User talk:Asbestos

——————————————— ASBESTOS: TALK ———————————————	Please, add new entries to the bottom and don't forget to sign your name by typing four tildes: ~~~~. If you would like to make comments on my Wikipediaing in general (positive or negative), feel free to do so on my own Request For Comments page.
Archive1 Archive2 Archive3 Archive4

Another question

Hi again--another possibly silly question for you. How do I find out if someone has an e-mail address posted? I got an e-mail from another user and I can't for the life of me figure out where you can look at other people's preferences. (No problem on the admin vote incidentally--congrats). Marskell 09:07, 8 September 2005 (UTC)

As far as I know, the only way that you can tell is by looking at the little "E-mail this user" link when you view a User Page (bottom left on the monobook skin). The link will let you send an email, though it won't give you the address for spam-prevention reasons. If the user doesn't have an email set, it either won't show the link or it will tell you so when you click on it (I can't remember which off-hand). Alternatively, people might show their email address on their user page (like I do), or you could always just ask them for their address in their Talk. — Asbestos | Talk (RFC)

Thanks. Odd, but this doesn't appear for me. If I look at other user pages or as an anon look at my own there is very definitely no "e-mail this usser" link anywhre. I'm in the mid-east and a lot of stuff gets blocked but this seems strange. Marskell 23:06, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Are you using monobook (check Preferences -> Skins)? Check my user page (or your own, for that matter) - no link at the bottom left, under "User Contributions"? If not, post a message at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical) and see if anyone there can work out what's wrong. — Asbestos | Talk (RFC) 23:20, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Saved with a different skin and then saved on default again and voila it appears. Odd but all better now apparently. Marskell 18:41, 10 September 2005 (UTC)

anon users

hi. what do you make of anonymous users who don't seem to be ignorant of how wikipedia works who go around making seemingly decent edits, garnering praise and whatnot? I ask cuz you and I have each had a run-in w/ one. they irk me but I gott say- I'v made an anon edit or two in my life. I don't imagine wikipedia establishment is in love w/ this phenomenon. lemme know if you hav any feelings on about this. thankz, Ish Micka Vonn aAmerikazakh 17:31, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Hi Ish Micka Vonn aAmerikazakh —

Having anon users is a big part of Wikipedia philosophy: anyone is supposed to be able to edit, as we don't want to make it difficult to edit this encyclopedia. Looking around, I've found a page on this, Wikipedia:Welcome anonymous editing. That said, having a user name makes it easy to communicate with a user, and automatically raises the level of trust in the eyes of other editors. A hard-to-verify edit, like the changing of a date in an article, is likely to regarded as probable sneaky vandalism if done by an anon user, yet more likely to be treated as good faith if the user is logged in.

If you're interested, many users put a note on the talk pages of valuable anon users suggesting that they create an account. I've got a template, for instance, at User:Asbestos/Anon, and I know there's a ready-made one around somewhere.

As a completely off-topic aside, there's been some discussion recently on signatures which don't correlate to the user's username. While there's no policy against it, it usually makes it easier if they do correlate (for instance, do I call you Ish Micka Vonn aAmerikazakh or Dzzl?). — Asbestos | Talk (RFC) 23:10, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Mediation Comittee

Since you'd been up for consideration for a while and it seemed like the community generally supported you, I took the initiative in making you a mediator. Please visit the Mediation Committee page and list your email address. Andre (talk) 20:43, September 10, 2005 (UTC)

Congratulations! :) Acetic'^Acid 23:30, September 12, 2005 (UTC)

dzznologic.

replied to your reply here. yaaa. Ished-out amounts of Vonn-ness 03:17, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

Malcolm X

Hi Clawson —

I'd like to just remind you that Wikipedia's three-revert rule doesn't only apply to those who are changing the article; it also applies to those changing it back [1]. I blocked User:70.23.104.48, as he had been explicitly warned against continuing the revert war. However, in future, please try to enlist the help of other editors to prevent yourself from violating 3RR when another user keeps changing an article. This isn't just pointless beaurocracy: it helps show a united voice and makes clear to the other editor that it's not just an argument between two people (though I realize his had been reverted by other editors earlier).

Don't worry too much about it now, but do keep it in mind in the future. — Asbestos | Talk (RFC) 17:36, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

The user in question was, essentially, vandalising the article. He had been asked multiple times to stop, and at least one other editor (Jpgordon) had attempted to engage the user in dialogue as well. We were both unsuccessful, and since the user kept adding irrelevant information, I figured the standard "3RR does not apply to vandalism" guideline would apply, so I kept reverting his irrelevant edits.—chris.lawson (talk) 20:47, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

I understood that that's what you felt, and that's why I said don't worry too much, but the vandalism clause is there for straightforward vandalism ("Wikipedia sUks and ur gAy"), and not for content disputes. The user may have been rude, and didn't know anything about discussing his edits instead of trying to force them through, but it was still a content dispute.

Anyway, though email I've encouraged him to get a username and start making proper use of the talk page. Hopefully he'll start to realize that his current tactic won't get him anyway, and start acting civilized. — Asbestos | Talk (RFC) 22:15, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

So am I to understand that repeatedly adding irrelevant/ungrammatical/otherwise inappropriate material to an article is not "straightforward vandalism?" If you look at the page history, you'll see that Josh and I have reverted the anon's edits previously, largely with edit summaries "please discuss on Talk". It was my understanding that continued insistence on the addition of controversial material (without discussion and consensus) was one of the definitions of vandalism.—chris.lawson (talk) 23:20, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

A further note, just as a heads-up: 702310448 (talk · contribs) is the anon's registered username. Please note that he has betrayed his highly biased point of view on my Talk page: [2]. As I pointed out on his Talk page, he is trying to support a non-neutral point of view with his own original research, which is two strikes against him, no matter how polite he is about it. If he's going to slur college professors, I don't think he's mature enough to edit here. Just my opinion, and admittedly a very harsh one, but I thought you should know what he wrote, and what I thought of it. Please continue to keep an eye on his edits (and mine; constructive criticisms are welcomed :)). Thanks.—chris.lawson (talk) 01:58, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

WP:AN/3RR

Would you mind taking a look at my report on the WP:AN/3RR page? I'd appreciate it. Jayjg ^(talk) 16:48, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

List of works in irregular time signatures

Hello,

Thanks for your recent edit of List of works in irregular time signatures. That guy has been driving me nuts, and he doesn't seem to read the comments or participate in any discussion.

Anyway, I'd be curious to know what attracted your attention to the article and why you chose to do what you did. I'm kinda' new to the wiki and haven't had a chance to read all the FAQs/guides yet.

Cheers,

Dave (User:Dkaplowitz).

Hi Dave,

Actually, I was just doing a little bit of RC Patrol (see WP:RCP). If you click on the "Recent Changes" on the right (assuming you're using the monobook skin) you can see all the edits that people have made recently. An edit made by an anonymous user without an edit summary is quite possibly an act of vandalism. Clicking on "Diff" beside the edit, you can see exactly what it was the editor did. In that case, I saw he had just deleted a bunch of text, so assumed he was just a straight-forward vandal, so reverted it.

Hope that makes it clearer, feel free to ask about anything else!

— Asbestos | Talk (RFC) 09:28, 16 September 2005 (UTC)

my article

Hi Asbestos,

my name is Riccardo! Three days ago I edited the Wikipedia page on "child prodigy". I just added "Arthur Rimbaud" in the list of child prodigies in literature. Since he was probably the most famous child prodigy in literature history, I felt it was unfair not to mention him in the list. However, my article was deleted because "[..]articles on Wikipedia are expected to be encyclopedic in nature[..]". To be honest, I don't understand what was wrong with my addition! :-) Could you comment on that?

Thanks, cheers Riccardo (140.105.16.2)

Hi Ricardo —

I'm not sure quite what you mean. The child prodigy article still exists, Arthur Rimbaud is in the list, and there is an Arthur Rimbaud article. I can't quite tell what it is that you're referring to. Can you be more specific? — Asbestos | Talk (RFC) 19:17, 23 September 2005 (UTC)

Modifying protected pages

Since you're an admin and previously experssed interest in renaming Wikipedia:Ask a question, I was wondering whether you could correct the name on protected pages from Wikipedia:Ask a question to Wikipedia:Where to ask a question to reflect my recent move.

To be specific, please fix:

1. Template:Categorybrowsebar
2. Template:Welcome

If you notice any other pages that still use Wikipedia:Ask a question, protected or otherwise, fix them if you can.

Thanks. Superm401 | Talk 20:42, 24 September 2005 (UTC)

Done! — Asbestos | Talk (RFC) 05:48, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. Superm401 | Talk 06:34, 25 September 2005 (UTC)

Wikijunior Solar System Needs You

Danny Wool has challenged us to get Wikijunior Solar System out to hurricane evacuees by October 32005. This is going to be tough!

You expressed interest in WikiJunior. Would you be willing now to join the push to get Wikijunior Solar System completed? Come see Wikijunior Solar System!

Thanks --SV Resolution(Talk) 17:36, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

MedCom

Hello, you are one of the 7 remaining active medcom members. I have immensely decluttered the WP:RFM page. Now I would like to start assigning people to cases. If you do not have the time for this, please remove yourself from the active listings. I hope that we can become active again, and we won't need WP:TINMC to cover for us as they have. Please check RfM frequently as I may be assigning you. And of course you can always turn down cases and choose your own, its not some kind of the-leaders-make-you-do-what-they-say deal... anywho, just saying I'm trying to revive the medcom. Thanks, Redwolf24 (talk) 00:35, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

Mediation assigned!

Hello Asbestos! I've assigned you a mediation at Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Jnc and Barberio. Redwolf24 (talk) 19:36, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

No problem, I have a busy schedule myself. Also, you might want to see if you can locate a copy of Janet Abbate, Inventing the Internet (MIT Press, 1999), which is the best current academic history of the development of the Internet (although it has its faults, it's still pretty good). Noel (talk) 18:50, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

PS: I don't usually check other User_talk: pages (so that I don't have to monitor a whole long list of User_Talk: pages - one for each person with whom I am having a "conversation"), so please leave any messages for me on my talk page (above); if you leave a message for me here I probably will not see it. I know not everyone uses this style (they would rather keep all the text of a thread in one place), but I simply can't monitor all the User_talk: pages I leave messages on. Thanks!

Re: "See comments by administrator Asbestos"

Could you please taks a look at [3]? Ramanim has edited my comments, that have my signature on them. I have no idea what comments of yours he is alluding to, or whether he is doing so ingenuously. I figured I would contact you rather than revert. -- Jmabel | Talk 17:58, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

Furthermore, he made similar, more drastic edits on the talk page, and his edit summary appears to threaten me with legal action if I revert. -- Jmabel | Talk 18:03, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

Hi Jmabel — I'm guessing he was referring to this comment, where I said that I personally didn't have a problem with his wanting to keep his wikipedia life and real life separate if he so wished. Obviously he shouldn't have been changing your comments without your approval, though. What do you think? Like I said, it's so far in the past if he wants to change all references to himself to "Ramanim" that's fine with me personally. — Asbestos | Talk (RFC) 22:03, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

Frankly, I couldn't care less about him as long as he has stopped using Wikipedia as a propaganda tool and harrassing other editors.

As long as he is otherwise well-behaved, I will leave this alone. However:

1. Some of his edits make what I said incoherent: charges of sockpuppetry where "Pnikolov" and "Ramanim" tag-teamed don't make much sense once edited to say that "Ramanim" and "Ramanim" tag-teamed.
2. I am somewhat concerned about suppressing evidence of ill conduct in intellectual matters by someone with academic ambitions.
3. The threat of legal action does not lead me to think he will be otherwise well-behaved, although I'm willing to wait and see. -- Jmabel | Talk 01:55, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Hmmm, those are all good points. Also, edits like this shouldn't be permitted — he can't just erase paragraphs as if he ad never said them. What if I revert all the recent changes he has made, then let him know that he can change references to his former name to PN, which would still direct to his former user page, but not show up on Google with his name? Aside from that, he doesn't seem to be interested in contributing anymore, so I think his future behaviour won't be our concern. — Asbestos | Talk (RFC) 16:13, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Do whatever you see fit. -- Jmabel | Talk 19:21, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Having said that check this out for an example of a problematic edit, especially because it is obviously him, but he is editing anonymously, removing his comments, altering other people's comments, and leaving the page incoherent in his wake. -- Jmabel | Talk 00:15, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

• • • • Jmabel, I am frankly a little surprised by what I see you saying. I do not have the time nor do I have the willingness to write a detailed rebuttal of what you said and it sounds like you are not interested in reading it anyway. I have made my case quite clear in an email to User:Asbestos. I hope you share my concern that labeling one user "problemmatic" is not really all that constructive. If I didn't think the same about you last year, we probably wouldn't have engaged in an argument over what you called a "remarkably trivial issue". I am trying to be forward-looking about this issue and I am willing to address your concerns in private emails with you and user:Asbestos since the argument was 95% among the three of us. What do you think? Rananim 16:56, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Troll image, hat or no hat?

Hi Asbestos. I was just wondering, does that troll in Image:DoNotFeedTroll.jpg wear a hat, or is it supposed to be his ear/nose? I would appreciate if you could clear this up for me asap, as this is keeping me awake at night. // E23 11:43, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

Hi E23 — it was meant to be his ear (on the left, nose on the right). Hope that wasn't too confusing! — Asbestos | Talk (RFC) 14:58, 7 October 2005 (UTC)

my articles -- writing, editing others, and submitting photos

Hi - you sent me a note in the midst of my writing an article == about asking you questions, if I had any, or discuss stuff. I have an addictive LOVE of writing and I have a lot of history to write about, some of which I know first-hand. (1.) I have perused the Wiki outlines about styles, etc. and have tried to gear my writing to be encyclopedic but not dull (history shouldn't have to be) -- but probably still "ain't perfect" by Wiki standards. (2.) I have a problem not being able to understand alot of the jargon and communication techniques laid out in Wiki -- even in writing this. (3.) I saw mentioned that some articles are actually "protected" from editing, which surprises me, as Wiki is advertised as being info that ANYONE can edit...gee...shouldn't it really say, "anyone can edit SOME info..."? (4.) I have been an anonymous editor on some articles. I only registered because I thought it was required to contribute photos. Do I have to go back to old articles I wrote or edited and put my user name on them somehow? If so, HELP!! (5.) Also, I tried to follow the instructions on how to get pictures inserted because I have photos ready to go, but the directions are too much, and too frustrating for me to follow. They lead to too many questions without another person to initially walk me through it. I seem to be clueless...thank you! IS THAT BOLD ENOUGH?

Mshafb 00:10, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

Asbestos: Thank you for your response. (1.) Regarding the input of photos, I notice you did not include the most puzzling part about choosing the license. Do I ignore that? Or do I have to do that on each one? How do I do that? What do I choose, if necessary, and where do I put that information? For the most part, the pictures are photos of people I know, either taken by me or by other non-professionals, and some of vintage years, as well as maybe artwork painted by my deceased parents who were professional artists, and whose copyrights for reproduction I am assuming to hold since I own the original art. Should I worry if they go public that they may be copied by other artists? (2.) In doing geneaology and historical work in other legitimate websites, I found that my name and inquiries were used as a title in a pornography site, OF COURSE WITHOUT MY PERMISSION. I am very angry and embarrassed about that. What can be done to make sure anything I include in this site will not be co-opted by porn sites? (3.) The particular site I wanted to add more info into was for "Ted Neeley." It is pitifully poor, only a sentence or so in the initial bio. It seems to remain protected, so I wonder about the timeline for that one? Or can't the original writer build it up with more quality info?

Thank you...

Mshafb 14:56, 10 October 2005 (UTC)mshafb

Wikipedia:Image_sleuthing#Image:FierceSnake_Olive.jpg

Can you take a quick look at this one and help get a suitable picture for the Fauna of Australia FAC? - Mgm|^(talk) 20:35, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

Active Case?

Hello, I'm sending this to the five of you with cases listed as active in the active tasks template. Just wondering which of you still have it active and how you're doing with it... Please message me on my talk, or email me if you see fit. Thanks :) Redwolf24 (talk) 23:14, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

Featured Picture

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Corncobs.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. ~~~~

Congratulations! I never knew there were so many different coloured varieties of corn. Very nice image.

History of the Internet

User:Coolcaesar is again induldging in pointless personal attacks on the talk page. (And a suspisious anon attack that smells like a sock puppet) After going to his talk page to ask him to stop, I discovered that User:Jnc had been the person who asked Coolcaesar to join in the 'debate'. [4]Coolcaesar's comments have almost entirly consisted of personal attacks, including one attack that labeled me as mental unwell because of my disability.

I would like you to ask these two to explain their actions before we continue this mediation. --John R. Barberio ^{talk, contribs 11:09, 18 October 2005 (UTC)}

I'm okay with waiting for JNC to return, no one can help getting ill, but I'll be a tad concerned if this drags on indefinatly. --John R. Barberio ^{talk, contribs 18:41, 26 October 2005 (UTC)}