Chris 73 |
commons:My Images |
If you find this page on any other site than Wikipedia, then you are viewing this from a outdated mirror. Please direct yourself to the real thing at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Chris_73 or one of the subpages there. |
This is an archive of my Talk page. Do not edit this page! Please leave new messages on my Talk page.
(Old archives: 001 — 002 — 003 — 004 — 005 — 006 — 007 — 008 — 009 — 010 — 011 — 012)
Hi Chris, I have another series of photos for you to take a glance over if you could. Thanks for voting in the last series --Fir0002 01:16, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Hi, Chris 73
For quite some time I have been uploading multiple images of the same subject as a Featured Picture Candidate, and, unknown (until recently) to me, this was causing considerable problems in the promoting/not promoting stage of the Featured Picture Candidates.
Recently Solipsist informed me of the problem and came up with the suggestion of holding my own semi Featured Picture Candidates page.
I would like you and several others (User:Sj, User:Solitude, User:Boffy B, User:Solipsist) to be the people who vote in this.
I would greatly appreciate your opinions on the photos.
The link to the page is User:Fir0002/FPCandidates
Thanks --Fir0002 08:32, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
There is a new version of John Fletcher (Methodist) under "Temp" which should not contain any copyright issues.
Hi chris. The talk of cherrapunji is collected from all leading websites of shillong,Meghalaya.I know the contents of cherrapunji is not my own collection.I regret for the same.I will of course try to publish something original. Yours etc., User talk:subash1
I had no idea that a dot-map for Sacramento, CA already existed. I'm doing dot-maps for Northern California county cities/places right now and don't always have time to look at all major cities for preexisting maps. Perhaps you could write to Seth_Ilys and tell him what maps you've already done so redundant maps won't be made (Seth is the user who started the "Dot-Map Project"). Bumm13 14:30, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Please don't engage in discussions with blocked users, it only encourages them to (again) avoid their block. --fvw* 03:51, 2005 Feb 2 (UTC)
I can take care of it myself, the last thing I need is a rv war on my talk page and 'new msg' note every 5 minutes. I will look into the Emax matter but note that you are rv a good link into a bad link... :> --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 12:43, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Hi, I'm somewhat confused - what prompted you to revert the posts by Emax (or someone claiming to be them - it was 172.177.155.244, dunno if it was an imposter) from WP:AN/3RR? I didn't see anything about the message that looked that problematic. What as I missing? Noel (talk) 03:50, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC) PS: I don't usually check other User_talk: pages (so that I don't have to monitor a whole long list of User_Talk: pages - one for each person with whom I am having a "conversation"), so please leave any messages for me on my talk page (above); if you leave a message for me here I probably will not see it. I know not everyone uses this style (they would rather keep all the text of a thread in one place), but I simply can't monitor all the User_talk: pages I leave messages on. Thanks!
What do you mean? I am not spamming anybody. (User:4.16.48.15)
Why do you remove my comments from the Administrators' noticeboard yesterday? Do you have read the Controversial blocks article? [1]
It says: nr. 3 "If possible, contact other administrators informally to be sure there are others who agree with your reasoning. The administrators' noticeboard, IRC and email are effective tools for this."--Emax 14:10, Feb 3, 2005 (UTC)
chris do you controlling and write down every step of me? [2] - pls. stop that or i will become paranoid! :)--Emax 03:50, Feb 4, 2005 (UTC)
"If you want to discuss items with me, please let me know on my talk page, and I am happy to respond."
OK - a question: do you not think, that you should have some consequences for the "Helga&Moron&Polish culture", matter? A 24th ban? a official reprimand? one month ban from Poland-related articles or something? My own view of justice, say yes - what about yours? :)--Emax 04:04, Feb 4, 2005 (UTC)
Chris, thanks for the diffs of your apologies -- looks to me like you goofed up, knew it, and did the right thing. All anyone could ask of you. My conversation with Emax is mostly me trying to stop this bizarre meme that Wikipedia admins get to do anything they want, and if any user insults them or inconveniences them in the slightest way, the user gets booted for life. I know that's not how life goes for me as an admin (ah, the grief I wouldn't have to live through if I could ban all the people who bother me!), and based on your conduct, looks to me as though the exact same thing is true of you. :-) Best wishes, and keep up the good work, Jwrosenzweig 23:35, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Chris 73, could you please add ((protected)) to the Anarchism page you protected? Thanks, Taco Deposit | Talk-o to Taco 15:44, Feb 4, 2005 (UTC)
Hello Chris 73. I think your proposed Schopenhauer entry re Danzig/Gdansk is just fine. Thanks for your work. I don't understand the attitude of some Poles, such as Emax, about this. He practically called me a Nazi!
Sca 14:32, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Hi Chris 73. On the admin notice board, you say that I broke the 3RR on Jan 3. I've looked at the history, and I can only find three that apply: 19:40, 3 Feb 2005, 19:54, 3 Feb 2005 and 00:16, 4 Feb 2005. I just wondered what the other one was. I'd be grateful if you would tell me, as I am concerned about this - I'm usually very careful. Thanks. - Jakew 16:57, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Hi, sorry about all the confusion with the sub-pages. Hopefully everyone will soon get used to it, and things will go smoothly. The original single page was really just getting too much traffic, though; we really did need to do the re-organization. Noel (talk) 17:40, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Chris, re your note on my talk page, just to set the record straight: I did not live in Poland for a "long time," only for about six months -- in Warsaw, where I worked for the Warsaw Business Journal. That happens to have been the longest time I lived anywhere outside the U.S. It's true that my primary interest is in German history, but I am certainly no hater of Poles, Russians, Jews or anyone else; I'm a humanist. And, er, a human being. Mazel tov. Sca 21:55, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
By the way, I made the following entry in Szczecin-Talk:
Please, whoever is fiddling with this entry, get real and refrain from saying that the then-wholly and totally German city of Stettin was "liberated" by the Red Army. The Germans DREADED the approach of the Red Army, with good reason -- both in terms of what the German Army and SS, etc., had done in the Soviet Union, and the revenge the Red Army already was exacting for those atrocities in eastern Germany.
Stettin, Germany (today: Szczecin, Poland) was no more "liberated" by the Red Army than Warsaw was "liberated" by the German Army. Both were conquered, with dire results for their inhabitants. Such were the savage and retributive dynamics of WWII in the east.
You can say Warsaw was "liberated" by the Red Army, though some might challenge that; but no German city, particularly those east of the postwar Oder-Neisse border, was "liberated." Need we mention that ALL of old Stettin's inhabitants were either killed or expelled? Is that "liberating"? Give me a break!
Sca 01:10, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I did find one German University (http://uni-muenster.de) that had his volumes in their special collections, but unfortunately not in their digital collections. Places like that are often not well indexed by Google, etc., so it might be worthwhile to check their website. I also seem to remember that the different "local" Googles sometimes yield different results, so you might try http://google.de. BlankVerse 10:06, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Its nice that you reverting me in so many articles - but you can be sure that i will mention this in the "case" againts you, because your reverts have probably (im very sure) personal reasons and provoked edit wars. (its not good when admins provoking edit-wars, and you have provoked a lot..)--Emax 23:41, Feb 7, 2005 (UTC)
I fear that what I do may not help, terribly. Even more than NPOV, what the article needs is to be converted into proper English (I took a stab at parts of it), but one is not eager to do it for fear of being reverted, since I also changed various references to "Gdansk" to "Danzig" - to be honest, I had not even realized that they had ceased to be Danzig, because I hadn't looked at the article in a while. The article seems to be one which continually gets gradually worse. For instance, I'm fairly certain that the history section was, at one point, far better written. At any rate, we'll see what happens. The article before was in pretty strong violation of the working compromise as to use of Gdansk and Danzig that had been agreed upon. I have changed it so that it is probably a bit of a violation going the other way (in that I call it Danzig between 1454 and 1793, when no agreement was ever reached for what it should be called at that time). Anyway, we'll see what happens. The whole thing is a mess. john k 01:27, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Hi Chris. I'm a little confused about how to correctly move images from here to the Commons, without losing information or violating the GFDL. I've started a discussion at Talk:Wikimedia Commons#Moving images to the Commons, and your input would be appreciated. – Quadell (talk) (sleuth) 19:59, Feb 8, 2005 (UTC)
Hi. I've noticed you put Numan Celebicihan under Wikipedia:Copyright problems. Did you notice that site's copyright statement [5]? Thanks 151.203.117.87 04:58, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Nice photos! Looking forward for an update after February 12. Also, since you said on Image:Gates base.jpg 'All rights are granted under the same license terms as the rest of Wikipedia, could you add a ((GFDL)) image copyright tag to the images? This gives them the same copyrights as the other wikipedia texts. Thanks -- Chris 73 Talk 23:57, Feb 9, 2005 (UTC)
I think you should be interested to take a look at the Khotyn article, which is repeatedly flooded by Romanian nationalism. If you have any facts on the Khotyn uprising, please help to make the article neutral. Ghirlandajo 06:55, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
In preparation of your vote: the period 1308-1790 IMHO should be divided into following sub-perdios:
Szopen 09:04, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Chris, with some juggling, I moved the vote to Talk:Gdansk/Vote. It shouldn't be in the main namespace. The old talk page is at Talk:Gdansk/Vote/discussion. You should announce it on Wikipedia:Current surveys and perhaps the Village pump. I'd also suggest leaving a note on the talk page of anyone who's been involved with the Gdansk page in the past and is still active. john k 03:56, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Can I then formally request deletion of those listed below from you without provoking you and your other administrators? I certainly wouldn't want to create ill feelings? By the way, I am curious to know why your fellow admin. "punished" me for things I do not believe I am guilty of. I was singled out today for allegedly making threats, personal attacks, being overly aggressive, and lacking Wikipedia etiquette, and the real doosey - the possible libel action? Was that his way of making me look bad? I certainly would not want to be associated with those who feel that it is important to "criticize" where the subject matter doesn't deserve such criticisms. Therefore, these are the Pages I am submitting for removal:
There might have been others. Those listed above are the main ones. And if you feel that it is of everyone's best interest to remove my account, then you do have the authority to do as you please. I and others would certainly appreciate it. - Paradigmbuff 01:49, Feb 18, 2005 (UTC)
My tendency for that would be towards Gdansk, both because it seems plausible and it will cause fewer problems. john k 03:27, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
thanks for information; i'll check it within the next days ... i only wonder why Gdansk and not Gdańsk?! ...Sicherlich talk 09:59, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Thank you for informing me about the vote. Right now, i did not understand what the 1793 date is about, the city was german-speaking, no matter who it was governed by, until its inhabitants were expelled in 1945. So, that's the date we discuss about. --Magadan 01:46, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Hi, I saw that you added a link to a closeup of a housefly picture to house-fly. The link is now removed since the picture didn't show up. Did you maybe make a typo in the picture's name? Thanks, AxelBoldt 19:54, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I noticed there was a vote going on, and yes, I did figure it needed to be covered in the Signpost. So I very much appreciate your getting started on the article. I'll have a closer look later to do some actual editing. --Michael Snow 06:23, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I'm not upset with you personally, you interpreted the 3RR the way that you saw it and you even got confirmation from another admin that they interpreted it the same way. So I don't think anyone reviewing your actions would find you at fault. Obviously this interpretation was surprising to me, otherwise I never would have made the last revert, which I thought I could make. I don't oppose the 3RR rule, I just find its interpretation more ambiguous and confusing (to me) than it could be.
I moved some of the inline discussion at Talk:Gdansk/Vote to a separate section. -- Curps 12:49, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Shall we coordinate our efforts on Willy cleaning? I'll do the moving back, you keep an eye on my contributions and cleanup his redirects. If you'd like to join forces, please let me know and I'll tell you at which article I'll stop deleting redirects. Mgm|(talk) 14:48, Feb 19, 2005 (UTC)
Hello, thank you for your recent pro-science vote in RNA world. Could I perhaps persuade you to weigh in at an RfC page created for this irritating anon user? Wikipedia:requests for comment/138.130.194.229 Thanks again.--Deglr6328 20:24, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Przydala by sie pomoc na ang. wersji artykulu o Szczecinie [7] - dwie osoby zaczely germanizowac artykul. Chodzi o wycofanie wersji tego [8] lub tego [9] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:John_Kenney) uzytkownika means: Help is needed in the english version of article about Szczecin - two people started germanizing the article. Problem is the removal of version [8] or [9].
Say, do you know anybody who knows German and could help me translate some materials into English? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 16:37, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)