|Archived talk pages|
|2005||Jan-Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul-Aug Sep Oct-Dec|
|2006||Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec|
|2007||Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec|
|2008||Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec|
|2009||Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec|
|2010||Jan Feb Mar-May Jun-Jul Aug-Sep Oct-Dec|
|2011||Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec|
|2012||Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec|
|2013||Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec|
|2014||Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec|
|2015||Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec|
|2016||Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec|
|2017||Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec|
|2018||Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec|
|2019||Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec|
A heads up.... Willy on Wheels (or an impersonator) is back...Edit
The username this one is using is I with a period. Figured it out after I looked at an article that had just been edited, and "on wheels" had been added. Let's block this guy before he gets really annoying... he had the nerve to post on the AN/I bragging about it.... but that might not be anything new.--Chanting Fox 00:14, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks, I've blocked it indefinitely, and reverted or deleted remaining vandalism.-gadfium 00:23, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
The Mossad ArticleEdit
I am in full comprehension as to the sarcarm adopted within the first half of the prior message, yet am highly thankful that you have provided an underlying reason to endorse the elimination of the word terrorism from the Mossad article.
Firstly, allow me to admit that it is within my knowledge that this is, along with all other elements of the Arab-Israeli conflict, a highly viotaile topic which sensitivity is strongly encouraged while controversal statements are highly frowned upon. Therefore, I choose to trust that your actions can be totally fuelled by the purest of intentions - protecting the neutrality of the information here.
However, I am strongly opposed to your idea that I play the role of an insensitive troublemaker, bent on advertising a strong bias against the methods emplyoed by the Israeli Special Forces. While I am admittedly inclined against the methods adopted by the Israelis (and the Arabs for that matter), I believe that it is a supported view, both by humanity and logic, which should be reflected (note: not supported) on a public domain like yours.
Before you might generalise me as the casual web-surfer chancing upon such an article and the opportunity of editing it to suit my personal viewpoints, I would like to inform you that prior research, thought has been done to this issue, and that I am well aware of the Wikipedia's policies - rendering the need for linking the NPOV page useless. In fact, I hope to use that article as evidence to why the edit made is acceptable and imperative under the neutrality policy.
The page for the NPOV policy states clearly that "[t]he neutral point of view policy states that articles should be written without bias, representing all views fairly." Furthermore, it states that in a bid to aviod confusion, the method of describing debates rather than advocating sides should be employed to maintain harmony. The first statement meets in full agreement with the article, clearly showing that a non-supportive viewpoint exists in relation to their tactics. While the second statement may appear to argue against this, I believe that certain mentioned incidents below do bear the concept of 'terrorism' over 'counter-terrorism' - the latter having more defensive implications.
For instance, there was the incident about the kidnapping of Mordechai Vanunu. In what way may taking away a person against his/her will not constitute terrorism, especially since the international condemnation of the kidnapping of innocent civilians in modern-day Iraq like Nicholas Evan Berg, and the kidnap cases on Sabah by extremist southern Phillippines militants.
Also, the releasing of sensitive information about the Osiraq nuclear reactor may be considered as a basic governmental intelligence right, but is assasination a right? I quote from your assassination article as such: "Israel's Mossad made use of such tactics to eliminate Palestinian guerrillas, politicians and revolutionaries". In the case of the Jewish nation, one such victim of an assasination case was Abu Jihad, a top aide to Yassir Arafat - in this case the leader of the Palestinian territories. If we fail to consider such an outrageous act terrorism, are we paving the way for allowing people to hold the autonomy to lawfully assasinate political leaders? Are we therefore considering the death of John F. Kennedy to be right and supported under the law?
Your Wikipedia article of counter-terrorism defines it as "[the] practices, tactics, and strategies that governments, militaries, and other groups adopt in order to fight terrorism". Of which I trust kidnapping of people who have their own views and assasination of others who are ideologically against your state cannot fall under.
Lastly, your NPOV article claims this under 'describing the debate' - "You won't even need to say he was evil. That's why the article on Hitler does not start with "Hitler was a bad man" — we don't need to, his deeds convict him a thousand times over. We just list the facts of the Holocaust dispassionately, and the voices of the dead cry out afresh in a way that makes name-calling both pointless and unnecessary. Please do the same: list Saddam's crimes, and cite your sources." Based on such guidelines, I believe the facts also do speak for themselves. However, another reason why I opt to protest against the deletion is because the term 'terrorist tactics' however, is distinctly present in your al-Qaeda article. Which from what has been established here, is not supported for it's tactics against civilian and political entities, in the same way that Mossad's policies are not totally endorsed.
As such, I believe that the inclusion of the word "terrorism" in the article is fully justified, leaving the fate of truth up to your discretion. As such a reliable encyclopedic public portal, it is my hope that not just the so-called 'popular public opinion' is shown, but also the viewpoint from the other side, so as to present an all-rounded and non-discriminatory image to other information seekers from around the world.
4th June 2005
0917 hrs [GMT +8]
Macrons in English Wikipedia page namesEdit
Gadfium. you wrote
- "I ... note that articles linking to Māori don't get there; Wikipedia is failing to parse past the M. I think the macron over the a used to be a valid character in article titles. As someone who seems to have used it extensively in the past, do you know what's happened and how we can fix it?".
I've had no noticeable trouble with it in WP Maori, which seems to be set up for it, though I lazily try to paste a macron whenever I can easily do so. One of our overseas experts changed a few macrons to hash-numbers, so I guess there's a good reason, eg some browsers don't display macrons. My home browser rendered them all as rectangles until a few weeks ago. But on English WP I have not created any page names using them (nor very many other pagenames, actually), as far as I remember, because I understood that the English WP could not handle them properly. Sorry I don't know where any discussion of the subject might be - it was many months ago. Kia ora. Robin Patterson 11:24, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Cameron's reference is worth the occasional look but doesn't cover the current browser question. I'm fairly sure "mi" is set up for macrons. (One contributor said that, on the mi:Community Portal.) I think "en" isn't yet but will be in v1.5 "real soon now" (ie to be introduced on 1 June). Robin Patterson 22:35, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks. I've blocked them for 24 hours.-gadfium 19:24, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Loooong ago, you did a bit of editing on this article. Does it actually make any sense? (Um, the article itself, not your specific edits). I can't figure out what it's talking about. Joyous 16:59, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)
My RFA: ThanksEdit
Thank you for your support on my RFA. Now that I have been promoted, I promise to be as hardworking and fair with the admin tools as I have been with the other areas here on Wikipedia. See you around and happy editing. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 00:42, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for your supportEdit
Thank you for voting on my RFA. Have some pie! I was pleasantly surprised by the sheer number of supporters (including several people that usually disagree with my opinion). I shall do my best with the proverbial mop. Yours, Radiant_>|< 08:04, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC)
Thank you for your supportEdit
Thank you for supporting my candidacy for administrator. Kelly Martin 15:12, Jun 10, 2005 (UTC)
Hi Gadfium, I know this is a bit late, but I want to thank you for your support vote on my RFA. Thanks to everyone who supported me, I am now an admin, and I've been using my new powers to further Wikipedia as a whole. Thank you for giving me this opportunity! Linuxbeak | Talk | Desk 23:18, Jun 15, 2005 (UTC)
Hi! thank you for your support for my admin candidacy. I hope that you will always feel that I am a responsible administrator. JeremyA 05:20, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Unsafe characters againEdit
Hi Gadfium - no, I never found the answer, other than converting it to the safe characters. I didn't notice that one, sorry. In this this case, it would be Nýja Sjáland. The is: link must have been added since I previously edited the page. Grutness...wha? 02:10, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Voting at Fir0002 FPC'sEdit
Thanks for your support on my RFA!
Wait a minute, that's not what I'm coming for at all.
Fixing link to correct RFA nomination. Someone might accidentally vote in the old one.
Chestnuts on Fir0002 FPCEdit
Howdy, Topbanana here, back after an extended absence. I've decided to round up a few of my more useful reports into a project with the goal of converting as many "red links" (links to non-existant articles) into "blue links" (links to real articles). As you've been active in fixing similar things in the past, I thought I'd let you know in case you're interested in joining up. If not, I won't be offended - we've all got lots todo here :) - TB 11:36, 2005 Jun 23 (UTC)
James Keir BaxterEdit
Thank you for copyediting my work on James Keir Baxter. I'd like to write a brilliant opening paragraph, but I'm not sure I can as I don't really know the subject. I used a number of internet sources to put together a biography, but I can't really comment on his poetic or personal legacy. Zeimusu | (Talk page) 12:59, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Thanks for your support of my RFA almost a month ago! Unfortunately, a family situation arose suddenly at that time that took a lot of my time and energy. Things are getting a little more normal now so I hope to be a more active admin. Best regards, FreplySpang (talk) 23:25, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
Hey there, just wanted to say thanks for the edit on the David Bain article. As I said to Evil Monkey: a) I'm new, b) it was nearly 6am when I finished lol. Regards, Andrew 04:52, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I have tried to fix that problem, see what you think of the new version of no. 4 --Fir0002 June 30, 2005 09:03 (UTC)