User talk:A Nobody/Archive 28

Greetings and salutations

Hoi, A Nobody! This is Tenebris from the Tonight Show article (216.254.156.188 in this dial-up incarnation, a range which I apparently share with at least one tadpole vandal). Just letting you know that I have my reasons for not creating a Wikipedia account (and let the chips drop where they may), but stopping by especially to mention that it was pleasant to see at least one message in that direction which was not an automated bot. Being unregistered, I won't ever be able to create my first article; but I have enough familiarity with the five pillars to recognise the humour in many of the meta-wiki discussions. (Call me an intrigued amateur Internet archaeologist.) Even so, thank you for the thought. Being both unregistered and a dial-up with a large provider, I know I come across as the perpetual newbie with no wiki history. It is another amusing thing in life that few things better draw aside the polite veil of potential administrative retribution to reveal the true character of both observer and observed.

Fair enough and happy editing! Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 14:35, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 1 February 2010

• From the editor: Writers wanted to cover strategy, public policy

• Strategic planning: The challenges of strategic planning in a volunteer community

• News and notes: New CTO, Britain Loves Wikipedia, Telefónica partnership, Multimedia and more

• In the news: Wikipedia on CDs, BBC uses Wikipedia content, and more

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Dinosaurs

• Sister projects: Sister project roundup

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 20:32, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the update! Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 22:00, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Hey

Spinach Monster (talk) 04:53, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Hello! Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 14:34, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Hello! how are you? Can you please review my article? As per your last suggestions, I have tried to make the article less listy, have added one link about MaaS in media, and tried to rewrite the article in an non advertising tone. Please advise how much work I need to more do to make it go live. Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by PCJain (talk • contribs) 10:06, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I have fixed some of the references. You need to have references after, not before sentences. Best, --A Nobody^{My talk} 18:00, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Please review my article

Hello! How are you?

Can you please review my article? As per your last suggestions, I have tried to make the article less listy, have added one link about MaaS in media, and tried to rewrite the article in an non advertising tone. Please advise how much work I need to more do to make it go live. Thank you PCJain (talk) 10:08, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I have fixed some of the references. You need to have references after, not before sentences. Best, --A Nobody^{My talk} 18:00, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Rebecca Chambers and Claire Redfield

I really wish you would not rush articles out that weren't finished. If you want to finish them be my guest, but until then moving out articles with a list of external links is NOT the way to do this and just makes it harder to make the article. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 17:40, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVII (January 2010)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter Issue XLVII (January 2010)
From the coordinators It's only a month into the New Year, and we've already made changes to the project's infrastructure, merging and improving several task forces (see below). Much content within the project's scope has also been improved: eleven new featured articles, two featured lists, two featured pictures, a featured sound, and seventeen A-class articles. Thanks and congratulations to all editors who contributed and/or nominated these items. In other news, the elections for new project coordinators are coming up in March. Think about whether you would like to run or not, and self-nominations will be coming up at the beginning of next month. Lastly, our project's A-class review process is desperately in need of new reviewers. Please consider looking at least one and leaving comments, no matter how small or trivial. It will be greatly appreciated by the article's nominator(s). For the coordinators, —Ed (talk • majestic titan) 03:32, 3 February 2010 (UTC)	Articles of note New featured articles: Battle of the Nile Bodiam Castle Charles Eaton (RAAF officer) Frederick Scherger Helmut Lent James Whiteside McCay Johann von Klenau Peter Heywood The Battle of Alexander at Issus Thomas Baker (aviator) Walter Peeler New featured lists: List of Asian American Medal of Honor recipients Order of battle at the Battle of the Nile New featured pictures: Return of the Great White Fleet SMS Moltke (1910) New featured sounds: It's a Long Way to Tipperary New A-Class articles: Alexander Pentland Battle of Osan Battle of Winterthur (1799) Cedric Howell CFM International CFM56 Florida class battleship Friedrich Freiherr von Hotze HMS Lion (1910) List of battlecruisers of Germany‎ List of Knight's Cross with Oak Leaves recipients: 1940–1941 Max-Hellmuth Ostermann Operation Windsor Petlyakov Pe-8 Robert Peverell Hichens Smedley Butler USS Hawaii (CB-3) Vernon Sturdee
Project news Congratulations go to Abraham, B.S., Nick-D, and Durova, who placed 1st, 2nd, and 3rd, respectively, in our annual Military Historian of the Year contest! Thanks to all who voted, and congratulations to our runners up: Auntieruth55, BilCat, Hawkeye7, Ian Rose, MBK004, MinisterForBadTimes, Parsecboy, Sturmvogel 66, and The ed17. Our thanks go to all editors who participated in our recent task force housekeeping discussion and to EyeSerene who implemented the technical side of the approved changes. The new line up is as follows: The Military science and the Military technology and engineering task forces have been merged to form the Military science and technology task force. The Indian and Pakistani task forces have been merged, and re-scoped, to form the South Asian military history task force. The Taiwanese task force has been merged into the Chinese military history task force. The Lebanese task force has been merged into the Middle Eastern military history task force. The Romanian task force has been merged into the Balkan military history task force.
Contest department The Contest Department has completed its thirty-third month of competition; and its fifth month under the new scoring system. A total of 91 articles were entered by ten editors. Sturmvogel 66 came first with 152 points, followed by Kumioko with 98 points. They receive the Chevrons and Writer's Barnstar respectively. Honorable mentions go to Auntieruth55 (87), Abraham, B.S. (48), Parsecboy (41), and Ian Rose (41). Binksternet, Radeksz, Ed! and D2306 also fielded entries. Please submit any articles you are working on for the February contest.
Awards and honours The A-Class medal has been awarded to: Auntieruth55 for her work on Johann von Klenau, Friedrich Freiherr von Hotze and Battle of Winterthur (1799). Sturmvogel 66 for his work on Sd.Kfz. 10, Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-3 and Petlyakov Pe-8. The_ed17 for his work on Design A-150 battleship, Dutch 1913 battleship proposal and USS Hawaii (CB-3). The A-Class medal with Oak Leaves has been awarded to: Abraham, B.S. for his work on Walter Peeler, Thomas Baker (aviator) and Cedric Howell. Parsecboy for his work on SMS Nassau, Florida class battleship and List of battlecruisers of Germany.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.

This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:52, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the update! Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 18:01, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

DYK on Sallie Gardner at a Gallop

Hi ANobody, I've always looked at your opinions as very sensible stuff either negative or positive. That's why in light of this matter I would like to ask your opinion with regard to this DYK Nomination, which has been arguing the contents of Sallie Gardner at a Gallop and Eadweard Muybridge. We'll appreciate your inputs on this issue and I'd like to clear my perspective in this matter as well. I'd like to correct how I view articles should be created if in case I'm wrong. Thanks.--TitanOne (talk) 14:29, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Is it still listed? I had to take a few days off due to diverticulitis and did not not edit from...

15:12, 9 February 2010 (hist | diff) Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of the occult secret societies ‎ (comment)

16:45, 4 February 2010 (hist | diff) User:New Age Retro Hippie/Rebecca Chambers ‎ (→Reception: merged from Rebecca Chambers (character))

I am doing better now. Can I still help or has this one already been resolved? Best, --A Nobody^{My talk} 18:03, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Guess what!?

It is February 6th, 2010, just saying ;) Dusti^SPEAK!! 19:54, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes, but I will only run if 100 people sign that I should. Best, --A Nobody^{My talk} 18:04, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Participation at my RfA

Thank you for taking the time to weigh in on my RfA. It was successful, in that the community's wish not to grant me the tools at this time was honored. I'm taking all the comments as constructive feedback and hope to become more valuable to the project as a result; I've also discovered several new areas in which to work. Because debating the merits of a candidate can be taxing on the heart and brain, I offer this kitten as a low-allergen, low-stress token of my appreciation. --otherlleft 14:35, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

You are welcome and congratulations! Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 15:18, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 8 February 2010

• News and notes: Commons at 6 million, BLP taskforce, milestones and more

• In the news: Robson Revisions, Rumble in the Knesset, and more

• Dispatches: Fewer reviewers in 2009

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Olympics

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 02:02, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the update! Best, --A Nobody^{My talk} 15:17, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Your support

Hi there. I wanted to thank you for supporting, but couldn't help but notice that you said I have 6 awards. Immediately under that list is a link to my older ones (I only have 6 listed on there so my userpage isn't a huge mess.). In any case, thanks again for supporting. The Thing // Talk // Contribs 16:53, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

You are welcome and I shall correct my typo ASAP! Best, --A Nobody^{My talk} 16:54, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Reminder

I just wanted to remind you of my position that I do not want you taking any articles from my user space without telling me, and especially without cleaning up the articles before you do so. Both of the articles that you split out were not even remotely finished, and I had barely searched for any references for notability. So I reiterate, do not do that again. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 18:06, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Anything else I should take care of ?

Apart from the references, is there any other thing I should take care of? Do you think the article is ready for moving into public space (making it live). Please advise. PCJain (talk) 07:40, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Hello! Do be sure to check the references in the "Implementation" section as they need to be right after a period, not a space and then a reference. One other thing you might consider is checking with a relevant Wikiproject for a sort of peer review in which perhaps multiple editors with expertise on that particular subject can also give it a once over. The main key with articles is that they are balanced and every fact within them is referenced through a reliable source. Editors will challenge you if you have uncited paragraphs or if it feels like an advertisement. Happy Valentine's Day! Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 00:14, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your RfA Support

A Nobody/Archive 28 - Thanks for your participation and support in my recent successful RfA. Your confidence and trust in me is much appreciated. As a new admin I will try hard to keep from wading in too deep over the tops of my waders, nor shall I let the Buffalo intimidate me.--Mike Cline (talk) 09:32, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

You are welcome, congratulations, and Happy Valentine's Day! Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 01:05, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Unreferenced living persons contest

	The Unreferenced living persons contest
	Please help us build this contest. Your suggestions are warmly welcome. >> Sign up now. <<

I thought you would be highly interested in this contest, since you were in charge of the newsletter contest. Okip (formerly Ikip)

So, now you have a new name? Anyway, unless if I missed it, no one has yet indicated an article they rescued in hopes of winning the first contest. I agree that contests are a good idea and means of encouragement, but I think some rescued articles listed last time, but did not see a need despite the newsletter to register what they did. Thus, I am not sure if there is simply no winner from last time or if I should just look at the listed articles and declare someone a winner anyway? Also, I am somewhat avoiding the whole BLP thing as it is the hot button topic of the day and as my dog is dying, I just do not want to get embroiled in anything here that makes me unhappy. I need to stay optimistic for the sake of my career. Best, --A Nobody^{My talk} 23:44, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Hey, Do You Check Your E-mail Anymore?

I'd like to talk to you, but i'd prefer not to talk here. Spinach Monster (talk) 14:42, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

I do here and there, but yes, things have been rather hectic as of late and I have had a couple recent stretches of neither editing nor checking my email as indicated above. My dog has more or less been given three weeks today...barring a miracle. :( Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 23:39, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Since You Don't Seem To Be That Active Anymore, Might As Well Be Vague Here To Get It Off My Chest

What i'd like is to let the bullies and thugs that run this place know that they cannot stop me. I've started another account with thousands of edits, productive edits actually, but to be honest, i'm indifferent on whether my edits are vandalism or productive ones. I don't care anymore, I just want to let them know that they claim this is a "free" encyclopedia, and I will not let them take the "freedom" away from it as long as people use it as a dominant information resource.

I would love to have my good name back here, since it was taken away due to my defense of the defenseless users of Wikipedia, but I don't expect these hypocrites to do that. Hell, they could probably find out the other account fairly easily through checkuser, but I don't care since it's done nothing but productive edits and that will only entice me to vandalize again under another account. I will only leave Wikipedia when I choose to. They cannot stop me. Spinach Monster (talk) 22:38, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

I strongly encourage you to stick to one account or if you have another make it a declared alternate account that is within policy. I know full well that once tarnished there really is not repairing a reputation on Wikipedia for a good number of editors, no matter what you do and no matter to what extent you were railroaded. All the same, do not let bullies make you play by their rules. Keep the moral high ground and let them wear themselves out and slip up instead. Besides, we could use good editors helping us rescue articles more than anything else!  :) Best, --A Nobody^{My talk} 23:42, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

I gave up the moral high ground years ago due to frustration, I was a hero on the Wikipedia Review and lost it due to procrastination and addiction to this website. I suppose one of my friends from those days is right though, they don't care enough now to even bother with a checkuser given the other account is entirely constructive and so far that other one is the only one I use. I might make a bunch more, it doesn't matter, if one is subtle enough (making sure accounts don't edit each other's articles/discussions in particular), socking is fairly irrelevant. hell, all their policies are fairly irrelevant. I wish I could just stop beating around the bush and state who I am, but I guess it doesn't really matter all that much, I wish I could stop thinking about it. Spinach Monster (talk) 04:36, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Heh, I thought I almost just edited here using the other account. I should probably officially retire this one forever. I might talk to you as an IP, but thanks for listening. Spinach Monster (talk) 04:37, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Nice talking to you as well, but I really do encourage you to stick with one account, though. Best, --A Nobody^{My talk} 14:59, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 15 February 2010

• News and notes: New Georgia Encyclopedia, BLPs, Ombudsmen, and more

• In the news: Labor squeeze revisited, journalist consultations, philosophy bungles, and more

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Singapore

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 12:22, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the update! Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 19:20, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

WikiThanks

Thank You Thanks for the barnstar, that was very nice of you. Editors such as you are what keep me going here ;) We haven't seen much of each other lately, and I hope that changes. Okip ^{BLP Contest} 02:18, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

You are welcome. I am usually a good judge of character and I can tell that your intentions are honorable. Nothing is more significant than preserving human knowledge. That is how we grow as an educated civilization. Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 14:58, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Relevant wiki editor

Hello! As per your suggestions, I have decided to add the article to WikiProject:Software.. However, I am unable to find my way in adding this tag to the article on my talk page. Currently I have put the tempelate Wikipedia:WikiProject Software|WikiProject Software on my sandbox page but am unable to identify the exact location of the template. Also, how do I find editors who have been working on WikiProject Software related articles? I have been struggling for the past two days to locate one. PCJain (talk) 09:38, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

I have requested a review of your article from the project at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Software#Request_for_article_review. The relevant project templates would be added after the article is in mainspace. Please allow a few days for the members of the project to review the article. Do not hesitate to ask any additional questions at the project's talk page. Thank you again! Best, --A Nobody^{My talk} 19:20, 18 February 2010 (UTC)--A Nobody^{My talk} 19:20, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Dwaynewest & Powergate92

Start a thread on them at ANI or something. This is getting ridiculous.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 02:06, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Okay. Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 18:33, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Reyk is also assuming bad faith here where there is a Japanese language book that is used as a reference.—Ryūlóng (竜龙) 23:36, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

Did you catch the "keepmongers" line? Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 05:13, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Need advise

Hello! I have been visiting different wiki articles for past few days in an effort to build them up and hone my writing skills. Every time an article has either not been edited for past couple of months or is needing an expert opinion. So, when an article is an year old, does it make sense to work on it and build it? When they say the article requires an expert opinion, who are they referring to? If I know that technology/product, would it be OK to go ahead and edit? Is it really OK to add and modify ones article? How do I make my judgment on selecting an article for editing? Are there any rules of the game I need to follow? Please advise.. PCJain (talk) 10:07, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes, the age of the article does not matter. Whether it is a year or a day old, if you can improve it, by all means please do not hesitate to do so. Experts are people familiar with the subject. I have degrees in history and political science and thus when I edit those articles, I come at them with an expert opinion. I also have a personal library I built (seriously, I put together shelves and had them nailed to the walls) that contains many books and magazines on video games, films, etc., which I read extensively. I therefore know a great deal on fiction and have studied academic interpretations of them. For example, I attended a presentation by a speaker at a major university on the show Lost, among various others. Thus, I am also an expert of television episodes and fictional characters. I am also a published author and am decent enough of a writer that how I write on Wikipedia is not the same as how I write elsewhere as a means of protecting my real life identity. Anyway, if you are knowledgeable about certain technology and products, then, yes, please do contribute. The rules are more simple than they may seem. So long as anything you add is sourced through neutral reliable sources and is not factually inaccurate, you are usually okay. The worst that would happen is someone undoes your edit and if so, don't sweat it. We all proofread and revise each other here frequently. If you would like to indicate some specific examples to me, I will gladly check them over and offer my thoughts. Best, --A Nobody^{My talk} 19:14, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Closure

I love the irony there considering that I almost put up a template that indicated that I would be doing something drastic to the page. That was one of the few times where I had the, "Well maybe someone will do something..." thought. Oh well, I can add the support if you would like to the other pages. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 19:05, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

I added it in since you didn't strike it. Thanks for being a positive note there though, as it was worse than his last RFA unfortunately. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 19:10, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Like I said there, I really do hate to see anyone get universally opposed (as I imagine that can be incredibly discouraging). There are instances where someone should be universally opposed, such as if it was a sock account created in bad faith or something, but I think that candidate generally means well and is someone we want to encourage and who can if anything benefit from the advice others provided there, but certainly not someone we want to leave. So, something positive seems like a good thing there. Plus, personally, I want to save my opposes for ones that I truly think will be likely to say block opponents, delete out of personal bias, etc., i.e. things that will cause drama at ANI or what have you. Otherwise, I am pretty apt to support anymore. I hope I am not too support happy, but I guess it is just in my nature to be nice. Best, --A Nobody^{My talk} 19:21, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

The Ghost Of Spinach Monster

Hey A,

Just E-mailed you. Thank you again for letting me speak my mind here.

Sincerely,

Spinach Monster —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.92.48.53 (talk) 19:38, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I'll check momentarily. I do encourage you to log in when editing though. Best, --A Nobody^{My talk} 19:45, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 22 February 2010

• News and notes: $2 Million donation, cybersquatting, comScore statistics and more

• In the news: Macmillan's Wiki-textbooks and more

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Mammals

• Features and admins: Approved this week

• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 11:22, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the update! Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 16:48, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Talk page move

I think you made a typo or something when you tried to movepage archive your talk page. If you are going to switch to a move-page method of archiving you should move it somewhere under User talk:A Nobody. Thanks, –xeno^talk 17:35, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I meant it to be User talk:A Nobody/Archive 1. I must have somehow accidentally cut out the "/Archive" just before I clicked the button. Thank you for pointing that out. I guess maybe I'll just keep the bot for the moment. Best, --A Nobody^{My talk} 17:40, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Which I see is already a blue link... Well, I wanted to come up with some kind of more easy to follow format for these things, and was toying with the idea of doing it by time period rather than regular numbers, but anyway, I'll have to give it some thought later when my stomach stops hurting perhaps. Best, --A Nobody^{My talk} 17:42, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

It needs fixing sooner rather than later. I suggest just moving it to User_talk:A_Nobody/Archive_29 if that's not used. As it stands now, it's unacceptable. ++Lar: t/c 17:45, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

I already moved it back and history merged it here. –xeno^talk 17:46, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

(restored due to surely inadvertent ec) There appears to be a big chunk missing (from the archives), containing very serious concerns raised by Flatscan and queries as to the timing of a hoped for response. Those concerns aren't going to go away just by deleting the thread (which is the apparent effect of all this moving about). ++Lar: t/c 17:48, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm a fan of transparency, but the WP:BLANKING guideline does permit summary removal without archiving. As a side note, the EC handler seems to be screwing up a lot today! –xeno^talk 18:03, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Absolutely. It also permits removal of material without responding. I just think it's worthy of note that we have yet another example of A Nobody blithely ignoring serious and legitimate concerns raised by others while happily complaining about trivial matters. So I've so noted, and will continue to do so. I expect sooner or later this will end up at arbitration, and I predict no amount of dodging will avoid such an arbitration going quite badly for A Nobody. The unresponded RfC/U almost certainly assures that. So A Nobody would be well advised to consider changing their approach. Soon. ++Lar: t/c 18:18, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

I thought about changing the way I archived my page some time ago (like switching to /2010/February or something), but I decided ultimately it was just too much trouble. –xeno^talk 17:44, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

I have a back up archive I started by year for last year at User talk:A Nobody/Archive 2009 (I have not yet finalized it as it is just a draft), and am trying to weigh what I like better. I see our founder at User talk:Jimbo Wales uses a date format. Best, --A Nobody^{My talk} 17:48, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

I use numbered archives formatted exactly as yours but I have a table of contents box that gives date ranges, and I have a bot do an archive index by subject so people can easily find stuff. Highly recommended, if your goal is to make it easy for people to review past discussions. ++Lar: t/c 17:53, 24 February 2010 (UTC)