User talk:Theresa knott/archive9

How now? Sam [Spade] 21:31, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for telling me that personal attacks is considered abuse (I'm somewhat new here), I'm making a record of it should I need it in the future. Also where is there a page highlighting this policy?--198 22:56, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Personal attacks (of course) I wouldn't make a record on you user page, it looks vindictive. I would also remove the pages that i will revert on sight section as well. It makes you look like an edit warrior. Theresa Knott (Not the skater) 23:02, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Well I'm compromising with the users in questions, I'll re-word it. BTW: pages that i will revert on site (site like website :)--198 23:12, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

do you happen to have a picture of yourself? i'm curious. --Anon

Oh you are are you? Well you'll have to follow the advice on my user page. Yes there is a photo of me on wikipedia. Yes it's particlulay easy to find. No i'm not going to tell you where it is, that'll take all the fun out of the search. Theresa Knott (Not the skater)

• Did you stop skating due to the hot knees? --Rebroad 22:53, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I requested adminship there. So now I'm on the campaign trail trying to woo voters, your support would be appreciated :-) Nicholas 12:42, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Sorry no. i'm on meta, wikibooks, and here. Theresa Knott (Not the skater)

Thank you for going and talking with user:Cheung1303. I am currently working my ass off trying to make the wikis for the MTR featured-article quality, and I keep getting annoying edits from him and a legion of people who work only under ISP addresses. For example, the MTR (which is the name of the company) was moved to MTR Corporation Limited, which is the full and never used name of the company that OWNS the MTR service.

Sorry, just ranting.

How do you recommend we go about trying to resolve the copyright issues with Cheung1303? I speak both Engish and Chinese fluently, so if there is any need of translation, I am happy to do it. Thank you! PZFUN 01:01, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Great! I suggest you go to his talk pagre and explain to him in chinese that he must only add photos that he took himself, or photos where he has the express permission of the copyright owners. Furthermore he must add copyright info to each and every photo he uploads. I've already done this in English, but it's possible he doesn't understand me, rather than just ignoring me. If he ignores you. I'll have to just delete everything he uploads. Theresa Knott (Not the skater) 05:42, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Hello, as an admin (and since I'm translating a big thing about copyrights into Chinese!) I'm coming to you with a series of angry edits and e-mails I have received from User:Rob Thomas regarding the Johannesburg article. He responds negatively when I edit what he has contributed, and this morning I received this e-mail:

Hello!

The reason why the info on Rand McNally was included is because people keep on listing Jo'burg's population as either 712,000 or 3 million. It is, in fact, between 6 and 8 million across the metro area (depending on which source you refer to), in the same way that Greater New York is listed as 21 million. I am so tired of fighting the prejudices and misinformation about both Johannesburg and South Africa. In any case, with all due respect, what makes you an authoritative expert on the city? It is quite clear that you don't live here. PS NOBODY refers to the city as "Egoli." It is the name of a TV soapie. If you had to include a slang word for the city, "Jozi" would be more appropriate.

To which I responded:

Rob,

No, the population of Johannesburg is three million, while its metropolitan population is around 8 million. Just as the wiki for New York City lists the population for New York City and its metropolitan area as separate, so should the Johannesburg wiki. I am not causing a prejudice nor misinformation. I just find it irrelevant to talk about what Rand McNally thinks about a subject not related specifically to Johannesburg in the abstract at the top of the page.

PS, there is no need to insult my knowledge or authority about the Johannesburg page. I welcome all criticisms, however I also think it is very important to be clear and concise at all times.

Paul

And I received this back:

Paul

Thank you for your response. I'm not insulting your knowledge about the Johannesburg page. What qualifies you to make assessments about Johannesburg in the first place? I wouldn't insult you by writing up about Denmark or New York. I've been to New York once and I have never been to Denmark. I'm sure you'd feel insulted if people wrote ill-informed stuff about your city and country. I fail to see how you can be an "expert" when you don't live here and your knowledge of the local literature is limited - simply because you don't have access to it.

The information about metropolitan Johannesburg IS relevant to the city and should never have been deleted in the first place, which necessitated the inclusion of Rand McNally as a credible source before someone accused me of original research again. Please feel free to read up on the brouhaha caused by the article on Johannesburg's mall culture, which nobody except a resident of Johannesburg would understand.

The support received from other South African contributors lends credence to the fact that people write a whole lot of rubbish about our country and then dish it up in the name of education. This is totally unacceptable, and flies in the face of Wikipedia being an encyclopaedia.

Please feel free to continue contributing to the Johannesburg page. But I will have no qualms editing it.

Have a great day!

Cheers

Rob.

I am trying to figure out what to do about this hostile attitude. Thank you! PZFUN 08:47, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

At first glance it doesn't look all that hostile to me. I think Rob probably feels strongly about the subject, it doesn't look as to me as if he is trying to offend you. The first thing i suggest you do, is not talk to him by email. Emails are private, and aricle disscusion should be public. For one thing the Arbitration committee doesn't have any duristiction over private communication. So IMO you should talk on the talk page and nowhere else. That way I can come to the article and try to mediate a solution that everyone can live with. Theresa Knott (Not the skater) 09:06, 29 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Theresa, thank you for for taking the time to participate in the current dispute at Talk:Winter Soldier Investigation. I see that you have read the current article, and made some observations and suggestions. As one of the primary editors of that article for the past several months, I must agree with your assessment that the present article is difficult to read, POV and a mess. It is also a vandalised version, and more than 100 edits away from what was the current version of the article. A more recent and readable version can be found here [1], although this more thorough version could certainly benefit from the formatting suggestions you made. Much of the "life" of both versions of the article has been stripped away in the name of NPOV. Please take a glance at it and let me know if you agree or disagree.

Your suggestions reflect common sense, but unfortunately I wouldn't know where to begin as far as a paragraph-by-paragraph rewrite is concerned. My rewrites would merely move the article back toward its state before it was vandalised. As for a dispute tag, the article has been thus tagged off and on for the past several months, as SEWilco and I hammered out acceptable NPOV content. That is basically standard procedure. My only disagreement is with your suggestion to leave it in the present vandalised state while trying to work paragraph by paragraph to bring it back to where it was. My suggestion would be to replace the most current version (presently over a third is missing), reinstate the dispute flag and work on any POV or content disputes that anyone has. -Rob

Please don't call other people's edits vandalism. Doing this does not foster cooperation.As far as I can see everyone is editing in good faith here, nothing that anyone has done looks like vandalism to me. I know how to begin as far as a paragraph by paragraph rewrite. We choose the first paragraph where there is two different vesions in existance. We put both versions on the talk page, everyone pipes in with their arguments and we work to reach a consensus version that everyone can live with (even though they may not be estatic about it). Theresa Knott (Not the skater) 20:23, 30 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I don't call other people's edits vandalism, and I don't believe I did in this situation. The changes most recently implemented by TDC to the article in question are not edits. He simply did a complete article revert to a version that is almost two weeks old. I don't believe TDC has made an actual edit (i.e.; making an addition or change of his own origin) to this article in months. His reverts, while he claims they are prompted by POV issues, also revert several spelling corrections, link additions, additional content by 3rd parties, etc. When this is pointed out to TDC, he refuses to discuss his changes - even to the point of bragging about his non-cooperation and threatening endless revert-wars. Forgive me if I call a duck a duck and refer to TDC's antics as vandalism. See this discussion for more insight to my ranting.

As for fostering cooperation, please note that my recent comments on Talk:Winter Soldier Investigation do not specify TDCs vandalism as such, but instead refer simply (and diplomatically) to incomplete articles and large missing sections. I tend to use a little more candor on private user's talk pages such as this. I must admit that I don't share your optimism regarding your "everyone pipes in with their arguments and we work to reach a consensus version" plan, as I've already tried that. The only response I got from TDC was: "I am not going to argue this with an Anon user who is trying to stuff this garbage into an article." You and I may be the only two contributors "piping in" for now. Not that such is a bad thing -- I've had my head buried in these articles for so long now that I'm certain to be blind to changes that would seem much more obvious to you. -Rob

I am actually very busy this weekend and will not be able to get back to the article till tommorow nite. TDC 21:49, Oct 30, 2004 (UTC)

Looking forward to your participation, TDC. The article will still be there :) -Rob

That's fine TDC, there's no particular hurry. To Rob - a couple of points

• Talk pages are not private. Anything you say here can (and probably will) be read by TDC. So please bear that in mind and be extra careful to always be polite. That advice goes to anyone else who wants to get involved too. In fact it's not advice it's a rule. This is my talk page and if anyone says anything that even hints of a personal attack, or appear to me to be having a go at their opponent, or are even just being impolite i will delete their comments. I will not have anything on my talk page that isn't 100% polite and respectful.

Please do not confuse candor with impoliteness or disrespect. As to your point that TDC "probably will" read whatever I post (regardless of location), that was made obvious some time ago. Of course I will respect your right to moderate your talk page, as I hope you will respect my right to reasonable expression. -Rob

• I don't know that it will do any good at all to go back and look at TDC's or your past behaviour. I'm not interested in apportioning blame for the edit war. All i want is to be able to have the edit war stop and the article unprotected. The best way forwards IMO is to simply forget the past, and start to work from this point onwards.That way we can focus on the facts of the arguments, rather than who is doing rthe argueing. Theresa Knott (Not the skater) 23:24, 30 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Spoken like a true diplomat. Might I point out, however, that an actual argument has yet to be raised? -Rob

Yes but hopefully that will change when TDC gets back to Wikipedia later on tonight. Theresa Knott (Not the skater) 19:25, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

From the previous paragraphs:

Me: I must admit that I don't share your optimism regarding your "everyone pipes in with their arguments and we work to reach a consensus version" plan, as I've already tried that. The only response I got from TDC was: "I am not going to argue this with an Anon user who is trying to stuff this garbage into an article." You and I may be the only two contributors "piping in" for now. -Rob 21:07, Oct 30, 2004 (UTC)

You: Yes but hopefully that will change when TDC gets back to Wikipedia later on tonight. Theresa Knott (Not the skater) 19:25, 31 Oct 2004 (UTC)

A month later, TDC still hasn't piped in with an argument - but I'll refrain from trumpeting the obvious "I told you so" claim. Instead, I'll just thank you for attempts at mediation in that matter. I'd also suggest that the article you created, Winter Soldier Investigation (temp), is now a good candidate for deletion since work has ceased on that page, and has resumed on the original non-temp article. Best wishes to you, -Rob

Hello, I'm sorry to bother you again, but I received another very hostile e-maiil from the person I've been having this dispute with after I edited his East Rand and West Rand article:

I really don't care that your husband is a native of Johannesburg. That means he should know better. It doesn't qualify if he lived here in 1972 or even 2000. Things have changed since then. In any case, he's more than likely a disgruntled expat who has nothing positive to say about Johannesburg or SA.

Arrogant, dumb Yank - now THAT would approximate an insult, only in your case it's true where Johannesburg is concerned. Mess with my city and I'll klap you.

Thank you PZFUN 08:03, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)

What a rude person. Do not reply to that email, just put his name in your killfile so that his emails are deleted without you having to bother reading them. It's a very awkward situation because emails are private communications and so the arbitration committee cannot get involved. So it's important not to communicate with this person in private. I'll take a look at the east and west Rand articles and see if I can mediate. Theresa Knott (Not the skater) 11:03, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Thank you for agreeing to step in and arbitrate. I find this quite abhorrant as I am only trying to make the pages better and I tend to work in places where there are fewer people to do the work themselves. I responded with an e-mail asking him to discuss any issue related to an article with me on its talk page, and to please have a nice day. PZFUN 12:01, 2 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Hi. I'm becoming embroiled in a dispute on the Genital modification and mutilation page with a new user (User:Jakew) who is now accusing me of vandalism. He has just reverted a large number of edits. Could you take a look at the page and at Jakew's user contributions? I think it may be time to protect the article for a short while; I'd do it myself but as I'm involved in the dispute I'd rather not. Thanks. Exploding Boy 20:30, Nov 3, 2004 (UTC)

Hi, I noticed that you (and multiple other admins) have complained on User:Cheung1303's talk page about his uploading of images without source information. (These days, he is adding copyright tags for some images, but they look very questionable to me in several cases, especially since he still doesn't indicate where the image comes from.) He is, unfortunately, still doing it (e.g. recently for the images at [2] and [3].) —Steven G. Johnson 21:02, Nov 4, 2004 (UTC)

Hi, since you've dealt with this user's persistent uploading of copyrighted images before, I wanted to let you know that the problem is still continuing. I've started a request for comment on him, to see what we can do about this. If you're willing to certify this RfC, that would be appreciated. --Michael Snow 05:58, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I've voiced my opinion over on meta, but I'm willing to pitch in with the grunt work on any of the projects...by which I mean researching, writing, editing. Organization is perhaps left best to others. I think writing for children will be a good exercise (and frankly I'll be happy to be free of edit wars on penises!)

That's how I feel.The pro and anticirc POV pushers, and the censors and the moral cursaders, and the people who think that those with differing opinions than themselves are nutters or evil can all have a bit of a break from me for a little while (they will still be there when I come back). I'm off to do something fun!

Some (content, but not media content) sites of interest might be:

• Big Cats Online
• The Big Cats Info Page
• rare and exotic cats
• Cats! Wild to Mild - Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County
• The World Conservation Union. Species Survival Commission - Nunh-huh 08:16, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Thanks I'll take a look.

P.S. If we do wind up doing big cats, it might not be a bad idea to reach out to User:Dan Koehl to see if he's interested. He's a reasonably famous elephant handler and may have pictures or interest in participating. - Nunh-huh 08:19, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)

That sounds like a great idea. Theresa Knott (Not the skater) 17:33, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Theresa, your revert is strange: if you think the arbitrators need to see his behavior, send them a diff, why keep his vandalism on a public page? Gady 22:14, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Yeah your right. i wasn't thinking straight. Theresa Knott (Not the skater) 22:15, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)

BTW, good luck with banning this idiot. Gady 22:21, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)

(Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Moriori")

I've removed you comment (but not your vote) from the picture vote. Saying that people who disagree with your POV needs psychiatric help violates our no personal attack rules :-( Theresa Knott (Not the skater) 22:00, 7 Nov 2004 (UTC)

What absolute rubbish. Every wikipedian is allowed to have opinions. I was giving my genuine opinion on a talk page, NOT insisting it be included in an article. People state their differing opinions every day -- it's called freedom of speech -- but you somehow decide you can elevate Wikipedia to a unique no-go area for opinions. Also, claiming that I said that people who disagree with me need psychiatric help is an astounding misinterpretation of the facts. I said no such thing, but was simply stating a generalisation, NOT aiming at a specific person/s personally. Your kneejerk censorship is frightening and I wonder about the future of wikipedia. I have read departing comments of some people who have quit wiki for good and understand their frustration. It's very disapppointing. Moriori 23:01, Nov 7, 2004 (UTC)

I've lost my temper at Anthony to the point where I don't think I'd better do anything more on this... could you take a look at Wikipedia:Votes_for_undeletion#S.T.A.L.K.E.R.:_Shadow_of_Chernobyl and sort of, uh, take over on figuring out what ought to be done next?

I personally believe the appropriate thing to do is to delete the page until the VfU process is complete, which I temporarily undeleted at Anthony's request so that he could review the page history. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 21:32, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Under what deletion policy would you suggest deleting the page? It's not a candidate for speedy deletion. anthony 警告 21:47, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Was this originally deleted as a speedy or did it go through VFD? Theresa Knott (Not the skater) 12:00, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)

It seems to have been a speedy. anthony 警告 13:19, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)

• I didn't get a reply on my own talk page, and didn't realize this discussion was in progress. I have taken the following further action: I have deleted the page which I temporarily undeleted at the request of a user who wished to examine the page history. The page was left undeleted for about 36 hours. My reading of the current undeletion vote is 4:4 with about five days' discussion. I intend to take no further action in this matter. [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 14:00, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)

• • IMO it's best to just let it stay at VFU for a little longer. If at the end of the voting period it is still evens then IMO it should be undeleted and go through vfd. Theresa Knott (Not the skater) 14:25, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)

• • • (Agree). [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith (talk)]] 15:06, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Hi, I have been absent due to a physical ailment which sent me to the hospital. I hope to return to active participation soon, but I am focusing on my recovery.

KeyStroke 05:44, 2004 Nov 10 (UTC)

Hello Theresa, This is about Node ue's blanking the article German modal particle, you removed my notice of current vandalism saying this wasn't vandalism. Did you actually look at both the histories of German modal particle and Talk:German modal particle. Talk about "dispute resolution", I must have spoken to him about this umpteen times, this is Mark Williamson isn't it? He has taken it into his head this totally POV, but he doesn't know what he is talking about and instead of placing it on to the Vfd list he just keeps blanking the article. Dieter Simon 23:22, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Yes I looked at the history and the talk page. This is very clearly a content dispute. It should be addressed through dispute resolution not vandalism in progress. VIP get's far to long as it is. Hope this helps. Theresa Knott (Not the skater) 23:28, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I am afraid it doesn't help. He started off as 24.251.242.236 and tells me it is all POV. Do you really think he would have taken notice of my patiently explaining to him why 'G.m.p.s' are quite different from other particles he would have just carried on doing the same, namely blanking the page, which in the end he did. Anyway, it is really all explained in the article. If he carries this on I shall revert the article every time, that's all. Dieter Simon 23:45, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Removal of relevant links from an article is clearly vandalism. Do not remove legitimate entries from VIP. anthony 警告 15:31, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

No it is not. VIP is not a punishment page. it's a page where admins can see if someone is actually vandalising an article and if they need to do something about it. Goto the article talk page, start a rfc or take it to arbitration if you feel you need to, but do not clutter up a page that gets out of hand as it is with all the genuine vandals without people adding other wikipedians in that thwey are in an edit war with. Theresa Knott (Not the skater) 15:41, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I didn't know VIP was just for admins. I thought it was a place to get attention when someone is vandalising Wikipedia instead of engaging in a revert war with that user. RFC would certainly not be appropriate at this stage, and neither is arbitration. In any case, an admin should look into the matter and see if they need to do something about it. I don't know where you get the idea that I was trying to punish anyone. anthony 警告 15:47, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

It's not just for admins. Anyone can use it. Sorry if i gave the impression that only admins can use it. Never the less this is clearly not vandalism, the VIP page has to be kept usable. So it's not an appropriate place for this. Theresa Knott (Not the skater) 15:51, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I don't see how you can call the removal of clearly relevant links anything but vandalism. anthony 警告 15:59, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC) I've just read the history. He is trying to prevent googlebombing. He appears to be trying various ways of having the link in without allowing googlebombing. Now you may disagree that this is necessary, but never the less he is clearly editing in good faith. therefore it is, by definition not vandalism. Theresa Knott (Not the skater) 16:03, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

If another uninvolved party removes the listing from VIP, I'll move it to the talk page, though. anthony 警告 16:01, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I've removed the listing. anthony 警告 16:29, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Thank you Anthony.I'm very glad that this was sorted out amicably. Theresa Knott (Not the skater) 18:40, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I'd like to compliment your witty anagram signatures, always good for a giggle when reading WP:RFA (and god knows that page needs one once in a while). Thanks! --fvw 00:09, 2004 Nov 11 (UTC)

Thank you . Most of the anagrams were suggested to me by other wikipedians, so I can't take credit for making them up. Theresa Knott (Not the skater) 06:00, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Here are a few more, apologies if you have one of these already:

Take the snort (or snort the teak)

Tank tester ho (sorry)

Tart, knees hot (sorry again)

Sank teeth rot (what?)

Ah, I give up. The best ones (taketh no rest, the token star) are already taken anyway. :-) JRM 17:10, 2004 Nov 12 (UTC)

I Love them! I'm going to change to one right now. Theresa Knott (Not the skater) 18:38, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

And some more. It's scarily addictive.

to thank trees

ten shot taker

the rote stank

then rot steak

the rots taken

the toner task

Seemingly your name has an infinite combination of anagrams. Really quite fascinating!

zoney ♣ talk 21:16, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Thanks. Yes I'm very lucky to have a number of very popular letters in my name. Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 21:19, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

We who have silent "k"s in our name are a lucky breed. ;-) func(talk) 23:15, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

• WOWWWWWW. I feel indescribably thick-headed right now. I just now realised that those were anagrams. *blushes* BLANKFAZE | (что??) 23:06, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)
  • I find the best cure for blushing is taking you mind off it. I think you'll find that if you spend some time thinking up some more for me, you soon forget your how long it took for you to cotton on ;-)
    • A few:

      That snot reek

      To the stanker

      The tort snake

      The snott rake

      The stark note

      This is fun... :-P BLANKFAZE | (что??) 07:16, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Thank you! As you can see I've taken a fancy to one or yours. Theresa Knott (The snott rake) 08:15, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Hahaha. BLANKFAZE | (что??) 18:19, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Excellent. --fvw*

Not up to much. I did not agree that it should be undeleted and the text of the policy explicitely said the admin "may" undelete - implying there was no policy that it must be undeleted. I was not going to prevent another admin from doing so and had no wish to hide the majority vote from anyone (hence my comment when it was removed). - Tεxτurε 23:06, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

OK fair enough. The page certainly needs cleaning up that's for sure. Anyway, the problem is solved now. Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 23:10, 12 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Nice work cleaning up the Cheung1303 mess. :) --mav 07:57, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Thanks. I'd rather have spent the last two hours drawing pictures for wikijunior, but someone had to sort these images out. I only hope that he will finally get the message and stop uploading them. Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 09:11, 13 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Hi Theresa, via the barnstar you awarded Angela I discovered you as involved in Wikibooks. I have a question, if you don't mind: I try to find a good place for the book on "Digital Network Theory" (1.1 MB pdf) that I recently wrote - after retirement from 32 yrs research at Philips Research Labs (Eindhoven, NL). Instead of trying to find a publisher (I don't need the money;-) I prefer to put it in a freely accessible, but known, internet place. My own homepage http://home.iae.nl/users/benschop/preface.htm works allright is also on the open directory 'Online_Texts' http://directory.google.com/Top/Science/Math/Publications/Online_Texts/ ) but is - apart from a Google search - rather anon. I recently discovered Wikipedia where it is now at Digital Network Theory, but maybe Wikibooks is better. Being a scientist and Wikipedian yourself, I hope you can advise me. Thanks, Nico B. 10:04, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Wikibooks is ideal for this sort of thing. The only thing is it would need to be editable. I don't know if there any pdf to wikimarkup converters that could do the job automatically, but I would certainly suggest you create an account there and ask for help at their equivalent of a village pump (they call it the "staff notice board") Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 12:20, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Theresa: I just wanted you to know that the ieSpell program was recommended to me for the ADD typing problem we had discussed. I am using it and it is helping a lot with reducing the time I spend going back and looking for and correcting my transpositions. It is by far the best I have ever used, and I've tried more than a few. Its free, and I would recommend it to you as well. I am having fun writing railroad and Virginia related stuff, and I updated my user page with some personal information. I am amazed at how many Wikipedia contributors and linked to the ADD page. Misery loves company.... blah, blah.. by for now, Yours in Richmond, Mark Vaoverland 15:33, 14 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Thank you. I'll take a look but i rarely use IE (haven fallen in love witrh firefox) Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 12:21, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I think you can lift the protection of the page because of Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Gzornenplatz, Kevin Baas, Shorne, VeryVerily/Proposed decision ...Sicherlich 08:57, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

• and there was one more city in Poland protected (same reason).. unfortunately i forgot which one and i dont know where on en you have your protection log ... please lift the protection as well ...Sicherlich 09:02, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Likewise for Great Purge. Fred Bauder 11:47, Nov 15, 2004 (UTC)

OK I've done those two. Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 12:52, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I understand that you have a job to do, and you had to block for that reason. However I was considering quitting wiki for that reason but I figured I'd better stay for now. On another note I think the current picture on the "Clitoris" is better than the last one (Although I still take some offence to it).--198 22:40, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I'm glad you've decided to stay. I didn't mean to drive you away. But as an admin I have to respect and sometimes enforce community consensus. I'm glad you find the new picture better than the old. i too prefer it but for different reasons. (I found the copyright status of the old one deeply troubling). I have to say that some of the comments of the people with an opposite view than you were sometimes rude. I think that's a shame. Take my advice 198 please. Just remove the clitoris article from your watchlist and think on it no more. Then it won't bother you. You are unlikely to come across it by accident. I hope we can work together on something more agreeable in the future. Hey come to wikibooks if you want. We are writing a series of children's books there. It's all very plesent, no edit wars, - nothing like wikipedia in fact. Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 23:02, 15 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Hello, I wonder if I can ask for your help. For some reason I have been rather doggedly targeted by vandals recently. In particular, there is a new user User:FirstPricniples whose name is obviously intended to imitate me. I wonder if you could delete that username. Sorry to be a hassle. -- FirstPrinciples 17:05, Nov 17, 2004 (UTC)

Also another one now, called User:FisrtPricniples. -- FirstPrinciples 17:16, Nov 17, 2004 (UTC)

I've blocked them both. Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 19:45, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I had to go in and unblock myself, Theresa, your unblock didn't even work for some reason. Oh well. I'm the only one who uses the IP, so it was just a harmless gesture of protest and frustration...I don't know what's going to happen to a project that punishes people who try to prevent vandalism. Maybe I'll have to leave eventually. But for the time being, of course I can't really stay blocked for 24 hours when I've got a 5,000 page watchlist to monitor. Everyking 20:48, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

It seems like the 3RR enforcement is going to result in people being blocked for reverting vandalism...I don't know if it would actually happen in practice, but we ought to be explicit in encouraging people to fix vandalism, it ought to be an explicit exception; we shouldn't leave people thinking they might be breaking the rules. Everyking 21:01, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

That'll be open to abuse. Edit warriors already call each other vandals, they'll be making bogus rfc's on admins who blocked them, and generally causing trouble. Genuine reverts of vandalism wont be punished anyway, remember "admins may block" They don't have to. What admin is going to block someone for reverting vandalism? Remember that you're not allowed to protect a page you're involved in. I've seen vandalism on pages, reverted, then protected that page. I've done this loads of times, but never been accused of breaking the rules, even though i just protected a page that I've edited. I honestly think you are worrying over nothing.Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 21:11, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Thank you, Theresa, for reminding this old feller. Yes, I'd like to be present to meet everyone, if I can. Have just moved to a new house after 44 years in the same place. Quite frighteneing, this. Anyway, I'll try to be there. Dieter Simon 00:22, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

First of all, Hi, nice to meet you, thanks for all of your valuable contributions...Pedant

Image:AtlasAward.jpgI'm worried about the copyright status of this image. I don't see the justification of "fair use". Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 21:23, 17 Nov 2004 (UTC)

It's a tiny piece of a picture from a reduced size, (the original of that portion is over 2 inches) low resolution scan of an ad from a 1960's comic book, famous enough to be the single most notable thing about its owner. It's attributed to the owner. The image description points at an article about the owner. The image is being used in a symbolic celebration of the owner's main claim to fame: the 98 pound weakling who had sand kicked in his face by bullies. I don't see any fairer use than that. Image:TrangBang.jpg

If you are looking for images that aren't fair use, though, I'd suggest you lean on Image:TrangBang.jpg if you want a clear-cut example of abuse of fair-use doctrine, the AP has specifically stated it may not be used in an encyclopedia in any form without payment and will not be licensed for free distribution in any way.

I do appreciate you looking out for 'bad' images, but I don't think that the Atlas image is one of those. If you just don't like it though, feel free to replace it with something suitable. Just upload to the same name, any 100 pixel square image, and explain why, and all that in the upload history. Thanks again for your concern. Let me know if there's anything I can do.Pedant 00:22, 2004 Nov 18 (UTC)

PS there's more on my talk page, I don't want to clutter yours up. I need to get off the computer though, the home school kids are all here working. I'll be on later tonight or if not, then Thursday. Thanks again for your inquiry.Pedant

Hi Theresa, thought this might help you be more comfortable with the use of the excerpt:the full ad (this full page was originally approximately 8x10 inches), as the 'Atlas Award'. You can see that, although Image:AtlasAward.jpg is a good quality scan of a well preserved copy of the ad, it is a tiny fragment, low resolution excerpt. It's not being used in a commercial way, and is being used with his name attached. The name "Atlas" itself might not be fair use, but I really think that this image, as used here is absolutely fair use. I don't think it's worth the time to try to make a substitute image, unless it's a great substitute... like redrawing the image by hand, in a similar style, or something along those lines. Also, Angelo Siciliano/Charles Atlas has been dead for over 30 years. But it won't bother me if you change the image.Pedant 16:26, 2004 Nov 18 (UTC)

As you've no doubt noticed, new members for the Arbitration committee are going to be elected this december. While there are some fine candidates, the number of … ehm, how shall we put this … "abrasive personalities" there is worrying me a little. While I'm sure the approval voting will weed out the more controversial candidates, I'd still greatly appreciate it if you'd consider running. --fvw* 05:17, 2004 Nov 18 (UTC)

OK I'm considering it at the moment. I'll probably decide to toss my hat in the ring later tonight. Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 15:14, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

You are a SICK, SICK BUNNY. I like her, can we mmmph mph…hey, let go of my throat!?! --Phil | Talk 07:59, Nov 18, 2004 (UTC)

I know I'm sick but she sure is a beauty. She likes you, I can tell by the way she is manhandling you. Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 15:19, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I'm desperately hoping your eyes are drifting leftwards as you say that: the thought of Jimbo in a dress does nothing for me [snigger, sorry Jimbo] although I'm sure you could find someone who would like it. Is it safe to say that the thought of Angela in that dress does do something for me? No, I thought not --Phil | Talk 09:50, Nov 19, 2004 (UTC)

You know full well my eyes were drifting right as I said it ;-p Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 10:12, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

You know that dreadful sound in the middle of the night which tells you to watch your step in the morning in order to avoid the gigantic hairball your cat is depositing just outside your door? That's my instinctive response to your latest outrage :-) A more measured response will have to await my recovery. Let's just send her the hairball… --Phil | Talk 15:31, Nov 22, 2004 (UTC)

Sorry, I will not upload any more photos without permission. cheung1303

I'm glad to hear that. Welcome back! Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 15:23, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I don't bite newbies. I usually start with the {{test}} notice, occasionally changing it to {{test2}} if they do something to a User_talk page, for example. The fact that this hypothetical newbie/vandal has newbie tested/vandalised a User_talk page proves that they aren't just testing. If your complaint is about User:Adolph Wales, I have to say that moving the sandbox (very possibly one of the most commonly used pages in the encyclopedia) is stupid, to say the least. Maybe vandalism was the wrong word, but the 'caps lock, italics and bold' was certainly justified. Finally, your saying it's a good thing you're not an admin I find extremely offensive. I spend a lot of time (1h a day plus) dealing with vandalism. I have received the Atlas Award (it's true: see my user page) for keeping the sandbox clean. I have created Template:Sbox which is obviously effective since it's attracting vandalism (I hope you follow my logic). I do, in fact, aim to become an admin, however, I will wait until you leave the Wiki or leave me alone before putting my name forward. NB this is not a threat. I didn't mean it threateningly. Please reply on my talk page.--Honeycake 16:57, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

OK, apology accepted.--[[User:Honeycake|Honeycake (mad scientist)]] 06:38, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

A few more anagrams you might be able to use -
HOT NET TASKER
KNEES THAT ROT
TAKE THE SNORT
My name (Adrian R Pingstone) is AN ROAST PIG DINNER! Best Wishes - Adrian Pingstone 17:23, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Thank you :-) I love pork BTW Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 21:26, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Theresa, do have any interest in running for the Arbitration Committee? I just asked Cecropia the same question. I was just thinking that it would be great if all of my favorite editors were to throw their hat into the ring. :) You are exceptionally fair minded, and would be a great addition to the ArbCom. func(talk) 20:33, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I'm thinking about it. But i haven't decided yet Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 21:25, 18 Nov 2004

OK I've thought about it long enough. (I was thinking about it before anyone asked me). I've added my name to the list. Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 22:24, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

YES!!! Good stuff, your addition to the Committee would be a very good thing. :) func(talk) 23:51, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I've endorsed you publically -- best of luck. :-) Incidentally, if you haven't looked yet, my colleagues on the AC are getting some speed and teeth -- the proposed decision at Irismeister 3 is only held up at present because they can't decide between a 1 and 5 year ban. :-) Happy editing and campaigning, Jwrosenzweig 23:54, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Thank you :-) Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 09:48, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

From User_talk:Cheung1303: ... You cannot steal images from other websites. ... Copyright violation and theft are two entirely different things, please don't synonimise^* them. --fvw* 22:45, 2004 Nov 18 (UTC)

*don't think that's a word, but you get my drift.

I know but Cheung is very difficult to talk to. I've tried explaining in all sorts of ways, but he never seems to "get it". I've resorted to oversimplifying my language in the hope that i can get through to him. Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 22:52, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

"Simplify language" in the same way as the record companies do, incidentally :-). Much like the minitrue of Nineteen Eighty-four simplified English into Newspeak. I suppose the record companies consider kids and adults who download songs from the Internet "never seem to 'get it'" too. </rant>— David Remahl 23:25, 18 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Don't get yer knickers in a twist ;-) Downloading a track of the internet is a world of difference to uploading over a hundred images to wikipedia that you know to be copyrighted, and in fact have removed the copyright info form the corner of the photo.(The evidence is in th deletion log - where i deleted 105 of Chuengs copyright violations last saturday morning)Record companies are a panicky breed because if they don't keep up with the times they are all going to die out. And even if they do keep up with the times, distribution costs over the internet are so small huge numbers of small independant companies will snatch thier business anyway. Bands may soon be able to distribute thier own music, without the need for record companies at all. So they try to talk tough, not simple. Whereas me -I'll try talking in any way I can to make Cheung understand that he will not be allowed to break our rules. Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 09:35, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I guess you've noticed that our dear friend i386, aka El Chico, aka Tuesday Teen, aka 33451 aka a slew of other names has picked up in activity? Still doing the same things; vandalising the front page, using his numerous sock puppets without any skill at all, and general trolling...Now he's on commons too [4]. — David Remahl 00:10, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

No I hadn't noticed. I'll keep an eye out for him here.*Sigh* Kids! You gotta love 'em. Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 09:40, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I'd like your opinion at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration. Thanks. Chameleon 12:05, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Can you explain your action in unprotecting apple pie while the conflict is still being worked out on the talk page? Arminius 13:15, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I unprotected because conflicts are being worked out on the talk page. Protection is generally a bad thing, nd should only be done for a short enough period that forces opponents to talk to one another. If another revert war happens the page can always be reprotected, but for now let's see what happwns with many more people involved. Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 13:20, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Indeed they are not being worked out if you observe the talk page. The conflict is between user:Darrien and User:Chameleon. Once they agree to not edit war again then it should go off protection. Arminius 13:24, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

The page is unprotected now, darrien has made a commitment to not edit war. User:Chameleon is now on block for personal attacks. Hopefully the page will continue to progress. thanks Arminius 13:51, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I have to agree that User:Chameleon was getting worked up, but then given that your (Arminius) page protection was ill considered and doesn't appear to have followed policy by reverting the page first, its not that surprising that User:Chameleon was getting annoyed. I'm not sure that blocking User:Chameleon was a good idea, he was making constructive edits to the article whilst User:Darrien had contributed little. Chameleon's personal attacks don't look sufficiently egregious to warrant blocking, it would have been better to have given him a warning first and better still to have gotten a different admin to consider the blocking. -- Solipsist 17:45, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I've unblocked him. Arminius you are making matters worse, when as an admin you should be trying to make them better. I respectfully ask that you just step away from the page becasue it appears to me that you are letting your irritation with Chameleon get in the way of your good judgement. Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 17:50, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I have left a comment on this matter on Arminius's talk page. Wolfman 23:13, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I was wondering if you were still having problems with Cheung. I just wanted to let you know that I explained to him what the issue was with his copyrights in Cantonese which he says is his native language. I haven't been paying attention, but has he stopped? PZFUN 20:16, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

You may be interested to know that the new version of Blender has a global undo feature, which is something it has never had before. I just now found out about it, and can't wait to try it out. Cheers! -- Wapcaplet 23:43, 20 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Good luck to you in the election too. Stealing Shane King's compliment to Ambi, if this election allowed one to rank candidates based on his preference, I'd rank you above me. Johnleemk | Talk 18:18, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Thank you. Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 18:20, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Wow, I just read User talk:Jimbo_Wales, and I just came here to say I'm quite impressed at your rational dealing with some rather annoying individuals. anthony 警告 04:16, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Thank you anthony.Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 10:06, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for the... I'm not sure what it was, but thanks. I've decided to remove my endorsements, and not to give any further in this election, but you have my well wishes, and my thanks for your kind words. Cheers, [[User:Sam Spade|Sam Spade Arb Com election]] 18:39, 21 Nov 2004 (UTC)

you are welcome :-) Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 10:07, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Greetings. You have my endorsement for Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2004, and you have therefore earned the Quadell seal of approval. Feel free to use this image, or not, as you like. (You won't hurt my feelings if you don't.) – Quadell ^{(talk) (help)}[[]] 05:24, Nov 22, 2004 (UTC)

That's very odd. My endorsement isn't in the history either. Oh well, I put it back in. – Quadell ^{(talk) (help)}[[]] 14:29, Nov 22, 2004 (UTC)

Thank you. Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 14:39, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Oh, and one more thing. IMHO, it would look best for you to respond to overblown accusations against you on a page in your user space, and simply add a link (rebuttal) on the page. But that's just my unsolicited advice. – Quadell ^{(talk) (help)}[[]] 14:48, Nov 22, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing out the merge error on the endorsements page. I apologize on behalf of those who introduced this error.

At 00:04, 22 Nov 2004, user Gzornenplatz changed the page to the last version which had all of the endorsements on one page.

Unfortunately, he was not careful enough to merge all of the most recent versions of the subpages at that moment, so a merge process took place for the next several hours. If you made your change after Gzornenplatz change, it was temporarily lost, although another pass was done to recover any such changes after the merge was completed.

However, if you made a change to your endorsements subpage after the last pass to check on the correctness of the merge was made, it was also lost.

If anyone finds any other discrepancies that were introduced during the merge process, and feels put upon to fix it themselves, I will happily fix it for them, quickly and without complaint.

I see that Quadell has already fixed the lost changes, and I apologize that you spent your valuable time wondering about that mistake.

It may be a lost cause, but I truly believe a central "public square" where interested voters can post their endorsements is worth the effort. If it proves futile because of user issues, (or perhaps even technical issues!) so be it, but I strongly believed in at least trying to make it work.

Thank you. --DV 14:53, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

It's very nice of you to apologise David but it really isn't necessary. These things happen! Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 15:18, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Jimbo says I have the wrong impression of you. Here is a link to a better organized framework for a discussion. If you have some time to navigate to this subpage and read any of this, I would be encouraged to hear from you. --DV 02:38, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Great tits, Teresa! I don't know how long you've had that picture up, but it gave me a good chuckle. Tannin

That's why I leave it up there:-) Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 11:54, 22 Nov 2004 (UTC)

• A TENTH STROKE
• TREATS KEN HOT
• SANK TEETH ROT
• TANKS HERE TOT
• TORE THE TANKS

Sorry, I couldn't resist ;) →Raul654 08:47, Nov 23, 2004 (UTC)

Please vote at Software and features, to approve an exciting new feature that allows users to control whether or not they receive campaign messages. --DV 11:19, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I thought you might get a kick out of this. – Quadell ^{(talk) (help)}[[]] 20:24, Nov 23, 2004 (UTC)

LOL!! Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 20:44, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Would you please comment at Wikipedia:Requests for comment about

Cultural and historical background of Jesus Admin (User:Theresa knott) took sides by protecting page immediately after revert by Biased editor. Rather than protecting a pre-edit war version (the edit war goes back about 100 or so edits, by the way). CheeseDreams 22:23, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)

• Nonsense. No matter what version an Admin protects a page at, someone will scream. Theresa protected a page in order to stop an edit war. Pure and simple. RickK 00:21, Nov 24, 2004 (UTC)
• The page was being discussed but reverted back to an edit war. CheeseDreams has tried hard to support the edit process and consensus in the last few days, but I can't fault the re-locking of the page, and *if* re-locking is right then it is almost arbitrary and not a "fault" item for theresa which version its locked at. Sadly. FT2 03:25, Nov 24, 2004 (UTC)

On a separate but related issue:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Three_revert_rule - #Enforcement

Where pages are protected due to revert wars, sysops may protect pages on the version disliked by those who have engaged in excessive reverts. This is believed by some to be a recent change to the protection policy. The sysop also has the option to protect the current version, thereby maintaining a sense of neutrality.

and Wikipedia:Protection policy#How

Additionally, when protection is due to a revert war, the protecting sysop may choose to protect the version favoured by those more closely complying with the guideline on repeated reverts. See wikipedia talk:revert#The protection option for the discussion on this.

On these grounds I request that you revert the article to a version prior to the current one.

The grounds above show me that I can revert. I already knew that. What you haven't shown me is why i should. Looking through the history shows that the number of edits is huge. There are a number of people reverting each other. I can't work out who is on whose side:-( If it's one person against everyone else, i will revert. If there is an arbitration ruling that has been broken, then I will revert. If there is a rfc against your opponent that shows the wikipedia community thinks he is biased I will revert. If the rfc against me shows that the community at large thinks I was wrong not to revert, then I will revert. Failing that I will not revert, because the moment I did, i would have your opponents claimimg that I was abusing admin powers :-( Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 23:29, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)

The only user who broke the 3RR was John kenney; he reverted 5 times today knowing he was violating the 3RR, which has a written policy suggesting the protector should favor the non-violating party. However, I fully understand your worries about an RfC. This group has seemed rather litigious than compromise oriented. I *regret* the current version, I have *asked* that you change it to one neither party wishes, but I do not think you have done anything unfair or partisan - which is nothing short of amazing. Further, I want to thank you for actually protecting the page, if I have not already done so. - Amgine 23:59, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Amgine I can't do as you request becasue I simply don't know what version to revert it to. Suggest a suitable version to me here. In the meantime I will ask some people I know and trust for thier opinion.Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 00:09, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Okay (wow there have been a lot of edits...) Here's the compromise version by FT2, Tigermoon, CheeseDreams which was over-written [5]. However, this is very likely to be seen as partisan by Slrubenstein, since he was author of the replacement essay. Therefore I suggest [6] which was the version unprotected after the last round of revert war. - Amgine 01:06, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)

After reading what everyone has to say I have decided that I would be unwise to revert. I think that the best thing for you to do, is to ask another admin to unprotect the page, or ask the formal mediator to revert the page, or create a temp page and work on that. Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 22:50, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Theresa, I put in my 2c at the RfC and seem to have incurred CheeseDream's wrath at the ArbCom vote. Such is life. -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 03:22, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)

You did the right thing here, Theresa. There was an edit war in progress, and you put a stop to it. It was extremely unreasonable for anyone to expect you to have waded through a 100 plus edits and figure out what was what. CheeseDreams's assertion that you took sides one way or the other is patent nonsense, and violates assuming good faith. P.S. You're going to be a great ArbCom member! :) P.P.S. Do any of the ranks under my Tote the Ranks strike your fancy? :) func(talk) 17:46, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Thanks eceryone. i'm going to take your advice and do nothing. As for func's offer - I quite like the idea of "Jimbo usurper" but you don't have a rank that high ;-) Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 19:16, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for thinking of me as someone whose opinion you respect. :-) Regrettably, I cannot be of any help in this case, as I am seen as a POV warrior by CheeseDreams. I expect that any advice that I gave you would be seen as biased -- indeed, I have almost given up on all Jesus articles here for a while until the flurry of talk page wars abates a little . I haven't kept up with the article in question anyhow, so I don't even know whose version is currently protected (and given my "given up" status, I hope you don't mind if I avoid checking). My one comment, which I hope will not get either of us in trouble for colluding against those who see me as biased, is that m:The wrong version was written by Angela a long time ago and I always find it a refreshing read when I am accosted for protecting a page. Given that anyone who disagrees with Angela must be wrong, that page (or at least that page as it existed at Angela's last edit) should be the one true way of looking at things. :-) And even if it's not, it's an excellent job by Angela of capturing the very situation you find yourself in. Best wishes as always, Jwrosenzweig 00:24, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I see no reason why you should allow material attacking you on your own talk page. If I were you, I'd revert. [[User:Neutrality|Neutrality (hopefully!)]] 00:53, Nov 24, 2004 (UTC)

You misunderstand me. I have no intention of reverting my talk page. I feel it important that people be allowed to question my decisions on my talk page. What I was asking was - should i revert Cultural and historical background of Jesus to an earler version in order to punish the editwarriors? (Note that this would involve editing a protected page) Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 00:59, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)

My suggestion would be to leave the page as it is unless the different sides can agree on what is the appropriate version to revert to (assuming that you can figure out what sides are involved - don't knock yourself out trying). Since protecting a page is the job of an uninvolved admin, it's hardly fair to expect someone who has no familiarity with the problem to identify what version predates the edit war. If we had the oft-discussed ability to flag stable revisions in the history, things might change, but in the meantime, "The Wrong Version" is the principle that applies. At least in theory, protection is supposed to push the parties towards discussion and working out their differences. --Michael Snow 01:01, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I continue to wrestle with ideas for cutting down that kind of aggravation. I have been putting hundreds of pages of articles in over the last 6 mos. I find it annoying when somebody makes small changes that don't match style or organization, particularly the ones that feel a need to make a plodding point obvious to any adult past 12. But the biggest aggravation is the idiots like Robert who are here for other purposes. So I oscillate between thinking wp isnt "worth the aggro" and thinking we need to provide some degree of protection, like when an article is in good shape with community confirmation that it's something we are proud of, asking for opinions to make sure all sides have been heard, and thereafter blocking the article from anonymous editing or requiring that proposed changes be posted on the talk page for discussion, or filtered through senior editors or something that slows the entropic erosion or POV warrior edits. I would like to see a controlled trial, where we randomly allocate 50 nontrivial articles, half to continued open edits and half to a monitored system for, 4 months, followed by a review of the quality of changes for most. I have an open mind about what system is healthiest for wp, and maybe the trial would show me I am wrong, but I think some of the articles that I have worked hard to shape simply regress toward an entropic low mediocre quality if left untended. Anyway, I think the people who put a lot of work into buffing the better articles would find some degree of erosion resistance welcome. Or maybe I'm trying to do the wrong things here. Vent over. alteripse 02:28, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I'd like to personally thank you for supporting my adminship request, so here it is: Thank you! [[User:MacGyverMagic|Mgm|^(talk)]] 11:10, Nov 24, 2004 (UTC)

Theresa of the Wikipedians, I hearby promote you to the rank of Field Marshal Administrator, with all the privileges and responsibilities it entails. :)

This is your ASCII rank: (****~)

I am confident that, one day, you will indeed rise to the newly created Tote the Ranks rank of Jimbo Usurper. ;-)

func(talk) 19:34, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Why thank you Func :) responsibilites? Dont like the sound of that! Priviledges - that's more like it.What do I get? Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 19:40, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)

We can discuss it during your "training"... muhahaha. ;-) (Turkey day tomorrow... can't wait!) func(talk) 00:16, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I wonder if you'd like to look at Wikipedia:Help_desk#Chemical_Notation and make any comments. I know you are interested in illustrating articles. --Minority Report (entropy rim riot) 22:08, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Hi Theresa, when you blocked Reithy and then unblocked him it had the same effect as just removing the original block, since you took over from Jimbo's when you put your own in. Users can only be blocked by one person at a time. silsor 22:36, Nov 24, 2004 (UTC)

Oh! Cheers for letting me know. Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 22:41, 24 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I think this is verging on an advertisement. (I'm especially noticing the use of "our" and "we" in the last part) What's your opinion? Joyous 16:08, Nov 25, 2004 (UTC) It looks like an advert to me. I suggest you put it on Wikipedia:Votes for deletion and see what everyone else says. Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 19:57, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I sent another friendly note to Cheung asking him again to remember the copy-write policy. Again, it was in Cantonese. Maybe I should try Zulu next, as it doesn't seem to be getting through. PZFUN 17:58, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

As far as I can see he's only uploading fair use logos. If he does start uploading copyvios again, i've told him I will delete them the moment I spot them. So he's just be wasting his time. Theresa Knott (Tart, knees hot) 20:21, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I just added my support for your candidacy on the Arbitration committee. Good luck! PZFUN 18:03, 25 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Maybe I'm misunderstanding. Why is it a CSD? I was confused because both this and Peano curve were listed as CSDs. --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 21:04, Nov 25, 2004 (UTC)

Hmm, you're right. It's also the exact same image as Image:Peano curve.png. Is Hilbert Curve the correct name for it? I have no idea what these are even. Maybe that's why it should go to IFD? People can go there and debate the proper name for it. In either case, do image redirects work? --DropDeadGorgias (talk) 14:44, Nov 26, 2004 (UTC)

Hey Theresa: Whats up? First of all Im so glad that everything is ok between us. That took a lot of weight off my back and Im happy that I didnt offend you.

I was told that youre the store manager for Wikipedia or the designer or that you hold a position as far as wikipedia sales.

I wanted to know what you think of these two ideas I have for wikipedia to promote and if maybe we can get them out with your help:

Numero uno: A Wikipedia shirt that says Im a Wikipedian, are you? on the front with the Wikipedia logo on the back. Black with White lettering for men, and White with Black lettering for women.

Numero dos: This will sound off the wall if not interesting at least, I know but......Wikipedia desktop model airplanes. This one should be easy, just go to flightminiatures.com They will discuss the price with the Wikipedia store and if the price is right, well then....as a collector of those plane models myself, I came to think that aviation enthusiasts who visit that website might actually buy the plane, thus our site earning maybe a commission, and aviation experts and collectors will also become interested to find out what Wikipedia is just by seeing a plane model with our logo in that website.

You let me know what you think and whats up:)

Sincerely yours, your friend, "Antonio Boy Antonio George Martin"