User talk:Viriditas/Archive 21

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Archive 21


Contents

Comment from Stone put to sky

Hello, Viriditas -- i notice you're from Hawaii. I have a close friend who is also from there and very much an admirer of the native culture. He's currently living in the south of Taiwan, living with and learning the language of the Ami. He's an informal scholar who never graduated University but, through his travels, has become familiar with enough Indonesian, Ami, Japanese and Chinese to be able to hold up his end of a" hearth-side chat", so to speak. He's also teaching himself how to build Ukeleles, which -- unlike his linguistic interests -- i'm able to help him with, as a result of the luthier work i did as a youth. Ciao -- Stone put to sky (talk) 04:14, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Request for comment on Category Redirect template

Because you are a member of WikiProject Categories, your input is invited on some proposed changes to the design of the {{Category redirect}} template. Please feel free to view the proposals and comment on the template talk page. --Russ (talk) 21:59, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

Waterboarding

I have just gone through the process of setting up the categories and assessments pages for WikiProject Human rights. Unfortunately there are not yet any criteria for importance in the WikiProject. I'm sure I've got some of the assessments wrong - I was hoping it would lead to some discussion rather than everything just staying unassessed. I put articles about global human rights law, human rights concepts etc as top; similar national articles, and significant organisations, people etc as high; smaller organisations and others as mid. I put articles on individual forms of torture, individual human rights abuses etc as low, because they on their own have a relatively small impact on human rights discourse. Waterboarding is of course more topical - so it should probably be more important. I will put it as unassessed until there is a consensus. If you have views on this - it might be very helpful to start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Human rights? Tkn20 (talk) 11:07, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Your suggestion re template and mediation

This seems to me to be an excellent suggestion. Is it being implemented? Where? Thanks. --Coppertwig (talk) 14:34, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

Reconsideration

Viriditas, I don't know if you have been going through the massive about of info/links I listed over the sock puppet issue, but if you have, I thought I would let you off the hook. (I can't stand to go through the mind-boggling mess myself.)

After the results of the Zeraeph Arbitration, I am being to get a better handle on what to do when I am harassed again. And also, having gone two Arbitrations in which I was one of the named parties (and in Starwood Arbitration the major party) only to have the arbitrators disregard negative evidence pertaining to me in both cases, I see that I just have to become more sophisticated at defending myself rather than worrying about the past.

Thank you so much for your offer though. And I do hope you and I can interact productively in the future. Sincerely, Mattisse 14:26, 15 January 2008 (UTC)

Leads of articles

[1]

This is somewhat of a moot point, but my lead was MUCH better than the existing one.

One of THE most important parts of Wikipedia is the encyclopedic style. The style that was used prior to me coming did not sound encyclopedia-like at all. It gave me the feeling of some manual or guide. Read WP:NOT - And it makes it clear that Wikipedia is not a manual.

AFAIK the sentence that we have now is good. :) WhisperToMe (talk) 10:48, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the stub feedback

Thanks for the rapid response - I'm used to the Mediawiki install at work, where I can pretty well do what I please, and I'm learning all kinds of Wikipedia procedural details. I responded to your comments...I think you've got a much better idea for how to organize all of the stub-class articles. Oh goody, now I get to learn how to clean up the mess I made. :-) Davidlwilliamson (talk) 08:49, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Rationale for the Iraq war

In Rationale for the Iraq war you deleted the following text: "The government of Iraq was alleged to have committed innumerable serious human rights abuses. Amnesty International made serious allegations in 1991 that Iraq was children were the victims of a policy of political repression that denied their human rights, and that they were were often executed or held as government hostages.[1]

Why did you delete well supported and relevant text? Raggz (talk) 11:15, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

The Special Barnstar

The Special Barnstar
For going above and beyond the call of duty—including but not limited to going to an actual library—in an attempt to track down the elusive proper name of Green Sand(s)/Mahana/Papakolea/etc. Beach (not to mention cleaning up and tweaking the references in the article of the same name), I hereby award you this Special Barnstar. You deserve it. --jonny-mt 03:01, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Silky Sullivan

Generally I'd like to avoid stepping on the TB racing folks' toes. And WPEQ is just getting off the ground, we're still trying to tag articles. And our next big task after that one is to sort out the Horse categories, which are an absolute mess. So I'm afraid we wouldn't be very fast on clean up. Sorry! Ealdgyth | Talk 00:57, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

If the horse is in one of the TB racehorse cats, go ahead and remove the WPEQ tag. If for some reason EQ has to step in and take over the TB project (say if TB project went inactive) we could find the article that way. Our biggest problem at EQ right now is that we have no idea where all the horse articles might be lurking. Some are out there that aren't in cats or at least not in logical cats. If you find lurking horse cats or orphan horse articles, feel free to drop a note on the EQ project page or on mine, and we'll try to see that the stray gets home!Ealdgyth | Talk 01:04, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Hawaii

I'm in Florida competing in a culinary competition at the moment. I should be back to New York (home) on Monday, I will try to catch up with you then, I've been very busy lately.--Chef Christopher Allen Tanner, CCC (talk) 03:56, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Archive

Yes, it had to be done, if only for the reason of keeping discussions focused. I didn't mean to come off as irritated, but it just happened at a rather awkward time. Silly rabbit (talk) 11:48, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

No, I don't need diffs. At some point or another, I may have asked Raggz for some diffs to support some allegation or another, but I don't need any of my own. Thanks for the offer, though. Cheers, Silly rabbit (talk) 11:52, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
The archiving happened just at a time when the mediation cabal was researching the case. The mediator asked me to bring her/him up to speed on things, and I couldn't point to the right sections anymore because so much of it had been absorbed into the archives. It really was just bad timing is all. Silly rabbit (talk) 11:58, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I saw the Reginald Wilson note. Actually, I had seen the article already, but I immediately disregarded it. Your note made me take a closer look. Silly rabbit (talk) 12:09, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Micronation template

Hello. Yes I noticed that too - and now I know why. I added a border around the "full name" - that is mprobably what has done this, but unfortunately I can't think of a way to solve this - I haven't really edited many templates. I'll ask some of the editors who are template coders. Onecanadasquarebishopsgate 14:44, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

I do not have proper information for some of the fields, what should be placed in those fields? Onecanadasquarebishopsgate 16:06, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
Principality of Sealand is fixed, but Atlantium isn't. Onecanadasquarebishopsgate 16:08, 26 January 2008 (UTC)
A template coder has helped fixed the problem - thanks for notifying us about it and helping us with it. ----- Onecanadasquarebishopsgate 16:37, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: proposal on AN/Pump

Hey there Viriditas, I don't want to clog up the AN with this little section, feel free to move this if you feel that it belongs there. One of your statements, specifically, "Multilpe AN/I reports followed by an RfC, then formal mediation, and finally, an arbitration case lasting a month involving only a select group of people discussing a very specific set of circumstances. Now compare that with a term limit that comes due once a year for a period of seven days giving the entire community a chance to comment", fails to address something that I would like to add.
Let's say I'm a new admin. (I am). Let's say that I royally screw up something, with or without malice (I haven't - or at least not brought to my attention). With a term limit in place, I could easily say "Bugger off, bring it up at my reconfirmation a year from now" and then continue on my merry way. Certainly, if I've screwed up that badly, I would probably have pitchforks and torches at my door, and rightfully. Meaning, the "old way" of doing things can't go away (the part you listed as AN/I, RfC, mediation, arbitration). So if the "old way" isn't going away, how is adding the "new way" (term limits) not adding a new layer of bureaucracy? With a term limit that replaces the current bureaucracy, I can do what I want while people foam at the mouth to get rid of me - waiting for my anniversary RfA. Am I missing something here? Keeper | 76 18:09, 26 January 2008 (UTC)


Charles Reed Bishop

Hi, I got your note re: Bishop. Since the article is only one paragraph long, and all of the information is in the External Link I provided (which is extremely detailed), I declined to source the info inline for now. I basically expanded the article for the benefit of anyone tooling around the internet curious as to who he was; what was there previously had no information to speak of, not even his birth date.

A 30-minute documentary on Bishop just aired on TV here in Hawaii. As I understand it, you can also, for a limited time, obtain a free DVD of the documentary from First Hawaiian Bank, possibly at any branch. Softlavender (talk)

EDIT: Speaking of which, how would one source a documentary film? Softlavender (talk) 03:53, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for getting back to me. Since my CMS was lost when I moved to Hawaii, thanks for providing the online style link for video referencing. :) Question: If perchance I wanted to develop a long article, on whatever subject, and wanted to write it piecemeal while I wrote and developed and researched it, where or how can I do that outside of the encyclopedia proper but on this site (so that I can use the Wikicodes and links that would require translating/redoing if I did it in a Word document)? I can't figure out how to make a separate page on my own account or Talk page, or alternatively how to make a "hidden" page on this site. Any suggestions? Softlavender (talk) 07:08, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: Manson and Counterculture

Thanks for your help on my reference desk question. Yes, I did notice the Bugliosi footnote; I guess I'm just not sure how reliable a source he is regarding the counterculture, since he was pretty clearly a (relative) outsider to the movement. But thank you for your help, and for that link to the John Lennon interview. You've been extremely helpful. --Brasswatchman (talk) 15:40, 27 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: my talk page - yes, that would be great! Again, if you can just point me in the right direction, I'd appreciate it. Thank you! --Brasswatchman (talk) 00:07, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Jeff Gannon

Re: your edit summary

Ordinarily, I'd agree with you, but in this case, we're arguing over whether a category should be there or not. In this case, it should be incumbent upon those who wish to add the category to provide a justification for its inclusion, not the other way around. If I was trying to add Category:Journalists, I'd have to prove it. I suggest the same should be required to add Category:Impostors. Horologium (talk) 01:46, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films January 2008 Newsletter

The January 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have any suggestions for improvement or desire other topics to be covered, please leave a message on the talk page of one of the editors.Thank you. Nehrams2020 (talk) 02:37, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Britney Spears

Hello. I delete material from that article according to WP:NOT#INFO, particular the 5th point:

  • Someone or something that has been in the news for a brief period is not necessarily a suitable subject for an article in their own right. While Wikipedia strives to be comprehensive, the policies on biographies of living persons and neutral point of view should lead us to contextualize events appropriately, which may preclude a biography about someone who is not an encyclopedic subject, despite a brief appearance in the news.[5] Routine news coverage and matters lacking encyclopedic substance, such as announcements, sports, gossip, and tabloid journalism, are not sufficient basis for an article.

And the policy of WP:NPOV#undue weight, particularly the 3rd paragraph, indicates that we should not put too much emphasis on the latest Britney news that lack encyclopedic merit. Thank you. Oidia (talk) 06:02, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Yep, let's discuss it on the actual talk page. Oidia (talk) 06:02, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

He he, I was beginning to think that no one noticed my absence, but you apparently did. Happy Lunar New Year to you. --BorgQueen (talk) 07:41, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

just sayin ...

--MPerel 05:49, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue XXI - February 2008

The February 2008 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by KevinalewisBot --12:20, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Whoa!

So I've been down and out for most of the past couple of weeks due to a huge project at work combined with some personal obligations, but I just took a look at the history of Hawaiian sovereignty movement and scanned through User talk:Yosemitesam25 and, well, "whoa" is the only word that comes to mind. In other words, I just wanted to stop by and let you know I support you 100% and will jump in once I've done the required reading. --jonny-mt 07:38, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Although just so you know, I don't think WP:RFCU likes fishing expeditions, so we might want to leave that off the table for the time being :) I would, however, suggest a request for full protection at WP:RFPP if it continues to escalate. --jonny-mt 07:54, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Thought you might like to know that the page has now been fully protected, so hopefully we'll have a bit of a breather and a chance to hash out some sort of conclusion on this. Thanks! --jonny-mt 05:12, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi Viriditas, I just noticed all this hoo-ha today as well, and I echo jonny-mt's comments. I'll keep an eye out for inappropriate edits as well, but feel free to give me a shout if needs be. This article is admittedly a mess, but YS (or whomever s/he is -- saw some of the discussion thread on that as well as to their identity) is not helping ameliorate that situation. Cheers, Arjuna (talk) 02:04, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

P.S. Btw, any progress on the Niihau article front? Arjuna (talk) 02:05, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Aloha Viriditas, as you might have noticed Yosemitesam25 and I have had a disagreement on the Overthrow article (discussion on my talk page, which I have pasted to the article talk page for the record). Just asking if you could help keep an eye on it and keep everyone (including me) honest. Btw, s/he went over 3RR, which I reported. Mahalo. Arjuna (talk) 21:16, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Your welcome template

Hi, I saw you welcomed User talk:KAVEBEAR, and that was a really nice welcome. What template did you use? By the way, thanks for your contributions to Hawaii related articles. Perhaps you'd like to take a look at Chantilly cake and Kalapana. Aloha! — Cuyler91093 - Соитяівцтіоиѕ 09:40, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Reply to Kalapana

Hey, thanks for that! Are you a local, too? — Cuyler91093 - Соитяівцтіоиѕ 08:33, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Really? I need to see what's wrong with the code. — Cuyler91093 - Соитяівцтіоиѕ 08:45, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Overthrow article (again)

Hi Viriditas, as you might have noticed, Yosemitesam is up to usual tricks. You may wish to refer to the back and forth discussion on the article's talk page. The potential COI issue was also discussed there and on YS's talk page. I don't know how you feel about these issues, but your input would be much appreciated. He just reverted again, and frankly, I feel a re-revert is entirely justified, but I think given where things are (YS seems unamenable to logic if you ask me) it would have more weight if the reverts had the consensus of other editors, so I'm loathe to do it myself (I'm already at 2RR today). Cheers and mahalo, Arjuna (talk) 02:00, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for weighing in on this. YS removed the state flag? Assuming it was not accidental, that is disturbing indeed. As I have stated elsewhere on numerous occasions, I do not have a problem with an editor trying to fairly represent a certain perspective with which I do not agree, but this and other recent edits do not suggest this is the case. If this pattern of behavior continues, it's possible that what we are looking at is starting to fit a definition of vandalism. I do not make such charges lightly, and I'm not there yet, but this raises a real red flag. Arjuna (talk) 08:39, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

The Aloha Plumeria

The Aloha Plumeria
For your tireless contributions to Hawaiʻi-related articles and for beating back the POV forces that would overwhelm us all, I hereby award you this, the first ever Aloha Plumeria. Mahalo! --jonny-mt 09:05, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Yosemitesam25

One more thought. Assuming JK and YS are one and the same, there is a sockpuppet issue. YS has indicated a lack of familiarity with Wikipedia editing on his userpage and in his edits. Clearly JK was fluent in coding, and so if they are the same person then this is classic disingenous sockpuppeting. Arjuna (talk) 09:42, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Very interesting on the sockpuppet issue. I've got to sign off for the night, but will be back and available at various points tomorrow to assist in the COI submission. Cheers, Arjuna (talk) 10:16, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Films February 2008 Newsletter

The February 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:01, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

On being a chump

It would explain why so many people are complacent about "mere" double-voting. An admin seems to have been recently desysopped for non-proxy socking with three accounts. That's the most blatant and unskilled kind of sockpuppeteering; surely there must be many others who are a bit more discrete. Durova is worried about what would happen if 10-15% of established users maintain socks. I suspect that's already the reality on the ground. Cool Hand Luke 03:31, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

burrito

There are several Mexican joints around here that can make a pretty boss burrito. I just think this entire dialog about burritos and pictures of burritos is funny. The next time I order a burrito or am in the general vicinity of someone eating a burrito made in Jersey, I will take a snap shot. lol --Endless Dan 13:13, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Woah... You are true connoisseur of burritos. When I get a pic, I will post it here first. --Endless Dan 13:32, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
...a documented lifestyle, the lifestyle of burritophilia, Wikipedians Interested in Burrito Studies... This is a fascinating subculture I was completely unfamiliar with. I almost feel guilty for posting such a meager burrito pic as a representation of burritos made in Jersey. Seeing as how Jersey cuisine is top notch. Question: Do you prefer your burrito grilled or au naturel?--Endless Dan 13:44, 5 March 2008 (UTC)
Yeeeah, well food made on the East coast is second to none... but fortunately you live in friggin Hawaii!--Endless Dan 15:00, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Around and around it goes

Hello again. Milo is up to his old essay-writing-to-confound-the-discussion trick again. Would you mind attempting to inject some sanity into the latest discussion please? --Gene_poole (talk) 21:48, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback and thoughtful discussion comments, as always. Bruno Sanfilippo is almost constantly on rotation on my music system these days. Listen to "Piano Textures" if you haven't already done so - it's brilliant. It's on one of the shows I did towards the end of last year. :-) --Gene_poole (talk) 02:31, 6 March 2008 (UTC)
You're right - he is an obvious troll. Every response he posts to my comments provides us with further evidence to use to have the account blocked. If you think it better that I cease running rings around him, I'll do so. --Gene_poole (talk) 06:57, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
I've been taking a look into the "spacemusic is different from ambient" original research theory that a certain individual has been trying to have written into WP for the past few years, and I cannot see anyone listed in the spacemusic article who is not also listed at List of ambient artists. This does rather tend to support the view that "ambient" and "spacemusic" are largely (albeit not entirely) synonymous - or at the very least that there's at least a very significant overlap between the two. What are your thoughts on how we should best ensure that the relevant articles properly reflect this - without getting bogged down in the usual endless petty arguments intended to confound consensus? --Gene_poole (talk) 01:10, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

I've listed a notice on the wikiproject music noticeboard, and am also formulating an RFC on the subject - so hopefuly we'll start to see some outside opinions in the not too distant future. The cleanup of these articles is long overdue, and now is as good a time as any to get the job done. --Gene_poole (talk) 00:17, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:British Pakistanis

I have nominated Category:British Pakistanis (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) for renaming to Category:Pakistani Britons (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. AllynJ (talk | contribs) 15:54, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Made of Bricks

There was nothing wrong with the edit and nothing to suggest it was done in bad faith. It removed a number of non professional reviews from the article in accordance with guidelines at WP:ALBUM which you wrongly reverted as vandalism. Please remember to assume good faith with all editors and only reverts edits as vandalism that are obviously done to harm the article. --neonwhite user page talk 16:40, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

I know what you wrote thank you very much. you made a poor revert, that removed good faith edits by User:172.203.139.152. This was poor editing. In future make sure you only remove the bad faith edits. Removing good edits is just as damaging to the article as the vandalism you were trying to remove. Also brush up on your civility, you condescending attitude towards other editors is not helpful. --neonwhite user page talk 01:10, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
It is utterly irrelevant how many edits the user had, the edits were good. I have edited wikipedia for a considerable amount of time and contributed alot to the encyclopedia. You made a mistake with an edit and i reverted it, in responce you have been grossly uncivil and launching condescending personal attacks about my editing skills. I suggest you cease this pettiness, admit that you made a mistake in reverting good edits rather than simply removing the small piece of vandalism and issue an apology on my talk page for your rudeness and remember in future that interacting with other editors in a civil manner is more productive. --neonwhite user page talk 15:00, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
I know how to remove vandalism, especially when it is several edits back. There is no need to revert all the edits since the vandalism occured. As i said, considering these contained good edits, this just eqaully damages the page and does not improve it which should be the aim of every edit. I admit i did not see the vandalism at first as it was so small compared to the large edits you reverted in error. Reverting to the last good version is only appropriate when there has been a considerable amount of vandalism that cannot be easily removed. This was not the case here, it was one line only and could easily have been and should have been removed manually. I do not need any help i have been positively involved in wikipedia for long enough. My talk pages shows no evidence to the contrary. I believe it is time for you to apologize for this condescending and incivil attitude that you have adopted from the start. --neonwhite user page talk 15:15, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
You have adopted a condescending tone from the start and have not assumed good faith. WP:AGF says When you can reasonably assume that a mistake someone made was a well-intentioned attempt to further the goals of the project, correct it without criticizing. When you disagree with people, remember that they probably believe that they are helping the project. I did not criticise your edit and have never made any suggestions that your edits were not done in good faith you however responded with accusations about me not looking at the edit history and have continually made baseless criticisms of my editing practices. I have never claimed you wrongly reverted vandalism, i said in reverting to the version you did, you also reverted a significant good edit for the sake of removing a single line of vandalism. I also clearly stated in the edit summary the reason for my edits so it should have been clear. I can see no purpose whatever to take this an administrator. This is not a content dispute, there is no edit warring here. I am merely asking for you to assume good faith, appreciate other editors contributions regardless of how many edits they have. I am sorry but i cannot accept that it is good practice to disregard someone's contribution. --neonwhite user page talk 15:32, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
I can only conclude that you are having some kind of difficulty understanding the English language. This is a personal attack. Personal attacks are not helpful to the wikipedia community. Please apologize for this and the earlier rudeness. I have already admitted that i did not see the line of vandalism and this was an oversight on my part. I have never doubted that your edits were in good faith and accept that different editors have different editing practices and apologize for any offense caused but i feel you could be a little more civil and careful to reinstate good edits when reverting multiple edits. --neonwhite user page talk 15:44, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

About the ukulele

You know Hawaii, right? I need some backup here. Apparently, another user believes it is right to spell ukulele "ukelele". Am I wrong in saying that "ukelele" is entirely incorrect? Cuyler91093 (Contribs) 18:31, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for backing me up. :) Cuyler91093 (Contribs) 04:04, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Heh, actually it would seem Viriditas supports my position. ʻukulele *is* the correct spelling in the hawaiian language, as he posted on your talk page. but we're not talking about hawaii, we're talking about english as it is written around the world, where the accepted spelling varies. i did not say "it is right to spell the word ukelele" i mearly said "it is not wrong to spell it that way". please stop thinking in such a closed-minded manner. — Nicholas (reply) @ 06:42, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
Guys, come on. Let's try to work together, ok? —Viriditas | Talk 06:45, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
what do you think of this? — Nicholas (reply) @ 17:07, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Hawaiian_Trail_and_Mountain_Club

Thank you for your message - I'm not sure whether you're effectively complaining about (a) the deletion itself, (b) the lack of notifaction or (c) both. On (b), no, I didn't, and if you feel that I should have done then my apologies for that. As for the deletion, however, the article didn't assert any notability at all - you, yourself, flagged it with notability concerns on 15 June 2007, and the article was in almost exactly the same state when it was flagged for speedy, so I feel the deletion was merited. The public face of GBT/C 11:16, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Noted, and I'll bear it in mind in the future. The public face of GBT/C 11:22, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Moses

I must admit that I am unfamiliar with this material, which is surprising, since I was raised as an orthodox jew, have been involved with entheogenic studies and prominent researchers in the field, and am familiar with the "Jesus was a mushroom" material. I'll have to check into it, though I can't see including it in any article in any way except to mention it as a theory that exists among some scholars. (I seem to recall someone expressing such a theory about ephedra, though, although I always considered the ephedra/soma link to be overblowing ephedra's value as a psychoactive.)

The folks that taught me my religion would cringe at this theory, calling it just another attempt to discredit the miracles of the bible. I, personally, don't see a difference between a revelation had under the influence of a power plant and one had after days of social and/or sensory deprivation, fasting, physical trials, chanting and prayer, fear, or any other practice or condition used to alter one's state of consciousness. I'm not sure there's much point in theorizing that an individual used psychedelics, however, when you can't even prove the individual existed. I don't think you can demonstrate that the bible SAYS Moses did, the way you can cite the cocaine use of the fictional character Sherlock Holmes in the works of Arthur Conan Doyle.

But who am I to say? There's a whole section in the Terence McKenna article about unnamed prehistoric primates using psilocybin, and he bases it primarily on having seen apes eat mushrooms growing out of cowpies.Rosencomet (talk) 17:47, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue XXII - March 2008

The March 2008 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This is an automated delivery by KevinalewisBot --18:03, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Wilderness articles

Viriditas, thanks for the note about linking from the parent articles. I've done this for a lot of the wilderness articles I've worked on, but some inevitably fall through the cracks. I'll be sure to double check in the future. Thanks! Axcordion (talk) 18:49, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Non-deletionism

(From the Talk: List of progressive metal artists#Mergelist)

Since this discussion isn't really appropriate for that talk page, I decided to respond here. I personally approach Wikipedia as a matter of improvement or deletion. If it can't be improved, it should be deleted. To be honest, despite my work on the page, I hadn't really considered the category page (amateurish error, really). I was simply curious how you would approach the issue with respect to precisely what an article would need to be more than just a category article. Is it even feasible to, without changing the nature of the list, make the article worth keeping? --Anon 67.187.38.109 (talk) 03:33, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Ah, but the great part: the logistical nightmare of interpreting a user's wishes. --Anon 67.187.38.109 (talk) 05:36, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

List of indie pop artists

I noticed you have proposed a merge with Category:Indie pop groups but there is no mention on the talk page. Can you detailing your reasons so it can be discussed? --neonwhite user page talk 18:19, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Block.

I've replied to that message. ScarianCall me Pat 02:42, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Yosemite

Hey viriditas, I've been on wiki break, and will continue for at least a few more months. Looking up some stuff on Charlie Maxwell I wanted to reference, I saw the recent edit war going on.

Just wanted to let you know that I am NOT yosemite, and he is NOT Ken Conklin, and he is NOT Grassroot Institute, and I do NOT advocate in any way for his edit warring. If you need anything more than my word on this, I'm more than happy to help verify that this is true. My guess is that, like with all points of view, we have a zealot on our hands. I assure you I have never feared attributing my opinions and edits to my own name.

Mahalo for all your wikiwork, and I'll enjoy being back later this year. If you think it would help for me to leave a message for yosemite asking him to be a bit more polite and reasonable, I'd be more than happy to do so - but please email me, since I don't check wikipedia often for messages anymore. --JereKrischel (talk) 03:31, 10 March 2008 (UTC)


Image copyright problem with Image:Berkeley in the Sixties (film).jpg

Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:Berkeley in the Sixties (film).jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 12:57, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

The People's Park Comment

Firstly, what do you mean by the stones+glass houses comment? Secondly, you point my towards and useful sources you know of for the peoples park (there is a dirth of sources to be found through google, and I'm not exactly sure of what direction to go in for finding more material)? --CalPaterson (talk) 19:54, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

FYI

[2] Milo 13:23, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Novels - 1st Coordinators Election

An election has been proposed and has been set up for this project. Description of the roles etc., can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/Coordinators. If you wish to stand, enter your candidacy before the end of March and ask your questions of anyone already standing at Wikipedia:WikiProject Novels/Coordinators/May 2008. Voting will start on the 1st April and close at the end of April. The intention is for the appointments to last from May - November 2008. For other details check out the pages or ask. KevinalewisBot (talk) 14:17, 12 March 2008 (UTC)