User talk:Viriditas

Tea Party movement arbitration case opened

An arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Tea Party movement. Evidence that you wish the Arbitrators to consider should be added to the evidence sub-page, at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Tea Party movement/Evidence. Please add your evidence by March 20, 2013, which is when the evidence phase closes. You can contribute to the case workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Tea Party movement/Workshop. For a guide to the arbitration process, see Wikipedia:Arbitration/Guide to arbitration. For the Arbitration Committee, Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 23:45, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Message

Replied at User talk:Anna Frodesiak#Makers 20:06, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Re:Ricketts

Replied at User talk:Dleit Ḵaa#Ed Ricketts. Dleit Ḵaa (talk) 23:06, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

A brownie for you!

Hey Viriditas, I know we disagreed on some aspects of it, but I was glad to see Brownie Mary made it the rest of the way to Good Article status. Thanks for all your work! -- Khazar2 (talk) 18:06, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your helpful review...and for the brownie. I hope they aren't "magical"! Viriditas (talk) 01:03, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

You'll have to try it and find out ... just don't plan to drive a car right after ... -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:06, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

User:Shaik Mydeen

• Shaik Mydeen (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

Would it be reasonable for me to move his userpage to his sandbox or at least add {{userpage}}? He's never edited, and is really using Wikipedia to webhost a promotional fake article.

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 11:08, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

I just decided to do it. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 13:12, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

Glad it worked out. Sorry, I wasn't available. Viriditas (talk) 20:39, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Good Humor
	For this. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:15, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! :) Viriditas (talk) 19:52, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Your Arbitration evidence is too long

Hello, Viriditas. Thank you for your recent submission of evidence for the Tea Party movement Arbitration case. As you may be aware, the Arbitration Committee asks that users submitting evidence in cases adhere to limits regarding the length of their submissions. These limits, currently at 1000 words and 100 diffs for parties and 500 words and 50 diffs for all others, are in place to ensure that the Arbitration Committee receives only the most important information relevant to the case, and is able to determine an appropriate course of action in a reasonable amount of time. The evidence you have submitted currently exceeds at least one of these limits, and is presently at 1082 words and 25 diffs. Please try to reduce the length of your submission to fit within these limits; this guide may be able to provide some help in doing so. If the length of your evidence is not reduced soon, it may be refactored or removed by a human clerk within a few days. Thank you! If you have any questions or concerns regarding the case, please contact the drafting Arbitrator or case clerk (who are listed on the case pages); if you have any questions or concerns about this bot, please contact the operator. On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, HersfoldArbClerkBOT^(talk) 04:04, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Conservatism

Hi there. Thanks for alerting me to the existence of this astonishing WikiProject, of which I was unaware until just now. My first reaction is to recoil, having looked into the site and its membership list. It seems to me to violate the basic tenets of NPOV in a most flagrant manner. If there is a "liberal" counterpart (I suspect there is somewhere) then I feel the same way about it as well. Talk about battleground mentality! Jusdafax 06:32, 16 March 2013 (UTC)

Evidence in Tea Party movement

In relation to your evidence submissions at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Tea Party movement/Evidence#WikiProject Conservatism, please be aware that the Arbitration Committee does not take evidence on subpages into account. Please remove the link to all such subpages from the Evidence page, and transfer what material you want to submit for consideration to your own section (within the confines of the word limit). Thank you, Guerillero | My Talk 03:51, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the notice. I've removed the link. Viriditas (talk) 04:58, 17 March 2013 (UTC)

Task force Science fiction for wiki project novels

Excuse me, my name is Liberalufp and I will be the new coordinator of the task force. With me as coordinator things will be very different, for one the task force at the moment is run down and only has 10 members. In effort to make this task force a major success and living up to its goals, I will be taking the reins and will be requesting for each one of you to do your assignment I will be assigning you and message me on my talk page when it is done. If you wish not to do the assignment let me know. I am sorry if this is harsh and tyrannical but we have over 4,000 articles that need taking care of. Everything is optional and do not feel pressured. If you have any objections or Questions please message me on my talk page.--Liberalufp (talk) 02:01, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Unregistered users can't participate in RfA

I suggest you expand "WP:BENEFITS" section: "Vote in Arbitration Committee elections and Wikimedia Board elections." with RfA. 84.106.26.81 (talk) 07:33, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Turns out the discrimination is a social limitation not a benefit from making an account. It is the wrong guideline. 84.106.26.81 (talk) 13:08, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

I've at least temporarily restored one of your deletions

I've at least temporarily restored your deletion of the 'External links' section of Simulated Reality, for reasons detailed here, in case you wish to discuss the matter there. However, as mentioned there, please note that the rules seemingly give you the whip hand when it comes to deleting any individual links you don't like (indeed you can delete each of them if you feel that way inclined). Tlhslobus (talk) 08:16, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

It's too bad you spend your time restoring trivia, "in popular culture" sections, and lists of links to external websites instead of actually improving the article. This is why we can't have nice things. Viriditas (talk) 09:08, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

I now think I've bitten off more than I want to chew with this article. I may or may not eventually make a lengthy suggestion on how I think this article and the related Simulation Hypothesis article might be changed, but I'm not sure I want to put in the time and effort needed to even produce such a suggestion, let alone try to get it implemented. Meanwhile please feel free to reverse my changes by deleting the Popular Culture and/or External Links sections and/or transferring their contents to the Simulation Hypothesis article and/or the Simulated Reality in Fiction article. Tlhslobus (talk) 20:36, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

Why do we need two separate articles on the topic? Viriditas (talk) 22:48, 23 March 2013 (UTC)

response to message

I am not forcing anyone but merely coordinating by suggesting people things to do. By "assignments" I mean they are things they agree to do, and since they agree they are "forcing" themselves not me.--Liberalufp (talk) 21:18, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

I appreciate your enthusiasm, but you've received good feedback from at least three users (check the replies on other talk pages where you left messages) explaining how they feel about your approach. Unless you can show that you understand what these users are saying and integrate their responses into a new approach that is changed by their feedback. then you will fail at your task. Please try to put your mind in the minds of other people. Your response indicates that you cannot understand the problem. Viriditas (talk) 21:26, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Update: Liberalufp, I was very surprised to see your latest comments on Doctorxgc's page showing that you did not understand any of the feedback you received by other users including myself. I will need to repeat myself with stronger language: please do not assign any editors any assignments of any kind. If you don't know why, then re-read the comments other editors have left in response to your messages. Do not respond here unless you have shown some kind of understanding about the problem. I'm afraid that if you persist in this behavior, there may be additional problems for you. Viriditas (talk) 01:00, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	Peace Maker Barnstar
	Your thoughtful words on Til Eulenspiegel's talk page was a nice way to try to restore harmony in a difficult situation. Nicely done, Viriditas. - MrX 01:32, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you, I hope everything works out for the best. Viriditas (talk) 04:31, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

ANI Notice

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Memills (talk) 03:35, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Carptrash

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Could you take a look at the parting gift Carptrash has left me here [1]. It is repugnant. CSDarrow (talk) 21:55, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm not seeing any problem. Maybe the best thing to do is laugh it off and get on with things. Viriditas (talk) 23:30, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your consistency, the whole site is utterly repugnant. Carptrash seem to have immunity in what she says and what she edits. She set that page up intentionally to taunt me. She has taken issues outside of Wikipedia I find that unacceptable. CSDarrow (talk) 01:04, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

There's no need to get upset. No page has been set up. No harm, no foul. Sometimes it is better to talk to the person than to posit allegations. Viriditas (talk) 01:13, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

That page was created in the last 24hrs, check with the search facility. You threaten me at the drop of a hat, yet Carptrash does as she wishes.CSDarrow (talk) 01:18, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

You are mistaken. No page has been created. Carptrash has done nothing I can see. Please stop pretending to be offended by people breathing and the sound of birds chirping. It's one thing for old men to yell at clouds, but this is ridiculous. Viriditas (talk) 01:47, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Lets see, the major thrust of Carptrash et al has been to paint the MRM, myself and others as right wingers and neocons; ie propaganda 101:- demonise the enemy. When in fact in general nothing could be further from he truth. Fighting this charge has made Wikipedia unrewarding. Carptrash links to that site by way of a taunt, knowing full well I would find it offensive. It is a revolting ultra right wing creationist site. You throw a fit of the vapors at one of my comments on the mrm/talk page yet she seems to be able to say what the hell she likes.

I spend my work day with the worst scum bags of our society, trying to compensate for the ungodly grief they have wrought. I come to Wikipedia to get away from that, yet structurally I see little difference here and it is not rewarding. What makes Wikipedia work is largely really unknown. But one thing for sure is known that treating willing and able editors like crap is not part of it. You may not find this and other behavior insulting, but then you are not the recipient of it or part of the context from which it comes from.

All of this moot as I am taking a leave form this part of Wikepedia. Unfortunately that Social Justice gene that drives much of who I am decided to express itself again. I simply could not leave your laissez faire response go unanswered. Thank you and goodnight CSDarrow (talk) 03:38, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Usually when people use antiquated 19th century verbiage like "fit of the vapors" I can tell they are trolling. You also sound very familiar. Viriditas (talk) 04:01, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

You respond by mocking my language? Good grief. And what on earth is your final sentence insinuating? Perhaps I need to get away from Wikipedia faster than I thought. CSDarrow (talk) 04:26, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

Give it a break already. The whole "I'm offended at your offense" schtick is as old as coal. Maybe that kind of nonsense plays in Peoria, but it doesn't work here. Go find another rube. Viriditas (talk) 04:29, 25 March 2013 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Makers

Are the 4 in the table at User:Viriditas/sandbox still to do? Sorry to vanish like that. I'd just had enough of the blocks. It seems better now, but who knows for how long? I tried to get photos where missing but had no luck. I will continue to try, but am not hopeful. Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 21:32, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

No worries and no hurry. If you can figure out how to improve the article, by all means go ahead. Viriditas (talk) 23:30, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:San_Francisco_burrito#Requested_move

You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:San_Francisco_burrito#Requested_move. Obi-Wan Kenobi (talk) 18:53, 26 March 2013 (UTC)Template:Z48

FYI - Article Probation on Men's rights movement

This is not a warning, only notifying you for the log. Thank you for your contributions to the encyclopedia! In case you are not already aware, an article to which you have recently contributed, Men's rights movement, is on article probation. A detailed description of the terms of article probation may be found at Talk:Men's rights movement/Article probation. Also note that the terms of some article probations extend to related articles and their associated talk pages.

The above is a templated message. Please accept it as a routine friendly notice, not as a claim that there is any problem with your edits. Thank you. -- v/r - TP 01:28, 27 March 2013 (UTC)