I will respond to messages on this page. Please check your contributions list ("My contributions") for responses. If there is a response, your edit is no longer the "top" edit in the list.

Unlike other Wikipedians I don't archive Talk pages since old revisions are automatically archived anyway - if you want to access previous comments use the "Page history" function. But I keep a log of the removals:

• Removed all comments prior to Jan 2003. --Eloquence 04:42 Jan 1, 2003 (UTC)
• Removed all comments prior to Feb 2003. --Eloquence 10:19 Feb 3, 2003 (UTC)
• Removed all comments prior to March 2003. --Eloquence 21:19 Mar 3, 2003 (UTC)
• Removed all comments prior to April 2003. --Eloquence 08:14 25 May 2003 (UTC)
• Removed all comments up to May 31 2003. -Eloquence 19:14 31 May 2003 (UTC)
• Removed all comments up to June 21, 2003. --Eloquence 18:58 21 Jun 2003 (UTC)
• Removed all comments up to July 3, 2003. --Eloquence 21:51 3 Jul 2003 (UTC)
• Removed all comments up to July 22, 2003. --Eloquence 09:07 24 Jul 2003 (UTC)
• Removed all comments up to August 28, 2003.—Eloquence 02:11, Aug 28, 2003 (UTC)
• Removed all comments up to October 15, 2003.—Eloquence 22:39, Oct 15, 2003 (UTC)
• Removed all comments up to December 5, 2003.—Eloquence 15:17, Dec 5, 2003 (UTC)
• Removed all comments up to December 20, 2003.—Eloquence 12:42, Dec 20, 2003 (UTC)
• Removed all comments up to February 23, 2004.—Eloquence 23:57, Feb 22, 2004 (UTC)
• Removed all comments up to April 2, 2004.--Eloquence* 09:12, Apr 3, 2004 (UTC)
• Removed all comments up to June 3, 2004.--Eloquence* 12:07, Jun 4, 2004 (UTC)
• Removed all comments up to December 24, 2004.--Eloquence* 11:25, Dec 25, 2004 (UTC)

Thank you for your message. It was very sweet surprise. Not what I normally expect when I visit my talk page. :) Merry Christmas darling. Angela. 20:13, Dec 24, 2004 (UTC)

Nope - that was wikibooks:user:Karl Wick. --mav 00:38, 25 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll get in touch with him.--Eloquence*

I like what you did with the handbook sidebar template!

Thanks.--Eloquence*

Image:Eloq-pic2.jpg currently has no license information. No doubt you know what to do. This is part of Wikipedia:Untagged Images. 119 08:06, 5 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I don't know if you're following the QuakeAID article... following the tsunami someone inserted an article on a rather odd outfit that purports to be an earthquake-relief charity, and the article has now been NPOV-ed to a fare-thee-well. Anyway, someone was amused/indignant about the fact that QuakeAID sells CafePress items to raise money, and was particularly amused/indignant about a thong being one of those items.

I thought he was going overboard, and checked, and noted that Wikipedia sell thongs too. See Talk:QuakeAID#Who_cares_about_what_they_sell_on_CafePress.3F.

But to satisfy my curiosity... how did it happen that we sell Wikipedia thongs? Did someone consciously say, "Oh, let's have a thong?" Are the items chosen individually? Or is there some handy box you check that instantly signs you up for some package deal of a dozen popular clothing items that just happen to include a thong? I have no objection at all to the decision, I just wondered what the process was. Dpbsmith (talk) 03:10, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)

For Premium Shops, it is quite easy to add an entire product range with the same logo. That's what I did, and the thong was one of them.--Eloquence* 05:47, Jan 13, 2005 (UTC)

As an active editor on Wikinews, it's plain that we need a good new logo, and as soon as possible. We now have plenty of proposals and it really is time to chose. I hope you'll support the commencement of the voting stage in the very near future. We cannot put this off any longer, several previous 'end dates' for logo proposals have come and gone for little benefit. All that's achieved is to leave us with the horrid existing logo for longer. Dan100 19:17, Jan 14, 2005 (UTC)

Voting will begin on Saturday or Sunday.--Eloquence* 21:17, Jan 14, 2005 (UTC)

Hi. I was image tagging, and I came across Image:Horseshoes.jpg. Could you tell me where the photo comes from? Thanks, – Quadell ^{(talk) (help)} 13:03, Jan 18, 2005 (UTC)

Dear Eloquence

I tried to post a link to Dr. Linz's response to the US Senate Subcommittee hearing on The Science Behind Pornography Addiction. The link was blocked as being a porno link. The referenced article is contained on the website operated by the Free Speech Coalition (FSC). The FSC is the trade association of the adult entertainment industry and has no illict photos or content on the site. Please take a look at the site:

http://www.freespeechcoalition.com/index.htm

Dr. Linz's article may be found at:

http://www.freespeechcoalition.com/dan_linz.htm

As you can see, it is a serious website dealing with First Amendment issues. As I maintain the website for FSC, I'd be interested in discussing the sharing of content.

Yours, Sid Grief FSC Internet Committee

Hi,

the URL is not in our spam blacklist. Maybe someone just reverted your addition? Could you tell me when and where you made it?--Eloquence* 02:26, Jan 19, 2005 (UTC)

Hi, after a vote we've chosen a new logo for WN. Could you upload it for us? Dan100 00:44, Jan 26, 2005 (UTC)

It doesn't seem to be clear yet which specific logo won. Besides, we absolutely need a transparent version, because the logo is placed above a non-white background in the standard skin, and users can customize their stylesheets as well.--Eloquence* 05:41, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC)

How to update LanguageRu.php in CVS and Wikipedia?

We worked on the file much, but more than year we can not update it in CVS! (See: meta:LanguageRu.php and it's history). It is not enough use of the messages of MediaWiki namespace.

What about meta:Requests for languageXX.php update page? How I can contribute to Wikipedia in this field?

and to whom it is possible to address this questions? :) --.:Ajvol:. 07:26, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Are you familiar with IRC? The developers usually hang out on #mediawiki on irc.freenode.net. The right person to talk to would be User:Brion VIBBER, who hands out CVS access. In the past we've been fairly liberal in doing that, but I'm not sure if that's still the case.--Eloquence* 03:24, Jan 28, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll try IRC. Unfortunately Brion VIBBER is on WikiBreak. --.:Ajvol:. 08:00, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Hi and sorry to bother you, but since you wrote the text on the Wikipedia:Fair use page, and we (at the Portuguese Wikipedia) are discussing if we will allow fair use or not on pt.Wikipedia, I would like to know what do you think about other languages using fair use content... in Brazil we do have a law that allows partial reproduction of copyrighted material (for partial and non-commercial use), but some users are questioning if whether this material should be allowed or not since the fair use provision of U.S. law is quite hard to understand.

Some users are affraid that Wikimedia may suffer legal actions if this kind of image is used, especially if someone tries to sell Wikipedia content. But, in this case, isn't the person who is selling the content the responsable for copying and selling the copyrighted content rather than Wikimedia Foundation? This is quite a difficult thing to be discussed... thank you for your time. --Ikescs 01:10, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Just thought I'd give a heads up here - Montel Williams did a show about the "teen help industry" tuesday last week.

Thought you might be interested in putting that in the WWASPS page. Furthermore, Dr. Phil sent a kid to Provo canyon school - another notoriously abusive place, referred to in the www.askquestions.org/aritcles/teens aritcle. The only print publication to talk about it so far is.... The National Enquirer. Go fig.

Hi,

Not sure what the best way to get this message to a Wikiadmin is, so I apologize if there's a better way.

The spamfilter's block on the "citibank spammer" includes a block on .com addresses with five or more consequtive digits in them. This unfortunately includes www.nyc10044.com, which I planned to add as a reference on the Roosevelt Island page.

Can this be somehow easily fixed?

Thanks!

J.D.

Happy Birthday darling. :) Angela. 14:19, Jan 30, 2005 (UTC)

Happy birthday! have a good one -- sannse (talk) 16:56, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Here is one that isn't fair use.

Hi Eric,

There is a debate that I think would interest you. Put simply a group of wikipedians have decided to add in styles into articles. Styles are formal methods of address used for specific office-holders. Standard encyclopaedic structure does not use them because

(i) they can be mis-interpreted as expressing a point of view. For example, using His Holiness for biographies on popes can (and is) seen by some as accepting or even stating that a particular pope is "Holy". Similarly calling Tony Blair the "Right Honourable" can be mis-interpreted by some as suggesting that the encyclopaedia is saying that Blair is both 'right' and 'honourable'.

(ii) If some office-holders are referred to by using their styles, then all office-holders should be. Which means that every US Congressman should be called an 'Honourable', all presidents must be called an "Excellency", etc.

(iii) some people may officially be entitled to be described using a style, but they themselves may be discredited or even be a criminal. But if styles are used, they still would have to be referred to style, because choosing not to do so would be expressing a POV. For example, if Saddam Hussein was still Iraqi president, he would have to be called "His Excellency Saddam Hussein". Similarly Robert Mugabe has to be called "His Excellency". Catholic prelates who have been convicted of raping children would still have to be called 'Eminence', 'Grace' or whatever.

Because of these and numerous other reasons the Wikipedia:Naming conventions (names and titles) page discussed the use of styles and decided they should not be used but they should be explained. In other words, articles in individual popes should not begin "His Holiness Pope Pius XII . . . " but would simply begin "Pope Pius XII". Later in the article, matter-of-factly, it would be said "Pope Pius XII was styled His Holiness. So you point out factually the existence of a style (which really you have to do, whether you like it or not), in the interests of NPOV but you don't use it.

However a small number of users have highjacked all royal, papal, imperial and other articles and jammed them full of styles; His Holiness, His Royal Highness, Her Serene Highness, His Majesty, etc etc.

Though it was agreed not to use styles on the naming conventions page (which deals with all royal and titled names) the people putting in the styles refuse to accept that rule, saying that the Manual of Style allows them. It doesn't. It allows the use of something marginally different (the use of Mr. Mrs. Ms. Dr. Sir, Dame, etc). They have mixed up two subtlely different but importantly different terms and are abusing the Manual of Style rules to justify cramming HMs, HHs, HRH, HSHs, etc through wikipedia.

We haven't always agreed, but I do respect your opinion. I think you can see the problem with calling popes, for example, "His Holiness" in articles even if the small group reverting all articles to make sure 'His Holiness' is kept in, don't. Pope John Paul II is just one example where there have been major flare-ups. Your comments would be welcome. FearÉIREANN 18:57, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Hi James. It's nice to see you back in action and I hope we can develop a better working relationship than on the dreaded page whose name shall not be mentioned ;-). I'm inclined to agree with you on the titles issue, but I'm not sure how I can help. Wikipedia:Manual of Style (biographies) cites "His Holiness", "the Right Honourable" as specific examples, but I note that this section of the page is currently being edit warred over. I think thet best thing to do would probably to hold a vote on Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (biographies). If that happens, I'd appreciate a quick notice.--Eloquence* 20:40, Feb 9, 2005 (UTC)

I wasn't sure how often you check into Simple... I have no objection to making them look dissimilar under those circumstances. Forgive me, but I was unaware of the context of your change to the tagline. I will puzzle it through and see how we can accomplish it. Related to that, do you know anyone who can finally make us a custom logo? I put a request on meta: quite some time ago, but noone's come through. It's "option E" at simple:Wikipedia:Simple talk#Logo. -- Netoholic @ 22:42, 2005 Feb 11 (UTC)

A slogan contest might help. Re: the logo, what exactly needs to be done? A transparent version? User:Nohat may be able to help with that.--Eloquence* 01:36, Feb 12, 2005 (UTC)

Not a bad idea about the contest. I tried contacting Nohat directly on his talk page, and made a general request on meta:Requests for logos#Requests but never got any reply. Can you ask on the mailing list for any graphics people who can help out? -- Netoholic @ 01:48, 2005 Feb 12 (UTC)

Per your request, I posted an unrotated version of the "lit" Wikinews logo design on the Wikinews logo variants page. — DV 10:05, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I put some notes and ideas on my 1.0 ramblings page, User:David Gerard/1.0, which Jimbo liked a bit. As I've noted on wikien-l and wikitech-l, he suggests (and I think it's a brilliant idea) that we set up a simple rating system on a larger wikipedia (e.g. en:) and just gather data for a month or whatever. Then release the data for people to see if it makes any useful sense. Magnus Manske wrote some very beta rating code, but he says it'll take a bit of beating before being ready for a production system. If I could program, I'd be onto it so fast ... - David Gerard 12:50, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I presume the following two interlinked pages where written by different people with different opinions and hence have contradictory contents. Please refer to different version Yuganskneftegas auction.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yukos http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baikalfinansgroup

Would you please consider in view of current on going events, to raise both the article to "disputed neutrality" level.

Gruß aus Ulm,

Wiz.ard

Can someone give a credible source for either version?

"Accounts from the auction say that the first bid of $8.6bn came from Baikal. When the auctioneer asked Gazpromneft to offer its price, a representative of the company asked to make a telephone call and left the room. A few minutes earlier, the auctioneer had told participants that using a mobile phone or leaving the room was against the rules. When a Gazpromneft representative returned to the room, Baikal made a bid of $9.3bn. Gazpromneft never placed a bid or spoke out."

"The auction took place on December 19, 2004. Only two companies participated: Gazprom and Baikalfinansgroup. Gazprom bid the initial price, then Baikalfinansgroup increased the bid to $9.3 billion US."

Where's the wikipedia wifebeater? The girls get all the nice tanks but the guys get nothing. I want a wikipedia wifebeater/male tanktop. - User:Sprewell

Alas, Cafepress doesn't have wifebeaters. The best I can offer you is a sleeveless tee.--Eloquence* 03:11, Feb 19, 2005 (UTC)

Hello, Eloquence, please help in updating the interface on Ro.Wikipedia and Ro.Wikinews. The file can be found at m:LanguageRo.php, I don't know how to use CVS, so please update if zou have some free time, the interface, and use this file, for all new projects that will be launched in the future. Also, all other romanian projects use the old interface, so it will be great if you could change all, but I guess you are very buisy, so I don't insist. Thank you.

And, another issue: Can I become an admin on ro.Wikinews? --Danutz

Hello Danutz, please fix LanguageRo.php first -- it has explicit references to Wikipedia. References in text should be replaced with "{{SITENAME}}", references in links (namespace prefix) with "Project:".

As a developer I'm not allowed to give you admin access. You will have to go through a steward instead (yes, stupid procedures, I know).--Eloquence* 10:05, Feb 19, 2005 (UTC)

Ok, I changed m:LanguageRo.php. I guess you need the Romanian names also (some donnot have separate language versions yet).

1. Wikipedia -> Wikipedia ;
2. Wiktionary -> Wikţionar ;
3. Wikibooks -> Wikimanuale ;
4. Wikiqoute -> Wikicitat ;
5. Wikisource -> Wikisursă ;
6. Wikispecies -> Wikispecii ;
7. Wikimedia Commons -> Wikimedia Commons ;
8. Wikinews -> Wikinews ;

That's all that you should need, I guess. --Danutz

First of all, the file currently on Meta is incomplete and broken. I had to manually combine it with the full LanguageRo.php and fix a few issues (mostly text escaping). It should work now, though. The updated file has been checked into HEAD and REL1_4 and is now in use on the live site. The bad news is that about 10 days of changes to the ro.wikipedia MediaWiki namespace may have gotten lost in the process of updating things. Please check ro:Special:Allmessages and make sure that nothing important is missing. Sorry for the inconvenience.--Eloquence* 15:44, Feb 19, 2005 (UTC)

Hi Erik,
Since you announced the opening of the portuguese edition of Wikinews, many experient users from WP:PT started to translate and create the necessary pages. So far, so good, but at this time, some changes need to be made at the software, since you have developer permissions, I would like to ask you to make the necessary changes.
I'm preparing to start a poll to elect at least 1 sysop, if he accept's (should be e2m, I'm waiting for a response, a great and very experient admin of the WP:PT).
Thanks, Get It 03:12, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Hi,

as I already explained to Carlosar, sysops can only be created by stewards - developers are not meant to do this (though they technically can). Is there anything else that needs to be done besides creating a sysop? I do not speak Portuguese, unfortunately.--Eloquence* 03:48, Feb 20, 2005 (UTC)

My bad, sorry about that. Well, I'm afraid that the stewards will give sysop access to users that don't have experience with the software. I'll make a request at the Requests for permissions page.

Thanks -- Get It 15:36, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

hi, i was blocked today for "vandalism".i am new to wiki so i kept trying to put in the article below because i thought i was doing it wrong when it kept disappearing.it seems another administrator was taking it off because of some kind of dispute; and since i kept trying to put it on has now blocked me. i tried to message that person but they have me blocked from contact. i am contacting you to get un-blocked. paulrevere2005 21:42, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)21:42, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)21:42, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)21:42, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)21:42, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)21:42, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)21:42, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)21:42, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)21:42, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)21:42, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)~~ Hunter Thompson on the radio; Jan.2003; “we'll see what happens to me if I …commit suicide … with no witnesses."

22 February 2005

In a Jan. 2003 interview Thompson gave on KDNK in the Roaring Fork Valley in Colorado, Thompson railed at the state of America; (source;democracynow.org) "Bush is really the evil one here and it is more than just him. We are the Nazis in this game and I don't like it. I am embarrassed and I am pissed off. I mean to say something. I think a lot of people in this country agree with me -...we'll see what happens to me if I get my head cut off next week -- it is always unknown or bushy-haired strangers who commit suicide right afterwards with no witnesses." On February 20, Hunter S. Thompson was found dead from an apparent suicide. Thompson coined the phrase "gonzo journalism" and his most recent book, [[1]] "Hey Rube: Blood Sport, the Bush Doctrine, and the Downward Spiral of Dumbness", portrays his view that the younger George Bush is evil in spirit as well as deeds; "Bush is a charming man who was born Evil". In the book, Thompson goes on to describe a strategy of "dumbing down the voters" being at work within the current administration. Publishers Weekly describes it as "decidedly anti-bush with references such as; "The Bush family appeared on TV hooting & sneering at the dumbness of the whole world." Thompson wrote an earlier book in 1990 about an "evil George H.W. Bush" titled "Songs of the Doomed: More Notes on the Death of the American Dream". On July 18, 2001, James Howard Hatfield, 43, Author Of "Fortunate Son: George W. Bush and the Making of an American President" [[2]] was found dead in a hotel room; also from an apparent suicide. In "Fortunate Son," Hatfield was the first to write a book claiming George W. Bush had used cocaine extensively and Hatfield was the first to expose the investment Salem bin Laden(Osama’s brother) made in Arbusto Oil(the president's first oil company). Hatfield claimed that a judge had expunged a criminal cocaine case against W. and given him community service as a favor to George Bush Sr., who was ambassador to the United Nations at the time. paulrevere2005

Sources; http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=05/02/23/164218 www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1887128751 http://www.lovearth.net/fortunateson.htm www.simonsays.com/content/content.cfm?sid=33&pid=411789 www.detnews.com/2004/books/0408/18/books-246421.htm Kevin Cowherd / The Baltimore Sun http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/4282865.stm http://story.news.yahoo.com/fc?cid=34&tmpl=fc&in=Entertainment&cat=Hunter_S__Thompson http://www.buzzflash.com/interviews/2001/05/Jim_Hatfield_053101.html http://www.independent-media.tv/item.cfm?fmedia_id=1965&fcategory_desc=Under+Reported http://search.barnesandnoble.com/booksearch/isbnInquiry.asp?userid=gF4iq7jALK&isbn=0684873192&itm=1#REV

Hi Eloquence,

My name is ngungo, and you have helped me once on phpMyAdmin through your girl friend Angela’s user page. Anyway, would you please help me again! Please. I post this problem on the mailing list already but it seems no-one interested. I also sent you an email of this matter, wondering if it'd go through spam filter.

What I try to do is: Right after hitting Save Page button, it would trigger a javascript routine (to do some client side string manipulation) then trigger a php subroutine (to save a string of text into a designated existing page i.e. Special:Text) before resume back to normal task (saving the curent page.)

If you have any questions please let me know. Thanks in advance,

ngungo

I checked out the CafePress store, and saw that Wikipedia has very little in merchandise except stuff with its logo stuck on it. Pretty, perhaps, but wouldn't the people who order this stuff be likely to appreciate something a bit more pragmatic?

Presenting - the Wikipedia reference mouse pad! A pad with a small Wikipedia logo in one corner, but with most of the space taken up by Wikipedia formatting tags, image and table use instructions, more obscure commands like NOTOC, and perhaps the ASCII codes for the most common special characters. What's your take on the concept? -- Kizor 11:54, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Good idea. Are you willing to turn it into a design? A high-resolution bitmap would be best.--Eloquence* 01:26, Mar 2, 2005 (UTC)

Willing and able are two different things, but I think could give it a shot. What would the dimensions of the mouse pad be like, and do any good tips for the aspiring designer spring to mind? -- Kizor 10:29, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The dimensions are 9 x 7.5 in., so the aspect ratio of the image should be about the same. Make the graphic as high resolution as reasonably possible, it's always possible to scale down later. Not being a designer myself, I'm not really a good person to ask for tips, but maybe User:Wapcaplet, who made some of the designs in the store, has some suggestions.--Eloquence* 11:45, Mar 4, 2005 (UTC)

Hey. What's the deal with the ad for cafe press under the fund drive message? ISTR a policy of not running ads on wikipedia, and it's pretty annoying to boot. If there's a good reason for it (maybe cafe press is supporting us or something?), it might be a good idea to at least link to an explanation rather than just alienating random editors. It's not even entirely clear (to me) who put that message there, but your user name shows up on the cafe press page.

Prumpf 13:24, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I will answer on Prumpf talk page as well Erik. Anthere 19:05, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

The right place is probably MediaWiki talk:Sitenotice. My apologies for not posting the comment in the correct place in the first place. It was not at all obvious to me that it would be there, until someone pointed it out to me. Prumpf 19:11, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Hey, I noticed you used the scummvm page screenshot of loom in the related article. As I was the one to originaly make this screenshots (it's from an early version with a glitchy distaff), I just wanted to tell you I had no problem in using this shot. I don't know if it can be licensed as anything else than faire use (as it's from copyrighted material), but I'm no expert... yaz0r 09:07, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC) (forgot to add name/stamp, sorry)

Thanks for the info. You're right that we probably cannot claim anything but fair use.--Eloquence* 11:39, Mar 4, 2005 (UTC)

I see you start the vote for meta:Wikinews/China，and it has been finished. I want to know what's the next step? start the chinese edition or not, please talk to me here,thank you for your attention to chinese wikinews! --w:zh:user:vipuser03:50, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Hi! Because the vote was very inconclusive, I have passed the decision on the the Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation (see my post to foundation-l). My suggestion would be to nag jwales, Angela and Anthere on IRC to get them to make a decision.--Eloquence* 11:37, Mar 4, 2005 (UTC)

I don't know if you're the right guy to talk to about this, but I want to buy something from the wikipedia store at cafepress, however, I can't seem to use the website to purchase. I add things to my cart, and when I go to the cart/checkout link, there's nothing there. Like none of my selections stuck. And I definitely have cookies enabled. I tried it in two different browers (Safari and Camino) Do you think this is a problem on my end? Or is the store broken right now? -Lethe | Talk 01:08, Mar 7, 2005 (UTC)

This should be fixed now.--Eloquence*

I think it's time that quickpolls be re-evaluated as a solution to short term disputes between users. What say you? --Ryan! | Talk 05:11, Mar 11, 2005 (UTC)

I don't think they should be brought back without substantial changes to the process. The original quickpolls proposal was a compromise to appease as many parties as possible. For example, allowing only sysops to start quickpolls would have prevented many spurious polls, but would have lost the support from the egalitarianism advocates. If quickpolls are ever revived, care should be taken to first develop a proposal that addresses possible failure scenarios. Then you could have a vote with a somewhat lower threshold of approval (70-80%). As others have pointed out, though, renaming the proposal may be a good idea as well.--Eloquence* 18:27, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)

Hi, I'm exploring creating a wiki about journalism. Fuzheado suggested you might be interested. A discussion is at User:Maurreen/Journalism. Maurreen 09:35, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Please consider carefully for all content you want to put on this wiki whether it might be appropriate on Wikinews in the meta namespace.--Eloquence* 18:22, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)

Why the security warning? I'm using it, and you make me worry — is there something I should know? Regards, — mark ✎ 10:19, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)

It's not as bad as it was yesterday. Unlike a script that resides exclusively in your protected User:Bla/Monobook.js subpage, Live Preview dynamically loads the latest version of the code from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Pilaf/livepreview.js -- that page wasn't even protected, so anyone could just insert attack code into it, for example, to steal your session cookies.

The page is now protected, Still, any sysop could make nasty changes to it, and it's not clear what process will be used to make code updates.

It might be a good idea to just wait for MediaWiki 1.5 (could be 3 months or so, though), which contains a very neat live preview feature that also works with templates, checks existence of links, etc.--Eloquence* 18:41, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)

Hi Eloquence,

thanks for taking care of the security risks. I was careless, I should have asked a sysop to protect it myself. Actually the first tests were made on the Spanish Wikipedia (where I am a sysop) and the code is protected there since day one. I totally forgot to take care of that here too, my apologies for that.

I have added a little extra note to your warning on the LP page making clear that the source code is available. I agree with having the note there though.

Right now I have pretty much quit development of this little project, especially since knowing of the new feature in 1.5 and having seen another wiki parser in JS which is early in development but already superior to mine in many ways. Perhaps I should mention this in the LP page, but I prefer to wait and see how things turn out and whether there will still be a place for my project. I must say I very much enjoyed being useful to Wikipedia in such a different way for once and hope to find new ways of helping in the future.

Best regards, Pilaf 05:05, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Dear Eloquence,

I noted that the article for erich Fromm is missing his photo. I do not understand why, as both you and I have put it there.

I will try to replace it.

The photos are public use and located at the Erich Fromm society. http://www.erich-fromm.de/e/index.htm

Sincerely,

Robert B. Livingston San Francisco

Dear Eloquence,

The Fromm photograph has been reinstated now.

I uploaded 3 photographs to the Wikipedia Commons-- hope I did so correctly.

I am rather clumsy-- hope photograph will stay. I like the photograph of Fromm writing with books in the background because it shows him as a human fulfilling his potential-- rather than those phographs that might suggest him as an icon which he deplored.

Sincerely,

Robert B. Livingston San Francisco

Seems to be working fine - thanks for fixing it. I don't know what went wrong, perhaps someone deleted the image because the copyright information was not following the new conventions. I'll make sure it stays this time around.--Eloquence* 05:37, Mar 16, 2005 (UTC)

Hello! I leave message for you in Wikinews/Start a new edition#Ukrainian. inetd 13:39, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)

This topic is a real bucket of worms, being an attractor for those with extreme views. I agree that the current material is in need of rewrite. I do fear that any change will draw impassioned comment.

• Wikipedia:Neutral point of view
• Wikipedia:NPOV tutorial
• Power word

There may be other pages that state or restate NPOV. If you're interested in working with me on this, I'll dig around.

I think NPOV is misunderstood by some editors. I don't guarantee that a rewrite for clarity will help a lot, but it might help a little.

I also think NPOV itself needs a formal modification of content. This is a real hot button issue requiring, no doubt, approval of everyone from the God-King on down.

In general, I propose that we admit some discussions are so polarized that there is no intermediate or moderate statement, or that any such moderate statement is unrepresentative of the gestalt. We should reach this conclusion reluctantly, but in some cases, is it not true? Proponents of one side of the debate hardly admit the right of the other extreme even to exist, or to define their positions. It is a major effort simply to get both sides, in such a case, to sit down together, let alone agree on any thing at all. Any statement of such a debate that excludes the main viewpoints of the opposing camps is too weak to be of value.

In statistical terms, this is a case of a bimodal distribution. No single element of the set is representative of the whole. Illustration: A room contains a quantity of objects, some of which are McIntosh apples, some of which are reels of magnetic tape on which are recorded Oval Office conversations. Select a representative element or description of the room's contents.

I dislike to point out a problem without offering a solution. Thus, "Equal space divisions":

In cases where a moderate, representative statement has been shown to be impossible, a final resort is to develop opposing statements from both sides of the debate. These will be presented side-by-side in a two-column format.

Some restriction will be necessary to prevent each side individually from racing to expand its statement to out-shout the other. ("Equal space".) Nor does permission to develop a partisan statement release editors from the requirement to be moderate in language and as conciliatory as possible under the circumstances. Equal space should only be resorted to after considerable effort has shown the effective impossibility of writing a neutral statement that embraces both views.

I cannot think of any violent debate with more than two large, vocal sides. Splinter groups either manage to accomodate themselves, however reluctantly, into one of two camps; or else they remain uninfluential. The question of three-column formats does not arise.

A weakness of most forms of democracy is its winner-take-all nature. Equal space protects the minority viewpoint. Peacemakers are themselves biased, and may unwittingly ally themselves with one side of a debate or the other, to the detriment of the common interest of honest and fair description of the true state of affairs.

A division is undesirable, yes. Considered in abstract, it may seem unacceptable. I suggest that when the concept is applied to concrete examples of overheated topics, it may allow us to get on with our other work.

Finally, as rational people, we can always hope that passage of time moderates viewpoints and permits a merger of two partisan views. Attempts to merge and produce a widely acceptable, single statement will be aided by the quantity of material added to each side of the division freely, without interference from opponents.

I hope not to be thought a madman for trying to extinguish all of WP's brushfires at one stroke, but equal space divisions may be an effective tool in managing the most disruptive cases. Additionally, an agreed-upon format for side-by-side text may have perfectly neutral applications. Please let me know what you think, Sir. — Xiong (talk) 23:05, 2005 Mar 18 (UTC)

There are potential problems with your proposed solution, and there are alternatives. The main problem I see is that the two-column format does not follow the argument/rebuttal model, so it can be difficult to answer questions like "What do creationists respond to the evolutionary biologist argument that their moon dust claims are based on a premise that has been scientifically refuted for decades?" (The answer: Creationists don't normally respond to evolutionary biologists. They just keep repeating the same claims over and over and over again.)

In my opinion, it is very enlightening to follow an argument tree to its final branch, rather than trying to present things as if both views are deserving of equal space. That, in my opinion, is a distortion, if one side utterly fails to respond to the other's arguments. It seems like an attempt to enforce balance when what is really needed is a clear and concise presentation of the facts.

What might be a reasonable alternative is to develop, in parallel to the article structure, an argument tree structure (which does not necessarily need to be developed as part of the main article, though if it could be presented in an appealing manner, that might be interesting). The article would then be written in a form to match the tree structure, and deviations from that structure would have to be justified as part of the tree discussion.

Regardless, it is always interesting to see how different formats work out, so I would like you to give an example of how you think the equal space solution can be applied in practice. The creationism articles are too much of a mess to even bother seriously looking into fixing (they've gotten a lot worse since I last worked on them), but circumcision might be an interesting proving ground for your model. So, before changing policies, perhaps you could develop this model there.--Eloquence* 23:43, Mar 18, 2005 (UTC)

I believe I catch your drift about argument trees, but they may be too complex for convenient implementation. I agree that failure to respond to a well-composed query automatically downgrades my estimation of anyone's POV. I'm not sure how a debate tree could be presented inline in an article, nor do I think proponents of any view will necessarily use the tree as intended.

The two-column model is usefully stupid. Anglo-Americans, especially, accept simple two-party division (us vs. them, Republicans vs. Democrats, prosecution vs. defense) as the most fair paradigm.

I agree with you wholeheartedly about the metaissue of inflexibly yielding equal time or space to both sides of every issue. Often, one side has demonstrable evidence to show, while the other side has only large numbers of vocal fanatics. My bias is that a preponderance of evidence should silence critics. I get easily annoyed when mass media feel compelled to present "both sides" of "issues" which I think should be presented as mere fact.

The difficulties with defining a debate as falling into the category "Rational scholars vs. screaming yahoos" is: Who shall judge? and How do you get the yahoos to accept their status (and shut up)? In some communities, there is a hierarchy of members who posess credentials attesting to their rationality (or at any rate conformance to the norm); they endorse other member's credentials and opinions, and exclude the yahoos. I don't think we want to go that way.

I accept your challenge to produce a mockup of my proposal using arguments for and against circumcision. Bias: I myself am circumcised and feel mildly annoyed about it. Give me a week or two and I'll see what I can come up with. I am honored by your respect of this idea. — Xiong (talk) 01:18, 2005 Mar 19 (UTC)

Hello. Say me please, how I can receive admin status for Ukrainian Wikinews. And where I can find help for Wikimedia project's admin? inetd 195.248.188.65 05:19, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)