Living may be too strong a word for it, but back. 13:46, 2 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Chile

Hi Viajero,

I was travelling and had limited Internet time when you posted your reply, so I never did give your lengthy and thoughtful message the full response it deserves, but I will now, especially as this issue is threatening to re-emerge on various articles.

I have indeed spent very little time in Latin America, though none at Cancun, but I have lived in some fairly cosmopolitan areas and have encountered the attitudes you allude to among those from that region. However, I very much question the value of the casual views of (as you put it) "cab drivers, campesinos, street vendors". It never ceases to amaze me that the same people who will mock and skewer Americans for supposedly being ignorant and for believing (as an example) the Saddam-9/11 connection will nevertheless take as gospel the "man on the street" impressions of common people in areas with high rates of illiteracy, media that is shoddy and often controlled, and heavily rural and isolated communities. Certainly, the notion that they have privileged insight into the "true" motives of US foreign policy or the secret machinations of US intelligence is absurd. Similarly, the complex and tricky details of the geo-political and world economic order are also not likely to be well understood by many (few Americans exhibit much understanding, and I assume the percentage worldwide is similarly low). Rather, I see such attitudes as rooted largely in much more base aspects of human nature: prejudice, resentment (of the well-off), scapegoating (of the powerful or of the easy target).

As for the "pundit" class, American commentators hate America; I don't expect foreign commentators to be more generous. (Yes, this is obviously a crude generalization, but you see what I'm saying.)

Now I don't doubt that those who want to validate their prejudices can find examples of American heavy-handedness to solace them, just as someone who (say) hated Chinese people could no doubt amass a book of newspaper clippings attesting Chinese misdeeds - but instances do not a pattern make. It is my own view that the US throws its weight around a hell of a lot less than it could, and less than its past counterparts with power did (although Bush has alas made this less so), but this is a cumulative impression from watching many trends and not easy to justify all at once. However, I find the notion that Latin America is "dirt poor" because of American scheming to be absurd (do you really believe this?). Again, I see prejudice and resentment and poor understanding of economics at work: people who are provided new job opportunities may notice less their own rising standard of living than the fact that the foreigners down the street they take orders from at work enjoy an even higher standard. All too human, sadly (at the risk of being totally cliched, one can compare Jews in Nazi Germany).

Of course, we are all aware of the US's high level of activity in Latin America over the past hundred years. Its portrayal as self-serving, callous, cruel, exploitative, and Machiavellian, however, is where I differ from other analysts. And yes the US may use economic pressure, because it can (but note "a hell of a lot less" above), but who doesn't? Japan plays games with its trade barriers, a few years ago Iraq cut off oil exports for a month to get at the US, and so on. In non-US cases no one questions the right of a sovereign nation to do such things. Do we not have the right to not give free money ("aid") to nations with leaders hostile to us?

Finally, your point about "the US prides itself as beacon of democracy, and as such, it doesn't look good for it to be seen toppling democratically-elected foreign governments" as reason for the lack of documentation, well, I think your own past posts contradict this reasoning. The quotes from Albright and Powell clearly show no qualms about unflinchingly expressing regret for these episodes, the same way people talk about segregation as the "bad old days". They show that at the highest level of the government there is a full willingness to state and admit past error - very American if I may say so. Nixon might cover for Kissinger, but do you seriously think Clinton would? I'm sure then documents would be buried, but I see no one with motive and ability to keep them buried now. So, I take the intelligence community at their word when they conclude the CIA "did not assist Pinochet to assume the Presidency" [1]. (The lame reply that the "CIA denies the CIA's guilt" overlooks the non-monolithic nature of such organizations.)

I hope this clarifies somewhat my position on these issues. V V[[]] 07:48, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Thanks. Also, thanks for directing me to the Che article. There are still some rough patchs. But I'll get to them, if you don't fix them before I do. 172 10:44, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)

PLO and Hamas

I'll certainly vote delete, but the idea of the wrangling on the VFD seems like a painful ordeal. It may be worth the shot to try another strategy. I'd be very happy to start a new article on PLO-Hamas relations. With such an article in existence, we could just blank the collection of quotes at PLO and Hamas and redirect the page. 172 11:24, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)

BTW, here's a pretty good NY Times in depth profile of Lula if you haven't seen it yet http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/27/magazine/27LULA.html?ex=1089518400&en=ab2fb803db615170&ei=5006&partner=ALTAVISTA1 172 11:27, 4 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Well that's simply by virtue of the fact that the other side seemed (early on) to be underrepresented, and even excommunicated from the discussion. That may have been just a perception, but I cant honestly say that there is an overall anti-Palestinian bias on Wikipedia now, if only because it is more or less equitably offset. Of course, its not about numbers, and thats why its extremely important that you and all relevant parties choose tact and civility over reactionism. I know I dont have to remind you, but we all need to remind each other at times. -Stevertigo 19:02, 6 Jul 2004 (UTC)

From my talk page: Sorry for the delay. Okay, it's not really of use here to go back into the history with too much detail: Suffice it to say that you both represent poles in the spectrum, and that what you both produce will likely be prejudiced or otherwise considered by the other as biased.... contd. -Stevertigo 21:58, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

There's been a lot of upbeat news from Venezuela lately, so perhaps Hugo Chavez should be updated with the new economic data. In case you're interested, here's a Bloomberg article with a lot of useful, recent data [2] BTW, sorry for starting work on PLO and Hamas yet. The Russia articles have me quite distracted lately (and then there's [[Bretton Woods system still left for me to finished-- the work here just never ends!) 172 11:51, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Look, I dont have time for this. Do you agree with renaming it back? Yes? Fine, then this can all be done with, and I will actively support the NPOV consensus for including material within the article itself, and do so in a way that doesnt alienate Humus. Why is that important? For the sole reason that it opposes the exhausted, cabalist attitude that relies on more on reverts rather than expressing oneself convincingly to those other than the choir. Your journalistic skills are well known; but your ability to persuade is less so. Thanks. -Stevertigo 17:05, 8 Jul 2004 (UTC)

On Pianists Copyright

Hi. I have replied to the abovementioned. Sorry for not replying earlier. Mandel 15:45, Jul 9, 2004 (UTC)

You might want to help watch 64.7.89.54, who has been inserting rightwing POV into articles, though many of his/her changes have been constructive. 172 20:35, 18 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Daniel Pipes

Greetings. I'm a new sysop, and I've been trying to resolve protection situations and long-standing feuds. (Yes, I'm naive.) On July 6 you protected Daniel Pipes due to a long-standing, low-level edit war. (This war had last manifested itself June 28.) It's been a fortnight; mind if I unprotect? Quadell (talk) 20:52, Jul 20, 2004 (UTC)

New Imperialism

Hello again. I really need help. Dealing with Lir on New Imperialism is going to give me an ulcer. The changes are just getting worse and worse. I don't know what he wants, and I don't know how to get him to stop. 172 21:28, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Personal attacks on the mailing list

I am sending the following message to multiple users I'd strongly appreciate it if fair-minded users responded to the latest string of baseless personal attacks on the mailing list ([3], [4], [5], [6]). Stan Shebs, Fred Bauder, and RickK started attacking me ferociously since it came up on the mailing list that one of the articles I'd written was featured, Russian constitutional crisis of 1993.

I know that I have made mistakes on Wikipedia; but those mistakes were not motivated by anything other than a passion to make Wikipedia into a serious, professional, quality encyclopedia, not a dumping ground for ungrammatical POV rubbish and fiction. This is making it harder and harder for me to be as efficacious as a user as I want to be. (The distorted impression of my work that these attacks engender are at the root of quite a large number of conflicts on Wikipedia.) That's why I feel that they should finally be thoroughly discredited. 172 05:52, 25 Jul 2004 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Lance6wins

The Lance6wins arbitration case is open. Please place evidence at Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Lance6wins/Evidence. --mav 10:40, 8 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Hello again! Welcome back! I just found out that you're back after seeing your username on requests for adminship. 172 15:33, 9 Sep 2004 (UTC)

IHR link in Thomas E. Watson

Hi, you wrote an article about Thomas E. Watson and put an Institute for Historical Review link into the page without comment. The institute is strongly linked with holocaust denial and both simple and sophisticated lying. I have read the paper only once (today) but already I saw that it missed out the Frank case completely, which is quite important even your the Wikipedia biography. I'm wondering if it's really a good idea to reference it, in which case I plan to put some comments in about the level of inaccuracy of material from the institute, or should we delete the link? Mozzerati 14:22, 2004 Sep 11 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your support for my adminship. Jayjg 16:30, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Your Staatsoper Hannover photo

File:Staatsoper Hannover.jpg

I found it among orphan images and set in up at the entry. I think it's your personal photo. Would you give some copyright info about it?

Hi, In case you're un-aware, I thought you might be interested in the the edits going on at Opera Company of Boston. You also might want to look at Opera Boston and Boston Lyric Opera. Paul August 21:04, Sep 30, 2004 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your heads up about the Boston opera articles. I have reverted the changes, and removed the Boston Opera Company from Cleanup. This anon user clearly has an axe to grind; his/her contributions were highly unencyclopedic. Of course the articles could use some additional material, but that will have to wait until someone with a more balanced POV comes along. PS Whereabouts in Cambridge to you live? I was born and grew up there. -- Viajero 17:50, 1 Oct 2004 (UTC)

You're welcome. Some of the content added to Opera Company of Boston seemed useful, but I don't know enough to be able to NPOV it. I live off of Sherman street next to Danehy Park, in North Cambridge. Where did you live? Paul August 21:11, Oct 1, 2004 (UTC)

You've claimed "fair use" on the image "borrowed" from http://www.hannover.de ... I cannot see any basis for the fair use claim ... looks more like copyvio to me. I've listed it on Wikipedia:Copyright problems --Tagishsimon

Opera pic

Greetings. I've been going around Wikipedia, trying to add image copyright tags to images that don't have them. I stumbled upon Image:Oper Leipzig.jpg, which apparently isn't linked to from any pages. Do you still need this image? If so, could you add a copyright tag, so we'll know if it's fair use, public domain, or what? Thanks so much, – Quadell ^{(talk) (help)}[[]] 17:13, Oct 6, 2004 (UTC)

esTofW

Since you put your name down as a spanish to english traslator, i thought you might be interested in the new Spanish translation of the week collaboration project. This weeks collaboration is Género chico.

paz y amor, The bellman 05:16, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Are you a vandal

Wikipedia:Village pump#Great bit of vandalism probably needs your attention. http://en.wikipedia.org/w/wiki.phtml?title=The_Weavers&diff=4344920&oldid=3977137 refers. --Tagishsimon

Wikipedia:Forum for Encyclopedic Standards

I have drafted a proposal for a new voluntary association on Wikipedia (joining groups like the Wikipedia:The Business and Economics Forum and the Wikipedia:Harmonious editing club) to promote discussion of a sort of system of expert review on Wiki. Please take a look and add your ideas. 172 08:01, 16 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I've noticed some of your recent edits. Welcome back! 172 23:48, 1 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Article Licensing

Hi, I've started the Free the Rambot Articles Project which has the goals of getting users to multi-license all of their contributions that they've made to...

...all U.S. state, county, and city articles...
...all articles...

using the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike (CC-by-sa) version 1.0 and 2.0 Licenses or into the public domain if they prefer. The CC-by-sa license is a true free documentation license that is similar to the GFDL (which every contribution made to Wikipedia is licensed under), but it allows other projects, such as WikiTravel, to use our articles (See the Multi-licensing Guide for more information). Since you are among the top 1000 Wikipedians by edits, I was wondering if you would be willing to multi-license all of your contributions or at minimum those on the geographic articles. So far over 90% of people who have responded have done this.

Nutshell: Wikipedia articles can be shared with any other GFDL project but open/free projects using the incompatible Creative Commons Licenses (e.g. WikiTravel) can't use our stuff and we can't use theirs. It is important to us that other free projects can use our stuff. So we use their licenses too.

To allow us to track those users who muli-license their contributions, many users copy and paste the {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}} template (or {{MultiLicensePD}} for public domain) into their user page, but there are other templates for other options at Template messages/User namespace. The following examples could also copied and pasted into your user page:

Option 1

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions, with the exception of my user pages, as described below:

OR

Option 2

I agree to [[Wikipedia:Multi-licensing|multi-license]] all my contributions to any [[U.S. state]], county, or city article as described below:

Or if you wanted to place your work into the public domain, you could replace {{DualLicenseWithCC-BySA-Dual}} with {{MultiLicensePD}}. If you only prefer using the GFDL, I would like to know that too. Please let me know at my talk page what you think. It's important to know, even if you choose to do anything so I don't keep asking. -- Ram-Man (comment| talk) 14:23, Dec 3, 2004 (UTC)

Mikhail Khodorkovsky article

I would appreciate your feedback on comments I left in Talk:Mikhail_Khodorkovsky when you get a chance. Thanks! --Dejitarob 20:47, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Kucera among Hungarian people

Hi, I saw you inserted the "Category:Hungarian people" in the article Henry Kucera on 19 June 2004. I'd like to ask you what your source was for this information, and in what sense you think Kucera is Hungarian. – Thank you.

--Adam78 16:47, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Hi. Good to see that you're back... I have a small favor to ask. Could you take a look at Origins of the American Civil War. I'm barred from editing it for a day due to the 3RR, causing some neo-Confederate apologia to be left standing... Happy New Year! 172 13:25, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I just sent you an email through the Wiki email feature. 172 18:09, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Terrorism categories

Yes, sadly, they survived the effort at deletion. -- Jmabel | Talk 19:35, Jan 27, 2005 (UTC)

Andrea Chénier

Andrea Chénier is a italian language opera. Not french. Hi SγωΩηΣ ^tαlk 21:56, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

1755 Lisbon earthquake

It seems that this revision, which is the creation of the 1755 Lisbon earthquake article is the original source of the "roamed the streets" comment that is receiving some attention. Apparently the claim was picked up and repeated by many journalists. Follow the link from this blog post to see what I mean.

What I'm curious about is this: can you substantiate the claim? Was it an error? It stayed in the article for a terribly long time if it isn't true. --Jimbo Wales 06:10, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Negroponte

Of course he knew what was happening, and despite claims that he "complained", he surely should have told more to Congress and the American people. But Negroponte always maintained that he didn't know the full extent of the brutality, etc., and so to make the article that he knew surely would require better sources I think. I'm not sure I hit all of the wrongheaded "alleged"s which were added to the article. You might diff the current and old versions to make sure that no unnecessary ones are there. There were one or two "alleged"s which should perhaps be left in for accuracy. And I think that the idea in one of the comments at the talk page to the effect that the article should be rearranged, adding more information about Negroponte's later years, and more of his side of the story is probably a good idea. Having the honduras section cut up into "what happened", and "what Negroponte knew" would perhaps dispel some of the POV claims.

Great job on the article. I really didn't contribute much. Just trying to prevent it from getting spun away from criticism of a man who should probably be behind bars.

--Jacobolus 10:20, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps an article on Battalion 3-16 should be made, which could then speak straight about facts, none of which are disputed, without the worry of being POV about Negroponte --Jacobolus 10:24, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

dynamax

viajero te importa darme tu msn o yahoo messenger? sobre los enlaces en español

Wikipedia:Spanish Translation of the Week

I would like to revive this project. I noticed that you've added yourself to the list of available Spanish-to-English translators. Are you interested in working on Spanish Translation of the Week? — J3ff 06:07, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Abimael Guzman

Viajero, just thought I'd give you a heads up. I agree with your changes to the Abimael Guzman article though I made a few minor tweaks. I've readded the prisoner pic. While I do agree that the 'main' pic should be something different, having the prisoner pic is important simply because of its wide dissemination. I also readded the tidbit about where he is currently imprisoned (I'm assuming that it is true) --Bletch 00:40, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Fujimori

I'll try to look in on this when I get a chance. I've glanced. It's clear that you are right on many points. You might want to look into which of their edits are acceptable, to reduce the gap between the two versions to significant matters. -- Jmabel | Talk 18:59, Feb 27, 2005 (UTC)

Bank of Sweden prize

Hi Viajero. Re your question about changing the "Nobel prize in Economics" to "Bank of Sweden Prize in Economic Sciences". I did it because that's what the prize is, that's what it's name is. The prize is not the "Nobel Prize in Economics", because no such prize exists. If one looks at the list of Nobel Laureates, or the Nobel Foundation site, you will not find the names of the Bank of Sweden laureates. The two are entirely unconnected.

Yes, I know that the Bank of Sweden prize is often colloquially called the "Nobel Prize in Economics", but the Pritzker Prize is often colloquially called the "Nobel Prize in Architecture", and I have heard other prizes called the "Nobel prize in ..." whatever.

If you look at the biographies of the Bank of Sweden Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel laureates, you will see the prize called the "Bank of Sweden" prize in the majority of articles; it is calling it the "Nobel Prize in Economics" that is the anomaly. In fact, the ones I changed called it different names like the "Memorial prize in Economics", the "Nobel Memorial Prize", to the "Nobel prize in Economics". If we're supposed to use the colloquial term, which one to use? I use "the Bank of Sweden prize" colloquially. If you read the Milton Friedman article, or economics texts, you will see that the colloquial name is "the Bank of Sweden prize".

I believe you took issue with using the full name of the prize, rather than an abbreviation. In subsequent mentions of the prize in the same article, I used only "the "Bank of Sweden prize". I suppose the "... in memory of Alfred Nobel" is unnecessary. However, this is already the term used in most of the articles, and is the name of the Wikipedia page as well. I believe it only looks strange if you see multiple mentions of it; in the Bank of Sweden Prize page it is only mentioned a few times, and on the laureate's pages I only use it once, so it is not too glaring. I noticed a few pages have separate links for the "Bank of Sweden prize" and the "Alfred Nobel" mentions. I could do that too, but the Bank of Sweden prize page makes the mention of Alfred Nobel, so it seems redundant.

The mention of a "Nobel prize in Economics" is incorrect, and inconsistent existing Wikipedia pages. By correcting it I felt I was making Wikipedia better and more consistent. However, I will avoid changing it until I see your reply on this page.

Page requested for protection

The Page Alberto Fujumori Is on requested for protection becouse of your constant lack of compromise and disregard of hearing any other point of view exept yours. Regarding the arbitration against me, are you planning to ban me from Wikipedia for stating some truth facts?. Ok, Fine with me. Messhermit 19:46, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Also, I also stated an arbitration request against you. It is not right to simply try to banned me just becouse I don't share your own POV. Messhermit 20:50, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Have you started an RfC on Messhermit? I don't believe you can go to arbitration without first starting an RfC and attempting mediation. -- Jmabel | Talk 20:15, Mar 1, 2005 (UTC)

Ward Churchill =

You're welcome, and more to the point, thanks for the "good version" in the first place. You're right; it was so bad a little while ago I really just couldn't bear to edit it myself -- only to sigh soulfully on the talk page about it. I think that it may be stabilising somewhat (if that's not tempting fate); I like to think Calicocat's edits are getting less erratic, and Keetowah is a bit less righteously steamed up, but we shall see. (It's very odd that given that they seem to make equal and opposite edits otherwise, they both seemed to want to remove the "mixed heritage claims" stuff from the intro...) The usual trend on WP seems to be that lead sections expand and expand, until someone points out they're three times longer than the MoS allows -- watching one dissolve down to a single sentence was almost surreal. (Uh, Keith Wigdor article flashback...) Alai 22:06, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Response to Churchill post at my talk

Parking tickets and teenage indiscretions don't bother me. Lying about being a recipient of the Combat Infantry Badge and Parachutist Badge (U.S.) is much more serious. He's claiming professional qualifications he doesn't have, and inferring a first-hand knowledge of the horrors of combat that he did not acquire.

Churchill may or may not have been involved in some hairy situations in Vietnam, (it doesn't sound like it) but he didn't earn the decorations he claimed. My own grandfather almost drowned landing at New Guinea, and saw *some* ground combat in the invasion of Luzon (not as much as a lot of other guys did). However, his MOS was not infantry, he didn't qualify for the CIB, and he never claimed to have it (actually, he never talked about any of his medals, which I didn't find out about until after he died). Ward Churchill, on the other hand, has falsified information about serious life events, and IMHO that does go to his credibility.

When a historian gives me information about controversial historical events, I needto be able to trust the information that he gives me. Professors may sometimes make mistakes, which can be forgiven if corrected; fabrications should not be, at least not without a major public retraction and apology (which I'm not aware of Churchill making). --Jpbrenna 22:35, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

CVR, etc.

Re the AF pic, I didn't put in back in the article on purpose, because it's tagged as fair use. Which has always struck me as the legal equivalent of wanting something terribly terribly badly and wishing ever so very hard so that it finally comes true. Plus the tag says, "subsequent persons who place it into articles assert that this qualifies as fair use of the material under United States copyright law" -- sod that; I'm in no position to assert anything under US copyright law. Yeah, anti fair-use, that's me. Sorry.

Re the T&R commissions: There's a definite case for List of truth and reconciliation commissions, using the lower-case name as a generic. Viz:

Argentina: Comisión Nacional de Desaparición Forzosa de Personas
Chile: C'n Nacional de Verdad y Reconciliación (Rettig)
El Salvador: Comisión de la Verdad
Panamá: Comisión de la Verdad

Guatemala had its "C'n de (¿para el?) Esclarecimiento histórico", too, and there's the "crímenes del pasado" business in Mexico. Plus a bunch in the non-Spanish speaking world, ZA and the rest. Grist for the mill... –Hajor 14:54, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Fujimori

My pleasure. It doesn't sem to me to be in bad shape at the moment, but it clearly needs vigilance. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 15:52, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

hugo chavez

No problem, I got a little lost in following the edit histories, but the article needs some cleanup anyways. What do you think of my proposal for an Hugo Chávez administration article arranged by policy area rather than chronologically? I think that this would be a better format for discussing things like Barrio Adentro and Plan Zamora and the [[[1999 Venezuelan constitution]] than trying to lace them around the coup and strikeout/lockout in chronological order. DanKeshet 17:57, Mar 7, 2005 (UTC)

Archiving

I disagree. Moving the page is better because it keeps the history with the page. It also alerts anyone watching a page that it has been archived. Philip Baird Shearer 15:24, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)

User Keetoowah: please justify deletion

Could you please justify your removal earlier today of a long section on Churchill's books? [7] If you don't consider Churchill a "scholar" that is your opinion. There is no reason why this article should not review his written work. -- Viajero 17:06, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Dear Viajero: Please explain to me what exactly your problem is. I did NOT make the changes that you accuse me of making. What changes that I made are a matter of record. This project keeps a record of who makes what changes when. If you would take the time to look up who deleted the summarizes of the fake Indian non-scholarly books you will see that it was NOT me. Do your research before you jump wild, inaccurate conclusions. It is clear that you have an axe to grind and your future comments will be judged in that light.--- --Keetoowah 20:25, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I'm glad that I came to your Talk page. I see how you and Alai are patting each other on the back. Also, I glad to see that it isn't just you that are making the obnoxious comment, Alai is chiming in with you, "I like to think Calicocat's edits are getting less erratic, and Keetowah is a bit less righteously steamed up, but we shall see." Oh, by the way, I clicked on the page that you provided to somehow "prove" that I deleted the summarizes of Churchill's work and that page does not show that I made those deletions at all. I convinced that you made the allegation on the Churchill Talk page to discredit me and my work. You are so mature.-----Keetoowah 20:47, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Hola, Viajero

Why, I have read several of your contributions, and enjoyed them greatly.

I am interested in history in general, and Peruvian history in particular. By now, I have imposed some sort of contribution-fast on myself, as I find it very hard to see what I write deleted within minutes by zealots who claim to have a direct link to the truth (and resort to name-calling, and (mis)identifying the speaker, instead of using arguments against what, to the best of my knowledge, are standard views among historians). It seems you are rather good at keeping your entries from being vaporized; perhaps I should learn from you. In the immediate future, I'll restrict myself to contributions on mathematics - but if you lack access to sources I may have access to, ask away.

Hasdrubal 23:37, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Please, could you explain me this:

I would certainly welcome an additional voice of moderation and thoughtfulness to balance some of the partisanos here.

It is not right (at least for me) to encourage other user to attack another Wikipedist just because it does not share a POV. User:Hasdrubal is making wronfully statements on the Alberto Fujimori article.

I already disscuss with Jmable the issue about Peruvians on Peruvian Politics (and I already apologise if those remarks were offensive) and this is clearly an attack against me and others that support the idea that "peruvians have also a voice on Peruvian related topics".

Please, speack with your friend and tell him that it is not right to add more fuel to a settled controversy. Messhermit 04:29, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

On the above: sigh. I think I made my point clear: nobody's opinion should count for more or less than it is worth simply because the person holding the opinion is or is not Peruvian.

OK, to answer your question: indeed, Haya de la Torre is a fancy double-barrelled name, not an apellido matrimonial (which would never be used by a man, anyhow). Victor Raul Haya de la Torre is usually referred to as Haya de la Torre, and not simply as Haya; "Haya" is not the most common name there is, but it isn't the most uncommon either. Hasdrubal 18:46, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Incidentally, how do you create a new heteronym for an entry? Say there is an entry on Dr. Dr. X Y Z de W - how does one make a request for "Z de W" be automatically redirected to the entry for Dr. Dr. X Y Z de W? (Haya de la Torre seems to be sufficiently covered, but other Peruvian historical figures aren't.) Hasdrubal 19:06, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Well, excuse my ignorance, but how does one create a new page? Hasdrubal 19:15, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Incidentally, Viajero - I've been busy with maths lately, but if you need any help resisting human-wave attacks, let me know... Hasdrubal 23:55, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Terrorism. What is it?

Hello Viajero. As a curiosity, why is it so important for you to avoid the word "terrorist" or "terrorist group"? Why is it important for you to label as "revolutionary" or "insurgency" or "rebel" to a person or group that clearly has used terrorist tactics and murdered thousands of people? Put yourself in the shoes of the victims or families of victims of those persons or groups, that indiscriminately killed civilians. Wouldn't you call them plainly "terrorists"? Of you think you would still call them "revolutionaries"? I would like your sincere explanation. I would really want to understand your way of thinking.--AAAAA 06:08, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Illegal enemy combatant

As you are a major contributer to the page Illegal enemy combatant please see the merge templage that I have put on the article and the section Talk:Illegal enemy combatant#Merge with Unlawful combatant section United States -- Philip Baird Shearer 16:11, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Universidad Nacional Mayor de San Marcos

Hi Viajero -

it seems that some people are pissed off at your welcome message to me to revert all edits I make to (completely non-political!) Peruvian webpages. Could you please take a look at the article on "National University of Saint Mark", and help me repel this human-wave attack (it seems now I am the target...)?

Hasdrubal 17:58, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

No - I was just getting rid of a spelling mistake or two. Thanks for the edits - I don't know why I kept the detailed description of the Parque Universitario (I was replacing a previous, unintelligible description, I suppose...) Hasdrubal 20:27, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Please vote on the San Marcos/Saint Mark issue on Wikipedia:Village_pump_(policy)#Voting. Thank you. --Tuomas ^hello 02:37, Mar 24, 2005 (UTC)

Links (in Spanish) like Alan's party website

Hey Viajero. Sorry I couldn't answer your message properly before. I'm a new wikipedian and am barely learning all the features this great enclyclopedia has. As far as the links to sites in Spanish, yes your right we should all use the "(in Spanish)" after the link. By the way, did you ever my email message from angeleno? Just curious. Take care! Bye. --Dynamax 07:44, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Belaunde

Saludos, Viajero,

take a look at my comments in the "discussion" section of Fernando Belaunde Terry. Hasdrubal 22:15, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Lima & UNMSM

Hi, the reason I restored the info you had deleted is because I think the first paragraph of every article article should give the reader a good overview of the whole content of the article. I have seen information being repeated in articles such as Buenos Aires or New York City (of course, the latter article is much longer than Lima, but hopefully someday the Lima article will be as long?). Regarding HappyApple and the San Marcos/Saint Mark name issue, isn't voting and reaching consensus one of the things that keep wikipedia going? If he doesn't want to respect that, I guess stricter measures will have to be taken. --Tuomas ^hello 20:06, Mar 27, 2005 (UTC)

Apples

Hi. This is no comment on your case (which seems reasonable at first glance), but I've sworn not to do 3RR blocks, mainly as a protest over misuse and misapplication of the three revert rule. You might want to try Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/3RR instead. —Charles P. ^(Mirv) 21:56, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Ronald Reagan

I already posted that I had hit my limit on the talk page (prompting the post?). This particular anonymous editor posting me to the noteboard is like the pot calling the kettle black. Check out his edit history. No edit summary comments. Ever. I've asked the user to make comments and he has limited comments to talk page attacks made whenever he doesn't get his way. Besides, one or two of those reverts were not reverts, but simple edits. Anyway, I'm not inclined to let a user provoke me into so many reversions, but maybe this is just a sign that Wikipedia is just as bad as ever and that I should just leave again. Daniel Quinlan 23:53, Mar 27, 2005 (UTC)

De-link De-link De-link De-link!

Hello Viajero. Thanks for your note on my Talk: page. Yes - overlinking is my Wikipedia pet peeve. Every instance of 2005 was linked in the Terri Schiavo article. Why? In my discussion about de-linking on the Schiavo Talk: page, somebody spoke excitedly about having clicked through on the link to the COUNTY that Schiavo was born in in 1963 - it gave him some amazing insight into the situation. There is an ongoing de-linking battle there... I keep de-linking the word knee and multiple people keep turning it back into a link - just in case anybody doesn't know what a knee is. Thank you for identifying yourself as a kindred spirit. --AStanhope 04:49, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Leo

I keep meaning to pull some stuff together on Strauss, but keep not having time. The area is polluted by the LaRouche articles, but his is a very significant figure on the political right.--Cberlet 03:10, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Toilet paper

Nice additions to the article. I do hope we losen up enough to use it on April Fool's Day. Filiocht | Talk 14:03, Mar 29, 2005 (UTC)

The call of nature

Or, "De nihilo, nihilarticle". Thank you, thank you, you have filled a notable lacuna! --Bishonen|Talk 14:10, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

As I told Taxman on the FAC vote, I think you'd be surprised by the accuracy of most of the references, note especially the Gorboduc link. Practically all of the little-known Elizabeth I of England/Eric XIV of Sweden affair really happened. --Bishonen|Talk 20:37, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Economy

Dear Viajero,

I think we agree re: the economy; it would be good to have hard data at hand - not everything is on the INEI's size, and you may have library access to Peruvian technical periodicals.

The Fujimori talk page is, as usual, full of flames - I'll try to put out the fire, or at least smother it a little. I hope we can all work together. Hasdrubal 19:35, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

ETPH

I'm happy to do some more tidying as of now, having no more major additions to make. Vamos a ver que pasare el Viernes que viene. Filiocht | Talk 07:45, Mar 30, 2005 (UTC)

Admin

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Sesel --SqueakBox 17:53, Mar 31, 2005 (UTC)

Henry Kissinger

Hi Viajero.

Have you looked at the Henry Kissinger page? It seems like a lot of sucking up to a man who is a documented war criminal. I don't really have the time to do the topic justice, though I'll try to rework a bit, and clean up the links section. I thought you, however, might know a broader community of Wikipedians on the left who could more clearly explain the criticism of Kissenger, track down sources, and put the rosier claims of the article in context. Speaking of which, it seems that there should be some place for organizing like-minded Wikipedians to fix up right-biased articles, with a todo list, etc. I don't know if such a thing exists, or if not how it would be created, but it would be useful--Some could call attention to biased articles, and all could go fix them up. Anyway, the Kissenger article seems like a good place to start. --jacobolus (t) 09:37, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Position of Images

I noticed you changed the position of the picture in Francesco Maria Piave page. As far as I know, the most used position is on the right as default. If you haven't other reasons, could you please move back the image? -Panairjdde 09:45, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Procuraduría

That particular Procuraduría is the Procuraduría Ad Hoc Anticorrupción -- set up by the incoming Toledo admin. to investigate corruption cases under Fujimori (and, perhaps more importantly, to get the $$$ back, which sounds like this UFEC's specific task). I assume it's attached to the Min. of Justice? I'd call it the (office of the) special prosecutor for corruption offences. Now, the Unidad Financiera Estratégica y de Cooperación Internacional -- when I come across something like that, name of a minor administrative department that's more of a label than a description, I tend to gloss the title as close to the Spanish as possible and preserve the Spanish acronym (so that if anyone is really interested they can look it up). So, you'd have the "Strategic Finance and International Cooperation Unit (UFEC)". If you can't quite swallow that (a distinct possibility), I suppose you could omit the "strategic", which doesn't really add much in English (or Spanish). The "Finance and International Cooperation Unit (UFEC) of the office of the Special Prosecutor for Corruption Offences"? That was the translator speaking; now let's see it from the journalist's POV. How about omitting the reference to the UFEC (which doesn't say much to a foreign audience anyway) and simply say it was the special prosecutor/investigator ('s office) -- "an agency specifically set up by the incoming... etc, etc." -- that issued the report? –Hajor 15:24, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I found Procuraduría translated on a blog[3] as "Internal Affairs" office -- Reading that entry, I'd guess the procuraduría refers back to the attorney-general, not internal affairs (of the police?). (Colombia's a mess in that regard, anyway, with both a Fiscal General de la Nación and a Procurador General de la Nación.) Take a look here at the example beginning "Fui agredida por un policía" -- sounds very similar to the case described there on the blog, and the oficina de asuntos disciplinarios de la policía would be a much better match for 'internal affairs office' and the disciplinary measures it is to take. Muddied the waters enough for you? –Hajor 15:57, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

My award

Most deeply (and regularly) moved. Thanks you. Filiocht | Serious fun 07:34, Apr 4, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for your support on adminship. I appreciate it. Keep up the good work, traveller. Helpful Dave 13:37, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Images

Is there a particular reason you are reverting a right aligned image? Not only does the left aligned introductory image make it difficult to follow the text and table of contents, but it interrrupts the natural tendency to follow the text. I have never seen a great article begin with a left-aligned image, but perhaps you could point me to one. Also, have you attempted to view the article at different resolutions? A left-aligned lead image at any resolution below 1024x768 makes the text difficult to read, especially on some laptops. --Viriditas | Talk 10:54, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Can you recover what you destroyed?

When you moved the anarchism (anti-capitalist) page back, it appears you destroyed the disambiguation work that had been done on the anarchism page in the mean time. I don't even see it in the my contributions list. Can you assist in recovering it?--Silverback 04:34, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC)

Thanx, I don't know why I couldn't find them before. I thought I had looked through the history.--Silverback 13:06, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC)

Andrea Dworkin

Hi, I noticed you added back in that Andrea Dworkin died on April 9, 2005--would you mind adding a source for that? I haven't been able to find anything. Thanks, Meelar (talk) 17:35, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC) Yes, Viajero, what's going on here, if she'd died it would be in the newspapers, no? -- Jmabel | Talk 20:00, Apr 10, 2005 (UTC)

LimeWire vs eTomi

Shareaza community found that rippoff programs becomes too noisy, like moskito's

And some sites are even selling Shareaza itself :-) Would You like to add some footer like one at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shareaza http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etomi

i think there are success-stories in LimeWire communities?

That is just idea, nothing more.

--80.249.152.133 13:57, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Dworkin

Wow. Needless to say, you obviously have, in this mailing list, an excellent source: good enough that it is hard to confirm other ways. You might want to make a note about it someplace, and if this comes up again put something in your edit summary explaining where you got the information, since otherwise this is obviously going to be indistinguishable from misinformation. -- Jmabel | Talk 20:08, Apr 11, 2005 (UTC)

Very well, Viajero. I apologize for reverting your unsourced edit when it was unconfirmed and seemed unlikely to be true. I most humbly eat my share of crow, because you were right and I was wrong. Ik ben een sukkel.

Now, let me add: We agree on something else as well. You have it right on your user page. You do have all the diplomatic skills of a jackass, and you shouldn't be proud of it. --Diderot 21:05, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Theatres...

It's not my picture, I found it on the Commons while compiling commons:Theatre buildings and commons:Concert hall. I hope you'll enjoy these pages as well (and I am still working on them with over 100 pictures to transfer from wikipedias - mostly de and en, but also lesser known ones - to the commons, and also still one or two dozens of my own theatre photographs to upload, not to speak of thousands of postcards, some of them old enough to be in the Public Domain (see my page http://www.andreas-praefcke.de/carthalia/ ). I am a bit uneasy if I see fair-use images (as too often the case on en:) if there are enough decent free images of the same stuff to be used on the commons, so I changed that one. Greetings from Germany --AndreasPraefcke 20:45, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

done... the Berlin State Opera picture is a bit greyish, but I do not have one in better weather right now. As for Komische Oper Berlin, I only have a decent interior view. Alas, next time I am in Berlin, I can hopefully take better pictures... --AndreasPraefcke 22:11, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

again done... ;-) I hope it's clear now. By the way, you may use whatever text you want from my theatres website and license under GFDL (it's not wikipedia-style, however, but has to be adapted a bit; furthermore it's only about the buildings, not so much about the companies and the theatre performances taking place in the buildings). Just write the URL in the edit summary field and add permission to use under GFDL by User:AndreasPraefcke, so everyone will see that it's no copyright violation. As to the pictures, everything PD (i.e. a couple of very old postcards) can be used for Wikipedia if you like, but most of the postcards depicted are still copyrighted and hence not usable. --AndreasPraefcke 09:04, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Template Boxes

I'm on board with you re: the template boxes, amigo, but I fear, as you do, that we may be tilting at windmills. There must be a master repository for these boxes somewhere. Do you know where that is? Do you know if there is any guideline for their use? BTW, I have been happily delinking YEARS in particular. I think the most stupid Wiki link I have run into to date was the word knee linked in the Terri Schiavo article. --AStanhope 23:09, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for the page protection

I shouldn't let the endless alberuni sockpuppets get to me, nor should I let WP's utter inertia when it comes to stamping out his many, many sockpuppets get to me. I could be wrong. User:Satiany could be a HistoryBuffEr sock. *sigh*. Will try harder to leave less strident edit summaries in future. --Mrfixter 21:09, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Ward Churchill / Fred Bauder

While discussing Ward Churchill recently on his personal talk page, Fred Bauder said this: "However, judging from his appearance I do think he probably has some Native American ancestory".. I am part Native American (Mi'kmaq aka Micmac), most certainly more so than Mr. Churchill and I don't like to be judged by my appearance. I think Bauder's comments are offensive racial stereotyping. I think he ought to apologize and have basically said as much on his talk page. What do you think? Rex071404 ^{216.153.214.94} 08:38, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I too have responded on User talk:Fred Bauder. Rex071404 ^{216.153.214.94} 13:08, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Yes, it was necesary. I want to make sure readers at Talk:Ward_Churchill are fully apprised. Rex071404 ^{216.153.214.94} 13:58, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Strange

Just now I posted a request for help from Snowspinner to look into how the Che y RfC could have met the two pwerson threshold without anyone certifying it. Then I refreshed my watchlist to see you just removed it. If your intention was to emberass me and my wretched self-esteem, well done! What did you mean by resolved, though? I just endorsed your(?) outside view about an hour before, incidentally. El_C 10:57, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Teach the Controversy

Thanks. I deliberately tried to keep the article in an imperfect state from bith points of view, to give all parties dissatisfied and wanting to reach a resolution; let's see if it works. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 15:05, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Teach the Controversy page

I note your protection of this page, which is not unreasonable. I believe that the page that should be protected is my edit of 16:14, 13 Apr 2005, which came just before Ian Pitchford's wholesale deletion of text without seeking any consensus, or the version of 09:48 or 09:58, 14 Apr 2005, which reflects my minor edits of text to which others objected in order to find consensus.

If you look at the edit history, you will see that I have edited in good faith and have tried to be fair to people with whom I disagree, even though they seem focused on attacking proponents of the policy which is the topic of the article rather than the merits of the policy and its implementation by the state of Ohio. I have always tried to discuss issues and work out solutions with others. Mr. Etitis' revert made the same wholesale deletions that Mr. Pitchford did. He has shown himself to be inconsistent in his application of procedure and has made several false and unconstructive accusations. He accused me of "removing" text when I had clearly moved it to a better location (with explanation based on Wiki policy), and today his edit deleted valid text without consensus.

The page you protected has an introduction that functions as an attack on the policy that is the subject of the article, and seems clearly to violate Wiki policy on how to write a good article.

I do not want to work from a version that reflects recent edits that violate Wiki policy.

I ask you therefore to review the edit history and the discussion page and protect one of the versions above, which I believe reflect the edits of the most constructive users. Thank you. --VorpalBlade 15:58, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I have tried to be constructive, but Mel Etitis just ignores my comments and insults me. He ignores my requests to focus on the unilateral deletions he made without consensus.

The current intro is a POV mess. Your picking his version functionally endorses his bad behaviour, and lets me know how the power to fix pages will be used. I think my editing record is very good in comparison to theirs, and can only assume by this that good behaviour in editing counts for very little here. I think further efforts on this page are futile. --VorpalBlade 19:59, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Who decides who has the power to update a locked page? How is that decision made? Is there a Wiki policy on this? --VorpalBlade 19:06, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

WC

the uncensored truth about ward churchill should be restored. He is white, a rather central fact that must be restored to the first paragraph. He is a plagiarist. That's important too. And the reason he is notable is his characterization of 9/11 victims. That must be prominently explored too. Being fair to him does not justify "white-washing" him, if you'll forgive the expression. Carlshooters 18:10, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

My newness is not relevant to the debate. Ward Churchill may be controversial but that doesn't mean he should be called native American when he isn't, that his public record be cleansed to remove his unpleasant remarks. I have read the NPOV page and agree with it absolutely, the article should reflect that policy and not PR spin to make a colorful white guy look like a bland native american. Carlshooters 18:35, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I am not Carlshooters although agree with what he's written here. He's a rich white guy indeed. He's a fraudster, falsely claiming a proud heritage he doesn't have. Native Americans have suffered enough with jerks like this. That's a viewpoint which is not in the article. The article should include the facts and will. Johnnyio 21:36, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

thanks

--for adding the "protected" template; I forgot (I'm a newbie admin; first time I've protected an article). As I'm sure you can see, a single user with an army of sockpuppets has been quite insistent on changing it to his version against the consensus view. Antandrus 15:20, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

another dubious category

See this: Category:Mafia associates I happened to notice it because it was added to Frank Sinatra, which was on my watchlist. I have not the slightest doubt that Sinatra had Mob friends, but should Wikipedia be in the business of passing this kind of judgment? -- Viajero 18:18, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

It's no worse than a bunch of other categories; actually, I've seen others far worse. I'm against the proliferation of these stupid, unencyclopedic categories. The worst is when they are subcategories and people move things out of useful categories (e.g. imagine if the category was "Italian Americans with Mafia affiliations" and people moved people out of a more general "Italian Americans" categories into it). -- Jmabel | Talk 05:19, Apr 16, 2005 (UTC)

You are a seasoned hand around here and I respect longevity of service but please don't delete material just because it doesn't suit your POV. The question of Churchill's childhood is actually very important in light of the controversy about his heritage. Stop censoring it without explanation. TonyMarvin 10:30, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I'm not sure whether to have expected a reply but can I suggest you think a little more carefully about using terms like "state oppression" and "subjugation", might be terrific on a pamphlet but not really appropriate for an article. TonyMarvin 10:42, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

For someone who appears to have been contributing for only a couple of days, you certainly have a precocious facility for determining what neutrality is here. That Churchill's classmates don't recall him mentioning his ethnic background proves just one thing: that the don't recall him mentioning his ethnic background, period. -- Viajero 10:42, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I think anyone can tell the difference between partisanship of the kind you are pushing and neutrality. On controversial subjects I think the only way to deal with it is by putting up one side and then the other in as tight a sequence as possible. I don't know if that's the official way of doing it but I can't imagine any other way. But what won't fly is your version which avoids anything controversial about him and the other version which reads like a Bill O'Reilly rant. TonyMarvin 10:51, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Let me get this clear: we are allowed to state, for example, that terrorists commit terrorists acts, but we are not allowed to say that states engage in oppression and subjugation? Wow. And you claim I have an agenda? -- Viajero 10:49, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I don't understand what you mean about terrorists, I presume they do. Do all states engage in oppression and subjugation? I don't know, I know some do, but I also know that an encyclopedia article is not the forum for off-handedly asserting such a thing. You may have a specific set of examples in mind but why indulge in the rhetoric if you don't or can't put up anything to back it up. It is not fair to presume that all states or states in general engage in oppression and subjugation. And if you don't understand that then I'm not sure I can help you. If you mean the United States and have a specific example of what the USG did to oppress etc., that would be a different matter, but you didn't. TonyMarvin 10:58, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

It troubles me that you presume I have an agenda that is anti-Churchill. In fact, I believe his removal for his views would have been a scandal had it occurred. I don't like what Churchill said or especially the way he said it but that's not the point. He should be free to say, write, think whatever he wants, that's why we have tenure. So if you seek my agenda, that's it.

Does that mean we should exclude all significant mention of his words from the introduction? No. Does it mean we shouldn't describe the very real challenges he faces with problems about his employment? No. You can't just ignore these things or pretend they aren't a big deal. I bet if you ask him, it's a very big deal. TonyMarvin 11:08, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Is the existence and nature of COINTRELPRO debated? Is there any doubt that the activities directed against AIM, BPPs and others took place? Do serious historians question this? -- Viajero 11:37, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

That would entirely depend on what COINTRELPRO is or was. Is it a screenplay you are working on? Or proof of a US Government conspiracy of some kind? AIM I presume is the American Indian Movement, would that be the MN faction or the CO faction or DK faction. I am serious but am not an historian, I prefer the sciences to the social sciences, if that is the correct term. TonyMarvin 11:40, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I now know what COINTRELPRO is or was. If the FBI was undermining or monitoring violent leftwing groups that's fine by me, I sure as hell hope they are undermining and monitoring violent groups like militias, Nazis, KKK etc. I couldn't think of a better use of my taxes than this. Seriously, I shouldn't provoke you because Hoover was clearly a menace to our freedoms in many ways but I won't go along with calling such activities "state oppression" or whatever you want to call it. I welcome the Government monitoring violent groups whether they be KKK or al Qaeda or far left groups. So let's just describe events and let others decide whether it's oppression of our rights and freedoms or protection of our rights and freedoms. Always a fine line of course. TonyMarvin 11:51, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

COINTELPRO

I've added Pablo Neruda to my watchlist. I'm not a poetry reader, but I look forward to the discussion. I see you've already been discussing COINTELPRO with another user. I would appreciate your opinion on the recent changes to the entry. Any pointers you could offer toward reaching a POV conclusion will be appreciated. DJ Silverfish 20:57, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

3RR

Awww, someone failed to entrap me. Nice try and what'n, but try harder next time, I am ,after all, a fucking pro at this by now. Ciao. TDC 21:50, Apr 18, 2005 (UTC)

I love your movie! El_C 22:16, 18 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Pablo Neruda

Yes, it seems very bizarre to focus on an unexceptional poem that happens to be politically embarrassing. TDC is such a POV warrior: I have literally never seen him make an edit that wasn't intended to score a political point. Some of it is worse than this: at one point he tried inserting the nickname "Stalin's songbird" into the first sentence of the Pete Seeger article.

Just in general, the emphasis on Neruda's Stalinism is utterly disproportionate. He isn't primarily known as a Stalinist. He's primarily known as a poet.

Offhand, I don't see any of this that absolutely doesn't belong in the article; it's mostly a matter of someone doing the heavy lifting of writing a real article about Neruda that would put this in proportion. Perhaps it should become a single section on "Neruda and Stalinism". -- Jmabel | Talk 01:22, Apr 19, 2005 (UTC)

native american vs american indian

Since we aren't explaining in the intro why Churchill prefers "American Indian" the default prefered term "Native American" should be used instead (and should be used anyway). zen master T 15:44, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I responded to Chip's comment on the talk page about the same moment you were reverting... zen master T 16:15, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

html hosed

My changes completely fixed the impossibly tiny font problems for me, what browser are you using? I am using Firefox on Linux. What is broken for you? It makes more sense as <A> <X> </X> </A> doesn't? That talk page is rather hosed for me otherwise. zen master T 15:52, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Margaret Sanger

Hi Viajero, I requested some clarification on the Talk:Margaret Sanger page, please take a look! -MFNickster 23:26, 19 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hello, no relation no. I did check his edits though and found many excellent edits were being removed for no good reason. Dagen 10:11, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Dagen

I haven't yet considered that Dagen may be a sock puppet. Certainly Dagen is engaging in some of the most extreme POV pushing I've seen in a while. Why do you think this is TDC? If you have evidence then I think the next thing to do is to confront TDC with it. If he admits, then we need to RFC this. Don't take this to RFAr, it's far, far too early. There are a lot of things we can do that could forestall such drastic action--and if we didn't do them then arbcom would not really want to intervene until we had. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 11:33, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I think he answered you above....and the fact that he didn't see the correct edit button indicates to me that he isn't TDC...all this looks like suppression on your part anyway. If he reverts more than he should then block him.--MONGO 12:19, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I just had a closer look at his edits. There seems to be very strong circumstantial evidence that this is a sock puppet of TDC. We should take this straight to RfC. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 12:20, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

I'll drop a small note here since I got a comment by Viajero's on my own talk page about this very matter. While I don't any hard proof that TDC and Dagen are connected (like an IP or something), I would see two arguments which could induce doubt:

1) comments like "Cuban dictator Fidel Castro smoking while Cuba burns" are very much in the style of TDC (upon which I have made severral comments in the past)

2) the fact that Dagen, appearing on the day when TDC is banned, would start by editing articles like Pablo Neruda, which happens to be one of TDC's latest battelfields, is odd. Rama 13:10, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

omphalocentric

Interesting word...did a yahoo search for it after seeing your use of the word and got linked back to you in 3 links....[8]. Regarless, what the heck does it mean...expand my horizons...--MONGO 12:15, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Dank Uw/Gracias

Thanks for your help reverting POVism on Anna Louise Strong ~ Dpr 01:36, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Hola shipmate

Thanks for the kind message.I hope it won't be the last time our paths cross. I'm sure it won't. WP is very large but it does seem you see the same faces as you sail around it! Grace Note 13:45, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Not so. Do not delete my changes without justification. Labeling your version consensus and POV is not sufficient reason. I have set out my reasons on Talk. Do the same or play another game. TonyMarvin 15:15, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Sock puppet!

Apparently I'm one of your sock puppets! Kelly Martin 18:56, Apr 21, 2005 (UTC)

No more changes to my stable article. It is now very good. Ramondelrio 19:20, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

TonyMarvin's reverting

(copied from Kelly Martin's talkpage)Kelly, I think you're perilously close to breaking the 3RR. You're definitely breaking the spirit, if not the letter. I know it's frustrating to be up against a POV warrior like Tony. Here's what I suggest. We get an agreement on the talk page of what is disputed. We make a list of disputed items. We state that we will consider it a revert to change any one of those items. This is what a revert really should be considered. Not just the same fact three times, but anything in the article. But let's make a list so that we know what's at stake and can point to the list when, inevitably, items on it are reverted. Then you, I and Viajero revert Tony once each in turn. This will take the heat out of it because we are online at different times. Tony will either have to talk or breach the 3RR and be blocked. I am willing to include his viewpoint if he can substantiate it but relentless POV pushing doesn't help this article or this encyclopaedia. Let me know what you think. (copied to Viajero and TonyMarvin's talkpages)Grace Note 23:34, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Shining Path

Thanks for the message. I have enjoyed reading your contributions to Shining Path as well as [Alberto Fuijimori]], etc. I just started screwing around with wikipedia, and by no stretch of the imagination am I an expert on the Shining Path. I'm not even Peruvian, and my travels to Peru have all taken place during the post-war period.

It's interesting what you say about the level of support. While I think it's clear that Shining Path support was minimal throughout the country, and especially in downtown Lima, there had to be at least some support. If there was 0 support, there wouldn't have been a war. I've noticed that, at least from my Peruvian friends and Peruvians I have talked to, the Shining Path is referred to almost exclusively as "the terrorists." But that doesn't mean that they think any better of the government; they usually trash Garcia as a total idiot, Fujimori as a dictatorial crook, and Montesinos as a corrupt murderer.

As for social reforms, I'm not so sure how much of that I buy. It's hard to imagine what the "New Society" of the People's Republic of Peru would have looked like, but it probably would have been extremely poor, extremely violent, and extremely autocratic. Have you read anything about the way that the "Base Areas" controlled by the Shining Path were governed? If so I'd be interested in hearing it and it'd make a good addition to Shining Path.

One more thing -- I was thinking of greatly expanding the article on the MRTA. I wonder how long it would take for that to devolve into a war with AAAAA. -- Descendall 08:43, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

User:UDoN't!wAn*

I'm not sure if you're aware of this, but it appears that UDoN't!wAn* has you on a "hitlist" on his user page, with a link to your contributions. If he's causing you trouble, you may wish to note that on his WP:VIP entry. --BaronLarf 16:15, Apr 23, 2005 (UTC)

Trey Stone

I've encountered him before, and he's well known on Wikipedia. Yes, he's one of those determined PoV pushers who spends a great deal of time pretending that he's merely combatting the PoV of the nasty left-wing clique who dominate Wikipedia. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 13:38, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Opera houses and Opera companies

Ave, Viajero! I figure, since it was you, that no text was lost in the redirect from Royal Opera, London to Royal Opera House. My opinion is, to emphasize the venue over the company is an error, since the cultural entity is the company, wherever it plays, and the house is a piece of architecture; but if it's made consistent across the board, and has redirects, then it's immaterial. I see that Royal Ballet is linked right in the head paragraph: good! --Wetman 15:32, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

User:Keetoowah

I am considering opening an RFC on User:Keetoowah. His aggressive and nasty style is really not helping. But I'm not sure it would help. Thoughts? Kelly Martin 20:06, Apr 28, 2005 (UTC)

Derek Jeter Page

You ever going to unlock that thing?? It's been locked for nearly a month already. Brian Brockmeyer 04:20, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Les Troyens

I've brought up a minor transcription issue regarding your orignal source for a Berlioz quote on the talk page for Les Troyens. ~CS 00:36, 2 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Viajero

I really appreciate your vote in support of my RfA! Happy May Day! All the best, El_C 01:09, 2 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Robeson

Time to scuttle on over to Paul Robeson, and unprotect. Just remember, I win, I always do! TDC 01:13, May 3, 2005 (UTC)

Trey Stone

Yes, I see what you mean. I've added them to my Watch list. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 11:20, 6 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

E-mail?

Viajero--You do excellent work. Can you be reached via e-mail? M.E., New York City, 5/6/05

Thanks. If you click on "E-mail this user" on the left, you can send me a message. -- Viajero 19:25, 6 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Francisco Morales

The only reason I moved it was to make sure that every article that was trying to link to the article about him would get access to it whether the link was to the article with or without the matrimonial name and with or without the U acute accent on Bermudez. I wasn't really thinking about the style guides, and I will try to follow them better in the future. You can move it to wherever you want, just make sure that you keep all the forms of his name as redirects to the article. Academic Challenger 18:48, 7 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ambulance photo

It seems to be gone now; has the problem been resolved? (talk) 04:59, 8 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ack

Hi, Viajero. Thank you very much. On the spanish side there's even more work to do. I'm on it. I would like to write better english, to participate on this side. Maybe someday soon, I'll encourage myself to do it. I've followed your work on music, and I appreciate it a lot. Thanks again and regards, --Jdiazch 14:35, 8 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Victòria dels Àngels

I'm sure you are right, but it happens that I personally had the honour to know Victòria dels Àngels, at Barcelona, where she was born and lived, and this was her name, how she was known, and liked to be. And I thougth that according to international usage, only king names can be translated. I'm really surprised if the Wikipedia use is another, and wouldn't find it objective nor informative.--Friviere 21:36, 8 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Trey Stone

If you can collect the relevant diffs to demonstrate his breaking Wikipedia policies, then I'll certainly back you on an RfC. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 21:58, 8 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That looks right. I only asked you to collect the diffs because I'm so bound up with other matters; I know that sounds lazy, but I genuinely can't find the time (I shouldn't be editing now — I should be marking essays and exam scripts). Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 22:07, 8 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Survey on Prefixed-Styles

Since you are one of the people currently voting only a "First choice" I am hoping to encourage you to vote a full set of preferences in the ongoing survey before May 14, in order to prevent a deadlock which will result in no consensus. Whig 13:16, 9 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Trey Stone

I do sympathise with you, of course, but I don't think RfCs ever really serve a purpose. If Trey was interested in dispute resolution, it wouldn't be necessary. He will in time be barred from from Wikipedia, or will realise that it is his fate and will leave before he can be. Either way he will return as a new name, a new "face", and nothing will be resolved. For my part, the process will go a lot more easily if I don't have to waste hours of my life helping him on his way. Grace Note 13:21, 9 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Having done his three reverts for today, Trey's found a new way to game the system. Can I ask you to take over reverting him?Grace Note 00:10, 10 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:WikiProject Journalism

Needs your attn. -SV|t 04:26, 10 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Trey Stone 3RR diffs

I found the diffs you requested and some related information, and added them to the RFC. If there's any other information I have that you need, feel free to ask. – Clockwork Soul 16:52, 10 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad to help. In the end, the best mechanism we have for dispute resolution is our own determination to work together to build an encyclopedia. Once we start getting overly attached to our own ideas of right and wrong and let our anger lead us into breaking the rules, we've stopped contributing to the common good. It always pains me to see this process, because it inevitably means that somebody simply doesn't want to play well with others. – Clockwork Soul 19:49, 10 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Toscanini and "Bee Gees"

But, unless, if I will declare WAR against Wikipedia. Toscanini had his own temper with the orchestras! It is true, and Bee Gee's "Fools Drinkin Us Down", which I don't like that song.

4.1x.xxx.xxx

F Kahlo

I think that calling her a Stalinist/anti-revisionist is too verbose, even if the Mao quote is true.

The most readily available source for the postmortem rejection of Trotsky is here:

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2001/0206.mencimer.html

After Trotsky was assassinated, however, Kahlo turned on her old lover with a vengeance, claiming in an interview that Trotsky was a coward and had stolen from her while he stayed in her house (which wasn't true). "He irritated me from the time that he arrived with his pretentiousness, his pedantry because he thought he was a big deal," she said.

Rarely is this unflattering detail included in the condensed Kahlo story. Nor is the fact that Kahlo turned on Trotsky because she had become a devout Stalinist. Kahlo continued to worship Stalin even after it had become common knowledge that he was responsible for the deaths of millions of people, not to mention Trotsky himself. One of Kahlo's last paintings was called "Stalin and I," and her diary is full of her adolescent scribblings ("Viva Stalin!") about Stalin and her desire to meet him. Less scandalous but worth noting is that Kahlo despised the very gringos who now champion her work, and her art reflects her obvious disdain for the United States. One wonders what the postal service was thinking when it put Kahlo on a stamp. "Visas are denied to [foreign] artists with Frida Kahlo's politics," notes Chadwick.

It would be nice to find the source of Kahlo quote above. Her diary (a sketchbook?) was published in 1995 in English: The Diary of Frida Kahlo', ed. by S. M. Lowe, and The Letters of Frida Kahlo also in 1995, ed. by M. Zamora. The level of invective against Trotsky seems to be real. She seems to have changed her mind about him at some point. The Mao quote seems to originate here Frida Kahlo's Socialism by Clifford F. Thies. Posted on Tuesday, December 10, 2002. There is no attribution for the quote, unfortunately. DJ Silverfish 13:33, 11 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hortus

Thanks for helping me out with the Hortus Botanicus articles. Stefan29 17:17, 11 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Trey Stone

What happened was that we chatted in email (which will remain private) and as a result I gave him a couple of days and advised him to read up on Wikipedia policy, then I unblocked him and he posted on my talk page:

I've read the wikirules and agree to abide by them. 04:28 UTC, 25 Mar 2005

If he's still misbehaving then he has no excuse. --Tony Sidaway|Talk 00:58, 13 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'll be posting to the ArbCom Evidence page soon and thought we should chat. Feel free to email me off-wiki if you like. Also, with your leave, I'd like to edit the RfC page some: clean up more diffs and add detail. If you're comfortable with the idea, I'd rather not leave my sig all over it; the earlier edits were so signed just to be crystal-clear about what I'd changed.

About 9 years ago I saw Patti Lupone perform in Master Class (play) by Terrence McNally; it's a one-woman show about Maria Callas. It was quite excellent.

— Davenbelle 09:47, May 13, 2005 (UTC)

New Left

I expanded the introduction. Let me know what you think. There is room for improvement. Some people consider the Prague Spring to be New Left, but I really don't know enough to say. There should be a paragraph on France and the June Days and the autonomist developments in Italy. I may try that over the weekend, if I'm feeling ambitious. Again, there will be lots of room for improvement. DJ Silverfish 19:42, 13 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Trey Stone and Davenbelle

Hi! Trey Stone has Requested Arbitration with me:

You are mentioned in evidence that I have presented and I'm bringing this to your attention. Comments and evidence of your own are welcome.

Sincerely, Davenbelle 01:04, May 14, 2005 (UTC)