Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 12:50, 27 September 2006

User:Kylu/talkheader

Wish you well

Haven't spoken to you for a few days so thought I would say hi and that I'm thinking of you. Hope you are doing well. --Ideogram 14:27, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

After some of what went on IRC, I started avoiding #wikipedia a bit. Went on last night and got queries too, but at least this time there was a notable absence of four letter words. :D As far as the other things go, I've got an appointment Friday to watch the latest episode of "What's Broken Inside Kylu" and with any luck it'll be the same as before. :) I'll annoy you on chat later, I'm sure. Pop into the medcab chan, you can help me motivate Cake into playing classical guitar for a living. ~Kylu (u|t) 19:41, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Kylu, my friend!! Is something wrong? You know you can talk to me anytime. I am more than willing to listen to what you have to say. Just click the + button!--Chili14 23:34, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

You should pop by User talk:CakeProphet and encourage his musical development. In fact, I think you're both close to the same age, maybe you could make a band or something? :) ~Kylu (u|t) 01:01, 8 September 2006 (UTC)

Wikicookie

Hey Kylu, noticed you have had a bit of wikistress lately so I thought I'd drop by and give you a cookie to help cheer you up. Although I am hesitant to give this to you, the last time I did (here) you became an admin shortly after (which seems to be the root of your wikistress). Hopefully this one isn't as harmful.

Oi. Now that you've said that, I may never eat another cookie again. o.o;; Thanks for the thought though. :) ~Kylu (u|t) 04:44, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

IP Blocked

Please don't block our IPs in the UAE - we are on Etisalat proxy and IP changes frequently while connected, we have no legal choices about how we're connected here (this message appeared when editing).

>> Your user name or IP address has been blocked from editing. >> You were blocked by Kylu for the following reason (see our blocking policy): >> Open proxy, as per Kelly Martin on IRC >> Your IP address is 213.42.2.23.

>> 195.229.241.181 07:28, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

The block on that IP is currently set by User:Netsnipe with the reason: Emirates national proxy (AO), set at 07:47, 9 September 2006 (see Block log for 213.42.2.23). The block I set earlier for your IP was done on behalf of User:Kelly Martin. While it's understandably annoying that a national proxy would get blocked and punish everyone in the country for the wrongdoing of a select few, that's also the function of a proxy: They concentrate all of the network traffic onto a few easily monitorable, controllable, and sadly, blockable, IP addresses. We have the same problem with AOL.

I'm sure you don't want to hear excuses, you'd rather hear "Okay, so how do I connect to my account and edit, then?" My suggestion: Log in via secure.wikimedia.org instead. Using the secure server should bypass the national proxy. Obviously, make sure this is legal where you're at before doing so. :) Hope that helps, and thanks for contributing to the project! ~Kylu (u|t) 22:02, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

I see Netsnipe reblocked it for Anonymous accounts only? Do we know if he allowed or denied new account creation on that block? —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 22:46, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

No clue, you'd have to ask Netsnipe, sorry. As far as account creation goes, though, I imagine that since the secure server works with the real IP address of the user instead of the blocked proxy address, it really shouldn't matter. I could be wrong, though. In fact, lately, it wouldn't surprise me a bit. Can't hurt to try though. I think I'll just give up on the block button for a while. :( ~Kylu (u|t) 22:54, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Courage. I'm just trying to understand the situation. —Bunchofgrapes (talk) 23:00, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Omne initium est difficile. Admin actions like protection and delete, especially when used on request by those who are working things out, aren't inherently confrontational. You can peacefully protect a page (like my WP:RFO) or delete a page (CSD U1 for instance) and be being nice to people. Blocking doesn't seem to be like that. I did the admin thing because people suggested I'd be good at it, that I could do more of my style of assistance with the extra buttons than without. *shrug* I don't see how a block is going to help anyone, anymore. If someone's violating 3RR or running from an open proxy or being incivil...well, let someone else handle it. I'm not an admin, just a wiki-janitor. Anywho, I'm not balking at you or anything, BoG, you've always been terribly nice, I'm just burnt out on people griping about blocks, I suppose.

Anywho, like I said, ask Netsnipe how he blocked the user. I don't know how to check that or if it's even possible. The developers may not have even thought to implement that capability. Might be a good question to ask on WP:AN though, or maybe WP:BP's talkpage perhaps? ~Kylu (u|t) 23:18, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

National Security Surveillance Act

Now, I'm sure this will surprise some of the people who watch this page, but I think this article looks to be a good start for sources regarding the "National Security Surveillance Act" which I have a sneaky suspicion will end up being quite Notable. Let's just pretend for the moment it's not intuition: Read through the text of the Act provided and see if you agree with me or not that it may well deserve an article. ~Kylu (u|t) 00:28, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Are you a Democrat or a Republican? Do you support Bush? And why in the heck does this article not yet exist? I fully support its creation.--Chili14 03:21, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

I don't vote in elections. Not that I'm apolitical or apathetic about our politics, I just disagree with every candidate that I've run across so far, and find that to vote for the lesser evil is still voting for evil. Selecting the "lesser" evil each time hardly qualifies as doing good, don't you think? I suppose I could say that on financial issues, I balance between conservative spending and libertarian spending to get government out from the lives of the people (in contrast to the current Republican party, which seems to be socially conservative but at the moment financially rather liberal.) and terribly liberal socially, as I fully support federally mandated equality regardless of age (within reason, no 6 year old semi drivers please), gender, gender identity or preference, race, religion (or lack thereof) and ethnic background. On the other hand, I'm not much for "extras" given out to any of these groups either: "Hand outs" will only increase the perceived differences between them, not reduce those differences. As far as Bush goes, it's rather interesting: Indiana (where I'm at now) is a very conservative state, yet I have yet to meet anyone who actually openly supports Bush. Most of the Republicans I know are considering voting Democratic in the next US Presidential Election merely because of the reputation that Bush has given the U.S. I'm not sure what political party I'd belong to, but as far as I can tell, none of the current ones qualify. ~Kylu (u|t) 19:28, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

I agree that it would be a good article to create, as it probably will be very notable and I think is notable now. I would be careful to use the article you provided. None of the interviews should be used, as they appear to be POV. Right now I think the best way to appproach this article would be to state what the act itself entitles (info straight from the act itself; which I assume is the second link but is not working for me). Maybe this would help (that is if you are a lawyer or senator) Other wise I think you're going to run into some serious opposition if any type of social commentary is included. This article does mention it briefly here, and may be of some help. Just my thoughts, but you may (and probably do) know what to do better than I do.--Joe Jklin (T C) 03:50, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

I've got an editing sockpuppet or two that I write with: Once this account hit admin, I started editing with other accounts, hence the drop in editcounts. You'll likely discover one of them soon, once this article is created. With luck, I may end up with another FA soon. :) ~Kylu (u|t) 19:28, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Izzy Gomez (restaurateur)

Would mind undeleting this, at least temporarily, so I can take a look at it? Having actually eaten at Izzy's (REALLY good steaks), I know he's real and at least locally well known. and it might be worth an actual article. --Calton | Talk 02:39, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Per your request, I restored the article. There's not much meat to it (ha ha!) but if you can fix it up, more power to ya! :D ~Kylu (u|t) 02:50, 21 September 2006 (UTC)re

Thanks. And ugh, you're right. I left a note at the article's creator to give him another chance. If he doesn't, gimme a couple of hours and I'll see what I can do with it. If not, delete away. --Calton | Talk 02:59, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Shouldn't it have been moved to userspace? not too late... - CrazyRussian talk/email 03:00, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Go ahead. Personally, while I don't/didn't think that Izzy's is notable enough for an encyclopedia, it's not hurting either way. If you decide to userify the page to Calton's userspace, please make sure you either tag the redirect or just delete it yourself, depending on if you have the janitor-bit. Thanks for the help! ~Kylu (u|t) 01:37, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

"Page prod'd for 7 days before CSD A7 applied"

So which was it? Prod or A7? Prod can be disputed retroactively per WP:PROD and must then be undeleted. A7 is a highe rmeasure of finality, which is why I nominated it. - CrazyRussian talk/email 03:01, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

The A7 applies and is what it was deleted under (hence why I said "before CSD A7 applied" ... I "applied" the A7 deletion), I was just noting that there were also 7 days where it could've been discussed also, that way the original author can't say it was deleted without discussion. In short, I'm agreeing with your csd nom and also noting that if he'd have cared that much, there was plenty of warning it was going to be deleted anyway. Sorry for the confusion, hope that helps! ~Kylu (u|t) 03:09, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

review

Hi Kylu - I request that you give a little time by visiting Misplaced Pages:Editor review/Rama's Arrow 2 to review my contributions and sharing any criticism or advice. I will greatly appreciate any input you give. Thanks, Rama's arrow 17:30, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Will do. :D ~Kylu (u|t) 01:37, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Hi!

It has occurred to me that perhaps you do not know what is happening here and would like the opportunity to explain your actions there Bearing in mind I had never heard of you prior to your action, it would make interesting reading. Incidentally, just for my personal interest, why do you write "I've got an editing sockpuppet or two that I write with: Once this account hit admin, I started editing with other accounts" Why do you feel the need to do that? Giano 21:20, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

Hiya Giano. Actually, I've been told about the arbcom case and have been hoping and praying that I wouldn't get involved. Unless a member of arbcom or a clerk asks me to clarify something on that page, I don't even have any intention of reading it. I have no interest in going through the mess that is RfA, so if arbcom removes my sysop flag, I have no interest in pursuing that work a second time. It'd be best to acknowledge that in the resolution.

When there's a policy violation, there's a couple different ways of looking at blocks: 1. Punishment (which blocking policy says it's not, even though some blocks seem like they are) or 2. Preventitive (Removing the ability of a user to cause further strife or vandalism to Misplaced Pages, which is my motivation.) When I blocked your account, it was in the hopes that it was a "common sense" (aka WP:IAR) block which would more benefit than hinder Misplaced Pages by both preventing further inflammatory edits and giving you an opportunity to take things into perspective. Obviously, admins on Misplaced Pages are not (well, for the most part) in the business of annoying long-standing contributors and further causing strife. I firmly re-emphasize that I was trying to do what was best for Misplaced Pages, though I apparently failed miserably in this. I really am sorry that you're the one that was blocked due to the actions of a non-FA-writing newbie admin, though I'm thankful that BunchOfGrapes managed to correct my blunder. Since then, I've attempted to stick to as non-controversial admin actions as possible. There are "obvious vandal" type accounts that I have not blocked, images and pages not deleted or restored, MediaWiki: projects that I was hoping to help improve, and page protections I've skipped, all due to ... well, bluntly, fear of fucking up again. CrazyRussian, above, has poked me on one delete and one restore, and after the debacle involving your block, I'm considering putting my admin account on wikibreak for a nice long period of time until I'm satisfied that I've got a better handle on things as apparently I did not at that time. I took my friends and supporters up on the idea of me going for admin in the hopes that I really could help improve the place and make people a little happier. In that, I think I failed miserably, though the amount of effort it takes to get to this point would make it be blatantly stupid to turn in the sysop bit right now. What if I visit CAT:CSD next week and there's a 60kb backlog? I could still help with that perhaps... better to have it and not need it than need it and not have it, ne? I suppose I'm not the best qualified to answer that question at the moment, though, and will find out soon enough if I even have to worry about it at all.

As far as me moving my article edits to my various sockpuppets (yes, it's allowable in current sockpuppet policy), I'd rather have my edits stand for themselves, rather than be "the edits of the idiot admin that blocked Giano and caused all the mess", so I hide them behind other accounts. If you see a newbie editor make a mistake while editing (for instance) a new anime series, but otherwise the article is fine, you correct the edit and go on with life, right? There are many, though, who if they see a similar mistake by a new admin feel that it might be their duty to bring this to their attention. See the deletion discussion with CrazyRussian above for the sort of thing I'm trying to avoid. My favorite account so far has been editing over a month now and has accumulated a whole one message: a welcome template. :) I'm no FA writer like you, I don't crank out the high quality articles. Most of my work is cleaning up a block-text article, adding infoboxes, spellchecking (thankfully automated, I've been told before that my non automated spelling is atrocious), wikilinking, and the like. Relative to others such as yourself, I do non-critical and apparently pointless work. I imagine that the work involved in setting up the oversight-l mailing list and WP:RFO has so far failed to help protect the privacy of even one user. Apparently the list is completely dead, from what I hear. (You don't think they'd give me access, do you? Heh, I barely qualified to be an admin, much less rate that sort of access.)

If you end up going for RfA yourself, let me know, okay? I won't vote either way, since it's impossible for me to not be biased, but I'd like to follow the votes. Again, sorry to have apparently instigated this whole mess. ~Kylu (u|t) 22:07, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

• Thank you for your explanation. The dilemma of voting for me at an RFA will never be able to perplex you, as I have never felt need to be an admin. I achieve all I wish too without resorting to the blocking other editors. Now I'll leave you to continue your work. Giano 12:50, 27 September 2006 (UTC)