NOTE: IF YOU ARE ANONYMOUS, AND POST ANYTHING ON THIS PAGE, YOU WILL BE DELETED WITHOUT CONSIDERATION.

---

RickK-- the lengthy post on the Golden Path that I submitted is my own creation (as evidenced by it's posting at several Dune websites). My appologies on it NOT fitting the Wikipedia model. If you wish I will edit it to fit that standard (not the best speller) or you may delete it. I just thought it was a topic needing some highlighting.

Either way, great site here.

~SuperString01 (aka- Dan)

I'm still learning all of the tricks of the trade. I'm not sure how to edit the Copyright issues that you spoke of. I will endeavor to get it right ASAP.

Peace.

Actually, I when I type Vitória in Microsoft Encarta Atlas 25 Vitória (s) come up. 23 in Brazil and 2 in Portugal. Not the one in Spain, but we know that exists. So would you like to recinsider the creation of a disambig at Vitória? I didn't really understand all you wrote in my talk, Did you mean that since Vitoria (spain) since it doesn~t have an accent shpuld only have a note pointing to a disambig for all the other Vitória (s)? Last but not least, Does that mean we should put Vitória (Espírito Santo, Brazil) back to some name that shows where it is like, "Vitória, ES". or "Vitória ES, Brazil". Sorry for bringing up so many problems, I just feel its better that you mediate, for me not to upset the guys from Vitoria (Spain) -Regards. K. Kurogawa 11:07, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)

It was discussed on IRC. Timwi said there was consensus and asked for help doing it; myself, I had free time at the moment and no objections to the idea. Fredrik (talk) 14:12, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I maintain that I acted in good faith, but I'll also admit my mistake; my apologies. Thanks for the feedback, Rick. Fredrik (talk) 19:18, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)

It concerns "The Alternate Asphygmo-Pyramidal Syndrome". I read the given reference in Neuro.Psychiat.,Basel,1962. It is all right. What is this ? Please read the entire page, not only a physician would it understand, included "that last sentence". There is nothing to cleanup, out of the "The". Excellsior 15:45, Jun. 26, 2004

Why do you want to include in the current news that secret detainment of an Iraqi prisoner is in "possible" violation of the Geneva Convention? It is just obvious, no one denies it. If you have anything supporting your view please show it. And do not revert explained edits without justification. Get-back-world-respect 21:29, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not the world court. It is not our job to pronounce judgement on events. RickK 21:34, Jun 17, 2004 (UTC)

It is no judgment that detaining a prisoner secretly is a violation of the Geneva Convention, it is a fact. The Pentagon admits it was done. Get-back-world-respect 21:39, 17 Jun 2004 (UTC)

"Alternate Syndrom" again !

Your style is arrogant really, RickK. I am not egotistical to think that my article is perfect, I only just finished my training in neurology and I have had the possibility to hear some years ago a fascinanting lecture about this alternate syndrome, by the way meanwhile a current syndrome in the clinical neurology. The article is writen in a scientifically style of a medical lexicon, you can open occasionally such a book. In this field is the competence of a neurologist, altough young, incontestably greater as that of a former technical writer, you concede it. You have not to persist in your opinion, dear RickK, you make yourself only ridiculous. Errare humanum est, perseverare diabolicum. Excellsior 23:09, Jun. 26, 2004

---

Hey Rick,

When you post a copy vio, can you please post exact urls with exact text as opposed to a google search. Thus it makes the checking so much easier. Burgundavia 22:12, Jun 17, 2004 (UTC)

Rick: There is NO copyright infringement of the article I posted ("Mad Crowd" Disease). It is an original essay created by me back in January 2004. Please explain what your objection is - SPECIFICALLY - instead of linking to some stupid Google listings referring to "corporate crowd". You are stretching way beyond belief with your claim! Paxdora June 17, 2004 10:05 pm

• I am sorry, but I cannot find anything in that article that remotely resembles a copyright violation. There are no whole blocks of text copied from some source. The debate over whether or not it can go in the encyclopedia should not be clouded by this false claim. In addition, it is obivious you probably did not check those urls on the google search, as several of them are 404's. Burgundavia 04:47, Jun 18, 2004 (UTC)

Yes, there are factual similarities, but no actual copies. By that standard, every encyclopedia is a copy of the 1st. However, aside from that, I did a very careful search with about a dozen randomly selected sentences from the article and I cannot find even something that remotely resembles a copy vio. Nothing, not even a hint. Burgundavia 04:54, Jun 18, 2004 (UTC)

Rick: You need to brush up on copyright law and Fair Use! Paxdora 6/18/04

• No, I don't. If enough people disagree with my assessment on the Copyright problems page, it can be reverted. RickK 18:48, Jun 18, 2004 (UTC)

• There is no assessment on the copyright problems page for people to disagree with. But on VfD there are several people who see NO copyvio at all, according to the Fair Use statute. Have you read the Fair Use statute yet? Do you understand it thoroughly? Why can't you just admit you made a bad call and reverse your claim? Paxdora 6/23/04, 9:10 am

---

'Tis ok. My apologies. Ambivalenthysteria 06:00, 19 Jun 2004 (UTC)

---

Well, I just asked Timwi why did he change cyrillic to Cyrillic. Nikola 06:02, 19 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Correct for what? Disambiguating suffixes aren't generally uppercased. Me and Mikkalai have agreed on this usage. Don't know what to say, there are more such articles and they all have "cyrillic". Perhaps there should be a vote about this. Nikola 06:31, 19 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I of course guessed that you know what Cyrillic alphabet is, but wanted to show you how many articles on letters there are already and they all have to be named consistently. In languages which use Cyrillic alphabet, which most contributors of said articles seem to speak, alhabet names are written in lowercase so that's perhaps why we haven't noticed this as an error. As I said disambiguating suffixes are usually lowercase which is one more reason to have this in lowercase; think of naming a variable while programming, grammar doesn't need to be followed. I'm going off Wikipedia now, please don't rush to anything; if you feel the need to do something, at least consult with someone else, ask at the pump, start a vote or something. The articles were there for some time, they could endure a bit more :) Note that another solution, such as (letter) would not be good, have no time to explain why. Nikola 06:47, 19 Jun 2004 (UTC)

As I already told you, lower-casing the word "Cyrillic" is incorrect English spelling. Other languages tend to lower-case all adjectives (French and German do that too: "cyrillique" and "kyrillisch"), but English doesn't (especially noticeable with adjectives like "English" in "the English language"!). Hope this clears things up. — Timwi 14:04, 21 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I kindof addressed this on the VFD page, but anyway, it's just a stray personal account that I couldn't really figure out what to do with. Thanks for putting it on VFD instead of speedy. Rhymeless 06:24, 19 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Why on Earth are you reverting a bunch of these? - David Gerard 09:32, 21 Jun 2004 (UTC)

And what is your reason for blocking The Undertones (talk · contribs) (who made the edits)? Thue 11:03, 21 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Excuse me for butting in (and for those who haven't seen the replies yet): The Undertones is either the latest reincarnation of the hard-banned user Michael or a very good imitator. The account is named after a punk band, like several of Michael's sockpuppets (Weezer, No-Fx/NOFX, Michael/Crass, etc.); the user focused exclusively on punk-related topics, which were Michael's favorite articles; and the user made several Michael-like edits:

• [1], changing the date of Crass' formation from 1977 to 1976. This is one of Michael's peculiar fixations; he will insert this error over and over and over . . . and over , no matter how many times people explain to him that it's wrong.
• [2], uncorrecting the dates of two records.
• [3], adding back a sentence (by Michael) previously deleted for being unverifiable.
• [4] and [5], changing [name of self-titled album] from [name] to Self-Titled—another Michael trademark.

Since nearly everything Michael wrote was—when not gibberish—completely wrong, he and his clones are under a revert-on-sight curfew. That said, most of his edits were just categorization of the articles listed on the list of forerunners of punk music, the list of musicians in the first wave of punk music, and the list of musicians in the second wave of punk music, so perhaps, Rick, you should have checked his edits a bit more carefully before rolling them back—though I've restored the removed category links, so no worries. —No-One Jones 06:53, 22 Jun 2004 (UTC)

OK - thanks. - I just wanted to know the what edits he had done wrongly, as I had looked at a few myself which seemed correct, including a correct edit which had been reverted. Thue 09:52, 22 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I wasn't sure about naming conventions, so I just went with the existing links. I'll keep this in mind in the future. mennonot 09:04, 22 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I'm with you. I don't even think it's ambiguous or debatable that the Settlers of Catan articles are copyright violations. Beyond that, though, it violates the how-to. Describing the game and providing the rule book are entirely different things. Giving the rule book, with images for cut-pase-and-play, is utterly different from saying, "This is a popular game developed X." Just because the page was constructed by a contributing Wikipedian, that doesn't mean that it's copacetic. I'm very careful, but I could slip up. Anyone can allow zeal and joy to tip them over into obsession and violation. However, there's no way I'm going to step into that debate. Better, I suppose, that dial up users have their connections go busy, the servers contain just that bit more that's not contributory, than that there be animosity over something that is, essentially, trivial. Geogre 18:58, 22 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Which Wikipedian do you think is the strongest at finding vandalism?? I certainly think you are. What do you think?? 66.245.29.74 20:32, 23 Jun 2004 (UTC)

It should just be speedy-deleted. Tolerance for articles that are created "just to prove a point" is too high; they waste everyone's time. VV 06:51, 26 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I have noticed your sharp editing work on the Jesus on Mars "bookreport" that I did. As well as observing that my proofing skills need some work, I am also encouraged by seeing that my work merited the time and effort you took to CopyEdit the article.

Thanks for cleaning up after me. Wetman 21:29, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Why are you deleting the images on Fluble? We dutifully obtained the author's permission, informed him of the GDFL implications, etc. -- कुक्कुरोवाच|Talk‽ 23:14, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Thank you for deleting the vandalism on my user page! --Woggly 08:44, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Hi Rick.. just pasting this in here as well as on Wikipedia:Copyright problems so you get the "You have new messages!" tag. :-) —Stormie 11:16, Jun 28, 2004 (UTC)

• King Kedri's Story, from same source as above? RickK 05:13, Jun 27, 2004 (UTC)
  • In fact, see from User:Lovanion, which are mass importations of copyrighted pages from [6] or [7]. RickK 05:24, Jun 27, 2004 (UTC)
    • I exchanged emails with the webmaster of [8], and am told that all that material is actually copyrighted by Cyan Worlds Inc. (producers of Myst) and used by [9] and [10] with their permission. He gave me the name of the guy at Cyan who deals with this permission - since Lovanion claimed on his talk page to have permission to use this stuff, I have emailed the guy at Cyan to double-check that he is aware that this is for republishing under the GFDL, not just for putting up on a fansite. —Stormie 11:16, Jun 28, 2004 (UTC)

I'll do NPOV edits on Sid McMath as I am able, one section at a time. Thing is, the guy kind of is a saint for Southern liberals. This is the guy who inspired Bill Clinton, e.g. Not that he was Mr. Altruism. He was a political fighter, no doubt, but taking on the Dixiecrats was pretty brassy. I suspect that the article is copyvio, myself, and it's way too long, so I'm leaving no sentence unaltered. I suppose this means, really, that I'm not the guy to do the Clean. (I have a soft spot in my head for any Southern liberals, as they're not supposed to exist.) Geogre 14:16, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for catching that. I was the one who had originally added the fact about Jeff Goldblum. I heard a recent Toyota Commercial and I thought the guy wasn't Jeff Goldblum for some reason. AlexPlank 16:46, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I am the user (66.233.115.42) that added the table to the thou article to demonstrate the relationship between thou and other personal pronouns. I originally posted the table without highlighting the 2nd person singular forms. However, considering the article is mainly about this form, I went back and highlighted those cells in blue. If I need to use a different highlight color, please let me know, or even better, point me to Wikipedia's style guidelines.

Thanks! LD

---

Why didn't you sign your threatful comment on my talk page? Rienzo 22:14, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)

It is strange, since you don't like anonymous comments. Plz, live as you learn! Rienzo 05:53, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Sounds a reasonable argument to me. What about Tamazight languages (better known as Berber languages)? - Mustafaa 06:40, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)

yes that is so, but amazigh and tamazight is also used see: (Imazighen) and Tamazight. and somebody are malignant and maked it so : http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berber .Aziri 14:38, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)

---

Hi! You have blocked User:64.229.0.167, who has made only one vandalism to Wikipedia. Why don't you warn him about it before deciding to block him? Marcus2 15:21, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Very good. But I was wondering how and why someone uses multiple IDs. Marcus2 18:31, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Are you having a fight with User:Excellsior? He blanked The Alternate Asphygmo-Pyramidal Syndrome. Is this article up for deletion? - Tεxτurε 21:57, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)

---

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moors are you not able to say that this article is wrong ? if you will know that the moors were with carthago against the greeks , and with hannibal against rome. who can the moors be a moslim group ?. you here the article of the prof. of the history of libye .[11] mustapha understand good arabic, but he don't want to improve it . why ? , an other link of an other proff . in morocco http://www.tawalt.com/archive.cfm?lg=_TZ&mStartRow=66 (also in arabic). tell me why you can not say that that article is not neutral .i beleave that will give sensible answers !Aziri 14:30, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn_Khaldun are you here to tell them that is may not be a judge . can tell hem also , that if the origine of ibn khaldun is certain have taha hussein not haied that he was a berber. and also mohamed chafiq who say that origine of ibn khaldun is uncertain. and see this arb also who saied that he was a berber :[12] and yet more is this one not a berber who saied that the father of ibn khaldun was a berber. http://www.salaam.co.uk/knowledge/biography/viewentry.php?id=808 . and there is very more. but i don't understand why you do nothing . i hoop that you will give sensible answers !.Aziri 14:44, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Thanks, Rick, for your note to Chris Mahan on the mailing list. I got pretty pissed off when I read his email...I almost responded in kind, but thought better of it. It was very gratifying, however, to see that someone uninvolved thought he'd gone out of his way to be rude unnecessarily. Editors like that are even more frustrating than trolls for me. Anyway, thanks for standing up for us a bit -- if I can help you out in the future, I'll try to do so. Keep up the good work, and have a relaxing summer. Jwrosenzweig 19:44, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I think that mustafaa don't may write about the Berber because he is enemy. he comes fast with his source . but like you can know ,there are many source, an source say that the berber are the arabs of the sahara, and aothers say that the are not arabs. + or the beber languages have not script and athers say that it have a script , and it is 2200 years old, and says it is more then 3000 years old and others say that is 3500 years old. about the poplations of the berber there is saied that there not more then 10 million berber in the world and claim to be more and others think that there are -+ 30 million... like you see there not one answer in google but more : the one say : it's black and others say it's red. therefor can one choose waht he want black or red.if you are not respnsible, you can remove it , and tell me to who i have to say that. because i don't want to play with his articles.Aziri 14:38, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Why are you reverting my edits? As clearly stated in the discussion the selected quote that Russell j added were taken out of context and do not communicate Clarke's full meaning from the comission report. He did not INITIALLY approve the request - that quote makes it look like he never went on to approve the request. Why don't you read the testimony and add to the discussion before you go reverting edits. Michael A. 23:08, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Heya.. I saw on User talk:Andrew Zito you wrote "Stop creating articles about yourself" - I assume this means that the Andrew Zito article which was just created has been VFD'd and deleted in the past, and thus is fair game for speedy deletion? Just thought I'd bring it to your attention. —Stormie 05:07, Jul 6, 2004 (UTC)

Dear RickK,

First off, my apologies for the dispute over the GenMay article. There was originally a suggestion on said forum to post an article related to GenMay. I formulated and posted a short and relatively unbiased article about the content and history of GenMay. This article was soon vandalized by several people, replacing it with disinformation (related to homosexuality and GenMay being a dating service for homosexuals, which is incorrect). I overwrote this disinformation twice, before recieving a message from Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason, stating that I will be banned the next time I vandalize GenMay. My question is twofold, and since I cannot reach Mr. Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason, I am forced to go to you.

1. Why was my action considered vandalism? 2. Can I post an informative article on GenMay, which might then be protected against future vandalism?

Thanks for your time. Ivan yulaev 21:25, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)ivan_yulaev

I have to say it is a very arbitrary decision to restrict editing in this way - and so would any 'policy decision' to revert any amendments on this basis

The Wikipedia by definition is open to all to add their own piece of information providing it is accurate (or as accurate as current knowledge allows) and not defamatory to any living individual.

Where the non-English is used it is always in addition to the vernacular (and often incorrect) English, and never in place of it. The common versions are clearly displayed and their links remain intact - likewise the links underlying the transcribed foreign text also points to the English article (where such an article exists).

The purpose of the use of foreign text and transcriptions thereof is partly illustration of the origin of the names/terms and how they differ from the anglicization which has superceded the original nomenclature.

Further, although this is the 'English' version of the Wikipedia, I would contend that this is the right place to place this information for an English-reading audience - there would be little point putting it in the Hebrew Wikipedia as Hebrew-readers already know how to read/pronounce the original text in their language.

--JohnArmagh 04:43, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

This does seem arbitrary and ott. JohnArmagh states quite clearly why it shouldn't be a problem -

a) In addition to the standard English, not instead of

b) Context, its extra information in the article, of a relevant nature. (I.e. it's not an article that isn't closely linked to the Hebrew culture)

c) I assure you, foreign language articles, where appropriate (articles about US, UK, Ireland) will contain English terms and explain them where appropriate.

There's plenty of other places in Wikipedia including foreign language phrases, e.g. particularly geographic, historical and culture articles. It's entirely appropriate. Why Hebrew should arbitrarily be singled out is beyond me!

Zoney 10:13, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

---

In reply to the recent message in my talk page from RikK I must reiterate once again that I will not be changing any English names. I have never implied that I would be doing so - in all circumstances any edits I make will include the foreign text in addition to the existing English names. I really cannot understand why this is turning into such a big issue and I do feel that I am being dictated to as to the level of factual information I am being allowed to enter and I feel this to be totally against the spirit of the Wikipedia. --JohnArmagh 19:44, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

---

I have noted the changes RikK has taken upon himself to make to the Kings of Israel page - and the result is quite unprofessional: the English names now appear repeated and therefore unnecessary - this totally undermines the whole project - I am sorely tempted to remove all my work from the Wikipedia and copyright it so that it cannot be freely used - which is not the idea of the Wikipedia, now is it. --JohnArmagh 19:55, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

It would be less contentious to remove the Hebrew entirely, though to do so would be removing information from the encyclopaedia. Removing the approximations of the Hebrew does not make sense. Zoney 00:20, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Hey, Rick. Our little friend over at 24.19.14.88 is back with more ranting. I've posted his little tirade as a speedy delete and listed him on the "vandalism in progress" page. Thought you should know since yours was the newest entry on his talk page. Best, Lucky 6.9 01:41, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

While patrolling New Pages, I came across WUML. What is the policy concerning articles like this? Is it an advert? Local interest? What sort of notability threshhold applies to local interest articles? I wasn't sure what to do with it so I'm passing it on to you.  :-) SWAdair | Talk 10:51, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)