User talk:Seth Ilys/Archive:2004-Winter

Hello Seth, welcome to Wikipedia. Here's some tips you might useful:

• If you made any edits before you got an account, you might be interested in assigning those to your username.
• You can sign your name using three tildes, like ~~~. If you use four, you can add a datestamp too.
• If you ever think a page or image should be deleted, please list it at the votes for deletion page. There is also a votes for undeletion page if you want to retrieve something that you think should not have been deleted.

Other useful links are how to edit a page, how to write a great article, naming conventions, Manual of Style. You should read our policies at some point too.

If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian!

Angela. 14:27, 22 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Anthony

Seth, as you can see he is now harassing KingTurtle as he has done to me for a while. Can you help to stop this? Please, this must end, he incites edit wars and continues to harass members. Please help! ChrisDJackson 00:14, 11 Mar 2004 (UTC)

FIFA list

Just click on the following link for now. List of 125 Greatest Living Footballers JB82 16:52, Mar 6, 2004 (UTC)

Actually, ignore the above message. Click on List of 100 Greatest Living Footballers (I voted the original 125 list for deletion just now...) JB82 17:01, Mar 6, 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Fame and importance

Please come vote! Jack 11:08, 29 Jan 2004 (UTC)

The Blue Marble

Good work on your "Blue Marble" article! I added a link to it from Apollo 17.

However I'm less sure about having it on List of artworks... I notice you added the category "photography" there. Perhaps having a seperate "Famous photographs" article might be better? -- Infrogmation 20:00, 31 Jan 2004 (UTC)

I added some discussion at Talk:List of artworks. Your thoughts? Cheers, -- Infrogmation 20:05, 31 Jan 2004 (UTC)

---

Good idea on the general assembly members. Much props. Meelar 05:58, 2 Feb 2004 (UTC)

---

Dude, you sure are adding a while lot of new stub articles. Come on man, we already passed 200,000 and you DIDN'T MAKE IT!!! :)

• That was a joke, sir. Fennec 06:08, 2 Feb 2004 (UTC)

---

Regarding List of Iowa rivers--Never mind Dysprosia. Anyone would answer her own question "where is iowa?" with her edit obviously is mean-spirited and snide and not worth arguing with.--Decumanus 05:41, 7 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Seth I'm sorry if you took that badly, I didn't mean to be snappy or mean spirited or anything, it's just every day I go through articles and they're missing somethings and you get a bit annoyed when things don't look right all the time. I hope I didn't offend you too much. I try and keep all my edit summaries neutral as well as my edits but sometimes...

If you wish to change things back, that's okay.

With unreserved apologies Dysprosia 06:25, 8 Feb 2004 (UTC)

---

Hi Seth Ilys, I've nominated you for adminship. Please respond there if you accept or refuse this nomination. silsor 22:46, Feb 10, 2004 (UTC)

Adminship Nomination

Seth Ilys has been around since December 20, 2003 and has made over 2000 edits. My only grudge against him is the stub spamming during the 200000 article marathon, but they are legitimate articles. He looks dedicated. I am nominating him for adminship because of his comments in Wikipedia talk:Candidates for speedy deletion. I think that a hard-working user should become an administrator when they start running into barriers in the course of their work. silsor 22:42, Feb 10, 2004 (UTC)

I accept the nomination. In defense of my introduction of a significant number of stubs at the beginning of February: I had been working on members of the North Carolina General Assembly during the day preceding the 200k mark, and I intentionally withheld submitting the stubs until after the milestone was reached (as can be verified by the times of submission). - Seth Ilys 22:50, 10 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I withdraw my acceptance of the nomination; I decline to hold authority in dubious or secretive organizational structures, and the lack of transparency codified by the Arbitration Committee's stated policies qualifies Wikipedia as such. -- Seth Ilys 22:59, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)

But adminship isn't a position of authority. silsor 00:04, Feb 16, 2004 (UTC)

As an administrator, I'd be in a position to uphold or act against decisions of the committee. To support, or to take no action with regards to their rulings would constitute approval of secret deliberation, to act against them would be a violation of trust against those who believed I would be a socially acceptable admin (which means upholding widely accepted policies). I've seen first-hand the terrible abuses that secret organizations and their protectors have brought, and I simply will not be a part of it or anything that smells of it. It's just that simple. -- Seth Ilys 01:39, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Er....the point of being an admin is to help keep the database clean. There is no glory in being an admin. The point involves daily, weekly and monthly maintenance. The key responsibilities granted to admins are deleting/undeleting and protecting/unprotecting. The bottomline is admins are janitors. It is a thankless job, really. Kingturtle 02:05, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Then perhaps it's better off that I not be an admin. Honestly, the only thing I ever imagined doing with admin powers is updating the main page. Fighting vandalism and setting policy just doesn't appeal to me; building content does. -- Seth Ilys 02:36, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)

If all you would want to do with admin abilities is to be able to update the main page, that's fine. There's no need to even promise to actually use any admin abilities when getting adminship... Κσυπ Cyp   09:21, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Seth, if updating main page is all you want to do, i assure you, you are not going to run into "the committee" you refer to. Kingturtle 17:28, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)

• Unsure. He's only been here since Dec 20 (less than 2 months), but in that time he's racked up an impressive 2,500 edits. I'd be a lot more comfortable if this nomination were made in another two months. →Raul654 07:25, Feb 13, 2004 (UTC)
• Support. A hardworking, fair-minded wikiholic who responds accordingly to conflicts. His work on the table on U.S. Democratic Party presidential nomination, 2004 has been mighty impressive. The table is quite elaborate, is packed with many different pieces of information, yet is easy as pie to follow. Another fine example of his work is the List of members of the North Carolina General Assembly, 2003-2004 session, which is wonderfully thorough. He created each Assemblyperson's page AND uploaded each of their photos. Kingturtle 15:27, 13 Feb 2004 (UTC)
• Support. I agree with Kingturtle. The Democratic nomination vote table is impressive and useful work. I've seen nothing but goodness spot-checking his other work. -- RobLa 17:25, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
• Support. --Danny 17:30, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
• Support -- Meelar 21:14, 14 Feb 2004 (UTC)
• Oppose. Two months is dangerously early. Angela. 21:53, Feb 14, 2004 (UTC)
• Support. I believe I was made an admin after only 2-3 months of useful edits... ugen64 23:39, Feb 14, 2004 (UTC)

---

Thanks for fixing that table problem at U.S. Democratic Party presidential nomination, 2004 - I don't know how I managed to make exactly the same mistake again... -- Vardion 05:32, 11 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Bravo on the NC stuff!

Seth,

Bravo on the GREAT work you've done on the various NC articles! With your edits, I hope it will show others how good our state is!

iHoshie 11:20, 15 Feb 2004 (UTC)

---

Hi Seth. I believe you wrote "Wikipedia members" when you meant "Wikimedia wikis"? You may also be interested to read wikipedia:arbitration rationale.

I'm sorry that you feel that you must leave Wikipedia, and I hope that you will feel able to return in due course, whether due to a change in the arbitration committee's yet-to-be-official policies, or for some other reason. Naturally I have passed on your concerns to the arbitration committee.

Sincerely,
Martin

Why is it necessary to have deliberations in public? In the real world jury deliberations are held in private as well as deliberations in nearly all other arbitration venues. All that matters is that the process is public and decisions are backed up with public evidence and the members give their own public rationale. --mav

Speaking only for myself at the moment, I expect that future decisions will have much more detailed public rationale, even if the deliberations are private. The one decision issued so far was done somewhat hastily and in an ad-hoc fashion, as it was the first case, and decided before we even had our procedures set up. I hope future decisions will be along the lines of "This is what we decided and why; here are some other allegations and issues we considered and decided aginst for the following reasons; this is what we decided to do and why" and so on.

My hope is that we can publish one or two detailed decisions per case on which all the arbitrators can sign (vaguely like "real courts"), which has the compromise benefit of both giving a public rationale at some length (for both the supporting and dissenting sides, if necessary), and keeping it readable (I'm not sure anybody really wants to read eleven separate detailed opinions). Unless, of course, all the arbitrators have different opinions and want to write their own opinions on the matter. --Delirium 11:51, Feb 17, 2004 (UTC)

That's pretty much the impression I got from talking to Martin and Camembert on IRC. I'm glad to hear it, of course, but words and promises are not the same as action, and given my level of discomfort with secrecy, I'm waiting to see actual action in a good direction (either on an actual case or upon the group approval of official policies) before I return fully. (Confessions of a wikipediholic: I'm working on a whole set of new articles to import upon my return). -- Seth Ilys 16:18, 17 Feb 2004 (UTC)

---

Hi, Seth. I found myself agreeing with what you had written on Kingturtle's talkpage regarding Wikien-L; I have written some comments there that you may find interesting. I am sorry for your stance with regard to the arbitration committee. The handling of the M-N-H matter was less than ideal, but such things are of sufficient complexity to require practice. After the first half dozen or so decisions I think the committee will gain experience on how best to work through such cases and how best to explain the rationale for decisions made. In any case, the arbitration process even at present is more open and inclusive than the unilateral decisions Jimbo made previously -- since he only deliberated with himself, there was nothing to share.

Best wishes, UninvitedCompany 15:35, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)

---

Hello again, Seth, just to let you know.. the M-N-H thing was supposed to be presented in a "concurring/dissenting" format. I'm not sure what happened, but I think some initial opinions got posted before we finalized anything, and then we ran out of time. I didn't like it, either, and hope we get better. We are all volunteers and not experts on this. If you've done much committee work you already realize the difficulty of getting anything done in a diverse group this large (11 people); I hope that you and others will take the long view and permit us to get the process right. I know that for this one I was mainly concerned with meeting the time frame and making a fair, fact based decision. I think others on the committee would mostly agree. We knew we don't have the process done, and there are those who did not want to take any cases at all until we were finished with that, and it was only because of pressure from Jimbo that we moved expediently. UninvitedCompany

Mailing lists

I have made a new discussion thread on Wikipedia talk:Mailing lists. It would be helpful if you could add your two cents there. It is important that we voice our concerns in the same place. Thanks, Kingturtle 17:11, 20 Feb 2004 (UTC)

---

Taking a principled sabbatical: I'm stepping away from Wikipedia (for what I hope is only a brief period) because of my discomfort with the current lack of transparency in the practices of the Arbitration Committee, specifically the failure of the committee to adhere to their own stated policy ("We will make the rationale for all our decisions public") in the case of Mr.-Natural-Health. Until such time as the arbitration committee begins to adhere to its own disclosure policies, I will refrain from contributing to the project. Secret decision-making groups should not be tolerated, especially in such an open project as Wikipedia. -- Seth Ilys 23:46, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Seth Ilys 21:53, 20 Feb 2004 (UTC) : Came back into the fold after observing substantial improvements in the activities of the Arbitration Committee, specifically personal communications with a number of its members and the open solicitation of evidence. I'm looking forward to wise and reasoned rulings from these folks...

---

Not sure if I "talk" by just typing here? I just wanted to thank you for the edits to "Neography" -- I learnt what to do next time. Regards, Joe

Åland and sensitive issues

Well done!
--Ruhrjung 00:53, 23 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Sorry and thanks

Sorry for being a prick and thanks for the update. I've added a note to the top of Talk:Main Page and MediaWiki talk:itn which should hopefully reduce confusion in the future. --mav 14:57, 24 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Hi! Not to stick my nose into whats not my business but I accidentally read about the issue between you and Mav. In one year and a half here, Ive known Mav to be one of the most intelligent, friendly and responsable editors here.

I respect both you and Mav, in that regards, Ive read some of your articles and I have to say well done!

I just wanted to share my view about edits with you: I dont get offended if any of my original articles are edited. My attitude towards it, if its a good edit then its better for the article. If not, then the person who edited is an idiot who doesnt know what they are talking about..lol and everytime that a person has done a bad edit on my articles it has been someone outside the wikipedia community, btw.

Don't get offended, rather just take it easy and try to form an opinion of the edit within yourself.

Thanks, and God bless you!

Sincerely yours, Antonio Geriapilic Martin

Babylon 5 Wiki

I'd love to join such a project. I also don't have any technical expertise, though... JMSNews would be a good place to announce such a project, anyway. Ausir 10:58, 25 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Movies/Greco-Roman

It's part of Lists of movie source material. :) jengod 05:53, Feb 26, 2004 (UTC)

On deception

Hi, I can assure you that deception is the last thing on my mind. Considering the innumerable silly user pages here at Wikipedia I wouldn't have thought that anyone would single out mine. You can find everything you want to know about me at User:KF/Details, which is my old user page. I changed it to pay tribute to the many many instances when Wikipedia just didn't work -- it's actually one of the many error messages I got. And I got the idea from User:Finlay McWalter, but he may have more wit than little old me.

As this is Wikipedia territory, feel free to revert to my old user page, even if I find your basic idea of deception rather ridiculous. All the best, <KF> 23:50, 26 Feb 2004 (UTC)

Flags

Hi. I notice you've been uploading flags of U.S. States - great work. I notice also that these have been compressed with JPG, resulting in lossy compression, which results in clearly visible artefacts on images like flags with large amounts of solid colour. Could I suggest using a lossless format like PNG instead? Morwen 22:16, Feb 29, 2004 (UTC)

Talk:Main Page

Why did you remove Perl's and my comments from Talk:Main Page? [1] Please put them back. --mav

I have no idea how that happened. I've restored the comments. Please accept my profuse apologies for this unintentional error. -- Seth Ilys 03:02, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

No biggie - I was curious, not offended. :) --mav

Re: deletion of comments

No problem at all. The comment probably wasn't that important, and you reverted it anyway. Regardless, I probabbly wouldn't have noticed. But thanks for the apology. thats really kind of you! Peace profound, Perl 03:15, 2 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Shuting down malining list

Hi Seth, thanks for the noice about shutting down of mailing list. I had no idea of this. I completely share your concern and I am glad to know I am not the only one. I have started to Committee of Wikipedians, which is a basically place to defend our rights to participate in decision making. Collective efforts should be more poweful than individual activies. If you agree with the mission statement, please take part in the commitee. -- Taku 23:49, Mar 2, 2004 (UTC)

4000

Congrats on 4k edits, --Ryan and/or Mero 16:26, Mar 3, 2004 (UTC)

Stations

It's a matter of consolidation. Most of the Georgia FM articles are stubs right now, and likely to be for some time, so consolidated articles are unlikely to get overlong for quite some time. It's more convenient for a reader to search on the call letters for a particular station rather than a specific subsection of the station (they are virtually all owned and operated by the same companies). - Hephaestos|§ 19:27, 6 Mar 2004 (UTC)

For example (and I'm just making this up), let's say there's WWWW-AM, which says "WWWW-AM is a station in Atlanta, Georgia broadcasting country music", WWWW-FM which has "WWWW-FM is a station in Atlanta, Georgia broadcasting jazz & blues", and WWWW-TV which has "WWWW-TV is the CBS television affiliate in Buckhead, Georgia".

Whereas it's more efficient to have WWWW: "WWWW is the FCC designation for (whoever owns the license), operating WWWW-AM, a country/western radio station, WWWW-FM which broadcasts jazz & blues, and CBS affiliate WWWW-TV, based in Buckhead."

- Hephaestos|§ 19:33, 6 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I tend to agree with you that a lot of them will eventually expand to the point where they'll need their own article, I just think that's quite a long way off. Also if there's nothing at the base call letter location, someone's likely to create an article there with duplicate information. - Hephaestos|§ 19:39, 6 Mar 2004 (UTC)

So close WWWW is a FM country music station in Detroit :) Rmhermen 16:09, Mar 11, 2004 (UTC)

---

Space Mission Pages

Seth- Let me finish up on the space shutle mission pages first and then I can start on the other pa misions. Theres only so much on peron can do at a time! Theon 23:31, Mar 6, 2004 (UTC)

Myths over the GDR

thanks sos muchs fors thes edits ;) - Textures

Patent those shortcuts

Seth, I like your shortcut box. You'd better patent it quick cause I plan to steal it... ;) - Texture 22:01, 9 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Senators...

Hi Seth, just in case you don't know, you can get more info on these folks at the Biographical Directory of the U.S. Congress -- the info at this site is public domain, since it's from the U.S. government: http://bioguide.congress.gov/biosearch/biosearch.asp

For an example, here's Augustus Merrimon: http://bioguide.congress.gov/scripts/biodisplay.pl?index=M000659

You can also get images for some of them there and download them and then upload them to Wikipedia.

Thanks, BCorr ¤ Брайен 03:07, Mar 10, 2004 (UTC)~

---

Re: Asteroid 4769 Castalia

> Maio, I noticed that you moved 4769 Castalia to Asteroid 4769 Castalia, and I'm wondering why, as "4769 Castalia" is the proper astronomical name and the "number Name" convention is in widespread use in Wikipedia for asteroids.

Wikipedia:Naming convention. 4769 Castalia is a redirect to it anyways so it is not affected. The reason is that search engines use the title of pages as main links, what would you think to be more appropiate for someone non-astronomy oriented, Asteroid 4769 Castalia or 4769 Castalia? :)

> Could you move it back to the correct name, please?

Unfortunately, I can't. If I move it back it will have to be manually and all the edit history will be lost. However, if you still beleive that it should be moved, you can ask that 4769 Castalia gets a speedy deletion stating that you need to move Asteroid 4769 Castalia to that location.

Take care,

--Maio 15:41, Mar 11, 2004 (UTC)

> Generally, article naming should give priority to what the majority of English speakers would most easily recognize with a reasonable minimum of ambiguity, while at the same time making linking to those articles easy and second nature. Beyond this general statement, the most important sections to read are the first few sections: Simplicity, Precision, Capitalization, and Pluralization.

Basically, it is to be a little more precise and detailed to those not familiarized with the naming conventions of astronomers. --Maio 15:55, Mar 11, 2004 (UTC)

> Clarity is all well and good, but your moves run contrary to the titles of dozens of other articles on asteroids and Messier objects. The naming conventions should be taken up collectively at Wikipedia:WikiProject Astronomical Objects, not moved individually and unilaterally.

Hehe, it's me now who fails to see the "rule" of the naming convention of these type of articles. Mind to point me to it? I read a few things about what to state on the article, but not of the article name. :(

Anyhow, sometimes it is better to break paradigms. Wikipedia is not a ruleset nor a democracy, although obviously editors should follow guidelines for easier navigation.

If you still beleive that the item should be moved, well that's OK although I do not agree with it (regardless of what has been said on WikiProject Astronomical Objects).

Peace out,

--Maio 16:10, Mar 11, 2004 (UTC)

M13

Forgot to add that I did the same thing with globular cluster M13, for the same reasons (naming convention for non-astronomy oriented). M13 redirects to it. --Maio 15:46, Mar 11, 2004 (UTC)

Tod Bertuzzi

I had added Todd Bertuzzi suspension to the Current Events page but User:David Gerard had removed it. dave 16:48, Mar 11, 2004 (UTC)

Forgotten Realms

Thanks for the pointers on the pages I have been working on as I think I said I am new and allways looking for ways to improve. Weatherdragon 02:05, 12 Mar 2004 (UTC)

---

Re: Goldstone

> Maio, please explain your move of Goldstone, California to Goldstone, San Bernardino County. It flaunts all conventions we have on naming of towns, so far as I can tell...

I have never performed any move to the Goldstone, California article. *shrug* (verify the page history) --Maio 04:00, Mar 12, 2004 (UTC)

No problem whatsoever man. However, someone pointed out the naming convention of towns at Talk:Goldstone, San Bernardino County, California. (Hehe, you look like you were having a good time in that photo.) --Maio 04:07, Mar 12, 2004 (UTC)

---

You know, you really should check whether you alledged 'copyvio' really is public domain text. That came from the Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships. I had forgotten to put the message saying where the text came from. However, even if something is elsewhere on the web, it might not be copyrighted. In future, if you find something from the DANFS section at that site on the Wikipedia IT IS NOT A COPYVIO. David Newton 22:18, 12 Mar 2004 (UTC)

---

Could you wait a bit more before adding stub messages and stuff to new articles? 2 minutes is barely enough... :) I wanted to NPOVise TheOpenCD a bit more and we were editting at the same time... Guaka 02:02, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)

---

11-Madrid. No os olvidamos. "We do not forget you", but the you refers to the people (presumably the victims/citicens of Madrid/...), not to Madrid. (2nd person plural).

By the way, thanks for your help at the article. It is quite important for us at Spain. We may differ in the "terror" word, but that matters little as long as we coincide in the feelings. Pfortuny 19:35, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)

---

Infancy Gospel of Thomas

I have spent hours on this material, and have credited the source you mention as a source for so wording. Where can I retrieve the text that you have suppressed, so that I may rework it? I am aware that the material in this entry may conflict with your personal views. Please respond Wetman 23:56, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)~

I have re-edited it and placed it on the discussion page. (So, this isn't the text I had worked up after all: so much the worse. What's gone is gone. Not your fault.) Post it or can it, as you like. But another time you might put the copyvio notice at the top of text for 48 hours before suppressing material. I wouldn't even suggest you alert the poster. But people do seem quite consistently to be asking you to moderate yourself a little. Your decision. Wetman 00:39, 14 Mar 2004 (UTC)

You've got mail!

Regarding: "If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly and redistributed at will, then do not submit it."

Yes, I have just now noticed that quip for the first time. Still it doesn't stress immediate deletions otherwise known as "rv", the Wikipedian Thought police, and last but not least the very public lynchings and personal attacks by the Wikipedian Thought police.

Speaking of Polemics, your Wikipedia Signal-to-Noise Statistics comes to mind. What I get the most of when doing random searches is articles on geographical locations like Minamidaito, Okinawa. Count only the real articles, and the true article count is only around 40,000. -- Mr-Natural-Health 01:25, 14 Mar 2004 (UTC)

---

Re: Astrononical objects: a possible compromise?

What about putting articles at M13 (globular cluster) or Mz3 (planetary nebula), as if they were disambiguations...

I don't really like the idea, sorry. :( But I appreciate your effort. =)

I'm not redirecting things back after they are changed to Number Name, be it by you or another person. I have already expressed my POV at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Astronomical Objects. To tell you the truth, when we have NASA providing images like these ones: [2] [3] where they use the naming convention of Type_of_object Number on the first published image, I can't really find a reason to not do so here. :/

--Maio 02:11, Mar 14, 2004 (UTC)

Whut do you think about Planetary Nebula M2-9 (Twin Jet Nebula), Planetary Nebula M57 (Ring Nebula) and Planetary Nebula Mz3 (Ant Nebula) ? --Maio 06:16, Mar 14, 2004 (UTC)

---

Re: Madrid 11 pictures

The photos came from Spanish newspaper websites. I am told that the use of news photos is covered by the "fair use" provisions, but I am no expert on this. If you want to delete them and incur the wrath of the many people working on that article, it's up to you. Adam 08:06, 14 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Do not delete them please. They have been claimed under fair use. The appropiate credit to BBC News has been given. --Maio 15:12, Mar 14, 2004 (UTC)

24 hour bans for edit wars

Hi Seth,

I've amended the proposal on 24 hour bans for edit wars. In short, the amendment calls for a quickpoll to take place before any such ban can be implemented. If you support this, I'd like you to add your vote in favor to the 24 hour ban vote, with the comment "with quickpolls".

Please also participate in the discussion on Wikipedia talk:Quickpolls.—Eloquence 22:15, Mar 14, 2004 (UTC)

apology?

Hiho, I am not sure but I may owe you an apology for the "terror"? :) Just in case, here it is. Pfortuny 20:04, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion

I noticed you put a speedy deletions notice on October 28, 1971. While the article should probably be deleted, I suggest it would be better placed on the Votes for Deletion page. I generally maintain a personal rule of thumb that Speedy deletions should be reserved for obvious vandalism and absolute nonsense. Even if the page is totally false, it could be fixed or deleted on vfd. Thanks. Ludraman | Talk 21:19, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Nickel

I knew I was forgetting something. Yes I will do so, thanks for pointing that out. - Hephaestos|§ 03:06, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Sedna poll

FYI: Poll on the Sedna talk page. What shall the article be named. Davodd 04:05, Mar 16, 2004 (UTC)

Too quick on the uptake

Not sure you should follow editors around and add "this is a stub" to work in progress. I was still adding stuff when you conflicted me on an article I had started not 15 mins before! No problem really, but how do you determine a stub from an article that has had its first "save" minutes before? ;^) - Marshman 04:35, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)

---

Thank You!

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

Hunt Museum - Copyvio

Hi there, this article is still awaiting processing on Copyvio page. I've written a reasonable stub for it on a temporary sub-page. As the person who noted the copyvio, do you have any idea when action might be taken? Plus I'm worried about the article being just plain deleted.

Zoney 23:53, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Adminship nomination and votes

User:Seth Ilys (27/0/0); ends 01:29, 19 Mar 2004 (UTC)

I've been thinking long and hard about this; particularly whether I should nominate myself and whether I should do so, especially so soon after my hasty refusal of a nomination last month. I value Wikipedia both as a resource and as an open community, which was one of the reasons the intital missteps by the arbitration committee troubled me so deeply. But since then, especially in being active on the #wikipedia IRC channel, my faith in the community as a supportive network has been entirely restored. I'm still outspoken on a number of matters, but I'm thrilled to be a part of a group like this where diversity (of many forms) is both valuable and appreciated.

So I want to step up to the plate further and be more useful as an admin, specifically by helping combat vandalism and handle speedy deletions (I spend a good deal of time monitoring newpages) without having to refer those tasks to others. I've been here since 22 December 2003 and have accumulated over 5500 edits; I've tried to be reasonable and not act rashly when perturbed. Once I find full-time employment (which I hope is soon), my activity level will certainly scale back a bit, but I don't plan to leave; Wikipedia is too much fun... -- Seth Ilys 01:29, 12 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Support:

1. Perl 01:33, 12 Mar 2004 (UTC)
2. I supported Seth last time. I will this time too. Kingturtle 01:39, 12 Mar 2004 (UTC)
3. Support. We could use dedicated admins now more than ever. →Raul654 01:56, Mar 12, 2004 (UTC)
4. Support. Seth appears to have a very good understanding of Wikipedia despite his short time here and I think he is more than capable of being a good admin. Angela. 01:59, Mar 12, 2004 (UTC)
5. Support. fabiform | talk 02:21, 12 Mar 2004 (UTC)
6. Support. Assuming he doesn't intend to refuse this nomination. ;-) Excellent editor, will make a fine admin. Jwrosenzweig 16:19, 12 Mar 2004 (UTC)
7. Support. Stewart Adcock 17:59, 12 Mar 2004 (UTC) (And, good luck with the job hunt!)
8. Support. I have frequently followed him around deleting stuff he has added the delete msg to...so he'd be good for that kind of work, for sure! Adam Bishop 19:43, 12 Mar 2004 (UTC)
9. Michael Snow 20:47, 12 Mar 2004 (UTC)
10. Support. Already thought he was an admin. Davodd 00:39, Mar 13, 2004 (UTC)
11. Support. Danny 02:45, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)
12. Support. Kosebamse 19:41, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)
13. Support. Seems quite helpful, hard-working and sympathetic. Pfortuny 19:46, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)
14. Support. Excellent editor and picture finder. - MykReeve 22:55, 13 Mar 2004 (UTC)
15. Support. Very good editor. RadicalBender 01:42, 14 Mar 2004 (UTC)
16. Support. Martin
17. Support. Decumanus 00:10, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)
18. Support. Seth has a great attitude and work ethic. - Mark 02:24, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)
19. Support. Definitely an asset to Wikipedia. BCorr¤Брайен 04:51, Mar 16, 2004 (UTC)
20. Support. Maximus Rex, 09:09, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)
21. Support. Elf-friend 18:25, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)
22. Support - Texture 06:17, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)
23. I'm re-moving my vote to support. Seth Ilys is a very good Wikipedian, and I might be better off taking up my nit-picking issues with him on his talk page. Ludraman | Talk 07:54, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)
24. Support. -- Cyan 21:03, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)
25. Hadal 07:31, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)
26. Support. Excellent editor and contributor. Rdash 08:52, Mar 18, 2004 (UTC)
27. Fennec 16:52, 18 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Neutral:

1. Support> Ludraman | Talk 10:05, 14 Mar 2004 (UTC)

   In the phrasing of Ned Flanders: I don't mean to be a negative neddy and all, but Seth Ilys might be a tad too quick in speedy-deleting some new pages, which given a chance often improve. Not that I'm against his sysophood, he's fairly very good otherwise. Ludraman | Talk 21:31, 15 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Just to be clear; I'm not an admin yet, so there's no way that I could have deleted any pages. I believe that what Ludraman is referring to is my placement of the {{msg:delete}} message on some articles. -- Seth Ilys 02:16, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Just placing {{msg:delete}} on an article does not mean you are responsible for its deletion. If every time a user adds the tag to the page is called into question, then vandalism cleanup teams will stop doing their jobs and Wikipedia will become overrun with junk. - Mark 02:24, 16 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Lists of Cities

Thanks for your note on my user page. The question of how to deal with the city/town/village difference was brought up in the general talk page, with no real decision made, so I decided to follow the lead of Davodd and how he handled Indiana's page. While the differences between the classifications may not be obvious, they are from the census and can provide a logical breaking-up of possibly long lists. I wouldn't mind seeing the lists combined, but I think it'd be necessary to rename the pages to "List of municipalities in the United States" and so on for each state, or something to that effect, otherwise the pages wouldn't be truly accurate.

Thanks for your time and attention to the topic. Bamos 06:12, 19 Mar 2004 (UTC)

General Joseph Henry Pendleton and Joseph Henry Pendleton

Seth, I'd like to removed General Joseph Henry Pendleton and Joseph Henry Pendleton from the copyvio page. The copyright permissions do not appear to violate the GFDL. - Texture 16:13, 19 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Grand Canyon

Sweet photo! Love it, thanks, Mark Richards 21:32, 19 Mar 2004 (UTC)

Please bring back Tats!

I've waited two days now for you to bring back the article Tats. The creaters gave me permission to copy it for Wikipedia. Check out Talk:Tats. ---Dagesan