Hi Crzrussian, I think I might have just had a brainwave. It revolves around the little icon at the top-right corner of your userpage, denoting that you are an admin. I was wondering if such a clever little feature can be devised and put on the pages of previous Orthodox Rabbinical Collaborations of the Week. This would be a great way spreading the ORBCW - and also an indicator of quality and that the article in question has undergone intense review and editing. Any ideas on how to create such a feature? Many thanks, Nesher16:16, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
OK... I reviewed the guidelines and found myself in compliance. It's a brief notice, really, and it's in conformance with prior practices - but if you insist, I won't go on. - CrazyRussiantalk/email21:22, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps make a post on WP:AN or WP:ANI about this mass posting question. WP:SPAM is only a guideline and as such there's no simple yes/no answer regarding the type of posting you were doing. To be honest with you though I'm not inclined to think that such mass postings have much support as they tend to be seen as "rallying up the troops" which is frowned upon. As well... you appearingly blindly posted your message to User:FairNBalanced's user page. Not sure if you recall but according to his talk page you made a report regarding the "Allah pig" image that he was formerly displaying on his user page that saw him blocked for a week. As such it's a bit odd to see you posting on his talk page with some sort of a "notice". Take it easy. Netscott22:23, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I figured that from looking at the message but usually such announcements are just made on one of the wikiproject's pertinent pages and thereby those in the project become aware of it (if you haven't already done so I encourage you to make such a post). Mass postings dealing with deletion questions (even a noticeboard about them) tend to raise eyebrows particularly when those recieving message are viewed to share a POV concerning particular deletions. So this is the reason that both User:Cyde and I contacted you. I hope you better understand why we did so. It seems so since you've decided to stop. :-) Netscott22:32, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Started with this. There is this POV vandal called User:Attasarana. Anatta article used to look like this which Attasarana see it as dominated by "secular modern Buddhism" bias. He did massive rewrite, which attracted attention from quite few. I also later received a complaint from another user informing that Attasarana is also involved in rewrite of Plotinus. I and Attasarana got into revert war. Somewhat suprisingly, two other wikipedian, TonyMPNS and Stephen Hodge supported his edit, which I thought was rather odd. Another wikipedian, RandomCritics checked their background and found out that they all have some doctrinal affiliation. I also found out that they are doing bit of propagation of their POV in relevant wikipedia article which explain their support to Attasarana. I outed their activities as "sort of a cabal". Upset, they retaliated, doing their own outing. I guess drawing line in this matter is bit difficult. I outed what TonyMPS put up in his own website. Information regarding me outside wikipedia is not provided by me. Stephen Hodge is doing "I know who you are" type of harassement. It appear that he know the exact university programme I attend. I have no doubt that he know my somewhat personal usenet posting which was done before search engine came into effect (1992). He is slightly more nasty in case of User talk:RandomCritic. Given that RandomeCritics's outing is done privatly in my talk page, he doesn't deserve feeling his privacy being invaded. Moreover, Stephen Hodge is making a legal threat which is not allowed in wikipedia. Anyway, I would like to have reference to my real name eliminated in wikipedia. Doing real name thingy was a big mistake because my name is unique, likely to be one and only in the whole world. This require wiping of profile page history so I was wondering who I should ask. Vapour
I start an afd nomination, notice that I've made a type, go to fix it and get an edit conflict, then when I go to add it to the afd log, I find its already there! Quick work! :) Grutness...wha?05:44, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Crzrussian, merci! Thank you for your support and congratulations. I've decided not to spam anyone with "RfA Thanks" messages, so please take a bite from of my RfA thanks message here. Cheers, and happy editing, Tangotango16:07, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much, Crazy, for your support and trust in my abilities. I gratefully accept your nomination, and I hope that I validate your judgement. Thank you. -- Avi20:11, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.
Yes, thanks for addressing that. I have gotten comments on my (transliterated?) sig before and I have already changed it once. But since you are ethnically Russian (correct?) I should heed your advice and change it again. Which do you suggest? Эйрон Кинни (t) 07:58, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I changed it again (I changed it another time a few hours ago, before you suggested this one I am currently using). Please forgive me, I'm a crazy American ;). Aaрон Кинни (t) 13:43, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Created this new article, similar to your Shalhevet Pass article. I must say that I am shocked by the things I just read on the discussion page there. People doubting whether it could be termed a terrorist attack. I don't know what to say. Well, if you have anything to add to the article about Ayala z'l, go ahead. --Daniel57510:37, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
AGF doesn't apply to assuming someone is intentionally doing something wrong, when you can't be sure they are? Wow, am I just reading the policy wrong? I don't think so, I think that is what it means, thank you. ILovePlankton16:52, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
First of all, your statement shows you don't know what 'POV' is. Read WP:POV. The AFD has only been running for 1 hour, and you summarily decided the AFD should stop because you decide the article isn't 'totally POV. If that were true, you wouldn't be afraid to allow those observing the matter make their judgements. The language on WP:AFD is clear, and this article is clearly a candidate for deletion based on the stalemate on the Dhimmi page. You said: "Your citation from WP:AFD is contrived and inapplicable." In as drastic an action as this, you have an obligation to explain yourself further. My reasoning based on WP:AFD was quite straightforward. All you've done is use your own judgements and your administrative tools to push away a legitimate process. You're abusing your powers as an admin to push things around. His Excellency...17:19, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You said: I'll only respond to say that I did not use my admin powers in connection with this incident. Before I was promoted, I may have done the same thing. I'd like to ask you to AfD Judaism because everything within is written from a Jewish POV. Ridiculous. - CrazyRussian talk/email 17:22, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
How did you become an admin? Your rhetoric is ridiculous. Would would not have been able to shut down an AFD ibefore you were an admin. Your last comment is absolutely stupid. Dhimmi his a historical matter comprised of incidences and policies. There are many views regarding that policy, while the article here gives voice only to one. WP:AFD cites NPOV first before all as reasons for deletions, and thus this article was a valid candidate. You had no right to do what you did. His Excellency...17:28, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I hope you'll pardon my AN/I blasphemy. As I've now explained there, my argument was premised on the idea that an extension of the AfD would have been unlikely to disrupt the project in any way (or at least to a degree considerably lesser than that to which it would benefit the project [by educating the nominator and sparking increased participation and collaboration on the article]); I trust, though, that your assessment that the AfD would have turned into a mess is correct, and so then I think your close to have been altogether appropriate. I am generally concerned by early closes because such closes seem to perpetuate the sense of some admins that if they should fail to act immediately (and unilaterally, in some cases), all hell should break lose, and because new information often arrives to affect the disposition of the AfD or to improve substantially the article; none of those applies here, though, and so I think my point might better have been expressed as Where the harm to befall the project in an AfD's being permitted to run its course is less than the prospective benefits of the AfD's being kept open for at least a few days, an early close, notwithstanding WP:SNOWBALL, should be disfavored.Joe23:43, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, yasher koach for your template! I've put it on all the collabs. However, I've noticed two small issues:
putting the template in causes a slight gap between the start of the article's text and the top of the article, as you'll notice
the actual appearance/placement of the template's icon is not entirely above the line, if you know what I mean. Most of it's above, but some stick's under. However, thats really not even a problem.
Yup, its fixed. Q:If you add this to the bottom of the article, where will it appear? PS: Your picture's done. Many thanks, Nesher22:35, 27 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No I am not. He has reverted more than three times today. I have reverted twice. I edited out unwanted info about Mark Bourrie.
Pete Peters01:32, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You well clearly see that it is not vandilizing. It is offensive that he can use this word so freely and get away with it. All I did was edit out someones name, because it is not worth a Wiki entry. Other people have done it too, read the discussion, but Arthur (Mark) just reverts it back to his own liking. And now he has the gull to call himself the victim, when he has victimized this the Warren Kinsella entry for too long.
Pete Peters01:36, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've been on Wikipedia for a month or so. I have done major edits, copy edits and writing on about 200 articles. Presently, I'm mediating a long-standing dispute.
"Pete Peters" has been on Wikipedia one day. He has done nothing but vandalize [Warren Kinsella] by blanking textm and he's harassed, accused and attempted to out me. Please compare.
[Pete Peters] is either a sock puppet or a simple vandal. Arthur Ellis01:47, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yo, both o' ya! Why do you think it's a good thing to take your beef to my talk page? I strongly suggest both of STOP REVERTING a.s.a.p. or risk being blocked per WP:3RR. I will now look into your revert war. - CrazyRussiantalk/email01:49, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Crzrussian ~ just dropping but a quick note, a thank-you for your clearing this new user's talk page. I felt so bad about it but had no time to ask anyone for help during the day. profound thanks for your kind care - Introvert •~02:28, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
One of the girls at my internship is addicted to Wiki editing and finally got me hooked on it too... as if I needed another internet distraction. :)
Wl21904:35, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Tovarish, I can't figure out how to leave the bold letter M signifying minor edits in edit summaries. I've looked at the editing help page but no luck. Thanks! Telzer12:23, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Ding! Got it! Talk about embarrassed.... Thanks! P.S. I nominate you for the Barnstar of quickest response! Telzer12:32, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Any reason why you think this should not be its own article? I have been trying to add these for Nevada to address concerns about lack of content in an AfD. Other school districts have their police departments listed as aticles. The CCSD article is currenly rather large and is still missing a ton of information so, spliting out a logical section makes sense. Likewise the merge drops entries from the categories that this department should be listed in. Listing the school district in those catgories would be a bit confusing. This department is rather large. Probably larger then many of the departments that will have their own articles. Vegaswikian16:40, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Is it? Also, I'm at work using IE on a mac, I can't be my speedy demon self on this thing. Argh. >< have a good one. Yanksox16:45, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hey CrazyRussian. I will keep Myrtle Ave's article in my head for improvement in the future. On a side note: Streets are very notable because there are people, places, and things happening on them. I don't think that it's valid to say that the only street that deserves an article in New York City is Broadway. There are many other important thoroughfares in the City that are not only essential for transportation, but also serve as points of interest and history. By extension of your logic, what would be the point of having articles for highways? There are many highways in Wikipedia and they are not considered "non notable". While it is not my responsibility to maintain all the articles associated with streets in the City, I do believe they belong in Wikipedia and so I will help develop them at my pace. Eventually, the "demented articles for city streets" you talk about will be like Broadway (New York City) or Fifth Avenue (Manhattan). Would you mind withdrawing your AID nomination? Regards, --Howrealisreal20:26, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Can you move Hawk's Nest, West Virginia back to Hawk's Nest (both with an apostrophe)? The naming was based on consensus, but an inexperienced user moved it around without discussing in order to create a dab that could include a student section at a basketball game. I have no problem with a possible move, but I would like some discussion first. Anyways, thanks. youngamerican (ahoy-hoy) 23:52, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The Hawk's Nest situation worked out when the one editor, User:Vaoverland, whose opinion I most wanted gave a thumbs up to the moves. As far as MJ, I hope it works out. Reading your comment was probably the last bit of education the juicer needed before being ready for sysoping. youngamerican (ahoy-hoy) 01:04, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Is he somehow imune from 3RR? He;s had quite the busy day making false accusations, doing reverts, re-posting sock puppet arnings after the case was rejected.Arthur Ellis02:27, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I never put a sock puppet any new sock puppets on Arthur Ellis, I put it on the other IP adressess you use. Shouldn't you be complaining uder the IP number that the sock puppets still exist on?
Pete Peters02:27, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Crzrussian, I took your advice and used the Discussion page, something he has by passed, and reverta anything he dislikes. I ask that you ban him from editing Warren Kinsella, since Warren is about to file a lawsuit against him.
Pete Peters02:33, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Luna-C Look, the article was deleted because Luna-C is simply not notable enough. But ok, I'll unlock the page, you can post the article, give you some time to bring it into some sort of shape, and then we'll take it to a discussion at WP:AFD and the community will decide if we should keep it or not. Deal? You reply on my talk page.
Ok deal, but I think that (Luna-C Productions) is as notable as several of the comedy groups that are on Wikipedia (definitly as notable as the one I looked at as a template 'Sketchup?) For some reason I cant get the external link coding to work or I would have put in links to several of the items on the entry. Unfortunatly I dont have time to do more, I have a fussy newborn and a show at Shoreleave next weekend that I have to finalize. But thanks for giving me a chance with the entry.
I agree with User:Telzer's concerns. Do you think the Chofets Chaim would be happy with some of the rabbinic pages his famous picture is going to pop up on? Will his holy ponim be seen as " smiling" or " grimacing" (krechtsing) on the pages of Hasidicrebbes and on Religious Zionists who were not from his chederFile:Cry-tpvgames.gif and perhaps even shocked ? I think that Nesher has a good idea here but that the photo of the Chofets Chaimmust be replaced with something more neutral/parev. Anyhow, much thought is certainly needed here. IZAK 08:34, 28 June 2006 (UTC
Hi Crz, I must say I rather like the large-design ORBCW on Telzer's uploaded images page. What do you think of it, especially in light of the concerns raised by IZAK and Telzer? With thanks, Nesher11:45, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Crz, hope all's well. I've changed the picture of the lovely template you made from the Chofetz Chaim to Telzer's graphic. What do you think? We can easily undo it if it's not to your liking. Many thanks, Nesher14:30, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
How about this picture? I was thinking that a picture of the Talmud (yes this is the Tanach and not the aformentioned) would be a good symbol, as Talmudic prowess is the forte and distinguishing feature of Orthodox rabbis. -- Nesher
Personally, crazy's picture looks like a VERY early edition of the Vilna Shas, if not another edition (not Warsaw, that much I can tell). In my opinion, it would be preferable to take a picture (or scan) a more modern Shas if we can avoid copyright problems. -- Avi15:39, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Irrespective of the precedential value of the AfD discussion, it provides useful information and a convenient link to the discussion. Therefore, a template should be placed. For completeness' sake, I will point out that the discussion does
have precedential value, in two ways:
It shows that the topic Chinky was not found to be unsuitable for a Wikipedia article.
It shows that the rewritten version of the article was found to be keepable.
I see mark bourrie has posted a letter he recieved from a lawyer. Please read it here. I think you can agree that the burden of proof is that Ceraurus and Arthur Ellis are the same person. And since Ceraurus is banned indefenitely, so should Arthur Ellis.
I am never again going to touch the Warren Kinsella entry, that I promise, I think you should lift the protection if you ban Arthur Ellis. Pete Peters23:52, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
think the Chofets Chaim would be happy with some of the rabbinic pages his famous picture is going to pop up on? Will his holy ponim be seen as "
smiling" or "
grimacing" (krechtsing) on the pages of Hasidic rebbes and on Religious Zionists who were not from his cheder File:Cry-tpvgames.gif and perhaps even shocked 
? I think that Nesher has a good 
idea here but that the photo of the Chofets Chaim must be replaced with something more neutral/parev. Anyhow, much thought is certainly needed here. IZAK 08:34, 28 June 2006 (UTC
