User talk:EVula

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is EVula's talk page, which shouldn't be a surprise if you clicked the link...
My general guidelines:
If I (EVula) left you a comment on your talk page, please just respond there, not here, so that conversations aren't spread out. Similarly, if you post something here, I will respond here.	Sign and date your posts using four tildes (~~~~). Place new comments after existing ones (but within topic sections). Separate topic sections with ==A descriptive header==, and put new topics at the bottom of the page.

Archives
Current April 2009 – June 2009 January 2009 – March 2009 October 2008 – December 2008 July 2008 – September 2008 April 2008 – June 2008 January 2008 – March 2008 October 2007 – December 2007 July 2007 – September 2007 April 2007 – June 2007 January 2007 – March 2007 October 2006 – December 2006 July 2006 – September 2006 April 2006 – June 2006 January 2006 – March 2006

[edit] A year

Did you know that it's now been an entire year since you were made a bureaucrat? The work that you've done in that time makes me glad I nominated you. In addition, since you received the oversight tool in the time, you can now make your socks and friends admins too, and then hide the logs. :D Seriously though, congratulations, and keep up the good work. Acalamari 18:34, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Has it really been that long? I thought it was sooner than that. –xeno^talk 18:36, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

Arg, I did realize it had been a year, and I totally meant to drop you a line before you could do so for me. You're too thoughtful! :P

...that's a good idea about the socks thing, though... Hmm... ;) EVula // talk // ☯ // 18:36, 3 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] I'm out of here

Because we had a lot of contact during the PirateSmackK episode I figured it'd be fair to let you know I'm quitting Wikipedia. I no longer believe this project has any chance of becoming a reliable, respected source of information. The endless vandalism and, more importantly, the community's refusal to battle it head-on (by introducing flagged revisions, BLP protection, etc) are slowly turning this project into a sad, unreliable joke. Also, when it comes to trolls and puppets there's enough Good Faith here to make Neville Chamberlain blush. I think the WP community is way too lenient when it comes to vandals, POV pushers, system gamers, puppets and trolls. That's their decision of course, fine, but it's a decision that I'm far from comfortable with and one that does this project a lot of harm. I feel I'm wasting my time reverting vandalism that can (and will) be restored the moment I turn my back. It's like hunting for burglars in the house of somebody who refuses to lock the door at night: an endless, pointless task. So thanks for your help and messages, and goodbye. Take care, Yintaɳ  23:41, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm really sorry to hear that, Yintan. I hope you come back someday to try to continue the good fight, but I'd totally understand if you didn't.

Regardless of what you do, I wish you the best in your endeavors. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 04:29, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] One rule for you crats and another for the rest of us......

So WP:EVULA is kept [1] and WP:PEDRO is deleted [2]. I for one blame IRC, the Mafia, Black Ops and WP:JIMBO....oh...... :) Pedro :  Chat  23:17, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Ugh, that sucks. Had I known about it, I would have participated in the RfD... the argument about cross-namespace redirects is total BS. EVula // talk // ☯ // 04:30, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, I really don't care but I guess we still need a guideline on them - a project for another day! BTW thanks for the email the other day - most kind and my apologies for not replying. Pedro :  Chat  19:56, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry about the email; you getting it was the important part, not me getting a reply. :) Hope all is well. EVula // talk // ☯ // 00:17, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

I for one am completely and totally opposed to cross namespace redirects. It's about time someone put Pedro in his place....Keeper | 76 01:32, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

*giggle* EVula // talk // ☯ // 15:33, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

You know, bureaucrats can't take away our adminship once they give it to us, so we could just tag-team to delete EVula's redirect. Since he's a crat, he would lose his rights before we would because crats are supposed to be even more exemplary in their conduct than us admins are. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 15:39, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Yes, but I could rename you and then oversight any evidence that you're actually an administrator, then tell a steward that I accidently give you the sysop flag and have you demoted. Mwuhaha! ;) EVula // talk // ☯ // 15:41, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

O_O HOLY SHIT! I forgot you had that! I take it back!!!! J.delanoy^gabs_adds 15:44, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Absolute power corrupts rocks absolutely. EVula // talk // ☯ // 15:45, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Of course, on the other hand, I've blocked more than 9,500 people. Would take you a while to oversight all those block notices. Also, you'd likely crash the servers renaming someone with two hundred sixty-four thousand edits... Hmmm... I'm starting to like this "powah" thing... ;-) J.delanoy^gabs_adds 15:53, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Well, I'd better get started now then! ;) EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:00, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

:O okay, okay. You win. :P J.delanoy^gabs_adds 16:05, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Napoleon once told one of his generals that he would like to plant trees along the side of the road to shade his soldiers while they marched. When the general replied that it would take years for the trees to grow, Napoleon remarked "well, then, we must get started immediately then!" bahamut0013^words_deeds 16:14, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

And thus the great J.delanoy/EVula peace treaty was signed.
You know, if you're so keen on tag-teaming someone, Keeper is right there... just sayin'. EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:08, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

(unindent) Y'know, it's always surprised me that Wikipedia's coverage of "tag team" seems to only refer to one sense of the word.... --MZMcBride (talk) 17:08, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

That definitely crossed my mind. Even Wiktionary doesn't have any "alternative" definitions. A sad day for those of us that enjoy grossly inappropriate innuendoes. EVula // talk // ☯ // 17:12, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Are there any other kind of innuendos? Keeper | 76 02:24, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Hey! What's wrong with those kind of tag teams? :D  iMatthew :  Chat  17:50, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Brought up again

Not to throw another log on the fire, but the issue is being raised again at RfD. ~ Amory (user • talk • contribs) 04:05, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

Gurch tagged it for deletion under G7, so I've obliged him.
I think "vanity" redirects that just go to someone's talk page should be deleted, as it's hardly a shortcut, but redirects to subpages that happen to bear a user's name (such as mine or Pedro's) shouldn't. EVula // talk // ☯ // 14:57, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Talkback

- Dank (push to talk) 15:51, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

I really am confused by this whole thing, as I'd thought that consensus was already that RfB discretionary range is 80-85%. I've seen nothing come from this discussion that I didn't already know. EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:41, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Kings AfD

Yes, go ahead and process it as a withdrawn nom. Thank you. -- ₪ Amused Repose ^Converse! 20:24, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Y Done EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:59, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Bad people

Your response to my comment at WT:RFA made me chuckle. Thanks for lightening up my afternoon. Shereth 19:59, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

You can always count on me to make a smartass comment and lighten the mood. ;) EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:31, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

/me mentions something about EVula's ass and "the mood". ;) لennavecia 23:41, 15 June 2009 (UTC)

Rawr. EVula // talk // ☯ // 02:36, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia Signpost: 15 June 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 11:26, 16 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Mr. Kite (usurp)

...has been renamed. —Anonymous Dissident^Talk 07:14, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Ah, thanks for the reminder. I'm not going to do it just yet, as there are some pretty major thunderstorms moving in and I might need to turn everything off soon... EVula // talk // ☯ // 15:32, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia Signpost: 22 June 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 02:43, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] I'm on to you

Admit it, the true motivation behind your RfDA proposal was to acquire desysop rights to get rid of all the other admins and crats, thus becoming the Emperor of Wikipedia. I haven't yet figured out how you intend to silence the Stewards before your coup, though... Jafeluv (talk) 09:39, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Hah, I'm found out. Now to oversight this so nobody else sees it... EVula // talk // ☯ // 15:16, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

That is an absurd accusation without a shred of proof, nobody will believe it. Hello my Emperor, when you have power absolute, please remember my meager services. Chillum 15:18, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

I saw through it the moment he phrased one of the "concerns" with the RfDA system as "what if a bureaucrat goes rogue?" - that way it conveniently sidesteps the problem of him being a rogue bureaucrat already! ~ mazca ^talk 15:21, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

I also thought it was a nice segue into the last item on the page, which is, in my opinion, the most important item. EVula // talk // ☯ // 15:35, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

You completely neglected to mention WP:EVULA, especially where it applies in that last item. bahamut0013^words_deeds 17:27, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Ping

You've got e-mail! :) Icestorm815 • Talk 20:57, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Sorry I haven't gotten to it yet; been a busy day, and have only been able to do wiki stuff while on hold on the phone. Oy vey. :\ EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:59, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

No worries. ;D Icestorm815 • Talk 21:16, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Ping 2

You've got another email. J Milburn (talk) 21:17, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

This one gets a quicker response because it's oversight related. Sorry, Icestorm. ;) EVula // talk // ☯ // 21:19, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. J Milburn (talk) 21:36, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Michael Jackson

Could you space the dashes in the lead, per MOS:DASH? Should be uncontroversial. Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 01:16, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Y Done EVula // talk // ☯ // 01:19, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. It was really bugging me... Dabomb87 (talk) 01:20, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

I feel your pain; that's how I felt about the caption periods. There's still two left that I want to tweak, but one of them is more of a rewrite; given the furious editing happening, though, I'll just wait so I'm not contributing to the EC orgy. EVula // talk // ☯ // 01:21, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Art will tackle them, hopefully. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:22, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm holding off on any other edits until he gets done. EVula // talk // ☯ // 01:26, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Bed? Sleep?

I request you step down from bureaucratship and adminship immediately. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 05:31, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Oh damn, I can't find the meta page to do that because I'm so tired... oh well! EVula // talk // ☯ // 05:33, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Don't forget his oversight too, otherwise this conversation may suddenly have never happened. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 05:36, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Having oversight but not adminship would be hilarious. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 05:38, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

The adminship part could come very easily :P J.delanoy^gabs_adds 05:40, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Yup, that's how 'cratship works. I'll rename your back if you'll promote mine... or something. EVula // talk // ☯ // 05:42, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

You'd still have a few adminsocks lying around, surely? –Juliancolton | ^Talk 05:45, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Pfft, what type of 'crat do you take me for? That was the whole reason I wanted the 'crat and oversight flags. EVula // talk // ☯ // 06:06, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

← Pardon the interruption EVula, but I had a favor to ask. May I send you an email? I have no problem with you posting it once you read it, but some things are not adding up here for me. I'd hate to publicly embarrass myself by asking questions that I don't "need to know" the answers for. — Ched :  ?  07:13, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Talkback

Just a followup to your post at 05:13, 29 June 2009 (UTC) NW (Talk) 13:04, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

I'm watching the thread, but thanks for the talkback. EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:25, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Hello

I recently sent you an email regarding oversight. Please check and reply, thanks;)SchnitzelMannGreek. 19:33, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Email has been acting up on this computer (both in sending and receiving), so it'll have to wait until I'm back on my main machine. EVula // talk // ☯ // 00:06, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Okay, how long would that be?SchnitzelMannGreek. 01:35, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia Signpost: 29 June 2009

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 01:49, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Nashville meetup

In planning. لennavecia 07:16, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Mother f... if it was just a week later, I'd be 100% there. However, Shakespeare in the Park runs thru September 7, and I'm house managing; the most I could do is hang out until about 4 (at the latest, most likely) before I'd need to haul ass over to Centennial Park.

Of course, the show could be part of the meetup (it'll be The Complete Works of William Shakespeare (Abridged), which is absolutely hilarious), but I certainly wouldn't be offended if nobody wanted that. :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:11, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

How much are tickets? I'll go. So, you'd be able to hang out for like, Sunday lunch? لennavecia 19:23, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Couple more questions. What time is the show and do you know anything about this place: http://www.tripadvisor.com/Restaurant_Review-g55229-d434828-Reviews-Jackson_s_Bar_and_Bistro-Nashville_Tennessee.html ? Thanks. لennavecia 19:56, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Tickets are free. I'd be available during the day on both Saturday and Sunday (shows are at 7:30, pre-show starts at 6:30). I've never been to Jackson's, but there are tons of places around town; Blackstone and Bosco's both come to mind (and are both microbreweries), though the former is actually not too far from Centennial Park. EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:03, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Meetup/Nashville. Updated. And sign it... I'm lonely over there. :( لennavecia 12:53, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Done and done, plus I let Kaldari know about it (since he's the only other Nashvillian that I know of 'round here). EVula // talk // ☯ // 16:18, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

I've explained how you will be able to attend Saturday's dinner on my talk page. لennavecia 04:27, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Shameless questionspam

It recently occurred to me to get the local timezones of various administrators that I've dealt with and know I can work with in the future, and to concentrate that information in one page instead of my memory. Because the relevant page is linked from my userpage, anyone will be able to find a list of the most useful admins. It so happens that you're the latest victim. If you feel like revealing your timezone (not exactly the most dangerous secret in the world), you can reply here, here or here (the latter by actually adding yourself to the table). If you object, simply reply here or here (be sure to specify if you're objecting to the concept itself, or just the timezone). Because this is shameless questionspam, thanks in advance for whatever option you choose. —LedgendGamer 20:43, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Never mind, I just discovered that WP:HAU exists. —LedgendGamer 20:51, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

...okay! :) EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:53, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Fug

What was this about? WP:HOTTIE can have a See also section but this one can't? - ALLST✰R▼^echo _{wuz here} 19:51, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

WP:BLP applies outside of article space. If you look at the history of WP:HOTTIE, you'll see that there was, at one point, a list of people that aren't hotties, but they were removed. It was also a complaint on the RfD page. EVula // talk // ☯ // 20:02, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

It seemed fairly clear-cut to me, yeah - having a page on a widely-read encyclopedia saying certain well-known people are hot is perhaps a little unprofessional but largely harmless; having a page on the same encyclopedia stating that certain well known people are effectively 'fucking ugly' is another thing entirely. ~ mazca ^talk 20:03, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm not so sure calling someone "ugly" or even "fucking ugly" is tantamount to such actual BLP vio content added to Bio articles such as "so and so murdered so and so"^{[citation needed]}. Calling someone ugly just simply isn't a BLP vio, especially when sourced by, well, their own face. ;] - ALLST✰R▼^echo _{wuz here} 20:25, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Allstar, I like your work here but given your recent issues I'd recommend you ease off on this. EVula's edit was totally correct. Your understanding of libel seems about as good as your previous understanding of copyright - i.e. weak to non-existent. Let it go please.Pedro :  Chat  20:44, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Note the smiley face and the "source by own face" joke.. calm down. - ALLST✰R▼^echo _{wuz here} 20:51, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Pedro seems perfectly calm. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 20:53, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Indeed, Pedro is perfectly calm. Allstar, if you start describing people as "ugly" on a public website you are subject to libel laws (possibly slander due to some week interpretations of "spoken" in many areas but it ammounts to a similar outcome) - trust me you really are. Smileys may be all good and well but they are in the middle of this conversation which is peripheral to the main issue so irrelevant. The simple fact is you have libeled those people. EVula removed it. Just let it drop and move on - and please think a bit more before posting stuff like that on WP. Pedro :  Chat  21:00, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

On further review this is an unatributed rip-off from WP:HOTTIE - efectively another copy-vio as it does not follow the GFDL realese the original words were created under. Please DB-U1 - now. You really need to wise up on GFDL and copyvio Allstar. Pedro :  Chat  21:12, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Look at when it was created. It's not new. - ALLST✰R▼^echo _{wuz here} 21:13, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

You really do not understand this do you? Replied on your talk Allstar. Pedro :  Chat  21:18, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Just as an aside, whining about the "no-fun brigade" is pretty immature. I fail to see how it's the collective fault of the administrators that you don't understand the difference between WP:HOTTIE and WP:FUGLY (and their respective "see also" lists). EVula // talk // ☯ // 22:43, 3 July 2009 (UTC)