User talk:Cimon Avaro/archive 4

For older talk: CLICK HERE

Finnjävel[edit]

I would suggest that some Swedes use -djävul or -jävel or some mixture thereof on virtually any nomen, as in: Inte fan träffade han spikjäveln, inte.

Tyskjävel, Ryssjävel, och Finnjävel are probably quite similar terms, but I refuse to believe that the suffix carries much meaning.

On the other hand, there are (in Malmö at least), a set of racist terms for people originating in Southern Europe and further away, which are used rather commonly and definitely are associated with somewhat hostile feelings.
--Ruhrjung 11:47, 31 Aug 2003 (UTC)

your wording on Truth[edit]

...I forget about the wording I didn't understand. ;-))

Regarding the severness, I stand by my assessment in Talk:Continuation War stressing the refusal to communicate on contested statements (who attacked whom in 1939 and 1941, an ally or not an ally, a war or a conflict, fascist or democratic... - everything as quoted from East-German schoolbooks).
--Ruhrjung 11:47, 31 Aug 2003 (UTC)

I wish to point out in the most strenous terms that I do not disagree with your evaluation on Talk:Continuation War. I only disagree with the degree of influence everything you said there, and the other talkpages referenced therein, should have on the sysop nomination process. I (still) don't think they are strong enough indications to deny him sysophood. Maybe they are enough to make explicit that he might not be the best of the sysops we have, though maybe he might have potential of growth, I don't honestly know.

But to drive my point to the ground, I personnally don't want a group of sysops who consist only of the "best of us", not just because I might fail the grade ;) but also because it promotes insincerity, fakeness and politicking. If I were Jimbo Wales, I would decree that the only standard for gaining sysophood was a sincere wish to preserve and improve Wikipedia, personality or tenor of conduct being only an extremely rare reason to deny it. The only issue I might take out of your disapproval of Graculus' actions is the accusation of deviousness, or dishonesty. If I believed they were real characteristics, I probably would have supported your and Tuomas' drive to not admit him as a sysop. But as I don't, I didn't. -- Cimon Avaro on a pogo-stick 12:20, Aug 31, 2003 (UTC)

I see that you rewrote large portions of the opening paragraphs of Cold War. Good job. However, since I wrote large portions of that article, I feel compelled to plea not guilty. Those sections weren't mine, but I guess I should have copyedited them long ago when I added a great deal of text. 172 18:27, 5 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Cimon, the Talk:List of heterosexuals/deletion page was created exclusively to discuss with the deletion debate, nothing else. Wiki policy is to delete talk pages alongside main pages when the main page is deleted. The deletion subpage is simply a record of what was discussed in the delete debate, nothing more, and to use it to continue the debate is a fundamental breach of wiki policy on deletion. If the issue is to be debated more, it should be debated elsewhere, but the deletion subpage was simply a time-specific one issue page. The time specified in its creation has lapsed and the issue which it was discussing was in accordance with wiki policy terminated with the deletion.

I originally deleted the page, having been unclear as to how it should be preserved. Eloquence undeleted it before I had a chance to do so, having decided that it would best be archived on the VfD page. It is however an archive of a specific discussion, not a live page. If you wish to discuss the issue further, it should be done on a different page, not an archive, which as with archives generally is simply a record of past discussions, not live ones, which are carried out on live pages or meta pages, not archives. FearÉIREANN 14:27, 9 Sep 2003 (EDT)

Hi, Jtdirl. Welcome to my talkpage.

The purpose a talkpage is created for, and the purposes it may serve, are not just two different things, but several.
Wiki policy may be to delete talk pages alongside main pages when the main page is deleted. There is no shortage of exceptions however, and the deletion page is not in any shape or form stricktly (for the purposes of any purported policy) analogous to a garden variety talkpage. Since the creation of the page itself was contrary to accepted practises (use VfD), justification (or otherwise) for its retention should also be argued ab novo.
I agree that the page should not be used to argue the case of the specific page, but merely as a handy reference to a case that was. There is much to be learned from the debate, for all its acrimoniousness. If someone tries to use it to continue debating the decided issue, it should be protected to disallow that. I wouldn't protest a move to meta either. As long as it remains where it can be read and referred to, when some new user asks: "why don't we have a page on heterosexuals too?"

Finally. The early days of the page, I thought the page would not survive long. I think it was a good thing that some people who cared more about the thing than I, took it upon themselves to vote against its retention, and therefore caused it to be deleted. In my opinion it was a good thing that they did so, because they felt that way. I believe Wikipedia functions best when people act on their beliefs. I believed I was doing the right thing when I restored the deletion page, since it was not a regular talkpage, but a historic occurence which contravened usual practises, and thus should remain on the record. Either it is a precedent for later analogous situations or a warning sign against what should not be allowed to happen again. Such discussion should definitely not be held on the page itself, but it should certainly be available to be referred to within such discussions. -- Cimon Avaro on a pogo-stick 17:45, Sep 9, 2003 (EDT)

Hello Mr. Avaro. May I have your email address? I've just put together a register of Wikipedia developers, including phone numbers, email addresses, etc., which Wikipedians can use to contact developers in case of server failure. I can't distribute it publicly, so I really need an email address or some other private method of communication. You had the dubious honour of contributing to Wikipedia during every hour of the day over the week when I collected data, and hence I thought you'd be a good person to have on the team, along with about 20 others. -- Tim Starling 03:51, Sep 13, 2003 (UTC)

So it was you that broke it! :) Angela 16:22, Sep 13, 2003 (UTC)

Hang on, I'm just looking up some things... -- Tim Starling 13:58, Sep 16, 2003 (UTC)

You should probably inform Jimbo by email. I know nothing about Finnish law, but it's probably best to let him know if there's even the slightest chance of legal exposure. I think it's probably pretty unlikely that this guy will take it further, but we shouldn't take chances. Other than that, I think the action you've taken was quite reasonable and I can't think of anything else you can do other than wait for a reaction to your email.

fi.wikipedia.org is running UseMod. I was just looking up some documentation -- I wasn't sure how one goes about deleting things in UseMod. It looks like there aren't any administrator accounts as such, just a global administrator password, and everyone who knows it can delete pages. I now know it. Do you want me to delete the page? -- Tim Starling 14:15, Sep 16, 2003 (UTC)

Done. I hope I don't get into trouble for it. Make sure you tell Jimbo what we just did. Anyway, it's my bedtime now, good night. -- Tim Starling 14:39, Sep 16, 2003 (UTC)

Bots[edit]

You know, I can automatically update all the articles that my bot created, so for a wording change like that the one about immigrants, it might be easier to let me do it (unless you don't mind editing all those articles). I was unsure about the wording of new immigrants, and I think that yours is an improvement, but "settlers" is a loaded word in the context of Israeli politics, so maybe something better could still be found.

As for "no significant Arab/Jewish Population", I don't have any more detailed information than that. The data I'm working from has a dash in the cell in question, basically saying "not available". I would say "none", except that in a number of cases the rest of the population adds up to 99.x%, so it's not clear that it's exactly none. -- AdamRaizen 16:13, 2003 Sep 21 (UTC)

When I first saw some user 's page rant about quiting this project I could not understand at all why , now I do. For a start it is a bit unfair to propose a vote for deletion if you are a Sysop who refuses to accept email. Few Sysops seem to want to accept email i notice. Listen Cimron, the page on Sir T.B.s Library is pefectly valid, i am not going to list all 1500 titles just those which illustrate the breadth and depth and TOLERANCE of Sir T.B.s learning. What is your problem? I thought this page would be of prestige to Wiki 'cos no-one in the past near 300 years has looked at this document in detail. Maybe you could take a page out of Sir T.B.'s wisdom and learn something about how people in the past had a much wider scope of knowledge than today. just 'cos you don't understand or approve of something doesn't mean it might not be of interest to others. perhaps you are attempting to annoy me to make me quit the project. At least have the guts to email me to articulate JUST WHY you want this page deleted.It may be a road you don't want to go down but at least respect other peoples cultural heritage. There are far more irrelevant and obscure pages at wiki than this,. For heavens sake Sir T.b. was one of Europe'e earliest Encyclopaedists. On that account alone he deserves an indepth coverage..Norwikian

Would it be too much to ask you to explain your reversion? LirQ

I should not be required to ask your permission, before editing a page. You reverted my changes, you explain why. Explain why "global wave of neoliberalism" is NPOV and it was wrong of me to put it in quotes. Explain why every single change I made, was so horribly wrong that it had to be reverted.

Surely there was at least "one" change which was worth keeping, and thus, did not require a complete revert. LirQ

If you have a source which states 1968 as the date for privatization's coinage, then change the date to 1968 and cite the source. The current date, being unsourced, is pretty much worthless. LirQ

"Since you are an avowed anti-deletionist..."

Yes?

Could you take a look at the current version of Wikipedia:Dead letter office (proposal)?

Sure.

"I am about ready to go on a last big push to get support for its adoption, or failing that its transfer to meta."

What does last ditch mean on WP?

"I cannot see anything I personally can polish further about it (and hence it may need a second view)."

My best, will do.

"Since you have criticized the abrupt process we have currently, perhaps you could give useful feedback on what should still be improved about it, how I should approach its promotion and other related matters?"

OK.

"That is of course if you don't think it's counterproductive."

No. I would simply state that my thinking on it is similar to Martin's -- that there be degrees-- that whatever process it is not reflect a paraniod "lets weed the wiki" type actions-- which are based in a fundamental misunderstanding of wiki.-戴&#30505sv 19:05, 30 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Deletion buffer, User:Stevertigo/DLO. (Grunt. Snort)-戴&#30505sv 21:32, 30 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Hi Cimron! What an odd handle you have, could only come from a dream !So what's to be verdict and outcome of my VfD page? Do you know? Do you still believe it should be deleted? I found a better title and home for it under Library Please don't let my harsh words get to you, like you I believe myself to go an okay person (sometimes), it's just that i hate attacks on cherished projects. It's awfully quiet and lonely out here on the 'wiki without any feedback. Please don't condemn me to silence. Sometimes i feel like Homer Simpson when i upset people. Dohh! ( ever noticed how the baddies on the Simpsons are invariably portrayed as having English accents. Such a parcel full of rogues in a nation, as the song goes).

So please take another look at Library of Sir Thomas Browne and tell me if i has a place at the 'wiki. I won't get angry whatever you say, promise.User:Norwikian 08:39 Brit Summer??!! Time

Let's hope Wikipedia doesn't die then or we'll have nowhere to go! Maybe they need a Berlios Status page here. :) --Angela 22:03, Oct 3, 2003 (UTC)

Have the VfD objections you raised about Lib. of Sir T.B. been placated with development of page? I am still interested to know your REASONS why you proposed to VfD page other than a road not to go down or why. I shall take silence to mean you're vaguely satisfied now. It is great to know of someone who is impervious to American popular culture and can transcend it's world-wide ubiquity. The Beatles, like the Simpsons seems to be another ( faded) icon of pop culture which arouses strong views from all even today Norwikian 10:22, 5 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Have just seen your encouraging comments on page.Queries answered Thanks Cimron Norwikian 11:19, 5 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Hi Cimron, i've just taken a look at the 'Hell on Earth' page which is VfD. Now will you too VfD this or accept it as just a typical example of American pop culture and is therefore okay. Do many pages pop up like this 'cos it looks like the wiki has a BIG problem if so?Norwikian 19:49, 7 Oct 2003 (UTC)

the text below was cross-posted to User talk:Netesq, User talk:Jiang, User talk:Jtdirl, and User talk:Cimon avaro

Still writing about me? Why? Since you and your friends can't stop obsessing about me, I may be forced to come back to Wikipedia. Sadly, however, you and your friends still are allowing a proven pro-Nazi viewpoint to be pushed on Wikipedia from Stevertigo and his friend Martin; the fact that you don't have a problem with this is shocking, and tells me things about you I rather would not have learned. User:RK 00:32, 8 Oct 2003 (UTC)~

Also, I see that you and others are still slandering me non-stop. Loo, tw o people kept harassing me. I excercised my right to remove their comments from my Talk User page. All Wikipedia users have always had that right. Yet then other Wikipedians such as Angela began harassing me; shockingly, they reverted my edits to my own page, and restored the harassment. When I reported this non-stop harassment to the Wiki list, no one helped, and in fact people slandered me. So I had no other options left; I did the same thing to them, yet I was banned and they were not. So this sick situation hasn't changed. I just wonder how much harassment I can put on someone else's page (perhaps yours?) until I see someone (perhaps you?) remove it? Then I can do this again and again until you take action...and then you would be banned? Does this sound reasonable? Frankly, to me this course of action sounds like harassment, and its totally insane. I just don't get why you think it was Ok to do to me, and not to anyone else. That kind of insane double standard is so hateful, that I can only attribute it to malice, and not ignorance. User:RK 00:32, 8 Oct 2003 (UTC)

No I am not writing about "you". On wikikipedia I most meticulously write only about personas as they manifest on wikipedia. The way someone acts on wikipedia may have some relevance to who they are, but personally I usually don't buy that argument, a rabid right-winger may in actual fact be a cynical communist agent provocateur, and so forth. When I write about some username, it is not about "that person"; it is about that username.

Personally, I find it extremely curious that you think that I have friends on wikipedia. I don't. At best I would call some of the users here acquaintances. So far, I can't think of any user here I have said only nice things to/about; so I guess I harrass and slander everybody here.

As to obsessing about you, I personally had already swiftly begun to forget that you existed. -- Jussi-Ville Heiskanen 01:26, Oct 8, 2003 (UTC)

I believe that the line you added to the article on Giordano Bruno is in error. I know that regret over the sentence of death has been expressed, but certainly it was carried out, and know of no "overturning" of the verdict of heresy, as in the case of Galileo. I would be delighted to learn otherwise, but have not found any indications that this is the case. Kalki 14:08, 11 Oct 2003 (UTC)

my apologies. i could swear that when i looked at your posts of 18:04, 11 Oct 2003 and 17:58, 11 Oct 2003, items were deleted...i don't know what my brain was seeing at the time, but i was wrong. please accept my apology. Kingturtle 00:23, 12 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Well, to quote Norwikian: "Worse things happen at sea." Consider your apology accepted.

I have misread edits myself, so I know what it feels like from both sides. I personally think people are much too much on the edge here, with the server troubles, wikidowns, slowness, press release delays and many utilities like VFD, Pages needing attention, thins to be moved into wiktionary etc. having a rough patch with the growth of wikipedia.

IMO this is purely a crisis that wikipedia is passing through right now, and people are on edge, and liable to make more mistakes than they would make under normal circumstances. This is a general comment, not aimed at you personally.

That in fact is part of the reason behind my Cleanup proposal. A informal, anonymous, shoot from the hip page, without personalities, without stress about being right or wrong, needing no rhetorical flourishes to justify opinions etc.

(And by the way, Carthage should be destroyed)

Respectfully:

-- Jussi-Ville Heiskanen 08:57, Oct 12, 2003 (UTC)

No, it wasn't scanned, I wrote it like a good little wikipedian. ping 07:39, 21 Oct 2003 (UTC)~

Fine then. I apologize for my misinterpretation. What set the alarm bells were the variable numbers of space characters after each sentence. -- Cimon Avaro on a pogostick 11:47, Oct 21, 2003 (UTC)

Please consider protecting Jesus Christ. Lirath Q. Pynnor

Should go on articles requested, but don't remember the exact phrase...[edit]

In brief: anybody who knows the story to the point of titleing it properly, please start an article on the USENET historical event of the one autumn student rush that did not end, because those rushing in were not students any more... I feel we are heading towards an unending slashdot effect. Arhechgm, Was It Ythe "Unending September", "The September That Did Not End", "The September Without End", (August?, different phrasing?), Anywhay thisi is an important subject whe havent kovered. If somevody knobs the corect subject, I weill feeeel free to elaborate on the historical detail... -- Jussi-Ville Heiskanen 08:46, Oct 16, 2003 (UTC)

"Eternal September" or "September That Never Ended". See the Jargon File: [1] -- Jake 09:24, 16 Oct 2003 (UTC)

That's alright, you put a bit of interest into my day :) I think you managed to confuse both Matt and me. It looks like someone's working on Berlios: it used to be timing out, but now it's returning a blank page. So it probably wasn't Erik trying to spite us all ;) By the way, I sent you an email. -- Tim Starling 03:31, Oct 22, 2003 (UTC)

Why the pogo stick? dave 03:48, 22 Oct 2003 (UTC)

System of a Down has a pogostick song. Lirath Q. Pynnor

Keeps both my feet unfirmly off the ground? -- Cimon Avaro on a pogostick 03:54, Oct 22, 2003 (UTC)

No problem, and don't worry too much about making links point to bullroarer rather than bull-roarer - both forms of the name are pretty common, I think, and the redirect means everyone ends up in the right place (but of course, if you've got nothing better to do... ;). --Camembert

OK. I will give it some energy with you, now that theres some coordination. What do you mean "went through" --its part of an overall deletion process overhaul. We need to draw people a picture. :) -Id like to see it re-formatted and the olde items removed. Thanks -戴&#30505sv 16:08, 23 Oct 2003 (UTC)

I think gradual does it best, small steps... Just hints that this or that article might have been rescued just as easily on cleanup. As the cleanup page gets more and more enmeshed with the way Wikipedia operates, further advances will be inevitable, but a too strong push right now, may still be counterproductive in the long run. Not draw people a picture, just some dots with numbers, and let them connect the dots themselves :-D

I have already been removing resolved items from the bottom of the list, the unresolved can stay there for a while and then be listed on VFD or pages needing help or whatever. Naturally they shouldn't stay there for ever, just a fairly long time.

As to the reformatting, could you provide me with a sample Cleanup entry which has been formatted in a way you would prefer? Or are you talking about a more expansive format change? -- Cimon Avaro on a pogostick 16:34, Oct 23, 2003 (UTC)

There are two of us with similar and confusing names. I'm User:Morven and there's also a User:Morwen. Different people. I believe that I, the former, is who you meant to respond to on Wikipedia talk:Votes for Deletion.

--Morven 19:35, 23 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Indeed. In fact I noticed my mistake immediately as I pressed the "Save page" button. (gr) -- Cimon Avaro on a pogostick 19:43, Oct 23, 2003 (UTC)

Hi there~ Chiang Kai-shek died on April 5, 1975 -- did you mean to add a different one (?) to Recent deaths? Thanks, BCorr ¤ Брайен 05:37, 24 Oct 2003 (UTC)

One word away from getting it right - it was his widow who died. [2] --Jiang 05:52, 24 Oct 2003 (UTC)

It has to be the 23rd. It's only been the 24th for 2 hours on the east coast. I don't think it's within this time frame. The articles say "thurs".

Reuters: "We were told that Madame Chiang passed away at about 11 something last night," Andrew Hsia, director general of the Taipei Economic and Cultural Office in New York, told Reuters by telephone. --Jiang 06:19, 24 Oct 2003 (UTC)

West-Europea[edit]

please delete - my misspelling and absolutely no-one will do that error regularly
--Ruhrjung 08:23, 26 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Hi ! How could I make it that people don't block others to limit their input, hein ? you have an answer to that ? And how to make it that a super developer does not take blocking decisions for us, hein ?

(note: above message added by User:Anthere)

<<Hi ! How could I make it that people don't block others to limit their input, hein ? you have an answer to that ?>>

Absolutely not. No answer whatsoever. The blocking is always done to limit their input. That is, the input of vandals.

What I think you mean is how to make sure that they only block the input of genuine vandals. Am I correct?

yes

If that is what you meant with your question, I am sorry, but the answer is still no, I don't have an answer to the problem. Accidents do happen. The best we can do is to communicate clearly when such accidents happen, that it is an accident, and not deliberate. You don't mean that anyone would deliberately block a genuine non-vandal contributor whose input one did not like, do you?

I do :-) Not here though :-) but it happened :-)

Where? Can you point me to the relevant discussion about the event? What was the reaction of developers and such when that happened? -- Cimon Avaro on a pogostick 08:03, Oct 27, 2003 (UTC)

That was on the fr wiki. There has been someone called Papotages. He is definitly a difficult user. Definitly. He belongs to a sect, raelien, he participated a lot on our articles on "secte", "raelisme", "aumisme" and "pédophilie" in particular, but others as well. He commonly add quite a lot of biaised information, but very interesting one as well. If you look at the history of secte (he is also 62.167.xx.xx)

http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secte http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discuter%3ASecte

and mostly its talk page, you may begin to see the problem. He is *very* talkative, and *very* provocative. Definitly difficult to work with. But given that we had at least two very serious anti-sect (cult for you), it was initially more a fight between one pro-secte and two anti-secte. It took us a lot of energy to define what a cult was; Then he wrote about some cults. I think it is awfully interesting that someone part of a cult write about this topic, so I believe the person important. But difficult to deal with. Very quickly (I was on holidays then), he was attacked by several users; the focus left the article, and discussions led to personal attacks exclusively. When I came back, there were two articles on aumisme, one from him, and another stricly defended by a group of users. And I saw little reason not to integrate his stuff in the current article. There were some biased stuff in both, and I could see both could make something decent. Papotages had been ip blocked by Brion upon request per mailing list. I asked Brion to stop that block. But, still, the access to the article was denied, and they all went on personal attacks. Was very stupid and very unproductive. Very bad for spirit. In the end, Papotages reacted to censorship in making a whole bunch of stupid articles. He just blew up. That would have been a reason to temporarily block him.

http://fr.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=Aumisme&action=history

Anyway, I tried to shut down the noisiest voices, and spent a whole night integrating the two articles together. I think it basically stable since then.

Papotages wrote some stuff I found very interesting on how NPOV was perceived on fr, and on how censorship is practiced. Very very provocative, but awfully relevant. I thought this would be censored later on, so it was copied to meta. A month ago, someone discovered the text on meta, and immediately started a witch hunt for Papotages to be rejected (it is on the mailing list, and through many private discussions). Just because he had been supposingly writing on meta and because this was hurting sensibilities (these are citations of what many people said about NPOV). He was hardly contributing then on wikipedia itself. Some wanted him banned for this. It was just a mob.

In the end, I would say that Papotages is a difficult user, but not one that should be banned, because he can be dealt with and discussed with. Most users do not hold that position and are strongly against him. Some accept he is there (but likely would prefer he is not). What I saw is a biaised and provocative, but enlightened editor, hunt and led to stupid acts by mishandling. Some insist they have been tring to talk to him, but when you look at the discussion, you just do not see them focusing on articles content, but on personal attacks.0

Reaction of developper : there was only one. Brion. He made the good decision ihmo. Aoineko and Yann asked him to make an ip block. He checked the last contributions of Papotages (which were bad) and did. Someone asked him to block the name as well, but he did not. Several then agreed to remove the ip block, as they agreed it would be block other contributors (I was among, but I do not know if my asking would have been sufficient to have the block removed) and he did. I suppose he considers it is our business, and do not try to get involved in it, just do a quick check and what we ask him to. Brion is wonderfully neutral for all this. Always. That is why he can be deeply trusted;

Whichever trust would not be so obvious if the developer had been involved in the battle.

Or do you fear that might happen somewhere, like on one of the smaller wikipedias, where there is less accountability?

Yes, again. I was only talking of small wikis. Not here, there are enough people. Some people on fr suggested that sysops should not be accountable, because that might limit their liberty and boldness in blocking vandals. It has also been suggested that sysops should not have the ability of blocking vandals, but only developers should. That is...for us Brion. Or another developer we might elect. That would be putting all power in the hands of one person. I think we are heading to a direction where sysops can only block for say 24 hours, and only a developper can permanently block. I am confused, not sure it is a good idea, a good decision. The positive point is that no sysop has permanent blocking power, the drawback is that we rely a lot on a developper sense of ethic. I do not know whether a discussion between no more than 2/3 people can lead to the best solution. I am just worried. Wondering. Anthère 07:40, 27 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Well, I now have a better understanding of what you meant :-) I don't have a better answer though :-( The stuff about blocking 24 or permanent and such is really beyond my competence. I personally haven't blocked anyone, even as a test, and I would be afraid to do so too. I guess I am just about one of the most timid sysops around. I've only once even protected a page, and then because two schoolgirls were using the article-page as a chatroom. -- Cimon Avaro on a pogostick 08:03, Oct 27, 2003 (UTC)

LOL. You could have left it for them for a while :-))) I have blocked one user name once a couple of days ago. And protected a handful of pages. Usually, the protection has been lifted less than an hour later. I do not like block because they are done *against* a person, while protection means "everyone just stop now". It does not have the same focus. Well, anyway, it will not really be mine to choose in the end, but I think we will have sysops wars over blocking and unblocking, and I do not like the idea, because it is a person concerned in the end, and this is an violent act toward itself. I hope you won't have the pb too quickly on your small wikipedia one Cimon :-)

But it was not a proud moment anyway, because I forgot to unprotect the page later, and someone, I think Tim Starling, had to do it for me, because I had forgotten the whole thing. I think you understand why I would fear blocking someone... I just don't trust myself to remember what I have done and when. I don't want responsibility.

Better not to do sysop things then :-) But you still are responsible of everything else you do :-)

And about Finnish wikipedia, I am sorry, but the English wikipedia is where I am active, not the Finnish one. Maybe that is a shameful thing, but it is true. I have tried to do things for the Finnish wikipedia, but it just is not any fun. The only thing I read in Finnish are the tabloids and subtitles in French films. I don't have an organic relation with my native language at all, except as a spoken tongue. There, I have probably revealed much too much about myself... -- Cimon Avaro on a pogostick 10:08, Oct 27, 2003 (UTC)

You are a finnish prime minister in exil ?

Seriously, starting nearly alone a wikipedia is sure no fun. But after a while some people get here. It is better when there are at least 15 people. But not seriously fun until much more.

I liked what you wrote on meta. One could feel the blood running in veins :-) good day Cimon

Please clarify. -- Cimon Avaro on a pogostick 22:02, Oct 26, 2003 (UTC)

IDS not a caucasian?[edit]

I always thought he was. What is he, then? 80.255 22:30, 26 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Denying him a place because he's one eighth japanese seems to be splitting hairs somewhat. However, it might be worth defining the level of purity required to qualify as caucasian at the top of the article. Would someone 1/16 japanese qualify, etc.? I'm all for accuracy, but I think this needs to be clarified and defined. 80.255 23:32, 26 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Knock yourself out, but don't ask me to join you. That article is fun to edit, but I am sorry, I won't be taking it seriously. -- Cimon Avaro on a pogostick 23:48, Oct 26, 2003 (UTC)

If it survives VfD then it will have to be taken seriously. If it doesn't, then there isn't any point in bothering. 80.255 23:53, 26 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Wrong. I decide which articles I take seriously. I don't abrogate that right to VFD. I may lament the folly, or exult in the whimsy, as the mood takes me, but take them seriously? Naah. -- Cimon Avaro on a pogostick 00:05, Oct 27, 2003 (UTC)

Hello Cimon! Since the dreaded developers did not made a sysop of me :) i have a request for you: can you put 1755 Lisbon earthquake in the historical anniversaries in the Main Page. Its tomorrow, November 1. Cheers, Muriel Gottrop 14:24, 31 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Done. -- Cimon Avaro on a pogostick 14:52, Oct 31, 2003 (UTC)

Re Scientific method. This should be the lead article on the subject. Because of that it should give some definition of just what we mean by the term. The only other part that I restored was a summary of the detailed explanation of the steps that are more fully described afterwards. I do agree that it was getting long, and so I was content to leave the rest where you moved it. ☮ Eclecticology 20:43, 2003 Nov 1 (UTC)

Don't apologise for correcting my typos... :) Martin 15:24, 4 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I think you're going a bit overboard. According to Alexa, we're about the same size as slashdot. See [3]. -- Tim Starling 23:40, Nov 5, 2003 (UTC)

On sober reflection, I concur. Maybe the volunteer fire-department should be demobilised permanently, after the new database monster goes online and we weather the Press Release.

Additionally, let's hope there was not an unreasonable inundation of wikipedians rushing to see the /. article:) -- Cimon Avaro on a pogostick 00:23, Nov 6, 2003 (UTC)

Dear Cimon, i'm glad to see you here. 2 new users are creating pages for friends like Shelby Glover, Cindy Farrar. I warned them but apparently they continue, including their birthdays in the dates. What should we do besides reverting, warning and posting on VfD? Cheers, Muriel Gottrop 17:54, 7 Nov 2003 (UTC) BTW, this page is over 35kb

Ok, i should know that :) They are calmer now. Thanks! Muriel Gottrop

Hm, it would be nice to get an admin on meta, so that we can kick him off of there too. I'm not sure who has privs though. - Hephaestos 23:28, 10 Nov 2003 (UTC)

No, unfortunately I am not. I asked a long time ago to be, but was never made one. Sorry I can't be of more help. See m:Wikipedia:Administrators. Anthere is going to look into it. Angela 00:23, 11 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Ok. Thanks anyway. -- Cimon Avaro on a pogostick 00:27, Nov 11, 2003 (UTC)

Re: Stephen Emanual Poulos and John Joseph Murray, the consensus on Vfd seemed to be to delete these pages. Why did you remove them with the note "decision was to keep"? Maximus Rex 19:28, 11 Nov 2003 (UTC)