New Immissions/Updates:
boundless - educate - edutalab - empatico - es-ebooks - es16 - fr16 - fsfiles - hesperian - solidaria - wikipediaforschools
- wikipediaforschoolses - wikipediaforschoolsfr - wikipediaforschoolspt - worldmap -

See also: Liber Liber - Libro Parlato - Liber Musica  - Manuzio -  Liber Liber ISO Files - Alphabetical Order - Multivolume ZIP Complete Archive - PDF Files - OGG Music Files -

PROJECT GUTENBERG HTML: Volume I - Volume II - Volume III - Volume IV - Volume V - Volume VI - Volume VII - Volume VIII - Volume IX

Ascolta ""Volevo solo fare un audiolibro"" su Spreaker.
CLASSICISTRANIERI HOME PAGE - YOUTUBE CHANNEL
Privacy Policy Cookie Policy Terms and Conditions
User talk:Mackensen/Archive13 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

User talk:Mackensen/Archive13

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

No
Solicitation

Mackensenarchiv

The Eye
The Eye

Spammers: I would like for this page to stay reasonably clean. If you have business with me, feel free to leave a comment, else please move on. Please ignore the gigantic eye in the corner with the pump-action shotgun.

Unsigned messages will be ignored. You can sign your messages with four tildes (~~~~). I reserve the right to disruptively eliminate gigantic blobs of wiki-markup from signatures on a whim if I think they're cluttering up my talk page.

Contents

[edit] Thanks

...for your help with that request. That it is working is shown by this [1] -- he's back to using his still-alive socks to spawn new accounts. Have a happy new year; I appreciate your work here. Antandrus (talk) 16:44, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cplot, again

I think this account is a sockpuppet or impersonator of Cplot...The username. User:Abouthere

[edit] Userpage vandalism

Mackensen: I reverted some vandalism to your userpage, but there were a couple of edit conflicts as I was doing so, so could you please doublecheck the userpage and make sure I caught it all and it's as you want it to be. Regards, Newyorkbrad 01:11, 5 January 2007 (UTC)


[edit] List of syndicated broadcasters of Futurama restored

This article has been restored after its deletion was contested at Wikipedia:Deletion review. As you nominated the article to be deleted via WP:PROD, you may wish to nominate the article for a full deletion discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. -- nae'blis 04:53, 5 January 2007 (UTC)


Touché :-) Giano 18:49, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Cplot collateral damage

Hi, we seem to be having collateral damage from the Cplot-related 68.30.0.0/16 range block, see Sadler@d50.org (talk • contribs). I was taking it to Dmcdevit (who actually instated the block) but he seems to be away on vacations. The autoblocked user has been getting rather impatient because it was never really explained to him what was going on. Do you think there's anything we can do for him? Would it be safe to lighten the range block again at this point? I realise the Cplot case is a pretty nasty one. Fut.Perf. ☼ 23:20, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Go ahead and remove it. Mackensen (talk) 23:22, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
    • Okay, thanks. Turned it into a soft block again for the time being. Fut.Perf. ☼ 23:56, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mail

You've got mail (forgot to mention that earlier). —Wknight94 (talk) 03:04, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Yes, I've read it and passed it on to the proper folks. Thanks, Mackensen (talk) 04:32, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 209.244.43.209

It was suggested on WP:ANI that I bring this to you since Dmcdevit is on break right now. I unblocked 209.244.43.209 (talk • contribs • WHOIS • RDNS • RBLs • block user • block log) as per this conversation. The Showster (talk • contribs) was caught behind the autoblock on this one. This stems from Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Bowser Koopa. However, I want to get input on this. I'm curious if I should reblock the IP address with the indefinite expiration time but make it for anonymous only (and disable account creation). Would this be more appropriate? Or should it just be the outright unblock? My concern is that I've opened us up to a flood of vandalism by completely opening up the IP address. I'm wondering if you feel that the vandalism stemming from this IP address and users on the IP address warrants a soft block with account creation disabled but one which allows currently registered accounts to be used would be more appropriate. Metros232 14:44, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Well, there's certainly wrestling-related vandalism coming from that IP (as of January 6), if that's what you wanted to know. Mackensen (talk) 23:25, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
    • What do you suggest then, restoring the original indefinite block on the IP address? Is it significant enough to warrant that? Metros232 23:39, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
      • I guess I really don't understand why it was lifted in the first place. Mackensen (talk) 23:44, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
        • The Showster was stuck behind the autoblock on that IP. Jimbo Wales allowed for The Showster to be unblocked in an attempt of good faith. I was nervous about lifting the block on the IP to allow The Showster to edit again and so I asked Jimbo about it. His response is in this diff, so that's why it was lifted. Metros232 23:47, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
          • I've restored the block fully. If The Showster wants to contribute, he'll have to find somewhere else to go to edit. Metros232 01:47, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Actually,the block is not preventing me from editing, so go ahead and block it if more vandalism came from it.--The Showster 20:17, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Clowning around on IPs

Cplot seems more intended on using IPs instead of user accounts to poison the water at the village pump with his diatribes. Also, Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Cplot is attracting a few sockpuppets. I've dumped a whole lot of them at RFCU but I dread thinking about the number of socks there might be in the drawer. MER-C 04:43, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Yeah, I can't even face it tonight. It's a mess. Mackensen (talk) 04:44, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Are you still active with Trivia Cleanup project?

I was wondering if you were still active with the Trivia Cleanup project. Seeing as how Category:Articles with large trivia sections hasn't gone down much, I figured many people became inactive. I've created a talk page discussion here, asking if people are active or not: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Trivia_Cleanup#Who_is_still_active_with_the_project.3F. RobJ1981 06:29, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Warning messages for established users

While I think I understand what you were saying here ([2]) I'll have to assume good faith that you didn't intend to be as harsh in your reply as it read to me.

At the risk of sounding stupid (as I explained, I am something of a novice to process, but do quite a bit of vandal reversion, so am keen to learn correct process) I presume that with a disruptive established user, the correct thing to do would be to write specific-to-case messages, rather than dashing off an off-the-peg template, but that this is something more to do with etiquette than a WP policy. --Dweller 12:50, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Correct, but etiquette is everything in these cases. See also my response below. Mackensen (talk) 13:10, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Your comments on my RFA

Hi Mackensen, thanks for your comments on my RFA and thanks for taking the time to read my answers to the many questions posed. I appreciate that good editors shouldn't be treated like common vandals, moreover that's why I suggested I'd try to discuss the situation with them before resorting to the use of templates. I have seen on at least one occasion a good, established user going off the rails (for whatever reason) who it became impossible to reason with who was then given the standard test templates before being blocked. I would be interested to hear how you would deal with this situation, if you don't mind giving me a little more of your time. Cheers! Budgiekiller 12:57, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

  • I've seen such situations as well, and the use of templates prior to blocking ought to tell you something. For me this isn't a hypothetical question. I've often entered into private correspondence with the user in question, to good effect. You need to approach the question from the perspective of one who wants to defuse the situation. This is very different from counter-vandalism. If a user is going off the rails then there's no need to degrade them prior to blocking because that just makes getting them *back* on the rails all the more difficult. Mackensen (talk) 13:06, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I understand, so in these cases, we adopt an WP:IAR kind of approach to giving them final t3/t4 style warnings, keep discussing until the point of no return and then block them? It makes sense, and I understand the use of templates could send an established user further over the edge. I would most certainly be judicious in their use, and would hope that my negotiations would be sufficient. I'm sorry that this point has caused an oppose, but I fully understand your concerns and look forward to bumping into you in the future. Budgiekiller 13:20, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

  • No, that's not at all what I'm getting it. This has nothing to do with IAR and everything to do with treating other editors with respect and assuming good faith. You should never find yourself threatening a good faith contributor who's going over the edge, you're trying to bring them back from the brink. Mackensen (talk) 13:29, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Okay, point made. I feel that in general all my contributions here are made with respect and good faith to all editors, including vandals who insult me and my family. I would do my best, but then I'm not infallible. Thank you, once again, for your time and interest. Budgiekiller 13:45, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unblock request

Sorry about forgetting to list the reason for editing. Lesson learned. Can you unblock me, please?

  • You don't appear to be blocked. Mackensen (talk) 23:19, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Unblock request

Hi, I'm trying to evaluate H4xx0r (talk • contribs)'s unblock request. Your block-reason was very sparse. Do you mind elaborating further? ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 20:32, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Requests_for_checkuser/Case/Tooj117. Most of the interactions this user has had appears to be with other accounts on the same IP. Notice the similarities between that account and Geekler (talk • contribs). OhNoitsJamie Talk 20:36, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Umm looks like the user was building up a walled-garden of sorts. Hmm ---J.S (T/C/WRE) 20:44, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Correct. Mackensen (talk) 21:12, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Olave Baden-Powell

Hi. I know you've helped with the title of Robert Baden-Powell's article before, Robert Baden-Powell, 1st Baron Baden-Powell and the explanation at the top of the article itself. I've always wondered that his wife's article is just Olave Baden-Powell. Shouldn't it be "Olave, Lady Baden-Powell]] (which is a redirect now) or something? Could you help with the proper title per wiki rrules and British customs and an bit in the lead of Olave's article? I think the two articles should be titled similarly and I'd like to improve Olave's article. Being an American, I simply don't understand peerage titles. Rlevse 14:56, 11 January 2007 (UTC), ScoutingWikiProject Lead Coordinator

  • Well, the full, correct title would be Olave Baden-Powell, Baroness Baden-Powell. The question is whether that's the name she was most commonly known by. It was eventually decided that B-P's title was important enough to be in the article title (especially as there was another Robert Baden-Powell floating around). I'm not convinced that there's anything to gain by moving the article at this point, especially as the intro discusses her full, legal name. Mackensen (talk) 15:29, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
    • As long as you and your Peerage project are okay with it, so am I.Rlevse 15:32, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mike Mendoza

Thanks for reverting. Could you do it once more? The user switched IP and re-reverted. I checked the WHOISes (or should the plural be WHOARE?), definitely the same guy, so I blocked it, but I'm still at 3 reverts. Even though I have a BLP/vandalism defence, it would be annoying if I had to wait for someone to unblock me. --Sam Blanning(talk) 16:13, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Never mind, already done. --Sam Blanning(talk) 16:14, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
I've got it on my watch list. Mackensen (talk) 16:17, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] My RFA

Hey, thanks for participating in my recent RFA. You were amongst a number of editors who considered that I wasn't ready for the mop yet and as a consequence the RFA did not succeed (69/26/11). I am extremely grateful that you took the time to advise me on to improve as a Wikipedian and I'd like to assure you that I'll do my level best to develop my skills here to a point where you may feel you could trust me with the mop.

I've been blown away by the level of interest taken in my RFA and appreciate the time and energy dedicated by all the editors who have contributed to it, support, oppose and neutral alike. I hope to bump into you again soon and look forward to serving you and Wikipedia in any way I can. Cheers! The Rambling Man 19:38, 11 January 2007 (UTC) (the non-admin, formerly known as Budgiekiller)

[edit] CheckUser procedure questions

First of all, thanks for your help with the Tooj117 case. Regarding future procedures; it seems that I've misunderstood the instructions at the top of [[3]] (which lead me to believe I should add new suspected socks to the top of that page and simply place the {{Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Tooj117}} template on the actual checkuser page....so instead, I should just write up a new request under the CU IP section with a reference to the original case? Thanks, OhNoitsJamie Talk 00:09, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

You were in the right neighborhood, you just needed to add a new section header at the top like Prodego fixed it [4]. Generally you should add at least a brief description of the problem, since the checkuser who answers the new request might be different from the one who answered the first request. Usually, a brief explanation of why you suspect the new accounts, maybe with a couple of diffs, is all you need. Thatcher131 04:03, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] need to move IP's to WP:OP?

Will I need to move the IP's to WP:OP or can you take a look? Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Enlighter1. One is already blocked. Agathoclea 00:34, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikileaks

I'm done for a good while, if you want to tear into what I put up. F.F.McGurk 00:50, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks!

Sorry for taking so long to reply. Thanks for unblocking me. Hope our paths cross again in the future. Until then, thanks a lot and happy editing! SD31415 (SIGN HERE) 12:37, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] List of syndicated broadcasters of Futurama nominated for deletion

An article that you have been involved in editing, List of syndicated broadcasters of Futurama, has been listed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of syndicated broadcasters of Futurama. Please look there to see why this is, if you are interested in whether it should be deleted. Thank you. --Slowking Man 10:54, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

I m sorry I did not understand what u wrote in usercheck of Babbarshair page, can u pls explain phippi46 17:47, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Stralia

[5] Hi, I find the above diff suspicious, as Wikimajesty has not been blocked. I thought it might be appropriate to bring it to your attention that a checkuser might be appropriate for Wikimajesty, as the circumstances suggest he is yet another sockpuppet of American Brit. Thanks. --Majorly 18:26, 13 January 2007 (UTC)


[edit] Declined checkuser

That's fine of course but please could you tell me if it was procedural (like I didn't present the 6RRs properly) or on a point of principle, just so I know for the future? I was advised by someone [6] to pursue this route on the sockpuppet farm but perhaps there is a better way? --BozMo talk 20:41, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Checkuser is often declined for obvious cases like this one. If you're concerned about identifying an underlying account then that may be a different matter. Mackensen (talk) 20:50, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Thanks, and I really appreciate the quick response but what do I do? I posted at AN/I Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/IncidentArchive177#Bharatanatyam and the only response was to send me to checkuser, even though I said I couldn't see a puppermaster just new socks every day. Checkuser says no so next I should...? Thanks again for any advice --BozMo talk 20:56, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
    • Hrmm. Well, if the noticeboard is dodging it I might have to do something. Let me take a second look. Mackensen (talk) 21:07, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
Thanks for your help and the fix. --BozMo talk 22:13, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
I saw you declined, then reconsidered Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Sselvakumar. I've spent a number of hours going over this one. If it helps, take a look at User:A. B./Sandbox2. I've worked my way through the list (from the heaviest editors of Bharatanatyam on downwards as far as User:67.191.164.199). I believe the crew I think of as the Medha Hari spammers (they link to in.geocities.com/medhahari) are all fairly low volume #'s -- the only Medha Hari spammer candidate i've hit so far is User:Santap. I did find a couple of Kalakendra spammers User:61.247.253.102, User:Sudhakar ks. That's as far as I got; I was looking at Santap when I saw the change here:
You may want to take a look at these:
You may also want to skim:
Finally, here are edit histories, however much of it has been "pre-digested" on my user subpage:
I hope this is useful. --A. B. (talk) 22:34, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] indefinite blocks

Since 84.172.86.125 (p54AC567D.dip.t-dialin.net) is a dynamic dial-up IP, isn't an indefinite block likely to cause collateral damage at some point in the future? --Delirium 02:49, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Probably. For the moment, it's a necessary evil. Mackensen (talk) 02:51, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
    • If it's "for the moment", what's wrong with, say, a 1-year block, rather than an indefinite one? I thought that was normal Wikipedia blocking policy? Even the arbcom doesn't issue indefinite blocks. --Delirium 02:52, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
      • I'm not willing to discuss this further in public. Mackensen (talk) 02:52, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
        • If that's the case, I will bring it up on AN/I. There is no acceptable reason for banning a dynamic IP indefinitely---in the extremely unlikely event that the same person is still using it a full year from now, it's a trivial matter to renew the block for a second year at that time, thereby avoiding reckless banning of other users. --Delirium 02:56, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
          • Indefinite is just that--indefinite. For the moment it needs to be blocked until it's decided to unblock. Go ahead and raise the matter on ANI if you feel you must, but I think we'd all be better served if you dropped me a quick email instead. Yours, Mackensen (talk) 02:58, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
            • In that case, could you at least put a useful message so someone caught in an accidental blocking doesn't receive the useless explanation, "do not pass go, do not collect $200?" --Delirium 02:59, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
              • Forgive me, I was being vague on purpose. It wasn't the best choice but my initial choice wasn't printable. Mackensen (talk) 03:00, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Checkuser

Why have you declined requests for checkuser for Max rspct? What else can be done instead of a checkuser? -- Vision Thing -- 18:08, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Per the Foundation's privacy policy I cannot "out" an IP address under regular circumstances. This looks like simple 3RR evasion and should be dealt with accordingly. If it's obviously him just block the IP as though it was him. Mackensen (talk) 18:25, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Ok, but I'm not an admin, so I can't block the IP. What do you suggest, should I just report this on WP:AN3? -- Vision Thing -- 18:39, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
  • That's as good a place as any. Mackensen (talk) 18:41, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Great Edit Summary

I've sent over some tissues for the Manual of Style... :-) Just H 18:43, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] No Prob. Question on something else

My cache didn't load or something and I was booted out of my screename into a plain old IP, which was "soft blocked". My IP here is 64.241.37.140, it's a coffee shop in Nashua, New Hampshire(I live just over the border and come over for the lower taxes). I guess maybe somebody else vandalized from the other side of the room or something. I'll keep an eye out for them and let you know if I see them, this is my hangout, i'm here often. Just H 20:20, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] B-P as Baronet and Baron

Hello Mac, in the article Robert Baden-Powell, 1st Baron Baden-Powell, you have removed Sir from the formal name of B-P, with the edit comment that 'sir' should not be included when the holder is a peer. Do you have a reference for that? Wim van Dorst (Talk) 20:36, 14 January 2007 (UTC).

[edit] Fixing sock puppeteering by more of the same

Hello Mackensen. BenAveling has proposed that the abusive editor behind the Revolver Ocelot/Guardian Tiger accounts move to using yet another sock. That seems a bit too easy to me, as it removes the permitted aspect of the behavior but does not address the offensive aspect (harassment and stalking). Could you take a look at the new development on ANI, here? See also this and this. Best wishes, Bishonen | talk 07:43, 15 January 2007 (UTC).

Never mind, Dmcdevit already took care of it. Sorry to bother you. Bishonen | talk 08:36, 15 January 2007 (UTC).
  • Hi there I have seen the request being denied. I accept it, I just want to know where should then appeal in case if this is a POV issue ? regards phippi46 11:10, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RE:Checkuser

Thanks for the quick response/action. It seems Nintendude has modified his username selection practices away from Metro Detroit/his highschool related naming conventions. I was going to add him to Wikipedia:Long term abuse but decided it against it because WP:DENY; I think he's an attention seeker and besides, if I document how easy it is to spot him it might encourage him to change more than just his username practices.--Isotope23 18:55, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kalamazoo again

Time for a two-month block? Same IP as before...--chris.lawson 22:09, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Interesting. The one you just blocked today is actually a Pfizer IP address. I'm sure his boss would love to know what he's doing on company time.--chris.lawson 21:16, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
Nah, I don't want to make trouble for Pfizer (not going to slit my own throat here). Mackensen (talk) 21:23, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Free Republic

Could you take a look at this article? I would like an outside opinion on User:DeanHinnen. Hinnen is the last name BryanFromPalestine uses in his e-mails, and this user is following his edits. But the last time I thought I saw a clear cut puppet.... Yea... Prodego talk 22:39, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Heh, that's pretty funny. Yes, I'll take a look. Mackensen (talk) 22:41, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Yes, that's him. Block and be merry. Mackensen (talk) 22:42, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Done. Now if this was Jimbo, I am going to hold you personally responsible ;-). I have an IP from the e-mails he sent me, do you think I should block that as well? You ran a checkuser on him, did he ever use a 76. IP to edit, or e-mail only? You probably can't answer that, but what the heck ;-) Prodego talk 22:51, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Go ahead an drop me an email with the IP, if you like (you're right, I won't answer that). Mackensen (talk) 22:52, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Pesky rules! (See commented out message) I sent you an e-mail anyway lest it help you. Prodego talk 23:11, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Happy Wikipedia Day!

Happy Wikipedia Day!

On January 15, 2007, Wikipedia turned six-years-old. According to statistics, Wikipedia has around 1,500,000 articles and Wikipedians have made 104,000,000 edits. The millionth article was Jordanhill railway station, created on March 2, 2006.

Wikipedia has moved from an Alexa rank of 20 to a rank of 12 having already briefly visited rank 8 (current rank). Happy editing!

—S.D. ¿п? 23:58, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Hrmm, how come I never get random stuff like this? Guess I'm not on the right lists. --Cyde Weys 21:23, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] You're a Wyrm

Geogre and Bishzilla (shown in human form) discuss how to dispose of the stinking carcasses. Blue skies and sunshine return to Wikipedia, while the Featured Article crowd cheers madly.
Geogre and Bishzilla (shown in human form) discuss how to dispose of the stinking carcasses. Blue skies and sunshine return to Wikipedia, while the Featured Article crowd cheers madly.

I appreciate the patience that you've shown in the recent thread at the Administrator's Notice Board. Despite mostly agreeing with the concept (if not the vitriol) of the side that is cast as "opposing" you, I value your commentary. Thus I present you with the "brenneman Wyrm award," showing your severed head and scaled tongue, sadly not forked. I'd note only that most recent accounts afford you with great wisdom, if questionable beauty.

I look forward to a reasonable outcome to this that will be despised equally by all sides, and to your continued tolerance of those with whom you disagree.

brenneman 00:57, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

  • I accept this award with great pleasure. Your kindness is much appreciated. Best, Mackensen (talk) 01:02, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Deferrance of RFCU case

Per Essjay's request, you are hereby notified that a case, Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Arthur Ellis, has been deferred to you. Cheers, Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 07:26, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Good work

Keep the excellent work up with your {{checkuserblock}}s - you've caught loads of sockpuppetmasters before they could get as bad as the most notorious vandals on Wikipedia. --SunStar Nettalk 01:51, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

I also made {{checkuserblock}} slightly better-looking (in my opinion): feel free to revert if you think I made a mistake. --SunStar Nettalk 01:54, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] deletion of "Clc bio"

Hi Mackensen,

you deleted the article "CLC bio" using the "proposed deletion procedure" on 6th of December 2006. I'd like to ask you to undelete this lemma. Please let me know if this in not the right procedure to ask for undeletion.

thanks in advance Rewireable 14:21, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Sure. I've undeleted it and listed it for deletion (per WP:PROD). Please feel free to comment here. Best, Mackensen (talk) 14:51, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mike Mendoza

Here is the disputed sentence:

A former member of the Conservative Party, he has served as a councillor for the party on Adur District Council near Brighton. [7] [8]

Can you please give me one good reason why this sourced material should not be included in the article? User:Samuel Blanning has locked the discussion page and has deleted a valid question that I put to him. 195.92.67.75 17:52, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

  • I can, but it's the same reason that Sam Blanning and Doc glasgow are giving you. Mackensen (talk) 17:55, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
    • Yes, I lost my cool with them. Who wouldn't if some well-sourced information was being censored. 195.92.67.75 18:01, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
    • This information is from verifiable sources and should be included. Mendoza has strong political opinions, and his past political activities are therefore relevant. 195.92.67.75 18:12, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Since I caught you online

Can you review the block situation at 208.54.95.1 (talk · contribs · logs · block user · block log)? It's apparently a T-mobile hotspot, and Dmcdevit blocked it, but someone just converted it to a soft block without waiting for an answer (see User talk:Dmcdevit. My recollection is the T-mobile hotspot business was one of cplot's tricks, but maybe I am conflating two different situations. Thatcher131 17:58, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Yeah, that's a favored Cplot location, but we're incurring real collateral damage there. I'm cool with a soft-block. Mackensen (talk) 18:01, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] advice request - Borderline RFCU

I have come to find out that User:Jefferson Anderson, User:999, User:Hanuman Das, User:Mattisse, and User:Ekajati have all been involved in an ArbCom case re: Starwood Festival and User:Rosencomet. They all seem to be following each other around WP, voting on the same things, such as the last Jahbulon AfD (which is what brings me here). We ended up with no consensus on the first two votes, and a keep on the 3rd. I don't want to put it up for DR, because it's half-decent now, but I'm concerned about this trend, because 4 or 5 votes will swing an AfD in some cases. Would it be phishing to ask for an RFCU, or has ArbCom done one? MSJapan 01:58, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/BryanFromPalatine

Just letting you know that Essjay's deferred this case to you. Luna Santin 09:19, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Newyorkbrad's RfA

Thank you for your support on my RfA, which closed favorably this morning. I appreciate the confidence the community has placed in me and am looking forward to my new responsibilities. Please let me know if ever you have any comments or suggestions, especially as I am learning how to use the tools. Best regards, Newyorkbrad 18:33, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Constance Holland AfD

[edit] AfD Nomination: Constance Holland

An article that you have been involved in editing, Constance Holland, has been listed by me at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Constance Holland. Please look there to see why this is, if you are interested in whether it should be deleted. Thank you. --DGG 20:56, 22 January 2007 (UTC) DGG 20:56, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Checkuser block unblock review needed

Since Dmcdevit has indicated on an ArbCom page that he's away for an unspecified length of time, could you please take a look at this and either unblock or decline the unblock. The user is requesting unblocking but there's a checkuser block note on the page so I'm deferring to Dmcdevit or, in his absence, to you or your designee. Newyorkbrad 23:37, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

  • I'm not really here either, but I'll take a quick look. Mackensen (talk) 00:00, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
    • Maybe there should be a central place to bring these type of requests? Newyorkbrad 02:03, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] IRC admin

Is there a way of reconciling what you promised regarding discussion of Giano on the IRC admin channel and what Bishonen contends here? [9] --Mcginnly | Natter 17:35, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Yes, there is. I promised that Chanops would be more vigilant, and indeed we are. That being said, we're not there all the time–and neither is Bishonen, or she would have witnessed a showdown between three Chanops and another user over this very issue of civility and politeness in discourse. I'm reviewing the discussion she's referring to now; I was not active in the channel because at that very moment I was recovering from a root canal. I have my logs in front of me, so let me recap.
  • There is a note in the topic to the effect that discussion of Giano is banned. This raised an inquiry from one user as to whether Giano himself was banned from the channel. This occasioned a warning from a chanop, and discussion switched to the old, somewhat unfruitful topic of non-admin access to the channel (if someone would only take my up on my proposal to rename it #wikipedia-en-functionaries I think we'd all be better off). Discussion then moved to whether Bishonen was kicked for posting logs. Note that Bishonen herself raised this matter. If I had been active at the time I would have politely asked her to not raise the matter, but as I've noted above I was (and remain, somewhat) indisposed. After a different user made this suggestion to Bishonen (not in the tone I would have used, but certainly not impolite), Bishonen left the channel.
  • The discussion in question was short, and quickly redirected by an active chanop. It pertained to Giano but did not actually involve any discussion of him, save the correct assertion that he is not an administrator. I would appreciate Bishonen verifying that I have discussed the proper event, and would appreciate any corrective that she might have to my narrative. Regards, Mackensen (talk) 17:59, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
Thankyou - my sympathies for your toothache. --Mcginnly | Natter 18:19, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Mack, those are the events I had in mind. I don't mean to quarrel with your reading, but I have my own. The discussion of whether it was bad to "say the G word" (=Giano), or bad to censor the saying of it, wasn't what I'd call short, nor "quickly redirected by an active chanop". It lasted for 27 minutes before Dmcdevit-- at the time "Dmcsleep" :-) --woke up and took issue with it, and after that for another ten minutes or so. I want to be absolutely clear that I don't begrudge the chanops dentistry, or sleep! They can't indeed always be there, and neither can I. (In fact, as I said, I've just come to the conclusion that there's little point in my being there at all.) The ten minutes after Dmcdevit joined in focused on a user's resentment at being threatened with a kickban by Dmcdevit for putting Giano in the topic. Actually, as was quickly made clear, this was a complete misunderstanding, but the user continued to grumble at being, putatively, rudely spoken to. This umbrage was what made me point to the rather different occasion when I was myself kickbanned from the channel, with no previous warning, no reason, and, to this day, no explanation. I suppose it's a matter of taste whether you'd call that context "Bishonen herself raised this matter". These were my words (with the user's name removed):

[07-01-20 21.02] <bishonen> [-] that's why i said the channel is "theoretically" for admins. there are non-admins who have ops in here. and who kick people for a lot less than saying any particular word. In fact for nothing. are you not aware of these things?

The "discussion" of my kickban lasted for all of one minute. It consisted of my words quoted above, an acknowledgement by the person I was speaking to that that sounded a lot worse than his own experience--in fact that a channel where such things happened was "kind of a sucky place"--a question from another user whether I had been banned for the mistaken perception that i had posted logs, which I never had time to reply to and in fact don't know the answer to (recollect that I can't tell what happens in a channel that I'm locked out of, nor have I been vouchsafed an explanation of the ban). Anyway, I was cut short by the remark you mention from as you say "a different user" that I ought not to speak of the matter--not "cover this ground again". Minutes aren't everything, but I think my brief interchange was supremely unimportant, especially in relation to the 38-minute "G-word" discussion. The whole thing is boring, in fact...but since you ask me to add to your narrative if I think it gives the wrong impression, I'll just add two things. Firstly, the "different user" who shut me up was an arbitrator. Much has been made of the supposed healthful effect of the increased presence of arbs in the channel, but this one didn't shut up anybody other than me. The G word apparently didn't offend him/her the way my attempt to clear up the mystery of my kickban did. And secondly, I don't think you do justice to the insinuations made during the G-word discussion. I would never say that "It pertained to Giano but did not actually involve any discussion of him, save the correct assertion that he is not an administrator.". I would like to, but must not, quote the remarks I mean. I t's a little frustrating. I ask you to read again. Maybe your characterisation of it as all " correct assertion" was the teeth speaking? (Try some codeine?) Bishonen | talk 21:34, 23 January 2007 (UTC).

  • Those teeth speak louder than anyone can possibly imagine. Thankfully I indeed have my codeine now and can look forward to a good night's sleep. I'll review again once I feel up to it. Thanks for your response, Mackensen (talk) 23:03, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

Is there a chance to add "Irpen" and "Ghirlandajo" to the list of users that IRC admins are not allowed to discuss? If you need to know why, please review the logs you received at the ArbCom list. I hope you will find the reason convincing. Thank you, --Irpen 04:47, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Quick note to that effect: "Giano" is considered a short, useful byword for the entire affair. Mackensen (talk) 11:45, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
    • Is it a "No" to the request I made? --Irpen 14:51, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
      • Your question can't be answered in that fashion. What I'm telling you is that a list would be inappropriate because such discussion in general is inappropriate. Therefore, there isn't a list, but if there was an explicit list, you would be on it. Mackensen (talk) 14:55, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
        • Fair enough. Could you then tell me what is the current message the users see when they log in. Something like: "Public logging prohibited, disscussion of .... prohibited, etc." Or is it a secret too? --Irpen 16:17, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
          • Sure.

            ">Discussion< of Giano is >banned<. Please do not release logs, but be aware that public leaks occur. Use discretion in discussing behavior of others. | WP:AE, CAT:NS, CAT:NL, CAT:ABL, and CAT:ORFU are under-watched. WP:AFD/OLD is severely BACKLOGGED, please help | Vandalfighter: http://hekla.rave.org/vf/35/vf-beren.jar"

            It is understood, as I've indicated above, that "Giano" means Giano and associated editors and disputes. I regret having to use his name specifically but I think most would agree that he has been the focal point of this dispute. I'm always open to alternatives. Mackensen (talk) 16:27, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
How about, "Discussion of the Giano matter, broadly interpreted , is banned." Thatcher131 16:30, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
    • And that is a very bad habit, I must say. After all, Bishonen's "rude" talk alluded to above wasn't about Giano. It was about her being kickbanned mysteriously. That's a separate issue from anything that occurred with Giano, but it's the same issue in terms of "people on that IRC channel whose behavior cannot be examined." It's the same offense from my point of view, but it's not the same matter in any sense. For me, the central offense is that the channel is used by people to behave in ways that are unacceptable socially as well as in flagrant disregard of Wikipedia's practices and policies, and yet there is no recourse to the aggrieved. The aggrieved cannot submit the evidence, cannot gain sanctions, and cannot prevent future bad acts. For those reasons, Wikipedia doesn't need to link to those IRC channels where such is the case. If no one may alter the composition of the group without James Forrester's permission, and if David Gerrard is right that James won't care what the arguments are, then it really is a private MySpace page in disguise, and Wikipedia is not in the habit of linking to such sites. Geogre 12:12, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
      • Geogre, I agree with you that such behavior wasn't acceptable. I've taken steps to stop all such behavior. In addition, I considered it useful to eliminate discussion of past events because they would easily lead to the same problems. Bishonen is correct; an arbitrator asked her not to bring the matter up. She was not, however, threatened with banning in any way; she left of her own accord. I have worked to restore the official (beneficial) uses of the channel. If I may, I did not consider the re-opening of old wounds a good idea, especially as the offending party, Greg, was not in the channel at the time. Regards, Mackensen (talk) 12:28, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
Current edits on the notice board can no longer be ignored by any editor, once and for all Oh Mackensen, how much more of all this do you think peole are going to beleive. Is any editor's true identity safe in that bloody channel? Yes or No? Giano 20:06, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
Well, if you think I'm a liar then nothing I can possibly do will change your mind. Did you ever stop to consider that I have been truthful and forthright throughout? Has it ever crossed you mind? Will you ever respond to my query about Donald Crawford's degree of relation to Sir Charles Dilke? Mackensen (talk) 20:10, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Checkuser issues

Could you do me a favor? Since you have a checkuser privilege, you have access to the checkuser log. Could you look there and tell me whether Giano, Ghirla or myself where ever checkusered and by who? Since none of us ever used any socks or were ever accused in that, the presence of our names in the checkuser log would hopefully shed some illuminating light. I would be also very interested to know this for personal reasons. Thanks, --Irpen 20:15, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

  • It is my understanding of policy that I'm not allowed to do this. Let me tell you, though, that I agree such a check would be out of bounds and uncalled for. Mackensen (talk) 20:21, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Please point me out to a policy clause that prevents me from knowing who ran a checkuser on me and on what pretense. --Irpen 20:22, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Let me clarify. I'm allowed to tell you if you've been checked, but I would prefer to do so privately. I cannot disclose information to you regarding Giano, Ghirla, or anyone else. Mackensen (talk) 20:25, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

OK, here is the link to my email. Please tell me privately who and when checkusered me but I don't see why you can't tell it to me here. But thanks anyway. --Irpen 20:28, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Let me clarify that I've done this, this one time, to clear up a matter of some controversy. I will not make a habit of it and users shouldn't think they can email checkusers asking if they've been checked. The log is private for a reason. I regret that I ever had to in the first place but it would be my hope that, having answered the question, we can move on. Mackensen (talk) 20:40, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Well I was certainly checkusered very recently by David Gerard, or is that to be denied?, it seems to me you are all at it every 5 minutes? =Giano 21:37, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

That's interesting. Can we all know why was Giano checkusered if this was truly the case? --Irpen 21:40, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Oh I can answer that, apparently I was a potential risk to the project! They invent anything to get themselves off the hook Giano 21:43, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

In what was Giano a risk for the project? IMO, the violation of the official WM privacy policy by those who are entrusted with the checkuser access to uphold it is indeed a very great risk to the project. Am I wrong? --Irpen 21:47, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Or the abusive use of sockpuppets. Or, in some cases, a stated intent to disrupt the project. No, you've been polite under the circumstances. Moreso than others anyway. Mackensen (talk) 22:09, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

What does the sockpuppetry threat have to do with checkusering Giano? If DG indeed checkusered him, I consider it a very serious matter and I would like to see it acted upon with DG being strongly cautioned if he is to retain the CU privilege. I do not know if this was the case. I am talking based on Giano's assertion that DG checkusered him. --Irpen 22:14, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Do you mind if I jump in for a second? Since I'm not a checkuser or an IRC fairy, I'm not a party to anything and can't give away any secrets. Per Mackensen's interpretation of the checkuser policy, he can't confirm or deny anything regarding Giano, and if the checkuser has to enter a reason when running a check (which I don't even know if it does), he can't reveal that either, if it exists. So Giano should probably ask David. However, looking at Giano's block log and recalling another WP:AN thread, it appears that David thought Giano had made a threat to disrupt the encyclopedia. That might have led David to inquire as to whether Giano had been creating or using sockpuppets. I believe David later acknowledged that he misinterpreted Giano's comments. In a court case (US rules) I believe the "reasonable person" standard would apply: Would a reasonable person faced with the same or similar circumstances react in the same way David G. did to Giano's comments? Thatcher131 22:25, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

So, the question is, would the reasonable person knowing what we know about Giano could assume that Giano was contemplating a creation of the network of socks with the aim of the overall disruption of Wikipedia. That's the question, Thatcher is raising.

All right. My answer to this question would be "no way". Similarly to how I am sure that this is not what Tony would ever do either.

So, the question why Giano was checkusered is a serious one, in my opinion, and not to be dismissed lightly. --Irpen 22:34, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

There have been other good, long-term editors who have gone off the rails; whether it should have been obvious that Giano was not one such person is something that I can't evaluate. Thatcher131 22:37, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

We all have gone off the rails once in a while. The narrow question here is whether any of us would have resorted to creation of a sock-net aimed at attacking Wikipedia. No reasonable person can possibly assume that Giano might do it whatever mad he is about his block orchestrated at IRC. There is no way on earth I can see his being checkusered justified. --Irpen 22:39, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Or do you disagree and think that anyone could reasonably suspect that Giano was to stage a sockpuppet attack? --Irpen 14:48, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
In my experience anyone might use sockpuppets. But then I've seen just about everything. Mackensen (talk) 14:51, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Using sockpuppets is not illegal per se. It is using them to disrupt WP is what I am talking about. Could Giano have done it in your informed opinion of someone who've seen just about everything? --Irpen 14:54, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

  • From a technical standpoint it's quite easy: create a different account and go raise hell. The harder question is whether he would have been willing to do so; was he angry or desperate enough? I don't like to speculate about that publicly–it's unkind and uncharitable. At the same time, we aren't supposed to take risks. Checkusers are expected to be paranoid. At the same time, we're expected to operate in secret so that said paranoia doesn't reflect badly on the person checked if they've done nothing wrong. Mackensen (talk) 14:58, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Since Giano knows of being Checkusered, obviously this was not done in secret and DG shared his action with people. So, there was obviously a breach of supposed secrecy, wasn't it? More importantly would be to know whether the IP info revealed by the checkuser was shared as well. --Irpen 15:02, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

  • That's an interesting point since DG didn't share that information with anybody, as far as I know, and he certainly didn't reveal IP information himself. That's the gravest breach of trust imaginable. I'd like to know where Giano got his information from. To clarify: Giano was the first person to reveal this information publicly, at least that I've seen. Mackensen (talk) 15:05, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Well, you are obviously mistaken since DG did share the info at least of the fact of the checkuser was run from what we see. More importantly, though, is that he had no justification for it whatsoever. Users like Giano and myself who built their reputation of commitment to the project by years of the content creation should not be worried that someone would checkuser them on the ridiculous pretense, like unexplainable suspicion of malaise or that "the account has been compromised" ridiculous excuse. While at it, I would like to make it clear to you and anyone with the checkuser access who might read this that I strongly object to the chekcuser being run on me on the matter of principle and WM privacy policy even though I am not hiding and my identity and location is not a secret and is already known to many. --Irpen 15:13, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

  • How do you know that DG shared the info? The checkuser log is viewable by all Wikimedia checkusers. Mackensen (talk) 15:15, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

A good question we better ask DG as well as to what was the justification and who he shared the info with and what info was shared. --Irpen 15:16, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

  • I ask you again: what makes you say that David Gerard shared the information? Mackensen (talk) 15:18, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Merely Giano's knowing about it. --Irpen 15:20, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

  • I repeat what I said above: all wikimedia checkusers (not just those on this encyclopedia) have access to that log. Any checkuser could have released that information, and I doubt very much that it was DG, because he keeps such things under his hat. Mackensen (talk) 15:22, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

I strongly doubt that anyone with checkuser would have released that info to Giano. There is no way for sure to know what happened, of course. I think ideally the mess with the checkuser issues and lack of clarity about checkuser policy should be settled by arbcom. Starting an ArbCom case would be costly because it may likely keep arbcom tied forever, especially with the evidence of Kelly's abuse being added to the mess and some of the checkusers who have very little community trust sitting on the arbcom itself. I need to think about this myself... --Irpen 16:42, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XI - January 2007

The January 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

This is an automated delivery by grafikbot 21:00, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] When you have a bit of time, please look at this?

[10] No hurry. Thanks so very much! --BenBurch 21:39, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

I should say what this is. It is a checkuser on a guy who is evading blocks which was deferred to you since you did the original checkuser on the guy. BenBurch 18:17, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User:65.88.88.214

You performed what looks to be a checkuser block on this, in May 2006 ("rms125 sock"); the block was indefinite, but User:El chulito requested unblocking, and seemed to be a good contributor, otherwise. I've unblocked the IP (log). If there's anything I should do (such as place an AO block), feel free to let me know, whenever/if you have a chance. Thanks! Luna Santin 22:52, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

  • That's fine, I think things are quiet on the Rms front (knock on wood). Mackensen (talk) 02:26, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Another checkuser block

User talk:71.57.32.46 has requested unblock twice now. I said I'd contact you - though the block expires in only a few days anyway. Appears innocent, though I could be wrong. Cheers. Patstuarttalk|edits 07:57, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Lifted. He got caught in one of many Cplot blocks. Mackensen (talk) 12:05, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mail 2

Re the sockpuppetry - I've sent you a mail. --Mcginnly | Natter 15:24, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Sock

I was about to say the same, but you beat me to it [11]. >Radiant< 16:55, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

  • These mistakes happen. I'm just grateful that the involved parties were able to talk it out.Mackensen (talk) 16:57, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Access to admin channel

You know, I never go to IRC, because I am busy with other things but I made an exception yesterday. I logged in to #wikipedia and requested Interiot to grant me access to the Admin channel. I figured that since non-admins are allowed, this would not be a ground-breaking precedent setting event and I figure I can also offer some valuable insights to the channel's usual crowd by my unbiased opinions. Besides, there was never any incidents with my involvement into the breach of anyone's trust, so there is no doubts that I no of about my integrity. Finally, I believe that generally, the community holds me in the higher regard than some of the well-known channel's regulars.

Interiot told me that he is not qualified to make such decisions and advised me to talk to you about this. Could you grant me the access? Thanks, --Irpen 17:37, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

  • At the moment I'm reconsidering my own participation there. Until I've figured that out I have no business acting as op. I can, however, grant you access to #wikipedia-en-functionaries. Best, Mackensen (talk) 17:41, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

I specifically request the Admin channel, not the functionaries one. Does your answer mean "No" or you would like to send me further to yet another chanop, just like Interiot did? --Irpen 17:43, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

  • My answer means no, because at the moment I'm not there myself and strongly considering resigning my op access. Therefore, I'm not currently adding anybody. Mackensen (talk) 17:45, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] clear:both in {{s-start}}

Hi! I noticed that you changed the template being used at Union Station (Denver) from the custom {{start RTD rail box}} to {{s-start}}{{s-rail}}{s-line}}(...). I think it's great that you are standardizing these succession boxes. And I looked at what it would take to remove the RTD-specific boxes. Recently, another editor added images on the I-25/Broadway (RTD) page, and the old RTD-specific box formatted the box so that it appears vertically below the images. That is to say: the box wouldn't align to the side of images anymore. I fixed this in the RTD-specific start box template, and then realized that style="clear:both;" was the reason that happened. Then I looked at Template talk:s-start and saw that you're actually in favor of clear:both. However, you don't list any examples of templates that were broken by removing this (or making it an option at least). Nor can I see any compelling reason to force every user of {{s-start}} to use clear:both when they could also use {{clear}} as David suggested. So, color me confused... unless you know of a better way to format the abovementioned page? Thanks! --BetaCentauri 11:58, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Hmph. Put that way I'm reconsidering my own insistence on "clear=both." You're certainly right that the use of {{clear}} accomplishes the same task and makes the formatting optional. Mind you, I don't like having succession boxes align next to images; I don't think that's proper formatting. The way I would avoid it in image-heavy, text-poor articles is by using the "gallery" tags to corral the images in their own section. That's my two cents anyway. Mackensen (talk) 01:54, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
    • Well, the thing is, not using clear=both allows making the page more compact. That way the succession boxes look like they're part of the content rather than added as an afterthought. Take, for instance, Waterloo station. This particular page has several succession boxes and sets of images. I'd argue each belongs in the section they're pertinent to. Compare Waterloo to, for example, Paddington station and Grand Central Terminal. In which case do you find the succession boxes feel like they're part of the article? Then again, maybe the style used in Exchange Place (PATH station) is better. --BetaCentauri (talk) 05:17, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:MILHIST Coordinator Elections

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are looking to elect seven coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by February 11!

Delivered by grafikbot 11:09, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you for your work on the Tube pages.

The Working Man's Barnstar
For your good work on applying the s-rail templates to LUL articles, please accept this barnstar as a token of our gratitude. -- Earle Martin [t/c] 10:42, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] West India Quay

I reverted this as trains towards Westferry go to Bank or Tower Gateway and to Poplar for Stratford. It showed the other way round before ir reverted. Simply south 15:09, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

  • Yes, I swapped the terminal types. It should reflect reality now. Mackensen (talk) 15:11, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Whilst i'm here, most trains on the Central Line do not cntinue to Woodford on the Hainault branch but terminate at Hainault. Also on the Northern Line, most trains terminate at Kennington on the Charing Cross branch. Simply south 15:15, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Okay, that should be easy to show. I thought I knew about most oddities of the Tube--apparently not! Anything else come to mind? Mackensen (talk) 15:16, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Both corrections have been made. Mackensen (talk) 15:47, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Morden peak times really, see here. I also got it slightly wrong before you make changes to the Central Line. It is quite common to terminate at Woodford on the Hainault branch but still a good deal terminate at Hainault (and less at Newbury Park, but do not worry about the latter). If this hasn't been put into effect, most Chesham trains are shuttles to Chalfont & Latimer, expanding to through trains oly at peak times. Simply south 15:54, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Well, at the moment it shows it as though there's a shuttle between Woodford and Hainault (and I know that it used to operate in that fashion). It's probably safe for the moment. I was wondering about the Chesham service--that's an easy change (in one place) and I'll make it at once. If you look at Kennington tube station, you can see the note about continuation to Oval at peak times. Mackensen (talk) 15:57, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Okay. Sorry for the mix up. Simply south 16:02, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Not at all, it's my fault for mixing up the details in the first place! Mackensen (talk) 16:03, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Above that is, trains from Chesham terminate at, lets call it C&L, and only continue to and from London at peak. I am not trying to muck you about and am sorry i have not got think quite right and have possibly not been quite clear. Simply south 16:07, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
No, I think I understand you. That is, main line trains from London terminate at C&L, with limited service between C&L and Chesham during peak times. In addition, there's a shuttle between C&L and Chesham. Do I have the thread? Mackensen (talk) 16:10, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Not quite. When they are not running through to chesham, instead they continue to Amersham. Also, it is not the mainline but the Metropolitan Line. Simply south 16:16, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Right, I was using "main line" colloquially. Okay, I think I've got it then. Mackensen (talk) 16:17, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
Could you change someting else actually? Although shown on maps etc etc etc, the DLR is actually not part of the LU, rather it is a seperate system with many things integrated. Simply south 16:24, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
I was wondering about that. Yes, that's an easy change to make as well. Mackensen (talk) 17:00, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

I am startng on this new line so that the writing does not become squaushed. Everything is fine at C&L except the shuttles terminate there not Amersham. I suppose i should clarify more. Simply south 17:04, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Boston Archdiocesan Choir School

I was trying to create a link to the Boston Archdiocesan Choir School Wikipedia page (which I assumed existed based on its continued presence on e.g. answers.com) but discovered it had been deleted (in Dec, by you). I was wondering what the rationale for deletion was. (I'm not certain that it shouldn't have been deleted, although I didn't see anything obviously wrong with the answers.com version.) 137.71.23.54 21:20, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

  • It was proposed for deletion in late November by Elonka (talk • contribs), who gave the following rationale: "No third-party references affirming notability per WP:CORP". I deleted the article as a procedural matter in early December. Mackensen (talk) 21:23, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
    • Would you please undelete it and I will attempt to remedy the issue? -137.71.23.54 13:01, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, Mackensen.  :) I'll keep an eye on it, give it some time to expand, and re-assess status later. --Elonka 18:06, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Are you online?

Hi, I want to e-mail the ArbCom about a banned editor whose one-year ban was meant to expire today (yesterday, actually, since it's now after midnight). It was extended because he continued to post on his talk page, and I think that was unjust, as I had told him he could, so, even if I'm wrong, he shouldn't be penalized for that. (Admittedly, what he posted was more of the kind of stuff that got him banned in the first place, but I really don't think he's malicious the way some other banned editors were — at least in my opinion!) I have Jayjg's e-mail address, and FloNight's but I've just looked at their contribs, and they don't seem to be online. You do seem to be. Can I send it to you through the e-mail link, and would you forward it to the rest of the committee for me, please? I'll have it ready to send one minute after getting your reply! Thanks. Musical Linguist 00:15, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

  • Sure. Mackensen (talk) 00:16, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
    • Thanks. It's sent. :-) Musical Linguist 00:19, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
      • And forwarded...Mackensen (talk) 00:19, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
        • Thank you. I've posted about it here as well, so I hope it will be sorted out, and some clarification given about banned users posting on their talk pages. I'd feel bad if someone's block got extended because I tried to help him. Cheers. Musical Linguist 10:33, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Joehazelton

Just letting you know, User:Jpgordon has deferred this case to you. Luna Santin 23:34, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Likewise with Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Danny Daniel. Thought another section might be overkill. ;) – Luna Santin (talk) 04:24, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
Lucky you. Jpgordon has deferred Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Joehazelton - another request, not the one that Luna messaged you about on Feb 9 - for you to handle. Cheers, Daniel.Bryant 06:14, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Munich U-Bahn

I just redirected the Ostbahnhof station to München Ost railway station before you got there putting up the boxes. Good work on those. Agathoclea 00:06, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Military History elections

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting seven coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of sixteen candidates. Please vote here by February 25!

Delivered by grafikbot 14:26, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Munich S-Bahn

Do you think it would be worth to use "Stammstrecke" instead of the individal linenumbers on the stations between Ostbahnhof and Pasing for the succesionboxes? Agathoclea 20:11, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

  • It's a possibility, but we'd need to have that concept defined in the Munich S-Bahn article. It would be possible to create it just as another line, but we'd also have to define all the possible termini for it. Complicated, but workable. The important question is whether this would improve the end-user experience. Mackensen (talk) 20:28, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Actually, I suppose we could just define the Stammstrecke as a line that runs between Pasing and Ostbahnhof, and have lines hive off as needed. Let me try this somewhere and see what it looks like. Mackensen (talk) 20:31, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
  • I've tested the idea at München Hauptbahnhof. The major issue, as I see it, is that the lines running over the Stammstrecke are not set in stone. The S1 and S2 veer off after Laim, for example. We can represent that with boxes, but it means that Stammstrecke is a variable. Mackensen (talk) 20:37, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
  • This defines it only until Donnersberger Brücke railway station, but we would need a proper reference anyway. I'll ask Flo if he is online on the German wiki. Anyway the situation would not be too dissimilar to the S1 which has two termini in the west. Agathoclea 22:25, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Well this defines it as Pasing - Ostbahnhof and gives a nice view of the planned 2nd Stammstrecke. Personally I would have just branched those off where they leave. It is more the optics I am concerned about with an everincreasing number of lines going through. Agathoclea 22:38, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
    • No, I think you've got a point. I've implemented this at München Hauptbahnhof (based on the idea of Pasing as the westbound end of the system). What do you think? Mackensen (talk) 22:45, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
      • I am happy with both solutions. The current one with all the endpoints works equally well as just using Pasing/Ostbahnhof. It will just mean I have to start putting up all these stations. Agathoclea 23:26, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
        • While I've got you, I'm thinking about adding boxes for BOB. Do you know if the three lines have names? Mackensen (talk) 23:29, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
          • Ah, you were just too late on that one, I went off-line. And sorry I don't know any names for that. And the German guy i was corresponding with for the U-Bahn articles has gone on an indefinete wikibreak. Agathoclea 08:19, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Veoh

Hi, there is no reason that there should be no article on Veoh. It is all over the news. Please unprotect. Thanks. frummer 20:22, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

  • please let me know. thanks frummer 20:00, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
    • I'm not familiar with the matter so I'm not inclined to act. Have you asked one of the admins who deleted/protected it? Mackensen (talk) 20:21, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
      • Mack, I'm asking you to ignore him right now. Honestly, he is trolling and this is out of the bounds of normal sanity. He's freaking out and accusing everyone of sysop tools of acting out of line. Yanksox 01:18, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Copper(II) sulfate

Hi, I saw that you reverted a paragraph in the article Copper(II) sulfate regarding use in school demonstrations. The paragraph seems legit to me, and I can confirm that the demonstration described is common in beginner's chemistry classes. You didn't specify any reason for reverting, so I thought I should just check with you what your rationale was, before I put it back, in case I might have misunderstood something. 129.240.250.4 13:35, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

  • It was added by a banned user who was trolling elsewhere. Not being an expert on chemistry I didn't want to take any chances. Feel free to add it back in. Mackensen (talk) 13:37, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WP:ANI RunedChozo thread

Should we start blocking these trollish IPs on sight, or...? --210physicq (c) 02:48, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

  • Only if they're coming from the same ISP and acting the same way. No need to get block-happy over this. Mackensen (talk) 02:49, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
    • So in short, ignore the ranting? --210physicq (c) 02:50, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
      • Indeed. It's only a problem when it interferes with the auto-archiving...Mackensen (talk) 02:51, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Checkuser block of 129.7.35.202

Hi. You blocked the range 129.7.35.0/24 earlier today with the message {{checkuserblock}}. One IP in that range - 129.7.35.202 (talk • contribs) - has asked to be unblocked. Can you review the request and respond as appropriate? When I encounter an IP requesting to be unblocked after a checkuser block, should I always simply decline the request? --BigDT 20:41, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

  • No, you should do what you just did–go and find the checkuser who did it. It's our fault, after all. I'll go review the request. Mackensen (talk) 20:44, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Haunting and Haunted Hollywood

I see you speedied these pages as copyvios. However, there is some question about this and several other articles with the same contributor. If Argonaut was not the original contributor there is page history that is not a copyvio that is worth saving. Even if Argonaut is the original contributor there is a question as to if it's a copyvio as the originating website has a license which may be semi-compatable with Wikipedia's. At any rate, a group of us are willing to re-write these. Would you please restore it? ~ ONUnicorn (Talk) 15:02, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

  • I would be willing to restore any versions which pre-date Argonaut's contributions, pending resolution of these other matters. Mackensen (talk) 15:10, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Powerrangerbuster et al

Would you confirm the suspicions I have of Wrongporch (talk • contribs • logs • block user • block log • checkuser) in this mess?—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 20:00, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gare Centrale (Montreal)

Previous station   VIA Rail   Next station
toward Aldershot
   Toronto-Montreal   Terminus
  Ottawa-Montreal  


Terminus   Montreal-Quebec  
toward Quebec
  The Ocean  
toward Halifax
  The Chaleur  
toward Gaspé
  The Saguenay  
toward Jonquière
  The Abitibi  
toward Senneterre
Previous station   Amtrak   Next station
Terminus   Adirondack  
toward New York

Aldershot (GO station) & Fallowfield railway stationare quite irrelevant, but I can't find where they are embedded in the table (box) so I can't remove them. Peter Horn 20:55, 5 February 2007 (UTC) Peter Horn 20:57, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you are asking. Can you specify exactly which line of the box you are trying to remove? --`/aksha 01:29, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
I'm talking about the phrases "toward Aldershot" and "toward Fallowfield", two phrases that do only appear in the finished version and that are meaningless & irrelevant. "Dorval" is OK. Peter Horn 02:06, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
"toward Aldershot (GO station)" & "toward Fallowfield railway station". Within this context this info is erroneous. How does one get rid of those out of "Dorval????? Peter Horn 01:40, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
It appears as though whoever made these templates thought that railroads will stay where they are for all of eternity :) Check out this page for how far this kingdom extends! I'm looking into it... ack... GracenotesT § 01:59, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
It seems like User:Mackensen created these templates. Really an awesome (if not magnificently terrifying) system. You could try asking him any questions. GracenotesT § 02:10, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
At this point, my lack of knowledge about these sorts of systems kicks in. I'm sure that Mackensen would know, though. GracenotesT § 02:17, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Hello User:Mackensen, can you help us??? Peter Horn 03:12, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, what exactly is the problem? Have the termini changed? Mackensen (talk) 03:16, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

The Montreal-Ottawa trains end/start at the "new" station in east end Ottawa (just east of the Rideau Canal). It is the station that replaced the original one in downtown Ottawa near the parliament buildings. See Ottawa Station. The Fallowfield has nothing to do with VIA's Montreal-Ottawa runs. Likewise all Montreal-Toronto runs start/end at Union Station in downtown Toronto. Aldershot is beyond Toronto. Peter Horn 01:07, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
I posted the same message with AirOdyssey (Talk in connection with Dorval (AMT) Peter Horn 01:15, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
Please have a look at the VIA Rail schedules, as per WP:V. NOT all Montreal-Toronto runs start/end at Union Station. At least one train a day continues to Aldershot. Same thing for Montreal-Ottawa. At least one train a day continues to Fallowfield. P.S. I know where the train stations in Ottawa and Toronto are, I've taken the train on the corridor more than once. That wasn't the point. AirOdyssey (Talk) 01:14, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
My appologies, I guess I havent been keeping up with the latest news. Peter Horn 01:27, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Copy and paste...Peter Horn 01:27, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] PATH infoboxes

Before you redo all the infoboxes for PATH stations, I think they should somehow denote the regular service and the late night service as the previous infoboxes did. Also, not sure I like having the next/previous stations linked at the bottom of the article. My preference is to keep them in the infobox, so one doesn't have to scroll all the way to the bottom of the page (for longer articles). I'm not sure a uniform infobox design for all metro systems is appropriate, because they don't account for unique aspects of particular systems (like late night/weekend service vs. regular service). But, if you go ahead with the change anyway, I'm not going to stand in your way much. However, if you try to make the same changes to Washington Metro station articles, I know the regular editors there will likely oppose it because the infoboxes there incorporate things specific to that system. I don't think the standard infoboxes would go over well either for New York City Subway stations. --Aude (talk) 19:37, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

  • I already talked to the Washington Metro people and consensus was to keep things as they were. I'm not planning on touching the NYC Subway either--far, far too complicated. My main desire was to present the information more clearly and concisely and to avoid duplication. Mackensen (talk) 19:41, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
  • I've altered the box on Journal Square to denote the difference of service [12]. Is this better? Mackensen (talk) 19:43, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
I'll have to think about it. It is better, though still not sure it fits all articles. I also like the look of your template. Scrolling all the way to the bottom for the next/previous stations is not ideal. It's most pertinent information, in my opinion, and a good way to link articles with eachother. While most subway station articles are short, they can develop into longer articles. In those cases, such as World Trade Center (PATH station), one would have to scroll way down. That article is really talking about four different stations that have existed there (Hudson Terminal, the original WTC PATH station, the temporary/current PATH station, and the future/permanent one) so tucking the pertinent next/previous station information into the way bottom is not ideal. Maybe you can come up with a way to make it an option of having that information part of the infobox? I'm not good enough with templates to come up with an solution for that. Is that a possibility? Regards. --Aude (talk) 19:53, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
I'll need to make a minor change to Infobox Station but yes, that's quite possible. Let me fiddle with it. Mackensen (talk) 20:09, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
I am playing around with {{Infobox_PATH_station}} - a copy of your template, but trying to add the next/previous below the "other" section. (using {{NWK-WTC2}}) I can't get it to work right, but with some time I think I could figure out what's wrong. The look of your infobox is way better, and I think agreeable to people, if it can be made to accommodate unique aspects of the system. --Aude (talk) 20:17, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
I've changed Journal Square to use Template:S-note (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) to convey the difference in service. Still at the bottom though. Mackensen (talk) 20:34, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Here's what I figured out so far: User:AudeVivere/Sandbox3 - it shows just one line but could show multiple lines and service. --Aude (talk) 20:36, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Two lines now: User:AudeVivere/Sandbox3. That's all I'll do now with it. Your suggestions or ideas would help. I think something like this would be agreeable among users working on Washington Metro station articles. The infoboxes for both systems have traditionally been done the same. --Aude (talk) 20:44, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

(indent) I've got a working example now at User:Mackensen/Pathtest. This allows the code formerly at the bottom to simply be included within the infobox. Thoughts (I cribbed from the Metro template, which has similar functionality)? Mackensen (talk) 20:54, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

You're not planning to touch the New York City subway? That's it, I'm unwatching this page; I just read it for the subway coverage. Newyorkbrad 21:01, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

  • Now, if I could get broad-based support for bringing s-rail/s-line to the NYC subway that would be one thing, but the evolved system over there appears quite complicated. Mackensen (talk) 21:04, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
I think that will work for PATH. Not to nit-pick, but the only minor thing that I would do different (if possible and not too much work) is maybe to tweak the colors. It's not a big deal though. Thanks for modifying the template. It will likely work for Washington Metro, though let's try it here and we can get feedback from others. And then, who knows it might then be possible for NYCS. I have worked some with them too. --Aude (talk) 21:08, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
The line colors or the template colors? The former is changed easily, the latter I'd be loath to do since it would affect templates all over the place. Mackensen (talk) 21:10, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
I was thinking the template colors. Having the grey "Services" heading and then repeat the grey right under it isn't ideal. But, it's a nit-pick detail. Let's stick with what we have now. --Aude (talk) 21:14, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Tigers fan?

I can't believe I'm arguing about Fuzzy Zoeller evidence with a Tigers fan. I love the Tigers!

That being said, I don't think you understand my point about the Zoeller case. They are going after someone who RESTORED edits in December that were initially CREATED in August. Where can we see the evidence of the identity of the August editor? How can you not think this is important? --72.94.164.52 05:06, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to jump in here -- I've been watching this go on for about an hour now -- and say that it isn't that the vandalism is unimportant; it's that you keep bringing up discussion of it on a page where it doesn't belong. The article's Talk page is for discussion relevant to improving the article itself, not for discussion of who edited it six months ago.--chris.lawson 05:10, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
Ah, but Chris, when I learned that lesson and tried to further improve the Discussion page by removing content that does not contribute to the improvement of the article itself, that edit was reverted. Seems that there's a cabal or hive-mind in action here. So, it is only too easy to also infer that this mentality would extend to a cover-up of Wikimedia Foundation's role in hiding the GFDL evidence from its own community. --72.94.164.52 05:13, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
Please explain to me how this edit helped to further improve the article's Talk page.--chris.lawson 05:20, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
Chris, you may seek to get some more sleep, or something. That edit helped to tighten up the Discussion page, so that the content would be more focused on issues that directly improved the article itself. It is no aid to junk up a Discussion page with personal "Thank yous" to other editors. If you can't see that at needless fluff, I'm sorry I can't help you further. --72.94.164.52 05:37, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
The proper thing to do in such a case, rather than removing six-month-old inactive discussion, would be to archive the discussion instead of deleting selected snippets of it (especially when you remove context for replies that you did not delete). But you're obviously just here to argue and throw around accusations of "hive mind" and conspiracy, so you should probably go find someone else to argue with.--chris.lawson 05:40, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
I'm actually here to try to find out who made the initial comments in August 2006 about Fuzzy Zoeller that were truly libelous. It's when that simple inquiry gets edited out of existence that I begin to liken Wikipedia's editors to "hive mind" conspirators. Cart before the horse, Chris. It's a basic principle of a logical argument. --72.94.164.52 05:54, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Hey, Mack, long time no... talk page dif. FWIW, pulling that comment off the talk page was the right call. Cheers, JDoorjam JDiscourse 07:13, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] S-line

I actually think I just figured it out. At first I thought the S-line/left/x-line was for masking names.. but now I see that its just for termini. So, I got rid of the redirect on the right one (I was basing it off of London's LUL) and just put a single variable into the #switch. Is that how it works? -- drumguy8800 C T 18:40, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Basically. Name masking is done with stations. The configuration of the /direction/x-line depends on the shape of the line. Like, if you've got a line shaped like a horseshoe left/right is irrelevant so you just work with one template. DART, however, appears to be pretty straightforward. Here's how I'd do it. Take west/east as your left/right base. The "left" end of the red line is "Westmoreland," the right end is "Parker Road." Therefore, Template:S-line/DART left/Red should just contain Westmoreland, because there's no ambiguity. You don't need a switch statement at all. Ditto with Blue: Ledbetter on the left, Downtown Garland on the right. Hope this helps, Mackensen (talk) 18:45, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
Hey thanks for having my back on all these edits! drumguy8800 C T 19:40, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
You're most welcome. You should've seen it when I converted the entire London Underground--seemed like I made a typo every other station! Mackensen (talk) 19:43, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Oh dear!

Is it concratulations or commiserations that are in order? Pity for the time taken away from the good work you are doing now, but I have every confidence in your ability/insight at ArbCom. Agathoclea 23:25, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

I'll go with congratulations, Mackensen, I am sure you will function well as a member of the Arbitration Committee. Prodego talk 23:27, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
What are you smoking? Thatcher131 00:23, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
Congratulations from me as well. Musical Linguist 00:37, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
Joining the chorus... May this service to the community be kind on your nerves. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 01:03, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Trains

I'm creating some new infoboxes for stations along the Merseyrail line: advice is appreciated! --sunstar nettalk 14:15, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

I had thought of there being a template for all the major operators (e.g. Northern Line) in the UK, but since I realize this might be controversial, I'll leave a note at the talk page. --sunstar nettalk 14:23, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merseyrail

Btw, Merseyrail is actually part of our national rail network. It is not a seperate metro. Simply south 23:11, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

  • I'm well aware of that. Mackensen (talk) 23:11, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
  • I suppose you could stick {{s-note|text=[[National Rail]]}} at the top of the box (see below), but I think it's pretty clear as-is. Mackensen (talk) 23:13, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
  National Rail  
    • I suppose you already know that we no longer have a national single company of sorts. Simply south 23:16, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
      • Yes, I've kept up with the privatisation as best I can, though it certainly made a muddle of things. Since the various "lines" are operated by distinct companies–by distinct I mean they rent/lease their own rolling stock and have their own liveries–it makes sense to me to organise the boxes as such. It's not that significant a change from the earlier boxes either--just moving the TOC from inside the line box to a header above the line box(es). Mackensen (talk) 23:19, 24 February 2007 (UTC)


Hi. Just wondering why the Merseyrail stations template that you've cleared from Sandhills railway station is 'superfluous' per your edit comment. Please can you advise? Many thanks 13:57, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

  • It's unnecessary for any station article to link to every other station in a particular geographic area, when all such stations are one or two clicks away through a less obtrusive method. The article already links to neighbouring stations and reachable termini. Additionally, through service route links and categorisation, you're no more than two clicks away from every other station in the region. The user, meanwhile, is presented the most relevant links first, and in a fashion that does not present too much information in one place. Best, Mackensen (talk) 15:09, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
    • makes sense now. Thanks. Grblundell 16:23, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] You may want to look at this...

I know that on Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Danny Daniel, you said that the evidence was inconclusive, but you may want to look at the page Jibbert Michart Macoy. It was created by Jibbity, but it's similar to the misinformation added by Danny Daniel's confirmed sockpuppets ([13], [14], [15]). Squirepants101 16:49, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Even Jibbity's username is based on this "Jibbert Mchart Macoy" character. Squirepants101 16:51, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/CBDrunkerson

Is this completed yet, or is it still to be kept active per you for further input? Cheers, Daniel.Bryant 01:43, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Geni

Do you have a list of Geni's prior indiscretions? I searched around and couldn't find anything and I have only some fairly vague memories. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 23:55, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

  • Off the top of my head he's revert-warred over the site notice repeatedly, and revert-warred over the arbcom elections last December. I'd have to scrounge for the specific diffs. It was also warring that caused Ed Poor to desysop him the first time (a dubious precedent, given that Ed himself was desysoped for it, but noteworthy all the same). I'll hunt around. Mackensen (talk) 23:57, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Here's the protection war over Wikipedia:Arbitration Committee Elections December 2006/Candidate statements/Questions for Paul August:

  1. SlimVirgin reverts Cyde
  2. SlimVirgin protects the page
  3. Geni unprotects the page
  4. Geni reverts SlimVirgin
  5. SlimVirgin reverts Geni
  6. SlimVirgin protects the page
  7. Geni unprotects the page
  8. Geni reverts SlimVirgin

Here's Geni revert-warring with Anthere over the site notice, in January of 2006:

  1. [16]
  2. [17]
  3. [18]

And another revert-war over the site notice, this time in July/August of 2006:

  1. [19]
  2. [20]

Finally, there's the time he undid protect on an OFFICE-protected article without consulting Danny, back in March of 2006. This occasioned his second temporary de-sysoping (c.f. [21]). This may seem like old business but I dislike the pattern, and I don't view arbcom's failure to address the matter previously as an adequate justification for letting it slide this time. Mackensen (talk) 00:15, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I think I'll add this to the case in some form. Also, I would like to suggest that we remove the "after 60 days" clause from the Geni remedy you have proposed. It serves no purpose since the odds of an appeal or RFA succeeding during that time are exactly zero, but the Kremlinologists are reading some sort of meaning into the fact that Geni's remedy is putatively harsher than Yanksox'. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 12:48, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
No objection from me. Mackensen (talk) 13:27, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

On a slightly related note, is it possible to encourage members to indicate their first and second choice when there are multiple variations of a proposed remedy? It gets hard to follow which variation is the most preferred. NoSeptember 13:34, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

the clerks will usually bug the arbitrators if we can't figure it out during the "motion to close" phase. Thatcher131 14:03, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Finnish railway stations...

Seeing as I have somehow elected to cover almost the entire Finnish railway network on the English Wikipedia, do you think I should join the WikiProject Trains? JIP | Talk 19:48, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

  • Probably worth doing. Just add your name to the list. Mackensen (talk) 19:51, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] User talk:Jkammert

Appears to be affected by a schoolblock you set a few months back, with "serious vandalism from a banned user; please contact before unblocking." I'm not familiar with whatever Bad Things happened, there, but any advice you could provide would be appreciated. – Luna Santin (talk) 20:05, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

  • Oh, Very Bad Things indeed. I was about a revert away from calling the school district. Anyways, the range looks clean, so go ahead and unblock and let's see what happens. Mackensen (talk) 20:38, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue XII - February 2007

The February 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.

Delivered by grafikbot 15:44, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Positioning of WCML template

I've partially reverted your edit to Milton Keynes Central railway station. Who wants to see a screenful of white space before the article starts? Who would even know to scroll down to find any content. I assume good faith but I don't understand why you thought that this would work? --Concrete Cowboy 13:18, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

  • Well, I didn't get a screen full of white space, but what you've done now accomplished what I intended. What browser/platform are you using? Mackensen (talk) 13:27, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
    • IE7 (IE6 does the same). [I should clarify - I mean "screenful of white space except for the Infobox and the list of WCML stations". I get both templates first down the RHS, then the text starts]. Nuneaton railway station is strange: I see the first para, then white space (apart from the template contents), then the rest of the intro and rest of the article as normal. --Concrete Cowboy 17:21, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
      • That's really weird. I'm running Opera on XP and it looks fine. Mackensen (talk) 17:30, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jimbo's whereabouts

"It is my understanding that Jimbo is presently traveling in India and may not have ready means of communication at his disposal." -- buried deep within the Essjay RFC.

You might want to move that right up top, as a comment under Jimbo's view, where most people will actually see it. Derex 02:16, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] National Rail

Why have you apparently taken it upon yourself to convert EVERY UK railway station page? Did I miss a memo? Or are you the self-appointed template converter? I fail to see why the template as seen below is apparently so offensive to you that you feel you need to change every single edition of it.

Preceding station National Rail Following station
New Cross   Southeastern
Hayes Line		   Lewisham

I look forward to an explanation. Hammersfan 04/03/07, 23.20 GMT

  • Because I enjoy editing Wikipedia as much as the next man and thought that the new templates constituted an overall improvement. I have worked with other editors on these and other railway articles and found broad support for these templates. I confess that I do not understand why you have come here with such belligerence. Best, Mackensen (talk) 23:24, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
I responded on his user page, and he did me the courtesy of replying on mine. For the record, I agree with him. These VT templates on every station article are too big, too obsessive and likely to discourage readers from continuing to the end of the article. --Concrete Cowboy 12:39, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
(I also responded on his, if you'll note, telling him that I'd responded here. Where he got the idea I didn't respond at all I have no idea) As it happens, I've been quite discouraged by the reception I've received thus far and I'm bogged down handling arbitration matters for the forseeable future. I have no interest in pursuing the matter. I believe I've been reverted everywhere, so we're back where we started. Best, Mackensen (talk) 13:16, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Happy Spread-the-funny and-slighty-random-love day!

:) pschemp (talk) 01:29, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
:) pschemp (talk) 01:29, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Another present for you, courtesy of Jpgordon

Wikipedia:Requests for checkuser/Case/Danny Daniel. Cheers, Daniel Bryant 10:59, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Heads up

Tobias Conradi has added you to his list because of a revert you made. Fame and fortune will soon come your way. - CHAIRBOY (☎) 14:27, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hello Dear

Hi ,i just deleting these artilces [[22]] and every time deleting those are again poping up.see my contribution you will understand.Please Help me what to do.Khalidkhoso 03:32, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

  • You're editing through a proxy by the looks of things, and the proxy is substituting html special characters. I'd strongly suggest that if you're using a proxy on purpose cease doing so; if you're not then change your computing environment. Mackensen (talk) 03:41, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
I work from my office and i work in shifts ,so i do not know who uses this system and why.i do not use proxy,it is from local admin to use it, so I can not change there policies I am just work for money here.You guide me what to do.this is 1st time i am facing this much problem.Khalidkhoso 03:55, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../m/a/c/User_talk%7EMackensen_Archive13_867e.html"

Static Wikipedia (no images)

aa - ab - af - ak - als - am - an - ang - ar - arc - as - ast - av - ay - az - ba - bar - bat_smg - bcl - be - be_x_old - bg - bh - bi - bm - bn - bo - bpy - br - bs - bug - bxr - ca - cbk_zam - cdo - ce - ceb - ch - cho - chr - chy - co - cr - crh - cs - csb - cu - cv - cy - da - de - diq - dsb - dv - dz - ee - el - eml - en - eo - es - et - eu - ext - fa - ff - fi - fiu_vro - fj - fo - fr - frp - fur - fy - ga - gan - gd - gl - glk - gn - got - gu - gv - ha - hak - haw - he - hi - hif - ho - hr - hsb - ht - hu - hy - hz - ia - id - ie - ig - ii - ik - ilo - io - is - it - iu - ja - jbo - jv - ka - kaa - kab - kg - ki - kj - kk - kl - km - kn - ko - kr - ks - ksh - ku - kv - kw - ky - la - lad - lb - lbe - lg - li - lij - lmo - ln - lo - lt - lv - map_bms - mdf - mg - mh - mi - mk - ml - mn - mo - mr - mt - mus - my - myv - mzn - na - nah - nap - nds - nds_nl - ne - new - ng - nl - nn - no - nov - nrm - nv - ny - oc - om - or - os - pa - pag - pam - pap - pdc - pi - pih - pl - pms - ps - pt - qu - quality - rm - rmy - rn - ro - roa_rup - roa_tara - ru - rw - sa - sah - sc - scn - sco - sd - se - sg - sh - si - simple - sk - sl - sm - sn - so - sr - srn - ss - st - stq - su - sv - sw - szl - ta - te - tet - tg - th - ti - tk - tl - tlh - tn - to - tpi - tr - ts - tt - tum - tw - ty - udm - ug - uk - ur - uz - ve - vec - vi - vls - vo - wa - war - wo - wuu - xal - xh - yi - yo - za - zea - zh - zh_classical - zh_min_nan - zh_yue - zu -

Static Wikipedia 2007 (no images)

aa - ab - af - ak - als - am - an - ang - ar - arc - as - ast - av - ay - az - ba - bar - bat_smg - bcl - be - be_x_old - bg - bh - bi - bm - bn - bo - bpy - br - bs - bug - bxr - ca - cbk_zam - cdo - ce - ceb - ch - cho - chr - chy - co - cr - crh - cs - csb - cu - cv - cy - da - de - diq - dsb - dv - dz - ee - el - eml - en - eo - es - et - eu - ext - fa - ff - fi - fiu_vro - fj - fo - fr - frp - fur - fy - ga - gan - gd - gl - glk - gn - got - gu - gv - ha - hak - haw - he - hi - hif - ho - hr - hsb - ht - hu - hy - hz - ia - id - ie - ig - ii - ik - ilo - io - is - it - iu - ja - jbo - jv - ka - kaa - kab - kg - ki - kj - kk - kl - km - kn - ko - kr - ks - ksh - ku - kv - kw - ky - la - lad - lb - lbe - lg - li - lij - lmo - ln - lo - lt - lv - map_bms - mdf - mg - mh - mi - mk - ml - mn - mo - mr - mt - mus - my - myv - mzn - na - nah - nap - nds - nds_nl - ne - new - ng - nl - nn - no - nov - nrm - nv - ny - oc - om - or - os - pa - pag - pam - pap - pdc - pi - pih - pl - pms - ps - pt - qu - quality - rm - rmy - rn - ro - roa_rup - roa_tara - ru - rw - sa - sah - sc - scn - sco - sd - se - sg - sh - si - simple - sk - sl - sm - sn - so - sr - srn - ss - st - stq - su - sv - sw - szl - ta - te - tet - tg - th - ti - tk - tl - tlh - tn - to - tpi - tr - ts - tt - tum - tw - ty - udm - ug - uk - ur - uz - ve - vec - vi - vls - vo - wa - war - wo - wuu - xal - xh - yi - yo - za - zea - zh - zh_classical - zh_min_nan - zh_yue - zu -

Static Wikipedia 2006 (no images)

aa - ab - af - ak - als - am - an - ang - ar - arc - as - ast - av - ay - az - ba - bar - bat_smg - bcl - be - be_x_old - bg - bh - bi - bm - bn - bo - bpy - br - bs - bug - bxr - ca - cbk_zam - cdo - ce - ceb - ch - cho - chr - chy - co - cr - crh - cs - csb - cu - cv - cy - da - de - diq - dsb - dv - dz - ee - el - eml - eo - es - et - eu - ext - fa - ff - fi - fiu_vro - fj - fo - fr - frp - fur - fy - ga - gan - gd - gl - glk - gn - got - gu - gv - ha - hak - haw - he - hi - hif - ho - hr - hsb - ht - hu - hy - hz - ia - id - ie - ig - ii - ik - ilo - io - is - it - iu - ja - jbo - jv - ka - kaa - kab - kg - ki - kj - kk - kl - km - kn - ko - kr - ks - ksh - ku - kv - kw - ky - la - lad - lb - lbe - lg - li - lij - lmo - ln - lo - lt - lv - map_bms - mdf - mg - mh - mi - mk - ml - mn - mo - mr - mt - mus - my - myv - mzn - na - nah - nap - nds - nds_nl - ne - new - ng - nl - nn - no - nov - nrm - nv - ny - oc - om - or - os - pa - pag - pam - pap - pdc - pi - pih - pl - pms - ps - pt - qu - quality - rm - rmy - rn - ro - roa_rup - roa_tara - ru - rw - sa - sah - sc - scn - sco - sd - se - sg - sh - si - simple - sk - sl - sm - sn - so - sr - srn - ss - st - stq - su - sv - sw - szl - ta - te - tet - tg - th - ti - tk - tl - tlh - tn - to - tpi - tr - ts - tt - tum - tw - ty - udm - ug - uk - ur - uz - ve - vec - vi - vls - vo - wa - war - wo - wuu - xal - xh - yi - yo - za - zea - zh - zh_classical - zh_min_nan - zh_yue - zu

Static Wikipedia February 2008 (no images)

aa - ab - af - ak - als - am - an - ang - ar - arc - as - ast - av - ay - az - ba - bar - bat_smg - bcl - be - be_x_old - bg - bh - bi - bm - bn - bo - bpy - br - bs - bug - bxr - ca - cbk_zam - cdo - ce - ceb - ch - cho - chr - chy - co - cr - crh - cs - csb - cu - cv - cy - da - de - diq - dsb - dv - dz - ee - el - eml - en - eo - es - et - eu - ext - fa - ff - fi - fiu_vro - fj - fo - fr - frp - fur - fy - ga - gan - gd - gl - glk - gn - got - gu - gv - ha - hak - haw - he - hi - hif - ho - hr - hsb - ht - hu - hy - hz - ia - id - ie - ig - ii - ik - ilo - io - is - it - iu - ja - jbo - jv - ka - kaa - kab - kg - ki - kj - kk - kl - km - kn - ko - kr - ks - ksh - ku - kv - kw - ky - la - lad - lb - lbe - lg - li - lij - lmo - ln - lo - lt - lv - map_bms - mdf - mg - mh - mi - mk - ml - mn - mo - mr - mt - mus - my - myv - mzn - na - nah - nap - nds - nds_nl - ne - new - ng - nl - nn - no - nov - nrm - nv - ny - oc - om - or - os - pa - pag - pam - pap - pdc - pi - pih - pl - pms - ps - pt - qu - quality - rm - rmy - rn - ro - roa_rup - roa_tara - ru - rw - sa - sah - sc - scn - sco - sd - se - sg - sh - si - simple - sk - sl - sm - sn - so - sr - srn - ss - st - stq - su - sv - sw - szl - ta - te - tet - tg - th - ti - tk - tl - tlh - tn - to - tpi - tr - ts - tt - tum - tw - ty - udm - ug - uk - ur - uz - ve - vec - vi - vls - vo - wa - war - wo - wuu - xal - xh - yi - yo - za - zea - zh - zh_classical - zh_min_nan - zh_yue - zu