User talk:Isomorphic/archive3

Old talk archived at User talk:Isomorphic/archive1 and User talk:Isomorphic/archive2

---

The business and economics forum

Anouncing the introduction of The Business and Economics Forum. It is a "place" where those of us with an interest in the business and economics section of Wikipedia can "meet" and discuss issues. Please drop by: the more contributors, the greater its usefulness. If you know of other Wikipedians who might be interested, please send this to them.

mydogategodshat 18:41, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Minions

I removed the bit on my User page (as discussed at User talk:259 wherein I accused you of using User:Metric Dollar as a sock puppet. I know you're not Metric Dollar, just as you know I'm not MC.

I think you should remove me from your "Minions" page; you have no justification for the claim and it is factually false. Furthermore, I think you ought to remove the page entirely. It doesn't make Wikipedia look good, and it doesn't make you look good.

I believe that user subpages are exempt from the Wikipedia:No personal attacks policy and will not be taking this matter to arbitration. However, it's undisputably bad form to insult a user who appears to have voluntarily removed himself from Wikipedia. Neither he nor any of his purported "sock puppet" vandals have posted in more than a week. 259 19:59, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Peter Weibel

Could you look in again at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Peter Weibel? I've reversed my earlier vote & think you might want to take a look at what I've found. -- Jmabel 23:42, Aug 28, 2004 (UTC)

Vendetta

Have you offended any User:Flying Rabbits lately? The user of that name did a quick revert of 3 of your edits, along with a couple of accusations of vandalism. What an asshole. I've fixed the ones I've seen. Dandrake 20:02, Aug 31, 2004 (UTC)

I did some quick copyedit on them. -FZ 20:17, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)

good luck...

RTKL Associates

Hi Isomorphic. I'm going to move your RTKL to RTKL Associates to avoid any potential conflicts with other articles that are abbreviated RTKL. I'm also going to move its listing from List of architects to List of architecture firms.

You're welcome -FZ 13:27, 7 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Hi

Haven't seen you around much recently.....maybe I've just been in the wrong corners, but I just wanted to say hello and make sure that everything was going well. I hope you know that you're well-respected here and a valuable person to have around -- we're not very good at saying that, so I try to make sure I do so when I can. Here's hoping I'm either wrong about your absences, or that they are related to your "real life". Here's hoping also that I see a bit more of you in the months to come. Peace, Jwrosenzweig 22:51, 16 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Hi there

Just caught the message you sent to my user page. I hope this gets to you safely (I've known some weird things happen with some Wiki pages I've edited lately. They close without warning and everything..! That's what you get when you have browser trouble..)

Thank you for your advice. I know I put some strange and wrong things up on my user page there. I'm going to look into these blogs that you mentioned, as I (embarrassingly so) haven't as yet. I'll continue to stick around Wikipedia though. (I've a mini-Wiki-project in the making, after all, and it would be mean of me not to continue..)

Matt

Follow up

Thank you for the follow-up note. I'm glad I sorted everything out so that it was okay.

Best wishes.

Matt

Hello

Thanks for the welcome note on my User_talk, Isomorphic. I'll be sure to check out the resources you listed! I have a quick question though. Is there some type of user statistice page I can see which will detail how many posts I've made, where I've made them, and other statistics such as posts-per-day, etc? I've seen some user pages where people list this information, but I'm not sure if it's a Wiki thing or some some of their own (tedious) calculations.

Much thanks, Ssx 04:59, 28 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Tigranes

I was just following the OCD, whose article on Tigranes "the Great", d. 56 BC, calls him "I", and the 20 BC - 6 AD guy "II". But digging further, I find that OCD's Armenia article lists a "I?" of unknown date, then "the Great" as "II", then the 20-6 one as "III". Even more comically, both the Tigranes and the Armenia articles were authored by the same person, Eric William Gray! So clearly the situation has befuddled at least one authority too. Might be something in more recent literature, otherwise any decision you make is defensible (a note about the confusion is a useful addition to the articles of course). Stan 20:44, 29 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Thank you

I got a brief chuckle out of my comment when I made it, but a much more hearty one out of your mock-indignant reply. :-) I have often been noted for my puns (well, "feared and loathed" more than "noted", I suppose) but I try to keep them in check around here. That one, though, I could not resist, and it was more than worth it. :-) Have a great evening, and thanks again for the laugh -- Jwrosenzweig 00:19, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments

I added the content to Roy Bates because the material there was incorrect. Secondly the issue is about the Royal Navy barge. There is no "tower" as such, what there is a name "Rough Tower" on the UK Ordinance Survey maps and the words "Rough Tower" on the Ministry of Defence buoys which have always marked the spot. Because we are talking about a sunken Royal Navy boat and not a constructed structure on a virgin bit of land, that is the first issue and it obviously shows that the entire topic is a hoax. MPLX/MH 18:52, 12 Oct 2004 (UTC)

• What gives with the removal of text which plainly states what the entity is? Without an explanation that the entity that he squatted upon was a partially submerged Royal Navy barge with twin legs supporting a platform, there is no way to understand what is being described. I do not wish to enter into any form of revert war with you, however, as a reasonable person I would ask you to take a second look at what you removed. If you don't like my wording then perhaps you should add on of your own. MPLX/MH 19:08, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Paddy Roy Bates

Since the conversation began here it makes sense to keep it in one place:

What gives is that the article is about Paddy Roy Bates. Inevitably, since he's best known for Sealand, much of the material is about that, but this article is a biography of the man, not his project. The only text I removed was about how the tower was built, which matters only in the legal context of Sealand's status. That discussion is not about Paddy Roy Bates, and thus belongs in Sealand. I'm not sure the stuff about Havenco really belongs either; what I've read makes it sound like Paddy isn't closely involved in Havenco, and has left that project to Micheal. Isomorphic 19:55, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)

If it is about Roy Bates then describe the man and his ethics. 1) he ran a pirate radio station inside the UK and it was closed down twice by UK legal action in court (Radio Essex then BBMS), 2) he became a squatter on a Royal Navy barge identified by the Ministry of Defence buoys, 3) he came up with idea of calling himself a "prince" after first deciding to make his wife a "princess" during a drink in a pub, 4) he became involved in a firearms incident and was taken to the wrong court by Essex Police and got off due to a jurisdiction technicality, 5) he made all kinds of claims about establishing casinos, radio and TV stations on the sunken barge and was stopped by the UK, 6) he entered into a contract with Ryan Lackey to establish a data haven but Lackey claims that Bates lied to him, caused him to lose a lot of money because Bates did not reveal the 1990-1991 USA-UK court hearings ruling the "Sealand" claim as a myth. Above all make it clear that "Rough Tower" is not a tower but twin legs of submerged superstructure on board a barge which supports a platform above sea level. Stick that in there and that will actually reflect the true history and character of Roy Bates and since it is about Roy Bates, then the material should be included. MPLX/MH 20:17, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)

It's strange to say that it "is not a tower". It's called a tower, it looks like a tower, it was built to be a tower. It was a barge for only as long as it took to float the thing into position. If that makes it a sunken ship for legal purposes, OK, but as far as this article goes it's irrelevant. I doubt Bates knew how the thing was put there when he arrived, and unless he's the curious type he may not know even today.

Also, I don't know why you deleted one of my links. I provided it according to Wikipedia:Cite your sources, because I used it in writing the original copy of this article. Isomorphic 20:55, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Sorry, about the last part: what link was that? Also, Bates served in the British Army during WWII and he lived within spitting distance of a lot of these Royal Navy and Army installations off the coast. You can see them from the shoreline and they were all built on land near to where he lived. Just about everyone who has any local interest in these structures knows that there are essentially two types belonging to WWII. The first were Army towers and the second were Royal Navy forts. The one in question was HMS Rough's or HM Fort Roughs. It was built as a barge with two legs of a superstructure rising to a platform upon which other constructions (which have since been removed) were built. Only the top half of the superstructure of the barge can be seen above the waterline. It is not "a tower" that can be seen but twin legs supporting the platform. Now to the clincher. I know for a fact that Roy Bates knows what HMS Roughs was all about because I have spoken with him about this. His lame excuse is as follows (and I may still have this on a tape recording somewhere with him saying it!), he said that when the hold of the barge was flooded, sand also washed in. He tried to claim that this act made the keel of the barge a part of the sea floor. No one buys this silly idea, least of all the UK government. A ship wreck is merely that. They concede that Bates may have access to the barge itself due to squatters rights, but that is all, certainly not to any part of the sea floor underneath the barge. It is for all of these reasons and a whole lot more that the total fraud of this article and the con of Bates should be exposed to put an end to this silly speculation that has no foundation in fact, in law or in reality. MPLX/MH 22:30, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)

A ship wreck is merely that. Except that it's not a shipwreck, it's a defense platform, so I'm going to call it that. What you're trying to do is present legal evidence, and it's off-topic in this article. Isomorphic 23:33, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Obviously your mind is made up and nothing will shake it, not even someone with first hand knowledge of the entire story, someone who has spoken to Roy, Joan and Michael as well as many UK governmental entities, lawyers and courts of law, not to mention US federal courts and followed the involvement of Ryan Lackey very closely. So be it - I will leave you to your story. I won't attempt to change it. Kind of a sad reflection upon Wikipedia standards. By the way, your reinserted reference is strictly in aid of what you are trying to tell me that your article is not about! That is, putting it very politely, somewhat contradictory of you - especially in light of your last reply to me! MPLX/MH 23:45, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I'm not disputing any of your facts, just questioning their relevance. The construction of Roughs Tower is relevant only to its legal status. The legal status of Roughs Tower is only relevant in a discussion of the legal status of Sealand, which belongs (surprisingly enough) in the article on Sealand. Also, my reinserted reference was provided because it was my source for some of the early details. Nothing contradictory about it. Isomorphic 00:37, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Adminship Qualifications

Just wanted to drop you a note to say I agree with your comment on Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Hawstom about working in a narrow area. Netoholic has very high standards, as evidenced by his page at User:Netoholic/Admins. Ave atque vale! PedanticallySpeaking 19:03, Oct 13, 2004 (UTC)

• Saw your comment on Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship about the standards for being an admin. Last month I asked User:Deb to nominate me and was surprised at the debate, which I've archived here: User:PedanticallySpeaking/Archive3#Admin_Nomination. I thought the policy was to be liberal in appointing admins; others are very conservative. Ave! PedanticallySpeaking 20:40, Oct 18, 2004 (UTC)

Armenian kings

Hi, I nuked that for you. Stricly speaking it's not a speedy candidate, but it's definitely one of the "delete" categories (several, actually), so I went ahead and did it. Noel 01:21, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Wikinews vote

In case you haven't noticed, there is a vote going on about whether we should launch the Wikinews project under m:Wikinews/Vote.--Eloquence*

Government of Maryland

Thank you for your kind words about my contributions and for creating the article. I'm not sure I would have gotten around to creating it myself for a long time had you not done so. Jacob1207 15:54, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Adminship

Thanks, Iso, for your support on my RFA. JOHN COLLISON [ Ludraman] 16:26, 28 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Collaboration of the week

I notice you commented on Wikipedia:Collaboration_of_the_week#Partisans_.28Yugoslavia.29, would you consider voting for it as well so it can stay alive as a collaboration candidate?AndyL 15:03, 30 Oct 2004 (UTC)

{{tutorial}}

I changed the template (legitimately plagiarized from Wikipedia FAQ), but I'm wondering who/how to get a replacement graphic? Amgine 18:37, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Wiki Junior Project

We are currently in the process of deciding what the first topics will be. We have already decided that the first humanities topic will be Countries of the World:South America. We need to decide what our first science topic will be. We already have plenty of pictures available for Big Cats, The Solar System and Human Flight. We're having a little vote to decide which one we should work on first. Please come to Meta:Wikijunior project first topics. Cheers! Theresa Knott (Not the skater) 07:58, 6 Nov 2004 (UTC)

RFA

Hello, I noticed a comment you made on Wikipedia:Requests for Adminship: People willing to do grunt-work should definitely be made admins. Considering that half my edits are outside the main namespace, would you be likely to support my nomination? --[[User:Eequor|ηυωρ]] 06:20, 10 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Jenny

Thank you for the names! :) I had to look up "Jenny": The female of certain animals, especially the donkey and the wren. func(talk) 19:54, 11 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks, I appreciate your support vote and comment on my RFA. I do have a strange and unnatural affection for tedious "grunt work." Topbanana's reports are like cocaine: I can't stay away from them. Joyous 00:04, Nov 16, 2004 (UTC)

HMS Dorsetshire (40)

See Wikipedia:Naming conventions (ships)#Disambigating ships with the same name, which says

Use ships' hull numbers (hull classification symbols for the United States Navy, and pennant numbers for the Royal Navy and many European navies) for disambiguation, if available

I expect you've seen pages like HMS Vengeance (R71) and HMS Iron Duke (F234). Same thing for Dorsetshire except for the lack (at least so far as I can tell) of a flag superior. Gdr 15:24, 2004 Nov 22 (UTC)

Dispute resolution

I'd like to discuss a dispute with you, as you're really the only admin I've had any contact with :) Is there a way I can contact you to do so? --Wolf530 03:51, Nov 23, 2004 (UTC)

On second thought... you can contact me via wolf530 at ya hoo d0t com, if you have the chance. I'd much appreciate it :) --Wolf530 03:58, Nov 23, 2004 (UTC)

Tutorial

Nice cleanup on Citing sources--when I was scrambling thru removing the second templates I kinda had blinders on, and didn't notice the problematic addition. On a related note, I think the old header/footer navigation was easier to use, and am thinking of recreating it at {{Tutorial header}} and {{Tutorial footer}} (or shorter names), and if you have much of an opinion whether or not that would be a good idea, I'd love to hear it. It's also pretty cool to see that at least 5 other language's have tutorials, with two mirroring en.'s organization. Niteowlneils 22:47, 23 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Barnstar

Today, I looked back at my first admin self nomination under this name and saw your kind comments and suggestions. I am Alex Plank, and I'm sorry I didn't admit it back then. I reward you this nice barnstar for your kindness during the nomination. --Lst27 (talk) 20:34, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I reward you this barnstar. --Lst27 (talk) 20:35, 26 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Please vote

Hi, I saw you've contributed to the wikipedia for a while, which means you can probably help on a vfd notability issue. Can you please vote on Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/La La? Cheers. .:. 06:43, 30 Nov 2004 (UTC)

"Oriental basilicia

Can you flesh out your introduction of the Armenian/Georgian basilica with enough discussion so the reader can understand what the term means. Is "Oriental" in this sense a 19th-century designation? Is there a modern one?--Wetman

Richard Hanson

Sorry to take so long in getting back to you on your question on his page. Arthur Meighen, who was leader of the Conservatives from 1920-1927 and Prime Minister from 1920-1921 and in 1926, was compelled to return as leader in 1941. The leadership became vacant after a poor showing in 1940 and Hanson became acting leader and the leader of the opposition in the House of Commons. When Meighen became leader, he did not have a seat in the House so Hanson continued as leader of the opposition. Meighen was unsuccessful in a bid for a seat in a 1942 and resigned the leadership. Hanson was again acting leader.

So, it depends. He was leader of the opposition from 1940-1943 and acting leader of the Conservatives from 1940-1941 and again in 1942. - Jord 03:13, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Article Licensing

Hi, I've started a drive to get users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to either (1) all U.S. state, county, and city articles or (2) all articles, using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) v1.0 and v2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to Wikipedia's license, the GFDL, but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles. Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. Over 90% of people asked have agreed. For More Information:

• Multi-Licensing FAQ - Lots of questions answered
• Multi-Licensing Guide
• Free the Rambot Articles Project

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" template into their user page, but there are other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

OR

Option 2

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace "{{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}}" with "{{MultiLicensePD}}". If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know what you think at my talk page. It's important to know either way so no one keeps asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk)

RFC pages on VfD

Should RFC pages be placed on VfD to be deleted? I'm considering removing Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Slrubenstein, Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Jwrosenzweig and Wikipedia:Requests for comment/John Kenney from WP:VFD. Each of them was listed by CheeseDreams. Your comments on whether I should do this would be appreciated. - Ta bu shi da yu 03:46, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Hey, I'm going to shift your comments to the new admin noticeboard... if you have any specific objections to this please let me know. - Ta bu shi da yu 22:31, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Meetup

Ok, I'll meet you in lot 41. Before we leave, though, I'll take you to nearby Russell lot (which is free on the weekends) and you can drop your car off there. →Raul654 22:09, Dec 11, 2004 (UTC)

PS - I am CCing this message to your email address, along with the phone numbers for my cell and house (I'd post them here if it weren't for the obvious privacy concerns).

Auction & Virtual Economy

I'm sorry if you think (as you insinuated on my talk page) I'm affiliated with the whole Mike Church fiasco. Honestly, on good faith you should believe I'm not. I quit Wikipedia in 2003 (before any of that seems to have transpired) and came back to it about a week and a half ago. I had no part in, nor knowledge of, that situation until User:Jerzy posted about the matter on my talk page, so I decided to read up on the issue, because it seemed important. I still don't understand it fully, because it's hard to see everything that happened from the pages I've read.

What I do want to talk about... if you're into auctions, I was wondering if you could give some direction for synthetic economy, or maybe even do some work on it. I did some significant work on it, but I still don't feel that it's a complete article.

Thanks. EventHorizon 05:07, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

No Big Deal?

Salve, Isomorphic!
Well, I've decided to put myself in the running for WP:RFA again. Since we communicated on this subject, I'd appreciate your vote here. To judge from the opposition, it is indeed a big deal to some of our fellows. Ave!

More Minions

I wouldn't feel comfortable editing a protected User subpage, so I'll just mention them here -- User:VFD and User:4FD are recent incarnations, both now blocked. See User_talk:SWAdair#Deletion and User_talk:DJ_Clayworth#Talk:Ambition_.28card_game.29 for a brief explanation. SWAdair | Talk 09:32, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Possible sub-page for the Tutorial

Since some people learn better by example than reading instructions, it occurred to me that an annotated version of a short, but multi-element article might be helpful to people going thru the tutorial. What do you think of this as an "annotated format/layout sample article" (real wording TBD--could probably be better). I think it addresses several of the most common newcomer mistakes. I was thinking of adding it as a subpage of, and linked from, the wrapup, or possibly the formatting page, while that's fresh in the reader's mind, or both. Any thots? Niteowlneils 04:37, 19 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your additions and input on the annotated article--just the sorts of improvements I figured a second/fresh set of eyes could find. I incorporated your suggestions, tweaked a few other things, and moved it as you suggested to Wikipedia:Annotated article. Now I'll go create some links to it. Thanks again. Niteowlneils 04:19, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Cayley-Newbirth operation matrix

• I wish I had enough pure math knowledge to pull something like that off. ;-) —ExplorerCDT 23:49, 23 Dec 2004 (UTC)