User talk:Zscout370

---

Current time: Sunday, August 18, 2024, 04:40 (UTC)

Number of articles on English Wikipedia: 6,869,268

---

Archives
User talk:Zscout370/Archive 1 User talk:Zscout370/Archive 2 User talk:Zscout370/Archive 3 User talk:Zscout370/Archive 4 User talk:Zscout370/Archive 5 User talk:Zscout370/Archive 6 User talk:Zscout370/Archive 7 User talk:Zscout370/Archive 8 User talk:Zscout370/Archive 9

Khatyn image

Delete it you feel like it. It was uploaded under PD-USSR when that license was in effect. --Ghirla^-трёп- 06:36, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Ah; I will email the flickr users to see if we can get that image. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 06:38, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Email sent. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 06:45, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Don't hold your hopes high yet, though, Zachs. If I remember correctly, some of our self-important copyright "specialists" claim that there is no "freedom of panorama" in Belarus. There is a whole bunch of possibilities that stem from that. One is that this claim is nonsense as much of what is said by Wikipedia/commons wannabe copyright lawyers. Another possibility is that the image is legal if uploaded not from within Belarus as BE-law does not forbid taking pictures and US law does not forbid publishing one's own pictures. Yet another possibility is that the image is free onwiki but not allowed in commons which does (or may one day) allow only free worldwide images. Yet another possibility, is that the "freedom of panorama" important stuff is non-circumventable but this instantly opens the possibility of Fairuse rationale as the 1969 image has zero commercial value on one hand but replaceable with another non-free image only. There are endless possibilities and endless number of commons "specialists" who would give their valuable opinions on this crucial issue. --Irpen 06:51, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

I see what you are getting at Irpen; I was informed about the image due to an FAC I started about Belarus. About the copyright law of Belarus, I have found this law and I have not see anything about the "freedom of panorama" mentioned at all (either allowing or forbidding it). I have uploaded several photos from Minsk and other Belarusian areas; I know several others who uploaded tons. I have not been sending many things to the Commons lately, but I will still await and see about the Flickr mail. I wanted to inform Ghirla because he was the uploader. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 07:02, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Limitation of freedom of panorama contained in next sentence from article 19: reproduction or communication for universal knowledge of works of architecture, fine art, photos, which are permanently located in a place opened for free visiting, except for cases when an image of the work is the main object of such reproduction or communication for universal knowledge or when it is used for commercial objectives. Sculptures are included in list of copyrighted objects (article 6).

On practice this mean that sculpture must not be main subject of image if you want to use image commercially. Otherwise you need to obtain explicit permission of sculptor or copyrights holder.

EugeneZelenko 14:29, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, I am glad that from your reading the freedom of panorama nonsense is not popping up. I just seem to remember that there was some user who were roaming around deleting or tagging for deletion BE-images commons-wide invoking the "panorama" stuff. The proliferation of such nonsense in commons led me to quit my participation in that project and upload my images to wp only marking them with {{keepLocal}} or {{NoCommons}} depending on whether the image is already copied to commons. I long since gave up trying to talk reason to our self-appointed copyright enforcers who have no interest in encyclopedic content (no grudge from me though to copyright-conscious content editors.) --Irpen 07:29, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Understandable, I am a little annoyed at the stuff myself. Honestly, if there was a lot more people doing this, I would pretty much be doing what I originally came here for; draw and write. I sometimes think what would my Wikipedia life be like without the shiny badge and buttons. Anyways, I will keep those two templates in mind and see what progress is made. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 07:34, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

I recommend you to read copyrights law of Belarus or Russia (article 21). If you will not happy with some of laws provisions you are free on making choices: to continue to blame selected Commons administrators or influence law change (see example). Of course this choice require to distinguish between cause and consequence (further reading). --EugeneZelenko 14:29, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Eugene, I am reading the Belarusian copyright law, Article 21 and it mentions computer programs. I will try and read Russia's law if I can. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 05:18, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, if I misled with this comment (actually addressed to Irpen). Limitation of panorama freedom is contained in article 19 of Belarusian copyright law and in article 21 of Russian copyright law. According to commons:Commons:Freedom of panorama same provisions present in laws of all ex-USSR countries except Ukraine and Turkmenistan. --EugeneZelenko 13:47, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

No problem; so with this provision in, what does this mean for photographs of Belarus we have of cities, memorials and other objects? User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 17:53, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

See what I meant? Sigh... --Irpen 23:43, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Ok. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 23:48, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Limitation of panorama freedom in Belarus for images of sculptures/memorials/etc mean that you have 2 ways of making photo of copyrighted work and use it for commercial purposes or made them publicly available:

1. Copyrighted object should not be main subject of the image. In this situation you don't need any permissions.
2. Otherwise you need to obtain explicit permission from author or copyright holder (if different).

This provisions seems logical for 2D objects like ad billboard (what is difference from scanning ad from magazine?) and not logical for 3D objects. But again, it's law of country which set such norms. Actually same problem exist in USA, France, Italy, etc.

Works of architecture is different things since it depend of definition of "work of architecture" in other parts of Civil Code. Could be building itself or its blueprints/projects/etc.

Khatyn memorial is copyrighted work. It was created at the end of 1960s. See details on http://www.khatyn.by/en/about/.

See also my first comment in this section.

EugeneZelenko 15:01, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Zach, just want to explain to you that by pressing the "copyright specialists" about Belarusian images and the Korean insignia I in no way want to belittle your effort which is worthy of many barnstar. I simply want to get to the bottom of it because, sadly, the copyright issues on wikipedia are too often taken over by users who have no idea but take great pleasure to go 'round showing off as "experts". I am so sorry that the divide between content writers and those who are here for other reasons shows up in so many different ways :( Cheers, --Irpen 07:50, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

I am not angry at you Irpen, I am just frustrated at the whole process now. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 07:56, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Zach, yes, it is frustrating, but please make no mistake what is the source of this frustration: the wrath of wannabe experts of all sorts who instead of concentrating on the most important task, creating content, hang around Wikipedia to make themselves feel important. Some, instead of going after blatant copyvios uploaded by ignorant, newbie or outright malicious users go just after any image they can get their hands on. I've dealt with several users who examined my entire upload log in order to frustrate me and challenged most every fairuse rationale I ever wrote. They managed to delete the whooping two (!) of hundreds of my images.

It is so trivial that PD insignia is PD or that a person can publish his own picture the statue! But no, some Zelenko or whoever brings his original interpretations of copyrights to Wikipedia, where, unfortunately it makes a whole lot of negative effect. I would like to see what kind of laughing response he would get if he addresses the demands to remove images of Khatyn to hundreds of books, newspapers, and magazines that publish them every year. But those have real lawyers who would just tell such "experts" to get lost. In Wikipedia, "everyone" can edit, which means hit the images arbitrary left as right as it makes one feel "important" and "doing a great work", and non-editing admins who largely hijacked all boards in Wikipedia space would encourage such activity by giving such users many rounds of applause. It is very unfortunate that the divide between content writers and "policymakers" of Wikipedia grew so much since the days were we both started here. :( Cheers, -Irpen 08:13, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Your view required

Hi Zscout370, you view might be required and helpful here as you have been dealing with topics re the WS conflict.

It would be great if you say your word. Thanks - wikima 19:51, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Keep in mind I do not know a lot the WS at much; the only reason why I was able to help on the flag articles is that flags are my bread/butter issue. I'll look. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 03:07, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Western Sahara nonsense

Sure I'd love to have someone of good faith assist me on this (which is not to discredit Fayssal, who is apparently injured.) -Justin (koavf)·T·C·M 06:02, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks. Now, I am waiting for the others involved to make a similar statement here. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 06:03, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

GA and FAs for furry stuff

The sounds doable. Keep in mind I don't know a lot, but I will try it out. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 03:23, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Cool! It might actually help that it's a new topic for you, you can look at it with a fresh eye and see the places that need improvement. I moved your nomination for furry convention to "Miscellaneous culture and society" as I figure it's a good mix of both. GreenReaper 08:19, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Western Sahara Mediation

Hi. I welcome your mediation and I am ready to cooperate with you to solve the rest of the disputed articles.--A Jalil 09:11, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Image removal

And what about {{Attribution}} tag usage, like this this, from the same web page? M.K. 16:41, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Going to delete. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 01:22, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Probably you should contacted original unloader of image for clarifications, before deletion. Maybe he knows additional details regarding image use of this type. M.K. 11:04, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

I'll keep that in mind, but we usually delete copyright incorrect photos from the site in a speedy manner. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 15:41, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

I only question this, because these images are very useful and it would be great if they were in PD. I intend to ask DDima (unloader of such image, if memory not fails me), maybe he knows something more. M.K. 16:08, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

I had pictures from the website before, but they were deleted in 2006 because of the very same issue that is causing me to delete the images now. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 06:13, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Ok, I understood. M.K. 15:27, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

PR mentorship

All on-wiki communications that I'm aware of between PR and Geni, or by others to Geni about mentorship, are located here. My expectation is that this mess will reach an ArbComm case similar to either Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Piotrus or Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Armenia-Azerbaijan 2. I'm not sure when. My concern has been that we not let one set of POV editors run editors of the opposing POV out of town on a rail via lynching parties. GRBerry 16:18, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

please consider making some type of statement/action regarding my questions here. Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 23:38, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

I had to leave my house when I was making a decision on the mentoring issue or not. Anyways, I have blocked PR before and I will do it again. I would need some time to look at the offenses and see how much should happen. I am not going to make a mission statement to you, since each situation is going to require a different response. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 06:15, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Mentorship was supposed to involve me consenting to a mentor - I was very happy with User:Geni doing it. S/he (dunno which!) appeared to be good, keeping the howling pack away from my ankles. S/he forced me to back down at least 3 times. I strongly suspected s/he was being bombarded with accusations in e-mails, it progressed to harrassment of her/him and then the harrasment started to appear in public (unfortunately, I didn't clock the page of complaints written up). I had to hastily put in a complaint to say that at least 2 out of the 3 edits I'd quietly backed down over were factually correct and the opposition was purely ideological, so Gina was actually biased *against* me.

In one sense, taking over this task would be childishly easy. You'd only be the chief mentor over a team of dozens, your biggest problem would be hearing yourself think. Geni and I never shared e-mails, I can explain myself just fine on that public page you've been pointed to. PR^talk 17:45, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

And that is fine. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 18:50, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

User:Zscout370, do you have a second user or is this your only user? Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 23:16, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

I have an account that performs automated edits using Pywikipedia but that is it. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 23:19, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

User:Zscout370, could you please provide a link to one of the blocks? Jaakobou^{Chalk Talk} 17:20, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

I did an unblock, nevermind. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 18:40, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

RE: Image:UK Royal Coat of Arms.png

Thanks for letting me know, CR7 (message me) 17:11, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:ITawAPuttyTat1.JPG

Rogereeny. I'll be ready to re-upload it, if necessary, once the issue is settled. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 10:05, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

No, no, no. We can restore images, including the image itself, like we can restore articles. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 18:49, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Even better. :) Keep in mind it might be awhile, depending on how slowly the wheels of the arb-com grind... or to put it another way, how long it takes for them to dump the rogue admin and/or the edit warrior. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 20:31, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Not a problem; most of the ArbCom members are admins or they can easily call admins to restore the images. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 20:35, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Excellent. We have options. Once some action is taken in the arbcom request. :) Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 20:42, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

And that is what I am waiting for. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 20:45, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Quantity vs. Quality

The supposed lack of quality in wikipedia is a direct result of its "anyone can edit" policy. Good luck fixing that. The one item I ever submitted to IMDB, for example, was scrutinized by someone (I don't know who, maybe some high schooler) but at least it supposedly went through a review process before being posted. There is no point in trying to put something up as a "featured article", when most any moron could mess with it at any time, throwing egg on the face of wikipedia and undermining its already-questionable credibility. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 10:18, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

FA's get reverted all of the time or not edited that much. Even if people can't make FA's or GA's, we just need to cite more. That what mostly kills us. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 18:51, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Belarus

Yep. Thanks. Looks good. Galantereischik 20:47, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Please see your talk page about the images (not by the bot, but from me). User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 20:49, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Belarus

Thanks, if you still have any disagreements about my edits talk to me about it.--Miyokan 04:35, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Belarus

Good work so far, let me know when you're done. --Victor12 00:43, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

I know WP:FAC can be really frustrating but it's currently the best way to get better articles. I just hope you keep on persevering, success is just around the corner. --Victor12 14:36, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Why did you remove this image without any notice at all? Richard W.M. Jones 09:45, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Unlock my userpage

no images have been added since it was locked over 2 months ago!H8jd5 23:03, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Unlocked. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 23:11, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Mexico

I just want to avoid conflict, because most people will consider Mexico as a developing or NIC. Coasilve 02:59, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

If it is other countries, then you had a major world player telling that Mexico is a good country (in this case, Japan). User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 03:09, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

False insignia template?

What was that? -- But|seriously|folks  05:22, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

See your talk page. The reason why it was false is that we had no proof for years that military insignia are PD because they are military insignia. People said it was in Geneva, but we could not find it. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 05:24, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

No big deal. The template's only used in 800+ places. <sigh> -- But|seriously|folks  05:35, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

A lot of it was used by one or two users, so just nuke their uploads and we will get a whole bunch gone. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 05:36, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Image:FleetAdmiral.gif

Not sure what the issue is with the image Image:FleetAdmiral.gif, but the removals of that image has been restored on various articles. Please use a clearer WP:ES, or discuss on the image's talk page. — MrDolomite • Talk 11:30, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

It was a copyright violation, so I needed to orphan before I deleted. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 13:04, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

While IANAL and thought that uniform insignia of the United States were in the public domain, I do thank you for the information and the note back. 16:35, 15 October 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by MrDolomite (talk • contribs)

I have created and uploaded a new image myself. This is what you should have done instead of deleting the image. Hawkeye7 20:49, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

We would have to deleted that reversion anyways, as per our policies. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 01:51, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Nobel medal

Hi Zach. Would you mind taking a look at the recent contributions of User:CoolKid1993? It looks to me like he has made his own version of a Nobel medal and changed all the Nobel prize biographies to use this image rather than the .svg image previously used in these articles. But taking a look at the Nobel Foundation's website, it looks to me like the medal's design is considered a protected trademark.[1]. Wouldn't this make the new image a fair use image as well? Valentinian ^{T / C} 12:11, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Give me some time to kick this around. But anyways, we should be using the vector, since I keep on being hammer for doing PNG images when Vector can be made. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 01:59, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for looking into this issue. Happy editing. Valentinian ^{T / C} 08:51, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Good Intentions

I am sure you have good intentions, I mean that seriously, but where is all of this coming from on the Korea ranks page that insignia are now stolen? I have made several long distance phone calls to Korea and a member of the CNFK staff was nice enough to log on and offer to respond on navy.mil to anyone who had questions. We seem to have gone from that to now saying that people aren't being truthful and that insignia pictures have been stolen. Please take a look at WP:AGF. I came to the Korea article trying to improve it and now it seems like you and your crowd are doing everything possible to take it down. -OberRanks 13:48, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

You say I have given you no proof, yet I asked the military to e-mail anyone who asked about this from a .mil account. Will you provide an e-mail and give them a chance to answer before you start deleting images? -OberRanks 13:53, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

BTW- I will give you that much of the stuff uploaded by User:Husnock seems fishy. I reviewed his page and a lot of the stuff he did appears to be from the IOH and Randolph Air Force Base collection. He claimed to once be a naval officer and was involved with the U.S. government at some point meaning he probably had access to government images. I have plans to re-upload much of his stuff from solid sources since most of it dealt with medals and ranks. -OberRanks 14:06, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Odd that you should say that - looking at your contribs, it seems to be that you may be the same person as Husnock. Videmus Omnia ^Talk 18:31, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Another thing too Ober; a lot of people assumed insignia from all countries are PD because they are insignia. We proved that false this year and managed to get rid of all of the templates. Some insignia are PD, but it depends on the country. US and Belarus (where I edit about alot), are countries that PD insignia. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 02:00, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Dont mean to upset you, but...

I dont mean to upset you and apologize if I do, but I reviewed Wikipedia regulations and it is improper for you to be deleting these images as you were directly involved in the debate and took sides in it. The proper thing would have been to let a neutral admin close out the discussion and have that admin delete the images. With you wiping out the article images it seems you have misused your admin powers to "get your way" as it were. again, sorry if I upset you, I just think we should ALL be sticking to procedure and policy here. With that said, I actually dont mind the images being deleted, just a bit worried about the way you did it. -OberRanks 14:15, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Since there are very few people that deal with copyright issues, I am usually involved in the discussions and deletions. Editing an article doesn't use administrator privileges at all, protecting articles do. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 01:50, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

In the end you were probably right, they were taken from that website; my anger was not directed against you but against the situation especially when I was making calls to Korea only to have the images then declared stolen. I am, however, very concerned that all images the original uploader Husnock ever uploaded are being summarily deleted by a single admin. I've raised a complaint on the admin noticeboard, but it might not get any attention as people are apparently letting personal feelings get in the way of this, calling Husnock a thief and a liar and things of that nature. To be blunt, I am thinking of distancing myself from all of this. The more I investigate that user and the images he uploaded, the more I find that there are admins who hate him with a vengeance. Whatever he did, I wonder if it was really that bad. Best to leave it alone, I guess, but I still dont think they should be mass deleting his image uploads. Best to you, thanks for the cool head in all of this. -OberRanks 10:50, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

The reason why a lot of the images by Husnock are being dealt with by me is I worked with Husnock before he left about these very images. I was working with other administrators at the time when dealing with his images. Plus, he is one of the main people who used the "military insignia" template on the website. There will be other administrators who will delete, but only to clear our categories of images missing information. I do not hate the man, I considered him a friend and backed him on many Star Trek Insignia articles and worked with him on several medal articles. However, I just need to show tough love. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 15:32, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

I've been on and off Wikipedia thoughout the day and the situation got very nasty indeed. I think I resolved it, but there is now a user out of Husnock's past returning swearing to stop the upload of further images, calling me a liar, and things like that. It could get ugly, I might ask for help. -OberRanks 15:45, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Believe it or not, I can try and help. As I said before, I do not believe the sockpuppet accusations, I am treating you as a new account who might needs to understand of what happened. I will explain more, but i need to go to class. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 15:48, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Input needed

You may want to respond here. Rlevse 14:36, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

I did. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 02:01, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

PR on Mentorship

I'm concerned that having you as a mentor will lead directly to the same kind of harassment and bullying of you that was carried out on User:Geni. I see no indication that the culprit/s intend to mend their ways - far from it, a ludicrous complaint is now being levelled at one of our most scholarly editors from the same sources. If you behave honorably, applying your own judgment to each situation, there is a real danger of these attacks accelerating and threatening to cause you real trouble.

Moreover, it is not clear to me why we need any change - the arrangement with Geni was working fine. There were 6 or so issues reported that Geni appears to believe I explained satisfactorily and were left to stand. There was 1 mistake on my part (it had been sorted and apologised for 36 hours before Geni notified me) and 2 cases where I was over-ruled, with each of which I complied without complaint. (Despite a strong suspicion that they were opposed for ideological reasons, later detailed in order to oppose the implication that Geni was biased in my favour). Only one of the objections was "proper" - it would (likely) be unwise of me to get involved in a completed disciplinary, defending an administrator I thought had received rough justice.

I am minded to accept you as mentor - but I fail to see why this highly prejudiced "Mentor Shopping" should be accepted, especially in view of the known stridency of the complainers, and their clear propensity for the laying of often very frivolous complaints. PR^talk 08:22, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

I already been called a sockpuppet by one of the editors who was complaining against you. Now, you took your break from WP and decided to come back. What I am going to suggest to you is this; you can still edit Wikipedia, but I would suggest try to find topics that you know about that won't get you in trouble. I would also suggest helping fix typos or do general cleanup on the site. I am not sure what specific tasks you want, but I can secure some for you. Honestly, if you still wish to work with Geni, you are welcome to. I will need to speak to Geni privately about the issue, but I am not sure when. Don't worry about a formal "topic ban," I am not going to ask for one at all. I do not even feel that your last comment was massively trolling at all. Taking pop-shots at editors is not a good idea, but saying a source is bad to use is not a bad thing to say. Listen, hate to cut this short, but I need sleep. I work on the Pacific Coast, USA, time zone and that could limit my chances to edit here and mentor you. So just sit tight; email and IRC are open for you to use. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 08:28, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

I'd be pleased to do anything that helps the project. I might even lay off pointing out and jeering at some glaring problems, at least for a while. I have a problem with editing on any of the other subjects that interest me, since I don't want this account linked to any of these other features of my life. It strikes me as a good idea if you're in touch with Geni (who, perhaps wisely, has not responded to an e-mail I did send it!). Like you, s/he is not identifiable by ethnicity or religion (or gender) and that's rather comforting. I know that's a funny thing to say for someone who seemingly "self-identifies" as a Palestinian, but you know what I mean! PR^talk 15:33, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

I can easily tell you that I could be considered a WASP, but I believe I been lucky on the site. Anyways, I will come up with some ideas and I will let you know. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 15:40, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Please comment on this. PR^talk 20:17, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

About the website choices, I am leaning towards not using both websites at all. If there is one thing I do know; anyone can just make a website and do anything now a days. I would use the state department website in very limited contexts, since they are the same folks who want to put entire militarties as FTO's. User:Zscout370 ^{(Return Fire)} 07:14, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Notification of PR issue

Please take note of the following attack by PR on his talk page. [2] Thanks! Kyaa the Catlord 07:01, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

User:Jaakobou has a long history of harassment of people on their TalkPages - at one point doing it to two admins. His block on that occasion was lifted with this warning at the AN/I: "We don't block for punishment's sake - it's supposed to be a way of modifying behaviour. I think of it as being like whacking a dog with a rolled-up newspaper to discourage it from crapping on the carpet. If Jaakobou is promising to mend his ways and only crap in the litter box in future (metaphorically speaking...) I think he should be given the chance to prove his sincerity."[3]

It should not be up to me to complain about this blatant defiance of the will of the community and remind everyone of the warnings handed out then. (By comparison, I've never again mentioned the CoI I detected in this connection, about which it would be entirely proper that I demand an answer).

I never complained about the only mentor I've accepted despite our disagreements (until right at the end for a balancing effect, as I explained). But running to teacher seems to be the prefered way of getting things done in the current atmosphere enpoisoned by harassment. It was not my intention nor is it my wish to be dragged down to this level - I'd much rather have the ArbCom which is now long overdue.

In addition, please note that these two users act in collusion together and make complaints that are blatantly false (see my one and only 3RR block, I've never otherwise received even a warning). Details if you want them, Jaakobou's record for making frivolous complaints larded with falsehoods is impressive indeed.

My apologies for using your TalkPage for this response, it's not a good start. If the only important characteristic of a mentor is the ability to stand up to and face down the personal harassment that is guaranteed to be visited on them, then the whole thing is even more of a waste of time than it appears. It's not even as if it works - 3 weeks of my working well with User:Geni ended up in another AN/I anyway. As so often before, that complaint was entirely frivolous, according to the evidence of others - seemingly serving only as an opportunity to further breach AGF against Geni and go "Mentor Shopping" for someone more malleable. Are you that more malleable person? PR^talk 08:41, 17 October 2007 (UTC)