User talk:FloNight/archive 5

Instant Karma

This amuses me quite a bit, so thanks. :-)

Thank you for unleashing the plague.--Jimbo Wales 00:19, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Erotic Network

Hey, could you look at this and vote. I deleted it when the author changed the content to "Where's the article?", but I looked again and decided it should at least go through AFD and should likely be kept. After deleting it after another party put a speedy tag on it, I didn't want to just resurrect it and leave it. Kind of a funny situation. But ho-hum, such is Wikipedia. --DanielCD 04:44, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

Thank you for participating in my RfA, which passed with a tally of 91/1/4. I can't express how much it means to me to become an administrator. I'll work even more and harder to become useful for the community. If you need a helping hand, don't hesitate to contact me. NCurse work 15:51, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Chose to answer here although normally I would have answered there....

Hey... I do appreciate your popping by and trying to help. I'm frustrated too. Thanks and happy editing. ++Lar: t/c 19:05, 8 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RFAR mess

Hi Flo, Be aware when fixing the mess made by the anonymous Gundagai editor in response to my RFAR that she cut and pasted a huge section of Talk:Gundagai, New South Wales onto the arbitration page, containing peoples' comments that she cut and pasted there without proper attribution. So for example Nuclear Umpf and Durova's comments originally come from Talk:Gundagai, New South Wales and User talk:Durova respectively, and may not reflect their intended participation in the case. She has also interspersed her own comments in various places since the massive crosspost (all without signing), so it will be a job figuring out what her response actually is. Thanks. Thatcher131 15:16, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think I'm going to move some of it to a subpage after I refactor it a bit more. And ask the ano to fix it by shortening it and using diffs to other peoples comments. --FloNight 15:22, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck with that now. :) Thatcher131 15:29, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pile-on

All I can say is that you misunderstood me, but Malber didn't, withdrawing in response. See my response to AnnH here - CrazyRussian talk/email

Vandalism user...

This user 152.163.100.139 is apparently on some kind of vandalism spree. Can you check thier history?

Thanks!!!

trezjr 20:06, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nursing Portal & wikiproject

Hi, You may or may not be aware that User:THB has crated a Nursing Portal and Nursing Wikiproject aiming to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Nursing. It would be great if all Wikipedian nurses got involved. — Rod ^talk 19:16, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Escalation on Farrell, Shays, CT

FloNight, you mentioned I might leave a message on your talk page if BLP problems began to emerge: they have, along with numerous failures to assume good faith. I've invested a lot of time in providing long explanations of edits and policies on the talk pages of all 3 articles (Diane Farrell, Christopher Shays, and Connecticut 4th congressional district election, 2006), trying to explain policies early on, in the hopes that editing won't get out of hand as the election nears. Editors so far have deleted well-sourced text,[1] inserted text not sourced to reliable sources, [2] [3] [4] violated WP:BLP with direct misquotes of candidate statements[5][6] and vague weasely statements not sourced to reliable sources,[7] made attackish edit summaries and talk page headings,[8] and failed many times to assume good faith. I approached Francisx (talk · contribs) about her repeated failures to assume good faith towards me, but I'm making no progress there. [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] Francisx is making posts to my talk page, accusing me of WikiStalking because I've requested correct sourcing of statements on all the CT candidate articles. There have only been two or three BLP violations to date, one still stands (but is not blatant-egregious, just a weasly and poorly-sourced statement about Shays, using Farrell's campaign as the "reliable" source). I don't know if you want to get involved, or if I should take it elsewhere? Dispute resolutions might not be timely or effective, considering the BLP issues; matters may worsen if anon editors start also injecting POV from both sides as the election nears. I don't think it's reached the level of needing BLP attention, and I can continue to revert BLP violations, but I'm being falsely accused of bias and wikistalking because of doing that. I don't see any progress or de-escalation either, and the talk page discussions don't indicate a hopeful prognosis. What next? Since I've not been successful in conveying the importance of well-sourced edits on BLPs to these editors, the articles may deteriorate as the election nears. Sandy 20:22, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not asking for a ban: it's more a matter of someone else might be better able to explain policy than I have, as they don't seem to trust me as the source of the explanation of the importance of getting it right, and sourcing things correctly. In fact, maybe they're not even reading what I'm writing :-) Thanks for having a look. Sandy 20:38, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid the problem is growing: I'm not sure if I should revert this right away, if it falls under BLP, if it falls under copyvio, or what I should do with it. [14] Please have a look at soon as you can: maybe I do need to post to BLP for advice and help now. It seems tendentious and unencyclopedic to reproduce Farrell's campaign ads on Shays' article. Sandy 03:50, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I would normally not start a debate on another user's talk page, but this seems like a significant misrepresentation. What Sandy terms "campaign ads" are reliably-sourced quotations from Chris Shays that articulate his views on the Iraq War issue. They are provided without prejudice, POV or commentary. Sandy seems to feel that they constitute an "attack," and has said that they are taken out of context. I have encouraged her to place them in context or provide more information, and yet she has not done so. Frankly, I do not understand her concern. I do, however, regret having my hard work summarily reverted, as happened here.[15] So as not to waste your time, I won't continue this argument on your talk page, but I don't want you to have any misconceptions about the situation.--Francisx 06:28, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not misrepresent my position. I have never used the word "attack" to describe the inserted material. We are talking about a possible copyvio, where you created and structured an entire section in Shays' article directly from Farrell's campaign ad, including exact wording from her ad (selective, biased press quotes taken out of context). My edit corrected that problem, as well as 3 other problems discussed on the talk page, and was not a restore of only the Iraq section. Copies of an opponent's campaign ads in an article during a closely-watched election does not reflect well upon Wiki. The material needs to be reverted quickly, and then re-written in NPOV. The Iraq section, copied from Farrell, is not salvageable: it needs to be completely rewritten in neutral, encyclopedic tone. Reverting to the original version provides a better starting place, and eliminates the campaign ad copy. This is now the third insert of Democratic campaign material into Shays' article. Sandy 06:59, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Aaron Brenneman posted it to ANI, nobody paid attention, admins all busy fighting over incivility. POV, OR, undue weight, and unbalanced, tendentious, piling on, unencyclopedic edits continue. I tagged the article POV. Had I known it would escalate this far, I certainly would have asked for protection or banning to avoid tendentious editing. Sandy 21:45, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I asked for a cite for original research/synthesis: lack of civility continues. Sandy 21:54, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Instead, engage them. Work with the editors and re-write the content together on the talk page of the article. Sure: I haven't been trying that for a week, have I? Thanks. Sandy 22:29, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Note to all: Sandy is doing some POV pushing him/herself. Why isn't a Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee a good enough source to show Russell is backed by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee? [16] This user is twisting policy for his/her own aims. Arbusto 23:38, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FloNight, the message in this entire incident has been delivered loud and clear: we don't enforce WP:NPOV, WP:CIVIL, or WP:AGF policies, we don't follow WP:NN or WP:DRV guidelines, we don't express concern about tendentious editing (sourcing and then copying verbatim a biased campaign ad into an opponent's bio), and we don't orient relatively new and basically single-topic editors towards the importance of the most fundamental policies of Wikipedia. I don't see how this is a good message to send, and it has certainly empowered others to persist in lack of civility towards me, POV editing to articles, and harassment on my talk page. I won't again trouble you with diffs, as that doesn't appear productive. Thanks much for the help towards a better understanding of the workings of Wikipedia, Sandy 11:10, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why blocking ...

At some point, when the same problem keeps on cropping up over and over again, and nothing else is getting through, there aren't many options left. --Cyde Weys 23:14, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Vivaldi

What's the status of Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Vivaldi? Is been about a month. Does it usually take this long? Arbusto 23:57, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protect Ben Savage

The Ben Savage bio has been assaulted with no less than 7 vandalism incidents in the last 2 days. Is this enough to request semi-protection again; or is this a non-solution?

Thanks!

trezjr 03:31, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

thanks...

Thank you.

trezjr 12:12, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Socks

The thing to do is organize some people and then start a discussion at WT:SOCK. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 03:45, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Images

Hello. I got several questions from several people but please pass on my response to you for others. Thank you for your attention and concerns regarding copyright status of the images. I’m photographer since 1992 and made numerous photo materials from many conflict zones, countries and places. Many of which are of my work and featured on Gettyimages, Reuters, Eye of Georgia, etc. For some I decided to upload to Wikipedia instead of selling them (which I do via gettyimages). Those images which have my signature @Luis Dingley, I am the author and copyright holder. As for parliament.ge images. Georgian parliament has huge collection of images which do not have any copyright and actually are covered by the Georgian law on the images of the government, see here [17] Some images which I uploaded have the following statement: “images which belong to me, uploading to wikipedia.” Being the member of various photo distribution companies, I purchase on monthly bases photographs which are for sale on auctions and through dealers. After the purchase is completed, images are transferred under my name of which copyright status is distributed on me. I agree, maybe I did not place a correct tag for which you must forgive me. I’m not very much familiar with Wikipedia image tagging and confuse between them all the time. But feel free to do whatever you need to do. My only intention was to enrich Wikipedia with rare photographs which sit on my computer and are not available for public. Ones again thank you very much for your help, All the best. :) Ldingley 14:29, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

p.s Dear Flo, Image:TL021461.jpg I purchased in 2003 at Gettyimages, P.O # RC-06-LNB-5478762 From: GettyImages Agent: Amy Jenckins, 877 438 8966, ext 2250

same goes for Tutsi images. If you provide Fax, i can fax you the papers from Getty. The ones from article Anna Politkovskaya were also recently acquired but unfortunately your friend deleted them. Its ok. And please don’t consider me as vandal, i do really appreciate your help and concerns. Thanks. Ldingley 18:18, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

My administratorship candidacy succeeded with a final tally of 81/0/1. I appreciate your early and confident support. Results are at Wikipedia:Recently_created_admins#Durova. Warmly, Durova 20:58, 17 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

Jeez. Yeah, sure thing. Revert on sight, I suppose? – Chacor 11:42, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, reply

Thanks for your response. I’m happy to leave the issue, however if this editor does pursue old ways I hope that the right action will be taken this time. Thanks and take care. Englishrose 11:07, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy ArbCom image?

Now that the Arbcom decision has been reached, can you or an arbcom member delete this image? I don't think it has any legitimate use anymore. --Tbeatty 07:36, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

thanks Tbeatty 17:02, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kosovo arb

It appears that in the Kosovo arb case, since there are now only 7 active arbs (plus JamesF, who voted before he went inactive) there are 8 on the case, making a majority of 5, so the case is ready to close if they want to. Thatcher131 14:40, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fresheneesz

FloNight, I spent a lot of time in debates with Fresheneesz, almost all of it on the same side of the debate (on the PRT pages). He is bold, blunt, and enthusiastic, and sometimes a little bit stubborn. His bluntness can get on the nerves of some editors. But I believe the picture being painted in the arbitration debate is greatly exaggerated. And I can tell you this based on my experience with him: Fresheneesz is particularly sensitive to removal of his talk page comments, so when Radiant removed his straw poll, he lost his temper a little bit - but even then his incivility was borderline. He did ask a bunch of other editors for help, but is this so unusual? He believed he was wronged and sought help from others. How is this different than, say, Radiant's request for help on ANI?

But since the straw poll removal was an aggressive act that could even be considered as vandalism, is it fair to judge Fresheneesz's actions after that point? And if we do condemn Fresheneesz for incivility that occurred after the removal, should we not also condemn Radiant for the aggressive act that escalated the conflict?

BTW, my only contact with Fresheneesz was on the PRT pages - I've never "teamed up" with him (as Radiant alleges) in any context other than on those articles, where we happened to be in agreement. I only got involved with this conflict when it seemed like people were piling on Fresheneesz on ANI, and the evidence did not seem to support the amount of criticism he was getting. ATren 16:31, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A.T.E. got himself banned from the Seattle P.I. web forum for ranting and raving. [18]

Here's a few more examples of A.T.E's bizarre rants.[19][20]Avidor 03:19, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ArbClerking

Hi, FloNight ... I have a suspicion that you've been a bit busier clerking for the Arbitration Committee that you might have originally bargained for. Let me know if you need another hand to pitch in at some point. At this point, I think I know the ArbCom procedures and policies in some detail, although I would probably need a quick tutorial in terms of how to open the pages and where to find the templates. Please let me know if I can ever be helpful. Regards, Newyorkbrad 20:03, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply on my talk. Given that this is a transition period in the "clerk's office," I agree it probably makes sense not to add anyone else new right now. However, if you are ever short-staffed again, or need someone to pinch-hit due to recusals or whatever, please feel free to whistle (or suggest to the Committee that they do so). Regards, Newyorkbrad 21:25, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

RFAr GreekWarrior

Hello :-) Does the GreekWarrior case need Proposed enforcement to log the ban if it becomes necessary? [21] FloNight 23:13, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes Fred Bauder 23:45, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Request for clarification reg. Sathya Sai Baba

I saw that you moved it. I hope the request is not overlooked. (I think that the arbcom members should be paid for their tedious, endless and difficult job. ) Andries 23:47, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The AaronS probation request for reconsideration from the Intangible case also seems to have aged off the RfAr page without being ruled upon by the ArbCom. Newyorkbrad 19:38, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Taunting

I do hope you follow up that comment on my talk page with those who say I'm a troll that should be permanently banned simply for being a contributor to a disliked website. SchmuckyTheCat 19:33, 22 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gundagai arbitration

Please keep an eye on the evidence page. The editor is adding unsigned comments in the middle of other editors's sections and then complainaing about vandalism when I moved them back to her section. Thatcher131 04:00, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Claria article discussion

Thanks for your offer to help on the Claria Corporation article. I will be in touch as soon as we have some things to propose for the page. Thanks! Kmesserly 18:14, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Vandal

How do...

...this user 68.14.230.227 has been attempting vandalism on several dates, like to Ronald Reagan. Can you attempt to shut him down?

Thanks!

trezjr 00:08, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Adam Carr Afd comment

Hello FloNight. Thanks for dropping by my User Talk page. You wrote:

Hello OfficeGirl :-) Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for participating in a discussion about deleting an article. When I closed the above Afd I noticed that your comment was a little harsh for an Afd of a biography of a living person. Please review Wikipedia policy about civility and articles that are about living people. Please feel free to contact me on my talk page about this matter or if I can assist you in any other way. Happy editing, FloNight 18:43, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

For the sake of reference, my comment which was made the subject of FloNight's post herein is quoted in its entirety:

*Delete. I'm sure his mommy loves him and thinks he's notable, but he's not ready for inclusion in an encyclopedia.OfficeGirl 05:25, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

I guess that there are a lot of different ways to take those words, depending on how much sarcasm you choose to impute to me. But I didn't mean those words in a sarcastic way at all. If your mommy loves you that's a good thing. My intention was only to say something lighthearted, soothing or constructive before saying that this man just isn't ready for an encyclopedia article. It's not as if I said: "(an example of something I DID NOT say...)Only a stupid, insane person would think there was anything notable about this worthless dude. He'll never amount to anything. Let's flush him down the toilet and hope he dies and goes to heck and never, ever comes back. Ever.(remember, that's just an example... and as far as I know nobody ever seriously said this example comment)" That would have been harsh and mean and I wouldn't have said that. Please assume good faith on my part-- "criticism should not be attributed to malice unless there is specific evidence of malice." Thanks!OfficeGirl 23:22, 26 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In response to my message you wrote:

The comment was not appropriate. Afd is not a vote. The comments on an Afd need to address the reason(s) that the content of the articles does not merit inclusion in Wikipedia. Your comment did not give any reason, rather it is a cutesy quip. FloNight 02:37, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, you are entitled to your opinion, no matter how irrational and emotional it may appear when observed by other normal, everyday people. My comment clearly stated the reason that the content of the article does not merit inclusion in Wikipedia, and I was very nice. In the light of the manner and tone of discussions that run on the AfD pages, singling me out for a public accusation is arbitrary, capricious and completely unjustified.

I see you have now changed your "reason" for making your accusation against me. Why not just admit that you misinterpreted my intentions and let it go-- no harm, no foul? Admins make mistakes all the time and that is what you did with me. No hard feelings on my part, but I want to have a peaceful existence on Wikipedia and I need to set a boundary here. There is no point in continuing further communications between you and me, as there is no indication that your problems with me are related to actual Wikipedia policies. In the future, please consult with another Admin if you have another problem with something that I have written and ask that person to contact me. Please do not contact me directly ever again. Your opinions have been heard and noted, and now this is the end.

I wish you PEACE and a VERY HAPPY LIFE. Live and Let Live. OfficeGirl 05:53, 27 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use images in lists

Hello, I see you have contributed your thoughts to Wikipedia talk:Fair use/Fair use images in lists. It's been dead for a while, but I have archived it and taken a new fresh start. I hope this time we will be able to achieve something as I have summarized the main points of both sides (feel free to improve them) and I call you to express your support or oppose on the concrete proposal that I have formulated. Thanks, Renata 02:15, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nursing COTM for November

Hi, Thanks for signing up as a member of the Nursing Wikiproject. The Nursing Collaboration of the Month for November is Nursing assessment. This article is currently a stub and needs major improvement - perhaps we can make it suitable to feature on the Nursing Portal, please take a look and see if you can improve it. If you have suggestions for other nursing related articles which should be chosen as Collaboration of the Month please add them to the project page. — Rod ^talk 17:42, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Science Collaboration of the month

File:Chemistry-stub.png

As a regular contributor to Science Collaboration of the Month, we thought you might like to know that the current collaboration is Antioxidant. You are receiving this message because your username is listed on our list of regulars. To stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name!

NCurse _work 07:48, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image:AGStumbo.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:AGStumbo.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the image description page and edit it to add {{Replaceable fair use disputed}}
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. – Quadell ^(talk) (random) 16:04, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Closing the Giano RfAr

It's a tough job, but sooner or later, someone is going to have to close the Giano RfAr. I know you're not clerking that case (I don't know if you're officially recused but I know your initials aren't there). I believe MacGyverMagic was listed as the case clerk but he took his initials down sometime ago. Thatcher131 has commented on the /Workshop and /Proposed decision talk, although not at all heavily, so he might not feel comfortable doing it. Can you or Drini do it or should we put out a call for volunteers? :) Regards, Newyorkbrad 02:26, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Neither Flo nor I are "involved"; however the arbs have just recently modified the John Reid block, and I believe the procedure is to wait 24 hours after the last vote to close is recorded, which was just a couple of hours ago. Thatcher131 02:46, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, thanks; your point is very well taken. Hypertechnically according to the Arbitration Policy it's the fourth net close vote that triggers the 24-hour period, but that doesn't contemplate a change such as occurred here, so there is good reason to wait. I only asked because I've seen even a couple of the arbitrators saying they wanted the case speedily closed. In any event, the only person I feel more sorry for than the Clerk who has to close this case is the editor who has to briefly summarize it for the Signpost. Regards, Newyorkbrad 03:00, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Well, they know who we are :) (Dmcdevit offered to make me official, BTW) If it had been closed 24 hours after the 4th vote, there would have been 5 votes to block John Reid for a week. Two arbs changed their minds after the technical deadline. I guess I'll do it in the morning. Thatcher131 03:08, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I saw Dmcdevit's offer to have you named an official Clerk and I was about to add Support per nom when I realized that for this job it didn't work that way. :) Newyorkbrad 03:13, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Giano RfAr

Hi,

From the proposed decision area, the proposed remedy 4A (relating to Tony Sidaway) appears to have passed, but it is not listed in the final decision. Just a clerical error, I guess, so I look to the most active clerk to tidy up. Best wishes, Xoloz 16:21, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I closed it. Unless I'm seeing things, 4A Tony Sidaway's sysop access is right there with the rest. Thatcher131 17:06, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It looks all right to me, too. Newyorkbrad 17:11, 28 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Er...

A vampire

Oh my. that's quite the image you found, isn't it! Did you know that you can put images you find on Flickr that are CC-SA or CC-BY-SA on Commons?... well at any rate thanks, it's gone in my collection, thanks very much! Too bad it's not 4:3 aspect ratio, you could add it to this project... as for vampires, I've given you a pic of the sort I prefer... :) PS, the check's in the mail! ++Lar: t/c 04:53, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A Fallen Wikipedian

Quite. Only too happy to educate!!! however I must say.. those folk don't seem at all happy at what they are learning about. Are you sure that it's purely educational???

I'd note that normally I'd refactor this conversation to one place or the other but it will be a bit harder for interlopers to follow this way, and for once... that might be for the best, really. You know I rather like Fallen Wikipedians, actually. You said you were married though, so ??... :p ++Lar: t/c 18:58, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You say PotAYto, I say PoTAHtoe ... You say Extra Friendly, I say Fallen... Let's not call the whole thing off, but, but... I would like to point out that I'd be much more discreet(1) than this fellow over yonder... So what say you, angle, er, I mean angel? Will you make sweet bloodmusic with me? I'd bare my throat, perhaps... If asked nicely anyway. ++Lar: t/c 22:29, 29 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]	An allegory	Not me!
1- given that this all is going down in public anyway...

Ya, um... were you gonna ever respond? you promised me something shocking IIRC... :) ++Lar: t/c 01:02, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Why yes, thank you!

Promise Kept! (although I note you didn't have the nerve to LEAVE it there... Since it got reverted, should I tick my vandalism counter then? :) I'll forgoe the half dozen double entendres I had queued up... :) ...for now. ++Lar: t/c 13:54, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Kven

Yeah I saw the template but since there is no particular Kven user, the username parameter is dicey. Also I'm not sure if the ban duration is indefinite. So I thought I'd ask for your help. What d'you think? --Srikeit ^(Talk | Email) 01:40, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think the template is out of date. Let me work on it. Thatcher131 02:48, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

{{User article ban}} seems to be for applying a ban after probation by any admin. I created {{User article ban arb}} for arbitration decisions; it has 3 arguments; the user name, length, and case name (just the subpage, not the full name) so you would use it thus:

{{subst:User article ban arb|Art Domique|indefinitely|Kven}}

It needs a better name maybe, and for more complicated cases you'll have to go back in once its subst'd and make any corrections, but its a start. Thatcher131 03:06, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Thatcher131! This is much better. FloNight 03:14, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I don't get it...

In this edit, isn't 4 still a majority of 6, or is there some supermajority requirement for closing a case? 68.39.174.238 19:49, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Two separate issues here. First, there are 8 active arbitrators so 5 is the majority. (6 are away). Second, the cases always take 4 net votes to close. (Support minus the oppose votes). Does this explain? FloNight 19:56, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK. 68.39.174.238 20:28, 4 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

November Esperanza Newsletter

For your reading pleasure, the newest Esperanza newsletter (November '06 edition) can be found at Wikipedia:Esperanza/Newsletter. —Natalya, Banes, Celestianpower, EWS23, FireFox, The Halo, Shreshth91 and HighwayCello, 20:33, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reliable Sources

FloNight, can you kindly tell me if Salon.com qualifies as a reputable or reliable source as per WP:BLP & WP:RS? Salon.com is an internet "magazine" that does not publish a newspaper, magazine, or anything else in harcopy form. On the Sathya Sai Baba article there are numerous mentions to Michelle Goldberg's article entitled "Untouchable?". Needless to say, this article has only been published on Salon.com and has never been published in reputable media newspapers, magazines or the like. Since this article contains critical, negative and potentially libelous information about Sathya Sai Baba, how can it be used as a reputable or reliabe source when it has never been published in hardcopy form by reputable media? It is only available on the internet as an online article. To me, this appears to violate WP:BLP & WP:RS. Thank you (also requested opinion of Tony Sidaway whom appears to be busy). SSS108 ^talk-email 20:04, 6 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

vandalism

...ah, the political season; can you please put a semi-protect on Bob Casey, Jr. and Chris Carney for repeated vandalism?

thanks!

trezjr 21:49, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Need Admin's Help With an Advocacy Case

Hi. I recently agreed to act as the advocate for an editor who is experiencing extremely uncivil behavior from User:Drennleberrn. I was going to drop a line over on the Admin Noticeboard, but then I discovered you recently saw an example of the behavior my "client" is concerned about. As a lowly advocate, I can't really do much to Drennleberrn other than make comments. I was hoping you might consider a 24 hour block (just to show him that he can't do whatever he wants on WP) based on the following (I know you've seen 3 of these, but I wanted to list them anyway for the record):

1. Personal Attacks on the entire state of Alabama (evidence)

2. POV motivated AfD. Note the comments from Drennleberrn in the debate, such as "I've never really liked the Auburn University team, because they've never played really well, and so I don't get what the F is going on with this 'great player'." (evidence)

3. Vulagar and insulting edit summaries. (evidence)

4. Uncivil behavior towards fellow Wikipedians. (evidence)

Again, let me state that I do not wish to see any editor permanently blocked. I simply want Drennleberrn to understand that his behavior will not be tolerated by this community. Thanks very much for any help you can provide in this matter. You may contact me here or on my talk page (left arrow in sig). →Bobby← 16:27, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Bobby :-) Thanks for contacting me regarding User:Drennleberrn. I monitor the various Wikipedia boards and intervene if I see something that needs to be addressed by an experienced editor/admin. and one is not already involved. In this particular case, I felt that the problems was broader than a conflict with one editor and was of the severity that it needed swift action. I left a message on his talk page explaining about our editor standard regarding civility and the need for an immediate change in the tone and content of their edits and edit summaries. Since then the editor has only made one edit and it was not a problem the best that I can tell. I will continue to monitor the situation. If the user that you are helping sees any other problems let me know. (In particular I am looking for new user accounts or IP accounts that use similar tone and article preference.) Otherwise I prefer to see if the warning did the job. Again thank you for contacting me so we can coordinate our efforts. Take care, FloNight 19:20, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Picture Usage

I was wondering about a matter of Wikipedia policy and didn't know where I should look for an answer. I wanted to put a picture from the article about a show I like onto my User Page. I know how to copy and paste the image, and I was just wondering if I'm allowed to do so. Since you're an admin I figured you might know, or at least be able to point me in the right direction. Thanks. By the way, does it make a difference if I "made" (perhaps I should say originated) the article but didn't add the picture in question myself? Ben 10 10:24, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick response, but that wasn't the picture I was interested in. I was interested in the picture they show of the Omnitrix (looks like a weird watch, in case you don't watch the show). Does the fact that the picture is in a different sort of "frame" (i.e., it only has a very brief caption underneath) mean anything in this case? Also, I wanted to utilize a picture or two which someone added to the Faline article I "made." The pictures in that article are all framed in a manner similar to the picture of the Omnitrix. Also, I made some new articles lately (Ronno and Bloodhounds Inc.) and was wondering how I should go about requesting pictures in them. Should I scan the Edit Histories and Discussion Pages of related articles to find fellow Wikipedians who might be interested in helping? Thanks for your time. Ben 10 11:06, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Darn about the pictures. Oh, well. Thanks again for the help.Ben 10 13:14, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion request

I noticed your remarks on Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Discuss and Vote; I would appreciate it if you could take a look at WP:DDV, and indicate if it accurately represents the way Wikipedia works (and feel free to reword it if it doesn't). Basically it states that AFD (etc) are not decided by vote count, and in general voting is discouraged (but not forbidde). Thanks. (Radiant) 08:26, 21 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bluedoor.JPG

It went many years,

But at last came a knock,

And I thought of the door

With no lock to lock.

I blew out the light,

I tip-toed the floor,

And raised both hands

In prayer to the door.

But the knock came again

My window was wide;

I climbed on the sill

And descended outside.

Back over the sill

I bade a "Come in"

To whoever the knock

At the door may have been.

So at a knock

I emptied my cage

To hide in the world

And alter with age.

--The Lockless Door by Robert Frost

ArbCom

Are you thinking of running for ArbCom? I'd like to encourage you to consider it. Guy 11:10, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow... Not expecting this. I have thought about it but not sure that I'm well known enough to get elected. I've only been here a year or so and only recently have spent time on IRC where it is easier to met people. I'm pretty Jeffersonian in my thinking, so I think most experienced Wikipedian that understand the culture could do a good job. My main strength is that I have more time to spend researching the cases and writing Finding of fact. Thanks for thinking of me, really. I'll decide in the next few days (so if I run I can get properly grilled with questions.) FloNight 12:16, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Second that, strongly. You alone can prevent the RUIN of Wikipedia (I can have bumper stickers made saying that if you wish.) KillerChihuahua^?!? 11:21, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

lol, KC. Thanks for the offer. :) Last time I looked Butter knife and Table setting were both in danger of RUIN. Who does such things..?! FloNight 12:16, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, there are only 4 people I would vote for on the candidate list as it stands now, and you would be the fifth; since there are 5 open seats, I'd say you have a good shot especially with the format they use. Thatcher131 13:13, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

FloNight, on Thatcher131's page last week, I urged both you and him to run. He has demurred, so it's up to you. :) Of course now he has me wondering who his 4 candidates of choice would be.... Newyorkbrad 13:31, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If my vote has any weight at all, I fully agree. I think you'd make a great Arb. Crum375 14:05, 7 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

By popular demand! ... Newyorkbrad 00:17, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

there goes my fifth vote (leaving me the only full time clerk, but I won't hold it against you) Thatcher131 00:21, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the encouragement, folks. I figure the more the merrier. FloNight 00:29, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, although I read that last year there were 68 candidates, so let's qualify "the more the merrier" with "within reason." Meanwhile, one of the other candidates tells me that I'm the only one who asked him a hard question, so I'd better put my thinking cap on for you too. :) Regards, Newyorkbrad 00:31, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bumper stickers! All proceeds go to the Committee to Elect FloNight:

This user supports FloNight for the Arbitration Committee.

KillerChihuahua^?!? 00:42, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Um, is there some inside-joke meaning to "RUIN" here that I am missing? Newyorkbrad 02:23, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I blush to confess it involves silverware articles. Please post in one place next time, thanks. KillerChihuahua^?!? 22:24, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ouch, did I just get nipped by the puppy? <g> Sorry about the dupe. I was afraid that my query would be overlooked here under the bumper sticker. Not that I now have any more understanding than I did when I started, though.... :) Newyorkbrad 22:28, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

No nip!~ a simple request, truly. Nipping usually involves wikilinks that start with WP:. Answer: Its in the talk page history of butter knife, FloNight's talk page history same period, some may have been on my page, BunchofGrapes' talk page... Giano's talk page may have gotten some... it was a silly but productive day which was a welcome break from vandal-fighting and trying to calm down disputes, we'd all been attacked and trolled and in the middle of edit wars, and so it was a relief and became a bit of an in joke. Now thats all cleared up - it is all cleared up, yes? We can move back into all that muss again. Yay.

Thanks, no muss, no fuss. You had to assume someone would ask sooner or later. Regards, Newyorkbrad 22:37, 11 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent! I was thinking just yesterday as I looked over the list (before you put your name in), gee FloNight would make a good arbiter on the committee... Glad you're running. --MPerel ^( talk | contrib) 05:32, 13 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck!

Hi Flo, Best of luck in the arbcom election. Just dropping by to say that you have my vote. Regards, Ben Aveling 10:57, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your support Ben. :-) FloNight 13:42, 19 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom questions

Hi. I'm Ral315, editor of the Wikipedia Signpost. We're doing a series on ArbCom candidates, and your response is requested.

1. What positions do you hold (adminship, mediation, etc.)?
2. Why are you running for the Arbitration Committee?
3. Have you been involved in any arbitration cases? In what capacity?

Please respond on my talk page. We'll probably go to press late Monday or early Tuesday (UTC), but late responses will be added as they're submitted. Thanks, Ral315 (talk) 01:57, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done --FloNight 22:47, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cfd Category:Rouge admins

Hello!! I saw that you listed this category for deletion and wondered if you spoke with any of the users in the category first??? This category is humorous yes... but it is really more. It is stress buster for admins that do some of the toughest admin tasks on Wikipedia. A way to laugh at the situation... I hope you will reconsider this nom. Take care, --FloNight 00:13, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As stated in the discussion, I don't have any problem with the article, an associated userbox (or template), or even if someone wished to create a list for them to be a part of... But at the moment, I don't think that the category is a good idea. What's interesting to me in reading over the discussion is that that has been confused by several of those commenting on the nomination(s). Nearly everyone seems to think that this will remove the concept, rather than merely a category. Anyway, I hope you're having a great day. Thanks for taking a moment to offer your thoughts : ) - jc37 07:54, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reply on Cfd for Category:Rouge admins FloNight 14:53, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Deletions of articles about schools

Thanks for your message. Is it a courtesy copy of a message to someone else, did you mean to send it to me, or err, what? Regards, Mr Stephen 09:25, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Reply on Mr Stephen talk page. FloNight 14:55, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, that's OK then. Regards, Mr Stephen 16:07, 27 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please

A request for clarification at WP:RFAR that I thought simple has so far generated no clarification, but instead a distasteful chat thread, including a comment from Mackensen which I think is really beyond the pale. Could you please remove the whole thing? [22] (I'm making this request of Thatcher131 as well, as I don't know who's around.) Bishonen | talk 12:27, 28 November 2006 (UTC).[reply]

FYI

This was probably inevitable sooner or later: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Arbcom_campaigning_images. Newyorkbrad 22:19, 29 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Science Collaboration of the month

You voted for Gene and this article is now the current Science Collaboration of the Month! Please help to improve it to match the quality of an ideal Wikipedia science article.

NCurse _work 17:14, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Portfolio for ArbCom

On Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2006/Summary table, I added a column "Examples" with links that exhibit a candidate's arbitration skills. My motivation is that as a voter, I don't want to just rely on a candidate's words, but also see their actions. Moreover, I believe a portfolio of "model cases" to remember in difficult situations can be useful for each candidate, as well.

So far I have entered examples for the candidates who registered first (from their questions page), and I'm not sure if and when I will get to yours, so you may want to enter an example or two yourself. — Sebastian (talk) 00:19, 4 December 2006 (UTC)    (I may not be watching this page anymore. If you would like to continue the conversation, please do so here and let me know.)[reply]

Of course

- crz crztalk 00:58, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My ArbCom Vote

Hi FloNight,

I think it would be improper of me to negotiate my vote with you. Instead, I will change my vote to 'neutral' with no guarantees from you of anything, and with a promise I will not revise my vote again.

If you are willing, I'd like to talk more about my general concerns, (but again not to negotiate my vote) in a day or so when I have some better time to compose something.

Thank you for raising your concerns, and I hope you continue to do so, if any more arise. Jd2718 18:19, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your input on this matter. I will consider your concerns, indeed. --FloNight 18:32, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Finals time

Actually I've been working hard at school. This is my last week of classes; next week is finals. Lots of studying, but I'll be glad to get it over and be free again. I haven't been active a lot on Wikipedia 'cause I've been so busy. I'm still here though. --DanielCD 03:12, 6 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Someone finally found a picture for my Fifinella article! --DanielCD 03:36, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That article is well referenced as you can see. I could probably do better by making in-line citations, but when I wrote it I thought the general citations would be enough. I'll look into to it, but all the refs are there.

I'll check my email. I think I changed it, so it should work now. --DanielCD 03:53, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Correction, ok I see you are talking about the pic. It will likely have to be looked at, but it's nice to see one in the article. I even thought about drawing one, so I might do that if that one gets pulled. --DanielCD 03:56, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I checked it and it's got the right email listed. I don't know why it's not working. Let me fiddle with it some more. --DanielCD 04:01, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I clicked the box that said "enable email from other users". That was likely the problem. --DanielCD 04:02, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'll verify tomorrow. Time for bed now. --DanielCD 04:08, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Possible problem.

Dear FloNight,
I hate to be a bother, but when checking my watchlist I found an external link had been deleted from one of the pagges. I checked the link to make sure it was justified, and found to my horror that it appeared to be claims Gould was part of a "Jewish conspiracy" to manipulate views of the holocaust and other horrifying claims. diff of it being added. Beyond checking the fellow's other entries - which I did - is there anything else I should do?
- Adam Cuerden ^talk 22:17, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Right! I've added those links to my watchlist, and will keep an eye on them. Beyond that, suppose there's not much else that can be done but keep an eye out, as you say. By the way, I must thank you for the nice comment about my writing - of course, I have a lot of help from other good editors, which is always useful. Best of luck with your vote - I'm sure you'll do well! Adam Cuerden ^talk 18:22, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for your kind congratulations. And indeed, leaving some jobs but I hear there are some good people aiming to fill them. ;-) Best of luck and cheers, Kat Walsh (spill your mind?) 01:43, 9 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Meetup

Over twenty, it felt like. ExplorerCDT has compiled and will publish a list of attendees. Stay tuned. - crz crztalk 02:56, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My ArbCom vote

FloNight, I based my votes on the candidates' statements, the rationale being that candidates who are serious about being appointed will put in the effort required to write a good statement. I voted against candidates where I could not see evidence in their statements of both experience and an interest in conflict resolution. I could not see this in yours; you mentioned your role as a clerk to ArbCom, but I don't think that is evidence of an ability to arbitrate. I voted for candidates where their statements contained things that impressed me; the belief that the ArbCom process must be transparent, the belief that ArbCom should be restricted to its intended role and not become involved in other areas, e.g. policy making. I was also impressed by those who recognised that to have a special role within Wikipedia brings responsibility, but not rank over other editors. Alan Pascoe 13:03, 10 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Answer on Alan Pascoe's talk page. --FloNight 14:37, 11 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've switched my vote to neutral, though I don't think it matters; you are clearly going to be one of the group of candidates from which Jimbo Wales will make the selection. Alan Pascoe 21:58, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom

Hi there, my name is Neille and I'm a producer at a public radio show called Weekend America. We're doing a piece on the ArbCom elections and would love to chat with you as a front runner if you have a few minutes today or tomorrow. Thanks! I'm at: nilel (at) marketplace (dot) org. Neille i 20:39, 12 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Election Question

I just wanted to make you aware that I posted a question for you, in case you didn't realize it. Thank you for your consideration. Thesmothete 02:35, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Done --FloNight 13:41, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for responding to my question. I will consider it carefully. Thesmothete 13:53, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate your response. I checked out the links you provided and came up short on understanding how you would approach recusals based on personal relationships, as opposed to direct involvement with a particular dispute. Facing a choice between pestering you with follow-up questions or simply providing you with my vote and a caveat, I chose the latter course. You are a superior candidate and will make a good ArbCom member, and while you surely don't need my vote (especially now that you have it), I would nonetheless encourage you to consider a more complete answer to my question. If you chose to do so, I would, of course, be equally open to revising my support statement to something stronger if this concern were addressed. Best wishes. Thesmothete 19:24, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

EDO

Hello FloNight. Your comments are at the top of the EDO Corporation talk page where you gave constructive feedback. It appears that since then there have been numerous other additions making the article bizarre for a company article. I am working on bringing some neutrality to it and having it comply with Wikipedia standards. Can you provide feedback through out this process? -- Seafront 13 December 2006

FloNight, it appears the article has once again been reverted to the bizarre and lengthly attack page against EDO Corporation. The person did not sign nor did they attempt to go into the talk page to read why the changes were made and to try to engage in discussions. I am therefore going to revert the article back to -- 22:58, 14 December 2006 SmackBot. I look forward to seeking a solution to the changes being made by a person critical of a company's small unit in Brighton, UK. Seafront 14:42, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Questions

Hello. I notice that you weren't able to respond to my questions before the ArbComm voting came to an end. I realize that it won't have any impact on the results, but would you be willing to do so now?

• You have identified yourself as a proponent of community sanctions. I have some concerns about the practical application of this policy. Specifically, I worry that it may be possible for groups of like-minded administrators to misuse the policy, and mete out dubious punishments against editors with whom they are engaged in content disputes. What safeguards would you recommend against such potential abuse? Would you support a policy which allows a set number of administrators to automatically overturn a community sanction, if they believe it was misapplied?

• Do you believe arbitrators should recuse themselves from Checkuser cases if they have a history of working in collaboration with the complainant?

Thanks, CJCurrie 01:51, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom

Congratulations, Flo, on a well-deserved win. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 03:39, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hearty congratulations! – Chacor 03:43, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Never got back to you about my concerns about extended length of ArbCom service. By requesting a seat in one of the other tranches you addressed my very last concern. Good move, and congratulations. Jd2718 05:31, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Woo-hoo! Congratulations. Lucky you :P I'm sure you'll do great. Herostratus 06:36, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Now the RUIN of Wikipedia has been prevented! My deepest appreciation for taking on this difficult role. KillerChihuahua^?!? 07:33, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, Flo! I was thrilled to read the news and I'm sure you'll make a fantastic arbitrator. I hope you and your family had a very happy Christmas and all the best for the new year, Sarah 08:18, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations! I'm very glad you were chosen for the ArbCom, in what has been perhaps the best election yet. You'll make a great arbitrator. You better than me! Cheers and condolences, -Will Beback · † · 11:37, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The very heartiest of congratulations, and all best wishes for your success... ++Lar: t/c 12:37, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats! Hope you enjoy attending to this new role, and you do not find it too exhausting... I have seen that it is sometimes a thankless job, so I thank you in advance for volunteering to it. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 22:31, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations! WP will benefit greatly from your tenure. It will be hard work - brace yourself. But I know you'll do just fine. Thank you from all of us for volunteering your time, energy and talents. Crum375 22:36, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations, FloNight! Best of luck with ArbCom! =) Nishkid64 23:47, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you All for the support! I've got busy days ahead catching up on some reading. Take care, --FloNight 12:10, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[Late] congratulations! --Nearly Headless Nick 10:06, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[Very Late] just notice you made it :) hope it doesn't end up to be too stressful, Congrats! ▪◦▪≡ЅiREX≡^Talk 03:00, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Omura Arb

Hello, please note that I have added another motion here[23]. I think this finding now throws a bit of a different light on events. Thanks.Richardmalter 05:19, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Arthur Ellis sockpuppets

Please see Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Arthur Ellis. Real Times 08:23, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oversight

Hello. Congratulations for your election. You now have oversight access on the English-language Wikipedia. Please read Wikipedia:Oversight before using this feature. Cheers! guillom 10:02, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi FloNight. In addition, please subscribe to Oversight-l. And congratulations on your new status. Redux 13:14, 26 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations

Or should I say, my sympathies.  :) I just saw the announcement on your appointment to the ArbCom. Wear the hat well. User:Zoe|(talk) 17:12, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Zoe. At least you know what you're getting into. You'll make a great arbitrator, I'm confident about that. Guettarda 18:47, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Just saw it, congratulations Flo. CanadianCaesar Et tu, Brute? 09:37, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats and a favor

Flo, big time congratulations! YOU are the glue that keeps this thing in one piece :-) On an unrelated subject, new Wiki editor Yeyewa does not have the typical "welcome to wikipedia" greeting with helpful hints and links on her talk page. I assumed that was somehow done automatically. Could you either tell me where I can copy and paste such a thing or do whatever it is you admin types do to pull that sort of thing off? Thanks! Mr Christopher 02:58, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you :-) Mr Christopher 03:18, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I put a welcome message on the user's talk page. The message is added by people that monitor the site for new accounts. (Look in the history and you can see the template I used. Other editors use different ones.) --FloNight 03:27, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your note

I found out I got the seat by seeing your congrats on my talk page!

See? You only use the very best sources. :-D Happy New Year to you too, Flo. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 13:18, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Louisville growing and changing

WikiProject Louisville is sprouting its wings for 2007! We have a new Assessment Department and a much more refined project template. We have nearly 1,000 articles catalogued for our project. And we still have a lot of work to do. We have 500+ articles left to assess for quality, and all our articles, as always, need tender loving care. Please consider dropping by the project and seeing what you might be able to do to move Louisville-related articles forward. Cheers, and Happy New Year! Stevie is the man! ^Talk • Work 01:19, 29 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

:-)

¿Why1991 ^ESP. | Sign Here has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:smile}}, {{subst:smile2}} or {{subst:smile3}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Happy editing!!!--¿Why1991 ^ESP. | Sign Here 02:20, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pastorwayne: Arbitration needed?

Please see #WP:ANI#Pastorwayne and category creation. Several of us have had problems with Pastorwayne and his rapid category creation, which is out of control. On 1 January 2007, he stopped actually creating category pages after multiple complaints, but he has not stopped adding red linked categories to articles, which is the first step in a technique for creating categories according to WP:CAT. The notice at WP:ANI has not received appropriate administrative attention. I left a request for information at WP:MEDCAB (see Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2007-01-02 Pastorwayne category creation), but it looks like the Mediation Cabal may not act quickly on this request.

At this point, I am wondering if arbitration is needed. Since you are on the arbitration committee, could you please tell me whether this would be appropriate? If arbitration is not appropriate, could you instruct me on how to get some type of definitive administrative action in a relatively short time period?

(I will be asking several members of the arbitration committee just to get some type of feedback.) Dr. Submillimeter 16:35, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jc37, an administrator, has now taken a stronger action regarding this situation. Hopefully, I can discuss future concerns regarding this situation with him. If you have additional comments for me, please contact me. Thank you, Dr. Submillimeter 18:48, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just now seeing this message. Glad you are getting some help. I will look into it and comment further if I think it will help. Take care, --FloNight 22:35, 3 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Science Collaboration of the Month

File:Chemistry-stub.png

As a regular contributor to Science Collaboration of the Month, we thought you might like to know that the current collaboration is Supernova. You are receiving this message because your username is listed on our list of regulars. To stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name!

NCurse _work 09:35, 4 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats from my corner as well

I just noticed your new position amongst the throngs. Congrats. I hadn't said hey to you in nearly a year...as I recall you were a fellow "welcomer." My best wishes to you in this next phase of wikilife. --Kukini 02:50, 7 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Move List of famous Kentuckians

Apparently, I need an administrator to move List of famous Kentuckians to List of people from Kentucky, as suggested in the list's failed Featured List nomination. Since you're an administrator in WikiProject Kentucky I thought I'd ask you to take care of this if you wouldn't mind. Thanks! Acdixon 15:50, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like the move was initiated by Stevietheman. I've been working with him on some stuff lately, so I'll see what I can discover from him. If you have any other avenues to check, please do. Thanks! Acdixon 14:03, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just checked with Stevietheman. Looks like the change was just a personal preference, as detailed here. Please proceed with this move at your convenience. Thanks! Acdixon 16:19, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OVERSIGHT

I just deleted an article at Jamie Mountain which gave out a little girl's full name, city, scout troop and other personal stuff. Is this the sort of thing that needs to be OVERSIGHTed? User:Zoe|(talk) 23:46, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

responded on Zoe talk page. --FloNight 00:55, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost interview

Hello, and congratulations on being named to the Arbitration Committee. The Wikipedia Signpost is doing a post-election interview with the arbitrators elected this year. Please answer these questions to the best of your ability. We request that responses be submitted any time between now and Monday, 17:00 UTC, to guarantee that your responses will be published. Please reply on my talk page. Thanks, Ral315 (talk) 04:27, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1. How do you feel about getting the opportunity to serve on the ArbCom?

2. What do you think of the election? Do you think they were conducted properly? What could have been improved, in your opinion?

3. What would you say to those who supported you? Opposed you?

4. What do you think of the other Wikipedians who were appointed along with you?

5. After about two weeks on the job, what are your initial thoughts?

6. How active a role do you plan to take on ArbCom workshop pages, and in writing ArbCom decisions, a role that has historically been handled mostly by just a few individuals?

7. What do you think are the strengths of the ArbCom? Weaknesses?

8. If you could change anything, what would you change? Why?

9. Do you plan on finishing your term? If you had to make a choice right now, when your term expires, would you run for re-election? Why or why not?

10. If there's one thing you could say to the Wikipedia community, what would you say, and why? Is there anything else you would like to mention?

Evidence question

Hello, I had a question about the current Naming Conventions case. I was in the process of supplying evidence a couple weeks ago, when my wiki-time was interrupted by the holidays (and the fact that I got stuck in the New Mexico snowstorm for a few days). Upon my return to Wikipedia, I see that the voting phase on the case has already started, before I was able to finish supplying evidence, and before some of the other involved editors had returned from their own holiday break.  :/ May I continue with supplying the rest of my evidence? Or would it be too late at this point? I'd posted alerts about my upcoming absence and return on the ArbCom talk pages, such as at Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Naming Conventions/Evidence#Christmas and Wikipedia talk:Requests for arbitration/Naming Conventions/Proposed decision#Additional evidence, but I'm not sure if anyone saw them. Thanks for your time, Elonka 19:49, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Elonka, Thank you for contacting me regarding this matter. I will look over the evidence that you provide. Please let me know when it is complete or if there is going to be another delay. Take care, FloNight 20:43, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for my absence -- Missouri was under a state of emergency because of the recent icestorm, but I'm back now. I'll endeavor to have my evidence wrapped up within a day (check my blog if you'd like details on the power outages here). --Elonka 18:10, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Again, please accept my apologies for the multiple delays. It's a been a really tough winter so far! Since the power's back on though, I have finally been able to finish presenting my own evidence, as well as a few extra proposed principles and findings of fact on the Workshop page. If you have time, I would appreciate if you could review them. If not though, I understand. To be honest, I feel better just knowing that I was able to complete my section, since its half-finished status was on my mind during the last couple weeks.

For what it's worth, I have no intention of challenging the final ArbCom decision, whichever way it goes. I see ArbCom as a useful part of the Wikipedia Dispute Resolution process. And just as with an AfD or DRV discussion, I may not always agree with the decision of the closing admin, but I will respect it.  :)

Despite some of the other comments that have been made about my behavior throughout this process, it is my hope that ultimately it will be clear that I am a longtime hardworking Wikipedian (I think I'm currently on the list as one of the 200 most active editors), that I believe strongly in the project, and that in general I'm not groundzero for various disputes. In this one particular case though, I felt strongly that I had an obligation to speak up. But I will be glad when the matter is finally resolved, as I am very much looking forward to getting back to writing articles! :) Elonka 03:31, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Please note that a significant part of Elonka's evidence is either misleading or downright false, as noted here. >Radiant< 14:36, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Derek Smart PD

With [24], would you be so kind as to add what number preference that is for you (I presume second, given the other one was first) - it just makes Thatcher, Srikeit's etc. job as a clerk much easier. Cheers :) Daniel.Bryant ^[ T · C ] 00:03, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Husnock RfAr

Damn, I looked at the proposed decision a few days hither and returned today to find that you've pretty much said everything just as, for instance, would I have. If there were a barnstar for one's demonstrating her brilliance by agreeing with Joe—why isn't there one?—I'd surely bestow it on you; in its absence, you'll have to accept my good on ya. Joe 19:09, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Derek Smart

Does this constitute a legal threat? I mean, it does in my mind, but I was wondering what you thought, and if you think I should propose an injunction about it. ⇒ SWATJester ^On Belay! 17:16, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Examining every one of SC's edits for actionable legal threats is not very becoming. He seems quite capable of sinking his own ship. Thatcher131 17:19, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not examining every single one. I'm examining this one as the entire thing is about legal standing for a lawsuit against another user, and I brought it to FloNight because he/she indicated on the Proposed Decision page that he may have been crossing the line. ⇒ SWATJester ^On Belay! 17:30, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Naming conv

Could you please take a brief look at the talk page? There are several remarks by the involved parties regarding issues that haven't been addressed by the ArbCom. Thanks. >Radiant< 12:24, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. I'd appreciate it if the ArbCom members actively involved in this case would take a look at this request and consider it before closing the case. Thanks. --`/aksha 10:57, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It wouldn't be a problem if it simply was a "difference of opinion", as you suggest. Rather, the situation is of one user who deliberately and repeatedly posts falsehoods (and not just in the case itself, but on several public noticeboards) in an attempt to disparage other people, marginalize their opinion, or get them blocked. In other words it appears that the current findings are only a partial resolution to the dispute. >Radiant< 13:57, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AC clerks

Flo, would you look at Wikipedia:Arbitration_Committee/Clerks#Organization as well as my comments on the talk page therein? I posted it a few days ago and haven't gotten any feedback. Thatcher131 14:17, 19 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sanity Check

Hi, A favour if I may? I've been trying to help an editor who's received what I believe to be an excessive block. I'm going back through their edits, and those of their accuser, where they overlap, trying to work out if there is any substance to the allegations. My concern is to make sure that the benefit of what I'm trying to do (hopefully demonstrate the man's lack of guilt) is in balance with the cost of what I'm doing (possibly encroaching on other users' privacy). Can I trouble you to have a look at this page and give me your feedback? Regards, Ben Aveling 09:42, 22 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

RfArb regarding Lucky 6.9 (talk · contribs)

I have completely revised my statement in regards to this RfArb I started regarding administrator User:Lucky 6.9. In particular, given a couple days to reflect on others' comments, I make a substantially different point, completely unrelated to furthering accusations toward the administrator. I would appreciate if you'd take a quick glance. Link Reswobslc 23:25, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Anesthesia edit war

Hi. If you have time, given your background, you might be well-suited to look into WP:ANI#Edit_warring_at_Anesthesia. Regards, Newyorkbrad 02:38, 30 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Piotros-Ghirla arbitration

Please review and consider voting for the pending motion to dismiss in the Piotros-Ghirla case, given that Ghirlandajo hasn't edited in over a month, and the parties were in mediation before that. Thanks for your consideration. Newyorkbrad 04:42, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]