User talk:TK/TKarchive12

From Conservapedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

Category - Political People

The category is mostly cleaned out, by subcategorization or otherwise. I left the currently-standing subcategories in there because Ed Poor has expressed some concern over labeling some of them as "Statesmen"; i.e. Fascists, Activists, etc. See Category_talk:Political People. Once we've established our next plan, I'll continue the moves (such as breaking down Category:International Political People and moving it to Category:International Statesmen. WesleySHello! 23:19, 9 January 2009 (EST)

Cool! You tell that Ed Poor for me*, that "Activists" should be in Political Activists" perhaps.....and here is the definition for "Statesman", men is plural:

1. a person who is experienced in the art of government or versed in the administration of government affairs.
2. a person who exhibits great wisdom and ability in directing the affairs of a government or in dealing with important public issues.

By that definition, both Hitler and Mussolini qualify, however distasteful. Of course they would have additional categories, such as Butcher, Dictators, Criminally Insane, etc.  ;-)...--₮K/Admin/Talk 00:23, 10 January 2009 (EST)
*Joking!

The move is complete, except for those I am incapable of.

  • Those belonging in Statesmen -> Vice Presidents
  • Those belonging in Political Figures -> the rest, including images.

They are either locked or the spam filter doesn't allow me to make an edit. You can see which one...I'll seek out the other categories to find some that may belong, but weren't originally in the Political People category. WesleySHello! 12:47, 10 January 2009 (EST)

Ok, I'm on for the next 1:15 or so. Let me know when you are ready to move those locked pages. WesleySHello! 16:14, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Here. --₮K/Admin/Talk 16:21, 13 January 2009 (EST)
What did you have in mind? WesleySHello! 16:22, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Well, I guess unlock the VP's and the rest and move 'em. I remember liking the final idea, but don't remember where we were going to move them to!  :p --₮K/Admin/Talk 16:26, 13 January 2009 (EST)

VPs were going (as a whole category) to Statesmen and the rest to Political Figures. One of them (Francis F., abbreviated for spam filter's sake) I can't seem to move, even though it is unlocked. WesleySHello! 16:30, 13 January 2009 (EST)
Ok, move Francis where? Political Figures? --₮K/Admin/Talk 16:33, 13 January 2009 (EST)
Actually, he could probably be moved to Category:Neoconservative instead. WesleySHello! 16:35, 13 January 2009 (EST)
  • Done. Anything else need to be opened? --₮K/Admin/Talk 17:03, 13 January 2009 (EST)
Thanks! That is all I can think of at the moment that I couldn't do myself. WesleySHello! 17:06, 13 January 2009 (EST)

A rush of young ladies

I see we had 4 join up in quick succession last night - DanielleR, PennyJ, BethG & MalloryN. The first two were blocked pretty quickly. Wondering about the other two - or is it just coincidence do you think? --KotomiTohayougozaimasu 07:55, 10 January 2009 (EST)

BethG was! See the block log. I can't check the other blocks right now, but will as soon as I can. Thanks, Jessica. --₮K/Admin/Talk 08:45, 10 January 2009 (EST)

What?

You blocked me? What rule did I break? --Tim TalkFormerly CPAdmin1 22:37, 10 January 2009 (EST)

  • The MYOB/TK rule. You can argue or butt-in with any Admin that will tolerate it, Tim. But you are not welcome to contradict or dispute my instructions. I view that as more of your undermining of authority because you didn't get your way. I suggest you walk away from all disputes that do not involve you directly. I can't believe you posted over a TWO MINUTE BLOCK. Jeeze...... --₮K/Admin/Talk 22:55, 10 January 2009 (EST)
I am not getting involved in any dispute here and am MYOB insofar that I only question to protect myself. Are the Conservapedia Commandments still the only rules on this site? TheGuy 23:01, 10 January 2009 (EST)
As you can clearly read on the Commandment's page, there is a link to the Conservapedia Guidelines. They are mainly common sense explanations and extensions of the Commandments, TheGuy. If you have questions, just ask. --₮K/Admin/Talk 23:37, 10 January 2009 (EST)
No one here has "rights" - protecting yourself is not an issue. Volunteers have obligations to the project. Those who ignore those obligations are removed. --Ed Poor Talk 17:06, 6 February 2009 (EST)

Hell Devil image

This seems an appropriate heading: What does it matter who added the image? It doesn't belong in any encyclopedia. --BWatson 18:51, 11 January 2009 (EST)

  • In your very own humble opinion? Thanks for your input. I look forward to reading your substantive contributions to this project. --₮K/Admin/Talk 18:56, 11 January 2009 (EST)

Blagojevich Article

While I appreciate the sarcasm (it was, actually, funny) I think we should leave that in. It is true. We shouldn't censor the facts over personal disputes. Gov. Blagojevich is an obvious criminal (as are most liberals), and it is quite apparent that B. Hussein Osa- Obama is just as guilty.--BWatson 21:22, 11 January 2009 (EST)

If you have a citation saying that by Obama's chosen Chief of Staff talking to the Governor, that by extension taints Obama, by all means put it back in. If not, it stays out, because it is only your opinion, and that doesn't count in an encyclopedia. --₮K/Admin/Talk 21:57, 11 January 2009 (EST)
His associations speak volumes about his character. Are suggesting that his relationships with Rev. Wright and the terrorist Bill Ayers don't suggest that he holds similar views and may be involved in similar activities? My words may be a little blunt, but with a quick rephrasing- I think we would be presenting our readers with a more complete understanding of Hussein's true nature.--BWatson 22:09, 11 January 2009 (EST)
I would suggest you stop with the over-the-top verbiage, and the downright un-Oxford like language. --₮K/Admin/Talk 22:18, 11 January 2009 (EST)

Subacute myelo-optic neuropathy

I think we've found a compromise. I didn't mean to bother you. Thanks anyways. Jeffrey W. LauttamusDiscussion 16:30, 12 January 2009 (EST)

No trouble at all. Our expert will still review it, however. Thanks for the alert. --₮K/Admin/Talk 16:31, 12 January 2009 (EST)
The compromise looks acceptable to me. The article now has a reference that purports to doubt the cause-effect relationship between the drug cloquinol and the disease known as subacute myelo-optic neuropathy. While I wouldn't be surprised to find that cloquinol is a cause of SMON, the onus is now on User:RickD to provide any sort of published report, from any source, that contradicts the government's claim.
To speak more broadly: alternative medicine is a legitimate area of research. (Alternative medicine becomes relevant here because one of the most salient claims of alternative medicine as a movement is that traditional treatments end up causing more diseases than they treat.) Even some hospitals are now granting credentials to alternative practitioners and offering alternative services, now that someone has actually spent serious money to find out that many alternative therapies do work. The papers are out there for any properly industrious student to find. Therefore, one cannot reject alternative medicine out-of-hand, but everything we publish in that regard must have solid sources. Acceptable evidence can include actual experience in offering advice to patients or friends and having that advice pay off. It must, however, involve more than claims that "the regulatory agencies are in bed with the industries that they regulate." That sort of claim is more suitable for an essay than for an article.--TerryHTalk 16:45, 12 January 2009 (EST)
Ahhhh...not unlike the single drop of homeopathic Arsenic someone here at home sneaks into my coffee once a week or so...I'll pass on your cautions. --₮K/Admin/Talk 17:21, 12 January 2009 (EST)

Liberalism Template

TK, what are you talking about? I have never added an article. All I did was elimate the "liberal deceit" tag under the existing link "deceit" because "liberal deceit" was emptied of all content, including the redirect. The template actually works better, because when on the page "deceit," the link will now appear in bold.

BTW, I will not add any articles to it :) AddisonDM 21:34, 12 January 2009 (EST)

"Pastaman" edits

Hi, I see that you are one of the Sysops online right now, and wanted to ask if I could trouble you to review the edits of "Pastaman" (a new user) to see if they warrant blocking? I reverted his edits to "Flying Spaghetti Monster" already, but don't want to overstep in blocking. Thanks! Taj 18:22, 13 January 2009 (EST)

  • Your instincts are usually always right, Taj. I have gone through the process, and welcomed the user, and now we will see if they comply and contact me. ;-) --₮K/Admin/Talk 18:58, 13 January 2009 (EST)
Thank you! :-) Taj 20:50, 13 January 2009 (EST)

Template Categories

TK, I just found that that there are TONS of normal content articles which labelled with the category "navigation box." It's not just the ones I accidently did. I guess they have navigation templates on them, and those templates are categorized in navbox? In other words, it's a big project to eliminate the navbox category from normal pages. I guess we can begin though. How should it be done? The CP maintenance category is all maintenance reports, I don't think we should clutter it with templates. What do you think? AddisonDM 20:25, 14 January 2009 (EST)

I posted on your page just now. This job is a job for EdBot! Please save yourself and Addison any extra work, and I will speak with Ed about this in a few minutes. --₮K/Admin/Talk 20:27, 14 January 2009 (EST)

Sounds good TK. EdBot will do the job! If you need any other help with this feel free to tell on my talk page. AddisonDM 20:29, 14 January 2009 (EST)

The NavBox category has to be removed from the template and can't be removed from the individual pages. From what I've gathered, it looks like there is a <noinclude> tag just before the Category:Navigation box is formatted. Example: {{Meet the Press moderators}}. WesleySHello! 20:33, 14 January 2009 (EST)
Do you have a link for it, Wes? --₮K/Admin/Talk 07:53, 16 February 2009 (EST)

States list

Hey TK, great edits to the list of states! That's a pretty good article now. AddisonDM 21:42, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Thanks, Addison, you have been doing so much, I was feeling guilty! --₮K/Admin/Talk 22:19, 15 January 2009 (EST)

Obama-isms

I'm sorry TK, but I made that article to be entertainment. It is the same kind of thing as Bushisms- a politician saying some dumb, ridiculous, and outrageous things. But I don't think we need to add that deceit bit. It damages the mood of the article and it's not necessary. Furthermore, as you know I am an admin too, and furthermore I created the page. However, I do not want to get into edit wars. AddisonDM 22:43, 17 January 2009 (EST)

Ed Poor is a senior administrator, Addison. a big difference, and the user is a liberal, previously warned about inserting liberal POV into articles. The articles you link to about Bush, are not labeled "entertainment" and I was unaware CP had such a frivolous category for non-encyclopedic entries. No edit wars, just common courtesy, don't you think, that when an Administrator adds content, it not be reversed without at least giving him time to respond on the talk page? Carry on.....;-) --₮K/Admin/Talk 23:03, 17 January 2009 (EST)
Yeah, okay. Ed really is a senior admin. I won't argue. It's kind of funny that we do have an entertainment category, you're right. AddisonDM 23:08, 17 January 2009 (EST)
From what I have seen, this encyclopedia is a serious project, therefore does not have an entertainment section. I see no reason to be claiming it does even though it doesn't. Unless you somehow regard the mainspace as amusement? My apologies if that was a joke. --Jack456 16:44, 31 March 2009 (EDT)

Politics revisited

Things are moving well in the Politics category. I've yet to clean up Category:United States Government and Category:Political Terms, as well as link the subcategories together the way we'd discussed, but all pages in Category:Politics that I could further categorize are thusly categorized. There are a dozen or so that are locked, but we'll get them at some point. WesleySHello! 23:54, 17 January 2009 (EST)

Ed said he can program the bot, but needs a list. If there is still lots to do, please post it to his page, or email me, and I can forward it on to him, if you don't have his email. Thanks! --₮K/Admin/Talk 00:45, 18 January 2009 (EST)
There isn't that much more to do. Typing a list and programming the bot will take equally as long in this case, I fear. WesleySHello! 10:00, 18 January 2009 (EST)

Image additions

Thanks for all your help. JY23 16:13, 18 January 2009 (EST)

Oh, by the way, I accidentally copied the wrong link. I was creating articles and using that as a reference. I'll fix it. JY23 14:06, 19 January 2009 (EST)

Thanks

Thanks for your kind welcome! – dstone 08:12, 19 January 2009 (EST)

Wiki Linking

Sorry for the excessive linking - I tried avoiding duplicate links within a single article, may have made a mistake. The "Manual of Style" you referred me to doesn't have information on what/how much wiki linking is acceptable for Conservapedia, it only told you how to do it. Could you refer me an article with the rules? Or is it just a generic "don't make it so annoying" type thing? -danq 01:16, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Help, Please!

I am writing to ask for your help in resolving a matter concerning Conservapedia. A few weeks ago, my stepson and I got into an argument after I overheard him watching a segment of a "Daily Show" rerun where Lewis Black compares Conservapedia and Wikipedia. My stepson and I have since had many exchanges and he one time had gloated about vandalizing the site. Well, you can imagine how angry that made me. So I recently decided that I would create an account of my own. After I made some edits I was promptly banned I guess having the same IP as my stepson.

Please, don't ban me right away this time. You could disable account creation to stop my stepson from further damage. I cannot bear to let my stepson's vandalism help to silence me. If he finds out, he will never let it go!

God bless, Cheryl Everett-Wood CherylE 09:05, 28 January 2009 (EST)

  • Spare the rod, spoil the child. What is your stepson's user name here, and the one you were blocked for using, Cheryl? --₮K/Admin/Talk 09:09, 28 January 2009 (EST)
Tell that to my hubby...It said "CWood" and I was blocked for using CherylE but I guess it's back up now. I believe it was someone named "Dean" who imposed the block. CherylE 09:18, 28 January 2009 (EST)
  • You will need to post on his page, user talk:DeanS or use the email link to the left on it. --₮K/Admin/Talk 09:24, 28 January 2009 (EST)
Many thanks, TK! CherylE 09:26, 28 January 2009 (EST)

Math

Yea, that was the error Philip just mentioned above. I was testing the math out, apparently I haven't got it working yet! CPWebmaster 17:11, 3 February 2009 (EST)

Thanks, Webmaster, just was making sure you knew about it. I no longer have a means of contacting you directly, so had to put it there. --₮K/Admin/Talk 17:13, 3 February 2009 (EST)
No problem thanks for the info. If you need to contact me just click the email this user link in my page, I just enabled it. Thanks CPWebmaster 17:44, 3 February 2009 (EST)

Reverts of edits by marcdaniels

Thanks for your comments on my talk page, but I'm afraid I'm not sure I understand your point. You reverted the following:

  • You are not here to argue or debate, Marcdaniels. If you wish to do that, please be gone. Your pattern is persistent, and originally noted by the site owner. In posting here, or anywhere, please do not re-post what I changed, because I do remember, in total, the changes you made. It is yet another mark of disruptors, wiki-lawyer types who enjoy constant arguing. You are now on your final chance before blocking. --₮K/Admin/Talk 17:39, 3 February 2009 (EST)

Joaquín

I just fixed his user page. On a side note, the math and other pages containing special accent marks are fixed! CPWebmaster 08:38, 4 February 2009 (EST)

Nevermind still broken :( working on it CPWebmaster 08:54, 4 February 2009 (EST)
!! It's like herding cats. --₮K/Admin/Talk 14:18, 4 February 2009 (EST)

FNNoonan

This user's page is a vulgar parthian shot. You probably want to get on killing it- he's the liberal troll who was trying that little hack job on Rush Limbaugh earlier. I can't imagine any reason to keep that around. --DReynolds 23:35, 4 February 2009 (EST)

Not a problem, TK. Glad to help. --DReynolds 21:19, 5 February 2009 (EST)

No more porn fanny tea, okay? --Ed Poor Talk 17:05, 6 February 2009 (EST)
Is that like Earl Grey? --₮K/Admin/Talk 17:09, 6 February 2009 (EST)

Masterpiece

Terry

You have to update also Masterpiece with the same material. --JMR10 23:10, 7 February 2009 (EST)

Thanks for letting me know, my friend. I have sent yet another email about that other matter. We live with hope! --₮K/Admin/Talk 00:49, 8 February 2009 (EST)

Great News post

I really like your latest news post "Obama stimulus isn't". Keep them coming! Btw, do you want to be a co-project leader for Wikiproject news? --DeanStalk 06:42, 8 February 2009 (EST)

Jensen problem

I'm still blocked from home (right now i'm using a campus library computer ---it works fine for me) please email me at rjensen@uic.edu thanks! RJJensen 18:48, 10 February 2009 (EST)

Minor question

TK, can you delete this: Front de libération du Québec? It's been in deadend pages for a few days and its empty. AddisonDM 20:12, 10 February 2009 (EST)

  • Empty? I see an article there, Addison. --₮K/Admin/Talk 00:52, 12 February 2009 (EST)
It was empty until Webmaster restored and filled it. Nevermind now. AddisonDM 22:06, 13 February 2009 (EST)
Yes, that happened twice...I moved it twice, and through the mess, it was....who knows! --₮K/Admin/Talk 22:17, 13 February 2009 (EST)

Category usage

Can you comment on the use of categories, as described in the post on "Jewish people" on this talk page? --Eric2009 08:15, 11 February 2009 (EST)

This has now been resolved, though the use of categories in a different manner has arisen in the post in the section "Category:Authors", also this here --Eric2009 10:01, 15 February 2009 (EST)
Sorry about posting for Administrator's opinions, I hadn't seen your comment on Aschlafly's page until this morning, and just figured that Admins would know best. Perhaps there is a general talk page where editors can solicit third party input?
I looked at Category:Jewish_People for more information, but it just seemed to give the general definition, and I had no idea there had been an earlier discussion. Perhaps you can amend the description at Category:Jewish_People to take into account the earlier discussion? --Eric2009 07:13, 16 February 2009 (EST)
You are understanding that Jensen is an Administrator? I can understand that at some other wiki's soliciting such opinion is accepted, but here it is our custom for Admins to discuss such disputes privately, and not enter into unseemly public displays of arguing, in spite of what some have done. You can always check here to know who is, and who isn't. You have a good point about the category definition, and I will undertake doing that ASAP, but I do want to discuss it with Ed Poor first. While we are talking categories, do you have any idea why some are removing the upper-most super cats from pages? I am trying to track down where that began. --₮K/Admin/Talk 07:44, 16 February 2009 (EST)
Yes, I understand that Jensen is an Admin, but felt this was an editorial matter, and didn't mean to turn it into a public argument, only an open discussion.
I have no idea why some are removing top-level category tags. I guess there is an argument that a thousand entries in a category is not necessarily useful. On the other hand, this is easily solved with sub-categories, and it could be misleading to remove certain articles from super-categories.
Personally, a category such as "Jewish People" makes sense to me, to be all inclusive of everyone that is Jewish. And a sub-category, "Jewish activist", or "Jewish politicians", or "Zionist" would apply to smaller groups. But I guess this is not the place to discuss it. --Eric2009 08:50, 16 February 2009 (EST)
  • So, you would add "Category: Black People" to all African Americans? "Gay" to all those publicly known to be Gay? See my thinking here? --₮K/Admin/Talk 17:13, 16 February 2009 (EST)
I would have the internationally accepted term for various ethnic groups; I don't think "black people" is politically correct, nor the internationally accepted term. I have no problem with with categories such as "gay", as potentially contentious tags can be backed up with a citation. I also recall that Wiki categories do not necessarily have to form a "tree" of subcategories, and that any category can belong to any other category. It's a shame that people can not opt to view articles based on a selection of more than one category. --Eric2009 07:38, 17 February 2009 (EST)
There should be as many categories as needed, and that is our policy, in descending order. --₮K/Admin/Talk 14:02, 17 February 2009 (EST)

Image Uploading

TK, I was wondering what the procedure is for obtaining the right to upload images to the site. I've found an article that could use a more appropriate picture, and I'd like to improve and clarify some of the economics pages by adding diagrams and graphs. Thanks. --Economist 17:37, 13 February 2009 (EST)

  • You can put the requests HERE or here on my talk page, Economist. Make sure the are Wikimedia Commons, or not copyrighted. Please provide as much documentation as you can. Thanks! --₮K/Admin/Talk 17:47, 13 February 2009 (EST)

TK, can you clarify what you meant by your remarks on WesleyS's talk page?

"I have always suggested just the opposite, Economist, Wesley. As the need becomes apparent, Administrators and/or Mr. Schlafly provide. If you ask an Administrator first, that usually gets the needed scrutiny, and it is suggested that you get it. Sort of like what has just happened here!" --Economist 23:15, 15 February 2009 (EST)

I usually tell people NOT to be one of those beseeching Andy for this or that. Things just always seem to go better for editors if Andy himself recognizes the need, and does it all on his own, or one of the Admins sees a need, and brings it up privately to him. Around here, the ones asking, repeatedly, have generally proved to be less that reputable. Yeah, that sucks for "real" editors, without a destructive agenda, but it is our reality here. --₮K/Admin/Talk 23:26, 15 February 2009 (EST)
It's strange though, because the ones that are recognized by Andy seem to have a higher likelihood of being the vandals (e.g. RodWeathers). That's probably because they just do a lot of radical things to make themselves look like they're really devoted to the cause, whereas the legitimate editors act in a more pragmatic fashion and are not as easily noticed, even though the rights would probably do them more good. --Economist 23:29, 15 February 2009 (EST)
  • Yes, I agree, sometimes strange. No one can guarantee to you what Andy's reaction will be, anymore than they could mine. I can tell you that none of the Senior Administrators posted to his page asking for promotion to our positions. In my case, I found out by seeing a notice of a post to my talk page, and reading of it there, from Andy. There wasn't any advance email, nothing. Rod wasn't so much a vandal, in that most of his contributions were sound. But his deceit was sub-rosa, and oftentimes so obtuse as to be meaningless. We try to avoid administrative discussions on-wiki, so if you have concerns, that require a detailed response, simply IM or email. The same problem with user rights exists at WP as well, and they don't have nearly as much politically inspired vandalism as CP does. --₮K/Admin/Talk 23:40, 15 February 2009 (EST)

Email

When you have a chance, please check your email. Thanks. --Economist 18:58, 18 February 2009 (EST)

  • Answered. --₮K/Admin/Talk 19:31, 18 February 2009 (EST)

Eric Felix/Sionap Gruffydd

While is seems to me that you intended that this user should use his EricFelix account instead of the other, I felt that I should point out that both accounts have been blocked; EricFelix was blocked by JessicaT before you dealt with Sionap Gruffyd. ETrundel 14:04, 19 February 2009 (EST)

Thanks for letting me know. --₮K/Admin/Talk 14:50, 19 February 2009 (EST)

Help pages locked?

Why? CPWebmaster 00:28, 20 February 2009 (EST)

  • The immediate answer is, I am editing it. The long-term answer is it is an instruction/rule page, and all such, by policy, have always been locked against editors, who do not have the authority to change our policies. The talk pages are provided for editors to suggest changes. --₮K/Admin/Talk 00:32, 20 February 2009 (EST)
    • Do you have to lock a page to edit it? And, I was not aware of any policies other than the CP commandments, at least that's how it was when I was active as an editor ;) Sorry if this sounds rude, I'm just trying to figure out why a help page, which should be subject to peer review as every other page, is locked. CPWebmaster 00:50, 20 February 2009 (EST)
Then you need to either IM or email me directly, or Andy, Webmaster, because we have lots of locked rule pages, including the Guidelines. And Andy has never allowed peer review of our policies or rules. Not ever. We also have a rule about not discussing policy and/or security between Admins on-wiki. Just FYI. --₮K/Admin/Talk 00:55, 20 February 2009 (EST)
Understood, no problem. CPWebmaster 00:59, 20 February 2009 (EST)

Vandals

Should we be proof reading the edits that these vandals have made to check for false information? I'd be willing to help. FJohn 15:47, 22 February 2009 (EST)

  • Please do so! Thanks for making the offer, FJohn. --₮K/Admin/Talk 15:56, 22 February 2009 (EST)

Template:Officeholder

Hey! Sorry I'm posting to you kind of randomly, I'm at school so I don't really have access to AIM or anything like that, but I was wondering if you could reprotect Template:Officeholder and make it a cascading protection. Appreciate it! Hope to see you on later, --IDuan 12:58, 23 February 2009 (EST)

Category:Clergy

I noticed mid-recatting Category:Religious People that there is a Category:Clergy and a Category:Ministers. Before I go any further, what are your thoughts on combining the two, or if not, what is the distinction between the two that should be noted for future categorization? WesleySHello! 17:20, 24 February 2009 (EST)

  • Religious People is, to my mind, a catch-all. In it, a person could be a noted layperson or professional clergy. "Clergy" to my mind would only include Priests, Ministers, etc. So, wouldn't it be better to make the SuperCat "Religious People" and form all the others below it? I am thinking on the fly here, so your input is helpful! I will also check with Professor Poor on this, seeking his input here. --₮K/Admin/Talk 17:37, 24 February 2009 (EST)
Both "Clergy" and "Ministers" are under "Religious People". The order goes as such..Religion -> Religious People -> Clergy AND Ministers. To me, Clergy and Ministers are the same thing in essence. WesleySHello! 22:01, 24 February 2009 (EST)
Agreed. --₮K/Admin/Talk 22:28, 24 February 2009 (EST)
Sounds like TK is on the right track. --Ed Poor Talk 22:58, 24 February 2009 (EST)
Now if only you had been one of my Professors, Professor, and so wisely said that to my English Lit class! ("School days, school days.....reading & writing and 'rithmatic, taught to the tune of a hickory stick!")  :D --₮K/Admin/Talk 23:36, 24 February 2009 (EST)

OK, so to be clear, are we eliminating the designations of both Category:Clergy and Category:Ministers and just placing them in the more general Category:Religious People, or are we combining both cats (Clergy and Ministers) into one subcat under Religious People, or are we just leaving it be? Or do I just need more coffee? :) WesleySHello! 08:28, 25 February 2009 (EST)

Ed Poor and I are fine with the bold part above, Wes, if you are. Combine the two, both under Religious People. Religious People would, of course, be under Religion. If you wish to use Clergy, just to have a one-word cat, that is acceptable as well....and perhaps we need to check and make sure someone hasn't created a separate cat for Preists! --₮K/Admin/Talk 08:40, 25 February 2009 (EST)
OK, thanks. I'll get on it when I get a chance. WesleySHello! 09:25, 25 February 2009 (EST)

RobertWDP

Can you please review this user's edits? I may have misspoken in terms of the advice I gave him, but I believe that he may be counterproductive anyway. --Economist 17:57, 24 February 2009 (EST)

My apologies for continuing the debate onto your talk page, but in response to Economist, I fail to see how correcting the facts could in anyway be counter-productive? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by RobertWDP (talk) 14:59, 24 February 2009
  • Short answer, Robert, without the benefit of remembering/reviewing any of your edits, is that this is an encyclopedia project, and while some discussion is needed and necessary in such an endeavor, unless it is a "Debate" page, continued argument/debate, not adding to our conservative/Christian mission, or seeking to change our factual (conservative and/or Christian) POV, isn't wanted. Remember, we do not subscribe to NPOV. --₮K/Admin/Talk 18:06, 24 February 2009 (EST)
I understand and accept this. The current debate with Economist regarding the POV of the site was due to his removal of my edits. My edits were simply factual corrections suggested on a Talk page for a history lecture. I was never actually questioning the POV policy but was simply trying to make clear to him that my edits did not contravene any rules on the matter. RobertWDP 18:09, 24 February 2009 (EST)
  • Well facts can be troublesome things, at times, and are often slyly used to introduce a divergence of opinion in another way. It was a fellow countryman of yours, Robert, who said:
“ The important thing in science is not so much to obtain new facts as to discover new ways of thinking about them. --Sir William Bragg (1862 - 1942) ”

--₮K/Admin/Talk 18:25, 24 February 2009 (EST)

Agreed, I think it was one of your countrymen who put it rather more bluntly; "First get your facts; then you may distort them at your leisure" - Mark Twain. Even if facts may be used to skew something later on, the facts must always be established first and not simply ignored for fear that they may be used to such effect further along the line. RobertWDP 18:31, 24 February 2009 (EST)

  • Bottom line, if one has a liberal-leaning POV or goal, there is perhaps a skew 1000/1 towards that on the Internet. Surely our liberal friends can allow one small portion of the Internet to present what they, in their humble opinion, view as "wrong"? Surely someone subscribing to the true meaning of "liberalism" can bring themselves to be so magnanimous! --₮K/Admin/Talk 18:46, 24 February 2009 (EST)

I will present here what I think is a fundamental flaw in how this website has been operating thus far, but which also raises much wider issues. Don't get me wrong, this is not an attack on anyone, it is simply me expressing a certain degree of frustration at not simply the activities of certain people on this site but on the internet at large.

To label someone as being politically conservative or liberal is an extremely divisive issue that serves to create a false dichotomy. Certainly there are fringe elements on either side that will trade insults with each other based upon the labels they assign. It is these groups who are naturally the loudest and they can give the incorrect impression that their views are more widely held than they are.

It seems that many people on this site have been called liberals in a way that implies its use as an insult. Because their opinion differs on a certain issue from someone who self-identifies themselves as conservative they are then portrayed as being a liberal. This is for one thing setting a very arbitrary standard as to the rating of political beliefs. It is to assume that huge groups of people must all hold the same exact views on the same issues, something which common sense will tell you is unlikely to be true. All that assigning a political category does is to divert debate away from the issues into the realm of personal attacks, where people attack labels instead of discussing the issues. All too many debates on here have turned into what are essentially attacks traded between people identified as liberals and people identified as conservatives, creating a heightened impression of division. Debates all too often turn to this rather than the issue itself to the detriment of all involved.

Certainly there are fringe groups at each end of the political spectrum, note that it is a spectrum not a set of two opposing camps as the two catch-all terms of conservative and liberal would have us believe. It is these groups that naturally have the loudest voices and it is generally they who are guilty of the things I have previously described. It helps no one to simply dismiss another's' argument as being 'liberal' or 'conservative', it is the actual content of the argument that matters. RobertWDP 19:12, 24 February 2009 (EST)

  • It is just that liberals, we find here, will do anything to avoid calling themselves that, possibly because it would be hard to support a logical argument as to why they are intent on "changing our minds", or worse yet, find some logic in their intent on suffocating our rights to free speech. Denial of our right to "be" and to have any public voice whatsoever, unimpeded, is the antithesis of classic liberalism, and simply exposes such people for what they truly are; unilateralist bullies. You, Robert, always need to keep in mind that growing up in a (mainly, officially) morally relativist society has colored your life outlook, to some extent or another. That is not a slam, but simply a stating of fact. Of course there are people in the UK averse to the course society there has taken, and most certainly in the United States an even bigger opposition, and longer history of States Rights & entrepreneurship. The division is not over-stated, IMO. It goes hand-in-hand with the Internet culture, one mainly of winning or looking good at all costs, without regard to the moral implications, or even personal integrity. That has hardened the lines, and lowered the tolerance level here. My hopes of the Internet fulfilling its initial promise hasn't died completely, but it certainly is on life support. That trolls and vandals of every stripe go to such lengths to disrupt and vandalize this site, is yet a small example of what Internet "culture" has become, I am sad to say. --₮K/Admin/Talk 19:58, 24 February 2009 (EST)

But your first sentence only goes to prove what I said if you don’t mind my saying. It is people on this site classifying people as ‘liberal’ or otherwise when you say not even the people in question are willing to do that. Certain people here have set this site up as a bastion of what they deem to be ‘true conservatism’ and thus assume any attack against it is an attack on conservatives in general. Although there are of course some out there who are attacking that label and yet others simply having a laugh, there are others who are seeking to argue against specific issues they have with this site. This site has created and perpetuates the notion of ‘them and us’. Not everyone who criticises the site is going to share the same views amongst themselves so it would not be right to label them all with one term.

As far as a logical argument concerning trying to change people’s minds, I think people in general are keen to change the minds of others to suit their own. Can you not see the irony of the ‘freedom of speech’ point. They criticise and they are banned, is that not both ‘sides’ engaging in such suppression of this right? Certainly if the posts are personal attacks for example then such measures are of course justified, but not for differences in opinion. You rightly argue that there are some who would try to deny some on this site a public voice, but it goes both ways of course. You would be right in describing some people as ‘bullies’ but the problem here is that you are letting what is in fact a minority on the left of the spectrum shape your opinions of the generally quieter people also to the left. There are people who might have generally liberal views who engage in personal attacks for example, but it is not right to prop them up as being typical.

I think divisions are overstated. Certainly as you live in a country with a two-party system it is all too convenient to view the country as neatly split down party lines. This of course hides many variations in the people who vote for each and suggests a clear cut division where it is more blurred. As you rightly point out, my views have of course been significantly shaped by the social context of my upbringing. I have thus far refrained from stating where I believe myself to be on the political spectrum because I have seen where this leads. In spite of my own views I would still contend that the division is false in so much as people’s views are not so neatly divided. The division has become reality in a sense given that it is much easier for politicians and the media to portray it as such, leading to a drift towards the poles as it were. You are correct IMO in stating that the internet goes hand-in-hand with this apparent division. It is almost universally the case that amongst a group of people, those whose views are most extreme have the loudest voice, and the internet simply gives them a mouthpiece to tell the world. RobertWDP 20:26, 24 February 2009 (EST)


ACLU

If you have a minute, would you mind taking a peek at my revision of the first couple of sentences? I tried to streamline them a bit without deleting any information, but frankly, with the cold I'm currently fighting off, I've caught myself making some boneheaded errors and could use a read-behind. --Benp 20:28, 24 February 2009 (EST)

  • Beat you to that, Ben, and noticed your wiry edit remark. Seems fine to me, if its the same as it was after you caught your rather odd spacing.  ;-) ----₮K/Admin/Talk 20:50, 24 February 2009 (EST)

Question

When you messaged me on my talk page, you said something about blocking a person's e-mail. There's no such link on the "block user" special page. I had even looked for it when I blocked that last parodist. Thanks in advance, JY23 13:14, 25 February 2009 (EST)

  • Unless it is a function reserved only for Administrators, there should be a check box for it, right above or below "Disable account creation" or "Block IP and future ones used by this editor". If you do not find it there, then it is reserved only for Admins, so please, in the case of more serious incidents, just let me know, I will go in and add it. --₮K/Admin/Talk 17:01, 25 February 2009 (EST)
OK. Just thought I'd let you know, watch for any account with "bob" in it. We've had a nice, big string of vandalism by people with "bob" in their account name. JY23 08:18, 26 February 2009 (EST)

Request

Hello, my name is Patrick. A while ago you banned me, I made some other accounts to try and contact you and other administrators, but I was banned again (and for a long time) for abusing multiple accounts. I attempted to E-mail you, but you did not respond with a final decision regarding my account(s). I just wanted to let you know, before there are any more "Misunderstandings", that I created this account in order to try and start anew with the Conservapedia community. If you would like me to not edit, then I request that you message me, or respond to me on here, rather then just banning me, so that we can talk out the issue that you have with me (I will stop editing upon your request). I wish to be a productive member of Conservapedia, and I apologize for some of the remarks I said earlier, but please, talk to me if you have a problem so that I can review what I am doing and fix it. Thank you --PatrickMJMF 13:50, 25 February 2009 (EST)

  • I show your last user name (at least from this one IP) MikeJMF, was blocked by the site owner, Mr. Schlafly, not me. You can use the link to the left....see it? It says "Email this user". Make sure you put "Conservapedia account" as part of the subject, so it avoids the SPAM filters. Thanks!
That one may have been banned by Aschafly, but my main account (PatF), when the bann expired, you promptly banned for my use of multiple accounts, so I just assumed you would be the one to talk to regarding that. I did use the "Email this user" feature. You and I had a few back-and-forths on the e-mail which eventually stopped before the conversation was over. But regardless, what is passed is passed, and I just wanted to alert you (or another administrator) that I had created another account so you did not assume that I was a vandal.--PatrickMJMF 07:57, 26 February 2009 (EST)
Well, I was waiting all night for your email, but I guess you won't be sending it, and with so many different user names and potentially dozens of email addresses, I certainly won't be able to find the emails you are talking about. I suggest you read here and here and perhaps here as well. of course you can always post here or get me by email, if you have questions. --₮K/Admin/Talk 08:05, 26 February 2009 (EST)

Conservapedia:Featured articles

Dear friend. I think we should update the actual members of the team. Some seems to be not interested any more. ----Joaquín Martínez 16:26, 1 March 2009 (EST)

It looks as if we are several ahead, and I have no idea what the "team" is, as I see many who are not members of it "voting" as if they were. Perhaps we need to reformat the page, lock it, and have non-team members making their suggestions on the talk page? I was assuming the featured articles would each come in turn, as approved, but it actually seems that the articles appear in no particular order, and have appeared without even being on the list, right? --₮K/Admin/Talk 17:14, 1 March 2009 (EST)
I've participated in this project in the past without soliciting a place on the team. I don't think I've ever witnessed vandalism to that page and I think it's a nice open door for encouraging aspiring editors to take on more serious roles with the wiki. In that regard, I would like to request that the page stay unlocked. Also, if you need a new team member... -Foxtrot 17:30, 1 March 2009 (EST)
And locking the main article page, and having non-members post their ideas on the talk page, that discourages participation, how? I have never, and neither has Andy, accepted that kind of fallacious wiki logic. Saying locking any article or page, and yet having the talk page open discourages participation is a giant assumption, lacking any research backing it up, isn't it? Just an intellectual curiosity on my part, Foxtrot, speaking as someone who came to CP without any wiki training or experience, it is just hard for me to swallow much of the conventional wiki-wisdom about "how things ought to be" presented by many. --₮K/Admin/Talk 17:52, 1 March 2009 (EST)
My wiki-wisdom isn't based on wikis really, but more on the business world. Having to go through the talk page introduces a middleman. In the case of the Main Page, I am very glad that there is middleman to prevent the undoubted vandalism that would occur. But the Featured articles page has been nearly solely the domain of those actually interested in featuring articles for the benefit of CP. So in this case, locking the article doesn't afford much additional benefit of preventing a vandalism than does a simple reversion of a vandal's edits. In which case I'm not sure I see a benefit to locking the article, but having an extra hoop to jump through is at least a minor disadvantage, and I would be happier knowing there was a tangible advantage counterbalancing it. -Foxtrot 18:15, 1 March 2009 (EST)

Contraception

TK, I sent you an email a few days ago about contraception. Did you receive it? (I noticed you hadn't been on much lately, so I didn't pester you earlier). -Foxtrot 17:27, 1 March 2009 (EST)

Yes, sorry Foxtrot! I was traveling the past few, and some things just slipped through the cracks. I just responded, so check your inbox. --₮K/Admin/Talk 17:43, 1 March 2009 (EST)

Thanks!

For the welcome message! I found the links particularly useful.--RegMac 20:39, 1 March 2009 (EST)

That's just super! Glad to be of help, RegMac. --₮K/Admin/Talk 21:23, 1 March 2009 (EST)

Bit much?

I know we have our differences, but deleting and then locking my user page is a bit much. You should know by now that I don't go around breaking any rules. If one of my many entries on my user page crossed the line, you should have let me know and I would have corrected/erased it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by ShawnJ (talk)

  • Wasn't that what I just did?  :p --₮K/Admin/Talk 00:59, 6 March 2009 (EST)
Not exactly, because now I got to rebuild my entire user page, apparently from memory. Ironically, I think putting that reason in the deletion summary drew more attention to it even being there in the first place. Oh well, thank you for unprotecting it. --ShawnJ 01:21, 6 March 2009 (EST)
Well, I hate to think of you being so dejected, but on the other hand you knew what you were doing when you put it there, right? So count yourself lucky, I guess. Or not. I don't much like deceit and snarks like that comment was. Clearly it shows you are wanting to edit a site you don't agree with about anything, and dislike the owner. It begs the question as to why you are here, don't you think? And please don't give the patronizing answer you are here to inject sanity/facts/logic. That's just a liberals natural craving of attention. --₮K/Admin/Talk 03:04, 6 March 2009 (EST)
  • You know, I typed the above, and it got me to thinking. Given your snippy response above, and thinking about your page, I think it will be better all around to just wish you a sincere Godspeed. Good luck to you. If you want to be unblocked, you can ask Andy to do so. --₮K/Admin/Talk 03:27, 6 March 2009 (EST)

Image

Terry, Could you take a look at?:

Image:National $.jpg

Thanks, --Joaquín Martínez 09:31, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

I am looking at it. What is the concern? --₮K/Admin/Talk 15:09, 10 March 2009 (EDT)
Terry, I just want to be sure there is no problem to show a bill. Good to see you around. --Joaquín Martínez 15:56, 10 March 2009 (EDT)
Here you go, Joaquín:


Regulations for Reproducing US Currency Images PART 411 -- COLOR ILLUSTRATIONS OF UNITED STATES CURRENCY Authority: 18 U.S.C. 504; Treasury Directive Number 15-56, 58 FR 48539 (September 16, 1993)

  • 411.1 Color illustrations authorized.

(a) Notwithstanding any provision of chapter 25 of Title 18 of the U.S. Code, authority is hereby given for the printing, publishing or importation, or the making or importation of the necessary plates or items for such printing or publishing, of color illustrations of U.S. currency provided that:

    • (1) The illustration be of a size less than three-fourths or more than one and one-half, in linear dimension, of each part of any matter so illustrated;
    • (2) The illustration be one-sided; and
    • (3) All negatives, plates, positives, digitized storage medium, graphic files, magnetic medium, optical storage devices, and any other thing used in the making of the illustration that contain an image of the illustration or any part thereof shall be destroyed and/or deleted or erased after their final use in accordance with this section. [1]
In other words, not exact size, either smaller or larger than the real thing. Good photos to use can be found here. Good to see you around, too! --₮K/Admin/Talk 16:18, 10 March 2009 (EDT)


I agree with you about the Weekly Featured Article, but also motion is important to increase interest. So I was thinking to let the other articles to have a top position for some weeks. How about that? --Joaquín Martínez 16:10, 10 March 2009 (EDT)
  • Is fine with me, Joaquin, whatever you wish. My only thinking was, as the edit note said, the others are more or less permanent, it seems, so the articles we change often should have more visibility. --₮K/Admin/Talk 16:18, 10 March 2009 (EDT)

Phrasecop

Why do I have the feeling something untoward is happening here? It does not look like he is doing anything wrong, and yet... --KotomiTnandeyanen? 08:16, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

  • Well, the edits smack of Wikipedia, a softening around the edges, some political correctness, like the changes they made to Natural-born citizen where something stated as a fact is softened a bit. See it? But that can come from innocence, perhaps having edited WP too. Trust them, but verify their work, is a good plan here. They are not editing from the same IP as any known vandals....of course I checked! You might want to let them know they shouldn't be "correcting" student work, however. Maybe they are simply "gnomelike" and enjoy copy editing! --₮K/Admin/Talk 08:27, 12 March 2009 (EDT)
Thank you. I will unblock and explain on his talkpage. --KotomiTnandeyanen? 08:41, 12 March 2009 (EDT)
Domo arigato! --₮K/Admin/Talk 08:47, 12 March 2009 (EDT)
(EC) I suppose you could test him - like block him for a day and then unblock him at a random time. If it was a bot he would start editing straight after his block was lifted. Also, I don't know if you saw this, but he seemed to be very efficient at locating the phrase 'due to the fact that' - almost too efficient for my liking. And should it be 'domou arigatou (gouzaimasu)'? ETrundel 08:49, 12 March 2009 (EDT)
Unknown, as my knowledge of Japanese is limited to Frohmer's guide and the Google translator! I noticed the pattern, and simple enough to mass revert if needed, but so far nothing worth all this thought...Chattanooga isn't all that big! :D Thanks, though for your usual logical thought. --₮K/Admin/Talk 08:59, 12 March 2009 (EDT)
I guess you're right, even is he is a bot, he's doing no harm at the moment. As for the Japanese, I'm pretty sure there are 'u's (I think Tokyo is actually Tokyou), unless my kana workbook lies. ETrundel 09:05, 12 March 2009 (EDT)
I was just a little concerned, as you said, it seemed strange he was targeting that phrase and I thought he might have been making edits to form words in his contribution list (using the first letter of each article) - that is another RW ploy, but I could not make anything out.
And TK is perfectly right to say "Doumo arigatou" - "domou arigatou gozaimasu" is the formal version, but as TK is my elder, he is entitled to use a less formal version. --KotomiTnandeyanen? 09:12, 12 March 2009 (EDT)
  • "Elder" will be taking a nap now, prior to teleconference in a couple of hours! You guys try to keep the place from blowing up, and I will be back soon enough to block another dozen terrorists before Noon!  ;-) --₮K/Admin/Talk 09:19, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

Cleaning featured articles

Elder, eh? :-) I just read the above and it made me smile. I had a question about protocol for how to list featured article suggestions on the talk page. I think the committee's official votes should stay on the main page, while regular editors' comments and suggestions should be on the talk page. This keeps official separate from unofficial. If you agree, then I'll remove votes from non-committee members on the main page, and remove committee members' votes from the talk page. -Foxtrot 19:37, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

  • Would you paste your comments over to Joaquin? I don't know if he is on, but its really his baby. I agree, however. --₮K/Admin/Talk 20:04, 12 March 2009 (EDT)
Will do. I'll wait to see his response. -Foxtrot 20:11, 12 March 2009 (EDT)
All fixed up. -Foxtrot 20:33, 12 March 2009 (EDT)

Conservapedia

With all due respect, why was my edit to Conservapedia reverted? I did not think that it broke any rules. DuncanChannel 16 16:16, 13 March 2009 (EDT)

Because you have been told, directly, as much as you permit yourself to be informed, that we do not honor members of vandal/parody sites, DuncanB. Since you wish to participate in this project, but also choose not to allow basic, minimal contact with those of us also entrusted with the same administrative privileges as you are, what else am I to do? Matters of security and personal information about editors isn't something one should discuss openly. It isn't in business, clubs or schools, as you know. --₮K/Admin/Talk 17:59, 13 March 2009 (EDT)

Eisenhower

Thanks for this redirect], Terry! :-) --Ed Poor Talk 20:37, 14 March 2009 (EDT)

  • Always at your service, Professor Poor! Even though I am still suffering with this horrible time change. ;-) --₮K/Admin/Talk 20:43, 14 March 2009 (EDT)

Admin

How do I become an admin like you? I love this project, and really want to see it succeed. PaulRevere 00:44, 16 March 2009 (EDT)

  • Administrators are chosen because of their contributions, always without asking for it, based upon the recommendation and consensus of other Administrators, especially the more senior Admins, for the most part. Moreover they must be willing to self-identify, which means that while an Admin might be anonymous publicly, we are not anonymous to each other and Mr. Schlafly. Remember all good things come to those prepared to wait. --₮K/Admin/Talk 00:50, 16 March 2009 (EDT)
How long on average does it take to earn one's stripes? i'm willing to put in the time. Although I can't "earn my contributions" on the Obama article, because it is locked. PaulRevere 00:54, 16 March 2009 (EDT)

How Conservapedia differs from Wikipedia

I'm sorry Terry, but I find it difficult to accept your actions here in light of #11 in the list of how this website differs from Wikipedia. Could you please shed some light on the specifics of what led you to erase ShawnJ's talk page and then ban him? Thank you in advance. --SStaples 23:10, 16 March 2009 (EDT)

  • I am happy to answer one final time, for all those too lazy to read my user page, where I go into this. Blocking someone for being a member/collaborator/sock/troll from a known vandal site is not in any way the same as blocking someone for posting their opinion on their own blog or some board or forum. As our Guidelines unambiguously state, an editors user and talk pages are their castle, but cannot be used to attack or denigrate CP, Admins or editors. Shawn knowingly placed just that kind of content on his user page, and given his comments in total, was blocked. Posting vague attacks and charges, known as a red herring is the mark of a deceitful person. Now do you understand? Does this answer adequately address your question? The reason we have a MYOB policy here at CP is because one user being blocked should have no bearing on those who follow the rules and are not here out of deceit. They should have no concerns as to the possibility of being blocked, and those users who are so concerned invariably turn out to be liberal trolls. --₮K/Admin/Talk 23:24, 16 March 2009 (EDT)
I see. Thank you for responding to my question so quickly. However, this concerns me:
"The reason we have a MYOB policy here at CP is because one user being blocked should have no bearing on those who follow the rules and are not here out of deceit. They should have no concerns as to the possibility of being blocked, and those users who are so concerned invariably turn out to be liberal trolls."
It almost sounds like you're saying anyone who questions the use of the banhammer is at risk of being banned for doing so. I thought the banhammer was meant to remove vandals, not make those who wield it immune from critique. --SStaples 23:41, 16 March 2009 (EDT)
  • As outlandish as it seems, I never in my life would have bet I would get two responses in the same day, on two different pages, from two different editors, equally as specious! "It almost sounds...", SStaples? Are you being so insulting as to use my own talk page to insult me? Do you go to school? Hold a job? What system is set up for you to critique your teachers performance, that of your boss? And, finally, how can you sit there, seriously, man, I am asking you in all seriousness, how can you critique something you absolutely know nothing about? And what special standing are you claiming to have, thinking you have some right to inquire into someone else's private business? Or are you asserting editing some wiki is somehow a public job? --₮K/Admin/Talk 00:55, 17 March 2009 (EDT)
Terry, please allow me to clarify my earlier statements. It was not my intention to insult you. You took it that way, though, and I apologize. For the record and since you asked, I've held a job as research microbiologist for about three years now, and I can say that our human resources department has a robust and effective policy for handling critiques or other complaints against anyone in the company. I didn't know if Conservapedia had an equivalent group, so I thought it best to come to you directly. With regard to your question of how I can critique something I know nothing about, I thought that my desire to more fully understand the details of the situation was made clear by my original post. If not, then please understand that this is what I was originally most interested in. If you can, I would also be curious to hear you clarify your earlier comment about the MYOB policy and perhaps provide a link to the page that outlines it (I couldn't find this). Thank you. --SStaples 21:46, 30 March 2009 (EDT)

Hello

What does 'dered your name' mean? JonathanR 08:05, 21 March 2009 (EDT)

  • It means de-red. It is wiki edit note jargon meaning unless and until your user page is actually "created" (putting something on it) your signature appears in red as a link, instead of blue, red links on a wiki meaning it goes to nothing, something not yet created.  :-) ----₮K/Admin/Talk 13:37, 21 March 2009 (EDT)

{{Age}} template

Terry, check out Oprah Winfrey. Her current age is 55, but that was calculated by the server based on her birthdate. It will go up to 56 next year, on January 29th - and every succeeding year, automatically. --Ed Poor Talk 15:38, 21 March 2009 (EDT)

Revert of NHS

Hi, I've changed the edit back and added a link to the Department of Health page detailing the costs. I was incorrect regarding charges in Scotland, so thanks for pointing that out and I've changed it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Andyt (talk) -- 08:09, 22 March 2009

  • Very good. Please sign your posts, using the button above, to the right of the circle/slash W. Thanks. --₮K/Admin/Talk 12:12, 22 March 2009 (EDT)

Removal

Please remove my userpage/talk page, all my signatures, and any other traces. Thanks!

Thank you

Thank you for your welcome message. Breithaupt 16:37, 28 March 2009 (EDT)

John McCain article

Why'd you revert everything I did? What's your rationale? I made the article more readable, less repetitive, and I copy-edited it into a format that doesn't reduce any meaning.--CTrooper 10:38, 29 March 2009 (EDT)

Please don't ping pong response. I posted on your talk page, and you should answer there. --₮K/Admin/Talk 12:12, 29 March 2009 (EDT)

MLB Template

Hey TK, once you get a chance, could you unlock Template:MLBPlayer - I'm planning on adding some parameters to that (like what team the player played (or plays) with)--IDuan 12:56, 29 March 2009 (EDT)

What does it mean to de-red?

I do not understand what you have posted on my name page. It says (to de-red your name link. Please feel free to remove this template if unwanted). Viktor

  • You are supposed to be signing your posts, using four tildes ( ~ ) or simply using the signature button from the edit tool bar, above where you type, next to the "W" with the red circle around it. Without you putting something on your user page, thereby actually "creating" it, your posts show red links in the recent changes, etc. Please avail yourself of the links in the "Welcome" message on your talk page, to learn about these things. Thanks for asking. --₮K/Admin/Talk 17:00, 31 March 2009 (EDT)
Thank you TK. I will read the rules. Is it permitted to go back to my old postings and add my signature with four tildes? VLeistung 17:48, 31 March 2009 (EDT)
Certainly you can, those who haven't already had the "unsigned template" added to them. If it was added, no need to. Thanks. --₮K/Admin/Talk 17:56, 31 March 2009 (EDT)
Hello TK - I have one question for you. Please how do I email you in private?  !VLeistung 11:29, 5 April 2009 (EDT)

You can use the "Email this user" link on the left-side menu, towards the bottom, under edit console. Simply click the link, and email. --₮K/Admin/Talk 14:09, 5 April 2009 (EDT)

DonnyK

Please block him immediately- see his entry to dog. --Jack456 17:28, 1 April 2009 (EDT)

  • Thanks, Jack, Dr. Jensen got him first, which indicates it isn't as frozen where he is as I would imagine, his fingers working so fast! Thanks for the heads-up. --₮K/Admin/Talk 17:51, 1 April 2009 (EDT)

Main page trolling?

I couldn't help but notice that you removed some content I posted on the main page with the comment "Removed trolling/argument post." While I understand why you don't feel it's within the scope of the main page news, I hope it's clear that I posted it in good faith, and wasn't attempting to troll. Was the removal incidental to the other content you deleted? --Benp 20:24, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

  • Well, I didn't delete anything, but I did revert arguing by a now blocked troll. And yes, Benp, evidently in that revert, your comments about a news item, and my own response were also swept away. I will put them back, when I get a chance, or you can add them back, if you are of a mind to. Sorry I was inattentive, and removed our different-topic posts as well! --₮K/Admin/Talk 20:40, 6 April 2009 (EDT)
Oh, no problem at all--I just wanted to make sure I wasn't being included in the comment. Parodists tend to have a short lifespan around here, after all! Thanks. --Benp 21:00, 6 April 2009 (EDT)
  • LOL!! Well, who can say what the future holds, right? --₮K/Admin/Talk 21:03, 6 April 2009 (EDT)

Global Warming

What was the point of reverting the Global Warming edit? CMcFreeze 21:28, 8 April 2009 (EDT)

  • Well, it could have been because I felt like it.....just hadn't reverted enough edits, or perhaps it was because all you did was make a red link for global cooling. Take your pick, Mr./Ms. McFreeze. In the time you have spent posting asking why, and originally making the red link, you could have created that article, if only a stub. --₮K/Admin/Talk 22:25, 8 April 2009 (EDT)

Disabling email

I noticed your message about disabling email for a vandal I blocked. I would do this, but it's not an option on my block dialog. Oddly, it used to be an option, a few months ago, but now that screen just has three options:

  • Prevent account creation
  • Automatically block the last IP address used by this user, and any subsequent IPs they try to edit from
  • Watch this user's user and talk pages

Perhaps something got changed in the block dialog displayed for non-sysops? I can try to take a picture of the dialog if that would help. -Foxtrot 04:37, 9 April 2009 (EDT)

I think you might have already told me that, via email, and I just forgot about it. No need for a screen shot, I don't think...but I will let the Webmaster know. Thanks! --₮K/Admin/Talk 07:00, 9 April 2009 (EDT)

When this is all settled, could you restore my pages?

Please and thank you. Jinxmchue 23:39, 9 April 2009 (EDT)

Thanks, man! And I am completely done with the you-know-whos. Not even for laughs, as I said. This all has helped me realize the damage that their poisonousness can do. It's just not worth it anymore. Jinxmchue 10:42, 10 April 2009 (EDT)

No, LV area

Thanks for the welcome! I'm in the greater LV area. Sadly, the economy of the area has given me time to work on this project.WayneInNV 14:12, 11 April 2009 (EDT)

Email

My preference settings currently say gmail for my email and its been like that for a while now, so I don't know why your email was sent to my defunct account on Yahoo (spam central). I resaved. Try again. jinxmchue 13:19, 12 April 2009 (EDT)

AIM

Hey, when you get a chance would you mind logging on to AIM - I just got back from vacation and I just wanted to get caught up. I'll be on for about an hour - and then I have to take a short break, but if I'm not on when you sign on, just know I'll be on soon.--IDuan 10:36, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

Riemann integral

While patrolling the wanted pages, I noticed that the article above (once a nominee for FA status) was there. Is there an explanation for the deletion? Thank you, JY23 17:16, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

  • It's pretty convoluted, and involves (at last count) four administrators, countless emails, and several policy issues involving the readability and understandability of CP articles, and the means to verify veracity, etc. I can email you a summary of just what was going on with this article, as could Geo and Ed, if you really are that interested, JY. --₮K/Admin/Talk 17:46, 13 April 2009 (EDT)
I'm not obsessing, but I'll probably just have to go to work on removing the links to said article. Thanks! JY23 18:04, 13 April 2009 (EDT)

My User Page

Mr. TK, Greetings I am Pietro Savo, proud conservative from New Hampshire. Please review my bio to insure compliance, a second set of eyes is always welcomed. Delete any part you feel not proper, you will not offend me, specially since I am from the "Live Free or Die" State. The reality of truth will always set you free! Special Regards, --PietroSavoUSA 11:12, 14 April 2009 (EDT) Pietro

  • Thank you, Peter! --₮K/Admin/Talk 12:47, 14 April 2009 (EDT)

User:Bigwhammy issue

TK, I did unblock User:Bigwhammy with a message in the unblock to keep him unblocked. However, in hindsight, it should have occurred to me that the unblock records might not be read by you and it was unreasonable for me to expect that you look at the unblock records. You are entirely correct that I should have sent you an email or made a post to your talk page. My apologies. conservative 21:06, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

That is sincerely appreciated, and accepted. Just let me know or the Admin Group, what's going on, and you will have all of our help. --₮K/Admin/Talk 22:21, 15 April 2009 (EDT)

Stalin article

Dear Sir, I have posted several items on the Stalin talk page. If these items meet with your approval, would it be possible to have the protected status removed so that they might be added to the article? Best Wishes, Kingstowngalway 08:00, 18 April 2009 (EDT)

Greetings

Have been too busy for CP lately. But it's good to be back! --Ed Poor Talk 20:44, 20 April 2009 (EDT)

  • Yes! But in all ways I never feel you are far away, my friend! Well gosh, it's 6:00PM here..... --₮K/Admin/Talk 21:00, 20 April 2009 (EDT)

Trolls

I see they came swarming out from under the bridge last night. Thank you for the reverts. --KotomiTnandeyanen? 03:08, 21 April 2009 (EDT)

  • Bah! I just wish more of them were "real" and not recycled, because they are so boring and predictable! I was reading the other night, and was shocked, but not really, to see politics in S.A. mirrors lots of it in the UK and US. Sad. --₮K/Admin/Talk 03:41, 21 April 2009 (EDT)
I know {>_<}. We are sitting with a ruling party that is still making the transition from "liberation movement" to "political party" (15 years later) and still making empty promises that the people believe. (Then again, if you have no house and somebody promises you a house, what would you do?) Crony-ism and corruption (just look at our Pres-to-be, Zuma) are rife. Still, this could be interesting, with the break-away movement (COPE) from the (ANC). And we have elections here tomorrow, and now that I have dual-citizenship, I will be making my mark for the first time. It probably will not change the overall result, but with proportional representation, every vote counts! At least S.A. nowhere near to becoming a Zimbabwe anytime soon! --KotomiTnandeyanen? 04:07, 21 April 2009 (EDT)

Surprise, surprise - you're being impersonated on Jill Stanek's website

Here: [2]. You should probably contact her[3] and have that person blocked from her website and the posts deleted. Jinx McHue 12:30, 21 April 2009 (EDT)

  • Exactly, Jinx, surprise, surprise! It always brings a smile to my face that the liberal trolls from a well-known (and designated so by the Los Angeles Times, no less!) vandal site never get that their mechanizations only serve to prove to the world that liberals are deceitful. If there were any honest liberals, with any personal integrity whatsoever, they would be cleaning their own house and outing those who are giving them a bad name. The fact that the are not doing so, shows that the absurd postulation that liberals are as honest, and have just as much integrity as conservatives, is just that; ridiculous. I have informed Jill of the problem. For their sake, I hope whoever the adolescent vandal is who is impersonating me, covered their tracks well. It just (well almost) crushes me to see someone very young harm their future just because they don't understand how seriously real (thinking) adults take this sort of thing. Thanks for letting me know! --₮K/Admin/Talk 18:50, 21 April 2009 (EDT)

Obama and Kenya

"So, if the CIA Fact Book says Kenya is not a "Muslim country" your answer is to remove the entire paragraph, with other facts, and not reference, by link, your information? I am beginning to think you might be incapable of editing an encyclopedia. Take some time to think about it."

I removed the rest of the paragraph because if Kenya is not a Muslim country, but is in fact a Christian country, whether he was or wasn't born there becomes at best irrelevant to arguments over whether he is really a Muslim, which is the section the paragraph came under. The gist of it was "he was really born in this Muslim country so he must be a Muslim". If it's not a Muslim country, you can't make that argument, indeed it arguably counters the argument. BTW are you always this rude? DanielVaccle 11:56, 25 April 2009 (EDT)
Thanks for answering my question, DanielVaccle! You are indeed incapable of editing any encyclopedia. Correcting the information about Kenya which says it is a Muslim country would have been fine. But how that relates to the statements of Obama's grandmother, that he was born there, is beyond me. The salient point being the place of birth, not the majority religion. If you cannot judge what material is relevant, and you think a factual question is being rude, you must suffer under some type of impairment. Godspeed to you. --₮K/Admin/Talk 12:04, 25 April 2009 (EDT)

Spoilsport

Oh, well. No biggie. You gotta admit, though, that it was pretty funny. Jinx McHue 14:02, 25 April 2009 (EDT)

  • I can only find humorous what I understand, that's on me, not you. The rest of us shoot an IM or something, sort of a heads up. --₮K/Admin/Talk 17:30, 25 April 2009 (EDT)

Block??

Please explain the block?--Meghunter99 17:09, 26 April 2009 (EDT)

  • Certainly. Your ignorance of Communism, to start. Your quarrelsome attitude and your snarky edit comments as well. They are certainly worthy of Wikipedia, and I suggest you stay there, where such qualities are appreciated by their mainly post-pubescent editor base. --₮K/Admin/Talk 17:13, 26 April 2009 (EDT)

Thanks and Request

Thanks for the block, TK! Quick request: there's a small mistake in Template:MLBTeam - would you mind unlocking that so I could fix it?--IDuan 17:20, 26 April 2009 (EDT)

Thank you! I'm done--IDuan 17:26, 26 April 2009 (EDT)
I'm probably going to be on AIM for the rest of the night - if you get a chance would you mind getting on? Thanks so much, --IDuan 18:54, 26 April 2009 (EDT)

Fossil

Did you even take a look at what you reverted in Fossil?--Meghunter99 17:10, 26 April 2009 (EDT)

Can you add the story of that Air Force One alternate that buzzed NYC?

Definitely front page material. I posted about it in the talk for the main page. Jinx McHue 22:23, 27 April 2009 (EDT)

  • I wanted to, but also wanted a picture I could use, and all I find are from the AP! :-( --₮K/Admin/Talk 23:01, 27 April 2009 (EDT)
Hmm. Well, I think the YouTube video is better anyway. Gives you a better sense of the plane's altitude as well as the terror felt by people on the ground. Jinx McHue 23:31, 27 April 2009 (EDT)

North Korea

http://conservapedia.com/User_talk:JessicaT#North_Korea -- —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Iaan (talk) -- 15:44, 1 May 2009

  • Yes? What about it? --₮K/Admin/Talk 18:51, 1 May 2009 (EDT)

Can you unblock Carrie Prejean's article

The edit-warring troll/vandal is gone now. Jinx McHue 19:51, 2 May 2009 (EDT)

  • Sure! Just don't get me in trouble with Addison, Jinx. ;-) --₮K/Admin/Talk 19:53, 2 May 2009 (EDT)
I'd never! Jinx McHue 19:55, 2 May 2009 (EDT)
I'd nerve! I'd Neve (Campbell)! I'd Neville (Brothers)! I'd Neva (River)! Jinx McHue 20:35, 2 May 2009 (EDT)

Template:MLBTeam request

Hey TK! Would you mind unlocking Template:MLBTeam? I'd like to just make a minor styling edit.--IDuan 22:24, 2 May 2009 (EDT)

Nevermind, I see you're not watching your talk page, but maybe we'll have better luck being around at the same time tomorrow. Hope to see you then!--IDuan 23:00, 2 May 2009 (EDT)
Better late than never? I didn't see you on during the daylight, and have been in and out this evening. If you are not around still, will lock it up in a bit. --₮K/Admin/Talk 00:44, 3 May 2009 (EDT)
Haha - perfect timing! I was closing everything up and about to go to bed when I refreshed my watchlist and saw you had unlocked it - thanks so much, and hope to see you tomorrow! have a great night --IDuan 01:25, 3 May 2009 (EDT)

Ignore AIM

Hey TK, so just so you know - ignore every AIM message I sent you - I pretty much had a conversation with myself (I need these templates unlocked - wait nevermind - wait - yes! - wait ... where are you?) ;). However, I actually do need a few templates unlocked, so if you get a chance to get on either tonight or maybe tomorrow (I have a few big AP exams, so I might not be on much during the week) then that would be awesome!--IDuan 23:18, 3 May 2009 (EDT)

Woho! Looks like we're on at the same time! Well if you get a chance to get on I got quite a todo list. Thanks!--IDuan 19:03, 4 May 2009 (EDT)

Was there anything here?

Something you deleted: User_talk:Jinxmchue/Archives. I don't remember if there was anything there to begin with. Jinx McHue 11:56, 5 May 2009 (EDT)

Now behave or shut up. Thank you. :P --₮K/Admin/Talk 13:02, 5 May 2009 (EDT)
Heh. Thank you. Jinx McHue 13:03, 5 May 2009 (EDT)
That was from your page, the wit and wisdom of Jinx! BTW, I never realized there were Moose in the U.K., but when I checked, that was so. I am there a few times each year, and never saw one. I guess the welfare state there has to contribute to their boredom, lots of addled, alcoholics and failing students with nothing left to lose, I guess.... --₮K/Admin/Talk 13:09, 5 May 2009 (EDT)
A Møøse once bit my sister... Jinx McHue 13:14, 5 May 2009 (EDT)
Oh my! I certainly hope she's in the pink now. I sent yet another email, but doubt I will get a response. Odd that. --₮K/Admin/Talk 13:19, 5 May 2009 (EDT)

Birthright

Nice pic. [4] Thanks! --Ed Poor Talk 14:47, 5 May 2009 (EDT)

  • Ed, hello! Thanks for unlocking that page, it had been vandalized....but I didn't intend to leave it locked. As for the picture, I was thinking that is what liberals are too often willing to do; sell their birthright for material comforts, or some temporary safety. --₮K/Admin/Talk 14:57, 5 May 2009 (EDT)
Retrieved from "http://conservapedia.com/User_talk:TK/TKarchive12"
Personal tools