User talk:Ingoolemo/Archive 02
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This page is an archive of the discussions taken place on my talk page between 2005 January and 2005 June. This Page is no longer live.
Note: for those of you not familiar with this, I include context for all of the comments made on this page by adding a space before them. In the standard skin, they will show up in a different font and appear in a light blue box. →Iñgōlemo← talk
[edit] Archive
| Archive | Start | End |
|---|---|---|
| Archive 1 | 2004-05-23 | 2004-12-31 |
| Archive 2 | 2005-01-01 | 2005-06-23 |
| Archive 3 | 2005-06-23 | 2005-09-05 |
| Archive 4 | 2005-09-05 | 2005-12-01 |
| Archive 5 | 2005-12-01 | 2005-02-10 |
| Archive 6 | 2006-02-10 | 2006-04-14 |
| Archive 7 | 2006-04-14 | 2006-07-09 |
| Archive 8 | 2006-07-09 | 2006-11-15 |
| Archive 9 | 2006-11-15 | 2007-01-10 |
| Archive 10 | 2007-01-10 | 2008-03-30 |
| Current | Current discussion | |
[edit] Proposal to expand CSD
Hi, I noticed you voted against proposal XI with the reason "3 days are too short to improve the article". Maybe too short to improve, but the proposal doesn't work like VfD, where the article has to improve to surive. If you just believe the article has potential or isnt blatant vanity, it would be enough to remove a template from the page to stop the deletion. The page will than propably go to VfD.
Btw prop. III states such articles can be deleted immediately. If no time is enough, why 3 days are too short? --Wikimol 09:55, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Category:Medicine
Please do not put EVERY medical article in Category:Medicine. Category:Diseases is already a subcategory. JFW | T@lk 08:02, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Adminship
I came across your name one day when checking your watchlist, and I was impressed, upon looking over your edit history and talk pages, at the degree of community involvement you have shown and people you have impressed during your brief tenure here. If you're interested, when you get over 1000 edits, I'd gladly nominate you to adminship. Cheers, →Iñgōlemo← (talk) 05:22, 2005 Jan 31 (UTC)
I'd like to be nominated when I get 1000 edits. Thank you for offering to do so. Bart133 (t) 03:10, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- What exactly do you mean by "over 1000 edits"? Bart133 (t) 03:02, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Since I now have over 1100 edits, feel free to nominate me whenever you get around to it (assuming you want to). Bart133 (t) 20:34, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
[edit] B-36
A while ago, I brought up that my computer won't finish loading Image:Convair B-36.jpg (see talk:Convair B-36). Here's a thought: if you can give me the source for that image and let me re-upload it (or maybe if you re-upload it yourself), that might fix the problem. But it doesn't matter, because I still haven't done anything to my software. I'll try that first, then let you know if it doesn't work so we can keep troubleshooting. Until then, I'd just like to know what you think of my idea. →Iñgōlemo← talk donate 07:43, 2005 Feb 13 (UTC)
I resaved the image in a different program; it makes it much smaller to boot. Try that one! —Morven 17:00, Feb 13, 2005 (UTC)
It now works. Thanks man. By the way, it's an awesome image. I'm glad you found it. →Iñgōlemo← talk donate 02:33, 2005 Feb 14 (UTC)
March 11 05 - Just discovered wikis recently. I'm hooked. As a B-36 fanatic, I'm grateful to see such a comprehensive article. I made a handful of edits to the B-36 page, added some details, corrected a minor error, and added a link to Goleta Air Museum, which has a good collection of info especially on FICON and TOM-TOM. Need to link to the Mk 17 H-bomb article if it exists. If not, hey - it's Wikipedia, right? :-)
I believe it was you who added the statistic on '900 hours' of maintenance needed for each hour aloft. Where exactly did you get that statistic? It means that for each transcontinental flight it needed 5 years of 24/7 maintenance to fly again! →Iñgōlemo← talk 19:11, 2005 Mar 25 (UTC)
March 28 05 - re 900 hours of maintenance per flight hour - IIRC that number came either from Dennis Jenkins' book "Magnesium Overcast" or from the [| B-36/Cold War vet's forum at Delphi ]. [| Here's a specific thread on maintenance ]. It doesn't specifically reference "900 hours" but you can see that it took a *lot* of work to keep the beast ready to fly. If you consider all the back-office and shop personnel involved, the number seems reasonable - for a 24-hour flight 900 staff-days. One post on the thread says, "I have heard that there were 95 maintenance hours for every hour of flight.I certainly have no quarrel with that figure." It may be that 90 became 900 via the game of 'telephone'.
I'll correct the B-36 entry and add a link to that thread in References.
[edit] Minor barnstar
I've given you a minor barnstar for your aircraft categorization work and your countless template fixes. Anar kaluva tielyanna! Jordi·✆ 10:21, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Inaugural WikiWings
Hi Ingoolemo. I'd like to award you the inaugural WikiWings award for your work on the C-108 Flying Fortress article in January. The effort you put in is especially appreciated for such an obscure and unglamorous aircraft. Many thanks and please keep up the good work. --Rlandmann 23:50, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Maybe my awarding you the wikiwings broke the conventions you want it to follow, but in my opinion I say take it anyway. As I said above, your are definitely a leader of WikiProject Aircraft. Whenever there is any discussion over any sort of topic, you are there. I'd give you a barnstar, but the WikiWings somehow fits better. →Iñgōlemo← talk 23:51, 2005 Feb 24 (UTC)
- Thanks for your kind words - and sorry for not replying earlier. Most of my wikitime of late is already spoken for in tidying up the avalanche of aircraft stubs we had in February. You've already correctly surmised why I won't display a WikiWings on my own page, but the thought is sincerely appreciated. Stay tuned for February's winner! --Rlandmann 03:11, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Return of the Untagged Image project
You were kind enough to contribute to the Wikipedia:Untagged images project; I beg to draw your attention to part 2 of the project - there are about 12,000 more images in need of tagging. Any assistance you could provide would be most welcome. thanks --Tagishsimon (talk)
[edit] Bomber chart
Are you willing to release this image into the public domain? I'm willing to, but I naturally need your permission, too. →Iñgōlemo← talk 07:12, 2005 Mar 2 (UTC)
I have some misgivings about releasing the chart to the public domain, but I wouldn't have any problem agreeing to the "Do whatever you want" terms of {{CopyrightedFreeUse}}. What are your thoughts on this? - RedWordSmith 18:56, Mar 5, 2005 (UTC)
Whatever you're willing to do, I'm willing to do. So I have no problem whatsoever with
copyrighted free use. I'll add the copyright tag to the image, unless you tell me otherwise.
→Iñgōlemo← talk 04:26, 2005 Mar 6 (UTC)
[edit] Colditz Glider
Hi, i've been working on the Colditz Castle article and there happens to be a subsection on the Colditz "Cock" Glider. As I know dick all about aviation beyond the B-26 Marauder, would you be so kind as to go over it and explain the aviation terms in laymans language for me? ALKIVAR™
01:25, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
[edit] welcome
Thanks for the welcome! Please don't create empty pages because of a dislike for redlinks though, redlinks exist for a reason, turning them blue without there actually being any content is misleading. --Weyes 13:51, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
[edit] User page redlink redirects
See User:Alphax/user-talk for a notice I put on people's talk pages. Alphax τεχ 05:13, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- Thanks, good idea. It would be nice if it was a feature, though! →Iñgōlemo← talk 05:44, 2005 Mar 28 (UTC)
PS. You can reply to this by clicking on the "edit" link - It's a sychronised thread :) However, you'll probably need to take advantage of the {{Purge|(link text)}} template to see the changes. Alphax τεχ 08:39, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks, Iñgōlemo
For supporting my RfA! I am reminded by one brief past interaction which already then revealed to me your basic decency. All the best, El_C 00:40, 2 May 2005 (UTC)
[edit] USAF seal
Hello Ingoolemo, I am not quite convinced that the commons:Image:USAF seal.png really is in PD because of the USAF's policy (http://www.af.mil/art/artfaq.asp section Air Force Seal and Permission to use art). I already would have used this image earlier if this restriction wasn't there. Or is it a misunderstanding? -- de:Benutzer:Arcturus 16:40 (UTC), 2005-05-03
- Would you put the two commons-images on commons:Deletion_requests ? If not, I will do so within the next few days. I will not touch the en-image, it is not my district. Regards -- de:Benutzer:Arcturus 15:34, 4 May 2005 (UTC)
[edit] The Hawai'ian word for slow
Can you tell me the Hawai'ian word for 'slow', the opposite of wiki, meaning 'fast'? →Iñgōlemo← talk 02:24, 2005 May 3 (UTC)
- Lohi, apparently. [1] --Tagishsimon (talk)
-
- Okay, the new word for a conventional encyclopaedia is: lohipaedia. To say that they are the opposite of Wikipedia, or that they are slow, is of course incorrect. However, I thought it might be a good word. →Iñgōlemo← talk 02:04, 2005 May 4 (UTC)
[edit] Re: Userpage
{{User:Alphax/user-talk}} Actually, as of now, I currently prefer to not have a user page because I agree with some of the same reasons Uncle G does not have a user page (See User:Uncle G/On having a user page if you are unfamiliar with it). And if you notice on my current signature (10qwerty), it actually links directly to my talk page now instead of my user page. Thanks anyway. 10qwerty 00:58, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Patrick Flynn VfD
Greetings! I'm wondering if you'd take a look at the detective work and the disambiguation that I did on the Patrick Flynn page, and perhaps reconsider your vote for deletion. Best wishes, Jacobw 12:40, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks :-)
I have removed the link to your nomination subpage from the RFA. I felt that your wishes were made clear when you withdrew your candidacy, and when you requested no further votes be made. In a month or so, I would be honoured to renominate you (but I'm sure there will be many people jockeying for that privilege). Cheers, and may the force be with you. :) →Iñgōlemo← talk 05:15, 2005 May 24 (UTC)
Not sure, but do you have to add it to failed nominations? - Ta bu shi da yu 05:21, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
I'm fairly certain that I do. Anyway, if it was required but I didn't add it, it'd be a
lot harder to rectify, because someone would have to notise that it hadn't been added.
→Iñgōlemo← talk 05:35, 2005 May 24 (UTC)
[edit] Missiles
Hi again Ingoolemo and thanks for your work in smoothing out the rough edges in the later B- series designations. A couple of suggestions:
- Please don't create redirects to non-existent articles. Current policy is that these should be speedied.
- Note that there's a suggested standard for missile specs on Wikipedia:WikiProject Launch vehicles that makes a lot more sense for most missiles than the standard aircraft specs do.
Cheers --Rlandmann 12:55, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Mongol invasion of Europe
Can I just point out again that I did not report Mongol military tactics as a copyvio. All I did was observed it was on the list at WP:CP, but did not have a copyvio notice on the page, and added one as per normal procedure. I also noted that Mongol tactics and organization was identical to help whoever was dealing with it. I have never had or expressed an opinion on the copyright status of the article. Thanks. Algebraist 22:07, 24 May 2005 (UTC)
Sorry for my misperception. It doesn't matter that much, because John's article should probably be merged back into Mongol invasion of Europe, anyway. →Iñgōlemo← talk 23:38, 2005 May 24 (UTC)
- no problem Algebraist 17:41, 26 May 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Thank you
Thanks for the star, and more especially, thanks for helping out with the work of slowly updating old pages to the new layout. It's very much appreciated. Rlandmann 03:19, 29 May 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Copyvios etc
In general, it's only articles where the first version of the article is a copyvio that are put through WP:CP. The issue of copyvio material that is preserved in articles' talk pages is a vexed one for Wikipedia and still hasn't been resolved. The Tu-124 article should have been listed as a copyvio and your amended version saved to a temp page; but I don't think what you did presents any particular problem. The other two were fine to just reword.
Despite what some would have you believe, thrust-to-weight is indeed unitless by convention. --Rlandmann 02:01, 30 May 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Adminship
Hi, I was browsing through RfA today, and I realized you weren't an admin from one of your comments. I didn't realize you weren't already an admin, and I thought you should be one, so I've nominated you — I hope that's ok. As I'm sure you know, you'll need to head over to RfA and accept (or decline) your nomination and answer some questions. Anyways, Good Luck! -Lommer | talk 03:20, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
- Well, I'm jumping the gun a little bit as your RfA still has four hours to go, but I wanted to be the first to congratulate you. I think having 18 supports and not a single oppose shows how overdue this adminship conferral was. Again - congrats! -Lommer | talk 23:16, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Re: removal
(Due to an edit conflict, Melissa accidentally removed {{POV}} and {{merge}} from Christian Love,
and I reprimanded her for it.)
It was accidental as you were editing at as I was writing...Melissa
[edit] Oops
Denjo is not adding nonsense, s/he is adding BIONICLE fancruft. There is a very important difference: nonsense is in bad faith, Denjo's contributions are not. I hate fancruft, and I'm sure you do to, but it isn't nonsense. I'm working on cleaning up after Denjo now, so don't worry about it to much. Cheers, →Iñgōlemo← talk 00:08, 2005 Jun 2 (UTC)
Sorry about the thing with Denjo's BIONICLE fancruft. Okay, I'll leave him/her to you. You 00:13, Jun 2, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Image:Spingosine.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Spingosine.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. Please look there to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in its not being deleted. Thank you. —MetsBot 19:38, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Talk:Islamist terrorism
It seems that I'm likely to become involved in many disputes similar to the one at Islamist terrorism. I'd like some input regarding my conduct there: are my comments reasonably calm? did I revert anything I shouldn't have? did I correctly cite policy? I'd just like some input, so I know what areas I can do better on. Thanks, →Ingoolemo← talk 21:06, 2005 Jun 5 (UTC)
Hello! I'd have said that you kept your cool admirably, and didn't put a foot wrong. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 21:37, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Congratulations!
Congratulations! It's my pleasure to let you know that, consensus being reached, you are now an administrator. You should read the relevant policies and other pages linked to from the administrators' reading list before carrying out tasks like deletion, protection, banning users, and editing protected pages such as the Main Page. Most of what you do is easily reversible by other sysops, apart from page history merges and image deletion, so please be especially careful with those. You might find the new administrators' how-to guide helpful. Cheers! -- Cecropia | explains it all ® 03:21, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Thanks
I'm glad you're on vandalism patrol. I appreciate the reversion of my user page. --Xcali 05:06, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Transwiki
Hey, thanks for transwiki-ing conspiracy nut. Just to let you know, we have a template, {{Moved to Wiktionary}} for the talk pages after transwiki. Also, did you list the transwiki at the log over at wikt:Wiktionary:Transwiki log? Both logs need to be updated, and actually the Wikt one is more important, because otherwise the Wiktionarians will never know it exists, and the article will be forgotten/lost. Thanks. --Dmcdevit 06:42, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- And actually, now that I notice it, why did you move its talk page to the transwiki namespace on WP? --Dmcdevit 07:08, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Oh, sorry, that doesn't show up in the edit history, so I assumed. Nevertheless, a strange thing to do... --Dmcdevit 07:13, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Google as an indicator of notability
Hey, Ingoolemo. Sometimes it's important to resort to other sources to establish notability. For example, one of the articles featured on my user page (which needs serious expansion), the Nkomati Accord, an important agreement between the governments of Mozambique and the Republic of South Africa, one which significantly impacted the lives of millions of people, also (like COOL) gets less than 1000 google hits. El_C 18:56, 7 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Editing Practice
Ingoolemo, I have not criticized several of your positions and edits and have even modified my own position to accomodate you. But, as you know, I greatly object to reactionary reverts with no or limited rationale provided. Please go back to the 9/11 Conspiracy article and discuss on a talk page. And never use Yuber as a rational -- you are on the pages and know that he is a vandal. Thank you. --Noitall 00:22, Jun 8, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Comment on my page
Mel Etitis, Yuber, and the rest of his sockpuppets have repeatedly vandalized my user page as well as slandering me. I have refuted the charges already both here and on the Wikien-l mailing list, and their response is to ignore what I have said and claim that I am a sockpuppet anyways.
This is vandalism and abuse of admin power on Mel Etitis' part, nothing more or less.
The inclusion of me in the RFAr is likewise in bad faith, prompted only by Yuber and his friends who are trying to push POV in articles and seek to exploit the process in order to gain a bad-faith advantage. I have chosen not to dignify it with a reply after seeing the lengths to which they are lying.Enviroknot 02:06, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] My RFA:Thanks
Hi Ingoolemo! Thanks for supporting my adminship nomination! Sjakkalle (Check!) 13:22, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] In correct Decision
It seems to be that consensus needs to be reached for VfD decisions and 50% is not consensus with regards to Pathogenic_theory_of_homosexuality its delete page here:
- "(what constitutes a rough consensus is not set in stone, some do consider a 2/3 majority a "rough consensus", while others believe consensus implies a higher ratio)"
I submit that without consensus the status quo is to be kept - leaving the article alone. Do you agree with the 7:5:2 / 14 vote, I could be mistaken, and that 50% is not consensus - I could be mistaken. If you would, please reply at your convenience in my talk page, or in the article's talk page. --ShaunMacPherson 23:04, 20 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Page protection
It seems awfully underhanded to protect a page without bothering to inform anyone, as you did with User:Enviroknot: I had to look it up in the Protection Log. And to give you a brief education:
[edit] Tagging identified sock puppets
If an account has been shown to be a sock puppet used for policy violations, then it should be identified as such. For instance, the following text may be added to the user page of the sock puppet account, replacing the two instances of "SOCKPUPPETEER" with the name of the sock puppeteer:
::''This user is a [[Wikipedia:Sock puppet|sock puppet]] of [[User:SOCKPUPPETEER]], as established by [[Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/SOCKPUPPETEER/Evidence]].''
The sock puppeteer may prefer other text; the clear identification is the important thing.
Note that this should only be done if the account has been shown beyond reasonable doubt to be a sock puppet of the user by either:
- the user's own admission;
- matching of IP addresses or similar strong technical evidence;
- by a ruling on Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration.
The above text should not be added in the cases of accusations of sockpuppetry which have not been proven. Instead, add Template:Sockpuppet to the page.
From WP:SOCK#Tagging_identified_sock_puppets, whose page has the message "This page is considered an official policy on Wikipedia. It has wide acceptance among editors and is considered a standard that everyone should follow. Except for minor edits, please make use of the discussion page to propose changes to this policy."
However you slice it, adding Sockpuppet tags is well within policy, no matter how much the puppeteer whines about it. --Calton | Talk 09:19, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
-
- [No such evidence has been presented] (Unsigned comment by 212.112.224.176 (talk • contribs) (personal attack removed by Ingoolemo talk)
[edit] Enviroknot's page
Just FYI, Mel Etitis abused his powers as admin to edit Enviroknot's page - AGAIN - after you protected it. (Unsigned comment by 212.112.224.176 (talk • contribs))
- The point of the tag is that Enviroknot is suspected of being a sockpuppet, and the evidence in favour of this is firm, though not irrefutable. My point is that some solution other than a constant revert war needs to be put in place. Ingoolemo talk 17:20, 2005 Jun 21 (UTC)
- The so-called evidence is 100% pure hog shit, nothing more and nothing less. Enviroknot is not a sockpuppet, nor does he use sockpuppets, and that has been established. Mel Etitis's latest attack was to "challenge" him and another user to both send him emails. I have no idea why Etitis really wanted Enviroknot's email, but I agree with Enviroknot that giving it to Etitis would have been a bad idea.
-
- Enviroknot's response was at Grace Note's talk page (Etitis wouldn't bother even leaving the message on Enviroknot's own talk page): diff linked because GN recently cleaned her talk page. I have seen the two emails Mel Etitis has sent me. I don't trust him as far as I can throw him. I've already seen the pathetic bad faith in which the admins on the wikien-l mailing list operate, too. He's not getting any emails from me.Enviroknot 04:48, 16 Jun 2005 (UTC)
-
- Etitis the islamist vandal has operated in NOTHING but bad faith this whole time, constantly harassing Enviroknot. While I don't think a revert war is good, it's a hell of a lot better than allowing Etitis to slap bullshit vandalism onto someone's page and then abuse admin powers to edit it while the user himself can't make any changes. (Unsigned comment by 217.79.181.118 (talk • contribs))
-
-
- I note, however, that David Gerard did an IP check, concluding that "Eniroknot = ElKabong = KaintheScion". Ingoolemo talk 20:33, 2005 Jun 21 (UTC)
-
David Gerard did an IP check and found that I got someone else's IP address after repeated power outages in my area. It happens. I still am not a sockpuppet nor do I use any account but this account. Please unprotect my page so that I can remove that vandalism from it.Enviroknot 23:13, 21 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Unprotecting my user page
I have asked David Gerard how reasonable your explanation is. If he agrees that your alibi is a likely one, I'll unprotect your userpage. Ingoolemo talk 02:25, 2005 Jun 22 (UTC)
If you're relying on [him], I shouldn't hold my breath.Enviroknot 05:12, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] In Soviet Russia....
this joke gets old fast :) In very short form, I used to live in the US, but I had to move to Greece to fulfil my military obligations. After 16 months as a sarge in the Hellnic Air Force, I was discharged, and my quest to find a job began. I have a very hard time to find work, since i'm a specialized unix system programmer, who never got to learn any windows programming. add to the fact i live away from athens where the majority of all work is located, and you got a programmer who's trying to get by to gather enough money to get the fuck out of this economical/political/cultural shithole of a country that never cares for its citizens. oh, yeah, I'm Greek, did i mention that? I don't hate Greece. I just hate the attitude of the people currently occupying it. It feels as if I was send off to the gullag. That's why i'm making all the soviet russia jokes.
Project2501a 09:15, 22 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Enviroknot's user page
Yes, I looked up the history before to try to figure out what had happened. Well, from my POV the page was locked after Mel edited it. I couldn't edit it. It may have been a server glitch. I will assume good faith and apologise to Mel for it, although if you were in my shoes, you might have come to the same conclusion. I do think that if you protect the userpage, you should protect it to the user's preferred version though. But I should know better to try to talk reason, or to suggest a more moderate approach, to people who are ganging up on another user. Once the scent of blood is in the hounds' nostrils, they cannot be dragged from the fox. It's not an edifying spectacle though.
Even though I deplore Enviroknot's behaviour, I don't think the harassment he/she is being subjected to will lead to an improvement in it. It seems vindictive, motivated by factionalism on the part of some, powertripping on the part of others. I have no doubt Enviroknot is a bad user, who it's likely couldn't be made good, but even so, we should do the right thing by the worst just as we would by the best. Grace Note 03:35, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC)
