User talk:Acroterion/Archive Q3 2007
 | This page 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. |
Thanks
Thank you for reverting the vandalism on my user page, it's much appreciated. :-) Trusilver 00:57, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
- You're welcome. A slow-motion sort of spree for that vandal. Acroterion (talk) 00:59, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
- He didn't seem to be in any hurry, considering I reverted his last vandalism this time yesterday. I wonder what he's going to do now that we have foiled his master plan? Trusilver 01:04, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
- Probably vandalize here this time tomorrow. Acroterion (talk) 01:08, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks once again, and it wasn't even the Patient Vandal this time. Trusilver 03:55, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
- You're welcome once again. The Patient Vandal didn't come here either. Instead I got a little troll. Acroterion (talk) 03:58, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Acroterion
First off, I would like to apologize for my comments on LOTRrules page. It was rude and inconsiderate, but I ask you to consider the circumstances. This guy who claims to be a vandal patroller, comes in and edits the adolescence picture to a "North American ****." I had confronted him concerning this earlier, and he responds lacking an apology.. stating he was just "joking." The edit I made on his page was out of the passion of the moment.
But let me inquire, why was the pic taken off by you from the teenager page? It had been up for a week and a half.. some guy today attempted to copy paste some random facebook link into the tag with no avail. Calmly, I took the link off, and pasted in the original pic back in. Did you decide to delete out of punishment or what? I'm willing to discuss this topic like gentlemen. I'm from Texas and down here in Texas we're friendly. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.145.128.126 (talk • contribs).
- Please remember the rules; WP:CIVIL. The "passion of the moment" should remain on one side. You should respond to adolescent (there's that word!) incivility with calm and maturity. The other editor's edits appeared to be inappropriate, and it was unclear whether the photo was the subject of some silly edit war. It's hard to sort out dynamic IP addresses to establish who it actually was that provided the image.
- Next, the photo. Wikipedia is not intended solely to serve or represent the inhabitants of the US, Canada, UK, Ireland, Australia and New Zealand. There is a tendency toward a North American bias in Wikipedia, simply due to the preponderance of editors there, and yet another picture of an American teenager wearing an NCAA t-shirt doesn't help. It's a snapshot, not a high-quality picture. The article is on adolescence, not "the teenager page", as you put it. Adolescence is a condition, and the article discusses it in fairly clinical terms. The picture adds nothing. Maybe a Bangladeshi adolescent or a Xhosa adolescent or a Han Chinese adolescent would be more inclusive, if one can be found.
- And finally, the temptation to insert pictures of one's friends is hard for some people to resist. It then becomes a vandal magnet, the phrase "x is a fag" appears, and it's off to the vandal races. Check out the history of Child or Girl and see what has happened there; everybody wants their kid/niece/whatever in the article.
- You may also wish to read WP:OWN, concerning personal attachment to articles or edits.
- The article is better off without the image, and I will remove it again, after a decent interval for you to read this. We're nice here on Wikipedia too, and "punishment" was not my intention. Please sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). Acroterion (talk) 13:29, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
1.) Yes, I acknowledge the passion of the moment is unacceptable, but the way I look at my edit on LOTR's page, and then your deletion of my picture on the teenager page (and yes, it is the teenager page.. type in teenager and you're sent there) I see a strong correlation. I have a hard time believing if it wasn't for my edit to LOTR, my picture would still be there, especially after it had been up for a week already.
- Of course there's a correlation. I looked at the page because there was an IP comment to a userpage, which frequently indicates vandalism. I think you were justified in objecting. I looked at the Adolescent article and saw a snapshot of a North American Teenager, of which we have plenty around here. We don't need another one, particularly of snapshot quality. But ... see below for further developments. Acroterion (talk) 02:54, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
2.) Your statement of picture addition to be inappropriate because of its bias towards North Americans is questionable to say the least. This is the english edition of wikipedia, there is already a picture of international teens below, I'm sure Canadians or British folks inquiring about adolescents won't be offended. It saddens me because of some silly worry of an American on a wikipedia page that you want it to be deleted. Excuse me for my language, but that's a lame excuse.. we're both Americans, and we both know your reason for this picture deletion is extremely nit-picky. The article is fine with the picture.. there are thousands beyond thousands of entries in wikipedia with average American folks exemplifying the tone of the article. Why is it that those American girls at the bottom of the page from Colombia University have a pic and the "North American teenager" pic is unacceptable? I don't understand your logic at all.. is it because they have 'sex appeal' or what? Because frankly, looking at your reasoning, anything is possible. Excuse me for my language again, but it seems like you just "grabbed out of your 'you know what' this excuse. My picture will not be deleted, this is something you will have to just let go. I know you wikipedia gurus are hard-headed and strong willed and refuse to admit defeat, but I will continue to fight within reason for what is right.
- That's quite a chip you've got on your shoulder. Whatever happened to WP:Assume good faith?
- However, if you think I'm a "Wikipedia guru" because I have a big blue username, a couple thousand edits, and a couple dozen new articles, I won't mind. I am not an admin.
- Nevertheless, settle down. It's a picture, probably of you or your friend. No big deal. No real rule against that, although it's bad form. Your picture will eventually be removed from the article when an editor with a better one comes along. That's the nature of wikis. It's not a fight, and nobody's out to get you. We're trying to make things better and write an encyclopedia, remember?
- Just because this part of Wikipedia is in English doesn't mean it caters exclusively to Americans, British and Canadians. Your assumption is demonstrably wrong. Right now I'm communicating with a Russian whose grandmother was executed by SMERSH in WWII, and an Indian who was concerned that there would be caste riots in his village over a Wikipedia edit. And you're a little too attached to an illustration?
- That article really needs a good cleanup, and I'm not doing it. But you've helped me with something. The girls at Columbia University aren't adolescents for sure, so they're gone. You or your friend can stay for the time being. Acroterion (talk) 02:54, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
71.145.128.126 20:04, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
I have to agree, no one's going to take offense to said photograph unless if that someone is extremely ethnocentric or just holding a grudge. And as for the constant photo-editing war, The photo should remain fixed somehow. Aaaxlp 23:22, 1 July 2007 (UTC)AAAXLP
- See my reply to your friend above. There isn't any grudge, so stop making unwarranted assumptions. Acroterion (talk) 02:54, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
I wasn't talking about you specifically hombre
Acroterion, thank you for your consideration.. I guess there is heart in you 'robots' after all. A man once said "I never knew teen-agers could be so serious." Hopefully in successfully fighting for my picture today, I improved the automatic assumption adults in this day of age have in today's youth, for we are the leaders of the future. Today a battle was won, but a war still rages. Although my 'tense' conversation with you is something I hope not to repeat in the future, I do wish you luck in your future endeavors in becoming a wikipedia admin, as today you have proved to me that you do indeed consider others feelings, a characteristic that unfortunately, many of today's wikipedia admins lack.
71.145.128.126 04:38, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
- "A war still rages?" Please. We're writing an encyclopedia, and you're not getting that essential point. Stop with the kids vs. adults melodrama. We have 15-year-old admins here, who know better than to call a stranger "hombre". Acroterion (talk) 11:58, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, I couldn't hear.. I'm too busy sipping out of my victory champagne. You have been defeated, and you know it. Average Joe- 1, Wikiguru- 0.. I'm savoring every bit of this, the way I man-handled you verbally.. was something else. A screenshot has been taken of this debate and now is my wallpaper.
71.145.145.167 16:00, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
- Glad to help. Go away, troll. Acroterion (talk) 17:25, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Ship infoboxes
There is definitely a lack of consistency in this regard, as most of the LST articles seem to employ one type I try to stay with that one whenever I make substantive edits to an LST article; I don't have a preference either way. Mdhennessey 15:44, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks
For the revert. :) Acalamari 02:56, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
- You're welcome, but it looks like more will be needed. What did you do? Acroterion (talk) 02:58, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
- Both my user page and talk page are semi-protected. I have no idea what I did! :) Acalamari 03:10, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
- Well, I'm impressed. Acroterion (talk) 03:13, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
Revert Thanks
Thank you for protecting my talk page from the vandals. Dust Filter 01:33, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
- You're welcome. This one appears to be a sockpuppet. Acroterion (talk) 01:34, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
- I have been debating how to handle that orange(colour) vs. orange(color) poster. As best I understand the discussion on that page (I checked before reverting), it should remain colour.Dust Filter 01:42, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
- I believe you're correct. I usually politely warn parochial spelling reverters and quietly revert the edits, but this guy's more militant, as his rude first edit summary and attack on you indicates. Acroterion (talk) 01:43, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
My apologies are posted on User:Dust Filter's talk page, as well as an explanation of sorts. 207.40.210.203 17:22, 7 July 2007 (UTC)
BlackStarRock
He has also used three other IPs: 70.144.158.22 (talk · contribs), 72.150.132.190 (talk · contribs), and 70.144.158.42 (talk · contribs), as shown in the history of Talk:Rotom. I think he has a dynamic IP. -Jeske (v^_^v) 04:05, 4 July 2007 (UTC) Yeah, i sock puppeted. yo thank you for making me a section, I feel so honored!
yeah, i socked. I feel so honored that yall made a section. Thank you!
Hello and welcome to the wikiproject - here's the bulletin - if you don't like it just delete it from your talk page, otherwise, it automatically updates. Please give me or one of the other project members a shout if you need any help. Kind regards --Mcginnly | Natter 19:00, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Architecture notability
Yeah, I like it, hadn't considered the green aspect before - suggest we merge it with Wikipedia:Notability (architecture) which was my first stab but based on existing notability templates. --Mcginnly | Natter 11:37, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
Vandalism on my User/Talk page
Thank you for reverting the vandalism on my user page and talk page. Happy editing :) --Malevious Userpage •Talk Page• Contributions 21:01, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
- You're welcome. Bobby Boulders was having his fun. Acroterion (talk) 21:03, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
Colonel Sanders
Hello!
I'm trying to clean up the Colonel Sanders page by deleting redundant/repeated and unfinished material, but it was reverted before by you using the Twinkle script. I was just wondering why it was reverted. Thanks in advance!
Squirrelfisher 21:23, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
- My apologies, it looked like page blanking by an anonymous IP. If you put in the edit summary "copyedit", "redundant" or something like that, it helps people checking recent edits to see that it's not vandalism. Blank edit summaries are a bad thing. That said, I'm sorry for reverting your work. Happy editing. Acroterion (talk) 21:28, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
Ahhh, thanks for the tip! Sorry for the confusion, I'll definitely remember to add in an edit summary in the future. Thanks for all your hard work on the Wikipedia project :-)
Squirrelfisher 21:35, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
- No apology needed. Acroterion (talk) 21:37, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
Hensim
Hey Acroterion,
I need some more time to finish writing and gathering sources. Will continue to build page and make sure its written with the wikipedia guidelines in mind.
- That's what I thought too, so I removed the speedy tag to give you a chance. Happy editing. Acroterion (talk) 01:43, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
RE: PIMPZ
I'll be damned. I'm gonna watch his user and talk page and monitor it see if maybe other suspicous users show up. Cheers, JetLover (talk) 03:11, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
Hey, thanks for the help there and the report on WP:AIAV. He was quick. I had actually been typing up a report on AIAV myself, but it appears you got there first, as there was an edit conflict. Again, thanks. :) --Dreaded Walrus t c 23:40, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
- You're welcome: I was going to wait and let you do the report, but he was really going on a spree.
- Twinkle makes it quick - one click and you're done. That also makes mistakes a lot easier; I think there ought to be some form of regulation on who gets to use it, because it's too easy to label everything vandalism and revert away. Acroterion (talk) 23:46, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
- Of course, this is all just speculation, but it looks like we might have an IP address for the user now, too. User:68.73.93.243 vandalised not only my page (without me having any involvement with them. No reverts of their edits or owt like that), but he did this (twice), which reminds me a lot of this. On top of this, both User:Makemoneymoney and User:68.73.93.243 have vandalised Jack Thompson, as seen here. The IP has been blocked. --Dreaded Walrus t c 20:17, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
Aim Higher Jets
Hi Sir, I put the Aim Higher Jets addition to your page. I'm not trying to increase my hits or anything. I just wanted our store documented on Wikipedia like many other ones. Please tell me how to edit it so that it is accepted. Thanks, Jeff
PS- my e-mail is info@aimhigherjets.com —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jjgilz (talk • contribs).
- It's best to answer you on-wiki. Your entry article must satisfy notability requirements - see WP:NOTABILITY for the guidelines. In a nutshell, if it doesn't seem to belong in an encyclopedia (albeit one with very generous and inclusive standards) then it doesn't belong on Wikipedia. There are commercial enterprises listed on Wikipedia, but they're organizations like Tesco or Marks and Spencer that have established notability. Big Mike's Pizza Shop in Nutley, New Jersey won't qualify. I'm not aware of any model shops listed on Wikipedia, and if they're here, they probably shouldn't be. Acroterion (talk) 01:02, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
Thank you
|
The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | |
| That is, I believe, five times now that you have reverted my user page from vandalism. You are an excellent RC patroller and I enjoy working with you. Trusilver 21:35, 17 July 2007 (UTC) |
- Thank you, you are most kind. Since you rile the vandals so, I'd say you're accomplishing a lot too. I owe thanks to AuburnPilot and Dreaded Walrus for keeping an eye on my userpage when I'm away. Acroterion (talk) 21:41, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
- Also Caltas, Kuru, OwenX, Blueboy96 and The Rambling Man.
Thanks
Thanks for your feedback on the edits. I am labeling my message page for deletion to get rid of the new messages box. Thank you again.
- Just blanking it will be fine. IP talk pages aren't anybody's in particular, even if you have a static IP. Acroterion (talk) 14:15, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
weinmann
Libelous statements are FALSE statements published to a third party with either negligence or malice depending on who the subject of the written statement is. The trivia section of the Ariel Weinmann page included true statements and facts though the source is anonymous. If Wikipedia is no longer using a Trivia section, such information should be included elsewhere. Kindest Regards.
- If the source is anonymous, the information is not usable on Wikipedia, and will be removed. The truthful nature of the edit must be documented. See WP:SOURCE and WP:BLP. Original research or hearsay is not acceptable; it must be published in a reputable, recognized source. Furthermore, the tone of the information was inappropriate to an encyclopedia;, see the first item [1]. Acroterion (talk) 15:47, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
Weinmann
Firsthand knowledge apparently is not worth anything (so much for primary sources all you history buffs out there). There is some irony there on that statement. Luckily, students and serious scholars realize that Wikipedia is not a good source and should never be cited. While the joke may have been mildly uncouth, that is how submariners think. The fact that Weinmann had not earned his dolphins is significant in the military community.
On another note and out of curiousity, do you work for Wikipedia? How does one become a website police and what motivates such a goal in life?
- Encyclopedias do not use primary sources; they are compendia of information gathered from elsewhere. Nobody above middle school should cite any encyclopedia references for coursework; they are a way to provide general knowledge as a starting point. Wikipedia, as we all know, is imperfect, which is why volunteers who like building encyclopedias, like me, review changes and contributions. It's entertaining and educational.
- I know all about submariners and the importance of dolphins; my late father-in-law's dolphins are in my wife's jewelry box. Acroterion (talk) 16:54, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
Article : Orange
In response to your claim that my change is agains the Style Guide. The original revision of the article uses the spelling "color". Please check this revision yourself if you have any doubt. I'd appreciate if we could stick to the style used at the articles origin. Thanks.
- Wrong. The November 1, 2001 article uses "colour". Acroterion (talk) 02:16, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
I just undid the edits by an idiot on "Cameroon"
... but I did not mean you... The other editor was meant
- I knew who you meant; there are actually three of them, by the IP's, which tripped me up. Acroterion (talk) 16:43, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
Acroterion - SUDA51's equal
Thank you for the gripping tale of morality, fear, duty and honour. (Also, you're welcome for the rv. I think he's the same person as the one who did it the day before :)) --Dreaded Walrus t c 15:54, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for the rv on my page of Vocano man's two edits. I have a feeling that Vocano man, Hey ya im jason wing, Joy saha aa, and possibly The bwamster are all the same person. I have quite a couple of reasons for this belief, but I'll keep it quiet for now. If they keep bothering you, perhaps we can do something about it at RfC. Until then, I suppose we just issue him/them with warnings and rvs, and block the individual accounts if they continue after warnings. Again, thanks for the rv. --Dreaded Walrus t c 01:00, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
- They're all related, and there are a half-dozen more that have already been blocked over the past few weeks. Sorry they're bugging you now. Acroterion (talk) 01:04, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
- I count around two dozen probable socks associated with Carmel High School (Carmel, Indiana). Acroterion (talk) 01:27, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
- Let me guess... the redlinked users and the caps-lock ones? --Dreaded Walrus t c 01:30, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
- You got it. They've been dealing in the usual "so-and-so is gay", and think they're being clever by using a couple of specific names that appear to be targets of their harassment as usernames. Acroterion (talk) 01:33, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for adding User:Search richard ni on google with mathcounts and User:My name is jason wing of carmel-search me on google to your list of vandals. I was going to submit a sockpuppet report about them, as quite a few of the accounts are blocked, but it would be my first case, and seeing all the steps was quite daunting, especially as I don't really know them that well outside of their vandalism to userpages.
- That said, if you decided to file a report one of these days, just drop a message to my talk page, or here, and I'd pop along and add my support. Again, thanks for all the rvs and stuff. :) --Dreaded Walrus t c 02:56, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
<Reset indent> Obviously, he's trying to defame the people named above, quite clumsily. I've made two previous cases on aspects of this sockmaster and screwed them up somewhat both times; I think I'll wait a little longer to see how many more of this guy's friends he tries to sell down the river before I put together a report. Acroterion (talk) 03:28, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
- I've added two more to your list. It appears he's creating a new username for pretty much every edit/string of edits now. I've also noticed that each account tends to be created around one minute before the vandalism begins, so it's clear that he is creating these accounts with the sole intention of vandalising, and it also is yet more evidence that this is obviously a sock case. Examples are [2][3], [4][5], [6][7], [8][9], and so on. It's pretty much the same for all of them. --Dreaded Walrus t c 04:56, 23 July 2007 (UTC)
- You're welcome, I still owe you a few. Acroterion (talk) 01:18, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
Detroit Catholic Central Article
I was the one who put the tags stating that a Novi HS student put some offensive tags on the Detroit Catholic Central Article, but i did NOT write these offensive sentences about how C C students "are gay" nor did i write the part about incest and homosexuality in the curriculum section. Again, all these comments were written by a Novi Student (which is a rival school). I discovered those offensive statements through a facebook group called "wikipedia says that cc is gay" this was created by the same person who wrote the offensive comments on the detroit catholic central page As of writing this message, my comments and the offensive comments that i found on the article have been removed, except for the one saying that the curriculum is based on incest which i will soon remove within a few minutes.
thank you and feel free to respond with any concerns
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by ccrunner863 (talk • contribs).
- I figured it out. It would be simpler if you just edited it out in the first place. If you can tag it, you can remove it. Acroterion (talk) 11:23, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
Don't know what I did to rile the ninnies
Thanks all the more, Kindly Stranger, for coming to my defense! --Orange Mike 03:13, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
- You're welcome. I ran across an edit of yours a little while later that was probably related in some fashion - a reversion, I think. It doesn't take much to get some people stirred up. Acroterion (talk) 03:15, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
Chaminade High School
The portion of the paragraph pertaining to Ms. Creamer that states "it is assumed that this has settled out of court" is pure speculation. There is no fact to back this up, so please do not add it back into the post.
- That's fine; in fact, I'd say I shouldn't have made the reversion - my apologies. Acroterion (talk) 01:06, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
|
I see that you're a student at or alum of Georgia Tech! I thought I'd let you know about WikiProject Georgia Tech, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Georgia Tech. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks and related articles. Thanks! —Disavian (talk/contribs) 04:49, 2 August 2007 (UTC) |
Thank ye, almighty Acroterion
I noticed that a certain vandal had been violating several pages, including List of Saiyans in Dragon Ball and Hot Pockets today. Thank ye for your reverts The S 21:31, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
- You're welcome - an odd combination of subjects to vandalize. Acroterion (talk) 21:34, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
reasons for redoing your undo of the robert frost middle school page (rockville md)
Hi,
The reason that I have put the letters back in is that I feel it is important for people who have children in the school or are considering putting their children in the school understand that the school believes that a teacher had alleged inappropriate activity with a student. I would have simply put a link to the letters, but the school did not make them available online. It is also important that people know not just the good things about the school, but also the bad (I believe that this is in line with the wikipedia policy of neutrality). These are not notices, the school admits alleged criminal activity by a teacher with a student.
Many people move to this area because of the quality of the schools in the montgomery county school system. I feel that it is noteworthy and appropriate to put this type of information in an encyclopedia entry, especially considering that RFMS in 2007 seemed to have an unusual number of teachers with problems requiring police or government intervention, because otherwise people might not have the information that they need to make a decision as the school system is trying to pretend that none of it ever happened as near as I can tell.
Thank you very much for your understanding. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 83.243.187.25 (talk • contribs).
- Please sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~) so I know who you are. My edit was based on these points:
- Does a letter from the school principal belong in any encyclopedia article?
- The issues with the teachers are already mentioned in the article - how much is added by the letters? The point of view is already neutral - adding the letters tilts the article away from a neutral point of view in my opinion.
- What is accomplished by putting them in? Neutrality does not mean that WP:STYLE is to be ignored. My edit was primarily a copyedit for style, not a comment, and did not change the tone of the article.
- The inclusion of the letter is also skating on the edge of copyright issues - just because a letter was issued to the parents does not mean it has entered the public domain, and that it can be placed in Wikipedia. It's not clear-cut, but basically, if it's not explicitly public domain, or if you didn't create it, it shouldn't be quoted.
- This sort of information comprises primary sourcing; it would be better (and more concise) to include an external link, if these letters have been published elsewhere. That would satisfy style, length, original research and copyright concerns.
I have put a copy of this on the talk page of the article. Acroterion (talk) 23:27, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
ok, I understand now, and understand your concern about a potential copyright/GFDL problem
I certainly agree with you about the fact that an online link would be better, but such a link does not exist.
I'm not sure I agree that adding information from the school which the article is about could somehow negatively affect the article's neutrality. This is the original information released by the school with no additions or subtractions.
I had not considered a potential copyright issue (as it is a publicly funded school, I had perhaps erroneously considered that it is in the public domain as it was not a personal letter). Also, as copies of these letters were sent to me, I thought that I would be able to release any letter sent to me personally. (I thought that a person who sends a letter to someone loses a right to privacy, look at all the books filled with celebrity letters and such).
However, I am not a lawyer, and could not say for certain. If you still feel that removing the letters is appropriate after this comment, then I will accept that, you are more experienced at wikipedia than I am.
I still think that how and when the school responded is important information about the school. Would it be acceptable to quote from the main points of these letters? If so, what would be the appropriate way to footnote the letter in the article?
Thank you for your advice.
(I am not sure what 4 tildes does, could you please explain? Is it simply a break between comments?) 83.243.187.25 03:29, 5 August 2007 (UTC)
- Welcome to the wonderful world of copyright policy and Wikipedia. If you have some time on your hands, you may wish to read Wikipedia:Copyrights. It boils down to (I think): unless you've written it yourself and uploaded it under the GFDL license, you can't quote from any written document unless:
- It's out of copyright in whatever jurisdiction the copyright may originate - i.e., Robinson Crusoe is probably safe.
- It was published by the United States federal government. State and local governments do not automatically waive copyright claims, even if it is a "public document."
- You've obtained explicit permission satisfactory to the Wikimedia Foundation (good luck).
- You should also read Wikipedia:No original research. Note especially the section on primary sources. A letter counts as a primary source, and is therefore inappropriate, unless it has been cited elsewhere in a reliable, notable source, which is why I suggested that it be an external reference, if you could find a place that has a copy. Including the letter/primary source is original research, which is something encyclopedias don't do: they are a repository for information already published elsewhere. If Wikipedia allowed OR, it would be even harder to police and fact-check than it already is.
- Then there's Wikipedia:Schoolcruft, which is almost always good-intentioned, but ultimately unencyclopedic. It appeared to me (and this was my original concern) that the reproduction of letters from the principal - on any subject - was getting into schoolcruft territory, and was not something that belonged in an encyclopedia. As I said, a plain recitation of the recent incidents with faculty members, appropriately referenced - which you've done - is what's appropriate to an encyclopedia. Letters from principals are ephemera.
- I hope I've helped a little, and not discouraged you. Normally, middle schools (unlike high schools) are not even considered notable, and tend to be proposed for deletion. Unfortunately, RFMS has established its notability/notoriety.
- By the way, four tildes is a formatting string in wikimarkup that automatically puts in the username/IP of the person doing the edit, along with the timestamp, as a signature. It's way faster than doing it manually. Acroterion (talk) 01:57, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
Your NPWatcher application
Dear Acroterion,
Thank you for applying for NPWatcher! You've been approved to use it. Before you run the program, please check the changelog on the application page to see if there is a newer release (or just add the main page (here) to your watchlist). Report any bugs or feature suggestion here. If you need help, feel free to contact me or join NPWatcher.
thank you, I agree with your removal of the two letters on the RFMS (rockville MD) wikipedia entry
OK, Acroterion,
I don't know the state of copyright for montgomery county md employees, and the letters are definitely a primary source so they fail that test too. You were therefore right to remove the letters (I think that the rest of the robert frost middle school article is ok).
thank you for all your advice, and NO, you are not discouraging me... ;-) I've actually added more from my home ip (I'm travelling at the moment), but I obviously have more to learn and appreciate your help.
take care!
83.243.187.25 08:06, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
- You're welcome! Ask anytime - if I don't know, I can probably refer you to someone who does. Acroterion (talk) 11:24, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
I've blocked both of these accounts pending some sort of explanation by the person presumably behind both of these accounts. I don't know if it is a hijack or just a kid on a vandalism bender, but I think it is reasonable to see an explanation before they continue editing given that these accounts actually have some article edits in the past.--Isotope23 talk 02:43, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
- I agree. I was reluctant to make a big deal about them, given the history of constructive edits. Also, it's gotten a little difficult to refer people to AIV without four progressive templates per protocol. I've seen more people jumping the gun and irritating the admins on AIV, and it's spoiled things for the times when you really need to just refer vandals right away.
- And thanks for keeping an eye on things - I presume you were the one who deleted those subpages as well? Acroterion (talk) 02:59, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
Reply
I think it's best to leave autoblock on the next disruptive account that comes by. And I guess I have to say that your anti-vandalism notices on the top of your user page and talk page are actually an invitation to vandals (WP:BEANS). —Kurykh 03:59, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
- OK with me. And you're probably right about the vandal magnet templates; I feel the same way about vandal counter userboxes. In this particular case, they're not related to the current vandal, but point taken. Acroterion (talk) 04:02, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
You can block J Bone86 while you are at it
- I'm not an admin. Already done by Can't sleep, clown will eat me. Acroterion (talk) 03:10, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
- I was just about to ask CSCWEM to do the block. I like it when it happens without asking. 199.125.109.19 04:22, 12 August 2007 (UTC)
The INSANITY Of It All!
Thank you for the userpage revert. :) That was one severe case of Coprophagia if you ask me... -WarthogDemon 17:48, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
- Perhaps a dung beetle? On meth? Certainly more determined than the usual poop test/vandals. Acroterion (talk) 17:52, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
- Coprophagia/coprophilia, toh-may-toe/toh-mah-toe. It's all crap to me. Acroterion (talk) 17:54, 16 August 2007 (UTC)
Re: Stacker (game)
Done. In the future, please use WP:RPP. ˉˉanetode╦╩ 04:13, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
- Will do. Acroterion (talk) 04:14, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
Squaw Bury Shortcake Vandalism?
I'm not entirely sure how you see my edit of Squaw_Bury_Shortcake as vandalism. I merely corrected the quotations that someone else had mis-quoted. See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Thf5eTKhiv4&mode=related&search= for the footage in question. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.178.65.154 (talk)
- You're right, and I immediately reverted my edit when I realized that. My apologies for the mistaken edit summary. Acroterion (talk) 18:43, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
No worries, my friend. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.178.65.154 (talk) 18:52, August 21, 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for patrolling
Thanks for keeping an eye on Arabian horse any idea how to request that the IP of this vandal be temporarily blocked? I put up a warning on the talk page, but wonder if we are to the point where administrator intervention is needed? Montanabw(talk) 03:21, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
- No, it's not exactly vandalism, just an apparent obsession, mixed with incivility. He's close to 3RR, and incivil, so there are grounds for intervention if he keeps insisting on inserting the material. I'll watch a little longer and report if necessary, but I'll be quitting soon. You can go to WP:AIV, but they usually want templated warnings to the IP, which I avoided so as not to escalate the discussion. Acroterion (talk) 03:25, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
OK, and I did give the IP a vandalism warning, but things are now just getting too weird for me. See the last discussion on the bottom of the page at Talk:Arabian horse. I like your calm explanations of how the "edit" had no purpose in the article. In short, I worked my butt off to get that article to GA status and my patience with idiots is in need of reinforcement. So please continue your monitoring because I need HELP! Montanabw(talk) 01:27, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
- Personally, I call troll. We'll see how this plays out. I requested and got semi-protection for the main article for five days, so IP's can't edit the article for that term. I'm not an admin, but I'll watch how things develop. Be patient - trolls eventually reveal themselves, and everything can be reverted. I've warned his other IP about civilty and 3RR (which he's violated). Acroterion (talk) 01:32, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
Much appreciated. Do you think the registered user who is now giving me minor grief on the talk page is the same as the IP? It is pretty tough for me to stay calm with this situation, I appreciate the support of more calm, neutral-sounding voices. Montanabw(talk) 01:38, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
- If "build support" means creating sockpuppets, we can deal with that as well. The editing patterns are interesting. Stay cool and factual, and don't feed him if you can help it. Acroterion (talk) 01:51, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
- And yes, I think it's the same guy. Acroterion (talk) 01:55, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
...breathing in, breathing out, trying to stay calm...really I am. I have seen some edit wars, this particular variety is out of my league, though. Montanabw(talk) 02:15, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
- It looks like you've got things under control - good job. Probably the best thing do do with almost-troll editors is to get them over to the talk page and inundate them with facts from several editors with policy experience, which is exactly what you've done. I haven't quite figured this guy out - he's edited zoophilia recently, which isn't too surprising, and he's been right on the edge of WP:POINT, and just over the line on WP:CIVIL and WP:3RR. I believe he'll either wander away or become a blockable disruption. I'm not going to revert him anymore unless he starts with true vandalism or sockpuppet editing and needs to be blocked - there are enough people watching that I don't need to go into 3RR territory myself. I should have pushed him into talk sooner, though. Acroterion (talk) 14:48, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
You recently reverted a vandalism revert i preformed, the revert i preformed was justified and correct, i am wondering why you reverted my edit back to the vandals? Tiptoety 18:05, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
- If you look farther, I took it back to the last good version - the taxobox had turned from pink to black in your most recent version (unless I got it wrong, which is entirely possible). You definitely weren't the vandal, that was clear, but there had been a few edits that appeared to have scrambled the article prior to then. Sometimes you just have to take it back a few versions. I appreciate the help, in any case. Acroterion (talk) 18:13, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
Help again
Our friend Donny has now moved to the horse article. See Talk:horse. Just FYI. Further monitoring is needed, it seems. Montanabw(talk) 20:45, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
- See User talk:Martinp23 for the latest fun. Acroterion (talk) 20:47, 1 September 2007 (UTC)
Uxbridge, Massachusetts article
I have done what I can to add footnotes to this article.There are several major historic references that give a lot of detail about this town, mostly in the 1879 book. But there is another key reference from 1864 if you feel more is needed. I have wikified it also. Hopefully it is improved from Scott;s version of March. I have done my best. The external links are now simply labled as footnotes if that is OK I can't really do any more on this one. Thanks for feedback. Hopefully more is now useable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ksherin (talk • contribs) 00:40, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
- You've made huge progress! I think you've done a great job - references and their formatting drive me crazy too. I think I can fix the orphaned refs for you, once I get a little time. One observation - the article has a "wall of words" look to it - some (small, high-quality, free-content) pictures would help break things up. Also, the "Main Roads" section looks awfully long and detailed - maybe a copyedit would be in order there. By the way, I'm taking the maintenance tags off - it's clearly wikified and referenced.
- You've put a lot of work into the article, and it shows - good job. Acroterion (talk) 00:49, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
|
|
The RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar | |
| I'm awarding you this RickK Anti-Vandalism Barnstar for your great contributions to protecting and reverting attacks of vandalism on Wikipedia. Wikidudeman (talk) 16:45, 4 September 2007 (UTC) |
- Thanks! I should be working on the articles I have in progress, but it's hard to do that in ten-minute increments as time allows; vandal-whacking is a bit more time-friendly. Acroterion (talk) 16:47, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
Note
Just so you know, I did not create BiodieselRocks. I honestly do not you what you are talking about when you mention that account name. —Preceding unsigned comment added by EthanolRules (talk • contribs) 22:02, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
- Riana and I disagree. Nevertheless, please take the advice offered and direct your editing to more productive efforts. Acroterion (talk) 22:14, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
Thanks
Appreciate your continued monitoring of Arabian horse. Don't know how Donny found someone to stir up an edit war on Iberian versus Arabian horses that ended months ago, but the article was edited to reflect those concerns way back. (see controversies section) I am temporarily limited in my computer time due to eye surgery. so all help is much needed as I haven't the time to defend things as much as is needed... Montanabw(talk) 03:49, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
- I posted a thread about Donny on WP:ANI [10] on Saturday after he 1) accused me of WP:BITE and then 2) demanded checkuser to clear his name. I thought that took some nerve, since I haven't run across any newbies who were so conversant with checkuser, but checkuser isn't employed to establish innocence. In any case, a passing checkuser confirmed that Donny evaded 3RR using IP's. Whether or not the IP that raised the Iberian/Arabian issue was Donny is probably beside the point - there's no possibility of AGF with Donny anymore. You've seen FisherQueen's warning, and I agree with her strategy - that comment isn't quite worthy of blocking, but ignoring her warning will be. Acroterion (talk) 12:01, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
- By the way, I will be away on vacation - in Wyoming/Montana in fact - later this month for ten days or so. I have no intention of being anywhere near a computer. There will be a few folks (including admins) watching my user/talk pages in case of trouble, and I'll suggest they keep an eye on horse-related articles as well. Hope your eye returns to normal soon. Acroterion (talk) 13:17, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
Thank You...
...for reverting vandalism on my userpage! :) Smokizzy (talk) 21:43, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
- You're welcome! Acroterion (talk) 21:44, 7 September 2007 (UTC)
- And likewise, you're welcome for similar. btw, if you wish, feel free to use {{subst:vangel}} for such thanks in future! :) — Timotab Timothy (not Tim dagnabbit!) 21:36, 11 September 2007 (UTC)
Please block
Can you please go to User talk:210.233.214.253 and place the block that you threatened? Thanks! -Freak104 02:59, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
- Well, no - I'm not an admin. The IP's been reported at WP:AIV, so I would expect a block anytime. Acroterion (talk) 03:01, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
- Blocked as of now. Acroterion (talk) 03:01, 10 September 2007 (UTC)
Evolutionary Astrology
Thank you for taking time read my first entry into Wikipedia. I was trying (and apparently failed!) to explain what Evolutionary Astrology is under the sub-catagory of Recent Western Traditions. I am not Jeff Green but did use his book as my source since it is a technique he created. Notable astrologers include Diana Stone, Donna Cunningham, Laura Gerking, Maggie Nalbadian, etc. The School for Evolutionary Astrology is in South Dakota and they have a website. I am unclear about inappropriate name dropping versus sounding like an advertisement. I was just surprised that nothing was in Wikipedia about such a popular movement in astrology (especially in the Northwest). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.18.248.190 (talk) 00:42, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you for contributing! Please understand that, while anyone may edit Wikipedia, there are a series of requirements for articles to remain in the encyclopedia, and the deletion nomination process helps us to maintain those standards. I would suggest that you consult the following Wikipedia references:
- All of these will guide you in your writing. The reason the Evolutionary astrology article was proposed for deletion is that it does not clearly define what evolutionary astrology is, nor does it provide multiple, notable and independent sources or references for the topic. Since it only references a book by the originator of the concept, it appears to constitute original research, which is not appropriate for an encyclopedia. Unfortunately, after reading the article in question, I cannot tell you what it is about, except that Pluto is involved and that Mr. Green is very concerned with Pluto. Thus, my proposal for deletion.
- I would suggest that you start out with less ambitious edits to existing topics, or very short articles on simple topics at first, to get a feel for editing. Since Wikipedia is becoming mature, it becomes very hard to insert new articles on new topics without close scrutiny for style, references and content.
- I will reply here and on your user page, since you were not logged in for your comment. Acroterion (talk) 01:10, 14 September 2007 (UTC)
RFA Thanks
Dearest Acroterion,
Thank you for your participation in my RFA, which closed successfully with 96 supports, 1 oppose, and 3 neutrals. No matter if you !voted support, oppose, neutral, I thank you for taking the time to drop by. I'm a new admin remember, so if you have any suggestions feel free to inform me of them. I would like to give a special shout out to Hirohisat, Wizardman, and Husond, for there original co-nominations. Thank you once again and good day.
Credits
This RFA thanks was inspired by Phaedriel's RFA thanks. So unfortunatly this is not entirely my own design.
Thanks for the help!
Thanks for the help, particularly reverting the vandalism on the Ernest Emerson article. I put alot of time and energy into that piece to get it featured, now that it's on the front page every loser with too much spare time on their hands wants to vandalize it!Mike Searson 05:25, 30 September 2007 (UTC)