User talk:The Anome/archive 8

Moved old talk to

Thanks for dropping in on the User:Bird situation. This is my first big dispute as a sysop, so I would appreciate knowing if you think I went about things correctly and with the correct level of forcefulness. David Newton 21:48, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Dude -- thanks for the IP lookups. BCorr ¤ Брайен 23:46, Mar 9, 2004 (UTC)

You're welcome. -- The Anome 23:51, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Thank You!

I want to thank you DEEPLY for your support in the vote to promote me to a sysop. I promise to do my best to be as helpful, sensible, and neutral as possible. Your friend, Ryan.

Yes, he seems to be systematically -- and cleverly -- removing all Billy Bragg songs from the Song Lists. And a moment ago he just stepped on another -- this time a Midnight Oil song.

Earl Manchester 01:14, 20 Mar 2004 (UTC)

(Moved comment from user page.)

What's a "second-wave Wikipedian"? —Noldoaran (Talk) 04:03, Mar 20, 2004 (UTC)

New articles on books deletions

Thanks for deleting IBM Webshere Application Server Complete Reference. Can you please also delete ISBM Webshere Application server Complete Reference? Can you please also reveiw all the new book articles created by User:Fruti. Samw 17:16, 20 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Developer

Hello there, Anome.

Without the benefit of your invitation to do so, I nominated you for "developer access" at meta:Developer access. I did this in an effort to broaden the "developer" role beyond the present group of people who are highly active in Wikipolitics. Besides, given your lengthy edit history and, AFAK, lack of involvement (or at least culpability) in controversy, I thought it appropriate.

I am puzzled by the reaction of others. Can you offer any explanation?

UninvitedCompany 20:52, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I'm not really interested in Wikipolitics per se; except for occasional anti-vandalism activities, I'm more interested in editing. But thank you for the nomination! -- The Anome 22:24, 24 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Stop deleting my Divine Truth. Ioannis G. Tsatsaris is the only living true prophet. I will defend his divine teachings to the best of my ability. He will save the world. Do not delete the article. Jt3 15:18, 25 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Unfortunately Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, that is, a record of well-known human knowledge. Please can you wait until your prophet becomes famous or well known? 44 Google hits, mostly his own website, or to sites promoting his book, does not indicate that he is well known. -- The Anome 15:22, 25 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Richard/Hanpuk/etc.

Thanks for contributing to the discussion on Richardchilton and his incarnations, including the newest Hanpuk; I laid out a similar case as you on Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Richardchilton, where mav moved your comments to. I of course have a stake in this now because 172 has begun a vicious campaign against me, primarily based on disingenuously calling my vigilance vis-a-vis these accounts "ideological edit wars" (when of course 172's own support of R/H/etc. is transparently ideological). I have been bothered by the hitherto relative silence and seeming lack of support by the community about what I've had to deal with and who "Hanpuk" really is and what his motives are. As of this writing, Khmer Rouge and Pol Pot are protected because of this user, and 172 and Hanpuk are piling up accusations against me, and now even targetting Adam Carr. -- V V 21:34, 27 Mar 2004 (UTC)

As annoying as GNAA are, they are a crucial part of the history of Slashdot over the last year. I ask you to reconsider your deletion. I agree the current form was self-advertising, but there is a lot of information that could be put on there to explain GNAA's role within Slashdot culture. Over 500,000 people a day have some contact with GNAA whilst browsing Slashdot, I think something with exposure that large deserves an article explaining it. Crculver 20:43, 5 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Fine. A subsection in Slashdot trolling phenomena should do it nicely. In fact, there's one already. -- The Anome 21:13, 5 Apr 2004 (UTC)

I'm afraid that GNAA subculture is simply too large to fit within the Slashdot trolling phenomena article. Besides, GNAA has grown beyond Slashdot and is now active at many other sites. It needs its own article. Crculver 13:55, 11 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Thank you for pointing the way to Gaucher's. Of course, if I weren't so easily distracted by Recent Changes, I'd get less edit conflicts<G>. - Nunh-huh 14:50, 6 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Hello,

I made a change to the BNP article last night which you have reverted, (although another user has "re-added" the link to the BNP website article). I did introduce myself on the talk page and asked for any comments. As you didn't respond there, could you please tell me here (or back on the talk page :-) what was wrong with my edit. Obviously if I make a change and it simply gets reverted without comment, I have no idea what the problem is. As I said on the talk page, I'm new in wikipedia land, so your comments would be appreciated.

James

LEO I

Why did you move/rename the article LEO I? // Liftarn

There were several different models of LEO: this was a prelude to expanding the article to cover them. -- The Anome 10:16, 15 Apr 2004 (UTC)

Frame dragging

The article on Frame-dragging that you wrote (almost entirely) recieved a full-force slashdotting tonight. Congrats. →Raul654 02:42, Apr 20, 2004 (UTC)

Down Syndrome

Thanks for the Down move. Hope it sticks. And keep that "i" out of your name! jaknouse 16:19, 20 Apr 2004 (UTC)

The Protocols of the Elders of Zion

Hi, I have a question about The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. It has been marked as a copyright violation because some of the text is identical to [1]. It looks like you posted the first version of the article back in 2001. Did you copy the text from the above link, and if you did, did you have permission to do so? (I apologize if you weren't the one who posted the original version.) Thanks! Wmahan . 16:08, 2004 Apr 21 (UTC)