Archives

one two (Mar 21 2006-July 11 2006) three (July 20 2006-Sept 24 2006) four (Sept 30 2006-Oct 31 2006) five six seven (May 2007) eight (June 2007) nine (July 2007) ten (Aug 2007) eleven (Sept 2007) twelve (Oct 2007) thirteen (Nov 2007) fourteen (Dec 2007-Feb 2008) fifteen (Mar 2008)

This page has archives. Sections older than 14 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Hi Akhilleus, I was out for a bit on vacation. It seems that while I was away Bruce slipped back into his old ways. I noticed you said you were getting a RfC/U together. Has it been posted yet? I'd like to contribute to the conversation as needed. Eugene (talk) 04:49, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Akhilleus, you provided useful input to Cyrus cylinder a while back. You might be interested to know that I've done a lot more work on the article since then and have nominated it for featured article status - see Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Cyrus cylinder/archive1. Any comments would be most welcome. -- ChrisO (talk) 00:22, 20 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Akhilleus:

I noticed that a user named Baseball Bugs make what I think is an uncivil comment on Eugene talk page. I deleted it and then he added it back in again. So, here are my questions:

1. Is Eugene allowed to edit his own talk page while blocked, in order to respond to such uncivil comments (or for any other reason for that matter)?
2. Does one have to be an admin to undo uncivil comments?
3. Do you think BB's questioning of Eugene's faith is uncivil as defined by WP:Uncivil?

Thanks. Bill the Cat 7 (talk) 01:36, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Eugene is allowed to edit his page, but since it's unlikely that he will be unblocked at this time, I don't think he should waste his time editing his talk page; it would simply be a source of irritation with no reward. As for BB's comment, I find it uncivil, and basically taunting. The comments can be removed, but it's not worth getting in an edit war over. --Akhilleus (talk) 02:09, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thank you very much. Bill the Cat 7 (talk) 02:20, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Akhilleus:

I've been discussing William Lane Craig with a couple of people on the the WLC talk page. I'm either not being clear that WLC is equally a philosopher as well as a theologian or there is some POV pushing going on. The two people seem to think that WLC is mainly a theologian with his philosophical background being minor. I think that he is both, but I'm tired of writing long dissertations explaining myself. Also, I honestly don't have a lot of time on my hands and I've already spent more time than I wish to spend on this article. Can you please suggest some places on Wikipedia where I can go and request a RfC for this article? Thank you. Bill the Cat 7 (talk) 07:05, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bill, have you looked at WP:RFC? There are detailed instructions there, but I find that Wikipedia pages don't always clearly explain how you're supposed to go about things. --Akhilleus (talk) 14:30, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. Doh!!! Thanks. I'll keep that in mind for the next time, since I conceded the point. Swallowing one's pride leaves a bad taste in one's mouth, but only for a little while. More importantly, it was the right thing to do. Bill the Cat 7 (talk) 05:55, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I see you were the admin who handled the original sockpuppet case for Davesmith33. He appears to have rejoined our ranks yet again, using User:Looneymann, a variation on the name of an editor who both regularly contributes to Top Gear (2002 series) and was instrumental in some phases of the sockpuppet case for this serial sockpuppeteer. I'm not sure how to proceed with this one; I've left a comment on User:Looneyman's talk page alerting him, but don't know how to reactivate a sockpuppet case, so I thought I'd turn to you. Drmargi (talk) 19:43, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A tempting notion, but it would require widening to a new subject and a new behavior, so not yet. I left a post for his mentor, and will look in at the current ArbCom case. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 01:02, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that didn't work. The mentor proceeded to threaten Cynwolfe for her patient efforts to deal with an editor who believes the Roman Empire existed two to five centuries before it was founded. Septentrionalis PMAnderson 01:57, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]