User talk:Lar/Archive 12#Note on my talkpage

Hi there. Thanks for handling the Matthvm affair, and sorry about the poorly-formatted sockpuppet evidence: I've been offline for the last couple of days and only got your messages now. I had also completely missed the link to WP:SSP from WP:SOCK; I hadn't even read WP:SPP before you provided the link. --Saforrest 12:42, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

:No worries. I'm not sure everyone does all that stuff anyway in every case so... no biggie. Please let me know if any more socks turn up, I won't necessarily be actively watching... (I'd judge it fairly likely more will in fact turn up...) ++Lar: t/c 13:50, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi Lar-- I just got your msg about crash space-- you'd put it on my user page rather than my user talk page, so I didn't see it until now. It turns out three people are continuing to stay with me, plus I'm moving so the apartment is in complete disarray. That said, if you're really stuck, let me know. Jeremy Tobacman 18:07, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

refactor to user Arturo 7's talk ++Lar: t/c 20:44, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

Hey Lar, quick off the mark there, thanks for your first few - most of them were on my original shortlist, but fell by the wayside as I had to prune ruthlessly :-(   You need to fix a few disambig links as well ... cheers. --Cactus.man ✍ 11:21, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

:I will fix later, am at WikiMania... have lots more to add. I dunno if I sholud just say "anything by Kubrick, anything by Hitchcock, anything Grant or Bogie in them" and then do the ones that don't fit that pattern... thanks for standing that up, great idea. and ya, someone needs to do books. maybe I will if no one beats me to it. LOL :)

::Later, I did create the book one... ++Lar: t/c 14:07, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

From what I've seen you examine the facts diligently and come to logically sound conclusions. I tip my hat to that. - User:Samsara (talk • contribs) 12:15, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

:Why thank you! I try. I've been in various online communities for a very long time, since the days of dialup BBS's... I'm trying very hard to do the good things that worked, and to not repeat the mistakes I made, in other communities. I appreciate your feedback... but pride is a thing to watch for. Quoting from my user page (wikipedia section)...

:* When I get too proud of my adminship, I need to remember that not everyone looks favorably on my actions here, or in my previous community activities: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:NSLE&diff=prev&oldid=52247117 1] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Dragon%27s_Blood&diff=prev&oldid=52250765 2]... (don't discount that user just because they chose to speak anonymously)

:++Lar: t/c 13:09, 6 August 2006 (UTC)

I got involved in Wiki as an outsider. I did Google searches and found Wiki coming up as a source quite frequently. I found I could edit articles and I signed up when I found that discussion was better conducted under a username. In the end, however, I am just a guy who likes to do Google searches and find out stuff on Wiki.

I always read the Main Page, as the featured article is usually both informative and a good guide on how Wiki likes its articles to appear. I had never before felt the urge to comment on an article (although I have done one or two typo edits in the past), but was quite surprised at the lack of clarity in the lead paragraph. Not as surprised as the response I got, though, for making the comment. I understand that people can be quite protective of their project, but dismissing any criticism as unconstructive is foolish. Of course the past cannot be changed, but we both know the maxim about those who are unable to learn from the past. The views of persons who do not participate in the creation or appraisal of a piece are no less valid than those who have, and may have the benefit of distance from the subject.

Civility, or the lack of, is the consequence of reasoned debate. Dismissing comment as "Johnny Come Latelies" whingeing is not reasonable. No aspect of criticism has been discussed, only the purported shortcomings of the manner. In my view the defenders of the article have not responded to comments made in good faith in a like manner; and the exasperation of some have lead to some uncivil language. In warning some editors about the language being used it does seem that the lack of reasonable responses is not being addressed. I know you, thus I know that this is not the case but the impression is of a little one-sidedness.LessHeard vanU 19:48, 6 August 2006 (UTC) er, you can edit this down/away once you have read it, if you like. Mark.

:Well, first of all, I'm glad you're involved now! You've made some good contributions to articles about The Beatles and so forth... as for this, it's a bit of a tangled web here I guess. I think some of the ubuntu writers may be a bit unnecessarily defensive, yes, but this large number of folk turning up and "taking potshots" is not necessarily easy to receive well, if you see what I mean. Not sure what further to suggest. ++Lar: t/c 05:50, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

It is a great flattery, dear Lar, and I will drop by every spin off to add my own selections asap, count on it! :) Btw, if any of you need my help to enhance the format of the new pages, just make sure to call me, and I'll take care of the rest. I hope you had a great time at WM, we really missed you over here! :) Big hugs, Phaedriel ♥ The Wiki Soundtrack!♪ - 01:32, 7 August 2006 (UTC) PS.

Dear Lar, AWB is really messed up for me now - I'll d/l the latest version, but it may take me along while to get it working, and unf, there's no telling how long that can be :( I'll let you know later, hugs! Phaedriel ♥ The Wiki Soundtrack!♪ - 05:30, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

:you may need to upgrade your .net framework? I'm around for a while LMK if I can help. ++Lar: t/c 05:35, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

:My thoughts too: you need .NET framework version 2.0. I'm also available if you need help. --kingboyk 12:00, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

I have responded to your message on my talk page. Suicup 08:11, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

: again. Suicup 12:08, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm wondering if that ought to go to FARC, because there seems to be several editors with reasonable criticisms of the article. It seems alright to me although hardly brilliant prose or our best work. What do you think Lar? --kingboyk 12:21, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

:Yes. WP:FARC is the right place to take criticisms of the article as an FA and work to get it removed if necessary. Suggested improvements to the article are fine on the article talk itself. My focus here is more on the lack of civility in the discussion than the merits of the article itself though. Several editors need warnings, although so far I've only warned one, (and have been engaged in an apparent running battle over the fact that I warned) I have more to do. ++Lar: t/c 12:31, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Gosh - I thought you would come out of the closet as a federal judge and offer me a judicial clerkship based on my exemplary behavior! Got my heart racing!...

I am glad to see you like the Armenian Radio jokes [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Radio_Yerevan&diff=prev&oldid=61939771]. We Russians are very proud of them. Here's one:

• Question to the Armenian Radio:
• Can a Zaporozhets (God-awful Soviet car) reach the speed of 100 km/hr?
• Answer of the Armenian Radio after several hours of thinking:
• Yes, provided it's released at the top of Mount Ararat.

My favorite! :) - CrazyRussian talk/email 17:53, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

:LMK if you want to take me up on my offer. That joke remindes me of another one... as you know Skoda is a brand of Czech car, now owned by Volkswagen.

::Pre Velvet Revolution a guy walks into the auto parts store and says "I'd like to get a mirror for my Skoda"

::the counterman thinks for a while, and replies "well, I guess that's a fair trade, so OK. But park it round back, I don't want anyone to know I was such a pushover trader..."

:++Lar: t/c 18:03, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

::I apologise for jumping into someone elses chat (and I was checking for responses to my comment) but I love "Eastern Bloc Car" jokes; mine is "Why were Trabants fitted with heated rear windows? So your hands didn't get cold pushing them...". Okay, I'll unwatch this page and hang my head in shame! (grin) LessHeard vanU 21:59, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

:::My mom used to have a Trabant... she didn't think much of it. No need to unwatch. ++Lar: t/c 16:31, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Talk:LinkedWords - brenneman [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&user=Aaron+Brenneman^{L}] 18:36, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

:Thanks for that. I'm stil a bit ill, and was on my last legs... as evidenced by the cryptic message. - brenneman [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&user=Aaron+Brenneman^{L}] 23:38, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

::Sorted, I think. No worries mate... now go look at Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents#Crzrussian and User_talk:Crzrussian#Recall_.28see_also_Wikipedia:Administrators.27_noticeboard.2FIncidents.23Crzrussian.29 where I am clerking our first test of :Category:Administrators open to recall ++Lar: t/c 23:43, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

::* At casual observation, this seems to be going smoothly... but can we not call it "clerking" please? I despise the assigment of titles (and god forbid powers!) to operations that are basically wiki-gnoming. A note as to why the second disavowed editor didn't count would not go astray. It seems to me that this exactly how it should be working, and dolars to donuts CZR will be more careful in the future regardless.

::* I'll take a punt and presume your silence on the other issue I asked you to look at as meaning you reckon I was over the line. ^_^ I only just now noticed that the current DRv requires a majority endorsement so with the exact 50/50 balance currently still get overturned. C'est la vie.
brenneman [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&user=Aaron+Brenneman^{L}] 03:14, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

:::What would you like it called instead of clerking? Clerking seems perfectly apropos. Did you see my mail about holding people to their campaign statements? As for DRV I think I forgot. I'll go try to dig up what particular one we are talking of and give it a boo. ++Lar: t/c 03:28, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I noticed your post on the poll talk page. Do you want me to sign you up? --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 00:19, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

:as an admin willing to try to help suss out what the consensus is? Sure if there aren't enough... ++Lar: t/c 00:24, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Who are these two clowns coming out of the woodwork!?!? Please help. - CrazyRussian talk/email 22:30, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the happy edit day wish. Yes, exactly 2 months to the day. 15px

. --Dakota 04:43, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Lar, I'd like to speak with you regarding setting a time limit for this thing. It has now been 48 hours since this story broke. The ANI thread is probably getting archived w/in the next 24. I don't know how long is good, but I am obviously not fit to make the determination. At the same time, I don't want it hanging over my head longer than necessary. Do you think it's appropriate for you to make this decision? - CrazyRussian talk/email 05:17, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

:I think it's your call, not mine, appropriatnesswise... But if you are asking me, I'd go with 5 days. more than that is too long but 48 hours is too short. That is my opinion but it's your decision. If you make me make a call, that would be it. ++Lar: t/c 05:23, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

I added a comment endorsing Dmcdevit request; this is better than a RFAr. [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ACrzrussian&diff=68557081&oldid=68556954] FloNight ^talk 06:28, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Have a good and safe trip Lar. You've spent a lot of time fixing up administrative debates lately. As have I...looks like some people think I am some kind of arbitrator....Blnguyen | rant-line 07:29, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Hey Lar. No rush on this, given your break. I would like to propose adding question 4 to the usual RFA lineup, as follows: "If promoted, do you plan to join :Category:Administrators open to recall and why? If yes, what course of action will you take if recalled?" I would like to get your input first on this idea. If you think this is good or possibly good, I will take it to AN for a discussion. Enjoy your trip. - CrazyRussian talk/email 04:44, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

:Make it a part of the permanent question set? Interesting idea. My take was that you were not very keen on the idea after how it came out for you. Do you think this is a good idea or not? ++Lar: t/c 20:48, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

::I would like to see the Recall process standardized after what happened to me. The truth is I completely brought this upon myself by suggesting it - nobody had thought about recalling me until I volunteered. Do I want this to be RfA Q4? I don't know yet. But I definitely want a discussion. I am really looking for your opinion on the following question: is this going to be a productive discussion or is the notion so utterly ridiculous and implausible that I shouldn't even bother starting one. Thanks. - CrazyRussian talk/email 21:03, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

:::I am a strong supporter of the idea of recall. I was one of the first people to add myself to the category. I think it is a good one. I think it will work. I don't want to see it be too rigid, I think people should have options and flexibility because it is optional. that said I think it may be premature to go to ANI or to RFA talk without a firm proposal. So I'd ratehr see it hashed out on the category talk page first. But I would love to see the question added to all RfAs going forward, yes. ++Lar: t/c 21:08, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

::::OK, I will propose this on Cat talk:AOtR. Thanks. - CrazyRussian talk/email 21:12, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Note [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Pschemp#User:KarlV here] from MangoJuice. He wants to unblock. The "apology" is on Karl's talk page. When he apologizes for inciting people to label me and Samsara neo-nazis I might consider a shorter block, but unblocking right now is unacceptable. pschemp | talk 16:27, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

On the contrary, I think continuing his indef block is now punitive as he has said he will not repeat the action he was blocked for. Could you please review the block with this in mind? Thanks --Guinnog 18:22, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

The drop that caused Comanche cph to be reported this time was him calling a fellow editor a "fjeldape" which means mountain ape in the edit summary to [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Denmark-Norway&diff=prev&oldid=68638801 this diff]. If you look at the very top of this entry you will see a more in depth explanation as to why this is a very bad thing to do.Inge 21:31, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

:Thanks. I've rewarned (after he removed a warning from me, an admin) and included that diff. ++Lar: t/c 21:42, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

::Ok, thank you for caring :) I posted the same answer as above on the Incidents notice board as well, just to let you know. Inge 21:47, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

refactored... see below. ++Lar: t/c 03:22, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

I've added you to the nominees. --Rschen7754 (talk - contribs) 03:12, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Image:WikiThanks.png Thank you for the note you dropped on my talkpage. Because of that note, I personally thought that it was better to leave Wikipedia alone for a few days...and to think of an adequate way to bring an end to this mess. However, now that I'm back I have come to realize that I was taking this debate with Tobias way too personal, and that partly because of my outbursts it had become a monstrous debate with many involved persons. Personally, I believe that it's currently on the edge of being passed on to the arbitration committee...which is certainly not something which any of us would consider a fitting solution to the problem (at best, a 'last resort' perhaps). Totally in the spirit of Wikilove I have apoligized to Tobias for my actions and I'm hoping he'll do the same. This whole debate about an eight-word-article has gone way over the top.—♦♦ SʘʘTHING^(Я) 10:18, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

You have messages.--Dakota 21:32, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

Refactoring this again, here in the next section is the complete discussion moved from her page and mine, above, to keep it threaded.

Regarding this reversion: [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3AKarlV&diff=68902336&oldid=68889314] ... I gave my reason why I feel it is important that there be a history here of the requests, and you reverted me without any discussion or rebuttal of the reason. Please do not do that going forward, but rather discuss reversion, I would appreciate it. If you have a suggestion as to how to make it clear that there is a history, which I feel is quite important in this particular case, without restoring the template itself I'm very open to that. Would a mention of a diff showing the request be acceptable to you? You can reply here, I prefer conversations to remain threaded and get confused when people reply to me on different pages. ++Lar: t/c 22:14, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

:(refactored, per my request, I prefer threaded, and I do watch pages and reply... ++Lar) Please don't revert you without discussion? And what do you think you did to me, or does it have a different name when you do it? You are going too far with this person, and it's starting to look personal. The only reason he isn't unblocked already is that I have a personal policy of not undoing other admins' blocks where it boils down to personal judgment, unless the circumstances are extreme. As for the tag, it says to remove it after two days, so by all means, leave an edit summary saying that he has already requested an unblock, but remove the first tag. And please note that this editor will be unblocked eventually; you can't block someone indefinitely for what he did. It's an overreaction. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 22:21, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

::I did not revert you without discussion, I restored something you removed and explained why, as part of the restoration, it wasn't a pure revert by any means. As for why he's not unblocked already, I think the reason clearly is that there's consensus that unblocking is not the right thing to do and that he should remain indef. blocked. Should consensus change, that's fine, and I'll happily support consensus, as I always do, but I don't see it yet. ++Lar: t/c 22:26, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

:::There was no consensus for him to remain indefblocked. The consensus was one month, and he'll be unblocked then at the latest. And you reverted me without discussion. It doesn't matter why you did it. If you don't want others to do it to you, don't do it to them. Please note that your behavior toward this editor is starting to look personal. I strongly advise you to hand this over to a completely disinterested administrator. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 22:43, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

::::I would really appreciate having the entire discussion between you and I in one place or the other, my talk, or yours. I did the work of getting it refactored onto your page to keep it together and you reverted that off your page without discussion and replied here. This style just does not work for me, I'm sorry. So my reply will be here, and when I have some time I'll reconstruct the discussion threaded properly, yet again, but on my page rather than yours, and I'll thank you not to revert it again. To the substantive points: I deny that I initially reverted you without discussion, (I after all said "I am restoring this because..." which is discussion) now or ever, while the history on Karl's page, and on your page itself show quite clearly that you on the other hand have done so several times. Further, I deny that there is no consensus for an indef block of this editor and I deny that I am taking this more personally than you are. I've never met the guy, and never edited the article in question, but I see trouble in this guy and see no reason to beleive that WP would be better served with him able to edit than it is now, with him unable to cause further trouble. I think you will have a hard time showing that consensus was what you say it was, the conclusion the last time this was dredged up was pretty clear to me and just about everyone else. I'll hand this off to a completely disinterested administrator and disengage if you will as well, because I suspect your interest in this is way too strong at this point. ++Lar: t/c 06:40, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

::::: Since I have oddly missed out on an apparent saga and would not know Karl from a bar of soap, is there any reason I can't be a "disinterested administrator?" (If it involves webcomics, simpsons, or internet "memes" then I'd probably be accused of bias.)
brenneman [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&user=Aaron+Brenneman^{L}] 06:46, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

I restored the warnings, hope you are happy now.

As a genaral tought, it seems quite unfair, at least from my POV, that you keep pushing me around telling me to read this and that, and yet failing to even cite a single sentence. If you want to be heard, you should show you have some sort of interest in the matter, not putting the burden of finding "proofs" of your statements on others.

--Kwame Nkrumah 15:12, 12 August 2006 (UTC)

:I'm not the one misbehaving here, you are. Further, it's your duty to understand our traditions, policies and practices by doing your homework, not mine to spoon feed you. If you again do something blockable, and I'm the blocking admin, I'll cite what you're in violation of at that time, don't worry. Meanwhile, do your homework, and drop the "I have issues with everyone" schtick... it doesn't fly well. ++Lar: t/c 00:37, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

::"I'm not the one misbehaving here, you are": you still need to prove this statement.

::"it's your duty to understand our traditions, policies and practices by doing your homework": I am well aware of our traditions, policies and practice, since I have been WP contributor since 2002.

::"not mine to spoon feed you": right, apart the fact that if you block me for something, or menace me to block me, you must come up with some sort rule I broke, apart your personal opinion

::"I'll cite what you're in violation of at that time": will this be the rule I broke or some sort of general and all-encompassing "disruption, trolling and personal attacks"?

::"I have issues with everyone": if you refer to the user page, there is nothing about having that.

::--Kwame Nkrumah 02:33, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

You've been a contributor since 2002??? Under what ID? [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&offset=20060811225448&limit=500&target=Kwame_Nkrumah] shows 30 July of this year as your earliest. So you're saying this id of yours is a restart or a sock? OK, whatever. You've been warned. We're done. ++Lar: t/c 02:50, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

...that you last name derives from the Polish word "pieniądze", meaning "money"? Pecher ^Talk 21:01, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

:Indeed I did! I've also heard it has the meaning "small coins" or "small change"... Thanks for sharing! :) ++Lar: t/c 00:06, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Hi Lar. I've introduced some major changes to our template, and I think the most esoteric template award will shortly be ours muahahaha! :) It could do with some reformatting though, if you're game. I was thinking perhaps we could lose the zebra crossing picture and have {{portalpar|The Beatles}}. --kingboyk 09:37, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

:I'll give it a boo. Personally I like the zebra, and would keep it and lose the portal. but the more important stuff is how you folded in bio. wonder if the music stuff should be folded in too? ++Lar: t/c 15:05, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

::Albums and songs have been folded in. I'm not sure there's any other Projects who share scope with us which are worth including (we have a few Film articles but not many; I don't know of any other relevant music Projects). I still have a couple of things to tweak, most notably bios needing infoboxes/attention (see template talk). --kingboyk 15:32, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

|class="MainPageBG" style="width: 45%; border:1px solid #cedff2; background-color:#f5faff; vertical-align:top"|

|}

|}

Sure thing! As the CfD seems to have gotten a bit out of control, I'd just as soon leave well enough alone in terms to adding or removing content from the category. That being said, I thought that you had some good explanations and it would certainly help those who choose not to place themselves in that category understand what you're (the admins in the category) there for. As I mentioned on the CfD, I believe the category could prove to be a great resource if approached in a different manner, as the principle seems to be valuable and well-meaning. hoopydink^{Conas tá tú?} 23:45, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

:I've suggested it on the talk page: WT:ROUGE ++Lar: t/c 19:12, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! I thought it was pretty funny too. ++Lar: t/c 18:42, 15 August 2006 (UTC)