User talk:Jossi/archive9

Queen's University Page Protection

May you please remove the editing block from the Queen's University article. This blcok is threatening any future constructive edits and is killing any additions to the article. Itsforreal 06:05, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Please place a request for unprotection at WP:RFPP ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 14:43, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

I am honored that you ask

Please do feel free to use the template (and/or make it better). I like this one because it offers a great deal of useful information to a newcomer. Most newcomers don't go off to find the information they need on their own, but they do seem to respond relatively well to information dropped on their laps. I have been kinda in overkill mode on welcomes as of late. As Dakota reminded me, I will need to learn how to take better and more consistend wikibreaks in the future. Best, Kukini 05:46, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Whitespace edits

Hi Jossi, please stop your whitespace edits, like now on the criticism proposal. --Francis Schonken 09:01, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Please also revert these whitespace edits for wikipedia:citing sources, where you caused (e.g.) (Concordia Libraries) suddenly to be read as ( Concordia Libraries ). [1]

When reverting, please also respect the over 20 edits that have been performed on that page since your "whitespace" edit. --Francis Schonken 10:49, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Oops. Sorry. Will take care of it now. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 00:34, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

User talk:72.240.140.135

I think {{blatantvandal}} right off the bat was more than a little harsh for User talk:72.240.140.135 - he only vandalized one word in one article! - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 00:04, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Oops, more than one, and in general, nevermind... Sorry. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 00:09, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Stco23

Thank You. Thank You. Thank You. I was trying to get this user 198.236.13.35 blocked for putting names on Cambrian, but I kept on getting edit conflicts but thank god I got though and you listened. Thank you for blocking him if I did not report this he could have put more names on that article. I was able to revert after he was blocked. Thank You.--Stco23 20:22, 28 April 2006 (UTC)

A favor please

Hello friend, do you remember me? In the month of September 2005, your vote had made me an administrator. we all know that the life here is exciting and full of challenges. I would request you to please spare fem moments for me, and favor me with your comments and suggestions (here please) on my performance as a wikipedian. Let us continue to build the Better than the Best global encyclopedia. Thank you and regards. --Bhadani 10:05, 29 April 2006 (UTC)

Guru-shishya tradition

Yes, I've been by that article a couple of times in the past and recall it as being pretty good. I do remember noting that it didn't make clear the fact that a parampara is, in most sects, a strict succession, with only one Guru active in a paramaparya at any one time. Of course, succession can take place by death, resignation and appointment, or by election if a successor is not appointed and these details should probably be in the parampara article, but it seems the single lineage guru concept should be mentioned in Guru-shishya tradition.

I'll look it over in more detail when I get a chance. Please respond on my talk page. —Hanuman Das 21:17, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Inquiry

Hello! I hope you are feeling great! By the way, I would like to inquire about a minor technical aspect of certain templates. For example, certain templates uses this term &nbsp. What does this mean? If I do not type these wordings when I am editing templates, would this pose a problem? Allow me to give you an example:

(Follow the edit link to view the details of this template)

And,what does noinclude stand for? If this template is updated, will it affect ALL the similar templates used in different articles? Will there be an auto update? What are the consequences of the exclusion of these particluar terms? I hope you will give me an answer soon! Thank You!

P.S. I realized that Gflores had gone for a wikibreak. So I am approaching you for your kind assistance in this matter. You are also my admin coach! --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 02:50, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Please leave your comments on my user talkpage. Thank You! --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 02:52, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

&nbsp' means "non-breaking space". I will explain further in your talk page. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 02:53, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank You for the info, my friend. But what does noinclude stand for? (Please leave your comment on my talk page) Thank You! --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 03:29, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Raphael1

Raphael1 (talk · contribs) has been blocked for one week for continuous disruptive editing at Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy over a two month period. He has been warned many many times, both on his user talk page and on the article's talk page, to cease this behaviour. We gave him one last warning. When he ignored the warning and continued in his behaviour, Cyde (talk · contribs) blocked him for 1 week and notified Raphael1 of it [2]. Unaware of Cyde's block, I blocked Raphael1 for 12 hours over the same action. Since the longer block ends when the shorter block expires, I reblocked Raphael1 to 1 week. His actions are not the only reason for the duration of his block though: the user has expressed the intention to continue in his behaviour and ignore the consensus that the community has reached. I feel, along with the other admins involved, that Raphael1 may disagree with the consensus that was reached (to display the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons), that he may strive to alter that consensus (as he is doing on the article's talk page), but that he may not ignore it. Aecis ^{Mr. Mojo risin'} 08:29, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Talk page troubles

In my judgement you are doing a fair (but seemingly not well received) job in trying to enforce take page disclipine at Talk:Prem Rawat, but it should be easy to find a volunteer which never have edited the topic to do this job. But I don't want to do a request without asking you first. --Pjacobi 11:59, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you Pjacobi. Your concern is appreciated. I was thinking of the same, but in my experience, these are bouts that subside after a few days. If it continues and/or escalates, I will take upon your offer. Would you be interested in intervening yourself and explaining talk page policy and ettiquette to involved editors? ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 14:31, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

I was thinking more about someone who really never touched the subject until now. But when the diffs I look at stay that frustrating, I'll comment at some point. --Pjacobi 14:58, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

I wouldn't mind if you intervened. You, at least, have some background in the dispute. I trust you that if you do, you will be impartial and neutral, in particular if you intervene with the intention of enforcing basic civility and talk page discipline only. Thanks again for your concern. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 15:08, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Off-wiki

Hi. You might remember me from the talk in Wikipedia talk:No personal attacks#A definition "What is Off-Wiki" needed urgently. Thx. Today I have found something which concerns this problem. Just a same user from the group which inspired me to ask the above question, published on his blog (http://wikipedie.blogspot.com/) an article „Fasiste na en:“ (Fascists on en:), where he writes: „Fašista Jossi, … navrhl omezit každému wikipedistovi svobodu slova a udělat z Wikipedie sektu.“ – in translation: „The fascist Jossi … requested to limit the freedom of speech to every wikipedia user and to make from wikipedia a sect…“. Your contributions in Wikipedia:Village pump (policy) and Wikipedia talk:No personal attacks/Extension are cited there. I wish you good luck with your proposals. -jkb- 13:14, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

See also here, -jkb- 13:39, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Unfortunately, some people believe Wikipedia to be a battleground, when actually Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and a community. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 14:19, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, unfortunately you picked out the point. Yes they do. Good luck (BTW, Wikipedia:No personal attacks has been already returned). -jkb- 14:36, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

This is the kind of thing I'm talking about:

They obviously had no respect for your message on the talk page of Yogiraj Gurunath Siddhanath, because Hanuman Das and his gang have been reverting the article again, despite your warning [3] not to.

12:50, 4 May 2006, 03:29, 4 May 2006, 19:08, 2 May 2006.

I have not acted in this manner, in spite of the fact that he has brought back a section of text that was long gone 03:27, 2 May 2006, which I disagree with but have not reverted.

Are you seriously going to let this kind of machiavellian editing go on on wikipedia, despite your warning? This has been going on since the beginning of this article. These guys (Hanuman Das (talk · contribs), Baba Louis (talk · contribs), and Chai Walla (talk · contribs)) have added practically nothing to this article of any value. Most of their edits are reversions, text deletions, or screwing around with wikilinks and formatting. I would tell you to watch the page for a few days and see what happens, but these guys are permanently watching my contributions, and will probably stop reverting for the next few days to stay off the radar. Hm, maybe a good deterrent. Anyway, it's all in the history. Hamsacharya dan 16:14, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Yogiraj Gurunath Siddhanath

Your protect is unlikely to be very effective, as you have protected the version by the person who refuses to enter into discussion and resists any attempt to arrive at a consensus. I won't say you've protected The Wrong Version (TM) - I've seen that page and agree with it. But please review the talk page and the RfC and note that ALL the other editors EXECPT Hamsacharya dan have been attempting to discuss and come to a consensus. Hamsacharya dan is the sole exception to this. Freezing the article on his version is unlikely to lead to any discussion or progress :-( —Hanuman Das 16:57, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Protection of pages does not endorse any specific version, although most people beliieve that admins always protect the wrong version. See Wikipedia:The_Wrong_Version ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 17:59, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Off-wiki personal attacks poll

Since you have previously participated in discussions about the off-wiki NPA policy, I wanted to let you know about a quick opinion poll that is now posted on the Talk page there. Your input is appreciated!

• Wikipedia_talk:No_personal_attacks#Poll:_Off-wiki_Personal_Attacks

Strom 21:53, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up, Strom. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 22:10, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

Locked Earth Day

Hello. I just wanna ask if its possible for the page to be locked longer? I really don't want to deal with Bargholz's attacks. Even after a week, he still trying to harass me at my talk page. He's a real advocate I'll tell you that! __earth ^(Talk) 04:28, 5 May 2006 (UTC)

67.68.189.148.

Jossi, Thank you for regarding this userUser:67.68.189.148. This user edited in negative way because He used abusive language on article John Cena. So, I will give him or herUser:67.68.189.148 block, if He does it again. Anyways, Thanks alot to protect the vandalism on John Cena. Send me message about this problem. Please, reply on my talk-page. Daniel5127, 02:33, 6 May 2006(UTC)

I mean.

Thanks for giving him67.68.189.148 warning on vandalism. Even though I'm not administrator of Wikipedia, but I was going to tell him to stop, and revert article back to last article.Ahh, You forgot to send me message about my question, so you must send me message back. Daniel5127, 06:09, 6 May 2006(UTC)

WP:PP

Perhaps you should use javascript to help automatic the listing of pages you protect. Contact me if you think it might be useful. I am not refering to the super javascript I was using to list pages from that category and not on WP:PP (while extracting the date and reason).Voice-of-All^T|@|ESP 01:59, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Semi-protect on Freemasonry related articles

Jossi, You recently placed Anti-masonry under semi-protection due to the vandalism of a POV agenda bashing banned user. Thank you for that. Unfortunately, the problem extends to a few other pages as well. user:Lightbringer, (using the sock IP signature: user:24.64.223.203) is also causing problems at Freemasonry and Christianity and Freemasonry. If you could place those under semi-protect as well, it would be appreciated. Thanks again Blueboar 12:13, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Never mind about Freemasonry, I now see that it is semi-protected. So the only one that needs s-protect is Christianity and Freemasonry. Blueboar 12:16, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

Esperanza Newsletter, Issue #3

Administrator Coaching The Administrator Coaching program is a program aimed at preparing Wikipedians for Adminship or helping them understand the intricacies of Wikipedia better. Recently, changes have been made to the requirements of coachees. Please review them before requesting this service. This would be something like the Welcoming Committee, but for people who have figured out the basics of editing articles; they're not newcomers any more, but they might want some help in learning new roles. Some might like suggestions about how to learn vandal patrol, or mentoring on taking an article to featured status, or guidance with a proposal they plan to make at the Village Pump, for example. In this way, Esperanza would help keep hope alive for Wikipedia because we would always be grooming the next generation of admins. Stressbusters The Stressbusters are a subset of Esperanza aiming to investigate the causes of stress. New eyes on the situation are always welcome! Note from the editor As always, MiszaBot handled this delivery. Thank you! Also, congratulations go to Pschemp, Titoxd and Freakofnurture for being elected in the last elections! An Esperanzial May to all of the readership!

The last AC meeting (full log) Posting logs of the Esperanza IRC channel are explicitly banned anywhere. Violation of this rule results in deletion and a ban from the channel. A disclaimer is going to be added to the Esperanza main page. We are humans and, as such, are imperfect. Various revisions have been made to the Code of Conduct. Please see them, as the proposal is ready to be ratified by the community and enacted. All members will members to have to re-confirm their membership after accepting the Code of Conduct. Referendums are to be held on whether terms of AC members should be lengthened and whether we should abolish votes full stop. Admin Coaching reform is agreed upon. Signed... Celestianpower, JoanneB, Titoxd, Pschemp and Freakofnurture 20:29, 7 May 2006 (UTC)

WP:3RR

Please refrain from using wildly inappropriate warning templates. Doing so makes you look like a dick. Even if you considered the second edit to be a revert that would be one revert, a far cry from a 3rr violation. You could also note that I attempted to address the concerns brought by SlimVirgin that the section is not (in her words) "a proposal". As such, I changed the messagebox to say that it is disputed which is quite obvious to anyone that reads the talk page. Kotepho 01:08, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

The warning was fair. WP:NPA is a policy page and not an article. You added two different templates, the first one invented by you and the other one, related to content disputes. The one that is behaving like a dick, is you, by adding templates to a policy to make your point. There is a poll going on, you are invited to make your comment there. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 01:17, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Oh yes, I am disrupting wikipedia to make a point by trying to stop people from edit warring on a policy page that I admit is a bad idea! You will also note that I did not use {{disputed-section}} and that at least one other user has seen that the messagebox is a decent solution instead of people deleting the section outright and others reverting it. Please provide some diffs for me repeatedly undoing someone else's edits, if you think the template applies. Kotepho 01:34, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

As I said before, dispute tags are not to be used on policy pages. These are for content disputes only. And it does not matter that another editor thinks like you. Now, if you wish, make your comments in talk and stop adding dispute templates to policy pages. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 01:50, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Re: Message widget to my IP

I have an account. I lurked and edited before, and I have continued to lurk and edit since.

I do not want more messages targeting my IP. Please respect my right to pretend that I have some semblance of privacy when browsing the web.

If it is a major issue that I copy edit without using my account... well, to be honest I doubt it matters, but if it does, I really could not care less and will continue to do so.

I do not wish to be involved in inane online discussions, and not using my account is my number one defense against them. Or it was, until I got this message:

Welcome!

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions.

Currently, you are editing without a username. You can continue to do so, as you are not required to log in to Wikipedia to read and edit articles; however, logging in will result in a username being shown instead of your IP address (yours is 68.209.12.10). Logging in does not require any personal details. There are many other benefits for logging in to Wikipedia. For now, if you are stuck, you can type {{helpme}} on this page and an experienced Wikipedian will be around to answer any questions you may have.

Please note these points:

• Please respect others' copyrights; do not copy and paste the contents from webpages directly.
• Please use a neutral point of view when editing articles; this is possibly the most important Wikipedia policy.
• If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
• Do not add unreasonable contents into any articles, such as: copyrighted text, advertisement messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject. Both adding such unreasonable information and editing articles maliciously are considered vandalism.

The Wikipedia Tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, ask me on my Talk page. I will answer your questions as far as I can! Thank you again for contributing to Wikipedia. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 23:56, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

In summary: Leave me alone, or ask me to leave. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aeon221 (talk • contribs)

That message is a standard Welcome message that I and other extend to new editors or people that edit with an IP address. You can remove any messages from your talk page, including my welcome message. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 15:29, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Errr. That message was not left by me, so i have changed the unsigned tag to that of the editor who did leave it [4]. He had left an incorrectly formated {{help me}} tag so i arrived to answer you questions. When i saw that it was there by mistake, i reformated it [5]. I was almost going to leave a message commenting on how ungracious it is to write that sort of reply to a simple welcome message. Anyway, i just wanted to make it clear that it wasn't me. Rockpocket (talk) 01:31, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks (phew)... I visited your page and could not believe it was you... ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 05:04, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Jossi/welcomeip

Did you accidentally create this instead of User:Jossi/welcomeip? --M1ss1ontomars2k4 00:25, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Oooops ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 02:40, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

I have deleted it and moved to corrct namespace. Thanks for the heads up. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 02:42, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Seznam fašistů

Hey dude, you're number one. [6]. Cheers, -Will Beback (#5) 10:04, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Translate? Please? ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 14:35, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

I have no idea. But it's been discussed at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard#A list of fascists on en.wiki, FYI. -Will Beback 21:17, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

However it's the same list as here [7], and apparently it's the same editor. -Will Beback 21:26, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

RE:Admin coaching

Hello! Please read my comments here and respond in my talk page. Thanks for helping me out. --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 15:01, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Bryant Gumbe

The article was protected over claims that certain edits violated a NPOV. This is not vandalism according to Wikipedia's vandalsim policy There were also attempts to discuss this on the talk page. Two user's involved in the dispute were both stubborn in what should be included in the article. Again according to Wikipedia's policy on vandalsim this is not vandalsim. Also note that [8]Wikipedia's policy on semi-protection states, " It is also not an appropriate solution to regular content disputes since it may restrict some editors and not others." Therefore in the spirit of Wikipedia and in compliance with stated policies of Wikipedia the protection should be lifted. Mbofuc 19:47, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Sandy Flash

You removed the categories for "criminals" and "highwaymen". This guy was, in fact, a highwayman and he was hanged for his crimes. I don't see the POV problem. Spikebrennan 20:33, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

I am of the opinion that we shpuld not use the main category "Criminals" for any specic article, rather use the more accurate sub-category for the crime committed. This is more appropriate. Otherwise the category "criminals" is misused. For example, the category does not discriminate in which country a person is considered a criminal. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 22:45, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Note that I kept the Highwayamn subcat. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 22:46, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Yogiraj Gurunath Siddhanath ... again...

Hi,

After you protected the page, the "opposing" editors (Hanuman Das, Chai Walla, Baba Louis) started messing with the redirects of the page, specifically Sidhoji Rao Shitole. Despite agreeing to work with them on the Yogiraj Gurunath Siddhanath/temp page to find a version that we all agree with (somehow they got it removed from the temp page today, that's why it's blank), they decided to start playing games (eg trying to do a "move page" onto the protected page). My main concern is that if their "move page" goes through (see talk:Sidhoji Rao Shitole), that all the article history on Yogiraj Gurunath Siddhanath will disappear. Could you please take a moment to look into this? The RfC Diff should explain most of this as well as latest SRS and YGS talk pages. Thanks, --Hamsacharya dan 10:14, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Jossi, the temp page that Hamsadan mentions was simply cut & pasted from Sidhoji Rao Shitole. This not only lost its edit history, but created a confusing situation where some editors were editing one page and some were editing the other page. The correct action was taken in deleting the (nearly identical) page which had been cut and pasted so that the page with the full edit history can be worked on and moved into place, as per the consensus at Talk:Sidhoji Rao Shitole. All of the most active editors have voted, and the consensus is that this new, shorter page which everyone agrees in nPOV should replace the old article. Dan doesn't want to lose the old article edit history, however. I suggested that he might have the old article moved into his personal space as a sub-page of his user page. I doubt that any of the editors of Sidhoji Rao Shitole want their edit history lost by cutting & pasting their work to replace the old article. I certainly don't. Anyway, please discuss the options for preserving the old page with Dan so that the last obstacle to resolving this dispute can be removed. —Hanuman Das 12:49, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

Please move thee discussions to the article talk pages. I will repond there, time permitting. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 16:12, 11 May 2006 (UTC)