User talk:Bcorr/Archive 200408
Archived talk from August 2004
• Vandalism by 62.252.0.4
[edit]Unfortunately the block that you put on this IP address hit me. I have reported the vandalism to abuse@ntlworld.com, and if you notice actions by similar IP addresses, can you please report the abuse rather than blocking the address. Cheers. User:Noisy
My I unblock 62.252.0.4? Noisy e-mailed me about the problem, saying that his editing abilities had been disrupted. --Merovingian✍Talk 08:51, Aug 1, 2004 (UTC)
- Thanks for taking care of this -- I'm afraid I was only able to edit via my PDA on Saturday and Sunday, and I couldn't get the unblock page to load properly -- and then Monday and Tuesday I couldn't even get onto the web, so I apologize for the delay and the lack of a response. Thanks, BCorr|Брайен 16:05, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)
• Nice to meet you in Boston
[edit]As promised, I have returned to Wikipedia activity.
Ortolan88 01:24, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Thanks Tom -- it was great to meet you too -- I'm glad you're back! BCorr|Брайен 16:05, 4 Aug 2004 (UTC)
• LJ -- ja!
[edit]Hiya; this question may seem a bit out of left field, but I was wondering if you have an account on LiveJournal? - Hephaestos|§ 14:00, 5 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Hi Heph -- yeah -- I just made one yesterday -- doubt I'll use it much to do anything other than leave folks messages.... long time, no see!
• Ukraina
[edit]Well done at Ukraine; I hope that, in the future, you can refrain from acting upon your initial impulse to revert -- the article is much improved by editing and cooperation. Lirath Q. Pynnor
- I agree Lir - thanks for the note. I'm a bit too sensitive about Russian & Cyrillic things. Peace, BCorr|Брайен 14:59, 6 Aug 2004 (UTC)
The timestamp was frozen, stuck at 15:22. If you tried to add tildes, User:Cyp already tried that way back in December (see the page history). It's possible it was just my end having trouble, but it did look completely broken. Also, if you're going to add an emdash to a template, it should be entered as &mdash (with a semicolon on the end) to make it browser-friendly. Hope this clears things up. Regards, -- Hadal 16:57, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)
• Mediation is fine...
[edit]Mediation is fine with me. I just want to get this resolved. Stirling Newberry 23:05, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Great! Thanks for the quick reply. I'll note that @ RfM and work on it while I'm away if at all possible. BCorr|Брайен 23:39, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)
• Bugzilla issues
[edit]¤ Hey, guess what? You're wrong!
[edit]Umm, I'm not really sure what you're talking about, I did mean that message to go to Fabiform. User:68.225.191.99
¤ Fabiform and 68.225.191.99
[edit]I suspect this is another instance of the "anon gets wrong person's talk page" bug (bugzilla). -- Finlay McWalter | Talk 11:36, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)
¤ What? James I of England who?
[edit]I just got this: (and some more, in a letter from you)
James I of England is at that name for a reason. Redirects were set up for James VI. Wikipedia policy does not allow monarchs to be listed for two areas. Instead redirects are used with the monarch placed at the most internationally known title, eg. Wilhelm II is in as Wilhelm II of Germany, not Wilhelm II of Prussia. George V is George V of the United Kingdom, not George V of the United Kingdom, Ireland, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, etc. See Wikipedia:Naming conventions (names and titles) for the agreed rules used. FearÉIREANN 19:40 14 Jul 2003 (UTC)
Honestly, I have absolutely -no- idea what you are talking about. I think you have got the wrong guy. I have only written one thing on Wikipedia, about a fan-made Dreamcast shooter, and that's as far from James I of England as you can come.
- The message you cited probably wasn't intended for you, and it also came from another user -- User:Jtdirl (who signs things "FearÉIREANN") -- not from me. There is some sort of software bug or glitch in the system that they are trying to work out. A number of people have had similar experiences. Thanks, BCorr|Брайен 16:53, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)
• Bureaucrat status
[edit]You are now one of the Wikipedia:Bureaucrats. Welcome to the bureaucracy! Best wishes, -- Infrogmation 21:27, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Congratulations. Although I've stopped voting on RfA, you have my full support. I'm sure you'll be a great bureaucrat. :) Angela. 22:35, Aug 23, 2004 (UTC)
• While you were gone...
[edit]Mediation completed successfully (see [[1]]).
Welcome back! --Uncle Ed 19:20, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Thanks Ed -- I appreciate your work on this one. Hope all is well! BCorr|Брайен 16:53, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)
• While I was gone...
[edit]Yeah, I miss some people here, and you are amongst those... but I can't manage everything :-( I had to stop doing anything here for personal survival :-) I hope you are well :-) stop by irc from time to time. I am horribly busy, in particular because I found a house ! Just currently trying to negociate with banks... I should move during october (I hope offtime wont be too long...). I keep an eye here, and on you ;-)
- I've also been away a lot recently, but not as much as you. Je pense que it is wonderful that tu as trouver une maison nouvelle -- est-ce à la même ville? I am doing very well -- tout continuent en accordance avec ma plan pour la domination de la monde :-) [just kidding!] Good to hear from you! BCorr|Брайен 21:20, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)
• Vandalism of Jew
[edit]Hi Brian, thanks for protecting Jew at the auspicious moment. You must have picked up my cry for help :-). I will summarise the present problems on Talk:Jew. JFW | T@lk 17:41, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Actually it's just on my watchlist and it was at the top for quite a while and I noticed the nasty edit comments...and thanks for the note. BCorr|Брайен 17:45, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Actually, I believe he turned to mediation because Jwrosenzweig suggested that on the RfC listing page. If the Mediation Committee believes this is not an appropriate case for mediation and doesn't want to get involved, I can accept that, but I have no particular objection to mediation and would be willing to try pursuing both avenues of dispute resolution simultaneously. --Michael Snow 19:15, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Bcorr, sorry I didn't communicate to you. I personally do believe this is a ripe time for mediation -- Grinch has done some pretty odd things, but it's early in his career, and rather than identifying others as outright enemies to be overthrown, he's simply upset because he doesn't understand the nature of the complaints (and honestly, doesn't really understand the site). I think if the dispute goes on a while, well, that's how we "make" trolls here. Granted, you have to arrive with certain personality traits that make you susceptible to being "made". But still, here's a guy I can see becoming a real thorn in someone's side....or possibly a good contributor whose silliness on arrival is eventually forgotten. I don't know what to do with him -- my time is limited and mostly taken up with arbitration. There's a request for comment, and right now he doesn't know what that means. I feel (and you may certainly disagree with me) that mediation might have more major success stories if editors were willing to go to you earlier when disputes are still disputes and not the festering grudges that a lot of our conflicts become. So I was thinking this was a good idea. I'm sorry if it isn't. I've advised the grinch to contact the AMA for help in understanding and facilitating the conversations he has with Michael Snow, and I've also suggested that a mediator might be interested in helping if he approached them privately. I do still feel personally that there is no real obstacle to the MC's "officially" taking the dispute on, but I respect your wishes, and understand that you're far more aware of the MC's workload and policies than I am. Thanks for not chewing me out for my suggestion. :-) Jwrosenzweig 21:35, 26 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Thanks for your thoughtful note -- at this point I'm still hesitant, but I think the the MC could take this on if people really do feel that this is ripe for mediation. We do have a lot on our plate at the moment, but we can stretch ourselves a bit more if necessary. Thanks again, BCorr|Брайен 20:53, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)
• Bush
[edit]Well, there are two contrary takes. One, yes you're of course right that reverting right after protection risks restarting the conflict. But on the flip side protection on a certain version does not mean that version "wins" and should be kept afterwards. I'll start by restoring some of kb's edits, although I doubt it will help. VV 20:35, 27 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- Hi VV -- thanks for the reply and for taking my suggestion to heart. I will say, though, that I don't believe in m:The Wrong Version and that protections doesn't mean a temporary "win" for "one side." It's just freezing the state of the article temporarily (and ideally, arbitrarily, although I know this isn't always true in practice), and that int is only for a very short period in the overall life of the article. And overall, I don't believe that a certain version should be kept afterwards -- just that it should be edited by all involved in a spirit of collaboration, and that even if one editor refuses to behave that way, others should "turn the other cheek" whilst simultaneously widening the groups of people working on the articl, so that it doesn't remain a 1:1 conflict.
• Goodbye
[edit]Hi. I am resigning from the mediation committee. Danny 01:30, 28 Aug 2004 (UTC)
• Message received
[edit]Thank you for your update. In the past, Neutrality actually deleted evidence that I entered in an Arb case, so I am quite nervous about him deleting me. Rex071404 17:01, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)
• User:CVA and User:Halibutt
[edit]Could you possibly become a mediator between me and User:CVA? The matter is a bit complex since the user in question declines any contact with anyone and is very consistent in erasing all traces of the questions we ask him (not to mention ignoring the talk pages). I don't really have a clue what could be done in order to encourage CVA to provide his sources when asked and take part in either Wikipedia:Requests for comment/CVA or current mediation. Do you have any clues and could you help me?
The situation is really strange since at times User:CVA is a vandal and engages in revert wars, while at other instances he is a great and valuable wikipedian with enormous knowledge on British special forces in WWII. I don't want to start the arbitration yet since perhaps his problems with us (namely me and other users involved in Talk:Partisan and rfc process) could be solved in a different way. [[User:Halibutt|Halibutt]] 20:24, Aug 31, 2004 (UTC)
- I took the liberty of reading the reply by User:CVA (posted below). It is extensive and quite informative, thanks for your effort. Too bad it arrived so late, if User:CVA posted it two months ago it would spare us lots of effort and stress. From what he (they?) have written I assume that User:CVA will not engage in other revert wars (the last of which happened on August 28th [2]) and will not vandalise [3] my user page any more. That's fine.
- If that is true then mediation is no longer needed. However, I'm afraid that CVA might continue to use racist remarks [4], which is not what wikiedia needs. Also, I'm afraid that, judging both from his (their?) behaviour and the reply posted below, User:CVA might continue to be a problem user since stating sources when asked is one of the basic things when preparing a good, NPOV wikipedia article. Failing to provide any sources yet engaging in a revert war is not what wikipedians should do. But let's hope User:CVA now has read the guidelines and will act accordingly.
- However, I still demand apologies for suggesting that Poles are wrong because we are Poles. This is not right and this is not the behaviour wikipedians should accept. If User:CVA fulfills my plea I will be more than happy to withdraw all my other objections. [[User:Halibutt|Halibutt]] 02:09, Sep 1, 2004 (UTC)