User talk:Kingturtle/Archive13

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] userbox broken

In your userboxes you have

This user is a feminist.

which should be

This user is a feminist.

.

I was going to change it myself but your page is protected (Vandalism? If so, sorry you have to put up with that). BTW your talkpage actually frightened me a little at first blush (too much red). Cheers. —Cronholm144 17:33, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User rights log summaries

Hello, would you mind putting a link to the RFA in the summary, so it's easier to find if users wish to view it? Thanks. Redrocketboy 13:07, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Will do. Kingturtle (talk) 13:08, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
thanks. Redrocketboy 13:09, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Image removal

Hi, Kingturtle, thought I'd mention that in removing an image as you did in Lou Gehrig, also means the associated transcluded Template:MLBBioRet needs to go as well, otherwise the article lead is broken. I've fixed it. Cheers, JGHowes talk - 18:12, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Earl Wilson

Hallo, I created the Earl Wilson (disambiguation) page as part of the Wikipedia:Suggestions for name disambiguation. I see you've moved it to Earl Wilson, and renamed the baseball player article to Robert Earl Wilson. I don't think that complies with WP:Name "Adding middle names, or their abbreviations, merely for disambiguation purposes (that is: if this format of the name is not the commonly used one to refer to this person) is not advised." - this must surely also apply to adding a first name not usually used. All the external links seem to refer to the name "Earl Wilson", so that is the name he is best known by. The links in the navbox template at the bottom of his page now lead to the dab page, the infobox disagrees with the article name... in short, I disagree with your changes and plan to revert them, but thought I would run this past you first. PamD (talk) 23:35, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for notifying me before you made the change. Please feel free to change it back. I personally prefer finding ways to get rid of the parenthesis, but I will make note of the policy and follow it. Kingturtle (talk) 23:55, 17 December 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for that. Have moved the dab page back to Earl Wilson (disambiguation), and requested move of the Robert Earl Wilson page to Earl Wilson using the correct procedure (I hope!). There are masses of links to E..W.., which would otherwise lead to the dab page. PamD (talk) 00:18, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks...

for the welcome note. It is much appreciated! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Moonlit Knight (talk • contribs) 16:45, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Clash question - THE ONLY BAND THAT MATTERS

"The Only Band That Matters" is credited to Epic Records' Director of A&R, Bruce Harris, but I didn't found a reliable source (currently is at The_Clash#_note-2). There is also an archived discussion at Talk:The_Clash/Archive_1#.22The_Only_Band_that_Matters.22 archive talk page. I know it was used by Clash's American fan during their first tour in North America on 1979.

Revision history of The Clash Related to "The Only Band That Matters":

  • 06:30, 7 March 2007 by User:R._fiend added: "Their record company once dubbed them "The Only Band That Matters," a phrase which caught on with their fans, and has since become closely associated with them".
  • 15:17, 25 March 2007 by User:Iprudence added: "Their record company once dubbed them "The Only Band That Matters," a phrase which caught on with their fans, and has since become closely associated with them. Epic Records Director of A&R, Bruce Harris, came up with the phrase. He is credited with convincing the company to release The Clash in the USA. His wife, Marion(Bernstein) Harris, was the product manager.She is credited with convincing Joe Strummer to include lyrics in the sleeve."
  • [ 20:30, 6 April 2007] by User:Nazamo did the reference TAG.

—PJoe F. (talk • contribs) 18:09, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi! I've seen you around on Clash articles... Would you consider becoming a member of WikiProject The Clash, a WikiProject which aims to expand and improve coverage of The Clash on Wikipedia? Please feel free to join us.

—Pjoef (talk • contribs) 18:27, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
"Know Your Rights"... Listen to this / Run ... to join us!
Todo:


Hello, thanks for the welcome. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ospix (talk • contribs) 18:09, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User:Energy Control = User:Ron liebman

I figured I'd drop you a note since you left a welcome message for Energy Control (talk · contribs). That account is unquestionably a sockpuppet of the banned user Ron liebman (talk · contribs). Let me know if you'd like more information. Assistance in blocking his socks would be much appreciated. —Wknight94 (talk) 21:06, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:BASEBALL

I joined. Next time you'd be better off asking on my talk page. But thanks for signing. Merry Christmas from Sasha 22:09, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] A Day Or Two Late, But...

Thanks for taking care of the extra reverts on PBS Kids Sprout. I can't tell if we've got a vandal on our hands there, or a kid, or an uninformed user, or just somebody with extraordinarily confusing phraseology....However, the fact that it keeps coming back and writing the same....whatever-that-is...is steadily leading me toward a conclusion...:) Anyway, thanks again. Gladys J Cortez 00:34, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] PrimeHunter RfA

Thanks for the mop! We made some fun with prime number counts in Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/PrimeHunter. The last uncounted vote made it 71 supports (assuming you didn't deliberately reject a vote), a prime number as targeted. Sorry to sound petty but will you please update the count in the RfA and Wikipedia:Successful adminship candidacies#December 2007? The uncounted prime vote has already been commented.[1] PrimeHunter (talk) 23:59, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for updating Wikipedia:Successful adminship candidacies#December 2007 to 71. I have taken the liberty of updating [2] the Rfa page with an edit summary URL for your update. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:28, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you

For reverting the vandalism to my userpage! I greatly appreciate it. KnowledgeOfSelf | talk 06:49, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rochester WIKI

Hi, Kingturtle, Please stop putting that ridiculous and uncited demographics about greeks in rochester on the wiki. it has no place being on the rochester wiki and i will report further abuses and get arbitration involved. stop self promoting. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.25.80.2 (talk) 20:57, 27 69.25.80.2 (talk) 21:36, 27 December 2007 (UTC)December 2007 (UTC)

A) This is not a Rochester WIKI. This is Wikipedia.
B) I am not Greek, and not self-promoting.
C) It was not me who put that information into the article. But I think it is useful information.
D) Let's work together to find the appropriate references.
E) I have done nothing wrong.
Signed, Kingturtle (talk) 21:03, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Please stop posting that content, its uncited, its opinion, it is inappropriate for a factual web page about the city of rochester. Its an unfounded fact, its self promotion to list last names of unknown families who dont have WP pages. I didn't call it a RocWiki i called it a Rochester Wiki aka Rochester Wikipedia page but thanks. Stop posting that content on that page, its totally irresponsible of you. It doens't matter what your background, its not relevant information for the main rochester wiki page. 69.25.80.2 (talk) 21:34, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Additionally, I do not want to find references for that content because I do not want to see it on the Rochester web page. Lengths were taken to remove famous rochesterians from the wikipage, therefore respect that move and do not post random rochestesterians interested in self promotion. Otherwise I belong on that page along with all of my family from the "historically significant" country of poland.69.25.80.2 (talk) 21:36, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

It wasn't me who added that information to the article. I am not Greek. None of those family names are mine. I do not believe the information is opinion. I think the information adds to the demographical information of the article. I find the information interesting, and I will try to find sources for it. If you have information about how and why people emigrated from Poland to Rochester, that would be much appreciated. Kingturtle (talk) 21:54, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
P.S. I encourage you to create a user page. Communication between users is much easier that way. Kingturtle (talk) 21:54, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Always nice to be appreciated! Aelfthrytha (talk) 21:32, 27 December 2007 (UTC)


yes but they will all die by a long terrible death,sooner then they think —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.105.19.126 (talk) 23:10, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Shout out

Thanks again for all the assists on Benazir Bhutto, you made my user page, and my day! Edit Centric (talk) 04:00, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree! This form of collaboration is exhilarating - and, in light of the awful people in this world capable of such violence, in this case it helps me to feel that people are also capable of good things. Keep up the good work! Kingturtle (talk) 04:04, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bhutto

I noticed on the Benazir Bhutto talk page you noted that this was similar to the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand in that it could lead to another world war. Do you really think this situation could? Who would be the major players in such a conflict in your view? Clinevol98 (talk) 06:08, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

If civil war breaks out in Pakistan, then how will the U.S., India, Iran Israel and Russia react? Then how will the E.U. and China react? Scares the bleep out of me. Kingturtle (talk) 06:12, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
India would certainly feel threatened if a radical Kashmiri terrorist group gained control of the government. John Bolton, like him or dislike him, said his primary worry now would be Musharraf himself getting assassinated. There's already been 3 attempts on the guy's life during his "presidency" already. That would surely plunge the country into all-out chaos. By the way, being a libertarian socialist puts you in line with Noam Chomsky as well, so you do know that as a baseball fan you have fallen into the media's propaganda trap to keep you interested in things that are of no importance, correct? :) I'm just kidding...I'm no fan of Chomsky and that assertion is ridiculous anyway. I've fallen into it too :) Clinevol98 (talk) 06:32, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Block question

I see you've blocked User talk:Harrybabbar, but you didn't block User talk:Sikh scholar despite his personal attack [3] I was curious why? From what I can tell, User:Harrybabbar was quoting back to User:Sikh scholar, not originating the threat. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 06:37, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Actually, Harrybabbar has been insulting anyone who corrects his POVs and vandalism. He purposly changes footnoted material and makes erroneous claims. The he goes on personal attacks of anyone who dares to try and show hi an academic perspective. He is abusive and has also threatened me as well.
Gorkhali (talk) 06:55, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
I'm not questioning the block of User:Harrybabbar as much as I'm questioning the lack of block for User:Sikh scholar who seems to warrant it with this [4]. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 06:57, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Sikh scholar is a great Sikh Wikipedian. Harrybabbar insulted his religion, his family and his personal honour. In Sikhism this is highly offensive and people in India would find harrybabbar's perosnal attack highly offensive. If he harrybabber did a personal attack on me like that I would probably react in the same way. Harrybabber need to be permenately blocked for vandalism and personal attack on editors. If he does vandalism again block him permenately.--Sikh historian (talk) 09:20, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
The edit history does not seem to match this interpretation. AliveFreeHappy (talk) 09:45, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Because you are not a Sikh you don't have the religious cultural knowledge of the highly offensive religious cultural insult he said to Sikh scholar
"do not refer yourself as Khalsa and insult such a pure word of our community" = To say this to a baptized Khalsa Sikh is the equivalent of saying his mother is a prostitute.--Sikh historian (talk) 09:59, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Kingturtle, someone has blocked Sikh scholar please unblock Sikh scholar one can understand his emotional outburst after the highly offensive religious insult he was subjected to. Lets not lose an expert Sikh Wikipedian over a vandal, only Wikipedia will suffer long term to lose a long time expert Wikipedian such as Sikh Scholar. Please do justice unblock him.--Sikh historian (talk) 10:31, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

I blocked Harrybabbar for making 20 spams in a row that were rude, provocative and counter to the energy necessary for the Wikipedia project. I did not blocked Sikh scholar because I had been online for 16 hours and I needed to go to bed. I see that Stephen has blocked Sikh scholar, which is a move I support. Kingturtle (talk) 13:24, 28 December 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Thank You

For the welcome! I have been sticking my toe in the editing waters of Wikipedia and having a blast...thanks for noticing :)Legotech (talk) 18:39, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Same here Kingturtle, thank you for your welcoming message!

I am a bit puzzled by your profile though. You seem to be at the Ghandi dot whereas I am at the Friedman dot. Wiki states libertarian socialists aim to distribute power more equally amongst members of society to create more freedom for the individual. If this is done by abolishing government its okay by me. But if it’s done by abolishing the free market, as many socialists would like to, it must be a major misunderstanding.

When private property is taken away by force and given to others who have done nothing to earn it, as is the case in many welfare state, there is nothing libertarian (i.e. no force, no fraud) about it. And believe me I know what I am talking about as I live in Holland (EU). Next to Sweden, the nanny state par example. Thus the phrase ‘libertarian socialist’ is a contradictio in terminis.

In other words: there can be no such thing as a libertarian socialist. Hence the political compass may be incorrect. To see where you really stand, I would advise you to use 'The world’s smallest political quiz'

Good luck and please let me know the result !

Cheers, Peter

PS Have you ever considered a society where everyone is free to politically associate WITHOUT imposing ones ideas on others by means of majority rule ? As a matter of fact this is a rather old idea. Belgian political economist Paul Emile de Puydt (1810-1888) came up with it in July 1860.

De Puydt advocates freedom of choice for government, or no government at all, and free competition between governments. When you’re a socialist, communist, fascist, liberal, democrat, monarchist or whatever, you should be free to choose your system of government, or no government at all if you’re an anarchist or libertarian, without having to move to another country. Or as De Puydt puts it: “no need to give up either national traditions or family ties, no need to learn to think in a new language, no need at all to cross rivers or seas, carrying the bones of one's ancestors.”

This idea of total political freedom is less odd than it may seem. After all, there are many large private associations (like the AAA) that people can join voluntarily to benefit from their services. And they don’t necessarily have to move when they join ! The important thing is that those who are not interested are not forced to join. That is genuine freedom.

“Each generation is like a new tenant who, before moving in, changes things around, cleans up the facade, and adds or pulls down an annex, according to his own needs. From time to time some generation more vigorous or short-sighted than its predecessors, pulls down the whole building, sleeping-out in the open until it is rebuilt. When, after a thousand privations and with enormous efforts, they have managed to rebuild it to a new plan, they are crestfallen to find it is not much more comfortable than the old one. It is true that those who drew up the plans are set up in good apartments, well situated, warm in winter and cool in summer; but the others, who had no choice, are relegated to the garrets, the basements or the lofts.

So there are always enough dissenters and trouble makers, of whom some miss the old building, whilst some of the more enterprising already dream of another demolition. For the few who are satisfied there is an innumerable mass of objectors. We must remember however that a few are satisfied. The new edifice is indeed not faultless, but it has some advantages; why pull it down tomorrow, later, indeed ever, as long as it shelters enough tenants to keep it going?

I myself detest the wreckers as much as the tyrants. If you feel your apartment is inadequate or too small or unhealthy, then change it - that is all I ask. Choose another place, move out quietly; but for heaven's sake don't blow up the whole house as you go. What you found unsuitable might delight your neighbour.”

“My panacea, if you will allow this term, is simply free competition in the business of government. Everyone has the right to look after his own welfare as he sees it and to obtain security under his own conditions. On the other hand, this means progress through contest between governments forced to compete for followers. True worldwide liberty is that which is not forced upon anyone, being to each just what he wants of it; it neither suppresses nor deceives, and is always subject to a right of appeal. To bring about such a liberty, there would be no need to give up either national traditions or family ties, no need to learn to think in a new language, no need at all to cross rivers or seas, carrying the bones of one's ancestors.

It is simply a matter of declaration before one's local political commission, for one to move from republic to monarchy, from representative government to autocracy, from oligarchy to democracy, or even to Mr. Proudhon's anarchy - without so much as removing one's dressing gown or slippers.”

Source: Panarchy

Peter de Jong I (talk) 21:59, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

for helping understand what i THINK i did wrong in posting about Cupid and Santa as depicted on TinkerTank.org. I'm still confused, but hope that people "get" my intention was not spammy and I can figure out how to include these in the dialog on those pages. basically, there is discussion of all of those characters in popular culture and how they are used and evolve, so i linked to the TinkerTank.org site, which is not commercial in any way (there's NOTHING for sale at all) but is a purely "academic" and creative site that re-imagines all these myths in a modern way to be useful to parents and kids..... so i guess it seemed spammy because I mentioned it in each of the character postings on Wikipedia.... Personally, I've never seen anything quite like it, because it does have all the characters in one place, and it isn't selling stuff like other sites..... and the characters are totally original.... so i'm trying to figure out how to join the dialog without breaking the rules..... thanks for helping Hudroy (talk) 02:45, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Evil flag

No problem, I looked on the war in afghanistan's page. Therequiembellishere (talk) 04:03, 29 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of Women's Edge

An article that you have been involved in editing, Women's Edge, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Women's Edge(2nd nomination). Thank you. BJBot (talk) 02:44, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] AfD nomination of List of tuberculosis victims

An editor has nominated List of tuberculosis victims, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of tuberculosis victims and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 16:29, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Special:Userrights

All the pages you linked are the same! Do you mean Special:Makesysop and Special:Makebot? If so, then yes, they still work fine at the moment, but it seems that the developers are keen to standardise on Special:Userrights, which is already used by stewards, so (guessing here) they might not be available in future version of MediaWiki. The instructions appear once you have entered a username - just click on the group to add a user to (or remove them from, in the case of bots). You can also add a reason, as before. If any of the instructions could be clearer, we can alter them. Just let me know if you have any difficulties. Warofdreams talk 01:02, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] User:Riceflan...

...which I take to equate to "rice pudding" or "rice custard", in addition to making me hungry, is singularly obsessed with this guy named [[Iver Whitney Adams. No particular harm, just amusing. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 21:02, 2 January 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Luis-Frois.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Luis-Frois.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 21:05, 2 January 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Thanks for the Welcome!

I hope I can do this community justice. I've utilized Wikipedia so much that I want to give back when I can. Thanks again.
--Low2snow (talk) 22:55, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] New Hampshire Liberty Forum Jan 3-6, 2008

You may not be able to visit, but this may still be of interest to you: New Hampshire Liberty Forum Jan 3-6, 2008

And Michael Badnarik explains in his Constitution Class why nothing we have is truly ours (unless you happen to own it under allodial titlewhich is very rare). I can also recommend his book Good to be King.

A visionary cartoon Ron Cobb made in 1968: At least we don’t have to worry about anarchy anymore

Finally, on a lighter note, Diet Coke + Mentos and MTV oldie Der Günther

Enjoy! Peter de Jong I (talk) 01:35, 3 January 2008 (UTC)