User talk:Sam Korn

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

---

Contents 1 Archives 2 Revert 3 Help Desk 4 Warning page 5 Hello 6 Copyvios 7 Editing the FA 8 patent nonsense 9 Thanks 10 Wikimedal 11 Korath's autovfd 12 Vandalism 13 JMBell 14 Revert 15 Rn71989 16 Who's RFA 17 thanks for supporting me 18 Cricketer images 19 Thanks from Profvk 20 my delete button got stuck 21 STop vandlising 22 Irate 23 RFC 24 Thank you! 25 Vandal 26 Human rights in the United States 27 Wikipedia:The Return of the Soldier 28 {{blanking}} 29 Latin 30 no good deed goes unpunished 31 wait 32 Canderson7's RFA 33 You're the Kornstar 34 Thanks 35 Changed "concept art" to a redirect? 36 Thank you! 37 Thanks 38 Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism 39 cricket 40 VfD question 41 Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Sam Korn 42 Fair use assessment 43 Supremacism 44 Volunteering for the Signpost 45 Sam Korn 46 Sam Korn 47 Abraham Lincoln was a Woman 48 Thank you! 49 Barnstar (zOMG) 50 Your edit war 51 Second tagline poll - please follow this link 52 Thanks for the revert 53 The Ashes 54 Thanks for reverting vandalism of my user page 55 thanks 56 thanks 57 User talk:Jimbo Wales 58 Question... 59 User 192.206.243.9 60 MCAT edit? 61 Featured Article Drive: Meeting (3rd September 2005) 62 Are you 17 yet? 63 Thanks 64 Name change 65 Your comments on my RfA 66 Your comments on my RfA 67 My User Name - DKorn 68 thank you for the feedback, Smoddy 69 The charter is here. (Relating to Esperanza) 70 Requesting feedback on Opus Dei article 71 Esperanza made less bureaucratic 72 The last time I'm spamming you all with Esperanza stuff 73 MedCom 74 How to locate a project manager 75 Cricket 76 Ashes 77 Systemwars.com 78 Newest Mediators 79 Welcome aboard! 80 WP:CP 81 Thank you for supporting my RfA! 82 David Mertz article 83 WP:MC Blanking? 84 Your input would be welcomed 85 RFM 86 Mediation for DOM 87 RFM 88 David Patrick Taylor

Archives

Current #1 #2 #3

Revert

Why did you revert my changes on MCSE? Do you work for Microsoft? 62.195.115.202 17:34, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

I didn't come up with it myself. There are in fact even more of them! Like 'Much Congestion Saturates Ethernet', referring to the (lots of) message passing between win NT and/or 2000 servers. But it's a lot more uncommon then 'Mentally Challenged Slave of the Empire'. But ok, if it ruins NPOV then fine. And I didn't mean to accuse you of bias, sorry, was just wondering because it happened before.

Help Desk

For your demonstrated brilliance at the Help Desk, I hereby award you this plenary indulgence. Thanks a million! Essjay · Talk 11:55, July 16, 2005 (UTC)

I've been accused of being the high priest of a WikiCult so consider your WikiSins forgiven! -- Essjay · Talk 12:04, July 16, 2005 (UTC)

Most certainly not; I just assumed "all have WikiSinned and fallen short of the glory of Jimbo." ; - ) -- Essjay · Talk 13:56, July 16, 2005 (UTC)

Sorry to disappoint, but my Latin is limited to basic liturgical phrases; the command of Latin necessary to create a parody is far beyond my abilities. My "cult" page is completely tongue-in-cheek, like Wikipedia:Really Reformed Church of Wikipedia and m:Reformed Chruch of Wikipedia; I wasn't particularly concerned with the explicit analogy, but rather the humor value (although, admins don't sin, do they?) ; - ) I put the Benedictus with the Sanctus because it is most familiar to American Catholics as a part of the Sanctus; if you asked the average American Catholic, they wouldn't know the difference between the Sanctus and Benedictus, and if asked to recite the Sanctus (which they probably couldn't do) would include it. I didn't do the Pater Noster or Ave Maria for two reasons: they had already been done at Wikipedia:Really Reformed Church of Wikipedia, and being that it is comedy, I didn't want to go overboard. As I said, sorry to disappoint, I know the community has high expectations of me because of my credentials, but in the interests of my sanity (or what is left of it), I reserve the high quality theology for articles, not my userspace. If you'd like to contribute to the cult, though, I'm always looking for adherents! -- Essjay · Talk 14:20, July 16, 2005 (UTC)

Warning page

Smoddy, I love your warning page! I've been playing around with something similar in my sandbox for the last little bit, but I have one problem: Your format doesn't work. I tested it on another of my sandboxes, and all I got was an empty edit box; with the boxes on all the other pages, I had the text in the edit box. Could this be a problem with the table formatting? Oh, by the way, I tried the "start a new message" link and I don't know where my post went (it doesn't show up in my watchlist or contribs) but it sure wasn't here. -- Essjay · Talk 17:45, July 17, 2005 (UTC)

I hadn't seen the User:Smoddy/Tools page yet; that page works. All I had seen was the User:Smoddy/Warning page, and when I tried to use those boxes (or copy them to my sandbox to customize them) I couldn't get them to work.

I think it would be great in the Wikipedia namespace; what about Wikipedia:Tools? -- Essjay · Talk 17:54, July 17, 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm a moron; I should have seen that wasn't a redlink. I was too excited to get back to my sandbox and play! What about Wikipedia:Toolbox? -- Essjay · Talk 18:08, July 17, 2005 (UTC)

Hello

Hi Sam, seems you're back around! I've just come back from the Oval (I wasn't expecting Surrey to win 4-3!). I'd bought my semi-finals/finals tickets after they'd announced we'd won the first time, so was relieved as well as elated that we won (see User talk:Sam Vimes for a fuller description). Now you're reconnected and back, I hope we'll see more cricket articles from you - just hoping Raul will see sense and put the Ashes on the front page this Thursday. Kind regards, jguk 22:41, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

Copyvios

Thanks for finding and cleaning up the LaRouche copyright violations. We'd also had some problems recently on the spanish-language Wikipedia, but this appears to be a new editor. Cheers, -Willmcw 11:21, July 19, 2005 (UTC)

Editing the FA

No problem - edit away. →Raul654 18:13, July 19, 2005 (UTC)

patent nonsense

You wrote: Please stop adding nonsense to Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you want to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. smoddy 12:03, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

• Could you please indicate the articles. Thanks. 198.103.138.130 14:00, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

• It wasn't me. And I have an account - but sometimes modifications are done without login. 198.103.138.130 15:00, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for voting in my RfA; I promise I'll wield my sacred mop with care. If you ever need me for anything, you know where to find me. Thanks again! -- Essjay · Talk 15:32, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

I know; but a few have managed to take thier comments to the right place! I'm not too worried about it, I'm sure being an admin, I'll get used to the "orange bar of death." When I put the notice up, I was getting one congrats after the other at the same time I was trying to thank 68 people for voting for me. I'm going to leave it like it is, and I'm glad to hear my optimism is uplifting! Sorsum Corda! -- Essjay · Talk 17:52, July 20, 2005 (UTC)

Wikimedal

Awww, shucks. Thanks you! Kim Bruning 18:04, 20 July 2005 (UTC)

Korath's autovfd

While I can get his block tabs to show up fine, his vfd tab is not showing on articles I find on the newpages log (I can see one on your user talk now though. Since Korath probably has other stuff to do, I decided to ask you too. What should I do? - Mgm|^(talk) 14:29, July 21, 2005 (UTC)

• Nevermind. It's on the edit page. - Mgm|^(talk) 14:30, July 21, 2005 (UTC)

Vandalism

Please check out the Mao Zedong page for 64.19.163.156's vandalism. I'm not sure about the policy but he's vandalized three times now...thanks CharlesZ 15:50, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

JMBell

Yeah, I sent a message to JMBell regarding this. User:Sir James is only supposed to edit the user pages, so I asked him to clarify. --Deathphoenix 16:44, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

Revert

I did use rollback; I don't know why the different summary! -- Essjay · Talk 19:40, July 21, 2005 (UTC)

Rn71989

Do you understand what Rn71989 was doing; I'm confused as hell! -- Essjay · Talk 22:10, July 21, 2005 (UTC)

Thank God I'm not the only one. I thought about permablock, but I wasn't sure when I was allowed to use it. (I've permablocked socks, but nothing else.) Hopefully it's over for now. (Undeletion is a skill I'd like to learn as well.) -- Essjay · Talk 22:19, July 21, 2005 (UTC)

Holy Jesus. I think an auto de fe is in order. -- Essjay · Talk 22:31, July 21, 2005 (UTC)

By which I mean to say: Rn71989 should be burned at the stake ad majorem gloriam Jimbo! -- Essjay · Talk 22:35, July 21, 2005 (UTC)

Who's RFA

Thank you for your vote of support on my RFA. ∞Who?¿? 03:28, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

thanks for supporting me

Hello, just a quick note to express my gratitude for your support of my RfA. I'm sure I'll become a familiar face on places like the Administrator's Noticeboard and Requests for Adminship, as well as the murkier parts of my new job. "From everyone who has been given much, much will be demanded; and from the one who has been entrusted with much, much more will be asked." (Luke 12:48, NIV) Never was a truer word spoken. I feel empowered, yes, but not in the "oooh cool delete button!" way I was kind of expecting. Already I feel the weight of the responsibility I have now been entrusted with, a weight that will no doubt reduce given time. Thank you for believing in me. :) Garrett^Talk 10:40, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

Hey,man,nobigdeal,yeah,y'know?Congratulationsanyway.(Sorry,myspacekeyisbroken).Cheers,smoddy 10:44, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

LOL, thought I was dealing with Louis Epstein for a minute there, whew! :) Garrett^Talk 11:14, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

Cricketer images

Hi Smoddy. You uploaded a large number of images of cricketers on Christmas Eve — Andrew Flintoff, Michael Vaughan, Steve Harmison, Nasser Hussain, Ashley Giles, Andrew Strauss and Mark Butcher. Are you still prepared to assert "fair use" on these images? As you may have gathered on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cricket, I'm skeptical that such images can qualify as fair use, and I often list them on WP:CP immediately if they've been uploaded by newbies. I just wondered if you still believed that they are fair use? Thanks, Stephen Turner 11:29, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply, Smoddy. You indicated that you're not prepared to assert that they are or that they aren't fair use. So I've listed them on WP:CP. (I think that's probably a more appropriate place than your suggestion of WP:IFD). Stephen Turner 15:31, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

Thanks from Profvk

Thank you Smoddy, for correcting my mess-up with the redirection of Divya Prabandham. --Profvk 16:01, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

my delete button got stuck

No, not really. I'm still getting used to these nifty new guidelines and something about the Anthony Connor made me want a 2nd opinion. I'm not sure what, probably just the length and readability, made me uneasy about deleting with extreme prejudice. Anyway, my delete button has been getting a workout at SickMonkey. :-) Cheers! FreplySpang (talk) 21:38, 22 July 2005 (UTC)

STop vandlising

Stop vandlising my work.--Jirate 12:32, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

Irate

Hi Matt. Seems our friend is back to his old ways. Do you think we could ask the ArbComm to enforce Remedy 1.1? Cheers, [[smoddy]] 12:53, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

Yes, sounds appropriate (sigh, again). Would you be able to drop ArbCom an official note asking for the personal attack parole on RfAr? I would, but I'm on a painfully slow dialup connect at the moment :( Cheers. — Matt Crypto 13:02, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for defending my user page. It's no surprise to see Irate continuing his actions - he just can't help himself. More blocks on their way for him. violet/riga (t) 15:37, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

RFC

• Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Smoddy

--Jirate 13:15, 24 July 2005 (UTC)

Thank you!

Hey smoddy, I saw your RFC (I've endorsed an outside view, see Wikipedia:Requests_for_comment/Smoddy) and there's a good chance that the RFC will be deleted because it's uncertified. Anyway, I went to read your user page and noticed you mentioned you'd hit 5,000 edits, and I thought I should check mine, since I hadn't checked in a while. It just so happens that when I checked I was on exactly 5000 edits! And the last edit was signing an RFC which will be deleted, thus, this will be my 5000th edit! ...and I'd thought I'd waste it thanking you for reminding me (since I already wasted the other one on you ;) -- Joolz 20:24, 25 July 2005 (UTC)

Vandal

User:204.108.80.10 again vandalized the page, Pontiac. This is from today - pretty current. What are your qualifications for "current vandalism", or perhaps you overlooked this one? --SFoskett 22:32, July 25, 2005 (UTC)

OK, I missed that "30 minute" point. Thanks for your understanding. But these IPs have repeatedly been used to vandalize pages. I just don't know what to about them - like I said, I get sick of constantly reverting what is obviously the same user's vandalism. Any advice would be appreciated. --SFoskett 22:45, July 25, 2005 (UTC)

Human rights in the United States

Please do not vandalize this page. If you have questions or concerns, please take them to talk. The version including nonsense like the Chinese propaganda "report" has not been justified in talk and has no consensus.Existentializer 16:57, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

[1] User:Siegerz and User:63.70.62.84 are definitely sockpuppets of each other and appear to be sockpuppets of the user called Yuber as well (who showed up earlier as User:EnviroFuck and another IP address). Please do not encourage revert wars.Existentializer 17:06, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

I don't see how that edit summary is a "trademark" of a banned user, as I just reported Siegerz/63.70.62.84 to the Admin noticeboard and Vandalism in Progress boards. The screaming of "enviroknot waah" is most definitely the trademark of either Yuber or those who are partisan sympathizers with him, and Yuber is himself banned from editing Wikipedia.Existentializer 17:13, 27 July 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:The Return of the Soldier

Hi Frank! I was so pleased today when your name showed up on my watchlist. Well, in the time that you've been away, I've become an admin. See what your disappearance did! Does this mean you're back for good? Smoddy (Rabbit and pork) 16:48, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Congratulations! If I'd been around at the time you would have had my vote. --fvw* 05:58, July 28, 2005 (UTC)

---

Because you accused me of whining, which I found insulting. Everyking 11:57, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

All right, I suppose removing the barnstar was an overreaction on my part as well. Everyking 12:02, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

{{blanking}}

Thanks, I'll remember that in future. DES 16:35, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

Latin

Thanks - I got it, as I couldn't get to the reference desk for about 5 minutes. Part of it came up and then it stopped. Odd. Anyway, your version certainly was colorful! I like it a lot. The next time a passerby complains about my sweet but barky dogs... (but I might substitute demon for phantasm) --Mothperson cocoon 16:52, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

no good deed goes unpunished

wait

I see how it is, so I can't put that because it has nothing to do with wikipedia and yet you can put "I am 16 I live in the United Kingdom, in Wales to be fairly precise I am currently a student, and intend to read Arabic, law, theology, or something else at university in two years' time, preferably at Oxford University. I am Anglo-Catholic", all that stuff about you, and I can put stuff for me to remember. Well that's completely stupid and unfair, but since you cried to me about it I took it down. Thanks for censoring me, fascist. Wikipedia Username 19:15, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

I know what fascism is, and there's no point in putting Charlton Heston in the letter (which I didn't write unless I'm a rich ass country musician named Charlie Daniels, which if you can't tell I'm not) due to the fact that Charlton Heston doesn't do anything wrong, all he does is love his guns and his country. And no ones going to ask you about stuff that is apart of your life, unless they're stupid because I don't care about your life, so no one else should either. And anyway I wasn't "calling" you a fascist, you are a fascist, so I was merely stating fact. I think its a bad thing to be a fascist, but I won't stop you, since I don't care what you think. How about that? Wikipedia Username 19:36, 28 July 2005 (UTC)

He has re-created it at User:Wikipedia Username/Facist Beating. Howabout1 ^{Talk to me!} 04:12, July 29, 2005 (UTC)

Canderson7's RFA

Thanks for supporting my RFA. I'm honored! --Canderson7 16:50, July 30, 2005 (UTC)

You're the Kornstar

This Admin is a saint with a name that follows his mind.

Thanks a million on all your help on the article about the Ebola Monkey, I consider it our cowork as of now. We should get together eat donuts and laugh at people doing sports sometimes.

I am slightly bemused by this. I nominated Ebola Monkey for deletion. [[smoddy]] 16:55, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

Smuddy Korns did all the research, he's elite admin of the world.

Yep. Still bemused. [[smoddy]] 17:01, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

Vir Prudens Non Contra Ventum Mingit ... You had me at hello. Is it true that you are the real Sam Korn?

A prudent man does not piss into the wind. I agree. [[smoddy]] 18:00, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for your vote of support on my recent RfA. I was quite surprised by the amount of support I received, and wish to extend my thanks to you for taking the time to support my nomination for adminship. -- Longhair | Talk 11:59, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

Changed "concept art" to a redirect?

I was just wondering why you reverted concept art article to a redirect to conceptual art? I think it quite easily deserves its own article. A quick google on the words concept art would show that there is ample evidence that this term is used for what it was defined as until you changed it. Sure it needed work as an article, but I would think that would qualify it as a stub rather than the redirect. -- wassermelone | Talk 15:38, 1 August 2005 (UTC)

Hello? I would like some response on this. Wassermelone 09:22, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the response. I think the best explanation would be to read what Concept Art is via the history. Concept Art does not follow the main definition of Conceptual art as the most important part of Concept art is the actual visualization rather than the idea. Concept art = form of Illustration, Conceptual art = Fine arts. Perhaps just a simple disambiguation page is in order? I do realize some people refer to Conceptual art as Concept art which is why I had originally put the link asking if someone had reached the concept art page in error. Wassermelone 04:25, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

Thank you!

Thank you for your support on my RfA! When I submitted it, I was unsure of how I'd do, but the support was great. I promise that I won't do anything too stupid with the trust you've given me. humblefool®^{Deletion Reform} 18:47, 2 August 2005 (UTC)

P.S. Stop by Wikipedia:Deletion reform!

Thanks

Thanks for reverting that vandalism to my user page. --Canderson7 21:36, August 2, 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism

It isn't a style dispute, though that's what the editors in question are trying to pretend that it is. If you look at the diffs that I provided, you'll see that they're persistently reverting such edits as correcting Wikilinks and MoS corrections over a wide range of articles. They have stated that they're not interested in Wikipedia style — you might also look at Talk:Vision of Love for some more discussion of the issues. Other admins have agreed that it's vandalism, and this pair are driving me crazy with their antics. A few other editors have become involved on some of the articles involved, but I'm mostly on my own in this. Please don't simply delete my request and wash your hands of it. If you don't want to get involved (and fine — I can't really blame you, I suppose), at least give someone else the chance to. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 21:42, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

That's OK — it's just that I've tried AN and AN/I, and got some sympathy (including the opinion that I was dealing with vandalism, so shouldn't worry about the 3RR) but no real help. This pair are implacable, and I'm beginning to spend half my editing time simply reverting their insistence on returning mistakes (so determined are they, that as I'm going through articles correcting them, they end up reverting different articles in contradiction — for example, within a minute or two reverting one article's infobox from "Song length" to "Length" and another from "Length" to "Song length"...). I don't in fact think that there's any doubt but that this is vandalism, but I can't block them because I'm now heavily involved in editing the articles. That's why I put the problem on Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 22:00, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

Well, I've listed it at AN (if that fails, then AN/I again...). No, I don't use IRC (it looks too much like a worse version of Usenet to me); perhaps I should look in some time. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 22:19, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

cricket

ok Smoddy

can you tell me when the four day tests ended as I seem to recollect there being four day tests in the seventies

VfD question

Smoddy: I closed the VfD on Email Triage, and deleted Image:Email Triage.pdf and Image talk:Email Triage.pdf. However, the image is still a bluelink, and when I click on it, I get the Firefox "you are downloading a PDF file" warning. I can't figure out what the heck the deal is; does it make any sense to you, and if so, what do I need to do to get rid of it? -- Essjay · Talk 12:47, August 6, 2005 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Sam Korn

It is my duty as the closing admin (I know I voted, but it was unanimous) to inform you that in line with Wikipedia's deletion policy and the decision at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Sam Korn, the Wikipedia article on you has been deleted. Please do not abuse your administrator powers to restore this article. Also, per said decision, you must be drawn and quartered; please contact me to discuss a convenient time for this. ; - ) -- Essjay · Talk 14:17, August 6, 2005 (UTC)

yeah, and keep your fans under control! :p -- Joolz 14:34, 6 August 2005 (UTC)

Glad to hear you've accepted your fate. ; - p As for the drawing & quartering, what if we skip martyrdom and I exercise my power as Protestant WikiPope to grant you a reprieve and make you a cardinal? As for the file, I don't think it really matters, the images aren't there one way or the other. I think the reason I get the pdf warning is because I have an extension that handles pdf files. -- Essjay · Talk 22:00, August 6, 2005 (UTC)

Ah, but we are Protestant only in the sense that we are protesting the two other WikiChurches. We are the editing embodiment of the one holy catholic and apostolic wiki, and thus, you may indeed be the Dean of the College of Cardinals. Perhaps I should change the title to the Catholic Church of Wikipedia or maybe just the Holy WikiChurch (like Holy Mother Church)...Anywho, enjoy your newfound position. -- Essjay · Talk 22:19, August 6, 2005 (UTC)

It is agreed then, we shall be the Catholic Church of Wikipedia. So let it be written, so let it be done! -- Essjay · Talk, Servus Servorum Jimbo 22:33, August 6, 2005 (UTC)

Fair use assessment

Hi Smoddy. I love your fair use assessment project. I hope you keep it up! Just remember that non-orphan images should be listed at WP:PUI, not WP:IFD. dbenbenn | talk 03:17, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

Supremacism

Thanks for your message. Yes, I'm forcing myself to stay away from the article for a while (though I'm worried that Germen (talk • contribs) is engaged in some heavily PoV editing there, and I've been unable so far to get anyone elde to look at it). Sill, it'll survive without me I expect... --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 22:08, 7 August 2005 (UTC)

Volunteering for the Signpost

Thanks for your comments. You would certainly be welcome to take over the featured articles beat that Spangineer is vacating, should The Signpost resume publication. For that to happen, it would take commitment from at least a few more people, but every bit helps. In any case, I will keep you posted about any future plans. --Michael Snow 15:47, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

Sam Korn

Sam

Don't seem to see you around the cricket articles so much these days:( I missed seeing this before it got deleted, and as I'm not an admin, I can't see it - I'd hate to miss what was written about you:) Could you put it on my talk page or email it to me? Cheers, jguk 15:21, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

Sam Korn

Sam

Don't seem to see you around the cricket articles so much these days:( I missed seeing this before it got deleted, and as I'm not an admin, I can't see it - I'd hate to miss what was written about you:) Could you put it on my talk page or email it to me? Cheers, jguk 15:23, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

Abraham Lincoln was a Woman

Why did you revert my entry to non existance, it was well researched and has a rightful a place as any in THAT arena of disputed Lincoln facts, sexuality or what have you. ~finis~

Thank you!

Thank you for deleting the mass of nonsense Fort Worth articles created by 172.161.129.117. I never expected such bizarre retaliation for a mere Template:Test! - Thatdog 20:17, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

Barnstar (zOMG)

:O Shiny Redwolf24 22:13, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

Sorry for the thing on IRC. Redwolf24 23:32, 15 August 2005 (UTC)

Your edit war

May I ask why you start your bullying rant on my page and do not post your message on the main collaboration talk page. Also, please cut it out. This bullying has caused so many problems in the and is so distructive. Don't you have anything else to do? If you want to contribute to the IDrive, please do something useful and add content to our project article: Spice trade.--Fenice 21:08, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

Second tagline poll - please follow this link

(This is already announced on Pump and Rfc but I'm adding it here because you contributed to the proposal talk page discussion.) Thanks! -- Sitearm | Talk 05:31, 2005 August 16 (UTC)

Thanks for the revert

Thanks for reverting that vandalism to my user page, I appreciate it. --Canderson7 13:44, August 17, 2005 (UTC)

The Ashes

See my comments at User talk:PaddyBriggs. Do yuo have a source that says all 5 days at Trent Bridge and The Oval are sold out? Even The Oval claims to have debentures and hospitality left. [2] -- ALoan (Talk) 18:05, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for reverting vandalism of my user page

80.47.160.225 (talk • contribs) seems to have a nasty agenda, and too much spare time. Adam^Rock 21:31, August 17, 2005 (UTC)

thanks

thanks

Thanks for the suggestion. There was a discussion on ending the style wars by using infoboxes on styles instead. It got an overwhelming consensus behind it. I'm an amateur at designing these things. I'll incorporate your advice. Thanks again. FearÉIREANN\^{(caint) 22:41, 17 August 2005 (UTC)}

User talk:Jimbo Wales

I believe that Jimbo prefers not to have posts removed from his talk page even if they appear to fall short of being worthy of his attention. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 19:58, 19 August 2005 (UTC)

Question...

Does User:Smoddy's underprivileged testing account actually belong to you? If it does, can you indicate this by editing it's user page using both accounts? If it doesn't, just put {{imposter|Smoddy}} on it. Thanks, Alphax ^τεχ 15:11, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

User 192.206.243.9

I noticed you placed a warning on his/her page regarding vandalism. After that another page (personal digital assistant) was "molested." Furthermore, in the past this IP has been blocked for the same thing.

• !--Your account has been blocked for 24 hours for repeated vandalism. Exploding Boy 22:16, Nov 10, 2004 (UTC)
• This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize a page you will be blocked from editing.  – Jrdioko (Talk) 19:22, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Would it be possible to block this IP indefinitely? This character is highly annoying! Please advise. Kind regard. Have left another request at GraemeL who also left a warning in the past. --Nomen Nescio 20:20, August 31, 2005 (UTC)

MCAT edit?

Would you happen to know why the reference to mcatpearls.com on 01:12, 2 September 2005 was removed? It seems no less advertisement than the brick and mortar references and is itself an open-source project that embodies Wiki's mission. Thanks for your response, 68.33.31.185 13:57, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

Featured Article Drive: Meeting (3rd September 2005)

This is a reminder that there will be a meeting of the Featured Article Drive team this evening at 20:00 GMT in our IRC channel on Freenode.

• To check what time 20:00 GMT is in your time zone, please see http://tinyurl.com/dclhr
• If you are unable to make the meeting, please let me know, and I will ensure that a link to the log is sent to you afterwards

With thanks, Rob Church ^{Talk | Desk} 15:07, 3 September 2005 (UTC)

Are you 17 yet?

Smoddy gets no older...if you're a Wiki addict you probably won't make it to Oxford. We suggest a bit of Wiki-Rehab along with User:Rje. Best wishes. --203.173.8.12 00:52, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

No, I'm still 16. I fail to see the consequence, but there we go. [[smoddy]] 17:49, 9 September 2005 (UTC)

Well, do let us know how the rehab goes. We're supporting you the whole way. --203.173.8.12 02:23, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

Preferred it when you were called Smoddy. --203.173.8.12 03:42, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for reverting that vandalism to my user page. I appreciate it. Congrats on the name change as well. --Canderson7 00:13, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Name change

Hey, you owe me one for the name change. How about celebrating it with a stub on cricket in the Latin wikipedia? (PS. If you ever change your mind...why the name smoddy?... you are free to email me. ;) ) =Nichalp «Talk»= 07:06, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

Ah, just seen the name change. That's another one to the list of Sams...maybe time to start Category:Wikipedians called Sam ;)? Sam Vimes 21:57, 15 September 2005 (UTC)

Your comments on my RfA

Gordon, I am saying this to you now in the hope that you will see some sense. I remind you that Wikipedia is run by consensus. There is clearly not going to be consensus for your promotion. Therefore it is prudent and acceptable for it to be removed. You haven't got some kind of democratic right to keep your nomination going ad nauseam. Any poll on Wikipedia where there is no chance of consensus for an action should be stopped. This is for the good of you, but primarily for the good of the encyclopaedia. To be honest, I think Rdsmith4 was mistaken in restoring your nomination. I remind you again that Wikipedia is run by consensus, not petty rules-lawyering.

And I also suggest that, in future, you tone down your stringent self-defence. I might have considered voting for you. However, your rudeness and aggression clearly showed to me that you have not got the temperament to be an admin.

I say this not out of malice but out of the hope that you are capable of recognising the will of the community.

[[Sam Korn]] 11:26, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

"There is clearly not going to be consensus for your promotion." Well, it's looking "mathematically bad," but you never know -if I get a fair hearing. After all, there are about 10,000 Wikipedians, right? What's 20 or 30 here or there? "I remind you that Wikipedia is run by consensus." Yes, but with a vote close prematurely -no matter how you think it would have turned out --that is not true concensus. Let there be one week of concensus -and then I will accept a final vote. "Therefore it is prudent and acceptable for it to be removed." That assumes I will lose, but Bill Clinton was behind former Pres. George H.W. Bush, Sr., and all looked hopeless, yet he didn't lose? He also didn't quit, which was important. Ross Perot, who also ran for President in our country was ahead, but he quit. This is silly: Letting my RfA run this week will not harm anything, but not letting it run will allow the ill will and abuse continue as it has in the past RfA's, and that is not good. You haven't got some kind of democratic right to keep your nomination going ad nauseam. No, but I do have a moral (and policy now) right for it to go this week, and I wish it to go to clear the air. "This is for the good of you, but primarily for the good of the encyclopaedia." No: If people can't handle this, then they don't need to be here at Wikipedia: No one is forcing other users to vote or participate and somehow get ill will. "However, your rudeness..." You are mistaken: Not only have I tried to be polite, I have also succeeded: "Gordon, I have a few thoughts about your RFA...First, I am pleased that you have managed to maintain a civil demeanor in the face of criticism. I've seen some RfA’s that have turned very ugly and resulted in a lot of hurt feelings all around, and I congratulate you for not letting yours turn into another of those...TenOfAllTrades(talk) 04:55, 15 September 2005 (UTC)" "I say this not out of malice but out of the hope that you are capable of recognising the will of the community." If the community want my respect, then they will have to earn it; I admit when I am wrong, for example, I lost my temper and called one user a "hypocrite" because he appeared to criticise me for using a textbook definition of some word in one of my edits, but I apologised and admitted I was wrong; However, apparently others, who simply follow the crowd, don't want to admit they are wrong when they claim that an Admin position requires a certain number of edits per page and all kinds of requirements.

Please also note that I have been misquoted numerous times, and people are criticising me for things that admins do -yet they don't seek to remove the admins for being as argumentive as I am. I understand the you don't like a person who argues, but, what if I'm correct in my main claims: Question 1: Would it be right for me to remain silent? Think about that, and then answer me at your leisure.

Think also about this: Question 2: Why did the people who know me support me a lot more? Maybe thay trust me and don't just look at "edit numbers" or "concentrating on Schiavo?"

Question 3: Is the majority always right?

Question 4: Since Wikipedians are not forced to read a page such as my RfA, then how would it harm them to let it remain posted for this week?

Last Question: #5:Did you actually read through the abuse that was directed to me -and read my responses in my RfA?--GordonWatts 12:02, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

Your comments on my RfA

Gordon, I am saying this to you now in the hope that you will see some sense. I remind you that Wikipedia is run by consensus. There is clearly not going to be consensus for your promotion. Therefore it is prudent and acceptable for it to be removed. You haven't got some kind of democratic right to keep your nomination going ad nauseam. Any poll on Wikipedia where there is no chance of consensus for an action should be stopped. This is for the good of you, but primarily for the good of the encyclopaedia. To be honest, I think Rdsmith4 was mistaken in restoring your nomination. I remind you again that Wikipedia is run by consensus, not petty rules-lawyering.

And I also suggest that, in future, you tone down your stringent self-defence. I might have considered voting for you. However, your rudeness and aggression clearly showed to me that you have not got the temperament to be an admin.

I say this not out of malice but out of the hope that you are capable of recognising the will of the community.

[[Sam Korn]] 11:26, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

"There is clearly not going to be consensus for your promotion." Well, it's looking "mathematically bad," but you never know -if I get a fair hearing. After all, there are about 10,000 Wikipedians, right? What's 20 or 30 here or there? "I remind you that Wikipedia is run by consensus." Yes, but with a vote close prematurely -no matter how you think it would have turned out --that is not true concensus. Let there be one week of concensus -and then I will accept a final vote. "Therefore it is prudent and acceptable for it to be removed." That assumes I will lose, but Bill Clinton was behind former Pres. George H.W. Bush, Sr., and all looked hopeless, yet he didn't lose? He also didn't quit, which was important. Ross Perot, who also ran for President in our country was ahead, but he quit. This is silly: Letting my RfA run this week will not harm anything, but not letting it run will allow the ill will and abuse continue as it has in the past RfA's, and that is not good. You haven't got some kind of democratic right to keep your nomination going ad nauseam. No, but I do have a moral (and policy now) right for it to go this week, and I wish it to go to clear the air. "This is for the good of you, but primarily for the good of the encyclopaedia." No: If people can't handle this, then they don't need to be here at Wikipedia: No one is forcing other users to vote or participate and somehow get ill will. "However, your rudeness..." You are mistaken: Not only have I tried to be polite, I have also succeeded: "Gordon, I have a few thoughts about your RFA...First, I am pleased that you have managed to maintain a civil demeanor in the face of criticism. I've seen some RfA’s that have turned very ugly and resulted in a lot of hurt feelings all around, and I congratulate you for not letting yours turn into another of those...TenOfAllTrades(talk) 04:55, 15 September 2005 (UTC)" "I say this not out of malice but out of the hope that you are capable of recognising the will of the community." If the community want my respect, then they will have to earn it; I admit when I am wrong, for example, I lost my temper and called one user a "hypocrite" because he appeared to criticise me for using a textbook definition of some word in one of my edits, but I apologised and admitted I was wrong; However, apparently others, who simply follow the crowd, don't want to admit they are wrong when they claim that an Admin position requires a certain number of edits per page and all kinds of requirements.

Please also note that I have been misquoted numerous times, and people are criticising me for things that admins do -yet they don't seek to remove the admins for being as argumentive as I am. I understand the you don't like a person who argues, but, what if I'm correct in my main claims: Question 1: Would it be right for me to remain silent? Think about that, and then answer me at your leisure.

Think also about this: Question 2: Why did the people who know me support me a lot more? Maybe thay trust me and don't just look at "edit numbers" or "concentrating on Schiavo?"

Question 3: Is the majority always right?

Question 4: Since Wikipedians are not forced to read a page such as my RfA, then how would it harm them to let it remain posted for this week?

Last Question: #5:Did you actually read through the abuse that was directed to me -and read my responses in my RfA?--GordonWatts 12:03, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

My User Name - DKorn

Korn is my middle name and my mother's maiden name. She has relatives in Wisconsin. Where is your family from? --DKorn 18:19, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

thank you for the feedback, Smoddy

Thank you for the feedback, Sam.

It is sometimes difficult to choose between speaking up and remaining silent. There is a time for both (Ecclesiastes, The Preacher from the Old Testament).

This is one good reason to speak up, but no, I don't intend to rant on and on forever:

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=%22if+the+rights+of+one+are+violated%2C+the+rights+of+all+are+at+risk%22+%22thomas+paine%22

** "If the rights of one are violated, the rights of all are at risk" --Thomas Paine **

You see what I mean, right? While I will probably not be adversely harmed by what I am sure are various failures to keep the promise to follow policy, this happens to other people (greater quantity), and some of them are more sensitive than I am (greater QUALITY), so I want to make sure future Wikipedians (RfA candidates included) get treated fairly.

Incidentally, Thomas Paine was probably not a Christian, as shown by his making fun of miracles and such, but I feel that I must speak out now, because I have the best chance to effect change when I have the attention of others.

What started out as a request to help myself to a few extra tools, no more, ended up as a request to stop selectively mistreating others -whether intended or not, this partiality is inappropriate and oftentimes unnecessary.

--GordonWatts 09:48, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

The charter is here. (Relating to Esperanza)

Hello Sam Korn, the Charter for Esperanza is up. Take a looksie :) Redwolf24 (talk) 02:57, 19 September 2005 (UTC)

Requesting feedback on Opus Dei article

Hi Smoddy, I was just checking the people who have helped in editing the Opus Dei article. And I saw what you did to revert the edit of somebody who replaced texts with black spaces. May I ask your help to check if the Opus Dei article is ready to be nominated as a feature article? I saw that you are the Dean of Cardinals in the Wikipedia: Catholic church, so I said to myself that you might have a lot of things to say. Thanks. :) Thomas S. Major 07:56, 20 September 2005 (UTC)

Esperanza made less bureaucratic

Hello again, I have (unilatterly) taken away the 'assembly' idea, as per my reasons at that edit summary and per Wikipedia talk:Esperanza/Charter. I have left the admin general, as some leadership is good. Now, all you have to do is be a member to establish consensus, the whole assembly idea is gone. Also, I have added an advisory committee, of four members, with limited power besides watching over the admin general and making sure he doesn't do anything stupid. Please look at the ammended charter, and I would love a comment. Redwolf24 (talk) 00:30, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

The last time I'm spamming you all with Esperanza stuff

Hello Sam Korn. As you may or may not know, there have been some troubles with Esperanza. So now, as a last ditch to save the community, please vote at Wikipedia:Esperanza/Reform on all neccisary polls. P.S. I'm very sorry for spamming you all with these messages, and this will be the last time. I recommend putting ESP on your watchlist. Cheers and please look at that, let's stop the civil war then. Redwolf24 (talk) 02:53, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

== Last over in tied test ==

Smoddy, links added to both matches for last over details -- Ian ≡ talk 17:19, 28 September 2005 (UTC)

MedCom

Sam, would you please meet me some time on IRC #wikipedia? I'd like to talk to you about your offer to join the Mediation Committee. You know that we desperately need the help, but I'd like to ask you a few questions, okay? Uncle Ed 00:41, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Are you awake yet? I'd like to get better acquainted with you, especially if we're going to working together on the Mediation Committee.

Please drop me a note on me user page and/or contact me on the #wikipedia IRC channel. Uncle Ed 11:51, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

How to locate a project manager

How to locate Project Manager for a given Category or page? To help resolve a dispute over inclusion in a Category, with someone who by his own admission says he doesn't know the proper definition of the Category, and thinks it should be abolished anyway, but who also believes he is entitled to delete the Category reference from the Page. Will provide details if you wish. Thank you. Steve Harnish 16:24, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Details would be very useful indeed. Bring it up either here, at WP:ANI or at my talk page, if you prefer. Cheers, (Sam Korn) 16:35, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Hi Sam. There is an existing category for "Zen master." The dispute is over whether Richard Rose, who I added to the Category, really deserves the link, which was removed by Nat Krause. Nat admits in the RR talk page that although he practices Zen Buddhism, he really doesn't know what a Zen master is and that he has recommended that the category itself shouldn't even exist. I was hoping as a compormise to have Richard Rose included in the category on a temporary basis, and if those who watch the Category follow the link to the Richard Rose site, and object to his inclusion, they will be free to make their opinion known on the talk page. Nat Krause has made a number of specious arguments because of his lack of understanding of Zen, insisting it should be regarded primarially as a social phenomena. Thanks for your interest. Here's the Richard Rose Talk page Steve Harnish 18:29, 30 September 2005 (UTC)

Cricket

Hi Smoddy, sorry to bother u again, could you let me know the Latin word for cricket is?. I'm going to write a stub there. Thanks =Nichalp «Talk»= 15:25, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, Basipila is Latin for baseball; I wonder if it helps. "Cricket" est ludus athleticus praesertim commonwealthus. Does it make any sense? I did a google search on those terms but nothing interesting turned up. =Nichalp «Talk»= 16:59, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, that would do. :) =Nichalp «Talk»= 17:33, 1 October 2005 (UTC)

Ashes

Oops, I should have checked; I found it on the Ashes article and just appropriated it. I'll be more watchful in future. I'ce removed it from my Talk page too. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 08:52, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

Systemwars.com

Hi. Can I get your opinion of Tony's latest recreation and relisting of a valid VfD deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Systemwars.com (second version). Thanks. - Tεxτurε 15:48, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

Newest Mediators

Hello Sam Korn, welcome to the WP:MC. I hope you read WP:M and look over WP:RFM. I will notify you upon case assignation, though you're always welcome to take a case without being assigned. Enjoy and you know where to find me if you have questions. Ed Poor, Catherine, Andre, Improv, and Asbestos, and Flcelloguy would be willing to help out too I'm sure. Again, welcome! Redwolf24 (talk) 00:55, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

Welcome aboard!

Welcome aboard the Mediation Committee, Smoddy! I look forward to working with you as a mediator. Also, I would suggest you add your email to the mediation mailing list; there's been some recent discussion there. Congrats! Flcelloguy | A note? | Desk | W_S 01:47, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

WP:CP

Hi, you've reported copyright infringements to WP:CP in the last week, a new measure was recently passed to allow the speedy deltion of new pages that are cut and paste copyvios. Please follow these instructions if you come across this type of copyvio. Thanks. --nixie 00:29, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Blatant copyright infringements may now be "speedied" If an article and all its revisions are unquestionably copied from the website of a commercial content provider and there is no assertion of permission, ownership or fair use and none seems likely, and the article is less than 48 hours old, it may be speedily deleted. See CSD A8 for full conditions. After notifying the uploading editor by using wording similar to: {{nothanks-sd|pg=page name|url=url of source}} -- ~~~~ Blank the page and replace the text with {{db-copyvio|url=url of source}} to the article in question, leaving the content visible. An administrator will examine the article and decide whether to speedily delete it or not.

Thank you for supporting my RfA!

Dear Sam: I would like to thank you very much for your support of my RfA. I am most honoured by the trust that has been placed in me by yourself and other members of the Wikipedia community. I promise to only use my administrative privileges to assist the community in doing good work, and also to be calm, considerate and careful in working to make Wikipedia a better place. I know you did try to nominate me before via IRC; however, to be perfectly honest, I didn't really think I had a hope in hell of passing RfA with my present edit count, let alone my edit count a few months ago! It has been a pleasure conversing with you via IRC, and I look forward to doing so in the future, as well as working with you on Wikipedia. All the best, --NicholasTurnbull | (talk) (e-mail) (cabal) 01:56, 8 October 2005 (UTC)

David Mertz article

I listed the David Mertz article for deletion once again, just wanted to see if you still had an issue with it or wanted to vote. --ScottyBoy900Q 16:51, 9 October 2005 (UTC)

WP:MC Blanking?

Hey Smoddy, any particular reason why you blanked so much content at WP:MC? My vote for Karmafist was among the content removed. Acetic'^Acid 20:01, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

That's all right. I'll give it a try. Sorry that I delay-double posted this topic. The lag has been killing me. x_x Acetic'^Acid 20:44, 10 October 2005 (UTC)

Your input would be welcomed

It's just an idea at the moment, but I'd welcome the input from a few people regarding my thoughts for an article rating competition. It would be great if you could take a look - feel free to edit any part of it and comment on the talk page. If you don't have time then no worries. Cheers, violet/riga (t) 10:07, 1 November 2005 (UTC)

RFM

Hey Sam... we have 4 requests, and 1 active mediator with no cases. Thus, feel free to pick which case you want... I'll figure out what to do with the other three. Cheers! Redwolf24 (talk) 00:53, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

Mediation for DOM

Johnski is willing as far as I know to accept mediation. Frankly I'm disappointed with your response. This has been a chronic problem that no one has been willing to help with. The problem I have, is those that are moderators (and in this case the mediation committee) seem to do little or nothing to help when there is a legitimate problem with vandalism. I've reported Johnski numerous times for 3RR violation. Has he been banned? Of course not! I have also asked for a IP check, to see who a bunch of diffrent users are, some of which we believe are sockpuppets Johnski uses. Again I wasn't able to get a response back.

So my question back to you is, why in the heck should anyone care about people who trash good articles on Wikipedia, when nothing is done? Please tell me what you think should be done? I'm honestly sick of nothing being done. I don't mean to be pissy, but I'm quite frustrated. Davidpdx 03:04, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

To answer your question about my mention of Johnski's behavior, it is partly that because he fails to follow the rules. Wouldn't you agree that is a behavioral issue? Yes, to some extent there is a "content dispute" in that the content Johnski and his many sockpuppets have been inserting material aganist consensus and without out proper documentation. I hope that clarifies the question. Davidpdx 04:32, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

You do what you please with the case, and if you feel it's legit and everyone accepts, then you get to be the mediator, and put it in #in progress. Then see Template:MedComOpenTasks and get it underway, as the cases you accepted before seem to have been rejected by people involved, so you're STILL free. Redwolf24 (talk) 04:42, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

RFM

K, you've referred that case to RFC... so be ready to take the next case that pops up, though now Joan of Arc as Stevertigo's taking it... Redwolf24 (talk) 23:03, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

David Patrick Taylor

Hi Mr. Korn. I noticed you removed the copyvio notice on this page. Could you point me to the archived discussion you mentioned in your edit. Also, what's the standard procedure when an editor claims permission to use material? Should the article be immediately reverted and the notice removed from the copyvio page? There are currently a few articles I've copyvio tagged that are in this situation- would like to revert them if that's ok. Thanks for your input. --JJay 15:55, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

Ok, thanks much for your rapid response. --JJay 16:20, 7 November 2005 (UTC)