User talk:Sannse/Archive 5

July 2005 - December 2005

Category:UK Wikipedians

Hi, just to let you know that the list of UK participants at the UK notice board was getting rather long, so I have replaced it with the above category which I have added to your user page. -- Francs2000 | Talk 30 June 2005 20:45 (UTC)

Thanks Francs, that looks fine -- sannse (talk) 1 July 2005 16:28 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Naming conflict

I've written up a new policy proposal, with assistance from Ed Poor, to set out some guidelines and basic principles for dealing with naming conflicts of the Gdanzig type. Could you take a look at Wikipedia:Naming conflict and let me know what you think? -- ChrisO 1 July 2005 22:14 (UTC)

Cally

Hi,

You took a photo of my Dachshund in 2003 at the City of Birmingham Champ Show. I have only just seen it and am thrilled at how good Cally looks.

I wonder could I get a copy sent to me or the JPEG emailed to me. I would love to have this on my website, on her page. Mt website id WWW.tekalhausdachshunds.com.

Just for your info Cally is now a Champion so it should read CH Tekalhaus Krugerrand. she was made up to a Ch at Crufts this year.

Love the photo you did a good job, thank you.

Kind regards,

Debbie Clarke

It's wonderful to know that you have seen the finished product! I had a great time at the show, and was very grateful to everyone who let me borrow their dogs. A copy of the photo is no problem at all, I'll send you a higher resolution version than the one here. I need your email address - if you could mail me with it at [e-mail] I'll get the photo back to you. And congratulations on making Champion - I've updated the image page. Best -- sannse (talk) 4 July 2005 17:03 (UTC)

Help needed on cyberstalking page

Hello Sannse, there is one user who keeps removing a link to *Working to Halt Online Abuse claiming it is a fraudulent group. He has presented no proof in the discussion page, and I have some, albeit little, experience with this group having been a victim of online harassment, they referred me to an attorney who helped me for absolutely free - so I would expect that this user Squeaky something or other should need to provide some evidence for his continual deletions.

Dee Dee Warren July 6, 2005 13:09 (UTC)

I have now explained my reasons (to some extent) on the cyberstalking talk page. This fraud was perpetrated by a member of their staff who was given my email address by the organisation. As most of the harrassment against me happened here I have a mountain of proof, but if you are interested start by looking at my user page, SqueakBox July 6, 2005 14:59 (UTC)

I woulde also point out that said staff member, having been blocked for a week for sockpuppetry, was blocked indefinitely on June 21 by an admin for death threats. So, yes, I am willing to stand by my claim that this is a fraudulent organisation, SqueakBox July 6, 2005 15:34 (UTC)

I've left a reply for you both at Talk:Cyberstalking -- sannse (talk) 6 July 2005 16:03 (UTC)

Email

I sent you an email a while back, don't know if you just didn't wanna respond or didn't get it. though i would appreciate a response. thanks. J. Parker Stone 02:59, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Many apologies for not responding to your mail sooner, I managed to lose it somehow. I've replied now -- sannse (talk) 11:29, 10 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration-related request

I'm sure arbitration disputes aren't your favorite thing to deal with, but could you take a look at this request for a temporary injunction against User:Alfrem? There is a request for arbitration against him, and his antics have recently resulted in the page protection of Libertarianism. Temporary blocks for 3RR violation seem insufficient. Fred Bauder recommended asking arbitrators individually for their opinions, so that's what I'm doing.

Thanks for your time, and I hope this mess doesn't keep you from the more interesting parts of Wikipedia for too long.

Dave (talk) 17:05, July 12, 2005 (UTC)

Cantus' request for arbitration

Hi Sannse, in Cantus' request for arbitration, would you consider applying an extension of Cantus' second case, which states Cantus is limited to one revert per article per 24 hour period. Should he violate this, an admin may ban him for a short period of time (up to a week), the extension being one revert per 24hr period to any page in any namespace? I feel that the current proposed decision will once again not make it clear to him that refusing to discuss and reverting without edit summaries is not acceptable. Thanks, Talrias (t | e | c) 18:11, 15 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Frankly, I think you are right. This is not a good decision. I will discuss this with the other arbitrators -- sannse (talk) 09:29, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about adding Evidence

I was under the impression that you add evidence in the case of arbitration! My mistake. --Vivin Paliath (വിവിന് പാലിയത്)

The arbitration tasks box is for open cases. It's not clear yet whether we will take this case or not. To help us decide, we ask for a summary of less than 500 words, rather than detailed evidence. -- sannse (talk) 09:33, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Sannse, I have added the summary in the request for arbitration page. Please take a look as soon as it is possible for you. Thetruth doesn't seem to be listening and we've run out of ideas. --Vivin Paliath (വിവിന് പാലിയത്)

81.183.164.245

Hi Sannse,

I have this anon user (contribs) adding what I consider linkspam to articles. I reverted his changes to Hungary twice already.

I'm relatively new here, so could you tell me what else to do in such a case? I'm not sure about his intentions, but I haven't got enough time to check every now and then whether he has messed with the article again. Is there a template message I could place on his Talk (saying something like "please stop this")? And if he proves to do this in bad faith, where do I report it?

Thanks for any answer,

KissL 15:45, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There is a template for this situation at Template:Spam, you can add {{subst:spam}} to his talk page. This sort of thing can be reported at Wikipedia:Vandalism in progress, but it's still at a low enough level not to worry too much (sometimes this happens to hundreds of pages at once). Just keep an eye on it when you can, maybe add the pages to your watchlist, and revert as needed. -- sannse (talk) 15:57, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! KissL 16:29, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimania competition

I thought you might like to know that since one of you images was one of the most popular WP:FPC nominations this year, I've entered it into the Wikimania Media Competition -- Solipsist 19:59, 18 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Solipsist :) Unfortunately, it was uploaded too long ago to be eligible under the rules. And, as I wrote the rules (mostly), I don't think I should enter anyway - a bit of a conflict there. But I really do appreciate you thinking it's good enough to enter. -- sannse (talk) 16:45, 20 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest, I was just working through the all last year's WP:FPC nominations that got more than 10 supports. I need to go through them again, because I suspect I missed a couple. The rules for the dates were clarified after I started going through the list (I think I was assuming July/August 2004). There is a danger that I may have entered some other pics that were too early, so sorry about that - I'll try to check them. -- Solipsist 14:43, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, but that doesn't detract from the fact that your catepillar was one of the most popular FPC nominiations in the last year. It is a nice picture. -- Solipsist 14:51, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Suspended ban

Can you put a note on User:Netoholic/Mentoring as well? - Omegatron 13:44, July 19, 2005 (UTC)

Especially now that he's blanked your comment on his talk page. - Omegatron 14:05, July 19, 2005 (UTC)

I'd rather leave that page to Netoholic and the ex-mentors, the ban has been posted on the appropriate pages anyway. -- sannse (talk) 16:45, 20 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Tkorrovi et al: Motion to close, etc

I draw your attention to this. Paul Beardsell 12:37, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

But you seem to have miscounted

You have counted the votes of people who have resigned from ArbCom. Paul Beardsell 23:00, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

As I have said on another page, their resignations are not yet in effect. -- sannse (talk) 23:02, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You play. They have left the ArbCom. Neither is active, neither responds, neither comments to ArbCom matters. One of them demonstrably displays bias. Each of them accuses me falsely without providing justification. And you count their votes. You make some narrow point about one case but you endorse their lamentable actions. Shame! Paul Beardsell 23:09, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

They were active at the time that their votes were cast, and the majority required in this case took that into account. Of course, if I had taken them as inactive and not counted their votes, the decision would have been exactly the same. The required majority would simply have dropped to four votes. As to their actions and "bias" - I disagree with your assesment of course. -- sannse (talk) 23:17, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You mean to say they showed you the evidence they wouldn't show me? Let's stop the pretense: We know why they've gone. Paul Beardsell 23:30, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I assure you that their resignations have nothing to do with your case. It's late here, and I'm going to bed, I really see no point in continuing this conversation at this point. -- sannse (talk) 23:34, 21 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Zivinbudas

Thanks for the info. Halibutt 15:53, July 22, 2005 (UTC)

Terri Schiavo

Hi Sannse, I saw you left a note at Talk:Terri Schiavo saying you'd removed a sentence after a complaint from Dr. Hammesfahr, but I can't see any edit from you in the history, so I'm wondering whether you forgot to delete it (though perhaps I'm having cache problems). Cheers, SlimVirgin ^(talk) 01:26, July 23, 2005 (UTC)

Sorry SlimVirgin, I was logged out and didn't notice. My IP was 80.42.162.228 -- sannse (talk) 15:44, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sanse, thanks, and sorry: I should have thought to check the IP edits. If Hammesfahr has any further complaints, I'd be interested in hearing about them. There has been quite a bit of negative editing about him at Terri Schiavo and William Hammesfahr. I recently tidied William Hammesfahr (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) to get rid of some of it, but an anon, with an IP address that resolves to Florida, still keeps deleting large sections of criticism without explanation, so I'm wondering whether it's Hammesfahr himself. If it's him, it'd be helpful if he could say on the talk page what his concerns are, or e-mail me, as I'm prepared to work with him to make sure the article is accurate and fair. Cheers, SlimVirgin ^(talk) 21:45, July 23, 2005 (UTC)

I've not heard any more from him yet, but will keep you informed if I do. Thanks for your help -- sannse (talk) 17:14, 24 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Sannse. I've been on and off for personal reasons lately. I noticed your edit. I support doing what's needed to address the concerns of Dr. Hammesfahr. Another user, who claims to be a medical professional, gave a detailed account of why Dr. Hammesfahr's testimony has been questioned. Please advise us on how to handle this. I'd hate to see what appear to be valid proofs get completely removed. I've suggested that the references be limited to links only to sidestep the issue. However, Wikipedia should not be used to slander any individual. Thanks for the help.--ghost 23:19, 26 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think what is needed here is very close adherence to NPOV. By that, I don't simply mean "be neutral", but adherence to the particular type of neutrality we have on Wikipedia. We don't give our opinions or our interpretations of the facts, we give the facts and let the reader interpret them. Where the facts are disputed, we give both sides and make clear who said what and when. Where an area is very disputed, it's often best to stick to quotes, or even to external links. I would rather see a link to an external article critical of Dr Hammesfahr than an analysis on Wikipedia. And I certainly don't think we should be throwing around words like "charlatan" - that is always an opinion, unless it is part of a direct quote (then it's still an opinion, just the source's rather than ours). Sorry if that is all rather too general, I don't know the subject and until (if) Dr Hammesfahr gets back in touch with me I don't know what else needs to be changed in our current article -- sannse (talk) 10:40, 27 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response. I'd recommend touching base with Uncle Ed when he gets back from vacation, as he's been handling the Mediation process on this subject (among others) until now. SlimVirgin and I are slightly partisan on how some of these issues should be handled in the article. However, I'm am very sensative to ensuring that the article does not open Wikipedia to litigation, and I'm sure that most other editors share that concern. Please let me know, by Talk or email, if I can assist building a concensus among the active editors that meets the needs of Dr. Hammesfahr, and others.--ghost 13:51, 27 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AER

Just thought I'd drop you a note of encouragement in your planned reorganization...and a comment to let you know that Iasson, at least, is not listed on that page (perhaps explaining the request for clarification). This fills me with dread and fear that other bans (perhaps many, perhaps not) are also not recorded there. If I can be of any help in tracking things down and sorting things out, leave me your instructions/requests on my talk page and I'll let you know what I discover. :-) Best of luck in your thankless role (and let me sincerely thank you, by the way -- I think the job's even tougher than when it cost me my wikisanity, and I am very proud of you for continuing your hard work), and good luck getting the new ones up to speed. :-) Jwrosenzweig 07:49, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks James, I really appreciate all that :) -- sannse (talk) 15:47, 23 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Qy1.jpg Tag

Hi thank you for the reminder. It is now tagged. --Colinoncayuga 02:28, 25 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration Committee case opening

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/AI has been accepted and is now open. Please bring evidence to Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/AI/Evidence. Thank you. -- sannse (talk) 15:08, 24 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

In order to save everyone time and so that AI can focus on the real world, AI has proposed a solution in Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/AI#Remedies :D Make sure you read my latest contribution first: Hector Lavoe. --AI 02:02, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Serbian letter

Anthere told me to contact you, because you got a Serbian e-mail, so you need a translator. I'm Serbian and here I am... Hit me with your best shot. Contact me on my sr: user page (that's where I hang around more frequently) - sr:Корисник:Dungodung --Dungo (talk) 22:58, 28 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Chalmers

Just a quick (and friendly) question: could you explain the basis of your addition to the article on Thomas Chalmers? In my opinion, the newer version appears the more dogmatic of the two and although it purports to be a revision, is in fact an insertion on a topic completely unrelated to the original one. Kindly, Anadine 21:06, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I put an explanation in my edit summary, but probably should have expanded on it on talk. The problem was a merging of two articles from the 1911 Encyclopaedia Britannica. The Thomas Chalmers article, had the end of an article about George Chalmers instead of the correct ending - I suspect that the original scan missed a page. It was the sudden mention of the death of George Chalmers that showed there was a problem. I checked with a couple of versions and it's the 1911encyclopedia.org version that's wrong [1], the encyclopedia.jrank.org version is OK ([2] and [3]). So I took out the faulty ending and put the right ending in. Of course, being a 1911 article, it has all the usual language and NPOV problems. Anyway, sorry for the confusion, hopefully it's clear now -- sannse (talk) 21:25, 30 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers: that clarifies the situation. Anadine 08:48, 1 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures now at commons

Just wanted to say I've uplaoded the pictures illustrating Silverweed at the commons, partly so I could use a different picture for the taxobox. While yours is great, I think Image:Zilverschoon plant Potentilla anserina.jpg illustrate the full plant a bit better, particularly in showing the stolons. Circeus 12:07, July 31, 2005 (UTC)

OK -- sannse (talk) 12:51, 31 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

RfAr for Gabriel

Sannse, I have been trying to reason with GabrielSimon now for quite a while (as early as 6 Jul) and he appears to be stuck in his ways. I suggested that he live by a 1RR rule for a while to let things die down, he agreed on 23 July, and yesterday was subsquently blocked for 3RR. I asked him about it, and his answer is "pehaps i am too stubborn". A lot has happened since you voted on the RfAr, including a doubling of the number of editor endorsements and a doubling of the evidence for the RfC. I would like you to revisit the issue, as I don't know that Gabriel is voluntarily going to work with us. - grubber 18:02, 2005 August 2 (UTC)

The case has the needed four votes to open - it looks as though no one has had a chance to do so - I'll open it today -- sannse (talk) 09:46, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

What is sbst

What is sbst? ¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸ 23:42, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Using {{subst:User:Sam Spade/Welcome}}, rather than {{User:Sam Spade/Welcome}} will paste the contents of your template rather than embedding them. This would mean that the last edit link on the talk page will no longer lead to your template page, and you won't have people editing your template by mistake any more. Like many people, I use the last edit link to add a section to a talk page, finding it taking me to a template page is annoying - especially when I don't notice until I've saved!

Using subst also means that changes you make to the template, will no longer change all previous uses of the text - something that saves on server resources and allows you to update the template without changing old talk page messages. -- sannse (talk) 09:46, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. ¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸¸,ø¤º°`°º¤ø,¸ 19:08, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

deletion of rfc re: deletion of vfd

I explained a bit at RFA about my premature deletion of the RFC. It was a time-zone miscalculation. And I don't think Kim was justified in blocking me. Uncle Ed 02:14, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

Thank you for your response -- sannse (talk) 20:47, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Jämthund, or Jamthund Spelling.

I don't object, and I don't think that the Swedish object either... Michael 13:58, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

User:J. Jones

Hi Sannse! I see you removed that spurious RFAr, and I think rightly so. I was quite tempted to remove it myself, but I thought it best to report it to WP:AN/I, and wait for someone who is more involved in arbitration than I am. Do you think I would be justified in removing that request as an obvious vandalism/disruption and then blocking User:J. Jones for being a probable MARMOT sock? Sjakkalle (Check!) 13:02, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It's best to leave the decision to arbitrators. We'll remove them if necessary - although it's more likely that we will leave them and vote, even if they appear to be disruption -- sannse (talk)

Thanks for your response, what about blocking/not blocking J. Jones? Sjakkalle (Check!) 13:09, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

As an arbitrator, I have no opinion on that. I'd see what other admins think on AN/I (but with only one edit, and that an offensive one, I doubt you would get much argument if you blocked) -- sannse (talk) 13:16, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Developing conflict with Mel Etitis

Heya, sorry to bother you. I hope you're feeling ok. :-/

I've asked Mel Etitis to come talk with you, basically about my past um non-conflicts with FeloniousMonk. He's picked up some very strange ideas and I'd like him to understand what's really up. I don't mind if you tell him about my side of the situation. I don't know if feloniousmonk will let you tell Mel about his side of the conflict. Thanks if you do have time. :-/

Failing that, I'll ask the medcom for help. They're overworked as it is though, so I hope one of them has time ^^;;

Kim Bruning 15:25, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

KB has somewhat misrepresented the issue, perhaps because he hasn't understood my position. He has presented himself as a neutral mediator between SS and FeloniousMonk, as engaging in good-faith attempts to settle their conflict. His actions and comments, however, have indicated very strongly that he is no such thing, and that he favours SS (to put it mildly). Now, from what he says to you above, it looks as though he wants you to explain to me the reasons for his hostility to FM, or something of the sort — but as you'll realise, that's not the issue. It's not why he favours SS over FM, but that he does so — or, rather, that he does so while claiming to be neutral. If in fact there's something relevant to that issue which you can tell me, then fine; I'm certainly ready to listen. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 15:49, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, well, right. Like I said, could you maybe fill Mel Etitis in? (And I never claimed to be neutral in this, Mel: you only assumed I'd done so.) Kim Bruning 16:13, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not really sure what you want me to say here Kim. And I am very reluctant to talk about the details of mediation anyway - confidentiality is key to the process. I certainly will not discuss it in public, and don't think that there is anything relevant I can say in private. -- sannse (talk) 16:34, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Good point. Sorry to bother. Let me think of something else then :-/ Kim Bruning 17:42, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Admin overriding Arb-com

Under exactly what authority does UninvitedCompany think he can unilaterally permanently ban users, and destroy their user pages, and protect their talk pages so that they can't respond? - [4]

It should be noted that the alleged images were listed at User:Evil Monkey/Nudity as well as being considered entirely appropriate for articles, having, as far as I can tell, already survived IFD, and have been on Wikipedia for over a month.

Note that an arbcom case has only just opened and has by no means come down with even remotely any penalty such as a ban. UninvitedCompany seems to think he has greater authority than ArbCom, and can completely act outside it.

Does UninvitedCompany has infinite power and permission to unilaterally with impunity?

Particularly when the user/victim in question has challanged a prior abuse of adminship by UninvitedCompany in an RfC, and has diametrically opposed political opinions?

This seems to be a case of right wing evangelical Christian admins thinking they have the right to dictate to everyone else.

It also seems in contempt of the arbitration committee's right to make the decision.

SomeAccountThatIWillListOn-Ril-'sUserPageWhenOrIfIEverGetItBack (-Ril-) 12:15, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sannse

Just dropping you a little note to ask if its alright if I request arbitration. As you well know, my account was blocked by Linux last month, indefinitely, and I don't think it's very fair! Anyway, please allow me to present my case before arbcom to stop the bloodshed. Thanks. Marmot

Jimmy Boyd Picture

Sannse, please see Talk:Jimmy Boyd for my response to your removal of Jimmy Boyd's picture from his article.

Hello, I'm seeking guidance / support in re Fac for Terri Schiavo

Hello, Sannse,

I remember you briefly relaying some information regarding Dr. Hammesfahr's concern over some role he played (or didn't), and a recent post.

Now-days, the Schiavo article's nominated for a Fac. I'm trying to drum up support, and here's a reprint of my post to the big-guy --in that box below: -and, since you are familiar with Terri Schiavo, I seek your feedback (and support, if it is appropriate).

Mr. Jimbo, You remember me: I'm the Lakeland wiki contributer who went to court for Terri and almost won -actually doing better than Jeb Bush: (we both lost, as you well know, and this should be an interestimg topic, as you, like I, live nearby to where the Schiavo ordeal unfolded) Raw Links here: Links regarding my recent court battles, in which I lost a "next friend" petition to save Terri's life by a 4-3 margin. I did better then the governor, who lost 7-0 both times he was permitted before the court: (Jeb's case) http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/clerk/disposition/2004/10/04-925reh.pdf Google'ing my court case: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%224-3%22+watts+schiavo Yahoo speaks about me: http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=%224-3%22+watts+schiavo&fr=FP-tab-web-t&toggle=1&cop=&ei=UTF-8 The Fla. Supreme Court's decision for my case: http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/clerk/disposition/2005/2/03-2420reh.pdf My Press Release: http://www.prweb.com/releases/2005/2/prweb212613.htm News Coverage about my case: http://www.rense.com/general63/shc.htm Anyhow, I hate to bother the top brass, but the Schiavo article is a Featured Article Candidate, and, while some of the critics have good points about image copyright concerns, most of the other criticisms are unfounded (e.g., length of article must be long to "do justice," etc.), I think the article is stable and very well-written. Slightly over half of the "votes" are against it being a "Featured Article," but I've whipped the article in shape -with help from many other editors, including Mark (aka →Raul654), the Fac editor. Please honor our combined hard work & team-effort, and use your "god-like" powers, just once more, before you give them up. Thank you.--GordonWattsDotCom 10:13, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your time.--GordonWattsDotCom 10:47, 31 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Nat-gall-lond-tr-sq dist1.jpg has been listed for deletion

An image or media file you have uploaded, Image:Nat-gall-lond-tr-sq dist1.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you.

Bull! (dogs)

Once upon a time, I'm thinking May of '04, there was a dog-project discussion on Bulldog vs Olde English Bulldogge naming, and I have spent half an hour searching and looking and can't find it. Do you have any idea where it might be/have a clever way of searching that discovers the text? It's come up again-- see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Dog_breeds#Bulldog_vs_English_Bulldog. Thanks. Elf | Talk 23:05, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

List of dog topics

FYI, you have a link to this article on your user page, but it's now becoming a redir to category:dogs. Elf | Talk 05:24, 16 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your dog-breed excel table

... has now been put online in Wikipedia:WikiProject Dog breeds/Breed source list. Elf | Talk 22:00, 16 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Replies at User talk:Elf

Image:WikiMeet_London_2004-12-03_sann3_Angela.jpg

Do you want to add a license to the image, or a source, or do you wish for the image to be deleted? Zach (Sound Off) 02:13, 18 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed -- sannse (talk) 09:56, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

---

I am the author of a new Wikipedia addition called "TDWG" that was 'held' due to possible copyright infringement.

The situation was this-

I am an Executive member of TDWG. I was using Wikipedia to search for some definition of terms that we use in our work on in TDWG on the Wikipedia site. I though that I would see if TDWG was listed and a group that TDWG relates "IETF". IETF was listd but not TDWG. I decided that I would use the basic defintion of the group on the www.tdwg.org site to ensure that it was listed on Wikipedia.

Lee

[e-mail]

Walton

Hope you are happy with my amendments to Walton-on-the-Naze. I know the area well, since my brother lived in Thorpe-le-Soken and then Walton. Nice images, how did you get the aerial shot?

(please note - not one Essex girl joke!)

jimfbleak 10:06, 4 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jim, the changes look good, nice work. The aerial photo comes from a gift of a flight over the area (there is another photo on Clacton-on-sea). The trip was in a tiny plane flying from Clacton's small airfield. The visibility wasn't perfect, but the photos didn't come out too bad.

Essex girl jokes don't work for me anyway - I was born in Kent ;P

Sorry for the slow reply - I've been away

-- sannse (talk) 10:17, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections

Hello, Sannse/Archive 5. In case you haven't noticed, I'm writing a special series on the upcoming 2005 ArbCom elections for The Wikipedia Signpost. In the October 17 issue, we will be profiling the current ArbCom members. Note that this should not be a platform for re-election; rather, it should serve as an insight into what you feel about the ArbCom, and your opinions of it are. Thus, I hope you don't mind answering a few questions. Many thanks!

1. Are up for re-election this year?
2. If so, do you plan to run for re-election?
3. How do you feel about serving on the ArbCom?
4. What do you think are the strengths of the ArbCom?
5. Weaknesses?
6. If you could change anything, what would you change? Why?
7. Do you regret accepting your position? Why or why not?
8. If you could say one thing to the current ArbCom candidates, what would you say, and why?
9. Do you think your job is easy? Hard? Explain.
10. Looking in retrospective, is there anything you would have done differently?
11. Do you feel that the ArbCom is appreciated by the community? If not, how do you think that could be changed?
12. What is the most frustrating thing about being on the ArbCom? Enjoyable?

I hope you didn't mind me bombarding with you with questions; by no means feel obligated to answer all (or any) of them. Thanks for serving Wikipedia, and for taking your time to help a Signpost reporter! Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk | W_S 14:11, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia chapter meeting

Hi Sannse, there will probably be a meeting for the specific purpose of discussing Wikimedia UK this sunday, which I was wondering if you'd be interested in attending. I'm also wondering myself... Cormaggio ^@ 23:18, 5 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Missed it. Maybe I will make the next -- sannse (talk) 10:25, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I created Thai Ridgeback Dog (stub) to replace deleted Thai Ridgeback article

Hi Sannse,
I hope I haven't overstepped my bounds by editing a subpage of your User area, but I made a new page (just a stub) for the Thai Ridgeback Dog to replace a page that was deleted due to copyright violation, it would seem. Then, for completeness, I researched all the pages linking to the page that had been deleted, and I am systematically updating them. I hope that's OK.
--GraemeMcRae 19:36, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That's just fine - it's a wiki after all :) -- sannse (talk) 10:27, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RFAR/SV

Re: Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_arbitration/Stevertigo/Proposed_decision#Ommision_of_fact

I understand that some are quite busy and may have missed recent discussion and questions regarding my Arbcom matter. Ive taken the liberty of posting here to remedy any inadvertent oversight regarding my case. Sinreg, St|eve 22:24, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Help! I am being hassled by what appears to be a sockpuppet vandal

Please take a look at the edit history for Accountable 1135. Please help if you can. Rex071404 ^216.153.214.94 01:47, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Go away--anon editor 01:56, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Pic of the day

Hi Sannse,

Just to let you know that your photo Image:Large White caterpillar 800.jpg is due to make a reappearance as Pic of the Day next Monday. I've reused the same caption as last time, but you can review and improve it at Wikipedia:Picture of the day/October 31, 2005. -- Solipsist 21:03, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, ...

... I just came across one of your older contributions in a page history and realize that you haven't contributed a word for more than two months. Are you okay? All the best, <KF> 00:34, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've been rather unwell and not logging on at all, but hopefully I'm back now - thanks for asking after me :) Best -- sannse (talk) 10:31, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Coventry Cathedral

I just converted a list of Coventry Cathedral photos (mostly yours from two years ago) into a gallery. 66.167.138.133 01:32, 31 October 2005 (UTC).[reply]

Looks fine -- sannse (talk) 10:32, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

General reply

I've been away for long enough that a lot of messages here are out of date. I've not replied to some that seem to be time-specific or are related to arbitration issues that I'm not currently involved in. I am working on catching up now, and hope to be back to arbitration shortly. If I've missed anything that I should have replied to, please leave me antoher note. I hope to be around a lot more again now. Thanks -- sannse (talk) 10:37, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, thanks for getting back to me, jimfbleak 13:56, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Your dog photographs at Wikipedia

Dear Sannse

I am currently writing an ebook about dogs and I have been viewing your beautiful photographs at Wikipedia. I was wondering if you would allow me to use some of them in my ebook. I would of course attribute them to you.

Kindest regards,

Alfie Harris

[e-mail]

Reply sent via email (summary - help yourself, they are GFDL!) -- sannse (talk) 19:41, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Resignation

Hello, Sannse. I heard that you had resigned from the ArbCom, and as a reporter for the Wikipedia Signpost, could I ask you why you decided to resign when you indicated last week that you hoped to participate more in the Arbitration process? In addition, if you don't mind me asked, did you announce your resignation on the ArbCom mailing list? If you you made a statement, would you be willing to announce some of it to the public? Thanks a lot. Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk | W_S 22:53, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I told the other arbitrators via the arbitration mailing list. On the reason for the contradictory messages: I came back from an extended wikibreak last week, and hoped to get back to arbitration work as soon possible. Unfortunately, it became clear as I tried to catch up that I am just not well enough at the moment to put in the time and commitment that the job needs. I didn't feel it fair to my colleagues on the committee to continue with that being the case. I still fully support the arbitration committee and believe strongly in the job the committee does. In fact, I would very much like to rejoin the committee one day - if the opportunity arises and if my health improves. Sorry for the slow reply, I hope it's in time to be of use to you. sannse (talk) 19:41, 6 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the response! Hope you get well soon. Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk | W_S 00:36, 7 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You are sick?

I'm very sorry to hear about it! :-( Sounds serious... hope that you get better soon. - Ta bu shi da yu 08:56, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

It's just the usual illness I've had for years, just a bad patch again. Thanks for the concern though :) -- sannse (talk) 12:30, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Bummer Sannse, I had no idea :( Hope you feel better! - Ta bu shi da yu 12:31, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Howard Smith's article

Cheers. You disambiguated "[[depression]]" into "clinical depression" in the Howard Smith (director) article (since he is a past board member and director of MDSG [5]), regarding the function of the Mood Disorders Support Group in New York City. MDSG not only helps people with clinical depression, but also people who are before that phase, perhaps just blue, light Seasonal Affective Disorder, reactional and situational depression, etc. I think I would like to broaden the category and change it back to something like depression (mood). MDSG is not a treatment center, so the panorama is larger. Unipolar, bipolar, and the mood disorders. Many people have a diagnosable disorder, so, I'm actually okay with having to word it as clinical depression but, again, I think might be too narrowing. Your thoughts ? Thanks ! -- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 17:56, 13 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, I'm happy with using depression (mood). It's often a bit tricky to know which of those two to use, corrections are always welcome :) I've made the change -- sannse (talk) 13:29, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi sannse ! Thanks so very much for the clarification and making the change ! It's sometimes very hard to define a line. One trusts you're doing well. Cheers ! -- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 16:34, 14 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

BBC articles internal links to non-existent articles

Hi sannse. An anonymous contributor made changes to many of the BBC sites but also just made internal article links where there were no supporting articles. He internally linked all names in the BBC 6 Music Past Presenter list. And other BBC radio articles where there are more names.

This is very hard, if there is a list of, say, ten or even thirty items, which ones are articles and which internal links are dead-ends. I had left them as plain text until I or someone had written a supporting article, then would change the plaintext name into an internal link to the new article. The anonymous contributor has done it to all names in all BBC radio articles. Lots of dead article links.

One can't distinguish which of a list of thirty presenters, have an article. One now has to try all thirty.

Is there some policy, or so you have a take on it ? Should internal pointers to non-existant articles be made when there's no obvious intention of the contributor's writing the supporting article ?

I think it disturbs the reader's flow to point to a number of contiguous dead articles.

Many thanks in advance. -- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 18:09, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The usual policy is to link to any article that is likely to be written. The idea is that this encourages readers who come across a blank link to start the missing article. The different colours of the links should be enough to show whether the link leads to an active article or not. Of course, if no one is ever likely to write the article, there is no point in having a link - it's all a matter of judgement and, to some extent, of style. Hope this helps -- sannse (talk) 11:39, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, sannse. I would agree in general, although my browser doesn't show different colours for a non-existent article v. a live one ! I still have a lingering question in my mind that when someone takes a list of names, such as BBC radio presenters in a BBC radio article, and makes them all links to non-existent articles, it makes the intention a little unclear. Especially when none are written subsequently ! And the ip address anonymous user had some warnings posted on his discussion page: User_talk:217.33.74.20. I mean it winds up being more work for me, to remove the article links, or more likely to research and write a dozen articles which I hadn't quite presently intended to write ! Many thanks for your kind thoughts and response. -- (Bob) Wikiklrsc 19:59, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikimedia UK

You have expressed an interest in Wikimedia UK. Just to let you know I've posted a draft Memorandum of Association and Articles of Association of the proposed "Wikimedia UK" charitable company on Wikimedia UK/Memorandum of Association and Wikimedia UK/Articles of Association. It is proposed that these will receive initial approval by interested parties at a meeting on 27 November. I will put together a brief agenda for the more formal aspects of that meeting soon. Memo and Arts of Association are a company's constitution, and need to be agreed before the company is formed (though they can be changed at a later date). Please feel free to comment on the relevant talk pages (I'd rather the proposed drafts are left unedited so that it is easy to see what is going on) - particularly if there is something there that you would disagree with at the meeting, details of which can be found on the Wikimedia UK page on Wikimedia Meta-Wiki. Kind regards, jguk 19:04, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info. I won't make the meeting, but will try to have a good read of the relevant pages. -- sannse (talk) 11:42, 16 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

hi

Wanted to say hi :) How are you doing? Dysprosia 21:57, 22 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dysprosia, good to see you! Have you got your home connection on yet? I'm looking forward to catching up with you on IRC as soon as you are back :) Thinking of you -- sannse (talk) 15:00, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No :( I'm thinking of getting wireless internet, but the modem is a bit pricey, so I'm not so sure... But I'm looking forward to seeing you on IRC again too :) Dysprosia 00:29, 24 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Mach kernel

Looks like you had a "fun" time chasing down that vandalism in the Mach kernel article today! – Mipadi 16:34, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, such obvious stuff is no trouble - easy to spot, easy to revert ;) -- sannse (talk) 16:37, 23 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration re-opened

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Climate change dispute 2 has been re-opened. Please place evidence at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Climate change dispute 2/Evidence. Proposals and comments may be placed on Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Climate change dispute 2/Workshop. (SEWilco 03:42, 29 November 2005 (UTC))[reply]

French Directory

Could I ask you to weigh in at Talk:Directory (political) about the recent move of French Directory to Directory (political)? Thanks. Jmabel | Talk 03:09, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry Jmabel, not really my area -- sannse (talk) 11:53, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Britney Spears article

The vandal who inserted those images is someone with access to a zillion IPs it seems, that one is blocked as well. I need to log out now I'm afraid. Is there something we can do with such people who enjoy playing the mole in whack-a-mole. Frankly, I have many other things I would rather be spending my time on. Sjakkalle (Check!) 16:09, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There is not a lot we can do I'm afraid, just keep an eye out and revert as needed. The good thing is that there are more of us than there is of him, and he will get bored and go away eventually. Just take time away from the wack-a-mole game any time you get tired, and don't let it burn you out. Otherwise, it's just keep up the good work :) -- sannse (talk) 16:13, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wolf Blitzer

Sannse, I'm not sure about the protection. It will just show that, when we're worried about vandalism, we protect in advance so that noone can edit, which is a long way from anyone. That won't look good broadcast live on CNN. -Splash^talk 23:13, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, no, it wasn't you. You just added the tag. -Splash^talk 23:17, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, it was Danny that protected - but I can see his point, we really don't want an article that is getting this much attention to be vandalised. And it will be vandalised -- sannse (talk) 23:26, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

CVU talk page template

The thing is this is in the talk page on articles that are already hammered by vandalism. The problem of being quiet is CNN reporters being unaware of our existance. Being brodcasted on national TV as an "uncredible source" and that "we aren't making an effort to prevent such incidents" is very very bad publicity for wikipedia. There is no reason to hide the fact that George W. Bush is getting hammered on a hourly (or much less) basis and that RC patrolers are watching, reviewing, reverting.

When someone is repetively accused/declared of assasinating JFK and are unaware of our existance they rightfully think we tollerate such nonsense on wikipedia as they are unaware of RC patrolers. Of course the template wont scare away the vandals but it will definately contain the apathy of CNN reporters whom (from what I understand from the CNN transcript) are also subject to random accusations. --Cool Cat^Talk|@ 14:49, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Reply at Wikipedia talk:Counter Vandalism Unit -- sannse (talk) 19:30, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

A Rare RFA Thank You Note to clutter up your talk page...

Sannse:

Just wanted to drop you a note to say thanks for supporting me in my recent RFA. I know you don't vote in RFAs often, so I'm doubly flattered that you chose to support me in mine. I will hopefully continue to maintain the style and flair you commented on.

All the best.
→ Ξxtreme Unction {^yakł_blah} 23:30, 9 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You are most welcome, and congratuations! -- sannse (talk) 18:59, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Help from an admin requested

Hi Sannse

May I ask you to have an eye on what's going on below. My knowledge is fairly limited about what to do in stressful situations on wikipedia as I'm relatively new to wikipedia. Maybe you could help a little.

• It started at User talk:AzaToth#Wikipedia:Avoid using meta-templates.
• Moved on to Wikipedia_talk:Avoid_using_meta-templates#Logic_templates.
• Then I was blamed to be a spammer at User_talk:Adrian_Buehlmann#Spamming by Netoholic.
• On User_talk:David_Gerard#More_bad_templates I feel the folks interested in {{book reference}} were titled a "mob".

See also Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Netoholic 2

Thanks for your help! In good faith, – Adrian | Talk 01:07, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Adrian. I would recommend listening to David Gerard on this. There are good reasons to avoid meta templates, they really do affect the performance of the wiki. However many people like using them, and I understand that they can be very useful in some ways, it doesn't change the underlying problem of server strain that they cause. Until that is fixed, then the advice is to avoid them. It doesn't matter that this has never been made an explicit policy - the guideline remains valid. I'm sorry if this is not the reply you hoped for, but I was an arbitrator for "Netoholic2", and so had to look into issues around meta templates. Other than that advice, I would just say to keep things calm and friendly and it is likely to all work out in the end. It is possible to come to an understanding in these disputes. Best -- sannse (talk) 18:59, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for your help. I try my best. – Adrian | Talk 20:48, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ramsey Lewis

I don't really know why I moved the Ramsey Lewis article, but I suspect it had something to do with my first hearing him back when he was billed as Ramsey Leis, Jr. However, as you point out, Ramsey Lewis is better. I've moved the article back to Ramsey Lewis. Thanks for catching that. John FitzGerald 16:05, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That's great - thanks for the help -- sannse (talk) 16:25, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

IRC

Hi Sannse. Yes, it's me. Jayjg ^(talk) 21:53, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks Jay -- sannse (talk) 22:03, 20 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

hi again

Merry Christmas :) Hope to talk with you in the new year... Dysprosia 06:37, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Heya! Yeah, get that connection up and get back to us :) Have a great Christmas Dysprosia -- sannse (talk) 15:26, 22 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Merry Christmas!!

MERRY CHRISTMAS, Sannse/Archive 5! A well deserved pressy!--Santa on Sleigh 22:00, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent news

Good deal on the lithium. I was helped about 5 years ago by 6 months of welbutrin but haven't needed it since. Probably different causes & needs. Best wishes for continued success. Elf | Talk 21:47, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Elf. It's early days, but I think this is a real change :) It's amazing what a difference the right help can make. I'm glad it worked out for you back then too. -- sannse (talk) 15:41, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

What the hell

what are you doin on wikipedia youre a uncyclopedia guy --Cao An Min 22:37, 28 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No, I'm a Wikipedia gal, but I also hang out at Wikicities sometimes. I don't have the sense of humour for Uncyclopedia -- sannse (talk) 15:41, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging Image:Lego-sannse.png

Unfortunately, fair use cannot be claimed for images solely on user pages. I've tagged the image Image:Lego-sannse.png that you uploaded as having unknown copyright status. You could try to contact the owners of the original site you retrieved it from to get permission, but without that it will be deleted. Thanks! ~MDD4696 02:37, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I've deleted it. You might have seen from my comments there that I didn't expect it to stay for long - the "fair use" claim was a joke (see also above ;) -- sannse (talk) 15:41, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Holidays

Happy Holidays Sannse! :) HolyRomanEmperor 13:49, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks :) and to you HolyRomanEmperor! And best wishes for the New Year - gonna be a good one, I can tell ;) -- sannse (talk) 15:41, 29 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]