Wikipedia

MartinHarper

Joined 29 November 2002

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Next Paige (talk | contribs) at 22:36, 2 October 2003 (New hat?). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Learn more about this page

My name is Martin, and I refactor my talk page

Hi, Martin!

Stuff written here could end up anywhere. In particular, my distaste for MeatBall:ForestFires, bad trolls, and spam applies doubly here. Also, I summarise stuff. If my summaries are inaccurate, fix them!

Unsigned stuff is probably written by me

See also: user talk:MyRedDice/refactoring

Praise for...

Helping my inner glow:

Top Trolls

All accidental, I assure y'all

Best of old summaries

  • Welcome! --Camembert
  • Welcome! --Ed Poor
  • (etc - Wikipedia is quite welcoming... once it notices you)
  • "Equal opportunity roasting place" -ROFL 'Vert
    • I enjoy a well-executed troll, but would prefer to avoid seeing one executed
  • There is a certain level of micro-management beyond which things become unacceptable. Tannin
  • do you know a lot of vicars? Nevilley
    • Yes, but I know more tarts.
  • I forgot to update my age on my home page...
    • when you get older...you even forget how old you are, and need to count... anthere
      • When you get older still, you forget how to count...
        • The worms feed on you whatever your age. anthere
  • Let it wash around you like water around a rock -º¡º
    • One cannot learn about filth without touching the mire
  • Good evening Martin-e. --Anther
    • You mean "Lucinda"... or "Lucy" :)
  • Perhaps there are times of openness, such as when flowers want to get fertilized, and times of protection, nurturing the growing fruit ? (anthere)
  • You behaved admirably Oliver. If only every Wikipedian behaved as you do when in a bad mood, then this'd be a nicer place... :)
    • In that case, I'll resist the urge to complain about you not signing the message I'm currently replying to... ;) -- Oliver P. 11:47 13 Jun 2003 (UTC)
  • "Unsigned stuff is probably written by me"
  • Otherwise, it is by me
    • Conversations between Martin and Anthere are my worst nightmare. ;) -- Oliver P. 14:15 13 Jun 2003 (UTC)
  • I love the timeline on User talk:Zoe. It reads like a detective's report on some horrific airplane crash, or something. :-) Evercat 01:38 17 Jun 2003 (UTC)
  • I am fighting against my "judéo chrétienne" education. Elk
    • My response to suffering is more Buddhist in style.

Summarised talk

  • Why is a sysop allowed to go around attacking anyone who disagrees with him? Pizza Puzzle
    • Treasures abound, as far as the eye can see. Why does the dragon's hoard seem the most attractive?
  • Martin, I only protected the page temporarily to... yada, yada, yada FearÉIREANN 15:21 28 Jul 2003 (UTC)
    • I don't question your motives, Jtdirl, but your action is at variance with our current recommendations.
  • I compiled this on PP. Evercat 01:03, 29 Jul 2003 (UTC)
    • I will now be able to make an informed decision.
  • I've noticed you editing Daniel C. Boyer... MB
    • I find out very attractive. Will you go to bed with me? (bad musical reference, sorry)


  • I removed Boyer's publisher info - it was misleading. Kat 18:45, 31 Jul 2003 (UTC)
    • But counteracted by the e-Bay info.
  • If Boyer attacks reasonable presumptions, what can we do? Kat 19:12, 31 Jul 2003 (UTC)
    • Ignore him?
  • Are there clear rules on deleting redirects? MB 20:58, Jul 31, 2003 (UTC)
    • We used to have unclear rules - but now we have clearly disputed rules.
  • I look at my user page for replies to my messages. MB
    • If you look hard enough in the wrong place, you will see things that are not there.
  • We're currently looking for speakers for the next Wizards of OS conference in Berlin, in April 2004. Could you speak on h2g2 vs Wikipedia?
    • I don't know.
  • I think the reasons for deletion far outweigh reasons for keeping. MB 21:47, Aug 1, 2003 (UTC)
    • I don't.
  • Why don't you just unblank those portions that you feel are verified? Kat 22:33, 1 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • Why don't you just blank those portions you feel are unverified? ;-)
  • You missed the point. Kat 23:30, 1 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • Your point is that if Boyer has an article, why can't you?
  • No. The page was patent nonsense. Kat 23:51, 1 Aug 2003 (UTC)
  • My opinion about AKFD hasn't changed. Koyaanis Qatsi 19:24, 3 Aug 2003 (UTC)
  • What was the resolution to the AKFD nonsense? -戴&#30505sv 21:02, Aug 3, 2003 (UTC)
    • We were resolved to be unresolved
  • I didn't know that there was going to be an additional vote. LDan 16:45, 4 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • Better than a coup d'etat.
  • What's this with wiki-wolves? Koyaanis Qatsi 21:31, 4 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • They devour all things, howling as they go.
  • Spam from the legion of trolls deleted.
  • Was your foolishness important enough to summarise?
    • No, but I didn't want to remove material unfavorable to myself. Kat 20:20, 7 Aug 2003 (UTC)
  • sv spam deleted
  • I undeleted Adolf Hitlier as you requested, master. Angela 23:21, 16 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • You are a most pleasing slave.
  • Very interesting comment from Alex756 regarding invariant sections, the GFDL, and the edit warning - moved and responded at User talk:Alex756 - people interested in Wikipedia copyrights would do well to read.
  • You are 24 Martin ? Ant
    • J'ai 24 ans, mais je ne suis pas 24.
  • What was the conclusion over Daniel matter ? Ant
  • We should not rely on the self-righteous Meatballers to run things here. EofT
    • Neither should we ignore what they have to say.
  • Messy RK vs EofT content deleted. Thanks to EofT for informing me, Uncle Ed for his compliment, Stevertigo and anthere for their sysop powers.
  • discussion to Wikipedia:Community case RK
  • Obscenities on Talk Israel: See Jtdirl's explanation on Talk:Israel, and my response there.
  • Please could you leave at least a summary of the Brazil rocket thing on the pump? -- Tarquin 13:56, 24 Aug 2003 (UTC)
  • Martin, I am likely mere minutes away from being banned for resisting the rule of RK. I hope we wikimeet again. If you see the Buddha on the wiki... well you know. --EofT
    • Engage him in edit war?
  • a light hearted attempt at humour by --Dante Alighieri 23:04, 25 Aug 2003 (UTC) on the WikiEN-l. Meets with my approval.
  • Wish you were french. Anthere
    • I save my wishes for greater transformations.
  • It was quite annoying seeing my name in red everywhere. Angela
  • The criticisms of you on the mailing list are particularly unfair. Persevere. Kat 01:42, 28 Aug 2003 (UTC)
    • Thanks, Kat! :)
  • I tried to apply the political virtues to someone's ongoing dispute with me and my responses, and this was the possibly-amusing result. EofT
    • heh, amusing.
  • Sure you want to be linking to anchors within pages? Evercat 01:55, 31 Aug 2003 (UTC)
  • Martin, help! Angela 23:34, 3 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • I'm going to bed! :)
  • I would appreciate links to the old discussion about the lag time on VfD.Cyan 00:58, 8 Sep 2003 (UTC)
  • Much appreciated. -- Cyan 13:32, 9 Sep 2003 (EDT)
  • Was there something I missed? DJ Clayworth 19:10, 8 Sep 2003 (UTC)
    • Nothing except my lack of deletion.
  • I think things could end up very heated if people start doing things to other people's talk pages that the user in question objects to. Angela 14:46, Sep 11, 2003 (UTC)
    • I am saddened by the idea that such pages are "owned" by the users, who have "rights" over their form. Such property is theft.

New talk

Relevance

You know Martin...a curious feeling...some people says wikipedia should aim at containing all usefull knowledge in the world. And wikipedia in different languages should not ultimately so much differ one from another, since aim at containing all knowledge...would that mean that each of them should also contain the knowledge it thinks irrelevant, but is actually relevant in another language/culture set ? I mean...ideally, if the en wikipedia decides Boyer is not relevant, why should it be relevant to the french ? But similarly, if the french keep Boyer, why would the en decide it is irrelevant ? It makes me actually thinks of a three star system, *** to indicate major articles, very important, essential notions for any decent person to know, ** to indicate significantly issues and topics, * for common topic or very focused topics (professional stuff for example), no star for unclassified, articles on unknown people, little covered topics.

Hum...ok, beer time :-)

Makes me think of a new idea myself: [[[[vitally important link]]]], [[[useful link]]], [[rarely used link]] - and allow people to configure how many links they want to be shown (and perhaps, important links in bold or otherwise highlighted).
Bed for me :)
very sweet dreams :-))

Hi MRD. I've done a search and there seem to be no further pages in the same scheme as France: Wars of Religion/Bourbon Dynasty. The place to co-ordinate their integration would be Talk:History of France, I've put a note there for when someone has time to deal with it. cheers. -- Tarquin 14:28, 12 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Hello. Good evening

I was wrong. It was a redirect. I hate these redirections from one wikipedia to another. This is totally misleading :-(

It happens :)

Hadn't noticed that; thanks for pointing it out! - Hephaestos 19:34, 12 Sep 2003 (UTC)

It is really interesting to dig in archives and talk pages. I read the weasel, verifiability and source citing pages today. Recently, I had a rather strong debate on the french wikipedia, on an article dealing with the very high temperatures of this summer, and their impacts in Europe. This article was rather nice, result from a collaboration between several newbies. But an amazing collection of fluttery assertions, free comments, dubious facts, aside with very solid and reliable stuff. I boldly pointed out at the worse points in the talk page, asking for sources. As a result, I was either answered that it was stupid from me to ask this since of course everyone knew it, and second that is was my business, so if I had problems with the article verifiability, it was my problem to correct it and check for sources and that I just had to watch tv as everyone. Mind you, there were some comments such as the US/Canada electricity break out was due to the wide use of air cooler, due to the high temperatures that swept throughtout the world that summer :-)))) or that since it was obvious that climate changes was occuring now, lobbyists were trying to hide their responsabilities. Hum...what is that supposed to mean, I still do not know. Anyway, I barely succeeded to convince the authors that it was not *my* responsability to correct all their laxist work. I looked for a couple of things though, hence removed some of the funniest parts.

We have no guidelines anywhere about how to deal with verification. I think I have a couple of update to do, and then, an example to make :-))). That would perhaps trigger some interesting discussions about verifiability sources :-)

It must be really fascinating, seeing at first hand the differences between the various language projects. It's likewise fascinating reading old archives of discussions on en.wiki - back in the days of Larry Sanger and the Cunctator, when the place was almost without form. Strange how much Wikipedia has changed over time, despite the conservatism that it displays on its face.


yup. I got around feb 2002, when Larry lost the job. On the french slightly later. When I got on the french, we had about 200-300 pages perhaps, user and meta included. Not to say that these were much. Perhaps 20 user pages ? Perhaps 20 meta pages, the basic guidelines, how to edit, why contribute. Just translation of english pages made by the starters. Nothing else. And most contributors not having anything to do with en, or just interested in making pages. No more.
I often wonder what would have happen without me :-) Not to say it would not have been good at all :-) It is just that...I think I wrote more than 50% of the meta pages. Perhaps more. Basically, the ones I did not write are those about naming conventions and such, which are more the realm of Aoineko or Looxix. But most of what I write was with the english model, removing what seemed bad, adding what seemed good. Now, there are a couple of people interested in this too, but usually, most contributors don't care much. They ask for the rules, much more than they tend to make them or participate making them. And complain if the rules do not exist, or if they do exist without having been written. So, I wonder how it would have evolved if I had not make noise on meta, noise on ML and made so many meta pages at all. Would someone else have emerged to do them ? Did I somehow prevent that ? Which would have been the rules then ? Would it have been very much different from what they are now ? I created very little myself, but what would have happened if I had not done anything ? Most of what I "creatively" did was to try to balance things. What would have happened if not ? It is probably harder to say on en, but on the french, we still are not numerous, so just one person can make a huge difference. And we are all precious. Especially the trolls :-) Thank God, the Cunctator was there in front of Larry !!!
shorten in three of your words : it is fascinating. :-))))

I'm not interested in being lectured to. Please keep your unsolicited advice to yourself. There are certainly many other people you can nag. You're very good at it. RickK 01:19, 14 Sep 2003 (UTC)

See http://www.worldviewpub.com/ Thanks. --Jiang
You didn't ask for my opinion, but I gave it anyway, because I'm so fantastically generous :) Martin 02:22, 14 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Robert Taylor Stuff

Sounds like a nasty interaction of edit conflicts, redirects and moved articles. I guess I should try to reproduce it on test.wikipedia and submit something to bug reports - or at least edit the help pages appropriately. Ho hum. Martin 15:23, 16 Sep 2003 (UTC)

I don't think it is a bug. From what I can tell, Robert thought it was the software playing up (but it was actually RickK trying to edit the page) and RickK thought it was a vandal (it was actually a newbie who didn't understand and didn't read the warnings on his talk page). I have explained this to him in an e-mail. Angela 18:36, Sep 16, 2003 (UTC)
Well, you certainly can get into really weird situations when page moves overlap in time with edits, and the symptoms sounded familiar. But thanks for info. Martin 22:29, 16 Sep 2003 (UTC)

What is interesting with protection war is that is invisible. A perfect example of the total irreality of consensus on wikipedia. Kat was right to leave. Indeed loosing hir time.

I have reverted your redirection of Living space to Lebensraum. The edit summary explains my rationale. Cheers, Cyan 09:16, 19 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Village Pump Deletions

You can't just delete other people's comments from the middle of discussions! CGS 12:45, 19 Sep 2003 (UTC).

If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then don't submit it here. ;-)
I thought leaving your comment in might change its meaning too much - but thanks for the feedback.
Yeah, ok. But would you be happy with me mercilessly editing comments that you have signed? Perhaps adding some insults or making you look stupid? You have to be careful editing things that people have said in the meta pages, they're different to the articles. CGS 14:24, 19 Sep 2003 (UTC).
Be bold in editing my comments - they're GFDL'd for a reason.
I don't think I've made anyone look stupid, or added insults to anyone's comments.
I agree with you that when we do any talk-refactoring, we need to be careful.
In this case, I was concerned that leaving your comment, while deleting mine, might misrepresent what you were saying, but I see that I was wrong, and should have left it.

list of hets

Indeed, I was thinking of how to satisfy Jtdirls claim that an "archive" was somehow needed...it did not occur to me to note that a link to a page history was sufficient. LirQ

Hi Martin, I reverted your revert at Wikipedia:Redirect. It seems all such pages are now moving to Meta. Having the text here as well will mean the two don't match, so there should be only one version. I think the link is there to avoid the problems that some people have with inter-wiki redirects. See mav's message at Wikipedia talk:Redirect#Plan to move most of this page to meta soon. Angela 15:55, 26 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing it out. I thought it was meant to be impossible for inlined images to appear anywhere. Angela 21:05, 26 Sep 2003 (UTC)

So did I. I've raised a bug report.
Keep it under your hat... :) Martin 21:27, 26 Sep 2003 (UTC)

RE: What do other wikipedians think of me

Boy with blanks? Isn't that for folks who are impotent?

^_^ Has any one ever told you how much we appreciate your sense of humor? If it wasn't for handful of great people like you here, I think I would have probably give up on this whole place as a colossal waste of time. So...thank you for that. (I think you probably don't hear that enough around here, which is a shame.) </sappy-touchy-feely-ness> Paige 00:46, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC) (When you summarize this, please just tell everyone that I told you "That's a very silly hat you have on.") &#167:o)

Aww, sweetness!
Love yous, hun, keep up the good work. :)

I moved this off talk:Main Page, because I'm not sure it was relevant there, but I didn't want to just delete it. k? Not a problem, I just didn't know where else to put it. RickK 06:26, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Hi Martin, I feel that user pages should be protected because it is the one place in wikipedia where one's one expression can be presented in its most pure form. Also, it is to thwart vandals. Is there anything in particular you think needs changing? Kingturtle 17:46, 27 Sep 2003 (UTC)

by all mean Martin, if a vote is going on somewhere, that could result in only sysops having the right to edit user page, do remember to tell me. I would certainly disagree that you cannot edit my user page any more. Ant

PLease archive your talk page. It would not be appropriate to refer to Thatcher/Reagan's actions as "strong" neo-liberalism. LirQ

Ill do it gradually over time, my policy with anything (such as making lists or redirecting pages) is to do only a few every now and again, that way it doesnt give me a headache. Regardless, for technical reasons u should archive your page -- some browsers may have problems editing pages approaching or longer than 32kb LirQ

Sometimes Hanlon's razor cuts me. Thanks for the instructions. -- Cyan 19:50, 28 Sep 2003 (UTC)

Would you mind changing your vote regarding integration (non-mathematical) -- i created it, I only linked one thing to it, as far as I know, nothing links there now. LirQ

Hi. Could you explain to me why if I put two images in div in a page, these two do not necessary stick to the area I want them to ? Ad what does margin:0 0 1em 1em mean ? Anthère

Wikipedia:Deletion buffer, User:Stevertigo/DLO. (Grunt. Snort)-戴&#30505sv 21:32, 30 Sep 2003 (UTC)

One must ask why you promote policies and put notices up for policies you claim not to agree with. By all means revert this, you will anyway, and it requires no response. But consider what is the point of an "encyclopedia" that contains User:RK's rants about Mel Gibson, say, and which has no article on bushmeat, and deletes it, simply because "the wrong person" touched it.

The encyclopedia is being sacrificed to the so-called "Community". --142.177.79.186

Putting up notices promotes openness, honesty, and transparency. It ensures that those who object to a policy or a decision have an opportunity to challenge it. This is important.

Hi there -- just wanted to say I appreciate the work you do -- and specifically your willingness to try to deal with RK. My first major edit here -- Race and intelligence -- ran into his meanness and intransigence, but I moved on and perservered, but I have to say he does get under one's skin, doesn't he? Anyway, thanks, and keep up the good work! -- Bcorr 16:34, 1 Oct 2003 (UTC)

From User talk:RK-"Your page blanking and comment: "This is no joke. I will not allow Stevertigo and other anti-Semitic racists to vandalize this page. RK 16:17, 1 Oct 2003 (UTC)" are unacceptible. It has been logged to m:RK.-戴眩sv 16:36, 1 Oct 2003 (UTC)" Just to make sure you understand. 戴&#30505sv 16:46, 1 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Re [1]: Bitter much? (Pretty funny though. ;-) -- Cyan 00:55, 2 Oct 2003 (UTC)

RK

Martin,

You're very good at refactoring. Would you please collect all the comments about RK, which led up to and commented on the recent temp-ban, and put them in an appropriate place?

I would appreciate this.

Thanks.

--Uncle Ed 16:23, 2 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Martin. I had read that letter, and it is a genuinely sad fact that it didn't change my view of RKs character one bit. Think about it.

That said, I think we have to ban people based on actions, and people should have to try very hard to get themselves banned. In my opinion RK was getting there, and if I had to guess, he very probably was heading in that direction.

Things certainly were at such a point at which nothing anybody else said to him was making an impact, and if he would have been able to pull himself away from the precipice and apologize for everyone about his misunderstandings, it would have to have come from within him.

As I say, I think the chances were overwhelming that he was for the high jump, but in the event, at the last moment, before he was finally committed to a course out of wikipedia, to my eyes he appears to have been pushed.

The whole list of stuff he did subsequently on the mailinglist, including the threats, should certainly be very thoroughly sorted out with him, but those should be conditions made for his reinstatement, rather than those (after-ban) acts being determinative as to the basic question of making the ban permanent or not.

One thing does swing me towards the idea that he might warrant permanent banning, and that is the incessant nature of his abusive behaviour. It doesn't really take anything to set him off, which suggests that the behaviour almost certainly is incorrigible. And in that sense, purely as a practical matter, (assuming we haven't created another Michael, or worse) wikipedia may be better off without him.

But I am iffy about the procedure that was followed to get us to that point. It is possible I am often too anal retentive about procedure, but then that is my nature, and I think that may be incorrigible as well :-/ Cimon Avaro on a pogo-stick 18:30, 2 Oct 2003 (UTC)

Your User page

...is quite spartan!

Do you like my hat?
 

Now would be a great opportunity for you to try out another picture, perhaps with an even better hat! Maybe something in a nice teardrop fedora or a porkpie, now that you've conquered the bowler/derby family? (If not, under the GFDL, I suppose I could always put a picture of this hat on my page couldn't I? Hmmmm...) ^-^ -- Paige 22:36, 2 Oct 2003 (UTC) (P.S. Why do you think it is that the British are so much more daring with hats than we Americans?)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:MartinHarper&oldid=1516414"