User talk:Sannse

Archive 1
Archive 2
Archive 3
Archive of discussion with Anon
Archive of discussion on the 2004 Arbitration committee election
Archive 4

Wikimedia Commons

Just a little request for future images:

I'd sure like to have your Passion_fruit_700.jpg image available for the Cookbook, but I can only do that if it is in the Commons (http://commons.wikipedia.org/). Please consider using the Commons for your images.

It seems that on 15 Jan 2005 somebody else copied it over there. So, in this case I'll use his copy. There are thus 2 copies on the wikimedia servers now. He also forgot to categorize it; I'll do that now I guess.

BTW, that's a very useful picture. It has a nice layout. Left-side lighting would've given less glare.

AlbertCahalan 18:52, 5 May 2005 (UTC)

Netaholic

I added links to Netaholic's arbcom decision indicating where to complain about his behavior now, and he reverted it (History (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Netoholic_2&diff=13355734&oldid=13354215)). I understand that ArbCom pages should not be edited lightly, but all I did was provide contact information for the mentors, User:Raul654, User:Kim Bruning, User:Grunt, and User:Netoholic/Mentoring. (Blanking and reversion seem to be his typical responses to criticism.) - Omegatron 21:33, May 6, 2005 (UTC)

The reversion was totally valid. The wording of the final decision has to reflect the wording that the arbitrators voted on – otherwise it's simply not an accurate record of what we did. Adding in the mentoring page might give the impression that the arbitrators decided this page should be created and used - not the intended impression I'm sure, but it could look that way to someone coming across the page. Regards -- sannse (talk) 14:30, 8 May 2005 (UTC)

Ok. Sorry. - Omegatron 19:47, May 8, 2005 (UTC)

I am me

Happy?--Fangz 14:49, 14 May 2005 (UTC)

Yep, thanks -- sannse (talk) 14:51, 14 May 2005 (UTC)

Invitation to Inquiry

sannse, you are cordially invited to join Inquiry. Adraeus 11:41, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

Thanks Adraeus, but my wiki-time is pretty full right now, I'll stick with the things I'm already involved in for now. Regards -- sannse (talk) 12:20, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

Sam Spade took over the project, and twisted its purpose. Unfortunately, the project can't be deleted; however, I'm moving it offsite so I can exhibit more control over the documentation and membership. Adraeus 13:57, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

Evidence request re Wareware RfA case

Greetings. :) Thanks for the note. I'm totally unfamiliar with all of this. I'm thinking that simply copying a portion of the RfC page to the evidence page should suffice. Yes? (It's fairly detailed.) Peace. deeceevoice 22:15, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

If that clearly sets out the problems, in a way that makes it as easy as possible for the arbitrators to understand the issues, then that will be fine. The most important part is to provide us with good, relevant diffs - rather than "he did this", we need to know "he did this, on this page, and here is the diff as evidence of that". Just try to make it as clear and concise as possible. Thanks -- sannse (talk) 07:46, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

Great. Then I believe the RfC info will suffice. No sense in spending time simply duplicating the info. Thanks. :) deeceevoice 08:55, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

Submitted. I'm hoping the Arb Com won't sweat me about the format. Having gone through the trouble of compiling the documentation for the RfC, I'd hate to spend more time simply reformatting it. The requested information is there, and I believe it is clear and concise. Hopefully, that will be sufficient/acceptable. Thanks again. deeceevoice 09:20, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

If the periodization of the evidence is found not in order, I volunteer my services to organize it accordingly. El_C 09:32, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

We have been talking about accepting evidence in different formats than the usual timeline - so we can see how this goes first. If necessary it can be rearranged. We need to leave some time for other evidence to be added before making any decisions of course -- sannse (talk) 09:38, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

I looked it over (& recollected that) the narrative follows a consistent chronology (rather than being otherwise thematic); any reformatting of the timeline would, therefore, be purely cosmetic (and easy enough to do). El_C 09:42, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

Still, El_C, I'm not doin' it unless they specifically request that I do it. "Purely cosmetic" -- precisely my point. Sannse, hopefully, you and your colleagues on the Arb Com will be flexible in this regard. Thanks, El_C, for volunteering; but should they request that I reformat it, I'll try to find some time to do it myself. Right now, I'm swamped with work, but you've already been more than helpful. I've appreciated your assistance and support. (Remember our bumpy start? :D) Peace. deeceevoice 11:27, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

I've mentioned this to the other arbitrators. As we are keen to try different formats, this is just fine for now - if any of the others feel it should be changed we'll let you know, but for now this is fine. Thanks for adding it -- sannse (talk) 11:46, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

Serious objection -- punishing a user for attacks made against him

In the finding of fact (Tkorrovi and Paul Beardsell case) only 1 out of 10 personal attacks mentioned was by me and even this was about how I named his Paul Beardsell's personal attack against me. And as a remedy, I was proposed to be indefinitely banned from editing the article. This is severely unjust, any punishment must be proportional to the misconduct. You give me an indefinite ban for a single comment, equal to indefinite ban to Paul Beardsell for numerous personal attacks against me during a year, which, as you see, I did not reply with personal attacks, except maybe only once (I'm human), in spite of everything which I might feel, I think this is civil behaviour. I'm going to be punished for attacks made against me.Tkorrovi 17:37, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

The remedies are currently only proposed, and haven't yet been fully voted on. I will be considering my votes in this case very shortly, and will look at all the evidence before voting - as, I'm sure, will the other arbitrators. I will also consider your comments here. Regards -- sannse (talk) 20:04, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

Thank you. But I must say that even indefinite ban both for Paul and me would be better for me, than being forced to tolerate Paul's attacks any longer. I only wanted to say that I will consider then, that the decision is not right, some form of collective punishment, as I know that I never had any bad intentions against Paul. His behaviour of course did annoy me a lot, but I find everything which can be considered to be a personal attack, too primitive behaviour to be used, not to talk about that it is too cruel to be anyhow in accordance with my principles. I mean to state a supposed fault in person, I may state a fault in person only when it is anyhow substantiated. I also don't want ArbCom to take the role of the underdogs, as Matthew Stannard thought it has done, on the Paul Beardsell's talk page [1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Psb777#Personal_Attacks_wot_you_are_making). Their way of thinking is kind of too strange for me, and I also don't find their jokes funny, maybe one may say the same about me, but because of that I cannot find any way to approach these people, to find a way to anyhow have good relations with them. Trying to talk to them with entirely good intentions, they find a way how to show you in bad light. Trying to find a consensus, they first push you as far as they can, and then say that you push your POV. I have no idea, how would it be possible to make peace with them, except a rare chance that they show some real signs of changing their behaviour. I talked on many forums before, saw severe conflicts and very hostile behaviour, but never had a conflict with anybody, which I couldn't solve. On intelligent forums no one were ever banned, everything was possible to solve without it. But not in this case here, something unimaginable, and very unfortunate. And this is in addition to everything else, also not interesting to anybody, so I really don't want you to deal with it a long time, don't want for anybody else to be forced to read that dull hostility, which is most there was, in editing the article. But I cannot stop before I use all possibilities, to be able to edit a single article, the one which I started.Tkorrovi 23:25, 23 May 2005 (UTC)

Oh yes if there is something which I can do for you concerning that case, I mean find out something or such, I will gladly do.Tkorrovi 00:10, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

172

Here is my belated response. [2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3A172&diff=0&oldid=14159570) 172 13:17, 24 May 2005 (UTC)

Reply at User talk:172 -- sannse (talk) 11:47, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

uwe kils

hallo sannse - your many photos are just great, congratulations - I hope your depression is getting better - best greetings from depressed Uwe Uwe Kils 03:23, May 28, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks Uwe, and sorry to hear you are so low at the moment. -- sannse (talk) 11:47, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

Arbitration - Paul and Tkorrovi

Thanks for the message. I suggested at the start of this arb that I might have been included, but wasn't clear about the process of adding my name. Let me know if anything is required of me.

I was checking out the gadfly article and related topics. I have been likened to Socrates by other people, so I'm honoured to be involved in this one, and from it will maybe get some useful tips on how to be more effective in that type of role in future. Of course, Socrates was executed for his pains, and I'm interested in how wikipedia groupthink might operate in the context of an arbitration committee.

One of the things that judges look at in determining motives and facts is the timing of events. I observe here that you've decided to include me in the list of protagonists shorly after I alluded to Kafka's classic, The Trial. Matt Stan 07:11, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

Arbitration Njyoder

Thank you, Sannse. I find the technicalities a little baffling. Is it OK to move bits of my own original statement on Requests for arbitration/Njyoder—some diffs and the descriptions of them—to the Evidence page? The point of that would be to make my statement itself more concise. (I won't move anything that Njyoder cites in his response, of course.) Bishonen | talk 18:20, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

Hi Bishonen, I've asked David to reply to your question as he is active on the case -- sannse (talk) 22:04, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

Copy it. Leave the statement as is, for history or whatever. The focus of attention at this stage is on the evidence page. Don't forget diffs, diffs, diffs! - David Gerard 22:07, 28 May 2005 (UTC)

uwe kils

hallo sannse! I did not contribute because I spend many months many times in hospitals after I was arrested by brutal police during imaging of dying fish in a pollution scandal - I suffer now from major depression, had even accept an offer of my university to go to early retirement - now I have a lot of time for Wikipedia, which helps me to get over my depression. like you say it does for you - may I ask you a favor: can you vote on http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Votes_for_deletion/Uwe_Kils we would like to have that for our Virtual University project proposals - good luck - keep up with your fine work Uwe Kils 23:38, May 29, 2005 (UTC)

Sounds like an awful time Kils, if that's not an understantement. I'm Sorry, but I don't think that needing the page for another project is the right reson to vote for an article to be kept. Each article should be judged only on its suitability as a Wikipedia article. Wishing you well -- sannse (talk) 11:33, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

I meant of course vote after checking the sources - Uwe Kils 16:11, Jun 1, 2005 (UTC)

Pic of the day

Hi Sannse,

Just to let you know that your photo Image:Yellow-rattle close 700.jpg is due for a reappearance as Pic of the Day on the 2nd June. I've reused the previous caption, but you can make any changes at Wikipedia:Picture of the day/June 2, 2005. -- Solipsist 08:00, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

Thanks Solopsist, looks fine :) -- sannse (talk) 11:33, 31 May 2005 (UTC)

congratulations, very nice image, sannse Uwe Kils 18:11, Jun 9, 2005 (UTC)

Hi Mark, Welcome to Wikipedia

Hi Sannse,

Sorry for the long delay in replying. Thank you for updating the Tri-Brindle image copyright on the Basenji page. It looks fine. -- MarkK 16:23, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

OK, thanks Mark -- sannse (talk) 17:26, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Antarctic krill

hallo Sannse! can you please take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates#Antarctic_krill maybe help with some editing / formatting / vote - best greetings Uwe Kils 20:54, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)

Talking to Adam Lopez by email

I'm so jealous I love him. Antares33712 18:09, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)

One of the advantages of replying to the foundation's mail, we've had a few famous correspondents :) -- sannse (talk) 17:26, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Irate

Seeing you informed Irate of his ban, I thought you might have special interest in this.

On Meta, Irate created the "m:WikiPedia Liberation Front". I informed Angela of it, it was deleted, or RfD'd (I forget exactly). Then, Irate posted "Do you mind burning your own books." on my Meta talk page, and recreated the said page on Meta, with the text "To liberate WikiPedia from the clutches of those who see it as crucial ego support. Obviously this cannot be done in the ful view of the ArbComm or it's running dogs." Aphaia put the page up for deletion, and Irate has began to live up to his name on the RfD.

Your comment on this deletion process would be much appreciated. Sad to see old cases re-emerge. -- user:zanimum