User talk:Mirv/archive 12

Archives by date
archive1 (27/01/04)
archive2 (pre-12/04/04 history)
archive3 (04/12–07/29/04)
archive4 (07/29–20/09/04)
archive5 (20/09–26/09/04)
archive6 (27/09–03/11/04)
archive7 (03/11–22/11/04)
archive8 (22/11–05/12/04)
archive9 (05/12–17/12/04)
archive10 (17/12/04–11/01/05)
archive11 (11/01/05–24/7/05)
archive12 (24/7/05–12/12/05)
archive13 (12/12/05–25/4/06)
Others
rubbish bin
AOL-using lawyer
Arbcom election
User talk:Mirv

Messages left here may not be seen for months. Use e-mail if you absolutely must contact me.

Administrator powers

If I have misused my magic powers in any way, this is the place to tell me.

Protection

Every page I protect is on the wrong version, of course, so to conserve valuable electrons, just leave a link to the page and a number from the list. Thanks.

If I accidentally protected a page to which I have made substantive edits, tell me here. I will unprotect it immediately.

Deletion

Did I speedy-delete something that wasn't a candidate? Did I delete something for which there was no consensus to delete? Tell me here.

Blocking

This is jgb trying to write to the MBone article. I'm behind a transparent proxy which I share with a bunch of customers of Telefonica's ADSL network (Spain). I would like to contribute a bit to wikipedia, but I cannot avoid being behind that proxy when at home. The address of the proxy is 80.58.0.107 (my current address is 80.24.39.212, but could change). Is it possible to find some solution?

You could contact your ISP and ask them to please not run open proxies :). Seriously though, I checked the address in question and it appears not to be an open proxy anymore, so it's safe to unblock now, I think. —Charles P. (Mirv) 21:19, 19 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your prompt answer. WRT the proxies, we have had complete campaigns about hidden proxies, which are a problem for many reasons. Of course, having them also as open proxies is even worse :-(

Rollback

Did I use the admin "rollback" feature on one of your edits without warning or explanation? Then I probably thought you were vandalizing, spamming, or otherwise editing in malice, and chances are good that you were: most of my rollbacks are of such edits. If you want to know why I reverted your edit, append your question to the end of this talk page.

Slave trade

This is a similar situation to the one you dealt with in Sexual Slavery. People keep wanting to put the "Islamic" descriptors in the headlines but don't want the Christian or Jewish descriptors put in. I tried to make it NPOV by making the headlines for each section neutral and only related to geography but a couple of POV warriors keep reverting me.Heraclius 00:55, 27 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Mezmerize

As someone who voted for Mike Garcia's adminship, you may wish to check out his behavior on Mezmerize to see how he is progressing. I'm wondering how much longer we have to keep putting up with this :( 66.36.138.147 14:55, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ralph Woodrow

This is up for deletion. I would like to have it kept as he is a significant critic of The Two Babylons. Would you care to vote on the VfD? - Ta bu shi da yu 04:12, 11 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Admin out of control

Under exactly what authority does UninvitedCompany think he can unilaterally permanently ban users, and destroy their user pages, and protect their talk pages so that they can't respond? - [1]

It should be noted that the alleged images were listed at User:Evil Monkey/Nudity as well as being considered entirely appropriate for articles, having, as far as I can tell, already survived IFD, and have been on Wikipedia for over a month.

Note that an arbcom case has only just opened and has by no means come down with even remotely any penalty such as a ban. UninvitedCompany seems to think he has greater authority than ArbCom, and can completely act outside it.

Does UninvitedCompany has infinite power and permission to unilaterally with impunity?

Particularly when the user/victim in question has challanged a prior abuse of adminship by UninvitedCompany in an RfC, and has diametrically opposed political opinions?

This seems to be a case of right wing evangelical Christian admins thinking they have the right to dictate to everyone else.

It also seems in contempt of the arbitration committee's right to make the decision.

SomeAccountThatIWillListOn-Ril-'sUserPageWhenOrIfIEverGetItBack (-Ril-) 11:46, 18 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Apartheid sign.JPG

Image deletion warning

Image:Apartheid sign.JPG has been listed at Wikipedia:Images and media for deletion. If you feel that this image should not be deleted, please go there to voice your opinion.

VFD

Hi Charles. Your vote in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Nazi Connection to Islamic Terrorism was to delete or to redirect? Or you meant delete and redirect? Svest 23:45, September 6, 2005 (UTC)

Delete and redirect. I've cleared this up now, I think. —Charles P. (Mirv) 23:47, 6 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I think you have to ~~clean~~ your first vote. Cheers -- Svest 23:49, September 6, 2005 (UTC)

There are other vfd for Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Infiltration:_How_Muslim_Spies_and_Subversives_have_Penetrated_Washington and Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Islam_and_the_Jews:_The_Unfinished_Battle. Svest 23:52, September 6, 2005 (UTC)

NAFTA

I'm happy to have this as a redirect since you've put a link to New Zealand Australia Free Trade Agreement at the top of North American Free Trade Agreement. Good call.-gadfium 02:08, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Android79's RfA

Thank you for your support on my RfA and for your kind comments. Handling the SamuraiClinton situation certainly wasn't pleasant, and there are some things I wish I would have done differently, but it was a worthwhile experience – I've learned to be more patient, that's for sure. android 79 15:32, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

RfA

Just to say thanks for supporting my RfA. Please let me know if you see me screw up. --Doc (?) 19:12, 24 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello

I think you are a communist mirv and I hate you...I wish you could stop being a member of the communist cabal on wikipedia and start to realize the truth that adam smith is greatest things that happened to world since slice bread...so please stop being a communist and start being a person. STOP CRITIZING THE ESTABLISHMENT you punk...become a corporate lawyer and love capitalism (not Love in a hippie sort of way). I don't like Hippies by the way because they oppose the establishment I love. Bush is an american hero btw :)--Anti-Communist 06:31, 29 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

? —Charles P. (Mirv) 06:51, 29 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Vandalism

Just to let you know, I rolled back a nasty comment left by your "friend" above, and blocked him indefinnately as a reincarnation of an indef blocked vandal. -- Essjay · Talk 03:01, 1 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA!

My dear Mirv, I simply wanted to drop by, now that my RfA is closed to give you a big THANK YOU! for your kind support. You'll always have a friend in me. Hugs! Shauri Yes babe? 22:43, 2 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Neoconservatism

Mirv, could you take a look at my comment at Talk:Neoconservatism_in_the_United_States#Anti-semitic_edit.3F? -- Jmabel | Talk 06:50, 3 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki:Newuserloglog

How did you know that would fix it? --AllyUnion (talk) 02:59, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, I don't quite understand your question. How did I know that would fix what? —Charles P. (Mirv) 14:07, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I requested for this feature for the developers awhile back... I didn't realize you could just create such a page and would alter the new user log. What I'm asking is who figured out that it would change the new user log by adding the new page. --AllyUnion (talk) 18:14, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I did. I looked through Special:Allmessages for something that matched the text in Special:Log/newusers, found that the page was a redlink, and figured that creating it couldn't do any irreversible harm. —Charles P. (Mirv) 19:20, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

MediaWiki:Newuserloglog

Hi Mirv, a slight problem with this addition is that the block link will now show up for non-admins (which they obviously do not have access to). Talrias (t | e | c) 03:32, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

They'll just see "The action you have requested is limited to users with the "block" permission assigned. See Wikipedia:Administrators", so no harm done. The link isn't helping much good anymore, since the vandalbot operator obviously knows what we're doing, but that's a different problem. —Charles P. (Mirv) 14:14, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this isn't a major problem. Are the other block statements done in the actual software rather than using the MediaWiki namespace then? Talrias (t | e | c) 16:31, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think the block links in Recent Changes and watchlists are in the software; that is, the fact that they appear at all is due to a software setting, but the appearance of the link itself is set by a MediaWiki message. Check Special:Allmessages to be sure. —Charles P. (Mirv) 19:23, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Could you do me a favor?

If I asked you to delete some of my user subpages, and some of my userpage history, would you do it? Taco Deposit | Talk-o to Taco 16:16, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Unless I thought there was some pressing need to keep them around, yes, certainly. What do you want deleted and why? —Charles P. (Mirv) 19:28, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I was hoping you could delete User:TacoDeposit/me, User:TacoDeposit/Fuck Wikipedia and User:TacoDeposit/Adult Swim, plus delete all the history on User:TacoDeposit, just leaving the current version. Thanks, Taco Deposit | Talk-o to Taco 19:51, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

And to answer your question as to why, it is simply because it is either silly stuff that I no longer wish to have associated with me, or because it is stuff that comprimises my anonymity more than I am currently comfortable with. Thanks, Taco Deposit | Talk-o to Taco 19:56, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

All deleted. —Charles P. (Mirv) 20:02, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks. Taco Deposit | Talk-o to Taco 21:00, 13 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Again

I baaack ;)

BTW is this yer car?

Art car seen in Northern California (perhaps owned by a hippie or neo-hippie)

LMFAO I dislike Hippies like you .....--Anti-Communist 3 04:36, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, Eric. No, that's not my car; this (or one like it) is my car, or was: like every true communist hippie, I use public transit now. —Charles P. (Mirv) 04:50, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Zionist Terrorism

Cheers for the support on this. It is a classic case of original research and well poisoning. I thought the comments about you jumping inot a revert war (by one of the warring editors) was particularly astonishing1. Unbehagen 07:37, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Zionist terrorism - 3RR

You have now reverted 3 times in 24 hours, just a heads up.

--Sebastian Kessel ^Talk 22:44, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm aware, but thanks for the caution. —Charles P. (Mirv) 22:47, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

No big deal, just figured that a heads up was warranted. So may edits went back and forth that one may lose count... I know I do. :)

--Sebastian Kessel ^Talk 22:49, 14 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

FSF RFA

Thanks for your support. freestylefrappe 22:19, 15 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Talk:Territories under Israeli control

Holding a vote will just give the obstructionists (we all know who they are) a chance to rally the troops and prevent the move solely by numbers rather than reasoned argument.

Considering what you did in "Fatwa" (deleting material, saying you'd move it elsewhere and not doing so), I find this accusation a bit much. Andjam 14:02, 17 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

From a new admin

I know that these kind of thank-you messages have gone out of fashion, and are always somewhat cheesy. However, thank you for your interest in candidates for RfA. I've been saying to everyone that, although these admin buttons look very shiny now, that I believe that cooperation is the greatest tool here. I would value your support and advice as I learn how to use admin status effectively, and please let me know if you need assistance in resolving a conflict. Thanks. --Gareth Hughes 10:21, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Would you consider weighing in?

Jayjg has been belligerantly restoring a statement on the Golan Heights having Israel's only ski resort at the Israeli-occupied territories article. You are probably aware of the fuss he made about how references to anything as trivial as water resources don't belong in that article. My relationship with Jay is such that there is no point in my trying to discuss anything with him, so would you leave him a message at his talk page requesting that he refrain from putting information he apparently considers "crap" back into the article? If he continues to misbehave, your action would complete a step in my formal complaint against him. Marsden 14:39, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'll drop you another line if it resumes. Marsden 20:15, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

WP:POINT

No, Charles, it's hardly that. Marsden has insisted that the scope of the article be expanded to include reasons why the various territories have value to Israel, against my vociferous objections. Well, it seems the consensus (or his edit warring) support his view, but now that he's opened Pandora's box, he cannot insist that only the things he thinks are important to Israel can be included in the article. Tourism is a huge industry in Israel, and has already been mentioned on the Talk: page as a reason for Israel's holding the territories - certainly the only ski resort in Israel contributes to that. As well, military uses are obviously critical to Israel, given its position, so it's difficult to understand why listing the Golan's unique capabilities as a training ground for soldiers should be deleted. Jayjg ^(talk) 22:46, 30 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You make interesting arguments; I'm sure we can work this out on the Talk: page. Jayjg ^(talk) 17:20, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

CAIR article

Hi Mirv, were you aware of my note about the prince's denomination in the talk page? Andjam 14:11, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Zionist Terrorism

jayg up to his antics again - constant edit warring with respect to WP:POINT and Well Poisoning material. Can you have a look? Unbehagen 14:23, 31 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

63.41.192.53 (talk · contribs)

Redwolf blocked for 24 hours. Feel free to re-block if they come back. I am getting tired of their reverts and spamming. Thanks --a.n.o.n.y.m ^t 05:28, 1 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you for speaking up on the behalf of a user you did not even know. I appreciate your efforts for justice. Should you have any lingering concerns, I encourage you to come to my talk page and join the dialog there on what has occured. Discussion is the best way to calm stormy waters. TheChief (PowWow) 17:30, 3 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

RFA

Thank you for supporting my nomination till the end. I appreciated it. - Haukur Þorgeirsson 15:02, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Nablus

The passage you removed- "as well as mismanagment by the Palestinian Authority" is not really disputed by very many people. I understand it's a touchy subject but do you seriously doubt it's validity?- Moshe Constantine Hassan Al-Silverburg 22:12, 5 November 2005 (UTC) (talk)[reply]

See Talk:Nablus. —Charles P. (Mirv) 22:23, 5 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

I just wanted to give my thanks for your support of my RfA, it was tough but finally passed today! I greatly appreciate it! Ramallite ^(talk) 04:01, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

Hi Merv,

Apologies for the 'scroteunit' thing. I was messing around. I really admire wiki. Keep up the good work.

Cheers,

Mat.

Notaricon

Thanks for your helpful answer.

SONIA WEBCAM GIRL

HAS INVADED MY SPACE AND I CANT DELETE THIS FREAK. ANY HELP?

What are you talking about? —Charles P. (Mirv) 05:15, 15 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Mirv, how is everything going? 65.35.197.181 00:39, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Well enough. Have we met? —Charles P. (Mirv) 13:23, 18 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Islamofascism

I know you were involved with this article, so can you now please look at it again? People are trying to reinstate it. Yuber^(talk) 15:48, 19 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Arbitration

Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2005/Candidate statements

Please add yours. —preceding unsigned comment by 86.136.58.120 (talk • contribs) 12:54, 26 November 2005

I'm not running. —Charles P. (Mirv) 16:50, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I´m sorry you are not running. I hope you change your mind. Regards, Huldra 21:46, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Important AfD

Hi. If you have time please take a look at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of modern day dictators. I'm a bit worried that the main protagonist for the keep side is threatening to reverse the long-established consensus against creating historical categorization schemes on Wikipedia based on editors' original research. If you are interested, arguments against generating such a list have been stated and restated over the course of several years at Talk:List of dictators. Thanks. 172 21:05, 26 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

question for jayg

Thanks for the clear up - I think it's a reasonable question and doesn't deserve a sarcastic dismissal. Especially by an admin who should know better. Unbehagen 23:33, 30 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

E-mail

Mirv, would you mind e-mailing me, please? It's slimvirgin at gmail dot com. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 19:46, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Is there some compelling reason that we can't discuss things in public? —Charles P. (Mirv) 19:48, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You scooped my on fixing that vandalism on Dersh's page. :)

Mirv, that's the second admin action of mine you've undone on the nomination page without discussing it with me. Please don't do that again. If you disagree with something I do, there or elsewhere, by all means get in touch, and I've asked you to e-mail me, but don't just override it. I don't do these things for no reason or (I hope) for bad ones, or at least I try not to. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 16:32, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Deleting others' questions is not an admin action. It is an editorial action, and in my opinion it is out of order—especially when that question pertains to removal of questions from that very same page. Don't do that again. —Charles P. (Mirv) 16:39, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not there as an editor, but as an admin, because there has been chaos on those pages, caused in at least two cases by trolling. I'm not the only admin or editor who has been moving and refactoring so this isn't a minority opinion. Fair enough if you disagree, but then discuss it with me, please, instead of just undoing things. Ril has already put up a few questions; they're perfectly legitimate and they're on the page. But his second questions were about other people's actions in relation to the trolls: meta-questions, nothing to do with the arbcom, and designed in my view to keep the toxicity going, which is why I first deleted them, then moved them to talk. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 17:08, 4 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not there as an editor, but as an admin—When did admins get the authority to control the content and direction of discussions? I must have missed that development. On the other hand, I've been aware of Wikipedia:Administrators, which says "Administrators are not imbued with any special authority, and are equal to everybody else in terms of editorial responsibility" quite well. —Charles P. (Mirv) 02:08, 5 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, I just saw this. Admins have not only the authority but the responsibility to control content when users are being disruptive, which is what was happening on that page. Several editors have refactored the page, and several admins have taken admin action in relation to it, by either protecting it or blocking one of the people posting abuse. Hence my surprise that you took the opposite view. However, you're entitled to do that, and that wasn't my point in writing to you. It's simply that I've never turned up to undo your admin actions (or actions as an editor) out of respect for you. If I disagree with something, I might argue with you, but I wouldn't act as though you don't exist. All I'm requesting is the same consideration in return. That's particulary important in this case, because you have a record of opposing Jay whereas I have a record of supporting him, so given that we come from this with different views, some mutual respect eases interaction. I don't want to argue about it any further, except to say that I do respect you (as an editor and admin) and don't want to fall out with you over it, but felt I had to say something to avoid bad feeling in the future. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 16:30, 6 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Unprotecting Jayjg arbcom candidacy page

Mirv, I do not mind that you unprotected the page, because I certainly did not intend to protect it indefinitely (only long enough for people to cool down). But I either do not understand or object to your reason: "sysops are editing this, others should be able to do the same)." My reading of the edit history (which of course may be mistaken) is that no one edited the page between the time I protected it and you unprotected it. If anyone accused a sysop of editing it after I protected it, I think they were wrong. Slrubenstein | Talk 22:13, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

From the edit history and the protection log I see that Karmafist edited the page at 18:41, 1 December 2005 (UTC), between your protection at 23:35, 30 November 2005 and my unprotection at 19:29, 1 December 2005. So one sysop did in fact edit the page while it was protected, though I don't suspect any malice. —Charles P. (Mirv) 22:24, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I stand corrected. In general, I think the proper course of action would have been to revert Karmafist's edit and leave a message reminding him or her that sysops have to be careful not to edit protected pages. Be that as it may, plenty of time elapsed between my protecting it and your unprotecting it, and hopefully the antagonistic parties have cooled down. Slrubenstein | Talk 22:44, 1 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Roylee RfC

Hi, Mirv. Some time ago, you made several additions to User:Mark Dingemanse/Roylee. A request for comment has been opened: Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Roylee. Your input would be appreciated. — mark ✎ 10:48, 2 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Islamonazism

Umm, do you know if there has been any consensus on this issue? I know CltFn is going to spark controversy here... just wondering about this issue. gren グレン 21:20, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Right, you ahem-ed in my face and I didn't notice it. Pardon gren グレン 21:23, 3 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Cosmotheism

Probably not. The anon there is far too articulate and intelligent for PV, and the location is wrong. —Charles P. (Mirv) 21:26, 7 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ah. I hadn't thought anyone else cared so much about the topic. Thanks, -Willmcw 08:50, 8 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Cairo

I have read your question about Cairo and as an Egyptian I think I can answer it, Cairo is considered a holy city because it got the rules of the three profits Mousse, Jesus and Mohammed. Mousse was born in Cairo and raised by the pharos, Jesus escaped to Egypt when he was young boy and Mohammed always said he liked Egypt that he didn’t visit but married an Egyptian lady (Maria). Also you will notice in Cairo the presence of thousands of mosques and churches beside the pharonic temples, which can be considered as holy places for ancient Egyptians. (comment by 63.87.74.235 (talk · contribs))

Thank you. I've copied your response to Talk:Cairo for future reference. —Charles P. (Mirv) 23:05, 10 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

thank you

thanks for reverting the vandalism to my user page. I really appreciate it. -- malo (tlk) (cntrbtns) 03:56, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Randal L Schwartz

I feel a little left out in the discussion of some of the material on Randal's page. I wrote the entirety of the first (fairly lengthy) version of the "PROM" course (as well as much of the other material that the two of us have taught), including the references to Gilligan's island. The first version of the material wound up in my book Effective Perl Programming (which he tech edited for an attribution on the cover). I'm not whining - it's just not accurate. --Joseph N. Hall ([e-mail snipped]) -- totally new to this Wikipedia stuff so I hope I'm not marking up excessively idiotically

If you think it needs correcting you are welcome to make whatever changes you think necessary. Just be sure to cite your sources so others can verify your work. —Charles P. (Mirv) 20:15, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Birthday greetings

I notice from Meta that today is your birthday, and so a Happy Birthday from me seems an apropriate use of your talk page :) Thryduulf 20:44, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

User categorisation

You were listed on the Wikipedia:Wikipedians by alma mater page. As part of the Wikipedia:User categorisation project, these lists are being replaced with user categories. If you would like to add yourself to the category that is replacing the page, please visit Category:Wikipedians by alma mater for instructions. Ooh, and it's also my birthday today, as well as Ben Browder's, the yummiest guy EVER. Happy birthday. :) --Cooksey 22:01, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]