User talk:Georgewilliamherbert/Archives/2009/August

968:

existant, perhaps you are not familiar with the writings of Che Guevara, but when someone has a revolutioanry quote from "El Che" on their userpage : "Hasta la Victoria Siempre" ( Always towards the victory which means that every act is a revolutionary act, El Che also advocated the use of propoganda to bring about the Revolution and any act was justified to usher it in) I was naturally concerned. He has since cleared up my question by explaining the quote on my talkpage. It was placed on it to atagonize some anti-communists from an earlier problem he had on the Che page. You must admit, using Knowledge for Revolutionary activities would be antithesis to the projects goals. It appears that is not his purpose. I didn´t realize that asking one if he were a revolutioanry impunged one´s character. True Revolutionaries will do anything to bring about their goal, and feel any act to be justified, Revolutioanry Justice not being the least.

1038:] I have written a lot of academic stuff over the years, and I know how to write and report with NPOV. While you may think that I am too close to the subject, there is equally strong evidence that many editors of the article on homeopathy are lividly antagonistic to the subject. Comparatively, I maintain a much more NPOV. I would hope that you and others would help police both sides of this issue. I have not tried to “push” anything (heck, I have not even made a single edit or reversion in the article). I have provided contributions on the Talk pages information, references, quotes, and sought to get collaboration. Further, I have sought to provide evidence from reliable sources on metaanalyses and have quoted primary (Cochrane) and secondary sources (the Lancet). 343:) article has begun to edit war with reverts even after I welcomed him, explained consensus and agreed to discuss changing the infobox image. Instead he simply reverted the page back to the version of the removal of many more images and commented in the summery "replacing dark photo that original photographer admits does not work". I agreed to discuss the image and agreed it was dark and was a tourist attraction, but there is no consensus to change it. I asked that he present more images to discuss and I would do the same and we could form a consensus and work together. Editor is becoming harrassive and is not working in good faith.-- 626:

lot of clawing. A courteous note or suggestion and some patience will usually do the trick and generally works much better than a arming a pack of civility police to run around willy nilly looking to enforce their whims on what they think is appropriate. The standard should be uniform and clear that only severe personal attacks and incivility that is harassing is worth pursuing. The odd fuck off on a user's talk page is hardly a calamity and truly not worth the bother. And other instances can be refactored or stuck through with some vigorous (and out of sight) finger wagging.

1912: 1341: 1134: 200: 1727: 774: 31: 479:

differences involved and warned against abusing processes and smearing other editors. When administrators fail to take these sensible steps, and refuse to get involved, it encourages the malicious activity of those who keep causing these disruptions and filing frivolous reports in hopes of getting a drive by block or winning a content dispute with the help of an admin who isn't bright enough to figure out what's really going on. Comprende?

376:. Third party suugestion for image was disputed as washed out, so I made good faith photoshop adjustments and added it to see if improved image works and discussed it on the talk page. I will make no further edits there. I feel I broke a commitment to you, but I was getting a little stepped on. Sorry, I feel a litle bad but it wasn't confrontational and I think it was constructive, but....I did break my word. Sorry.-- 288:

happened. Or since he is so much interested in CoM, he should've checked on the changed remedy, he would realize that his accusation is unfound. However, the user who has accused CoM for breaching things that do not exist, indeed said "I'd block you". That is a breach of policies on NPA and harassment, so I checked to see if he were an admin. (of course, he is not) He seems to have some

1455:

fact that several editors (including myself) have posted in support of RockMFR demonstrates that you acted rashly here. I am also concerned about the selective edit history you posted - why did you not mention that the article has been targeted by vandals for the last few weeks and that I was also involved in reverting this nonsense? - RockMFR was not acting entirely unilaterally.

570:, s/he's posted an unblock request. I think it could be easier for the reviewing admin if you posted some diffs indicating problematic conduct. Of course, I realize that in some instances, an ongoing pattern doesn't neatly fit into a couple diffs, however if you could leave a note on the user talk page, providing some more details, that would be appreciated. 447:. Or maybe you can ask Binkenstreet, who I see has made some edits there, which photos they think should be used. Just because the other editor is anonymous doesn't mean their position has less validity than yours does. Somehow you have to work out a compromise or a resolution to the dispute as opposed to trying to get them blocked because you disagree. 305:. He may want to speak to the creator of the site for what? AGF is only for people who deserve. This is very absurd. I'm politically more than "liberal" (applying to worldwide) which is strikingly opposite to CoM who is known as a conservative, but I think minority should have a right to voice out without oppression or tackles. Anyway, thank-- 1856:

I tried to intervene to clarify the issue, but I was effectively pushed off-side. I then investigated what the knock on effect of this definition would have on electric permittivity. I discovered that it threatened the traditional view that the equation c^2 = 1/(εμ) is an empirical equation that follows from the 1856 experiment of

1777:, claiming the station is digital only. While this is true, the redirect gives the idea that the official callsign of the station has changed, it has not. All stations, when they switched to digital in June, were given the option of changing their callsign to reflect their digital status...some did, like 1855:

issue in relation to the 1983 re-definition of the metre. I entered this dispute as an arbitrator. I was actually unaware at the time I entered that the metre had been re-defined. Yes, I'm out of date. But when I examined the argument, I could see clearly that Brews ohare had a very legitimate point.

516:

If you're upset that you're not being treated entirely fairly here due to lack of resources - you're probably right. You probably deserve more in depth review. And I'll try and give you some time tomorrow. But I have a backlog on requests for that. There's an issue regarding Monterey you can read

1830:

You have too much of a COI to apply a fair topic ban. If the topic ban were necessary, someone else would suggest it. It's clear that you are doing this to 1. punish me, and 2. protect koalorka. i do not accept your topic ban, as it's based on fallacious and deceptive reasoning. You have provided no

625:

And thus we see an example of the various interpretations on civility. Which is why we should all act civilly and with restraint, assuming good faith and trying not to make mountains out of mole hills. Staying under our rocks when we want to involve ourselves in the crabbiness of others will avoid a

543:

The article content board, the third opinion board, the RfC process, and the soliciting of a respected third party to offer an opinion are all appropriate venues and approaches to take in resolving disagreements. Trolling for blocks and misusing admin boards to find sympathetic admins who don't know

417:

IP user, 71.149.243.247 has crossed the line from incivil to harrassment, personal attacks and name calling. Continues to edit war and revert against consensus and refuses to allow a new consensus to be discussed or formed. User creates an atmosphere on the page no editor would want to step into. IP

2041:

Hello George. I've seen you around Knowledge many times, but I don't think we've spoken directly to one another. I just wanted to leave you a note saying how much I personally appreciate the work you do on Knowledge. You work in a lot of contentious areas, yet you manage to think things through and

1470:

I'm also concerned, though reading through previous ANI threads it would appear that previous complaints have achieved little against you. However, I'll echo NickD by saying that your representation of the issue was false and misleading, apparently intentionally so, and against the rules of conduct

1041:

While some metaanalyses of the entire field of homeopathy have shown no benefits from this treatment, others have shown benefit. Similarly, many metaanalyses of the homeopathic treatment of specific diseases have shown no benefits, though SOME have shown benefit. In efforts to maintain a NPOV, we

856:

I asked you a simple question, and you can´t or won´t give me a straight answer. The second part of the question was only if the first part was true. Perhaps I should havve worded it to be clearer. It seems that my greatest mistake was naivity: That anyone would answer that question honestly if the

438:

Mad Scientist, I notice that you accused the other edit of vandalism, and yet here you are complaining about incivility when they called you a bully. It seems to be a content dispute over which photos to use. As you removed the gallery, that also limits the number of photos. Maybe you and the other

1537:

This whole thread was archived and seems to have grown stale despite the support for a topic ban. I'm assuming since you proposed the ban you don't want to be the one to close the discussion (which makes more than enough sense), but how does one get another admin to do so at this point especially

1454:

Hi, I think that it's pretty poor form to report another admin to ANI, declare that a consensus exists to overturn their decision after only two hours worth of discussion and before the admin posted in their own defence and then go on to overturn the block. This is basically wheel warring, and the

901:

You're implying here, without presenting actual evidence, that there's something deeply suspicious. The form of the question makes it sound like not answering is some form of self-incrimination, when in fact no Wikipedian whose actions have not established a bias or non-neutrality need answer any

836:

If you had restrained yourself to a polite inquiry into political orientation that would be fine. What you asked was not a polite inquiry. If you do not understand how it was impolite, you need to re-review your writing, and consider if you have a problem with communications which will make your

520:

A note of caution on sarcasm and humor online - if you don't put a smiley in, especially if it's in the middle of an actual disagreement, not everyone can tell you're trying to use good humor. I encourage the use of humor to defuse things, it's an effective social lubricant, but it doesn't always

943:

You could have asked him about his politics without any implication of COI or propagandistic misuse. If you had examples of COI or propaganda you could have asked him if he was letting his politics shade his contributions. The medium ground you took instead comes across as a clear attack on his

885:

I have a concern that you might have a conflict of interest based on several of the previous editions of your user page. You could clear it up for me by telling me a little more about yourself. Are you a Marxist or a Communist or other form of revoluntionary? A Maoist? I have read serveral of Che

504:

WP is a volunteer organization and aspects are understaffed, because of self-selection issues. I have a lot more fun working on articles, but when I blocked Giano someone made a nasty comment afterwards about my recent edit history - which I went back and looked at, and which for months has been

287:

I really do, but it is true that people who disagree with their opponents use whatever things they can take advantage of just like the case. If CoM would have explained the changed remedy to Scribner who brought in the absurd accusation on the first place, then the whole thing could have not been

967:

Sorry , after two rounds with my username being questions always couched the same way about "clearing up concerns" by " telling me a little more about your choice" or words to that effect, I thought, truly , that that was how one cleared up theses things. Perhaps your Spanish is not good, or non

535:

Thanks for the reply GWH. As far as my suggestion, I tried to make it above and I will reiterate: Do not encourage disruption (ie. aggravating time wastage) on admin boards by allowing them to be used for content disputes. Redirect the editors misusing the boards in this way, and if the behavior

478:

Poor judgment is rather an epidemic on Knowledge these days, and content disputes shouldn't be brought up on administrative noticeboards. When administrative functions are abused in this way, the editors causing the problem should be moved along with practical suggestions for how to solve the

1471:

an admin should hold themselves to; and the same with your misleading claim that you had consensus for your actions to unblock the user in question, then no such consensus had appeared. However, like I said, I can't imagine this will have any effects on your conduct, much as I hope otherwise.

292:

issue and has history related to the article if you look at his log. He also harassed me by falsely accusing that I attacked him because I said to him that CoM would revert his edit on his talk page because I know CoM tend to delete unwelcome message. He further continued forum shopping to

1873:

to get some clarification about whether the vibrating reed switch experiment is still in the textbooks. That is a basic outline of the dispute. I hope that it is helpful to you. I'd be obliged if you could make the necessary correction on Jimbo's talk page because there have been too many

1850:

George, I have to correct you on a particular point. To the best of my knowledge, nobody has offered any publication of mine as evidence in any of these disputes, contary to what you have said on Jimbo's talk page. In fact, I haven't actually written anything on-line about the

539:

As you point out, we are volunteers and in limited numbers. So we have to work together and to collaborate. Those who consistently abuse boards to attack and smear editors with whom they disagree are a big problem and at the core of the tensions and frustrations we have on

536:

persists then they need to be warned or blocked. You can start by being proactive in closing threads that deal with content disputes as being resolved per redirection to appropriate content dispute venues (Scribner's is a good example of a thread needing this remedy).

2042:

you try to work with people in achieving the best possible outcome. I'm glad you're an admin, and I think you're one of the best ones we have right now. I just felt like leaving you some words of encouragement, because everybody needs some now and then.

512:

It can take a focused application of hours of work - or an hour or more a day for weeks in some cases - to deal with some of these things. And that's with almost complete uninvolvement in arbcom cases et al, which can take up that much more themselves

1891:

George, This is just a reminder. I'd be obliged if you could return to Jimbo's talk page and put the record straight regarding your statement that the sources in question were written by myself. It's important that we correct that misunderstanding.

1221:

Thanks for your note. Okay - I am still waiting to see some indication that the cited refs are wrong, when we get a new ref then we can amend the article to indicate the discrepancy, disagreement, controversy or whatever it turns out to be. -

521:

work and isn't always clear. I really don't want to have to re-read the ANI thread again and pick out whatever I missed there, but apparently I missed something. I AGF on your contributions. Perhaps it will be more clear in the morning.

947:

If someone has done something wrong there is evidence for it. If there's evidence, you don't need to go around implying things like that or impugning people's integrity - you lay out the evidence and ask them and others to review and

1012:

of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank

886:

Guevara´s writings ( most recently the Libro de olivo verde, in Spanish) . Would you use the project as a front for revolutionary activity or propaganda purposes? Any clarification would be appreciated. Feel free to respond by email

799:

Please show me exactly where the attack was. It was resonably couched, polite, and germane. When someone has a quote of a revolutionary on his Userpage, is it unsual to ask if the user is a revolutionary? (unsigned - Die4Dixie)

318:

If by "conservative" you mean a freedom loving supporter of opportunity, prosperity, sensible environmental policies and free expression, then I will accept the label. But I think describing me as a moderate is more accurate.

508:

But if I stop doing the admin stuff that's one less person who's willing to step in, one less of the already few admins who will, if given enough reason, spend all day looking at a problem and working on it and trying to be

494:

If we had an infinite admin pool - we would not have tired admins seeing situations which have not been dealt with yet, we would not have a lack of admin involvement in some notice-boarded things which need involvement,

116: 1308:, you offered to impose rangeblocks if the inappropriate activity continued. My attention was diverted for a few days, so I missed your suggestion. The problem editing has continued, coming from IP addresses like 1868:

to reflect my knowledge on this matter. It was instantly reverted by Steven G Johnson. I then realized that there is a clash between traditional electromagnetism and the new definition of the metre, so I went to

1042:

should acknowledge and reference both sides, while giving more weight to the mainstream POV that questions homeopathy’s efficacy but that also acknowledges that some research quizzically suggests some benefits.

1306: 107: 99: 192: 172: 2005:...but to be frank, I've had enough of TSC's making himself out to be the victim when, most of the time, he provokes whatever reaction he gets. I can only simmer for so long before I start whistling. - 937:. With specific examples of potential "front activity or propaganda" one might ask "With these edits, were you trying to...". But you appear to have found no diffs and certainly didn't present them. 430: 352: 334: 1324:, and the editor was active about an hour ago as I write. I don't think anything less than blocking will be effective; the editor simply ignores the deletion of his/her contributions. Thanks. 1701:

If Cveig's edits were problematic, please discuss that at the article talk page. As I said, the block on editing is short duration (was six hours, now about 4-something remaining I think).

1025: 97: 475:

In all seriousness, you seem unable to differentiate between disruptive behavior on the one hand and restraint and good humor from someone being harassed on the other. This is unfortuante.

1001: 1740: 960: 787: 553: 530: 2030: 407: 385: 367: 1819: 1154: 1008: 1532: 92: 1621: 1607: 1575: 1561: 1547: 991: 977: 866: 849: 831: 822:

I won´t ask again, but it seems resonable based on the qotations about revolution by Che Guevara that he had on his Userpage and my reading of El Che´s writing on propoganda.--

1648:

article, I'm wondering if you could revert it back to the version just before the person claiming to be Jenrette started editing it since that was the last "stable" version.

657: 456: 1698:

made some apparently valid cleanup efforts, followed by her simply zeroing out the article (and my restoration and protection for a bit). I restored to Cveig's last version.

328: 2062: 1710: 1689: 1675: 679: 80: 760: 1294: 1950: 1901: 1399: 1172: 232: 1956: 1593: 1405: 1178: 238: 1962: 1944: 1411: 1393: 244: 579: 2119: 312: 1994: 1517: 1443: 1231: 1210: 1897: 1879: 1480: 1361: 1333: 276: 2087: 1932: 1381: 1160: 220: 76: 61: 59: 544:

the whole story is counterproductive. Cheerios, and thanks for your good efforts. Monterey is a bit cool for me, but it's supposed to be lovely up that way.

2051: 815: 398:

This isn't the same dispute - You're talking about the issue, no foul. I still need to get to reviewing the details and the IPs behavior, but will do so.

1371: 940:

The combination of the lead in and the COI / propaganda question particularly slants it towards an overall assumption of bad faith and inquisitorial tone.

1938: 1387: 1275: 1166: 226: 2015: 1082: 933:

some use of Knowledge as that front for revolutionary activity or propaganda purposes. The manner of the question presupposes an answer - and fails to

1893: 1883: 1875: 635: 594: 470: 149: 488: 695: 707: 1840: 1799: 1755: 1279: 1260: 1241:

Hey GWH, I saw your reference to something left on my talkpage as an attack, and I appreciate you trying to work with the other editor on it. (

2104: 1271: 1657: 1053: 739: 517:

about above, that I still haven't finished with, and a bunch more stuff around in the wings. In the meantime, please don't blow anything up.

1498: 2076: 140: 1216: 1063:

Since you've been involved with him, and are actually the administrator who recently administered a block for baiting, I'd like to bring

1464: 1909: 1338: 1131: 589:

Your prompt warnings to David Fuchs made you the only admin to emerge with any credit from this incident. However your threat to block

1126: 1064: 2111:

I believe you have a double negative here that says the opposite of what you mean (illegitimate should be legitimate if I'm right). –

613:. Even when acting relatively honourably your conduct still exemplifies the double standard from which misbehaving admins benefit. -- 197: 561: 2090:

included in your block summary and see no mention of Bluemarine, Matt Sanchez or Durova. Exactly what is he being blocked for? -

165: 132: 1979: 1428: 1195: 261: 1503: 1313: 282: 1106:). As I am not an admin any longer, just giving you a heads up that there is an open SPI, ANI and RFPP case regarding this. 1285:

I'm assuming by this comment because the time was off the personal attack was ok? The fallacies in logic here are amazing.

2021:

I understand, but we can't respond in a nasty manner or it escalates situations rather than calming them down. Thanks.

1975: 1424: 1309: 1191: 257: 153: 120: 1552:

I'll see about asking around; Any uninvolved admin (not the proposer) can close it. I shouldn't as I am the proposer.

1807: 161: 128: 610: 501:

If you have any constructive ideas on how to solve that, I'm sure there's interest in hearing them, and I'm listening.

145: 112: 1785:. I am not sure how to nominate these redirects for deletion under CSD, so if you could, would you mind helping? - 498:

If we had an infinite admin pool - admins could be proactive consistently, or at least promptly and evenly reactive.

2026: 1815: 1706: 1671: 1603: 1557: 1528: 1058: 956: 845: 811: 526: 403: 363: 1270:

I think if you check the time stamp the example you gave of my 'attcking someone' happened after the accusation!

472:. Accusing others of dramatizing situations isn't constructive at all. Do I need to call in the civility police? 2036: 1329: 590: 421:

I ave warned the user on the page that I intend to take this to ANI, but will wait to hear from you. Thank you.--

1320:

was created as a vehicle for Meryl Streep and Goldie Hawn and that Chevy Chase was up for the Al Pacino role in

944:

motives and honesty. He interpreted it that way, I did, the others reading and reviewing from ANI seem to have.

805: 1254: 1103: 645: 185: 47: 17: 444: 157: 124: 1970: 1419: 1186: 1120: 1074: 252: 171:. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at 1810:. If you can give him a bit more time to respond on his talk page, it would probably be best, though. 1845: 1325: 1300: 1290: 840:

Baiting people and asking impolite leading questions are not ok. In real life, or particularly here.

689: 38: 2022: 1911: 1811: 1702: 1667: 1599: 1553: 1524: 1340: 1133: 952: 841: 807: 631: 549: 522: 484: 452: 399: 359: 324: 199: 176: 2008: 2000: 1836: 1751: 1733: 1726: 1769:

is creating unnecessary redirects to television station pages. For example, the user has created

1487: 1265: 721:

page while doing some recent changes patrol and tagged it as {{db-person}}, but it also violates

675: 653: 426: 381: 348: 1874:

misrepresentations made in relation to this dispute. It has never been about original research.

918:

Lumping revolutionary extremists in with a mainstream (if now discredited) political philosophy.

2098: 1793: 1236: 794: 754: 733: 306: 1538:

when it is archived and away from the attention of uninvolved parties? Thanks for your input.

358:

I will take a look later today; it doesn't sound like they're trying to work constructively.

2126:

A* seems to disagree that it's illegitimate for the community to impose such an absolute ban,

2056: 2047: 1639: 1513: 1286: 584: 567: 298: 1857: 1617: 1589: 1571: 1543: 1494: 780: 773: 627: 575: 545: 480: 448: 340: 320: 88: 8: 1870: 1832: 1760: 1747: 987: 973: 862: 827: 464: 1663:

The version from today just before they edited, or from before they edited on Aug 10th?

1476: 1242: 1097: 1021: 924:

Would you use the project as a front for revolutionary activity or propaganda purposes?

671: 649: 422: 377: 344: 2092: 2081: 1865: 1861: 1825: 1787: 1598:

Sorry for not responding earlier. Go for it, Phil. Entirely appropriate solution.

1031: 748: 727: 618: 373: 2063:

Knowledge:Administrators'_noticeboard#Proposed_topic_ban_on_Landmark_Education_SPAs

2043: 1990: 1720: 1687: 1655: 1581: 1509: 1460: 1449: 1439: 1206: 1114: 1080: 703: 294: 272: 1613: 1585: 1567: 1539: 1490: 1227: 1050: 725:

and gives out WAAAY too much information. Could you delete it for me quickly? -

722: 712: 571: 302: 84: 1680:

From today. Quite a bit of editing was done after that to refine the article.

46:

If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the

2117: 2072: 1852: 1087: 983: 969: 858: 823: 602: 598: 698:

incident included in the list? Nevertheless, I have fixed this contradiction.

1645: 1472: 1249: 1093: 1017: 934: 903: 289: 2061:

I mentioned an administrative warning you gave in a new AN post, please see

1486:

what are you going to do about your comments on Koalorka's talk page, here..

910:

Are you a Marxist or a Communist or other form of revoluntionary? A Maoist?

648:

to futuretime.itaweb.it ? There is download with Generic BackDoor trojan.--

614: 606: 440: 72: 65: 1766: 1382:

Three million articles, Chen, Walsh and Klein win board election, and more

1986: 1682: 1650: 1456: 1435: 1202: 1108: 1069: 699: 268: 896:

You could clear it up for me by telling me a little more about yourself.

1695: 1223: 1046: 1566:

Hi George, has anything happened in regard to the proposed topic ban?

2112: 2067: 505:

primarily administrative stuff. Which is sort of sad, and annoys me.

1388:

Reports of Knowledge's imminent death greatly exaggerated, and more

1782: 1778: 1774: 1770: 469:

Please refrain from incivil and unhelpful comments like this one

418:

user has used this situation as revenge for his own perceptions.

335:

IP editor ignoring GF attempt to work together and seek consensus

593:

undid a lot of that, IMO. Nothing Roux wrote came anywhere near

221:

WMF elections, strategy wiki, museum partnerships, and much more

1155:

Tropenmuseum to host partnered exhibit with Wikimedia community

1508:

I added two words "broadly construed" in it; hope that's ok.

1002:

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLI (July 2009)

1939:

Health care coverage, 3 million articles, inkblots, and more

1743:

at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

790:

at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

79:, though that editor has not filed a request himself. See 915:

Orwellian in its following Sen. McCarthy's lead and form.

1694:

You reverted her changes to the one from Aug 19th, then

951:

Slyly implying they're already in the wrong is not OK.

767: 1933:$ 500,000 grant, Wikimania, Knowledge Loves Art winners 1732:

Hello, Georgewilliamherbert. You have new messages at

1161:

Tech news, strategic planning, BLP task force, and more

929:

Asking this question in this manner implies that there

779:

Hello, Georgewilliamherbert. You have new messages at

1045:

I hope that you will consider helping provide NPOV on

443:, or seeking input at the article content noticeboard 718: 1945:Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations 1394:Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations 670:Sorry, I see in the history the link is removed.-- 1666:It's only protected for 6 more hours, roughly. 837:ongoing participation on Knowledge unsuccessful. 804:I recommend that you re-read your own comment. 696:United States Holocaust Memorial Museum shooting 439:editor can agree to abiding by a third opinion 1963:Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News 1412:Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News 1316:. Recent contributions includes claims that 245:Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News 227:Dispute over Rorschach test images, and more 141:Category:United States military associations 108:Category:United States Military Associations 100:Category:United States Military Associations 1831:diffs and you have no community support. 1580:If you don't mind, I'll apply a ban under 566:Hi George, regarding your recent block of 1167:Shrinking community, GLAM-Wiki, and more 1016:This has been an automated delivery by 339:The IP editor I mention above, (on the 14: 44:Do not edit the contents of this page. 1049:...IF you can meet this challenge... 25: 1305:A few days ago, in this discussion 1217:Belite Aircraft and the Kitfox Lite 23: 1808:Knowledge:Redirects for discussion 1725: 772: 24: 2136: 1806:I think you need to take them to 1957:The Report on Lengthy Litigation 1910: 1406:The Report on Lengthy Litigation 1339: 1179:The Report on Lengthy Litigation 1132: 746:Nevermind, taken care of. :) - 644:Could you please remove link on 562:Factsontheground unblock request 239:The Report on Lengthy Litigation 198: 29: 609:, for which you administered a 906:on the part of the questionee. 904:The question assumes bad faith 857:were indeed a fellow traveler. 646:Windows Metafile vulnerability 445:Knowledge:Content noticeboard 18:User talk:Georgewilliamherbert 13: 1: 1504:Topic ban proposal on wikifan 1488:User_talk:Koalorka#Unblocking 283:Thank you for the stepping in 1067:to your attention. Thanks. 1036:Thank you for your thoughts. 7: 2120:21:18, 29 August 2009 (UTC) 2105:15:09, 29 August 2009 (UTC) 2077:12:44, 29 August 2009 (UTC) 2052:07:32, 29 August 2009 (UTC) 2031:01:20, 26 August 2009 (UTC) 2016:23:58, 25 August 2009 (UTC) 1995:04:24, 25 August 2009 (UTC) 1902:17:24, 23 August 2009 (UTC) 1884:10:29, 22 August 2009 (UTC) 1841:06:21, 23 August 2009 (UTC) 1820:01:21, 23 August 2009 (UTC) 1800:00:56, 23 August 2009 (UTC) 1756:23:33, 22 August 2009 (UTC) 1711:06:10, 22 August 2009 (UTC) 1690:05:53, 22 August 2009 (UTC) 1676:05:51, 22 August 2009 (UTC) 1658:05:36, 22 August 2009 (UTC) 1622:22:20, 20 August 2009 (UTC) 1608:20:18, 20 August 2009 (UTC) 1594:10:40, 20 August 2009 (UTC) 1576:17:21, 15 August 2009 (UTC) 1562:02:16, 12 August 2009 (UTC) 1548:02:07, 12 August 2009 (UTC) 1499:17:25, 19 August 2009 (UTC) 1481:16:09, 19 August 2009 (UTC) 1465:09:07, 19 August 2009 (UTC) 1444:02:10, 18 August 2009 (UTC) 1334:02:14, 16 August 2009 (UTC) 1295:20:05, 15 August 2009 (UTC) 1280:20:01, 15 August 2009 (UTC) 1261:10:36, 15 August 2009 (UTC) 1232:18:02, 14 August 2009 (UTC) 1211:03:39, 11 August 2009 (UTC) 1127:02:59, 11 August 2009 (UTC) 1083:03:17, 10 August 2009 (UTC) 1054:01:01, 10 August 2009 (UTC) 10: 2141: 1971:Read this Signpost in full 1864:. Hence I made an edit at 1734:Theserialcomma's talk page 1533:03:27, 5 August 2009 (UTC) 1518:03:19, 5 August 2009 (UTC) 1420:Read this Signpost in full 1187:Read this Signpost in full 1026:19:36, 9 August 2009 (UTC) 992:02:30, 9 August 2009 (UTC) 982:Sorry to be such an ass.-- 978:04:40, 7 August 2009 (UTC) 961:04:15, 7 August 2009 (UTC) 881:Your question to him was: 867:03:57, 7 August 2009 (UTC) 850:00:27, 7 August 2009 (UTC) 832:00:23, 7 August 2009 (UTC) 816:00:18, 7 August 2009 (UTC) 761:04:42, 6 August 2009 (UTC) 740:04:41, 6 August 2009 (UTC) 708:03:08, 6 August 2009 (UTC) 680:20:04, 5 August 2009 (UTC) 658:20:00, 5 August 2009 (UTC) 636:08:25, 5 August 2009 (UTC) 580:12:24, 4 August 2009 (UTC) 554:06:27, 4 August 2009 (UTC) 531:06:03, 4 August 2009 (UTC) 489:05:33, 4 August 2009 (UTC) 457:07:09, 4 August 2009 (UTC) 329:05:36, 4 August 2009 (UTC) 313:05:19, 4 August 2009 (UTC) 277:04:19, 4 August 2009 (UTC) 253:Read this Signpost in full 193:02:32, 3 August 2009 (UTC) 93:18:17, 1 August 2009 (UTC) 431:22:37, 31 July 2009 (UTC) 408:02:05, 30 July 2009 (UTC) 386:02:03, 30 July 2009 (UTC) 368:22:57, 29 July 2009 (UTC) 353:21:09, 29 July 2009 (UTC) 75:suggesting an unblock of 1644:Since you protected the 1059:Theserialcomma on WP:ANI 372:I made an edit today on 2037:A word of encouragement 1937:Knowledge in the news: 1386:Knowledge in the news: 1165:Knowledge in the news: 595:Jehochman's accusations 225:Knowledge in the news: 2128: 1730: 781:Redthoreau's talk page 777: 2124: 1949:Features and admins: 1781:, some did not, like 1729: 1398:Features and admins: 1326:Hullaballoo Wolfowitz 1171:Features and admins: 776: 299:User talk:Jimbo Wales 231:Features and admins: 71:A user has posted at 42:of past discussions. 2086:OK, I looked at the 2023:Georgewilliamherbert 1955:Arbitration report: 1858:Wilhelm Eduard Weber 1812:Georgewilliamherbert 1703:Georgewilliamherbert 1668:Georgewilliamherbert 1600:Georgewilliamherbert 1554:Georgewilliamherbert 1525:Georgewilliamherbert 1404:Arbitration report: 1177:Arbitration report: 1092:Thanks for blocking 953:Georgewilliamherbert 842:Georgewilliamherbert 808:Georgewilliamherbert 523:Georgewilliamherbert 400:Georgewilliamherbert 360:Georgewilliamherbert 341:Monterey, California 301:) as well as making 237:Arbitration report: 1961:Technology report: 1943:Discussion report: 1410:Technology report: 1392:Discussion report: 243:Technology report: 173:the discussion page 1951:Approved this week 1917:Knowledge Signpost 1846:The Speed of Light 1741:remove this notice 1731: 1400:Approved this week 1346:Knowledge Signpost 1301:Rangeblock request 1173:Approved this week 1139:Knowledge Signpost 788:remove this notice 778: 694:Well, why was the 690:Same kind of event 233:Approved this week 205:Knowledge Signpost 188:that's not my name 98:CfD nomination of 2107: 1997: 1866:electric constant 1862:Rudolf Kohlrausch 1802: 1446: 1362:Where should the 1360:From the editor: 1318:Thelma and Louise 1213: 1125: 1028: 935:assume good faith 763: 742: 611:slap on the wrist 374:Carmel-by-the-Sea 279: 105:I have nominated 54: 53: 48:current talk page 2132: 2101: 2095: 2091: 2014: 2011: 2001:Sorry about that 1984: 1931:News and notes: 1925: 1919: 1914: 1796: 1790: 1786: 1744: 1685: 1653: 1433: 1380:News and notes: 1354: 1348: 1343: 1287:Hell In A Bucket 1257: 1253: 1245: 1200: 1159:News and notes: 1147: 1141: 1136: 1123: 1117: 1111: 1107: 1079: 1077: 1072: 1015: 902:such question. 791: 757: 751: 747: 736: 730: 726: 568:Factsontheground 295:Talk:Jimmy Wales 266: 219:News and notes: 213: 207: 202: 190: 182: 170: 169: 138:for renaming to 137: 136: 64:is discussed at 33: 32: 26: 2140: 2139: 2135: 2134: 2133: 2131: 2130: 2129: 2099: 2093: 2084: 2059: 2039: 2009: 2006: 2003: 1982: 1967: 1927: 1920: 1915: 1848: 1828: 1794: 1788: 1763: 1745: 1738: 1723: 1681: 1649: 1642: 1506: 1452: 1431: 1416: 1356: 1349: 1344: 1314:200.121.137.252 1303: 1268: 1266:yet another lie 1255: 1247: 1243: 1239: 1219: 1198: 1183: 1153:Special story: 1149: 1142: 1137: 1121: 1115: 1109: 1090: 1075: 1070: 1068: 1065:this ANI thread 1061: 1034: 1009:July 2009 issue 1004: 797: 792: 785: 770: 755: 749: 734: 728: 715: 692: 628:ChildofMidnight 587: 564: 546:ChildofMidnight 481:ChildofMidnight 467: 449:ChildofMidnight 337: 321:ChildofMidnight 285: 264: 249: 215: 208: 203: 186: 178: 143: 139: 110: 106: 103: 69: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 2138: 2123: 2122: 2083: 2080: 2058: 2055: 2038: 2035: 2034: 2033: 2002: 1999: 1968: 1966: 1965: 1959: 1953: 1947: 1941: 1935: 1928: 1926: 1923:24 August 2009 1908: 1907: 1906: 1905: 1904: 1853:speed of light 1847: 1844: 1833:Theserialcomma 1827: 1824: 1823: 1822: 1762: 1759: 1748:Theserialcomma 1737: 1724: 1722: 1719: 1718: 1717: 1716: 1715: 1714: 1713: 1699: 1664: 1641: 1638: 1637: 1636: 1635: 1634: 1633: 1632: 1631: 1630: 1629: 1628: 1627: 1626: 1625: 1624: 1505: 1502: 1484: 1483: 1451: 1448: 1417: 1415: 1414: 1408: 1402: 1396: 1390: 1384: 1378: 1370:Radio review: 1368: 1357: 1355: 1352:17 August 2009 1337: 1302: 1299: 1298: 1297: 1267: 1264: 1238: 1237:Another thanks 1235: 1218: 1215: 1184: 1182: 1181: 1175: 1169: 1163: 1157: 1150: 1148: 1145:10 August 2009 1130: 1089: 1086: 1060: 1057: 1033: 1030: 1014: 1003: 1000: 999: 998: 997: 996: 995: 994: 980: 949: 945: 941: 938: 931:is or has been 927: 921: 920: 919: 916: 907: 899: 893: 890: 889: 888: 879: 878: 877: 876: 875: 874: 873: 872: 871: 870: 869: 838: 796: 795:Clarification. 793: 784: 771: 769: 766: 765: 764: 717:I came across 714: 711: 691: 688: 687: 686: 685: 684: 683: 682: 663: 662: 661: 660: 639: 638: 586: 583: 563: 560: 559: 558: 557: 556: 541: 537: 518: 514: 510: 506: 502: 499: 496: 466: 463: 462: 461: 460: 459: 415: 414: 413: 412: 411: 410: 391: 390: 389: 388: 336: 333: 332: 331: 284: 281: 250: 248: 247: 241: 235: 229: 223: 216: 214: 196: 102: 96: 81:this AN thread 68: 60:Your block of 58: 56: 52: 51: 34: 15: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 2137: 2127: 2121: 2118: 2116: 2115: 2110: 2109: 2108: 2106: 2102: 2096: 2089: 2079: 2078: 2074: 2070: 2069: 2064: 2057:See AN thread 2054: 2053: 2049: 2045: 2032: 2028: 2024: 2020: 2019: 2018: 2017: 2013: 2012: 1998: 1996: 1992: 1988: 1985:Delivered by 1981: 1977: 1973: 1972: 1964: 1960: 1958: 1954: 1952: 1948: 1946: 1942: 1940: 1936: 1934: 1930: 1929: 1924: 1918: 1913: 1903: 1899: 1895: 1890: 1889: 1888: 1887: 1886: 1885: 1881: 1877: 1872: 1867: 1863: 1859: 1854: 1843: 1842: 1838: 1834: 1821: 1817: 1813: 1809: 1805: 1804: 1803: 1801: 1797: 1791: 1784: 1780: 1776: 1772: 1768: 1758: 1757: 1753: 1749: 1742: 1735: 1728: 1712: 1708: 1704: 1700: 1697: 1693: 1692: 1691: 1688: 1684: 1679: 1678: 1677: 1673: 1669: 1665: 1662: 1661: 1660: 1659: 1656: 1652: 1647: 1646:Rita Jenrette 1640:Rita Jenrette 1623: 1619: 1615: 1611: 1610: 1609: 1605: 1601: 1597: 1596: 1595: 1591: 1587: 1583: 1579: 1578: 1577: 1573: 1569: 1565: 1564: 1563: 1559: 1555: 1551: 1550: 1549: 1545: 1541: 1536: 1535: 1534: 1530: 1526: 1523:Fine by me. 1522: 1521: 1520: 1519: 1515: 1511: 1501: 1500: 1496: 1492: 1489: 1482: 1478: 1474: 1469: 1468: 1467: 1466: 1462: 1458: 1447: 1445: 1441: 1437: 1434:Delivered by 1430: 1426: 1422: 1421: 1413: 1409: 1407: 1403: 1401: 1397: 1395: 1391: 1389: 1385: 1383: 1379: 1377: 1375: 1369: 1367: 1366:go from here? 1365: 1359: 1358: 1353: 1347: 1342: 1336: 1335: 1331: 1327: 1323: 1319: 1315: 1311: 1310:190.43.136.87 1307: 1296: 1292: 1288: 1284: 1283: 1282: 1281: 1277: 1273: 1263: 1262: 1258: 1252: 1251: 1246: 1234: 1233: 1229: 1225: 1214: 1212: 1208: 1204: 1201:Delivered by 1197: 1193: 1189: 1188: 1180: 1176: 1174: 1170: 1168: 1164: 1162: 1158: 1156: 1152: 1151: 1146: 1140: 1135: 1129: 1128: 1124: 1118: 1112: 1105: 1102: 1099: 1095: 1085: 1084: 1081: 1078: 1073: 1066: 1056: 1055: 1052: 1048: 1043: 1039: 1037: 1029: 1027: 1023: 1019: 1011: 1010: 993: 989: 985: 981: 979: 975: 971: 966: 965: 964: 963: 962: 958: 954: 950: 946: 942: 939: 936: 932: 928: 925: 922: 917: 914: 913: 911: 908: 905: 900: 897: 894: 892:Disecting it- 891: 887: 883: 882: 880: 868: 864: 860: 855: 854: 853: 852: 851: 847: 843: 839: 835: 834: 833: 829: 825: 821: 820: 819: 818: 817: 813: 809: 806: 803: 802: 801: 789: 782: 775: 762: 758: 752: 745: 744: 743: 741: 737: 731: 724: 720: 710: 709: 705: 701: 697: 681: 677: 673: 672:Vatrena ptica 669: 668: 667: 666: 665: 664: 659: 655: 651: 650:Vatrena ptica 647: 643: 642: 641: 640: 637: 633: 629: 624: 623: 622: 620: 616: 612: 608: 604: 600: 596: 592: 585:The Fuchs ANI 582: 581: 577: 573: 569: 555: 551: 547: 542: 538: 534: 533: 532: 528: 524: 519: 515: 511: 507: 503: 500: 497: 493: 492: 491: 490: 486: 482: 476: 473: 471: 458: 454: 450: 446: 442: 437: 436: 435: 434: 433: 432: 428: 424: 423:Amadscientist 419: 409: 405: 401: 397: 396: 395: 394: 393: 392: 387: 383: 379: 378:Amadscientist 375: 371: 370: 369: 365: 361: 357: 356: 355: 354: 350: 346: 345:Amadscientist 342: 330: 326: 322: 317: 316: 315: 314: 311: 309: 304: 300: 296: 291: 280: 278: 274: 270: 267:Delivered by 263: 259: 255: 254: 246: 242: 240: 236: 234: 230: 228: 224: 222: 218: 217: 212: 211:3 August 2009 206: 201: 195: 194: 191: 189: 184: 183: 181: 175:. Thank you. 174: 167: 163: 159: 155: 151: 147: 142: 134: 130: 126: 122: 118: 114: 109: 101: 95: 94: 90: 86: 82: 78: 74: 67: 63: 57: 49: 45: 41: 40: 35: 28: 27: 19: 2125: 2113: 2094:NeutralHomer 2085: 2066: 2060: 2040: 2007: 2004: 1983: 1969: 1922: 1916: 1849: 1829: 1789:NeutralHomer 1764: 1746: 1643: 1507: 1485: 1453: 1432: 1418: 1376:radio series 1373: 1363: 1351: 1345: 1321: 1317: 1304: 1269: 1248: 1240: 1220: 1199: 1185: 1144: 1138: 1100: 1091: 1062: 1044: 1040: 1035: 1007: 1005: 930: 923: 909: 895: 884: 798: 750:NeutralHomer 729:NeutralHomer 716: 693: 588: 565: 477: 474: 468: 420: 416: 338: 307: 290:WP:OWNership 286: 265: 251: 210: 204: 187: 179: 177: 104: 70: 55: 43: 37: 2044:Killiondude 1980:Unsubscribe 1976:Single-page 1894:David Tombe 1876:David Tombe 1761:Help Please 1510:Ncmvocalist 1429:Unsubscribe 1425:Single-page 1196:Unsubscribe 1192:Single-page 465:August 2009 262:Unsubscribe 258:Single-page 36:This is an 1696:User:Cvieg 1614:PhilKnight 1586:PhilKnight 1568:PhilKnight 1540:PelleSmith 1491:Off2riorob 1372:Review of 1051:DanaUllman 1047:homeopathy 572:PhilKnight 540:Knowledge. 85:EdJohnston 77:Amisquitta 62:Amisquitta 2082:ASE Block 1826:topic ban 1582:WP:ARBPIA 1374:Bigipedia 1032:Thanx but 984:Die4Dixie 970:Die4Dixie 859:Die4Dixie 824:Die4Dixie 1739:You can 1721:Talkback 1612:Thanks! 1473:Skinny87 1450:Koalorka 1364:Signpost 1322:Scarface 1250:BWilkins 1122:contribs 1104:contribs 1094:TownDown 1018:BrownBot 948:comment. 786:You can 723:WP:CHILD 303:WP:POINT 1871:WT:PHYS 1783:WTOV-TV 1779:WTVQ-DT 1775:WWPX-TV 1771:WWPX-DT 1272:UkFaith 768:Replied 713:Concern 615:Philcha 603:WP:GAME 599:WP:MEAT 513:easily. 308:Caspian 154:history 121:history 39:archive 2010:Jeremy 1987:SoxBot 1683:Dismas 1651:Dismas 1457:Nick-D 1436:SoxBot 1256:←track 1203:SoxBot 1110:seicer 1088:Thanks 700:OOODDD 605:, and 269:SoxBot 1993:) at 1442:) at 1244:talk→ 1224:Ahunt 1209:) at 607:WP:DE 509:fair. 441:wp:3O 297:(not 275:) at 162:watch 158:links 129:watch 125:links 73:WP:AN 66:WP:AN 16:< 2114:xeno 2100:Talk 2088:link 2073:talk 2068:Cirt 2048:talk 2027:talk 1991:talk 1898:talk 1880:talk 1860:and 1837:talk 1816:talk 1795:Talk 1773:for 1767:user 1752:talk 1707:talk 1672:talk 1618:talk 1604:talk 1590:talk 1572:talk 1558:talk 1544:talk 1529:talk 1514:talk 1495:talk 1477:talk 1461:talk 1440:talk 1330:talk 1312:and 1291:talk 1276:talk 1228:talk 1207:talk 1116:talk 1098:talk 1076:JEFF 1022:talk 1013:you. 1006:The 988:talk 974:talk 957:talk 863:talk 846:talk 828:talk 812:talk 756:Talk 735:Talk 719:this 704:talk 676:talk 654:talk 632:talk 619:talk 591:Roux 576:talk 550:talk 527:talk 495:etc. 485:talk 453:talk 427:talk 404:talk 382:talk 364:talk 349:talk 325:talk 310:blue 273:talk 166:logs 150:talk 146:edit 133:logs 117:talk 113:edit 89:talk 597:of 180:APK 2103:• 2097:• 2075:) 2065:. 2050:) 2029:) 1978:· 1974:· 1921:: 1900:) 1882:) 1839:) 1818:) 1798:• 1792:• 1765:A 1754:) 1709:) 1674:) 1620:) 1606:) 1592:) 1584:. 1574:) 1560:) 1546:) 1531:) 1516:) 1497:) 1479:) 1463:) 1427:· 1423:· 1350:: 1332:) 1293:) 1278:) 1259:) 1230:) 1194:· 1190:· 1143:: 1119:| 1113:| 1071:Mc 1024:) 990:) 976:) 959:) 912:- 865:) 848:) 830:) 814:) 759:• 753:• 738:• 732:• 706:) 678:) 656:) 634:) 621:) 601:, 578:) 552:) 529:) 487:) 455:) 429:) 406:) 384:) 366:) 351:) 327:) 260:· 256:· 209:: 164:| 160:| 156:| 152:| 148:| 131:| 127:| 123:| 119:| 115:| 91:) 83:. 2071:( 2046:( 2025:( 1989:( 1896:( 1878:( 1835:( 1814:( 1750:( 1736:. 1705:( 1686:| 1670:( 1654:| 1616:( 1602:( 1588:( 1570:( 1556:( 1542:( 1527:( 1512:( 1493:( 1475:( 1459:( 1438:( 1328:( 1289:( 1274:( 1226:( 1205:( 1101:· 1096:( 1020:( 986:( 972:( 955:( 926:- 898:- 861:( 844:( 826:( 810:( 783:. 702:( 674:( 652:( 630:( 617:( 574:( 548:( 525:( 483:( 451:( 425:( 402:( 380:( 362:( 347:( 323:( 271:( 168:) 144:( 135:) 111:( 87:( 50:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Index