User talk:Gene Poole/archive 5

• Reference for longterm WP policy abuse issues see here.
• Reference for Space music non-mainspace article cleanup see here.

Diliberto

Per this edit, how can you say that an article about a radio program hosted by John Diliberto and edited by Jdiliberto isn't a COI? Look at his edit history, he has done nothing but spam links to his program and add promotional information to the article. IrishGuy ^talk 21:00, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Mass additions of links to a website he is the host of...is...well...spamming. It is entirely irrelevant whether or not the person is an important critic or a bored teenager promoting his website. It is the same end result - spam. Edit warring over spam isn't a good idea. IrishGuy ^talk 21:16, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

When you are done reading WP:CIV (which you clearly need to) please read WP:SPAM and note that you couldn't be more incorrect. IrishGuy ^talk 21:22, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Mass additions of the same link/website is the very definition of spamming. How do you not understand this? IrishGuy ^talk 21:32, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Report whatever you want. You are reverted valid edit simply because you like the guy who was spamming. All the links added were to the same website. They were added in multiple article by a person with a serious conflict of interest. In what world is that not spamming? IrishGuy ^talk 21:34, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

So now you blank my comments and call it vandalism? Nice. IrishGuy ^talk 21:47, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

For the record, that was an error on my part which I acknowledged and immediately reverted - as you well know. --Gene_poole 10:12, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

E-mail

Just a head's up that I have sent you an e-mail through the Wikipedia e-mail system. Please be on the lookout for it. Thank you. Newyorkbrad 21:01, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Milomedes

I am posting this comment for the purposes of public record. A number of editors, among them senior WP admins, have communicated with me to identify the above as a single-purpose troll account. In the spirit of not feeding the trolls, and in anticipation of an indefinite block being applied to said account, I will no longer respond to, or consider as valid any communication posted using the "Milomedes" account, as its sole purpose is the active disruption of Wikipedia. Should any administrator require clarification or further information on this subject they should contact me privately via email. --Gene_poole 21:10, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Do you have any proof of that? --Pixelface (talk) 07:41, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

Of course I do.

In my private communications with a well-known senior admin, the "Milomedes" account was explicitly referred to by the other party as not only an "obvious" troll account, but also a "particularly nasty" manifestation of the species. The context of the comments also seems to infer that this admin is not alone in having arrived at this conclusion.

A second editor has found it necessary to warn the "Milomedes" account against posting comments that constitute obvious trolling on at least one occasion.

A third editor is in no doubt that the way in which the "Milomedes" account is used inherently, persistently and deliberately to propagate extensive civility-based discord with other editors as well as generating ongoing disruption of Wikipedia, over long periods of time, constitutes clear evidence of systemic abuse. The editor has identified the "Milomedes" account as being used to introduce massive volumes of largely indecipherable talk page content into discussions. This filibustering technique actively discourages time-poor and univolved editors from contributing to the consensus-building process, helping to turn spectacularly trivial points of contention into epic, intractable, months-long campaigns of labyrinthine complexity. "Milomedes" typically casts these vast, disruptive episodes as some sort of apocalypic war pitting the forces of darkness (anyone who disagrees with the POV Milomedes supports) against the forces of light (Milomedes). Editors whose opinions are not aligned with Milomedes' are subjected to relentless bouts of incivility and personal attack in the context of these battles. If they are articulate/experienced they find themselves slapped with accusations of COI and civility abuses. The less articulate/experienced are sneeringly informed that since their opinions so obviously lack the profound depth of philosophical understanding and incisive intellectual capacity with which Milomedes has been blessed, and which he has so generously and unselfishly made it his mission to bestow upon WP, they really should, to paraphrase, 'just run along now and let the grownups sort this one out'. "Milomedes" apparently does not consider this sort of discussion technique to be classifiable as an abuse of WP:CIVIL, because in the "Milomedes" universe, telling other editors that they're intellectually inferior to "Milomedes" and don't really know what they're talking about anyway is actually doing them some sort of favour.

Finally, a personal investigation which I recently concluded and subsequently referred to an uninvolved third party editor for further analysis, seems to indicate a strong correlation between several of the accounts investigated. This suggests that there may be at least some truth to the longstanding sockpuppet / meatpuppet abuse allegations that numerous editors have made about Milomedes. They certainly warrant more granular analysis, and that process is presently being pursued via the appropriate channels. --Gene_poole (talk) 14:26, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

GDP

The GDP figure for the Principality of Sealand came from here [1], the Spanish estate agents company thats in a business contract with Sealand. Onecanadasquarebishopsgate 12:11, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Here is another website showing the GDP of Sealand. [2] This is from the Summit of Micronations 2003. Onecanadasquarebishopsgate 18:00, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Sealand dollar

The article for the Sealand dollar could be improved if there were images of the coins. I found the following template and thought that it could be useful in the uploading of images from this site.

Can this template be used on these images? Onecanadasquarebishopsgate 23:02, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Cairo Opera Company

Hi. I'm attempting to track down an Arabic-speaking editor for some assistance on an article we're looking at as part of an Article for Deletion debate. The article, Cairo Opera Company, appears to be entirely in Arabic. I'd love to see the article translated, but I'll settle for some indication that the article is worth translating as written, or whether it should be deleted in favor of a fresh start in english. Your user page indicates that you speak Arabic, and you appear to be active - could you have a look for us? If you're too busy, no trouble. Either way, thanks for your time. Best, ZZ ^Claims ~ Evidence 05:00, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

UT and Atlantium

Need I say it? Sure I do. You outdid yourself again with UT 682. Have you played Burmer and Brennan before? That's what I call headphone music; it's just not the same on speakers, although I did try listening to it on an iPod alarm clock, and it sounded fine. I don't think it's possible to hear the texture and nuance without good headphones. This particular music reminds me of the best ambient film scores. BTW, don't forget about sources for EoA, or even UT for that matter, as I'm chomping at the bit to get started. —Viriditas | Talk 12:57, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Any idea if any of these composers ever made their way to Hollywood (or its equivalent)? Seems like they would have been perfect for the job. —Viriditas | Talk 10:53, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Sealand

I thought the new editor was genuinely interested in cleaning up the Sealand article and making it Featured, which is why I spent a lot of time cleaning out old cruft, marking the potentially bad references, copyediting etc. Unfortunately I'm now beginning to believe he's working to an agenda, which is that Sealand is a state. That's really too bad, because if he can't see the big picture he arguably shouldn't be editing the article at all. --kingboyk (talk) 20:35, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Another sockpuppet of you know who?

Hi David. I wonder if you wouldn't mind looking at the contributions of Onecanadasquarebishopsgate on the talk page of Principality of Sealand. This new editor appeared a little while ago, and as the weeks have passed his comments have become less and less coherent/rational, and more and more troll-like - to the point where they now seem to resemble those of you-know-who, to a rather uncanny degree. Let me know what you think. --Gene_poole (talk) 06:01, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

I spent a few minutes looking it over. I don't honestly think he has anything to do with Johnski, however I think the person who is editing the article is highly involved in PoS in some way or another. The user does have the same talk in circles mentality though. That's got to be a headache. Davidpdx (talk) 10:43, 12 December 2007 (UTC)

No - I'm not a sockpuppet of any user. And also I'm not trying to rewrite the article to say that Sealand is a state, I just thought that the first paragraph was not completely accurate - and I wasn't about to let it be controlled by those that support the opinion "Sealand is a micronation". This is an assumption, but the Wikipedia users that edit the article who consider Sealand nothing more than a micronation probably greatly outnumber the people who consider Sealand a state - I have seen this before.

On the same day as the above was posted I suggested using a solution that has been used for the past week with success. Maybe this could solve the problem? Onecanadasquarebishopsgate (talk) 15:59, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Arms Avram.GIF

Thanks for uploading Image:Arms Avram.GIF. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 06:55, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Gay and Lesbian Kingdom of the Coral Sea Islands

An editor has nominated Gay and Lesbian Kingdom of the Coral Sea Islands, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gay and Lesbian Kingdom of the Coral Sea Islands (3rd nomination) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 21:30, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Dispute resolution

Rather than continue with this absurd to-and-fro, perhaps you would agree to mediation. Here is the link, you can sign there, [3].

I would like to see this dispute resolved, why not in a NPOV way? Onecanadasquarebishopsgate (talk) 22:23, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

As required by the Arbitration Committee, this notification. Onecanadasquarebishopsgate (talk) 19:38, 9 January 2008 (UTC)

Request for mediation not accepted

A Request for Mediation to which you were are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the case subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Principality of Sealand. For the Mediation Committee, WjBscribe 00:30, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

This message delivered by MediationBot, an automated bot account operated by the Mediation Committee to perform case management.
If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.

ArbCom

In the event that it does go to ArbCom, I want to be notified. Basically, that's it. Also, it gives me a chance to make a statement. I was a party to the discussion of how that editor insisted that Sealand was a part of the scope of the European Micronations Project, and how the stamping of passports by a few countries was proof of being a microstate. I would certainly consider at least adding that information to the statement as well. If you thought it best that I remove myself as a party, however, I probably would. John Carter (talk) 02:04, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

You mean European Microstates John? --kingboyk (talk) 02:31, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Dispute resolution

As an uninvolved administrator I have left User:Onecanadasquarebishopsgate a rather lengthy disruption warning. [4] The present dispute hardly seems worthy of ArbCom. If you or any observers have any evidence that suggests any sort of bad faith editing, such as sock puppetry by a banned user, please let me know.

Additionally, it would help resolve the situation if you avoided calling Onecanadasquarebishopsgate a vandal, troll, POV pusher, etc. WP:SPADE is just an essay. If he is one of these things, it will be proven soon enough. If he isn't, at this stage such terminology only serves to inflame the dispute. Thank you for that. Best regards, Jehochman ^Talk 14:54, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

I've read through the history of some articles and I have seen plenty of disputes similar to the Sealand dispute - they appear every few months and without a proper convention or essay as a guide they will probably appear again. I thought maybe a new convention could be written and placed on the Wikiproject Micronations page to stop these future disputes from happening, and to stop this dispute entirely. Would you help create this convention? The other members could help too and with a proper guide these articles will be much easier to edit. Onecanadasquarebishopsgate (talk) 16:25, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

If you need further information, see the Wikiproject's discussion page. Onecanadasquarebishopsgate (talk) 16:47, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

I have created the convention, which can be found here. I have also included the naming convention. Onecanadasquarebishopsgate (talk) 20:09, 12 January 2008 (UTC)

It would be good to give User:Gene Poole a bit of space. Also, the convention is a proposal, and if you wait a while, you will get feedback as to whether others agree. Meanwhile, if you need something to work on while waiting, try Special:Recentchanges or Special:Random. Happy editing, Jehochman ^Talk 02:48, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Micronations

Hello, I know that there has been a dispute for the past two months, but ever since the dispute resolution has been restored there has been a lot of progress with the micronation articles and the discussion pages, so I don't think the dispute needs to continue anymore. I do have a question about Atlantium - the capital of Atlantium has been moved to Concordia - yet I don't understand how Atlantian territory exists Would that not mean seccession from Australia as it is Australian land, or is that land more like an embassy or the Sovereign Military Order of Malta?

Thanks ----- Onecanadasquarebishopsgate (talk) 23:24, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedian micronationalists

I made a user category, Category:Wikipedian members of micronations, and added you to it, as I know you are emperor of Atlantium. I hope you don't mind. If you know of any other micronationalists, please add them to the page. --Micromaster (talk) 01:50, 9 August 2008 (UTC)

Atlantium's website

Can the images from Atlantium's website be used for Wikipedia? I think the article would benefit from more images - the only ones being used at the moment is the flag and the seal.

Thanks ----- Onecanadasquarebishopsgate (talk) 17:30, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

By this I mean the several images of Atlantian flags, banknotes, stamps and the new province - all of this would significantly improve the article. Maybe an article could be created for the coins, banknotes and postage stamps of Atlantium. ----- Onecanadasquarebishopsgate 21:54, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Sealand e-mail

I've tried sending the info to you twice now, and been told each time that your address does not pass the Sender Policy Framework. I'm adding the information from the CIA factbook enclosure to the page User:John Carter/Sealand. The formatting is problematic, but it's what I can do. Sorry for the delay. John Carter (talk) 14:50, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Tried at the new address. The statement is the one that Sealand submitted to the CIA. I didn't know that's how they get their information, but evidently they use the governments themselves as at least a source. Let's hope it gets through this time. John Carter (talk) 22:50, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

I honestly don't think we can use their submission directly, unless we can verify that it was published somewhere else. Even then, it might violate WP:SPS. Kingboyk would probably be a better person to ask, though. And it doesn't seem to be included in the world factbook as per here. John Carter (talk) 01:14, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Template:Bumbunga table

A template you created, Template:Bumbunga table, has been marked for deletion as a deprecated and orphaned template. If, after 14 days, there has been no objection, the template will be deleted. If you wish to object to its deletion, please list your objection here and feel free to remove the {{deprecated}} tag from the template. If you feel the deletion is appropriate, no further action is necessary. Thanks for your attention. Bryan Derksen (talk) 04:38, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Good article

After creating those tables I think that the Atlantium article can be, after some more improvement, nominated for good article status (probably better to get good article status first, then eventually featured article status). Atlantium's website has plenty of information and images that could benefit the article, but some of the images require permission. Can I use those images? Since you are the Emperor, I think that your contribution to this will gain the article good article or even featured article status.

Thanks ----- Onecanadasquarebishopsgate 21:34, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi - there's a problem with the infobox - if we don't complete all of the fields it leaves four or five blank lines at the top of the page. Sealand has been fixed, but some of the fields don't apply to Atlantium. Any suggestions on how to fix the Atlantium article? Thanks ----- Onecanadasquarebishopsgate 16:15, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Problem solved. ----- Onecanadasquarebishopsgate 16:39, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I've requested a peer review for Empire of Atlantium, you can find the link on the discussion page. We should get some information on how to improve the article to good or featured article status. Onecanadasquarebishopsgate 16:53, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Template:Hutt River Province table

A tag has been placed on Template:Hutt River Province table requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.

If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>{{tranclusionless}}</noinclude>).

Thanks. --MZMcBride (talk) 21:36, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Johnski Part 378

It appears our DoM hack is once again back. [5] We'll see if he makes a run at mucking up the DoM articles again. Davidpdx (talk) 10:54, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for letting me know. Davidpdx (talk) 08:19, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

GP, there was another edit to the DoM article recently. I think this is clearly a "test edit" aimed at trying to figure out of we are still watching that page. Please take a look and let me know if you agree or not. Davidpdx (talk) 00:16, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Template and the symbols of Atlantium

Hi, there has been a problem with the images at template:AtlantiumFlags. One solution would be to update the images so that Wikipedia had Atlantium's permission to use them - will Atlantium allow Wikipedia to use them?

Thanks ----- Onecanadasquarebishopsgate 10:50, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Problem solved ----- Onecanadasquarebishopsgate 15:27, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

I'll take a look

Wanted to also tell you that I enjoyed the UT "Patagonian excursion" podcast. —Viriditas | Talk 13:32, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Interesting discussion about the birth-dates. Milo's got a good point about using it. Any idea if the music or biography project uses it in that way at present? But, you also make a valid point about consistency. —Viriditas | Talk 13:49, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Milo

Gene, any chance you can avoid addressing Milo directly, and just discuss his ideas without mentioning his name? If you can, then adminstrators will be able to see that he's the one doing the trolling. In the past, the problem has been your reaction to his trolling. Don't react, just ignore him, and I'll report his behavior to the appropriate people. But every time you react to him, it makes it look like the two of you are responsible for the same behavior. So please, stop reacting to his jabs and we might be able to make some progress. —Viriditas | Talk 06:50, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

Keep doing what you are doing. Bring more people into the discussion, particularly those who have worked on ambient and space music articles, and some who have not but are experts in other areas, such as categorization, lists, disambiguation, etc. You've got the WP:3O, WP:RFC, and even the assorted noticeboards. There's a lot we can do, but laying out your argument in clear, but brief and persuasive language wins at the end of the day. —Viriditas | Talk 02:05, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

BTW, UT672 is downloading right now per your suggestion. What do you think of Stephen Kent and Trance Mission? I wanted to add some sources to remove the unreferenced tag, but I'm having some trouble. I found a few, but one is self-published and the other isn't as good as it could be. Having seem them perform before, I'm sure there's good press coverage somewhere. If you know of anything, let me know. Which brings me to the question of categorizing their music. Is this electroacoustic music or some other form of ambient? The self-published book calls it "Electronic Ambient World Music", so should I just tag it with electronic music and world music cats? —Viriditas | Talk 12:18, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:UT New Square Logo x300.JPG)

Thanks for uploading Image:UT New Square Logo x300.JPG. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a

Gemnoviag

I am curious as to why you deleted Gemnoviag from "List of Micronations" when it clearly has over 500 hits on Google which is more than other micronations such as Alantium. So if Gemnoviag is an "unverified nonsence claim" than several of those are too. So if you are going to delete something like this and how you classify it is rubbish maybe it's time to take it down a notch and do a bit more research... Furthurmore I would like to point out that on your page for Alantium is referenced as only two are reliable sources. All but those are references to the "governmental" site. Obviously given what you are putting on is only using two reliable claims you are under cited. Given someone took the time your article is qualified for the Articles for Speedy Deletion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.32.220.117 (talk) 22:37, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Block of Davidpdx

Hi Gene Poole. I blocked because of 3RR; the discussion that occurred on his talk page was evidence of communication, and a defence of editing. Davidpdx acknowledged his awareness of the defence by replying, but he still continued to revert. This is not acceptable, and should have been taken to dispute resolution, i.e. a request for comment before the 3RR was broken. Furthermore, no evidence has been provided that Mattfray is a sockpuppet, and we can't assume that they are; if one suspects it, there are proper channels in which concerns should be raised. I've advised dispute resolution following the block's expiry, in order to avoid edit warring. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 12:14, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

I'm not active in scokpuppetry or meetpuppetry, and I've only blocked a user for sockpuppetry once. I suggest you take it to WP:SPP, and provide your evidence for the consideration of those who have the tools to say for certain. Looking through Mattfray's contributions, I can see a number of new articles and helpful edits; I'm not familiar with the ArbCom case, and meatpuppetry is not an area of Wikipedia I specialise in; and I only came to this issue in response to a request for page protection, in which I noticed that both had broken 3RR. It would therefore be inappropriate for me, judging by my lack of expertise on sockpuppetry, to pursue this case further. Best, PeterSymonds (talk) 13:38, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

Hi Gene. My name's Matt Bray, the editor you recently accused of being a sock puppet. I understand there's a lot of history for you and davidpdx tied into the Solkope page, so I hope we can discuss this maturely. Its clear both you and Davidpdx have paid no direct attention to my edits on the solkope page because then perhaps you would have noticed my edits pertain not only to DOM but also to the geographic nature of Solkope which is pertinent,unbiased and could certainly be left. I'm not interested in a petty editing war: read my edits and you will see the sense in them. Look at my contribution history! I've been a wikipedian for a while and have many diverse interests outside those of DOM, making your case for me being a sockpuppet a lot less plausible.

I humbly beseech that both you and Davidpdx desist from these needless editing of my work on Solkope. My statement about the ABSENCE of DOM on Rotuma couldn't be further from DOM propaganda. The reality of the situation is that people who called themselves DOM went to Rotuma and tricked a lot of people, before being found out for what they were and ejected from the island. That actually happened and it deserves to be reported on the page. Reporting these facts is not an endorsement of DOM (personally, as a relative of some of the disenfranchised victims I am far from a supporter) but rather a goal of this fine website and community. Please, before you seek to revert my edits again, discuss with me why - justify why each and every word I've written on that page doesn't deserve to be there. Thanks mate --Mattbray 08:49, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

GP, thanks for coming to my defense. I just took the block like a man and it doesn't mean much since I don't even edit on Wikipedia much anymore. Awhile back I was labeled a sockpuppet and had to argue to get cleared of that. It just goes to prove how unstable Wikipedia has become.

I put a note on the talk page saying I was perfectly happy with the changes you made, but that I don't believe they will stay given the history of the DoM POV crap that's gone on. I'll continue to watch it as I can. Davidpdx (talk) 05:38, 19 June 2008 (UTC)