User talk:Jerzy/Phase 00

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< User talk:Jerzy

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Sj (talk | contribs) at 22:54, 13 August 2004 (AC et al). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Jump to navigation Jump to search

All New: 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Orphaned: 500 1001 1501

Note to Non-Native Speakers of English

Years ago, i got stuck in my brain the idea that there's something wrong about modern English singling out the first-person singular pronoun to be spelled with a capital letter. So i spell it without the capital -- except at the beginning of a sentence, or when i'm not the sole author. If you follow my example, native speakers will just figure you're ignorant of the basics.

(I also say the above, and a bit more on my User page.)

Log/Index of Archived Material

Topical Archive: List of people by name

Topical Archive: Dialogue with Adam Carr

Arc 00

  • In /Archive 00 (~ 20 KB, 2004 Feb 26 Thu (UTC))
    • 1 Non-Native Speakers and other Topics of Hopefully Continuing Interest
      • 1.1 Note to non-native speakers of English
      • 1.2 Good Advice to Anyone
      • 1.3 "As of"
        • 1.3.1 as of 2003
        • 1.3.2 Reply
        • 1.3.3 Infinite monkey as-of
      • 1.4 Grammar & Usage Quibbles
        • 1.4.1 "Not to mention its being hard... "
          • 1.4.1.1 Wise use of sentence fragments
          • 1.4.1.2 The problem of "its"
          • 1.4.1.3 The gerund problem
          • 1.4.1.4 Articles?
        • 1.4.2 Like vs. As
      • 1.5 Pascal

Arc 01

  • In /Archive 01 (~ 18? KB, 2004 Feb 26 Thu (UTC))
    • 1 Verbose Disamb Page Soviet
      • 1.1 Bolshevik Understanding
        • 1.1.1 Soviets - frame 1
        • 1.1.2 Soviets - Frame 2: A reply about Soviets
        • 1.1.3 Soviets - Frame 3 - Jerzy again
      • 1.2 (Temp) Deletion of Soviet
    • 2 Re: Family-name-first Names
    • 3 Intel 4004
    • 4 IFF
    • 5 Old Miscellany
    • 6 Nation-State
    • 7 List of people - Response from Paul (User Rfc1394)

Arc 02

  • In /Archive 02 (~ 7? KB, 2004 Feb 26 Thu (UTC))
    • 1 Cut and paste move
    • 2 Contributions on New Topics
    • 3 Die Walküre
      • 3.1 New Miscellaneous
      • 3.2 Welcome back
    • 4 In Use msg
    • 5 Brianism
    • 6 Battery disambiguation
    • 7 Polar something
    • 8 Yeti disagreement
    • 9 List of people by name
    • 10 Kylchap
    • 11 Extro
    • 12 Sandy (?)
    • 13 Senate
    • 14 Request for Comment

Arc 03

Arc 04

Whining

Please see my comment at Wikipedia:Cleanup#January 31. RickK 02:19, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Actually, don't. I've moved it here... Angela. 03:43, Feb 9, 2004 (UTC)

The Moved VfD CU Material follows, as part of the "Whining" section

[Belated correction of slip of the pen by Jerzy(t) 06:00, 2004 Jul 16 (UTC)]

Velvet Revolver - reads like an article created by banned User Michael - Info seems correct [1][2] Mrdice 17:24, 2004 Jan 31 (UTC)

  • Not the point. Hard banned users are to have all of their input deleted on sight. RickK 19:58, 31 Jan 2004 (UTC)
  • Really? Surely the point is content? Flobster
    • No, enforcing a ban and not encouraging them is the point. Most of Michael's edits contain factual inaccuracies anyway. Angela.
    • See User:Michael: This user is under a hard ban - see User Talk:Michael/ban for details. All edits by this user will be reverted. Please do not reinstate any edits made by this user. RickK 00:14, 8 Feb 2004 (UTC)
    • Normally the point is content, but i for one have no problem trusting the sysops and Jimbo's judgement that this is an abnormal case where the disincentive given a vandal is more important that speeding up the improvement of a few articles, or avoiding frustration for a few editors who get caught in the crunch. --Jerzy 02:04, 2004 Feb 8 (UTC)
  • What i have written just above notwithstanding, i am flabbergasted and embarrassed that those who are pointing out the hard-ban can't give a more coherant defense of the policy. If nothing else, start out by pointing out Jimbo's EMail instead of making us wade thru the heated rhetoric to its link. People should stop editing the Michael-IDed stuff, and stop whining about it. But someone better informed than i should do more to relieve the impetus to whine. --Jerzy 02:04, 2004 Feb 8 (UTC)
    • Excuse me? I lsited this here because I wasn't sure that the anon creator was Michael. If I had been sure, I would have deleted it on sight. I was giving the article and the author the benefit of the doubt. Pardon me for trying to avoid getting my head snapped off for a quick delete. Instead, I get it snapped off for not doing a quick delete. I just can't win, can I? Whine, indeed. RickK 02:18, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)
  • My first order of business is apologizing to RickK; the following is what would have been at this point on the Cleanup page if Angela hadn't Edit-Conflicted me by moving it first, just as i tried to add it there:
    • For the benefit of anyone who thought i was describing RickK as one of those who have whined, i make public my apology. I was careless in making the above comment here, rather than under one of the several other items in the last week or so that concerned the ban on Michael. I certainly should not have put my comment right after one of his, on any item where his name is so prominently posted. I should have dug up a different one, where there was extensive "whining" by people who wanted to edit an apparent Michael article, or not to have their baby (their already posted edits) thrown out with Michael's bathwater. I think RickK behaved admirably with regard to this article, and that his reasoning for listing it here rather than VfD is fine. --Jerzy 04:03, 2004 Feb 9 (UTC)
  • Cleanup is not the place to be asking for a defense of the banning policy. Please read Wikipedia:Bans and blocks and then ask on the talk page if you still need further information. Also, Rick did provide you with a link to Jimbo's email. He linked to User:Michael and User Talk:Michael/ban, both of which contain the link to the email. Angela. 03:43, Feb 9, 2004 (UTC)

The Moved VfD CU Material Ends Here, and the "Whining" section continues:

[Belated correction of slip of the pen by Jerzy(t) 06:00, 2004 Jul 16 (UTC)]

Ooops. Sorry for the edit conflict. :) Angela. 03:57, Feb 9, 2004 (UTC)

It's because I had a broken header on my talk page. It said ==Meta===, which is half recognised as a header and messes up all sections after it. Angela. 04:13, Feb 9, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks, Jerzy, I appreciate your comments. RickK 04:25, 9 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Copyvio

At the moment, getting an email from the person involved attesting that they own the copyright in question is generally enough to clear things up. In an ideal situation we'd require an official, signed letter stating that fact, but we just have to do with what we have. Go ahead and re-integrate it. It might be worth stating that you received an email from said owner of website on the talk page to preemp any future concerns. - snoyes 04:04, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)

You're probably right re: the revert/edit distinction. I'll keep that in mind. - snoyes 04:21, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)

VfD move

Moving long discussions to the talk page of an article and retaining a link in page is well established process on VfD. Please don't re-add the discussion again, it increases the likelihood of edit conflicts.—Eloquence 09:58, Feb 18, 2004 (UTC)

N-CONUS

I don't recall weather I came with non-continental on my own, or if it is an actual term. I wrote that bit when I was doing a internship and Hughes Network Systems (makers of DirecTV), and they used terms like CONUS (continental united states) and other such terms often. So I either pocked it up from them, or deduced it logically on my own. Which I am not sure, but it is cetainly valid in my opinion. { MB | マイカル } 04:01, Feb 20, 2004 (UTC)

Paczki

Hi Jerzy, the talk pages are sorted out now too. Thanks for explaining the move this page feature to GusGus. Unfortunately, there is no automated way of finding these things, so it relies on people spotting it in recent changes and sorting the problem out before the page histories diverge from each other and become unmergeable. Thanks for noticing it so quickly. By the way, your talk page is 56kb, so you should think about archiving it. Angela. 20:31, Feb 25, 2004 (UTC)


Hey, thanks for the "move this page" info. You folks are a lot nicer than I expected! &mdash GusGus 21:09, 2004 Feb 25 (UTC)

Cleanup

Thanks for reminding me about the proper way to list something on cleanup. I had read it but I'm just so used to signing by writing ~~~~ that I forgot to write ~~~ instead. I think I'll keep the name because I've been using it on the internet for years. Saul Taylor 03:05, 27 Feb 2004 (UTC) (Or should that be Saul Taylor).


Cleanup

I don't know what to say. I'm very sorry. I remember this happening on the 15th, but I assumed it was just an error, and when it didn't repeat itself, I let it go. I'll go to the pump right away--in fact, I might need your help to figure this out. If so, I'll let you know. Again, I apologize. Thanks for assuming good faith--I assure you, this is not something I'm doing. Embarassed, Meelar 06:27, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)

P.S. I'm using IE 6.0, if that helps any. P.P.S. I had no idea this had happened again, or I would have done something. I'm mortified.

I just asked Uncle Ed on his talk page. Hopefully, he'll get back to me.
Meelar 22:19, 28 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Vote Clarification

I have clarified my vote on the new VfD layout per your request. I am for neither layout. Thanks for the heads up. :) --Flockmeal 20:14, Mar 4, 2004 (UTC)

Diode bridge diagram

Hi Jerzy, glad to help. Take a look at Image:Diodebridge1.png and see if you think that's close to what you had in mind. Let me know if you want it modified in any way (size, etc.) I can base the others off it if you like it. -- DrBob 18:08, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Hey again. Good eyes on the connection dots; I've updated the Image:Diodebridge4.png with a new version. -- DrBob 16:02, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

VfD

Hi, thanks for your work on VfD, but please could you put it in a separate page. VfD was 110kb today so there really isn't room for all that additional text. It's been moved to the talk page for now, but maybe a separate Wikipedia:VfD instructions page would be better. Angela. 14:19, Mar 6, 2004 (UTC)

Sigs

Yes, it is documented at m:MediaWiki User's Guide: Setting preferences. I think it was Dori's idea originally. Angela. 15:47, Mar 6, 2004 (UTC)

Mislead

What is wrong with it? It seems a sensible redirect to me. If you feel it's not, please list it on WP:RfD. Thanks. Angela. 23:32, Mar 9, 2004 (UTC)

I don't know of any policy of deleting verbs. Perhaps you should ask Patrick as he is the person who created it. I have no strong opinion on keeping or deleting it. Angela. 00:14, Mar 10, 2004 (UTC)


List of people by name

[moved to User talk:Jerzy/Top Arc LoPbN Jerzy(t) 04:24, 2004 Jul 16 (UTC)]

Exigencies of Non-admin Moves

Response re move problem

Hey, I moved the article without any difficulty. Don't know what was up with that. john 05:01, 20 Mar 2004 (UTC)

[What "historyless redirect" really means

The reason you couldn't move it was because List of people by name: Ste needed to be deleted first. Unless a page redirects to the same page that are you are trying to replace it with (and always has done - you can't just edit it to make it a redirect there), then you need to delete a redirect before you can move something into its place. Anyway, it should be ok now. Angela. 09:01, Mar 24, 2004 (UTC)~

Nice to see TRAC article getting filled out...

...I couldn't write any more myself since I have no reference material other than thirty-year-old, wait, make that forty-year-old recollections of playing with the language for a few days.

IF possible, what I would most like to see added to this article would be just a couple of examples of what the language looked like (an example of a simple macro expansion), and perhaps a brief explanation of the difference between \ expansion and \\ expansion. (Or was it / and // ?).

Noted by Jerzy(t) 04:54, 2004 Jul 16 (UTC), the above 2 'graphs have this history entry:
19:55, 2004 Mar 22 Dpbsmith (Nice to see TRAC article getting filled out...)
Hope you're watchlisting me now, and that i don't need to look at the history to know how to reply to you in the absense of a sig, but i'll try to remember to do so if you don't reply soon.
Wow, i have no idea what you mean by
the difference between \ expansion and \\ expansion. (Or was it / and // ?).
and i wonder if one of us was using a non-standard implementation. Could the slashes reflect a difference between dialects; hmm, wait a minit, nothing to take back, but i was about to say
/ vs. (
but now i want to say
/ vs. #
Does than ring any bells? One and two were, i think, expansions that get rescanned immediately and the other not; i don't find the terminology i'm about to use familiar, but think its a sound one reflecting necessary implementation: # or ## controlling whether the expansion is inserted in the working string to the left or right of the "expansion cursor". (I'm a little uneasy about that, bcz i think this cursor jumps around as the interpreter pops nested functions off the stack, and i can't picture that process at the moment.)
I bet i have some serious TRAC code around somewhere, in a box of tab-paper (including the TRAC pretty-print program that i built on top of someone's (hmm, Leonidas Jones's) paren-nesting-display program).
Hmm.
#(DS,howdy,Hello(,) World!)##(howdy)
How's that look? -- not the most trivial implementation, but IIRC the minimal interesting one.
OK, i looked at the comma that's now parenthesized, and i want to say
Active function
#(DS....
Inactive function
##(howdy)
Protected function
(,)
Any bells?

--Jerzy(t) 20:41, 2004 Mar 22 (UTC)

MediaWiki:Sandbox

Like many pages in the mediawiki namespace, Template:Sandbox is protected as it is likely to attract a lot of vandalism. It isn't a message that needs to be changed often, so I thought the protection would not cause as much disruption as the vandalism of it might. If you want any changes made to it, you can suggest them at MediaWiki talk:Sandbox. Angela. 00:53, Mar 27, 2004 (UTC)

List of people by name: Nf-Nh etc deleted as per your request. Angela. 18:53, Mar 31, 2004 (UTC)

Blowing Rock (sex)

Regarding the article Blowing rock (sex), I wonder if your memory of Airplane! might be somewhat rusty (or perhaps based on a translation of the film into another language)? In the film, the autopilot (which is not "legless", as its legs can be seen when it's out of its seat) is named "Otto", not "Rock", and even has a joke listing in the credits. The instruction to reinflate Otto doesn't come from Ted Striker, but rather from McCrosky, played by Lloyd Bridges. And there isn't any line about "blowing rock". From the transcript, the specific exchange mentioned in Blowing rock (sex) actually goes like this: 

Elaine  : 35,000 feet.  NO wait, 34,000 feet . . . NO WAIT,
	  its dropping.  Its dropping fast, why's it doing 
	  that?  Oh my god, the automatic pilot, its 
	  deflating.
MCrosky : Don't panic, on the belt line of the automatic pilot
	  there's a tube, now that is the manual inflation 
	  nozzle.  Take it out and blow on it.
Passngr : What the hell's going on up there?

--Arteitle 05:29, Apr 1, 2004 (UTC)

Sysop help available

(response to note on User talk:Paul A)

Here I am. What's up? --Paul A 03:56, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Not that I'm aware of. (I have to admit, though, that I've tried to avoid having anything to do with the user-login side of sysop-ing.) What is it you're actually trying to achieve? --Paul A 04:14, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Sorry for leaving you hanging like that. My 'net connection cut out, then I got called away to do something else. I can't think of anything to add to Tim Starling's contribution, anyway. (On my talk page, if you haven't spotted it yet.) --Paul A 12:11, 3 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Re: Were

I see, now. I guess I didn't follow the grammar of your sentence. You comments were apt. I deleted my comments, but left the quotation.

Thanks for noticing that I replied.

Best wishes, --Wighson
05:12, 2004 Apr 5 (UTC)

Urolagnia

I've restored some of the text. See my comments in Talk:Urolagnia. I think your edits were reasonable for safety given a lack of information, but I can vouch for the correctness of the text. - UtherSRG 14:36, 5 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Re: Cleanup

I think that the merging of headings is still essential and valuable work, if just to keep the TOC short enough to be useful. - SimonP 21:07, Apr 5, 2004 (UTC)

Thanks [re broken heading, probably on VfD]

I couldn't figure out what was wrong with that page. Thanks for the fix. - Tεxτurε 02:51, 9 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Hi back

Thanks for the greeting! Guido 07:31, 10 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Steadicam

Re Steadicam

I reverted your revert where you removed the link which you described as an add. The page describes to build a steadicam which is obviously relevant. It was featured on Slashdot. Just because the guy also sells them doesn't make the page worthless and only an add. The $14 refered to the cost of materials when you do it yourself, btw, and not the price of a video that gives instruction of how to build a steadicam, which is sort of what it looked like.

CGS 18:48, 11 Apr 2004 (UTC)

A reversion regarding time zones

Hey. Sorry to hinder anything, but I was just doing the RC watch seeing all the anonymous contributions, saw this one, and it looked like a random anon trying to reformat the page and not doing a particularly good job. (There are dozens of those daily... most of them have no clue what the Manual of Style is... :) Additionally, I thought it looked slightly better the old way. If, in fact, the edits were useful, I'm sorry... Apart from that, I don't take particular interest in the matter. - Fennec 01:30, 12 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Angela & Angela

I wouldn't worry about it too much. There are various bugs with {{msg}}s at the moment, and sometimes they show old content that shouldn't be there. They are expected to be fixed in the new release of MediaWiki though. Angela. 01:27, Apr 15, 2004 (UTC)

Sorry for not replying sooner. I think Wikipedia:Peer review's a good place for it, though WP:RFC or Wikipedia:Cleanup might have done as well. Angela. 15:52, Apr 21, 2004 (UTC)

Consolidation of Dialogue with AC

[Moved to User talk:Jerzy/Top Arc AC Dilog by Jerzy(t) 05:34, 2004 Jul 16 (UTC)]

West Papua Maps, tar

I just wanted to say THANKS for the pointer for some Indonesian maps with their silly province borders show. When I have time I'll produce something I can put on Wikipedia from them :)Daeron 19:27, 24 Apr 2004 (UTC)

While i did some editing that related to that place (or the location, somewhere adjacent, of the highest mtn described as in Oceania), and i remember trying to interpret some maps in that context,
  • it must have been months ago,
  • i know what .tar is , but have never had access to means of manipulating .tar files that i can recall,
  • i don't recall whether the maps were in the article i edited; if not, i simply found either them elsewhere on WP or via Google, and deserve no credit, and
  • if you are suggesting i expressed some opinion about political boundaries, i'm pretty sure you're mistaken.
Are you sure you meant to leave that paragraph here?
--Jerzy(t) 03:27, 2004 Apr 26 (UTC)

Sorry for the language difficulty ;-)
It was months ago Dec9, on Talk:West_Papua
"tar" is an Australian term meaning "Thank You" or "Thanks"
You pointed to a URL (web page), since removed. But I've still been able to access the map in question, so Thank you for pointing to where it was, I would not have known of it without the message posted on the West Papua page.
I said "silly province borders" only because I've been unable to find such a map for so long (first looked for them years ago).
The right "Jerzy"? I don't know, the person used that name and you looked settled in so I thought there was a good chance that it was yourself that had both the good luck of finding the map, and the courtesy to mention it on the West Papua page.
P.S. Tar files are a Unix thing, yes anything ending in .tar .tar.gz .tgz .tar.gz .tar.bz2 should be a tar or compressed tar file. If you have problems with one I can convert it to a Dos/Windows zip file or the like if you like. No problems.
Daeron 05:44, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Good morning. I've moved List of people by name: Bo-Bq to List of people by name: Bo as you requested. I'll leave you to sort out redirects. Angela. 06:43, May 5, 2004 (UTC)

[Cleanup needing cleanup]

Nice work listing Wikipedia:Cleanup on itself. Made me chuckle, and sadly it has a lot of truth to it. The thing has grown out of control. --Ed Cormany 05:03, 13 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Transition of Jerzy into Adminship

Adminship [nomination]

I nominated you for adminship. Please go to WP:RFA and accept. I think you would make a great admin. Cheers, Jiang 06:50, 20 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

[Admin requirements]

Hi. I liked your acceptance on the adminship page. Just wanted to respond to a couple things you said. First off, your evaluation of the admin standard as "do no harm" is pretty accurate. Admins aren't really required to do anything. There are a few tasks that only admins can do, so we do them, but no individual is ever required to do any of them. We're only required not to use admin abilities in violation of established policy and the wiki spirit. Secondly, being pseudonymous is no big deal. Some people prefer real names, but others don't. There are a very few jobs within Wikipedia where you're expected to reveal your RL identity (I think the Arbitration Committee does this but I'm not sure, and I know that candidate for new Wikimedia Board need to) but generally there's no restriction. Anyway, good luck and happy editing, Isomorphic 02:01, 21 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

[3]

Sysop [Designation]

I am very pleased to tell you that you are now an administrator after getting 100% support on RfA. You should read the relevant policies and other pages linked to from the administrators' reading list before carrying out tasks like deletion, protection, banning users, and editing protected pages such as the Main Page. Most of what you do is easily reversible by other sysops, apart from page history merges and image deletion, so please be especially careful with those. Congratulations and good luck! Angela. 00:24, May 27, 2004 (UTC)

Interstates

Hello,

I noticed that you are a contributor to US road pages. I noticed that pages about interstates have a heading called 'Number of miles'. I want these pages to have metric equivalents and that heading does not make sense with km. It should be something like 'Distance' or 'Length'. I notice that there are a *lot* of road pages and they are very non-metric. Is there a place to discuss the issue of standard headings etc?
Bobblewik 18:58, 7 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Apologies for writing on your 'user' page rather than your 'talk' page. I took your advice about looking at projects and the closest that I could find was: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Highways

So I posted my question there. Does that seem to you to be the best place?

Thanks.
Bobblewik 19:01, 20 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Dice

I knew there was a direction specified, and the dice I checked at the time had 1-2-3 in clockwise direction. Now I checked my backgammon dice (of 3 makes) and they all have 1-2-3 in counter-clockwise direction, so I think we can safely assume that counter-clockwise is correct. Zocky 11:29, 22 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Noah's Ark

Looks like a simple case of vandalism. Just revert it and keep an eye on it. RickK 03:35, 27 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

[Deleted at this point: identical copy hdg and text just above, except date is instead 03:32, 27 May 2004 (UTC).
--Jerzy(t) 06:25, 2004 Aug 13 (UTC)

Doogan

Someone made a mess by moving the Sandbox, I tried to fix it. If you had the sandbox in your watchlist, you got the page where it got moved as well. No bug there. Dori | Talk 17:05, May 27, 2004 (UTC)

IASO

Hi Jerzy, someone recently used IASO as an abbreviation for "is a sockpuppet of". I wouldn't be surprised if it means something else too. 8^) Hope that helps, Wile E. Heresiarch 19:08, 27 May 2004 (UTC)[reply]

Hawaii

[Re Languages]

Hi Jerzy, got your message re reversion. =)

Definitely, I don't mind the (re)change and I am not one to "write for the enemy." I like the "just the facts" attitude and feel like I have tried to do that here (although it is very tempting to assert one's opinions in Wiki, that wouldn't be conducive to a good encyclopedia).

Just as a background and given only in the spirit of information-sharing, the two changes I made are both in regards to the Hawaiian pidgin language (also Hawaiian Creole English), I believe. The majority of Filipinos who migrated to Hawaii from the early 20th century up to now are Ilocanos for primarily economic reasons (early Dole pineapple plantation politics), constituting up to 80% of the current Filipino population in Hawaii and according to the current census, making Ilocano the top ESL needing teachers in Hawaii. In linguistic terms, I made the changes because the term "Filipino" actually is a recent phenomenon. It is a "new" language invented based on Tagalog, the language of the Philippine capital. This is layered with politics, but in the context of Hawaiian Creole as an article on a distinct language in Wikipedia, "Filipino" would not have much of an impact historically and linguistically to the development of the language, one that spread across the Hawaiian population in the early 20th century.

The following site actually mentions Ilocano as a substrate to pidgin, as well as, Tagalog:

http://www.hku.hk/linguist/program/contact6.html

That was my main reason for changing the words. I'm a scientist and a writer by profession and hobby, and so I offer factual articles in Wiki with as clean (English), as unbiased and as scientific as I can get them. Didn't mean to step on anyone's toes. =) I just knew I shouldn't have ventured to Hawaii! --Oavcacananta 08:25, 5 Jun 2004 (UTC)

[Re "Discovered"

No problem your change my "discovered" to "interaction" on the Hawai'i page. I never did like that "discovered" concept, which is why I stated it as a mutual thing; but your wording is even better - Marshman 02:14, 12 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Hawai‘i

Jerzy, what has happened to you? You came here with such an open mind and tremendous promise as an editor and administrator. You've turned into a "jerk"—I apologize, I do not like to call people names, but your actions on the Hawaii pages are certainly bordering on that. Your only argument seems to be that "Hawaii" is (in your mind) the correct English spelling; despite the many arguments that have been pointed out to you on the Talk:Hawaii page that dispute that. Not wanting to expand your mind, you just go in and delete everything that a lot of good people have spent their valuable time making (in their POV, yes) correct. Does it not occur to you to consider that there might well be lots of persons in Hawai‘i and elsewhere who are English speakers and use Hawai‘i, not Hawaii? Is such arrogance as you are clearly displaying what you want to project as an admin? - Marshman 20:39, 15 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Michael Johns

[Re Reversion]

Always happy to discuss; not sure what you want to discuss here, though. The edit I made restored an edit which had been reverted on suspicion of being made by hard-banned user Michael (which, in my view, it almost certainly was not). It moved a link to Soviet Union to the right place, it clarified a link to federal government of the United States (don't see much need to shorten it to "federal", though it's a minor point, admittedly, and I wouldn't mind if you changed that back) and removed a notice that it was listed on Wikipedia:Cleanup (because it isn't listed there at all). Have I missed something? --Camembert

Hi Jerzy - absolutely no need for you to apologise--you've been perfectly polite and I really appreciate you taking the time to explain the situation. I apologise myself if I came across as a little brusque - I was editing rather late last night and may not have been at my best.

The only reason I (re-)reverted Guanaco's edit was because he was chasing down edits by Michael (whose edits, as you may know, are generally reverted on sight) but was also reverting some other people's edits by mistake, including some rather useful ones--this one appeared to be one of those. The problem is that Michael uses AOL, but lots of other people also use AOL, so just because such-and-such an IP address is being used by Michael now doesn't mean that all other edits from that address in the past were also by Michael--they could have been by thousands of different people.

In this particular case, I noticed the Soviet Union link had been moved further up the article (which I knew was good) and that the Cleanup notice had been removed (which appeared to be good, though I realise now there was more to it than there seemed)--the "federal" edit seemed about 50/50, so I reverted back on the assumption that the edit did more good than harm. If I'd had a bit more time, I would have looked into the Cleanup situation a little more deeply, but I was in a bit of a rush.

As for what to do now: your plan seems perfectly reasonable to me, and I'm going to make the edits you suggest (do take a look to make sure I've done what you intended). Thanks again for explaining, and good luck in keeping the article in good shape. All the best--Camembert

[ Re Finishing Cleanup ]

Hi, Jerzy: Regarding Michael Johns, I have done some work on this (and many other wikepedia articles) over the past few months, and--based on your comments, I made some further revisions to it. I think it is in reasonable, even good shape. Maybe you have a wikipedia colleague who could look it over one final time in the event I've missed anything, but the Bush issue is now clearly addressed and the article is pretty much void of POV. Would appreciate if you would accept my decision to thus remove it from cleanup status. Thanks. --Rob.

Noun

Nice point on noun, but I get suspicious of words which end with "-ize". Let me know what you think of the change (I've had Canada on my mind lately). Mackerm 05:56, 9 Jun 2004 (UTC)

--

Removing Discussion

I apologize if you thought I was "censoring" your previous edits on my talk page. Your comments didn't appear to be anything that was asking for a direct response from me. I made it clearer that discussion of my name was at a specific place, and I restored the one and only non-name comment that I had previously deleted. I thought this was what you were asking me to do, but I must have been wrong. --CrucifiedChrist

Dick Clarke

Thankyou for your message on my talk page about a redirect with which I had inadvertently created an endless loop. See Talk:Dick Clarke if you want to read a description of the intentions behind this foul-up, and how I have fixed it. Please don't worry about the rather intense tone of your message - I quite understand your desire that Wikipedia should be perfect. EdH 20:17, Jun 26, 2004 (UTC)

Consolidation of non-consecutive Ato discussions

Mount Ararat name

Hi Jerzy. I didn't mean to offend you or anybody else with my tone or with the things I have said regarding the order of names in Mt. Ararat article. I am still not sure if I offended you, but if I did please accept my apologies. I had the impression you expect me to respond, but I really do not know what part of your comment you expect me to respond, so I decided I would post here and give you a chance to post to my talk page if you want me to write back. ato 18:27, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Thoughts on Armenian Genocide

Hi Jerzy,
First I have to admit that it is very hard for me to write about the (alleged) Armenian Genocide for various reasons:

  • I do not have enough information. Being Turkish, I was preferentially exposed to one side of the argument. Even though I try to read the other side, it would be ridicilous if I claimed impartiality.
  • This is a political issue. Most of the information out there is politically biased and it is hard to seperate facts from speculation. This is valid for everyone but the people who lived through those times, and those people are either close to their death or already died.
This is not a straightforward case, as you might be thinking. Because genocide happened before does not automatically mean all allegations of genocide are true. I of course acknowledge some of them are true. There has been discrimination against muslims, in particular against Turks, for a long time in Europe. This is still going on in many European countries, just check the arguments given by some political parties in Germany againt Turkey's joining European Union. The information being fed by the Christians about the Christian/Muslim affairs can be far from fair. I can back these words up.

This being said here are my thoughts. I am sure I will regret going on record about this issue, and will probably refuse to discuss it much further. Even if I have more things to say, I might choose silence.

I will concentrate on events around 1915, as my knowledge of other events is even less. First of all, there are the following undisputed facts:

  • There was an order of immigration given by Sultan of Ottoman Empire but Ittihat ve Terakki Cemiyeti was in power. For sake of argument I will refer to them as Young Turks. They are the ones responsible for the order.
  • Many Armenians died during this period.

The question is then whether we call these events a genocide. To answer this the following should be answered:

  • What was the reason for the immigration order? In particular: Was the reason to get rid of Christians/Armenians, based on their religion/race?
  • What were the other reasons for Armenian deaths?
  • How does the death toll compare with the loss of other ethnic/religious groups under same/similar conditions? Could these be results of the war in the region?

Which of course leads to more "pragmatic" questions:

  • Is there any responsibility of Republic of Turkey?
  • Even if there is no direct responsibility on its part, should Republic of Turkey acknowledge that the events took place qualify as a genocide and issue an apology since it is the direct descendant of Ottoman Empire and arguably benefited from the outcome of these events?

This is how I would approach the events, but I cannot answer the questions I pose, because of the reasons I mentioned. Let me try to partially answer some of them though. I will of course present a mostly Turkish point of view.

First of all, we need peace. Turkey and Armenia should stop being hostile to each other. History is history, today is today. Without peace, we cannot resolve anything, we certainly cannot resolve this issue.

It does not make sense that the immigration order was given on solely the Armenians' race or religion. They have been living in Ottoman Empire for a long time, there must be additional reasons. The reason is that the Armenians were 1) supporting the enemies of Ottoman Empire at that time, and 2) were trying get independent and in the process attacking the Ottoman army as well as the Turkish and Kurdish villages. Looking at it now, it might look as a noble cause "independence", but at that time Ottoman government must have felt something should be done about it. Note that, in the parts of modern Turkey where these uprisings happened, Armenians were not majority. I will not try to answer if uprising or support of enemies justifies an immigration order. But if this was the reason, the term "genocide", in my opinion, would not apply.

There was a war in the region, and a lot of people on all sides (except maybe the British which was definetely a side) died. Yes, a lot Armenians died, during those times. There are Armenian churches in eastern Turkey, which are empty now. The people who used those churches are either driven out or killed. However, there are also mass graves in eastern Turkey, full of people killed at those times, allegedly by Armenians. Turkish villages were emptied as well. My own father's grandparents had to leave eastern Turkey, to escape from the Armenian gangs' harassment. I honestly do not know if Armenians were targeted for their race or religion, but there was a lot friction in that region. If they were targeted as such and this was all a coordinated effort by Young Turks, how come the British could not evidence for these charges against any of them for two years while they were kept in Malta? Some people claim that the British were making these up to remove influential politicians from the picture, and there was no planned mass murder, hence no genocide.

Whether Republic of Turkey should accept responsibility and apologize. This I can answer firmly: No. First, we don't know what really happened. Even the events of Musa Dagh, which is maybe the most celebrated piece of Armenian propaganda, are not clear. An Armenian who lived through those times says "there was no fighting" but historians say otherwise. I say we do not know. Second, "Countries do not apologize". You should know this as an American. Do I approve such policies? "no". Would I apologize if I was head of state of Republic of Turkey? "no". Why? This brings me to my third reason: I am afraid this will turn into a holocaust industry. I do not want the borders of Turkey to be disputed (which you seem to accept as natural) or to pay monetary compensation for things done in Ottoman era. I would not accept any comprimise on any other issues either, so Republic of Turkey would be forgiven.

Again I will repeat, we need peace. If you want to make a comparison with other events, how about this: From beginning of 19th century to beginning of 20th century, 5 million Turks were killed in and another 5 million were driven out of Europe. Should we shout "genocide!" as well and blame the European countries, or shall we come to peace with each other? Where will hatred take us? Whereever it is, I don't want to go there.

Have fun. ato 04:23, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Scientific American Voynich article

Thanks for the tip on the Scientific American article! I happened to go through Miami airport last week, on a conference trip, and bought myself a copy. It may be a month or more before it shows up in bookstores around here...Jorge Stolfi 04:30, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)


VfD section doubling

Hiya! I was wondering if you noticed any weird behaviour from the system when you made those edits to WP:VFD earlier? Because your 12:11 edit "Logamnesia — Add to this discussion - +=== July 7 === blw it" caused a doubling of the whole page, and then your 12:18 edit "pre-ToC: + 7th; rlk 1st to /Old" caused another one!!

Did you hit any edit conflicts? I notice that you were moving some section headers around, thought maybe that we could be onto a clue here as to what causes the page-doubling? —Stormie 02:04, Jul 7, 2004 (UTC)

"Trimming" signatures

You, sir, are an asshole. Because I'm too lazy and too busy to get in some petty war over a signature, I will remove the link that you have a problem with. However, you are still an asshole. Don't ever mess with my (or anyone else's, for that matter) signature again. It's not your place. I'm not quite sure how you made admin, going around doing rude, unilateral, agregious shit like that. blankfaze | •• | •• 14:16, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

  • Now that I've cooled down a bit, I want to apologise for calling you an asshole. I was very offended, and took action very offensively, as such. I mean, how would you feel if I went around, changing your signatures? But anyway, I should have cooled down first. I sincerely apologise. blankfaze | (беседа!) 14:51, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)


Heading anomalies

Unbalanced Heading Reference

Just noticed this in my Whining section, before archiving it:

It's because I had a broken header on my talk page. It said ==Meta===, which is half recognised as a header and messes up all sections after it. Angela. 04:13, Feb 9, 2004 (UTC)

Possible Tag-after-Heading-Markup Anomaly

heading in templates

You wrote "Rem Hdgs in template: <!-- FOR TECHNICAL REASONS, headings must NOT be placed in templates -->".

[ Jerzy(t) has added clarifying <nowiki> to quote of his edit summary (from a "VfD/" quasi-template page, and to which he (or possibly orthogonal) added comment markup from the edit), making the comment markup visible w/o editing.]

What exactly is the technical problem (I'm being curious, not contentious). -- orthogonal 05:09, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

On Template talk:VfDFooter, you suggested that the silence means we should add the anti-ad language back to the footer. I'd rather wait a while longer. The instructions are much too clumsy right now. I've already made my case for why I think the ad language is overkill. Let's both take a few more days to see if we can drum up any more interest in discussing the point. Thanks. Rossami 15:13, 22 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I like it. And I'd never found WP:RFC before. Thank you. Let's do the collaboration on the talk page. I'll start a draft there (unless you already have). Rossami

Oil, meet troubled waters, hope you get along...

Hi. I'm back from work and am thoroughly relaxed now though I'm still maintaining a wee break till maybe Sunday.

I think these things need to happen occasionally because it forces discussion around policies that for whatever reason are not working as well as they could. Unfortunately somebody has to complain and somebody has to be complained at and in this cicrumstance I was the latter. But I'm not the type to harbour ill feelings towards others.

So yesterday I got down to some editing rather than sysoping, tidied up Tyburn, created Chidiock Tichborne, got it listed on Template:Did you know and then had a good night's sleep. And now I'm bright as a daisy and feeling happy. No ill feelings at all!

Graham ☺ | Talk 11:55, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Too big

I'm sorry. I guess that I was trying to do a lot of things, and didn't really think this one through. You were right to revert that edit. [[User:Mike Storm|Mike Storm (Talk)]] 21:54, 28 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Partisan

Please take a look at Talk:Partisan and Wikipedia:Requests for comment/CVA. Halibutt 09:32, Aug 3, 2004 (UTC)

I simply thought you might be interested since you participated in the discussion some time ago. [[User:Halibutt|Halibutt]] 12:47, Aug 3, 2004 (UTC)

I am fully aware of how protecting works. I'd rather intended to point out that this dispute is well behind three-reverts rule, and does not point to anything useful. Besides, I believe that while protecting, admins are not allowed to revert article to pre-controversion version since often initial version was controversional to some party. In this case omittal of Polish forces can even be in protected version, since it is not so much material as in Home Army. Przepla 09:20, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Closing VfD debate

St
Hi Jerzy, got your message about closing VfDs..

As a freshly appointed admin, I decided to help reduce the size of the VFD page by closing off some 5-day-old entries, and, not being sure of the exact process, I read Wikipedia:Deletion process. It makes absolutely no mention of Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Old (which I'd never heard of before), it just says (paraphrasing) at the end of the VFD period, determine whether the consensus is to keep or delete, add the header and footer to the discussion page and link it from the article talk page (if you're keeping) or Wikipedia:Archived deletion debates (if you're deleting), and remove the listing from the VfD page (emphasis mine).

So I think some editing to Wikipedia:Deletion process is in order. :-)

Now that you've brought VfD/Old to my attention, I'll help out with clearing things out there. Although I may not be that much help, since I don't intend to touch anything that isn't completely clear-cut in its voting until I'm more experienced at this. —Stormie 23:22, Aug 5, 2004 (UTC)

p.s. I'm not sure what you mean by "what reason is there for the confusing and less efficient practice of closing and perhaps taking action before midnite, unless you are going to reduce the excessive size of VfD by getting the entries off VfD?" — the two I closed (The Meritocracy and Tips for New Poker Players), I actually removed from the VfD page before I closed the debate & actioned the delete (see [4]). —Stormie 23:42, Aug 5, 2004 (UTC)
Hi Jerzy.. it occurred to me after I posted that p.s. that maybe you had VFD opened up from before I edited it, such is life. As for the instructions on Wikipedia:Deletion process, I'm happy to have a stab at clarifying them—I'll drop you a note when I've done so, so you can have a glance over the page and make sure it all (a) makes sense and (b) accurately describes the desired procedure. Cheers! —Stormie 00:52, Aug 6, 2004 (UTC)
OK, I've revised Wikipedia:Deletion process. It didn't change much, just explained the VfD/Old situation, and copied in a little bit from Wikipedia:Deletion guidelines for administrators to remind people to pay heed to redirects and links when deleting a page. Hope you like it! —Stormie 03:47, Aug 6, 2004 (UTC)

Sig

Thanks, I already knew MSIE sucks ;). I'm just teasing of course. It is of course unfortunate that Microsoft does not see the need to follow the Unicode character standards that it itself helped shape. Also, I am a bit suprised that after Microsofts latest security hole anyone is still using their browser at all. Who am I kidding though, people will continue to use their products Ad nauseam, even if they were/are inferior. Anyways, enough of that rant. Download Mozilla Firebird! I used to be stuck using MSIE, but I'm so much happier now! Tabbed browsing is godlyness! Take Care. — マイケル ₪ 02:31, Aug 6, 2004 (UTC) (or as you know me box box box box squigly)

Rouble or Ruble

[ Dainamo tk ]
Jerzy, I am almost speachless as to your efficiency and excellent administrative judgment in the actions you have taken concerning moving and presenting the above discussion. Well done and thank you. Dainamo 11:41, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Request for help with a move

[ JML]
Your comment about a redirect with no history makes me think that maybe I could do this myself without fouling things up, but I'd rather play safe.

An article was moved from Modeling (NLP) to Modelling (NLP), leaving a redirect. I think it should be moved back with a redirect where the article now is. I explained the background at Wikipedia:Redirects for deletion#August 4, but it seems like it can take a while for anything to happen on that page. I noticed your expression of particular willingness to help with such situations, so I'm calling it to your attention. Thanks for anything you can do. JamesMLane 20:15, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Thanks for laying out the process in detail for me. That was exactly what I needed. I think I've moved the article, and even fixed the links, without causing any floods or earthquakes. I gather from your comment on Wikipedia:Redirects for deletion that you can handle the administrative followup needed there, which would be great.
By the way, just in case you haven't come across it, one of my favorite articles on Wikipedia is American and British English differences. It's very useful when you need to get a handle on how something is "spelt" in Commonwealth usage. JamesMLane 23:49, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)

First Bible Stories

B tk
Jerzy, thanks very much for your giggle-raising comments on "First Bible Stories" (which I nominated for deletion) on VfD. It was a relief to see somebody go on from my own figure-laden example of how a Barnes&Noble book would tend to get a high Barnes&Noble rating, because I was beginning to think it had killed all conversation stone dead. ;-) Bishonen 19:16, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Genitalia

Hello, Jerzy. 10 days on VfD is a long time, and the art in question hadn't been significantly changed since Manning's reverse-redir and copyedits. I'm not sure what you expect to happen by continuing to leave the VfD discussion up, though I understand it is an emotional issue for the participants. Feel free to explain your concerns on my talk page. Cheers, +sj+ 04:36, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC) (after reading your comments on VfU, I have a slightly better understanding of what you hope for... but still no sense of how you will determine when it is appropriate to archive te VfD discussion.)

You're a fairly new admin, so I suppose you don't remember when the recommendation was that VfD-templates be deleted once the VfD discussion was over. I can live with the community decision, since then, to keep everything... but it wasn't because the GFDL requires that. Similarly, I agree that as long as one is preserving a large block of text with unsigned edits, it is nice to preserve its edit history; moving it to a Talk:foo/Delete page is a great solution. And again, this is for neatness's sake more than for legal reasons; a user leaving an unsigned comment, then set in amber and referred to by others, on a talk page about a piece of actual content -- is many steps removed from a copyright grievance; note for instance that the GFDL is content to have a list of [major] editors of a body of work for a given year, without any details of who contributed what where.
In any case, thank you for caring about these issues, and for fixing the things you see as broken. Wiki works best when editors are bold, and don't worry about pushing back on one another. +sj+ 08:51, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)
ps - why do you make 'routine dummy edits' to your own talk page? +sj+

I think my solution meets a nice midpoint. The article has changed substantially, and the article it was supposed to redirect to got changed to a redirect to it. However, since it should be Genital integrity and not Genital Integrity, I'm still hacking at it a bit. But I think the matter is basically settled. Oy. Snowspinner 21:24, Aug 12, 2004 (UTC)

Re:

A fresh reply awaits @ User_talk:Sam_Spade#Nagarjuna. Sam [Spade] 04:54, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)

AC elections

Hi Jerzy. Thanks for explaining your dummy edits, and I'm glad we're on the same wavelength again about moves and deletions. I'm just writing to remind you to vote in the ArbComm elections on En: today. Raul654 and I are both running on platforms to make the AC fast and efficient, and I'd like to help it view its own infallibility with a healthy grain of salt. +sj+ 22:39, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)

AC et al

Yes, you can vote more than once. Only your last ballot is counted. You should vote for every candidate you would like to see in office!

+sj+ 22:54, 13 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Jerzy/Phase_00&oldid=5192084"