User talk:Eloquence

I will respond to messages on this page. Please check your contributions list ("My contributions") for responses. If there is a response, your edit is no longer the "top" edit in the list.

Unlike other Wikipedians I don't archive Talk pages since old contents are automatically archived anyway - if you want to access previous comments use the "Older versions" function. But I keep a log of the removals:

Removed all comments prior to Jan 2003. --Eloquence 04:42 Jan 1, 2003 (UTC)
Removed all comments prior to Feb 2003. --Eloquence 10:19 Feb 3, 2003 (UTC)
Removed all comments prior to March 2003. --Eloquence 21:19 Mar 3, 2003 (UTC)
Removed all comments prior to April 2003. --Eloquence 08:14 25 May 2003 (UTC)
Removed all comments up to May 31 2003. -Eloquence 19:14 31 May 2003 (UTC)

Sehr geehrter Herr Moeller, ich finde Ihre Reaktion sehr befremdlich. Bitte loeschen sie die Eintraege auf meiner Talk Seite umgehend - ich moechte meinen Namen nicht in einen Zusammenhang mit den pornographischen Seiten verlinkt sehen - ich habe eine Ruf zu verlieren - Professor Dr. Uwe Kils Kils 19:26 31 May 2003 (UTC)

Sehr geehrter Herr Kils, auf Ihrer Diskussions-Seite befindet sich kein Link auf "pornographische Seiten". Für die laufende Diskussion auf wikien-l ist diese Seite jedoch wichtiges Hintergrundmaterial, und es wäre unfair gegenüber Nicht-Administratoren, sie einfach zu löschen -- zur Löschung von Seiten gibt es auf Wikipedia strenge Regeln, an die ich mich halten muss (siehe Wikipedia:Administrators). Wenn Sie allerdings ein Posting an wikien-l schicken und freiwillig auf Ihren Sysop-Status verzichten, erübrigt sich die Debatte und ich werde den Schutz der Seite gerne aufheben. Ich würde mich freuen, wenn Sie auch weiterhin bei Wikipedia mitarbeiten. --Eloquence 19:33 31 May 2003 (UTC) ---

Dear Mr. Moeller! I asked you to erase my talk page which you reverted even though I erased some of it as invited sysop. Instead of doing it you threat me now you will leave it up longer and even blocked it, opend the ugly content of user:Mbecker discussions and threat me that only if I voluntarily let go of the sysop status you will open the "protection". If you think you can take these liberty as a developer and act accordingly I ask you hereby to immediately erase the whole user:kils page or immediately give me back my sysop status so I can do it. I am not willing to appear in a project which hosts images like the clitoris.jpg on http://www.wikipedia.org/upload/archive/1/19/20030520015715!Clitoris.jpg , which is a clear conflict with USA pornography law, probably even copyright law. This image has been mounted by your partner Michael Becker user:Mbecker who made a motion to ban our viking project. After I read as administrator that six users on the sysop mailing list requested to ban viking I did what they asked me for as sysop.

As soon as the pornographic content is gone and some other pages are edited to be within the rules again I might discuss with BOMIS CEO about a further cooperation as editor and the reason for the pause. Sincerely yours Dr. Uwe Kils Kils 03:28 1 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Professor Kils,

several responses appear to be in order.

1) You were invited as a sysop under the condition to respect our policies, one of which is the Wikipedia:Policy on permanent deletion of pages. By deleting your user talk page and the Viking user pages, you removed the documentation of your Viking experiment. This was an inappropriate abuse of your sysop privileges, as two other users on the wikien-l mailing list have already noted. It is therefore likely that your sysop status revocation will be upheld until you promise to act in accordance with our policy in the future.

2) Your talk page, in its current protected form, does not link to any "pornographic" page, not the clitoris image, not Mbecker's user page, not Mbecker's user talk page (which references the image). The content which you removed from that page has nothing at all to do with the clitoris image.

3) I happen to be an expert on the scientific study of pornography [1],[2]. Pornography, according to Supreme Court precedent law in the United States, are texts and images which lack redeeming artistic, scientific, or social value and have no purpose except to appeal to "prurient interests"; the German definition from the Strafrechtskommentar to §184 StGB is:

"Ein Medium ist pornographisch, wenn es unter Hintansetzen aller sonstigen menschlichen Bezuege sexuelle Vorgaenge in grob aufdringlicher Weise in den Vordergrund rueckt und wenn seine objektive Gesamttendenz ausschliesslich oder ueberwiegend auf Aufreizen des Sexualtriebes abzielt."

The clitoris image in question is not pornographic according to the American or the German definition. An even further refined version of that image is used to illustrate the Clitoris article and therefore has quite obvious educational value; it is not directly embedded into this article but rather linked to with a clear description to avoid offense. This is the result of a long discussion regarding the proper placement of the image. You seem to be intent on removing educational information from Wikipedia -- this will not be allowed.

4) Mbecker is not my "partner" any more than anyone else on this project. He was not the only user who considered a ban of the Viking user, and has no special authority.

5) Nobody asked you to delete the viking user pages, and certainly not to delete your own talk page. People asked you to stop whoever it is who was acting under the user name Viking (and now Vikings) from needlessly removing perfectly valid content from articles like fisting.

Your moral standards seem more appropriate for a monastery than for an encyclopedia. Certainly Wikipedia will not be edited to reflect these standards, and if this means that you will no longer participate in the project, so be it.

I stand by my decision to protect your user page to prevent you from removing your own explanation of the Viking experiment without any reason. I also stand by my revocation of your sysop status and hope someone responsible for the German Wikipedia will make the same decision there.

Sincerely,

--Eloquence 04:15 1 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Dear Mr. Moeller, thank you for your extensive letter. To your comment: "You seem to be intent on removing educational information from Wikipedia -- this will not be allowed.": I never used my sysop rights to do such, nor am I planning to do so. I just made suggestions in the hope some would support it. If it stays like this we can only contribute, maybe we should do it anonymous.

Sincersly

Uwe Kils

Just wanted to thank you for all your help with User:Kils/User:Viking. It was certainly an unpleasant situation. MB 07:30 1 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Check the new article I just started Wikipedia:Wikipedia and Religion... Bad idea? --Dante Alighieri 08:56 1 Jun 2003 (UTC)

No, but someone will tell you pretty soon that "this belongs on meta", specifically, that it should be merged with m:Wikipedians categorized by sub-cultural affiliation. --Eloquence 08:59 1 Jun 2003 (UTC)

To all: I appologize to everybody that might have felt insulted. I did not mean it that way. You can delete whatever you want from my content. I do not want to keep my sysop status nor the user page.

uwe Kils 12:17 1 Jun 2003 (UTC)

--- Hallo Erik! thank you for the kind words. I lost, not one supported my case. Vikings just challenge each other all the time. But vikings are also good losers, so I will keep on supporting wikipedia, and I hope we will become good friends in the future - "sailor" - Kils 13:45 1 Jun 2003 (UTC)

User:GormanBechard created the article Gorman bechard. It is directly copied from www.gormanbechard.com, Gorman Bechard's website. I deleted it. Was this the right thing to do? MB 20:47 1 Jun 2003 (UTC)

You should really post a copyvio notice from Wikipedia:Boilerplate text and list it on votes for deletion. Evercat 20:55 1 Jun 2003 (UTC)

I have restored the text. As a matter of fact, Wabcaplet posted the notice already. --Eloquence 20:59 1 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Hi Eloquence, thanks a lot for the sysoping, I promise to behave well. Auf gute Zusammenarbeit, Kosebamse 22:25 1 Jun 2003 (UTC)

No, I know the trick, I recommand it to all the new users on the french wiki :-)

However, I don't have the thild on my keyboard, and the key combination is quite complicated and involving a pretty strong twist of my hands. I don't have the vertical bar either. Solving the bar issue is simple as I can "copy" it from most article content (except stub I start myself), but I can't copy the thilde, since it is not visible in the page edit :-) This is the strongest reason why I rarely sign. I try to make an effort on en though, I promise I will try more. French are now used to me signing simply ant (or not signing at all in fact, many just know me so well I don't even need to). As we are not very numerous, we don't use talk pages as much as english people do anyway. I only put thildes when there is need to date the comment. User:Anthere

No tilde on the keyboard? That's strange, most latin keyboards should have it -- it's essential for webpages as well (many URLs contain the ~). Keyboards are cheap -- why not get a new one? Alternatively, there are countless programs, for Windows and Linux, that allow you to redefine a certain key to another. So if you never use the ^, the 3 or the µ, you could define that to be your tilde. Here's a commercial one, I'm sure there are free solutions as well.

Macintosh. With a small keyboard. Yes, that is curious. The worst missing key, imho, is the delete forward. That was the result of an extended family discussion :-) And the conclusion was "we keep the small". However, we are currently studying bying a second computer, for the kids are stealing this one more often than appreciated :-) Redefining could be a good option. I will enquire. Thanks and good nite. ant

Whoops, nearly forgot to sign :) --Eloquence 00:44 2 Jun 2003 (UTC)

. ;-)

What's the point, when people like Camembert and MyRedDice undo what I've done? -- Zoe

MRD undeletes articles that others besides Michael have worked on - I can understand the desire to do so, although I find it counterproductive. I would suggest just ignoring that and continuing to delete Michael's new articles, I doubt that MRD can keep up with the undeletion. --Eloquence 00:48 2 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Nor would I want to do so. The vast majority of Zoe's reverts and deletions of Michael are uncontroversial and widely supported, including by me. In a handful of cases there's a bit more debate. I think I've undeleted... three articles by Michael? Something like that, anyway. Martin 01:03 2 Jun 2003 (UTC)

In this particular case, User:Quercusrober had added three and a bit perfectly good new paragraphs to Conflict (band), not related to Michael's edits at all. Getting rid of them seemed (and still seems) wrong to me. That is why I undeleted the page. It is the only page by Michael I have ever deleted. --Camembert

While you're here, as a developer, quick, check out recent changes and look at the entry for Talk:Binary (computing). Specifically, look at the diffs for my edit and Wapcaplet's edit of the same time. My edit actually just disappeared, and doesn't even show up in the history of the article. Bug! Evercat 00:53 2 Jun 2003 (UTC)

I mean the simultaneous edits at 00:50 UTC by myself and Wapcaplet. Apparently becuause they occured together mine was just lost utterly, with the only record of it appearing on Special:Recentchanges. It doesn't appear in the history or in my contributions. Evercat 01:02 2 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Ack, the simultaneous edit bug. That's a known one, I'm afraid. Brion has a theory as to what might cause it, but so far no priority has been given to fixing it. I'm afraid the data is lost. --Eloquence 01:11 2 Jun 2003 (UTC)

It just needs an appropriate lock added in to keep saver #2 from being able to check cur until saver #1 has finished updating it (a 'FOR UPDATE' in the SELECT should do it), but the save-edit code is rather spaghetti-like and I'm not sure where to put it without breaking things. I don't have time to really go over it now... --Brion 01:28 2 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Damnit, Brion, you respond to threads on my talk page, but not to my repeated whining on yours? I think you don't love me anymore. You just want my WikiMoney... --Eloquence 01:32 2 Jun 2003 (UTC)

That's fine, no big deal, just wanted to phone it in, in case you didn't know about it (or in case an example would help fix it). Evercat 01:12 2 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Zum vorgeschlagenen Treffen in Wien: Sehr gerne -- am 7. oder 8. Juni, wann immer Du willst. Vorher geht's leider nicht. 9209003 (Anrufbeantworter) -- ich kann in 30 Minuten beim Karlsplatz sein. KF 14:19 2 Jun 2003 (UTC)

OK, das passt mir eh am besten, weil ich den Tagen noch nix vorhabe. Ich melde mich. --Eloquence 14:25 2 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Yeah, I'll be glad to update the main page with new pages. MB 22:28 2 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Lieber Erik! Kannst Du bitte den Eintrag auf der deutschen wikipedia Mädchen wieder vollstaendig loeschen, auch das Bild. Die Eltern moechten nicht, dass die Mädchen auf dem web sind, und es sollte nicht als vikings startseite in der history zu sehen sein. vielen Dank fuer die Muehe Vikings 00:31 3 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Hallo Uwe,

ob Du es glaubst oder nicht, ich bin auf der deutschen Wikipedia kein Sysop. Selbst wenn ich es wäre, ich könnte das Bild nicht ohne vorherige Diskussion löschen. Bitte einfach einen kurzen Kommentar auf Seiten, die gelöscht werden sollen schreiben. --Eloquence 00:45 3 Jun 2003 (UTC)

apologies for putting my comment on your User page. It was late, I was tired and upset. -- Zoe

No biggie, made the same mistake a couple of times. --Eloquence 06:48 3 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Could a developer check to see if User:Eddie is loging in using User:Michael's ip range (i.e. 152.163.25x.xxx)? He has been reverting articles of User:Michael's back to user Michael's content in a sneaky way. I just want to make sure it is or isn't User:Michael. If it is him, please ban the account. Thanks. MB 17:41 4 Jun 2003 (UTC)

User:Fuck is Michael, please ban and delete the account, or whatever is nessesary.

user:My Green Dice is also Michael-- Green Dice, with spaces, not MyRedDice, without. Anyway, he's moving Hephaestos' page to different places; could you block him please? Thanks. Koyaanis Qatsi 01:56 8 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Hi. There's a bug in your new deletion code. If a reason is automatically inserted, then even if I alter it (ie write a different reason in the box) it still uses the automatically generated reason. Evercat 01:26 9 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Argh, that should not be happening. Fixed in CVS. --Eloquence 01:48 9 Jun 2003 (UTC)

That was fast. :-) Evercat 01:49 9 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Okay, I've installed your fix from CVS, plus I've restored the <br clear="all" /> which somehow vanished in the revision where you added the deletion enhancements. --Brion 02:02 9 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Weird. Must have somehow happened during the copying of files that is now required because of the uninstalled/installed separation. The strange thing is that all other changes survived. --Eloquence 02:10 9 Jun 2003 (UTC)

I found that when I deleted Great Baddow, moved Great Baddow, Essex to its place, and then undeleted Great Baddow, the Great Baddow, Essex article appeared at the top of the page history, even though it was the oldest. It's in the right order now, though... -- Oliver P. 01:50 9 Jun 2003 (UTC)

I didn't touch that code, perhaps Brion knows why the initial order problem occurs. I think it always worked like that, though. --Eloquence 01:53 9 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Undeletion of a page which exists restores the archived revisions only to the 'old' table; it leaves the current revision intact, on the assumption that it's more recent. Moving a different, older, page into the deleted pages place breaks this assumption, so the results may not be as expected. :) After editing the page again all should be well, as the old revisions are always sorted by timestamp. I suppose we could special-case it to move the current revision down into old, but ugh. :) --Brion 01:59 9 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Oh! Thanks for explaining that, both of you. I did encounter weirdnesses in some page histories a few months ago, but hadn't done so for quite a while until tonight, so I thought it had been fixed. It must be just a coincidence that I encountered another weirdness shortly after an unrelated code update. It's okay now, anyway. -- Oliver P. 02:26 9 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Re: your new announcement - is there any chance that, when a redirect uses one of these formats, the page that is displayed could have the usual (redirected from Page X) so that we can click on that and edit it? (by the way, do you object to feature requests here? If so, sorry...) Evercat 02:19 9 Jun 2003 (UTC)

No objection, but the problem with that is that these prefixes are built on the basis of the InterWiki code, without any changes to the special pages affected. The advantage is that this just required three lines of code, the disadvantage is that redirect notices (which I would find useful, too) are not possible. These would require more far reaching changes to the special page code. For the time being, you have to use something like

http://www.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=User:Fuck&action=edit

to edit InterWiki redirects. If you use Mozila, you can define a keyword for that, e.g. "edit", which is useful in any case --Eloquence 02:25 9 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Holy cow, you're just full of coolness tonight. those keywords rock; I've been using mozilla for a year or so and never knew about them. [goes off to organize some bookmarks]. Koyaanis Qatsi

Very clever about the redirect you just did. :-) Koyaanis Qatsi 02:22 9 Jun 2003 (UTC)

It seems POV to state merely that " Aristarchus' astronomical ideas were not well-received and were subordinated to those of Aristotle and Ptolemy" Pizza Puzzle

Not to me. --Eloquence 13:25 10 Jun 2003 (UTC)

A belated thanks for your warm welcome. I hope to be as zany and unpredictable in the future as I have been heretofore, but in a more helpful and reliable way :-). --Uncle Ed 13:20 13 Jun 2003 (UTC)

That's odd. I tried to move an article to a page I assumed would be empty (since the article was incorrectly titled), but there was another better-written article at the page I was going to move the inferior article to. So... I couldn't move it, Wiki gave me an error message, and I don't know how a nameless page got created. -- goatasaur

We need a ban on User:FuckingFucker for A. Vandalism and B. The obvious reason. Cheers. Evercat 19:57 14 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Done.--Eloquence 20:03 14 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Thanks for the sysop welcome message- the main reason I thought I'd give it a go was precisely because it would be nice to be able to delete obvious garbage without having to trouble other sysops by putting on 'votes for deletion' (and I do mean OBVIOUS garbage like new pages with U R GAY on and the like...

I'm keen to avoid edit wars and 'politics' in general, I found my participation in flame wars on usenet to be unhealthy, one of the reasons I arrived at wiki was because it seemed a more constructive use of my 'online' time (which is usually about avoiding something else like an article I'm meant to be writing, doing my accounts, etc)

Cheers quercus robur 22:07 14 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Thanks for your note. I would be happy to be a sysop, and will endeavour only to use my "powers" where necessary and constructive. Quercusrobur says it all above, really. I hope I'm doing right by replying on your Talk page -- or is there somewhere else I should be saying it? Deb 22:40 14 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Huh? No, Im not Irish. Pizza Puzzle

Hi, could you point me to the page where you were talking about searching wikipedia with Mozilla keywords? I got it to work exactly once and now all it does is say the URL isn't valid, so I'd like to troubleshoot it. thanks. Koyaanis Qatsi 01:06 15 Jun 2003 (UTC)

I didn't talk about it, I think, but you'll find the information on Wikipedia:Searching, where the keyword solution is incorrectly referred to as a "bookmarklet". --Eloquence 01:14 15 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Oh, sorry. I got it to work again, finally, thanks. :-) Koyaanis Qatsi 01:29 15 Jun 2003 (UTC)