin, one of my best friends is from New Jersey as well! I saw you contributed to the salsa article and since I created wikibooks in english (http://wikibooks.org/wiki/Dancing:Salsa:Rueda_de_Casino) and german (http://wikibooks.org/wiki/Tanzen:_Salsa:_Rueda_de_Casino) for rueda de casino I wondered if you might want to add to it. I also saw that you have a french version of your page, so maybe you would be interested in a learning project I describe on my user page and that is discussed on my talk page? Please let me know what you think about it over there. Get-back-world-respect 12:27, 24 May 2004 (UTC)

Greetings Dick

Could you please change your name. It offends me that you would admire such an evil man enough that you would name yourself after him. Nevermind that he's one of the few solely responsible for the many deaths of our American Soldiers, let alone many innocent Iraqis.

What do you find so compelling about Dick Cheney that would cause you to bear his name with pride?

Have a nice day 219.88.219.37 02:35, 27 May 2004 (UTC)

I'll take a look. Unfortuantley, I lent someone my copy of Oliver North's autobiography, so I don't have access to it now. I'll try to see what I can do, though. 172 02:30, 30 May 2004 (UTC)

RfA

I've responded to your concern on RfA - basically, I just hit the page early in my Wikilife because it was linked to from RfA. It was a non-voting edit, and I think I made it under an IP, not even as a logged in user. Really, nothing to worry about. :) Snowspinner 03:12, Jun 2, 2004 (UTC)

I appreciate the offer. I'll let you know in late July. Part of me would be very much amused to be nominated by both you and 172. :) In any case, would you mind noting that you're satisfied by my explanation on RfA on the page itself? Snowspinner 03:23, Jun 2, 2004 (UTC)

Warning

Please stop tampering with votes on the Wikipedia:Requests for adminship, or you may be blocked from editing. Thanks. JRR Trollkien (see warning) 15:28, 5 Jun 2004 (UTC)

WP:RFA

(It's a bit of a long one. Reading every third word will not, I assure you, harm the comprehensibility of this rant in any way.)

I've taken the liberty of replying to your 9 Jun 2004, 17:09, post here, lest the WP:RFA article becomes too long. I assure you, I am very much serious about adminship, as can be deduced by the fact that it is specifically mentioned in my request. If it were the case that I am not serious, my request would have consisted of nothing but: "Wibble, wobble, wubble... Flob!" Complete sentences, to say nothing of English, is also a mark of my seriousness.

I was unaware of the 2%-3% statistic, but it does show that we run at the risk of cliques being formed. It should also be noted that while anthony (see warning) has every right to ask whatever he pleases, I have every right to wonder whether anthony (see warning) and associates have valid motives to oppose my nominations. Saying "this person is far too stubborn" is no reason to oppose adminship; "this person is far too stubborn and this will hurt his performances as an admin" is. You could say that given that this is WP:RFA, the latter implied by the former. Then again, I have my doubts - not at all surprising, since, not entirely unnaturally, I think I'll make a great admin, not to mention Emperor of the World.

You of course right that "good editor" does not equal "good admin". However, there are no secrets on Wikipedia, and my entire edit history, be it on Talk: pages or in the main article namespace, is revealed to you, if only you have a gazillion free hours. If indeed you require a one-paragraph summary of my qualifications, I can do little better than: "Itai is great!" (I was doing so good so far, wasn't I?) For my part, I am not overly anxious, for three reasons: (A) as I said elsewhere, if I managed 2000 edits so far, I'll manage 2000 more. (B) I try do defend myself as little as possible, albeit in far too many words. If I am voted against, let it be. (C) Even if I were to leave Wikipedia following these events - an event as unlikely as a cocaine addict giving up his addiction after having pricked his thumb with a needle - the encyclopedia would take very little damage.

So, all in all, vote as you see fit, judge as you see fit, live long and prosper. I'll probably continue to harbor some nasty suspicions regarding the motives of those who votes against me - once again, a cryptic message is no excuse, it is presumed performances as an admin that counts - but all will end come the deluge. And that makes me feel better. -- Itai 21:35, 9 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Template talk:Europe#Poll: Which items should be listed?

I am confused by your votes to oppose Kazakhstan and Azerbaijan, and vote to support Aland. Could you please explain here? Thanks. Pædia 14:54, 2004 Jun 14 (UTC)

My Bueracratship

Generally, I feel that Adminship should be for trusted members of the community (not people who came here a month ago with like 50 edits), but it shouldn't be an elite club of people (with like 10 members, like the developers). IF a user is a known troll and isn 't gaining too much respect in the community, then their vote shouldn't count quite as much as a respected user's vote. The reason I don't vote, is that I don't like voting about people who I don't know about. If there was a person there who I knew...I might vote (plus April and May, I wasn't on here too often). I hope this answers your questions. Ilyanep 19:06, 14 Jun 2004 (UTC)

My Bueracratship

User talk:Hcheney/Archive 1

thanks

The offer, of course, is to provide a similar eye for articles you feel need an overview from a stranger.

Maybe we can improve a few crypto articles and some <your choice> with a little mutual eyeballing?

Thanks again.

ww 20:55, 15 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Quickpolls

"If due process and attempts at de-escalation are skipped, Quickpolls will be nothing more than a lynch-mob under the democratic veil, becoming a tyranny of the majority."

Cantus is a very active user. Why are you removing his vote? RickK 05:28, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Oh. I didn't understand your comment. I thought you meant it had been more than three months since he last edited. RickK 05:37, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)

You've been making a pretty good case on the Quickpolls page. It got me to vote against banning VV. You'd be really good on the WP conflict resolution committees. 172 06:04, 17 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I have nominated you

Sysop

Great. That was a quite interesting piece--I'm thinking of putting it up for featured status; hopefully, I'll be able to find more images. Meelar 16:16, 2 May 2004 (UTC)

Wik's list

I see you too are listed, with the charge "trickery/lies", and that you have complained to Wik. I wouldn't worry much about it. Indeed, I now find it fun to be part of this little club; I'm "FOX POV pusher" myself. Especially after this, almost no one takes Wik and his charges seriously (except of course 172 [2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User_talk:Wik&dummy=1&diff=3385385&oldid=3385173)). -- V V 06:44, 3 May 2004 (UTC)

This is a misrepresentation. Notice that I wasn't commenting on his list of unsuitable admins. After all, I voted for your nomination for admin status in the first place. 172 10:45, 3 May 2004 (UTC)

Sep 11 Wiki

Thanks for the nomination, but I never go to the Sep 11 Wiki, so I'll decline. Besides, I would probably not get a consensus. RickK 14:56, 4 May 2004 (UTC)

mediation

I suggest we end this foolishness over your baseless accusation. I request we go to mediation to work out our differences...do you accept? GrazingshipIV 01:27, May 10, 2004 (UTC)

Please go here and agree to mediation. I suggest Bcorr be used as a mediator. GrazingshipIV 01:50, May 10, 2004 (UTC)

Mediation with GrazingshipIV: Update

I have created the topic (thread) on the mediation bulletin board here (http://boards.wikimedia.org/viewtopic.php?t=81). Thanks, BCorr|Брайен 23:51, May 10, 2004 (UTC)

Your question

And now, my answer to your follow-up question. --Michael Snow 06:10, 11 May 2004 (UTC)

Excuse me, sir. Sorry to be so rude in the summary of my recent change to you but you deleted my data that was indeed valid. Please explain yourself. --65.73.0.137

P.S.: Oh!, and I'm deeply sorry I was extremely rude in my edit summaries. Please accept my apologies. (--User:65.73.0.137)

Retrieved from "https://academickids.com:443/encyclopedia/index.php/User_talk:Hcheney/Archive_2"

User talk:Hcheney/Archive 2

thanks

Quickpolls

I have nominated you

Sysop

Wik's list

Sep 11 Wiki

mediation

Mediation with GrazingshipIV: Update

Your question

sep11 wiki

Austria

Admin nominations

Background check

Liberia

Empire of Atlantium Talk Page

Hey Dick

Salsa and learning project (http://amor.rz.hu-berlin.de/~h0444e1w/vokeng.htm)

Greetings Dick

RfA

Warning

WP:RFA

Template talk:Europe#Poll: Which items should be listed?

My Bueracratship

My Bueracratship

thanks

Quickpolls

I have nominated you

Sysop

Wik's list

Sep 11 Wiki

mediation

Mediation with GrazingshipIV: Update

Your question

Navigation

Search

Toolbox

Personal tools