User talk:Indubitably/Archive 20

Archive 15

←

Archive 18

Archive 19

Archive 20

Archive 21

Archive 22

→

Archive 25

Vanity page

Thebluesharpdude (talk · contribs) created a vanity account for his band—Shadow of The Day TheBand (talk · contribs)—which you blocked (after I posted in UAA), moving the "article" to the editor's own userspace (User:Thebluesharpdude/Shadow of the Day (band)). He has now moved it to a new vanity account: Shadow of the Day (band) (talk · contribs). I have tried supervising this editor, offering tips and such; I convinced him to get Wiki-adopted; I even left a note on ANI asking others to keep an eye on him but he continues to abuse Wikipedia. Precious Roy (talk) 00:10, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

I've deleted the redirects. Perhaps have his adopter speak to him about image policy and notability. Lara❤Love 00:33, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Precious Roy (talk) 00:35, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter

The February 2008 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter is ready! Dr. Cash (talk) 05:26, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Dana: Canvassing and CoI

Hi Lara. Dana's been involved on the "water memory" page for a while now, and I noticed after replying to him there that he has posted two messages [1], [2] to old editors of that page that promote his point of view. I'm not sure if they are directly a problem, but the do seem to be close to WP:CANVAS and WP:COI. BTW: I read the discussion about what was said about you on the mailing list, and I think it was appalling. Thanks. --DrEightyEight (talk) 08:46, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, 88. I'll look over it and drop my thoughts on your talk page after dealing with it accordingly. And thanks for your support, I really do appreciated it. :) Lara❤Love 15:42, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Heads up. east.718 at 09:08, February 1, 2008

Thanks for the note east, much appreciated. Lara❤Love 15:42, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi Lara, about Dana4

Resolved

 – Handled on User talk:Dana4

In regards to this, which Checkuser ran the check, and where? I'd just like to follow up with them directly. Thanks! Lawrence § t/e 17:59, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

OneFortyOne ArbCom filing

After spending all that time preparing and filing the ArbCom case, I din't look back. (I checked the ArbCom page, but it only goes back 500 edits.) I know I'm not the only one to run away from the Elvis article screaming. 141 is putting similar material in the Steve Allen article. Now I can find no evidence of the filing. Do you know anything about it, and how can I find out what happened? Rikstar never heard anything either. Steve Pastor (talk) 20:59, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

I think it was rejected. And we were directed to file an Enforcement case, as he's already got sanctions placed on him. I hate ArbCom and all the paperwork so much that I stopped looking at it after a few Arbs turned down the case. Lara❤Love 21:05, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

a delicate question....

I thank you for "adopting" me. I have been carefully watching the edits of articles put up by the now-blocked puppets of a now-blocked puppetmaster. My sense is that the edits should be removed if proven to be non-factual, or if in violation of WP:NPOV or WP:COI. But what I am seeing is that many of the edits are being removed simply because of their source with no reagrd to their accuracy or benefit to Wikipedia, as many seem to be good contributions. For instance, here[3] where an episode title was removed with no discussion and no reason or here[4] where a reference was removed about one of the many videos segments of a show (though in this latter case, the reference contained specific mention of the actors involved and that specific mention likely does not belong). And going back a bit, here[5], here[6] and here[7], where partial filmologies were removed... though in the latter example, another editor came forward and returned[8] the filmology as being a recognized good edit. I do not want to stir up trouble, and am definitely afraid of myself being accused of violating WP:NPOV and WP:COI, but not all of what is being undone by that particular editor (as the last example shows) are in and of themselves bad edits... and are being removed only because their original submitters were blocked as puppets sometime after the edits were made. Wishing to tred VERY lightly, is this something I might myself address? The editor making these deletions is someone whose has gotten a few negative responses for their edits or comments in other areas and I do not wish to do anything that would further upset them. What options do I as a neophyte have?

Also, one last question... to remove a filmology[9] because "this information is identical to IMDB" really a proper reason to summarily delete something without discussion? My sense is that factual informations is supposed to be on Wiki and then properly referenced or cited outside of Wiki. I believe that to remove information simply because it can be found outside of Wiki seems to defeat the whole purpose of Wiki as an enclopedia. Am I crazy? MichaelQSchmidt (talk) 22:08, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Michael. Sorry it's taken me so long to respond. I started looking over this, got pulled away and then forgot I hadn't already responded. My apologies. Some of the edits appear appropriate to me, although a note on your talk page explaining why would have been polite. Considering your previous issues with Cumulus Cloud it is, however, not surprising that he's just removing without any sort of explanation. Regardless, to explain. Notability is a concern with some of these addition, as well as undue weight. The Paris movie, for example, was the only item on the list that gave any detail past the title. So you've basically (or whoever added it) put your name in a list of movies. That looks like promotion, which is unacceptable. It also gave that particular movie, which does not have an article, undue weight. Other examples listed appear as though they may not have met the notability requirement of Wikipedia. Lara❤Love 14:27, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Image

...as promised; Image:Daniel BRC.JPG. *sigh* Daniel (talk) 12:07, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Fantabulous!! Lara❤Love 15:47, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

P.S. It's great that your enthusiasm in your message here is equal to that displayed in the image. :p

Request for advice

Hi, Lara, I'm involved in a situation where I'd like the advice of an admin, and I am hoping you can help. Here's a summary; I can provide diffs and so on if that's useful. Editor Yorkshirian created a map he wanted to use on several medieval articles. There was some reverting but eventually we got several people to discuss the issue at Talk:Mercia#Map. Yorkshirian joined that conversation. My interpretation of that discussion is that there was a strong majority for the version of the map I was suggesting. On 18 January I went ahead and repointed all instances to the revised map.

Yesterday Yorkshirian reverted the change to one article, Northumbria, with no edit summary. I reverted, pointing to the consensus. He has just reverted several of those edits with an edit summary of "remove crap, amateur map per majority concensus on Talk:Mercia#Maps" (the link error is my fault; it should be 'Map', not 'Maps', but he was copying my previous edit summary which was a typo.)

I'm not sure what to do next. It doesn't seem to me to be a content issue any more; we've got what I would cal a clear consensus. Is this an ANI issue? I've rarely posted there. I have also never done an RfC, so I'm not sure if that's the right thing here. Can you suggest what the right next step is? His tone isn't polite, but that's OK. I'd simply like to implement the consensus and have him respect it. If he can change people's minds so they want to use his map, that's fine too. I don't see much value in reverting him since I would assume he'll just revert me back; I reverted the first one with an edit summary that pointed him at the consensus and that didn't help.

If you would like more details of the history, including diffs of various conversations with him, let me know. If you look at a recent version of Yorkshirian's talk page, you'll see some of the conversations with him. I did ask another editor (Llywrch) for advice at an earlier stage and you can see the result on Yorkshirian's talk page too, here.

Thanks for any help. Mike Christie (talk) 14:06, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Mike. Although there is some incivility coming into play here, it's fairly minor, from what I see. So I would still consider this a content dispute, which would make it inappropriate for AN/I at this time. I recommend filing an WP:RFC on Talk:Mercia. This will bring in a few outside views of uninvolved editors to help reach a consensus. If there is an act against consensus after that, then it may be time for administrative intervention. When you file the RFC, explain the situation more briefly than you have here, but touching on each of the main points. Basically, explain simply that there are two options, consensus was reached on which to use, but the consensus has been challenged and you want additional opinions on the issue. Lara❤Love 15:42, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks -- I've created the RFC and we'll see what happens. I appreciate the advice. Mike Christie (talk) 16:08, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Help in dealing with a tendentious editor

User:Amazonfire will not stop his POV-pushing at So Far from the Bamboo Grove. He has disruptively reverted with super-civil edit summaries such as "Don't falsificate the history" and wants to insert an unsourced fact with a source that contradicts his claim.

Although he wants to say "The Japanese who had become the captive of a Soviet federation was indiscriminately restrained," to claim that the Japanese were not restrained for war crimes[10] his "source" says "Some 600 soldiers have been convicted for crimes (in accordance with paragraph 10 of the Potsdam Declaration) committed against prisoners or civilians in the occupied territories." I'm sick of dealing with him. He just refuses to get the point. I need help bad! миражinred (speak, my child...) 21:26, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Your Userpage

Hello, I just wanted to say that I like your userpage and I think it is designed very well. :) --Grrrlriot (talk) 01:43, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. :) Lara❤Love 23:04, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Your welcome. --Grrrlriot (talk) 23:14, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Dana's Homework

I'm sorry to bother you again, but I've posted a note on Dana's adoptee homework. I probably shouldn't, but I felt compelled after the misrepresentation he made. I'm sure you'd have spotted this though, so apologies if I've stepped on your toes - I didn't feel I could let it pass without coment. Yours, --DrEightyEight (talk) 22:24, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

I also think that this edit shows that Dana is continuing to behave in a very very poor manner [11]; it is full if lies, does not AGF, and breaks many of the wikipedia policies Dana claims to have read and understand. --DrEightyEight (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 07:36, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

LOL!

• LaraLove has quit IRC ("The Bathrobe Cabal > all...")

Absolutely right! :) Jmlk17 07:29, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes! It's my Horatio Caine move. I say some shit and walk away before anyone can respond. You can't see it, of course, but I also rip my sunglasses off every time I leave IRC. ;) Lara❤Love 14:19, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Needs more terrible punning to be a true Horatio move. ;) Th 2005 (talk) 16:55, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

The banner at the top of your userpage

Is annoying to people who use skins other than monobook (I use "modern"). For me, it blocks the title, the talk/preferences/watchlist bar, the edit/history/move/watch tabs, and is generally a pain. Perhaps you could use a css class instead of inline styling so people with other skins can fix it (No particular reason to be picking on you, other than that your userpage was about the third I visited with this problem). — Werdna talk 11:21, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

If you could give me the CSS code, that would be great. But which banner are we talking about? The Pats thing, or the custom title? Lara❤Love 14:08, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Ok. I jumped in a couple other skins (eep, that's a change) and took out the custom title. If you could get me CSS code that would do the same, it would be appreciated. :) Lara❤Love 14:15, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Lara. I had a play with it (but I'm not really a css expert) and I couldn't really find a particularly good way to do what you're after (I could speak to another developer with a better grasp on CSS). My suggestion is that, if you apply a class to the banner at the top (Where you've got class="metadata", add a space and topbanner, so it reads class="metadata topbanner". That way, people using other skins can at least filter that kind of thing out using personal stylesheets. — Werdna talk 07:42, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

TINBRC

There is no bathrobe cabal.

I figured that it should only follow that if there's WP:TINC, and WP:BRC, then there should somewhere be a silly reference to TINBRC, and thus I took this picture. It was fun writing backwards. :P Cheers =) --slakr^\ talk / 14:53, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Awesome. I have slippers to hand out. I'm behind. I'm on it! Lara❤Love 15:20, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputes

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Warning someone about their behaviour isn't a dispute. Guettarda (talk) 15:56, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

You two were arguing back and forth. That constitutes a dispute. Lara❤Love 16:04, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I warned him. He responded by repeating the sort of behaviour I warned him about. Not a dispute. Guettarda (talk) 16:14, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm not alone in my view. It was a dispute. The block was bad. Like I said at AN/I. You're both guilty of the same behavior, NPA vios or not. So you can either both be blocked or you can both let it go, leave each other alone and be on your merry way. I recommend the latter. Lara❤Love 16:18, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

You unblocked an editor after they engaged in repeated personal attacks. Are you saying that it's acceptable to engage in personal attacks after a warning? And that after they were posting personal information on Wikipedia. You consider that a bad block? Odd. Guettarda (talk) 16:25, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

You might want to take a look at AN/I. If we're considering them PAs, then you've engaged in the same. Keep it up and maybe you'll get blocked for harassment. Not really, but I'm just saying, let it go. It's over. Consensus is against you. Lara❤Love 16:27, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

To be fair, you did mention on the ANI that if the block should be reduced or removed completely, you said it can happen without any consultation with you. Just a thought. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 16:28, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I said so. I didn't mean to come across like I was criticising Lara for unblocking without consultation. Undoing the block because you considered me too involved - not a problem. (I disagree, but I respect your judgment call). But you seem to be scolding me for blocking someone who responds to a PA warning with a PA. That I don't get. But that's ok. "I don't get it". The end. Guettarda (talk) 17:00, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Assistance

Lara, a page of mine has been nominated for deletion and I was wondering your two cents on it. Given your perspective on Cumulus Cloud, I'm sure your comments would be good within this discussion, BUT, I would prefer them on my talk page or on yours with a note on my page to look here. In the interests of full-disclosure, should you decide to throw your input into the mix, I would appreciate you notifying everyone that I contacted you so we don't run into any canvassing concerns. I ask this as someone who respects your opinion. Thanks. — BQZip01 — ^talk 04:23, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I really don't understand your comments as they don't seem to apply to this page. Could you please elaborate? — BQZip01 — ^talk 21:27, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Rollback

Hi, I was wondering if you would grant me rollback rights. I have been doing some recent changes editing and have come across a lot of vandalism. This feature would be of some great help. Thanks and Happy Editing, Dusti^talk 19:27, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Already handled. ~Kylu (u|t) 20:30, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Patriots

I would've really liked them to have gone 19-0, and I do like the Patriots (I am a UKer, so I'm mostly limited to the Super Bowl and the team's reputations from a giant folder that my dad got back in the 90s), but I have to admit that the "Great Escape" that Manning did was amazing. Best game in ages. Will ^(talk) 21:41, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Eff the Manning family! Haha. Lara❤Love 03:55, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I wanted the Pats to win too, though I am sort of a closet fan ... my friends wanted them to lose :). Voice-of-All 07:48, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

My brothers were here and they were rooting for the Giants. I was basically the only chick in a sausage party (what's new?) and the only Pats fan. Bad times. I was so on my feet at the end. And flippin' my shit in IRC with Jeffery O. At least I had fun. Lara❤Love 22:55, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for February 4th, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 6	4 February 2008	About the Signpost

Special: 2007 in Review, Part IV	Tensions in journalistic use of Wikipedia explored
Best of WikiWorld: "Calvin and Hobbes"	News and notes: Milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Tutorial: Adding citations
Dispatches: New methods to find Featured Article candidates	Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:13, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Checkuser

Hi, can you have a look here [12] please. The process of my RfCU seems to have ground to a halt for some reason. Any help would be much appreciated. Thanks. Jack1956 (talk) 20:52, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm not a checkuser, nor do I currently clerk. Sorry. Lara❤Love 22:53, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks and sorry. Jack1956 (talk) 23:03, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

misc page for deletion

I have left a tool for your future use on the page you commented on. 70.4.248.49 (talk) 02:10, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Go Lara Go!

I was 30 when I went back to college. 33 when I got my bachelor's. I expect I'll be around 38 or so when I finish a PhD. It CAN be done. And, if you need some help, that BS ( and future PhD) are in Statistics, which is the first cousin of math. qitaana (talk) 04:07, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I appreciate it. I'm for certain not majoring in math. I'm just trying not to bomb the SATs. Haha. And I definitely have respect for those that go to college later in life. I think it's more stressful. BUT!! I look like I'm in my early 20s, so maybe no one will notice. Haha. Lara❤Love 04:30, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Good luck! If you have math questions let me know. It was one of my favorite sujects. It is never too late to go back to school. Abridged ^talk 15:03, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Dude,

I think you've gone mad with power. Now we can be buddies! I'm making a "Welcome to the Cabal" Template - I'll run it by you once it's done. Oh, and thanks for assuming the role of "Violent Fire-fox Nazi", someone had to do it. Stay Frosty! Dfrg_msc 05:08, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

- TRANSMISSION ENDS -

I've been mad, both with power and without... but I'm glad it's starting to become obvious. I look forward to seeing awesome in template form. Make it look sweet in Firefox but shitty in IE... which shouldn't be hard. I'm a long-time follower of Firefoxism. I've got a flag hanging in my living room and a tattoo on my back. Viva Firefox! Now I've got to find someone to make me a sammich... Lara❤Love 13:59, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

The probation of Homeopathy and the use of Rfc's

I think edit wars are very counter productive and I will not participate in them. With that said I reverted an edit by an Ip address who seems to be opposed to having anyone address Dana's concerns about the article misrepresenting him . I think that the time for an Rfc on the block quote in question may be fast approaching. I do not intend to revert anyone else on that particular edit but I would appreciate your input pursuant to the use of Rfc's to avoid the onset of an incipient edit war : Albion moonlight (talk) 13:16, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

As an update I would like to say that I may have spoke too soon. Another Ip address made an edit that may wind up being accepted by everyone inas much as it attempts to represent both sides. But I still wouldn't mind hearing your thoughts on the frequent use of Rfc's to avoid edit warring. Albion moonlight (talk) 13:43, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm keeping a watch on Dana and teaching him the ropes. I've initiated one RfC for him. If he feels the need to initiate another, he can come to me with his questions on how to proceed. For everyone else, you guys should already know what's up. I'm not getting embroiled in this mess any more than I already am. I've got too much going on, on-wiki and off. Lara❤Love 14:03, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

SSP case

Thank you, LaraLove, for your help in the IP SSP case, the edit comparison tool came in handy and contributed to the closing rationale by me. Thanks again. Regards, Rudget. 21:19, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Fantastic. Glad to help. :) Lara❤Love 21:35, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

James Blunt

Nice to see you around GA again :) Cheers, dihydrogen monoxide (H₂0) 10:18, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Ah, yes. Thank you. It's just give and take, tho. I've got one up, so I reviewed one. Twas not easy, I'm still not in the mood to review. Lara❤Love 15:31, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Block shortening

Hello - in the future, could you give me a heads-up if you shorten one of my blocks? It's not a big deal, but I'd like the feedback. My concern with Mccready (talk · contribs) is that he's rationalized away every previous block as the work of "newbie admins", "overzealous chiro believers", admin abuse, etc. He's got 3 previous 3RR blocks that stuck, plus one overturned and an additional block for "wikistalking" - he's got ongoing problems. My gut feeling is that the reduction gives him more fodder for rationalizing away yet another block, and that admin-shopping with 3 successive {{unblock}} templates probably ought to be discouraged, but that's me. MastCell ^Talk 21:42, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Replied on your talk. Lara❤Love 04:38, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

No problem. I don't mean to give you a hard time about it. Good luck with the math. :) MastCell ^Talk 04:39, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

About Status bot

If you didn't already find out, Status bot is currently not operational. Just letting you know :) Compwhiz II^(Talk)_(Contribs) 00:29, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

P.S. This might work for you! Compwhiz II^(Talk)_(Contribs) 00:37, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I like it. Now if I can just remember to do it. Lara❤Love 04:23, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Good to see I've been proven wrong

FWIW - good to see I've been proven wrong cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:51, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. A few have dropped by for the same reason. Much appreciated. Lara❤Love 04:57, 9 February 2008 (UTC)