Шизомби
 | This is a Wikipedia user talk page. This is not an encyclopedia article or the talk page for an encyclopedia article. If you find this page on any site other than Wikipedia, you are viewing a mirror site. Be aware that the page may be outdated and that the user whom this page is about may have no personal affiliation with any site other than Wikipedia. The original talk page is located at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:%D0%A8%D0%B8%D0%B7%D0%BE%D0%BC%D0%B1%D0%B8. |
User talk:Шизомби archives edit
Talkback edit
Hmmm, no, I had not seen that ANI discussion, I'll take a look at it. Thanks.
Well, there's a couple of things. First of all, it's a contentious subject, and a number of editors have pretty established positions. So there is a lot of heat. It's not just me, I would say. I think on contentious subject like this, editors should expect it might get a little heated. That's life in the Agora if you're going to take a contentious position. You don't seem me complaining, at least not an ANI or whatever. We're big boys here.
It's a political fight, I would say, or an ideological or philosophical issue if you prefer. I don't really think that a lot of editors are really so much offended as looking for ways to win the political fight, or at least get rid of a political opponent. That's OK, that is human nature, and if they can make the charges stick, hey: he shoots, he scores.
It's kind of like what, according to some people anyway, is happening to Julian Assange. I lot of powerful people would like to see him put away, but they can't get him, so they're using an incident that, if he was just an average schmoe, would probably be ignored or maybe settled with a quick plea-to-a-lesser-charge and probation, or something. Same thing with John Sinclair in my day. Abbie Hoffman.
On the other hand, as a practical matter, Assange should have probably been more careful if he was going to piss off so many people, and I should be more careful too. So I will try harder. However, you said trying harder wouldn't be enough to satisfy you, so what would you suggest?
Yes, I have used various noticeboards and other things such as RfC's. I've offered mediation a few times, and have been consistently refused. The Wikipedia dispute resolution system is set up on the assumption that, at the end of the day, everyone is trying to get the articles to be the best, so it's based on voluntary cooperation and the assumption that everyone - or at least most editors - will be fairminded, when it comes to things like vetting references and so forth. It kind of breaks down in this kind of situation, so we are more on our own.
By they way, are you Russian? Your English is really good. I've translated a number of articles in from the Russian Wikipedia, you know. Herostratus (talk) 17:21, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
- Well, you make an excellent point. Yes the ammunition point is a good point, as I said above. Not too concerned on focusing on other's misdeeds, except on an ad-hoc as-needed basis or to defend myself against charges. I hate litigation.
- Yes I will try to adopt the "Ralph Nader" standard. Nader, like Assange, pissed off some powerful people (in this case, General Motors, which is not a government but was at the time (1960's) the world's largest corporation) with his assertion that that General Motors had deliberately made unsafe cars. Well, GM put private detectives on his tail and combed through every detail of his life. And they found nothing. He's Ralph Nader; he'd never even returned a library book late, smoked a cigarette, said "gosh darn it", etc. let alone anything worse. So is that acceptable? I will try to apply the Nader Standard to my actions in future. OK?
- I wouldn't go so far as to say "control oneself" or compare my situation to someone with an uncontrollable neuropsychiatric disorder. I don't see myself ranting like a madman or anything like that. Willing to stand corrected, quotes would help.
- Yes, Cyrillic. The familiar, but skewed. You're not alone, Faux Cyrillic is an amusing article. Herostratus (talk) 22:23, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
Barnstar edit
|
The Original Barnstar | |
| In appreciation of your thorough, and multilingual, source research. Good work. JN466 19:14, 19 February 2011 (UTC) |
- Thanks! Шизомби (Sz) (talk) 20:42, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
September 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States edit
The September 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
December 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States edit
The December 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
The article J. X. Williams has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- Hoax article written (and repeatedly re-created) about a character created by a performance artist as if he were real. Apparently re-created by someone involved with subject, and moved from the actual subject Noel Lawrence (who is himself of unclear notability). Should be recreated only with reliable sources and repeat hoaxers should be unable to move/edit.
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. T L Miles (talk) 16:11, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
Nomination of Talk:J. X. Williams for deletion edit
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Talk:J. X. Williams is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Talk:J. X. Williams until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. T L Miles (talk) 21:01, 2 August 2012 (UTC)
Love history & culture? Get involved in WikiProject World Digital Library! edit
| World Digital Library Wikipedia Partnership - We need you! | |
|---|---|
 |
Hi Шизомби! I'm the Wikipedian In Residence at the World Digital Library, a project of the Library of Congress and UNESCO. I'm recruiting Wikipedians who are passionate about history & culture to participate in improving Wikipedia using the WDL's vast free online resources. Participants can earn our awesome WDL barnstar and help to disseminate free knowledge from over 100 libraries in 7 different languages. Multilingual editing encouraged!!! But being multilingual is not a necessity to make this project a success. Please sign up to participate here. Thanks for editing Wikipedia and I look forward to working with you! 14:10, 26 May 2013 (UTC) |
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:37, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open! edit
Hello, Шизомби. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)
ArbCom 2017 election voter message edit
Hello, Шизомби. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message edit
Hello, Шизомби. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
ArbCom 2018 election voter message edit
Hello, Шизомби. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 2 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
I already undid my mistake. edit
Nomination of Independent Party of Utah for deletion edit
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Independent Party of Utah is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Independent Party of Utah until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Toa Nidhiki05 12:40, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
Nomination of Edward Winn for deletion edit
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Edward Winn until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
Nomination of Helen Halyard for deletion edit
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Helen Halyard until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.
The article Joyce Dattner has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
No useful sources. Fails WP:NPOL, WP:GNG. Overly promotional
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. AusLondonder (talk) 16:37, 15 April 2022 (UTC)
The article Maria Elizabeth Muñoz has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Fails WP:NPOL and WP:GNG; only one source referenced which is a results page. Googling for subject yields no significant coverage or reliable sources.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. reppoptalk 07:09, 12 January 2023 (UTC)
The article Fred Mazelis has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Does not appear to be notable; no substantial coverage.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. — Moriwen (talk) 23:07, 30 June 2023 (UTC)
"EGAFD" listed at Redirects for discussion edit
The redirect EGAFD has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Anyone, including you, is welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 October 23 § EGAFD until a consensus is reached. Thryduulf (talk) 19:47, 23 October 2023 (UTC)