This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Musical Linguist (talk | contribs) at 00:44, 11 November 2005 (Welcoming Newcomers). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.
Revision as of 00:44, 11 November 2005 by Musical Linguist (talk | contribs) (Welcoming Newcomers)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)Current time: Tuesday, January 14, 2025, 15:21 (UTC)
Leave a message
User talk:Sam Spade/ - archive
Quotes
- archived @ User:Sam_Spade/Quotes
- The historian should be fearless and incorruptible; a man of independence, loving frankness and truth; one who, as the poet says, calls a fig a fig and a spade a spade. He should yield to neither hatred nor affection, but should be unsparing and unpitying. He should be neither shy nor deprecating, but an impartial judge, giving each side all it deserves but no more. He should know in his writings no country and no city; he should bow to no authority and acknowledge no king. He should never consider what this or that man will think, but should state the facts as they really occurred. -- Lucian (from user:Scimitar)
Art
User:Sam Spade/Art and artists
Ed Poor
If you are serious about wanting Ed Poor off the committee, state your case at Misplaced Pages:Mediation Committee/Ed Poor. I will contact every single mediator and have them vote, arbcom style. If there's a consensus to kick him out, he will be kicked out. I myself will act as the top judge and will monitor it and will not vote. If the link above becomes blue, leave a message at my talk page and I'll proceed with the case. Redwolf24 (talk) 23:15, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks very much for your welcome!! I hope that I'll be able to contribute much. I'm currently working on dumping my knowledge of video game lore into certain appropriate articles. :-) ParallaxTZ 23:24, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
- Your articles will be read, that much is certain ;) Sam Spade 00:50, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
Dated user message
Hi. Your user welcome message is signing as 31 August 05. See User talk:ParallaxTZ. Thought you'd like to know.. Secretlondon 00:28, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
- Yep, it gives the time stamp from when I last edited it. Thanks tho. Sam Spade 00:36, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks, I used a number of dictionaries which helps me to build a good one. - Vaikunda & Raja
Re: welcome
Thanks for the welcome. I'm slowly finding my way around. JohnSankey 08:39, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
- Hope those links help! Cheers, Sam Spade 14:25, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
Archiving Talk:Psychoanalysis
I understand the practical reasons for archiving. I do wonder, though, what this does to the cumulativity of discussions. Not that unarchived Talk pages are necessarily consulted for background systematically.... --Macrakis 18:19, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
- I didn't archive this particular page, but I do often archive after coming to a contentious page. Such pages usually have alot of long winded debate, and I find it best to clear the air and allow for people to take a fresh start periodically ;) Sam Spade 19:02, 6 October 2005 (UTC)
human
On June 2nd you suggested adding this to the introduction of the article for "Human":
A concept current within the scientific community is that human evolution occured in response to a need for long distance running. Humans are said to be one of a short list of animals with such a capacity.
It (the above 2 sentences) were later added to the article and they are still in the current version of the article in this form:
One current hypothesis within the scientific community is that the human evolution of bipedalism (two-legged locomotion) occurred in response to a need for long-distance running. Humans are said to be one of a short list of animals with such a capacity.
I agree that the origin of human bipedal locomotion is an important issue, but I think that mention of specific speculative ideas about it is not the best thing to include right at the start of the article for "Human". Nobody knows how or why humans became bipedal. A list of speculations about the origin of human pipedal locomotion could be added to Human evolution or some other page dealing with human origins. Since these speculations are tentative, they should be presented on a page along with citations to specific references.
My suggestion is that these two sentences be replaced with something like: "Current evidence indicates that bipedal locomotion in the human lineage evolved before the large human brain. The evolutionary origins of human bipedal locomation and its role in human brain evolution are topics of on-going research." --JWSchmidt 13:47, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
- I'm not sure if you've looked over Talk:Human, but the discussion regarding the intro filled up a number or archives ;) Still, if you'd like to see this changed (I an decidedly neutral myself), I would recommend mentioning it there. Sam Spade 14:16, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
- See Talk:Human#intro. Cheers, Sam Spade 14:32, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
Thanks
Thanks for your welcome and for the links.
Ciao! Trifola 14:30, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
- Glad to have you! Sam Spade 14:33, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
Bektashi
Thank you for your comment about the Bektashi article. However, I would like to ask you to comment in more detail, i.e., clarify what you think about the appropriateness about these jokes and the accusation/offensive comment directed against me by freestylefrappe. Thanks again. AldirmaGonul 14:59, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
- Ok, will do. Sam Spade 15:02, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
Höðr and Lóðurr
Hi, Sam! :)
There's currently a vote underway on Talk:Höðr on whether Höðr should be moved to Hodur and another at Talk:Lóðurr on whether Lóðurr should be moved to Lodur. I know you've edited Höðr in the past and I thought you might be interested. Your opinion is valued if you are. - Haukur Þorgeirsson 18:26, 7 October 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for the welcome
Greetings, and thanks for your letter. I've been learning a lot on the fly, as probably a good many editors have; but the links shall be very useful, and I will hang on to them. (Actually, when I saw the flag, "You have messages," I thought I was either (1) in trouble for something; or (2) getting some abuse from some vandals that have been attacking the Code: Lyoko page. I've been helping to fend them off over the weekend, but it's just teen larking, AFAIK.
Peace be to you.
I obviously still don't have a total command of the Wiki. That other message was from me. And this is probably wasting bandwitdth, so I'll shut up (grin).
Harperbruce 14:22, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
- Sounds like your often to an excellent start! I'll have a look @ Code: Lyoko. Cheers, Sam Spade 21:48, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
Herman Buttfor is a sassy lass
Yikes. That was obviously not what I intended. Dystopos 13:17, 11 October 2005 (UTC)
"no jumping que"
It's spelled "queue". -- Antaeus Feldspar 01:09, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
Thank you, Sam!
Thank you for your support on my RfA, and for your very kind words. Both are sincerely appreciated. It is always a pleasure collaborating with you.≈ jossi fresco ≈ t • @ 15:44, 15 October 2005 (UTC) |
Florida article about Jim Wales and wikipedia
Hi, Sam There's an interesting article about Jim wales and wikipedia. http://www.floridatrend.com/issue/default.asp?a=5617&s=1&d=9/1/2005
Interestingly, Jim is virtually unknown in Florida, where he lives and is more famous outside the Us.
Raj2004 00:33, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
- That is an extremely good article, thank you! I'm going to post it on the mailing list. Sam Spade 13:56, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
See . Cheers, Sam Spade 14:01, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
No problem, Sam
Raj2004 00:57, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
Arbiter refuses to discuss mistakes
This does not strike me as a sound revert, nor the right wording regarding it. Please be more careful with reverts and edit summaries. Sam Spade 20:59, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
- The revert was sound, the reasoning was sound, and please do not bring up 3 month old edits on my Talk: page any more. Jayjg 00:26, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
If there was any basis for that revert (which you have chosen not to explain) the personal attack was of course unwarranted.
I will continue to bring attention to unfortunate misuses of the revert function, and politically motivated personal attacks in the edit summaries. If you refuse to accept or discuss your mistakes, and they continue, I will of course go forward with the next step of the Misplaced Pages:Dispute resolution process. Sam Spade 12:35, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
User Page!?
AWESOME JOB ON IT! like a professional:D User:Xino
- Have you seen the sub-pages? I'm still working on those, of course... Sam Spade 23:37, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
- o_O.You got Sub Pages.. lets check it..out
- Nice awards...wait a minute did you steal them and put your name on it
- don't worry i don't need an award, i may even own this Wiki
- by the way.. your Internet Logo, doesn't come up has "W" it comes up has "Y" Yahoo sig..thats cool><ino 06:55, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
Which logo? Sam Spade 14:28, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
FYI
I just posted "The lies/misrepresentations that constitute this hatchet job can be appreciated by studying the involved set-up behind this misrepresentation: "he posted a list of 12 things that I must do before he will leave me alone". How about: "He was goaded into stating what would make him comfortable enough to throw away the subpages he thought he might need if an attack like this one were to occur." So that it could here be taken out of context, misrepresented, and used as a weapon against him. These bullies make me sick." at Misplaced Pages:Requests for comment/FuelWagon 2. WAS 4.250 10:23, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
- I agree with you, and wish your comment was an outside view of its own, so I could endorse it. As it is its in a subsection on terrorism, and I am not well aquainted enough w the particulars to endorse it there. Sam Spade 14:27, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
Hello
Thanks a lot for the links. I really want to try and contribute to wikipedia and I've been nervous about making large additions to any page. These will help a lot.
Seirscius 23:09, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
Reinsertion of Material in Time Cube
Hi. In this edit, you reinserted lists of quotes from the Time Cube website. This material was previously controversial. It would be greatly appreciated if you enumerated your reasons for this reinsertion on the talk page. Thanks. — Ambush Commander 18:12, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
Hindu denominations
Sam, I agree with you that most Hindus probably don't fall into any denomination and adopt smarta beliefs. Of those who choose a denomination, most are Vaishnavites. On the other hand, those who agree with the inclusive monotheism model do fall into smarta category.
Among Brahmins, smarta is a common distinction to distinguish between Brahmins who follow Madhva; i.e., Madwas, or Ramanuja, Srivaishnavite Brahmin or Saivite Brahmin such as Iyer.
Thanks, Raj2004 23:04, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
Adi Shankara
In what sense is it "bad form" to revert edits whose main function was to turn decent English into poorer English? I don't, for example, insist on changing so-called "split infinitives", but I can't see the point of an edit that deliberately inserts one where the text originally avoided it. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 21:40, 23 October 2005 (UTC)
- They made alot of edits, most of them good. Reverts are not ment for such purposes. Sam Spade 01:30, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
- "most of them good". Which? One or two were, and I kept those. You, on the other, simply reverted everything.
- "Reverts are not ment for such purposes." I don't know what this means, except that you disagreed with my reverting the edits. I wanted an explanation, not a mere repetition of your position. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 18:51, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
I have made the necessary edits, please avoid reverts in the future. Sam Spade 20:42, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
I added the following to Mel's talk page: Split infinitive says In the present day, all reference texts of grammar deem simple split infinitives unobjectionable..
I wonder if I should have also quoted where it says a split infinitive can remove ambiguity or where wikipedia says not to pointlessly revert. I never can tell where the line is between not providing enough data (Why didn't you say so?) and providing too much (What do you think I am - an idiot?) WAS 4.250 23:54, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
- I'm at a near total loss as to what to do about mel. In reality, I think its less his fault than the wikipedia's social structure, which rewards cliqueness and discourages well reasoned discussion. We need a different method of Reputation management. Of course, w Jimbo's recent decision to micromanage the Misplaced Pages:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2005, and the sort of discussion I see on the Misplaced Pages:Mailing list... I don't have over much hope.
- My answer is to focus on doing what I enjoy, reading and writing high quality encyclopedia articles, and talking to nice people (like yourself), rather than messing about w users like mel. Sam Spade 00:00, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
Nice one
Thanks for that mate, being blocked is amazingly annoying. Martin 19:08, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
- Your welcome, having been controvercially blocked twice now I can empathise. The wikipedia needs more rewards, and less punishments. We are volunteers after all, not prisoners, and focusing on punishments (blocks, arbcom, criticism) as we do drives away good contributors, and encourages malevolent ones. Sam Spade 19:13, 25 October 2005 (UTC)
Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Template/Workshop
You, or any Misplaced Pages user, can contribute your suggestions and comments to the /Workshop page of any active arbitration case. Comments on evidence or proposals can help in understanding the import of evidence and in refining proposals. Proposed principles, findings of fact, or remedies may be listed on /Proposed decision and form part of the final decision. Fred Bauder 14:50, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
- Yes, I understand that, altho I usually contain my statements to the evidence page, not wanting the workshop to become overly cluttered. Indeed as you can see here, I advise against excessive use of the workshop page. Are you meaning to say you'd prefer more comments be made there? Also, what was this about rewards? ;)
The rumor is that should a members advocate (rather than wikilawering) contributed a suggestion which was used User:Kelly Martin would "buy them a drink." Yes Workshop provides a platform for lengthy effusions; but constructive and thoughtful suggestions are more welcome. Can't have too many of those. Fred Bauder 15:48, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
- Hmm... not sure my wife would allow that! Anyways, I will begin to make suggestions in the workshops, if nothing else it will provide an example of the sorts of decisions I might make, and should give you some food for thought. Thank you for your informations, Sam Spade 16:08, 26 October 2005 (UTC)
Hello Sam
Gee Sam, you are supposed to be a friendly user! Lol. Just kidding. :) I appreciate your vote, but if you think my "campaigning" for votes was wrong, it was because of this reason. A couple of users voting oppose were rallying support against me. See the following: , , (+ there are even more). I didn't think that was fair. Btw, I simply asked all the users I have had contact with before, and I just asked them to vote, not necessarily support. Thank you for your concern. --a.n.o.n.y.m 03:25, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
- There is nothing inherently wrong w campaigning, particularly when it is general, rather than selective, in nature. Yours gave me a clear impression that you were seeking a particular partisan voting bloc.
- As far as opposition campaigning, there is a precedent against that, I used informations regarding such an incident in one of my many successful cases before the ArbCom. See Misplaced Pages:Requests_for_arbitration/IZAK.
- So that you know, I don't rule out voting for you in the future, if you improve the bad impression the current RfA gave. I am certain I am not alone in that regard. You may want to consider a new user name and a fresh start. Sam Spade 03:35, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
- Nope I wasn't selecting a particular voting bloc, just all the editors I know and some I have seen around. Aside from that I had only good faith, no bad intents. I don't think I can improve the bad impression Sam. There are just some voters who will do this and I can't change who they are. I have changed a lot since I first started editing here, but unfortunately there are people out there who don't want to change. Thanks --a.n.o.n.y.m 03:48, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
I can relate, some of the support voters are among my most unreasonable opposition. I assure you however that everyone changes, and that I make no judgement regarding you as a person, but only regarding the small bit of information I have seen regarding you. If you are confident you are being unfairly persecuted by unreasonable persons, it should be easy enough for you as an anonymous editor to create a new acount and a fresh start, thereby leaqving all that baggage behind you. Sam Spade 03:52, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
- Okay thanks for the advice. However, I don't want to lose the reputation I have with good editors simply because some are doing this is bad faith. Thank you for the advice though and just wondering, why "strong oppose"? Now that you have seen both sides of the story. Thanks. --a.n.o.n.y.m 03:56, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
I find the situation disturbing and creepy, and feel strongly this is not the time or manner in which a promotion should occur. Sam Spade 13:51, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
Fin
Picture of the day
Nigeen Lake is a mildly eutrophic lake located in Srinagar, in Indian-administered Jammu and Kashmir. It is sometimes considered to be a part of Dal Lake and is connected to it via a narrow strait. This panoramic photograph shows the west bank of Nigeen Lake, with houseboats lining the shore. Hari Parbat, a hill overlooking Srinagar, is visible to the left of centre, and the snow-capped Pir Panjal Range can be seen in the distance.Photograph credit: KennyOMG; edited by UnpetitproleX
Archive – More featured pictures...
To include this picture of the day on a page, add the text {{pic of the day}}. |
Page Protection problems
FYI - The arbcom case I had against Willmcw and SlimVirgin was accepted last week and the usual clique is now at it again. A recent incident stands out that I thought I'd ask your advice on. I introduced evidence for the arbitration showing that SlimVirgin had repeatedly and flagrantly violated WP:PPol's injunction against admins from protecting pages where they've been editing. A couple days later SlimVirgin went over to WP:PPol and quietly tried to change the policy itself she had violated in a way that would give her more cover. This was also done without consensus on the talk page as is required for changing official policies. I reverted back and posted an explanatory note, but knowing the way she operates I'm anticipating that the clique will arrive in short order and try to bully her change into official policy so she can get off the hook when the Arbcom looks at it. Please take a moment to review this incident - any advice or input would be much appreciated. Rangerdude 04:26, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
Bounty Board
Greetings. You've recently been involved with working on get articles up to featured status, so I wanted to let you know about a new page, Misplaced Pages:Bounty board. People have put up monetary bounties for certain articles reaching featured status - if the article makes it, the bounty lister donates the stated amount of money to the Wikimedia Foundation. So you can work on making articles featured, and donate other people's money at the same time. If this sounds interesting, I hope you stop by. – Quadell 22:20, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
- Thats a great idea, there are a few articles I'd be willing to pay a bit to see improved! I doubt I'd be especially inclined to work on these however, as I very rarely make improvements to articles I wasn't reading for enjoyment to begin w. Anyhow, this is an extremely good idea, providing an incentive (however convoluted) to editors for their work. Thanks for the heads up, Sam Spade 23:03, 27 October 2005 (UTC)
Sufism
I think it would be better if we started a single article named Sufi Philosophies and add cosmology & Lataif-e-Sitta in it . Since there will be a lot more concepts/philosophies coming up , I think it would be nice to have all of them in one article , rather than different pages . F.a.y. 21:33, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
- Why not both? My conception of an ideal wiki article is a hub, linking to related texts. You can always summarise on a central page, but whey lose content which can exist on a subpage? Sufi philosopy is going to result in a huge amount of content, over time. What we need to do is set up a good framework. Sam Spade 21:37, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
Mandate of heaven
What is the Mandate of heaven?
The Amalekite affair is discussed again
I don't know if you noticed but the Amalekite affair has been brought up again on my RFA, which now looks as though it will probably fail due to it, with around 7 new oppose votes having come in today. I would value your opinion though I understand if you don't want to wade into that dark pit again. - Haukur Þorgeirsson 21:26, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
Image:Lonnie Donegan - Sing Hallelujah.jpg
This image had to be removed from Lonnie Donegan as there is no commentary on it in the article it is violating fair use law. You can readd it if you mention it in the article and say how well it was received etc., although the image you added ws a recent reissue it would be better to use the original. Arniep 18:06, 1 November 2005 (UTC)
Cheers
Thanks for the kind words. I had kind of had it, but this helped. My thesis is about explaining why European Defence is picking up, and more specifically why now? Why not in 1989? Or even after Bosnia? Why now? Not sure about the answers yet, but i'll find out soon hopefully! I'm putting wiki work on hold, I really have to get to work on it... About those articles: I will probably also do a bit of work on them. I'm busy writing my thesis anyway, so i'll put some stuff on Wiki while i'm on it - there is almost nothing on Wiki on that topic! It'd be nice to do some stuff together. Well, see you around! The Minister of War 18:55, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
FK Research
Dear Sam, Famekeeper's gone a while and I don't miss him. You were involved with him and have wondered about his language. Well, I asked a friend of mine, who's into computers and stuff, about his IP and he said, that FK posted from Dublin, Ireland. He also thought that his language as well as his insistence on being a native speaker of English remings of Indians (meaning from the subcontinent) he was talking about. This is also confirmed by some sections from FK's talk page: ] ] ]
I thought I might post this, in case you're interested. Str1977 22:26, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
- Makes sense. I can understand why you didn't enjoy him, but I enjoyed cleaning up his additions, mainly due to my interest in the subject matter. He was clearly very opinionated (regarding you as well as catholicism and etc...), but bulk content contributers usually are... Sam Spade 22:48, 2 November 2005 (UTC)
Final decision
The arbitration committee has reached a final decision in Misplaced Pages:Requests for arbitration/Onefortyone. →Raul654 01:01, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
Haukur's RFA
Thanks, Jack. I appreciated it. All of it. - Haukur
- What bothers me is that this wasn't a situation where reasonable people could disagree. Your one of the very best wikipedians (the best I can think of, actually), someone who writes wikipedia articles which are better than what can be found elsewhere. I used Lóðurr as a justification to my professor as to why wikipedia should exist, and be given a shred of credibility. Hrafnkels saga is another example of something that just can't be found on other encyclopedias.
- As monstrous as some may have found your request for administrative review and intellectual rigour in the case of this one "nazi" (I think in other times and places this word for an unpopular minority could be traded for "communist" or "jew"), no one was ever able to show any credible basis for assuming you would misuse the status of adminship. Quite the opposite.
- I am frankly disgusted that a project i have so long volunteered for allows such partisans a monopoly on the RFA process. In the end, it is RFA that needs to be changed, not your willingness to fight fallacious reasoning and crowd psychology. Thank you for all you have done, Sam Spade 16:54, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
A "Spirituality" portal
Hi Sam,
Goethean and I have been discussing the possibility of creating a “Spirituality” portal. I’ll be asking some other editors to weigh in on the subject as well. What do you think? — RichardRDF 12:08, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
- I created Misplaced Pages:WikiProject_Spiritual_Fauna, but it hasn't gained any interest. Advertising these sorts of things seems to be important. In any case, yes, I'm interested. Sam Spade 16:11, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
Cool. Would you be willing to comment at the above link and mention something about the project you started? :-) — RichardRDF 16:36, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
I entered some basics to get the ball rolling. I look forward to your participation in the Spirituality WikiProject and reading your contributions to the Spirituality portal. :-) — RichardRDF 00:41, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
Spoof?
You may want to check out this user, if you didn't already know about them. - UtherSRG (talk) 16:38, 7 November 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks, I do, and I'm not too worried about it. He seems to be an advocate of a micronation, rather than an attempt to make me look bad. I appreciate the courtesy of your note,
H's P, again
Thanks for your kind words Sam. I leaft a link on the discussion for H's P which is the clearest most complete analysis available . I keep an eye on things from the exterior , and the guy who noted on my Rfc that things don't link , would find they link still less now . It is almost comic how it's effected . Really though I don't like the idea of hopping thru the german sections and nazi sections and all that , but it will have to be done unless we abdicate altogether . I can only suggest you read that link , such that you will understand . Even jimbo said that there's no point in persuading those who don't want to hear , and I don't retain such an illusion . I put the link for the rest of you - I suggest it be edited as minimally as possible and used to correct all the relevant articles , Hitler, Weimar, Popes , Magnates.
As to Str missing me and wanting to find me - I left word at the start of all this on WP , in case I'd be missed . As you well know, every hair is counted in time , especially in India . EffK 02:54, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
Wikilawyering
Misplaced Pages:Wikilawyering is destructive as it removes the focus of a case away from trying to find out what the real problems are and trying to find a solution. Encouraging someone else to focus on wikilawyering as the basis of a defense rather than addressing their behavior is quite unproductive. By the way, the arbitrators are equal in status. Fred Bauder 20:16, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
Your viewpoint on this particular is diametrically opposed to my own, and not for the first time. We disagreed regarding your wiki-info, and the exceptions to your SPOV. And we utterly disagree here, regarding the ability of Kelly Martin to adjudicate in a non-partisan manner in this case, and in your assessment of the standing of appointed arbiters as opposed to those who have been given a mandate by the community (such as Theresa Knott). Arbiters, admins, Jimbo and the board do not an encyclopedia make. The contributers, the readers, and the developers are the key to the community, and they have not signed off on these recent "appointees", nor the process which might be taking place to replace them this december. Sam Spade 20:33, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
up-coming wikishowdown :please note
I'm sorry to butt in here but you are both somewhat familiar with famekeeper problems. On return here I have immediately encountered the editor ,User:Str1977 , who has taken again , it upon himself to revert all and any extra background and foreground to nazi historical/ vatican subjects. I came back because str1977 was speculating as to my location in depth , and consorting in malicious calumny with User:Robert McClenon as to my sanity . This is rather more serious than their shared use of ad hominem against my writing and left me no choice but to return to the fray . Fred knows that I was driven out by Jimbo to Wikinfo, but also knows that I have not treated it with the same active sense as the Misplaced Pages .
I stumble upon you both having asked User:Pjacobi to assist in oversight to the Reichskonkordat article where Str1977 has tried immediately to revert my additional history , even to the extent of reverting material re: Nuremburg Trials . I find this so shocking that I conclude that after all there will have to be a wikishowdown between myself and Str1977 , and I invite you both to join as responsible citizens of this sorry planet's cyberspace , in oversight of this very showdown . I ask either one and both of you , if you judge it a necessity as I now do , to list that user , with or without my user name(whatever cookie it is) , under whichever list , pages, alerts necessary . A general decision should be possible, though I rather fear from this particular section , that both of you are at odds over similar current dispute . I appeal to you and to everyone , to consider this with the seriousness and relevance of this history to our present world as real factor in your action or decision towards inaction . There is no point in mediation , and there is no point in the WP , if such a cavalier dismissal of history is left to reign un-checked . I believe that Str1977 is a clear enemy to truth and understanding , and i regret to ask for you to assist in extracting the mental vandalism, albeit of the highest possible order, from polluting this organ . Please now call for study of his editing however so tedious and let's hopefully have him permanently removed from WP . However erudite his contributions to abstruse subjects may appear I refer to his particularly focused efforts at sanitisation of all links and references from history concerning the darker history of temporary , mistaken and immoral collusion between the Holy see and Hitlerism . I presume neither of you gentlemen is frightened to so assist . yrs EffK 23:22, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
Please relax and have some tea. If I thought Str1977 needed to be banned (which i don't), and I had time to review his edits (which I don't), now is not the time to bring an ArbCom case.
I understand you and he havn't gotten along, but the key is to be as nice to him as possible, and focus on citing sources and allowing others to step in and correct the situation. I will review the article in question, and please remain calm. Sam Spade 23:52, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
Dear Sam, despite EffK's accusations. I have looked at his edits with an open mind and even retained some (smaller edits). However, alomost everything was either off-topic, or inaccurate or POV. It was basically a piece of editorializing matching in quality to the article he linked to (about Ludwig Stiegler), whose author apparently has no clue whatsover about current German politics or the Weimar Republic - calling the Reichsbanner Schwarz-Rot-Gold a right-wing group resembles either User:68.57.33.91, who calls the DNVP left-wing or exposes his own political position as being so much to the left, that everyone else must be right-wing. Unfortunately, that's the kind of literature EffK feeds on. Str1977 23:45, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
- I will look it all over, if its off topic, it needs to be merged elsewhere. If it is inaccurate it needs to be cited, and if its POV it can be reworded. I think he is right to be upset by such a large deletion, but clearly a "wiki-showdown" is not called for...
- The issue of content on other articles being wrong suggests we need some citations, and a consistant story in both articles. Sometimes that means 2 or more sources cited, and 2 or more stories told, but both articles should still agree.
- i will do the best I can to help, but despite my skills in german history (which are well above average) I don't know that much about these particulars. My primary advice is for both of you to be extra nice, and to cite anything being disagreed about. Sam Spade 00:02, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
Welcoming Newcomers
Hi, Sam. I just want to let you know that when you welcome newcomers using your welcome template, it shows a date of 31 August, regardless of when you actually send it. I came across one that you sent very recently, and then I took a quick look at your contribs to see other welcome messages, and the next one also displayed 31 August. Maybe you should remove that date from the template, and then just use the four tildes after the template when sending your messages. Cheers. Ann Heneghan 00:44, 11 November 2005 (UTC)