User talk:Ambi~enwiki/Archive9

User talk:Ambivalenthysteria/Archive1
User talk:Ambivalenthysteria/Archive2
User talk:Ambi/Archive3
User talk:Ambi/Archive4
User talk:Ambi/Archive5
User talk:Ambi/Archive6
User talk:Ambi/Archive7
User talk:Ambi/Archive8
Last archived April 19, 2005.

You will need to contact each of the state / terrirory parliaments and ask them for either a copy of the latest edition of their parliamentary handbook or a historical list of members with dates of election. some of this may now be online at the parliamentary websites so check first. Adam 12:37, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Swan Hill, Victoria

Ambi,

What do you intend to be the status of the Swan Hill article? Swan Hill is presently a double-redirect, as you reverted the article to be a redirect to Towns in Victoria, Australia, which also presently has no info on Swan Hill.

Which page is supposed to have conversation about this aggregation project? I prefer the separate articles for each town. --ScottDavis 00:52, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick response. I hope those two get sorted out soon. --ScottDavis 01:13, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Origanal Research on wikinews

G'day,

Wikinews has been experimenting with OR for a while now, and it seems like it's all going pretty well, and we've had a couple of really good articles from it. So what im planning with a couple of other aussies on wikinews, is to write an OR article in real time from the senate for a blow by blow account of what happens on July one, when the government gets its majority (i mean, we all knows what happens; unions get fucked over, but we dont know exactly how its gonna happen yet). Anyway, just wondering since you are also in our fine nation's capital, if you were interested in a foray into OR? Im gonna contact some of the other wikipedians who have said they are from Canberra to see if they are interested aswell, since its gonna take some logistical doing - at the very least we will need one laptop, a digital cammera (are you allowed to take photos, or are you only allowed to use the official TV fotage?), and some means of wireless conection to the internet. Im really not sure what the facilaties are in APH, so it will need a bit of research. The bellman 12:12, 2005 Apr 21 (UTC)

You know what i just realised; July 1 is smack bang in the middle of the semester break, so i may well not be in canberra. :( Damn howard, not planning his assult on Australia around my calander. Re: privacy; for normal OR you dont (currently) need to give any personal details above and beyond normal (there would be a mention that wikinews reporter The bellman saw/heard/whatever foobar, and a link to a subpage of the article which had further details (ie. a transcript, emails etc), however there is a seperate mechanism for Acreditation which means you have to put your personal details on wikinews, but you dont need to be acredited to write OR. Anyway, looks like this idea might not work after all, still ill talk to some other canberra wikipedians and see if i can get it off the ground The bellman 12:04, 2005 Apr 22 (UTC)

Apologia pro Vita Sua

Thankyou, Ambi, for trying to justify yourself. I am quite happy to have dropped out of editing Wiki. I have multiple "personalities" under which I used to edit, but found my best and longest articles were the ones I wrote anonymously. These have stood the test of years. Dropping out has not only saved time, but also saved money: I found I was buying books to get the information for articles. Silly me! Thortful 06:44, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thankyou for the library advice - I have been following it for more than half a century now. Although I find your focus rather narrow, I admired your bravery in adding the link to Queer wikipedians on your page. Thortful 07:00, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Deniliquin

Hi,

I am perplexed by your moving Deniliquin to Deniliquin, New South Wales, and angered that you have done this again, without entering into discussion - I put a note on the discussion page asking you why you had done this. Is this a generally agreed-upon convention to add the names of states to Australian places? If so, it is a bloody stupid one, IMHO. Are we to redirect Sydney to Sydney, New South Wales?XmarkX 06:49, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

thanks for clearing that up - although I don't understand your assertion that you did enter into discussion about the Deniliquin move.XmarkX 07:57, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

also, it would be good if you could point me in the direction of where the decision regarding Australian article names was made.XmarkX 08:00, 23 Apr 2005 (UTC)

why don't you need to enter into discussion about what you were doing? am I supposed psychically to realise that there is a place where such decisions are being made, and to know that such a decision has been made?XmarkX 13:04, 24 Apr 2005 (UTC)

HELP! deleted articles on Australian towns

Something very strange has happened. I was looking over my watchlist and noticed some red links: Drouin, Nyah West and Moe. Someone has just gone and deleted these articles. Fortunately I have 2 of those articles on my Towns in Victoria, Australia article, but since Moe was removed because it was quite long, it's all gone. I don't know who did it, and I don't know if the information can be retrieved as in deleting the article the history goes as well. I couldn't find any of these listed under VfD. I'm asking you for help as you're an admin, but I don't know if anything can be done. Please help keep a watch on the other towns as they might go to. This message is also on Wikipedia:Australian Wikipedians' notice board. --Chammy Koala 09:54, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Actually, I just looked in my history and I have all the information on Moe as well, so I can re-create the article, but it wouldn't have the history of all the people who worked on it, so I won't at this point. I've listed the 3 articles on votes for undeletion.--Chammy Koala 10:19, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Ok, sorted. I don't think the article should have just been deleted, even if it did breach copyright.--Chammy Koala 10:59, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the kind words, Beck. You made my day :-) Hesperian 01:59, 2 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Ambi, thank you very much for your correction on Mr. Vojislav Kostunica article. Obviously, I was so tired that nigh and mixed up versions, and did not noticed offensive content when edited other parts. --Ninam 14:52, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Assembly Elections

Election dates can be found here.

Lists of members elected to each parliament are strangely hard to come by. There are lists of members in alphabetical order floating around, e.g. here, but I guess it would be pretty time consuming to convert such a list into a list for each parliament. I could suggest some books that would almost certainly contain the information you want, but they would be pretty hard to get hold of outside WA, and I suspect you don't live over here in the west. Hesperian 22:39, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The Western Australian Parliamentary Handbook gives election results only for the election previous to its publication. So my 17th edition provides details of the 1983 election only. If you can get access to multiple editions, then it would just be a case of photocopying a couple of pages from each one. The Handbook also contains lists of successive members for each electoral district. e.g entries of the form

ASHBURTON: Burt, Hon Septimus: From 1890–1900. Forrest, David: From 1900–1901. Consistuency abolished, 1901.

It wouldn't be impossible to extract the information from these entries, but I wouldn't recommend it.

The State Law Publisher publishes a number of books containing electoral information and statistics. The most obviously relevant is:

Black, David (1997) Election Statistics: Legislative Assembly of Western Australia 1890–1996

Another that might be relevant is

Black, David (1989) An Index to Parliamentary Candidates in Western Australian Elections 1890–1989

I hasten to add I haven't seen either of these; I'm just going by their titles. Good luck, Hesperian 23:48, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

CheeseDreams

I'm sorry to bother you with this (and do let me know if there's a more sensible place to bring such things in future), but it has been suggested [1], [2] that User:The Rev of Bru is yet another sockpuppet of User:CheeseDreams which seems to have reactivated (they both have the same POV and act in similar ways). I'm not sure how this needs to be investigated, etc. Any help would be gratefully recieved. Thank you! --G Rutter 08:30, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help. --G Rutter 14:31, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Max Weber FARC

Since Sarge withdrew his opposition, can you reasses your vote and - hopefully - change it to keep? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 11:41, 5 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hey

New here, found your page by following links...and more links, and links...anyway, I'm from Australia too and just wondering - which university are you at? --Snakeman 00:18, 6 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

terse

Freed from verbal redundancy; neatly concise; compact and pithy in style or language. (Oxford English Dictionary)

Michael Hardy has been known to be the very definition of terse.

Hello. I am puzzled by your comment. Looking over your last 500 edits, I'm not sure where your path and mine have crossed. "Terse" can be good or bad depending on context. Is this about the way I write articles? Which of my articles are you familiar with? Michael Hardy 01:21, 7 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

New LGBT noticeboard.

Hi, I've created a LGBT noticeboard for wikipedians to post issues and concerns. Please take a look. Thanks. -- Samuel Wantman 07:33, 8 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I'm here

Hi Ambi, thanks for your comment on my talk page - yes, I am still about - I wish I could spend more time than I do here (ie. same as I did last year), but, real life is keeping me fairly busy at the moment :( Eventually I'll be able to get back into it. I hope! -- Chuq 08:09, 9 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Page doubling at WP:RFAr

I have just reverted the second of your two edits to the main ArbCom page as it caused a page doubling. I don't think I've removed anything I shouldn't have, but you should take a look just in case. As the edits were 1 minute apart, it looks like your first attempt at saving generated an error (no response from server, perhaps) and you tried again. If this is the case and you can remember what happened in more detail, there was a discussion about this happening on Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) to which you might wish to contribute. Thryduulf 11:15, 9 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration case against LevelCheck

Hi, regarding the arbcom case against LevelCheck: recently, he's returned to editing after a 9-day hiatus, and immediately commenced disrupting again (see List of people who have used the word "Islamofascism"). In light of this, I hope the arbcom will take a look at my request for a temporary injunction. Thanks, Meelar (talk) 22:37, May 9, 2005 (UTC)

BC/AD versus BCE/CE

There's a discussion and a vote on this topic going on at Talk:Jesus#Reversions & Consensus on BCE/AD; I thought you might be interested. Jayjg ^(talk) 18:47, 10 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Tkorrovi and Paul Beardsell

Paul Beardsell edited the Proposed decision page of the arbitration case. My comment [3], diff [4], please read it before voting on case, the last principle was added by him.Tkorrovi 12:00, 14 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ambi, you can see that I am asking where the rule is. Where is the rule? Are you just going to revert without explanation? Will you deign to say why the principle is a bad one or a good one? If it is one which is deserving of discussion will you put it in the list of "proposed principles" for consideration by the arbitrators? Paul Beardsell 04:46, 15 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ambi replied on my talk page:

Only arbitrators are allowed to edit the proposed decision page. That's all there is to it. Please don't re-add the principle again, else I'll have to protect the page. Feel free to make suggestions on the talk page, however. Ambi 06:16, 15 May 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia never used to be like this. Things should not be allowed or disallowed seemingly on a whim. Explain where there is such a rule. The wording of the page does not say that non-arbitrators can not add proposed principles. It does say that only arbitrators can modify or vote on the proposed principles. This is not some police state: You are accountable, just like the rest of us. Say why! Paul Beardsell 06:25, 15 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I note you have not replied to my other point: If the principle proposed by me is a good one, say so. If not, say that. Either way, as one of the only permitted editors, supposedly, of that page, please copy my proposed principle in and then vote for it. Or against it. Things are not "just so". Explain. Paul Beardsell 06:25, 15 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The Number/Sollogfan RfAr

I didn't get your reference to an existing hard ban. If you are referring to the many Sollog sockpuppets that have been banned indefinitely, then at least a determination has to be made that the present two users constitute another pair of sockpuppets from the same uhm drawer, which they have persistently denied. (I personally don't care who they are sockpuppets of, but am convinced that these two accounts are linked.) --MarkSweep 10:29, 15 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

NPOV

Please check out Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/BCE-CE Debate, Slrubenstein | Talk 00:02, 16 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

PSYCH

i have reasonable grounds, allbeit circumstantial, to believe that PSYCH is behind the recent continual vandalism of my user page, Mark's user page and various other pages. The IPs are similar, he deleted the reference to PSYCH's arbitration from my page continually, has the same vandalism type, and like PSYCH, claims to be studying law. Remember PSYCH is on one year personal attack parole. Is there some way to:

Have PSYCH permabanned
Have any anon user who vandalises in a way substantially similar to PSYCH permabanned

or do i have to take this beck to the Arbcom or is there really nothing that can be done? Xtra 13:27, 20 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Military history of Puerto Rico

Hi, how are you? I submitted the above mentioned article to be considered for faetured article status. I would be honored if you could take a look and express your opinon here: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Military history of Puerto Rico, Thank you very much Tony the Marine

Caulfield Grammar

Thank you very much for your comments on the FAC page. I've been waiting for some useful feedback for ages! I'll try and add in some of the stuff you suggested to help this article along. Harro5 06:16, May 22, 2005 (UTC)

I've written a section on the uniform in prose. Please have a look and make some comments. A picture of a blazer pocket to come. Harro5 07:06, May 25, 2005 (UTC)

Caulfield Grammar FAC

Hi! You previously voted to object this FAC nomination, but the article has been significantly upgraded and improved since then. I would urge you to have a second look before leaving your final vote. Thanks. Harro5 08:16, May 25, 2005 (UTC)

Friendly Chat

Hi, I just thought that I would let you know that Linuxbeak has nominated me for adminship. I would like to invite you to participate at WP:RFA if you wish to do so. Thank you and take care Tony the Marine

TSSK

I WANNA BE PART OF THE TOP SEKRIT SYSOP KABAL. CAN'T I? CAN I JOIN? CAN I JOIN? </energetic puppy> →A sysop wanna-be← ^talk

KaintheScion/ElKabong RFAr

I have left my comments in the KaintheScion/ElKabong RFAr. Please be advised that I have yet to be convinced that these two are actually sockpuppets. I also object to being named in this RFAr at all, as it is an obvious indication to me that the whole thing has been enacted in bad faith by editors pushing a political agenda. Enviroknot

Advice on possible arbitration

I'm considering requesting arbitration in the case of Mr Tan (talk • contribs). I've not really been involved in an arbitration (or mediation), and though I've read all the information about the process, I'm not sure that arbitration is in fact the appropriate step. I'd be very grateful if you could have a quick look at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Mr Tan, and the main articles involved (Zanskar and Tsushima Islands), and tell me if there's any other less drastic route that I could go down. Many thanks. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 14:00, 27 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Page duplication

One of your edits on WP:RFAr caused a page duplication. Please wait with further editing, I'm fixing it. Mgm|^(talk) 14:07, May 30, 2005 (UTC)

BTW, here's the diff to prove it. [5] Mgm|^(talk) 14:10, May 30, 2005 (UTC)
- Fixed it. Don't know what you planned on doing, but you can try again now. Cheers! Mgm|^(talk) 14:12, May 30, 2005 (UTC)

Tkorrovi vs Paul Beardsell and others

Ambi, please provide a reference for when anyone said anyone else was "not human". Thanks, Paul Beardsell 17:08, 30 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ambi, maybe you do not reply because you are confused and know not to which I refer. In the proposed decision you have written that one of the parties to the case said of the other that "you're not human". A reader of Tkorrovi's evidence might think that I had said such a thing. You, an arbitrator in this case who, by your comments in the proposed judgement, is claiming to know what went on, must surely have seen evidence of this somewhere. I don't remember writing this and I am unable to find a reference. Please supply one. I would like you to do so reasonably quickly as you are repeating what I think is a false assertion (one of many) by Tkorrovi and thereby giving it unreasonable credibility amongst followers of the case and, more importantly, your fellow ArbCom members. Paul Beardsell 21:00, 31 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I note that since the above posting you have made scores of edits without replying to the issue I raise here. This is discourteous but more importantly compounds your mistake. You are a member of the ArbCom and so what you say carries extra weight in the opinions of some. It is more important therefore for me but also for you to admit your error. Paul Beardsell 20:34, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

STILL NO RESPONSE. Paul Beardsell 02:38, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Thank You

What a year! My first year in Wiki, a featured article and now administrator. Thank you for your support. I feel honored to have befriended you. I will be counting on you for advice and guidance.Tony the Marine (UTC)

Another unsubstantiated allegation

I pay you the courtesy of drawing your attention to this. Perhaps you could repay it by dealing with the "not human" false allegation by you, see 2 sections above. Paul Beardsell 20:13, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

You've been logged in, you've been posting. STILL NO RESPONSE. I say, "Boo!" Paul Beardsell 02:40, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

liberal party / liberalism

Please read book I referenced on the talk page and then reconsider your revert. I think you will find that the liberal party is well within its definition of traditional liberalism. Xtra 11:00, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Spite

So I express an opinion and you accuse me of being 'spiteful'?! Ket pottle black? With folk like you on the 'arbcom', who needs enemies. I also feel the need to refer you to Wikipedia:No personal attacks, in particular 'Stay cool', and the first example "Negative personal comments and "I'm better than you" attacks, such as "You have no life"".

Is this really the example you want to set for everyone else here? Or do you not think that, as a member of the arbcom, you should be taking a more measured view of things? Dan100 14:29, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)

In fact I want to stress that I am very upset by your comment I continue to add a heck of a lot more articles and information to this encyclopedia every week than you do. Are you suggesting that, as a mere Wikignome, I am somehow inferior? Yeah, you won't find my sig on many Wikipedia talk: pages, or requests for what-not. Yeah I'm not on the mailing list. But I do my duty as a citizen of Wikipedia by voting in polls and in the meantime get on with trying making Wikipedia articles better (even if I do not always succeed).

Perhaps a wiser course of action on your part would have to been to explain why you think the arbcom and its entourage is such a good idea, instead of simply lashing out. I would have expected a higher standard of public conduct from someone occupying a position such as yours. Dan100 17:39, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)

Sorry to butt in: I too take exception. Ambi has, without properly perusing the evidence, asserted I have said something I did not. That I am guilty of personal attacks on another. She has also falsely called me a bully. (See recent postings by me on this page.) SHE HAS DONE BOTH THESE THINGS ON A PAGE WHICH I (AND OTHER LESS SPECIAL USERS) AM FORBIDDEN TO EDIT. She, on Dan100's, page and elsewhere attacks him personally and now she calls him a hypocrite. The hypocisy is plain and it is not Dan's. Paul Beardsell 02:35, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I too am amazed at Ambi's behaviour. How is this becoming to someone who has been elected to a public position of trust? And are you, Ambi, really saying that my work on Wikipedia is worthless, and that you are somehow superior to me? Dan100 07:13, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)

I'm also very concerned that Ambi is showing no remorse. I am very upset that my work on Wikipedia is being so belittled, and I find this bullying extremely objectionable. Dan100 07:36, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)

So I'm a jerk?!

Dan100, seeing as I write more articles than you do, perhaps you should go write some articles instead of being a jerk. Ambi 11:46, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Well thanks, Ambi. Dan100 07:51, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)

I think I'm quite within my rights to ask for an apology, so, Ambi, that's what I'd like you to do, and that will be the end of it. Dan100 09:25, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)

Neutral

Thanks for your comment and neutral vote at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Pjacobi. It's clear to me myself, that seeking for an easy solution at ODP, where there may be none, may be judged critically. But OTOH I honestly believe, that the worst thing to fear, if I get the extra buttons, is not enough work done using them, not mis-using them. --Pjacobi 21:16, 2005 Jun 2 (UTC)

Women

Hi. I'm giving some thought to starting Wikiproject:Women, so far I think I'd cover things like biographies, women's health, and women in politcs, and issues of feminism. Have you got any ideas both content wise and organisation wise since you've been involved in heaps of wikiprojects?--nixie 02:49, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

You do not respond...

...so please see here. Paul Beardsell 02:51, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Ambi, thanks for removing the one accusation. But you have not removed the other "bully" accusation. Same page. I trust that if you thought it apt to remove the one you would also consider it apt to move the other. Paul Beardsell

NO RESPONSE YET. Paul Beardsell 09:09, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Accusations of bullying should always cite instances, I think. Because otherwise the making of such an accusation can so easily be construed itself as an instance of bullying. It is better to cite an instance of unacceptable behaviour and then let others decide whether that constitutes bullying than to claim that someone is a bully as though it were self-evident. It's certainly not evident to Paul that he's a bully so, to allow him dignity, you should indicate why you think that. Even if you can show that he's been high-handed with Tarvo, you should also indicate why Tarvo is a victim and what Paul has done that prevents Tarvo from defending himself. I'm actually at a loss to see how a medium like wikipedia could possibly provide an avenue for bullying. Nobody is forced to do anything. People like to win their arguments, as they do everywhere, but to equate that with bullying needs proper justification. Matt Stan 10:47, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Tkorrovi did not understand that considering him not a conscious entity was a talk about science

In relation to the alleged "you're not human" accusation, I think I may have introduced this idea into the artificial consciousness discussion at some point, based on the speculation that Tarvo might be a chatbot, i.e himself an artificially conscious entity. Remember we were all the time (or at least I was) aiming to reach a consensus on what the criteria for articicial consciousness are. This speculation was just that, and was in the context of discussing tests for artificial consciousness along the lines of the Turing test for artificial intelligence. If it was wrongly taken by Tarvo, I think you'll find this was just another instance of Tarvo not really understanding what was being said. If you want to weigh up the levels of nastiness between Paul and Tarvo, then please consider how 'nice' it is to accuse someone of being a racist, shortly after discovering their country of origin. Matt Stan 06:42, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Considering someone an unconscious entity is a personal attack, no matter how you substantiate doing so. This was certainly not any serious scientific conversation, I did not want such senseless discussions, you forced them upon me, as I was supposed to "work together with you", but you used that not to have a constructive discussion, but to ridicule me. In any other circumstances I never talked to you, but here in Wikipedia you cannot choose the people you have to deal with. So I talked to you in a faint hope that maybe you start to work constructively, which even happened sometimes for a short while, but your general attitude didn't change, and personal attacks against me didn't stop. If it did change, then at best your speculations might be considered as a lame (un)friendly joke, but unfortunately how you treat me is very far from jokes. Now you offer to discuss a subterfuge for personal attacks, I would advise no one to go into that trap, as I said, personal attacks cannot be discussed, but only considered as personal attacks by the community.Tkorrovi 14:53, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I called Paul's remarks against me racist, and not allowed, this had nothing to do with the country of origin of neither Paul or me. I consider racist a remarks like whether I'm conscious or not, that anthropologist would be necessary to find out who I am, that he knows smarter animals than me (see blasphemy archive), and that he compares me with monkey, also that I'm paranoid, a pest etc. Just only that. No need for these, maybe I was not patient enough in wanting them to stop, but instead of changing your attitude, you started to attack me even more. And of course, I always wanted you to stop any talk about nationality as well, most senseless and not appropriate, especially when done against one's will. Things like that, I don't see them as any interest concerning science or whatever, but as a way to find a possibility to attack me, and the history of our interaction proved that more than well. Not only nationality though, whatever you succeed to find, like the most senseless and absurd criticism of me by Chinasaur, he wrote to support you after your complaint or who knows what reason. I talked to him, and he don't support that any more, I forgave him, as he was a reasonable person who understood while having a reasonable conversation.Tkorrovi 15:31, 3 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Cutting to the chase

I assume you view my comments as a personal attack. OK, even if that's not what I meant them to be, if that's how you feel, I am sorry. I will take care to present any frustrations I feel surrounding arbitration in a less ambigous manner in the future, if I feel the need to express such opinoins again. So again, I am sorry that I said what I did, and if you were upset by them.

However, that does not excuse you calling me a 'jerk', nor your attempts to belittle my work and bully me. We should not make personal attacks, against anyone, under any circumstances. So I am simply going to express my extreme disappointment in you for breaking the very rules you were elected by the community to uphold. Fin. Dan100 17:01, Jun 3, 2005 (UTC)

Blocking without warning

Ambi, I believe you have made a substantial error in judgment by concluding that you do not need to warn and notice people when you block them. If you do not have the time to leave a note on their talk page, then I would suggest that you are also too busy to be engaging in blocks at all. By failing to leave a note even in the case of an obvious vandal you substantially increase the risk of confusion and hurt feelings by other users who are also blocked due to the occasional shared IP. --Gmaxwell 04:36, 4 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Arbitration against Yuber

I could provide more evidence, but I would need to know what is missing. I've read the guidelines, but if you could give me a hint, I'd appreciate it. Perhaps it wasn't as thorough as it should have been? I think if we should wait until jayjg gives his statement. He has had loads of experience with Yuber's bad faith pov pushing. Also, does the request for arbitration stand without expiration? So if more evidence is provided by the end of the week, can the petition be re-examined?

Thanks in advance,

Guy Montag 10:30, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Here is what I have so far.

The discussion entitled "minor changes" [6]. Yuber inserted "sources" which had nothing to do with the subject. He insterted his POV, than tried to cover it up by source spamming. It took us 4 days of close policing of the article before it stood up to NPOV standards.

Sea of Galilee locked because of Yuber.[7]

See discussion. [8]

Citations for numerous violations of 3rr breaches and warnings to lock articles because of his editing.[page] Evidence is found in "3RR" discussion on Yuber's Talk Page.
[9] Jizya page paged locked because of Yuber's non cooperation and edit warring.

Dhimmi page locked because of Yuber's editing [10]

[11] Another paged locked previously because of his editing.

Guy Montag 21:47, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)

My RFA: Thanks

Thank you for your support on my RFA. Now that I have been promoted, I promise to be as hardworking and fair with the admin tools as I have been with the other areas here on Wikipedia. See you around and happy editing. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 00:43, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Importance

Hey Rebecca whosharesmybirthday, your continued input at Wikipedia:Importance would be appreciated. Your last comment was at Wikipedia_talk:Importance#Comments. Thanks, ··gracefool |☺ 03:20, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)